Advertisement

Urban Forum

pp 1–19 | Cite as

Success Factors for Urban Brownfield Developments in Johannesburg, South Africa

  • Johan Goosen
  • Anne FitchettEmail author
Article
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

Redevelopment of urban brownfields sites is important as a means of limiting urban sprawl, making more efficient use of infrastructure, and preventing urban decay. Uncertainty on risks and responsibilities for remediation are often cited as reasons for these sites lying fallow; however, there is a scarcity of literature on brownfields in southern Africa. Using global literature, nine factors are identified as the main determining features of successful redevelopment. Documentary sources allow for an evaluation of three sites in Johannesburg, namely Newtown, Egoli Gas, and Modderfontien. These case studies are then compared to the global literature to determine whether the same factors apply. The main findings of this study are that a high level of contamination, uncertainty on liability for clean-up, poor market conditions at the time of redevelopment, lack of alignment of public and private sector values and uncertainty about funding contribute to a lack of success in the redevelopment of brownfield sites in Johannesburg.

Keywords

Brownfield redevelopment Contamination Clean-up liability Market conditions Johannesburg 

Notes

References

  1. Accordino, J., & Johnson, G. T. (2002). Addressing the vacant and abandoned property problem. Journal of Urban Affairs, 22(3), 301–315.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2166.00058.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, D., De Sousa, C., & Tiesdell, S. (2010). Brownfield development: a comparison of North American and British approaches. Urban Studies, 47(1), 75–104.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009346868.Google Scholar
  3. Adelaja, S., Shaw, J., Beyea, W., & McKeown, C. (2010). Renewable energy potential on brownfield sites: a case study of Michigan. Energy Policy, 38(11), 7021–7030.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.07.021.Google Scholar
  4. AECI. (1999). AECI limited annual report. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  5. AECI. (2000) Heartland properties - Review of operations. Accessed 18 June 2016 from http://www.aeci.co.za/aa_history.php
  6. Agostini, P., Pizzol, L., Critto, A., D’Alessandro, M., Zabeo, A., & Marcomini, A. (2012). Regional risk assessment for contaminated sites part 3: spatial decision support system. Environment International, 48, 121–132.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2012.07.005.Google Scholar
  7. Ahmad, N., Zhu, Y., Shafait, Z., Farook Sahibzada, U., & Waheed, A. (2019). Critical barriers to brownfield redevelopment in developing countries: the case of Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 1193–1209.Google Scholar
  8. Alberini, A., Longo, A., Tonin, S., Trombetta, F., & Turvani, M. (2005). The role of liability, regulation and economic incentives in brownfield remediation and redevelopment: evidence from surveys of developers. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 35(4), 327–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2004.05.004.Google Scholar
  9. Alex News. (2019). City of Joburg invites residents to comment on Newtown Urban Development Framework. Accessed 26 May 2019 from https://alexnews.co.za/131927/city-joburg-invites-residents-comment-newtown-urban-development-framework-draft/
  10. Altona, R. E., Bosman, J., Breyer-Menke, C. J., & Lever, N. A. (1983). Disposal of wastewater from Modderfontein Factory: review of the biological nitrogen removal systems. Water SA, 9(4), 125–130.Google Scholar
  11. Amekudzi, A., & Fomunung, I. (2004). Integrating brownfields redevelopment with transportation planning. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 130(4), 204–213.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2004)130:4(204.Google Scholar
  12. Bacot, H., & O’Dell, C. (2006). Establishing indicators to evaluate brownfield redevelopment. Economic Development Quarterly, 20(2), 142–161.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242405285749.Google Scholar
  13. Berman, L., & Forrester, T. (2013). An indicator framework to measure effects of brownfields redevelopment on public health. Journal of Environmental Health, 76(1), 50–55 http://www.jstor.org/stable/26329909.Google Scholar
  14. Bethlehem, L. (2013). A new dynamic – urban regeneration in the Joburg CBD. The Journal of Helen Suzman Foundation, 69, 17–24. Accessed 4 July, 2018 from https://hsf.org.za/publications/focus/focus-69-future-of-our-cities/focus69jun-3-l-bethlehem.pdf
  15. Breier-Menke, C. J., & Moffat, B. (1987). Industrial water management: changing perspectives 1937–1987. Water Institute of South Africa.Google Scholar
  16. Brill, F. (2018) Playing the game: A comparison of international actors in real estate development in Modderfontein, Johannesburg and London’s Royal Docks. Geoforum.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.05.015.
  17. Brill, F. & Reboredo, R. (2018) Failed Fantasies in a South African Context: the Case of Modderfontein, Johannesburg. Urban Forum.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-018-9348-1.
  18. Brodie, N. (Ed.). (2014). The Joburg book: A guide to the city’s history, people and places (2nd ed.). Johannesburg: Pan MacMillan South Africa, Sharp Sharp Media.Google Scholar
  19. City of Johannesburg. (2010a). Regional spatial development framework: region E.Google Scholar
  20. City of Johannesburg. (2010b). Regional spatial development framework for region F.Google Scholar
  21. City of Johannesburg. (2011a). Johannesburg inner city - common vision, shared success - end of term report 2006–2011.Google Scholar
  22. City of Johannesburg. (2011b) Niche living at Egoli Gas. Accessed March 13, 2016 from http://www.joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&id=7431&Itemid=266
  23. City of Johannesburg. (2018). Draft Integrated Development Plan: 2018/2019 Review.Google Scholar
  24. Davie, L. (2011) It’s a gas to be living in Egoli. Mail & Guardian, p.2. Accessed 13 Mar 2016 from http://mg.co.za/article/2011-11-11-its-a-gas-to-be-living-in-egoli.
  25. De Souza, C. (2001). Contaminated sites: the Canadian situation in an international context. Journal of Environmental Management, 62(2), 131–154.Google Scholar
  26. Demuijnck, G. & Fasterling, B. (2016) The social license to operate. Journal of Business Ethics, 1 36(4), 675–685.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2976-7.
  27. Department of Environmental Affairs. (2010). Framework for the management of contaminated land.Google Scholar
  28. Department of Environmental Affairs. (2014). National norms and standards for the remediation of contaminated land and soil quality. Pretoria: Government Gazette. Accessed 4 July 2018 from https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/natl-norms-and-stds-for-remediation-of-contaminated-land-and-soil-quality.pdf.
  29. Dillon, L. (2014). Race, waste, and space: Brownfield redevelopment and environmental justice at the hunters point shipyard. Antipode, 46(5), 1205–1221.  https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12009.Google Scholar
  30. Dixon, T., Otsuka, N., & Abe, H. (2011). Critical success factors in urban brownfield regeneration: an analysis of “hardcore” sites in Manchester and Osaka during the economic recession (2009 - 10). Environment and Planning A, 43(4), 961–980.  https://doi.org/10.1068/a43468.Google Scholar
  31. Dorsey, J. W. (2003). Brownfields and Greenfields: the intersection of sustainable development and environmental stewardship. Environmental Practice, 5(1), 69–76.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466046603030187.Google Scholar
  32. Edward Nathan Sonnenberg. (2014). The further evolution of South African environmental legal practice. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  33. Ferguson, C. C. (1999). Assessing risks from contaminated sites: policy and practice in 16 European countries. Land Contamination and Reclamation, 7(2), 87–108.Google Scholar
  34. Frantal, B., Kunc, J., Novakova, E., Klusacek, P., Martinat, S., & Osman, R. (2013). Location matters! Exploring brownfields regeneration in a spatial context (a case study of the South Moravian region, Czech Republic). Morovian Geographical Reports, 21(2), 5–19.  https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2013-0007.Google Scholar
  35. GAPP. (1999). Architects and urban designers. Johannesburg: Newtown Urban Design Framework.Google Scholar
  36. GAPP. (2001). Architects and urban designers & urban solutions architects. Johannesburg: Newtown Cultural Precinct Urban Design Plan.Google Scholar
  37. GAPP Architects and Urban Designers. (2010). Egoli gas: precinct plan for a mixed use development: appendix i1 of draft basic assessment report. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  38. Gaule, S. (2005). Alternating currents of power: From colonial to post-apartheid spatial patterns in Newtown, Johannesburg. Urban Studies, 42(13), 2335–2361.Google Scholar
  39. Georem International. (2011). Egoli gas cottesloe site remediation plan. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  40. Hamilton, J. T., & Viscusi, W. K. (1999). How costly is “clean”? An analysis of the benefits and costs of superfund site remediations. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(1), 2–27.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199924)18:1<2::AID-PAM2>3.0.CO;2-2.Google Scholar
  41. Heartland Properties. (2008) Investors Presentation. Accessed 15 December 2016 from https://www.aeciworld.com/pdf/investors/presentations/2008/heartland-presentation-161008.pdf
  42. Hollander, J. (2010). Private property owners and the remaking of brownfields. Public Works Management & Policy, 15(1), 32–56.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X10367915.Google Scholar
  43. Hollander, J. B., Kirkwood, N. G., & Gold, J. L. (2010). Principles of brownfield regeneration: cleanup, design, and reuse of derelict Land. Washington: Island Press ISBN 1597269905, 9781597269902.Google Scholar
  44. Hoogendoorn, G., & Gregory, J. (2016). Instagrammers, urban renewal and the Johannesburg inner city. Urban Forum, 27(4), 399–414.Google Scholar
  45. Howland, M. (2003). Private initiative and public responsibility for the redevelopment of industrial brownfields: three Baltimore case studies. Economic Development Quarterly, 17(4), 367–381.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242403257437.Google Scholar
  46. Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA). (2001). Inner city position paper. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  47. Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA). (2009). Analysis of the impact of the JDA’s area-based regeneration projects on private sector investments. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  48. Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA) (2015) Inner city transformation & investment trends, 66.Google Scholar
  49. Kloppers, E. (2004) New life awaits Johannesburg Egoli. www.fin24.com.
  50. Kramer, L. & Orlando, E, eds. (2018). Principles of environmental law. Elgar Encyclopedia of Environmental Law Series, 6. Edward Elgar. ISBN 9781785365652.Google Scholar
  51. Labuschagne, A. (2003). Qualitative research: Airy fairy or fundamental? The Qualitative Report, 8(1), 100–103.Google Scholar
  52. Lange, D., & McNeil, S. (2004). Clean it and they will come? Defining successful brownfield development. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 130(2), 101–108.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2004)130:2(101.Google Scholar
  53. Läuferts le Roux, M. & Mavunganidze, J. (2015) The Johannesburg Gas Works. Fourthwall Books: Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  54. Leigh, N. G., & Coffin, S. L. (2005). Modeling the relationship among brownfields, property values, and community revitalization. Housing Policy Debate, 16(2), 257–280.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2005.9521543.Google Scholar
  55. Litt, J. S., Tran, N. L., & Burke, T. A. (2002). Examining urban brownfields through the public health “macroscope”. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(Suppl. 2), 183–193.Google Scholar
  56. Luo, Q., Catney, P., & Lerner, D. (2009). Risk-based management of contaminated land in the UK: lessons for China? Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2), 1123–1134.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.05.001.Google Scholar
  57. McCarthy, L. (2002). The brownfield dual land-use policy challenge: Reducing barriers to private redevelopment while connecting reuse to broader community goals. Land Use Policy, 19(4), 287–296.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-8377(02)00023-6.Google Scholar
  58. McQueen, H. (2011). Brownfield redevelopment: an analysis of key variables in the development process. Master’s Report, Queens University, Canada. http://hdl.handle.net/1974/6455
  59. Muller, J. (2015) Modderfontein’s R84bn city on track. Financial Mail. Accessed 19 June 2016 from https://www.businesslive.co.za/fm/fm-fox/2015-09-10-modderfonteins-r84bn-city-on-track/
  60. Mwangala, E.S., 2010. Urban development zones (UDZs): an investigation of the perceptions of stakeholders on the impact of the UDZ tax incentive on property development in Johannesburg inner city. MSc Research Report, University of Witwatersrand.Google Scholar
  61. Nijkamp, P., Rodenburg, C. A., & Wagtendonk, A. J. (2002). Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield development: a comparative case study approach to polluted sites. Ecological Economics, 40(2), 235–252.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00256-7.Google Scholar
  62. Oryx Environmental. (2005). Environmental impact report for Isidleke development. Johannesburg: Modderfontein.Google Scholar
  63. Osman, R., Frantal, B., Klusacek, P., Kunc, J., & Martinat, S. (2015). Factors affecting brownfield regeneration in post-socialist space: The case of the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy, 48, 309–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.06.003.Google Scholar
  64. Potts, L., & Cloete, C. (2012) Developing guidelines for brownfield development in South Africa. In: Brebbia, C.A. & Chon, T.S. (eds) Environmental Impact (Volume 162 of WIT transactions on ecology and the environment). WIT Press, 389–399. ISBN 1845646045, 9781845646042.Google Scholar
  65. Rall, E. L., & Haase, D. (2011). Creative intervention in a dynamic city: A sustainability assessment of an interim use strategy for brownfields in Leipzig, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(3), 189–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.12.004.Google Scholar
  66. Republic of South Africa. (2008). National Environmental Management Waste Act No 59, 2008. Cape Town: Government Gazette.Google Scholar
  67. Schadler, S., Morio, M., Bartke, R., Rohr-Zanker, R., & Finkel, M. (2011). Designing sustainable and economically attractive brownfield revitalization options using an integrated assessment model. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(3), 827–837.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.026.Google Scholar
  68. Seeliger, L., & Turok, I. (2015). Green-sighted but city-blind: developer attitudes to sustainable urban transformation. Urban Forum, 26(3), 321–341.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s1213.Google Scholar
  69. Sigman, H. (2010). Environmental liability and redevelopment of old industrial land. The Journal of Law and Economics, 53(2), 289–306.  https://doi.org/10.1086/649803.Google Scholar
  70. Theron, G. (2010) Brownfield Land development. In: The Green Building Handbook South Africa, Volume 3. Alive2green.Google Scholar
  71. Tonin, S. (2014). Assessing the impact of the remedial actions taken at a contaminated Italian site: an ex-post valuation analysis. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 13(2), 121–137.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-014-9332-8.Google Scholar
  72. Tsica Heritage Consultants. (2010). Gas works heritage report: appendix G7 of draft basic assessment report. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  73. Van der Westhuizen, M. (2011). Draft basic assessment report: Redevelopment of the Egoli gasworks site. Pretoria.Google Scholar
  74. Van Niekerk, W. (2011) Risk-based site assessment for Egoli Gas, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  75. Winson-Geideman, K., Simons, R. A., & Pendergrass, J. (2004). Tracking remediation and redevelopment trends of brownfield clean-up programmes: the Cook County experience. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(3), 393–405.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0964056042000216528.Google Scholar
  76. Zabeo, A., Pizzol, L., Agostini, P., Critto, A., Giove, S., & Marcomini, A. (2011). Regional risk assessment for contaminated sites part 1: vulnerability assessment by multicriteria decision analysis. Environment International, 37(8), 1295–1306.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2011.05.005.Google Scholar
  77. Zendai, ARUP & Atkins. (2015) Modderfontein regeneration: final workshop report, 28–29 July 2015, Johannesburg.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of the WitwatersrandJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations