I am sorry to have missed the meeting on the 5th December at the Marine Hotel. I would be keen to be involved, to help in anyway I can. As a lover of Hermanus and especially of the Cliff Path, I might be able to help being a Civil Engineer and having specialized in concrete for most of my career.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am trying to register as a stakeholder in the Pooles Bay project. Please tell me how I go about this.
Many thanks
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am against this project for many reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
5. Although CPAG claim the path will be maintenance free, this is impossible in such a harsh environment as the inter-tidal zone. Sections of the path are planned to be dowelled with steel bolts being drilled into the rock. These will rust and the path will collapse in time.
6. There is also the issue of this plan impinging on private property, affecting the value of coastal properties, in addtiion to the impact on the privacy of those who live on Poole’s Bay.
7. I have studied several surveying articles on the determination of the high water mark which is a very complex matter. I believe that the applicant (CPAG) may have submitted their survey to the Surveyor General for approval in which case the SG must be made aware that there are objections to their survey methodology and that I would like to have sight of their survey records. I also notice that the applicant has not signed many of the applications, rendering much null and void.
8. The “deadline of January 20th” is a cheap legal trick and wont hold water as this is the holiday period and many of the consultants, applicants and complainants aren’t available – some don’t reopen their offices until January 18th. I will be contesting that issue as well.
9. More to come.
I oppose the proposal. As do many others who will be posting soon,
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Internationally scientists are working on a 0.3m rise in sea level by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This means the path would be well under water by 2100. It seems pointless to build it when it will have a limited lifespan. Realistically the earliest the CPAG could expect the path to be finished would be close to 2030.
Noted and added with your previous comment, thank you.
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed by a member of their board, Mr van der Sluys.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This pristine coastline needs to be protected and you oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. May I please ask for a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am against this project for many reasons – Poole’s Bay is a special place and we need to protect the fauna and flora, the path will cost millions to build and this money should be used better especially in these Covid times.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This proposal is ridiculous, this pristine coastline really needs to be protected and I oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG wholeheartedly Please give a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline for us to build a case for preservation.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
“I am against this project for many reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
5. Although CPAG claim the path will be maintenance free, this is impossible in such a harsh environment as the inter-tidal zone. Sections of the path are planned to be dowelled with steel bolts being drilled into the rock. These will rust and the path will collapse in time.
6. There is also the issue of this plan impinging on private property, affecting the value of coastal properties, in addition to the impact on the privacy of those who live on Poole’s Bay.
7. I have studied several surveying articles on the determination of the high water mark which is a very complex matter. I believe that the applicant (CPAG) may have submitted their survey to the Surveyor General for approval in which case the SG must be made aware that there are objections to their survey methodology and that I would like to have sight of their survey records. I also notice that the applicant has not signed many of the applications, rendering much null and void.
8. The “deadline of January 20th” is a cheap legal trick and won’t hold water as this is the holiday period and many of the consultants, applicants and complainants aren’t available – some don’t reopen their offices until January 18th. I will be contesting that issue as well.
9. More to come.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Please extend the deadline from the 20th. This will be for such a destructive cause to an incredibly pristine coastline. The expensive and expansive destruction. Is uncalled for
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays with dense kelp beds along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape from Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising. This would put the path underwater all the time at some point in the future. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has very real and current pressing issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along Main road. Rather put the money into Zwelithle and in so doing help to protect the future of Hermanus as a whole
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect on the project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this pristine coastline needs to be protected and i strongly oppose the destructive and expensive plans put forward by CPAG. I request a 30 day extension on the Jan 20th 2021 deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this coastline needs to be protected and i strongly oppose the destructive plans put forward by CPAG. I request a 30 day extension on the Jan 20th 2021 deadline.
Noted and added with your previous comment.
i totally oppose the plans. they would look awful and be destructive, in addition to being very expensive.
Noted with your previous comment, thank you.
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed
15. I request a 30-day extension of the deadline on 20th January.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
The proposal to build the Poole’s Bay cliff path connection is truly terrible – it is frighteningly expensive, in a dangerous position below the high watermark, fiercely destructive to the environment and without a doubt will require ongoing and costly maintenance.
This proposal should be unequivocally condemned!
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
My partner and I walked/climbed/staggered along the proposed cliff path extension the other day and noted that the CPAG blue markers were in many cases far higher than the orange litchen on the rocks and some growing plants — this means that their designated path is much higher than the High Water Mark as litchen only grows above it.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This is pristine coastline that needs to be protected. I therefore oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. I am also requesting a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This is a pristine piece of coastline in Hermanus and one of the last remaining in the town that does not have a footpath. There are more than adequate footpaths along the Hermanus coastline and it would be unwise to subject this stretch to unwarranted interference as proposed by the CPAG.
I also think the deadline of 20th January should be extended to allow for more comments.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I strongly object to this “pathway” in Hermanus. It is not feasible practically and also in general from a eco view.
There are way more issues that need funds in Hermanus than building a risky walkway that will open itself up to more poachers and impact the value of private property in that section.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
“I am against this project for these reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this pristine coastline needs to be protected and I oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. And ask for a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1) It is one of the untouched coves along this coastline and construction will disrupt species in their habitats and wreck biodiversity in this precious bay. Allowing such human disruption in this area of nature reserve sets a precedent for further areas of nature reserve to be destroyed for selfish reasons.
2) It is a dangerous area to consider for walkers due to the infamous rough tides in this area. Furthermore, such tides and the rising sea level will result in the path being under water frequently and constant maintenance being required.
3) The Cliff Path and Municipality have emphasised they will not pay for maintenance at all along the Poole’s Bay stretch.
4) There is already an upgraded pedestrian walkway from each entrance to the path payed for by the municipality- making is a safe and easy stroll (which is actually more accessible for walkers than the extension that will be constructed which does not allow access for disabled persons)
5) 3 years of construction will be long and destructive- and where will the building materials be stored?
6) There will be increased crime in the bay as a result- which will cause homeowners to have to build large fences and walls. This further disrupts ecosystems and nature in the bay and is not an attractive sight.
7) Tens of millions of rands would be far more beneficial to the community in other places. Such funding is hugely needed in the Zwelihle community, and could be used to create far more jobs in Hermanus than would be created through cliff path construction. Hermanus locals would definitely like to see this money elsewhere: healthcare, education, reduced taxes for elderly etc.
8) The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
9) Mollergen have not indicated their support for the path at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1) It is one of the untouched coves along this coastline and construction will disrupt species in their habitats and wreck biodiversity in this precious bay. Allowing such human disruption in this area of nature reserve sets a precedent for further areas of nature reserve to be destroyed for selfish reasons.
2) It is a dangerous area to consider for walkers due to the infamous rough tides in this area. Furthermore, such tides and the rising sea level will result in the path being under water frequently and constant maintenance being required.
3) The Cliff Path and Municipality have emphasised they will not pay for maintenance at all along the Poole’s Bay stretch.
4) There is already an upgraded pedestrian walkway from each entrance to the path payed for by the municipality- making is a safe and easy stroll (which is actually more accessible for walkers than the extension that will be constructed which does not allow access for disabled persons)
5) 3 years of construction will be long and destructive- and where will the building materials be stored?
6) There will be increased crime in the bay as a result- which will cause homeowners to have to build large fences and walls. This further disrupts ecosystems and nature in the bay and is not an attractive sight.
7) Tens of millions of rands would be far more beneficial to the community in other places. Such funding is hugely needed in the Zwelihle community, and could be used to create far more jobs in Hermanus than would be created through cliff path construction. Hermanus locals would definitely like to see this money elsewhere: healthcare, education, reduced taxes for elderly etc.
8) The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
9) Mollergen have not indicated their support for the path at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Hi there
This path construction has come to my attention and I wish to oppose the draft put forward.
I believe that this natural and unspoiled coastline needs to be protected and left to its current tranquility and peace. What is more is that this looks to be a costly and invasive plan put forward, and I think there needs to be a halt to this.
Please consider this a strong vote against these plans.
Kind regards
Josie
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This would completely ruin our seaside.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I write on behalf of the Winkler Family to express our opposition to the proposed construction of the intertidal cliff path between Mollergren Park and Protea Road.
The argument that property owners along the Poole’s Bay coastline deny members of the public access to the area is both dishonest and deceitful. The Bay is easily accessible from the east, and fisherman, walkers, surfers, families exploring rockpools, and others who have made use of it over many decades have never been denied access by residents.
Private properties begin at the high-water mark, and as with any private property ownership, residents have every right to have their private land respected.
The high-water mark defined by those employed by the Hermanus Cliff Path Action Group and the methodology used is disputed and must be independently assessed and verified before any construction can begin.
But however this point is ultimately defined, it is disingenuous to seek permanent construction of any sort below it. The intertidal zone is ecologically sensitive. Any construction below the high-water mark will not only disfigure this last pristine stretch in Hermanus, it will certainly have a negative effect on fauna and flora. This is likely why there is no precedent for such a construction in Walker Bay: no other part of the formal cliff path, from Grotto Beach to the New Harbour, has been built to intrude into the intertidal zone – I can only assume to protect nature and humans alike.
The notion of a “high-water mark” is an intellectual construct, and as far as safety is concerned, far from a practical one. It assumes some kind of objective median level for all high tides, concluded under perfect theoretical conditions, and consequently assumes that the ocean will behave accordingly. This is nothing less than sheer arrogance. I have personally witnessed driftwood posts, football-sized stones and boulders with the diameter of an average car tyre being driven well past any theoretical “high water mark” by storm surges, coming to rest well within the bounds of private properties situated on Poole’s Bay. The destructive power of the storm surges and the debris they throw about cannot be underestimated.
It is clear that those supporting the extension of the cliff path along this stretch of coastline have a rather naïve understanding, if any at all, of the variability and danger of local conditions.
To imagine that these dangers will be mitigated by warning signs is disingenuous and glib. Not only is a reliance on the good sense of the public to heed these signs beyond unrealistic, it will be impossible to provide objective, clear and accurate information as to when the path is safe to use or not with signage alone.
This raises important questions of accountability – most crucially, who will be accountable for injury (or worse) that will inevitably occur on an intertidal cliff path?
Who would be responsible for the extensive and ongoing maintenance of a construction built in such a hostile and destructive environment?
The proposed development also raises questions of security. Given the easy public access, Poole’s Bay is already a poaching hotspot. The fact that it is accessible only from the east end of the bay at present provides some measure of control. A cliff path would not only create easier access for poachers, but also provide alternate escape routes.
The same will hold true for other criminal elements. It would be ironic if the construction of the cliff path forced property owners to erect unsightly walls with razor wire and electric fences between themselves and the coastline to ensure their security – which by the logic of the CPAG they would surely be allowed to erect along the very same high-water mark.
There has been substantial negative press levelled at the property owners along this stretch of coast (verging on the defamatory, but that is separate issue) in which their “privilege” and “entitlement” is invoked as the primary barrier to preventing the public from enjoying this stretch of coastline. As I mention above, this is dishonest – members of the public, from all walks of life, have never been denied access to Poole’s Bay, or any other part of this coastline beyond the boundaries of private property. It is a fact that most users of the existing cliff path are themselves privileged – those who can afford to live in Hermanus itself, or who have the means to holiday in the town. The CPAG sees fit, then, to spend tens of millions to extend the privilege of the already privileged (and to put them in danger at the same time). Surely the vast amounts of money required for the construction could be better spent for the upliftment of those who sorely need it – those who so vociferously protested their basic conditions of living during the 2019 riots, for example.
In short, the proposal for the construction of an intertidal cliff-path between Mollergren Park and Protea Road is misdirected. The project is nothing more than the expensive, dangerous and environmentally destructive hobby-horse of a select few who themselves are too entitled to be able to identify where the true needs of the greater Hermanus community lie.
Mark Winkler
on behalf of the Winkler family
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I have been visiting Hermanus since the 1940’s and care deeply for its
unique ecology. Hermanus has over time suffered much ecological harm as a
result of thoughtless and unsustainable man-made intrusions.The plans
for the extension to the Cliff Path through Poole’s Bay will be
destructive of the natural beauty of this sensitive intertidal area and
likely end up as yet another man-made eyesore such as the Markus Jooste
property nearby.
In Hermanus, where poverty and related issues are so patently obvious it
is simply plain wrong – for the comfort of a few strollers – to incur
great expense on an alternative to a short and perfectly pleasant detour
along the Main Road. We need to keep a sense of balance in our
socio-economic planning rather than make the comfort of the privileged sector of our society our
automatic priority.
I have read several submissions which have been sent to you to oppose this extension to the cliff path and I endorse them all. Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you would like any further information.
Finally, I would like to ask you kindly to grant a 30-day extension on your January 20 2021 deadline .
Thank you
Ruth Kirkland
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
The coastline does not need more pathways and additional pathways will only damage the ecosystem. Please give a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline to allow this issue to be fully reviewed.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed by a member of their board, Mr van der Sluys
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Ek toets net of dit werk
you haven’t confirmed my prior messages
Your comments have been acknowledged as per my earlier message. Thank you.
I think security of the houses bordering the Cliff Path is already compromised and now you want to add to this with even more access to the sea-front properties?
Not a good idea
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Good Morning All,
Having built/ lived/ holidayed at 212 Baleana Crescent (used to be Main Road) since 1974 I believe I’m very aware of the coast line of Poole’s Bay.
The cliff path, as it stands today is no different to what it was when we built our house.
It has certainly been upgraded over the years and security guards are now visible – that, of course comes with the territory.
When the path was initially built I don’t think anyone would have objected had they continued across Poole’s Bay so long as they kept below the highwater mark.
Obviously it was then, and still is today not a feasible proposition. Since then nothing has changed other than the high water mark possibly rising due to the melting of the icebergs further south.
If it was too dangerous to do it then it is too dangerous to do it now. The expense, insurance, life risk and accessibility of this project seems fated from the start.
Whilst on holiday over the Festive Season I had numerous intrepid hikers clambering up onto Johnny Bouwer’s and our lawn in order to avoid an accident…slipping, falling or being washed away!
Continuing this walkway is just NOT feasible.
It is an outright dangerous proposal and would be totally irresponsible of the Council to let something of this nature slip past.
Bye for now
Lynn Rowand
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am very much against this. There are REAL world problems in Hermanus that can benefit from a R30 – R50million rand garden path.
It is shocking that this has actually come this far. WAKE UP!
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I wish to register my OPPOSITION to the Poole’s Bay connection path as it will take the footpath along an ecologically fragile area. In addition, the placement of the path along the high tide line is dangerous for pedestrians and damaging to the environment. Encroachment of the path on private property is also totally unacceptable, and violates the property owners’ rights to privacy as well as compromising their security.
Further, it will make access to the Marine Reserve so much easier for poachers who already pillage that area for perlemoen, so why facilitate this crime.
This objection is not about keeping walkers happy but to protect a fragile ecosystem. The existing cliff paths are more than sufficient to satisfy all walkers without the need for an ugly eyesore that will have no benefits for the wildlife, landscape or the ecosystem at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am totally against this cliff path extention as per the current proposal for the following reasons:
We live in an unequal society as it is. We would be better off putting money and energy into poorer areas or educating poorer communities about the environment.
Solutions:
1. Make a high quality interpretive walk on the section of the Main Rd where the cliff path is not accessable. Themes of the ocean and history of the town, the fishermen etc come to mind. This will be interesting for both tourists and locals.
2. The public and adventurous hikers should however not be denied access. Warning posters about the danger must be shown prominently, plus the addition of chains, climbing rings, steps or supports similar to what they have at Vogelgat and top section of Lion’s Head. This will not be invasive to the environment but will add safety to the existing path.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Yeah, nothing fresh here. Seems like it was never going to be a reasonable debate anyway. The defensiveness and victimhood of these poor property owners is laughable. Regardless of their protestations, the shoe clearly fits when it comes to the naked self interest on display by the 16 inhabitants / inheritors against the rest of the community – who supposedly needs to be (silently) grateful for NOT being able to enjoy this “privatised” piece of nature. The how-dare-you-hurt-my-feelings defence is just plainly silly; doubly so the hilarious argument that the cliff path would be pandering to the comfort of privileged walkers at the expense of the poor. (Nogal! Pot, kettle, maybe..? Hah!)
The deluge of one-sided comments here on this forum is the transparent result of a concerted, family-and-friends effort by the small number of home-owners along this stretch of coast, designed solely to keep everyone else out. To this end they regurgitate the same – and perfectly hollow – arguments, presumably off a curated, cut-and-paste handout disseminated specifically for this purpose. As publicly as possible, self-righteously appealing to environmental and aesthetic aspects of the path instead off being frank about just not wanting pedestrians passing between them and the ocean. (Or did they not understand the registration instructions?)
Without bothering the old grey matter too much:
1. Funds would not come from the municipal budget, it will largely be privately raised. The irony of a call on morality w.r.t. to spending community funds – the same community deprived of access by these very same home owners – is apparently lost in a veil of crocodile tears. And it hasn’t even gone noisily political yet; imagine if the Land Party or ZR becomes aware of the issue… Regardless, measured against the value from a tourism point of view, any funds applied to this project will be well spent.
2. The whole cliff path is a nature reserve, and pretty pristine regardless of being accessible to the public. Anyone who has walked the route will quickly see that this stretch is no more or any less “special” than the rest of the reserve. In fact, the amount of rubbish washed up here (and not removed by the home owners) and the rusty and broken pipe infrastructure and rust stains makes it much less pristine than other parts of the cliff path, not to mention the invasive-alien garden and lawn areas. But nice try at keeping it to yourselves as the only self-approved custodians…
3. Good to hear that this stretch of properties have escaped the (low) crime rate visited upon all the properties that border the Fernkloof reserve stretching all the way to Grotto Beach. The proletariat is grateful for and impressed by the savings you have enjoyed in not having had to take security measures like all other ratepayers. But here’s the thing: the able-bodied can already access this area from the high water mark direction, uneven as it is; so do you now need protection against dangerous old aged strollers, or robbers in wheelchairs?
4. Ditto for the poachers: If anyone can access this stretch currently, so can the poachers. There has been no news of any of these home owners protecting the sea in front of their dwellings from poaching. (And if they were pro-active, wouldn’t law enforcement efforts be best served by having quick and easy access instead of having to clamber over rocks?)
All things being considered, HPP would do a better (and far more trusted and reliable!) job of providing vigilance on the marine protection front.
5. Engineering obstacles are not challenging at all, despite the straw-grab at rising tides and other convenient “obstacles”. The coast line is longer than the few hundred meters of Poole’s Bay, in case you haven’t noticed. Don’t let your reduced property of the year 2050 scare you, you probably won’t be around then.
Furthermore: the path COULD of course run a few meters above the high water mark, a much simpler and less intrusive design, but permission for THAT will clearly not be forthcoming from the very same home-owners exhibiting their naked self interest here. (Oh, and by the way: the high water mark being an “intellectual construct” really takes the cake for facetious input!)
6. Calling on your “right” to privacy from eyes outside your erf line… Really? Put up curtains and screens and shutters like everyone else along the coast. Your slip is showing. And no, ugly walls are not spoiling the cliff path along the expensive houses lining the Kwaaiwater and Voelklip pathway; that outcome would be your personal aesthetic choice. But I must say, those screaming PRIVATE PROPERTY signboards currently staked out do not reflect well on the inhabitants of the properties along the route, so perhaps one should be fearful of the monstrosities their spite may yet conjure up? As for the concrete path being an eyesore, again pot and kettle, eye-of-the-beholder stuff. One can richly debate the design merits in some of the architectural trinkets presently on display on this stretch…
Etcetera, etcetera. Red herring is ostensibly in season. Regardless, it is clear that these property owners do not want to share and will fight tooth and nail to protect their privilege. Q.E.D.
So their feelings are evidently hurt that the great unwashed is pointing out their naked self-interest. Well, that is OK, but please just be honest about it. These pearl-clutching obfuscations are just pathetic.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Dear Kozette Myburgh
The comments from home owners and their friends are a perfect demonstration of ‘white privilege’ in action, but pretty easily seen through as MT Wessel so eloquently and accurately lays out in their comments on 8/2/2021.
I have walked from Voelklip into the Hermanus village for 5 decades now. It has always irked me (and everyone else I know who has walk it), that we have to walk from the seaside beauty to the increasingly noisy, unpleasant and often very hot main road, so these home owners can enjoy their exclusive privilege of having their private strip of coast. The whole coast line in South Africa is meant to be shared by all South African, that is part of our law. The fact that these properties were allowed to be set up in this way should never have happened and is a reflection of the era where wealthy and powerful white people were able to keep things for themselves. The wrongs of the white privileged past should be corrected and a narrow strip should be cut off above high water mark to allow easy access along this shore line for a path like the rest of the cliff path. The only reason expensive structures have to be thought of is because land owners do not want to give up a little bit of their gardens to allow a flat easy path to run along the end closest to the sea, which woudl also allow less mobile citizens to enjoy the stretch of coast. Such a path would be less of an obstruction to the owners views and perhaps safer than staircases. This would also keep people a bit further from the sea and preserve the actual coast rockpools etc. In most of the rest of the cliff path with similar rocks to those at Poole’s Bay, almost no-one goes down to the water, they stay on the path and preserve the natural coast. But then I do not think the home owners are really interested in keeping the public safe, or really interested preserving the natural beauty and the making the path unobtrusive when an inch of their private property is at stake.
The home owners main concern is that they want exclusive right to enjoy this beautiful part of the coast and keep everyone else out. If they really want more of the nature reserve, fine, but they must share it with all the rest of us and allow us to walk along a simple path right at the end of your properties and for us to enjoy it as well. Numerous of the home owners have large ‘un-water-wise’ lawns and gardens reaching all the way down to the coast which are anything but eco-friendly.
Their arguments about rather spending money on poor people in the townships is completely false and particularly outrageous/offensive that they should use that as a reason against the cliff path beign joined; The CPAG does not plan on using municipal money to fund the new part of the path. What it will do, is make the Cliff path more iconic than it already is, allowing people to walk all the way from Grotto Beach to the New Harbor. Many people including my own family often turn around at the start of this strip furthest from the village, rather than walk on the unpleasant main road section. If we did walk on, we would like to buy drinks and food in the village and then return home some time later. Joining the cliff path would result in a lot more people walking into the village on the cliff path and spending their money and thereby creating much needed revenue and jobs for locals, including those form the townships. The Hermanus cliff path is unique and joining it up will be be an enormous boost for tourism of ‘just the right sort’, people who want to enjoy walking and nature in a respectful way. Illegal divers and thieves will get in through the existing ‘entrances’ to this strip.
While this site has mostly anti-CPAG posts, there are many many more people who are rate payers and own properties in the rest of Hermanus, all of whom would want this path joined up – except those who perhaps know owners of the properties and want to stay in their good books or enjoy the exclusivity with them at the expense of the rest of us. Just not fair or right in our country. The powers that be have spent enough time pandering to wishes of this small group of home owners it is time to do the right thing.
Kind regards
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.I have also received this comment via the email you sent and will register you as interested and affected party.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
I fully support the joining up of the cliff path walk in Hermanus.
I find it to be totally outrageous that a small number of rich home owners are allowed to prevent local residents and visitors to have access to this part of the coast. It feels highly unconstitutional to me. White privilege seems alive and well in Hermanus. The Municipality and the local DA representative should be ashamed that this form of apartheid is allowed to continue – because that is exactly what this is. Disgusting.
I very much look forward to the day when the path is joined up.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
In so many ways we have to almost disregard the past privileges enjoyed by so few on this section under discussion of the Cliff Path. All that is required from all the stakeholders, including the local municipality, ratepayers and Department of Environmental Affairs, is to look forward to the future of tourism in Hermanus. Walking along the Cliff Path is one of the gems of Hermanus – terribly disrupted by the stretch on the R43, with all the concomitant noise and pollution. And for what? A few historically privileged home-owners?
It is a special town, but backward-looking management is not going to help a beleaguered tourism industry. Whether the local resident – who are against the full inclusion of the Cliff Path – want to know it or not, the town needs tourists – local and international. And the competition is stiff.
Perhaps even more important are the local residents. It has been absolutely fantastic to see the number of people out on the Cliff Path – old, young, all enjoying the beauty and the security that are on offer.
Please let us first agree on getting it done, before we start on the “how”. Having recently hiked on Robberg Nature Reserve in Plettenberg Bay, there are chains and ropes where a bit of assistance on the path is required. My husband and I – both at retirement age, managed it with ease. One can think of a simple adjustment to the existing Cliff Path – with a warning about high tide. Eventually a more comprehensive completion of the path can be considered.
Please spare us the “fake news” about the environmental impact of allowing people to walk the disputed stretch of the coast. I walked this section about two years ago and was shocked. Starting with the swimming pool outlets into the sea, the poachers living on one of the undeveloped properties, extensive evidence of perlemoen poaching – many years away from maturity – , and alien vegetation spilling over the highwater mark from existing gardens, are just a few of the eyesores that the concerned owners of these properties are trying to divert attention from.
We need everybody in Hermanus to move on from self-interest and think about the future of the town.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
I am fully supportive of the initiative. Hermanus has a unique coastal walk, excellent on global terms. This walk is interrupted over a short distance due to private property constraints. There is no doubt in my mind that linking and completing the current route will be beneficial to all, over many generations. The choice of tidal pool technology using battered rough reinforced concrete and building a solid foot path is completely appropriate, both in terms of tidal control and longevity. I am the appointed agent for the design of the path, with Henry Fagan, Structural Engineer, and together we have completed many projects that are appropriate to their settings and using relevant technology. Hermanus and many visitors to come will benefit positively from this initiative, a carefully considered intervention in a sensitive and spectacular coastal environment.
Thank you for your comment, which will also be noted with the rest of the comments.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
We would love to be able to walk along the coast to town for a coffee or breakfast,
but to go on the busy road is not nice. So we always turn around and walk home.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
As the owner of Kraalrock (260 Main road) we would strongly object to having a construction depot and delivery point on the Kraalrock parking lot for an extended time.
We were informed by neighbours about this proposal, and feel strongly that this info should have been provided to us directly and earlier.
Reasos for objection include:
Security
Invasion of privacy
Noise
Lack of ablution facilities
Dust
It will also hinder local and visitor “walkers” who use this parking lot extensively for their cars while walking, as well as the
destruction of the lawn that was planted and irrigated by ourselves and the neighbouring house.
Please keep us informed via this email
Thank you for your comments and we note your concern. We have registered you as interested and affected party to receive future correspondence regarding the assessment process for the proposed project.
We are required to notify potential Interested and Affected Parties whose properties border onto the proposed project that they may register as interested and affected parties. In addition for this project, we distributed notices by hand delivery to all mailboxes of properties further away from the project (including east of Kraal Rock parking area, not only immediately adjacent in Poole’s Bay, so we could also inform those property owners such as yourself who might be affected by issues such as laydown areas. In addition we placed advertisements in the local newspapers and put up a number of signs in the area, also at the parking areas. We try to use all reasonable means to notify all potential stakeholders, but do apologise if you have not received a delivered notice.
There will be more opportunity to comment and the current draft report will remain available on our website, should you wish to read it. This report will be revised in the coming weeks to reflect the comments and address the identified concerns. You will be notified via email when it will again be available for further comment. We will also then respond further to your concerns.
I FULLY SUPPORT the extension of the cliff path, for the reasons below:
The cliff path is one of our biggest tourist attractions, and a pivotal part of a town that is primarily a holiday destination. It is an easy and accessible way for visitors to get enjoy the natural beauty that Hermanus has to offer. Sadly, it can’t be marketed as such since a few selfish owners are not willing to share what doesn’t belong to them. Every year I have to explain this injustice to baffled international visitors. Hopefully this won’t be the case in the future.
2. It isn’t safe or enjoyable to be forced to abandon the beautiful, serene setting of the cliff path to continue your walk/run on the main highway. On the cliff path you breathe our Champagne air, and enjoy the incredible views of Walker Bay, only to be forced to leave all that behind and be subjected to exhaust fumes, hot tar smells, and cars driving past at high speeds. To make matters worse those same property owners that deny us access to the coast also endanger our lives by neglecting to prune their trees, making the already small sidewalk even smaller. It goes without saying that it’s a narrow, dangerous sidewalk, and trying to pass someone with their dogs on that narrow strip is almost impossible without stepping in the road, a dangerous action indeed!
Despite the commentary on this site, the support for the extension of the cliff path far outweighs the few home owners and their friends that wants to keep these prime views to themselves. We really cannot afford to let a privileged few rob the people of Hermanus and its visitors from what is rightfully theirs; an unobstructed walkway all along the coast from the New Harbour to Grotto beach.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
I am sorry to have missed the meeting on the 5th December at the Marine Hotel. I would be keen to be involved, to help in anyway I can. As a lover of Hermanus and especially of the Cliff Path, I might be able to help being a Civil Engineer and having specialized in concrete for most of my career.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am trying to register as a stakeholder in the Pooles Bay project. Please tell me how I go about this.
Many thanks
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am against this project for many reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
5. Although CPAG claim the path will be maintenance free, this is impossible in such a harsh environment as the inter-tidal zone. Sections of the path are planned to be dowelled with steel bolts being drilled into the rock. These will rust and the path will collapse in time.
6. There is also the issue of this plan impinging on private property, affecting the value of coastal properties, in addtiion to the impact on the privacy of those who live on Poole’s Bay.
7. I have studied several surveying articles on the determination of the high water mark which is a very complex matter. I believe that the applicant (CPAG) may have submitted their survey to the Surveyor General for approval in which case the SG must be made aware that there are objections to their survey methodology and that I would like to have sight of their survey records. I also notice that the applicant has not signed many of the applications, rendering much null and void.
8. The “deadline of January 20th” is a cheap legal trick and wont hold water as this is the holiday period and many of the consultants, applicants and complainants aren’t available – some don’t reopen their offices until January 18th. I will be contesting that issue as well.
9. More to come.
I oppose the proposal. As do many others who will be posting soon,
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Internationally scientists are working on a 0.3m rise in sea level by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This means the path would be well under water by 2100. It seems pointless to build it when it will have a limited lifespan. Realistically the earliest the CPAG could expect the path to be finished would be close to 2030.
Noted and added with your previous comment, thank you.
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed by a member of their board, Mr van der Sluys.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This pristine coastline needs to be protected and you oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. May I please ask for a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am against this project for many reasons – Poole’s Bay is a special place and we need to protect the fauna and flora, the path will cost millions to build and this money should be used better especially in these Covid times.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This proposal is ridiculous, this pristine coastline really needs to be protected and I oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG wholeheartedly Please give a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline for us to build a case for preservation.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
“I am against this project for many reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
5. Although CPAG claim the path will be maintenance free, this is impossible in such a harsh environment as the inter-tidal zone. Sections of the path are planned to be dowelled with steel bolts being drilled into the rock. These will rust and the path will collapse in time.
6. There is also the issue of this plan impinging on private property, affecting the value of coastal properties, in addition to the impact on the privacy of those who live on Poole’s Bay.
7. I have studied several surveying articles on the determination of the high water mark which is a very complex matter. I believe that the applicant (CPAG) may have submitted their survey to the Surveyor General for approval in which case the SG must be made aware that there are objections to their survey methodology and that I would like to have sight of their survey records. I also notice that the applicant has not signed many of the applications, rendering much null and void.
8. The “deadline of January 20th” is a cheap legal trick and won’t hold water as this is the holiday period and many of the consultants, applicants and complainants aren’t available – some don’t reopen their offices until January 18th. I will be contesting that issue as well.
9. More to come.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Please extend the deadline from the 20th. This will be for such a destructive cause to an incredibly pristine coastline. The expensive and expansive destruction. Is uncalled for
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays with dense kelp beds along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape from Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising. This would put the path underwater all the time at some point in the future. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has very real and current pressing issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along Main road. Rather put the money into Zwelithle and in so doing help to protect the future of Hermanus as a whole
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect on the project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this pristine coastline needs to be protected and i strongly oppose the destructive and expensive plans put forward by CPAG. I request a 30 day extension on the Jan 20th 2021 deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this coastline needs to be protected and i strongly oppose the destructive plans put forward by CPAG. I request a 30 day extension on the Jan 20th 2021 deadline.
Noted and added with your previous comment.
i totally oppose the plans. they would look awful and be destructive, in addition to being very expensive.
Noted with your previous comment, thank you.
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed
15. I request a 30-day extension of the deadline on 20th January.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
The proposal to build the Poole’s Bay cliff path connection is truly terrible – it is frighteningly expensive, in a dangerous position below the high watermark, fiercely destructive to the environment and without a doubt will require ongoing and costly maintenance.
This proposal should be unequivocally condemned!
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
My partner and I walked/climbed/staggered along the proposed cliff path extension the other day and noted that the CPAG blue markers were in many cases far higher than the orange litchen on the rocks and some growing plants — this means that their designated path is much higher than the High Water Mark as litchen only grows above it.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This is pristine coastline that needs to be protected. I therefore oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. I am also requesting a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This is a pristine piece of coastline in Hermanus and one of the last remaining in the town that does not have a footpath. There are more than adequate footpaths along the Hermanus coastline and it would be unwise to subject this stretch to unwarranted interference as proposed by the CPAG.
I also think the deadline of 20th January should be extended to allow for more comments.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I strongly object to this “pathway” in Hermanus. It is not feasible practically and also in general from a eco view.
There are way more issues that need funds in Hermanus than building a risky walkway that will open itself up to more poachers and impact the value of private property in that section.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
“I am against this project for these reasons, some of which are:
1. Poole’s Bay is a special place as it is protected from large numbers of people walking through it and disturbing the fauna and flora. It is important that this last undisturbed small bay remains that way to protect the sensitive inter-tidal zone.
2. Poaching is rife and by building a path down to the water’s edge, you will make it even easier for poachers to access the kelp beds and make a quick escape.
3. The path will cost tens of millions to build – you have significantly underestimated the cost. This money could be far better spent on other parts of Hermanus, particularly areas where there is a far greater need such as Zwelihle. The money to build the path will come from donations and it is critical that, if the path were allowed to be built, no construction begins until every last cent required has been collected, plus a buffer. It will be a disaster for Hermanus if a half-built eyesore (such as the flyover in Cape Town) is allowed to ruin pristine Poole’s Bay.
4. Poole’s Bay is known for the very large surf that occurs there. Your path will be built below the high water mark encouraging people to walk in this dangerous area. Hermanus is a tourist town with large numbers of foreign (and local) visitors who do not know about the dangers of the sea. It is not a clever idea to encourage people to walk across these rocks and there is bound to be a serious injury (or even death) and your associated insurance costs have been underestimated.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
this pristine coastline needs to be protected and I oppose the expensive and destructive plans put forward by CPAG. And ask for a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1) It is one of the untouched coves along this coastline and construction will disrupt species in their habitats and wreck biodiversity in this precious bay. Allowing such human disruption in this area of nature reserve sets a precedent for further areas of nature reserve to be destroyed for selfish reasons.
2) It is a dangerous area to consider for walkers due to the infamous rough tides in this area. Furthermore, such tides and the rising sea level will result in the path being under water frequently and constant maintenance being required.
3) The Cliff Path and Municipality have emphasised they will not pay for maintenance at all along the Poole’s Bay stretch.
4) There is already an upgraded pedestrian walkway from each entrance to the path payed for by the municipality- making is a safe and easy stroll (which is actually more accessible for walkers than the extension that will be constructed which does not allow access for disabled persons)
5) 3 years of construction will be long and destructive- and where will the building materials be stored?
6) There will be increased crime in the bay as a result- which will cause homeowners to have to build large fences and walls. This further disrupts ecosystems and nature in the bay and is not an attractive sight.
7) Tens of millions of rands would be far more beneficial to the community in other places. Such funding is hugely needed in the Zwelihle community, and could be used to create far more jobs in Hermanus than would be created through cliff path construction. Hermanus locals would definitely like to see this money elsewhere: healthcare, education, reduced taxes for elderly etc.
8) The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
9) Mollergen have not indicated their support for the path at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1) It is one of the untouched coves along this coastline and construction will disrupt species in their habitats and wreck biodiversity in this precious bay. Allowing such human disruption in this area of nature reserve sets a precedent for further areas of nature reserve to be destroyed for selfish reasons.
2) It is a dangerous area to consider for walkers due to the infamous rough tides in this area. Furthermore, such tides and the rising sea level will result in the path being under water frequently and constant maintenance being required.
3) The Cliff Path and Municipality have emphasised they will not pay for maintenance at all along the Poole’s Bay stretch.
4) There is already an upgraded pedestrian walkway from each entrance to the path payed for by the municipality- making is a safe and easy stroll (which is actually more accessible for walkers than the extension that will be constructed which does not allow access for disabled persons)
5) 3 years of construction will be long and destructive- and where will the building materials be stored?
6) There will be increased crime in the bay as a result- which will cause homeowners to have to build large fences and walls. This further disrupts ecosystems and nature in the bay and is not an attractive sight.
7) Tens of millions of rands would be far more beneficial to the community in other places. Such funding is hugely needed in the Zwelihle community, and could be used to create far more jobs in Hermanus than would be created through cliff path construction. Hermanus locals would definitely like to see this money elsewhere: healthcare, education, reduced taxes for elderly etc.
8) The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
9) Mollergen have not indicated their support for the path at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Hi there
This path construction has come to my attention and I wish to oppose the draft put forward.
I believe that this natural and unspoiled coastline needs to be protected and left to its current tranquility and peace. What is more is that this looks to be a costly and invasive plan put forward, and I think there needs to be a halt to this.
Please consider this a strong vote against these plans.
Kind regards
Josie
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
This would completely ruin our seaside.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I write on behalf of the Winkler Family to express our opposition to the proposed construction of the intertidal cliff path between Mollergren Park and Protea Road.
The argument that property owners along the Poole’s Bay coastline deny members of the public access to the area is both dishonest and deceitful. The Bay is easily accessible from the east, and fisherman, walkers, surfers, families exploring rockpools, and others who have made use of it over many decades have never been denied access by residents.
Private properties begin at the high-water mark, and as with any private property ownership, residents have every right to have their private land respected.
The high-water mark defined by those employed by the Hermanus Cliff Path Action Group and the methodology used is disputed and must be independently assessed and verified before any construction can begin.
But however this point is ultimately defined, it is disingenuous to seek permanent construction of any sort below it. The intertidal zone is ecologically sensitive. Any construction below the high-water mark will not only disfigure this last pristine stretch in Hermanus, it will certainly have a negative effect on fauna and flora. This is likely why there is no precedent for such a construction in Walker Bay: no other part of the formal cliff path, from Grotto Beach to the New Harbour, has been built to intrude into the intertidal zone – I can only assume to protect nature and humans alike.
The notion of a “high-water mark” is an intellectual construct, and as far as safety is concerned, far from a practical one. It assumes some kind of objective median level for all high tides, concluded under perfect theoretical conditions, and consequently assumes that the ocean will behave accordingly. This is nothing less than sheer arrogance. I have personally witnessed driftwood posts, football-sized stones and boulders with the diameter of an average car tyre being driven well past any theoretical “high water mark” by storm surges, coming to rest well within the bounds of private properties situated on Poole’s Bay. The destructive power of the storm surges and the debris they throw about cannot be underestimated.
It is clear that those supporting the extension of the cliff path along this stretch of coastline have a rather naïve understanding, if any at all, of the variability and danger of local conditions.
To imagine that these dangers will be mitigated by warning signs is disingenuous and glib. Not only is a reliance on the good sense of the public to heed these signs beyond unrealistic, it will be impossible to provide objective, clear and accurate information as to when the path is safe to use or not with signage alone.
This raises important questions of accountability – most crucially, who will be accountable for injury (or worse) that will inevitably occur on an intertidal cliff path?
Who would be responsible for the extensive and ongoing maintenance of a construction built in such a hostile and destructive environment?
The proposed development also raises questions of security. Given the easy public access, Poole’s Bay is already a poaching hotspot. The fact that it is accessible only from the east end of the bay at present provides some measure of control. A cliff path would not only create easier access for poachers, but also provide alternate escape routes.
The same will hold true for other criminal elements. It would be ironic if the construction of the cliff path forced property owners to erect unsightly walls with razor wire and electric fences between themselves and the coastline to ensure their security – which by the logic of the CPAG they would surely be allowed to erect along the very same high-water mark.
There has been substantial negative press levelled at the property owners along this stretch of coast (verging on the defamatory, but that is separate issue) in which their “privilege” and “entitlement” is invoked as the primary barrier to preventing the public from enjoying this stretch of coastline. As I mention above, this is dishonest – members of the public, from all walks of life, have never been denied access to Poole’s Bay, or any other part of this coastline beyond the boundaries of private property. It is a fact that most users of the existing cliff path are themselves privileged – those who can afford to live in Hermanus itself, or who have the means to holiday in the town. The CPAG sees fit, then, to spend tens of millions to extend the privilege of the already privileged (and to put them in danger at the same time). Surely the vast amounts of money required for the construction could be better spent for the upliftment of those who sorely need it – those who so vociferously protested their basic conditions of living during the 2019 riots, for example.
In short, the proposal for the construction of an intertidal cliff-path between Mollergren Park and Protea Road is misdirected. The project is nothing more than the expensive, dangerous and environmentally destructive hobby-horse of a select few who themselves are too entitled to be able to identify where the true needs of the greater Hermanus community lie.
Mark Winkler
on behalf of the Winkler family
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I have been visiting Hermanus since the 1940’s and care deeply for its
unique ecology. Hermanus has over time suffered much ecological harm as a
result of thoughtless and unsustainable man-made intrusions.The plans
for the extension to the Cliff Path through Poole’s Bay will be
destructive of the natural beauty of this sensitive intertidal area and
likely end up as yet another man-made eyesore such as the Markus Jooste
property nearby.
In Hermanus, where poverty and related issues are so patently obvious it
is simply plain wrong – for the comfort of a few strollers – to incur
great expense on an alternative to a short and perfectly pleasant detour
along the Main Road. We need to keep a sense of balance in our
socio-economic planning rather than make the comfort of the privileged sector of our society our
automatic priority.
I have read several submissions which have been sent to you to oppose this extension to the cliff path and I endorse them all. Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you would like any further information.
Finally, I would like to ask you kindly to grant a 30-day extension on your January 20 2021 deadline .
Thank you
Ruth Kirkland
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
The coastline does not need more pathways and additional pathways will only damage the ecosystem. Please give a 30 day extension on the January 20th deadline to allow this issue to be fully reviewed.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am opposed to the cliff path extension for the following reasons:
1. Poole’s Bay is one of the last protected bays along the Hermanus coast and if you put a path through this area you will be driving large numbers of people into the sensitive intertidal zone.
2. Poole’s Bay is known for the large surf. It is foolhardy to be encouraging tourists to enter a dangerous area especially when many of them will not understand the sea, wave patterns, tidal changes, spring and neap tides. There is no doubt there will be serious injuries and possibly even death.
3. This path will make it extremely easy for poachers to access and escape Poole’s Bay. We should be doing everything we can to protect the marine environment, not making it easier for criminals to destroy it.
4. The sea level is rising and internationally there is expected to be a 0.3m rise by 2050 and another 0.7m by 2100. This would put the path underwater all the time. Why build a path in a sensitive marine environment that will have a limited life span.
5. Hermanus has real issues relating to poverty. It is unethical to spend tens of millions of rands on a short section of path in an area that should be kept as pristine as possible. All this just for the comfort of a handful of people who don’t want to walk for a short section along the Main road.
6. The path will affect the privacy and property values of people living on that section as it will pass extremely close to their properties in certain places. It will also impact their security by making it easy for criminals to access their properties. This may cause them to build unsightly walls and fences to the detriment of the attractive Poole’s Bay.
7. The high water mark indicated in your diagrams is above where the surveyor general will most likely determine it to run. This will dramatically impact the path and most likely make it unfeasible.
8. The municipality upgraded the pedestrian path along the Main Road and it is now an easy stroll around Poole’s Bay.
9. The deadline of 20 January is disingenuous and seems to be deliberately timed to take advantage of people being on holiday and therefore not being able to comment. You need to extend the deadline.
10. If this path ever does get approval, no construction should be allowed until every single cent of the construction cost has been placed in a trust together with a 20% extra amount to cover contingencies and cost escalations. The architect not he project has claimed it will take three years to build.
11. Where will the building materials be stored for three years? This will be a long, disruptive process.
12. Any construction in the tidal zone will deteriorate over time. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? The people who maintain the current cliff path have indicated they do not want anything to do with this path extension.
13. The municipality have already shown they are not in favour of the path and this means they will not support it when things go wrong.
14. In the press it has been claimed that Mollergren support the path going over their property. This is not true at all and has been confirmed by a member of their board, Mr van der Sluys
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Ek toets net of dit werk
you haven’t confirmed my prior messages
Your comments have been acknowledged as per my earlier message. Thank you.
I think security of the houses bordering the Cliff Path is already compromised and now you want to add to this with even more access to the sea-front properties?
Not a good idea
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Good Morning All,
Having built/ lived/ holidayed at 212 Baleana Crescent (used to be Main Road) since 1974 I believe I’m very aware of the coast line of Poole’s Bay.
The cliff path, as it stands today is no different to what it was when we built our house.
It has certainly been upgraded over the years and security guards are now visible – that, of course comes with the territory.
When the path was initially built I don’t think anyone would have objected had they continued across Poole’s Bay so long as they kept below the highwater mark.
Obviously it was then, and still is today not a feasible proposition. Since then nothing has changed other than the high water mark possibly rising due to the melting of the icebergs further south.
If it was too dangerous to do it then it is too dangerous to do it now. The expense, insurance, life risk and accessibility of this project seems fated from the start.
Whilst on holiday over the Festive Season I had numerous intrepid hikers clambering up onto Johnny Bouwer’s and our lawn in order to avoid an accident…slipping, falling or being washed away!
Continuing this walkway is just NOT feasible.
It is an outright dangerous proposal and would be totally irresponsible of the Council to let something of this nature slip past.
Bye for now
Lynn Rowand
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am very much against this. There are REAL world problems in Hermanus that can benefit from a R30 – R50million rand garden path.
It is shocking that this has actually come this far. WAKE UP!
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I wish to register my OPPOSITION to the Poole’s Bay connection path as it will take the footpath along an ecologically fragile area. In addition, the placement of the path along the high tide line is dangerous for pedestrians and damaging to the environment. Encroachment of the path on private property is also totally unacceptable, and violates the property owners’ rights to privacy as well as compromising their security.
Further, it will make access to the Marine Reserve so much easier for poachers who already pillage that area for perlemoen, so why facilitate this crime.
This objection is not about keeping walkers happy but to protect a fragile ecosystem. The existing cliff paths are more than sufficient to satisfy all walkers without the need for an ugly eyesore that will have no benefits for the wildlife, landscape or the ecosystem at all.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
We also wish to inform you that the comment period on the Pre-application Basic Assessment Report has been extended by another 30 days until 19 February 2021.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
I am totally against this cliff path extention as per the current proposal for the following reasons:
We live in an unequal society as it is. We would be better off putting money and energy into poorer areas or educating poorer communities about the environment.
Solutions:
1. Make a high quality interpretive walk on the section of the Main Rd where the cliff path is not accessable. Themes of the ocean and history of the town, the fishermen etc come to mind. This will be interesting for both tourists and locals.
2. The public and adventurous hikers should however not be denied access. Warning posters about the danger must be shown prominently, plus the addition of chains, climbing rings, steps or supports similar to what they have at Vogelgat and top section of Lion’s Head. This will not be invasive to the environment but will add safety to the existing path.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Yeah, nothing fresh here. Seems like it was never going to be a reasonable debate anyway. The defensiveness and victimhood of these poor property owners is laughable. Regardless of their protestations, the shoe clearly fits when it comes to the naked self interest on display by the 16 inhabitants / inheritors against the rest of the community – who supposedly needs to be (silently) grateful for NOT being able to enjoy this “privatised” piece of nature. The how-dare-you-hurt-my-feelings defence is just plainly silly; doubly so the hilarious argument that the cliff path would be pandering to the comfort of privileged walkers at the expense of the poor. (Nogal! Pot, kettle, maybe..? Hah!)
The deluge of one-sided comments here on this forum is the transparent result of a concerted, family-and-friends effort by the small number of home-owners along this stretch of coast, designed solely to keep everyone else out. To this end they regurgitate the same – and perfectly hollow – arguments, presumably off a curated, cut-and-paste handout disseminated specifically for this purpose. As publicly as possible, self-righteously appealing to environmental and aesthetic aspects of the path instead off being frank about just not wanting pedestrians passing between them and the ocean. (Or did they not understand the registration instructions?)
Without bothering the old grey matter too much:
1. Funds would not come from the municipal budget, it will largely be privately raised. The irony of a call on morality w.r.t. to spending community funds – the same community deprived of access by these very same home owners – is apparently lost in a veil of crocodile tears. And it hasn’t even gone noisily political yet; imagine if the Land Party or ZR becomes aware of the issue… Regardless, measured against the value from a tourism point of view, any funds applied to this project will be well spent.
2. The whole cliff path is a nature reserve, and pretty pristine regardless of being accessible to the public. Anyone who has walked the route will quickly see that this stretch is no more or any less “special” than the rest of the reserve. In fact, the amount of rubbish washed up here (and not removed by the home owners) and the rusty and broken pipe infrastructure and rust stains makes it much less pristine than other parts of the cliff path, not to mention the invasive-alien garden and lawn areas. But nice try at keeping it to yourselves as the only self-approved custodians…
3. Good to hear that this stretch of properties have escaped the (low) crime rate visited upon all the properties that border the Fernkloof reserve stretching all the way to Grotto Beach. The proletariat is grateful for and impressed by the savings you have enjoyed in not having had to take security measures like all other ratepayers. But here’s the thing: the able-bodied can already access this area from the high water mark direction, uneven as it is; so do you now need protection against dangerous old aged strollers, or robbers in wheelchairs?
4. Ditto for the poachers: If anyone can access this stretch currently, so can the poachers. There has been no news of any of these home owners protecting the sea in front of their dwellings from poaching. (And if they were pro-active, wouldn’t law enforcement efforts be best served by having quick and easy access instead of having to clamber over rocks?)
All things being considered, HPP would do a better (and far more trusted and reliable!) job of providing vigilance on the marine protection front.
5. Engineering obstacles are not challenging at all, despite the straw-grab at rising tides and other convenient “obstacles”. The coast line is longer than the few hundred meters of Poole’s Bay, in case you haven’t noticed. Don’t let your reduced property of the year 2050 scare you, you probably won’t be around then.
Furthermore: the path COULD of course run a few meters above the high water mark, a much simpler and less intrusive design, but permission for THAT will clearly not be forthcoming from the very same home-owners exhibiting their naked self interest here. (Oh, and by the way: the high water mark being an “intellectual construct” really takes the cake for facetious input!)
6. Calling on your “right” to privacy from eyes outside your erf line… Really? Put up curtains and screens and shutters like everyone else along the coast. Your slip is showing. And no, ugly walls are not spoiling the cliff path along the expensive houses lining the Kwaaiwater and Voelklip pathway; that outcome would be your personal aesthetic choice. But I must say, those screaming PRIVATE PROPERTY signboards currently staked out do not reflect well on the inhabitants of the properties along the route, so perhaps one should be fearful of the monstrosities their spite may yet conjure up? As for the concrete path being an eyesore, again pot and kettle, eye-of-the-beholder stuff. One can richly debate the design merits in some of the architectural trinkets presently on display on this stretch…
Etcetera, etcetera. Red herring is ostensibly in season. Regardless, it is clear that these property owners do not want to share and will fight tooth and nail to protect their privilege. Q.E.D.
So their feelings are evidently hurt that the great unwashed is pointing out their naked self-interest. Well, that is OK, but please just be honest about it. These pearl-clutching obfuscations are just pathetic.
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
In order to register you as interested and affected party, please send us your name and contact details. Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh (Ecosense)
Dear Kozette Myburgh
The comments from home owners and their friends are a perfect demonstration of ‘white privilege’ in action, but pretty easily seen through as MT Wessel so eloquently and accurately lays out in their comments on 8/2/2021.
I have walked from Voelklip into the Hermanus village for 5 decades now. It has always irked me (and everyone else I know who has walk it), that we have to walk from the seaside beauty to the increasingly noisy, unpleasant and often very hot main road, so these home owners can enjoy their exclusive privilege of having their private strip of coast. The whole coast line in South Africa is meant to be shared by all South African, that is part of our law. The fact that these properties were allowed to be set up in this way should never have happened and is a reflection of the era where wealthy and powerful white people were able to keep things for themselves. The wrongs of the white privileged past should be corrected and a narrow strip should be cut off above high water mark to allow easy access along this shore line for a path like the rest of the cliff path. The only reason expensive structures have to be thought of is because land owners do not want to give up a little bit of their gardens to allow a flat easy path to run along the end closest to the sea, which woudl also allow less mobile citizens to enjoy the stretch of coast. Such a path would be less of an obstruction to the owners views and perhaps safer than staircases. This would also keep people a bit further from the sea and preserve the actual coast rockpools etc. In most of the rest of the cliff path with similar rocks to those at Poole’s Bay, almost no-one goes down to the water, they stay on the path and preserve the natural coast. But then I do not think the home owners are really interested in keeping the public safe, or really interested preserving the natural beauty and the making the path unobtrusive when an inch of their private property is at stake.
The home owners main concern is that they want exclusive right to enjoy this beautiful part of the coast and keep everyone else out. If they really want more of the nature reserve, fine, but they must share it with all the rest of us and allow us to walk along a simple path right at the end of your properties and for us to enjoy it as well. Numerous of the home owners have large ‘un-water-wise’ lawns and gardens reaching all the way down to the coast which are anything but eco-friendly.
Their arguments about rather spending money on poor people in the townships is completely false and particularly outrageous/offensive that they should use that as a reason against the cliff path beign joined; The CPAG does not plan on using municipal money to fund the new part of the path. What it will do, is make the Cliff path more iconic than it already is, allowing people to walk all the way from Grotto Beach to the New Harbor. Many people including my own family often turn around at the start of this strip furthest from the village, rather than walk on the unpleasant main road section. If we did walk on, we would like to buy drinks and food in the village and then return home some time later. Joining the cliff path would result in a lot more people walking into the village on the cliff path and spending their money and thereby creating much needed revenue and jobs for locals, including those form the townships. The Hermanus cliff path is unique and joining it up will be be an enormous boost for tourism of ‘just the right sort’, people who want to enjoy walking and nature in a respectful way. Illegal divers and thieves will get in through the existing ‘entrances’ to this strip.
While this site has mostly anti-CPAG posts, there are many many more people who are rate payers and own properties in the rest of Hermanus, all of whom would want this path joined up – except those who perhaps know owners of the properties and want to stay in their good books or enjoy the exclusivity with them at the expense of the rest of us. Just not fair or right in our country. The powers that be have spent enough time pandering to wishes of this small group of home owners it is time to do the right thing.
Kind regards
Thank you for your comment, which is hereby acknowledged.I have also received this comment via the email you sent and will register you as interested and affected party.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
I fully support the joining up of the cliff path walk in Hermanus.
I find it to be totally outrageous that a small number of rich home owners are allowed to prevent local residents and visitors to have access to this part of the coast. It feels highly unconstitutional to me. White privilege seems alive and well in Hermanus. The Municipality and the local DA representative should be ashamed that this form of apartheid is allowed to continue – because that is exactly what this is. Disgusting.
I very much look forward to the day when the path is joined up.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
In so many ways we have to almost disregard the past privileges enjoyed by so few on this section under discussion of the Cliff Path. All that is required from all the stakeholders, including the local municipality, ratepayers and Department of Environmental Affairs, is to look forward to the future of tourism in Hermanus. Walking along the Cliff Path is one of the gems of Hermanus – terribly disrupted by the stretch on the R43, with all the concomitant noise and pollution. And for what? A few historically privileged home-owners?
It is a special town, but backward-looking management is not going to help a beleaguered tourism industry. Whether the local resident – who are against the full inclusion of the Cliff Path – want to know it or not, the town needs tourists – local and international. And the competition is stiff.
Perhaps even more important are the local residents. It has been absolutely fantastic to see the number of people out on the Cliff Path – old, young, all enjoying the beauty and the security that are on offer.
Please let us first agree on getting it done, before we start on the “how”. Having recently hiked on Robberg Nature Reserve in Plettenberg Bay, there are chains and ropes where a bit of assistance on the path is required. My husband and I – both at retirement age, managed it with ease. One can think of a simple adjustment to the existing Cliff Path – with a warning about high tide. Eventually a more comprehensive completion of the path can be considered.
Please spare us the “fake news” about the environmental impact of allowing people to walk the disputed stretch of the coast. I walked this section about two years ago and was shocked. Starting with the swimming pool outlets into the sea, the poachers living on one of the undeveloped properties, extensive evidence of perlemoen poaching – many years away from maturity – , and alien vegetation spilling over the highwater mark from existing gardens, are just a few of the eyesores that the concerned owners of these properties are trying to divert attention from.
We need everybody in Hermanus to move on from self-interest and think about the future of the town.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
I am fully supportive of the initiative. Hermanus has a unique coastal walk, excellent on global terms. This walk is interrupted over a short distance due to private property constraints. There is no doubt in my mind that linking and completing the current route will be beneficial to all, over many generations. The choice of tidal pool technology using battered rough reinforced concrete and building a solid foot path is completely appropriate, both in terms of tidal control and longevity. I am the appointed agent for the design of the path, with Henry Fagan, Structural Engineer, and together we have completed many projects that are appropriate to their settings and using relevant technology. Hermanus and many visitors to come will benefit positively from this initiative, a carefully considered intervention in a sensitive and spectacular coastal environment.
Thank you for your comment, which will also be noted with the rest of the comments.
Comments received will be considered and responded to in the next round of public participation for the environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
We would love to be able to walk along the coast to town for a coffee or breakfast,
but to go on the busy road is not nice. So we always turn around and walk home.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense
As the owner of Kraalrock (260 Main road) we would strongly object to having a construction depot and delivery point on the Kraalrock parking lot for an extended time.
We were informed by neighbours about this proposal, and feel strongly that this info should have been provided to us directly and earlier.
Reasos for objection include:
Security
Invasion of privacy
Noise
Lack of ablution facilities
Dust
It will also hinder local and visitor “walkers” who use this parking lot extensively for their cars while walking, as well as the
destruction of the lawn that was planted and irrigated by ourselves and the neighbouring house.
Please keep us informed via this email
Thank you for your comments and we note your concern. We have registered you as interested and affected party to receive future correspondence regarding the assessment process for the proposed project.
We are required to notify potential Interested and Affected Parties whose properties border onto the proposed project that they may register as interested and affected parties. In addition for this project, we distributed notices by hand delivery to all mailboxes of properties further away from the project (including east of Kraal Rock parking area, not only immediately adjacent in Poole’s Bay, so we could also inform those property owners such as yourself who might be affected by issues such as laydown areas. In addition we placed advertisements in the local newspapers and put up a number of signs in the area, also at the parking areas. We try to use all reasonable means to notify all potential stakeholders, but do apologise if you have not received a delivered notice.
There will be more opportunity to comment and the current draft report will remain available on our website, should you wish to read it. This report will be revised in the coming weeks to reflect the comments and address the identified concerns. You will be notified via email when it will again be available for further comment. We will also then respond further to your concerns.
I FULLY SUPPORT the extension of the cliff path, for the reasons below:
The cliff path is one of our biggest tourist attractions, and a pivotal part of a town that is primarily a holiday destination. It is an easy and accessible way for visitors to get enjoy the natural beauty that Hermanus has to offer. Sadly, it can’t be marketed as such since a few selfish owners are not willing to share what doesn’t belong to them. Every year I have to explain this injustice to baffled international visitors. Hopefully this won’t be the case in the future.
2. It isn’t safe or enjoyable to be forced to abandon the beautiful, serene setting of the cliff path to continue your walk/run on the main highway. On the cliff path you breathe our Champagne air, and enjoy the incredible views of Walker Bay, only to be forced to leave all that behind and be subjected to exhaust fumes, hot tar smells, and cars driving past at high speeds. To make matters worse those same property owners that deny us access to the coast also endanger our lives by neglecting to prune their trees, making the already small sidewalk even smaller. It goes without saying that it’s a narrow, dangerous sidewalk, and trying to pass someone with their dogs on that narrow strip is almost impossible without stepping in the road, a dangerous action indeed!
Despite the commentary on this site, the support for the extension of the cliff path far outweighs the few home owners and their friends that wants to keep these prime views to themselves. We really cannot afford to let a privileged few rob the people of Hermanus and its visitors from what is rightfully theirs; an unobstructed walkway all along the coast from the New Harbour to Grotto beach.
Thank you for your comments, which are hereby acknowledged. Apologies for the late reply.
Comments received will be entered into environmental authorisation process for the proposed project, considered and responded to in the next round of public participation, the date of which will be announced to interested and affected parties who have registered as such.
Interested and affected parties wishing to register must note that in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act, participating interested and affected parties are entering a public process and that their names, comments and objections will be made public. Contact details which may appear on submitted emails for instance will however be hidden as far as possible and only made available to the authorities for proof. Please note further that it is also required by the EIA Regulations that any interested and affected party that register as part of the process to comment must disclose any direct business, financial, personal or other interest they may have in the approval or refusal of the application. We will provisionally register you as Interested and affected party, but please let me know if you do not wish to receive further correspondence on the application.
Kind regards,
Kozette Myburgh
Ecosense