Developments that appear affordable can become financially unsustainable if they are poorly connected to economic opportunities and essential services. As the country works to reduce its housing backlog, the focus should shift from simply delivering affordable housing units towards creating affordable, resilient and well-connected cities that support long-term quality of life.
If South Africa is serious about addressing its housing backlog, the conversation must evolve from delivering cost-effective housing units to creating affordable cities.
One of the biggest misconceptions is that affordability can be achieved simply by reducing constructio costs. While the capital cost of a housing unit remains an important consideration, it represents only one component of what households ultimately pay to participate in urban life. A family may move into a lower-cost apartment, yet spend a significant portion of its monthly income commuting long distances to work, accessing healthcare, travelling to schools or simply reaching essential services.
The financial savings achieved through lower housing costs are quickly eroded by transport expenses, lost productivity and the daily pressures associated with lengthy commutes. Equally, specifying lower-cost building materials may reduce upfront expenditure, but often results in higher maintenance costs, shorter replacement cycles and increased operational expenses over the life of the building. Housing should therefore be cost effective to build, able to be operated within budget and affordable to live in.
Affordable housing begins with location: Location remains one of the most powerful determinants of long-term affordability. It influences whether residents can easily reach employment opportunities, schools, healthcare facilities, retail centres, places of worship, public transport and community amenities.
Developments situated on the urban periphery may reduce land-acquisition costs, but they frequently impose significant long-term financial burdens on households that spend hours each day travelling between home and work. This is where the principles underpinning the ‘15-minute city’ become particularly relevant.
While South Africa cannot simply replicate European planning models given its unique mobility patterns and transport systems, the underlying objective remains highly applicable: reducing unnecessary travel by bringing people closer to opportunity. Mixed-use precincts provide an increasingly effective model by integrating residential accommodation with employment opportunities, schools, healthcare facilities, retail, recreational spaces and reliable public transport.
Barlow Park in Sandton illustrates this shift in thinking. By combining affordable residential units with education, medical facilities, retail space, offices and lifestyle amenities within one precinct, the development demonstrates how affordability can be strengthened through proximity rather than price
alone.
Residents spend less time travelling, reduce transport costs and enjoy improved access to economic opportunities and essential services. Ultimately, location should be viewed as infrastructure. Where services cannot be provided within a development itself, they must at least be readily accessible through efficient transport networks. Otherwise, housing may remain affordable only on a balance sheet while becoming increasingly expensive
in everyday life.
Infrastructure is the invisible foundation of affordability: The buildings themselves are often the most visible part of a housing development, yet it is the infrastructure beneath and around them that ultimately determines long-term affordability. Bulk infrastructure, including water supply, sewer capacity, electricity networks, stormwater systems and road infrastructure, can fundamentally influence whether projects remain financially viable. A site may appear attractive during the early feasibility stages, but inadequate municipal services or ageing infrastructure can quickly alter development costs and undermine affordability.
Today’s operating environment has made resilience an equally important consideration. Ongoing electricity disruptions have encouraged developers to invest in solar photovoltaic systems, backup power solutions and smarter energy-management technologies, while increasing water-supply challenges are driving the adoption of storage systems, pressure boosting and alternative water strategies.
These investments inevitably increase upfront capital expenditure, yet they often reduce operating costs and improve long-term resilience for residents. The challenge is therefore not simply to minimise construction costs, but to balance immediate affordability with future operational savings. From a cost-management perspective, this reinforces the importance of lifecycle thinking. The lowest construction cost rarely represents the lowest lifetime cost.
Decisions made during design around drainage, ventilation, water systems, energy infrastructure, maintenance access and building services determine how efficiently a development performs over decades.
Removing essential systems through aggressive value engineering may create short-term savings but often results in significantly higher maintenance costs and reduced building performance over time. Affordable housing should therefore be judged not only by the cost of construction, but by whether it continues to provide affordable, reliable and resilient living environments throughout its operational life.
Breaking down silos to build better cities: South Africa already possesses a strong policy framework to support integrated spatial development. The Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) provides a clear vision for inclusive, equitable and sustainable planning. However, implementation remains fragmented. Housing, transport, education, healthcare and municipal infrastructure are frequently planned and delivered independently, creating disconnected developments that struggle to meet the broader needs of the communities they are intended to serve.
Affordable housing cannot remain solely the responsibility of housing departments. Municipalities need integrated planning pipelines that align housing delivery with transport infrastructure, bulk services, schools, clinics and community facilities from the earliest planning stages. The buildings that eventually emerge are simply the visible outcome of planning decisions made years earlier. If those decisions occur in isolation, the resulting urban environment will inevitably reflect that fragmentation.
The same principle applies to collaboration across the built environment. Government, municipalities, developers, investors, consultants, contractors and communities each understand different aspects of the housing challenge. When these stakeholders engage only after projects are already underway, avoidable risks emerge around land availability, planning approvals, infrastructure capacity, construction programmes and long-term operational costs.
By working together from the outset, these risks can be identified earlier, responsibilities allocated more effectively and projects designed to remain both financially viable and socially sustainable.
Public-private partnerships have an important role to play in accelerating this process, provided that risk is allocated appropriately. Government is best placed to manage land release, policy certainty, planning approvals and infrastructure co-ordination, while the private sector can contribute design innovation, procurement expertise, construction capability and operational excellence.
South Africa has already demonstrated through major infrastructure programmes such as Gautrain that long-term partnerships can successfully deliver complex projects when responsibilities are clearly defined and accountability is shared. Affordable housing developments require the same integrated approach.
Building affordable cities, not simply affordable homes: If South Africa is to make meaningful progress over the next decade, implementation must become the priority. The country does not lack progressive policy, planning legislation or technical expertise. Instead, it needs greater co-ordination, faster approvals, improved land release and infrastructure investment aligned with long-term housing pipelines rather than introduced only after developments have been approved.
Practical incentives that encourage inclusionary housing, together with more efficient municipal-approval processes and strategic investment in bulk infrastructure, would significantly improve both delivery and affordability. Equally important is recognising that affordable housing is not merely a human settlements issue. It is simultaneously an infrastructure issue, a transport issue, a planning issue, an investment issue and, ultimately, a dignity issue.
South Africa should therefore stop asking only how to build cheaper homes and instead ask how to build more affordable cities. Housing may be the visible product of development, but infrastructure is what makes it work. Only by integrating planning, transport, resilient infrastructure, sound cost management and effective collaboration can affordable housing become genuinely affordable for the people who need it most.
