1. PRELIMINARY DRAFT not for circulation
feasibility and review of housing plan for NEW REST 100

3. Feasibility and Review of Housing Plan
NEW REST 100
Feasibility and Review of Housing Plan
prepared for
EASTERN CAPE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS
31-33 Phillip Frame Road Chiselhurst
Tel: +27 (0)
NXUBA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Private Bag X350, Adelaide, 5760
Tel: (046)
Fax: (046) by
CNdV africa (Pty) Ltd
environmental planning, urban design, landscape architecture
17 New Church Street Cape Town 8000
Tel: Fax:
Kantey & Templer
PO Box 15087
Beacon Bay, 5205
Tel:
IQ Vision
110 Sarel Cillier Street Strand 7140
Tel:
March 2014

5. CONTENTS LIST OF ANNEXURES LIST OF FIGURES 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 Locality Plan
Figure Aerial Photograph
Figure Visual Survey
Figure Statistical Background
Figure Cadastral Layout
Figure Engineering
Figure Environment
Figure Geo-tech
Figure Distribution of Social Facilities
Figure Current Spatial Development Framework
LIST OF ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 Ownership
Annexure 2 Title Deed
Annexure 3 Surveyor General diagram

6. CONTENTS GLOSSARY ACRONYMS
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 Settlement
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
GP General Plan
HSP Human Settlement Plan
LM Local Municipality
MHSP Municipal Human Settlement Plan
SA South Africa
SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute
SDF Spatial Development Framework

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 New Rest 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 ten Human Settlement Project feasibility reports for Nxuba Municipality. It is designed so that it can be part of a single document that includes the other five 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:
Determination of housing demand and potential beneficiary status
Land identification and ownership
Availability of bulk services and confirmation of capacity
Environmental conditions;
Geo-technical conditions
Alignment with Municipal Spatial Planning
Visual survey (area visits)
Future development plans of other sector departments
Provision of recommendation and proposals to ECDHS
2.1.4 BACKGROUND TO SETTLEMENT
Registered Owner: Transnet and Nxuba Municipality
Property Description: Erf 545 and portion Erf 1 Adelaide
Title Deed Restrictions: Title deed requested from Deeds Office King Williams Town
Servitudes: None (See Annexure 3)
Current Zoning: Unknown
Site Size: Ha
The New Rest 100 project is located in Adelaide within Nxuba Municipality.
Adelaide is approximately 22.8kms and 37,6kms from its nearest neighbours Bedford and Fort Beaufort respectively, see Fig
The site is in close proximity to the water works north-east, as well as Adelaide Hospital directly opposite the site, see Fig
New Rest is situated to the east of the railway line in Adelaide. The study area envisaged for the human settlements project is a green field site, see Fig

9. Locality Plan
Figure 2.1.1

10. Aerial Photograph
Figure 2.1.2

11. a. Along the street boundary of the on the R344
b. Current access on to the site
c. A view of the Transnet portion of the site.

13. STATUS OF HOUSING PROJECTS AND WAITING LISTS 2.2
100 subsidies have been proposed for New Rest. These units will comprise a project linked subsidy onto an existing In-fill site.
Housing waiting lists have been requested from the municipality and are still awaited for this project.
The project has no beneficiaries as yet. The number of beneficiaries is based on the number of units that can be accommodated on the project site.
NEW REST 100
Population (Nxuba SDF 2011)
Does not mention
Population (2011 Census)
N/A
No. Households (2011 Census)
Proposed Units (EC DHS)
100
Waiting List (Nxuba LM)
Awaited
Figure Statistical Background

14. LAND IDENTIFICATION AND OWNERSHIP 2.3
The land on which New Rest 100 is located is Erf 545 and portion of Erf 1, Adelaide as illustrated on S.G No.s 9024/52 and S.G No. 704/1870, see Fig and Annexure 3a and 3b.
The General Plans were approved on 08/07/1952 and 27/02/1966 respectively, see Annexure 3a and 3b.
The registered owner of Erf 545 Adelaide, which comprises the larger portion of the site is Transnet. The portion of Erf 1 Adelaide is owned by Nxuba Municipality as stated in Title Deeds T4635/953 and T17365/1979 respectively, see Annexure 1a, 1b, 2a and 2b.

15. Cadastral Layout
Figure 2.3.1

16. ENGINEERING (Kantey & Templer) 2.4
BULK SERVICES
Existing Services
....
INTERNAL 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.

17. Engineering (Kantey and Templer)
Figure 2.4.1

18. ENVIRONMENT
2.5
The land on which the project is proposed is reletively flat land.
Koonaprivier flows west of the site, however it does not impact the proposed human settlement project.
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). In which, a basic assessment would be required for:
The expansion of:
jetties by more than 50 square metres;
slipways by more than 50 square metres; or
buildings by more than 50 square metres
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.

19. Environment
Figure 2.5.1

20. GEO-TECH
2.6
In terms of the geotechnical information available the following is extracted from a report by Outeniqua Geotechnical Services cc,
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.

21. Geo-tech
Figure 2.6.1
The Site

22. DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL FACILITIES 2.7
There is one hospital and one clinic located directly opposite the site, see figure
The closest primary school is in Adelaide 1km walking distance of the site.
When social facilities are measured against the population threshold of the Adelaide, Lingelethu and Bezuidenhoutville area, according to the SDF, the facilities that were needed in 2011 were 1 primary school and 2 police stations. (Nxuba SDF 2011, pg 39)
No new facilities are required to support the proposed human settlements project.

23. Distribution of Social Facilities
Figure 2.7.1

24. CURRENT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2.8
The 2011 Nxuba SDF makes the following proposals for Adelaide:
Future residential extension is proposed to grow to the west, east and central parts of Adelaide (see figure 2.8.1).
The proposed site for the New Rest 100 project was earmarked for industrial purposes, see Project no. 24 and 20 on fig
The main intersection adjacent to the site may become a key opportunity for local businesses in future.
The proposed Human Settlement Project contradicts the SDF.
Should the municipality want to continue with the project an amendment of the SDF should be sought.

25. Current Spatial Development Framework
Figure 2.8.1

26. Future Plans of Other Sector Departments 2.9
The following table indicates government interventions proposed in the various settlements as contained in the IDP
Note: Projects may not be in the settlement itself, however if they were taking place within the same ward, they were noted.
No budget was reflected in the IDP for some projects.

27. APPROVAL BY COUNCIL
2.9
Awaiting Council Resolution

28. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.10
The site was inspected on 21/10/2013 and the conclusions below ground-truthed.
There are adequate engineering services. (K&T to confirm)
There are no environmental concerns affecting the proposed Human Settlement Project. It should not trigger an EIA.
A detailed geo-technical site visit inspection and, if necessary, survey will be required prior to the project commencing.
The project comprises 100 subsidy units onto a greenfield development.
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 contradictory with the SDF.
Awaiting Council Resolution from the municipality.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The project is not feasible.
Firstly, the land on which the proposed Human Settlement Project is proposed belongs to Transnet and therefore poses an issue of ownership.
Secondly, The Municipal SDF envisages that the site to be most suitable for industrial purposes rather than residential. The Municipality must therefore seek an amendment of the SDF.
It is recommended that the Municipality follow SDF proposals and seek to develop low income housing in areas that have been already earmarked for residential development.

30. ANNEXURE 1a: OWNERSHIP PRINTOUT

32. ANNEXURE 1b: OWNERSHIP PRINTOUT

34. ANNEXURE 2a: TITLE DEED

36. ANNEXURE 2b: TITLE DEED

38. ANNEXURE 3a: SURVEYOR GENERAL DIAGRAM

40. ANNEXURE 3b: SURVEYOR GENERAL DIAGRAM