Every delay in delivering affordable housing translates into another generation growing up in inadequate conditions, another community denied the chance to build wealth through property ownership.
As a past executive director and currently the CEO of the Home Market, a non-profit organisation dedicated to providing affordable housing in Gqeberha, I find myself composing what feels like an elegy – a lament for the dying dream of accessible, quality homes for all.
Over the past two decades, we’ve witnessed the slow asphyxiation of affordable housing initiatives, strangled by a web of bureaucracy, misaligned policies and an increasingly hostile operating environment. This is not just a story of bricks and mortar; it’s a narrative of crushed ideals, systemic failures, and a city at risk of losing the vision of what a city can be, given the chance.
The Home Market: A beacon of hope dimming
The Home Market emerged from the General Motors Foundation initiative as a “special purpose vehicle” – a housing delivery processing system designed to get homes to those who need them most. As a non-profit/public benefit organisation, we’ve dedicated ourselves to bridging the gap between government-assisted housing programmes and the open market.
Our mission has been clear: to create subsidised and non-subsidised affordable housing for communities historically denied access to quality homes.
In 20 years, we’ve been involved in constructing 2,427 homes in strategic locations close to social and economic amenities. It’s a number we’re proud of, yet it falls devastatingly short of the urgent need. Why? With each passing year, the obstacles to development have multiplied tenfold, making our work nearly impossible.
The concept of the Home Market was revolutionary – a prime example of social entrepreneurship in action. As a non-profit developer focused solely on affordable housing, we embody the core principles of this approach: using innovative business models to address pressing social issues. We operate outside the profit motive that drives most developers, allowing us to prioritise community needs over shareholder returns.
This social entrepreneurship model should have been a catalyst for change, inspiring a network of like-minded organisations dedicated to solving the housing crisis through market-based solutions with a social conscience. Instead, we find ourselves increasingly isolated, our innovative approach under-utilised and under-supported, as we fight against a tide of indifference and obstruction.
Quagmire of obstacles
The challenges we face are numerous and interconnected, forming a quagmire that threatens to swallow any hope of progress. Let me take you through the labyrinth we navigate daily.
The legislative labyrinth
We’re drowning in a sea of inappropriate and unnecessary legislation. What should be a straightforward process of building homes has become an absurd nightmare of paperwork and approvals. Time, our most precious resource, is squandered navigating this labyrinth.
The regulatory environment has become a clanking beast, with layers upon layers of controls that serve more to hinder than to help. We’re not arguing against all regulation; we understand the need for proper controls. But what we have now is the equivalent of cracking a peanut with a sledgehammer.
The legislation in place often fails to distinguish between large-scale commercial developments and affordable housing projects, applying the same onerous requirements to both.
Environmental impact assessments, for instance, while crucial for many projects, have become exercises in box-ticking for affordable housing developments. These assessments cost fortunes and often prove little, yet they’re mandatory hurdles we must clear. The time and resources spent on these could be better used actually building homes.
Bureaucratic bottlenecks
The very institutions meant to facilitate development have become our biggest hindrances. A pervasive lack of communication plagues our municipal structures, creating bureaucratic bottlenecks at every turn. Departments operate in silos, lacking the capacity or willingness to coordinate effectively. This dysfunction manifests in countless ways, from unanswered phones to ignored emails, leaving citizens and organisations alike frustrated in their attempts to engage with local government.
The challenge of reaching the right person or getting a timely response has become so normalised that we often joke about it – but the implications for our community’s development are far from amusing. As we strive for a more efficient and responsive local government, addressing this communication breakdown must be a top priority.
This lack of coordination extends beyond mere communication issues. Different departments often have conflicting requirements or interpretations of the same regulations. We find ourselves caught in the crossfire, trying to satisfy multiple masters who don’t seem to talk to each other, or indeed, don’t understand the complexities of affordable housing development.
The officials we deal with, while often well intentioned, are frequently hamstrung by their own bureaucracy. They’ve become rigidly bound to rules and procedures, unwilling or unable to exercise discretion even when it’s clear that strict adherence to regulation is counterproductive. There’s a pervasive fear of making decisions, leading to endless delays as files are passed from desk to desk, each official afraid to take responsibility.
This bureaucratic paralysis points to a deeper issue: the disconnect between the national government’s vision of a “developmental state” and its implementation at the local level. While national policies set the tone for a proactive, facilitative government approach to development, there’s a stark gap in understanding and execution at provincial and municipal levels.
The concept of a “developmental local authority” – one that actively enables and drives progress rather than merely administering rules – seems lost in translation.
We’re left questioning whether these lower tiers of government truly grasp the policies they’re meant to implement, let alone possess the capacity and will to do so effectively. This misalignment between national vision and local execution is a critical factor in the bottlenecks we face, underscoring the urgent need for better integration and capacity building across all levels of government.
The infrastructure burden
Historically, municipalities were responsible for providing bulk infrastructure. Now, that burden has shifted to developers. We’re expected to fund the installation of services that should be a municipal responsibility, driving up costs and making “affordable” housing a misnomer.
This shift not only represents a fundamental abdication of responsibility by local governments but also a violation of existing legislation. The Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act of 2013, Section 49(2), explicitly states that municipalities are legally compelled to provide external (bulk) engineering services. Despite this clear mandate, the reality on the ground tells a different story.
The root of this problem lies in the lack of a coherent development policy linked to proper planning strategies. Even when funds are available – and sometimes remain unspent – for bulk infrastructure, the burden of providing what the municipality legally must provide shifts to developers. This misalignment between law and practice significantly hampers our ability to deliver affordable housing efficiently.
Municipalities are asking developers to pay for infrastructure upgrades that will benefit the entire community, not just our developments. Once we’ve created this value, the municipality then collects rates in perpetuity, without having invested in the initial infrastructure or even facilitating the approval process. This approach not only contradicts the spirit of the law but also creates an unsustainable model for urban development.
A stark example of this infrastructure challenge is our experience with the Fairview area. The Home Market has access to 54 hectares of strategically located, developable land in Fairview, with the potential to accommodate 3,800 affordable housing units.
This project could be an enormous asset to potential affordable housing buyers in our city, not to mention its positive impact on employment opportunities and the potential rates and service income for the municipal treasury.
However, the development of this land is being severely hindered by inadequate bulk sewerage infrastructure. Despite long, persistent attempts to engage with the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality to resolve this issue, we’ve made no progress. Our efforts to collaborate on solving the bulk sewer problem have been met with inertia, indifference and a lack of vision.
This situation exemplifies the broader challenges we face: a combination of political unwillingness, bureaucratic indifference, and a fundamental misunderstanding of the developmental nature of housing delivery. It highlights the inability of local government to grasp the true potential of public-private partnerships in development.
The Fairview project alone could significantly alleviate our city’s housing shortage, boost the local economy and provide much-needed revenue for the municipality. Instead, it lies dormant, a testament to the systemic failures plaguing our affordable housing initiatives.
This is not an isolated incident. Across the city, potential developments are stalled due to similar infrastructure constraints. The municipality’s failure to invest in and maintain basic services not only impedes housing development but also stifles economic growth and perpetuates spatial inequality.
The irony is palpable. By failing to invest in infrastructure, the municipality is foregoing future revenue streams from rates and services. This short-sighted approach not only hinders current development but also compromises the city’s long-term financial sustainability.
We urgently call on the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality and other local governments to reclaim their role in providing and maintaining bulk infrastructure. This is not just about facilitating development; it’s about fulfilling their mandate to serve the public and foster sustainable urban growth.
Read more: The questions the Nelson Mandela Bay metro won’t answer over six-day water outage
Financial shackles
As a non-profit, we face unique challenges in securing funding. Banks view us with scepticism, often offering less favourable terms than for-profit entities. It’s a cruel irony – those trying to serve the most vulnerable face the highest hurdles in accessing capital.
The financial sector’s risk assessment models are not designed for organisations like ours. They perceive poor people and non-profits as high-risk investments, despite our track record and the social value we create. We often face higher interest rates and stricter terms than commercial developers, further squeezing our ability to deliver affordable homes.
Even government-linked financial institutions, which one might expect to be more sympathetic to our cause, often impose unaffordable terms. The rhetoric of support for affordable housing doesn't translate into practical financial assistance. We’re left to navigate a financial landscape that seems designed to thwart rather than facilitate our efforts.
The construction battlefield
On the ground, we face a different kind of threat. The rise of what some term the “construction mafia” – groups using intimidation and violence to extort financial gain from projects – has turned development sites into potential battlefields. It’s not just about building homes anymore; it’s about navigating a minefield of security concerns.
These groups, often operating under the guise of promoting local employment, use threats and sometimes violence to demand a share of construction contracts. Their actions not only increase costs but also cause significant delays and create an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty around projects. We have resisted these hostile approaches.
The lack of effective law enforcement in this area leaves developers vulnerable. We’re forced to factor in these security concerns when planning projects, further driving up costs and complexity.
Read more: Durban summit declares war on construction mafia’s reign of terror
The human cost
Behind these challenges are of course real people – families dreaming of a safe, stable home; young professionals hoping to step onto the property ladder; communities yearning for integration and opportunity. As we struggle to deliver housing, these dreams remain deferred, and the social fabric of our city continues to fray.
The housing crisis is not just about a lack of physical structures. It’s about the perpetuation of historical spatial planning that segregated our communities, the denial of economic opportunities and the erosion of hope. Every delay in delivering affordable housing translates into another generation growing up in inadequate conditions, another community denied the chance to build wealth through property ownership.
Consider the daily reality for many in our city: A worker living in a distant township, forced to rise at 4am to embark on a gruelling commute – two buses and a taxi – just to reach a workplace by 8am. This is not merely an inconvenience; it’s a theft of time, money and quality of life.
The friction of distance erodes family bonds, as parents return home exhausted, with little energy left for their children. It’s a cycle that perpetuates inequality, as the cost and time of commuting eat into already strained household budgets and limit opportunities for education or skill development.
This disabling environment for affordable housing development means we’re unable to integrate our communities effectively. The spatial disparities of our past continue to define our present, limiting access to jobs, schools and essential services for those who need them most.
The construction of affordable housing is a significant job creator. The entire supply chain, from land preparation to the final fitting of windows, provides employment opportunities.
By stifling affordable housing development, we’re also choking off a vital source of jobs in a country grappling with staggering unemployment rates. This job creation potential is not just about economic growth, it’s about providing dignity, purpose and the means for families to support themselves.
The ripple effects of this housing crisis touch every aspect of our society. In short, our failure to address the affordable housing crisis is more than a failure of urban planning or economic policy. It’s a failure to create the integrated, equitable society we’ve long aspired to build. Every day that passes without progress is another day we’ve failed to live up to the promises of our democracy. It’s another day where thousands lose precious hours of their lives to a problem we have the power to solve.
A call for change
The affordable housing sector in Gqeberha – and indeed, in South Africa – stands at a crossroads. Without significant changes, organisations like the Home Market may become relics of a bygone era of hope, ambition and idealism. We need more than piecemeal solutions; we need a fundamental shift in how we approach housing development.
- Legislative reform: We call on the government to review and streamline legislation, creating a fast-track process for affordable housing projects. This should include exemptions from certain regulations that, while perhaps necessary for large commercial developments, serve only to decelerate the progress of the development of affordable housing projects.
- Bureaucratic overhaul: We need a complete rethink of how government departments interact with developers, especially non-profit developers and consultants. This should include the creation of a single point of contact for affordable housing projects, someone with the authority and knowledge in housing, to coordinate across departments and make decisions.
- Infrastructure investment: We urge municipalities to reclaim their role in bulk infrastructure development, alleviating the financial burden on developers and ultimately, on homebuyers. This could be funded through municipal infrastructure grants and should be seen as an investment in the city's future.
- Financial innovation: We ask financial institutions to recognise the unique value of non-profit developers and offer terms that reflect the social good of our work. This could include lower interest rates, longer repayment terms, and more flexible collateral requirements for affordable housing projects.
- Security framework: We need a robust security framework to protect construction sites and workers from extortion and violence. This requires coordination among law enforcement, local government and the construction industry.
- Skills development: There’s a critical need for skills development within local government. Officials need training not just in the technicalities of their roles, but in the broader context of national developmental goals and how their work impacts the lives of citizens.
- Public-private partnerships: We need a renewed commitment to true public-private partnerships. This means moving beyond rhetoric to create meaningful collaborations that leverage the strengths of both sectors.
- Community engagement: We must find ways to better engage communities in the development process. This can help address Nimby (Not In My Back Yard) attitudes and create a sense of ownership and pride in affordable housing projects.
- Attitudinal change: We must foster a culture of service and care within our society, particularly among public servants. The term “public servant” itself embodies a commitment to service provision. We need to reinvigorate this ethos, encouraging a mindset where serving the public is seen not just as a job, but as a calling. This shift in attitude is crucial for creating a more responsive, efficient, and caring approach to affordable housing and other essential services.
A vision for the future
Imagine a Gqeberha where affordable housing is not an afterthought, but a cornerstone of urban planning and development. Where mixed-income communities thrive, breaking down the spatial legacies of a segregated history. Where young families can put down roots, secure in the knowledge that they have a stable home. Where the elderly can age in dignity in houses adapted to their needs.
This vision is not a pipe dream. It’s an achievable goal, but one that requires a collective effort. It demands political will, administrative will, community involvement and a shared commitment to spatial justice and urban integration.
Conclusion: A refusal to mourn
As I write this, I’m reminded of the very many families we’ve helped house over the years. Their stories of transformation fuel our persistence in the face of these challenges. But persistence alone is not enough. We need action, and we need it now.
The ideal of affordable housing in Gqeberha isn’t dead yet, but it’s in a chokehold gasping for air. This is our call to action, our refusal to let this ideal become just another eulogy in the story of our city. We refuse to compose an elegy for affordable housing. Instead, let this be a rallying plea.
To our national, provincial and local government officials: We challenge you to break free from the inertia of bureaucracy and to rediscover the spirit of public service and connection with the real needs of our community – not the imagined or “perceived” needs.
To our financial institutions: We call on you to innovate, to create products and services that serve the needs of all our citizens, not just the wealthy few.
To our fellow developers: We invite you to join us in prioritising social good alongside financial returns.
The Home Market stands ready to continue our work, to push against the tide of obstacles, to fight for every family’s right to a decent home. But we cannot do it alone. DM