HOUT BAY & LLANDUDNO HERITAGE TRUST

Community Post Box 1. No1 Andrews Rd. Hout Bay. 7806
Website: www.zsd.co.za/~houtbay/
eMail:- HB.Heritage@zsd.co.za

MISSION:- To protect our Architectural, Historical, Environmental and Cultural Heritage.

The Chief Executive Officer                                                           28th Oct 1999
South Peninsula Municipality
Private Bag 5
Plumstead
7800

Dear Sir

Response to invitation for public input - Hout Bay River Study.

The Hout Bay & Llandudno Heritage Trust is on record as having commented during the previous study period. The comments still stand and remain applicable. However, in the light of changed circumstances we offer additional comment in the attached document. We would be grateful if these comments could be considered and, if agreed, incorporated into the final approved version of the Hout Bay River Study.

In particular we wish to emphasise the following points:

· Restoration and conservation of the natural environment along the river must be of paramount concern.

· That the Hout Bay River Forum should be formally recognised in the River Study as the appropriate "custodian" of the Hout Bay River, its catchment areas, tributaries and wetlands.

· The Draft River Concept Plan, which is being prepared by the River Forum, must be taken into account before any land use decisions are made.

· Transitional Zones, similar to those defined by the Urban Edge Study, should be established on both sides of the river.

· A high priority must be placed on the restoration of the wetlands and their natural interaction with the river, so that by natural processes the water can be filtered and purified and in such a way as to create a natural equilibrium between the river and the sea.

· The 50-year flood line should be clearly defined and illegal land filling prohibited.

· The legal rights and responsibilities of owners of the estuary's littoral erven must be established and that an environmental management plan should be agreed for these areas.

· The predicted rise of 1.0m to 1.5m in the mean sea level over the next 100 years must be taken into account in planning decisions.

· The incline of the banks of the River along its whole length should not exceed 1:5, as recommended in a recent technical report on the river.

· That Officials and Councillors should be fully informed about the environmental issues and opportunities, before the approval of a final version of the River Study.

· That one or maybe two collective workshops be convened as a quick way of reaching consensus before the final Study is adopted.

We hope that these points and the attached more detailed comments will assist the process of agreeing the River Study as a structure plan, which will be of long-term benefit to all concerned, including generations yet to come. We look forward to contributing further to the development of a high quality structure plan for our river and wetlands system.

Endorsements:

The following organisations have given their support to this submission and we would like their interest recorded accordingly.

Hout Bay Museum
Llandudno Civic Assn
Friends of the Liesbeck River
Hout Bay Beach Buddies
Captrust and Habitat Council
Wildlife & Environment Society
Hout Bay Business & Tourism Association
The Peninsula Mountain Forum

Yours faithfully

Dave Cowley
Chairman Board of Trustees

HOUT BAY & LLANDUDNO HERITAGE TRUST

Additional Comments on the Hout Bay River Study

1. General Background.

The original motivation for the study (1996) was to create a development structure plan for the River that could be used to resolve river corridor planning issues, in the absence of an overall Hout Bay structure plan. The Trust believes that conservation of the natural environment, wherever possible, is vital to the community and we therefore emphasise that the conservation of one of South Africa's most significant valleys is paramount in considering this response.

Since the report was first published, the Heritage Trust has participated in the creation of the Hout Bay River Forum, which was formally inaugurated at the beginning of 1999. We believe that a Forum based in Hout Bay, that has the river itself as its prime focus rather than the resolution of land development issues, is more likely to accurately reflect public opinion on river issues, rather than a Council or Planning Dept which operates outside the community.

The Forum has already embarked on a restoration project on Public Open Space Erf 5328 and a portion of Erf 5326 and it is envisaged that this project will be completed by Sept 2000. The project will enhance a section of the river for the benefit of tourists as well as residents and is in keeping with our philosophy of conservation balanced with responsible development. The particular section of the river from the Princess Road Bridge to the sea was chosen because of its good exposure to the public and the fact that it could be a catalyst towards support for restoration work in the Wetlands to the North of the Bridge.

2. Implementation of the River Structure Plan.

The Trust is concerned that the formal acceptance and rapid implementation of the River Structure Plan may have the effect of unleashing applications for rezoning which are currently effectively "in suspension" by an unofficial moratorium. We require assurance that the Municipality has the capacity to cope with any unusual demand and that the requests will receive adequate scrutiny and will be referred to the River Forum for an opinion, in addition to the normal consultation with I&Aps, before any decisions are made.

3. Draft Vision Statement.

At the River Forum meeting on 20th September 1999, the Heritage Trust tabled a "Vision Statement" which was provisionally approved by the Forum and is due for ratification by the Forum on Dec 8th 1999. The purpose of this "Vision" is to articulate the policy of the Forum clearly to developers and residents in the hope that they will understand that consultation and co-operation with the Forum at an early stage will ease the process of the approval of developments. We believe that this approach is preferable to adopting a confrontational stance, which could create long and expensive delays that in the end force decisions by expediency rather than good planning. The vision statement is attached as Appendix 1.

4. Priorities

We believe that the development of eco-tourism is one of the most important economic elements required for national prosperity. National and Local Government continually advocate its development and implementation. In the case of Hout Bay, eco-tourism relies heavily on the conservation of our natural environment, the River being one of the principal elements. Eco-tourism businesses in the valley and the community as a whole could benefit considerably from development of the river as the natural centre of a green corridor between the new National Park and the sea.

5. River Water Quality & Health Issues.

It is acknowledged by the CMC that the water quality at the river's estuary is beyond the acceptable limits for micro-organism contamination. The E.coli count, which is indicative of the river's ability to transmit dangerous diseases like Cholera and Typhoid, exceeds the limits considerably and though signs have been positioned at the lagoon, children still seasonally play there. In view of the fact that the beach is a tourism attraction, it is vital that this matter be addressed and we are convinced that the river itself and its associated wetlands are the key to a solution to this urgent problem.

Much of the pollution results from the legacy of sceptic tanks which still operate close to the river and further pollution comes from informal settlements with inadequate sanitary provisions. A recent edition of "Earthyear" features the wetland system which serves Calcutta as a natural purification system, processing 174 million gallons of effluent daily. If it is possible in India on a large scale, it is possible in Hout Bay on a comparatively minor scale. Such a scheme will also reduce the necessity to have 100% coverage of the water borne sewage reticulation system, particularly in areas where it is uneconomic to install.

6. River Transitional Zone.

The Urban Edge Study, which makes recommendations regarding reduced densification of urban development along the old CPPNE, advocates a Transitional Zone which defines the density permitted on either side of the boundary. We suggest that a similar Transitional Zone be applied on both sides of the river. The natural centreline of each transitional zone would be Valley and Hout Bay Main Road, and Milner and Hout Bay Main Rd. Such a measure would prevent increased densification, which will otherwise occur along the river as a result of the Urban Edge legislation tending to encourage higher densities in the middle of the valley.

7. Wetlands above Princess Bridge

The WWF Living Planet Report 1999 states that there has been a 50% loss of river and wetland habitat world-wide since 1970 and Hout Bay is a sad example of that fact. The writer has lived in the valley for almost 30 years and can testify as to the accuracy of the statement.

A high priority must be placed on the restoration of the wetlands and their interaction with the river by the removal of the berms in selected places. Such restoration will serve to detain and filter contaminated water so that by natural processes the water can be filtered and purified before it reaches the lagoon and the sea.

The Hout Bay River Forum has been charged with the task of the creation of a "River and Wetland Concept Plan" as the basis for a detailed Catchment Management Plan. We suggest that the Wetlands Concept Plan should be incorporated into the River Study before the latter is finally approved. The Plan will include the provision of islands as well as areas of open water. This would encourage the nesting of inland waterfowl as well as seabirds and could even provide continuity of habitat for montain fynbos species along the green river corridor extending up to Table Mountain.

Around the perimeter of the area, which would effectively become an urban park, could be trails, which could be used by "joggers" and cyclists or pedestrians. Equestrians could also be provided with bridle paths, if possible separate from the walking trails. The challenge would be to create an "inner sanctum" where bird hides could be located and, perhaps as part of a commercial element, visitors could be attracted to guided field tours on a regular basis, including early morning and late evening viewing. Such facilities would encourage the need for overnight accommodation in the valley.

We feel that the River and Wetland Concept Plan to be created by the Forum should be embedded within River Study. The viability and sustainability of the wetlands will fully depend on the suitability of development further upstream. Thus it will be important to establish the required parameters for conservation of the wetlands before agreeing guidelines in the Study for consideration of land use and possible developments along the whole river corridor upstream from the wetlands.

8. Scenarios Suggested in the River Study

The Heritage Trust is hesitant to agree with the suggested scenarios in the lower reaches of the river and requests that the options remain open until such time as a concept plan for Wetlands is completed and agreed. For example Erf 4034, lends itself to being converted into an island which could have controlled access (thus being defined as a conservation area). The views of the wetlands are unrivalled from that point and it would be an ideal place for viewing platforms and hides. It could also be suitable for visitor accommodation. The impact on the wetlands of any activity abutting it should be carefully considered. For example the existence of playing fields adjacent to a bird sanctuary would probably severely prejudice the latter if not destroy the possibility of its viability altogether.

9. Land Fills

It is clear that indiscriminate filling within the 50yr flood plain has and continues to take place. Specific mention of this problem and clarification of the 50yr flood line should be done so that the public has a clear appreciation of its extent. We suggest the construction of beacons at specific points so that monitoring can be achieved by the public. The 50 year flood line should be clearly defined in the plan and where appropriate, areas should be negotiated where, for logical reasons, fill could be permitted. Consideration should be given to land below the 50 yr. floodline being rezoned to Private, or preferably negotiated as Public Open Space. Until such time as this is done illegal land filling is likely to continue.

10. Historically inappropriate land division and zoning of the lower river and estuary below Princess Bridge.

An examination of the property boundaries in the region of the river estuary reveals that they appear to be straight line, beaconed boundaries. The alignments of these boundaries, however, make no concession to natural processes. They are at odds with the natural processes of the river, the sea and the natural dunes. At one point the two littoral properties on either bank converge to leave only a narrow gap of public land through to the sea. This gap is perched high on a dune on the West bank of the river and the river at this point flows across the property on the East bank.

The environment at this point is highly dynamic, particularly when viewed against a time scale of decades over a century or more of time (currently the time span since the proclamation of the townships in Hout Bay and the present level of development). Furthermore experts report that over the next century or so the mean sea level in this part of the world is predicted to rise by between 1.0m and 1.5m. This will have a major impact on the river and its estuary and must be taken into account when planning long term development in this area.

Normal development (buildings etc.,) on the two littoral properties on either bank of the river is not possible without major engineering structures to stabilise the land on each property. The portion of land on the East bank will need such works prior to development. The portion on the West bank has already been developed with only minimum protection. Full development of the East bank property will probably initiate rapid physical degradation of the West embankment. Furthermore the required environmentally correct rehabilitation of the public space between the two properties could release the natural instability of the site and compromise whatever engineering works have been constructed on both properties.

Engineering works to stabilise such estuarine sites have to be designed at the level of building construction works (normally the only economically justifiable level of construction in these situations). This approach has a very poor track record in South Africa. Such works tend to exacerbate the instability condition and are normally taken out by natural processes in short order. Extensive engineering works are usually needed to permanently stabilise such sites. These are inevitably environmentally objectionable and economically unjustified.

In the light of the comments above, were such sub-divisions and property boundaries to be made now, in this day and age, the planners and the land surveyors would be considered guilty of both incompetence and unethical conduct.

In view of the comments above, any work on either of the two properties or on the public space between them could have consequences for the others. The true legal position needs to be established as a matter of urgency before undertaking any works in the locality.

The Trust recommends that a full search in the deeds office of the original land grant, of subsequent sub-divisions, of the title deeds and of any land surveyors' reports must be undertaken. In particular one would look for any restrictions to the usage of the properties or to the rights of ownership thereof or for any servitudes, actual or implied, over any of the properties in favour of any other.

It is the last point that is of greatest concern. In view of the dynamic nature of the site, there may be implied servitudes over each site to stabilise that site to the benefit of the others. We would consider this environmentally objectionable and, with respect to the public space, an unreasonable imposition on the public interest.

The alternative is that there may be implied servitudes over the sites that limit artificial development on each site so that the natural instability over all the sites is unimpeded and no site is required to construct artificial works to interfere with the natural processes. Ideally such an interpretation would permit the management of each site to optimise the natural environment and, hopefully, imply an obligation (or permit a local by-law to impose such an obligation) for a minimum degree of such management.

Besides a full search of the records of the deeds office, we would recommend retaining the services of a competent environmental lawyer to review the matter and if necessary include recommendations in the final structure plan.

11. The River above Victoria Road Bridge and profiling of the River Banks

As stated in our previous response we fully support the eventual creation of a trail along the river that could join trails in the National Park. We do accept that issues such as security must be satisfactorily addressed and that such a trail may take many years to become a reality. We

do however support the idea of a systematic improvement program for the upper part of the River above Victoria Rd Bridge, that would ultimately restore much of the riverbanks to a more natural state.

The Longkloof weir has stopped the immediate need for action above that point but below Longkloof we believe that consideration should be given to the creation of several smaller gabion weirs similar to those used on the Klaasenbosch/Diep River which have proved most successful at modest cost. We also support the construction of a silt trap above the Victoria Road Bridge and the recommendation, made in a recent technical report, that the incline of the river banks should not exceed 1:5 and that any future development affecting the river and its tributaries should adhere to that profile. An incline of not more than 1:5 must also be applied to the banks of the river in its lower reaches and particularly at the Estuary.

12. Opportunities to inform Officials and Councillors

The Heritage trust has conducted several field trips for the public and interested parties, which have revealed great potential particularly now that much of the alien vegetation has been removed. We request the opportunity to conduct a comprehensive field visit with any interested parties and particularly request the company of officials and concerned councillors, who until now have not made such a visit, so that the potential can be fully appreciated before any decisions are taken.

In addition we wish to have the opportunity to make a presentation to the Council before it debates the River Study, so that its decisions can be made on a fully informed basis.

13. Reduction of further delays in the implementation of the Study.

It is clear that as a result of new developments since the Study was written, there are several issues that have not been adequately addressed in the Study. In the main these are of a technical nature and need specialist rather that public input. The changed circumstances include the following, none of which were in existence or imminent at the time of the study.

The creation of the new Cape Peninsula National Park.
The new Water Act.
The Urban Edge Study
The creation of the Hout Bay River Forum

Investigation into these outstanding issues could be protracted and thus become unnecessarily complicated. We therefore request that one, or if necessary two, one-day Workshops be convened to include representation and presentations from The HB River Forum, DWAFF, SANParks, WWFSA, WESSA & PMF to brainstorm the conservation issues and agree an addendum which could be attached to the River Study before its final adoption. This approach will significantly speed up the process of consensus in the matters which need to be incorporated into the Study. If necessary these Workshops could also give consideration to the need for seed funding and identify possible sources of long term funding.

14. Hout Bay River Forum

We request that the Hout Bay River Forum should be formally recognised in the River Study as the responsible "custodian" of the River, its catchment areas, tributaries and wetlands and that all planning applications involving the river system should be referred first to the Forum for an opinion. Details about the Forum can be seen at: www.zsd.co.za/~houtbay/riverind.htm

Whilst we firmly believe that the River Forum should have a crucial future roll in the resolution of river issues, we must point out that very little debate has taken place within the Forum on the topic of the River Study. The Heritage Trust, as a member of the Forum, must therefore reserve its unconditional support for the River Study until such time as it is adequately debated and issues resolved to the Trust's satisfaction. We feel that the proposed field visit could go a long way towards resolving many of the issues, provided the necessary officials could make themselves available.

APPENDIX 1

HOUT BAY & LLANDUDNO HERITAGE TRUST

Draft Vision Statement - for the Hout Bay River Forum

Preamble This Vision Statement recognises that the Hout Bay River System and its associated Wetlands and Catchment Areas, as defined by the Cape Metropolitan Council in 1999, constitute a unique natural asset - the last remaining River System linking Table Mountain to the sea that is still capable of being largely restored and conserved as a natural wildlife and recreational resource of national and international significance.

Aims To manage the River System so that the natural continuity and equilibrium of its riverine and wetland ecosystems, flora and fauna can be restored and sustained from the headwaters of its tributaries to the sea.

To develop new river management and soft engineering methods which will allow the whole river system to perform its natural functions of containing floodwaters and biologically purifying the water in its wetlands before flowing into the sea.

To work towards the establishment of a legally protected green corridor consisting of the River's special natural environments extending from the Cape Peninsula National Park to the sea for the benefit of future generations.

To seek solutions to development issues affecting the river that are sympathetic to the realisation of the Hout Bay River System as an irreplaceable national and international ecological asset.

Ways and Means To establish the Forum as the responsible body for monitoring development activity and advising on all planning decisions affecting the River System, including its tributary riverine courses and wetlands as defined in the Preamble above.

To monitor and publish details of water quality in the river and its outflow and to seek the application of the law against those who abuse the river, its banks, and wetlands in any way, eg. by pollution, introduction of alien or invasive plants, illegal use of its waters or by destruction or erosion of its banks or floodplain.

Further details about the River Forum are contained in the Hout Bay River Forum Web Site at:

www. zsd.co.za/~houtbay/