SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR MSINGA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 2017/2018 REVIEW APRIL 2012 SUBMITTED BY: THE BLACK BALANCE – VUKA AFRICA CONSORTIUM REVIEWED IN-HOUSE BY: MSINGA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 892 Umgeni Road, 1st Floor Stadium Building, DURBAN Suite 233, Private Bag X504, Northway 4065 TEL: (031) 303 3900 FAX: (031) 303 3911 P a g e | 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADDRESSING THE MEC FOR COGTA’S COMMENTS ON THE FINAL SDF REVIEW This document represents the revised 2016/17 Msinga Spatial Development Framework 2016/17 (SDF) a summary of which is also included as an Annexure in the 2016/17 Msinga Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The adoption of this SDF is a legal requirement, and as such fulfils In the SDF assessment based on the May 2015/2016 (Final Report), the MEC for COGTA the requirements as set out within the Municipal Systems Act (MSA), No. 32 of 2000.This SDF commended the municipality for complying with Section 26(e) of the MSA and Section 12(1) also seeks to comply with the new Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (Act and Section 20 of the SPLUMA which required our Municipality to develop the Spatial No.16 of 2013). Development Framework (SDF) and ensure that it is included as an annexure to our IDP. The SDF is required to be in compliance with Section 2(4) of the Local Government Planning and Performance Management Regulations, 2001 (Reg. 796 of 2001) and the provisions of Section 21 of the SPLUMA. It was highlighted that Msinga’s SDF is, however, partially This SDF is an integral component of the Integrated Development Plan (IDP); it both informs compliant with the MSA Regulations and the SPLUMA provisions and the municipality is and translates the IDP spatially and guides how the implementation of the IDP should occur therefore requested to ensure that this is taken into cognizance when reviewing your current in space. The SDF therefore guides the overall spatial distribution of land uses within a SDF. Municipality in order to give effect to the spatial vision, goals and objectives of the Municipality. This SDF is also aligned with provincial and municipal sector plans and strategies It has been evident that the comments that wer highlighted during the year 2015/2016 were as a way of ensuring that the desired spatial form and outcomes of the Municipality are raised again in the 2016/2017 financial year. Thus, achieved. The first municipal Spatial Development Framework (SDF) was adopted in 2012. A review of In response to the MEC comments above it should be noted that: the 2012 SDF was done during the 2013/2014 fiscal year. The municipality notes the comments highlighted by the MEC. The municipality has tried to its full capacity to address such comments; however we have now opted to respond to all the As the SDF is strategic, it does not provide definitive statements on all aspects of spatial comments through our sourcing the developing of the 4the generation of the SDF. The development in the Municipal Area as such it is advisable that this SDF be read in conjunction municipality has budgeted a total amount of R900 000. 00 to cater for all SDF and Land Use with other sector plans and local area plans. management Scheme requirements. In this document there are minor changes that have been done. The new SDF for 2017 – 2022 will be in cooperated in the next IDP 2018/2019 review. This SDF can also be viewed or downloaded from the Council’s website: www.msinga.org MSINGA SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2017/2018 REVIEW JUNE 2017 P a g e | 3 7.10 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN VISION FOR 2030 ......................................... 14 CONTENTS 7.11 SUBDIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND ACT 70 OF 1970 .................................. 17 7.12 PROVINCIAL SPATIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY .............................. 17 ADDRESSING THE MEC FOR COGTA’S COMMENTS ON THE FINAL SDF 7.13 KZN COGTA SPATIAL PLANNING GUIDELINES ................................................... 18 REVIEW 2016/17 ..............................................................................................2 7.14 STATE OF THE NATION’S ADDRESS 2017 ....................................................... 18 7.15 STATE OF THE PROVINCE’S ADDRESS ............................................................. 18 SECTION A. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 6 7.16 OUTCOME 9 ............................................................................................. 18 1. BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY ............................................................ 6 SECTION C. MSINGA MUNICIPALITY WITHIN UMZINYATHI DISTRICT AND 1.1 STUDY OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................6 KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCE .................................................................. 20 2. STUDY APPROACH ............................................................................. 7 3. GIS BASED ANALYSIS AND MAPPING ..................................................... 8 8. MSINGA MUNICIPALITY WITHIN KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCE........... 20 4 STUDY AREA .......................................................................................... 9 8.1 CONTRIBUTION TO THE ECONOMY .................................................................. 20 5.NEIGHBOURING MUNICIPALITIES......................................................... 10 8.2 THE R33 PROVINCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR .............................................. 20 6. DEFINITION OF THE SDF ................................................................... 10 8.3 THE R33 AS AN AGRICULTURAL CORRIDOR ...................................................... 20 6.1 SDF, IDP AND BUDGET ALIGNMENT ................................................... 10 8.4 THE R33 TOURISM CORRIDOR ....................................................................... 21 9. MSINGA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY WITHIN THE UMZINYATHI DISTRICT ... 22 SECTION B. LEGAL FRAMEWORK – RECOGNITION AND INTERGRATION ... 12 SECTION D. STATUS QUO ANALYSIS ........................................................ 24 7. THE LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY ENVIRONMENT – RECOGNITION & INTEGRATION ........................................................................................ 12 10. DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS .............................................................. 24 7.1 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, 1996 ................................ 12 10.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ............................................................. 24 7.2 NATIONAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE .................................. 12 10.2 POPULATION GROWTH EXPECTATIONS ............................................. 24 7.3 MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS ACT, 2000 (ACT 32 OF 2000) ......................................... 12 10.3 POPULATION STRUCTURE [POPULATION PYRAMID]................................... 25 7.4 DEVELOPMENT AND FACILITATION ACT, 1995 .................................................. 13 10.4IMPACT OF HIV/AIDS .............................................................................. 26 7.5 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 1998 (ACT 107 OF 1998) ....... 13 11. SETTLEMENT PATTERN ................................................................... 31 7.6 NATIONAL HOUSING ACT, 1997 (ACT NO. 107 OF 1997) AND NATIONAL HOUSING 11.1 POMEROY URBAN SETTLEMENTS .......................................................... 31 7.7 THE NATIONAL LAND TRANSPORT TRANSITION ACT, 2000 (ACT 22 OF 2000) ...... 13 11.2 TUGELA FERRY PERI – URBAN SETTLEMENT .......................................... 31 7.8 SPATIAL PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT ACT 2013 ............................ 14 11.3 RURAL SETTLEMENTS ............................................................................ 31 7.9 COMPREHENSIVE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME ...................................... 14 12. EXISTING NODES AND CORRIDORS ................................................. 32 MSINGA SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 2017/2018 REVIEW JUNE 2017 P a g e | 4 12.1 TUGELA FERRY AS A PRIMARY NODE ................................................ 33 25. DEGRADED LAND ........................................................................... 58 12.2 POMEROY AS A SECONDARY NODE .................................................. 36 26. TOURISM....................................................................................... 58 12.3 KIETS DRIFT AS SECONDARY NODE ................................................... 39 12.4 THE MUNICIPAL MOVEMENT CORRIDORS ........................................ 39 SECTION F: AGRICUTURE ........................................................................ 59 7. LAND REFORM................................................................................. 39 8. DERMACATION PROCESS ................................................................. 40 SECTION G: INFRUSTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT ........................................... 82 9. LAND USE MANAGEMENT ................................................................ 40 10. BROAD LAND USES......................................................................... 41 27. ELECTRICITY ................................................................................... 82 11. URBAN EDGES ............................................................................... 42 28. WATER .......................................................................................... 86 12. DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES .......................................................... 43 29. SANITATION .................................................................................