The idea nobody lives in Dublin City Centre is the myth that won’t die

Comment & Analysis: The idea not very many people live in Dublin City Centre is the myth that won’t die.

Dublin City Centre is defined as what is commonly called “the area between the canals”. Really it is the inner section of the canals connected on the north-west side by the North and South Circular Roads.

Many people think of the city centre as much smaller, but there are many good reasons for the defined area to be within the canals — it’s, for the most part, a clear visual boundary. It includes not just the main shopping and nightlife areas but also most of the central office area, the transport hubs, and institutions such as the central hospitals.

More than 130,000 people live within Dublin City Centre using that “within the canals” perspective (Data: CSO Census 2022). That’s more than the population of all of the urban areas of Limerick or Galway. Or even Cork City before the boundary expansion.

For argument’s sake, let’s say the city centre is less than half the size of the area “within the canals” as above — say, bound by the Four Courts to Christchurch to St Partick’s down to around Camdon Street along the Grand Canal in the south-east office area, the north Docklands only inside the Royal Canal and across to the Matter Hospital.

That area still has over 70,200 people — in other words, 82% of Galway City’s population is 17% of the area, or 131% of the population of Waterford City is less than 1/4 of the area.

Even if we go one step further and reduce the city centre to the areas around Connelly Station (not even including the station area), Pearse Street Station, Merrion Square and Fitzwilliam Street to the east; the areas around Capel Street, Dublin Castle and Camden Street to the west; the area around Parnell Square to the north and around end of Harcourt St to the south.

So, including Dublin’s more central parts, the main shopping and nightlife streets, Dublin Castle, and the central train stations, but not even half of medieval Dublin.

We’re still left with over 40k people, which is more than Navan, Ennis, Carlow, Kilkenny, Naas, Tralee, Newbridge, Balbriggan, Portlaoise, Athlone, etc etc. The only towns larger than this population are Swords, Dundalk, and Drogheda.

You’re talking about an area of around 9km2 — the likes of Naas or Swords get to similar or larger populations in around twice the area. That’s quite something when you consider that this area of Dublin is highly populated with the likes of shops, offices, parks, museums, and institutional lands like government buildings.

This article does not suggest that there is anything wrong with planning to increase the number of people living in the city centre. The Dublin City Development Plan’s objective is to densify the city centre, and that process has been actively happening for decades.

Some people who call for high density get a bit too focused on the lower-rise houses (which mostly aren’t going anywhere fast) and living above shops. Unlike many other cities across Europe, there is still a relatively high number of sites in the central area of Dublin that have the potential for development — both unused or underused sites.

While there is more than one surface bus depot, a number of large surface area council depots and large unused or underused sites, focusing on already-built housing in a housing crisis is misguided.

Many low-level houses in central parts of Dublin are so small and without any or significant gardens that they have a higher density than people think. Cities with far higher central density also retain some low-rise housing.

And, of course, as hinted at above, fewer people live in some sections of the city centre where, for example, there is a high concentration of shops, offices, institutional buildings, museums, etc. That’s indisputable. And you’ll find the same in a lot of cities, especially those which are both a shopping etc hub and their country’s national Government’s administrative centre.

The central south side gap in housing density is stark (shown below in the pink squares beside the yellow ones). That area has a high density of shops and offices, Trinity College Dublin, Houses of the Oireachtas, Government and Department buildings, etc.

(As a side note, the map below is from 2011. At that stage, there were a good few dark red areas just under the 10k persons per squared km threshold, which have now likely also exceeded the 10k persons per squared km threshold. Today, the map should have more yellow blocks, which would make it more comparable to at least some similar cities, and Dublin is still playing catchup)

On the up, but is all density good?

The number of people living inside the canal is trending upwards — it was at 108,560 in 2011, hit 114,987 in 2016 and then reached 130,057 in 2022.

Of course, we can discuss all sorts of demographic issues, but we first have to collectively accept that a significant number of people live in the city centre.

Once we do, we can also look at how much of those numbers are made up of “bad” or “undesirable” density –that can range from too many low-level houses and not enough parks or overcrowding in homes for various reasons from a number of generations in the one home because there’s no or no affordable choice or some landlords packing people in or accounting for sheltered accommodation.

City life and nightlife

Discussion about nightlife should also include wider factors, including a discussion on the affordability of housing.

For example, if you spend a high percentage of your income on housing, you’re less likely to go out as much, or if many younger people are priced out of the city, they are less likely to come back for drinks.

There’s a lot of ‘if’s here: If people like students are commuting because they cannot afford to live in the city at all, it’s less likely they are going to be available to work in restaurants and bars etc, and if there’s more working from home there’s going to be less socialising after work especially when working from home has enabled people to live further away from the city while the desire for affordability has pushed people towards looking further away.

Then we also need to talk about the update of drinking at home (not just pre-drinks), and the various reasons for fewer clubs (hint: Dublin and Ireland had many more at far lower population levels so it’s not down to population alone).

What about other cities?

Tom Forth’s online tool, ‘Population Around A Point,‘ comes with a health warning (that the data is known to be less accurate for small areas, especially where there has been rapid population change), but within its smallest km radius, 3km, it still gives an idea of different populations of cities somewhat comparable to Dublin (in other words, excluding larger cities like Paris or London).

For various geographical reasons, I’m also not sure the radius tool gives a great idea of what’s central to the city centre, but people see it as fairer than other ways.

If the data can be somewhat trusted given the health warning on it, Dublin is around the midpoint here — but note that many cities with lower levels of the population within a 3km radius in a central area are seen as much better cities than Dublin, with healthier nightlife, etc.

There probably could be a whole other article written about how transport features into this — Copenhagen, for example, has not just a 24 hour automated metro network in its central area but also a regional rail system that services towns smaller than Dublin’s commuter towns with frequent services at weekends into the early mornings.

Regardless of whatever role density plays in current situations or as a solution to issues, we need to stop denying Dublin has density relative to cities around its size and some larger cities. We also need to stop reaching for simplified answers because there are more complex social, economic, and transport issues at play.