|
Joburg appears to be putting more effort into cleanliness, with a special capital injection for Pikitup. Now other spheres of government need to come on board, says Neil Fraser.
 I was once asked by an ex-city councillor, who was against the establishment of city improvement districts (CIDs) - because she perceived them as undermining the role of the council - why it was necessary, through the establishment of CIDs, to turn large areas of the city into "sanitised environments".
What an unfortunate perception - CIDs across the world seek to provide sustainable managed environments that are pleasant urban spaces for all city users and make cities attractive to investors and users alike. One of the ways they seek to do this is to ensure that unnecessary litter isn't around long enough to result in a feeling of neglect and lack of urban management.
Research has shown that there is a close link between "crime and grime" and it is a fundamental that these issues be tackled together. CIDs do just that. In doing so, one doesn't have to provide sanitised spaces at all, but reach a level of cleanliness and safety that provides a quality of life that is comfortable.
I must say that the City appears to have been putting much more effort into cleanliness over the past year than previously, although we have a long way to go! A special capital injection has enabled Pikitup to buy new equipment, to roll out more refuse bins and to start some experimentation with underground bins for refuse collection. I saw these in widespread use throughout Rotterdam, particularly in residential areas where "black bags" can no longer be left for collection on the pavement but are immediately trashed by the property owner into the corner underground bin (after separating for recycling). No need to wait for a weekly removal, but instant dispersal.
Littering
But, will such a widespread approach counter Johannesburg's propensity to litter? I very much doubt it. Attempts have also been made through the City's regional office to educate citizens in regard to littering - I'm assured this includes schools where, together with homes, such education should start. But how effective has this been? Littering remains a serious problem for the city.
These thoughts were initiated by a recent trip to the Johannesburg Art Gallery (JAG). I had been asked to give a management group from one of our major financial institutions an overview of the urban revitalisation progress in the inner city and then accompany the financiers to meet a number of business owners on the periphery of Joubert Park.
We drove into the JAG grounds and one of the first sights to greet us was the condition of the railway cutting just to the south of the gallery. The filth, muck and litter on the banks of the railway cutting were unbelievable and totally unacceptable. Transnet may have been "turned around" from a financial point of view but its lack of interest in urban hygiene is positively disgusting.
And, of course, because we have government-in-silos, it probably isn't the City's responsibility to maintain such areas - so no-one does and we have muck and all sorts of human detritus lining the so-called rivers of steel that bisect the city - cesspits would be a better description!
World Cup
I doubt that the World Cup is going to swell the number of visitors to the JAG by any great numbers, but to see such cesspits in the middle of the city only reinforces prejudices against "African" cities. As I wrote when our selection for 2010 was made public some years back, what an opportunity to make everyone aware of urban hygiene - a clean and green World Cup! We wouldn't be the first city to use such a major sporting event to educate not only our citizens but also the parastatals that affect our lives.
Surely the City should be saying to Transnet, "If you don't clean up your backyard on a daily basis, we'll do it for you at your cost." So what will happen? The city will be subject to a blitz before 2010 to present an acceptable face to our visitors and will then relapse into the status quo. So much talk about 2010 leaving lasting legacies for our children - these appear to relate to physical structures rather than a change in lifestyle. We have our priorities screwed up again.
With those thoughts going through my head, I came across a couple of interesting reports. The first was that Barak Obama was already planning changes to be speedily implemented after his inauguration that would propel the US from behind the pack that has a concern for global warning and the pollution of the environment, to the fore.
Green building conference
The second was a report by Ian Fife in last week's Financial Mail on a green building conference. He started his article by suggesting that, "It was easy to believe that ‘greening' the built environment would save the world, if you were amongst the 600 delegates at South Africa's first green building conference last week in Cape Town."
He then provided some important figures - buildings were responsible for 40 percent of carbon emissions, used 40 percent of energy, 30 percent of natural resources, 20 percent of water and 70 percent of electricity, and caused the dumping of up to 65 percent of solid waste.
The chief executive of the Green Building Council of South Africa was quoted in the article as saying that South Africa's buildings were slightly less toxic, "but only because our transport system is a bigger polluter"! Nice! The idea is to follow the world trend of launching "green-star" rating systems for offices. "It's about much more than carbon emissions and energy use. Green-star rating includes measuring how much driving employees and customers have to do to get to the buildings and proximity to public transport, shops, homes and other amenities.
"Buildings are scored (among other criteria) on materials, land use and ecology, emissions, management, indoor environment quality and innovation. Energy makes up about 25 percent of the score. The total score determines the star rating."
After providing some pertinent facts with regard to the cost and practicality of greening buildings in this country ("There are as many as 500 000 commercial structures in South Africa and about 12 million homes that will make even 10 000 certified buildings in the next 10 years seem insignificant") the article pointed out that, "The hope though, is that rating will be the vanguard of broader greening as many property owners improve efficiency in less formal ways."
But what really caught my attention was Fife's concluding paragraph - "Another driver that was evident at the conference was idealism, and with it optimism that the world could be changed. This may soon start spreading to the more hardened participants in the built environment such as developers and owners."
Vision
I'm really enthusiastic about greening and all it stands for, but I am left with this vision of 50 years from now - a plethora of tall, incredibly efficient buildings standing in a morass of litter because we have no apparent idealism and optimism that the small things like littering can be changed! How do we change the perceptions of basically unglamorous issues such as the quality of our horizontal public space?
On my visit to Rotterdam I heard about really pragmatic research into not just greening or global warning, but self-analysis by communities, under the direction of their local authorities, of the practical outcomes of dealing with the small things. A community in a defined residential area has fully supported and become totally committed to the research programme which puts every action and outcome, from even the smallest issue, under the community's collective microscope to determine the effect on the environment.
Thus, the issue of whether disposable nappies are more efficient and cost effective in the overall scheme of things, becomes a community concern, as does littering and greening! Just as research and education are creating a new awareness about green buildings, among professionals, we need sustainable programmes that involve communities in finding solutions for urban hygiene.
Regards, Neil
Bus tour: Saturday, 29 November
Heidelberg - Junction City
Long before the town of Heidelberg was founded, the site at the foot of the Suikerbosrand Nature Reserve was a trading post, at the crossroads to coastal and inland destinations.
After proclamation of the town, Heidelberg became the seat of the Boer provincial government during the War of Independence. The gold boom on the Witwatersrand further fostered its dominance when the Transvaal Mining Commissioner set up headquarters, and 18 hotels housed fortune seekers.
Though the affluent days have passed, the town remains busy, yet quaint, with a wealth of heritage, adjacent to an abundance of wildlife and indigenous fauna and flora.
Meet Deanna Kirby and Pascale Petit at the Sunnyside Park Hotel to depart at 8am. The cost is R400 for members of the Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust, and R450 for non-members. Booking is essential and is through Computicket , on 083 915 8000 or 011 340 8000, or through the Computicket website.
For more information, telephone Eira Bond on weekdays from 9am to 1pm on 011 482 3349.
Related stories:
|
