CSEssaynewurbanism
-
Upload
annie-swanepoel -
Category
Documents
-
view
104 -
download
0
Transcript of CSEssaynewurbanism
Critical Studies: Interior Design
Module Title: New Urbanism
A discussion on New Urbanism in South Africa with reference to Melrose Arch in Johannesburg
Due date: 14 April 2011
Anmari Swanepoel
New Urbanism in America was first introduced by Miami-based architects Andres
Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, who won recognition in the early '80s for their
Florida coastal development called Seaside (Leon, 2011). These two architects and
many of their peers felt discontent with the emergence of suburban sprawl and the
problems it created. Problems such as insecurity, alienation, urban decay and
inadequate transport infrastructure (Dirsuweit, 2007:1) caused communities to be cut
off from each other and created an over-dependence on motorcars, which in-turn
has led to many knock on effects if one considers air pollution and global warming.
Research indicates that for every liter of petrol consumed by your car, your car emits
2.4kg of CO2 (Mannion, 2007). The average motorist drives about 20 000km a year
and will therefore emit anything between 2000kg and 7000kg of CO2 a year, and this
does not even take into account other pollution from gases like nitrogen oxides and
carbon monoxide (Mannion, 2007).
In 1993, a formal organisation called the Congress for New Urbanism was formed in
America to try and resolve and focus attention on some of the above issues by
proposing a charter for New Urbanism (Congress of New…, [Sa]). The Congress for
the New Urbanism states ([Sa]):
We view disinvestment in central cities, the spread of placeless sprawl,
increasing separation by race and income, environmental deterioration, loss
of agricultural lands and wilderness, and the erosion of society’s built heritage
as one interrelated community-building challenge. We stand for the
restoration of existing urban centres and towns within coherent metropolitan
regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real
neighbourhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural
environments, and the preservation of our built legacy.
From the above it is clear that New Urbanism refers to a move back to the old ways
of living or so-called traditional neighbourhood development. New Urbanism
proposes that new developments should be created to include various mixed zoning
2
regulations, ample public spaces, and pedestrian friendly spaces all linked to a
central and solid transportation infrastructure. New Urbanism tries to improve on the
modernist dismal utopian failure. This has worked for many areas in America but
could this create the same benefits for developments in our country? According to
Dirsuweit (2007) New Urbanism has been applied in various interesting ways within
Johannesburg, one such an example is the development of Melrose Arch.
Melrose Arch is one of the more well-known so-called ‘new urbanism’ developments
in Johannesburg. This mixed-use development has been in various stages of
development for more than 10 years now and more than a billion rand has already
been spent on developing an open precinct of offices, hotels, restaurants and
residential spaces (Dirsuweit, 2007). But could Melrose Arch truly be regarded as
New Urbanism? When analysing Melrose Arch with regards to the various principles
of New Urbanism, as identified by Nozzi ([Sa]), the following can be identified:
Mixed use is one of the most important principles of New Urbanism. Melrose Arch
fully embraces this principle as the development houses almost everything you need
under ‘one’ roof. There are over 120 retailers (Mall Listings) situated in Melrose Arch.
These include banking facilities, fashion outlets, pharmacies, mobile phone outlets,
hairstylists and even a Virgin Active (figure 1). This retail space is complimented with
a mix of office spaces, hotels and a residential area (figure 2). All the buildings at
Melrose Arch is also at least two storey’s high which creates the opportunity for
mixed use as restaurants and other shops are housed on the ground floor with
offices or residential suites on the second and third floors. This in-turn also allows for
another principle of New Urbanism called walkability (New Urbanism…, [Sa]). The
walkability principle proposes that all things (activities and necessities) should be
within a 10 minute walking distance from work and home (New Urbanism…, [Sa]).
By creating multiple storey buildings that house people, business and leisure,
walkability within Melrose Arch is greatly improved.
3
The New Urbanism principle of Build-to Line is also quite evident at Melrose Arch.
Most of the buildings are basically ‘pulled’ up to the sidewalk (figure 3), which allows
pedestrians to ‘interact’ with their surroundings to a greater extent – allowing them to
appreciate the marvellous and interesting architecture (figure 4) of some of the
buildings up close. This also relates to another principle of New Urbanism which
refers to the notion that all buildings should be designed to provide interesting
facades for pedestrians which is in strong contrast to the typical bland and boring
grey ‘monsters’ found in for example the Johannesburg CBD. Melrose Arch’s
sidewalks are also very spacious (figure 3) which provides a safe and convenient
area for pedestrians to walk on. Some of the buildings also incorporate sidewalk
seating as part of the building’s façade as can be seen in figure 5, which contributes
to the notion of interesting architecture as well as creating a context of a more ‘user-
friendly’ sidewalk.
Formal landscaping is also used throughout Melrose Arch as evident in figure 1-7.
The rows of trees aligned with the building’s facades frames the streets and provide
shade and safety to pedestrians. It also contributes to the forming of public space
and softens the hardness of the paved streets (Nozzi, [Sa]). The use of formal
landscaping in this instance also installs a feeling of community and unity with
nature, something that traditional urbanism fails miserably at.
Connectivity is another principle that is strongly exhibited in Melrose Arches’ design.
All the main streets within the development are connected with one another (figure 8)
which in-turn promotes walkability, and are also connected to the ‘outside’ via
Melrose Boulevard (internal), joining with Corlett Drive (external). Walkways are also
found between upper storeys of some of the buildings in Melrose Arch, which also
contributes to the principle of connectedness by allowing ‘ease of accesses between
areas (figure 9).
Another important part of New Urbanism is the move towards the integration of
public transport systems into urban developments. Melrose Arch attempts to satisfy
4
this requirement by providing transit links to outside areas through conveniently
located bus stops (figure 10). There is however various underground parking lots
located within Melrose Arch which lies in strong contrast to the notion of creating a
less-car dependent community, but then again considering that the public
transportation system in South Africa is quite under developed the designers of
Melrose Arch could be forgiven for this.
When considering the above analysis of Melrose Arch one could confidently say that
it does adhere to most of the requirements of New Urbanism. It does however fail
miserably in one very important aspect of New Urbanism referred to as ‘mixed
housing’.
According to Nozzi ([Sa]) the mixed housing principle implies that different ranges of
affordable housing should be available and in close proximity to one another within a
development. This principle allows cities to bridge the gap between poor and affluent
more efficiently. Average property prices within Melrose Arch ranges from about
R3,4 million for a one-bedroom apartment to R9,5 million for the biggest 3 bedroom
unit and up to approximately R22 million for the largest penthouse (Melrose Arch,
luxury…, 2010). These prices hardly reflect mixed housing and unfortunately only
cater for a small percentage of the population in Johannesburg. These prices also
contrast with the aims set out in the Johannesburg Spatial Development Framework
(SDF) which proposes integrated and sustainable spatial development agendas for
the greater Johannesburg area (Landman, 2004:40).
Another disappointing aspect of the Melrose Arch development is the fact that it is
gated off from its surrounding area. The gating off of communities and the
development of security villages in South Africa as a response to high crime levels
have grown significantly during the past few years (Landman, 2002:2). There are
various differing viewpoints with regards to these phenomena, some feel that it
assists local governments in maintaining certain services and infrastructure while
other feel that it only increases the fragmentation between poor and rich (Landman,
5
2002:08), a problem that New Urbanism proposes to rectify. In the case of Melrose
Arch it forms a very elitist type of community, even though Melrose Arch claims to
cater for all walks of life, the fact of the matter is that only the upper middle-class can
afford to be part of this community.
When considering the above mentioned facts it is clear that Melrose Arch is not a
true example of New Urbanism. It does support various principles of New Urbanism
which contributed to the success of the project but at the end of the day it still does
not form part of the city surrounding it. It is a closed off simulacra. The residents of
Melrose Arch do not live in a ‘real’ world, but rather in some simulated European
look-a-like town with hostile fencing surrounding the entire development. Any sense
of community that could be achieved with this development is short lived – right up
until you step out onto Oxford Street.
The question however remains: How can New Urbanism projects like Melrose Arch
truly benefit a country like South Africa where one of the main requirements for
success is very difficult to achieve – mixed housing?
If we as South Africans can overcome our defensive vernacular architecture,
‘Voortrekker Laar’ tendencies, prejudices and fears with regards to crime and living
in dense mixed housing communities the proposed benefits of New Urbanism like
stable property values, pedestrian friendly communities, less ugly and congested
sprawl, more efficient use of tax money and more unique architecture, to name but a
few would be within hands reach (New Urbanism – Creating…, [Sa]). As Vince
Graham, one of the strong promoters for New Urbanism in America stated (Perifeira,
[Sa]):
“If what you sell is privacy and exclusivity, then every new house is a
degradation of the amenity. However, if what you sell is community, then
every new house is an enhancement of the asset”.
6
At the end of the day the real question is: Can we actually change? The answer to
this is uncertain. We as humans are creatures of habit and in a country like South
Africa, where exclusion and segregation is the norm drastic change would need to
be effected for New Urbanism to be truly successful.
Word count: 1954
7
List of Figures
Figure 1 Melrose Arch’s Virgin Active
8
Figure 2 Melrose Arch’s residential area
9
Figure 3 Photo illustrating the large sidewalk and small setbacks of the Melrose Arch development in Sandton
10
Figure 4 Photo illustrating the rich and interesting architecture of Melrose Arch, Johannesburg
11
Figure 5 Image showing interesting use of a building’s façade to create seating for pedestrians
12
Figure 6 Photo showing the use of formal landscaping at Melrose Arch
13
Figure 7 Melrose Arch residential courtyards
14
Figure 8 Aerial view of Melrose Arch showing interconnecting streets
15
Figure 9 Buildings ‘connect’ to one another in Melrose Arch, Sandton
16
Figure 10 Conveniently placed bus stops creates alternative transportation options
17
Reference list of Images
Figure 1 The Virgin Active at Melrose Arch, Sandton (Photograph: author)
Figure 2 Melrose Arch’s residential area (Photograph: author)
Figure 3 Large sidewalk and small setbacks of the Melrose Arch, Sandton
(Photograph: the author)
Figure 4 Hayman, F. 2007. Melrose Arch. Available [O]:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8424342@N04/1464573626/ Accessed
2011/06/10
Figure 5 Image showing interesting use of a building’s façade to create seating for pedestrians (Photograph: author)
Figure 6 Use of formal landscaping at Melrose Arch, Sandton (Photograph:
author)
Figure 7 Malan, G. 2007. Melrose Arch Residential Courtyards. Available [O]:
http://www.gerbera.org/landscaping-magazine/landscape-sa-index/sept
ember-october-2007/melrose-arch/ Accessed 2011/06/02
Figure 8 Aerial photo of Melrose Arch [Sa]. Available [O] http://www.imagine-
group.com/melrosedb/melrose-map.html Accessed 2011/06/02
Figure 9 Buildings ‘connect’ to one another in Melrose Arch, Sandton
(Photograph: author)
Figure 10 Example of a bus stop in Melrose Arch, Sandton (Photograph: author)
18
Reference List
Congress for New Urbanism. [Sa] Available [O]: http://www.cnu.org/charter
Accessed 2011/06/05
Dirsuweit, T. 2007. The Production of ‘secure’ space in new urbanism
developments in Johannesburg. Available [O]:
http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/glasze/Abstracts_Papers_Paris_2007/Dirsuweit.
pdf Accessed 2011/06/02
Mall Listing – Melrose Arch. Available [O]:
http://www.mallguide.co.za/mall.htm?mallID=218 Accessed 2011/06/08
Melrose Arch, luxury apartment launch. 2010. Available [O]:
http://www.property24.com/articles/melrose-arch-luxury-apartments-launch/
12681 Accessed 2011/05/29
Mannion, G. 2007. How much pollution does a car produce? Available [O]:
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/92479-How-much-pollution-
does-a-car-produce?s=a8d27a882a17eaec5e82109e0a86637a Accessed
2011/06/03
New Urbanism – Creating Liveable Sustainable Communities [Sa]. Available
[O]: http://www.china-up.com:8080/international/case/case/1589.pdf
Accessed 2011/06/02
Harrison, P., Todes, A. and Watson, V. 2008. Planning and Transformation:
Learning from the post-apartheid experience. Abingdon: Routledge
Landman, K. 2002. Gated communities in South Africa: building bridges or
barriers? Conference on Private Urban governance, Mainz, Germany June 6-
9 2002
Landman, K. 2004. CSIR Report: Gated Communities in South Africa:
Comparison of four case studies in Gauteng. Tshwane (Pretoria) CSIR
Leon, H. 2011. New Urbanism: Mon Amour. Available [O]:
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/11.06.03/evergreen-0345.html
Accessed 2011/06/07
Nozzi, D. [Sa] Merits and principles of New Urbanism. Available [O]:
http://www.walkablestreets.com/merits.htm Accessed 2011/06/08
19
Periferia - Internet Resources for Architecture and Urban Design in
the Caribbean. [Sa]. Available [O]:
http://www.periferia.org/publications/Quotes.html Accessed
2011/06/03
20
Bibliography
Arde, A. 2010. Area Review: Century City. Available [O]:
http://www.privateproperty.co.za/news/area-review/area-review-century-
city.htm?id=415
Congress for New Urbanism. [Sa] Available [O]: http://www.cnu.org/charter
Accessed 2011/06/05
Dirsuweit, T. 2007. The Production of ‘secure’ space in new urbanism
developments in Johannesburg. Available [O]:
http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/glasze/Abstracts_Papers_Paris_2007/Dirsuweit.
pdf Accessed 2011/06/02
Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., and Speck, J. 2000. Suburban Nation: The Rise
of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point
Press
Mall Listing – Melrose Arch. Available [O]:
http://www.mallguide.co.za/mall.htm?mallID=218 Accessed 2011/06/08
Melrose Arch, luxury apartment launch. 2010. Available [O]:
http://www.property24.com/articles/melrose-arch-luxury-apartments-launch/
12681 Accessed 2011/05/29
Mannion, G. 2007. How much pollution does a car produce? Available [O]:
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/92479-How-much-pollution-
does-a-car-produce?s=a8d27a882a17eaec5e82109e0a86637a Accessed
2011/06/03
New Urbanism – Creating Liveable Sustainable Communities [Sa]. Available
[O]: http://www.china-up.com:8080/international/case/case/1589.pdf
Accessed 2011/06/02
Du Plessis, L. 2007. The Ideological Construction of New Urbanism in
Melrose Arch: A Critical Analysis. Unpublished dissertation; University of
Pretoria
Harrison, P., Todes, A. and Watson, V. 2008. Planning and Transformation:
Learning from the post-apartheid experience. Abingdon: Routledge
21
Landman, K. 2002. Gated communities in South Africa: building bridges or
barriers? Conference on Private Urban governance, Mainz, Germany June 6-
9 2002
Landman, K. 2004. CSIR Report: Gated Communities in South Africa:
Comparison of four case studies in Gauteng. Tshwane (Pretoria) CSIR
Leon, H. 2011. New Urbanism: Mon Amour. Available [O]:
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/11.06.03/evergreen-0345.html
Accessed 2011/06/07
Nozzi, D. [Sa] Merits and principles of New Urbanism. Available [O]:
http://www.walkablestreets.com/merits.htm Accessed 2011/06/08
Periferia - Internet Resources for Architecture and Urban Design in the
Caribbean. [Sa]. Available [O]:
http://www.periferia.org/publications/Quotes.html Accessed 2011/06/03
22