Kieran Rose Article

copyofcopyofvenice1ja4.jpg
How Kieran Rose wanted to liberate Bridgefoot St (image analogy courtesy Kevin Duff)

People dealing with planning in Dublin have wondered for a while what was going on in Kieran Rose’s head.We found out in today’s Irish Times (Opinion IT 17 June below). As a senior planner in Dublin City Council his speciality has been promoting permissions that breach the city’s development plan – e.g. the Clarence and some of the unplanned high-rise around Ballsbridge and the Liberties (including the inverted L depicted above, though with some geographical licence). Because of the breaches many of his controversial decisions get overturned by An Bord Pleanala. I found his article confusing but essentially he believes that we need to get rid of “limiting mindsets”; promote the economy and creativity; and that “a great city has two hallmarks: tolerance for strangers and intolerance for mediocrity”. He has no time for the accepted concept of sustainability (including boring environmental concerns like reducing traffic and carbon emissions), for democracy as represented by the views of the elected representatives and citizens who together draw up the development plan that is intended to guide planning permissions, or for the heritage that distinguishes the attractions of Dublin from those of New York. Indeed most of the works he quotes are relevant to the US and not to Ireland. Barmy abstract quotations along the lines of those included in his article have for some time now peppered planning decisions emanating from Dublin CIty Council. His vision may offer a certain superficial energy but is so transparently limited in planning terms as to be risible and dangerous. The point about planning is that it must aim to address all factors and interests, not just the exciting or voguish ones.

THAT ARTICLE:

Dublin could be a ‘creative city’ if we get rid of limiting mindsets

Increasingly, cities are drivers of national economies and are successful largely because creative people want to live there. Research shows such people are drawn to places that are diverse and tolerant.
Increasingly, cities are drivers of national economies and are successful largely because creative people want to live there. Research shows such people are drawn to places that are diverse and tolerant.

Successful, dynamic, exciting cities are ones that embrace diversity and openness and plan to meet people’s real needs, rather than adhering to ideological positions, writes Kieran Rose .

IN THE Rise of the Creative Class , Richard Florida writes: “We live in a time of great promise. We have evolved economic and social systems that tap human creativity and turn it into economic value as never before. This in turn creates an unparalleled opportunity to raise our living standards, build a more humane and sustainable economy, and make our lives more complete.”

Florida documents the centrality of creative industries and creative workers in the new economy and in global competitiveness; and how openness to diversity, especially in relation to gay people and people from diverse backgrounds and other countries, is critical to success.

Creative workers are those who add economic value through their creativity. They include scientists, engineers, designers, artists and those employed in knowledge-based industries. Increasingly, cities are drivers of national economies and are successful largely because creative people from around the world want to live there.

From his research, Florida found that people were drawn to places that were diverse, tolerant and open to new ideas. He writes of “creative ecosystems – habitats open to new people and ideas”.

Places with a high concentration of gay people tend to have higher rates of innovation and economic growth. Florida is not arguing that gay people cause cities to be successful, but that our presence in large numbers is “an indicator of an underlying culture that’s openminded and diverse”, and thus conducive to creativity and attractive to creative workers. A place that welcomes gay people welcomes all kinds of people.

He quotes Bonnie Kahn, who writes: “A great city has two hallmarks: tolerance for strangers and intolerance for mediocrity.”

The Florida approach links a wide range of issues such as globalisation, economic growth and prosperity, diversity and creativity, equality and social justice, planning and city-making. Economic success is key; it is fundamental to social success and should be welcomed for the life opportunities it offers. It is not to be decried, as it is by some; prosperity, it would seem, is good for them but dangerous for others.

Issues of social justice and equality are crucial. In a paper on educational disadvantage, Creating a Place for All in the Knowledge Economy and the Learning Society , John Sweeney, senior social policy analyst with the National Economic and Social Council, rebuts a negative mindset, among even the well-intentioned, that discounts Ireland’s economic success. He argues that “our economic performance is much more part of the solution than part of the problem when it comes to ensuring a better quality of life for all”.

Florida makes a related point when he says there is a huge reservoir of untapped creative potential that is being squandered because of social exclusion and argues that we must strive to tap the full creative capabilities of every single human being. Addressing these issues “is not only socially and morally just; it is an economic imperative for any society interested in long-term innovation and prosperity”.

There are common themes across these issues: there are two mindsets, liberating or limiting.

The liberating mindset is characterised by embracing diversity; having high ambitions for a better quality of life for all; a confidence in our ability to deliver positive change; openness; flexibility; responsiveness to changed circumstances; and prioritising real people’s lives over abstract ideological positions. This approach can deliver progress and optimise opportunities in all areas, whether social, economic or city-making.

The limiting or fearful mindset is characterised by being change-averse; having low ambitions; a lack of confidence; a resistance to diversity; and sacrificing ordinary people’s life opportunities to a glorification of either a past that never was or a rigid ideological position.

Max Page’s study of the redevelopment of New York touches on all of these issues, including diversity and immigration. He argues that in the battles over new buildings, demolition and planning lay “the fundamental tension between a celebration of the metropolis – its dynamism and diversity – and a profound nostalgia born of a fear for what the modern city portended”.

Similar resistances are at work in Dublin today. Florida puts it well when he says new creative cities can emerge and surpass established players very quickly. He analyses how some cities lose out: “these cities are trapped by their past”, in the culture and attitudes of a bygone age, and so innovation and growth shift to new places.

Florida brings together issues of economic growth, creativity, equality, diversity, social justice, planning and city-making in a challenging and productive way.

This approach provides a wide agenda for change that could involve a broad range of agencies in an alliance for progress. This could include central and local Government; planning authorities; trade-union and business interests; equality, social justice and community organisations; economic development agencies; private enterprises; and the development sector.

Peter Hall’s Cities in Civilization analyses the evolution of creative cities such as Los Angeles, London, New York and others. He wonders where the next global creative city will be and concludes that it will be “a special kind of city, a city in economic and social flux with large numbers of new and young arrivals, mixing and merging into a new kind of society”.

This sounds like Dublin. It could be Dublin, but only if we get rid of our limiting mindsets and are ambitious, open and determined to succeed.

Kieran Rose is chairman of the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, a board member of the Equality Authority, a member of the consultative panel of FuturesIreland, and a planner with Dublin City Council. The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of any of these organisations.

About these ads

2 Responses to “Kieran Rose Article”

  1. Here’s the nub of the article by Kieran Rose (a man who is defining his interpretation of public, popular policy through his socio-sexual perspectives):

    “There are common themes across these issues: there are two mindsets, liberating or limiting.” And that is that. Good or bad. Black or white. No room for grey, striped – or pink.

    “The liberating mindset is characterised by embracing diversity” – i.e., all change is good. Those who disagree are myopic and, at worst, prejudiced.

    “This approach can deliver progress and optimise opportunities in all areas, whether social, economic or city-making” – based on what impirical or other measurements? This is the very definition of woolliness and the worst type of a counter to technobabble.

    “The limiting or fearful” [where did “fearful” come from?] “mindset is characterised by being change-averse; having low ambitions; a lack of confidence; a resistance to diversity…” Diversity – that’s it in a nutshell. Rose’s subtext here is that if you don’t embrace new development at any cost to a city’s intrinsic existing structure (Paris, anyone? Prague?), you’re blinkered and unaccepting of other forms of diversity in, say, sexual orientation. Sorry Kieran – it’s puerile and cheap to equate these.

    As a lapsed member of the RTPI and IPI (and having met Rose in his junior days in the Irish Life building), I am often astounded that the higher up the ladder many idealists rise, their views become so patently encrusted and inflexible, yet are clung to by their adherents as reflecting a progressive outlook. The danger here is the Robert Moses-like power of a single voice clouding out other voices of reason, but I have every faith in my Dublin planning colleagues that they will keep Rose in check.

  2. This Rose chap is a nut. You can liberate humans, not cities (unless you’re Max Robespierre).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: