West Rand

West Rand District Municipality:

Municipality:
SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK – 2014 & 2017 REVISION
SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK – 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Section: Human Settlement & Transport Planning

 i
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Contents Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL

DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2014 & 2017 REVISION ................................ 1
I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1
II. LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................... 1
III. SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDELINES ....................................................................................................... 5
IV. SYNTHESIS: SPATIAL STRUCTURING / FORM GIVING ELEMENTS ..... 13
V. THE WAY FORWARD: IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK........................ 14

WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT

FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION .......................................................... 19
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 19
2 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 24
2.1 STUDY AREA .................................................................................... 24
2.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES ........................................................................ 27
2.3 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 27
2.4 REPORT STRUCTURE ..................................................................... 28
3 NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL POLICY GUIDELINES .......................... 29
3.1 NATIONAL POLICY CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
……………………………………………………………………………...29
3.1.1 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ........................................... 29
3.1.2 NATIONAL OUTCOMES APPROACH ....................................... 32
3.1.3 THE REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY .. 34
3.1.4 NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE RURAL DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMME (CRDP) .............................................................. 38
3.2 PROVINCIAL POLICY CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDELINES ................................................................................................. 39
3.2.1 GAUTENG VISION 2055 ............................................................ 39
3.2.2 GAUTENG SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK ............. 41
3.2.3 GAUTENG 25-YEAR INTEGRATED TRANSPORT MASTER
PLAN ........................................................................................... 45
4 ISSUES AND VISION .............................................................................. 48
4.1 WEST RAND REGIONAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGY .................................................................................................... 48
4.2 GREEN IQ .......................................................................................... 49
4.3 IDP RELATED PRIORITY ISSUES ................................................... 50
4.4 CONCLUSION: ELEMENTS OF SPATIAL VISION........................... 51
 ii
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5. SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS ............................................ 53

5.1 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ............................................................. 53
5.1.1 POPULATION ............................................................................. 53
5.1.2 AGE PROFILE ............................................................................ 56
5.1.3 RACE .......................................................................................... 59
5.1.4 GENDER ..................................................................................... 61
5.1.5 EDUCATION PROFILE .............................................................. 63
5.1.6 EMPLOYMENT STATUS............................................................ 65
5.1.7 HOUSEHOLD INCOME .............................................................. 67
5.1.8 TENURE STATUS ...................................................................... 69
5.1.9 DWELLING TYPE ....................................................................... 72
5.1.10 CONCLUDING REMARKS ......................................................... 76
5.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE ............................................................... 76
5.2.1 EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR ..................................................... 76
5.2.2 EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION ............................................ 78
5.2.3 SECTORAL TRENDS (GDP) ...................................................... 78
5.3 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... 81
5.3.1 TOPOGRAPHY, HYDROLOGY AND CLIMATE ........................ 81
5.3.2 VEGETATION ............................................................................. 85
5.3.3 NATURE RESERVES AND CONSERVATION AREAS ............. 88
5.3.4 BIODIVERSITY ........................................................................... 89
5.3.5 GEOLOGY AND MINERAL POTENTIAL ................................... 90
5.3.6 DOLOMITIC AREAS ................................................................... 93
5.3.7 SOIL TYPES ............................................................................... 93
5.3.8 ACID MINE DRAINAGE (AMD) .................................................. 95
5.3.9 AIR POLLUTION ......................................................................... 97
5.3.10 CONCLUSIVE SUMMARY ......................................................... 97
5.4 LAND USE AND SPATIAL STRUCTURE ......................................... 99
5.4.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT ............................................................... 99
5.4.2 LOCAL CONTEXT .................................................................... 101
5.5 TRANSPORT NETWORK................................................................ 124
5.5.1 WRDM INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN 2010-2015 .......... 124
5.5.2 GAUTENG INTEGRATED TRANSPORT MASTER PLAN
(GITMP25) ................................................................................ 129
5.6 ENGINEERING SERVICES ............................................................. 135
5.6.1 WATER PROVISION ................................................................ 136
5.6.2 SANITATION............................................................................. 140
5.6.3 ENERGY ................................................................................... 142
 iii
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.6.4 WASTE MANAGEMENT .......................................................... 145

5.6.5 TRANSPORT ............................................................................ 149
5.7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (SPACE ECONOMY)
149
5.7.2 WRDM LOCAL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ...................... 152
5.8 LAND OWNERSHIP, TRIBAL AREAS AND LAND CLAIMS ........... 159
5.9 SYNTHESIS: SPATIAL STRUCTURING/FORMGIVING ELEMENTS
159
6. WEST RAND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK .................... 162
6.1 POINTS OF DEPARTURE, SPATIAL VISION AND LAND USE
BUDGET 162
6.1.1 POINTS OF DEPARTURE ....................................................... 162
6.1.2 SPATIAL VISION ...................................................................... 163
6.1.3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND Land Use Budget........... 163
6.2 SPATIAL CONCEPT ........................................................................ 167
6.3 DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES (DERIVED FROM CONCEPT) ...... 169
6.4 SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDELINES ............................................................................................... 171
7. IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK ...................................................... 206
8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK .............................. 209
 1
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2014 & 2017 REVISION

I. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the West Rand District Spatial Development Framework is to provide guidance
regarding a preferred development approach. More so, apart from addressing the distortions created
by apartheid the purpose of the spatial development framework is to comply with the legislative
requirements presented by the Municipal Systems Act as well as the Spatial Planning and Land Use
Management Act which was promulgated late 2013.

The spatial development framework ensures that development does in actual fact take place in an
integrated and sustainable manner in order for the Integrated Development Plans (IDP’s) and Spatial
Development Frameworks (SDF’s) of local and district authorities to be aligned with the goals and
directives provided by the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act and new national and
provincial policy documents.
II. LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

The document is guided by key planning legislations which include:

The Municipal Systems Act

Chapter 5 of the Municipal Systems Act provides the core components of an Integrated Development
Plan of which a spatial development framework must include the provision of basic guidelines for a
land use management system for the municipality. It is clear that the formulation of a Spatial
Development Framework is a key component of an IDP by law. Hence, the West Rand District
Municipality responded to this legislative requirement by formulating a Spatial Development Framework
in 2009. The 2009 West Rand SDF was compiled in line with the following directives stipulated in
Government Gazette No. 22605 and which pertains to the prescribed minimum content of a Spatial
Development Framework:

(a) to give effect to the principles of land development as contained in chapter 1 of the
Development Facilitation Act (Act 67 of 1995);
(b) to set out objectives that reflect the desired spatial form of the municipality;
(c) to contain strategies and policies regarding the manner in which to achieve the objectives
referred to above, which strategies and policies must:
- indicate desired patterns of land use within the municipality;
- address the spatial reconstruction of the municipality; and
 2
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

- provide strategic guidance in respect of the location and nature of development within
the municipality
(d) to set out basic guidelines for a land use management system in the municipality;
(e) to set out a capital investment framework for the municipality’s development programmes;
(f) to contain a strategic assessment of the environmental impact of the spatial development
framework;
(g) to identify programmes and projects for the development of land within the municipality;
(h) to be aligned with the Spatial Development Frameworks reflected in the Integrated
Development Plans of neighbouring municipalities; and
(i) to provide a visual representation of the desired spatial form of the municipality, which
representation –
- will indicate where public and private land development and infrastructure investment
should take place,
- will indicate desired or undesired utilisation of space in a particular area,
- will delineate the urban area,
- will identify areas where strategic intervention is required; and
- will indicate areas where priority spending is required.

Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA)

One of the reasons for the commissioning of the Spatial Development Framework to be reviewed was
because the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) was promulgated late during
2013. This legislation contains various principles in order to influence spatial planning, land use
management and land development. These general principles recognises that that spatial planning,
land use management and land development must promote and enhance five main Development
Principles: Spatial Justice, Spatial Sustainability; Spatial Efficiency; Spatial Resilience, and Good
Administration.

These concepts, as described in the legislation, are briefly summarised below.

Spatial Justice
(i) past spatial and other development imbalances must be redressed through improved access
to and use of land;
(ii) spatial development frameworks and policies at all spheres of government must address the
inclusion of persons and areas that were previously excluded, with an emphasis on informal
settlements, former homeland areas and areas characterised by widespread poverty and
deprivation;
(iii) spatial planning mechanisms, including land use schemes, must incorporate provisions that
enable redress in access to land by disadvantaged communities and persons;
(iv)
 3
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

must include all areas of a municipality and specifically include provisions that are flexible and
(v) appropriate for the management of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and former
homeland areas;
(vi) must include provisions that accommodate access to secure tenure and the incremental
upgrading of informal areas; and
a Municipal Planning Tribunal considering an application before it, may not be impeded or
restricted in the exercise of its discretion solely on the ground that the value of land or property
is affected by the outcome of the application.
Spatial Sustainability
(i) promote land development that is within the fiscal, institutional and administrative means of the
Republic;
(ii) ensure that special consideration is given to the protection of prime and unique agricultural
land;
(iii) uphold consistency of land use measures in accordance with environmental management
instruments;
(iv) promote and stimulate the effective and equitable functioning of land markets;
(v) consider all current and future costs to all parties for the provision of infrastructure and social
services in land developments;
(vi) promote land development in locations that are sustainable and limit urban sprawl; and
(vii) result in communities that are viable.
Efficiency
(i) land development optimises the use of existing resources and infrastructure;
(ii) decision-making procedures are designed to minimise negative financial, social, economic or
environmental impacts; and
(iii) development application procedures are efficient and streamlined.
Spatial Resilience
Flexibility in spatial plans, policies and land use management systems are accommodated to ensure
sustainable livelihoods in communities most likely to suffer the impacts of economic and
environmental shocks.

Good Administration
(i) all spheres of government ensure an integrated approach to land use and land development
that is guided by the spatial planning and land use management systems as embodied in this
Act;
(ii) all government departments must provide their sector inputs and comply with any other
prescribed requirements during the preparation or amendment of spatial development
frameworks;
(iii) the requirements of any law relating to land development and land use are met timeously;
(iv)
 4
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

the preparation and amendment of spatial plans, policies, land use schemes as well as
procedures for development applications, include transparent processes of public participation
(v) that afford all parties the opportunity to provide inputs on matters affecting them; and
policies, legislation and procedures must be clearly set in order to inform and empower
members of the public.

As far as the methodology to be followed in the compilation and minimum contents of a Spatial
Development Framework are concerned, the Act stipulates as follow:

Municipal Spatial Development Framework

Preparation of Municipal Spatial Development Framework
(1) The Municipal Council of a municipality must by notice in the Provincial Gazette adopt a
municipal spatial development framework for the municipality.
(2) The municipal spatial development framework must be prepared as part of a municipality’s
integrated development plan in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Systems Act.
(3) Before adopting the municipal spatial development framework contemplated in subsection (1)
and any proposed amendments to the municipal spatial development framework, the Municipal
Council must—
(a) give notice of the proposed municipal spatial development framework in the Gazette and the
media;
(b) invite the public to submit written representations in respect of the proposed municipal spatial
development framework to the Municipal Council within 60 days after the publication of the
notice referred to in paragraph (a); and
(c) consider all representations received in respect of the proposed municipal spatial development
framework.
Contents of Municipal Spatial Development Framework
(a) give effect to the development principles and applicable norms and standards set out in
Chapter 2;
(b) include a written and spatial representation of a five-year spatial development plan for the
spatial form of the municipality;
(c) include a longer term spatial development vision statement for the municipal area which
indicates a desired spatial growth and development pattern for the next 10 to 20 years;
d) identify current and future significant structuring and restructuring elements of the spatial form
of the municipality, including development corridors, activity spines and economic nodes where
public and private investment will be prioritised and facilitated;
(e) include population growth estimates for the next five years;
(f) include estimates of the demand for housing units across different socio-economic categories
and the planned location and density of future housing developments;
(g) include estimates of economic activity and employment trends and locations in the municipal
area for the next five years;
 5
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

(h) identify, quantify and provide location requirements of engineering infrastructure and services
provision for existing and future development needs for the next five years;
(i) identify the designated areas where a national or provincial inclusionary housing policy may be
applicable;
(j) include a strategic assessment of the environmental pressures and opportunities within the
municipal area, including the spatial location of environmental sensitivities, high potential
agricultural land and coastal access strips, where applicable;
(k) identify the designation of areas in the municipality where incremental upgrading approaches
to development and regulation will be applicable;
(l) identify the designation of areas in which—
(i) more detailed local plans must be developed; and
(ii) shortened land use development procedures may be applicable and land use schemes may
be so amended;
(m) provide the spatial expression of the coordination, alignment and integration of sectoral policies
of all municipal departments;
(n) determine a capital expenditure framework for the municipality’s development programmes,
depicted spatially;
(o) determine the purpose, desired impact and structure of the land use management scheme to
apply in that municipal area; and
(p) include an implementation plan comprising of—
(i) sectoral requirements, including budgets and resources for implementation;
(ii) necessary amendments to a land use scheme;
(iii) specification of institutional arrangements necessary for implementation;
(iv) specification of implementation targets, including dates and monitoring indicators; and
(v) specification, where necessary, of any arrangements for partnerships in the implementation
process.

III. SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

The twelve development principles that follow represent the building blocks to the Spatial Development
Framework of the West Rand District.

PRINCIPLE 1: CONSOLIDATE AND PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS TO

ENSURE LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

The key element to this principle focuses on the environment and protecting environmentally sensitive
areas as the West Rand mainly comprises of areas of high biodiversity. Furthermore, it focuses on the
open spaces within the district. The Spatial Development Framework sets out that open spaces need
to be maintained in line with the guidelines and directives contained in the West Rand District
Municipality Environmental Management Framework (June 2013).All the existing proclaimed nature
 6
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

reserves like Abe Bailie Nature Reserve in Merafong City, the Krugersdorp Nature Reserve, and the
Cradle of Humankind are also included in the open space system.

Map 47 illustrates the proposed regional open space system as part of the West Rand Spatial
Development Framework

DESIRED STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT

In terms of the desired state of the environment the proposed open space system in the WRDM should
be an integral part of spatial planning, resource conservation, biodiversity protection, sensitive land use
planning and land use management.

The following principles should be adopted in integrating the open space into the future urban system :

 The series of ridges in the WRDM are environmentally very sensitive and should form a
fundamental part in open space planning and maintaining the existing high levels of biodiversity;
 The rivers in the WRDM are regarded as zones of conservation and should be carefully managed
to ensure limited / no pollution;
 The establishment of a network system of open space areas at municipal level will ensure that
river corridors are able to function ecologically;
 Open space areas within towns and urban areas should be developed to ensure safety for users
by creating overlooking structures such as housing on the edge, lighting and security personnel;
 Major recreational parks and facilities within the network of open spaces should be easily
accessible by public transport;
 All the protected natural areas (COHWHS, Krugersdorp Nature Reserve, Abe Bailey Nature
Reserve, etc.) must be formally proclaimed and linked to the network of open spaces;
Urban areas should be greened and made aesthetically pleasing and linked to the network of open
spaces.

PRINCIPLE 2: ENHANCE SPATIAL EFFICIENCY BY DEFINING A RANGE OF URBAN AND

RURAL NODES IN THE DISTRICT AROUND WHICH TO CONSOLIDATE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT

The key element to the principle focuses on promoting spatial efficiency within urban and rural areas
within the district. Hence, it becomes important that there is a strategy in place that will guide and direct
public and private investment towards well located urban and rural activity nodes. Activity nodes are
also important public transport destinations. In this context the nodal system also influences the district
public transport network as it determines the major movement desire lines.

Map 49 identifies the main activity nodes forming part of the District Spatial Development Framework.

There are four primary nodes, eight secondary nodes and four rural nodes as the table below indicates.
 7
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Primary Nodes Secondary Nodes Rural Nodes

 Mogale City CBD  Lanseria-Nietgedacht  Hekpoort
 Randfontein CBD  Muldersdrift  Magaliesburg
 Westonaria CBD  Silver Star-Cradle Mall  Tarlton-Orient
 Carletonville CBD  Leratong Node  Badirille
 Syferfontein-N12
 Fochville
 Khutsong South
 Wedela

PRINCIPLE 3: ESTABLISH A COMPREHENSIVE MOVEMENT NETWORK TO LINK ALL

ACTIVITY NODES WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND BEYOND, AND TO PROMOTE CORRIDOR
DEVELOPMENT THROUGH LAND USE-TRANSPORTATION INTEGRATION

Principle 3 focuses on transportation as a creator for the linkages between activity nodes and
movement networks. The transportation vision is as follows:

“The enhancement of mobility and accessibility of all people in the West Rand District Municipality,
within equitable, justified, affordable and sustainable standards, by providing and managing an effective
and efficient transport system comprising of transport infrastructure and integrated multi modal public
transport that will enable and serve as a catalyst for economic development and the upliftment of the
community in the region”.

Some of the aims are to improve the transportation links between regional development clusters and
nodal points along corridors with an efficient road system that will promote economic activity between
the identified development clusters or nodal points. Furthermore, to promote choice of transport mode
by investigating the promotion of subsidized bus-services/ alternatively implementation of Bus Rapid
Transit or Light Rapid Transit (Rail) in the West Rand.

PRINCIPLE 4: CONSOLIDATE THE TOURISM CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AROUND THE

CRADLE OF HUMANKIND AS PART OF THE REGIONAL CRADLE-HARTBEESPOORT DAM-
MAGALIESBERG-PILANESBERG TOURISM COMPLEX

This principle places focus on tourism. Tourism plays are huge role in the West Rand District hence the
vision of the WRDM Tourism Sector Strategy (2011) states that by 2016 the West Rand District wants
to be Gauteng’s most preferred nature and heritage visitor experience

Some of objectives from the WRDM Tourism Sector Strategy include:

 Geographically spreading the benefits of the visitor economy throughout.

 Increase day and night visitor numbers in the Cradle of Human Kind.
 Collaboration between public and private sector in developing tourism services and facilities.
 Responsible tourism ensuring environmental and economic sustainability and benefits for all.
 8
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In order for these objectives to be achieved the aim is to diversify the current tourism base through
providing for various types of tourism such as agri-tourism, eco and educational tourism and
adventure tourism.

PRINCIPLE 5: OPTIMISE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING IN AND AROUND

THE TWO AGRICULTURAL HUBS IN THE DISTRICT

This principle focuses on the Agricultural Hubs of the West Rand District Municipality: the one being to
the north-west between Mogale City and Merafong City and the other in the areas south of the Gatsrant
in the District. These two agricultural areas are declared as the agricultural hubs of Gauteng province
as identified by Map 17.

AGRICULTURAL HUBS OF WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY

WRDM should use these two areas of high agricultural potential to promote the agricultural industry
within the municipal area by:

 Exploiting the opportunities offered by the high potential agricultural land identified within the
district. Significantly increasing the yield per hectare (relative to extensive farming) and
therefore providing more affordable food to the consumer.
 Providing support to emerging and small-scale farmers, and ensuring that appropriate skills
development takes place in line with the principles of the national Comprehensive Rural
Development Programme.
 Increasing land availability for agricultural purposes through partnerships with the current
mining houses and through mining rehabilitation and land reform (where relevant).
 Increasing job creation in rural areas through labour-intensive agricultural projects and
extending the agriculture value chain by way of agro-industries and agro-tourism around rural
nodes.
 Encouraging the use of different crops and new planting, harvesting and processing
techniques.
 Supporting a variety of farming concepts including intensive commercial farming small scale
commercial farming, subsistence farming, aquaculture development, agri-villages,
demonstration plots and agro processing industries.
 Although the primary focus should initially be on the two agricultural hubs, initiatives
can/should be expanded over time to the extensive agriculture (more marginal) areas of the
District (refer to Map 17).
 This is quite a large area and there is certainly potential to enhance production in these areas
as well.
 According to the WRDM Economic Development Plan the following types of agro-industries
could be established in the District:
 Increased poultry and pig feed manufacturing from maize to promote expansion of
the chicken industry and piggeries.
 9
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Textile cluster (wool and cotton), which would engage in wool washing and further
down- stream activities such as spinning and weaving, manufacturing of final
products such as school wear, knitting wear for the tourism industry, utilisation of
waste (lanoline for the chemical industry).
 Seed oil processing to process the full range of seed oils available in the region.
Medium- term down-stream value-adding activities could further include
manufacturing of margarine, mayonnaise, etc. thus, establishment of a food-
processing cluster.
 Livestock by-product utilisation whereby hides and skins could be sourced from
abattoirs for down-stream manufacturing of shoes, bags, safety shoes, furniture and
tourism items. - Manufacturing of maize and potato snacks such as chips, popcorn,
etc.
 Further down-stream manufacturing of paper and plastic packaging for maize
products and animal feed.
 Manufacturing of plastic containers for items such as mayonnaise and margarine,
achieving backward linkage.

PRINCIPLE 6: UTILIZE THE MINING POTENTIAL OF THE DISTRICT ALONG THE SOUTHERN
MINING BELT IN A SUSTAINABLE, WELL-MANAGED MANNER

Principle 6 focuses on the mining sector as mining still plays an important role in the economy of the
West Rand District Municipality both in terms of production and employment. There is still potential
within the mining sector to act as a catalyst for developing other economic activities.

In the northern mining belt between Mogale City and Randfontein the main focus will be on the
rehabilitation of old mining land to make it available for future residential/commercial development; the
re-working of the existing mine dumps, ash processing for the refilling of mines, manufacturing of
construction aggregate and a variety of other associated activities.

PRINCIPLE 7: EXPAND AND CONSOLIDATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG NEWLY

IDENTIFIED DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS, AROUND EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND AT
RURAL NODES

Principle 7 places focus on the development industry through spreading out the Industrial areas along
the newly developed corridors as well as to develop existing industrial areas including those in rural
nodes. The West Rand District Municipality has to achieve the vision of the West Rand Industrial
Development of the WRDM Regional Economic Development Plan which is to “Transform the West
Rand industrial offerings into new, modern and diversified nodes and proactively stimulate the
development of optimally located new industrial nodes to attract clean industry and logistics orientated
industrial enterprises, whilst promoting the settlement of a broad spectrum of enterprises (SMME
through to large corporates) that promote value chain extension of local resources”.

The Vision is supplemented by the following industrial development objectives which should
inform/guide future industrial development in the district:
 10
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Strengthen the functionality and performance of existing industrial nodes as shown above.
 Diversify the existing industrial base of the nodes and unlock local resources by developing
new nodes/corridors in priority areas as illustrated on above.
 Strengthen existing agglomeration advantages.
 Contribute to the establishment of sustainable clusters.
 Attract higher skill levels to the nodes, contribute to skills development and capacity building of

green industries/technology in all nodes.

 Ensure availability/flexibility of engineering services and related infrastructure serving industrial
areas.
 Exploit the opportunities offered by the existing strong agricultural base by encouraging
development of agro-processing and related downstream activities and industries around the
rural nodes depicted on above.

According to the West Rand Industrial Development Strategy (2013) all four local municipalities have
potential for future industrial expansion. Mogale City has the most potential (132.8ha) whilst Merafong
City has very limited (9.9ha) potential. In the Mogale City area the major new industrial development
area is around the N14 corridor as shown above well as the proposed agro-industry clustering around
the rural nodes – especially at Badirille and Tarlton-Orient Hills.

In Rand West City LM, Randfontein industrial expansion (78.8 ha) should be mainly focused along the
R28 development corridor (north and/or south of Aureus), and in Westonaria the major new
development potential (17.6 ha) occurs along route N12 in the vicinity of Syferfontein and Protea Glen.

PRINCIPLE 8: ACTIVELY MANAGE AND MAINTAIN HIGHEST ORDER BUSINESS NODES

(CBD’S) IN THE DISTRICT TO ACCOMMODATE RETAIL, OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES
AND TIMEOUSLY IMPLEMENT URBAN RENEWAL PROGRAMMES WHERE NECESSARY

Moving on from a focus from industry, principle 8 places a focus on the business areas in the District.
The West Rand District Municipality should focus on managing and maintaining the business nodes/
Central Business Districts (CBD’s) in the district and it must accommodate retail, office and residential
uses.

Central Business Areas of towns should be treated as special precincts requiring dedicated
management in order to prevent urban decay and/or the relocation of economic activities to
decentralized business nodes. Decentralised nodes normally establish closer to the middle and higher
income residential areas of towns at highly accessible locations which normally marginalise the
disadvantaged communities of these towns even further.

Special precinct plans such as Urban Revitalisation/Urban Renewal Plans and Strategies should be
compiled for the West Rand District Municipality to manage and control CBD’s if it is undergoing urban
decay and economic decline. Such plans should be compiled in close liaison with local business in
 11
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

these areas as the success of such strategies/plans depends on public-private partnerships and
cooperation.

In the rural areas of the WRDM, the approach to enhance business activity should be aligned with one
of the objectives of the National Development Plan which is to utilise “small town development”‖ as
nodes of rural development. It is thus proposed that retail activities (both formal retail and/or properly
managed informal trade markets) be provided for in close proximity to each of the Rural Nodes in the
WRDM area. The primary objective of this is to accommodate local economic development and further
strengthen the economic viability of the identified nodal points by consolidating community facilities and
social services at the same point.

PRINCIPLE 9: ACHIEVE URBAN RESTRUCTURING AND SPATIAL JUSTICE BY

CONSOLIDATING MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (BONDED AND SUBSIDIZED)
IN WELL-LOCATED STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS

Human Settlements play an important role in the District hence the focus of principle 9 is placed on
human settlements. Past spatial fragmentation needs to be addressed and corrected in order for people
to be located closer to places of work and economic opportunities.

Subsidised housing acts a tool for government to influence development patterns in and around towns.
With the high housing demands in the District it is important that housing units be developed in line with
spatial guidelines of local SDF,s. Land has been identified for housing development in order to deal
with the high demand for housing and is indicated in the Maps 30, 31 & 58.

PRINCIPLE 10: FACILTATE URBAN RESTRUCTURING IN THE DISTRICT BY WAY OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS LIKE THE URBAN
DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY AS PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY

Drawing on from the principle 9, development in the District needs to occur in a manner aimed at
consolidating the urban form and limiting urban sprawl. Principle 10 deals with the growth management
strategy for the District and proposes an urban development boundary to reduce urban sprawl. A
Growth Management Strategy is thus required as a guideline for implementation.

Some of the core objectives in the Growth Management Strategy include:

 Introducing development conditions that are congruent with best-practice standards relating to
resource efficiency.
 Establish monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to review the status of the infrastructure
problem areas and the limitations placed on these areas.
 Limit future development rights in infrastructure problem areas within the WRDM area until
backlogs have been addressed;
In order for the successful implementation of the Growth Strategy there needs to be a range of financial
incentives/mechanisms that are aligned with the municipal rates and policy to support projects which
will bring about significant economic development and job creation or projects complying with the criteria
 12
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

of governments Breaking New Ground (BNG) Policy. Other factors would include institutional support
and arrangements.

The development principles contained in the WRDM SDF provides the basis for the implementation of
a much more comprehensive Growth Management Strategy in order to ensure the long term sustainable
development of the area.

PRINCIPLE 11: DIRECT INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT TOWARDS THE ACTIVITY NODES

IN THE DISTRICT, STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS EARMARKED FOR RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, AND COMMUNITIES WITH EXCESSIVE SERVICE BACKLOGS

Access to basic services such as water, sanitation and electricity is a constitutional right hence
principle 11 focuses on engineering service infrastructure. Areas with very low levels of services will be
targeted as priority service upgrading priority /areas within the District.

The District with its local municipalities should continue to endeavour to expand its formal water,
sanitation and electricity networks and refuse collection system to reach and serve all rural and urban
communities. Sufficient infrastructure capacity is important in order to ensure that it can facilitate and
enhance the process of local economic development and human settlement.

PRINCIPLE 12: CONSOLIDATE COMMUNITY FACILITIES AT STRATEGIC LOCATIONS TO

ENHANCE ACCESS TO SUCH FACILITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND TO CONTRIBUTE
TOWARDS CREATING “CRITICAL MASS” REQUIRED TO STIMULATE LOCAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT – ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AREAS AND AT RURAL NODES

The key element to principle 12 is to essentially provide a full range of social services/community
facilities within a reasonable distance of all communities, urban and rural, in the District. Hence, there
is a proposal that a full range of social services/ community facilities be incrementally provided at all
identified nodal points in the District. In this manner, all communities in the District will be served with
at least a basic range of social infrastructure in a Thusong Centre format within a convenient/reasonable
distance of approximately 10 kilometres.

Some of the advantages of the establishment of one-stop service centres in the District include:

 Support the rural nodal concept as contained in the Comprehensive Rural Development Plan and
the National Development Plan
 Provides guidance for the development and provision of engineering services
 Basic services are provided by government in a financially sustainable manner.
 13
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

IV. SYNTHESIS: SPATIAL STRUCTURING / FORM GIVING ELEMENTS

The following key issues and structuring elements have been identified in the WRDM:

 The WRDM is well located to connect the central and outer nodes of the Global City Region (GCR)
to one another, and to the major economic activity areas around Tlokwe, Lichtenburg, Rustenburg
and Madibeng.
 However, the urban settlements of the WRDM are located at the far-western periphery in the
context of the Gauteng Province urban conurbation – far removed from the N4, N17/N2 and N3
national corridors which link to the major import/export harbours in Southern Africa (Maputo,
Richards Bay and Durban-eThekwini).
 The District is served by three strong corridors i.e. the N14 to the north and N12 to the south, as
well as route R28 which functionally links the aforementioned two corridors as a north-south link
through the urban areas of Mogale City and Rand West City (Randfontein and Westonaria).
 There is also potential to link to the N4 Bakwena Platinum corridor via future PWV 3 from Lanseria
to Rustenburg.
 The westward extension of route N17 from the City of Joburg to Mogale City/Randfontein will not
only provide a direct link to some major export harbours, but also unlock the development potential
of the western parts of the Witwatersrand mining belt in the WRDM.
 The Gauteng SDF identified the Chamdor-Leratong Node and the Chamdor-Ennerdale-ORTIA
southern ring-road as initiatives of strategic significance at provincial level.
 The future WRDM public transport network could act as catalyst towards social integration of the
WRDM society and should be structured around the existing road and rail network.
 The WRDM holds a population of 820 955 people of which approximately 72% fall within the
economically active age bracket and almost 70% are economically active (73.7% of economically
active population are employed).
 Education levels of the population improved significantly over the past decade, as did the
disposable income per household.
 The District economy is well established in terms of mining in the southern mining belt (Westonaria-
Merafong City), and agriculture in the south-eastern and north-western agricultural hubs.
 Numerous opportunities exist to expand and diversify the economic base of the WRDM, especially
in terms of industrial developments and more specifically agro industries associated with the two
agricultural hubs located in the district.
 The WRDM should capitalise on the tourism potential of the Cradle of Humankind as part of a
significantly larger tourism region comprising the Hartbeespoort Dam, Magalies mountain range
and the Pilanesberg Nature Reserve.
 The Magalies Mountain to the north and Gatsrand to the south are strong spatial structuring
elements to the WRDM, but also provide the basic footprint for tourism promotion in the district.
 14
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Shallow undermining and dolomitic conditions (183 000 ha) limit the extent to which the WRDM
urban structure can be consolidated – especially in areas around the Witwatersrand mining belt
between the CBD’s of Mogale City and Randfontein.
 Irrespective of the above, there is a need to consolidate the fragmented urban structure of the
WRDM to be aligned with the principles of sustainable development as promoted in national and
provincial spatial policy, keeping in mind geological conditions (cost implications) and ecosystem
sensitivities.
 The WRDM has a range of established, affordable residential areas with associated services and
amenities that could play a supportive function in the GCR, but it also has a housing backlog
estimated at approximately 58 011 units that need to be addressed.
 Informal settlements and associated housing demand occurs in the urban and rural parts of the
district and are mainly associated with existing low income residential areas (Former Township),
mining activity, and strategic intersections along main routes in rural areas.
 A large component of the housing demand relates to mine workers which are in many instances
migrant workers requiring rental stock.
 The temporary nature of mining activity is also problematic in terms of social infrastructure
investment like houses, schools etc. if a secondary economy to support the town is not developed.
 The WRDM Industrial Development Strategy identified 5 Primary Industrial Nodes, 6 Secondary
Industrial Nodes, two new nodes with potential for agro-industries, and two corridors with high
potential for industrial development.
 Socio-economic weaknesses that are critical to address include low and inappropriate skills; low
general income levels; and outflow of human and financial capital from the WRDM to other towns
in the GCR.
 There has been a steady improvement in the levels of services provided in the WRDM between
2001 and 2011. However, backlogs in the former Westonaria Municipality are consistently higher
than in the other three municipalities.
 Due to the fragmented nature of the WRDM urban structure it is difficult and costly to provide and
maintain bulk engineering infrastructure and reticulation networks.
 Due to continuous processes of human settlement in rural areas there is growing pressure for the
establishment of sustainable rural nodes/agri-villages.

V. THE WAY FORWARD: IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

The following is thus a list of priority projects to be initiated in the West Rand Area, based on the findings
and development proposals contained in the SDF. (Note: Sectoral plans/studies will/should provide
more detail on individual projects, priorities and costs):

Priority Initiatives/Projects following from the SDF

 15
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
Development Principle 1: Environment
- Establishment of District WRDM In-house/Operational 
Environmental
Management Unit/Office. WRDM In-house/Operational   
- Implementation of the
District Environmental
Management Plan, with
special focus on mining
activity rehabilitation. WRDM In-house/Operational   
- Coordination/alignment with
GDACE and local
municipality i.t.o of Land
Use Applications/Protected
Areas.
Development Principle 2: Nodal Hierarchy
- Establish nodal hierarchy  WRDM Operational   
concept in WRDM and with  Local Municipalities
local municipalities, and  Provincial/National
align infrastructure Government
development and funding
allocation accordingly.  NGO’s R300 000/node 
- Compile Precinct Plans for
(average)
each nodal point. 
R500 000/CBD
- Compile Urban Renewal
Strategies for four CBD’s.
Development Principle 3: Transportation
- Facilitate/Monitor/Prioritise  WRDM T.B.D.   
proposed route  Local Municipalities
construction/upgrading  Provincial/National
programme. Government 
In-house/Operational
- Expand/align public
transport network with
GITMP.
T.B.D. 
- Upgrade major bus/taxi
ranks in nodal areas. 
T.B.D.
- Compile rail Precinct Plan
for TOD stations.
Development Principle 4: Tourism
- Formalise WRDM Tourism  WRDM In-house 
Network.
 Local Municipalities T.B.D.   
 16
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
- Implement Tourism  GEDA In-house  
Branding and Signage 
Strategy.  GDACE In-house
- Prioritise initiatives listed 
under Principle 4.
- Establish Institutional
Structure to
monitor/facilitate
implementation (public-
private).
Development Principle 5: Agriculture
- Protect high potential  WRDM/GDACE In-house   
agricultural areas.
- Precinct Plans at Rural  WRDM R300 000/node 
Nodes.
In-house 
- Establish Institutional  WRDM/DRDLR
Structure to assist small
farmers. In-house 
 WRDM/DRDLR/GEDA
- Facilitate establishment of
agro industries. T.B.D.   
- Upgrade/maintain rural  WRDM
district roads.
Development Principle 6: Mining
- Establish District-Provincial  WRDM /GDACE In-house   
forum to assess mining
license applications (and
comment on these) in line
with the requirements of the
proposed Environmental
Management Plan (EMP) –
also see Development
Principle 1.  WRDM/Mining In-house   
- Liaise with mining houses Houses
regarding rehabilitation of
old dumps in Mogale City
and release for SDA’s.
Development Principle 7: Industry
- Compile Precinct Plans for  WRDM R500 000/corridor   
N14 and N12 Corridors.
- Implement WRDM IDS 3  WRDM/GEDA In-house   
Pillar Strategy.
Development Principle 8: Business Areas
 17
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
- Compile CBD/Small Town  WRDM/Local R200 000 per Nodal   
Revitalisation Strategies in Municipalities Plan
areas of urban decay.
- Establish Fresh Produce  WRDM/Local To be determined   
Markets close to Rural Municipalities
Nodal Points.
Development Principle 9: Human Settlement
- Implement WRDM  WRDM/LM’s/Gauteng Continuous   
Sustainable Human Dept. of Sustainable
Settlement Plan housing Human Settlements
priorities in SDA’s.  
Continuous 
- Pre-actively prepare SDA’s
for development.
Continuous   
- Focus on Social Housing
opportunities in nodal
Precinct Plans.
Development Principle 10: Growth Management
- Confirm/Formalise  WRDM/LM’s In-house   
Consolidated District Urban
Edge.
- Formulate comprehensive  WRDM R600 000

District Growth
Management Strategy.
Development 11: Engineering Service Infrastructure
- Allocate dedicated funding WRDM/Municipalities/ Annual Allocations
for water, sanitation and COGTA
electricity infrastructure to:
o the Service Upgrading   
Priority Areas to
achieve minimum
levels of service;
o in Strategic   
Development areas
earmarked for large
scale mixed
development in order
to facilitate integration
of communities; and   

o Nodal Areas/Corridors
to promote economic
development and job
creation.
 18
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
Development Principle 12: Thusong Centre Development
- Conduct a district wide WRDM R1 200 000 
Community Facility Audit
and compile a Thusong
Centre/MPCC Precinct Plan
and Implementation
Strategy/Programme for
each of the Tertiary/Rural
Nodes per local
municipality. WRDM IDP Technical Annual Allocations  
- All provincial and national Committee and 
service departments to align Representative Forum
their capital programmes in
accordance with the
Thusong/MPCC Strategy at
identified Rural Nodes.
 19
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL

DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1. INTRODUCTION

In terms of Chapter 5 of the Municipal Systems Act which was promulgated in 2000, each local authority
in South Africa is required to compile an Integrated Development Plan (IDP) for its area of jurisdiction.
In Section 26 of the Municipal Systems Act it is furthermore stated that the core components of an
Integrated Development Plan are the following:

a) the municipal council’s vision for the long term development of the municipality with special
emphasis on the municipality’s most critical development and internal transformation needs;
b) an assessment of the existing level of development in the municipality, which must include an
identification of communities which do not have access to basic municipal services;
c) the council’s development priorities and objectives for its elected term, including its local
economic development aims and its internal transformation needs;
d) the council’s development strategies which must be aligned with any national or provincial
sectoral plans and planning requirements binding on the municipality in terms of legislation;
e) a spatial development framework which must include the provision of basic guidelines for a land
use management system for the municipality;
f) the council’s operational strategies;
g) applicable disaster management plans;
h) a financial plan, which must include a budget projection for at least the next three years; and
i) the key performance indicators and performance targets determined.

It is evident from the above (paragraph (e)), that the formulation of a Spatial Development Framework
(SDF) is a key component of an IDP by law. West Rand District Municipality responded to this legislative
requirement by formulating a Spatial Development Framework in 2009. The 2009 West Rand SDF was
compiled in line with the following directives stipulated in Government Gazette No. 22605 and which
pertains to the prescribed minimum content of a Spatial Development Framework:

(j) to give effect to the principles of land development as contained in chapter 1 of the
Development Facilitation Act (Act 67 of 1995);
(k) to set out objectives that reflect the desired spatial form of the municipality;
(l) to contain strategies and policies regarding the manner in which to achieve the objectives
referred to above, which strategies and policies must:
- indicate desired patterns of land use within the municipality;
- address the spatial reconstruction of the municipality; and
 20
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

- provide strategic guidance in respect of the location and nature of development within
the municipality
(m) to set out basic guidelines for a land use management system in the municipality;
(n) to set out a capital investment framework for the municipality’s development programmes;
(o) to contain a strategic assessment of the environmental impact of the spatial development
framework;
(p) to identify programmes and projects for the development of land within the municipality;
(q) to be aligned with the Spatial Development Frameworks reflected in the Integrated
Development Plans of neighbouring municipalities; and
(r) to provide a visual representation of the desired spatial form of the municipality, which
representation –
- will indicate where public and private land development and infrastructure investment
should take place,
- will indicate desired or undesired utilisation of space in a particular area,
- will delineate the urban area,
- will identify areas where strategic intervention is required; and
- will indicate areas where priority spending is required.

During January 2014, the West Rand District Municipality (WRDM), in conjunction with the Department
of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR), commissioned the review of the WRDM SDF for a
number of reasons. These include the fact that Census 2011 information is now available for the area
while the previous SDF used 2001/2007 information; national government have published the National
Development Plan; the National Outcomes Approach and Comprehensive Rural Development
Programme have been initiated; and Gauteng Province formulated a new provincial Spatial
Development Framework (GSDF), Integrated Transport Master Plan (GITMP25) and Vision 2055.

The 2017 Revision primarily encompassed the results of the 2016 STATSSA Community Survey
results, as well as accommodating the 2016 merger of Randfontein & Westonaria LMs into the newly
demarcated Rand West City LM.

All these plans provide national or provincial guidelines, objectives, development targets and the like,
and therefore require that the District SDF be updated in order for it to be aligned with the latest policy
requirements.

Furthermore, the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) was promulgated late
during 2013. This legislation puts forward principles to influence spatial planning, land use management
and land development. It also provides for national and regional spatial frameworks as well as provincial
and municipal frameworks, implying that a package of plans will be undertaken from national to
municipal level to direct land use management, while providing for uniform regulation of land use
management.
 21
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

The general principles endorsed by this Act is that spatial planning, land use management and land
development must promote and enhance five main Development Principles: Spatial Justice, Spatial
Sustainability; Spatial Efficiency; Spatial Resilience, and Good Administration.

These concepts, as described in the legislation, are briefly summarised below.

Spatial Justice
(i) past spatial and other development imbalances must be redressed through improved access
to and use of land;
(ii) spatial development frameworks and policies at all spheres of government must address the
inclusion of persons and areas that were previously excluded, with an emphasis on informal
settlements, former homeland areas and areas characterised by widespread poverty and
deprivation;
(iii) spatial planning mechanisms, including land use schemes, must incorporate provisions that
enable redress in access to land by disadvantaged communities and persons;
(iv) must include all areas of a municipality and specifically include provisions that are flexible and
appropriate for the management of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and former
homeland areas;
(v) must include provisions that accommodate access to secure tenure and the incremental
upgrading of informal areas; and
(vi) a Municipal Planning Tribunal considering an application before it, may not be impeded or
restricted in the exercise of its discretion solely on the ground that the value of land or property
is affected by the outcome of the application.
Spatial Sustainability
(i) promote land development that is within the fiscal, institutional and administrative means of the
Republic;
(ii) ensure that special consideration is given to the protection of prime and unique agricultural
land;
(iii) uphold consistency of land use measures in accordance with environmental management
instruments;
(iv) promote and stimulate the effective and equitable functioning of land markets;
(v) consider all current and future costs to all parties for the provision of infrastructure and social
services in land developments;
(vi) promote land development in locations that are sustainable and limit urban sprawl; and
(vii) result in communities that are viable.
Efficiency
(i) land development optimises the use of existing resources and infrastructure;
(ii) decision-making procedures are designed to minimise negative financial, social, economic or
environmental impacts; and
(iii) development application procedures are efficient and streamlined.
 22
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Spatial Resilience
Flexibility in spatial plans, policies and land use management systems are accommodated to ensure
sustainable livelihoods in communities most likely to suffer the impacts of economic and
environmental shocks.

Good Administration
(i) all spheres of government ensure an integrated approach to land use and land development
that is guided by the spatial planning and land use management systems as embodied in this
Act;
(ii) all government departments must provide their sector inputs and comply with any other
prescribed requirements during the preparation or amendment of spatial development
frameworks;
(iii) the requirements of any law relating to land development and land use are met timeously;
(iv) the preparation and amendment of spatial plans, policies, land use schemes as well as
procedures for development applications, include transparent processes of public participation
that afford all parties the opportunity to provide inputs on matters affecting them; and
(v) policies, legislation and procedures must be clearly set in order to inform and empower
members of the public.

As far as the methodology to be followed in the compilation and minimum contents of a Spatial
Development Framework are concerned, the Act stipulates as follow:

Municipal Spatial Development Framework

Preparation of Municipal Spatial Development Framework
(1) The Municipal Council of a municipality must by notice in the Provincial Gazette adopt a
municipal spatial development framework for the municipality.
(2) The municipal spatial development framework must be prepared as part of a municipality’s
integrated development plan in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Systems Act.
(3) Before adopting the municipal spatial development framework contemplated in subsection (1)
and any proposed amendments to the municipal spatial development framework, the Municipal
Council must—
(a) give notice of the proposed municipal spatial development framework in the Gazette and the
media;
(b) invite the public to submit written representations in respect of the proposed municipal spatial
development framework to the Municipal Council within 60 days after the publication of the
notice referred to in paragraph (a); and
(c) consider all representations received in respect of the proposed municipal spatial development
framework.
 23
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Contents of Municipal Spatial Development Framework

(a) give effect to the development principles and applicable norms and standards set out in
Chapter 2;
(b) include a written and spatial representation of a five-year spatial development plan for the
spatial form of the municipality;
(c) include a longer term spatial development vision statement for the municipal area which
indicates a desired spatial growth and development pattern for the next 10 to 20 years;
d) identify current and future significant structuring and restructuring elements of the spatial form
of the municipality, including development corridors, activity spines and economic nodes where
public and private investment will be prioritised and facilitated;
(e) include population growth estimates for the next five years;
(f) include estimates of the demand for housing units across different socio-economic categories
and the planned location and density of future housing developments;
(g) include estimates of economic activity and employment trends and locations in the municipal
area for the next five years;
(h) identify, quantify and provide location requirements of engineering infrastructure and services
provision for existing and future development needs for the next five years;
(i) identify the designated areas where a national or provincial inclusionary housing policy may be
applicable;
(j) include a strategic assessment of the environmental pressures and opportunities within the
municipal area, including the spatial location of environmental sensitivities, high potential
agricultural land and coastal access strips, where applicable;
(k) identify the designation of areas in the municipality where incremental upgrading approaches
to development and regulation will be applicable;
(l) identify the designation of areas in which—
(i) more detailed local plans must be developed; and
(ii) shortened land use development procedures may be applicable and land use schemes may
be so amended;
(m) provide the spatial expression of the coordination, alignment and integration of sectoral policies
of all municipal departments;
(n) determine a capital expenditure framework for the municipality’s development programmes,
depicted spatially;
(o) determine the purpose, desired impact and structure of the land use management scheme to
apply in that municipal area; and
(p) include an implementation plan comprising of—
(i) sectoral requirements, including budgets and resources for implementation;
(ii) necessary amendments to a land use scheme;
(iii) specification of institutional arrangements necessary for implementation;
(iv) specification of implementation targets, including dates and monitoring indicators; and
(v)
 24
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

specification, where necessary, of any arrangements for partnerships in the implementation

process.

The major impetus (apart from addressing the distortions created by apartheid) for the SDFs completed
up to 2012, was to comply with the legislative requirements presented by the Municipal Systems Act.
Yet, to ensure that development does in actual fact take place in an integrated and sustainable manner,
the IDPs and SDFs of local and district authorities now have to be aligned with the goals and directives
provided by the SPLUMA and new national and provincial policy documents. This implies that IDPs and
SDFs need to be reviewed on a continual basis to ensure synergy between the three spheres of
government – i.e. what happens on local level needs to “fit-in” and “contribute” to both provincial and
national development goals and priorities.
2 BACKGROUND

2.1 STUDY AREA

As shown on Map 1, the West Rand District Municipality (WRDM) is situated within the western part of
the Gauteng Province and represents one of two District Municipalities in Gauteng, the other one being
the Sedibeng District Municipality, located to the south-east thereof. Gauteng Province furthermore
constitutes three Metropolitan Municipalities: City of Tshwane, City of Joburg and Ekurhuleni. The West
Rand District Municipality (the Study Area) comprises 3 local municipalities as depicted in Map 2,
namely Merafong City Local Municipality, Mogale City Local Municipality, and the Rand West City Local
Municipality, comprising of the former Randfontein & Westonaria LMs. A large portion of the Cradle of
Humankind World Heritage Site also falls within the boundaries of the WRDM – and more specifically
within the Mogale City’s area of jurisdiction.

As shown on Map 2, the WRDM is bounded by the North West Province to the northern, western, and
south-western side, which includes the Madibeng Local Municipality, Rustenburg Local Municipality,
Ventersdorp Local Municipality and the Tlokwe Local Municipality. To the eastern side the WRDM is
bounded by the City of Tshwane to the north-east, City of Joburg to the east, and Sedibeng
District/Emfuleni Local Municipality to the south-east.

The District is situated relatively close to the hub of economic activity of Gauteng (i.e. City of
Johannesburg), and is traversed by two major national roads namely the N12 and N14. The West Rand
District holds an estimated population of 838,594 people (according to the 2016 Community Survey of
STATSSA) and covers an area of approximately 4,087 km².
 25
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 1: West Rand District Municipality: Provincial Institutional Context

 26
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 2 West Rand District Municipality: Local Institutional Context

 27
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

2.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES

Primary Objective: The main objective of the project is to assist the West Rand District Municipality to
compile a new SDF in order to align it with those of its three Local Municipalities: Mogale City, Rand
West City and Merafong City. Through this process the District Municipality will also ensure that the
new revised SDF is well aligned with its Integrated Development Plan and all the recent new Provincial
and National policy directives and sector plans completed at national level and for Gauteng Province.

The SDF process will furthermore address integration and alignment between spatial, engineering,
environmental and socio-economic issues confronting the various municipalities – especially the mining
related problems and issues in the Merafong area. It will also facilitate implementation of the IDP and
all related government intentions to fight poverty and facilitate urban and rural development in the West
Rand area, as contemplated in policy documents like the National and Provincial Development Plans
and various Master Plans. This also includes the Support for Mining Towns initiative conducted under
the supervision of National Department of Human Settlement.

Secondary Objectives: Apart from the above, the following more detailed objectives are to be
addressed as part of the WRDM SDF process:
 To provide strategic, indicative and flexible forward planning instrument to guide decisions on land
development;
 To provide a set of policies, principles and directives for spatial development;
 To provide a clear and logical framework for private and public sector investment;
 To promote sustainable development in terms of natural and built environment conservation;
 To facilitate the social, economic and environmental sustainability of the WRDM area;
 To provide a framework for dealing with key issues such as natural resource management, land
reform, and land use management;
 To facilitate the development of an aesthetical urban and rural landscape;
 Development of the West Rand SDF to comply with legal requirements and also be conversant
with the developments within the broader Gauteng City Region;
 Alignment of the West Rand SDF with the recommendations of the NDP, PGDS and District IDP;
 Ensuring consistency in level of detail, general contents, development philosophy, as well as
horizontal and vertical integration between the Local SDF’s, and the District SDF.

2.3 METHODOLOGY

The project is conducted in seven distinct phases as summarised below. The Inception Meeting (Phase
1) took place on Friday, 31 January 2014 and the Inception Report was completed one week later by 7
February 2014.
 28
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Phase 1: Inception and Establishment of Project Institutional Structure

Phase 2: Identification of Issues and formulation of Vision
Phase 3: Conduct Multi-Sectoral Spatial Analysis and Synthesis
Phase 4: Compilation of Draft SDF
Phase 5: Achieving Support for Approval and Implementation of the SDF
Phase 6: Finalisation and Approval of SDF
Phase 7: Closure Report and Implementing and Monitoring

Phases 2 and 3 were conducted during February and March 2014 with the Spatial Analysis and
Synthesis Report being submitted and presented to the Project Steering Committee on Tuesday, 16
April 2014.

The Draft SDF (Phase 4) was submitted on 11 May 2014, and presented to the relevant WRDM Portfolio
Committee on Wednesday, 14 May 2014. Phases 5, 6 and 7 will be completed during June 2014 in
order for the project to be finalised within the 2013/14 financial year of the WRDM which was a special
request submitted by the WRDM during the Inception Meeting held on 31 January 2014.

2.4 REPORT STRUCTURE

Section 1 & 2 of the SDF focus on introduction and background.

Section 3 provides an overview of the relevant national and provincial policy context within which the
WRDM SDF is to be compiled.

Section 4 provides a summary of Priority Issues and the District Spatial Vision and highlights the spatial
implications thereof in terms of objectives.

Section 5 represents the Spatial Analysis and Synthesis which provides a multi-disciplinary analysis of
the current situation regarding the regional and local context of the WRDM area. From this situational
analysis a list of development opportunities and constraints were identified and summarised as a
Synthesis in Section 5.10 of the document.

Section 6 contains the proposed Spatial Concept and Development Framework for the West Rand
District Municipality, which is based on a set of Development Objectives with a Spatial Plan and
Development Strategy.

Section 7 delineates the way forward in terms of an Implementation Programme comprising a list of
SDF related Priority Projects earmarked for future Implementation in the WRDM area, while section 8
puts forward a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework.
 29
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

3 NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL POLICY GUIDELINES

3.1 NATIONAL POLICY CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

Following is a brief overview of the relevant National and Provincial policies context and development
guidelines of relevance to the West Rand District Municipality.

3.1.1 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Government committed itself to the development of a longer term perspective on the future of South
Africa with the overall intention of ensuring that such a perspective would form the foundations for
medium term and annual planning across all spheres of government and the private sector throughout
the country.

Subsequently the National Planning Commission (NPC) was appointed by the president in May 2010
to draft a Vision and National Development Plan which was completed in 2011.

The National Development Plan: Vision for 2030 focuses on the following key priority areas:
 An economy that will create more jobs;
 Improving infrastructure;
 Transition to low carbon economy;
 Reversing the spatial effects of apartheid in urban and rural areas;
 Improving the quality of education, training and innovation;
 Quality health for all;
 Social protection;
 Building safer communities;
 Reforming the public sector.

The NDP reports that in urban areas in-migration, especially by the young and poor, increases pressure
on services and transport, complicated by apartheid-fragmented geography. Economic growth has
been slower than the demand for employment. In particular, accommodation faces challenges,
including financing for lower end housing and its incorporation into the market, and slow progress on
rental accommodation (CRU and Social Housing) and upgrading of informal settlements.

In urban areas, key NDP recommendations include:

 Upgrading all informal settlements on suitable, well-located land by 2030;
 Increased urban densities to reduce sprawl and costs;
 Investments to shift jobs and investment to the urban townships on the peripheries;
 Substantial investments in safe, reliable and affordable public transport and better co-ordination
among the various modes;
 30
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 A comprehensive review of the grant and subsidy regime for housing to ensure diversity in product
and finance options and spatial mix;
 A focused strategy on the housing gap market, involving banks, subsidies and employer housing
schemes;
 The development of spatial compacts.

In the rural areas, the National Development Plan reports that general productivity has been declining
and outmigration to cities and towns has been accelerating. The rural landscape is characterised by
rural densification without associated infrastructure and governance arrangements, ill located land-
reform initiatives from the perspective of viable farming, or access to markets, and many of these
initiatives are in conflict with other imperatives such as mining or preserving biodiversity.

The NDP suggest that rural interventions will differentiate less dense marginal areas primarily needing
appropriate service provision from more viable and denser areas with transport and market access,
including:
 Innovative, targeted and better co-ordinated provision of infrastructure (including ICTs) and
services provision supported by the spatial consolidation of rural settlements to enhance densities
and associated service delivery;
 Prioritising agricultural and rural development along mobility corridors, to build local economies
and contribute to national food security;
 Identification of non-agricultural opportunities such as tourism and mining, especially with a “green”
focus’;
 Small-town development as nodes of rural development;
 Mechanisms to make land markets work more effectively for the poor, especially women.

The National Development Plan provides for the following spatial development proposals as part of the
national spatial development interventions (also refer to Map 3):
 Primary Transnational Development Corridors and cross border infrastructure connections.
These include:
- The Maputo Development Corridor (MDC);
- The Ermelo-Richards Bay Freight Corridor;
- A link between Ermelo and Swaziland;
 Gauteng as a national Node of Competiveness which strongly associates with the nearby
economic activity nodes of Emalahleni, Middelburg, Secunda and Nelspruit as part of the Maputo
Development Corridor.
 The National Competiveness Corridor building on the Durban-Gauteng Freight Corridor,
providing for logistics hubs, road, rail and fuel transportation.
 Rural Restructuring Zones: These zones include the more densely occupied parts of the
previous homelands where there is sufficient numbers of people to provide the basis for viable
markets through the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP).
 31
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 3: The National Development Plan

 32
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Resource critical zones: These have valued mineral resources, and are areas of great
importance to biodiversity and critical water production. The sustainability of these areas is crucial
and needs specific policies to ensure that.

3.1.2 NATIONAL OUTCOMES APPROACH

In January 2010, Cabinet adopted 12 Outcomes within which to frame public-service delivery priorities.
Cabinet Ministers accordingly signed Performance Agreements linked to these Outcomes. More
detailed Delivery Agreements have since been developed to extend targets and responsibilities to
national and provincial departments, agencies and municipalities. Below are the 12 Outcomes and the
respective outputs per outcome.

Outcome 1: Improve the Quality of Basic Education

 Output 1: Improve the quality of teaching and learning.
 Output 2: Undertake regular assessment to track progress.
 Output 3: Improve early childhood development.
 Output 4: Ensure a credible outcomes-focused planning and accountability system
Outcome 2: Improve Health and Life Expectancy
 Output 1: Increasing life expectancy
 Output 2: Decreasing maternal and child mortality rates
 Output 3: Combating HIV and AIDS and decreasing the burden of disease from Tuberculosis
 Output 4: Strengthening health system effectiveness
Outcome 3: All People in South Africa Protected and Feel Safe
 Output 1: Address overall levels of crime and reduce the levels of contact and trio crimes
 Output 2: Improve effectiveness and ensure integration of the Criminal Justice System (CJS)
 Output 3: Combat corruption within the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster to
enhance its effectiveness and its ability to serve as deterrent against crime
 Output 4: Manage perceptions of crime among the population
 Output 5: Ensure security at the border environment
 Output 6: Secure the identity and status of citizens
 Output 7: Integrate ICT systems and combat cyber crime
 Output 8: Corruption
Outcome 4: Decent Employment Through Inclusive Economic Growth
 Output 1: Faster and sustainable inclusive growth
 Output 2: More labour absorbing growth
 Output 3: Multi-pronged strategy to reduce youth unemployment
 Output 4: Increased competitiveness, to raise net exports, grow trade as a share of world trade
and improve its composition
 Output 5: Improved cost structure in the economy
 Output 6: Improved support to small business and cooperatives
 Output 7: Implementation of the expanded public works programme
Outcome 5: A Skilled and Capable Workforce to Support Inclusive Growth
 Output 1: Establish a credible institutional mechanism for skills planning
 Output 2: Increase access to programmes leading to intermediate and high level learning
 33
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Output 3: Increase access to occupationally-directed programmes in needed areas and thereby

expand the availability of intermediate level skills (with a special focus on artisan skills)
 Output 4: Increase access to high level occupationally-directed programmes in needed areas
 Output 5: Research, development and innovation in human capital for a growing knowledge
economy
Outcome 6: An Efficient, Competitive and Responsive Economic Infrastructure Network
 Output 1: Improving Competition and Regulation
 Output 2: Ensure reliable generation, distribution and transmission of electricity
 Output 3: To ensure the maintenance and strategic expansion of our road and rail network, and
the operational efficiency, capacity and competitiveness of our sea ports.
 Output 4: Maintenance and supply availability of our bulk water infrastructure
 Output 5: Communication and Information technology
 Output 6: Develop a set of operational indicators for each segment

Outcome 7: Vibrant, Equitable and Sustainable Rural Communities and Food Security
 Output 1: Sustainable agrarian reform
 Output 2: Improved access to affordable and diverse food
 Output 3: Rural services and sustainable livelihoods
 Output 4: Rural job creation linked to skills training and promoting economic livelihoods
 Output 5: Enabling institutional environment for sustainable and inclusive growth
Outcome 8: Sustainable Human Settlements and Improved Quality of Household Life
 Output 1: Accelerated delivery of housing opportunities
 Output 2: Improve access to basic services
 Output 4: More efficient land utilisation
 Output 4: Improved property market
Outcome 9: A Responsive, Accountable, Effective and Efficient Local Government System
 Output 1: Implement a differentiated approach to municipal financing, planning and support
 Output 2: Improving access to basic services.
 Output 3: Implementation of the Community Work Programme
 Output 4: Actions supportive of the human settlement outcome
 Output 5: Deepen democracy through a refined Ward Committee model
 Output 6: Administrative and financial capability
 Output 7: Single window of coordination
Outcome 10: Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Assets and Natural Resources
 Output 1: Enhanced quality and quantity of water resources
 Output 2: Reduced greenhouse gas emissions, climate change impacts and improved
air/atmospheric quality
 Output 3: Sustainable environmental management
 Output 4: Protected biodiversity
Outcome 11: A Better South Africa, a Better and Safer Africa and World
 Output 1: Enhanced African agenda and sustainable development
 Output 2: Enhanced regional integration
 Output 3: Reformed global governance institutions
 Output 4: Enhanced trade and investment
Outcome 12: A Development-Orientated Public Service and Inclusive Citizenship
 Output 1: Service delivery quality and access
 34
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Output 2: Human resource management and development

 Output 3: Business processes, systems, decision rights and accountability management
 Output 4: Tackling corruption in the public service

3.1.3 THE REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

The Department of Trade and Industry (the dti) formulated a Regional Industrial Development Strategy
(RIDS) (2006) the aim of which is to promote regions based on their key (comparative) advantages, and
to design support measures appropriate to each region in order to:
 Respond to persistent inequalities between the first and second economies;
 Encourage regions to seize current and potential opportunities presented by both the national and
the international market economies; and
 Encourage the country’s most successful economic regions to consolidate and improve on their
current economic potential.

Notably, since the late-1990s, there has been a resurgence of interest internationally in the notion of
regional industrial development as a spatial economic mechanism to assist regions to achieve their
economic potential within the context of a market economy. Key features of ‘new’ regional support
include: (RIDS, p6)
 A focus on enhancing physical and social infrastructure;
 A multi-sectoral approach to development which moves beyond an exclusively manufacturing
focus, to a focus on knowledge-based development, tourism and improvement of human
capital;
 A reliance on partnership formation and the driving of development from ‘the bottom-up’ through
regional agencies/ partnerships, able to galvanise local development and tap into private and state
resources and capacities;
 A focus on unique programmes for each region based on local strengths and opportunities i.e. local
comparative advantages;
 A focus on cluster development; and
 Support for business retention and expansion programmes.

The purpose of RIDS is to respond in broad terms to issues of spatial differentiation in economic welfare
levels. A key challenge is both to simultaneously support lagging regions and to assist leading regions
to capitalise on their inherent strengths and potential. (RIDS, p11)

Usefully, in respect of potential economic regions and clusters, the RIDS provides a spatially referenced
development perspective (see Map 4). A key feature of the national space economy is the economic
dominance of the three primary economic cores of Gauteng, greater Cape Town and eThekweni-
uMsunduzi. Classifying regions according to their level of development, it is possible to identify a number
of additional prominent economic regions. Outside of the three primary economic cores there are at
 35
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

least 16 other prominent economic regions, based primarily on gross value added and key mineral,
energy and manufacturing linkages. (RIDS, p59)

These regions have clear comparative and competitive advantages which, to a large degree, are based
on the strength of the dominant economic activities and industrial concentration nodes within them.
Clustering of related economic activities is clearly a key regional competitive advantage in these areas.
Appropriate support to enhance the competitive edge of these regions would clearly be of national and
regional significance. In terms of the three primary cores, their diversified economies and multiple-
activity bases are critical to the national economy, and enhancement is also necessary. (RIDS, p60)

Apart from being part of the Gauteng Economy as illustrated on Figure 4, the WRDM also represents
the point of entry into Gauteng from the Potchefstroom-Klerksdorp “Diversified Mining Region” (see
number 2 on Map 4).

In addition to the regions and sectors identified, the RIDS also identifies a series of sector-specific
districts in which medium to high levels of economic potential and clustering may be discerned (see
Map 5).

As indicated on Map 5, it is clear that large parts of the West Rand District are classified as Mining and
Energy Complexes.
 36
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 4: RIDS Spatial Development Perspective

 37
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 5: RIDS Sector-specific Districts

 38
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

3.1.4 NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (CRDP)

In support of the former ISRDS, national government initiated the Comprehensive Rural Development
Programme (CRDP) in 2009. The CRDP differs slightly from previous government strategies in that it
takes a proactive participatory community-based planning approach rather than an interventionist
approach to rural development.

Essentially, the CRDP is aimed at being an effective response to poverty alleviation and food insecurity
by maximizing the use and management of natural resources to create “vibrant, equitable and
sustainable rural communities”.

The vision of the CRDP is to be achieved through a three-pronged strategy based on:
1. A coordinated and integrated broad-based Agrarian Transformation;
2. Strategically increasing Rural Development through infrastructure investment; and
3. An improved Land Reform Programme.

The objectives of each of the three strategic thrusts thought applicable to the formulation of a SDF for
the WRDM are as follows (see diagram on Figure 1):

Figure 1: CRDP Framework

 39
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1. Agrarian Transformation
 Facilitating the establishment of rural and agro-industries, cooperatives, cultural initiatives and
vibrant local markets.
 Increased production and sustainable use of natural resources by promoting farming and related
value chain development (exploring all possible species for food and economic activity).

2. Rural Development
 Access to community and social infrastructure, especially well-resourced clinics.
 Focusing on the development of new and the rehabilitation of existing infrastructure.
 Improving and developing infrastructure conducive to economic development – e.g. distribution
and transportation infrastructure, agricultural infrastructure, water and electricity infrastructure,
market and storage infrastructure, retail infrastructure, and telecommunications infrastructure.
 Improving and developing infrastructure conducive to social development – e.g. sanitation
infrastructure, health infrastructure, sports and recreation infrastructure, and educational
infrastructure (especially ABET centres).

3. Land Reform
 Promoting restitution, tenure reform, and redistribution in a sustainable manner.
 Increased access to land by previously disadvantaged people.
 Establishing Agri-villages for local economic development on farms.
 Up-to-date information pertaining to land claims.
 Providing reliable and efficient property (deeds) registration systems.
 Contributing to economic growth and housing development by providing government and private
agents with essential land information in order to engage in planning as well as economic
transactions.
 Providing spatial planning information and services to local municipalities and other public or
private institutions that may require these services for development purposes.

There are no CRDP pilot projects identified for the Gauteng Province.

3.2 PROVINCIAL POLICY CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

3.2.1 GAUTENG VISION 2055

The vision for Gauteng 2055 is: A liveable, equitable, prosperous and united Gauteng City Region.

Unpacking the G2055 vision, it is clear that the aim of the G2055 for Gauteng is to have a strong
knowledge capital, be the hub of innovation to Africa, and be a liveable, prosperous, competitive,
equitable, accessible and sustainable City Region as spatially depicted in Figure 2.
 40
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 2: Gauteng Global City Region

The directions that the G2055 is taking are illustrated in Figure 3 below. These include: (1) good
governance, (2) building a high performance economy (equitable growth), (3) cultivating social capital
through social inclusivity and cohesion, and (4) facilitating sustainable development and infrastructure
by transforming the spatial structure of the city region, and sustaining the natural capital for the future.

Figure 3: Gauteng City Region 2055 Conceptual Framework

 41
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In terms of the conceptual framework:

 The outer-most ring presents the drivers viewed as necessary to create momentum for, and support
achievement of the four defined ideals and ultimately, the vision for the GCR of 2055.
 The intermediate circle represents the ideals we strive for, with delivery envisaged as staggered
across the short, medium and long-term. These ideals are intricately inter-related, with causality
viewed as complex and situation-specific, rather than being linear in nature.
 The central ring reflects our vision for 2055 – the creation of a ‘liveable, equitable, prosperous and
united GCR’.

3.2.2 GAUTENG SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Gauteng is the economic hub of the mining, manufacturing, tertiary and quaternary sectors of the
national economy while being the smallest province in spatial extent. Yet it has by far the largest
population of all the provinces and is the most densely settled. Added to this, it has the highest
proportion of GDP and has the highest per capita income. (GSDF, p2)

The Gauteng Province has adopted the Gauteng Spatial Development Framework (GSDF) as the core
policy framework intended to guide decisions relating to the location and nature of physical development
in Gauteng. The GSDF seeks to achieve the following:
 Creation of a functionally integrated natural open space system and protection of the rural parts of
the province for agricultural, recreational (walking and cycling), biodiversity and aquifer
management purposes;
 The containment of urban sprawl by way of growth management that seeks to advance compaction,
residential densification, and in-fill development, and mixed land uses within the existing urban
fabric which will promote walking and cycling;
 The social and economic integration of disadvantaged communities into the urban system,
particularly those on the urban periphery;
 The establishment of a hierarchy of nodes coupled with the improvement of linkages and
connectivity between these nodes and areas of economic opportunity;
 Land use-public transport integration through nodal and corridor development;
 The promotion of viable public transport systems and reduction of reliance on private mobility with
strong emphasis on densification along the priority public transport routes, especially rail and BRT
routes which form the basis of the IRPTN movement system;
 Public transport routes become the priority areas for densification and infill development; and
 The urban system’s existing and proposed road network is used to reinforce and shape the urban
form as a growth management tool.

Evident from these principles is the strong emphasis on public transport becoming the basis of the
‘movement system’ in the province, and urban corridors, activity spines and public transport routes
creating the framework for future processes of densification and intensification, including Transit
 42
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Oriented Development (TOD) comprising mixed uses around road and rail based public transport
facilities.

The GSDF as reflected on Map 6 represents the future spatial vision for Gauteng, while Map 7 highlights
a number of Strategic Development Initiatives fundamental to the implementation of the plan.

The most notable features from Map 6 relevant to the WRDM area include the natural features around
the Cradle of Humankind which constitutes the northern parts of the WRDM; the agricultural hub
between Mogale-Randfontein-Westonaria to the east, and Merafong (Carletonville) to the west thereof;
the proposed development axis towards the north along route N14 and towards the south from Mogale
City to Westonaria along the same route (R28).

From this image the proposed consolidation of the fragmented urban structure of the WRDM that
resulted from scattered mining activity is also evident.

From Map 7 the following Strategic Development Initiatives are directly relevant to the WRDM:
- the Ennerdale-Chamdor Corridor (number 13) and the associated development of the
Chamdor node (number 9);
- development of the N17 western corridor which extends right up to Mogale City (project 12);
and
- the integration of the broader Soweto area (project 25) into the provincial urban fabric.
 43
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 6: Gauteng Spatial Development Framework Spatial Vision

 44
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 7: GSDF Strategic Development Initiatives

 45
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

3.2.3 GAUTENG 25-YEAR INTEGRATED TRANSPORT MASTER PLAN

The Gauteng Integrated Transport Master Plan (GITMP25) aims to deliver a world class and
sustainable transport system that supports Gauteng’s economic, social and cultural, and
environmental goals. It provides a planning framework, which assists government at all three levels to
develop a comprehensive transport system over the next 25 years. It further empowers the Gauteng
Department of Roads and Transport (GDRT), in collaboration with other spheres of government, to
plan, regulate and develop an integrated and efficient transport system for the province that serves the
general public interest. It also strives to embody the principles of an efficient, competitive and
responsive economic infrastructure network that prioritises public transport.

The founding principles for the GITMP25 are:

 Integration of land use with transport, as well as integration of networks, modes and services;
 Being “smart” by using scarce resources more effectively and application of suitable technology;
 Social inclusion and beneficiation; and
 Promotion of a more sustainable Gauteng City Region (GCR).

GITMP25 is furthermore centred around the following ten interventions of which the first three relate to
land use:

INTEGRATED TRANSPORT INTERVENTIONS

Land Use Development
1 Subsidised housing provision within urban core areas
2 Facilitating local economic development outside the urban core
3 Land use densification in support of public transport
Strategic Public Transport Network
4 Reinforcing passenger rail network as the backbone of the system
5 Extending the integrated rapid and road-based public transport networks
6 Capacity building in the transport industry
Freight Transport
7 Strengthening intermodal freight hubs
Road Transport
8 Travel demand management
9 Mainstreaming non-motorised transport
10 Continued provincial wide mobility

Key to the GITMP25 is the focus on public transport with the rail system being the backbone of the
network, in order to enable a shift from private vehicles to reduce congestion, enhance efficiency and
promote sustainability. This means planning for the transport of people as opposed for private transport
infrastructure which tend to separate communities, create barriers and promote an individual
“conscience”. The GITMP25 believes that public transport is a catalyst towards social integration of
society and should be applied as such in the Gauteng City Region.
 46
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Freight rail and the movement of freight from road to rail is a key departure point, which includes the
focus on the development of major rail-based freight logistic hubs, located on the periphery of the core
urban areas. This is to reduce extensive heavy vehicle freight traffic moving through core urban areas,
taking up road space and adding to congestion.

The GSDF Based Approach (Map 8) was simulated in the GITMP for the period 2012 to 2037. This
scenario is based on the Development Principles of the Gauteng Spatial Development Framework and
seeks to contain urban development within the existing Gauteng urban footprint as depicted on Figure
10, prioritise development along the major public transport network in the province (Gautrain, PRASA
rail and BRT networks) and to utilise well-located vacant land within the existing urban footprint for infill
development.

The study concluded that there is sufficient land available within the existing urban footprint of Gauteng
Province to accommodate the entire incremental population for the province up to 2037 without any
significant expansion of the urban edge; that densification along public transport corridors should
maintain net densities of at least 80 units per hectare in order to significantly enhance the viability of
public transport systems; and that rail and rapid transit infrastructure should be the priority areas around
which to promote densification, intensification and infill development within the existing provincial urban
fabric.
 47
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 8: GITMP25 – Gauteng SDF Based Growth Scenario

 48
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

4 ISSUES AND VISION

Section 4.1 to 4.4 below comprise extracts from the four main “Visioning” documents of the WRDM
which includes the West Rand Regional Growth and Development Strategy; West Rand Green IQ
Initiative; the West Rand Integrated Development Plan (IDP), as well as the previous West Rand Spatial
Development Framework (SDF).

These chief strategic planning documents of the WRDM are analysed to extract the main developmental
issues and objectives identified to date as part of the Issues and Visioning Phase of the WRDM SDF.

4.1 WEST RAND REGIONAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

The vision of the WRDM Regional Growth and Development Strategy is to “develop and sustain an
integrated, socio-economically and economically thriving and green environment with a unified society.”

In order to achieve the above Vision, the Regional Growth and Development Strategy identified the
following critical requirements:
 Ensure the WRDM is connected – with more people enjoying the benefits of flourishing activity
centres where shops, jobs, services and recreation are within walking and travelling distance of
their homes, with fast and reliable travel to and from local centres and regional opportunities, with
a comprehensive, efficient and networked public transport system and pedestrian routes and
access to rural and tourism areas.

 Ensure the WRDM is attractive – with quality urban and rural areas that are well-maintained, new
developments which comply with high design standards, clean and safe environments and well-
preserved heritage and natural areas.

 Ensure the WRDM is sustainable – with resources well managed and planned for, viable and cost-
effective service provision; and where the environment is valued as a vital resource and meaningful
open space is provided for all.

 Ensure the WRDM is well managed – where development decisions are predictable, fair and cost-
effective, partnerships are developed, planning takes place on a continuous basis, formal systems
for data collections are in place, and data is used to support and improve planning.
Subsequently, the study then identified the following six strategic priorities/key focus areas for the West
Rand District Area and these form the basis of the West Rand Regional Growth and Development
Strategy:

Strategic Priority 1: Spatial Integration

 Suitable development planning around dolomitic areas
 Optimise opportunities/spin-offs from neighbouring areas’ initiatives:
 Nodal densification
 Corridor development and diversification
 49
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Mining rehabilitation to increase land availability

 Informal Settlement Management
 Development Incentive Schemes
 Urban Renewal and Inner City Rejuvenation in the four main business areas
Strategic Priority 2: Physical Infrastructure
 Promoting Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
 Focus on strategic economic infrastructure programmes
 Planning for current and future infrastructure
 Maintenance of current infrastructure
 Securing investment for infrastructure development
Strategic Objective 3: Economic Development
 Expanding the Agriculture/Agro-processing industry in the District
 Stimulating mining activity and mineral processing and -beneficiation activities in the District
 Increasing manufacturing opportunities and activities in the District
 Strengthening and promoting the tourism industry in the District
Strategic Objective 4: Environmental Management
 Biofuel
 Alternative energies (such as photovoltaic)
 Hazardous and new waste types
 Mine water pollution (e.g. Acid Mine Drainage)
 Nanotechnology
 Land Degradation
 Creating a renewable energy sector
 Managing and addressing mining-related environmental impacts
 Waste Management and Recycling Programmes
 Mitigate and prevent land degradation
Strategic Objective 5: Social Development
 Reducing Poverty & Unemployment
 Promoting Sustainable Human Settlements
 Ensuring adequate education and training facilities
 Ensuring efficient Health Care and Facilities
 Promoting Safety and Security
 Developing Sports, Recreation, Arts and Culture (SRAC) facilities
Strategic Objective 6: Governance
 Promote Community Participation
 Ensure Clean Audits
 Effective implementation of Council policies
 Maximise resources from other spheres
 Regular Monitoring and evaluation
 Promote easy and affordable business

4.2 GREEN IQ

The WRDM Green IQ was compiled in (2012) and is a commitment to make the West Rand District the
greenest district in South Africa and an African example of how sustainable development should be
conducted. The Green IQ is a comprehensive strategy, built on 5 pillars, namely:
 50
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 PEOPLE: To create a place where people come first, a place characterized by equity, dignity and
possibility; where everyone has the opportunity to build a better life for themselves, their children.
 ECONOMY: To restructure the economy to seize future development opportunities; to foster local
resilience; to serve the people of the West Rand and to be an example of participatory prosperity.
 ENVIRONMENT: To make the precious natural resources available for future generations; create
a low-carbon built environment dedicated to quality of life; and regenerate rural areas with a new
sense of purpose.
 ENERGY: To facilitate the creation of new independent power producers to generate renewable,
affordable and reliable energy to power new industries and create competitive advantages.
 INNOVATION: To establish itself as a centre of excellence in green technology and green living;
attract the best minds; and encourage and support the industries of the future.

Seven Key Programmes have been identified in the WRDM Green Economy Programme

Sector Description
Energy Efficiency  Expanding off-grid options in rural and urban areas
 Refit optimization for large scale renewable and localization, and
 Up-scaling Solar Water Heater rollout
Food security  Integrate sustainable agricultural production
Water and sanitation  Water harvesting
 Alternative technology for effluent management
 Comprehensive municipal water metering (demand and management)
 Reduce water losses in agriculture, municipalities and mining
Waste  Waste beneficiation
 Zero waste community programme for 500 000 households
Transportation  Promoting non-motorized transport and
 Conversion to solar powered traffic lights
Spatial planning and  Investing in sustainable land use which will contribute to the WRDM economic
land use vitality
 Investing in the WRDM’s green space which creates opportunities to socialize
and rest, fundamentally boost quality of life and socio-economic integration, and
the associated economic benefits
Green buildings and the  Greening of private and public buildings.
built environment

4.3 IDP RELATED PRIORITY ISSUES

The vision for the WRDM as identified within the IDP is as follows: Integrated District Governance
Excellence.

It is the mission of the municipality: To provide a developmental district governance system for a
better life for all in the West Rand district.

The West Rand District Municipality noted the following as the priority spatial issues in the District as
identified from the District and Local Spatial Development Frameworks:
 51
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Amending the urban fringe (edge) to allow for future residential expansion;
 Integration of residential development between the historically disadvantaged and advantaged
areas;
 Rehabilitating mining dumps and areas to promote integration of urban areas;
 The establishment of development corridors and the development thereof;
 Facilitating the development of well-defined economic activity nodes;
 Increasing accessibility towards the east;
 Protecting all environmentally sensitive areas and to promote tourism;
 Promoting the diversification of the primary economic sector (mining);
 The promotion of agricultural activities, both from a commercial and small scale farming point of
view;
 Managing smallholdings as not to promote conflicting and non-complimentary land uses;
 The establishment of higher order social and commercial activities within the rural environment at
selected areas of concentration (rural service area); and
 The enhancement of industrial and commercial areas in terms of occupancy, bulk and investment
(urban renewal).

4.4 CONCLUSION: ELEMENTS OF SPATIAL VISION

Based on the inputs from various Provincial initiatives and studies, as summarised in the table below,
the primary guiding elements which should be fundamental to the Vision for the future spatial structure
of the West Rand District are as follow:
 Containment of urban growth;
 Densification of urban areas;
 Eradicate large housing backlog in sustainable manner, integrating communities;
 Incorporate environmental management principles in the management of land;
 Protect high value agricultural land;
 Improve and rehabilitate mining areas for future agricultural use;
 Provide different typologies of housing;
 Establish niche tourism opportunities; and
 Address the large infrastructure backlog in the West Rand.
The key elements of alignment between the WRDM RGDS, Green IQ and IDP and which need to be
incorporated into the WRDM SDF are summarised in Table 1 below.
 52
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table 1: Key elements of alignment between the WRDM RGDS, Green IQ and IDP
WRDM Regional Growth and Development Green IQ WRDM Integrated
Strategy Development Plan
Vision Elements Key Focus Areas Pillars Spatial Issues
 Connected  Spatial Integration  Innovation  Contain urban sprawl
 Attractive  Physical Infrastructure  Energy  Establish nodes and corridors
 Sustainable  Economic Development  Economy  Improve eastward connectivity
 Well-  Environmental Management  Environment  Protect natural environment
Managed  Social Development  People  Promote tourism
 Governance/Management  Sustainable utilisation of
mining potential
 Enhance agricultural
production
 Diversify industries
 Manage rural residential use
on small holdings
 Consolidate rural infrastructure
at nodes
 Actively promote urban
renewal
 Upgrade/expand engineering
services
 53
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5. SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS

5.1 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

The socio-economic environment of the WRDM is defined by social factors such as population growth
and education levels, as well as the economic situation as it relates to society, for example, income and
employment statistics. This information provides an indication of the level of poverty and well-being in
the community.

Subsequent tables and diagrams provide the demographic profiles of the West Rand District
Municipality and each of the four Local Municipalities.

5.1.1 POPULATION

Figures 4 to 7 below indicate the population profile of the WRDM and the respective three local
municipalities (as demarcated currently, as well as the four previously demarcated LMs). The most
salient features in this regard are summarised as follow: 1
 The West Rand DM population contribution towards the total Gauteng Province population declined
from 8.4% in 2001 to 6.7% in 2011 to 6.3% in 2016.
 The West Rand DM experienced a population increase of approximately 82 627 people from the
738 368 people registered in 2001, to approximately 820 995 people in 2011, and a population
increase of approximately 17 598 people to approximately 838 593 people in 2016.
 Mogale City had the highest population contribution towards the West Rand DM in 2011, totalling
362 422 people (44.1%), followed by the Merafong City with 210 481 people (24.1%), Randfontein
comprised approximately 128 728 people (18.2%), and Westonaria about 109 328 people (13.6%).
The latter two jointly contributed approximately 238 056 people (31.8%). In 2016 it was as follows:
o Mogale City - 383 860 (45.8%);
o Rand West City – 265 886 (31.7%); and
o Merafong City – 188 847 (22.5%)
 Mogale City, the former Randfontein and Westonaria LMs experienced a positive population
increase from 2001 to 2011 while the population of Merafong City showed a slight decline during
the same period. Same tendency was observed from 2011 to 2016.

1
Data sourced from STATSSA.
 54
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 4: WRDM Population Contribution to Gauteng

Gauteng Population Contribution Gauteng Population Contribution

2001 2011
West
West
Rand,
Rand,
6.7%
8.4%

Rest of Rest of
Gauteng, Gauteng,
91.6% 93.3%

Gauteng Population Contribution 2016

West Rand, 6.3%

Rest of Gauteng,
93.7%

Figure 5: West Rand DM Population 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM Population 2001-2011-2016

840 000 838 593

820 000 820 995
800 000
POPULATION

780 000
760 000 738 368
740 000
720 000
700 000
680 000
2001 2011 2016

2001 2011 2016

POPULATION 738 368 820 995 838 593
 55
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 6: Local Municipalities Population Contributions

LM Population Contribution 2001 LM Population Contribution 2011

Merafong
Merafong Mogale City, Mogale
City, City, 24.1% City,
28.5% 39.3%
44.1%

Westonaria,
Westonaria,
13.6%
14.8%
Randfontein, Randfontein,
17.4% 18.2%

LM Population Contribution 2016

GT485: Rand West

City, 31.7% GT481: Mogale City,
45.8%

GT484: Merafong City,

22.5%

Figure 7: Local Municipalities Population 2001-2011-2016

LM Population 2001-2011
500 000
362 422

450 000
289 831

400 000
350 000
210 481

197 520

300 000
149 286
128 728

250 000
111 767
109 328

200 000
150 000
100 000
50 000
-
Mogale City LM Randfontein LM Westonaria LM Merafong City LM

2001 2011
 56
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

LM Population 2016
400 000
350 000
300 000
250 000
200 000
150 000
100 000
50 000
0
GT481: MOGALE CITY GT484: MERAFONG CITY GT485: RAND WEST CITY

GT481: Mogale City GT484: Merafong City GT485: Rand West City
Population 383 860 188 847 265 886

5.1.2 AGE PROFILE

The age distribution is an important indicator in terms of the development character and economic active
population segment of an area as illustrated in Figure 8 below.
Figure 8: West Rand Age Distribution 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM Age Distribution 2001-2011

Ages 80+ 0.7%

0.6%
Ages 65-79 3.3%
2.7%
Ages 50-64 11.5% EAP:
8.8% 2001: 73.3%
Ages 35-49 21.7%
25.3%
Ages 15-34 38.7%
39.2%
Ages 0-14 24.1%
23.5%
2011 2001
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0%

WRDM Age Distribution - 2016 (%)

80+ 0.7%
65-79 4.5%
50-64 14.0% EAP:
2016: 71.7%
35-49 24.0%
15-34 33.7%
0-14 23.1%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0%

0-14 15-34 35-49 50-64 65-79 80+

% 23.1% 33.7% 24.0% 14.0% 4.5% 0.7%
 57
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 The West Rand DM is characterised by a predominantly young population with the largest
percentage (39.2% (2011) & 33.7% (2016)) being aged between 15 and 35 years, followed by the
age group 0-14 years.
 The age group 15 to 35 years represents young people entering the job market which poses certain
challenges to the WRDM in terms of job creation.
 It is noted from Figure 8 that the West Rand and all four local municipalities respectively have a
proportionally small aged / retired population (age groups 65 years and older).
 It must be noted that the age group 50+ (representing the last 3 age categories) are showing an
increasing trend:
o 2001 – 12.1%
o 2011 – 15.5%
o 2016 – 19.2%
Figure 9: Local Municipalities Age Distribution 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM Age Distribution 2001- Randfontein LM Age Distribution 2001-

2011 2011

Ages 80+ 0.8% Ages 80+ 0.8%

0.4% 0.7%

Ages 65-79 3.7% Ages 65-79 4.1%

2.0% 3.3%

Ages 50-64 11.6% Ages 50-64 12.8%

8.0% 9.5%

Ages 35-49 20.9% Ages 35-49 21.0%

28.6% 22.5%

Ages 15-34 39.2% Ages 15-34 36.4%

38.5% 40.2%

Ages 0-14 23.7% Ages 0-14 24.9%

22.4% 23.8%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

2011 2001 2011 2001

Westonaria LM Age Distribution 2001- Merafong City LM Age Distribution 2001-

2011 2011

Ages 80+ 0.3% Ages 80+ 0.6%

0.7% 0.3%

Ages 65-79 1.8% Ages 65-79 2.8%

3.3% 1.5%

Ages 50-64 9.9% Ages 50-64 11.3%

9.7% 7.4%

Ages 35-49 22.5% Ages 35-49 23.2%

23.1% 29.2%

Ages 15-34 41.0% Ages 15-34 38.1%

38.2% 39.0%

Ages 0-14 24.5% Ages 0-14 24.1%

25.0% 22.7%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

2011 2001 2011 2001

 58
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Age Distribution per LM - 2016 (Total)

80+
65-79
50-64
35-49
15-34
0-14

0 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000 100 000 120 000 140 000

0-14 15-34 35-49 50-64 65-79 80+

GT485: Rand West City 62 984 89 070 63 192 37 600 11 107 1 933
GT484: Merafong City 44 004 62 780 47 808 25 778 7 462 1 015
GT481: Mogale City 86 669 130 984 90 623 53 816 18 796 2 972

Age Distribution per LM - 2016 (%)

80+
65-79
50-64
35-49
15-34
0-14

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0%

0-14 15-34 35-49 50-64 65-79 80+

GT485: Rand West City 23.7% 33.5% 23.8% 14.1% 4.2% 0.7%
GT484: Merafong City 23.3% 33.2% 25.3% 13.7% 4.0% 0.5%
GT481: Mogale City 22.6% 34.1% 23.6% 14.0% 4.9% 0.8%

Table 2: Economically Active Population Segment

EAP 2001 2011 2016
West Rand DM 73.3% 71.9% 71.7%
Mogale City LM 75.2% 71.7% 71.8%
Randfontein LM 72.1% 70.2%
71.4%2
Westonaria LM 71.1% 73.3%
Merafong City LM 75.6% 72.5% 72.2%

From Table 2 it is evident that the Economically Active Population segment of the West Rand declined
slightly from 73.3% in 2001 to 71.9% in 2011 and to 71.7% in 2016. The former Westonaria is the only

2
Now Rand West City LM
 59
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

local municipality which experienced an increase in the Economically Active Population segment for the
period 2001 (71.1%) to 2011 (73.3%).

5.1.3 POPULATION GROUPS

Figure 10 and 11 indicate the population group profile of the West Rand DM and the four local
municipalities and depict the following features:
 The West Rand DM mainly comprises the African/Black population segment (78.7%) followed by
the White population segment (17.7%).
 The African Black population segment increased from 78.8% in 2001 to 79.2% in 2011 and declined
to 78.7% in 2016, whilst the white population declined from 17.9% (2001) to 16.6% (2011) and
increased to 17.7% in 2016.
 Mogale City has the largest representation of the Indian / Asian population segment within the West
Rand (2.2% - 2016).
 Rand West City has the largest representation of the Coloured population segment within the West
Rand at 6.0%.
 The population composition profile is very similar between 2001, 2011 and 2016, with no significant
changes recorded.
Figure 10: West Rand Population Group Distribution 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM Population Groups - 2001-2011

79.2%
78.8%

90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
17.9%

16.7%

30.0%
20.0%
2.5%
2.3%

1.1%
1.0%

10.0%
0.0%
African Black Coloured Indian Asian White

2001 2011
 60
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

West Rand DM Population Groups - 2016

80.0% 78.7%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0% 17.7%
20.0%
2.5% 1.1%
10.0%
0.0%
BLACK AFRICAN COLOURED INDIAN/ASIAN WHITE

Black african Coloured Indian/asian White

WRDM 78.7% 2.5% 1.1% 17.7%

Figure 11: Local Municipalities Population Group Distribution 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

100.0% 100.0%
75.9%
75.9%

90.0% 90.0% 69.5%

68.9%

80.0% 80.0%
70.0% 70.0%
60.0% 60.0%
50.0% 50.0%
21.1%
21.1%

20.7%
40.0% 40.0%

20.2%
30.0% 30.0%
10.2%
9.8%

20.0% 20.0%
2.2%
2.2%
0.8%
0.7%

0.4%
0.1%

10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
African Coloured Indian White African Coloured Indian White
Black Asian Black Asian

2001 2011 2001 2011

 61
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Merafong City LM 2001-2011

91.9%
89.2%

86.8%
83.5%
100.0% 100.0%
90.0% 90.0%
80.0% 80.0%
70.0% 70.0%
60.0% 60.0%
50.0% 50.0%

15.7%
40.0% 40.0%

11.8%
10.2%
30.0% 30.0%

7.1%

1.1%
0.7%
0.7%
0.4%

0.3%

0.3%
0.1%

0.1%
20.0% 20.0%
10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
African Coloured Indian White African Coloured Indian White
Black Asian Black Asian

2001 2011 2001 2011

LMs 2016
100.0%
83.4% 79.3%
80.0% 76.0%

60.0%

40.0%
21.2%
15.1% 14.4%
20.0% 6.0% 2.0% 0.3% 0.3%
0.8% 1.2%
0.0%
BLACK AFRICAN COLOURED INDIAN/ASIAN WHITE

Black african Coloured Indian/asian White

GT481: Mogale City 76.0% 0.8% 2.0% 21.2%
GT484: Merafong City 83.4% 1.2% 0.3% 15.1%
GT485: Rand West City 79.3% 6.0% 0.3% 14.4%

5.1.4 GENDER

Figure 12 and 13 indicate the gender profile of the West Rand DM and the local municipalities
respectively. The following are noteworthy from these images:
 The gender distribution within the West Rand DM has been reasonably even and consistent from
2001 to 2016 with 51.8 % of the population being males and 48.2% being females. However, there
is a slight decreasing tendency of the male component.
 This pattern is consistent for all four local municipalities.
 62
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 12: West Rand Gender Profile 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM Gender Profile - 2001-2011

70.0%

53.8%

52.2%

47.8%
46.2%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Male Female
-10.0%

2001 2011

West Rand DM Gender Profile - 2016

52.0%
51.8%
51.0%

50.0%

49.0% 48.2%
48.0%

47.0%

46.0%
MALE FEMALE

Male Female
WRDM 51.8% 48.2%

Figure 13: Local Municipalities Gender Profile 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM Gender Profile - Randfontein LM Gender Profile -

2001-2011 2001-2011
70.0% 70.0%
51.5%

51.0%

50.3%

50.2%

49.8%
49.7%
49.0%
48.5%

60.0% 60.0%
50.0% 50.0%
40.0% 40.0%
30.0% 30.0%
20.0% 20.0%
10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
Male Female Male Female

2001 2011 2001 2011

 63
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Westonaria LM Gender Profile - Merafong City LM Gender Profile -

2001-2011 2001-2011

57.5%
56.9%
70.0% 70.0%

54.7%

54.3%

45.7%
45.3%
60.0% 60.0%

43.1%

42.5%
50.0% 50.0%
40.0% 40.0%
30.0% 30.0%
20.0% 20.0%
10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
Male Female Male Female

2001 2011 2001 2011

LMs Gender Profile - 2016

54.0% 53.6%
52.0%
52.0% 50.9%
50.0% 49.1%
48.0%
48.0% 46.4%
46.0%
44.0%
42.0%
GT481: MOGALE CITY GT484: MERAFONG GT485: RAND WEST
CITY CITY

GT481: Mogale City GT484: Merafong City GT485: Rand West City
Male 50.9% 53.6% 52.0%
Female 49.1% 46.4% 48.0%

Male Female

5.1.5 EDUCATION PROFILE

The education profile provides an indication of the literacy levels of the District Municipality. Figure 14
and 15 indicate the education profile of the West Rand and the respective four local municipalities.
 Education levels within the West Rand have improved overall.
 higher education increased (5.0% in 2001 compared to 7.4% in 2011 and 8.2% in 2016). This trend
is consistent for all four local municipalities.
 64
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 14: West Rand DM Education Profile – 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM Education Profile – 2001-2011

70.0%
61.3%
60.0%
49.6%
50.0%
40.0% 33.4%
30.0% 26.0%

20.0% 12.0%
10.0% 5.3% 5.0% 7.4%
0.0%
No schooling Primary (Grade 1-7) Secondary (Grade 8-12) Higher

2001 2011

West Rand DM Education Profile – 2016

60.0% 55.3%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0% 20.4%
14.0%
20.0% 8.2%
2.1%
10.0%
0.0%
NO PRIMARY SECONDARY HIGHER UNKNOWN
SCHOOLING (GRADE 1-7) (GRADE 8-12)

Secondary (Grade 8-
No schooling Primary (Grade 1-7) Higher Unknown
12)
WRDM 14.0% 20.4% 55.3% 8.2% 2.1%

Figure 15: Local Municipalities Education Profile – 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

63.3%
61.8%

53.4%

70.0% 70.0%
52.6%

60.0% 60.0%
50.0% 50.0%
30.2%

30.0%
24.7%
23.2%

40.0% 40.0%
30.0% 30.0%
11.3%
10.3%

10.1%

7.9%
6.9%

20.0% 20.0%
5.3%
4.9%

4.2%

10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
No Primary Secondary Higher No Primary Secondary Higher
schooling (Grade 1- (Grade 8- schooling (Grade 1- (Grade 8-
7) 12) 7) 12)

2001 2011 2001 2011

 65
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Merafong City LM 2001-2011

60.0%

59.6%
70.0% 70.0%

45.9%
44.1%
60.0% 60.0%

38.4%

37.1%
50.0% 50.0%

30.4%

29.5%
40.0% 40.0%
14.6%

13.5%
30.0% 30.0%

6.4%
20.0% 20.0%
6.2%

4.5%
3.5%

3.4%
2.9%
10.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0%
No Primary Secondary Higher No Primary Secondary Higher
schooling (Grade 1- (Grade 8- schooling (Grade 1- (Grade 8-
7) 12) 7) 12)

2001 2011 2001 2011

LMs 2016
60.0% 55.6%52.9%56.7%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0% 22.1%22.0%
18.5%
20.0% 13.5%14.5%14.2%
10.2%8.3%
5.3%
10.0% 2.2% 2.2% 1.8%
0.0%
NO PRIMARY SECONDARY HIGHER UNKNOWN
SCHOOLING (GRADE 1-7) (GRADE 8-
12)

Primary (Grade Secondary

No schooling Higher Unknown
1-7) (Grade 8-12)
GT481: Mogale City 13.5% 18.5% 55.6% 10.2% 2.2%
GT484: Merafong City 14.5% 22.1% 52.9% 8.3% 2.2%
GT485: Rand West City 14.2% 22.0% 56.7% 5.3% 1.8%

GT481: Mogale City GT484: Merafong City GT485: Rand West City

5.1.6 EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Employment status is a good indication of the vibrancy of the economic environment of a Municipality.
Figure 16 and 17 indicate the employment status of the West Rand and the four respective local
municipalities from which the following is evident.
 69.8% of the West Rand DM population is Economically Active in 2011, of which 73.7% is employed
(2011). Employment increased by 6% from 2001 to 2011. This is a good indication of positive
economic growth within the district during the past decade.
 For 2011, all four local municipalities have an employment rate of 70%+.
 66
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Merafong City LM has the lowest EAP segment at 66.2% for 2011 which means that Merafong City
has a limited population aged 15 to 64.

Figure 16: West Rand DM Employment Status – 2001-20113

West Rand DM 2001-2011

100.0
EAP Segment:
90.0 69.8% (2011)

73.7
67.7

80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0

32.3
40.0

26.3
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Employed Unemployed

2001 2011

Figure 17: Local Municipalities Employment Status – 2001-20114

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

100.0 100.0
EAP Segment: EAP Segment:
90.0 90.0
75.4

70.9% (2011) 69.4% (2011)

72.9

80.0 80.0
65.9

64.0

70.0 70.0
60.0 60.0
50.0 50.0
36.0
34.1

27.1

40.0 40.0
24.6

30.0 30.0
20.0 20.0
10.0 10.0
0.0 0.0
Employed Unemployed Employed Unemployed

2001 2011 2001 2011

3
No 2016 data available from STATSSA
4
No 2016 data available from STATSSA
 67
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Marafong City LM 2001-2011

100.0 100.0
EAP Segment: EAP Segment:
90.0 73.3% (2011) 90.0 66.2% (2011)

72.8
71.9
70.5
68.1
80.0 80.0
70.0 70.0
60.0 60.0
50.0 50.0

31.9

29.5

28.1

27.2
40.0 40.0
30.0 30.0
20.0 20.0
10.0 10.0
0.0 0.0
Employed Unemployed Employed Unemployed

2001 2011 2001 2011

5.1.7 HOUSEHOLD INCOME

From Figure 18 and 19 below the following conclusions can be derived:

 The income distribution profile indicates that the disposable income per household per annum
overall increased from 2001 to 2011 (higher disposable incomes per annum).
 A significant increase in the income bracket of R153 800 and more is noted. The West Rand
household income increased by 10.3% 2001 (4.7%) to 2011 (15.0%). In terms of the LM, Mogale
City experienced the most significant change in the household income bracket R153 800 and more,
from 2.9% in 2001 to 18.2% in 2011 (15.3% change).
 In terms of the West Rand DM, a slight decrease (1.6%) in terms of households earning no income
was experienced from 2001 (17.3%) to 2011 (15.7%).
 68
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 18: West Rand DM Household Income Distribution – 2001-20115

West Rand DM 2001-2011

R 2 457 601 or more 0.3%

0.1% HI 2001: 4.7%
HI 2011: 15.0%

R 1 228 801 - R 2 457 600 0.4%

0.2%

R 614 001 - R 1 228 800 1.6%

0.2%

R 307 601 - R 614 400 4.7%

0.9%

R 153 801 - R 307 600 8.0%

3.2%

R 76 401 - R 153 800 10.6%

6.2%

R 38 201 - R 76 400 18.3%

8.8%

R 19 601 - R 38 200 17.2%

22.4%

R 9601 - R 19 600 13.1%

23.8%

R 4801 - R 9600 5.9%

11.5%

R 1 - R 4800 4.0%
5.3%

No income 15.7%
17.3%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%

2011 2001

Income Bracket: R153 801 and more 2001 2011 % Change

West Rand 4.7% 15.0% 10.3%
Mogale City 2.9% 18.2% 15.3%
Randfontein (now Rand West City) 7.7% 18.5% 10.8%
Westonaria (now Rand West City) 5.7% 8.6% 2.9%
Merafong City 2.3% 11.1% 8.9%

5
No 2016 data available from STATSSA
 69
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 19: Local Municipalities Household Income Distribution – 2001-20116

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

R 2 457 601 or more 0.4%
0.1% HI 2011: R 2 457 601 or more 0.2%
0.2% HI 2011:
R 1 228 801 - R 2 457… 0.7%
0.2% 18.2% R 1 228 801 - R 2 457… 0.3%
0.3% 18.5%

R 614 001 - R 1 228… 2.5%

0.1% R 614 001 - R 1 228… 1.6%
0.4%
R 307 601 - R 614 400 0.5% 6.0% R 307 601 - R 614 400 1.7% 5.9%
R 153 801 - R 307 600 2.0% 8.5% R 153 801 - R 307 600 5.2% 10.5%
R 76 401 - R 153 800 4.6% 10.2% R 76 401 - R 153 800 8.5%12.3%
R 38 201 - R 76 400 6.6% 14.1% R 38 201 - R 76 400 11.5%15.5%
R 19 601 - R 38 200 18.6%27.3% R 19 601 - R 38 200 17.8%
16.9%
R 9601 - R 19 600 14.2% 28.1% R 9601 - R 19 600 15.0%
18.8%
R 4801 - R 9600 5.6%
8.6% R 4801 - R 9600 5.3% 14.5%
R 1 - R 4800 3.6%
5.1% R 1 - R 4800 3.3%5.8%
No income 15.5%
16.7% No income 12.3%16.4%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0%15.0%20.0%
2011 2001 2011 2001

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Merafong City LM 2001-2011

R 2 457 601 or more 0.2%
0.1% HI 2011: R 2 457 601 or more 0.1%
0.1% HI 2011:
8.6% 11.1%
R 1 228 801 - R 2 457… 0.1%
0.3% R 1 228 801 - R 2 457… 0.2%
0.1%
R 614 001 - R 1 228… 0.5%
0.2% R 614 001 - R 1 228… 0.8%
0.1%
R 307 601 - R 614 400 2.4%
1.0% R 307 601 - R 614 400 3.1%
0.4%
R 153 801 - R 307 600 5.4%
4.1% R 153 801 - R 307 600 1.5%6.8%
R 76 401 - R 153 800 9.0%
8.7% R 76 401 - R 153 800 3.3% 11.3%
R 38 201 - R 76 400 11.9% 20.2% R 38 201 - R 76 400 6.2% 26.6%
R 19 601 - R 38 200 16.4%
17.8% R 19 601 - R 38 200 14.7% 25.9%
R 9601 - R 19 600 11.4% 20.3% R 9601 - R 19 600 11.1% 27.2%
R 4801 - R 9600 7.8% 13.6% R 4801 - R 9600 5.9%10.2%
R 1 - R 4800 6.0%
5.6% R 1 - R 4800 4.0%
4.5%
No income 16.3%20.6% No income 15.3%20.7%
0.0% 5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0%
2011 2001 2011 2001

5.1.8 TENURE STATUS

The tenure status gives an indication of the ownership status of residential units in the West Rand
(Figures 20 and 21). The following figures indicate the tenure status of occupants in the West Rand
residential units in 2001 and 2011.
 The rental tenure increased by 7.7% from 2001 (34.5%) to 2011 (42.2%) and properties owned and
fully paid off increased slightly by 2.5% from 2001 (22.5%) to 2011 (25.0%).
 Owned but not yet paid off tenure decreased by 6.5% from 18.5% (2001) to 12.0% (2011) and rent
free tenure decreased slightly by 3.7% from 24.5% (2001) to 20.8% (2011).

6
No 2016 data available from STATSSA
 70
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Mogale City LM and Merafong City LM experienced minimal changes in term of the residential
tenure.
 The former Randfontein LM experienced an increase in the rented 34.4% category in 2011, as well
as the owned and fully paid off 31.6% category in 2011 tenure composed to 23% in 2001.
 The former Westonaria LM experienced the most significant changes in term of the rental tenure -
19.1% increase in rental tenure from 32.2% (2001) to 51.3% (2011). The owned but not yet paid off
tenure decreased significantly by 13.7% from 20.7% (2001) to 7.0% (2011).

Figure 20: West Rand DM Tenure Status – 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM 2001-2011

42.2%

50.0%
34.5%

40.0%

25.0%
24.5%

22.5%
20.8%
18.5%

30.0%
12.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Rented Owned but not yet paid Occupied rent-free Owned and fully paid off
off

2001 2011

West Rand DM - 2016

40.0% 37.6%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0% 21.0%
20.0% 14.6%
12.3%
15.0% 7.3%
10.0% 5.6%
1.5% 0.1%
5.0%
0.0%

Rented
Rented from other
Owned; but Owned and
from (incl. Occupied Do not
not yet fully paid Other Unspecified
private municipalit rent-free know
paid off off
individual y and social
housing ins
West Rand DM 21.0% 5.6% 12.3% 37.6% 14.6% 7.3% 1.5% 0.1%
 71
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 21: Local Municipalities Tenure Status – 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

50.0% 50.0%
37.6%
37.5%
45.0% 45.0%

34.4%
40.0% 40.0%

31.6%
35.0% 35.0%

27.0%
25.8%
25.8%

24.6%

24.3%
23.2%

23.0%
22.4%
30.0% 30.0%

17.5%
25.0% 25.0%

16.6%
15.4%
13.5%

20.0% 20.0%
15.0% 15.0%
10.0% 10.0%
5.0% 5.0%
0.0% 0.0%
Rented Owned Occupied Owned Rented Owned Occupied Owned
but not rent-free and fully but not rent-free and fully
yet paid paid off yet paid paid off
off off

2001 2011 2001 2011

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Merafong LM 2001-2011

70.0% 70.0%
55.6%
51.3%

49.9%

60.0% 60.0%

50.0% 50.0%
32.2%

40.0% 40.0%
26.7%

24.6%
22.1%
20.7%

20.4%

19.8%
19.6%

19.5%

30.0% 30.0%
15.1%

20.0% 20.0%
9.6%
7.0%

6.0%

10.0% 10.0%

0.0% 0.0%
Rented Owned Occupied Owned Rented Owned Occupied Owned
but not rent-free and fully but not rent-free and fully
yet paid paid off yet paid paid off
off off

2001 2011 2001 2011

 72
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

LMs - 2016
45.0% 43.2%

40.0%
35.8%
35.0% 33.4%

30.0%
24.6%
25.0% 20.8%
18.7%
20.0% 14.5%
15.7% 14.4% 14.9%
15.0% 12.5%
10.4%
8.1% 8.8% 6.1%
10.0% 5.3% 6.0% 0.8% 0.2%
5.0% 2.4% 2.0% 1.4%
0.1% 0.0%
0.0%

Rented
from other
Rented (incl. Owned;
Owned
from municipali but not Occupied Do not Unspecifie
and fully Other
private ty and yet paid rent-free know d
paid off
individual social off
housing
ins
GT481: Mogale City 20.8% 2.4% 15.7% 35.8% 14.4% 8.8% 2.0% 0.1%
GT484: Merafong City 24.6% 12.5% 8.1% 33.4% 14.5% 6.0% 0.8% 0.2%
GT485: Rand West City 18.7% 5.3% 10.4% 43.2% 14.9% 6.1% 1.4% 0.0%

GT481: Mogale City GT484: Merafong City GT485: Rand West City

5.1.9 DWELLING TYPE

Dwelling type is a good indication of the residential character of a municipality. Figures 22 and 23
indicate the dwelling type distribution within the West Rand DM and the four local municipalities
respectively and can be summarised as follow:
 The most dominant dwelling type within the West Rand for the period 2001 till 2011 is a house or
brick structure on a separate stand or yard (60.5% - 2011).
 Informal dwellings (shack, not in back yard) decreased from 2001 (20.5%) to 2011 (14.7%).
 The LM indicate a similar trend in terms of dwelling type, although it is noted that the Merafong LM
had a significant decrease in informal dwellings (shack not in back yard) from 2001 (39.6) to 2011
(16.5%).
 73
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 22: West Rand DM Dwelling Type – 2001-2011-2016

West Rand DM 2001-2011

Caravan/tent 0.1%
0.3%
Room/flatlet on a property or… 1.3%
2.1%
Informal dwelling (shack; not in… 14.7%
20.5%
Informal dwelling (shack; in… 11.1%
11.3%
House/flat/room in backyard 5.0%
6.4%
Cluster house in complex 3.0%
1.6%
Flat or apartment in a block of flats 4.1%
2.7%
Traditional dwelling/hut/structure… 0.3%
1.5%
House or brick structure on a… 60.5%
54.0%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%

2011 2001

West Rand DM 2016

OTHER 0.5%
CARAVAN/TENT 0.0%
ROOM/FLATLET ON A PROPERTY OR LARGER… 0.7%
INFORMAL DWELLING/SHACK NOT IN… 10.6%
INFORMAL DWELLING/SHACK IN BACKYARD 9.2%
FORMAL DWELLING/HOUSE/FLAT/ROOM IN… 6.5%
SEMI-DETACHED HOUSE 0.5%
TOWNHOUSE (SEMI-DETACHED HOUSE IN A… 1.2%
CLUSTER HOUSE IN COMPLEX 1.1%
FLAT OR APARTMENT IN A BLOCK OF FLATS 2.4%
TRADITIONAL DWELLING/HUT/STRUCTURE… 0.3%
FORMAL DWELLING/HOUSE OR… 67.0%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%

Traditio Informa Room/f

Formal Townh
nal l latlet
dwellin ouse Formal Informa
dwellin dwellin on a
g/hous Flat or Cluster (semi- dwellin l
g/hut/s Semi- g/shack propert
e or apartm house detach g/hous dwellin
tructur detach not in y or Carava
brick/c ent in a in ed e/flat/r g/shack Other
e made ed backyar larger n/tent
oncrete block of comple house oom in in
of house d (e.g. dwellin
block flats x in a backyar backyar
traditio in an g/serva
structur comple d d
nal informa nts
e on a x)
mater l quart
West Rand DM 67.0% 0.3% 2.4% 1.1% 1.2% 0.5% 6.5% 9.2% 10.6% 0.7% 0.0% 0.5%
 74
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 23: Local Municipalities Dwelling Type – 2001-2011-2016

Mogale City LM 2001-2011 Randfontein LM 2001-2011

Caravan/tent 0.1% Caravan/tent 0.1%

0.3% 0.3%
Room/flatlet on a 1.2% Room/flatlet on a 1.2%
property or larger… 1.9% property or larger… 2.1%
Informal dwelling 9.6% Informal dwelling 8.4%
(shack; not in… 22.0% (shack; not in… 17.3%
Informal dwelling 15.8% Informal dwelling 10.9%
(shack; in backyard) 8.7% (shack; in backyard) 11.7%
House/flat/room in 4.2% House/flat/room in 8.8%
backyard 6.3% backyard 4.9%
Cluster house in 4.3% Cluster house in 2.8%
complex 1.0% complex 2.5%
Flat or apartment in a 2.7% Flat or apartment in a 4.2%
block of flats 2.7% block of flats 2.8%
Traditional 0.4% Traditional 0.2%
dwelling/hut/structu… 1.3% dwelling/hut/structu… 1.7%
House or brick 61.7% House or brick 63.4%
structure on a… 55.8% structure on a… 56.7%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0%
2011 2001 2011 2001

Westonaria LM 2001-2011 Merafong City LM 2001-2011

Caravan/tent 0.0% Caravan/tent 0.1%

0.2% 0.4%
Room/flatlet on a 0.8% Room/flatlet on a 2.0%
property or larger… 2.8% property or larger… 1.5%
Informal dwelling 33.6% Informal dwelling 16.5%
(shack; not in… 9.0% (shack; not in… 39.6%
Informal dwelling 6.0% Informal dwelling 5.6%
(shack; in backyard) 10.6% (shack; in backyard) 15.6%
House/flat/room in 4.1% House/flat/room in 4.5%
backyard 9.2% backyard 7.4%
Cluster house in 1.5% Cluster house in 1.9%
complex 1.3% complex 0.5%
Flat or apartment in a 2.7% Flat or apartment in a 7.2%
block of flats 2.7% block of flats 2.3%
Traditional 0.3% Traditional 0.2%
dwelling/hut/structu… 1.0% dwelling/hut/structu… 1.7%
House or brick 51.0% House or brick 62.0%
structure on a… 63.2% structure on a… 31.0%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0%
2011 2001 2011 2001
 75
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

LMs - 2016

0.6%
Other 0.3%
0.6%

0.0%
Caravan/tent 0.0%
0.0%

Room/flatlet on a property or larger 0.9%

0.7%
dwelling/servants quart 0.6%

Informal dwelling/shack not in backyard 11.7%

11.5%
(e.g. in an informal 9.5%

10.5%
Informal dwelling/shack in backyard 5.0%
10.3%

Formal dwelling/house/flat/room in 6.9%

7.9%
backyard 5.5%

1.2%
Semi-detached house 0.4%
0.0%

Townhouse (semi-detached house in a 2.0%

0.3%
complex) 1.1%

0.6%
Cluster house in complex 0.3%
1.8%

3.5%
Flat or apartment in a block of flats 2.4%
1.6%

Traditional dwelling/hut/structure made of 0.2%

0.8%
traditional mater 0.1%

Formal dwelling/house or brick/concrete 61.9%

70.5%
block structure on a 68.8%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%

Traditi Inform
Room/
Formal onal Townh al
flatlet
dwellin dwellin ouse Formal Inform dwellin
on a
g/hous g/hut/ Flat or Cluster (semi- dwellin al g/shac
Semi- proper
e or structu apartm house detach g/hous dwellin k not
detach ty or Carava
brick/c re ent in in ed e/flat/r g/shac in Other
ed larger n/tent
oncret made a block compl house oom in k in backya
house dwellin
e block of of flats ex in a backya backya rd (e.g.
g/serv
structu traditi compl rd rd in an
ants
re on a onal ex) inform
quart
mater al
GT485: Rand West City 61.9% 0.2% 3.5% 0.6% 2.0% 1.2% 6.9% 10.5% 11.7% 0.9% 0.0% 0.6%
GT484: Merafong City 70.5% 0.8% 2.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 7.9% 5.0% 11.5% 0.7% 0.0% 0.3%
GT481: Mogale City 68.8% 0.1% 1.6% 1.8% 1.1% 0.0% 5.5% 10.3% 9.5% 0.6% 0.0% 0.6%

GT485: Rand West City GT484: Merafong City GT481: Mogale City
 76
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.1.10 CONCLUDING REMARKS

In summary, the following are the most salient socio-economic features of the WRDM based on the
2011 Census information for the area:
 The West Rand DM contributes 6.7% (2011) towards the Gauteng Province, of which the Mogale
City (44.1%) is the biggest population contributor towards the West Rand DM.
 The District experienced a population increase of 82 627 people from 2001 to 2011.
 The WRDM is characterised by a younger population segment, mainly represented by the age
group 15 to 35 years (38.7% - 2011).
 In addition, 71.9% of the total West Rand DM population falls within the Economically Active
Population segment.
 The West Rand DM is dominated by the African Black population segment (79.2% - 2011) followed
by the White population segment (16.7% - 2011).
 In terms of gender, the West Rand DM is relatively equally represented by males (52.2% - 2011)
and females (47.8% - 2011).
 The overall education levels of the West Rand DM increased from 2001 to 2011.
 However, only 61.3% of the West Rand DM population has a secondary school education level
and merely 4.7% have a higher education.
 The West Rand have relatively high employment level. Of the 69.8% of the Economical Active
Population, about 73.7% are employed.
 The overall disposable income per annum of households increased for 2001 to 2011, especially
within the income bracket R153 801 and more (4.7% in 2001 compared to 15.0% in 2011).
 In terms of tenure status, rental tenure is the most significant within the West Rand, representing
42.2% of the total tenure distribution (2011).
 The dominant dwelling type within the West Rand is a house or brick structure on a separate stand
or yard (60.5% - 2011) followed by informal dwellings (shack not in back yard) (14.7% - 2011).

5.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE

The following section highlights the relevant employment and sectoral trends within the main economic
sectors in the West Rand District, as identified by the WRDM Regional Economic Development Plan
which was compiled in 2012.

5.2.1 EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR

The current employment rate of the WRDM is calculated at about 74%, which is higher than the
employment rate of Gauteng (72%). Unemployment in the WRDM is thus calculated at 26% compared
to the 28% of Gauteng Province. As illustrated on Figure 24
the main sectors of employment within the WRDM are as follow:
 Mining Sector - 22.9%,
 77
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Wholesale and Trade Sector – 18.7%

 Business Services Sector – 14.5%
 Community services Sector – 12.9%
 Government Services Sector – 11.2%

Figure 24: Percentage Distribution of Employment for West Rand District

Government Agriculture
services 2% Mining
11% 23%
Community services
13%

Manufacturing
10%

Business services
14%
Electricity & Water
0%
Transport &
Construction
Communication Wholesale & Trade 4%
4% 19%

Source: WRDM Regional Economic Development Plan

The main sectors of employment in the individual local municipalities are summarised below. From this
it is evident that mining is mainly concentrated in Merafong City and Westonaria, while Wholesale and
Retail Trade is prominent in all four municipalities. Business Services is a major contributor in
Randfontein and Mogale City while Community Services is prominent in Merafong City, Randfontein
and Mogale City.

Local Municipalities Main Employment Distribution per Sector

 Merafong City LM: Mining; Wholesale & Retail Trade and Community services
 Former Westonaria LM: Mining; Community services and Wholesale & Retail Trade
 Former Randfontein LM: Wholesale & Retail Trade; Business services and Community services
 Mogale City LM: Wholesale & Retail Trade; Business services and Community services
 West Rand DM: Mining; Wholesale & Retail Trade and Business Services

Deduced from the above economic analysis, it is clear that the Mining sector (23%) is the main
employment contributor towards the WRDM, followed by the Wholesale and Trade sector (19%) and
the business services sector (14%).
 78
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.2.2 EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION

In terms of the employment by occupation profile of the WRDM, the largest portion of the district’s
employed population is employed as craft and related trades workers (17%), this is also the case for
the former Randfontein (15%) and Westonaria (26%) LMs. The largest portion of Merafong City’s
employed population is employed as plant and machine operators (22%), and the largest portion of
Mogale City’s employed population is employed in elementary occupations (15%). The smallest portion
across all four local municipalities’ and District’s employed population is skilled agricultural and fishery
workers. This small portion of employed population in agriculture is concerning given the agricultural
potential within the West Rand District. This implies that there is a need for training in agriculture and
to improve the skills level in this sector.

5.2.3 SECTORAL TRENDS (GDP)

The mining sector has been the highest contributor towards the Gross Domestic Product of the
Merafong City Local Municipality (42%) and the former Westonaria Local Municipality (60%). The
Business services sector was the highest contributor towards the Gross Domestic Product for Mogale
City Local Municipality (22%) and the former Randfontein Local Municipality (22%). The Agricultural
sector contributed the least to all four Local Municipalities’ Gross Domestic Product.

Local Municipalities Main GDP Contributions Sector

 Merafong City LM: Mining, Business Services and Wholesale & Trade
 Former Westonaria LM: Business Services, Manufacturing and Government Services
 Former Randfontein LM: Business Services, Government Services and manufacturing
 Mogale City LM: Mining, Government Services, Business Services
 West Rand DM: Mining; Business Services, Government Services and Manufacturing

As depicted on Figure 25 below, the Mining sector and the Business services sector were the highest
contributors towards the District Municipality’s Gross Domestic Product, each contributing 18%,
followed by the Government services sector (16%) and the Manufacturing sector (15%). The sector
that contributed the least towards the District’s Gross Domestic Product is the Agricultural sector,
contributing a mere 1% to the total GDP.
 79
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 25: Percentage Distribution Of GDP By Sector For West Rand District, 2010

Government services 16%

Community services 5%
Business services 18%
Transport 8%
Wholesale & trade 12%
Construction 4%
Electricity, water 2%
Manufacturing 15%
Mining 18%
Agriculture 1%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%

Source: WRDM Regional Economic Development Plan

Table 3 is a summary of the Gross Domestic Product indicators and employment indicators of the
main economic sectors for the West Rand DM:

The per annum Gross Domestic Product growth rate for the West Rand District Municipality as a whole
was 1% between 2001 and 2005 and remained at 1% for the period 2006 to 2010. This growth was
not equally spread across all sectors. The Agriculture sector (-2%) and mining sector (-7%) experienced
negative GDP growth during the 2001 to 2005 time period. Between 2006 and 2010, the agriculture
sector (-4%), the mining sector (-5%) and the manufacturing sector (-1%) experienced negative GDP
growth. The Construction sector had the highest rate of Gross Domestic Product growth between 2001
and 2005 (10%), as well as between 2006 and 2010 (7%).

Table 3: Summary of GDPR Indicators and Employment Indicators of the WRDM

Economic Sector Economic Contributions (GDPR and Employment) %
Agricultural Sector GDPR share of agriculture sector 0.6%
Average per annum growth of the agriculture sector -5%
Employment share of agriculture sector 1.7%
Average per annum growth of the agriculture sector -10%
Mining Sector GDPR share of mining sector 26.0%
Average per annum growth of the mining sector -6%
Employment share of mining sector 23.0%
Average per annum growth of the mining sector -3%
Manufacturing GDPR share of manufacturing sector 12.5%
Sector Average per annum growth of the manufacturing sector 2%
Employment share of manufacturing sector 9.6%
Average per annum growth of the manufacturing sector 0%
GDPR share of utilities and construction sector 6.3%
 80
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Economic Sector Economic Contributions (GDPR and Employment) %

Utilities & Average per annum growth of the utilities and construction 8%
Construction sector
Employment share of construction sector 5.0%
Average per annum growth of the construction sector 0%
Wholesale & Retail GDPR share of wholesale and retail trade sector 11.4%
Trade Average per annum growth of the wholesale and retail trade 4%
sector
Employment share of wholesale and retail trade sector 16.8%
Average per annum growth of the wholesale and retail trade 2%
sector
Transport & GDPR share of transport and communications sector 4.4%
Communications Average per annum growth of the transport and 6%
communications sector
Employment share of transport and communications sector 3.6%
Average per annum growth of the transport and 2%
communications sector
Finance and GDPR share of finance and social/community services sector 36.1%
Social/Community Average per annum growth of the finance and social/community 5%
services services sector
Employment share of finance and social/community services 38.6%
sector
Average per annum growth of the finance and social/community 2%
services sector
Tourism Sector GDPR share of tourism sector 0%
Average per annum growth of the tourism sector 3%
Employment share of tourism sector 1.8%
Average per annum growth of the tourism sector -2%

Table 4 below summarises the GDPR and employment contributions of the main economic sectors per
each of the local municipalities in the West Rand District.

Table 4: Summary of GDPR and Employment Contributions toward WRDM per Local
Municipality
Sector Contribution GDPR / Mogale Former Former Merafong
towards District Employment City LM Randfontein Westonaria City LM
LM Lm
Agricultural Sector GDPR 43% 12% 3% 42%
Employment 57% 15% 3% 25%
Mining Sector GDPR 7% 6% 34% 53%
Employment 2% 3% 20% 75%
Manufacturing Sector GDPR 64% 24% 5% 7%
Employment 61% 24% 5% 10%
Utilities & Construction GDPR 63% 17% 6% 14%
Employment 58% 12% 9% 21%
Wholesale & Retail GDPR 57% 17% 5% 21%
Trade Employment 51% 18% 6% 25%
Transport & GDPR 58% 18% 6% 18%
Communications Employment 59% 24% 8% 9%
GDPR 56% 21% 5% 18%
 81
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Sector Contribution GDPR / Mogale Former Former Merafong

towards District Employment City LM Randfontein Westonaria City LM
LM Lm
Finance and Employment
Social/Community 55% 19% 7% 19%
services
Tourism Sector GDPR 67% 15% 3% 15%
Employment 67% 14% 3% 16%

The following can be concluded from Table 4:

 Agriculture is dominant in Mogale City and Merafong City;
 Mining is dominant in Westonaria and Merafong City;
 Manufacturing is mainly concentrated in Mogale City and to a lesser extent in Randfontein;
 Utilities and Construction is dominant in Mogale City;
 Transport and Communications as well as Finance and Social Services are also most prominent
in Mogale City;
 Mogale City also holds the bulk of Tourism activity and job opportunities;
 Apart from mining, the former Westonaria municipality makes very little contribution to the regional
economy.

5.3 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Section 5.3 provides an overview of the main environmental features of the West Rand District
Municipality. Extensive environmental work has been done in the WRDM area over the past few years,
most of which have been captured in the WRDM State of the Environment Report (2011), and the
WRDM Environmental Management Framework (2012). Most of the information contained in section
5.3 has been extracted from these two documents.

5.3.1 TOPOGRAPHY, HYDROLOGY AND CLIMATE

a) Topography

The West Rand District comprises two major series of ridges – the ridges in the far northern extents of
the district which are part of the Magalies mountain range, and the Gatsrant ridges which run in an east-
west direction across the central part of the district as illustrated on Map 9. The areas in between
comprise large areas with gentle slopes.

Ridges, due to the varied topography and climate, are considered to have spatially heterogeneous,
abiotic conditions that provide a greater diversity of potential habitats and migration/ecological corridors
for plants and animals. Ridges are therefore considered ecologically sensitive, and protection of these
is critical to the sustainability of many species as well as the overall biodiversity of the region. Slope
steepness also restricts development potential – especially on slopes of more than 11 degrees.
 82
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

b) Hydrology

The central-northern part of the district, more or less in the vicinity of Randfontein comprises the main
watershed between the Vaal River (south) and the Crocodile River (north) Water Management Areas
as depicted on Map 10.

Seven main river systems intersect the WRDM, namely the Skeerpoort River, Magalies River,
Rietspruit, Crocodile River to the north, and the Wonderfonteinspruit, Loopspruit and Leeuspruit.

External pressures, emanating from acid mine drainage, agriculture and industrial activities in the West
Rand are major contributing factors to the poor state of surface and ground water quality in the region.

Strongly associated with the hydrology of the WRDM, is the occurrence and spatial distribution of
wetlands as depicted on Map 11. From this it is evident that there is a large concentration of wetland
areas located in between the two series of ridges as described under a) above.

Wetlands are extremely important ecosystems as they support a high biodiversity and also perform
important ecological functions such as water purification, flood attenuation, sediment and nutrient
retention, carbon sinks, tourism potential, and stream flow regulation.

The Gauteng C-Plan (GDARD, 2011a) has identified 3 960.43 ha of important wetlands in the WRDM.
Of these wetlands only 2.7% is currently under formal conservation (Map 11).

c) Climate

The climate of the WRDM is typical of Highveld conditions, with relatively warm to hot summers, fairly
high rainfall and moderate to cool winters (with little or no rain). Average annual minimum and maximum
temperatures recorded range between 8° Celsius and 23.9° Celsius respectively.

average annual precipitation recorded ranges between 646mm and 736mm, and falls predominantly
between October and March, during the summer months. Monthly rainfall ranges from 4 mm to 138
mm. Cycles of prolonged drought, lasting for several years, are a natural phenomenon. The area
experiences thunderstorms, which usually occur in the late afternoons during the summer months.
Extreme weather conditions, such as hail and fog, rarely occur within the West Rand District.
 83
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 9: Ridges

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 84
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 10: Water Management Areas

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 85
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.3.2 VEGETATION

The WRDM incorporates 11 vegetation types classified by Mucina & Rutherford (2006) and as spatially
depicted on Map 12 and summarised in Table 5 below. The dominant vegetation type is the
Carletonville Dolomite Grassland which covers about 61 246ha of land in the central parts of the district,
followed by Rand Highveld Grassland to the south of Gatsrant. The Gauteng Shale Mountain Bushveld
occurs along the Gatsrant and southern parts of the Magalies ridges.

Table 5: Vegetation

Vegetation Type Description

Soweto Highland Grassland The WRDm incorporates a total of 61 246.22 ha of the Soweto
Highveld Grassland of which 874.56 ha is protected (1.4%).
Eastern Temperate The WRDM incorporates a total of 1 032.35 ha of Eastern
Freshwater Wetlands Temperate Freshwater Wetlands of which none are conserved.
Carletonville Dolomite The WRDM incorporates a total of 149 678.95 ha of Carletonville
Grassland Dolomite Grassland of which 27 719.81 ha are protected (18.5%).
Egoli Granite Grassland The WRDM incorporates a total of 18 374.8 ha of the Egoli Granite
grasslands of which 443.96 ha are protected in conservancies and 4
620.57 ha are formally protected (27.5%)
Andesite Mountain Bushveld The WRDM incorporates a total of 10 882.56 ha of the Andesite
Mountain Bushveld of which 6 212.01 ha are formally protected
(57%).
Gauteng Shale Mountain The WRDM incorporates a total of 56 778.37 ha of the Gauteng
Bushveld Shale Mountain Bushveld of which 956.84 ha are protected in
conservancies and 1 856.81 ha are formally protected (4.9%).
Waterberg – Magaliesberg The WRDM incorporates a total of 489.27 ha of the Waterberg –
Summit Sourveld Magaliesberg Summit Sourveld and is 100% protected.
Gold Reef Mountain Bushveld The WRDm incorporates a total of 14 447.52 ha of the Gold Reef
Mountain Bushveld of which 4 700/03 ha are protected (32.5%).
Moot Plains Bushveld The WRDM incorporates a total of 30 942 ha of the Moot Plains
Bushveld of which 324.33 ha are protected in conservancies and 5
806.67 ha are formally protected (19.8%).
Rand Highveld grassland The TRDM incorporates a total of 62 962.94 ha of the Rand
Highveld Grassland of which none are protected.
Northern Afrotemperate The WRDM incorporates a total of 0.56 ha of the Northern
Forest Afrotemperate Forest of which 0.55 ha are protected (98%).
 86
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 11: Wetlands

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 87
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 12: Vegetation

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 88
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.3.3 NATURE RESERVES AND CONSERVATION AREAS

The WRDM has a number of protected areas of which the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site
located in the north-eastern extents of the District is the most prominent. (Refer to Map 13). These
include the following areas/facilities:
1. The Walter Sisulu National Botanical Garden which is shared with the City of Johannesburg;

2. Abe Bailey Provincial Nature Reserve between Khutsong and Carletonville;

3. The Krugersdorp and Blougat Municipal Nature Reserves adjacent to the south of the Cradle of
Humankind;

4. The Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment (PNE) along the far-northern extents of the
District;

5. The Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site (WHS);

6. King Kloof, Rustig, John Nash and Plovers Lake Nature Reserves and Natural Heritage Sites;

7. Rhenosterspruit, Magaliesrivier, Hartebeesfontein Conservancies in the northern rural parts of

Mogale City;

8. Con Joubert Bird Sanctuary in Randfontein; and

9. The Hartebeeshoek Radio Astronomy Observatory in the vicinity of Hekpoort and which is also
part of the Cradle of Humankind.

The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD) is also in the process of
declaring a biosphere reserve for the Magaliesberg PNE and surrounding area (GDARD, 2012a). A
biosphere reserve is an area of terrestrial ecosystem which is internationally recognised within the
framework of the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
Programme on Man and the Biosphere (MAB). The biosphere consists of three areas:
 The Core: comprising the Magaliesberg PNE where conservation, research and ecotourism
activities are desired land use;
 The Buffer Zone: comprising undisturbed areas worthy of protection due to their generally high
natural, visual and cultural quality and/or sensitivity;

 Flexible Transition area: comprising areas of cooperative land owners and other affected
stakeholders who agree to work together to manage and develop the areas resources in a
sustainable and environmentally friendly way.
 89
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 13: West Rand Protected Areas and Conservancies

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

5.3.4 BIODIVERSITY

According to the Draft Bioregional Plan for the West Rand District Municipality, the West Rand District
contains a disproportionately high percentage of rare and threatened species and threatened
ecosystems compared to much of the rest of the South Africa. This is a consequence of the combination
of its topographic and geological diversity resulting in a diversity of habitats and the high level of habitat
transformation that characterises the bioregion.
 90
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Just under two thirds of the West Rand District is in a natural or near natural state (63%), with
urbanisation (6%), agriculture (28%) and mining (3%) together covering 37% of the District.

As shown on Map 14, Critical Biodiversity Areas cover 27.5% of the District; with CBA 1 (natural or near
natural state) covering 27% and CBA 2 (cultivated landscapes which retain importance for threatened
species) covering 0.5%.

Ecological Support Areas cover a further 19% of the City; with ESA 1 (natural, near natural or degraded
state) covering 13% and ESA 2 (transformed landscapes which retain importance for ecosystem
processes) covering 6%. Protected Areas cover just over 2% of the West Rand District.

In order to conserve biodiversity, the WRDM should ensure that areas of high conservation value, such
as rivers, ridges and formal and unofficial conservation areas are protected and linked via open spaces
and that the land conserved is representative of the habitat diversity in the area.

5.3.5 GEOLOGY AND MINERAL POTENTIAL

The geology of large parts of the WRDM is characterized by dolomitic compartments.

As illustrated on Map 15 the WRDM is underlain by different rock forms of which the dolomites of the
Malmami Subgroup (Transvaal Supergroup) are the most important in terms of extent and management
practices. Dolomites act as a groundwater aquifer storing vast amounts of water.

Shale, sandstone or mudstone of the Madzaringwe Formation (Karoo Supergroup) with intrusive
dolerites characterize the area around Randfontein. The eastern section of te MCLM is underlain by
archaean granite and gneiss of the Halfway House granites. The southern section of the WRDM
comprises of quartzite ridges of the Witwatersrand Supergroup.

The underlying dolomites restrict development and requires detailed geological studies prior to any
development commencing. Large parts of the district area are also unsuitable for development because
of undermining and sinkhole risks.

Mining is the most significant pressure on the geology of the WRDM, as it cuts into the earth and
removes vast amounts of rock. It also dewaters the dolomites and allows oxygen to come into contact
with the dolomite.
 91
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 14: Bioregional Plan

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 92
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 15: Geology

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 93
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.3.6 DOLOMITIC AREAS

As shown on Map 15 approximately 183 000 hectares (of the total 406 640 hectares encompassing the
entire WRDM) is located on dolomite land (land where dolomite is located at or near [less than 100m]
surface). Dolomitic areas are prone to sinkhole development and karst landscapes and as a result the
West Rand District is pitted with sinkholes and dolines, particularly in the central areas. Mining and
human habitation has further accelerated the development of sinkholes and dolines in the West Rand
through the pumping of water from subterranean aquifers while the ground water pollution potential in
dolomitic areas is also regarded as high.

5.3.7 SOIL TYPES

Map 16 indicates the spatial arrangements of soil classes in the WRDM.

The majority of the WRDM is covered in freely drained structureless soils, which have favourable
physical properties, but may have restricted soil depth, excessive drainage, high erodibility and low
natural fertility. The soils in large sections of Mogale City Local Municipality restrict development
options, because of shallow soils on rocks, low base status, excessive drainage and erodiblity. Another
soil class of undifferentiated shallow soils with restricted development options are found in Merafong
Local Municipality and the former Westonaria Local Municipality. The southern section of WLM is
dominated by structureless soils and clay with low depth, poor drainage and potential swell-shrink
properties.

Approximately 5% of West Rand District has been classified as having a high to very high erosion
hazard potential.

Clearly associated with the soil types in the WRDM is the high potential agricultural land in the District.
From Map 17 it is evident that the high potential agricultural land in the WRDM area is mainly
concentrated in the central core area between the Gatsrant and Magaliesberg (red areas on Map 17).
This land also broadly corresponds with the areas characterised by the Carletonville Dolomite
Grassland as shown on Map 12. In line with this, two areas in the WRDM form part of the Gauteng
Agricultural Hubs as depicted on the Gauteng Spatial Development Framework (Map 6). These include
the rural western parts of both Mogale City and the former Randfontein LM (Badirille up to
Magaliesburg), as well as the eastern extents of the former Westonaria LM as shown on Map 17.
 94
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 16: Soil

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 95
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.3.8 ACID MINE DRAINAGE (AMD)

A major environmental problem relating to mining in the WRDM is uncontrolled discharge of

contaminated water (or decant) from abandoned mines (Banks et al, 1997, Pulles et al, 2005).
Commonly known as Acid Mine Drainage (AMD), there is a wide acceptance that this phenomenon is
responsible for costly environmental and socio-economic impacts.

The acidic water dissolves salts and mobilizes metals from mine workings and residue deposits. Dark,
reddish brown water and pH values as low as 2.5 persist at the site (Akcil and Koldas, 2006). AMD is
not only associated with surface and groundwater pollution, but is also responsible for the degradation
of soil quality, aquatic habitats and for allowing heavy metals to seep into the environment (Adler and
Rascher, 2007). An exacerbating characteristic of AMD is its persistence, it is extremely difficult to
rectify.

Acid mine water started to decant from the defunct (closed) flooded underground mine workings in the
West Rand in August 2002. “Decant has subsequently been manifested at various mine shafts and
diffuse surface seeps in the area. Up until early 2005, and completion of storage and pumping facilities
to contain and manage on average of 15 Mega-Litres per day (ML/D) of decant, the AMD found its way
into an adjoining natural water course and flowed northward through a game reserve, and towards the
Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site”. (Oelofse et al, 2007).

AMD is thus the single most important environmental concern from mining activities. Many mines in the
WRDM area are reaching the end of their productive life and as a result, dewatering is terminated and
re-watering results in the decant of AMD, often at unpredictable locations. In addition, tailings dams and
waste rock dumps constitute surface sources of AMD. The threat of AMD to the environment is not
solved in the short to medium term; it is likely to persist for centuries to come. Whilst AMD threatens
the scarce water resources of South Africa, and as a result also human health and food securing in
mining areas, it also presents an opportunity to provide usable water through appropriate treatment
technologies.
 96
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 17: Agriculture

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 97
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.3.9 AIR POLLUTION

Airborne concentrations of particulates and dust fallout are the main concern in the WRDM area as a
result of exposed or partially exposed tailings dams, unpaved roads, mining and industrial activities
(such as crushing and screening, and temporary storage piles) as well as biomass (veld) burning and
informal refuse burning. Fine particulate concentrations have been found to be elevated throughout
areas with a high concentration of mining and industrial activities in South Africa and even in areas
more remote from heavy industrial and domestic coal burning areas.

Emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), including various toxins, teratogens, mutagens and
carcinogens are frequently associated with waste disposal facility operations and certain industrial
activities. These pollutants, despite their being emitted in trace amounts, present significant health risks
in instances where residential settlements are located in close proximity to sources. The potential also
exists for the bio-accumulation of certain substances (e.g. mercury) and for increased exposure due to
other exposure pathways, primarily ingestion. The main sources of concern include industrial operations
associated with HAP releases, domestic coal burning, and incineration and landfill operations.

5.3.10 CONCLUSIVE SUMMARY

Map 18 summarises the main environmental structuring/form giving elements relevant to the West Rand
District Municipality, and which have to be taken into consideration during the formulation of
development proposals during phase 4 of the project. These structuring elements include the following:
- the series of ridges located to the north and central-southern parts of the district area;
- the two major drainage systems with the watershed running from east to west through the
central parts of the WRDM; and associated with this the wetland areas as illustrated;
- the existing and proposed protected areas in the district of which the Cradle of Humankind is
the most significant;
- the high potential agricultural land in the WRDM, and more specifically the two agricultural
hubs as illustrated on Map 18;
- the dolomitic areas which cover the bulk of the central parts of the district.
 98
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 18: Main environmental structuring/form giving elements relevant to the West Rand District Municipality
 99
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.4 LAND USE AND SPATIAL STRUCTURE

5.4.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT

As illustrated on Map 19 the West Rand District Municipality is located at the western extents of the
central urban conurbation of Gauteng Province, generally referred to as the Witwatersrand. This
functional area extends from Randfontein/Mogale City in the west, past Roodepoort and through
Johannesburg in the City of Joburg, and further eastwards towards Germiston, Boksburg, Benoni,
Brakpan and up to Springs and Nigel at the far eastern end which are all part of the Ekurhuleni
Metropolitan Municipality.

In this context it is evident that Mogale City, Randfontein, Westonaria and Merafong City represent the
western peripheral parts of this urban conurbation and that the urban structure of the WRDM is fairly
fragmented when compared to that of the City of Joburg. This is mainly due to historic mining activities
between/around Mogale City and Randfontein which sterilized large pockets of land for urban
development, and the occurrence of dolomite in the area (refer to section 5.3.6) which restricts
urbanization in certain areas.

The WRDM covers approximately 406 623 ha of land and broadly comprises urban areas (6%), mining
(3%), natural open spaces (63%) and agricultural lands (28%). Historically the district was home to a
prosperous gold mining industry but these reserves are now largely depleted in the eastern and north-
eastern parts, while the bulk of mining currently occurs to the south and south-west in a belt stretching
from Westonaria towards Merafong City. The WRDM’s contribution to the Gauteng Province’s Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) lies primarily within the mining sector.

Areas such as Krugersdorp and Randfontein fulfil a residential function for many people working in the
Johannesburg area which represents the economic hub of the province. The Cradle of Humankind in
the WRDM is classified as a World Heritage Site and is viewed as an international tourism feature which
functionally forms part of a much larger tourism region extending from the Hartbeespoort Dam, all along
the Magalies Mountain, and up to the Pilansberg to the north-west. (Refer to Map 19). It is one of the
main tourist attractions in Gauteng Province.

The N12 and N14 freeways are the only national roads traversing the District. The N12 runs in a
northeast / southwest direction in the southern parts of the District connecting Westonaria with Merafong
City and further southwest towards Tlokwe. The N14 runs parallel to the north of the N12 through
Mogale City, and connecting the City of Tshwane to Ventersdorp. The main link between these two
routes in the WRDM area is route R28 which runs in a north-south direction linking Mogale City,
Randfontein and Westonaria to one another.
 100
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 19: Regional context

 101
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.4.2 LOCAL CONTEXT

Map 20 illustrates the spatial structure and main land uses in the WRDM area. The following should be
noted in this regard:

 The WRDM area is predominantly rural in nature with the major land use activities in the rural parts
of the district being agriculture(1)g, conservation and to a lesser extent mining;
 Conservation areas largely coincide with the ridges in the northern and central-southern parts of
the district, of which the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site(2) and the Abe Bailey Nature
Reserve(3) are the most prominent;
 Tourism facilities and activities in the district are mainly concentrated in the northern parts of the
district in the areas around Magaliesburg(4), Hekpoort(5) and in the Cradle of Humankind(2);
 Agricultural holdings(6) mainly occur in a strip parallel to the west of the residential areas of Mogale
City, Randfontein and Westonaria along route R28 and include areas like Loumarina, Elands and
Wheatlands Agricultural Holdings;
 Historically, mining activities were concentrated in the Witwatersrand mining belt(7) which represents
the area between Randfontein and Mogale City in the context of the WRDM. However, the central-
southern parts of the WRDM(8) more or less along route N12 through the Westonaria and Merafong
City municipalities have now become the primary mining area. As illustrated on Map 20 mining
activity is scattered throughout this area;
 There are eleven proclaimed industrial areas in the WRDM of which one is located in Westonaria,
one in Randfontein (Aureus), two in Merafong City and more specifically in Carletonville and
Oberholzer, and seven in Mogale City of which the most prominent include Chamdor, Factoria and
Boltonia;
 Business activities are mainly concentrated in the central business districts of Mogale City,
Randfontein, Westonaria and Carletonville respectively, with smaller nodes currently being
established in Key West and the Cradle City(9) area north of the Krugersdorp CBD, around
Kagiso(10), in Khutsong(11) and in Welverdiend(12);
 Residential areas are mainly concentrated around the historic central business districts of the main
towns, but from Map 20 it is evident these areas still resemble a very fragmented spatial structure;
 Similarly, the low income residential areas are even further removed from the urban core areas.
These include large residential areas like Khutsong and Kagiso in Mogale City, Toekomsrus and
Mohlakeng in Randfontein, Bekkersdal and Simunye in Westonaria and Khutsong, Wedela and
Kokosi in Merafong City;
 Several informal settlements also occur in the rural parts of the district with the major concentrations
being around Badirille(13), Tarlton/Orient Hills(14), Magaliesburg(4), Hekpoort(5) and Nooitgedacht(15)
adjacent to the south of the Lanseria Airport(16);
 The main transport routes in the WRDM area include the N14 and N12 national routes; route R28
which links Mogale City, Randfontein and Westonaria to one another; route R24 towards

g
See corresponding number on Map 20.
 102
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Rustenburg; R512 to Hartbeespoort Dam, R500 which serves the western rural parts of the district
in a north-south direction; route R501 which links Westonaria to Carletonville, and route R54 which
serves the far southern parts of the district;
 Development pressure translates into a continuous sprawl of development into the rural areas. This
needs to be controlled to preserve and maintain the rural character of the area.;
 Mogale City is very much the economic driver of the district. It has considerable manufacturing
capacity while tourism is mostly consolidated in the Cradle of Humankind in the north-western parts
of Mogale City. Significant attractions within the Cradle of Humankind include the Magalies
Meander, the Sterkfontein caves and the Krugersdorp Game Reserve;
 Residential development in the southern parts is mainly aimed at consolidating the existing
fragmented urban fabric while a fairly strong trend of residential development is emerging in the
northern parts of Mogale City around the N14 freeway and along Hendrik Potgieter Drive.
The following is a more comprehensive description of individual land uses as these occur in the West
Rand District area.

[Link] AGRICULTURE

Due to the strategic location of the WRDM in relation to the Gauteng Province and its close proximity
to the large consumer markets of fresh produce, the agriculture sector has huge potential to grow and
stimulate economic development. The WRDM also contains some areas with good to excellent
agricultural potential as illustrated on Map 20 in this report and intensive agriculture currently covers
approximately 28% of total land area in the District. The WRDM also possesses the potential to develop
agro-processing within its borders, as the majority of required resources are available. The pursuit of
this opportunity would also be in line with the Provincial and National priorities to promote and enhance
rural development by expanding the economic base of these areas.

At present most of the high potential agricultural areas in the WRDM, especially towards the north-west,
are under cultivation. However, high potential agricultural areas in close proximity to urban areas such
as those in Mogale City, Randfontein and to a lesser extent Merafong are under threat from
development as these urban areas expand.

If areas with a high agricultural potential are being degraded, agriculture must be practised on marginal
soils. These soils will require higher inputs of fertilisers and additional irrigation that will potentially
pollute the environment and cause eutrophic conditions in rivers.

From the economic assessment (refer to Table 3 – p. 80) it was shown that agriculture currently shows
the largest negative growth of all economic sectors in the WRDM. It is therefore important to intervene
in a sustainable manner in order to increase the agricultural contribution towards the local economy of
the Municipality.
 103
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 20 the spatial structure and main land uses in the WRDM area
 104
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

The expansion of agriculture in the WRDM will inevitably lead to an expansion in the secondary sector
of agro processing. A big advantage of the Municipality is that it is situated in the economic hub of South
Africa, which enables it to provide its products to the end users efficiently and economically. Existing
infrastructure such as the N14 national road and the Lanseria Airport provide the opportunity of
exporting the products to regions further away.

The main agricultural products being produced in the West Rand are:
 Maize
 Grain sorghum
 Dry beans
 Sunflowers
 Various vegetables
 Beef cattle
 Chickens and broilers
 Pork
 Milk
Eighty-one percent (81%) of the Agricultural products being exported from the WRDM is Vegetable
Products, the most common being Ground nuts. Another major contributor towards exports within the
District is cut flowers, dried flowers for bouquets, etc.

[Link] MINING

Mining is a very important economic sector in the West Rand, both in terms of production and
employment. There is still considerable potential to utilize the mining sector as a catalyst for developing
other economic activities, by strengthening local backward and forward linkages.

The mines currently operating within the WRDM include AngloGold, Harmony Gold, Durban-
Roodepoort Deep, Goldfields, JCI Limited, Placer Dome-South Deep.

However, the gold mines on the West Rand where Uranium is mined as a by-product, poses restrictions
to further development and threatens human health. The shallow undermining of the area, particularly
in the former Randfontein LM area also presents environmental risks in terms of sinkhole development
and future land use complications thereof. The cumulative impact of mining, watering and dewatering
of the mine voids and the extensive dolomitic areas in the WRDM is thus of grave concern.

It is important to note that this sector includes downstream mining beneficiation activities such as the
extraction and beneficiation of minerals occurring naturally, including solids, liquids and crude
petroleum and gases. It also includes underground and surface mines, quarries and the operation of oil
and gas wells and all supplemental activities for dressing and beneficiating for ores and other crude
materials.
 105
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

The main mineral deposits being mined within the WRDM are as follows:
 Gold  Peat
 Manganese  Dimension Stone
 Clay  Building sand
 Dolomite  Nickel
 Serpentine

Apart from mining and processing the mineral extracts, the opportunity also exists to continue and
expand mining operations for commercial materials such as sand, clay and aggregate. However, the
WRDM should strictly manage this activity by undertaking regular environmental inspections and law
enforcement procedures.

[Link] TOURISM

The WRDM has various tourism opportunities / attractions, of which the most important is surely the
Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site which is part of a larger functional tourism region which
includes the Hartbeespoort Dam and Magalies Mountains in the Madibeng Municipality to the north-
north-east, and even extends up to the Sun City complex in the Pilanesberg crater. The West Rand
District Municipality must capitalize on the consequential opportunities for tourism development that
can be created, which will allow the West Rand to increase its share of international and domestic
tourism arrivals and capitalize on the resultant opportunity for economic growth.

The District offers a variety of tourist products and services, including hotel, conference and bed and
breakfast facilities, restaurants, leisure options, heritage attractions and nature tourism options which
includes but are not limited to the following:
 Silver Star Casino;
 Crocodile Ramble towards Hartbeespoort Dam along the Crocodile River;
 Magalies Meander which links together artist studios, arts and crafts, restaurants etc;
 Magaliesburg Express steam train;
 Magaliesburg Wilderness Area;
 Krugersdorp Game Reserve;
 Treasure Route along route N12 focusing on mining industry; and
 Tourism Activity Corridor along R24, R560 and R563 (Tarlton, Magaliesburg, Hekpoort,
Krugersdorp).

From Map 21 it is evident that several heritage sites with high importance are located in the District,
mostly within the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site area. The northern parts of Mogale City
Local Municipality have various medium and low importance heritage sites, and Merafong City Local
Municipality has a small number of medium importance heritage sites.
 106
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 21: Heritage Sites within the West Rand District Municipality
 107
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

As noted in the WRDM EMF (p.145) tourism is considered a powerful tool for developing economies,
with the ability to integrate diverse strengths and improve socio-economic conditions. As such, the
development of tourist facilities around the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site and in ecologically
sensitive landscapes is highly beneficial for the protection of these natural and cultural resources while
still contributing to the local economy. Tourism not only generates income and creates employment
opportunities, but also provides a sound base for the development of associated industries to service
this sector.

[Link] BUSINESS ACTIVITIES

Business development mainly occurs in the four Central business Districts in the WRDM as well as a
number of smaller decentralized shopping centres and business nodes, the most notable being the new
developments around the N14/R28 and Hendrik Potgieter Drive intersection where the Silver Star
Casino and Cradle Mall have been developed in recent times.

[Link] INDUSTRIAL (MANUFACTURING)

There are eleven industrial areas/concentrations of industrial activity in the WRDM area as depicted on
Map 22 and listed below:

 Merafong City LM
- Carletonville Extension 6
- Oberholzer
 Mogale City LM
- Boltonia
- Chamdor
- Delporton
- Factoria
- Fariaville
- Muldersdrift
- Nooitgedacht
 Former Randfontein LM
- Aureus
 Former Westonaria LM
- Westonaria

It is evident from Map 22 that the majority of these industrial areas are located around the old
Witwatersrand mining belt in the vicinity of Mogale City and Randfontein. It should, however, also be
noted that there are currently significant trends of light industrial/commercial development to the north
thereof along route N14 in the northern parts of Mogale City.
 108
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 22: Industrial Areas within the West Rand District Municipality

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA IS NOW RAND WEST CITY

 109
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

A detailed summary of the land use / zoning and development status of each of the industrial areas are
included in Annexure A of this document.

Figure 26 depicts relative size / extent of each of the industrial areas. From this it is evident that Aureus,
Fariaville and Chamdor are the largest industrial areas by far. The smallest are namely Delporton,
Nooitgedacht, Westonaria and Boltonia.

The leading manufacturing sectors include food products, non-metallic mineral products, metal
products, machinery, motor vehicle accessories and plastic products. Fast growing sectors include
beverages, textiles, rubber products and non-ferrous metal products.

The largest portion of manufacturing output and employment is situated in Mogale City and Randfontein.
Industries in Westonaria and Merafong City, on the other hand, are medium- and small-sized with a
lower average number of workers employed.

Figure 26: Size of Industrial Areas (Ha)

West Rand Industrial Areas (size in ha)

450
414
400

350
323

300
259
250

200
154
150

94
100 83
62
54
41 44
50
22

0
 110
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 27 illustrates the relative size of land uses categories across the District:

Figure 27: Land Use General (incl. Fariaville):

Industrial activity in the eleven industrial areas comprises several industrial categories such as Heavy/
Noxious Industries, General Industries, Service Industries, and Multi-use. The latter represents erven
where multiple companies/ activities are active.

It is evident that the largest share of the industrial areas, in terms of size, comprises Heavy/ Noxious
Industrial activities (274 ha), followed closely by Multi-use erven (259 ha) and General Industries (232
ha). The smallest industrial category in terms of size is made up by Service Industries (125 ha).

Notably, a number of non-industrial uses are found within the industrial areas. Some uses are
supportive to the industrial activity, including educational institutions, offices, and substation; while
others are more residential-related and support the workforce rather than the activities themselves.
 111
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

These include single and medium-density residential, hotel/ accommodation, as well as sport and
recreation.
Vacant erven, vacant buildings and erven under construction comprise a considerable proportion of
land (126 ha) – even more so when Fariaville is included (449 ha). The erven under construction are
an indication that there is economic energy and growth within the District’s industrial areas, while the
vacant erven and –buildings represent development potential.

Map 23 illustrates the spatial results of the West Rand Industrial Strategy which was completed in 2013.
It is evident that the primary industrial nodes in the district are located around Chamdor/ Fariaville,
Aureus, and along route N14 between Muldersdrift and Nooitgedacht. Secondary industrial nodes are
located at Oberholzer/Carletonville, Fochville, Boltonia and Delporton, while industrial expansion
potential exists around Tarlton and Badirille in the northern rural parts of the WRDM.

Also notable is the two high potential industrial corridors demarcated along N14 to the north and N12
to the south.

As far as spatial implications for the WRDM SDF are concerned, Map 24 depicts the major industries,
commercial areas and mining related facilities as well as wastewater treatment facilities and landfill
sites together with the relevant buffer zones restricting development that have to be applied according
to their respective emissions.
 112
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 23: West Rand District municipality: Industrial Nodes and Corridors
 113
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 24: Industrial Buffers

 114
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

[Link] Residential Development (Formal and Informal)

This section of the document summarises the current situation within the West Rand District Municipality
with regards to informal structures and backyard units as documented in the West Rand Sustainable
Human Settlement Plan (2013). Map 25 depicts the spatial distribution and extent of the informal
settlements and backyard units recorded within the West Rand District Area.

A survey recorded by the Gauteng Department of Housing during 2009 identified approximately 41 848
informal structures and 48 785 backyard units in the West Rand District. However, the housing demand
records of the municipalities show a figure closer to 58 011 units which is about 16 163 units more than
that recorded by GDOH. It should, however, also be noted that the municipal data is for 2013 while the
GDOH data dates back to 2009/2010. The largest housing demand was recorded in Merafong (21 050
units), followed by Westonaria (14 581 units), Mogale City (13 917 units), and Randfontein with 8 463
units (Municipal 2013 figures). The combined demand for Randfontein & Westonaria (now Rand West
City) were 23 044.

Also illustrated on Map 24 is the location and extent of backyard units in formalised township areas
throughout the District. There is an estimated 48 785 backyard structures recorded in the WRDM of
which the largest part (27 552 units) is located in Mogale City. Randfontein holds an estimated 9 234
backyard units, followed by Merafong (8 059) and Westonaria (3 940). (Randfontein & Westonaria
combined – now Rand West City: 13 174).

Map 26 shows that Mogale City has a total of about 13 917 informal structures and 27 525 backyard
units. The largest single concentration of informal structures in the urban parts of Mogale City are
located in Kagiso (1337 units), followed by Westvillage with 1194 and Munsieville with 1005 units.

In the rural parts of Mogale City the largest numbers are located in the Tarlton region (4920 units),
followed by Muldersdrift (3223 units), Muldersdrift Ward 23 with 734 units, Muldersdrift Ward 31 with
549 units, and Hekpoort with 626 units.
 115
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 25: WRDM Informal Settlements

 116
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 26 Mogale City Local municipality Informal Settlements

 117
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In the Randfontein area (as part of Rand West City LM), the municipal housing demand is estimated at
about 8463 informal structures compared to the 4842 units recorded in the GDOH survey.
Approximately 9190 backyard units were also recorded (Map 27). Informal structures are located within
11 informal settlements with the largest concentration at Zenzele (5010 units), followed by 640 units at
Badirille/Brandvlei and 468 units recorded in OR Tambo.

Informal settlements are fairly widely distributed throughout the entire Westonaria area (as the
remainder part of the Rand West City LM) - see Map 28. The bulk of the housing demand in Westonaria
occurs to the north of route N12 around Bekkersdal, with a smaller concentration also located in close
proximity to the Thusanang Mine on the farm Doornpoort 347 towards the south.

In Merafong City Local Municipality there are 12 481 structures located in informal settlements and an
estimated 650 backyard dwellings in the area according to the GDOH records. The largest number of
informal structures are located in Khutsong (8376 units), followed by 2403 units at Leeuwpoort near
East Driefontein, and 1092 units at Kokosi near Fochville. Blyvooruitzicht recorded about 524 units and
Wedela 66 units (refer to Map 29).

However, the 2013 housing demand in the area according to Merafong City Municipality stands at about
21 050 units which is significantly higher than the number of informal structures counted in 2009/2010
by GDOH.

The West Rand Sustainable Human Settlement Plan (2013) identified 26 Strategic Development Areas
for accommodating future human settlement (see Map 30). These sites are deemed to be the most
suitable ones to accommodate residential development within the West Rand District during the next
10 to 20 years, and are also aligned with the spatial goals and objectives of each of the municipalities
as contained in their respective Spatial Development Frameworks and Integrated Development Plans.

Urban Areas
As can be seen from Map 30 the sites (Strategic Development Areas) identified are mainly concentrated
in the urban parts of the West Rand District Municipality around the CBDs of Randfontein and Mogale
City. Furthermore, the focus was mainly on filling the mining belt between Kagiso and Chamdor in a
northerly direction towards the Mogale City and Roodepoort area, and also between Kagiso and
Randfontein which is located to the west and south-west thereof.

Around Randfontein there was also an effort to fill the vacant land between Mohlakeng and the
Randfontein CBD and to consolidate the urban structure of Randfontein around route R28, the CBD
and Aureus industrial area.

In Westonaria the focus was towards developing the town southwards towards route N12, and to
consolidate informal settlement at Thusanang to the south and Syferfontein to the east.
 118
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 27: Rand West City Local Municipality Informal and Backyards Counts – Randfontein
 119
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 28: Rand West City Local Municipality Informal and Backyards Counts – Westonaria
 120
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 29 Merafong City Local Municipality Informal and Backyards Counts

 121
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 30: Strategic Development Areas

 122
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In Merafong City the main objective was to fill the vacant, developable areas between Carletonville and
Khutsong, and around Fochville/Kokosi (expand the existing urban footprint). If the development of
these pockets of land can be achieved within the next 20 years, it will make a huge contribution towards
consolidating the current fragmented urban structure of the West Rand District Municipality, and
functionally linking and integrating these with the new developments currently initiated by surrounding
municipalities, specifically within the City of Joburg between Soweto and Kagiso (see pink precincts on
Map 29).

Rural Areas
To the north of Mogale City the Nooitgedacht area between route R28, Beyers Naude Drive and Cosmo
City is earmarked to be the focus area for future promotion of mixed income residential development
which will be compatible with developments in the Cosmo City area adjacent. This area may in future
also accommodate part of the incremental demand for housing originating from the City of Joburg
adjacent to the east.

Of critical importance is also the close proximity of this area to the Lanseria Airport and the proposed
new metropolitan activity node around Lanseria Airport which is expected to be developed in the next
10 to 20 years.

Three other priority areas were also identified in the rural parts of Mogale City Municipality around
Tarlton, Magaliesburg and Hekpoort, while the Randfontein rural settlement node is at Badirille. The
objective is that these should become future rural activity nodes accommodating the housing demand
of rural farm workers in close proximity to the majority of farm activities in the rural parts of the West
Rand District.

In the southern parts of the West Rand District Municipality the southward expansion of Westonaria is
one of the top priorities, as is the development of the Syferfontein precinct which is functionally part of
the Greater Soweto, Lenasia, Protea Glen and Doornkop complex to the east.

In Merafong City the focus is primarily on four areas – consolidating and integrating Khutsong and
Carletonville, consolidating informal settlement at a central location at Blyvooruitzicht, expanding
Wedela, and expanding Kokosi to the south and north around Fochville.

Map 31 depicts the priority assigned to each of the Strategic Development Areas (short-, medium-, or
long term) in terms of the West Rand Sustainable Human Settlement Plan. This information will be
incorporated into the WRDM SDF during Phase 4 of the process.
 123
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 31 Strategic Development Areas (short, medium or long term)

 124
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

[Link] COMMUNITY FACILITIES (Map 32)

Map 32 depicts the spatial distribution and number of community facilities located in the WRDM area.
It is clear that the majority of community facilities are clustered around the urban nodes of Krugersdorp,
Randfontein, Carletonville, Westonaria, Fochville, Magaliesburg and Muldersdrift.

The largest number and most extensive range of community facilities are located in Mogale City
Municipality, followed by Merafong City and then the former Randfontein.

In total the WRDM holds an estimated 18 community halls, 158 schools, 6 magistrates courts, 17 police
stations, some 66 health facilities of various kinds, 8 landfill sites and 3 solid waste transfer stations.
Apart from schools, the number of community facilities in the rural parts of the WRDM is very limited.

5.5 TRANSPORT NETWORK

5.5.1 WRDM INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN 2010-2015

a) Road Network

The WRDM is serviced by a network of National, Provincial and Local roads as depicted on Map 33.
The following is a brief summary of the most prominent facilities in this regard:
 The N12 and N14 are the two National roads that run through the district in an east to west
direction. These two routes provide good regional access between the WRDM and Johannesburg
to the east, Pretoria to the north-east and the NW Province to the west;
 The N12 links the City of Joburg to Potchefstroom and passes between Westonaria and Fochville
through the southern extents of the District;
 Route N14 links the City of Tshwane to Mogale City and from there to Ventersdorp/Lichtenburg in
North-West Province;
 Route 28 is the main north-south link between Krugersdorp, Randfontein and Westonaria;
 R500 links Carletonville to Fochville and Parys (Free State) to the south, and to Rustenburg (via
R24) to the north and further south towards Emfuleni;
 R501 provides access from N12 and Westonaria to Carletonville;
 R41 links Carletonville to Randfontein;
 R24 provides a link between Mogale City and Rustenburg to the north-west while routes R512 and
R563, combined with route R560 serve the northern parts of the district and surrounds including
the Cradle of Humankind and the Hartbeespoort-Skeerpoort areas;
 The main freight routes within the District include the N12, N14, R500, R501 and R28 which carry
significant traffic of heavy vehicles per day in and out of the WRDM.
According to the WRDM ITP (2010-2015) road infrastructure in the residential areas is generally poor,
due to lack of maintenance, improper rehabilitation and pressure from new developments.
 125
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 32 Community Facilities

 126
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 33. Transport Network

 127
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

b) Rail Networks

The rail network is a far more efficient means of transporting large numbers of commuters between
major centres within WRDM and work opportunities in Johannesburg and other centres (i.e.
Potchefstroom). Rail services are operated by the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA).
Only 2 routes are operational and these are between Randfontein and Johannesburg, and between
Oberholzer, Westonaria and Johannesburg. According to the Integrated Transport Plan rail accounts
for approximately 23 000 commuters per day (WRDM 2009d), however, experience shows that this is
no longer the case and in fact very few commuters do so by rail. It is likely that the taxi industry has
taken up a large part of this volume since 2009.

c) Airfields

There is very little information available regarding airfields in the WRDM, however, it is assumed that
most of the airfields are owned by farmers and mining companies for private use. There are two
municipal-owned airstrips, namely the Krugersdorp (Jack Taylor) Airfield and the Orient Airfield.
Lanseria International Airport is a key transport node for Gauteng Province, and although Lanseria
Airport falls just outside the WRDM, the impact of the airport (both positive and negative) on the WRDM
is an important consideration. Development pressure in the area in terms of informal settlement and
economic activities, consequential infrastructure upgrades (including transport infrastructure upgrades
due to increased traffic) and tourism activities establishing in areas of high biodiversity are just some of
the impacts of the airport on the WRDM. Currently, Lanseria airport provides flights to Cape Town and
Durban operated through commercial airlines like South African Airways and Kulula. Other smaller
commercial companies also utilise the airport for national and international flights.

The Lanseria airport node is an important development for the Cradle of Humankind. The airport could
influence development along route K29 (Malibongwe Drive) including the development of new
residential areas secondary to Cosmo City. K29/Malibongwe Drive serves as a regional corridor
between Johannesburg and Rustenburg and it also connects with the Platinum toll road.

d) Public Transport Plans

The majority of the WRDM public transport system is dominated by minibus taxi system. The taxis
account for 86% of all commuter work trips daily and 28% of all work trips daily. Taxis also dominate
the public transport operations in the District with approximately 24 minibus-taxi public transport facilities
existing in the WRDM. Bus transport in the district is very limited with no subsidised commuter services,
apart from contracted learner transport services that are provided in the predominantly rural area.

Public Transport Plans were prepared for the following selected corridors (Table 6) in the West Rand
as depicted on Map 34:
 128
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table 6: West Rand Corridors

Public Transport Description
Corridor
Corridor A Magaliesburg – R24 - Krugersdorp – R28 - Pinehaven – Hendrik Potgieter
Road -Ruimsig (Johannesburg);
Corridor B Mohlakeng – R559 – Protea South/Lenasia (feeding into the Joburg BRT
trunk route).
Corridor C Westonaria (R28) – Randfontein – Mogale City
Corridor D Krugersdorp (CBD) –Ontdekkers – Roodepoort (Westgate)
Corridor E Randfontein (CBD) – K198 – Leratong – Main Reef Road – Roodepoort
Corridor F Krugersdorp – R28 – Pinehaven – N14 – R512 – Lanseria International
Airport. (Part of this corridor overlaps with Corridor A above).
Corridor Y Kagiso – Luipaardsvlei Station – Krugersdorp (Pretoria Street).
(These Corridors note to be mistaken by the Corridors & Mega Projects announced in 2015.)

5.5.2 GAUTENG INTEGRATED TRANSPORT MASTER PLAN (GITMP25)

The GITMP25 which was completed during 2013 also holds some significant strategic directives to be
considered by the WRDM. The following section briefly summarises some of the most pertinent aspects
in this regard.

a) Strategic Road Network

Map 35 illustrates the proposed Strategic Transport Network for Gauteng Province as defined in the
Gauteng Integrated Transport Master Plan (GITMP25).

The overall principle of the network is to improve north/south linkages within Gauteng (existing strong
demand) and provide for future strong west/east linkages taking account of the future employment
opportunities. The network also addresses regional mobility by extending linkages beyond municipal
boundaries, which will enable passengers to move seamlessly between municipal boundaries.

b) Public Transport Network

The recommended integrated public transport network consists of a public rail network and a road-
based public transport network as depicted on Map 35. The following is notable from this in the context
of the WRDM:
 Routes R24, R41 and R501 are earmarked as Mixed Traffic Road Based public transport routes
in the western rural parts of the District;
 Similarly, route R28 and K76 (Ontdekkers Road) are earmarked to perform the same function
within the eastern urban parts of the District;
 In terms of Higher Order Segregated Road Based public transport the following routes have been
highlighted: K72 (Hendrik Potgieter Drive), K11 and K198 (Randfontein Road);
 129
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 34 Public Transport Corridors

 130
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 35: Proposed Public Transport Priority Network

 131
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 No part of the priority Road Based Rapid Transit Network of the province extends into the WRDM
area.

a) Public Rail Network

According to GITMP25 the modernisation of the existing PRASA/Metrorail services upgrading of the
existing infrastructure and rolling stock, as well as extending the railway network will improve the overall
mobility of the citizens of Gauteng and it concretise rail as the “backbone” of the integrated multi-modal
Public Transport Network.

This proposed passenger rail network will comprise:

 A link to the High-speed Rail proposed by the national DoT;
 A rapid rail link, including the Gautrain and its extensions, that provides high operating speeds and
high frequencies for the high-mobility corridors;
 A metropolitan railway system based on the existing PRASA/Metrorail offering, but which is
modernised to be similar to that of any World Class City with high service levels and frequencies,
even in the off-peak periods. (Relevant to the WRDM); and
 A commuter rail network that provides basic mobility between high concentrations of residential and
employment areas. (Relevant to the WRDM.

The proposed rail network is indicated in Map 36.

The following new rail services are proposed (Table 7) to augment the current services but it is evident
that none of these extend into the WRDM area:

Table 7: Proposed New Rail Services

Rail Type Proposal
High Speed 1. Provide for Terminal Station
Rapid Rail / Metro 2. Mabopane – Pretoria – Germiston – Park – Naledi / Midway
(upgrade - Modernisation)
3. Mamelodi – Tshwane East – Samrand – Ruimsig – Roodepoort –
Naledi (Soweto)
4. Sandton – Ruimsig
5. Rhodesfield – East Rand Mall - Boksburg
6. Tshwane Ring Rail (upgrade)
Commuter Rail 7. Hammanskraal – Pretoria (upgrade)
8. Leralla (Tembisa) – Midrand
9. Mamelodi – Pienaarspoort – Rayton / Bronkhorstspruit (upgrade)
10. Daveyton – Etwatwa
11. Baralink
12. Moloto – Pretoria
 132
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 36: Proposed Rail and Rapid Rail Network

 133
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

b) Freight Network

According to GITMP25 one of the biggest growth areas will be containerised freight and fast moving
consumer products. Map 37 depicts the location of existing and proposed new terminals in Gauteng
to accommodate future growth with one “general freight terminal” being proposed in Randfontein where
various freight lines converge.

c) Road Network (Mobility)

Map 38 illustrates the priority routes in the province in terms of upgrading over the next 25 years as
determined from the GITMP25. The following are notable with regards to the WRDM:
 Upgrading of N14 and part of N12 and construction of PWV5 as part of Gauteng Freeway
Improvement Prog4ramme Phase 2 and 3 (GFIP);
 Upgrading of route K13/K11 through central parts of Mogale City, Randfontein and Westonaria
(Class 2) as well as Hendrik Potgieter Drive (K72), route K15 from Chamdor/Kagiso southwards
towards Ennerdale, and K56 to Cosmo City and Malibongwe Drive (K29) to Hartbeespoort Dam.
(Also PWV3 to Hartbeesoort Dam;
 N12-PWV5 link southwest of Soweto.

The Integrated Development Plan of the West Rand District Municipality, specifically with regards to the
Nodal Development Strategy, identifies the Lanseria Airport Node as an important Strategic Project and
Programme.
 134
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 37: Freight Terminals

 135
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 38: Strategic Road Network Priorities

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA ARE NOW RAND WEST CITY

 136
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.6 ENGINEERING SERVICES

Engineering infrastructure generally includes water and sewerage systems, lighting, drainage, road and
transportation facilities, waste disposal sites and electricity. Following is an overview of each of the
aforementioned engineering services.

5.6.1 WATER PROVISION

Domestic water in residential areas is provided by Rand Water, which generally abstracts water from
outside of the WRDM. Rand Water has only abstracted water from the Zuurbekom dolomitic
compartment in the former Westonaria Local Municipality, but since this water resource became
polluted only outside resources have been used to abstract water for purification and supply to the
WRDM. Equally detrimental to the water resources are the impact from ill-managed, under capacitated
waste water treatment works and the lack of sanitation services in informal settlement areas.

The following diagrams reflect the most salient features pertaining to the source of water to households
in the respective Local Municipalities and the District. Figure 28 indicates that in 2011 most households
(89.1%) within the WRDM received water from regional water schemes. A relatively small number
(6.6%) of households in 2011 utilized a borehole as source of water. It is noted that within Mogale City
LM (8.7%) and the former Randfontein LM (12.2%) more households are reliant of boreholes as source
of water compared to the former Westonaria LM (1.6%) and Merafong City LM (2.1%).

Figure 28: Source of Water, 2011

 137
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Turning the focus to Piped Water provision, the Figure 29 below indicates for 2011, approximately half
(53.6%) of the total number of households within the WRDM had access to piped (tap) water inside
their dwelling / institution and 29.7% had access to piped water inside their yard. (Total = 83.3%)

Figure 29 Geography by Piped Water, 2011

GEOGRAHPY BY PIPED WATER, 2011

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Mogale City Randfontein Westonaria Merafong City West Rand
No access to piped (tap) water 2.9% 1.8% 0.8% 1.0% 2.0%
Piped (tap) water on community stand: distance
0.5% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%
greater than 1000m (1km) from dwelling/institution
Piped (tap) water on community stand: distance
between 500m and 1000m (1km) from dwelling 1.0% 0.5% 2.1% 1.7% 1.3%
/institution
Piped (tap) water on community stand: distance
2.3% 2.1% 10.0% 3.2% 3.7%
between 200m and 500m from dwelling/institution
Piped (tap) water on community stand: distance less
6.0% 6.2% 21.9% 10.6% 9.6%
than 200m from dwelling/institution
Piped (tap) water inside yard 32.5% 27.4% 22.8% 30.4% 29.7%
Piped (tap) water inside dwelling/institution 54.8% 61.9% 42.2% 52.9% 53.6%

Compared to the other local municipalities, the former Westonaria had the lowest number households
(42.2%) provided with piped (tap) water inside their dwelling / institution. In addition, the former
Westonaria LM have a relatively large number of households provided with piped (tap) water inside
their yard (22.8%) and households provided with piped (tap) water on a community stand: distance less
than 200m from dwelling / institution (21.9%).

The following Figure 30 illustrates the Geography by Piped Water per Local Municipality and for the
WRDM for the period 2001 to 2011. (Note: Only the following four categories could be compared in
terms of the 2001 and 2011 census due to changes in categories between the two censuses:
 Piped water inside dwelling
 Piped water inside yard
 Piped water on community stand: distance less than 200m from dwelling
 Piped water on community stand: distance greater than 200m from dwelling).
 138
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

From the diagrams below it is clear that the most significant changes in terms of piped water provision
to households for the respective local municipalities was in the piped water inside dwelling water
provision and piped water inside yard water provision categories.

Figure 30: Geography by Piped Water per Local Municipality, 2001 - 2011

MOGALE CITY GEOGRAPHY BY PIPED WATER, RANDFONTEIN GEOGRAPHY BY PIPED WATER,

2001 - 2011 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
Mogale Mogale Randfontei Randfontei
City 2001 City 2011 n 2001 n 2011
Piped water on Piped water on
community stand: community stand:
5.4% 4.0% 6.9% 2.8%
distance greater than distance greater than
200m from dwelling 200m from dwelling
Piped water on Piped water on
community stand: community stand:
8.2% 6.2% 5.0% 6.3%
distance less than 200m distance less than 200m
from dwelling from dwelling
Piped water inside yard 47.7% 33.5% Piped water inside yard 37.1% 27.9%
Piped water inside Piped water inside
38.8% 56.4% 51.0% 63.0%
dwelling dwelling

WESTONARIA GEOGRAPHY BY PIPED WATER, MERAFONG CITY GEOGRAPHY BY PIPED

2001 - 2011 WATER, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
Westonaria Westonaria Merafong Merafong
2001 LM City 2001 City 2011
Piped water on Piped water on
community stand: community stand:
10.7% 12.5% 5.6% 5.2%
distance greater than distance greater than
200m from dwelling 200m from dwelling
Piped water on Piped water on
community stand: community stand:
16.2% 22.1% 8.0% 10.7%
distance less than 200m distance less than 200m
from dwelling from dwelling
Piped water inside yard 52.2% 22.9% Piped water inside yard 56.2% 30.7%
Piped water inside Piped water inside
21.0% 42.5% 30.2% 53.4%
dwelling dwelling
 139
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Mogale City LM experienced a significant increase of 17.6% in the number of households provided for
in terms of piped water inside dwelling from 2001 (38.8%) to 2011 (58.4%). The total number of
households provided of water by means of piped water inside yard decreased from 47.7% in 2001 to
33.5% in 2011.

The former Randfontein LM experienced an increase in the number of households provided for in terms
of piped water inside dwelling from 2001 (51.0%) to 2011 (63.0%). The total number of households
provided of water by means of piped water inside yard decreased from 37.1% in 2001 to 27.9% in 2011.

The former Westonaria LM experienced a significant increase of 21.5% in the number of households
provided for in terms of piped water inside dwelling from 2001 (38.8%) to 2011 (58.4%). The total
number of households provided of water by means of piped water inside yard decreased considerably
from 52.2% in 2001 to 22.9% in 2011. A slight increase in the total number of households provided with
piped water on community stand: distance less than 200m from dwelling is noted from 2001 (16.2%) to
2011 (22.1%) in noted.

Merafong City LM experienced a significant increase of 23.2% in the number of households provided
for in terms of piped water inside dwelling from 2001 (30.2%) to 2011 (53.4%). The total number of
households provided of water by means of piped water inside yard decreased considerably from 56.2%
in 2001 to 30.7% in 2011.

Figure 31: Geography by Piped Water for the WRDM, 2001 - 2011

In terms of the WRDM (Figure 31),

the most noteworthy changes in
terms of piped water provision for the
period 2001 to 2011 was an
significant increase in the number of
households provided with piped water
inside dwellings and a significant
decrease in the total number of
households provided with piped water
inside yard. The number of
households provided with piped water
on community stand: distance less
than 200m from dwelling and piped
water on community stand: distance
greater than 200m from dwelling)
stayed relatively the same.
 140
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.6.2 SANITATION

The available sanitation in the municipality has improved since 2001, but there are still a large number
of backlogs in the area. The lack of adequate sanitation makes people vulnerable to poor health.

As shown on Figure 32, during 2011, 76.1% of households within the WRDM had access to a flush
toilet (connected to a sewerage system) and 4.6% of households had access to a flush toilet (with a
septic tank). It is noted that 8.3% of households still had access to only a pit toilet without ventilation
and 5.1% of households had access to a pit toilet with ventilation (VIP).

Figure 32: Toilet Facilities, 2011

TOILET FACILITIES, 2011

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Mogale City Randfontein Westonaria Merafong City West Rand
None 2.0% 1.1% 2.6% 1.0% 1.7%
Other 0.8% 0.4% 1.3% 1.0% 0.9%
Bucket toilet 3.2% 0.6% 1.4% 0.4% 1.8%
Pit toilet without ventilation 4.8% 11.3% 9.4% 11.6% 8.3%
Pit toilet with ventilation (VIP) 2.3% 1.5% 21.9% 2.3% 5.1%
Chemical toilet 2.9% 0.3% 0.7% 0.6% 1.6%
Flush toilet (with septic tank) 5.8% 5.5% 4.0% 2.1% 4.6%
Flush toilet (connected to sewerage system) 78.2% 79.3% 58.6% 81.0% 76.1%

The former Westonaria LM still had a significant number (21.9%) of households utilizing a pit toilet with
ventilation (VIP) and pit toilet without ventilation (9.4%) in 2011 compared to the other local
municipalities. The former Randfontein LM (11.3%) and Merafong LM (11.6%) has the greatest number
of households that in 2011 still only has access to a pit latrine without ventilation.

The following Figure 33 compares the Toilet Facilities per Local Municipality and for the WRDM for the
period 2001 to 2011.
 141
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Mogale City LM experienced a slight increase in the number of households that has access to a flush
toilet (connected to a sewerage system) from 70.6% in 2001 to 78.8% in 2011. A significant decrease
in the number of households utilizing a pit latrine without ventilation is noted from 12.6% in 2001 to
4.9% in 2011.

Diagram 33: Toilet Facilities per Local Municipality, 2001 - 2011

MOGALE CITY TOILET FACILITIES, 2001 - 2011 RANDFONTEIN TOILET FACILITIES, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%
90% 90%
80% 80%
70% 70%
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Mogale Mogale Randfontei Randfontei
City 2001 City 2011 n 2001 n 2011
None 4.6% 2.0% None 3.2% 1.1%
Bucket latrine 2.1% 3.2% Bucket latrine 0.7% 0.6%
Pit latrine without Pit latrine without
12.6% 4.9% 12.9% 11.4%
ventilation ventilation
Pit latrine with ventilation Pit latrine with ventilation
1.8% 2.4% 0.5% 1.5%
(VIP) (VIP)
Chemical toilet 1.8% 2.9% Chemical toilet 0.3% 0.3%
Flush toilet (with septic Flush toilet (with septic
6.5% 5.8% 3.7% 5.5%
tank) tank)
Flush toilet (connected to Flush toilet (connected to
70.6% 78.8% 78.7% 79.7%
sewerage system) sewerage system)

WESTONARIA TOILET FACILITIES, 2001 - 2011 MERAFONG CITY TOILET FACILITIES, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%
90% 90%
80% 80%
70% 70%
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Westonaria Westonaria Merafong Merafong
2001 2011 City 2001 City 2011
None 3.9% 2.7% None 2.8% 1.0%
Bucket latrine 6.4% 1.4% Bucket latrine 1.4% 0.4%
Pit latrine without Pit latrine without
20.7% 9.5% 10.6% 11.7%
ventilation ventilation
Pit latrine with ventilation Pit latrine with ventilation
2.3% 22.2% 0.6% 2.3%
(VIP) (VIP)
Chemical toilet 0.3% 0.8% Chemical toilet 0.7% 0.6%
Flush toilet (with septic Flush toilet (with septic
1.5% 4.1% 1.1% 2.1%
tank) tank)
Flush toilet (connected to Flush toilet (connected to
65.0% 59.4% 82.8% 81.8%
sewerage system) sewerage system)
 142
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Merafong City LM experienced a slight decline in the total number of households that have access to a
flush toilet (connected to a sewerage system) from 82.8% in 2001 to 81.8% in 2011. A slight increase
in the number of households utilizing a pit latrine without ventilation is noted from 10.6% in 2001 to
11.7% in 2011.

Overall, Merafong City LM has the greatest number of households that have access to a flush toilet
(connected to a sewerage system) in 2011 (81.8%) whilst the former Westonaria has the lowest number
of households that have access to a flush toilet (connected to a sewerage system) in 2011 (59.4%).

Figure 34: Toilet Facilities for the WRDM, 2001 - 2011

WEST RAND TOILET FACILITIES, 2001 - 2011

Within the WRDM 9 (Figure
34) 76.8% of households has
100%
90%
access to a flush toilet
80% (connected to a sewerage
70%
60% system in 2011, compared to
50%
75.1% in 2001. A slight
40%
30% decline in the total number of
20%
10% households that has access
0%
West Rand 2001 West Rand 2011 to a pit latrine without
None 3.6% 1.7%
Bucket latrine 2.4% 1.8% ventilation is noted from
Pit latrine without ventilation 13.4% 8.3%
Pit latrine with ventilation (VIP) 1.3% 5.2%
13.4% in 2001 to 8.3% in
Chemical toilet 0.9% 1.6%
2011.
Flush toilet (with septic tank) 3.3% 4.6%
Flush toilet (connected to sewerage
75.1% 76.8%
system)

5.6.3 ENERGY

The WRDM has increased it supply of electricity in the last decade. Candles are the second most
popular source of lighting and this is due to the presence of rural areas within the municipality as well
as informal settlements. Alternative sources of energy (i.e. paraffin, coal and wood) are still being widely
used even where access to electricity is available; this is due to the high cost of electricity.

During 2011, 81.7% of households within the WRDM had access to electricity as means of energy or
fuel for lighting and 13.2% of households still utilized candles as a as means of energy or fuel for lighting.
(Refer to Figure 35)

The former Westonaria LM had the greatest number of households still utilizing candles (21.3% and
paraffin (13.6%) as means of energy or fuel for lighting in 2011 compared to the other local
municipalities.
 143
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 35: Energy or Fuel for Lighting, 2011

ENERGY OR FUEL FOR LIGHTING, 2011

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Mogale City Randfontein Westonaria Merafong City West Rand
None 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3%
Solar 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Candles (not a valid option) 11.2% 11.8% 21.3% 12.9% 13.2%
Paraffin 2.3% 3.1% 13.6% 3.6% 4.4%
Gas 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2%
Electricity 85.9% 84.5% 64.3% 82.8% 81.7%

Figure 36 illustrates the trends in terms of Energy or Fuel for Lighting per Local Municipality and for the
WRDM for the period 2001 to 2011.

Mogale City LM experienced a slight increase in the total number of households that utilize electricity
as means of energy or fuel for lighting, from 79.6% in 2001 to 86.1% in 2011. The total number of
households utilizing candles as means of energy or fuel for lighting decreased from 18.3% in 2001 to
11.2% in 2011.

The former Randfontein LM experienced a significant increase in the total number of households that
utilize electricity as means of energy or fuel for lighting, from 75.2% in 2001 to 84.7% in 2011. The total
number of households utilizing candles as means of energy or fuel for lighting decreased considerably
from 21.2% in 2001 to 11.8% in 2011.

The former Westonaria LM experienced a slight decline in the total number of households that utilize
electricity as means of energy or fuel for lighting, from 66.4% in 2001 to 64.5% in 2011. The total number
of households utilizing candles as means of energy or fuel for lighting decreased from 25.6% in 2001
to 21.3% in 2011 and the total number of households utilizing paraffin as means of energy or fuel for
lighting increased from 6.8% in 2001 to 13.6% in 2011.
 144
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Merafong City LM experienced a slight increase in the total number of households that utilize electricity
as means of energy or fuel for lighting, from 80.1% in 2001 to 83.1% in 2011. The total number of
households utilizing candles as means of energy or fuel for lighting decreased from 17.0% in 2001 to
13.0% in 2011.

Figure 36: Energy or Fuel for Lighting per Local Municipality, 2001 - 2011

MOGALE CITY ENERGY OR FUEL FOR LIGHTING, RANDFONTEIN ENERGY OR FUEL FOR
2001 - 2011 LIGHTING, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
Mogale City 2001 Mogale City 2011 Randfontein 2001 Randfontein 2011
Solar 0.2% 0.2% Solar 0.1% 0.2%
Candles 18.3% 11.2% Candles 21.2% 11.8%
Paraffin 1.7% 2.3% Paraffin 3.2% 3.1%
Gas 0.2% 0.2% Gas 0.2% 0.2%
Electricity 79.6% 86.1% Electricity 75.2% 84.7%

WESTONARIA ENERGY OR FUEL FOR LIGHTING, MERAFONG CITY ENERGY OR FUEL FOR
2001 - 2011 LIGHTING, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50%
50%
40%
40%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0% Merafong City Merafong City
Westonaria 2001 Westonaria 2011 2001 2011
Solar 0.1% 0.2% Solar 0.1% 0.2%
Candles 26.6% 21.3% Candles 17.0% 13.0%
Paraffin 6.8% 13.6% Paraffin 2.7% 3.6%
Gas 0.1% 0.3% Gas 0.1% 0.1%
Electricity 66.4% 64.5% Electricity 80.1% 83.1%
 145
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

It is interesting to note, that none of the respective local municipalities saw a noteworthy increase /
decrease in the total number of households utilizing solar energy as a source of alternative sustainable
energy. Gas is also not a preferred source of energy or fuel for lighting.

Figure 37: Energy or Fuel for Lighting for the WRDM, 2001 - 2011

WEST RAND ENERGY OR FUEL FOR LIGHTING, 2001 - 2011

The WRDM (Figure 37)
experienced a slight increase in the
100%
total number of households that
90%
utilize electricity as means of energy
80%

70%
or fuel for lighting, from 76.8% in
60% 2001 to 81.9% in 2011. The total
50% number of households utilizing
40%
candles as means of energy or fuel
30%
for lighting decreased from 19.8% in
20%

10%
2001 to 13.3% in 2011. The total
0% number of households utilizing
West Rand 2001 West Rand 2011
Solar 0.1% 0.2% paraffin as means of energy or fuel
Candles 19.8% 13.3%
Paraffin 3.2% 4.4% for lighting increased slightly from
Gas 0.1% 0.2%
Electricity 76.8% 81.9%
3.2% in 2001 to 4.4% in 2011.

5.6.4 WASTE MANAGEMENT

The WRDM (excluding Merafong LM) generates approximately 730 805 tons of general waste annually.
Most of the waste is generated by Mogale City, approximately 80% of the waste in the WRDM (WRDM
2009b).

There are six municipal landfill sites in the WRDM. Mogale City has Luipaardsvlei landfill and
Magaliesburg landfill. Randfontein has the Uitvalfontein landfill operating in the area and Westonaria
has the Lebanon landfill servicing it. Merafong City has the Carletonville municipal landfill site. The
Fochville municipal landfill site was closed in 2010. Poorly managed landfill sites often have a number
of negative impacts on the environment, such as groundwater pollution, health and disease issues and
also it may cause a nuisance in the surrounding area. Other than the two sites in Mogale City which
have reached full capacity, the other landfills have between 8-15 years airspace remaining. Mogale City
has received authorization for an extension to the Luipaardsvlei landfill and is currently negotiation a
lease agreement with the property owner.

There are several areas within the WRDM which experience some form of illegal dumping. In the
Mogale City LM illegal dumping has been recorded in the Kagiso and Munsieville areas, approximately
10 954kg/day of waste is dumped illegally in Kagiso only. In the former Randfontein LM illegal dumping
 146
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

has been observed in the Mohlakeng, Toekomsrus, Finsbury and Kocksoord areas, no quantities have
been recorded for these areas. In the former Westonaria LM illegal dumping is experienced in
Bekkersdal and Glenharvie. Some illegal dumping sites and private dumps are often poorly managed
and can be situated in or too close to rivers, wetlands or sensitive ecosystems. Solid waste breaks
down slowly and can be harmful to birds and other animals. Pollutants leach out of waste dumps,
especially after rain events, which can pollute water resources.

As illustrated on Figure 38, refuse disposal in 2011 for the WRDM mainly consisted of the removal of
refuse by the local authority / private company at least once a week (76.8%), whilst 12.2% of households
utilized their own refuse dump as means of disposal of refuse.

Figure 38: Refuse Disposal, 2011

REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2011

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Mogale City Randfontein Westonaria Merafong City West Rand
Other 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.3% 0.6%
No rubbish disposal 3.5% 4.0% 2.0% 4.5% 3.6%
Own refuse dump 11.7% 13.4% 16.6% 9.3% 12.1%
Communal refuse dump 2.6% 2.1% 7.6% 6.2% 4.2%
Removed by local authority/private company less
1.8% 1.0% 3.6% 4.8% 2.7%
often
Removed by local authority/private company at least
79.6% 78.8% 69.4% 74.9% 76.8%
once a week

The former Westonaria has the lowest removal of refuse by the local authority / private company at
least once a week (69.4%) compared to the other local municipalities and the highest number of
households utilizing their own refuse dumps (16.6%) and communal refuse dumps (6.7%) as means of
disposal of their refuse for 2011.

The following Figure 39 illustrates the Refuse Disposal per Local Municipality and for the WRDM for
the period 2001 to 2011.
 147
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 39: Refuse Disposal per Local Municipality, 2001 - 2011

MOGALE CITY REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2001 - 2011 RANDFONTEIN REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
Mogale Mogale Randfontei Randfontei
City 2001 City 2011 n 2001 n 2011
No rubbish disposal 4.5% 3.5% No rubbish disposal 2.9% 4.1%
Own refuse dump 19.6% 11.8% Own refuse dump 19.6% 13.5%
Communal refuse dump 2.8% 2.7% Communal refuse dump 0.8% 2.2%
Removed by local Removed by local
1.1% 1.9% 4.2% 1.0%
authority less often authority less often
Removed by local Removed by local
authority at least once a 72.0% 80.2% authority at least once a 72.6% 79.3%
week week

WESTONARIA REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2001 - 2011 MERAFONG CITY REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2001 - 2011

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
Westonaria Westonaria Merafong Merafong
2001 2011 City 2001 City 2011
No rubbish disposal 2.0% 2.0% No rubbish disposal 2.0% 4.5%
Own refuse dump 16.9% 16.7% Own refuse dump 19.3% 9.4%
Communal refuse dump 6.9% 7.7% Communal refuse dump 1.8% 6.2%
Removed by local Removed by local
5.6% 3.7% 8.9% 4.8%
authority less often authority less often
Removed by local Removed by local
authority at least once a 68.6% 69.9% authority at least once a 68.0% 75.1%
week week
 148
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Mogale City LM experienced an increase in the total number of households refuse being remover by
the local authority / private company at least once a week from 72.0% in 2001 to 80.2% in 2011. The
total number of households utilizing their own refuse dump as means of disposal of their refuse
decreased from 19.9% in 2001 to 11.8% in 2011.

The former Randfontein LM experienced an increase in the total number of households refuse being
remover by the local authority / private company at least once a week from 72.7% in 2001 to 79.3% in
2011. The total number of households utilizing their own refuse dump as means of disposal of their
refuse decreased slightly from 19.6% in 2001 to 13.5% in 2011. A slight increase in the total number of
households that has no rubbish disposal is noted from 2.9% in 2001 to 4.1% in 2011.

The former Westonaria LM experienced a slight increase in the total number of households refuse being
remover by the local authority / private company at least once a week from 68.6% in 2001 to 69.9% in
2011. The total number of households utilizing their own refuse dump as means of disposal of their
refuse stayed virtually the same for 2001 (16.9%) to 2011 (16.7%).

Merafong City LM experienced an increase in the total number of households refuse being remover by
the local authority / private company at least once a week from 68.0% in 2001 to 75.1% in 2011. The
total number of households utilizing their own refuse dump as means of disposal of their refuse
decreased significantly from 19.3% in 2001 to 9.4% in 2011. Similarly to the former Randfontein LM, a
slight increase in the total number of households that has no rubbish disposal is noted for Merafong
City, from 2.0% in 2001 to 4.5% in 2011.

Figure 40: Refuse Disposal for the WRDM, 2001 - 2011

WEST RAND REFUSE DISPOSAL, 2001 - 2011

Overall, the WRDM experienced
a slight increase in the total
100%
number of households refuse
90%
being removed by the local
80%

70% authority / private company at

60% least once a week from 70.0% in
50%
2001 to 77.3% in 2011. The total
40%
number of households utilizing
30%

20% their own refuse dump as means

10% of disposal of their refuse
0%
West Rand 2001 West Rand 2011 decreased from 19.0% in 2001
No rubbish disposal 2.9% 3.6%
Own refuse dump 19.0% 12.2% to 12.2% in 2011.
Communal refuse dump 2.9% 4.2%
Removed by local authority less
5.1% 2.7%
often
Removed by local authority at
70.0% 77.3%
least once a week
 149
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.6.5 TRANSPORT

The combination of deteriorating road surface conditions, increasing traffic volume and heavy vehicle
movements as well as a lack of law enforcement capacity forms the background of the increasing
number of high impact and serious motor vehicle accidents being experienced. The declining and
unsafe road conditions, if not addressed, will without doubt act as a major constraint factor for economic
growth. (EMF, p64)

Adequate stormwater infrastructure reduces the negative impact on the surrounding environment. With
the steady increase in development that the municipality has been experiencing, it is important to
integrate this with a district storm water management plan. The local municipalities have a mandate to
make sure that they provide for improvements of all storm water infrastructures in their area of
jurisdiction.

5.7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (SPACE ECONOMY)

The West Rand Regional Economic Development Plan conducted extensive work to develop an
Economic Nodal Development Perspective for the WRDM and each of the four Local Municipalities.
This Perspective has a strong spatial focus and it is important that this be incorporated into the WRDM
SDF.

The following is a summary of this information as extracted from the West Rand Regional Economic
Development Plan (2012).

5.7.1 PROVINCIAL PERSPECTIVE

The Gauteng Opportunity Analysis gives a spatial expression of sectoral opportunities in different areas
around Gauteng using the Geographic Information System. Map 39 presents the economic
development points within Gauteng as outlined in the Economic Opportunity Analysis, and which shows,
in provincial context, opportunity for the promotion of manufacturing and mining in the WRDM area.

The Opportunity Analysis also identified opportunities at a more local level as illustrated on Map 40
below.
 150
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 39: Gauteng Economic Development Points

 151
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 40: Gauteng Economic Opportunities

 152
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

5.7.2 WRDM LOCAL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES

According to Map 40, the following opportunities have been identified for each of the four local
municipalities within the WRDM (Table 8):

Table 8: Economic Opportunities

Mogale City Local Municipality: Former Randfontein Local Municipality:
 Manufacturing  Agriculture
 Mining  Manufacturing
 Finance and Trade  Construction
 Construction  Trade
 Transport
 Finance
Merafong City Local Municipality: Former Westonaria Local Municipality:
 Trade  Agriculture
 Finance  Manufacturing
 Manufacturing
 Mining

More specifically, the spatial distribution and nature of major economic opportunities for each of the four
local municipalities within the West Rand District are summarised and illustrated in sections a) to d)
below.

a) Merafong City LM (Map 41)

The economic opportunities in Merafong City LM, as outlined in the Map above:
 Around the Khutsong area:
o Establish sustainable farm projects to diversify the agricultural sector
 Around Carletonville:
o Provision of centralized manufacturing hives for SMME manufacturers.
o Establishment of Development Units (wire, jewellery, industrial, dental, charcoal, crushed
stone, drilling equipment).
 Alongside the N14:
o Promotion of manufacturing hub and mining related industry.

b) Mogale City Local Municipality (Map 42)

The Map illustrates the following identified opportunities for the Mogale City Local Municipality:
 Around Magaliesburg:
o Value added high tech manufacturing
 153
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 41: Economic Opportunities in Merafong City

Source: Gauteng Economic Opportunities Atlas by GEDA

 154
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 42: Economic Opportunities: Mogale City

Source: Gauteng Economic Opportunities Atlas by GEDA

 155
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Area around the Cradle of Humankind WHS and the proposed Lanseria Aerotropolis:
o Leisure tourism
o Meetings, Exhibitions and Special Events (MESE) Tourism
o Reworking of mine dumps, brick works, processing and beneficiation of mining produce
o Cultural and Historic activities
o Food cluster (with focus on processing, packaging and distribution of agricultural products).
o Rehabilitation of mine dumps, processing and beneficiation, value added high tech
manufacturing (serviced land available at the industrial area Aureus)
o Eco Tourism (Riebeeck Lake, disused mining shaft and Business Processing &
Outsourcing)
o Around Tarlton:
o Production crops, input logistics (packaging, cooling facilities, etc.) & transport and agro-
processing, abattoir

c) Randfontein, as part of Rand West City Local Municipality

Opportunities for production crops, input, logistics (packaging, cooling facilities, etc.) and transport and
agro-processing, meat processing, chicken feed exist within the Randfontein area as outlined in the
Map 43.

d) Westonaria, as part of Rand West City Local Municipality

Map 44 below illustrates the economic opportunities within the Westonaria, which are summarised as
follow:
 Ostrich product processing,
 Organic food supplements,
 Bio-medical products,
 Chemical waste processing and refinement,
 Foundries,
 Jewellery,
 Education & ecotourism,
 Expansion of the Magaliesberg steam train,
 Mining-based tourism, and
 Donaldson dam and Riebeeck dam.

South of the R28 and N12 in the Kalbasfontein area, opportunities have been identified with regards to:
 Reworking of mine dumps,
 Brick works,
 Processing and beneficiation of mining produce,
 Refinery and
 Jewellery manufacturing.
 156
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 43: Economic Opportunities: Former Randfontein LM

Source: Gauteng Economic Opportunities Atlas by GEDA

 157
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 44: Economic Opportunities: Former Westonaria LM

Source: Gauteng Economic Opportunities Atlas by GEDA

 158
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In summary, the following Table 6 represents a brief summary of development opportunities as

identified for each economic sector in the WRDM area.

Table 6: WRDM Economic Development Opportunities

Sector Development Opportunities
Agricultural Sector  Intensive commercial farming opportunities
 Aquaculture development
 Small-scale commercial farming
 Subsistence farming
 Other development opportunities within the agricultural sector
Mining Sector  New gold mining projects
 Improving the profitability of mines
 Small Scale mining
 Strengthening local backward linkages
 Mining assisted small business development
 Processing and beneficiation of mining produce
 Mining Centre of Excellence
Manufacturing Sector  Industrial cluster development
 Manufacturing opportunities in niche markets
 Manufacturing activities using local produce as inputs
 Supportive and service industries linked to the mining sector
 Promotion of further investment in currently successful
manufacturing activities
 Chemical Waste Sector
Utilities and  Development of Donaldson Dam:
Construction Sector  Development of Riebeeck Lake
 Katlego cultural facility
 CBD Regeneration and Industrial Development Districts:
 Township and Urban Renewal Projects
Wholesale and Retail  Gaps in regional retail hierarchy
Trade Sector  Mining and agriculture supplies and services
 Fresh produce market
 Development of commercial clusters
Transport and  Utilise existing infrastructure optimally through proper routine
Communications Sector maintenance and rehabilitation routines
 Improvement of existing infrastructure with the aim of increasing
accessibility to the area
 Transportation corridor development with surrounding areas and
economic of importance
 Improving the safety and efficiency of rail commuter services, in
order to utilise the system to full capacity
 Introducing new communication technology, i.e. logistics, ICT,
networking platforms, call centres, etc.
 Possibility of a Logistics/Distribution Centre in the West Rand
should be investigated
Finance and  Provision of services to the mines
Social/Community  Multi-Purpose Community Centre
services  Call Centres
Tourism Sector  Promotion, information and infrastructure
 159
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Sector Development Opportunities

 Development of tourism attractions:
 Development of specific tourist routes
 Tourism and hospitality training
 Tourism facilities
 SMMEs in tourism

5.8 LAND OWNERSHIP, TRIBAL AREAS AND LAND CLAIMS

Land rights and access to land resources is one of the most important social and political issues in
South Africa today. Communal and freehold commercial land ownership constitutes the two main
systems of land tenure in South Africa.

The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform reported that there are 295 land claims in the
WRDM most of which occur in the former Randfontein Municipality (DRDLR, 2010). Most of these
claims have been settled. However, some land claims turn out to be a lengthy process and during this
time investors are unwilling to invest until the claims have been settled. This creates uncertainty over a
prolonged period of time with existing commercial farmers and their ability to expand and employ more
people. Unsettled land claims in the district are also hindering spatial development in the area. Land
claims could considerably alter the spatial pattern of development on land that is needed for various
macro land uses, such as human settlement development, agricultural development, mining and
conservation areas. Unsettled land claims also have an impact on the economic development in the
district as it can lead to large scale sterilisation of economically productive land that would otherwise be
used for food production, mining or nature conservation/tourism.

5.9 SYNTHESIS: SPATIAL STRUCTURING/FORM-GIVING ELEMENTS

The following key issues and structuring elements have been identified in the WRDM:
 The WRDM is well located to connect the central and outer nodes of the Global City Region (GCR)
to one another, and to the major economic activity areas around Tlokwe, Lichtenburg, Rustenburg
and Madibeng.
 However, the urban settlements of the WRDM are located at the far-western periphery in the context
of the Gauteng Province urban conurbation – far removed from the N4, N17/N2 and N3 national
corridors which link to the major import/export harbours in Southern Africa (Maputo, Richards Bay
and Durban-eThekwini).
 The District is served by three strong corridors i.e. the N14 to the north and N12 to the south, as
well as route R28 which functionally links the aforementioned two corridors as a north-south link
through the urban areas of Mogale City, Randfontein and Westonaria.
 There is also potential to link to the N4 Bakwena Platinum corridor via future PWV 3 from Lanseria
to Rustenburg.
 160
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 The westward extension of route N17 from the City of Joburg to Mogale City/Randfontein will not
only provide a direct link to some major export harbours, but also unlock the development potential
of the western parts of the Witwatersrand mining belt in the WRDM.
 The Gauteng SDF identified the Chamdor-Leratong Node and the Chamdor-Ennerdale-ORTIA
southern ring-road as initiatives of strategic significance at provincial level.
 The future WRDM public transport network could act as catalyst towards social integration of the
WRDM society and should be structured around the existing road and rail network.
 The WRDM holds a population of 820 955 people of which approximately 72% fall within the
economically active age bracket and almost 70% are economically active (73.7% of economically
active population are employed).
 Education levels of the population improved significantly over the past decade, as did the disposable
income per household.
 The District economy is well established in terms of mining in the southern mining belt (Westonaria-
Merafong City), and agriculture in the south-eastern and north-western agricultural hubs.
 Numerous opportunities exist to expand and diversify the economic base of the WRDM, especially
in terms of industrial developments and more specifically agro industries associated with the two
agricultural hubs located in the district.
 The WRDM should capitalise on the tourism potential of the Cradle of Humankind as part of a
significantly larger tourism region comprising the Hartbeespoort Dam, Magalies mountain range and
the Pilanesberg Nature Reserve.
 The Magalies Mountain to the north and Gatsrand to the south are strong spatial structuring
elements to the WRDM, but also provide the basic footprint for tourism promotion in the district.
 Shallow undermining and dolomitic conditions (183 000 ha) limit the extent to which the WRDM
urban structure can be consolidated – especially in areas around the Witwatersrand mining belt
between the CBD’s of Mogale City and Randfontein.
 Irrespective of the above, there is a need to consolidate the fragmented urban structure of the
WRDM to be aligned with the principles of sustainable development as promoted in national and
provincial spatial policy, keeping in mind geological conditions (cost implications) and ecosystem
sensitivities.
 The WRDM has a range of established, affordable residential areas with associated services and
amenities that could play a supportive function in the GCR, but it also has a housing backlog
estimated at approximately 58 011 units that need to be addressed.
 Informal settlements and associated housing demand occurs in the urban and rural parts of the
district and are mainly associated with existing low income residential areas (former townships),
mining activity, and strategic intersections along main routes in rural areas.
 A large component of the housing demand relates to mine workers which are in many instances
migrant workers requiring rental stock.
 The temporary nature of mining activity is also problematic in terms of social infrastructure
investment like houses, schools etc. if a secondary economy to support the town is not developed.
 161
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 The WRDM Industrial Development Strategy identified 5 Primary Industrial Nodes, 6 Secondary
Industrial Nodes, two new nodes with potential for agro-industries, and two corridors with high
potential for industrial development.
 Socio-economic weaknesses that are critical to address include low and inappropriate skills; low
general income levels; and outflow of human and financial capital from the WRDM to other towns
in the GCR.
 There has been a steady improvement in the levels of services provided in the WRDM between
2001 and 2011. However, backlogs in the former Westonaria municipality is consistently higher than
in the other three municipalities.
 Due to the fragmented nature of the WRDM urban structure it is difficult and costly to provide and
maintain bulk engineering infrastructure and reticulation networks.
 Due to continuous processes of human settlement in rural areas there is growing pressure for the
establishment of sustainable rural nodes/agri-villages.
 162
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

6. WEST RAND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

6.1 POINTS OF DEPARTURE, SPATIAL VISION AND LAND USE BUDGET

6.1.1 POINTS OF DEPARTURE

In line with the Development Principles for spatial planning as contained in the Spatial Planning and
Land Use Management Act, the West Rand District Spatial Development Framework seeks to achieve
the following:

Spatial Sustainability:
 Create a more consolidated settlement structure in the WRDM, so as to allow for the cost-effective
and sustainable provision of engineering and community services and infrastructure;
 Ensure the sustainable use of land and other resources in the District.

Spatial Justice:
 Mitigate existing and future conflicts between urban development, mining, industry, agriculture,
and tourism which are the main economic sectors in the District;
 Achieve spatial justice by way of inclusion of communities that were previously excluded from
services and facilities through processes of urban restructuring and consolidation;
 Provide all communities access to resources to improve their living conditions.

Spatial Efficiency:
 Ensure the channelling of resources to areas in the WRDM displaying both economic potential and
development need;
 Functionally linking the main growth centres / areas of greatest economic activity in the District to
one another and to the regional economy of the GCR;
 Enhance the development potential of existing towns and smaller settlements in rural areas of the
District.

Good Administration:
 Ensure alignment between different sectoral plans and initiatives from various spheres of
government, surrounding districts, metropolitan municipalities, and the local municipalities within
the WRDM.

The Spatial Development Framework for the West Rand District thus facilitates the consolidation of
the District’s settlement structure; encourages rural-urban interaction; provides a framework
(spatial logic) for the efficient, equitable and sustainable provision of community infrastructure
and services; unlocks the development potential of existing towns through proposals for
developing industry specific economic clusters in line with the district space economy;
 163
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

functionally links the main growth centres via well-developed corridors; and mitigates existing
and potential future land use conflict(s) between industrial developments, mining, agriculture,
and tourism.

6.1.2 SPATIAL VISION

In line with the elements of a Spatial Vision as identified in section 4.4 of this document, the West Rand
Spatial Development Framework is based on the visionary elements contained in the WRDM Regional
Growth and Development Strategy, WRDM Green IQ Initiative, as well as the Spatial Issues highlighted
in the WRDM Integrated Development Plan.

The Vision for the future development of the West Rand is that it should ultimately be spatially
connected, attractive, sustainable and well-managed. It furthermore addresses all six the key focus
areas contained in the Regional Growth and Development Strategy i.e. integration, physical
infrastructure, economic development, environmental management, social development and
governance; it is well-aligned with the key pillars of the Green IQ initiative which evolves around people,
the environment, economy, energy and innovation; and it deals with all the spatial issues identified in
the Integrated Development Plan of the District.

6.1.3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND LAND USE BUDGET

Supplementary to the above points of departure and spatial vision, the existing and projected future
population, job opportunities, and households to be catered for in the WRDM SDF were also
considered. Table 10 comprises the future projections of households, population and job opportunities
for the West Rand District Municipality from 2001 to 2037, while Table 11 comprises the land use
budget required to accommodate the incremental population and economic activity in the District. These
two tables are briefly discussed in the section below.
 164
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table 10: West Rand: Projections of Household, Population and Job Opportunities
Local Households Population Job Opportunities
Municipality 2001 2011 2025 2037 2001 2011 2025 2037 2001 2010 2025 2037
Mogale City LM 85469 117 373 191 459 212 405 296 643 362 422 555 814 609 169 55 623 84 330 155 859 216 833
Randfontein LM 35820 43 299 79 453 94 021 127 715 149 286 243 176 288 678 28 903 39 560 68 398 94 055
Westonaria LM 29988 40 101 62 957 79 699 109 329 111 767 176 330 223 157 34 542 38 317 51 800 75 267
Merafong City LM 56329 66 624 76 500 79 500 210 471 197 520 227 060 235 153 57 794 59 270 60 781 70 970
West Rand DM 207 606 267 397 410 370 465 625 744 159 820 995 1 202 380 1 356 158 176 861 221 476 336 838 457 125
PERCENTAGE
Local Households Population Job Opportunities
Municipality 2001 2011 2025 2037 2001 2011 2025 2037 2001 2010 2025 2037
Mogale City LM 41% 44% 47% 46% 40% 44% 46% 45% 31% 38% 46% 47%
Randfontein LM 17% 16% 19% 20% 17% 18% 20% 21% 16% 18% 20% 21%
Westonaria LM 14% 15% 15% 17% 15% 14% 15% 16% 20% 17% 15% 16%
Merafong City LM 27% 25% 19% 17% 28% 24% 19% 17% 33% 27% 18% 16%
West Rand DM 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
INCREMENT
Local Households Population Job Opportunities
Municipality 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2010 2010-2025 2025-2037 2010-2037
Mogale City LM 31 904 74 086 20 946 95 032 65 779 193 392 53 355 246 747 28 707 71 529 60 974 132 503
Randfontein LM 7 479 36 154 14 568 50 722 21 571 93 890 45 503 139 392 10 657 28 838 25 657 54 495
Westonaria LM 10 113 22 856 16 742 39 598 2 438 64 563 46 827 111 390 3 775 13 483 23 467 36 950
Merafong City LM 10 295 9 876 3 000 12 876 -12 951 29 540 8 093 37 633 1 476 1 511 10 190 11 700
West Rand DM 59 791 142 973 55 255 198 228 76 836 381 385 153 778 535 163 44 615 115 361 120 287 235 648
INCREMENT PER ANNUM
Local Households Population Job Opportunities
Municipality 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2010 2010-2025 2025-2037 2010-2037
Mogale City LM 3 190 5 292 1 745 3 655 6 578 13 814 4 446 9 490 3 190 4 769 5 081 4 908
Randfontein LM 748 2 582 1 214 1 951 2 157 6 706 3 792 5 361 1 184 1 923 2 138 2 018
Westonaria LM 1 011 1 633 1 395 1 523 244 4 612 3 902 4 284 419 899 1 956 1 369
Merafong City LM 1 030 705 250 495 -1 295 2 110 674 1 447 164 101 849 433
West Rand DM 5 979 10 212 4 605 7 624 7 684 27 242 12 815 20 583 4 957 7 691 10 024 8 728
PERCENTAGE GROWTH
Local Households Population Job Opportunities
Municipality 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2011 2011-2025 2025-2037 2011-2037 2001-2010 2010-2025 2025-2037 2010-2037
Mogale City LM 3.2% 3.6% 0.9% 2.3% 2.0% 3.1% 0.8% 2.0% 4.7% 4.2% 2.8% 3.6%
Randfontein LM 1.9% 4.4% 1.4% 3.0% 1.6% 3.5% 1.4% 2.6% 3.5% 3.7% 2.7% 3.3%
Westonaria LM 2.9% 3.3% 2.0% 2.7% 0.2% 3.3% 2.0% 2.7% 1.2% 2.0% 3.2% 2.5%
Merafong City LM 1.7% 1.0% 0.3% 0.7% -0.6% 1.0% 0.3% 0.7% 0.3% 0.2% 1.3% 0.7%
West Rand DM 2.6% 3.1% 1.1% 2.2% 1.0% 2.8% 1.0% 1.9% 2.5% 2.8% 2.6% 2.7%

Sources: 2001: Gauteng Transportation Study (GTS-2000), 2005

2011: Population Census 2011, STATS SA
2025, 2037: Gauteng 25 – Year Integrated Transport Master Plan (GITMP 25), adjusted to incorporate Census 2011
 165
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

[Link] Population Projections

Table 10 shows that the number of households in the district municipality will increase from the existing
267 397 in 2011, to approximately 410 370 by 2025, and 465 625 by 2037. This represents an annual
growth rate of approximately 2.2% and translates to an incremental number of households of 142 973
units up to 2025, and a total of 198 228 additional households by the year 2037. This implies that
housing demand (all income groups) will increase at an average rate of approximately 7929 units per
annum over the next 25 years.

The associated population will increase from 820 995 in 2011 to an estimated 1 356 158 by 2037. This
represents an increment of approximately 535 163 people over the 25 year period. This translates to
approximately 20 583 people per annum which need to be accommodated.

As far as job opportunities are concerned, it is estimated that the existing 221 476 job opportunities in
the WRDM will increase by 115 361 to about 336 838 by the year 2025. From 2025 to 2037 there will
be a further increment of approximately 235 648 economic job opportunities in the district which will
bring the total number of job opportunities to approximately 457 125 by 2037. This is more than double
the 221 476 job opportunities recorded in the WRDM area for 2010.

The 198 228 new households will need additional space for human settlement, while land would also
be required to accommodate the projected 235 648 new job opportunities in the district. This needs to
be catered for in the Spatial Development Framework through the identification and reservation of land
most suitable for economic development as well as land for human settlement (housing) development.

[Link] Land Use Budget

Table 11 provides a land use budget to accommodate the incremental population/households and
associated job opportunities for the period 2011 to 2025 per each of the four municipalities and for the
district as a whole (see right hand column). The incremental dwelling units in the WRDM up to 2025
will be 142 973, while the population will increase by approximately 381 385 people by the same time.

The following section summarises the required number of community facilities, land area and/or floor
space required to accommodate this increment. The standards applied in the calculations are included
in Annexure C.

 The residential increment in the WRDM over the next decade (up to 2025) will require
approximately 7149 hectares of land for housing purposes.
 The incremental population will qualify for an estimated 179 additional educational facilities in the
district which would require approximately 70 ha of additional land.
 166
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table 11: West Rand: Incremental Land Use Budget (2011-2025)

INCREMENTAL LAND USE BUDGET (2011 - 2025)
LAND USE MOGALE CITY LM RANDFONTEIN LM WESTONARIA LM MERAFONG CITY LM WRDM TOTAL
no ha % no ha % no ha % no ha % no ha %
BASE DATA 3 704 69% 1 808 69% 1 143 69% 494 68% 7 149 69%
Dwelling Units 74 086 3 704 36 154 1 808 22 856 1 143 9 876 494 142 973 7 149
Population 193 392 93 890 64 563 29 540 381 385

Education 91 28 1% 44 17 1% 30 14 1% 14 10 1% 179 70 1%
Pre-Primary 44 21 21 10 15 7 7 3 86 42
Primary 29 2 14 2 10 2 4 2 58 10
Secondary 18 5 8 5 6 5 3 5 35 18

Retail (floor area in m²) 367 445 114 2% 178 390 56 2% 122 670 38 2% 56 126 17 2% 724 631 226 2%
Small and Local Convenience
retail centres (floor area in m²) 96 696 24 46 945 12 32 282 8 14 770 4 190 692 48
Neighbouhood and Community
retail centres (floor area in m²) 154 714 52 75 112 25 51 650 17 23 632 8 305 108 102
Regional retail centres (floor area in 116
m²) 035 39 56 334 19 38 738 13 17 724 6 228 831 76

Offices (floor area in m²) 36 745 9 0% 17 839 4 0% 12 267 3 0% 5 613 1 0% 72 463 18 0%

Industrial (floor area in m²) 133 2% 79 3% 18 1% 10 1% 240 2%

Community Facilities 26 0% 12 0% 9 1% 3 0% 50 0%
Religious places 96 14 46 7 32 5 14 2 190 28
Clinic 19 4 9 2 6 1 2 0 38 7
Hospital (Regionl Facility) 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 19
Post Office 17 1 8 0 5 0 2 0 34 2
Police 8 1 4 0 3 0 1 0 15 2
Community Centre / Library/Pay Point 3 2 1 1 1 1 - - 7 3
Municipal Office 3 2 1 1 1 1 - - 7 3
Fire Station 3 4 1 1 1 1 - - 6 6

Open Space 242 5% 117 4% 81 5% 37 5% 476 5%

Active 89 43 30 14 175
Passive 153 74 51 23 301

SUBTOTAL 4 257 77% 2 093 76% 1 306 78% 573 78% 8 229 77%

STREET 1 107 21% 544 21% 339 21% 149 21% 2 139 21%

TOTAL 5 364 98% 2 637 97% 1 645 99% 721 99% 10 368 98%
 167
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Similarly, an estimated 190 sites (28 hectares) will have to be made available for religious places;
 38 sites (7 hectares) for clinics;
 1 additional regional hospital (19 hectares) will be required;
 About 34 post offices (2 hectares);
 15 police stations (2 hectares) will be required;
 The population will also warrant the construction of about 6 additional fire stations as well as
several municipal offices and community centres;
 An estimated 50ha of land will have to be set aside to accommodate all the community facilities to
be provided in the WRDM area;
 Apart from education and other community facilities, the WRDM area would also require
approximately 724 631m² of retail space as well as 72 463m² of office floor space;
 The retail space demand would justify the construction of approximately 38 small and local
convenience retail centres throughout the district, 12 community retail centres and about 3 new
regional retail centres;
 A total of about 226 ha of land will be required to construct the retail facilities, about 18 ha for office
space and, in accordance with the WRDM Industrial Development Strategy, about 240 ha for
industrial uses;
 In total, the urban footprint of the WRDM will expand over an area of approximately 10 368 ha.

Map 45 provides an indication of the spatial extent of land required for future development in the WRDM
(10 368 ha) over the next decade, in comparison to the existing urban footprint of the area. This needs
to be considered in the compilation and design of the District Spatial Development Framework.

6.2 SPATIAL CONCEPT

Following from the critical elements identified in the Situational Analysis, the project team compiled a
spatial concept for the West Rand District Municipality as illustrated on Map 46. The following are the
main concepts to be noted from this:
 The fragmented urban structure is consolidated around Mogale City, Randfontein and Westonaria
with infill development, densification and redevelopment being promoted (from Lanseria in the
north up to Syferfontein/Lenasia to the south). The aim is to integrate this urban complex with the
existing urban fabric of the City of Joburg;
 To the west the mining towns around Carletonville-Khutsong, Fochville and Wedela are also
consolidated by way of an urban edge;
 The N14 and N12 routes represent the major east-west movement corridors serving the northern
and southern parts of the district respectively, while route R28 serves as a development corridor
linking the urban fabric from Mogale City to Westonaria, and stimulating and promoting economic
growth and infill development;
 168
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 45: Spatial Extent of Land Required for Future Development

NOTE: RANDFONTEIN & WESTONARIA IS NOW RAND WEST CITY

 169
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 46: Spatial Concept

 170
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 N17 and PWV5 will play an important role towards unlocking the development potential of the
central mining belt, enhancing infill development, and supporting the development of the Leratong
node;
 Several urban nodes have been identified mainly around the existing CBDs of Merafong City,
Westonaria, Randfontein and Mogale City while a number of rural nodes are earmarked in the
northern parts of the district between Mogale City, Rustenburg and the Hartbeespoort Dam;
 Tourism and conservation are mainly promoted in the far-northern parts of the district around the
Cradle of Humankind (which functionally forms part of the Hartbeespoort Dam-Magaliesberg-
Pilanesberg tourism region) and towards the south along the Gatsrant series of ridges;
 Two areas of extensive agriculture are set aside in the central-western and southern parts of the
district. These areas focus on promoting agricultural activity and both form part of the Gauteng
Agricultural Hubs;
 It is furthermore anticipated that mining will continue in an east-west orientated belt along the
southern parts of the district in the areas of jurisdiction of Merafong City and the former Westonaria
LM with the old Witwatersrand mining belt areas between Randfontein and Mogale City being
utilized for infill development and densification.

6.3 DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES (DERIVED FROM CONCEPT)

From the spatial concept as highlighted in section 6.2 above, the project team derived the following
twelve development principles which represent the building blocks to the Spatial Development
Framework of the West Rand District Municipality. These principles are listed below:
 Consolidate and protect environmentally sensitive areas to ensure long term environmental
sustainability;
 Enhance spatial efficiency by defining a range of urban and rural nodes in the district around which
to consolidate economic development and infrastructure investment;
 Establish a comprehensive movement network to link all activity nodes within the district and
beyond, and to promote corridor development through land use-transportation integration;
 Consolidate the tourism character of the district around the Cradle of Humankind as part of the
regional Cradle-Harbeespoort Dam-Magaliesberg-Pilanesberg tourism complex;
 Optimise agricultural production and processing in and around the two agricultural hubs in the
district;
 Utilize the mining potential of the district along the southern mining belt in a sustainable, well-
managed manner.
 Expand and consolidate industrial development along newly identified development corridors,
around existing industrial areas and at rural nodes.
 Actively manage and maintain highest order business nodes (CBD’s) in the district to
accommodate retail, office and residential uses and timeously implement Urban Renewal
Programmes where necessary.
 Achieve urban restructuring and spatial justice by consolidating mixed income residential
development (bonded and subsidized) in well-located strategic development areas.
 171
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Facilitate urban restructuring in the district by way of implementation of growth management

instruments like the Urban Development Boundary as part of a comprehensive Growth
Management Strategy.
 Direct infrastructure investment towards the activity nodes in the district, strategic development
areas earmarked for residential development, and communities with excessive service backlogs.
 Consolidate community facilities at strategic locations to enhance “one-stop” access to such
facilities for the community, and to contribute towards creating “critical mass” required to stimulate
local economic development – especially in and around rural nodes.

Each of these principles represents a spatial element to the West Rand District Spatial Development
Framework and will be discussed in greater detail under section 6.4 below.

6.4 SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

PRINCIPLE 1: CONSOLIDATE AND PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS TO

ENSURE LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Map 47 illustrates the proposed regional open space system as part of the West Rand Spatial
Development Framework. It mainly comprises the areas of high biodiversity along Magaliesberg
towards the north and Gatsrant ridge towards the south; supplemented by the river drainage systems
running through the district as well as the associated wetland areas as indicated which should function
as ecological corridors. All the existing proclaimed nature reserves like Abe Bailie Nature Reserve in
Merafong City, the Krugersdorp Nature Reserve, and the Cradle of Humankind are also included in the
open space system.

It is important to note that the open space system as highlighted for the Spatial Development Framework
needs to be maintained in line with the guidelines and directives contained in the WRDM Environmental
Management Framework (June 2013). The following is an extract from this document containing
guidelines which should be utilized in the evaluation of applications and in assessing the feasibility of
developments in all parts of the district.

Strategic Environmental Management Plan Guidelines

A consolidated zonation map (refer to Map 48) has been developed as part of WRDM EMP which
classifies the entire WRDM area into one of four categories:
- Agriculture
- Conservation
- Mining
- Urban/Peri urban

These recommended zones are a support tool for decision-makers and do not preclude the need for
site-specific studies.
 172
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 47: Proposed Regional Open Space System

 173
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 48: Strategic Environmental Management Zones for the West Rand District Municipality
 174
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Conservation and eco-tourism has been given the top priority in this Environmental Management Plan
as these areas are considered critical areas for habitat and ecosystem function and protection of these
natural resources is critical to the sustainability of the environment and the health and wellbeing of all
species present.

Priority is also given to areas with high agricultural potential to ensure that these areas are protected
for agricultural use and future food security.

Development activity guidelines have been prepared for each of the four zones to ensure that future
development and management of these areas take place in a sustainable manner without
compromising the integrity of the environment. (Refer to the WRDM EMF Report: June 2013). These
guidelines aim to provide government with the tools required to effectively evaluate development
applications by indicating which activities are supported and not supported in any particular zone. These
are also intended to assist developers during the planning and design phases of proposed
developments to identify areas of potential conflict between development proposals and
critical/sensitive environments such that these can be mitigated, managed and designed to be
appropriate.

The following are general guidelines pertaining to the State of Environment to be achieved in the
WRDM:

DESIRED STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Sustainability is a desired future state whereby the pressures caused by the scale and impact of
human activities, industrialisation and population growth are managed. In order to achieve
sustainability in the WRDM, and to avoid ecological collapse, the following guidelines must be
applied:
Atmosphere and Climate
 The desired state for air quality in the district should be such that it is not detrimental to the health
and well-being of the municipal residents and should be compliant to the National Standards for
ambient air quality in South Africa (2009), as well as any other applicable legislation.
Water
 The rivers and tributaries in the WRDM are regarded as zones of conservation and should remain
largely in their natural state. Exotic vegetation should be removed and replaced with indigenous
vegetation.
 The natural floodplain of all rivers in the WRDM should be maintained and managed as an open
space that is able to fulfil the normal hydrological and ecological functions in an unhindered
manner.
 175
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Acid mine water should be prevented from decanting and contaminating ground and surface water
sources
 The provision of a high quality natural fringe along the river channels that should act as an
effective ecological connector through the District; and
 There should be no development within the natural floodplain of all rivers, especially with regards
to the areas below the 1:100 year floodline.
Geomorphology
The WRDM should ensure that all land use planning and development applications take the
underlying geology into account (i.e. geology, slope, risk of mass movement, expansive soils,
sinkholes, undermining etc.). A Karst Management Plan should be developed for each local
municipality in order to guide development in dolomitic areas.
Biodiversity
In order to conserve biodiversity, the WRDM should ensure that areas of high conservation value,
such as rivers, ridges and formal and unofficial conservation areas are protected and linked via open
spaces.
Agriculture
The WRDM should promote the agricultural industry within the municipal area, by encouraging the
use of different crops and new techniques. The WRDM should also promote the following:
 Small-scale farming and urban agriculture.
 Agricultural industry compliant with all the relevant legislation and policies.
 Agricultural practices on all land with high agricultural potential to optimize food production.
 Development of agro-based tourism expansion and utilisation of agro-processing facilities that
accommodate locally produced inputs.
Industry and Mining
 Waste management and pollution in industrial and mining areas should conform to all national,
provincial and local norms and standards.
 Ensure that all mining areas comply with the relevant regulations and they have up-to-date
Environmental Management Programmes and Rehabilitation Plans in place.
Open Space
The proposed open space system in the WRDM should be an integral part of spatial planning,
resource conservation, biodiversity protection, sensitive land use planning and land use
management.
The following principles should be adopted in integrating the open space into the future urban system:
 The series of ridges in the WRDM are environmentally very sensitive and should form a
fundamental part in open space planning and maintaining the existing high levels of biodiversity;
 The rivers in the WRDM are regarded as zones of conservation and should be carefully
managed to ensure limited / no pollution;
 The establishment of a network system of open space areas at municipal level will ensure that
river corridors are able to function ecologically;
 176
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Open space areas within towns and urban areas should be developed to ensure safety for users
by creating overlooking structures such as housing on the edge, lighting and security personnel;
 Major recreational parks and facilities within the network of open spaces should be easily
accessible by public transport;
 All the protected natural areas (COHWHS, Krugersdorp Nature Reserve, Abe Bailey Nature
Reserve, etc.) must be formally proclaimed and linked to the network of open spaces;
 Urban areas should be greened and made aesthetically pleasing and linked to the network of
open spaces.
Bulk Service Infrastructure
 Ensure that all residents have access to acceptable bulk services of at least level 1 services. The
acceptable standards with regards to level 1 services are that every household shall have a
Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) latrine and access to piped water within 200 m walking distance. All
households should have access to weekly waste removal services.
Waste Management
 Waste produced should be reduced, reused and recycled as far as possible.
 All remaining waste should enter the formal waste stream for disposal in the correct manner at
appropriately licensed waste disposal facilities.
 No liquid waste should enter into the stormwater system.
 Where feasible, the employment creation opportunities of sustainable waste recycling should be
fully explored.
 Hazardous waste should be responsibly disposed of at an appropriately licensed hazardous
waste disposal facility and in accordance with all relevant legislation and policies.
The Cultural Environment
 Ensure that all cultural, historical and archaeological areas and sites are conserved and protected
in accordance with all the relevant legislation and policies.

PRINCIPLE 2: ENHANCE SPATIAL EFFICIENCY BY DEFINING A RANGE OF URBAN AND

RURAL NODES IN THE DISTRICT AROUND WHICH TO CONSOLIDATE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT

It is important to define a strategic range of well-located activity nodes in the district with the very specific
purpose to guide and direct public and private investment towards these areas, and to optimize
agglomeration benefits to be derived from such clustering of activities. These nodes serve as focal
points for attracting retail, office and residential uses and even commercial and light industrial activity
in the district and are thus priority areas for infrastructure development and promoting high density
mixed uses. Activity nodes are also important public transport destinations. In this context the nodal
system also influences the district public transport network as it determines the major movement desire
lines.
 177
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table 13 below lists the main activity nodes forming part of the District SDF as depicted on Map 49. It
includes four primary nodes, eight secondary nodes and four rural nodes. It should be noted that several
smaller (neighbourhood) nodes are identified in the Spatial Development Frameworks of local
municipalities, but it was decided not to include these at the scale of the District SDF. Detailed precinct
plans for some of these nodes are also included in the Spatial Development Framework extracts for the
four local municipalities included in Annexure B1 to B4 in this document.

Table 13: Main Activity Nodes

Primary Nodes Secondary Nodes Rural Nodes
 Mogale City CBD  Lanseria-Nietgedacht  Hekpoort
 Randfontein CBD  Muldersdrift  Magaliesburg
 Westonaria CBD  Silver Star-Cradle Mall  Tarlton-Orient
 Carletonville CBD  Leratong Node  Badirille
 Syferfontein-N12
 Fochville
 Khutsong South
 Wedela

a) Primary Nodes

The primary nodes represent the existing Central Business Districts of Mogale City, Randfontein,
Westonaria and Carletonville. In all four of these municipalities, these areas represent the highest
concentration and greatest variety of economic activity in the municipal area. These areas also perform
a very important function in terms of defining the identity of towns and serving the needs of local people,
whilst also creating the critical mass required to stimulate economic development and job creation.

The activity nodes should be strengthened with medium and higher density residential development
and also accommodate the need for rental housing in line with the Social Housing Programme of
national government. (In order to qualify for Social Housing these areas need to be declared
“Restructuring Zones”).

b) Secondary Nodes

The secondary nodes are located outside the existing CBDs but all of these either perform very
important functions by virtue of a strategic location (e.g. Silver Star-Cradle Mall), or are part of
intervention programmes aimed at stimulating economic growth in certain disadvantaged areas (e.g.
Leratong). The secondary nodes in the West Rand District Municipality include the following areas:
 178
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 49: Nodal Points

 179
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 The future Lanseria-Nietgedacht-Cosmo City node towards the north at the intersection between
route K29 (Malibongwe Drive) and the N14 freeway which is earmarked to become a future
metropolitan activity node comprising more than 33 000 residential units in the context of the City
of Joburg;
 Muldersdrift in the central part of the N14 corridor in the vicinity of the Beyers Naude Drive
intersection;
 Silver Star-Cradle Mall node at the intersection between route K72 (Hendrik Potgieter Drive) and
N14;
 The Leratong Node which is located to the east of Kagiso and which is part of the Gauteng Spatial
Development Framework aimed at promoting economic development in the vicinity of
Chamdor/Kagiso;
 Syferfontein-N12-Protea Glen which is proposed as a future activity strip/node in the WRDM
Industrial Development Strategy;
 Fochville CBD which also serves the surrounding farming and mining communities;
 Khutsong South CBD which is a new development area in the southern parts of Khutsong (part of
Gauteng Top 26 Townships Programme);
 The business node around Wedela serving the local community and surrounding mining and
farming activities.

c) Rural Nodes

The four main locations identified for the establishment of rural nodes are around Hekpoort in the far-
northern parts of the district at the route R560 and R563 intersection; at Magaliesburg along route R24;
in the vicinity of Tarlton/Orient Hills along route R24; and Badirille in the Randfontein area at route N14-
D801 intersection where there is an existing cluster of agro-industries present.

Nodal areas in the WRDM should be carefully planned, maintained and managed as these represent
the major areas of economic growth and service delivery.

In the case of the existing, well-established CBD’s of the four towns care should be taken that all signs
of urban decay and deterioration are immediately responded to in a pre-active manner. Officials should
be designated to continuously monitor and manage these areas. This can be done in terms of an Urban
Renewal/Regeneration Strategy to be compiled for each of the CBD’s in the District.

In the case of new/emerging nodes it is essential to pre-actively compile Precinct Plans to guide and
direct the location, type, extent and phasing of development in these areas rather than allowing the
areas to grow in an organic (haphazard) manner. Precinct Plans should determine the future spatial
structure, function and land use composition of such areas – not only to ensure orderly development,
but also to establish investor confidence.
 180
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

PRINCIPLE 3: ESTABLISH A COMPREHENSIVE MOVEMENT NETWORK TO LINK ALL

ACTIVITY NODES WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND BEYOND, AND TO PROMOTE CORRIDOR
DEVELOPMENT THROUGH LAND USE-TRANSPORTATION INTEGRATION

a) Transport Vision

The Transport Vision for the WRDM according to the WRDM ITP (2010-2015) is as follow:

“The enhancement of mobility and accessibility of all people in the West Rand District Municipality,
within equitable, justified, affordable and sustainable standards, by providing and managing an effective
and efficient transport system comprising of transport infrastructure and integrated multi modal public
transport that will enable and serve as a catalyst for economic development and the upliftment of the
community in the region”.

b) Transport Objectives

The following strategic directives for transport in terms of short, medium and long term measures or
projects are also noted in the WRDM ITP:
 To establish a safe and comprehensive road and rail network within the WRDM region that will
promote the economic development of the area and enhance the accessibility of previously
disadvantaged areas to essential facilities;
 To improve the transportation links with the CoJ and Ekurhuleni areas through the construction of
the N17;
 To improve the transportation links between regional development clusters and nodal points along
corridors with an efficient road system that will promote economic activity between the identified
development clusters or nodal points;
 To attend to the upgrading and maintenance of roads and railway infrastructure in both rural and
urban areas and to cater for the category “Special needs passengers”;
 To upgrade the entire public transport system to an acceptable standard by means of a review of
the operational strategy for road based modes;
 The road based public transport services within the WRDM public transport system to act as a
feeder service supplementing the rail network and to provide direct services to destinations not
served by rail;
 To promote principles of non-motorised transport by focusing on the construction of pedestrian and
cycling lanes along priority pedestrian movement desire lines;
 To ensure the safe transport of all learners and to devise a policy to regulate the learner transport
fraternity;
 To promote choice of transport mode by investigating the promotion of subsidized bus-services/
alternatively implementation of Bus Rapid Transit or Light Rapid Transit (Rail) in the West Rand.
 181
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

c) Movement Network

The priority movement network as illustrated on Map 45 comprises the following:

 N14 linking the WRDM to the City of Tshwane to the north-east and Lichtenburg to the west;
 N12 linking the WRDM to the City of Joburg to the east and Tlokwe to the south-west;
 Route R28 linking the urban parts of Mogale City, Randfontein and Westonaria to routes N14 and
N12;
 Route R24 which is the main link between WRDM and the Bojanala Platinum District (Rustenburg)
to the north-west;
 Route R500 which is the main north-south route through the western parts of the District, mainly
serving the Merafong City Municipality;
 Route R501 linking Westonaria to Merafong City;
 Route R41 which is the western extension of Randfontein/Main Reef Road linking up with route
R500 towards the west;
 Route K31 (Beyers Naude Drive) and K72 (Hendrik Potgieter Drive) serving the north-eastern parts
of Mogale City up to Poortview and Ruimsig;
 Route K74 (Ontdekkers Road) linking Mogale City to Roodepoort;
 Route R54 serving the far-southern extents of the WRDM;
 Routes R560, R563 and R512 which traverse the Cradle of Humankind and provide access to
Lanseria, Hartbeespoort Dam and Madibeng Municipality towards the north;
 Rail links to Magaliesburg, Derby and Koster; to Carletonville, Ventersdorp and Tlokwe; and the
commuter line extending from Randfontein to Mogale City and eastwards up to the City of Joburg.

d) Movement and Development Corridors

As noted in the spatial concept, routes N14, R28 and N12 east represent the main corridors in the
district. Routes N12 and N14 are primarily movement corridors facilitating east-west movement through
the District, while R28 serves as the central development corridor along which the urban fabric of
Westonaria, Randfontein and Mogale City will be consolidated in future.

Development will be facilitated/promoted along the following sections of the higher order road network
in the WRDM area:
 N14 from Lanseria up to Cradle Mall (K72) on both sides of the road in line with WRDM Industrial
Development Strategy);
 R28 from the Cradle Mall in the north up to the N12 interchange in the vicinity of Westonaria to the
south; and
 N12 east in the vicinity of Syferfontein/Protea Glen both north and south of the road (in line with
the WRDM Industrial Development.
 182
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 50: Road Network

 183
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

e) Public Transport Corridors

As noted in section 5.1.1(d) of this document the West Rand Municipality identified a number of public
transport corridors as part of the WRDM ITP in 2010. The Gauteng Integrated Transport Master Plan
(2013) also identified several of these routes as being priority for public transport in provincial context
and the following is a brief summary of the combined public transport priority routes from the West Rand
District ITP and the Gauteng Integrated Transport Master Plan (also refer to Map 51):

i) Dedicated Lanes Road Based

 K72 Hendrik Potgieter Drive
 K76 Ontdekkers Road
 K11/R28/K13 through Mogale City towards Randfontein
 K198 Randfontein Road linking to Main Reef Road
 K15 to the east of Chamdor/Kagiso
 P241-1 Toekomsrus towards the N12.

ii) Mixed Traffic Road Based

 Route R24 to Rustenburg
 Route R41 from Randfontein to Merafong City
 Route N12-R501 from Soweto to Westonaria and Carletonville.

In the rural areas the main public transport routes are route R24 towards Rustenburg, route R411
towards Ventersdorp, and route N12/R501 between Carletonville and Westonaria.

f) Strategic road Network Priorities

Several road sections from the Gauteng Strategic Road Network have been highlighted as priority
routes for upgrading/construction in the period up to 2037 by the GITMP. (Refer to Map 51). The most
significant in this regard which impacts on the West Rand District Municipality is route PWV5 up to N17
in the vicinity of Kagiso and further south up to N12; N17 east from Kagiso towards Soweto; N12 up
towards PWV5 in the west; N14 to the north; and PWV3 from Lanseria up to the N4 Bakwena toll road.

Omitted from this network is the section of N17 from Kagiso, across the mining belt up to the Mogale
City CBD which will contribute significantly towards enhancing access to the Mogale City-Randfontein
CBD’s from Joburg.

Also important to note that the proposed road network for the West Rand District links all the major
nodes to one another and provides access to all the functional precincts identified in the West Rand
Spatial Development Framework.
 184
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 51: Public Transport Corridors

 185
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

g) Transit Oriented Development

Another important principle is to promote Transit Oriented Development (high density mixed use)
around the railway stations along the rail network in the West Rand District. Map 52 illustrates the
stations around which such development can and should be promoted in the district and the associated
development potential around these stations – especially along the section from Mogale City to
Randfontein.

PRINCIPLE 4: CONSOLIDATE THE TOURISM CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AROUND THE

CRADLE OF HUMANKIND AS PART OF THE REGIONAL CRADLE-HARTBEESPOORT DAM-
MAGALIESBERG-PILANESBERG TOURISM COMPLEX

The vision of the WRDM Tourism Sector Strategy (2011) is that by 2016 the West Rand will be
Gauteng’s most preferred nature and heritage visitor experience.

The objectives of the WRDM Tourism Sector Strategy are as follow:

 Geographically spreading the benefits of the visitor economy throughout the district;
 Focused (prioritized) tourism development growing from the core of the Cradle of Humankind as
anchor;
 Growing both overnight and day visitor numbers and visitor yields in the Cradle of Humankind;
 Superlative customer experiences – safe, high quality, authentic and service excellence;
 Public and private sector collaboration in developing tourism services and facilities;
 Demand-led development meeting market potential and needs, related to experiences;
 Responsible Tourism ensuring environmental and economic sustainability and benefits for all.

In pursuance of the above objectives following existing and proposed tourism routes in the WRDM will
be actively enhanced and developed (see also Map 53):

 Magalies Meander - The Magalies Meander broadly along route R560 between Magaliesburg,
Hekpoort and Scheerpoort links together a number of artist’s studios, restaurants, conference
venues, outdoor activities and accommodation facilities just south of the Magaliesberg mountain
range. It was initiated and is managed and promoted privately through the Magaliesberg Tourist
Association with little or no government involvement;
 Crocodile Ramble - The Crocodile Ramble offers similar facilities and activities as the Magalies
Meander and is also privately run by the Crocodile Ramble Association. It meanders along the
Crocodile River and route R512 through the region from the Witwatersrand Botanical gardens in
the south, to Hartebeespoort Dam, Thabazimbi, and beyond. It is divided into two main areas, the
Crocodile Ramble in the Cradle of Humankind and the Ramble around the Hartebeespoort Dam;
 186
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 52: Rail Network

 187
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 53: Tourism focus Areas

 188
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Treasure Route - The Treasure Route, launched in 2001, runs along the N12 highway, which is
the main Johannesburg-Cape Town route via Kimberley. In the West Rand, this route includes
Merafong City and Westonaria and the route is being developed around the mining industry as its
primary draw card, and aims to benefit local communities through the use of SMMEs, local labour,
etc.; and
 Tourism Activity Corridor - The West Rand’s Spatial Development Framework has identified a
tourism activity corridor linking Tarlton, Magaliesburg, Hekpoort and Krugersdorp utilising the R24,
R560 and R563 roads. The tourism activity corridor strengthens linkages between attractions along
the Crocodile Ramble and those forming part of the Magalies Meander with the Cradle of
Humankind being the backdrop to the entire network.

This tourism corridor also provides access to Maropeng and many other educational and tourism
facilities to local and international visitors.

In line with the recommendations of the WRDM Regional Economic Development Plan these features
should be positively exploited to expand the tourism sector of the District and simultaneously ensure
the long term conservation of the ecological and heritage features of the WRDM.

One of the aims should be to diversify the current tourism base through providing for various types of
tourism such as agri-tourism, eco and educational tourism, adventure tourism and to arrange annual
events in line with this e.g. cycle races, marathons etc.

Municipalities should also provide support to local hospitality industries and existing attractions to
ensure a strong tourism industry which adheres to industry and tourist standards without overregulating
the industry which would make it very costly to enter the market.

Signage and branding of the tourism precincts and corridors are important first steps towards
establishing these concepts in the minds of local stakeholders and visitors/tourists to the area.

The aforementioned purpose can be achieved by means of the following projects (see WRDM EDP for
more detail):

 The promotion of Mining Tourism in the area around Westonaria and Merafong City.
 The promotion and marketing of Cultural and Historical Tourism in the area.
 Development and Promotion of Outdoor Adventure Tourism in the Cradle area.
 Promote and Market Eco- and Educational Tourism.
 Promote Township Tourism in the relevant areas in the West Rand.
 Development of Agri-Tourism in the northern parts.
 189
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Eco-tourism opportunities at Riebeeck Lake and at disused mining shafts in the former
Randfontein LM.
 Expansion of Magaliesberg steam train.
 Establish Crafters Market and Cultural Village along the N12 Treasure Route at the n12-R28
intersection.
 Development and promotion of Meetings, Exhibitions and Special Events.
 Provision of Tourism Development and Support services.

PRINCIPLE 5: OPTIMISE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING IN AND

AROUND THE TWO AGRICULTURAL HUBS IN THE DISTRICT

As noted earlier in this report the WRDM shares two of the declared Agricultural Hubs of Gauteng
Province: the one to the north-west between Mogale City, Merafong City and towards Rustenburg; and
the other in the areas south of the Gatsrant in the District as depicted on Map 54.

Subsequently, the WRDM should use these two areas of high agricultural potential to promote the
agricultural industry within the municipal area, and specifically by way of the following measures:
 Exploiting the opportunities offered by the high potential agricultural land identified within the
district.
 Significantly increasing the yield per hectare (relative to extensive farming) and therefore providing
more affordable food to the consumer.
 Providing support to emerging and small-scale farmers, and ensuring that appropriate skills
development takes place in line with the principles of the national Comprehensive Rural
Development Programme.
 Increasing land availability for agricultural purposes through partnerships with the current mining
houses and through mining rehabilitation and land reform (where relevant).
 Increasing job creation in rural areas through labour-intensive agricultural projects and extending
the agriculture value chain by way of agro-industries and agro-tourism around rural nodes.
 Encouraging the use of different crops and new planting, harvesting and processing techniques.
 Supporting a variety of farming concepts including intensive commercial farming small scale
commercial farming, subsistence farming, aquaculture development, agri-villages, demonstration
plots and agro processing industries.
 Although the primary focus should initially be on the two agricultural hubs, initiatives can/should be
expanded over time to the extensive agriculture (more marginal) areas of the District (refer to Figure
45.6). This is quite a large area and there is certainly potential to enhance production in these areas
as well.
 According to the WRDM Economic Development Plan the following types of agro-industries could
be established in the District:
 190
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 54: Agriculture

 191
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

- Increased poultry and pig feed manufacturing from maize to promote expansion of the chicken
industry and piggeries.
- Textile cluster (wool and cotton), which would engage in wool washing and further down-
stream activities such as spinning and weaving, manufacturing of final products such as
school wear, knitting wear for the tourism industry, utilisation of waste (lanoline for the
chemical industry).
- Seed oil processing to process the full range of seed oils available in the region. Medium-term
down-stream value-adding activities could further include manufacturing of margarine,
mayonnaise, etc. thus, establishment of a food-processing cluster.
- Livestock by-product utilisation whereby hides and skins could be sourced from abattoirs for
down-stream manufacturing of shoes, bags, safety shoes, furniture and tourism items.
- Manufacturing of maize and potato snacks such as chips, popcorn, etc.
- Further down-stream manufacturing of paper and plastic packaging for maize products and
animal feed.
- Manufacturing of plastic containers for items such as mayonnaise and margarine, achieving
backward linkage.

The aforementioned purpose can be achieved by means of the following projects (see WRDM EDP for
more detail):
 Availing rehabilitated/unused mining land for agricultural purposes/projects (especially within
Merafong, the former Westonaria and Randfontein LMs).
 Promotion of intensive, export-orientated products in the Mogale City area, due to the close
proximity to the Lanseria Airport and OR Tambo Airport.
 Skills development in agriculture and farming practices.
 Developing a partnership between established commercial farmers and the Agriculture FET
College.
 Land Reform Support to enhance access to the natural resources of the WRDM.

PRINCIPLE 6: UTILIZE THE MINING POTENTIAL OF THE DISTRICT ALONG THE SOUTHERN
MINING BELT IN A SUSTAINABLE, WELL-MANAGED MANNER

Mining is still a very important economic sector in the West Rand, both in terms of production and
employment and is set to play an important role in the economy of the West Rand for many years to
come. With an average life span of 26 years per mine, there is still considerable potential to utilize the
mining sector as a catalyst for developing other economic activities, by strengthening local backward
and forward linkages e.g. mining tourism, mineral processing, jewellery production, manufacturing of
bricks etc.

As illustrated on Map 55 the bulk of mining activity in the WRDM over the next few decades will be
along the southern mining belt between Westonaria and Merafong City.
 192
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 55: Mining Areas

 193
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

In the northern mining belt between Mogale City and Randfontein the main focus will be on the
rehabilitation of old mining land to make it available for future residential/commercial development; the
re-working of the existing mine dumps, ash processing for the refilling of mines, manufacturing of
construction aggregate and a variety of other associated activities.

The southern mining belt will comprise primary mining and associated activities. In view of the limited
lifespan of these mines it is important that appropriate environmental management processes be put in
place to ensure the continuous rehabilitation of mining land with a view to eventually restoring the
agricultural land tourism value of the land once mining activity ceases.

Human settlement associated with mining activity should be carefully managed to prevent the
establishment of small, unsustainable human settlements with no secondary economic base to support
it once the mine closes down.

Workers and their families should rather be integrated into the larger towns in this area like Westonaria,
Carletonville-Khutsong, Fochville and Wedela where they can share social and economic infrastructure
and services with the broader community and enhance the economic viability of such towns.

Although it implies that workers will have to commute to work during the lifespan of the mine it is still
more sustainable than creating several small mining towns/villages requiring duplication of
infrastructure etc. and which further fragment the urban footprint of the WRDM.

The Thusanang initiative currently underway in the Westonaria municipality is a good example of what
should not be allowed to happen as it flies in the face of all spatial norms and principles of SPLUMA.

PRINCIPLE 7: EXPAND AND CONSOLIDATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG NEWLY

IDENTIFIED DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS, AROUND EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND AT
RURAL NODES

The West Rand Industrial Development Vision as noted in the WRDM Regional Economic Development
Plan is to “Transform the West Rand industrial offerings into new, modern and diversified nodes and
proactively stimulate the development of optimally located new industrial nodes to attract clean industry
and logistics orientated industrial enterprises, whilst promoting the settlement of a broad spectrum of
enterprises (SMME through to large corporates) that promote value chain extension of local resources”.

The Vision is supplemented by the following industrial development objectives which should
inform/guide future industrial development in the district:
 Strengthen the functionality and performance of existing industrial nodes as shown on Figure 26
& Map 22 and analysed in Annexure A in this report.
 Diversify the existing industrial base of the nodes and unlock local resources by developing new
nodes/corridors in priority areas as illustrated on Map 56 and 57.
 194
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Strengthen existing agglomeration advantages.

 Contribute to the establishment of sustainable clusters.
 Attract higher skill levels to the nodes, contribute to skills development and capacity building of the
local labour force, and contribute to SMME development.
 Promote the incorporation of green industries/technology in all nodes.
 Ensure availability/flexibility of engineering services and related infrastructure serving industrial
areas.
 Exploit the opportunities offered by the existing strong agricultural base by encouraging
development of agro-processing and related downstream activities and industries around the rural
nodes depicted on Map 56

According to the West Rand Industrial Development Strategy (2013) all four local municipalities have
potential for future industrial expansion. Mogale City has the most potential (132.8ha) whilst Merafong
City has very limited (9.9ha) potential. In the Mogale City area the major new industrial development
area is around the N14 corridor as shown on Map 57 as well as the proposed agro-industry clustering
around the rural nodes – especially at Badirille and Tarlton-Orient Hills.

In Randfontein industrial expansion (78.8 ha) should be mainly focused along the R28 development
corridor (north and/or south of Aureus), and in Westonaria the major new development potential (17.6
ha) occurs along route N12 in the vicinity of Syferfontein and Protea Glen.

The following table is a summary of the overall development for the West Rand and the respective four
local municipalities as determined in the WRDM Industrial Development Strategy.

Industrial Space Demand Summary (20 year forecast)

Local Municipality Space Demand Potential Capital Investment
Mogale City 132.8 hectares R13.2 billion
Merafong City 9.9 hectares R988 million
Randfontein8 78.8 hectares R7.8 billion
Westonaria9 17.6 hectares R1.7 billion
Total West Rand District 239.1 hectares R23.6 billion

The total industrial market demand potential over the next 20 years is thus ± 239.1 ha. In addition, the
development potential translates into ± R20 – R25 billions of potential direct capital investment in new
industrial ventures on the West Rand over the next two decades.

The WRDM Industrial Development Strategy identified the following as the themes around which future
industrial development should be facilitated in the WRDM:

8
Now part of Rand West City LM with the former Westonaria LM
9
Now part of Rand West City LM with the former Randfontein LM
 195
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 56: Industrial Areas

 196
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 57: Industrial Areas

 197
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Industrial cluster development

o Manufacturing development can be promoted through the development of industrial
clusters around growth sectors that appear to have a (potential) comparative advantage,
e.g. industries linked to the mining sector, textiles.
 Manufacturing opportunities in niche markets
o Downstream processing of ostrich products
o Organic food supplements and bio-medical products
o SMME manufacturing, incl. clothing, upholstery, arts and crafts, etc.
 Manufacturing activities using local produce as inputs
o Mining product beneficiation, e.g. jewellery manufacturing
o Agro-industrial processing, e.g. Diary processing, grain milling
 Supportive and service industries linked to the mining sector:
o These industries should be targeted for growth, since more/larger contracts for the delivery
of services/inputs to the mines will improve backward linkages
 Promotion of further investment in currently successful manufacturing activities:
o E.g. Aranda Textiles, metal products – Manufacturing firms that are currently successful
or have a strong presence in the West Rand could increase its positive impact on
employment in the area if its operations were expanded through further investment.
Targeted investment incentives should be investigated.
 Chemical Waste Sector
o The current environmental problems experienced in the West Rand due to chemical/toxic
seepage, points to an urgent gap in terms of waste management agencies/companies. The
West Rand should investigate opportunities in the waste disposal sector, which includes the
safe and appropriate disposal of waste, as well as the utilization/recycling of waste, e.g.
chemical waste processing and refinement.
The overarching West Rand Industrial Strategy is based on three main pillars, each of which addresses
a unique set of industrial elements related to existing and new industrial nodes/ developments as
summarised in the table below:
Strategy West Rand Industrial Nodes
Pillar 1: Industrial Revival Strategy  Boltonia
 Declining older existing nodes  Delporton
 In need of revival strategies  Carletonville
 Oberholzer
 Fochville
Pillar 2: Industrial Maintenance Strategy  Chamdor
 Existing stable industrial nodes  Factoria
 In need of long term maintenance plan  Westonaria existing node
 Aureus existing node
Pillar 3: Industrial Growth Management Strategy  Fariaville
 Existing, expanding and new industrial nodes  Muldersdrift proposed N14 corridor
 In need of Growth Management Strategy  Nooitgedacht proposed N14 corridor
 Westonaria proposed new N12 corridor
 Aureus
 Proposed Badirille/N14 Intersection node
 Losberg
 198
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

PRINCIPLE 8: ACTIVELY MANAGE AND MAINTAIN HIGHEST ORDER BUSINESS NODES

(CBD’S) IN THE DISTRICT TO ACCOMMODATE RETAIL, OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES
AND TIMEOUSLY IMPLEMENT URBAN RENEWAL PROGRAMMES WHERE NECESSARY

The Central Business District (CBD’s) of all towns in the West Rand District play an important role in
serving the retail and office needs of communities, but also represent significant opportunities for
economic development and job creation to the informal sector.

Central Business Areas of towns should be treated as special precincts requiring dedicated
management in order to prevent urban decay and/or the relocation of economic activities to
decentralised business nodes. Decentralised nodes normally establish closer to the middle and higher
income residential areas of towns at highly accessible locations which normally marginalise the
disadvantaged communities of these towns even further.

When CBD areas in the WRDM show signs of urban decay and economic decline, special precinct
plans (Urban Revitalisation/Urban Renewal Plans and Strategies) should be compiled for these areas.
Such plans should be compiled in close liaison with local business in these areas as the success of
such strategies/plans depends on public-private partnerships and cooperation.

In the rural areas of the WRDM, the approach to enhance business activity should be aligned with one
of the objectives of the National Development Plan which is to utilise “small town development” as
nodes of rural development. This is in line with Principle 2 in the WRDM SDF which emphasises the
role that rural nodes perform in the nodal hierarchy of the WRDM. In the rural nodes the WRDM should
consolidate business activities around Thusong Centres (clusters of community facilities/services) in
line with the guidelines provided by the Precinct Plan compiled for the node. This approach maximises
the economic benefits to be derived from the concentration of people around the social services and
facilities provided by government. It is thus proposed that retail activities (both formal retail and/or
properly managed informal trade markets) be provided for in close proximity to each of the Rural Nodes
in the WRDM area. The primary objective of this is to accommodate local economic development and
further strengthen the economic viability of the identified nodal points by consolidating community
facilities and social services at the same point. (Refer to Figure 41 as an example).
 199
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 41: MPCC

It is thus important that, at design phase, sufficient land be earmarked for business/retail purposes
around each of the proposed Rural Nodes, and particularly the land parcels which enjoy the most
exposure to regional traffic and passing ‘feet’. Initial informal trade will give way to more formal activities
in the same location, as the node develops and grows.

The agricultural products listed under Principle 5 pose opportunities for agri-processing which could
further enhance economic development and job creation in the area by adding value to agricultural
products before exporting it to other regions. Linked to this, it is proposed that fresh produce markets
be established at the identified business nodes in rural parts of the District to provide a platform for local
farmers, small-scale farmers and entrepreneurs to sell their goods and gain entry to the district
economy.

PRINCIPLE 9: ACHIEVE URBAN RESTRUCTURING AND SPATIAL JUSTICE BY

CONSOLIDATING MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (BONDED AND
SUBSIDIZED) IN WELL-LOCATED STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS

Each of the towns within the District still carries the spatial legacy of the previous political dispensation
and historic mining activity in the Witwatersrand mining belt which separated various communities
socially and economically and resulted in a highly fragmented urban form. In response to the above,
 200
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

local authorities within the West Rand District need to ensure that the spatial imbalances of the past
are corrected and that people are located closer to places of work and economic opportunities, and that
the urban fabric of the WRDM is consolidated over time.

Housing, and more specifically subsidised housing, is a very powerful instrument at the disposal of
government to influence development patterns in and around towns, and to give effect to the spatial
restructuring objectives of municipalities.

Map 25 (p,115) in section [Link] of this document indicated that there is a housing demand of
approximately 58 011 units in the WRDM area, with an estimated annual incremental demand of about
142 973 units up to 2025.

It is critically important that these housing units be developed strictly in accordance with the spatial
guidelines provided in the local SDF’s, and more specifically in the Strategic Development Areas
identified on these plans as these areas comply with the development principles contained in SPLUMA
and/or the Development Facilitation Act (DFA).

These areas were incorporated into the WRDM Sustainable Human Settlement Strategy (2013) as
illustrated on Maps 30 & 31 (pp. 121 & 123) in this report. These area hold sufficient capacity to
accommodate the housing demand in the WRDM up to 2025.

Subsequently, these Strategic Development Areas were incorporated into the WRDM SDF as illustrated
on Map 58. In principle, all large scale human settlement projects in the WRDM area should be located
in these areas as part of an endeavour to consolidate the district urban fabric. This approach also
provides strategic direction in terms of priority areas for the expansion of engineering services over the
next decade.

PRINCIPLE 10: FACILITATE URBAN RESTRUCTURING IN THE DISTRICT BY WAY OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS LIKE THE URBAN
DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY AS PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY

Following from Principle 9 it is clear that each of the towns and settlements within the WRDM should
be developed in a manner aimed at consolidating the urban form and limiting further urban sprawl by
way of the introduction of an urban edge/urban development boundary, and by so doing correcting the
development patterns of the past. The proposed consolidated WRDM urban development boundary is
graphically illustrated on Map 59 as part of the WRDM SDF.
 201
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 58: Strategic Development Areas

 202
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 59: District Urban Edge

 203
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

All the Municipal Spatial Development Frameworks in the WRDM support this principle (refer maps
included in Annexure B), and provide more detail in terms of the exact alignment of the urban edge. It
is important that development follow in line with these guidelines at the implementation stage which
requires the implementation of a Growth Management Strategy for the WRDM.

At the core of the Growth Management Strategy of the WRDM should be the following strategic
objectives:
 Determine priority areas for short-medium term investment and allocation of future development
rights (as done in the identification of Strategic Development Areas for housing development);
 Re-direct the respective capital investment programmes of the WRDM and Local Municipality
Service Departments to address the short-term problem areas and strategic priority areas;
 Limit future development rights in infrastructure problem areas within the WRDM area until backlogs
have been addressed;
 Identify priority investment areas for the public and private sector, specifically in respect of municipal
infrastructure;
 Introduce development conditions that are congruent with best-practice standards relating to
resource efficiency (e.g. Green IQ, energy, water, fuel);
 Introduce development obligations relating to the full spectrum of inclusionary housing (i.e.
subsidized housing, bonded, rental / social housing) in identified priority areas;
 Apply a package of incentives to promote and facilitate development that subscribes to the socio-
economic and spatial imperatives of the district; and
 Establish monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to review the status of the infrastructure problem
areas and the limitations placed on these areas.

The successful implementation of the WRDM Growth Management Strategy will depend on the
following:
 A comprehensive and regular updated spatial information system including continuous market
trend assessment;
 A range of financial incentives / mechanisms aligned with the municipal rates policy to support
projects which will bring about significant economic development and job creation or projects
complying with the criteria of government’s Breaking New Ground (BNG) Policy;
 Institutional support and arrangements in terms of the following:
- High-level strategic decision-making based on the Growth Management Strategy;
- Long-term political endorsement and commitment of the principles fundamental to the Growth
Management Strategy;
- The District and Municipal IDP and Budget allocations for the WRDM area be based on the
principles of the Growth Management Strategy;
- Alignment with national and provincial policy frameworks like the National Development Plan.
 204
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

The WRDM cannot achieve these goals in isolation and would require the private sector to buy into the
WRDM Growth Management Strategy so that it can assist the process. It is therefore important to
structure demand management tools and incentive packages in such a way that they effectively benefit
the developers and future residents.

The WRDM urban edge is but one of a range of growth management instruments that can be applied
as part of the WRDM Growth Management Strategy. Other growth management instruments/tools that
can/should be applied in conjunction with the urban edge include Land Use Infrastructure Coordination;
declaration of Urban Renewal/Revitalisation Zones (Principle 8); Strategic Development Areas
(Principle 9); Economic Growth Target Areas e.g. along corridors (Principle 7); Transit Oriented
Development (Principle 3); Bulk Services Contributions; Zoning Incentives etc.

From the above it should be evident that the Development Principles contained in the WRDM SDF
provides the basis for the implementation of a much more comprehensive and sophisticated Growth
Management Strategy to be applied in the District in order to ensure the long term sustainable
development of the area.

PRINCIPLE 11: DIRECT INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT TOWARDS THE ACTIVITY NODES

IN THE DISTRICT, STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS EARMARKED FOR RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, AND COMMUNITIES WITH EXCESSIVE SERVICE BACKLOGS

All communities within the West Rand District Municipality have the right of access to basic services
like water, sanitation, and electricity whether they are located at one of the formal nodal points, or in the
rural parts of the District. The District, together with local municipalities, should thus continue to
endeavour to expand its formal water, sanitation and electricity networks and refuse collection system
in order to eventually reach and serve all rural and urban communities within the municipal area to at
least RDP level (as per the NDP guidelines).

The key challenge is to create a balance in terms of improving services in the rural and urban areas in
the district simultaneously. Sufficient infrastructure capacity in the urban areas is critical in order to
ensure that it can facilitate and enhance the processes of local economic development and human
settlement. It is proposed that this should be done in accordance with an unbiased prioritisation model
for the district area, based on the priorities identified in the WRDM and/or Municipal Infrastructure
Master Plans.

Notably, the services assessment (water, sanitation and electricity) as contained in Section 5.6 in this
document indicated that some communities feature very low levels of services – specifically the historic
township areas. Hence, as a principle, these areas should be targeted as priority Service Upgrading
Priority /Areas within the District.
 205
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

However, as noted under Principle 9 and 10 above the Strategic Development Areas identified should
also be provided with services in order to unlock and facilitate the development potential of these areas
for housing/mixed use projects aimed at eradicating the district housing backlog, and achieving the
urban restructuring required. There should thus also be a drive towards continuously expanding service
networks in these areas.

PRINCIPLE 12: CONSOLIDATE COMMUNITY FACILITIES AT STRATEGIC LOCATIONS TO

ENHANCE ACCESS TO SUCH FACILITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND TO CONTRIBUTE
TOWARDS CREATING “CRITICAL MASS” REQUIRED TO STIMULATE LOCAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT – ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AREAS AND AT RURAL NODES

The fragmented settlement structure of the West Rand District has resulted in both a lack of, and the
costly duplication of essential social services/ community facilities and engineering infrastructure.
Ultimately, the objective is to provide a full range of social services/ community facilities within a
reasonable distance of all communities, urban and rural, in the District. These services need to be
consolidated for maximum efficiency as there are spin-off benefits to be derived from such consolidation
such as increased economic potential (“critical mass”), and greater sense of “community identity”
around such centres etc.

It is thus proposed that a full range of social services/ community facilities be incrementally provided at
all identified nodal points in the District. The level of services provided is to be in line with the proposed
nodal hierarchy (i.e. higher order community facilities like hospitals, magistrates courts, tertiary
education facilities etc. located at Primary Nodes (the four CBD’s), while lower order facilities like
primary schools, clinics etc. should be provided more extensively at all Secondary Tertiary/Rural
Nodes). In this manner, all communities in the District will be served with at least a basic range of social
infrastructure in a Thusong Centre format within a convenient/reasonable distance of approximately 10
kilometres.

The establishment of such one-stop service centres in the District holds the following advantages:
 Provides a one stop comprehensive service to members from surrounding communities which are
in many cases very poor and cannot afford multiple trips.
 It promotes nodal development which is conducive to targeted infrastructure spending, local
economic development and corridor development.
 Consolidates human settlement around nodal points and protect valuable agricultural land from
urbanisation pressures.
 Provides guidance for the development and provision of engineering services.
 Indicates where to provide tarred road infrastructure and multi-modal transport facilities.
 Basic services are provided by government in a financially sustainable manner.
 Provides a platform for entrepreneurship and small business development (LED).
 Provides government with a platform from which to develop tele-centres in rural areas, as well as
rural energy centres.
 206
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Support the rural nodal concept as contained in the Comprehensive Rural Development Plan and
the National Development Plan.

7. IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

The following is thus a list of priority projects to be initiated in the West Rand area, based on the findings
and development proposals contained in the SDF. (Note: Sectoral plans/studies will/should provide
more detail on individual projects, priorities and costs):

Priority Initiatives/Projects following from the SDF

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority
Short Medium Long
Development Principle 1: Environment
- Establishment of District WRDM In-house/Operational 
Environmental
Management Unit/Office. WRDM In-house/Operational   
- Implementation of the
District Environmental
Management Plan, with
special focus on mining
activity rehabilitation.
- Coordination/alignment with WRDM In-house/Operational   
GDACE and local
municipality i.t.o of Land
Use Applications/Protected
Areas.
Development Principle 2: Nodal Hierarchy
- Establish nodal hierarchy  WRDM Operational   
concept in WRDM and with  Local Municipalities
local municipalities, and  Provincial/National
align infrastructure Government
development and funding
allocation accordingly.  NGO’s
- Compile Precinct Plans for R300 000/node 
each nodal point. (average)
- Compile Urban Renewal R500 000/CBD 
Strategies for four CBD’s.
Development Principle 3: Transportation
- Facilitate/Monitor/Prioritise  WRDM T.B.D.   
proposed route  Local Municipalities
construction/upgrading  Provincial/National
programme. Government
- Expand/align public In-house/Operational 
transport network with
GITMP.
- Upgrade major bus/taxi T.B.D. 
ranks in nodal areas.
- Compile rail Precinct Plan
T.B.D. 
for TOD stations.
Development Principle 4: Tourism
- Formalise WRDM Tourism  WRDM In-house 
Network.
- Implement Tourism  Local Municipalities T.B.D.   
Branding and Signage
Strategy.  GEDA In-house
- Prioritise initiatives listed   
under Principle 4.  GDACE
In-house 
 207
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
- Establish Institutional
Structure to
monitor/facilitate
implementation (public-
private).
Development Principle 5: Agriculture
- Protect high potential  WRDM/GDACE In-house   
agricultural areas.
- Precinct Plans at Rural  WRDM R300 000/node 
Nodes.
- Establish Institutional  WRDM/DRDLR In-house 
Structure to assist small
farmers.
- Facilitate establishment of  WRDM/DRDLR/GEDA In-house 
agro industries.
- Upgrade/maintain rural  WRDM T.B.D.   
district roads.
Development Principle 6: Mining
- Establish District-Provincial  WRDM /GDACE In-house   
forum to assess mining
license applications (and
comment on these) in line
with the requirements of the
proposed Environmental
Management Plan (EMP) –
also see Development
Principle 1.
- Liaise with mining houses  WRDM/Mining In-house   
regarding rehabilitation of Houses
old dumps in Mogale City
and release for SDA’s.
Development Principle 7: Industry
- Compile Precinct Plans for  WRDM R500 000/corridor   
N14 and N12 Corridors.
- Implement WRDM IDS 3  WRDM/GEDA In-house   
Pillar Strategy.
Development Principle 8: Business Areas
- Compile CBD/Small Town  WRDM/Local R200 000 per Nodal   
Revitalisation Strategies in Municipalities Plan
areas of urban decay.
- Establish Fresh Produce  WRDM/Local   
To be determined
Markets close to Rural Municipalities
Nodal Points.
Development Principle 9: Human Settlement
- Implement WRDM  WRDM/LM’s/Gauteng Continuous   
Sustainable Human Dept. of Sustainable
Settlement Plan housing Human Settlements
priorities in SDA’s.
- Pre-actively prepare SDA’s   
Continuous
for development.
- Focus on Social Housing  
Continuous 
opportunities in nodal
Precinct Plans.
Development Principle 10: Growth Management
- Confirm/Formalise  WRDM/LM’s In-house   
Consolidated District Urban
Edge.
- Formulate comprehensive  WRDM
R600 000
District Growth 
Management Strategy.
Development 11: Engineering Service Infrastructure
 208
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Priority Action/Project Responsibility Cost Priority

Short Medium Long
- Allocate dedicated funding WRDM/Municipalities/ Annual Allocations
for water, sanitation and COGTA
electricity infrastructure to:
o the Service Upgrading   
Priority Areas to
achieve minimum
levels of service;
o in Strategic
Development areas   
earmarked for large
scale mixed
development in order
to facilitate integration
of communities; and
o Nodal Areas/Corridors
to promote economic   
development and job
creation.
Development Principle 12: Thusong Centre Development
- Conduct a district wide WRDM R1 200 000 
Community Facility Audit
and compile a Thusong
Centre/MPCC Precinct Plan
and Implementation
Strategy/Programme for
each of the Tertiary/Rural
Nodes per local
municipality.
- All provincial and national WRDM IDP Technical Annual Allocations  
service departments to align Committee and 
their capital programmes in
Representative Forum
accordance with the
Thusong/MPCC Strategy at
identified Rural Nodes.

A WRDM SDF Implementation Strategy is indicated in Figure 42:

 209
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Figure 42: WRDM SDF Implementation Strategy

8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

Map 60 represents the comprehensive Spatial Development Framework of the West Rand District
Municipality. The Spatial Development Framework will form part of the Integrated Development Plan of
the WRDM, and will be legally binding, specifically with regard to the implementation thereof.

In terms of Section 26 of the Municipal Systems Act the Spatial Development Framework of a
municipality is one of nine legal components of the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) of that
municipality. As such the SDF thus becomes part of the statutory processes associated with the IDP,
and which includes, amongst others, the processes related to Inter Governmental Relations (IGR),
Community Consultation and Participation, and the Budgeting Process of the local municipality.

In view of the above it is firstly proposed that the West Rand District SDF be incorporated into the
WRDM IDP process during the 2014/2015 IDP Review Process which should be concluded by early
2015. Within the IDP, the WRDM SDF and that of the local municipalities should then serve as the
backdrop against which all development needs, and projects and initiatives forthcoming, should be
measured and assessed. (As part of a comprehensive Growth Management Strategy).

All projects and programmes to be implemented by the various spheres of government, parastatal
organisations, and/or the private sector should then firstly be evaluated in order to ensure that these
 210
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

are in support of the principles of the WRDM SDF, and that these will contribute towards the
achievement of the spatial vision for the WRDM area, before being included into the WRDM (and Local)
IDP for the next financial year.

The two consultation mechanisms in the IDP process i.e. the WRDM IDP Technical Committee and the
WRDM IDP Representative Forum involve all technical and political stakeholders, public and private
and is the ideal medium to use to promote and market the development opportunities as reflected in
the SDF. This process is illustrated on .

Representatives of all departments from all three spheres of government participate in the IDP process,
and if they all work in accordance with the principles contained in the SDF, the alignment and
synchronisation of the programmes of sectoral departments can be significantly improved. This will
specifically be of critical importance in the establishment of Thusong/One Stop Service Centres where
a number of stakeholders have a role to play.

The next important benefit to be derived from utilising the IDP process to promote and market the
WRDM SDF, is the fact that the IDP process involves all communities, and private sector stakeholders
in the municipal area. As part of a general capacity building initiative the contents and philosophy of the
WRDM SDF should be presented to these stakeholders during the IDP process. This will ensure that
all communities have a common understanding of the principles fundamental to the SDF, and will also
guide and inform the inputs provided by communities during the consultation process.

If all stakeholders (public and private) in the WRDM Municipality have a common understanding of the
long term spatial vision for the area, it will ensure the effective alignment of all development initiatives
in the area, and optimise the collective benefits to be derived from these.

The next significant benefit associated with implementing the WRDM SDF via the WRDM IDP process,
is the fact that the IDP is legally linked to the Budgeting Process of the municipality (in terms of the
Municipal Systems Act and the Municipal Finance Management Act).

By incorporating the WRDM SDF into the IDP process, it ensures that the proposed projects and
programmes emanating from the SDF process are incorporated into the IDP, from where it feeds into
the Budgeting Process of the district. In this way the effective linkage of the SDF to the Municipal Budget
is achieved.

The last important component to be addressed is the Monitoring and Evaluation of the implementation
of the SDF proposals. The IDP process is subject to a cyclical review on an annual basis. It is
appropriate that, as part of the annual IDP Review Process, an assessment/ audit should be done by
November of each year to determine to what degree the goals and objectives of the SDF have been
achieved during the preceding year. This also leaves sufficient time (December up to March) to rectify
 211
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

the shortcomings identified, and to include these in the Revised IDP and Budget for the next financial
year. As the IDP Review process involve all development partners in the municipal area, it will also be
possible to grant each partner an opportunity during the SDF assessment process to report on progress
made in implementing their respective spatial initiatives, and for the various stakeholders to illustrate
how their initiatives support the realisation of the spatial vision as contained in the WRDM SDF.
 212
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Map 60: WRDM Consolidated SDF

 213
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

ANNEXURE A: WEST RAND DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY –

REGISTER INPUTS
 214
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

West Rand District

Industrial Strategy
Register
May 2013
 215
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

Table of Contents

1 Industrial Areas per LM .............................. 216

1.1 Merafong City LM .....................................................................216
1.1.1 Carletonville Extension 6 ......................................................216
1.1.2 Oberholzer ............................................................................217
1.2 Mogale City LM ........................................................................218
1.2.1 Boltonia ................................................................................218
1.2.2 Chamdor...............................................................................219
1.2.3 Delporton ..............................................................................220
1.2.4 Factoria ................................................................................221
1.2.5 Muldersdrift...........................................................................222
1.2.6 Nooitgedacht ........................................................................223
1.3 Randfontein LM ........................................................................224
1.3.1 Aureus ..................................................................................224
1.4 Westonaria LM .........................................................................226
1.4.1 Westonaria ...........................................................................226
 216
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1 INDUSTRIAL AREAS PER LM

Carletonville Ext 6 Industrial Area
(ha)
1.1 MERAFONG CITY LM
45 42
40
35
30
1.1.1 CARLETONVILLE EXTENSION 6
25
20
15 9
10 4
The industrial area is located to the east of Carletonville town and is 62 2 3
5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hectares in extent. The industrial area is not prominently located in terms 0

Heavy / Noxious…

Medium Density…
Hotel /…

Under Construction /…
Retail
Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
General Industries

Multi Use
Government

Vacant Building
Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

No Information
of visual exposure but it is situated between the R501 (that connects to the
N12 freeway) and the road to Randfontein.

 There are many vacant erven in Carletonville Ext 6

 Developed erven are predominantly located closest to the
northern and southern access points, as well as in the central
parts of the industrial area – along Kleim and Skag Streets.
 General industries are most prominent, followed by multi-use
and service industries
 217
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

 Most prominent activities relate to manufacture of machinery and

equipment, wholesale/ auto repairs, and construction. Oberholzer Industrial Area (ha)
50 45
45
40
1.1.2 OBERHOLZER 33
35
30
25
20
Oberholzer industrial area comprises a 94 Ha strip of land along Station 15 11
Road and the railway line running parallel to it to the north of Carletonville 10
5 3 1 1
town. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0

Medium Density…

Under Construction /…
Retail
No Information
Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
General Industries

Multi Use
Government

Vacant Building
Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

Heavy / Noxious Industries

 The area is nearly fully developed with almost only industrial
activities.
 In terms of land cover, the majority of erven are multi-use,
followed by Service Industries and Heavy/ Noxious Industries.
 One large multi-use site, to the east (Re/2/103) skews the data
– the site includes engineering services but predominantly
comprises a horse riding club (also see aerial photo)
 The most prominent activity is wholesale/ auto repairs (as well
as multi-use)
 218
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2 MOGALE CITY LM

Boltonia Industrial Area (ha)
16 14
1.2.1 BOLTONIA 14
11 12
12
9
10
8
Boltonia is located to the west of Krugersdorp, more specifically it is 6
6
adjacent to the south of Krugersdorp West. The industrial area comprises
4
54 Ha. 1
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0


Under Construction /…
Apart from one large vacant site, the industrial area is fully

Retail
Offices

Service Industries

Vacant Erf
General Industries

Multi Use
Government

Vacant Building
Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Education

Medium Density Residential

Substation
Heavy / Noxious Industries

No Information
developed.
 In terms of land cover, the majority of the area comprises
General Industries, followed by multi-use and Heavy/ Noxious
Industries.
 The latter is fairly well distributed throughout the industrial area.
 Prominent activities include Manufacture of food products,
beverages, and tobacco products, Manufacture of rubber/
plastics and other non-metallic mineral products, Manufacture of
textiles, earing apparel, leather and related products, as well as
Wholesale/ auto repairs.
 219
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2.2 CHAMDOR
Chamdor Industrial Area (ha)
100 94
Chamdor is situated to the south of Krugersdorp and the west of 90
80 72
Roodepoort. Kagiso township surrounds the industrial area to the south 70
and west. It is 259 Ha in extent, and the third largest industrial area in the 60
50 40
WRDM, after Aureus and Fariaville.
40
30 22
 Except for a few vacant erven and -buildings, Chamdor is fully 20 9 12
10 1 2 0 0 4 0 0 3 0 0 0
developed 0

Heavy / Noxious…

Medium Density…

Under Construction /…
Multi Use

Retail
Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
General Industries

Vacant Building
Government

Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

No Information
 The majority of industries, by far, are classified as General
Industrial and Multi Use. There are only a few Heavy/ Noxious
Industries and Service Industries.
 Heavy industrial activities are mostly situated in the eastern and
southern extents of the industrial area.
 There are very few non-industrial uses in this industrial area.
 Apart from multi-use activities, prominent activities include
Transport/ Storage, Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum
products and Manufacture of wood and paper products, printing
and reproduction of recorded media.
 220
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2.3 DELPORTON
Delporton Industrial Area (ha)
14
12
Delporton industrial area is located to the west of Krugersdorp, and south- 12
west of Munisieville settlement. It is 22 Ha in extent. 10
8
 Delporton is fully developed, except for six vacant erven – five of
6
which are situated in the eastern part of the industrial area. 4 3
2 2
2
 The majority of industries were categorised under General 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Industries, and secondly under Multi-use. 0

Heavy / Noxious…

Medium Density…

Under Construction /…
Retail
Multi Use

Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
General Industries
Government

Vacant Building
Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

No Information
 The bulk of Heavy Industrial activity is situated towards the east
of the study area.
 The entire northern half of the industrial area is occupied by
Gelita who manufactures gelatine (classified as Manufacturing
of food products, beverages and tobacco products).
 A prominent activity is the Manufacturing of transport equipment,
scattered throughout the southern half of the township.
 A cluster of Manufacturers of wood and paper products, printing
and reproduction of recorded media, is found in the south-
eastern corner of the estate.
 Erf 18 in the south-west is occupied by the SPCA.
 221
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2.4 FACTORIA  To the south is a large Shell Depot (classified as Manufacturers

of coke and refined petroleum products).

Factoria is situated to the east of Krugersdorp and is 83 Ha in extent.

 The area is nearly fully developed, except for 5 Ha of vacant Factoria Industrial Area (ha)
erven in total. The largest concentration of vacant erven is found 45 39
in the north-western part of the industrial area. 40
35
 Nearly half of the total land cover comprises Multi-use activities; 30
followed by Heavy/ Noxious industries. 25 21
20
 Heavy/ Noxious activities is primarily concentrated in the eastern 15
8
and south-eastern parts of the industrial area. 10 5
3 4
5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
 General Industries are mostly concentrated in the central extents 0

Under Construction /…
Retail
No Information
Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
Multi Use
General Industries
Government

Vacant Building
Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

Medium Density Residential

Heavy / Noxious Industries
of Factoria.
 Factoria includes a few large brands, each of which occupy a
number of adjoining erven.
 The eastern border is almost fully occupied by Kansai Plascon
(Manufacturers of chemicals and chemical products i.e. paint).
 The bulk of the central concentration of General Industries are
represented by Cobra (Manufacturers of basic metals an
fabricated metal products except machinery and equipment)
 To the east of Cobra is a concentration of Manufacturers of
machinery and equipment, largely represented by Sandrik.
 222
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2.5 MULDERSDRIFT
Muldersdrift Industrial Area (ha)
70 63
The study area is not a proclaimed industrial area, but a number of 60
industrial activities are found clustered at the intersection of the 48
50
Nooitgedacht Road and Beyers Naude Drive, just south of the N14 freeway. 40
An area of 154 Ha in extent was demarcated as the study boundary, and 28
30
includes all existing industrial activity in the area. Note that the land cover
20
may be misleading due to the fact that many of the activities do not cover 8
10 2 3 3
the entire farm portion as indicated on the attached figures. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0

Under Construction /…
Government

Retail
Offices

Service Industries

Vacant Erf
Multi Use
General Industries

Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Vacant Building
Medium Density Residential

Substation
Sports / Recreation
Education

Heavy / Noxious Industries

No Information
 The area primarily comprises Multi-use sites.
 For many of the remaining farm portions, no information could
be found regarding the activities that take place and/or the land
is vacant.
 223
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.2.6 NOOITGEDACHT
Nooitgedacht Industrial Area (ha)
35 30
The Nooitgedacht area is also not a proclaimed industrial area. However, 30
some industrial activity was identified near the Malibongwe offramp off of 25
the N14 freeway. Four farm portions, comprising an area of 41 Ha, was 20
demarcated and analysed.
15 11
 The industries may be divided into Service Industries and 10
5
General Industries. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0

Medium Density…

Under Construction /…
 The two southern farm portions comprise Wholesale and retail

Retail
No Information
Offices

Vacant Erf
Service Industries
General Industries

Multi Use
Government

Vacant Building
Hotel / Accommodation

Residential

Sports / Recreation
Substation
Education

Heavy / Noxious Industries

trade, auto-repairs.
 The two northern farm portions comprise Construction-related
activities.
 224
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.3 RANDFONTEIN LM  The two large sites to the south of route R559 (classified as
Manufacturers of rubber and plastic products, and other non-
metallic mineral products) are occupied by Wearne concrete
1.3.1 AUREUS
mixers and Lafarge cement respectively.
 Aureus has a large Wholesale and retail trade/ auto-repairs
Aureus is the only industrial area in Randfontein Local Municipality. It is component, distributed throughout the area.
located south-west of Randfontein town and is the largest industrial area  There are also a fair amount of Transportation and Storage
in the West Rand District, comprising 414 Ha in extent.
activities.
 A large area – 47 Ha – of the industrial area is vacant. The vacant  A large erf in the centre of the industrial area, classified as
erven are predominantly located in the eastern half of the Construction, is occupied by Rand Bricks.
industrial township.
 The western parts are fully developed.
 The greatest component of industrial activity in Aureus is
classified as Heavy/ Noxious. Two large sites to the south of
route R559, and one to the north along route R28 contribute to
the large land cover total.
 The second largest category is General Industries, followed by
Service Industries.
 There are comparably few Multi-use properties in Aureus.
 There are very few non-industrial-related activities.
 It was not possible to source information pertaining to quite a
number of erven (see table).
 40
60
80

20
0
100
120
140
160
180

1
Education

48
General Industries

0
Government
Heavy / Noxious Industries
158

12
Hotel / Accommodation

1
Medium Density Residential 22
Multi Use
75

No Information
0

Offices
1

Residential
0

Retail
39

Service Industries
4

Sports / Recreation
Aureus Industrial Area (ha)

Substation
4

Under Construction /…
2

Vacant Building
47

Vacant Erf
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION
225
 226
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION

1.4 WESTONARIA LM metallic mineral products, are all occupied by Griniger Aveng
concrete.
 Erven to the north (classified as Manufacturers of machinery and
1.4.1 WESTONARIA
equipment) are occupied by Avery Manufacturing Duraset.
 In the west, and to the south of the railway line, the erven are
Westonaria Industrial Area is located immediately to the north of used as storage space for Murray and Roberts.
Westonaria Town. It is the only industrial area in the Westonaria Local  Finally, the erven to the north of Murray and Roberts, classified
Municipality, and is 44 Ha in extent. The industrial area straddles the
as Manufacturers of wood and paper products, printing and
railway line.
reproduction of recorded media, are occupied by Seagull Mining.

 There is four hectares of vacant land in the industrial area;

concentrated in the eastern and far-western parts respectively.
 The central and far-western parts of the industrial area comprise
Heavy/ Noxious industrial activities. The section in between
predominantly comprises General Industries.
 Westonaria Industrial Area is home to a few massive industries,
that occupy a number of adjoining erven.
 The erven along the eastern border, south of the railway line, are
occupied by a SAB Distribution Centre (classified as Wholesale
and retail trade/ Auto repairs)
 The erven to the south of the railway line, classified as
Manufacturers of Rubber and plastic products, and other non-
 10
15
20
25

0
5
0
Education

11
General Industries

0
Government
22

Heavy / Noxious Industries

0
Hotel / Accommodation

0
Medium Density…
Multi Use 0
0
No Information
0

Offices
0

Residential
0

Retail
5

Service Industries
0

Sports / Recreation
1

Substation
Westonaria Industrial Area (ha)

Under Construction /…
2

Vacant Building
4

Vacant Erf
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION
227
 228
WEST RAND DISTRICT SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK, 2014 & 2017 REVISION