Let’s rethink the planning of urban areas

By Jeckonia Otieno

1. Where did Africa go wrong with planning of urban areas?

Africa did not go wrong. The problem started when much of Europe and America failed to plan for people and instead started concentrating on planning for how people would move from one place to another. Africa then, instead of making a clean break, followed suit and most of the cities got it all wrong, hence the mess we now see. Many cities, instead of planning for people, have concentrated on planning for cars and how the cars will get space to move people from one place to the other. This has in turn meant that more infrastructural development is seen but it does not have a significant impact on the larger population. You find beautiful roads, which are clogged with cars yet there is a huge number of people who have to walk to work. This number is usually stuck in traffic jams, which in turn wastes man hours.

2. What is the main problem that needs to be addressed?

Segregation of land use is the biggest problem that face many cities, African cities included. We have created cities where there are extremes of social groups. These groups rarely mingle and one has no business with the other. The high-income group is not bothered about what happens at the bottom of the food chain.

3. What would you propose instead of segregation?

As opposed to segregation, the idea of mixed land use could be the solution to all these planning problems. Mixed land use means planning urban areas in such a way that people do not have to travel a long distance to go to work or to school or to play and relax. All these things can be done in the same area.

4. How will this solve the segregation problem?

In this case, there is planning for people. When you plan for people then there is social integration where all social classes share the same neighbourhood.

When this happens we would not see extremes of both sides — either very upmarket estates or slums — but a well planned location where one economic activity affects the other and they end up synergising because, after all, they need each other.

5. Wouldn’t slum upgrading be a better solution?

Slum upgrading will still mean that there is just one group of people from the same class living in the same area and this would not bring any sense of social responsibility to those outside that class.

Upgrading cannot do away with delinquency; nor alleviate poverty. Social integration will ensure that both the rich and the poor have a symbiotic relationship where they reside.

6. What then is the solution instead of planning for cars?

Planning for cars means that people can move easily in their cars to get to work or school; but not everybody can afford a car. This makes many people walk to work. Also as more people struggle to buy cars, a lot of pressure is exerted on the existing infrastructure.

7. Why not invest in public transport to ease the traffic jams and move people easily?

A free market dictates that the strongest survives. Many people have invested in public transport, which is a thriving business.

No government is willing to invest in public transport because it lacks profit, but if it were to be in place, then more people will be accommodated rather than have more cars on the road.

To individuals, it is big business but to governments, it never seems a worthy option.

8. But still, infrastructure development counts, doesn’t it?

Take a quick sum. If more people buy cars and you are forced to expand or build roads or if you decide to invest in a viable public transport, which one is cheaper? Building more roads is neither that easy nor cheap.

So the solution as people rethink about sustainable planning is to create a functional public transport system.

9. Has this worked elsewhere?

Take an example of Johannesburg, which was planned for cars and now is trying to introduce a viable mass transport system that has proved problematic.

Brazil and Colombia have model rapid bus transport in the world and this has cleared roads and killed the traffic jams. Other cities can follow from these examples and create better planned cities that care for everybody.

10. Can private developers step in to come up with better-planned cities?

It is the prerogative of the government to take care of citizens. Private developers might come in but the ultimate responsibility lies with the government, which needs to put proper policies in place for proper planning.

The people pay taxes, which call for services from the government. Therefore, in as much as the private sector steps in, a big chunk of the responsibility lies with the government.