THE overall sentiment of residents around the contentious issue of the proposed uMhlanga tidal pool remains intact. This after DA ward councillor, Heinz de Boer, started a petition for the city to abandon the almost R30-million venture. More than 100 residents have signed the petition which they see as a waste of expenditure and despite specialist studies pointing to a loss of sand on uMhlanga’s beach, many believe the real reason is ostensibly in favour of the proposed project going ahead.
The proposed tidal pool idea was first mooted about seven years ago and has again resurfaced because coastal engineers have determined uMhlanga’s beaches are losing beach sand at a rate of one per cent per annum. The municipality has suggested the loss of the beach area would be detrimental to uMhlanga’s tourism and a tidal pool, according to the city, is the perfect way to help boost tourism. The city engineers have suggested that the tidal pool takes the shape of an oval, making it usable all year round.
“That argument is nonsensical, I feel it is a waste of ratepayers money. The reason we started the petition was to make the municipality and other bodies aware that we are opposed to the project. The same department who say we need a tidal pool have also shown there are rising sea levels.
“In a few years time the entire tidal pool will be underwater. I don’t see how a city that has 410 000 people waiting for homes, faces frequent service delivery protests and has an irregular expenditure bill of R750-million would even dare to now spend this amount on a tidal pool. We believe the money should be re-allocated to the housing or associated budget, for real use in solving real issues.
“High seas and high tides have the potential to lift children off their feet and drag them over a tidal pool wall and into the sea. They caused several hundred million rands in damage to the coast four years ago and washed away a chunk of the uMhlanga promenade. To think that the sea may not break, damage or even completely wash away the rock mounted tidal pool is in my opinion foolish,” he said.
De Boer said the draft basic assessment report which was completed recently seems to point in favour of the tidal pool despite the objections of residents and including the negative impact on the bio-diversity.
Wayne Coetzer, general manager of the Oyster Box, concurred. He said felt the report was fundamentally flawed. “The argument holds no water. There was no mention of who is going to maintain the tidal pool nor was the infrastructure to support such a venture discussed. Tidal pools have never worked along this coastline, they are not the answer. They eventually become cesspools,” he said.
All comments must be emailed to susan@enviroconsult.co.za
The comment period (40 days) closes on 18 February.
