Opinion poll on development in Wilderness

GEORGE NEWS - There is serious concern among environmentally conscious Wilderness residents over the rate of development in their area.

They say it seems as if there is no consideration of the fact that the Wilderness Lakes area falls under a Unesco Biosphere Reserve and adjoins a National Park. Development seems to take priority over biodiversity conservation and sense of place.

They say too many building relaxations and too much subdivision of property are approved, which increases density and has a higher impact on the environment.

George Municipality's director of Human Settlements, Planning and Development and Property Management Department, Lauren Waring, responded as follows to the various issues mentioned by concerned members of the Wilderness community:

1. There is no cognisance or action with regard to climate change mitigation and the heavy construction footprint.

Any parting claim that NO regard or action is taken to mitigate against the impacts of climate change has not regarded the strategies and policy in our Municipal Spatial Development Framework (MSDF), which is being applied with diligence, not only in the Wilderness area but across all the municipal area of jurisdiction.

Data relating to the impacts of climate change, risk areas and management interventions are integrated into our Geographic Information System (GIS) database and addressed in the 2019 Municipal Spatial Development Framework. Due cognizance is given to the risks and development in risk areas is being addressed through mitigation. While it is preferred that no development occurs in these risk areas, the municipality cannot disregard the rights of property owners to exercise their rights and ensures proper awareness is raised with the landowner regarding the risks by enforcing the Coastal Management Line (CML) not permitting new development below the 5m AMSL, identifying areas where high fire risk exist, excluding areas with steep slopes, etc.

These data sets are used in the evaluation of individual applications for amendment of land use rights and applicants are required to illustrate climate change mitigation measures, where applicable. Development is contained within the existing urban edge, which was retracted with the amendment of the 2019 MSDF to safeguard as much of the pristine environment from the pressures of development where rights have already accrued.

The mainstreaming of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures is an ongoing effort and strategies are continuously refined with the review of our frameworks, by-laws, and policies.

2. Development seems to take priority over biodiversity conservation and our ‘sense of place’.

The spatial layers applied in decision-making isolate the sensitivities identified in the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) layers, riverine areas, and riparian buffers as well as threatened vegetation. No new development rights are afforded on parcels affected by these sensitivities. This policy is applied throughout the George Municipal area to ensure the open space systems are integrated and the health of these systems is regarded across their entire span.

Each individual’s perception of ‘sense of place’ may differ and it appears that property owners who have invested in the Wilderness areas have not all accounted for dormitory rights in their surroundings that have yet to be exercised. Over the past two years, it has been found across the municipal area of George that dormitory rights are being taken up with the resultant impact that areas that may have been perceived to be pristine natural areas, yet already committed to potential development, are now being transformed.

Like existing property owners in this area, these owners too, have the right to develop their property and the development footprint is determined by the rights that have already accrued to these sites.

Retrofitting new conditions, which affect existing land use rights, is near impossible and may have severe financial implications on public funds. In reality, certain trade-offs need to be regarded as excessive control in areas designated as urban areas will result in increased pressure on the development of the natural area and agrarian assets on the periphery of the urban area.

The George Municipality has not expanded its urban edge since the approval of the MSDF in 2012. Growth is still being absorbed and managed within the urban footprint and contained by means of the urban edge. Low-intensity development does not respond to growth and creates pressure for outward growth, which threatens the natural areas.

Upon careful consideration of the MSDF objectives, it will become clear that the protection of these areas, not already committed to development in terms of past layouts approved, is where the main priorities lie.

The Outeniqua Sensitive Coastal Areas Extension (OSCAE) Regulations provide the Municipality with an added mechanism of control during the assessment of land development proposals on properties where rights have already been confirmed. In the case of new developments, the department applies several instruments in the process of evaluation of the land use applications, such as the visual impact on scenic routes, development restrictions due to gradient and restricting development in hydrological buffers. Throughout, the decision-makers must apply the principles of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA) and cannot favour some principles over others. All the decisions taken by the municipality on land development applications are published on the webpage and any aggrieved party has the right to file an appeal to such decision.

3. No consideration of the fact that we reside in a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and adjoin a National Park.

This statement, like the statement in (1) above is exaggerated and illustrates oblivion towards the spatial strategies and policy in the approved MSDF. The dataset received from SANPARKS on their priority natural areas, their expansion area, as well as the National Park Support areas, have been included on the datasets that are applied in all decisions that relate to land development. The draft amended MSDF was advertised in 2022 and published on various platforms accessible to I&APs. The policies under Theme E that deals with the wealth of natural assets and resilience and the conservation significance of these areas are addressed in detail, hence consideration is indeed given to the status of protected areas. To this end, the municipality works in close cooperation with SANPARKS, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and the Environment (DFFE), Cape Nature and other environmental authorities such as the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning (DEA&DP) to assist and guide in its efforts to protect the integrity of the environmental system, as the management of these areas of statutory conservation does not fall within the municipal mandate. All conservation areas are excluded from the urban edge and will not be considered for urban development.

4. Town planning approves too many relaxations with regards to developments.

The development of most of the properties in the Wilderness, Hoekwil, Wilderness Heights and Lakes areas are encumbered by steep slopes, coastal dunes activities or coastal erosion, rock outcrops and unstable underlying rock formations (making them susceptible to landslides), indigenous vegetation, protected trees, forest or coastal thicket, water courses and wetlands, and a host of other bio-physical constraints. These properties were created decades or even a century ago before the advent of modern planning practices and environmental management guidelines that are applied to new developments.

The George Municipality inherited the existing development form from former municipalities. These properties have existing development rights. The municipality cannot in law deny the owners of these properties, their right to exercise them and thus, it is incumbent on its officials to at least get the owners to develop their properties in the most responsible manner possible. As stated, the bio-physical constraints of these properties often mean that it is not advisable for owners to erect their buildings in accordance with the development restrictions (building lines, height, etc). The instruments available to us in respect of adapting the parameters are also applied to forge a development that adapts to the natural constraints and sensitivities of the property. The number of departures approved since 2015 for the Wilderness/ Hoekwil area amount to 160 applications, which forms 15% of the total amount of departures granted for the municipal area as a whole. The departures are therefore not regarded lightly and are generally only pursued if all other options have been duly regarded.

The approach adopted by the municipality is nothing new and in fact, it is enshrined in the provisions of the National Environmental Management Act 1998 (NEMA), which states where development cannot be prevented, it should as far as possible mitigated.

5. Town Planning approves too many subdivision of property which increases density and a higher impact of the environment.

Subdivision of farmland, is, in principle not supported. Subdivision of Small Holdings may occur within the permissible parameters of the LSDF. It is the mandate of the Department of Agriculture (National) to evaluate and approve the division of farmland.

The development of most of the properties in the Wilderness, Hoekwil, Wilderness Heights and Lakes areas are encumbered by steep slopes, coastal dunes activities or coastal erosion, rock outcrops and unstable underlying rock formations (making them susceptible to landslides), indigenous vegetation, protected trees, forest or coastal thicket, water courses and wetlands, and a host of other bio-physical constraints. Subdivision of such properties is in general not considered, however, properties within the urban edge, with a suitable topography, situated within an area serviced by existing infrastructure and well located in respect of amenities as suitable candidates for subdivision as these aids in the absorption of growth and alleviates the pressure to expand into the sensitive periphery.

The densification through subdivision of residential properties in the Wilderness area is low compared to the rest of the Municipal area as only 30 applications have been approved since 2015, which comprises 13.6% of the greater George municipal area.

Growth is experienced across all of George and as a result, all neighbourhoods are witnessing a transformation of their urban environment and the environmental resources within are equally threatened. The fact that the most sensitive and pristine parts of Wilderness are already protected as conservation areas, safeguards these areas, whereas these benefits are not prevalent in all the sensitive areas in the remainder of the municipal area.

The municipality is not oblivious to the demands that pressures for development places on the environment, which is why mitigation is applied and is being improved on an ongoing basis.

6. Municipality fails to enforce compliance with respect to environmental and town planning regulations; fines issued in respect of lack of compliance when enforcement is carried out, are ridiculously low.

Committed efforts have been made to improve enforcement on the fronts of environmental, town planning and building control offences. Lawlessness is an unfortunate occurrence and millions of Rands are spent annually on addressing the impacts thereof.

While the litigation succeeds in some instances, they are not always fruitful in others and may take several months if not years in resolving. The municipality is limited in its capacity to issue fines, as the proposed system of fines, submitted early in 2022, has not yet been approved by the Chief magistrate. A fine system will allow the municipality’s officials to issue spot fines and for matters to be referred to the municipal court. At present, the only mechanism available is a civil action which requires matters to be heard in the high court. Nonetheless, the municipality has ensured that its officials responsible for enforcement have undergone the required training to render them eligible to be sworn in as Peace Officers, which will enable them to issue these fines once approval has been granted.

A portal for reporting suspected transgressions is being developed, which will enable residents and community members to report their observations on a platform that will alert the case officers directly and will enable feedback to complainants regarding the actions taken.

7. Decisions, more often than not, are in favour of the developer and not the environment.

The protection of the environment is one of the key strategies of the municipality’s planning. To this end, the urban edges around existing settlements contain the development envelope and offer limited space to grow outward where infringement on these protected and agricultural areas may occur.

Within these urban edges, urban development occurs where land use in these areas must intensify and where existing developments are promoted to be utilised. Decision makers must give regard to all seven principles of SPLUMA when considering land development applications, of which spatial sustainability is but one.

The principle of spatial sustainability involves various elements of which upholding consistency of land use measures in accordance with environmental management instruments, is but one. Neither the official Authorised to take land development decisions, nor the Tribunal can justify the refusal of a land development proposal if such a proposal cannot be proven to be in breach of environmental law or policy. Extensive deliberation is often undergone with the developer to adapt their development proposals to embrace the environmentally focussed policy presented in the MSDF.

Decisions taken on land development applications must be administratively fair and the principle of resilience needs to be applied. Any party aggrieved by a decision, who is able to demonstrate that the principles of SPLUMA and the policy in the MSDF have not been duly considered during the decision-making process may appeal to such decision.

8. Environment and town planning laws and regulations should be better enforced in the Garden Route, Wilderness.

This has been addressed in point 6 of this response.

9. The Wilderness Spatial Development Framework is not adhered to when decisions are being made regarding developments.

The MSDF and the Wilderness Hoekwil Lakes Spatial Development Framework (WGHLSDF) are considered in all applications under consideration. In some instances, deviation from the provisions of the LSDF may be regarded as justified, however, any deviation may not contradict the spatial trajectory or the objectives stated in the MSDF. Each decision is accompanied by reasons which motivated the outcome.

The WHL LSDF is a local spatial development framework. It provides guidelines for the spatial development of the area to assist officials in their decision-making. It is not a statutory document and serves as one of many tools that the planner has at his/her disposal, as part of his/her basket of considerations, when evaluating an application. The decision maker is required to consider the specific circumstances that apply to a site and may impose measures to mitigate the anticipated or perceived impacts.

The provisions of the MSDF and Local Spatial Development Frameworks (LSDFs) are only statutory if it forms part of the Integrated Zoning Scheme. The municipality is in the process of revision of the zoning scheme and some enhancements in respect of the environmental management actions, in response to the need to adapt to the impact of climate change have been proposed. Interested and affected parties will have the opportunity to comment on the document once it is released for public participation.

George Herald also posed the following question to the municipality: Many people say the influx of people should be controlled, but would this be legal and doable?

Influx control is absolutely not legal or desirable, and the history of our country provides more than sufficient reasons as to why this is the case. To expect or request such abhorrent mechanisms shows an astounding lack of insight or empathy into the plight of millions of South Africans, the results of which our country is still grappling with today.

The obligations of a municipality are embedded in the Constitution and the municipality may not statute law that contradicts principles related to the promotion of equity, equality, inclusivity, access, transformation, etc. The needs of citizens must be balanced with the imperatives that inform environmental and resource conservation.

The South African Constitution requires of a municipality to be developmentally orientated and therefore it must give regard to all sides of the spectrum. The sustainable development of land demands the integration of social, economic and environmental considerations in both our planning for future growth and ongoing land use management to ensure the development of land serves present and future generations.

Populations growth may be a combination of influx and natural growth of the existing population, the resulting needs of which cannot be disregarded as service delivery to all our citizens remains at the core of our mandate.

It is within human nature to migrate to a better environment. The fact is that it happens continually, and will to the end of time, absolutely nothing you can do about it. If it wasn't for migration, places like Johannesburg (gold) and Kimberley (diamonds) for instance, would not have been. While migration can not be stopped, it should be managed in a responsible way taking cognisance of pressure on land, human rights and specifically also the environment. This is a fine balancing act and a supreme headache for all the professionals involved (town planners, engineers, environmental consultants etc). It is here where the municipality should have a very clear vision with relevant development guide lines which should be strictly enforced (no exceptions or favours to anyone).

"Let's all move to the garden route and turn it into Jo'burg! This seems to be the mentality. People with beachfront properties in Kleinkrantz want the bush chopped because it "interferes with their sea view". Clearing all vegetation on plots when they build, sparing no tree. And an EIA is all about the money, not impact on the environment. Until the last tree falls and there's no water, greed and selfishness will unfortunately continue. Imagine the CEO of environmental affairs schemes glyphosate is safe... True story."

Unless there is substantive reasoning, building-lines should not be relaxed otherwise it becomes a mere formality and the relevance of the restrictions has no meaning. Architects need to come on board too, and as they generally receive a payment based on total costs, and costs are based on sq/m prices, it is in their interest to design bigger houses. As for the subdivisions....there is a new trend of 'consolidating' undersized properties and resubdividing...in my opinion it is fraudulent...many people are over-obsessed with wealth and status and care very little about what it was that attracted them here in the first place...unless, of course, it was the opportunity to enrich themselves a little bit more...

"100% agree. It is exactly how this is unravelling. The beauty of George and the Garden Route is the natural environment. It has to STOP and carefully managed in a more sustainable way."