Blaauwberg residents rally against proposed housing developments near Koeberg Nuclear Power Station

The Community Representation for Blaauwberg (CRB) is protesting against the City of Cape Town's Big Bay Local Spatial Development Framework (LSDF), raising concerns over nuclear safety evacuations plans and its risks.

The CRB claimed the LSDF proposes adding 10,000–25,000 new residents (low-cost housing opportunities) within the Koeberg Urgent Protective Action Zone (UPZ) without disclosing the Traffic Evacuation Model (TEM) or demonstrating whether the sole evacuation route (R27) can cope.

The City’s Deputy Mayor and Mayco Member for Spatial Planning and Environment, Eddie Andrews defends the LSDF as a statutory process, clarifying there is no existing development application for Erf 1117, which proposes approximately 3600 residential units and that the number of 25 000 was inaccurate.

The CRB, along with other community groups, is holding a public demonstration on Saturday, December 6, from 10–11 am, at Erf 1117 (corner of Big Bay Boulevard and R27).

Key Objections raised by CRB:

• Nuclear Safety Risk: The LSDF proposes adding 10,000–25,000 new residents within the Koeberg Urgent Protective Action Zone (UPZ) without disclosing the Traffic Evacuation Model (TEM) or demonstrating that the sole evacuation route (R27) can cope. Opponents argue this intensification is unsafe, unlawful, and violates nuclear-risk management obligations.

• Legal & Procedural Flaws: The City ignored two formal CRB submissions demanding the LSDF's suspension and disclosure of the TEM. The LSDF fails to meet statutory requirements, including the Disaster Management Act, by not integrating disaster risk assessments. 

• Biodiversity Violations: The plan proposes development directly over confirmed Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA1a) and wetlands on Erf 1117, contravening biodiversity law (NEMA) and the City's own Biodiversity Spatial Plan (BSP 2025).

• Inadequate Planning: The LSDF lacks enforceable height, density, or population limits, is incompatible with the existing low-rise coastal context, and relies on already overloaded infrastructure.

The CRB said it made two formal submissions to the City highlighting serious flaws in the LSDF process and the document. CRB stated that during the second submission, on November 11, 2025, the following objections were raised: The LSDF document had structural defects, was incomplete, contradictory, and violates statutory requirements.

“That is why we are escalating to the Public Protector, to the National Nuclear Regulator, and, if necessary, to the courts. Communities deserve lawful, transparent, and safety-led planning,” the CRB said.

Michelle Collins, Chairperson of CRB, said they were not against the development but supported led with responsiblity and safety.

Andrews said the draft LSDF for Big Bay and surrounds was currently available for public comment until 12 December 2025: "The City’s Urban Planning and Design Department will take into consideration all of the comments."

He outlined the following:

• The draft LSDF makes some proposals about the need for coastal protection, extension of the Blaauwberg Nature Reserve to the south, and the creation of continuous biodiversity conservation corridors.
• All new developments will have to comply with the Koeberg Nuclear Power Station Urgent Protection Zone which sets mobility conditions in case of an urgent evacuation.
• The City, Eskom and the Nuclear Regulator are in full compliance with the law regarding emergency planning in relation to the Koeberg Nuclear Power station.

Regarding Erf 1117: the draft LSDF proposes approximately 3600 residential units for Erf 1117, Andrews added: "This site belongs to the National Department of Public Works and has been earmarked for the development of housing opportunities for a wide range of income levels.

"The draft LSDF proposes some considerations for this large parcel of land, should development be pursued at some point.It is important to clarify there is no existing development proposal or application for Erf 1117 at this point in time

Furthermore, not all proposed housing in Big Bay is intended as affordable or low-cost; the majority is market-related or private-sector development. Therefore, the assertion of “low-cost housing for 25 000 people” is inaccurate."

Get your news on the go, click here to join the Cape Argus News WhatsApp channel.

Cape Argus