PARKS

INTRODUCTION
|
DRIVING FORCE
|
PRESSURE
|
STATE
|
IMPACT
|
RESPONSE
|
| Past planning policy |
Contrast in provision of parks in the south and
north |
Quality and quantity of parks in north much
higher than in south |
Less social activities in disadvantaged
communities |
Identify and maintain parks in the south |
| Underutilisation of parks |
Bad maintenance |
Not sufficient and well maintained parks |
Underutilisation due to bad quality |
Develop and maintain all parks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPEN SPACE

INTRODUCTION |
|
|
DRIVING FORCE
|
PRESSURE
|
STATE
|
IMPACT
|
RESPONSE
|
| Past planning policy |
Sprawled and heterogeneous city |
Lots of buffer zones and wasted space between
built up areas North have more access to open space than south |
Loss of conservation potential of green open
spaces
Less space
for people to recreate in south |
Use open space better and connect green areas
Supply equal open space throughout GJ
|
| Mining activity |
Limits amount of available land |
Wasted and degraded open land in mining zone
from south of Roodepoort to south of Jhb |
Degraded land, loss of soil fertility |
Rehabilitate land |
| Lack of funding |
Prohibits efficient
and sustainable use of open land |
Many pieces of unused
land |
Waste of conservation
potential of open space |
Budget for open space
development and maintenance |
| Illegal dumping |
Places pressure on
Klipriver belt and other resources |
Scrapyards,
squatting and illegal dumping in open spaces in the south |
Decreased
environmental potential Increased crime |
Better management of
open spaces |
|
| Urban development |
Amount of open space
decreases |
Little open space in
urban environment |
Less places to relax,
recreate and achieve better mental health |
Increase open space
and maintain development |
|