the gauteng spatial development framework - Gauteng Online

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In order to achieve spatial integrity at all levels in the Gauteng City Region, it is proposedthat the following package of plans be established, each at successively more detailed scale.Five plans are proposed:• The Gauteng Spatial Development Framework (GSDF);• Municipal-based Spatial Development Frameworks (MSDF);A Local-based Spatial Development Framework (LSDF) deals with more finite 'character'areas at neighbourhood scale. It may often be associated with a specific large scale projectarea. Zonke Zizwe in Midrand may be cited as an example, as might be an extensive urbanrenewal area.The following table sets out the various levels of SDF, their essential focus, the scale andsome examples of the scale intended:• Region-based Spatial Development Framework (RSDF);• District-based Spatial Development Framework (DSDF); and• Local-based Spatial Development Frameworks (LSDF)The GSDF is as set out in this document (noting that it is in its formative stages of preparation).The MSDF is proposed as a framework covering the appropriate level of municipal counciljurisdiction; the three metropolitan councils would each prepare a MSDF for their respectivemetropolitan areas; the District councils would prepare a MSDF incorporating all local councilareas within their jurisdictions.ANNEXURE D: THE PACKAGE OF PLANSA Region-based Spatial Development Framework (RSDF) is intended to cover a level ofspatial extent more or less covered by what are referred to as regional spatial developmentframeworks for the CoJ and CoT. They cover extensive sectors of municipal areas that havegeographic, administrative, management, functional relationships that suggest commonalitiesof inclusion.A District-based Spatial Development Framework (DSDF) is an extensive area with specificconcerns and commonalities and would cover particular, but fairly large, areas whereintegrated spatial planning is required. In the Johannesburg context, Modderfontein wouldbe a typical example of a district. In the Tshwane context, the broader Irene area wouldbe an example. At the nexus of Tshwane, Mogale City and Johannesburg, developmentinitiatives around Lanseria Airport would apply.187 GAUTENG SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2011 GAUTENG GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
LEVEL ESSENTIAL FOCUS AND SCOPE SCALE EXAMPLE OF SCALE LEVEL OF GOVERNMENTRESPONSIBILITYThe Gauteng SpatialDevelopment Framework(GSDF)A SINGLE FRAMEWORK• Concerned with the entire Gauteng city region,including the open space/ rural areas adjacent tothe urban areas and within the provincial boundary• Takes note of the inter-provincial issues andrelationships that arise and indicates key policiesrelated to these issues• Focuses on the structuring elements of how thecity region is to function spatially: urban corridors,activity nodes, an integrated open space system;public transport systems; goods transportation;movement systems; broad land-use classifications;minimum and maximum development intensityand density performance requirements.• Emphasis on both service and social infrastructuralinvestment in reinforcing the spatial structuringprinciples for the city region with focus on 'citybuilding'infrastructure rather than smaller-scaleinfrastructural investment• Notes the policy context of how the spatialstructuring of the city region is to be achievedand how these policies are to be harmonized withother policies such as subsidies, grants, incentivesand so on.• Establishes the current position on restrictingurban sprawl and the criteria on which it is to be(a) established and (b) subject to review• Entire Gauteng provincial area• Extends beyond the provincialboundary to include adjacentprovinces in defining interprovincialrelationships and issues.• Clearly demarcates the municipaljurisdictional boundaries withinthe province but concentrates onthe functional relationship acrossboundaries• Apart from observing jurisdictionalissues and protocols, theframework downplays thesignificance of municipalboundaries and highlightsfunctional relationshipsAs noted under scalecolumnPROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTANNEXURE D: THE PACKAGE OF PLANSGAUTENG SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2011GAUTENG GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY188
Page 1:
THE GAUTENG SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRA
Page 4 and 5:
TABLE OF CONTENTSSECTION 1: INTRODU
Page 6 and 7:
Table A.2-iv: Summary - Typical per
Page 8 and 9:
FIGURESSECTION 1: INTRODUCTIONFigur
Page 10 and 11:
Figure A.2.4: Modelling key compone
Page 12 and 13:
FOREWORD
Page 14 and 15:
SECTION1:Introduction
Page 16 and 17:
development framework around which
Page 18 and 19:
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTIONcadastral in
Page 20 and 21:
Not only does it seem necessary to
Page 22 and 23:
SECTION 2: THE GSDF AS A CONCEPTA S
Page 24 and 25:
disasters, shortages and changes in
Page 26 and 27:
are to promote sustainability, equi
Page 28 and 29:
It is legislated that metropolitan
Page 30 and 31:
Similarly, there must be a consiste
Page 32 and 33:
The corridors reflected in the figu
Page 34 and 35:
Similarly, in the United Kingdom, i
Page 36 and 37:
• urban compactness, also noted i
Page 38 and 39:
With Johannesburg as the city syste
Page 40 and 41:
Making sense of, and integrating, t
Page 42 and 43:
Based on this figure, it is suggest
Page 44 and 45:
On this basis, there is no reason w
Page 46 and 47:
SECTION 2: THE GSDF AS A CONCEPTPRI
Page 48 and 49:
SECTION 2: THE GSDF AS A CONCEPTPRI
Page 50 and 51:
SECTION3:The modelling elements of
Page 52 and 53:
value that goes with this can be de
Page 54 and 55:
THE MODELLING THAT UNDERPINS THE GS
Page 56 and 57:
MODEL 2: THE MORPHOLOGICAL MODELaro
Page 58 and 59:
with lower levels of accessibility.
Page 60 and 61:
MODEL 5: THE VIRTUAL MODEL ROOMSECT
Page 62 and 63:
URBAN MANAGEMENT AND SPATIAL DEVELO
Page 64 and 65:
making processes around these (for
Page 66 and 67:
The intricacies of the urban struct
Page 68 and 69:
SECTION 4: OUTCOMES OF APPLICATION:
Page 70 and 71:
STEP SIX: URBAN DEVELOPMENT, MANAGE
Page 72 and 73:
THE COMPOSITE SPATIAL STRUCTUREThe
Page 74 and 75:
SECTION 4: OUTCOMES OF APPLICATION:
Page 76 and 77:
FRAMEWORK FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
Page 78 and 79:
SECTION 5: FRAMEWORK FOR THE IMPLEM
Page 80 and 81:
TRANSPORTATIONThe principles of urb
Page 82 and 83:
URBAN STRUCTURING INITIATIVESSECTIO
Page 84 and 85:
SECTION 5: FRAMEWORK FOR THE IMPLEM
Page 86 and 87:
It is not enough, however, to simpl
Page 88 and 89:
APPENDIXA.1: The urban profile mode
Page 90 and 91:
ANNEXURE A: THE 5 GIS-BASED MODELSF
Page 92 and 93:
THE IDENTIFICATION OF MORPHOLOGICAL
Page 94 and 95:
ANNEXURE A: THE 5 GIS-BASED MODELSU
Page 96 and 97:
DEFINING THE MORPHOLOGICAL COMPONEN
Page 98 and 99:
• Activity Spines, with a hierarc
Page 100 and 101:
ANNEXURE A: THE 5 GIS-BASED MODELSN
Page 102 and 103:
comprises specialised trade, such a
Page 104 and 105:
• Development Intensity: Land are
Page 106 and 107:
THE REGIONAL NODEDevelopment Yield:
Page 108 and 109:
THE TYPICAL PERFORMANCE DIMENSION O
Page 110 and 111:
TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS: URB
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Figures A.2.13-15 show the same are
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
THE CONNECTIVITY MODELANNEXURE A: T
Page 122 and 123:
CONNECTIVITY MODEL 2This iteration
Page 124 and 125:
CONNECTIVITY MODEL 4The fourth iter
Page 126 and 127:
CONNECTIVITY MODEL 6The final itera
Page 128 and 129:
THE BID-RENT MODELThe Bid-Rent Mode
Page 130 and 131:
TOPOGRAPHIC SUITABILITYThe Topograp
Page 132 and 133:
THE SPATIAL POLICY SUPPORT INDEXThe
Page 134 and 135:
SURFACE CONSTRAINTSThe Surface Cons
Page 136 and 137:
APPENDIXA.5Model 5 - the virtualmod
Page 138 and 139:
TSHWANE STATIONS123Existing conditi
Page 140 and 141:
APPENDIXB.1: Restrictingurban spraw
Page 142 and 143:
urban edge, many of the municipal S
Page 144 and 145:
ANNEXURE B: POLICY POSITION PAPERSF
Page 146 and 147:
APPENDIXB.2: A densification policy
Page 148 and 149:
The model that is to guide both res
Page 150 and 151: APPENDIXB.3: Harmonisinghousingprov
Page 152 and 153: housing and mixed-uses can be reali
Page 154 and 155: ANNEXURE B: POLICY POSITION PAPERSF
Page 156 and 157: ANNEXURE B: POLICY POSITION PAPERSF
Page 158 and 159: THE PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE TRANSP
Page 160 and 161: ANNEXURE B: POLICY POSITION PAPERSi
Page 162 and 163: Possible outer extentsof urban deve
Page 164 and 165: APPENDIXB.5: Thecase principles ofs
Page 166 and 167: sustainable and efficient. A long-t
Page 168 and 169: ANNEXURE B: POLICY POSITION PAPERSB
Page 170 and 171: APPENDIXC.1: Thefreight and logisti
Page 172 and 173: overall platform on which more focu
Page 174 and 175: A further south-eastern regional hu
Page 176 and 177: ANNEXURE C: POLICY PERSPECTIVESFigu
Page 178 and 179: APPENDIXC.2: A perspective guidingt
Page 180 and 181: anges of hills or mountains, whethe
Page 182 and 183: APPENDIXC.3: Preservationof landhav
Page 186 and 187: URBAN CONSOLIDATION ZONESThe physic
Page 188 and 189: APPENDIXC.5: Indicativepatterns ofe
Page 194 and 195: APPENDIXC.6: Integrationof the rura
Page 196 and 197: opportunity that goes with being ab
Page 198 and 199: ANNEXURED: The package of plans
Page 202 and 203: LEVEL ESSENTIAL FOCUS AND SCOPE SCA
Page 204 and 205: LEVEL ESSENTIAL FOCUS AND SCOPE SCA
Page 206 and 207: ANNEXUREE: Glossary of terms
Page 208 and 209: Brownfield Land and SitesPreviously
Page 210 and 211: ANNEXURE E: GLOSSARY OF TERMSTown -
Page 212 and 213: Development ManagementThe process w
Page 214 and 215: Geographic Spread Programme (DTI)Th
Page 216 and 217: ANNEXURE E: GLOSSARY OF TERMSIntegr
Page 218 and 219: ANNEXURE E: GLOSSARY OF TERMSSpatia
Page 220 and 221: ANNEXURE E: GLOSSARY OF TERMSUrban
Page 222: ANNEXURE E: GLOSSARY OF TERMS• Ur
show all

the gauteng spatial development framework - Gauteng Online

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?