CITICHAT 20/2007- 25 May 2007
Urban Management and crafting the Charter into action.
Some years ago I was visiting an improvement district in Brooklyn, New York City. They had been experiencing a difficulty related to the numbers of cars illegally using their borough for all-day parking. They were also experiencing a lack of response to their constant requests for the vehicles to be ticketed by the New York City Police.
At about the same time as this was occurring, the improvement district president was looking for methods to improve the management of the public urban environment within their operational area. A New York company, specifically established to develop software solutions for local authorities, offered them a solution in the form of hand held computers fitted with digital cameras and software that included detailed maps of their area. The maps showed the position of every light pole, parking meter, directional sign, refuse bin, etc. The CID on-street supervisors could now walk the area, marking on the computer where something needed attention eg a pole that had been knocked over, new graffiti, potholes or street lights needing replacement globes. They could also immediately take and e-mail a photograph of the problem to the relevant Council or CID department for action. They had an automatic record of the report with date and time of reporting, could issue reminders, if necessary, and finally record exactly when the matter was attended to and provide detailed summaries of the response of Council to all such issues.
As an aside, the system provided them with the opportunity to photograph the offending vehicles’ number plates and send them to the traffic authorities for identification, Turns out that 90% were council employees who worked in Manhattan and found it convenient to leave their cars all day in Brooklyn from where they would catch the metro to and from work.
This is partly what urban management is all about and the lack of it, in our case, was what we constantly heard at stakeholder working groups in the run-up to the Summit. “Why can’t the Council merely do their job?” This related to cleansing, waste removal, street sweeping, illegal dumping, recycling, removal of graffiti and illegal posters, noise pollution, building waste management, management of public space, management of informal trading, storm water drainage, street furniture, signage and public information, painting street poles, road markings, weeding, keeping an eye out for illegal uses of buildings and enforcement, enforcement, enforcement! Urban management is all about attending to the myriad details of what makes a city work for its users in a systematic fashion and penalizing those who do want to obey the rules of the game thereby making it unpleasant for everyone else. Urban management is what we generally haven’t experienced in the inner city for nigh on two decades. It was, in fact, the lack of urban management that led to the establishment of the city improvement district (CID) initiative back in 1993 – CIDs are all about the private sector supplementing and complementing services provided (and sometimes not provided) by the City. CIDs have formed the nucleus of urban management provision over a large portion of the core area of the inner city since then.
At the beginning of his second term of office, the Executive Mayor announced a ‘return to urban management’ through the establishment of a Department of Development Planning and Urban Management headed up by an Executive Director under an MMC (Member of the Mayoral Committee) at political level. In addition, the responsibilities of the Regional offices would change from administering clinics, libraries, community centres, sports facilities etc to being responsible for the implementation of the urban management function.
Now, one of the big concerns raised through the Summit and Charter process was how the outcomes of the initiative would be turned into reality. Looking at some of the previous processes, one becomes very aware of great intentions but not always a great deal in the way of commitment of resources specifically set aside to achieve implementation, or, maybe, just not enough resource for the job at hand.
On the practical implementation side, a series of workshops have been held over the past few weeks with both Council and private sector representatives, to determine the best structure for Council to adopt for both implementation of the issues arising out of the Summit & Charter process and also for monitoring progress. Although this has not yet been finalized, a further workshop on Monday this week moved a stage closer to a solution and there should be a final proposal on the table within the next few weeks.
I was struck again at the workshop session how very little in urban regeneration is straight forward. The city is a complex organism that is continuously in process and you can’t just switch it off, or get it to mark time, whilst waiting to insert a new approach. The decision to recognize the criticality of Urban Management in the vacuum created by it’s absence for so many years is extremely important. But who does what, who reports to whom, who is responsible for what and to whom are critical questions to be answered if the system is to work. For decades Council has worked on a silo approach, each department or municipal entity doing its own thing will little thought or consideration of the impact of their actions on other departments. Now we will need a matrix style management that is hard to achieve but essential for the effective and efficient management of the city let alone the inner city. So the good news is that the process to find the right formula is well advanced.
The even better news was the announcement by the Executive Mayor on Wednesday in his Budget Speech of money being set aside to kick-start both Urban Management and the requirements of the Charter. A surcharge of 2% on water, electricity and refuse removal charges “is to create revenue that will fund and support business growth in the City and to stimulate economic growth. It will be utilized to stimulate urban regeneration and improve our capacity for urban management. It will enable us to fast track the required infrastructure needs that have resulted from rapid economic growth and expansion.”
But the Mayor went on to advise that one of the major increases in this year’s budget relates to the Department of Development Planning and Urban Management. Here the budget has been increased from R381 million in the current year to R779 million for the 2007/8 council financial year – that’s more than a doubling and is “our way of emphasizing our priority in the growth and development of our Central Business Districts.”
And then the commitment to the Summit and Charter “ the budget process has considered the commitments made by the City at the Inner City Summit. We are now committing R2 billion capital allocation to Inner City rejuvenation over the next five years. In the next financial year we will make R300 million capital allocation and R100 million operational allocation for improvements in service delivery.”
Now that’s putting your money where your mouth is – yay, Amos for Pres!!!!!
Wrap up for the weekend, cheers, neil
Friday, May 25, 2007
Friday, May 18, 2007
Transport & Inner City Summitl Citichat 18 May 2007
CITICHAT 19/2007 - 18 May 2007
Provincial Government does it again and Mayoral Summit commitments.
Mashatile’s Monorail – Masterstroke or Mayhem?
First it was the Shilowa Express and now it’s the Mashatile Malaysian Monorail or is it Jacobs’ Junket!
At the Mayoral Summit and Charter meeting on the 5th May, Mayor Masondo said the following about transportation. “We are one of very few municipalities that have a comprehensive transport policy in place. The City’s approach is informed by the Integrated Transportation Plan.
In addition, the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) will be integrated into the broader transport system with feeder routes being serviced by minibuses and taxis that will link to the Gautrain network. Our objective is to move at least 10 percent of City’s commuters from private vehicles onto the public transport network.”
Well our ‘comprehensive transport policy’ looks like its gone out of the window!
I really don’t know about Provincial Government. First we had the debacle of the Gauteng Provincial Government Precinct (GPGP) – an ill-conceived and far reaching plan hatched with no prior consultation with City Government aspects of which would have negatively impacted on the inner city. A joint effort between Local and Provincial governments could have provided the city with a real asset.
We still have the debacle of the Rissik Street Post Office. Sold some years back to the Provincial Legislature for conversion into offices but to date untouched and being allowed to implode on itself – demolition by dereliction. The plastic sheeting that has now wrapped the clock tower for a couple of years to prevent water penetration is torn and increasingly looks like a giant spent condom. My latest info is that the Legislature no longer needs the building so it is now under consideration as a location for the Premier’s office. If the Council had proceeded with private sector developers the project would have been long completed and already adding to the economic life of the city.
And now it’s a R12 billion monorail that will run through Soweto from Protea to the Bree Street taxi rank to be built, financed and operated by a little known Malaysian consortium.. The year long feasibility study “had been kept secret until now to prevent any escalation in the price of land, among others” according to yesterday’s Star. That of course was the reason given for the secrecy that surrounded the GPGP and now the Gauteng Government sits with a bunch of buildings that they would prefer not to own and which the taxpayers paid for. The National Department of Transport says it had no prior knowledge of the monorail initiative and the Council have been waiting for a presentation for some months.
On the surface the monorail initiative looks like a brilliant solution to the problem of connecting a large number of people in the south to the inner city quickly and efficiently. It also would have a positive impact by reducing the numbers of vehicles using the roads. Given the rapid deterioration of road surfaces and overstressed road network , the continuing taxi recapitalization debacle, the pathetic bus and rail services, this should be good news – but is it?
Firstly, as I read it, it completely overrides all the planning, which is at a very advanced stage, for a comprehensive integrated transport system connecting the south not just to the inner city but also to the areas beyond it. Looking at the route diagram in yesterday’s Star it either replaces or totally duplicates the southern section of four planned Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) routes – Lenasia to Sunninghill; Dobsonville to Jeppestown; Nasrec to Ellis Park and Regina Mundi to Alexandra.
As the Mayor said at the Summit, we did have an Integrated Transport Plan which surely must have been approved by the Central and Provincial Government transportation authorities and now, in one fell swoop, it lies in tatters.
The bus rapid transport approach would have resulted in an upgrading of the previously approved Strategic Public Transport Network (SPTN) into a higher-quality public transport system than was previously considered. The Council’s November 2006 document that sets out the rationale for the BRT points out that “In many respects, the proposal is not a major departure from the original design and objectives of the SPTN. The principal project addition is to upgrade the quality and performance level to that of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT is simply the idea of creating a rail-like performance using road-based technologies that are affordable to most cities. Much of the design and operational studies completed to date on SPTN are transferable to the upgraded system”.
The objective of the BRT proposal, known as Rea Vaya, was “to improve the quality of life of Johannesburg citizens through the provision of a high-quality and affordable public transport system.” The long-term vision was to develop a relatively low-cost system that would place over 85 percent of Johannesburg’s population within 500 metres of a Rea Vaya trunk or feeder corridor. What will be the effect of a monorail imposed on this system? Aren’t we going to end up with having to integrate a number of widely divergent transportation systems – will BRT still work if it is only serving the north of the metropole or will it duplicate what will now be provided by the monorail in the south?
Secondly, cost. The entire BRT initiative of 148 kms was to have cost R2 billion – I make that R13.5 million per kilometer. The monorail appears to be about 45kms at a cost of R12 billion, nearly R270 million per kilometer! Why not spend the R2 billion on a perfectly acceptable solution and get our existing rail system working properly instead of the poor excuse it currently provides?
Thirdly, time. Personally I had my doubts on just how much BRT would have been implemented by 2010. However, according to the research behind the BRT proposals, Rea Vaya was one of the few options that could deliver a superior public transport service in time for the 2010 Soccer World Cup. Phase One of Rea Vaya would evidently have required one year of planning and approximately one year of construction. So the milestones were:
�� Completed planning by September 2007
�� Secured finance by January 2008
�� Operations initiated by April 2009.
In fact, Rea Vaya was scheduled to be inaugurated two months prior to the start of the Confederations Cup in April 2009. The system would then have over one year of tested operation prior to the start of the World Cup in June 2010.
Now it’s a R12 billion monorail constructed, tested and in operation by 2010! A period of 30 months would result in an average monthly spend of R400 million! And that at a time when the entire construction industry is dramatically overheated and when there is a dire shortage of cement and steel. I think not!
Fourthly, its effect on the taxi industry. Interesting that the MEC claimed to have consulted fully with the taxi industry whilst the SA National Council expressed “shock” that they were reported as having endorsed the project. I must say that even with all its many faults including issues of safety and disruptive road usage, the taxi industry provides a great deal of employment and opportunities for investment and ownership. I personally think that the industry is treated shabbily by Government. During the stakeholder working group sessions leading to the Summit, taxi industry representatives expressed concern as to the effect of Rea Vaya on their industry. Rea Vaya would clearly impact the industry, as any more efficient alternative to taxis would. However I would anticipate, from the usage figures that have been quoted, that a monorail would effectively wipe out a large percentage of the local taxi industry providing no alternative for employment. On the other hand the media reports that a return fare Soweto/Inner City would be R10.00 which is substantially less than a current taxi return fare
The BRT report appears to be sensitive to the taxi issue:
“The BRT proposal encompasses the same SPTN flagship corridors already articulated in the City’s Integrated Transport Plan (ITP). In order to further strengthen the financial viability of the new system as well as to permit a more complete engagement of the minibus-taxi industry, this study recommends the addition of several new routes to the project’s first phase. Specifically, the Rea Vaya proposal calls for a total of 94 kilometres of trunk corridors encompassing a total routing length of approximately 148 kilometres. Seven routes have been selected in order to give the customer maximum flexibility with a minimum of cumbersome transfer”.
Finally, can anyone tell me how Government, in terms of its own overly stringent legislated requirements regarding supply chain management can secretly negotiate this size deal with a single vendor? The answer given is that there is no public money involved so the rules don’t apply. But surely the fare to be charged must relate to the cost of the initiative and therefore a competitive bid would have been in the interests of commuters. And surely Provincial Government can’t take decisions regarding the use of Council land? There are too many unanswered questions to merely accept this as an ‘answer to a commuters prayer’.
I just can’t help wondering what the Provincial Government has been smoking!
Mayoral Summit Commitments
Was going to summarise the Charter issues but the monorail blew that away so here are just some of the proposed programmes and initiatives highlighted by the Executive Mayor at the Summit.
1. New structures and improved urban management. “By urban management we mean the proper management and maintenance of the public environment. We have realized that we can’t just assume that the work of Pikitup, Joburg Water, the Johannesburg Metro Police Department, our environmental health officers and building control will somehow just come together by itself to make for a clean and orderly Inner City. We need more than the sum total of the parts. Over the next year we will put up a structure and a relevant mechanism in Region F for this purpose.”
2. Public environment upgrading “We aim to replicate the work that we have done in Braamfontein across the Inner City within the next five years. To kickstart this programme we are committing R100 million of public environment upgrade funds over the next 5 years. We trust that this will leverage equally large contributions from the private sector. Together we will completely upgrade all pavements, put in place decent streetlights, plant trees, build decent street furniture, install waste bins, develop public conveniences, and upgrade available plots into new mini-parks and public-spaces.
3. Waste management and collection. “We are finalizing plans to significantly improve regular everyday waste management and collection in the Inner City. To ensure the full implementation of these plans we have devoted almost R100 million in operating subsidy to Pikitup in the coming financial year.”
4. CCTV. “The Inner City will be fully covered with CCTV cameras within the next five (5) years. As a first step in this direction we commit to doubling the number of CCTV cameras in the Inner City by the end of this year. This will bring the number of cameras to 216. We are also working to link this system up with private sector systems.”
5. Residential accommodation. “We aim to address the crisis in residential accommodation in two ways. First, we are already working on a first phase Housing Plan for the Inner City that will be released publicly in July this year. A second phase operational plan will be ready by the end of 2007. Following this plan we aim to see the development of some 50 000 new residential units before 2015. Many of these of course will cater for middle and upper income residents. We will also develop emergency, transitional and social housing at scale.
National and provincial government policy is strongly in support of the new concept of inclusionary housing. We will be working with national and provincial government to promote this idea in the Inner City. We will also be working with developers to incentivise this form of development, which is becoming the norm in many cities around the world, so that many of our Inner City buildings become vibrant mixed-income communities in and of themselves.
We know that desirable residential neighborhoods don’t only depend on good accommodation. They need all those other things that allow residents to exercise a sense of community. Over the next few years we will completely refurbish all swimming pools, sports fields and community sport centres.”
6. ‘Transportation’ which I quoted earlier.
7. Informal Trading. “One of the critical issues facing parts of the Inner City is unmanaged street trading or micro-retailing. The City regards informal trading as an important and integral part of our broader economy. It is the City’s view that informal trading, as is the case in many countries and cities in the world, should be legally controlled and properly managed. Trading should occur only in those areas that are suitably designated for this particular purpose.
This Council is encouraging groups and individuals to be involved in income generating activities. Street trading constitutes part of this. The Growth and Development Strategy, our long-term plan in this municipality, as adopted in May 2006, recognises this fact and encourages this type of productive activity.
Our policy is based on the development of informal trading as a strong economic sub-sector, which, if developed, can robustly add to the City’s growth and employment.
The City’s Informal Trading Development Programme envisages that trading should take place in markets, stalls and other demarcated spaces.”
Well, if we accomplish just these 6 issues and get some resolution on the Transportation issue, we will have advanced the state of the inner city dramatically.
Cheers, neil
Provincial Government does it again and Mayoral Summit commitments.
Mashatile’s Monorail – Masterstroke or Mayhem?
First it was the Shilowa Express and now it’s the Mashatile Malaysian Monorail or is it Jacobs’ Junket!
At the Mayoral Summit and Charter meeting on the 5th May, Mayor Masondo said the following about transportation. “We are one of very few municipalities that have a comprehensive transport policy in place. The City’s approach is informed by the Integrated Transportation Plan.
In addition, the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) will be integrated into the broader transport system with feeder routes being serviced by minibuses and taxis that will link to the Gautrain network. Our objective is to move at least 10 percent of City’s commuters from private vehicles onto the public transport network.”
Well our ‘comprehensive transport policy’ looks like its gone out of the window!
I really don’t know about Provincial Government. First we had the debacle of the Gauteng Provincial Government Precinct (GPGP) – an ill-conceived and far reaching plan hatched with no prior consultation with City Government aspects of which would have negatively impacted on the inner city. A joint effort between Local and Provincial governments could have provided the city with a real asset.
We still have the debacle of the Rissik Street Post Office. Sold some years back to the Provincial Legislature for conversion into offices but to date untouched and being allowed to implode on itself – demolition by dereliction. The plastic sheeting that has now wrapped the clock tower for a couple of years to prevent water penetration is torn and increasingly looks like a giant spent condom. My latest info is that the Legislature no longer needs the building so it is now under consideration as a location for the Premier’s office. If the Council had proceeded with private sector developers the project would have been long completed and already adding to the economic life of the city.
And now it’s a R12 billion monorail that will run through Soweto from Protea to the Bree Street taxi rank to be built, financed and operated by a little known Malaysian consortium.. The year long feasibility study “had been kept secret until now to prevent any escalation in the price of land, among others” according to yesterday’s Star. That of course was the reason given for the secrecy that surrounded the GPGP and now the Gauteng Government sits with a bunch of buildings that they would prefer not to own and which the taxpayers paid for. The National Department of Transport says it had no prior knowledge of the monorail initiative and the Council have been waiting for a presentation for some months.
On the surface the monorail initiative looks like a brilliant solution to the problem of connecting a large number of people in the south to the inner city quickly and efficiently. It also would have a positive impact by reducing the numbers of vehicles using the roads. Given the rapid deterioration of road surfaces and overstressed road network , the continuing taxi recapitalization debacle, the pathetic bus and rail services, this should be good news – but is it?
Firstly, as I read it, it completely overrides all the planning, which is at a very advanced stage, for a comprehensive integrated transport system connecting the south not just to the inner city but also to the areas beyond it. Looking at the route diagram in yesterday’s Star it either replaces or totally duplicates the southern section of four planned Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) routes – Lenasia to Sunninghill; Dobsonville to Jeppestown; Nasrec to Ellis Park and Regina Mundi to Alexandra.
As the Mayor said at the Summit, we did have an Integrated Transport Plan which surely must have been approved by the Central and Provincial Government transportation authorities and now, in one fell swoop, it lies in tatters.
The bus rapid transport approach would have resulted in an upgrading of the previously approved Strategic Public Transport Network (SPTN) into a higher-quality public transport system than was previously considered. The Council’s November 2006 document that sets out the rationale for the BRT points out that “In many respects, the proposal is not a major departure from the original design and objectives of the SPTN. The principal project addition is to upgrade the quality and performance level to that of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT is simply the idea of creating a rail-like performance using road-based technologies that are affordable to most cities. Much of the design and operational studies completed to date on SPTN are transferable to the upgraded system”.
The objective of the BRT proposal, known as Rea Vaya, was “to improve the quality of life of Johannesburg citizens through the provision of a high-quality and affordable public transport system.” The long-term vision was to develop a relatively low-cost system that would place over 85 percent of Johannesburg’s population within 500 metres of a Rea Vaya trunk or feeder corridor. What will be the effect of a monorail imposed on this system? Aren’t we going to end up with having to integrate a number of widely divergent transportation systems – will BRT still work if it is only serving the north of the metropole or will it duplicate what will now be provided by the monorail in the south?
Secondly, cost. The entire BRT initiative of 148 kms was to have cost R2 billion – I make that R13.5 million per kilometer. The monorail appears to be about 45kms at a cost of R12 billion, nearly R270 million per kilometer! Why not spend the R2 billion on a perfectly acceptable solution and get our existing rail system working properly instead of the poor excuse it currently provides?
Thirdly, time. Personally I had my doubts on just how much BRT would have been implemented by 2010. However, according to the research behind the BRT proposals, Rea Vaya was one of the few options that could deliver a superior public transport service in time for the 2010 Soccer World Cup. Phase One of Rea Vaya would evidently have required one year of planning and approximately one year of construction. So the milestones were:
�� Completed planning by September 2007
�� Secured finance by January 2008
�� Operations initiated by April 2009.
In fact, Rea Vaya was scheduled to be inaugurated two months prior to the start of the Confederations Cup in April 2009. The system would then have over one year of tested operation prior to the start of the World Cup in June 2010.
Now it’s a R12 billion monorail constructed, tested and in operation by 2010! A period of 30 months would result in an average monthly spend of R400 million! And that at a time when the entire construction industry is dramatically overheated and when there is a dire shortage of cement and steel. I think not!
Fourthly, its effect on the taxi industry. Interesting that the MEC claimed to have consulted fully with the taxi industry whilst the SA National Council expressed “shock” that they were reported as having endorsed the project. I must say that even with all its many faults including issues of safety and disruptive road usage, the taxi industry provides a great deal of employment and opportunities for investment and ownership. I personally think that the industry is treated shabbily by Government. During the stakeholder working group sessions leading to the Summit, taxi industry representatives expressed concern as to the effect of Rea Vaya on their industry. Rea Vaya would clearly impact the industry, as any more efficient alternative to taxis would. However I would anticipate, from the usage figures that have been quoted, that a monorail would effectively wipe out a large percentage of the local taxi industry providing no alternative for employment. On the other hand the media reports that a return fare Soweto/Inner City would be R10.00 which is substantially less than a current taxi return fare
The BRT report appears to be sensitive to the taxi issue:
“The BRT proposal encompasses the same SPTN flagship corridors already articulated in the City’s Integrated Transport Plan (ITP). In order to further strengthen the financial viability of the new system as well as to permit a more complete engagement of the minibus-taxi industry, this study recommends the addition of several new routes to the project’s first phase. Specifically, the Rea Vaya proposal calls for a total of 94 kilometres of trunk corridors encompassing a total routing length of approximately 148 kilometres. Seven routes have been selected in order to give the customer maximum flexibility with a minimum of cumbersome transfer”.
Finally, can anyone tell me how Government, in terms of its own overly stringent legislated requirements regarding supply chain management can secretly negotiate this size deal with a single vendor? The answer given is that there is no public money involved so the rules don’t apply. But surely the fare to be charged must relate to the cost of the initiative and therefore a competitive bid would have been in the interests of commuters. And surely Provincial Government can’t take decisions regarding the use of Council land? There are too many unanswered questions to merely accept this as an ‘answer to a commuters prayer’.
I just can’t help wondering what the Provincial Government has been smoking!
Mayoral Summit Commitments
Was going to summarise the Charter issues but the monorail blew that away so here are just some of the proposed programmes and initiatives highlighted by the Executive Mayor at the Summit.
1. New structures and improved urban management. “By urban management we mean the proper management and maintenance of the public environment. We have realized that we can’t just assume that the work of Pikitup, Joburg Water, the Johannesburg Metro Police Department, our environmental health officers and building control will somehow just come together by itself to make for a clean and orderly Inner City. We need more than the sum total of the parts. Over the next year we will put up a structure and a relevant mechanism in Region F for this purpose.”
2. Public environment upgrading “We aim to replicate the work that we have done in Braamfontein across the Inner City within the next five years. To kickstart this programme we are committing R100 million of public environment upgrade funds over the next 5 years. We trust that this will leverage equally large contributions from the private sector. Together we will completely upgrade all pavements, put in place decent streetlights, plant trees, build decent street furniture, install waste bins, develop public conveniences, and upgrade available plots into new mini-parks and public-spaces.
3. Waste management and collection. “We are finalizing plans to significantly improve regular everyday waste management and collection in the Inner City. To ensure the full implementation of these plans we have devoted almost R100 million in operating subsidy to Pikitup in the coming financial year.”
4. CCTV. “The Inner City will be fully covered with CCTV cameras within the next five (5) years. As a first step in this direction we commit to doubling the number of CCTV cameras in the Inner City by the end of this year. This will bring the number of cameras to 216. We are also working to link this system up with private sector systems.”
5. Residential accommodation. “We aim to address the crisis in residential accommodation in two ways. First, we are already working on a first phase Housing Plan for the Inner City that will be released publicly in July this year. A second phase operational plan will be ready by the end of 2007. Following this plan we aim to see the development of some 50 000 new residential units before 2015. Many of these of course will cater for middle and upper income residents. We will also develop emergency, transitional and social housing at scale.
National and provincial government policy is strongly in support of the new concept of inclusionary housing. We will be working with national and provincial government to promote this idea in the Inner City. We will also be working with developers to incentivise this form of development, which is becoming the norm in many cities around the world, so that many of our Inner City buildings become vibrant mixed-income communities in and of themselves.
We know that desirable residential neighborhoods don’t only depend on good accommodation. They need all those other things that allow residents to exercise a sense of community. Over the next few years we will completely refurbish all swimming pools, sports fields and community sport centres.”
6. ‘Transportation’ which I quoted earlier.
7. Informal Trading. “One of the critical issues facing parts of the Inner City is unmanaged street trading or micro-retailing. The City regards informal trading as an important and integral part of our broader economy. It is the City’s view that informal trading, as is the case in many countries and cities in the world, should be legally controlled and properly managed. Trading should occur only in those areas that are suitably designated for this particular purpose.
This Council is encouraging groups and individuals to be involved in income generating activities. Street trading constitutes part of this. The Growth and Development Strategy, our long-term plan in this municipality, as adopted in May 2006, recognises this fact and encourages this type of productive activity.
Our policy is based on the development of informal trading as a strong economic sub-sector, which, if developed, can robustly add to the City’s growth and employment.
The City’s Informal Trading Development Programme envisages that trading should take place in markets, stalls and other demarcated spaces.”
Well, if we accomplish just these 6 issues and get some resolution on the Transportation issue, we will have advanced the state of the inner city dramatically.
Cheers, neil
Friday, May 11, 2007
Inner City Summit Citichat 11 May 2007
CITICHAT 18/2007- 11 May 2007
The Summit - one more mountain to climb or a great opportunity for re-energising the Inner City?
“A good city is one that works. The trash is picked up, snow is plowed, pot-holes are filled, streets and sidewalks are cleaned, calls for emergency help are promptly answered - at the same time a city is a cradle of culture, an organ of memory, the enactment of the human drama, transmitting human achievement and insight from generation to generation” Willian H Hudnut III, former Mayor of Indianapolis.
The announcement of an Inner City Summit and Charter was initially greeted with a high degree of skepticism and cynicism. Why? Well, the Johannesburg Inner City has been the focus for quite a number of ‘summits’ over the past 16 years, all probably well intentioned but a number ill advised. The Inner City Summit and Charter held last Saturday, the initiative of the Executive Mayor, Amos Masondo, could break the mould and be the re-energising catalyst for what my American friends call “raising the bar”. The secret of success of course is in one word – implementation!
Whatever the cries from the ‘usual suspects’ of no adequate consultation, the consultation process for the Summit, in fact, has been greater than anything that has taken place in the development of all the processes and progammes that the Inner City has experienced since a 1991 business driven initiative and the 1996 visioning process.
Last Saturday saw nearly a thousand people come together to receive the draft Inner City Charter - the output and culmination of 6 months hard preparatory work and the precursor to a lot more.
During the run-up to the Summit, 24 lengthy stakeholder working groups were held plus a number of sub-group meetings as well as a charette process that resulted in a proposed new spatial framework for the inner city. Behind the scenes considerable negotiation and discussion within affected Council departments. Three sets of detailed research were also undertaken. Firstly, into the various inner city regeneration processes from 1991 to 2006; secondly, a status quo report on the current state of the inner city and, thirdly, a look into the future. The last three aspects were presented at a public information sharing session the morning before the Summit.
So what processes has the Inner City been subjected to previously that would have the effect of any new process being treated with cynicism? Well, quite a few!
In 1991, Business in the inner city organized “A Strategic Initiative for Central Johannesburg”. The rationale for the two day workshop was “increasing concern at the evidence of accelerating urban decline”. The outcome of the workshop was the establishment of the Central Johannesburg Partnership (CJP) “an independent, non-profit agency representative of Johannesburg’s diverse community, the City Council and the private sector to revitalize and develop the central city and the urban economy, jointly and effectively”. Six priorities were established for priority attention, crime; grime; informal trading; residential accommodation; transportation and urban design and development.
In 1995, the Gauteng Provincial Government and the Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council called for “an inner city summit” as the “culmination of the first stage in the formulation of an urban renewal strategy for the inner city.” ”Inner City Ivukile”, the resultant initiative, proposed the introduction of an inner city ‘stablisation strategy.’ The “Ivukile” initiative included little to no consultation with the business sector and was undertaken during an inappropriate period given the pending major changes in local government structures and really came to nought.
In 1996 an inner city visioning exercise was undertaken between the Council, Provincial Government and business and community sectors. With a large degree of consultation it was a most successful initiative resulting in the vision “Johannesburg, the Golden Heartbeat of Africa….” that formed the basis of policies and strategies that were to underpin the urban regeneration strategies for the next decade. It was also highly successful in bringing together the four sectoral participants working together for a common goal, the revitalization of the inner city.
The vision crafted in 1996 was publicly launched by then Deputy President Thabo Mbeki in 1997 under the name “Mayivuke”.
But also in 1996, Provincial Government led a new province wide initiative known as “Vusani Amadolobha” – A Four Point Plan for the Regeneration and Integration of Cities, Towns and Township Centres” throughout Gauteng. The four ‘points’ were;
• Promote Clean and Safe Centres
• Foster Compact Development
• Encourage Vibrant Commercial Centres
• Build Regeneration Partnerships
In 1998 we experienced the quite bizarre Provincial Government period when Mathole Motsheka was appointed Premier. During his short term in office a second “Vusani Amadolobha” conference was held when he proposed local development committees to provide a “highly organized and coherent system of inter-governmental programmes and structures for rapid development and social services delivery”. My response to this, Citichat 7 April 1998, was “Nou, ja fine!” Shortly after this the Vusani Amadolobha process ground to a halt when the MEC responsible was ‘re-deployed’. Motsheka also organized an “Inner City Workshop” which took no cognizance of anything that had been or was happening in terms of urban regeneration programmes.
In 1999 an “iGoli 2002 Summit” was held, focusing on the Metropolitan area, in which it was acknowledged that “the current financial crisis was caused by an institutional crisis” and steps were taken to address the institutional crisis.
2001 gave birth to “iGoli 2010”, again Metro wide, but it proved to be a consultant driven process of research and data collection that proposed no new strategies and, in fact, was never endorsed by Council.
2002 then saw the launch of “Joburg 2030” basically a long term economic vision for the Metropolitan area that was based on the premise that the city would not progress without growth in order to generate “a better life” for all its citizens.
The Johannesburg Inner City Regeneration Strategy and Business Plan 2004 – 2007 was developed by the City’s Economic Development Unit (EDU) in 2003 and accepted by the Mayoral Committee in 2004. Known as the ‘five pillar strategy’ it focused on:
• Addressing sinkholes
• Undertaking intensive urban management
• Maintaining and upgrading infrastructure
• Promoting ripple pond investments and
• Supporting economic sectors.
A Business Plan was developed from the strategy detailing 63 ‘Programmes and Activities’ to be completed by June this year but 44% of these had no budget allocation and all the objectives of the plan have therefore not been achieved.
A Metropolitan ‘Growth & Development Strategy’ was adopted in 2006.
In 2007 the major problems that the inner city continued to be faced with were:
• Crime
• Grime
• Informal trading
• Residential Accommodation
• Transportation and
• Urban design and development.
Although, on face value, these are still the issues first identified in 1991, it would not be true to say that some progress, to a greater or lesser extent, had not been made over the past 16 years and, in particular over the past five. The investment figures quoted last week reflect the progress that has in fact been made.
The inner city visioning process in 1996 was the starting block for the inner city revitalization or renewal process, through the logical development of a variety of structures that retained the involvement of the sectors responsible for the crafting of the vision (with the exception of Provincial Government). These structures were
• The Inner City Development Forum - later the Section 59 Committee and then the Section 79 Inner City Committee;
• The Inner City Office later to become the Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA).
• The Region 8 directorate and office including the Inner City Task Force
The tools that were developed and formed the basis of the processes were.
• The 1999 Inner City Spatial Framework and Inner City Economic Framework,
• The initial Inner City Strategy and then
• The 2003/2007 Inner City Strategy.
The combination and integration of the above processes and structures provided a coherence to the revitalization process as well as maintaining important communication linkages between public and private sectors. The broader Metropolitan processes undertaken during this decade, iGoli 2002, 2010 and 2030 etc, always appeared to be proceeded with little or no specific recognition of the critical importance of the inner city to the Metropolitan area. That the Inner City was one of the Mayoral priorities of the Executive Mayor’s first term of office, led to a reversal of this situation and the tremendous gains made by the Inner City during that period are evidence of this.
The virtual ‘destruction’ of the structures that supported the Inner City regeneration process at the end of the first term of office in order to once again make the Inner City fit political imperatives and the metropolitan planning mould are, to put it mildly, regrettable.
The 2007 Summit and Charter needs to be seen against this history and offers an opportunity to redress some of the questionable decisions of the last year as well as re-energise the regeneration process.
At the Summit the Executive Mayor spelt out his vision for the inner city:
“I have been very clear about what I want to see happen in the Inner City. Within the next few years, by the time of the 2010 Soccer World Cup and the end of this Council’s term of Office, we want the complete transformation of our Inner City. We want this Inner City to be clean and green. We want it to be safe for residents and visitors. We want a proper balance between residential development and business development. We want it to be a desirable location where both the wealthy, and those who are just getting on to the ladder of prosperity, can live, work and enjoy themselves in harmony.”
A great vision but how do we get there? Well, the Executive Mayor in his speech, highlighted the following response to the issues raised in the consultation process:
1. New structures and improved urban management.
2. Public environment upgrading
3. Improved waste management and collection.
4. Extended CCTV.
5. An inclusionsary residential accommodation programme.
6. State of the art public transportation.
7. Managed informal trading.
Let’s see, crime grime, informal trading, housing, transportation - shades of 1991! Cheers, neil
The Summit - one more mountain to climb or a great opportunity for re-energising the Inner City?
“A good city is one that works. The trash is picked up, snow is plowed, pot-holes are filled, streets and sidewalks are cleaned, calls for emergency help are promptly answered - at the same time a city is a cradle of culture, an organ of memory, the enactment of the human drama, transmitting human achievement and insight from generation to generation” Willian H Hudnut III, former Mayor of Indianapolis.
The announcement of an Inner City Summit and Charter was initially greeted with a high degree of skepticism and cynicism. Why? Well, the Johannesburg Inner City has been the focus for quite a number of ‘summits’ over the past 16 years, all probably well intentioned but a number ill advised. The Inner City Summit and Charter held last Saturday, the initiative of the Executive Mayor, Amos Masondo, could break the mould and be the re-energising catalyst for what my American friends call “raising the bar”. The secret of success of course is in one word – implementation!
Whatever the cries from the ‘usual suspects’ of no adequate consultation, the consultation process for the Summit, in fact, has been greater than anything that has taken place in the development of all the processes and progammes that the Inner City has experienced since a 1991 business driven initiative and the 1996 visioning process.
Last Saturday saw nearly a thousand people come together to receive the draft Inner City Charter - the output and culmination of 6 months hard preparatory work and the precursor to a lot more.
During the run-up to the Summit, 24 lengthy stakeholder working groups were held plus a number of sub-group meetings as well as a charette process that resulted in a proposed new spatial framework for the inner city. Behind the scenes considerable negotiation and discussion within affected Council departments. Three sets of detailed research were also undertaken. Firstly, into the various inner city regeneration processes from 1991 to 2006; secondly, a status quo report on the current state of the inner city and, thirdly, a look into the future. The last three aspects were presented at a public information sharing session the morning before the Summit.
So what processes has the Inner City been subjected to previously that would have the effect of any new process being treated with cynicism? Well, quite a few!
In 1991, Business in the inner city organized “A Strategic Initiative for Central Johannesburg”. The rationale for the two day workshop was “increasing concern at the evidence of accelerating urban decline”. The outcome of the workshop was the establishment of the Central Johannesburg Partnership (CJP) “an independent, non-profit agency representative of Johannesburg’s diverse community, the City Council and the private sector to revitalize and develop the central city and the urban economy, jointly and effectively”. Six priorities were established for priority attention, crime; grime; informal trading; residential accommodation; transportation and urban design and development.
In 1995, the Gauteng Provincial Government and the Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council called for “an inner city summit” as the “culmination of the first stage in the formulation of an urban renewal strategy for the inner city.” ”Inner City Ivukile”, the resultant initiative, proposed the introduction of an inner city ‘stablisation strategy.’ The “Ivukile” initiative included little to no consultation with the business sector and was undertaken during an inappropriate period given the pending major changes in local government structures and really came to nought.
In 1996 an inner city visioning exercise was undertaken between the Council, Provincial Government and business and community sectors. With a large degree of consultation it was a most successful initiative resulting in the vision “Johannesburg, the Golden Heartbeat of Africa….” that formed the basis of policies and strategies that were to underpin the urban regeneration strategies for the next decade. It was also highly successful in bringing together the four sectoral participants working together for a common goal, the revitalization of the inner city.
The vision crafted in 1996 was publicly launched by then Deputy President Thabo Mbeki in 1997 under the name “Mayivuke”.
But also in 1996, Provincial Government led a new province wide initiative known as “Vusani Amadolobha” – A Four Point Plan for the Regeneration and Integration of Cities, Towns and Township Centres” throughout Gauteng. The four ‘points’ were;
• Promote Clean and Safe Centres
• Foster Compact Development
• Encourage Vibrant Commercial Centres
• Build Regeneration Partnerships
In 1998 we experienced the quite bizarre Provincial Government period when Mathole Motsheka was appointed Premier. During his short term in office a second “Vusani Amadolobha” conference was held when he proposed local development committees to provide a “highly organized and coherent system of inter-governmental programmes and structures for rapid development and social services delivery”. My response to this, Citichat 7 April 1998, was “Nou, ja fine!” Shortly after this the Vusani Amadolobha process ground to a halt when the MEC responsible was ‘re-deployed’. Motsheka also organized an “Inner City Workshop” which took no cognizance of anything that had been or was happening in terms of urban regeneration programmes.
In 1999 an “iGoli 2002 Summit” was held, focusing on the Metropolitan area, in which it was acknowledged that “the current financial crisis was caused by an institutional crisis” and steps were taken to address the institutional crisis.
2001 gave birth to “iGoli 2010”, again Metro wide, but it proved to be a consultant driven process of research and data collection that proposed no new strategies and, in fact, was never endorsed by Council.
2002 then saw the launch of “Joburg 2030” basically a long term economic vision for the Metropolitan area that was based on the premise that the city would not progress without growth in order to generate “a better life” for all its citizens.
The Johannesburg Inner City Regeneration Strategy and Business Plan 2004 – 2007 was developed by the City’s Economic Development Unit (EDU) in 2003 and accepted by the Mayoral Committee in 2004. Known as the ‘five pillar strategy’ it focused on:
• Addressing sinkholes
• Undertaking intensive urban management
• Maintaining and upgrading infrastructure
• Promoting ripple pond investments and
• Supporting economic sectors.
A Business Plan was developed from the strategy detailing 63 ‘Programmes and Activities’ to be completed by June this year but 44% of these had no budget allocation and all the objectives of the plan have therefore not been achieved.
A Metropolitan ‘Growth & Development Strategy’ was adopted in 2006.
In 2007 the major problems that the inner city continued to be faced with were:
• Crime
• Grime
• Informal trading
• Residential Accommodation
• Transportation and
• Urban design and development.
Although, on face value, these are still the issues first identified in 1991, it would not be true to say that some progress, to a greater or lesser extent, had not been made over the past 16 years and, in particular over the past five. The investment figures quoted last week reflect the progress that has in fact been made.
The inner city visioning process in 1996 was the starting block for the inner city revitalization or renewal process, through the logical development of a variety of structures that retained the involvement of the sectors responsible for the crafting of the vision (with the exception of Provincial Government). These structures were
• The Inner City Development Forum - later the Section 59 Committee and then the Section 79 Inner City Committee;
• The Inner City Office later to become the Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA).
• The Region 8 directorate and office including the Inner City Task Force
The tools that were developed and formed the basis of the processes were.
• The 1999 Inner City Spatial Framework and Inner City Economic Framework,
• The initial Inner City Strategy and then
• The 2003/2007 Inner City Strategy.
The combination and integration of the above processes and structures provided a coherence to the revitalization process as well as maintaining important communication linkages between public and private sectors. The broader Metropolitan processes undertaken during this decade, iGoli 2002, 2010 and 2030 etc, always appeared to be proceeded with little or no specific recognition of the critical importance of the inner city to the Metropolitan area. That the Inner City was one of the Mayoral priorities of the Executive Mayor’s first term of office, led to a reversal of this situation and the tremendous gains made by the Inner City during that period are evidence of this.
The virtual ‘destruction’ of the structures that supported the Inner City regeneration process at the end of the first term of office in order to once again make the Inner City fit political imperatives and the metropolitan planning mould are, to put it mildly, regrettable.
The 2007 Summit and Charter needs to be seen against this history and offers an opportunity to redress some of the questionable decisions of the last year as well as re-energise the regeneration process.
At the Summit the Executive Mayor spelt out his vision for the inner city:
“I have been very clear about what I want to see happen in the Inner City. Within the next few years, by the time of the 2010 Soccer World Cup and the end of this Council’s term of Office, we want the complete transformation of our Inner City. We want this Inner City to be clean and green. We want it to be safe for residents and visitors. We want a proper balance between residential development and business development. We want it to be a desirable location where both the wealthy, and those who are just getting on to the ladder of prosperity, can live, work and enjoy themselves in harmony.”
A great vision but how do we get there? Well, the Executive Mayor in his speech, highlighted the following response to the issues raised in the consultation process:
1. New structures and improved urban management.
2. Public environment upgrading
3. Improved waste management and collection.
4. Extended CCTV.
5. An inclusionsary residential accommodation programme.
6. State of the art public transportation.
7. Managed informal trading.
Let’s see, crime grime, informal trading, housing, transportation - shades of 1991! Cheers, neil
Friday, May 4, 2007
History urban decline Jhb Citichat 4 May 2007
CITICHAT 17/2007 - 4 May 2007
The Changing City (2)
1996 to 2000 turned out to be a period of ongoing decline yet also a consolidation period for the inner city during which time various policies and strategies were develop off which increasingly positive investment would start to flow. As one would expect during such a volatile period, media headlines captured the dichotomy of the times - “Squalor and decay growing in inner city” and “Joburg’s inner city – from bad to worse” to “Inner city decay can be reversed” and “Putting shine back in the City of Gold”
Politically, the first democratic council, 1995 to 2000, concentrated to a large extent on restructuring the apartheid structures they had inherited. This did have the effect of extending the period of political paralysis that characterised the previous regime in so far as urban management was concerned.
But the local authority’s lack of urban management performance during this period was not the only aspect that contributed to ongoing decline. A number of CBD property owners were as culpable.
Last week I quoted from Richard Tomlinson’s 1999 Economic Report that noted that “The Johannesburg CBD is essentially owned and controlled by 20 major landowners of which the most notable are Old Mutual, Anglo American, First National Bank, JCI, Sage, Sanlam and Standard Bank.”
Soraya Goga, “Property Investors and Decentralisation” remarks that “the existing CBD owners market also provided the capital for decentralized investment…..CBD owners through investing in real estate in new locations in a period of economic decline, undermined their investments in the CBD……..both the owners and the investment markets were not competitive but oligopolistic …..the issue in Johannesburg is not so much that relocation occurred but the extent of relocation. Given that CBD owners could have dampened decentralized demand, relocation seems to have been excessive.”
Goga argues that (1) an excess of capital in search of investment and held by long term financial institutions (insurance houses and pension funds) acted as a necessary condition in driving investment to decentralized areas (2) the oligopolistic industry structure of these institutions drove ‘false’ competition within the market to exacerbate conditions of oversupply and (3) poor internal organization and management within the investment institutions contributed to the oversupply across the metropolitan area. Clearly the lack of commitment to the CBD was recognized by Council who probably considered that this placed no priority on improving service delivery.
An examination of the major current property owners in the CBD reveals the extent to which the previous institutions disinvested. Southern Life, Sanlam, the Mines Pension Fund, Sage Properties, JHI, Liberty Life, Ampros, Investec etc are no longer present (some no longer exist!) whilst a number of the banks have considerably shed their CBD property holdings. There no longer is a ‘top twenty’ of major property holders but rather a small number of major investors who hold property in excess of a billion rand and then a growing number of others who hold a small number of properties, in each case the total value of which would be below a billionrand. So the current property owners represent a very different breed largely as individuals or consortiums. That’s good for the inner city as such investors often pay a lot closer attention to urban issues than many of the larger institutions of yesteryear - it is their own money at stake! So the first major structural change in the inner city relates to ownership.
Whilst, as I have said, this can be seen as a positive change, my one concern is that the private individuals and new corporations responsible for the larger private sector investment of the past five years (and that which is to probably come over the next five) is almost totally from the white sector.
Jennifer Robinson, “Johannesburg’s Futures” argues that “apartheid’s demise has not ended the experiences of segregation and inequality that have shaped the lives of most of the people living in Johannesburg. New developments seem as likely to reinforce old patterns as transform them, despite many hopes of initiating a new, integrated and compact city form across the country.” The inner city will not be truly transformed until the majority of property ownership is transformed.
The second noticeable structural change in the inner city relates to the geography of the provision of residential accommodation be it upgrading or refurbishing of existing accommodation or conversion of office buildings to residential. At least R2 billion has been invested in this market over the past five years contributing at least 10 000 new or refurbished units and another R3 billion has already been identified as known projects planned for the next few years. These are occurring in a number of areas. Firstly, the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor through the inner city appears to be a major focus for the provision of middle income residential as does Braamfontein although the latter also caters for the middle to higher income.
Secondly, the middle to higher end of the market is also being catered for in an area generally west of Rissik and between Commissioner and Anderson Streets. In this areas between 850 and 1000 units are currently at one stage or another of development.
Whilst the large Brickfields project in Newtown (742) units is in the middle income category, a substantial number of upper-income units are planned for the Central Place sites opposite the new AngloGold Ashanti headquarters and in the proposed ‘Majestic’ site in the Market Theatre precinct. 43 units have recently been developed and sold in the Quinn Street conversion from offices to residential and a large project, ‘The Sidings’, will be started shortly behind, or just west of, the Quinn Street development, and will bring a further 440 units onto the market.
Interestingly, the pace of refurbs, conversions or upgrades in Hillbrow and Berea, the traditional high density areas of the inner city, is not as active as I expected. The Trust for Urban Housing Finance (TUHF) records loans into Berea of R50 million and Hillbrow of R40 million between June 2003 and March 2007 – certainly the need would appear to be many times those numbers although other financial institutions are also lending. These areas contain some 420 multi-unit medium to high rise buildings of which 220 are sectional title. According to Ian Fife, a major property owner in the area, no real secondary market has developed in Hillbrow yet, with just the beginnings of one in Berea. Clearly the upside potential in these areas is huge but the Council does need to act to regularise service delivery and by-law enforcement.
One concern that I have in this densifying of residential accommodation in built-up areas such as the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor is the lack of open space and social facilities. Inner city residents desperately need space to congregate, socialize and relax and the City has to react urgently to these needs or we will have a potential disaster on our hands.
The third structural change is not really a change as much as a consolidation of an earlier change. I mentioned last week that, instead of a clustering of activities that one finds in most major cities, the dominant developments of the ‘70s were spread and located at the four corners of the traditional CBD. Well, ABSA have now announced and commenced construction of another major extension to their campus (R1.1 billion) which is to the east of the traditional CBD. This eastern sector now contains the growing ABSA campus, Jewel City which is currently also being extended and, to its north, a mixed use residential and industrial precinct that is starting to emerge from a really gritty area. So the node on the east of the traditional CBD initiated originally by the location of the Carlton Centre and the UBS, is considerably strengthening.
But another of the ‘70s nodes outside of the traditional CBD is also being strengthened, this time on the western edge, through some interesting developments. ABSA have recently also purchased 11 Diagonal Street, a purchase that will change the use of that building from commercial letting to predominantly institutional. Then FNB have purchased the previous AA Life Building, also on Diagonal Street, and this will have the same result, the institutionalising of previous commercial space. FNB may also be considering redeveloping their open site between the old Stock Exchange building and their new parking garage on the previous First Card site. Immediately to the north west of both of these buildings, Anglo Gold Ashanti’s new corporate head office is to be completed by mid-year. To the south of these Diagonal Street developments, the Johannesburg Land Company’s purchases of properties as well as the open land west of the Magistrates Court for a major office park development, will result in a new dynamism for this south western quadrant. All of this now supports the Standard Bank Superblock development which was the ‘70s ‘breakaway’ from the traditional CBD.
So that leaves the traditional CBD itself. This is in fact the area that coincides with the historic CBD which approximates the area created by consolidating the two original mining camps in 1887. It was later of course the prime area for retail and attracted some major development in the late 90s (Bank City, 1066, etc) as well as new retail for Woolworths, Edgars and Game. But for the past few years nothing much has happened in the area.
Well all that is likely to change. The Gauteng Provincial Government Precinct, if the revised proposals of the architect are accepted by his client, will have a major impact on the southern part of this area. At least one major commercial project is being considered whilst the central part is being impacted on with a great deal of residential conversions and upgrading as previously mentioned down the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor. The northern sector is the site for the massive Park Station development being planned by the city’s Transportation Department. This, which includes major bus and taxi ranks, also envisages substantial residential and retail activity. In my estimation it will be a multi billion rand development that will be an ideal vehicle for a Private Public Partnership and is planned currently to be developed in six phases between now and 2015. To its north-east is the R100 million Gautrain station already under construction.
Given all the above it is probably not surprising to learn that within the inner city:
1. 9655 property transfers amounting to some R6 billion took place between 1996 and 2006, the greater proportion since 2001.
2. Capital developments by both the public and private sectors amounted to between R6.5 and R7.5 billion (roughly 2001 to 2006) of which R2.5 to R3 billion was from the public sector.
3. Known projects (of which some commenced in early 2007) already reflect investments over the next 3 to 5 years of R12 billion of which R3 billion will be public sector which EXCLUDES the cost of the proposed Bus Rapid Transport System. Excluded also is public sector work that may flow from the City’s 2010 office.
4. The known future projects also include a further 4000 to 5000 residential units, new, converted or refurbished.
Isn’t it great when a plan comes together?
See you at the Summit, regards, neil
The Changing City (2)
1996 to 2000 turned out to be a period of ongoing decline yet also a consolidation period for the inner city during which time various policies and strategies were develop off which increasingly positive investment would start to flow. As one would expect during such a volatile period, media headlines captured the dichotomy of the times - “Squalor and decay growing in inner city” and “Joburg’s inner city – from bad to worse” to “Inner city decay can be reversed” and “Putting shine back in the City of Gold”
Politically, the first democratic council, 1995 to 2000, concentrated to a large extent on restructuring the apartheid structures they had inherited. This did have the effect of extending the period of political paralysis that characterised the previous regime in so far as urban management was concerned.
But the local authority’s lack of urban management performance during this period was not the only aspect that contributed to ongoing decline. A number of CBD property owners were as culpable.
Last week I quoted from Richard Tomlinson’s 1999 Economic Report that noted that “The Johannesburg CBD is essentially owned and controlled by 20 major landowners of which the most notable are Old Mutual, Anglo American, First National Bank, JCI, Sage, Sanlam and Standard Bank.”
Soraya Goga, “Property Investors and Decentralisation” remarks that “the existing CBD owners market also provided the capital for decentralized investment…..CBD owners through investing in real estate in new locations in a period of economic decline, undermined their investments in the CBD……..both the owners and the investment markets were not competitive but oligopolistic …..the issue in Johannesburg is not so much that relocation occurred but the extent of relocation. Given that CBD owners could have dampened decentralized demand, relocation seems to have been excessive.”
Goga argues that (1) an excess of capital in search of investment and held by long term financial institutions (insurance houses and pension funds) acted as a necessary condition in driving investment to decentralized areas (2) the oligopolistic industry structure of these institutions drove ‘false’ competition within the market to exacerbate conditions of oversupply and (3) poor internal organization and management within the investment institutions contributed to the oversupply across the metropolitan area. Clearly the lack of commitment to the CBD was recognized by Council who probably considered that this placed no priority on improving service delivery.
An examination of the major current property owners in the CBD reveals the extent to which the previous institutions disinvested. Southern Life, Sanlam, the Mines Pension Fund, Sage Properties, JHI, Liberty Life, Ampros, Investec etc are no longer present (some no longer exist!) whilst a number of the banks have considerably shed their CBD property holdings. There no longer is a ‘top twenty’ of major property holders but rather a small number of major investors who hold property in excess of a billion rand and then a growing number of others who hold a small number of properties, in each case the total value of which would be below a billionrand. So the current property owners represent a very different breed largely as individuals or consortiums. That’s good for the inner city as such investors often pay a lot closer attention to urban issues than many of the larger institutions of yesteryear - it is their own money at stake! So the first major structural change in the inner city relates to ownership.
Whilst, as I have said, this can be seen as a positive change, my one concern is that the private individuals and new corporations responsible for the larger private sector investment of the past five years (and that which is to probably come over the next five) is almost totally from the white sector.
Jennifer Robinson, “Johannesburg’s Futures” argues that “apartheid’s demise has not ended the experiences of segregation and inequality that have shaped the lives of most of the people living in Johannesburg. New developments seem as likely to reinforce old patterns as transform them, despite many hopes of initiating a new, integrated and compact city form across the country.” The inner city will not be truly transformed until the majority of property ownership is transformed.
The second noticeable structural change in the inner city relates to the geography of the provision of residential accommodation be it upgrading or refurbishing of existing accommodation or conversion of office buildings to residential. At least R2 billion has been invested in this market over the past five years contributing at least 10 000 new or refurbished units and another R3 billion has already been identified as known projects planned for the next few years. These are occurring in a number of areas. Firstly, the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor through the inner city appears to be a major focus for the provision of middle income residential as does Braamfontein although the latter also caters for the middle to higher income.
Secondly, the middle to higher end of the market is also being catered for in an area generally west of Rissik and between Commissioner and Anderson Streets. In this areas between 850 and 1000 units are currently at one stage or another of development.
Whilst the large Brickfields project in Newtown (742) units is in the middle income category, a substantial number of upper-income units are planned for the Central Place sites opposite the new AngloGold Ashanti headquarters and in the proposed ‘Majestic’ site in the Market Theatre precinct. 43 units have recently been developed and sold in the Quinn Street conversion from offices to residential and a large project, ‘The Sidings’, will be started shortly behind, or just west of, the Quinn Street development, and will bring a further 440 units onto the market.
Interestingly, the pace of refurbs, conversions or upgrades in Hillbrow and Berea, the traditional high density areas of the inner city, is not as active as I expected. The Trust for Urban Housing Finance (TUHF) records loans into Berea of R50 million and Hillbrow of R40 million between June 2003 and March 2007 – certainly the need would appear to be many times those numbers although other financial institutions are also lending. These areas contain some 420 multi-unit medium to high rise buildings of which 220 are sectional title. According to Ian Fife, a major property owner in the area, no real secondary market has developed in Hillbrow yet, with just the beginnings of one in Berea. Clearly the upside potential in these areas is huge but the Council does need to act to regularise service delivery and by-law enforcement.
One concern that I have in this densifying of residential accommodation in built-up areas such as the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor is the lack of open space and social facilities. Inner city residents desperately need space to congregate, socialize and relax and the City has to react urgently to these needs or we will have a potential disaster on our hands.
The third structural change is not really a change as much as a consolidation of an earlier change. I mentioned last week that, instead of a clustering of activities that one finds in most major cities, the dominant developments of the ‘70s were spread and located at the four corners of the traditional CBD. Well, ABSA have now announced and commenced construction of another major extension to their campus (R1.1 billion) which is to the east of the traditional CBD. This eastern sector now contains the growing ABSA campus, Jewel City which is currently also being extended and, to its north, a mixed use residential and industrial precinct that is starting to emerge from a really gritty area. So the node on the east of the traditional CBD initiated originally by the location of the Carlton Centre and the UBS, is considerably strengthening.
But another of the ‘70s nodes outside of the traditional CBD is also being strengthened, this time on the western edge, through some interesting developments. ABSA have recently also purchased 11 Diagonal Street, a purchase that will change the use of that building from commercial letting to predominantly institutional. Then FNB have purchased the previous AA Life Building, also on Diagonal Street, and this will have the same result, the institutionalising of previous commercial space. FNB may also be considering redeveloping their open site between the old Stock Exchange building and their new parking garage on the previous First Card site. Immediately to the north west of both of these buildings, Anglo Gold Ashanti’s new corporate head office is to be completed by mid-year. To the south of these Diagonal Street developments, the Johannesburg Land Company’s purchases of properties as well as the open land west of the Magistrates Court for a major office park development, will result in a new dynamism for this south western quadrant. All of this now supports the Standard Bank Superblock development which was the ‘70s ‘breakaway’ from the traditional CBD.
So that leaves the traditional CBD itself. This is in fact the area that coincides with the historic CBD which approximates the area created by consolidating the two original mining camps in 1887. It was later of course the prime area for retail and attracted some major development in the late 90s (Bank City, 1066, etc) as well as new retail for Woolworths, Edgars and Game. But for the past few years nothing much has happened in the area.
Well all that is likely to change. The Gauteng Provincial Government Precinct, if the revised proposals of the architect are accepted by his client, will have a major impact on the southern part of this area. At least one major commercial project is being considered whilst the central part is being impacted on with a great deal of residential conversions and upgrading as previously mentioned down the Jeppe/Bree/Plein corridor. The northern sector is the site for the massive Park Station development being planned by the city’s Transportation Department. This, which includes major bus and taxi ranks, also envisages substantial residential and retail activity. In my estimation it will be a multi billion rand development that will be an ideal vehicle for a Private Public Partnership and is planned currently to be developed in six phases between now and 2015. To its north-east is the R100 million Gautrain station already under construction.
Given all the above it is probably not surprising to learn that within the inner city:
1. 9655 property transfers amounting to some R6 billion took place between 1996 and 2006, the greater proportion since 2001.
2. Capital developments by both the public and private sectors amounted to between R6.5 and R7.5 billion (roughly 2001 to 2006) of which R2.5 to R3 billion was from the public sector.
3. Known projects (of which some commenced in early 2007) already reflect investments over the next 3 to 5 years of R12 billion of which R3 billion will be public sector which EXCLUDES the cost of the proposed Bus Rapid Transport System. Excluded also is public sector work that may flow from the City’s 2010 office.
4. The known future projects also include a further 4000 to 5000 residential units, new, converted or refurbished.
Isn’t it great when a plan comes together?
See you at the Summit, regards, neil
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
