Dublin docklands. The urban fabric as cultural heritage

Introduction

Since the 1980s there have been major policies and projects for the redevelopment of Dublin Docklands. These projects were mainly aimed at profitable development of office, commercial and residential space, without a sound plan that would preserve the identity or community of the area. The recent shift in policies and urban design principles in the Dublin Docklands Area Master Plan 2008 shows that policy makers have acknowledged that mistakes were made in the last decades of the 20th century. The current map of the Dublin Docklands Area Master Plan 2008 gives us useful information about these changes. The Ringsend/ Irishtown area, which has kept a great part of its urban form and community identity throughout centuries, is described as an ‘area of protection of residential and services amenities’ (DDDA, 2008, map A). Meanwhile, the area of the Grand Canal Docks, recently developed, is described with the objective ‘to seek the social, economic and physical development or rejuvenation
within an area of mixed use of which residential and enterprise facilities would be the predominant uses’ (DDDA, 2008, map A). This classification shows that recent development has been unable to achieve the cohesion and complexity of existing neighbourhoods, revealing flaws not only in policy, but also in the built environment and approaches to urban design.

The shift towards the consideration of more community participation reveals a need to understand the tradition and past of these communities, while the urban fabric of small plots in the existing neighbourhoods, therefore, seems to have a very important role in the conservation of identity of place and providing the opportunity for difference within regularity. On the other hand, the new fabric of residential block developments in the docklands denies the possibility of developing a sense of community, and by providing only regularity, does not leave space for difference.

This paper will address questions related to urban morphology and town analysis in the case of Ringsend and Irishtown. This will provide a tool to learn from the past and perhaps find new models of development that might be less detrimental for the heritage of cities and urban communities. One of the ideas of this paper is to adhere to the new tendency in conservation policies to provide a broader analysis of urban areas, not only considering individual monuments in cities, but also analysing the significance of urban morphology and intangible heritage. It forms part of an OPW Post- Doctoral Fellowship in Conservation Studies and Environmental History.1 Research has been carried out in different areas of urban history of Dublin’s southern waterfront, including infrastructure history and a thorough analysis of the letters of the Pembroke Estate of the 19th century, which included the areas of Ringsend and Irishtown. However, this paper focuses on the study of urban form of the area and its significance to Dublin’s heritage.

The social consequences of broken urban structures: a case study of Belfast

This article explores how the design and layout of the urban environment can have significant social impacts on working class communities whose access to employment and other necessary services depends largely on public transport and safe walk-able streets. It does so by considering a case study of Belfast. Although Belfast has a distinctive recent history as the site of political violence and territorial division, it also has a spatial configuration that emerged out of a modernising roads and redevelopment programme in the 1960s and 1970s. However, an understanding of contemporary Belfast, particularly its urban structure and form, requires n analysis of how the social impacts of such ubiquitous regional and urban planning practices were not addressed. The article argues that a culture of ‘politically safe’ bureaucratic inaction developed during the ‘war years’ has been sustained in the ‘new democracy’. In turn, this has had significant consequences for the functioning of the city. Major areas of derelict land around the city core together with the impediments created by regional road infrastructure have combined to create a doughnut city that, on the one hand, facilitates a commuting middle class, while on the other, discriminates against the poorest inner city communities. The article goes on to examine how an activist urban design group, known as the Forum for Alternative Belfast, has responded to these challenges. It focuses particularly on action-research undertaken during its 2010 Summer School which aimed to address issues of disconnection in inner North Belfast that affect some of the most territorialised and deprived communities in the city.

Urban planning after the Black Death: townscape transformations in later-medieval England (1350-1530)

This article offers a reconsideration of planning and development in
English towns and cities after the Black Death (1348). Conventional historical
accounts have stressed the occurrence of urban ‘decay’ in the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Here, instead, a case is made that after 1350 urban planning continued to influence towns and cities in England through the transformation of their townscapes. Using the conceptual approaches of urban morphologists in particular, the article demonstrates that not only did the foundation of new towns and creation of new suburbs characterize the period 1350–1530, but so too did the redevelopment of existing urban landscapes through civic improvements and public works. These reveal evidence for the particular ‘agents of change’ involved in the planning and development process, such as surveyors, officials, patrons and architects, and also the role played by maps and drawn surveys. In this reappraisal, England’s urban experiences can be seen to have been closely connected with those instances of urban planning after the Black Death occurring elsewhere in contemporary continental Europe.