According to Agbiz, the draft policy marks a significant shift in departure from the 2016 framework, which centered on road safety, convenience and private-sector participation. In contrast, the new proposal is far more prescriptive, layering in requirements related to transformation, environmental sustainability and new electricity vehicle integration.
(View the draft document at SANRAL policy.)
Annelize Crosby, legal intelligence manager of Agbiz, explained to Farmer’s Weekly that the adoption of the policy could expand SANRAL’s regulatory reach beyond its core mandate of financing, developing and managing national road infrastructure into the regulation of land use and commercial activity adjacent to national roads.
“This could create a parallel regulatory regime that intrudes on provincial and municipal planning functions and likely increase the administrative and cost burden on members that operate roadside facilities,” she said.
Amongst others, the draft policy seeks to regulate where road facilities may be located, their size and spacing, permitted activities, access design, and applicable levies.
“For agriculture, these are not abstract considerations. They directly affect corridor viability, freight efficiency, diesel availability and investment confidence in rural areas,” Crosby said.
Extended reach
A key concern is the proposed extension of the policy to developments within a 500m radius of intersections with national roads. Crosby explained that many agribusinesses operate from central hubs in rural towns that historically developed around cooperatives and transport routes. If these fall under SANRAL’s jurisdiction, businesses with limited connection to roadside access could still face compliance requirements.
The policy also affects the economic viability of RSFs by limiting mixed-use models, increasing capital and compliance costs, introducing uncertainty through discretionary approvals, and imposing turnover-based levies.
“Farm-linked roadside operations are typically mixed-use out of necessity, combining fuel supply, truck parking, food services, repairs and logistics support. A framework that restricts such integration risks undermining essential agricultural infrastructure,” Crosby said.
Levies and commercial pressure
The draft policy proposes turnover-based levies of 7% to 10%, depending on the activity.
“For agriculture, where margins are thin and supply chains are fuel-intensive, such levies could make rural facilities commercially unviable. Smaller operators and co-operatives would be hardest hit, skewing competition in favour of larger corporations with stronger balance sheets,” Crosby said.
She pointed out that the Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled that SANRAL’s powers to impose levies are not unlimited and must comply with constitutional and administrative law principles. She warned that a levy-heavy, discretion-driven framework could face similar legal challenges if not properly grounded.
There is also concern about the cumulative impact of the policy. While individual provisions may be justified, their combined effect on rural trade and investment could be significant and would need to meet a rationality test.
“We acknowledge SANRAL’s funding pressures, but levying rural businesses is not the solution. Instead, government should ensure that funding follows when provincial roads are transferred to SANRAL. Otherwise, roadside businesses face ‘double taxation’ through both ordinary taxes and levies,” Crosby said.
Impact on rural businesses
The policy may also favour developments on SANRAL-owned land, potentially disadvantaging private landowners and independent operators.
Furthermore, restrictions on facility size, spacing and access could limit the viability of agricultural corridor developments. Rural RSFs are capped at 350m², urban RSFs at 500m², maxi facilities at 2 500m², and exclusive truck stops at 3 000m², unless specially motivated.
Minimum spacing between facilities is set at 30km on Class 1 rural roads and 20km on Class 2 and 3 rural roads, unless SANRAL approves a shorter distance.
“These restrictions can prevent otherwise suitable agricultural corridor sites from becoming commercially viable developments,” Crosby said.
Diesel depots may also not have direct access to national roads, which could severely limit their functionality in farming operations.
Specific provisions flagged by Agbiz include:
- Requirements for operators to fund upgrades and infrastructure changes;
- Mandatory safety and surveillance infrastructure;
- Costly traffic impact assessments and lengthy approvals;
- Strict penalties for non-compliance;
- The risk of access closures affecting business viability;
- Additional administrative burdens, including audited financial reporting.
Agbiz has called for the framework to be revised to align with SANRAL’s mandate, ensure fair and transparent levies, protect property rights, and support, rather than undermine, rural economic activity.
