A master plan for a city that has forgotten how to dream

Pierre Voges, MBDA Interim CEO.

Cities, like people and companies, can sometimes lose their way. The only way back is to be bold and honest, to admit your mistakes and to regroup. Criticising the past or trying to replicate it will not help. What matters is future‑oriented thinking, even if our pockets feel empty. In rugby, the best tries often come from broken play. That’s where creativity and momentum emerge.

Something refreshing is happening at the Mandela Bay Development Agency. It is not a ribbon‑cutting or a billboard promising thousands of jobs. Instead, a group of serious, experienced people have gathered to talk about Nelson Mandela Bay, where it should go and (perhaps more importantly) where it should not.

This is the MBDA’s voluntary Advisory Panel, a collection of professionals in urban planning, architecture, property, investment, infrastructure and economics. They are giving their time pro bono, in the spirit of giving back to the city. They are shaping a mini master plan and capital‑project pipeline for the Bay. The first session has taken place, the second is scheduled for the end of September, and then the real work begins.

Nelson Mandela Bay does not suffer from a shortage of ideas. In fact, it suffers from too many ideas going in too many directions. For years, development has been a series of scattered projects: fix this building, upgrade that park, add another attraction. Some were worthwhile, but many lacked maintenance or connection to a bigger vision. You cannot build a city one disconnected project at a time.

A good project in the wrong place is a wasted investment. A good project in the right place, linked to transport, housing, tourism and private investment, can become catalytic. That is a word we should use more often in this city. The Tramways Building investment, for example, triggered activity in the Baakens Valley. That is how projects should work: as catalysts, not standalone monuments.

The MBDA’s own framework already speaks of “game‑changing catalytic projects”. The challenge is to turn that phrase into a disciplined investment philosophy. We do not need another 200‑page plan gathering dust. We need a development compass. Where should the city concentrate its limited resources? Which public projects can unlock larger private investment? Which precincts should be connected? Which heritage assets should be protected and commercialised?

Most importantly, what are the five or 10 projects that could truly change the trajectory of Nelson Mandela Bay? As former Finance Minister Derek Keys once said: “Do not try and do 50 things. Do five and do them well.”

One of the most valuable ideas emerging from the Advisory Panel is the puzzle principle. Capital projects should be seen as pieces of a larger puzzle. A public space on its own may be pleasant. But connect it to restaurants, hotels, cultural activities, residential development and events, and it becomes part of an economic ecosystem. This is how successful cities grow. The project is not the destination, but the trigger.

The MBDA’s value lies in identifying where intervention can unlock transformation. A conventional project manager asks: “Can we deliver this?” A development strategist asks: “Should we deliver this, and what will it unlock?” Nelson Mandela Bay needs both, but it especially needs strategy.

The missing ingredient is concentration: of money, management attention, political support, private investment and public expectation. That is what the Advisory Panel is designed to provide. It is unusual in that the MBDA has not appointed consultants. Instead, it has brought together people willing to give their time voluntarily, and willing to ask the hard questions: Who will pay for this? Who will deliver it?

Government cannot build the future of Nelson Mandela Bay alone. The public sector must create the conditions in which private capital wants to participate. A R100 million public investment that unlocks R1 billion of private investment is transformational. That is the catalytic model. It means thinking about infrastructure, land, public spaces, approvals and development rights as instruments for attracting capital. It means talking to banks and investors before projects are designed. It means being prepared to stop projects that look impressive on paper but make no economic sense.

The first Advisory Panel session generated exactly the kind of conversation we need: practical interventions, interconnected projects and collaboration between the public and private sectors. The second session will sharpen those ideas into choices. The decisions are difficult, but they are necessary.

And after that comes the most important phase: execution. Nelson Mandela Bay has spent enough time talking about its potential. Now it is time to act.

To those who have contributed voluntarily, baie dankie. To those who did not respond, you may be missing out.