CITICHAT 25/2007- 29 June 2007
Caramba! We’re actually Portuguese in name!
Have been confined to bed for a good bit of this past week with an unpleasant viral complication from a previous bout of flu. However the respite did give me an opportunity to dig into the growing pile of books on my bedside table. Of particular interest a book published in 1974 on “The Naming of Johannesburg” by Niel Hirschson. Hirschson provides a plausible proposition debunking the generally accepted origin of “Johannesburg” ie that Johannesburg was named after Johann Friedrich Rissik and Christiaan Johannes Joubert. He does so in great detail interweaving the Jameson Raid, the Delagoa Railway, the relationships between the Boers and Britain and Portugal and some philosophical thoughts on issues such as ‘victory and defeat’.
Hirschson points out that three basic documents in the form of letters appear to offer a conclusive explanation of the original naming of Johannesburg as above. Two were written by government officials in 1896 (but only discovered in 1971) – one from T.J.Krogh, assistant to the State Secretary, and the other from Rissik himself, then surveyor General of the Transvaal. The third was written in 1926 in a private capacity by Gideon von Wielligh, who was the Surveyor-General before Rissik, at the time Johannesburg was founded. “Since all three agree that Johannesburg was named after Johann Rissik and Christiaan Johannes Joubert, the matter seems at first, settled. However, this is a superficial and deceptive impression, for two curious though unobtrusive features in these documents put the naming in quite a different light. First, they were written shortly after the Jameson Raid, more than nine years after the founding of Johannesburg and, second, they all omit to mention the date on which the actual naming took place.”
There are of course a number of other theories regarding the naming which Hirschson labels as all equally incorrect. That the city was named after President Kruger – “Legend has it …..”that after the two-man Rissik-Joubert commission had presented its report, Kruger said: “ And what shall we call this place?” To which Rissik is said to have answered “We thought of naming it after you, Mr. President. Since your name is Johannes, we suggest Johannesburg.” ….according to the legend, Kruger answered as follows: “ Well, as we are all Johanneses, we’ll name it as you say.”
James and Ethell Gray , “Payable Gold” concluded that Johannesburg was named after Veldkornet Johannes Petrus Meyer whose “….duties were carried out so efficiently over such an extensive area which called for many long days to be spent in the saddle that it is possible only to come to one conclusion, that the naming of Johannesburg after Johannes Meyer was a recognition of his willing, able and ungrudging service.”
Anna H. Smith “Street names in Johannesburg” comments “Why the name Randjeslaagte was not retained for the village is unknown….no document of 1886 has yet been found concerning the establishment of Johannesburg in which the reasons for the name are given…. Everybody..at that time was under the impression that Johannesburg had been named after Johannes Meyer.”
So what does Hirschson’s extensive research reveal? - (the book is in excess of a hundred pages!) Impossible to convey all the nuances and interwoven plots and intrigues, but here are some fascinating gems:
No official proclamation of the source of the name ‘Johannesburg’ has ever been made.
Johann Rissik, a Dutch immigrant and Christiaan Johannes Joubert, a Boer, were appointed on 3 August 1886 by the Executive Council of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek (ZAR) to inspect the farms in the Witwatersrand area “to arrange with farm owners for prospecting, and to find an acceptable area for establishing a town”
Johann Rissik was in fact a relatively young (29) and junior official, a First Clerk under Surveyor General Gideon von Wielligh whilst Joubert was the Vice President of the ZAR. However, as von Wieligh was away at the time, Rissik was temporarily in charge of the Surveyor General’s office. He had only recently, received a licence to practice as a surveyor. They reported back to President Kruger on the 12th August with a “comprehensive and detailed document” in which the name Johannesburg never appeared!
The two-man commission had recommended that some nine farms be proclaimed as “public diggings” and the official announcement to this effect appeared in the Staats-Courant of 8 September but, again, the name Johannesburg did not appear. The triangular area, to later be known as Johannesburg, was then still called Randjeslaagte. This is the name used throughout the commission’s report and some subsequent maps of the time.
The first time the name appeared in official correspondence was in a letter dated 3 October 1886 by the Mining Commissioner, Carl von Brandis to the State Secretary, W.E.Bok, asking for confirmation of the name Johannesburg, given to him by the Surveyor-General. He received the confirmation but with absolutely no explanation regarding its source. Hirschon points out that it is clear that the name did not come about by popular use or the through normal channels – “it seems hardly accidental that the origin of the name is so obscure, for it was introduced in an obscure fashion.”
In 1887, a Charles Cowen recorded in a booklet that Johannesburg had received its name “from Mr.John Rissik” no mention was made of Joubert who was a far more illustrious figure than Rissik – Vice President of the ZAR, a Boer and later to be Minister of Mines!
Some five years after the founding of the city, in 1891, The Press Weekly Edition, a local newspaper, reported that “it may be news to some that the city is named after Rissik and Joubert.” Clearly, unlike the establishment of most cities there was confusion regarding the source of the naming of ours and this was the first recorded time that Joubert’s name was linked to that of Rissik. The earlier confusion, Hirschson suggests, was deliberate.
Hirschson points out that it would be very unlikely for a town to be named after such a person as Rissik, a young Dutch immigrant, not a Boer, – town and city naming was usually drawn from heroic explorers and pioneers, soldiers and traders and almost always by their surname. When a first name was used it usually was that of a woman’s or from the ranks of Royalty - anyway Rissik was a Johann and not a Johannes! Paul Kruger had a great interest in the naming of places and would not have treated the naming of the new mining town lightly.
In a letter to a British newspaper, a Sir Ralph Williams, the British Representative in the Transvaal, wrote “ I….asked the question on my arrival (1887) and was informed on the best authority that it was so named after Mr Johann Rissik…..Kruger, more perhaps in humour than anything else….declared that the town should bear the name of its surveyor” Kruger is described as an astute politician with a puckish sense of humour and a love for confusing and surprising friends and Hirschson suggests that his comment, described as “more perhaps in humour than anything else” was made deliberately as a ‘leak’ serving a calculated purpose, to put the British off the scent of the real source of the name.
Hirschson’s thesis is that the confusion on the source of the naming between 1886 and 1891 was deliberately created by Kruger for shrewd political reasons that will become clearer from the following.
Joburg’s ascendancy coincided with Portuguese plans to gain a transcontinental territory from their western colony of Angola to Delagoa Bay (now Maputo) on the east. This suited Kruger as he needed support from other Imperial powers in Africa such as Germany and Portugal to counterbalance growing British influence. Portugal, in fact, had a number of ‘colonizing’ forces moving west to east and east to west – a Portuguese held border to the north of his Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek would have been vastly preferable to British held territories of which Rhodesia became one.
Thus. Paul Kruger enjoyed a close relationship with Portugal. So close in fact that in 1884, two years before the presumed naming of Johannesburg, he travelled to Lisbon and was invested with the Portuguese Grand Cross of the Order of the Immaculate Conception (the King Johannes Knightly Order of the Immaculate Conception) – a high and rare order indeed. It was first proclaimed a military order in 1818 and was intimately associated with the Johannine kings of Portugal. King João (Johannes) VI actually established the order in gratitude for the monarchy’s return from exile at the beginning of the 19th century.
In 1895 one of Kruger’s stated “fondest wishes” was realised - the creation of the Pretoria-DelagoaBay rail link – a link he himself used to leave the continent for Europe during the Anglo-Boer War to gain support for the beleagured Boers. The Portuguese had again honoured him by naming one of the Pretoria/Delagoa locomotives after him.
Kruger was no lover of the British and was heavily constrained by the London Convention of 1884 and particularly Article 4 – “The South African Republic will conclude no treaty or engagement with any State or nation other than the Orange Free State, nor with any native tribe to the eastward or westward of the Republic, until the same has been approved by Her Majesty the Queen”. Hirschson points out that whilst the clause places no restriction on northern movement Kruger did not want to take advantage of this as, had he moved north, he would have been in conflict with Portugal which in turn would have weakened his relationship with Britain even further.
In the meantime there was great opposition from Britain to Portugal’s desire to create their transcontinental territory and in 1890 Britain forced Portugal to abandon this approach. The resultant Portuguese-British treaty was signed in 1891 and it was shortly thereafter that the Press Weekly Edition announced that Johannesburg was named after the two members of a government ad-hoc commission.
Hirschson’s theory is clear – Kruger badly wished to return the honour of his Portuguese 1884 knighthood through the use of the names of a number of Portuguese kings, Johannes. He was restrained from doing so in 1886 due to his treaty with Britain which would have seen such a move as siding with Portugal during a period when they were at loggerheads with the Portuguese over their colonial expansion plans. When Portugal lost that argument, the basis of the naming of Johannesburg on Rissik and Joubert was immediately ‘leaked’ although it was five years after the naming of the city, it would certainly not have been wise to even suggest that the city might have had a different naming source. R.H.Wilde in “Joseph Chamberlain & The South African Republic 1895-1899 had written “…if the Republic (ZAR) could be caught in a violation of the convention, a concrete British grievance could be advertised and strong countermeasures taken. Kruger could have thus be made to feel British displeasure.”
In fact, Hirschson records, in 1896, in 1896, “in 1896, following the Jameson Raid and in the course of Chamberlain’s stepped up activities against the Boer Republic, and the attempt to accuse the ZAR of contravening the London Convention by establishing unapproved foreign relations two curious inquiries, perhaps British inspired, were received by the ZAR as to the origin of the name Johannesburg, for the British probably suspected its Portuguese origin. Theses letters answered respectively by T.J.Krogh and indirectly by Johannn Rissik, within months of each other, attempted to allay suspicion, declaring with a finality that could not be questioned at this stage, that Johannesburg was named after Rissil and Joubert. Reasonably enough, they omitted to mention any dates in order to avoid possible complications…..“its true derivation, the expression of a long-standing Boer orientation towards the Portuguese, was never publicly revealed”.
A last little twist provided by Hirschson relates to the abbreviation Jo’burg.
One of the many coins in circulation in the Cape Colony at the beginning if the 19th century, and which would have naturally made its way northwards, was a gold coin named the ‘Johannes’ which honoured certain Portuguese monarchs of the 18th and 19th centuries. It was first introduced by John V (1706-1750) and achieved primary importance as a colonial currency. It was seen as a protection against inflation and as a “compact and easily portable supply of reliable wealth”. At the time of King John VI, who bestowed the Order of Immaculate Conception on Paul Kruger, the King’s portrait appeared on the Johannes coin. Its nickname was a a Jo’ and led to what Hirschson describes as “that almost derisive nickname, popularised by aliens (the British) ” – Jo’burg!
Hirschson concludes “British popular suspicions, however, were perhaps not entirely allayed, and the nickname Jo’burg, derived from the gold Johannes or Jo’, came into common use among aliens at first.
In short, Johannesburg’s naming has three phases. First the honouring of Portugal, then the ascription in a leak to Rissik, and finally the naming after Rissik and Joubert without reference to dates.”
So there we have it, or do we? Adeus (that’s Portuguese for ciao!), neil
Friday, June 29, 2007
Friday, June 15, 2007
Jhb Inner City East West? Citichat 15 June 2007
CITICHAT 23/2007 - 15 June 2007
East, West – which is best?
For some time concern has been expressed about the lack of activity in the area to the east of the centre city core. To a very large extent the concentration appears to have been on the other side of the core, ie to the west.
Certainly the development in and around Newtown has been spectacular and has strongly bolstered that edge of the centre city core. Starting with the redevelopment of Mary Fitzgerald Square in 2001, a large number of projects have followed and more are being planned for implementation in the near future. Infrastructure projects that have been completed include Mary Fitzgerald Square, the Nelson Mandela Bridge and M1 on-and off ramps, Metro Mall taxi rank and retail facility and the upgrading of the urban environment as well as the conversion of disused railway sidings into parking space and, more recently, the completion of public toilets on Mary Fitzgerald Square.
Completed residential accommodation included Johannesburg Housing Company’s Tribunal Gardens and Carr Gardens and the Cope Housing development all on the Fordsburg end of Newtown and JHC’s Brickfields development on the city end. Completed office or commercial developments, new and refurbished, included No I Central Place (new) and refurbishments such as The Mills@Newtown, the Newtown Hotel by NUMSA, a building on the corner of Bree and Miriam Makeba and, more recently, the construction of new offices for the JDA within the Bus Factory. The Oriental Plaza on the western edge of Newtown has also experienced major upgrading/refurbishing over the past few years with a lot evidently still to come.
On the cultural front, work was done some years back in accommodating the Dance Factory, Moving into Dance and the Midi Trust’s Newtown Music Centre – now the Bassline. The first phase of the Sci Bono Science & Technology Centre was also completed a few years back in the historic Electric Workshop building which included a great refurbishment of the offices and the creation of retail on the southern end of the building.
Work currently under construction includes the Quinn Street apartments (conversion from offices – just being completed); the additions to and refurbishment of the Turbine Hall and Boiler House as the corporate Head Office for Anglo Gold Ashanti (also just being completed); the refurbishment of the AA Building and 11 Diagonal Street for FNB and ABSA respectively and the Franklin (previously Ernst & Young) residential accommodation.
Planned projects include the conversion of Transport House into an 80 room boutique hotel with 200 apartments and 3600 square metres retail and cinemas; mixed use developments on Nos 2, 3 and 6 Central Place; apartments and retail opposite the Market Theatre to be known as the Majestic; a major new residential project behind the Quinn Street development to be known as The Sidings; a very large office and retail development in Carr Street and a complete refurb of the popular SAB World of Beer.
My calculation of the cost of all the development that has taken place from 2001 to date and including known projects to be developed in the near future as mentioned above is well over R3 billion. So the Western area has really been hot!
And the forgotten East? Not so forgotten anymore!
The first major new project in this area was the development of ABSA’s R450 million headquarter building that was completed in 1999 followed by their staff parking garage. Currently the really big project under construction (R1.1 billion) is another massive addition to the ABSA campus. It covers three city blocks and comprises two blocks of offices and an energy centre to service the ABSA campus over basement parking for 3000 cars and providing 115 000 square metres of additional office space that will house 3 580 staff. The new buildings will consolidate ABSA’s corporate dominance in the south eastern quadrant of the inner city.
Directly to the east of the ABSA campus is Jewel City where considerable work is under way. ApexHi are investing substantially in upgrading and extending the precinct as is another private investor. JDA is busy upgrading the public environment surrounding the Jewel City precinct. I know of at least one residential developer who has started purchasing properties just east of Jewel City and I would anticipate increasing interest in this area for residential development purposes.
To the north of Jewel City there has been a great deal of new investment particularly in the area bounded by the railway line in the north and east, End Street in the west and Market Street in the south. Upgrading to a number of industrial buildings and the conversion of a large number of office blocks into apartments will see this area become far more residential in nature than previously whilst retaining some of the industrial. Some of the residential projects that are on or around End Street are extremely large such as the 120 End Street conversion from offices to 800 residential units; the previous Checkers office building into 330 residential units and Purchase Place into 440.
In regard to infrastructure, there is talk of a new railway station being built in the area which would replace the existing Ellis Park and Doornfontein stations and the existing taxi rank must be ready for an upgrade.
Further east, the Ellis Park/Bertrams area has a minimum of R300 million allocated for upgrading prior to 2010 and a visit to the area shows a great deal of work underway on upgrading roads and pavements. R200 million is being spent on upgrading the Ellis Park Stadium itself and I would imagine that a lot more money will be pumped into the area directly around the Ellis Park and Athletics Stadia.
Residential is again high on the priority list in this area with a precinct in Bertrams being targeted for expropriation and redevelopment and the announcement by the Johannesburg Housing Company at the Inner City Summit of a massive new development.
Not lagging too far behind the west, this eastern sector is looking at investment of between two-and-a-half and three billion rand taking into account projects since 1999 to date and known projects to come and. As we come closer to 2010 I would see a lot more going into this area.
Exciting stuff and it can only get better! But notice how often I’ve referred to ‘residential’ or ‘housing’ – this is currently one of the major drivers of urban regeneration in the inner city and both east and west appear to be attracting their fair share.
Ciao, neil
East, West – which is best?
For some time concern has been expressed about the lack of activity in the area to the east of the centre city core. To a very large extent the concentration appears to have been on the other side of the core, ie to the west.
Certainly the development in and around Newtown has been spectacular and has strongly bolstered that edge of the centre city core. Starting with the redevelopment of Mary Fitzgerald Square in 2001, a large number of projects have followed and more are being planned for implementation in the near future. Infrastructure projects that have been completed include Mary Fitzgerald Square, the Nelson Mandela Bridge and M1 on-and off ramps, Metro Mall taxi rank and retail facility and the upgrading of the urban environment as well as the conversion of disused railway sidings into parking space and, more recently, the completion of public toilets on Mary Fitzgerald Square.
Completed residential accommodation included Johannesburg Housing Company’s Tribunal Gardens and Carr Gardens and the Cope Housing development all on the Fordsburg end of Newtown and JHC’s Brickfields development on the city end. Completed office or commercial developments, new and refurbished, included No I Central Place (new) and refurbishments such as The Mills@Newtown, the Newtown Hotel by NUMSA, a building on the corner of Bree and Miriam Makeba and, more recently, the construction of new offices for the JDA within the Bus Factory. The Oriental Plaza on the western edge of Newtown has also experienced major upgrading/refurbishing over the past few years with a lot evidently still to come.
On the cultural front, work was done some years back in accommodating the Dance Factory, Moving into Dance and the Midi Trust’s Newtown Music Centre – now the Bassline. The first phase of the Sci Bono Science & Technology Centre was also completed a few years back in the historic Electric Workshop building which included a great refurbishment of the offices and the creation of retail on the southern end of the building.
Work currently under construction includes the Quinn Street apartments (conversion from offices – just being completed); the additions to and refurbishment of the Turbine Hall and Boiler House as the corporate Head Office for Anglo Gold Ashanti (also just being completed); the refurbishment of the AA Building and 11 Diagonal Street for FNB and ABSA respectively and the Franklin (previously Ernst & Young) residential accommodation.
Planned projects include the conversion of Transport House into an 80 room boutique hotel with 200 apartments and 3600 square metres retail and cinemas; mixed use developments on Nos 2, 3 and 6 Central Place; apartments and retail opposite the Market Theatre to be known as the Majestic; a major new residential project behind the Quinn Street development to be known as The Sidings; a very large office and retail development in Carr Street and a complete refurb of the popular SAB World of Beer.
My calculation of the cost of all the development that has taken place from 2001 to date and including known projects to be developed in the near future as mentioned above is well over R3 billion. So the Western area has really been hot!
And the forgotten East? Not so forgotten anymore!
The first major new project in this area was the development of ABSA’s R450 million headquarter building that was completed in 1999 followed by their staff parking garage. Currently the really big project under construction (R1.1 billion) is another massive addition to the ABSA campus. It covers three city blocks and comprises two blocks of offices and an energy centre to service the ABSA campus over basement parking for 3000 cars and providing 115 000 square metres of additional office space that will house 3 580 staff. The new buildings will consolidate ABSA’s corporate dominance in the south eastern quadrant of the inner city.
Directly to the east of the ABSA campus is Jewel City where considerable work is under way. ApexHi are investing substantially in upgrading and extending the precinct as is another private investor. JDA is busy upgrading the public environment surrounding the Jewel City precinct. I know of at least one residential developer who has started purchasing properties just east of Jewel City and I would anticipate increasing interest in this area for residential development purposes.
To the north of Jewel City there has been a great deal of new investment particularly in the area bounded by the railway line in the north and east, End Street in the west and Market Street in the south. Upgrading to a number of industrial buildings and the conversion of a large number of office blocks into apartments will see this area become far more residential in nature than previously whilst retaining some of the industrial. Some of the residential projects that are on or around End Street are extremely large such as the 120 End Street conversion from offices to 800 residential units; the previous Checkers office building into 330 residential units and Purchase Place into 440.
In regard to infrastructure, there is talk of a new railway station being built in the area which would replace the existing Ellis Park and Doornfontein stations and the existing taxi rank must be ready for an upgrade.
Further east, the Ellis Park/Bertrams area has a minimum of R300 million allocated for upgrading prior to 2010 and a visit to the area shows a great deal of work underway on upgrading roads and pavements. R200 million is being spent on upgrading the Ellis Park Stadium itself and I would imagine that a lot more money will be pumped into the area directly around the Ellis Park and Athletics Stadia.
Residential is again high on the priority list in this area with a precinct in Bertrams being targeted for expropriation and redevelopment and the announcement by the Johannesburg Housing Company at the Inner City Summit of a massive new development.
Not lagging too far behind the west, this eastern sector is looking at investment of between two-and-a-half and three billion rand taking into account projects since 1999 to date and known projects to come and. As we come closer to 2010 I would see a lot more going into this area.
Exciting stuff and it can only get better! But notice how often I’ve referred to ‘residential’ or ‘housing’ – this is currently one of the major drivers of urban regeneration in the inner city and both east and west appear to be attracting their fair share.
Ciao, neil
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Carlton Centre Citichat 12 June 2007
CITICHAT 24/2007- 12 June 2007
Sale of Carlton Centre provides opportunities and an invitation to a US tour and conference both addressing urban issues.
So “The Carlton” is going to be up for sale - again! Can’t tell you how many calls I field regarding the future of the hotel section of the Carlton Centre. Its demise was so closely linked to that of the inner city’s and, with the change of the inner city’s fortunes, many of us are impatient to see the fence surrounding her being removed and appropriate redevelopment taking place.
Over the past few years there have been two or three groups actively looking for a deal with Transnet on the hotel redevelopment but all were frustrated by a total lack of response from the parastatal. However, Transnet CEO Maria Ramos has been on record for a considerable time that investments not central to Transnet’s core business will be disposed of and she appears to be doing this systematically – the first major divestment was the Cape Town Waterfront which was sold to London & Regional a company of of UK and Dubai investors. From what I hear, they are to make considerable further investments in the Waterfront with some new thinking that will turn the Waterfront into a building site for a number of years. They clearly are interested in investing in the Carlton evidently having already approached Transnet. Question is, do we want them to end up as owners?
Would rather be great to see the sale of the Carlton Centre leading to some real local black ownership – my concern relative to the major changes in ownership that have occurred in the city centre property market over the last five/six years in particular, is that whilst the smaller new city centre investors have taken over from the institutional investors, which in my mind is a definite plus, they are still predominantly white. The urban renewal of the inner city will never be completely successful until there is a major swing in racial ownership and the Carlton would be a great catalyst in this regard. As announced this past week, bids for the sale of the Transnet housing loan book were assessed on weightings of 50 percent for price, 30 percent for profile and 20 percent black economic empowerment. Would be good to see those weightings reversed but that is more than unlikely given Transnet’s approach of seeking the highest price. So how can this investment be turned into broad black empowerment? Here’s an opportunity for some clever structuring.
I understand that the tower block has only 5000 sq metres of 72 000 unlet but that the 52 000 sq metre retail section is fully let although not all of the lettings retail based. Thus SARS rent about 3 000 square metres where the OK Bazaars used to trade. The 620 bed hotel however has been empty since the mid ‘90s. The hotel has always been synonymous with the fortunes of the city. Following numerous delays from the time the hotel had been conceived by Barney Barnato in the mid-1890s, the original Carlton Hotel was to open its doors on the 20th February 1906. Its opening was the subject of the very first issue of the Sunday Times which proclaimed “It isn’t merely a hotel – it’s a miniature city, insofar as it contains within its four walls the whole of those comforts to which the luxury loving modern aspires. It occupies the greater portion of an immense block, has frontages on four important streets and towers so high that one imagines that it would not be impossible to step off its roof on to a passing cloud (the original building was six storeys high and increased to nine in 1936 – wonder how the writer would have viewed the 50 storey Carlton tower!) ………there will be nothing to strike a discordant note, no jarring features, no administrative shortcomings or decorative faults, when the crowd of well-dressed men and women commence to throng the hallways of Johannesburg’s great hotel. The plan upon which the hotel is constructed is perfect, its appointments superb. Taste is the keynote of the decorative scheme, as comfort is the motive of the building’s design. From the lowest basement to the topmost story there is visible no single garish feature, no architectural effect with which the most hyper-critical visitor could possibly find fault.”
The hotel which was actually located on the site of African Life Centre, not where the current Hotel is located, closed its doors in December 1963, fifty-seven years after its opening. The Carlton was an hotel with an international reputation accommodating royalty, heads of state, millionaires, well known celebrities and the best known names of the entertainment world of the time. It was therefore fitting that when the SA Breweries and Anglo American Corporation conceived their massive new development shortly after the hotel closed, that it would include not only a new Carlton Hotel but that the project itself would be known as ‘The Carlton Centre’. Completed in 1973 the new hotel took over the mantle of ‘international hotel’ and was the leading hotel in the country for two decades. When it closed in the mid ‘90s a palisade fence was erected around it which somehow typified the decline of the inner city – it’s time to see it removed and the building put back into the economic life of the city.
Hopefully that will now be sooner rather than later.
Invitation to a close look at urban management and other related urban issues in some major cities in the USA and attendance at the International Downtown Association Annual Conference and World Congress in New York City, September 2007
Over the last fifteen years I have taken a number of groups overseas to examine various aspects of urban regeneration and urban management and plan to do this again shortly. So why don’t you join me in September on a visit to three American cities, Washington DC, Philadelphia and New York City, all of which have highly successful urban management initiatives through Business Improvement Districts (City Improvement Districts), and attend the 53rd International Downtown Association Annual Conference and World Congress on Downtown and Town Centre Management to be held in New York City in September 2007.
There have been three World Congresses on Downtown and Town Centre Management before – Coventry, England, New York and London have all played at host city.. The fourth World Congress in New York in September this year is being jointly sponsored by UK’s Association of Town Centre Management and IDA and 1200-1500 delegates are anticipated, this will be a truly international event.
The conference programme will consist of plenary sessions and workshops with various study tours. In addition there are a series of networking events being planned.
The occasion will provide an opportunity to meet stakeholders and urban practitioners from around the world and explore with them the issues that cities face.
The tour will start in Washington DC, go on to Philadelphia and then to New York City arriving in time for participants to get involved in some of the IDA pre conference workshops and tours.
After the conference we’ll spend some time with some of the CIDs in NYC, and a number of areas that have been dramatically regenerated.
The timetable is to be in Washington DC by Sunday 9th September then to Philadelphia on the 12th and arriving in New York City in time for the pre-conference activities. The conference takes place from Saturday 15th to Tuesday 18th and we will then spend a couple of days in New York looking at a number of CIDs and successful regeneration areas leaving on Wednesday 19th.
If you are interested please let me know and I’ll send you further details.
Ciao, neil
Sale of Carlton Centre provides opportunities and an invitation to a US tour and conference both addressing urban issues.
So “The Carlton” is going to be up for sale - again! Can’t tell you how many calls I field regarding the future of the hotel section of the Carlton Centre. Its demise was so closely linked to that of the inner city’s and, with the change of the inner city’s fortunes, many of us are impatient to see the fence surrounding her being removed and appropriate redevelopment taking place.
Over the past few years there have been two or three groups actively looking for a deal with Transnet on the hotel redevelopment but all were frustrated by a total lack of response from the parastatal. However, Transnet CEO Maria Ramos has been on record for a considerable time that investments not central to Transnet’s core business will be disposed of and she appears to be doing this systematically – the first major divestment was the Cape Town Waterfront which was sold to London & Regional a company of of UK and Dubai investors. From what I hear, they are to make considerable further investments in the Waterfront with some new thinking that will turn the Waterfront into a building site for a number of years. They clearly are interested in investing in the Carlton evidently having already approached Transnet. Question is, do we want them to end up as owners?
Would rather be great to see the sale of the Carlton Centre leading to some real local black ownership – my concern relative to the major changes in ownership that have occurred in the city centre property market over the last five/six years in particular, is that whilst the smaller new city centre investors have taken over from the institutional investors, which in my mind is a definite plus, they are still predominantly white. The urban renewal of the inner city will never be completely successful until there is a major swing in racial ownership and the Carlton would be a great catalyst in this regard. As announced this past week, bids for the sale of the Transnet housing loan book were assessed on weightings of 50 percent for price, 30 percent for profile and 20 percent black economic empowerment. Would be good to see those weightings reversed but that is more than unlikely given Transnet’s approach of seeking the highest price. So how can this investment be turned into broad black empowerment? Here’s an opportunity for some clever structuring.
I understand that the tower block has only 5000 sq metres of 72 000 unlet but that the 52 000 sq metre retail section is fully let although not all of the lettings retail based. Thus SARS rent about 3 000 square metres where the OK Bazaars used to trade. The 620 bed hotel however has been empty since the mid ‘90s. The hotel has always been synonymous with the fortunes of the city. Following numerous delays from the time the hotel had been conceived by Barney Barnato in the mid-1890s, the original Carlton Hotel was to open its doors on the 20th February 1906. Its opening was the subject of the very first issue of the Sunday Times which proclaimed “It isn’t merely a hotel – it’s a miniature city, insofar as it contains within its four walls the whole of those comforts to which the luxury loving modern aspires. It occupies the greater portion of an immense block, has frontages on four important streets and towers so high that one imagines that it would not be impossible to step off its roof on to a passing cloud (the original building was six storeys high and increased to nine in 1936 – wonder how the writer would have viewed the 50 storey Carlton tower!) ………there will be nothing to strike a discordant note, no jarring features, no administrative shortcomings or decorative faults, when the crowd of well-dressed men and women commence to throng the hallways of Johannesburg’s great hotel. The plan upon which the hotel is constructed is perfect, its appointments superb. Taste is the keynote of the decorative scheme, as comfort is the motive of the building’s design. From the lowest basement to the topmost story there is visible no single garish feature, no architectural effect with which the most hyper-critical visitor could possibly find fault.”
The hotel which was actually located on the site of African Life Centre, not where the current Hotel is located, closed its doors in December 1963, fifty-seven years after its opening. The Carlton was an hotel with an international reputation accommodating royalty, heads of state, millionaires, well known celebrities and the best known names of the entertainment world of the time. It was therefore fitting that when the SA Breweries and Anglo American Corporation conceived their massive new development shortly after the hotel closed, that it would include not only a new Carlton Hotel but that the project itself would be known as ‘The Carlton Centre’. Completed in 1973 the new hotel took over the mantle of ‘international hotel’ and was the leading hotel in the country for two decades. When it closed in the mid ‘90s a palisade fence was erected around it which somehow typified the decline of the inner city – it’s time to see it removed and the building put back into the economic life of the city.
Hopefully that will now be sooner rather than later.
Invitation to a close look at urban management and other related urban issues in some major cities in the USA and attendance at the International Downtown Association Annual Conference and World Congress in New York City, September 2007
Over the last fifteen years I have taken a number of groups overseas to examine various aspects of urban regeneration and urban management and plan to do this again shortly. So why don’t you join me in September on a visit to three American cities, Washington DC, Philadelphia and New York City, all of which have highly successful urban management initiatives through Business Improvement Districts (City Improvement Districts), and attend the 53rd International Downtown Association Annual Conference and World Congress on Downtown and Town Centre Management to be held in New York City in September 2007.
There have been three World Congresses on Downtown and Town Centre Management before – Coventry, England, New York and London have all played at host city.. The fourth World Congress in New York in September this year is being jointly sponsored by UK’s Association of Town Centre Management and IDA and 1200-1500 delegates are anticipated, this will be a truly international event.
The conference programme will consist of plenary sessions and workshops with various study tours. In addition there are a series of networking events being planned.
The occasion will provide an opportunity to meet stakeholders and urban practitioners from around the world and explore with them the issues that cities face.
The tour will start in Washington DC, go on to Philadelphia and then to New York City arriving in time for participants to get involved in some of the IDA pre conference workshops and tours.
After the conference we’ll spend some time with some of the CIDs in NYC, and a number of areas that have been dramatically regenerated.
The timetable is to be in Washington DC by Sunday 9th September then to Philadelphia on the 12th and arriving in New York City in time for the pre-conference activities. The conference takes place from Saturday 15th to Tuesday 18th and we will then spend a couple of days in New York looking at a number of CIDs and successful regeneration areas leaving on Wednesday 19th.
If you are interested please let me know and I’ll send you further details.
Ciao, neil
Friday, June 8, 2007
Urban Green Recycling Citichat 8 June 2007
CITICHAT 22/2007- 8 June 2007
Still looking at green – Charter commitments and a potted history of waste leading to recycling.
The Draft Inner City Charter states:
A key concern of a wide range of stakeholders is the lack of effective management of waste in the Inner City. Littering, illegal dumping of waste, poor management of activities such as street trading and on-street taxi-ranking, and the increase in the number of buildings with collapsing management structures, all contribute to the challenge. Waste management infrastructure and routine service delivery systems and processes have failed to respond adequately. Enforcement capacity to give effect to by-laws has also been lacking. The challenge will not decline in future. The Inner City population will continue to grow significantly in the years ahead. In addition the Inner City economy has begun to revive and new economic activity is beginning to respond to the increases in residential densities. This will bring new businesses such as restaurants that are large contributors to the waste stream.
Unmanaged waste has a spillover negative effect in other areas. There is a demonstrable relationship between grime and crime. Correspondingly, efforts to remove unsightly waste restores dignity to the inhabitants and users of an area, and conveys to all a public expectation to abide by a set of common norms of conduct. Stricter by-law enforcement on issues such as littering publicly communicates a zero-tolerance approach to all infringements of the law that eventually translates into lower crime levels.
Desired outcome:
The City of Johannesburg will ensure a clean, waste-free Inner City, through the development of waste management and cleansing services operating on a 24/7 basis.
Amongst 8 Commitments set out in the draft Charter leading to the above desired outcome is the following:
• An additional R99 million injection of operating budget will be allocated to Pikitup in the 2007/08 financial year to build a new system of waste management and street cleaning with a specific focus on the Inner City.
• By December 2007, the City will complete the piloting of a new underground bin system for commercial and residential buildings. This system will be rolled out across the Inner City by 2011.
• By July 2008, the City will introduce a set of measures and incentives to support the development of waste compactors in all new buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment.
• By July 2008 the City will launch an Inner City recycling programme that will support small and medium sized enterprises operating in the Inner City to grow sustainable waste recycling businesses.
• By March 2008 by-laws will be revisited to adjust the schedule of fines for illegal dumping, littering and poor management of waste. Capacity to vigorously enforce these by-laws will be built as part of the urban management system.
• Before December 2008, the Gauteng Provincial Government will lead a major anti-litter campaign in the Inner City, with the participation of a wide range of community organizations. The City of Johannesburg will support the campaign.
I’ve been researching waste and recycling and found a fascinating history of the subject - it is rather detailed so the following are just some of the highlights you may find interesting:
In early pre-industrial times waste was mainly composed of ash from fires, wood, bones, bodies and vegetable waste. It was disposed of in the ground where it would act as compost and help to improve the soil. Ancient rubbish dumps excavated in archaeological digs revealed only tiny amounts of ash, broken tools and pottery. Everything that could be was repaired and reused, populations were smaller, and people lived in less concentrated groups. However, the transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer to farmer meant that waste could no longer be left behind, and it soon became a growing problem.
Until the Industrial Revolution when materials became more available than labour, reuse and recycling was commonplace. Nearly 4000 years ago there was a recovery and reuse system of bronze scrap in operation in Europe and there is evidence that composting was carried out in China. Reuse and recycling has always existed in the form of salvage, an ages-old tradition stretching forward to the Rag-and-Bone men. Traditionally, recovered materials have included leather, feathers and down, and textiles. Recycling included feeding vegetable waste to livestock and using green waste as fertiliser. Pigs were often used as an efficient method of disposing of municipal waste. Timber was often salvaged and reused in construction and ship-building. Materials such as gold have always been melted down and re-cast numerous times. Later recovery activities included scrap metal, paper and non-ferrous metals.
However, as city populations increased, space for disposal decreased, and societies had to begin developing waste disposal systems.
The first recorded landfill sites were created in Knossos, the Cretan capital, in 3000BC, where waste was placed in large pits and covered with earth at various levels. Slightly later, a municipal landfill site was opened in Athens and waste had to be transported at least one mile beyond the city gates.
In Britain, around 1300 AD, in response to the increasing amount of waste deposited in the towns, a law was passed to make householders keep the front of their houses clear of refuse. It was largely ignored, nothing new under the sun!
Medieval German cities required the wagons which brought produce into the city to carry out waste into the countryside.
The Industrial Revolution in the 18th century was a time when the availability of raw materials and increased trade and population stimulated new inventions and the development of machinery. Coal powered machinery could now produce increasingly large quantities of materials quickly and cheaply. Increased production led to increased waste. Over three and a half million tons of coal was burned in London in a year! The dust was taken to dust-yards. Here men, women and children worked on the heaps of rubbish, sieving the brieze or coarse dust. This was used as a soil conditioner and for brick making.
Staying with Britain, the Public Health Act 1875 charged local authorities with the duty to arrange the removal and disposal of waste, starting an evolution of local authority power. This replaced the previously widespread practice of scavenging. The Act also ruled that householders keep their waste in a "movable receptacle", the beginning of the dustbin, which the local authorities had to empty every week and, by the late 1800s, household waste was collected daily in moveable ash bins. The waste was sorted by hand, usually by women or girls, into salvageable materials, and coarser materials were sieved from fine ash (breeze). A large proportion of the waste was salvaged, revealing the extent of reuse and recycling systems, for instance materials such as glass and metal were returned to merchants, and the breeze and hard core from incinerated residue were used in building materials. The value of goods reclaimed from dust heaps showed that the level of recycling and reclamation has always depended on economic incentive.
The 1930s saw the beginning of the manufacture of plastics from chemicals produced from petroleum (plastic products had been made from plants since 1862). The production and manufacture of plastics grew slowly over the next 20 years. In the economic boom of the 1950s, production began increasing sharply due to increases in different types and applications for plastics. While the development of plastics and other forms of packaging had reduced the amount of food wastage, the environmental consequences of increasing amounts of non-biodegradable plastic packaging and toxic inks increased exponentially.
Contemporary consumer society evolved with the increase in production and consumption, as products were increasingly designed to be thrown away and the packaging industry grew. Increased consumption inevitably generated an increase in manufacturing, industry, mining and quarrying, agricultural and food processing wastes.
In Britain a combination of increased new chemical waste, changing waste compositions after clean air legislation, and new health and safety guidelines brought about the first serious waste regulations during the 1970s. This was also linked to concerns over energy use and the wider depletion of resources. The decade of the ‘80s saw increasing public concern over waste disposal especially hazardous waste. The construction boom in the UK in this period resulted in an estimated 1 million tonnes of illegally deposited waste lying around London at any one time. Those who produced the waste had no responsibility for it.
In 1990 - the British Government produced "This Common Inheritance", its first comprehensive White Paper on the Environment. This set out a waste strategy which regarded waste minimisation and recycling as priorities, and set a target of 25% for the recycling of household waste by 2000. 1997 saw new legislation being implemented, requiring businesses to recover and recycle 38% of their packaging, increasing to 56% by 2001. Additional recycling targets to enforce a minimum percentage of recycling for each of the packaging materials (paper, card, plastics, aluminium, steel and glass) were also introduced. The obligations would have to be shared between raw material manufacturers, converters, packers and fillers, and sellers.
"Waste Strategy 2000" was then published, setting revised national targets for the recycling or composting of household waste: 25% by 2005, 30% by 2010, and 33% by 2015.
It would be good, in the final draft of the Charter, to see such targets developed to give us benchmarks on which to set our sights and provide a measure for progress for, clearly, we have a long way to go when it comes to recycling and are way behind World Class City status when it comes to this aspect.
Here’s a good start - I received this from Mike Bills of “The Glass Recycling Company” (TGRC):
“The Glass Recycling Company is a not for profit company established by the glass filler and manufacturers in South Africa, for example, SA Breweries, Consol Glass, Nampak Wiegand Glass, Distell, Nestle, Tiger Brands, etc. Our funding is derived from a levy paid by the fillers. The main objective of the company is to increase the glass recovery rate for recycling purposes i.e.: minimizing the use of non-renewable raw materials.
The direct spin off of such an objective is job creation. This is achieved through the establishment of new entrepreneurs to collect glass as well as supporting existing suppliers in developing their own collection market.
In the more affluent areas there is no price tag on glass as the income levels and unemployment dynamics is vastly different. In order to recover this glass we have adopted the implementation of glass banks at strategically located sites accessible mostly by the public. A glass bank is a receptacle made from roto-moulded plastics with the ability to hold 800 kgs of glass. Being made from plastics the maintenance and durability of the bank is fantastic. Currently the colour adopted is green although this can be adapted should a customer request a bulk number. The bins are available at no charge.
We have designated service providers who empty the banks on a frequent basis. Their obligations are to ensure that a bank does not overflow. In addition they are required to ensure all shards of glass are removed when servicing the bank with the surrounding left clean. Any damaged bank would be removed and replaced by a functional unit.
We are currently able to place 550 units with an additional 400 due therefore potential homes over 12 months for 950 units. This is a very exciting time for the glass recycling industry considering over the past 20 years there was only funding to place a total of 1,000 banks (currently active). In a matter of 12 months we will equal that and continue to grow.
The truth of it all – there is no snake under the rock – we just want to minimize glass waste. There are advantages for companies and individuals, but a win-win for all.”
Stay green, best, neil
PS For more info on glass recycling contact Mike Bills at mbills@theglassrecyclingcompany.co.za or office phone 011 803 0767
Still looking at green – Charter commitments and a potted history of waste leading to recycling.
The Draft Inner City Charter states:
A key concern of a wide range of stakeholders is the lack of effective management of waste in the Inner City. Littering, illegal dumping of waste, poor management of activities such as street trading and on-street taxi-ranking, and the increase in the number of buildings with collapsing management structures, all contribute to the challenge. Waste management infrastructure and routine service delivery systems and processes have failed to respond adequately. Enforcement capacity to give effect to by-laws has also been lacking. The challenge will not decline in future. The Inner City population will continue to grow significantly in the years ahead. In addition the Inner City economy has begun to revive and new economic activity is beginning to respond to the increases in residential densities. This will bring new businesses such as restaurants that are large contributors to the waste stream.
Unmanaged waste has a spillover negative effect in other areas. There is a demonstrable relationship between grime and crime. Correspondingly, efforts to remove unsightly waste restores dignity to the inhabitants and users of an area, and conveys to all a public expectation to abide by a set of common norms of conduct. Stricter by-law enforcement on issues such as littering publicly communicates a zero-tolerance approach to all infringements of the law that eventually translates into lower crime levels.
Desired outcome:
The City of Johannesburg will ensure a clean, waste-free Inner City, through the development of waste management and cleansing services operating on a 24/7 basis.
Amongst 8 Commitments set out in the draft Charter leading to the above desired outcome is the following:
• An additional R99 million injection of operating budget will be allocated to Pikitup in the 2007/08 financial year to build a new system of waste management and street cleaning with a specific focus on the Inner City.
• By December 2007, the City will complete the piloting of a new underground bin system for commercial and residential buildings. This system will be rolled out across the Inner City by 2011.
• By July 2008, the City will introduce a set of measures and incentives to support the development of waste compactors in all new buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment.
• By July 2008 the City will launch an Inner City recycling programme that will support small and medium sized enterprises operating in the Inner City to grow sustainable waste recycling businesses.
• By March 2008 by-laws will be revisited to adjust the schedule of fines for illegal dumping, littering and poor management of waste. Capacity to vigorously enforce these by-laws will be built as part of the urban management system.
• Before December 2008, the Gauteng Provincial Government will lead a major anti-litter campaign in the Inner City, with the participation of a wide range of community organizations. The City of Johannesburg will support the campaign.
I’ve been researching waste and recycling and found a fascinating history of the subject - it is rather detailed so the following are just some of the highlights you may find interesting:
In early pre-industrial times waste was mainly composed of ash from fires, wood, bones, bodies and vegetable waste. It was disposed of in the ground where it would act as compost and help to improve the soil. Ancient rubbish dumps excavated in archaeological digs revealed only tiny amounts of ash, broken tools and pottery. Everything that could be was repaired and reused, populations were smaller, and people lived in less concentrated groups. However, the transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer to farmer meant that waste could no longer be left behind, and it soon became a growing problem.
Until the Industrial Revolution when materials became more available than labour, reuse and recycling was commonplace. Nearly 4000 years ago there was a recovery and reuse system of bronze scrap in operation in Europe and there is evidence that composting was carried out in China. Reuse and recycling has always existed in the form of salvage, an ages-old tradition stretching forward to the Rag-and-Bone men. Traditionally, recovered materials have included leather, feathers and down, and textiles. Recycling included feeding vegetable waste to livestock and using green waste as fertiliser. Pigs were often used as an efficient method of disposing of municipal waste. Timber was often salvaged and reused in construction and ship-building. Materials such as gold have always been melted down and re-cast numerous times. Later recovery activities included scrap metal, paper and non-ferrous metals.
However, as city populations increased, space for disposal decreased, and societies had to begin developing waste disposal systems.
The first recorded landfill sites were created in Knossos, the Cretan capital, in 3000BC, where waste was placed in large pits and covered with earth at various levels. Slightly later, a municipal landfill site was opened in Athens and waste had to be transported at least one mile beyond the city gates.
In Britain, around 1300 AD, in response to the increasing amount of waste deposited in the towns, a law was passed to make householders keep the front of their houses clear of refuse. It was largely ignored, nothing new under the sun!
Medieval German cities required the wagons which brought produce into the city to carry out waste into the countryside.
The Industrial Revolution in the 18th century was a time when the availability of raw materials and increased trade and population stimulated new inventions and the development of machinery. Coal powered machinery could now produce increasingly large quantities of materials quickly and cheaply. Increased production led to increased waste. Over three and a half million tons of coal was burned in London in a year! The dust was taken to dust-yards. Here men, women and children worked on the heaps of rubbish, sieving the brieze or coarse dust. This was used as a soil conditioner and for brick making.
Staying with Britain, the Public Health Act 1875 charged local authorities with the duty to arrange the removal and disposal of waste, starting an evolution of local authority power. This replaced the previously widespread practice of scavenging. The Act also ruled that householders keep their waste in a "movable receptacle", the beginning of the dustbin, which the local authorities had to empty every week and, by the late 1800s, household waste was collected daily in moveable ash bins. The waste was sorted by hand, usually by women or girls, into salvageable materials, and coarser materials were sieved from fine ash (breeze). A large proportion of the waste was salvaged, revealing the extent of reuse and recycling systems, for instance materials such as glass and metal were returned to merchants, and the breeze and hard core from incinerated residue were used in building materials. The value of goods reclaimed from dust heaps showed that the level of recycling and reclamation has always depended on economic incentive.
The 1930s saw the beginning of the manufacture of plastics from chemicals produced from petroleum (plastic products had been made from plants since 1862). The production and manufacture of plastics grew slowly over the next 20 years. In the economic boom of the 1950s, production began increasing sharply due to increases in different types and applications for plastics. While the development of plastics and other forms of packaging had reduced the amount of food wastage, the environmental consequences of increasing amounts of non-biodegradable plastic packaging and toxic inks increased exponentially.
Contemporary consumer society evolved with the increase in production and consumption, as products were increasingly designed to be thrown away and the packaging industry grew. Increased consumption inevitably generated an increase in manufacturing, industry, mining and quarrying, agricultural and food processing wastes.
In Britain a combination of increased new chemical waste, changing waste compositions after clean air legislation, and new health and safety guidelines brought about the first serious waste regulations during the 1970s. This was also linked to concerns over energy use and the wider depletion of resources. The decade of the ‘80s saw increasing public concern over waste disposal especially hazardous waste. The construction boom in the UK in this period resulted in an estimated 1 million tonnes of illegally deposited waste lying around London at any one time. Those who produced the waste had no responsibility for it.
In 1990 - the British Government produced "This Common Inheritance", its first comprehensive White Paper on the Environment. This set out a waste strategy which regarded waste minimisation and recycling as priorities, and set a target of 25% for the recycling of household waste by 2000. 1997 saw new legislation being implemented, requiring businesses to recover and recycle 38% of their packaging, increasing to 56% by 2001. Additional recycling targets to enforce a minimum percentage of recycling for each of the packaging materials (paper, card, plastics, aluminium, steel and glass) were also introduced. The obligations would have to be shared between raw material manufacturers, converters, packers and fillers, and sellers.
"Waste Strategy 2000" was then published, setting revised national targets for the recycling or composting of household waste: 25% by 2005, 30% by 2010, and 33% by 2015.
It would be good, in the final draft of the Charter, to see such targets developed to give us benchmarks on which to set our sights and provide a measure for progress for, clearly, we have a long way to go when it comes to recycling and are way behind World Class City status when it comes to this aspect.
Here’s a good start - I received this from Mike Bills of “The Glass Recycling Company” (TGRC):
“The Glass Recycling Company is a not for profit company established by the glass filler and manufacturers in South Africa, for example, SA Breweries, Consol Glass, Nampak Wiegand Glass, Distell, Nestle, Tiger Brands, etc. Our funding is derived from a levy paid by the fillers. The main objective of the company is to increase the glass recovery rate for recycling purposes i.e.: minimizing the use of non-renewable raw materials.
The direct spin off of such an objective is job creation. This is achieved through the establishment of new entrepreneurs to collect glass as well as supporting existing suppliers in developing their own collection market.
In the more affluent areas there is no price tag on glass as the income levels and unemployment dynamics is vastly different. In order to recover this glass we have adopted the implementation of glass banks at strategically located sites accessible mostly by the public. A glass bank is a receptacle made from roto-moulded plastics with the ability to hold 800 kgs of glass. Being made from plastics the maintenance and durability of the bank is fantastic. Currently the colour adopted is green although this can be adapted should a customer request a bulk number. The bins are available at no charge.
We have designated service providers who empty the banks on a frequent basis. Their obligations are to ensure that a bank does not overflow. In addition they are required to ensure all shards of glass are removed when servicing the bank with the surrounding left clean. Any damaged bank would be removed and replaced by a functional unit.
We are currently able to place 550 units with an additional 400 due therefore potential homes over 12 months for 950 units. This is a very exciting time for the glass recycling industry considering over the past 20 years there was only funding to place a total of 1,000 banks (currently active). In a matter of 12 months we will equal that and continue to grow.
The truth of it all – there is no snake under the rock – we just want to minimize glass waste. There are advantages for companies and individuals, but a win-win for all.”
Stay green, best, neil
PS For more info on glass recycling contact Mike Bills at mbills@theglassrecyclingcompany.co.za or office phone 011 803 0767
Friday, June 1, 2007
Urban Green Citichat 1 June 2007
CITICHAT 21/2007 - 1 June 2007
JoGreen?
Was interested to read some articles recently by Neal Peirce (Washington Post Writers Group), regarding Greening and Global Warming. In one of his articles Johannesburg is mentioned as being present at a “Large Cities Climate Summit of Mayors” held about two weeks ago in New York City. The dominant message from the Summit was evidently that cities may cover less than 1% of the earth’s surface but they generate 80% of the globe’s heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Whilst everyone looks to National Governments to take the lead (and probably the flack!) for legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions, the Climate Summit called on cities to lead the way. London Mayor Ken Livingstone was quoted as saying that “It’s in the cities that the battle to tackle climate change will be won or lost” whilst the Toronto Mayor, David Miller, said “Where national governments can’t or won’t lead, cities will”.
After dragging his heels for years, President George Bush has at last announced long term targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Up to now any national thrust to provide legislation on climate change appeared to have been blunted by American vested interests particularly in coal, oil and manufacturing. The Washington Post recently reported that a system of federal low-interest loans will be used to build new coal fired power plants to the tune of R245 billion over the next decade. Over that period they will completely negate all existing State and Federal efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions! Interesting that these low-interest loans were introduced during the depression years to bring electricity to the “dark” areas of the States and are kept alive to this day by vested interests. One wonders if this is still going to be accommodated given the US President’s latest announcement.
So what can cities do?
Some of the initiatives mentioned at the Mayors Climate Summit ranged from developing more advanced biofuels to recycling more waste; setting high energy efficiency standards for new buildings, creating more parks and planting millions of trees. London’s congestion pricing system that has reduced the number of vehicles entering the core of the city was highlighted as a “traffic and pollution-cutting plan”. New York’s Mayor Bloomberg is planning to introduce a similar intervention in parts of Manhattan as part of his newly announced city ‘greenprint’ described as “the most aggressive change benchmarks on energy of any big city to date.”
Whilst planting thousands of trees is already underway in Soweto, two of the other initiatives mentioned at the Mayors Climate Summit, recycling more waste and creating more parks, were the subject of much discussion at our own Inner City Summit and are reflected in the Charter commitments as follows:
• By July 2008 the City will launch an Inner City recycling programme that will support small and medium sized enterprises operating in the Inner City to grow sustainable waste recycling businesses.
• By March 2008, the City of Johannesburg will, together with stakeholders, identify possible new spaces to contribute towards the desired outcome. In this plan it will:
– Explore the development of “Partnership Places”, to be co-designed and co-managed with communities. For example, the residents and management of the eKhaya precinct has identified three spaces that should be upgraded into landscaped public places, such places to be managed by the precinct;
– Following the Main Street model, explore the development of other “Partnership Places”, to be co-designed and co-managed with the private sector under an arrangement that guarantees public accessibility;
– Develop simplified procedures for lease agreements over public places re management & maintenance;
– Identify potential buildings to be released from the Better Buildings Programme or City of Johannesburg owned property that can be demolished to make way for public open space.
– Develop new public open space concepts that can feasibly be developed in the dense urban landscape of the Inner City. Special attention will be given to so-called pocket parks or tot-lots.
• As a major intervention the City will investigate the feasibility of constructing a linear, continuous public open space ‘spine’ from Yeoville Ridge, through Pullinger Kop, down along the End Street Park, across decking the railway line to the south of the Johannesburg Art Gallery, and finally linking the new Park Station precinct with the original Park Station building in Newtown.
• Other key public open space interventions to be investigated by March 2008 include: Braamfontein Cemetery; a park at the base of the Hillbrow Tower; a major park east of the Supreme Court and West of Joe Slovo Drive to cater for the large number of conversions from office to residential currently underway; and public open space east of the Standard Bank Superblock.
Great stuff, but in retrospect I don’t think we tackled the issue of environmental sustainability enough in the Charter, although there is still time to include additional issues. I see the city of Pasadena, California, has also adopted an accountability approach on that city’s commitments which include a goal to become 20% more efficient over the next five years in regard to recycling, alternative energy, green building standards, open-space preservation, water and low-emission and no-emission vehicles. Now that’s a commitment! Las Vegas has recently adopted a BRT approach but using aerodynamic buses powered by diesel-electric engines. In Bangkok air pollution levels have been reduced dramatically despite an increase of 40% in numbers of vehicles over the past 10 years. This has been achieved by imposing stringent pollution controls on cars, raising taxes on two-stroke motorbikes and making all taxis run on (subsidised) liquefied natural gas. In 2002 the Supreme Court in Delhi ordered its buses to be converted to gas and Delhi’s air is now half as polluted as it was in 1994.
What about a commitment on our BRT project that the buses to be used will all be energy efficient; that all existing vehicles, particularly buses and taxis, will have to adhere to more stringent anti-pollution laws and that pollution control will be enforced? After all, the City’s vision with respect to the human and built environments as set out in Joburg 2030 provides plenty of scope.
“A human environment in which people’s work and residential environment is safe and healthy, the air and water is clean, noise is not invasive, sufficient opportunities for leisure exist and the organisation of the society promotes individual and community well-being in line with the Bill of Rights contained in the Constitution.”
A built environment which values and conserves its cultural and historical heritage, with buildings and open spaces which are aesthetically pleasing and designed using ecological principles (ie energy efficiency) and infrastructure which is equitably distributed and well maintained, rather than degraded.”
Buildings designed using ecological principles (ie energy efficiency) ? I don’t think we have seriously looked at how to promote this approach. US estimates put office buildings as using anything from 27 to 40 percent of that country’s energy supply. Since 2000, the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) has provided a rating system for building projects that seek to lessen their environmental impact and conserve natural resources. Now, Los Angeles, amongst a growing number of US cities, requires all new projects to be LEED certified.
The big problem in cities, of course, is how to deal with decades of energy deficient buildings. Peirce provides the example of New York which has 950 000 buildings, the vast majority privately owned. “If those buildings could be more energy efficient, with new high-yield furnaces and air conditioners, insulation, better insulated doors and windows and more – the city would reduce its energy consumption, and thus its power demand and greenhouse gas emissions, by a stunning 16.7 million metric tons of greenhouse gases each year”.
But how many property owners are going to willingly spend money to make their buildings more energy efficient? Back at the Mayors Climate Summit former President Bill Clinton announced “that his personal foundation had lined up $5 billion (that’s R35billion) in energy efficiency loan commitments from five major global banking institutions to lend city governments and landlords in 16 major world cities (I don’t think we made the cut) among them Bangkok, Berlin, Chicago, Houston, New York, San Paulo, Tokyo and Mumbai. The loans will pay to replace energy-hungry heating, cooling and lighting systems, to seal and upgrade windows to let more light in and to install sensors to make lighting and air-conditioning more efficient……the financing will be essentially cost-free, with the savings (20 to 50 percent increased energy efficiency) used to pay back the initial investment.”
That looks like an exciting approach to a huge problem and one in which our national banks could well provide leadership!
Let’s Go Green! ciao, neil
JoGreen?
Was interested to read some articles recently by Neal Peirce (Washington Post Writers Group), regarding Greening and Global Warming. In one of his articles Johannesburg is mentioned as being present at a “Large Cities Climate Summit of Mayors” held about two weeks ago in New York City. The dominant message from the Summit was evidently that cities may cover less than 1% of the earth’s surface but they generate 80% of the globe’s heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Whilst everyone looks to National Governments to take the lead (and probably the flack!) for legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions, the Climate Summit called on cities to lead the way. London Mayor Ken Livingstone was quoted as saying that “It’s in the cities that the battle to tackle climate change will be won or lost” whilst the Toronto Mayor, David Miller, said “Where national governments can’t or won’t lead, cities will”.
After dragging his heels for years, President George Bush has at last announced long term targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Up to now any national thrust to provide legislation on climate change appeared to have been blunted by American vested interests particularly in coal, oil and manufacturing. The Washington Post recently reported that a system of federal low-interest loans will be used to build new coal fired power plants to the tune of R245 billion over the next decade. Over that period they will completely negate all existing State and Federal efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions! Interesting that these low-interest loans were introduced during the depression years to bring electricity to the “dark” areas of the States and are kept alive to this day by vested interests. One wonders if this is still going to be accommodated given the US President’s latest announcement.
So what can cities do?
Some of the initiatives mentioned at the Mayors Climate Summit ranged from developing more advanced biofuels to recycling more waste; setting high energy efficiency standards for new buildings, creating more parks and planting millions of trees. London’s congestion pricing system that has reduced the number of vehicles entering the core of the city was highlighted as a “traffic and pollution-cutting plan”. New York’s Mayor Bloomberg is planning to introduce a similar intervention in parts of Manhattan as part of his newly announced city ‘greenprint’ described as “the most aggressive change benchmarks on energy of any big city to date.”
Whilst planting thousands of trees is already underway in Soweto, two of the other initiatives mentioned at the Mayors Climate Summit, recycling more waste and creating more parks, were the subject of much discussion at our own Inner City Summit and are reflected in the Charter commitments as follows:
• By July 2008 the City will launch an Inner City recycling programme that will support small and medium sized enterprises operating in the Inner City to grow sustainable waste recycling businesses.
• By March 2008, the City of Johannesburg will, together with stakeholders, identify possible new spaces to contribute towards the desired outcome. In this plan it will:
– Explore the development of “Partnership Places”, to be co-designed and co-managed with communities. For example, the residents and management of the eKhaya precinct has identified three spaces that should be upgraded into landscaped public places, such places to be managed by the precinct;
– Following the Main Street model, explore the development of other “Partnership Places”, to be co-designed and co-managed with the private sector under an arrangement that guarantees public accessibility;
– Develop simplified procedures for lease agreements over public places re management & maintenance;
– Identify potential buildings to be released from the Better Buildings Programme or City of Johannesburg owned property that can be demolished to make way for public open space.
– Develop new public open space concepts that can feasibly be developed in the dense urban landscape of the Inner City. Special attention will be given to so-called pocket parks or tot-lots.
• As a major intervention the City will investigate the feasibility of constructing a linear, continuous public open space ‘spine’ from Yeoville Ridge, through Pullinger Kop, down along the End Street Park, across decking the railway line to the south of the Johannesburg Art Gallery, and finally linking the new Park Station precinct with the original Park Station building in Newtown.
• Other key public open space interventions to be investigated by March 2008 include: Braamfontein Cemetery; a park at the base of the Hillbrow Tower; a major park east of the Supreme Court and West of Joe Slovo Drive to cater for the large number of conversions from office to residential currently underway; and public open space east of the Standard Bank Superblock.
Great stuff, but in retrospect I don’t think we tackled the issue of environmental sustainability enough in the Charter, although there is still time to include additional issues. I see the city of Pasadena, California, has also adopted an accountability approach on that city’s commitments which include a goal to become 20% more efficient over the next five years in regard to recycling, alternative energy, green building standards, open-space preservation, water and low-emission and no-emission vehicles. Now that’s a commitment! Las Vegas has recently adopted a BRT approach but using aerodynamic buses powered by diesel-electric engines. In Bangkok air pollution levels have been reduced dramatically despite an increase of 40% in numbers of vehicles over the past 10 years. This has been achieved by imposing stringent pollution controls on cars, raising taxes on two-stroke motorbikes and making all taxis run on (subsidised) liquefied natural gas. In 2002 the Supreme Court in Delhi ordered its buses to be converted to gas and Delhi’s air is now half as polluted as it was in 1994.
What about a commitment on our BRT project that the buses to be used will all be energy efficient; that all existing vehicles, particularly buses and taxis, will have to adhere to more stringent anti-pollution laws and that pollution control will be enforced? After all, the City’s vision with respect to the human and built environments as set out in Joburg 2030 provides plenty of scope.
“A human environment in which people’s work and residential environment is safe and healthy, the air and water is clean, noise is not invasive, sufficient opportunities for leisure exist and the organisation of the society promotes individual and community well-being in line with the Bill of Rights contained in the Constitution.”
A built environment which values and conserves its cultural and historical heritage, with buildings and open spaces which are aesthetically pleasing and designed using ecological principles (ie energy efficiency) and infrastructure which is equitably distributed and well maintained, rather than degraded.”
Buildings designed using ecological principles (ie energy efficiency) ? I don’t think we have seriously looked at how to promote this approach. US estimates put office buildings as using anything from 27 to 40 percent of that country’s energy supply. Since 2000, the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) has provided a rating system for building projects that seek to lessen their environmental impact and conserve natural resources. Now, Los Angeles, amongst a growing number of US cities, requires all new projects to be LEED certified.
The big problem in cities, of course, is how to deal with decades of energy deficient buildings. Peirce provides the example of New York which has 950 000 buildings, the vast majority privately owned. “If those buildings could be more energy efficient, with new high-yield furnaces and air conditioners, insulation, better insulated doors and windows and more – the city would reduce its energy consumption, and thus its power demand and greenhouse gas emissions, by a stunning 16.7 million metric tons of greenhouse gases each year”.
But how many property owners are going to willingly spend money to make their buildings more energy efficient? Back at the Mayors Climate Summit former President Bill Clinton announced “that his personal foundation had lined up $5 billion (that’s R35billion) in energy efficiency loan commitments from five major global banking institutions to lend city governments and landlords in 16 major world cities (I don’t think we made the cut) among them Bangkok, Berlin, Chicago, Houston, New York, San Paulo, Tokyo and Mumbai. The loans will pay to replace energy-hungry heating, cooling and lighting systems, to seal and upgrade windows to let more light in and to install sensors to make lighting and air-conditioning more efficient……the financing will be essentially cost-free, with the savings (20 to 50 percent increased energy efficiency) used to pay back the initial investment.”
That looks like an exciting approach to a huge problem and one in which our national banks could well provide leadership!
Let’s Go Green! ciao, neil
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
