1. HIBISCUS COAST MUNICIPALITY PRESENTATION TO KZN PDA FORUM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE KZNPDA IN THE HIBISCUS COAST MUNICIPALITY 18 FEBRUARY 2011

2. CONTENTS Delegations Applications Received Feedback on Applications Received Implementation of The PDA in Traditional Authority Areas Bondholders Consent Positive Aspects to the PDA Conclusion

3. DELEGATIONS Delegations are in place With the exception of delegations for the permanent closure of Municipal Roads and Public Places and Municipal Consent Applications When Municipalities prepare delegations to deal with Road Closures and Municipal Consent Applications, this will be used as an opportunity to address challenges with the current delegations

4. APPLICATIONS RECIEVED Adoption, replacement or amendment of Scheme (Chapter 2 Applications) Applications Received – 10 Applications Finalised – 02 Applications Withdrawn – 02 Applications Pending – 06 Reasons for applications still in process are mainly due to outstanding information from applicants.

5. Applications received continued Removal, suspension and/or alteration of restrictive conditions (Chapter 6 Applications) Applications received – 06 Applications finalised – 03 Applications pending – 03 Reasons for applications not finalised vary from outstanding information, at times applications are received directly from owners who do not provide correct and complete information and take a while to obtain this information Implementation of this chapter in March 2010 vs having delegations in place at later stage is puzzling

6. Applications received continued Development of Land outside the area of a scheme (Chapter 4 applications) Applications received – 04 Applications finalised – 1 Applications Pending – 03 Two of the applications have been advertised, municipality awaits public input

7. Applications Received continued Subdivisions and/or Consolidation of Land/Amendment of General Plan (Chapter 3 Applications) – 2 Applications received Phasing or Cancellation of Approved Layouts (Chapter 5 Applications) – NONE RECEIVED

8. Unlike Subdivision Applications where a registered land surveyor can submit an application, ANYONE can submit a development planning application. The result, notwithstanding the pre-consultation process: Incomplete, incorrect, inaccurate information submitted with development applications, giving rise to delays in the approval process and frustration on all parties concerned. Feedback on Applications Received

9. After Pre-consultation, applicants taking longer to submit applications, can be attributed to the PDA being “new” Many enquiries from Surveyors, no applications for subdivisions and/or consolidations received Feedback on Applications Received

10. No Applications have been received for development in traditional Authority Areas, with the exception of government and anticipated rural housing applications from the Municipality This does not mean that Development by private persons and entities in Traditional Authority Areas have stopped or people are not keen to apply The community, churches and small businesses have consulted town planners in an effort to obtain municipal approval for development Development in Traditional Authority Areas (Chapter 4 Applications)

11. The participatory process does not seem to have infiltrated communities living in Traditional Authority Areas, A meeting with a Chief of Traditional Authority area revealed that the Chief does not know the PDA, the same applies to the community members and businesses that have consulted planners on matters of development approval. The requirements seem to be too cumbersome and too costly. Development in Traditional Authority Areas cont…..

12. the cost factor seems to be an issue: Application fee: R8 500 Consultant: R 20 000 The SIMPLE and PRACTICAL question is how many people can afford this? The result is that after people have consulted on the requirements, they never come back Development in Traditional Authority Areas

13. Bondholders Consent Municipality VS Bank Applicant insist that the municipality has been empowered to approve development applications, not the banks Applicant poses the question: if banks were to decide that no bondholders consent will be issued for the next two years, does this mean that no development takes place?

14. Same process for all applications Easier to deal with one legislation then multiple ones PDA Municipal Forum for support and capacity provided by COGTA Municipalities have powers to approve applications Positive Aspects of the PDA

15. Despite pre-consultations and meetings before the submission of an application, applications tend to have some information outstanding and/or incomplete, leading to delays – this needs to be addressed at a Local Municipality Level with applicants Surveyors are possibly still trying to figure out exactly what are the requirements of the PDA, judging by the “dry-season” – no applications received, some have hinted that the PDA could make them close their offices? The lack of acknowledging town planning as a profession that only those who are qualified can submit applications is a challenge: incomplete, inaccurate applications – this is a problem in implementing the PDA – must be addressed by SACPLAN Conclusion

16. The PDA has made the requirements for development in urban areas and Traditional Authority Areas the same (cost and process), in depth research into the socio-economic realities in Traditional Authority Areas may reveal that the PDA must be revisited in this respect or risk being irrelevant – the debate must be re-opened. Planners who are recruited to municipal planning will find it easier to process applications through the PDA and planners already in the system will spend less time “showing them the ropes” – positive The PDA in Hibiscus Coast works relatively well, the challenges are mainly operational and administrative and can be addressed, this is true for urban areas, and municipal projects in Traditional Authority Areas Conclusion