lable at ScienceDirect

Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195

Contents lists avai

Habitat International

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/habitat int

Contested discourses of a mixed-use megaproject: Cornubia, Durban

Catherine Sutherland*, Vicky Sim, Dianne ScottSchool of Built Environment and Development Studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4041, South Africa

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 21 July 2014

Keywords:MegaprojectsLarge scale housing projectsHuman settlement discoursesHousing policyPro-growth agendaPro-poor agenda

* Corresponding author.E-mail address: sutherlandc@ukzn.ac.za (C. Suther

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.06.0090197-3975/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

Housing for the urban poor remains a significant challenge in South African cities. Post 1994 the SouthAfrican state engaged in a large-scale housing programme delivering over 3 million state subsidisedhomes. However, housing policy since 2004 has shifted away from the delivery of housing units to thedevelopment of integrated human settlements. The national state has identified large scale mixed useprojects, such as Cornubia in Durban, as the new approach. This paper explores the discourses con-structed by multiple actors, including the national and local state, the private sector, technical experts(consultants) and civil society as they have shaped the development of this mixed use ‘housing’ projectover time. The paper reveals the multiple ways in which space is constructed in a megaproject that isintended to address both pro-growth and pro-poor goals.

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Megaprojects, or very large development projects, haveemerged in cities across the globe as a reflection of state supportedneo-liberalism. Defining characteristics of megaprojects are theircomplexity; the scale of new construction or rehabilitation; thestate-led public-private partnerships and multiple developerswhich are usually required to produce them; their exceptionalismin relation to policy and planning; the transformation of land use inone contiguous area; the long period of time required forcompletion and the high cost of the development (Fainstein, 2009;Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius, & Rothengatter, 2003; van Marrewijk, Clegg,Pitsis, & Veenswijk, 2008). Two main types of large scale projectshave been identified, namely economic projects, such as industrialestates or shopping malls; and infrastructure projects, includingairports, roads and other transport infrastructure such as bridgesand tunnels (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003; Kennedy, 2013). Fainstein(2009: 768) argues that the original large scale projects that weredeveloped in American cities in the late 1990s as a response topressures of the global economy were “very big, mixed use de-velopments” that provided sites for housing and were attractive tomultinational businesses. Housing continues to form part ofmegaprojects, such as accommodation included in mega-eventdevelopments, waterfronts, or mixed use projects, particularly asa result of the equity measures it addresses (Fainstein, 2009).However, housing is usually not the main focus of megaproject

land).

development. Nonetheless, in South Africa the political, economicand social pressure associated with the post-democracy housingquestion has resulted in the development of human settlementsbeing elevated to the level of large scale project developmentinvolving all three tiers of government (national, provincial andlocal).

Large scale human settlement projects, which reflect a ‘mega-project’ approach to addressing sub-standard housing in SouthAfrican cities, emerged from the ‘Breaking New Ground’ Policy(BNG) which was launched in 2004 to address housing backlogsand persistent urban segregation in South Africa cities. Ten years ofpost-democracy housing delivery under the 1994 Housing Policyand Strategy had resulted in the large scale provision of statesubsidised formal housing units to the poor. However, this nationalhousing programme did not adequately achieve its goals ofaddressing housing backlogs or of developing integrated sustain-able human settlements; fundamentally, it did not reconstruct thegeography of apartheid (Charlton, 2009; Department of Housing,2004; Sutherland, Robbins, Scott, & Sim, 2013). The BNG wastherefore introduced to address a number of shortcomings in thenational housing programme. Two large scale human settlementprojects, N2 Gateway in Cape Town (City of Cape Town) and Cor-nubia in Durban (eThekwini Municipality) were identified aspresidential lead projects, which are now known as national pri-ority projects (2011) to exemplify this new approach to housing thepoor.

In the early 2000s, the eThekwini Municipality, under theleadership of the then city manager Mike Sutcliffe, began to shifttowards entrepreneurial urbanism, with a focus on the

Fig. 1. Locality Plan (Iyer, 2011: 9).

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195186

development of large scale projects or ‘mega-projects’. The PointDevelopment, a large scale urban renewal project on prime coastalland within the inner city (see Hannan & Sutherland, 2014), wasproposed in 2003 by the Municipality in partnership with privatedevelopers. At this time Moreland Properties, now known as Ton-gaat Hulett Developments (THD),1 in partnership with the Munic-ipality identified mixed-use projects with a large scale housingcomponent, as a specific approach to enhance economic growth,create employment, address housing backlogs and produce inte-grated human settlements. The ANC government had been suc-cessful in delivering housing units to the urban poor but thesesettlements created ‘islands’ of poverty as they lacked the facilities,employment opportunities, social integration and urban connec-tions that transform housing projects in to integrated human set-tlements. This approach was aligned with the national housingdepartment's BNG policy. Large scale developments were thereforebeing promoted at both a national and local government level toaddress the multiple challenges facing South African cities.

According to Kennedy (2013) ‘megaprojects’ are a usefulanalytical tool for exploring urban governance and urban trans-formation. This paper focuses on the Cornubia megaprojectdevelopment, a public-private partnership between the eThek-wini Municipality and THD2 to produce a new ‘integrated humansettlement’ consisting of a large housing component, commercialand light industrial development, and social facilities. Thedevelopment was touted by the Municipal Housing DepartmentHead and THD as being strategically positioned to contribute tothe consolidation and integration of the area. It therefore rep-resents an ‘economic’ mixed-use megaproject (Fainstein, 2009;Kennedy, 2013). The paper explores the strategies deployed bydifferent sets of actors, namely the state, private sector, consul-tants and civil society, to wield control over space by reflectingon the dominant discourses that have emerged in this large scaleproject over the period 2005e2011. The paper reveals the ten-sions and entanglements between the different actors and theirinterests, as they have attempted to dominate the production ofthis large scale development, thereby shaping the future of thecity.

Fig. 2. Cornubia Land Ownership (SSI, 2011: 23).

Megaprojects for economic growth and socialtransformation?

In large cities, megaprojects are used as a “strategy of interna-tional competition to attract capital” and they “leverage the po-tential of cities as growth engines” (Kennedy, 2013: 5). Theytherefore form a core component of the pro-growth agenda ofcities. However, in the case of South Africa, as a result of thecountry's post-apartheid commitment to economic growth andsocial redistribution, large scale projects are required to addressboth pro-growth and pro-poor imperatives. The tension betweenthe pro-growth and pro-poor agenda is strongly evident in thecountry given its neo-liberal development approach and itscontinuing high levels of social inequality and poverty. Megaproj-ects in South Africa, particularly large scale infrastructure projects,are packaged and promoted as having the potential to drive eco-nomic growth, create employment opportunities, restructure thespace economy of apartheid and ensure that benefits trickle down

1 Tongaat Hulett is a listed agri-processing business which engages in agriculture,land management and property development.

2 Initially a joint venture between the eThekwini Municipality and TongaatHulett, the Cornubia development has since been adopted by the South AfricanCabinet (2011) as a national priority project or Lekgotla Project, bringing all spheresof government in as official partners in the development.

to the poor and disadvantaged. Public-private partnerships areused as a mechanism through which to negotiate and implementboth global economic and local redistributive imperatives(Houghton, 2013).

However, using megaprojects as a driver of economic growthand as a means of social redistribution is challenging, as literaturereveals the failure of megaprojects to address social concerns3 andto reduce poverty and inequality (Dupont, 2013; Fainstein, 2009;Follmann, 2015; Robbins, 2015). The pro-growth approach isevident within the eThekwini Municipality, with national, provin-cial and local government developing mega-projects and largescale investments to drive economic growth in strategic zoneswithin the city (Hannan & Sutherland, 2014; Houghton, 2013;Robbins, 2015). Within this approach there is a clear focus onneo-liberal discourses of market driven growth, flexibility andlocational competitiveness, with each city-region or city zonehaving a unique and competitive place-specific economic profile(Brenner, 2004). Megaprojects support the approach of

3 Bornstein (2010) argues however, that in megaprojects in Los Angeles, Montrealand Vancouver community concerns were taken in to account and social issueswere embedded in to the design of the projects.

Fig. 3. Spatial Concept for NUDC (eThekwini Municipality, 2011a: 8).4

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195 187

entrepreneurial urbanism as they “channel investments into spe-cific locations in the city” (Bornstein, 2010).

Conversely, in most megaproject developments there is only aminimal commitment to socially just policies as their primaryorientation is towards profitability and competitiveness (Fainstein,2009). For example, in India the severe lack of space for new urbandevelopment and the state's response to urban informality has ledto megaprojects being superimposed over informal spaces as a wayof ‘formalising the city’ and creating ‘world class’ infrastructureand projects, resulting in large scale displacement, homelessnessand social injustice (Dupont, 2013; Follmann, 2015; Roy, 2009). InDurban, megaprojects have been proposed and developed on bothbrownfield (the Point Development, the Moses Mabhida Stadiumand the Back of Port project) and greenfield sites (Dube TradePortand Cornubia) which has altered the politics associated with thesedevelopments (Hannan & Sutherland, 2014; Scott et al., 2006). Inthe case of greenfield sites, the state has been able to avoid socialissues associated with displacement and injustice. In the case ofCornubia, the informal settlers who live in Blackburn informalsettlement, which is located on the site, have been promised formalhousing in the Cornubia development. The state has ‘technically’managed social impacts to Dube TradePort, through the relocationof informal settlers from Ocean Drive-In informal settlement to theformal housing project of Hammonds Farm (see Sutherland et al.,2013), and through the Environmental Impact Assessment for thenew airport, with its associated social impact assessment.

State/private megaproject development is favoured in many fastgrowing cities as it provides a mechanism through which ‘largescale planned development’ can be achieved, thereby meeting thegoals and objectives of the national and local state in a technicaland controlledmanner. Most megaprojects reflect ‘exceptionalism’,as they are able to bypass mandated planning, funding and devel-opment procedures even though they are integrated into existingformal planning frameworks (Swyngedouw, Moulaert, &Rodriguez, 2002). As this paper reveals, the state and private

4 An urban development line (UDL) has been delineated between the NUDC andthe Rural Corridor to ensure that the agricultural integrity of the Rural Corridor ismaintained, both to maximise agricultural export opportunities linked to DubeTradePort but also to ensure food security for the city (Fig. 4). HPPTN is the HighPriority Public Transport Network. KwaMashu and Phoenix are large townshipsestablished during the apartheid era.

developers have used the frame of a ‘planned large scale develop-ment’ to negotiate their way around the multiple objectives andcompeting rationales of urban development in Durban. A similarapproach has been adopted by governments and elites in urbanAsia, as they attempt to regain control of their cities (Follmann,2015; Shatkin, 2011). New paradigms of megaproject develop-ment within the framework of competitive cities have enabled cityactors more space to manoeuvre. Megaprojects are now more“flexible and diverse, rather than singular and monolithic” (Lehrer& Laidley, 2008: 786). The diversity and complexity of these mixed-use spaces simultaneously address and re-produce socio-economicsegregation (ibid.), enabling the state and the private sector topromote social justice, while at the same time protecting the in-terests of capital and the elite.

The large scale housing projects identified as lead projects forthe progressive BNG Policy in South Africa, namely N2 Gateway andCornubia, initially aimed at meeting the specific goals of the newhousing policy. The BNG policy had argued for the development ofintegrated human settlements rather than the delivery of housingunits; the inclusion of informal settlements and in-situ upgrades aspart of the housing solution; the densification of housing; the in-clusion of a social housing component (20% of housing units) in anynew large scale middle to upper income housing development;enhancing the role of the private sector, and greater participationby communities in the housing process (BNG, 2004). However,urban politics in both Cape Town and Durban began to reshape thegoals of these projects, as multiple actors engaged in and competedover their production.

This paper identifies and explores the contextually specificdiscourses through which the state and other actors have attemp-ted to facilitate or resist capital accumulation and enhance politicaldomination through the development of a housing mega-project ineThekwini Municipality. The following section presents the historyof the planning process for the Cornubia development so as tocontextualize the power and socio-spatial relations that haveemerged in the planning of this mega-project and social redistri-bution programme.

The Development Planning of Cornubia: 2005e2011

Cornubia is located in the northern development corridor ofeThekwini Municipality, 15 km south of the new King Shaka

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195188

International Airport and Dube TradePort megaproject. Thedevelopment is strategically located within eThekwini Municipal-ity's northern development corridor, situated between historicallydisadvantaged townships, new post-modern high-income housingestates, regional shopping centres and the decentralised officeparks of the Umhlanga Ridge. The total area of 1200 ha, 750 ha ofwhich is developable, was originally owned by the private com-pany, the Tongaat Hulett Group, as part of its extensive sugar canelands (see Fig. 1). Negotiations between Tongaat Hulett De-velopments (THD) (the developmental arm of the sugar giant) andthe Municipality in 2005 resulted in a publiceprivate partnershipfor a mixed-use development on the site, with the Municipalitypurchasing 580 ha from THD, the remaining 620 ha being retainedby the owner (see Fig. 2).

Cornubia has been strategically situated at different scaleswithin a number of development corridors or growth areas iden-tified since 2006 in provincial and local government plans andstrategies for the north of the Municipality.

1. Cornubia is in the eThekwini/Umhlatuze corridor, which isidentified in the Provincial Spatial Economic DevelopmentStrategy (DTLGA, 2006) as one of three Primary Corridors in theProvince connecting the port of Durban to the port of RichardsBay. Together these function as the primary logistics gatewayinto South Africa, taking advantage of the development oppor-tunities presented by the King Shaka Airport/Dube TradePortinitiative (eThekwini Municipality, 2011a).

2. At local government level, Cornubia is also included in theSpatial Development Framework in the Municipality's Inte-grated Development Plan (IDP).

3. The Northern Spatial Development Plan supports the develop-ment of a high density mixed land use and transportationcorridor which is called the Northern Urban DevelopmentCorridor (NUDC), that optimises the opportunities offered by thenew airport node or “aerotropolis” which will create “a newmini-city for eThekwini” (The Mercury, 30/05/2012: p. 15).eThekwini Municipality (2010b) identifies ‘Dube Tradeport andsurrounds’ as the main spatial investment driver for thenorthern area of the city. One of the spatial development stra-tegies (expansion) for the NUDC is to “promote the establish-ment of the area of Cornubia as a new town to accommodateanticipated population and associated business growth in thenorth” (eThekwini Municipality, 2011a: 4) (see Fig. 3 showingCornubia as a ‘new town’).

The objectives for the Cornubia development, which are listedon the development's website, reflect a mixed-used, large scaleproject that is attempting to address both the pro-growth and pro-poor agenda. They include:

“the creation of stakeholder value through the delivery of abalanced economic, environmental and social return which isfinancially viable and contributes to redressing inequalities andenhancing the quality of life and value of the area; to contributeto building, consolidating and integrating the social and eco-nomic base of the region; to ensure a sustainable, inclusionarymixed use development that maximises the development out-comes for housing, employment as well as investment andeconomic opportunities (www.cornubia.co.za).

THD and the Municipality have framed the project as a ‘mixed-use’ development, which enables both the private sector and thelocal state to determine the mix of land use activities and to shiftthe priorities of the project as it evolves. However, at a nationalgovernment level Cornubia is referred to as a large scale housing

project or a human settlements project, a remarkably differentemphasis than that given by the THD and the Municipality. In hislaunch of the Cornubia development on 6 April 2014, PresidentZuma referred to the project as an “integrated housing project”emphasising the role of the project in providing housing andemployment. The tension around the focus of the development isexplored further on in the paper as the discourses of different ac-tors reveal the multiple identities of Cornubia as both a large scalehousing project that addresses the goals of the BNG policy and astrategic economic project that will facilitate growth in the north ofthe Municipality.

In its original proposal the development aimed to provide50,000 homes of which 20,000 were to be subsidised housing,90 ha of industrial platform, over 1 million m2 of commercial spaceand 400 ha dedicated to a rehabilitated open space system. Pro-jections included the creation of 48,000 permanent jobs and 15,000construction jobs sustained over 15 years. The total investment ofR24 billion was expected to generate rates of R 300 million perannum (www.cornubia.co.za). According to the Municipality andTHD the project is a significant development that has “the realpotential of creating substantial housing opportunities as well asemployment and economic opportunities and will serve as abenchmark for future developments in South Africa”(www.cornubia.co.za).

The Cornubia project consists of five phases e a pilot phase ofdeveloping 488 low cost housing units, followed by phases 1e4,which involve the development of a mix of land uses. In 2013 thefirst mini-factory park for small businesses was launched in Cor-nubia and phase 1 sold out within three weeks. By January 2014,482 subsidised housing units had been built as part of Phase 1A andon 25 January 2014, 151 beneficiaries were moved from differentinformal settlements across the city into their new subsidisedhouses in Cornubia (New Age, 28/01/2014). Large scale infrastruc-ture is currently being developed on the site with the NDHSproviding additional funding for a link road between housing andthe industrial park (www.cornubia.co.za).

Negotiations over space within a privateepublic partnership

The framing of the large scale development on the Cornubia sitehas been shaped by the interests of the private landowner (THD)and the local and national state. Cornubia has had the benefit ofbeing developed by one large private company, THD, which hasallowed for stability in the private sector approach adopted towardsthe project. However, the state is not monolithic and differentsectors within the local state have adopted different positions inrelation to the development. The eThekwini Housing Departmenthas aligned with the national Department of Human Settlements,driving the housing agenda. However, the strategic economic andplanning sectors have aligned more strongly with the mixed-usedevelopment concept, arguing that Cornubia should play a criticalrole in the future sustainable development of the northern zone.

Moreland Developments (now THD) initially conceptualised amixed use development for the site in 2004, when it “identified thepotential to release a vast portion of sugar cane land for urbandevelopment” (www.thehda.co.za). Intensive negotiations with theeThekwini Municipality ensued, with the Municipality determinedto ensure a mix of residential opportunities across the incomespectrum, thereby introducing a stronger human settlementcomponent to address the pro-poor agenda. The negotiationsentered the political arena in November 2005 when the thenMayor, Obed Mlaba, councillors and officials met on the site to‘unveil’ the plans for an integrated mixed income community of15,000 to 20,000 families housed in homes ranging from R50,000(low income) to R500,000 (middle income) in value (The Mercury,

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195 189

2005). The development was promoted by the Municipal HousingDepartment Head and Moreland Developments as being strategi-cally positioned to contribute to the consolidation and integrationof the area, and to include commercial, light industrial and socialfacilities in addition to housing.

The National Department of Human Settlements (NDHS) iden-tified Cornubia as one of eight National Priority Projects for 2011/12, hence raising the profile of the project to a national level, andalso ensuring national financial support. According to a NDHSspokesperson (Julie Bayat, 31/05/2011), Cornubia fulfils the intentof the 2004 national Comprehensive Plan for Sustainable HumanSettlements (BNG, 2004), by meeting the range of both social andeconomic criteria. In fact all the housing departments at national,provincial and local level support the project as an ‘integrateddevelopment’ which will go much further than just housing pro-vision, to create a viable community through investment, economicdevelopment, and job creation. By linking the Cornubia projectwith the BNG policy, the national state is signalling that this projectis part of its national agenda of creating integrated human settle-ments that address both the housing and economic developmentchallenges of South Africa.

Another area of protracted negotiation revolved aroundownership of the land. In August 2008, frustration on the part ofANC councillors over the slow pace of negotiations with the owner(THD) led to a threat to expropriate the land if agreement could notbe reached (TheMercury, 2008). Later on in that year, an agreementwas signed between theMunicipality and THD, leading to “a uniquearrangement in the release of private land for public purposes”(HDA, 2011). The national Housing Development Agency (HDA)5

and the KZNDHS then entered into a strategic partnership withthe Municipality, facilitating the purchase of 580 ha of land fromTHD and providing additional funding on an annual basis forproject management, facilitation of land assembly and packaging,assistance with overall planning of the housing strategy, andparticipation in the project Steering Committee (HDA, 2011). Aswith other megaprojets, Cornubia was supported by decisionmaking processes that took place outside the usual channels(exceptionalism) and drew in resources and support from all tiersof government. This reflects the exceptionalist process that iscommon in megaproject development (Follmann, 2015;Swyngedouw et al., 2002). The setting aside of mandated fundingand planning policies and procedures has been justified by thepolitical and strategic nature of the Cornubia project, particularly asa lead project for the BNG policy, and more recently as a nationalpriority project, and its unique scale and focus on integration. Theneed for flexibility in planning as a result of THD's power in shapingdevelopment in the north of the municipal area, due to its largeland holdings and its ‘proven’ track record of ‘successful’ high in-come commercial and retail development on the Umhlanga Ridge,has also played a critical role.

Critical to the success of the project is ‘intergovernmentalcooperation’ at all levels of government as well as intersectoralcollaboration. At a meeting hosted on 31May 2011 by the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Human Settlements (KZNDHS) to facilitateintergovernmental co-operation, Departments at provincial andlocal government level were urged to prioritise Cornubia and toalign their funding streams with the project time frames such thatdevelopment could be undertaken in an integrated manner. This

5 The Housing Development Agency (HDA) was established in 2009 as a publicdevelopment agency whose mission is fast-tracking the acquisition and release ofstate, private and communally owned land for human settlement developments.The HDA provides project management services for the development of humansettlements (www.thehda.co.za).

applies particularly to the provision of social facilities such asschools and clinics so that past problems of unserviced housingsettlements would be avoided. A strong partnership approach tothe development, both with the private sector and between gov-ernment departments at all levels, has been promoted by nationaland local government.

Negotiations over the details of the development, landownership, the housing mix, roles and responsibilities of thedifferent stakeholders, have been protracted over the past nineyears, given the multiple goals that the project is required toachieve within a pubic-private partnership. The extent of housingopportunities to be provided, particularly in the lower incomerange has been one area of contention (The Mercury, 2008).Initially the project was aligned with the National Housing Min-ister's requirement introduced in 2004 that all new developmentsinclude 20% low-cost housing (Sunday Tribune, 2005). The poli-ticians in the Municipality insisted on 15,000 low income units,while THD wanted to plan an integrated and sustainable devel-opment before making a decision on the appropriate number oflow cost units. THD was reluctant to create another poor housingsettlement without it being integrated with economic opportu-nities. In one of his regular newsletters, the City Manager sug-gested in 2008 that the development could yield over 70,000houses as a “best case density scenario, aiming to be innovative onhousing typologies to make the area work as a sustainable highuse development” (Sutcliffe, 2008). Evidence shows that theallocation of space to low cost housing in Cornubia is a site oftension over how the pro-growth and pro-poor agendas of bothlocal and national government and the private sector becomeintegrated.

The actual number of housing opportunities has waxed andwaned over the planning period and has dwindled as negotiationshave taken place over the years. The original EIA report in mid-2010proposed a development of 50,000 units (The Mercury, 2011a,2011b), but a Municipal press release in December 2010 spoke of30,000 homes (eThekwini Municipality, 2010a). The subsequentamended Cornubia Framework Plan (CFP) (Iyer, 2011) and theamended EIA report (SSI, 2011) however indicate a much reduceddevelopment of 24,320 units, of which 11,664 would be low cost. InJuly 2010, the Municipality issued a regulation that no residentialdevelopment would be permitted within the 55 dB noise contour(2035) of the new airport,6 which necessitated a review of theCornubia Framework Plan.

A Joint Planning Forum was set up by the Municipality tofacilitate the review process. As a result of the discussions, the sizeof Phase 1 development footprint was substantially reduced from614 ha to 295 ha to exclude most of the land within the noisecontour (The Mercury, 2011a, 2011b). As a result, the residentialcomponent of Phase 1was reduced from 11,600 units in the originalEIA to only 2766 units (SSI, 2011). It was agreed by the Forum that“any shortfalls in social facility and housing targets … not accom-modated within Cornubia will be addressed in the planning of theCornubia North area and the Northern Spatial Development Plan-ning at a regional level” (SSI, 2011: 20). Questions have been raisedabout the extent to which the 55 dB noise contour has become aconvenient technical tool for controlling housing development inthe north of the city. This contour line, in precluding the originalextent of land for housing, serves to open up more land for in-dustrial and commercial development, which is not restricted bynoise impacts.

6 This noise contour was derived from the Environmental Impact Assessment forthe Dube Tradeport/King Shaka Airport.

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195190

Contested discourses in the development of a mixed-usemegaproject

The state (national, provincial and local) and private sector, withtheir associated consultants, have played amajor role in driving andshaping the planning and development of Cornubia, through apublic-private partnership. However, local communities and civilsociety have also responded to the development, claiming theirrights over space, which in the rhetoric of the proposed develop-ment, is dedicated to meeting the needs of the poor and margin-alized through economic growth, the provision of low incomehousing and the creation of employment. The following sectionexplores the dominant discourses of the main actors who areengaging in the production of a mixed-use megaproject inCornubia.

The landowner: Tongaat Hulett Developments

THD initiated the proposal of a mixed use development for itslarge land holdings in the northern corridor of the Municipality.THD defines Cornubia as

“a mixed use andmixed income development, spanning over 20years, which will alter the skyline of Umhlanga in the future.Cornubia will be the home of the next major industrial area inthe north, with approximately 90 ha coming onto the market in2011. This will be a key industrial development with linkages tothe new airport” (THD, 2011).

The development is described in terms of the principles ofsustainability, integration, high densities, meeting the housing andsocial facility needs of a wide range of income levels, and having apublic transport focus. Certainly its strategic location from an in-dustrial perspective is highlighted more by THD than by any otherstakeholder, as well as its potential to create employment andeconomic opportunities due to its strategic location near DubeTradePort. When the development was first announced by theMayor in 2005, THD argued that the land is “uniquely positioned tomake a key strategic contribution to the consolidation and inte-gration of the area” (The Mercury, 2005). This original concept/discourse of integration, which was constructed by THD planners,has also become the dominant discourse of government for thisproject. THD's interests in the development is to maximize thevalue of their land holdings and their associated profits, which aresignificant in the north, through the development of ‘successful’mixed used developments in this corridor. Their discourse is one ofpro-growth couched within a sustainability framework.

8 Abahlali baseMjondolo is a national shack dwellers movement which emergedin Durban in 2005.

9 Kennedy Road informal settlers were not the first informal settlers to move toCornubia on 25 January 2014. The first recipients have been moved from 16 otherpriority settlements across the city (www.cornubia.co.za, accessed 08/02/2014).10 A discussionwith a new homeowner in Cornubia in January 2014 was revealing.The new beneficiary stated that “they have moved people from many differentsettlements into the first 151 houses. I am sure this is all to do with the elections”(which will take place on 7 May 2014).11 On 6 April 2014, just one month before the South African national elections,

National and provincial government

Durban was “voted champion of housing delivery in the coun-try” in October 2008 (eThekwini Municipality, 2008). On thisoccasion, the National Minister of Housing, Lindiwe Sisulu,“pledged her support for the Cornubia Housing project, an initiativethat will include low-income, middle-income and high-incomehousing in the north of eThekwini”. In 2011, Cornubia was furtheridentified as one of three national Cabinet Lekgotla7 priority pro-jects, providing the project with further national support and

7 The Cabinet Lekgotla is a special meeting of the Cabinet called to addresscritical issues, to outline the main interventions of the government and to preparefor the State of the Nation address. The President, Deputy President, CabinetMinisters, Deputy Ministers, premiers, local government representatives, directors-general from national and provincial departments attend the meeting.

increasing its profile as an innovative and sustainable large scalehousing project. It will receive additional government funding,project management support, and the full backing of governmentgoing forward, which will also directly benefit the private partner,THD, as a result of their land interests in the area. At the Cornubiainter-governmental cooperation meeting held in Durban in 2011(KZNDHS, 31/05/2011) all levels of government used the languageof an ‘integrated human settlement’ or ‘integrated project’ todescribe Cornubia and its range of housing values. This discoursesupports the goals of the BNG policy and both the economic pro-growth and social pro-poor agenda. Integration has been themain post-apartheid urban restructuring discourse given the frag-mented and segregated nature of South African cities, and hence itis not surprising that the storyline of ‘integration’ has gained suchtraction and power in the Cornubia megaproject.

The local state: the Mayor, City Manager, councillors and officials

In 2005, the Mayor Obed Mlaba, as the representative of theANC, together with local ANC councillors, said that the Cornubiaplan was “another way to address the backlog in housing for shackdwellers” (Sunday Tribune, 2005). At the time, the Mayor statedthat residents of the Kennedy Road Settlement, who are stronglyaligned with Abahlali baseMjondolo8 (AbM), and who had pro-tested in 2005 against the lack of housing delivery, would be first tomove to the new site (ibid).9 In August 2008, AbM accused the ANCof using the Cornubia development proposal as a political ploy togain votes, first in November 2005 (prior to the 2006 local gov-ernment elections) and then again in 2008 (prior to the 2009 na-tional elections)10 (AbM, 2008).11 In the same month, municipalcouncillors argued for the land to be expropriated as a result of theslow pace of the land negotiations (The Mercury, 2008). Housingdelivery to their constituents plays a critical role in ensuring thepolitical power and re-election of councillors in political wards inthe Municipality. The Housing Committee chairman S'bu Gumedestated that expropriation would be considered within two to threemonths if agreement could not be reached. The position of theMayor, housing officials and councillors reveals their political in-terests in promoting Cornubia as a large scale project that wouldaddress the critical housing backlogs in the Municipality. However,given that Cornubia is being developed as a mixed-use project bymultiple actors, with the aim of achieving both pro-growth andpro-poor goals, housing could not remain as the central focus of theproject. Housing numbers have thus steadily declined over time, asSection 3.1 shows.

The City Manager's newsletters (29 August 2008 and 7 April2009) indicated that the city perceives the Cornubia developmentas an opportunity to “undo what characterised the apartheid city”

President Zuma officially launched the R25 billion Cornubia project. He wasaccompanied by the Minister of Human Settlements Connie September, KwaZulu-Natal Premier Senzo Mchunu and eThekwini Executive Mayor Councillor JamesNxumalo. This highlights the significance of Cornubia in the politics of the ANC andthe local and national state. In his address the President stated that over 12 millionSouth Africans had benefited from the 3.6 million houses and serviced sites pro-vided by government since 1994 (SABC News, 6 April, 2014).

13 Although there are some differences at a detailed level around the need for a

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195 191

and to create an integrated settlement that “has a spatial locationaladvantage which will allow the northern corridor of the city tocontinue to expand rapidly” (Sutcliffe, 2008). The partnership orconsensus approach to working with the landowner THD is clear inSutcliffe's statements. He argued that the development is notdriven so much by political imperative but by making the devel-opment sustainable to the Municipality and the land owner. Thereis no mention of consultation with poorer communities or evenlocal stakeholders in this process. Of interest is that these state-ments were made just a week after the city's EXCO (i.e. the ANCcouncillors) threatened to expropriate the land (The Mercury,2008). A disjuncture between city management and officials, onone hand, and the city's ruling party (ANC), on the other, inhandling the planned development of Cornubia is evident,although at the time the City Manager did concur with the partythat expropriation was an option. In 2005, the Head of themunicipal Housing Department stated that the project providedthe opportunity tomeet the housing backlog and provide a range ofhousing typologies for people from those “who are living in shacksto people who have bonded houses from R80 000 to R500 000”(The Mercury, 2005). In his newsletter on 7 April 2009 (Sutcliffe,2009), the City Manager alluded to the importance of the Cornu-bia project in addressing the city's housing backlog to continue itsgood track record in housing delivery. According to Sutcliffe (2009)“No city in the world can proudly say as we say that we have pro-vided 90,000 houses for the truly poor over five years and this yearmay well provide 30,000 houses as Cornubia comes on stream”. Atthe 31 May 2011 meeting, the then Head of the municipalHousing Department lauded the project as an ‘integrated project’which is different to what the Housing Department has done inthe past, as it makes proper integration possible and viable. Hestressed that provincial support and integration is critical to ensurethat the project is successful and that Cornubia becomes a livingenvironment where people can ‘live, work and play’ (Cogi Pather,31/05/2011).

The Municipality's objective of using the Cornubia developmentto address the legacy of apartheid, drive economic growth in thenorthern zone and meet the requirements of the BNG policy havebeen impacted by the long gestation period of the project, the entryof new actors such as Dube TradePort, the challenge of meetingboth pro-growth and pro-poor interests and the politics of devel-opment in the Municipality. However, the dominant discourse ofthe national and local state has remained focused on redistributionand the pro-poor agenda as Cornubia is being used to address thehousing backlog through an integrated human settlement that re-flects the goals of the BNG (2004).

“The technical experts” e Strategic planning consultants, EIAconsultants and property specialists

Much of the conceptual thinking around the development of thenorthern area of the city was undertaken by consultants.

1. The Northern Spatial Development Plan, the NUDC SpatialConcept and the Verulam-Cornubia Local Area Plan (LAP) wasdeveloped by planning consultants from SSI, an engineering andenvironmental consulting firm.12 The LAP provides detailedguidelines for development of the area (eThekwini Municipality,2011b).

2. The Cornubia Framework Plan (CFP) was developed by Iyer Ur-ban Design Studio in consultation with other urban design

12 These consultants had been part of the environmental consultancy ‘Future-works’ at the beginning of the planning process.

consultants. Originally developed for THD, the Municipalitylater became a joint client with THD. The CFP (Iyer, 2011) pro-vides an overview of the land use mix and residential yieldproposed in the development.

The two plans produced by the two different consulting teamsare presented in Fig. 4 (Verulam-Cornubia Local Area Plan) andFig. 5 (the Cornubia Framework Plan) below.

Currently there is a partial disjuncture between what is pro-posed in the Verulam-Cornubia LAP and the CFP around the loca-tion of the main nodes and spines, and the mix, location andquantum of different land uses. In his presentation to governmentofficials on 31May 2011, the planning consultant from Iyer Rothaug,a planning and design firm, who developed the CFP spoke of Cor-nubia as an ‘integrated human settlement’ echoing the integrationdiscourse of the housing officials from all three spheres of gov-ernment. He stated that Cornubia is in a strategic position where ithas the potential to ‘stitch together communities’ as the proposedroad network will link surrounding communities. It was proposedthat community cohesion will be promoted through a series ofresidential clusters surrounding social facilities.

It is striking that both the Verulam-Cornubia LAP and the CFPwere approved by the Municipality's Economic Development andPlanning Committee on 3 March 2011. While there are many pointsof convergence between the CFP and the LAP, there are also somekey areas of the CFP that contradict or are misaligned with the LAP,despite their approval on the same day by the Committee. Insummary, the plans are generally aligned around the core roadnetwork and open space structure, which together provide theframework for the development.13 They are also aligned around thenoise contour restriction of no residential development within the2035 noise contour, and the provision of a mix of residential op-portunities at medium to high densities, and specifically along andnear the public transport network.

The plans diverge around the conceptual nature and location ofthe development nodes. The LAP proposes a ‘new Town Centre’ inthe south-central part of the site and a neighbourhood level centrelocated further north. The town centre is envisaged as a publictransport intermodal hub providing a mix of commercial and socialservices to the Cornubia population, and including residentialdevelopment. The CFP proposes two nodes e a mixed use node inthe south-eastern corner of the site, with a bridge link to theGatewaymixed use precinct across the N2 (essentially an extensionof the Gateway precinct which was developed by THD in the late1990s), and a key intermodal transfer point (public transport hub)located in a similar position to the LAP's new town centre. From aspatial planning perspective, the LAP's town centre node is moreoptimally situated than the CFP's mixed use node, being morecentrally positioned in the site and thus more accessible to the fullrange of residents and employees of the area. However, a contra-diction in the LAP is that the Town Centre is situated within the2035 noise contour and hence no residential development will bepermitted.14 This may already mean that the new town centreconcept is not feasible in its proposed location, and that the alter-native proposed in the CFP will become fixed in the developmentconcept for Cornubia.

The other main area of divergence between the LAP and theCFP is the quantum and location of the main land uses, in

new interchange on the N2 as well as alignments of some access spines.14 This issue appears to have not been resolved in the LAP process, with SSI (theconsultants)’ town centre proposal being misaligned with the city's noise contourpolicy.

Fig. 4. Verulam-Cornubia Local Area Land Use & Activity Framework (eThekwini Municipality, 2011b: 59).

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195192

particular light industry and business. The LAP expresslyadvises against large-scale mono-functional office park de-velopments, and in particular along the N2, promoting insteadmixed use development. However, the CFP includes extensiveareas to be zoned for General Business use along the M41 and N2,which then surround the mixed use node, reflecting THD's in-terests of maximizing large scale business development. It is

anticipated that these would repeat the same urban form andcharacter of the Gateway retail and office park precincts on theeastern side of the N2 which were previously developed byMoreland Properties (now THD), and which the LAP seeks toavoid.

Furthermore, again due to the noise zone restriction, the CFPwas amended to include a considerable increase in the area set

Fig. 5. Cornubia Land Use Zones (Iyer, 2011: 38).

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195 193

aside for light industry and business by replacing the residentialdevelopment originally proposed along the north-south mobilityspine. Both the LAP consultants and THD's planner have indicatedthat the development area is now over-subscribed with these uses.However, it is noteworthy that those prime areas assigned forbusiness purposes have not been reassigned to make up theshortfall of housing, pointing perhaps to the power of THD in thenegotiating process in the Joint Planning Forum. The noise contourshave certainly added a complex dynamic to the process of negoti-ating a development concept for the site. Through the Joint Plan-ning Forum the land usemixwas revised to accommodate the noiserestriction, but to the detriment of housing provision. It is impor-tant to debate the trade-offs of subjecting residents to airport noiseimpacts versus a development concept that is lacking in certainareas, including an oversupply of business and industrial landwhich may be difficult to sell because it is poorly located, althoughmostly in city ownership, a reduced residential supply, thusnegating the benefits of high density, mixed use new town op-portunity, and a town centre in a less than optimal position.

As a Council-approved strategic level document, the LAP holdsthe most weight, yet the nature of the partnership between theMunicipality and THD is such that the co-owned Framework Planmay ultimately have more power. The spatial concepts underpin-ning the LAP were developed by consultants who are ‘outsiders’ tothe negotiation processes that have been going on between the cityand THD. If the city's own planners have not taken full ownership ofthe LAP, in the sense of defending its key spatial concepts and therationale behind the specific spatial structure proposed in the LAPfor Cornubia, it is quite possible that the development concept ofthe CFP will overshadow the LAP and will become the lastingspatial structure that is translated into reality on the Cornubia site.However, it is not improbable that the city may still exert pressure

on THD to change elements of the CFP going forward. The city wasable to exert pressure to prevent residential development withinthe 2035 noise contour, even though this is a position not sup-ported by its own consultants or some planners from THD, as this isconsidered to be overly restrictive and impacts on the integrity ofthe whole development. As this analysis suggests, there are manyissues that still need to be resolved within the Municipality be-tween officials in different sectors and between officials and poli-ticians, and then between the Municipality and THD, to ensure thatthe Cornubia development meshes well with the development ofthe broader region, and also functions optimally as a new town.Hence the development of the Cornubia site is still in a state of fluxdespite the dominant discourse of integration, and is likely tocontinue to remain so as it progresses.

The local community and civil society organisations

The local community in the north corridor is not homogenousand it represents the divisions of both class and race, which remainentrenched in the fabric of South African society. The initialresponse to the announcement of the Cornubia integrated mixedincome development was met with a mix of responses.

The wealthier communities of Umhlanga and Durban Northwere concerned about the impact of the development on theirproperty values and were concerned that their lives would be‘overwhelmed’ by the size of the low cost housing area. Accordingto a resident of a high income residential gated estate, the devel-opment would be acceptable “as long as they don't stick it next tothe high-priced houses, it would work” (Cozens, Sunday Tribune,2005). Lower income residents in surrounding areas were verypositive about the development, as they believe it will providethem with the opportunity to live in the area, closer to amenities

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195194

and work. Two residents in the north corridor stated that “I stay inBallito andwork at Gateway. I would like to live closer towork, evenin the proposed low cost housing if I could” (Sibanda, SundayTribune, 2005) and “now this place will be accessible to averagepeople” (Ndlela, Sunday Tribune, 2005). However, many low in-come residents indicated that they would like to live in Cornubiabut they were concerned “that the prices are too high” (Nqwele,Sunday Tribune, 2005).

Residents recognized the trade-offs that need to be made be-tween high income and low income residents when integrateddevelopments are proposed to address the inequalities of the past.Some consider these as acceptable while others deem that theintrusion of this approach into the neo-liberal property market isunfair. According to one resident “people pay R2 million for a flatover here, but now people will be getting houses in this area fornext to nothing. It won't be fair on those who have paid so much”(Vithal, Sunday Tribune, 2005).

In a press release on 24 August 2008, AbM berated all thoseinvolved in the Cornubia development process, including the Mu-nicipality, the Mayor and political parties and the technical expertsfor not consulting the un-housed poor in their discussions. Theyreject the top down planning of the project:

“if shack dwellers are not included in the planning of this projectit will fail like the N2 project failed in Cape Town ( … ) Planningmust not just be technical talk that excludes people. Democracyis not just about voting. Democratic planning is the wayforward”.

Their main argument is that the private ownership of consid-erable land holdings in the Municipality by THD has compromisedhousing provision in eThekwini Municipality. AbM believes thatTHD should relinquish their rights because “many generationssuffered on their plantations” and because “Tongaat Hulett hascontinued to separate the rich from the poor after apartheid bybuilding a separate gated world for the rich on the old sugar canefields”. They support the expropriation of Tongaat Hulett's land forhousing the poor. However, theywelcome the fact that governmentnow speaks about integrated development.

AbM state that the Cornubia developmentmust provide ‘no-costhousing’, unlike the N2 Gateway project which was “taken over bypoliticians and companies who saw an opportunity to exploit thedevelopment for their own profit”. Ultimately the very poor wereexcluded from the development. They also argue that Cornubiacannot be the solution to housing all shack dwellers, and peoplemust not be forced to move to Cornubia. AbM favours the upgradeof existing settlements rather than relocations, and the provision ofnew housing in Cornubia should not be used to deny upgrades orthe provision of services to existing settlements. They also wantedclarity about housing allocations and timing of the development.

During the run-up to the 2011 municipal elections ANC repre-sentatives, including the Minister for Economic Development andTourism and the ward councillor, visited the Blackburn informalsettlement, located within the Cornubia site. The informal settle-ment has been in existence for 30 years yet no services have beenprovided, causing the residents to feel “abandoned by government”(The Mercury, 2011b). As stated in the Mercury article, “Blackburnresidents have their eyes set on the multibillion-rand Cornubiadevelopment”. The ward councillor Musa Dladla stated that hehoped that everyone in the settlement could be housed in Cornubia(ibid). The dominant civil society discourse is centred on socialjustice, however, the NIMBY discourse of the upper and middleclasses reflects their concerns about how integrated mixed usedevelopments impact on property values in the upper end of themarket.

Conclusion

The different discourses constructed by the multiple actorsinvolved in the Cornubia project reflect the struggle of competinggoals in a mixed-use megaproject that is required to meet pro-growth and pro-poor imperatives. The plans for the projectremain in a state of flux, with two different ‘plans’ (the LAP and theCFP) reflecting the interests of the dominant actors. The researchreveals the complexity that arises in new mega-projects which aremore flexible and which contain multiple elements, as actorscompete to promote their interests and agendas. By constructing amixed-use megaproject the hope is that contestation will bereduced, as the project seemingly contains ‘something foreveryone’. However, as this study has shown meeting both pro-growth and pro-poor objectives is ‘easier said than done’.

It is evident that the Cornubia megaproject reflects many of themain characteristics of other large scale urban development pro-jects across the world. Globalisation and liberalisation of the SouthAfrican economy have led cities such as Durban to adopt anentrepreneurial approach to urban development, concentratingeconomic assets in competitive, well located spaces in the munic-ipal area and using large scale development as mechanisms ofgrowth. Cornubia has been able to draw on a new form of governingwhich allows for exceptional measures in relation to large scaleprojects. However, AbM, which is a well-established grassrootsmovement, as well as the mobilised community of Blackburn, havechallenged the lack of participation in project planning and the pro-growth priorities of the project. The real tensions around the pro-poor agenda will be evident once the allocation of low incomehousing begins in earnest in Cornubia, as to date a significantnumber of ward councillors in the north have informed informalsettlers within their wards that they will be relocated to Cornubiain the future.

In contrast to many other large scale projects, which are poorlyintegrated into wider urban processes and planning frameworks(Swyngedouw et al., 2002), the Cornubia project has taken cog-nisance of the broader planning frameworks and developmentplans for the Municipality. The extent to which Cornubia will be aninternally ‘integrated development’ that is well incorporated withthe broader area is yet to be seen. THD continues to promotestrong linkages between Cornubia and the existing Gateway retail/commercial development, although this would appear to under-mine other more important development goals of the project. Thechallenge for the development in the future is the way in which itintegrates different classes within a mixed-use development sothat it avoids the socio-economic polarisation that is common inso many large scale developments (Swyngedouw et al., 2002). Theability of Cornubia to draw in all three tiers of government rightfrom the outset of the project has been striking. Cornubia wasinitially conceptualised by the private sector but the discoursesmobilised to promote it, which focus on integration and meetingboth economic development and social redistribution needs ineThekwini, have elevated it into the arena of national government,particularly the Department of Human Settlements, who at thetime of Cornubia's inception was searching for projects that couldepitomise the approach of the BNG policy. The use of Cornubia as apolitical platform for the ANC just one month before the nationalelections in 2014 reflects the importance national governmentplaces on this megaproject and its offer of housing, employmentand economic growth opportunities for the poor. By analysing thediscourses constructed for the development of a mixed-usemegaproject in Durban, it is evident that these large scale pro-jects act as a useful lens for exploring political, social and eco-nomic relations in cities (Kennedy, 2013; Swyngedouw et al.,2002).

C. Sutherland et al. / Habitat International 45 (2015) 185e195 195

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the EU's 7th Framework Programmeunder the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities for funding the‘Chance2Sustain’ project, which has resulted in the production ofthis work. Loraine Kennedy has made a significant contribution tothis paper for which she is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Abahlali baseMjondolo. (2008). Why are Shack Dwellers Excluded from the Discus-sions about the Cornubia Development? Nothing for Us, Without Us! eThekwiniPress. Release, Sunday, 24 August 2008 http://www.abahlali.org/node/3954.

Bornstein, L. (2010). Mega-projects, city building and community benefits. CityCulture and Society, 1, 199e206.

Brenner, N. (2004). New State Spaces. Urban Governance and the Rescaling of State-hood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Charlton, S. (2009). Housing for the nation, the city and the household: competingrationalities as a constraint to reform? Development Southern Africa, 26(2),301e315.

Department of Housing. (2004). Breaking New Ground. Comprehensive Plan forHousing Delivery, as approved by Cabinet and presented to MINMEC on 2September. Available online http://www.nwpg.gov.za/DDLG&TA/acts/BreakingNewGrounds.pdf.

DTLGA. (2006). Provincial Spatial Economic Development Strategy: Development of anEconomic Cluster Programme of Action.

Dupont, V. (2013). Which place for the homeless in Delhi? Scrutiny of a mobi-lisation campaign in the 2010 commonwealth games context [Online] SouthAsia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 8. Online since 19 December 2013; URLhttp://samaj.revues.org/3662.

eThekwini Municipality. (2008). City Tops of Housing Pops, 21 October 2008.eThekwini. Online e http://www.durban.gov.za/durban.

eThekwini Municipality. (2010a). Cornubia project coming, 20 December. eThekwini.Online e http://www.durban.gov.za/durban.

eThekwini Municipality. (2010b). Northern Spatial Development Plan, 2010 review.eThekwini Muncipality. (2011a). Spatial Concept for the NUDC e Final, 18 February

2011. prepared by SSI.eThekwini Municipality. (2011b). Verulam-Cornubia Local Area Plan e Final, 18

February 2011. prepared by SSI.Fainstein, S. (2009). Mega-projects in New York, London and Amsterdam. Interna-

tional Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(4), 768e785.Follmann, A. (2015). Urban mega-projects for a ‘world-class’ riverfront e the

interplay of informality, flexibility and exceptionality along the Yamuna inDelhi, India. Habitat International, 45, 213e222.

Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N., & Rothengatter, W. (2003). Megaprojects and risk: Ananatomy of ambition. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Hannan, S., & Sutherland, C. (2014). Mega-projects and sustainability in Durban,South Africa: convergent or divergent agendas? Habitat International. Availableonline 5 April 2014.

Houghton, J. (2013). Entanglement: the negotiation of urban development imper-atives in Durban's Public-Private Partnerships. Urban Studies, 50(13),2971e2808.

Iyer Urban Design Studio. (2011). Cornubia Framework Plan and Phase 1 DesignReport, 15 February 2011. prepared on behalf of eThekwini Municipality andTongaat Hulett Developments.

Kennedy, L. (2013). Chance2Sustain: Megaprojects as city growth strategies. Presen-tation at MILE seminar, 18 October, 2013, Durban.

Lehrer, U., & Laidley, J. (2008). Old mega-projects newly packaged? Waterfrontredevelopment in Toronto. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research,32(4), 786e803.

van Marrewijk, A., Clegg, S. R., Pitsis, T. S., & Veenswijk, M. (2008). Managingpubliceprivate megaprojects: paradoxes, complexity and project design. In-ternational Journal of Project Management, 26, 591e600.

New Age. (2014). First phase of Cornubia housing project nears completion, 28January, 2014.

Robbins, G. (2015). The Dube TradePort e King Shaka International Airport mega-project: exploring the impacts in the context of multi-scalar governance pro-cesses. Habitat International, 45, 196e204.

Roy, A. (2009). Why India cannot plan its cities: informality, insurgence and theidiom of urbanization. Planning Theory, 8(1), 76e87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1473095208099299.

Scott, D., Oelofse, C., Scott, K., & Houghton, J. (2006). Social impact assessment for theproposed small Craft harbour, Durban Point Waterfront, prepared for the Envi-ronmental Impact Assessment for the proposed small Craft Harbour, Durban PointWaterfront. Durban: Durban Point Development Company.

Shatkin, G. (2011). Planning privatopolis: representation and contestation in thedevelopment of urban integrated mega-projects. In A. Roy, & A. Ong (Eds.),Worlding cities: Asian experiments and the art of being global (pp. 77e97). Ox-ford: Wiley.

SSI, (2011). Amended environmental impact report for the proposed Cornubiamixed use phased development e Phase 1 Mount Edgecombe, a public-privatepartnership project by Tongaat Hulett developments and eThekwini munici-pality, 28 February 2011.

Sunday Tribune. (2005). Muted response to Housing Plan. November 20, 2005.Sutcliffe, M. (2008). City Manager's Newsletter, 29 August 2008.Sutcliffe, M. (2009). City Manager's Newsletter, 7 April 2009.Sutherland, C., Robbins, G., Scott, D., & Sim, V. (2013). Durban City Report, Chan-

ce2Sustain. www.chance2sustain.eu.Swyngedouw, E., Moulaert, F., & Rodriguez, A. (2002). Neoliberal urbanization in

Europe: large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy.Antipode, 34(3), 542e577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00254.

The Mercury. (2005). R10bn low-cost housing plan. November 18, 2005.The Mercury. (2008). Low-cost housing at Umhlanga becomes election issue e City

threatens big land grab. August 20, 2008.The Mercury. (2011a). Airport noise pollution means housing development reduced.

March 3, 2011.The Mercury. (2011b). Plea for toilets from shack dwellers. May 13, 2011.The Mercury. (2012). Cornubia e KZN's ‘first truly sustainable integrated settlement’,

30 May, 2012.Tongaat Hulett Developments. (2011). Cornubia is a mixed use and mixed income

development. http://www.cornubia.co.za/about-cornubia/development-profile/.www.cornubia.co.za Accessed 24.03.14.www.thehda.co.za Accessed 20.03.11.