MSINGA MUNICIPALITY
SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRAMEWORK
DRAFT STATUS QUO REPORT
JUNE 2020
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Contents CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 1 1.3 WHAT IS A SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2 1.4 LEGAL AND POLICY IMPERATIVES 3 1.5 RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER PLANS 4 1.6 DEFINING THE STUDY AREA 5 1.7 STRUCTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT 9 1.8 STUDY OBJECTIVES/ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED 9 1.9 MUNICIPAL SPATIAL STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMANTS 11 CHAPTER 2: STATUS QUO OF MSINGA MUNICIPALITY 12 2.1 LEGISLATIVE ENVIRONMENT 12 2.1.1 SOUTH AFRICAN CONSTITUTION AND PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (NO. 108 OF 1196) ...... 12 2.1.2 MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS ACT (NO. 32 OF 2000) ...... 12 2.1.3 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT (NO. 107 OF 1998) ...... 14 2.1.4 SOCIAL HOUSING ACT (NO.16 OF 2008) ...... 14 2.1.5 THE KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE ACT (NO 4 OF 2008) ...... 16 2.1.6 SPLUMA (NO 16 OF 2013) ...... 17 2.2 POLICY ENVIRONMENT 21 2.2.1 PROVINCIAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY ...... 21 2.2.2 NATIONAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 25 2.2.3 NEW GROWTH PATH...... 26 2.2.4 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2030 ...... 28 2.2.5 THE COMPREHENSIVE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME FRAMEWORK ...... 31 2.2.6 SOCIAL HOUSING POLICY ...... 32 2.2.7 PROVINCIAL SPATIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (PSEDS) ...... 34 2.2.8 PROVINCIAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY ...... 35 2.2.9 STATE OF THE NATION ADDRESS JUNE 2019(SONA) ...... 38 2.2.10 STATE OF THE PROVINCE ADDRESS JUNE 2019 (SOPA) ...... 40 2.3 CONCLUSION 44 CHAPTER 3: THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 45 3.1 THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT/ STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT 45
ii | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.1.1 TOPOGRAPHY ...... 45 3.1.2 SLOPE ANALYSIS ...... 45 3.1.3 GEOLOGY ...... 46 3.1.4 SOILS ...... 50 3.1.5 WATER CATCHMENT ...... 52 3.1.6 CLIMATE ...... 54 3.1.7 OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ...... 58 3.1.7.1 BIODIVERSITY SECTOR PLAN 58 3.1.8 VEGETATION ...... 63 3.2 THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 67 3.2.1 LAND TENURE ...... 67 3.2.2 POPULATION DENSITY ...... 69 3.2.2.1 POPULATION GROWTH 69 3.2.2.2 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS 69 3.2.2.3 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE 70 3.2.2.3 GENDER DISTRIBUTION 70 3.2.2.4 INCOME LEVELS 72 3.2.2.5 EDUCATION LEVELS 72 3.2.2.6 POPULATION DENSITY 73 3.2.3 HUMAN FOOTPRINT ...... 75 3.2.4 BROAD MUNICIPAL LAND USE ...... 75 3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE 78 3.3.1 ELECTRICITY NETWORK ...... 78 3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION ...... 80 3.3.3 ACCESS TO WATER ...... 83 3.3.4 ACCESS TO SANITATION ...... 86 3.4 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT 88 3.4.1 ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE FACILITIES ...... 88 3.4.2 ACCESS TO EDUCATION FACILITIES ...... 88 3.4.3 ACCESS TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES ...... 89 3.4.4 ACCESS TO POLICE STATION FACILITIES ...... 92 3.5 HUMAN SETTLEMENT 97 3.5.1 PREDOMINANTLY SCATTERED LOW-DENSITY RURAL SETTLEMENTS ...... 98 3.5.2 PERI-URBAN AND SEMI-URBAN SETTLEMENTS ...... 99
iii | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.5.3 URBAN SETTLEMENTS ...... 99 3.6 FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 101 3.6.1 KZN DEPENDENCY RATIO ...... 102 3.6.2 KZN DEPRIVATION INDEX ...... 104 3.6.3 AGRICULTURE...... 106 3.6.4 MANUFACTURING ...... 107 3.6.5 TOURISM ...... 108 3.6.6 PUBLIC/CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT ...... 112 3.7 PROVINCIAL SDF 113 3.7.1 PRINCIPLE OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ...... 116 3.7.2 PRINCIPLE OF ECONOMIC POTENTIAL ...... 117 3.7.3 PRINCIPLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING ...... 117 3.7.4 PRINCIPLE OF SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS ...... 117 3.7.5 PRINCIPLE OF SPATIAL CONCENTRATION ...... 118 3.7.6 PRINCIPLE OF LOCAL SELF-SUFFCIENCY ...... 118 3.7.7 PRINCIPLE OF CO-ORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION ...... 118 3.7.8 PRINCIPLE OF ACCESSIBILITY ...... 118 3.7.9 PRINCIPLE OF BALANCED DEVELOPMENT ...... 119 CHAPTER 4: SPATIAL REPRESENTATION OF THE IDP 120 4.1 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT VISION 120 4.1.1 STATUS OF THE IDP ON DISTRICT AND LOCAL LEVELS 120
4.1.2 SPATIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE IDP VISION 120 4.1.3 SPATIAL ALIGNMENT BETWEEN DISTRICT AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT VISION 121 4.2 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT MISSION 121 4.3 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES 123 4.4 LONG TERM SPATIAL VISION 129 4.5 SPLUMA SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 129 4.5.1 SPATIAL JUSTICE 129 4.5.2 SPATIAL SUSTAINABILITY 133 4.5.3 SPATIAL EFFICIENCY 139 4.5.4 SPATIAL RESILIENCE 140 4.5.5 GOOD ADMINISTRATION 142 4.6 SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES 145 4.7 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY LAND 146
iv | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CHAPTER 5: DELINEATION OF THE URBAN EDGE 155 5.1 UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT 155 5.2 CONCERNS COMMONLY UNDERPINNING URBAN EDGE POLICIES 157 5.2.1 ERADICATING SPRAWL AND PROMOTING URBAN COMPACTION 157 5.2.2 PROTECTING IMPORTANT ELEMENTS WITHIN URBAN SETTLEMENTS 159 5.2.3 PROMOTING SMALL-SCALE AGRICULTURE 159 5.2.4 MANAGING URBAN WASTES 159 5.2.5 ISSUES OF SUSTAINABILITY AND RECYCLING 160 5.2.6 CO-ORDINATION OF LINE AND POINT BULK SERVICES TO ACHIEVE EFFICIENCIES 160 5.2.7 AVOIDING HAZARDS 160 5.3 SYNTHESIS 161 5.4 GUIDELINES FOR DELINEATING THE URBAN CONTAINMENT EDGE 162 5.5 GUIDELINES FOR DEFINING WHERE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD NOT GO 163 5.5.1 PRINCIPLES 163 5.6 CONCLUSION 164 CHAPTER 6: SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 168 6.1 INTENDED FUTURE LAND USES 168 6.1.1 CONSERVATION/ ECO-TOURISM/ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ZONES 168 6.1.2 AGRICULTURAL AREAS 171 6.1.3 INFILL AREAS 173 6.1.4 RESIDENTIAL AREAS 174 6.2 DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS 176 6.2.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR 177 6.2.2 SECONDARY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR 177 6.2.3 TERTIARY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS 178 6.3 SERVICE CENTRE AND ACTIVITY NODES 179 6.3.1 PRIMARY MUNICIPAL NODES 184 6.3.2 SECONDARY MUNICIPAL NODES 190 6.3.3 TERTIARY MUNICIPAL NODES 197 CHATPER 7: GUIDELINES FOR THE LUMS 206 CHAPTER 8: ALIGNMENT OF SPATIAL PLANS 208 8.1UMZINYATHI DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SDF 209 8.2UMVOTI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 210 8.3 INKOSI LANGALIBALELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 211
v | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.4ALFRED DUMA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 212 8.5 ENDUMENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 213 8.6 NQUTHU LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 214 8.7 NKANDLA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 214 CHAPTER 9: IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING 214 9.1. RESOURCE TARGETING 215
Graphs
Graph 1 Population Distribution ...... 71 Graph 2 Education level ...... 73 Graph 3 Electricity ...... 78 Graph 4 Toilet facilities ...... 86
Tables
Table 1 Municipal Overview ...... 7 Table 2 Wards and Councillors ...... 8 Table 3 Spatial Development ...... 10 Table 4 Hierarchy of Nodes ...... 22 Table 5 Average Temperature and Rainfall ...... 55 Table 6 Environmental important terms and Description ...... 58 Table 7 Population growth ...... 69 Table 8 Population Age ...... 69 Table 9 Number of Households ...... 69 Table 10 Average Household Size ...... 70 Table 11 Gender Distribution ...... 71 Table 12 Annual Household Income ...... 72 Table 13 Population by Educational level ...... 73 Table 14 MIG Projects ...... 84 Table 15 Toilet facilities ...... 86 Table 16 Education Facilities ...... 89 Table 17 Community facilities ...... 90 Table 18 Nodes ...... 97 Table 19 Sector Plan Adopted ...... 120
vi | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 20 Msinga KPA’S ...... 124 Table 21 Spatial Justice Principles applied to Msinga Municipality ...... 132 Table 22 Spatial Sustainability Principles applied to Msinga Municipality ...... 138 Table 23 Spatial Efficiency Principles applied to Msinga Municipality ...... 139 Table 24 Spatial Resilience Principles applied to Msinga Municipality ...... 141 Table 25 Good Administration Principles applied to Msinga Municipality ...... 144 Table 26 Conservation Orientated Projects ...... 169 Table 27 Development on Agricultural Land ...... 172 Table 28 Agricultural projects ...... 173 Table 29 Housing projects ...... 175 Table 30 Nodes ...... 180 Table 31 Facility Needs ...... 182 Table 32 Status of Tugela Ferry ...... 187 Table 33 Pomeroy facilities ...... 190 Table 34 Keate’s Drift Facilities ...... 197 Table 35 Msinga Top Facilities ...... 198 Table 36 Nhlalakale Facilities ...... 199 Table 37 Mfenebude Facilities ...... 200 Table 38 Masebuko Facilities ...... 202 Table 39 Rorke’s Drift Facilities ...... 203 Table 40 Gunjana Facilities ...... 204 Table 41 Guidelines for Developing a LUMS ...... 207 Table 42 Alignment with Umzinyathi District Municipality SDF ...... 209 Table 43 Alignment with Umvoti Local Municipality SDF ...... 210 Table 44 Alignment with Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality SDF ...... 211 Table 45 Alignment with Alfred Duma Local Municipality SDF ...... 212 Table 46 Alignment with Endumeni Local Municipality SDF ...... 213 Table 47 Alignment with Nquthu Local Municipality SDF ...... 214 Table 48 Alignment with Nkandla Local Municipality SDF...... 214 Table 49 Capital Investment Framework ...... 217
Figures
Figure 1 Link between SDF, IDP and Budget ...... 5 Figure 2 KZN PGDS Strategic Framework ...... 37
vii | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Figure 3 Spatial Principles ...... 38 Figure 4 PGDS Principles ...... 116 Figure 5 Urban Edge Concept ...... 155 Figure 6 Proposed Development of Cwaka Node ...... 193
Maps
Map 1 Locality ...... 6 Map 2 District Regional Locality...... 9 Map 3 KZN SDF ...... 23 Map 4 Natural Environment – Topography...... 47 Map 5 Natural Environment – Slope Analysis ...... 48 Map 6 Natural Environment – Geological Map ...... 49 Map 7 Soil and Terrain ...... 51 Map 8 Natural Environment – Water Catchment ...... 53 Map 9 Mean Annual Precipitation ...... 56 Map 10 Evaporation ...... 57 Map 11 Areas of Conservation ...... 60 Map 12 Open Space and Conservation ...... 61 Map 13 Vegetation ...... 65 Map 14 Acocks Veld Types ...... 66 Map 15 Land Ownership ...... 68 Map 16 Human Environment – Population Density ...... 74 Map 17 Human Environment – Human Footprint ...... 76 Map 18 Composite Map – Human Environment ...... 77 Map 19 Infrastructure – Electricity ...... 79 Map 20 Transportation ...... 82 Map 21 Water Infrastructure ...... 85 Map 22 Sanitation Access ...... 87 Map 23 Social facilities ...... 91 Map 24 Access to health facilities ...... 93 Map 25 Access to Primary Schools ...... 94 Map 26 Access to Secondary Schools (TBC)...... 95 Map 27 Social Facilities ...... 95 Map 28 Access to Police Stations...... 96
viii | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 29 Settlement Patterns (TBC) ...... 100 Map 30 Dependency Ratio ...... 103 Map 31 Social Needs ...... 105 Map 32 Agriculture Potential ...... 110 Map 33 Grazing Capacity ...... 111 Map 34 Provincial SDF ...... 115 Map 35 Tugela Ferry Urban Edge ...... 166 Map 36 Pomeroy Urban Edge ...... 167 Map 37 Msinga nodes & Corridors ...... 183 Map 38 Primary Node, Tugela Ferry ...... 185 Map 39 Tugela Ferry Development Framework ...... 186 Map 40 Pomeroy Road Network ...... 188 Map 41 Pomeroy Urban Edge ...... 189 Map 42 Cwaka development Edge ...... 192 Map 43 Cwaka Masterplan ...... 192 Map 44 Secondary Node, Keate’s Drift ...... 196 Map 45 Tertiary Node, Msinga Top ...... 198 Map 46 Tertiary Node, Nhlalakale ...... 199 Map 47 Tertiary Node, Mfenebude ...... 200 Map 48 Tertiary Node, Masebeko ...... 201 Map 49 Tertiary Node, Rorke’s Drift ...... 202 Map 50 Tertiary Node, Gunjana ...... 203 Map 51 Composite SDF Map ...... 205 Map 52 Umzinyathi District Municipality SDF ...... 209 Map 53 Umvoti Local Municipality SDF ...... 210 Map 54 Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality SDF...... 211 Map 55 Msinga – Alfred Duma Linkage ...... 212 Map 56 Endumeni Local Municipality SDF ...... 213
ix | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
SECTION A: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 INTRODUCTION The Spatial Development Framework (SDF) provides strategic guidance for the spatial restructuring of the Msinga municipal area. It indicates where certain types of developments should or could take place, how these areas relate to other areas, and what development standards should apply. The aim of this review of the municipality’s Spatial Development Framework is to: Ensure alignment of municipal IDP and related projects with the spatial reality of the study area. Ensure compliance with SPLUMA requirements Ensure alignment with the Provincial Growth and Development Strategy Ensure alignment with the District Growth and Development Plan Give direction and take into account the need for and compatibility of land uses; Confirm the Settlement Edge in line with COGTA’s Guidelines
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of the Spatial Development Framework as a land use management tool is to plan, direct and control development but it does not provide land use rights. It forms part of the existing land use management process of the municipality and provides the necessary policies at local level in order to ensure the application of the development principles of sustainability, integration, equality, efficiency and fair and good governance in order to create quality of living, investors’ confidence and security of tenure. The purpose of this Status Quo Report is to ensure that all internal and external factors that may have an influence on the spatial development of the municipality are taken into consideration. The municipal SDF should achieve the following: Align and compliment the Provincial Spatial vision Provide the long term spatial strategy and vision Provide the spatial logic to the IDP
1 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Guide municipal planning and land use decisions Cross-sectoral focus (housing ecological, economic, transport, infrastructure etc.)
1.3 WHAT IS A SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK SDFs are not rigid or prescriptive plans that predetermine or try to deal with all eventualities. They should, however, contain sufficient clarity and direction to provide guidance to land use management decisions while still allowing some flexibility and discretion. What is important is for the SDF to distinguish between critical non-negotiables and fixes, and what can be left to more detailed studies. SDFs should be based on normative principles including performance principles that form the basis of monitoring and evaluation of impacts.
At every level of government there is the need to have long-term frameworks, five-year plans, and annual plans to achieve national vision set forth by the constitution.
The spatial management of growth in urban and rural environments due to rapid urbanization rates and the subsequent impact on resources was previously done through the Guide Plans and Structure plans. These took the form of rather inflexible master plans which were underpinned by the principles of discrimination and separate development. The new democratic government, post 1994, adopted a new system of spatial planning described in principle in the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) and Municipal Systems Act (MSA). This system had two components to it. The first is an indicative plan or Spatial Development Framework (SDF) that is intended to show desired patterns of land use, directions for future growth, indicate the alignment of Settlement Edges, and depict special development areas. The impact of SDFs was limited to providing policy to guide and informing land development and management. They did not change or confer real rights on land. The second component was the Land Use Management System (LUMS). This is similar to a town planning or zoning scheme. In many instances where they haven’t been replaced or repealed these still take the place of LUMS. In contrast to SDF’s LUMS have a binding effect on the development rights attributed to land and confer real rights on properties. Because development in Municipalities is dynamic and responds to changing socio- economic and environmental circumstances, it is impossible to predict the exact requirements of development rights in every instance; therefore, LUMS may be amended from time to time to take into account these changing circumstances. This is normally achieved through the processing of rezoning, subdivisions and removal of title deed restrictions applications. It is in these instances
2 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 where SDF’s play an important role in guiding appropriate future change and helping to guide motivations as to the need and desirability, or not, of proposed land use changes.
At its fundamental core spatial planning deals with the art and science of place-shaping at different scales. It aims to:
Enable a vision for the future of regions and places that is based on evidence, local distinctiveness and community derived objectives; Translate this vision into a set of policies, priorities, programmes and land allocations together with the public sector resources to deliver them; Create a framework for private investment and regeneration that promotes economic, environmental and social well-being for a specific region or area; and Coordinate and deliver the public sector components of this vision with other agencies and processes in order to ensure for collaborative / coordinated / integrated implementation.
1.4 LEGAL AND POLICY IMPERATIVES Within the limitations of a SDF as laid down by the Local Government Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act 32 of 2000) i.e. that it should be a guiding and informing document and does not confer real rights on land, it is intended that the SDF should be a binding document endorsed by Municipal Council and approved by the Provincial Administration as part of the Municipality’s IDP. Without this endorsement it will be difficult for the recommendations to have any meaningful impact on future development patterns and determination of capital investment in the area. The essential elements, which should be included into a local spatial development framework, are guided by a legal framework provided in terms of existing legislation, including the Constitution of South Africa, Governmental policies including the White Paper on Local Government, and Local Governmental Acts, including the Municipal Structures Act and Municipal Systems Act, determining roles and responsibilities of the municipal sphere of Government.
Section 8 (2) of SPLUMA provide further clarity on the scope and focus of spatial planning, stipulating that SDFs must:
a) reflect the national policy, national policy priorities and programmes relating to land use management and land development;
3 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
b) promote social inclusion, spatial equity, desirable settlement patterns, rural revitalisation, urban regeneration and sustainable development; c) ensure that land development and land use management processes, including applications, procedures and timeframes are efficient and effective; d) include— (i) a report on and an analysis of existing land use patterns; (ii) a framework for desired land use patterns; (iii) existing and future land use plans, programmes and projects relative to key sectors of the economy; and (iv) mechanisms for identifying strategically located vacant or under-utilised land and for providing access to and the use of such land; e) standardise the symbology of all maps and diagrams at an appropriate scale; f) differentiate between geographic areas, types of land use and development needs; and g) provide for the effective monitoring and evaluation of compliance with and enforcement of this Act.
Together with the development principle set out in Chapter 2 of SPLUMA, these norms and standards aims to ensure that SDFs at the various scales will conform to a unified set of criterion in order to create consistency in focus at all scales. This in turn has informed the specification of the content and themes that SDFs should focus on
The influence of the legislative and policy environment on the SDF will be discussed in more detail in chapter 2 of this document.
1.5 RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER PLANS The SDF links the development objectives taken from the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and the Budget of the particular municipality. Therefore, the SDF becomes the spatial presentation of the IDP objectives that guide projects funded through the budget of the local municipality (Public Capital Investment Strategy). This link between the SDF, IDP and Budget is shown in the figure 1 below:
4 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Figure 1 Link between SDF, IDP and Budget
1.6 DEFINING THE STUDY AREA The Terms of Reference for the project indicates that the whole of KZN244 better known as Msinga Local Municipality will form the study area with certain specific focus points as indicated in paragraph 1.1 of this document. Located in the Umzinyathi District Municipality in KwaZulu-Natal, Msinga Local Municipality comprises a rural-based subsistence economy with cultural heritage areas that attract some tourists, but that still need to be substantially developed.
The locality of the Msinga Municipality is illustrated by Map 1: Regional Locality. The municipality is located in the central parts of KwaZulu-Natal, within the Umzinyathi District Municipality, and is bordered by the Nqutu, Endumeni, Umvoti, Mpofana, Umtshezi, Indaka and Nkandla municipalities.
5 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 1 Locality
Msinga Local Municipality, established in 2000, is one of the four (4) category B municipalities comprising the uMzinyathi District Municipality, the municipalities being Endumeni, Nquthu, and Umvoti Local Municipalities.
Msinga Local Municipality is located within the centre of the uMzinyathi District Municipality and is bordered in the North by Endumeni LM, in the east by Nquthu and Nkandla Municipalities, in the south by Umvoti and Mpofana Municipality, in the west by uMtshezi and Indaka Local Municipalities. The municipality covers an area of 2 500km² with its seat situated in Tugela Ferry. Please refer to Map 1 – Regional Locality for a depiction of the above.
Msinga is largely located in deep gorges of the Tugela and Buffalo Rivers, isolated from the immediate surrounding municipal areas. The population dynamics result in a growing rural area and a declining urban area in Msinga, contrary to most other areas in the country. This can be attributed to the fact that the urban areas of Msinga are very small and are unable to provide the normal range of goods and services provided in urban areas although Tugela Ferry seems to grow to a substantial service centre in the municipality’s context.
6 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Msinga is a poverty stricken area with few economic resources and little economic activity. Social services and private households generate 29% of the income for the area.
The area is divided into 18 political wards with 36 Councillors. Msinga Municipality has a total population of approximately 177 577 an increase from 167 274 in 2001 Population Census, a total of 37 723 households.
Owing to its rugged terrain, Msinga’s population is relatively dispersed. Where services exist, they are concentrated along road infrastructure and water sources such as the Tugela River. The municipality is predominantly rural, with 99,1% of the population living in non-urban areas. The small urban town of Pomeroy is home to only 0,9% of the municipality’s population.
Table 1 Municipal Overview Basic figures Basic facts Community Community Stats SA 2001 Stats SA 2011 Survey 2007 Survey 2016 Total poulation 168 025 161 894 177 577 184 494 Total number of Umzinyatihouseholds District 32 505 32 592 37 724 38 370 Municipality 480 411 495 737 510 836 554 882 Age profile 0 - 14 78 619 70 747 77 669 77 339 15 - 64 84 975 82 242 90 234 94 611 65+ 9 701 8 904 9 677 12 544
Source: STATSSA
The area is divided into 18 political wards with 36 Councillors. Msinga comprises six Traditional Authority areas namely, Qamu, Mchunu, Bomvu, Ngome, Mabaso and Mthembu.
7 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 2 Wards and Councillors
In terms of the IDP the municipality faces the following spatial related challenges:
Most of the land is under Ingonyama Trust and the State. No Municipal owned Land Lack of social support services & amenities/facilities Dysfunctional and lack of infrastructure support services Access to basic Infrastructure Sustainable & subsistence Agriculture/farming Environmental sensitive and protected areas.
8 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 2 District Regional Locality
1.7 STRUCTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT This Section of the SDF document represents the Status Quo analysis of Msinga municipality and provides an in depth contextualizing of the municipal area. The factors that may have an impact on the way the municipality develops in future are identified. In the process the assessment focused on the legislative mandate, the natural environment, human environment, physical environment, social resources and economic drivers.
The Status Quo analysis is undertaken as a process to identify the key issues which will needs to be addressed in the implementation framework to be developed. It is thus foreseen that the information in the report will be amended and improved as further role-players engagements continue.
1.8 STUDY OBJECTIVES/ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED The primary objective of the SDF is to propose a model for the spatial development of Msinga Municipality that will ensure the optimal public capital investment and settlement growth. In
9 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 order to promote this objective the priority spatial development issues and concomitant objectives in the following table are identified.
Table 3 Spatial Development
PRIORITY SPATIAL OBJECTIVE DEVELOPMENT ISSUE 1. Spatial Fragmentation To create a well-structured, efficient and sustainable node. To correct historically distorted spatial development patterns Within the settlements themselves, development has occurred in a spatially fragmented way. This fragmented pattern of spatial development is costly to service and maintain, and also imposes significant costs on the residents of the area, making access to services and socio-economic opportunities more difficult. 2. Rapid and Unmanaged To provide adequate land and services for settlement Urbanization areas (existing and new) communities. This issue refers to the fact that the area has, over the last few years, experienced a rapid growth in lower socio-economic settlements within the built areas and, more especially, on the fringes of existing settlements 3. Low density Settlements To create higher density settlements This issue refers to the fact that development within the lower socio-economic settlements has been of a low density, with settlements comprising of large residential sites sprawling over wide areas and consuming valuable land resources. Moreover, when associated with the fragmented spatial pattern of development noted above, the phenomenon of settlement sprawl imposes additional costs in the provision of effective services, and reduces the likelihood of such services being rendered in a way that is affordable both to the provider and the consumer. 4. Uncoordinated Spatial To achieve environmentally sustainable and spatially Development coordinated sectoral practices. Here the issue is related to the fact that many decisions that result in spatial development or have an impact on existing development are taken by a
10 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
range of different authorities, often without consulting each other. This results in developments that are not planned in an integrated manner and gives rise to problems, ranging from environmental impacts that are unacceptable, to developments that are not serviceable within a short period of time.
1.9 MUNICIPAL SPATIAL STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMANTS The SDF need to provide guidance to the future structure of development of Msinga Municipality. In order to establish where development should be promoted and where it should be discouraged suitable land should be identified in the Urban, Rural and Wilderness model. In order to establish the three different areas the following aspects were taken into consideration: Urbanised areas, Slopes, Land Potential from the 2012 Department of Agriculture dataset, Environmental sensitive areas, wetlands and watercourses. The outcome of the combined overlay of these factors indicated the land that cannot be developed and need be protected, land that can be used for agricultural production and land where urban expansion and densification can be promoted.
11 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
SECTION B: STATUS QUO
CHAPTER 2: STATUS QUO OF MSINGA MUNICIPALITY
2.1 LEGISLATIVE ENVIRONMENT The SDF is guided by, amongst others, the following Legislation and Policies at a National and Provincial Level:
South African Constitution and Principles of Sustainable Development The Municipal System Act (MSA) The National Environment Management Act (NEMA) Social Housing Act (SHA) The KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Act (1997) The Provincial Growth and Development Strategy (PGDS) Provincial Spatial Economic Development Strategy (PSEDS) Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA)
2.1.1 SOUTH AFRICAN CONSTITUTION AND PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (NO. 108 OF 1196) Chapter 7 of the Constitution deals with local government and section 152 deals with the objectives of local government. It indicates that these objectives are:
To provide democratic and accountable government for local communities; To ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner; To promote social and economic development; To promote a safe and healthy environment; and To encourage the involvement of communities and community organizations in the matters of local government.
2.1.2 MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS ACT (NO. 32 OF 2000) Section 23 (1) of the Act indicates that a municipality must undertake developmentally- orientated planning and Section 24 (1) indicates that planning undertaken by the municipality must be aligned with and compliment plans of other municipalities and organs of state.
12 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Section 26 of the Act indicates that a core component of an IDP is a SDF which must include the provision of basic guidelines for a land use management system for the municipality.
Section 35 of the Act also indicates that a SDF contained in an IDP prevails over a plan as identified in Section 1 of the Physical Planning Act (No. 125 of 1991).
Regulation GN796 OF 2001 promulgated in terms of the Act outline the following requirements for a SDF:
“A spatial development framework reflected in a municipality’s integrated development plan must: a) give effect to the principles contained in Chapter 1 of the Development Facilitation Act, 1995 (Act 67 of 1995); b) set out objectives that reflect the desired spatial form of the municipality; c) contain strategies and policies regarding the manner in which to achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph (b), which strategies and policies must- i) indicate desired patterns of land use within the municipality; ii) address the spatial reconstruction of the municipality; and iii) Provide strategic guidance in respect of the location and nature of development within the municipality. d) Set out basic guidelines for a land use management system in the municipality; e) Set out a capital investment framework for the municipality’s development programmes; f) Contain a strategic assessment of the environmental impact of the spatial development framework; g) Identify programmes and projects for the development of land within the municipality; h) Be aligned with the spatial development frameworks reflected in the integrated development plans of neighbouring municipalities; and i) provide a visual representation of the desired spatial form of the municipality, which representation- i) must indicate where public and private land development and investment should take place; ii) must indicate desired or undesired utilization of space in a particular area; iii) may delineate the urban edge; iv) must identify areas where strategic intervention is required; and v) Must indicate areas where priority spending is require.
13 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
These legislative requirements provide a clear framework for the development of the Msinga SDF and provide a legislative checklist for its contents.
2.1.3 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT (NO. 107 OF 1998) The National Environmental Management Act (No. 27 of 1998) was drawn up to provide for co- operative, environmental governance by establishing principles for decision-making on matters affecting the environment, institutions that will promote co-operative governance and procedures for co-coordinating environmental functions exercised by organs of state; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
Section 28 of the Act that falls within Chapter 7 – Compliance, Enforcement and Protection can be related to future developments. Part 1 of the Chapter focuses on environmental hazards and Section 28 relates to the duty care and redemption of environmental damage. Section 28 provides that every person who causes, has caused, or may cause, significant pollution or degradation of the environment, must take reasonable measures to prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or reoccurring or, insofar as such harm to the environment is authorized by law or cannot reasonably be avoided or stopped, to minimize and rectify such pollution or degradation of the environment.
2.1.4 SOCIAL HOUSING ACT (NO.16 OF 2008) The Social Housing Act of 2008 was drawn up to establish and promote a sustainable social housing environment; to define the functions of national, provincial and local governments in respect of social housing; to provide for the establishment of the Social Housing Regulatory Authority in order to regulate all social housing institutions obtaining or having obtained public funds; to allow for undertaking of approved projects by other delivery agents with the benefit of public money; to give statutory recognition to social housing institutions; and to provide for matters connected therewith. In giving priority to the needs of low and medium income households in respect of social housing development, the national, provincial and local spheres of government and social housing institutions must- a) Ensure their respective housing programmes are responsive to local housing demands, and special priority must be given to the needs of woman, children, child-headed households, person with disabilities and the elderly;
14 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 b) Support the economic development of low to medium income communities by providing housing close to jobs, markets and transport and by stimulating job opportunities to emerging entrepreneurs in the housing services and construction industries; c) Afford residents the necessary dignity and privacy by providing the residents with a clean, safety and healthy environment; d) Not discriminate against residents on any of the grounds set out in section 9 of the constitution, including individuals affected by HIV and AIDS; e) Consult with interested individuals, communities and financial institutions in all phases of social housing development; f) Ensure the sustainable and viable growth of affordable social housing as an objective of housing policy; g) Facilitate the involvement of residents and key stakeholders through consultation, information sharing, education, training and skills transfer, thereby empowering residents; h) Ensure secure tenure for residents in social housing institutions, on the basis of the general provisions governing the relationship between tenants and landlords as set out in the rental housing act, 1999 (Act No. 50 of 1999), and between primary housing co-operatives and its members as set out in the co-operatives Act. 2005 (Act No.14 of 2005); i) Promote:
i. an environment which is conducive to the realization of the roles, responsibilities and obligations by all role-players entering the social housing market;
ii. training opportunities for stakeholders and interested parties who wish to enter the social the social housing market;
iii. the establishment, development and maintenance of socially and economically viable communities to ensure the elimination and prevention of slums and slums conditions;
iv. social, physical and economic integration of housing development into existing urban or town areas through the creation of quality living environments
v. medium to higher density in respect of social housing development to ensure the economical utilization of land and services;
vi. the provision of social, community and recreational facilities close to social housing development ;
15 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
vii. the expression of cultural identity and diversity in social housing development;
viii. the suitable location of social housing stock in respect of employment opportunities;
ix. the conversion of upgrading of suitable residential and non-residential buildings for social housing use;
x. incentives to social housing institutions and other delivery agents to enter the social housing market;
xi. an understanding and awareness of social housing processes;
xii. transparency, accountability and efficiency in the administration and management of social housing stock;
xiii. best practices and minimum norms and standards in relation to the delivery and management of social housing stock;
xiv. the provision of institutional capacity to support social housing initiatives;
xv. the creation of sustainable, viable and independent housing institutions responsible for providing, developing, holding or managing social housing stock and;
xvi. the use of public funds in a manner that stimulates or facilitates private sector investment and participation in the social housing sector.
2.1.5 THE KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE ACT (NO 4 OF 2008) Apart from provisions in the act that allow for the proclamation and listing of individual buildings, the act also allows for the protection of groups of buildings forming a conservation area and it provides for the general protection of buildings that are over sixty years in age.
Section 34 (1) of the act states that “No person may alter or demolish any structure or part of a structure which is older than 60 years without a permit issued by the relevant provincial heritage resources authority”.
Under Section 26 (1) the Act deals with demolitions, additions and alterations. Section 19 deals with Heritage Landmarks, Section 20 with Provincial Landmarks. Section 22 deals with the opening of a Heritage Register, and Section 23 deals with Heritage Conservancies.
Section 51 of the act allows for a fine and imprisonment for a period not exceeding two years or both such imprisonment and fine of anyone contravening Section 31 (1) of the Act.
16 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
2.1.6 SPLUMA (NO 16 OF 2013) The Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (No 16 of 2013) seek to provide a framework for spatial planning and land use management. This framework presents the monitoring, coordination, review of the spatial planning and land use management system and efficient spatial planning. The Act allows for: 1. Policies, principals, norms and standards for development. 2. Address past spatial and regulatory imbalances 3. To promote greater consistency and uniformity in the application procedures and decision making by authorities responsible for land use decisions and development applications 4. To provide for the facilitation and enforcement of land use and development measures 5. To supply for the inclusive, developmental, equitable and efficient spatial planning at the different spheres of the Government. All the land use and development measures will by indicated in the SDF. Chapter 4 Part A of SPLUMA sets out the focus and general requirements that must guide the preparation and compilation of SDF products at the various scales. Chapter 4 is divided into six parts of which Part A provides an extensive introduction to the purpose and role of SDFs and sets out the preparation requirements and expectations of the SDF process. Section 12 (1) sets out general provisions which are applicable to the preparation of all scales of SDFs. These provisions require that all SDFs must: a) interpret and represent the spatial development vision of the responsible sphere of government and competent authority; b) be informed by a long-term spatial development vision; c) represent the integration and trade-off of all relevant sector policies and plans; d) guide planning and development decisions across all sectors of government; e) guide a provincial department or municipality in taking any decision or exercising any discretion in terms of this Act or any other law relating to 25 spatial planning and land use management systems; f) contribute to a coherent, planned approach to spatial development in the national, provincial and municipal spheres; g) provide clear and accessible information to the public and private sector and provide direction for investment purposes;
17 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 h) include previously disadvantaged areas, areas under traditional leadership, rural areas, informal settlements, slums and land holdings of state-owned enterprises and government agencies and address their inclusion and integration into the spatial, economic, social and environmental objectives of the relevant sphere; i) address historical spatial imbalances in development; j) identify the long-term risks of particular spatial patterns of growth and development and the policies and strategies necessary to mitigate those risks; k) provide direction for strategic developments, infrastructure investment, promote efficient, sustainable and planned investments by all sectors and indicate priority areas for investment in land development; l) promote a rational and predictable land development environment to create trust and stimulate investment; m) take cognizance of any environmental management instrument adopted by the relevant environmental management authority; n) give effect to national legislation and policies on mineral resources and sustainable utilisation and protection of agricultural resources; and o) consider and, where necessary, incorporate the outcomes of substantial public engagement, including direct participation in the process through public meetings, public exhibitions, public debates and discourses in the media and any other forum or mechanisms that promote such direct involvement.
Section 12 (2) stipulates that: a) The national government, a provincial government and a municipality must participate in the spatial planning and land use management processes that impact on each other to ensure that the plans and programmes are coordinated, consistent and in harmony with each other. b) A spatial development framework adopted in terms of this Act must guide and inform the exercise of any discretion or of any decision taken in terms of this Act or any other law relating to land use and development of land by that sphere of government.
The five founding principles as set out in Section 7 (a) to (e) of SPLUMA that apply throughout the country and to the all SDFs covered in these Guidelines are:
18 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
1. Spatial Justice: past spatial and other development imbalances should be redressed through improved access to and use of land by disadvantaged communities and persons. 2. Spatial Sustainability: Relates to the need to promote spatial planning and land use management and land development systems that are based on and promote the principles of socioeconomic and environmentally sustainable development in South Africa. 3. Spatial Efficiency: The spatial efficiency pillar places significant importance on the optimization of existing resources and the accompanying infrastructure, including the oiling of development application procedures in order to promote growth and employment. 4. Spatial Resilience: Relates to mitigation, adaptability and innovations to secure communities from spatial dimensions of socio-economic and environmental (climate change) shocks. 5. Good Administration: The spatial governance principle is the fulcrum of this framework largely because implementation of the spatial planning vision and objectives is not only highly dependent upon a strong coordinating role of central government, but is also predicated upon good governance mechanisms, incorporating meaningful consultations and coordination with a view to achieving the desired outcomes across the various planning spheres and domains.
Section 21 of SPLUMA prescribes the content of a municipal SDF. a. Give effect to the development principles and applicable norms and standards set out in Chapter 2; b. Include a written and spatial representation of a five-year spatial development plan for the spatial form of the municipality; c. Include a longer term spatial development vision statement for the municipal area which indicated a desired spatial growth and development pattern for the next 10 – 20 years; d. Identify current and future significant structuring and restructuring elements of the spatial form of the municipality, including development corridors, activity spines and economic nodes where public and private investment will be prioritised and facilitated; e. include population growth estimated for the next five years; f. include estimates of the demand for housing units across different economic categories and the planned location and density of future housing developments;
19 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 g. include estimates of economic activity and employments trends and locations in the municipal area for the next five years; h. identify, quantify and provide location requirements of engineering infrastructure and services provision for existing and future development need for the next five years; i. identify designation of areas in the municipality where a national and provincial inclusionary housing policy may be applicable; j. include a strategic assessment of the environmental pressures and opportunities within the municipal area, including the spatial location of environmental sensitivities, high potential agricultural land and coastal access strips, where applicable; k. identify the designation of areas in the municipality where incremental upgrading approaches to development and regulation will be applicable; l. identify the designation of areas in which – i. More detailed local plans must be developed; ii. Shortened land use development procedures may be applicable and land use schemes may be so amended; m. Provide the spatial expression of the coordination, alignment and integration of sectoral policies of all municipal departments; n. Determine a capital expenditure framework for the municipality’s development programmes, depicted spatially; o. Determine the purpose, desired impact and structure of the land use management scheme to apply in that municipal area; p. Include an implementation plan comprising of – i. Sectoral requirement, including budgets and resources for implementation, ii. Necessary amendment to a land use scheme, iii. Specification of institutional arrangements necessary for implementation, iv. Specification of implementation targets, including dates and monitoring indicators, and v. Specification, where necessary, of any arrangements for partnerships in the implementation process.
20 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
2.2 POLICY ENVIRONMENT
2.2.1 PROVINCIAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Cabinet adopted PGDS Review Framework at the February 2011 Cabinet Lekgotla. The Draft 2030 Vision and PGDS adopted by Cabinet on 31 August 2011. The purpose of the PGDS is to: focus on a clear vision for the Province; promote vertical, horizontal and spatial alignment; mobilise all development partners to achieve predetermined development objectives and targets; and Build on the strengths and opportunities of the Province, while addressing weaknesses and threats. The provincial vision as contained in the PGDS: KwaZulu-Natal, a prosperous Province with a healthy, secure and skilled population, acting as a gateway to Africa and the World.
The Strategic Goals for the province as indicated in the document: 1. Job Creation 2. Human Resource development 3. Human and Community Development 4. Strategic Infrastructure 5. Response to Climate change 6. Governance and policy 7. Spatial Equity
The implementation of Vision and Strategic Goals aspire to lead to: Position the Province as a Gateway to South Africa and Africa Human & Natural Resources Safe, Healthy & Sustainable Living Environments Healthy Educated Communities Employable people are employed Basic Services More equitable Society World Class Infrastructure
21 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Investors’ Confidence Skilled Labour Force Focus on People centeredness. Strong & Decisive Leadership Foster Social Compacts
The PGDS identified a hierarchy of nodes for the province defined as follows:
Table 4 Hierarchy of Nodes
Primary Node Only eThekwini is classified as a Primary Node within the Provincial Context as an urban centre with very high existing economic growth and the potential for expansion thereof. Provides service to the national and provincial economy.
Secondary Nodes Richards Bay/ Empangeni, Msunduzi, Newcastle and Port Shepstone has been identified as provincial Secondary Nodes and thus urban centres with good existing economic development and the potential for growth and services to the regional economy.
Tertiary Nodes These nodes are mainly centres which should provide service to the sub- regional economy and community needs and is represented by the following towns such as Pongola, Vryheid, Ulundi, Dundee, Ladysmith, Estcourt, Howick, KwaDukuza, Ixopo, Scottburgh, Hibberdene, Kokstad, Margate.
Quaternary Nodes These nodes are mainly centres which should provide service to the local economy and community needs and is represented by 31 towns, such as but not limited to: Nongoma, Nkandla, Eshowe, Bergville, Paulpietersburg, Msinga, Mkhuze etc.
Rural Service Centres The proposed rural service centres are envisaged to serves as the lowest level of provincial nodes and could typically be established around existing traditional administration centres as well as other accessible rural points identified as periodic markets. These will be identified in consultation with the district municipalities and should serve as first access to basic services within rural areas.
The information used to compile a SDF for the province was based on environmental sensitivity, social need, economic potential and accessibility. The use of these informants leads to the compilation of a spatial representation of the provincial SDF.
22 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 3 KZN SDF
23 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The provincial SDF identified the following intervention areas on which the Integrated Provincial Infrastructure Plan will be based: Social Investment areas Priority Conservation areas Economic Support areas Economic value adding areas Biodiversity Priority areas Agricultural investment areas Mandated Service Delivery It is the intention that District and Local municipalities align their respective SDF’s with the provincial plan to structured and sensible development that work towards a common goal and ensure that development on local level does not take place in an ad hoc silo on its own.
In terms of the identified intervention areas Msinga municipality is situated in a mandated service delivery area otherwise known as an area of high social need. In terms of the provincial SDF the following broad intended land use and interventions will be applicable. The highest ranges of combined social need when considering the population density, dependency ratio as the provincial index of multiple deprivations is illustrated by this category of high social need. These area broadly the areas where the most intensive social interventions area required and this category is further overlaid above all other categories to provide a spatial reference to the types of interventions which might be pursued towards addressing the concentrated social need within these areas. As example where high social need is identified within an area earmarked as a conservation corridor, this firstly provides a reference to the fact that social conditions of communities will need to be addressed if any conservation is to be promoted within such areas. Further it suggests that the effective utilisation of the high biodiversity within such areas might be harnessed towards addressing social need through example conservation tourism.
24 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
2.2.2 NATIONAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK The Policy Co-ordination and Advisory Services (PCAS) in the Presidency produced a National Spatial Development Perspective (NSDP) that was endorsed by Cabinet in March 2003. The National Spatial Development Perspective (NSDP) guides government in implementing its programmes. The NSDP is built on four basic principles. These are: Principle 1: Rapid economic growth that is sustained and inclusive is a pre-requisite for the achievement of poverty alleviation Principle 2: Government spending on fixed investment should be focused on localities of economic growth and / or economic potential in order to gear up private sector investment, stimulate sustainable economic activities and create long-term employment opportunities Principle 3: Where low economic potential exists investments should be directed at projects and programmes to address poverty and the provision of basic services in order to address past and current social inequalities Principle 4: In order to overcome the spatial distortions of Apartheid, future settlement and economic development opportunities should be channelled into activity corridors and nodes that are adjacent to or link the main growth centres in order for them to become regional gateways to the global economy.
The National Spatial Development Vision reads as follows: “South Africa will become a Nation in which investment in infrastructure and development programmes support Government growth and development objectives: By focusing economic growth and employment creation in areas where this is most effective and sustainable By supporting restructuring, where feasible, to ensure greater competitiveness By fostering development on the basis of local potential By ensuring that development institutions are able to provide basic needs throughout the country.” The NSDP identifies Core Regions and Spatial Economic Linkages outside the country’s three main Metropolitan Areas. The clustering of economic activities in areas with high potential for economic development provides regional competitive advantages. At the same time, where feasible, economic benefits
25 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 from those growth sectors which are not dependant on clustering should be spread to those parts of the municipality where relatively low economic potential exists.
2.2.3 NEW GROWTH PATH The New Growth Path starts by identifying where employment creation is possible, both within economic sectors as conventionally defined and in cross-cutting activities. It then analyses the policies and institutional developments required to take advantage of these opportunities. In essence, the aim is to target our limited capital and capacity at activities that maximize the creation of decent work opportunities. To that end, we must use both macro and micro economic policies to create a favourable overall environment and to support more labor-absorbing activities. The main indicators of success will be jobs (the number and quality of jobs created), growth (the rate, labour intensity and composition of economic growth), equity (lower income inequality and poverty) and environmental outcomes. To achieve profound changes in the structure of savings, investment and production, the government must steadily and consistently pursue key policies and programmes over at least a decade. Moreover, the state must coordinate its efforts around core priorities rather than dispersing them across numerous efforts, however worthwhile, that do not contribute to a sustained expansion in economic opportunities for our people. These are the core characteristics of a developmental state. The requisite policy stability and coherence will be supported by effective social dialogue that helps establish a broad consensus on long-run policy goals and a vision for the country, and facilitates the necessary trade-offs and sacrifices by ensuring a visibly fair distribution of the benefits from growth. Engagement with stakeholder representatives on policy, planning and implementation at national, sectoral and local levels is central to achieving coherent and effective strategies that are realized without endless debates and delays. That, in turn, means government must both strengthen its own capacity for engagement and leadership, and re-design delivery systems to include stakeholders meaningfully. Long-term structural change also requires phasing to establish the preconditions for success over time. In the case of employment, for instance, the steps that the state can take vary over time: 1. In the very short run, the state can accelerate employment creation primarily through direct employment schemes, targeted subsidies and/or a more expansionary macroeconomic package.
26 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
2. Over the short to medium term, it can support labour-absorbing activities, especially in the agricultural value chain, light manufacturing and services, to generate large scale employment. Government can provide effective inducements to private investment in targeted sectors principally by prioritizing labour-absorbing activities for the provision of appropriate and cost-effective infrastructure, regulatory interventions that effectively address market and state failures, measures to improve skills systems, and in some cases subsidies to production and innovation. 3. In the longer run, as full employment is achieved, the state must increasingly support knowledge- and capital-intensive sectors in order to remain competitive. This inherent phasing means that in the medium term the state must focus on facilitating growth in sectors able to create employment on a large scale. But it should not neglect more advanced industries that are crucial for sustained long-run growth. Government must encourage stronger investment by the private and public sectors to grow employment-creating activities rapidly while maintaining and incrementally improving South Africa’s core strengths in sectors such as capital equipment for construction and mining, metallurgy, heavy chemicals, pharmaceuticals, software, green technologies and biotechnology. These industries build on our strong resource base and our advanced skills and capacity in some economic sectors. The connection between economic and social measures needs to be further strengthened. In addition to their important social goals, basic and secondary education plays a critical role in long- run equality, access to employment and competitiveness. So does investment in health, including effective measures to address HIV/AIDS. Government has prioritized health and education investment and delivery. Apartheid left South Africa with an extraordinary spatial divergence between the economic centres of the country, linked to the metro areas, and the densely settled rural areas of the former Bantustans, which have very limited economic resources and investments. Within metros, too, there are vast disparities and spatial challenges, with townships located far from most employment opportunities. A core task for the New Growth Path is to break with this legacy through a coherent approach to spatial development backed by strong investment in infrastructure and the identification of viable and sustainable opportunities for historically disadvantaged regions. Rural development will necessarily depend largely on links to the main urban areas.
27 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
It is acknowledged that while urbanization will continue, a significant share of the population will remain in rural areas, engaged in the rural economy. Enhancing rural employment requires finalization of a spatial perspective that sets out the opportunities available and the choices that we must make in order to lay the basis for aligning government spending, infrastructure and housing investment and economic development initiatives. In addition, government must do more to support small-scale agriculture, including through community food gardens and marketing and service coops as well as accessible banking facilities.
2.2.4 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2030 The National Development Plan aims to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality by 2030. South Africa can realize these goals by drawing on the energies of its people, growing an inclusive economy, building capabilities, enhancing the capacity of the state, and promoting leadership and partnerships throughout society. The National Planning Commission’s Diagnostic Report, released in June 2011, set out South Africa’s achievements and shortcomings since 1994. It identified a failure to implement policies and an absence of broad partnerships as the main reasons for slow progress, and set out nine primary challenges: 1. Too few people work 2. The quality of school education for black people is poor 3. Infrastructure is poorly located, inadequate and under-maintained 4. Spatial divides hobble inclusive development 5. The economy is unsustainably resource intensive 6. The public health system cannot meet demand or sustain quality 7. Public services are uneven and often of poor quality 8. Corruption levels are high 9. South Africa remains a divided society. South Africans from all walks of life welcomed the diagnostic as a frank, constructive assessment. This led to the development of the draft national plan, released in November 2011. Building on the diagnostic, the plan added four thematic areas: rural economy, social protection, regional and world affairs, and community safety. The plan focuses on the critical capabilities needed to transform the economy and society. Achieving these capabilities is not automatic, nor will they emerge if the country continues on its
28 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 present trajectory. Rising levels of frustration and impatience suggest that time is of the essence: failure to act will threaten democratic gains. In particular, South Africa must find ways to urgently reduce alarming levels of youth unemployment and to provide young people with broader opportunities. Progress over the next two decades means doing things differently. Given the complexity of national development, the plan sets out six interlinked priorities: Uniting all South Africans around a common programme to achieve prosperity and equity. Promoting active citizenry to strengthen development, democracy and accountability. Bringing about faster economic growth, higher investment and greater labour absorption. Focusing on key capabilities of people and the state. Building a capable and developmental state. Encouraging strong leadership throughout society to work together to solve problems. While the achievement of the objectives of the National Development Plan requires progress on a broad front, three priorities stand out: Raising employment through faster economic growth Improving the quality of education, skills development and innovation Building the capability of the state to play a developmental, transformative role. A sustainable increase in employment will require a faster-growing economy and the removal of structural impediments, such as poor-quality education or spatial settlement patterns that exclude the majority. These are essential to achieving higher rates of investment and competitiveness, and expanding production and exports. Business, labour, communities and government will need to work together to achieve faster economic growth. Social cohesion needs to anchor the strategy. If South Africa registers progress in deracialising ownership and control of the economy without reducing poverty and inequality, transformation will be superficial. Similarly, if poverty and inequality are reduced without demonstrably changed ownership patterns, the country’s progress will be turbulent and tenuous. Longer term interventions from the local authority need to take cognizance of the following: Promote mixed housing strategies and more compact urban development to help people access public spaces and facilities, state agencies, and work and business opportunities.
29 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Invest in public transport, which will benefit low-income households by facilitating mobility. For infrastructure that supports human settlements (housing, water, sanitation, roads, parks and so on) the picture is unnecessarily complicated. The planning function is located at local level, the housing function is at provincial level, and the responsibility for water and electricity provision is split between those responsible for bulk services and reticulation. In practice, these arrangements do not work. In general, human settlements are badly planned, with little coordination between those installing water reticulation infrastructure and those responsible for providing bulk infrastructure. Responsibility for housing should shift to the level at which planning is executed: the municipal level. The plan sets out recommendations for effective urban development. Local government faces several related challenges, including poor capacity, weak administrative systems, undue political interference in technical and administrative decision-making, and uneven fiscal capacity. The Commission believes that within the framework of the Constitution, there is more room for the asymmetric allocation of powers and functions and for more diversity in how developmental priorities are implemented. To achieve this, longer-term strategies are needed, including addressing capacity constraints, allowing more experimentation in institutional forms and working collaboratively with national and provincial government. Reshaping South Africa’s cities, towns and rural settlements is a complex, long-term project, requiring major reforms and political will. It is, however, a necessary project given the enormous social, environmental and financial costs imposed by existing spatial divides. The Commission proposes a national focus on spatial transformation across all geographic scales. Policies, plans and instruments are needed to reduce travel distances and costs, especially for poor households. By 2030, a larger proportion of the population should live closer to places of work, and the transport they use to commute should be safe, reliable and energy efficient. This requires: Strong measures to prevent further development of housing in marginal places Increased urban densities to support public transport and reduce sprawl More reliable and affordable public transport and better coordination between various modes of transport Incentives and programmes to shift jobs and investments towards the dense townships on the urban edge Focused partnerships with the private sector to bridge the housing gap market.
30 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Rural areas present particular challenges. Policies are required to bring households in these areas into the mainstream economy. There are rural areas, however, where transport links are good and where densification is taking place in the absence of effective land-use management and urban governance. These require urgent interventions.
2.2.5 THE COMPREHENSIVE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME FRAMEWORK The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) is aimed at being an effective response against poverty and food insecurity by maximizing the use and management of natural resources to create vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities. The strategic objective of the CRDP is therefore to facilitate integrated development and social cohesion through participatory approaches in partnership with all sectors of society. The vision of the CRDP is to create vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities include: contributing to the redistribution of 30% of the country’s agricultural land; improving food security of the rural poor; creation of business opportunities, de-congesting and rehabilitation of over-crowded former homeland areas; and Expanding opportunities for women, youth, people with disabilities and older persons who stay in rural areas. The ultimate vision of creating vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities will be achieved through a three-pronged strategy based on: a coordinated and integrated broad-based agrarian transformation; strategically increasing rural development; and An improved land reform programme. Agrarian transformation is the rapid fundamental change in the relations of land, livestock, cropping and community. It will focus on, but is not limited to, the establishment of rural business initiatives, agro industries, co-operatives, cultural initiatives and vibrant local markets in rural settings, the empowerment of rural people and communities (especially women and youth), and the revitalization of old, and revamping of new economic, social, and information and communication infrastructure, public amenities and facilities in villages and small rural towns. Rural development is about enabling rural people to take control of their destiny, thereby dealing effectively with rural poverty through the optimal use and management of natural resources. It is
31 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 a participatory process through which rural people learn over time, through their own experiences and initiatives, how to adapt their indigenous knowledge to their changing world. Land reform is a national priority and is further entrenched in Section 25 (4) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No.108 of 1996). A three-pronged land reform programme aiming at tenure reform, restitution and land redistribution, was launched in 1994. In relation to the CRDP, the land reform agenda will focus on reviewing the Restitution, Redistribution and Tenure Reform Programmes. In relation to Restitution, the focus will be on expediting the processing of settled claims and the settlement of outstanding claims. In addition, the work of the Land Claims Commissions will be rationalized within the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. The focus of the Redistribution and Tenure Reform Programmes will be to develop less costly alternative models of land redistribution while reviewing legislation and policies that apply to both programmes.
2.2.6 SOCIAL HOUSING POLICY The primary objectives of the Social Housing Programme include: Contributing to the national priority of restructuring South African society in order to address structural, economic, social and spatial dysfunctional ties and imbalances to achieve Government’s vision of an economically empowered, non-racial, and integrated society living in sustainable human settlements. Improving and contributing to the overall functioning of the housing sector and in particular the rental sub-component, as far as social housing is able to contribute to widening the range of housing options available to the poor. The most important elements of urban restructuring include: Spatial Restructuring Spatial restructuring is necessary to address the needs of the urban poor (most black), who are located far away or completely excluded from the economic opportunities. The majority of these people also have limited or inadequate access to housing. Therefore; it is necessary to restructure the town by means of identifying appropriately located land for the provision of social housing, where places work, live, and play can be created. Economic Restructuring Economic restructuring will occur when social housing is used as a tool for economic revitalization of poorly performing cities or towns. Introduction of social housing in economically
32 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 underperforming cities has had a positive impact in a number of cities world-wide. The number of fully completed houses will determine the scale and number of sustainable jobs created during construction. The end result will be an empowered population, which is able to use the building skills to make a living whilst creating sustainable human settlements. Social Restructuring Social housing can be used as a tool to create stable social environments that integrate with town with the rest of the LM. This also means the creation of a “sense of place” where residents have a sense of belonging and feel secured. Social housing can also be used to achieve social integration amongst people of different racial groups and backgrounds. The Guiding Principles for Social Housing include: Promoting urban restructuring through the social, physical, and economic integration of housing development into existing areas. Promoting establishment of well-managed, quality rental housing options for the poor. Responding to local housing demand. Delivering housing for a range of income groups, in such a way as to allow social integration and financial cross subsidisation. Supporting the economic development of low income communities in a number of ways. Fostering the creation of quality living environments for low-income persons. Promoting a safe, harmonious, and socially responsible environment both internal to the project and in the immediate urban environs. Promoting the creation of sustainable and viable projects. Encouraging the involvement of private sector where possible. Facilitating the involvement of residents in the project and/or key stakeholders in the broader environment. Ensuring secure tenure for the residents of projects, on the basis of the general provisions for the relationship between residents and landlords as defined in the Housing Act, 1997 and the Rental Act, 50 of 1999. Supporting mutual acceptance of roles and responsibilities of tenants and social landlords, on the basis of the general provisions for the relationship between residents and landlords as defined in the Rental Act, 50 of 1999, the Co-operatives Act, 91 of 1981c, as well as the Social Housing Act, 16 of 2008.
33 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Facilitation, support and driven by all spheres of government. Ensuring transparency, accountability and efficiency in the administration and management of social housing stock. Promoting the use of public funds in such a manner that stimulates and/or facilitates private sector investment and participation in the social housing sector. Operating within the provisions of the Constitution, 1996, the Public Finance Management Act, 1 of 1999, the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 5 of 2000, and other statutory procurement prescripts.
2.2.7 PROVINCIAL SPATIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (PSEDS) The KwaZulu-Natal Spatial Economic Development Strategy (PSEDS) was formulated in 2007 as a spatial economic assessment of the areas of need and potential within the province. The PSEDS is intended as a guide to service delivery within the cluster to achieve the goals set in ASGI-SA to halve poverty & unemployment by 2014. The PSEDS sets out to: Focus where government directs its investment and development initiatives; capitalize on complementarities and facilitate consistent and focused decision making; bring about strategic coordination, interaction and alignment; The PSEDS recognises that: Social & economic development is never uniformly distributed; apartheid created an unnatural distortion of development and this distortion must be addressed. The PSEDS has been developed in order to achieve the objectives of ASGISA within the framework of the NSDP and the PGDS and aims to achieve the following: Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger; Promotion of gender equality & empowerment of women; Reduction in child mortality; Improvement of maternal health; Combating HIV-AIDS, malaria and other diseases; Ensuring environmental sustainability; Developing a global partnership for development; Sustainable governance and service delivery; Sustainable economic development and job creation; Integrating investment in community infrastructure; Developing human capability;
34 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Developing comprehensive response to HIV-AIDS; Fighting poverty & protecting vulnerable groups in society. The PSEDS prescribed that Msinga can achieve some of its economic and financial needs by focusing on agriculture and tourism industries.
2.2.8 PROVINCIAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY The provincial Government has developed its own Growth and Development Strategy, which is closely aligned to both the Millennium Development Goals and national development goals. The PGDS is essentially a tool through which the provincial government can address the legacies of the apartheid space economy, promote sustainable development and ensure poverty eradication and employment creation.
The Provincial Vision is indicated as: “By 2035 KwaZulu-Natal will be a prosperous Province with a healthy, secure and skilled population, living in dignity and harmony, acting as a gateway to Africa and the World” MISSION STATEMENT
By 2035, the PROVINCE OF KWAZULU-NATAL should have maximized its position as a GATEWAY to South and Southern Africa, as well as its human and natural resources so creating a safe, healthy and sustainable living environment.
Abject poverty, inequality, unemployment and current disease burden should be history, basic services must have reached all its’ people, domestic and foreign investors are attracted by world class infrastructure and a skilled labour force.
The people shall have options on where and how they opt to live, work and play, where the principle of putting people first, living together in dignity and harmony, and where leadership, partnership and prosperity in action has become a normal way of life.
This PGDS provides KwaZulu-Natal with a reasoned strategic framework for accelerated and shared economic growth through catalytic and developmental interventions, within a coherent equitable spatial development architecture, putting people first, particularly the poor and vulnerable, and building sustainable communities, livelihoods and living environments. Concomitant attention is also given to the provision of infrastructure and services, restoring the
35 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 natural resources, public sector leadership, delivery and accountability, ensuring that these changes are responded to with resilience, innovation and adaptability. This will lay the foundations for attracting and instilling confidence from potential investors and developing social compacts that seek to address the inter-connectedness of the Provincial challenges in a holistic, sustainable manner, whilst nurturing a populous that is productive, healthy and socially cohesive.
The purpose of the 2016 KZN PGDS is to:
Be the primary growth and development strategy for KwaZulu-Natal, but now to 2035; Mobilise and synchronise strategic plans and investment priorities in all spheres of government, state owned entities, business, higher education institutions, labour, civil society and all other social partners, in order to achieve the desired growth and development goals, objectives and outcomes; Spatially contextualise and prioritise interventions so as to achieve greater spatial equity; Guide clearly defined institutional arrangements that ensure decisive and effective leadership, robust management, thorough implementation and ongoing inclusive reviews of the growth and development plan; Provide a firm basis for monitoring, evaluation and reporting, as well as a framework for public accountability.
The PGDS identifies the following strategic goals, framework and objectives for the province of KZN:
36 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Figure 2 KZN PGDS Strategic Framework
The following nine spatial principles underscores the general spatial intentions of the PGDS and serves and provincial guiding principles which should ideally be pursued within all levels of spatial planning at district and local level in alignment with the provincial spatial development strategy.
37 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Figure 3 Spatial Principles
2.2.9 STATE OF THE NATION ADDRESS JUNE 2019(SONA) The President highlighted the following issues as part of the 2019 SONA.
Working together, we must undertake the following tasks:
Firstly, we must accelerate inclusive economic growth and create jobs.
Secondly, our history demands that we should improve the education system and develop the skills that we need now and into the future.
Thirdly, we are duty bound to improve the conditions of life for all South Africans, especially the poor
Fourthly, we have no choice but to step up the fight against corruption and state capture.
Fifthly, we need to strengthen the capacity of the state to address the needs of the people.
The potential of agriculture in South Africa for job creation and economic growth still remains largely underdeveloped. This is especially the case in Msinga Local Municipality where the agricultural potential, especially along the Thukela River is largely untapped.
38 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
As part of accelerating land reform, we have identified land parcels owned by the state for redistribution. Strategically located land will be released to address human settlements needs in urban and peri-urban areas. As part of the stimulus package in agriculture, we have invested significantly in comprehensive farmer development support to ensure that restituted and communal land is productively utilised.
In addition to direct jobs, this export industry could generate as many as 2 million more jobs in food and agriculture, construction, transport, retail, and the creative and cultural industries by 2030.
Infrastructure development has been flywheel of the engine of our economy and has yielded tremendous benefits for the country. We must do more. Our infrastructure development has slowed down for a whole number of reasons. We have also realised that our infrastructure provision is too fragmented between the different spheres of government. It does not fully integrate new housing development with economic opportunities and with the building of dams, water pipelines, schools and other amenities. We plan to do things differently, starting with a deeper partnership with our communities in the planning, building and maintenance of infrastructure.
At the centre of all our efforts to achieve higher and more equitable growth, to draw young people into employment and to prepare our country for the digital age, must be the prioritisation of education and the development of skills. With over 700,000 children accessing early childhood education in the last financial year, we have established a firm foundation for a comprehensive ECD programme that is an integral part of the education system. This year, we will migrate responsibility for ECD centres from Social Development to Basic Education, and proceed with the process towards two years of compulsory ECD for all children before they enter grade 1. Another critical priority is to substantially improve reading comprehension in the first years of school. This is essential in equipping children to succeed in education, in work and in life – and it is possibly the single most important factor in overcoming poverty, unemployment and inequality.
We will give effect to our commitment to build human settlements in well-located areas that bring together economic opportunities and all the services and amenities that people need. The Housing Development Agency will construct an additional 500,000 housing units in the next five years, and an amount of R30 billion will be provided to municipalities and provinces to enable
39 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 them to fulfil their respective mandates. However, if we are to effectively address the substantial housing backlog in our country, we need to develop different models of financing for human settlements. It is for this reason that we are establishing a Human Settlements Development Bank that will leverage both public and private sector financing to aid in housing delivery. We will also be expanding the People’s Housing Programme, where households are allocated serviced stands to build their own houses, either individually or through community-led housing cooperatives.
2.2.10 STATE OF THE PROVINCE ADDRESS JUNE 2019 (SOPA) The Premier of KZN provided the following insights in the June 2019 SOPA.
The NDP remains our long-term plan to drastically reduce the scourges of poverty, unemployment, and inequality by 2030. The NDP is an expression of the Freedom Charter and constitutes a strategic framework for the construction of National Democratic Society. In defining it in December 1955, Oliver Tambo said that the Freedom Charter “is the road to a new life…the uniting creed of all the people struggling for democracy and for their rights; the mirror of the future South Africa.”
Consistently, in the NDP we envision the society we are building. During the election campaign the ANC presented its Manifesto to the electorate which is a pledge and programmatic commitment towards building a National Democratic Society. The Manifesto was premised on the NDP as a strategic vision and identified the seven priority areas of our government.
These are:
Economic transformation and job creation Education, skills and health Consolidating the social wage through reliable and quality basic services Spatial integration, human settlements and local government Social cohesion and safe communities A capable, ethical and developmental state A better Africa and World
These priorities will constitute a guiding framework of the 6th Provincial Government as critical pillars towards the attainment of a non-racial, non-sexist, democratic and prosperous society.
40 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
One of the key focus for our government will be to ensure improve provision of basic services such sanitation, water and electricity.
Sanitation
In terms of sanitation we are proud to report that the KZN province has eradicated the bucket system and aim to ensure that all households have decent levels of sanitation and VIP toilets where water reticulation is non-existent.
Thus far thirty four (34) sanitation projects are currently being implemented throughout the Province through Municipal Infrastructure Grant.
Water
In 2019/20, we will continue working with all the 14 Water Service Authorities in the implementation of projects with the aim to improve the provision of water and decent sanitation services to households.
Water is one of the biggest challenges we face as a province. We are battling with meeting the water demands for the growing population. In this regard, we have resolved to embark on a provincially coordinated approach to address the water problem. We have assembled a technical team constituted by experts which will work with all districts in identifying and examining water challenges in each district. Based on scientific findings, we will embark on appropriate interventions per district.
This project will be coordinated by COGTA and the Premier’s Office being hands-on with quarterly reports being presented to the Premier’s Coordinating Forum and MUNIMEC. The MEC for Finance will also present financial allocation that will be reserved for water provision during the Budget Review in October 2019.
We will continue with the implementation of large scale water projects that are planned for Zululand, EThekwini, uMhlathuze and Harry Gwala and over R750m has been committed toward the bulk water projects.
Electricity
41 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The Province has made great strides in addressing electricity backlogs. We still have serious challenges especially in the Umkhanyakude District and in particular Umhlabuyalingana. Our priority will be to address backlogs and in fills using the INEP grant and our own budget as a Province.
Transmission lines will be strengthened through Eskom bulk electricity transition lines programme. Over R15 billion has been targeted for the Province to address network capacity.
Climate Change
The impact of climate change in the province is being felt by everyone as we just experienced severe floods. As a result the Province had to react to deal with the effects of floods and improve on our disaster response measures including establishing effective and functional early warning systems. We will achieve this by fast-tracking the installation of communication and early warning systems at the Provincial Disaster Management Centre.
Therefore, all 11 District Disaster Management Centres will be supported to remain functional, and to be monitored on the implementation of the Disaster Risk Management legislation in light of climate change.
Ingonyama Trust
The Provincial Government together with Local government must ensure that Amakhosi are consulted when spheres of government, especially municipalities, plan development. In the case of Msinga where the majority of land falls under the Ingonyama Trust it is of utmost importance that that the municipality works hand in glove with the Traditional Authorities to ensure coordinated forward planning and implementation in the municipal area.
As KZN, we are determined to shape the agenda and policy direction of the 4th Industrial Revolution. We cannot be spectators and we want to make our contribution to ensure that we do not only prepare our youth for work of the future, but to ensure that we participate in the re- skilling of our people to deliver a truly humane, and just transition.
Job Creation and local economic development
42 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
We want to use the infrastructure development as a way to assist local municipalities to create much needed jobs for millions of people who live in abject poverty. To this effect, the province is budgeting to spend R12.250 billion in 2018/19 and R13.264 billion in 2019/20 on various infrastructure projects. In particular, we want to use the infrastructure budget to ensure that we empower emerging entrepreneurs.
The Small Town Rehabilitation and Corridor Development Programme is our game changer in terms of job creation.
The District Development Agencies remain the pillar in supporting the high impact LED initiatives and they will be workshopped on the implementation of the District Growth Development Plan and other catalytic projects towards the support of RASET (radical agrarian social economic transformation).
We will also continue with the alignment of the industrial hubs with the work of the District Development Agencies to ensure that we achieve the growth targets that have been set out in our PGDP.
To achieve economic transformation, this government will deepen the support needed by emerging entrepreneurs, especially those who remain marginalized. We want improve the participation of street traders, primary and secondary cooperatives and small business in the mainstream economy and monitor progress in this regard.
Manufacturing
We are determined to increase employment in this sector by driving investment towards automotive, agro-processing, food and beverages - wood and paper to name but a few.
Agriculture, Food security and Agriculture revolution
Over the next five years will see this province embarking on the agriculture revolution to ensure food security, the growth of the sector and job creation. Guided by the Agriculture Master Plan we aim to increase the value of agricultural contribution to the provincial economy from R 18 billion to R 23 billion by 2020.
Tourism
43 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
In 2017, tourism’s direct contribution to GDP in KZN was R9.4 billion while the total contribution to GDP was approximated at R18.8 billion. Going forward, our plan is plan is to increase the employment in tourism by creating 10 000 jobs over the next five years.
We will sustain our aggressive campaign to market and promote KZN on international platforms. We have also planned infrastructure projects that will help create more job opportunities whilst giving us a competitive edge.
The Premier concluded with the following statements:
We need to forge more trust and build consensus.
We need to unite to break the restrains that hinder economic growth, and plunge the people into undignified conditions of unemployment and poverty.
We need to unite and break the grimy social ills that obliterate joy, human compassion and prosperity amongst our people.
We need to unit and break the resilient challenges of corruption, fraud and poor performance that affect the effectiveness of our government
We must strengthen our social compact for growth and development. Such a compact needs the full participation and commitment of business, labour, civil society, and communities as a whole
2.3 CONCLUSION The Spatial Development Framework for Msinga Municipality must be aligned with the National and Provincial Policies and principles to ensure integration and alignment. This will ensure the acceptance of the municipality’s strategies and projects and the eventual funding thereof by the various external funding agencies. The municipality needs to take this opportunity to promote itself as a tourism and agricultural benefit to the province with the necessary support and assistance from the Provincial focus.
44 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CHAPTER 3: THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1 THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT/ STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT
3.1.1 TOPOGRAPHY The nature of the topography is such that Msinga is largely located in deep gorges of the Tugela and Buffalo Rivers. This effectively isolates the area from the immediate surrounding municipal areas. Msinga Local Municipality area ranging from 405m (minimum) to 1726m (maximum) above sea level.
The highly variable topography characteristic of the District creates biophysical habitat and micro climatic conditions which support a range of biodiversity. North facing slopes are generally warmer and drier, supporting habitat types such as grasslands. South facing slopes, escarpments and sheltered kloofs on the other hand tends to be cooler and wetter, commonly providing conditions favourable for supporting indigenous forest. This mosaic of habitat provides opportunity for a diversity of biota with different habitat requirements to exist within relatively smaller areas, in comparison to regions with flat topography. The cool, damp scarps and sheltered kloofs also provide refugia, for example protection of important flora and fauna against fire and utilisation/damage from anthropogenic factors.
3.1.2 SLOPE ANALYSIS The municipality is situated in an area with relatively steep slopes that makes a large area of the municipality not suitable for development and settlement. This situation also makes the municipal area highly susceptible to erosion of topsoil and silting in dams. The protection of these areas should be high on the municipality’s list and the identification of sensitive areas where development should not take place need to be considered as part of the Wilderness area. The eastern third part of the municipal area is the most suitable for both settlement and agricultural development.
The slope analysis depicts the gradients of the land as it declines in height above sea level towards the east. The slope categories range from smaller than 1:10 (10% incline), 1:6 (17% incline) 1:3 (33% incline) and steeper. The greater the gradient (1:6 – 1:3), the more difficult and more expensive construction and provision of services become.
45 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Slope is also affecting modes of transport, as a maximum gradient of 1:20 (5%) is recommended for bicycle tracks, and a maximum gradient of 1:12 (8%) is recommended for foot paths. The terrain therefore plays an integral part in determining settlement patterns or the line of roads which needs to be built cost effectively.
The Slope analysis map, attached overleaf as map nr 6: Slope Categories clearly depicts the more mountainous areas to the western part of the municipal area.
3.1.3 GEOLOGY The geology of uMzinyathi District mostly consists of the Ecca group, about 250 million years old, overlain with patches of the Drakensberg from about 65 million years ago. The Ecca group largely consist of shale and sandstone, which are sedimentary rocks while the Drakensberg group consists of basalts and dolerite (Igneous rock). Metamorphic rocks are also present especially amphibolite and gneiss in the south-eastern part of the municipal area (uMzinyathi District Municipality, 2012).
Msinga Municipality: consists of conglomerate, dolerite, schist, shale, tillite, nsuze group, basalt, tonalite, ecca group arenite, natal granite
Arenite is the most common rock covering the municipal area. Shale is also found through the area and Tillite is present along the Buffalo River but only in the mountainous areas before joining the Tugela River. These sedimentary formations are topped by dolerite that is still exposed in the higher parts of the mountains (uMzinyathi District Municipality, 2012).
46 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 4 Natural Environment – Topography.
47 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 5 Natural Environment – Slope Analysis
48 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 6 Natural Environment – Geological Map
49 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.1.4 SOILS The Msinga Municipality is characterised by the following 3 broad soils:
Soils with minimal development, usually on hard weathering rock and with or without intermittent diverse soils. The presence of lime is rare in these soils Soils range from red and yellow apedal through plinthic to duplex soil patterns Soils with marked clay accumulation
In the higher rainfall areas above 800 mm per annum soils tend to be deep, well-drained, fine- textured and leached with somewhat sandier textures where derived from sandstone or granite but more clayey where formed from dolerite. In terms of the South African Soil Classification system the most common soils are those of the Clovelly and Hutton forms in gently-sloping upland areas with Glenrosa soils on steeper slopes and Katspruit or Cartref soils in vleis and depressions. The soils in the eastern part of the municipal area are most suitable for agriculture and grazing.
The western and central Lowveld BRU has a moderate to steep terrain and a climate with severe restrictions on the choice of crops mainly because of the low rainfall below 650 mm per annum and heat and moisture stress. Irrigation would be necessary to grow crops. Arability is assessed to be 22% of the area of the BRU and there are moderate limitations due to the soils. Areas would have to be carefully selected for cropping but irrigation is essential. The grazing capacity is 6 ha per animal unit on very good veld and this BRU has a reasonable to restricted potential.
50 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 7 Soil and Terrain
51 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.1.5 WATER CATCHMENT The majority of the streams and smaller rivers in this municipality form part of the Thukela, Mooi, Umvoti, Buffalo and Blood River catchments. All of the afore-mentioned rivers eventually flow into the Thukela River, as this Municipality forms a part of the Thukela catchment. It should be noted that although these smaller streams and rivers may not contribute as much as the larger systems in terms of water resources, they are still important [and are protected by law. Development permission will be required when development proposals have potential to alter drainage networks and/or compromise the integrity of the water systems (including wetlands). Section 21 of the National Water Act 1998) will apply and an application for a water use license will be required if these resources are to be used.] In terms of development, all systems are of interest as they may pose a risk to the development, or vice versa, in which case an assessment process would have to be initiated which would then extend the timelines of the proposed developments.
The predominant activity in this region is agriculture with a small amount of industry, largely revolving around mining or agriculture. There are no major storage dams in this District Municipality. All urban areas rely on run of river abstraction from the rivers mentioned above, or others have small storage dams. Additionally, there are a number of small farm dams, which are impractical to highlight at the spatial resolution of district municipality. These storage systems allow farmers to undertake agricultural activities such as irrigation, however, owing to the size of the storage dams these are not meant for long-term water storage. Unfortunately, in many instances these small dams do not release water to downstream systems, which can detrimentally impact on the overall hydrological regime of this area, especially with regards to the larger primary and secondary river systems.
If further development or agriculture or a combination of the two is to be initiated, a thorough investigation of the available water resources must be undertaken. This will allow future planning for the water requirements of the district and manner in which these demands can be met to accommodate further development of both agriculture and other activities. Although the catchment analysis indicates minor consumption in this area, the Dept. of Rural Development Plans, (2017), indicate that many of the rivers do not have excess water to accommodate future requirements, indicating that this a drier area.
52 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 8 Natural Environment – Water Catchment
53 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The main rivers within Msinga are: - Buffalo River - Mooi River - Nadi River - Sundays River - Thukela River
The Buffalo flows through the centre of the UMzinyathi District feeding into the Thukela River east of Ngubevu and then traverses the boundary between Msinga and Nkandla. The Mooi River flows into the Thukela River at Keate’s Drift. The Thukela is the largest river system in KZN. The Buffalo River is the main northern tributary of the Thukela River and flows in a south-easterly direction from the eastern escarpment to its confluence with the Thukela River near Nkandla.
River condition status
The approach to identifying conservation status of ecosystems is based on the loss of integrity and the subsequent loss of habitat in each ecosystem, relative to two thresholds: one for maintaining healthy ecosystem functioning, and one for conserving the majority of species associated with the ecosystem. As river integrity is eroded and habitat is lost in an ecosystem, its functioning is increasingly compromised, leading eventually to the collapse of the ecosystem and to loss of species associated with that ecosystem.
River condition status is based on the percentage of the river over its total length that is still intact. The intact length was compared to the total length of each river to derive conservation status categories. These categories are: Least threatened rivers have an intact length for ≥ 60% of their total length; Vulnerable rivers have an intact length for ≥ 40% of their total length; Endangered rivers have an intact length for ≥10% of their total length; Critically endangered rivers have an intact length below their conservation target for <10% of their total length; The entire river system in the UMzinyathi Municipal area is vulnerable. It implies that special attention will have to be paid to all development affecting the river system.
3.1.6 CLIMATE The Provincial Spatial Planning Guideline 8 “Integration of Agro hydrological issues into Municipal Spatial Planning for KwaZulu-Natal” describes climate as follows:
54 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
“Climate is a significant factor that limits agricultural systems, and thus is an important driver of agricultural production. Climate variations are affected primarily by the physical landscape. Hence climate in KwaZulu-Natal is spatially variable. It is therefore useful to define the climatological limitations that otherwise influence the productivity of agricultural systems, as well as how they are spatially varied.
Schulze et al. (2008) regards water to be the most important climatic parameter influencing the growth of crops in South Africa; rainfall being the primary regulator of the availability of water to plants. Therefore mean annual precipitation (MAP) is considered to be a useful parameter that characterizes the long term quantity of water available for agricultural purposes (Schulze et al., 2008). For dry land agriculture, MAP presents the upper limit, and thus the critical threshold, for sustainable agricultural potential in terms of production (Schulze et al., 2008). In addition to the average rainfall situation, it also useful to take into consideration how the rainfall varies from year to year. Schulze et al. (2008) highlights that year-to-year variability of rainfall presents a prominent climatic risk in terms of availability of water for agriculture and the coefficient of variation of annual rainfall is suggested as a useful index to define the likelihood of fluctuations in crop yield between each year.
Another key parameter that influences crop production is temperature. Agricultural crops in particular are affected primarily by extreme fluctuations in temperature. Hence the use of indices defining critical temperatures is generally more useful as opposed to simply describing average temperatures. As defined within the South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology, the heat unit provides a useful index that takes into account both minimum and maximum temperature thresholds that ultimately limit the growth and development of agricultural crops.
The aforementioned climatic factors are spatially varied, which therefore affects the distribution of areas suitable for agriculture.” The average temperature and rainfall for Msinga is indicated in the table below:
Table 5 Average Temperature and Rainfall
55 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 9 Mean Annual Precipitation
56 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 10 Evaporation
57 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.1.7 OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION One of the development issues in the municipality is the promotion of LED through agriculture and tourism. There are also various projects associated with settlement growth through the implementation of Land Reform and Housing programmes. Therefore it is essential that while accommodating these challenges, environmental assets associated with the municipality are not undermined.
3.1.7.1 BIODIVERSITY SECTOR PLAN The definition of terms below is adapted from the EKZNW document ‘Document describing the Conservation Planning Terms for the EKZNW Spatial Planning Product’ (Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, 2014). The Complete list of definitions can be found in the “Biodiversity Sector Plan – uMzinyathi District Municipality” The list hereunder is of the terms used to compile Map 13 indicating areas of environmental importance that need to be protected by the SDF.
Table 6 Environmental important terms and Description
TERM DESCRIPTION Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) Natural or near-natural features, habitats or landscapes that include terrestrial, aquatic and marine areas that are considered critical for (i) meeting national and provincial biodiversity targets and thresholds (ii) safeguarding areas required to ensure the persistence and functioning of species and ecosystems, including the delivery of ecosystem services; and/or (iii) conserving important locations for biodiversity features or rare species. Conservation of these areas is crucial, in that if these areas are not maintained in a natural or near-natural state, biodiversity conservation targets cannot be met. CBA Irreplaceable Areas considered critical for meeting biodiversity targets and thresholds, and which are required to ensure the persistence of viable populations of species and the functionality of ecosystems. This category is a combination of three subcategories, namely CBA: Irreplaceable (SCA), CBA: Irreplaceable linkage and CBA: Expert Input CBA Optimal Areas that represent an optimised solution to meet the required biodiversity conservation targets while avoiding areas where the risk of biodiversity loss is high Category driven primarily by process but is also informed by expert input. This category is a combination of two subcategories, namely CBA: Optimal (SCA) and CBA: Optimal Expert Input
58 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Ecological Support Area (ESA): Areas required for the persistence of specific species. Species Specific Although these areas are frequently modified, a change in current land use, to anything other than rehabilitated land, would most likely result in a loss of that feature from the area. Landscape Corridors A series of bio-geographic corridors created in KZN to facilitate ecological and climate change processes to create a linked landscape for the conservation of species in a fragmented landscape. Critical Linkage Areas within Terrestrial Landscape Corridors that, due to the modification of the natural landscape within and surrounding the corridor, represent the only remaining and highly constrained link (i.e. pinch point on corridor) which, if lost, would result in the breakage of the corridor and corridor network. These areas are vital in maintaining the linkage of the corridor and its associated biodiversity related processes. Protected Area Formally Protected Areas declared under NEMPAA. Such areas form the backbone of the conservation network and are critical in their contribution to the achievement of conservation objectives in the Province.
The primary areas of conservation are indicated on Map 11 and can be described as follows: 1. The ESA Species areas along the Nhlangyanga river 2. The CBA Irreplaceable areas distributed through the municipality 3. The Landscape corridor on the northern boundary of the municipality
4. The wetland complex distributed through the municipality.
59 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 11 Areas of Conservation
60 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 12 Open Space and Conservation
61 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
62 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.1.8 VEGETATION A study done in Msinga municipal area by the Agricultural Research Council highlights the following:
The veld in the Thukela Valley Bushveld is in a poor condition (score below 50) while in the Northern KwaZulu-Natal Moist Grassland the condition is average to good (score between 51 and 90)
The Thukela Valley Bushveld condition of grazing areas at the different villages:
Village Nxamalala Mawozini Siphongweni Nembeni Dayiswayo Kwaphakwe Enzala Enqoleni Kwadolo Veld Extremely Extremely Extremely Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Condition bad bad Bad The Northern KwaZulu-Natal Moist Grassland condition of grazing areas at the different villages: Village Vimbukhalo Nkonyane Khaneni Mqotha Veld Average Average Average Average Condition
63 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Problems identified in the study area:
Overgrazing Encroachment of the succulent Euphorbia pseudocactus Decrease in grass species No grazing management plan Overgrazing of the riverbanks Erosion
Wrong burning practices
64 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 13 Vegetation
65 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 14 Acocks Veld Types
66 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2 THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
3.2.1 LAND TENURE Land Tenure in the municipal area can be classified in 5 major groups, namely: a) Land reform areas b) Government owned land c) Traditional Authority areas d) Private Land Approximately 70% of the land within the Msinga Municipality falls under the control of the Ingonyama Trust, the remaining 30% falls either under state ownership or private owners. This status has far reaching implications for development and conservation in the municipal area and participatory practices with the land owners is highly recommended.
In order to comply with SPLUMA and its Regulations and to make provision for Traditional Leaders in the SPLUMA decision-making process it is recommended that the Municipality enters into a service level agreement with each Traditional Leader that clearly explain the roles and responsibilities of the parties in relation to SPLUMA applications. Such a Service Level agreement will be legally binding and need to be compiled by an attorney with the necessary knowledge of Traditional land allocation practices and also of SPLUMA’s requirements in this regard.
67 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 15 Land Ownership
68 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2.2 POPULATION DENSITY The municipality has a fairly low average population density with the expected high density areas of the primary node and the traditional authority areas. This pattern has a positive effect on service delivery as the higher the density the more economical can service delivery be done.
3.2.2.1 POPULATION GROWTH Table 7 Population growth
Gender Population 2011 Population 2016 Population 2021 Population 2030 Male 77 068 82 399 88 150 99 442 Female 100 509 102 095 109 220 123 211 Total 177 577 184 494 197 370 222 653 Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
The information from STATSSA Census 2011 and Community Survey 2016 indicates an annual population growth rate of 1,226% per annum for the period 2011 to 2016.
Table 8 Population Age
Age Group Msinga Under 18 53.7% 99 069 18 to 64 41.6% 76 664 65 and over 4.8% 8 761 Total 100.0% 184 494
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
The table above clearly indicates that 53.7 % of the municipality’s population falls in the age groups 0 to 18 years. This is a very young population that have serious implications for service delivery and the provision of (especially social) facilities in the municipal area. The implications of a young population in an area is high requirements for social services; educational and employment opportunities.
3.2.2.2 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Table 9 Number of Households
Census Years 2011 2016 2021 2030 Number of 37 724 38 370 41 027 46 282 Households Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
69 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2.2.3 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE Table 10 Average Household Size
Census 2011 2016 Ave Household Size 4.6 4.8 Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
Household size is an important indicator for the demand for services since the number of people in a household determines consumption demand for water, electricity, and waste disposal.
As per the Census 2011 data, it is noted that the number of households within the Municipality is 37,724 with 19,999 agricultural households. The average household size is 4.6 with 66.7% of all households are female headed.
The situation according the 2016 Community survey was that the number of households within the Municipality is 38,370 with 20,954 agricultural households. The average household size is 4.8 with 67% of all households are female headed. There are 704 households in the municipality where the head of the household is younger than 18 years, this scenario leads to a myriad social and economic challenges that need to be addressed.
3.2.2.3 GENDER DISTRIBUTION The following table and diagram indicates that a large population group is dominated by females with 55% of the municipality’s population wile males constitutes only 45%. This have serious implications for the type of community facilities and concomitant services that need to be provided in the municipal area where the focus need to be placed on female and children orientated services.
70 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Graph 1 Population Distribution
Population Distribution 85+ 80-84 75-79 70-74 65-69 60-64 50-59 50-54 Female 45-49 Male 40-44 35-39 30-34 25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14 5-9 0-4 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
Table 11 Gender Distribution
2016 Percentage Male 82 399 45% Female 102 095 55% Total 184 494 100%
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
71 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2.2.4 INCOME LEVELS Table 12 Annual Household Income
Annual household income
Income Msinga R 0 11.4% 4 093 Under R4800 7.8% 2 799 R5k - R10k 16.1% 5 808 R10k - R20k 28.8% 10 364 R20k - R40k 22.5% 8 112 R40k - R75k 6.7% 2 399 R75k - R150k 3.5% 1 248 R150k - R300k 2.0% 706 R300k - R600k 0.9% 337 R600k - R1.2M 0.1% 50 R1.2M - R2.5M 0.1% 44 Over R2.5M 0.1% 40
Total 100.0% 36 000
Source: Stats SA Census 2011
The income levels, linked to economic opportunities, are very low. The greatest majority of residents enjoy little to no income, with a relatively large proportion of the economically active people in the municipality which earn between R4,801 and R19,600 per annum. This amount correlates with the average amounts for social grants and it is assumed that this is an indication of the high levels of economic and social dependencies in the municipality.
3.2.2.5 EDUCATION LEVELS The education levels in the municipality indicate that the largest proportion of residents (more than 50%) have some primary schooling or no schooling. It is accepted that this is because of the demographic structure of the municipality, indicating that the majority of residents in the municipality are young people (under the age of 20 years). Notwithstanding, the general education levels in the municipality are very low, with only a handful of residents being in possession of tertiary education qualifications.
72 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 13 Population by Educational level
Population by highest Educational level
Msinga None 36.7% 29 750 Other 1.1% 912 Some primary 6.7% 5 418 Primary 2.7% 2 220 Some Secondary 28.1% 22 845 Grade 12 (Matric) 20.3% 16 462 Undergrad 1.1% 880 Post-grad 2.6% 2 085 N/A 0.8% 610 Total 100.0% 81 182
Graph 2 Education level
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
3.2.2.6 POPULATION DENSITY The map indicating the population density clearly shows that the population are concentrated at the nodes of Pomeroy, Tugela Ferry and Keate’s Drift.
73 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 16 Human Environment – Population Density
74 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2.3 HUMAN FOOTPRINT The human footprint in the municipality has been derived from the household count of the ESKOM where all households were captured from 2013 aerial photographs. The correlation with the population density is obvious but this map drills down to a less general level and indicates the overall population/household distribution. Map 17 indicates the human footprint in the municipal area.
3.2.4 BROAD MUNICIPAL LAND USE The accompanying map indicates at first glance that Veld, cultivated land and trees the majority of land uses in the municipality contain. There are also some build up areas in the north eastern section of the area. This Land Use Pattern together with the environmental and slope information needs to dictate the spatial development form of the municipality as the basis of the eventual SDF.
75 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 17 Human Environment – Human Footprint
76 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 18 Composite Map – Human Environment
77 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE
3.3.1 ELECTRICITY NETWORK The electricity network map indicates that the network covers the most densely populated areas. The indications from the IDP are that some households, although close to the network, are not yet serviced. The availability of the network at the most densely populated areas is positive for service delivery as a large number of households can be reached within a relative short distance and thus cost effective and efficient. It can be seen from the graph hereunder that 36% of households don’t have access to electricity.
Graph 3 Electricity
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
78 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 19 Infrastructure – Electricity
79 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION Transport and road networks vary a great deal across the municipality. The majority of citizens rely on foot for daily transport needs.
The road network is made up of primarily provincial, district and access roads, the majority of which are in poor condition. The road network in Msinga consists of the following:
The primary transport route within the municipality is the R33 (P6-4) Route that traverses Msinga from north to south and links the centres of Dundee in the north and Greytown and Pietermaritzburg to the south and other linkages like:
P190 & P365 Route linking R68 to Rorkes Drift, Mazabeko & R33
P 17 Route linking R103 to Tugela Ferry, Kwa-Dolo and Kranskop (via R74)
P280 Route linking Weenen and Tugela Ferry
The primary transport route within the municipality is the R33 Route that traverses Msinga from north to south and links the centres of Dundee in the north and Greytown and Pietermaritzburg to the south. Map 20 of the SDF: Access to Roads indicates that the majority of the households in the Msinga area have access to roads within 2,5km or less from their homes. This however does not paint the true picture of transport accessibility in the area, as many of these roads are poorly maintained or designed, causing vehicle access to the adjacent or nearby areas to be problematic. The Road Infrastructure Strategic Framework for South Africa (RIFSA) classifications indicates a major dependency on lower order access roads for most of the residents within Msinga. Due to the remoteness of these roads, as well as the limited funding for infrastructure maintenance, maintenance of these roads might pose a problem in future. To ensure correct future analysis of these roads and the dependency of other aspects such as economic opportunities etc. it will be necessary to research the conditions of all these roads, as well as the condition and localities of transport facilities.
Most of the roads at Msinga are gravel however, below is the list of the tarred roads:
R33 (P6-4) – connecting Dundee and Greytown P280 (some parts of it) D1271 (some parts of it) – connecting to Nkandla D1272 - connecting to Weenen P32,
80 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
P373, P752 and P368
One of Msinga municipality challenges is that most of the roads are in a state of disrepair and requires substantial upgrading. This renders some settlements almost inaccessible by a normal car and accounts for a poor public transport system in these areas.
Department of Transport has presented a project priority list for 2017/2022 financial periods, and this highlights local roads and causeways prioritised for construction or upgrade. The Department also intends investing on securing the KwaKopi Hill that posse danger on road users during the rainy season. The Department of Transport has also planned for the maintenance of R33, further more; the construction of an additional Tugela Ferry Bridge is now near completion and is expected to be handed over during this 2018/2019 financial year. The municipality is in the process of upgrading local access roads which were identified as a priority issue in previous IDP’s and will continue to do so as the need arises and funding is available.
In terms of defining a roads backlog, this refers to all weather access to within 500m of each dwelling (gravel road width of 4.5 to 6m). The uMzinyathi Backlog Study (2007) determined road backlogs based on hut count data in the Traditional Authority areas which indicates that 58% of households have inadequate access to roads. It is also assumed that backlogs in storm water drainage correlate with the high levels roads of backlogs. The Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs’ works closely with the municipality through the Municipal Infrastructure Grants has funded a number of capital projects.
81 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 20 Transportation
82 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.3.3 ACCESS TO WATER The uMzinyathi District Municipality (UDM) is the Water Services Provider (WSP) and is responsible for the implementation of new capital projects to extend the provision of water services facilities and their maintenance thereof. The District’s Water Services Development Plan (WSDP) indicates that the backlog of water services in the Msinga municipal area is still substantial. The UDM IDP states that the largest number of households which are using other sources of water is 27 790 and they are under Msinga Municipality.
The UMzinyathi District is the Water Service Authority (WSA) for all its local municipalities and the bulk water supply is provided by the Tugela Ferry Water Supply. According to Statistics SA 2011 figures, it is estimated that 23% of the population of the Municipality had access to potable water. Other areas within the municipality have standpipes and boreholes with water also being drawn from protected springs. In most cases these springs are not maintained and livestock also drink from these sources thus contaminating them. In 2011, 23% of households had access to portable water (inside their dwellings, in the yard or sharing communal standpipe) while 14% rely on untreated water.
According to the information from the District Municipality there are 932 boreholes spread through the LM although there’s no indication how many are in a working condition. There’s also infrastructure in the form of pipelines, storage, standpipes and pump stations at Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy. Water Infrastructure shows the existing infrastructure providing water services to areas in the municipality.
The map below might not indicate the entire infrastructure that exists, but aims to relate the need for expansion of water infrastructure and services Furthermore, additional information relating to the locality of extraction points, purification works and storage facilities as well as the bulk capacity of these facilities will be essential for the further formulation of the combined strategic capital investment initiatives between the District Municipality and the Msinga Local Municipality.
According to the 2016 Community Survey there are still 57.4% of the municipal households without access to potable water and need to make use of Water tankers, natural water or rainwater. It is however clear that the DM is addressing the issue of access to water as can be seen in Map 21.
83 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The water provision in Ward 13 is especially concerning as the Census data indicates that only 1% of the population is serviced. It is furthermore noted that although Tugela Ferry is the administrative primary node of the municipality the level of service delivery in this area is very low and may prove to be a challenge to the future development of the node. According to the information from the District Municipality there are 932 boreholes spread through the LM although there’s no indication how many are in a working condition. There’s also infrastructure in the form of pipelines, storage, standpipes and pump stations at Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy.
The IDP identifies the following projects:
Table 14 MIG Projects
84 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 21 Water Infrastructure
85 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.3.4 ACCESS TO SANITATION Access to sanitation services is also an indicator of the standard of living amongst the population in the sub-places. The district has the Service Authority for the sanitation in its local municipalities.
From the table below, three percent of households in the municipality have access to flush toilets, 63 percent of household have pit. It is extremely shocking that there are still households that still use the bucket system as their form of sanitation. There is a need to improve the level of access to sanitation services within the municipality as they fall below the basic level of service that municipalities should target.
According to the 2016 Stats SA Community Survey 5 421 Households do not have access to sanitation. No information with relation to the actual spatial information could be sourced.
Table 15 Toilet facilities
Population by toilet facilities
Type Msinga Pit toilet 88.6% 163 418 Chemical toilet 6.0% 11 142 None 2.9% 5 281 Flush 2.5% 4 655 Total 100.0% 184 496
Graph 4 Toilet facilities
Source: Stats SA Community Survey 2016
86 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 22 Sanitation Access
87 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.4 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT The social environment takes a broad look at the existing availability and access to social services such as schools and hospitals. Not all facilities will be taken into consideration but the facilities indicated in the national and provincial policies will be focused upon.
3.4.1 ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE FACILITIES There is only one hospital in the Msinga Municipal area, located at Tugela Ferry. Although a large portion of the population falls within 20km accessibility from this hospital, the majority of the population of Msinga stills falls outside of this 20km accessibility perimeter. Considering that there is only one hospital in the municipality, Tugela Ferry is probably the most relatively central location for the hospital. This hospital is highly accessible as it is located next to the District, Provincial and a gravel Road, which all intersect right next to this hospital.
The municipality has a total of 16 fixed clinics that serve the entire municipality and one of it is the Ehlanzeni Clinic. The UMzinyathi Department of health has already planned to construct a new Vezokuhle (Phakwe) Clinic in this area as part of its 2015 – 2030 Msinga Municipality’s Service Transformation.
The municipality has half the primary health facilities it should have; now in an area with high levels of unemployment lack of health facilities exacerbates poverty as people are not afforded the high level of basic health care system.
Access to health services is still unreasonable since many people are forced to travel more than 10km to make use of the facilities.
The accompanying maps indicate the access of households within 25km of a hospital and within 5km from a clinic.
3.4.2 ACCESS TO EDUCATION FACILITIES The municipality’s IDP states that the figures released by Statistics SA display a ratio of 40 learners per educator at schools in Msinga with a 58 learner per classroom ratio. From the demographic of the municipality, the population between the age of 5 and 19 is estimated at approximately 73 000, which illustrates an even larger backlog in either schools or additional class rooms. Based on the information available, it is apparent that a severe under provision in educational facilities occurs within this municipal area. Using the data available from Stats SA it is apparent that an additional 241 classrooms would be needed to accommodate the 14,000 children not attending
88 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 school. Msinga is served only by primary and secondary education facilities, with a recent addition of an FET college at the Msinga Top. (Map 21 of the SDF): Access to Education Facilities, depicts the localities of these educational facilities within the Municipality. Msinga is relatively well serviced with high schools, apart from a few areas in the municipality, especially around the outlying areas around Pomeroy and the entire area around the Helpmekaar area. It would appear if all of the denser settlement areas are relatively well serviced with high schools. The challenge, with this amount of facilities, will be the maintenance, upgrading and quality of these facilities. Considering the topography and road network systems, accessibility might also pose challenges to the community.
Table 16 Education Facilities
Facility Number Crèche (Formal and Informal) 8 Primary School tbc Secondary School tbc Combined School tbc
Source?
Based purely on the distance factor it is clear that the area is well provided for with regards to both primary and secondary facilities. There are three areas however where concentrations of households are further than 5km from a primary and six areas where concentration of households are further than 5km from a secondary school.
3.4.3 ACCESS TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES The IDP indicates the following. The municipality is in dire need to have at least one orphanage, pay points within a reasonable walking distance. According to social provision standards a cemetery is required, the people of Msinga have not raised it as a need, however in terms of strategic planning provision should be made spatially for a cemetery. The distributions of social services throughout the municipality are listed hereunder.
89 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 17 Community facilities
90 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 23 Social facilities
91 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.4.4 ACCESS TO POLICE STATION FACILITIES The municipal area is serviced by 3 police stations, refer to the map below, located at Helpmekaar, Pomeroy and Tugela Ferry, and recently there is a development of the KwaNocomboshe station in Msinga Top. The greater majority of households are located at a distance greater than 10km from a police station. Almost the entire municipal area is located within a travel time of less than 1 hour from a police station, apart from a small area at the south east of the municipality, around the KwaDolo area. It can be assumed that the area is relatively well serviced by police stations
92 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 24 Access to health facilities
93 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 25 Access to Primary Schools
94 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 26 Access to Secondary Schools (TBC)
Map 27 Social Facilities
95 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 28 Access to Police Stations
96 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.5 HUMAN SETTLEMENT The municipality has a largely rural character with low density scattered households and the following nodal points:
Table 18 Nodes
Primary Nodes Secondary Nodes Tertiary Nodes Tugela Ferry Pomeroy Msinga Top Keate’s Drift Mashunka/ Nhlalakahle Mkhuphula/Dolo Cwaka Masabeko Rorkes Drift Source: Msinga IDP 2019/20
Rural Areas: rural areas are characterized by extensive commercial and subsistence farming, mainly crop production and cattle farming. It is notable from the household distribution that there are numerous low density settlements scattered throughout the municipal area, typically of the settlement patterns throughout the traditional areas of the province.
The Msinga settlement pattern is dominated by expansive rural and informal settlements. Approximately 90% of Msinga is rural in nature and this is made evident by the housing typology. These settlements are scattered unevenly in areas under traditional authority with poor road infrastructure that interlinks them. Their location in space is highly influenced by a variety of livelihood strategies such as access to water, land, public facilities, public transport routes and bulk services. The following are some key features of the rural settlements in Msinga.
Settlements in the municipal area have neither followed any predetermined spatial structure nor have they benefitted from ‘formal’ spatial planning. They are scattered in space in an unsystematic manner with limited (achieved by means of social facilities and access roads) if any linkages between the settlements; The majority of the rural dwelling units are constructed with traditional materials and often traditional practises such a home burials are prevalent. Most settlements are located along major transport routes (see map 6). Land allocation is undertaken in terms of the traditional land allocation system, which is not based on any verifiable standards. As a result, site sizes even for similar land uses vary significantly;
97 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Land ownership pattern and the prevalent land rental systems whereby landowners rent land out to the tenants has also had a profound impact on the settlement pattern; Land use management is based on collective memory where members of the community collectively agree that a piece of land is earmarked for a particular use or belongs to someone. Therefore, development processes i.e. acquiring development approvals are not followed.
The settlements differ in size and density depending on location in relation to the above- mentioned factors. Relatively high-density settlements are found on the northern edge of Msinga.
3.5.1 PREDOMINANTLY SCATTERED LOW-DENSITY RURAL SETTLEMENTS Settlements are loosely scattered throughout the entire municipal area and they surround communal grazing, crop production and grasslands. Settlement density appears to be directly correlated to accessibility (increased accessibility – increased density).
Spatially, settlements density appears to be lower, the further the location from the main road axis and it’s feeder roads. This is also supported by demographic information which clearly indicates that population density decline the further one moves away from the main transport routes. Levels of services are generally low, with the majority of residential structures being self- built.
Apart from a few trading stores and agricultural activities there is generally little sign of economic activities outside of the urbanized areas and main transportation corridors. The rural settlements mainly serve as residential areas with a limited economic base. Inhabitants are predominantly dependent on external sources of income and social and welfare grants. The continuous low- density sprawl of these rural settlement and poor planning of the past, which results in more productive agricultural land being taken up need to be addressed to ensure protection of the municipality’s primary economic generating resource.
The key issues relating to tenure and settlement in the region are: Competition for land. Competing uses of land (productive agriculture vs. subsistence agriculture/residential) Access to affordable infrastructure This emphasizes the need for appropriate land reform planning and spatial planning intervention to resolve the rural problems.
98 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.5.2 PERI-URBAN AND SEMI-URBAN SETTLEMENTS Keate’s Drift; Msinga Top and Nhlalakahle can be classified as Semi Urban Settlements. These centers currently perform functions such as service delivery and to a limited extent commercial activity. The influence of these service centers is quite critical for service delivery to the areas w here they are located.
The identified secondary centers are strategically located to serve these areas and the neighboring rural settlement and they can be seen as the opportunity for clustering future development that must benefit these areas. Expansion of these small-scattered rural settlements should be discouraged in the short to medium term with an intention to enable them to develop into sustainable human settlements with an identifiable character. Spatial planning interventions in respect of these settlements should focus on the following:
Agricultural development particularly protection of agricultural land from settlement. Conservation development in line with the Ezemvelo proposals, especially in the Tugela valley and Keate’s Drift areas. Management of grazing land including introduction of strategies such as rotational grazing. Consolidation of settlements as a means to create service thresholds.
3.5.3 URBAN SETTLEMENTS The only settlements in the municipal area which provides some higher order services and can be classified as urban are Pomeroy and Tugela Ferry. The IDP describes the nodes as follows: Tugela Ferry Town is identified as a primary node and it offers both administrative and business activities for the entire municipality. This town is held under Ingonyama Trust and is divided in to two traditional Authorities; Mabaso Area and Mthembu Area separated by the Tugela River. According to the Tugela Ferry Urban Design Framework (2010) the area is characterised by dramatic topography as a result of the Tugela and Buffalo Rivers, which effectively isolates the area from neighbouring areas such as Umvoti and Endumeni. This town is categorised by separation between different types of settlements with a clear rural urban separation. The urban settlements are of low density however does reflect a degree of urbanisation in the area.
Pomeroy is the only town which falls under a Scheme which effectively leaves the commercial farm land in the northern section of the municipality subject to the Act. This town has been
99 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 identified as a Secondary node as it offers limited economic activities compared to Tugela Ferry. Similarly to the rest of the municipality, this town lack infrastructure development and bears a challenge to optimise investment.
This urban centres serves as a link between the outlying areas as well as the dispersed rural settlements located at the peripheral areas of the municipality with marginal economic development potential.
In comparison to the surrounding hinterland, towns generally have a higher level of social and infrastructure services, higher concentrations of administrative and business infrastructure and hence, towns normally fulfil the role of service centre to the surrounding hinterland.
This pattern is significant when the recent policy of the Department of Human Settlements is taken into consideration where the principle of densification rather than sprawl is promoted. The National Development Plan 2030 specifically states:
This requires:
Strong measures to prevent further development of housing in marginal places Increased urban densities to support public transport and reduce sprawl The future spatial form of the municipality will need to give serious consideration to this declaration as it is mainly a turnabout from the practical reality currently taking place in the rural areas. The settlement pattern is indicated in Map 30.
Map 29 Settlement Patterns (TBC)
To be completed.
100 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.6 FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT Msinga municipality has completed Local Economic Development (LED) Strategy in January 2012. It is noted that the LED Strategy has highlighted the agriculture as the competitive advantage of the municipality. The municipality is preparing to implement the Strategy and look for funding for all of those projects highlighted in it. A further strategy dealing with the LED potential of Rock Crushing was prepared in 2008 and the negotiations are still underway with the Department Human Settlements for funding. The LED Strategy is emerging on business development and retention it is also aiming on enriching local Youth and Workforce with skills development and training across economic sector. This strategy intended to create an enabling institutional environment to facilitate local economic development, develop the local economic environment to become conducive to growth and development and to attract further investment as well as enhancing key sectors identified to broaden the economic base of Msinga.
Msinga can be described as a middle to low income area with growth potential. This is justified given the fact that there are pockets of wealth and a growing middle class. This is juxtaposed with areas of low income and poverty. There is potential in the area for greater growth and there is untapped potential for future developments. There are a number of future developments and PDA applications lodged with Msinga LM and this implies potential for the area to experience more fruitful growth. It also means that skills development and training programmes need to be developed in order to meet the demand for skills associated with these developments.
Msinga LM operates under a limited budget and budget constraints are a significant problem for the implementation of LED projects and programmes. The Municipality has a number of key development projects in the pipelines that are aimed at strategically unlocking key development opportunities in the LM. In order for the realisation of said projects and the Msinga Nodal Expansion Plan, funding and budgeting remains a key issue.
In order to develop a meaningful strategic framework for LED in Msinga, it is important to ensure that the current challenges are translated into potential opportunities, while the existing opportunities are strengthened to drive LED. This will require identification of a strategic framework that promotes the existing strengths, conversion of weaknesses into potential opportunities, and diversification of current activity to ensure expanded and productive growth in the local economy.
101 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The strategies can be classified as:
1. Sector specific strategies;
2. Crosscutting strategies.
SECTOR-SPECIFIC STRATEGIES:
The sector specific strategies are:
1. Strategy 1: Expansion of the agricultural sector;
2. Strategy 2: Expansion and diversification of the manufacturing sector;
3. Strategy 3: Development and support for the tourism sector;
CROSSCUTTING STRATEGIES:
The crosscutting strategies are:
1. Strategy 4: Improve the institutional capacity and policy environment for effective LED;
2. Strategy 5: Ensuring effective education, skills and capacity development;
3. Strategy 6: Expansion and development of strategic economic infrastructure;
4. Strategy 7: Support for informal economy and small enterprises
With a comparatively large and growing population, initiatives need to be put in place in order to create and support economic opportunities for job creation and growth within the Municipality.
3.6.1 KZN DEPENDENCY RATIO The Provincial Spatial Development Strategy describes the Dependency ratio as the total number of person dependent on a single income earner within a particular area. The dependency ratio within Msinga Local Municipality is high (96,8) and therefore there are a large number of not- economically active persons depending on a smaller number of economically active persons for economic support. A high dependency ratio limits the spending power of the economically active and in turn slows down the economy of the area.
102 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 30 Dependency Ratio
The Provincial Spatial Development Strategy further indicates The Local Municipalities with notable concentrations of significantly high dependency ratios include:
Hlabisa Msinga Umhlabuyalingana Imbabazane Ndwedwe uMlalazi Impendle Nkandla Umvoti Indaka Nongoma Umzimkhulu Ingwe Nquthu Umzumbe Jozini Ubuhlebezwe Vulamehlo Maphumulo Ulundi
It is concerning to notice that both Msinga falls within the area of noticeably high dependency ratios.
103 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.6.2 KZN DEPRIVATION INDEX The KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Government annually prepares a Deprivation Index which ranks municipalities in terms of their comparative levels of depravation. The index is a composite of several elements which includes: Income levels Employment Health Education The Living Environment Crime The combination of the above aspects is called the Multiple Deprivation Index. The Multiple Deprivation Index for KwaZulu-Natal is depicted below, with the Msinga Local Municipality depicted in Pink within the uMzinyathi District Municipality which is marked in Black. The Msinga Local Municipality has a High level of deprivation, with the only exception a small area in the north western part. Please refer to the image below for a depiction of the KZN Multiple Deprivation Index developed as part of the Provincial Growth and Development Strategy 2011.
104 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 31 Social Needs
It is clear that Msinga municipality need drastic interventions to establish an enabling environment with better conditions of life for its citizens. The IDP identifies that there are various opportunities that are offered by features within the municipality to assist with the economic development of the area. These opportunities include: Natural Landscape Suitable Arable Land and Land for Infrastructural Development Location and Accessibility Tourism
105 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The three sectors with the best potential to stimulate sustainable economic opportunities in Msinga are Agriculture, Manufacturing and Tourism.
3.6.3 AGRICULTURE The municipality has large tracts of land with agricultural potential that varies from irreplaceable (along the Tugela Valley) and threatened (North of Pomeroy) to mixed land use. It is crucial that agriculture be promoted on this land as a primary economic driver. It need to be noted that the highest settlement prevalence is on some of this valuable agricultural land and sprawl of the settlements on this land need to be managed through the establishment of a settlement edge and forward planning for the settlement of people. The Agriculture Potential is indicated in Map Nr.32.
Although the Provincial Spatial Economic Development Strategy of KwaZulu-Natal identified only the southern part of the Msinga Municipality as having agricultural potential, it also identified an important regional Agricultural Corridor traversing the Municipality along the R33 in a North South direction. Agriculture in Msinga is still largely practised for subsistence and is subject to the limited capacity of the land, due to poor soil quality, climatic conditions and over stocking. Despite the large irrigation potential from the rivers, the area is subject to water shortages during dry seasons, high soil erosion and low land carrying capacity for grazing. The types of crops cultivated include: - Maize - Beans - Sweet Potatoes - Tomatoes - Cabbage - Spinach - Beetroot - Onion Stock farming of cattle and goats is again a large cultural practice. The stock is not kept primarily as an economic asset. Only in times of dire economic pressures do families resort to selling stock. The overstocking adds to land pressure. Map indicates the grazing capacity of the number of livestock units per ha. It is noteworthy that the area south of Tugela Ferry is the best grazing land in the municipal area.
There is high potential to increase both crop and stock farming production through improved farm management and agricultural practices and support systems.
The settlements of people on land that can be economically utilised to address the plight of poverty just strengthen the downward poverty spiral for the people involved. The nature of agriculture in the Msinga Municipal area is characterized by fragmented subsistence cultivation, traditional animal husbandry and some cultivation of produce including cotton, morula and sugarcane.
106 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The climate of Msinga Local Municipality can, for the most part, be described as subtropical and varies from moist subtropical along the coast to moderately dry subtropical in the west. The climate, together with the soils of the area has the greatest influence on agricultural production in the area. Value-adding remains a challenge for Msinga Municipality’s agricultural production. Value-adding approaches should focus on processing, packaging, marketing and the distribution of local produce. Workers are more likely to transfer their skills to value-added enterprises than to non-agricultural manufacturing and service industries.
Msinga Municipality needs to harness the potential of proposed strategies and plans for agriculture in order to:
1. Promote the development of economic infrastructure, such as market stalls at accessible locations; 2. Provide agricultural extension services (fertilizers, seeds, irrigations etc.) and training programmes with the Department of Agriculture as a key partner; 3. Identify international donor agencies for investment programmes; 4. Promote agricultural beneficiation; and 5. Identify suitable areas for the development of market gardens. These projects can be supported by the Msinga Municipality, in cooperation with other role players, with due recognition of the realities such as establishing markets to support the economic multiplier potential of these projects. Also, the implementation of these projects should be done in conjunction with skills audits and development to support the sustainability and potential of these projects.
3.6.4 MANUFACTURING Some of the key constraints highlighted by manufactures in the context of LED, which have had an impact on employment and output of the sector are: a) Increasing input costs (electricity, water, labour and capital goods); b) Collapse of the rail network and unreliability of the current rail service; c) Underinvestment into electricity and water supply infrastructure; d) Lack of available, zoned industrial land; e) Too much red-tape creating an administrative burden for industry; f) Lack of maintenance and provision of roads and other bulk services; g) Restrictive labour legislation;
107 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
h) Declining competitiveness due to a lack of new investment (and technology); i) Vulnerability to international market prices; j) Lack of coordination between public and private sector; k) Lack of support for industry by local government (in terms of lobbying with provincial and national government and SOEs); and l) Impact of HIV/AIDs on the working age population.
However constraints vary according to the industry, as well as the size of the manufacturer. For example, certain large manufactures purchase their water and electricity directly from the suppliers, which limit their reliance on local government. On the other hand, smaller manufactures purchase services directly from Msinga Municipality, and therefore are more reliant on local government service provision in order for the success and sustainability of their business.
Msinga’s industrial activity is limited due to lack of supporting infrastructure. However, it should be noted that despite this, there are numerous SMME and informal activities in evidence in the area. For these smaller operators as well as larger scale industrialists, water and power access remain constraints, there are opportunities that can be explored in this sector. Expanding established industry has a range of exciting possibilities and municipal support functions will play an increasingly important role in supporting continued inward investment in to the local area.
The major contributors to this sector are:
Block making for the domestic market Craft: Local people involved in the production of craft. 7% of the employed people partake in Craft and related trade as compared to 10 % in uMzinyathi District. Shoe Industry: According to the uMzinyathi Economic Nodal Profile, an interesting new establishment was made in the manufacturing industry in Msinga which is the production of shoes for shoe manufacturers in Durban via a ‘middleman’. Rock Crushing: To be implemented. Revitalization of the Pack House
3.6.5 TOURISM Although Msinga is part of the rich Battlefield products, most of these tourism activities occur outside Msinga. The area is endowed with beautiful scenery and topography that is suitable for eco-tourism, adventure tourism and cultural tourism. Some of the factors that hinder tourism
108 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 development include remoteness from major routes, lack of appropriate infrastructure (R33) and tourism related facilities.
The District’s current marketable advantage is its Battlefields Tourism, but its unique selling point (USP) is the presence of six seminal historical battlefield sites of both national and international significance in close proximity to each other. The district can also gain a potential unique competitive advantage in linking this Battlefields Heritage and Zulu Cultural tourism.
The district’s key (potential) competitive tourism strengths are:
the uniqueness of the current battlefields and Heritage products in the area, the potential provided by strong Zulu Cultural assets particularly along the R33 between Greytown and Dundee through Msinga and along the R68 to Nquthu, The natural scenery and river bush valleys that provide potential for naturebased and adventure tourism.
Existing Tourism attractions include:
Fort Bengough: Located outside Pomeroy Fort Helpmekaar: Located in the town Helpmekaar Helpmekaar Battlefield Rock of The Cannibals, Helpmekaar Fort Melville Pieters Laager Rorke's Drift: ‘This is the most well-known and successful tourism product in Msinga. It includes the site of the battle, a museum and orientation centre, Rorke's Drift Art and Craft Centre and Rorkes Drift Cultural Village. The orientation centre provides information on the battle as well as the opportunity to buy arts and crafts. There is a coffee shop that has 3 small outside tables and a number of inside tables. The Art and Craft Centre provides space for local community to develop and market arts and crafts. The Rorkes Drift Cultural Village is allowing tourist to experience historical Zulu culture, by hosting cultural shows and dances.’ Gordon Memorial: Located 3km from Pomeroy Gordon Memorial Mission Church:
109 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 32 Agriculture Potential
110 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 33 Grazing Capacity
111 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.6.6 PUBLIC/CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT Msinga Municipality is largely Grant dependent due to the lack of a sustainable income base. This means that the municipality does not have internal generated funds to do allocate towards its primary mandate of service delivery.
Infrastructure development is not the sole responsibility of the Municipality but it is an integrated partnership between the spheres of government and parastatals. The different Government Departments such as Education, Health, Human Settlements and Public Works and the parastatals such as ESKOM all have a responsibility towards infrastructure investment in the local government sphere.
Public Capital investment needs to strengthen the spatial development component of the local municipality and therefore need to take place in an orderly planned environment to ensure the maximum benefits and concomitant spin-off development for the municipality.
The key elements of capital infrastructure include: Movement Systems and Associated Infrastructure e.g. different order roads and public transport facilities. Public Institutions and Facilities e.g. schools, Thusong centre, pension payout points, informal markets. Services Infrastructure e.g. Water, Sanitation and Electricity (Bulk and reticulation)
In a resource deprived municipality such as Msinga the spatial structuring influence of capital investment need to be harnessed and managed to strengthen the investment landscape and social fabric of the municipality. Projects that are capital investment in nature should be filtered through a model that ensures alignment with the municipal spatial development framework.
Public Capital Investment is a necessary mechanism to lever Private investment such as the existing mix of investment in Msinga.
Efforts to address past and current social inequalities should focus on people, not places. In localities where there are both high levels of poverty and demonstrated economic potential, this could include fixed capital investment to exploit the potential of those localities. In localities with low demonstrated economic potential, Government should, beyond the provision of essential services, concentrate primarily on human capital development by providing social transfers such as grants, education and training and poverty relief programmes
112 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 and reducing migration costs by providing labour market intelligence so as to give people better information, opportunities and capabilities to enable people to gravitate, if they chose to, to localities that are more likely to provide sustainable employment and economic opportunities. In addition sound rural development planning, aggressive land & agrarian reform & expansion of agricultural extension services are crucial.
3.7 PROVINCIAL SDF The Provincial SDF applied the following classification to the various spatial structures in the study area: The Msinga and Mkhuze nodes are identified as a Quaternary Nodes which is defined as nodes that are mainly centres which should provide service to the local economy and community needs There following areas are identified in the PGDS:
1. Priority Conservation Proposed regional critical conservation areas which are linked in a continuous system of ecosystems and bioregions traversing the province between the Drakensberg and the Indian Ocean. These areas were identified combining existing environmentally protected areas as well as conservation corridors proposed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, through combining extensive environmental research into bio-resources throughout the province as part of the formulation of a Critical Biodiversity Plan for the province. These Conservation Corridors are not suggested as absolute “no-go” areas, but rather highlighted as areas of environmental significance to the sustainable development of the entire province. Where economic opportunity (such as tourism development) and high social need exist within these Conservation Corridors, it implies both that the rich natural environment should contribute to the address such needs and potential, and further that any interventions in these areas need to consider the impact on such important regional ecological corridors. These corridors are however perceived as areas where extensive densification would be discouraged and sensitive development promoted. 2. Biodiversity Priority area 1 Areas with a significantly high biodiversity value expressed in the number of species and sensitive environments as identified through extensive research by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. These areas are most often located in close proximity to the identified Conservation Corridors and may serve as an
113 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 additional buffer to these corridors. These areas too are not (at a provincial level) proposed as absolute “no-go” areas, but are identified to indicate areas where extensive densification would be discouraged and sensitive development promoted. 3. Social Investment The highest ranges of combined social need when considering the population density, dependency ratio as the provincial index of multiple deprivation is illustrated by this category of high social need. These area broadly the areas where the most intensive social interventions area required and this category is further overlayed above all other categories to provide a spatial reference to the types of interventions which might be pursued towards addressing the concentrated social need within these areas. As example where high social need is identified within an area earmarked as a conservation corridor, this firstly provides a reference to the fact that social conditions of communities will need to be addressed if any conservation is to be promoted within such areas. Further it suggests that the effective utilisation of the high biodiversity within such areas might be harnessed towards addressing social need through example conservation tourism. 4. Mandated Service delivery The areas which are not representative of any of the above mentioned categories are classified as undifferentiated areas. It is acknowledged that these areas also have communities residing on them with economic potential and environmental resources, however, based on the approach followed these areas weren’t differentiated to the same degree as the identified preceding categories. It is therefore important that this category is not neglected from public and private interventions and as the various departmental programmes are inclusive in nature, these areas should also benefit from it. It is anticipated that the intensity of such programmes and the total portion of resource allocation to these areas would be less than the identified categories as well as the key intervention areas identified previously.
114 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 34 Provincial SDF
115 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Spatial Development Plan further developed nine (9) Principles to guide development in the Province which will enhance the provisions of the SPLUMB. The relationship between the two sets of principles is depicted further in the document. The nine principles of the PGDS are depicted in the diagram below.
Figure 4 PGDS Principles
The following nine spatial principles underscores the general spatial intentions of the PGDS and serves as provincial guiding principles which should ideally be pursued within all levels of spatial planning at district and local level in alignment with the provincial spatial development strategy.
3.7.1 PRINCIPLE OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES The Principle of Sustainable Communities promotes the building of places where people want to live and work. Again the sense of Quality of Living refers to the balance between environmental quality, addressing social need and promoting economic activities within communities. Often communities within the rural context of KwaZulu-Natal are not located in the areas with perceived highest economic potential. Where low economic potential exists planning and investments should be directed at projects and programmes to address poverty and the provision of basic services in order to address past and current social inequalities towards building sustainable communities.
116 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.7.2 PRINCIPLE OF ECONOMIC POTENTIAL The Principle of Economic Potential aims to improving productivity and closing the economic performance gap between the various areas of KwaZulu-Natal towards economic excellence of all areas. Rapid economic growth that is sustained and inclusive is seen as a pre-requisite for the achievement of poverty alleviation. The principles further promotes the consideration of spatial needs for Economic Competitiveness (Potential) by proposing an asset based spatial approach based on unique advantages and opportunities within various areas. An essential component of this principle is the engagement of the private sector in the refinement and spatial economic needs of any particular zone / area.
3.7.3 PRINCIPLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING The Principle of Environmental Planning (Bioregional Planning) refers to understanding and respecting the environmental character (potential and vulnerability) and distinctiveness of places and landscapes and promoting balanced development in such areas. The PGDS supports environmental planning as the fundamental methodology on which spatial planning should be based. Thus, rather than being a reactionary barrier to commenced development, the environment is seen as an enabling primary informant to spatial planning and development. Environmental planning can be defined as land-use planning and management that promotes sustainable development. The environmental planning methodology involves the use of Broad Provincial Spatial Planning Categories to reflect desired land use
3.7.4 PRINCIPLE OF SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS The Principle of Sustainable Rural Livelihoods considers rural areas in a way which is integrated with other decision making associated with the Sustainable Livelihoods frameworks. This principle requires that spatial planning consider the locality and impact of human, physical, natural, financial and social capitals of an area and spatially structure these in support of each other. Another aspect of this principle is promoting spatial planning in a continuum where rural areas are not addressed as completely separate entities to urban centres, but rather a gradual change in landscape with the potential progression of rural areas to more closely resemble the service standards and quality of living achieved in some urban contexts.
117 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
3.7.5 PRINCIPLE OF SPATIAL CONCENTRATION The Principle of Spatial Concentration aims to build on existing concentrations of activities and infrastructure towards improved access of communities to social services and economic activities. In practical terms this promotes concentration along nodes and corridors with multi-sectoral investment i.e. roads, facilities, housing etc. This is envisaged to lead to greater co-ordination of both public and private investment and result in higher accessibility of goods and services to communities while ensuring more economic service delivery. This principle will further assist in overcoming the spatial distortions of the past. Future settlement and economic development opportunities should be channelled into activity corridors and nodes that are adjacent to or link the main growth centres in order for them to become regional gateways.
3.7.6 PRINCIPLE OF LOCAL SELF-SUFFCIENCY The Principle of Local Self-Sufficiency promotes locating development in a way that reduces the need to travel, especially by car and enables people as far as possible to meet their need locally. Furthermore, the principle is underpinned by an assessment of each areas unique competency towards its own self-reliance and need to consider the environment, human skills, infrastructure and capital available to a specific area and how it could contribute to increase its self-sufficiency.
3.7.7 PRINCIPLE OF CO-ORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION The Principle of Co-ordinated Implementation actually projects beyond spatial planning and promotes the alignment of role-player mandates and resources with integrated spatial planning across sectors and localities. Essentially the principle suggests that planning-implementation becomes a more continuous process and that government spending on fixed investment should be focused on planned key interventions localities. The principle ultimately also proposes a move towards more developmental mandate definitions of the various departments away, from single mandates to enable the spatial alignment of growth and development investment.
3.7.8 PRINCIPLE OF ACCESSIBILITY The Principle of Accessibility simply promotes the highest level of accessibility to resources, services, opportunities and other communities. This is intrinsically linked to transportation planning and should consider localized needs for the transportation of people and goods by various modes of transport as guided by the scale and function of a region. At a provincial level
118 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 there is a strong correlation between the most deprived areas and poor regional accessibility to those areas. In addressing accessibility at provincial and local level, the need for possible new linkages, the upgrade in the capacity of existing linkages and the suitable mix of modes of transport should be considered.
3.7.9 PRINCIPLE OF BALANCED DEVELOPMENT The Principle of Balanced Development promotes the linking of areas of economic opportunity with areas in greatest need of economic, social and physical restructuring and regeneration at all spatial scales. In practical terms the principles sought to find a balance between the potentially competing land uses by understanding the relationship and integration between major dimensions within the province and promoting a synergetic mixture of land uses in support of each other at various spatial scales.
119 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
SECTION C: DEVELOPMENT VISION, STRATEGIES & OBJECTIVES CHAPTER 4: SPATIAL REPRESENTATION OF THE IDP
4.1 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT VISION
4.1.1 STATUS OF THE IDP ON DISTRICT AND LOCAL LEVELS The following strategic documents are used as basis of analysis for the formulation of the Msinga Spatial Development Framework.
Table 19 Sector Plan Adopted
SECTOR PLAN STATUS
Msinga Municipality IDP 2019/20 Adopted 2019 uMzinyathi District Municipality IDP 2019/20 Adopted 2019
4.1.2 SPATIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE IDP VISION The purpose of evaluating the Vision and Mission of the Local Authority is to highlight the components of these statements that need to be spatially interpreted. The Municipality needs to be made aware of the implications of the spatial statements to allow them to prepare and evaluate a proper course of action. These spatial implications will be manifested within the Spatial Development Framework being compiled.
The Current Vision of Msinga Municipality reads as follows:
BY 2030: Msinga will be a Municipality with the capacity to ensure local development, through good management and development support.
BY 2022: Commitment towards corruption free, infrastructural development, poverty eradication and supporting local economic development initiatives towards the financial and social emancipation of the Msinga community.
120 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The main concepts that come from the above vision are Service Delivery, Local Economic Development, and community development. These concepts are interrelated and should you achieve economic development, community development and service delivery should follow automatically. Economic initiatives and products being produced/sold, no matter where they are situated (in terms of city or province) have to have the optimum locality to provide access to the markets they target. It is therefore necessary to determine what the capabilities within the municipality is with regards to land and resources, and whether the spatial locality of the initiatives provides access to markets or not. If you lack access to markets, and proper marketing is not done, it is not feasible to produce, no matter how big the demand is. One of the objectives of the Spatial Development Framework is to determine the optimum localities for investment and economic initiatives to be located to capitalise on the comparative advantages that is offered by a specific location. Spatial distribution of facilities will be linked to the spatial distribution of spatial needs, but in the sense that it will be provided where a large concentration of similar needs exist to ensure cost effective provision of services.
4.1.3 SPATIAL ALIGNMENT BETWEEN DISTRICT AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT VISION The uMzinyathi District Municipality Vision in its 2019/20 IDP reads as follows:
“CHAMPIONING AN ECONOMICALLY VIABLE DISTRICT WHICH STRIVES TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT BY 2035”
As a secondary sphere of government to the District Municipality, development policies of Msinga Local Municipality should be aligned to that of the district to ensure that the goals and development visions are the same.
There is definite alignment between the Development Vision of the District Municipality and that of Msinga Local Municipality. The District’s development Vision is much more future orientated than that of Msinga Municipality, but the aspects of integrated development is reflected within both development Visions. That will become evident when comparing the above Development Vision to that of Msinga, as depicted in the following section.
4.2 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT MISSION The Mission statement The Mission Statement defines the fundamental purpose of the municipality and is as follows:
121 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
“MSINGA MUNICIPALITY WILL STRIVE TO PROVIDE GOOD HEALTH, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE PROVISION OF ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS” Emanating from the broader development vision established in the Integrated Development Plan, the physical and spatial development vision is suggested to provide the following guidance:
The future development of the Msinga Municipality will be structured such as to provide upliftment of and involvement in the economic and social development of all sectors of the community. The future development will ensure that the natural resources of the municipality, which form the basis for much of the existing and potential economic development, are appropriately protected and maintained. The future development will focus on infrastructure provision taking cognisance of the local circumstances and in collaboration with the required role-players. The above notions address the provision of services to the whole community, as well as the integration of the community which implies physical integration of the communities. Spatial planning will therefore dictate that the various towns/settlements, if possible at all, will grow towards each other. The integration of communities will in the long run ensure cost effective provision and maintenance of services.
Access to all basic services requires equal provision of services without prejudice but certain considerations must be kept in mind, which relates to the issues of the Spatial Service Costs Differentiation, spatial concentration of services, and the spatial sustainability/efficiency of services, which again relates to cost effectiveness of services with regards to implementation & maintenance. “Cost implications” is THE major consideration when looking at the distribution and provision of services with the emphasis on maintenance of these facilities.
High development and maintenance costs combined with a very limited budget available makes it is very difficult to maintain extensive infrastructure systems that are underutilised. It might therefore be necessary to decide rationally that not everybody can have the same level of services. It must however be kept in mind that it is the municipalities’ responsibility to provide in the basic needs of the communities such as access to water, but a definite decision needs to be taken on what level of services will be implemented, and where a concentration of services will be provided to form a node where cost effective services can be provided.
122 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Poverty eradication and successful economic initiatives goes hand in hand, with the economic initiatives leading the way. It is imperative to determine what comparative advantages are presented by the area and the locality, and how to harness these opportunities. The SDF will identify the optimum localities for investment and economic development, to uplift the communities, and provide access to the global economy.
The spatial development framework will contribute to the balanced physical development of the municipality by:
Establishing a spatial development structure
Guiding the management of future development,
Accommodating development pressures and additional investment,
Maintaining and further developing the economic potential of the municipality,
While protecting and integrating the natural environment of the area.
4.3 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES To ensure the realisation of the Vision and Mission Statements, the Msinga Municipality developed certain strategies, which are linked to the 6 national Key Performance Areas (KPA's) which are:
Basic Service Delivery;
Local Economic Development (LED);
Good Governance and Public Participation;
Institutional Development and Transformation; and
Municipal Financial Viability and Management.
Spatial Planning And Environmental Management
123 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
These KPA’s and their corresponding strategies are outlined in the table below:
Table 20 Msinga KPA’S
KPA GOAL
MUNICIPAL The strategy focuses on promoting sound administration which is TRANSFORMATION efficient and effective and that will enable the Municipality to AND INSTITUTIONAL meet its developmental needs DEVELOPMENT The Municipality must ensure that financial and capacity resources are provided to meet the needs of the communities as indicated in the IDP Review, and that would also enable the adherence to the vision, objective and strategies. To ensure proper administration in line with legislation Municipal IDP 2019/20 2019/20 Mid-Year Performance Report (S72 Report) submitted to Council for adoption Adopt 2018-19 Annual Performance Report (s46 APR) Develop Batho Pele Policy, Service Charter & Service Delivery Implementation Plan (SDIP) Prepare credible CBPs (Ward plans) Revised internal audit charter Employment equity targets be reflected in the WSP, Vacancy rate, increased critical vacancies Human Resource Plan & human resource strategy need to be adopted in 2019/2020. ICT Framework policy status must be stated BASIC SERVICE The strategy focuses on facilitating the provision of new DELIVERY infrastructure and also the maintenance of existing infrastructure to ensure sustainable service delivery within the community. The indicator measures the outcome: the number of kilometres of roads achieved. The continued construction of better local access to roads will improve mobility, which will open up economic opportunities for the residents who can reach work places easier, due to the presence of public transport. It will also open economic markets that were not accessible previously due to inaccessibility. The provision of water, sanitation, and roads is inadequate within the Municipal area and huge backlogs exists which can only be eradicated at a minimum standard level.
124 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Build, maintain and provide access to improved, sustainable and modernized infrastructure to the community Improve the reliability and service life of municipal infrastructure and facilities Review the IWMP Get a license application approved for the landfill site. Housing sector plan be reviewed to be in line with KZN master spatial plan Development of the Local Integrated Transport Plan Updating maps on water & sanitation in line with WSDP To provide a better Local access Road network Proper management of waste Boreholes for 5 Wards at Ward 1, Ward 2, Ward 5, Ward 15, Ward 19 Provision of water to community gardens Construction 15 of Two room Houses Construction 2 of two Classrooms Construction of 11 Crèches Renovation of 6 Community Halls, Ward 2, Warm 7, Ward 9, Ward 10, Ward 11, Ward 12, Ward 14, Ward 17 Roads Maintenance through Construction plants programme Upgrade of Mzisho sportfield Mbabane sportfield Kwangubo sportfield Mhlangane sportfield Gxushaneni sportfield Construction of new access road (Ngconco Road) Construction of new access road (Nsongeni Road) Construction of new access road (Magobela Road) Construction of new access road (Sampofu Road) Douglas Electrification project Mzweni Phase 3 Electrification project Palafin Electrification project Msinga master light EPWP street cleaning LOCAL ECONOMIC To reduce poverty through Local Economic development DEVELOPMENT initiatives AND SOCIAL To promote cultural and indigenous skills DEVELOPMENT To promote sport development and improve sports participation To empower the disadvantaged communities LED Strategy review Finalise & adopt informal economy policy
125 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Finalise Business investment & retention policy Optimise green economy initiatives & reflect integrated grant spending submitted to NDPW- Create & maintain up to date Database of all SMMEs & Coops Construction of Kopi Curio shop 30 SMME's capacitated BUSINESS INDABA/LED summit Ensure easy access to sports facilities Create an environment that will create jobs and reduce poverty Host Umcimbi weBhayi by June 2020 Sports Indaba Msinga Marathon Iscathamiya Event Msinga Maskandi Festival Annual Reed Dance Mayoral Cup SALGA Games Disability Sports Day Tertiary Education Registration Assistance Youth Day Celebration GOOD To ensure proper administration in line with legislation GOVERNANCE AND To increase awareness and develop a culture of community PUBLIC participation in the Local government affairs PARTICIPATION 2019/20 Mid-Year Performance Assessments for s54/56 managers conducted Implementation of Provincial policy framework on the establishment of ward committees Mayoral Izimbizo Effective secretariat services to council and standing committees Public Awareness Campaigns World aids celebration commemorations Implement Ward Youth Projects as per Ward Based Plans in the IDP 2019/2020 B2B indicators be included in the SDBIP B2B Indicators be included in 2019/2020 IDP review Develop an M&E to track economic development & infrastructure MUNICIPAL Develop and maintain a financial viable and sustainable FINANCIAL institution that achieves full compliance with municipal VIABILITY AND legislation MANAGEMENT Comply with legislated dates for actions to compile Budget.
126 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Drafting of business plans, proposals and motivations for additional funding of projects and programmes each financial year. Financial plan needs review to reflect (borrowings, an asset renewable plan, repairs and maintenance in terms of 8% norm, financial ratios for the past three years) Revenue projections for 2019- 2020/2020-2021 be prepared. Comprehensive presentation of the capital funding and expenditure by source. Expenditure projections be prepared for the 2019-2021. Implementing stringent budgetary controls. Ensure budget management Tabling of Draft Budget and Final budget within timeframes as legislated Full implementation of the Municipal Standard Chart of Accounts (MSCOA) Spending of grants according to stipulated conditions Development and implementation of business plans in accordance with Division of revenue act Achieve unqualified audit Develop and Implement Action Plan to address Auditor Generals findings Risk Register Maintenance and compliance Asset Register Approved procurement plan and implemented Creditors payments Turnaround time (in days) for payment of creditors (from date of receipt of invoice) Monitor Irregular Expenditure Adjustment budget preparation Payroll ensure monthly payments on time Adjustment budget preparation Compilation of the 2020/21 budget Credible Annual financial statements Monthly reviewed general ledger SPATIAL PLANNING Formulation of SPLUMA compliant SDF AND Adopt 2019/20 Housing Sector Plan ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT Develop strategic environmental assessment, climate change response strategy and alien eradication plan, EMF Review the Agricultural sector Plan to address food security Source: Msinga IDP 2019/20
127 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Some of the aspects depicted in the table above, has spatial implications that needs to be considered and are briefly discussed below.
The Promotion of Municipal Transformation and Institutional Development, more specifically the development of planning capacity and integrated service delivery is essential to serve the communities through provision of successful and effective initiatives to eradicate poverty and boost the economy. The issues of service provision including the access to water, and expansion of water services, free sanitation, electricity, access to community facilities provision of sport fields and education facilities all relates to integrated service provision where services are provided cost effectively, at nodal localities where the highest number of lives can be improved. Access to roads will improve mobility, which will open up economic opportunities for the residents who can reach work places easier, due to the presence of public transport. It will also open economic markets that were not accessible, once again due to presence of transport. Provision of housing can be done more cost effectively in remote areas, than sewage systems can be provided for example, but this will create communities which in the long run will need sewerage systems, piped water etc, which are all dependent on high concentrations of population to make provision thereof cost effective.
This once again highlights the need to identify nodal areas of investment, and encourage the movement of people to these areas where they can be provided with services and opportunities.
According to policy municipal projects will only be funded when they are depicted in the IDP. This indicates that the projects underwent a thorough public participation process, and that it is aligned with the growth direction the municipality wants to take. The chances of lobbying successfully for funds increase exponentially if the local strategic documents are aligned with the Provincial Growth & Development Strategy, as well as with the National Spatial Development Perspective and municipalities should be able to source funds from provincial as well as national departments.
The implementation of a land use management scheme is necessary to manage the implementation of the spatial development framework and to ensure that land rights and developments are managed properly, and comply with all legislative requirements laid down by the various developmental laws.
128 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
4.4 LONG TERM SPATIAL VISION A Developmental integrated Municipality where resources are optimally allocated to ensure access to basic services, social amenities and economic opportunities are available to all.
4.5 SPLUMA SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES The municipal Development Objectives are mainly orientated and aligned to National Key performance areas (KPA’s) as indicated in paragraph 4.3 of this document.
The following tables depict the strategies set out by the municipality that have aspects that can be spatially manifested. These strategies can be identified and categorised by the 5 principals indicated in the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, 2013 (SPLUMA):
4.5.1 SPATIAL JUSTICE Past spatial and other development imbalances are redressed through improved access to and use of land
Although South Africa has adopted a normative approach to spatial planning, unique circumstances prevail as a result of the pre-1994 Government’s policy of separate development across racial lines. This principle is quite unique in spatial planning terms to the South African context, and should be interpreted as such. The application of spatial justice impacts on different levels. On a regional level, that is for the purpose of national-, regional-, and provincial SDF’s and/or land use management systems, it impacts on the integration of the previous homeland areas (for example Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei) with the new municipal structures as demarcated by the Municipal Demarcation Act. Given present-day provincial structure, the impact is mostly on the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Limpopo, Gauteng and the North West Province. On a municipal level the focus of this principle would be on the integration or development of rural and/or traditional settlements, as well as restructuring the urban morphology created before 1994. The focus should be on urban integration strategies as part of the SDF. The inclusion of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and less formal land use types traditionally found in the African-
129 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
neighbourhood (for example shebeen, tuck-shop) in the formulation of a LUMS is essential. An integrated approach towards improved access to and use of land is an essential part of this principle. Accordingly, supportive legislation (for example land restriction and alienation of land) and processes must be aligned and reflected in the process of compiling a SDF and land uses management system for all geographic scales. The technical and legal character of a SDF is an efficient vehicle to implement and reflect an integrated development approach (through SPLUMA), as the other pieces of legislation aren’t necessarily equipped to support this principle. Accordingly, strategic land, privately owned, can be identified in the compilation of a SDF to facilitate this principle of spatial justice in an effort to integrate components of the existing apartheid-city structure. Spatial Development Frameworks and policies at all spheres of government address the inclusion of persons and areas that were previously excluded, with an emphasis on informal settlements, former homeland areas and areas characterized by widespread poverty and deprivation;
Spatial planning instruments, which is SDF’s and land use managements systems, must focus specifically on previously disadvantaged areas and historically disadvantaged people. Although it is a universal urban reality that all parts of a settlement are not supported by the same level of social and economic activities, this principle seeks to correct the historical reality of urban bias in land ownership, spatial planning, and land use change procedures. Liaison with sectoral departments is essential to extract funding (for example neighbourhood development grants and municipal infrastructure grants) from provincial and national departments, into the local sphere. In terms of this principle, all inhabitants should have reasonable access to opportunities and facilities which support living in urban settlements. Neighbourhood development grants and municipal infrastructure grants are essential to extract funding from provincial and national departments into the local government sphere. The timing thereof is focussed on the compilation stages of SDF’s on all geographic levels.
130 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Spatial planning mechanisms, including land use schemes, include provisions that enable redress in access to land and property by disadvantaged communities and persons;
Portions of land to fulfil the object of this paragraph must be identified and formalised within SDF’s and land use management systems. Land use management systems are inclusive of all areas of a municipality and specifically include provisions that are flexible and appropriate for the management of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and former homeland areas;
The national spatial area has been delineated into the so-called wall-to-wall municipalities. Accordingly, and in stark contrast to the national geography of pre- 1994, all portions of land have been included in a local municipal area. Based on the historical demarcation of homelands (tribal areas) in especially the northern and eastern provinces, tenure and land use management is mostly regulated by traditional authorities. These authorities need to be consulted and recognised appropriately. Land use and zoning categories in the relevant land use management system needs to make provision for the traditional authority’s tenure rights and its less-formal land use management practices. In terms of pre-1994 spatial planning legislation, agricultural and non-urban land use types were mostly excluded from forward planning (SDF’s) and land use management systems. Appropriate typologies relevant to the government sphere need to be compiled and aligned with neighbouring municipalities and/or provinces. Land development procedures will include provisions that accommodate access to secure tenure and the incremental upgrading of informal areas; and
Tenure is a function of National Government and regulated by the Deeds Registries Act. Traditionally, land in informal (squatter) areas are usually not based on formal cadastral data, for example represented by a general plan and title deed.
This principle of secure tenure recognises the importance of security of tenure and requires the promotion of tenure at all times. Conversely, it is illegal for the relevant authority to allow forms of development in which secure tenure may not be achieved within a reasonable time frame. The principle requires that the rights of occupants in designated informal settlement areas be accommodated. There
131 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
should be no involuntary removal, except for absolute necessary public improvement. As a developing country, the incremental upgrading of informal areas in this context refers to the process whereby legally recognised settlements are created over time in an incremental manner. Accordingly to the Integrated Urban Development Framework, spatial transformation is a long-term process and requires an incremental approach. The process includes geotechnical and environmental investigations, land surveying, layout planning, and the provision of engineering services amongst others. Stakeholders in the process must include the affected relevant citizens, local government and potentially also the private sector. The definition of ‘tenure’ can be seen also to include ‘collective tenure’. This can include commercial mechanisms such as trusts, share block companies and other mechanisms that will have the effect that land is owned for the benefit of a group of persons. Where a planning tribunal considers an application before it, the planning tribunal’s exercise of discretion may not be impeded or restricted on the ground that the value of land or property is affected by the outcome of the application;
This principle must be interpreted against the historical background of South- Africa’s previous political dispensation. The National Government’s policy in this regard reflects on integrated into the urban fabric of the city. This principle emphasises the importance of collaboration between the public and private sector in the determination of the content and structure of SDF’s – both public and the private sector need to have confidence in the planned growth of the town or city. Table 21 Spatial Justice Principles applied to Msinga Municipality
SPATIAL ISSUES EFFECTS STRATEGIES
Communities in the areas away It is expensive and time 1. Provision, upgrading and from the R33 do not have easy consuming for poor rural families maintenance of key access to services and economic to move to places of employment distribution routes and link opportunities found in Tugela and social facilities. roads to corridors. Ferry and other nodes. Limited employment 2. Promotion of economic Clear and uneven distribution of opportunities and access to land activities in closer proximity to employment opportunities exist results in a downward poverty the rural unemployed.
132 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 between Tugela Ferry and spiral. 3. Clustering of social and Pomeroy nodes and most of the community facilities at more If community facilities are rural areas. accessible points within rural scattered in different locations service nodes. Public facilities and services are then the thresholds (number of being scattered across people needed) to promote local 4. Promotion of private sector community areas rather that development activities and investment in rural areas grouped together at access access to opportunities is within diverse economies. points, although this is emerging decreased. 5. Spatial focus of resources to in some areas. High degrees of segregation areas of greatest need to While economic integration between places of work and redress inequalities in services occurs to some extent in Tugela home and uneven access to standards and quality of life. Ferry, for the most part social and economic activities 6. Equitable protection and economic barriers continue to within the total Msinga area support of rights to and in prevail. (E.g. very limited land. economic investment in outer laying areas) 7. Promote participatory and accountable spatial planning Msinga Municipality is primarily and land use management rural in character with expansive within all areas of Msinga rural settlements occurring Municipality. mainly along ridge lines and major access routes. The main 8. Spatial Focus of land uses and defining feature of these resources to balance settlements is their low density, development and protect and general lack of spatial environmental services which structure. contributes to quality of life.
4.5.2 SPATIAL SUSTAINABILITY The principles contained under spatial sustainability can be read together with the principle of proportionality. The proportionality principle helps to facilitate decisions about where prescription should stop and more direction should be given to stakeholders, citizens and decision-makers. Accordingly, spatial planning must be able to facilitate initiative rather than simply adhering to overly prescriptive measures.
The principle of ‘spatial sustainability’ should lead to an approach that allows for flexibility in dealing with applications and proposals which may not have been anticipated. On the other hand, it also implies that a rigid and non-negotiable directive is required for the protection of vulnerable environmental assets.
133 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Promote land development that is within the fiscal, institutional and administrative means of the country;
This principle is aimed at discouraging approaches to land development which are unlikely to make substantial, long-term contributions to urban development. The principle relates to fiscal, institutional and administrative capacity at the appropriate level of government. This principle may affect the approach and format of spatial planning and physical land development. If a municipality lacks institutional or administrative capacity, the Office of the Premier of the relevant provincial department should provide such support. The fiscal component to this principle of land development also relates to viable communities, which is to say government must ensure that residents have reasonable access to community services and amenities, as well as employment opportunities. The form of land development must provide for basic needs in affordable way. The cost of land and engineering services, given the financial means of the residents, must be appropriate. Applicants and MPT’s should measure land development applications accordingly. Ensure protection of the prime and unique agricultural land, the environment and other protected lands and the safe utilisation of land;
Land which is used for agricultural purposes should only be reallocated to other types of use where a real need exists. Prime agricultural land, as identified by the Department of Agriculture, should remain in production. This department is responsible for overall food security in the country and this principle is crucial to curb unrestrained urban sprawl across fertile agricultural land. Subdivision of agricultural land should only be considered in extreme cases where its agricultural value is negligent and severe pressure for urban sprawl is experienced. It is important that data bases (maps) reflecting soil types, crops, forestation and conservation be integrated within the integrated development planning process – this must be executed on all three levels of government for all the components of spatial planning. This principle is also vital with regard to a necessary mind-shift that spatial planning is only anticipated in built-up areas – a meaningful level of spatial planning is
134 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
necessary, in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, in the rural and agricultural areas of the country. Uphold consistency of land use measures in accordance with environmental management instruments.
The South-African approach towards environmental sustainability has been guided by the United Nations Stockholm summit (1972) and the United Nations Rio de Janeiro summit (1992). This principle is supported by global best-practice in general, and by the United Nations specifically in terms of their precautionary principle. Accordingly, where potential damage of a development activity is serious, the lack of certainty about the impact cannot be used for inappropriate development decisions. In situations where the environmental impact of potential development cannot be assessed as a result of lack of information or uncertainty, the precautionary principle must be implemented in an effort to divert questionable developments. When applied to settlements and land use management, environmental sustainability refers to the relationship between settlement and the natural landscape where it exists. Governmental should undertake environmental planning (for example strategies environmental assessments) and should prepare conservation plans to be able to comment on environmental aspects with regard to land development applications. Spatial sustainability with regard to the environment include avoiding: 1. New settlements on unique habitats or ecologically sensitive areas; 2. Actions that will irrevocably interfere with self-regulating ecological processes; 3. Settlement in places of hazard or high risk (for example dolomitic area, flood plains, noxious industry). The concept of environmental quality should also be read herein, that is to say being an integral part of an integrated approach to the attractiveness of cities and its citizens’ well-being. Reduced congestion as a result of appropriate spatial planning initiatives would result in positive economic growth and more productive use of time. Energy efficiency in buildings, for example, is directly related to social inclusion and the alleviation of energy poverty. Increased energy efficiency also reduces the economic and energy vulnerability of cities – the related innovations and technologies are important drivers for a greener local economy.
135 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Promote and stimulate the effective and equitable functioning of land markets;
This principle must be seen in the context of the principle of proportionally. On the one hand, policy and decision-making must create certainty for reducing risk for investors. On the other hand, it must be flexible enough to adapt to economic, social and technological trends. And enduring problem in managing spatial planning is the maintenance of an appropriate balance between commitment and flexibility in special policy. This principle must therefore be interpreted to facilitate judgements about where prescription should end and discretion be given to developers, the community and decision-makers. Locally, national government has introduced programmes to support cities in promoting public and private investment programmes, such as Urban Development Zones and Special Economic Zones. Such initiatives provide an opportunity for spatial targeting and integrated economic growth, but is dependent on ongoing dialogue between private investors, municipalities and relevant government departments. Consider all the current and future costs to all parties for the provision of infrastructure and social services in land developments;
Specific guidelines for the provision of infrastructure and social services have been determined in South Africa. Based on settlement size, guidelines have been formulated for the provision of health and emergency services, civic services, social services, educational services and engineering services. These guidelines documents refers to parameters for the provision of engineering services, health and emergency services, social, cultural and civic services, and education and recreation services. Promote land development in locations that are sustainable and limit urban sprawl;
Urban sprawl is a specific form of land use, resulting from the spread of low-density residential developments, and from one of the main challenges for cities globally. The development of urban sprawl has been closely linked to spatial segregation, and is especially evident in the South-African landscape with the development of the apartheid-city structures in the pre-1994 era.
136 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Global best-practices in spatial planning aims to promote more compact cities. As a development principle in terms of SPLUMA, it is arguable one of the most important aspects when evaluating applications or compiling spatial plans. The negative consequences of urban sprawl include: 1. Complicated and expensive provision of social and engineering services; 2. Increased energy consumption and congestion; 3. Spatial segregation and social exclusion; 4. Loss of agricultural land and increased soil sealing; 5. Loss of biodiversity and overexploitation of natural resources; and 6. Economic decline of the traditional city centres. SDFs must reflect on the scale of urban growth and address it through planned extensions, infill and redevelopment strategies. It must reflect on adequate densities and the structuring of well-connected systems. This principle relates to the need to integrate urban settlements in the apartheid-city structure, based on the long travel distances from disadvantaged areas to the areas of employment opportunity (for example central business districts and industrial zones).A SDF should specify what specific measures it has taken to curb urban sprawl and promote compact and connected growth opportunities, for example revitalisation zones, brownfields developments, densification policies, mixed land use zones. However, urban sprawl is often curbed by building vertically, which again impacts negatively on daylight and sunlight provision for other spaces left for public to use.
Result in communities that are viable;
This principle’s implication differs significantly in terms of geographical scale. On a regional scale, it relates to the viability of rural areas with limited economic base. On a municipal scale, it can relate to enormous travel distances between rural or tribal settlements and the main town or city. The relevant sphere of government must balance the requirements of the provision of basic services to a community with the long-term viability of investing capital in such a settlement. On an urban scale, it should relate to provisions for mixed land use and social mix. The latter refers to the availability of housing in different
137 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
price ranges and tenures in any given neighbourhood, while the former relates to a significant portion of any neighbourhood to be allocated to economic use. Table 22 Spatial Sustainability Principles applied to Msinga Municipality
SPATIAL ISSUES EFFECTS STRATEGIES
Insufficient maintenance of The people in outlaying rural 1. Protection and use of natural existing physical areas have low per capita hydrological systems. infrastructure. income, which often means 2. Plan service standards in line that full services are Conservation worthy and with economic and unaffordable and this leads sensitive areas are being lost environmental affordability. to non-payment which is to other competing land uses financially unsustainable for 3. Conservation and in the majority of rural areas. the municipality and the maintenance of infrastructure Daily rural living activities are rural poor. and resources are better than contributing to localised water replacement. Once disrepair reaches a pollution. critical point complete 4. Fragmented spatial structure Current lack of land reconstruction is required at causes rural sprawl and management in rural a greater cost. should be countered within settlements, the clearing of parameters of rural culture. Pollution impacts on human natural vegetation, conversion health and living conditions 5. Improved land management of agricultural land and and limits future agricultural measures to control potential inadequate storm water and tourism development conflicts are required. provisions have high costs for potential, with implications remedial and mitigation 6. Protect productive land for for export competitiveness, actions, e.g. damage to roads agricultural purposes. and health costs. and houses after heavy rains. 7. Identify and promote alternative infrastructure solutions within landscape of municipality.
8. Provision of cost effective services which can be maintained
9. Protection of the environment during service delivery
10. Ensure that LED projects are located where its sustainability is ensured and in areas of greatest need.
138 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
4.5.3 SPATIAL EFFICIENCY Land development optimizes the use of existing resources and infrastructure;
In terms of land use applications and land development, it is clear that where the granting of development permissions is not coupled with the provision of adequate infrastructure and traffic management, the consequences can be severe. Conversely, where infrastructure is provided without taking into account appropriate and relevant land use and settlement patterns, the opportunity costs to society are very high. Forward planning in terms of the compilation of a SDF on all geographic levels, needs to be a coordinated effort whereby strategic planning (master plans) for bulk infrastructure forms an integral part of the envisaged SDF. The principle of efficient use of existing resources could, on municipal level, promote high density urban growth, alleviate urban sprawl, ensure alignment between sector plans, design streamlined land development application procedures, develop performance indicators, and optimise the use of land by providing an interconnected network of streets (transit oriented developments). It should also provide stands and housing types to cater for diverse community needs at densities which the existing or planned services can support. Decision-making procedures are designed with a view to minimizing negative financial, social, economic or environmental impacts;
Refer to comment on sustainability above.
Development application procedures are efficient and streamlined and time frames are adhered to by all parties;
Section 44 of SPLUMA regulates the timeframes for applications. In Regulation 16 the minister has prescribed the timeframes as inter alia referred to in Section 44. These timeframes apply, unless an applicable provincial legislation or municipal by-laws have been promulgated that provide timeframes for land development and land use applications or a mechanism for regulating circumstances of apparent delay by the MPT or authorised official.
Table 23 Spatial Efficiency Principles applied to Msinga Municipality
SPATIAL ISSUES EFFECTS STRATEGIES
Historic and current rural land The poor condition of certain 1. Provision, upgrading and use patterns outside of Tugela vital distribution routes is maintenance of key distribution
139 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Ferry and Pomeroy do not costing the local rural routes. support the principle of communities in terms of time 2. Stimulation of Tugela Ferry and efficiency. and money. Pomeroy and Rural Service nodes Economic investment mainly in Effective transport service is to promote sufficient market Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy hampered by road conditions thresholds. Settlements. which impacts on accessibility of 3. Phased Planning around Public opportunities for the rural poor. General lack of clear nodal Investment and bulk capacities to clustering is contributing to The fluctuation of subsistence ensure more cost effective inefficient spatial structure. agricultural production causes developments. an increased pressure on urban Lack of structured spatial 4. Promotion of economic economic opportunities within economic strategy and/or opportunities in close proximity Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy and coordination to guide private to residential functions (where is an evident poverty trap. investment. sustainable). The location of housing options Uncoordinated investment and 5. Planning alignment with mainly in rural areas means long development in the 2 nodes are surrounding municipalities and and expensive journeys to work ineffective and inefficient. sector strategies, especially and social facilities. Endumeni and Alfred Duma Local Investment and Development Economic investment occurs on Municipalities of the Cwaka node strengthen an ad hoc basis and is scattered the ribbon development 6. Prioritising of municipal by sporadic opportunities. pattern along the R33. investment strategies to Uncoordinated land allocation strengthen specific unique The traffic and arbitrary land and land use practices have character for Tugela Ferry and use rights allocation in Tugela serious negative effects on the Pomeroy to prevent duplication Ferry need to be addressed to environment and agricultural and fruitless expenditure. ensure the creation of an land in the municipality, enabling environment for 7. Identification of land for housing contributing to climate change investors. should be done with evident care and the encumbering of food to ensure that existing and security. planned infrastructure such as water and sanitation take precedence.
4.5.4 SPATIAL RESILIENCE Flexibility in spatial plans, policies and land use management systems is accommodated to ensure sustainable livelihoods in communities most likely to suffer the impacts of economic and environmental shocks;
Resilience refers to the capacity to which a certain system is able to tolerate financial, ecological, social and cultural change before reorganising around a new set of structures and processes. Spatial resilience would imply a policy and legal
140 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
framework that contribute to increased human security by enhancing mitigation measures for climate change and improving the management of natural risks and hazards. On a national and regional level, it would include standards for the protection of natural resources (water, air), agricultural land, open spaces and ecosystems. Various parameters have been developed to measure resilience. On a local level, it could include SDFs adapted to increased resilience for human settlements, especially focussed on vulnerable and informal areas. It could also include assessments of potential impacts of climate change and prepare for the continuity of key urban functions during disasters. Commitment in the form of robust, unambiguous policies is important when encouraging land development, as it contributes to creating certainty and reducing risks for investors. On the other hand, special policy (SDF) must also be flexible enough to adapt to social, economic and technological trends. Spatial resilience applied to the urban system, would generally include the following concepts: 1. The local economy is no longer in a situation of continuous growth. Negative effects from global and local economic crisis and the rising need for social expenditure, have resulted in many cities facing the challenge of diversifying their economies. 2. Stimulating job creation, entrepreneurship and expanded local skills base are integral elements of a more resilient city. Cities have to create a favourable entrepreneurial environment while addressing unemployment, education and social issues to avoid marginalisation. 3. The development of social capital is crucial for a diversified and knowledge- intensive economy. Social capital includes investment in education and training and is vital for the development of entrepreneurship and small business development. 4. The connectivity of cities is a key element in creating a balanced urban hierarchy. Larger cities benefit from good connectivity by road/rail/air. Table 24 Spatial Resilience Principles applied to Msinga Municipality
SPATIAL ISSUES EFFECTS STRATEGIES
141 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The Msinga Community aims A dualistic and sometimes 1. Enhance regional identity to preserve the rural culture conflicting situation arises and unique character of place and rural nature of the where the preservation of the by the incorporation of rural municipality as a key rural nature could hamper standards in spatial planning. distinguishing factor and way economic development or 2. Encourage mixed land use of life. vice versa. in interaction with each other The current predominant The lack of spatial diversity at a scale and intensity that rural character often negatively affects living will contribute to economic perpetuates a monogamous, quality, economic opportunity development. ineffective economic as well as a justification for 3. Stimulation of rural service landscape. public investment. nodes to promote sufficient mark thresholds through Public Investment planning The nodes owe their spatial Conflict between logic from indigenous land environmental and 4. Support economic activities allocation practices and agricultural sensitive land that in rural areas to ensure communal land tenure need to be protected and the sustainable activities. system. prevalent land allocation and 5. Ensure Continuation of land use models. rural livelihoods through integration with urban economic activities.
6. Implement environmentally cognisant land use practices through the necessary strategic plans.
4.5.5 GOOD ADMINISTRATION All spheres of government ensure an integrated approach to land use and land development that is guided by the spatial planning and land use management systems as embodied in this Act (SPLUMA);
Spatial planning, through various sectoral and geographic compartments, has been an efficient way to govern. Integration between the relevant levels of government helps to create complementary and mutually reinforcing policies and programmes. Spatial planning and decision0making should be dealt with appropriately at the relevant geographical or administrative scale. The principle of subsidiarity acknowledges that it is necessary that certain decisions be taken at national or regional level where it cannot be properly addressed at local level (for example
142 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
regional infrastructure projects). However, when appropriate, the decision-making process should be driven by local requirements and citizens.
A rigid allocation of competencies should be avoided and the interconnectedness of spatial planning decisions should be shared on a technical level between administrations and levels of government. Accordingly, it is important to link the compilation of a land use a management system (on all geographical levels) to the SDF at the same geographical level. To ensure consistent decision-making, the land use management system must reflect the vision, strategies, policies and projects contained in the integrated development plan and spatial development framework. The use of statements of intent in a land use management system will assist users to link it to the broader vision, strategies and policies contained in the SDF. All government department must provide their sector input and comply with any other prescribed requirements during the preparation or amendment of Spatial Development Frameworks;
The principle of sectoral and governmental co-ordination is based on the integration principle of the United Nations. Accordingly, spatial planning plays a critical role in facilitating policy coherence and integration. The integration between the levels of government helps create complementary and mutually reinforcing policies, while the integration between sectors will mutually reinforce positive benefits. Accordingly, integration across administrative boundaries will effect positive policy coherence and reduce damaging competition across larger geographical entities (for example regions and provinces). The requirements of any law relating to land development and land use are met timeously;
Please refer to comments on SPLUMA Section 44 and Regulation 16 above under Spatial Efficiency.
The preparation and amendment of spatial plans, policies, land use schemes as well as procedures for development applications, to include transparent processes of citizen participation and all parties to have the opportunity to provide inputs on matters affecting them;
This principle is recognised world-wide and is officially supported by recognised institutions like the United Nations, European Union and ISOCARP. It is widely
143 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
recognised that spatial-planning decisions have such extend beyond the normal democratic process. In terms of the democratic principle, it is particularly important that spatial-planning decisions are made by legitimate authorities that are accountable through democratic processes. Their decisions should be made on a thoroughly consistent basis through procedures established in law that ensure fairness and respect for human rights. Effective procedure for public participation will enhance the legitimacy of policy- and decision-making exercises by creating a sense of ownership and ensuring consideration for property owners’ rights. The policy-formulation and decision- making processes must be transparent so that all relevant citizens are made aware of the reasoning behind policies and decisions. Policies, legislation and procedures must be clearly set out and inform and empower citizens
Citizens of the relevant geographic entity (province, municipality, and etcetera) must have access to the relevant information regarding policies, plans and development proposals. They must also have access to the officers and political committees which take the relevant decisions. Citizens should be able to comment on spatial-planning policy and proposals and be able to make formal objections an appeal against decisions. Table 25: SPLUMA principles applied to Msinga municipality
Table 25 Good Administration Principles applied to Msinga Municipality
SPATIAL ISSUES EFFECTS STRATEGIES
Lack of integrated Scattered housing provision 1. Ensure an integrated approach Development and Public leads to settlement pattern to land use and land Investment Strategies that cannot be serviced cost- development. Slow and ineffective effective. 2. Ensure participation and buy- processing of Development Increase the cost of in from Sector Departments and Applications development and investors parastatals during plan Tugela Ferry Town is not thus select other areas for preparation and application formalised and situated on investment. evaluation. Traditional Authority land. Negative influence on 3. Prioritise and peruse the security of ownership, land formalisation and land use rights, land use ownership issues regarding
144 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
management, service Msinga Town. provision, investor security 3. The requirements of any law and public capital relating to land development investment. and land use are met timeously 4. Spatial plans, policies, land use schemes as well as procedures for development applications, to include transparent processes of citizen participation. 5. Ensure institutional capacity for both technocrats and decision makers to guarantee adherence to legislative time frames. 6. Each application should be treated on its merits and that rational reason underpins decisions 7. The Municipality should enter into a service level agreement with each TA as set out in SPLUMA and its regulations.
These challenges are crosscutting in nature and needs to be addressed within all the development sectors identified, within all of the development priorities as well as within all geographical areas of the municipality; urban as well as rural settings. Thus these three spatial challenges will form the basis of the entire Spatial Development Framework in order to achieve the municipal development vision.
4.6 SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES The following Spatial Objectives have been identified for Msinga Municipality:
Demarcate areas where development should not be allowed
Establish the Urban/Settlement Edge and identify land for infill development
145 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Ensure that Public Capital investment promote development of the Primary node and attract private investment to the area.
Establish a hierarchy of nodes
Formalise emerging urban settlements
Develop rural service centres in municipal nodes (emerging urban settlements)
Provision and upgrading of infrastructure to address backlogs
Develop a uniform Land Use Management System that is SPLUMA compliant.
Support Land Reform Projects and Security of tenure
Promote a variety of housing typologies and densities in and around identified nodes
4.7 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY LAND
1. INTRODUCTION
This document is compiled to provide guidance on the role of Traditional Leaders in the decision-making process for SPLUMA applications in Msinga Local Municipality. The current situation is that most land in the municipality’s jurisdiction falls under the control of Traditional Leaders. SPLUMA addresses the processes to be incorporated into a LUMS to ensure that TA’s are acknowledged and provided with certain accountabilities in terms of the Act.
The different sections of SPLUMA and the Regulations pertaining to TA’s are unpacked hereunder.
SECTION 7: DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES
The following principles apply to spatial planning, land development and land use management:
(a) The principle of spatial justice, whereby-
i. Past spatial and other development imbalances must be redressed through improved access to and use of land;
Although South Africa has adopted a normative approach to spatial planning, unique circumstances prevail as a result of the pre-1994 Government’s policy of separate development across racial lines. This is quite unique in spatial planning terms to the South African context, and should be interpreted as such.
146 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The application of spatial justice impacts on different levels. On a regional level, that is for the purposes of a national-, regional-, and provincial SDF’s and/or land use management systems, it impacts on the integration of the previous homeland areas (for example Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei) with the new municipal structures, the impact is mostly on the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Limpopo, Gauteng and the North West Province.
On a municipal level the focus of this principle would be on the integration or development of rural and/or traditional settlements, as well as restructuring the urban morphology created before 1994. The focus should be on urban integration strategies as part of the SDF. The inclusion of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and less formal land use types traditionally found in the African-neighbourhood (for example shebeen, tuck-shop) in the formulation of a LUMS is essential.
An integrated approach towards improved access to and use of land is an essential part of this principle. Accordingly, supportive legislation (for example land restitution and alienation of land) and processes must be aligned and reflected in the process of compiling a SDF and land use management system for all geographic scales. The technical and legal character of a SDF is an efficient vehicle to implement and reflect an integrated development approach (through SPLUMA), as the other pieces of legislation aren’t necessarily equipped to support this principle. Accordingly, strategic land, privately owned, can be identified in the compilation of a SDF to facilitate this principle of spatial justice in an effort to integrate components of the existing apartheid-city structure.
ii. Spatial development frameworks and policies at all spheres of government must address the inclusion of persons and areas that were previously excluded, with an emphasis on informal settlements, former homeland areas and areas characterised by widespread poverty and deprivation;
Spatial planning instruments, which is SDF’s and land use management systems, must focus specially on previously disadvantaged areas and historically disadvantaged people. Although it is a universal urban reality that all parts of a settlement are not supported by the same level of social and economic activities, this principle seeks to correct the historical reality of urban bias in land ownership, spatial planning, and land use change procedures. Liaison with sectoral departments is essential to extract funding (for example neighbourhood development grants and municipal infrastructure grants) from provincial and national departments, into the local sphere. In terms of this principle, all inhabitants should have reasonable access to opportunities and facilities which support living in urban settlements. Neighbourhood development grants and municipal infrastructure grants are essential to extract funding from provincial and national departments into the local government sphere. The timing thereof is focused on the compilation stages of SDF’s on all geographic levels.
147 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
iii. Spatial planning mechanisms, including land use schemes, must incorporate provisions that enable redress in access to land by disadvantaged communities and persons;
Portions of land to fulfil the object of this paragraph must be identified and formalised within SDF’s and land use management systems.
iv. Land use management systems must include all areas of a municipality and specifically include provisions that are flexible and appropriate for the management of disadvantaged areas, informal settlements and former homeland areas;
The national spatial area has been delineated into the so-called wall-to-wall municipalities. Accordingly, and in stark contrast to the national geography of pre-1994, all portions of land have been included in a local municipal area. Based on the historical demarcation of homelands (tribal areas) in especially the northern and eastern provinces, tenure and land use management is mostly regulated by traditional authorities. These authorities need to be consulted and recognised appropriately. Land use and zoning categories in the relevant land use management system needs to make provision for the traditional authority’s tenure rights and its less-formal land use management practices. In terms of pre-1994 spatial planning legislation, agricultural and non-urban land use types were mostly excluded from forward planning (SDF’s) and land use management systems. Appropriate typologies relevant to the government sphere need to be compiled and aligned with neighbouring municipalities and/or provinces.
v. Land development procedures must include provisions that accommodate access to secure tenure and the incremental upgrading of informal areas; and
Tenure is a function of National Government and regulated by the Deeds Registries Act. Traditionally, land in informal (squatter) areas are usually not based on formal cadastral data, for example represented by a general plan and title deed.
This principle of secure tenure recognise the importance of security of tenure and requires the promotion of tenure at all times. Conversely, it is illegal for the relevant authority to allow forms of development in which secure tenure may not be achieved within a reasonable time frame. The principle requires that the rights of occupants in designated informal settlement areas be accommodated. There should be no involuntary removal, except for absolute necessary public improvement.
As a developing country, the incremental upgrading of informal areas in this context refers to the process whereby legally recognised settlements are created over time in an incremental manner. According to the Integrated Urban Development Framework, spatial transformation is a long-term process and requires an incremental approach. The process includes geotechnical and environmental investigations, land surveying, layout planning,
148 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
and the provision of engineering services amongst others. Stakeholders in the process must include the affected relevant citizens, local government and potentially also the private sector.
The definition of ‘tenure’ can be seen also to include ‘collective tenure’. This can include commercial mechanisms such as trusts, share block companies and other mechanisms that will have the effect that land is owned for the benefit of a group of persons.
(e) The principle of good administration, whereby –
iv. the preparation and amendment of spatial plans, policies, land use schemes as well as procedures for development applications, include transparent process of public participation that afford all parties the opportunity to provide inputs on matters affecting them; and
This principle is recognised world-wide and is officially supported by recognised institutions like the United Nations, European Union and ISOCARP. It is widely recognised that spatial-planning decisions have such a widespread impact that opportunities to participate in those processes should extend beyond the normal democratic process. In terms of the democratic principle, it is particularly important that spatial-planning decisions are made by legitimate authorities that are accountable through democratic processes. Their decisions should be made on a thoroughly consistent basis through procedures established in law that ensure fairness and respect for human rights.
Effective procedure for public participation will enhance the legitimacy of policy- and decision-making exercises by creating a sense of ownership and ensuring consideration for property owners’ rights. The policy-formulation and decision-making processes must be transparent so that all relevant citizens are made aware of the reasoning behind policies and decisions.
SECTION 23: ROLE OF EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY
(2) Subject to section 81 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of 1998), and the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, 2003 (Act No. 41 of 2003), a municipality, in the performance of its duties in terms of this Chapter must allow the participation of a traditional council.
The duties of a municipality, wherein a traditional council can meaningfully and pragmatically participate, is the development, preparation, adoption, review, amendment and enforcement of the land use scheme. Participation must be interpreted with reference to section 81(3) of the Structures Act in terms of which the traditional leader must be given an opportunity to express a view before the municipal council takes a decision on any matter directly affecting the area of the traditional authority. The traditional council’s participation is therefore limited to the duties of the municipality in as far as participation directly affects the area of the traditional authority and not the whole
149 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
of the municipal area of the municipality. This is so in view of the fact that the traditional council’s right to participate is subject to section 81 of the Structures Act.
Section 81 deals with the participation of traditional leaders in the proceedings of the municipal council of a municipality. This entails that the designated traditional leaders must be allowed to attend and participate in any meeting of the municipal council. Section 81(2) places certain restrictions on who the traditional leaders are who may so participate and how many of them may do so.
Section 81(3) is of special importance when interpreting section 23 of SPLUMA. Section 81(3) states that before a municipal council may take a decision on any matter directly affecting the area of a traditional authority, the municipal council must give the leader of that authority the opportunity to express a view on that matter.
Apart from the participation of traditional leaders provided for in this section, regulation 19 of SPLUMA also provides for the involvement of traditional councils in the fulfilment of certain functions, provided that the traditional council may not make a land development or land use decision.
Regulation 19 deals with areas under traditional leadership. An area under traditional leadership is an area of jurisdiction, as defined in the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act and means the area of jurisdiction designed for a traditional community and traditional council that has been recognised as provided for in sections 2 and 3 of the Act. Regulation 19(1) stipulates that a traditional council may conclude a service level agreement with the municipality in whose municipal area that traditional council is located, subject to any relevant national or provincial legislation, in terms of which the traditional council may perform such functions as agreed to in the service level agreement, provided that the traditional council may not make a land development or land use decision. Subject to any relevant national or provincial legislation means that in implementing the said regulation, other legislation must observed and complied with.
A traditional council may enter into a service delivery agreement with a municipality in accordance with the Systems Act (and any other applicable legislation). The Systems Act stipulates that a municipality any provide a municipal service in its area or part of its area through an external mechanism by entering into a service delivery agreement with an organ of state, including a traditional community. A municipal service, in turn, is defined as a service that a municipality in terms of its powers and functions provides, or may provide to or for the benefit of the local community irrespective of whether
1 such a service is provided, or to be provide, by the municipality through an internal or external mechanism; and
2 fees, charges or tariffs are levied in respect of such a service or not.
150 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
In terms of the Constitution, municipal planning is an exclusive functional are of a municipality. A municipality can accordingly enter into a service delivery agreement with a traditional community in terms of which functions or services contained in the functional area of municipal planning, or parts thereof, can be rendered by the traditional community in respect of land situated within the jurisdiction area of the traditional community.
The Systems Act provides further that the municipality remains responsible for ensuring that that service is provided to the local community (if a municipal service is provided through a service delivery agreement concluded with an external mechanism, such as a traditional community), and places several duties upon the municipality to ensure that this responsibility is met.
The functions which the traditional council may perform in terms of the service delivery agreement envisaged by the Regulations are however subject to an important qualification. The regulation states that ‘the traditional council may not make a land development or land use decision’. The word ‘make’ must be interpreted to mean ‘determine’, which encompasses hearing, considering and deciding an application.
The Regulations stipulate that if a traditional council does not conclude a service level agreement with a municipality as contemplated in regulation 19(1), that traditional council is responsible for providing proof of the allocation of land in terms of the customary law applicable in that traditional area to the applicant of a land development and land use application in order for that applicant to submit it in accordance with the Regulations. Regulation 19(2) places a responsibility on a traditional council to assist an applicant, who brings a land development application in respect of land which was allocated to the applicant in terms of customary law, to provide such an applicant with proof of the fact that the land in question was allocated to the applicant. Mere proof of the fact that the land in question was allocated to the applicant will not satisfy the requirements stipulated in section 45(1)(c) of SPLUMA. The proof needs to be in writing and also stipulate that the land was availed to the applicant for development.
There are opposed views as to whether SPLUMA affords too much or too little input to traditional councils. The co-existence between a municipality and a traditional authority, each striving for autonomy when it comes to making decisions regarding land use management pertaining to land owned by the traditional authority but situated within the municipal area of the municipality, has always been an uneasy one. The advent of SPLUMA is sure to bring this unease to a head as it clearly delineated the powers and functions of the municipality pertaining to all land within its municipal area and defined the role of the traditional authority. In fact SPLUMA stipulates that a land use scheme of a municipality must include provisions that permit the incremental introduction of land use management and regulation in areas under traditional leadership. The last word regarding this topic has definitely not been spoken.
151 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
It is also of importance to note that a traditional council qualifies as a ‘person’.
SECTION 45: PARTIES TO LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
(1) A land development application may only be submitted by –
(c) a person to whom the land concerned has been made available for development in writing by an organ of state or such person’s duly authorised agent;
Again issues arise regarding the concept of a trust. In the event, for example, where an informal right to land (that is to say the right or interest in land of a beneficiary) under a trust arrangement in terms of which the trustee is a body or functionary established or appointed by or under an Act of Parliament or the holder of a public office, the trust, unless it is the owner of the land, will not be able to submit an application in terms of section 41 of SPLUMA. The trust will also not be entitled to authorise another person to act as agent for the trust.
Regulation 19(2) envisages that a person to whom land was allocated in terms of the customary law applicable in that traditional area, may bring a land development and land use application as an applicant in respect of such land. The person must be a natural or juristic person or an organ of state to be able to qualify as an applicant. If the land was allocated to a trust, the trust cannot submit an application. The application will be a person as referred to in section 45(1)(c) above.
The regulation also places a responsibility on the applicable traditional council, in the absence of a service delivery agreement as contemplated in the provisions of regulation 19(1), to provide the applicant with proof that the land to which the application pertains was allocated to the applicant. In order to satisfy the provisions of section 45(1)(c) of SPLUMA the proof also needs to be in writing together with the statement that the land in question was availed to the applicant for development.
SECTION 56: DELEGATION
Any power, except the power to make regulations and the power to determine land use and land development applications as contemplated in section 35, conferred in this Act upon a Minister, a Premier or a municipality, may, in general or in cases of a particular nature, be delegated by the person or body entrusted with that power to a political office holder or an official in the employ or service of the relevant sphere of government: Provided that any such delegation must be in writing and must specify full particulars and the limitations of such a delegation.
The power to make regulations and the power to determine land use and land development applications as contemplated in section 35, are excluded from the powers which may be delegated in terms of this section. In this regards reference can also be made to the contents of regulation 19(1) which follows on the abovementioned exclusion
152 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
and stipulates that a traditional council may perform certain functions as agreed to in a service level agreement concluded with a municipality, but excluding the making of a land development or land use decision. In the case of a municipality, the powers referred to in section 160(2) of the Constitution as well as the powers referred to in section 59(1)(a) of the Systems Act, may not be delegated.
The phrase ‘the relevant sphere of government’ means that the delegation must be within the sphere of government wherein the delegator resides. This means that the person or body entrusted with that power within the national sphere of government may delegate his/her powers only to a political office holder or an official in the employ or service in the provincial sphere of government; the person or body entrusted with that power within the local sphere of government may only delegate its powers to a political office holder or an official in the employ or service in the local sphere of government.
The importance of this principle lies in the fact that the delegations may only be effected on the same sphere of government level. As such, a power bestowed in terms of SPLUMA to a person or body in the local sphere of government may not be delegated to a political office holder or an official in the employ or service of the provincial or national sphere of government. Such a delegation must remain within the local sphere of government.
The spheres of government are those set out in section 40(1) of the Constitution which stipulates that government is constituted as the national, provincial and local spheres of government. Resorting in each of the three spheres of government is the organs of state within that particular sphere of government.
The section, in as far as it relates to a municipality, must be read with, interpreted and implemented with regard to the provisions of Part 3 of Chapter 7 of the Systems Act.
In relation to the municipal manager delegating any of his/her powers, the provisions of section 59(4) of the Systems Act applies.
REGULATIONS 19: AREAS UNDER TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP
(1) A traditional council may conclude a service level agreement with the municipality in whose municipal area that traditional council is located, subject to the provisions of any relevant national or provincial legislation, in terms of which the traditional council may perform such functions as agreed to in the service level agreement, provided that the traditional council may not make a land development or land use decision.
(2) If a traditional council does not conclude a service level agreement with the municipality as contemplated in sub-regulation (1), that traditional council is responsible for providing proof of the allocation of land in terms of the customary law applicable in that traditional areas to the applicant of a land development and land use application in order for that applicant to submit it in accordance with the provisions of these Regulations.
153 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CONCLUSION
In order to comply with SPLUMA and it’s Regulations and to make provision for Traditional Leaders in the SPLUMA decision-making process it is recommended that the Municipality enters into a service level agreement with each Traditional Leader that clearly explain the roles and responsibilities of the parties in relation to SPLUMA applications. Such a Service Level agreement will be legally binding and need to be compiled by an attorney with the necessary knowledge of Traditional land allocation practices and also of SPLUMA’s requirements in this regard.
154 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CHAPTER 5: DELINEATION OF THE URBAN EDGE
5.1 UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT Guideline 5 from COGTA’s Provincial Planning Guidelines dated July 2009 is titled “Defining Limits on Settlement Expansion: The issue of the Urban Edge”. This Guideline will be applied to the Msinga Municipal area to define the three fundamental landscapes of the study area and to underpin the spatial development of the municipality. The three fundamental landscapes of society can be defined as: 1. Urban 2. Rural 3. Wilderness
Figure 5 Urban Edge Concept
Wilderness
Intensive Agriculture
Peri-Urban
Urban core
(high density development)
155 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
There is considerable confusion about the concept of ‘the urban edge’. In large part, this stems from the fact that, in the rhetoric surrounding the concept in policy and planning arenas, different reasons for its application are confused and conflated. There are two main concerns around which use of the concept is advocated: increasing intensification within urban cores in order to gain the benefits of densification and urban agglomeration; and The need to maintain a dynamic balance between the three fundamental landscapes of society: wilderness, rural and urban. These different concerns require two different kinds of spatial definition: the first involves the definition of a containment edge to define the limits of the urban core; The second involves determining where, and what forms, development should not be allowed beyond the containment edge. It defines three zones (peri-urban, rural and wilderness) and suggests appropriate responses to these. It then outlines a methodology by which ‘no go’ development areas should be defined.
This section of the document is concerned with issues relating to the ‘urban edge’. It should be noted from the outset that the term ‘urban’ is not particularly useful in this context, as it is used loosely in everyday language and is not easy to define. Urban refers to function. It refers to settlements, the economic base of which is not primarily based on the primary sector, particularly agriculture. Even here, there is blurring. Parts of the economy of almost all settlements are directed towards providing some goods and services for their agricultural hinterlands. Conversely, relatively few are entirely based on this function. The term ‘urban’ is issued as a short-hand to refer to all agglomerated settlements which are not directly based on working the land. The issue of the urban edge is applicable to almost all of these.
One important reason why urban edge policies have been relatively ineffective has been that the one instrument (the definition of an urban edge) has been applied to attempt to resolve a number of different problems, all valid and important in their own right, but which collectively cannot be resolved through the use of a single policy instrument. The result has been confusion about how the edge should be delineated. Without a convincing conceptual basis for delimitation, authorities
156 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 have frequently been unable to withstand the pressure from developers for increased rights and change. It is undeniable that the concerns underpinning the need for urban edge definition are valid and that the definition of an urban edge is important. This document seeks to provide guidelines to strengthen the definition and use of the policy instrument. It does not seek to replace judgment and thought by absolute rules, for judgment will always be required. Land owners have the right to apply for increased land-use rights on any land parcel. It is a legal requirement that their applications be treated with administrative fairness. This, in turn, requires that each application be treated on its merits and that rational reason underpins decisions. This document seeks to provide a basis for arguing a logical position, and to outline a method through which local and provincial authorities can engage in a process of edge definition.
5.2 CONCERNS COMMONLY UNDERPINNING URBAN EDGE POLICIES
5.2.1 ERADICATING SPRAWL AND PROMOTING URBAN COMPACTION It is a common cause that sprawl is a major problem facing most South African settlements, formal and informal, large and small. Inter alia, it has the following consequences: It results in the extensive destruction of agricultural and wilderness land and places of high amenity; It results in very low densities which make the delivery of viable and efficient public transportation virtually impossible; It is extremely inefficient in terms of the use of utility services; It results in the inadequate provision of social and commercial facilities, since thresholds are too low to create acceptable levels of provision; It results in places which are extremely expensive and inconvenient in which to live; It actively militates against the creation of small-scale economic activity, because of a lack of vibrant local markets; It makes the co-ordination of point and line services difficult; It aggravates key societal problems of poverty, inequality and unemployment, since it is frequently the poor who are differentially affected and who often live on the outskirts of these settlements.
157 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Given these consequences, there is a powerful case to be made for combating urban sprawl vigorously. In the case of South Africa, it is a matter of the utmost urgency. A recent United Nations Habitat Report (October, 2008) listed South African towns and cities as the most inefficient in the world. From an urban edge perspective, however, two interrelated, but different sets of issues underpin these problems:
5.2.1.1 ACHIEVING DYNAMIC BALANCE BETWEEN THE LANDSCAPES OF SOCIETY A feature of settlement formation and growth is that this balance is being destroyed: the urban is seen as the dynamic element and it spreads out like a cancer, devouring all rural and wilderness landscapes in its path.
One of the greatest planning challenges in South Africa is to reverse this mind-set: to view rural and wilderness landscapes as the positive dimensions and to allow these to inform the pattern and path of lateral urban growth.
5.2.1.2 ACHIEVING GREATER URBAN EFFICIENCIES The second issue relating to the control of sprawl is to increase settlement density. This requires restrictions on the lateral expansion of settlements in order to promote inward urban development and densification. The lateral expansion of settlements cannot be prevented entirely or in perpetuity. The consequences of a policy which put a restriction on lateral expansion in all directions will be: Short term: a) increased land speculation, b) slowed rates of land release and c) inevitable increases in land prices (with highly negative social consequences); and, Longer term: a) An inevitable breach of the cordon, in non-predictable and potentially negative ways. The task therefore, becomes one of defining paths of least damaging (in ecological and landscape terms) possible future urban expansion. Further, edge policies may be necessary to increase densities, but they are not sufficient. Policies of encouraging higher density infill programmes on un-and under-developed sites, particularly in structurally significant locations, are also necessary.
158 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
5.2.2 PROTECTING IMPORTANT ELEMENTS WITHIN URBAN SETTLEMENTS These include cultural and heritage landscapes, as well as important ecological areas, within the containment boundary. This implies that responsible urban management requires not one boundary but a family of firm boundary lines, of decreasing hierarchical significance, within the settlement itself.
5.2.3 PROMOTING SMALL-SCALE AGRICULTURE In the face of high levels of unemployment and poverty and, for many, inadequate access to food, it is clearly sensible in South Africa to promote small farmer programmes vigorously. Two factors make the issue of small farmer promotion particularly pertinent in South Africa at this time. a) Food security. Internationally, an increasing number of people have inadequate access to food, in the face of globally manipulated market forces. The call for local food production to combat this, and thus to increase security, is growing rapidly. b) National land restitution and redistribution policies based on small-farmer programmes. It is becoming increasingly clear that these programmes cannot succeed if they are located in the deep periphery, away from necessary support. In particular, easy and cheap access to the markets represented by agglomerated settlements is essential. The history of agriculture in South Africa abounds with examples of small farmers’ involuntary going out of business because of burgeoning sprawl and thin local markets. The successful introduction of small farmer programmes therefore demands a permanent, proximate relationship (a fixed edge) between dense urban markets and small producers.
5.2.4 MANAGING URBAN WASTES A repeating problem in the management of settlements is the treatment of urban wastes, such as sewage and solid wastes. Frequently, facilities for this have two characteristics: They are space extensive; they need large parcels of land; They are noxious or, at least, nuisance-creating. The traditional management way of dealing with these has been to place them beyond the (then) urban fringe on geologically suitable sites. In the face of rampant urban sprawl, urban development soon overtakes them, with two profoundly negative consequences: they create a lasting nuisance for the new settlement areas which are proximate to them; and they are
159 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 massively destructive of the fine grain of the surrounding settlement – they create obstacles or barriers which interfere with the structural logic of any new settlement. These problems can be resolved if there is a permanently fixed containment edge, behind which these bulk services can be located.
5.2.5 ISSUES OF SUSTAINABILITY AND RECYCLING Related to this is the issue of, recycling wastes productively, as far as is possible. Of particular importance in a water-scarce country such as South Africa is the location of sewerage plants. In a dry region such as Kwa-Zulu- Natal, sewerage treatment plants are potential generators of large amounts of (irrigable), partially treated wastes. The challenge is to recycle waste water to potentially productive agricultural land at a cost which makes recycling viable. Again, for this to occur there needs to be a fixed-edge between productive land and urban markets, behind which bulk sewerage works can be located.
5.2.6 CO-ORDINATION OF LINE AND POINT BULK SERVICES TO ACHIEVE EFFICIENCIES International precedent shows that the positive impact of line and point services is greatly enhanced when they are co-ordinated. For example, the developmental potential of the provision of water to a site is much greater if that site also has power. Similarly, the impact of a new regional hospital is massively reduced if it has neither water nor power. Despite this, there is little service co-ordination in South Africa at this time. Services are supplied by different providers who largely react to new demands: they occur outside of any plan for settlement expansion. Yet, potentially, the provision of services (the ‘hidden land of the capital web’) has enormous power to attract and direct development, and control over service capacities is a potentially powerful instrument of settlement control. For service co-ordination to occur there must be a clear vision of where development should be promoted and where it should not: there must be the definition of clear urban edges which define paths of possible future expansion.
5.2.7 AVOIDING HAZARDS An argument that is increasingly heard in favour of the definition of urban edges is the prevention of the spread of hazards, particularly fire and floods. This is receiving growing attention since the recent tragic events in Australia in 2017. In these instances, ‘edge’ is seen as a buffer or protective device at the interface between potential sources of hazard and settlement.
160 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
5.3 SYNTHESIS This approach to planning reverses the common planning and management practice of trying to determine where development should go: rather it focuses on the question of where development definitely should not go. The answer to this is largely informationally and settlement structurally-driven. The discussion on reasons for defining limits to development suggests that it is useful to consider development potential zonally. Four zones, with each zone ‘buffering’ the next, suggest themselves: I. An urban core within the demarcation line: Within this, high intensity development should be encouraged, in order to promote the benefits which can (with good design) result from this. II. (ii) A peri-urban zone. This is a zone adjacent to the urban core, within which there is a gradual intensification of agriculture. Some development can occur within this zone, but subject to stringent conditions. 1) It must ensure the continuing dominance of agriculture. By definition, the form of development must be that of ‘beads’ – small pockets which are integrated with existing regional or sub-regional movement infrastructure. 2) Within the zone, intensification of agriculture in response to the influence of proximate urban markets should be allowed. 3) New development must be structurally appropriate – it must respond to historic patterns of movement and settlement. 4) The form of development must be appropriate: it must reflect qualities of homestead and village – not suburbia. 5) It must respect the dictates of the natural and cultural landscape. 6) It must bring with it public benefits. (iii) An intensive agricultural zone. No development should occur within this, except in special cases related to agricultural activity or providing access to wilderness areas (for example, eco-tourist based). Here development should only occur in small pockets which conform to the principles of the ‘agricultural superblock (see below) – settlements which reinforce historical patterns of regional movement. (iv) Wilderness. No permanent development should be allowed within this zone.
161 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
5.4 GUIDELINES FOR DELINEATING THE URBAN CONTAINMENT EDGE There is no ‘scientific’ way of defining these containment edges: they require strong administrative actions to defend them. A number of factors contribute to the delineation of the line. 1. The delineation needs to be informed by important characteristics of the natural environment. A useful tool is to compile a map identifying composite natural resources and character - contributing elements in the settlement region. Wherever possible, the edge definition should co-inside with natural barriers (water courses, steep slopes, vegetation of significance and so on). 2. Since the central purpose of these edges is to compact urban development in order to achieve greater urban efficiencies, to be effective the line should be drawn as close to the edge of the existing built-up area as possible. The line should be defensible in terms of the logic of the internal structure of the existing settlement. As a rule of thumb, the line should not be more than 1.5 kilometres – a reasonable walking distance – from the closest point or line of more intensive urban activities (places of work, retailing and community facilities.) A number of points need to be made about the process of delimitation. Firstly, the defining edge should not be continuous. By omission, it should define paths of future lateral spread which, in turn, allow for a rational pattern of future government spending on utility and social infrastructure. As a general principle new urban development should occur on the worst land in terms of agricultural productivity and amenity: urban development should be used to improve the total landscape. Secondly, within these paths of future lateral expansion, sprawl should be strongly discouraged. Development should not be suburban but should take more urban, higher density forms. Further, ‘leap-frog’ sprawl should be discouraged. As far as is possible, new development should be contiguous with the existing built edge. Thirdly, the definition of edges should not follow existing cadastral boundaries. It should form a strong geometric edge. Straight, not wavy, lines should be encouraged. Fourthly, the edge should be made physically, not just administratively determined. Buildings should occur hard against the edge and open-ended street networks, which encourage further lateral spread, should be disallowed.
162 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Fifthly, wherever appropriate, the edge should be reinforced through the creation of fire- breaks and more intensive forms of agriculture which should be encouraged to occur hard against the edge.
5.5 GUIDELINES FOR DEFINING WHERE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD NOT GO
5.5.1 PRINCIPLES Four central principles should guide this determination: Avoid locating new built development on land of medium to high agricultural and amenity value; Avoid fragmentation of rural and wilderness landscapes; Avoid fragmentation, or a scatter of ‘pockets’, of development: ensure that new development responds to, and reinforces, the logic of regional and sub-regional infrastructure (the principle of ‘structural reinforcement’); Maintain the dominance of agricultural and wilderness landscapes outside of the urban cores. All four of these are central to the important landscape and heritage principle of authenticity, which, in turn, underpins all landscapes of quality. International precedent shows that in all landscapes of quality, there is an identifiable logic to the locational pattern of settlements. Settlement does not take the form of random pockets: it follows a structural logic which is strongly informed by the nature of (particularly) movement (the pattern of access) and other forms of sub-regional infrastructure which logically follow movement. The methodology which is necessary to define these zones where development should not go involves a number of steps. The collation of relevant information by appropriate information category; The overlay of the different layers, to produce, a map of composite informants and constraints; The translation of this product into a map showing ‘no-go’, ‘tread lightly’ and ‘possible development’ parcels; Super-imposition of the settlement and movement structural logic to determine which of the ‘possible’ development areas should be allowed. A number of different settlement forms occur within Kwa-Zulu Natal including:
163 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Mixed-use towns and cities, both large and small; Rural hamlets; Spontaneous (frequently informal) settlements, both urban and rural; Historical apartheid settlements with little or no economic function; Settlements developed through customary systems. The way of thinking, and the approach, outlined here are applicable in some form to all these settlement forms. At the heart of the issue are four central principles: (i) Settlement systems should be authentic (in the sense that they have a clear purpose and an economic base which is responsive to that purpose).The South African landscape (including that of Kwa-Zulu Natal) is peppered with settlements which are not authentic – which have been brought into being purely for ideological or political reasons. As a general rule, no new development should be encouraged in relation to these. (ii) The need to determine where development should not go (on the grounds of the characteristics of both natural and cultural landscapes). Every settlement must determine this for the land under its jurisdiction. Without this, there can be no rational planning or management of either urban or rural areas. (iii) The need to apply rigorously the principle of structural reinforcement. All new development must contribute to a reinforcing system which brings benefit to those already on the landscape New development cannot be randomly scattered, according to the self-interest of a limited number of people. This lies at the heart of the planning and management of rural and urban areas. (iv) The need to promote settlement compaction in order to achieve urban efficiencies and economies of agglomeration. This is clearly more applicable in the case of larger urban settlements than small rural ones. Nevertheless, the requirement to use land efficiently and wisely lies at the heart of sustainable approaches to settlement-formation.
5.6 CONCLUSION The guidelines outlined here argue that the definition of ‘the urban edge’ in fact requires demarcations of two very different kinds:
164 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
An inner edge or containment: The purpose of this is to achieve greater urban efficiencies and, to this end, it must be accompanied by urban infill programmes concentrating primarily on structurally significant locations. The delineation of this edge is determined by internal structural considerations relating to the existing settlement itself. The definition of where development should not go. This is necessary to maintain a synergistic balance between wilderness, rural and urban landscapes. The logic of this edge definition derives from two sources. Substantive information relating to natural systems, issues of heritage and the cultural landscape and historical settlement and infrastructural investment patterns. The logic of existing regional and sub-regional infrastructure, particularly in the form of existing patterns of settlement and movement. Within these delineation forms, all other concerns underpinning the arguments for ‘an urban edge’ can be accommodated. The protection of important elements within settlements; The promotion of small-scale agriculture; The responsible management of bulk infrastructure; Issues of sustainability and re-cycling; The co-ordination of and point bulk services and the achievement of future urban efficiencies; Control over hazards, such as fire.
165 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 35 Tugela Ferry Urban Edge
166 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 36 Pomeroy Urban Edge
167 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CHAPTER 6: SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
6.1 INTENDED FUTURE LAND USES
6.1.1 CONSERVATION/ ECO-TOURISM/ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ZONES It is critical for the development of a sustainable Spatial Development Framework to identify environmentally sensitive areas in order to direct and manage intensive development away from such areas. The Msinga Spatial Development Framework considers both formally registered conservation areas as well as additional potential/future conservation worthy areas. Areas of environmental concern include the following: Wetlands and watercourses, Areas prone to soil erosion, steep slopes, archaeological sites and tourism assets Rural Settlement with no adequate water and sanitation are also of big concern. In general the following areas were identified as future conservation areas. All formally registered Nature Reserves All formally registered Protected Areas (National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No. 57 of 2003) (NEMPAA) Areas identified as of environmental significance by KZNWildlife. ESA (Ecological Support Areas) CBA Irreplaceable areas CBA Optimal Areas Landscape Corridor Critical Linkage All river and stream areas, Wetlands & Dams in excess of 1 Ha with a 30m buffer around the boundary. Riverine buffer areas. A conceptual buffer of 30m from centreline was utilised. Selected slope areas that is intersected by rivers. Indigenous forests.
168 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The resulting analysis identifies various riverine areas distributed throughout the municipality. Although not many formal protected areas exist the following areas have been identified by the Msinga IDP as significant environmental conservation areas. Interesting to note is the high number of wetlands located in the northern area of the Municipality which is situated within the highest value agricultural land. Although wetlands need to be protected, it is an indication of the availability of water which could be used for irrigation schemes, or at least effective small scale cultivation. The subsistence farming patterns coincides with the locality of the wetlands. Very few conservation orientated projects could be sourced from the IDP and other sector reports. These projects have been depicted in the table below. Table 26 Conservation Orientated Projects
PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT STATUS Develop strategic environmental assessment, climate change response strategy and alien eradication plan, EMF Educating the community Empower the community to contribute (Build community awareness to the greening of Msinga Local and community involvement Municipality least one community in greening, Abor week driven greening project per year to be events) delivered by the community in a public space with financial and in-kind support from Municipality Increasing tree canopy Increase tree canopy cover to at least cover (also plant indigenous 15% by 2021 trees and reduce alien Reduce 30% of alien species by 2021 plants) Greening, enlarging and Establish 10 new greenways by 2021 Enhancing public open (adopt new news and methods to green the environment) spaces (Pos) (parks In addition to greenways convert infrastructures and nature suitable areas of underutilised public play grounds) land into open green spaces Encourage green nature plays grounds Greening New development Retention, reinstatement and where (green infrastructure and possible increase of vegetation cover greener development and on privately owned/traditional land Incorporation of innovative green principles infrastructure into the design of new developments, particularly where high density limits the site area
169 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
available for in-ground plantings
Optimise green economy initiatives & reflect integrated grant spending submitted to NDPW- Puts measures in place that protect environmental sensitive areas and therefore ensure that no land use is proposed in an area where the specific land use can have detrimental effects on the environment. Environmental Management Plan (EMP) – Enabled identification of hotspots for potential projects and programmes to prevent environmental degradation Promote the development of alternative energy, including renewable energy technologies Adopt 32 metres buffer area from boundary of regulated area of major watercourses for strict regulation of development. Implementation through adequate provisions in the municipal LUMS.
There are a number of people already living within the newly identified Environmental Management Zones, due to their need for water. The intention is not to force people from these areas, but to make them aware of the dangers of living close to rivers, which includes flood risks, and the risk to contaminate water which leads to cholera. Due to the previous mentioned, national laws restrict occupation of land closer than 30m from rivers and other water sources, and therefore the Municipality cannot condone any future development within 30m of any water source.
170 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
6.1.2 AGRICULTURAL AREAS The objective is to identify and to distinguish between cultivated land (commercial and subsistence) as well as high Potential Agricultural Land, which gives input into the identification of future expansion of agricultural activities. Agriculture is the primary sector in the municipal area with relation to job creation and as the economic base of the area. This means that the municipality needs to support the sector and in collaboration with the department of Agricultural and Environmental Affairs create circumstances to protect the land and promote value adding to the products of the area. The Municipality’s Economic Development Strategy identified agricultural opportunities in the Municipality. This provides opportunities for expanding of agro processing facilities as well as beneficiation opportunities to be explored. The parameters used to determine the best potential agricultural land: High Potential Agricultural Land of areas larger than 20 Ha, Good Potential Agricultural Land of areas larger than 20 Ha, Intensive and Extensive Agricultural Activities larger than 20 Ha, Cultivated land larger than 20 Ha, Rainfall higher than 500 mm per annum
The criteria of 20Ha were used, as the Department of Agriculture does not consider anything less than 20 ha as a viable unit. Subdivisions less than 20Ha will therefore not be allowed. The 2015 Department of Agriculture Guideline identifies the following types of Agricultural land: IRREPLACEABLE – very high potential agricultural land should be retained exclusively for agricultural use. THREATENED - high potential agricultural land, retaining land within this Category for predominantly agricultural use PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL - moderate agricultural potential, Preference given to land uses which will enhance the viability of the farming enterprise. SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL - low agricultural potential, requires significant interventions to enable sustainable agricultural production MIXED LAND USE - limited to very low potential for agricultural production, Cultivation within this land category is severely limited, grazing value will be poor
171 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 27 Development on Agricultural Land
NEEDS STRATEGIES INTERVENTIONS 1. Capitalise on Facilitate rural economic development Packaging of feasibility studies and Agricultural through the promotion of SMME’s, creating business plans LED initiatives opportunities opportunities for small scale farmers and Staging Awareness campaigns on “1 through the development and Co-ordinating home, 1 garden” concept to an Integrated Poverty Alleviation Program promote subsistence farming Implement UNSRDP (“Ukuzakha Nokuzenzela Sustainable Rural Development Programme) Food Security Project Provide ploughing assistance to local small scale farmers for subsistence use Goat Farming Project Vegetable Production Poultry rearing Fresh water Fish farm 2. Unleashing To develop and implement an agricultural Develop Agriculture Potential Agricultural sector plan Analysis/Strategy Potential Sustainable agricultural practices that reduce leaching, erosion, compaction and loss of soil structure, should be promoted There is significant potential to increase crop production through improved farm management and agricultural support systems. However, due to the already vulnerable environment, the current and future stock farming practices should be managed carefully in order not to cause any further degradation of the environment. 3. Protect prime To develop and implement an Develop Agriculture Potential agricultural, the agricultural sector plan Analysis/Strategy environment, and Erosion Control Erosion control measures should be other protected intensified in these areas by means areas of intense agricultural interventions (including agricultural extension programs and facilitation of transformation to sustainable agriculture). 4. Establishing / Additional income generating opportunities involve communities in agro Expanding Agro- are needed within areas of economic need. processing Processing Agro processing, especially within an area Establishing small-scale,
172 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 facilities: situated on an agricultural corridor provides appropriate and sustainable the potential for additional income. Agro processing businesses that are Processing entails the turning of primary flexible require little capital investment and can be carried out agricultural products into other commodities in the home without the need for for market I – in other words, beneficiation sophisticated or expensive of primary agricultural commodities equipment. Expansion of trade opportunities related to agricultural activities – formal and informal Focus on the following opportunities that exist within the Municipality: Agricultural perishable products to local hospitals and general markets in nearby Municipalities. Chakalaka and other vegetable orientated agro- processing opportunities. 5. Promote and Facilitate the training and use of the Training and education on irrigation support Agric available irrigation infrastructure to ensure farming Irrigation Scheme the contribution towards food security and Protect high value agriculture land Projects optimal utilisation of the available resources for food security and economic by both small scale and commercial farming beneficiation operations. Promote security of tenure and ownership of high potential agricultural land
Table 28 Agricultural projects
PROJECT FUNDING AGENT Iniesta Agri-Processing Coops Assistance
6.1.3 INFILL AREAS Msinga Municipality identified an urban edge as part of this SDF which has been clearly defined and need to be taken further through the municipality’s Land Use Management Scheme (LUMS) process. The urban edge facilitates a planned environment while protecting the natural environment so as to promote sustainable development. The urban edge intends to ensure that ad hoc development will not have a negative impact on planned development. Further, it facilitates the efficient delivery of services and infrastructure. It is proposed that future urban uses
173 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 are contained within the existing urban areas and development first seeks to densify and infill the existing urban areas. This will support the Public Investment programme and ensure the highest benefit and most people serviced with the available funding. Urban Sprawl and the concomitant high cost of service delivery and public investment should be discouraged intensely in Msinga Municipality. The land use management scheme is not adopted as yet, and the concept urban edge needs to be incorporated into the final adoption of the LUMS by the municipality.
6.1.4 RESIDENTIAL AREAS Various areas have been earmarked for Urban Infill through the identification of developable land with the following characteristics: Land that is Unoccupied; Land that is not cultivated or used for any agricultural purposes; Land that is classified as high environmental value, (refer paragraph 6.1.1) should enjoy protection. This is mitigated by only earmarking land adjacent to existing residential areas. Land larger than 25ha (accommodate 100 families) Situated adjacent to existing residential areas. Land with slopes of less than 1:3 Land close to infrastructure and services The most significant areas for infill are situated in the identified Urban Edge areas, specifically the available area within the Mkuze Urban Edge. Various other settlements have potential for expansion as far as land potential is concerned. It must be kept in mind that although the land potential allows for residential expansion, infill development and compact residential areas is preferable over wide expanding residential areas.
This allows for more cost effective implementation of infrastructure and optimum use of Public Investment. The goals of compact residential areas and urban infill developments are to promote sustainable, functional and integrated settlement patterns in order to: Discourage low density urban sprawl; Generate social and economic opportunities for people; and Promote easy accessibility to opportunities. In turn it also has an effect on maximizing resources efficiency through:
174 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Ensuring the protection of the available environmental resources within a municipality; Protection of productive land for agricultural purposes; As indicated above, only land in excess of 25ha is identified for residential development in areas outside the urban Edge. The Department of Human Settlement will seldom, if ever, fund projects less than 100 units. Traditional standards for erf sizes are ±2,500m² which is large enough to accommodate the traditional extended families and concomitant activities. These portions of land also need to be situated in close proximity to current settlements with existing infrastructure, or in an area where the new development will create densities in the existing settlement which will justify the sustainable provision of services.
Table 29 Housing projects
PROJECT NUMBER OF STATUS IMPLEMENTING BENEFICIARIES AGENT Ezimbomvini Phase 2 1000 Units Alva Housing Project 1000 Units Uthuli Iwezulu Housing Project 1000 Units Pomeroy Phase 2 1000 Units Mngeni Housing Project 1000 Units Ophathe Housing Project 1000 Units Pomeroy Integrated Stock 1000 Units Fabeni Housing Project 1000 Units Nqoleni Housing Project 1000 Units Ngongolo Housing Project 1000 Units Mthembu Phase 2 Rural Housing 1000 Units Emvundlweni KwaLatha Rural Housing 120 Units Ezimbomvini Rural Housing 300 Units Ngome Rural Housing 1000 Units Kwadolo Mbono 1000 Units Nxamalala Douglas Rural Housing 1000 Units
175 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Nhlalakahle 1000 Units Msinga Top Rural Housing 3500 Units Mzweni Rural Housing 1000 Units Nteneshane Rural Housing 3000 Units Mahlaba Rural Housing 1300 Units Mkhuphula Rural Housing 1000 Units
Source: Msinga IDP 2019/20
The list of housing projects from the IDP is comprehensive but seemingly without a development strategy and not in a way that will ensure maximum benefit from public capital investment. The Municipality need to develop in a structured way to ensure the most beneficial settlement and development pattern for the municipality, which will promote investment opportunities and create the concomitant economic benefits for the residents.
6.2 DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS The major structuring element for determining the existing and future concentration of development, activity and investment in the Msinga Municipality consists of an access and movement hierarchy that has been established through the major internal and external provincial linkages. In rural, provincial and national contexts, corridors range in scale depending on function and categorisation of the transportation route that forms the basis of the corridor. Corridors carry the flows of people and trade into and around the nodes connected through the corridor. These flows of people and trade make a corridor function, and should form an integral part of the corridor planning and development processes.
The key advantage of a corridor as a spatial structuring element, and tool for economic growth, is that is has the potential to link areas of higher thresholds (levels of support) and economic potential, with those that have insufficient thresholds. This allows areas that are poorly serviced to be linked to areas of opportunity and benefit with higher thresholds.
176 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
6.2.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR The Primary Transport Corridor for Msinga is the provincial road R33. This road traverses the Municipality in a north south direction and internally connects the main economic areas of Keats Drift, Tugela Ferry, and Pomeroy. The R33 further connects the Municipality to Greytown in the South and Dundee in the North. This corridor is the main transport and economic activity corridor in the municipality regarding agricultural and tourism opportunities as part of the Battlefield Routes, and can link to the R68 in Nqutu. This corridor also connects the nodes of Tugela Ferry, Cwaka and Pomeroy in the municipality.
6.2.2 SECONDARY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR The primary focus of these corridors is to link places of economic opportunity with places of residence. Development can be encouraged at appropriate locations along these corridors.
Secondary Corridors in the Municipal area are as follows:
1. P280 This route links Tugela Ferry to Weenen and provides access through the central part of the municipal area. This corridor forms part of the PSEDS that identified a tourism corridor traversing the Municipal area in an east west direction connecting Tugela Ferry with Weenen in the west and Nkandla in the east.
Interventions envisaged along this route include the following:
Movement Corridor: Constant Inter Governmental communication and co- ordination relating to the linkages to nodes external to Msinga in Adjacent Municipalities. Developing localised Corridor Development Strategies (where R33 passes through towns/urban areas which will focus on spatial structure, infrastructure provision and attracting both public and private sector investment. Ensure multimodal transport integration occur along these roads at key points, as distribution strategy between rural settlements and nodal areas. This route provides development opportunities that must be explored. Development should be encouraged along this primary route. 2. P365 – P194 – R33 This corridor provides access to the east central part of the municipality, linking the rural settlements with the node of Pomeroy for social and economic services.
177 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Interventions envisaged in this area relate to: Developing a localised Corridor Development Strategy which will focus on spatial structure, infrastructure provision and attracting both public and private sector investment. Ensure multimodal transport integration occur along these roads at key points. Tarring of roads which will provide transport services access to the remote regions, and open up additional economic opportunity in opening the areas. Accessibility is of key importance. This is an area where shortend procesesses as indicated in Section 21 (l)(ii) of SPLUMA must seriously be considered by the municipality.
3. P363 Interventions envisaged in this area relate to: Tarring of roads which will provide transport services access to the remote regions, and open up additional economic opportunity in opening the areas. Accessibility is of key importance. Developing a localised Corridor Development Strategies which will focus on spatial structure, infrastructure provision and attracting both public and private sector investment. Ensure multimodal transport integration occurs along these roads at key points.
6.2.3 TERTIARY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS Tertiary corridors link areas and lower order settlements within the municipality to the secondary and tertiary nodes. These are generally slower moving corridors in terms of social interaction and economic activities. The following routes in Msinga fulfil the role of Tertiary Corridors.
1. P190 – P53
2. D1273
3. D1268
4. P368-P373
6.2.4 LOWER ORDER CORRIDORS
178 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
These corridors ensure linkages between settlements and serve as strategic areas for the location of public facilities and webs of settlement. They are not demarcated on the maps as there are a large number of such access routes, which do not provide vital strategic information, or require to be strategically evaluated within this spatial development framework.
6.2.5 Agricultural Corridors
The purpose of these corridors is to provide the agricultural sector with access to higher order roads and eventually to markets for the agricultural products. Public interventions envisaged in this area relate to:
Establishing / Expanding Agro-Processing facilities:
Additional income generating opportunities are needed within areas of economic need. Agro processing, especially within an area situated on an agricultural corridor provides the potential for additional income. Agro Processing entails the turning of primary agricultural products into other commodities for market thus, beneficiation of primary agricultural commodities.
To involve communities in agro processing the following option can be considered:
Establishing small-scale, appropriate and sustainable processing/value adding businesses that are flexible require little capital investment and can be carried out in the home without the need for sophisticated or expensive equipment.
Expansion of trade opportunities – formal and informal
The following routes in Msinga can be described as agricultural corridors:
1. P193 Providing access to markets and higher order roads from the commercial farming area in the northern part of the municipality.
6.3 SERVICE CENTRE AND ACTIVITY NODES A hierarchical system of nodes is proposed, based on existing levels and patterns of development, and the distribution of future development and transport linkages, to ensure optimum accessibility to goods and services through equitable distribution. The various nodes are distinguished in terms of whether they are: Existing and to be maintained at that level Existing at a lower level and to be extended and consolidated into a higher level node
179 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy are identified as Rural Service Centres in terms of the Provincial SDF but both fulfils the role of primary node for service delivery and availability of facilities in the municipal area. Tugela Ferry is the commercial and administrative node of the municipality where Pomeroy is a commercial node. These dual nodes exist primarily due to their locality and the differences in topography and land ownership mechanisms of the two. It is however foreseen that the Tugela Ferry node will over time become more and more the primary node where Pomeroy will fulfil an intermediately function on the level between the primary and more rural secondary nodes.
The economy of Msinga Municipality, as is the case with most rural municipalities in KwaZulu- Natal, operates on a marginalized economic level, and cannot be compared to larger municipal areas with large population numbers, and stronger more vibrant economies. The exception is the commercial s farms in the northern part of the municipal area that is a primary contributor to the economy and job opportunities in the municipality. It need however to be taken into consideration that the commercial agriculture sector in the municipality have strong linkages with Dundee as a service centre rather than with the Msinga nodes.
The classification of nodes as indicated in the following table is therefore applicable only to the Msinga Municipal Area and the different order nodes cannot necessarily be compared with similar classified nodes of the adjacent municipalities.
Table 30 Nodes Primary Municipal Node Secondary Municipal Node/Rural Tertiary Municipal Service Center Node/RSC Satellite Tugela Ferry Cwaka Msinga Top Pomeroy Keate’s Drift Nhlalakale Mfenbude Masabeko Gunjana Rorkes Drift Rural Settlement Clusters have been identified as an indication of large groupings of population. Limited services are provided at these locations, which should be serviced through the Tertiary/RSC Satellite Nodes. The sections below propose a number of facilities to be provided according to the standards as highlighted in 6.4 Standards for Provision of
180 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Services. Conceptual localities have been marked for all proposed facilities to depict the broad area where the facility should be provided. Specific sites must still be obtained through negotiations with land owners, and according to principles which allows for maximum accessibility to the community.
181 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 31 Facility Needs
182 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 37 Msinga nodes & Corridors
183 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
6.3.1 PRIMARY MUNICIPAL NODES TUGELA FERRY Tugela Ferry town is the main nodal area and the most developed settlement in Msinga Local Municipality, and as such is the Primary Node within the municipality. This is the main centre of the local municipality, serving generally a radius of 25 km with most services and activities required at the local municipality level. This is the point with the highest accessibility within the municipality and provides accessibility on regular basis via public transport to the rural hinterland. It serves as the main activity node for commercial and local administrative activities. In order to service the large population concentration, development efforts are focused on economic development & service provision, job creation, government services and provision of basic services. The focus of Public Capital Investment in the primary node to strengthen the node by means of attracting higher order activities is recommended. The locality of the town in terms of the Tugela River and the topography dictates the future extension and growth of the town. The major limitation to expansion is the existing road through the town which is highly congested and due to the topography it will be exceedingly difficult to build a bypass or broaden the existing road. The new bridge over the Tugela River will contribute to the alleviation of congestion and provide increased accessibility to both parts of the town. The topography south of the river lends itself much better to development compared with the area north of the river. According to the 2011 Census the following is applicable: Households: 899 Population: 2 267
Average Household size: 2.5
184 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 38 Primary Node, Tugela Ferry
In 2011, Msinga Municipality appointed Iyer Urban Design Studio, in conjunction with StratPlan Planning Resources to assist with the preparation of the Urban Design Framework Plan for the Tugela Ferry area. This study was aimed at assessing the current situation in Tugela Ferry with the view to provide a basis for the Development Vision and Conceptual Framework, which will in turn, outline and facilitate the development of the Urban Design Plans.
The challenges that the framework sought to address included;
The lack of clarity within the urban structure as a result of ad-hoc and unstructured development; Lack of management of informal traders and trading; Livestock roaming freely through the town; The roads in a poor state of condition with no stormwater management; Current development is unmanaged; Current parking accommodation is limited;
185 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Potential widening of the bridge; and Understanding the land legal impacts. In response to these challenges, the framework plan proposed interventions aimed at addressing the physical structure of the town which would promote its functionality within the broader municipal economy, promote a responsive urban structure in relation to the needs of Tugela Ferry and the promotion of Local Economic Development for the area whilst also respecting the ecological integrity and environmental sensitivity. These interventions were all geared towards attracting public and private investment.
Map 39 Tugela Ferry Development Framework
The following initiatives should be supported in the node:
Public Capital Investment Plan to ensure that investment will lead to sustainable long-term development of the node and efficient public and private service delivery for the residents of Msinga Local Municipality Detailed local plan to update and review the 2011 Urban Design framework Shortened land use management procedures Adoption of a Town Planning Scheme Industrial development based on the agro-economy
186 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Commercial development Decentralization point for local administration of provincial and local government services Higher order social and commercial services Housing development As the primary node in the municipal area the table depicts the status of Tugela Ferry.
Table 32 Status of Tugela Ferry
Existing Facilities Planned Facilities Proposed Facilities Pre-School 1 Municipal Buildings Upgrade
Primary School 3 Sport Facilities Tertiary Education (FET) 1 Secondary School 2 Market Stalls Fire Station 1 Tribal Court 2 Community health Centre Emergency Service Facility 1 Clinic 1 ABET/Training Centre 1 Police Station 1 Post Office 1 Community Hall 3 Post Boxes 1 Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field 1 Bus Service on Regular 1 basis Taxi rank and/or Bus 1 Depot Library 1 Hospital 1
POMEROY
The Pomeroy node is situated in the northern part of the municipality and is well suited for future expansion and development. The node enjoys very good access due to the R33 through the town. The area’s topography is also such that the node can easily be developed. This node is a formalised town with a registered layout. The Pomeroy Town consist of a number of land uses, there is mixed uses such as agriculture, residential, commercial – formal and informal activities, social services and facilities such as the Pomeroy Community Health Centre (CHC) that is secondary to the main hospital in Tugela Ferry, Nhlanhleni police station as well as secondary Msinga Municipality’s offices. The main focus of the Pomeroy Town is economic activities for the entire municipal area.
187 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Although there is a proper layout of the town, the current activities are disorganised, congested and degraded. An abundance of informal traders are obstructing the free flow of pedestrian and movement by trading along shop fronts, passages and on pavements in close proximity to R33.
Access to Pomeroy town is through a single movement network – the R33 linking to Dundee and Tugela Ferry up to Pietermaritzburg. It is further divided by provincial and district roads providing linkage to Mazabeko (East) and Mzweni (West) areas. The town has a grid-iron street pattern that the municipality is currently surfacing as identified in its IDP as Pomeroy internal road surfacing.
Although the street pattern is clearly defined, there is insufficient parking and loading bays, as a result intensifying congestion along the R33. The public transport facility is available although is under pressure. A semi-formal taxi rank is located as one enters the town from Tugela Ferry; some of the taxis are operating along the main road adding to the congestion problems within the town.
There are two Petrol filling stations located in the town and due to small premises the vehicles add to the congestion.
The 2019 Roads Masterplan include the proposals as depicted in the following map.
Map 40 Pomeroy Road Network
The
188 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 town centre is the heart of Pomeroy. This is characterised by dual economic activities. Similar to other business district within South Africa, there is a dualistic economy in Pomeroy consisting of formal and informal traders along the R33 strip. Both these sectors are critical for the functioning and development concept of the area. The police station, clinic and municipal offices are also found within this core business area. In 2015 the Department of Health handed over the Community Health Centre that is secondary to Church of Scotland in Tugela Ferry. There is a Sports Complex that has been completed and handed over to the community during the 2015/2016 financial year. Map 41 Pomeroy Urban Edge
The following initiatives should be supported in the node:
Public Capital Investment Plan to ensure that investment will lead to sustainable long-term development of the node and efficient public and private service delivery for the residents of Msinga Local Municipality Detailed local precinct plan Adoption of a Town Planning Scheme
189 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Industrial development based on the agro-economy Decentralization point for local administration of provincial and local government services to strengthen the existing functions of the node According to the 2011 Census the following is applicable: Households: 2 064 Population: 4 414 Average Household size: 2
Table 33 Pomeroy facilities
Existing Facilities Planned Facilities Proposed Facilities Combined School 1 Licencing of Landfill site Emergency Service Facility 1
Primary School 2 Street Lights
Sport Field 1 Upgrade of roads in CBD Police Station 1 Land fill site 1 Bus Service on Regular 1 basis Cemetery 1 Community Health 1 Centre (CHC) Community Hall 1 Airfield 1 Landfill site 1
6.3.2 SECONDARY MUNICIPAL NODES CWAKA uMzinyathi has been selected as a pilot District to test the CSC framework concept, and as a result of this a project for the building of a Community Service Centre in Cwaka that is worth R1.4 billion was launched by CoGTA. Cwaka is situated on the R33 and D1273/P281 intersection. The new development is about to be experienced in CWAKA. This has been marked by the Inkululeko project that was introduced by the COGTA MEC early this 2016. The MEC plans on investing R1.4 Billion due to following issues and demands: - Land demand in Tugela Ferry has increased however the supply of land is limited
190 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
- Developers have shown interest in Cwaka however the TA does not know where to allocate development opportunities and how to approach these projects As a response to such request, CWAKA was the identified by the KZN Cabinet as the suitable center in driving the Inkululeko Programme to assist rural communities with integration and prioritization of catalytic projects in key nodes of the KZN province. The new node to be built at Cwaka, and the programme and projects will include: 1. uMgungundlovu TVET College 2. uMgungundlovu Student Village and Sporting Precinct
3. DoE Model School Site
4. Existing Clinic Site
5. Existing Place of Worship
6. Existing Schools 7. Proposed Hotel / B&B / Lodge
8. Proposed Cemetery
9. KZN Agric - Agriculture Education and Demonstration Zone 10. KZN Agriculture - Commercialization of Subsistence farming
11. KZN Agriculture and KZNEDTEA - Livestock (goat) processing zone
12. KZN COGTA and Partner Departments - Social Facilities Cluster Precinct
13. KZN DoT and KZNEDTEA - Public Transport and Community Market for Traders
14. KZN EDTEA - Tourism Resorts Projects Sites 15. KZN Human Settlements - Formal Housing
16. KZN Department of Agriculture - Communal Food Gardens 17. Low Income Housing - portion of Agricultural Households
18. Petrol Service Station and Convenience stores site
19. New Town Center Business Sites
191 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 42 Cwaka development Edge
Map 43 Cwaka Masterplan
192 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
The following extracts from the Cwaka plan depicts the proposed development of the node.
Figure 6 Proposed Development of Cwaka Node
193 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
194 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
It is foreseen that the development of the Cwaka node will have a profound influence on the future spatial structuring of Msinga municipality. The locality, accessibility and topography of the node will ensure that the node will compete to become the primary node in the municipality. The development will have far reaching consequences on the municipality in terms of service delivery
195 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 and to curb the current tendency of linear development and sprawl along the R33 between Pomeroy and Tugela Ferry.
KEATE’S DRIFT
Keate's Drift is a rural centre with just the R33 running through the formal business area. It is not as congested since the business area are relatively small, but for future development additional streets will need to be formalised to prevent it from becoming congested like Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy.
Map 44 Secondary Node, Keate’s Drift
The node of Keate’s Drift has development potential and capital investment to strengthen the node need to be done.
196 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 34 Keate’s Drift Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School -
Primary School 1 Secondary School 1 Library - Clinic 1 Hospital - Police Station - Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field 1 Bus Service on Regular basis 1 Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
6.3.3 TERTIARY MUNICIPAL NODES Msinga Top
Msinga Top is situated in the central eastern part of the municipality and is well situated to provide lower order services to the residents within its catchment area. Msinga Top is situated at the end of the D1273 tertiary corridor.
The node has 395 households which relays to a population of 1 895 people.
197 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 45 Tertiary Node, Msinga Top
Table 35 Msinga Top Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility Clinic 1 Community Hall 1 Police Station 1 Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field 1 Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
198 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Nhlalakale Nhlalakale is situated in the south western part of the municipality on the P373 secondary corridor. The nod provides low level services to the area. The node consists of 485 households and 2 328 people.
Map 46 Tertiary Node, Nhlalakale
Table 36 Nhlalakale Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility Clinic 1 Community Hall 1 Police Station - Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field 1
199 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
Mfenebude Mfenebude is situated in the south eastern part of the municipality at the end of the D1268 tertiary corridor. The node consists of 207 households and 993 people.
Map 47 Tertiary Node, Mfenebude
Table 37 Mfenebude Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility
200 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Clinic - Community Hall 1 Police Station - Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field - Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
Masebeko Masebeko is located on the P365 corridor in the north eastern part of the municipality. The node has 98 households and 470 people. The node fulfils a services function to the rural residents of the area as Pomeroy fulfils the function of a Secondary node with most services available.
Map 48 Tertiary Node, Masebeko
201 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 38 Masebuko Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility Clinic 1 Community Hall - Police Station -
Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field - Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
Rorke’s Drift Rorke’s Drift is situated on the P190 and is the municipality’s primary tourism node as part of the Battlefields Route. The node attracts local and international tourists and is a service centre for the population in its hinterland. The node consists of 402 households and 1 930 individuals.
Map 49 Tertiary Node, Rorke’s Drift
202 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 39 Rorke’s Drift Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility Clinic 1 Community Hall 1 Police Station - Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field - Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
Gunjana
Gunjana is situated in the east central part of the municipality on the ----. The node has 111 households and 533 people although it serves quite a larger population in it’s hinterland.
Map 50 Tertiary Node, Gunjana
203 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 40 Gunjana Facilities
EXISTING FACILITIES NO. PLANNED FACILITIES PROPOSED FACILITIES NO. Pre-School - Post Office
Primary School 1 Pre-School Secondary School 1 Library - Emergency Service Facility Clinic 1 Community Hall - Police Station -
Pension Pay Point 1 Sport Field - Bus Service on Regular basis - Taxi rank and/or Bus Depot -
204 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Map 51 Composite SDF Map
205 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
CHATPER 7: GUIDELINES FOR THE LUMS
A Spatial development framework forms part of a larger Land Use Management System, which consist of a number of components which includes the following: Spatial Development Framework Land Use (Planning) Schemes Rates database Cadastral and property (registration) database Valuation system Information regarding the provision of infrastructural services Property ownership and tenure Environmental management system Transportation management system Information system GIS The purpose of a Spatial Development Framework (SDF) is to inform the development of a Land use Management Scheme. The SDF provides best-use scenarios for use of land, and it is the function of the Land Use Management Scheme to regulate these land uses. An SDF therefore does not change the rights of properties but gives guidance and direction for growth of a municipality. It is however necessary to align the Land Use Management Scheme with the Spatial Development Framework to ensure that the objectives of the SDF are met. Where the SDF provides direction for expansion of specific land uses or the restriction of development within other areas, the purposes of Land Use Management Scheme is to manage the use of the land in order to ensure a healthy living environment, where the environment is safe to live in. It is also necessary to provide social amenities (including social facilities, and services) to ensure a convenient living environment. Through evaluation of conservation resources the SDF also addresses the efficient utilisation of scarce natural resources. According to COGTA’s Guidelines a Land Use management Scheme should address the following aspects: a. Land Use Zones (Based on land uses identified within the SDF) b. Statements of Intent for use Zones
206 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
c. Management Areas and Management Plans required for applicable areas of the land use scheme, together with such Land Use Matrices as may be required to identify the land uses permitted or prohibited. d. Development Control Templates with permissions, conditions, limitations or exemptions, subject to which such developments may be permitted. e. Definition of Terminology f. Procedures regarding application, consent, appeal, etc. g. Land Use Scheme Maps, Management Area Overlays and Management Plans to spatially depict the land use rights. The guideline indicates that to process to develop a LUMS can be as follows: Table 41 Guidelines for Developing a LUMS
STEPS ACTIONS OUTCOME
1. What is the Develop an information system that functions Functioning institutional efficiently, both internally and externally to the Planning Unit capacity for organization. preparing a Establish and or confirm a planning section / land use spatial planning unit in your organisation. scheme? Appoint staff in the unit / or consultants taking into consideration the empowerment of the municipality. 2. What is the Conduct the information audit to get an indication of the A clear picture status quo following: of information within a No. of TPS, R293 and Amakhosi areas included in gaps and the Municipality? the Municipality; level of Clarity and accuracy of tenure, cadastral and consultation mapping information. required. Existing sectoral plans and policy guidelines. (Transportation, environment, housing, etc.). Financial resources and budgeting. Identify the level of community consultation required (Consultation Plan). 3. What type of a Prepare a Strategic Land use Framework which will An agreement Land Use include the following: on the type of a Scheme (LUS) Strategic issues identified in the IDP and its SDF. Land Use do you need? Identify pressure points (areas needing urgent Scheme that the attention). Municipality Identify the LUS level for various parts of the wishes to municipality (Elementary, primary, comprehensive prepare. or rural level).
207 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Decide on the type of Land Use Scheme you prefer by doing either or a combination of the following: Translate the existing zones into a LUS without a review or consolidation. Partially translate, consolidate or align different schemes and extend such schemes to areas where there is no land use management. Undertake a detailed review of zones, land uses and controls in all current schemes with a view to creating a single scheme. 4. How to prepare Council resolves to prepare a LUS in accordance A Municipal a Land Use with a new LUMS using appropriate legislation Land use Scheme? (once available). Scheme Address information gaps (if necessary). comprising of a Formulation of the Statement of Intent (SOI) for Plan, a Land Use large or special areas of the LUS based on the Table (Matrix) objectives of the municipal IDP. and a table of Identify the zones, districts and appropriate development control. development control (Land Use Template) 5. What is the Circulate the LUS for public comments within a An approved Road to legislated time period. Land Use Approval of the Amend the LUS by incorporating the received Scheme to guide LUMS? public comments. land use Table the LUS (reports and maps) to Council and management Amakhosi or a structure comprising of the two for within a final approval. municipal area. Submission to COGTA for comments and or assessment.
CHAPTER 8: ALIGNMENT OF SPATIAL PLANS
Msinga Local municipality falls within the area of the Umzinyathi District Municipality and it shares boundaries with six local municipalities namely:
a) Umvoti Local Municipality
b) Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality
c) Alfred Duma Local Municipality
d) Endumeni Local Municipality
208 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
e) Nquthu Local Municipality f) Nkandla Local Municipality
8.1 UMZINYATHI DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY SDF Table 42 Alignment with Umzinyathi District Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development Provincial Corridor – R33 Corridors Regional Distributor linking Nlongo through Tugela Ferry to Weenen
Regional Distributor linking Cwaka; Masebeko and Rorke’s Drift to the R68 and Dundee
Cross Boundary N/A as Msinga falls within the uMzinyathi District Municipality. Influences
Cross Boundary N/A as Msinga falls within the uMzinyathi District Municipality. Corporation
Potential N/A as Msinga falls within the uMzinyathi District Municipality. conflicting issues
Map 52 Umzinyathi District Municipality SDF
209 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.2 UMVOTI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Table 43 Alignment with Umvoti Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development Primary Corridor – R33 linking Greytown to Tugela Ferry Corridors
Cross Boundary People from Msinga may use the Kwadolo node for certain services Influences
Cross Boundary There is limited opportunity regarding cross boundary corporation except for the Corporation opportunity to strengthen the activities and opportunities along the R33. .
Potential None apparent between the 2 SDF’s. conflicting issues
Map 53 Umvoti Local Municipality SDF
210 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.3 INKOSI LANGALIBALELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Table 44 Alignment with Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development Secondary Corridor – P368 linking Weenen to Tugela Ferry Corridors
Cross Boundary It seems that there very limited cross boundary influences due to the topography of the Influences area.
Cross Boundary There is limited opportunity regarding cross boundary corporation except for the Corporation opportunity to strengthen the activities and opportunities along the P368.
Potential None apparent between the 2 SDF’s. conflicting issues
Map 54 Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality SDF
211 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.4 ALFRED DUMA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Table 45 Alignment with Alfred Duma Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development There seems to be strong linkage between the settlements using the P361 and the Corridors Ekuvukeni node as these settlements only have direct access to Pomeroy by means of district roads.
Cross Boundary There are certainly service delivery issues that the two municipalities need to consider Influences due to the access issue mentioned above where residents of Msinga may use services in Alfred Duma due to practical easy of access reasons.
Cross Boundary It is recommended that the municipalities cooperate on the service delivery and facilities Corporation provision for the Douglas area.
Potential None apparent between the 2 SDF’s. conflicting issues
Map 55 Msinga – Alfred Duma Linkage
212 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.5 ENDUMENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Table 46 Alignment with Endumeni Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development The R33 primary corridor links Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy with Dundee. Corridors
Cross Boundary The farming community in the northern part of Msinga use Dundee as a service centre Influences and market for produce rather than the smaller nodes of Pomeroy and Tugela Ferry.
The provincial Landscape Corridor traversing the northern section of the municipality links with Endumeni Municipal area.
Cross Boundary It is recommended that the municipalities cooperate on the protection of the landscape Corporation corridor and the future development of the R33 corridor.
Potential None apparent between the 2 SDF’s. conflicting issues
Map 56 Endumeni Local Municipality SDF
213 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
8.6 NQUTHU LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Table 47 Alignment with Nquthu Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development The D30 links Rorke’s Drift with Nquthu municipality but in neither of the municipality’s Corridors SDF’s is it identified as a corridor of any significance.
Cross Boundary The provincial Landscape Corridor traversing the northern section of the municipality Influences links with the Nquthu Municipal area.
Cross Boundary It is recommended that the municipalities cooperate on the protection of the landscape Corporation corridor and the future development of the D30 link road.
Potential None apparent between the 2 SDF’s. conflicting issues
8.7 NKANDLA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Table 48 Alignment with Nkandla Local Municipality SDF
ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT STATUS INDICATOR Development TBC Corridors
Cross Boundary Influences
Cross Boundary Corporation
Potential conflicting issues
CHAPTER 9: IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING
The SDF, in effect is the spatial representation of the municipality’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The SDF and its implementation are crucial to the development of the municipal area and its communities. Through the IDP, the SDF will influence budgeting and resource allocation and specific interventions will be measured through the performance management system. Practical
214 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 implementation of the SDF will be achieved through the further detailed planning of special development areas and the Msinga Land Use Management System, currently being formulated. The Spatial Development Framework needs to contribute in a meaningful manner towards the spatial restructuring and development within the municipality, and it is therefore vital to address key implementation aspects related to the SDF and spatial planning in general. The SDF needs to reflect the IDP strategies and projects in a spatial framework. The assessment of current capital investment target areas to assess the level of compliance to the findings and intentions of the SDF as well as to identify any gaps or needs for additional expenditure in order to achieve the desire spatial structure.
The SDF also need to address further planning highlight issues where more details are required. The strategic nature of the SDF always identifies key intervention areas which might require more detailed investigation and/ or planning and this should be addressed as a vital part of direct implementation of the SDF. This will also include some guidelines for the municipality’s land use management system.
9.1. RESOURCE TARGETING Determining the capital investment framework for a municipality is primarily the function of the IDP and /or associated Financial Plan to be illustrated spatially within the SDF of the municipality. Msinga Municipality’s IDP includes the Capital Investment Framework and states the following: “A Capital Investment Framework (CIF) was developed as part of the Financial Plan demonstrating the relationship between what resources is required to meet the challenges as per mandate and the actual budget implications, incorporating the respective MTEF’s of the Provincial Sector Departments in an attempt to set the framework for capital investment. It is clear that the need by far over exceeds the resource allocation, as well as the ability of the Msinga Municipality to fulfill its mandate through the allocation of own resources, hence its dependency on external grant funding to deliver services.
In an effort to record these projects, existing GIS data and topographical maps were used to locate projects with place reference as accurately as possible per type of project. The result is a map of planned capital projects illustrated overleaf. Although it is evident that the planned projects are clustered within the most densely populated and needed areas generally in line with the proposed SDF, it is currently not possible to determine the amount of capital required to implement these
215 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020 projects which would ideally assist in determining planned investment per area and/or availability of capital required over specific financial years.
However the map does provide an indication of the spatial concentration of the planned capital projects within the various wards and intervention areas. This furthermore allows for the identification of potential additional planning and capital projects to be identified towards the implementation of future spatial structure of the municipality as listed on the overleaf:
216 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
Table 49 Capital Investment Framework
CAPITAL INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID Project supported at Agriculture Mooi River FPSU NDAC, pending Agronomy F P S U -28.91725 30.415778 R 60 000 000.00 R 7 884 612.10 19/20 endorsement by minister Project supported at Vegetable under - Agriculture Tugela Ferry FPSU NDAC, pending 30.423 R 100 000 000.00 R 2 360 000.00 19/20 irrigation - F P S U 28.754445 endorsement by minister Implementation, enterprise Msinga Goat support Livestock: small - Agriculture 30.781667 R 8 954 260.00 R 1 700 000.00 19/20 Agribusiness reported, skills stock improvement 28.936111 and jobs also reported Project already approved for Livestock: Large uMzinyathi Red implemenation - Agriculture stock 30.322831 R 3 200 000.00 R 81 000.00 19/20 Meat project for the 2019/20, 28.629923 commecialization business plan drafted NEW, Memo for additional Repairs and Agriculture Tugela FPSU funding, advert -28.74897 30.444317 R 2 000 000.00 19/20 Completion and bid to be done Appointment of NEW, Construction of contractor for the - Agriculture Appointed, 30.426435 R 1 000 000.00 19/20 Pomeroy FPSU construction of 28.552129 handover 02/10 Pomeroy SCM, TOR being DESIGN AND PSP: Tugela Ferry - Agriculture prepared by CONSTRUCTION 30.441163 R 1 000 000.00 19/20 Tomato Paste 28.752972 Director MONITORING Tugela Ferry 837HA land-31km Agriculture -28.84066 31.00516 R 40 000 000.00 - 19/20 Irrigation canal At Procurement Completion of Agriculture Tugela FPSU -28.75444 30.423002 R 2 000 000.00 R 1 000 000.00 19/20 stage Tugela ferry FPSU Construction of Mooi River irrigation Mooi River Phase The project is scheme phase 1 - Agriculture 1 - Contract re- 30.415778 R 25 080 598.40 R 8 000 000.00 19/20 60% complete including six stogare 28.917215 readvertisement sheds with tractor depot Mashunka Boreholes, Water 6 Boreholes R 253 147.00 Pumps and Water Tanks Boreholes; Water 2;15 Boreholes Pmps and Water R 180 819.00 Tanks Philisizwe Garden 18 Boreholes Boreholes and R 72 328.00 Water Tanks Extend Keates Community 11 Drift Community R 109 776.00 Halls Hall Ward 11 Extension of Ntili Community 16 Community Hall R 264 816.00 Halls ward 16 Community Hholwane R 264 816.00 Halls Community Hall KwaGudlintaba Community 7 Community Hall R 275 412.00 Halls Ward 7 Makhungubhede Community 14 Big Community R 572 016.00 Halls Hall ward 14
Community Ntombikayise R 235 836.00 Halls Community Hall
217 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID Renovation of Community Othulinilwezulu R 317 784.00 Halls Community hall Community Simo Myeza R 264 816.00 Halls Community Hall Rehabilition of Imizi - Construction Rehabilition Tender Stage 30.600853 R 200 000.00 19/20 Yezizwe 28.679823 Rehabilition of Imizi - Construction Rehabilition Tender Stage 30.440218 R 200 000.00 19/20 Yezizwe 28.751965 Maintenance of Traditional - Construction Maintenance Tender Stage 30.444812 R 80 000.00 19/20 Administrative 28.762715 Centre Maintenance of Traditional - Construction Maintenance Tender Stage 30.305833 R 80 000.00 19/20 Administrative 28.847415 Centre Maintenance of Traditional - Construction Maintenance Tender Stage 30.526209 R 80 000.00 19/20 Administrative 28.871452 Centre Maintenance of Traditional - Construction Maintenance Tender Stage 30.386798 R 80 000.00 19/20 Administrative 28.555767 Centre Construction of Construction of Construction Pomeroy Storage 40% complete Pomoroy storage 28.559855 30.4312552 R 1 000 000.00 R 800 000.00 19/20 Facility facility Construction of Tugela Ferry Block The project is Construction of - Construction 30.422999 R 50 832 608.00 R 16 000 000.00 19/20 6 including 60% complete Block 6 28.754459 storage shed Suppy, delivery and the project is erection of 14 km 9 Construction Pomeroy Fencing 28.5598 30.43143 R 2 000 000.00 R 750 000.00 19/20 99% complete strand barbered wire Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF POMEROY Construction Delays due to R 184 516.15 CHRISTIAN Covid 19 SCHOOL Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF BANGANI Delays due to R 148 421.90 CRECHE Covid 19 Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF EKUNINGELENI Delays due to R 148 421.90 CRECHE Covid 19 Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF Construction Delays due to R 148 205.20 KWAMPHAHLENI Covid 19 CRECHE Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF MAKHANKANE Delays due to R 146 606.25 CRECHE WARD Covid 19 Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF SHABASE Delays due to R 147 758.85 CRECHE Covid 19 Lockdown
Under- RENOVATION OF construction - SOMVELI TWO 9 Construction Delays due to R 189 875.67 CLASSROOMS IN Covid 19 WARD 9 Lockdown
218 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID
Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF PHOHLOZANE Delays due to R 149 950.00 CRECHE Covid 19 Lockdown CONSTRUCTION Under- OF construction - Construction MAKHUNGUBHED Delays due to R 498 503.50 E COMMUNITY Covid 19 HALL Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF HHOLWANE Construction Delays due to R 243 793.00 COMMUNITY Covid 19 HALL Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF Construction Delays due to R 243 353.00 KWAGUDLINTABA Covid 19 COMMUNITY Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF SIMO MYEZA Construction Delays due to R 248 530.00 COMMUNITY Covid 19 HALL Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - OF BAMBANANI Construction Delays due to R 197 236.60 TWO Covid 19 CLASSROOMS Lockdown Under- CONSTRUCTION construction - Construction OF KOSIBIYA TWO Delays due to R 198 597.00 CLASSROOMS Covid 19 Lockdown CONSTRUCTION Re-Advertised - OF NTILI Delays due to 16 Construction COMMUNITY Covid 19 HALL WARD 16 Lockdown Re-Advertised - CONSTRUCTION Delays due to 13 Construction OF MAMEDI HALL Covid 19 WARD 13 Lockdown ward 17 Construction Pound Add on GIS R 240 000.00 centre Not ALL Construction Cemetries spatially R 600 000.00 on map Two Room for Construction- 10 Bongani Shelembe R 72 328.00 Two Room Ward 10 Two Room for Construction- Bongani 10 R 72 328.00 Two Room Sikhakhane ward 10 Two Room for Construction- 5 Mbatha Family R 100 000.00 Two Room Ward 5 Construction- Two Room for Mrs 10 R 72 328.00 Two Room Ngubane Ward 10 Two Room for Construction- 18 Mthaleni Area R 100 000.00 Two Room Ward 18 Two Room for Construction- 5 Ndlela Family R 100 000.00 Two Room Ward 5 Two Room for Construction- 2 Mkhize Family R 91 167.00 Two Room Ward 2 Two Room for Construction- 2 Ximba Family R 91 167.00 Two Room Ward 2
219 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID
Two Room for first Construction- 4 needy family ward R 91 167.00 Two Room 04 Two Room for Construction- 4 Second Needy R 91 167.00 Two Room Family Ward 04 Two Room for Construction- 2 Zondo Family R 91 167.00 Two Room Ward 2 Construction - Ntabende Creche 11 R 108 491.00 Creche Ward 11 Construction - Othame Creche 15 R 108 491.00 Creche Ward 15 Construction - Macijane Creche R 80 000.00 Creche renovation Renovation of Construction - 10 Mkangala Creche R 80 000.00 Creche Ward 10 Construction - Siqhingini Creche 3 R 150 000.00 Creche Ward3 Construction - Ezisululwini 6 R 150 000.00 Creche Creche ward 6 Market Stalls- Development Pomeroy & Keates R 1 000 000.00 Planning Drift Procurement - 4 Education Sakhiseni H School 30.45186 R 419 149.70 19/20 Combo Court Stage 28.686311 Application for 180 Electrification 1 Electricity Douglas #3 funding & Add on GIS settlement R 6 232 000,00 20/21 connections Planning Phase Application for ward 2 Electricity Ntokozweni funding & 250 Connections Add on GIS centre Planning Phase Application for 3 Electricity Phalafin #3 funding & 150 Connections Add on GIS settlement R 7 000 000.00 Planning Phase Application for 6; 7; 8; ward Electricity Msinga Infills funding & 1000 Connections Add on GIS 9 centre Planning Phase Equita Ezingulubeni ble Application for (Ngcuba) Share Electricity funding & R 3 500 000.00 20/21 Electrification - (EQ) Planning Phase Voltage Regulator funded Equita ble Application for Share Electricity Mzweni Phase #2 funding & 1000 Connections R 1 660 000.00 20/21 (EQ) Planning Phase funded Equita ble Application for Share Electricity Mzweni Phase #3 funding & R 2 108 000.00 20/21 (EQ) Planning Phase funded DBEC evaluated the proposed Installation of bidders 02 folding partition in Church of September 2019 between Scotland Hospital on and it’s classrooms, Health Health Add on GIS R 3 212 800.89 19/20 RTC- renovations anticipated the Renovations to point to RTC tender will be accommodation awarded before ablutions & ironing the 22 room November 2019 Borehole dried up- 250 Households Drill 2 Housing Gunjane Housing and equipping one Add on GIS Node R 500 000.00 production borehole
Pomeroy Housing 17 Housing Add on GIS Node R 1 000 000.00 Bulk Services
220 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID
Enterprise support Project with non-agricultural Sandlasenkosi approved, inputs for the - Manufacturing Primary advertised and 30.432056 R 5 000 000.00 R 100 000.00 19/20 NARYSEC 28.559417 Cooperative closed on 20 cooperative within September 2019 the district Xholobane Access ward 5 Roads Planning Phase Add on GIS R 1 000 000.00 20/21 Road centre Ngongolo Access ward 6 Roads Planning Phase Add on GIS R 2 500 000.00 20/21 Road centre Ezibomvini Access ward 13 Roads Planning Phase Add on GIS R 4 000 000.00 20/21 Road centre Thibeni Access ward 15 Roads Planning Phase Add on GIS R 1 500 000.00 20/21 Road centre Mahlaba Access ward 17 Roads Planning Phase Add on GIS R 4 000 000.00 20/21 Road centre Delays due to Nsongeni Access Roads Covid 19 R 5 441 437.04 Road Lockdown Business Plan Not Reviewed, ALL Sanitation Msinga Sanitation spatially awaiting DWS on map approval Not ALL Sanitation Msinga Sanitation spatially R 8 000 000.00 on map Progress is currently at 85% Douglas Clinic - construction. Douglas Clinic - Replacing of Practical Health Sanitation Replacing of Existing Add on GIS R 16 000 000.00 R 1 612 343.01 Existing Sewer completion is point Sewer System System anticipated to be reached on 31 October 2019 Mvundlweni 10 Sports Field Planning Phase Add on GIS settlement R 288 213.48 20/21 Sports field Delays due to Sports Field Mzisho Sport Field Covid 19 R 350 000.00 Lockdown Delays due to Kwa-Ngubo Sport Sports Field Covid 19 R 3 130 662.22 Field Lockdown Delays due to Mbabane Sport Sports Field Covid 19 R 5 797 835.54 Field Lockdown Water Water Reticulation Reticulation & & Electrical - Water Supply Electrical Planning Stage 30.600853 R 300 000.00 20/21 Connection for Imizi 28.679823 Connection for Yezizwe Imizi Yezizwe Umzinyathi (Gunjane Water Supply Implementation Stock water Dam 28.63987 30.339673 R 2 577 097.91 19/20 Boreholes) Stock water Dam Bulk Water Supply ward 2; 17 Water Supply Add on GIS R 33 000 000.00 2020 Scheme centre KwaKopi Water 10 Water Supply Add on GIS settlement R 10 000 000.00 2020 Supply Scheme Muden-Keates 11 Water Supply drift Water Supply Umvoti? R 29 980 819.91 R 29 980 819.91 Scheme Ph 3A Muden-Keates 11 Water Supply drift Water Supply Umvoti? R 23 997 928.74 R 20 299 000.00 Scheme Ph 2A Cwaka Bulk uMsinga Bulk reticulation , Water Supply Water Supply Ph Add on GIS Node R 28 465 861.66 R 28 465 861.66 reservoir and pump 3D station Ophathe water Reservoir 19 Supply 9 Water Supply Add on GIS settlement R 11 255 341.05 R 11 255 341.05 supply Ph 2 area Douglas Water Water Supply Supply Scheme Ph Add on GIS settlement R 32 000 000.00 R 19 311 000.00 3
221 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID
Cwaka Water Water Reticulation 4 Water Supply Supply Scheme Ph with 43 standpipes Add on GIS Node R 15 437 506.00 R 7 480 998.80 2 & steel Reservoir Cwaka Water Water Reticulatio 4 Water Supply Supply Scheme Ph ppeline with 50 Add on GIS Node R 25 979 173.30 R 14 400 000.00 4A standpipes Muden Water Construction of 2ML 11 Water Supply Umvoti? R 13 228 183.00 R 8 552 334.00 Supply Ph 3B Reservoirs Muden Water Supply of Bulk Steel 11 Water Supply Umvoti? R 27 947 473.00 R 11 255 341.05 Supply Pipeline Bulk Pipeline, Mthembu West Water Supply Reticulation with 10 No location R 9 234 371.98 Extension Standpipes Business Plan Muden Regional Submitted to 11 Water Supply Bulk Water Supply Umvoti? DWS, waiting Scheme Ph 2 DWS Approval Business Plan KwaParafini/Ngce Approved by 3 Water Supply ngeni Water Add on GIS settlement DWS, waiting for Supply Scheme COGTA Approval KwaKopi Water 10 Water Supply Supply Scheme Ph Add on GIS settlement R 36 610 044.70 3 KwaKopi Water 10 Water Supply Supply Scheme Ph Add on GIS settlement R 18 557 840.61 R 11 525 000.00 2 Ntinini Regional Water Supply Nquthu? R 20 000 000.00 Water Ruigtefontein & Water Supply Kunene Farm Endumeni? R 15 000 000.00 Water Borehole dried up- Emzweni 180 Households 2 Water Supply Add on GIS settlement R 300 000.00 (Mzweni) Production borehole equip Ngubukazi scheme does not cover entire area-200 Households - ward 2; 17 Water Supply Nkamba Extension of Add on GIS R 2 000 000.00 centre reticulation network to reduce water tanker deliveries Inadequate water source - 185 Households Drilling ward 10 Water Supply Nxamalala Add on GIS R 500 000.00 and equipping of centre supplementary production borehole Borehole dried up- 250 Households Drill 10 Water Supply Fabeni (Kwakopi) and equipping one Add on GIS settlement R 500 000.00 production borehole Inadequate water source - 210 Households Drilling and equipping of 10 Water Supply KwaKopi supplementary Add on GIS settlement R 3 000 000.00 production borehole and rehabilitation of reticulation networks Inadequate water source - 150 Nocomboshe/Hol Households Drilling 15 Water Supply wane (Msinga and equipping of Add on GIS settlement R 500 000.00 Top) supplementaryprod uction borehole
222 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD Category Type Pr_Status Descript Lat Long Budget Exp_2019 FY GIS_ID
Inadequate water source - 140 Households Drilling ward 15 Water Supply Mawela Add on GIS R 500 000.00 and equipping of centre supplementary production borehole Inadequate water source - 120 Households Drilling ward 16 Water Supply Gxushaneni Add on GIS R 500 000.00 and equipping of centre supplementary production borehole Inadequate water source - 300 Households Drilling 17 Water Supply Pomeroy Add on GIS Node R 500 000.00 and equipping of supplementary production borehole Inadequate water source - 160 Households Drilling 18 Water Supply Mthaleni Add on GIS settlement R 500 000.00 and equipping of supplementary production borehole Inadequate water source - 170 Emazabeko Households Drilling 18 Water Supply Add on GIS settlement R 500 000.00 (Mazabeko) and equipping of supplementary production borehole Not Rehabilitation of ALL Water Supply All Settlements spatially R 6 000 000.00 hand pumps on map
WARD PLANS FOR 2020/2021 - INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
WARD # INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS KZN 244 GOAL 1 WARD 01 · Fencing for eZimbubeni, Mkhuzeni, Ntanyezulu, Obisini Community Halls, · Building two toilet per hall at EZimbubeni, Mkhuzeni, Obisini, Nhlanhleni, Ntanyezulu and Nzimande.
· Buying 300 chairs and 14 tables for all ward halls.
WARD 02 · Water installation, fencing of Bhaza and Ngulule halls, · Building of 8 toilets for Madudula hall, Gunjana hall, and kwaThushana hall,
· Building of 2 room house for Dladla family. WARD 03 · Renovating Macijane crèche. · Toilets, chairs, floor tiles, fencing and JoJo Tanks at Zamokuhle hall.
· Building one classroom at Phaphamani School WARD 04 · Two Roomed houses for 3 Families · 1 hall for Esdakeni area WARD 05 · Two room house for Mpungose family at koNdlela · Two room house for Ndlovu family at Ngqongeni
· Toilets at Mbabane, Ngqongeni, Mahlabathini, Mzisho, Machobeni, Osuthu Community Halls WARD 06 · Building Ezisululwini Crèche. · Installing of water Mashunka area and Water pumps WARD 07 · Ntombiyodumo x2 class room · Sphethwini min hall
· Tools material and fencing material. WARD 08 · Alterations and edition to Kanteneshane Hall · Building of Mgeza Dam
223 | P a g e
MSINGA MUNICIPALITY SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2020
WARD 09 · Crèche toilets: Mxheleni, Ezintandaneni, Somveli school, Emagwababeni, Esihlanjeni & Mapheka hall. · Building crèche Mphambanyoni (Ezintandaneni)
· Renovation of Emagwababeni hall.
· Fencing: Esihlanjeni crèche, Ezintandaneni crèche and Ekuningeleni crèche WARD 10 · 2 Room for Bongani Sikhakhakne, · 2 room of Bongani Shelembe,
· 2 room of Khonangani Madlala
· Renovate Mkangala Creche and
· Fencing Material of Mkangala Crèche,
· 700 Chairs and 6 Tables WARD 11 · Renovations of Ntabende community hall and Ntabende crèche. · Construction of two room house for Zondi family at Mawozini.
· Construction of two room house for Ngubane family at Othulinilwezulu. WARD 12 · Fencing of Ntombikayise hall, · Buying chairs for Mambeni, Giba, Nxala, Ndanyana, Magoso and Ntombikayise Halls WARD 13 · Taxi Rank with an Office and Toilet WARD 14 · Big Ntshishili Community hall · Building toilets at Ntombenhle, Barnhill, Mpophoma, Mayizekanye, Msizini, Dayiswayo halls and Nyandu, Mpophoma,
Dayiswayo crèches. · Renovation of Gxobanyawo community hall WARD 15 · Othame crèche · Toilets for halls: Nkolovu Community Hall
· Boreholes to water schemes
· 600 Chairs for Community Hall,
· Solid tables and burglar guards for 6 halls
· Fencing materials for Halls WARD 16 · Renovate Mngeni hall, Bahulazi hall · Building toilets at Mabedlana hall
· Buying chairs for Sakhisizwe (30) crèche, Mabedlana (250) Hall and Ntili (450) Hall
· Building Collesie hall
· Extending Ntili hall at Gxushaneni area (Using a rollover from 2019/20 financial year (R100 000) WARD 17 · Tables, toilets and fencing of all halls · Extending CJ Mthethwa community hall,
· Tables, toilets and fencing of all halls
WARD 18 · Building of 2 rooms for 1 family, · Digging of bore-hole for Philisisizwe Garden,
· Building of Mthaleni Crèche; and
· Building of toilets.
224 | P a g e