The verbal image of Cape Town will widen the gap between the rich and poor
WE HAVE heard so much well-deserved criticism of the ruling party and its shenanigans in recent years, we might almost think the official opposition occupies some kind of moral high ground.
The sale of the Tafelberg site shows it does not. The inadequate, pseudo-technical-procedural explanations, the hidden realities, the shifting of the argument to other issues, the sense that in the background someone involved in this sale has vested interests, all smells of the same odours as the game-playing and corruption in our national government.
The fact is, if our city council and provincial administration wanted to use the site for social housing they could have easily shifted minor technical hitches out of the way and made it possible. Their sale shows they did not want social housing on that site. Why not?
The site is perfectly located to house many of the poorer people who are essential to the good functioning of Sea Point. Being close to the mountain, the promenade along the sea, the stadium, the park, the shopping in Sea Point, its use primarily for housing makes excellent amenities accessible to a group who were limited access by apartheid.
When a couple of colleagues and I designed a proposal for the site, in response to a call from Ndivuyo Ukwazi, we recognised that it was one of a number of similar sites ranged across the city into Woodstock, Observatory and Mowbray, owned by one or other level of government.
The development of Tafelberg could be a wonderful model for how to penetrate Cape Town with a “necklace” of mixed use, mixed income developments.
But instead of grabbing the moment to start moving us towards a more integrated and equitable city, to start bridging the gaps apartheid forced on us, the City and Province reject it with confusing argument.
For what, I wonder? My guess is that there is some urgent idea about making us a world-class city. If you want to see what that is, open up the website of any city from Johannesburg to Atlanta to Melbourne to Dubai to the City of London. You’ll find an image of a city of shiny towers and motorways. It’s the same as the verbal image of the vision for Cape Town Robin Carlisle made of various city precincts when he was Provincial Minister of Transport and Public Works.
I would have thought our muchvaunted city and provincial government, instead of limply following this global model in which the gap between have and have-not is widening, should be aiming to show the world what a really good city is.
It is one in which all citizens can live the good life, can move freely and cheaply, have easy access to work and amenities, have a wide choice of where to live, are helped to participate in decisions that are made, are not pushed out by gentrification.
It’s not an exclusive city of glistening, inscrutable glorifications of big business that we want to create, but one of sustainable four to six-storey walk-up buildings shaped around busy streets and public spaces for people of all income groups to celebrate together.
The government of our city should be leading the fight to create such a place, not obstructing it.