The DA has accused the Gauteng and National Health departments of contradicting each other regarding the Sizwe Hospital development.
The party claimed the provincial department recently stated that the Sizwe Tropical Disease Hospital will not be moved, while in an earlier parliamentary reply the National Minister of Health, Dr Aaron Motsoaledi, said the hospital was to be moved and that land had been identified.
The DA’s MP Mike Waters said the minister was asked to explain the contradiction between the communication coming from both departments on this matter, as the provincial department agreed to the relocation of the hospital subject to the developer undertaking to fund the relocation fully at their own cost.
MP Waters said the minister further said it is the duty of the developer to ensure that all approvals (including but not limited to Environmental Authorisation) are obtained prior to any developments and relocation taking place on the site where the hospital is currently located.
It is assumed that until such time that the developer and the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) and Human Settlements obtain approval to relocate the hospital, the relocation will not take place.
The Department of COGTA and Human Settlements has since brought to the attention of the Gauteng Department of Health that the developer no longer wished to follow through with the terms of relocation as was agreed upon.
MP Waters said this latest development raised more questions, such as what impact this will have on the feasibility of the development as a large section of land can no longer be developed. The DA has called on the government to come clean with the public and explain all the contradictions.
The DA has also called for the development to be stopped, stating that the South African National Roads Agency (Sanral) has objected to the housing development due to the substantial traffic volumes that will result from the large number of new residents moving into the area.
The agency has argued that the N3 will not be able to accommodate the increased traffic, particularly during peak hours.
“There are a number of gravesites on the land, where victims of anthrax, bubonic plague, smallpox and tropical diseases are buried. Moving these graves could pose serious health risks to residents. The Sizwe Hospital is also a national monument that is over 100 years old and should be preserved as such,” said MP Waters.
Mr Vusi Mona, the general manager of communications at Sanral, said as an agency of government, Sanral supports development and the provision of housing as it brings about economic growth and creates jobs, however only when done in a sustainable manner.
“We received a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) for a proposed extensive mixed-use development for the larger Linksfield area – between Modderfontein and Linksfield roads and between Club Road and the N3.
“We were asked for our comment. This TIA indicated a heavy reliance on the N3 for trips generated by the proposed development. Proposed upgrades of the N3 were limited to the section from the Modderfontein interchange to the Linksfield interchange,” said Mr Mona.
Mr Mona said they conducted their own investigation to determine the joint impact of various large developments on the mentioned section of the N3.
These developments included Waterfall City, Zendai/Modderfontein, Huddle Park, Linbro Park and Frankenwald.
“This study indicated that the N3 between the Buccleuch and Gillooly’s interchanges are at capacity. Further substantial, additional traffic would result in severe congestion and gridlock. Gillooly’s interchange was upgraded as part of the GFIP, but is already experiencing severe capacity constraints, and would not be able to accommodate the foreseen additional traffic,” he said.
Mr Mona said they also engaged with the Johannesburg Roads Agency (JRA) and the Gauteng Provincial Department of Roads and Transport (GPDRT) to discuss the outcome of their investigation.
He further said the JRA also raised reservations with respect to the ability of the municipal road network to handle the traffic volumes to be generated as a result of the proposed development, including concerns over whether some of the proposed road upgrades were feasible.
“Indications from the GDRT were that they would not be undertaking any road upgrades to ameliorate the impact of the proposed development, even though the proposed development is a provincial initiative,” said Mr Mona.
He said Sanral then indicated that they were not, at that time (March 2015), in a position to support the development proposal in its proposed format based on the following:
r Their main concern is the impact that this development, together with other approved major developments in the area, will have on the surrounding freeway network, especially on the N3 between and including the Buccleuch and Gilloolys systems interchanges and at the relevant access interchanges in between. This section of the N3 is already operating at capacity, and will not be able to cope with this additional demand. Existing road users on the N3 would therefore suffer the consequences.
r The mentioned TIA relies heavily on proposed public transport systems on municipal roads, which do not currently exist, which seem problematic to implement and which seem unlikely to be implemented by the JRA in the foreseeable future.
r Sanral has an obligation to act in the best interests of all our road users, and more specifically, to protect the capacity and mobility on the N3. The localised freeway improvements proposed in the traffic impact assessment will not address the substantial N3 capacity impacts of the proposed development to the north and south of the Modderfontein and Linksfield interchanges respectively.
“Since it remains important to balance the economic spin-offs of development and the potential negative spin-offs of a constrained freeway network which negatively affects the economy, we proposed that the land use amendments be reconsidered in conjunction with the City of Johannesburg and the JRA, in order to determine the optimum use for this land.
“We further indicated that we are prepared to reconsider its position, should a proposal with substantially reduced dependence on the N3 be presented. Discussions are ongoing with the engineers of the applicant to find a mutually acceptable solution. In the meantime, the EIA application for the road upgrades was officially submitted. This forced Sanral to object to the application as submitted, as no acceptable solution has to date been presented,” said Mr Mona.
Numerous attempts have been made to obtain comment from the national and provincial departments of health. The NEWS sent a request for comment to both departments on November 23 and requested by November 25.
The was followed up with direct telephone calls after November 25.
At the time of going to print, no comment had been received.
