Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The City of Johannesburg would like to express our sincere appreciation to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) for providing generous funding for the publication of the this report and other related materials through the NORAD funding. We would also like to thank all the UACs, regions, council departments and persons who were involved in the development of the State of the Environment Report.

CONTACT DETAILS Tel: (011) 407 6748 Fax: (011) 339 1885 Email: [email protected] [email protected]

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ACRONYMS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 CITY OF JOHANNESBURG VISION WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENT 3 PURPOSE OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT 4 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT 4.1 INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK 4.2 NATIONAL FRAMEWORK 5 THE FIRST STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF JOHANNESBURG 6 UPDATING OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT 7 AIMS OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT 8 RATIONALE / OBJECTIVES FOR STATE OF ENVIRONMENT 9 METHODOLOGY 10 PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION 11 THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE CITY OF JOHANNESBURG 11.1 CITY STRUCTURE 11.2 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 11.3 THE ECONOMY 11.4 SOCIAL CONTEXT 12 FORCES DRIVING ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE IN JOBURG 12.1 AIR QUALITY 12.1.1 Context 12.1.2 State 12.1.3 Driving forces and pressures 12.1.4 Impacts 12.1.5 Response to Air quality issues 12.2 WATER QUALITY 12.2.1 Context 12.2.2 State 12.2.3 Driving forces and pressures 12.2.4 Impacts 12.2.5 Response to water quality and sanitation issues. 12.3 WASTE 12.3.1 Context 12.3.2 State 12.3.3 Driving forces and pressures 12.3.4 Impacts 12.3.5 Response strategy to Waste Management challenges 12.4 LAND AND OPEN SPACE RESOURCES 12.4.1 Context

4 6 7 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 11 11 12 12 13 14 15 18 23 31 32 39 40 40 44 45 50 50 50 50 52 63 63 64 66 66 69 74 74 76 80 80

01

12.4.2 12.4.3 12.4.4 12.4.5 12.5 12.5.1 12.5.2 12.5.3 12.5.4 12.5.5 13. 14.

State Driving forces and pressures Impacts Response strategy to land and open spaces BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION Context State Driving forces and pressures Impacts response strategy to biodiversity and conservation CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY

82 82 83 83 85 85 87 93 94 94 95 96

LIST OF TABLES Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

1: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: 8: 9: 10: 11: 12: 13: 14: 15: 16: 17: 18: 19: 20: 21: 22: 23:

Political and Legal framework for state of environment report Population per Region Area (Hectare) per land Use Category Average temperature and rainfall data for Johannesburg Type of vegetation Geology Population per Geological Category Population Density by Administrative Region Average Monthly Household Income Employment Statistics Major sources, pressures and impact on air quality Major sources of air pollution, type of pollution and mean concentration Monthly averages of NO2 (µg/m³) Monthly averages of SO2 (µg/m³) Major source of pollutants and impact on water quality Surface water quality in the Jukskei catchment. Surface water quality in the Klip and Rietspruit river catchments Major sources, pressures and impact on waste management Waste infrastructure Waste deposition and airspace utilization at the CoJ landfill sites Summary of driving forces and pressures on land and open spaces Driving forces, pressures and impact on conservation of biodiversity. Primary Open Spaces of High Ecological Value

9 18 21 24 27 27 28 32 35 37 42 45 47 51 53 54 68 71 72 80 86 90

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

Figure Figure Figure Figure

6: 7: 8: 9:

Map of South Africa City of Johannesburg within Gauteng Province Regional demarcation Predominant regional land use Graphical representation of the City of Johannesburg temperature and rainfall Topography and drainage pattern Rainfall distribution pattern Vegetation distribution pattern Geology

16 17 19 22 24 25 26 29 30

STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT REPORT 2003

03

MAYORAL FOREWORD

Our vision is to build Johannesburg into a world class African city. In this city we need to grow our economy and be effective in delivering services. If we succeed to grow our economy we will drive up the city’s tax revenue, private sector profits, and increase individual disposable incomes. Overall, however, we need sustainable development. It is important to note that in attaining a high standard of living and a better quality of life for all our citizens, we have a responsibility to ensure that we do nothing that will compromise the right of future generations to enjoy a good life. The saying that: “we have borrowed the present from our children and future generations”, holds true. We must, therefore not squander available limited resources at the expense of tomorrow. The city, like any other similar city in the developing world, faces numerous challenges: urbanisation, service delivery, protection of water resources, waste management, provision of adequate sanitation and plant and animal biodiversity management.

The City of Johannesburg is proud to have hosted the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in August and September 2002. The Johannesburg Plan of Action, the resolutions adopted at the WSSD, encapsulates the decisions and the resolve of the world to address the numerous complex challenges facing the world today. In this city, we used the pressure of hosting this event to consolidate our own environmental programmes and development plans. The environmental management framework (EMF) for this city was developed to partly respond to our strategic agenda and the call made at WSSD. The EMF provides a new paradigm shift in the manner in which the environment should be managed to achieve sustainable development. This report seeks to inform all interested and affected stakeholders about the state of the environment and the intervention measures that have been taken to address these complex challenges.

THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR: COUNCILLOR AMOS MASONDO CITY OF JOHANNESBURG

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

PREFACE

For years the city of Johannesburg has been one of the leading city’s that contributes to the economic development of South Africa. The city acknowledges that in the past years the quest to achieve economic development resulted in environmental degradations because there was no recognition of the integral relationship between environment and development. Today the city has to deal with various environmental challenges ranging from air, water, noise and land pollution to ensure that the City of Johannesburg communities enjoy a quality of life that is free of environmental degradation.

degradation, as well as the current state current of the environment. It also provides the city’s strategic responses on specific environmental media that are affected. The report attempts to respond to international obligations that the country has ratified. It also responds to national, provincial and local obligation to achieve sustainable development and a better life for the communities of Johannesburg.

To respond to the environmental management challenges facing the city, an environmental management framework was developed. The State of the Environment Report forms part of this. The framework provides a strategic direction on how the city’s scarce environmental resources should be managed to achieve sustainable development. The report provides an interim update to the Johannesburg State of the Environment Report, which was published in the year 2000. It provides timely and reliable information to all interested and affected parties on the causes of environmental

COUNCILLOR M MOKOENA MEMBER OF THE MAYORAL COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON: SECTION 80: CITY OF JOHANNESBURGDEVELOPMENT PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENT

05

1. INTRODUCTION The City of Johannesburg (CoJ), in both its 2010 and 2030 vision, has made a commitment to adopting and implementing the principles and underlying approaches to sustainable development. This commitment can be divided into broad categories, these being: -

-

Sustainability: This refers to a city in which the integrity of underlying, supportive social and ecological systems is maintained well into the foreseeable future. Quality of life: This refers to a city in which the surrounding environment is conducive to its citizens’ health and sense of well-being. Implicit in this notion are the desirable aesthetic, recreational and psychological benefits of living in a clean environment.

2. CITY OF JOHANNESBURG’S VISION WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENT The City’s vision with respect to aspects of the environment is defined in the following manner in the Jo’burg 2030 strategy:

designed using ecological principles (e.g. energy efficiency), and infrastructure which is equitably distributed and well maintained, rather than degraded. A human environment in which people’s work and residential environment is safe and healthy, the air and water is clean, noise is not invasive, sufficient opportunities for leisure exist and the organisation of the society promotes individual and community well-being in line with the Bill of Rights contained in the Constitution.” This commitment requires the integration of environmental issues into the City’s planning and development as well as decision-making processes. One of the ways of achieving this is by ensuring and/or supporting sustainable and equitable land use practices. For the city to be able to achieve this, it is critical that the state of the City’s environment is collected, collated and reported, particularly the biological and physical aspects and how the socio-economic and political aspects impact on this.

3. PURPOSE OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT

“A natural environment in which the remaining biodiversity, ecosystems and natural open space are conserved and sustainably utilised for recreation and scientific research, while scarce natural resources such as water and topsoil are more efficiently used, with increasing reliance on renewable resources.

The purpose of The State of Environment Report for the City of Jo’burg is to provide information with regard to the state of the environment or the current situation in the city in a user-friendly format. This is a report, which aims at providing information, which will set the framework for policies and strategies to deal with environmental problems. It, therefore, contains up-to-date information to aid in the planning process.

A built environment which values and conserves its cultural and historical heritage, with buildings and open spaces which are aesthetically pleasing and

State of environment reporting is an important step in the essential process of refining the information

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

and knowledge base on which decisions about the environment are made. The value of the State of Environment (SoE) lies in the fact that it informs decision-makers, interested and affected parties and the general public on the most fundamental environmental issues in an accessible way. It aims to stimulate debate and to raise awareness on key environmental issues and challenges. It is also important in that it helps to measure the progress of policy implementation as well as the success of the policy in effecting change.

4. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and Agenda 21, the global environmental strategy for sustainable development, which resulted from the conference, called for, amongst other things, improved environmental information for decision-making. Agenda 21 also calls for the development of sustainable development indicators to provide a basis for decision-making and performance monitoring. State of environment reporting has since become the globally accepted means of reporting on environmental issues, and of measuring progress towards sustainable development in the countries, which have adopted the principles, contained in Agenda 211 .

4.1 International Framework

1 State of the Environment in South Africa: An Overview. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (1999).

07

4.2. NATIONAL FRAMEWORK Table 1 highlights a national framework for state of environment reporting. Table 1: Political and legal framework for state of environment report

LEGISLATION

SECTION

PROVISION

CONSTITUTION, ACT 108 OF 1996

SECTION 24

Everyone has the right to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that: • Prevent pollution and ecological degradation; • Promote conservation; and • Secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

Sect 32

To promote just administrative action

Sect 33

To promote access to information.

Chapter 7 – Local Government

Executive powers and obligation by a Local Government read with schedule 4 part B.

Local Government Municipal Systems Act 2000 National Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998

Environment Conservation Act, Act 73 of 1989

Waste Management Bill

To develop a Spatial Development Framework and Integrated Development Plans to guide development direction of the City.

1. Chapter 3

To provide environmental information for reporting purpose and decision making in the state of the environment.

2. Chapter 2

To establish principles to guide sound decision making.

3 Chapter 3

To assess the impact of policies, programmes, plans and projects on the environment.

4. Chapter 3

To clean up after an emergency activity that threatens the environment.

5. Chapter 4

To undertake environmental impact assessment of activities that may have a substantial detrimental impact on the environment.

Regulation in terms of Sections 21,22 and 26

To undertake environmental impact assessment of activities that may have a substantial detrimental impact on the environment. To establish principles for sound environmental decision making on environmental impact assessments To develop waste management plans which will be an addendum to the Integrated Development Plan. To develop a waste information system. To establish mechanisms to manage hazardous substances.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

LEGISLATION

SECTION

PROVISION

Water Act, Act 36 of 1998

Sect 19

To take all reasonable measures to prevent any pollution of a water resource from occurring, continuing or recurring.

Chapter 2

Requires integrated water quality management at regional or catchment level in terms of the catchment management strategy

Sect 3

Local Authorities are required to prepare a water services development plan. The plan will be an addendum to the integrated development plan.

Section 4

To provide of water services and drafting of by-laws.

Section 6

To obtain approval for water services provider by water services authority.

S9 and Schedule 2

Listed processes need a registration certificate from the chief air pollution control officer.

Section 27

Declaration of dust control areas.

Section 28

Steps to prevent atmospheric pollution by dust.

S37, 40

Powers to detain and inspect any vehicle driving on a public road in its jurisdiction, for the emissions of noxious or offensive gases.

Water Services Act, Act 108 of 1997

Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, No. 45 of 1965

Air Quality Management Bill

Formulation of Air Quality Management Plan which will be an addendum to the integrated development plan. Develop an emissions inventory. Enforcement and regulation of scheduled processes (now to be called controlled processes). Standard setting. Local Government liable for ensuring adherence to acceptable ambient air quality standards within its area of jurisdiction (including enforcement).

Minerals Act, No. 50 of 1991 Biodiversity Bill

S38 and 39

Approval is required for the excavation, establishment of barrow pit etc from Department of Minerals and Energy for the construction of roads and other infrastructure. To develop biodiversity plans as part of the IDP.

09

5. THE FIRST STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF JOHANNESBURG In supporting the principles of Agenda 21 an opportunity was first created by the Cities State of the Environment Reporting on the Internet (CEROI) project. This project was initiated by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) through the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, and funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. The project formed part of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism’s Local Agenda 21 national campaign. This was a research project initiated within the framework of both Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21, whose purpose was to facilitate access to environmental information. The then Greater Johannesburg was one of the fifteen (15) pilot cities participating in this project to produce a city state of the Environment Report, based on its own experiences and needs. The Global Resource Information-Database centre in Arendal, Norway, provided technical and specialist support. A state of the city’s environment report was produced and published on the Internet in 2000. The purpose of the state of the environment report was to provide easily understandable information about the state of the environment on the former Greater Johannesburg Region, for citizens, local decision makers as well as a broad national and international audience, by means of the Internet as information agent.

6. UPDATING OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT Since 2000, the City of Johannesburg has undergone a transformation process resulting in the creation of a Unicity from various metropolitan sub-structures. The boundaries of the city were defined when the City of Johannesburg was established in 2000. The city is now divided into eleven administrative regions. The need to update the State of Environment report is amongst other things due to these changes. In complying with the legislative requirements, the current state of the City’s environment report (2000) has to be evaluated, revised and updated to: • •

• •

Incorporate new information, Monitor and evaluate progress that has been made in terms of achieving goals of sustainable development, Highlight potential environmental challenges for the future, and, Recommend intervention mechanisms.

This report will be the second state of environment report for the City of Joburg but the first since the transformation process. It seeks to provide an update on the current state of the city’s environment, in a user-friendly, strategic and non-technical format. The report focuses on the City of Joburg’s local environmental experiences and challenges. It provides information on the current state of the city’s biophysical components of the environment (i.e. land and open spaces, air and water) as well as information on the social, economical and political activities that impact on the biophysical resources.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

For each of these components, the environmental problems or challenges and changes or trends are described, the causes for environmental changes are identified and their impacts are discussed in terms of ecosystem functioning and socio-economic support. The report also highlights what is being done to prevent and reverse environmental degradation and what could be done to promote sustainable development and integrated environmental management.

7. AIMS OF THE STATE OF ENVIRONMENT

development practices. It is designed for everyone who wants to know what the state of the environment of Joburg is and what the consequences will be of certain policies, projects or actions. The rationale (objectives) for the state of environment report is to: •

• •

The State of Environment Report aims to: • • • • •

•

Provide a picture of what the state of Joburg’s environment was in 2000 and how it is now. Update key environmental issues, problems, challenges and progress made. Investigate, demonstrate and explain tendencies, trends and improvements. Report on progress or lack of progress of current policies, programmes and initiatives to the environmental issues and trends identified. Identify and recommend strategic interventions that can be adopted to respond to the issues.

8. RATIONALE / OBJECTIVES FOR STATE OF ENVIRONMENT

• •

•

• • •

The State of Environment Report is designed for government and other agencies and stakeholders (individuals, communities and organizations) to create awareness of environmental issues and support decision-making processes so as to promote sustainable

Improve understanding of environmental processes and the impacts of human activities on these processes, Improve understanding of the causes and effects of environmental change, Provide recommendations for responses to such changes, Provide data for establishing, monitoring and evaluating sustainable development strategies, programmes and projects, Integrate information from various sources on different aspects of the environment, Provide access to environmental information that has been integrated, analysed and interpreted to enhance and inform decision making and sustainable development planning, Provide information not only for local, provincial and national environmental monitoring and reporting but also for global environmental assessment, Enhance decision making so as to improve environmental protection and sustainability, Raising awareness around local environmental issues and priorities for the City, and, Promoting ongoing discussions in respect of the implementation of Council policies.

9. METHODOLOGY The

Department

of

Development

Planning,

11

Transportation and Environmental Management of the City of Joburg produced the state of environment report with inputs from a number of stakeholders, various Council departments, Regional offices and UACs, research institutions and specialist consultants. Information gathering was mostly based on secondary data and therefore primarily desk top in nature. It included literature review and in some instances, interviews with key informants and workshops with relevant stakeholders. Maps were compiled using the latest statistical data and information from the Geographical Information System and then analysed to give a clear picture. The approach to the state of environment reporting for the City of Joburg is based on a modified version of the previous state of the City’s environment report produced in 2000. For practical purposes the Report has been structured around overarching general environmental themes, which represent major groupings of subject matter or issues, which are closely related. This serves to simplify navigation through the Report and provide easy access to the subject matter. The structuring that has been adopted must not be interpreted as a simplification of the interactions of environmental influences. The main themes selected after the review of several • Land and open spaces, • Biodiversity and conservation, State of the Environment Reports are: • Water, • Air, and, • Waste (various media). These issues were identified through and extensive

stakeholder participation process where all council Utilities, Agencies and Corporatised entities and other core departments were involved.

10. PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION The DPSIR model was used to compile The City’s State of Environment Report and focuses on the following: Driving Forces: These are the underlying social and economic activities that lead to environmental change e.g. population growth, poverty, agriculture and industrial production. Pressures: These are pressures on the environment which result from the driving forces, e.g. water, soil and air pollution from industrial production, or depletion of fish stock through human consumption. State: This section describes the current state of the environment and recent trends in environmental quality. Impacts: These are the consequences of the pressures on the environment, e.g. reductions in biodiversity, soil degradation, poor human health, and lack of clean and safe water. Responses: This section describes the human responses to environmental change, including policies and management strategies to reduce environmental damage, rehabilitate damaged environments and encourage sustainable development. It is important to note that the information contained in the report may not be 100% accurate due to the

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

following reasons: • •

•

•

In a number of areas there is not enough information to assess the situation. Data was not readily available for reporting on the state of the City’s environment. Some important data are missing, for example, on waste generation, air quality (i.e. gaseous emissions) and water quality. There are also gaps in information on nonpoint sources of pollution. Many data sets, although available, are incomplete. The data does not provide city wide coverage or have in some instances records are missing or records are inaccessible, especially on waste often because they are held by private corporations or institutions that are not willing to release them. Some data is in a format that needs considerable analysis before it can be used and this often leads to distortions and inaccuracies in the information. As a result, in some cases, inaccurate, incomplete and outdated information had to be relied upon.

As part of the next phase, it is vital that the city puts in place measures to ensure that existing information databases are maintained and updated to support future SoE reports and that all new data sets are incorporated into the existing data. It is also critical that that data gaps are filled before the next reporting phase and that research programmes are encouraged and supported. This will help to monitor progress and provide accurate scientific data on the state of the City’s environment.

11. THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE CITY OF JOHANNESBURG The City of Johannesburg is one of the most diverse, beautiful and progressive cities in the world. Sustaining and enhancing all these qualities is high on the City’s agenda. The City of Johannesburg is committed to sustainable development and integrated environmental management. To achieve this, the city deems it necessary to assess and report on the state of the city’s environment, monitor its progress, evaluate whether the policies can be implemented and are effective, legislative and management responses and continuously identify intervention mechanisms and environmentally sound strategies, programmes, projects and activities. Economically and by population, Johannesburg is the largest City in the Gauteng Province, which is one of the nine provinces in South Africa. Figure 1 indicates the location of Gauteng province in relation to the other provinces in South Africa while Figure 2 shows the location of the City of Johannesburg within the Gauteng province. After the local government elections of December 2000, the City of Johannesburg became a Unicity. Areas that were incorporated into the City were the former Northern, Southern, Eastern and Western Metropolitan Local Councils, as well as Midrand and Modderfontein. The administration of the City has been decentralised into 11 regions with the intention of bringing the City’s administration into close contact with local communities. This closeness will enable administrators to be more responsive to the differing local needs.

13

Figure 1: Map of South Africa

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 2: City of Johannesburg within Gauteng Province

15

11.1 CITY STRUCTURE The City of Johannesburg can be divided into broad structural / analytical bands. These bands have resulted in there being varying environmental pressures in different parts of the City. The Deep South consists of residential areas and several informal settlements, which are located outside the City’s urban development boundary and mainstream economy. The focus for the area would be to prevent further expansion. The Soweto and Southern Suburbs band can be split into the Soweto Complex that accommodates approximately fifty percent (50%) of the City’s marginalized communities. The development focus for the Complex is to create within it an economic web and provide adequate social and engineering infra-

structure. The Southern Suburbs comprises middle to high-income residential suburbs and industrial complexes. There is a shortage of tertiary sector activities in this area. In addition cultural, recreational and ecotourism opportunities have not been exploited. The development policy for this area would be to exploit redevelopment opportunities. The City of Johannesburg is divided into 11 administrative regions. See Figure 3. Region 1 is the most sparsely populated region with approximately 28 000 people. Table 2 summarises the population distribution by region. It should, however be mentioned that significant housing projects have been implemented in Region 1 since the 1996 census. The two administrative regions with the highest population (Regions 6 and 10) enclose Soweto – one of the highest density areas within Gauteng Province.

Table 2: Population per Region

REGION Diepsloot (1)

POPULATION

PERCENT 28,062

0.94%

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

127,808

4.29%

Rosebank/Sandton (3)

127,808

5.16%

Northcliff (4)

127,808

6.64%

Roodepoort (5)

168,712

5.66%

Doornkop/Soweto (6)

593,476

19.90%

Alexandra (7)

336,461

11.28%

Central Region (8)

406,825

13.64%

Johannesburg South (9)

143,026

4.80%

Diepkloof/Meadolands (10)

563,293

18.89%

Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11)

262,380

8.80%

2,982,033

100.00%

Total

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 3. Regional demarcation

17

The Mining Belt / Inner City band makes up the central part of the city. The CBD has lost much of its status and investment drive but plans are being implemented by the Council to revive this area. Business has moved out of the CBD to new developing nodes. The main residential areas in this band are located to the west with industrial activity being present as a result of mining activity. Extensive environmental and geological issues exist in this portion of the band. The eastern portion is made up of the City Deep Economic Development Zone and declining Malvern and Jeppestown residential areas. The policy implication of the belt is one of urban renewal, change and integration. The knowledge-based economy is predominately located in the Northern Area band. The band includes a number of major nodes and established residential areas with high amenity. The policy implications for this area are to enhance and maintain the urban qualities of this band. The North-West band area lies beyond the urban development boundary. This band is under pressure from urban sprawl, illegal land uses and land invasion. The policy outcomes for this band are consolidation, prevention of expansion, and to ensure that acceptable levels of service are provided. Key to achieving the vision for the City is the focus on the spatial development of the City. To facilitate this, City officials have defined a Spatial Development Framework (SDF) that seeks to optimise the opportunities and choices offered by the City through the physical planning of the City. The six strategies that feed into the SDF are the delineation of an urban development boundary, the movements system, establishment of development nodes, environmental

management issues focussing on sustainable development and efficiencies, sustainable neighbourhood development and corridors. Table 3 provides a summary of the land usage within the City of Johannesburg. Figure 4 illustrates the predominant regional land use. The two highest categories include residential and undeveloped land. The residential areas are mostly concentrated around the ring road system with Soweto and Johannesburg South below the mining belt and Lenasia South and Orange Farm almost 40Km south of the city centre. A further residential component can be found in the far north of the City – that is, Diepsloot. Undeveloped land can be found mostly to the north and the south of the city. The economic activities in Johannesburg are represented by Commercial activities (2.5%), Cultivated land (4.8%) and Industrial / Transport related activities (2.2%).

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 3: Area (hectare) per land use category

LAND USE CATEGORY

POPULATION

PERCENT

Commercial

4.066

2.5%

Cultivated Land

7.844

4.8%

Forest, Woodland & Bush

6.728

4.1%

Improved Grassland

4.574

2.8%

Industrial / Transport

3.677

2.2%

Mines & Quarries

6.024

3.7%

361

0.2%

Residential

56.229

34.2%

Small Holdings

17.074

10.4%

Undeveloped Land

56.739

34.5%

1.137

0.7%

164.453

100.00%

Pans & Dams

Wetlands Total

19

Figure 4: Predominant regional land use

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

11.2

THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

The City of Johannesburg is situated on the Highveld, a broad, grassy plateau that sweeps across the South African interior and has an elevation that ranges from 1 500 m to 1 800 m. Figure 5 shows the topography and drainage pattern of the city. The City straddles the Witwatersrand, or Rand, a string of low, rocky ridges that constitutes the watershed between the drainages into the Indian and Atlantic Oceans. The Jukskei River drains into the Crocodile River, which in turn drains into the Indian Ocean while the Klip River, which flows into the Vaal River, in turn flows into the Orange River, which drains into the Atlantic Ocean. The high portions of the Witwatersrand ridges run through the centre of the City in an east west direction. The lowest lying areas of the City are located in the northwest through which the Jukskei River runs.

From a climatic perspective the City has a high temperate climate and enjoys about eight hours of sunlight per day in both winter and summer. Daily temperatures range between an average mid-summer (January) maximum of 26ºC and an average mid-winter (June) maximum of 16ºC. Rainfall averages about 710 mm per annum, but the total varies considerably from year to year, making drought a common occurrence. Within the City the highest rainfall occurs in a band across the central region, which coincides with the ridge band that runs east west across the City’s centre. Most of the rain the City receives falls mostly in the summer months, often in spectacular late-afternoon electrical storms. Table 4 and Figure 6 summarise the average temperature and rainfall data for Johannesburg.

Johannesburg has an interesting characteristic that makes it a unique metropolis, in that it is the only metropolis in the world which is not located on a navigable river, estuary or has a seaport. It obtains most of its water from an adjoining region in Gauteng, via the Vaal River. In terms of geology the northern third of the City is dominated by granite formations. The central region of the City, which includes the central business district, is dominated by quartzite geology. The Southern portion of the City’s geology is made up of east-west running bands of lava, dolomite, shale and quartzite.

21

Table 4: Average temperature and rainfall data for Johannesburg

MONTH

AVERAGE AVERAGE HIGH TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE (°C) (°C)

AVERAGE LOW TEMPERATURE (°C)

AVERAGE RAINFALL (MM)

January February March April May June July

20

25

15

124

20

23

15

96

18

23

14

83

16

20

11

53

13

18

8

17

10

15

5

7

11

16

5

5

August September October November December

13

18

7

5

16

21

10

27

17

22

12

73

18

23

13

119

19

24

15

109

Figure 6: Graphical representation of the City of Johannesburg temperature and rainfall

Rainfall in the City of Johannesburg varies between 600 and 750 mm per annum. The highest category rainfall can be found over the higher areas of Johannesburg (Northcliff, Melville Koppies,

Houghton etc.) with the predominant category being 650 – 700 mm per annum. Figure 7 illustrates the rainfall distribution pattern in the city.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 5: Topography and drainage pattern

23

Figure 7: Rainfall distribution pattern

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 5: Type of vegetation VEGETATION

HECTARE

Bankenveld Grassland / Bush

PERCENTAGE 619

0.4%

Cymbopogon - Themeda Grassland

17,648

10.7%

Disturbed Urban Grassland

35,485

21.6%

Dolomitic Mixed Grassland

15,247

9.3%

Englerophytum - Protea caffra

9,845

6.0%

Euclea - Acacia caffra

15,768

9.6%

Hyparrhenia hirta

69,098

42.0%

Wetland Total

Table 5 summarises the vegetation type found in the city. Forty-two percent (42%) of the City of Johannesburg’s vegetation falls within the Hyparrhenia hirta category (common name – tall granitic grassland). The maps indicated that this type of vegetation occurs mostly to the north of the ridge

744

0.5%

164,453

100.0%

that runs along Northcliff, Melville and Houghton Estate. To the south of Johannesburg, vegetation can be predominantly classified as “grassland” (Cymbopogon Themeda Grassland & Disturbed Urban Grassland). Figure 8 shows the vegetation distribution pattern.

Table 6: Geology

GEOLOGY

HECTARE

PERCENTAGE

Amphibolite

2,499

1.5%

Dolomite

16,572

10.1%

Granite

69,618

42.3%

Lava

15,886

9.7%

Quartzite

52,331

31.8%

Shale

7,546

4.6%

TOTAL

164,453

100.0%

The bulk of Johannesburg is made up of Granite (42%). Table 6 illustrates the geographical make up of the city while Figure 9 shows the geological pattern. Again this geology can be found to the

north of the City with a band of Quartzite running through the middle of the City. Dolomite can be found along the Western and South Western parts of Johannesburg around the Soweto / Lenasia area.

25

Table 7: Population per geological category GEOLOGY

POPULATION

Amphibolite

PERCENTAGE 5,591

0.2%

Dolomite

112,597

4.3%

Granite

610,388

23.1%

Lava

607,466

23.0%

1,290,333

48.9%

13,122

0.5%

2,639,498

100.0%

Quartzite Shale TOTAL

Aggregating population to geological categories proved that four point three percent (4.3%) of people stay inside areas categorised by dolomite, with almost fifty percent (50%) of the population

staying in areas underlain by quartzite. Table 7 demonstrates this.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 8: Vegetation distribution pattern

27

Figure 9: Geology

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

11.3

THE ECONOMY

Most of the gold mines in the city ceased operation in the 1970s. The remnants of the industry-rusting headgear, towering yellow-white mine dumps, corpses of dusty Australian blue gum trees imported for Underground timber are still common and unique to the City’s landscape. Today the City, which is one of the youngest major cities in the world, has evolved into being South Africa’s chief industrial and financial metropolis. Economically, the City is very important within the South African context, generating a Gross Geographic Product (GGP) of approximately R117 billion, which equates to fourty percent (40%) of Gauteng’s and sixteen percent (16%) of South Africa’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This makes Johannesburg the largest single contributor to South Africa’s GDP. Twenty percent (20%) of all of South Africa’s exports originate from Johannesburg and thirty-nine percent (39%) of the country’s exports pass through the City.

(1.8%), with employment growing at just under one percent (1%) per annum over the same period. Johannesburg will continue to be a city of economic activity, where individuals come to earn a living, often at the expense of keeping the family unit together. The per capita GGP in Johannesburg is R31,000. This compares to World Bank designated middle-income countries whose average GGP per capita is R33,000. Whilst very little data exists at present on the quality or sustainability of Johannesburg’s environment, the iGoli 2010 process suggests that Johannesburg must pay attention to such issues. If not managed in terms of environmental consequences, unmanaged economic growth could result in increased air quality problems currently experienced in first world countries. Agenda items such as alternative fuel resources, energy efficiency, waste generation and management, and water usage will all need to be addressed.

The City provides jobs to 840,000 people in 290,000 formal sector business enterprises, which represents twelve percent (12%) of South Africa’s employment. Although employment growth has averaged one percent (1%) over the past ten years it is disturbing that unemployment in the city has risen from twentyseven (27) to thirty percent (30%) in the past three years. Economic growth has averaged at two percent (2%) per annum over the last ten years, slightly ahead of the national average of one point eight percent

29

11.4 SOCIAL CONTEXT The City of Johannesburg area forms the largest urban complex in South Africa and one of the largest on the African continent, with an urbanisation rate of ninety-seven percent (97%). The City is home to a population of two point eight three (2.83) million people living in some 791,367 households of approximately three point six (3.6) people per household. Thirty-three percent (33%) of Johannesburg’s population is housed in less than adequate accommodation, with fourteen point eight percent (14.8%) of households living in informal settlements and thirteen point six percent (13.6%) of households in backyard shacks. At present, nineteen percent (19%) of the population resides in the magisterial district that includes the inner city, Northcliff and the South. Twenty percent (20%) live in the North where the projected population growth is the strongest, eight percent (8%) in Roodepoort and by far the largest

concentration of the population (53%) reside in Soweto, Diepkloof and Orange Farm. The previously disadvantaged areas of Ivory Park, Alexandra, Soweto, Orange Farm and also the Central Business District are indicated as areas with a high population density. Table 8 and Figure 10 summarises and illustrate the population density by administrative regions. Of the eleven (11) administrative regions, region 9 has the lowest population density (32 people per hectare). Region 7 has the highest population density – mostly because of Alexandra that is situated within this region. Within Alexandra there are numerous hostels and informal settlements, whilst the lack of space for future expansion around Alexandra can also be cited for the high population density of this region. Region 8 also has a high population density (365 people per hectare). This is consistent with the multiple residential character of the area – various flats and high-rise building with a fairly small footprint causing high population density.

Table 8: Population density by administrative region REGION

AVERAGE POPULATION DENSITY (PEOPLE PER HECTARE)

Diepsloot (1)

98

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

86

Rosebank/Sandton (3)

41

Northcliff (4)

55

Roodepoort (5)

49

Doornkop/Soweto (6)

163

Alexandra (7)

499

Cetral Region (8)

365

Johannesburg South (9)

32

Diepkloof/Meadolands (10)

187

Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11)

68

Total

149

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 10: Population density by administrative regions

31

Figure 11: Monthly income per household

Table 9 and Figure 11 indicate that Region 3 is by far the “richest” administrative region, with Regions 6, 10 and 11 the poorest. Interesting enough it can be noted that region 11 is also furthest removed from

job opportunities within the City of Johannesburg. Figure 12 shows the distribution of household income by administrative region.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 9: Average monthly household income Region

Ave. Monthly Income per Household

Diepsloot (1)

R 3,961

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

R 3,943

Rosebank/Sandton (3)

R 8,015

Northcliff (4)

R 6,100

Roodepoort (5)

R 6,968

Doornkop/Soweto (6)

R 1,906

Alexandra (7)

R 3,306

Cetral Region (8)

R 3,357

Johannesburg South (9)

R 5,174

Diepkloof/Meadolands (10)

R 1,915

Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11)

R 1,934

TOTAL

In terms of the age structure of people residing in the City there has been evidence over the last forty (40) years that there are fewer young children (0 to 14 years old) and fewer older citizens (55 upwards) with the majority of the population aged between nineteen (19) and thirty-nine (39) years. It is projected that in light of the declining life expectancy and fertility trends, the City’s population will become younger on average over the next fifteen (15) years.

R 4,235

The HIV / AIDS epidemic is projected to have a significant impact on demographic trends in the City, including population growth, which is expected to slow to point nine percent (0.9%) per annum over the next decade. By 2010 the population is forecasted to reach 3.1 million people in 873,000 households.

33

Figure 12: Distribution of household income

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 10: Employment statistics REGION

EMPLOYED

Diepsloot (1) Midrand / Ivory Park (2) Rosebank/Sandton (3) Northcliff (4) Roodepoort (5) Doornkop/Soweto (6) Alexandra (7) Cetral Region (8) Johannesburg South (9) Diepkloof/Meadolands (10) Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11) TOTAL

The region with the largest number of employed people is the inner city (region 8). Table 10 indicates that the two regions with the highest population (region 6 and 10) also have the highest percentage of unemployed people (25% and 22% respectively).

UNEMPLOYED - LOOKING

UNEMPLOYED PERCENTAGE

7,081 26,472 50,399 43,339 44,404 79,339 81,998 88,609 27,248 68,240 39,175

1,634 6,202 1,307 2,413 2,285 22,363 7,982 6,527 1,582 19,549 15,402

1.9% 7.1% 1.5% 2.8% 2.6% 25.6% 9.1% 7.5% 1.8% 22.4% 17.7%

556,304

87,246

100.0%

Those areas with the lowest unemployment percentage also correlate with those areas with higher income. Figure 13 illustrates the distribution of employment and unemployment by administrative regions.

35

Figure 13: Distribution of Employment by region

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12. FORCES DRIVING ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE IN JOBURG One of the primary functions of the City is to develop and implement policies, strategies and plans to encourage and support sustainable development practices. To effectively do this, it is critical that the City understands the driving forces and the pressures they cause.

processes and put pressure on ecosystems. The rate of environmental degradation and the amount of pressure exerted on the City’s natural resources is increasing by day. The driving forces which have contributed to the current environmental situation include the following: • •

Experience and research from international sources has shown that the costs of repairing and rehabilitating degraded areas is higher than the costs of preventing environmental damage. In essence, this means that the costs of prevention are far lower than the costs associated with extinction, habitat loss, and loss of ecosystem functionality, pollution and impaired human health. These are some of the key driving forces that influence the development of policies and economic activities. It is therefore apparent that in order to prevent or reverse environmental damage arising from human pressures, and to promote activities, which are environmentally sustainable, it is critical to understand natural resources and ecosystem functions and what causes them to become depleted and degraded. It is also important to understand the driving forces of environmental change, and how they work together to put pressure on natural resources and ecosystem function. This understanding can be used to guide, inform or influence decision makers to develop and implement policies, projects and strategies that ensure sustainable development. Environmental change is caused by human activities (driving forces), which combine with natural

•

• •

•

Population growth, rapid urbanization and urban sprawl. The failure of government to enforce regulations (i.e. pollution control). The pressure to meet the basic needs of the population (i.e. food, shelter and energy requirements). The need for economic growth and job creation. Unsustainable and exploitative patterns of resource use – industry, mining and agriculture use water wastefully and there are no incentives to use them wisely or to recycle waste products. Increased waste generation.

The above driving forces put enormous pressure on the environment through increased demand for resources and ecosystem services, which in turn leads to exploitation and depletion of these resources. These can be summarised as follows: Land degradation: Widespread change of land cover by clearing and deforestation, and conversion of land from natural habitats to agriculture, settlement and other development activities constitute a major pressure on open spaces, areas of conservation significance, rivers and the city’s biodiversity because large areas are transformed.

37

Threats to biodiversity: Natural habitats in Joburg are coming under increasing pressure from human settlements, mining activities and other commercial activities. Alien invasive plants (although not adequately quantified and documented) are causing massive disturbance in natural systems. Problem plants such as Acacia Saligna have dominated large areas of the city to the extent that natural vegetation has been almost completely lost. Others, for example, pine present a threat to water availability because they use greater amounts of water than the natural vegetation and therefore reduce the amount of run-off water reaching streams and rivers. These impacts reduce the diversity and cover of indigenous plant species, and thus alter the functioning of the ecosystem. Escalating soil degradation, declining biological diversity and soil productivity and over exploitation of rangelands undermine the development prospects for present and future generation in the city. Pollution and waste: Generation of air pollutants and waste on land and soil by mining, industrial and domestic activities exert a lot of pressure on the envi-

ronment and on the limited waste disposal facilities in the city. The specific driving forces and pressures and their impacts will be discussed under each environmental theme in the following paragraphs.

12.1 AIR QUALITY 12.1.1 Context Poor air quality poses an increasing threat to health, with an increasing number of residents suffering from respiratory diseases, this being further exacerbated by poor levels of immunity and lowered resistance to disease due to HIV etc. There are also less visible impacts, such as the increasing of an urban heat island effect, acid deposition and chemical corrosion of structures, and the advancement of global warming through the depletion of the ozone layer by greenhouse gases. Table 11 presents the major sources and pressures that impact on air quality.

Table 11: Major sources, pressures and impact on air quality POLLUTANT

DRIVING FORCES/ SOURCES OF POLLUTION

IMPACTS

STATE OF AIR POLLUTION

Particulate Matter or PM, is the term for particles found in the air, including dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplets. Particles can be suspended in the air for long periods of time. Some particles are large or dark enough to be seen as soot or smoke. Others are so small that individually they can only be detected with an electron microscope. Indoor and ambient.

Main sources include domestic fuel burning. They further come from a variety of sources such as diesel-driven vehicle tailpipe emissions, industrial operations, construction sites. Minor (localised) sources include unpaved roads, stone crushing and burning of wood as in the case of braai’s.

PM can be linked to a series of health impacts resulting in respiratory problems, visibility impairment and aesthetic damage (in the case of soot). Impacted areas include the domestic fuel burning areas which coincides with un-electrified areas and poorer electrified areas in former townships.

The concentration of the pollutant is well in excess of health guidelines. In the event that SA guidelines are brought in line with international standards, much of the City would be classified as being in non-compliance.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

POLLUTANT

DRIVING FORCES/ SOURCES OF POLLUTION

IMPACTS

STATE OF AIR POLLUTION

Nitrogen Dioxide (or NO2) and Ozone (or O3) Ambient

Primary source includes vehicle tailpipe emissions. Other potential sources include domestic and industrial fuel burning appliances, airport related emissions and power generation.

They are considered as greenhouse gasses and contribute to global warming. Impacted areas are associated with areas of high vehicle activity, e.g. CBD and city highways.

Elevated levels were identified over large portion of the City.

Sulphur Dioxide (or SO2), Carbon Monoxide (or CO) and Volatile Organics- benzene (or VOC’s). Indoor.

Domestic coal burning.

Main impacted areas include coal burning households.

Increased ambient levels have been experienced at various outdoor sites but are general within health guidelines. Indoor SO2 and CO concentrations exceed health guidelines significantly within domestic coal burning households.

Hazardous Air Pollutant (or HAP) This include various toxins and are carcinogenic.

Domestic coal burning, incinerators, landfills, vehicle exhaust tailpipe emissions, industrial operations associated with HAP releases.

Exposure to sufficient quantities can result in cancer or other serious health effects. Impacted areas include domestic coal burning areas, areas in close proximity to incinerators and landfill sites and areas of high level vehicle activity.

They are usually emitted in trace amounts but present significant health risks within close proximity of source.

Dust- nuisance impact.

Major sources include unpaved roads and un-rehabilitated mine tailing dumps.

Impacted areas include areas in close proximity to un-rehabilitated mine tailing dumps, unpaved roads, poor mining practices, poorly maintained construction operations and exposed soil areas during ploughing season.

This is as a result of dust deposition and associated with loss of amenity.

Odours.

Sources include sewage treatment works, poorly operated landfill sites, abattoirs, and animal rendering plants.

It result in loss of amenity and residential areas in close proximity are high impacted areas.

39

Figure 14: Major sources of air pollution

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.1.2 STATE While in many parts of Johannesburg, air quality is within acceptable standards, approximately twenty percent (20%) of the City, particularly dense informal settlements and lower income townships, experience severe air pollution, with ambient air pollution levels exceeding acceptable guidelines by approximately twenty to thirty percent (20-30%) particularly during winter when temperature inversions prevent emissions from dispersing. Levels of particulate matter in certain townships can exceed the WHO standards by as much as 250% in winter. A major source of this pollution is the high use of fossil fuels, particularly low-grade coal, amongst poorer households. Figure 14 illustrates the distribution of major sources of air pollution. Table 12 shows the major sources of pollution, type of pollutants and

mean concentration by regions. Even in electrified areas, use of fossil fuels, for cooking, heating and social activities still persists. Increasing vehicular emissions due to the strong reliance on private cars and taxis, and inadequate maintenance, also contributes significantly to high pollution levels. This is anticipated to get worse, in view of the trends in private vehicle usage and traffic volumes, which showed a 25% growth between 1996 and 2000. Dust from un-rehabilitated or operational mine dumps, and from un-tarred roads, also causes pollution, particularly in the southern and western parts of the City, and impacting negatively on the most disadvantaged communities. Another problem, which occurs mainly in winter, is widespread burning and veld fires, which generate additional, smoke pollution and cause poor visibility on roads.

41

Table 12: Major sources of air pollution, type of pollution and mean concentration

Region

Major sources of air pollution

Type of pollutant

Diepsloot (1)

Coal burning, traffic

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

Coal burning, industry, traffic

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

?

Rosebank /Sandton (3)

Traffic

Particulates, NOx, O3, CO

NO2: 32 ppb

Northcliff (4)

Industry, traffic

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

?

Roodepoort (5)

Industry, traffic

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

?

Doornkop/Soweto (6)

Coal burning, traffic

SO2, particulates*, NOx, O3, CO

SO2: 14 ppb

Mean concentration SO2: 14 ppb

Alexandra (7)

Coal burning, traffic, industry

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

SO2: 40 ppb PM10: 55ug/m3 NO2:50 ppb O3: 70 ppb CO: 5 ppm

Central Region (8)

Coal burning

SO2, particulates

?

Johannesburg South (9)

Traffic, industry

SO2, particulates, NOx, O3, CO

PM10: 55um/m3

Diepkllof/Meadolands (10)

Coal burning

SO2, particulates*

?

Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11)

Coal burning, traffic

SO2, particulates#, NOx, O3, CO

10 ppb

KEY: # ?

* Particulates (dust from mines and dirt roads – seasonal) Particulates (dust from dirt roads) No data

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.1.3 DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES Residential coal and wood burning Burning of coal and wood for heat, cooking and lighting cause classical smog containing SO2 and smoke, as well as contributing to the greenhouse effect through CO2 emissions. This is occurring especially in low-income areas like Soweto, Orange Farm and Alexandra. Studies have shown that a wood-burning stove creates more than twice the CO2 emissions per unit of energy produced than that from a coal fired power station.

Vehicle emissions Emissions primarily from private motor vehicles contribute to photochemical smog, with pollutants such as NOx, PM10 (particulate matter) and Total Suspended Particulates (TSP). This is occurring especially in areas of high traffic density such as the CBD, Sandton, Randburg, Melville and Southgate. In 1997, car ownership in the City of Johannesburg was approximately 350 cars / 1,000 population and this is projected to increase by sixteen point five percent (16.5%) over the period to 2010. Figure 15 shows the distribution of mine dumps within the city.

43

Figure 15: Geographical distribution of mine dumps

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Mining activity

Waste disposal practices and fires

Mines are a major source of dust / particulates, which are blown from their tailings dams, ash heaps and mine dumps. There are 159 mines in the Gauteng province, several of which still operate on the outskirts of Johannesburg. Perhaps more problematic are the mine dumps of discontinued operations which occur south of the city and which were abandoned prior to legislated rehabilitation requirements being introduced in 1991.

The twelve landfills within the City of Johannesburg emit methane, which is combustible and contributes to the greenhouse effect. Emissions from the three incinerators also emit a variety of pollutants, as do illegal burning of tyres or other waste. The prevalence of illegal veld fires in the City of Johannesburg was one of the key reasons for the introduction of the National Veld and Forest Fire Act, 101 of 1998. Nitrogen dioxide

Industrial activity Industry, including power generation, emits a variety of pollutants contributing to photo chemical and classical smog, especially in the industrial areas of the former Eastern Metropolitan Local Council, which is now predominantly Region 3. Kelvin Power Station, for example, received public complaints regarding dust fall-out as early as 1990 and has had to install various control measures to address the issue. This driver is partly a function of the City of Johannesburg’s economic status, since it produces twelve percent (12%) of South Africa’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

The highest levels of NO2 can be found mainly in the areas surrounding the CBD and in the industrial area of Marlboro, with the main source types being domestic heating, energy production and vehicle exhaust emissions. The highest monthly mean observed for outdoor concentration of NO2 were about half of the concentration levels as defined by the South African ambient air quality standards (150 µg/m³) on a monthly basis. Table 13 provides monthly averages of NO2 µg/m³. Figure 16 shows areas affected by nitrogen dioxide. Even though the NO2 level were within acceptable limits the indoor pollution levels were high, even exceeding acceptable standards in some areas. This should be looked upon seriously, especially with respect to health aspects.

Table 13:

Monthly averages of NO2 (µg/m³)

CLASS

AREA

Residential Areas (Incl. Parks)

Greater JHB Eastern Western Northern

39 48 33 40

Southern

37

Outside

25

Background

MEAN (G/M³)

(Source: IVL Report, 1999)

45

Sulphur dioxide As with Sulphur dioxide, the maximum mean observed value was less than the South African ambient air quality standards (130 µg/m³). Table 14 provides monthly averages of SO2 (µg/m³). Figure 17 shows area affected by sulphur dioxide. Areas with the highest levels of SO2 are Soweto,

Alexandra, CBD and the northern part of Diepsloot, showing a strong correlation with population density. The relatively high air pollution concentration levels observed outdoors in these areas are to a great extent caused by indoor sources such as facilities used for cooking.

Table 14: Monthly averages of SO2 (µg/m³) CLASS

AREA

Residential Areas (Incl. Parks)

Greater JHB

30

Eastern

29

Western

26

Northern

29

Southern

32

Outside

24

Background

MEAN (G/M³)

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 16: Air pollution – nitrogen dioxide

47

Figure 17: Air pollution – sulphur dioxide

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.1.4 IMPACTS The impact of atmospheric emissions emanating from sources within the City has not only local, but also regional and global, implications. Atmospheric emissions from local sources also impact on the air quality of neighbouring regions, with jJohannesburg being considered a contributor to background air pollution concentrations within the Vaal Triangle. Air pollution has both direct impacts, and also secondary impacts, or externalities, the costs of which are imposed on society and which are also ultimately borne by the City. Health impacts – Air pollution has severe health impacts, such as high rates of respiratory disease and asthma associated with poor air quality in certain areas, which lead to reduced life expectancy, poor quality of life, increased medical costs and lower productivity. Air pollution impacts more severely on vulnerable groups such as the aged, children, and HIV affected communities. The financial costs associated with health impacts are significant. Decrease in bio-diversity and damage to sensitive areas – Pollution and acid deposition impacts on plant life and sensitive eco-systems, and increased incidence of diseases affecting trees. Loss of investment and other economic impacts - Air pollution negatively affects a city’s profile as

a destination for foreign investment, whether for direct industrial investment or attraction of high profile international events. Mitigation and abatement measures can also be very costly for cities, for example, the construction of alternative transport systems. Ozone depletion and climate change – Emissions of ozone depleting or greenhouse gases contribute to global climate change, and compound associated negative impacts such as skin cancers, volatile weather and sea level rise. Air pollution generally can lead to increased temperatures and changes in rainfall patterns. Damage to buildings and infrastructure – Air pollution, such as acid rain, can cause staining and chemical corrosion of buildings and monuments. Distortion of land values – Air pollution associated with certain parts of the city, such as dense, previously disadvantaged areas, and those adjacent to mine dumps will tend to depress property prices in such areas. Some of these secondary outcomes of air pollution have been quantified as externality costs in various studies. These are quoted below, as indicative of the kind of costs which the City of Johannesburg may have to bear in the future. Table 15 summarises a WWF (2000) study of the externality costs associated

Table 15: Externatlity cost associated with air pollution SECTOR COVERAGE

EXTERNALITY COSTS FOR SA IN RBN

DERIVED EXTERNALITY COST FOR CITY OF JOHANNESBURG IN RM*

Coal mining

0.3 - 1,5

30 – 175

Transport

9,5

1,137

Electricity generation

2.9 – 16.7

348 – 2,010

* Based on ity of Johannesburg’s proportion of national GDP, namely 12%

49

with air pollution in certain sectors in South Africa.

12.1.5 RESPONSE TO AIR QUALITY ISSUES The city is concerned about air quality problems and is committed to address them. The city has designed an air quality management plan that is inline with the requirements of the National Air Quality Management bill, which aims to achieve acceptable air quality levels to promote clean and healthy environment for all citizens within the city. It will also minimise the negative impacts of air pollution on health and the environment and to promote the reduction of green house gases so as to support the council’s climate change protection programme. The implementation of the plan has included the installation of five air quality-monitoring stations at strategic positions around the city. The monitoring stations will be used to collect data on air quality around the city to inform the implementation of intervention measures.

12.2 WATER 12.2.1 Context Johannesburg is situated in the middle of two catchments or drainage systems which drain either to the Klip River in the South or to the Jukskei river in the North. Further south, a part of Johannesburg also falls within the Rietspruit catchment. The area has summer rainfall with an average of between 650mm and 750mm depending on the microclimate. This rainfall is usually in the form of thundershowers and often causes flood events in the catchments during the summer months.

Jukskei River Catchment: The Jukskei River catchment is situated in the heart of the Pretoria-Witwatersrand area. The Jukskei River is one of the main tributaries of the Crocodile River and rises in Johannesburg near Ellis Park Sports Complex in the Inner City. The catchment area of 77 650 ha drains a large portion of the Witwatersrand, and is bound by Johannesburg in the south, Midrand in the north, Roodepoort in the west, and Kempton Park in the east. The Jukskei River flows northwards draining, ultimately, to the Hartebeespoort dam. This densely populated region impacts negatively on the river water quality. Pollution associated with urban run-off, sewage, and industrial activity is prevalent throughout the catchment. Due to relatively steep slopes, none of the streams in the catchment meander to any great extent. There are also no major natural obstacles or changes in geology to influence the course of the river. The streams, therefore, run fast and shallow and are, for the most part, aerated and well-mixed. Due to the relatively high velocities, the streams carry a relatively high suspended load. Any drop in velocity will cause the coarser material to settle out, causing rapid siltation at various weirs and impoundments. Granite forms most of the catchment geology. The river bottom is characteristically rocky, with occasional pools. The sedimentary and volcanic rocks that occur in the catchment are not particularly susceptible to chemical weathering. This means that natural background concentrations of dissolved solids in the surface water are relatively low.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Main industrial areas draining into the Jukskei River system include Sebenza, Spartan and Chloorkop in the Modderfontein Spruit catchment, and Kew, Wynberg and Marlboro surrounding Alexandra. There is very little farming activity in the catchment, with farming operations only at Modderfontein, Leeukop Prison and Johannesburg Northern Works. The catchment contains a large number of golf courses and parks. The Jukskei catchment falls into a summer rainfall area, receiving almost 50% of its rainfall from November to February, and highest rainfall occurring in January.

ment. The wetlands are dominated by Phragmites communis reed, with occasional Typha latifolius and sedges. These wetlands occur naturally, but their growth has been accelerated by increasing silt loads from mine dumps, as well as high nutrient levels. These wetlands benefit the river system by assimilating limited amounts of pollutants, which enter the watercourse. The Upper Klip River catchment has a relatively steep gradient at its source for approximately 40km until its confluence with the Rietspruit. The effluent discharge over the entire catchment is approximately twice the estimated natural runoff. Without interference the Klip River would naturally be a seasonal river. However the additional effluent inflows allow the river to flow on a permanent basis. The river system also has a number of impoundments or dams within it, most of which are man-made and associated with mining. These include Florida Lake, Fleurhof Dam, New Canada Dam, and Orlando Dam in the Upper Klip River, as well as Wemmer Pan in the Rietspruit sub-catchment. These impoundments are responsible for improving water quality to a certain extent as they act as traps and sinks for silt and pollutants.

Klip River and Rietspruit Catchments The Klip River drains to the south of the Johannesburg Central Business District and the Roodepoort area to the West, after which it flows into the Vaal River and finally into the Atlantic Ocean. The Klip River catchment is characterised by wetlands, which are largely absent in the Jukskei catch-

The general geology of the catchment is complex, with a number of formations dipping steeply southwards on an East-West axis, and including basement complex granites overlain by quartzites and shales, lavas and Malmani Dolomites. Dolomite is encountered at depths of 0-50m throughout the catchment, making the area susceptible to groundwater pollution.

51

Monitoring of Surface Water Quality Surface water quality is monitored at selected points throughout the city to assess and audit the resource on a regular and ongoing basis. Monitoring is a crucial function, enabling the assessment of the impacts of development in the city, compliance of water bodies to water quality standards, and the health of the ecosystem. In terms of the City’s surface water monitoring programme, samples are taken regularly on a forthnightly / monthly basis at monitoring points located on all major tributaries and are tested for bacteriological and chemical pollution. Testing for heavy metals is done twice a year. Biomonitoring is also undertaken from time to time. The Klip and Rietspruit Rivers feed the Vaal River system while the Jukskei feeds the Hartebeespoort dam. These water resources are used for abstraction of portable water. Johannesburg does not have its own adequate water source and obtains most of its potable water from adjoining regions, purchasing it from Rand Water. Johannesburg’s water is, in this sense, being recycled, hence the importance of monitoring and managing water quality in the city. Another consideration in the recycling of water is that the cost of water purification to portable standards increases as water quality decreases and this cost must be contained. Water and Sanitation Services Johannesburg does not have its own adequate water source and buys most of its portable water from adjoining regions, purchasing it from Rand Water Board, who are effectively the monopoly supplier.

12.2.2 STATE Water Quality Table 16 summarises the surface water quality in the Juskei catchment for recent periods, while table 17 summarises the surface water quality of the Klip river and Rietpruit catchments. Figure 17,18,19 and 20 show quarterly surface water quality information, based on water quality indices determined by the respective Catchment Management Forums for the two catchments. The river systems within the above mentioned catchments currently show evidence of high levels of sewage pollution, (high E.coli counts, associated elevated ammonia and phosphate values and increased COD levels). The Klip River also shows evidence of mining pollution (low pH values, high electrical conductivity and high sulphate values. Overloaded sewers, unreported leaks and blockages and misuse of sewer systems account for much of the poor bacteriological quality. Contaminated storm water run-off, increased littering, unacceptable and illegal effluent discharges from wastewater treatment works and industries, and leachates from old landfill sites also contribute to high levels of pollution in the two main river systems, while poor storm water management and uncontrolled construction activities alongside watercourses exacerbate erosion and silt problems.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 16: Surface water quality in the Jukskei catchment. TRIBUTARY

REGION

Braamfontein Spruit

3 4 8

Sand Spruit

1&2 3

MAJOR SOURCES OF POLLUTION *

POLLUTANT MEASURED VARIABLE

WATER QUALITY INDEX YEAR 2002

Incidents of sewage pollution.

E. coli

Bad to Ideal

Chemical water quality usually good. Incidents of sewage pollution Industrial Effluent pollution downstream of Wynberg

Modderfontein spruit

7 Ekurhuleni

Incidents of sewage pollution Industrial Effluent pollution downstream of industrial areas

Klein Jukskei

Wilge Spruit

1&2 3 4 5

Incidents of sewage pollution Chemical water quality usually good

5

Incidents of sewage pollution Chemical water quality usually acceptable/ good

Unacceptable to Ideal E. coli

Bad to Good

Ammonia, COD, Orthophosphate

Unacceptable to Ideal

E. coli

Unacceptable to Ideal Unacceptable to Good

Ammonia, COD, Nitrate, Sulphate, phosphate E. coli

Bad to Ideal Acceptable to Ideal

E. coli

Bad to Ideal Acceptable to Ideal

53

Table 16: Surface water quality in the Jukskei catchment. TRIBUTARY

REGION

MAJOR SOURCES OF POLLUTION *

POLLUTANT MEASURED VARIABLE

WATER QUALITY INDEX YEAR 2002

Jukskei (proper)

1&2

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Bad to Ideal

Chemical water quality usually acceptable/ good Kaalspruit

1&2 Ekurhuleni

Ongoing sewage pollution

E. coli

Bad

Ammonia, COD, Nitrate, phosphate

Acceptable to Unacceptable

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Bad to Ideal

Chemical quality ranges from Unacceptable to Ideal.

Ammonia, phosphate

Unacceptable to Ideal

Chemical water quality unacceptable Upper Jukskei

7 8

Acceptable to Ideal

Table 17: Surface water quality in the Klip and Rietspruit river catchments TRIBUTARY

REGION

MAJOR SOURCES OF POLLUTION*

POLLUTED MEASURED VARIABLE.

WATER QUALITY INDEX YEAR 2002

Bloubos Spruit

9

Sporadic incidents of sewage pol-

E. coli

Ideal to unacceptable*

lution. Ideal to acceptable$ Chemical water quality usually good. Glenvista Spruit

9

Sporadic incidents of sewage pol-

E. coli

Ideal to bad

lution Chemical water quality usually

Ideal to acceptable

good Harrington Spruit

10, 11

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Ideal to bad

Ammonia, nitrate, phos-

Good to unacceptable

Sludge seepage from Goudkoppies waste water treatment works

phate Hamberg Stream

5

Occasional minor sewage pollution Chemical pollution infrequent

E. coli

Acceptable Ideal to good

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 17: Surface water quality in the Klip and Rietspruit River catchments Len Rutter Stream

5

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Ideal to unacceptable

Chemical pollution infrequent Ideal to good Klip River (upper

5, 6

section)

Infrequent (Roodepoort) to ongo-

E. coli

Ideal to bad

ing, industrial and sewage pol-

Ammonia, phosphate,

Ideal to bad

lution

sulphate, conductivity,

ing (Soweto) sewage pollution Chemical water affected by min-

metals; low pH Klip River (lower

9, 11

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Good to bad

section) Chemical water quality usually good Klipspruit

6, 10

Frequent sewage pollution

Ideal to unacceptable E. coli

Good to Bad

by sewage and to a lesser extent

Ammonia, phosphate,

Ideal to unacceptable

mining

sulphate

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Ideal to bad

Sulphate, conductivity,

Ideal to unacceptable

Chemical water quality affected

Natalspruit

8, 9

Chemical water quality affected by mining pollution and industry

metals, low pH Russell Stream and

4, 8

Frequent sewage pollution

E. coli

Ideal to bad

Ammonia, phosphate, sul-

Good to unacceptable

Robinson Canal Chemical water quality affected by sewage, mining and industry

phate, low pH, metals Rietspruit Catchment

11

Incidents of sewage pollution

E. coli

Ideal to bad

Ammonia, sulphate

Ideal to acceptable

Chemical water quality impacted with incidents of sewage pollution and minor mining pollution

* Bacteriological water quality index $ Chemical water quality index

55

Water Services The quality of portable water is good, meeting current SABS standards. There is no immediate shortage from the supplier, Rand Water, on whom the City has traditionally relied upon to ensure a steady supply to meet its development needs. However, current consumption patterns do suggest an increasing dependency upon external supply such as the Lesotho dam project, at high cost. In addition, many rural residential plots and agricultural holdings rely on boreholes and groundwater abstraction, and there is no regular or comprehensive monitoring of this resource or of the state of the City’s aquifers, although these may become important in the future. Johannesburg’s water is re-used several times, ultimately being discharged from wastewater treatment works back into the rivers. Water services in the City are generally good, with less than 1% of residents of the City having no access water services, and three quarters of the informal population having access to either communal standpipes or higher levels of services such as yard standpipes. Those residents who are still without adequate water generally make use of urban streams for daily domestic purposes, and are therefore vulnerable to waterborne diseases, for which the City also bears the costs of health care and lost productivity. The City currently experiences a high degree of water loss through Unaccounted for Water, around 42% as compared with the international benchmark norm of 14 percent. As a result, it has a systematic plan to reduce water losses with interventions over a number of years, focusing on improved metering and billing, pressure reduction programmes, repair and

re-engineering of reticulation systems, identification and monitoring of illegal connections, education and awareness programmes. One major cost driver for the City in terms of tarrifs is the cost of bulkwater. This necessitates the management of water quality, as higher treatment costs come back to the City in the form of increased bulk water charges.

Sanitation Current capacity of sewer reticulation systems and wastewater treatment works is at critical levels while many parts of the City’s ageing infrastructure is collapsing, necessitating a major programme of upgrading in the near future. Maintenance of sewers also needs improvement, as this has suffered in the past through inadequate budget allocations, inadequacy of equipment and lack of systematic monitoring. Figure 21 shows the distribution of people without adequate sanitation. Compared to the water services, the sanitation services are less developed. Eighty four percent (84%) of households have access to basic sanitation, with fifty four percent (50%) of informal settlements having unimproved pit latrines provided by the residents themselves and others having to rely on chemical toilets. However, more than fifteen percent (15%) of shack dwellers have no facilities at all. The bulk of the City’s housing backlog tends to be focussed around Soweto, the CBD and the mining belt, with components thereof also present in the South (Lawley and Finetown) and the north – Zewenfontein and Diepsloot.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 18: Informal Settlements REGION

INFORMAL HOUSEHOLDS

PERCENTAGE

Diepsloot (1)

23,316

19.7%

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

14,466

12.2%

Rosebank/Sandton (3)

0

0.0%

Northcliff (4)

1,629

1.4%

Roodepoort (5)

4,780

4.0%

Doornkop/Soweto (6)

21,355

18.1%

Alexandra (7)

9,604

8.1%

Cetral Region (8)

510

0.4%

Johannesburg South (9)

1,646

1.4%

Diepkloof/Meadolands (10)

11,310

9.6%

Ennerdale/Orange Farm (11)

29,495

25.0%

TOTAL

118,112

100.0%

Source: National Housing Pilot Project: 2002

Table 18 summarizes the results of a recent study completed by National Department of Housing regarding informal settlements in City of Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni (2002). Table 18 also shows clearly that approximately 118000 households live in informal settlements, with one quarter of these present in Region 11. Figure 22 illustrates the distribution of housing and informal settlements. Figure 23 illustrates the distribution of people without adequate housing.

12.2.3 DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES Urbanisation and population growth:

Rapid urbanisation and population growth put pressure on water resources and service provision and infrastructure. The Klip River and Jukskei River’s water quality, which run through areas of informal urban development, show signs of contamination from raw sewage (high E.coli levels). This poses a major health risk to anyone ingesting water from this river system (Johannesburg SoE, 2000). These pressures are likely to be exacerbated by the anticipated urban population growth in the City of Johannesburg and by poverty levels. Mining activity: Mining particulate matter discharges into rivers and watercourses. The Klip River’s water quality, which runs through an area of urban development and

57

mining land, shows evidence of mining residue (low pH values, high electrical conductivity, and high sulphate values) (Johannesburg SoE, 2000). Industrial activity: An uncontrolled increase in industrial development could result in an increase in the amount of water pollution in the area, through irresponsible discharges into storm water. The mines are also responsible for water pollution effects, especially through salination and acid mine drainage. Existence of informal settlements: Many informal settlements are without an adequate source of water supply and thus make use of nearby streams, dams or any other available water source for washing, drinking, cooking and ablution purposes. This results in both organic and chemical pollution of these watercourses.

Sewage systems: Undeveloped and/or overloaded sewer networks, inadequate maintenance, blocked and leaking sewers, and illegally occupied buildings in Soweto and/or areas such as the Johannesburg CBD are some of the factors contributing to high organic loads draining into the water courses in the City of Johannesburg, in turn causing eutrophication and higher mortality rates in respect of aquatic life. Indiscriminate waste disposal into, and misuse of the sewage system can also cause costly damage to the infrastructure of the wastewater treatment works in the City of Johannesburg. Waste Management: Poorly designed waste management procedures and uncontrolled littering and dumping all exacerbate the problem, increasing costs of water treatment and adding to high levels of pollution in rivers. Driving forces and pressures impacting on the state of water quality are summarised in table 19 below.

Table 19: Major source of pollutants and impact on water quality DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES The following factors contribute to the contamination and degradation of the Jukskei and Klip river systems; • Urbanisation and population growth • Dysfunctional sewage systems result in the contamination of the river systems by raw sewage • Mining particulate matter discharges into rivers and watercourses • Uncontrolled industrial activities could result in discharges to storm water drains. • Illegal effluent discharges from treatment works

POLLUTANTS

IMPACT •

For the type of pollutants refer to table 17 and 18

•

• •

Contaminated water present major health risk to the public. Creation of poor perception about the city, which result in the loss of tourism and investment. Financial implications for the rehabilitation of the river systems. Loss of aquatic life and amenity value of rivers

STATE OF WATER QUALITY

•

•

The quality of portable water meets current SABS standards. The water quality of the river systems is unacceptable.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 18: Surface water quality (November 01 – January 02)

59

Figure 19: Surface water quality (February – April 2003)

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 20: Surface water quality (May – July 2002)

61

Figure 21: Surface water quality (August – October 2002)

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 22: People without adequate sanitation

63

Figure 23: Housing and informal settlements

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 24: People without adequate housing

65

12.2.4 IMPACTS

Loss of aquatic life:

Monitoring and GIS data show that approximately seventy-five percent (75%) of Johannesburg’s rivers are “bad” or “unacceptable” in terms of bacterial pollution according to the SA Water Quality Classification, versus approximately fifteen percent (15%) for chemical pollution.

Both chemical and organic pollution can result in loss of aquatic life in the rivers, which may have an amenity value (e.g. for recreational fishers).

Investigations and trend analyses indicate that inadequate sanitation services and network or infrastructure problems such as blockages, leaks and capacity constraints, contribute significantly to high levels of pollution found in surface water.

Other impacts include: Externalities: Water pollution has various secondary outcomes, or externalities. These are costs which are imposed on society and which the City of Johannesburg will likely have a share in paying for. The following are examples of financial costs that may be incurred:

Health impacts: Poor water quality and/or inadequate access to water and sanitation services can result in health impacts, such as increased rates of gastro-intestinal and vomiting incidents associated with high water pollution, which will lower quality of life, increase medical costs and lower productivity.

DAMAGE TO INFRASTRUCTURE: Solid waste materials in the sewage water system can cause costly damage to the wastewater treatment plant equipment.

Impacts on tourism and investment: Degraded Rivers lower the aesthetic value of the City of Johannesburg for tourists and potential investors and hence impact negatively on tourism and investment income to the city.

12.2.5 RESPONSE TO WATER QUALITY AND SANITATION ISSUES The city has embarked on a number of initiatives to deal with the water quality and sanitation challenges. The initiatives include the development of sanitation policy, catchment management policy and storm water management policy. Initiatives are also underway to improve storm water infrastructure, reduction and prevention of sewer spills and the elimination of illegal discharge of industrial effluent. There is also a surface water-quality monitoring programme that has been put in place to assess, audit and report on a regular and on going basis. Lastly plans are underway to monitor ground water quality.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.3 WASTE 12.3.1 CONTEXT Solid waste management has a significant impact on the City. These include impacts on land, water, health and the aesthetic appeal of the City. Efforts have been put in place to address past imbalances in waste services provision in the City. However, even with these efforts, currently 93,303 households have no solid waste removal, with a considerable number enjoying less than a weekly service. Although poor performance in the recent past is not necessarily cause for alarm in terms of future service provision, serious attention must be paid to correcting the situation. The population groups affected most in terms of solid waste are those people without access to regu-

lar refuse removal services. Figure 25 demonstrates the distribution of people without adequate refuse removal by administrative regions. To the west of Orange Farm, including the Kapok and Hopefield settlements, in excess of seventy-one percent (71%) of the population do not have access to waste removal services. No refuse removal takes place east of Ennerdale in the Weilers Farm area, while limited or irregular removal takes place in Orange Farm, Ennerdale, Poortjie, Lenasia, the Lawley settlement south of Lenasia, Freedom Park / Goldev, Bushkoppie / Slovo Park settlements southeast of Soweto, and at the Eikenhof settlements southeast of the City. In the inner City the solid waste infrastructure is insufficient to deal with the solid waste from the densely populated area. Illegal dumping also takes place on most open spaces and informal settlements. The major sources and pressures that impact on waste management are summarised in taste 20.

Table 20: Major source of pollutants and impact on water quality DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES The shortages of resources, throwaway habits, rapid urbanisation, unplanned settlements, lack of environmental awareness, recycling and composting result to inadequate waste collection and disposal.

POLLUTANTS

IMPACT

Illegal dumping and littering.

Blockages of man holes. Increase in environmental health related diseases.

The overcrowding of certain areas like the inner city also contributes to inadequate refuse removal. Inadequately designed and managed landfill sites could result in landfill emissions and leachate production.

Landfill emissions -odoriferous and toxic substances; Emission of CH4 and CO2.

STATE OF WASTE MANAGEMENT Approximately 1 351 000 tonnes per year is generated in the CoJ and the figure will increase in the near future.

More resources are needed especially for street cleansing.

Over 130,000 dwellings in informal areas are without formal refuse removal services.

Less land available for establishment of new landfills.

There are approximately 1 366 illegal dumping spots.

Landfill gas (CH4) if not well managed could present a risk to public health and could also result in spontaneous fires and green house effect.

There are common design problems which are experienced by many landfill sites which include inadequate access control, inadequate drainage, no liner design, inadequate capping of completed portions of landfills.

Contamination of underground water and surface streams.

Inadequate water quality monitoring systems.

67

Table 21: Waste infrastructure REGION

1

LANDFILL

NO. COMPOSTING FACILITIES

NO. GARDEN SITES

NO. RECYCLING DEPOT

NO. WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPOT

NO. TRANSFER STATION

Northern works

1

-

-

-

-

Kya sand (located on boundary of region 1 & 5) 2

-

-

-

-

1

1

3

-

-

3

-

2 plus 1 located in boundary of region 3&7

-

4

Marie Louise (located on boundary of region 4 & 6)

-

13

1

1

-

5

-

-

1

1

-

-

6

-

-

4

-

1

-

7

Linbro park

-

3

-

1

-

8

Robinson deep

-

2

-

1

-

9

-

-

6

-

1

-

10

Goudkoppies

1

7

11

Ennerdale Palm springs

-

8

3 -

2

-

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.3.2 STATE The City currently generates approximately 1,560,400 tonnes of waste per annum. This is predicted to rise to some 1,700,000 tonnes or even greater by the year 2010. Commercial activities account for twenty-three percent (23%) of solid waste produced in the City, industrial waste a further ten percent (10%), while the remaining sixty-seven percent (67%) is generated by households. Industrial and commercial waste volumes are expected to increase from their current 461,340 tons a year to 614,073 tons a year by 2010. Residential waste volumes are expected to increase from 889 665 tons a year to 1,079,055 tons a year by 2010. Actual growth is dependent upon levels of disposable income, which are expected to improve as economic development and job creation increase, leading to higher levels of consumption. Highincome earners currently generate on average one point three (1.3) to one point six kilograms (1.6) of waste per day, middle-income earners between point seven (0.7) and one (1) kilograms per day, and lowincome earners between point three five (0.35) and point six (0.6) kilograms of waste per day. Although all formal dwellings are served by regular refuse removal services, over 130,000 dwellings in informal areas are still without formal services. The waste is generally disposed of in five (5) general waste landfill sites, to date viewed as the most cost effective manner of disposal. The five general landfill sites include Chloorkop, which is outside the CoJ jurisdiction. Chloorkop accept waste from Midrand and Ivory Park. Figure 24 and Table 21 illustrates the distribution of

waste management infrastructure throughout the eleven regions. Current projects suggest that these landfills will reach its half life by 2010, with their lifespan likely to be shortened as waste generation increases over time. Table 22 shows the landfill airspace utilisation and the remaining lifespan of the landfill sites. Given the difficulties of identifying new landfill sites, which do not conflict with existing or planned residential development, the increasing costs of waste transport and the environmental and social problems associated with landfills, it has become necessary to review the City’s waste disposal strategy. A waste management policy and integrated waste management plan has been developed to guide the proper management of waste. Common problems at landfill sites include inadequate access control, inadequate drainage and liner design, and the practice of informal salvaging. These issues all need to be addressed in the interests of health, safety and environmental protection. It is also necessary to address problems relating to the numerous disused and closed landfills, and to ensure that future planning regarding the closure of landfills is properly undertaken, with particular attention given to environmental compliance aspects. In addition, inadequate levels of service in certain areas, past practices, cost avoidance by industries and lack of awareness and enforcement result in high levels of illegal dumping and littering. This not only causes degradation of open spaces and watercourses in particular, but also places a huge cost burden on the City, as litter disposal costs significantly outweigh waste disposal costs.

69

The COJ does not own any hazardous landfill sites and most of its hazardous waste are disposed of at the Holfontein hazardous landfill located within the Ekurhuleni Municipal area. The absence of hazardous landfill sites in the CoJ and the lack of awareness of low-grade hazardous materials (e.g. Paints, batteries, pesticides, outdated medicines, fluorescent bulbs), results in illegal dumping of hazardous waste in Council general waste landfills. There are however, a number of health care risk waste (HCRW) incinerators located in the city. Many of the incinerators are part of hospital infrastructure but there are some privately owned incinerators, which provide a collection, transport and treatment option for private clinics, doctors, dentists and veterinary surgeons. In Gauteng there are approximately 600 major sources of HCRW, these being hospitals and clinics (89% of the waste generated) and approximately 9 700 minor sources (11% of the waste generated) such as doctors, etc. Human body tissue is either incinerated on site or collected by private contractors for off-site treatment. Sanumed: Enviroserv operates two incinerators in the Roodepoort Region and incinerates approximately 295 tonnes/month (3,540 tonnes/year). They currently service the majority of HCRW generators in the CoJ. Sanumed also operates an additional two incinerators located in Rietfontein where approximately 165 tonnes/month (2,000 tonnes/year) of waste is incinerated. It is very likely that HCRW generated in the CoJ is also sent to this incinerator for destruction. The quantity of HCRW emanating from the CoJ and incinerated at these various incinerators could not be determined. Phambile Waste and Buhle Waste are the waste contractors assigned to collect

and transport the HCRW to Sanumed incinerators. PIKITUP operate an incinerator in Region 8, the Inner City, at the Springfield complex where the Robinson Deep Landfill is situated and incinerate approximately 260 tonnes/year of HCRW. PIKITUP collect and transport the HCRW to the Springfield complex. For both the Waste Characterisation study undertaken and the landfill evaluations, large amounts of medical waste are bypassing the correct route of treatment, that being incineration, and are currently being disposed of at the five (5) PIKITUP landfills in the city. Current levels of recycling are low – estimated at six to eight percent (6 - 8%) of the waste stream, and are mainly a result of informal or private sector initiatives. Recycling levels are low by comparison with international benchmarks and fall short of the National Waste Management Strategy target. The limited practice of waste separation at source currently inhibits recycling, making it inefficient and reducing potential recovery rates. No formal recycling of construction and demolition waste is practised, although this waste currently places a significant burden on landfills. There are however, untapped opportunities for small business development, job creation and poverty alleviation initiatives linked to the waste sector, both in respect of waste disposal services and waste recovery at local level. A major problem is the lack of accurate waste data, particularly in respect of private waste operations, but also in terms of source waste characteristics, making effective planning, management and control difficult.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

AVAILABLE AIRSPACE (M3) SEPTEMBER 2002

Central region (8)

1,626

422,800

4

352,333

3,051,600

6.5

Marie Louise

Northcliff (4)

1,421

369,400

2

307,833

7,766,500

20.6

Goud-koppies

Diepkloof / Medowlands (10)

1,163

302,500

1

252,083

11,264,800

39.6

Linbro Park

Alexandra (7)

1,306

339,500

1

282,017

1,240,300

3.3

Ennerdale

Ennerdale/ Orange Farm11 Outside COJ

312

81,200

1

67,667

832,400

10.6

173

45,000

2

37 500

362,500

8.5

6,002

1,560,400

1,300,333

24,555,600

Chloorkop* TOTAL

REMAINING SITE LIFE (YEARS)

GROWTH RATE (%PER YEAR)

AIR SPACE UTILISATION (M3 PER YEAR)

ANNUAL DEPOSITION (TONNES/ YEAR)

Robinson Deep

REGION

RATE OF DEPOSITION (TONNES/DAY)

NAME OF LANDFILL

Table 22: Waste deposition and airspace utilization at the CoJ landfill sites

Source: City of Johannesburg, Waste management planning status quo report, April 2003. * Figures given for Chloorkop landfill reflect the airspace used by the Midrand / Ivory Park waste and not the total waste going to the landfill.

71

Figure 25: Waste management infrastructure

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.3.3 DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES Waste collection services Inadequate waste collection is one of the major causes of the current waste problem, especially in the poorer areas. There are also resource shortages in dealing with cleansing activities related to litter, yard trimmings, builder’s rubble and commercial and industrial waste. Illegal dumping, especially of industrial waste, compounds the problem even more. Attitudes and lifestyles In areas which are already degraded through high density living and lack of basic services, the attitude towards indiscriminate waste disposal is more likely to be indifferent than in already clean, well maintained areas. On the other hand, in more affluent areas of the City of Johannesburg, people are more likely to display “throw-away” consumer habits. Goods purchased tend to be over packaged and more quickly disposed than in areas, which are more constrained by income. Waste production is particularly high in areas in the former SMLC and WMLC. Urbanisation Rapid urbanisation has resulted in an increased number of informal settlements. This, in turn, has created waste collection service problems. Overcrowding of the inner city has also resulted in poor living conditions with insufficient provision (or maintenance) of services and an associated decline in

environmental health in parts of the CBD.

12.3.4 IMPACTS The result of the poor waste management services in these areas has impacts such as: •

•

Blockages of manholes related to inadequate solid waste management services, which in turn impact on the operational (maintenance) budgets of the local council. An increase in environmental health related diseases occur as a result of inadequate waste management services. The inappropriate storage and disposal of organic waste attracts rodents and insects, which may increase the frequency of gastro-intestinal and parasitic diseases. One of the most frequent environmental health complaints from the Alexandra area is related to mice, rats and bedbug infestations. It is calculated that the cost of health expenditure related to poor waste management is estimated at R33 million per annum with an associated economic productivity loss of R36 million per annum.

Increase in litter Litter in nearby streams or in manholes ultimately ends up in the local river systems. The increase is due to a lack of environmental awareness and poor infrastructure, there are large amounts of litter on the streets, on pavements and on unoccupied open or municipal land. Most of the litter ends up in nearby streams or in manholes and ultimately in local river systems.

73

Impacts on tourism and investment Degraded Rivers lower the aesthetic value of the City of Johannesburg for tourists and potential investors and hence impact negatively on tourism and investment income to the city. There are a number of factors that influence the solid waste management in the City. These include: •

•

•

Inadequate waste collection services are one of the major causes of the current waste problem, especially in the poorer areas. There are also resource shortages in dealing with cleansing activities related to litter, yard trimmings, builder’s rubble and commercial and industrial waste. Illegal dumping, especially of industrial waste, compounds the problem even more. In areas that are already degraded through high-density living and lack of basic services, the attitude towards indiscriminate waste disposal is more likely to be indifferent than in already clean, well-maintained areas. On the other hand, in more affluent areas, people are more likely to display “throw-away” consumer habits. Goods purchased tend to be over-packaged and more quickly disposed of than in areas, which are more, constrained by income. Waste production is particularly high in areas in the southern and western areas of the City. The contrasting trend towards greater recycling is a more positive driver. Rapid urbanisation has also contributed significantly to the solid waste problem in the City particularly due to the increased number of unplanned informal settlements. This, in turn, has created waste collection service problems.

From an environmental perspective, littering and dumping (which has not been quantified), was judged by expert opinion to be a more pressing problem than landfills (which are generally well constructed and have future capacity), due to widespread visual impacts. Other related issues which, while less critical, also have strategic importance include: • •

Hazardous waste – illegal dumping and accessibility of facilities, and, Recycling – resulting in increased resource efficiency and decreased waste disposal costs.

Inadequate waste management has various secondary outcomes, or externalities. These are costs which are imposed on society and which the City of Johannesburg will likely have a share in paying for. Although there is no data to support this, the potential impact of a poor aesthetic image the city could be significant. Certainly, living in a “dirty” environment damages the quality of life of the city’s residents. The Johannesburg SoE (2000) mentions the following as some of the financial costs: -

Blockages of man holes and waste water systems, Increase in environmental health related diseases, Increase in litter, and, Impacts on tourism and investment.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.3.5 RESPONSE STRATEGY TO WASTE MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES The current rate of waste generation presents management challenges to the City of Johannesburg. The challenges are aggravated by poor or lack of waste management facilities, illegal dumping and littering, limited facilities for hazardous waste disposal, low levels of recycling and lack of accurate waste data. Inadequate waste management could result in among other things environmental and health problems. The city has completed the development of a waste management policy and an integrated waste management plan. The waste bylaws have also been completed and adopted by council for implementation. These initiatives will transform the manner in which waste is managed within the city.

75

Figure 26: People without adequate refuse removal

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.4 LAND AND OPEN SPACE RESOURCES 12.4.1 CONTEXT Due to the restructuring process, the City of Johannesburg had inherited a fragmented open space system, which fails to provide the benefits and potentials of a MOSS. Figure 28 shows the distribution of open spaces. The absence of a comprehensive policy framework or guidelines for the protection, management and optimisation of open space areas within the city has resulted in the ongoing loss of valuable open space

resources. Furthermore, a high population density and a rapid rate of urbanization increases the demand for housing, services and infrastructure as well as employment, which places extreme pressure on the city’s natural resources. Figure 26 shows the distribution of available land while Figure 27 shows the distribution of land owned by council. This threatens not only the conservation of biodiversity and ecological systems, but also the recreational amenity of residents. It also impact negatively on the aesthetics of the city and the provision of other important services open spaces provide to the city. The driving forces and pressures that impact on the state of land and open space resources are summarised in Table 23.

77

Table 23: Summary of driving forces and pressures on land and open spaces DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES

IMPACT

STATE OF LAND AND OPEN SPACES

Past planning policies have contributes to the lack of public open spaces.

Degraded open spaces lower the economic value of CoJ open spaces and this has an impact on tourism and investments.

Large tracts of land degraded through mining have not been rehabilitated.

Industrial, commercial, mining activities, inappropriate land use practices, poorly managed landfills and etc contributes to the deterioration of open spaces. Uncontrolled tourism and urban growth puts pressure on the open spaces and result in their degradation.

Impact on conservation of biodiversity and ecological systems. Impact on open space services (ecological recreational, tourism, research and etc).

The Johannesburg metropolitan open space project aims to facilitate the proper management of open spaces.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Figure 27: Land availability

79

Figure 28: Council owned land

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.4.2 STATE

pollution and threat to land.

Vast tracts of land within Johannesburg have been degraded by large-scale mining activity. The mining activity has contributed to both surface and groundwater pollution, soil pollution, high radiation levels, increased dust pollution and loss of land. Much of the land previously utilised for mining remains unrehabilitated and is consequently not fit for use. It also degrades surrounding land through water and air pollution. Communities in the southern and western parts of the City have in particular suffered the negative effects of slimes dams. Eroded materials from the dumps are carried through the air to residential areas, water sources and farmlands, while many water sources are contaminated by mining effluent and heavy metals leachates from slimes dams, threatening the health of communities. Parts of the City are also endangered by subsidence resulting from underground mining and extensive groundwater pumping, which has altered drainage patterns.

12.4.3 DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES

One of the problems is the large number of abandoned mines without rehabilitation funds. Smallscale mining and quarrying activities also cause damage to the natural environment within the City, often not able to invest in cost-effective and efficient technology to manage their operations in a sustainable manner. Land contamination and degradation has also resulted from other industrial and commercial activities, poorly managed waste disposal sites and from inappropriate land practices, which have caused erosion and removal of topsoil. Lack of access to adequate sanitation and waste management services, particularly in informal settlements also poses an ongoing

Past planning policies - the existing lack of public open space has been caused mainly by past planning policies, which are greatly responsible for creating city sprawl through the use of buffer zones, resulting in the inefficient use of land. In parts of Orlando and Soweto, open space is made into illegal dumping grounds. This is true for other parts of the City of Johannesburg to a lesser extent. Mining activities - mining activity and undermining of parts of Greater Johannesburg has left large tracts of land fallow and subject to development constraints. This is considered to be wasted space rather than open space. Mine dumps that are no longer operational occur mainly in the south of the city. Tourism and urban growth - the growth in the number of tourists and the local population puts pressure on the usage of open space, which in turn may lead to greater degradation. Depletion of natural areas Open spaces are defined as non-built public or private green areas, which include parks, squares, gardens, pathways, cemeteries and natural reserves Figure 28 shows the distribution of open spaces in the city. The role of open spaces includes serving as national, local and private parks, preserves and recreational areas, archaeological preserves, urban green belts, greenways and trails, land for urban agriculture, and buffer zones to provide separation between conflicting land uses or to protect vulnerable areas. The need for parks and open spaces form an essential part of

81

addressing the recreational and aesthetic needs of the community in the City of Johannesburg.

correct and adequate management of the natural resource base.

Degradation of open space resources (e.g. parks) – especially through inadequate maintenance; and the externalities associated with a lack of or poor quality of the open space areas include:

12.4.5 RESPONSE STRATEGY TO LAND AND OPEN SPACES

Drainage impacts: Open space plays a very important role in regulating the drainage patterns in the City of Johannesburg, which is compromised as this open space diminishes. Impact on tourism and investment: Degraded open space lowers the aesthetic value of the City of Johannesburg for tourists and potential investors and hence impacts negatively on tourism and investment income to the city. Impact on land values: As the City of Johannesburg grows, so the availability of open space decreases and therefore becomes more valuable. Johannesburg’s natural areas have an economic value (various ecological services, recreation, tourism, research), which is as yet un-quantified. In the past, decision makers and communities have undervalued open space since the benefits and services delivered by open space to society have not been clearly understood or explained. Acknowledging that open space provides services and recognising the demands made by urban residents for these services gives open space an economic value. This enables decision makers to make more informed decisions regarding the need for directing resources towards the management of open spaces so that the benefits that are delivered to communities are protected through

To respond to the challenges of protecting and managing land and open spaces an open space policy framework and management strategy is in the process of being completed by the city. The policy framework will facilitate the protection, management and optimisation of open space areas within the city. The policy will further facilitate the protection of biodiversity. The principles of open space protection and management are also integrated into the Spatial Development Frame (SDF) and the Regional Spatial Development Frameworks (RSDF’s). There is an attempt to integrate the principles of the overall environmental management in all the development policies, plans and programmes of the city.

12.5 BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION 12.5.1 CONTEXT The City area falls into the Highveld mixed grassland zone, dominated by indigenous grasses such as Loudetia simplex (common russet grass), Themeda triandra (red grass) and Trachypogon spicatus (giant spear grass), as well as indigenous trees such as Acacia caffra (common hook thorn) and Rhus leptodictya (Karee). The vegetation includes pure grassland, bush grassland, mixed grassland, and temperate mountain bushveld and wetland areas. A lot of different species of exotic plants, such as Blue Gum, Black Wattle and Jacaranda, are also

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

found in Johannesburg. This influences the water table, as well as the drainage and erosion capacity of the area. Residential development and suburban living has however contributed to turning the City into a wooded area rather than maintaining its original grassland character. Certain areas in Region 7, in the eastern part of the City, possess pristine Bankenveld. In addition the Klipriviersburg Nature Reserve also protects an area of pristine Bankenveld. Region 2 has Bankenveld as its dominant type of natural vegetation. Only one point three eight percent (1.38%) of the City of Johannesburg is formally conserved as natural areas, compared with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s recommended ten percent (10%). The remaining natural areas continue to be put under pressure from urban and industrial expansion. South Africa is obliged to address conservation of these areas as a signatory to the UN Framework

Convention on Biodiversity. Johannesburg is home to many different species of fauna and flora, some of which are indigenous to the area but its biodiversity is increasingly threatened as the city faces competing demands for development and conservation. Like most cities in the world, the City of Johannesburg is experiencing the impacts of development on its natural areas. Development on the urban fringes, especially with regard to informal settlements without access to services or infrastructure, is placing additional pressure on the natural environment with a resulting reduction in biodiversity. The driving forces and pressures that impact on the state of conservation and biodiversity are summarised in Table 24.

83

Table 24: Driving forces, pressures and impact on conservation of biodiversity DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES

IMPACT

STATE OF CONSERVATION AND BIODIVERSITY

The increase in the canalisation of urban waster courses, inappropriate sitting of roads contributes to the degradation of natural areas.

Loss of indigenous species.

Conserved areas account for 1.38% in CoJ, which is far below the 10% recommended by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Modification of ecosystem functioning. Impact on tourism and investments.

Industrial mining and commercial activities contributes to loss of biodiversity. Uncontrolled development, clearing for agriculture and new settlements threatens the scarce natural Highveld grassland. Uncontrolled clearing and burning, dumping and informal settlements and invasive plants contribute to the modification of the ecosystem.

Negative impact on conservation and biodiversity will undermine development prospects for current and future generations.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

12.5.2 STATE Only one point three eight percent (1.38%) of Johannesburg is formally conserved as natural areas compared with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s recommended ten percent (10%). The remaining natural areas continue to be put under pressure from urban and industrial expansion. South Africa and, thus, also Johannesburg, is obliged to address conservation of these areas as a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Biodiversity. Johannesburg contains a variety of fauna and flora, some of which are indigenous to the area. Typically, however, conservation areas are only found on the outskirts and alongside ridges and rivers in the metropolitan area. The Wilds in Region 3 is an area of conservation importance both from a historical and environmental perspective but is being degraded and serves as informal housing for vagrants. In Region 4, Northcliff Ridge and the Witwatersrand Ridge are under pressure from development. To the east of the City lies the Linksfield Ridge which is of historical importance. Its’ northern slope serve as a habitat for trees, bush, birdlife and flowers including the rare Transvaal rothmania. Protected and proclaimed areas are also seen around Roodepoort stretching eastwards to the northern areas of the City. Protected areas are also found in the far northern areas, as well as to the north, east and south of Randburg, Sandton and Alexandra. Other protected areas and natural features stretch from east to west along ridges and rivers to the south of the CBD. Some protected areas are located in Soweto, around the Klip River north of Lenasia,

while natural features are found to the south of Lenasia and north of Ennerdale. Pans and dams are mainly situated in the Klip (south) and Jukskei (north) River Systems. Wetlands in and around Soweto, including the large Olifantsvlei wetland to the southeast, are very important as conservation areas, but are being filled up or threatened by illegal dumping and siltation. A protected area is also located around Orange Farm. Environmental conservation areas in the northern suburbs of the City are located mainly alongside river systems, with very few if any around the CBD. There is a large conservation area to the west of Dobsonville, and a few around the Klip River system through Soweto. The largest conservation area is the Klipriviersburg Nature Reserve. Other conservation areas are found around Kibler Park, with a very important area around the Klip River in the south. Other conservation areas are seen north of Lenasia, north and south of Ennerdale, and east of Weilers Farm. Environmental corridors in the north are all located alongside the Jukskei River system, except for the large Diepsloot Nature Reserve in the far north (Region 1), which however has not been proclaimed as a nature reserve. Some environmental corridors are also found south of Ennerdale and south of Lenasia. Despite the fact that the City of Johannesburg is densely populated there are still a number of areas with a potential to serve as conservation areas. To the south Regions 6, 9 and 11 all have a medium conservation potential. To the north the high lying

83

areas (e.g. Northcliff Ridge area), which traverses Regions 4, 5 and 8, characterised by the presence of Englerophytum species and Protea caffra are areas with a medium conservation potential. Table 24 indicates primary open spaces of high ecological value classified as either having a botanical, conservation, heritage, eco-tourism, recreational or educational potential or a combination thereof. Figure 29 shows geographical distribution of nature conservation areas within Johannesburg.

Figure 29: Geographical distribution of nature conservation areas within Johannesburg

NATURE AREAS 1. Rietfontein 2. Norscott Koppies 3. Lone hill 4. Fourways Gardens 5. Ridge 6. The Wilds 7. Harveys/Linskfield 8. Melville Koppies 9. Langermans Kop 10. Observatoty Ridge 11. Alberts Farm 12. Kloofendal 13. Northcliff Ridge 14. Roodepoort Wits. Ridge 15. Entomological Reserve 16. Joburg Botanic Garden 17. Klipriviersberg 18. Vorna valley 19. Cosmo City 20. Pimville koppies 21. Goudkoppies 22. Naturena Ridge 23. Zondi Koppies 24. Gebrand Range 25.Hartebeesfontein ridge 26. Elandsfontein 27. Diepsloot NR

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

Table 25: Primary open spaces of high ecological value A. NATURE RESERVES / AREAS NAME

REGION

Rietfontein

Rosebank / Sandton (3)

25 ha

Norscott Koppies

Rosebank / Sandton (3)

10,5 ha

Lonehill Koppies

Rosebank / Sandton (3)

5 ha

Fourways Gardens

Northcliff (4)

1 ha

Harvey Nature Reserve / Linksfield Ridge

Alexandra (7)

28 ha

The Wilds

Central Region (8)

Wagon Hill (Arboreturn)

Rosebank / Sandton (3)

0,5 ha

Melville Koppies

Northcliff (4)

150 ha

Langermanns Kop

Central Region (8)

25 ha

Observatory Ridge

Central Region (8)

27 ha

Alberts Farm

Northcliff (4)

90 ha

Kloofendal

Roodepoort (5)

Northcliff Ridge

Northcliff (4)

Roodepoort / Witwatersrand Ridge

Roodepoort (5)

±90 ha

Ruimsig Entomological Reserve

Roodepoort (5)

4 ha

Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve

Johannesburg South (9)

Johannesburg Botanic Garden

Northcliff (4)

Vorna Valley

Diepsloot1

Cosmo City Nature Areas

Roodepoort (5)

Total

SIZE

17,5 ha

156 ha 11 ha

615 ha 80 ha 4 ha 227 ha 1651.5ha

85

B. DECLARED NATURE / RIVER TRAILS NAME

REGION AREA/

Braamfontein Spruit

Melville to Paulshof (1; 3 & 4)

20,4 km

Bloubos Spruit

Klipriviersberg Nat Reserve (9

5,5 km

Sand Spruit

Oaklands to Paulshof (2; 3 & 8)

Jukskei River

Buccleuch / Marlboro (2 & 7)

3 km

Outspan Spruit

Morningside (3)

2 km

Mervyn King (Linksfield Ridge)

Gillooleys Farm to Doornfontein (7&8)

5 km

Klein Jukskei River

Fourways (3)

2 km

Roodepoort Wits Watershed

Constantiakloof to the National Botanical Gardens (5)

6 km

Parktown / Westcliffe

Empire Rd to Westcliff Waterfall site (4)

5 km

Glen Eagles Stream

Glenvista to Bloubos (9)

Klip Trail

Naturena to Kliptown (9 & 10)

Pampoenspruit

Randpark Ridge (5)

Motsamai & Umhlangini

Mofolo to Naledi (6)

6 km

Little Falls Nature Trail

Helderkruin to Wilgespruit (5)

7 km

Ferndale Spruit

Randburg to Bryanston ext 3 (3 & 4)

Lindhurst Stream Trail

Glenhazel to Corlett Gardens (7)

3 km

Gallo Glenn Walk

Gallo Manor (3)

1 km

Total

SIZE / LENGTH

18,6 km

4,5 km 9 km 2,5 km

6,5 km

107KM

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

C. RIVERS AND STREAMS NORTH FACING NAME

REGION

Jukskei River

Dainfern to Doornfontein (1, 2, 7 & 8)

Sand Spruit

Oaklands to Paulshof (2 & 3)

Braamfontein Spruit

Cottesloe to Paulshof (2, 3 & 4)

Klein Jukskei

Florida Glenn to Maroeladal (1, 3 & 4)

Wilge Spruit

Helderkruin to Zonne hoewe AH (5)

Strubens Spruit

Strubensvallei to Wilgeheuwel (5)

Outspan Spruit

Riverclub to Morningside (3)

Ferndale Spruit

Ferndale to Bryanston ext 3 (3 & 4)

Melrose Spruit

Orchards to Oaklands (3)

Westdene Spruit

Westdene to Emmarentia (4)

Montgomery Spruit

Albertsfarm to Emmarentia Dam (4)

SOUTH FACING NAME

REGION

Kliprivier

Lindhaven to Protea Glenn (5, 6 & 10)

Klipspruit

New Canada to Nancefield (4 & 10)

Bloubosspruit

Ridgeway to Kliprivier (9)

87

D. BIRD SANDTUARIES NAME

REGION

Kelland Cumberland Florence Bloom Water Fowl Beaulieu Jacanlee Outspan Boero Dam Granville Place Alberts Farm Melrose Hans Crescent Heilbrunnen Hammerkop Total

Northcliff (4) Rosebank / Sandton (3) Northcliff (4) Dieepsloot (1) Midrand / Ivory Park (2) Northcliff (4) Rosebank / Sandton (3) Alexandra (7) Alexandra (7) Northcliff (4) Rosebank / Sandton (3) Rosebank / Sandton (3) Rosebank / Sandton (3) Northcliff (4)

SIZE 4,2 ha 1,4 ha 2,5 ha 3,0 ha 3,0 ha 0,75 ha 1 ha 0,75 ha 0,8 ha 2 ha 2,7 ha 0,5 ha 0,5 ha 1,5 ha 24.6ha

E. WATER BODIES / URBAN IMPOUNDMENTS NAME

REGION

Delta Park Darrenwood Skinner Emmarentia Princess Dam Zoo Lake Hamberg Glenn Austin Pan / Padda Dam Florida Lake Westdene Dam Rhodespark Dam Russel Dam North Russel Dam South Blue Dam Bruma Lake Wemmer Pan Orlando Dam Union Dam Lawley Dam Olifantsvlei Dam Hennie Hugo Dam Bennie Reyneke

Northcliff (4) Northcliff (4) Roodepoort (5) Northcliff (4) Roodepoort (5) Rosebank /Sandton (3) Roodepoort (5) Midrand / Ivory Park (2) Northcliff (4) Northcliff (4) Central region (8) Johannesburg South (9) Johannesburg South (9) Northcliff (4) Alexandra (7) Johannesburg South (9) Diepkloof / Medowlands (10) Ennerdale / Orange Farm (11) Ennerdale / Orange Farm (11) Northcliff (4) Northcliff (4)

SIZE 1,53 ha 3,1 ha 2 ha 9,23 ha 6,3 ha 4,53 ha 4,25 ha 1,16 ha 27,5 ha 7,5 ha 2,05 ha 1,37 ha 1,17 ha 2,45 ha 5,8 ha 34,6 ha 23,5 ha 18,5 ha 6,1 ha 7,9 ha 1,8 ha 1,9 ha

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

F. OTHERS (RIVER RANGER BASES) NAME

REGION

Paulshof Stables

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

7,2 ha

Field and Study River Ranger Base

Rosebank / Sandton (3)

3,1 ha

Craighall Park River Ranger Base

Northcliff (4)

2,5 ha

Park 90

Midrand / Ivory Park (2)

12.5.3 DRIVING FORCES AND PRESSURES Loss of biodiversity and degradation of natural areas – increasing canalisation of urban watercourses, inappropriate silting of roads and railways has led to loss of riparian and in stream wetlands and degradation of natural areas. Contamination of rivers by industrial, urban and mining effluents and seepage has also impacted on the water quality, and hence the biodiversity which they support. Eutrophication is also an issue in many water bodies particularly wetlands, resulting in encroachment by reeds, problem water plants and exotics. Johannesburg’s aquatic ecosystems are highly degraded due to bacteriological, chemical and heavy metal pollutants, which result in the loss of plants, fish, frogs and invertebrates. Vast stretches of riverine areas have been subject to artificial engineering, canalisation and clearance of natural vegetation and riparian habitats, and further damaged by siltation, erosion, encroachment of development, the spread of alien vegetation and water usage or diversions which have resulted in low in stream flow. Only fragments of natural riverine forest habitat remain.

SIZE

4 ha

Terrestrial ecosystems survive mainly in parks, open spaces and in natural conservation areas, but while certain rivers and ridges enjoy protection status, the scarce natural Highveld grasslands are increasingly threatened and scarce within the City, and continue to be eroded by uncontrolled development and clearance for agriculture or new settlement. Many natural areas, particularly in peripheral areas where development pressures are expanding, lack formal conservation or protection status. In addition, habitat fragmentation and loss of linkages threaten the maintenance of genetic flow between remnant natural areas. Maintained open space is unevenly distributed, with disadvantaged areas having a deficiency of managed, landscaped open spaces and recreational parks. Conservation areas are only found on the outskirts and alongside ridges and rivers in the metropolitan area. Management and maintenance of open space and conservation areas is inconsistent and generally lacks sufficient resources, with open spaces being vulnerable to illegal clearing and dumping, uncontrolled burning, informal settlement, and

89

the spread of invasive plants which compete unfairly with native species for habitat and food, ultimately altering ecosystems. Development Development has for a number of years enjoyed priority over conservation in the City. Development for residential and business purposes as well as industrial expansion, population growth and invasion of open spaces place increased pressure on biodiversity conservation. Exotic species The existence of exotic and invasive species threatens and disturbs the indigenous environment. For example, invasive plants such as Acacia saligna and blue gum trees around mine dumps dominate large parts of the city and as a result the loss natural vegetation is increasing.

12.5.4 IMPACTS Natural habitats in Jo’burg are coming under increasing pressure from human settlements, mining activities and other commercial activities. Alien invasive plants (although not adequately quantified and documented) are causing massive disturbance in natural systems. Problem plants such as Acacia saligna have dominated large areas of the city to the extent that natural vegetation has been almost completely lost. Others, for example, pine present a threat to water availability because they use greater amounts of water than the natural vegetation and therefore reduce the amount of run-off water reaching streams and rivers. These impacts reduce

the diversity and cover of indigenous plant species, and thus alter the functioning of the ecosystem. Escalating soil degradation, declining biological diversity and soil productivity and over exploitation of rangelands undermine the development prospects for present and future generation in the city.

12.5.5 RESPONSE STRATEGY TO BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION There are a number of initiatives that the City has embarked upon together with the UAC’s to respond to the challenges of conserving biodiversity within the city. These initiatives include the development of open space policy and management strategy, greening strategy, clearance of alien vegetation and the conducting of environmental awareness raising programmes. There is an attempt to integrate the principles of overall environmental management in all the development policies, plans and programmes of the City.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

13. CONCLUSION The environmental problems, issues and challenges can be summarised as follows: Poor Air Quality The reliance on fossil fuel contributes to an increase in smog containing SO2 and smoke, and as well as contributing to green house effects through CO2 emissions. The increase use of vehicles results in vehicular emissions such as photochemical smog with pollutants such as NOx, PM10 (particulate matter) and total suspended particulates. Dust from operating and discontinued mines contributes to poor air quality. Industrial activities and wide spread burning and veld fires poses significant environmental and health problems. The expenditure on respiratory and air, nose and throat ailments by the population is estimated at R280m p.a and loss of productivity at R1.2bn p.a. To deal with these air pollution problems the City of Johannesburg has drafted an air quality management plan, which aims to achieve acceptable air quality levels to promote clean and healthy environment for all citizens within the city. The plan also aims to minimise the negative impacts of air on health and environment and promote the reduction of green house gases. The plan also advocates for the establishment of air quality monitoring stations. Poor Water Quality The quality of portable water in the city is of acceptable standard. However, the quality of water for the Klip and Jukskei rivers show signs of contamination

from a number of sources. They have high E. coli counts, associated with elevated ammonia and phosphate values and increased COD levels. There is a low pH value for surface and underground water. All this is as a result of pollution from mines, overloaded sewers, unprotected leaks and blockages. The illegal effluent discharges from waste water, treatment works and industries, poor storm water management, erosion and silt problems, poor sanitation, poor sewer reticulation systems. These problems could result in loss of aquatic life, impact to human health, tourism and investments. To respond to the problem, surface water quality is monitored at various points throughout the city to assess, audit and report on a regular and ongoing basis. There are other initiatives that are under way to minimise the pollution of the river systems. They include the development of a catchment management policy, improvement of storm water infrastructure, reduction sewer spills and pollution incidents improved control and elimination of illegal discharge of industrial effluent.

Waste management The current rate of waste generation presents management challenges to the City of Johannesburg. The challenges are aggravated by poor or lack of waste management facilities, illegal dumping and littering, limited facilities for hazardous waste disposal, low levels of recycling and lack of accurate waste data. Inadequate waste management could result in among other things environmental and health problems. The City has completed a waste status

91

quo report, waste management policy, Integrated Waste Management Plans and waste bylaws. These initiatives will transform the manner in which waste is managed within the city. Land and open spaces Past policies did not cater for enough public open spaces and they are responsible for creating city sprawl through buffer zones resulting in the inefficient use of land. Some of the existing open spaces are disturbed by land invasions, uncontrolled developments, increase in informal settlement and illegal dumping. To facilitate the proper management of the land and open spaces the city is formulating a policy and management strategy for open spaces. The policy and strategy introduce a new dimension in the management of open spaces. Conservation and biodiversity

The City of Johannesburg is home to many different species of fauna and flora, some of which are indigenous to the area. The biodiversity is threatened by impacts of development on its natural areas, illegal dumping and etc. Furthermore, past planning policies promoted development at the expense of conservation. It is envisaged that the open space policy strategy and other provincial and local government policies will promote the conservation of biodiversity.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

14. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Cape Metropolitan Council, 2001, Metropolitan Spatial Development Framework. 2. City of Johannesburg, 2003, Air quality management plan for the City of Johannesburg, compiled by Scorgie Y, Annegarn H and Randell L, Report No. MTX/03/JHB-01d. 3. City of Johannesburg, 2001, Spatial Development Frame Work Working Document. 4. City of Johannesburg, 2003, Mini-project WM4 on metro-wide waste management planning Status: QUO Report on the current waste generation and management, compiled by Jorrod Ball and Associates, Johannesburg. 5. Central Statistics Services, 1998, Population Census of 1996 Report No1:03-01-11, Pretoria. 6. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism 1999,State of environment in South Africa – An Overview report. 7. Greater Johannesburg Council, 1998, Strategic Metropolitan Development Framework 1998, Strategic Metropolitan Development Framework 1998. 8. Housing Dept of City of Johannesburg: Revision the Housing Strategy of the City for Johannesburg Revision 1:2001: Executive summary including Sustainable Housing Policy for Johannesburg. 9. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute and CSIR, 2000, Mapping of Air Pollution levels in Johannesburg: Measurement Campaign with diffusive samplers in July 1999, Göteborg and Johannesburg. 10. Johannesburg 2030 full report, 2002, Johannesburg, ISBN No. 0-620-28636-9. 11. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, 2001 Status Quo Report on the current waste generation and management in the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No. 1. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 12. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, 2001. A Waste Stream analysis of the general waste Stream. Final Draft Report No. 1A. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 13. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, 2001. Informal salvagers survey on the landfills of the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No. 1B. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg

93

14. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, 2001. Alternative waste treatment/management technologies for the City of Johannesburg: A sub-strategy for composting. Final Draft Report No. 3. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 15. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, 2001. Development of waste information systems for the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No.3. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 16. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, Dec 2001. Strategy document for waste collection in high density low-income area and illegal dumping in the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No.4. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 17. Jorrad Ball & Associates Consortium, Dec 2001. Waste recycling sub-strategy for the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No.5. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 18. Jarrod Ball & Associates Consortium, Dec 2001. Landfill planning and rehabilitation sub-strategy for the City of Johannesburg. Final Draft Report No.6. Danced Environmental Capacity Building Project, Johannesburg. 19. Johannesburg State of the Environment Report 2000. Johannesburg. 20. Raskin, P., Gilberto, G., Gutman, P. Hammond, A., and Swart, 1998. Bending the Curve: Toward Global Sustainability. Stcokholm Environmental Institute. 21. Southern Metropolitan Local Council,udated, Draft Environmental Assessment: Greater Soweto. 22. Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1997, Environmental Status Quo and Land Development Objectives Report. 23. Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1997, Land Development Objectives Volume 2: Community Participation 24. Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1997, Land Development Objectives Volume 3: Status Quo 25. Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1997, Environmental Land Development Objectives Report 26. Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1997, LDO Formulation for Parks, Open Spaces, Sports & Recreation Facilities. 27. WRP, 2001, Water Conversation & Demand Management Strategy. Report for Johannesburg Water.

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg

95

Department of Development Planning, Transportation and Environment, Environmental Planning and Management Unit, City of Johannesburg