News‎ > ‎

Feedback from the meeting held on the 2nd September 2009.

posted 4 Oct 2009, 11:23 by Mike Jewitt   [ updated 4 Oct 2009, 12:34 ]
The meeting was well attended and 80 people signed the attendance register. I have tried to summarise the comments and responses to the questionnaires questions 1 to 5 and will post all the comments under ”What is your vision for the Eastern region of Pietermaritzburg for the next 100 years. What would you like to see?”
Dr Jeremy Ridl has kindly allowed us to attach his presentation and you can find it on the home page as an attachment "COMMUNTIES, INDIVIDUALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT.pdf" to the 2nd article "Meeting 2nd September".  Please also read the very important judgement concerning the powers of the  DFA.
 

Question 1:

 Do you value or make use of the rural landscape in the eastern region of Pmb?

92% said yes

 

 

Question 2:

 Do you think urban housing development (high density) should be permitted in the eastern region?
 

88% said no

 

Question 3:

Do you think industrial development should be permitted in the eastern region?
 

88% said no

 

 

Question 4:

Do you think low density tourism development should be permitted in the eastern region?

 
100% said yes

 

Question 5:

Do you think that undeveloped bushveld should be protected as a nature reserve?
 

100% said yes

 

Interestingly only one person was in favour of both high density housing and industrial development  and that person answered "NO" to question one, so we can make the assumption that they neither live nor work in the area. A case of “Not in my backyard, but yours will do” ??

 

What is your vision for the eastern region of Pmb for the next 100 years?
 
The following comments were made. If comments were very similar they have been combined.
 
1 Preservation of bushveld.
2.Low density tourism.
3.A special environment for nature lovers
4.A well maintained natural area with no high density developments or alien invaders.
5.Keep wide open spaces.
6.Yes we can have developments as long as the infrastructures are correct.
7.As natural as it is now.
8.Sustainable utilisation of land.  Utilisation is not necessarily development.
9.Ecofriendly tourism.
10.Less human imposition on the natural resources. Maintenance of the natural bush and grasslands with the introduction of small pockets of forest.
11.A dam being built on the Peniel mission bridge to create a dam and provide the area with an enhanced stretch of water to add to the wildlife and environmentally conserved housing development.
12.An industrial, business, residential and tourism hub under strictly managed process as part of the spatial development framework of the Msundusi municipality.
13.Controlled development which maintains the existing environment through home industry, art, sport, and other similar low impact commercial development similar to the midlands meander.
14.Very much what I see now but with better developed tourist attractions.
15.Some development (housing), ecotourism and protected areas.
16.A green landscape with an integration of light industry, residence and green space and tourism.
17.More game areas open to public.
18Reserves, kept natural, ecotourism.
19.Keep bushveld undeveloped with large properties greater than 0.5ha.
20.Low density tourism development, conservation, protected.
21.I am realistic and it is difficult to foresee the future of Pmb under the political atmosphere.
22.That we do not blindly make the same mistakes as other countries.
 
Very few extra comments were made and they are as follows:
 
1.Keep wide open spaces.
2.Yes we can have developments as long as the infrastructures are correct
3.I would like to see a better understanding of the residents in the manner in which they develop their properties. Less suburban type sprawl.
4.Add to the wildlife and environmentally conserved housing development.
5.Need to strike a balance between environmental protection and development.  These two are not dichotomies.
6.Developers are just trying to make a quick 'buck' so no concern after they have made their money. Mess left behind, degrades rivers etc.
7.We have to get the support of those with the power including the local chamber of commerce and industries. Deterrants to hunting must be so strong that nobody will attempt it. Many hunting dogs taken to SPCA, but just get released to their owners the same evening.  Please follow up.  They're getting away with murder. 
 
To summarise.
The overwhelming response is to keep the natural biodiversity of the area and promote controlled ecotourism. .
As residents the only way we can ensure that this happens is to actively participate in the various processes currently taking place, such as the EMF (Environmental Management Framework) and the  IDP (Integrated Development Plan)  and to respond to all development applications. We will be posting as much information as possible on this website, especially regarding dates and times of meetings. So please be proactive and attend these meetings and have your say.
 
The question and answer session will be reported on once we have consolidated the responses.
 

 

Comments