Chris Hani District Municipality EMALAHLENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY March 2014 PRELIMINARY DRAFT not for...

Chris Hani District MunicipalityEMALAHLENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

March 2014

PRELIMINARY DRAFTnot for circulation

feasibility and review of housing plan for DORDRECHT 800DORDRECHT 800

Feasibility and Review of Housing Plan

DordrechtDordrecht 800 800

March 2014

by

prepared for

CNdV africa (Pty) Ltdenvironmental planning, urban design, landscape architecture

17 New Church Street Cape Town 8000Tel: 021 424-5022 Fax: 021 424-6837

Kantey & TemplerPO Box 15087Beacon Bay, 5205Tel: 041 373-0738

IQ Vision110 Sarel Cillier Street Strand 7140Tel: 021 853-3902

EASTERN CAPE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS 31-33 Phillip Frame Road ChiselhurstTel: +27 (0) 43 711 9735

EMALAHLENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITYPrivate Bag X1161, Lady Frere , 5410

Tel: 047 878-0020Fax: 047 878-0303

DORDRECHT FEASIBILITY STUDYCNdV africa (Pty) Ltd 21 April 2023

page 5

CONTENTS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.1.2 Purpose of the Report

2.1.2 Background of this Report

2.1.3 Terms of Reference

2.1.4 Background to Settlement

2.2 Status of Housing Project and Waiting List

2.3 Land Identification and Ownership

2.4 Engineering

2.5 Environment

2.6 Geo-tech

2.7 Distribution of Social Facilities

2.8 Current Spatial Development Framework

2.9 Future Plans of Other Sector Departments

2.10 Approval by Council

2.11 Summary and Recommendations

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 .1 Locality Plan

Figure 2.1.2 Aerial Photograph

Figure 2.1.3 Visual Survey

Figure 2.2.1 Statistical Background

Figure 2.3.1 Cadastral Layout

Figure 2.4.1 Engineering

Figure 2.5 .1 Environment

Figure 2.6.1 Geo-tech

Figure 2.7.1 Distribution of Social Facilities

Figure 2.8.1 Current Spatial Development Framework

LIST OF ANNEXURESAnnexure 1 OwnershipAnnexure 2 Title DeedAnnexure 3 Surveyor General diagram


page 6

CONTENTS

GLOSSARY

Informal Site: A Site occupied by a household or to which a household has customary rights, e.g. Permission to occupy (PTO, no longer formally in use) or community agreement via a meeting of elders including headman or chief.

Formal Site: A site occupied by a household or to which a household is entitled to have a registered right recorded at the Deeds Registry with a title deed and surveyors diagram and/or registered General Plan. However, in many instances title deeds have not been issued nor ownership registered.

In-Situ upgrade project: Formalising of tenure and installation of services and possibly also construction of a subsidised dwelling on land on which people are already living. Generally refers to a project larger than one unit.

Greenfields project: New project site which there has been no formal or informal settlement, industry, infrastructure to date. Project sites are often outside of existing urban development.

Infill Project: New project site within existing urban development usually on under utilised or vacant land and which often can help to promote physical integration between spatially isolated parts of the settlement.

Rectification projects: Repair or rebuilding of defective existing houses built through one or other government housing program.

Erven: The plural of ‘erf’ meaning plots of land each registered as an ‘erf’ in a deeds registry and forming part of a registered General Plan.

Plots: The plural of ‘plot’ meaning unregistered pieces of land informally laid out.

Portion: A plot of land forming part of a proposed or approved (by LM Council) subdivision layout but which has not yet been registered by the Surveyor General as a general plan and for which erf numbers have not yet been registered.

ACRONYMS

ECDHS Eastern Cape Department of Human SettlementEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentGP General PlanHSP Human Settlement PlanLM Local Municipality MHSP Municipal Human Settlement PlanSA South AfricaSANBI South African National Biodiversity InstituteSDF Spatial Development Framework


page 8

INTRODUCTION 2.1

2.1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

The purpose of this report is to describe the key elements to be taken into account when assessing the feasibility of Dordrecht 800 as a Human Settlement Project and to recommend whether it should be approved or not.

2.1.2 BACKGROUND TO THIS REPORT

This report is one of 3 Human Settlement Project feasibility reports for Emalahleni Municipality. It is designed so that it can be part of a single document that includes the other two projects.

2.1.3 TERMS OF REFERENCE (Part C.3 Scope of work Tender No. SCMU11-12/13-A0240)

The project terms of reference for the feasibility report are summarised as follows:

Ascertain the feasibility of the project within each MHSP. The study shall reveal the developmental opportunities and constraints in relation to:

1. Determination of housing demand and potential beneficiary status

2. Land identification and ownership3. Availability of bulk services and confirmation of capacity4. Environmental conditions;5. Geo-technical conditions6. Alignment with Municipal Spatial Planning7. Visual survey (area visits)8. Future development plans of other sector departments 9. Provision of recommendation and proposals to ECDHS

2.1.4 BACKGROUND TO SETTLEMENT

• Registered Owner: Emalahleni Local Municipality and Dordrecht Country Club

• Property Description: Portion of erf 1 and portion of erf 1838, Dordrecht

• Title Deed Number: T1015/1926 and T56973/1992

• Servitudes: None (See Annexure 3)

• Zoning: Unknown

• Site Size: 11.5 Ha

• The Dordrecht 800 project is an urban project in Dordrecht within Emalahleni Municipality.

• Dordrecht is one of 3 urban centres in Emalahleni Municipality. It is classified a rural town with the role of being a service centre to the adjacent rural hinterland.

• Dordrecht is located on the northern boundary of the municipality approximately 71.7 km north of Queenstown along the R392 road and 109.2 km south of Lady Grey along the same road.

• The site is a greenfield site situated within the Dordrecht commonage, north of the town and takes access from the R56 main road from Dordrecht town.

• It abuts Muniikville to the south across the rail line.

• It anticipates taking one or two fairways from the Dordrecht golf course.


page 9

Locality Plan Figure 2.1.1


page 10

Aerial Photograph Figure 2.1.2


page 11

Visual Survey Fig 2.1.3

a. Dordrecht welcome sign board on entrance of the town b. A view along Grey Street in Dordrecht CBD c. The settlement abutting the site towards the south over the railway line

d. The north eastern edge of site e. Houses directly abutting the southern boundary of the site f. The inactive railway line on the site.

g. Portion of the site where small scale land fill occurred h. The northern boundary of the site i. The Golf course on across the R56 road


page 12


page 13

STATUS OF HOUSING PROJECT AND WAITING LISTS 2.2

Figure 2.2.1 Statistical Background

DORDRECHT 800

Population (Emalahleni SDF 2010) Does not Specify

Population (2011 Census) N/A

No. Households (2011 Census) N/A

Proposed Units (EC DHS) 800

Waiting List (Emalahleni LM) Awaited

• 800 subsidies have been proposed for this project. These units will comprise a project linked subsidy onto an existing greenfield site.

• The number of subsidies are significantly higher than the site is able to accommodate.

• At a plot size of 250m² per plot, the site can only accommodate 276 units.

• The project will have to be reduced.

• There has been some fill deposited on the site, possibly with a view to develop it in the future.

• The municipality has negotiated that the northern portion of the site, erf 1838, be donated over to the municipality by the current owners, the Dordrecht Country Club.

• The waiting list has been requested from the municipality and is still awaited for this project.


page 14

LAND IDENTIFICATION AND OWNERSHIP 2.3

• The land on which Dordrecht 800 is located is portion of Erf 1 and portion of Erf 1838, Dordrecht as illustrated on S.G No 696/1850 and S.G No. 696/1850, see Fig. 2.3.1. and Annexure 3a and 3b.

• It is not clear as to when Erf 1 was registered at the Surveyor – General, however the survey was completed on 22/02/1966, see annexure 3a. Erf 1838 wasa registered on 11/03/1992, see Annexure 3b.

• The registered owner of portion of erf 1 is Emalahleni Municipality, which comprises the larger portion of the sit. Erf 1836 Dordrecht is owned by the Dordrecht Country Club as stated in Title Deeds T1015/1926 and T56973/1992 respectively, see Annexure 1a, 1b, 2a and 2b.


page 15

Cadastral Layout Figure 2.3.1


page 16

ENGINEERING (Kantey & Templer) 2.4

BULK SERVICES Existing Services

....

INTERNAL SERVICES Existing Services

....

GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS....

EXISTING INTERNAL SERVICES ARE ADEQUATE AND REQUIRE NO UPGRADING

TOP STRUCTURE....

TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT...

ROADS AND ACCESSIBILITY...

THE PROJECT IS FEASIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS.


page 17

Engineering (Kantey and Templer) Figure 2.4.1


page 18

ENVIRONMENT 2.5

(iii) buildings by more than 50 square metres

(iv) infrastructure by more than 50 square metres within a watercourse or within 32 metres of a watercourse, measured from the edge of a watercourse, but excluding where such expansion will occur behind the development setback line.

• The site is situated on relatively flat land, see Figure 2.5.1

• There are no formerly cultivated fields, see Figure 2.5.1

• The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Plan (ECBCP), 2007 has developed four terrestrial Biodiversity Land Management Classes (BLMCs) according to the terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs). Each BLMC sets out the desired ecological state that the area should be kept in to ensure biodiversity persistence.

• The site falls within CBA 2 as per SANBI data (2007) and therefore is subject to BLMC 2 guidelines according to the ECBCP. This must be ground-truthed by a botanist, prior to undertaking the Human Settlement Project, see Figure 2.5.1

• BLMC 2 permits the land to be used for Conservation and Game Farming. Settlements are not permitted.

• However, it can be seen on Figure 2.5.1 that CBA 2 is shown as extending over most of the urban areas of Dordrecht. This is clearly incorrect and the mapping of CBA 2 in this vicinity has not been ground-truthed and amended.

• Furthermore, the ground has been disturbed by filling and the landscaping and construction of the golf course.

• The river flows north west of the site, see Figure 2.5.1.

• Housing development would need to ensure that it remains 32m from the River or watercourse so as to avoid triggering NEMA EIA Regulations, namely Listing No. 40 as identified in the Government Notice R. 344 (Listing Notice 1). A basic assessment would be required for the following activities.

The expansion of:

(i) jetties by more than 50 square metres;

(ii) slipways by more than 50 square metres; or


page 19

Environment Figure 2.5.1


page 20

GEO-TECH 2.6

• In terms of the geotechnical information available the following is extracted from a report by Outeniqua Geotechnical Services cc, 2013.

• Some potential geotechnical constraints have been identified for further investigation which may have an impact on the extent of the developable land and/or the development costs.

• The recommended typical foundations for subsidy housing are conventional strip foundations or light rafts to cater for variations in soil profile and minor soil movements.

• On sloping terrain, some earthworks and retaining walls may be required to create level platforms for houses and this can have significant cost implications.

• Foundations should be placed on well compacted natural soil, engineered fill or rock. Founding conditions will have to be inspected by the engineer to confirm suitable soil conditions with adequate bearing capacity and to check for any seepage or groundwater problems.

• Preliminary and Phase 1 geotechnical site investigations are required to obtain a more accurate evaluation of the development potential of each site, but the initial indications are that the geology is unlikely to pose a significant threat to the further development of these areas.


page 21

Geo-tech Figure 2.6.1

The Site


page 22

DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL FACILITIES 2.7

• Using 1km walking distance as a measure for accessibility or proximity to social facilities, the following can be observed in Dordrecht.

• Two primary schools in Munnikvlle and Sinhako are within 1 km walking distance from the site and are located south of the site, see Figure 2.7.1.

• The hospital and clinic are located on the same property east of the site a little under 2 km away. They are not easily accessible on foot however efficient public transport as well as patient transport services can lower the impact of non – accessibility, see Figure 2.7.1.

• The police station that would service the proposed project is located in town on Grey Street a little over the 1km walking distance, see Figure 2.7.1.

• No new facilities are required to support the proposed human settlements project.


page 23

Distribution of Social Facilities Figure 2.7.1


page 24

CURRENT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2.8

• The Emalahleni 2010 SDF makes the point that there is a need for Infill and densification in Dordrecht.

• It is not clear, however, from the map whether infill is proposed to take place on erven indicated as “commonage” or “unknown”, see Figure 2.8.1.

• The site is situated outside the urban edge, see Figure 2.8.1.

• It is also proposed using one of the fairways of the Dordrecht golf course. Tourism is one of the few economic activities open to rural municipalities and golf is an important tourism product.

• The fairway should be replaced, possibly along the river banks as part of the 32m buffer zone.

• If it does not prove viable to replace removed sections of the golf course, then the impact of this on Dordrecht’s future tourism and residential potential, should be considered.

• If justified, that portion of the site currently proposed on the fairway should be relocated to the land around Munnikville earmarked in the SDF.

• The proposed Human Settlement project is not in line with the SDF.

• The SDF proposed further residential development abutting Munnikville’s western boundary, see Figure 2.8.1.

• While the proposed site is closer to the CBD, the decision to remove fairways from the golf course should be reviewed.

• If, on review, it is viable financially and geographically to replace this fairway elsewhere, then:- This should be part of the project implementation; and,- The project should proceed as proposed.


page 25

Current Spatial Development Framework Figure 2.8.1

The Site


page 26

FUTURE PLANS OF OTHER SECTOR DEPARTMENTS2.9

• The following table indicates the future plans of other sector departments proposed in the various settlements as contained in the IDP 2012 - 2017.

• There are no projects envisaged in the IDP that will impact the proposed Human Settlement Project in the financial years 2013/2014 and 2014/2015, however it should be noted that the project is a greenfield project.


page 27

APPROVAL BY COUNCIL 2.10

Awaiting Council Resolution


page 28

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.11

2.11.1 SUMMARY

• The site was inspected on 31/10/2013 and the conclusions below ground-truthed.

• There are adequate engineering services. (K&T to confirm)

• In Terms of ECBCP BLMCs that apply to CBA 3, settlements are not recommended. However, the extent of the CBA 3 in and around Tsomo is clearly inaccurate as it is indicated as covering all of the developed areas. It is recommended that the site be assessed by a Botanist to ground-truth the extent of CBA 3 on the site prior to the commencement of the Human Settlement Project. It is unlikely that an EIA will be required.

• A detailed geo-technical site visit inspection and, if necessary, survey will be required prior to the project commencing.

• The project comprises 800 subsidy units onto a greenfield site.

• Awaiting beneficiary list from the municipality.

• There are no new social facilities required to support the proposed human settlements project.

• The Human Settlement Project is not in line with the SDF.

• The impacting of removing fairways from the golf course should be reviewed I the short, medium and long term. If justified, land earmarked for development in Munnikville in the SDF should be considered.

• Awaiting Council Resolution from the municipality.

2.11.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

• The project is feasible, subject to the following:

• A technical assessment by a botanist to ground truth the extent of CBA 3 on the site.

• The amendment of the urban edge to include the human settlement project.

• An assessment by engineers to determine whether land rehabilitation is required prior the commencement of the Human Settlement Project.


page 29

ANNEXURE 1a: OWNERSHIP PRINTOUT


page 31

ANNEXURE 2: TITLE DEED


page 33

ANNEXURE 3a: SURVEYOR GENERAL DIAGRAM

Date post:	16-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	maud-murphy
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Chris Hani District Municipality EMALAHLENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY March 2014 PRELIMINARY DRAFT not for...

Documents