WATCH: South Crest residents remain unconvinced despite developer’s assurances over proposed 900-unit development
More than 600 objections have already been submitted as South Crest residents continue to raise concerns over traffic, infrastructure and service delivery.
Residents of South Crest fear the proposed 900-unit development will overwhelm ageing infrastructure, increase traffic congestion, and negatively affect the character of one of Alberton’s oldest suburbs.
The latest community meeting held at the NG Kerk South Crest on July 28 follows widespread opposition to the proposed Extension 13 and 14 development on Portion 592 of the Farm Elandsfontein 108 IR, where residents previously submitted more than 600 formal objections to the project.
While developers and technical specialists attempted to answer questions, many residents said they were still not convinced the development would be in the community’s best interests.
Concerns have been addressed
Ward 106 councillor Tim Denny told residents that after consulting engineers and specialists, several concerns he shared with the community had since been addressed.
He said Eskom had assured him during a meeting that no development could proceed unless the necessary electricity infrastructure had been approved.
Denny also dismissed concerns that the development would affect water supply.
“As a councillor, how can people even think about worrying about water when you’ve got the biggest pipeline going past you and five reservoirs? You should not have a problem with water because of this development,” he said.
@albertonrecord Ward 106 councillor Tim Denny told residents that after consulting engineers and specialists, several concerns he shared with the community had since been addressed. He said Eskom had assured him during a meeting that no development could proceed unless the necessary electricity infrastructure had been approved. Full story on southerncourier.co.za
Denny also addressed concerns around blasting after consulting an explosives specialist.
“My complaint a few months ago was wrong, and I apologise for that. I was thinking about protecting residents’ homes, but I have since learnt they use a specialised emulsion that cracks the rock rather than exploding it. They have assured me it will not crack houses,” he said.
Two issues remain unresolved
Despite his reassurances, Denny said two major concerns still required further clarification before he could fully support the proposal.
“For me as your councillor, there are two issues I’m not yet happy with. The first is traffic congestion and the second is road infrastructure,” he said.
He questioned whether the surrounding road network would be able to cope with additional traffic generated by the development and he also wanted greater clarity on how roads damaged by heavy construction vehicles would be maintained.
“There is money allocated for infrastructure, but I still need to understand exactly how those roads will be upgraded and maintained.”
Community input has shaped proposal
Representing the developer, civil engineer and professional project manager Dutliff Bredenkamp said public participation had already resulted in changes to the proposed development.
He said concerns raised during earlier meetings in 2024 prompted the developer to amend plans for the open space.
“People told us they wanted to continue enjoying the natural environment, whether for walking or mountain biking.
“We stopped the process and changed the application from public open space to private open space so that most of the natural habitat would remain protected while still allowing controlled community access,” he said.
According to Bredenkamp, approximately 18 hectares of the site would remain undeveloped, allowing the existing natural habitat.
@albertonrecord Civil engineer and professional project manager Dutliff Bredenkamp, and Hanlie van Greunen of ECI Environmental Consultants address residents during the South Crest community meeting on the proposed Extension 13 and 14 development. Full story on albertonrecord.co.za
Bredenkamp said the developer had also commissioned additional specialist input on blasting and agreed to update the traffic impact study after residents pointed out that the original study had been conducted shortly after the Covid-19 pandemic.
Bredenkamp said any blasting would be undertaken using controlled techniques developed by specialists and monitored throughout construction.
He acknowledged that differing opinions formed part of the planning process.
“The planning process is about engaging with different views. We have tried to respond to concerns raised by the community and adapt the proposal where possible,” he said.
Residents challenge assurances
Despite the explanations, several residents said the information presented did not reflect their daily experiences.
One resident said traffic studies failed to capture the reality of peak-hour congestion.
“You do not hear us. We know what it’s like in the morning when we travel to work and school. You can give us all the figures and estimates, but you are not here. Even 50 extra cars will be a problem,” the resident said.
Another resident questioned how the developer could ask residents to trust the project without offering guarantees.
“You want to build all these structures and you can’t guarantee anything. We already struggle with electricity outages and water pressure. We can’t simply accept that everything will be fine,” the resident said.
Another resident told the meeting that ageing asbestos water pipes remained a concern.
“These asbestos pipes need to be replaced. They cannot handle additional pressure,” the resident said.
Public participation continues
The latest meeting forms part of the ongoing public participation process for the proposed development.
Denny encouraged residents to continue engaging constructively while outstanding concerns are investigated.
The developer also indicated that further engagement with residents would continue as technical studies and responses to objections are finalised before any decision is made on the application.
ALSO READ: South Crest residents oppose proposed 900-unit development
