Thamrin sidewalk project: Insanity?

Thamrin sidewalk project: Insanity?

Marco Kusumawijaya, Architect, Jakarta

Isn't it pathetic that something as mundane and taken for
granted as sidewalks has become the center of attention after the
city announced its plan to beautify Jl. Thamrin?

Perhaps not, as for decades sidewalks have never really been
conceived as an integrated part of streets. When the city's
public works department said it wanted to widen the street, it
meant only the asphalted part of the street, often at the expense
of already-narrow sidewalks. When new streets are first built,
they are often constructed without sidewalks, which are added
only later as token, or even decorative, features.

Think about the contrast: Paris, since Napoleon's time, has
had a law that stipulates that all streets should include
sidewalks of a certain minimum width and quality. London has had
them since the 18th century, in a law that also regulates
placement of billboards and shop signage. It also says that
sidewalks should have a better surface than that for carts.

However, in Jakarta, a good sidewalk is a special "project",
not something "normal" to be provided for all streets of the
city, but only for Jl. M.H. Thamrin, the most prestigious avenue
of the capital.

It is the responsibility of the city's Department of
Landscaping and City Beauty, instead of Public Works, which also
speaks volumes about the sidewalk being seen as something "less
or more than the street". Over the years, we have seen that the
department has grown in importance, as the governor has relied on
it for its "image-building" projects to provide a distraction
from the administration's inability to tackle serious fundamental
problems, such as flooding and poor transportation.

Professionals know how silly this department has been in its
handling of the Hotel Indonesia traffic circle, the fencing-in of
the National Monument park, and other projects.

In Jakarta, cars are parked on sidewalks. Look at the shameful
occurrences near many embassies and ambassadorial residences in
Menteng. This privatization of the public realm also takes on
another form: Some sidewalks are planted so heavily that no one
could possibly walk on them. I have argued with security guards
because they forbade me from parking on streets in front of
sidewalks outside their bosses' residences.

I told one such guard, "In case you didn't know, you have no
right to claim the streets and the sidewalks, so you cannot tell
me not to park outside your fence, unless I park right in front
of your gate."

"But my boss had the sidewalk paved", he said.

"Aha! That is even worse. He should not have done anything on
public land! Moreover, in this area it should be left open with
grass," I replied with joy. Yesterday I saw the paving removed,
the surface planted with grass, and some beautiful pots were
placed there to prevent people from walking on the area.

Another reason why the pedestrianization of Jl. Thamrin has
been paid so much attention is that Singapore's Orchard Road has
become its model. What a shame for Jakarta, one of the most
liveliest cities in the world, to have to look up to Singapore.
It is, in architect Rem Koolhaas's words, a city without
qualities.

Unfortunately, it (Singapore) is "metastasizing across Asia,
with the sparkle of its organization, the glamour of its
successful uprooting, the success of its human transformation,
the laundering of its past, its manipulation of vernacular
cultures."

Well, it is OK to imitate Singapore, not only for its
cleanliness (although it has still suffered SARS) and discipline,
but for its social imagination, too? Please, we do not want to
limit ourselves to Premier Goh's Next Lap: Our vision is "an
island with an increased sense of 'island-ness' -- more beaches,
marinas, resorts, and, possibly, entertainment parks."

Perhaps the most that we should worry about is not a further
"modernization" of Jakarta according to a Singaporean model that,
of course, will be over-simplistic and ignore the capital's
social, cultural and economic reality, and will result in more
conflict, split personalities, and public expense.

What we should worry about is that there is no clear,
acceptably plural social imagination, richly and openly
deliberated in public, before the city starts on these stupid,
physical works. We should worry about this because that is how
the city has been operating in many other respects, including the
poorly (socially and culturally) imagined northern coastal
reclamation project.

Faith seems to be vested in the technician. This may lead to
another disaster, as the pedestrianization -- as they oddly call
it, despite its further humiliation of pedestrians -- is designed
by the same professor from Bandung who also designed the
uninspiring "renovation" of Hotel Indonesia traffic circle, and
whose hometown does not show any indication of his contribution
to prevent its further rot.

It appears so sad that, after Budi Lim -- the only Indonesian
Oxford graduate, licensed urban designer -- moved out, in this
city, professor Danisworo seems to be the only architect that the
administration trusts. What is happening to more or less 3,000
architects available in the city, who have produced much better
designs all over the metropolis?

How come public money can be spent on beautifying the most
important avenue of the city simply by directly appointing an
architect, instead of organizing a competition to get the best
result? I smell something fishy.