|

BEACH
EROSION
AND
REHABILITATION
PROJECT:
ST
FRANCIS
BAY
Introduction
This
report
has the
objective
of
informing
Council
of the
progress
with
regard
to the
beach
erosion
in St
Francis
Bay.
Emanating
from the
research
a way
forward
is
proposed
and
certain
decisions
are
required
from
Council
in order
to
support
and
resolve
the
beach
erosion
challenge.
This
report
which
may be
seen as
an
executive
summary,
is
supported
by the
Final
Report
by ASR
Ltd
(Marine
Consultants
and
Research)
dated
June
2006 and
which
will be
available
in the
main
Library
(not
attached
due to
the
length
of the
report).
In
addition
during
the
meeting
at which
this
report
is
tabled a
presentation
will be
made by
the St
Francis
Bay
Beach
Trust to
Council.
1.
Background
Development
to the
west of
St
Francis
has
stabilized
the
dunes
and thus
the
natural
ability
of the
coast to
replenish
the
beach
within
the bay
has been
lost.
The
Final
Report
states
the
following:
“This
erosion
has
forced
beachfront
home
owners
to
install
rock
revetments
“in a
last
ditch
effort”
to save
their
properties
from the
sea. The
state of
the
beach is
now so
severely
degraded
that the
high
tide
laps up
against
the rock
revetments
leaving
little
or no
beach
for
recreational
use.
Large
easterly
swells
are
responsible
for the
most
damage
with the
most
recent
event
during
November
2005
causing
such
severe
erosion
that
public
toilets
collapsed
onto the
beach.”
The
Final
Report
emphasizes
the
downstream
effects
of the
erosion
on the
economy,
in
particular
the
negative
effects
on
tourism
and
longer
term job
creation.
After
years of
ineffective
lobbying
for a
solution
to the
erosion
problem
at St.
Francis
Bay,
residents
combined
to form
the St.
Francis
Bay
Beach
Trust (SFBBT
– a copy
of the
Trust
Deed is
attached
to this
report)
and
contracted
ASR
Marine
Consulting
and
Research
Limited
in New
Zealand.
ASR are
world
leaders
in the
field of
coastal
processes,
have
developed
cutting
edge
numerical
modelling
and
completed
the
seminal
work in
the
design
and
construction
of
multi-purpose
reefs.
2.
Results
of
research
Past
studies
and the
ASR
Report
have all
to a
greater
or
lesser
degree
considered
the
following
options:
The
Final
Report
explains
that due
to
either
cost,
economic
losses,
unsuitable
environmental
conditions
in the
Bay
area,
the
possibility
of
encouraging
further
erosion
or a
combination
of the
aforementioned
reasons
the
first
five
options
are
deemed
unsuitable.
The cost
effective
results
obtained
from the
artificial
reefs is
recommended
as the
most
suitable
solution
for St
Francis
Bay.
The
project
therefore
envisages:
-
Restore
the
beach
and
therefore
the
sustainable
supply
of
an
ecosystem
Service.
-
Enhance
tourism
and
therefore
create
and
sustain
job
opportunities
in
this
important
core
industry.
-
Use
local
services
and
suppliers
during
implementation,
wherever
possible,
to
support
local
industry
and
provide
employment
opportunities
to
the
local
community,
including
initiation
and
support
of
BEE
initiatives.
-
Source
funding
from
the
private
sector
as
much
as
possible.
The
intention
is
to
raise
the
estimated
R 20
million
required
for
implementation
and
repay
this
through
a
beach
levy
paid
by
property
owners
in
St.
Francis
Bay.
(The
investigatory
phase
including
feasibility
study
and
detailed
modelling
and
design
phase
totalling
some
R 1
million
has
been
entirely
funded
by
donations
from
the
residents/private
sector).”
The
reference
to
restoring
the
beach
involves
acquisition
and
placement
of the
envisaged
artificial
reefs
and the
transfer
of sand
from the
estuary
to the
beach on
an
ongoing
basis.
“The
project
offers
an
opportunity
to
provide
technology
transfer,
through
the
collaboration
of
international
and
national
experts,
to
sustain
ecosystem
services
and its
associated
benefits
and to
enhance
job
creation
by
promoting
St.
Francis
Bay as a
prime
tourism
destination
and
jump-off
point
for
nature
tourism
as
indicated
in the
report.”
The
following
extract
from the
report
summarises
the
previous
experience
and
extent
of
involvement
in the
concept
of
artificial
reefs:
“The
first
reef
designed
by ASR
Ltd at
Narrowneck
on the
Gold
Coast in
Queensland,
Australia,
won the
State
Environmental
Award.
This
project
has
demonstrated
the
effectiveness
of
multi-purpose
reef
technology,
with
significant
widening
of the
beach
without
down
stream
impacts
(the
Narrowneck
area of
the Gold
Coast
has a
net
northerly
sediment
transport
of
~500,000
m3/yr),
enhanced
marine
life and
quality
surfing
waves.
Similar
multi-purpose
reef
projects
undertaken
by ASR
world-wide
are at
various
stages,
projects
that are
primarily
for
either
coastal
protection
(erosion
control,
submerged
port
walls),
the
creation
of
surfing
breaks
or
ecological
enhancement,
in New
Zealand
(8),
Australia
(5), the
USA (3)
India
(2),
Bahrain
(1),
Fiji
(1),
Costa
Rica
(1),
Spain
(1) and
the UK
(4),
with
construction
of two
of these
reefs
currently
underway
and
several
others
scheduled
to
proceed
in the
next 12
months.
|
The
majority of these reef projects are in locations where the existing coastline is
already developed, and where much of their income is derived from the tourism
industry – these projects are 5 often driven by the socio-economic benefits that
multi-purpose reefs provide. |
Indeed,
the
public’s
demand
for
beaches
for
recreation,
combined
with the
increasing
value
society
places
on the
natural
environment,
has led
to a
dramatic
increase
in the
development
of
submerged
reef
projects
world-wide
(e.g.
Ahren
and Cox,
1990;
Hsu and
Silvester,
1990;
Pilarczyk
and
Zeidler,
1996;
Hall and
Seabrook,
1998;
Black et
al.,
1998;
Harris,
2001;
Mead et
al.,
2003;
Babtie,
2003),
and more
recently
independent
research
is
strongly
supporting
the
findings
of the
initial
ARP
(e.g.
Nielsen,
2001;
Houston,
2002;
Pilarzyck,
2003;
Ranashinge
and
Turner,
2005;
Jackson
et al.,
2005”
3.
Costs
and
Implications
for the
Community
within
the Bay
Area
Using
the ASR
Feasibility
Study as
a
starting
point as
well as
including
other
information
available
to the
SFB
Beach
Trust a
broad
estimate
of costs
and
timing
(cost as
at July
2006) is
as
follows:
|
Construction Phase 1: Year 2007/8 |
|
|
1 x Submerged Reefs |
R 4 500 000 |
|
Dredger – IMS Model 5012 |
R 2 800 000 |
|
Sand Pumping & Renourishment |
R 3 000 000 |
|
Professional Fees |
R 500 000 |
|
Contingencies |
R 1 000 000 |
|
Total Phase 1 |
R 11 800 000 |
|
Construction Phase 2: Year 2008/9 |
|
|
2 x Submerged Reefs @ R 4.5 m ea |
R 9 000 000 |
|
Dune Sculpting and Replanting |
R 700 000 |
|
Professional Fees |
R 250 000 |
|
Contingencies |
R 750 000 |
|
Total Phase 2 |
R 10 700 000 |
|
Grand Total |
R 22 500 000 |
There is
a
possibility
that one
additional
reef may
be
required.
To be
confirmed
following
completion
of
design
phase.
The
operational
costs
would
include:
-
Servicing
external
finance
and
depreciation
-
Dredging
costs
(including
the
fuel,
insurance,
labour
and
maintenance)
-
Some
cost
to
monitor
the
artificial
reef
The
estimated
operational
cost
would be
in the
order of
R 3.5
million
per
annum.
In order
to
finance
the
operational
cost an
estimated
special
levy (a
beach
levy)
based on
property
valuations
for the
properties
deemed
to be
within
the Bay
area is
calculated
to be in
around
R150 per
month
for each
property
owner.
This
figure
will be
further
refined
in the
months
leading
to the
budget
cycle
for
2007/8.
4.
Requirements
for the
Project
The
primary
role-players
for this
project
would
include:
-
The
National
Department
of
Environmental
Affairs
which
has
been
consulted
and
the
Minister
has
been
appraised
of
the
circumstances
and
intentions
of
the
project.
There
is
general
support
for
the
initiative
from
his
Department.
-
The
St
Francis
Bay
Beach
Trust
which
represents
the
affected
Community
-
Kouga
Municipality.
This
report
formalises
the
discussions
and
contact
with
the
Municipality
that
has
taken
place
via
the
Office
of
the
Mayor
todate.
It is
not
clear
whether
or to
what
extent
the
spheres
of
government
will
contribute
financially
and
hence
all
costing
and
implications
in this
report
are
stated
so as to
reflect
the
maximum
burden
on the
community.
There is
an
argument
to be
made
that the
impact
of
further
beach
erosion
affects
the
entire
Municipal
area of
Kouga.
Nevertheless,
the
Beach
Trust is
proceeding
on the
basis
that
there
will be
no
contribution
in view
of the
other
priorities
facing
all
spheres
of
Government.
The
Beach
Trust is
expecting
to
source
external
finance
and
maintain
the
project
after
installation.
The
primary
aim of
this
report
is
therefore
to seek
the
support
and
assistance
from the
Kouga
Municipality
through
the
ability
of the
Municipality
to
support
the
project
via the
following
means
-
The
external
finance
(at
this
stage
an
approach
has
been
made
to
the
Development
Bank
of
Southern
Africa)
will
no
doubt
require
some
security
from
the
Municipality
and
in
particular
some
assurance
of
the
appropriate
revenue
stream
to
repay
the
loan.
-
To
assist
the
Beach
Trust
in
accessing
the
envisaged
revenue
stream
through
a
special
levy
to
be
administered
via
the
Municipal
revenue
systems.
Other
than the
above
support
no other
financial
commitment
is
envisaged
at this
stage
nor is
the
Municipality
to
accept
any
other
risks
for the
venture
such as
risks
associated
with
ownership.
With
regard
to
collection
of the
special
levy the
Beach
Trust
envisages
doing
the
collection
of any
unpaid
levies
and thus
there
should
be
little
impact
on the
existing
administrative
capacity.
The
above
arrangement
would
require
a legal
agreement
in
addition
to the
external
finance
agreement
with the
eventual
bank.
This
project
has
already
had
extensive
public
participation
and will
receive
further
public
consultation
in the
coming
months
as more
specifically
indicated
below.
5. Way
Forward
In order
for the
Beach
Trust to
proceed
there is
a need
for the
in
principle
support
from the
Kouga
Municipality
to
assist
with
raising
the
external
finance
as
mentioned
in the
report
and to
administer
and
approve
the
special
beach
levy for
the
2007/8
financial
year.
The
following
project
schedule
below is
a
forecast
of key
milestones
and
timing
merged
with the
approximate
key
municipal
cycles:
-
Meet
Mayor
/
Municipal
Officials
–
done
7
August
2006
-
Visit
by
the
Environmental
Minister
–
September
2006
-
EIA
–
due
for
completion
late
2006/early
2007
-
Submit
this
report
to
Kouga
Municipality
for
in
principle
approval
for
specific
support
from
Council
August
2006
-
Review
with
the
Community
-
December
2006
/January
2007
-
Municipal
IDP
Review
–
commences
September
2006
-
Municipal
Budget
2007/8
Budget
cycle
–
commences
September
2006
-
Beach
Levy
approved
-
May
2007
-
Financial
closure
(external
finance
arranged
and
available)
September,
2006
to
March,
2007
-
Project
implementation
start
date
–
February/March,
2007
-
Reef
deployment
commences
–
April
2007
-
First
payment
of
Beach
Levy
–
July
2007
Comments
by
Director
Technical
Services
Comments
by
Director:
Community
Services
Comments
from
Acting
Chief
Financial
Officer
Comments
by
Acting
Municipal
Manager
7.
RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 That
Council
supports
the
community
initiative
via the
St
Francis
Bay
Beach
Trust to
resolve
the
beach
erosion
via an
artificial
reef
subject
to:
-
Submission
of
appropriate
agreement/s
for
consideration
by
Council
in
due
course
-
Compliance
with
any
legislation
that
may
apply
to
the
project;
and
-
Approval
of
the
2007/8
Budget
after
the
appropriate
public
consultation
process
as
required
by
legislation.
7.2
Subject
to
recommendation
7.1
Council
supports
the
initiative
and in
principle
will
support
the St
Francis
Bay
Beach
Trust to
acquire
external
finance
by
providing
reasonable
security
(in the
form of
a
dedicated
revenue
stream),
7.3
Subject
to
recommendation
7.1
Council
supports
in
principle
a beach
levy to
be
determined
in terms
of
Section
22 of
the
Rating
of
Property
Act, to
be
applied
and
recovered
for an
area to
be
designated
in due
course,
accrue
such
levy via
the
revenue
systems
of the
municipality
provided
that the
St
Francis
Bay
Trust
shall
accept
responsibi |