In the interests of the common good

When in need of the higher moral ground, or a superiority judgement, you just can't beat invoking 'The Common Good'.  The 'Common Good' is without doubt a good thing.  But are we as planners uniquely privilged to act in its interest, let alone credibly understand what the Common Good is?  Do our cities and towns abound with evidence of 'Common Good' planning?

The Common Good is a profoundly philosophical challenge and dilemma.  To have a proper understanding of the common good, its probably best to start with Plato and work your way up through Marx and Lefebvre.  Issues of equality are matters of government policy not philosophy or law.  There is a profound difference between invoking a policy (i.e. give us 10% of your houses because we don't build any) to claiming you act in the common good.  Those in Council's have a  very limited mandate (local Councillors) or no mandate (officers and administrators) to act in the public good, other than the fact that the government pays them (they are therefore more responsible to government (and their pay cheque) than the common good).  No less, the consultant is responsible to their client and (potential) next pay cheque.

David Harvey in his brilliant and provocative book 'Rebel Cities' addresses the concept of an Urban Commons in some detail.

"... Much of the corruption that attaches to urban politics relates to how public investments are allocated to produce something that looks like a common but which promotes gains in private asset values for privileged property owners.  The distinction betweeen urban public goods and urban commons is both fluid and dangerously porous.  How often are developmental projects subsidized by the state in the name of the common interest when the true beneficiaries are a few landholders, financiers, and developers?"

The point is that no decision is completely a-political.  Planning is highly political.  Developers arn't always the bad guys just as planners arn't always the good guy.  There is no reason a Common Good can't be economic just much as environmental or cultural.

The Common Good is a catch-phrase just like Sustainable Development that is utilised to give an impression of superiority.  By saying you act in the Common Good doesn't mean you do, and chances are you don't!

Ireland needs a pro-city planning strategy not more regional planning

There were some interesting presentations at this years Irish Planning Institute Conference in Kilkenny at the end of April. Hendrik W van der Kamp from the School of Spatial Planning, DIT gave an interesting paper on The City State as an Urban Model – a case study of supply based planning. He highlights some really important analysis on urban trends in Ireland. Firstly, he finds that the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) has been ineffective with regard to designated Gateway towns. In 2011 he finds that “Of 10 counties with gateway towns only 5 row above national average. Of 16 counties without gateway towns only 5 grow below national average”. He also notes an ambiguous trend in urbanisation. The Irish Urban Population in 2011 is 62% (60.7 % in 2006, 59.6% in 2002 and 58.1% in 1996). However, he also quotes Eurostat (March 2012) “In nearly all Member States, it was in urban regions that the population grew most rapidly. Ireland was an exception with growth in its rural population, while the urban population declined.” This reflects, that outside Dublin inner city wards, all other major towns and cities have experienced decline in their cores. The trend of urbanisation growth reflects massive suburbanisation on Greenfield sites. Van der Kamp cites the statistic that thepProportion of people living in cities > 100,000 pop decreased from 31.2% in 1996 to 29.2% in 2006. His conclusions are that we are not achieving compact cities and we are not achieving cities of scale (proportion of population in cities over 100,000 is decreasing). Also see recent Life After Roundabouts post ‘Are Lending Institutions getting it wrong?’ This analysis is hugely important for the Irish economy, and strategic planning policy. This really should be setting the alarm bells ringing in the Customs House. There is a strong body of research from the likes of Geoffrey West, Richard Florida and Edward Glaeser that says city scale and size really matter! The bigger a city is, the richer it is, the more money people make, it attracts better people and companies and the more influential that place is. So where we have a strategic policy framework that positively supports anti-urban development (Rural Housing Guidelines), and we pursue a path of anti-urban economic investment (IDA) , the result is declining cities, declining wealth and an increasingly uncompetitive country. Strong urban places are synonymous with strong economies. While many policy documents including the NSS contain pro-urban statements, its simply not working when applied to County Council administrations. There is an urgent need to go back to the drawing board. This must involve linking a very different Rural Housing Policy with a simplified National Spatial Strategy. Its time to have a big re-think about urban regeneration strategies pursued over the last 15 years, and the tools we use. Even before the recession hit, PPP was an abject failure. Local Area Plans often only add bureaucracy, costs and delays. The national rural agenda pursued by all governments is damaging cities, and damaging Ireland’s economy. I’m not sure about Van der Kamps conclusions that Ireland should essentially adopt a single City State approach to Strategic Planning. There is undoubtedly potential outside the capital. In either case, the Irish economy needs stronger cities. Stronger cities need stronger City Governance and better leadership, focussed on city economies and their citizens. Regional authorities simply don’t do this; its not their mandate. Rather, the mayoral governance model presents a tried and tested approach to city focussed planning.

10 things planning should do:9

Manage the message

The towns that will succeed are the ones where businesses understand that they are collectively dependent on the place they make their living from. A business makes money because of the qualities of a town, and vice versa. Towns need to managed autonomously and collectively to sell and promote the place. Most traditional towns have inherent qualities, so it doesn’t need to be made up, but they do need to step up.

Managing the message means that you can't let a single retailer, business or a mall take ownership of marketing the town. It also means controlling the hyperbole/delusion. Its not enough to say great things about a place - without taking real steps or investments that make the statements reality. It happens too often that the stuff on websites and in corporate documents fall apart the minute you drie into town, or walk down its main street.

Limerick Regeneration smokescreen

Housing Minister Finneran announces Limerick Regeneration to press ahead http://bit.ly/91nDqx, totalling about €336m being devoted to various projects.

However, the first item in the budget http://bit.ly/cb7tP8 is a ring road with a cost of €43m for the Coonagh to Knockalisheen Distributor Road (which is a strategic road for the city), the next item is €7m for an Access Road from the Southern Ring Road (ramps etc.) and then €5m for Childers Road (part of a €10m road project). So thats €55m down on roads - good start for a regeneration project! Enabling works + demolition come to €41.6m. And theres another €10m for land purchases. So a figure of €230m up to Dec 2014 (approx. €58m pa) is a slightly more honest figure. But still a hell of a lot of money. Probably enough to build around 2,500 to 3,000 residential units. They're building/refurbishing something of the order of 735 to 800. But they are building schools & community facilities. A civic hub grouping of buildings is put at €32m

The road building is Dept. of Transport funded, & nothing to do with the regen project, but the job creation, and economic benefit (tax income etc) of building these roads is included in the overall economic analysis. Funding of €6.5m for a sports facility includes PPP and 'scope for philanthropic' contributions. The figures are misleading.

Not sure how CEO Brendan Kenny considers this will be a catalyst for Limerick City and Region, and create a Green Economic Hub. This is a project that does not invest in Limerick city, but seeks to maintain segregated suburbs. It doesn't bring any new population into Limerick city. It builds a ring-road that helps the suburbanites drive around the city. Its re-engineering the social engineering.

The Masterplan for the regeneration of the Limerick periphery doesn't address the obvious. Why are we doing this? The suburbs failed in these situations. Are profesional egos so great to keep experimenting to try and get it right this time around? The current economic depression is an opportunity to shelve the masterplan, and invest the money in the city, supporting its mix of uses, plurality of tenures and economic profiles, and support a truly green city based on sustainable transport.

ARe we not allowed to be critical of this, as its all proosed under the label of regeneration?

10 things planning should do:8

Don’t plan to solve traffic congestion

Cities and towns have a certain amount of space, and we make choices as to who gets to use that space. Wider pavements means more space for pedestrians, street cafes/vendors. Buses want bus lanes, cyclists want cycle lanes, and people want to be able to drive their car from beside their bed to their destination (paraphrasing M. Garrido). Traffic congestion is a symptom of this competition for space, and trying to solve traffic is a one way ticket to nowhere-surburbs, designed by road engineers. So priorities have to be set for that ‘space’ between buildings (the ‘ways’ and ‘interways’ as Cerda called them). Its not something that can be solved by segregating or bypassing the town, because that deprives users other than the cars of the new ‘urban ways’. Rather, expand the network of streets, and reduce the blockages (L. Krier) so that everyone can benefit from the investment, and good streets can be created.

10 Things planning should do: 7

Only set objectives in a plan that can be followed by direct action

The core objective of a plan should be clearly understood, and achievable through a set of direct actions or measures - it should not be a result of trickle-down effect.

If a planning authority has a core objective to improve a town centre, there are measures to achieve this i.e. town centre management, environmental improvements, increase population, promote business districts.. and then stopping things happening in suburbs in competition to this.

What has tended to happen, particularly in the tiger years, is that these improvements are expected to happen by osmosis. By this logic a new shopping centre on the edge of town, or even in the town centre, will improve everything else around it, simply because it is there. A new business park will be good for the town .... because brings people/business to the general vicinity of the town.. suburban populations will support the town centre. It hasn't turned out like that.

Its the same for tax incentive sites - the hope that the redevelopment of one site is going to solve all the other problems. This is great for a developer, as they can promise a town the earth to get an uber scheme through, but it also makes a place dependent on the something that may not be the right solution. So if a town is to be made a better place (and if anybody cares) by creating a new pocket park – well, make that the first priority to make it happen, not the last. Investment is a follower not an instigator... retail follows footfall... people want to go to nice places... nice places need to be created, realised, enhanced & cared for..


This was all highlighted in the paper yesterday again, concerning regeneration projects in Limerick. The fact that they want to demolish and rebuild a failed suburb, is hailed as being good for Limerick City. Its not! Limerick City centre is emptying at a rate of knots - the regeneration project is a hopeless waste of money for the city. If they are serious about doing anything for Limerick, they would bring the people back to the city - away from social, physical and economic segregation.

As highlighted in recent ECTP awards, the European Planning tradition is particularly good as setting key objectives as the vision for the plan - where everything else follows - i.e. addressing the river, building bridges, the sustainable town.. They don't do the business school vision statement, brought to Ireland by the UK consultants i.e. "this is a vibrant, safe, clean place that people love to spend their time drinking coffee outdoors in". One is a plan - the other is symptom!

10 things planning should do:6

Plant street trees

This is so important and fundamental to successful urban places, but it seems to have been forgotten about, or only ever addressed in expensive urban landscaping schemes or as part of road schemes (under Pt. 8 of Planning Regulations). Street trees are easy and cheap to achieve and can have a transformative effect on places. They are also much more beautiful than expensive steel street furniture. It should be an objective of every authority to have an ongoing programme of planting and replacing of trees. Street trees also serve the purpose of segregating traffic from pedestrian and parked cars, and no street is too wide if broken up by boulevard planting (see the wonderful Boulevard Book by Allan B. Jacobs et al).

10 things planning should do: 5

Make towns more attractive than suburbs/rural living-

People must want to live in towns; unloved & dismantled by modernist planning, architecture and engineering. We’ve taken out the retail, housing and businesses, and flung them out to the suburbs in their own little pods. We’re a suburban nation, every bit as much as the US (Duany et al). We need to reassemble the town, and fundamental to that is to keep people living there, and re-populating the centres. For this to happen the centre has to be more attractive, and present better and wider opportunities than the suburban equivalent.

Sustainable urbanism must be at the heart of urban renewal, adaption and innovation. The historic fabric is an asset that denotes identity and character, just as established communities represent continuity and social fabric and local economies. During the tiger years continuity and respect for the fabric, was replaced with faith in the zeigteist. The economics of development of individual plots can stand up again. The only situation where comphrehensive redevelopment can be justified is when the public gain through new streets and parks can be achieved.

Local authorities need to undertake thorough reviews of their budgets to examine geographically where they are spending public money and who is benefiting. Look at most main-streets - is there a cent being spent? Quality housing + attractive residential streets, business districts (not parks) and retail streets = walkable towns + neighbourhoods = good towns = sustainable urbanism

10 things planning should do: 4

Stop using mono-use zoning.

The first schedule of the 2000 Planning Act contains a host of regulatory instruments that which can be used as objectives in a development plan. This includes layout of areas or structures, design, colour materials, floor areas, coverage, set-back and height. All the tools are there, but too many authorities don’t attempt to utilise them. Too often parking-space requirements and open space are used as controls. Plans should be used as opportunities design streets, perimeter blocks, and use design codes to guide the appearance of buildings. Great care needs to be given to the smallest detail, and zoning doesn’t fit the bill.

10 things planning should do:3

Manage the town as a priority

Planning Authorities’ primary task is 'development management' or development control as it used to be called. However, this is only managing the changes that other people want to make. Town management should be the priority, and resources reallocated to this task. This is not necessarily making local plans or master plans but focuses on implementation and making things happen. If it is the vision of a local authority to make a town better (vitality, viability etc) then they have to do things to make it happen. Approaches include Town Centre Managment Partnerships, Business Improvement Districts, Tax Incentive Financing, Local Development Vehicles etc, extaordinary temporal rate increases, or just shaking up budgets to redirect expenditure.

10 things planning should do

I want to set down some thoughts on things we should be doing (particularly in Irish urban planning), to contribute more effectively, and have a positive effect on urban environments through our actions. Over next 10 days I'm going to list the 10 things planning should do, according to me. Some may be obvious, some disagreeable, but would appreciate any feedback. Here we go:

1.Deal with the present

-‘Now is the time to plan for the future’ (or words to such effect) is a well-worn motto of many a planning consultancy at the moment. How fortunate for these experts to have such foresight, and know what lies ahead! (credit to David Engwicht here) Planners (‘the profession’) can’t be blamed for looking toward the next economic upturn, because the previous period has been so kind. However, those halcyon days are gone, and we need fresh approaches to deal with the crisis.
-What development plan faces the challenges of the next 1 to 5 years, not the next 20? Development Plans are increasingly becoming monolithic documents, conceived in red tape, where any life support for innovation or creativity, is sucked out in the course of the arduous process of getting them adopted. So, what are we doing now ... about now? How do we encourage investment, innovation, improvements, autonomy + the economy.
-We have to stop pretending this can be put on the long-finger. We have to take responsibility for making things happen, and make the system work – not work the system.

The Vision Statement

I have issues... with the Vision Statement. It is the ubiquitous section of the Development or Local Area Plan where the planner utilises the time machine to construct a series of bullet points in the present tense, of the wonderful place the world turned out to be after all. I've written a few myself.

As far as I know, in Ireland, its something that we imported from UK planning consultants, which imported the thinking from business school mumbo jumbo.

The problem is that it typifies a focus on strategic level thinking that ignores the nitty gritty. It is the equivalent of the powerpoint slide of a nice street in Holland, which by virtue of existng as an image will transmutate into action on the ground. It doesn't.

I presume most people don't want their town to be a dowdy, unpopular, dangerous place where nobody wants to go; so do really need an visioning exercise to confirm this.

Following on the theme of autonomous action, and bottom-up planning, people do know what is needed or the gaps in society, economy and the built fabric. Where planning has a capacity to address that need, thats where the focus of plan should be. A planning authority isn't in the coffee shop businees (this is a symtom of good planning as car/ bus choked streets are a symtom of less than optimum planning) but it can influence the fabric and infrastructure of the town that attract people or not.

The question is what actions will be effected to encourage change to happen. If the vision can't be achieved, for whatever reason (recession, funding, talent, road engineers)why include misleading statements at the core of a plan? Are development plans the place for spin?

Life After Roundabouts

This blog has been set up as a forum for the discussion of town planning, urbanism and urban design issues in Ireland and further afield. Theres plenty of room in Ireland for an open forum for the discussion of urban development and the plethora of people and interests that this draws in. Fortunately, planning's track record in Ireland is not exactly perfect and so there is a lot to talk about. However, its one thing to sit back and point fingers, and its another to offer alternative solutions. And hopefully thats what this is about. Everything from the impact of climate change and environmental legislation, to urban regeneration, retail development and modernist architecture to the detailed design of streets is on the agenda.