A few years back I wrote a couple of
articles for a local paper about the importance of Culture and Identity and
also touched upon the equally important issue of History.
I also quoted Sir Seretse Khama’s famous
statement that we cannot understand where we are going, if we don’t know from
where we are coming. Hence, we cannot build a future with identity without the proper
visual artefacts of our history and
culture, in my opinion. And her I take rather recent history as often important to connect with the past.
We cannot treat our few landmarks as
objects in a china crushing stand at a carnival! We have now a situation of
that kind coming up:
Let us start with a picture of a very
famous architect, planner and designer from Southern Africa, well known and
awarded prizes from all over the world – Jose Forjaz from Mocambique – the
designer behind the first phases of UB (or UCBLS – Univ College of Botswana,
Lesotho and Swaziland), designed and built in mid-70’s and opened in 1977:
Jose Forjaz – UB architect 1974
My story is – when reading a paper I see an
“Invitation to Tender” from the Tender Committee, University of Botswana –
“Consultancy Services for the Proposed Decommissioning or Demolishing of Old
Buildings at UB”.
As some of it is already demolished and
new, tasteless and bombastic buildings are the fashion, I immediately come to
think of the few remaining original buildings from the early day of UB (when
Swaziland and Lesotho were our partners). That’s the careful design by Jose Forjaz, internationally well-known
architect that in 1989 was rewarded the Ralph Erskine Award for his designs. A
Fact that R E pointed out when here in 1992 when having a workshop/seminar at
UB, sponsored by SIDA.
Consequently we have a landmark in Gaborone
that not many other African Cities have. But according to the Tender
Invitation, now prone to demolishing! Minus another landmark so to say if you
have followed my earlier essays.
However, I got a message from Killion
Mokwete, architect and lecturer at the UB dept for architecture (furthermore
the editor of Boidus Focus).
His message to me simply said – “the
demolition has been suspended after a colleague started a petition which gained
a lot of support from staff and students”. Well and fine, but...
It’s a good first step but hardly the last
– an academic tender committee has as many lives as a cat! So I read the
message as “temporarily suspended” and the committee will probably be lobbying
with various authorities. And as far as I know, UB doesn’t have to ask for planning and building
permission, just notify about the start of the project, as far as I know.
We are in fact dealing with the Ministry of
Education here, not City Council and the Town & Country Planning Board.
Thus, I think the anti-demolition activists must see that the famous old
buildings will have a “building preservation order” from the Minister in
charge.
I see it, the future for the landmark is
still uncertain – keep fighting at the grassroots and involve the antiquarians
at the Museum!
I find it important for the future that we
follow SSK’s statement – UB is an important part of Gaborone (and Botswana) and
has a history of its own. And that
history must be made visual to students, teachers and visitors by preserving
more than one or two buildings – there is a living environment to be preserved!
And wouldn’t it be fair by UB to contact
the architect and ask him for advice. Maybe he can incorporate the old parts
into some new concept while keeping a creative view on history and identity?
That’s normally done when the architect is still alive and active.
Let me now give you some few words in
general about History, Culture and Identity - how important the issues are,
especially when we are coming to a “renewal situation”.
A renewal and the ever ongoing expansion of
the City don’t start with a blank slate or panel. It is always primed by
topography, existing objects and history.
It is unthinkable to imagine that an established university of reputation (and,
thus, ranking) would demolish old
buildings to create new – they mostly don’t have the finance for that – do we have that?
Impotent two-variable thinking has already
cost a fortune to Botswana. For instance the de-construction of easily
upgradable roundabouts to horrible non-functional robotized four way stops. I
have written a lot about this in other articles, but to no avail. I only hope
that the unfortunate financial recession will put a stop to this frenzy so we
can mildly upgrade the ones left for us (as memory of earlier times).
Let me finish with an example how history
and previous use of land for agricultural purposes also can determine the
future use and planning. Almost all existing “expansion” land outside cities,
towns and major settlements have been divided up in fields and used for crop
production since many generations.
Consequently, they have a history and
certain conditions that must be understood by the planners. Fields are “”belonging”
to somebody, have distinct borders, often with drains, tracks and some trees.
The fields have soil conditions peculiar to planting. Tracks are compacted and
drains clayish.
We often see plans produced by either DTRP
or consultants (working in accordance with DTRP orders – remember, this
authority has the most un-experienced planners you can find – often employed
straight from university). If you check new detailed plans, you mostly find
iron-grid layouts with no reference to the existing fields or topography. It’s
like a big brother from government will come in with a bag of millions and
prepare for the infrastructure.
But development on tribal land is seldom
Council or GoB-funded like the old Accelerated Land Servicing Programmes for
towns. They are Land Board based and there is hardly any project finance. The
development must evolve bit by bit over time and for many years, the new
settlers must suffer from no constructed roads, drains and probably no sewers.
Furthermore, the overworked LB surveyors
must deal with a lot of claims from “landowners” that have a corner here and
there cut off. And new plot owners must build houses partly on an old field,
partly over a ditch or an old track. Knowing the situation at LB’s, this is not
feasible.
If the development had been “field by
field”, tracks kept for transportation and ditches for storm water disposal, and
existing vegetation intact, we have a more pragmatic and rational development
in tune with the history of the place – the
spirit of the place, called.
A paper on this methodology has been
presented by me many years ago but can’t even be found in the DTRP library,
today.
Bad methodologies cost government a lot of
money – I don’t like to say this but fortunately we have to Change, just like
in USA. And like there – it’s most important to find housing concepts better
than the “bungalow” one!
Jan Wareus
No comments:
Post a Comment