There is still no agreement between the City of Cape Town and the South African National Roads Agency (Sanral) on the proposed changes and widening of the Brackenfell Boulevard bridge over the N1, as well as how the bridge and adjoining road will be integrated, a matter that has become increasingly politicised.
This, after the City of Cape Town excused themselves from an urgent stakeholder meeting called by community stakeholders to mediate between the two roads agencies. The meeting was attended by Sanral.
As plans stand now the bridge will be converted – not widened – to accommodate a three-lane road, two in a northerly direction and one in a southerly direction, whilst the City of Cape Town previously indicated that no funds were currently available to broaden the road on either side of the bridge.
Current plan not sustainable
According to Phillip van Zijl of the Business Chamber, the current three-lane plan is not sustainable in light of future traffic projections. He believes a better option would be to halt all plans until the necessary funding is available to upgrade both the bridge and the road to four lanes simultaneously at such time that collaboration is established between the two road agencies.
“Brackenfell is growing at an exceptional rate on both sides of the N1, which will only add to the already unbearable traffic congestion on Brackenfell Boulevard,” said Van Zijl, stressing the urgency for the City and Sanral to collaborate on all future planning, warning that failure to do so would be to the detriment of both residents and businesses.
At the meeting, Van Zijl argued that the City should take responsibility for ensuring residents have adequate road infrastructure. He referred to the City’s previous stance that it would only widen Brackenfell Boulevard once Sanral had widened the bridge, a position that now appears to have shifted following Sanral’s announcement of its bridge-widening plans.
“Over the years, the City said they would widen Brackenfell Boulevard once Sanral upgraded the bridge. Now that Sanral is moving ahead, the City has changed its position, saying it doesn’t have the money to do so,” Van Zijl said.
“If Sanral proceeds with expanding the bridge to three lanes now, it will likely never be upgraded to four lanes in our lifetime. Wouldn’t it make more sense to delay the bridge project until the City can afford to widen the road as well?”
‘We pay our taxes’
Phillip van Zijl
“As residents pay our rates and taxes to local government to provide us with roads to get to work, to live and conduct our business and take our children to school. It is their responsibility, not Sanral’s.
Van Zijl said the community is now in a situation where the City is seemingly dishing its responsibility of the road, while the community is left to engage with Sanral to get the bridge problem solved.
“The City should engage Sanral over the matter and provide us with a road. It is not the responsibility of the community to engage with Sanral every time a City road crosses a Sanral highway. That is why we pay taxes.”
“A lot of us vote for the DA who is in charge of the City. If they want us to continue to support them they must provide for us a road that is usable, and at this stage it is not the case.
He referred to a recent survey done by the Northern District Community Forum (NDCF) in which 4 280 motorists indicated the severe traffic congestion on Brackenfell boulevard for residents and business at certain times during the day.
In this survey 78,1% of people said traffic congestion over the bridge is extremely serious and disruptive while 20,8% said it was serious and disruptive. A total of 80% stated that converting the road over the bridge to three lanes without widening the structure will not alleviate the traffic congestion.
According to LPR camera records a rate of 2 800 cars cross the bridge per hour during peak hour traffic, and 1 500 cars per hour up to 15:00, during the week, and on Saturdays approximately 12 000 cars cross the bridge between 09:00 and 15:00,
At the meeting, Leon Brynard of the NDCF, who officially objected to the current plans, said a Sanral project manager admitted to him in a meeting held last year that Sanral was aware of the heavy congestion and are ready to upgrade its own plans on condition that the City do the same with the road, in order to clear the bottleneck. “I later learned that the City had not prioritised Brackenfell Boulevard for this upgrade and had thus not allocated funds for it in the budget. It was only when we made them aware of Sanral’s plans that there were some talks about it,” said Brynard.
Ward councillors Rhynhardt Bresler and Johann Loods agreed that Brackenfell Boulevard must be upgraded, with a four-lane bridge for future traffic and stressed the importance of engaging both road agencies together.
Renaldo Lorio from Sanral emphasised the fact that Sanral’s jurisdiction is confined to national roads and road reserves.
“The overpass road link has been in planning for many years. Only the bridge structure as it is tied to the land is our responsibility; the road itself is that of the City’s. Ordinarily if there is an overpass road (link) it is not our problem. It is a pity they could not attend this meeting,” he said. He indicated that Sanral would be willing to engage with the City to redesign the bridge in the best interest of the broader road network. This would depend on the City committing to plans to widen Brackenfell Boulevard on both sides of the road.
Comments from community
Representatives made it clear that there is growing frustration over the disconnect between the City and Sanral, as well as the ongoing traffic issues on Brackenfell Boulevard. Stakeholders agreed that the forum will continue to act as a mediator to encourage constructive engagement between the City and Sanral, aiming to resolve the issue and address the community’s concerns.
Stakeholders concluded that as a forum it will continue to play a mediating role in order to get the City and Sanral to engage constructively in order to find a solution.
In response to a media inquiry by TygerBurger, Rob Quintas, Mayco member for urban mobility, stated that the City had communicated that they would only attend the above mentioned meeting once they have received confirmation on whether Sanral would be in attendance, and who would be representing Sanral at the meeting.
“The City never received such confirmation and therefore did not attend,” said Quintas.
“We have however, confirmed our attendance for the next meeting which is scheduled for 15 October 2025 at the Sanral offices.”
