RESIDENTIAL city improvement districts (RCIDs) have been given the go-ahead in principle by the council, subject to the finalisation of a City policy framework for these areas.
The approval comes after lengthy public consultations and follows from the recommendations made by a special independent advisory panel into the matter.
Over the last two years especially the City has received a number of applications to extend the CID concept to residential areas. But the issue was controversial.
While certain segments of these communities were strongly in favour of CIDs, others objected to levies over and above municipal rates, and personal monthly payments already made to private security companies.
However, with the recommendations now approved, the City can take the issue forward.
Accordingly, all applications received by the City for RCIDs before 1 October 2008 will be evaluated in terms of the panel’s recommendations, while those received after this date will be put on hold until the policy has been finalised, the City confirmed in a statement.
The policy framework for RCIDs is expected to be ready by the middle of the year.
“The extension of CIDs to residential areas is an important precedent-setting step for the City and we have to ensure that a well-informed policy framework is in place before we proceed,” said Ruby Mathang, the member of the mayoral committee for development planning and urban management.
Panel recommendations
Among the key recommendations made by the panel is that the required proportion of landowners giving consent for the creation of an improvement district in residential areas should be increased to 75 percent.
“The 75 percent requirement is to ensure that CIDs in residential areas are not divisive and have the support of the community at large, especially given the additional financial contribution that will be required in the form of the CID levy,” the City stated.
The current CID legislation stipulates that 51 percent of owners of rateable property, representing 51 percent of the rate base in value of the property must be in support of forming a CID. This ensures that the smaller property owner is not forced into forming a CID by larger property owners.
According to Anne Steffny, a director for Kagiso Urban Management and the Central Johannesburg Partnership (CJP) – an independent section 21 company dedicated to the revitalisation of Joburg’s inner city – the 75 percent consent is extremely high and will need to be reviewed. She suggested a 66 percent consent rate, which still makes for a comprehensive participatory process.
The disparate income found in residential areas was another concern and gaining support from sectional title units would prove to be incredibly difficult, she added.
But, although there was still a lot of devil in the detail needing clearing up, the CJP was delighted with what Steffny called “a bold move by the City”.
“The City’s supporting of RCIDs in principle is cutting edge stuff,” she said.
The panel also recommended that the approval of a RCID be effective for a period of three years only. After the expiry date, an application for extension of the particular improvement district must be submitted to the City. Approval will be granted after the completion of an independent evaluation.
And RCID proposals must provide a detailed breakdown of all costs relating to the establishment and maintenance of the improvement district, the panel advised.
All of these recommendations relate to residential areas falling outside the urban development zone boundary of the inner city, and outside mixed business and residential nodes that are suffering symptoms of urban decay.
Concern about crime
Submissions received by the City to create RCIDs to date reflect a growing concern for crime and safety issues in certain residential areas. This should, however, be only one of the factors in the consideration of applications, Mathang cautioned.
“The intention of a CID is to fund the provision of services that can halt the degeneration of cities and promote economic growth and sustainable development within cities,” he said.
Therefore, proposals from residents must indicate how the establishment of an RCID can contribute towards neighbourhood regeneration.
“We don’t want RCIDs to be nothing more than a high-security neighbourhood or to promote a paramilitary approach to controlling public spaces. It is the policy of Johannesburg to promote the growth of inclusive neighbourhoods that reflect the diversity of the City’s population.”
Background
In the past, CIDs were strictly established in places with retail, commercial and industrial components, as dictated by the Gauteng City Improvement Districts Act.
Because of rapid urbanisation in the late 1990s, the inner city went into rapid decline, prompting swift action by the government and property owners alike.
The result was the Act, which, since its inception has contributed to the complete about-turn of decaying areas such as Braamfontein, parts of the inner city and Newtown, to name a few.
In these areas, property owners pay additional levies to complement existing municipal services in order to improve the urban environment. Levies are applied in particular to keep areas clean, attractive and crime-free.
Both statutory and voluntary CIDs operate in the inner city.
Mathang said it was a logical next step to extend the CID concept to residential areas, “but it has to be done in a structured and equitable manner”. The issue of RCIDs has been on the agenda since the Inner City Summit in 2007 and the Inner City Partnership Forum that was subsequently formed.
A draft policy on the RCID will be available for public comment before it is finalised and submitted for approval. Details for the public comment process will be advertised in the press.
Source: City of Johannesburg – Improvement districts are approved
