Towards more compact South African settlements through informal housing: The case of backyard densification in Bridgton and Bongolethu, Oudtshoorn
Louis Lategan & Juanee Cilliers MALEBANA LE BODULO BO http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2415-0495/trp68i1.2 PETETSANENG HAHOLO AFRIKA Peer reviewed and revised BORWA KA MATLO A SENG MOLAONG: QAKA YA TETEANO YA MATLO DIJARETENG TSE Abstract KA MORAO BRIDGTON LE This article engages the concepts of urban sprawl and density, as the foundations for a discussion on South Africa’s informal backyard rental sector. This research BONGOLETHU, OUDTSHOORN attempts to relate some of the spatial impacts levied by the backyard sector Atikele ena e sebedisa mehopolo ya ho in post-apartheid South Africa, based on case study research in Oudtshoorn, se tswellepele ha toropo le ho teteana. Western Cape, the Rose Valley formalisation project, as well as the Bridgton Tsena di sebediswa jwalo ka metheo and Bongolethu townships. This article employs both qualitative and quantitative bakeng sa puisano ya lekala la khiriso e analyses and arrives at several key findings. Results show that informal backyard seng molaong ya dijarete tse ka morao rentals increase dwelling unit and population densities substantially in the case matlong Afrika Borwa. Dipatlisiso tsena di study, accommodating households who would otherwise occupy land illegally on leka ho amanya tse ding tsa dikgahlamelo the urban periphery, contributing to urban sprawl. Findings also suggest that these tsa tefo ho ya ka lekala la khiriso ya backyard tenants enjoy excellent access to services, placing increased pressure on dijarete tse ka morao matlong nakong Oudtshoorn’s already overcapacitated infrastructure network. This article posits that ya dilemo tsa kgethollo Afrika Borwa. informal backyarding has to be encouraged and supported based on the sector’s Dipatlisiso tsena ke ho ya ka Western contribution to urban compaction, but that related impacts on infrastructure be Cape Town ya Oudtshoorn, projeke ya addressed in future planning interventions. ho etsa dintho semolao ya Rose Valley le makeishene a Bridgton le Bongolethu. Key words: Urban sprawl, density, low-cost housing, informal backyard rentals, Atikele ena e sebedisa manollo ya lebadi South Africa le ya boleng (quantitative and qualitative analysis), mme hape e fihlella diphumano DIE WEG NA MEER KOMPAKTE SUID-AFRIKAANSE NEDERSETTINGS tse mmalwa tsa sehlooho. Thutong ena DEUR INFORMELE BEHUISING: DIE GEVAL VAN AGTERPLAAS ya mehlala (the case study), diphetho di bontsha hore khiro e seng molaong ya VERDIGTING IN BRIDGTON EN BONGOLETHU, OUDTHSOORN dijarete tsa ka morao matlong e eketsa diyuniti tsa bodulo le bongata ba baahi, Abstrak e fana ka bodulo ho malapa ao a neng a ka inkela dibaka tsa bodulo ntle le Hierdie artikel betrek konsepte soos stedelike randsprei en digtheid as die grondslag molao toropong; mme sena se bapala vir ʼn bespreking oor Suid-Afrika se informele agterplaasverhuringssektor. Diè karolo ho se tswelleng pele ha toropo. navorsing poog om die ruimtelike impak van die agterplaassektor uit te lig in die Diphetho hape di bontsha hore bahiri ba era na apartheid in Suid-Afrika, gebaseer op veldwerk in Oudtshoorn in die Wes- matlo a ka morao dijareteng ba fumana Kaap, die dorp se Rose Valley formaliseringsprojek en die Bridgton en Bongolethu ditshebeletso tsa boemo bo hodimo, mme nedersettings. Hierdie artikel maak gebruik van beide kwalitatiewe en kwantitatiewe sena se beya boima bo eketsehileng analises om tot ʼn gevolgtrekking te kom. Resultate toon aan dat informele hodima marangrang a meralo ya motheo agterplaasstrukture wooneenheid- en bevolkingsdigthede merkwaardig verhoog in Oudtshoorn; e seng e sena bokgoni. die gevallestudie, terwyl die sektor huishoudings huisves wat andersins onwettig Atikele ena e paka hore ho dula matlong op die stedelike periferie sou vestig en randsprei bevorder. Resultate wys ook dat a ka morao dijareteng ka ntle ho molao agterplaashuurders goeie toegang tot dienste geniet, wat meer druk op Oudtshoorn ho tlameha ho kgothalletswa le ho se reeds oorlaaide infrastruktuurnetwerk teweeg bring. Hierdie artikel voer dus aan tshehetswa ho ya ka kabelo ya lekala dat informele agterplaasverhuring aangemoedig en ondersteun word, gebaseer bakeng sa ho fokotsa toropo, empa op die sektor se bydrae tot stedelike kompaktheid, maar dat verwante impakte op dikgahlamelo hodima meralo ya motheo infrastruktuur in toekomstige beplanning aangespreek word. di tlamehile ho sekasekwa nakong e Sleutelwoorde: Stedelike randsprei, digthede, laekoste behuising, informele agter tlang ha ho etswa merero. plaasverhuring, Suid-Afrika Mantswe a sehlooho: Ho se tswellepele ha toropo, ho teteana, matlo a theko e tlase, khiro e seng molaong ya matlo a ka morao jareteng, Afrika Borwa
The authors declare no conflict of interest for this title or article. Mr Louis G. Lategan, Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Private Bag X6001, Potchefstroom, 2520, South Africa. Phone: 018 299 2486, email:
1. INTRODUCTION all facets related to informal backyard urban sprawl. Density is highly renting in South Africa. correlated with nearly all measures of The South African city is typified by urban sprawl (Brownstone & Golob, a sprawling urban form, perpetuated The article begins with a literature 2009: 91). Osman et al. (2008: 41) by peripheral, low-density subsidised review intended to explore core state that “[d]ensity is the most housing development and mass concepts such as urban sprawl important dimension of sprawl” and informal housing settlements, as and density and familiarise the is the most widely used indicator to shanty towns (Goebel, 2007: 292; South African housing and informal evaluate the phenomenon. Density is Jay & Bowen, 2011: 575; Klug, backyard rental sectors, all of which discussed accordingly and revisited Rubin & Todes, 2013: 668; are revisited in the empirical section. in the ensuing case study. Turok, 2013: 180; Cash, 2014: 127; Empirical research consists of a Du Plessis, 2014: 70). However, case study of Oudtshoorn, focusing 2.2 The density concept the low densities that characterise specifically on new low-cost housing subsidised housing projects development taking place in the Density continues to garner attention are augmented regularly by the Rose Valley extension as well as on in the quest for a more sustainable addition of informal backyard rental the established practice of informal urban form; this article accepts accommodation (Gardner, 2009: 14; backyard densification in Bridgton density as a principal element of Shapurjee & Charlton, 2013: 663; and Bongolethu. sustainability. Density, as an indicator Tshangana, 2013: 12) that also of sprawl, is considered a proxy for absorb a large proportion of those access to employment, amenities 2. LITERATURE REVIEW households who would otherwise and other destinations (Brownstone occupy sprawling informal & Golob, 2009: 91) and even socio- 2.1 The urban sprawl concept settlements. The informal backyard economic features such as income rental sector has shown sustained Recently, urban sprawl has received (Forsyth, Oakes, Schmitz & Hearst, growth in terms of new informal amplified attention, but the concept 2007: 679). In this sense, density has backyard dwellings (Bank, 2007: 206; remains elusive, with no generally become an important analytical tool, Lemanski, 2009: 473; Turok & agreed upon definition or empirical but also a multifaceted one vulnerable Borel-Saladin, 2014: 687), but has measurement (Inostroza, Baur & to ambiguity and misapprehension gone underreported in the national Csaplovics, 2013: 88). Yet, definitive (Turok, 2011: 470). Density can be Census (Watson, 2009: 5), remains principles seem to recur in the measured and defined as dwelling unrecognised in national policy, and literature. This article provides that units per land area; habitable enjoys limited, piecemeal attention urban sprawl entails a change in land rooms per land area; people or bed at both provincial and local level use from the non-urban to the urban, spaces per land area; or as stand (Carey, 2009: 7; Rubin & Gardner, often as new low-density, single-use ratios with floor area multiplied by 2013: 68), particularly in smaller, urban expansion as residential or the number of storeys/area of the undercapacitated municipalities commercial strip development at site, commonly referred to as the that show a shortage of technical or near the urban fringe, with land floor area ratio (FAR) (Poulsen & expertise to address it (Morange, consumption exceeding population Silverman, 2005: 23; CABE, 2010; 2002: 20). In fact, the sector has growth, producing a strung out and McGaffin, Cirolia & Massyn, 2015: 64; been described as terra incognita discontinuous urban form (Fulton, Turok, 2016a). Of these, population (Parnell & Hart, 1999: 367), hidden Pendall, Nguyen & Harrison, per land area or housing unit or (Turok, 2012: 22) especially when its 2001: 3; Ewing, Pendall & Chen, number of dwelling units per land area spatial implications are considered 2002: 3; Osman, Nawawi & Abdullah, seem most popular (SCANPH, 2004), (Shapurjee et al., 2014: 21). In 2008: 40; Brunner, 2012: 1; Inostroza with the latter commonly favoured. recognition of the above, this article et al., 2013: 88; Linard, Tatem & Furthermore, it is important to intends to shed light on the spatial Gilbert, 2013: 23; Yue, Liu & FAN, distinguish between gross and net impacts of informal backyard rental 2013: 358; Cash, 2014: 126). Sprawl densities. Gross density refers to the accommodation in the smaller local is mostly related to housing demand, number of stands or area used for municipality of Oudtshoorn and an as cities will consume new areas development, including allowances for roads and other obligatory land area in the Bridgton and Bongolethu if housing demand cannot be met allocations, which are excluded from townships. Accordingly, this research within existing urban boundaries net density calculations (Sivam & aims to quantify the level of backyard (Broitman & Koomen, 2015: 32). Karuppannan, 2012: 269). Net density densification taking place, present Expansion is inevitable. The is revisited in the case study research. the case for informal backyard challenge lies in deciding on what infill as counter to urban sprawl, degree of sprawl is acceptable in Densities influence urban form and and engage with consequences maintaining compact and sustainable function and present several positive for bulk infrastructure and service cities (Inostroza et al., 2013: 96-97), and negative impacts. Table 1 captures delivery as issues to be recognised while accommodating the effects of these effects, providing advantages and addressed in future planning urbanisation and population growth. and disadvantages for increased and initiatives. This article is not intended The definition also evidences the low-density development synthesised as a comprehensive discussion on relationship between density and from the literature. 13 Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of both lower and increased densities areas legitimately, gained access Increased densities Lower densities to cities via informal housing, either • Decreased land consumption per capita in shanty towns or in the informal • Reduced land acquisition costs by reducing land backyard structures erected in area requirements • Reduced development costs due to reduced non-White townships (Crankshaw, servicing costs Gilbert & Morris, 2000: 3). Informal • Decreased infrastructure and servicing demands • Increased privacy housing has traditionally been • Promotes non-motorised transport • More public open space • More viable public infrastructure • Reduced land acquisition costs linked to a myriad of challenges, • Promotes efficient public transport due to cheaper land on the including geographically and • Encourages efficient natural resource consumption periphery environmentally hazardous
Advantages • Encourage efficient energy consumption • More affordable for residents • Reduce carbon emissions due to decreased travel due to decreased land costs locations that contravene planning distances • Greater appeal for residents regulations; poorly constructed • Protect agricultural land from infringement • Reduces overcrowding and dilapidated informal structures • Protect ecosystems from infringement • Protect biodiversity from infringement that oppose building regulations; • Increased access to amenities a lack of access to infrastructure, • More public open space due to reduced area required for top structures basic services and public amenities; • Traffic congestion due to with informal dwellers burdened by increased need for private disease, violence, exclusion and • Traffic congestion due to increased traffic in a vehicles tenure insecurity and informality reduced total area • Increased commuting times due • Reduced privacy due to proximity to increased distances perceived as indicative of instability • Increased overcrowding due to proximity • Increased commuting costs due and unsustainable futures (Cities • Escalating crime rates due to intensification to increased distances Alliance, 2002; UN-Habitat, 2003: 4; • Fewer public open spaces due to competition for • Increased land consumption per land capita Goebel, 2007: 295; Richards, • Increased construction costs for top structures • Increased land acquisition costs O’Leary & Mutsonziwa, 2007: 2; • Opposition by residents due to increased land area Disadvantages Mehta & Dastur, 2008; Lombard & • Polluted ecosystems due to intensification requirements • Inflated property prices due to increased • Increased infrastructure and Huxley, 2011: 122; UN-Habitat, 2013, development costs and exclusivity servicing demands 2014; Turok & Borel-Saladin, 2016). • Increased number of cars parked on the street • Increased development costs • Inflated property prices The post-apartheid democratic • Public transport inefficiency government endeavoured to Source: Own construction adapted from Churchman (1999); Carruthers & Ulfarsson (2003); make sustainable development a Poulsen & Silverman (2005); Carey (2009); CABE (2010); McConnell & Wiley leading objective. The commitment (2010); Boyko & Cooper (2011); Turok (2011); Sivam & Karuppannan (2012); to sustainability, especially Chhetri et al. (2013); Rubin & Gardner (2013); Rode, Floater, Thomopoulos, Docherty, Schwinger & Mahendra (2014); Brewer & Grant (2015); Glaeser & Sims regarding urban development (2015); Turok (2016a, 2016b) and housing, was encapsulated, inter alia, in commitments towards Densification is commonly pursued the following sections introduce the UN’s Sustainable Habitats as a planning and sustainability the South African context in terms Agenda (Goebel, 2007: 292) and goal (Rubin & Gardner, 2013: 19). of informal housing, the low-cost publications such as the Breaking However, for Turok (2016a: 238), subsidised housing sector and the New Ground Strategy (RSA, 2004) “… urban density on its own is no informal backyard rental subsector. and the 2013 Spatial Planning panacea for prosperity”. Density is and Land Use Management Act a valuable condition that supports 2.3 Informal housing in (SPLUMA) (Van Wyk & Oranje, resource efficiency and human South Africa and the 2014; Nel, 2016). The democratic interaction, but is not sufficient on its post-apartheid status quo age brought a renewed focus on own. It does not guarantee positive South Africa’s contemporary urban urban integration and compaction outcomes such as more sustainable structure is a product of its apartheid (Turok, 2016b: 9) and an emphasis urban environments (Poulsen & past (Du Plessis, 2014: 71). on low-income subsidised housing Silverman, 2005: 24). It would thus Apartheid planning established as a vehicle to remedy past injustices be irresponsible to assume that ‘shadow cities’, whereby White (Turok, 2016a), promote spatial increased densities are universally settlements were accompanied sustainability and address the positive when compared to lower by ‘locations’, or townships, for informal housing issue. The approach density arrangements. Table 1 Black or Coloured populations, to low-income housing was initiated demonstrates that densities at any located at some distance from them in 1994 with the Reconstruction level may present challenges and (Cash, 2014: 128), or separated by and Development Programme opportunities and that density should natural or artificial buffers (Jürgens, (RDP) based on eradicating be considered in a context-sensitive Donaldson, Rule & Bähr, 2013: 256) informal housing and delivering manner in order to balance potential that provided a limited number home ownership opportunities to positives and negatives. Context of citizens with accommodation. the disadvantaged via full housing may be regarded as the single most By the end of apartheid, many of subsidies (Morange, 2002: 3). Low- important factor in planning. As such, those who could not access urban income housing subsidies have been 14 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles made available to households who housing has increasingly sheltered 2.4 Introducing the informal earn less than R3 500 per month, the poor. The country’s informal backyard rental sector delivering homes for nuclear families settlements have expanded in For Carey (2009: 12), a solution as detached one- to two-bedroom both size and number since 1994, to the densification conundrum units of 40m² on fully serviced with approximately 2 700 informal lays in existing stock, in the well- stands of approximately 250m² settlements now established established practice of providing (Poulsen & Silverman, 2005: 21). nationally, housing nearly 1.2 million informal backyard rentals. The Roughly 2.8 million subsidised units households (Turok, 2012: 21) as informal backyard rental sector have now been delivered (Turok, part of the escalating housing was established during apartheid 2016a: 235). New low-income backlog. Progress has thus been and now houses over 756 000 subsidised housing projects, as significant, but insufficient, as the households (StatsSA, 2014) in new discussed in the case study to current approach to housing cannot low-cost housing settlements and follow, have had significant impacts deliver to scale at a sustainable rate more prolifically in older, well-located on South Africa’s urban landscape, (Gardner, 2009: 6). Housing only townships (Lemanski, 2009: 474). but have generally not reversed these 1.2 million households in the In lieu of an officially accepted apartheid’s spatial legacy. Pressure full RDP package, in 40m² units on definition, this article defines an to deliver large housing volumes 250m² stands, with a 30% allowance informal backyard rental unit as within limited budgets, together with for roads and amenities, would a land-intensive housing typology, require 39 000 ha of Greenfield area. An informal structure erected by have precluded the majority of a property owner or tenant within It is worthy to note that informal the boundaries of a formally low-income housing projects from settlements and, to a limited extent, registered property that contains securing well-located and more the state’s low-income housing at least one formal dwelling unit. spatially integrated development sites The materials and construction projects with their backyard (Massyn, McGaffin, Viruly & Hopkins, practices used do not comply with dwellings, establish relatively high 2015: 413; McGaffin et al., 2015: 62). National Norms and Standards population densities on the urban with the structure constructed And so, the poor are commonly outskirts (Sukhai & Jones, 2014: 12). attached or adjacent to an existing established on the urban periphery South African cities are among few formal dwelling. (Goebel, 2007: 294; Turok, 2012: 14; globally that present a rise in average Haferburg, 2013: 262; Jürgens Backyard densification is attributed population density with distance et al., 2013: 256; Turok, 2016b: 11), to infill development (Lategan & from the centre (Turok, 2016b: 11). in suburbs that continue to contort Cilliers, 2013: 305), referring to Yet, average population densities settlement patterns and entrench the use of land located within an remain well below density standards fragmentation, segregation, already developed surrounding in comparable middle- and low- inefficiency, and urban sprawl area (McConnell & Wiley, 2010: 9; income, developing countries (Brunner, 2012: 4; Chobokoane Inostroza et al., 2013: 88; McGaffin and almost half of standards in & Horn, 2015: 79; Nel, 2016: 81). et al., 2015: 70). Informal backyard higher income, developed nations Sprawl is further intensified by the rental infill does not refer to the use (Turok, 2011: 471). These densities detached housing typology that of relatively large consolidated open are often still too low to establish requires substantial road space and areas, but to the intensified use and the thresholds needed to supply establishes configurations of “very densification of residential properties city functions viably (Massyn et al., low density” (Van Rooyen, 2010: 47), already deemed developed by 2015: 413). It is thus maintained generating densities of roughly 40 authorities according to their zoning that, in South Africa, low-density units and 160 persons per hectare policies and official registers. expansion stands in the way of more (Poulsen & Silverman, 2005: 21). sustainable human settlements For Gardner (2009: 6), the informal These densities are often augmented (Poulsen & Silverman, 2005: 20). backyard rental sector presents “the exponentially by the addition of “There is a clear need to break greatest latent human settlement backyard dwellings (Harrison & not only the pattern, but also the potential in South Africa”, whilst Todes, 2015: 157; McGaffin et al., underpinning logics which drive Shapurjee and Charlton (2013: 655) 2015: 65). the production of low-density and contend that the sector can improve Sprawling low-income subsidised sprawling low-income settlements” settlement-wide performance, and suburbs have housed approximately (McGaffin et al., 2015: 73) and to Tshangana (2013: 11) confirms 10 million beneficiaries, increasing introduce a more compact urban that informal backyard rentals may the proportion living in formal form, in which increased densities play a positive part in building housing from 64% in 1996 to 78% may play a crucial part (Mammon & sustainable human settlements. As in 2011 (Turok, 2016a: 235). The Ewing, 2009: 4). alluded to in Section 2.3, informal proportion of urban households backyard dwellings have contributed residing informally might have fallen, to intense horizontal densification but the absolute number has risen nationally (McGaffin et al., 2015: 62) (Turok & Borel-Saladin, 2014: 688). and continue to provide shelter to Land invasions persist and informal vulnerable households, those more suited to rental accommodation
15 or awaiting ownership of subsidy rentals to introduce increased load imposed by backyarding is not homes (Rubin & Gardner, 2013: 6; densities sustainably. As a result, proportional in service capacity to Shapurjee, Le Roux & Coetzee, local authorities have generally the number of households added to 2014: 20) with intermediate access viewed the increased occupancy an area (Gardner, 2009: 16; Rubin to basic services, often in more densities introduced by backyard infill & Gardner, 2013: 22), or for which central locations (Morange, 2002: 10; in a negative light, given the burden services were initially planned. Bank, 2007: 206; Carey, 2009: 17; placed on municipal infrastructure However, this is highly contingent on Watson, 2009: 5). Fundamentally, (Poulsen & Silverman, 2005: 22) the number of backyard households the majority of backyard tenants and the difficulties with metering, presented and their and main would be housed in sprawling shanty service consumption metering, households’ specific deomographic towns, if they did not contribute to and payment posed thereby profiles. Generalisations should backyard densification. (Tshangana, 2013: 10). Municipalities be avoided and cases evaluated cannot generate an additional on a context-related basis, as The effects of backyard infill on future income through rates and taxes on spatial and land-use planning and backyard populations are not uniform informal backyard rentals and thus municipal infrastructure management (Shapurjee et al., 2014: 20). profit-driven authorities, or indeed cannot be ignored (Shapurjee et al., The following section, the empirical smaller, underfunded municipalities, 2014: 20). Access to urban services research component, explores may be reluctant or unable to commit is a main motivation for backyard the town of Oudtshoorn and the resources to the backyard sector renting (Morange, 2002: 19). For, new Rose Valley extension and (Carey, 2009: 12). As such, most unlike those in informal shanty delves into the spatial impacts of municipalities have not extended towns, backyard tenants may enjoy the informal backyard rental sector basic services to backyard residents some access to sanitation, water in a section of the Bridgton and (Bank, 2007: 206); financing and electricity (Shapurjee et al., Bongolethu townships in keeping with basic urban services remains a 2014: 24) via services provided to formidable challenge to sustainable the focus on contextualised research. their landlords in main dwellings. urban development in South Africa Electricity may be accessed via (Goebel, 2007: 269). informal connections to the main 3. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH house, whilst water and sanitation Infrastructure upgrades or retrofits may be accessed through outside to service backyard tenants may 3.1 Research methodology lavatories and taps on the stand, or not be unilaterally required in all The town of Oudtshoorn was access granted to facilities within low-income suburbs that present identified as case study as a fitting the main house. When considering backyard densification. Some alternative to the abundance of backyard infill and infrastructure, infrastructure networks are indeed planning research in South Africa two main arguments have emerged buckling under the pressure, whereas focussed on metropolitan areas (Tshangana, 2013: 7). others continue to cope with the and large cities (Zwaig, 2015: 2). added stress (Rubin & Gardner, The first supports backyard Initially, this research was sparked 2013: 22). These networks may densification to make improved by the sudden establishment of an manage demand due to the capacity use of existing infrastructure informal settlement on the outskirts of for which infrastructure networks networks and capitalise on existing Oudtshoorn, the Rose Valley informal were initially planned and installed. investments (see Table 1), by settlement. This article references There are examples in which original providing a more sustainable number a survey conducted in Rose Valley infrastructure was overspecified and of users (Solé-Ollé & Rico, 2010: 2-4; in 2012, a survey conducted thus cope with increased densities Carey, 2009: 3; Gardner, 2009: 5; in Oudtshoorn’s Bridgton and (Tshangana, 2013: 7). In the majority McConnell & Wiley, 2010: 3; Rubin Bongolethu townships in 2013, and of cases, only minimum capacities & Gardner, 2013: 9; Shapurjee & a more intensive survey conducted can be sustainably serviced, as Charlton, 2013: 633). The second in the same area of Bridgton and most formal low-income settlements argument cautions against excessive Bongolethu in 2015. continue to discount the potential backyard infill as a strain on already demands of their informal tenants 3.1.1 Sampling methods, sample overcapacitated infrastructure (Lemanski, 2009: 477). sizes and data collection networks (Rubin & Gardner, 2013: 6; Turok & Borel-Saladin, 2014: 687). In Secondly, networks may cope due The 2012 Rose Valley survey South Africa’s low-income suburbs, to a national decrease in average involved the distribution of 100 infrastructure networks are generally household size (Turok, 2012: 29) surveys on a door-to-door basis in designed to service the very low of 25% between 2001 and 2011 the Rose Valley informal settlement. densities planned for in subsidised (Tshangana, 2013: 7), a trend Respondents were selected based on housing projects. The intense expected to continue. It is argued convenience sampling and included densification introduced by informal that reduced average and smaller on the grounds of their willingness backyard rentals may thus place household sizes, conventionally to participate. Questions were fairly immense pressure on networks and attributed to informal backyard rudimentary, with the aim of exploring counter the potential of backyard dwellings, indicate that the additional where settlers came from, what their 16 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles opinion regarding housing, increased willing landlord and backyard tenant 3.2 The case of Oudtshoorn densities, backyard renting, and respondents. A total of 103 properties The town of Oudtshoorn is located future housing aspirations were. The were included in the survey, with in South Africa’s Western Cape Rose Valley survey revealed that different, targeted questionnaires province, within the Eden District the majority of respondent settlers distributed to landlords and backyard Municipality (EDM). Oudtshoorn is the originated from informal backyard tenants, respectively. main centre of the OLM, which also dwellings in Oudtshoorn’s Bridgton includes scattered rural settlements and Bongolethu townships. It is from 3.1.2 Response rate and (OLM, 2015a) (see Figure 1). The there that the area of Bridgton and limitations OLM covers an area of 353 755 adjacent Bongolethu was identified Out of the 141 informal backyard ha and is occupied by 95 933 as study area when the 2013 survey rental structures recorded in the residents in 21 910 households, was considered. The specific study Bridgton/Bongolethu survey (2015), according to the 2011 Census, area within the townships (see only 120 backyard households whereas Oudtshoorn comprises Figure 3) was targeted, given the were represented in questionnaires; 3 696 ha (OLM, 2015b: 16), then recent refurbishment of the representing a sufficient sample with a total population of roughly Bridgton Pavilion and the aim of that size (Hashim, 2010). In addition, the 61 500 residents, classifying it as research to investigate the use of stand numbers of only 81 of the 103 a small- to medium-sized town public green space in low-income properties included in the survey (OLM, 2015a: 15). Nearly 80% of housing areas and to determine the could be retrieved on the municipal the White population still resides effects of informal backyard renting valuation roll and be allocated stand in the original town of Oudtshoorn, thereupon (Lategan & Cilliers, sizes by the time statistical analysis with other racial groups mostly 2014: 430). The 2013 Bridgton/ took place. The intention of the remaining in apartheid-era townships Bongolethu survey concentrated Bridgton/Bongolethu survey (2015) such as Bridgton and Bongolethu on 101 properties immediately was to probe the informal backyard (see Figure 2) and dispersed surrounding the Bridgton Pavilion, rental phenomenon with regard to rural settlements (Wisner, Pelling, regardless of whether they contained spatial, demographic, economic and Mascharenhas, Holloway, Ndong, informal backyard dwellings or social trends. This article reports on Faye, Ribot & Simon , 2015: 174). not. The area in Bongolethu was the spatial aspects only. Consequently, the poorest citizens included, as the Bridgton Pavilion is, are still denied equitable access to in fact, located outside, but on the 3.1.3 Data analysis and the socio-economic opportunities boundary of the Bridgton township, interpretation of findings pledged under the promise of within Bongolethu. As a result, Both 2013 and 2015 Bridgton/ democracy (OLM, 2015b: 40). properties surrounding the Bridgton Bongolethu questionnaires were Pavilion are located in both Bridgton The democratic age brought political drafted in collaboration with the and Bongolethu (see Figure 3). emancipation, yet the OLM has North-West University’s Statistical Participating households were struggled to establish political Consultancy Services, who also selected with convenience sampling. consistency. Two main political captured data and helped with However, Bridgton/Bongolethu parties have competed for power, statistical analysis and interpretation. survey data (2013) revealed certain resulting in the OLM being placed Statistical analysis was conducted shortcomings such as the omission of under administration by the provincial using IBM’s SPSS software. It must residential addresses to record stand authority to address issues such as be noted that, as convenience sizes and targeted questions for soaring municipal debt and service instead of random sampling was backyard renters themselves. These delivery failures. Infrastructure is a used, p-values are reported in this deficiencies were addressed with particularly sensitive topic in the OLM article for the sake of completeness, the 2015 survey. The latter focused as Oudtshoorn’s bulk infrastructural but not interpreted. on the same broad area as the 2013 capacity, related to ultimate service survey, due to the high number of Case study research was further delivery, is under stress. In this backyard dwellings identified there supplemented by semi-structured regard, both water and sewer in 2013, the level of familiarity the interviews with municipal officials reticulation networks are at capacity research team now enjoyed in the in selected departments of the and no new development can be community, and the opportunity to Oudtshoorn Local Municipality (OLM) approved without updated master compare certain findings in both and other stakeholders who filled plans. The existing waste-water data sets. The 2015 Bridgton/ gaps in the literature and provided treatment works is under stress, Bongolethu survey extended beyond a more nuanced perspective, as presenting spare hydraulic capacity, properties immediately bordering the referenced throughout. Please note but with biological capacity exceeded. Bridgton Pavilion, thus penetrating that pseudonyms are used to cite The electricity network is also at full both Bridgton and Bongolethu. these interviewees. capacity. Master plans are outdated It included only properties that and exclude recent developments presented informal backyard and exact loading on electrical components, selected on the basis infrastructure and spare capacity of convenience sampling, with cannot be determined accurately.
17 Western Cape Province Eden District Municipality Oudtshoorn Local Municipality
Figure 1: The OLM within South Africa
Figure 2: The spatial layout of Oudtshoorn town 18 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles
Development decisions are thus since the Census, or errors in the settlement here, settlers effectively made without a clear long-term interpretation and manipulation of supported apartheid-era spatial strategy on network expansion or Census figures to calculate housing planning that banished Oudtshoorn’s capacity, and urgent upgrades are status. Most worrying perhaps is non-White residents to an expanding needed. Furthermore, the town’s time- that the Department states that, urban periphery on the town’s worn subterranean infrastructure has regardless of the large contradiction eastern boundary. The actions of eroded road surfaces; potholes are in figures, “these two figures provide informal settlers could be excused common, with gravel roads servicing useful ranges for the planning of as ignorant, perpetrated out of much of Oudtshoorn’s township areas human settlement interventions” desperation to access housing and (WCPT, 2014; OLM, 2015a: 13). (WCHS, 2015: 24). This article claim their Lefebvrian right to the city. Inadequate infrastructure capacity accepts housing demand as the Rose Valley was certainly established will severely influence future number of persons registered on the from such motivations, but another residential, commercial and industrial official housing database, as these more obscure force was also at development. Of these, residential names constitute demand regardless play. Many Rose Valley settlers development is of particular concern of the number of households were reportedly lured by politicians when the housing demand for the currently residing informally or who promised housing in exchange OLM and subsequent servicing inadequately. Municipal officials for political support (Westen, 2013: demands are considered. The (Christian, 2012; Gold, 2015) also interview). These promises were following section reflects on housing provided figures corresponding not left unfulfilled. By 2015, the first demand in the OLM. more closely with database figures. stage of the Rose Valley housing The collective capacity of areas project was under way, perpetuating 3.3 Housing demand in demarcated for housing in the future apartheid development under the the Oudtshoorn Local by the OSDF further seem to support banner of post-apartheid housing Municipality housing database figures despite and service delivery. The project was other contentions held therein. justified by South Africa’s informal Determining Oudtshoorn’s housing settlement upgrading programme demand was somewhat challenging. The OLM currently delivers (ISUP) and the incremental upgrade The municipal housing waiting list between 250 (Christian, 2012) of informal settlements accordingly reflected 14 517 names in 2015 and 300 (Gold, 2015) new subsidy (OLM, 2015a: 54). (WCHS, 2015: 4), while Gold (2015) units per annum. Accepting an estimated that housing demand was average of 275 units per year and Rose Valley is developed by ASLA, closer to 16 000. The total number a subsidised housing demand of following what is best described as of inadequately housed households approximately 14 517 units, it would RDP principles (Lee, 2012). The (those in informal dwellings, take over 52 years to comply with project delivers detached housing informal backyard structures, demand, discounting an annual units in a layout that provides 966 and overcrowded dwellings) was increase in demand of 6% to 7% residential stands, a large school, recorded as 3 942 (WCHS, 2015: 7). (Gold, 2015). Housing demand has library, police station, two crèches, Seemingly based more on this figure, been expressed most urgently in three churches, six public open the Oudtshoorn Spatial Development recent times by the establishment space stands, and two business- Framework (OSDF) (2015) states of a substantial informal settlement use stands. In addition, Rose that there is a need to make land on Oudtshoorn’s periphery, as Valley is linked to Oudtshoorn and available to accommodate a potential discussed accordingly. its commercial and employment demand of 6 000 new housing opportunities by an added entrance units, as 3 000 low-income and 3.4 Informal settlement on the N12 motorway and a public 3 000 middle-income dwellings by in Oudtshoorn – from transport route to be operated by 2020 (OSDF, 2015: 54). In spite of Riemvasmaak to Rose Valley minibus taxis (Westen, 2013). Phase recognising a demand of only 6 000 Oudtshoorn’s housing demand one of the Rose Valley extension units, the OSDF provides spatial reached breaking point in 2010, has now been completed, delivering planning for an additional 16 000 when a major informal settlement 299 units. Phase two will provide 335 new housing opportunities without was established following a land units, while Phase three is planned referencing the housing waiting list invasion on Oudtshoorn’s south- to deliver 332 units and enhanced or motivating why such vast areas eastern boundary (see Figure 2). service sites (Dickens, 2016). are set aside for future housing The informal settlement was initially Residential stands are delivered at development (OLM, 2015a). For known as Riemvasmaak, but has an average 150m² (Dickens, 2016), the Western Cape Department of now been baptised Rose Valley with dwellings constituting 40m² Human Settlements, the discrepancy (Lategan & Cilliers, 2013: 306). The and consisting of two bedrooms, between numbers recorded for Rose Valley site was incorporated one bathroom and an open plan inadequate housing and Housing into Oudtshoorn’s urban edge in living-kitchen area (Daughters, 2015). Demand Database figures may be the 1980s (Lee, 2012; Westen, Despite claims in the OSDF, Dickens attributed to an overestimate on 2013), then intended for low-income (2016) maintains that Oudtshoorn’s the database, significant growth housing. By founding a new bulk infrastructure has sufficient 19 capacity to cope with phases one to by the OLM’s legal department and 3.5.1 Results and discussion three of the Rose Valley extension. removed, as they lacked municipal based on Bridgton/ approval (Daughters, 2015). Bongolethu case Rose Valley is of value to this article, study findings not only because it perpetuates The next section investigates the urban sprawl, but also considering case study area as the origin of many i. Introduction and where the majority of Rose Valley’s Rose Valley settlers and an area demographic findings settlers migrated from. The Rose still accommodating a significant The Bridgton/Bongolethu survey Valley survey (2012) found that 61% backyard tenant population. (2015) reached 244 households, of the respondents relocated to Rose as 103 (42.21%) main households Valley from the backyards of formal 3.5 The Bridgton and and 141 (57.79%) informal backyard dwellings elsewhere in Oudtshoorn, Bongolethu study area households. Of these, 223 were with the majority of those (68.85%) represented in questionnaires, as coming from the townships of Bridgton The study area (see Figure 3) was selected based on Rose Valley 103 (46.19%) main households and (52.46%) and Bongolethu (16.39%). 120 (53.81%) informal backyard findings on the origin of settlers and On its part, the Rose Valley extension households. The 223 households concentrated in a central part of may remain exclusively formal accommodated 1 023 persons, 577 both the Bridgton and Bongolethu with some difficulty, as new RDP (56.40%) in main dwellings and townships, well-known as a community settlements provide new locations 446 (43.60%) in informal backyard for backyard tenancy (Lemanski, hub owing to landmark features such structures. An average of 5.60 people 2009: 474; Shapurjee & Charlton, as the Bridgton Pavilion, Bridgton (s=2.928) were housed in main 2013: 663), instigating the ‘re- Post Office and Bongolethu Public dwellings, whereas a mean of 3.72 informalisation’ of formal housing and Library, with a high concentration of (s=1.74) were accommodated in the overburdening of service networks informal backyard dwellings. Morange each informal backyard structure. (Tshangana, 2013: 11). Robins (2002: 10) found that in Port Elizabeth’s If we accepted Census 2011 data (2002: 516) likens the way informal Walmer township “… most backyard indicating a total of 990 informal backyard rentals emerge from the shacks concentrate in the ‘old location’, backyard dwellings in the OLM settling dust in new housing schemes around the heart of the township: the (WCHS, 2015), then this study reached to the fortitude of the mythical phoenix. community centre …”, as also reflected 14.24% (n=141) of all backyard In the Rose Valley survey (2012), in the study area. 39% of the respondents foresaw that households. However, accepting informal backyard rentals would be The following section mainly reports this is problematic as this figure included in their survival strategies on the findings of the Bridgton/ discounts growth in the sector post 2011 and would imply that 14.24% of once they received their subsidised Bongolethu survey (2015) in terms of backyard dwellings were located in homes. Backyard densification has, number of respondents reached, the the backyards of 0.47% (n=103) of the in fact, already started, with Dickens size of main and backyard dwellings, OLM’s 21910 households. (2016) stating that new shacks were dwelling unit and population being erected in Rose Valley as the densities, and service access, with This seems unlikely, given the first construction phase was under other surveys and interviews cited proliferation of informal backyard way. These shacks were addressed where appropriate. dwellings throughout the town’s
Figure 3: The Bridgton/Bongolethu case study area
20 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles low-income suburbs, evident in rooms in total and an average of informal backyard dwellings more satellite imagery and site visits. The 1.5 persons per room. For main than doubled dwelling unit densities. Census figure is further queried dwellings, Cramer’s V test provided Considering population density for considering the extent of the OLM’s an effect size of 0.277 (p=0.199), the 223 households represented housing waiting list and that the indicating small to medium effect in the Bridgton/Bongolethu survey database does not include all between number of people residing (2015), a total population of 1 023 backyard dwellers. It is common in the main house and number persons in both main and tenant nationally for many informal backyard of rooms provided. The mean of households related to 1 023 people tenants not to be registered on the all households included (n=223) per 3.25 ha, or 315 people per ha. If housing waiting list (Carey, 2009: 11). produced an average of 1.82 persons figures were extrapolated to the 21 In the Bridgton/Bongolethu survey per room (s=1.27). Comparing the backyard dwellings unrepresented (2015), only 70.8% of backyard results of Cramer’s V test for main in questionnaires, this figure could households were represented on and tenant households for number of increase to an estimated 339 people the housing waiting list. This article people residing and number of rooms per ha, based on a mean population thus concurs with others who relayed provided, a relatively small difference of 3.72 persons per backyard that informal backyard rentals in effect size was observed, with dwelling synthesised from the data. have been underreported in both backyard structures displaying a Without backyard tenants, the total official surveys and the National larger effect size. This is expected, population density would be 178 Census (Carey, 2009: 12; Watson, given that backyard dwellings are people per ha. 2009: 5; Shapurjee et al., 2014: 22). constructed around the needs of These findings are significant, yet Underrepresentation on the housing tenants, whereas main homes are inaccurate, in capturing the true waiting list and underreporting in the fairly uniform housing products that, extent of backyard densification. National Census suggest that the in the majority of instances, had not The Bridgton/Bongolethu survey total number of informal backyard been extended. (2015) included only properties that structures and tenants in Oudtshoorn presented backyard dwellings and might be considerably higher than iii. Findings related to dwelling thus logically provided that dwelling reflected on municipal spreadsheets unit and population densities unit densities were doubled and and that real numbers remain unclear The Bridgton/Bongolethu survey population densities increased (Daughters, 2015). Regardless of (2015) revealed that respondent substantially. To overcome this bias, numbers, backyard structures tend to properties showed a mean of 1.37 display some general characteristics. (s=0.7) informal backyard rental the Bridgton/Bongolethu survey structures per stand. The majority (2013) may be of value. This survey ii. The structures themselves (73.8%) of the properties presented included 101 properties surrounding the Bridgton Pavilion, irrespective of The majority of informal backyard one informal backyard structure, whereas 8.7% showed three or whether properties accommodated structures in Oudtshoorn consist of backyard tenants or not. Data showed one to two rooms (Daughters, 2015), more backyard structures. No respondents reported more than four that 53% of the respondent properties with the informal dwellings surveyed presented informal backyard rental presenting an average of 1.87 informal backyard structures. Net residential density (see section 2.2) structures. Of the 172 households (s=1.053) rooms per structure. included, 101 (58.72%) were main Of backyard dwellings, 46.7% of was employed to calculate dwelling units and population per hectare by dwellings and 71 (41.28%) were structures presented one room, informal backyard structures. This followed by two rooms at 30.8%, dividing the total number of units and occupants presented by the total survey excluded stand numbers and three rooms at 14.2%. Only area of the stands included, following and stand sizes could thus not be 15.5% of backyard structures Brewer and Grant (2015). Stand retrieved. However, assuming an presented more than four rooms, sizes in the Bridgton/Bongolethu average of 315.11m² (as provided with one showing seven rooms. In survey (2015) showed a mean of above), this survey provided a total, informal backyard dwellings 315.11m² (s=44.096) and ranged dwelling unit density of 172 dwelling provided 224 rooms, with an from 214m² to 513m² (based on units per 3.18 ha or 54 dwelling units average of two persons per the 81 properties for which this per ha. Without informal backyard backyard room. Cramer’s V test data was available). Extrapolating structures, density would be 101 provided an effect size of 0.374 a mean stand size of 315.11m² to dwelling units per 3.15 ha, or 32 (p=0), indicating a practical visible all 103 properties yielded a total dwellings per ha. This survey included significant association and medium area estimated at 32 456m², or 510 people in main dwellings and 198 effect between number of people 3.25 ha. Density as total number of people in backyard accommodation. and rooms per backyard structure. dwellings per land area could then As a result, a total population density Thus, more rooms generally equalled be expressed as 244 dwellings per of 223 people per ha was recorded, more people. 3.25 ha or 75 dwellings per ha. which, without informal backyard Landlord dwellings presented an Without informal backyard dwellings, tenancy, would be 160 people per ha. average of 4.87 rooms per structure, density would be 103 dwellings per Surveys are synthesised in Table 2 for including bathrooms, providing 502 3.25 ha, or 32 dwellings per ha. Thus, ease of comparison. 21 Table 2: Summary of density findings for the Bridgton/Bongolethu surveys
Bridgton/Bongolethu survey (2013) Bridgton/Bongolethu survey (2015)
Total dwelling units 172 dwelling units 244 dwelling units Total main dwelling units 101 dwelling units 103 dwelling units Total backyard dwellings 71 dwelling units 141 dwelling units Total area 3.18 ha 3.25 ha Du/ha total 54 dwelling units per ha 75 dwelling units per ha Dwelling units per ha without backyard dwellings 32 dwelling units per ha 32 dwelling units per ha Total population per ha 223 people per ha 315-339 people per ha Population per ha without backyard tenants 160 people per ha 178 people per ha
According to Table 2, informal 26% of their income on commuting stress, as experienced in Oudtshoorn backyard rentals increased both (Kerr, 2015: 16). Given the low (see section 3.2). dwelling unit and population per levels of private vehicle ownership, The following section examines ha considerably in both surveys. especially in the informal backyard infrastructure access for backyard Without backyard dwellings, the area rental sector, the effects of relocating tenants in the case study to would display dwelling unit densities tenants to new low-income housing underscore the potential impacts below that of new low-income projects on the periphery, such as informal backyard tenants may have Rose Valley, were again stressed. housing projects developed under on bulk capacity. state subsidies of approximately 40 The survey (2015) further showed dwelling units per ha. The following that backyard tenure was stable v. Infrastructure considerations section is dedicated to the impacts and secure. Backyard tenants and service access of the case study’s backyard reported occupying their structures The Bridgton/Bongolethu survey densification on issues related for a mean of six and a half years, (2015) revealed high levels of service to urban sprawl, as discussed in echoing findings in other studies access for backyard households. section 2.1. (Morange, 2002; Carey, 2009; As such, 80.8% of the backyard Lemanski, 2009; Watson, 2009). iv. Reflections on sprawl issues respondents had access to electricity, As such, the sudden settlement of with 77.5% accessing power via The value of backyard densification Rose Valley underscores the real informal connections from the main in counteracting urban sprawl is influence of political manipulation home. The remaining 4.3% were further highlighted by the socio- and the allure of home ownership. serviced by a formal connection. economic characteristics of those in The survey (2015) found that 75.8% Nearly all (98.3%) backyard low-income housing. The Bridgton/ of the backyard respondents would respondents claimed access to basic Bongolethu survey (2015) found that only leave current accommodation sanitation, 6.7% via an external, the majority of landlord and tenant in favour of home ownership. The communal lavatory, reflecting practice households reported a monthly Rose Valley invasion thus further in older apartheid and some RDP household income between R1 001 evidences the challenges related to developments to provide ablution and R1 500. Consequently, private backyarding as a popular, but unideal facilities outside the house (Gardner, vehicle ownership was extremely low, form of accommodation. In this 2009: 22). The majority (89.2%) with 10.7% of the main households instance, the negatives of increased accessed a lavatory in the main and 5.8% of the backyard households densities (see Table 1) may come house. For refuse removal, 96.7% reporting private vehicle ownership. into play and be intensified under of the backyard respondents relied The vast majority of respondents low-income, mainly unemployed on municipal waste removal. Data thus relied on the goodwill of others, populations (Cameron, 2015). Of showed that 97.5% of the backyard walking or expensive minibus these negatives, overcapacitating respondents had access to water, taxis to reach destinations. In infrastructure networks is a main 59.2% through a communal tap on South Africa, commuters who use concern, especially where existing the property, and 40% through a minibus taxis may spend an average bulk infrastructure is already under tap in the main dwelling. Table 3
Table 3: Service access for backyard respondents in study area vs average access in the Oudtshoorn Local Municipality
Bridgton/Bongolethu survey (2015) Average for Oudtshoorn Local Municipality % difference Electricity 80.8% 85.3% -4.5%
Sanitation 98.3% 77.2% 21.1%
Refuse removal 96.7% 78% 18.7%
Piped Water 97.5% 74.5% 23%
Aggregate % 14.56%
Source: Own construction based on OLM (2015b)
22 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles synthesises levels of service access as extreme housing demand, informal informal backyard tenants in the case from the survey (2015) versus land invasion, formalisation, limited study generally enjoy security of average levels of service access for delivery capacity, low-density housing tenure. As such, the mass exodus to the OLM. development, urban sprawl, and, Rose Valley indicates that backyard importantly, issues related to informal structures are far from ideal, that Table 3 shows that the informal backyard accommodation. The latter home ownership is a significant draw, backyard households surveyed related to Rose Valley in the number and that backyarders are vulnerable enjoyed improved service access, at of settlers who previously occupied to political manipulation. Rose an aggregate of 14.56%, compared informal backyard rentals, particularly Valley testifies to the importance to averages for the OLM, with the in the more centrally located of supporting and sustaining the exception of access to electricity. In Bridgton and Bongolethu townships, informal backyard rental sector, a broader sense, only 4.6% of the and the renewed opportunities if only to thwart urban sprawl by informal backyard households go for backyard densification the completely unserviced in the OLM similar schemes in the future. Such extension will present, even as more when access to water, electricity initiatives will depend on accurate aggressive action in preventing illegal and sanitation are combined as a data regarding backyard-housing construction and small stand sizes single indicator (WCHS, 2015: 21). numbers for which this article has seem to signify a more restrictive Other studies have confirmed that shown that the Census data may attitude towards future informal backyard tenants generally enjoy be inadequate. backyard infill. excellent access to basic services Accordingly, it is recommended (Gardner, 2009: 27; Lemanski, The literature emphasised the value that local authorities, in particular, 2009: 477; Shapurjee & Charlton, of informal backyard accommodation undertake informal backyard 2013: 660). Note that these levels of in densifying otherwise very low- sector surveys and infrastructural service access are not guaranteed, density townships, tested in the evaluations to determine the with examples from around South empirical section of this article by status quo and take appropriate Africa where some backyard means of an analysis of data from action based thereupon, ultimately dwellings are consistently unable to the Bridgton/Bongolethu surveys bringing backyard dwellings out access formal ablutions and potable (2013 and 2015). Quantifying the of the shadows of obscurity, water (Rubin & Gardner, 2013: 21). level of densification in the case as terra incognita, and placing study showed that informal backyard them at the centre of future dwellings had increased dwelling 4. CONCLUSION planning initiatives. unit density by at least 68.75% and This article has added to the pool augmented population density by Acknowledgements of established literature on core at least 39.38%. Consequently, This research (or parts thereof) planning concepts such as urban informal backyard rentals house was made possible by the financial sprawl and density, accepting that a considerable number of tenants contribution of the NRF (National low residential densities contribute who would otherwise occupy land Research Foundation) South Africa. to urban sprawl at the cost of urban informally on a sprawling urban Any opinion, findings and conclusions compaction and sustainability. The periphery, such as Rose Valley, within or recommendations expressed review of post-apartheid South Africa the existing urban footprint where in this material are those of the and related planning literature they use existing services. author(s) and, therefore, the NRF showed that the country has failed to However, as shown in the literature, does not accept any liability with deliver integrated human settlements, the shared use of infrastructure regard thereto. instead producing sprawling, low- is cause for concern when density settlements that replicate infrastructural capacity is considered an apartheid geography, conflicting REFERENCES LIST for the majority of low-income with sustainable development BANK, L. 2007. The rhythms of the subsidised housing suburbs. In aspirations (Turok, 2016b: 11). yards: Urbanism, backyards and the Bridgton/Bongolethu case Literature findings were reflected housing policy in South Africa. Journal and for Oudtshoorn in general, in the case study of Oudtshoorn. of Contemporary African Studies, backyard tenants enjoy excellent In this instance, a new low-density 25(2), pp. 205-228. https://doi. access to services, thus placing low-cost housing project has been org/10.1080/02589000701396298 substantial pressure on Oudtshoorn’s located on the fringe of an apartheid- infrastructure in a context where BOYKO, C.T. & COOPER, R. 2011. era township, as the Rose Valley Clarifying and re-conceptualising all bulk services are functioning extension, in response to a crippling density. Progress in Planning, 76, at full capacity and may already housing demand of over 14 500 pp. 1-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. be overextended, exacerbated in units. Rose Valley and its upgrade progress.2011.07.001 circumstances of high municipal debt into a standard low-cost housing and existing service delivery failures. BREWER, K. & GRANT, J.L. 2015. project represents a microcosm Seeking density and mix in the of South Africa’s low-cost housing In addition to excellent service suburbs: Challenges for mid-sized sector, encapsulating aspects such access, research revealed that cities. Planning Theory and Practice, 23 16(2), pp.151-168. https://doi.org/10.10 CITIES ALLIANCE. 2002. Cities without HARRISON, P. & TODES, A. 2015. 80/14649357.2015.1011216 slums. Cities Alliance annual report. Spatial transformations in a “loosening Washington, DC: Cities Alliance. state”: South Africa in a comparative BROITMAN, D. & KOOMEN, E. perspective. Geoforum, 61(May), 2015. Residential density change: CRANKSHAW, O., GILBERT, A. pp. 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Densification and urban expansion. & MORRIS, A. 2000. Backyard geoforum.2015.03.003 Computers, Environment and Soweto. International Journal Urban Systems, 54(November), of Urban & Regional Research, HASHIM, Y.A. 2010. Determining pp. 32-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 24(4), pp. 841-857. https://doi. sufficiency of sample size in compenvurbsys.2015.05.006 org/10.1111/1468-2427.00282 management survey research activities. International Journal of Organisational BROWNSTONE, D. & GOLOB, DAUGHTERS. Oudtshoorn Local Management & Entrepreneurship T.F. 2009. The impact of residential Municipality. Personal interview on Development, 6(1), pp. 119-130. density on vehicle usage and energy 7 October 2015. consumption. Journal of Urban INOSTROZA, L., BAUR, R. & DICKENS. ASLA Devco. Personal Economics, 65(1), pp. 91-98. https:// CSAPLOVICS, E. 2013. Urban interview on 8 February 2016. doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2008.09.002 sprawl and fragmentation in Latin DU PLESSIS, D.J. 2014. A critical America: A dynamic quantification and BRUNNER, A. 2012. The effects reflection on urban spatial planning characterization of spatial patterns. of urban sprawl on daily life. South practices and outcomes in post- Journal of Environmental Management, Carolina State University. apartheid South Africa. Urban 115, pp. 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. CAMERON. City of Cape Forum, 25(1), pp. 69-88. https://doi. jenvman.2012.11.007 Town. Personal interview on org/10.1007/s12132-013-9201-5 JAY, I. & BOWEN, P. 2011. What 25 February 2015. EWING, R., PENDALL, R. & CHEN, D. residents value in low-cost housing CAREY, S. 2009. Investigation 2002. Measuring sprawl and its impact. schemes: Some South African into the proliferation of low-income Report by SmartGrowth America, concepts. Building Research & private rental housing supply, and the Washington. Information, 39(6), pp. 574-588. https:// development of recommendations doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2011.617082 FORSYTH, A., OAKES, J.M., concering appropriate interventions/ SCHMITZ, K.H. & HEARST, M. JÜRGENS, U., DONALDSON, R., responses. Social Housing Foundation, 2007. Does residential density RULE, S. & BÄHR, J. 2013. Townships Urban Landmark, pp. 1-36. increase walking and other in South African cities – Literature CARRUTHERS, J.I. & ULFARSSON, physical activity? Urban Studies, review and research perspectives. G.F. 2003. Urban sprawl and the cost 44(4), pp. 679-697. https://doi. Habitat International, 39, pp. of public services. Environment & org/10.1080/00420980601184729 256-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Planning B: Planning & Design, 30(4), habitatint.2012.10.011 FULTON, W., PENDALL, R., NGUYEN, pp. 503-522. https://doi.org/10.1068/ M. & HARRISON, A. 2001. Who KERR, A. 2015. Tax(i)ing the Poor? b12847 sprawls most? How growth patterns Commuting costs. South Africa Labour CASH, C. 2014. Towards achieving differ across the US. Washington, D.C.: and Development Research Unit resilience at the rural-urban fringe: The Brookings Institution. Working Paper. Cape Town: University The case of Jamestown, South Africa. of Cape Town. GARDNER, D. 2009. Strategy for Urban Forum, 25(1), pp. 125-141. increasing supply of small-scale private KLUG, N., RUBIN, M. & TODES, A. CHHETRI, P., HAN, J.H., CHANDRA, dwelling rental in South Africa. Social 2013. Inclusionary housing policy: S. & CORCORAN, J. 2013. Mapping Housing Foundation, Urban Landmark, A tool for re-shaping South Africa’s urban residential density patterns: pp. 1-31. spatial legacy? Journal of Housing Compact city model in Melbourne, and the Built Environment, 28(4), GLAESER, E. & SIMS, H. 2015. Australia. City, Culture and Society, pp. 667-678. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Contagion, crime and congestion: 4, pp. 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. s10901-013-9351-8 Overcoming the downsides of density. ccs.2013.03.001 London: International Growth Centre. LATEGAN, L.G. & CILLIERS, E.J. CHOBOKOANE, N. & HORN, A. 2015. 2013. South Africa’s informal backyard GOEBEL, A. 2007. Sustainable Urban compaction and densification in rental sector: Linkages with smart urban development? Low-cost Bloemfontein, South Africa: Measuring growth and sustainability concepts. housing challenges in South Africa. the current urban form against In: Zubir, S.S. & Brebbia, C.A. (Eds). Habitat International, 31(3-4), pp. Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality’s Proceedings of the Sustainable 291-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. spatial planning proposals for City VIII, 3-5 December, Putrajaya, habitatint.2007.03.001 compaction. Urban Forum, 26(1), Malaysia. Ashurts: South Hampton: pp. 77-93. GOLD. Oudtshoorn Local Municipality. WIT Press, pp. 303-314. Personal interview on 13 October 2015. CHRISTIAN. Oudtshoorn Local LATEGAN, L.G. & CILLIERS, E.J. Municipality. Personal interview on HAFERBURG, C. 2013. Townships of 2014. The value of public green spaces 6 July 2012. tomorrow? Cosmo City and inclusive and the effects of South Africa’s visions for post-apartheid urban informal backyard rental sector. In: CHURCHMAN, A. 1999. futures. Habitat International, 4(39), Marchettini, N., Brebbia, C.A., Pulselli, Disentangling the concept of density. pp. 261-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. R. & Bastianoni, S. Proceedings of the Journal of Planning Literature, habitatint.2012.10.014 Sustainable City IX, 23-25 September, 13(4), pp. 389-411. https://doi. Siena, Italy. Ashurts: South Hampton: org/10.1177/08854129922092478
24 Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles
WIT Press, pp. 427-440. https://doi. pp. 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/ pp. 653-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/ org/10.2495/sc140361 s12132-015-9265-5 s10901-013-9350-9 LEE. Oudtshoorn Local Municipality. OUDTSHOORN LOCAL SHAPURJEE, Y., LE ROUX, A. Personal interview on 10 July 2012. MUNICIPALITY (OLM). 2015a. Greater & COETZEE, M. 2014. Backyard Oudtshoorn Spatial Development housing in Gauteng: An analysis of LEMANSKI, C. 2009. Augmented Framework, pp. 1-28. spatial dynamics. Town and Regional informality: South Africa’s backyard Planning, Issue 64, pp.19-30. dwellings as a by-product of formal OUDTSHOORN LOCAL housing policies. Habitat International, MUNICIPALITY (OLM). 2015b. SIVAM, A. & KARUPPANNAN, S. 33(4), pp.472-484. https://doi. Oudtshoorn 2nd Integrated 2012. Density design and sustainable org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.03.002 Development Plan Review 2014/2015. residential development. In: Lehmann, Outshoorn Municipality. S. & Crocker R. (Eds). Designing for LINARD, C., TATEM, A.J. & GILBERT, zero waste: Consumption, technologies M. 2013. Modelling spatial patterns OSMAN, S., NAWAWI, A.H., and the built environment. New York of urban growth in Africa. Applied ABDULLAH, J. 2008. Urban sprawl and London: Earthscan, pp. 267-283. Geography, 44, pp. 23-32. https://doi. and its financial cost: A conceptual org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.07.009 framework. Asian Social Science, SOLÉ-OLLÉ, A. & RICO, M.H. 4(10), pp. 39-50. 2010. Does urban sprawl increase LOMBARD, M. & HUXLEY, M. 2011. the costs of providing local public Self-made cities: Ordinary informality? PARNELL, S. & HART, D. 1999. services? Evidence from spanish Planning Theory & Practice, 12(1), Self-help housing as a flexible municipalities. Urban Studies, pp. 120-125. instrument of state control in 20th- 47(7), pp. 1513-1540. https://doi. century South Africa. Housing Studies, MAMMON, N. & EWING, K. 2009. org/10.1177/0042098009353620 14(3), pp. 367-386. https://doi. Moving towards a design approach org/10.1080/02673039982858 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA to low-income housing in urban Cape ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT Town: The case of Joe Slovo Park. POULSEN, L. & SILVERMAN, M. 2006. HOUSING (SCANPH). 2004. In: Proceedings of the 33rd IAHS Design strategies for the densification Density guide for affordable World Congress on Housing, 27-30 of low-income housing. International housing developers. Los Angeles, September, Pretoria, South Africa, Journal for Housing Science and Its California: SCANPH. CD-ROM. 2009-06-04T12:49:41Z. Applications, 30(1) (special issue), pp. 19-31. STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA MASSYN, M.W., MCGAFFIN, R., (STATSSA). 2014. General household VIRULY, F. & HOPKINS, N. 2015. The REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA survey 2014: P0318. Pretoria: Statistics challenge of developing higher density, (RSA). 2004. Breaking new ground: South Africa. affordable housing in the inner city of A comprehensive plan for the Cape Town. International Journal of development of sustainable human SUKHAI, A. & JONES, A.P. 2014. Housing Markets and Analysis, 8(3), settlements. Pretoria: Department of Urban density, deprivation and pp. 412-428. https://doi.org/10.1108/ Human Settlements. road safety: A small area study in IJHMA-11-2014-0049 the eThekwini metropolitan area, RICHARDS, R., O’LEARY, B. & South Africa. African Safety Promotion MCCONNELL, V.D.K. & WILEY, K. MUTSONZIWA, K. 2007. Measuring Journal, 12(2), pp. 1-20. 2010. Infill development: Perspectives quality of life in informal settlements and evidence from economics in South Africa. Social Indicators TSHANGANA, A. 2013. Local and planning. Discussion Paper. Research, 81(2), pp. 375-388. https:// government position on municipal Washington, D.C: Resources for doi.org/10.1007/s11205-006-9014-1 responses to backyarders and the Future. backyard dwellings. Draft policy ROBINS, S. 2002. Planning ‘suburban proposal. South African Local MCGAFFIN, R., CIROLIA, L.R. & bliss’ in Joe Slovo Park, Cape Town. Government Association, pp. 1-17. MASSYN, M.W. 2015. Overcoming the Africa, 72(4), pp. 511-548. https://doi. challenge of vertical consolidation in org/10.3366/afr.2002.72.4.511 TUROK, I. 2011. Deconstructing South Africa’s low-income settlements: density: Strategic dilemmas confronting RODE, P., FLOATER, G., A case study of Du Noon. Urban the post-apartheid city. Cities, 28(5), THOMOPOULOS, N., DOCHERTY, J., Forum, 26(1), pp. 59-75. https://doi. pp. 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. SCHWINGER, P. & MAHENDRA, A. org/10.1007/s12132-014-9232-6 cities.2010.10.003 2014. Accessibility in cities: Transport MEHTA, B. & DASTUR, A. (Eds). and urban form. NCE Cities Paper TUROK, I. 2012. Urbanisation 2008. Approaches to urban slums: A 03. LSE Cities. London School of and development in South Africa: multimedia sourcebook on adaptive Economics, pp.1-61. Economic imperatives, spatial and proactive strategies. WBI Learning distortions and strategic responses. RUBIN, M. & GARDNER, D. 2013. Resources Series. Washington, D.C.: International Institute for Environment Developing a response to backyarding World Bank. and Development. United Nations for SALGA, pp. 1-93. Population Fund, pp. 1-66. MORANGE, M. 2002. Backyard SHAPURJEE, Y. & CHARLTON, S. shacks: The relative success of this TUROK, I. 2013. Transforming South 2013. Transforming South Africa’s housing option in Port Elizabeth. Africa’s divided cities: Can devolution low-income housing projects through Urban Forum, 13(2), pp. 3-25. help? International Planning Studies, backyard dwellings: Intersections with 18(2), pp. 168-187. https://doi.org/10.10 NEL, V. 2016. Spluma, zoning and households and the state in Alexandra, 80/13563475.2013.774146 effective land use management in Johannesburg. Journal of Housing South Africa. Urban Forum, 27(1), and the Built Environment, 28(4),
25 TUROK, I. 2016a. Housing and the P., Jørgensen, G., Kabisch, S., urban premium. Habitat International, Kombe, W.J., Lindley, S., Simonis, I. & 54(3), pp. 234-240. https://doi. Yeshitela, K. (Eds). Urban vulnerability org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.019 and climate change in Africa. Future City 4, pp. 153-196. https://doi. TUROK, I. 2016b. South Africa’s org/10.1007/978-3-319-03982-4_5 new urban agenda: Transformation or compensation? Local Economy, YUE, W., LIU, Y. & FAN, P. 2013. 31(1-2), pp. 9-27. https://doi. Measuring urban sprawl and its org/10.1177/0269094215614259 drivers in large Chinese cities: The case of Hangzhou. Land Use Policy, TUROK, I. & BOREL-SALADIN, J. 31(March), pp. 358-370. https://doi. 2014. Is urbanisation in South Africa on org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.07.018 a sustainable trajectory? Development Southern Africa, 31(5), pp. 675-691. ZWAIG, P.J. 2015. Everyday hazards https://doi.org/10.1080/037683 and vulnerabilities amongst backyard 5X.2014.937524 dwellers: A case study of Vredendal North, Matzikama Municipality, South TUROK, I. & BOREL-SALADIN, J. Africa. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster 2016. Backyard shacks, informality and Risk Studies, 7(1), pp.1-8. https://doi. the urban housing crisis in South Africa: org/10.4102/jamba.v7i1.210 Stopgap or prototype solution? Housing Studies, 31(4), pp. 384-409. https://doi. org/10.1080/02673037.2015.1091921 UN-HABITAT. 2003. The challenge of slums: Global report on human settlements 2003. London: Earthscan Publications. UN-HABITAT. 2013. State of the world’s cities 2012/2013. Prosperity of cities. New York: Routledge. VAN ROOYEN, H. 2010. CSIR provides support in guiding housing and human settlement investment: Human settlements, construction and building. CSIR Science Scope (1), pp. 46-47. VAN WYK, J. & ORANJE, M. 2014. The post-1994 South African spatial planning system and Bill of Rights: A meaningful and mutually beneficial fit? Planning Theory, 13(4), pp. 349-369. https://doi. org/10.1177/1473095213511966 WESTEN. Oudtshoorn Local Municipality. Personal interview on 14 August 2013. WATSON, V. 2009. Strategic literature assessment for informal rental research project. Report to the Social Housing Foundation, pp. 1-26. WESTERN CAPE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS (WCHS). 2015. Municipal human settlement demand profile. Oudtshoorn Local Municipality, pp. 1-36. WISNER, B., PELLING, M., MASCHARENHAS, A., HOLLOWAY, A., NDONG, B., FAYE, P., RIBOT, J. & SIMON, D. 2015. Small cities and towns in Africa: Insights into adaptation challenges and potentials. In: Pauleit, S., Coly, A., Fohlmeister, S., Gasparini,
26