CHAPTER 6: SOLUTIONS TO FLOOD RISK IN EMNAMBITHI/LADYSMITH LM AND THE VALUE OF
6.4. Reflection on the use of EI in addressing flood risks
6.4.1. Perceptions of Emnambithi/Ladysmith Municipal Open Space System in regulating the floods
103 | P a g e flood risks areas and other environmentally sensitive areas aiming to protect the citizens from water related disasters. However, there is a need to address urban bias as it contributes to the inequality and the exclusion of the rural areas from the programmes to address flooding and other water related disasters. In this way, a holistic approach which takes into account the whole catchment, is needed.
104 | P a g e Community Stakeholder, 2015). According to Respondent 5: LG Stakeholder-Environmental Hygiene Section (2015), the area near Forbes and Lyell Street is included in the municipal open space system (EL’MOSS) and this is a confirmation that the floods in Ladysmith are still a problem and Ladysmith is still a floodplain irrespective of the Qedusizi dam. This response challenges the claim that after constructing Qedusizi flood attenuation dam, the 1: 100 floods have been avoided while not acknowledging that there are remaining floodplains in the lower parts of Ladysmith Town (ELLM, 2012c). According to the SDF draft (2012), these remaining floodplains in some portions of Ladysmith are also located near Sofi Mosque where the scouring or sand mining takes place (ELLM, 2012c) (See Figure 5.3).
However, it must be also noted that even though the Forbes and Lyell Street have been identified as forming part of the EL'MOSS, the area has been allowed to establish a new taxi rank (coordinates:
28°33'48.53"S 29°47'1.20"E). According to them, little will be lost in the taxi rank when there are floods and therefore it is not perceived as a high risk property development. However, the establishment of a taxi rank and the widening of the stream are forming part of the hard engineering approaches. This also looks at the economic and social sustainability of the municipality and its growth. Based on the interviews with the municipal officials, the results have shown that the urban vegetation along the stream is not seen as a strategy to resolve Ladysmith flooding. However, the review of the ELLM strategic development documents and own observations has shown that they are aiming to use the EL’MOSS around the town for attracting economic growth and investors in their aesthetic environment which forms part of the vision of the district. This contributes to the tourism growth in the municipality and the region by showcasing their endemic species in the strategic entrance areas of the municipality such as Windsor Park in the South West of the town.
Except for Respondent 7: NG Stakeholder-Environmental Affairs (2015), all other officials do not see the riparian habitat (mostly, the bush) as a way of addressing the floods as they claim that it is responsible for bringing more negatives in flood risk management and causing more security threats.
For example, some of the respondents have argued that it traps the water in the flood risk environment, making the town unprepared for the upcoming floods (Respondent 11: FT Community Stakeholder-Elder, 2015). Also the protection of the riparian habitat was criticised as it limited surveillance causing the lack of safety (Respondent 11: FT Community Stakeholder-Elder, 2015). This shows poor understanding of how rivers work as with the uncultivated EI along the river, the velocity of the flood water can be reduced. Most importantly, the EI can also regulate the geometry of the stream and also avoid the further expansion of the river to where it is not supposed to be.
105 | P a g e Even though Respondent 4: LG Stakeholder-Town Planning Section (2015) has mentioned that the problem with their EL’MOSS is that it is not linked (and operates in isolation), it was not mentioned that these areas can regulate flooding. Unfortunately, even with the stakeholders coming from Parks and Gardens, the respondents (Respondent 13 and 16) did not see how they contribute to reducing flood risks with their investment in EI (i.e. Parks) next to the Klip River. However, the response has shown that the parks are acting as a strategy to regulate land pollution and illegal dumping in the abandoned open public spaces, encouraging tourism, and promoting recreational spaces (Respondent 13 and 16). The stakeholders also knew that their open spaces play a crucial role in soil conservation (ibid). Therefore, it was realised that their strategies are indeed part of soft engineering strategies to resolve flood risks but the key informant interviews with the municipal officials (Respondent 4, Respondent 5: Respondent 13 and 16) are unaware of the flood regulation brought about by their urban parks. Despite this, the results from all the community and municipal official key informant interviewed in Ladysmith indicated that they are not responsible (anyhow) for flood risk decision making or reduction because this is a responsibility of Department of Disaster Management and Engineers are the main actors when it comes to flood control and response.
This indicates that there is a need for the inclusions and awareness of sociological and political dimensions of flood risks management in Ladysmith as this will consider various types of knowledge in flood governance decision making.
6.4.2. Observations and the inclusion of urban EI in flood risk management
After interviewing Ladysmith officials and its citizens, the researcher in a site visit walked and observed the land uses activities to see what is happening along or next to the Klip River in Ladysmith town. This was important because these observations helped to verify whether or not the concept of EI was incorporated in land use planning and in practice. The site visit has shown that some elements of EI are incorporated as some of the developments along Klip River have low environmental impacts and improve the condition of the river under stress of impervious surfaces and pollution.
Irrespective of the perceived poor understanding of the role of EI in flood management among the government officials and the citizens in Ladysmith, the observation and land use survey done by the researcher has also revealed that there are also environmental engineering and related specialists who are playing a significant role in the installation and the maintenance of the flood management infrastructures (i.e. providing active and inactive open spaces, designing Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUD) in the city). Unfortunately, their role is unrecognised as the suppliers are outsourced (i.e. consultants). This is particularly the case as the officials of the municipality lack capacity and do
106 | P a g e not have skills to deal with the provisioning and planning of the interlinked functioning of EI in their vicinity. In this way, the respondents indicated that they are unaware about the issues of how EI contributes to the reduction of flood risk in Ladysmith (See plate 6.6 below).
Plate 6.6: The well-maintained extension of Wimpy Public Park adjacent to Klip River in Ladysmith (Photograph by Njabulo Ngcobo, 2015).
The park near the flood risk area is an example of artificial EI because it absorbs the floodwater (rather than to encourage run off). It also contribute directly to land use planning because it create a buffer zone that separate urban development and its properties from the risk of flooding. The open spaces zoning allowing low impact development such as parks near the floodline are a good practice because they are reducing the flood vulnerability of the properties and human settlements in these high risks areas. Unlike concrete or tarmac development, the soft engineering strategies encourage the infiltration of water reducing the immediate run-off of the surface floodwater to the Klip River. The functioning of these areas have even higher impacts if they are owned by the municipality which cleans and maintain it for recreational or flood attenuation functions.
6.4.3. RC Stakeholder reflections on the solutions to floods and environmental changes