STELLENBOSCH: SPATIAL TRANSFORMATION IN AN ASPIRING

CITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND INNOVATION

July 2017

Source: Unequalscenes, 2017

Report prepared by

Danie du Plessis

Stellenbosch | Page ii

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 5

2. DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC OVERVIEW ............................................................. 6 2.1 Overview of demographic characteristics and trends ................................................................... 6 2.2 A brief overview of economic structure and performance ............................................................ 8

3. MAIN SPATIAL TRANSFORMATION ISSUES ............................................................... 12

4. ALIGNMENT WITH OTHER SECTOR PLANS ............................................................... 15

4.1 Provincial level plans ......................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Municipal level plans ............................................................................................................. 17

5. OVERVIEW OF STELLENBOSCH SDF ......................................................................... 18 5.1 Institutional setting and status of SDF .................................................................................. 18 5.2 Expected outcomes of SDF .................................................................................................. 21 5.3 Spatial concepts and proposals ............................................................................................ 24

6. ASSESSMENT OF STELLENBOSCH SDF .................................................................... 27 6.1 Quality of the planning process ............................................................................................. 27 6.2 General overview of plan quality ........................................................................................... 29 6.3 Plan quality: Consideration of key spatial transformation principles ..................................... 31 6.4 Implementation of SDF ......................................................................................................... 34

7. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................. 36

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................. 42

Stellenbosch | Page iii

List of Figures

Figure 1: Spatial composition of Stellenbosch Municipality 5 Figure 2: Stellenbosch LM: Composition of gross value added and employment 9 Figure 3: Security estate in rural area 13 Figure 4: Informal housing in Kyamandi 14 Figure 5: Growth potential of settlements and municipalities in the Western Cape 16 Figure 6: Western Cape Province consolidated framework proposals 17 Figure 7: Stellenbosch land use change 2000 to 2010 22 Figure 8: Stellenbosch wine farms 24 Figure 9: Stellenbosch SDF town analysis and proposals 25 Figure 10: Stellenbosch urban edge 26 Figure 11: Stellenbosch University campus 28

Stellenbosch | Page iv

List of Tables

Table 1: Population and density trends 6 Table 2: Access to basic infrastructure and housing 7 Table 3: Cape Winelands District municipalities: GDPR contribution and growth 8 Table 4: Cape Winelands District municipalities: Employment creation 9 Table 5: Stellenbosch employment status and income 10 Table 6: Financial status 11 Table 7: Application of generic spatial planning concepts in Stellenbosch SDF 30 Table 8: Assessment of relevance of IUDF policy levers and policy priorities to Stellenbosch SDF 37

1. INTRODUCTION

Stellenbosch municipality forms part of the Cape Winelands District Municipality and covers an area of approximately 831 km² with a population of 173 419 in 2016. The

municipality is characterized by a dispersed spatial settlement structure consisting of 13 identified nodes across the municipal area from Klapmuts in the north, Franschoek in the east, Raithby in the south and Lynedoch in the west. The municipal area includes the towns of Stellenbosch and Franschhoek, as well as a number of rural hamlets such as Wemmershoek, La Motte, De Novo, Kylemore, Pniel, Johannesdal, Languedoc, Groot Drakenstein, Muldersvlei, Klapmuts, Elsenburg, Raithby, Jamestown, Koelenhof and Vlottenburg (most with a population of less than 5 000) (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2016b).

Figure 1: Spatial composition of Stellenbosch Municipality

Source: Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a

Stellenbosch town is the second oldest town in South Africa with its history dating back to 1679 when the then Governor of the Cape, Simon van der Stel named an island in the Eerste River Stellenbosch. From a more recent historical perspective the local municipality area currently defined as Stellenbosch in the pre-1994 era consisted of a number of individual institutional entities. These included Stellenbosch, Franschhoek, Jamestown and Pniel that constituted independent municipal authorities for white residents, the Coloured Local Advisory Councils (CLACs) representing the coloured communities of Cloetesville and Idas Valley in

Stellenbosch | Page 6

Stellenbosch, the African settlement of Kayamandi administered by the Central State, and the surrounding rural settlements under control of the Cape Provincial Administration's control (Seethal, 2005).

The municipality houses a variety of educational institutions, including the University of Stellenbosch and a number of prestigious schools. It has a strong business sector, varying from major South African businesses and corporations, to smaller enterprises and home industries. The municipality is well known for its world renowned cultural landscapes and exceptional scenic quality. Stellenbosch is also particularly well known for its wine industry and related wine tourism industry with the Stellenbosch wine route receiving more than 800,000 visitors annually (Ferreira & Hunter, 2017). The municipal area includes various architectural styles such as Dutch, Georgian and Victorian which reflect their heritage and traditions, but also divisions of the past (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b).

2. DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC OVERVIEW

2.1 Overview of demographic characteristics and trends

The total population of the municipality increased from 103 996 in 1996, to 118 709 in 2001 and the most recent official figure of 173 419 in 2016 (Statistics SA, 2016). This represents an average annual population growth rate of 2.6% per annum over the period 2001 to 2016. The number of households increased from 29 023 to 52 371 between 2001 and 2016 representing an average annual household growth rate of 4.0% per annum over this period. By 2016 as much as 91% of the population lived in urban areas. The overall gross population density across the entire municipal area is low and increased somewhat from 1.25 persons/ha in 1996 to 2.09 persons/ha in 2016. Based on the urban development footprint data of 2014 and the 2016 population data the estimated net population density of the municipality is 61.7 persons/ha (18.6 households/ha). Table 1: Population and density trends

Indicator 1996 2001 2011 2016

Total number of people 103 996 118 709 155 733 173 419

Total number of people urban n.a n.a 119 256 157 845

Total number of people rural (commercial farms) n.a n.a 36 476 15 575

Total number of households 25 931 29 023 43 420 52 374

Avg annual growth rate (population) since previous period 2.7 2.8 2.2

Avg annual growth rate (households) since previous period 2.3 4.1 3.8

Density

Total area of the municipality (ha) 83 100 83 100 83 100 83 100

Total area of built up area (urban area, 2014) (ha)

2 810

Persons per ha 1.25 1.43 1.87 2.09

Persons per ha for built up area

61.7

Households per ha 0.31 0.35 0.53 0.63

Households per ha for built up area

18.6

Stellenbosch | Page 7

The levels of access to basic services in the municipality is high with 98.1% of the population having access to a flush toilet, 92.7% to electricity and 66.8% with indoor water access in 2016. One of the growing challenges from a services and physical development perspective is the percentage of households living in informal settlements that increased from 15.7% in 2001 to 34.2% in 2016. This 2016 figure is the second highest figure amongst the 25 intermediate city municipalities in South Africa.

Table 2: Access to basic infrastructure and housing

Indicator 1996 2001 2011 2016

Total number of households 25 931 29 023 43 420 52 374

Number of households with indoor water access 19 472 19 905 31 437 34 972

Percentage of households with indoor water access

75.1 68.6 72.4 66.8

Number of households with flush toilet access 21 828 25 407 39 834 51 386

Percentage of households with flush toilet access 84.2 87.5 91.7 98.1

Number of households with electricity access 23 395 26 415 40 352 48 532

Percentage of households with electricity access 90.2 91.0 92.9 92.7

Number of households living in informal structures 3 543 4 556 9 947 17 936

Percentage of households living in informal structures

13.7 15.7 22.9 34.2

In 2016 a total of 68.5% of the municipal population could be classified in the economically active age category (15 to 64 years of age). The majority of these fall in the age category 15-34 years of age and a further 26.2% between 35 and 64 years. Children (population 14 years and younger) represent 23.8% of the total population and the elderly (65 years and older) 7.7%. Expressed in dependency terms, the child dependency ratio (ratio of children to economically population) fluctuated between 36.2 in 2001, 31.6 in 2011, and 34.7 in 2016. The elderly dependency ratio (ratio between population 65 years and older and the economically active age population) increased from 6.4 in 2001 to 6.8 in 2011 and quite dramatically to 11.2 in 2016. Despite this sharp increase in the elderly dependency ratio in 2016 and the impression expressed by some of the interview respondents that Stellenbosch houses a large proportion of pensioners, the 2016 ratio of 11.2 only ranked 13th on the elderly ratio amongst the 25 intermediate city municipalities. The overall dependency ratio (children plus elderly expressed as a ratio relative to the economically active population) fluctuated between 42.6 in 2001 to 38.4 in 2011 and increasing again to 45.9 in 2016. This implies that Stellenbosch had the 4th lowest total dependency ratio amongst the 25 intermediate municipalities in 2016.

Stellenbosch | Page 8

Despite the vision of Stellenbosch described in its latest Integrated Development Plan (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b) as “Valley of Opportunity and Innovation” only 28.0% of its population had an education level of matric or higher in 2016, placing Stellenbosch only 13th on the list of the 25 intermediate city municipalities. In 2011 a total of 52.9% of households in Stellenbosch earned less than R3200 per month, a further 27.0% earned between R3200 and R12 800 per household per month, and 20.1% of households earned in excess of R12 800 per month. The estimated average monthly household income in the Stellenbosch LM increased from R8 062 in 2011 to R12 769 in 2011. Stellenbosch LM remained with the highest average monthly household income amongst the 25 intermediate municipalities in both 2001 and 2011.

2.2 A brief overview of economic structure and performance

According to the 2015 Municipal Economic Review and Outlook for the province, Stellenbosch is the largest and fastest growing municipality in the Cape Winelands district (WCPT, 2015). Despite intensive agricultural activities located in the municipality this sector only contributed 8.2% of GDP in 1996 and declining further to 6.5% of the municipal GDP in 2015. As indicated in Table 3 Stellenbosch consistently outperformed the district and the Western Cape from an economic growth perspective over the period 2005 to 2013 and by 2013 accounted for 34% of the district GDP. In addition Stellenbosch was the only municipality that contributed positively to employment creation on a net basis between 2005 and 2013.

Table 3: Cape Winelands District municipalities: GDPR contribution and growth

Source: WCPT, 2015

Stellenbosch | Page 9

Table 4: Cape Winelands District municipalities: Employment creation

Source: WCPT, 2015

By 2013 Stellenbosch accounted for 33.7% of the district GVA and 29.1% of employment (WCPT, 2015). The economic structure is dominated by the commercial services sector (48% of municipal GVA and 39% of employment); general government, community, social and personal services sector (20% of GVA and 32% of employment), and manufacturing (20% of GVA and 14% of manufacturing). Research into knowledge-based service industries in Stellenbosch revealed that these businesses locate in Stellenbosch as a matter of preference rather than necessity. It also indicated that the most prominent factors crucial to the successful performance of core business activities is the opportunity for face-to-face client consultation and the availability of a highly educated workforce (Adendorff & Donaldson, 2012). These figures also dispel the perception and anecdotal statements such as contained in the municipal IDP (Stellenbosch LM, 2017b) stating that “Stellenbosch’s economy is also driven by the agricultural sector which requires the seasonal influx of labor”. Figure 2: Stellenbosch LM: Composition of gross value added and employment

Source: WCPT, 2015

Stellenbosch | Page 10

All economic sectors in Stellenbosch experienced positive GVA growth between 2005 and 2013 and apart from the agricultural sector and construction sector all other sectors experienced positive net employment creation between 2005 and 2013. The economic performance of Stellenbosch as outlined by the indicators above is also reflected in the official employment statistics. According to the official definition of unemployment the unemployment rate in Stellenbosch decreased slightly from 16.9% in 2001 to 15.2% in 2011. The employed as a percentage of the unemployed over the same period decreased slightly from 37.1% to 36.6%. When comparing the 2011 figures of the 25 intermediate municipalities, Stellenbosch had the lowest unemployment rate and the second highest percentage employed people. Stellenbosch also outperformed the other intermediate city municipalities with the lowest youth unemployment rate in both 2001 (23.1%) and 2011 (21.5%). Table 5: Stellenbosch employment status and income Indicator 1996 2001 2011 2016

Total population 103 996 118 709 155 733 173 419

Total number of people employed 39 825 44 067 56 957 n.a

Employed people as a percentage of total population 38.3 37.1 36.6 n.a

Unemployment rate n.a 23.1 21.5 n.a.

Youth unemployment rate n.a 16.9 15.2 n.a

Average household income n.a 96 743 153 233 n.a

Annual growth in household Income (2001-2011) n.a n.a 4.7 n.a

Average annual CPI (2001-2011) n.a n.a 5.9 n.a

Dependency ratio n.a 42.6 38.4 45.9

A summary of the financial status of Stellenbosch as reflected by its audited financial statements is summarized in Table 6. Total municipal expenditure increased from R544 million in 2008/09 to R1.25 billion in 2015/16. Over this period the total capital expenditure increased from R106 million (19.5% of total budget) to R287 million (22.9% of total budget). Although the total expenditure on maintenance increased over this period it decreased in proportional terms from 6.1% of total expenditure in 2008/09 to 4.4% in 2015/16. A positive indication is that the proportion of total expenditure spent on salaries decreased from 30.8% in 2008/09 to 29.3% in 2015/16. Total municipal income increased from R574 million in 2008/09 to R1.41 billion in 2015/16. The total income generated from property rates more than doubled from R119 million to R270 million and as a percentage of total municipal income decreased slightly from 20.7% to 19.2%. The proportion of total municipal income derived from service fees decreased slightly from 52.4% to 50.% over this period. A significant feature of the financial trends is that grants as percentage of total municipal income nearly doubled from 8.8% in 2008/09 to 16.1% in 2015/16. In 2015

Stellenbosch | Page 11

the total number of employees per km² of built-up area was approximately 31.3 and

the average annual salary of employees (total municipal expenditure on salaries divided by total number of employees) R313 000. Table 6: Financial status Indicator 2008/2009 2015/2016

Number of municipal employees 1174

Total Municipal expenditure 544 475 586 1 254 937 245

Total capital expenditure 106 356 972 287 122 600

Capital budget as % of total budget 19.5 22.9

Municipal expenditure on maintenance 33 022 475 54 657 830

Municipal expenditure on maintenance as a percentage of total expenditure

6.1 4.4

Municipal expenditure on salaries 167 828 964 367 462 966

Municipal expenditure on salaries as a percentage of total expenditure

30.8 29.3

Total municipal Income 574 231 995 1 411 088 371

Total Income from property rates 119 118 905 270 378 662

Municipal income from property tax as a percentage of total municipal income (self- generated income)

20.7 19.2

Total income from service fees 300 929 648.00 705 713 720

Service fees as a percentage of total income 52.4 50.0

Total income from grants 50 289 596.00 227 268 132

Grants as a percentage of total income 8.8 16.1

Total Municipal area (km²) 831 831

Total Municipal built-up area (km²)

28.1

Number of municipal employees per km2

1.41

Number of municipal employees per km2 of built up area 41.8

Municipal expenditure per employee

1 068 941

Average salary of officials

313 001

Source: Stellenbosch Municipality 2009 & Stellenbosch Municipality 2016a

Stellenbosch | Page 12

3. MAIN SPATIAL TRANSFORMATION ISSUES

Although there are some different interpretations of the concept of spatial transformation it is broadly accepted that it is not only about the restructuring of space, but also about institutional transformation, the development of organisational capacity and a focused vision and plan (SACN, 2016). As part of the interviews with the respondents they were asked to provide their understanding of the term spatial transformation. Although a variety of ideas were expressed, these can be distilled into a number of common ideas. Firstly, there is a general view that spatial transformation consists of both a social dimension and an economic dimension. There also seems to be a common view that successful spatial transformation from a social perspective is not possible without sustainable economic development. Secondly, there is a widely held perception that spatial transformation does not necessarily only refer to low cost housing in high income suburbs, but rather a focus on establishing a housing mix in line with the affordability levels of residents and the labor force of Stellenbosch and the creation of innovative mixed land use areas. The current affordable housing funding model is viewed as inappropriate to support spatial transformation and it is generally agreed that available resources (land and buildings) must be optimally used to support spatial transformation. It was also mentioned that development norms and standards must be applied consistently across all areas in the LM to support spatial transformation. A third broadly held view is the need to maintain financial sustainability whilst accommodating spatial transformation. It was mentioned that there are many pensioners and students living in Stellenbosch struggling to keep up with increasing rates and taxes of the municipality. This will in the long term impact negatively on the ability of the municipality to support a successful spatial transformation agenda.

The main spatial transformation issues in Stellenbosch were identified as those aspects that were identified as one of the “strategic perspectives” in the SDF and identified by the interview respondents as priority spatial transformation issues. This process resulted in the identification of five priority spatial transformation issues as summarised in the subsequent paragraphs.

• Balancing the need for new development with maintaining the unique rural and historical heritage character and sense of place of the town and municipality. Extensive urban expansion typified by the construction of low density suburbs on agricultural land situated not in proximity of major transport systems and pressure on arable land due to rapid population and settlement growth are identified as important threats in the SDF. The SDF also noted that the agricultural industry has experienced difficulties in attracting capital as high premiums are paid for the lifestyle aspects of Stellenbosch farm land resulting in increasing property prices and lower financial returns for farmers (Stellenbosch municipality, 2017a). Recent research further emphasized the importance of not overdeveloping or over-commercializing the Stellenbosch wine route experience and to maintain some of its authenticity (Ferreira & Hunter, 2017).

Stellenbosch | Page 13

Figure 3: Security estate in rural area

Source: Property 24, 2017

• Expanding the capacity of bulk infrastructure (including the improvement of mobility, circulation and parking) to accommodate future development needs and reduce negative environmental impacts. According to the SDF much of Stellenbosch’s key water supply infrastructure is in a state of disrepair, severely constraining the municipality’s ability to deliver uninterrupted fresh water services to its constituents. The upgrading of the current wastewater treatment works is one of the largest capital investments ever made by the Stellenbosch Municipality (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b).

• Providing a broader mix of housing types in closer proximity to economic opportunities, including the delivery of public and private sector housing in the social, gap and lower income sectors to also accommodate the high proportion of the Stellenbosch labour force that cannot afford to reside there. An important principle to practically achieve this is the optimal use of publicly owned land to maximize opportunities for mixed use and mixed housing type development. Accommodating and managing the growing need for affordable housing (especially the growth of Kyamandi) and the prioritization of the incremental upgrading of informal settlements were also identified as an important spatial transformation priority.

Stellenbosch | Page 14

Figure 4: Informal housing in Kyamandi

Source: Stellenbosch Heritage Foundation, 2017

• The protection and conservation of key natural resources and eco-system services and public open spaces. Pressure on fresh water resources due to rapid population and settlement growth is identified as a threat in the SDF. Climate change is likely to bring a combination of rising temperatures and reduced or erratic rainfall, placing pressure on constrained water supplies (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a). Stellenbosch is home to some very rare and diverse vegetation that is coming under pressure from the uncontrolled expansion of urban areas and industrialized agriculture into indigenous ecosystems (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a: 33).

• The SDF identified the growth of Stellenbosch University as a major opportunity for the property and services sectors and a driver of inclusive economic growth. This growth of the university and its associated facilities however also brings its own unique challenges for spatial development, especially the eexpanding footprint, student accommodation encroaching into the suburbs, a major contributor to traffic volumes in Stellenbosch, and its impact on infrastructure capacity (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a). The university expressed a willingness to become involved in upgrading precinct infrastructure where such challenges are a result of University growth

Stellenbosch | Page 15

Other important spatial transformation issues also identified by the interviewees include the maintenance and further development of the municipality’s agricultural base; a much stronger focus on the interaction between spatial development, infrastructure prioritization and funding and financial sustainability; and the lack of progress with socio-economic integration (the different nodes as identified in the SDF have very distinct racial characteristics).

It is also relevant to reflect on the main spatial issues that have been identified in the 2017 revision of the municipal Integrated Development Plan. These key issues include new property developments that have transformed the landscape in response to new market demands, homeless households who have occupied strategically located parcels of land, expansion of the University footprint and student accommodation has encroached into the suburbs, traffic congestion, the emergence of new malls, and the tourism and the services sector that has boomed. The need to consider the future spatial development of Stellenbosch in its broader regional context has also been identified as an important issue (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b). The 2016/17 IDP identified the importance of focusing strategic planning effort broader than mere administrative boundaries to also include the Cape Town Functional Region. This initiative recognizes shared environmental resources and key regional economic interdependencies such as a commuting workforce and a shared consumer catchment area (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b).

4. ALIGNMENT WITH OTHER SECTOR PLANS The Stellenbosch SDF only makes reference to two specific sector plans: precinct plans in some of the nodal proposals and the Stellenbosch University campus master plan. There are however a range of municipal sector plans potentially relevant to spatial development in Stellenbosch and are briefly summarized in the following sections.

4.1 Provincial level plans

The primary objective of the Western Cape Provincial Growth Potential of towns Study (GPS 2013) was to determine the growth potential of settlements outside the City of Cape Town in terms of potential future economic, population and physical growth. The analysis of growth potential is based on two related concepts: inherent preconditions for growth and innovation potential. Five thematic indexes formed the basis for modelling the growth preconditions and innovation potential within each settlement and municipality in the province. Both Stellenbosch municipality (at municipal level) and Stellenbosch town at settlement level was identified as having a very high potential for future growth.

Stellenbosch | Page 16

Figure 5: Growth potential of settlements and municipalities in the Western Cape

Source: DEADP, 2013.

The Western Cape Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) of 2014 is a framework to guide the formulation and rolling out of coherent and consistent sector and area based plans by the various spheres of government and state owned enterprises operating in the Western Cape. It also provides communities and the private sector with greater certainty over where development is heading to enable them to respond to emerging opportunities. In terms of the consolidated framework proposals Stellenbosch is identified as a regional center forming part of the Cape metro priority urban functional region.

Stellenbosch | Page 17

Figure 6: Western Cape Province consolidated framework proposals

Source: DEADP, 2014

4.2 Municipal level plans

The purpose of the Heritage Inventory and Management Plan is to provide detailed management information and guidelines on heritage resources in the municipal area. A heritage register was completed for the historical core of Stellenbosch through the Stellenbosch Heritage Foundation and was submitted to Heritage Western Cape for assessment. A similar register was also completed for the Stellenbosch University and approved by Heritage Western Cape.

The Municipality is in the process of reviewing the Integrated Human Settlements Plan to ensure alignment with the Urban Development Strategy and with special emphasis on alignment with the SDF and the IDP. The existing approved Stellenbosch Housing Strategy supports the SDF’s proposed municipal spatial configuration comprising of a system of interconnected and tightly configured settlements with clear urban edges. The target is the provision of roughly 18 775 residential units to cater for the current backlog in housing.

The Comprehensive Integrated Transport Plan (CITP) serves as a mechanism to plan for, develop, manage, integrate and provide for all modes of transport. The latest completed CITP has been prepared and adopted by Council for the 2016-2020

Stellenbosch | Page 18

period and has identified the following areas of strategic intervention for Stellenbosch (Stellenbosch municipality, 2017b):

• “Towards Car Free Living” which refers to strategies that encourage more

effective modes of travel such as public transport, NMT and other mechanisms to

increase the number of passengers per vehicle.

• “Travel Demand Management” which refers to strategies that manage overall

demand for travel during peak periods such as congestion pricing and parking

management.

• “Infrastructure and Operational Enhancements” which refer to capacity

improvements to transport infrastructure but only as part of the overarching

transport philosophy in Stellenbosch.

• “Optimal Land-Use and Interconnected nodes” which refers to integrated land use and transport planning which supports and promotes transit orientated development (TOD).

The municipality has also prepared a number of other sector plans such as an Integrated Waste Management Plan, Electrical Master Plan, Water Services Development Plan, Long term water conservation and water demand strategy, Local Economic Development Strategy, Disaster Management Plan, Air Quality Management Plan, Community Development Strategy, ICT turn-around strategy, and Human Resource Plan. The existing Stellenbosch University Campus Master Plan was approved by the university management in May 2010. The aim of this master plan is to guide the spatial development of a leading 21st century university campus by maintaining a balance between new development and historical heritage. One of the overall objectives of the plan is cooperation with the local municipality and communities. This master plan provides detailed proposals for future spatial development of academic facilities, student accommodation, and support services. It also includes the identification of strategic properties required for the short, medium and long term expansion of the university (Stellenbosch University, 2010). The master plan has a 20 to 30 year horizon and is currently (2017) being reviewed and updated.

5. OVERVIEW OF STELLENBOSCH SDF

5.1 Institutional setting and status of SDF

The spatial planning function of Stellenbosch is vested in the Directorate Planning and Economic Development with the allocated responsibilities of management and planning of heritage and environmental resources; spatial planning and land use management, stakeholder management, neighborhood revitalization, community development, local economic development and tourism. Political oversight of this function is provided by the Economic Development and Planning Portfolio Committee of the municipality (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017b).

Stellenbosch | Page 19

The existing SDF was originally prepared in 2012 based on a draft status quo report and draft strategies reports by CNdV Africa in 2010 and inputs from Stellenbosch municipality in 2012. This SDF was approved by Council in 2013. The municipality subsequently initiated two parallel processes to prepare an updated and SPLUMA compliant SDF. As an interim measure the 2012 SDF has been revised during 2017, specifically to accommodate some minor changes to the urban edge, and approved as part of the 2017 IDP process. In parallel the municipality has embarked on a process to prepare a completely new SDF that will be approved during the 2017/2018 IDP cycle in 2018. This process consists of four separate but mutually informing baseline studies that will form the point of departure for formulating alternative spatial development concepts and proposals:

• A heritage register and plan: The first phase focusing on the rural and farming areas have been completed and approved. The second phase focusing on the urban areas was in progress at the time of the completing this report.

• A rural development plan focusing on spatial development and appropriate forms of development in the rural areas of the municipality (all areas outside the urban edges).

• An urban development strategy informed by current and future requirements for housing, economic growth and other space consuming activities. This urban development strategy will also informed by a specialist study to accurately quantify the housing backlog and need requirements in the municipality.

• A specialist study to investigate the feasibility of a proposed new western bypass to alleviate traffic congestion in Stellenbosch and improve overall accessibility.

These four studies will then jointly form the bases for developing alternative spatial development concepts and subsequent more detailed future spatial development proposals. The assessment and evaluation of the Stellenbosch SDF reflected on in the remainder of this report thus refers to the existing Stellenbosch SDF of 2012 updated in 2017.

Stellenbosch | Page 20

Stellenbosch | Page 21

5.2 Expected outcomes of SDF

The revised April 2017 SDF clearly articulates four envisaged aims (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a):

• Achieve shared growth

• Increase access to opportunities, particularly for disadvantaged citizens

• Improve sustainability by minimizing ecological footprints

• Maintain the unique sense of place of the municipality’s towns and regions

To achieve these outcomes the SDF is structured around seven strategic perspectives that should guide the future spatial development of Stellenbosch. It also provides a set of principles for each of these seven strategic perspectives. A synopsis of these seven strategic perspectives as outlined in the SDF is summarized in the subsequent sections (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a).

i. Interconnected nodes

The SDF recommends that each settlement should have its own design and implementation framework that recognizes the unique characteristics of its setting. The principles of walking distance, functional integration and socio-economic integration should be common to all of them and it is hence suggested that developments should be prioritized firstly around rail routes, and secondly alongside road routes and intersections. This should be supported by a balanced supply of low, middle and high income housing in each node including some social and gap-housing on private developments. In accordance with the principles of densification, existing settlement nodes should receive priority over greenfield land and land use should be based on its best long term sustainable use, rather than on its best financial return.

ii. Car Free Transport

The SDF calls for a reduction of the number of cars on the road through a combination of non-motorized transport (NMT) and public transport facilities. Adequate pedestrian and cycling infrastructure and appropriate development policies should ensure that at least 50% of activities in the urban areas are within 1km of residential areas, making it easier to live without private cars. Increased settlement densities should also ensure improved financial viability of public transport facilities and encourage a shift away from dependence on private cars.

iii. Inclusive Economic Growth

The SDF recognizes the imbalances between rich and poor and recommends the provision of a proportionate balance of low, middle and high income housing with more affordable housing provided closer to economic opportunities, and commercial zones to be created within close proximity of low income suburbs. Sufficient industrial land should also be made available near public transport links, especially

Stellenbosch | Page 22

rail. The SDF further recognizes the requirements of the informal sector and proposes that shopping centers and areas with high pedestrian traffic should also include market areas and sidewalk opportunities that help informal traders to access more business. Markets and informal retail spaces should be properly managed, and rentals charged for informal retail spaces according to the level of services provided. The SDF further recommends that appropriately located public land should be used for agricultural, conservation and tourism purposes in land reform, equity or lease schemes that broaden participation in the rural economy.

iv. Optimal Land Use

The SDF recommends that the expansion of urban footprints should be limited and that suitable locations need to be identified either as part of existing settlements through densification or extension and integration of existing settlements. Preference must be given to locations close to public transport hubs, and brownfield sites are preferred over greenfield locations. Projects catering to low, middle and high income groups should be designed as larger integrated settlements rather than stand-alone townships or gated communities. Space should simultaneously be created for additional educational and other facilities to ensure minimal need for vehicular transport. Figure 7: Stellenbosch land use change 2000 to 2010.

Source: Musakwa & Van Niekerk, 2013.

Stellenbosch | Page 23

The physical growth and land use change of Stellenbosch town as the main development node in the municipality between 2000 and 2010 is reflected on Figure 7. Clearly the most significant growth of the urban footprint occurred in the south (De Zalze Estate and Paradyskloof), north-west (Kayamandi) and north (Welgevonden) indicating significant pressure for the peripheral extension of the urban footprint.

v. Resource Custodianship

The SDF highlights five specific areas requiring urgent attention:

• Fresh water: Pollution reduction should be complemented by efforts to re-

establish and protect indigenous riverine ecosystems and the eradication of

alien vegetation from all areas should be supported. Peak water demand

should be accommodated with supplementary water storage and recycling,

and urban water conservation and demand management programs should be

implemented.

• Waste water: The SDF recommends that the WWTWs must be upgraded to

achieve minimum water quality standards as defined by DWAF and where

feasible, development at new settlement nodes should be serviced by

localized waste water treatment plants that utilize appropriate sustainability-

oriented technologies. Peak load management systems will need to be

considered for particular areas. Sewage should be regarded as a potential

source of water, nutrients, methane gas.

• Solid waste: The reduction of waste streams need to be prioritized and

strategies for waste separation at source should be formulated and

implemented. Private and community-based sub-contractors should be

included in a recycling- oriented waste management system.

• Energy: All new housing should install solar water heating devices, and non-

subsidy housing should be encouraged to supplement their demand by

generators such as solar photovoltaic panels and solar hot water heating

devices. Alternative energy sources should be developed and integrated into

the grid, and the largest energy users should be encouraged and incentivized

to invest in solar energy generation.

• Construction materials: The SDF proposes the use of recycled, recyclable and

low energy building materials in the construction of new buildings where

possible.

vi. Food and Agriculture

Land outside of existing or proposed urban settlements should be used for agricultural production, biodiversity conservation, scenic quality and agri-tourism. Further sub-division of land should be strongly discouraged. Informal, properly managed farmers markets selling fresh produce should be provided in key centres, while further large mall developments should be discouraged. This aspect is particularly relevant in light of the findings of research indicating that despite a strong agricultural context food insecurity is high in Stellenbosch (Kelly & Schulschenk, 2011).

Stellenbosch | Page 24

Figure 8: Stellenbosch wine farms

Source: Wesgro, 2017

vii. Heritage

The SDF proposes a number of specific principles to protect the character of the area, including the use of guidelines for sensitive biodiversity areas, controls over building heights and architectural styles along major roads, and the determination of appropriate land use zoning according to view sheds.

5.3 Spatial concepts and proposals

From a spatial development viewpoint, and in line with the strategic perspective of interconnected nodes, the SDF identified 14 nodes as the focus of future development in Stellenbosch municipality. The SDF provides a summarized strategic analysis for each of the 14 nodes addressing aspects such as advantages, challenges, opportunities, constraints, future lateral growth, development areas, a summary of infrastructure constraints and implications, and rivers and conservation zones. The spatial proposals for each of the 14 nodes consists of three elements: a conceptual representation of the key findings of the analysis of each node, a conceptual representation of the spatial proposals for each node; and a detailed map showing the urban edge for each node (see examples provided in Figures 9 and 10).

Stellenbosch | Page 25

Figure 9: Stellenbosch SDF town analysis and proposals

Source: Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a

Stellenbosch | Page 26

Figure 10: Stellenbosch urban edge

Source: Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a

The conceptual categories to reflect the spatial proposals for the 14 nodes include the following (not all categories used in the proposals for each individual nodes):

• Green field/new development areas

• Infill and redevelopment

• River conservation corridor

• New passenger stations

• Urban edge

• Urban village centers

• Important gateways to be protected

• Proposed agriculture (land reform)

• Upgrade of facilities (e.g. picnic site)

• Wetland conservation

• Traffic calming and pedestrian safety zone

• Urban agriculture

• Scenic route

Stellenbosch | Page 27

As summarized in Table 7 in Section 6 the concepts used in the spatial proposals are rather limited and only includes 6 of the 14 generic spatial concepts widely used in SDFs. The scale and level of detail of the proposals for each of the nodes was generally regarded by the interviewees as insufficient to inform decisions regarding individual development applications.

6. ASSESSMENT OF STELLENBOSCH SDF

6.1 Quality of the planning process

Both the existing SDF (2012 version updated in 2017) and the new SDF currently being prepared has been and is developed by private consultants. The current SDF process involves different private consultants and specialists for the various components of the process. Although compiled by external consultants the municipal planning department is actively involved in the process. The interviewees held quite different views on the institutional capacity of the planning function in the municipality. Some are of the opinion that the municipality is sufficiently capacitated in this field whilst others regard it as insufficient. Specific areas of concern that were mentioned include the lack of IT systems supporting planning (especially a functional GIS), and the absence of a drawing office and map room. The general consensus opinion amongst the interviewees is that stakeholders were adequately consulted in the process of preparing the existing SDF, although the opinion was expressed that ward councilors could potentially play a more prominent role to inform constituents of the SDF process. Regarding the current process underway to prepare a new SDF for adoption during 2018, an attempt was made during the 2017 IDP process to integrate the public engagement requirements of the SDF process with the IDP consultative process. This was however not deemed very successful because the focus of IDP meetings tended to focus more on general local development issues (such as crime and services infrastructure) with limited opportunity to engage on spatial aspects. Further ward level consultation around the SDF specifically is planned for 2017/18. The current process to engage stakeholders also includes bilateral meetings with identified stakeholder groups attended by the mayor and an Intergovernmental Steering Committee to involve all relevant organs of state in the process. In addition, monthly meetings are held between the SU and the municipality to discuss planning issues of common interest. It was unclear to what extent the different municipal departments have been involved in the preparation of the existing SDF. It is however clear that other departments within the municipality are actively and directly involved in the preparation of the new SDF. A strategic meeting is held every 14 days between all the directors of the departments regarding development in the municipality. This is not necessarily aimed at the SDF only but also includes discussions relevant to the preparation of the new SDF.

Stellenbosch | Page 28

Despite a range of sector and other plans at provincial and municipal level potentially relevant to spatial development (see details in Section 4) the Stellenbosch SDF only makes clear reference to two related plans as informants of the SDF: precinct plans in some of the nodal proposals and the Stellenbosch University campus master plan. The respondents did however indicate that the current process to prepare a new SDF does consider all relevant provincial and national policies and legislation as required by SPLUMA. Figure 11: Stellenbosch University campus

Source: http://www.holidaybug.co.za/a-360-view-of-stellenbosch-in-pictures-a-photoblog

From the interviews it became clear that there are two opposing views amongst the community and stakeholder groups regarding spatial development:

• Those favoring new development

• Those opposed to new development mainly based on two arguments – impact on traffic and impact on rural character of area.

The opinion was expressed that the biggest influence on development originates from influential local individuals and private developers and not necessarily organized lobbyist groups. The views and comments on development applications by organized community groups such as the Stellenbosch Interest Group (SIG) and the Heritage committee are regarded as influential. There was however no mention of power play influencing spatial development in a negative context.

Stellenbosch | Page 29

The alignment between the existing SDF and IDP is limited and the vision of the IDP is not clearly reflected by the principles and proposals of the SDF. The current process for preparing the new SDF however specifically aims to achieve alignment of the two processes and it is envisaged that the new SDF will be approved together with the 2018 revision of the IDP.

6.2 General overview of plan quality

The existing SDF was prepared in 2012 before the implementation and finalization of SPLUMA and is thus not SPLUMA compliant. It is however envisaged that the new SDF will be fully SPLUMA compliant in all respects. Due to the fact that the SDF was prepared in 2012 well before the finalization of the draft IUDF (2014) and the final IUDF (2016), the strategic goals and policy levers of the Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) is not considered in the current SDF. Surprisingly the interviews revealed very limited knowledge about the existence and content of the IUDF and its relevance for spatial transformation. The general opinion of the interviewees is that the existing SDF is of an average quality with no specific focus on spatial transformation and with limited ability to influence development decisions. The general principles are generally regarded as sound and even reflecting some far reaching proposals for spatial transformation but provide insufficient detail to meaningfully guide development. Its impact is severely constrained by the absence of prioritized projects and a detailed implementation plan. Some proposals such as the development of new railway stations are viewed by some as unrealistic. Although the plan provides a proposed conceptual spatial framework for each of the 14 identified nodes, no alternative municipal or nodal level spatial concepts are explored or evaluated in the SDF. The new SDF currently being prepared will however specifically consider alternative SDF concepts to be formulated based on the findings of a number of specialist studies referred to earlier. Although spatial transformation is not specifically identified as one of the strategic perspectives or objectives of the IDP, a number of the development principles identified in the SDF do however represent some recognition of the need for spatial transformation albeit not as a separately defined objective. Some of these principles can in fact be regarded as quite radical from a spatial development perspective. According to the SDF (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a: 20) municipal owned land can be used to provide affordability advantages for agricultural and low income housing developments rather than selling this land to the highest bidder. Some of the principles identified under the strategic priority area of optimal land use include the following (2017a: 21):

• Land and projects catering for low-, middle- and high-income groups should be designed as part of a larger integrated settlement rather than stand-alone townships or gated estates

• Public land to be used for social or low income housing should not be sold at the highest price, but rather leased or sold at levels that make such projects viable

Stellenbosch | Page 30

• Identify suitable locations for 6,000 middle- and low-income residential units (middle to high density, including flats), preferably at locations that are close to public transport links.

The SDF further recommends as one of its principles that areas of land should be set aside, and if necessary expropriated, to provide SMMEs with access to well-located parts of the CBDs for retail, service provision and manufacturing. It further recommends as one of its principles that a range of informal retail locations should be provided on sidewalks, verges and median areas to cater for permanent traders. The SDF also supports the principle that the construction of additional large grocery anchored shopping malls should be discouraged in the municipality, mainly because they undermine neighbourhood-level commercial activity and they are often only accessible by private car. Instead, locations for informal, properly managed farmers markets selling fresh produce, arts and crafts should be provided in key centres (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a).

Table 7: Application of generic spatial planning concepts in Stellenbosch SDF Spatial concept Concept used

Yes / No/ ? Concept used

Development/activity corridors and spines

N

Development nodes N

Economic development/investment zones N

Civic/community areas; Multipurpose service delivery centers

Y Urban village centers Facilities upgrade

Mixed use nodes or corridors N

Urban edge/boundary Y Urban edge

Densification or infill areas Y Infill and redevelopment

Urban development/expansion areas Y Green field/new development areas

Urban renewal/regeneration zones N

Open space system N

Stellenbosch | Page 31

Protected or high biodiversity zones Y River conservation corridor Wetland conservation

High potential agricultural land ? Proposed agriculture (land reform) Urban agriculture

Coastal edge NA

Public transport focus areas Y New passenger stations

Other

Important gateways to be protected; Traffic calming and pedestrian safety zone; Scenic route

As summarized in Table 7 the concepts used in the spatial proposals are rather limited and only includes 6 of the 14 generic spatial concepts widely used in SDFs. It is a widely held view amongst the interviewees that the scale and level of detail of the proposals for each of the nodes is insufficient to inform decisions regarding individual development applications.

6.3 Plan quality: Consideration of key spatial transformation principles

The SDF identified urban sprawl and the development of low density suburbs on agricultural land as a specific threat and hence one of the seven strategic perspectives of the SDF is interconnected nodes within a framework of a high density nodal development pattern based on strategic transport intersections (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a). One of the principles identified in support of this strategic perspective is higher development densities supported by urban edges that are strictly maintained. Neither the overall nodal proposals, nor the more detailed conceptual proposal maps for each of the 14 nodes however provide more detailed spatial guidelines for this densification process apart from the clearly defined urban edges. According to the SDF each node has unique characteristics that make different combinations of densification and greenfields development appropriate. The SDF recommends that development should thus target infill and redevelopment of strategic areas and identified a number of principles in support of higher densities under the strategic perspective of optimal land use:

• Various forms of infill and brownfield development opportunities should be prioritized over greenfield sites

• Policy consistency is required for at least 10 years with regard to the approval of applications in terms of whether they are inside or outside the urban edge.

One of the sector plans referred to in the SDF is the SU campus master plan. This plan also supports the concept of increased densities and prioritizes infill and densification over new developments. It also supports densification through optimal

Stellenbosch | Page 32

use of space in existing buildings and the application of appropriate new space standards. One of the identified impediments to achieving densification is the parking requirements as specified in the current LUMS and bylaws of the LM. The view has been expressed that these bylaws will have to be amended and that norms and standards will have to be applied consistently across the entire LM area to give practical effect to densification.

The SDF also supports the idea of mixed land use development based on the principle of “functional integration” to inform settlement design. The SU campus master plan supports the principle of grouping of similar land uses but supports the concept of multi-functional use of space within existing buildings and also students residences (should not only be spaces for sleeping and eating but also for studying and socializing).

The SDF clearly supports the concept of shorter travel time and travel distances and improved connections between places of residence, place of work and social amenities. One of the seven strategic perspectives of the SDF is interconnected nodes to inform settlement design. This perspective is supported by the principles of walking distance, functional integration, and socio-economic integration. The SDF also promotes the principle that at least 50% of activities found within the urban area should be within 1km of where people live. The plan also promotes the principle of intensification, integration and mixed use development around primary station precincts (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a:17) and the principle that suitable land located close to places of work should be made available timeously to cater for the residential needs of employees, particularly in the gap, social and middle income markets (2017:19). Moreover, the SU campus master plan supports the idea of providing new student residences as close as possible to the existing campus. The SDF supports the idea of a wider usage of alternative transport modes and recommends that all regional roads should facilitate non-motorized transport (particularly cycling) and suggests the possibility of constructing more stations on the Lynedoch – Klapmuts rail line. Some of the persons interviewed expressed reservation about the concept of rail as a feasible public transport option between the various nodes. The SU campus master plan as one of the sector plans referred to in the SDF also prioritizes alternative modes – especially the needs of pedestrians and cyclists. It also supports the concept of peripheral parking with a shuttle service to town center and campus. The SDF provides a number of very clear principles for dealing with informality. It recommends as one of its principles that areas of land should be set aside, and even goes as far as to suggest that if necessary expropriated, to provide SMMEs with access to well-located parts of the CBDs for retail, service provision and manufacturing. It uses the term SMMEs but does not clearly indicate whether it also refers to informal businesses. It also does not provide any details of the conditions under which expropriation will be considered. The SDF recommends as one of its principles that a range of informal retail locations should be provided on sidewalks,

Stellenbosch | Page 33

verges and median areas to cater for permanent traders. As far as the management of these areas are concerned it is recommended that informal retail spaces should be properly managed and reasonable permit conditions enforced, and rentals charged depending on the level of facilities and services provided. The SDF supports the principle that the construction of additional large grocery anchored shopping malls should be discouraged in the municipality, mainly because they undermine neighborhood-level commercial activity and they often are only accessible by private car. Instead, it proposes that informal, properly managed farmers markets selling fresh produce, arts and crafts should be provided in key centers (2017:32). According to the SDF climate change is likely to bring a combination of rising temperatures and reduced or erratic rainfall, placing pressure on constrained water supplies in the municipality The SDF also provides a range of principles to support the optimal use of available water resources and effectively managing water demand (Stellenbosch Municipality, 2017a). The Stellenbosch University places a high premium on sustainable development and has implemented various initiatives such as installing water saving shower heads, installing low energy lighting, collection of rainwater, use of greywater for irrigation purposes, and waste separation and recycling. It also implemented an active awareness campaign amongst staff and students. The SDF does not provide a comprehensive review of economic prospects in Stellenbosch municipality or its impact on or relationship with spatial development. It does however identify “inclusive economic growth” as one of its seven strategic perspectives and includes a number of principles to implement this strategic perspective:

• Marketplaces should be created in central locations that are able to intercept significant pedestrian flows, preferably linked to public transport interchanges

• A range of informal retail locations should be provided on sidewalks, verges and median areas to cater for permanent traders

• All markets and informal retail spaces should be properly managed and reasonable permit conditions enforced, and rentals charged depending on the level of facilities and services provided

• Appropriately located public land should be used for agricultural, conservation and tourism purposes in land reform, equity schemes or lease schemes that broaden participation in the rural economy

• Sufficient industrial land should be made available close to public transport links (especially rail)

The SDF includes a set of principles to protect sensitive biodiversity areas, heritage sites and supports the principle that tourism that reinforces the municipality’s sense of place should be encouraged.

According tom the SDF Stellenbosch currently faces a major infrastructure backlog worth approximately R1 billion and development in the municipality is negatively affected by its infrastructure backlogs and constraints. It is estimated that the municipality will require a capital budget of approximately R400 million per annum for

Stellenbosch | Page 34

four to five years to rectify is infrastructure capacity backlogs. The municipality’s capacity to spend on infrastructure is however currently limited to a figure less than this requirement and will thus impact on the financial sustainability of the municipality. Significant investments have recently been made in upgrading the capacity of the sewer treatment plant. The municipality has recently acquired a project prioritization system to better align infrastructure provision, spatial planning and development, and capital investment decisions. This system will enable the municipality to consider the impact of spatial development on income and expenditure within a lifecycle approach and not only from a capital expenditure perspective alone. Although Stellenbosch University is a major user of bulk infrastructure it does not directly fund bulk infrastructure projects. There are however examples where they have contributed to the cost of new bulk infrastructure and they also pay developer contributions for new developments.

6.4 Implementation of SDF

In response to a question regarding elements that have been successfully implemented during the lifespan of the SDF, the interview respondents in general agreed that certain elements of the SDF were indeed successfully implemented. The strict application of the urban edge over the last five years is considered to have had a positive impact on limiting urban sprawl and contributing to some densification. The view was however also expressed that the strict application of the defined urban edges also had negative impacts on limiting proposed new development and associated economic growth opportunities. The overall perception is that development density has increased with a stronger focus on infill development. Traffic calming and improving non-motorized mobility is regarded as a further success of the current SDF. Significant progress has been made with introducing facilities and infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists. Some elements of the concept of providing peripheral parking with a shuttle service to the town center in Stellenbosch and campus have also been successfully implemented in conjunction with Stellenbosch University. Although it is not clearly reflected in the spatial proposals of the current SDF the concept of transit oriented development is reflected in the identified spatial development principles and is starting to influence the discourse around appropriate forms of spatial development. The SDF has successfully created a broader awareness of the need to protect natural resources. In particular the SDF is credited with contributing towards establishing the importance of protecting and improving river corridors and a number of projects were implemented to improve the status of river corridors. The SDF is also credited as contributing to more efficient use and management of water resources through initiatives such as training and awareness campaigns and the installation of new water meters. Although not fully adequate some significant improvements have been made to the bulk infrastructure capacity constraints, most notably the upgrading of the wastewater treatment plant in Stellenbosch. There is also a much stronger focus on aligning the prioritization and funding of bulk infrastructure with the policy of densification and the identified urban edges.

Stellenbosch | Page 35

It was also indicated that the SDF did contribute towards improving the land use management function and the land use management system of the municipality. There are however also elements of the SDF that were regarded by the interviewees as not having been implemented (or successfully implemented). Although some aspects of densification were achieved, the SDF was not able to effectively manage the development of student housing and aligning it with infrastructure capacities and constraints. Despite not being an entirely new concept there is still no clearly expressed view in the SDF regarding the desirability of the proposed new western bypass road or consideration of the potential positive and negative aspects from a spatial development perspective. Although some progress has been made with improving the capacity of wastewater treatment plants, other constraints in the water, sewer and electricity networks remain and is limiting potential new developments in certain locations. Although the principles of the SDF made a number of far reaching proposals for dealing with the informal economic sector, most of these aspects still remain as principles only without clearly implemented projects and strategies. Of specific relevance to spatial transformation is the view that the SDF made no meaningful contribution to racial and socio-economic integration of different housing types. It was also not successful in managing the growth of informal settlements and accommodating the pressure for lower and medium income housing in the municipal area in general and specifically in Stellenbosch. In addition potential infill projects on strategically located land and at the scale where it could make a meaningful contribution to spatial transformation have not progressed beyond the conceptual stage and was not vigorously pursued. The role of other spheres of government and their contribution to the implementation of these types of projects has been identified as problematic. Elements of intergovernmental cooperation that have been identified as problematic include:

• Support and resources made available from the provincial Department of Human Settlements that are not necessarily targeted at the correct locations as supported by the SDF

• DEADP holds a strong view on urban expansion and maintaining the integrity of urban edges with potential negative impacts on spatial development that can support economic development

• Public works owns significant land resources but did not meaningfully engage with the SDF process.

The impact of the SDF on decision making in the municipality in general is regarded as very limited apart from enforcing the urban edges. From the perspective of the interviewees this limited implementation stems from the format of the SDF which, although providing sound general principles, is without any detailed prioritization of

Stellenbosch | Page 36

key projects or implementation plan. The scale and nature of the conceptual plans in the SDF also makes it very difficult to evaluate individual applications against the SDF. To date there has been no form of monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the goals, principles and spatial proposals of the SDF. The municipality however recently acquired the NOVUS-CP3 capital planning and prioritization decision support platform that is envisaged to play an important future role in monitoring the implementation and impact of the SDF and its influence on capital planning and prioritization. This system utilizes Multi-Criteria Analysis and includes spatial criteria in addition to the qualitative and quantitative criteria used in more traditional project prioritization approaches. The system is intended to facilitate the alignment of capital expenditure with the strategic spatial vision of the municipality and to ensure that capital is spent in the priority areas identified by strategic planning documents such as the SDF.

7. CONCLUSIONS The seven strategic perspectives identified in the SDF are regarded as a fair representation of the key spatial development issues in SM. Although the critical aspect of housing is recognized in various development principles it may have merited the status as a separate strategic perspective given the scale and extent of the challenges faced. Although spatial transformation is not specifically identified as one of the strategic perspectives of the IDP, a number of the development principles identified in the SDF do however represent recognition of the need for spatial transformation. The concept however does not come across as a central issue in the SDF. These principles for spatial transformation included in SDF appear to be more incidental to good planning practice and not necessarily part of a clear spatial transformation agenda. There are clearly a range of different interpretations of the concept “spatial transformation”. The response to these strategic perspectives are described in the form of a broad set of relevant spatial development principles but no quantitative diagnostics of these issues are provided in the SDF. One of the key shortcomings identified by the interviewees across the board is the absence of a clear implementation plan to give effect to these principles and the ineffective scale and level of detail of proposals (apart from the demarcation of the urban edges). The optimal utilization of municipal and other government owned land and assets such as buildings are widely recognized as a critical potential tool for implementing aspects of spatial transformation. The vision of the IDP is not clearly reflected in the SDF although the preparation of the new SDF currently in progress places a substantial emphasis on the integration of the IDP and the SDF. The interviews also revealed a surprising lack of awareness and application of IUDF as a policy to drive spatial transformation.

Stellenbosch | Page 37

The need for effective engagement with stakeholders is widely recognized and an Intergovernmental Steering Committee to involve all relevant organs of state, the university, and parastatals such as Transnet has been established. An important initiative to improve the integration of spatial planning and capital planning and prioritization has been the acquisition of a decision support platform intended to facilitate the alignment of capital expenditure with the strategic spatial vision of the municipality and to ensure that capital is spent in the priority areas identified by strategic planning documents such as the SDF. As a final conclusion to this case study it may be informative to relate some of the findings outlined in this report with key elements of the policy levers outlined in the Integrated Urban Development Framework insofar as they are relevant to this study. The IUDF clearly states that its overall outcome is spatial transformation by “steering urban growth towards a sustainable growth model of compact, connected and coordinated cities and towns” (COGTA, 2016:7). It identifies nine policy levers and the policy priorities associated with each policy lever. The relevance of these policy levers and the policy priorities appropriate to this study is summarized in Table 8. Table 8: Assessment of relevance of IUDF policy levers and policy priorities to Stellenbosch SDF Policy lever Policy priority Relevance to Stellenbosch SDF

Integrated urban planning and management

Align spatial, sectoral and strategic plans

The current SDF shows limited alignment between the SDF and other strategic and sectoral plans. There are however a range of municipal sector plans potentially relevant to spatial development in Stellenbosch (see Section 4)

Align land-use and human settlement planning to transport planning

The IUDF recommends that new urban development and infrastructure investments should be focused around mass transit corridors and existing/emerging economic nodes, applying TOD principles. The concept of transit oriented development is reflected in the identified spatial development principles of the SDF but does not clearly resonate in the spatial proposals.

Integrate spatial planning and urban resilience

One of the seven strategic perspectives of the SDF is resource custodianship and the application of appropriate sustainability-oriented technologies. These concepts should be further extended to explicitly address the link between spatial planning and urban resilience.

Develop and strengthen instruments for creating compact cities and connected cities

The IUDF strongly advocates the concept of compact, connected, integrated and inclusive cities. The SDF in its principles and proposals places significant emphasis on limiting urban sprawl and supporting infill development

Stellenbosch | Page 38

and densification.

Expand the instruments for spatial intervention

The IUDF is very clear that SDFs must be sufficiently detailed to provide a meaningful basis for adjudicating development applications and guiding the public and private sector’s capital investment. One of the key shortcomings of the SDF is the absence of a clear implementation plan to give effect to the development principles and the ineffective scale and level of detail proposals making it difficult to inform decision making.

Integrated transport and mobility

Strengthen and integrate public transport modes

The IUDF emphasizes the inclusion of NMT and rail in spatial planning. The implementation of NMT has been identified as one of the aspects of success in the implementation of the SDF and the principles and proposals supports the prioritization of rail transport.

Invest along core public transport nodes and corridors

The IUDF proposes that SDFs and zoning regulations should ensure that new growth is concentrated along core transport corridors. The Stellenbosch SDF supports this principle but fails to provide any details in the spatial proposals.

Make cities pedestrian and cyclist friendly

One of the successes of the SDF have been identified as the significant progress with introducing facilities and infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists

Integrated sustainable human settlements

Accelerate the upgrading of informal settlements

The percentage of households living in informal settlements in SM increased from 15.7% in 2001 to 34.2% in 2016. This 2016 figure is the second highest figure amongst the 25 intermediate city municipalities in the country (see Section 2.1). This element of the IUDF should thus be prioritized in the new SDF currently under preparation.

Provide additional options for accessing urban opportunities

The IUDF recommends that the diverse needs of different kinds of households should be met by providing a greater variety of housing stock. Although the SDF supports the principle of a balanced supply of low-, middle- and high income housing in each node, including some social and gap-housing, it does not provide any clear spatial proposals in this regard.

Promote densification, including support for backyarding

The IUDF proposes that cities and towns extend basic services to backyarders, assist with creating more permanent structures and enhance tenant security. Densification is an important principle advocated in the Stellenbosch SDF and

Stellenbosch | Page 39

some successes have been achieved in this regard. No specific proposals for dealing with back yard housing are however provided.

Identify and fast track land for settlement interventions

Challenges with the release of strategic land owned by other organs of state have been identified as specific issue impeding potential spatial transformation projects.

Integrated urban infrastructure

Institutionalize municipal long-term infrastructure planning

The IUDF strongly supports the idea of projects and major capital investments that are spatially targeted and aligned to the municipal SDF. SM recently acquired a decision support system to facilitate the alignment of capital expenditure with the strategic spatial vision of the municipality and ensuring that capital is spent in the priority areas identified by strategic planning documents such as the SDF.

Efficient land governance and management

Address the fragmentation in public land information

There is no consolidated spatially referenced data on available public land in SM. This may also be related to the absence of a fully functional GIS system to support spatial planning.

Improve municipal access to state owned entities (SOE) and state-owned land

The IUDF proposes that integrated strategic land plans be prepared which would include the identification of SOEs, state, municipal and privately owned land, and provides clear motivations of why and when the land is necessary for urban transformation purposes. This plan must be linked to the IDP and the SDF. An integrated strategic land plan should form part of the implementation plan of the new SDF currently being prepared.

Inclusive economic development

Support urban livelihoods and the informal sector

The IUDF recommends that informal trade and informality should also be considered in spatial planning policies. The SDF provides a number of very clear principles for dealing with informality and informal trading. As with some of the other principles no detailed spatial proposals are however provided.

Empowered active communities

Strengthen participatory governance

The IUDF is adamant that citizens should be involved in planning and designing their neighborhoods. SM has put in place a number of initiatives to enable participation by communities at ward level, as well as the engagement of strategic stakeholders and other organs of state at a municipal level.

Effective urban governance

Strengthen inter-municipal and intra-municipal coordination

The IUDF recognizes that integrated urban development needs to look beyond the administrative boundaries of municipalities or cities, and emphasizes the need for coordination across municipalities or regions. The municipal

Stellenbosch | Page 40

IDP identified the importance of a strategic planning effort broader than its administrative boundaries including the Cape Town Functional Region and recognizes the importance to consider shared environmental resources and key regional economic interdependencies such as a commuting workforce and a shared consumer catchment area

Sustainable finances Improve capital budgeting and expenditure

The IUDF emphasizes the need to align planning and the need for realistic and financed capital budgets using life-cycle

costing.SM recently acquired the

NOVUS-CP3 capital planning and prioritization decision support platform that will enable the municipality to consider the impact of spatial development on income and expenditure within a lifecycle approach and not only from a capital expenditure perspective alone

The overall aim of the case studies is firstly to determine to what degree are the spatial issues identified in the IUDF important or relevant for intermediate cities, and secondly whether the spatial transformation issues in secondary cities differ fundamentally from those in the metropolitan municipalities. Regarding the first aim, the assessment provided in Table 8 clearly indicates that many of the policy levers and associated policy priorities are directly relevant to spatial planning and transformation in the Stellenbosch municipality. In terms of the second aim it is clear that some of the issues in Stellenbosch are very similar to those experienced in most of the metropolitan municipalities, whilst others are unique to the local circumstances. Some of the main spatial transformation issues in Stellenbosch identified in Section 3 such as the challenge of expanding the capacity of bulk infrastructure to accommodate future development needs, providing a broader mix of housing types in closer proximity to economic opportunities, and the protection and conservation of key natural resources and eco-system services and public open spaces are critical spatial development issues also facing most metropolitan municipalities in South Africa. Other challenges such as balancing the need for new development with maintaining the unique rural and historical heritage character and sense of place of the town and municipality, accommodating the growth of the University, and not overdeveloping or over-commercializing the Stellenbosch wine route experience is clearly spatial development issues unique to Stellenbosch. Although not the purpose of the case study, the findings do however suggest some interventions that may be beneficial to the spatial planning process in general and advancing the spatial transformation agenda specifically in secondary cities:

Stellenbosch | Page 41

• Maintaining a strong and consistent focus on sustainability as a key principle of spatial planning is a key ingredient for implementing a successful spatial transformation agenda.

• A shift in focus away from pure spatial planning to emphasizing the link between spatial planning, infrastructure prioritization and development, and financial planning could in future yield “best practice” for intermediate cities.

• Although some relevant principles for spatial transformation are included in SDFs it does not necessarily reflect a coherent spatial transformation agenda. Spatial transformation principles must be supported by a clear implementation plan.

• This case study revealed a surprising lack of awareness and application of the IUDF as a policy to drive spatial transformation. There may thus be need for IUDF information dissemination and capacity building regarding the application of the IUDF goals and policy levers in the spatial planning processes of intermediate cities.

• The successful implementation of even a single well-planned and well-funded spatial transformation pilot project in intermediate cities could positively change perceptions around the concept of spatial transformation.

• Coordination and alignment with other spheres of government, specifically regarding land availability remains a challenge for intermediate cities.

Stellenbosch | Page 42

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adendorff, A & Donaldson, R. 2012. Knowledge-based service industry in a South African university town: The case of Stellenbosch. Development Southern Africa, 29:3, 418-433 Department Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA). 2016. Integrated Urban Development Framework. A new deal for South African cities and towns. Pretoria: COGTA. Ferreira, S L A & Hunter, C A. 2017: Wine tourism development in South Africa: a geographical analysis. Tourism Geographies, DOI: 10.1080/ 14616688.2017.1298152. http://www.unequalscenes.com/stellenbosch-kayamundi [Accessed 26 June 2017]. http://www.holidaybug.co.za/a-360-view-of-stellenbosch-in-pictures-a-photoblog. [Accessed 26 June 2017]. Kelly, C & Schulschenk, J. 2011. Assessing the vulnerability of Stellenbosch's food system and possibilities for a local food economy. Development Southern Africa, 28:4, 563-578 Musakwa, W & Van Niekerk, A. 2013. Implications of land use change for the sustainability of urban areas. Cities, 32: 143-156. Property 24. 2017. Available from https://www.property24.com/for-sale/stellenbosch/stellenbosch/western-cape/8578/105061164 [Accessed 26 June 2017]. Seethal, C. 2005. Postmodern urban politics in South Africa: The case of Stellenbosch (2000–2004). South African Geographical Journal, 87:2, 141-151. South African Cities Network (SACN). 2016. State of South African Cities Report 2016. Johannesburg: SACN. Stellenbosch Heritage Foundation. 2017. Available from http://www.stellenboschheritage.co.za/wpcontent/uploads/Khayamandi_Week_After_Fire_Arial.jpg. [Accessed 26 June 2017]. Stellenbosch Municipality. 2009. Financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2009 Financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2009. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Municipality. Stellenbosch Municipality. 2016a. Audited Financial statements for the period ended 30 June 2015/2016. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Municipality.

Stellenbosch | Page 43

Stellenbosch Municipality. 2016b. Draft Annual Report 2015/16. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Municipality. Stellenbosch Municipality. 2017a. Stellenbosch Municipality Spatial Development Framwork. Revised Edition April 2017. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Municipality. Stellenbosch Municipality. 2017b. Draft fourth generation Integrated Development Plan (2017-2022). Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Municipality. Stellenbosch University. 2010. Universiteit Stellenbosch Kampusmeesterplan. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Universiteit. The Western Cape Destination Marketing, Investment and Trade promotion agency (Wesgro). 2017. Available at http://wesgro.blogspot.co.za/2013/03/absa-cape-epic-stellenbosch.html. [Accessed 26 June 2017]. Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEADP). 2013. Growth potential of towns. Cape Town: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEADP). 2014. Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework. Cape Town: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Western Cape Provincial Treasury (WCPT). 2015. Municipal economic review and outlook 2015. Cape Town: Western Cape Provincial Treasury.