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