Proposed Expansion of Container Handling Facilities in ... - Transnet

Proposed Container Handling Expansion
Discussion
Following the presentation participants raised questions and concerns. Where
requested by the facilitator, representatives of Transnet responded. The discussion
is summarised by theme below.
Traffic Issues
A significant proportion of comments made at the meeting were related to the
problem of traffic congestion. A number of participants, particularly those
representing residents around the port and recreational users of the bay, referred to
the “havoc” on the roads around the harbour. They would like to see this problem
solved as soon as possible. They argued that, instead of relieving the situation,
Transnet’s proposal seems to project a scenario where more trucks and cars will
make use of the roads, thereby worsening the situation.
Mario Steyn, of Transnet Projects, acknowledged the problem and indicated that
feasibility studies were being done to inform how best to deal with the traffic problem
in both the short and the long term. He explained how Transnet’s Bayhead proposal
intends to improve the traffic problem. He noted that as soon as dredging of the basin
begins, Bayhead Road would be affected. An alternative road with several lanes will
be constructed to replace Bayhead road, routed around the new development. Links
will also be provided between this and other roads. He said that this new proposed
road layout would be an upgrade from the current situation. He also explained that
Transnet was pursuing a strategy to shift more freight, and particularly the growth in
freight, onto rail. The Bayhead development will include realigning rail yards. The
new rail system will be more efficient than the current system and is set to transport
up to 50% of freight in the future, but designed to take up to 80% if required.
A participant argued that interim solutions were necessary and that improvements
should not only be instituted after 2010. Another argued that the new road planned
would not be sufficient since it only provides one access road to the port. He argued
that this would not solve the congestion problem. He believed that the transport
strategy around the new development had not been thought through sufficiently. He
argued further that the shift to rail would not be successful as cargo was often time
sensitive. Rail presents a much slower option than road transport. Mario Steyn
explained that the rail option would become feasible, as it would be made
significantly more efficient by utilising 50 truck block trains with turn around times of
no longer than 3.5 hours per train.
A Bluff resident noted that tip trucks carrying concrete were being driven through the
residential areas around the port on a daily basis. The facilitator noted that this point
was not strictly applicable to the process on the proposed expansion. However, the
comment was useful in that the issue of construction vehicles would become relevant
if this project were to enter a construction phase.
Recreation Issues
Several participants asked for clarity on the future of recreational clubs in the bay. A
member of the Kwa-Zulu Natal Rowing Association asked about the impact of the
Public Meeting Record
2
10 May 2007