Negotiating grey spaces: A southernised relational analysis of customary land-use regulation mechanisms in peri-urban Informal mixed-use developments - A case study of the Helderberg District in Cape Town

Thesis (PhD)--Stellenbosch University, 2021.

ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The study investigates the phenomenon of mixed-use development in informalised public housing (Colloquially referred to as RDP housing) developments in the Helderberg region of the City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. This settlement is ironically termed the Location by its residents. There is an irony that these informal mixed-use developments have several attributes of smart growth, such as high densities, affordable housing, accessibility, employment opportunities, etc., in contrast to zoned formal settlements that mostly do not have these characteristics. Informal mixed- use developments occur without the influence of zoning, but is informally regulated through customary land management systems (CLMS). Another irony is that these ‘smartified’ settlements are by no means ideal spaces to live and are generally regarded as unsustainable modes of living due to its informal nature by formal actors. This study investigates these paradoxes in terms of Relational theory and Southern theory, analysing how space is actively produced, organised, and regulated in the everyday life politic of the actor. The study analysed three research problems: Is informal mixed-use development smart, i.e., sustainable? How are these settlements regulated in a CLMS? And how can we plan and zone for these settlements? The study used an ethnomethodological research method to analyse these problems using in-depth interviews. The research results indicate that the mixed-use informalisation of RDPs creates a juxtapositional and contradictory urbanism, a Heterotopia. Informality creates liveable, polymorphic spaces from the marginalised and segregated Location. It develops several smart growth characteristics, not for aesthetic reasons but to make space functional and personal for the subaltern. This creates a new mode of urbanism that gives the actor the freedom to produce their own urban, but it also disconnects the actor from the city as an informal with an uncertainty of rights and standing, it limits the accumulation of wealth, and it creates dangerous and unhealthy living conditions. The Street, a local CLMS self-regulates informal mixed land-uses in the Location. These highly organised, democratic, and transparent organisations record their transactions in ‘black’ books. The Street layers authorities and procedures to create an open and idiosyncratic method of negotiating informal land-use externalities. This system is based on the principles of Ubuntu, which customarily defines propertied relations and incentivises self-regulation of land-uses, enabling the Street committees to provide several voluntary magisterial functions. It provides de facto security for informal land uses, but also complements and reinforces the role of the state in certain limited functions. However, this is also an imperfect system that struggles to regulate non-privatised externalities and accommodate ethnic plurality. The Street committees are also often dysfunctional or corrupt. The combination of informal mixed-uses and CLMS creates a legal grey zone in the Location with alternate zonings, legislations and polycentric authorities and a hybridity of regulations. This peri-urbanisation of the Location unmaps space and protects tenure but does not provide enough legitimacy for novel policing through zoning. This delegitimises zoning but it also creates a new role for planning and zoning, away from traditional socio-technical management by specialists to a more pragmatic and selective enforcement of zoning based on common law and substantial relations tests, in close collaboration with the Streets. Although this is by no means without its challenges, continually operating within a criticality of instabilities and crises, it does, however, strengthen the role of the state as a final and objective authority and benevolent provider of services. The Location thus has the best of both worlds: a formally zoned substructure and a peri-urbanised informal top structure that provides citizenship and agency to the subaltern.

AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die navorsing ondersoek die verskynsel van gemengde gebruiksontwikkeling in informaliseede openbare behuisingsontwikkelings (RDP), wat ironies genoeg die Lokasie deur sy inwoners genoem word. Dit is ook ironies dat hierdie informele gemengde gebruiksontwikkelings 'n aantal kenmerke van slim ontwikkeling, soos hoë digthede, bekostigbare behuising, toeganklikheid, werksgeleenthede, ens. het, in teenstelling met gesonerde formele nedersettings wat meestal nie van hierdie eienskappe beskik nie. Informele gemengde gebruiksontwikkeling vind plaas sonder die invloed van sonering, maar word informeel gereguleer deur gebruiklike grondbestuurstelsels (CLMS). Verder is dit ironies dat hierdie ‘slim’ nedersettings geensins ideale leefruimtes is nie en dat dit as 'n onvolhoubare lewenswyse beskou word. Die navorsing ondersoek hierdie paradokse in terme van Relasionele teorie en Suidelike teorie, en analiseer hoe ruimtes geproduseer, georganiseer en gereguleer word in die alledaagse lewenspolitiek van die akteur. Die studie het drie navorsingsprobleme ontleed: Is informele ontwikkeling vir gemengde gebruik slim, m.a.w. volhoubaar? Hoe word hierdie nedersettings in 'n CLMS gereguleer? Hoe kan ons hierdie nedersettings beplan en soneer? Die studie het van 'n etnometodologiese navorsingsmetode gebruik gemaak om hierdie probleme deur middel van in-diepte onderhoude te analiseer. Die navorsingsresultate dui aan dat die gemengde gebruike informalisering van RDPs 'n naasliggende en teenstrydige stedelikheid, 'n Heterotopie skep. Informaliteit skep leefbare, polimorfe ruimtes vanaf die gemarginaliseerde en gesegregeerde Lokasie. Dit het 'n aantal slim ontwikkelings-eienskappe ontwikkel, nie om estetiese redes nie, maar om die ruimte funksioneel en persoonlik te maak vir die subaltern. Hierdie skep 'n nuwe modus van verstedelikheid wat die akteur die vryheid gee om hul eie verstedeliking te produseer, maar dit ontkoppel ook die akteur van die stad af as informeel met 'n onsekerheid oor regte en status, dit beperk die ophoping van rykdom en dit skep gevaarlike en ongesonde lewenskondiesies. Die Straat, 'n plaaslike CLMS, selfreguleer informele gemengde grondgebruike in die lokasie. Hierdie hoogs georganiseerde, demokratiese en deursigtige organisasies teken hul transaksies in 'swart' boeke aan. Die Straat leer owerhede en prosedures om 'n oop en eiesinnige metode te skep om informele grondgebruikseksternaliteite te onderhandel. Hierdie stelsel is gebaseer op die beginsels van Ubuntu, wat gebruiklike grondregte en die selfregulering van grondgebruike aanspoor, en wat die straatkomitees toelaat om 'n aantal vrywillige landdrosfunksies te lewer. Dit bied de facto sekuriteit vir informele grondgebruike, maar komplimenteer en versterk ook die rol van die staat in sekere beperkte funksies. Dit is egter ook 'n onvolmaakte stelsel wat sukkel om nie-geprivatiseerde eksternaliteite te reguleer en etniese pluraliteit te akkommodeer. Die Straatkomitees is ook dikwels wanfunksioneel of korrup. Die kombinasie van informele gemengde grondsgebruike en die CLMS skep die Lokasie in 'n wettige grys sone met alternatiewe sonering en wetgewing, polisentriese owerhede en 'n hibriditeit van regulasies. Hierdie peri-verstedeliking van die Lokasie ‘ontleg’ ruimtes en beskerm verblyfreg, maar bied nie genoeg legitimiteit vir eiesoortige polisiëring deur middel van sonering nie. Dit delegitimitiseer sonering, maar dit skep ook 'n nuwe rol vir beplanning en sonering, weg van die tradisionele sosio-tegniese bestuur deur spesialiste tot 'n meer pragmatiese en selektiewe toepassing van sonering op grond van die gemenereg en wesenlike verhoudings toetse, in noue samewerking met die Strate. Alhoewel dit hoegenaamd nie sonder uitdagings is nie, deur voortdurend binne die kritiekeit van onstabiliteite en krisisse werk, versterk dit egter die rol van die staat as hoër en objektiewe gesag en ʼn welwillende diensverskaffer. Die Lokasie het dus die beste van twee werelde: 'n formeel gesoneerde substruktuur en 'n peri-verstedelikte informele topstruktuur wat burgerskap en agentskap aan die subaltern verleen.

Doctoral