amathole district municipality nkonkobe local municipality march 2014 preliminary draft not for...

Amathole District MunicipalityNKONKOBE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

March 2014

PRELIMINARY DRAFTnot for circulation

feasibility and review of housing plan for HOGSBACK 300HOGSBACK 300

Feasibility and Review of Housing Plan

HOGSBACK 300HOGSBACK 300

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

NKONKOBE LOCAL MUNICIPALITYPrivate Bag X31008, Cambridge, 5206

Tel: (043) 711-9800

Fax: (043) 711-9785

HOGSBACK 300 FEASIBILITY STUDYCNdV africa (Pty) Ltd 19 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 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 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

BLMC Biodiversity Land Management ClassCBA Critical Biodiversity AreaECBCP Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation PlanECDHS 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 Hogsback 300 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 five Human Settlement Project feasibility reports for Nkonkobe Municipality. It is designed so that it can be part of a single document that includes the other four 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: Nkonkobe Municipality (see Annexure 1)

•Property Description: Farm 182, Stockenstroom

•Title Deed Number: T1111/2002 (see, Annexure 2)

•Servitudes: Yes

•Site Size: Approximately 7.1 Ha

•The Hogsback 300 site represents the first opportunity for residents in the general area of Hogsback who are not property owners to achieve security of tenure.

•These residents had always lived in staff quarters on the various privately owned smallholdings and plots.

•Hogsback is situated on the slopes of the Amathole Mountains overlooking dominant ridges said to resemble the hog’s back, a type of rock formation.

•It is at the north east corner of the Eastern Cape in Nkonkobe Municipality.

•The settlement is 35 km north of Alice and 44km south of Cathcart on the R345.

•Nearby towns include Seymour in to the west and Keiskammahoek to the east.

•Hogsback is surrounded by large tracts of indigenous protected forests and is a popular tourist destination which is famous for its hiking trails, campsites and holiday resorts.

•The required size of the plots and what they are to be used for will require confirmation, e.g. to accommodate food gardening etc.

•Current plots appear to be 50m x 50m, i.e. a typical rural plot size of 2000m² to 2500m². 50 plots of this size could be accommodated on ±15 hectares which would require a larger site than that demarcated on figure 2.1.2.


page 9

Locality Plan Figure 2.1.1


page 10

Aerial Photograph Figure 2.1.2


page 11

VISUAL SURVEY Figure 2.1.3

a. The main road through Hogsback town (± 5km from site) b. Access to the site at junction on R345 to Cathcart c. View of the site from access point.

d. Existing wattle and daub structure on site e. View of existing wattle and daub structures f. View from the northern slopes of the site facing the western boundary.

g. Example of wattle and daub structures with some under construction. h. View of the site from the main road I. Wattle and daub structures further west from the main road.


page 12


page 13

STATUS OF HOUSING PROJECTS AND WAITING LISTS 2.2

• Many of the owners do not live permanently on their properties.

• The current permanent population of Hogsback is approximately 1000 people most of whom have resided on their employers’ properties for generations.

• The proposed project is intended to provide an opportunity for secure tenure for those wishing to take this opportunity.

• This suggests that the number of beneficiary households could be in the region of 300.

• 300 RDP subsidies have been proposed for Hogsback.

• The proposed housing delivery strategy and housing instrument is a project linked subsidy onto an existing informal settlement.

• There are currently approximately 50 informal mud structures and shacks on Farm 183 Hogsback.

• This property was donated to the municipality by private owners for the purposes of providing a new settlement for low cost housing beneficiaries.

• The application for 300 subsidies initially applied for by Amathole District Municipality on behalf of Nkonkobe Municipality was objected to by neighbouring property owners citing concerns of a fire risk brought about by the proposed project. A density of 10du/ha (600m² plots) will require 30 hectares. At 3du/ha (2000m²) 100 hectares will be required.

• However, the neighbouring property owners recommend that the proposed project comprises no more than 50 residential units. This would require 5 hectares at 10du/ha and approximately 17 hectares at 3du/ha.

• A Commission of Enquiry has been set up by the Eastern Cape Office of the Premier that recommends a fire risk assessment be undertaken and attached to findings of the enquiry.

• The municipality is awaiting the Commission’s report and recommendations prior to proceeding with the project.

• The waiting lists for Hogsback has been verified and a total of 261 beneficiaries have been identified.

HOGSBACK 300

Population (Nkonkobe SDF 2010) Not specified

Population (2011 Census) 1029 (Hogsback)

Ex. Units (2011 Census) Not specified

No. Households (at 4/hh) 344

Proposed Subsidies (EC DHS) 300

Waiting List (Nxuba LM) 261 still to be verified

Figure 2.2.1 Statistical Background


page 14

LAND IDENTIFICATION AND OWNERSHIP 2.3

• The land on which the site is located is a portion of remainder Farm 182, Stockenstroom.

• It has been donated to Nkonkobe Municipality by private owners. (see Fig 2.3.1 and annexure - ownership) However, the exact status of this transaction needs to be confirmed.

• A General Plan has not been drawn up for the site however it is reflected as remainder lot F on the General Plan for Hogsback Township, S.G No. 5228/52.

• The land has been occupied by approximately 50 households who will benefit form the proposed Human Settlement Project.


page 15

Cadastral Layout Figure 2.3.1


page 16

ENGINEERING (Kantey and Templer) 2.4

BULK SERVICES Existing Services

....

INTERNAL SERVICES Existing Services

....

GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS....

EXISTING INTERNAL SERVICES ARE ADEQUATE AND REQUIRE NO UPGRADING

Await K&T

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

Await K&T


page 18

ENVIRONMENT 2.5

• 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.

• A very small portion on the north-east corner of the site falls within CBA 2 as per SANBI data (2007) and therefore is subject to BLMC 2 guidelines according to the ECBCP 2007. If necessary, this must be ground-truthed by a botanist, prior commencing with the Human Settlement Project.

• BLMC 2 permits the land to be used for Conservation, Game Farming and Communal Livestock. Settlements are not recommended for these areas.

• The site slopes south towards the Cathcart, Seymour road along its southern boundary and appears to have no Critical Biodiversity Areas. All vegetation on the site falls under the least threatened category.

• There are some localised wet areas – puddles, but generally the area appears well-drained and there are no watercourses or wetlands nearby.

• The community has been living on the site for approximately three years and did not report problematic watercourses or wetlands.

• The northern part of the site abuts a formal protected area, see fig. 2.5.1.

• The site is on formerly cultivated land and will have little impact on natural vegetation.

• It would appear the proposed project (activity) will trigger the NEMA EIA Regulations, namely listed activity no. 23 as identified in the Government Notice No. R. 544 (Listing Notice 1):

– The transformation of undeveloped, vacant or derelict land to:

(i) residential, retail, commercial, recreational, industrial or institutional use, inside an urban area, and where the total area to be transformed is 5 hectares or more, but less than 20 hectares, or

(ii) residential, retail, commercial, recreational, industrial or institutional use, outside an urban area and where the total area to be transformed is bigger than 1 hectare but less than 20 hectares;

Except where such transformation takes place:

(i) for linear activities; or

(ii) for purposes of agriculture or afforestation, in which case Activity 16 of Notice No. R. 545 applies.

• However, it may be possible to obtain a letter from the environmental authorities agreeing that the site has already been transformed and that, therefore, an EIA is not required.


page 19

Environment Figure 2.5.1


page 20

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 21

Geo-tech (Kantey and Templer) Figure 2.6.1

The Site


page 22

DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL FACILITIES 2.7

• There is only one local primary school in Hogsback located in the village approximately 5 - 6km from the site, see fig. 14.6

• The Police Station is located as the entrance to Hogsback of the R345 from Alice approximately 5 – 6km from the site. (off map)

• The local clinic is also situated in town about 5 - 6km from the site. (off map)

• Retail shops are most common facility in Hogsback. These shops are also located in the village centre.

• Residents not owning cars would need to travel by means of public transport or non-motorised transport to access the required facilities in town.

• Should a project of 300 households, approximately 1000 people, be developed on the site this should take the form of a fully fledged rural village with commercial opportunities at the junction on the R345.

• Consideration will have to be given to either providing a new primary school in due course on the site or ensuring there are adequate public and non motorised transport (cycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks) to enable pupils to commute to the current school.

• Careful consideration should be given to ensuring that the settlement is as viable as possible and does not become a marginal dormitory suburb of Hogsback.


page 23

Distribution of Social Facilities Figure 2.7.1


page 24

CURRENT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2.8

• The Hogsback 300 site is a village envisaged as settlement Zone B for densification and formalization according to Nkonkobe Spatial Development Framework. (Nkonkobe SDF 2013, page 73)

• However, the Plaaitjieskraal Farm has been identified for the settlement of landless people and commonage purposes. (Nkonkobe SDF 2013, page 74)

• In terms of the SDF this project should be developed as a Model 1 settlement , i.e. plots larger than 1000m² to be used for agricultural purposes (see page 16).

• This is the only way that settlement on a site so remote from the nearest urban centre (5kms) can be justified. Otherwise, an urban village or suburb should be located within 1km of employment and economic opportunities in terms of various policy and legislation.

• The current Spatial Development Framework specifies broad land use management guidelines and does not specific spatial proposals for Hogsback.

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


page 25

Current Spatial Development Framework Figure 2.8.1

The Site

source: Nkonkobe Local Municipality, 2010)


page 26

FUTURE PLANS OF OTHER SECTOR DEPARTMENTS 2.9

• The following table indicates future plans of other sector departments proposed in the various settlements as contained in the IDP 2013-2014.

No. Project Government Dep./ Other Mso

bom

vu (

Wa

rd 1

2)

Balfo

ur (W

ard

9)

Joji

(200

)

Chris

Ha

ni (

Wa

rd 3

)

Hog

sback (

Wa

rd 1

0)

Budget '13/'14 Budget '14/'151 Nkonkobe Area Wide Sanitation Programme ADM 5 000 0002 Hogsback Water Treatment and New Reservoir MIG 1 000 0003 Hogsback Settlement MIG 500 000

4 Ethembeni HCBC Project DoSD 269 2984 Balfour Internal Streets MIG5 Flood Damages Project6 Construction of Sport Field7 Construction of Community Hall7 Upgrading of Roads

10 Greening and Beautification project

Future Plans of other Sector Departments for Nkonkobe Municipality 2013/2014


page 27

APPROVAL BY COUNCIL 2.10

• Awaiting Council Resolution


page 28

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.11

2.10.1 SUMMARY

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

•The project comprises of 300 proposed housing subsidy units onto an in-situ site

•The land on which the site is located, Ptn of Rem Farm 182, was donated to Nkonkobe Municipality by private owners. (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.

•Environmental concerns affecting the proposed Human Settlement Project include a fire risk. A report is awaited on this.

• Using ECBCP guidelines in determining the BLMCs that apply to the CBA that covers a very small portion of the site, settlements are not recommended for theses areas. It is recommended that if necessary, the site be assessed by a Botanist to verify and ground-truth the CBA nature of the site prior to commencing with the Human Settlement Project.

•The proposed project will trigger the NEMA EIA Regulations, namely listed activity no. 23 (see section 2.5) as identified in the Government Notice No. R. 544 (Listing Notice 1) unless a letter of exemption can be obtained from the relevant environmental authorisation body.

•A detailed geo-technical site visit inspection and, if necessary, survey will not be required prior to the project commencing.

•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.

•The project should be developed as a Model 1 agricultural settlement (plots >1000m²) in terms of the SDF (p 80) to justify its remote location.

• This will enable a lend of self sufficiency and food security to be achieved by providing enough gardening space.

2.10.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

•In light of this assessment it is recommended that pending the outcome of the fire risk assessment and recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry the award of subsidies can proceed in Hogsback as the land is generally suitable.

•A layout based on 1000m² plots or larger, e.g. traditional betterment scheme garden plots of 2000m² - 2500m² should be prepared.

•Agreement must still be reached on the area of land required for the settlement. This will be a function of the number of the verified beneficiary list and the desired plot configuration.

•Consideration must also be given to whether it will be more viable to provide social facilities at the site or create convenient and safe public transport and non-motorised transport links to the existing facilities.

•The settlement should be developed as a true eco-village with off-grid services and financial and technical support that promotes the use of green building materials in construction as the current residents are already doing but unsupported.

•The ad-hoc construction of conventional RDP houses using conventional imported building materials should be avoided.

•The Umzi choice pilot project strategy should be considered here to help the non – shelter requirements such as agricultural and business facilities.


page 29

ANNEXURE 1: OWNERSHIP PRINTOUT


page 30


page 31

ANNEXURE 2: TITLE DEED


page 32


page 33

ANNEXURE 3: SURVEYOR GENERAL DIAGRAM


page 34

amathole district municipality nkonkobe local municipality march 2014 preliminary draft not for...

Documents

engineering figure

environment figure

new project site

locality plan figure

extent of general plan

geotech figure

statistical background

greenfields project