Desalination and seawater quality at Green Point, Cape Town: A study on the effects of marine sewage outfalls*

 Desalination and seawater quality at Green Point, Cape Town: A study on the effects of marine sewage outfalls

This paper presents our collection methods, laboratory protocols and findings in respect of sewage pollution affecting seawater and marine organisms in Table Bay, Cape Town, South Africa, then moves to consider their implications for the governance of urban water as well as sewage treatment and desalination. A series of seawater samples, collected from approximately 500 m to 1500 m offshore, in rock pools at low tide near Granger Bay, and at a depth under beach sand of 300-400 mm, were investigated for the presence of bacteriological load indicator organisms including Escherichia coli and Enterococcus bacteria. A second series of samples comprised limpets (Patella vulgata), mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis), sea urchins (Tripneustes ventricosus), starfish (Fromia monilis), sea snails (Tegula funebralis) and seaweed (Ulva lactuca), collected in rock pools at low tide near Granger Bay, and sediment from wet beach sand and where the organisms were found, close to the sites of a proposed desalination plant and a number of recreational beaches. Intermittently high levels of microbial pollution were noted, and 15 pharmaceutical and common household chemicals were identified and quantified in the background seawater and bioaccumulated in marine organisms. These indicator microbes and chemicals point to the probable presence of pathogens, and literally thousands of chemicals of emerging concern in the seawater. Their bioaccumulation potential is demonstrated.

In respect of proposed desalination, the findings indicate that desalinated seawater must be subjected to treatment protocols capable of removing both bacterial loads and organic chemical compounds. The terms of reference for desalination plants must specify adequate testing and monitoring of chemical compounds as well as microorganisms in the intake and recovered water. Drinking water supplied by the proposed seawater desalination plants should be carefully tested for its toxicity.

In respect of water management, our findings suggest the need for the City of Cape Town to move to an integrated water and sewage management plan that treats urban water, including seawater, as a circulating system that is integral to the health of the City, and which excludes marine outfalls.

https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext...

Leslie Petrik; Lesley Green; Adeola P. Abegunde; Melissa Zackon; Cecilia Y. Sanusi; Jo Barnes

Environmental and Nano Science Group, Department of Chemistry, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

Environmental Humanities South and Department of Anthropology, School of African and Gender Studies, Anthropology and Linguistics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

Senior Lecturer Emeritus, Division of Community Health, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa

scielo.org.za

Desalination and seawater quality at Green Point, Cape Town: A study on the effects of marine sewage outfalls

Escherichia coli EnterococcusPatella vulgataMytilus galloprovincialisTripneustes ventricosusFromia monilisTegula funebralisUlva

RESPONSE TO CITY OF CAPE TOWN’s PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAMME RE MARINE OUTFALL PLANTS

RESPONSE TO CITY OF CAPE TOWN’s PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAMME RE MARINE OUTFALL PLANTS

The CBCRA is strongly opposed to the use of Marine Outfall Plants (MOP’s) to discharge land-based effluent into the ocean.

This commentary refers specifically to the Camps Bay MOP, unless otherwise specified.

Firstly, the actual advertisement by the City for its citizenry to respond to the Public Participation Process (PPP), is both disingenuous and misleading. The City appears to have learnt absolutely nothing from its impugned (and set aside) PPP of 2015, or thereabouts.

In its online message, the City claims that MOP’s safely disperse wastewater and that such wastewater is diluted to nearly undetectable concentrations (my emphasis). It fails to recognise the fact that it is not wastewater but raw, untreated sewerage that is pumped into the ocean.

The scientific research by all of Cape Town’s universities’ pre-eminent scientists (including Professor Emeritus Jo Barnes PhD (Stellenbosch), Professor Leslie Petrik PhD (UWC) and  Professor Lesley Green PhD (UCT) reveal that this statement by the City is simply wrong and not evidence-based.

Further, the City attaches its much criticized CSRI report, of a few years back, to the online notice.

It must be borne in mind that this “independent” study by the CSRI, used City-supplied base data and even then, the findings were not favourable toward the continued use of MOP’s. The City managed to cherry-pick one statement (that there was no indication of an immediate environmental catastrophe) to justify the use of an archaic and environmentally dangerous process of disposal of raw sewerage.

The City also claim that the outfall pipe’s discharge point is far from land. Again, this is simply not true:

The Camps Bay pipe is a short 1,3km from a section of a Blue Flag beach but less than 800m from the popular Maidens Cove beach and tidal pool. With prevailing currents from the south-west and winds from the north-west, it is an ineluctable fact that the raw sewerage will return to land, where it poses extreme health risks to the thousands of residents and tourists who frequent the beaches in Camps Bay and Clifton.

The CBCRA received a senior counsel ex parte opinion from two of Cape Town’s most highly regarded environmental lawyers.

One of their findings was that it remained illegal for the City to discharge effluent into a Marine Protected Area (MPA), such as the bay at Camps Bay. Therefore, the Minister’s power to issue such a CWDP is questionable at best.

There is no facility on the City’s portal for the actual document to be uploaded but the CBCRA will make it available to the Minister on request.

However, despite the long history of opposition to the MOP’s in Cape Town – and Camps Bay specifically – some dating back a century (for Green Point), the City has pursued this cheap and nasty option to avoid high infrastructural costs. 

Cost cannot be a factor where public health and the destruction of the marine environment are concerned. 

The City also fails to mention that, in Camps Bay alone, hundreds of millions of rand have been collected by the City, over the years, via sewerage tariffs. Clearly, none of this has been spent on any upgrade of the local MOP system!

It is also common cause that the City has failed to adhere to any CWDPs that have (or have purported to have) been issued previously. Two such clear failings are:

• Periodic exceeding of discharge quantities
• Failure to establish a Permit Advisory Committee, to ensure oversight of the City-run operation.

The latter condition needs to be urgently addressed and the Minister must insist that local public representatives are installed onto such committees.

The real issue is that the MOP’s exist and the City, although recently admitting that such a system is problematic, has set itself long timelines, of many, many years, to address the matter. The MOP’s are extremely dangerous to public health and the marine environment and the City, the author of this problem in the first instance, cannot be trusted to leisurely ponder the future of its foul sewer water disposal.

To this end, the CBCRA requests that the Minister, if she decides to issue any CWDP, attaches meaningful conditions to such permit.

• The first condition must be to address the actual problem: There are many affordable and relatively easy solutions provided by so-called “package” plants. These small plants can be located next to a MOP and offer treatment of the effluent prior to it being pumped out to sea by the MOP. This will ensure that wastewater quality is of a high enough standard to make it harmless to humans and the environment.

• The Minister could make it a condition of approval of the CWDP that the City have such a system designed and installed within a stipulated period, which would not be unreasonable at 4 or 5 years from issuance.
  
  
• With immediate effect, a Permit Advisory Committee must be established by the City, with local civic representation.

The CBCRA wishes to thank the Minister for creating this opportunity to comment on this extremely important issue.

Regards

CHRIS WILLEMSE

CHAIRPERSON
CBRRA contact:   Chris Willemse   Mobile 083 6536363   

City launches public participation process for marine outfalls and more

21 September 2023

Residents and interested stakeholders will have the opportunity from today, Thursday, 21 September 2023 until Tuesday, 21 November 2023, to submit their comments during the 60-day public participation period on the marine outfalls discharge permits applications. They can also comment on the permits for the Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW) in Mitchells Plain, Simon’s Town, Millers Point, Oudekraal and Llandudno.

The City of Cape Town’s Water and Sanitation Directorate launched the public participation process and outlined its details at a public meeting last night held at Camps Bay High School.

About the three City-operated marine outfalls:

• The marine outfalls are located offshore discharging beyond the intertidal zone at Hout Bay, Green Point and Camps Bay.
• These discharge wastewater into the ocean that has gone through degritting and screening. 
• All other areas in Cape Town are serviced by 23 wastewater treatment works (WWTWs) which treats sewage, removing the various nutrient loads before it is released as treated effluent into the ocean. In total, 95% of Cape Town’s wastewater is discharged from WWTW, compared to 5% from the three outfalls. 
• The City is making major investments to improve wastewater treatment and upgrade sewers, to the benefit of inland and coastal water quality, with a 226% increase in the overall infrastructure budget, from R2,3bn in 2022/23 to R7,8bn in 2025/26.
• Coastal outfalls are a global practice which is guided by local engineering and environmental pollution legislation and guidelines.
• In some cases, spatial and environmental constraints inhibit wastewater treatment works at small coastal enclaves. For example, there are major spatial, practical, and financial constraints to building a multi-billion rand WWTW in the area to service the Green Point, Hout Bay and Camps Bay catchments. Substantial reconfiguring of the existing sewer network would also be required in these areas. 
• An expert summary report on seven major studies into the outfalls concluded that “the marine outfalls are meeting their design objectives in reducing potential deleterious ecological and/or human health effects of discharged effluent by taking advantage of increased effluent dilution offered by deep water”.
  

‘The Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Environment (DFFE) is currently considering appeals to her Department’s granting of permits for the three marine outfalls in the City of Cape Town. Because the Minister is only deciding the appeal eight years after public participation was conducted, the Minister has determined that the City should collate fresh public inputs to enable her to decide the merits of the appeal. 

‘The City welcomes the opportunity to do this as since the initial public participation, seven major studies have been undertaken by different and independent marine science experts. In the meantime, the City continues to operate the marine outfalls with its current permits and within its licence conditions that have been issued by the Department of Water and Sanitation/ DFFE.

‘The City further commissioned a study on the feasibility and costing of various options regarding the outfalls. The draft scoping report for this study has been completed by 30 June 2023. Further community engagements are planned for later this year on the way forward regarding outfalls once the City has had an opportunity to consider the outcome of the study,’ said the Mayoral Committee Member for Water and Sanitation, Councillor Zahid Badroodien. 

About the permits for the Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW) in Mitchells Plain, Simon’s Town, Millers Point, Oudekraal and Llandudno.

The City is also proactively including these five WWTWs in the public participation process so the public can comment on these permit applications too.

Please note: This is not related to the marine outfalls permit applications. 

Public participation details:

‘It is important for the City to give the public a fair chance to provide their considered, informed inputs on these matters. We encourage residents and stakeholders to submit their comments during this fresh 60-day public participation period. After this period, the City will respond to the comments received and thereafter also submit both the public’s comments and the City’s responses to the National DFFE for its decision on the applications. We want to hear from the public so don’t miss this opportunity,’ said Councillor Badroodien. 

From Thursday, 21 September 2023 to Tuesday, 21 November 2023: 

View the applications: 

• Online:                   www.capetown.gov.za/haveyoursay

• At sub-councils:    https://bit.ly/3CUlnKW 

• At libraries:            https://bit.ly/3nQvqKH 

• On-site at each of the marine outfall depots

For more information, email: public.participation@capetown.gov.za

Submit comments:

• Online:                   www.capetown.gov.za/haveyoursay

• Via Email:              public.participation@capetown.gov.za

• At Sub-councils:   https://bit.ly/3CUlnKW 

Other information:

• For a list of public meetings, visit: www.capetown.gov.za/haveyoursay 

• Marine outfalls FAQ and more research reports and findings: https://bit.ly/3Z5EwDY

• For City updates on the public participation process, email Communications.WaterandSanitation@capetown.gov.za

Published by:
City of Cape Town, Media Office

Comments to the MPBL 2024

Read the CBCRA’s full comment on the proposed amendments to the MPBL so that you may better understand our deep concerns regarding these draconian steps by the City to prejudice your property rights.

** Find easy print and submit document links and the petition at the end of this page:

CONCERNS

• The total removal of 3rd-party objections to new developments

• Additional restrictions on specific areas

• Reduced public participation without public consultation

• Temporary land use deviations, such as converting residential 

properties into commercial spaces

• Increase to allowable building heights

• No public notice for small-scale developments

• Removal of 10m height restriction for Camps Bay & Bakoven 

COMMENTS TO THE AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING BYLAW (MPBL) 2024

The City administration has, for more than 2 decades now, attempted to minimise public participation and impose its own version of planning law on the property-owners of Cape Town.

This despite the ongoing efforts of, amongst others, the Camps Bay & Clifton Ratepayers Association (CBCRA), other civic and ratepayer groupings and many individuals, to engage positively with both the planning officials and the politicians of the City.

The CBCRA, in particular, has responded to hundreds of applications over the years and dutifully conformed with all the requirements of an interested and affected party - and a good citizen.

This has been almost to no avail, as the planners and Municipal Planning Tribunal (MPT) generally ignore all of its representations, with almost standard dismissal arguments incorporated into planning reports, which the MPT simply approve.

Even well-motivated and sound legal opinion is brushed off, often by professional planners, who should know better than to give legal advice to City processes.

In one notable case, the CBCRA presented a detailed traffic assessment, by a respected professional engineer, to refute many claims made by an applicant. This comprehensive report was accepted onto the agenda by the MPT at the appointed meeting but not a single member of the Tribunal bothered to read it, or refer to it. Needless to say - and within 30 minutes of deliberation - the application was approved and tens of thousands of rands worth of detailed, well-reasoned investigation consigned, unread, to the waste bin!

In the current attempt to amend the MPBL, the City has clearly indicated that public participation needs to be curtailed to the absolute minimum possible.

An issue that has irked both planners and politicians over the years, restrictive title deed conditions (viewed by all SA courts, including the Concourt, as praedial servitutal rights in property), are also to be dealt with dismissively. So much for the Constitution!

South Africa is a constitutional democracy and its citizenry should be encouraged to actively participate in matters that affect them. The proposed amendments are designed to discourage – even prevent – public participation for the purposes of allowing a bureaucracy the unfettered opportunity to engage in its own, often self-serving, actions and policies. 

With the proposed amendments, the City is attempting to use a bylaw to circumvent statutes contained in national legislation (of the National Building Act and the Spatial Planning & Land Use management Act). National legislation obviously stands before local bylaws.

In essence, a City planner will now decide whether an application materially affects a property owner and whether it is deemed necessary to inform that owner of a pending application in the first instance. So much for property rights and public participation!

It is very important to contextualise the planning process: A Zoning scheme for an area exists for those who live and own property there. It is not a plaything for officials and politicians to manipulate for their benefit. The City’s function is to manage the area for the owners and residents, not special interest- or lobby groups, which mostly have a profit motive. The City is actually the manager, not the owner, of the city and is meant to act for the benefit of the residents and owners of property, who are, in a sense, the City’s clients.

Clearly, the proposed amendments to the MPBL do not benefit ratepayers and property owners.

Further, it is proposed that certain sections are back-dated. This can only mean that the City wishes to “assist” a developer(s) with a troublesome application!

Another problematic proposal is for an official to decide whether an amended application needs to be re-advertised. The CBCRA has seen too many acts of deceit over the years to ever believe that this could be a good idea.

In conclusion, the current proposed amendments should be scrapped and, if necessary, be reworked by delegates who are representative of all role-players in the city. 

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

From the Friends of Constantia Valley Greenbelts Facebook, which we support:

The proposed Municipal Planning By-Law amendments by CoCT will remove environmental protections for greenbelts & open spaces & vastly alter residential rights!

The deadline for submitting comments is  FRIDAY 25th OCTOBER.
Please see below for more information and instructions on now to object:

 *Three urgent & critical steps to preserve environmental protections & residential rights across Cape Town* 

 Sign & submit the *Environmental Objection*: https://bit.ly/EnviroObjection

 Sign & submit the *Residential Objection*: https://bit.ly/ResidentialObjection

 Complete the *CRRA petition*: https://bit.ly/CRRAsurvey to add your voice to theirs

 Email objections by *THIS FRIDAY 25th OCT* to: lums@capetown.gov.za

 *Please share far and wide.*
If you are unclear on the issues and threats to our greenbelts, public open spaces & suburbs, please read the executive summary here: https://bit.ly/FoCVGBSummary

JOIN the *Constantia Matters* WhatsApp Community (Broadcast Only) to be informed in future: https://bit.ly/40g69On

Be proactive, Be an involved citizen - *Not objecting means these amendments WILL BECOME LAW!*

Proposed Amendments to the Municipal Planning By-Law (MPBL)

Summary of Proposed Amendments to the Municipal Planning By-Law (MPBL):

1. Removal of Third-Party Objections
2. Introduction of Overlay Zones
3. Reduced Public Participation Periods
4. Temporary Land Use Deviations
5. Increased Building Heights
6. No Public Notice for Small-Scale Developments
7. Removal of 10m Height Restriction for Camps Bay

The City of Cape Town is proposing a number of significant amendments to the Municipal Planning By-Law (MPBL) that could impact property rights, building regulations, and public participation in the development process. These proposed changes could directly affect how developments are managed, particularly in areas like Camps Bay and Bakoven. Below is a breakdown of the most important amendments and their potential impact on our community.

1. Removal of Third-Party Objections

One of the most contentious proposed amendments is the removal of third-party objections. Currently, residents who are not directly affected by a development, but who live nearby or are part of the wider community, can lodge objections to developments they believe could negatively impact the area. Under the new amendment, only those who are directly affected (for example, immediate neighbors) will have the right to object to development proposals.

This change could limit the broader community’s ability to protect the character of the neighborhood and ensure developments align with the area’s needs. It is crucial for residents to voice their concerns about losing this important mechanism for public input.

2. Introduction of Overlay Zones

The proposed amendments also include the introduction of overlay zones, which would give the City the ability to impose additional regulations on specific areas without requiring further public consultation. In areas like Camps Bay and Bakoven, the current local area overlay (Item 190 of the Development Management Scheme, DMS) limits buildings to three storeys and caps the height of facades to 10 meters above the ground level.

These restrictions help to preserve the scenic views and character of the area. However, the new overlay zones could allow for even stricter or more lenient regulations, depending on the City’s discretion, without any opportunity for residents to be consulted. This means that changes could be made that affect property rights, building heights, and land use without input from the community.

3. Reduced Public Participation Periods

Another significant change is the proposal to reduce the time allowed for public participation during the planning application process. The current process allows for a certain period where residents can review development proposals and submit their objections or comments. The new amendments would shorten this period, giving residents less time to respond to proposed developments that could impact their neighborhood.

This reduction could make it more difficult for communities to organize and make informed submissions, potentially allowing developments to proceed without adequate scrutiny. It’s important for residents to stay informed and be prepared to act quickly should this amendment be approved.

4. Temporary Land Use Deviations

The proposed amendments would also make it easier to approve temporary deviations from land use regulations. For example, it could become simpler for residential properties to be temporarily converted for commercial use. While this flexibility might benefit certain short-term needs, it also has the potential to alter the character of primarily residential neighborhoods by increasing traffic, noise, and commercial activity.

For areas like Camps Bay and Bakoven, which are known for their residential atmosphere and scenic beauty, this change could lead to a more commercialized environment if not carefully monitored.

5. Increased Building Heights

A crucial change that could impact our area is the proposal to increase the allowable building heights in certain zones. This could result in taller buildings that might block views, reduce privacy, and alter the overall aesthetic of the neighborhood.

Currently, areas like Camps Bay benefit from strict height limitations that preserve views of the ocean and mountains, which are part of what makes the area so desirable. An increase in building height restrictions could negatively affect property values and the character of the neighborhood.

6. No Public Notice for Small-Scale Developments

One of the more concerning amendments is the proposal to allow small-scale developments to proceed without public notice. This means that certain developments or alterations could be approved without the requirement to notify nearby residents, leaving them unaware of changes happening in their vicinity.

In practice, this could mean small but significant alterations could take place next door or down the street, without the community being informed or having a chance to comment.

7. Removal of 10m Height Restriction for Camps Bay

In addition to the general increase in building heights, one specific amendment proposes to remove the 10-meter height restriction for buildings in Camps Bay. Currently, this restriction ensures that buildings in the area do not exceed a certain height, preserving the visual harmony and scenic views. If this restriction is removed, it could pave the way for taller structures that would disrupt the skyline and potentially diminish the appeal of the area.

The proposed amendments to the Municipal Planning By-Law represent a significant shift in how developments are managed in Cape Town. For residents of Camps Bay, Bakoven, and other affected areas, these changes could have a lasting impact on the character and livability of our neighborhoods. It's essential that residents review these amendments and submit their comments before the 25 October 2024 deadline.

Your input can help ensure that the changes are made with the community’s best interests in mind. To review the full details of the proposed amendments and to submit your comments, visit the City of Cape Town’s official website.

Comments in respect of the proposed amendments can be submitted by:

•Website: www.capetown.gov.za/haveyoursay

•Email: lums@capetown.gov.za
Anthea.Bendie@capetown.gov.za for general public participation and disadvantaged groups
www.capetown.gov.za/haveyoursay

Disclaimer: 

This post (including attachments) is subject to the disclaimer published at: http://www.capetown.gov.za/general/email-disclaimer Please read the disclaimer before opening any attachment or taking any other action in terms of this e-mail. If you cannot access the disclaimer, kindly send an email to disclaimer@capetown.gov.za and a copy will be provided to you.

 Draft_CCT_Municipal_Planning_Amendment_By-law_2024.pdf
 Full-memorandum-003.pdf
 SSRU-map-002.pdf
 CTA86-2024_HYS-MPBL-2_131mmwx200mmh_AF.pdf
 Executive-Summary.pdf
 Executive-Summary-Afr.pdf
 Executive-Summary-Xho.pdf
 CTA86-2024_HYS-MPBL-2_150mmwx190mmh_EN.pdf
 CTA86-2024_HYS-MPBL-2_131mmwx220mmh_XH.pdf

The City’s Public Participation Unit will assist people who cannot read or write, people living with disabilities and people from disadvantaged groups who are unable to submit written comments, to have their input or comments recorded and submitted to the City. 

Contact Anthea Bendie 021 400 1450.

The proposals are available for viewing on the City of Cape Town website:

Contact Schalk de Jager at schalk.dejager@capetown.gov.za for any enquiries on the proposals.