1. Urban LandMark Comments on Land Use Management Bill [B27-2008]
National Assembly: Portfolio Committee for Agriculture & Land Affairs
31 July 2008

2. Introducing Urban LandMark

3. Funding and institutional home
Funded by UK government’s Department for International Development (DfID)
Part of the Finmark Trust stable (
Emerged from Finmark Trust’s Township Residential Property Markets (‘TPRM’) study

4. goal: what we want to achieve
to improve access to well-located urban land (in South Africa)
by making markets work for the poor and improving governance systems
thus giving meaning and effect to the right to land

5. mission: how we intend to achieve our goal
By creating a place for engagement and discovery, and establishing:
a dependable empirical information base
a clear advocacy position on M(UL)MW4P
as the basis for policy dialogue and change

6. who are our stakeholders?
ULM
Urban
Sector
Network
Federation
of the
Urban Poor
Landless People’s
Movement
LEAP
Isandla
Institute
Universities
Treasury
Land Affairs
Housing
Provincial &
Local Govt
Presidency
Transport
HSRC/ CSIR
DBSA/ SACN
Government
Private Sector
Donors/
iNGOs
Civil society
Habitat for
Humanity
SA Cities
Network
DFID
UN Habitat
Cities
Alliance/
World
Bank
Ford
Foundation
South African
Property Owners
Association
Banking
of SA
Professional
Institutes

7. Urban LandMark concerns with the Land Use Mangement Bill

8. The need for national land use management legislation
National legislation is critically important for the redress of apartheid spatial injustices as well as for the development of efficient and sustainable human settlements in which all citizens are able to benefit from good land use planning.
The question is: will the current LUMB do this?

9. More, not less uncertainty
The LUMB adds another layer of legislation to the existing duplicative and discriminatory legislative framework
If there is a grand plan for how the LUMB will work in relation to the provincial Ordinances, the BCDA regulations and the Less Formal Township Establishment Act it has not been shared.
In practise now every land development approval process will be governed by two pieces of legislation, which
Will require constant cross-referencing;
creates potential for unintended consequences; and
Opens loopholes for legal challenge

10. Norms & standards These are needed now They must provide, inter alia:
uniformity on procedures for quicker approval processes (e.g. as are found in the Development Facilitation Act); as well as
guidance on how to unravel the legal complexity of inherited planning legislation
Towns & cities in which all South Africans can thrive and prosper requires innovative planning : and the LUMB does not provide that

11. The DFA: throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
Recent case in the WLD has upheld the power of the DFA tribunals (CoJ v GDT and others, 2007)
The DFA introduced innovation and still provides an invaluable route for approvals in both the commercial and ‘developmental’ sectors
Repealing the DFA will leave serious gaps, especially in some provinces

12. What’s needed Clarity as to which sphere makes which decisions
Clarity as to the scrapping of apartheid land development & planning legislation and a transition path
Clarity as to relationship between planning & environmental approvals
Mechanisms for fast-tracking projects
We are unfortunately not persuaded that the LUMB meets these needs

13. Moving forward
Urban LandMark, with the Second Economy Strategy Project, is commissioning a Regulatory Impact Assessment (‘RIA’) of the LUMB, which will run August to September 2008
Urban LandMark is committed to providing whatever assistance may be requested to reconceptualise and redraft the LUMB: we have budget and capacity to work together (at the least the RIA report will be helpful, we think)

14. Urban LandMark contact details
Director: Dr Mark Napier
Website:
Phone