Dublin City Council
Maximising the City’s Potential
A Strategy for Intensification and Height


Submission from Green Party / Comhaontas Glas, April 2008

‘Planning without broad participation by and concern for the city’s inhabitants will result in a narrow efficiency, which ultimately condemns it to sterility.’
Green Paper on the Urban Environment, Commission of the European Communities, 1991

Introduction
The publication of this strategy is welcome, however the document is difficult to read and understood. Reference is made other to other framework plans, local plans and strategies without sufficient attempt to place them in context

There appears to be an emphasis on economic considerations, and a relegation of both sustainability and design to second place.

The statutory position of this document is unclear. The Green Party believes that any plan or strategy should be democratically adopted and should involve a robust system of consultation and participation with affected communities.

Throughout the Strategy there is an association of tallness with modernity, and a dangerously implicit suggestion that building height represents prosperity and ambition.


Definitions
The height definitions in Chapter Two appear to inflate the generally accepted definitions of building height. The Wikipedia entry on ‘high rise’ states that “Most building engineers, inspectors, architects and similar professions define a high-rise as a building that's at least 75 feet (23 m)”. In the Dublin context many would see buildings of between 4-6 stories as low rise, and buildings higher than this as being in the high-rise category.

The Green Party suggests that the definitions of low mid, and high rise should be significantly reduced.

Design
Any building that is significantly higher than its surroundings should be of outstanding design quality. Many of the taller buildings constructed in recent years are characterised by their mediocrity which does not auger well for the construction of high buildings.

The Busarus building stands out as an exception to this, but recent contributions to the city skyline such as the ‘Canary Dwarfs’ at Georges Quay are banal in their design and execution, and do not bode well for the future.

Environmental Considerations
Dublin has a mild damp and windy climate. Tall buildings can contribute to substantial overshadowing. People seek rather than shelter from the sun in Dublin’s climate and tall buildings tend to reduce levels of sunshine to people in nearby buildings.

As moves to maximise solar energy through the use of exterior water panels or other devices increases, the placing of taller buildings may reduce the light and potential energy capture of existing or other buildings.

High buildings can increase wind speeds and gusts at street level. Such changes can impact negatively on vulnerable groups such as older people, children and people with disabilities.

It is normally difficult to open windows in the building facades of taller buildings, leading to less communication between a tall building’s users and those in surrounding buildings.

Climate Change and energy difficulties in the future would point in the direction of encouraging building forms that can function in the absence of full reliability on mechanical and electrical systems.

Taller buildings raise significant concerns about infrastructure, particularly transportation. Without a significant investment in public transportation, tall buildings can place significant pressure on existing transportation infrastructure.

The above factors dictate that caution should be exercised in any move towards high rise buildings.


Social Considerations
Tall buildings typically overlook lower buildings and reduce privacy for people in lower buildings nearby. Their large floor areas and distance from the street can contribute to them becoming vertical ‘cul de sacs’ that are only entered or exited once a day, diminishing the vibrancy of social and economic interaction at street level.

Once the threshold of six stories is exceeded it is more difficult to have audible or visual connections with those at street level. A parent can no longer shout or wave to a child in a nearby park from the upper floors of a tall building.

The Green Party favours mixed-use development and suggests that a generous mixture of residential and work activities, together with other uses would be appropriate in proposals for higher buildings in the city.

Medium rise buildings add more to the civic life of urban areas that tall buildings.

Urban Form
The Green Party believes that most of the taller buildings built recently in Dublin sit uncomfortably in their surroundings. While the recent move towards higher densities in the city is welcome, caution is urged towards any move to quickly embrace high buildings.

The city should concentrate more resources on improving the quality of design, and density of new buildings rather than rushing toward height.

The exterior environment should be carefully considered. In the ‘Cerda’ blocks of Barcelona half of the width of the typical 20m wide street is given to pedestrian traffic. The street width is allocated to two 5m wide pavements and three 3.3m lanes of vehicular traffic. In Dublin many streets and roads both old and new give a much higher proportion of road space to vehicles. This should be reduced to encourage the more economic and social activity rather than vehicular movement.

High density good quality urban environments exist in Dublin such as the Iveagh Trust buildings; City Council Housing at Bride Street / Nicholas Street / Ross Road, and the new developments at Golden Lane including the Radisson Hotel. There are also high density developments of decent design quality emerging around Grand Canal Square in Docklands.

Cities abroad such as Helsinki, Barcelona and the older parts of Paris combine medium rise development with high densities and provide quality places for people to live, work and relax in.

Such examples are probably better indicators of what is required in Dublin City rather than any rush to height on the basis of economic progress, marketing or modernisation.

Conclusion
There are some locations that due to public transport connectivity or urban context may be appropriate for taller buildings. Such proposals should be only considered in the context of a democratically adopted plan that has strong community endorsement; where the proposal is of excellent design quality and where the social, economic and environmental benefits have been clearly demonstrated.

Increasing densities, rather than rushing to build tall buildings may provide more benefits for existing and future residents of Dublin.

In conclusion it is suggested that having considered and amended the Strategy based on submissions and the views of elected members of the Council, Dublin City Council should then consider amending or varying the County Development Plan to reflect the views of the Council on the Study’s recommendations.

Green Party, April 2008