© Palgrave Macmillan 2008 Introduction
The post-apartheid era in South Africa brought about many changes, including significant spatial transformations. In an attempt to redevelop and reconstruct the apartheid city, new urban policies set out to give direction in the form of a clearly revised vision and supporting normative principles for urban planning and design. The vision for the post-apartheid city pivoted on the broad goal of a more integrated and sustainable city and this was unpacked in a number of policy documents and development action plans.
However, in response to high levels of crime (Burger, 2007) and fear of crime (Mistry, 2004), contributing to a general 'culture of fear' (Hamber, 1999), and insecurity (Dirsuweit, 2002), recent years have witnessed a rapid increase in various types of gated communities in the country. These developments contribute to significant changes in the built form and urban landscape in general, resulting in the production of a new spatial order through specific urban forms. The urban design of these neighbourhoods is influenced by a number of ideas that are based on specific urban design concepts or movements that are often imported from abroad and combined with local variations or adaptations. Recently, however, a number of authors have started to raise concerns regarding the impact and implications of these developments, including their contribution to increased fragmentation and segregation (Lipman and Harris, 1999; Hook and Vrdoljak, 2002; Landman, 2004, 2006a; Lemanski, 2004, 2006a, 2006b; Durington, 2006; Harrison and Mabin, 2006). This is especially pertinent, given the historical context and the post-apartheid spatial policies that are aimed at the reconstruction and development of the apartheid city towards greater sustainability, equity, efficiency and integration.
Despite a growing body of literature on gated communities in general and to a lesser extent in South Africa, there has been a limited exploration of the urban design influences on gated communities internationally. Ellin (1997) started to raise some of the critical questions and briefly introduced the situation in the USA, while Rouse (2003) suggests a connection between contemporary urban design movements, such as New Urbanism, and the development of gated communities. Although he does not elaborate on this connection explicitly, he comments that new urbanist principles were originally applied to greenfield sites where a strict design code guided the development, with the most extreme example referring to a gated community replete with polo fields. Similarly, Grant (2001) only states that many new urbanist projects are often gated for security reasons, revealing true power relations within the city. Apart from this, the mainstream literature on New Urbanism and Urban Villages has been relatively silent on the subject.
This raises a number of questions. What are the main ideas influencing the design of gated communities in South Africa and how are these incorporated into practice? What are the impact and implications for the transformation of the built form in South African cities? Given the intended policy goals, how appropriate are these urban design approaches and the development of gated neighbourhoods in the country?
This paper addresses these questions through an exploration of the relationship between contemporary urban design ideas and the development of gated communities in South Africa. The findings and discussions are based on in-depth research through a national survey conducted in 2002, four in-depth case studies carried out in the municipalities of Johannesburg and Tshwane and attendance of and detailed documentation review of the proceedings from the Public Hearings on Security Access Restriction in both the municipalities of Johannesburg and Tshwane. The first part focuses on the design of gated neighbourhoods in South Africa and briefly outlines the ideas influencing these designs, as well as how they are applied in practice. Following this, there will be an indication of how the different types of gated developments contribute to emerging spatial patterns and trends in the post-apartheid South African city, combined with a short description of their relation to what has been defined as micro- and anti-urbanism. The remaining section will show how gated neighbourhoods contribute to a segregated approach to urban design through a focus on the privatisation of urban space through fortified boundaries and physical borders. The conclusion highlights the contested meanings and shortcomings of international urban design approaches in South Africa as manifested through gated neighbourhoods and argues for a more integrative urbanism.
Influential design ideas
Development context: policy guidance and normative principles
The Development Facilitation Act (DFA) was the first post-1994 planning law enacted by the South African parliament. The DFA paved the way for integrated development based on normative planning principles. This introduced a huge shift from previous planning policies and legislation based on specific standards and a very technocratic and master-planned approach. The first principle refers to 'a need to create new forms and structures for South African settlements to improve their performance' (National Development and Planning Commission Resource Document 1995, p. 11). One way to achieve this is through 'Positively Performing Settlements' and one of the aspects of positively performing settlements refers to 'the central significance of integration' (Resource Document 1995, p. 12). The DFA explains that the term integration '... calls for a rejection of past practices of fragmentation and separation' (Resource Document 1995, p. 12). The Department of Housing took this further and commissioned the development of Human Settlement Planning and Design Guidelines (2000) - commonly referred to as the Redbook - to serve as a tool for a variety of professionals, including planners, urban designers and engineers. The general vision is promoting the establishment and continuation of sustainable and integrated human settlements. The White Paper on spatial and land use management is based on a long-term vision and a set of principles and norms to achieve a vision that calls for 'integrated planning for sustainable management of land resources' (2001, p. 2). In response to a decade of learning and in order to give a clearer guidance, the Department of Housing developed a comprehensive plan for the development of sustainable human settlements in 2004, commonly referred to as 'Breaking New Ground' (BNG). This action plan reinforces the vision of the Department of Housing, to promote the achievement of a 'non-racial, integrated society through the development of sustainable human settlements and quality housing' (2004:1) and promotes, among other things, social and spatial integration.
These documents represent the post-apartheid planning and design approach in the country and provide a basis for spatial planning and urban design intervention through normative design guidelines and spatial principles (see Table 1 (See PDF) for a summary of the main principles). Implicit in the new approach is a call for greater urbanism in South African cities. Although some of the finer detail and spatial principles may differ slightly, all the new planning documents have this in common. In addition, many of the principles contained in these documents are strikingly familiar to international urban design approaches and specific movements.
International urban design concepts and movements
Gated neighbourhoods in South Africa are mainly influenced by two sets of design ideas: firstly, New Urbanism and the Urban Villages concept and, secondly, those related to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED).
New Urbanism and Urban Villages
New Urbanism and Urban Villages are related to the idea of 'planning by neighbourhoods' (Madanipour, 2001). Although there has been a resurgence of the idea of planning by neighbourhoods in the last two decades, it is not an entirely new concept. Creating urban neighbourhoods or villages was a focal point of urban design and planning in the early 20th century, as advocated by protagonists such as Ebenezer Howard 1 and Clarence Perry 2 , among others (Biddulph, 2000; Madanipour, 2001; Neal, 2003; Franklin, 2004). The idea of creating urban neighbourhoods or villages, however, faded into the background as severe criticisms were waged against its claims, which included creating communities. It was critiqued on the grounds that it was essentially anti-urban, attempting to idealise the form of village life and that it would fail in the modern structure of urban life. Despite these criticisms, the quest for promoting communities and small urban villages is regaining increasing support, from social and political debates around communitarianism to a variety of design proposals for sustainable urban neighbourhoods (Madanipour, 2001). This trend, which Madanipour (1996) identifies as micro-urbanism, promotes the design and development of small-scale, distinctive neighbourhoods and settlements, recreating a small version of the city (Madanipour, 2001). Today, this concept forms the basis of an emerging trend in urban design - that of the promotion of urban neighbourhoods or villages, for example, through the work of the Urban Villages Forum (UVF) in the UK and the Congress of New Urbanism in the USA.
The UVF defined an urban village as follows: 'An urban village is a concept of a settlement which is small enough to create a community in the truest sense of the word - a group of people who support each other, but big enough to support a reasonable cross section of facilities. Walking determines the size - a ten minute walk from one side to the other. To provide a sufficiently large population to maintain a range of community facilities all within a walkable distance means the density of development must be high. An urban village is densely develop in the centre, with town squares and key community focal points, density eases away from the centre, and the boundary of the village is marked by green space' (Urban Villages Forum, Urban Villages - an introduction, Urban Village Website). Thompson-Fawcett and Bond (2003) point out that the UVF combines a number of values and principles from a variety of time periods, and packages it in a new form. It takes 'the organic, holistic, urbanistic, polycentric, aesthetic nature of pre-industrial city quarters and villages, combines that with the communitarian and management ideals of late 19th and 20th centuries' social utopian models, and then integrates these with current objectives for sustainability, compact cities and collaborative planning' (Thompson-Fawcett and Bond, 2003, p. 168). It therefore aims to transcend the mere physical and allows anyone to determine when a development is not just physically a good piece of urban design but also an urban village, including aspects of community as well (Biddulph, 2000, p. 66).
The term 'urban village' has become part of the contemporary lexicon of urban development across the globe. Yet its meaning is manifold, lacking in rigour, hard to 'fix' and open to individual, collective, national and international interpretation and manipulation. At the centre of this resistance to a stable definition lies the contradiction inherent in the essentially oxymoronic juxtaposition of 'urban' and 'village'. The two concepts of village and city are given meaning by virtue of the fact of their opposition, an opposition that contains both resistance and attraction. To some country dwellers, the city is a place of fear and revulsion and is to be shunned. To some urban dwellers, the country is a place of poverty and backwardness and is to be avoided. For many people residing in a village, there is a desire to escape and explore the adventures of the city. For others from the city, the village becomes a symbol of an idyllic place to which they will some day return. In this way, the 'good' aspects of the city and village are conceptually combined and captured in the idealised 'urban village', while the 'bad' qualities are rejected (Franklin, 2004). This is similar to what Howard tried to do with his garden villages, combining the positive aspects of town and country while avoiding their negative aspects.
In terms of essential characteristics, the urban village concept is very similar to the ideas put forward by the New Urbanist movement, with their concepts of 'traditional neighbourhood development', 'pedestrian pockets' and 'transit orientated development', some of these developments that in turn have become known as 'villages' (Franklin, 2004, p. 5). New Urbanist neighbourhoods are designed to contain a diverse range of housing and jobs, and to be 'walkable'. The principles of New Urbanism can be applied increasingly to projects at the full range of scales from a single building to an entire community. The key objectives include ensuring compact urban layouts, a variety of employment opportunities, a mix of activities, regionally coordinated open space networks, viable public transport, good quality and familiar architecture, retention of built heritage, safe streets and green construction (Thompson-Fawcett, 2003).
As with Urban Villages, New Urbanism is also not a tightly bounded normative model. It is more of a collective discourse, encompassing the variations of different contexts, proponents and implementers. In addition, while some fundamental principles are agreed upon, the priority and mechanisms of execution vary. The concept therefore operates as an umbrella structure for a variety of planning ideas and tools (Thompson-Fawcett, 2003). This has also occurred in South Africa, as will be discussed in the next section.
Recent studies have started to highlight the fact that the application of these design concepts varies considerably, depending on the context as well as the purpose of the development - which may lead to a selective use of some of the principles. For example, in a study conducted in the United Kingdom, researchers identified 55 so-called 'Urban Villages' and found that in each location adoption of the urban-village idea stemmed from different considerations, and that even residents within these developments expressed different opinions. Therefore, the application of any 'fixed' notion of an Urban Village within different contexts has been partial. The rhetoric has often been adopted by particular actors, at particular times, and in relation to particular tasks, in many cases more to support an existing position or purpose (eg, to access funding) than as a solution to specific development issues. The study has also shown how the process of naming a development 'an urban village' lends to its apparent coherence and therefore deeper legitimacy within the discourse of planning, regardless of its characteristics (Biddulph et al , 2003).
Designing safer places
The notion that the physical environment can either increase or reduce opportunities for crime is not new. Internationally, CPTED has been studied extensively over a number of decades. It has also been incorporated into broader approaches such as place-specific and situational crime prevention. Environmental design has formed an integral part of many crime prevention initiatives in countries such as the UK, USA, Canada, The Netherlands and Australia. CPTED is aimed at reducing the causes of, and the opportunities for, criminal events, as well as addressing the fear of crime, through the application of sound design and management principles to the built environment. In other words, it is based on the idea that certain design and management interventions in the built environment can make a difference in terms of crime prevention by reducing the opportunities for crime and improving the opportunities for policing. A wide range of authors have defined many principles that are relevant for reducing the opportunities for crime in the built environment. The principles can broadly be summarised as surveillance and visibility, territoriality and defensible space, access and escape routes, image and aesthetics and target-hardening. These principles have given rise to a wide range of spatial interventions in practice. For example, Oscar Newman's theory of defensible space is based on the concept of territoriality, which he defines as 'the capacity of the physical environment to create perceived zones of territorial influences' (1972, p. 51). This is achieved through an emphasis on target-hardening (eg, fences around housing estates) and access control (eg, access restriction, restriction of through-traffic). According to Newman, there are different ways to restrict through traffic, such as one-way streets, cul-de-sacs, dead ends and speed bumps (1972, p. 60). The motivation is, among other things, to minimise the degree of shared public space inside residential areas, make the boundaries between public and private spaces very clear, make public areas clearly visible to nearby housing and reduce escape routes.
As was the case with Urban Villages, the interpretation and application of CPTED also varies in practice. For example, Kitchen (2005) points out that there are different viewpoints to crime prevention and its implementation in the built environment in Britain due to a clash of ideas between national planning approaches to safety (influenced by New Urbanism) and reiterated in, for example, neighbourhood renewal plans and Safer by Design practices. Such different viewpoints are not only limited to Britain. Recent spatial responses to crime in South Africa have started to highlight the emergence of two distinctive approaches, even within different place-based approaches to crime prevention (Landman, 2006b), which exposes several issues of importance to the growing field of planning and design for safety, especially in the light of post-apartheid planning policies promoting greater integration.
Application of design ideas in South Africa
These design ideas, namely New Urbanism and Urban Villages on the one hand and CPTED on the other, have become entwined and often confused in South Africa, especially in the development of gated communities. In South Africa, gated communities refer to physical areas that are fenced or walled off from their surroundings, either prohibiting or controlling access to these areas by means of gates or booms. In many cases, the concept can refer to a residential area with restricted access, so that normal public spaces are privatised or their use is restricted. Gated communities in the country can broadly be categorised into two major types, namely security estates (or villages) and enclosed neighbourhoods. Security estates refer to private developments where the entire area is developed by a private developer. These areas/buildings are physically walled or fenced off and usually have a security gate or controlled access point, with or without a security guard. The roads within these developments are private and, in most of the cases, the management and maintenance is carried out by a private management body. Enclosed neighbourhoods refer to existing neighbourhoods that have controlled access through gates or booms across existing roads. Many are fenced or walled off, as well, with a limited number of controlled entrances/exits and security guards at these points in some cases. The roads within these neighbourhoods were previously, or still are, public property, depending on the model used within different local authorities. The majority in the country are based on the public approach (where the roads remain public). Security estates are private developments, while enclosed neighbourhoods are concerned with restriction of access to existing public roads.
In the case of enclosed neighbourhoods, residents combined a particular approach to CPTED with an idea to recreate old suburban neighbourhoods. These neighbourhoods combined ideas from Howard's Garden City concept and Perry's neighbourhood unit, such as rural-like residential neighbourhoods with a central park for neighbourhood and community activities, as well as self-contained and inwardly focused residential areas with access to green open space. Combined with the principles of defensible space, target-hardening and access control, enclosed neighbourhoods can therefore recreate a version of suburbia that is associated with safety and community.
The physical interventions are restricted to what is possible in an existing neighbourhood within the policy framework of the local authority and in line with the ideas held by the neighbourhood residents. These include interventions such as fencing in the neighbourhood, closing roads through gates or booms and in some cases upgrading existing neighbourhood spaces such as parks, or providing additional infrastructure - for example, neighbourhood lights, traffic-calming measures and additional road signs (Figures 1 - See PDF, and 2 - See PDF,). Some of the previously open roads are completely inaccessible as the gates are locked permanently, while others allow restricted access through booms or gates that are either operated by remote control or manned by security guards (Figures 3 - See PDF, and 4 - See PDF,). The incorporation of facilities depends on what was available prior to closure, for example a church or a local school.
Larger security estates incorporate a wider range of ideas, based on selective notions of the Garden City and neighbourhood unit, similar to those mentioned above, combined with a partial inclusion of elements from both New Urbanism's principles of neighbourhood design and in some cases limited notions from the Urban Villages movement. The principles of neighbourhood design that are incorporated into security estates include the creation of a distinctive centre and edge, a mixture of activities, a network of streets and attention to public or common space. Although security estates start to incorporate limited notions from the Urban Villages concept, such as a mixture of housing types, as well as community and recreational facilities in close proximity, it appears that their appeal lies more in the name than the characteristics. In this way, it is more an appeal for a rural-like village atmosphere within an urban environment that makes the idea attractive, hence the notion of an urban village and not so much the actual design principles advocated by, for example, the Urban Villages Forum, although some are partially incorporated. In this regard it is more reflective of the old concept of Garden Cities, retrofitted to be applicable in a new context of growing insecurity. The other appeal is that the principles associated with 'Urban Villages' and New Urbanism are promoted in many local planning and development policies, which enhances the chances for council support, as is the case in the UK (Biddulph, 2000). All these elements are combined with a particular approach to CPTED, based on the principles of territoriality, defensible space, target-hardening and access control, to create the ideal living place, probably best described by the terms 'lifestyle estate' or 'lifestyle village', depending on the nature of the security estate. Therefore, in practice, security estates incorporate a mixture of ideas and a partial implementation of many international design concepts and planning trends. In addition, it also shows that New Urbanism and Urban Villages in South Africa is not a tightly bounded normative model and that the mechanisms of execution vary. The concept thus operates as an umbrella structure for a variety of design ideas in practice.
In terms of the physical interventions, security estates in South Africa incorporate all the physical elements related to security, including perimeter walls and fences, often electrified and enhanced with surveillance cameras or alarm systems, access-control measures such as booms and/or gates combined with visitor check-in booths and/or PIN numbers or access discs for residents. In most cases, there are separate entrance lanes for residents and visitors. The design of these features, including very elaborate entrance gates (Figure 5 - See PDF,), also contributes to the image and identity of the estate and reflects the implementation of an aesthetic of security in South Africa, similar to Brazil (Caldeira, 2000). The layout of the estates reflects the idea of a lifestyle village, featuring organic road networks structured around prominent parks or gardens, natural features such as hills or rivers and/or amenities such as a golf course (Figure 6 - See PDF,). Landscaped parks, walkways and roads feature prominent elements such as porticoes, fountains, water features, bridges, characteristic light fittings and purposefully designed street furniture. These designs are often further organised into smaller distinctive neighbourhoods, each with their own identity - for example Dainfern (Figures 7 - See PDF, and 8 - See PDF,). The estates also have a distinctive edge or hard boundary, in the form of high walls or fences, as well as a centre dominated by the clubhouse (Figure 9 - See PDF,), combined with facilities such as conference rooms, restaurants, multi-purpose halls, a range of sports facilities, postal facilities and small shops, for example golf pro-shops. The larger estates often have their own private schools on the estate grounds, as is the case in both Dainfern and Woodhill. In this way, the estates start to provide for a range of activities and land uses, although they are far from offering a self-sufficient neighbourhood or village. Residents are still dependent on the rest of the city for retail services, employment, entertainment and a range of other services.
Emerging spatial patterns
Old and new patterns
Contrary to the aims set out in the policies, and despite a number of positive interventions, current South African cities in the early 21st century reflect very similar characteristics to the cities of the early 1990s, as discussed by Dewar (1992), with the same spatial patterns. These are to a great extent exacerbated by the development of large gated communities. Firstly, low-density sprawl perpetuates through the development of large security estates on the urban periphery, low-income housing developments and various informal settlements. Secondly, fragmentation persists. Gated communities facilitate a cellular development pattern, as developments occur or are contained in discrete pockets, bounded by walls and fences and connected by over-congested rapid transport routes and freeways (Figure 10 - See PDF,). These types of development restrict opportunities for integration in an urban structural sense. The enclosed cells also restrict access through a limited number of entry/exit points and limit mixed use as smaller business and public facilities cannot operate freely from within these areas. Thirdly, gated communities contribute to urban segregation and neighbourhood separation . This includes the separation of land uses, races and income groups. Although some of the larger estates include other land uses apart from residential, these are only available for use by those living inside the gated community. The research has indicated that although the separation of income groups is the major driver in many gated communities, the issue of race does play a role in some neighbourhoods to a far lesser degree. Therefore, the dominant spatial pattern that is emerging resembles a series of gated enclaves for the middle- and higher-income groups - different types for different groups, juxtaposed with poorer ghettos, especially in the inner city and on the urban periphery, comprising low-income housing developments and informal settlements.
Micro- and anti-urbanism
These emerging spatial patterns and trends start to indicate a contradiction between the aim of the national policies and local practices in South Africa, as well as between the way that American and European planning and design concepts are inappropriately adopted in South Africa. The two types of gated communities studied are reflective of two of the three main paradigmatic approaches towards urban design in the 20th century. These three are urbanism of a metropolitan paradigm, anti-urbanism and micro-urbanism. The first approach focuses on the city by trying to change it as promoted by a modernistic design, or trying to preserve or celebrate the city, as applied by a post-modern design (Madanipour, 1996, p. 184). Anti-urbanism abandons the city in favour of suburbanisation, also described as the 'collective effort to live a private life' (Mumford, quoted in Madanipour, 1996, p. 199). In South Africa, however, due to numerous changes in the post-apartheid city, many of the original characteristics of suburbia, such as spatial and social segregation, were threatened or lost. Enclosed neighbourhoods reflect an attempt to abandon the 'new' post-apartheid city and recreate the suburbia of the past. In this way, they concretise a new form of anti-urbanism within South African cities through a focus on social homogeneity, economic segregation, a closed-road network with limited entry points, the re-establishment and extension of car dependency owing to road closures and a negation of pedestrian and cycle mobility beyond the defined neighbourhood. This does not support the vision contained within current national planning and development policies in post-apartheid South Africa, or the majority of structural and spatial principles highlighted earlier.
The third trend, micro-urbanism of the small-town paradigm, is a reaction against the previous two as it offers an alternative that is more manageable than metropolitanism, and more collective than anti-urbanism. This paradigm is based on the idealisation of small communities and the small town as the place to facilitate intersubjective communication and therefore community-building. It has a long history, including Howard's Garden Cities, Perry's neighbourhood unit, Radburn's new towns in the USA, British new towns and in its most recent form, American New Urbanism's rejection of suburbs as an unsustainable waste of time, space and resources (Madanipour, 1996). It can also be argued that the quest for traditional neighbourhoods or Urban Villages is a form of micro-urbanism. Although only yet a partial implementation is-out in practice, large security estates in South Africa are reflective of a new form of micro-urbanism, where there is an emphasis on the development of distinctive neighbourhoods, using the rhetoric of community-building for commercial purposes. Although they have not yet been developed as self-sufficient small towns, they start to encompass a number of the characteristics of a range of micro-urbanistic designs. They combine the benefits of both rural towns and the city to offer a neighbourhood with large green open spaces, community and recreational facilities, and state-of-the art security within a reasonable distance of all the major urban attractions - such as employment, major shopping malls, hospitals and universities.
This form of development, however, challenges the aims of post-apartheid development policies and questions the relationship between neighbourhood design and metropolitan planning. Firstly, the original notion of planning by neighbourhood was that these neighbourhoods needed to grow around centres of social and commercial activity located on a public transport route. Closed-off gated communities do not adhere to this criterion, as the focus is internalised. While the sense of community has been reported to have improved in certain gated neighbourhoods, the relationships with surrounding communities have often been tarnished. Secondly, these neighbourhoods cannot function in isolation; they need to be linked by well-functioning and accessible public transport systems.
Relevance to urban design in South Africa
The question therefore arises as to whether an urban design focus on anti-urbanism and/or micro-urbanism is relevant for city planning in post-apartheid South Africa. While most of the gated communities may offer an improved quality of life and some a sense of community to its residents and users, and increase opportunities for pedestrians and reduce car dependency inside, they are still dependent on the larger city. The small populations of many of these neighbourhoods cannot support a wide range of activities or large metropolitan facilities. As is the case internationally (Madanipour, 2001), South African people's patterns of movement are increasingly complex as different functions, for example shopping, living and leisure, are located across the entire city. Biddulph (2000) maintains that Urban Villages are not necessarily the only solution where there is an opportunity for reconstruction or re-development in urban areas. Lessons from history suggest that they may actually damage cities. He explains that the neighbourhood concept had been openly questioned by academics committed to testing empirically the relationship between the built form and its socio-economic ramifications. They argue that people identify with local streets, but not necessarily with a wider area such as a neighbourhood. They also note that people use local shops, but that they also positively want to use other shops or facilities elsewhere in the city. The vast majority of people live happily in places that are not so self-contained (Biddulph, 2000). Similarly, Jacobs, (1961, p. 127) argued that the conception of neighbourhoods in cities was meaningless as long as they were seen as 'self-contained units to any significant degree'. Many people aspire to overcome locational boundaries so that they can find other communities of interest. It is suggested that, instead of encouraging greater isolation, designers can start to physically plunge people back into the city by promoting greater overlapping of functional, social, economic and environmental systems (Biddulph, 2000). Given this, it becomes clear that New Urbanism and Urban Villages, as well as new developments that partially incorporate principles from these approaches, as a form of micro-urbanism do not offer an appropriate form of urbanism for South Africa, which is desperately trying to address its legacy of separate development.
Exploring alternatives: towards a more appropriate urban design approach
Segregated and integrated approach to urban design
Gated communities encompass the transformation of open space to closed space through physical boundaries. This is a manifestation of a segregated approach to urban design and spatial planning that is evident worldwide. It encompasses a focus on the private realm through the privatisation of public space. The characteristics of such an approach include a separation of land uses, the physical separation of neighbourhoods, the privatisation of community and recreational facilities, the use of gates and fences to define divided space and an incorporation of extreme target-hardening measures to protect distinctive neighbourhoods. The end result of the multiplication of these measures across the city is the creation of a fortress city and the significant transformation of contemporary cities worldwide (as highlighted by Davis, 1992; Tiesdell and Oc, 1998; Graham and Marvin, 2001; Webster et al , 2002).
Lloyd-Jones et al (2001) argue against reducing the city to its constituent neighbourhoods. Instead, they call for a focus on the connections between these parts. They argue against the feasibility of conceptualising and prescribing Urban Villages. Rather than expecting autonomous Urban Villages to develop, the immediate aim should be to encourage the most efficient use of transport systems. Urban management systems should be developed to channel and regulate movement flows. According to Lloyd-Jones et al , this would contribute to a more humane, sustainable and perpetually coherent city form termed the 'integrated metropolis' (Lloyd-Jones et al , 2001, pp. 118-119). It therefore calls for a redefinition of the integrated city to be more than just a compact city based on clusters of neighbourhoods or villages.
In contrast to the segregated approach is an integrated approach to urban design and spatial planning. Such an approach focuses on and celebrates the public realm through sufficient public and private investment (Figure 11 - See PDF,). The characteristics of this approach include, among other things, mixed land use, the externalisation of public facilities and amenities along activity corridors and in mixed use nodes, as opposed to centralisation inside residential neighbourhoods, and the integration of different urban areas and smaller neighbourhoods through integrated routes, a well-functioning public transport system and a continuous public open space system. The focus is therefore on the development of the neighbourhood 'seams' as common and public spaces to allow for the overlapping of the functional, social, economic and environmental systems. It therefore implies the blurring of hard boundaries through the creation of a public framework or spine in order to create the pre-conditions for complexity, diversity and integration. As stated by Dewar and Uytenbogaardt (1991), and reiterated in the DFA (1995), complexity cannot be designed. Environmental richness and diversity result partly from freedom of action and from many decision-makers and actors supporting the process over time.
The integrated approach does not negate a search for place and a sense of community, but rather promotes permeable boundaries and symbolic barriers instead to indicate local 'ownership' and transitional space - that is, from public space to semi-public, or from 'metropolitan space' (large metropolitan facilities and activity corridors 'belonging' to all) to 'community' space under the stewardship or guardianship of a particular local community. 'Community' space would, therefore, create a sense of place, which ideally would encourage visitors to respect the local community when crossing permeable boundaries or symbolic barriers, as advocated by some CPTED protagonists who warn against an over-emphasis on target-hardening and access control (including Jacobs 1961; Hillier, 1988; Ekblom, 1995). A few contemporary writers have started to explore and advocate urban design and social interventions that would support such an integrated approach (including Sennett, 1995; Ellin, 2001 and Friedmann, 2002).
The aim of such an approach is to achieve greater integration and accessibility to urban opportunities. According to a number of urbanists (including Jacobs, 1961; Hillier, 1988), such an approach (given that it is implemented appropriately) can also reduce opportunities for crime, as well as the fear of crime, in the built environment.
Future design
Unfortunately, this does not always occur in practice. As such, it becomes a two-edged sword. While there is a need to transcend the physical walls and gates that create fortified boundaries and physical borders, there is also a need for mutual respect for everyone and 'community' space. In addition, while there is a desperate need in contemporary cities for people to transcend their fears and insecurities, there is also a need for greater humanity and respectful actions. Therefore, if high levels of crime continue to prevail, it is hard to imagine an urban condition beyond the fortress city. It may in fact be that many fortress cities start to constitute a fortress world, as pointed out in a publication on future global scenarios. One of the more negative scenarios is that of Barbarisation , envisioning the grim possibility that the social, economic and moral underpinnings of civilisation deteriorate, as emerging problems overwhelm the coping capacity of both markets and policy reforms. The Fortress World variant is based on an authoritarian response to the threat of total breakdown. Ensconced in protected enclaves, elites safeguard their privilege by controlling an impoverished majority and managing critical natural resources, while outside the fortress there is repression, environmental destruction and misery (Gallopin et al , 1997, p. vii).
Conclusion: beyond the barriers towards a more integrative urbanism
This paper has shown that there are many signs of cross-fertilisation of international design ideas and planning trends as evident in the development of gated communities in South Africa. However, these ideas became entwined and often confused in terms of the specific application of these design concepts, leading to a mis-interpretation and/or partial application of their principles, especially related to the creation of Urban Villages or the implementation of New Urbanism in South Africa, which in turn creates a number of unintended consequences. In addition, the impact of gated communities in this country is also likely to be far greater owing to their extent in large South African cities (Figure 12 - See PDF,), and their nature - which is related to the closing off of public space, their impact on spatial fragmentation and segregation in the context of moving towards urban integration and finally their link to the planning practices and spatial patterns of the apartheid era.
This raises two issues related to the nature of gated communities: the process of urban transformation and the relationship between design ideas and urban form. Firstly, it may not be relevant to refer to gated 'communities' as the mainstream writers do, as the research has indicated that physical space does not necessarily create social harmony. Therefore, it is not possible to 'design' communities or force community-building through urban design, especially in larger urban areas such as districts. At most, the urban designer can only initiate some of the preconditions for a greater sense of community and complexity to develop over time. Given this, it would be more appropriate to refer to gated neighbourhoods.
Secondly, it has become clear to what extent neighbourhood transformation can influence urban transformation. Changes on a neighbourhood level have had large-scale implications for the urban functions, management and maintenance of South African cities, especially in the case of gated neighbourhoods. In this way, the cumulative impact of fortress neighbourhoods can lead to the creation of fortress cities, which can lead either to a total collapse of the urban system or a large-scale uprising and revolution from the masses. In this way, the capital flows and acts of resistance shape and transform the order and form of the city and, as such, the form also informs us much about the wider society, including relations of power, respect and discipline.
This discussion has led to two conclusions: firstly, that New Urbanism is open to contested meanings in South Africa, and secondly that there are shortcomings in terms of current urban design theories and paradigms. South African development policies promote many of the principles of New Urbanism as an approach to address the patterns of fragmentation and separation. While such an approach may be useful to assist with upgrading of and integration within specific neighbourhoods, it fails to offer a coherent way to address the city as a whole and integrate separate neighbourhoods. Instead, the focus is on different parts of the city such as the neighbourhood, districts and the corridor. Therefore, despite attempts from protagonists such as Calthrope that New Urbanism should start addressing urban space beyond the neighbourhood, through models such as 'transient orientated development', it essentially remains a neighbourhood-based urban design approach. In South Africa, which is emerging from apartheid, emphasis on the neighbourhood at the expense of the city appears to be a step backward. This is especially problematic if these neighbourhoods are fortified and space privatised through target-hardening and access control.
This leads to the second point, namely that there are shortcomings in terms of current urban design theories and paradigms. It has been argued in all the major planning policies and design guidelines in post-apartheid South Africa that there is a need for a greater focus on urbanism, as opposed to anti-urbanism and micro-urbanism. The two known approaches, namely the radical change promoted by modernistic design, or the preservation of the city, as applied by post-modern design, will not be sufficient to address the challenges of the 21st-century city. A new form of urbanism is therefore called for that will consider the city as a whole system, made up of a large number of subsystems that overlap and continuously interlink to produce a dynamic balance. 'Space Syntax', developed by Bill Hillier, could provide one instrument to start considering multiple subsystems of the whole urban system. Such a systemic approach could guide attempts to start exploring an integrative eco-urbanism with all its relevant aspects and implications for urban order and form, as well as for place and time.
| [Author Affiliation] |
| [1] CSIR Built Environment, PO Box 395, Pretoria 0001, South Africa |
Correspondence : Karina Landman, Tel: +27 12 841 2084; Fax: +27 12 841 3400; E-mail: klandman@csir.co.za
| [Footnote] |
| 1 Howard introduced the idea of garden cities to address the ills of the industrial city - a place of crime, disease and poverty. The garden city advocated reform through an ideal type of settlement: a self-sufficient city for some 32 000 inhabitants. The settlement should consist of rural-like residential neighbourhoods, extensive cultivatable land, shopping areas, cultural facilities and a central park for recreational and community activities. It should also be surrounded by a green belt to exclude any future urban extension. Neither highways nor railways are to pass through the individual garden city neighbourhoods, although they are to serve as connectors between different neighbourhoods in the larger city (Lampugnani 1986). |
| 2 The neighbourhood unit concept was developed (first by Perry) in the United States during the 1920s in response to rapid urbanisation and based on the concept of a catchment area of a primary school, with a radius of approximately 0.4-0.8 km (half a mile) and bounded by main arteries. The idea was to provide a safe area for children and a communal space (school hall and grounds) that could also be used by adults at night (Madanipour 1996). The neighbourhood unit was based on the following principles: (1) separation of residential land-use; (2) self-contained and 'inwardly orientated' residential areas; (3) 'buffer strips' around these areas; (4) limitations on the number of people living in these areas (10 000 people); and (5) access to green open space (Dewar et al , 1990). |
| [Reference] |
Biddulph, M. (2000) Villages don't make a city, Journal of Urban Design , 5 (1): 65-82.
Biddulph, M., Franklin, B. and Tait, M. (2003) From concept to completion: a critical analysis of the urban village, Town Planning Review , 74 (2): 165-193.
Burger, J. (2007) Security arrangements for the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup, Crime Quartely , 19 : 1-6.
Caldeira, T.P.R. (2000) City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paulo . Berkeley: University of California Press.
Davis, M. (1992) Fortress Los Angeles: the militarization of urban space, in Sorkin, M. (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park: Scenes from the New American City and the End of Public Space . New York: The Noonday Press, pp. 154-180.
Dewar, D. (1992) Urbanization and the South African city: a manifesto for change, in Smith, D.M. (ed.) The Apartheid City and Beyond: Urbanisation and Social Change in South Africa . London: Routledge.
Dewar, D. and Uytenbogaardt, R. (1991) South African Cities: A Manifesto for Change . Cape Town: Urban Problems Research Unit and Urban Foundation.
Dewar, D., Watson, V., Bassios, A. and Dewar, D. (1990) The Structure and Form of Metropolitan Cape Town: Its Origins, Influences and Performance . Cape Town: Urban Problems Research Unit and Urban Foundation.
Dirsuweit, T. (2002) Johannesburg: fearful city? Urban Forum , 13 (3): 3-17.
Durington, M. (2006) Race, space and place in suburban Durban: and ethnographic assessment of gated community environments and residents, GeoJournal , 66 : 147-160.
Ekblom, P. (1995) Less crime by design, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 539 (1): 114-129.
Ellin, N. (1997) Post Modern Urbanism . New York: Princeton University Press.
Ellin, N. (2001) Thresholds of fear: embracing the urban shadow, Urban Studies , 38 (5-6): 869-883.
Franklin, B. (2004) The Urban Village: a concept with global connections, Open House International , 29 (4): 4-7.
Friedmann, J. (2002) City of fear or open city, APA Journal , 68 (3): 237-242.
Gallopin, G., Hammond, A., Raskin, P. and Swart, R. (1997) Branch Points: Global Scenarios and Human Choice . A resource Paper of the Global Scenario Group. Stockholm Environment Institute. Polar Star Series Report no.7.
Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (2001) Splintering Urbanism: Network Infrastructures, Technological Mobilities and the Urban Condition . London: Routledge.
Grant, J. (2001) The dark side of the grid: power and urban design, Planning Perspectives , 16 : 219-241.
Hamber, B. (1999) 'Have no doubt it is fear in the land'. An exploration of continuing cycles of violence in South Africa, Zeitschrift fur Politische Pshychologie , 7 (1-2): S.113-S.128.
Harrison, P. and Mabin, A. (2006) Security and space: managing the contradictions of access restriction in Johannesburg, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , 33 : 3-20.
Hillier, B. (1988) Against enclosure, in Teymeur, N., Markus, T. and Wooley, T. (eds.) Rehumanising Housing . London: Butterworth.
Hook, D. and Vrdoljak, M. (2002) Gated communities, heterotopia and a 'rights' of privilege: a 'heterotopology' of the South African security park, Geoforum , 33 : 195-219.
Jacobs, J. (1961) The Life and Death of Great American Cities . New York: Vinatge Books.
Kitchen, T. (2005) New Urbanism and CPTED in the British Planning System: some critical reflections, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research , 22 (4): 342-357.
Lampugnani, V. (ed.) (1986) Encyclopedia of 20Th-Century Architecture . (Revised edition). Harry N, Thames and Hudson, London: Abrams Publishers.
Landman, K. (2004) Gated communities in South Africa: the challenge for spatial planning and land use management, Town Planning Review , 75 (2): 151-172.
Landman, K. (2006a) Who owns the roads? Privatising public space in South African cities through neighbourhood closures, GeoJournal , 66 : 133-146.
Landman, K. (2006b) An Exploration of Urban Transformation in Post-apartheid South Africa Through Gated Communities, With a Specific Focus on Its Relation to Crime and Impact on Socio-spatial Integration . Unpublished PhD Thesis, UK: University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Lemanski, C. (2004) A new apartheid? The spatial implications of fear of crime in Cape Town, South Africa, Environment and Urbanization , 16 (2): 101-112.
Lemanski, C. (2006a) Spaces of exclusivity or connection: linkages between a gated community and its poorer neighbour in a Cape Town master-plan development, Urban Studies , 43 (2): 397-420.
Lemanski, C. (2006b) Residential responses to fear (of crime plus) in two Cape Town suburbs: implications for the post-apartheid city, Journal of International Development , 18 (5/6): 787-802.
Lipman, A. and Harris, H. (1999) Fortress Johannesburg, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , 26 : 727-740.
Lloyd-Jones, T., Erickson, B., Roberts, M. and Nice, S. (2001) The integrated metropolis: a strategy for the networked, multi-centred city, in Madanipour, A., Hull, A. and Healy, P. (eds.) The Governance of Place. Space and planning processes . Aldershot: Ashgate.
Madanipour, A. (1996) Design of Urban Space: And Inquiry into a Socio-Spatial Process . Chichester: John Wiley.
Madanipour, A. (2001) How relevant is 'planning by neighbourhoods' today? Town Planning Review , 72 (2): 171-191.
Mistry, D. (2004) Falling crime, rising fear, Crime Quartely , 8 : 17-24.
National Development and Planning Commission. (1995) Resource Document and Manual on Chapter 1: Principles of the Development Facilitation Act of 1995 . Pretoria, South Africa.
Neal, P. (2003) An urban village primer, in Neal, P. (ed.) Urban Villages and the Making of Communities . London: Spon Press.
Newman, O. (1972) Defensible Space: Crime Prevention through Urban Design . London: MacMillan.
Rouse, J. (2003) The place of urban design, Planning Theory and Practice , 4 (2): 220-221.
Sennett, R. (1995) The search for a place in the world, in Ellin, N. (ed.) Architecture of Fear . New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Thompson-Fawcett, M. (2003) Engaging with a tenacious New Urbanism, Planning Theory and Practice , 4 (2): 212-219.
Thompson-Fawcett, M. and Bond, S. (2003) Urbanist intentions for the built landscape: examples of concept and practice in England, Canada and New Zealand, Progress in Planning , 60 (2): 147-234.
Tiesdell, S. and Oc, T. (1998) Beyond 'fortress' and 'panoptic' cities - towards a safer urban public realm, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , 25 : 639-655.
Webster, C., Glasze, G. and Frantz, K. (2002) Guest editorial, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , 29 : 315-320.
|
My Research
