Redrawing ‘Jovi’
239
240
JoVi
Redrawing ‘JoVi’ Structuring a response to inner-city redevelopment Vision To reconceptualize a model of urban transformation that meets the basic needs of the existing population through encouraging investment and development that builds on existing social and physical infrastructures.
Kasim Faith Fatai, Nigeria University of Ibadan kasimfaithy@yahoo.com
Studio Participants
Coral Gillett, Australia Queensland University of Technology coral.gillett@gmail.com
Students Elina Alatalo, Finland Tampere University of Technology elina.alatalo@tut.fi Charles Anderson, USA California College of the Arts chuckand_ucsc@yahoo.com Maria Sole Benigni , Italy University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ mariasolebenigni@yahoo.it Yukiko Bowman, USA University of California, Berkeley yukibowman@berkeley.edu Sarah Brennan, Australia Monash University sebre1@student.monash.edu Eliana Capiato, Italy University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ eliana.capiato@hotmail.com Archie Dave, India Center for Environmental Planning and Technology tabbydockarchie@yahoo.co.uk / archi.e.rag@gmail.com
Kevin Goncalves, South Africa The University of Witwatersrand kevingnclvs@yahoo.com
Erick Gregory, USA Columbia University etg2117@columbia.edu
Mentors Fanuel Motsepe & Eric Lindenberg Motsepe Architects reception@motsepearchitects.co.za Laura Kurgan Director, Spatial Information Design Lab Columbia University, New York, USA ljk33@columbia.edu Elena Pascolo Architectural Association, London pascolo@aaschool.ac.uk Rodrigo Tapia Chile, Universidad Católica de Chile rtapiav@uc.cl
Project Associate Tiina Merikoski, Finland Helsinki University of Technology tiinamerikoski@gmail.com
241
Global Studio Johannesburg 2007
Executive Summary On our first visit to the site, standing atop the Carlton Center peering down into the area, revealed a seemingly desolate landscape of abandoned buildings, vacant lots, and streets largely devoid of people. In contrast, exploring the neighborhood by foot revealed layers that did not appear on city maps or the architects initial plans for redevelopment. We began to understand the role that this ‘dead’ zone of the CBD plays in the wider Johannesburg area: as car repair district, transitional space for recent migrants and immigrants, home to longterm residents, and a labor force for the greater CBD.
in the inner city region. Such development strategies are underscored in the Jozi city map.
Our initial investigations on the ground revealed that far from being an abandoned warehouse district, the area was in fact home to a bustling auto repair industry with a state of the art training facility, and thousands of mostly hidden residents who had transformed warehouse and open space alike into high density housing of various levels of formality. Often the only indication of tenancy is a surreptitiously hung line of washing peaking over a parapet or through a window.
One of the primary elements that needs re-examination are notions of the formal and informal, in both residential and economic conditions. While the city attaches mostly negative interpretations to the category of ‘informal’ our concept allows for celebrating the informal as a responsive, flexible, accommodating, productive, and high-density urban response.
Motsepe Architect’s plan is a response to the Johannesburg City’s intentions of development 242
We re-wrote the Jozi - Jo’burg city map, which currently highlights the ‘5 pillar inner city regeneration strategy,’ and generated our own ‘5 ‘building blocks for inner city transformation.’ While the city plan aimed to redevelop the inner city through investment in increasing real-estate values and its accompanying ripple effects, our approach aims to enhance the existing strengths of the area by revealing its rich social and spatial conditions, and by connecting the area’s hidden populations to the larger city.
The mandate of Global Studio compelled us to question the notion of the urban slum as a seed of, and not detriment to, positive urban transformation.
JoVi
The Site JoVi is bounded by Commissioner Street to its north, Joe Slovo Boulevard to the east, the M2 highway to the south, and Eloff Street at the eastern boundary. It is an area that falls within the southern shadow of the landmark Carlton Center, and one that stands in stark contrast with the more energized activity nodes of the Carlton, Park Station, and Smal Street. While these areas are bustling centers of commercial and pedestrian activity, JoVi was more-or-less perceived as devoid of activity, and comprised of a majority (80%) of vacant buildings, most of which were former warehouses. Has JoVi become a forgotten component to Johannesburg’s CBD? Many argue that JoVi, just east of the city center in Marshalltown, is the future site for re-development. They site the Carlton Center, Jewel City, and ABSA’s headquarters as important commercial landmarks to the area. Despite such claims, the present conditions in Marshalltown prove to be an intriguing place of inquiry. Located adjacent to the M2 highway, much of the informal economy in Marshalltown hinges upon the auto repair industry. Also, the taxi rank adjacent to Faraday Market serves hundreds, if not thousands, of passengers a day. 243
244
JoVi
Other developers have speculated upon the prospects for the conversion of industrial warehouses into residential flats. Yet, the question of housing in Marshalltown is complex and often contentious. A large number of south Africans and immigrants have settled into the area – many of them live within formal housing structures, such as apartments, whereas others occupy industrial buildings illegally. Motsepe Architects coined the name “JoVi” to describe this region of the Johannesburg CBD for a presentation to the Rotterdam Biennale. The presentation was not so much an urban design proposal as the re-branding of a neglected light industrial zone, a seemingly abandoned warehouse district adjacent to the busy Carlton Center and the ABSA District, both of which are undergoing extensive redevelopment. The guiding vision of the proposal was to create a catalyst for the generation of a neighborhood similar to Greenwich Village in New York.
245
Global Studio Johannesburg 2007
Background Written by Percival Greaves. What is JoVi? What are the historical forces that conspired to create the idea of JoVi? How is this area viewed within the context of development? And, what are the prospects for the future of JoVi? These are just a few of the questions that have guided the investigation and the production of this report, and on which this report aims to shed some light. On the final day of the People Building Better Cities (PBBC) conference a presentation was made by Motsepe Architects about their aspirations to create a village in the Marshalltown section of downtown Johannesburg. This village was envisioned as a community built to reflect the diverse realities of the target area, somewhat akin to that found in New York’s Greenwich Village and Chelsea neighborhoods. Thus, the name JoVi – Johannesburg Village. Mr. Fanuel Motsepe, articulated that his company intended to propose a redevelopment strategy for the area that questioned conventional planning and design methods, which in his estimation neglected to consider the characteristics of neighborhoods slated for development. His idea for JoVi was that it would transfer the energy that abounded on the outskirts of the area into the target area. 246
Motsepe Architects’ vision for JoVi is built on the premise that the energy that now exists to the area north of JoVi, specifically, the Smal Street area and its pedestrian mall, could somehow be transferred into this proposed village. Motsepe’s proposal would extend the pedestrian activity of Smal Street Mall from its terminus in Carlton Center, by breaking through an existing Parkade (parking lot) and connecting it to the Smal Street extension, and establishing nodes of activity within JoVi that would help to redirect activity – primarily in the form of pedestrian flows – through the proposed village. Motsepe also expressed interest in developing entertainment, green space, and various attractions in the area. The JoVi group was formed to explore the area and suggest possible approaches for informing the proposed development of the area. The group set out to explore JoVi by first going on a walking tour of the busy areas around Main Street, Park Station, and Carlton Center, during which we learned about some of the city’s history and the events that shaped the downtown Central Business District (CBD). We were shown some of the prime real estate that currently stood abandoned in the heart of the city.
Why had such a once vibrant city been reduced to mostly empty buildings, marginalized communities, crime, and social and spatial decay? Johannesburg was established following the discovery of what Motsepe called a “river of gold� running under the high plains, and grew to become the major center of economic activity in South Africa. But, as the city grew, the quest for riches helped to plant the seeds of apartheid. The mostly Black African population, and Indians living in the areas were relegated to living in townships and other housing schemes on the outskirts of the city, to be seen only in the CBD during working hours. Apartheid formalized this arrangement by enacting pass laws, but also brought to light the severity of the social contradictions that existed in the city and South Africa as a whole. The JoVi area became a manufacturing and warehousing annex to the bustling mining industry that characterized the city. As the end of apartheid loomed and blacks began to disregard the country’s unjust laws, the economic elite who lived and worked in the CBD fled to the safer suburban areas of Sandton and Midrand, abandoning the housing and commercial infrastructure in their wake. This prompted massive invasion of the city by blacks hoping to eke out an existence by grab-
bing hold of the dregs of economic activity they hoped to finds there. JoVi proved attractive because it provided easy access to the city center, and the possibility of low-cost or free housing in the abandoned buildings. But the unavailability of services meant that the new residents were to be without essential services, and that they could become prey to unscrupulous slumlords and building hijackers. As our walking tour of the CBD drew to a close, we rode to the top of Carlton Center and looked out at the area slated for redesign by Motsepe Architects. This view corroborated the common perception of the area as a sea of vacant buildings, some accidentally burned out by fires in squatter encampments, most seemingly void of any semblance of human life. The following day the group set out to uncover what exactly existed in the area, a day filled with surprise, shock, and disbelief at the many unknown realities that abounded in JoVi. Our entry into the neighborhood began with a walk along the other side of Smal Street, what we initially saw and referred to as the extension, and we were immediately made aware of the large number of vacant buildings. However, as we proceeded through the neighborhood we began to realize that what seemed 247
Global Studio Johannesburg 2007
as vacant buildings, indeed were containers of hidden communities and the complex reality of housing in various degrees formalization, legal and illegal landlordship, formal and informal economic activity, and varying degrees of organization in housing, commerce, and social service, mostly as survival mechanisms against the harshness of the city. The JoVi group made several more visits to the area, and at each stage the realities of the target area became more apparent, prompting the group to first entertain a series of acupuncturist interventions aimed at relieving the poverty, lack of services, and economic and political marginalization in the area. The group also engaged government officials including the Ward Councilor, talked to landlords and residents in innovative forums, and conducted hours of research to add to their understanding of JoVi, and to inform our and Motsepe’s proposals for the village. As time progressed, the group develop a deeper understanding of JoVi, and came together to embark on a project that questions common perceptions of the area, identify the hidden realities of the neighborhood and its population, and establish a new framework for development in JoVi. In effect, the JoVi group has developed a view that critiques the birds-eye view 248
afforded from the top of Carlton Center and other distant locales, one that begs the examination of people and their realities alongside that of spaces and buildings as a framework for development.
249
Global Studio Johannesburg 2007
250
JoVi
Process This is a process of a work that progressed throughout our investigations. We took a conventional architectural plan and kept annotating it as our understanding of the site and it’s inhabitants grew. Our question became how to account for these unprecedented contrasts and the transformation of a part of a modern city into a slum.
An interview with both the caretaker and owner of a semi-formalised building gave an insight into the difficulties faced by private investors in re-zoning land as residential, in meeting building codes, in access to financial assistance, and above all, the lack of coherent and consistent advice from various housing an development agencies.
Information was gathered primarily through site visits and extensive mapping; along with interviews with various stakeholders: council officials, a local preacher, various building managers/owners, community representatives and community members. Official statistics of the area were largely unavailable.
With guidance of Fanuel Motsepe and Eric Lindenberg of Motsepe Architects, we were introduced to the greater Johannesburg CBD, then the area of study in the following days. As we walked around the area and spoke with the inhabitants, we began to understand the role that this zone of the CBD plays in the wider Johannesburg area: car repair district, transitional space for recent migrants and immigrants, home to longterm residents, cheap labor pool for the greater CBD.
The interview with Ward Councilor Pahad provided information regarding services available to both the informal and formal housing sector, and led us to believe that the neighbor is not as hidden, at least from the consciousness of developers, as we might have thought. An interview with Pastor Mafika of the Central AME Church revealed that private service providers have an active and rather robust presence in the neighborhood.
We collated our work and proposals into a redrawing of an existing map to include the invisible populations we had interacted with and also the cacophony of informal and formal spaces that built this area.
251
Global Studio Johannesburg 2007
250
Redrawing ‘Jovi’ Structuring a response to innercity redevelopment
253
254
Objective: To engage multiple communities and populations, visualise the invisible, and move from mapping conditions to designing stragegies
Introduction Nearly no information had been compiled about the area at the outset of our project. Our first visit to the site standing atop the Carlton Center peering down into the area, revealed streets largely devoid of people, and a seemingly desolate landscape of abandoned buildings and vacant lots. Our initial investigations on the ground revealed that far from being an abandonded warehouse district, the area was in fact home to a bustling auto repair industry with a state of the art training facility, and thousands of mostly hidden residents who had transformed warehouses and open spaces alike into high density housing of various levels of formality. Often the only indication of tenancy was a seripitiously hung line of washing peaking over a parapet or through a window. This (background) is a process of a work that progressed throughout our investigations. We took a conventional architectural plan and kept annotating it as our understanding of the site and it’s inhabitants grew. our question became how to account for these unprecedented contrasts and the transformation of a part of a modern city into a slum. 255
image courtesy City of Johannesburg 256
How do we ensure the area’s current populations are included in future regeneration? Motsepe Architects coined the name “JoVi” to describe this region of the Johannesburg CBD for a presentaion to the Rotterdam Bienale. The presentation (excerpt above) was not so much an urban design proposal as the rebranding of a neglected light industrial zone, a seemingly abandonded warehouse district adjacent to the busy Carlton Center and the ABSA District, both of which are undergoing extensive redevelopment. The guiding vision of the proposal was to create a catalyst for the generation of a neighborhood similar to Greenwich Village. Motsepe Architects plan was in turn a response to the Johannesburg City’s intentions of development in the inner city region. Such development strategies are underscored in the Jozi city map. Our group realised after the first visit to the site that we saw many layers that did not appear on city maps or the architects inital plans. We began to understand the role that this zone of the CBD plays in the wider Johannesburg area: car repair district, transitional space for recent migrants and immigrants, home to long-term residents, and a labor force for the greater CBD.
image courtesy Motsepe Architects
The mandate of Global Studio compelled us to acknowledge that one of the most modern city centres in Africa was able to hide and camoflague a slum within it’s CBD. 257
258
How do you meet the basic needs of the population and encourage investment and development, while building on existing social and physical infrastructure? What design tools can we use to reveal and reimagine this extreme environment in a more inclusive manner?
259
talk to me 260
261
TALK TO ME
COMMUNITY LIVING ROOM
262
Talk to me Initally, we were unable to locate strong community groups to connect with, to further understand the nature of Marshaltown. This meant that we created these links by simply approaching people on the streets or in the buildings. in these exchanges, local people were often uneasy and uncomfortable in being approached. This encouraged us to experiment with more sensitive ways in connecting with the various communities in the area. We were inspired by ‘Talk To Me’, a dialogue between strangers that was initiated in New York by Bill Wetzel and Liz Barry in 2002. The concept of placing a sign that says “talk to me” in a public space appealed to us because we felt it may invert the relationship between us and Marshaltown locals, and could circumvent the confrontational nature of previous interactions. On the afternoon of Sunday 15th July, we set up a board proclaiming “talk to me” in several languages (english, zulu, xhosa, sotho, tswana, afrikaans, portuguese) on a vacant lot on the corners of Delvers, Frederick and Anderson st. The immediate area is characterised by an informal taxi rank, a social housing development, informal and squatter buildings, a large construction site, a restaurant/bottle shop and some informal hot food stalls. We had previously noticed that this area is quite lively on Sunday afternoons. Our arrival generated alot of interest (albeit at a distance) from onlookers. We asked some people already using the lot if we could set up next to them - after some hesitancy and stifled giggles, they approved. We layed a straw floor mat on the group, set up 5 chairs and tea and biscuits. We aimed to restrict the group size to a maximum of six people at most times. Initally many people approached us, enquiring what we wanted to talk about. The people who approached us often seemed more comfortable speaking languages other than english. We put ourselves on a stage that exposed ourselves, not them. After offering tea/biscuits and chatting initally, people often addressed the more serious themes about their living environments and their ideas about their city. For the majority of interactions, we didn’t take notes/photos or collect personal information (unless people expressed an interested in the project, wishing to be contacted at a later stage). Many people said that they felt that small events such as this are needed in the area. There is a distinct sense of distrust in the neighborhood, so this non-threatening event was seem as a first step of communication (some people introduced themselves to each other for the first time and began conversation). In this context, we felt that the event was successful. Through casual discussion we were able to enhance our understanding of the area and its inhabitants - an area for which there are no reliable statistics. 263
264
“Imnyama Indawo” (Zulu)
The Dark Place
Case study 1 A three story building, roughly 750 sq ft per floor, a block and a half from Gandhi square. A chief occupies the first room on the ground floor at the entrance who controls the building. “You can come in and look around, but no pictures”. The building has no eletricity or water, no washing facility or toilets. While 20-30 people live on each floor, the top floor alone has light from skylights. The floors are partitioned into units with scavenged sheet material, an immense amount of trash has piled up both within and spilling outside over the sidewalk. Waste was formerly removed through a side exit which is now blocked by a pile of refuse from next door. there is only one way in and out up a perilous metal strair with missing steps.
265
266
Hijacked.
Case study 2 The last legitimate owner, Sipho Zulu, died in 2004, his identity was stolen by a hijacker... The building was over R10 000 in arrears and went into liquidation when an izinkaba (henchmen in Zulu ) made a partial payment to forestall the auction. The new “Mr. Zulu� extorted R350-400 rent per resident plus R2 000 for a ground floor workshop. Without the residents knowledge in the year 2006, Mac Steel bought the building for R 260 000 in an auction. The residents fear that Mac Steel will use their security company, The Bad Boys, to evict the reidents in style similar to that employed by the Red Ants. The tenants, organized into an association, are working with the city council in an effort to regularize their residency, and raising money in an effort to purchase the building. Many residents work as security officers, laborers, and company workers in the nearby CBD. The conditions in the building are dire; there is no water or sewage, fires provide heat and light, because the windows are all sealed, carbon monoxide fills the three floors... The 50 or so units are partitioned of cardboard and other scavenged material, and house families and single males from around South Africa.
267
268
Toward Formalization.
Case study 3 This Building was set up as communal housing jointly by the building caretaker and a private investor. The building was purchased from a private owner in 2000 at the price of R 11,000. They have approached various development agencies to seek financial assistance and design advice, however they have little success. inconsistances between the various municipal agencies involved has, compounded difficulties in the process of re-zoning the building as residential. The building has no showers or communal cooking facilities (residents currently cook on electric stoves in their rooms, however there is a plan to set up a communal kitchen) and electricity is intermittent, and there is very little natural light. this means that the residents are very dependant on electricity. There are approximatley 60 rooms, which are rented from R 380 to 1100 per month (depending on size of the room and number of inhabitants.) The building houses a tuck shop on the street level which remains open till late in the night, and a basket workshop employing several Zimbabwean men. The majority of tenants are migrants, either from regional South Africa (Natal and the Eastern Cape) and other African nations. There is a large population of children in the building.
269
270
Formal by default.
Case study 4 The owner of this former retail clothing import warehouse lives in Hong Kong, bought the building in 1996 for R 1.2 million, attempted to sell it in 2003, subsequently converted it into a residential building to recoup some of the purchase price. The building is a ground +2 storeys structure with 98 rooms to rent, housing approximately 180 tenants, has in room bathing and cooking facilities and electricity supply which is in limited supply. There are separate toilets for male and females. The rent varies from R 439-630 per month. The ground floor houses a tuck shop. Most of the tenants are South African, while some are recent immigrants from Mozambique and Zimbabwe. Visiting hours to the building end at 10pm, an attempt to prevent in–room sublet. A landlord/tenant association meeting is held at least once a month to discuss housing issues.
271
272
Peri-Urban Shack Settlement
Case study 5 The settlement occupies an 11 100 sq m former gold mining site along the southern end of Von Wielligh Street before its junction with Wermer Jubilee. A highly organized settlement of 40 shacks, fenced off communal areas, and several underdeveloped, single-season agricultural plots, completely closed off from the surrounding neighborhood. The plot sustains a community of 200-250 residents who share a single pit toilet, have no access to electricity, no refuse pick-up, and communinally gather water from a tap 1/4 mile away. The community has acheived a high level of security though a ridgid hierarchy and control of all access to the site through two gates, one at each end of the 300 meter long site. They maintain the site as a “crime free zone� which they feel contributes to their tenure security... The residents pay R300 per month for their well constructed shacks, although unemployment and alcoholism are cronic problems. In addition to the small scale agriculture which is limited to the summer months by the lack of water on the site, some chickens are raised. The community owns several vehicles and two small solar panels which they use to charge batteries primarily for radios, they use parafin for cooking and candles for light. The residents professed interest in developing the agricultural potential of their site and specifically asked for assistence in building a larger chicken coop. They tried to build a second pit toilet but had trouble digging the pit. They hoped to work with the landlord to establish water service and waste pick-up, but simutaneously stated they would agree to a move if a viable housing alternative were found nearby. Images courtesy Motsepe Architects
273
274
We have reformatted the existing map of JoziJo’burg centre city to illustrate alternative possibilities for transforming the area into more equitable place
275
How do we incorporate what we have seen into a transformation of the city? 276
? HOMELESS
BOTH? U AS RESO NOT REC
PROMOTE SECURITY OF TENURE FOR RESIDENTS--> WHY? [economic and social] 2 - investing in PEOPLE as INFRASTRUCTURE what are their needs? - education / training - clinics
1) STABILITY in POPULATION (?) - area becomes attractive for investors - tenure --> offical status (?) --> formal employment (?) - IMCOME GENERATION = TAX GENERATION
--> creates a flow on effect
2) speaks to HOUSING problem in SA / Jo’burg - gov’t are unable to give everyone a house - high density - close to employment opportunities
FACILITA instigated money to
3) incorporate ability to sub-let / rent one room, as an income generator to assist re-pay loan - (e.g. ARP proposal)
--> breaks cycle of poverty by increasing opportunities
SECURITY OPTIONS:
cost to go house? [
MONEY into source / prevention (education/training) or
MONEY into dealing with the consequences
CIVIC SPACES
ADAPTABILITY
social and physical infrastructure.
ground floor commercial / office use activation of corner of ground floor (high visibility commercial potential)
commercial activity connection to street
TRANSP
FACILITATE FLEXIBILITY
ADAPTABILITY internal communal space in residental area
1st floor - office use
FACIL
EXISTING
potential of many existing buildings (industrial typologies) for adaptive re-use
top floor residential
CO-OP INVESTMENTS
Meet the basic needs of the population, encourage investment & development, while building on
5 BUILDING BLOCKS FOR INNER CITY TRANSFORMATION ENHANCE COMMUNICATE CONNECT
it will be
g
happenin
* take lab force to/fr
* it is the AFFORD public tra
INFOR
IN THE INNER CITY
YOUR OPINIONS?
(INFOR
WHY ADAPTIVE RE-USE? * Industrial typology - able to respond to HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
have ‘forma
* REDUCED COSTS of adaptive re-use (compared to demolition and rebuilding) * FLEXIBILITY of industrial typology * Already adapting to the reality of the area (informally)
how PRODUCED BY GLOBAL STUDIO JOHANNESBURG 2007 Archie Coral Elina Jessica Charles Eliana Erick Kasim
Kevin Ndoli
Percival Rodrigo
Sarah Sole
Yuki Zee
From urban regeneration to urban transformation We collated our work and proposals into a redrawing of an existing map to include the invisible populations we had interacted with and also the cocophany of informal and formal spaces that built this area. We re-wrote the Jozi - Jo’burg city map called ‘the 5 pillar inner city regeneration stategy’ into 5 ‘building blocks’ for inner city ‘transformation’. While the city plan aimed to regenerate, invest in and re-develop the area, ours aimed to enhance the area, communicate what is going on there, and connect hidden populations to the larger city. This concept of urban transformation informs decisions at the spatial, economic and institutional level.a It turns out that what we were questioning is now felt separate by the familiar categories of formal and informal building strategies. While the city attaches mostly negative interpretations to the category of ‘informal’ our project allows for the interpretation of informal as a responsive, flexible, accomodating, productive urban infrastructure. How can we learn from current structures of informality to harness what already exists in the city and its potential as a productive force to reshape how cities are made?
277
“ SAFETY & SECURITY ” = isolation? = “Improvement”?
MAPPING = MEANING MAKING THE POWER OF REPRESENTATION
(for whom?)
unfold..
reveal...
Jo’burg’s major park rendered as a non-resource
SELECTIVE
Jo’burg’s most dense area rendered an unnavigable ‘no-go’ zone
athletic facilities rendered down to building plans
WHOSE VIEW? THE OUTSIDER LOOKING IN ...
SEGREGATION
.. a one-dimensional representation & recipe for a fractured city
continuing
PROPERTY-VALUES OVER PEOPLE: WHERE TO INVEST, WHOM TO IGNORE?
(i.e. READ WITH CAUTION) STREETLESS?
WORLD CLASS? a city divided by disconnected public infrastructures & selective investment -- how does this configure the socio-spatial fragmentation of the city?
GREENLESS?
public rail system rendered as unarticulated river of grey HUBLESS?
??
a city divided by districts and precints -how and by whom are they defined and what happens in between?
PUZZLE-PIECE CITY
?? detailed articulation of highway infrastructure: a MAP for CAR OWNERS
a city of discrete buildings -- who inhabits them and what happens in between?
HOW MIGHT A PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATE THIS CITY?
Gandhi Square, Jo’burg’s official bus station: de-emphasized, and only one player within a vast network of informal taxi routes
insert investment in public space here
COMMUNITY south africa
gauteng province
greater jo’burg
the CBD
FLOWS OF RESIDENTS INTO JO’BURG: INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL, PROVINCIAL, METROPOLITAN
source: South Africa Mapping Co., 2004.
Critique of Jozi map 278
HOW CAN THE CITY’S CURRENT INHABITANTS/CITIZENS BECOME RESOURCES IN THE IMPROVMENT OF THE CITY? SO ONE DAY THEY MAY BENEFIT FROM ITS DEVELOPMENT? VEHICLE FOR GENTRIFICATION ...PROPERTY VALUES... DISPLACEMENT ...AND WHAT ABOUT SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE???
...WHAT ABOUT: SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, CLINICS, NEIGHBOURHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, RECREATION FACILITIES... ....WHAT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY/ PEOPLE??? DOES THIS INCLUDE THE INFORMAL SECTOR?
AND THE PEOPLE? OWNERSHIP? PRIDE IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD? SOCIAL?
?
INFOLINE PUBLIC TRANSPORT/ TAXIS?
ARE THERE ANY POSSIBLE LESSONS WHICH WE COULD LEARN FROM THESE SINKHOLES? RESOURCEFULNESS OF PEOPLE? COMMUNITY BUILDING?
SPACE + PEOPLE = PLACE
Analysis of Jozi map 279
280
What are the key spatial moves, investment priorities and sequences needed to release the economic and social development in the area?
Re-drawing Jovi 281
2) speaks to HOUSING problem in SA / Jo’burg - gov’t are unable to give everyone a house - high density - close to employment opportunities
FACILITAT instigated money to b
3) incorporate ability to sub-let / rent one room, as an income generator to assist re-pay loan - (e.g. ARP proposal)
SECURITY
cost to gov house? [A
CIVIC SPACES
Meet the basic needs of the population, encourage investment & development, while building on
CO-OP INVESTMENTS
FACIL
EXISTING
social and physical infrastructure.
ADAPTABILITY
TRANSPO
FACILITATE FLEXIBILITY
ea
5 BUILDING BLOCKS FOR INNER CITY TRANSFORMATION
e
y et
ENHANCE COMMUNICATE CONNECT YOUR OPINIONS?
ng i n e p p a h it will be
* take labo force to/fro
* it is the o AFFORDA public tran
INFOR
IN THE INNER CITY
(INFOR
AL
have s ‘formal 282
SECURITY
[ SECURITY OF BASIC RIGHTS ] [ SECURITY OF TENURE ] [ SECURITY OF CITIZENSHIP ] Fear of eviction (not conducive to community interaction)
? MIGRANTS (from sa, from africa, illegal immigrants? increasing population in jo’burg) ? SQUATTERS ? HOMELESS PROMOTE SECURITY OF TENURE FOR RESIDENTS--> WHY? [economic and social] 1) STABILITY in POPULATION (?) - area becomes attractive for investors - tenure --> offical status (?) --> formal employment (?) - IMCOME GENERATION = TAX GENERATION 2) speaks to HOUSING problem in SA / Jo’burg - gov’t are unable to give everyone a house - high density - close to employment opportunities 3) incorporate ability to sub-let / rent one room, as an income generator to assist re-pay loan - (e.g. ARP proposal)
SECURITY
ing)
CIVIC SPACES
Meet the basic needs of the population, encourage investment & development, while building on
CO-OP INVESTMENTS
Strategies for transformation EXISTING
social and physical infrastructure.
283
CIVIC SPACES 1 - PUBLIC/OPEN/GREEN SPACES SPACES TO GATHER - facilitate interations between community members (links to tenure & fear of eviction) - ‘eyes on the street’
Fear of eviction (not
? MIGRANTS (from ? SQUATTERS ? HOMELESS
PROMOTE SECURI 2 - investing in PEOPLE as INFRASTRUCTURE what are their needs? - education / training - clinics --> creates a flow on effect
1) STABILITY in PO - area becomes a - tenure --> offica - IMCOME GENE
2) speaks to HOUSI - high density - close to employ --> breaks cycle of poverty by increasing opportunities
3) incorporate ability - (e.g. ARP propo
OPTIONS: MONEY into source / prevention (education/training) or
284
MONEY into dealing with the consequences
CIVIC SPACES
CO-OP INVESTMENTS OPTIONS: invest in ‘infrastructure’
lation in jo’burg)
OR invest in people
nomic and social]
e everyone a house
BOTH? USING PEOPLE AS RESOURCES, NOT RECIPIENTS.
$
FACILITATE BOTTOM-UP INVESTMENTS (i.e. investments instigated by communities - e.g. group of infomal residents collecting money to buy their own building, by-passing landlords/slum lords)
to assist re-pay loan
cost to gov’t of this, compared to building each resident an RDP house? [ANC “everyone will have a house”]
CO-OP INVESTMENTS 285
MONEY into source / prevention (education/training) or
MONEY into dealing with the consequences
CIVIC SPACES
ADAPTABILITY potential of many existing buildings (industrial typologies) for adaptive re-use
ADAPTABI top floor residential
internal communal space in residental area
1st floor - office use
ground floor commercial / office use activation of corner of ground floor (high visibility commercial potential)
commercial activity connection to street
5 BUI INNER C
ENHANCE COMMUNIC CONNECT YOUR OPINIONS?
WHY ADAPTIVE RE-USE? * Industrial typology - able to respond to HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL * REDUCED COSTS of adaptive re-use (compared to demolition and rebuilding) * FLEXIBILITY of industrial typology * Already adapting to the reality of the area (informally)
PRODUCED BY GLOBAL STUDIO Archie Coral El Charles Eliana Er
286
house? [ANC “everyone will have a house”]
CO-OP INVESTMENTS
FACILITATE FLEXIBILITY [INFORMAL] TRANSPORT
HOUSING
COMMERCE
* take labour force to/from city
* fulfilling housing need (in an area that was empty)
* GENERATOR - of income - of energy
vacant building = ‘home sweet home’
* affordable - food - basic necessities
CILITATE XIBILITY
FOR MATION
pening
NER CITY
Sarah Sole
* it is the only AFFORDABLE public transport
INFORMAL = RESPONSIVE, FLEXIBLE, ACCOMMODATING, PRODUCTIVE, URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE (HOW DO WE LEARN FROM THIS?) (INFORMAL CURRENTLY HAS BOTH NEGATIVE & POSITIVE IMPLICATIONS)
... REGULATE? have seen numerous unsuccessful examples of ‘formalising’ the ‘informal’ - how do we learn from these mistakes?
Yuki Zee
how do gov‘t step in to minimise (?) negative aspects
287
Studio Timeline July 5 Introduction to site, lead by Fanuel Motsepe July 6 - 8 First contact with communities in study area, interviews with residents and landlords, inital mapping of site, generation of ideas for intervention possibilities. July 9 Presentation and critique of inital ideas on potential projects. July 10 Refining of material presented, new directions considered. July 11 Meeting with Ward Councillor and local AME pastor, further comprehensive mapping of area. July 12-14 Presentation and in-depth critique, definition of future directions of project, further analysis of mapping process. July 15 “Talk to Me� event in community. July 16-17 Production of final reports and maps July 18 Final presentation of report and maps to peers, mentors, community menbers and other stakeholders.
288
289
future directions Our version of a better city based on transformative regeneration strategies which should include all relevant parties, government, private entities, and marginalised populations. Our work thus far has been process oriented. In such a fast transforming city, this type of documentation incorporating invisible spaces allows an active vision for a new city and it’s by-product is also the memory of a city in transition, building on existing social and physical infrastructure.
290
291
participants Students Elina Alatalo Finland, Tampere University of Technology Architecture and Planning elina.alatalo@tut.fi Charles Anderson California, USA, California College of the Arts Architecture, Landscaping chuckand_ucsc@yahoo.com Maria Sole Benigni Rome, Italy, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ Town and Landscape Planning mariasolebenigni@yahoo.it Yukiko Bowman California, USA, University of California, Berkeley Architecture yukibowman@berkeley.edu Sarah Brennan Melbourne, Australia, Monash University Arts/Science sebre1@student.monash.edu
Zenzile Mbinza Johannesburg, South Africa, University of Johannesburg Town and Regional Planning zmbinza@gmail.com Ndoli Okonda Nairobi, Kenya, University of Nairobi Architecture joearts20@yahoo.com Percival Greaves New York, USA, New School for Social Research International Affairs greap489@newschool.edu Jessica Faith New York, USA, New School for Social Research International Affairs jessicafaith36@hotmail.com
Mentors Fanuel Motsepe & Eric Lindenberg Motsepe Architects reception@motsepearchitects.co.za
Eliana Capiato Rome, Italy, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ Architecture eliana.capiato@hotmail.com
Rodrigo Tapia Chile, Professor School of Architecture, Universidad Católica de Chile rtapiav@uc.cl
Archie Dave India, Center for Environmental Planning and Technology Architecture tabbydockarchie@yahoo.co.uk / archi.e.rag@gmail.com
Laura Kurgan Director, Spatial Information Design Lab Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia University, New York, USA ljk33@columbia.edu
Kasim Faith Fatai Ibadan, Nigeria, University of Ibadan Urban and Regional Planning kasimfaithy@yahoo.com Kevin Goncalves Johannesburg, South Africa, University of Witwatersrand Architecture kevingnclvs@yahoo.com Coral Gillett Brisbane, Australia Interior Design, Project Management coral.gillett@gmail.com Erick Gregory New York, USA, Columbia University Architecture,Urban Design etg2117@columbia.edu
292
Elena Pascolo Architectural Association, London pascolo@aaschool.ac.uk
Project Associates Tiina Merikoski, Finland, Helsinki University of Technology Architecture tiinamerikoski@gmail.com
Acknowledgements Our first acknowledgment goes to Motsepe
We would like to thank:
Architects for their assistance in introducing
Ward Councilor Pahad, who provided
our group to the study area, providing maps
information regarding services available to
& contextual information, and giving us the
both the informal and formal housing sector,
use of their facilities, this was invaluable.
and led us to believe that the neighborhood
We hope that our research furthers their
is not as hidden as we might have thought,
interpretation of and vision for the site.
at least from the consciousness of the municipality and developers.
We wouldn’t have been able to begin this work without the guidence of Fanuel
Pastor Mafika of the Central AME Church, who
Motsepe and Eric Lindenberg, who
revealed that some private service providers
introduced us to the greater Johannesburg
have an active and rather robust presence in
CBD, then the area of study in the following
the neighborhood.
days. As we walked around the area and spoke with the inhabitants, we began to
We would also like to thank both the caretaker
understand the role that this zone of the
and owner of a semi-formalised building for
CBD plays in the wider Johannesburg area.
their insight into the difficulties faced by private investors in re-zoning land as residential, in meeting building codes, in access to financial assistance, and above all, the lack of coherent and consistant advice from various housing an development agencies. We would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the following community members: Mr. Alfred Mulaudzino & Mr. Jacobas Bale, Evelyn, Mafika, Ethel & Kenneth, Jackie.
293
294