Rural Village of Verkykerskop

Small ideas for big impacts: Multifunctionality in the tobana le meralo e kgona ho fetoha
lefatsheng le seng le fetohile. Ho latela

rural village of Verkykerskop pontsho ya Davidoff ya ho etsa bophelo
ba toropo bo be botle, bo thabise le
ho ba le mekgwa e metjha; bahlophisi
Jako Viviers ba kopana le “mehato e makatsang”
dipakeng tsa mekgwa ya ditoropo tse
nnyane, ketsobotjha ya toropo (NU),
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2415-0495/trp73.2 ketsobotjha ya mahae (NR), kgolo e ntle
Peer reviewed and revised October 2018 “green urbanism” (GU), le tse ding. Ho
arabeng taba ya Castells ya “diphethoho
*The authors declared no conflict of interest for this title or article
tse ngata tekanyong ya sepakapaka”
(multidimensional change in the spatial
Abstract dimension), menahano ya bahlophisi e a
Nijkamp affirms the Utopians’ claim of an open and flexible future, where thibelwa/sitiswa, e lebiswa lehlakoreng la
development could imply surprising steps towards something better. Castells moralo o nang le mesebetsi e mengata.
questions admonishingly whether planning approaches are changeable in a world Atikele ena e fana ka mabaka a hore
that has already changed. Following Davidoff’s indications of making urban life kopanyo ya NU, GU le NR, e ka kgona
beautiful, exciting and creative, planners encounter “surprising steps” within the hore e be ntho e nang le molemo bakeng
planning approaches of compact cities, new urbanism, new ruralism, smart growth, sa ditshebeletso tse ngata, haholoholo
green urbanism, and so on. In responding to Castells’ “multidimensional change ha ditlwaelo tsa batho ba bangata di
in the spatial dimension”, the imagination of planners is intercepted, angling them hatella tlhoko ya ho emisa telekiso ya
towards a multifunctional planning advent. This article reasons that a combination of ho ba le bokamoso kapa sephetho se le
the new urbanism, green urbanism and new ruralism may be a beneficial response seng. E botsolotsa hore ebe tshebediso
to multifunctionality, especially as megatrends emphasise the need to abandon the ya mekgwa ena e neletsanang ya moralo
pursuit of a predictable single future or outcome. It questions whether the reciprocal e tla etsa bokgabane/botle ba dinaha tsa
use of these planning approaches may induce multifunctional rural landscapes. mahaeng/mapolasing na. Ho kgetheha
The uniqueness of the inherently rural South African landscape also necessitates ha bokgabane/botle ba dinaha tsa Afrika
a rural emphasis in this article, questioning whether the reciprocal use of the three e Borwa, tseo e leng mahae/mapolasi ka
planning approaches in the recently planned rural village of Verkykerskop, acclaimed tlhaho, bo hloka hore mahae/mapolasi
by the Charter for New Urbanism in 2012, generated multifunctional rural land use. a hlahelle atikeleng ena, bo botsolotsa
tshebediso e neletsanang ya boraro
Keywords: Green urbanism, multifunctionality, new ruralism, new urbanism, rural
(NU, GU le NR) “trio” ya mekgwa ya ho
landscapes, urban design
rala motse-mahae wa Verkykerskop o
qetang ho ralwa nakong e seng kae e
KLEIN IDEES VIR GROOT IMPAK: MULTIFUNKSIONALITEIT IN DIE sa tswa feta. O rotloetswang ke Tjhata
PLATTELANDSE DORPIE VERKYKERSKOP ya ketsobotjha ya toropo ka 2012 “the
Nijkamp benadruk die utopiese aanspraak dat die toekoms oop en buigsaam Charter for New Urbanism in 2012”,
is, waar ontwikkeling verrassende treë tot “iets beter” kan impliseer. Castell e entseng ditshebetso tse ngata tsa
bevraagteken vermanend of beplanningsbenaderings kan verander in ŉ wêreld wat lefatshe mahaeng/mapolasing.
reeds verander het. In Davidoff se siening dat die lewe in die stad gestalte kan
vind in ŉ pragtige, opwindende en kreatiewe milieu, vind beplanners “verrassende 1. INTRODUCTION: “THE
treë” in die konsepte van kompakte stede, nuwe urbanisme, slim-groei, groen
urbanisme, en dies meer. In reaksie op Castell se “multidimensionele verandering WORLD HAS CHANGED”
in die ruimtelike dimensie”, word die verbeelding van beplanners aangegryp en Castells (1992: 73) poses the
ge-oriënteer na ŉ multifunksionele beskouing van beplanning. Hierdie artikel voer
inevitable warning question to the
aan dat die kombinering van die beplanningsbenaderings van nuwe urbanisme,
“nuwe landelikheid” en groen urbanisme ŉ moontlike antwoord vir multifunksionaliteit planning fraternity as to whether
kan wees, veral aangesien mega-tendense benadruk dat daar wegbeweeg its approaches are changeable
behoort te word van die soeke na ŉ voorspelbare en enkelvoudige uitkoms. Die in a world that has already
artikel besin of die wedersydse toepassing van die drie beplanningsbenaderings changed. The resultant effect of
moontlik multifunksionele landelike landskappe tot gevolg kan hê. Die uniekheid the former political dispensation in
van die inherent landelike Suid-Afrikaanse landskap noodsaak ook ŉ landelike
South Africa heightened spatially
fokus in hierdie artikel. Daar word bevraagteken of die wedersydse toepassing
van die drie beplanningsbenaderings in die onlangs beplande landelike dorpie van distorted settlement patterns,
Verkykerskop, wat in 2012 ŉ toekenning van die Charter for New Urbanism ontvang characterised by fragmented urban
het, ŉ multifunksionele landelike grondgebruik in die hand werk. forms, distinctive of robust racial
Sleutelwoorde: Groen urbanisme, landelike omgewings, multifunksionaliteit, nuwe segregation. The precedence
urbanisme, nuwe landelikheid, stedelike ontwerp restructuring is relishing on the
South African planning agenda
MEHOPOLO E MENNYANE BAKENG SA TSHUSUMETSO E KGOLO: as a consequence of the recently
DITSHEBELETSO TSE NGATA MOTSE-LEHAENG WA VERKYERSKOP promulgated Spatial Planning
Nijkamp o tiisa tseko ya “the Utopians” ya bokamoso bo bulehileng, bo fetohang and Land Use Management
habobebe, moo teng ntshetsopele e ka hlahisang ditsela tse isang nthong e betere. Act (No. 16 of 2013), urging the
Katamelo e entsweng ke Castells, e botsolotsa taba ya hore na mekgwa ya ho resolve of distorted settlement
Mr Jako Viviers, Lecturer, Subject Group: Town and Regional Planning, North-West University (Potchefstroom Campus), PO Box 123, Building E4
(De Klerk-Huis), North-West University, Potchefstroom, 2520. Phone: 018 299 1542, e-mail: <[email protected]>
15
SSB/TRP/MDM 2018 (73)
patterns, and requiring scholars historical starting point, of which of a qualitative inquiry into the
and professionals to take their planners may well be a significant recently designed rural village of
creative successes to the academic part (Castells, 1992: 78). Gunder Verkykerskop, acclaimed by the
discourse and to progressively and Hillier (2009: 195) equally Charter for New Urbanism in 2012,
grapple the less familiar and recommend that “for planning raises the question as to whether the
innovative nuances of planning. to be innovative, practitioners reciprocal employment of the design
need to engage with challenges approaches of NU, NR and green
As a planning profession is expected
and alternative ways of doing urbanism (GU) may well induce
to create a more beautiful, exciting,
and thinking”. Pre-shaped and multifunctionality. As this research
creative and more just urban life,
mechanically defined solutions, in deals with numerous “how” questions,
Davidoff (1965: 331-338) charged
a world that has already changed, a case study is deemed the
planners in 1965 as “having little
compel us to revisit and critically appropriate strategy. Verkykerskop
to say”. In prescribing future urban
evaluate where we are, where we is selected as a single, unique and
life, the obligation was to ensure a
may wish to go, and what we wish revelatory case study (Yin, 2003:
generation of planners to surpass
to become as communities – in 1, 39, 42), providing “rich and vivid
those of the1960s. Nijkamp (1980:
essence, a restored narrative that descriptions” (Cohen, Manion &
241) later affirmed the utopians’
reflects solutions beyond apparent Morrison, 2018: 376). It presents
claim that the future is open and monofunctional planning. In a new an exclusive and distinctive
flexible, and that every development realm, Ahern (2011: 4) senses (Cohen et al., 2018: 223) design
in the community could imply a that planners will have to explore philosophy, realising farming, playing
surprising step towards something innovative ways of providing for and living through the collective
better. Nearly 40 years later, “sustainable ecosystem services employment of NU, NR and GU.
planners encounter ever-increasing in the increasingly limited spaces
approaches “towards something within compact cities”. He continues
better”, oscillating from compact that multifunctionality is “inherently 2. RISE OF THE
cities, transit-oriented developments, efficient spatially and economically” MULTIFUNCTIONALITY
new urbanism (NU), new ruralism and benefits from support by DISCOURSE
(NR), shared cities, to smart communities and role players; all as a
growth and, of late, eco-cities; all consequence of the multiple functions 2.1 Scientific point of departure
in response to a prospect where it endorses. In specifically observing Notwithstanding the increasing
monofunctional and one-dimensional the rural context, Dijst, Elbersen attention that multifunctionality gained
planning are gradually surpassed by and Willis (2010: 3-6) emphasise over the past decade, planners are
multifunctional hybrid alternatives that traditional planning policies are progressively experiencing frustration
and the optimum utilisation of land. no longer suitably addressing the (OECD, 2001: 9) regarding a proper
These approaches outpaced the demands stemming from a diverse set of broad definitions and clear
methodologies of the 1960s, where group of actors, typically found in statements concerning its scientific
urban planning was branded as rural areas. Balmford, Bruner, Cooper points of departure. Although the
homogeneous development, leading et al. (2002: 950) simply maintain that concept is relatively new, it appears
to spatially separate residential, the multifunctional and sustainable that what it presents, is not new
working and commercial areas use of natural landscapes typically (Bohman, Cooper, Mullarkey et
(Jacobs, 1961: 32). In responding surpasses “gains of their conversion al., 1999: 5). It first appeared in
to homogeneous development to single-purpose land use types”, the agricultural dialogue. Holmes
and the “multidimensional the latter signalling the alien nature (2006: 142) perceived agriculture
change in the spatial dimension” of monofunctional tactics in a production as intended (food
revealed by Castells (1992: 73), rapidly changing world. The weight outputs) and unintended (non-food
the imagination of planners is of the monofunctionality of the 20th outputs) by-products. This gradually
progressively intercepted, angling century is recurrently bewailed as an progressed by dredging up old
them towards a multifunctional “inherent burden that we must leave ideas and practices and converting
planning advent. This collaborative behind” (Brandt & Vejre, 2004: 28). them into new ones, now being
and aggregated approach is
In attaining multifunctional embraced by several disciplines.
comprehensible, especially
planning, this article reasons that a By way of illustration, the European
considering Katz’s (1994: ix)
combination of design approaches Commission (2012: 3) claims that
alarming caution that the suburban
may be a response to a world the multifunctional application of
paradigm that has dominated
that has changed, especially as green infrastructure contributes to the
since the 1940s and 1950s will not
megatrends emphasise the need to achievement of a number of policy
be able to meaningfully sustain
abandon the pursuit of a predictable aims and fulfils the needs of a variety
another generation of growth.
single future or outcome (Retief, of stakeholder groups. Several
Planning approaches, therefore, Bond, Pope et al., 2016: 56). Using scholars similarly view multifunctional
inevitably need to have a new theoretical sampling as a component planning as a feasible methodology
16
Jako Viviers • Small ideas for big impacts: Multifunctionality in the rural village of Verkykerskop
to embark on the contests of a 2.2 Multifunctionality and 102). In utilising the multiple rural
changed world (Kopeva, Peneva society goods offered by the landscape,
& Madjarova, 2010; Brand & Vejre, it is possibly in the modest advice
Schama’s (1995: 35) leitmotif
2004; Ahern, 2011; Vreeker, 2004). from Grandpa to Little Tree that
is simply that “landscapes are
the answer is rooted in taking “only
In meeting the evolving complex and culture before they are nature”.
what ye need” (Carter, 1998: 9).
multiple societal demands on rural This is in stark contrast with times
land use, interests are increasingly when planning was known to be De Groot (2005: 175) shares
mounting in comprehending homogeneous and led to spatially Marsden et al.’s (1993: 20)
multifunctionality. Brandt and disconnect residential, working and assumptions by arguing for a
Vejre (2004: 7) suggest that commercial areas (Jacobs, 1961: systematic analysis of the ecological,
multifunctionality should essentially 32). In response to homogeneous sociocultural and economic values
seek a transfer from “functional approaches, multifunctionality of the landscape, giving rise to
segregation towards functional is presented as accomplishing multifunctionality. In attaining
integration”. Batty, Besussi, Maat interactive environments and these landscapes, he deems the
and Harts (2011: 333) highlight the generating social cohesion and involvement of local people as
intricacy of its attainment, stating economic benefits in the rural significant, and their role should
that the “concept of multifunctionality community (RSA, 2015: 13). be effectively communicated to
and mixed use is more convoluted Wilson (2010: 364) presents its both planners and authorities.
spatially than its discussion implies”. broader application to include, Researchers stoutly advocate
They recognise it as a theme among others, the “production” of collaborative planning among
running through many substantive social functions and social capital economists, ecologists, social
discussions of the contemporary evolving in networks of relationships scientists, planners and the
planning scene. Supportive of this among people residing and community in understanding the
interpretation, Vreeker (2004: 1-18) labouring in a community, thereby compromises involved in land-use
comprehends multifunctionality as enabling its effective functioning. change decisions in the rural milieu.
a form of development whereby In the simplest of premises, Quinn
different land uses are concentrated Multifunctionality involves ‘‘the need
(1999: 47) avers that civilisation
in a specific area, resulting in synergy to appreciate the significance of
must not be abandoned under any
among the combined land-use space and locality not just as residual
circumstances. He reminds us that
functions. In framing a structured variables but as causal social factors
the elements of our culture ascend
multifunctional point of departure, in moulding development’’ (Marsden,
from the very structure of our minds:
a threefold approach is assumed: Murdoch, Lowe et al., 1993: 20).
“if you don’t have them, there must
spatially combining separate land It appears that multifunctionality
be something wrong with you”.
parcels that differ in function; applying requires an equilibrium, not only
Nelson (2009: 13) sagely admits
different functions to the same land between environmental and
that, as the physical landscape is
parcel, but at different times, and economic attributes, but also
examined, so the social landscape
applying different functions to the between social capital. Hansen
must similarly be examined.
same land parcel, but at the same and Pauleit (2014: 527) request
time (Brand & Vejre, 2004: 3-6). that multifunctionality should not be
2.3 Multifunctional rural
Considering its scientific points of assumed in a meagre, quantifiable
landscapes
departure, Kopeva et al. (2010: 10) sense of ‘‘the more functions the
elaborate on the increased economic better”, but rather as a normative South Africa’s distinctive and
results in peri-urban and rural areas approach, suggesting a broader intrinsic rural landscape necessitates
through multifunctionality, suggesting planning event whereby settlements a context-driven reflection on
that its combination with economic are “interrelated social-ecological multifunctionality. Notwithstanding
and ecological principles may well systems”. The significance of the known economic value of the
accomplish sustainable development. multifunctionality is, therefore, multifunctional use of the natural
Holmes (2006: 145) seeks to provide embedded in the premise that the rural environment, its large-scale
the basic purpose underlying the landscape already provides social obliteration and degradation is
human use of rural space, narrowing resources, multiple material and looming (Wessels, Prince, Frost &
it down to production, consumption immaterial goods to meet societal Van Zyl, 2004: 47). The increasing
and protection, deeming it to be demands and processing of the pressure on the use of rural land,
the radical re-ordering principles landscape on multiple levels. The in the absence of continuously
at the core of multifunctional rural amalgamation of functions should, improving multifunctional attentions,
transition. The concept, as perceived among others, offer improved will result in conflicts and loss of
by Vreeker (2004: 14), turned out to health and well-being benefits for environmental quality (Djist et
be an “interesting one”, deeming it the public, and secure unharmed al., 2010: 4). These pressures
a spatial planning principle dealing ecological systems (Lafortezza, relate to demographic and lifestyle
with, inter alia, land scarcity. Davies, Sanesi & Konijnendijk, 2013: changes, increased mobility, the
17
growing need for housing in nature, rural ambience”. Danbom (1995: context of its tributary resources
landscape and recreational space 45) raises rural occupancy to such as protection, leisure,
conversion, and a demand on rural an ethical dialogue, signifying recovering space, and the cultural
space for water. Holmes (2006: that relationships amid friends landscape (non-food outputs).
141) observes the complexities of and neighbours in the farming
The principles of multifunctionality
rural change in an affluent Western community should take place in
will initially be coded and
society as multifunctional, where the context of a “moral, rather than
categorised, and themes
the values of consumption and a market, economy”. We should
will ultimately be developed
protection entwine. He questions conceivably avoid portraying rural
(Cohen et al., 2018: 673) deemed
the former dominance of sheer occupancy as a solely economic
inherent in the multifunctional
production in favour of “greater and demographic phenomenon.
discourse. The selected themes of
complexity and heterogeneity in
Kopevav et al. (2010: 3) echo the multifunctionality will be included in a
rural occupance”. In its 2007-2013
current debate in theory and practice theoretical matrix (see Table 1) that
Rural Development Programme,
relating to the opposing approaches will be used in analysing theoretical
the European Commission
of multifunctional agriculture and data. This analysis will seek the
(2004: 8-9) conversely identified
multifunctional land use. They interface between the themes
three axes of rural development,
motivate that both strategies should of multifunctionality and the
signalling the “attractiveness
be interlinked in an outline where aggregated principles of the planning
of rural areas, economic
land use, biodiversity, and economic, approaches of NU, NR and GU.
diversification and quality of life”
social and environmental dimensions In further preparing this analysis,
as a significant axis. This specific
of sustainability are congruently the structure of this article explores
axis should be supplemented
attempted. In deviating from the the selected planning approaches
by policy measures concerning
stance that multifunctionality is as plausible building blocks in
infrastructure improvement,
simply a survival strategy for farmers response to multifunctionality.
preservation of cultural heritage,
and emphasising the interwoven
tourism, and micro-enterprise
nature thereof, Marsden and
development – all demonstrating a 3. THE RATIONALE FOR
Sonnino (2008: 423) distinguish
multifunctional disposition towards AGGREGATING PLANNING
activities, under the emerging
the planning of rural landscapes. APPROACHES
paradigm, as conducive thereto:
In countering unceasing agricultural adding income and opportunities; “Urban design is a fundamental,
abandonment, Pallarès-Blanch, establishing new agricultural sectors essential ingredient of our intellectual
Prados and Tulla (2014: 2) as well that address societal needs, and tradition, yet it cannot provide
as Bielsa, Pons and Bunce (2005: instituting the redefinition and the only material basis for the
85-102) envisage “naturbanization” reconfiguration of rural resources reconstruction of our field in the
(an approach, perhaps, to some in, and beyond farming. Vereijken’s face of new historical challenges”
extent, related to NR), whereby (2002: 177) research elucidates (Castells, 1992: 77). This assertion
residential dwellers are enticed the ongoing transition from the mirrors Castells’ covenant with
towards protected natural and monofunctional use of agricultural earlier academics, sensing that a
rural areas, changing the socio- land to multifunctional land monofunctional approach is deemed
demographic and economic use. He endorses physical and obsolete in meeting the appeals
structure, the form of settlements economic restructuring. In principle, of a changed world. Although it
and the agricultural landscapes. “dualistic planning” is predicted, appears that the records of scholars,
This is, perhaps, akin to Holmes’ by permitting areas for openness, incoherently contemplating the
(2006: 145) contemplating radical quietness and silence, where the planning approaches of NU, NR and
re-ordering principles of rural emphasis is on nature, recreation, GU, are saturated, this contrasts with
transition. Settlements of this cultivated farms and grazing and a minor group of academics seeking
nature incite multifunctionality by entitling areas for “main road” the collective interface between
and enhance a broader economic functions, permitting living, soft these planning approaches in their
base for rural land use (Johnson & (retailers and services) and hard quest to attain multifunctionality.
Rasker, 1995: 405-416). Audirac, enterprises (production, trade and They increasingly portray the future
Shermyen and Smith (1990: 473) transport). In the European theatre, process of planning as linking
present the causes for changing it appears that multifunctionality is different projects with different
residential preferences by opting for discussed against the background functions in prompting spatial
“suburban or ex-urban residential of changing conditions relating to synergy (Priemus & Hall, 2004: 348).
environments” as “…the ideal of diverse agricultural production. In laying down the fundamentals of
owning a single family home, the Consequently, agriculture is planning, Hedman and Jaszewski
need for an adequate environment viewed, to a lesser extent, within (1984: 1) state that architecture and
for raising a family, a strong desire the context of sheer production planning are inseparable and failure
for privacy and the appeal of a (food outputs), but rather within the to acknowledge their interface is
18
“to invite confusion, if not chaos”. and Saginor (2016: 2) lament the increasing residential development
Implying a potential interface, problem of translating NU principles density; placing urban amenities
Stratton (2009: 7) positively observes in the NR philosophy. They caution within walking distance of houses,
that the future of NR is still optimistic that rural communities often view and positioning plans toward
and that the movement is relatively the integration of NU concepts pedestrians and public transportation.
new and exploits the triumphs of NU. in low-density environments as NU and its continuously updated
demanding. Jepson and Edwards’ collaborative “Lexicon of NU”
A desired interface is sensed by
(2010: 434-435) research depicts (Plater-Zyberk, 2014: 13) are
the European Commission (2012:
related problems, verifying that schools of thought among post-
4), reporting that the nature of
planners identify NU, smart growth suburban planners, as it introduces
green infrastructure, due to its
multifunctionality, should not be and the ecological city as complex a substitute to sprawl through higher
linked to a single science, especially approaches for which to prepare densities, diversification, calmed
as its key attraction is to perform development strategies. Their roads, mixed use, and walkability.
“several functions and provide findings essentially advocate the It has simultaneously cultivated
several benefits in the same spatial planning profession’s accountability a substantial network of agents
area”. Kraus (2006: 28), in turn, in formulating a cross or hybrid in the architectural, engineering,
distinguishes NR as a framework methodology. The latter verdict environmental, societal, and
connecting sustainable agriculture prompted this research, in seeking planning fields. NU has advanced
and NU, by suggesting an equivalent the interface resultant from combining increasingly in theory and technology.
with the NU vision of compact, mixed three seemingly intertwined planning Duany, Pater-Zyberk and Speck
use urbanised areas, the elimination approaches. Trudeau (2013: 8) (2010: xiii) witness it as, inter alia,
of low-density, auto-dependent encourages this fusion, as he, like introducing the “rural-to-urban
sprawl and distinct edges between Jepson and Edwards, recommends transect as an organising structure
towns and their surrounding rural a “hybrid urbanism” characterised by for conservation and development”.
and agricultural areas. Highlighted low-density projects and selecting The transect displays equivalence
by ‘pro-ruralists’, the rural landscape the qualities of NU concurrently with Churchman’s (1999: 389-411)
may be presented as green food with other planning features, arguments in favour of the compact
belt perimeters, buffers between thereby questioning conventional city planning approach, restricting
city and rural lifestyles, countryside developments. Assuming the development and higher densities
residences, small agricultural parks planner’s position of influence in certain areas, thereby releasing
in the urban-rural interface or bigger “towards something better” (Davidoff, pristine agricultural land from the
preserves further afield, including 1965: 331-338), the limitations of risks of sheer urbanisation. As
larger farms and rural settlements. separately using NU, NR and GU a planning approach, NU offers
It is generally presumed that the are emphasised by offering a clearer wide-ranging attributes from its
interfacing of planning approaches sense into its collective defining development principles to laying
in the same “spatial unit”, aside from and correlation. This institutes a foundations for social goals
their status as “spatially well-defined developing hybrid approach to and may well be viewed as an
or diffused”, may be conducive to the planning. Drawn from the research already prevailing multifunctional
multifunctional landscape (Moffat, of Ross and Bigon (2018: 23), a approach to planning. In addition,
2006: 74; Nelson, 2009: 8; Versaci, “more nuanced” understanding of it values community, civility, a
2008: 10; Brandt & Vejre, 2004: the grid layout in Senegal indicated sense of place, beauty, equity
24). Lehmann (2010: 3) supports hybridisation, further suggesting not and sustainability, not necessarily
the significance of a consolidated only the practical functioning and reflected upon in familiar and
planning approach by connecting the enhancing of daily urban life, but conventional planning approaches
definitions of NU and GU, signifying also replicating a more “inclusive, (Mayo & Ellis, 2009: 239).
principles for GU. Ultimately and transnational and cosmopolitan,
As with all creations, destruction
convincingly, he remarks that the cum postmodern approach”.
followed soon and NU has since
“eco-city theory” is the future of all been laced with criticism from certain
settlements. By the same token, 3.1 New urbanism
academic corners and is becoming
Arendt (1994: 42) views the direct link Muschamp (1996: 761) labelled different things to different people.
between NU, environmental benefits
new urbanism (NU) as “the most Moudon (2000: 42) offers opposing
and the conservation of sensitive
important phenomenon to emerge in opinions that NU should study its
environmental areas as the promotion
American architecture in the post- own work, value it critically, and find
of compact development patterns,
Cold War era”. He describes the a baseline from which its progress
combined with infill strategies.
Congress for the New Urbanism’s to date ought to be evaluated. Both
Despite scholarly suggestions of (CNU) commencement with an its positive and negative responses
a promising correlation between unpretentious approach, modelling require explanation, in order to guide
planning approaches in a new suburban developments on planners who are attempting its
multifunctional means, Newman a compact scale of small towns; principles into the next generation
19
of development. Ellis (2002: 283)

deliberates the vast criticism NU
encountered, advising that the
standards of academic science claim
the need for more evidence, and it
should be “exposed by a rigorous,
side-by-side comparison of proffered
alternatives”. Although new urbanists
are justified in adhering to their
principles, continuing to build, and
paying close attention to results on
the ground, additional research is
nonetheless awaited; research that
provides definitive resolutions to
the disputed inquiries. Conversely,
and as usual, critiques are often
preoccupied with lofty generalisations
with limited awareness of the routine Figure 1: Windsor Village
realities of land development, Source: Katz, 1994: 62
finance and local politics. They
are “letting a rare opportunity with the findings of Trudeau (2013: pleasures, will render a service to
to push for a more sane urban 24) that various approaches in the whole face of this continent...”
development pattern slip through NU are indeed related to different (Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1944)
their fingers” (Talen, 2000: 318-337). (Machor, 1987: 157).
contexts. Bohl (2000: 765) asserts
In seeking the affiliation between the rural significance of NU, by Emerson’s foretelling statement
planning principles and social goals, endorsing rural hamlets and villages, is reminiscent of Holmes’ (2006:
Talen (2002: 184) also underscores small towns in districts that afford 144) research, as he observes that
the CNU’s social goals, indicating compact alternatives applicable the rural landscape is increasingly
that NU is primarily concerned to different rural settings. Limited being “consumed” by market-driven
with common good, followed by research on NU in its rural context interests, “attracted by a residential,
social equity and community. Day requires a better understanding tourism and recreational lifestyle
(2009: 92) acknowledges the of the different scales at which or investment opportunities and
value of NU for planners. A single settlements are shaped, as well by farm households increasingly
vision should pave the way for an as the relationships that exist dependent on non-farm income”.
encompassing multiple vision, varied between elements at the different Leisure activities and farm-based
activities, lifestyles and identities. scales (IURD & SAGE, 2006). recreation, of late, are backing the
Planners are also requested not This article finds itself taking fulfilment of Emerson’s prediction and
to emphasise the economic and small steps in resolving certain are often mentioned as possibilities
environmental consequences of limits of NU in rural context. for farm diversification. Unlike land
the urban form only, by navigating use for exclusive food production
from social consequences and In putting forward a reasonable and decreasing landscape diversity,
goals (Duany & Plater-Zyberk, 1992: urban framework for the essentially
multifunctional use nurtures an
20). NU is, therefore, “new”, as it rural case study, the Windsor model
altered landscape that may still
proposes an infrequent approach (Figure 1), a decidedly successful
be dominated by wide expanses
to planning suburbs, redeveloping NU village in the United States
of agriculture-related activities,
cities, and strongly emphasising its of America (Katz, 1994: 62-77),
complemented by progressively
inhabitants’ well-being. Research was viewed as a likely planning
developing non-productive activities
concluded in local contexts (AHI, equivalent. The latter, mostly
and functions, often from private
DCOG & GIZ, 2016: 23) support as a consequence of pertinent
and small initiatives (Elgåker, 2012:
Duany and Platter-Zyberks’ premise spatial similarities between the two
592). Although Nelson (2009: 13,
that multi-level collaboration and villages. The urban form and rural
96) agrees that the forces of the
fundamental change may only be locality of Windsor were deemed
more relevant, not necessarily its NR are already afoot, they are
attained through extensive dialogue only rudimentarily theorised. He
and purposeful engagement with cultural or architectural context.
perceives NR as a necessary step
all stakeholders of a settlement. in “sharpening the resolution with
3.2 New ruralism
For the purposes of this article, which social scientists can describe
emphasis is placed on the rural
“Whatever events in progress the effect of place on people”.
shall go to disgust men with cities,
extremity of the NU’s “rural-to-urban and infuse into them the passion Understanding NR is progressively
transect”, and correlation is pursued for country life, and country increasing, as academics and
20
practitioners, especially in the emphasis on a specific lifestyle 10). Imminent development

European theatre, are intent on where people want to “rediscover markets, where prospective
framing its definition, approaches and re-utilise” the delicacies of residents experience country life
and priorities. In essence, NR life in the rural landscape. Said and its pristine landscapes as
is entrenched in past models, lifestyles advocate a new form of desirable are, among others, an
comparable with the agricultural sustainable life in the countryside, additional consequence of NR.
context of the ‘Garden City’ and incorporating social, environmental,
In deliberating a clearer framework
the self-sufficiency components and economic sustainability.
for NR, scholars at the University
of agri- and eco-villages.
It appears that the application of NR of California (IURD & SAGE, 2006)
NR may accordingly be viewed is more appropriate on a smaller emphasised the contributions by
as an approach built on the past scale of sustainable agriculture, Dean Fraker that NR is a combination
two decades’ cumbersome reform overlapping with areas for wildlife of many different parts, with
in food, agriculture and land-use and habitat management. It provides pertinent linkages between the built
planning, whereby sustainable the opportunity for adding value to environment, health and urban-rural
agriculture made farmers’ markets agricultural areas, in order to permit interface issues. They concluded
a basic amenity of a town centre clustered residential development that, above all, “NR is not just the
(Kraus, 2006: 28). During this time, (Moffat, 2006: 74). Versaci (2008: absence of urbanism”. Prominence
new alternative approaches showed 10) reasons that NR ought to be is equally placed on the local agenda
the possibilities of creating healthier, regarded as the inverse of NU. by Louw (2012: 1-143) who regards
more liveable rural centres. Kraus He suggests a strategy to develop NU and NR as potential tools for
(2006: 27) views NR as a “corollary new communities in the rural sustainable development in South
of NU, with a related framework of landscape, offering a way to preserve Africa’s rural setting. Most recently,
principles, policies and practices”. its landscape and architectural the South African rural landscape
In attempting to provide a more heritage (typically illustrated in was competently divided into cities,
refined meaning of NR, Newman the case study of Verkykerskop smaller towns, rural villages and
and Saginor (2016: 2) recommend in Figure 2). NR is described as a countryside; thus, final destinations
that it should encompass “clustered, better way to promote rural areas, announcing the vast wilderness
small- to medium-scaled suburban seeking to preserve the “ambiance in between. Farmsteads, built in
style developments, occurring in of a place” by understanding the regional vernacular style, were
rural areas, under urban influence, traditions, patterns and customs dispersed throughout a mainly open
characterised by large ratios of viable in planning new communities. The landscape, while small rural towns
preserved farmland, that contribute to Lexicon of NU (Plater-Zyberk, served as centres for the surrounding
local and regional food systems and 2014: 13) positively endorses this agricultural community. Rather than
help contain/ sustain metropolitan assumption, emphasising that bulldozing this unique countryside
regions”. In attaining permanent the planning and re-planning of into oblivion, the South African rural
preserves, as a primary goal of settlements should take cognisance landscape echoes Versaci’s (2008:
NR, their research also ascertains of “historical patterns, precedents 12) awareness that the preservation
multiple economic opportunities, and boundaries”. At its core, NR developments of NR may “draw the
optimal preservation of farmland considers environmental stewardship best of the past into the present”.
and green space, and ensuring in a context of conserving Communities seeking to preserve
stable and adaptable working farms. agricultural land (preserves) for their natural resources and cultural
Kvorning (2016: 26) recommends vernacular architectural traditions, heritage find comfort in Stratton’s
a similar holistic view of NR. He wildlife habitat, natural settings, (2009: 7) assurance that they are
highlights the current debates’ and recreation (Versaci, 2008: not alone, predicting that NR is
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 2: Facade studies of vernacular architecture in the Verkykerskop region

Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 30
21
the “vaccine” against sprawl and a dispute that the world is unable to Lehmann (2010: 3) is resolute that
way to “ward off the encroachment “merely afford urban sustainability our “cities can and must become
of those who see the land as an utopianism”. Considering their the most environmentally friendly
accessory and not a commodity”. opposing assertion, equated with the model for inhabiting our earth”.
scholarly emphasis on GU, this article He continues that GU is not viewed
3.3 Green urbanism contemplates whether the measly as a phenomenon confined to
application of a single planning élite academia, but that it ought to
In a world that has changed, Castells
approach (GU) will construe the be applied as standard approach
(1992: 77) alerts planners that
“rapidly increasing planning frontier”. in planning new settlements. In
environmental planning will be “the
Or, will a progressive understanding broadening its applicability, Artmann,
most rapidly increasing planning
of the reciprocal application of Bastian & Grunewald (2017: 14, 19)
frontier in the United States in the next
several planning approaches provide further emphasise the phenomenon’s
decade”. Freilich & Popowitz (2010: 1)
solutions in fostering multifunctional significance on a regional scale,
also admit that the first decade of the
landscapes? Various scholars applied beyond settlement planning.
21st century spawned extraordinary
examined the integrated disposition of In an era of rapid urbanisation, of
levels of environmental awareness
GU, especially Freilich and Popowitz which Africa is reported to take an
and action globally. Howard (1902:
(2010: 4) who expect that smart unenviable lead of 3,5% per annum
1-195) suggested that GU as a
growth, NU and GU (and renewable (Adesina, Gurria & Helen, 2016),
political and social agenda “recently”
energy) should be combined and higher levels of environmental
surfaced. McHarg (1971: 5) states
employed interchangeably, integrably awareness are terms that should elicit
that society was already urged in
and in a comprehensive fashion. decisive action and not be viewed as
the 1960s to “give expression to the
They continue that this approach is fad by planners and authorities. Rapid
potential harmony of man-nature”,
a far broader and useful treatment of urbanisation in the local context wants
which he oscillated in the 1980s
various planning approaches, thereby a pertinent encounter with GU, moving
by stating that ecological planning
suggesting a multifunctional planning from the “far-sighted planning of urban
should meet the requirements of
approach. The current regard for areas towards more sustainable and
both user and nature (McHarg, 1981:
green infrastructure is intrinsically liveable places” (Retief et al., 2016:
109). The turn of the century saw
reliant on its multifunctionality and 54). In this manner, multifunctionality
a global diaspora of sustainability
its capability to address several is advocated as a normative concept,
principles into neighbourhood
challenges concurrently by offering taking a broad perspective on urban
planning (Sharifi, 2016: 1). GU, as a
sustainable solutions (European and rural areas as interrelated
planning approach, is contemporarily
Commission, 2012: 25). In reviewing socio-ecological systems. Hansen
viewed as metamorphic, presented
megatrends that are rapidly changing and Pauleit (2014: 516-529) promote
in various forms and tributaries.
in a world that has changed, Retief et green infrastructure and ecosystem
It developed globally as a way of
al. (2016: 58) underscore their view services, confirming that these seek
comprehending how green resources
that the “most promising approach to combine “ecological, social and
and ecological systems function as
is a shift in practitioners’ thinking economic/abiotic, biotic and cultural
part of the infrastructural fabric that
towards the possibility of multiple functions of green spaces”. It could
supports and sustains society and
possible futures of any one proposal develop as an innovative planning
builds resilience (Harrison, Bobbins,
because thinking of a predictable approach, capturing the complexity
Culwick et al., 2014: 67). Lafortezza
single future or outcome is unlikely and dynamic of socio-ecological
et al. (2013: 102) propose that the city
to succeed”. Tîrlă, Manea, Vijulie et systems in the built environment, and
and its adjacent “wildland interface”
al. (2014: 462) indicate to planners
are the most useful zones for the supporting the concepts of sustainable
that the persistent dilemmas of the
implementation of green infrastructure, development, environmental justice,
21st century are focused on rapid
environment and urban planning, social cohesion, and resilience.
exhaustion of conventional energy
largely accepted as “GU”. It focuses In addition to its apparent ecological
resources, abrupt urbanisation,
on correcting the relationship between benefits, green infrastructure has
pollution at various levels, and global
urban and nature and has developed the ability to evolve as a local tourist
warming; all having an impact on
as a conceptual and theoretical basis asset, enhancing the communities’
the quality of life and consequently
for a new planning archetype. economic benefits and self-
necessitating reconsideration when
sustainability (Tîrlă et al., 2014: 476).
Despite noticeable advances to date, planning settlements. They claim that
Beatley and Newman (2009: 216) this re-examination ought to consider Despite the various social, fiscal
agree that we are only attempting a multidisciplinary approach to and environmental tributaries
sustainability, how to use less and live compact settlements, green transport, combined with the urban cum rural
better, how to rejuvenate the “ecology ecosystem services, urban greening application of GU, a transition from
of the city and its bio-region”, and that by means of community gardens, “spot sustainability” to cohesive
“sense of place, means something in green roofs and urban agriculture, strategies, producing a greater sum
a globalised economy”. By contrast, renewable energy projects, a than its parts, ought to be pursued
Palmer and Simon (2016: 16) sense of place, and lifestyle. (Freilich & Popowitz, 2010: 4). The
22
question remains whether GU will sampling (Suri, 2011: 7) and in the future.1 All planning principles
attain sustainability, either in its coding to ultimately generate a were, therefore, not selected, but
singular or reciprocal application with theory pertaining to the attainment merely a purposeful selection for the
other planning approaches. Gunder of multifunctionality in the rural scope of this article as portrayed in
and Hillier (2009: 141) profess that context. By using a process of “open the emergent theoretical matrix.
it will not, as they recognise that coding” (Cohen et al., 2018: 670), ‘Direct content analysis’ is used to
“no one knows or can succinctly or the progression of the principles assess the research content, as
comprehensively and universally of multifunctionality into categories the coding structure was derived
define what the sustainable city, and themes considered intrinsic to from pre-existing theory (Newby,
social justice or the common good, the multifunctional narrative was 2010: 485). This process illustrates
for that matter, actually is”. described in concluding section 2. potential linkages, correlations
The identified themes are listed in and the interface with the themes
the ensuing emergent theoretical of multifunctionality, with the
4. VERKYKERSKOP:
matrix (see Table 1). This article also purposefully selected principles
MULTIFUNCTIONAL
deliberates whether the reciprocal of the planning approaches.
URBAN PLANNING
use of the three distinctive planning Brandt and Vejre’s (2004: 3-32)
SUBSTANCE approaches of NU, NR and GU may interpretation that a multifunctional
well induce multifunctionality. Neither
4.1 Methodology 1 This article, at its core, aims to illustrate
these planning approaches nor their the interface between a trio of planning
This article uses selected procedures related principles are exhaustive approaches and multifunctionality,
emphasising the planning of rural landscapes.
(Cohen et al., 2018: 714) embedded and there is room to change or Its purpose is not to provide comprehensive
in grounded theory, i.e. theoretical expand the scope of this research and detailed planning guidelines.
Table 1: Multifunctionality interface with planning principles of NU, NR and GU

Recoded Principles of Multifunctionality
Coding
Production
Categories
Economic
Land use
Ecology
Social
Policy
Intact ecological systems (protection)
Countering agricultural abandonment

Ecological systems (green services)
Agglomeration vs dispersion forces
Agricultural diversity & new sectors

Reconfiguration of rural resources
Radical re-ordering principles
Infrastructure improvement
Social utility in production

Combination of functions
Unconventional policies
Health and well-being
Sociocultural values
Society involvement
Renewable energy
Economic benefits
Land-use synergy
Dualistic planning
Ecological values
Impact reduction
Cultural heritage
Rural transition
Rural markets
Land scarcity
Densification
Themes
Tourism
Purposefully
Selected Planning
Principles of the
Planning Approaches
of NU, NR & GU
Mixed-use/diversity                
Quality architecture & urban design                

NU
Increased density            
Connectivity & walkability     
Small-medium scale development                
Overlapping wildlife, habitat & recreation                   

NR
Tourism & residence               
Comprehensive plan                    
Renewable energy            
Density & retrofitting            

GU
Green buildings & passive design                
Cultural heritage/
         
sense of place
Source: Ahern, 2011; Balmford et al., 2002; Brandt & Vejre, 2004; Bielsa et al., 2005; De Groot, 2005; Dijst et al., 2010; European
Commission, 2004; OECD, 2001; Hansen & Pauleit, 2014; Hikichi, 2003; Holmes, 2006; Kraus, 2006; Lafortezza et al., 2013; Lehmann, 2010;
Marsden & Sonnino, 2008; Pallarès-Blanch et al., 2014; Vreeker, 2004; Rodenburg & Nijkamp, 2004; Talen, 2013; Vereijken, 2002; Wiggering,
Dalchow, Glemnitz, Helming, Müller, Schultz, Stachow & Zander, 2006.
23
landscape simultaneously comprises

Primary & secondary axes several functions is, therefore,
Eixisting village elements accepted. A comparative, correlating
(Fram, 2013: 20) and aggregating
(Parrachina et al., 2009: 79) content
analysis is included in an emergent
theoretical matrix, from which
conclusions are drawn (Cohen et
al., 2018: 675). It is predictable that
no single article will conclusively
contribute to the current academic,
discourse multifunctionality. Table 1
should, therefore, simply be weighed
as an emergent analysis. The matrix
is not intended to be extensive and
does not reflect on the complete
assessment that was endeavoured
as part of the contributing research.
It is acknowledged as a mere
illustration of the conduciveness
that seems to exist as an outcome
of the reciprocal application
of the considered planning
approaches, as promising tactics
to attain multifunctionality.
4.2 Responses from

(a) Verkykerskop
Selecting the single case of
Verkykerskop was prompted by
Gymkhana track three distinctive hallmarks, as it
Circulation network provides “rich and vivid descriptions”,
Provincial road highlights the fusion of three
Areas for equine activities
idiosyncratic planning approaches,
and is a consequence of the
researcher’s “integral involvement”
with the case (Cohen et al., 2018:
376). Although the purpose of this
section is not to comprehensively
deliberate all the nominated
interfaces, a brief discussion will
validate certain applications of the
planning approaches followed in
Verkykerskop, in responding to
multifunctionality. It is accepted that
the emergent theoretical matrix has
to be improved and developed into
a detailed assessment matrix, prior
to expansively deliberating all the
nominated interfaces. A synthesis of
the design philosophy and planning
features used during the re-planning
of Verkykerskop and its correlation
with the interfaced themes of
(b) multifunctionality and the principles
of the contemplated planning
Figure 3: Verkykerskop urban framework: (a) prominent places; approaches are, therefore, merely
(b) regulating axis and pedestrian movement noted in the theoretical matrix as a
Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 7, 8 developing assessment of the case
24
(a) (b)
Figure 4: Dualistic planning: (a) “hard” areas; (b) “soft” areas

Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 7, 9
study. The ensuing discussion simply landscape features. This approach and activities gradually and
indicates an incipient exploration is sensed as an endeavour to ultimately disperse into outlying low-
of the case study, signalling that intercept the village’s “dying density, exclusively residential areas.
continuing work is required and syndrome” (Keneley, 2004: 7) and Although Ching (2007) identifies
further articles should be anticipated. the already prevalent symptoms the axis as the most elementary
thereof. Findings from the set means of arranging forms and
Although the rural village of
design philosophy and disposition spaces in settlement design, its
Verkykerskop dates back to the
were comprehensively described significance in Verkykerskop (Figure
Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902),
in a Green Living Compendium 3[b]) is apparent as a powerful and
it was recently re-planned (2013-
(GWA Studio, 2014: 1-100), prepared regulating device, ordering prominent
2016). It is located in the Free
for the future development of places. Figure 3(a) illustrates these
State province, South Africa;
Verkykerskop. The compendium places as (6) an existing gymkhana
it comprises pristine views over the
includes a detailed, comprehensive track (a social pivot in an area
Drakensberg escarpment, and is
and diverse development characterised by its horse breeding,
set in a predominantly agricultural
plan (Trudeau, 2013: 23). horse racing, polo and gymkhana),
region. The multidisciplinary design
linking the (1) village commons to the
team (Gary White & Associates, The first ordering principle of
outlying predominantly low-density
Insite Landscape Architects, the “urban framework” is laid
residential zones (7) and hamlets (4),
LMV Town and Regional Planners, down as prominent places of
with the visual and (2) picturesque
MDA Environmental Specialists, historical, natural and agricultural
forces of the Drakensberg
Cobus Dreyer Archaeologist, significance (Figure 3[a]), counting
escarpment further afield, the cultural
KMA Traffic Engineers, appointed the commercial and dense village
village (5) and a farm dam (3). Since
by Verkykerskop Township commons from where development
this axis is essentially a linear state
Development, and Verkykerskop will disperse to a distant low-density
of length and direction, it creates
Tourism) pinned its planning residential zone, intertwining
free pedestrian movement and views
philosophy on enhancing the historic the different functions of equine,
along its path, constituting a more
and cultural heritage of the rural agricultural and weekend living
environmentally friendly development
area; protecting its rural and rich activities (Rodenburg & Nijkamp,
attitude (Lehmann, 2010: 3).
agriculture operative, and potentially 2004: 275). This design approach
unlocking its tourism and economic was also applied in the Windsor In encouraging the optimal utilisation
growth potential without impeding village by providing a well-defined of scarce land (Vreeker, 2004: 14),
on its natural beauty and rural village centre from where densities a mere 50 ha is earmarked for the
25
re-planned village, as the remaining generating a healthier, more liveable matrix (Figure 6) displaying a mere
farm (measuring 800 ha in extent) rural centre (Kraus, 2006: 27). selection of the projected ecosystem
and its immediate hinterland proceed services for the various urban
Urban agriculture is permissible
with diverse agricultural activities. zones of the re-planned village.
on a combination of residential
The “green framework” (Figures 4 The projected ecosystem services,
erven varying in size, allowing
and 5) is reminiscent of a dualistic in combination with detailed green
for production on larger erven,
planning approach (Vereijken, 2002: services allotted for every building
processing and marketing on typology (Figure 7[b]), introduce
177), identifying “main road function”
smaller erven and thereby green resources and ecological
areas surrounding the village
simultaneously applying different system function incorporation as part
commons, a main road traversing the
functions to the same parcel of of the infrastructural fabric of the
village (Figure 4[a]) and “openness,
land (Brandt & Vejre, 2004: 1). village (Harrison et al., 2014: 67).
quietness and silence” areas on
In this instance, urban agriculture,
the village’s peripheral environs, As elucidated, detailed housing
herb gardening, organically
reserved for sheer agricultural typologies (Figure 7[a]) are identified
grown produce and bio-intensive
activity (Figure 4[b]). Sustainable for the village, further illustrating
practices, among others, are
agricultural and environmental Lehman’s (2010: 422) submissions
anticipated (Figures 5[b] and 7[a]).
management (De Groot, 2005: 175) of a “symbiosis between building and
are integrated into the larger fabric The significance of green nature”, including landscape (see
of the village and its surrounding infrastructure is dependent on Figure 7[b]) as an innate component
rural landscape in the “production “multifunctionality and its ability of planning by integrating “new forms
framework” (Figure 5[a]). It warrants to offer sustainable solutions to of green” in buildings; all despite
a combination of green open space several problems” (European the anticipated increased density of
(Lehman, 2010: 422), productive Commission, 2012: 25). Focusing the re-planned village. It is essential
open space, productive streets, urban on specific solutions, smaller steps to distinguish between the two
and rural productive space; all in are ventured upon in preparing a purposes of the proposed housing
(a) (b)
Open green space Open green space
Urban agricultural space Productive common orchards
Green belt Productive common crops
Secondary fruit bearing trees Green house
Primary fruit bearing trees Proposed/ existing trees
Water body Exclusive green
Figure 5: (a) Production framework; (b) Production and processing in the residential component
26
typologies. First, it aims to reflect

and maintain the region’s vernacular
architecture (Versaci, 2008: 10) and,
secondly, it seeks to demonstrate that
with, inter alia, the use of building
materials, the placement of buildings,
water harvesting, energy generation
and on-site waste disposal,
housing is provided, in attaining
some of the principles of GU.
The housing typologies all illustrate
the collection of renewable energy
(Figure 6[b]), as advised by Brandt
et al. (2004: 22). The question arises
whether the application of the NU
planning approach, apart from its
connectivity and walkability benefits,
will undeniably decrease traffic.
Crane (1996: 15-17) is hesitant
and argues that the combination
of its design features could either
increase or decrease traffic; this may
not necessarily be a “good thing”.
By contrast, Hikichi (2003: 2, 26)
identifies the benefits of walkable
communities as enhancing a
pleasant environment conducive
to cycling and walking, thereby
decreasing “environmental costs”.
Notwithstanding these contradicting
insights, both scholars agree that
the approach is a viable choice Figure 6: Matrix: Abstract of projected ecosystem services
that must be continuously explored Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 29, 30
(a) (b)
Figure 7: Housing typologies illustrating a symbiosis between building and nature

27
(a) (b)
Figure 8: (a) Connectivity framework; (b) Selected examples of detailed street reserve designs
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 9: Selected housing typologies reflecting the regional vernacular architecture:

(a) village home; (b) economic style with cultural influences; (c) hunter’s cottage
in order to attain quality of life Bielsa et al., 2005: 85-102) is In providing characteristic precincts
(Hikichi, 2003: 26) and a clean measurably not monofunctional in Verkykerskop, the “Umgidi
environment (Vereijken, 2002: 174). and commodity and non-commodity Village” (illustrated in Figure
production and processing are, inter 10), offers housing opportunities
The application of NU planning
alia, permitted. In valuing Cilliers, incorporating the indigenous
principles in Verkykerskop population’s cultural heritage.
advocates the linkages between Du Toit, Cilliers et al.’s (2014: 260)
landmarks and prominent opinion that the South African urban The re-planning of Verkykerskop
land uses in a “connectivity landscape is rich in biodiversity contemplates a dualistic design
framework” (Figure 8[a]) and and characterised by cultural (Vereijken, 2002: 177) in foreseeing
detailed design of street reserves diversity, but contains sharp socio- a diverse “land use framework”
(Figure 8[b]). The connectivity (Figure 11), permitting higher
economic differences, the “housing
framework prompts maximum densities, mixed land use, production
framework” presents a diversity
and commercial related “hard”
choices and clear connections in housing typologies, compliant activities, gradually transecting to
to existing places, routes and with various, all-encompassing remote low-density areas comprising
proposed routes (see Figure 3). socio-economic groups, also fittingly sheer residential “soft” activities,
The resultant residential element infused with the region’s vernacular located in areas of wide expanses
(Pallarès-Blanch et al., 2014: 2; architecture (Versaci, 2008: 10). of agriculture, complemented by
28
arrangement emulates the Windsor

model, where density is intensified
around the village common
Place of slaughter
and incrementally decreases in
and kraal function and activity to the outlying
Community hall
low-density residential zone. This
phenomenon is, to some extent,
coherent with Burton’s (2002: 226)
identified key aspects of the compact
city, i.e. high density, mixed use, and
intensity. In addition, Matsumoto
(2011: 17) emphasises the feasible
employment of these key aspects on
a smaller scale than the entire city
and corroborates its significance in
“Chief” July neighbourhood planning. In response
to the “compact city” discourse,
Verkykerskop illustrates a “density
Figure 10: Umgidi Cultural Village transect” from higher to medium to
lower density zones (see Figure 11).
A holistic framework (Lehmann,
2010: 4) and revised policies (Dijst,
2010: 5) are essential in attaining
the desired multifunctional rural
landscape at Verkykerskop, in view
of the complexity of the reciprocal
use of various planning approaches
and existing policies not tactic
Exclusive green space Residential/ selling permitting a multifunctional approach
Village commons Residential/ working towards settlement planning.
Residential/ production Residential/ working & guest house
In closing: The preparation of unique
Residential/ green house production & selling Outlying/ exclusive residential
Circulation network
Conditions of Establishment and
of Title, especially in areas where
green infrastructure is anticipated,
substituting conventional services,
is apparent. Obsolete development
control measures do not necessarily
comprise accommodating attributes
towards multifunctional planning
and dictate the compilation of an
innovative Land Use Scheme.
Preparation of the above policies
Green houses Exclusive green space Various housing typologies is evidently preceded by the
“2050 vision” (Figure 12[a]) and
an exceedingly exhaustive master
Figure 11: Density transect from (a) higher density residential
plan (Figure 12[b]) drawn up for the
village living/commercial/production; (b) medium-
village. Assigning fixed typologies to
density living-commercial/ living-work; (c) lower density
specific premises enables a series of
residential outspan living/expanses of agriculture
inventive building control measures,
Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 22 especially building lines and the
defining of novel land uses, i.e. urban
other non-productive activities and options are similarly reached by agriculture, stables, courtyards, and
functions (Elgåker, 2012: 592), areas assigning permissible live-work vertical zoning (Figure 13[a] & [b]).
for wildlife, habitat management, and live-commercial residential It is apparent that these specific and
and passive recreation. In denoted options in medium-density areas; consequential planning policies are
areas, guest houses are intrinsically all introducing non-conventional uncompromising in warranting the
permitted, enhancing the region’s land-use management policies feasibility of the re-planned rural
tourism basis. Synergy-generating (Dijst et al., 2010: 5). This specific landscape (Kraus, 2006: 28).
29
regarded as an expedient solution for

the planning of rural environments. It
appears, however, that the practical
application of multifunctionality is
less familiar among its proponents.
Practitioners and authorities will need
to rethink multifunctionality on several
levels. This means that accustomed
planning approaches and
development policies are no longer
suitable. This article illustrates and
argues that the reasonable hybrid
and infused planning approaches
are not necessarily included in
prevalent policies and guidelines in a
changing South Africa, for example,
the Subdivision of Agricultural Land
Act (No. 70 of 1970); Municipal
Spatial Development Frameworks
(SDFs); the Department of Rural
Figure 12: (a) “2050 vision”; (b) exhaustive master plan
Development and Land Reform’s
Source: GWA Studio, 2014: 11 Guidelines for the preparation of
SDFs (2014); Spatial Planning and
Land Use Management Act (No. 16
of 2013), (considering the contents of
SDFs and preparation of Land Use
Schemes), and existing Municipal
Land Use Schemes, unremittingly
yearning for restructuring.
(a)
5.2 Dealing with attainability
There is no denying that the rural
landscape is dramatically changing.
Irrespective of its predominantly
agricultural alignment and limited
Court
available examples of non-
yard productive tactics (for example,
diversification of agricultural
practices, non-agricultural land
use, small retailers, protection,
leisure, and living), the South
African cadre seems silent, plagued
(b) by monofunctional advances and
gazed with austerity by authorities.
Figure 13: Illustrations applied in defining Small steps taken in re-planning
(a) vertical zoning; (b) the “court yard” Verkykerskop illustrate the feasibility
of the devices of multifunctionality.
The emerging analysis used in
this article is indicative of potential
5. CONCLUDING European theatre that is inundated
“big” impacts, especially by
THOUGHTS AND FUTURE with the demands of a continuously
pursuing interfaces between the
DIRECTIONS FOR changing “world”. In agreement
applied planning approaches of
MULTIFUNCTIONALITY with the European Commission
NU, GU NR and multifunctionality.
(2004: 8-9), This article alludes to This article further illustrates
5.1 Dealing with policy the importance of moving away from multifunctionality’s attainability in
Resolute scholars in various a monofunctional and exclusively the rural landscape, causing the
disciplines deliberate producer-oriented approach in the acceptance of the basic premise that
multifunctionality and its variations, rural landscape. It also affirms and multifunctionality will likely always
especially those scholars in the shows that multifunctionality may be be valid and even more so in future.
30
It appears that multifunctionality, especially when seeking to proceed AND TRADITIONAL AFFAIRS) &
driven by its numerous benefits with an “aggregation framework for GIZ (DEUTSCHE GESELSCHAFT
for the revitalisation of rural multiple indicators”. They caution FUR INTERNATIONALE
areas, is readily attainable amidst that the vulnerability of simplification ZUSAMMENARBEIT). 2016. Small
various planning approaches. lies in distantly viewing reality. towns development initiative. Pretoria:
AHI and DCOG.
The planning of multifunctional In seeking an optimum level
landscapes is an essential between the planning approaches ARENDT, R. 1994. Rural by design:
constituent of future rural life and and multifunctionality, interfacing Maintaining small town character.
ought to be a traversing theme. offers a valuable instrument to distil Chicago, ILL: American Planning
information into a comparative Association.
5.3 Dealing with planning “aggregation framework”, instead ARTMANN, M., BASTIAN, O. &
approaches of attempting to simultaneously GRUNEWALD, K. 2017. Using the
construe multiple attributes. concept of green infrastructure and
In emphasising the assets and
Further investigation of the planning ecosystem services to specify Leitbilder
liabilities of the three planning for compact and green cities – The
approaches and multifunctionality
approaches of NU, NR and example of the landscape plan of
may reveal more interfaces; more
GU, the article highlighted the Dresden (Germany). Sustainability,
practical solutions might evolve, and
unique planning highlights of 9(198), pp. 1-26. https://doi.
refining the interfaces be realised.
each approach as potential org/10.3390/su9020198
“surprising steps towards Although there is no simple way out AUDIRAC, I., SHERMYEN, A.H. &
something better”. Admittedly, of a changed world, several small SMITH, M.T. 1990. Ideal urban form
the application of a single steps “towards something better” are and good visions of the good life –
planning approach may partially deemed essential in seeking “bigger” Florida’s growth management dilemma.
accomplish multifunctionality, impacts, of which the leitmotif of Journal of the American Planning
although it is preferably agreed multifunctional planning is, perhaps, Association, 56(4), pp. 470-482. https://
with Ahern’s (2011: 4) assertion a keel that may well stabilise the doi.org/10.1080/01944369008975450
that multifunctionality aims to rapidly changing rural landscape. BALMFORD, A., BRUNER, A.,
effectively intertwine or combine Positive, yet small steps may well be COOPER, P., CONSTANZA, R.,
different functions in a restricted taken in accomplishing the changes FARBER, S., GREEN, R.E., JENKINS,
space. The sum of the reciprocal that are necessary to bring about a M., JEFFERISS, P., JESSAMY, V.,
application of more than one stronger sense of community and to MADDEN, J., MUNRO, K., MYERS, N.,
planning approach may negate develop a broader vision than that NAEEM, S., PAAVOLA, J., RAYMENT,
some of the limitations resulting which is evident in known practices. M., ROSENDO, S., ROUGHGARDEN,
from applying a single approach. In conclusion: it is agreed with Hall J., TRUMOER, K. & TURNER, R.K.
2002. Economic reasons for conserving
A developing analysis of the and Porterfield (2001: xxii) “that
wild nature. Science, 297(5583),
planning features of the re-planned we must be proactive in effecting pp. 950-953. https://doi.org/10.1126/
Verkykerskop village shows that change”, rather than being science.1073947
several of the identified principles despondent in the midst of this
of multifunctionality are readily chopping sea of a changed world. BATTY, M., BESUSSI, E., MAAT, K.
endorsed by the simultaneous & HARTS, J.J. 2004. Representing
multifunctional cities: Density
application of NU, NR and GU.
REFERENCES and diversity in space and time.
Finding interfaces among the three
Built Environment, 30(4), pp.
planning approaches increasingly ADESINA, A.A., GURRIA, A., HELEN,
324-337. https://doi.org/10.2148/
informed multifunctionality. C. (Eds). 2016. African economic
benv.30.4.324.57156
outlook: Sustainable cities and
5.4 Dealing with interfacing structural transformation. Paris: BEATLEY, T. & NEWMAN, P. 2009.
OECD Publications. [online]. Available Green urbanism down under.
Based on the limitations of this at: <www.africaneconomicoutlook. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
article, it is accepted that neither the org/sites/default/files/content-
BIELSA, I., PONS, X. & BUNCE,
principles of multifunctionality, nor pdf/eBook_AEO2016.pdf>
B. 2005. Agricultural abandonment
its interface with the contemplated [Accessed: 29 June 2017].
in the North Eastern Iberian
planning approaches are exhaustive. AHERN, J. 2011. From fail-safe to peninsula: The use of basic
Assuming that the multiple indicators safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience landscape metrics to support
and “copious data” result from the in the new urban world. Landscape planning. Journal of Environmental
applied methodological approach, and Urban Planning, 100(4), Planning and Management,
Thoreau’s (1990: 61) philosophical pp. 241-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 48(1), pp. 85-102. https://doi.
recommendation in 1854 to simplify landurbplan.2011.02.021 org/10.1080/0964056042000308166
and simplify seems enticing. AHI (AFRIKAANSE BOHL, C.C. 2000. New urbanism and
Paracchini, Pacini, Laurence et al. HANDELSINSTITUUT), the city: Potential applications and
(2011: 79) advise to the contrary: DCOG (DEPARTMENT OF implications for distressed inner-city
not to simplify a complex world, COOPERATIVE GOVERNANCE neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate,
31
11(4), pp. 761-801. https://doi.org/10.10 DAVIDOFF, P. 1965. Advocacy and FREILICH, R.H. & POPOWITZ, N.M.
80/10511482.2000.9521387 pluralism in planning. Journal of 2010. The umbrella of sustainability:
the American Institute for Planners, Smart growth, new urbanism,
BOHMAN, M., COOPER, J.,
31(4), pp. 331-338. https://doi. renewable energy and green
MULLARKEY, D., NORMILE, M.,
org/10.1080/01944366508978187 development in the 21st century. The
SKULLY, D., VOGEL, S. & YOUNG,
Urban Lawyer, 42(1), pp.1-39.
E. 1999. The uses and abuses of DAY, K. 2009. New urbanism and the
multifunctionality. Economic Research challenges of designing for diversity. GUNDER, M. & HILLER, J. 2009.
Service. Washington, D.C.: United Journal of Planning Education and Planning in ten words or less. Surrey,
States Department of Agriculture. Research, 23(1), pp. 83-95. https://doi. UK: Ashgate Publishing Company.
org/10.1177/0739456X03255424
BRANDT, J. & VEJRE, H. 2004. GWA STUDIO. 2014. Verkykerskop
Multifunctional landscapes – Motives, DE GROOT, R. 2005. Function- Green Living Compendium
concepts and perceptions. In: Brandt, analysis and the valuation as a tool to (unpublished), pp. 1-100.
J. & Vejre, H. (Eds). Multifunctional assess land use conflicts in planning
landscapes: Volume 1: theory, values HALL, K.B. & PORTERFIELD, G.A.
for sustainable, multi-functional
and history. Southampton: WIT Press, 2001. Community by design. New York,
landscapes. Landscape and Urban
pp. 3-32. Planning, 75(3), pp.175-186. NY: McGraw Hill.
BURTON, E. 2002. Measuring urban DIJST, M., ELBERSEN, B. & WILLIS, HANSEN, R. & PAULEIT, S. 2014.
compactness in UK towns and cities. K. 2010. The challenge of multi- From multifunctionality to multiple
Environment and Planning B: Planning functional land use in rural areas. ecosystem services? A conceptual
and Design, 29(1), pp. 219-250. https:// Journal of Environmental Planning and framework for multifunctionality in green
doi.org/10.1068/b2713 Management, 48(1), pp. 3-6. https://doi. infrastructure planning for urban areas.
org/10.1080/0964056042000308120 Ambio, 43(4), pp. 516-529. https://doi.
CARTER, F. 1998. The education of org/10.1007/s13280-014-0510-2
little tree. Albuquerque, NM: University DUANY, A. & PLATER-ZYBERK,
of New Mexico Press. E. 1992. The second coming of the HARRISON, P., BOBBINS, K.,
American small town. The Wilson CULWICK, C., HUMBY, T., LA
CASTELLS, M. 1992. The world has MANTIA, C., TODES, A. & WEAKLEY,
changed: Can planning change? Quarterly, 16(1), pp. 19-48.
D. 2014. Urban resilience thinking
Landscape and Urban Planning, DUANY, A., PATER-ZYBERK, for municipalities. University of
22(1), pp. 73-78. https://doi. E. & SPECK, J. 2010. Suburban nation: the Witwatersrand, Gauteng
org/10.1016/0169-2046(92)90009-O The rise of sprawl and the decline City-Region Observatory.
CILLIERS, S.S., DU TOIT, M., of the American dream. New York,
NY: North Point Press. HEDMAN, R & JASZEWSKI, A.
CILLIERS, E.J., DREWES, J.E. &
1984. Fundamentals of urban design.
RETIEF, F. 2014. Sustainable urban ELGÅKER, H.E. 2012. The new Chicago, ILL: American Planning
landscapes: South African perspectives equine sector and its influence on Association.
on transdisciplinary possibilities. multifunctional land use in peri-
Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, urban areas. GeoJournal, 77(5), HIKICHI, L. 2003. New urbanism and
pp. 260-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. pp. 591-613. https://doi.org/10.1007/ transportation. University of Wisconsin-
landurbplan.2014.02.009 s10708-010-9398-y Milwaukee, pp. 1-28.
CHING, F.D.K. 2007. Architecture form, ELLIS, C. 2002. The new HOLMES, J. 2006. Impulses towards
space and order. Hoboken, NJ: John urbanism: Critiques and rebuttals. a multifunctional transition in rural
Wiley & Sons Inc. Journal of Urban Design, Australia: Gaps in the research agenda.
CHURCHMAN, A. 1999. 7(3), pp. 261-291. https://doi. Journal of Regional Studies, 22(2),
Disentangling the concept of density. org/10.1080/1357480022000039330 pp. 142-160.
Journal for Planning Literature, EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2004. HOWARD, E. 1902. Garden
13(4), pp. 389-411. https://doi. New perspectives for EU rural cities of tomorrow. London: Swan
org/10.1177/08854129922092478 development, fact sheet. [Online]. Sonnenschein & Co.
COHEN, L., MANION, L. & Available at: <https://ec.europa.eu/ IURD (INSTITUTE OF URBAN AND
MORRISON, K. 2018. Research agriculture/publi/fact/rurdev2007/2007_ REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT) & SAGE
methods in education. New York, en.pdf> [Accessed: 31 March 2018]. (SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
NY: Routledge. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. EDUCATION). 2006. Summary of
CRANE, R. 1996. On form versus 2012. The multifunctionality of workshop - Developing a framework
function: Will the “new urbanism” green infrastructure. [Online]. for new realism, held at the
reduce traffic or increase it. Available at: <http://ec.europa.eu/ University of California, Berkeley, 7
Journal of Planning Education and environment/nature/ecosystems/ April. [online]. Available at: <http://
Research, 15(2), pp. 1-26. https://doi. docs/Green_Infrastructure.pdf> newruralism.pbworks.com/f/New%20
org/10.1177/0739456X9601500204 [Accessed: 4 April 2018]. Ruralism%20Workshop20060407.pdf>
[Accessed: 30 June 2017].
DANBOM, D.B. 1995. Born in the FRAM, S.M. 2013. The constant
country: A history of rural America. comparative analysis method outside JACOBS, J. 1961. The death and life
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins of grounded theory. The Qualitative of great American cities. New York,
University Press. Report, 18(1), pp.1-25. NY: Random House.
32
JEPSON, E.J. & EDWARDS, M.M. rural development in South Africa. pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/
2010. How possible is sustainable M.Phil. thesis. Stellenbosch: su8030269
urban development? An analysis Stellenbosch University.
NIJKAMP, P. 1980. Herfsttij der
of planners’ perceptions about new
MACHOR, J.L. 1987. Pastoral cities: vooruitgang. Groningen, The
urbanism, smart growth and the
Urban ideals and the symbolic Netherlands: Uitgeverij De Vuurbraak.
ecological. Planning Practice &
landscape of America. Madison,
Research, 25(4), pp. 417-437. https:// OECD (ORGANISATION FOR
doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2010.5110 WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION
16 MARSDEN, T., MURDOCH, J., LOWE, AND DEVELOPMENT). 2001.
P., MUNTON, R. & FLYNN, A. 1993. Multifunctionality: Towards an analytical
JOHNSON, J.D. & RASKER, R.
Constructing the countryside. London: framework. Paris: OECD Publications.
1995. The role of economy and
quality of life values in rural business UCL Press.
PALLARÈS-BLANCH, M.,
location. Journal of Rural Studies, MARSDEN, T. & SONNINO, R. PRADOS, M.J. & TULLA, A.F. 2014.
11(4), pp. 405-416. https://doi. 2008. Rural development and the Naturbanization and urban-rural
org/10.1016/0743-0167(95)00029-1 regional state: Denying multifunctional dynamics in Spain: Case study of new
KATZ, P. 1994. The new urbanism: agriculture in the UK. Journal of Rural rural landscapes in Andalusia and
Toward an architecture of community. Studies, 24(4), pp. 422-431. https://doi. Catalonia. European Countryside, 6(2),
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.04.001 pp. 118-160. https://doi.org/10.2478/
euco-2014-0008
KENELEY, M. 2004. The dying MATSUMOTO, T. 2011. Compact city
town syndrome: A survey of urban policies: A comparative assessment PALMER, H. & SIMON, D. 2016.
development in the western district – Final Report. Washington, D.C.: Conclusions, implications and
of Victoria 1830-1930. The Electronic Organisation for Economic Co- practical guidelines. In: Simon, D.
Journal of Australian and New operation and Development (OECD). (Ed.). Rethinking sustainable cities:
Zealand History, pp. 1-14. [online]. Accessible, green and fair. Bristol:
MAYO, J.M. & ELLIS, C. 2009. Policy Press, pp. 145-166.
Available at: <http://dro.deakin.edu.
Capitalist dynamics and new urbanist
au/eserv/DU:30002410/keneley- PARACCHINI, M.L., PACINI,
principles: Junctures and disjunctures
dyingtownsyndrome-2004.pdf> C., LAURENCE, M., JONES, M.
in project development. Journal of
[Accessed: 30 June 2017]. & PE´REZ-SOBA, M. 2011. An
Urbanism: International Research on
KOPEVA, D., PENEVA, M. & Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, aggregation framework to link indicators
MADJAROVA, S. 2010. Multifunctional 2(3), pp. 237-257. https://doi. associated with multifunctional land
land use: Is it a key factor for rural org/10.1080/17549170903466061 use to the stakeholder evaluation of
development? Paper prepared for policy options. Ecological Indicators,
McHARG, I.L. 1971. Design with 11, pp. 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
the 118th seminar of the European
nature. New York, NY: Doubleday. ecolind.2009.04.006
Association of Agriculture Economists,
25-27 August, Ljubljana, Slovenia. McHARG, I.L. 1981. Human ecological PLATER-ZYBERK, D. 2014. The
planning at Pennsylvania. Landscape lexicon of new urbanism. Miami, FL:
KRAUS, S. 2006. A call for new
ruralism. [online]. Available at: Planning, 8(2), pp. 109-120. https://doi. DPZ. [online]. Available at <http://www.
<https://frameworks.ced.berkeley. org/10.1016/0304-3924(81)90029-0 dpz.com/uploads/Books/Lexicon-2014.
edu/2006/a-call-for-new-ruralism/> MOFFAT, D. 2006. New ruralism: pdf.> [Accessed: 26 April 2018].
[Accessed: 30 June 2017]. Agriculture at the metropolitan edge PRIEMUS, H. & HALL, P. 2004.
KVORNING, J. 2016. Ruralism and [dispatch]. Places, 18(2), pp. 71-75. Multifunctional urban planning of mega-
periphery: The concept of ruralism and MOUDON, A.V. 2000. Proof of city-regions. Built Environment, 30(4),
discourses on ruralism in Denmark. goodness: A substantive basis for new pp. 338-349. https://doi.org/10.2148/
In: Carlow, V.M. (Ed.). Ruralism – The urbanism? Places, 13(2), pp. 38-43. benv.30.4.338.57154
future of villages and small towns in QUIN, D. 1999. Beyond civilization.
an urbanizing world. Berlin: Jovis, MUSCHAMP, H. 1996. Can new
urbanism find room for the old? [online]. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
pp. 26-39.
Available at: <https://www.nytimes. RETIEF, F., BOND, A., POPE. J.,
LAFORTEZZA, R., DAVIES, C., com/1996/06/02/arts/architecture-view- MORRISON-SAUNDERS, A. & KING,
SANESI, G. & KONIJNENDIJK, C.C. can-new-urbanism-find-room-for-the- N. 2016. Global megatrends and
2013. Green infrastructure as a tool to old.html> [Accessed: 4 April 2018]. their implications for environmental
support spatial planning in European
assessment practice. Environmental
regions. iForest, 6, pp. 102-108. NELSON, G.D. 2009. Towards the
Impact Assessment Review, 61,
new ruralism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
LEHMANN, S. 2010. Green urbanism: pp. 52-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
University Press.
Formulating a series of holistic eiar.2016.07.002
principles. Surveys and Perspectives NEWBY, P. 2010. Research methods
RODENBURG, C.A. & NIJKAMP,
Integrating Environment and for education. Harlow, UK: Pearson
P. 2004. Multifunctional land
Society, 3(2), pp.1-10. Education Ltd.
use in the city: A typological
LOUW, M.P. 2012. The new urbanism NEWMAN, G. & SAGINOR, J. 2016. overview. Built Environment, 30(4),
and new ruralism frameworks Priorities for advancing the concept of pp. 274-288. https://doi.org/10.2148/
as potential tools for sustainable new ruralism. Sustainability, 8(269), benv.30.4.274.57152
33
ROSS, E. & BIGON, L. 2018. The 6(2), pp. 113-138. https://doi.org/10.108

urban grid and entangled planning 0/17549175.2013.771695
cultures in Senegal. Planning
VEREIJKEN, P.H. 2002. Transition to
Perspectives, 33(2), pp. 1-26. https://
multifunctional land use and agriculture.
doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2018.1453
Netherlands Journal of Agricultural
860
Science, 50(2), pp. 171-179.
RSA (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA).
VERSACI, R. 2008. New ruralism –
2013. Spatial Planning and Land Use
Developers are looking to our agrarian
Management Act, Act 16 of 2013.
past to create communities. Old House
Pretoria: Government Printer.
Journal’s New House, Spring 2008,
RSA (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH pp. 10-11. [online]. Available at: <http://
AFRICA). 2015. Department of Rural www.russellversaci.com/New_Ruralism.
Development and Land Reform. pdf> [Accessed: 30 June 2017].
Strategic plan 2015-2020. Pretoria:
VREEKER, R. 2004. Urban
Government Printer.
multifunctional land use and
SCHAMA, S. 1995. Landscape and externalities. Paper presented at
memory. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. the European Regional Science
Association Conference, 25-29
SHARIFI, A. 2016. From garden
August, Porto, Portugal. Available
city to eco-urbanism: The quest
at: <http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/
for sustainable neighbourhood
ersaconfs/ersa04/PDF/346.pdf>
development. Sustainable Cities and
Society, 20, pp. 1-16. https://doi. WESSELS, K.J., PRINCE, S.D.,
org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.09.002 FROST, P.E. & VAN ZYL, D. 2004.
Assessing the effects of human-
SURI, H. 2011. Purposeful sampling
induced land degradation in the former
in qualitative research synthesis.
homelands of northern South Africa
Qualitative Research Journal, 11(2),
with a 1 km AVHRR NDVI time-series.
pp. 63-75. https://doi.org/10.3316/
Remote Sensing of Environment, 91(1),
QRJ1102063
pp. 47-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
STRATTON, E.M. 2009. New rse.2004.02.005
ruralism. [online]. Available at:
WIGGERING, H., DALCHOW,
<http://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/
C., GLEMNITZ, M., HELMING,
landuse/18> [Accessed: 4 April 2018].
K., MÜLLER, K., SCHULTZ, A.,
TALEN, E. 2000. New urbanism STACHOW, U. & ZANDER, P. 2006.
and the culture of criticism. Urban Indicators for multifunctional land use
Geography, 21(4), pp. 318-341. https:// – Linking socio-economic requirements
doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.21.4.318 with landscape potentials. Ecological
Indicators, 6(1), pp. 238-249.
TALEN, E. 2002. The social goals of
new urbanism. Housing Policy Debate, WILSON, G. 2010. Multifunctional
13(1), pp. 165-188. https://doi.org/10.10 ‘quality’ and rural community resilience.
80/10511482.2002.9521438 Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers, 35(3), pp. 364-381.
TALEN, E. 2013. Charter for the
new urbanism. New York, NY: YIN, R.K. 2003. Case study research:
McGraw-Hill Education. Design and methods. 3rd edition.
London: Sage Publications.
THOREAU, H.D. 1990. Walden.
Philadelphia, PA: Courage Books.
TÎRLĂ, M.L., MANEA, G., VIJULIE, I.,
MATEI, E. & COCOS, O. 2014. Green
cities – Urban planning models of the
future. In: Efe, R., Sam, N., Sam, R.,
Spiriajevas, E. & Galay, E. (Eds). Cities
in the globalizing world and Turkey:
A theoretical and empirical perspective.
Sofia, Bulgaria: St Kliment Ohridski
University Press, pp. 462-479.
TRUDEAU, D. 2013. A typology of new
urbanism in neighborhoods. Journal of
Urbanism: International Research on
Placemaking and Urban Sustainability,
34

Rural Village of Verkykerskop

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rural Village of Verkykerskop

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rural Village of Verkykerskop

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Small ideas for big impacts: Multifunctionality in the tobana le meralo e kgona ho fetoha

lefatsheng le seng le fetohile. Ho latela

of development. Ellis (2002: 283)

practitioners, especially in the emphasis on a specific lifestyle 10). Imminent development

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 2: Facade studies of vernacular architecture in the Verkykerskop region

Table 1: Multifunctionality interface with planning principles of NU, NR and GU

Countering agricultural abandonment

Agglomeration vs dispersion forces

Agricultural diversity & new sectors

Social utility in production

Quality architecture & urban design                

Connectivity & walkability     

Small-medium scale development                

Overlapping wildlife, habitat & recreation                   

Tourism & residence               

Density & retrofitting            

Green buildings & passive design                

landscape simultaneously comprises

4.2 Responses from

Figure 4: Dualistic planning: (a) “hard” areas; (b) “soft” areas

Open green space Open green space

Urban agricultural space Productive common orchards

Green belt Productive common crops

Secondary fruit bearing trees Green house

Primary fruit bearing trees Proposed/ existing trees

Water body Exclusive green

typologies. First, it aims to reflect

Figure 7: Housing typologies illustrating a symbiosis between building and nature

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 9: Selected housing typologies reflecting the regional vernacular architecture:

arrangement emulates the Windsor

regarded as an expedient solution for

ROSS, E. & BIGON, L. 2018. The 6(2), pp. 113-138. https://doi.org/10.108

You might also like