The National Physical Planning Policy, 200?

CONTENTS

1. Background

2. International Planning Principles

3. The Proposed Physical Planning System

• Purpose of Planning System
• Outdated Legislation
• Duplication of Planning Legislation
• Proposed National Physical Planning Authority
• Appeals Tribunal and Strengthening of Building Inspectorate Services
• Planning Responsibility
• The Content of Plans
• The Physical Planning Hierarchy
• Community Participation
• Land Sub-Division, Planning Applications and Process
• National Zoning Typology
• National Development Code

4. Key Issues and Specific Policy Statements

5. Physical Planning 'Best Practices'

6. Conclusion

List of Policy Acronyms

CC City Councils

CDC Community Development Committee

CMP Comprehensive Mitigation Plan

DPM Deputy Prime Minister’s Office

EA Environmental Assessment

GIS Geographical Information System

GOS Government of Swaziland

HSA Human Settlements Authority

IEE Initial Environmental Evaluation

LED Local Economic Development

LMA Land Management Authority

MEE Ministry of Enterprise and Employment

MEPD Ministry of Economic Planning and Development

MHUD Ministry of Housing and Urban Development

MNRE Ministry of Natural Resources and Energy

MOAC Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives

MOJ Ministry of Justice

MPWC Ministry of Public Works and Construction

NDS National Development Strategy

NLP National Land Policy

NPDP National Physical Development Plan

NPPA National Physical Planning Authority

NRB Natural Resources Board

PPDC Physical Planning and Development Control Act (proposed)

PUD Planned Unit Development

SDI Spatial Development Initiative

SEA Swaziland Environmental Authority

SEB Swaziland Electricity Board

SG Surveyor General

SNL Swazi National Land

SPTC Swaziland Posts and Telecommunication Corporation

SWSC Swaziland Water Services Corporation

TB Town Board

TDL Title Deed Land

TPA Town Planning Act

TPB Town Planning Board

1. Background

The Government of Swaziland (GOS) has undertaken an Urban Development Project to address growth and related infrastructure in Swaziland. The project includes investments in urban infrastructure, the development of sites and services projects for residential and commercial use, and institutional strengthening of key implementing agencies – the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD) being one of these. Part of this institutional strengthening involves legislative reform that will create the enabling environment within which the project can successfully proceed. The Project Co-ordination Unit of this Ministry is responsible for co-ordinating the project.

The first phase of the Urban Development Project, a feasibility study, was completed in mid 1990. Phase II Projection Preparation was recently completed and the project has been launched. In a series of reports, the Phase II consultants have presented issues and concerns that will affect the future structure, conduct and performance of the urban sector, along with recommendations for their satisfactory implementation. Through a series of workshops and meetings, members of the Project Steering Committee along with representatives from the World Bank, reviewed these recommendations and provided action plans for each participating agency, which brought the project to the implementation stage.

Included in the Action Plans are proposals for the formulation of a consolidated policy and legislative framework regarding physical planning and development control. As an adjunct to these proposals, a Physical Planning Study – referred to as Devco II – was completed in April 1993. This study sought to provide a structure for the Physical Planning Department and all legislation related to planning and development control. Currently statutes are uncoordinated, duplicated and some control authorities have lengthy approval mechanisms. Some of the planning codes are out of date, not clear or have never been gazetted and are restrictive to development. Hence, a new and effective approach to physical planning is essential. This approach will consist of a new National Physical Planning Policy, a National Physical Planning and Development Control Act and a new National Development Code. This exercise aims to streamline physical planning and development control and would establish a framework for physical planning in the country which will determine the most appropriate way to promote orderly and environmentally sound development into the next millennium.

This policy document expands on the work carried out thus far by the MHUD by : (1) outlining relevant planning principles to guide planning practice; (2) identifying critical national planning problems; (3) offering institutional recommendations that will address these challenges (e.g. streamlining planning authorities and providing appropriate planning and control measures); (4) outlining associated planning processes and their content, namely a hierarchy of plans and guidelines for a zoning typology and development code; and (5) addressing key planning issues by providing succinct policy statements on each issue that had been raised in ministerial, local authority and agency consultations. Finally, the policy provides a set of general ‘best practices’ for physical planners. This policy document therefore outlines the basis and content for the formulation of a Physical Planning and Development Control (PPDC) Act and National Development Code.

2. International Planning Principles

Several important principles may be extracted from international experience and have both, direct applicability to Swaziland, and provide a useful starting point from which to reassess local land use control mechanisms.

Ease of Administration : Any land use management system places administrative demands on the public sector. In many developing countries this capacity is scarce and land use management systems must be matched with the evolving capacity of public authorities to implement and administer them and the private sector’s capacity to become engaged with them.

Simplicity : While related to the principle of ease of administration, this principle includes the sense that procedures must be easy to implement and simple to understand as complex systems tend to exclude many actors from engagement. Simplicity also contributes towards principles of openness and transparency.

Effectiveness : Land use management systems must help public and private sector actors to achieve their land use management objectives. This would require, among other things, that the system incorporate mechanisms for monitoring and review.

Legitimacy : The legitimacy of a land use management system will depend on public acceptance and the extent to which the public have participated in its formulation and to which they participate in its implementation. Legitimacy also depends on the degree to which planning processes and decisions have been affected by insular political imperatives. It is therefore essential that planning processes are guided by bipartisan and technical imperatives. Without legitimacy, the system will not be respected and compliance with rules and regulations which form part of the system will not be achieved.

Devolution : Planning and land use management decision making powers are increasingly being devolved to the lowest level at which remain effective. This is due to the increasing complexity of development issues, public participation requirements, the lack of public sector capacity and the recognition of the expanding role of private initiative in shaping land use decisions. Nonetheless devolution must be accompanied with sufficient investment in capacity building, skills strengthening and appropriate budgetary commitments.

Flexibility : Social and economic development is becoming more and more complex and more difficult to control. This is particularly the case in societies where change is rapid and fundamental. Future planning is difficult where development outcomes are hard to predict. This requires a flexible land use management philosophy which accommodates positive yet unpredicted developments and manages or contains negative yet unpredicted developments.

Certainty : At the same time as flexible land use management systems are needed, in times of rapid change, many actors require more certainty or a stable environment in order to operate effectively – particularly in the case of investors of capital. Of all factors which create certainty, security of tenure and clear zoning mechanisms are perhaps the most important.

Maximisation of Choice : Pursuit of equity does not mean pursuit of uniformity and so land use management systems should recognise diversity and freedom of choice. This could mean that different areas (urban and rural) choose differing land use management systems or mechanisms. A balance is however required between choice and the principle of certainty. This could mean that when choices are made, their consequences remain fixed for a period of time.

Promotion of Growth and Development : In an increasingly competitive global economy land use management systems must promote growth and development. This is considered part and parcel of an attempt to achieve full employment and to enable government at all levels to fulfil its obligations to provide services and infrastructure to the poor. Mere control of development is no longer sufficient and land use management systems need to actively attract and retain investment. While this principle may at times appear to contradict other principles such as environmental protection, it should not necessarily do so.

Cascading of Authority : Whilst devolution is a significant trend, the tendency for higher tiers of government to use lower tiers to achieve political objectives is common. This imposition of authority is also a requirement if higher levels of the hierarchy are to enforce the compliance of lower levels in implementing the policies of higher levels. This principle seems to contradict the principles of devolution and legitimacy, but may be important in certain cases where national government has strong equity objectives that require local compliance. In these cases incremental devolution of planning powers according to growing levels of technical capacity may be necessary.

Integration of Land Use Management Systems & Other Planning Processes : There is a need to adopt ‘integrated planning’ methodologies that take into account land use management, transportation planning, rural and environmental planning and building controls.

Protection of Rights Except Where Infringement Would Benefit the Poor : Land use management must protect existing rights and promote the extension of rights (e.g. tenure rights to women). This is particularly important if land use systems are subject to profound change.

Empowerment : Land use management mechanisms must be designed so as to empower the least advantaged, creating equality of opportunity e.g. by ensuring security of tenure and zoning rights. This is particularly important in societies where inequality is endemic. This principle is related to the principle of diversity, but goes further in helping the capacity of the marginalised to participate in land use management systems and to receive their just share of its benefits.

Formalisation : The most common response of land use management systems to the emergence of informal settlements, informal trading and other non-formal land uses, has been to try to formalise them in some way. This has been done either by declaring them illegal in an attempt to force them to conform to formal land use management systems, or to develop parallel systems which have as their aim the incorporation of illegal and semi-legal land uses within the formal system over time.

Partnership : Partnerships are required to make land use management systems perform optimally. Partnerships exist at different levels between various parties. First, is the implicit partnership between civil society (both ‘modern’ and ‘traditional’) and government as embodied in a constitution. This is a fundamental pre-requisite of any system of regulation and control, regardless of whether it is concerned with land use, safety and security or social welfare. Second is the partnership between developers seeking to change land uses and civil society which will have the bear the consequences of development. Third is the partnership between applicants and authorities in adjudicating applications and determining appropriate conditions for approval of applications.

Rationalisation of Frameworks : The broad spectrum of land use management mechanisms are often based on overlapping pieces of legislation which perform similar functions in similar areas which historically fell under fragmented or divided institutional frameworks. It therefore makes sense to rationalise operational frameworks in line with the principles of Ease of Administration, Simplicity and Effectiveness.

The physical planning policy in this document closely incorporates these principles and translates them into a proposed planning system.

3. The Proposed Physical Planning System

"Swaziland is a small country and has a rapidly growing population. This increasing population has to be supported by a limited amount of land. In order to successfully support the population…land has to be used effectively and efficiently to sustain the population. This calls for a rational process of selecting an optimum area for the different and competing land uses e.g. housing, industry, conservation etc. The process of optimising land use involves : evaluating the suitability of land for the proposed activity, identifying constraints and opportunities, evaluation of the financial consequences related to particular site choices, and the prediction of environmental effects over time by the proposed land use. This process is referred to as physical planning and development control and it plays a major role in the economy of any country."

Preface to NPDP : Volume One (1997)

Purpose of Planning System

The purpose of a planning system is to regulate the development and the use of land in the public interest. It is not to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another. While considerations of public interest may in a particular case serve to protect private interests, the critical question is not whether owners or occupiers of adjacent properties would suffer financial or other loss, but whether the proposal would affect the locality generally and unacceptably affect amenities that ought to be protected in the public interest.

The planning system should be efficient, effective and simple in conception and operation, to facilitate much needed development and to strike the right balance between that development and the interests of the public. The system should not be regarded as simply a means of preventing change. Properly used, it can help secure economy, efficiency and amenity in development and land use . Improperly used, the system can impose costs on the economy and constraints without any real public benefit.

While the planning system should operate firmly where land uses are not permitted, it should also be flexible where special consent is possible. In the latter case, the planning system should impose conditions on planning permission in a manner that will enable the development proposal to proceed where it would otherwise be necessary to refuse planning permission. Sensitive use of conditions can improve the quality of development control and improve public confidence in the planning system. To achieve these ends conditions should be used in a manner which is clearly seen to be fair, reasonable and practical. Conditions should only be imposed where they are necessary, relevant, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all respects.

Outdated Legislation

Swaziland is currently experiencing rapid physical development as well as informal and peri-urban sprawl. While a number of urban infrastructure and site and service schemes have been initiated to address community needs, it has been argued that these efforts will not be effectively implemented if the current uncoordinated and duplicated physical planning legislation remains in force. Therefore, there is a need to review the current spatial / physical planning framework governing Swaziland and to revise and consolidate legislation such as the Housing and Building Act of 1968, the Urban Area Regulations of 1930, the Subdivision of Land Act of 1957, and more particularly the Human Settlements Authority Act of 1988 and the Town Planning Act of 1951.

It is proposed that physical planning in Swaziland should be the spatial expression of government social and economic policy as expressed by the current national policy framework (e.g. the National Development Strategy or NDS). These policies should also be translated across scales (national, regional and local). There is therefore a need to create a statutory environment that will facilitate appropriate planning across spatial and ministerial boundaries. The current legal framework however, as expressed by the Human Settlements Authority (HSA) Act of 1988 as Amended in 1992, and the Town Planning (TPA) Act of 1961, is arguably out of date, uncoordinated and does not provide an adequate legal foundation for addressing current government policy requirements and the needs of Swazi civil society.

Duplication of Planning Legislation

While the HSA has functioned reasonably well in managing housing developments, it has not been able to fulfil a number of responsibilities (formulating policy, establishing finance mechanisms, encouraging research into housing and infrastructure standards) outlined in the Act. Similarly, while the Town Planning Board (TPB) has provided a useful mechanism to manage and provide advice on Town Planning Schemes, it’s role and functions need to be significantly strengthened to include providing statutory support to regional planning initiatives and to expand the role and influence of physical planning into areas previously not catered for (e.g. peri-urban and informal settlements, commercial and industrial estate planning, and planning for informal trade). Furthermore, the TPA does not clearly define the need for working relationships with related agencies and statutes (e.g. Building and Housing Act) and it also greatly centralises authority in the Minister to approve sub-divisional applications, planning schemes and planning appeals. Clearly these tasks make enormous demands on the individual and may open the position of the Minister to political pressures.

Finally, it can also be argued that the current statutory environment meets very few of the planning principles outlined in this document, namely ease of administration, simplicity, effectiveness, flexibility, the encouragement of partnerships, the maximisation of choice and the cascading of authority.

The policy therefore concurs with the Devco II Study which recommended that the HSA Act and Town Planning Act be repealed and their functions merged into a single authority under the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD). This new authority will be named the National Physical Planning Authority (NPPA) and appointments will be made by the Minister. Furthermore, it is recommended that the statutory relationship between the Building and Housing Act of 1968 be formalised through the revision of the Act and it’s incorporation as a section in the new Physical Planning and Development Control (PPDC) Act. This Act would update the Building Act’s provisions, providing for a Building Inspectorate and the creation of single institutional framework for Building and Planning Appeals i.e. the reconstitution of the Building Appeals Tribunal to include planning appeals.

Proposed National Physical Planning Authority

It is recommended that the proposed PPDC Act give the MHUD the authority to :

• Appoint individuals and officials to the National Physical Planning Authority;
• Reconstitute the Building Appeals Tribunal to include planning appeals;
• Direct the NPPA to carry out tasks in accordance with its designated functions and duties;
• Declare Controlled Areas for the purposes of development control;
• Request revisions to the final draft of all development plans;
• Approve all physical development plans.

Duties of the NPPA should include :

• Assisting Government in formulating policy relating to human settlements;
• Ensuring orderly development of existing and future human settlements throughout the country and the preparation and monitoring of National, Regional and Local Physical Development Plans;
• Preparing standards for the provision of land and infrastructure;
• Preparing standards for the provision of shelter;
• Evaluating and approving all physical plans and housing schemes in urban and rural areas;
• Approving all subdivision applications in urban areas except where these powers have been devolved to local authorities [1].

As an advisory body [2], the composition of the NPPA should be technical in nature and as broad as possible by including the following individuals :

• The Principal Secretary of the MHUD;
• The Director of Housing and Human Settlements;
• The Senior Land Use Office of the MOAC and a representative of the MNRE;
• Two Planners from local authorities;
• The Chief Economic Planner of the MEPD and a representative of the MEE;
• The Senior Architect and Roads Engineer of MPWC;
• The Surveyor General and the Registrar of Deeds;
• The Chief Engineer of the Water Services Corporation;
• The Director of the Swaziland Environmental Authority (SEA);
• A representative from the DPM’s office;
• A representative from the Works Inspectorate;
• A representative from the SNHB, SPTC and SEB;
• A private sector physical planner or engineer; and
• Two nominated private sector individuals.

Members of the NPPA will have voting rights and will represent as wide a range of relevant expertise as possible. Considerations regarding choice of membership should include appropriate technical expertise, the need to include key interested and affected parties, as well as the need to establish ties to relevant ministries and agents. Members should also be controlled by a strict code of conduct e.g. be required to declare conflicts of interest.

The administration of the NPPA will be more clearly defined by Physical Planning and Development Control Act (e.g. period of office, conditions of service). Secretarial and technical support for the NPPA would come from the Department of Housing and Human Settlements, and the NPPA should delegate some authority to the Director of Housing and Human Settlements as senior technical adviser to the Authority. These delegated powers could include applications for single dwellings, the subdivision of property up to four plots outside local authority areas, extensions and commercial or industrial development of less than 100m². The NPPA should also meet regularly once a month and receive all necessary documentation prior to the meeting. All submissions to the NPPA should be accompanied by a recommendation by the Director of Housing and Human Settlements and all decisions should be recorded for public inspection (and possible appeal). The NPPA will be serviced by the staff of the Department of Housing and Human Settlements in the MHUD. Finally, the Director of Housing and Human Settlements will be charged with :

• Administration of the proposed Physical Planning and Development Control Act;
• Acting as principal advisor to the NPPA;
• Functions delegated by the NPPA;
• The preparation of physical development plans;
• Advising the NPPA on the preparation and implementation of physical development plans.

The Department of Housing and Human Settlements in the MHUD also requires some restructuring of its operations in line with the needs of the NPPA and the new Physical Planning Act. Hence, in line with DEVCO II proposals, the Department should be redefined and strengthened in a manner that formalises a relationship with the NPPA by establishing an annual ‘report-back’ mechanism via the Director to the NPPA on matters regarding local authority performance, physical planning and building standards, development plans, housing and township developments and urban land administration.

Proposed NPPA in MHUD Organogram

The diagram above indicates the close operational relationship between the proposed NPPA and the Department of Housing and Human Settlements. While certain powers should be delegated from the Authority to the DHHS to improve operational efficiency, the NPPA will be responsible for a number of important planning functions (in a similar way to related parastatal organisations) and will be accountable to the MHUD.

Appeals Tribunal and Strengthening of Building Inspectorate Services

It is recommended that the Building Appeals Tribunal be reconstituted or expanded to include the function of considering appeals made against the decisions of local planning authorities and the NPPA. The Tribunal members should not be members of the NPPA or a local authority but should include an experienced land-legal expert, a suitably qualified architect and physical planner, nominated persons from the MPWC and a person to represent the local private building industry.

It has been noted from a number of quarters that Swaziland’s existing Inspectorate of Works (with MHUD’s Department of Urban Government) lacks capacity to ensure that building plans passed by the MHUD or local authorities are constructed in a manner that fully complies with the approved plans. On the basis of a revised and consolidated Building and Housing Act, it is recommended that the MHUD improve the capacity of the Inspectorate of Works to supplement the work of the township engineers in the Ministry and in local authorities. The Inspectorate of Works [3] should be empowered to widely monitor the quality of formally constructed buildings, internal infrastructure (e.g. plumbing, sanitation and electrical wiring) and related infrastructure services throughout the country.

Planning Responsibility

Changes in the use of land and buildings must be approved by the relevant authorities in order to ensure that towns retain a character that is acceptable to its citizens (as defined by the town’s individual Development Code as guided by the National Development Code, and public opinion during the approval process). This process may also require intervention to control noise, pollution, traffic congestion and the loss of sensitive environments. However, plans must also highlight opportunities for encouraging economic growth and the suitable location for various services that will benefit adjacent communities.

The responsibility for physical planning in Swaziland lies in the hands of local authorities (if they have the technical capacity to do so) and ultimately with the Department of Housing and Human Settlements of the MHUD. However, this responsibility is also shared with a number of related Ministries that manage land subdivision (MNRE), rural development (DPM and MOAC), economic development (MEPD [4], MEE) and agencies delivering services (SWSC, SEB, SPTC etc.). There is therefore an urgent need for ongoing co-operation between Ministries through both, the operations of the proposed NPPA, and medium- to long-term planning initiatives such as the NPDP, regional and local physical development plans - Diagram 1 briefly outlines the functions, relationships and responsibilities of the various Ministries in a three-tier planning hierarchy. It is also equally important that all these ministries sufficiently budget for their planning functions and seek outside funding where it is available e.g. World Bank, African Development Bank, Development Bank of Southern Africa, Aid Agencies and international Planning Associations and Environmental lobby groups.

It is proposed that the MHUD strongly oppose the adhoc or reactive declaration of new towns [5]. While it should initially adopt the Indicative Criteria proposed by the NPDP, the Ministry must look to the formulation of appropriate regional plans to clarify the status of small human settlements. It is proposed that the MHUD’s direct planning responsibilities remain with local authorities without planning departments. However, the MHUD must assume responsibility for planning commercial and industrial areas [6] and it must also assist relevant Ministries (e.g. MOAC) that may require planning advice at a regional (regional development plans) and local scale (integrated land-use plans).

Finally, there is an equally important need to bridge the legislative and cultural divide between the so-called ‘modern’ land management system and the customary system managed by the chiefs in rural areas. This divide can be best addressed at a national or regional scale through the enactment of appropriate land management legislation e.g. the proposed National Land Policy (NLP). The latter approach will however require close co-operation by the MHUD, the MNRE and the MOAC and close consultation with the Chiefs and Regional Administrators in order to produce appropriate regional physical development plans that take into account existing agricultural policy, agro-ecological zoning, areas containing mineral deposits and the needs and potential of secondary and small emerging rural towns.

The Content of Plans

The content of physical development plans depends heavily on which scale the planning exercise is focused. However, at any scale, physical and township development plans must contain :

• A co-ordinated policy framework;
• A clearly defined set of planning controls and performance criteria e.g. land development objectives;
• A programme and budget for implementation of the plan in determined stages;
• Public participation strategies;
• Environmental controls as prescribed by relevant agencies; and
• Mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the plan.

Furthermore, development plans should adopt the ‘integrated planning’ methodology which takes into account all the conditions and circumstances which play a part in the successful outcome of a plan , and gives an opportunity for participation to all the people and organisations who have a direct role to play or a contribution to make. It generates solutions that optimise the joint expertise of different disciplines.

The Physical Planning Hierarchy

As illustrated on Diagram 2 on page 24, at a national scale, the National Physical development Plan (NPDP) should clearly reflect the priorities and aims of the Government through the National Development Strategy (NDS) and related programmes. The plan should provide a clear spatial framework of prioritised movement corridors and activity nodes and this structure should be closely linked to opportunities in neighbouring countries e.g. South Africa and Mozambique. Key commercial, industrial and agricultural projects should be highlighted and backward and forward linkages between these opportunities should be highlighted. Finally, the country’s environmental and conservation potential should be identified through the national Environmental Action Plan and linked to key infrastructural investments that will unlock this potential e.g. roads and rail.

While a similar methodology should be adopted at the regional scale greater emphasis should be placed on detailed regional zoning and matching the social needs of regional populations with the economic potential inherent in their respective regions. Swaziland can selectively adopt physical planning and economic strategies by focussing on the detailed planning of ‘development corridors’ and the linking areas of commercial, industrial and agricultural importance. These corridors have the potential to generate employment and economic growth that can benefit adjacent rural areas (‘corridor shadows’) by providing jobs, additional government revenue for social services and improved access to regional markets. Detailed spatial strategies for each major urban node and broad regional zoning would occur at this scale in a manner that would address a number of critical Swazi planning challenges, namely: (1) assessments of the ‘urbanity’ of rural settlements by analysing formal local job creation potential, (2) long term spatial planning to take account of changes in urban demarcation or to prevent peri-urban sprawl, (3) environmental and conservation zonings (and controls) for sensitive areas, and (4) agricultural and (high potential) mineral zones to preserve rural areas with good economic potential against human settlement sprawl.

At the local urban scale Town Planning Schemes are used to assist and manage the development of the country’s urban areas. Local development plans along the lines of town planning schemes will have to be developed by the local planning authorities of urban and peri-urban areas. The town planning scheme should be made up of three components: the Structure Plan; the Development Plan; and the Development Code [7]. Every town planning scheme has for its purpose the co-ordinated and harmonious development of the urban area in such a way as will most effectively promote health, safety, order, amenity, convenience and general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development.

In more detail :

The Structure Plan defines the goals and policies of the scheme and outlines the basis for directing the pace, location and image of future development. Together with statutory and regulatory tools to implement the plan, the local authority has the ability to define the overall framework for development, urban growth and land use over the next twenty years.

The Development Plan outlines the short-term (3-5 year) objectives of the scheme and highlights the co-ordination and timing of development projects. The plan will include estimates of demands, budget allocations, funding sources and the detailed requirements of the projects over the next five years. The Plan should also include the recommendations of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the projects and highlight any required Mitigation Plans.

The Development Code provides the regulations to implement the strategies and programmes identified in the Structure Plan and Development Plan. It contains the rules and regulations concerning zoning requirements, setback limits, number of buildings per plot, minimum plot sizes, coverages, permitted uses, parking requirements etc. These regulations are based on the National Code and discretionary changes to the Code are only allowed by the Minister in exceptional circumstances i.e. where they are a bottleneck to major development projects or substantial commercial investments.

Furthermore, at a local rural scale so-called Local Development Plans could be prepared for communities with the permission of the Ngwenyama. These plans would outline the agricultural potential of an area, the needs of local communities and appropriate investment plans with accompanying strategies for leveraging finance for specific projects.

Plans should be broadly guided by the following methodology:

Planning Phase

Step One : Planning Exercise Approval

Step Two : Status Quo & Policy Analysis

Outline current policy environment and local strengths, weaknesses opportunities and threats (SWOT analysis)

Public Consultation regarding Vision, Objectives and Strategy Statements with local community structures or CDA

Step Three : Strategy Plans

Strategy Statements for Economy, Social Needs, Infrastructure, Physical Management

Step Four : Spatial Framework, Zoning Plan and Controls

Cascading hierarchy of Agro-Ecological and Urban Zones

‘Special Case’ Areas (Peri-Urban, Informal Settlements, Tourism Attractions, Conservation Areas)

Appropriate Development Controls

Step Five : NPPA Approval of Plan

Project Implementation Phase

Step Six : Action Plans

Action Plans for Rural Development, Tourism, Service and Infrastructure Delivery, Environmental Protection, Regional and Local Economic Development, and Public Participation / Communication.

Step Seven : SEA Approval of Plans

Initial Environment Evaluation, Strategic Environmental Assessment, Comprehensive Mitigation Projects

Step Eight : Implementation Plan

Accountability and Financial Plans for Ministries and Departments

Step Nine : NPPA Adoption

Step Ten : Ongoing Monitoring, Evaluation and Review

It can be argued that these planning mechanisms are well understood and widely adopted. It is therefore proposed that the NPPA adopt these mechanisms as part of its land use management responsibilities. The resolution to prepare physical development plans or extend demarcation boundaries lies with the MHUD and local authorities with delegated planning powers. Other local authorities will have to request permission from the NPPA to undertake these exercises.

Community Participation

The consultation and involvement of key interested and affected parties in a planning process is absolutely essential. At every scale in the planning process, physical planners must carefully define the institutional arrangements that will support the planning process. Planners will have to understand the roles and responsibilities of individuals, groups and community / traditional organisations, the contributions of, and relations between organisations as well as the mandates of various groups. With this knowledge planners will have to ensure representative participation in the planning process, the empowerment of role-players and effective communication between role-players. Hence, every substantive planning exercise (national, regional and local physical plans) will require a public participation strategy, an empowerment strategy and a communication plan.

The public participation strategy will require the development of a stakeholder profile, agreement on which stakeholders are to be involved and what mechanisms to use (e.g. workshops, public meetings), and the allocation of roles, responsibilities and resources to support the participation process.

The empowerment strategy is required to ensure meaningful participation in the planning process and to secure an appropriate skills base in support of the planning process. This will include addressing capacity differences between role-players, facilitating the transformation of local authority operations and allocating roles, responsibilities and resources in support of the empowerment process.

Finally, a communication plan is required to keep citizens informed of the planning process. This may include identifying the most suitable communication media (public notice, brochure, hearings etc.) and identifying the most effective way and frequency of distributing information (mail drops, municipal bills, small information meetings etc.).

Land Sub-Division, Planning Applications and Process

As previously proposed, the NPPA will take over the land sub-division and township establishment responsibilities of the HSA. Any legal person or organisation wishing to establish an urban township or human settlement (for the purposes of this policy, five or more plots) in Swaziland will be required to seek approval from the NPPA. As the bulk service cost implications of four or less sites are minimal it is suggested that this continues to be the cut-off number that City Councils or the Director of Housing and Human Settlements (depending on location) be empowered to make approvals on. The NPPA [8] must however approve developments of over and above this number of sites (in cases of both new and historical sub-divisions) as the bulk services contribution [9] or endowment that should be required from developers may be significant (see Annexure A) and will require larger interventions in areas such as sewerage, water, roads, drainage and electricity provision.

In the case of the City Council areas, those wishing to subdivide property up to four or fewer plots (or to develop a PUD with up to four dwelling units) can apply to the City Council for permission while those wishing to sub-divide property into five or more plots must apply directly to the NPPA. Outside of urban areas, it is proposed that the NPPA assumes this authority on TDL while the proposed Land Management Authority (LMA) would assume responsibility for subdividing and recording boundaries on SNL [10]. In the case of the NPPA, it is recommended delegated powers be given to the Director of Housing and Human Settlements to decide on Town Board or rural area applications for single dwellings, PUD’s of up to four dwelling units, the subdivision of property up to four plots, extensions and commercial or industrial development of less than 100m². In the case of substantial commercial developments (i.e. shopping centres and malls) concurrence with the NPPA will however be necessary. Densities and numbers of dwellings allowed on each plot will be controlled by the National Development Code or Town Planning Schemes depending on the location of the plots. Finally, all these approval procedures such occur within a reasonable time period of not more than two months from the submission of the application.

Criteria to determine approval should be defined by the current approval process but should also include various matters that should be considered, namely :

The proposed human settlement (five or more plots or dwelling units) should be within the boundaries of an existing urban area and the need or desirability of the private township should be established;

If the proposed human settlement is outside an urban area, the responsibility for the maintenance of infrastructure services must be clearly specified in the submission;

Suitability of the proposed site and building plans with regard to impact on surrounding area, position, possible location of mineral rights, flood plains, water supply, soil, aspect and slope of the land, grade of the services, possibility of extension, accessibility to through roads and public transport services and other relevant circumstances defined by the proposed National Physical and Development Control Act;

Suitability of the layout with regard to dimensions of plots, existence of servitudes or encumbrances, sewerage, drainage, probable traffic requirements both within the proposed human settlement and in relation to the surrounding district, aesthetic considerations and social amenities;

Sensitivity to environmental protection and conservation;

Financial ability of the applicant to pay an endowment, if any, and to initiate and diligently undertake construction of the infrastructure to completion within stipulated conditions of approval;

Provision or reservation of land for public benefit (e.g. parks, play fields etc.), roads, water, sewerage, solid waste removal, drainage and electricity;

The necessity for including in all transfers right-of-way (ROW) servitudes and a servitude for drainage, sewerage, solid waste removal and electricity; and

Application shall be submitted to the Swaziland Environmental Authority [11].

The general review and approval process should broadly encompass the following sequence [12]:

A completed application is submitted to the Secretary of the NPPA;

A general notice is published in the media informing the public of the developer’s intentions and calls for objections and comment – general notice is also posted prominently outside the property and hand delivered to contiguous property owners;

At the same time copies of the application are circulated to all members of the NPPA;

Comments must be returned during a reasonable time period (e.g. 21 days) and on the strength of the recommendation based on conformity with the National Development Code (and depending of the numbers of plots / units involved) the Director of Housing and Human Settlements or the NPPA will make a decision;

If the application is successful, the Director of Housing and Human Settlements or NPPA grants conditional approval and plans are submitted to the Surveyor General (SG) within a reasonable time period;

The local authority or township engineer inspects the site to ensure that all planning conditions have been adhered to and s/he informs the NPPA;

After SG approval, the township is then declared an approved human settlement in the Government Gazette;

The developer then submits the Deeds and Plans to the Registrar of Deeds – if the documentation is complete, the Registrar opens a Township Register.

The developer will then be given a reasonable period to complete construction of the proposed units;

Once construction is complete, the local authority engineer / building inspector, or a inspector of the National Building Inspectorate will be required to inspect the building(s) and provide an approval for occupation;

The developer may appeal to the Planning and Building Appeals Tribunal for recourse.

At all stages of the approval process careful consideration should be given to the planning merits of an application with regard to aesthetics, safety, health, environmental (as specified by the National Development Code) and economic implications i.e. job creation and / or rates revenue. The specific details of these factors and other relevant issues (penalties, application fees and detailed procedure) will be outlined both, in the National Physical Planning and Development Control Act and the National Development Code.

National Zoning Typology

A new planning typology for Swaziland must embody the strength of current zoning practices and develop the advantages of some of the other procedural and regulatory systems currently being used by the Ministry of HUD. The following key points should be used to structure a hybridised system of land use controls for Swaziland. The recommended system should endorse :

• the link between land use controls, detailed plans and strategic plans through a mechanism of a hierarchy of development plans;
• the protection of existing rights and the extension of new rights;
• incremental change and focus on making improvements to existing Town Planning Schemes;
• flexibility and choice in the construction of the physical planning control system; and
• simple elegant structuring to ensure ease of administration without limiting choices in terms of the alternative processes to acquire development rights.

In addition to the above points which relate to the functioning of the recommended system the following additional points should also be considered :

Continuum of Plans and Land Uses : That there is a hierarchy of prescriptive plans that have increasing levels of detail from the national to the local development plans.

Upgradeability of Plans : As areas develop, urbanise, acquire appropriate management capacity, and evolve a ‘richer’ mix and variety of land uses, it would become appropriate to translate part of or the whole of an area along the proposed zoning continuum.

Concept of Ancillary Uses : Regardless of which particular level of plan is being applied, there exists the concept that each level of land use definition that there are a number of appropriate related ancillary uses that are part of that land use.

Authority to Develop : Within the concept there is an implication that some form of permission to develop will always be required. The concept of ancillary use within the primary land use also implies that rather than being a ‘free entry use’ these uses will require some form of adjudication or planning assessment. It is envisaged that there should be some flexibility in obtaining planning permission. In a similar manner to which Swazi Environmental Regulations require differing procedures depending on the impact of a particular activity, so a relatively more sophisticated set of evaluation measures will have to occur on those ancillary uses that are likely to have a major impact.

Concept of ‘Special’ Planning Response Areas : Over and above the increasing types of land use zones there is a need to recognise the nature of some current delivery systems of development. For example, there is an increasing demand for large-scale developments that embody a mix of land uses that are also developed as a single unit. Similarly, the upgrading of informal settlements and the incorporation of peri-urban areas may require a special response in terms that will facilitate their development e.g. special or simplified development zoning controls according to the revised Grade II Building Regulations.

Integrated Continuum of Land Use Controls : The recommended system should establish an integrated continuum of land use controls that are horizontally linked across rural to urban areas and vertically linked between regional and local zoning plans. The reasons for adopting a two-level approach to land use are that in some areas the issues are relatively straight forward and do not necessitate a complicated system for approving changes of land use (e.g. regional agro-ecological zones), whereas in other areas more sophisticated levels of land use are required (e.g. peri-urban, town board and city council areas).

National Development Code

A National Development Code is a set of planning regulations devised to control land use activities and to provide for consistent development throughout planned areas of Swaziland. The new National Code should ensure a high quality physical environment through the imposition of compulsory minimum requirements designed to accommodate infrastructure, fire fighting and rescue equipment, parking and loading areas, storage and handling, including provision for the needs of the elderly, infirm or disabled. The Code should also specify situations where the relaxation of minimum standards may be considered and establish the conditions for relaxation. Finally, the Code should also specify detailed controls regarding requirements for open space (active and passive), mixed uses, the placement of advertising signs and location of petrol filling stations and places of worship. Much work has already been done in Southern Africa on developing appropriate Codes for local climatic and socio-economic conditions and the Swaziland Code will benefit from the selective use of these codes.

Key Issues and Specific Policy Statements

A number of key issues were raised in the broad consultation process carried out as part of the policy formulation phase. These are highlighted below and specific policy statements have been formulated in response to these issues.

Issue:

Swaziland’s historical divide between ‘traditional’ and ‘modern’ land management systems has led to similar divisions in the management of physical and land use planning. Hence, while the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD) and Local Authorities carry out physical planning control in urban areas, the rural chiefs are the de facto planners of land which is held by the King in trust for the Swazi Nation. It has been argued by officials and planning specialists that this division has encouraged peri-urban sprawl and the environmental degradation of land and water resources.

Policy:

Intergovernmental co-ordination (between ‘modern’ and ‘traditional’) and intra-governmental co-operation (between Ministries) are essential to the future success and well being of the Swazi Nation. Physical Planners are in a unique position to bridge this gap in Swazi Civil Society by co-operating with the Ministry of Agriculture, and Regional Administrators to carry out broad brush planning at a regional scale. There is a large ‘gap’ in the planning hierarchy between the National Physical Development Plan and local Town Planning Schemes and it is proposed that this can be filled by the formulation of Regional Plans that combine planning for urban centres and rural districts.

However this would require both, liaison with Regional Administrators and Community Structures, and close working co-operation with land use planners in the Ministry of Agriculture (MOAC) and the Ministry for Natural Resources and Energy (MNRE). In the medium- to long-term some of these agencies may be combined into the Land Management Authority (LMA) which would play the leadership role in the land management process through the establishment of local Community Structures or Development Committees (DC’s) and thus make the process far more transparent [13]. However, if this policy approach is not followed through, it is proposed that physical planners must nonetheless still engage in liaison with Regional Administrators and legitimate Community Structures, and work closely with other land use and economic planners.

Issue:

The Swaziland National Physical Development Plan (1994) and the National Development Strategy (1997) provide broad spatial and sectoral strategies to guide the operations of the Government of Swaziland (GOS) in the medium to long term. The national spatial strategy – North-South Corridor and Secondary Centres Development – is extremely broad and does not provide a sufficiently detailed framework to guide regional spatial development, to specify changes in human settlement status, and to integrate the comparative advantages of urban and rural areas in Swaziland.

Policy:

It is proposed that appropriate regional planning will address the need for a development framework for secondary, private company and border towns as well as surrounding rural areas. The reactive declaration of rural growth centres as urban areas is rejected by this policy document and it is argued instead that while the last NPDP’s Indicative Criteria is a useful short-term tool, regional plans will be the best medium- to long-term mechanism to address changing spatial trends in Swaziland [14].

Regional Plans will fill in the gaps left by the NPDP by addressing the need to :

• Consult and involve Regional Administrators, Chiefs and Communities in broad-brush planning as well as detailed project processes;
• Carry out Agro-Ecological Planning in conjunction with Small Town planning;
• More clearly outline commercial, industrial and agricultural strategies for rural districts;
• More clearly outline urban hierarchies and bulk infrastructure requirements, and match these to assessments of local economic potential;
• Address urban expansion needs in light of adjacent rural regional zonings [15] and environmentally sensitive areas;
• Address peri-urban trends and test the applicability of the NPDP’s indicative criteria for nodal hierarchies;
• Highlight and market regional comparative advantages in the areas of tourism;
• Identify local infrastructure and beneficiation projects for approval through the Swaziland Environmental Authority’s assessment procedures (IEE, SEA and CMP).

By carrying out these processes Swaziland’s planning authorities will reinforce the principle of subsidiarity and be better equipped to take advantage of the regional planning exercises taking place on its borders, namely the Maputo and Lubombo Spatial Development Initiatives (SDI).

Issue:

There is a current absence of active co-operation between key physical planning bodies such as the Human Settlements Authority (HSA) and Town Planning Board (TPB) which operate under the same umbrella of the MHUD, and land use management agencies such as the Natural Resources Board (NRB), the Land Use Section of the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives (MOAC) and the Industrial Estates Department of the Ministry of Enterprise and Employment (MEE). This has led to public confusion around roles and responsibilities and an overly complex system of land management.

Policy:

The functions of the HSA and TPA will be consolidated with the creation of a National Physical Planning Authority (NPPA) responsible for all planning, building regulations and land subdivision responsibilities of the Ministry of HUD. The NPPA will be responsible for simplifying planning and permit procedures, for carrying out national and regional development plans, approving town planning schemes and carrying out physical planning activities for local authorities without planning departments. As such, the Ministry of HUD should adopt the Indicative Criteria proposed by the NPDP until these have been reassessed by the regional planning process.

It can be argued that while many dense rural settlements resemble small towns, they are nevertheless highly dependant on agricultural production and hence it is proposed by this policy that they should be developed and serviced by relevant agencies [16]. Many of the services these centres require include rural water supplies (boreholes, pumps and standpipes), VIP latrines, agricultural markets, some street lighting, clinics and schools and a taxi rank or shelter. These services currently fall out of the ambit of the Ministry of HUD’s responsibilities. The growth of these centres must however be reassessed by a revised NPDP or relevant regional physical development plan and a change of status may become necessary upon a rational evaluation of the settlement’s inherent potential to create formal employment opportunities – as opposed to remaining a residential / rural dormitory settlement.

Issue:

Neither the HSA or TPB offer an effective independently structured national planning appeals mechanism that is common to most western planning systems. The current planning appeals system places undue pressure on the Minister’s portfolio and as such, an independent institutional mechanism is essential for the planning system to be seen as fair and transparent in dealing with land use management in the public interest.

Policy:

It is proposed that the Building Appeals Board should be reconstituted or enlarged to handle planning appeals in addition to appeals relating to building regulations. While DEVCO II proposed the establishment of a separate body, the need to conserve national expenditure should dictate that a reconstituted body would be a far more efficient solution to the need for a planning appeals body. It is also relevant to note that the existing Building Appeals Board already represents key building actors and the existing highly skilled members should simply be supplemented with required planning and land-legal expertise. The Board should be renamed as the Planning and Building Appeals Board and should retain an independent status in much the same fashion as a national judicial body empowered to settle or mediate conflicts over land use. It is also proposed however, that final appeal powers remain with the Minister as the national authority responsible for physical planning matters. In this manner, the responsibility for handling appeals is shared rather than simply placed on the already overburdened shoulders of the Minister.

Issue:

It has become evident that the Town Planning Act of 1961 and the Human Settlements Authority Act of 1988 are not linked and not fully implemented. The HSA in particular has lacked sufficient capacity to fully implement the Act in the following critical areas :

• Assisting government in the formulation of planning policies;
• Establishing financing and revenue collection mechanisms to support shelter provision;
• Regulating rent control and the sale of land and buildings;
• Encouraging and supporting research into infrastructure and shelter provision;
• Establishing appropriate planning and shelter standards and regulations.

With hindsight it has been argued that the legislative basis of the HSA was poorly founded as it misunderstood the nature of land markets, and its administrative arrangements are inadequate for tackling financing and research demands [17]. Furthermore, while the Town Planning Act provides a comprehensive framework for physical planning it can be argued that the legislation is outdated and should be thoroughly revised to incorporate more integrated development planning methodologies whose inherent approach is to proactively integrate environmental, economic and land use management ‘best practices’ in all planning exercises.

Policy:

The NPPA should be sufficiently empowered to carry out the following functions :

• The preparation and monitoring of the NPDP (Policy) and Regional Plans (Statutory);
• The approval of Town Planning Schemes (Statutory) and the carrying out of local statutory development planning for Town Councils and Boards;
• Assist the MOAC and MNRE to plan for Rural Settlements;
• The preparation and approval of National Planning Standards;
• The approval of Subdivisional Applications in Town Board and Controlled Areas (except local authorities which would carry out their own delegated planning responsibilities);
• Co-ordination of urban demarcation and land matters with the MOAC or LMA (as proposed by the draft National Land Policy).

Issue:

The historical divide between TDL and SNL and the lack of active co-operation between various land management and planning agencies has led to a failure to adopt ‘integrated development planning’ methodologies which are common internationally. The result has been separate planning for urban and rural land and the resultant difficulty in tackling critical issues such as peri-urban land management, municipal boundary demarcations and the management of town boards and small urban nodes.

Policy:

The adoption of integrated development planning will ensure improved inter- and intra-governmental co-ordination and regulation / enforcement around issues of infrastructure delivery, public facility management, environmental protection, economic development and social services delivery. This integration can only occur through the adoption of the principle of subsidiarity and the cascading of authority through a clear hierarchy of policy and statutory plans. There should be a hierarchy of development and zoning plans as follows :

• The National Physical Development Plan (NPDP), which together with the National Development Strategy (NDS) and National Environmental Action Plan forms part of an overarching policy statement for the Government of Swaziland;
• Regional Development Plans for Swaziland’s four regions (Hhohho, Manzini, Lubombo and Shiselweni);
• Urban Town Planning Schemes including a Structure Plan, Development Plan and Development Code) for all major urban centres including NPDP Hierarchy Groups 1-3 and Rural Local Development Plans that include agricultural assessments, and infrastructure and investment plans that are approved by the Ngwenyama.

Issue:

About 10% of the Swazi population lives in the two largest cities of Mbabane and Manzini, and with rapid growth in these cities some 60% of their residents are found in informal and unplanned settlements. These settlements have particularly mushroomed on SNL bordering urban centres and along major highways (Mbabane-Matsapha-Manzini) and Main Roads. While the recent Urban Development Project has begun to tackle the shelter and infrastructural needs of these communities, planning responsibility for settlements outside local authority boundaries remains unclear. The lack of integrated planning in these areas prevents the initiation of in situ upgrading and the delivery of basic services particularly sanitation and water reticulation. Furthermore, the responsibility for the redefinition of urban boundaries to include adjacent informal settlements currently rests with the Minister of Housing and Urban Development. In recent years this responsibility has come under tremendous political pressure and there is a need to establish urban boundaries along clear technical lines in consultation with city planners and local communities.

Policy:

The NPPA together with local authorities should work closely with the MOAC, Tinkundla and the proposed LMA to establish Community Development Structures or Committees in peri-urban areas (current Land Policy proposes the creation of CDC’s). These community structures will bring together councillors and regional administrators in urban areas, farm owners and chiefs in libandla to ensure community participation, accountability and transparency in land administration. Community Structures or the proposed CDC’s would be formed on a voluntary basis and be delegated such authority as permitted by the NPPA or LMA. With the assistance of the relevant technical authorities [18], the Community Structure or CDC would :

• Develop appropriate rules for land use;
• Prepare a physical development plan in consultation with a local authority or the NPPA [19];
• Determine acceptable minimum servicing standards with close regard to cost recovery;
• Develop appropriate and transparent bye-laws;
• Settle boundary disputes and mediate changes in municipal boundary demarcation;
• Decide the nature, conditions and scope of land user rights such as leaseholds;
• Develop rules for the use of common property resources;
• Impose fines and lobby for finance for infrastructural and social development;
• Design a constitution embodying these rules.

The Community Structure’s management committee could be chaired by the local chief and would work closely with land management authorities to improve the current land management information system to assist the MHUD to support improved local tax or service fee collection, the Surveyor General’s Department (MNRE)and the Registry of Deeds (MOJ). Finally, the Community Structure or CDC could also lobby relevant agencies such as the Swaziland National Housing Board to make appropriate housing investments in their respective areas.

Issue:

It has been argued that in light of current urbanisation trends in Swaziland the Building and Housing (Building Regulations) Act 1968 is outdated and needs to be revised as platform legislation on which regulations can be constantly revised according to need. Similarly, the HSA Act and the TPA did not contain a development code or a set of appropriate land use regulations.

Policy:

The Building and Housing Act of 1968 should be updated and simplified procedurally to take into account the current realities and constraints facing low income households and informal settlements generally. Regulations to be reviewed include those affecting building sites and layouts, the design and planning of buildings and specifications for materials as outlined in the revised Swaziland Building (Grade II) Regulations 1994. Attention should also be given to improving current in situ settlement upgrade approaches by adopting both, an incremental approach to housing and the use of de facto land use analysis to formalise plot boundaries. These tools can be most effectively used if local authorities adopt transitional zoning mechanisms in their town planning schemes that allow for the incremental formalisation of peri-urban settlements [20]. Neighbouring countries such as South Africa have also recently revised their guidelines for engineering services and township development (the 1994 Provision for Engineering Services ‘Red Book’ [21]) and these guidelines should be selectively adopted where they are appropriate.

It is also essential that the MHUD and empowered local authorities consolidate and expand building inspection services in order to address areas that are poorly addressed for i.e. changes of land use subsequent to approval.

Issue:

Whilst the HSA Act 2/1988 and TPA 45/1961 contain measures for the enforcement of development control measures (as well as provisions for recompense) in reality compliance is difficult to achieve because of a lack of co-operation from other agencies (Water Services Corporation, Electricity Board) whose governing legislation guarantees citizens access to these services. To make matters worse current legislation such as the Town Planning Act of 1961 offers authorities little remedial powers and lack of compliance fines are extremely low i.e. they have not been increased to take account of the effects of inflation.

Policy:

The Ministry of HUD and the NPPA, aside from including all relevant agencies in it’s decision making process, should also lobby relevant Ministries to make amendments to their governing legislation in order to enable compliance enforcement. The example of measures taken in South Africa are instructive in that, while the new Constitution guarantees the supply of basic services to all its citizens, services such as electricity are seen as non essential and can be cut off or restricted where essential (e.g. water) to punish those who refuse to pay reasonable charges for services.

Issue:

The City Councils have argued that they are sufficiently empowered to be able to deal with planning matters effecting their cities without immediate recourse to the MHUD. In particular, it has been argued that matters such as the formulation of Urban Development Plans and the management of sub-divisions should fall within the ambit of municipal community and planning departments.

Policy:

The principle by which services should be provided at the lowest level of government capable of providing the service effectively and economically should apply in the case of the planning powers of City Councils. However an assessment should be carried out in consultation with the Council concerned regarding existing or required capacity to carry out such powers [22]. Manzini, for example, only has one senior planner and currently does not have sufficient capacity to fulfil all the responsibilities inherent in the granting of full devolved planning powers. At the end of the day however, the Minister of the MHUD and the NPPA should be satisfied through a process of clear and transparent guidelines and monitoring mechanisms that City Councils have sufficient technical capacity to make appropriate planning decisions. These guidelines should include inter-agency concurrence, financial responsibility, clear and transparent planning assessments and co-operative governance between the relevant Council and the NPPA. In this manner urban management decisions would become not simply the sole responsibility of the Minister but also the responsibility of key officials in the NPPA and the local authorities [23].

Issue:

There is an urgent need for the MHUD to play a leading role in improving and developing both, a record of land subdivisions and related data, as well as the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS).

Policy:

The NPPA must develop a close working relationship with existing information service providers, namely the Surveyor General’s department, the Registrar of Deeds and related Ministries (e.g. MEPD). Local authorities who have the capacity should also use GIS technology to improve the level of their land use management functions. However, the growth in use of these technologies is heavily dependent on the financial resources of the MHUD, sufficient commitment to capacity building and a willingness to adopt compatible systems and share data. In this manner, the MHUD will be able to record and locate the number of building application processes, rate of processing, actual construction versus approved application and then status / spread of informal settlements.

Diagram 1 : Basic Functions, Relationships and Responsibilities of Relevant Ministries

National Planning

* e.g. MEPD, MOAC, MEE, MPWC, MNRE.

Regional Planning

Local Planning

Diagram 2 : Three Tier Hierarchy of Plans

5. Physical Planning 'Best Practices'

In addition to the policy statements and institutional framework outlined, the following planning 'best practices' should be adopted by all physical planners in the MHUD.

All laws, policies and administrative practices affecting land development should :

• Make provision for urban and rural land development; 
• Facilitate the development of both formal, peri-urban, informal and traditional settlements; 
• Discourage informal sprawl and illegal settlement; 
• Promote efficient and integrated land development between urban and rural areas; 
• Integrate social, economic, physical and institutional aspects of land development; 
• Establish viable urban settlements that meet the needs of all citizens in an affordable way; 
• Clearly apportion responsibility for land management in a manner that encourages inter-agency co-operation and avoids duplication.

Authorities in each Ministry, Department or Council should :

• Co-ordinate their efforts to develop or protect land resources in order to minimise conflict over scarce resources; 
• Develop the community's skills and capacity to actively participate in land development; 
• Define and publicise the functions and responsibilities of all sectors of the economy in relation to land development; 
• Provide equitable and fair access to land and related services in an efficient and economically effective manner; 
• Provide a range of tenure security options (e.g. Freehold or Lease); 
• Promote the orderly planning of established urban centres; 
• Encourage local economic development (LED) in urban areas and investment in rural settlements, particularly in social and economic infrastructure;
• Protect land from unsuitable or environmentally unsustainable development; 
• Provide for a wide range of land uses at all levels.

Physical Planners should adopt the following practices for urban areas :

• Promote the integration of all land uses; 
• Encourage the housing delivery process and promote densification within urban boundaries;
• Direct new urban development to un-used or under-used land (i.e. densify) within current boundaries;
• Plan for improvements to the public transport system;
• Engage in best urban management practices that will transform the environment and economies of cities, towns and townships;
• Compliment urban management practices with land development objectives and a thorough system of key performance indicators to establish the efficacy of development programmes and service delivery;
• Engage in management practices that encourage co-operation between cities and towns;
• Design defensible and safe open spaces that will promote environmental and psychological health, and enable crime prevention;
• Encourage the formalisation of informal trade and plan for expansion of the sector by targeting areas for the upgrade of markets, shelters and improved access;
• Develop environmentally sustainable cities and towns by an agreed year;
• Promote the provision of open and public space according to accepted standards;
• Control pollution and encourage proper water and waste management;
• Provide for the location of appropriately situated low income housing;
• Promote the diversification of economic sectors;
• Integrate Environmental Assessment (EA) proposals into major development proposals and co-operate will the Swaziland Environmental Authority in the completion of Mitigation Plans.

Physical Planners should adopt the following practices for rural areas :

• Assist the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives to plan rural areas;
• Promote secure and gender-sensitive forms of tenure, local economic development (LED) and investment in support of small businesses;
• Provide access to opportunities for small farmers and entrepreneurs;
• Encourage management that promotes small and medium-scale enterprises, small agriculture and tourism-, cultural- and labour-based infrastructure development;
• Co-operate with the land-management Authorities (e.g. MOAC, MNRE) and acknowledge Agro-Ecological Zoning and the locations of Mineral Deposits at a regional scale and encourage the development of Land Use Plans at the local scale;
• Provide planning guidelines for areas where there is competition between urban, agricultural and conservation uses;
• Adopt a balanced approach to competing land uses;
• Encourage agricultural systems that retain and enhance valuable productive agricultural land;
• Promote administrative practises which enhance integrated development, and are environmentally sustainable;
• Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded land where the polluter pays and prevention is emphasised;
• Encourage the regulation of river catchments;
• Protect forest and indigenous woodland areas;
• Promote transport infrastructure that is environmentally sustainable;
• Promote sanitation and waste systems that are environmentally sustainable;
• Integrate Environmental Assessment (EA) proposals into major development proposals and co-operate with the Swaziland Environmental Authority in the completion of Mitigation Plans.

6. Conclusion

This policy document represents a sincere attempt to update existing planning policy in Swaziland and to provide a basis for the consolidation and revision of existing planning and land use management law. It recognises the complexity of current land use management mechanisms in Swaziland and offers a number of policy proposals to address various physical planning issues and land use management challenges. The policy document suggests ways in which planning legislation and institutions should be consolidated, and offers various processes and methodologies to address the current dichotomy between rural and urban, and between national and local planning processes. Finally, it provides some suggestions regarding the need for appropriate planning practice and makes proposals for a national zoning typology and development code for Swaziland.

It is suggested that this document will also compliment other GOS initiatives (e.g. housing policy, resettlement guidelines and urban governance policy) and should therefore be approved by the MHUD and be translated into a Physical Planning and Development Control Act. This Act would be further strengthened by the formulation of a National Development Code.

Footnotes

[1] This would imply (1) a revision of the Subdivision of Land Act 7/1957 and (2) negotiating suitable arrangements for co-operation with the Land Management Authority proposed by the draft NLP 

[2] It is essential that the Department maintains or expands its current number of highly qualified and experienced personnel so that it can provide the necessary and appropriate technical advise / direction to the NPPA and local authorities.

[3] Including buildings constructed by the Ministry of Public Works and Construction.

[4] The Ministry for Economic Planning and Development (MEPD) plays a proactive role in project preparation and in many instances, the MHUD should ensure that it’s plans respond appropriately to current economic development projects and policy frameworks.

[5] Unless these are company towns that are accompanied with substantial private sector investment and the beneficiation of local resources (human and natural).

[6] Currently the Ministry for Enterprise and Employment (MEE) facilitates the creation of industrial estates and it can be argued that role requires the close co-operation of the MHUD which is responsible for the orderly development of urban land.

[7] This structure does not prevent local authorities from carrying out smaller and more detailed planning exercises within the framework of an approved Town Planning Scheme e.g. urban design projects and neighbourhood plans.

[8] For the purposes of this policy, the term 'human settlements' excludes specialised non-permanent residential developments such as hospitals, hotels and dormitories but includes residential schemes, sectional title schemes or planned unit developments (PUD) where 5 or more residential dwelling units are constructed on a single plot. 

[9] The standardised service contribution or endowment required from developers is based on the intensity of the new / proposed land uses and is a common practice with all municipalities who wish to manage infrastructure delivery in a sustainable manner.

[10] While the MNRE is currently responsible for such functions, the draft NLP proposes that the functions of Natural Resources Board be absorbed into the LMA. If the NLP is not approved in its current form, the MHUD will have to negotiate reasonable measures to streamline subdivision processes nationally.

[11] Consideration should be given to delegating approvals on Category 1 Projects (up to three single dwellings, renovations, small scale commercial structures etc.) to City Councils in order to speed up approval processes. 

[12] As defined in this section, procedures required by local authorities (e.g. City Councils) and the MNRE may differ substantially in terms of their sanctioned / delegated powers and their technical capacity to handle large development applications.

[13] As proposed by the draft NLP.

[14] Rural growth centres are, and should continue to be the responsibility of the land use planning sections of the MNRE and MOAC. 

[15] As specified in the National Development Code.

[16] MOAC, NRB, Rural Water of MNRE, MPWC and the Central Rural Development Board. 

[17] DEVCO (1993) Physical Planning Study : Final Report for the MHUD and the Industrial Infrastructure Project.

[18] NPPA or City Council Engineer and Treasurer.

[19] Approval procedures for such plans would closely depend on the location of such an initiative i.e. adjacent to a local authority with capacity or outside such areas (where the NPPA would facilitate such a process). 

[20] The National Development Code, and the Mbabane and Manzini Town Planning Schemes have adopted this transitional approach to the formalisation of dense informal settlement on their boundaries.

[21 ]These guidelines are currently being revised. 

[22] For example, while the SEA Act (1992) and its Environmental Regulations provide authorising agencies with the powers to ensure the implementation of Comprehensive Mitigation Plans, this is an unfunded mandate and it is therefore necessary that Councils be given resources to carry out such responsibilities.

[23] The spirit of these proposals, namely the promotion of subsidiarity, closely compliments the recommendations of the Urban Government Policy (1996) which has substantially reviewed Urban Government Act of 1969.

ANNEXURE A

Examples of Bulk Service Contributions in Johannesburg, South Africa

In terms of town planning ordinance guidelines for the contribution to local authorities for the installation of external services, the following examples of calculated once off engineering service contributions should be used as a conservative guideline for local authorities :

Residential Developments

E600 for sites not larger than 100m²

E743 for sites not larger than 101m² up to 125m²

E892 for sites not larger than 126m² up to 150m²

E1040 for sites not larger than 151m² up to 175m²

E1200 for sites not larger than 176m² up to 200m²

E1560 for sites not larger than 201m² up to 350m²

Thereafter an extra R4.46 per m² with a maximum of R5000.00

Trading / Commercial Developments

E5.35 per m² for the entire site where the authorised coverage is less than 100%

E8.92 per m² for the entire site where the authorised coverage is 100% or no maximum is specified

Industrial Developments

E2.68 per m² for the entire site where the authorised coverage is less than 100%

E4.46 per m² for the entire site where the authorised coverage is 100% or no maximum is specified

Suggestions or comments

Home | National Projects | Environmental Legislation | Policies and Action Plans | Documents

This page was last updated on 01 May 2004