Category Archives: cornubia

AbM Statement on the Cornubia Development

Sunday, 24 August 2008
Abahlali baseMjondolo eThekwini Press Release

Why are Shack Dwellers Excluded from the Discussions About the Cornubia Development?

Nothing for Us, Without Us!

There has been much discussion about the Cornubia housing development in the press. The City and the political parties have had their say. Tongaat-Hulett, the company that owns the land, have had their say. The technical experts have had their say. Shack dwellers’ organisations have not had their say. We who live with the rats in the mud and the fires have not had our say. We who were publicly promised houses in this development in November 2005 have not had our say. We who have been beaten and arrested while defending our right to speak for ourselves, defending our communities from eviction, and defending our right to decent housing in the city have not had our say.

When ever we have asked the eThekwini Municipality to fulfil the promise to house the poor they have told us that they want to build houses but that land, not money, is the problem. They have always told us that there is nothing that they can do because there is no land left in the city. But everyone can see that there is lots of land. The real problem is not that there is no land. The real problem is that the land is privately owned and that most of the land is owned by one big company – Tongaat-Hulett.

The Freedom Charter said that South Africa belongs to all who live in it. The Freedom Charter said that the land should be shared. These were clear goals of the peoples’ struggles against apartheid. We are still committed to these goals.

It is clear that building democratic cities where everyone has a proper space and real hope for a better life will require the end of the private ownership over huge lands. Some of our members believe that God made the land as a gift for everyone and that is a sin for one company to own so much land. We all agree that there can be no justice in this city, no safety and no hope for a better life for the poor while one company owns so much land. Everybody in the city needs to be matured and to face this reality.

The Kennedy Road Development Committee (KRDC) first demanded the expropriation of Tongaat-Hulett land to house the poor on 13 May 2005 when the KRDC organised a mass march to bury Councillor Yakoob Baig. After Abahlali baseMjondolo was formed on 6 October 2005 this demand was placed at the centre of our struggle. We made this demand because Tongaat-Hulett is the largest land owner in Durban. We also made this demand because it was never right for Tongaat-Hulett to own that land and because many generations suffered on their plantations. We also made this demand because Tongaat-Hulett has continued to separate the rich from the poor after apartheid by building a separate gated world for the rich on the old sugar cane fields. In 1994 that land should have gone for housing for the poor. That would have been real democracy.

The Cornubia development was first announced in November 2005. That was just before the 2006 local government elections and just after the world’s media reported that the eThekwini Municipality had illegally banned our march on Obed Mlaba from the Foreman Road settlement and then sent in the police to shoot at us when we marched in defiance of the ban. The Mayor clearly stated that the announcement was due to pressure from Abahlali baseMjondolo. He said in the New York Times that we were being used by agitators and that we would not still be here in 2007. We are still here. We are still agitated by the conditions that we live in. Now that the 2009 elections are coming Cornubia is back on the agenda.

The debate goes on but it excludes us. Who are the ‘stakeholders’ in the discussions about Cornubia? Just the landowner, the government and the technical people! Where do the poor fit? We find that if we talk about history we are seen to be launching an offensive. We are not supposed to talk about history but we have to reclaim what is our own, what has come out of our efforts. This announcement is the fruit of our struggle and the struggles of all the communities across South Africa that have been rejecting forced removals to rural human dumping grounds since 2005.

We want to say some things very clearly:

1. We welcome the statements by government that they are considering meeting our demand that they expropriate land from Tongaat-Hulett. We also suggest that they issue a moratorium on any sale or development of Tongaat-Hulett land until everyone in the city has been housed. That would show that that they are serious about justice for the poor because there will not be justice for the poor until the social value of land is put before the commercial value of land.

2. We welcome the fact that government is now talking about integrated developments where the rich and the poor can live together in the city instead of building more of the notorious rural human dumping grounds like Parkgate and Delft.

3. However if shack dwellers are not included in the planning of this project it will fail like the N2 Gateway Project failed in Cape Town. Top down planning has been completely rejected by shack dwellers all over South Africa. Those days are over. We reject top down control of our struggles by NGOs and we reject top down planning of housing development by government. Everybody thinks. We are poor, not stupid. Planning must not just be a technical talk that excludes the people. Democracy is not just about voting. Democratic planning is the way forward.

4. The government is talking about building low-cost housing at Cornubia but shack dwellers need no-cost housing. We cannot afford low-cost housing. No bank will give us a bond. There must be negotiations resulting in a public commitment to build a fixed number of no-cost houses. We must all remember that the N2 Gateway Project in Cape Town began as a project for the poor. But it was quickly taken over by politicians and companies who saw an opportunity to exploit the development for their own profit. Bank bonded houses were built for the rich instead of no-cost houses for the poor. In the end the poor were driven out of the project that was started in their name and the whole project failed.

5. This project must not be used as an excuse to claim that shack settlements are now ‘temporary’ and that they will soon be ‘eradicated’ because Cornubia is being built. The settlements are established communities and in most settlements most residents want upgrades and not relocations. We must all remember that most shack dwellers will not be able to fit in Cornubia. Cornubia can be a solution for some but not for all.

6. This project must not be used as an excuse to continue to deny collective and secure rights to the land for long established communities. The legal ownership of the land that has been occupied by communities must be transferred to those communities so that the fear of eviction can be permanently put to rest.

7. This project must not be used as an excuse to continue to deny life saving basic services to shack settlements. Each settlement needs these services immediately. They include water, toilets, electricity, fire extinguishers, refuse removal, homework areas and access roads for emergency vehicles.

8. This project must not be used to make promises to people that cannot be kept, to divide the poor or to keep everyone waiting and not struggling. Before the end of the year there must be exact and public clarity on how many no-cost houses will be built, how they will be allocated and who they will be allocated to.

9. The allocation of the no-cost houses in Cornubia must not be corrupt or driven by party political interests. The houses must go to those who need them most. There must be no discrimination against people born in other countries.

10. The City must upgrade all settlements where they are. The no-cost houses in Cornubia must be for those who genuinely can’t be accommodated in upgrades. Cornubia must not be used as an excuse to evict people from areas where they have lived for a long time and where they want to stay. No one must be forced to go there at gunpoint like we have been forced to go to Parkgate at gun point. People must choose to go there.

11. The City needs to provide one house for each family not one house for each shack.

12. The government must accept that shack dwellers and other poor people have a right to organise and to represent themselves independently of party politics. All democratic membership controlled shack dwellers’ movements must be fully included in all planning for shack dwellers. Each community must be fully included in all planning for that community.

For comment on the Cornubia project contact:

S’bu Zikode: 083 547 0474
Mnikelo Ndabankulu: 079 745 0653
Fanuel Nsingo: 076 742 3397
Zodwa Nsibande: 0828302707

For comment on the crisis caused by top down planning across South Africa contact:

Mzonke Poni, Abahlali baseMjondolo, Cape Town: 073 256 2036
Ashraf Cassiem, Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign, Cape Town: 076 186 1408
Mzwanele Zulu, Joe Slovo Task Team, Cape Town: 0763852369
Maureen Mnisi, Landless Peoples’ Movement, Johannesburg: 082 337 4514

Mercury: Cornubia ‘the way to go’

http://www.themercury.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4571305

Cornubia ‘the way to go’
Low-cost housing blueprint for future

August 22, 2008 Edition 1

Matthew Savides

INTEGRATED communities, like the proposed 1 200ha multi-use Cornubia development near Umhlanga, are “absolutely the right way to go” for future integrated developments in the country.

This is the view of KwaZulu-Natal Institute of Architects president Ivor Daniel, who said it was important that all low-cost housing developments were carefully planned so that employment opportunities were nearby and they promoted a sense of community.

He was speaking in the wake of an announcement at Tuesday’s eThekwini Municipality executive committee meeting that the municipality would consider expropriating the Tongaat-Hulett Developments-owned sugar cane field north of Durban if negotiations around the development failed.

In a newsletter, municipal manager Michael Sutcliffe said the development had huge potential for the municipality and it had to be carefully planned.

Fears

The development is near the Gateway shopping centre, Sibaya Casino and King Shaka International Airport, and has prompted fears that nearby properties might lose value when the 25 000 low-cost houses are built.

Deputy mayor Logie Naidoo said “buffer zones” would be created to ensure that there was no effect on neighbouring property prices.

Daniel said these areas should be used effectively. Parks, sports fields and other community-based facilities that all residents, irrespective of their income group, could use would be ideal.

Daniel added that it was vital that the low-cost houses were not developed in isolation, but that the planning was done so that people could work and play in areas easily accessible from their homes. Failure to do so would perpetuate apartheid separation policies.

Daniel said the type of housing built would also be important, and emphasised the need for efficient use of space.

To this end, double-storey or even high-rise housing could be developed, and some businesses could have flats built above them. This would also save on the infrastructure needed.

Sutcliffe said the size of the site meant it had huge potential for the future of the municipality.

“We must, therefore, plan it carefully and that is why it has taken some time to develop the conceptual framework to guide future development,” he said.

Light industry, retail and commercial properties would be included, and care would be taken to ensure environmentally sensitive land was protected, he added.

“It will ensure we become a more caring city, integrating people all across it.”

Sutcliffe said the process was not being driven by “political imperative” but rather “by how we can make the development most sustainable to the city and the land owner”.

“I am very excited that if we get it right, Cornubia will provide the first real opportunity to build a city based on the principles underpinning our constitution, and not those which defined our apartheid past.

“It will have a CBD geared up for mixed and high-density use, and has a spatial locational advantage which will allow the northern corridor of the city to continue to expand rapidly.”

Nathi Olifant reports that housing MEC Mike Mabuyakhulu, speaking at the official opening of a R70 million low-cost housing development outside Pietermaritzburg yesterday, said the government had a constitutional and legal mandate to expropriate land where negotiations to transfer property for development failed.

He was aware of the ongoing dispute between the municipality and Tongaat-Hulett over Cornubia and hoped it would be resolved “in the best interests of our people”.

Mabuyakhulu said the government was open-minded on the matter and would not allow any friction between the parties involved to impede its public-private partnership goals.

The Mercury: Cornubia development treated ‘with urgency’

buffer zones? no threat to houses prices?….

http://www.themercury.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4569476

Concern that project rushed ahead of elections
Cornubia development treated ‘with urgency’

August 21, 2008 Edition 1

Matthew Savides

UMHLANGA was important to the eThekwini Municipality, which would ensure that a proposed 1 200ha integrated development near the area was done responsibly and would not affect property prices.

This was according to deputy mayor Logie Naidoo yesterday, speaking in the wake of the municipality’s threat on Tuesday to expropriate the land from Tongaat-Hulett Developments to speed up construction.

Tongaat-Hulett said yesterday it was treating the proposed Cornubia development, which will include 25 000 subsidised low-income houses, as “a matter of urgency”.

Concerns were raised that the mammoth project was being rushed, possibly to garner support for the ANC ahead of next year’s general elections. This was denied by Naidoo.

It is envisaged that Cornubia will incorporate low-income, middle-income and high-income housing, as well as industry, business, schools, clinics, parks and other public service infrastructure.

While the final costs have not been released, Cornubia is expected to cost at least R10 billion.

The development zone is bordered by the N2 highway to the east, the R102 to the west and the Ohlange River to the north, and is also in close proximity to the Gateway shopping complex, Sibaya casino and King Shaka International Airport.

According to a report tabled at the municipality’s executive committee on Tuesday, the mixed use of land would ensure sustainability and create jobs.

Tongaat-Hulett issued a statement yesterday confirming talks over the development, and saying the company was committed to finding a solution “to the affordable housing needs of the region”.

Tongaat-Hulett land development executive Michael Deighton said: “Cornubia offers a unique opportunity to address the urgent need for affordable housing, city-building and job creation in the region.

“A development of the magnitude envisaged can only be achieved in partnership between the public and private sectors and to this end we have been planning jointly with the city to achieve an optimal outcome. This process is continuing as a matter of urgency.”

The statement made no mention of the municipality’s threat to expropriate the land, nor did it address any of the concerns raised about the project, including whether the development would negatively affect property prices in nearby affluent areas.

Naidoo said the northern areas of the municipality were “perfectly poised for phenomenal growth”, hence the push for the development. He said the city would not be “irresponsible” and only build low-cost housing, thus avoiding any risk to neighbouring property prices.

“We are not fools. We will not threaten our own rates base. Umhlanga is an important node for us. We will not build low-cost homes that will impact negatively on the area,” he said.

He said “buffer zones” would be created and the site developed so that low-cost regions were separated from upmarket areas.

Naidoo denied the urgency regarding the development was connected to the elections, saying the council had wanted the development from “years ago”.

ANC councillors said on Tuesday they wanted construction to start in the next few months. This is despite the need for rezoning that would have to take place and the drawing up of an extensive environmental impact assessment, none of which has begun.

matthew.savides@inl.co.za

Mercury: City threatens big land grab

Abahlali baseMjondolo has been demanding the expropriation of Tongaat-Hulett land since 2005. But nothing came of the city’s announcement of a big housing development just before the 2006 local government elections. And if this does happen there are no assurances that it won’t just be more top down planning that doesn’t meet people’s needs and is riddled with the politics of patronage at every level, including the allocation of the houses.

http://www.themercury.co.za/?fArticleId=4567545

Low-cost housing at umhlanga becomes election issue
City threatens big land grab

August 20, 2008 Edition 1

Matthew Savides

THE eThekwini Municipality yesterday threatened to expropriate 1 200ha of Tongaat-Hulett Developments-owned sugar cane fields to fast-track a massive low-income integrated housing development near Umhlanga.

It emerged from a report presented to the municipality’s executive committee, and elaborated upon at a subsequent ANC press conference, that councillors are frustrated by the pace of negotiations over the giant development.

However, a property specialist warned that rushing into building thousands of low-cost homes, ahead of the 2009 election and without the balance of “mixed usage”, could have disastrous results on the values of surrounding properties.

Housing committee chairman S’bu Gumede said that expropriating the land would be an option “in the next two or three months” if an agreement could not be reached with Tongaat-Hulett over the huge Cornubia development.

However, he stressed, expropriation was not the first choice.

The proposed development area – which could accommodate up to 75 000 building units as well as many other property uses – is bordered by the N2 highway to the east, the R102 to the west and the Ohlange River to the north.

It is also in close proximity to the Gateway shopping complex, Sibaya casino and King Shaka international airport.

A property specialist, who asked not to be named, said if properly planned and handled, the Cornubia development could become a model for integrated living between people of various race and income groups.

On the other hand, if the construction of 15 000 low-cost “Smarties box-type” homes was rushed through and not properly planned, it would become a financial and human disaster – resulting in the value of other properties in the suburb plunging by as much as 50%. The opposition DA cautioned that apparent fast-tracking of the development was an electioneering tactic.

Municipal manager Michael Sutcliffe described the area as “bigger than many towns”, and indicated that he felt a fully integrated plan was the best way to go.

This would see low, middle and high-income houses being coupled with industry, business, schools, clinics, parks and other public service infrastructure. This would assist in job-creation and ensure the project’s long-term sustainability.

Sutcliffe said expropriation was an option, but the municipality and Tongaat-Hulett were close to signing a memorandum of understanding that would see the development take off. The final agreement could be signed in the next few months.

The issue hit the headlines in 2005 when eThekwini Mayor Obed Mlaba announced the development, saying it would cost about R10 billion.

Mlaba said yesterday the matter had dragged on for many years and it was now time to secure the land to get the development off the ground.

At least 25 000 homes were planned for the site, which could yield as many as 73 000 units. Fifteen thousand of the homes would be reserved for people earning less that R1 500 a month, with the remainder for those earning between R1 500 and R3 500.

The report said Tongaat-Hulett was insisting the land be used for more than just housing, to make it sustainable.

Mlaba said expropriation was “not only an option, but a must” if the company did not agree with the municipality.

DA caucus leader John Steenhuisen said it was wrong to negotiate while threatening expropriation as this was in bad faith.

He said the threat should only be used if negotiations broke down completely. It could also damage the relationship between Tongaat-Hulett and the municipality, which had resulted in other major developments, including Durban’s Point precinct.

Sutcliffe said the DA was misreading the situation, saying expropriation was contained in the report as one of the options available.

“This is a programme that promises development, (which) will come either through negotiation, or through us buying the land, or through expropriation. All it is is a case of us not putting all our eggs in one basket.”

If expropriation took place, some of the land would be developed for low-cost housing and the remainder sent out for public tender.

In a January Business Report article, Tongaat-Hulett Developments executive Mike Deighton said land sales for the property would take place towards the end of 2009.

But Gumede said the council would not be held to Tongaat-Hulett’s timeframes.

He said when people asked the ANC about promises it made, the party would be able to show them the work being done on the site, a hint that elections were a factor.

According to sources close to the negotiations, one of the biggest areas of contention was the municipality’s insistence on having 15 000 low-cost houses.

Tongaat-Hulett was insisting on a fully integrated development comprising many different land uses, and to do this effectively it was necessary to decide on the number of low-cost houses as the development was planned in greater detail.

Unless this was done, the people who moved into the low-cost houses would not have any chance of economic upliftment. In essence, the development would amount to the creation of another poor, informal settlement in the mould of neighbouring Waterloo.

Also, developers who were responsible for the bigger, more lucrative developments would be prepared to cross-subsidise the cheaper housing forms and public service infrastructure because of the money they stood to make.

Apparently there was agreement in this regard from city officials, including Sutcliffe, but the political officials were so focused on the housing numbers issue that they were not prepared to budge to make the project sustainable.

Sutcliffe said the final layout would result in some areas being residential while others were more integrated.

“We will test out different models and see what works best. This is a huge piece of land, and there are a variety of options for use,” he said.

Sutcliffe said it was difficult to estimate when the development would begin because of all the options. He expected basic details to be finalised “in the next few weeks”.