THROUGHOUT August, the Makati CBD rolled out its Weekend Shared Street program, where key streets in Salcedo Village became car-free on Saturdays and Sundays.
I laud this move toward utilizing tactical urbanism to encourage people to enjoy the neighborhood further. However, we must look at the bigger picture by realizing the value of open spaces as the heart of communities and the lungs of our cities.
Privately-owned public spaces (POPS)
Longtime residents of Salcedo Village, and those working in the Makati CBD, are familiar with Jaime Velasquez Park, the main urban pocket park that serves the denizens of Salcedo. The park itself is only about 7,000 square meters, and, admittedly, it does get rather cramped these days, especially during the Saturday Market.
What many people do not recall is that Jaime Velasquez Park was once part of a wider block for Salcedo Village’s integrated green spaces that covered about 1.5 hectares (or 15,000 square meters). It was not until the late 1980s that a section of the park was shaved off for the construction of Velasquez Street and One Salcedo Place.
This is an example of a developer exercising their right over privately owned public spaces (or POPS) for purposes of income generation. The same was done for Ayala Triangle, which is now occupied by tall office buildings.
Currently, Presidential Decree 1216 requires only 30 percent of developed land to be allocated for open spaces — and this includes the roads, sidewalks and alleys. As a result, only around eight percent is actually left.
However, open spaces should not be treated as leftover land, but rather as the central component of urban environments. I’d like to share some important lessons using Singapore, Bangkok and Boston as relevant examples.
The urban jungle of Singapore
Singapore provides the clearest model of an urban jungle. Over decades, the city has deliberately woven greenery into the urban fabric through its extensive network of parks and tree-lined streets.
Rather than treating each park as an isolated island of greenery, Singapore connects its open spaces into a larger system known as the Park Connector Network that brings people closer to nature.
Its current planning direction seeks to make parks accessible within a short walk of homes, while its development guidelines also require open spaces to be conveniently located and accessible to surrounding communities.
A small pocket park becomes considerably more valuable when it is connected to another place of interest, such as a transit station, a school, a shopping area, or a place of worship.
This suggests an important principle for our own cities: Good open spaces are not simply a collection of parks; they are a network that connects communities.
Multipurpose parks in Bangkok
Bangkok offers another particularly relevant lesson. The Chulalongkorn University Centenary Park and Benjakitti Park demonstrate how open spaces can be multifunctional.
These parks act as recreational spaces as well as green infrastructure. By incorporating substantial planting, retention ponds, and other water-management measures, the park helps mitigate flooding by acting as a sponge that absorbs rainwater.
This is particularly relevant to the Philippines, where we share a similar climate to Thailand and our Southeast Asian neighbors. The problem here is that we pave over our green spaces with concrete, and this further overwhelms our outdated and undersized drainage system during heavy rainfall.
Boston’s tactical urbanism
Boston has long benefited from the Emerald Necklace, an urban forest spanning 450 hectares that was designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, which runs through the city’s neighborhoods. However, the city didn’t stop with this network of nine parks.
Boston demonstrates the importance of reclaiming streets for people through its Tactical Public Realm framework. This allows the city to experiment with inexpensive, temporary interventions to improve streets and public spaces.
Tactical urbanism is a powerful tool because it demonstrates how we can introduce lasting change without making costly and permanent investments.
This is precisely where Makati’s shared streets initiatives can become more ambitious. Temporary closures can help us understand how people can make better use of our streets when cars are removed.
Successful experiments can then evolve into pedestrianized streets, vibrant promenades, and lush parks.
Correcting Metro Manila’s open space deficit
Philippine developers and policymakers must shape the built environment on the principle that open space should be planned before the buildings, not after them. However, due to the profit-oriented nature of property development, following this principle can be difficult.
We must realize that success should not just be measured by profit, but also in the long-term value that developments generate for people and communities. That is why we at Palafox follow a triple bottom line of people, planet, profit.
The benefits of open spaces are cross-cutting: healthier residents, cleaner and cooler air, tight-knit communities, and a more liveable city. These are just as important, if not more, than every peso earned per square meter.
The bigger question
The challenge for Metro Manila is therefore not simply to create more parks. It is to build a culture in which open space is understood as the public wealth of cities.
We should move beyond the mentality that asks, “How much open space can we afford to give up?” Instead, our planners, developers and policymakers should be asking, “How can we invest in open spaces for all to create lasting value in our cities?”