Johannesburg, which is South Africa’s largest city and economic center, is still influenced by patterns of inequality of the past. Although spatial transformation has been rapid since 1994, spatial divisions along class lines are still prevalent long after the apartheid era. This is despite the fact that societal values such as inclusivity, spatial justice and equal access to resources have become the core goals of Johannesburg’s spatial and urban development. This is particularly true when addressing housing, public open spaces, transport and social infrastructure embedded in a suitable land-use mix. However, despite the adoption of numerous policies by government, this research indicates that even recent urban development projects such as Fleurhof and Waterfall are falling short in delivering those objectives. Based on a case study analysis, we show that significant dysfunctionalities become evident when evaluating these two projects, despite their meeting relevant indicators of spatial inclusion on paper. Tensions are identified between theoretical approaches and the implementation of societally relevant policy goals. These include inclusivity and spatial justice by mostly privatized provision of housing and services, and deficiencies in public maintenance of infrastructure. The research reveals, that ‘ticking-the-boxes’ behavior on policy and project level does not produce equitable, inclusive neighborhoods and urban spatial patterns, but rather reproduces spatial inequalities of the past. If these policies are to result in real spatial change and improvement in the lives of Johannesburg residents, a more proactive approach by the public sector at different levels will be necessary.

约翰内斯堡是南非最大的城市和经济中心，仍然受到过去不平等模式的影响。尽管自 1994 年以来空间转型迅速，但在种族隔离时代之后很久，沿阶级线的空间划分仍然普遍存在。尽管包容性、空间正义和平等获取资源等社会价值观已成为约翰内斯堡空间和城市发展的核心目标。在解决嵌入合适的土地使用组合的住房、公共开放空间、交通和社会基础设施时尤其如此。然而，尽管政府采取了多项政策，但这项研究表明，即使是最近的城市发展项目，如 Fleurhof 和 Waterfall，也未能实现这些目标。根据案例研究分析，我们表明，在评估这两个项目时，明显的功能失调变得明显，尽管它们在纸上满足了空间包容的相关指标。理论方法与社会相关政策目标的实施之间存在紧张关系。其中包括包容性和空间正义，主要是提供住房和服务的私有化，以及基础设施公共维护方面的缺陷。研究表明，政策和项目层面的“打勾”行为不会产生公平、包容的社区和城市空间模式，而是再现过去的空间不平等。如果这些政策要为约翰内斯堡居民的生活带来真正的空间变化和改善，就需要各级公共部门采取更加积极主动的方法。