SofA: 03.09

What follows is the first in what SofA hopes will be a series of short opinion pieces written by students, staff and others on issues they are currently exploring in the realm of architecture and beyond.

If you are interested in submitting a piece to SofA for publication on our blog, please contact us at societyofarchitecture@gmail.com

This text was written following a visit to Ballymun undertaken by the 2nd year students of SAUL during March of 2009 in which the writer expresses their fears for the future of the community and meditates on the role of idealism in architecture.

ON HOPE AND THE REGENERATION OF BALLYMUN

The word ‘regeneration’ is a contentious one, particularly here in Limerick where some of the city’s most disadvantaged areas are set to undergo the process in the coming years in an attempt to alleviate the rampant social problems and poor living conditions many people endure as a result of prior neglectful planning, design and management of housing schemes.

In Dublin, the regeneration of Ballymun, perhaps the most notorious social housing development in the country, is progressing apace, although the results appear to be far from promising.

Built as a solution to the housing crises of the 1960s inner city, the Ballymun development forcibly displaced thousands of residents from their city neighbourhoods to what was a semi-rural greenfields site in North Dublin. Architecturally, the original scheme was most noted for its pre-cast concrete tower blocks – part of a utopian modernist vision of clean, comfortable housing units, stacked and placed delicately into a vast, green parkscape. Of course, the reality soon dispelled the hope that had been embodied in the brave development as key facilities went unbuilt and malfunctions in infrastructure were ignored as social problems escalated to the extent that it became impossible to contract workers willing to make the necessary repairs.

A strong community in the area campaigned relentlessly as problems with drugs and violence threatened to engulf Ballymun, and in 1997 Ballymun Regeneration Ltd was established to plan for the future of the area.

The masterplan they produced was a revival of hope and a reassertion of faith in the power of architecture to instigate change; to make a real difference in the lives of the poor, the vulnerable and the disenfranchised. It provided for amenities and community facilities within walking distance of every home, a new ‘main street’ designed around pedestrian movement and the human scale and what perhaps amounts to the symbolic destruction of the high-rise towers that came to represent the problems of the area in the outside world. Superficially, at least, it seemed as though Ballymun was to undergo a transformation.

The vast architectural playground that is now under construction does not engender confidence. In the shadowy stairwells of the older buildings and at the infamous shopping centre, the few opportunities for shelter in the windswept remnants of the green landscape, figures can be glimpsed congregating and shady exchanges taking place. Shelter remains at a premium in the new schemes too; it seems that there has been a deliberate, choreographed attempt to provide strongly programmed open space, presumably in an effort to discourage anti-social behaviour, with the effect of creating inhospitable areas that appear abandoned.

The high, industrial metal railings that encircle some of the new park spaces (to be removed when security cameras are installed) and create barriers in front of many new houses are indicative of the fundamental distrust of the architects in their end-users; an unhelpful cynicism that would perhaps be better channelled into the formation of a strong maintenance company to service the area. In fact, a number of the new dwellings are already bearing the scars of vandalism and abandonment, with graffiti, smoke stains from fires and boarded-up windows beginning to appear.

Facetious attempts to create a degree of homogeneity in what could have become a multifarious tissue of developments designed by so many hands have seemingly resulted in quite the opposite – a sprawling, labyrinthine maze of low density dwellings that is virtually impossible for an outsider to navigate.

Perhaps the most successful move made thus far has been the reworking of Main Street. An increase in the number of junctions on what was historically a heavily trafficked artery has both allowed for greater pedestrian interaction between the two sides of the street as well as undermining the hegemony of the car in the area; the street has in essence been transformed from a barrier to a permeable membrane. An injection of commercial buildings with street frontage has begun to bring pedestrian life to the street, and despite the clumsiness of many of the insertions the space as a whole would appear to be lively and well-used at this point.

Historically, social housing has often been fertile ground for what has been referred to as architectural experimentation. This sentiment, often prevalent among those who have been ‘experimented’ upon with dire results in the modernist period, should serve to caution those who work on projects such as Ballymun. In fact, there is no clearer or more relevant precedent than that of the abject failure of Ballymun’s first thoroughly idealistic and hopeful inception as a community characterised by open space, fresh air and healthy living away from the dangers of the inner-city slums. However, some of the most refreshing and successful housing schemes have resulted from bold experimentation, which leaves us with a quandary; should we forgo innovation by eschewing experimentation? And what is the place of hope and idealism, the driving forces of experimentation, in social design?

With another five years until the completion of the regeneration project at Ballymun, it is much too soon to pass judgement on the success of the initiative. Nonetheless, while the ambitions and objectives of the plan are admirable, the burgeoning problems outlined above, among others, would suggest that it may prove to be yet another failure of an ‘architecture of good intentions’.

LE