CITICHAT 43/2008 - 31 October 2008
“Het Schipperskwartier – een verleidelijk stukje Antwerpen”.
The Institute of Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), the International Institute of Urban Management of Erasmus University, Rotterdam, runs a variety of short urban related courses annually in addition to their Masters and other longer Programme. I have been fortunate to lecture on one of their short courses, Urban Management and Private Public Partnerships, for a couple of years. The course attracts international interest. Last year the participants were mostly from north, west and east Africa - this year they were from Moldavia, Indonesia, Thailand, Brazil, the Cameroons and the Netherlands itself. The course is an excellent mix of theory and practice and includes visiting a number of urban renewal projects in various cities, all easily accessible from Rotterdam. I unfortunately wasn’t able to be present for the whole course due to other commitments, so missed the visit to Amsterdam projects but managed to pick up the visits to Lille and Roubaix in France and Brussels and Antwerp in Belgium as well as having a quick look again at Rotterdam.
As I only flew in late last night, I thought I’d tell you about my visit to one of Antwerp’s Red Light Districts - , no it was strictly urban renewal business and one of the most holistic approaches to urban redevelopment project I’ve seen, and a highly successful one too - “Het Schipperskwartier” in Antwerp.
Prostitution and the need to clean out the centre of the city’s main venue for counterfeit goods, led to an urban redevelopment project that has resulted in a major turn-around in an important precinct in the city and attracted a great deal of new investment.
The area, traditionally known as Het Schipperskwartier, edges on part of the Antwerp docks and thus has always attracted a certain amount of prostitution. The area was, however, what could be described as typical European mixed-use with lots of people living in street apartments or housing and with all the trappings of community living - cinemas and gyms, schools, grocers, the butcher, the baker and a number of prostitutes. A local says that it was one of those areas where everyone knew everyone else. Sex workers and locals lived comfortably side by side. Then came the fall of the Berlin Wall and the city, and this area in particular, was inundated with sex workers and pimps from eastern Europe. The pimps proved to be part of a larger criminal mafia and the area became a hotspot for the selling of counterfeit goods and all kinds of criminal activity. Most of the locals moved out. When the baker left, he was replaced with a lady from Brussels, Jeanneau, who introduced window prostitution by skilfully lighting up the ex-baker’s window where the main display was now herself! Soon, the narrow streets of the area were jammed with cars checking out the ladies – it became known as the Carousel - sometimes as many as 4000 cars packed the streets. One houseowner next to the ex-bakery, was considerably annoyed because whenever the cars drove past to check Jeanneau’s evidently abundant charms, they inevitably crashed into his wall ripping off the downpipe! The area went into major decline and eventually the local community declared that life had become unbearable and in 1997 drew up a petition demanding that the City do something. The problem was passed onto the Police and the Planning Department.
The Planning Department started in-depth research into the history and possible use of the area as well as of the needs of the prostitutes. A spatial plan helped them define the boundaries of the precinct and determine the existing functions and connections with the rest of the city but also a number of possible new ones. There were two squares in the precinct, one of them had become known as “Red Square” because of the origin of the people selling illegal goods and also because it was the centre of criminal activity involving all the surrounding shops.
The research into prostitution revealed that there were about 280 “window prostitutes” spread over thirteen streets in the precinct living in generally extremely bad conditions.
All Council departments were brought together to determine a future strategy for the area. This resulted in four principles being adopted for the redevelopment of the precinct:
1. prostitution mustn’t cause trouble in the precinct
2. the criminal element must be dealt with
3. the prostitutes position shouldn’t be interfered with
4. the precinct should be renovated
The police progressively charged all those involved and closed down their activities and, gradually the area emptied out.
The Planning Department determined that a triangular area in the heart of the precinct, bordered by three streets, could accommodate all the prostitutes spread out over thirteen streets. New Policy was drawn up limiting window prostitution to this specific area and drawing up minimum standards for their ‘homes’. The three streets were pedestrianised thus removing the vehicle problems in the area. The City then got busy upgrading the environment. One of the problems they encountered was that, although they had got rid of all the criminal activities, the shops around the squares, in particular, were empty and they couldn’t find tenants for them because of past perceptions of the activities in the squares. The City’s Marketing and Promotions department developed a programme of temporary billboards explaining what was being done and what could be expected when construction activity had ceased and then ran a series of promotional events in the squares from parties to film festivals and even a regular organic market. As people saw the changes that were happening, investment and letting picked up.
In the meantime the City was determining possible projects that could be developed within the area. Some 26 were identified. On the dock edge are some magnificent shipping warehouses that were turned into retail and loft living – one of the old ship’s warehouses was converted by the City into its archives – every bit of Council paper finds its way there for cataloguing and storage and slowly being electronically converted. Not only the Council but citizens are able to source all documentation. In a situation like ours, where 5 or 10 year Council periods are the norm, and new people constantly take over new responsibilities, it should be mandatory for them to first search what has been done previously instead on constantly wasting tax-payers money by recreating the wheel. But you can’t do that if you don’t have a reliable source. From what I’ve experienced over the last fifteen years, a proper archives where all documents and results of research and project information can be properly stored and indexed, would save enormous amounts of money as well as providing a reliable source of city history.
Back to Het Schipperskwartier - new street paving, public squares, lighting, greening, public art, etc. have turned the macro area into a really pleasant place to work and stay and has drawn a great deal of new investment. In fact you can stroll through the area and never know that at its centre is a burgeoning sex trade! The redevelopment included reusing old buildings, the Stad’s Magazyn is now a community centre which offers all types of regular activities and is strongly supported by the community and used extensively, another building has been turned into a sex-workers health centre, a new police station (the police have uniformed and plain-clothed policemen in the precinct, but particularly in the sex workers area, 24/7), new shops and living quarters. New Policy regarding Prostitution and Window Prostitution has been developed which strictly controls minimum standards of buildings, health requirements, etc and these are annually inspected for compliance or you lose your licence!
The project has been tackled slowly and deliberately over a ten year period so that adequate involvement of the local community, including the prostitutes, could take place – the results speak for themselves and the project recently was the Laureate Winner of the newly established Flemish Spatial Planning Academy for being an “example of a perfect match between social and sustainable redevelopment.“
Well, that’s my story for being in “Het Schipperskwartier – the seductive Part of Antwerp”, and I’m sticking to it! Ciao, neil
Friday, October 31, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
Medellin 2 Citichat 24 October 2008
CITICHAT 42/2008 - 24 October 2008
Medellin -2.
Well, here I am shivering in Rotterdam! This is the other half of the quite inspiring Medellin story from last week:
“The media are a vitally important part of this process: not as strategic accomplices but just through doing their journalism and media roles according to their highest standards and ethics. There is no media in any country that can be isolated from and unaffected by the overall social and political mood [witness the USA media post 9/11 and pre Iraq involvement]. Medellin is no different. A closed, fearful, threatening city with power firmly in the hands of elites has to affect media reporting and insight no matter how high the media-related laws rank on some international freedom of the press scale. So, the first immediate effect of these policy changes on media in Medellin was to 'free up' the press as a more open social atmosphere emerged.
There were other specific and immediate effects. Everything outlined above - and much more for which there is no space at this time – is news! It is worthy of reporting. The kinds of social changes taking place produce numerous local stories and, perhaps more importantly, significant and real themes and issues for debate and dialogue – great stuff for all media. That media engagement really helps the overall change process - and it helps strengthen the media. It also provides an atmosphere in which the media can be creative: Just one example.
There are a large number of TV channels in Medellin and a mix of
ownership patterns - from completely private sector to the Mayor's
office. TeleMedellin is owned by the people of Medellin through the
office of the Mayor. TeleMedellin executives have complete editorial
independence. They are about to launch a new way of doing the news. The nightly news programmes will be hosted by local families from their homes. Sitting somewhere in their home the normal news reader will read the normal news in the normal way. But after each of the lead items they will turn to family members for their comment, reaction and insight. This opens up the news, makes it real and connects the news item to people's lives. But the integrity of the news as news is maintained. And it will certainly make a refreshing change from so called "expert opinion"!
There is often a park somewhere in most cities. That park is often a
social space that has been lost to the broader community. Medellin has a botanical garden very near Moravia. Few people ventured there - certainly never at night. City officials decided that creating a
vibrant, open, safe, beautiful botanical garden would not only be
important in its own right, but would send a very powerful signal and message to the rest of the city. So, they got the park itself into great shape with the best examples of local vegetation. Then they replaced the solid wall around the park with a transparent fence, opening the park up so that people passing could see what was there and of course making it much safer for those in the park. A design competition was held for the public space created at the center of the park. It was won by a group of local architectural students competing against some of the biggest architectural firms in Latin America. Festivals - music, literature, drama, poetry!
- were organised and hosted in that public space. Then they created
the best restaurant in Medellin [believe me - it is good!] which brought the elites into the park and gave them a vested interest in its future. The vibrancy and symbolism of this open approach were huge.
Two important parts of the Medellin strategy they label "nearness" and "delivery". At all levels of the city government, public officials were encouraged and supported to spend significant amounts of their work time in economically poorer communities engaging and listening - to get "near" to the people experiencing the most difficult issues - to spend as little time as possible sitting behind desks. And all public officials were expected to "deliver" on promises - they are accountable for and are judged on things happening. Underpinning both the "nearness" and "delivery" strategies is an attempt to "build trust". In our development rush to implement programmes and projects, perhaps, as a policy imperative, we too often overlook the vital importance of "trust'. Let's face it, if people do not know the people saying that they will help them, if they are not "near" to them, if they do not see the results of that help, then there is hardly a solid basis of the trust required for development action on often very sensitive issues. Medellin is trying to address this vital element for all positive progress.
Leaving Medellin airport we were delayed by fog [a hazard of living in a high mountain valley!]. One of my CI Latin America colleagues introduced me to a fellow stranded passenger, an acquaintance of hers who turned out to be a leading business women in Medellin. She had little idea why we had been in Medellin. Before she could ask, I asked for her impressions and assessment of the change process in Medellin. She was unreservedly enthusiastic but from a very different perspective. Of course she cares about the development of people - as do those of us who come at this from a development perspective. But her primary interest is making money as a business women, and, for her, the economic climate in Medellin had improved markedly.
It's kind of hard to get economic development progress when communities are fearful, violence is high, people have difficulty getting to work and everyone's home situations are so precarious. Contrary to what we are often told about business people she did not even mind paying the taxes related to these developments because she had trust that the city would deliver - and, as they have delivered, she has a better environment to do business. She applauded and supported the public policy driving these changes. But this public policy approach around public spaces, dialogue, debate, etc. is not something we see in many international agency macro-economic policies.
Perhaps what is most striking about the Medellin process from a
development perspective is how it has gone counter to the current of the predominant streams of development thinking and strategy. It is a city-based process when much development focus and action is negotiated with and for the country/nation. There was no detailed micro-plan of action. The Medellin process is more akin to dropping a few well-placed stones in a lake in order to change the dynamics than it is to mapping out a detailed plan for how and where we want those ripples to flow. Medellin did not seek to follow global policies. Instead, it sought out the places from which it felt it could learn relative to the situation and issues in Medellin. Those places included three cities/regions whose positive development progress provided both ideas and inspiration - Bogota, Catalonia and Curutiba. But in the end they are doing it the Medellin way. There is a collection of organisations driving this process. The Mayor's office is vitally important for the overall policies. But there is a network of community groups, ComFama [the health care cooperative],
the Mayor's office, EPM [more below], businesses and local NGOs – the shared, collective, leadership and ownership is real strength. It is an integrated approach - there are no issue silos here - at the core of all of this work is the creation of public space; openness, debate and dialogue; a culture of citizenship, community budget control and the importance of symbolism. For example, they did not set out to address violence specifically. They did set out to create more safe, open spaces expecting that those would have a significant effect across a range of related issues, including the levels of violence. You can feel the passion - and that passion is infectious. There is even a local civic group called Passion for Medellin. Finally, there is a specific emphasis on the often overlooked policy element of culture. The city of Medellin spends four times more money each year through its Culture budget than does the Federal Ministry of Culture for the whole of Colombia.
What is happening in Medellin is a grand public policy process in the
rich tradition of the New Deal in the USA to overcome the Depression, the Marshall Plan for resurrecting Germany post World War II, the creation of the National Health Service in the UK in the late 1940s to improve health standards and other big public policy processes. The shape, style, scale, strategy and principles of the Medellin initiative are, of course, very different from those and other examples. But the public policy-driven process is not different. This is public policy in the driving seat, not market forces.
If I was to read your mind at this time, and if I was a betting person, I would lay a small wager that you have one question in your mind - "how did they pay for all of this?" The answer to this question deserves its own article because part of that response also runs counter to predominant economic development thinking and action. There were two main processes that created the funds to support all of the above and more. First, through greater transparency and accountability related to the city budget, the extent of the city's ability to make the significant investments highlighted above became very apparent. There was more city money than anyone thought. Second, and this is the counter-thought element, Medellin has pursued a policy of public ownership of public services [water, electricity, sewerage and now digital telecommunications] and has demanded that those services be
efficient and profitable. EPM - Empresas Públicas de Medellin - the
Medellin public utility company, is amongst the most efficient and profitable companies [all companies] in Latin America. And it is owned by the residents of the city through the office of the Mayor. There is no privatisation here. Consequently, there is no expatriation of profits beyond the valley walls. Instead, a
substantial share of the profits, over 100 million dollars per annum,
are immediately returned as investments in the city.
It would be a huge mistake to think that everything is fixed in Medellin or that these policies alone were 100% responsible for the change that is occurring. There are emerging challenges and other factors have contributed. For example, there have been recent violent episodes involving de-mobilised guerilla and para-military personnel. It is still far too early to say what impact these overall public policy efforts will have long term on the wealth "gap" that is the curse of so many cities and countries including Medellin and Colombia. The death of the globally infamous cartel leader Pablo Escobar helped the situation as has the overall performance of the Colombian economy with record growth the past 4 years.
But quite clearly, based on the data and the local critique, huge
progress has been made and these public policies have been vital to that progress. The mountains that ring the valley in which Medellin exists are indeed very high as are the social and economic challenges that the people living within that mountain wall face. But through a commitment to open public spaces, transparent public processes, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and striking symbolism, big, positive changes are happening and the physical and social obstacles seem greatly diminished. It is well worth your in-depth policy analysis.”
Enjoy the warmth, you don’t know how lucky you are! Best, neil
Medellin -2.
Well, here I am shivering in Rotterdam! This is the other half of the quite inspiring Medellin story from last week:
“The media are a vitally important part of this process: not as strategic accomplices but just through doing their journalism and media roles according to their highest standards and ethics. There is no media in any country that can be isolated from and unaffected by the overall social and political mood [witness the USA media post 9/11 and pre Iraq involvement]. Medellin is no different. A closed, fearful, threatening city with power firmly in the hands of elites has to affect media reporting and insight no matter how high the media-related laws rank on some international freedom of the press scale. So, the first immediate effect of these policy changes on media in Medellin was to 'free up' the press as a more open social atmosphere emerged.
There were other specific and immediate effects. Everything outlined above - and much more for which there is no space at this time – is news! It is worthy of reporting. The kinds of social changes taking place produce numerous local stories and, perhaps more importantly, significant and real themes and issues for debate and dialogue – great stuff for all media. That media engagement really helps the overall change process - and it helps strengthen the media. It also provides an atmosphere in which the media can be creative: Just one example.
There are a large number of TV channels in Medellin and a mix of
ownership patterns - from completely private sector to the Mayor's
office. TeleMedellin is owned by the people of Medellin through the
office of the Mayor. TeleMedellin executives have complete editorial
independence. They are about to launch a new way of doing the news. The nightly news programmes will be hosted by local families from their homes. Sitting somewhere in their home the normal news reader will read the normal news in the normal way. But after each of the lead items they will turn to family members for their comment, reaction and insight. This opens up the news, makes it real and connects the news item to people's lives. But the integrity of the news as news is maintained. And it will certainly make a refreshing change from so called "expert opinion"!
There is often a park somewhere in most cities. That park is often a
social space that has been lost to the broader community. Medellin has a botanical garden very near Moravia. Few people ventured there - certainly never at night. City officials decided that creating a
vibrant, open, safe, beautiful botanical garden would not only be
important in its own right, but would send a very powerful signal and message to the rest of the city. So, they got the park itself into great shape with the best examples of local vegetation. Then they replaced the solid wall around the park with a transparent fence, opening the park up so that people passing could see what was there and of course making it much safer for those in the park. A design competition was held for the public space created at the center of the park. It was won by a group of local architectural students competing against some of the biggest architectural firms in Latin America. Festivals - music, literature, drama, poetry!
- were organised and hosted in that public space. Then they created
the best restaurant in Medellin [believe me - it is good!] which brought the elites into the park and gave them a vested interest in its future. The vibrancy and symbolism of this open approach were huge.
Two important parts of the Medellin strategy they label "nearness" and "delivery". At all levels of the city government, public officials were encouraged and supported to spend significant amounts of their work time in economically poorer communities engaging and listening - to get "near" to the people experiencing the most difficult issues - to spend as little time as possible sitting behind desks. And all public officials were expected to "deliver" on promises - they are accountable for and are judged on things happening. Underpinning both the "nearness" and "delivery" strategies is an attempt to "build trust". In our development rush to implement programmes and projects, perhaps, as a policy imperative, we too often overlook the vital importance of "trust'. Let's face it, if people do not know the people saying that they will help them, if they are not "near" to them, if they do not see the results of that help, then there is hardly a solid basis of the trust required for development action on often very sensitive issues. Medellin is trying to address this vital element for all positive progress.
Leaving Medellin airport we were delayed by fog [a hazard of living in a high mountain valley!]. One of my CI Latin America colleagues introduced me to a fellow stranded passenger, an acquaintance of hers who turned out to be a leading business women in Medellin. She had little idea why we had been in Medellin. Before she could ask, I asked for her impressions and assessment of the change process in Medellin. She was unreservedly enthusiastic but from a very different perspective. Of course she cares about the development of people - as do those of us who come at this from a development perspective. But her primary interest is making money as a business women, and, for her, the economic climate in Medellin had improved markedly.
It's kind of hard to get economic development progress when communities are fearful, violence is high, people have difficulty getting to work and everyone's home situations are so precarious. Contrary to what we are often told about business people she did not even mind paying the taxes related to these developments because she had trust that the city would deliver - and, as they have delivered, she has a better environment to do business. She applauded and supported the public policy driving these changes. But this public policy approach around public spaces, dialogue, debate, etc. is not something we see in many international agency macro-economic policies.
Perhaps what is most striking about the Medellin process from a
development perspective is how it has gone counter to the current of the predominant streams of development thinking and strategy. It is a city-based process when much development focus and action is negotiated with and for the country/nation. There was no detailed micro-plan of action. The Medellin process is more akin to dropping a few well-placed stones in a lake in order to change the dynamics than it is to mapping out a detailed plan for how and where we want those ripples to flow. Medellin did not seek to follow global policies. Instead, it sought out the places from which it felt it could learn relative to the situation and issues in Medellin. Those places included three cities/regions whose positive development progress provided both ideas and inspiration - Bogota, Catalonia and Curutiba. But in the end they are doing it the Medellin way. There is a collection of organisations driving this process. The Mayor's office is vitally important for the overall policies. But there is a network of community groups, ComFama [the health care cooperative],
the Mayor's office, EPM [more below], businesses and local NGOs – the shared, collective, leadership and ownership is real strength. It is an integrated approach - there are no issue silos here - at the core of all of this work is the creation of public space; openness, debate and dialogue; a culture of citizenship, community budget control and the importance of symbolism. For example, they did not set out to address violence specifically. They did set out to create more safe, open spaces expecting that those would have a significant effect across a range of related issues, including the levels of violence. You can feel the passion - and that passion is infectious. There is even a local civic group called Passion for Medellin. Finally, there is a specific emphasis on the often overlooked policy element of culture. The city of Medellin spends four times more money each year through its Culture budget than does the Federal Ministry of Culture for the whole of Colombia.
What is happening in Medellin is a grand public policy process in the
rich tradition of the New Deal in the USA to overcome the Depression, the Marshall Plan for resurrecting Germany post World War II, the creation of the National Health Service in the UK in the late 1940s to improve health standards and other big public policy processes. The shape, style, scale, strategy and principles of the Medellin initiative are, of course, very different from those and other examples. But the public policy-driven process is not different. This is public policy in the driving seat, not market forces.
If I was to read your mind at this time, and if I was a betting person, I would lay a small wager that you have one question in your mind - "how did they pay for all of this?" The answer to this question deserves its own article because part of that response also runs counter to predominant economic development thinking and action. There were two main processes that created the funds to support all of the above and more. First, through greater transparency and accountability related to the city budget, the extent of the city's ability to make the significant investments highlighted above became very apparent. There was more city money than anyone thought. Second, and this is the counter-thought element, Medellin has pursued a policy of public ownership of public services [water, electricity, sewerage and now digital telecommunications] and has demanded that those services be
efficient and profitable. EPM - Empresas Públicas de Medellin - the
Medellin public utility company, is amongst the most efficient and profitable companies [all companies] in Latin America. And it is owned by the residents of the city through the office of the Mayor. There is no privatisation here. Consequently, there is no expatriation of profits beyond the valley walls. Instead, a
substantial share of the profits, over 100 million dollars per annum,
are immediately returned as investments in the city.
It would be a huge mistake to think that everything is fixed in Medellin or that these policies alone were 100% responsible for the change that is occurring. There are emerging challenges and other factors have contributed. For example, there have been recent violent episodes involving de-mobilised guerilla and para-military personnel. It is still far too early to say what impact these overall public policy efforts will have long term on the wealth "gap" that is the curse of so many cities and countries including Medellin and Colombia. The death of the globally infamous cartel leader Pablo Escobar helped the situation as has the overall performance of the Colombian economy with record growth the past 4 years.
But quite clearly, based on the data and the local critique, huge
progress has been made and these public policies have been vital to that progress. The mountains that ring the valley in which Medellin exists are indeed very high as are the social and economic challenges that the people living within that mountain wall face. But through a commitment to open public spaces, transparent public processes, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and striking symbolism, big, positive changes are happening and the physical and social obstacles seem greatly diminished. It is well worth your in-depth policy analysis.”
Enjoy the warmth, you don’t know how lucky you are! Best, neil
Friday, October 17, 2008
Medellin 1 Citichat 17 October 2008
CITICHAT 41/2008 - 17 October 2008
Medellin -1.
I have been away for the past week and will be away again from the middle of next week so thought it would be a good opportunity to share with you the story of Medellin which was recently written up by Warren Feek, the Executive Director of the Communication Initiative.
Medellín is the second largest city in Colombia and is located in the Aburrá Valley, one of the more northern regions of the Andes in South America. Size wise the city is larger than Joburg with a population of 2.5 million but has a Metropolitan population similar to ourselves at more than 3.2 million. This article shows just what can be achieved when there is unity of purpose and all those words we so readily mouth but which are so seldom put into practice – accountability, transparent public processes, a commitment to open public spaces, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and real delivery.
“Can there be any argument with a policy that drives strategies and
programmes that reduces homicides from 184 to 26 per 100,000 adults over a 5 year period [2003 to 2007]; significantly raises a city's Human Development Index score [74.35 in 2001 to 80.4 in 2006]; sees the Quality of Life Index zoom upwards [68.09 in 2001 to 83.77 in 2006]; and makes considerable economic gains for that city? Not to mention puts more smiles than frowns on people's faces and more pride than shame in their hearts? Such is the case of Medellin, a city of 2.5 million people in Colombia, and how it happened, and continues to happen, may have significant policy lessons across many aspects of international development.
Mention Medellin and most people - including me before a recent visit - immediately conjure images of drug cartels and unmitigated violence. Life was cheap. Hit men were abundant. Crime was endemic. Poverty was rife. Though a wealthy city the great majority of that wealth, including the tax pesos contributed by all, were in the hands of a very few. There were numerous "no-go" dangerous areas for public officials who were anyway severely mistrusted, often for good reason. The cartels ran the poor barrios where 90% of the population of Medellin live. Factions fought. Schooling was poor quality. Housing was primarily "informal". Medellin had these and other issues that are too commonly experienced across far too many cities. But that is a view of Medellin that is five years out of date, as indicated above.
The prime driving force for transforming Medellin into a comparatively safe, economically advancing and educated city is a set of public policies built around open public spaces, transparent public processes, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and striking symbolism including [you need to stick with me here] cable cars, library parks, bridges, budget control and a botanical garden! There is still much to be done but huge amounts have been achieved.
The response of most cities to rising violence [and Medellin had the
highest homicide rates in the world] is to close things down and to
contain - to increase security, make that security increasingly visible and forceful and ensure that the places that the elite gather, live and work are comparatively safe. For many years, Medellin took that approach. It did not work. So, they took a 180 degree turn and opened everything up!
In the poorest and most violent communities, library parks were built. Five library parks operate at present, and many more are planned. These are as they sound - a combination of places of learning [library] and play [park]. They are places for the community to gather, to talk, to organise, to make and perform music, poetry and dance, to access other ideas [thousands of books and hundreds of computer terminals with broadband access], to network and to discover. The buildings and services are high quality. They are designed to be open - with numerous fully open access points [no entry gates or guards] and large numbers of open spaces as gathering and discussion venues. Security is minimal and never armed. The Library Parks have become both hugely popular and appropriated by communities. Closed doors have been replaced by open spaces - physically and psychologically.
Moravia is a very poor barrio in Medellin that was renowned for the
worst violence. A significant venue for that violence was a local creek across which two communities used to shoot at each other. So, the city bought the houses either side of the creek at above market value, demolished those houses and on one side of the creek built a library park and on the other an open green park. The library park was the last building designed by Colombia's most famous architect - extremely high quality. But what was striking was the symbolism. They built three pedestrian bridges over the creek - actually and symbolically linking the two communities. And rather than forget the people who lived there, the names of those families whose houses were purchased are engraved into the glass side of the building. That symbolism resonated with significant meaning well-beyond the 100 meters either side of the creek.
The library park is incredibly well used. The shooting did not go to
another location! It dramatically reduced.
Medellin is in a very steep valley. As with so many cities, the
economically poorest communities live on the outside in informal
settlements. In Medellin, that means living on the side of mountain
cliffs over a thousand feet high. It is a precarious existence. So the
city built some cable cars - not just any old cable cars, but gondola
style ones that would be the pride of any French ski resort. The effect was enormous and, according to the locals, immediate. It opened the community. For those that had a job, the previous 2-hours-each-way bus ride over snaky, narrow roads was replaced by a 20 minute journey in comfort. Family-, friend- and community-time increased from both quantity and quality perspectives. Many people's houses were now open to all to see from the gondolas. We are all vain and proud and when people can see your house you take extra steps to make that house attractive and safe. This has a knock-on effect.
With more people spending more time in their communities, businesses began to flourish. In one barrio there were 10 businesses before the cable car and now there are hundreds - mostly locally-commenced, -owned and -managed. Services came: there was no bank before - now there are banks; health facilities arrived. More bridges were built. The cracks down the mountainside divided communities. Suspicion and inter-community violence were rampant. So, pedestrian bridges were built across the "cracks" to link these communities. The spaces below the cable cars were
made into walkways. People use these as connection points. This space, openness and connectivity is transforming these areas. Some of the most well-used libraries are at the entrance to the cable cars - people spend their time reading whilst travelling.
In the end, it often comes down to money. In Development, we always seem to be so reluctant to hand over the purse strings to people in their communities. Not Medellin. Seven per cent of the city's core budget – 70 million dollars - is now directly controlled by representative committees in some of the poorest communities in Medellin. Part of the agreement with the city by these communities is that they will go through a two-step process: first, consultation within the communities on priorities; and, then, allocation and monitoring of resources related to the agreed priorities. But the decisions are all their own. So, a community in a poor barrio can be responsible for millions of dollars of local expenditure. For those of us in development action, the stock-in-trade of governance and democracy progress is accountability, participation and transparency. Medellin has that in bucket-fulls. The people involved in deciding how these fund will be spent live in the communities in
which they are spending! Everyone in those communities knows how much there is to spend and what the priorities are. These local decision makers see their friends, family and fellow community members all the time. Dialogue, transparency and accountability are high. Good decisions are made.”
Ciao, neil
Medellin -1.
I have been away for the past week and will be away again from the middle of next week so thought it would be a good opportunity to share with you the story of Medellin which was recently written up by Warren Feek, the Executive Director of the Communication Initiative.
Medellín is the second largest city in Colombia and is located in the Aburrá Valley, one of the more northern regions of the Andes in South America. Size wise the city is larger than Joburg with a population of 2.5 million but has a Metropolitan population similar to ourselves at more than 3.2 million. This article shows just what can be achieved when there is unity of purpose and all those words we so readily mouth but which are so seldom put into practice – accountability, transparent public processes, a commitment to open public spaces, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and real delivery.
“Can there be any argument with a policy that drives strategies and
programmes that reduces homicides from 184 to 26 per 100,000 adults over a 5 year period [2003 to 2007]; significantly raises a city's Human Development Index score [74.35 in 2001 to 80.4 in 2006]; sees the Quality of Life Index zoom upwards [68.09 in 2001 to 83.77 in 2006]; and makes considerable economic gains for that city? Not to mention puts more smiles than frowns on people's faces and more pride than shame in their hearts? Such is the case of Medellin, a city of 2.5 million people in Colombia, and how it happened, and continues to happen, may have significant policy lessons across many aspects of international development.
Mention Medellin and most people - including me before a recent visit - immediately conjure images of drug cartels and unmitigated violence. Life was cheap. Hit men were abundant. Crime was endemic. Poverty was rife. Though a wealthy city the great majority of that wealth, including the tax pesos contributed by all, were in the hands of a very few. There were numerous "no-go" dangerous areas for public officials who were anyway severely mistrusted, often for good reason. The cartels ran the poor barrios where 90% of the population of Medellin live. Factions fought. Schooling was poor quality. Housing was primarily "informal". Medellin had these and other issues that are too commonly experienced across far too many cities. But that is a view of Medellin that is five years out of date, as indicated above.
The prime driving force for transforming Medellin into a comparatively safe, economically advancing and educated city is a set of public policies built around open public spaces, transparent public processes, the culture of citizenship, high quality for all and striking symbolism including [you need to stick with me here] cable cars, library parks, bridges, budget control and a botanical garden! There is still much to be done but huge amounts have been achieved.
The response of most cities to rising violence [and Medellin had the
highest homicide rates in the world] is to close things down and to
contain - to increase security, make that security increasingly visible and forceful and ensure that the places that the elite gather, live and work are comparatively safe. For many years, Medellin took that approach. It did not work. So, they took a 180 degree turn and opened everything up!
In the poorest and most violent communities, library parks were built. Five library parks operate at present, and many more are planned. These are as they sound - a combination of places of learning [library] and play [park]. They are places for the community to gather, to talk, to organise, to make and perform music, poetry and dance, to access other ideas [thousands of books and hundreds of computer terminals with broadband access], to network and to discover. The buildings and services are high quality. They are designed to be open - with numerous fully open access points [no entry gates or guards] and large numbers of open spaces as gathering and discussion venues. Security is minimal and never armed. The Library Parks have become both hugely popular and appropriated by communities. Closed doors have been replaced by open spaces - physically and psychologically.
Moravia is a very poor barrio in Medellin that was renowned for the
worst violence. A significant venue for that violence was a local creek across which two communities used to shoot at each other. So, the city bought the houses either side of the creek at above market value, demolished those houses and on one side of the creek built a library park and on the other an open green park. The library park was the last building designed by Colombia's most famous architect - extremely high quality. But what was striking was the symbolism. They built three pedestrian bridges over the creek - actually and symbolically linking the two communities. And rather than forget the people who lived there, the names of those families whose houses were purchased are engraved into the glass side of the building. That symbolism resonated with significant meaning well-beyond the 100 meters either side of the creek.
The library park is incredibly well used. The shooting did not go to
another location! It dramatically reduced.
Medellin is in a very steep valley. As with so many cities, the
economically poorest communities live on the outside in informal
settlements. In Medellin, that means living on the side of mountain
cliffs over a thousand feet high. It is a precarious existence. So the
city built some cable cars - not just any old cable cars, but gondola
style ones that would be the pride of any French ski resort. The effect was enormous and, according to the locals, immediate. It opened the community. For those that had a job, the previous 2-hours-each-way bus ride over snaky, narrow roads was replaced by a 20 minute journey in comfort. Family-, friend- and community-time increased from both quantity and quality perspectives. Many people's houses were now open to all to see from the gondolas. We are all vain and proud and when people can see your house you take extra steps to make that house attractive and safe. This has a knock-on effect.
With more people spending more time in their communities, businesses began to flourish. In one barrio there were 10 businesses before the cable car and now there are hundreds - mostly locally-commenced, -owned and -managed. Services came: there was no bank before - now there are banks; health facilities arrived. More bridges were built. The cracks down the mountainside divided communities. Suspicion and inter-community violence were rampant. So, pedestrian bridges were built across the "cracks" to link these communities. The spaces below the cable cars were
made into walkways. People use these as connection points. This space, openness and connectivity is transforming these areas. Some of the most well-used libraries are at the entrance to the cable cars - people spend their time reading whilst travelling.
In the end, it often comes down to money. In Development, we always seem to be so reluctant to hand over the purse strings to people in their communities. Not Medellin. Seven per cent of the city's core budget – 70 million dollars - is now directly controlled by representative committees in some of the poorest communities in Medellin. Part of the agreement with the city by these communities is that they will go through a two-step process: first, consultation within the communities on priorities; and, then, allocation and monitoring of resources related to the agreed priorities. But the decisions are all their own. So, a community in a poor barrio can be responsible for millions of dollars of local expenditure. For those of us in development action, the stock-in-trade of governance and democracy progress is accountability, participation and transparency. Medellin has that in bucket-fulls. The people involved in deciding how these fund will be spent live in the communities in
which they are spending! Everyone in those communities knows how much there is to spend and what the priorities are. These local decision makers see their friends, family and fellow community members all the time. Dialogue, transparency and accountability are high. Good decisions are made.”
Ciao, neil
Friday, October 10, 2008
Mixed Use ; Southwards Citichat 10 October 2008
CITICHAT 40/2008 - 10 October 2008
Mixed Use and Growing Southwards.
Attended a session last week looking at the future development of the inner city. A couple of things emerged to make one think. Firstly one developer spoke passionately about creating a “residential free zone” in the inner city. This would basically be the area south of Commissioner Street stretching from Newtown to the Carlton Centre. He felt that the European/North American model of inner city mixed use wasn’t really appropriate for Johannesburg. Interesting issue. In actual fact the bulk of residential development has taken place north of Commissioner and the amount of residential in the southern area is relatively low at present – but to deliberately create what amounts to the old Americanism of ‘CBD’ – Central Business District – requires a great deal of careful thought and is contrary to the generally accepted direction that the inner city is moving in, that of mixed use. My constant refrain for many years has been that we have laissez faire zoning operating in the inner city that allows anyone to do almost anything anywhere. Whilst this has been to our advantage, resulting in numerous conversions from commercial to residential accommodation – especially north of Commissioner Street – it has also resulted in some slumlording to the south. There was the case of a developer buying a derelict office block in Frederick Street next to the Standard Bank corporate head office and converting it not just into residential but into something of a slum. If we can’t change zonings because of the complications that will result in owners claiming that they are being prejudiced by the removal of certain rights, then we at least need the ability to use the ‘carrot and stick’ approach. This would provide incentives for certain types of development in certain areas and penalties for undesirable usage in others. But a blanket commercial zone?
‘Mixed use’ has an interesting history. Historically, human settlements were mixed use. Most people lived in buildings that were not just their place of work but also their homes. Most neighbourhoods offered a diversity of uses with some districts developing towards a specialised use – the Fashion District in the inner city would be a modern example of this trend. Of course walking would have been the major way of getting from A to B, later this was enhanced by using animals such as horses and cattle. Densities were high and were determined by the amount of space required for living whilst movement between different activities was determined by ‘walkability’. That all changed with industrialisation which saw inner city factories producing substantial pollution but also acting as employment-magnets drawing the rural poor into the cities in large numbers. This in turn led to overcrowding of working class and poor people and terrible conditions. Poverty, poor services especially sanitation, rather than high density itself were the culprits. The distancing of commercial and residential uses followed by separating land uses that had previously occurred in the same space. Cities were however ‘restricted’ in size by the fact that the movement of people was by foot. Mass transit and in particular, private cars, changed all that resulting in dispersed low density cities where people could live at a distance from their workplaces.
De-industrialisation in the middle to late 20th century no longer provided an impetus for separating residential from noxious industrial use. It was also found that separation by zoning law created isolated islands of different usage. Mixed use provisions in zoning emerged once again leading to retail space on the ground floor with residential or offices above. One of the great advocates for mixed use was Jane Jacobs who argued in “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” that mixed use is vital and necessary for a healthy urban area. The terminology ‘CBD’ came increasingly under fire as urban thinking moved to viewing cities as places where people could live, work and play. In South Africa, the mixed use approach to cities was, of course, dramatically affected by apartheid- planning leaving our cities as the centres of ‘donut’ development with white citizens living in the suburbs and black citizens in townships (usually each in diametrically opposed directions). Since 1994 mixed use has been seen as a catalyst to normalising and integrating our cities. But, does mixed use mean a total intermingling of residential and commercial uses? The jury is still out on that one.
The second issue that was highlighted at the planning session was the growing importance of the southern edge of the inner city. This has, until now, been artificially delimited by the M1 highway and consists mainly of light industrial usage. Incidentally, the City is a major landowner in this strip. Standard Bank were probably the first to do a major development in this light industrial band. Over the years their development has grown to some 200000 m2 of office space catering for 12 5000 workers. Their purchase last year of the Ussher site, just to the west of their existing campus, will ultimately double the area developed to date although it will probably not be confined to office space but will include substantial retail and residential. To their west also on the edge of the highway I-prop will also be developing a major building with significant parking and public space with retail at the lower levels and residential above. Between the Standard Bank and I-prop developments is a large site currently being used by Pikitup which requires to also be developed or it will form a discontinuity between the new developments. But it could also be positively developed as large public open space which we desperately need possibly with various social amenities. This means that there will be a serious amount of residential occurring on the north side of the highway and opens up the possibility of also driving redevelopment further south into Selby up to the Top Star mine dump. But it also gives credence to continuing with residential along this edge in an easterly direction.
Also in the south-western quadrant where the Standard Bank and I-prop developments will take place, the Johannesburg Land Company is busy developing office space just west of the Magistrates’ Courts. They have about 180 000 m2 of rights in this area of which they are currently developing 10 000.
The south-western quadrant is going to provide a serious amount of future mixed use development and is set to become a major node in the inner city and a focus for more residential provision.
Ciao, neil
Mixed Use and Growing Southwards.
Attended a session last week looking at the future development of the inner city. A couple of things emerged to make one think. Firstly one developer spoke passionately about creating a “residential free zone” in the inner city. This would basically be the area south of Commissioner Street stretching from Newtown to the Carlton Centre. He felt that the European/North American model of inner city mixed use wasn’t really appropriate for Johannesburg. Interesting issue. In actual fact the bulk of residential development has taken place north of Commissioner and the amount of residential in the southern area is relatively low at present – but to deliberately create what amounts to the old Americanism of ‘CBD’ – Central Business District – requires a great deal of careful thought and is contrary to the generally accepted direction that the inner city is moving in, that of mixed use. My constant refrain for many years has been that we have laissez faire zoning operating in the inner city that allows anyone to do almost anything anywhere. Whilst this has been to our advantage, resulting in numerous conversions from commercial to residential accommodation – especially north of Commissioner Street – it has also resulted in some slumlording to the south. There was the case of a developer buying a derelict office block in Frederick Street next to the Standard Bank corporate head office and converting it not just into residential but into something of a slum. If we can’t change zonings because of the complications that will result in owners claiming that they are being prejudiced by the removal of certain rights, then we at least need the ability to use the ‘carrot and stick’ approach. This would provide incentives for certain types of development in certain areas and penalties for undesirable usage in others. But a blanket commercial zone?
‘Mixed use’ has an interesting history. Historically, human settlements were mixed use. Most people lived in buildings that were not just their place of work but also their homes. Most neighbourhoods offered a diversity of uses with some districts developing towards a specialised use – the Fashion District in the inner city would be a modern example of this trend. Of course walking would have been the major way of getting from A to B, later this was enhanced by using animals such as horses and cattle. Densities were high and were determined by the amount of space required for living whilst movement between different activities was determined by ‘walkability’. That all changed with industrialisation which saw inner city factories producing substantial pollution but also acting as employment-magnets drawing the rural poor into the cities in large numbers. This in turn led to overcrowding of working class and poor people and terrible conditions. Poverty, poor services especially sanitation, rather than high density itself were the culprits. The distancing of commercial and residential uses followed by separating land uses that had previously occurred in the same space. Cities were however ‘restricted’ in size by the fact that the movement of people was by foot. Mass transit and in particular, private cars, changed all that resulting in dispersed low density cities where people could live at a distance from their workplaces.
De-industrialisation in the middle to late 20th century no longer provided an impetus for separating residential from noxious industrial use. It was also found that separation by zoning law created isolated islands of different usage. Mixed use provisions in zoning emerged once again leading to retail space on the ground floor with residential or offices above. One of the great advocates for mixed use was Jane Jacobs who argued in “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” that mixed use is vital and necessary for a healthy urban area. The terminology ‘CBD’ came increasingly under fire as urban thinking moved to viewing cities as places where people could live, work and play. In South Africa, the mixed use approach to cities was, of course, dramatically affected by apartheid- planning leaving our cities as the centres of ‘donut’ development with white citizens living in the suburbs and black citizens in townships (usually each in diametrically opposed directions). Since 1994 mixed use has been seen as a catalyst to normalising and integrating our cities. But, does mixed use mean a total intermingling of residential and commercial uses? The jury is still out on that one.
The second issue that was highlighted at the planning session was the growing importance of the southern edge of the inner city. This has, until now, been artificially delimited by the M1 highway and consists mainly of light industrial usage. Incidentally, the City is a major landowner in this strip. Standard Bank were probably the first to do a major development in this light industrial band. Over the years their development has grown to some 200000 m2 of office space catering for 12 5000 workers. Their purchase last year of the Ussher site, just to the west of their existing campus, will ultimately double the area developed to date although it will probably not be confined to office space but will include substantial retail and residential. To their west also on the edge of the highway I-prop will also be developing a major building with significant parking and public space with retail at the lower levels and residential above. Between the Standard Bank and I-prop developments is a large site currently being used by Pikitup which requires to also be developed or it will form a discontinuity between the new developments. But it could also be positively developed as large public open space which we desperately need possibly with various social amenities. This means that there will be a serious amount of residential occurring on the north side of the highway and opens up the possibility of also driving redevelopment further south into Selby up to the Top Star mine dump. But it also gives credence to continuing with residential along this edge in an easterly direction.
Also in the south-western quadrant where the Standard Bank and I-prop developments will take place, the Johannesburg Land Company is busy developing office space just west of the Magistrates’ Courts. They have about 180 000 m2 of rights in this area of which they are currently developing 10 000.
The south-western quadrant is going to provide a serious amount of future mixed use development and is set to become a major node in the inner city and a focus for more residential provision.
Ciao, neil
Friday, October 3, 2008
Outdoor Advertising 2 Citichat 3 October 2008
CITICHAT 39/2008 - 3 October 2008
Outdoor Advertising -2
I mentioned the northern ‘gateway’ to Newtown last week (as you drive over the Nelson Mandela Bridge). On your right is an empty building that has been wrapped for the past five years, possibly much more. It’s current advertisement is for Castle Beer. Look left and you have a wrap advertising KWV Brandy and next to it a seven storey high Chivas Regal advert. The KWV ad reads “perfect whichever way you look at it” – well, whatever the quality of the brandy might be, “perfect” the ad certainly is not, whichever way you look at it! It is filthy and shows how badly polluted the city must be. Flo Bird says “We approach the Mandela Bridge through a setting of grubby wraps which not only reveal the grubby commercial soul of the city but the disgracefully foul and polluted air. Perhaps the City should include a wash day clause when it grants these rights. They are certainly no advertisement for Johannesburg.”
Driving up Rissik Street and 222 Smit Street directly ahead of one, (built in 1967 as The Schlesinger Centre) is really disfigured by a giant Amstel ad over part of its façade. Apart from other considerations, the ad totally unbalances the symmetry of the building. Then there is the technically advanced Johnny Walker ad on Life Building in Commissioner Street. Technically advanced because, whilst the ad looks like a wrap-around it in fact isn’t – the ad material only spans the section between windows which is quite amazing given the narrow width of that space. The building is in fact covered with about two dozen strips per elevation each strip about twenty storeys high and only covering the non-window portion of the structure. The eye doesn’t read it that way of course and what we have is a twenty storey high Johnny Walker on each elevation! I actually think it is technically brilliant but wonder who in Council decided that it complies with 4 (1) The Council is to have due regard to “(a) the compatibility of the proposed advertising sign with the environment and with the amenity of the immediate neighbourhood …..” given that the immediate neighbourhood is the historic Indian quarter, the religions of which prohibit alcohol!
Then there is the C N A building in Commissioner Street, one of the city’s twenty Art Deco buildings. Neglected by its previous owners, Old Mutual, for many years, it was sold two or three years back to Urban Ocean who immediately threw up a hoarding around the building proclaiming that it would be commencing reconstruction within months. Now years, rather than months, later, huge advertising signs have been fixed to its elevations. This is clearly against the Heritage Act as well as our new by-laws which specifically state that in considering an application, the Council will have due regard to ”whether the advertising sign will obscure an architectural feature…of architectural, historical or heritage significance” There is a growing feeling amongst many who truly have the city at heart, that these particular developers have some sort of ‘deal’ with the Council – illegal signboards, lanes of roads closed off to their advantage for years, a substantial part of Harry Hofmeyr parking garage reserved for their exclusive use whilst the public battle to find parking; buildings like the C N A and Shakespeare House allowed to self-implode – something is clearly not right!
But it isn’t only the ads that are a problem, it’s also when the ad has gone and we’re left with an ugly steel skeleton on which it was erected. A good example is on top of the previous Sanlam Centre now called Marble Hall. The structure for the erection of a wrap around sign on top of the building has been there for years and years. A by-law states (4) that if no sign has been advertised on the structure “at any time” the Council may require a sign to be displayed, that this could be a ‘community message of the Council’s specification” or that advertising approval lapses. If it lapses then the Council can order the removal of the structure. Again, no compliance, no enforcement!
Was in Cape Town on Wednesday and interested to see from the Cape Times that “The City of Cape Town is waging ‘long-running battles’ with landlords and advertisers who ignore signage restrictions on historic buildings in Long Street and other parts of the city”. The report also states that “The city last year got a court interdict against signage company Tractor Outdoor preventing it from erecting a sign on the wall of the Portswood Lodge in Sea Point.”
Cape Town is obviously way ahead of us, it not only has by-laws to manage the outdoor advertising industry but appears to be actively trying to enforce them. My biggest concern here is that we have by-laws (not just for outdoor advertising) that are taken off the shelf from time to time, dusted off, updated to cover the latest technologies, negotiated through public participation that I suspect is solely with the industry representatives involved and not the people who really care about the city, then put back on the shelf and ignored by those who are responsible for enforcement. Can someone assure us that when considering applications for advertising someone “has due regard” to 4 c “the size and location of a proposed advertising sign and its alignment in relation to any existing advertising sign on the same building or on the same property if such property is greater than 1000m2 in extent, and such sign’s compatibility with the visual character of the area surrounding it.” Seriously, who monitors the rash of signs we have throughout the city – is the checking for illegal signs part of the function of the new urban management officers and multi task enforcement groups or of the JMPD? Whichever, nothing is being done!
I have this constant fear that we are moving towards a city with perfect regulations and by-laws none of which mean more than a row of beans because no-one enforces them.
And, I’m not against signage nor appropriate advertising. One Citichat reader puts forward the following: “Neon Signage adds life to the city’s skyline. Every commercial world class city that I have been to has a abundance of neon signage. It shows a sense of prosperity. It also gives the city two distinct vibes, one at day and the other at night. We need MORE big neon signs in the inner city, it should be encouraged. We should, like Times Square, increase the minimum size of neon signs. Only BIG signs should be allowed on rooftops and only one sign per building This will stop the clutter of small signs that look like sign farming especially around the bridge.
I think the Carlton Centre should get a 10 storey neon signboard or light up the building in Transnet colours. Shanghai buildings light up and have changing colours as well as huge neon signs. I think it looks classy - Bling is the relevant word and is very much African. Look at the chrome on cars these days in SOWETO and look at the music videos. We don't want Joburg to look like some boring European / Nordic cities. From a fashion perspective good big name branding is where the world is going. Why can't the city get more big brands like the Coke, it shows the world that these brands are part of the city. It is like an endorsement and they add value to the name Joburg.”
Well, Neal Peirce (Washington Post Writers Group) shows where the USA is moving and where we may well follow given the clout of the advertising industry – so read the following and weep!
All signs point to billboard blight
“There's lots of talk about the "greening" of America in this time of climate change and soaring energy costs. But don't count the billboard industry in.
Indeed, its latest and biggest moneymakers are the big, brash, brilliant signs — LED (light-emitting diode) digital billboards — being sited rapidly on high-volume highways coast to coast.
The flashy mega-signs are called energy efficient, but they're powerful enough to be seen a half mile away and consume about 4,800 watts of electric power per square yard per hour. Each costs about $450,000. Over 500 are up already; one industry analyst predicts there'll be 75,000 by 2010.
Driving on congested, stop-and-go urban freeways, it's increasingly tough to ignore these monsters, each flashing a new commercial every six or eight seconds. "We have the ultimate ability to withstand the whole challenge of consumer avoidance," Paul Meyer, chief executive of Clear Channel Outdoor, one of the media titans now dominating the billboard industry, told The Washington Post. "We're there 24-7. There's no mute button, no on-off switch, no changing the station."
What's more, because each digital board can have multiple sponsors with constantly updated messages, advertisers are proving easy to recruit. The industry is reportedly enjoying close-to-astronomic profit margins.
Critics charge that the new signs, like the 500,000-plus old-style billboards dotting U.S. highways coast to coast, not only blight the landscape but represent private exploitation of roadways that the public paid for.
And increasingly, charges Kevin Fry, president of Scenic America, tasteless outdoor advertising is endangering Americans' public realm. Drive into San Francisco and a forest of signs looms ahead, obscuring one of our most beautiful and renowned skylines. New York's great neighborhoods are being — in Fry's words — "draped like a giant burrito in enormous vinyl signs."
There's no doubt the billboard industry, which sues to invalidate local communities' sign ordinances and targets decision-makers from local towns to state legislatures to Congress, represents one of the nation's most potent lobbies. It's effectively emasculated the 42-year-old Highway Beautification Act, passed with Lady Bird Johnson's inspiration.
And its hunger shows no bounds. Think trees, for example. This January, the Spartanburg, S.C., Men's Garden Club planted dozens of dogwoods, maples and other trees along a five-mile stretch of interstate roadway, some of it blighted by decaying and partly collapsed billboards. But the South Carolina Department of Transportation ordered removal of 45 trees because they were inside the 300-foot highway "view window" the billboard lobby had urged the state to mandate.
Indeed, at least 28 states have laws that can force cutting trees owned by the public on public land if they obscure drivers' clear view of billboards. Florida even insists on a 500-to-1,000-foot "view zone." How "ungreen," one wonders, can government policy get?
Are all signs then to be condemned? No, says Fry, reasonably sized informational signs are fine. Even big electronic displays are OK where they spell the very character of a place, such as Times Square or the Las Vegas strip. The problem is the sign and billboard lobby trying to force inappropriate signs down Americans' throats, from city to country, wherever it sees a buck to be made.
Los Angeles, for example, has been trying to get a handle on the 10,000-plus billboards, many illegally placed or sized, lining its roadways. The City Council ordered an inspection and enforcement program, plus a moratorium on new boards. Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. and CBS Outdoor Inc. sued to invalidate the ordinance. According to the Los Angeles Times, the city was winning successive court rounds when City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo suddenly stepped in to settle with the billboard giants. He agreed to legalize scores of illegally operating billboards if the industry would agree to inspection and modest fees.
Billboard opponents were enraged, noting Delgadillo had received $424,000 worth of billboard space to support his election, and that the firms had continued to contribute thousands more to him and some of the City Council members who eventually approved the settlement.
Fighting the billboard lobby looks like a classic David and Goliath struggle — huge resources against largely unpaid volunteers. But those volunteers say that if we're to hope for a clean, green, uncluttered America, this is one battle we can't avoid.”
Have a good weekend, neil
Outdoor Advertising -2
I mentioned the northern ‘gateway’ to Newtown last week (as you drive over the Nelson Mandela Bridge). On your right is an empty building that has been wrapped for the past five years, possibly much more. It’s current advertisement is for Castle Beer. Look left and you have a wrap advertising KWV Brandy and next to it a seven storey high Chivas Regal advert. The KWV ad reads “perfect whichever way you look at it” – well, whatever the quality of the brandy might be, “perfect” the ad certainly is not, whichever way you look at it! It is filthy and shows how badly polluted the city must be. Flo Bird says “We approach the Mandela Bridge through a setting of grubby wraps which not only reveal the grubby commercial soul of the city but the disgracefully foul and polluted air. Perhaps the City should include a wash day clause when it grants these rights. They are certainly no advertisement for Johannesburg.”
Driving up Rissik Street and 222 Smit Street directly ahead of one, (built in 1967 as The Schlesinger Centre) is really disfigured by a giant Amstel ad over part of its façade. Apart from other considerations, the ad totally unbalances the symmetry of the building. Then there is the technically advanced Johnny Walker ad on Life Building in Commissioner Street. Technically advanced because, whilst the ad looks like a wrap-around it in fact isn’t – the ad material only spans the section between windows which is quite amazing given the narrow width of that space. The building is in fact covered with about two dozen strips per elevation each strip about twenty storeys high and only covering the non-window portion of the structure. The eye doesn’t read it that way of course and what we have is a twenty storey high Johnny Walker on each elevation! I actually think it is technically brilliant but wonder who in Council decided that it complies with 4 (1) The Council is to have due regard to “(a) the compatibility of the proposed advertising sign with the environment and with the amenity of the immediate neighbourhood …..” given that the immediate neighbourhood is the historic Indian quarter, the religions of which prohibit alcohol!
Then there is the C N A building in Commissioner Street, one of the city’s twenty Art Deco buildings. Neglected by its previous owners, Old Mutual, for many years, it was sold two or three years back to Urban Ocean who immediately threw up a hoarding around the building proclaiming that it would be commencing reconstruction within months. Now years, rather than months, later, huge advertising signs have been fixed to its elevations. This is clearly against the Heritage Act as well as our new by-laws which specifically state that in considering an application, the Council will have due regard to ”whether the advertising sign will obscure an architectural feature…of architectural, historical or heritage significance” There is a growing feeling amongst many who truly have the city at heart, that these particular developers have some sort of ‘deal’ with the Council – illegal signboards, lanes of roads closed off to their advantage for years, a substantial part of Harry Hofmeyr parking garage reserved for their exclusive use whilst the public battle to find parking; buildings like the C N A and Shakespeare House allowed to self-implode – something is clearly not right!
But it isn’t only the ads that are a problem, it’s also when the ad has gone and we’re left with an ugly steel skeleton on which it was erected. A good example is on top of the previous Sanlam Centre now called Marble Hall. The structure for the erection of a wrap around sign on top of the building has been there for years and years. A by-law states (4) that if no sign has been advertised on the structure “at any time” the Council may require a sign to be displayed, that this could be a ‘community message of the Council’s specification” or that advertising approval lapses. If it lapses then the Council can order the removal of the structure. Again, no compliance, no enforcement!
Was in Cape Town on Wednesday and interested to see from the Cape Times that “The City of Cape Town is waging ‘long-running battles’ with landlords and advertisers who ignore signage restrictions on historic buildings in Long Street and other parts of the city”. The report also states that “The city last year got a court interdict against signage company Tractor Outdoor preventing it from erecting a sign on the wall of the Portswood Lodge in Sea Point.”
Cape Town is obviously way ahead of us, it not only has by-laws to manage the outdoor advertising industry but appears to be actively trying to enforce them. My biggest concern here is that we have by-laws (not just for outdoor advertising) that are taken off the shelf from time to time, dusted off, updated to cover the latest technologies, negotiated through public participation that I suspect is solely with the industry representatives involved and not the people who really care about the city, then put back on the shelf and ignored by those who are responsible for enforcement. Can someone assure us that when considering applications for advertising someone “has due regard” to 4 c “the size and location of a proposed advertising sign and its alignment in relation to any existing advertising sign on the same building or on the same property if such property is greater than 1000m2 in extent, and such sign’s compatibility with the visual character of the area surrounding it.” Seriously, who monitors the rash of signs we have throughout the city – is the checking for illegal signs part of the function of the new urban management officers and multi task enforcement groups or of the JMPD? Whichever, nothing is being done!
I have this constant fear that we are moving towards a city with perfect regulations and by-laws none of which mean more than a row of beans because no-one enforces them.
And, I’m not against signage nor appropriate advertising. One Citichat reader puts forward the following: “Neon Signage adds life to the city’s skyline. Every commercial world class city that I have been to has a abundance of neon signage. It shows a sense of prosperity. It also gives the city two distinct vibes, one at day and the other at night. We need MORE big neon signs in the inner city, it should be encouraged. We should, like Times Square, increase the minimum size of neon signs. Only BIG signs should be allowed on rooftops and only one sign per building This will stop the clutter of small signs that look like sign farming especially around the bridge.
I think the Carlton Centre should get a 10 storey neon signboard or light up the building in Transnet colours. Shanghai buildings light up and have changing colours as well as huge neon signs. I think it looks classy - Bling is the relevant word and is very much African. Look at the chrome on cars these days in SOWETO and look at the music videos. We don't want Joburg to look like some boring European / Nordic cities. From a fashion perspective good big name branding is where the world is going. Why can't the city get more big brands like the Coke, it shows the world that these brands are part of the city. It is like an endorsement and they add value to the name Joburg.”
Well, Neal Peirce (Washington Post Writers Group) shows where the USA is moving and where we may well follow given the clout of the advertising industry – so read the following and weep!
All signs point to billboard blight
“There's lots of talk about the "greening" of America in this time of climate change and soaring energy costs. But don't count the billboard industry in.
Indeed, its latest and biggest moneymakers are the big, brash, brilliant signs — LED (light-emitting diode) digital billboards — being sited rapidly on high-volume highways coast to coast.
The flashy mega-signs are called energy efficient, but they're powerful enough to be seen a half mile away and consume about 4,800 watts of electric power per square yard per hour. Each costs about $450,000. Over 500 are up already; one industry analyst predicts there'll be 75,000 by 2010.
Driving on congested, stop-and-go urban freeways, it's increasingly tough to ignore these monsters, each flashing a new commercial every six or eight seconds. "We have the ultimate ability to withstand the whole challenge of consumer avoidance," Paul Meyer, chief executive of Clear Channel Outdoor, one of the media titans now dominating the billboard industry, told The Washington Post. "We're there 24-7. There's no mute button, no on-off switch, no changing the station."
What's more, because each digital board can have multiple sponsors with constantly updated messages, advertisers are proving easy to recruit. The industry is reportedly enjoying close-to-astronomic profit margins.
Critics charge that the new signs, like the 500,000-plus old-style billboards dotting U.S. highways coast to coast, not only blight the landscape but represent private exploitation of roadways that the public paid for.
And increasingly, charges Kevin Fry, president of Scenic America, tasteless outdoor advertising is endangering Americans' public realm. Drive into San Francisco and a forest of signs looms ahead, obscuring one of our most beautiful and renowned skylines. New York's great neighborhoods are being — in Fry's words — "draped like a giant burrito in enormous vinyl signs."
There's no doubt the billboard industry, which sues to invalidate local communities' sign ordinances and targets decision-makers from local towns to state legislatures to Congress, represents one of the nation's most potent lobbies. It's effectively emasculated the 42-year-old Highway Beautification Act, passed with Lady Bird Johnson's inspiration.
And its hunger shows no bounds. Think trees, for example. This January, the Spartanburg, S.C., Men's Garden Club planted dozens of dogwoods, maples and other trees along a five-mile stretch of interstate roadway, some of it blighted by decaying and partly collapsed billboards. But the South Carolina Department of Transportation ordered removal of 45 trees because they were inside the 300-foot highway "view window" the billboard lobby had urged the state to mandate.
Indeed, at least 28 states have laws that can force cutting trees owned by the public on public land if they obscure drivers' clear view of billboards. Florida even insists on a 500-to-1,000-foot "view zone." How "ungreen," one wonders, can government policy get?
Are all signs then to be condemned? No, says Fry, reasonably sized informational signs are fine. Even big electronic displays are OK where they spell the very character of a place, such as Times Square or the Las Vegas strip. The problem is the sign and billboard lobby trying to force inappropriate signs down Americans' throats, from city to country, wherever it sees a buck to be made.
Los Angeles, for example, has been trying to get a handle on the 10,000-plus billboards, many illegally placed or sized, lining its roadways. The City Council ordered an inspection and enforcement program, plus a moratorium on new boards. Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. and CBS Outdoor Inc. sued to invalidate the ordinance. According to the Los Angeles Times, the city was winning successive court rounds when City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo suddenly stepped in to settle with the billboard giants. He agreed to legalize scores of illegally operating billboards if the industry would agree to inspection and modest fees.
Billboard opponents were enraged, noting Delgadillo had received $424,000 worth of billboard space to support his election, and that the firms had continued to contribute thousands more to him and some of the City Council members who eventually approved the settlement.
Fighting the billboard lobby looks like a classic David and Goliath struggle — huge resources against largely unpaid volunteers. But those volunteers say that if we're to hope for a clean, green, uncluttered America, this is one battle we can't avoid.”
Have a good weekend, neil
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
