The
Portfolio Committee on Transport (National Assembly), having undertaken an
oversight visits to the national department of Transport and nine host cities
as follows.
1.
Introduction
1.1 In the
course of the Parliamentary second term, the Transport Portfolio
Committee
in the National Assembly has conducted a relatively intensive oversight
programme to assess transport preparations for the 2010 FIP A
World Cup. The Committee has interacted with the National Department of
Transport (DoT), including a full-day interaction with departmental staff in
the head office in Pretoria. The Committee has also conducted a series of
oversight visits to host cities. At the time of completing this report, eight
of the nine host cities (Johannesburg, Polokwane, Nelson Mandela, eThekwini, Rustenburg, Mangaung, Mbombela and Cape Town) had
been visited. For the moment, the Committee has been unable to establish a date
with the City of Tshwane.
1.2 Cabinet
has identified public transport as the primary legacy that should be derived
from our hosting of the World Cup. If the opportunity of hosting the 2010 FIPA
World Cup is to be used to provide a sustainable transport legacy, then
planning and the assurance of effective funding for public transport systems
need to be more or less completed already, and full-scale implementation needs
to be underway in the coming months, if this is not already the case.
1.3 The
relatively tight time-lines that we are now facing need to be further
appreciated in terms of the PIF A requirement that no major infrastructural
construction should be underway in the host cities for six months prior to the
actual event in July 2010. This means that there are, effectively, just two-and
a-half years in which to complete significant public transport transformation.
1.4 In this
report the Committee will raise a number of concerns about the current state of
progress. In the light of attempts in some quarters, mostly outside of our
country, to suggest that South Africa will not be able to host a successful FIP
A World Cup, we wish to state up-front that we have no doubt that the
capacity
to provide effective transport for the event itself exists within our country
and that we will rise to the occasion. Our concern as a Committee relates less
to event-oriented transport provision in the narrower sense, and much more
specifically to the question of ensuring that an effective and sustainable
public transport legacy will be laid down.
1.5 In the
light of the tight deadlines, we have decided as a Committee to produce this
interim report on our work before the end of the Parliamentary second term. We
will focus on some key areas of concern, making recommendations which we
believe need to be addressed by the Executive with a sense of urgency. We will
consider compiling a fuller report providing much more specific details once we
have completed our round of host city oversight visits and other ongoing
oversight work.
2.
Reinforcing dedicated 2010 capacity in the National Department of Transport
2.1 In the
budget hearings with the DoT on March 20th, 2007, the Committee was informed
that the DoT had a staff vacancy rate of 41 %. The Director General assured the
Committee that 50% of these vacancies "were in the process of being
filled". It is possible that some progress has since been made, but that still
leaves a very high level of vacancy. Whatever the general levels of staff
shortage, the shortage of senior DoT staff working in a relatively dedicated
way on 2010 was very evident to the Committee. It was also raised as a concern
with us by a number of host cities.
2.2 At
present there is only one senior official, a Chief Director, who is working
full-time on 2010 in the DoT. The official reports to an Acting Deputy Director
who heads the Department's Programme Four (Integrated Planning and Inter-sphere
Co-ordination). This programme has four sub-programmes, of which 2010
co-ordination is one. The Committee was impressed with the competence and long
work hours put in by both the Chief Director and Acting Deputy Director, but it
was clear that they were seriously over-stretched. Many other senior officials
in the DoT are also actively involved with 2010 matters, and the Committee was
impressed with the general understanding senior members of the DoT brought to
the challenges - but they all have many other responsibilities and principal
points of focus.
2.3 This
situation should be compared to Germany's World Cup preparations where, we were
told, the Local Organising Committee had a team of 80 fulltime transport
specialists. We understand that a similar sized team of transport experts is
working full-time on London's 2012 Olympic preparations.
2.4 The
Committee recommends that the DoT should urgently build up a dedicated 2010
transport team.
2.5 An important role for such a team should be to support the work of the host cities, through:
·
augmenting
city capacity where it is needed, which may require some full-time secondment
to host cities;
·
ensuring a more effective flow of national information on 2010
transport. Several host cities commended the early support they had received
from the DoT but added that "things have gone a bit quiet over the past
six months";
·
assisting host cities to more effectively access national transport
entities - for instance, Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality is uncertain what
ACSA's plans are for the Port Elizabeth airport. This is impacting upon their
road based transport infrastructure planning in terms of connecting the airport
to local hotels. eThekwini expressed even stronger
concerns and uncertainties about road access to the planned new King Shaka
airport at La Mercy.
·
Ensuring
that there is effective coordination between provinces and host cities.
3. Challenges in host cities
3.1 The
level of planning and preparedness varies greatly from host city to city. In
some of the major cities, including City of Johannesburg (CoJ), eThekwini Cape
Town and Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality there are clearly competent transport
teams in place, most planning is effectively completed and implementation of
the main 2010 projects and systems is poised for roll-out. However, in each of
these cities there are challenges and frustrations that need to be addressed
some of which will be noted below.
3.2 Other
cities, Polokwane and Rustenburg in particular, appear to have made very little
progress and there are serious capacity and other concerns that will also be
noted below.
4. Johannesburg
4.1 The
Johannesburg 2010 flag-ship public transport project is the Rea Vaya Bus Rapid
Transit system. Phase one of the project, which is scheduled to be operational
by 2009 in time for the Africa Confederations Cup, will involve at least 94kms
of dedicated bus-lanes and will provide an estimated 413,000 passenger trips
per day. The first phase runs on several key routes including a major
south-north line from Lenasia through Soweto to Sunninghill, another line
begins in Alexandra, and there are lines around and through the CBD. The routes
take in the two Johannesburg 2010 stadiums - Soccer City and Ellis Park - as
well as some of the training stadiums. The capital expenditure will be R2,lbn, and the city expects to have secured all funding by
January 2008.
4.2 Costing
less than one-tenth of the Gautrain project, and with a first phase that will
transport about four times more passengers, this is a major project. The CoJ is
receiving full support for the Rea Vaya project from National Treasury and has
successfully accessed other financial assistance.
4.3 The CoJ
has, however, identified several potential risks to the Rea Vaya project,
including:
·
The
slow pace at which Environmental Impact Assessment approvals are moving;
·
Uncertainty
about the provincial Operating Licensing Board and the province's impending
conclusion of new bus contracts and subsidy policies and whether these will be
coordinated with Rea Vaya planning;
·
The
dangers of competing provincial initiatives on similar routes that will
undermine the financial sustainability of Rea Vaya - the example of the recent
Monorail proposal was cited.
4.4 The CoJ
also mentioned capacity challenges. In this regard the Committee believes that
the CoJ should consider building a full-time Rea Vaya team. At present leading
officials dealing with Rea Vaya are not full-time on this project, they all
have other transport responsibilities. In particular, the Committee believes
that, while strong engineering, infrastructural and town planning skills exist
within the City, much greater attention should be given to the very complex
area of institutional development, financial models, and BR T operational and
regulatory features. The CoJ is pioneering one of the first integrated public
transport systems ever in South Africa. It plans to integrate the city-owned
Metrobus, the privately owned Putco, and the taxi associations currently on the
routes, into BRT operating consortia. This is a highly commendable approach,
but it is an extremely complex matter which cannot be left to the last few
months before the first phase becomes operational. Integrated mass-based,
public transport systems have not been built in South Africa for 40 years and
more, if at all. Experience and skills, particularly in regard to public
transport financial, institutional, business-planning and the operating and
regulatory systems are not readily available. Experienced international
transport economists and operational planners may well have to be brought in,
to work closely with South African counterparts.
4.5 The CoJ
is of course involved in numerous other 2010-related transport projects
including park and ride facilities for access to stadiums, coordination with the
SA Rail Commuter Corporation on stadia-related stations, access to fan parks,
and the first phase of an International Transit and Shopping Centre for buses
and taxis arriving from the Southern African region, and even further a field
on our continent.
5. eThekwini
5.1 The
Committee was also impressed with the senior officials in this metro and with
the detailed 2010 transport planning processes underway. After considerable
evaluation, eThekwini has decided not to go for a full BRT system as their
principal 2010 flagship public transport legacy project. Instead they have
decided to focus on upgrading, extending and revitalising the northsouth rail
corridor. They indicate that they are working closely with the SA Rail Commuter
Corporationl/Metrorail in this regard. Most of the infrastructure expenditure
will have to be borne by SARCC/Metrorail.
5.2 Using
existing rail infrastructure obviously has many advantages, however a major
challenge will be to greatly improve on the very low present levels of rail ridership
on the corridor - a mere 17,000 out of a current 200,000 public transport
passenger trips per day (the majority of them currently in minibus taxis).
5.3 The
City's major contribution to the north-south rail corridor is an ambitious plan
to transform the Warwick Junction precinct. In terms of passenger movements,
Warwick Junction is by far the City's major rail station and transport
interchange hub with several major taxi ranks. It is also a thriving commercial
centre for small traders. However, the present reality is chaotic different
taxi ranks are located irrationally, pedestrians have to cross the extremely
busy N3 main route into Durban from Gauteng, the area has the highest
concentration of pedestrian fatalities in the country, and the commercial
potential of the location is compromised.
5.4 The
City has completed extensive planning for a major overhaul of the Warwick
Junction area. The overhaul involves transforming existing taxi ranks and
regulating them more effectively, so that taxi associations servicing townships
in the North, West and South of the City are respectively located on the
appropriate side of the precinct (which is not the case at present). The
overhaul also involves building a fly-over for the Gauteng-Durban road at this
point, to create a safer pedestrian and public transport environment below.
Despite planning having been completed for some years, the project has failed,
for some reason, to secure DoT support, and therefore there has not been
funding for it. Unless approval is secured before September 2007, it will be
too late to proceed with the renewal ahead of 2010.
5.5 The
DoT's reluctance to support the project appears to be based on the belief that
this is basically a car-friendly, free-way oriented project. The proposed
fly-over is about pedestrian safety and about freeing up ground-level space to
public transport. The Committee recommends that the DoT should engage, as a
matter of urgency, at a high level with eThekwini to clarify this matter. The Committee
further recommends that eThekwini's Warwick Junction transformation plans
should be fully supported as a key component of providing a 2010 transport
legacy.
5.6
eThekwini has many other important public transport plans related to 2010including
an inner-city People Mover bus project, stadium related pedestrian
infrastructure, public transport priority lanes on some east-west corridors,
and a proposed extension of the rail line to Bridge City in the North.
5.7
eThekwini is also engaging the taxi industry with a view to developing an
active role for existing associations as feeders for the flagship north-south
rail corridor. While commending the objectives of this process, the Committee
is concerned that the City does not yet seem to have very clear ideas about
exactly how taxi association cooperation will be secured, and particularly what
business and financial models and integrated operating systems are envisaged.
Once again, we believe this reflects the relative strengths on the engineering
and town planning side in our country, and the relative lack of expertise in
operationalising integrated mass public transport networks. We recommend that
this should be an important area of assistance that should be provided by a
dedicated DoT 2010 transport team as envisaged in 2.5 above.
6.
Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality
6.1 The
N1vtBM has opted for a BRT system as its flagship 2010 public transport legacy
project. Route planning is more or less complete, and the city has decided to
go for low-floor, left-door buses on the system, partly because it will not be
a fully closed BR T system throughout, and will therefore rely on kerbside
loading in some cases. The city is relatively sure of adequate funding for the
project. In the view of the Committee, here as elsewhere, the principal
challenges lie in the operational, business, financial and regulatory models.
The city is currently in negotiations with eight taxi associations operating on
the proposed BRT route. It envisages breaking the Algoa Bus Company's current
single contract for the whole city into five and combining Algoa Bus Company
and taxi operators into consortia. The proposal is to have a negotiated
contract for BRT routes.
6.2 Nelson
Mandela Bay Municipality officials have identified as potential risks to their
2010 transport programmes several issues, among them:
·
A
lack of in-house capacity. The Committee believes that this applies less to
infrastructural, engineering and
town-planning capacity, and rather more to operational, business, financial and
regulatory capacity for the BRT;
·
Slowness
in obtaining environmental impact assessment approvals. The city officials
recommended that national government considers establishing a 2010 fast-track
capacity in the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism - not in order
to avoid effective environmental impact assessments, but in order to ensure
that delays on this front do not undermine the whole objective of using 2010 to
lay down an effective (and environmentally enhancing) public transport legacy.
The Committee recommends that this proposal should be seriously considered.
6.3 As
mentioned in 2.5 above, Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality also expressed concern
about a lack of clarity around ACSA's plans for Port Elizabeth airport. This
hampers their own ability to plan effectively for road transport and
infrastructure to cater for the anticipated 2010 surge in passengers through the
airport - an estimated 5000 per day compared to the current 1200.
7.
Polokwane
7.1 The
Committee is very concerned with what we found in Polokwane. The City does not
appear to have any serious 2010 public transport planning in place. In fact, it
has not even completed its regular Integrated Transport Plan, as is required by
the National Land Transport Transitional Act.
7.2 For the
present, 2010 transport projects involve widening to four lanes the main access
roads to the stadium but with little thought given to a public transport
legacy. The Committee was told by the mayor that public transport is a
"provincial matter".
7.3 The
city is also planning to build a bus and taxi rank near the station for crossborder
international transport. It is planning a second rank for domestic buses and
taxis but at some distance from the international rank - that is, without any
consideration for integrating national, domestic and road and rail modes. This
second rank is being proposed despite the fact that there is a relatively new
bus and taxi rank that is unused. The city officials were unable to provide
satisfactory explanations for any of this. Nor were they able to provide any
sense of current ridership levels on different routes. The Committee was
referred to "studies that are still underway".
7.4
Planning for the road-based connections to the airport at Polokwane are also a
serious matter of concern. The Committee did not have a sense that any serious
planning or consultation is happening in this regard.
7.5 It is
true that smaller host cities like Polokwane may well not encounter as many
inherent transport challenges as cities like Tshwane, Johannesburg and Cape
Town that already face serious congestion problems. However, the Committee
believes that the situation in Polokwane needs to be addressed as a
matter of
urgency. In particular, we recommend that the DoT and the Limpopo provincial
Department of Transport engage actively with the city.
8.
Rustenburg
8.1 The
Committee was equally unimpressed with the state of preparedness and planning
in Rustenburg.
8.2 There
is absolutely no evidence of any attempt to lay the ground for an effective
post-2010 public transport legacy. 2010 transport planning seems to be almost
exclusively focused on the access roads to the stadium. Nothing appears to be
planned for the CBD, except the widening of one intersection.
8.3 No
mention was made of work with or transformation of the existing bus and taxi
operations. One official told the Committee that they "think" they
might upgrade one taxi rank.
8.4 The
Committee's main interaction in the course of the day's oversight visit was
with an advisor to the mayor. A second consultant was introduced to us as the
"co-ordinator of 2010"
in Rustenburg, but he did not say a single word in the course of the visit.
8.5 The
Committee obviously strongly recommends that the DoT devotes focused attention
to the situation in Rustenburg as a matter of priority.
9.
Mbombela
9.1 In many
respects the capacity challenges are similar in Mbombela to Polokwane and
Rustenburg. There was, however, in the Committee's estimation one very
important difference. The officials in Mbombela were not defensive and readily
admitted that they needed considerable assistance with transport and spatial
planning and project management.
9.2 The
2010 stadium is a new stadium currently under construction some 5kms outside of
the city. This obviously means that Mbombela has no experience at this time of
hosting major events at the location. They therefore have no experience to draw
upon in trying to anticipate likely challenges. This is one critical area in
which they will require technical assistance as soon as possible.
9.3 The
privately-owned and managed Kruger Mpumalanga International Airport (KMIA) will
also be key for the hosting of 20 1 o. The Committee was informed that there is
uncertainty at present about its future ownership structure, and there had been
talk about a possible purchase by the provincial government. We were told that
this had caused uncertainty and reluctance by private investors to upgrade.
This, in turn, created uncertainty for the city in terms of planning road
access to and from the airport. Clearly any uncertainty about this matter must be
clarified as soon as possible, so that planning and implementation are not
hampered.
9.4 Two
major road infrastructure projects are under-way, the upgrading of the N4 and
the R40 (Mandela Drive), both of which are bypasses around the city, and both
of which pass close to the stadium under construction. The N4 upgrade is being
handled by SANRAL, and the R40 by the province. It was
not clear to the Committee the degree to which these major investments and the
city's transport planning were all being coordinated and integrated. This is
clearly an important task for a DoT 2010 team.
9.5 There
is no forum in place between the city and the main local bus operator (Buscor)
to plan for 2010. Nor is there any apparent engagement of this kind with local
taxi associations.
9.6 The
largest taxi rank is privately owned. There have been recent upgrades of taxi
ranks in the neighbouring towns of Hazy View and White River.
9.7 The
City believes that there might be scope in the run-up to 2010 for improving the
current Spoornet/Shosholoza Meyl station which is on the line from Maputo to
Gauteng. But there appears to have been no formal discussion with relevant
entities.
10.
Mangaung
10.1 Mangaung has clearly done considerable planning in regard to the 2010 event itself, and in particular in regard to access to the stadium. The city has an advantage in that the existing stadium, located close to the CBD, only requires relatively minor upgrading.
10.2 For event-related access they are focusing on converting some streets into pedestrian walkways, and there is generally an important focus on non-motorised transport, including cycle-ways. A new access road is being constructed, and a large new rank and parkade for taxis and buses will be built.
10.3 The
Committee was told that the city has been in discussions with SANRAL on the
link road to the airport. It was not clear to the Committee what progress has
been made in this regard.
10.4 The
City also referred to the upgrading of the ACSA-owned airport, but again they
were unable to provide any clear indication of an effective working
relationship with ACSA.
10.5 The
City officials indicated to us that they expect many 2010 passengers to be
arriving by train. It was not clear to us whether this has been substantiated
by any serious research, however the station is old and in need of considerable
upgrading. The City does not appear to be in contact with Transnet about its
plans in regard to the station.
10.6 We
were also told that the province is considering revitalising the Botshabelo
rail-line.
10.7 In
general, the Committee formed the impression of a city that has begun to do
useful planning on event-related access, especially in the general vicinity of
the stadium. However, in regard to laying down a public transport legacy, very
little serious planning has happened. The city would greatly benefit from
focused DoT support. The city would also benefit from more dynamic information
sharing with other host cities, particularly with those that are beginning to
develop exciting public transport legacy projects.
11. Cape
Town
11.1 The
City of Cape Town has developed extensive and detailed plans for a post-2010
public transport legacy. The plans are part and parcel of their ongoing
integrated transport planning process. The City has also conducted relatively
extensive public and transport operator consultation, and the Committee
strongly commends this.
11.2 This
consultative approach was also borne out in our own Committee hearing with the
City, which was attended by a large number of City officials, councilors, officials from the provincial department of transport, MPLs
from the provincial legislature, and members of the media. The Committee again
commends this approach, the more multi-sectoral buy-in there is, the more the
chance of success.
11.3
However, the City appears to be a few months behind cities like Johannesburg
and Nelson Mandela Bay in the finalisation of its plans, and this might present
a challenge in meeting deadlines for funding. With the right assistance from
DoT and from the National Treasury, this challenge should not be (and cannot be
allowed to be) insuperable.
11.4 Senior
City officials indicated that they had "found it difficult to implement
transport projects without funding up-front". While understanding this
concern, in the view of the Committee this problem has related more to a
tendency in the recent past for the City (and Province) to tailor, cut and trim
transport projects around diverse funding streams, like existing bus subsidies,
rather than to plan boldly for integrated networks. This tendency has, perhaps,
been exacerbated by the City and Province's experience with the stop-start
Klipfontein bus corridor project, an earlier forerunner of the kind of BRT
system now being implemented by the City of Johannesburg. The operational
sustainability of the original Klipfontein project was uncertain because of the
relatively low density of the route. But it was also a project that was
proposed at a time in which there was little available budget for major
integrated rapid public transport networks. That has now changed.
11.5 The
Cape Town Metrorail system carried some 601 000 passengers per day according to
a rail census carried out in 2004. In Cape Town, uniquely for a South African
city, rail is the primary public transport mode, accounting for 53% of public
transport trips. The rail network penetrates extensive middle to high income
areas as well as many low income areas, and therefore has the potential to
connect and integrate the city. In its ITP and 2010 transport legacy planning,
the City is, therefore, quite correctly placing considerable emphasis on
investment and improvement in the rail network.
11.6 Among
the targets on priority rail corridors are:
·
An
18 hour service day;
·
Punctuality
with 95% of trips on time
·
Frequencies
in the peak with a train every 5 minutes, and in off-peak every 20 minutes.
11.7The priority projects include:
·
Extension
of the Khayelitsha line with two new stations ·
·
Refurbishment
of the fleet
·
Increase
in the operational fleet from 80 to 93 trains on priority corridors
·
Upgrading
Cape Town station
11.8. These rail projects clearly require close work with SARCC/Metrorail. The City assured the Committee that this cooperation is proceeding well.
11.9. Ahead of2010, the
City also plans an extensive network of bus ways as the first phase of a more
comprehensive system. Priority corridors for phase 1 are:
·
Klipfontein
Corridor including the N2 busway . Landsdowne Corridor
·
Koeberg
Road/including the Nl busway
·
Symphony
Way Corridor.
11.10 Some of these busways will involve full bus rapid transit infrastructure median busways and median stations, platform-level boarding, and pre-board fare collection. The Committee had the impression that some of the bus planning remains incomplete and the observations made in 11.4 above apply particularly to these planned road-based public transport corridors.
12.
Summary and general recommendations
12.1 The
Committee recommends that the DoT develops and scales up a dedicated 2010 team
that is able to assist host cities.
12.2 In the
larger host cities that we have visited - Johannesburg, eThekwini, Cape Town
and Nelson Mandela Bay - relatively good 2010 transport legacy planning is more
or less completed. However, in the view of the Committee, each of the cities
requires dedicated assistance, mostly in the area of organizational, business-
and finance-planning, regulation and operationalising of the mass public
transport network systems that they are proposing. This may well require
importing some experienced international public transport experts, as there is,
as far as we know, very little expertise within our country in these areas.
12.3 In
other host cities that we visited, with the possible exception of Mangaung, it
is probably already too late to attempt to roll-out a catalysing mass public
transport network as a 2010 legacy. In these cities a more modest focus on some
infrastructure legacy and, above all, a narrower focus on transport
preparations for 2010 itself may be the key priority challenge.
12.4
Government should give consideration to a fast-track mechanism for EIAs related
to building 2010 transport infrastructure. This should not be see as an attempt
to avoid effective environmental impact assessments, but rather as a means to
ensure that unnecessary delays do not completely compromise projects that are
now working to very tight dead-lines.
12. 5 The
Committee has not been able to visit the City of Tshwane, but we hope to do so
in the coming months.
12.6
Although it is not a host city as such, Ekhuruleni is a critical Metro from the
point of view of 20 1 0 and transport legacy. A major point of entry for 2010
international visitors will be Oliver Tambo International Airport, which is
located within its boundaries. Ekhuruleni will have an important responsibility
for ensuring effective road-based transport connections and facilities in and
around the airport. Ekhuruleni needs also to be more effectively engaged with,
for instance, the City of Johannesburg's Rea Vaya BRT system.
12.7 The
Committee wishes to thank all of those who hosted our visits,
prepared
inputs for our hearings, and facilitated our work.
-~-_..-.._-
-~