PATRONAGE, POWER and PROBITY
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
I PATRONAGE, POWER and PROBITY Accountability and aspiration in publicly funded development Robert Henry Croydon Cardiff School of Geography and Planning Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Cardiff University 2016 II Abstract The research examines actions and relationships described as patronage which have contributed to the development of architecture and the built environment. In so doing it first seeks to identify the characteristics that have defined such patronage historically. It then moves to examine whether such characteristics could be identified in the promotion and execution of publicly funded projects in the modern day. The focus on aspirational forms of development which relied upon the commitment of public resources allowed the following proposition to be more fully tested. That is that the forms of patronage evidenced historically cannot be replicated in a democratic polity like contemporary Britain for reasons which include current requirements relating to the exercise of probity in management and public office. As an inevitable consequence of the universal franchise and wider democratic accountability those commissioning public works do not then enjoy the relative autonomy exercised by those described as patrons historically. A case study research strategy was adopted and undertaken focussing on major publicly funded developments in Cardiff between 1986 and 2006. Those, expressly or implicitly, aspired to the creation of places which would embody symbolic or cultural capital. Among the factors examined are the impartiality required of bureaucracies and political pressures for public bodies to prioritise quantifiable short-term outputs over less tangible longer-term assessment of environmental qualities. Other countervailing forces considered are prevailing economic conditions and market forces, which are similarly short-term, the cultural climate and public support for such development. The conclusions of the research then question the extent to which actions and relationship described as patronage can be the effective means of realising publicly funded urban development of notable quality. III Declaration and Statements Declaration This work has not been submitted in substance for any other degree or award at this or any other university or place of learning, nor is being submitted concurrently in candidature for any degree or other award. Signed ………………………………………… (RH Croydon) Date ………………………… Statement 1 This thesis is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD. Signed ………………………………………… (RH Croydon) Date ………………………… Statement 2 This thesis is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by explicit references. The views expressed are my own. Signed ………………………………………… (RH Croydon) Date ………………………… Statement 3 I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed ………………………………………… (RH Croydon) Date ………………………… IV Acknowledgements My sincere thanks to my supervisors Dr. Huw Thomas and Dr. Neil Harris and my assessor Dr. Francesca Sartori for their guidance and perseverance. A particular debt of gratitude is expressed to those who gave generously of their time in clarifying points of fact and issues arising in the course of case study research- many in extensive interviews. These are listed alphabetically as follows; Jonathan Adams Russell Goodway Ian Campbell Patrick Hannay Liz Court Nigel Hanson David Crompton Ivan Harbour Sybil Crouch Ian Layzell Andrew Davies Tim Levinson Dai Davies Rhodri Morgan Gareth Davies (Stride Treglown Prof Malcolm Parry Davies) Lord (Peter) Palumbo Gareth Davies (Welsh Rugby Union) Prof. John Punter Geraint Talfan Davies Huw Roberts Ron Davies Prof. Richard Silverman Nic Downs Wiard Sterk Adrian Edwards Prof. Terry Stevens Richard Essex Huw Thomas (Residuary Body for Wales) Sue Essex Dr. Huw Thomas (Cardiff Geraint Evans University) Dr Wayne Forster Jonathan Vining V Contents. 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 8 2 Chapter 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 33 3 Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................112 4 Chapter 4 CASE STUDY 1. ...............................................................................................147 The Bute Avenue/ Bute Square Project, Cardiff Bay ..............................................................147 5 Chapter 5 CASE STUDY 2 .................................................................................................198 The Cardiff Bay Opera House/ Wales Millennium Stadium ‘contest’ ....................................198 6 Chapter 6 CASE STUDY 3 .................................................................................................246 Housing the National Assembly for Wales .............................................................................246 7 Chapter 7 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................291 VI List of Illustrations Figure 1. Carmona diagram of competing imperatives. These are also described by Carmona as the 'three tyrannies' of design, market and regulation ..................................................................................................... 43 Figure 2 The cycle of possible motivation .................................................... 99 Figure 3 procedural steps in quasi- judicial method reproduced from Collis and Hussey (1987) ...................................................................................... 141 Figure 4. Analysis of the characteristics of patronage and opposing factors .................................................................................................................... 144 Figure 5. Case Study Locations ................................................................... 146 Figure 6 Bute Avenue – location ................................................................ 151 Figure 7 Aerial view of Bute Avenue ...................................................... 152 Figure 8 Llewelyn Davies 1988proposal plan showing the avenue as a 'formal mall' and with reference to 'great New Town' .............................. 154 Figure 9 Bute Street looking north. Railway embankment wall on right, Butetown housing estate on left. .............................................................. 159 Figure 10 Through section from MBM design proposal showing proposed light railway and separation of existing local authority housing estate and proposed residential development ............................................................ 159 Figure 11 PFI submission by Citylink Consortium showing separation of existing and proposed residential areas by roads, light rail, linear park and pedestrian walkways .................................................................................. 160 Figure 12. Relative population of Cardiff, Paris and Barcelona ................ 162 Figure 13 Oval basin/ Plas Roald Dahl ...................................................... 167 Figure 14 Oval Basin/ Plas Roald Dahl. View south. In use for public concert ....................................................................................................... 168 Figure 15 Oval basin/ Plas Roald Dahl. View north - recreational use in summer ...................................................................................................... 168 Figure 16 Herbert Street Bridge (on left) viewed from junction of Callaghan Square and the northbound carriageway of Bute Street. The head of Bute VII Avenue can be seen beyond the bridge only from this part of the square. .................................................................................................................... 188 Figure 17 Aerial view of the Herbert Street Junction and Bridge. The northern junction of Lloyd George Avenue can be seen to turn away from Callaghan Square. ....................................................................................... 188 Figure 18 The Zaha Hadid design proposal for the Cardiff Bay Opera House .................................................................................................................... 211 Figure 19 The Wales Millennium Stadium ................................................. 218 Figure 20F The ‘Millennium Walkway’ to the west/ riverbank of the Stadium ...................................................................................................... 230 Figure 21 Millennium Plaza, southern access to Stadium with commercial development to right ................................................................................. 231 Figure 22 General view of Pierhead/ Inner Harbour with principal buildings annotated. .................................................................................................. 248 Figure 23 Aerial view of Pierhead/ Inner harbour, Cardiff looking north showing the relative location of buildings referred to. ............................. 248 Figure 24 Crickhowell House, now known as Ty Hywel. ........................... 257 Figure 25 NCM Building (now known as Atradius)................................... 261 Figure 26. Costs of the Senedd – Source : Wales Audit Office