CITICHAT 38/2001 - 27 September 2002
INNER CITY LIVABILITY, WHY DON’T WE RATHER TRY SAO PAULO?
Some years ago I was on the 50th floor of the Carlton Centre with the Star’s James Clarke chatting about various aspects of the city. I was bewailing the fact that many of the more modern buildings were totally introverted - people came to work and parked in the basement, caught a lift to their office floor, ate in the cafeteria at lunch-time or in one of the executive dining rooms, had a work-out in the corporate gym and at the end of the day caught the lift back down to the basement and drove home. No interaction with the city at all. And the losers? The city as well as the individual. Livability isn’t just something that the city environment provides but is the sum of many things, and one of the vital ingredients is people. Whilst we were chatting, we saw a helicopter zoom past and settle on a rooftop helipad, disgorge its passengers who disappeared into the building and then zoomed off again. “There, see” I said to James, only part in jest, “some don’t even trust our roads!”
I was reminded of that incident when I was given an article on Sao Paulo published earlier this year in the Washington Post. The article says; “Sao Paulo – a city of 18 million, populated by the fantastically wealthy and the severely poor with little in between – is, by some accounts, a vision of future urban life in the developing world.”
In the case of Sao Paulo it was an industrial boom over the past century that lured millions of poor Brazilians from the destitute areas of the country to the city. As the writer puts it; “Most trade destitute rural lives for urban misery, piling into ever-growing slums that have become dens for gangs dealing in drugs, kidnapping and arms.” Sound familiar? Only in our case it was, ironically, as a result of our first taste of democracy as the repressive and restrictive laws of the previous regime, its social engineering, officially disappeared from the statute books.
And in our case, much of the “big business” that was still left in city, upped and left for the sought after sanctuary of the northern nodes led by many of our “captains of industry”. Sao Paulo appears to have been different in that business appears to have largely stayed in the city but moved their residential addresses in a double whammy that has been even more devastating. Firstly, they make no attempt to deal with the city problems, isolating themselves from the streets and, secondly they have moved their homes and families into new 'settlements'. But forget the three metre high walls topped with spikes and electrified fencing that our suburbs boast. Road closures and suburban fences? Oh no! they have moved to the next generation!
Whilst business has stayed in the city, the executives commute by helicopter, to home, to office, to meetings outside offices, to shop, even to church. There are 240 helipads in the city (New York has 10 – we have one maybe two) and helicopter companies estimate that liftoffs average 100 per hour. As helicopters are not cheap (between R4 million and R20 million in Sao Paulo), some businessmen syndicate their use, paying a one time fee of four hundred thousand rand and then a further fifteen thousand rand per month.
The determinants are quoted as being high crime (60 murders to 100 000 residents compared to 7.4 and 7.8 in the Washington metro area and New York respectively); frustration with traffic, lack of acceptable public transport and clogged highways.
A recent study has shown that a million Brazilian residents live in walled cities of which Sao Paulo has more than 300. These walled communities have helipads and limited entrances and exits all monitored 24 hours a day. Private security ‘armies’ some as large as 1 100 officers oversee every aspect of public life within the walled areas, whether at the shopping centre, school, sports facilities or gyms. Inside the ‘compounds’ every visitor is recorded by cameras and all exiting employees are ‘patted down’ and searched in front of live TV.
The wife of a banker who lives in Alphaville, some seven-and-a-half miles from the city centre (a walled community of 300 000 residents, three helipads and only four entrances/exits each monitored 24 hours a day) says that she is concerned that her kids are growing up in a bubble - "they go to school here, their friends are here but when we go (infrequently) to the city they ask "Mommy why is that man begging?" or "why do those kids live on the streets?"
Teresa Caldeira a noted Brazilian anthropologist and author of “City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paulo” sums it up; “ The elite have made a decision. Instead of looking to better Brazilian society in general, they are abandoning it and finding their own personal protection behind guarded walls. The rich are retrenching, restricting their lives in incredible ways and living their lives in an increasingly paranoid fashion.”
Other sociologists concur saying that Sao Paulo provides all the signs of the way urban society in Latin America's largest nation is changing. The writer of the article suggests, as you will have seen previously, that it may also be a "vision of future urban life in the developing world."
For us, warning, maybe, but vision, no! There are just too many visible signs of progress made during these past two years in particular. There is just so much energy, so many people and organisations committed to and actively working on the revitalisation of this city that I have every confidence that we have reversed the downward spiral and are off the bottom and on our way up. And 'people and organisations', thankfully, include the Executive Mayor and Council who continue to show the political will that is so essential an ingredient for success.
As an aside, I trust that their political will is going to continue to hold under the latest pressure that threatens the city's recovery, that from hawker associations over MetroMarket and street trading. They seem to be determined to prevent their members from being part of the future of the city by forcing them to continue trading on streets at subsistence levels and less. They, the hawker associations not the hawkers, would do well in Sao Paulo!
Thursday, September 27, 2001
Friday, September 21, 2001
Public Open Space Citichat 21 September 2001
CITICHAT 37/2001 - September 21.2001
Public Open Space
Still intending to look at private sector organisations established to interface with cities, but other issues keep distracting me. Wednesday we had another 'march/demonstration/ whatever' in the City, have absolutely no idea what it was about. I still remain positive from the point of view that we at least now have the freedom for these to take place (even if we don't know what they're all about!). But Why O Why must they be accompanied by a continuous cacophony of amplified shouting later to be followed by metro police cars with sirens screaming leading the marchers? Some time after the event I had occasion to cross the Library Gardens area (no, that is too much of a misnomer, let's try Civic Spine) and was again appalled at the litter and filth that appears to be the hallmark of gatherings of people in our city. Apart from the mess, I noticed that openings created in the awful structures in the corners of the Civic Spine have been secured with barbed wire. Apart from the perception that barbed wire creates, from a practical point of view it also acts as a catch-all for every bit of wind-borne paper or plastic. Our cleansing department appears to work with downcast eyes, can't say that I blame them, but this means that only refuse on the ground is removed. As a result, detritus of the wind-borne variety stays as a permanent monument to our inability to educate the broad community to respect the public environment.
Or, maybe the 14th Century observation of one, Petrus Berchorius is correct when he said; "Since piazzas are areas in villages or cities, empty of houses and other such things and of obstructions, arranged for the purpose of providing space or set up for meetings of men, it should be remarked, in general, through piazzas the condition of man in this world can be discovered."
Richard Rogers in his book “Cities for a Small Planet” says much the same as he comments that cities reflect the values, commitment and resolve of the societies which they contain. He says “The success of a city therefore depends on its inhabitants, their government and the priority both give to maintaining a humane urban environment……. The public domain is the theatre of the urban culture. It is where citizenship is enacted, it is the glue that can bind an urban society…..Quality of urban environment defines quality of life for its citizens….. A new form of citizenship must be evolved that responds to the needs of a modern city.”
What are we doing about evolving a new form of citizenship?
Cy Paumier, the principal of the company LDR International which is based in Columbia, Maryland, in his keynote speech at the Mayor's Forum held last year in Seattle Washington, began with the following statement; "The really great cities of the world are remembered for their public realm: their parks, plazas, boulevards, squares, and pedestrian streets. It isn't about buildings alone - it's the public realm, the public environment, the connective physical fabric that sets the tone for private investment and creates the human environment for human activity and habitation. And those are the things that people really remember."
Clearly, if really great cities are remembered by their public realm, we have an awful long way to go! What’s to do about it?
Paumier then highlighted the following principles in regard to the provision of memorable public space:
1. Parks, plazas and pedestrian streets are the primary organising elements that shape city centre development, create livability, and preserve property values
2. Revitalising existing parks and open space stimulates private investment in cities
3. Creating new parks and green space generates vitality and fosters residential development in cities
4. Enhancing existing civic space restores respect and pride in cities
5. Creating linear greenways reinforces pedestrian walkways between activity areas and amenities
6. Streetscape improvement along vehicular entrances to the city improve the image of an urban area and
7. A well-designed public realm will promote community investment, contribute to a city's unique character and create a sense of place.
Let’s face it, our city public spaces are just awful and their usage, whilst underlining our young democracy emphasises our lawlessness and disrespect for the city’s public realm. I shudder to think of Earth Summit attendees in now under twelve months time! Again, what’s to do?
The rebuilding of the Civic Spine into a space that is in keeping with the vision of a ‘World Class African City’ – ‘a city of propriety, excellent quality of life and a wealth of cultural and economic activity’ -, on the agenda now for some time, must be accelerated. This would be a good start. Let’s have an international design competition with the entries exhibited all over the city and its citizens given the opportunity to comment, criticise and generally participate in the decision making process. Then, in parallel, the city must embark on a massive ‘citizenship pride’ campaign. The editorial in an issue of ULI’s Urban Land magazine said this; “So what makes a community great? According to some common findings, a great community is about how it feels, not how it looks; how it acts, not how it is managed; if the community is wired; if it offers charitable goals; if it addresses health, educational, social and cultural needs; and if it provides recreational amenities. If it meets all of these criteria, not only will a community be ‘great’ but by nurturing a sense of well–being amongst residents, it will encourage ‘value-added’ development.”
And if that doesn’t work let’s just introduce a hefty littering spot fine starting just in the areas of our public spaces – the whole city would be impossible to police. And if all this doesn’t work, move the demonstrations elsewhere! Spiro Kostof in his book "The City Assembled" provides the motivation:
"Cities of every age have seen fit to make provision for open places that would promote social encounters and serve the conduct of public affairs. The model of a democratic civic centre remains the Greek agora. In its origin it was the open air locus of citizen's meetings. When the Athenian Agora proved too small for this purpose, the general assembly moved to the nearby hill of the Pnyx."
As luck would have it, we too have a nearby hill at the top of which is our bland monolith of a Metropolitan Centre. But it is surrounded by grassed public spaces which would provide an excellent venue for “moving the general assembly to” complete with the accompanying noise and litter. Then, in solidarity with the Athenian example, we could rename the hill Stynx!
Public Open Space
Still intending to look at private sector organisations established to interface with cities, but other issues keep distracting me. Wednesday we had another 'march/demonstration/ whatever' in the City, have absolutely no idea what it was about. I still remain positive from the point of view that we at least now have the freedom for these to take place (even if we don't know what they're all about!). But Why O Why must they be accompanied by a continuous cacophony of amplified shouting later to be followed by metro police cars with sirens screaming leading the marchers? Some time after the event I had occasion to cross the Library Gardens area (no, that is too much of a misnomer, let's try Civic Spine) and was again appalled at the litter and filth that appears to be the hallmark of gatherings of people in our city. Apart from the mess, I noticed that openings created in the awful structures in the corners of the Civic Spine have been secured with barbed wire. Apart from the perception that barbed wire creates, from a practical point of view it also acts as a catch-all for every bit of wind-borne paper or plastic. Our cleansing department appears to work with downcast eyes, can't say that I blame them, but this means that only refuse on the ground is removed. As a result, detritus of the wind-borne variety stays as a permanent monument to our inability to educate the broad community to respect the public environment.
Or, maybe the 14th Century observation of one, Petrus Berchorius is correct when he said; "Since piazzas are areas in villages or cities, empty of houses and other such things and of obstructions, arranged for the purpose of providing space or set up for meetings of men, it should be remarked, in general, through piazzas the condition of man in this world can be discovered."
Richard Rogers in his book “Cities for a Small Planet” says much the same as he comments that cities reflect the values, commitment and resolve of the societies which they contain. He says “The success of a city therefore depends on its inhabitants, their government and the priority both give to maintaining a humane urban environment……. The public domain is the theatre of the urban culture. It is where citizenship is enacted, it is the glue that can bind an urban society…..Quality of urban environment defines quality of life for its citizens….. A new form of citizenship must be evolved that responds to the needs of a modern city.”
What are we doing about evolving a new form of citizenship?
Cy Paumier, the principal of the company LDR International which is based in Columbia, Maryland, in his keynote speech at the Mayor's Forum held last year in Seattle Washington, began with the following statement; "The really great cities of the world are remembered for their public realm: their parks, plazas, boulevards, squares, and pedestrian streets. It isn't about buildings alone - it's the public realm, the public environment, the connective physical fabric that sets the tone for private investment and creates the human environment for human activity and habitation. And those are the things that people really remember."
Clearly, if really great cities are remembered by their public realm, we have an awful long way to go! What’s to do about it?
Paumier then highlighted the following principles in regard to the provision of memorable public space:
1. Parks, plazas and pedestrian streets are the primary organising elements that shape city centre development, create livability, and preserve property values
2. Revitalising existing parks and open space stimulates private investment in cities
3. Creating new parks and green space generates vitality and fosters residential development in cities
4. Enhancing existing civic space restores respect and pride in cities
5. Creating linear greenways reinforces pedestrian walkways between activity areas and amenities
6. Streetscape improvement along vehicular entrances to the city improve the image of an urban area and
7. A well-designed public realm will promote community investment, contribute to a city's unique character and create a sense of place.
Let’s face it, our city public spaces are just awful and their usage, whilst underlining our young democracy emphasises our lawlessness and disrespect for the city’s public realm. I shudder to think of Earth Summit attendees in now under twelve months time! Again, what’s to do?
The rebuilding of the Civic Spine into a space that is in keeping with the vision of a ‘World Class African City’ – ‘a city of propriety, excellent quality of life and a wealth of cultural and economic activity’ -, on the agenda now for some time, must be accelerated. This would be a good start. Let’s have an international design competition with the entries exhibited all over the city and its citizens given the opportunity to comment, criticise and generally participate in the decision making process. Then, in parallel, the city must embark on a massive ‘citizenship pride’ campaign. The editorial in an issue of ULI’s Urban Land magazine said this; “So what makes a community great? According to some common findings, a great community is about how it feels, not how it looks; how it acts, not how it is managed; if the community is wired; if it offers charitable goals; if it addresses health, educational, social and cultural needs; and if it provides recreational amenities. If it meets all of these criteria, not only will a community be ‘great’ but by nurturing a sense of well–being amongst residents, it will encourage ‘value-added’ development.”
And if that doesn’t work let’s just introduce a hefty littering spot fine starting just in the areas of our public spaces – the whole city would be impossible to police. And if all this doesn’t work, move the demonstrations elsewhere! Spiro Kostof in his book "The City Assembled" provides the motivation:
"Cities of every age have seen fit to make provision for open places that would promote social encounters and serve the conduct of public affairs. The model of a democratic civic centre remains the Greek agora. In its origin it was the open air locus of citizen's meetings. When the Athenian Agora proved too small for this purpose, the general assembly moved to the nearby hill of the Pnyx."
As luck would have it, we too have a nearby hill at the top of which is our bland monolith of a Metropolitan Centre. But it is surrounded by grassed public spaces which would provide an excellent venue for “moving the general assembly to” complete with the accompanying noise and litter. Then, in solidarity with the Athenian example, we could rename the hill Stynx!
Friday, September 14, 2001
Musings 7/11 Citichat 14 September 2001
CITICHAT 36/2001 - 14 September 2001
Musings on 7/11
I’ve changed my mind a number of times since Monday about the contents of this Citichat. Then I was thinking of writing in regard to the increasing variety of ways the private sector in South Africa structures itself for dealing with city issues. By Tuesday night, quite numbed by the day’s events, I thought that it might be an idea to pass up doing anything this week at all. But, as this newsletter is meant to provide a personal commentary on cities, city issues and ‘happenings’ I later felt that it can hardly ignore the tragedy that took place and which is still being played out in two of the world’s best known cities this past week. Whilst ‘Citichat’ is personal opinion it is based as far as possible on facts, so it is not a vehicle for emotional outpourings. Therefore I do not want to talk about what has happened this week from the human tragedy point of view, we have the media for that. Rather, to try to comment more pragmatically on the issue from a city point of view.
A couple of weeks ago I recorded the comments of my American friends at our local conferences as to the importance of cities. That they are the economic hub and heart, the icon for the region, the ‘kitchen’ for the community. But in reality none of these capture the intensity yet variety of the experiences that cities offer. For they are so much more, they are the meeting place for every facet of human life be it business or social, community, residential, sport, recreation, education, culture, art, religion, the market, the trading centre - engaging, making, learning, seeking, finding - the melting pot of humanity, rich and poor, legal and illegal, that is drawn like a magnet to seek work but equally to seek social intercourse, companionship and shared experience. None more so than in New York. With its incredibly diverse neighbourhoods, racial, ethnic, economic, social, its teeming mass of millions of people all seemingly in a rush to keep ahead of the highly competitive environment in which they live which makes them often appear impatient and rude. Its streets spurt columns of smoke from underground train tunnels whilst vehicles of every size shape and colour aggressively and loudly negotiate the roads with their never ending bumps and holes, its noises and smells, it has always been for me the epitome of a city. Some say that New York isn’t America just as London isn’t England – maybe, but they are both cities in the true sense of the word. Pumping with sheer vitality, excitement and exhilaration. And EXPERIENCES. Drawing the best of the good and the worst of the bad, for that is what cities are all about, they attract it all.
Both cities’ buildings and bridges are just so representative of their character, London’s dignity and history provides a homogeneity that is never boring. New York’s glitter and its ‘in your face’ brashness makes you have to look for the gems amongst its eclectic offerings of every style and shape and type. And great gems there are, too many to mention. For me the Chrysler Building catches something of the past that I find deeply satisfying. The Empire State is the grand old lady that one never tires of. Wolfgang Koeppen described it thirty years ago as “the tallest building in the city claiming to be the 8th wonder of the world. All of humanity crowds into the elevators for a ride up to heaven. Signposts flash by like vast storm fronts confirming unity. Security guards guide the traffic. It’s as busy as a large train station.”
What is it with structures that they so succinctly define the nature of their settings? The Great Pyramids at Giza, the Tower of London, the Taj Mahal, St. Sophia - all capture the imagination of people throughout the ages. Some become symbols or icons of a single place, others of the cities they are set in and yet others of a whole country or civilisation. Structures are a prerequisite for human life and an ever present factor in our modern world. The delicacy of the Acropolis overlooking the city of Athens, the impenetrable fortress of Masada homogenious with the desert below, the ‘Africanness’ of the Djenne Mosque of Mali, the blinding beauty of the Taj Mahal. Can you imagine Rome without St Peter’s, London without its Houses of Parliament, Paris without the Eiffel Tower, Sydney without its Opera House? All contribute to the ethos and particular character of the city about them. And whilst it is the sheer massing of its ‘tall buildings’ that provides the backdrop to Manhattan’suniqueness, the World Trade Centre – its two soaring, gleaming towers quite dominating the skyline have proclaimed the ingenuity and the high technology of the financial centre of the world.
I look at pictures of prominent buildings and structures that disappeared before my time with a faint regret that I never had the chance to taste their special significance. As a result they are not even part of my personal experience bank. But I did walk, admittedly nervously, on the slab of one of the top floors of the second World Trade Centre tower while it was under construction and open to the sky above and around. Later, as with millions of others, I was exhilirated by the ride to the top and marvelled from its roof deck at the teeming city below. And the Manhattan that is imprinted on my mind will always be confused by their absence. The space they occupied will always conjure up the surreal image of them seemingly imploding on themselves. I love cities, I love New York. I expect the new at the expense of the old. But never like this.
Musings on 7/11
I’ve changed my mind a number of times since Monday about the contents of this Citichat. Then I was thinking of writing in regard to the increasing variety of ways the private sector in South Africa structures itself for dealing with city issues. By Tuesday night, quite numbed by the day’s events, I thought that it might be an idea to pass up doing anything this week at all. But, as this newsletter is meant to provide a personal commentary on cities, city issues and ‘happenings’ I later felt that it can hardly ignore the tragedy that took place and which is still being played out in two of the world’s best known cities this past week. Whilst ‘Citichat’ is personal opinion it is based as far as possible on facts, so it is not a vehicle for emotional outpourings. Therefore I do not want to talk about what has happened this week from the human tragedy point of view, we have the media for that. Rather, to try to comment more pragmatically on the issue from a city point of view.
A couple of weeks ago I recorded the comments of my American friends at our local conferences as to the importance of cities. That they are the economic hub and heart, the icon for the region, the ‘kitchen’ for the community. But in reality none of these capture the intensity yet variety of the experiences that cities offer. For they are so much more, they are the meeting place for every facet of human life be it business or social, community, residential, sport, recreation, education, culture, art, religion, the market, the trading centre - engaging, making, learning, seeking, finding - the melting pot of humanity, rich and poor, legal and illegal, that is drawn like a magnet to seek work but equally to seek social intercourse, companionship and shared experience. None more so than in New York. With its incredibly diverse neighbourhoods, racial, ethnic, economic, social, its teeming mass of millions of people all seemingly in a rush to keep ahead of the highly competitive environment in which they live which makes them often appear impatient and rude. Its streets spurt columns of smoke from underground train tunnels whilst vehicles of every size shape and colour aggressively and loudly negotiate the roads with their never ending bumps and holes, its noises and smells, it has always been for me the epitome of a city. Some say that New York isn’t America just as London isn’t England – maybe, but they are both cities in the true sense of the word. Pumping with sheer vitality, excitement and exhilaration. And EXPERIENCES. Drawing the best of the good and the worst of the bad, for that is what cities are all about, they attract it all.
Both cities’ buildings and bridges are just so representative of their character, London’s dignity and history provides a homogeneity that is never boring. New York’s glitter and its ‘in your face’ brashness makes you have to look for the gems amongst its eclectic offerings of every style and shape and type. And great gems there are, too many to mention. For me the Chrysler Building catches something of the past that I find deeply satisfying. The Empire State is the grand old lady that one never tires of. Wolfgang Koeppen described it thirty years ago as “the tallest building in the city claiming to be the 8th wonder of the world. All of humanity crowds into the elevators for a ride up to heaven. Signposts flash by like vast storm fronts confirming unity. Security guards guide the traffic. It’s as busy as a large train station.”
What is it with structures that they so succinctly define the nature of their settings? The Great Pyramids at Giza, the Tower of London, the Taj Mahal, St. Sophia - all capture the imagination of people throughout the ages. Some become symbols or icons of a single place, others of the cities they are set in and yet others of a whole country or civilisation. Structures are a prerequisite for human life and an ever present factor in our modern world. The delicacy of the Acropolis overlooking the city of Athens, the impenetrable fortress of Masada homogenious with the desert below, the ‘Africanness’ of the Djenne Mosque of Mali, the blinding beauty of the Taj Mahal. Can you imagine Rome without St Peter’s, London without its Houses of Parliament, Paris without the Eiffel Tower, Sydney without its Opera House? All contribute to the ethos and particular character of the city about them. And whilst it is the sheer massing of its ‘tall buildings’ that provides the backdrop to Manhattan’suniqueness, the World Trade Centre – its two soaring, gleaming towers quite dominating the skyline have proclaimed the ingenuity and the high technology of the financial centre of the world.
I look at pictures of prominent buildings and structures that disappeared before my time with a faint regret that I never had the chance to taste their special significance. As a result they are not even part of my personal experience bank. But I did walk, admittedly nervously, on the slab of one of the top floors of the second World Trade Centre tower while it was under construction and open to the sky above and around. Later, as with millions of others, I was exhilirated by the ride to the top and marvelled from its roof deck at the teeming city below. And the Manhattan that is imprinted on my mind will always be confused by their absence. The space they occupied will always conjure up the surreal image of them seemingly imploding on themselves. I love cities, I love New York. I expect the new at the expense of the old. But never like this.
Friday, September 7, 2001
Smart Growth Citichat 7 September 2001
Citichat 35/2001 - 7TH SEPTEMBER 2001
More Smart Growth
I mentioned the press report of Cape Town's proposed "Smart Growth" policy that caught my eye some time ago (Citichat 27 of 13th July). I subsequently listened to a detailed presentation on the proposal by Michael Farr, CEO of the Cape Town Partnership. Their proposal cleverly brings together a variety of initiatives, identification and declaration of re-development areas, tax increment financing (TIFs), urban growth boundaries, etc.
Inevitable that the proposal would generate opposition as there are two diametrically opposed views when it comes to any discussion on 'smart growth'. On the one hand, those that are seeking better planned, more compact city and town development (that will result in savings of millions of rands spent on public infrastructure whilst protecting established urban centres - which in turn promote a better quality of life and enhance economic competitiveness.) On the other, those, mainly major property developers and their lackeys (in this country mainly pale males), who obfuscate about so-called 'free market principles.'
Some of the arguments being trotted out by one well-known property economist are quite puzzling. "For instance to force the citizens of Bellville or Boksburg to sit for nearly two hours per working day in a car to and from work smacks of authoritarianism. Neither does it make economic sense to enforce lower productivity and lower quality of life in this way." But what about the citizens of Soweto and Mitchell's Plain? Have you ever tried to get into and out of Sandton at peak times? Whose quality of life are we concerned about?
"Ask Gauteng Province what happened when it arbitarily moved the provincial capital from Pretoria to Johannesburg. All of a sudden the Ben Schoeman highway was running at full capacity necessitating the construction of another freeway." Before the move, which was the subject of many months deliberation and planning, the majority of Provincial Government employees were decidely pale and domiciled in and around Pretoria. Today that level of government reflects the demographics of the country and most employees come from the south of Johannesburg. Any Gautie knows that the traffic congestion on the highway is actually the direct result of uncontrolled sprawl along almost its entire length, the very thing that smart growth seeks to avoid!
Anyone who claims that Century City, the outcome of free market principles in planning, is good for the Cape Town CBD, let alone for itself, is living in cloud cuckoo land. Anyone who says 'so what?' doesn't understand the first thing about the critical importance of a city in the role of the region. Margaret Thatcher's 'free market' approach to development almost killed the traditional British High Street and South Africa's historic laissez faire planning approach is doing just that for many of its towns and cities. Johannesburg, Durban, Roodepoort, Nelspruit, Paarl, the list grows and the results are certainly not in the best interests of their citizens. 'Free market principles' in property development is more accurately translated as 'greed'! Or maybe more politely, "Dumb Growth!"
The Maryland statutes which cut state subsidies for new sprawl development has largely led the way in the US and some 30 states now testify to Main Street revitalisation and preservation of open space through 'smart growth' policies.. The Governor of Maryland Parris Glendening who visited here last year made this comment recently; "If growth patterns don't change, development will consume in the next 25 years as much land as was developed in the first 368-year history of Maryland. We just can't continue that way." Neither can we!
So what does "Smart Growth" actually mean? Here is an extract from the Executive summary of 'Why Smart Growth?: A primer': "In communities across the nation there is a growing concern that current development patterns - dominated by what some call "sprawl" - are no longer in the long-term interests of our cities, existing suburbs, small towns, rural communities or wilderness areas. Though supportive of growth, communities are questioning the economic costs of abandoning infrastructure in the city, only to rebuild it further out. They are questioning the social costs of the mismatch between new employment locations in the suburbs and the available work force in the city. They are questioning the wisdom of abandoning "brownfields" in older communities, eating up the open space and prime agricultural land at the suburban fringe and polluting the air of an entire region by driving farther to get places. Spurring the smart growth movement are demographic shifts, a strong environmental ethic, increased fiscal concerns, and more nuanced views of growth. The result is both a new demand and a new opportunity for smart growth. Smart growth recognises connections between development and quality of life."
Here is a quote from some testimony before a US Select Committee on Jobs and Housing: "Smart Growth means promoting land development patterns that reduce land consumption and vehicle trips while at the same time challenging automobile-dominated projects and automobile-dependent development patterns. Smart Growth encourages compact development in the urban core while saving the greenbelt from development. Smart Growth provides safe and reliable public transportation for those who cannot, or choose not to, drive, and targets mixed use development along those public transportation corridors. Smart Growth recognises prime farmland as an irreplaceable resource and directs development away from those valuable lands."
A nationwide poll conducted recently in the US shows that a remarkable 78% of Americans support policies to curb sprawl. Over 80% think government should give priority to maintaining services and infrastructure in established communities before subsidising new sprawl.
An article on Brownfields redevelopment states "Smart growth focuses on reducing public costs and increasing private returns, saving natural resources, creating better access to goods and services, and preserving a sense of place."
That's what Cape Town and Johannesburg are striving to achieve!
More Smart Growth
I mentioned the press report of Cape Town's proposed "Smart Growth" policy that caught my eye some time ago (Citichat 27 of 13th July). I subsequently listened to a detailed presentation on the proposal by Michael Farr, CEO of the Cape Town Partnership. Their proposal cleverly brings together a variety of initiatives, identification and declaration of re-development areas, tax increment financing (TIFs), urban growth boundaries, etc.
Inevitable that the proposal would generate opposition as there are two diametrically opposed views when it comes to any discussion on 'smart growth'. On the one hand, those that are seeking better planned, more compact city and town development (that will result in savings of millions of rands spent on public infrastructure whilst protecting established urban centres - which in turn promote a better quality of life and enhance economic competitiveness.) On the other, those, mainly major property developers and their lackeys (in this country mainly pale males), who obfuscate about so-called 'free market principles.'
Some of the arguments being trotted out by one well-known property economist are quite puzzling. "For instance to force the citizens of Bellville or Boksburg to sit for nearly two hours per working day in a car to and from work smacks of authoritarianism. Neither does it make economic sense to enforce lower productivity and lower quality of life in this way." But what about the citizens of Soweto and Mitchell's Plain? Have you ever tried to get into and out of Sandton at peak times? Whose quality of life are we concerned about?
"Ask Gauteng Province what happened when it arbitarily moved the provincial capital from Pretoria to Johannesburg. All of a sudden the Ben Schoeman highway was running at full capacity necessitating the construction of another freeway." Before the move, which was the subject of many months deliberation and planning, the majority of Provincial Government employees were decidely pale and domiciled in and around Pretoria. Today that level of government reflects the demographics of the country and most employees come from the south of Johannesburg. Any Gautie knows that the traffic congestion on the highway is actually the direct result of uncontrolled sprawl along almost its entire length, the very thing that smart growth seeks to avoid!
Anyone who claims that Century City, the outcome of free market principles in planning, is good for the Cape Town CBD, let alone for itself, is living in cloud cuckoo land. Anyone who says 'so what?' doesn't understand the first thing about the critical importance of a city in the role of the region. Margaret Thatcher's 'free market' approach to development almost killed the traditional British High Street and South Africa's historic laissez faire planning approach is doing just that for many of its towns and cities. Johannesburg, Durban, Roodepoort, Nelspruit, Paarl, the list grows and the results are certainly not in the best interests of their citizens. 'Free market principles' in property development is more accurately translated as 'greed'! Or maybe more politely, "Dumb Growth!"
The Maryland statutes which cut state subsidies for new sprawl development has largely led the way in the US and some 30 states now testify to Main Street revitalisation and preservation of open space through 'smart growth' policies.. The Governor of Maryland Parris Glendening who visited here last year made this comment recently; "If growth patterns don't change, development will consume in the next 25 years as much land as was developed in the first 368-year history of Maryland. We just can't continue that way." Neither can we!
So what does "Smart Growth" actually mean? Here is an extract from the Executive summary of 'Why Smart Growth?: A primer': "In communities across the nation there is a growing concern that current development patterns - dominated by what some call "sprawl" - are no longer in the long-term interests of our cities, existing suburbs, small towns, rural communities or wilderness areas. Though supportive of growth, communities are questioning the economic costs of abandoning infrastructure in the city, only to rebuild it further out. They are questioning the social costs of the mismatch between new employment locations in the suburbs and the available work force in the city. They are questioning the wisdom of abandoning "brownfields" in older communities, eating up the open space and prime agricultural land at the suburban fringe and polluting the air of an entire region by driving farther to get places. Spurring the smart growth movement are demographic shifts, a strong environmental ethic, increased fiscal concerns, and more nuanced views of growth. The result is both a new demand and a new opportunity for smart growth. Smart growth recognises connections between development and quality of life."
Here is a quote from some testimony before a US Select Committee on Jobs and Housing: "Smart Growth means promoting land development patterns that reduce land consumption and vehicle trips while at the same time challenging automobile-dominated projects and automobile-dependent development patterns. Smart Growth encourages compact development in the urban core while saving the greenbelt from development. Smart Growth provides safe and reliable public transportation for those who cannot, or choose not to, drive, and targets mixed use development along those public transportation corridors. Smart Growth recognises prime farmland as an irreplaceable resource and directs development away from those valuable lands."
A nationwide poll conducted recently in the US shows that a remarkable 78% of Americans support policies to curb sprawl. Over 80% think government should give priority to maintaining services and infrastructure in established communities before subsidising new sprawl.
An article on Brownfields redevelopment states "Smart growth focuses on reducing public costs and increasing private returns, saving natural resources, creating better access to goods and services, and preserving a sense of place."
That's what Cape Town and Johannesburg are striving to achieve!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
