PRELIMINARY DRAFT not for circulation

Amathole District MunicipalityGREAT KEI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

March 2014

PRELIMINARY DRAFTnot for circulation

feasibility and review of housing plan for WARDS 1-4 and 6-7, 6 000WARDS 1-4 and 6-7, 6 000

Feasibility and Review of Housing Plan

WARDS 1-4 and 6-7WARDS 1-4 and 6-7

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

GREAT KEI LOCAL MUNICIPALITYPO Box 21, Komga, 4950

Tel: (043) 831-1028

Fax: (043) 831-1029

WARDS 1-4 AND 6-7, 6000 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 Approval by Council

2.10 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 Extent of General Plan

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: General Plan


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 or 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 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 WARDS 1-4 AND 6-7, 6000 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 two Human Settlement Project feasibility reports for Great Kei Municipality. It is designed so that it can be part of a single document that includes the other project.

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:• Property Description: • Title Deed Number:• Servitudes: • Current Zoning:• Site Size:

•Komga is an established settlement situated along the R63 off the N2, see Figure 2.1.1and 2.1.2.

•It is located approximately 50km south-west of Butterworth and 60km east of Stutterheim.

•This settlement has been well located along a major road (R63) and a railway line.

•The settlement was established as a farming centre in 1877 on a military camp site established in 1854 and acquired municipal status in 1904.


page 9

Locality Plan Figure 2.1.1


page 10

Aerial Photograph Figure 2.1.2


page 11


page 12

STATUS OF HOUSING PROJECTS AND WAITING LISTS 2.2

•400 to 1 000 housing subsidies have been proposed for Komga. These units will be project linked subsidies onto vacant, unsurveyed land.

•Housing waiting lists are awaited from the Department of Human Settlements and still need to be verified.

•It appears officials had experienced challenges with the collection of beneficiary lists as these were not forthcoming from the ward councillors.

KOMGA PHASE 2 400 - 1000

Population (Great Kei SDF 2005) 1 270

Population (2011 Census) 8 087

Ex. No. Households (Great Kei SDF 2005) Not specified

No. Households (2011 Census) 2 681

Proposed Subsidies (EC DHS) 400 - 1 000

Waiting List (Great Kei LM) Awaited

Figure 2.2.1 Statistical Background


page 13

LAND IDENTIFICATION AND OWNERSHIP 2.3

•The land on which the site is located is a portion of remainder erf 1, Komga.

• The site is currently vacant and is adjacent to a school as well as next to the railway line.

•A General Plan has not been drawn up for the site however it is reflected as remainder lot F on the General Plan for Komgha Township, GP No. 899-1926

•The waiting lists for Komga Phase 2 are awaited and still need to be verified.


page 14

Extent of General Plan Figure 2.3.1


page 15

ENGINEERING (Kantey and Templer) 2.4

BULK SERVICES

Existing Services

Source of potable water is boreholes. Availability of water is sporadic.

Electricity is supplied by Eskom.

There is no water-borne sewer system in the area.

There is no bulk municipal stormwater management infrastructure in the area.

Condition of existing infrastructure is reported to be in good working order.

INTERNAL SERVICES

Existing Services

Potable water reticulation exists with communal stand pipes.

No water-borne sewers. All households use VIP toilets.

All roads are approximately 5m wide, gravelled and generally with flat gradients.

Unlined V-drains along the edges of the road, with stormwater pipes for road crossings with lined V-drains.

Low voltage power lines in road reserves with house connections.

GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS

Existing houses appear to be built on strip footings.

No major cracking was observed on existing houses.

Soil conditions appear favourable for housing development subject to confirmation by a detailed geotechnical investigation.

EXISTING INTERNAL SERVICES ARE ADEQUATE AND REQUIRE NO UPGRADING.

TOP STRUCTURE

A 40 square metre house with a water tank to be provided for all beneficiaries.

House foundations expected to be strip foundations.

Human Settlements norms and standards for top structures to be applied, such as ceilings, internal & external plaster and paint, concrete roof tiles, etc.

No new VIP toilets required.

TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The proposed provision of top structures on existing erven does not increase the traffic load on the existing road infrastructure.

Therefore no traffic impact assessment is required.

ROADS AND ACCESSIBILITY

Access is from R61, a provincial road that links Queenstown and Tarkastad.

THE PROJECT IS FEASIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS


page 16

Engineering (Kantey and Templer) Figure 2.4.1

Await K&T


page 17

ENVIRONMENT 2.5

• There appears to be no Critical Biodiversity or protected areas in the area with all vegetation in the area falling within the least threatened category.

• The site is a greenfield located on the far west of the Komga.

• The water course to the north of the site flows clear of the site to pose any impact on it, however there is evidence of a high water table on the land that directly abuts the site to the east.

• Housing development needs 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). Should the development require a buffer less than 32m, a basic assessment will be required for:

– The expansion of:

(i) jetties by more than 50 square metres;

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

(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 high water table may cause concerns affecting the proposed Human Settlement Project.


page 18

Environment Figure 2.5.1


page 19

GEO-TECH (Kantey and Templer) 2.6

•In terms of the geotechnical information available the following is extended 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 20

Geo-tech (Kantey and Templer) Figure 2.6.1

The Site


page 21

DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL FACILITIES 2.7

•An abundance of education facilities exists in Komga town and surrounds. At least three schools are located in proximity of 1km – 2km from the site.

•The health facilities are also well provided and centrally located. The District Hospital and clinic are in proximity of the site.

•The police station is located in the northern edge of Komga Town

•Facilities are adequately provided for in Komga.


page 22

Distribution of Social Facilities Figure 2.7.1


page 23

CURRENT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2.8

• According to the Great Kei SDF 2005, Komga is the main administrative centre of Great Kei municipality, as well as the main town for a high proportion of the urbanised population of the area.

• The land on which the site falls on has been identified as Proposed Layout under the category Developable Areas.

• The following general issues should be targeted for Komga:

1. Investment in infrastructure to increase services capacity;

2. Development of public-funded housing areas in line with the proposals set out in the Komga Zone Plan Report (ADM, Sept 2004);

3. Development of regional social goods and facilities, including educational institutions, and sports and recreational facilities;

4. Land use management that focuses on the integration of disparate settlement elements in the town;

5. Commonage Development allied to settlement development in line with the proposals set out in the Komga Zone Plan Report (ADM, Sept 2004)


page 24

Current Spatial Development Framework Figure 2.8.1


page 25

APPROVAL BY COUNCIL 2.9

•The proposed human settlement project was approved by council on 14 December 2012. (Minutes of The Ordinary Council Meeting held on the 14th of September 2012 at the Tsolwana Council Chambers at 11h00), see Annexure 3.


page 26

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.10

2.10.1 SUMMARY

•The site was inspected on 24/10/2013 and the conclusions below ground-truthed.

•The land on which the site is located on Ptn of Rem Erf 1, and is owned by Great Kei Municipality. (see Fig 14.1 and annexure - ownership)

•There are adequate engineering services. (to be confirmed by K&T) It is likely that these will have to be off-grid.

• No environmental concerns will be affecting the proposed Human Settlement Project.

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

•The project comprises of 400 to 1 000 housing subsidy units onto an in-situ site.

•There are no new social facilities required to support the proposed human settlements project, however public transport and non-motorised transport facilities, e.g. cycleways, is necessary to enable residents to access facilities in town.

•The Human Settlement Project is in line with the SDF.

2.10.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

•The Umzi choice pilot project strategy should be considered here.

Date post:	24-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	hera
View:	17 times
Download:	0 times

PRELIMINARY DRAFT not for circulation

Documents