4.3 The case study of the Small Craft Harbour
4.3.2 The proposed site
The proposed site for the SCH consists of a sheltered bay and a strip of land and beach extending from the base of Vetch's pier in the north, to the proposed new northern harbour breakwater in the south (See Figure 4.5). As the SCH will involve the construction of new piers and breakwaters to accommodate sailing craft and boats, considerable land reclamation will be involved. This has resulted in the boundary for the EIA extending into the sea and has implications in terms of land ownership below the high water mark. The beach and the protected waters are valuable both in social and ecological terms and have a history which contributed to the creation of this unique environment.
the Bluff OCEAN
I NO I AN
~~-~---
1
~,',~cVetch'SPier---7
~~~~
I
Vetch's Bight
I
I I I I
,...~. .r~-I
I
o 200 400m
I I I
scale approx
Cadastral boundary of POint Development Boundary of Small Craft Harbour EIA
~ Canal development Railway
Figure 4.5: The site of the proposed SCH (adapted from Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004:Appendix 5)
In 1861 Captain Vetch's breakwater plan failed and the remnants of the wooden boulder pier have remained in tact in this location, serving as an artificial reef ever since (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004) (See Plate 4.1). The man-made reef which is 490m Iona ando
ranges in width between 30 and 70m, it is relatively flat near the shore, and curves outwards in a south-easterly direction, to become a more complex arrangement with various recesses and rocky protrusions (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004). This arc-shaped reef was named Vetch's Pier and lies in close proximity to a natural reef known as Limestone Reef. This reef lies in a north-westerly direction and is approximately 350m long, it is 70m at its widest point and is a maximum of 2m in depth (ORl, 2004). The protected waters to the south of Vetch's Pier form a sandy basin with a maximum depth of 5m, known as Vetch's Bight, while the stretch of beach between the base of Vetch' s and the northern harbour breakwater is known as Vetch's Beach (ORl, 2004).
Plate 4.1: The Point area with Vetch's pier visible
As a consequence of the protection offered by Vetch's Pier, the area between the shore and the pier is effectively sheltered from wave action and swells, resulting in a unique area of calm water. Ecologically, this unique environment hosts an abundance of marine life, as documented by ORl. The predominant 'reef-associated invertebrate fauna' are brown mussels and red bait which in themselves provide protection and food for a diversity of other vertebrate and invertebrate species (ORl, 2004). The mussel beds are largely unexploited and host the largest
mussels in KwaZulu-Natal, they may also provide valuable seed-beds to rejuvenate other exploited areas along the coast (ORl, 2004). Sea cucumbers, sea urchins, corals, sponges, rock lobsters and octopus are other 'reef -associated invertebrate fauna' identified in the area. In terms of the vertebrates, 'reef-associated vertebrate fauna' included a total of 85 species, whilst the 'sand-associated vertebrates' included 134 species (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004). According to the study, the area also functions as a valuable nursery area for some species. In light of the above findings, the Vetch's Reef and the Limestone Reef offer a unique environment upon which a variety of vertebrate and non-vertebrate aquatic biota depend.
This unIque protected location rendered the area suitable for a wide variety of sea related activities namely watersports. As early as the 1800s subsistence fisherman, known as the Indian Seine Netters, were the first group to use Vetch's (See Plate 4.2). By the 1940s the group had expanded to over thirty boats which were operated by three different companies (Point Watersports, 2004). Also in the 1940s, the first crocker-ski led the way for a number of anglers who launched offVetch's and by 1945 the first crocker-ski with offboard motor signified the first ski-boat in South Africa (Point Watersports, 2004). Eventually the large number of boats operating in the area began to impact on the fish populations and numbers began to decline, attracting fewer boats. In 1947 the port authorities drew up a lease for the Durban Ski-Boat Club which was established at Vetch's to reduce congestion within the harbour (Point Watersports, 2004). In 1969, the NSRI required a site on the beach and hence another lease was signed. By 1971 the increasing numbers of paddle-skis launching offVetch's necessitated a clubhouse and consequently the Durban Paddle-Ski Club was formed, which is the only club of its type in the world (Point Watersports, 2004). The following year both the Durban Underwater and Inflatable Boat Club were established and because small yachts were prohibited from using the harbour mouth to reach the Point Yacht Club at Victoria Embankment, a second site at Vetch's was established (Point Waters ports, 2004). In addition to the five official watersports clubs currently operating at Vetch's, there are other representatives of the general public, including learner surfing clinics. Over the years, the beach area has developed into a vibrant locus of watersports activity and recreation (See Plate 4.3).
Plate 4.2: The remaining seine fishing boat amongst the ski boat trailers
Plate 4.3: Activities on the beach and in the sea
In response to the threat of development proposals which has recently become consolidated in the form of the PDFP, the five watersports clubs (The Boardsailing Club of Durban, the Durban Paddle-Ski Club, the Durban Ski-Boat Club, the Durban Underwater Club, and Point Yacht Club) have amalgamated to form one body: Point Watersports (Point Watersports, 2004). In order to secure the current functions and uses of the area in the future, the members of this body have united with a common vision, as they have articulated in their brochure (Point Watersports, 2004):
"The primary initial interest of the committee is to secure the organisations' future in the Point Redevelopment and to carry this through to a physical manifestation of the amalgamated body that will provide for the social and recreational needs of watersport enthusiasts".
The association has justified the importance of accommodating their activities within future developments by highlighting the positive impact that a watersports facility will have for Durban as a whole. They suggest that a watersports theme will provide an iconic feature for the Point Development and enhance the City's reputation as a sporting hub.
However, the clubs currently form a barrier between the rest of the Point area and the beach, with fencing, barbed wire, guarded booms and signboards keeping non-members out (See Plate 4.5). As a result the public cannot gain direct access from the Point and can only access the beach via Addington Beach to the north. In addition, Vetch's Beach and the adjacent clubhouses are currently in poor condition. The beach is strewn with rubble, pipelines (for sand pumping) and litter, whilst some of the buildings have not been adequately maintained (See Plate 4.6). The positioning of the clubs and the limited access to parking has resulted in the predominantly 'private' use of this space for decades. It is because of these subtle codes that a perception of exclusivity has been constructed. However, despite the domination of the beach by club members, the aesthetic appeal of the area with views of Durban's 'golden mile', the Bluff and the Indian Ocean, has resulted in the wide use of this beach by the public (See Plate 4.7).
Plate 4.5: Security measures employed by the watersports clubs
Plate 4.6: Bags oflitter and vehicle tracks detract from the aesthetic appeal of Vetch's Beach
Plate 4.7: Views of Durban from Vetch's Beach
4.3.3 The regulatory context
a) Planning
In terms of planning, the Durban Point Waterfront Framework Plan as the long term masterplan of the Point area, was approved by the Council and the Provincial Authorities in 1997 (Sutcliffe, 2004.). The same year, Rocpoint lodged a rezoning application for the Point area to facilitate future development in accordance with the Plan (Sutcliffe, 2004). In 1998, a Special Zone was adopted by the Council to allow Rocpoint to package and launch development initiatives within the Point area and accordingly a regulatory framework was required (Sutcliffe, 2004). The Special Zone area was divided into six precincts, the SCH comprising part of Precinct 5.
As development commenced with the uShaka Marine World, Moreland Developments identified a weakness with the package of plans process as stipulated in the Special Zone regulations. This was namely the relationship of proposed development with adjacent land and interfaces therewith which would result in having to second guess how the surrounding land would or could be developed. In order to improve the management of the Point, Moreland submitted an application on behalf of the Point Development Company in January 2003 which was later approved.
In terms of the SCH, the zoning specified in the Plan supports it in principle, however, a Scheme extension application would be required to include the SCH area within the Durban Town Planning Scheme and Special Zone 91 (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004).
b) Environmental
In addition to the planning context, environmental legislation has framed the decision-making process of the SCH. As a national policy, the White Paper on Sustainable Coastal Development requires co-ordination between the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) as the lead agent, provincial departments and units as well as local departments to ensure a coastal development adheres to the policy principles (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004; South Africa, 2000b). In addition, coastal developments are also required to be aligned with the following national environmental legislation (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004):
• The Constitution, Act 108 (South Africa, 1996) - with specific reference to the rights of citizens in terms oftheir environment (Section 24)
• The Seashore Act, Act 21 (South Africa, 1935) - with reference to the rights of the public in terms of access to the sea (the water and the bed of the sea below the low water mark).
• The Environmental Conservation Act (ECA), Act No. 73 (South Africa, 1989) which ensures that activities are not to the detriment of the environment (Section 21, 22 and 26) as well as EIA Regulations 1182 and 1184.
• The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), Act 107 (South Africa, 1998b) - with emphasis on the broader principles and procedures guiding developments. (South Africa, 1998b)
Of particular relevance to the process under study is the ECA (South Africa, 1989). In line with the ECA, the proposed development of a SCH is required to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in accordance with Sections 21, 22 and 26 and its respective Regulations (Regulations 1182 - 1184 of 1997) (South Africa, 1989). The DPDC appointed Pravin Amar Development Planners as the Independent Assessor to carry out the Environmental Scoping Study which was to identify the potential environmental impacts (biophysical and social) of the proposed SCH (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004). The process commenced in October 2003 with the application for authorisation in terms of Section 22 of the ECA (South Africa, 1989) which was submitted to the delegating authority for KwaZulu-Natal, DAEA. In January 2003, an amended Plan of Study was resubmitted with the suggested changes and accepted on 29 January 2003 (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004).
In Iine with Section 6 of Regulation 1183 of the ECA, the Scoping Phase, as the first phase of assessment, was required to produce a report which was to provide (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2004: 12):
(a) "a brief description of the project
(b) a brief description of how the environment may be effected (c) a description of environmental issues identified
(d) a descri ption of all alternatives identified and;
(e) an appendix containing a description of the public participation process followed, including a list of Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) and their comments".
The Draft Scoping Report was thus compiled by Pravin Amar Development Planners as the EIA consultant, with input from the relevant Professional Team of specialists and I&APs. As part of the process, a set of seven options were identified as alternatives for the development and were described in the report (See Appendix I; Round One). The report is summarised as follows:
"The Draft Scoping Report identified seven different options, of which only five involved the development of a Small Craft Harbour. These options were developed by the initial team of consultants and were based on the key concepts contained in the Framework Plan. Only four of these alternatives supported the notion of a Small Craft Harbour on the Point Precinct. These four options were conceptually similar, with their major variation being the position of the Northern breakwater. The major debates therefore revolved around maximising economic benefits vs minimising ecological impacts. Hence, the position of the breakwater was the fundamental defining factor" (Oelofseet ai,2005).
The Report was submitted for review by the public and authorities on 21 May 2004, with the deadline for review scheduled on 30 June 2004. A public meeting was thus scheduled for 17 June 2004 to discuss all issues and concerns raised from the Draft Scoping Report.
However, the City considered the proposed set of options presented in the Draft Scoping Report inadequate, as the alternatives did not meet the broader goals of the City. This reflected the growing tension between the goals of the public and private sectors. As a result, on 19 July 2004 the City placed a request to investigate further alternatives and on 5 August 2004 it was motivated that the Scoping Phase would be extended and would include an additional team of independent specialists (Pravin Amar Development Planners, 2005b). This Professional Team included two financial/economic consultants and one social consultant and their involvement signified an expansion of the previous network of actors. These specialists would work with the existing team to devise a new set of more adequate alternatives, opening up the process to more deliberation and negotiations. Their involvement corresponded with the duration of the Extended Scoping Phase which ran from July 2004 until April 2005. This process is outlined as follows.