Foreshore Freeway Completion Project
Issues Document
Updated at 19 October 2001
This issues document reflects the issues and concerns raised by interested and affected parties during the public consultation process to
date as well as the responses to them. The issue document will be expanded and updated on a regular basis and additional comments and
inputs are welcome. The respondent to each issue is indicated in brackets and are identified as follows: RH = Ron Haiden, DS = David Shandler,
BT = Basil Tommy, SF = Steve Fanner, PS = Peter Silbernagl, WC = Wilfred Crous and IP = Ivor Prinsloo.
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
1.
PROCESS, POLICY AND GOVERNANCE ISSUES
1.1
DECISION MAKING
1.1.1 When and by whom was the
decision to proceed with the
completion of the freeway
taken?
Mr Frank van der
Velde,
Mr Romelaere,
Mr Townsend,
WESSA
Phase
Applicability
1
The Executive Committee (Exco) of the City of Cape Town took a decision on
th
19 June 2001 to: proceed with the appointment of consultants to complete the
conceptual design for the project; to tender for Phase One and also to approve
the budget for Phase One of the project. In addition, a combined meeting of the
Exco, Transport and Roads, Finance, Planning and Environment and Economic
Development and Tourism Portfolio Committees met on 3 May 2001 and
approved the decision of Exco to proceed with the phased completion of the
Foreshore Freeway. However, the decision whether or not to proceed with
construction will only be taken on 6 November 2001, and will be informed by the
outcomes of the public consultation process. (RH)
1
2
3
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
1.1.2 Is it legally correct for the
Executive Committee of the
City of Cape Town to have
taken a decision of this
magnitude without a proper
public participation process
to inform it?
1.1.3 Did the full Council and the
Provincial Legislature
discuss the decision to
complete the freeway?
1.1.4 It is unacceptable that the
Exco can make a decision for
a project of this magnitude
without referring it to the full
council.
1.1.5 Will the project be
reconsidered in the light of
concerted public opposition?
Mr Frank van der
Velde, Mr Morgan
Behr
The Exco has legal delegated authority that allows it to make such decisions.
(RH)
Mr Frank van der
Velde, WESSA
The matter was discussed and approved by a combined meeting of Portfolio
Committees as indicated above. The project has also been discussed and
approved by the relevant Provincial Cabinet Committee and Cabinet members.
(RH)
1.1.6 Was an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA)
done?
Response
Mr Frank van der
Velde
Ms Brianne
Stolper,
Ms Dusty
Holloway,
Ms Lisa Kane,
CIA
NM and
Associates,
SAHRA, UTRG,
CIA, WESSA
The Exco is obliged to apply their minds to the issues and concerns raised in the
public consultation process and this may mean a re-consideration of the decision
to proceed. (RH)
No, an EIA is not legally required for a project of this nature. The Environmental
Impact Assessment Regulations (GG No. 1826, 5 September 1997) promulgated
in terms of sections 21, 22 and 26 of the Environmental Conservation Act, Act 79
of 1989 specifically excludes roads inside of the borders of town planning
schemes from the requirements of an EIA in section 1 (d), Schedule 1. (BT)
2
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
1.1.7 Who decided that an EIA was
not necessary and what was
the legal basis of this
decision?
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs,
Prof Todeschini,
Ms Lisa Kane,
Mr Hutton-Squire,
SAHRA, UTRG,
CIA
This conclusion was reached by the City in consultation with the Province. Only
road developments outside of town planning schemes are a listed activity that
would require authorisation from the Department of Cultural and Environmental
Affairs and Sport (DECAS),i.e., authorisation from DECAS for the completion of
the freeway is not a statutory requirement. The environmental branch of the city
has however, requested that wind, noise and visual impacts, as well as current
Foreshore Planning and the requirements of the National Heritage Resources
Act be taken into consideration. (BT)
The city’s legal department checks all decisions taken by Council or Exco. The
city is of the opinion that the decision is legally correct. The city will therefore not
ask for another legal opinion on the matter.
1.1.8 Has legal opinion been
obtained on the legal status
of the process? What is the
essence of this opinion and
is it available to
stakeholders?
1.1.9 It is critical that an
independent legal opinion
concerning the legality of the
decision to proceed must be
obtained.
1.1.10 A project of this magnitude
requires an EIA even if it is
not strictly legally required in
terms of environmental
legislation. Such an EIA
must look at physical, social,
economic, heritage,
governance, land-use,
transport and other issues.
UTRG, Mr Piet
Louw, Mrs Marie
Lou Roux.
More detail of the actual legal opinion is needed . (BT)
UTRG, CIA, Ms
Marie Lou Roux
Mr Piet Louw, Mrs
Marie Lou Roux,
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs, CIA,
UTRG
Basil Tommy to respond
Ron Haiden to respond
3
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
1.2
Source
Response
Phase
Applicability
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
1.2.1 Does the public participation
process only focus on
mitigation measures or does
it allow opportunity for debate
and discussion around
alternatives?
1.2.2 What is the extent of the
stakeholder base and were
any public meetings planned
for the Cape Flats, Bellville
and Khayelitsha?
1.2.3 Is it possible to extend the
public participation process
to include a greater crosssection of the people of Cape
Town?
1.2.4 Who would make the final
decision as to whether the
public consultation process
will be extended or not?
Mr Charles Fuller,
Ms Suzanne Du
Toit, Ms Cathy
Glover,
Mr Frank van der
Velde, Mrs Dusty
Holloway, Nisa
Mammon and
Associates,
SAHRA, CIA
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email), MPRA
Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Mr Tony Barbour
Ms Suzanne du
Toit, Mr Tony
Barbour,
Ms Brianne
Stolper
The process is not restricted to discussion relating to the implementation and
mitigation of the scheme proposals. The scope of the discussion includes
debate on the advisability of proceeding with completion in the first place. (DS)
Ms Suzanne du
Toit, Ms Lisa
Kane, Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Ms Brianne
Stolper
Mpl Tasneem
Essop
This would be possible if the process were to be extended. (DS)
At the moment the core stakeholders are city-based and broader metropolitan
stakeholders, including umbrella civic organisations and environmental groups.
There is also a very deliberate effort to use the print and broadcast media to
reach out to a broader group of people. There are no plans to have meetings in
Bellville, the Cape Flats and Khayelitsha. (DS)
The Exco of the City Of Cape Town makes the final decision on the 6
November 2001
4
th
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
1.2.5 It is critical that the
responsible politicians be
part of the public meetings to
respond to issues that are
raised.
Mr Frank van der
Velde,
Mr Romelaere,
Mr Townsend,
Mr Cassiem
Johnstone
Ms B Stolper,
Mr Martin Hutton
– Squire, CIA,
MPRA
Peter Wilkinson,
UTRG
Every effort is being made to ensure that the responsible politicians attend the
second public meeting. (DS)
Mr Schwartz,
UTRG, CIA
The decision to proceed with construction has not yet been taken. The following
policies were taken into account: The National Land Transport Transition Act
(Act 22 of 2000), which binds local authorities to the findings of traffic impact
assessments; previous transport plans and approved transport business plans;
the MSDF and council policies that promote inner city development; policies that
discourage decentralization and Integrated Development Planning processes for
the City and the Metropolitan Area. (WC)
1.2.6 Is the project a fait accompli,
irrespective of the outcome
of this public participation
process?
1.2.7 Will the record of the
decision-making process be
made public?
1.3
Response
The decision to proceed with construction is not a fait accompli. Exco will only
th
decide on this matter on the 6 November and its decision will be informed by
the issues and concerns raised in the public consultation process. (DS)
All decisions of the City is on record and is available on all channels. Please
contact Common Ground Consulting for assistance in accessing these.
PROJECT RATIONALE
1.3.1 On which policy was the
decision to complete the
freeway based?
5
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
1.3.2 This project does not
represent the best
application of scarce
resources for the city.
1.3.3 Why is this project being
prioritised when there is a
reported backlog of R2bn in
provincial transport and
traffic infrastructure?
1.3.4 Have issues relating to
spending priorities,
appropriateness (as a
solution to the problem) and
the weighing up of relative
against absolute needs
informed the decision to
continue?
Source
Response
Mr Colin Bird
(Email),
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs,
Mr Frank van der
Velde,
Prof. Francis
Wilson, Mrs Lisa
Kane, Ms Cathy
Glover, Nisa
Mammon and
Associates,
UTRG, CIA,
WESSA
Mr Louis De
Villiers
This is an important point of debate. There are a number of practical and
strategic considerations that has to inform the conclusions that will be drawn by
the decision-makers. The key issues to be considered include matters relating to
the efficient, effective and equitable use of the scarce financial resources of the
City and Province. (RH)
Prof Todeschini,
Mr Cassiem
Johnstone,
Mr Frank van der
Velde, UTRG,
CIA, WESSA
As indicated above the decision made on November 6 2001 must be informed
by considerations relating to the efficient, effective and equitable use of the
scarce financial resources of the City and Province. There was indeed very
thorough debate on the issues. The proposal to continue will entail a decision at
a strategic level. The effect on the City and the economy if a gridlock situation
extends to three hours twice a day and the results of the socio-economic
analyses will influence the decision. (SF)
This requires a more detailed response
Ron Haiden to respond
6
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
1.3.5 How does the City and the
PAWC justify spending
almost R300m of public
funds to ease congestion for
motorists who make up less
than 20% of the City’s
travelling population?
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email),
Mr Townsend,
Mr Tony Barbour,
UTRG, WESSA,
CIA
1.3.6 Does the decision to proceed
contradict National Public
Transport Policy (Moving SA)
that proposes a 80:20 modal
split in favour of public
transport?
1.3.7 Will the council seriously
apply its mind to considering
a variety of alternative
options, for example, no
completion, demolition etc?
1.3.8 Why is the city and province
completing a project that is
essentially based on 1960’s
thinking and that was wrong
in the first place?
Nisa Mammon
and Associates,
CIA
Prof Todeschini
At present, road-based transport, including private and public transport, makes
up more than 50% of the city’s traveling population. (a) If there is gridlock, road
based public transport ceases along with everything else. (b) Commercial /
Freight transport will also be held up. (c) Business in the City will be hamstrung
and this will lead to an exodus. (d) There is also spending on Public Transport.
A new unit in PAWC has a R60 million budget for its first year of operation alone.
The bulk of this will probably be spent in the City. The completion of the freeway
also serves the needs of road-based commercial traffic into the city. (SF)
No, it does not contradict the policy because it does not deviate from the
proposed modal split and it also serves the needs of road-based public
transport. Part of our public transport is on rubber tyres and will be vitally
affected if we “close down” parts of the network through inaction. (SF)
1.3.9 The situation in the
Foreshore/Waterfront/lower
CBD needs a re-investigation
which takes into account
changes in the city’s
structure and patterns of
development
Mr Hanekom,
Mr Frank van der
Velde, SAHRA,
CIA, UTRG
The City will have to seriously apply its mind to the issues raised in the public
process in reaching a decision. (RH)
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs,
Prof Wilson,
Mr Tony Barbour,
MPRA
Mrs Brianne
Stolper, UTRG,
CIA, WESSA
UTRG
The freeway scheme has been drastically revised since its initial
conceptualisation. The current design represents current thinking on projects of
this nature. Similarly, the policy issues driving the design are consistent with
policies like the MSDF. (RH)
Ron Haiden to respond
7
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
1.3.10 What criteria did the
Province use in deciding to
prioritise this project above
others?
1.4
Source
Response
Mr Tony Barbour,
Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Mr Romelaere,
UTRG, CIA
The effect on the City and the economy if a gridlock situation extends to three
hours twice a day and the results of the socio-economic analysis influenced the
in-principle decision. Another major factor is the functioning of the Convention
Centre. Without the improvements to the system only very small conferences
could be hosted in the Centre. No final decision on the matter has yet been
taken. (SF)
Mr Tony Barbour,
UTRG
Mpl Tasneem
Essop
From normal City budgeting processes. The funding from the Province is still
under discussion. (RH, SF)
Nisa Mammon
and Associates,
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email)
Agreed. It does, through taxes, property rentals and development levies.
Ideally, individual developments should cover the cost of traffic accommodation
and public transport needs directly attributable to them. (RH,SF)
Mr Redelinghuys
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs, CIA
Mr Colin Bird
(Email) UTRG,
MPRA
The project is being considered together with a number of complementary policy
initiatives, most of which involve improvements to the city’s public transport
system. (RH)
FUNDING
1.4.1 Where does the funding for
the project come from?
1.4.2 Has the Provincial
government budgeted for the
project according to a
medium- term expenditure
framework? If this is not the
case, from which other
capital projects would the
province shift money to fund
the completion project?
1.4.3 The private sector should
fund the project.
Steve Fanner to respond
2. TRANSPORTATION
2.1
TRANSPORT POLICY
2.1.1 What transport policy
alternatives are being
considered?
More details requested
8
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
2.1.2 How does the project weigh
up the projected costs
against the public transport
needs of the city?
2.1.3 Does the city require the
completion of the freeway
from a transport point of
view?
2.1.4 Who initiated the Traffic
Impact Assessment (TIA),
where is it available and what
are its key conclusions?
2.1.5 The TIA is not a holistic
assessment of the traffic
issues and concerns of the
city but deals only with the
needs of the Convention
Centre
2.1.6 What is being done to
develop an integrated
transport plan for the city
dealing with public, private
and pedestrian traffic issues?
Source
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email), Nisa
Mammon and
Associates,
SAHRA, UTRG,
CIA
Mr Frank van der
Velde (Email),
Mr Colin Bird,
UTRG
Mpl Tasneem
Essop
Mr Frank van der
Velde (Email),
Mr Colin Bird,
Mr Hart, CIA
Mr Rommelaere,
Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Prof Wilson,
SAHRA,
UTRG, WESSA
Response
The costs for completing the freeway are minimal in relation to the costs
associated with the public transport needs of the city. (RH)
Yes, the city does require the completion of the freeway from a transport point of
view. (RH)
More details requested
Wifred Crous to respond
Wifred Crous to respond
There are currently a number of initiatives, including the improvement of the
inner-city public transportation system; the pedestrianisation of the CBD and
long-term planning for the metropolitan rail system. These processes seek to
encourage holistic solutions to promote the viability of the CBD. In addition,
integrated transport planning is fundamental to the IDP process and the
implementation of the ’Moving Ahead’ policy. (WC)
9
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
2.1.7 Has a comparative costbenefit analysis been
completed that takes the
following into account?
a) The environmental costs of
vehicular traffic (noise, gas
emissions, air pollution, and
health).
b) The benefit of the freeway to
the majority of Cape Town’s
non car-owning population.
c) The relative cost to other city
priorities given the backlog in
the maintenance of municipal
infrastructure.
d) The real, costed benefit of the
freeway to the Convention City
and the Waterfront as opposed
to the claims that it benefits
Sea Point traffic.
WESSA, Mrs
Marie Lou Roux,
UTRG,CIA
2.1.8 Will the proposed cost:benefit
ratio and internal rate of
return only be realised
through spending R286m or
will it require a bigger
scheme?
2.1.9 Non of the cost benefits will
be realised until all three
phases are completed and
the bottlenecks are dealt
with.
Mr Frank van der
Velde
This is based on the assumption that more spending is required to deal with
Koeberg Interchange, Hospital Bend, etc. The network cost-benefit analysis still
needs to be done. (RH)
Mr Frank van der
Velde
Ron Haiden to respond
Ron Haiden to respond
10
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
2.1.10 Has a socio-economic
analysis, in addition to a
cost-benefit analysis, been
completed for the project?
Does such an analysis take
into consideration the
broader socio-economic
needs of the metropole as a
variable in assessing the
need for the completion of
the freeway?
2.1.11 Does the completion project
take into account the
broader debate on freeways
as one element of movement
and the debate on urban
form?
2.1.12 What is the comparative
spending for the completion
of the freeway in relation to
other national, provincial and
local transport spending?
2.1.13 What is the comparative %
of the total Provincial
infrastructure budget that is
allocated to the completion
project?
2.1.14 What is the role of the
freeway in the context of the
urban restructuring of the
City as outlined in the
MSDF?
Source
Mpl Tasneem
Essop
Mr Frank van der
Velde,
Prof Todeschini
UTRG, SAHRA
Response
Ron Haiden to respond
This requires more detail (Ron Haiden)
The costs for completing the freeway are minimal in relation to the costs
associated with national and provincial spending and minimal in relation to the
costs associated with the local transport needs. (RH)
This requires more detail (Ron Haiden, Steve Fanner, Wilfred Crous)
Mpl Tasneem
Essop
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email),SAHRA
This requires more detail (Steve Fanner, Wilfred Crous)
The freeway project is consistent with the central MSDF vision of the CBD as a
core metropolitan node. (WC)
This requires more detail (Steve Fanner, Wilfred Crous)
11
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
2.1.15 What are the estimated
costs for Phase One, is it
R40m or R800m. What are
the reasons for these vastly
different estimates?
2.1.16 Is it really possible to
manage the growth of the
city properly without an
integrated road and transport
system and policy?
Mr Frank van der
Velde
Ron Haiden to respond
Mr Clough
No, therefore a lot of planning and other initiatives are presently underway to
address this in the long term. (RH)
2.2
Response
More details are requested
TRAFFIC ISSUES
2.2.1 Will completing the freeways
fundamentally address the
issue of congestion,
considering that it is a
problem in all cities?
Mr Piet Louw,
Mr Ashraaf Adam
(Email), CIA
2.2.2 What are the links of the
completion project to
Granger and Portswood
Roads?
2.2.3 What are the basic
assumptions of the traffic
projection flows on which the
planning for the freeway is
based?
Alderman Bronnie
Harding, MPRA
2.2.4 Is it possible to add High
Occupancy Lanes for public
transport?
Mr Dave Skinner
Prof Wilson, CIA
It will greatly address, but not completely eliminate, current congestion. Traffic
studies indicate that if the present congestion problems are not dealt with
holistically, the problem will increase dramatically in the medium to long term.
The completion of the freeway will ease local city congestion but does not
assume that congestion in other areas will be eased through it. In addition, it will
also ease road-based congestion on the Atlantic Seaboard side. (RH)
There is no direct links to the Freeway Completion. However, planning for the
Granger Bay links are currently underway and this will co-incide with the
completion of the freeway. (PS)
The key assumptions include detailed investigation of the traffic profiles of the
Convention Centre and future CBD growth and development. The Traffic Impact
Assessment Report detailing these and other assumptions is available for study
and can be obtained through contacting Common Ground Consulting. (RH, SF,
WC)
More details are requested re TIA
This is possible if it is warranted and if it forms part of the Public Transport
System currently being planned. (RH)
12
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
2.2.5 What will the precise impact
be on inner city traffic
transportation patterns, such
as easing bottlenecks?
Mr Colin Bird
(Email),
Mr Redelinghuys
2.2.6 Why is the bottleneck caused
by Koeberg Interchange and
Hospital Bend not addressed
as part of this project?
Mr Frank van der
Velde, Mr Piet
Louw, Mr Ashraaf
Adam, Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Mr Colin Bird, CIA
Mr Colin Bird, Mr
Frank van der
Velde, Mrs Hilary
Jacobs
Mr Frank van der
Velde, CIA
2.2.7 Does it not make more sense
to deal with the completion
and the easing of the
bottlenecks simultaneously?
2.2.8 Cape Town does not have a
gridlock situation. The key
issue is the slow access in
and out of Cape Town
because of traffic congestion
in other parts of the city like
Koeberg, Interchange,
Hospital Bend etc.
2.2.9 The following alternatives
should be considered:
a) Solve congestion at source
b) Improve links between
transport modes to make
alternatives more viable
c) Develop an interim plan for the
CTICC basement to take future
viaduct supports.
CIA
Response
The local road system around the convention centre will benefit greatly. The
entrance to the waterfront will also greatly improve. More detail is provided in the
Traffic Impact Assessment Report that is available for study and can be obtained
through contacting Common Ground Consulting. (RH)
More details re TIA
These issues do not form part of the completion project but are currently being
addressed in design and programme terms in separate planning processes.
(RH)
Ron Haiden to respond
Ron Haiden to respond
Ron Haiden to respond
13
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
2.2.10 What are the City and
Provincial transport
authorities doing to address
and reverse the deterioration
of the public transportation
system?
Mr Tony Barbour,
Peninsula
Mountain Forum,
Mrs Hilary
Jacobs, CIA
Councillor Botha,
UTRG
New units dedicated to public transport have been established in the City and
Provincial transport departments. A new unit has been created in PAWC to plan
and implement public transport improvements and has a R60 million budget for
its first year of operation alone. (SF, RH)
Has a detailed economic
feasibility study for the
project been done? Are the
results of the study
available?
What will be the economic
benefits and spin offs for the
city and beyond?
Mr Colin Bird
(Email), UTRG
A detailed feasibility study has been undertaken and was made available at both
the first public meeting as well as the interactive workshop. A copy of the study
is available from Common Ground Consulting.(RH)
Has an economic analysis of
public transportation and
investment into public
transportation been done?
The value and the
development potential of the
property between the
harbour and the city will be
drastically reduced by the
completion of the freeway.
Mr Tony Barbour,
UTRG
3. ECONOMIC ISSUES
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Mr Bev Mitchell,
Mr Townsend,
UTRG
More details requested
Through the feasibility study it is estimated that a benefit/cost ration (B/C) of at
least 2, an internal rate of return (IRR) of approximately 17% over a 20-year
analysis period and approximately R1billion worth of spin-offs will be realised for
the city through completion of the freeway.(RH)
No, but parallel public transport investigations are currently underway. (RH)
More details needed
Mrs Hilary Jacobs
Ivor Prinsloo to respond
Mr Dave Skinner
The extension of Long Street through to Duncan Road is being considered. Long
Street extension will also provide local access to the adjacent hotel, conference
centre, Coen Steytler Parking Garage, Customs House and the Roggebaai
Canal precinct. (PS)
4. SCHEME ISSUES
4.1 SCHEME PROPOSALS
4.1.1 What are the options being
considered in relation to
Long Street extension?
14
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
4.1.2 The Cape Town Port
Authority objects to the
extension of Long Street into
Duncan Road as Duncan
Road is a private road and it
the main feeder for the port
fruit terminals
4.1.3 Would it not be possible to
have an interim scheme that
could function with Phases
One and Two only?
Mr Billy Cillier
4.1.4 Does the total cost of R286m
include the upgrading of
Hospital Bend, the Koeberg
Interchange and Portswood
Road?
4.1.5 Is it possible to consider the
extension of the viaduct over
Culemborg up to the
Woodstock Holiday Inn, and
the provision of additional
lanes from Oswald Pirow
Street to the Koeberg
Interchange
Mr Frank van der
Velde, Mr Ashraaf
Adam (Email),
Mr Frank Fuller
Response
Ivor Prinsloo to respond
Mr Dave Skinner
Mr Dave Skinner
No, this option has been investigated and in both the medium term constrained
scenario and medium term unconstrained scenario (i.e. removal of the N1
bottlenecks), 4 lanes on the westbound outer viaduct would be required. There is
presently only 3 lanes and therefore there is presently inadequate capacity. In
addition, the weaving maneuvers would also be unsafe because of the short
weaving distance. In addition, the temporary ramps would be costly and would
constitute abortive work. (DC)
No, it does not. The amount is only for the completion of the foreshore freeway
between the eastern and western boulevards. (DC)
The extension of the central viaducts over Culemborg to a tie-in with the eastern
boulevard at the Woodstock Holiday Inn is a logical and more direct route.
However, it would have a negative impact on the residential areas of Woodstock
and the business activities along Sir Lowry Road and New Market Roads. This
option was considered in the 1960’s but was not implemented because the
present route of the Eastern Boulevard was more cost-effective. Investigations
are presently underway to look at the addition of a third lane through the
Koeberg Interchange and a fourth lane between the Koeberg Interchange and
Oswald Pirow. (DC)
15
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
4.1.6 Does the question of
alternatives deal with purely
mitigatory matters or can the
issue of the demolition of the
freeway also be considered?
Mr Clough
4.1.7 Is it possible to demolish the
existing freeway and put
everything underground?
Mr Clough,
Mr Molenaar
4.1.8 Is a 16-lane freeway really
necessary?
Prof Wilson
4.1.9 At which point does the
freeway descend into
Buitengragt Street and would
it pass over Martin Melck
House?
Mrs Dusty
Holloway
Response
The demolition option can be considered but various traffic investigations have
shown that there are no practical and cost-effective alternatives. In other words,
this would require the replacement of one lane at freeway level with two lanes at
ground level, in effect meaning the replacement of 11 freeway lanes with 22
ground level lanes to provide equivalent capacity. There is no land space
available for these additional roads, with the only option being the demolition of
existing buildings. The proposed CTICC is also a barrier to the route of a ground
level road. (DC)
A tunnel solution or an open depressed scheme would cost at least 4 times more
than the elevated freeway and would present practical difficulties. The
underground option would cut off all existing stormwater drainage routes to the
sea and would also conflict with underground municipal and electrical services.
In addition, it would also rule out a proposed 2-track underground rail tunnel
beneath the Heerengracht. (DC)
The ultimate freeway solution consists of 11 lanes - 5 in the westbound direction
and 6 in the eastbound direction. The predicted ultimate traffic flows are 13 622
and 14 055 respectively in the am and pm peak hour periods. The number of
lanes in the westbound direction is determined by the am peak hour flow when
the full 5 lanes are necessary. The number of lanes in the eastbound direction is
determined by the pm peak hour flow when 5 additional lanes are necessary,
with an additional lane being required for purposes of lane balance. (DC)
The Buitengragt link is a 2-lane, one-way ramp that will pass over Coen Steytler
and Hans Strijdom Avenues and connect into Buitengragt opposite the Mechau
Street intersection, 300m before Martin Melck House. It will be located in the
landscaped areas between the existing carriageways of Buitengragt and will not
pass over any buildings. (PS)
16
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
4.1.10 Why not simply demolish
certain parts of the freeway
and just complete the
eastern off-ramps?
Mr Piet Louw
4.1.11 Is it possible to tie the
parking garage at the end of
the freeway into a building,
demolish the western
flyovers, and replace it with a
proper spatial connection
system to the water’s edge?
Mr Piet Louw,
Ms Gressner
4.1.12 What would be the
economic and other
impacts on the Convention
Centre if the freeway were
not completed?
Ms Sharon
Manzini
4.1.13 Has consideration been
given to reversing the lanes
of the freeway for the
morning and afternoon rush
hours?
Mrs Hilary Jacobs
Response
The foreshore freeways allow east-west through-traffic to pass around the
outskirts of the CBD. To remove the freeway would result in severe congestion
of the CBD street system with particularly the movement of pedestrians and the
movement of private, freight and land-based public transport vehicles being
severely impeded. In addition, the existing developments in the CBD, Foreshore,
Waterfront and Sea Point will also be affected and new developments restricted.
The ability of the CT ICC to hold large international conferences will be restricted
because easy access by road-based private and public transport will be impeded
during the peak periods. (DC)
Yes, but at great cost. The parking garage is intended for CTICC parking and
should it be demolished alternative parking will have to be provided. The western
flyovers can be demolished but they would have to be replaced by double the
amount of traffic lanes at ground level. This may have a negative effect on the
urban form and the environment. Having large queues of vehicles crawling
through the at-grade CBD road system throughout the day , rather than speedily
around the perimeter freeways, will lead to a deterioration in air quality. A
‘spatial’ connection system to the waters’ edge in the form of the Roggebaai
Canal and parallel pedestrian routes is already planned and is under
construction. Other ’spatial’ connection systems to the water’s edge will be
considered by the Urban Design team. (DC)
The CTICC is designed to accommodate large local and international
conferences of up to 5000 delegates. The road system would have to
accommodate 80 buses and 1000 private vehicles in a short, 30-minute period in
the morning peak hour. Without the completion of the foreshore freeway system,
the adjacent at-grade intersections would not cope with the additional traffic. A
solution would be to restrict conferences to smaller numbers of delegates or to
restrict conference operating times for large conferences from 09:30 to 15:30
(DC)
There are large traffic flows in both eastbound and westbound directions
in the morning and evening peak periods. Reversing the lanes will
therefore not be a viable traffic solution. It is also impossible to achieve
simple safe flexible ramp connections or carriageway cross-overs to make
contra-flow lanes possible on an elevated or at-grade freeway system.(DC)
17
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
4.1.14 Consideration should be
given to the following
ultimate preferred alternative
options:
Westbound direction infrastructure
a) Construct the westbound
viaducts as proposed but with
an off ramp to the
Heerengracht.
Eastbound direction
infrastructure
b) No Buitengragt viaduct.
c) Construct only two lanes on the
proposed new inner eastbound
viaduct
d) Provide an eastbound off-ramp
to the Heerengracht.
e) Construct an eastbound on
ramp from the Heerengracht to
the existing uncompleted
connection to Eastern
Boulevard viaduct .
Proposed immediate
construction
1. Westbound: Construct
proposed project scheme only
west of the Heerengracht with a
temporary connection from the
existing westbound viaduct
2. Eastbound
Construct only two lanes from
the Western Boulevard to the
Heerengracht with an off ramp
to the Heerengracht.
Mr Dave Skinner,
MPRA
The fully
motivated
arguments from
Mr Skinner is
obtainable from
the Common
Ground Website
Response
A meeting was held with Mr Skinner at the offices of VKE Engineers on
Friday 19 October 2001 at 14:00. Mr Skinner was given access to all of the
drawings and the traffic volumes which he might require.
The following was discussed and noted :
a) The Buitengragt link may well be dropped in the future but that is the subject
of further planning.
b) An eastbound connection from the inner or outer viaducts down to
Heerengracht will require a long fill embankment with retaining walls, which will
impact on the access roads and parking areas behind the convention centre. Mr
Skinner will have to show that this ramp is feasible and can be achieved without
precluding private vehicle and truck access to the convention centre from
Heerengracht.
c) A westbound connection from the N1 and Eastern Boulevard to Heerengracht
will be investigated for Phase 3 in order to reduce traffic flows through the Coen
Steytler / Buitengragt intersection in the morning peak hour.
d) An eastbound connection from the Heerengracht to the N1 and Eastern
Boulevard will be investigated for Phase 3 in order to reduce traffic flows through
the Coen Steytler / Buitengragt intersection in the evening peak hour.
e) The need for temporary connections from the Phase 1 inner viaducts to the
existing outer viaducts will only be investigated if there is a problem with the
completion of Phase 3. (DC)
18
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
The following should be considered
as an ultimate preferred alternative:
Westbound: As proposed by the
project team with the addition of a
westbound off-ramp to the
Heerengracht.
Eastbound: Provide only two lanes
on the new inner viaduct. Provide
an eastbound off-ramp to the
Heerengracht
Source
Response
Mr Dave Skinner
4.2 STUDIES
4.2.1 What are the studies that
have been commissioned for
the project?
Ms Lisa Kane
The following studies have been commissioned:
1) Traffic impact assessment by Hawkins, Hawkins and Osborne.
2) Reassessment of the Foreshore Freeway Scheme by the CMC
Administration.
3) Economic Evaluation by Prof Christo Bester.
4) Regional Development Evaluation (external benefits) by Prof Wessel
Pienaar.
5) Integration of the urban design issues associated with the freeway: Gapp
Architects in association with MMA Architects.
6) Archaeological Assessment of potential heritage impacts by the
Archaeological Contracts Office, UCT.
7) Wind Study, by CSIR (this is an integrated wind study done together with
Convenco).
8) Noise assessment by Jongens Keet Associates.
9) Geotechnical investigations by Mike van Wieringen.
10) Cadastral mapping and topographical survey by Satmap Solutions/Arvind
Bhawan. (PS)
19
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
4.2.2 Are the studies available to
the public?
Source
Ms Lisa Kane
Response
All the studies will be made available to the public once they have been
completed and have been accepted by the Project Management Team of the
project. The studies in 1) and 2) have been completed and are available. The
draft reports of 3), 4) and 6) have been completed and are currently being
evaluated. The work in 9) and 10) has also been completed, but more work may
be required, depending on further project requirements. The study in 5) is part of
an ongoing process. With respects to 7), a preliminary assessment regarding the
Convention Centre is available. The brief for the integrated study is currently
being negotiated with the CSIR. Arrangement for studying the available reports
can be made by contacting Common Ground Consulting. (PS)
4.3 CONSTRUCTION ISSUES
4.3.1 Will the present parking
areas around the Freeway be
affected during the
construction period?
Amway
4.3.2 How long is the construction
period and what are the
exact dates of construction?
Amway
4.3.3 What will be the level of
disruption to traffic during the
construction period?
Mr Tony RomerLee (Email)
Disruption to parking areas is not anticipated during Phase 1, except for a small
section east of the Heerengragt. During Phase 2, any parking area directly below
the intended route of the viaduct may be affected. It is not anticipated that any
parking areas on private land will be affected, but parking areas on land leased
from the public authorities may be affected. Open public space may also be
affected. The contractor responsible for Phase 2 may negotiate the use of open
land for the temporary use of land for storing construction equipment, depending
on the construction plan presented. During Phase 3 the parking directly beneath
and between the existing viaducts may be affected. (PS)
The anticipated construction dates are as follows:
Phase
Start date
End Date
1
mid-Nov 2001
end Sept 2002
2
April 2002
Aug 2003
3
June 2002
Aug 2003 (PS)
Traffic will be disrupted to greater and lesser degrees during the whole of the
construction period. During Phase 1 the level of disruption to traffic should not be
any worse than currently caused by the construction of the Convention Centre.
The construction of Phase 2 may have the greatest level of disruption to traffic.
The level of disruption in Phase 3 will not be significant. Certain mitigation
measures are being evaluated to reduce the disruption caused by construction
but this has to be balanced by possible after hours noise experienced by hotels.
(PS)
20
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
4.3.4 Which roads will be closed
during the construction
period?
Source
Mr Tony RomerLee (Email)
Response
It is not anticipated that any major roads will be closed during the construction
periods. Some lanes of major roads may be temporarily occupied by staging for
shuttering for a few weeks at a time. A traffic management plan will be compiled
for the management of traffic, including construction traffic, during the
construction periods. (PS)
4.4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ISSUES
4.4.1 Does the urban design take
into account the
environmental impacts of
encouraging greater use of
private transport?
4.4.2 What are the conclusions of
the noise studies regarding
the impact on the Holiday Inn
and Cullinan hotels of the
construction of the
Buitengragt flyover?
Ms Cathy Glover,
UTRG, WESSA
The urban design considers this a serious matter for consideration. However, it
is not anticipated that there will be an exponential increase in private traffic in the
short term because the present modal split will not change. (IP)
Mr Engelbrecht
The noise study has not yet been completed and the report on the scoping
assessment is due shortly. Preliminary indications are that large areas of the
Foreshore already have very high noise levels. Preliminary indications also show
that the noise levels near the Holiday Inn and Cullinan Hotels may be raised.
The design of the Convention Centre has taken cognisance of the existing noise
levels. (IP)
4.5. LINKAGES WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS
4.5.1 How does the completion of
the freeway link to the other
major developments in the
CBD/ Foreshore area?
Mr Bev Mitchell
The completion of the connection to western boulevard will positively impact on
the CBD and the Waterfront. In addition, through traffic on the CBD road system
will be considerably reduced. For more detailed discussion see the Traffic
Impact Assessment. (IP)
4.5.2 Does the Cape Town
International Convention
Centre require the
completion of the freeway?
Mr Frank van der
Velde (Email),
UTRG, CIA,
Mr Rommelaere
No, not on its own. However, it is a contributory factor to the need to accelerate
the construction of the additional section of the freeway. If the freeway is not
completed it will significantly impact on the operations of the Convention Centre.
(IP)
21
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
4.5.3. The Convenco Board is not
of the opinion that the non
completion of the freeway will
significantly impact on the
operations of the Convention
Centre
Source
Response
Minister Leon
Marcowitz
5. URBAN DESIGN ISSUES
5.1 BARRIERS BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE WATERFRONT
5.1.1 Why was the original
alignment of the canal
changed?
Mr E Seeton,
1) The original canal alignment was not completed because of the cost
implications.
2) The second canal was pushed back from Coen Steytler because of the
space requirements of the CTICC. (IP)
5.1.2 Is it not possible to go back
to the original alignment of
the canal and restore a
continuing link between the
CBD and the Waterfront?
Mr E Seeton,
Mr Engelbrecht,
Prof Wilson,
MPRA
1) Yes it is possible to revert to the original alignment.
2) It is not possible to do so with the second canal. (IP)
5.2 SCHEME DESIGN ISSUES
5.2.1 The project must be driven
by a Urban Design
Framework Plan that
addresses issues such as;
the integration of the city,
resolving linkages to the
metro transport network and
giving equitable weight to the
different elements and the
needs of their users
5.2.2 What alternative urban
design options are presently
under consideration?
CIA
Ivor Prinsloo to respond
Mr Mitchell,
SAHRA , MPRA
There are presently three alternatives based on the Foreshore Freeway
proposals. For more information please contact Common Ground Consulting.
(IP)
22
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
5.2.3 The project time frame should
allow for rational, proper and
detailed consideration and
debate on all the alternatives
that have been tabled thus
far.
5.2.4 Are these design alternatives
costed?
5.2.5 Is it possible to reconsider
the planned alignment of the
parking garages so that it
integrates more with the city
and the buildings around it?
5.2.6 Is there a consideration by
the traffic experts of the
alternatives being proposed?
5.2.7 Does the process allow the
possibility of a complete
conceptual rethink of the
present design of the
freeway particularly around
the Buitengragt intersections
and its link to the viaducts?
5.2.8 What alternatives are
considered for the present
Buitengragt pedestrian
crossing?
5.2.9 What urban design
alternatives could be
considered to address the
need to prevent the
increasing flow of private
traffic into the city?
Source
Response
Mr Martin Hutton
Squire
Ivor Prinsloo to respond
MPRA
Ivor Prinsloo to respond
Mr Dave Skinner,
SAHRA
1) The present Coen Steytler garage is presently a fix but the Project
Team is reviewing the implications of its demolition and
replacement.
2) Alternatives for other parking garages are being studied. (IP)
Mr Stanbury
There is ongoing interaction between the urban design and traffic components of
the project. (IP)
Prof
Wilson,SAHRA
Yes, it does. This matter is presently under serious consideration and is the
subject of further investigations and study.(IP)
Mr Engelbrecht,
Mr Mitchell,
Mr Crook
A range of alternatives is presently under consideration. Some of the options
include an overpass, an underpass or a combination with or without use of street
level crossing. Please contact Common Ground Consulting for more information.
(IP)
The option would assume that the present freeway is sufficient for present and
future needs. The matter is currently under review.(IP)
Prof Wilson,
Mr Mitchell,
23
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
5.2.10 What are the motivations for
retaining the Coen Steytler
parking garages and what
are urban design implications
of demolishing it entirely?
Mr Green,
Mr David Hart
The key motivations for retaining the Coen Steytler garages are the parking
requirements of the Convention Centre. The urban design implications of
demolishing the garages as part of an alternative option is currently the subject
of further investigations. (IP)
5.2.11 Where is the human scale?
Why does it appear that the
completion project only takes
the needs of motorists into
account?
5.2.12 Is it possible to return to the
city the surface land
released as a result of the
construction of the
Buitengragt fly-over?
5.2.13 Is it possible to consider the
construction of a walkover
from the Holiday Inn to the
Waterfront?
5.2.14 Has thought been given to a
link between the Waterfront
and the Bo-Kaap area?
5.2.15 What thought has been
given to what will happen
under the freeway,
particularly in Phase
Three?
5.2.16 How will the security
measures around the
convention centre impact
on the Foreshore roads and
the freeway itself?
Ms Gressner
The needs of a wide range of users have been considered in the urban design
and the needs of pedestrians and human scale is a concern that is being
addressed in variations currently being studied. The point of departure of the
project is to deal with vehicular traffic but other needs are also being examined.
(IP)
This matter is presently under consideration and particular attention is focused
on dealing with the issue in a holistic manner. The key requirement is that traffic
concerns are dealt with. (IP)
SAHRA
Mr Engelbrecht
Mr Rommelaere
An elevated walkway would have to be part of a pedestrian system that serves
all pedestrians. The Holiday Inn could use such a walkway. The area between
the Cullinan and Holiday Inn Hotels and the Waterfront is currently being treated
as a pedestrian priority area. (IP)
This matter is currently under further investigation. A visual and functional
linkage is being explored and designed. (IP)
Mr Renier Visser,
Ms Gressner,
SAHRA
This is the subject of ongoing discussion and investigations. Phase 3 is still
being studied, particularly regarding proposed parking garages. Consideration of
these is a relatively late requirement due to new private initiatives and may
extend beyond the present proposal. (IP)
Mr Renier Visser
Wilfred Crous to respond
24
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
Source
Response
5.2.17 Does the technical and
urban design promote
equality of opportunity and
access to all the citizens of
Cape Town?
Nisa Mammon
and Associates
Yes, to all that use private and public road transport. The technical and urban
design is specifically aimed at promoting a combination of private and public
transport within the current modal splits. The road-based solutions under
consideration provide equal opportunities for public and private transport. Future
light rail possibilities are also being considered. (IP)
5.2.18 Will the completed freeway
cut the Waterfront and the
Convention Centre off from
the rest of Cape Town?
Mrs Dusty
Holloway,
SAHRA, MPRA,
Mr Cassiem
Johnstone
Mr Renier Visser
The completion of the freeway will not add any more barriers than what already
exist. With careful design it may be possible to create improved access to the
Waterfront.(IP)
5.2.19 Is it possible to consider a
Gateway Bridge that
welcomes people into the
city?
5.2.20 How best can vehicular,
public and pedestrian
movements between the
city and waterfront be
integrated?
SAHRA
This matter has some difficulties but deserves further investigation. The entire
area is currently conceived as a Gateway. It is possible to develop design
options that promote a more general gateway environment that is not restricted
to the single consideration of a Gateway Bridge. A Gateway Bridge is a good
idea but is made more difficult by the different alignments and heights of the two
viaducts. (IP)
This matter is currently under consideration and is the subject of further
investigations and study. The issue is best addressed by balancing development
that takes into account inputs by the public, key stakeholders and the design
teams. (IP)
5.3 VISUAL IMPACT
5.3.1 Is it possible to make the
elevated section more
hospitable and attractive?
Mr Bird
5.3.2 Has the visual impact of the
elevated sections on the
Waterfront and the hotels in
the Buitengragt area been
considered?
Mr Hutton-Squire
Yes it is. This is the subject of further investigations and study. The elevated
structures are being designed with a number of possibilities in mind. These are
however constrained by cost and by the context, such as the shape and type of
existing elements. (IP)
This matter is currently under consideration and is informed by the engineering
and traffic studies. This is an important but difficult matter and a balance of
gains and losses has to be achieved. (IP)
25
Phase
Applicability
Issue/Concern/Comments
5.3.3 Have traffic and
transportation issues been
looked at together with
planning and urban design
issues?
Source
Mr Tiaan Meyer,
Mr Piet Louw
Response
There is a deep appreciation of the need for concerted integration of all aspects
of the project. Urban design extends beyond traffic issues. The urban impact,
positive and negative, of the CTICC, the weak head of the Roggebaai Canal, the
barrier of the Coen Steytler garage, the service traffic to the CTICC off the
Heerengragt all have an impact. The traffic implications are being reviewed in
the context of these and other urban design issues such as the linkages to the
Waterfront and the area alongside the Holiday Inn and the Cullinan Hotels. A
critical linkage is from St Georges Mall, the City Hotels and the railway station.
All the studies are conducted on the basis of integrated professional teams. (IP)
5.4. LINKAGES WITH OTHER PROCESSES
5.4.1 What are the linkages
between the planning for the
Convention Centre, Freeway
and the Port Master Plan?
Mr Mitchell
The Port Master Plan is not yet available and the Port Authority has indicated
that Harbour functions are their priority. However, planning at this stage must
take into account a future public link between the inner city and the sea at the
Harbour. Possible corridors of development are being considered so as to inform
present designs north of the freeway. The city has approved an urban design
conceptual framework that provides for links between the city and the Port. (IP)
5.4.2 The present assumption of
an immediate planning link
between the Port and the
Convention Centre is
problematic because the port
has other immediate
priorities and the link
between the Port and
Convention Centre is a long
term priority.
Mr Billy Cillier
There is no assumption of an immediate planning link. However, there is the
possibility of a link between Lower Duncan Road and Port Road.
The Port and its planning must be in terms of the Port’s priorities. However,
without detracting from this requirement, it would be in the interests of the Port
and City-and of the country-for there to be a mutually beneficial integration of the
two sets of requirements.
These and other matters are a part of ongoing planning studies that are based
on holistic and integrated planning processes. (IP)
26
Phase
Applicability