The planned, the unplanned and the hyper-planned: dwelling in contemporary Jerusalem

Abstract

In this paper we examine the production of two dwelling configurations which have developed concurrently in Jerusalem over the last two decades against a background of continued ethno-national contestation and extensive colonization of the city’s spaces on one hand, and of growing liberalization of planning processes on the other. The first housing pattern is the planning and construction of luxury apartments in the form of gated communities in West Jerusalem’s city center. These compounds mainly house religious Jewish immigrants from Western countries. The second housing activity is the recent proliferation of local zoning plans submitted by Palestinians in East Jerusalem to the Israeli planning authorities, plans whose purposes are to legalize, expand and save their houses from possible demolition. Though at first sight the hyper-planned compounds of West Jerusalem and the unplanned neighborhoods of East Jerusalem seem fully antithetical to each other, we argue that both are an outcome of the same tensions between neoliberalization of the Israeli planning system, especially in the realm of housing development and ongoing colonization of the city’s urban spaces. We conclude that the privatization of space and spatial planning is integrated into and complements the older patterns of organizing the ethno-national space.

Keywords:

• Housing
• neoliberalism
• colonial urbanism
• ethno-nationalism
• Jerusalem
• gated communities
• spot zoning

Notes

1. In the scope of this article, we will not be able to discuss the vast literature on divided and contested cities. For a recent and comprehensive review discussing this body of knowledge see Allegra et al. (2012).

2. For example, Jerusalem of Gold apartments (http://jerusalem-of-gold.co.il/), 7 Kook St (http://res.afi-g.com/en/cities/Jerusalem/7KookSt/pages/default.aspx), Haneviim Court (http://res.afi-g.com/en/cities/Jerusalem/HaNeviimCourt/pages/default.aspx), King David Residence (http://king-david-residence.com/), or Jerusalem Gold Garden (http://www.tafnit-eng.com/English/buildings/Preservation/BishopsHouse/JerusalemGoldGarden.htm).

3. http://www.jiis.org.il/.upload/yearbook/2015/general_table_heb.pdf. ( Retrieved 26.7.16).

4. For an updated and comprehensive discussion see Zaban, 2016.

5. See, for example, http://jerusalem-of-gold.co.il/Heb/Index.asp?CategoryID=84.

6. See for example, Urban scheme 2925 (Kfar David), Urban scheme 2080B (Haneviim Court), Urban scheme 4715 (King David’s Crown). Schemes accessed through Israel Land Authority website: http://www.land.gov.il/IturTabot2/taba1.aspx. This claim is also supported by the findings of Alfasi and Ganan (2015), who further discuss some of these plans.

7. Amendment 168 of the Ordinance “Law for the encouragement of immigration and return to Israel” (2008).

8. In the Israeli land-use code, various open area and landscaping categories are generally indicated by the color green. However, in the context of the history of planning in Israel in general and in Jerusalem in particular these zoning categories were abused for obscuring national and political goals (Misselwitz & Rieniets, 2006).

9. The data was collected using the website of the Planning Administration at the Ministry of Interior, for a long-term survey of planning in East Jerusalem. One of the authors was part of the survey’s team.

10. In the Israeli planning system, the planning permit is the last link of the document chain one must obtain in order for a house to be considered legal.

11. District Planning and Building Committee protocol, Plan No.2080b (Haneviim Court), 29.04.2004..

12.  Barkat, N. August 1, 2010. The Mayor’s vision for Jerusalem. Jerusalem: Center for Public Affairs. http://jcpa.org/article/the-mayors-vision-for-jerusalem/.