Makro hearing continues
MAGALIESEIG - Day three of the Makro appeal hearing started with a strong focus on how the store would affect traffic in Magaliessig.
Day two of the hearing ended with Makro’s traffic engineer giving a presentation on his company’s research into the impact traffic would have on Magaliessig if the Makro store was built.
Makro’s legal representative, Fanie Grobler broached the subject that there were discrepancies between the traffic assessment report submitted by the Magaliessig Action Forum’s (MAF) traffic engineer, and the report conducted by Makro’s traffic engineer.
Grobler said the discrepancies could be due to the differing software used by the engineers.
Residents in attendance at the hearing scoffed in unison at the claim by Makro’s traffic engineer that traffic was not a problem in Magaliessig on a Saturday morning.
Day three of the hearing started later than usual as, ironically, much of the townships board was stuck in traffic.
The committee members who were present jokingly made reference to this by saying that traffic is already bad in Fourways, even before the Makro has been built.
A pertinent issue which arose during Makro’s traffic engineer’s presentation was the issue of how taxis dropping off and picking up workers would behave should the store be built.
The townships board questioned the pick up and drop off system, which has been proposed by Makro as opposed to the building of a taxi rank.
The townships board mentioned that there would be a possibility that taxis would create a rank in a neighbouring road.
Makro’s traffic engineer responded to this possibility, by saying it was his understanding that taxis dropped off workers and went about their own business for the rest of the day until it was time to pick them up again.
Read out previous story here:
Fourways consumers spoiled for choice
