 |  |
Click for Contents
Future Shock
Rochelle Furstenberg and Leslie Susser
Ehud Olmert, sailing to reelection in November's municipal ballot, is fostering high-rise building to renew the city center, solve housing problems and provide hotel space. But critics say the rash of planned skyscrapers threatens to overwhelm the city.
It's November 2003, five years after the reelection reelection of Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert - and the Holy City's historical landscape of gentle hills and low, stone-faced buildings has changed beyond recognition. Forty-four high-rises, ranging from 16 to a skysplitting 62 stories, zigzag across the skyline, some still under construction, with giant cranes hanging over them.
At East Talpiot, on the Hill of Evil Counsel, five huge hotels cast a shadow over the Old City across the valley. Other skyscrapers also loom over Jerusalem's ancient core, shattering the centuries-old proportions of turrets, gates and domes, and, from many angles, overshadowing the view of world-renowned scenery - the Old City walls, the Dome of the Rock on Temple Mount, the churches of Mt. Zion.
Towers rise incongruously from other historic areas as well. A 27-story building soars high above the classic 19th-century stone buildings that line the Street of the Prophets. A modernistic skyscraper, juxtaposed to the low, stone-arched Notre Dame of Zion convent, interrupts the pastoral beauty of old Ein Karem. Two 33-story hotels jut into the sky in the city's southwest, on what were once the rolling, forested grounds of the low-rise Holyland Hotel. And towering high above everything else is Merkaz Hayakum, the "Center of the Universe" on King George Street in the city center - a 62-story monument that developer Dudi Appel, a staunch Olmert political supporter, happily claims will replace the Old City as Jerusalem's focal point.
But the skyscrapers aren't the only thing marring the picture of Jerusalem 2003. Development has chewed away at the city's green spaces. Builders have turned more of what was once the 4,500-dunam Jerusalem Forest into housing, leaving intact less than a third of the original green space, and Road No. 16 now slices through it; in northwest Jerusalem, the Arazim residential projects have swallowed up more greenery in the Lifta Valley.
Despite the new highways, the city is congested. There isn't enough parking space for the new high-rises, or enough room on the streets for cars to reach them. In response, people are selling their homes and leaving Jerusalem in droves; ironically, the gleaming high-rises are in danger of becoming empty shells.
A far-fetched scenario? Not necessarily. Environmentalists say that every one of the high-rise projects mentioned above is already at one stage or another of planning. According to City Engineer Uri Ben-Asher, 12 have already received a stamp of approval from planning authorities - though no one knows just how long it will take to build them.
Jerusalem's imminent high-rise rush - today there are just a handful of buildings over 16 stories - would violate basic rules of conserving historic cities observed world-wide. No one would dream of building a modern tower in the center of Florence. In Paris, futuristic architecture has been concentrated in one thematically coherent area, La Defense, well away from the historic center. "It's not only individual buildings that must be preserved but the historic context, the architectural milieu that gives Jerusalem its unique character. If you leave a few old buildings on a street of skyscrapers, you've lost your historic city," explains Naomi Tzur, coordinator of the Jerusalem branch of the Society for the Protection of Nature (SPNI).
Many urban experts believe that Jerusalem's historical character is under serious threat. At a seminar sponsored by the Rothschild Foundation this summer, world renowned Israeli architect Moshe Safdie warned "there are plans for Jerusalem that will make it unrecognizable." And Shlomo Hasson, head of the Hebrew University's urban planning department and now an independent candidate for city council, warns: "If Olmert continues in this vein, even those of us who love this special city despite all its problems will leave."
Jerusalem didn't catch high-rise fever only when Olmert took office in 1993; early symptoms appeared under former mayor Teddy Kollek. The jarring towers from the Kollek era cited by environmentalists include the Sheraton Plaza Hotel looming over Independence Park, the white City Tower jutting up from downtown and the Holiday Inn at the city entrance.
But officials in Olmert's City Hall leave no doubt that they intend to accelerate the high-rise trend. Although they point out that no new high-rises have been completed during Olmert's years in office, they acknowledge that a dozen are all set to go up, and describe high-rise building as the ideal means to revive the downtown area and to attract new investors to build in the city (see box, page 17). (Explaining the discrepancy between City Hall's talk of 12 new skyscrapers and their own list of 44, environmentalists note that the balance have yet to receive all planning approvals.)
Urban planning experts and environmentalists complain that City Hall is ignoring both aesthetic and practical problems. Asserts Yisrael Shulderman, formerly of Kollek's One Jerusalem party and now of the independent Telem, who serves on the municipal planning committee and has sat on the city council for the past decade: "The only type of 'green' that interests developers and politicians is the green of dollars. We have to fight that."
Leading the critics is Shlomo Hasson. "Take the amphitheater Olmert's started building in the Ein Ya'el area (on the city's southwest edge, near the zoo)," he storms. "It's slashed out of the mountainside, instead of using the natural folds of a valley, the way the Greeks did." Hasson, who would have preferred to see the project close to the historic center of the city, says that "instead of an aesthetic triumph, unifying elements of nature and the Old City, what you have is an unsightly scar on a mountain in the middle of nowhere."
Far worse, says Hasson, is that the mayor uses his planning powers to win friends and influence p eople. "It's cynical, brutal and is not what we expect from a mayor. There is a lethal coalition between a manipulative, power-driven politician, greedy land developers and megalomaniac architects like Ram Carmi."
(Olmert has been mayor for a whole term already -- apart from the amphitheater, what evidence is there -- apart from 2 extremely lightweight political opponents -- of his obsession with highrise buildings, his disregard for history and aesthetics, and most important, of his corrupt ties with contractors? unless we can come up with specifics -- Olmert's role in and complicity with and connections to all these things -- this stuff reads like a rather crude hatchet job. How does what he's doing differ to what others do, and most important, to what Kollek, who was there for 2x years before him, did -- lots of people blame him for the Hilton, Omaria, the pink and black thing up the road, and more.)
That's easier said than done. Every new building needs an OK from the municipal and district planning committees. But the municipal panel is simply a committee of the city council, where Mayor Olmert has a built-in majority. And while the district panel has representatives from government ministries and "public" members, critics say Olmert commands an automatic majority there too.
What's more, Israeli cities are supposed to have master plans that set legal limits on what can be built where, but the plan for Jerusalem is so old that it puts virtually no limits on development. It doesn't even mention building heights. Kollek never sought to draw up a new plan; but it's only in the last few years that high-rise development has become a major issue. While a number of candidates in the local election are pressing for a new statutory blueprint, Olmert's administration speaks only of a "strategic" - non-binding - plan.
"Israel is experiencing today the kind of development fever that existed in the U.S. and Europe in the late 60s and early 70s, " says environmental attorney Phillip Warburg. "And much of the problem in Jerusalem can be traced to the fact that the last master plan was drawn up in 1959." That was eight years before the Six-Day War and the reunification of Jerusalem; the plan was written for a city of 160,000 people and some 20 square kilometers. Since then, population has risen to 600,000, and is expected to reach 900,000 by 2020. The city now has an area of 105 square kilometers, and could grow still more if Olmert succeeds in his efforts to incorporate the open spaces of the Judean Hills. Since the 1959 master plan was approved, no fewer than 8,460 variances have been made to it.
What's needed, says Warburg, is a new blueprint, which "limits the heights of buildings, and identifies sites for legal protection. It must provide more green space in Jerusalem which, at the moment, is well below international standards."
Shlomo Hasson says a master plan is needed urgently because "we're facing the phenomenon of commercial construction" with developers throwing up clumps of towers, out of place in existing parts of the city. He advocates a solution along the lines of La Defense - a modernistic high-rise technological and corporate complex far from the city center and its historic neighborhoods, preferably somewhere on the line between Israeli and Palestinian territory to promote cooperation.
City Engineer Uri Ben-Asher responds that City Hall does have a clear idea of where it's allowing towers: downtown, to renew the city's "seedy" center. Critics counter that the only way to energize downtown is to accentuate its historic character, gentrifying old commercial buildings - as has already been done successfully in some parts by creating pedestrian malls among the historic buildings.
There are diplomatic reasons for the absence of a master plan - a desire not to arouse Palestinian and world criticism of a Jewish-Israeli blueprint for Jerusalem. But the result, says Mike Turner, who sits on the district planning committee as an independent expert, "is that everything is decided on an ad hoc basis."
Shimon Sheetrit, Labor's underdog candidate for mayor, pledges that if elected, he'll stop any high-rises he can, and produce a new master plan. "We must exploit the best minds in Israel and the world to plan and conserve our unique city," he says.
A voluntary group called the Forum for the Future of Jerusalem, headed by Hasson, has already been working for two years on a new unofficial master plan. It hopes to pressure the winner of the mayoral election to use the proposal as the basis for a statutory blueprint. Hasson concedes that chances are slim of Olmert accepting a binding blueprint that would dramatically curb his power. But, Hasson muses, he might do so for the sake of his place in history.
The political alliance between Olmert and the ultra-Orthodox parties, say some critics, doesn't bode well for such a change. After winning on ultra-Orthodox votes in 93, Olmert gave his allies the chairmanship of the municipal planning committee.
"If you really want to understand what's been happening in Jerusalem," charges Hasson, "you need to understand how this alliance works. The ultra-Orthodox, who don't care what the secular city looks like, or what the urban implications of high-rise building are, vote automatically for anything the mayor proposes."
Not everyone goes that far. Shulderman says that Uri Lupolianski, head of the planning committee, has tried to expand ultra-Orthodox housing without allowing great planning abuses. And ultra-Orthodox residents of the Har Nof neighborhood have joined in the fight to save the nearby Jerusalem Forest. And Oded Hermoni, a local journalist who specializes in urban planning, notes that at least the ultra-Orthodox don't build skyscrapers in their own areas, albeit because many members of the community don't use elevators on Shabbat.
What's clear is that the mayor has huge clout in the planning process. Says Ruti Shalev, one of a group of young architects more willing than veteran ones to criticize the planning establishment: "The possibilities for abuse are built into the structure of city government." After a building project has been evaluated by the professionals in the city's engineering office, and changes suggested, it is brought before the municipal planning committee, which hears the arguments of citizens opposing the building, neighbors affected by the development, or environmental groups like the SPNI. "But while the committee might stop the small guy who wants to close in a balcony," charges Shalev, "there are different rules for the wealthy and well-connected."
A group of residents objecting to an addition of two stories to a house on Marcus Street in the stately Talbieh neighborhood came away from the municipal planning group feeling they'd been treated crudely, their objections absolutely disregarded. "They sat and ate while we presented our objections," said one resident. "It was clear that the decision was a foregone conclusion, that the contractor was a friend of the committee members, and nothing we could say would make any difference."
Dominated by members of Olmert's coalition, the planning committee is clearly responsive to his wishes. According to Shulderman, Olmert often attaches a memorandum to building requests, indicating that he has discussed the project with the developers and recommends approving it. "What member of Olmert's coalition would oppose a building if it's recommended by the mayor?" he asks.
Former mayor Kollek also allowed building out of step with urban needs. The high-rise apartment building on Rabbi Akiva Street near Independence Park, a tower of stone and glass, was approved during Kollek's term, setting off a chain reaction of plans for skyscrapers in the town center.
But under Olmert, there are consistent complaints of cronyism in approving major projects. For instance, the mayor backed the request of Alfred Akirov, the owner of the new Hilton and a contributor to Olmert's 1993 campaign, to add two extra stories to the hotel, blocking the view from downtown of the Old City walls. The municipal committee duly gave its approval.Olmert is reported [by whom?] to have contacted every member of the district committee to approve Sami Abudayah's [who's he? is he supposed to be a friend of Olmert? if not, drop eg] development plans at Al Rashid [which is what?] in East Jerusalem. There might be justification for promoting Arab development, and it could also be argued that increased housing and office space provides revenue for the city's needy coffers. But many feel that Olmert 's involvement is exaggerated, taking a "hands on" attitude in pushing projects for friends, at the expense of Jerusalem aesthetics. "He's a bulldozer, really cares abou t Jerusalem, and gets things done" said one close observer of the municipal scene, while questioning whether the mayor's vision for Jerusalem is for a great modern metropolis, rather than a great historic city. "At the same time," an admirer of Olmert admitted, "he takes care of his friends."
Argues one critic: "Olmert's aiming to be prime minister, and that takes a lot of money. He'll need rich friends."
After passing the municipal panel, projects must gain the approval of the district planning committee. Representatives of government ministries like Housing and Interior sit on it, as do public figures - who, say critics, are sometimes closely tied to Olmert. "It's incomprehensible," says Shulderman, "but the very entrepreneurs or their lawyers who have large interests in Jerusalem real estate, sit on the district committee."
In fact, the sole representative of a professional organization is urban planner Mike Turner, for the Architects Association.
The result is countless conflicts of interests. For instance, Nissim Abuloff, the Likud's representative on the committee, has major real estate holdings in Jerusalem, as does Shlomo Deri, who represents Shas and is the brother of party leader Arye Deri. When Abuloff wanted to add onto a building on Ben-Maimon Boulevard in Rehaviah, he didn't even send the plans - which included false claims about parking and building size - for approval by the city planning department and the municipal committee, planning sources say. Instead, he pushed the plan through the district committee, but was blocked by alert residents. Abuloff could not be reached for comment.
Another example: Architect Pascal Broide is developing a third of a gigantic complex at the end of the Haas promenade in East Talpiot; his piece includes a 22-story hotel tower, one of five to be built there. "This hotel complex will dominate the skyline," says Turner. "It is equivalent to 60 percent of all the hotel space in Tel Aviv." Yet Broide also sits on the district committee. And although he was not present when the committee confirmed plans for the complex, it would have been awkward for his colleagues to oppose it.
Hasson charges that the worst case concerns the Holyland project, which would put several 11-story apartment buildings and two 33-story hotel towers on 400 dunams (100 acres) on a ridge in southwest Jerusalem, once the wide grounds of the Holyland Hotel. "Aside from the aesthetics," say Hasson, "the plan ignores basic demands for parking, road access and public space. It creates another town within Jerusalem, without adequate facilities."
The Holyland Corporation, developer of the project, has enormous influence. Hasson claims Olmert pushed for the project, arguing that Jerusalem needs hotels for the anticipated influx of Christian tourists in the year 2000. But it's unlikely the hotels would be complete for the burst of tourism the year after next; besides, the project includes far more than hotels.
Residents of the nearby Ramat Sharett neighborhood have been fighting the project. "But the municipal committee would not even let us present our opposition," Hasson complains. "Then, it was pushed quickly through the district committee."
The Ramat Sharett residents appealed to the National Planning Commission - essentially the supreme court of planning, which includes public representatives, including environmentalists. That body ruled that the plans must be resubmitted to the district panel after significant changes. But the developers brought the plan back to the district committee without any basic changes - and it was approved again. Now opponents intend to appeal to the Supreme Court, which can only block the project on procedural grounds.
Hasson believes that the developers behind the Holyland project are not planning to build there themselves: "There's no money for it right now. But once they have approval for such massive, high-rise development, they can parcel out the land to other contractors and make a killing."
Indeed, there is no statute of limitations on approval for construction. All over Jerusalem, "real estate building rights are accumulating, to be sold at the right time," explains local journalist Oded Hermoni.
The irony of all the high-rise planning, says Mike Turner, is that there is no urban need for residential high-rises. People don't want to live in densities greater than 16 units per dunam, or quarter-acre, Turner argues, and these densities can be achieved without any tall buildings. What's more, he says, there's enough land in Jerusalem to get by at that density. "First there should be a debate about optimal building density in all the different parts of the city, and the heights of the buildings should be derived from that. To do anything else is crazy - like designing a suit around a button."
One alternative to building high is building "deep." To put up a tower, a developer is required to purchase surrounding ground for parking, green space and other needs; the same land can be used for a lower, wider building.
When approached by a developer who wanted a 30-story building on Jaffa Street near the city entrance, architect David Reznik agreed to build only eight, to avoid breaking the existing skyline. But by building in depth, he was able give the developer all the apartments and commercial space he wanted. "It was like breaking the high-rise down, and stacking the parts behind each other," Hasson explains.
High-rises, charges Turner, do not solve urban problems, but rather create them. They are expensive to maintain; only about 5 percent of the population could afford to live in them; and only 1 percent would actually want to. Not to speak of the parking and traffic problems they create, and the fact that firemen are virtually powerless to do anything about saving people trapped above the 16th floor.
In addition to the Holyland project, several other planned high-rises are intended to serve as Millennium hotels - and unlikely to be ready for the surge. And Hasson argues that in the long term, the hotels are likely to prove an urban and financial disaster. Mega-hotels in Spain and Turkey are now empty because people simply don't like staying in them. "They are like big inhospitable factories. You go once, and you don't go back again," he says.
Turner, who has written a detailed proposal for building heights in the city, believes that historic Jerusalem must remain at the architectural center. This means that tall buildings should not be allowed to obstruct the view of the Old City. City Engineer Ben-Asher echoes this view, saying that no tall buildings should be built on the first or second range of hills around the Old City. But it's an open question whether Ben-Asher has the clout to stand up to the politicians and entrepreneurs.
Ahead of polling day, a green coalition to "save Jerusalem" from high-rise fever has begun to coalesce. Small, neighborhood groups that previously fought to save one park, or stop one building, are joining together with the SPNI's Naomi Tzur, in a project entitled Sustainable Development for the City of Jerusalem, supported by the Dorot and the Nathan Cummings foundations. Along with planning professionals who have joined together in the Forum for the Future of Jerusalem, the group is writing planning guidelines, which it plans to present at a series of meetings around the city for public discussion and input.
"Ultimately, there must be a change in Jerusalem planning policy. The public should be able to have input early on in the planning process, and not just object to things after they've already been decided," says Tzur?
In the meantime, Mike Turner calls upon the public to be more aware of what's happening, to follow the announcements of proposed buildings posted at City Hall and published in the newspapers, and to support the SPNI. But ultimately it is politics and the politicians who will decide the future of Jerusalem, and the outcome of the November elections could be crucial And several of the parties and special interest groups running for council seats are making planning and environmental issues a top priority. Shulderman and Hasson, whose Yesh list would dearly love to gain the city's planning portfolio, are on independent "green" tickets, and Labor's Shetreet has put Tzippi Ron, one of Israel's green pioneers, high on his list.
Hasson, No. 2 on the Yesh list headed by Yosef Tal-Gan, denies that his criticism of Olmert is a question of party politics; on the contrary, he says, his criticism brought him into politics. The party's main goal, he says, is to get the city planning portfolio after the election, and put it in the hands of professionals who care. "We're willing to join whatever coalition is formed," says Hasson, who says that Yesh has support from left and right, religious and non-religious residents.
Hasson argues that the biggest problem facing forces for change in Jerusalem is public apathy. In the last election, the ultra-Orthodox turnout was about 90 percent, compared to less than 40 percent for the secular community. This, Hasson believes, distorted the results, since the ultra-Orthodox constitute only 17 percent of the voters. "What I want to do," says the SPNI's Naomi Tzur, who describes herself as politically right of center, "is to create a Green organization as powerful as those in Europe."
That would change the political map in Israel and the capital. And perhaps, at last, it would push politicians to respect and preserve the Talmudic dictum - "Ten measures of beauty were given to the world. Nine of them went to Jerusalem."
1998
 |
|
 |
|
© The Jerusalem Report 1999-2000 |  |