|
Irish Planning Institute
Conference 2003 Quality of Life Quality of Space
Consultation, Politics
and Place: The View of the Spire from the Red Cow Roundabout
Ciarán Cuffe March 2003
Abstract
Recent legislation allows
the planner greater control over the built environment at both local and
regional scales. The Millennium Spire in Dublin’s city centre is contrasted
with Red Cow Roundabout on Dublin’s ring road in order to stress the need for
planners to address the problems of suburbia.
The planning of suburban
areas requires greater community control. This consutation or empowerment can
enrich the planning process It also establishes ownership of the end product.
Building at higher densities
can assist in reducing the demand for new building land beyond the city
limits. Land that was previously unused or designated for transportation
facilities should be built on and can create high quality urban spaces.
The move towards building at higher densities requires a higher quality of
design of the built environment.
Introduction
It is often said that the
only certainties in life are death and taxes. I wish to add a third item to that
list –the Red Cow roundabout. Why the Red Cow Roundabout? Well, we all
encounter the Red Cow roundabout, whether we like it or not: sooner or later.
The Red Cow roundabout is where it all went wrong. It represents a
challenge to us all. It perplexes our engineers, it infuriates our
transportation managers and it puzzles us as planners. No-one’s heart soars
when we mention the Red Cow roundabout, but it’s there and as planners we have
a duty to address it.
How can we make good places
when the most significant places that are built are designed by road designers?
These are people who know how to get people from A to B but who rarely are
educated in creating good places. The more a road fulfils its transport function
the more it loses out in place-making qualities. The more it becomes a way from
A to B the more it loses out as a place for social or economic activity.
Planners know this, but the Director of Transportation Services, or the County
Engineer often does not. These people should be sitting in the front row but
they’re not. I believe there should be a mandatory urban design module in
Continued Professional Development for civil engineers.
City versus suburb
The City’s problems are
relatively easily dealt with. The problems of the suburbs are more intractable.
Having represented part of Dublin’s inner city as an elected representative
for over a decade I am confident that we now have enough in our planners’
toolbox to address the difficulties that arise. We no longer allow the road
engineers to punch highways through the city centre, we no longer allow historic
buildings to be demolished, and we no longer for the most part allow indigenous
communities to be displaced. The emergence of Local Area Plans under the
Planning Act 2002 allows for detailed plans to be drawn up for individual
neighbourhoods. At the other end of the scale the Strategic Planning Guidelines
and the National Spatial Strategy paint the broad brush picture within which the
planner operates at a regional and national level. There are of course caveats
to all of this, but by and large we have the abilities to address the problems
that have arisen. We realise that we should take the heat of Dublin, and
that it’s a bad idea to pave over Kildare Meath and Wicklow. We realise that
we need to tame the traffic, provide good quality public spaces, promote
mixed-use buildings and use the standard urban design tools to manipulate the
public domain.
There isn’t much of a view
of the Spire from the Red Cow Roundabout, and on a cautionary note the next time
you’re driving through Newland’s Cross, can I discourage you from craning
your necks as you navigate the four lanes of traffic. It’s a busy and a
dangerous junction and you’re better off watching the road. I pose the
question in order to juxtapose the challenges that we face as planners in a
suburban and an urban setting. I believe that the suburbs are as the most
significant challenge that planners currently face in Ireland, and I believe
that we must question whether the suburb is a sustainable way of life. Certainly
the continued outward expansion of the Capital City into and beyond Kildare,
Meath and Wicklow is fundamentally unsustainable. New low-density housing
estates are being built in a ‘slash and burn’ pattern of development. This
is leaving greying suburbs behind with facilities being provided that are
over-used for a short time and then practically abandoned. The second generation
are unable to find housing in the community that their parents bought into, and
must move further away from the city. This creates a vicious circle that uses up
land, increases car dependency, and threatens community life. As an
alternative we should consider increasing densities and making better use of
existing assets.
Red Cow is more of a state
of mind than an actual place. If we were to produce a figure and ground map of
the area it would be characterised mostly by blank space. Gertrude Stein’s
quote about Oakland California: “There is no there, there” springs to mind.
Of course there are some buildings, an Ibis hotel, Moran’s Red Cow Hotel, Fiat
Offices and a Luas Depot. But the area is mostly characterised by surface car
parking. Surface car parking is a dangerous land-use. Well-planned
neighbourhoods are rarely characterised by surface car parking. I agree with the
American urbanist. Victor Dover who stated: “Parking is a narcotic and ought
to be a controlled substance. It is addictive, and one can never have enough.”
Unless we control our infatuation with car parking we will continue to create
sub-standard insipid inferior places. Instead of prescribing minimum car parking
standards we should be putting in place maximums. I note that the draft South
Dublin Plan prescribes a minimum of one car parking space per 25 square metres
of gross floor area. Given that a parking space takes up 12.5 sq. m, and the
same again in circulation space it means that the Plan is a recipe for
low-density development before we’ve even started. We’ve got to break away
from regulating for mediocrity before we’ve even got off the drawing board.
We must also reconsider the
benefits of creating additional road space as a solution to our traffic
problems. “Adding lanes to solve traffic congestion is like loosening your
belt to solve obesity,” stated Glen Hemistra in a letter to the English
Independent last December. Leaving aside the land to add additional lanes means
that space which should be either prime retail or office is left idle. It is not
good planning.
Densification
Increasing density has been
the mantra of urban design professionals for many years now. However rather like
‘Living Over the Shop’ (LOTS), everyone is in favour of it but no one is
quite sure how to make it happen. Dublin City Council initiated a pilot LOTS
scheme almost ten years after the idea had gained support amongst planners. How
do we shorten the time-scale with increased density? Local Authorities and the
State should lead by example. It’s not good enough for instance for a Local
Authority to build new offices and surround them with a sea of car parking. They
should make better use of their assets. The alternative to building single
buildings is to prepare a master plan and ensure that the entire block is
developed over time. The Planning Act 2000 provides us with an appropriate
mechanism for doings so – the Local Area Plan (LAP).
It is of little benefit to
increase density at the building level unless we tackle the block and the
neighbourhood. Here is where planners often fail to deliver. All to often the
planner must defer to the road planner when it comes to dealing with larger
sized pieces of land. It is a concern that transport corridors or arteries are
often not zoned in the Development Plan. We should zone this land and ensure
that roads engineers do not perform a land grab in order to protect their
territory. Let us consider the classical planning model pioneered by Clarence
Perry in 1929. For the best part of a century planners concentrated on
implementing parts of this model. However the model was a low density one, and
instead of streets and boulevards it resulted in motorways and roads. This is
what Myles Wright proposed for Dublin, and it has resulted in vast swathes of
indifferent low density housing with enough green space to sustain a cavalry
unit. It was an inefficient use of land, and it used up a scarce resource.
Of course we don’t wish to
turn the M50 motorway into an urban boulevard, but the arterial routes that
intersect the C- ring motorway could be re-imagined as boulevards or streets
that would be fronted by urban blocks of between four and eight stories in
height.
These new developments
should be of mixed use with retail and office space on the lower floors, and
predominantly office space above. These new developments would ensure the
viability of the proposed Metro system. The typology of the urban block and
boulevard is also by its nature more pedestrian friendly than low density
‘island buildings as the pavement is clearly delineated and linked to the
adjoining buildings. The mixed-use medium to high-density city supports high
quality public transport, and creates vibrant sustainable walkable
neighbourhoods. Instead of just prescribing maximum plot ratios we should ensure
that minimum plot ratios are also contained within Development Plans and also
Local Area Plans. The beauty of building blocks rather than stand alone
buildings is that the ‘space left over after planning’ (SLOPE) is actually
used and valued, rather than left behind to have the grass cut and litter
gathered once or twice a year.
We must consider the
suburbs, we must plan them, we must densify them, and we must provide mixed-use
buildings and neighbourhoods. Richard Ford the American author once wrote,
“Weather is all we really have of real experience in the suburbs”. Surely as
planners we can do better than that.
Participation
Public participation is
often a daunting task. Prior to studying planning I worked as an architect and
the equivalent phrase in the architects lexicon was ‘community
architecture’. It conjured up an image of Prince Charles instructing us on
what to do, and how to do it. Needless to say it wasn’t exactly
enthusiastically embraced by my colleagues. However I believe that participation
is the key to success. It does not imply that the planner or urban designer
cannot be creative. If anything it assists in formulating plans and
policymaking.
Thirty years ago Sherry
Arnstein published her seminal work on participation in decision-making ‘Eight
Rungs on a Ladder of Citizen Participation’. There are eight rungs on
Arnstein's ladder ranging from manipulation to citizen control. We have
certainly moved beyond the phases of nonparticipation identified in her work,
but I wonder have we really moved into the area of partnership or are we still
simply placating the general public. Certainly the freedom of Information
legislation has helped people have access to the apparent reasons behind
decision-making, but I’m not convinced that all Development Plans reflect the
heartfelt wishes and involvement of those who will be affected by its contents.
There is a duty to ensure
that the public are stakeholders in both the inception and implementation of
Development Plans and Local Area Plans. This requires significant work in the
preliminary states of plan formulation. It requires public advertisement,
clinics, public meetings and ‘planning for real workshops’. Two years ago I
undertook consultancy for the Ballymun Housing Task Force in formulating
proposals for a neighbourhood centre in Poppintree in Ballymun. My experience
there underlined the need to have good three-dimensional representations of
proposals. It showed that people want proposals to be referenced to built
examples that people are familiar with. For the Poppintree proposal we used the
urban village of Drumcondra as a reference.
People also want to feel
engaged with what changes are being proposed. As part of the process we
photographed the fronts of all homes close the study area. We then photocopied
and glued a black and white version of each home onto the facades of a simple
block model. Seeing one’s own lace curtains on a model certainly allowed
people to comprehend their place in the greater scheme of things. This type of
participation also challenges our own perceptions. My own bias in favour of a
mixed-use neighbourhood centre was challenged by people living adjacent who
didn’t want either a health centre or a public house within the centre due to
fears of anti-social activity. When people’s expectations are low,
cautiousness is justified. The outcome resulted in approval of a mixed-use
development, but not as mixed as we had hoped. Agreement was reached on a
proposal consisting of shops with apartments overhead, backed by terraced
housing and workshops.
The Development Plan process
could follow a more hands on approach. Current arrangements for consultation are
often perceived as adversarial. Perhaps Local Authorities could put more
investment into the preliminary steps of plan preparation and ensure that people
feel that their views are being heard in the Plan process
.
Design
Good design is no longer a
luxury nor is it an add-on. It must be the cornerstone of what we plan. The more
development plans that allow for refusal on the basis of bad design the better.
Good design is of paramount importance as we increase densities. It can turn
mediocrity into brilliance. Burke-Kennedy Doyle and Dublin City Council’s
proposals for the future of Fatima Mansions in Dublin 8 illustrate what can be
achieved through design. The failed attempt at refurbishment in the early
1990’s appears to have been due both flawed housing policies and inadequate
control by the residents themselves. Financial incentives allowed many families
to take a swift exit route from local authority housing at a time when they were
most needed in their community. Community empowerment was still at an embryonic
stage within the then Dublin Corporation at the end of the nineteen eighties.
The spire is a powerful
design that I believe more than compensates for the loss of Nelson’s Pillar
back in 1966. In design terms the spire simply and elegantly terminates the
vistas of Henry Street and Talbot Street west and east, and O’Connell Street
North and South. The Integrated Area Plan also incorporates significant public
transport improvements as well as a dramatic renewal of the pedestrian domain. I
don’t wish to comment in detail on the landscaping proposals but suffice to
say, I favour the retention of as many mature trees as possible! Increasing the
spectrum of land uses in buildings on and adjacent to O’Connell Street and
re-introducing a residential component would probably contribute towards
improving the security of the public domain.
O’Connell Street is and
elegant space that was substantially rebuilt in the early part of the twentieth
century. It has stood the test of time. It is crucial to strike a balance
between a street’s transportation, economic and social functions. I am not
convinced that we have struck the right balance between these three functions in
many of the roads and streets of towns and cities around the State. In
Dublin I query the need for national roads to be camouflaged by tree planting
and designed as dual carriageways within the confines of the M50. I believe that
they could fulfil a more urban and civilising function by being renamed as
boulevards, and by building alongside them at densities that would reflect
Dublin’s role as a capital city. The designation of the upper Shannon basis
for renewal should not result in more cars heading for Dublin every morning.
Ildefons Cerda’s ambitious
plan for Barcelona one hundred and fifty years ago was a bold and visionary
proposal that made the best use of land: a scarce resource for a city that was
hemmed in between the mountains and the sea. Today in Ireland land is also
scarce, but so also is time. Many of us now travel ten times the distance that
our parents did in order to carry out the basic tasks of our daily lives.
Environmental concerns have made us more aware of the need to cut down on energy
use and pollution. I believe that denser, well-designed communities with
increased citizen participation can reduce urban sprawl and assist us in
creating vibrant neighbourhoods that will stand the test of time.
Ciarán Cuffe March 2003
|