Future perfect?
Sunlight glints off the steely grey towers lining Avenue Arquitectos. And as palm trees sway in the cool morning breeze, smiling couples eat muffins and croissants under parasols advertising Italian coffee. A young man in a polo shirt glides past in a convertible German sports car. In Le Salon de Serenité, a blond-haired woman in distressed designer jeans chats to the young girl treating her
nails. And in the Malibu Sports Centre, P Diddy entertains rowers, runners and cyclists courtesy of MTV.
This is City Santa Fe, Mexico City’s most high-profile residential development. Or at least this is the vision of City Santa Fe. If all goes to plan, the first three of its ten apartment blocks will be completed in September, when, according to its developers, residents will be able to enjoy ‘the best education centers, commercial services, corporate offices and the most renowned malls and recreation centers in Mexico City’.
This multi-million-dollar luxury residential community is the latest addition to Santa Fe, Mexico City’s 946-hectare business district in the southwestern hills of the Distrito Federal (DF). Built on the site of an old rubbish dump, its impressive array of skyscrapers stands as a shining example of the city’s transition from urban catastrophe to global city. However, while politicians and business leaders gaze
in awe at Mexico City’s self-proclaimed Manhattan, critics argue that it’s destroying public life in the city.
Santa Fe is one of several ‘megaprojects’ commissioned by the DF in the early 1990s as part of its attempt to elevate Mexico City’s regional and global standing. Along with a regenerated stretch of Paseo de la Reforma, it was to provide facilities for foreign companies expected to arrive post-NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). Designed by some of Mexico’s most distinguished architects, it hosts more than 170 multinationals, including Coca-Cola, Eriksson, Honda, IBM, Kraft, Jaguar, Toyota and Volvo.
However, it’s more than just a business district. It also offers commercial, residential and leisure facilities. At last count, it was home to 7,630 families, 114 restaurants, seven private schools with more than 10,000 students, two private universities, five 5-star hotels, an 18-hole golf course, a convention centre, an entertainment complex with 17 cinema screens and the largest shopping mall in Latin America.
In fact, according to Valentina Davó, Santa Fe offers a whole new way of life. ‘Santa Fe is like a city within a city,’ says Davó, sales manager
of City Santa Fe. ‘You live where you work, your kids can go to school here, you have a hospital, retail areas, leisure facilities and so on.’
City Santa Fe, she points out, will include four Olympic-size swimming pools, spas, gyms, day-care centres and retail areas with restaurants, boutiques, dry cleaners and so on. ‘You could compare it to a little New York,’ she says,’ a downtown where you have everything you need for a more comfortable, convenient way of living.’
This is all very nice, and aspirational chilangos have been falling over themselves to buy into this vision of a future perfect lifestyle. However, architects and sociologists point out that while it offers fantastic facilities, as an urban centre within the city, it’s a disaster.
For a start, its transport links are woefully inadequate. There are no subway or train services and only a handful of bus routes, so access is almost exclusively by car. But with only four entry roads, its 100,000 commuters create gridlock throughout the south and west of the DF every day. Combined with its remote location and its concentration on high-end amenities, its poor transport means that Santa Fe is inaccessible both physically and economically to the majority of chilangos.
However, some of Santa Fe’s most vocal critics argue that the global forces at work have created an urban landscape that’s divorced from the history, character and identity of Mexico City, a ‘generic city’ that is culturally and architecturally indistinguishable from other high-rise developments around the world. While some may view these as the objections
of romanticists and Luddites, there’s a serious point here beyond simple aesthetics and tradition that concerns the impact of globalisation on social integration, public life and the nature of the urban environment.
DEVOID OF LIFE
Driving around the streets of Santa Fe, one is immediately struck by its sterility and anonymous, rather unhuman character. Compared to the hustle and bustle one finds all over Mexico City, Santa Fe’s streets are devoid of life; pedestrians are few and far between. And while there is some traffic in the business and commercial areas, the residential sections are eerily quiet. The steely grey and blue skyscrapers are cold and rather intimidating. And sentry posts at the entrances to gated apartment blocks and residential complexes
do little to make visitors feel welcome.
In aspiring to exclusivity and modernity, it seems, Santa Fe has lost the very element that gives Mexico City its character: public space. ‘The most successful urban centres are places of people, interaction and serendipity,’ says Diane Davis, professor of urban studies and planning at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ‘Public space creates this idea of the public sphere and the sense of connection to a cosmopolitanism and diversity.’
According to Gareth Jones, senior lecturer in geography at the London School of Economics, public space has always been an integral part of Mexico City. ‘Although it wasn’t built with the whole public in mind, the focal point of many traditional parts of the city was an urban infrastructure that created a sense of conviviality in public life. In the old towns such as Coyuacan and San Angel, this would have included the church, the square, the convent, the market and the bandstand.’ Even the informal settlements and the large-scale social housing developments of the 20th century included provision for public space, he points out.
In contrast, Santa Fe is virtually devoid of public space. According to Maria Moreno-Carranco, assistant professor in urban design at Mexico’s Metropolitan Autonomous University, it all comes down to the design. ‘Santa Fe isn’t designed for people,’ she says. ‘It’s oriented almost entirely towards cars. There are very few pavements or pathways that are pedestrian-friendly. And many of the streets
are cul-de-sacs, which mean there is very little through traffic, of either pedestrians or cars.’ Most pavements are purely decorative and seldom get any use, she continues. ‘And all the buildings are separated from the streets and there is often no way for pedestrians to gain access to them.’
That isn’t to say that there aren’t any spaces for public interaction. The mall is full of shops, restaurants and walkways. And there is a square that has recently been dressed with grass and benches. However, it would be difficult to call these areas public spaces. Moreno explains: ‘Santa Fe is essentially privately controlled, by multinational companies and neighbourhood associations, who are hiring security guards and, increasingly, installing CCTV cameras to monitor their patch. So even in the areas where there is physical space for interaction, people are seldom at liberty to behave as they might wish.’ In practice, this can mean anything from selling tacos on a street corner to simply waiting for a friend or colleague on the steps of an office building. Even taking a photograph invites harassment from private security or the police.
PRIVATE CONTROL
It would be easy to assume that Santa Fe’s lack of public space comes down to negligence, but nothing about its planning is accidental. On the contrary, it has been carefully designed according to a US model that is being adopted in globalising cities all over the world, from Johannesburg to Mumbai and Buenos Aires to Shanghai.
Through the private control of public areas, says Jones, this model allows a globalised class to withdraw from public life as much as possible. ‘In this privatised world,’ he says, ‘people rely on their garden, gym and club, and whatever else can be arranged as space for children and dog walking and so on.’ In some cases, he continues, neighbourhood associations have even lobbied for the removal of public transport, small public parks and other public amenities that they consider undesirable because they attract the general public.
From a certain perspective, Santa Fe’s control of public space should be considered a success, says Davis. ‘Santa Fe was conceived as an area in which multinational businesses could operate. So if you’re a wealthy businessman living or working in Santa Fe, the controls and security in place are going to make you feel safe. You won’t have to worry about being mugged or kidnapped, about mixing with the so-called riff-raff and so on.’
But in terms of creating a functioning urban centre, it’s a resounding failure, says Moreno. ‘Santa Fe is promoting this whole idea of the city, a global capital, a professional elite, transnational companies, cosmopolitanism and so on,’ she says. ‘So if you can’t live in New York, you can at least live in a part of Mexico City that feels like it. But there’s a double discourse going on here. You’re not actually living in a city, you’re in a city-like environment. Santa Fe has all the imagery of city life. But it has none of the functions. It has no atmosphere. It doesn’t have public space, it just has empty spaces that do nothing except collect rubbish.’
April 2008
nails. And in the Malibu Sports Centre, P Diddy entertains rowers, runners and cyclists courtesy of MTV.
This is City Santa Fe, Mexico City’s most high-profile residential development. Or at least this is the vision of City Santa Fe. If all goes to plan, the first three of its ten apartment blocks will be completed in September, when, according to its developers, residents will be able to enjoy ‘the best education centers, commercial services, corporate offices and the most renowned malls and recreation centers in Mexico City’.
This multi-million-dollar luxury residential community is the latest addition to Santa Fe, Mexico City’s 946-hectare business district in the southwestern hills of the Distrito Federal (DF). Built on the site of an old rubbish dump, its impressive array of skyscrapers stands as a shining example of the city’s transition from urban catastrophe to global city. However, while politicians and business leaders gaze
in awe at Mexico City’s self-proclaimed Manhattan, critics argue that it’s destroying public life in the city.
Santa Fe is one of several ‘megaprojects’ commissioned by the DF in the early 1990s as part of its attempt to elevate Mexico City’s regional and global standing. Along with a regenerated stretch of Paseo de la Reforma, it was to provide facilities for foreign companies expected to arrive post-NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). Designed by some of Mexico’s most distinguished architects, it hosts more than 170 multinationals, including Coca-Cola, Eriksson, Honda, IBM, Kraft, Jaguar, Toyota and Volvo.
However, it’s more than just a business district. It also offers commercial, residential and leisure facilities. At last count, it was home to 7,630 families, 114 restaurants, seven private schools with more than 10,000 students, two private universities, five 5-star hotels, an 18-hole golf course, a convention centre, an entertainment complex with 17 cinema screens and the largest shopping mall in Latin America.
In fact, according to Valentina Davó, Santa Fe offers a whole new way of life. ‘Santa Fe is like a city within a city,’ says Davó, sales manager
of City Santa Fe. ‘You live where you work, your kids can go to school here, you have a hospital, retail areas, leisure facilities and so on.’
City Santa Fe, she points out, will include four Olympic-size swimming pools, spas, gyms, day-care centres and retail areas with restaurants, boutiques, dry cleaners and so on. ‘You could compare it to a little New York,’ she says,’ a downtown where you have everything you need for a more comfortable, convenient way of living.’
This is all very nice, and aspirational chilangos have been falling over themselves to buy into this vision of a future perfect lifestyle. However, architects and sociologists point out that while it offers fantastic facilities, as an urban centre within the city, it’s a disaster.
For a start, its transport links are woefully inadequate. There are no subway or train services and only a handful of bus routes, so access is almost exclusively by car. But with only four entry roads, its 100,000 commuters create gridlock throughout the south and west of the DF every day. Combined with its remote location and its concentration on high-end amenities, its poor transport means that Santa Fe is inaccessible both physically and economically to the majority of chilangos.
However, some of Santa Fe’s most vocal critics argue that the global forces at work have created an urban landscape that’s divorced from the history, character and identity of Mexico City, a ‘generic city’ that is culturally and architecturally indistinguishable from other high-rise developments around the world. While some may view these as the objections
of romanticists and Luddites, there’s a serious point here beyond simple aesthetics and tradition that concerns the impact of globalisation on social integration, public life and the nature of the urban environment.
Start the slideshow (4 pictures)
DEVOID OF LIFE
Driving around the streets of Santa Fe, one is immediately struck by its sterility and anonymous, rather unhuman character. Compared to the hustle and bustle one finds all over Mexico City, Santa Fe’s streets are devoid of life; pedestrians are few and far between. And while there is some traffic in the business and commercial areas, the residential sections are eerily quiet. The steely grey and blue skyscrapers are cold and rather intimidating. And sentry posts at the entrances to gated apartment blocks and residential complexes
do little to make visitors feel welcome.
In aspiring to exclusivity and modernity, it seems, Santa Fe has lost the very element that gives Mexico City its character: public space. ‘The most successful urban centres are places of people, interaction and serendipity,’ says Diane Davis, professor of urban studies and planning at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ‘Public space creates this idea of the public sphere and the sense of connection to a cosmopolitanism and diversity.’
According to Gareth Jones, senior lecturer in geography at the London School of Economics, public space has always been an integral part of Mexico City. ‘Although it wasn’t built with the whole public in mind, the focal point of many traditional parts of the city was an urban infrastructure that created a sense of conviviality in public life. In the old towns such as Coyuacan and San Angel, this would have included the church, the square, the convent, the market and the bandstand.’ Even the informal settlements and the large-scale social housing developments of the 20th century included provision for public space, he points out.
In contrast, Santa Fe is virtually devoid of public space. According to Maria Moreno-Carranco, assistant professor in urban design at Mexico’s Metropolitan Autonomous University, it all comes down to the design. ‘Santa Fe isn’t designed for people,’ she says. ‘It’s oriented almost entirely towards cars. There are very few pavements or pathways that are pedestrian-friendly. And many of the streets
are cul-de-sacs, which mean there is very little through traffic, of either pedestrians or cars.’ Most pavements are purely decorative and seldom get any use, she continues. ‘And all the buildings are separated from the streets and there is often no way for pedestrians to gain access to them.’
That isn’t to say that there aren’t any spaces for public interaction. The mall is full of shops, restaurants and walkways. And there is a square that has recently been dressed with grass and benches. However, it would be difficult to call these areas public spaces. Moreno explains: ‘Santa Fe is essentially privately controlled, by multinational companies and neighbourhood associations, who are hiring security guards and, increasingly, installing CCTV cameras to monitor their patch. So even in the areas where there is physical space for interaction, people are seldom at liberty to behave as they might wish.’ In practice, this can mean anything from selling tacos on a street corner to simply waiting for a friend or colleague on the steps of an office building. Even taking a photograph invites harassment from private security or the police.
PRIVATE CONTROL
It would be easy to assume that Santa Fe’s lack of public space comes down to negligence, but nothing about its planning is accidental. On the contrary, it has been carefully designed according to a US model that is being adopted in globalising cities all over the world, from Johannesburg to Mumbai and Buenos Aires to Shanghai.
Through the private control of public areas, says Jones, this model allows a globalised class to withdraw from public life as much as possible. ‘In this privatised world,’ he says, ‘people rely on their garden, gym and club, and whatever else can be arranged as space for children and dog walking and so on.’ In some cases, he continues, neighbourhood associations have even lobbied for the removal of public transport, small public parks and other public amenities that they consider undesirable because they attract the general public.
From a certain perspective, Santa Fe’s control of public space should be considered a success, says Davis. ‘Santa Fe was conceived as an area in which multinational businesses could operate. So if you’re a wealthy businessman living or working in Santa Fe, the controls and security in place are going to make you feel safe. You won’t have to worry about being mugged or kidnapped, about mixing with the so-called riff-raff and so on.’
But in terms of creating a functioning urban centre, it’s a resounding failure, says Moreno. ‘Santa Fe is promoting this whole idea of the city, a global capital, a professional elite, transnational companies, cosmopolitanism and so on,’ she says. ‘So if you can’t live in New York, you can at least live in a part of Mexico City that feels like it. But there’s a double discourse going on here. You’re not actually living in a city, you’re in a city-like environment. Santa Fe has all the imagery of city life. But it has none of the functions. It has no atmosphere. It doesn’t have public space, it just has empty spaces that do nothing except collect rubbish.’
April 2008
|
FIND OUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON TWITTER:
| |
 |
