Warum in Gottes Namen wollen die Leute junge Leute verarschen, nur weil einige von ihnen etwas dagegen haben wollen, was höher als ein zweistöckiges Haus ist?
Die unzähligen Projekte, die abgelehnt wurden, bringen mich zum Schreien.
Dublin ist eine Hauptstadt, keine bezirksgroßen Wohnsiedlungen mit ein paar Glasgebäuden, die nur ein paar Stockwerke hoch sind, und einem hässlichen Fahnenmast, der einfach schrecklich aussieht.
https://i.redd.it/4jvgsulf4iud1.png
Von J7Eire458t56y
33 Comments
You can’t build a tall thing because if you do, then I’ll be able to see it, which is unacceptable, apparently.
It would be faster and cheaper to build a whole new town out in Longford or Roscommon than build in Dublin. You could get 2 or even 3 social houses for the price of building one in Dublin.
Dublin looks shite from above
I’ve a lot on chats with an older lady from central Dublin and the comments she makes about buildings beyond about 3 floors are unbelievable. “I couldn’t live in something like that.” “You’d get dizzy looking out.” “It’s sick! They’re ruining Dublin.”
Every building is “it’s like the Ballymun Flats…”
It really is the most beautiful city, in fairness.
They should put a 6 lane motorway over the Liffey and run it on stilts American style out to the Red Cow. Let the buses and bicycles have the old quays.
You make a solid point OP, but personally I think that in the long term we need to invest in decentralisation. Despite there not being enough room to swing a cat, Dublin is still growing but our other cities all seem to be dying and it’s not sustainable in the long term.
We are pushing for a higher skyline at a slow rate, college square for example. The council are scared of fire at great heights. Our regulations have become very strict and observant of fire and escape. The concern would be our ability to stop the fire. We don’t really have the same fleets of tenders as say London or New York.
With boundary restrictions also being a factor we can’t provide full access to buildings for high level fire fighting. For example college square has 360 degrees of boundary access. There’s likely other factors but it’s maybe just not as easy as we think based off the building conditions
How many houses have been refused planning permission by reason of the skyline?
The same again for apartments?
Anyone been on Portrane or Donabate way recently? With the amount of road infrastructure that’s been built out there, if a new town isn’t built there I’ll eat my hat.
They should’ve redeveloped the whole old glass bottle site into 40 storey apartment blocks
We should bring in minimum density zoning for the city centre and immediate surrounds as an anti-sprawl/anti-NIMBY measure.
I.e. if you’re not delivering X number of units or Y amount of bedrooms/office space per unit area of land you get automatically rejected.
The amount of derelict units in Dublin is also mental, tax the life out of them and bring in legislation that it they remain derelict for over 10 years it can be seized or CPOed for redevelopment as social housing.
How is it that every other city in the world has managed to overcome this problem. But the Dublin skyline is the next wonder of the world that has to be kept, what a joke.
Why are people incapable of saving images these days?
You have 2 options, build up or build out. I’d rather keep as much of the country untouched by concrete jungles as possible. People who argue against tall buildings are extremely short sighted
Dublin has no skyline. Dublin needs no skyline.
Preserve what skyline? The modern stuff along the river looks far better than the older stuff. Liberty hall is one of the ugliest buildings ever, only rivaled by the central bank. Other than the customs house and the fourcourts, we destroyed everything worth keeping long ago. The quicker we rip down all the ugly, brutalist shit built in the 60s and 70s the better
Building upwards won’t necessarily solve the problem. In London, large developments have intensified the housing crisis. The city has gone turbo with skyscrapers, but they are sold off-plan to investment portfolios and have very low occupancy rates. Yet, the ‘redevelopment’ accompanying the influx of expensive flats raises property prices, meaning the deprived and rundown places that might stand immediately adjacent to such buildings see their rents go up to the point where they become unaffordable to everyday people.
The biggest problem with these schemes is that the land itself – often publicly owned – is sold off in the process, leaving local government with fewer options for building affordable housing in the future. Every time one of these schemes goes through, it tightens the noose on the city.
Possibly the worst looking major city in Europe if not then the world, the planning laws have to be overhauled, we’re planning for the future not the past
Do the Nimbys not realise that without any building, there wont be a city? If they were around in 800CE dublin just never would have fucking existed
Completely get having more high-rises, it’s partially one of the reasons Belfast is a cheaper place to live then Dublin, but they should still fit in architecturally with the current skyline of Dublin and not stand out as bland monoliths of metal.
On that basis shouldn’t all buildings be demolished? Historically they wouldn’t have been there.
Build some skyscrapers that look like the 40 year old poolbeg chimneys. Because apparently they must be protected at all costs.
Its important to respect the significance of our built environment but we should not be beholden to it. A city should evolve over time in response to the changing needs of its inhabitants.
A good example might be the loop-line bridge. Do you think the designers of that structure would want us to keep it in its current state for posterity or would they rather encourage us to widen it to help meet the acute public transport need we have?
Buildings and places can be repurposed, renovated or reimagined to new contexts while being sensitive to their past.
I think a problem we have in ireland is that much urban development ends up being somewhat ad-hoc instead being part of a coherent vision set out in a sdz for example. When locals are faced with an unpredictable future for their area its not surprising to me to see objections being raised (even though i disagree with it).
Positively, i think the new planning bill does help to improve some of this, but we are some way off before seeing any results.
View from the Guinness brewery sky bar is stark. Almost embarrassing
Dublin is quite an ugly city. It’s Georgian heritage has been stripped away. It has no architectural uniqueness, nothing to Protect. Just go big like Berlin. Nothing to lose, all to gain.
I don’t get the grá for British Dublin at all – Georgian Dublin gets too much appreciation. Every era must be allowed to make some sort of architectural impact, or cities will die.
My Gaf is in that photo, on the quays. We couldn’t give a fuck about the high rise shit, just stop building stupid fkin offices, build apartments. Everything around me is empty.
Theres nothing historic about the skyline in Ireland it never existed
I’m sorry but dublin is fully fugly.
It’s nothing to do with protecting the skyline, or because it “blocks views”, these are the reasons people put in to reject because “it will lower the value of my asset” is not. Valid excuse.
So these thinly veiled excuses are what they use, and because everyone in the council and in office knows what’s really going on, and what gets them elected, they’re more than happy to do it.
Anything to reduce urban sprawl destroying the country, including building tall buildings.