Johannesburg Housing Company

0

Johannesburg Housing Company

Mismatches Location
Policies and regulations Local policies Public-private initiatives
Financing Supply subsidies
Promotion and production Public-private partnerships Private promotion Favelas/Slums

Main objectives of the project

When addressing informal settlements and the relocation of their residents, the common solution often involves outskirts due to their affordability. Typically, a large proportion of slum dwellers gravitate towards the outskirts of cities. However, Johannesburg has adopted a different approach. In efforts to rejuvenate its downtown area, the city has embraced an alternative strategy. Through the utilization of a non-profit institution, Johannesburg has implemented social housing initiatives within its city center. By repurposing abandoned or deteriorating buildings, the city has not only revitalized its downtown core but also provided much-needed social housing options.

Date

  • 1995: Implementation

Stakeholders

  • SHRA
  • Promotor: JHC

Location

Continent: Africa
Country/Region: Johannesburg, South Africa

Description

In South Africa, a significant portion of tenants reside in informal settlements, with over 400,000 housing units constructed on unauthorized land lacking basic services and vulnerable to environmental hazards like floods and fires. Between 2001 and 2011, the number of shacks erected in the backyards of existing dwellings surged by 55%, totaling more than 700,000 units. Despite the existence of the Social Housing Policy since 1994, the establishment of the regulatory authority (SHRA) in 2010 marked notable progress. The Minister of Human Settlements pledged the delivery of 1.5 million new housing opportunities by 2019.

Social housing projects are financed through a blend of government funds, debt, and up to 10% from for-profit private capital. The national government, via the SHRA, subsidizes up to 65% of capital costs and allows subsidized units for tenants meeting specific monthly family income thresholds. These subsidized units must constitute between 30% and 70% of all mixed projects.

Investment opportunities include the Social Housing Institution (SHI) model, where non-profit entities or owners undertake projects inclusive of social housing. Currently, around 83 SHIs have been established, delivering approximately 33,000 units nationwide. However, while the number of institutions is on the rise, the rate of unit development hasn't matched, leading to financial challenges for many. Only six out of the 83 institutions are financially stable, with an additional 25 potentially viable.

In Johannesburg, two SHIs have demonstrated remarkable success. One such entity is the Johannesburg Housing Company (JHC), founded in 1995, which has pioneered an innovative affordable housing model with efficient building management and exemplary customer service. It has facilitated the development of over 4,293 rental housing units, providing homes for more than 19,478 individuals. JHC's efforts have played a pivotal role in revitalizing downtown Johannesburg, transforming dilapidated or abandoned buildings into modern architecture units. The company utilizes two components of the rental housing policy: urban restructuring zones declaration and the Inner City Property Scheme (ICPS), formerly known as the Bad Building Program.

Initial funding provided to JHC enabled it to establish a solid capital base necessary for large-scale social housing development in the downtown area. By the late 2000s, JHC had a portfolio comprising nine renovated buildings and two new construction projects. The organization's cost management strategy ensures each building covers its operating costs, including interest on operating income.

Contrary to traditional urban regeneration strategies focused solely on economic growth, JHC's approach emphasizes building improvements, renovations, and new constructions to increase the city's housing stock by approximately 10% while rejuvenating rundown structures to provide affordable rents and decent housing. However, the future of social rental housing faces challenges, particularly regarding the diminishing availability of affordable land in restructuring zones.

Inclusionary Housing in Johannesburg

0

Inclusionary Housing in Johannesburg

Mismatches Segregation Diversity
Policies and regulations Local policies Planning
Urban Design Inclusion
Promotion and production Public-private partnerships Private promotion

Main objectives of the project

In 2019, the Johannesburg City Council approved the Inclusionary Housing project, making it the inaugural inclusionary housing policy implemented anywhere in Africa. This initiative aims to ensure that every development includes a percentage of social housing units. The objective is to augment the availability of smaller units in strategically situated areas of the city, thereby alleviating the housing backlog, gradually lowering housing prices, and diminishing travel times, expenses, and emissions in a city where these factors are excessively high.

Date

  • 2019: Implementation

Stakeholders

  • City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Location

Continent: Africa
Country/Region: Johannesburg, South Africa

Description

The framework works as follows: Inclusionary housing is mandatory for any development application under the jurisdiction of the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality that includes 20 dwelling units or more. Different options (and associated incentives) are given for inclusionary housing that developers may choose from. In each option, a minimum of 30% of the total units must be for inclusionary housing. When inclusionary housing is applicable, it will be implemented as a condition for development (in land use/development approvals) by the City of Johannesburg. The City may take action against developers/owners who do not comply with the conditions for inclusionary housing outlined in land use/development approvals, as with any condition of approval. Yet, a developer developing below the threshold of 20 units, but who meets the criteria for one of the inclusionary housing options detailed in the framework approved, may still benefit from the incentives associated with the option chosen.

The incentives are, usually, the possibility to build extra units, hence, an increase in the allowable residential floor area, densifing the area in development. All the incentives depend on the options that planning allows and that the developer choose. Each option have some mandates regarding the 30% of inclusionary housing and some incentives. For example, Option 1 asks to have social housing units, hence, it has greater incentives than other options. Yet, in some options they can be sold in the open market. In those cases, incentives are tighter and the main goal is to densify the area and generating mixed communities by allowing a diverse typology of housing units.

Indeed, a primary objective of the program is to foster a compact city by densifying urban developments. By transitioning towards a more condensed urban landscape instead of perpetuating urban sprawl, the aim is to safeguard the remaining natural and biodiverse areas on the city outskirts, preserving the ecosystem services they offer. This approach is anticipated to enhance air quality by enhancing city efficiency. A compact city model is both environmentally and economically sustainable. It promotes increased density and proximity, resulting in reduced energy consumption for transportation, optimized land use management, and the conservation of rural land and biodiversity. Medium to high-density settlements in a city also lead to decreased service costs, improved accessibility to public facilities, and more efficient infrastructure provision, thereby enhancing economic sustainability and feasibility.