Human Settlements Review - Parliamentary Monitoring Group

Human Settlements Review, Volume 1, Number 1, 2010
standard quality of infill for all the tenants,
a consumer-oriented rent policy may be
implemented to offer a flexible response to
clients’ needs in terms of infill quality (Dekker,
1998). By using alternative construction
methods, it may be possible to include poor
people in the city on land traditionally thought
of as being too expensive for low cost housing.
Social housing stock being built now is generally
three or four storey walk-ups with minimal
space standards. This rental stock does not
have the built in capacity for adaptation and
change. Many times separating walls between
the tiny units are structural walls that cannot
be remove easily. If rental buildings are not
designed to allow for change, they may
soon become redundant and will have no
market value; future adaptations may be very
complex and costly exercises. To address
the issue of tenant turnover throughout its
lifetime, Social Housing also needs finishing
that is of a sufficiently high quality and a
basic structure that is robust. Space layouts,
materials, construction methods, detailing can
accommodate for unforeseen need.
Attempts at inclusionary housing can be
problematic where the high cost market
housing and the lower cost housing is included
in the same development but is visibly very
different. With an Open Building approach
the base building benefits all residents of the
development while, within this structure, the
infill can be of varying costs and qualities.
Housing programmes must also be approached
as being mutually dependent. Huchzermeyer
et al (2006: 23) explain how “transformative
policy” approaches may “involve setting aside
portions of conveniently located land with basic
services for a relatively informal and rapid
form of occupation under flexible but secure
tenure (in South Africa these are referred to
as ‘reception areas’).” It is argued that this
concept as well as ideas of community-based
or area based subsidy mechanisms for land
and infrastructure can also be relevant to
Social Housing developments.
For example, the informal settlements
programme adopts a “…community-based or
area-based subsidy mechanism for land and
infrastructure.” (Huchzermeyer, 2006: 55). She
elaborates that; “The grant to the municipality
for the land regularization and upgrading
intervention is not linked to the individual
qualifying household, as is the case with most
subsidies available under the national subsidy
system. The individual household qualification
criteria apply only in the last (fourth) phase
of the Programme, which focuses on the
improvement of the dwelling structures.”
Should the same concept not be applied to
other forms of housing such as Social Housing
where the subsidy is split into at least two
components One subsidy may be used at
the precinct/neighbourhood level to achieve
the aims of restructuring, while the other part
of the subsidy can be used for the individual
units. This community-based or area-based
approach may offer opportunities to experiment
with different processes and techologies.
4 Final comments
Housing reveals the social, cultural and
political intentions of a people; in South Africa
this is particularly evident. Housing policy
248