environmental impact assessment for the proposed ...projects.gibb.co.za/portals/3/projects/200906...

J29020/7231/DSR 01 - May 2009

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality

Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Motherwell NU 31 housing development

Draft Scoping Report

Motherwell NU31 DSR 2 May 2009

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED

MOTHERWELL NU 31 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

CONTENTS

Chapter Description Page

1 INTRODUCTION 7

1.1 Motivation for the proposed activity 7 1.1.1 Recipients of government subsidised social housing 7 1.1.2 Health and environmental concerns 7 1.1.3 Government responsibility towards social upliftment 8

1.2 Development process 8 1.2.1 Conceptual planning 9 1.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment 9 1.2.3 Preliminary design 9 1.2.4 Final design 9 1.2.5 Detailed design 9 1.2.6 Tender process 9 1.2.7 Construction 9

1.3 EIA process 9 1.3.1 Application phase 10 1.3.2 Scoping phase 12 1.3.3 EIA phase 12

1.4 Identification of ‘Listed Activities’ 13

1.5 Previous EIA investigations 14

2 DETAILS OF THE EAP 15

2.1 ARCUS GIBB (PTY) LTD. 15 2.1.1 Details of the EAPs that prepared the Scoping Report 15 2.1.2 Expertise of the EAPs to carry out the Scoping procedures 16

3 LEGISLATION AND POLICY GUIDELINES IDENTIFIED 17

3.1 The Constitution of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) 17

3.2 The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) 17 3.2.1 EIA guidelines published under NEMA 18

3.3 The Housing Act (Act 107 of 1997) 19

3.4 The Social Housing Bill (G.G. No. 30022 of 6 July 2007) 19

3.5 The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) 19

3.6 Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004) 20


3.7 National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) 20

3.8 Policy guidelines 21 3.8.1 Integrated Development Plan 21 3.8.2 Metropolitan Spatial Development Framework 22

4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY AND ALTERNATIVES 2 3

4.1 Location of the proposed activity 23

4.2 Developable area 24 4.2.1 Proposed layout and land use zoning scheme of the development 24 4.2.2 Housing typology 27

4.3 Proposed bulk services and associated infrastructure 28 4.3.1 Roads 28 4.3.2 Stormwater management 28 4.3.3 Sewerage and sanitation 30 4.3.4 Water supply 30 4.3.5 Electricity 30 4.3.6 Lighting 30 4.3.7 Solid waste management 30

4.4 Alternatives 30 4.4.1 No-Go alternative 31 4.4.2 Activity Alternative 1: Increased capacity of the Cerebos ponds

with additional pumping capacity 31 4.4.3 Activity Alternative 2: Construction of new stormwater pond and

canal 31 4.4.4 Site Alternative 1: Land exchange alternative 31 4.4.5 Technology Alternative 1: Decreased density/footprint area 32

4.5 Other developments in their planning or construction phase 32

5 DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT 33

5.1 Introduction 33

5.2 Physical environment 33 5.2.1 Terrain 33 5.2.2 Geological setting and soil characteristics 34 5.2.3 Climate 34

5.3 Biological environment 36 5.3.1 Vegetation 36 5.3.2 Mammals 37 5.3.3 Avifauna 38 5.3.4 Reptiles and amphibians 39 5.3.5 Invertebrates 40

5.4 Heritage resources 41

5.5 Socio-economic aspects 41 5.5.1 Socio-economic trends in the NMBM 42 5.5.2 Age and gender distribution 42 5.5.3 Service delivery progress 42


5.5.4 Ward 54 demographics 42 5.5.5 Housing in Motherwell 43 5.5.6 Motherwell Urban Renewal Programme 43 5.5.7 Existing NMBM resettlement programme 44

6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 46

6.1 Identification of Interested and Affected Parties 46

6.2 Notification of Interested and Affected Parties 48 6.2.1 Notice board 49 6.2.2 Notification of landowners and authorities 49 6.2.3 Notification of informal settlers near the Motherwell reservoir. 49 6.2.4 Background information Document (BID) 49 6.2.5 Newspaper advertising 50

6.3 Public meetings 50

6.4 Focus group meetings 50

6.5 Register of I&APs 51

6.6 Comments register 51

6.7 Comments and response report 51

7 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND IMPACTS IDENTIFIED 52

7.1 Identification of key environmental issues 52

7.2 Issues raised by the I&APs and responses by EAP 52

7.3 Potential environmental issues identified by the EAP 55 7.3.1 Removal of vegetation 55 7.3.2 Stormwater management 56 7.3.3 Loss of topsoil 56 7.3.4 Pollution of the environment and health risks to humans 56 7.3.5 Illegal hunting, snaring and plant collection 57 7.3.6 Jobs and economic investment 57 7.3.7 Service infrastructure and availability 57 7.3.8 Fire risks 58 7.3.9 Dust 58 7.3.10 Noise 58 7.3.11 Trenching and fencing 58 7.3.12 Aesthetics of the development 58 7.3.13 Increased traffic volumes 58 7.3.14 Crime 59 7.3.15 Political instability 59

8 PLAN OF STUDY FOR THE EIA 64

8.1 Introduction 64

8.2 Proposed process for the EIA phase 64


8.3 Environmental assessment report and EMP 66

8.4 Public Participation Process 66 8.4.1 Informing I&APs of the acceptance of the Scoping Report and

commencement of EIA phase 66 8.4.2 Notifying I&APs of the availability of the draft Environmental Impact

Report; and 66 8.4.3 Comments and Response Trail 67 8.4.4 Compilation of final EIR and submission to the Competent

Authority 67 8.4.5 Notifying I&APs of the Environmental Authorisation. 67

8.5 Specialist studies 68 8.5.1 Introduction 68 8.5.2 Assessment procedure for specialists 68 8.5.3 Criteria used to determine the significance ratings 69 8.5.4 Identified specialist studies, Specialists and Terms of Reference 70 8.5.5 Further specialist input 73

8.6 Programme for EIA Phase 74

9 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 75

10 REFERENCES 77


ACRONYMS

ARCUS GIBB Arcus GIBB (Pty) Ltd BID Background Information Document CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism DEDEA Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs DSR Draft Scoping Report DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry EIR Environmental Impact Report EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner ECA Environment Conservation Act ECO Environmental Control Officer EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIR Environmental Impact Report EMP Environmental Management Plan FSR Final Scoping Report I&AP Interested & Affected Party IEM Integrated Environmental Management IDP Integrated Development Plan NEMA National Environmental Management Act NGO Non Governmental Organisation NMBM Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality NMMM Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality = NMBM NM MOSS Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Open Space System NSBA National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment POS Plan of Study PPP Public Participation Process ROD Record of Decision SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Authority SDF Spatial Development Framework SDP Spatial Development Plan SHEQ Safety Health and Environmental Quality STEP Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Plan


1 INTRODUCTION

ARCUS GIBB (Pty) Ltd. has been appointed to undertake an application for environmental authorisation through an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed housing development known as Motherwell NU 31. The proposed development is situated between the Swartkops and Coega River valleys some 20 km to the north of the city centre of Port Elizabeth. The project involves the development of land, services and top structures to accommodate people in need of housing. The project proponent is the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM), who has appointed GOBA Consulting Engineers & Project Managers (GOBA (Pty) Ltd) to act as project managers to help alleviate the housing backlog in the municipality.

1.1 Motivation for the proposed activity

1.1.1 Recipients of government subsidised social ho using

The Motherwell housing project aims to provide serviced low cost housing for low or no income families that qualifies for government housing subsidy and have been identified by ward councillors across the metro as recipients of low income housing. These identified recipients are, amongst others, victims of the 2006 floods in the Swartkops flood plain, occupants of informal settlements in retention ponds, within the servitude areas of power lines, living within the road reserves of roads earmarked for upgrade, and recipients living in and around the New Brighton dump site. These families constantly experience adverse weather conditions, especially during the cold winter months and rainy autumn and spring periods, and are constantly subjected to health threatening conditions. During heavy rains shacks are often flooded or destroyed, and strong winds frequently cause fires to spread rapidly in informal settlements.

1.1.2 Health and environmental concerns Many informal settlements located within the Swartkops River flood plain are not serviced and the residents mostly use the bucket system to dispose of their sewage. As a result residents often empty their buckets into the stormwater drains, drainage channels or vegetated areas. This practice, for example, was recently noted in the KwaZakhele area next to the Swartkops estuary. This poses a major health and environmental threat to the people residing in the flood plain and the Swartkops River and estuarine ecosystems. Raw sewage entering the Swartkops estuary causes the introduction of high nutrient levels into the estuary, which may lead to eutrophication of the estuary. Eutrophication is one of the principal threats to coastal ecosystems, especially urban estuaries, and may cause changes in the community structure and biodiversity patterns of the Swartkops estuary. Eutrophication also decreases the water quality for the affected system and could thus negatively impact the recreational function of the Swartkops estuary. Furthermore, water quality monitoring conducted during the last few years have often identified high levels of E. coli in the water of the Swartkops River and estuary, which could seriously affect the health and wellbeing of residents living in close proximity to the Swartkops estuary and are dependent on natural resources of the estuary.


1.1.3 Government responsibility towards social upli ftment The Motherwell housing projects are rooted in the Freedom Charter of the ANC of 1955, which proclaims “Slums shall be demolished, and new suburbs built where all have transport, roads, lighting, playing fields, crêches and social centres”. Recognizing that previous township schemes failed to create functioning communities, the Motherwell Project aims to provide much more than shelters. By building houses of different layout and market value as well as providing all necessary amenities, the project hopes to attract a variety of different income groups to the new suburb thereby establishing a functional community where its basic needs, such as community centres, schools, police stations, clinics, shops and public transport, are catered for.

1.2 Development process

Once the need for houses has been identified, the housing development process unfolds in various stages, with the EIA being the second stage (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Typical stages in the housing development process.

Conceptual planning

Environmental Impact Assessment

Preliminary design

Final design

Detailed design

Tender process

Construction


1.2.1 Conceptual planning Conceptual planning typically involves broad feasibility studies, layout determination, engineering investigations and evaluation of options. This stage includes the appointment of survey and mapping teams as well as the appointment of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to undertake the EIA.

1.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment

The EIA is undertaken by an independent EAP and aims to assess the environmental impacts of building the houses and related infrastructure. It includes the identification and assessment of various alternatives in layout and design and it also includes a public participation process (PPP).

1.2.3 Preliminary design The preliminary design phase is a broad concept design which is not drawn to scale. At the completion of this stage, development specifications are produced that inform detailed design and development.

1.2.4 Final design The final design precedes the detailed designs. These designs are the final specifications but may lack material specifications.

1.2.5 Detailed design This stage includes the development of detailed designs that brings initial design work into a completed form with specifications. The detail design is responsible for producing the product, process and material specifications.

1.2.6 Tender process During this process a contractor or contractors are employed to carry out the construction works as set out in the detailed designs.

1.2.7 Construction Following the appointment of a contractor, the contractor will establish themselves at a site camp in the vicinity of the development. The activities of the contractor will be closely monitored by the consulting engineer to ensure that the construction works are built to standard. Activities potentially affecting the environment will be controlled through a construction Environmental Management Plan (cEMP) and will be monitored by an independent Environmental Control Officer (ECO).

1.3 EIA process

The EIA process is controlled through Regulations published under Government Notice No. R. 385, R. 386 and R. 387 and associated guidelines promulgated in terms of Chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998). Three phases to the EIA process are typically recognized:

1. Application phase;

2. Scoping phase; and

3. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) phase.

The three phases are illustrated in Figure 2.


1.3.1 Application phase

The Application phase consists of completing the appropriate registration form by the EAP and the proponent and the subsequent submission and registration of the project with the permitting authority. An application form was completed and submitted to DEDEA, Port Elizabeth office, on 23 April 2009. (a) Details of the proponent Name: Schalk Potgieter Address: Acting Assistant Director: Properties Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality 17th floor, Lillian Diedericks Building, Goven Mbeki Avenue Port Elizabeth 6000 Telephone Number: 041 506 2168 Fax Number: 041 506 3469 E-mail: [email protected] (b) Details of the case officer handling the application Name: Mr Andries Struwig Address: Department of Economic Development and Environmental

Affairs Collegiate Provincial Building Cnr Belmont Terrace and Castle Hill Central Port Elizabeth 6000 Telephone Number: 041 508 5800 Fax Number: 041 585 1958 E-mail: [email protected] (c) Registration number of application DEDEA has issued an acknowledgement of receipt in acceptance of the EIA application on 15 May 2009. The reference number for the EIA is ECm1/387/M/09-45.


Figure 2. Scoping and EIA procedure (NEMA, 1998)

Submit EIR and Draft EMP

Submit Application • Applicant form • Landowner consent • Exemptions being

applied for

Check Application

Acknowledge Receipt

Scoping • Public participation • Scoping Report • Public comment

Submit Scoping Report • Submit Plan of Study for EIA • Scoping Report • All correspondence with I&APs

Notify I& APs of Decision

Notify Applicant of Decision

Decision

Acknowledge Receipt • The authority can reject the EIA Report and

request amendments • The authority can request additional specialist

studies +45 days • Authority can accept or reject the report and

notify the applicant + 45 days

EIA Process • Prepare EIA Report • Specialist Investigations • Allow for public review of Draft

EIR • Draft EMP

Authority Response • Request amendments • Reject because :

o Insufficient information o Failure to consider

guidelines • Accept

30 days

14 days

60 days

10 days

EAP

Authority

Legislated time frame

Scoping / EIA Process


1.3.2 Scoping phase The Scoping Phase aims to identify the key project issues raised by the proponent, consultants and the public; consider project alternatives; and through public participation, ensure consensus is reached regarding the process to be followed in the EIA Phase. At the end of the Scoping Phase a report is compiled known as a Scoping Report. Prior to submission of the final Scoping Report to the authorities the public is provided with an opportunity to further comment on the matter. (a) Draft Scoping Report The aim of this Scoping Report is to document the outcome of the Scoping Phase. The report includes:

• Details of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner undertaking the EIA; • Details of the proposed project; • Details on alternatives to the proposed project; • Description of the legislation and guidelines applicable to the proposed

activity; • A description of the receiving environment; • A register of Interested and Affected Parties; • Documenting the process and outcome of public participation; • An identification of environmental issues and impacts associated with the

project proposal and alternatives; • A description of the issues that require further investigation; • A description of the methodology to be used in the assessment of impacts;

and • A Plan of Study for Environmental Impact Assessment which will include a

description of the public participation process and terms of reference for the identified specialist studies required in the EIA phase.

(b) Final Scoping Report Once the draft Scoping Report has been reviewed by the Interested and Affected Parties, the comments were collated and the report was amended as appropriate, it is finalised. The final Scoping Report is then submitted to the DEDEA together with a Plan of Study for Environmental Impact Assessment.

1.3.3 EIA phase Once the final Scoping Report and the Plan of Study for EIA have been accepted by DEDEA, the project will proceed into its detailed EIA phase with specialist investigation. After completion of all the specialist studies, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be produced by ARCUS GIBB. The EIR will provide an assessment of all the identified key issues and associated impacts from the Scoping Phase. The Assessment Phase will typically include the following:

• Public participation will continue with information sharing between the consultants and Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs), document review and associated collection of comments.

• An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be produced which will document the key findings of the specialist studies and provide an impact assessment of the identified alternatives.


The EIR will be submitted to the DEDEA for their consideration and, if acceptable, for their authorisation of the proposed housing development.

1.4 Identification of ‘Listed Activities’

The NEMA section 24(5) stipulates that "listed activities” require environmental authorization by way of a full Environmental Impact Assessment. Government Notices Nos. R. 386 and 387 (July 2006 EIA Regulations) identify the following listed activities pertinent to this proposed development as having a potentially detrimental effect on the environment: Government Notice 387, 2: Any development activity, including associated structures and infrastructure, where the total area of the developed area is, or is intended to be, 20 hectares or more. Government Notice 387, 5: The route determination of roads and design of associated physical infrastructure, including roads that have not yet been built for which routes have been determined before the publication of this notice and which has not been authorised by a competent authority in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006 made under section 24(5) of the Act and published in Government Notice No. R. 385 of 2006, where – (a) it is a national road as defined in section 40 of the South African National

Roads Agency Limited and National Roads Act, 1998 (Act No. 7 of 1998); (b) it is a road administered by a provincial authority; (c) the road reserve is wider than 30 metres; or (d) the road will cater for more than one lane of traffic in both directions. Government Notice 386, 1: The construction of facilities or infrastructure, including associated structures or infrastructure, for – (K) the bulk transportation of water in pipelines with –

(i) an internal diameter of 0.36 metres or more; or (ii) a peak throughput of 120 litres per second or more.

Government Notice 386, 12: The transformation or removal of indigenous vegetation of 3 hectares or more or of any size where the transformation or removal would occur within a critically endangered or an endangered ecosystem listed in terms of section 52 of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004). Government Notice 386, 14: The construction of masts of any material or type and of any height, including those used for telecommunication broadcasting and radio transmission, but excluding - (a) masts of 15 metres and lower exclusively used

(i) by radio amateurs; or (ii) for lighting purposes

(b) flag poles; and (c) lightning conductor poles. Government Notice 386, 15: The construction of a road that is wider than 4 metres or that has a reserve wider than 6 metres.


Government Notice 386, 16: The transformation of undeveloped, vacant or derelict land to – (b) residential, mixed, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional use where such development does not constitute infill and where the total area to be transformed is bigger than 1 hectare. Government Notice 386, 18: The subdivision of portions of land 9 hectares or larger into portions of 5 hectares or less.

1.5 Previous EIA investigations

No previous Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies have been conducted on the land in question.


2 DETAILS OF THE EAP

This chapter is intended to provide details on the organisation and the authors that are undertaking the Environmental Impact Assessment Study. Authors of Environmental Impact Assessments are termed Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs). The EIA regulations (Section 18; G.N. R385) stipulate that an EAP must have the following requirements:

a) Be independent. b) Have expertise in conducting environmental impact assessments including

knowledge of the Act, the EIA Regulations and any guidelines applicable to the activity.

c) Perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if the results and findings are not favourable to the applicant.

d) Comply with the Act, these Regulations and all other applicable legislation. e) Disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information

in possession of the EAP that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing:

− Any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority in terms of these Regulations; or

− The objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by the EAP in terms of these Regulations for submission to the competent authority.

2.1 ARCUS GIBB (PTY) LTD.

ARCUS GIBB (Pty) Ltd. is a multi-disciplinary engineering and environmental consultancy company whose environmental division comprises 51 individuals of which 45 are Environmental Assessment Practitioners. The environmental division has undertaken over 100 Environmental Impact Assessments for development projects within South Africa. ARCUS GIBB has a comprehensive ISO 9001:2000 Quality Management System in place. As such, all documentation is professionally reviewed.

2.1.1 Details of the EAPs that prepared the Scoping Report Name: Dr Norbert Klages Address: PO BOX 63703 PORT ELIZABETH 6057 Tel: 041 363 9330 Fax: 041 363 9300 E-mail: [email protected] Name: Mr. Mathys Vosloo


Address: PO BOX 63703 PORT ELIZABETH 6057 Tel: 041 363 9330 Fax: 041 363 9300 E-mail: [email protected] Name: Mr. Jesse Jegels Address: PO BOX 63703 PORT ELIZABETH 6057 Tel: 041 363 9330 Fax: 041 363 9300 E-mail: [email protected]

2.1.2 Expertise of the EAPs to carry out the Scopin g procedures Norbert Klages Dr Norbert Klages is a registered Professional Natural Scientist (Ecological Science) with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (Pr.Sci.Nat. No. 400412/04). He holds a Bachelor of Science Degree: Hanover University, Germany, 1976, Master of Science (cum laude): Kiel University, Germany, 1979 and Doctor of Natural Sciences (cum laude): Kiel University, Germany, 1983. A natural scientist with more than 30 years of experience, Dr Norbert Klages specialises in coastal and marine environmental consulting and contract research. Please refer to Appendix A for a detailed CV. Mathys Vosloo Mathys has an MSc in biology and has a sound understanding of ecological issues. Mathys’s role is to assess all impacts, prepare all relevant reports required for the EIA, report to the client regarding project progress, and to handle all mapping work (GIS). Please refer to Appendix A for a detailed CV. Jesse Jegels An environmental scientist with 6 years experience, Jesse Jegels specialises in public participation processes. He will also manage the independent specialists during the EIR phase. Jesse will also conduct the environmental audits during the construction phase of the project. Please refer to Appendix A for a detailed CV.


3 LEGISLATION AND POLICY GUIDELINES IDENTIFIED

3.1 The Constitution of South Africa (Act 108 of 19 96)

The legal reference source for environmental law in South Africa is found in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996. All environmental aspects should be interpreted within the context of the Constitution. The Constitution has enhanced the status of the environment by virtue of the fact that environmental rights have been established (Section 24) and because other rights created in the Bill of Rights may impact on environmental management. An objective of local government is to provide a safe and healthy environment (Section 152) and public administration must be accountable, transparent and encourage participation (Section 195(1) (e) to (g)). Specific to this EIA, Section 26 asserts the right of everyone to have access to adequate housing.

3.2 The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998)

The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998), commonly known as “NEMA”, is South Africa’s overarching framework for environmental legislation. NEMA provides for operative environmental governance by establishing principles for decision-making on matters affecting the environment, institutions that will promote co-operative governance, and procedures for co-ordinating environmental functions exercised by organs of state. It sets out a number of principles that aim to implement the environmental policy of South Africa. These principles are designed, amongst other purposes, to serve as a general framework for environmental planning, as guidelines by reference to which organs of state must exercise their functions and to guide other law concerned with the protection or management of the environment. The principles include a number of internationally recognized environmental law norms and some principles specific to South Africa, i.e. the:

• Preventive principle;

• Precautionary principle;

• Polluter pays principle; and

• Equitable access for the previously disadvantaged to ensure human well-being.

Chapter 5 of NEMA is designed to promote integrated environmental management. Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concerns and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably. Development must be socially, environmentally and economically sustainable. Sustainable development therefore requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:

• The disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity is avoided, or minimised and remedied;


• The pollution and degradation of the environment are avoided, or minimised and remedied;

• The disturbance of landscapes and sites that constitute the nation’s cultural heritage is avoided, or minimised and remedied;

• That waste is avoided, or minimised and re-used or recycled where possible and otherwise disposed of in a responsible manner;

• The use and exploitation of non-renewable natural resources should be utilised responsibly and equitably;

• The development, use and exploitation of renewable resources and the ecosystem of which they are part of do not exceed the level beyond which their integrity is jeopardised;

• A risk-averse and cautious approach is applied; and

• Negative impacts on the environment and on the peoples’ environmental rights be anticipated and prevented, and where they cannot be altogether prevented, are minimised and remedied.

Regulations promulgated under NEMA include the Environmental Impact Assessment regulations published under Government Notices No. R. 385, R. 386 and R. 387 of 2006 for those activities that require environmental authorisation by means of a Basic Assessment Process or an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process. Amendments to the EIA regulations have been gazetted (G.G. 31885, 13 February 2009) for public comment. The proposed amendments retain as a listed activity the transformation of undeveloped, vacant, derelict land for residential, mixed, retail, commercial, recreational, industrial or institutional use where the total area to be transformed is 20 hectares or more.

3.2.1 EIA guidelines published under NEMA The following guidelines have been considered in the production of this Scoping Report:

• DEAT (2002) Scoping, Integrated Environmental Management, Information Series 2, Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.

• DEAT (2005) Guideline 3: General Guide to the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2005, Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series, Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.

• DEAT (2006). Guideline 4: Public Participation in support of the EIA Regulations, 2005. Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.

• DEAT (2006) Guideline 5: Assessment of Alternatives and Impacts in support of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006. Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series, Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.


3.3 The Housing Act (Act 107 of 1997)

The Housing Act, as amended, lays down general principles applicable to housing development in all spheres of government. In terms of section 2(1)(a) of the Housing Act, 1997, national, provincial and local spheres of government must give priority to the needs of the poor in respect of housing development, and must promote the establishment of socially and economically viable communities and of safe and healthy living conditions. The Act further promotes higher density in respect of housing development to ensure the economical utilisation of land and services.

3.4 The Social Housing Bill (G.G. No. 30022 of 6 Ju ly 2007)

The establishment and promotion of a social housing environment that is sustainable forms a key objective of the Social Housing Bill. To this end, the following general principles must be observed:

• The social, physical and economic integration of housing development into existing urban and inner-city areas through the creation of quality living environments must be achieved;

• The economical utilisation of land and services must be ensured;

• Social, community and recreational facilities close to social housing development must be provided; and

• Social housing stock must be located at suitable locations with respect to employment opportunities.

3.5 The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998)

The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) is the fundamental law for managing South Africa’s water resources. The purpose of the Act is to ensure that water resources of the nation are protected, used, developed, conserved and controlled. It is concerned with the allocation of equitable access and the conservation of water resources within South Africa. The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) repeals many of the powers and functions of the Water Act (Act 54 of 1956). Key aspects of the National Water Act:

• Catchment Areas - Any disturbance to a watercourse such as the construction of a dam or weir type facility requires authorization from the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry.

• Water Supply - Under the National Water Act, a developer is required to obtain the necessary permits for water usage and the disposal of wastewater from the authority responsible for the administration of the Act, namely the Department of Water Affairs & Forestry (DWAF).

• Any private well or borehole sunk for the abstraction of groundwater has to be reported and registered with the regulatory authority.


• Wastewater - The National Water Act is the principal piece of South African legislation governing wastewater management. Under the Act there are several important issues relating to wastewater to note: − It is generally prohibited to allow stormwater to enter sewer systems; − It is an offence to wilfully or negligently pollute surface water or

groundwater; − In the event of a pollution incident, the offending party is obliged to report

the incident to the regulatory authority; and − The regulatory authority can take the necessary steps to prevent the

pollution of water resources and can recover the costs of clean up from the polluter.

3.6 Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004)

The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004) provides for the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity within the framework of the NEMA. This Act allows for the protection of species and ecosystems that warrant national protection, the sustainable use of indigenous biological resources, the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from bio-prospecting involving indigenous biological resources and the establishment and functions of the South African National Biodiversity Institute. Key elements of the Act are:

• The identification, protection and management of species of high conservation value;

• The identification, protection and management of ecosystems and areas of high biodiversity value;

• Biodiversity Initiatives such as the STEP (Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Plan) and CAPE (Cape Action Plan for People and Environment) may become accepted as bioregional plans and are thus implemented as legislation;

• Alien invasive species control of which the management responsibility is directed to the landowner; and

• Section 53 of the Act identifies that any process or activity that is regarded as a threatening process in terms of a threatened ecosystem, requires environmental authorization via a full Environmental Impact Assessment (Government Notice No. 387).

Applicable guidelines related to biodiversity considered in this Scoping Report are taken from Stewart et al. (2005).

3.7 National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999 )

The National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) aims to promote the good management of the national estate of South Africa. The national estate can include:

• Places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance;


• Places to which oral traditions are attached or that are associated with living heritage;

• Historical settlements and townscapes;

• Geological sites of scientific or cultural importance;

• Archaeological and palaeontological sites;

• Graves and burial grounds, including:

− Ancestral graves;

− Royal graves and graves of traditional leaders;

− Graves of victims of conflict;

− Graves of individuals designated by the Minister by notice in the Gazette; and

− Historical graves and cemeteries.

− Other human remains not covered in terms of the Human Tissue Act, 1983 (Act No 65 of 1983); and

• Sites of significance relating to the history of slavery in South Africa. In terms of Section 38 of the Act, the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) must be notified during the early planning phases of a project for any development that includes the following activities:

• The construction of a road, wall, power line, pipeline, canal or other similar form of linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in length;

• Any development or other activity which will change the character of a site exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent; or

• Involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof;

• Involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been consolidated within the past five years; and

• The costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority;

• The re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent; and

• Any other category of development provided for in regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority.

3.8 Policy guidelines

3.8.1 Integrated Development Plan

Municipalities are faced with a complexity of legal obligations to safeguard the environment in all land use planning, land development and subdivisions. Through the Constitution and the National Environmental Management Act, and more specifically the Municipal Systems Act (No. 32 of 2000), NMBM is obligated to take all reasonable measures to manage the environment and its sustainability. The Municipal Systems Act sets out the legislation guiding developmental local government. According to the definitions in Chapter 1, ‘environmentally sustainable’


means the provision of a service that aims to ensure that risks of environmental harm and risks to human health and safety are minimised to the extent reasonably possible under the circumstances, and the potential benefits in these areas are maximised to a similar extent, while legislation intended to protect the environment and human health and safety is complied with. Chapter 5 requires that municipalities develop an Integrated Development Plan (IDP) as the principle strategic planning instrument guiding and informing all planning, budgeting, management and decision-making in the municipality. An IDP should be based on a long-term vision through integrating planning and management across people, economy and the environment. Hence, the Integrated Development Plan 2008 – 2012 of the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, 7th Edition, was extensively consulted in this EIA process.

3.8.2 Metropolitan Spatial Development Framework The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality Metropolitan Spatial Development Framework of 2007 (NMBM SDF) also formed an important policy document for this EIA process. The MSDF is a plan outlining the desired spatial development of the metropolitan area as contemplated in Section 25(e) of the Municipal Systems Act (Act 32 of 2000). It also highlights priority investment and development areas and will serve as a guide to decision-makers and investors. It should be emphasised that the MSDF is an integral component of the IDP and translates this plan into its spatial implications to provide broad, overall development guidelines. The NMBM SDF identifies ‘Strategic Development Areas’ as far as future residential expansion is concerned, of which Motherwell is one. Other major ‘Strategic Development Areas’ that have been identified include, Walmer Gqebera, KwaNobuhle, Uitenhage East, Wells Estate and Hunters Retreat (end of Walker Drive). The development of these areas has been phased based on the availability of bulk service infrastructure. Housing developments at all these precincts will have to take place in order to meet the very substantial housing demand in the Metro. The NMBM SDF was subjected to a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) (Stewart & van Gend 2008). The study addresses conservation planning at a fine scale and seeks to provide a framework for the conservation of a representative proportion of the biodiversity endemic to the metropolitan area in addition to identifying economic and social opportunities. As the SEA provides updated information on the conservation status of the vegetation types occurring the NMBM it was extensively consulted in this EIA process.


4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY AND ALTERNATIVES

4.1 Location of the proposed activity

The Motherwell NU31 housing development is situated entirely within the boundaries of portion 2 of farm 316, Uitenhage (SG no: C07600000000031600002), in Motherwell. It located approximately 4.5 km north of the lower Swartkops estuary (Figure 3) and is approximately 147.67 ha in extent. It is bordered in the north by the MR460 road connecting Uitenhage and Addo. The new developments of NU29 and NU 30 are situated along the eastern border of NU 31.

Figure 3. Regional map showing the position of the site within the NMBM.

The NU 31 development is located directly adjacent to the Cerebos salt works in Motherwell. The study area is flat to gently undulating with a series of natural hollows. The proposed Motherwell NU31 development is situated entirely in ward 54 in the NMBM. A police station, magistrates court complex and clinic is located along Tyinira Street, east of the proposed development boundary. Zoning is controlled in terms of the Motherwell Town Planning Scheme and the remainder of farm 316, Uitenhage is currently zoned as Undetermined. A rezoning and subdivision application must therefore be lodged with the NMBM. This may only continue after a positive Record of Decision has been issued by the Department of Economic development and Environmental Affairs (DEDEA). The proponent has proposed to rezone the


remainder of Farm 316 into a sub divisional area to enable the development of a mixed and integrated residential area.

4.2 Developable area

4.2.1 Proposed layout and land use zoning scheme of the development

The developable area available for the NU 31 development equates to approximately 148 ha and represents approximately 33 % of the total area within portion 2 of farm 316 (see Figure 4). Approximately 45 % (206 ha) of portion 2 of farm 316 to the east of the developable area are earmarked for development in the approved layouts for the NU 29 and NU 30 housing development and are thus unavailable for the NU 31 development. The remaining western section of portion 2, farm 316, represent low lying areas where stormwater may accumulate and are prone to flooding, making these areas unsuitable for development. A total of 5187 erven is expected to be subdivided and rezoned during the implementation of the proposed development (Table 1). The greatest majority of these rezoned and subdivided erven will accommodate residential living units. In addition, several large and smaller community sites are provided throughout the proposed development area. Some residential erven have been consolidated to create a large site for the multi-purpose centre next to the Motherwell reservoir, which it is envisaged would include a resource centre/community hall, sports fields, clinic, administrative offices, library and other institutional facilities. Figure 4 represents the conceptual layout of Motherwell NU 31.

Table 1. Land use, zoning and number of units propo sed for the Motherwell NU 31 development.

Type Zoning No of units Single units Residential 1 1907 Higher density units Residential 3 2296 Walk-ups Residential 4 945 Residential units 5148 Business units Business 1 & 4 (mixed

use) 4

Institutional Institutional 5 Community facilities Community 1 11 Public open space Open Space 1 & 2 19 Roads Transport 1 Other 39

Total 5187 The proposed layout for NU31 has been designed in line with the concept of sustainable human settlements. The proposed development will thus include areas zoned for mixed use with the aim to establish development corridors. Based on this a number of larger and smaller business sites are provided throughout the neighbourhood unit. It is envisaged that it the development corridors will accommodate the following: • Convenience retail for groceries and other day to day services, • Specialist shops, business, take away outlets, etc., • Public transport facilities,


• Industrial type services for local repair, • Parking, • High density residential (maximum 50 units/ ha). These areas will be located along the main roads, prominent junctions, closer to the centre of neighbourhoods and within the main business node. These mixed use developments shall typically comprise residential units behind and/or above business premises depending on the scale and building costs associated with a multi-storey development. The mixed use development can occur on a single property or in a single building and may include three storey blocks dependant on whether parking will be located in the basement or next to the building. The affordability profile of the target population would exclude the construction of basement parking. Erven along the MR460 has been identified as the main development corridor for mixed use. The MR460 shall remain a high speed and high capacity road. Road junctions will be spaced sufficiently to ensure traffic safety and free traffic movement. It is also proposed that access to properties adjacent to the MR460 be limited to major signalised intersections at appropriate distances (±250 metres). Pedestrian bridges over the MR460 shall be provided where appropriate subject to the availability of funds. Minimum road widths for public roads in NU 31 have a design width of 8 m. A large number of the neighbourhood blocks in NU 31 terminate in cul-de-sacs to minimize through traffic in these residential enclaves. These measures have been included in the development layout to improve pedestrian safety and provide more evenly distributed public spaces and squares.


Figure 4. Preliminary layout for the Motherwell NU 31 housing development, indicating zonation.


4.2.2 Housing typology

Figure 5. House typology and arrangement proposed f or the NU 31 development (from Metroplan, 2009)

A variety of housing types have been allowed for in the proposed NU 31 housing development (Figure 5). Housing type categories include free standing units, semi-detached units and walk-ups. Minimum road widths (including reserves) allowed for public roads are 8 m. A range of erven sizes have been identified for the proposed development and specific housing types will be associated with each category of erven sizes (Table 2).

Table 2. Housing type categories and erf sizes

Housing type Erf size

Free standing 10 m x 10 m = 200 m2 8 m x 18 m = 144 m2 12 m x 20 m = 220 m2

Semi-detached 8 m x 15 m (20 m) = 120 m2 (160 m2) 12 m x 20 m = 220 m2

Row houses 4.5 m (6 m) x 18 m (20 m) = 90 m2 (120 m2) Walk-ups Minimum size of 800 m2


4.3 Proposed bulk services and associated infrastru cture

4.3.1 Roads

The existing roads of metropolitan significance serving the proposed NU 31 development include Tyinira Street traversing NU 12, and the MR460 connecting Uitenhage and Addo. Tyinira Street is to be upgraded by resurfacing the existing tarred road. The road reserve is to be increased to 40 m to allow for future widening as part of the integrated transport plan for the Motherwell area. Provision is made in the NU 12, NU 29 and NU 30 layouts for road links from the developed portion of NU 10 to NU 12 to the east of Tyinira Street. These links will be extended to NU31 to improve connectivity and accessibility. A north-south major escarpment arterial from Dibanisa Road connecting to the MR460 is proposed to service NU 31. This road axis is located between the proposed NU 31 development and NU 29/NU 30 extensions. Three east-west road corridors connecting to the road network of NU 29 and NU 30 is proposed to extend westward from the escarpment arterial to serve the interior residential blocks and roads of NU 31, and will likely house the public transport system which will serve NU31.

4.3.2 Stormwater management The Motherwell area contains land-locked pans separated by localised ridges that retain stormwater. Most of these pans occur in sequence and it is envisaged that the channels will be connected to facilitate stormwater flow through the area. Initial preliminary investigation of the natural flows from the proposed development area (Figure 6), using the Manifold 8.0 GIS software package, indicate that the Motherwell reservoir located approximately in the centre of the development is situated on a high lying area (Figure 7). The thicket vegetation on the northern, north-western and western boundaries of the Motherwell pump station naturally traps a large proportion of the runoff draining towards the Cerebos salt works. Natural depressions in the soil surface further aids this trapping function. Two large natural depressions north of the salt works seemingly trap residual stormwater flowing towards the Cerebos salt works before it enters the plant. Natural drainage lines indicate that runoff in the north-eastern section of the proposed development will drain towards the north and north-east, whereas runoff draining the south-eastern sector of the proposed development drains east- and south-eastwardly. It is expected that measurably more stormwater runoff will drain from the proposed NU 31 development due to the removal of vegetation and hardening of the soil surface. A good indication of the envisaged amount of stormwater will only be known once the designing engineers have investigated the stormwater aspects of NU31 in detail.


Figure 6. Preliminary assessment of the natural sto rmwater flow through the proposed NU 31 development. Brown coloured areas in dicate high lying areas, while blue coloured areas indicate low lying areas.

Preliminary design indicate that stormwater originating from the north- and south-eastern sections (indicated in red in Figure 6) of the proposed development will successfully be drained to the proposed stormwater infrastructure in NU 31, which in turn will tie into existing stormwater infrastructure in the Motherwell NU 29 and NU 30 developments. Stormwater in the north-western, western and south-western sections of the proposed development cannot successfully be drained through gravity feed to existing stormwater infrastructure to the east of the proposed development. As a result, stormwater runoff to the west will have to be accommodated by other means. Three preliminary options have been suggested. The first option proposes the formalisation and enlargement of one or both of the natural ponds located between the proposed development and the Cerebos salt works, coupled with additional pumping capacity to pump excess stormwater to existing infrastructure along the north-eastern boundary of the proposed development if needed. The second option proposes the construction of an open stormwater channel to intercept stormwater originating from the western section of the development. This stormwater canal will run from the eastern side of the proposed development, following the contour line past the Cerebos salt works towards the Swartkops estuary where the stormwater will be discharged. Option three proposes a land exchange scenario where the proponent, the NMBM, exchanges the western section of land for a portion of

NE

SE

NW, W, SW


Cerebos-owned land further south where gravity fed stormwater can be channelled into existing stormwater infrastructure. These options are viewed in a preliminary capacity and may change after detailed investigation and design.

4.3.3 Sewerage and sanitation NMBM proposes to develop living units with flush toilets and piped water in each home. The study area falls into the catchment area of the Fishwater Flats Treatment Works. A 350 mm diameter bulk sewer pipeline has already been installed to serve NU 29 to NU 31. Internal sewerage infrastructure to service household in NU 31 will be installed during the construction phase and will be tied into the existing bulk sewage infrastructure. Detailed design of bulk sewage infrastructure for NU 29, NU 30 and NU 31 were completed in light of the existing pressure on the bulk sewage infrastructure and designing engineers are confident that the Fishwater Flats sewerage system has the capacity to successfully incorporate additional sewage loads. It is envisaged that the “bucket system” will not be used in the NU 31 development.

4.3.4 Water supply NU 31, as well as adjacent NU 29, NU 30 and NU 12, will largely be served by the Motherwell reservoir located approximately in the centre of the proposed NU 31 development. The parts of NU 31 immediately surrounding the Motherwell reservoir, however, will be serviced from the proposed Amanzi reservoir, which will be located immediately north of the MR460, and the existing Coegakop reservoir. The top water level of the Motherwell reservoir is 109 m. The capacity of the Motherwell reservoir is 34Mℓ, 23Mℓ of which was constructed in 1986 and the remaining 11Mℓ in 2006. The environmental authorisation process for the Amanzi reservoir and the 500 mm diameter pipeline leading from the Motherwell reservoir is nearing completion. The construction of the reservoir is expected to be completed in 2010.

4.3.5 Electricity A significant Eskom electrical power line linking the Grassridge and KwaMagxaki substations traverse the NU29 and NU30 housing developments. Electricity for the new NU 31 development will thus be sourced directly from this 132 kV powerline linkage via an existing substation close to the proposed development.

4.3.6 Lighting It is proposed that high mast lighting will be incorporated into the proposed development to provide lighting for the interior of the development area. Further, it is proposed that street lights will be erected along the main roads and transportation axes to provide lighting along the roads.

4.3.7 Solid waste management The NMBM solid waste removal service will be introduced into the proposed development on completion as in the rest of Motherwell.

4.4 Alternatives

The EIA Regulations require that reasonable and feasible activity, site or technology alternatives are considered in the assessment process. The environmental impact of these alternatives will be assessed thoroughly and objectively alongside those of the proposed development. Other alternatives may become apparent during the EIA, and these will be added to the assessment, where necessary. The EIA Regulations


require the consideration of the no-go alternative. The evaluation of this alternative will include a discussion on the resulting impacts, both locally and regionally should no development occur. This will form the baseline for comparison against the other impacts of the proposed development and the alternatives.

4.4.1 No-Go alternative The No-Go alternative assumes that no development will occur on the identified parcel of land. The greatest advantage of this alternative is no further destruction of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket. On the other hand, sorely needed housing delivery for the impoverished people in the metro will be delayed further.

4.4.2 Activity Alternative 1: Increased capacity of the Cerebos ponds with additional pumping capacity The next three alternatives stem from the difficulty in draining the western portion of the proposed development area. As a result of the topology of the development area the western poertion of the developable area drains westward towards the Cerebos Salt Works. Representatives speaking on behalf of Cerebos have indicated that this option is only viable if the NMBM takes possession of the pond and provides Cerebos with a similar facility elsewhere. This alternative is thus proposed to prevent the above mentioned impacts. This alternative proposes the formalisation of the one or both of the natural ponds north of the Cerebos Salt Works, with additional pumping capacity to pump stormwater during heavy rains to stormwater infrastructure in the north of the proposed development. This advantage of this alternative is minimal destruction of natural vegetation.

4.4.3 Activity Alternative 2: Construction of new s tormwater pond and canal This alternative proposes the construction of a stormwater pond at the western boundary of the development site and canal leading from the proposed pond past the Cerebos Salt Works. This canal will discharge stormwater draining from the proposed development into the Swartkops Estuary. The construction of a canal will be expensive as it would stretch a length of at least 4 km to the Swartkops estuary. This canal will in all likelihood prevent any stormwater originating from the proposed development from entering the Cerebos Salt Works. Disadvantages associated with this alternative include potential pollution of the Swartkops Estuary up and down stream of the point of entry into the estuary. Organic pollution from the Motherwell entering the Swartkops Estuary further south along the estuary have become more and more evident in recent years, with harmful pathogens in the estuarine water often reaching alarming proportions in the vicinity of the mouth of the stormwater canal. The stormwater canal may also prevent movement of animals across canal. The experience from open formalised stormwater canals elsewhere in the metro illustrate that snakes and amphibians, for example, often fall into these canals and are trapped. In some parts this proposed stormwater canal may be meters deep that may cause injury to animals or humans.

4.4.4 Site Alternative 1: Land exchange alternative This alternative represents a potential site alternative. This alternative proposes the exchange of the western parcel of land in the proposed development area that drains westward with a parcel of land further south owned by Cerebos. The viability of this alternative is entirely dependant on the willingness of Cerebos to engage in negotiations with the NMBM regarding a possible land ‘swop’ or agreeable terms of sale of the land. The advantage of this alternative is that the new development area can in all likelihood be drained successfully to existing bulk stormwater infrastructure. This area south of the proposed development area furthermore contains Motherwell Karroid Thicket considerably more fragmented than the patch located in the northern half of the proposed development area.


4.4.5 Technology Alternative 1: Decreased density/f ootprint area

This alternative proposes a smaller construction footprint with more multi-storey buildings in stead of single units. The advantage of this alternative is that the density can be maintained in order for the development to meet its financial and development goals. More open space will be created affording an opportunity to preserve more of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket and the habitat it provides. However, multi-storey structures may be more expensive to construct and more difficult to service.

4.5 Other developments in their planning or constru ction phase

The developments of Motherwell NU 29 and NU 30 are situated along the eastern boundary of the NU 31 development. NU 29 and NU 30 form part of the greater Motherwell development and are being implemented by the same proponent, the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality. Environmental authorisation for the development of NU 29 and NU 30 has been granted by DEDEA in February 2009. NU 29 and NU 30 are earmarked for commencement of construction towards the middle of 2009. There exist opportunities to develop other significant nodes either side of Tyinira Street in NU 29 and NU 30, and along the link roads from the Steve Tshwete Village and NU 10 – NU 12. These proposed nodes could contain sports fields, multi-purpose community halls, clinics, libraries, municipal offices and other ancillary facilities. In addition, land along and between the proposed Commuter Railway Line and Tyinira Street in NU 12 is best utilised for an activity corridor with mixed use development (high density housing, business on ground floor below three to four storey walk-ups). Part of this land is already zoned for business purposes while the remainder is zoned for community facilities such as schools. The land is undeveloped and is owned by the NMBM and this presents an opportunity to redesign the area in line with the new concept of integrated planning and high density development. Motherwell NU 32 and NU 33 were proposed for development to the southwest of NU 31 on land currently owned by the Cerebos salt works. Early land procurement negotiations with Cerebos have been unsuccessful, with the development plans for NU 32 and NU 33 being shelved until further notice. A large housing development is being planned north of the MR460, above the NU 31 development. The land owner and proponent, Nu-Way Housing Developments (Pty) Ltd, proposes to construct approximately 30 000 housing units and is expected to start construction within the next five years. Another development that has been tabled proposes the development of 5000 to 7000 housing units in the Coega Ridge area. No other details are available at this point in time. A number of roads of metropolitan significance are planned to bisect the western region of Motherwell. This area is known as the Motherwell West Sustainable Community Unit (SCU). These roads include the proposed Motherwell Southern Bypass from MR 460 to Dibanisa Road and the realign and upgrade of the MR 460 to four lanes from Tyinira Street to MR 43, earmarked for construction post 2010 (SDF 2007), and Commuter Railway Line adjacent to Tyinira Street from Aloes Stations to the MR460 and beyond.


5 DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

In terms of chapter 3 Part 3 of the EIA regulations, 2006, and chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998, “A scoping report must contain all the information that is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of issues identified during scoping, and must include: (c) a description of the property on which the activity is to be undertaken and the location of the activity on the property, or if it is – (i) a linear activity, a description of the route of the activity; or (ii) an ocean-based activity, the coordinates where the activity is to be undertaken; (d) a description of the environment that may be affected by the activity and the manner in which the physical, biological, social, economic and cultural aspects of the environment may be affected by the proposed activity”.

5.1 Introduction

This chapter provides a description of the receiving environment within the study area and its immediate surrounds. This description has not been informed by any specialist studies undertaken for this EIA but includes information obtained from a literature survey and is described at a level deemed appropriate for a Scoping study. Additional detailed information will unfold in the EIA Phase once specialist investigations are undertaken. Four components have been taken into consideration during the investigations:

a) Physical environment;

b) Biological environment;

c) NMBM demographics (socio-economic status);

d) Demographics of the affected wards (socio-economic status);

The severity of the potential impacts is largely determined by the present state and sensitivity of the receiving environment.

5.2 Physical environment

5.2.1 Terrain The proposed development is situated on a low hill rising to a height of 109 m at the bulk water reservoir situated at the centre (Figure 7). The lowest point at 86 m is located in the south of the development area. Low-lying pans are located outside the developable area to the southwest and west. The largest of these pans is currently used by Cerebos Salt to harvest natural salts.


Figure 7. Topography of the greater study area

5.2.2 Geological setting and soil characteristics

Port Elizabeth is situated at the eastern end of the Cape Fold Belt, a wide band of folded mountains of Triassic to Jurassic age, striking east – west. The Kirkwood Formation of Upper Jurassic age underlies the northern part of the city in which the study area falls. It consists of brightly coloured terrestrial or estuarine mudstones and sandstones with bands and lenses of grit and conglomerates. Most of Motherwell is situated on the Uitenhage Group rocks. Geotechnical investigations are currently being conducted on the proposed development site by SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, which specialise in geotechnical investigations. The outcome of these studies will inform this EIA and will be attached to the final EIA when to is submitted for environmental authorisation to the DEDEA.

5.2.3 Climate The climate is mild and generally frost-free in winter. The summers can be very warm. Rainfall has a peak in autumn and spring with a maximum of not more than 500 mm (Table 3). Desiccating, stiff winds from the southeast and the southwest that blow in most months further contribute to the aridity of the area.


The weather of the NMBM area is mainly dependent on atmospheric depressions that move over the region in an easterly direction followed by anticyclones (Stone et al. 1998). In winter, the approaching depression is preceded by a coastal low-pressure system accompanied by a north-easterly wind, changing either to northerly or north-westerly berg winds. Following the low-pressure system, the westerly to south-westerly wind brings cooler weather with low cloud. As the depression passes, there is a tendency for more wind and rain to occur. Winds are often strong, sometimes giving rise to gales and rain lasting from 12 to 36 hours. In summer, the passage of coastal low pressure systems are followed by cloudy, occasionally rainy weather brought about by following cells of high pressure. Temperature inversions are commonly observed during winter mornings above the study area and have the tendency to inhibit vertical air pollution dispersion.

Table 3: Climate data for the study area.

Temperature (° C) Precipitation

Month Highest Recorded

Average Daily

Maximum

Average Daily

Minimum

Lowest Recorded

Average Monthly

(mm)

Highest 24 Hour Rainfall

(mm) January 39 25 18 10 36 68 February 38 25 18 11 40 121 March 41 25 17 8 54 224 April 39 23 14 4 58 105 May 35 22 12 2 59 76 June 32 20 9 -1 62 60 July 33 20 9 -1 47 99 August 34 20 10 2 64 77 September 39 20 11 2 62 429 October 39 21 13 3 59 46 November 36 22 15 6 49 52 December 36 24 16 9 34 95 Year 41 22 14 -1 624 429

This climatological information is the normal values and, according to World Meteorological Organization (WMO) prescripts, based on monthly averages for the 30-year period 1961 – 1990 (South African Weather Service). Winds at Port Elizabeth reflect the seasonal variation of the atmospheric circulation systems and the influence of coastal lows. Westerly to south-westerly winds are the most prevalent, but during the summer months, easterly to south-easterly winds are almost as frequent. During winter, offshore (north-westerly) winds occur more frequently than in summer. This region of the South African coast experiences strong winds and occasional gales regardless of the season. The prevailing direction of these winds is west-south-west to south-west (Figure 8). Fresh winds (of >8 m·s-1) are fairly frequent, with the highest prevalence of strong winds in September to December (Stone et al. 1998).


Figure 8: Wind rose for Port Elizabeth (from SA Wea ther Service)

5.3 Biological environment

5.3.1 Vegetation Historically the entire study area was covered with Motherwell Karroid Thicket, a mosaic type of Valley Thicket occurring in a matrix of succulent karoo. This vegetation type is characterised by asbossie (Pteronia incana) and soon after fire, rooigras (Themeda triandra). Characteristic species include local endemic succulents such as Euphorbia meloformis (Pierce 2003). It provides ideal microclimates for geophytes and succulents, many of which are rare or localised endemics such as Apodolirion macowanii, Aloe bowiea and Euphorbia meloformis. It also seems to be the favoured habitat of several tortoise species, e.g. Parrot-beak Tortoise and Angulate Tortoise (Wren et al. 2008). Motherwell Karroid Thicket is restricted to the deep, red, loamy to clayey soils of the Alexandria and Bluewater Bay formations (Pierce 2003). Originally Motherwell Karroid Thicket, mainly occurring in the Motherwell area and along the central interior of the NMBM just south of the Swartkops River. It covered 12232 ha in the metropolitan area, but by 2007 it had been reduced to 4840.4 ha giving it an ecosystem conservation status of Endangered. The development opportunities listed in Stewart et al. (2004) defines Endangered as: “Depending on


constraints (such as avoidance of spoiling scenery or wilderness, or infra-structure limitations), Class II land can withstand only negligible loss of, or disturbance to, natural areas. Within the constraints, this class may be suitable for eco-friendly activities such as sustainable game farming and responsible ecotourism (hiking trails etc). In those areas which have undergone severe impacts, this Class II land presents opportunities for IDP projects for restoration.” The Motherwell area has, however, been identified and earmarked for low-cost housing development in the SDF of the NMBM (2007), and has since been identified as one of two major housing development nodes. Implementation of all development projects identified in the NMBM SDF of 2009 – including the project dealt with in this Scoping Report – will cause a further 69.7 % loss of Motherwell Karroid Thicket. Only 1465 ha will remain thereafter, pushing this vegetation type into the Critically Endangered conservation category. Current land use practices on site include informal settlement, subsistence farming, including cattle and goat herding, and illegal dumping of household, construction and other waste. These practices have significantly altered large areas south of the Motherwell reservoir transforming dense Motherwell Karroid Thicket into open, degraded areas. Already more than half of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket in the NU31 area is highly degraded. Only 26.27 % of the natural vegetation found on site may be graded as fairly intact. This is found in the northwest of the site (Table 4).

Table 4. Status of natural vegetation on the study site

Status Area [ha]

Fairly intact 26.27

Fragmented and damaged 46.14

Fully degraded and non-restorable 75.51

Total 147.92

5.3.2 Mammals A preliminary faunal survey, including mammals of the study site, was conducted in the proposed development area by Sandula Conservation physically walking through the site. This preliminary survey was further informed by a desktop study investigating species most likely to be on site. Species identified are listed in Table 5. The Grey mongoose is a protected species.

Table 5: Mammal list for the study site

Common Name Scientific Name Striped mouse Rhabdomys pumilio House mouse Mus musculus House rat Rattus rattus Common duiker Sylvicapra grimmia* Blue duiker Cephalophus monticola* Grysbok Raphicerus melanotis* Bushbuck Tragelaphus scriptus*


Common Name Scientific Name Grey mongoose Galerella pulverulenta

* although these species are listed in this report, it is highly unlikely that they will be occur on the site as they would have moved out of the area or have been poached by the residents from the nearby settlement.

5.3.3 Avifauna A total of 82 species occur or are expected to occur in the study area. The bird list (Table 6) was compiled from information provided by the South African Bird Atlas Project and from personal knowledge of the study area. No dedicated field work was conducted. Of the birds typically associated with Motherwell Karroid Thicket only the more resilient species are still present although the numbers of individuals are reduced.

Table 6: Bird list for the study site

Bird list for the study site. Source – SANBI: South African Bird Atlas Project. 1 Black-headed Heron 42 Terrestrial Brownbul (Bulbul) 2 Cattle Egret 43 Sombre Greenbul (Bulbul) 3 Hadeda Ibis 44 Olive Thrush (pre-split) 4 Black-shouldered (Winged) Kite 45 African (Common) Stonechat 5 Steppe (Common) Buzzard 46 Cape Robin-Chat 6 Jackal Buzzard 47 Karoo Scrub-Robin 7 Peregrine Falcon (Near Threatened) 48 Chestnut-vented Tit-Babbler 8 Lanner Falcon (Near Threatened) 49 Cloud (Tink-tink) Cisticola 9 Kittlitz's Plover 50 Le Vaillant's (Tinkling) Cisticola 10 Crowned Lapwing (Plover) 51 Neddicky (Piping Cisticola) 11 Spotted Thick-knee (Dikkop) 52 Spotted Prinia (pre-split) 12 Rock (Feral) Dove (Pigeon) 53 Fiscal Flycatcher 13 Speckled (Rock) Pigeon 54 Cape Wagtail 14 Red-eyed Dove 55 African (Grassveld/Grassland) Pipit 15 Cape Turtle (Ring-necked) Dove 56 Cape (Orange-throated) Longclaw 16 Laughing (Palm) Dove 57 Common (Fiscal) Fiscal (Shrike) 17 Namaqua Dove 58 Southern Boubou 18 Klaas's Cuckoo 59 Southern Tchagra 19 Dideric (Diederik) Cuckoo 60 Bokmakierie 20 Barn Owl 61 Common (European) Starling 21 Fiery-necked Nightjar 62 Pied (African Pied) Starling 22 Common (European) Swift 63 Wattled Starling 23 African Black (Black) Swift 64 Southern Double-collared Sunbird 24 White-rumped Swift 65 Greater Double-collared Sunbird 25 Little Swift 66 Grey (Mouse-coloured) Sunbird 26 Speckled Mousebird 67 Amethyst (Black) Sunbird 27 Red-faced Mousebird 68 Cape White-eye (pre-split) 28 European Bee-eater 69 House Sparrow 29 African Hoopoe 70 Cape Sparrow 30 Rufous-naped Lark 71 Greyheaded Sparrow (pre-split) 31 Cape Clapper Lark (pre-split) 72 Spectacled Weaver 32 Red-capped Lark 73 Cape Weaver 33 Barn (European) Swallow 74 Southern Masked-Weaver 34 Greater Striped-Swallow 75 African (Blue-billed) Firefinch 35 Lesser Striped-Swallow 76 Common Waxbill 36 Black Saw-wing 77 Bronze Mannikin 37 Fork-tailed Drongo 78 Pin-tailed Whydah


Bird list for the study site. Source – SANBI: South African Bird Atlas Project. 38 Cape (Black) Crow 79 Brimstone (Bully) Canary 39 Pied Crow 80 Streaky-headed Seedeater (Canary) 40 White-necked Raven 81 Yellow-billed Kite 41 Cape Bulbul 82 Speckled Mouse bird

All of the species listed in Table 6 have a conservation status listed as Least Concern except for the Peregrine Falcon (7) and the Lanner Falcon (8) which has a Near Threatened status. These two species do not breed on site.

5.3.4 Reptiles and amphibians A preliminary survey of the reptiles and amphibians of the study site was conducted in the proposed development area by Sandula Conservation by physically walking through the site identifying species encountered (Sandula Concervation 2009). Table 7 shows a list of reptiles and amphibians that are most likely found in the area. This species list was further informed by conducting a desktop survey on potential species that may occur on the study site. The invasion of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket vegetation by human activity should have destroyed the habitat of many species.

Table 7: Reptile and amphibian list for the study s ite

Common Name Scientific Name Snakes Cape cobra Naja nivea Puffadder Bitis arietans Night adder Causes rhombeatus Rinkhals Hemachatus hemachatus Herald/Red-lipped snake Crotaphopeltis hotamboeia Olive house snake Lamprophis inornatus Brown house snake Lamprophis fuliginosus fuliginosus Spotted harlequin snake Homoroselaps lacteus Mole snake Pseudapsis cana Slugeater Duberria lutrix lutrix Crossmarked sandsnake Psammophis crucifer Cape Wolf Snake Lycophidion capense Black thread snake Leptotyphlops longicaudus Karoo whip snake Psammophis notostictus Aurora house snake Lamproophis aurora Spotted (Rhombic) skaapsteker Psammophylax rhombeatus Sunderval’s shovel snout Prosymna sundervalli Natal green snake Philothamnus ornatus Brown water snake Lycodonomorphus rufulus Rhombic egg eater Dasypeltis scabra Boomslang Dispholidus typus Cape skink Mabuya capensis Red sided skink Mabuya homalocephala Lizards/geckoes/skinks/chameleons Southern Rock Agama Agama atra Spotted thick-toed gecko Pachydactylus maculates Cape dwarf gecko Lygodactylus capensis Cape Skink Mabuya capensis Red-sided skink Mabuya homalocephala


Common Name Scientific Name Percival’s legless skink Acontias percivali Southern dwarf chameleon Bradypodion ventrale Tortoises Angulate tortoise Chersina angulata Parrot-beak tortoise Homopus areolatus Amphibians Raucous toad Bufo rangeri Leopard/Giant toad Bufo pardalis Common platanna Xenopus laevis Painted reed frog Hyperolius marmoratus Striped stream frog Strongylopus fasciatus

All the species in Table 7 above are listed as Least Concern except for the Southern Dwarf Chameleon, which is an endangered species.

5.3.5 Invertebrates A preliminary survey of the common invertabrates of the study site was conducted in the proposed development area by Sandula Conservation by physically walking through the site identifying species encountered (Sandula Concervation 2009).

Table 8. List of invertebrates found on site

Common Name Scientific Name Granulated thick-tailed scorpion Parabuthus granulatus Giant burrowing scorpion Opistophthalmus capensis Baboon spider Harpactira sp. Millipede assassin Ectrichodia crux Ant Plectroctena mandibularis Yellow mealworm Tenebrio molitor Beetle Trigonopus Black velvet cockroach Deropeltis erythrocephala Black maize beetle Heteronychus arator Cotton nest termite Microcerotermes Snouted harvester termite Trinervitermes African giant earthworm Microchaetus rappi Two-spotted cricket Gryllus bimaculatus Painted lady Cynthia cardui Superclass Mtriapoda Millipede spp. (3 species)

In terms of the Eastern Cape Nature Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974, under the definition of “wild animal”, section 25, read with section, 27(b), the above invertebrates (Table 8) are protected under the ordinance.


5.4 Heritage resources

Certain cultural and heritage resources are protected under the National Heritage Resources Act, No 25 of 1999. These may include: • Structures older than 60 years, • Archaeological and palaeontological sites and materials, • Meteorites sites, • Certain burial grounds and graves, • Sites of cultural significance, • Landscapes, • Living heritage, • Declared heritage objects, and • Declared heritage sites. No structure older than 60 years are present on the study site. The only structure on site, The Motherwell water reservoir, was constructed in 1986 and thus not considered a structure of heritage significance. Very little information is known regarding archaeological aspects of the site. The only archaeological and palentological information close to the site originates from farm 294 (Amanzi Estate) and erf 296 (Rietheuwel). The Amanzi springs site is reportedly the only Early Stone Age site in the Eastern Cape which has been excavated. This site is located approximately 9 km northwest (as the crow flies) of the study site. Sediments of the Alexandria and the Sundays River Formations present at the proposed development site are known to contain both vertebrate and invertebrate fossils. In addition to plant fossils the formation reportedly contains reptile remains, as well as fossilized invertebrate shells of freshwater, estuarine and marine origin. The Sundays River formation was deposited under shallow marine or estuarine conditions and while fossilized molluscs are common, vertebrate remains are rare in these sediments. Additional fossilized features in these rocks include ripple marks, trace fossils and bioturbation. A variety of stone implements having been reported from the surroundng area. These include Early Stone Age (E.S.A.) artefacts of 2 million to 125 000 years in age. Many of the implements collected at the Amanzi site were preserved in a well defined chronological sequence by sediments from the springs. The presence of the Amanzi springs, historically a reliable source of water at the site, may have been motivation for many prehistoric peoples to utilize the area. This suggests that the site may also have further artefacts or sites of archaeological importance, including Middle Stone Age (M.S.A.) and Late Stone Age (M.S.A.) implements and features (Wren et al. 2008) closer to the proposed development site.

5.5 Socio-economic aspects The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM) has a population of 1.1 million people in 277 000 households and covers an area of 1950 km2 (StatsSA 2008).


5.5.1 Socio-economic trends in the NMBM Decades of distorted development in the city has manifested in highly skewed distribution of income and wealth. The unemployment rate among the economically active sector of the community is approximately 38% (StatsSA 2008). The Municipality continues to provide relief to impoverished households through its Assistance to the Poor Scheme, increasing its monthly contribution from 6 kℓ of water to 8 kℓ of water and from 50 kWh of electricity to 75 kWh of electricity in 2007. Approximately 93 111 households receive free basic water, sanitation and refuse removal services, while 94 823 households receive free electricity every month (StatsSA 2008).

5.5.2 Age and gender distribution The age and gender distribution in the NMBM reflects a very youthful population, with 55% of residents falling in the age group below 30 years, with a male:female ratio of 48:52.

5.5.3 Service delivery progress The following service delivery statistics convey the current status with regard to aspects of service delivery to the 289 000 households in the NMBM. (a) Water

Altogether 93% of households have access to a basic level of water. The remaining households have access to potable water through standpipes.

(b) Sanitation To date 91% of households have access to a basic level of sanitation. The bucket system has been eliminated in all formal areas of NMBM constructed prior to 1994.

(c) Electricity Ninety eight percent of households in formally demarcated municipal residential areas have access to a basic level of electricity.

(d) Housing The municipality has constructed over 42 000 low-cost houses. The current housing backlog is approximately 80 000 units.

5.5.4 Ward 54 demographics

The proposed development is large and positioned within Ward 54 in the Motherwell area. Within this ward there are 5468 households according to the Municipal Demarcation Board ward profiles of 2006. Of these households approximately 15.5% consist of 6 people or more. The number of people with direct access to water is 10797 (98.7%) with the remaining 1.3% of residents using natural or unregistered water resources (Municipal Demarcation Board, 2006). The area is a poor, low income area with approximately 99.9% of the population earning less than R25600 per annum. Approximately 78.1% of the residents have no form of income at all. In terms of household income, 89.2% of households are living off less than R19200 per annum (Municipal Demarcation Board, 2006). The number of people with access to flushing toilets (sewer or tank) is 5030. The rest of the toilet access (439) consists of chemical toilets, pit latrines and bucket latrines. A total of 87 people in these wards have no toilet access (Municipal Demarcation Board, 2006) at the time of this census.


5.5.5 Housing in Motherwell Motherwell consists mostly of formal housing areas. The average house in Motherwell is a 40 square meter detached house on a 200 square meter plot. The residential areas all have similar appearances; there are no variation in scale, size and height. Most houses are located in small clusters along a “cul–de-sac” street or small “loop street”. Because of this the houses turn their entrances away from the main street. When the first part of the area was built, banks and building societies used to provide housing finance. This is clearly visible in Neighbourhood Unit 5 and Neighbourhood Unit 6 where the houses are of good standard. The more recently built parts are of a lower standard, so called subsidy housing, a 40 square meter house, provided by the municipality for families with a total household income below R 3500 per month. The lowest standard of living is found in the illegal shack areas, which occur on vacant land in the more recently built northern part of Motherwell. The estimated numbers of shacks in the whole of Motherwell are 2700, which is a small number compared to the number of residential in the township as a whole. The goal is to relocate people living in them to formal houses. The average density in Motherwell is approximately 19 units per hectare or 70 persons per hectare estimated for Motherwell as a whole. This is based on an estimated household size of four persons. The density is low as a result of the housing typology and large land provisions for public facilities such as school sites and public places. The low density is not sustainable to provide a critical mass, which supports public transportations, facilities and retail in Motherwell.

5.5.6 Motherwell Urban Renewal Programme Situated 18 kms outside of the City of Port Elizabeth, Motherwell was established in 1982 to accommodate people illegally occupying areas located in the flood plain in Soweto-on-Sea as well as the normal influx into the City area. Designed as a purely residential area for about 120 000 people, it now consists of a number of neighbourhood units (NUs), which house an estimated 117000 people (although local studies shows a population of close to 450 000 people). The broad objectives guiding the Motherwell Urban Renewal Programme (MURP) are poverty alleviation, human resource development, enterprise development, enhancement of capacity of local authorities, economic and social infrastructure and strengthening of crime prevention and reduction strategies and initiatives. The Motherwell Urban Renewal Programme is fully integrated into the municipality’s IDP, providing the basis for co-operation and integration in the implementation of projects. The necessary infrastructure for recreation, basic amenities, and job creation has not kept pace with the changing needs of the community and with the growth of the area. The female population is 53.1%, with an average illiteracy rate of 16% but as high as 38,6% in some areas. 6% of the population is functionally illiterate and 50.7% have no life skills. There are 8 primary schools in the area with 7100 learners and 9 High schools with 7100 learners. The NMBM provides health services through 41 fixed and 15 mobile clinics. It is estimated that, to provide an adequate service, the NMBM would have to provide 4 new clinics per annum, redistribute mobile clinics to service remote areas, and employ an additional 93 nurses. The crime rate in the area is generally also higher than that in the rest of the Metropole. The node is located in close proximity to Coega IDZ and en route to the Addo Elephant Park. Generally, the erosion of civic pride, environmental pollution, and an ineffective and poor public transport network characterizes the area. There is a lack of justice facilities; only 1


police station to service the area and traffic lawlessness is rife. Community Police Forums are established but do not function very well. Focus areas for the MURP (IDP 2008) include: (a) Improved Local Economic Development. (b) Habitable Human Settlement (i.e. infrastructure, housing, environment, etc.). (c) Improved Social Development. (d) Improved Public Participation. (e) Improved- Strategy, Programming, Project implementation and Coordination and

Service Delivery. (f) Improved Municipal Institution relating to Financial Management, Audit,

Procurement, Project Management and Integrated Planning. (g) Support to the functions of the National and Provincial Urban Renewal

Programme. To date, large strides have been made in formalising informal settlements in Motherwell since 2001, with almost a third of all houses (in excess of 10,000 units) having been constructed using subsidies. Approximately 2,500 households still live in shacks, however, and the low densities achieved in existing housing developments places a question mark over the sustainability of the area. Low developer activity has been experienced in the area, and is likely caused by a number of factors including limited amounts of reasonably priced land, high servicing and building costs, planning delays, affordability constraints and competing RDP products. Motherwell’s lack of density, combined with the fact that there are no significant transport hubs in the area means that the viability of a great deal of commercial activity is doubtful. It also explains why only a small proportion of land zoned for commercial activities has been developed, and why residents frequently prefer to shop in the Port Elizabeth CBD. These shortcomings will be addressed to some degree in the proposed NU 31 (in combination with NU 29 and NU 30) housing development.

5.5.7 Existing NMBM resettlement programme The NMBM have an existing programme that deals with the relocation of informal settlements in the metro. This programme is implemented and managed by the social development, education and administration division of the NMBM, under the leadership of senior informal housing officer, Odwa Malamlela. One of the main objectives of this division is to improve the quality of life of poor communities within the metro through relocation of such communities from health hazardous, undevelopable public open spaces and low lying areas to formal housing. A formalised approach to the relocation of informal settlers has been developed over the years and has been successfully implemented by the project team on a number of occasions. The following approach thus represents the standard programme utilised by the NMBM for relocating communities located in areas unsuitable for housing. Prior to relocations the informal housing official will check if the service provider has the following documentation for staff and vehicles: • Current Road Transportation Licenses, • Certificate of Fitness, • Vehicle / Driver Permits, • Traffic Ordinance, and • Roadworthy Condition. The informal housing official will liaise with the Social Development, Education and Administration (SDEA) office to arrange service providers that will be used during


relocation well in advance. The informal housing official will obtain lists of families to be relocated from the Ward Councillor’s office. This information will be communicated with the Informal Settlements Task Committees (ISTC). The informal housing official will then visit and clearly identify the households that need to be relocated. The informal housing official will also ensure that all documentation to be utilised during relocations is in order and that all parties are available to sign all documentation concerned. The informal housing official will be in constant communication with the affected households while preparing them for relocation timeously. There will a series of consultation and confirmation meetings to ensure that the identified households are ready for relocation.

On the relocation day a service provider will provide a truck, driver and assistants to speedily load and transport the household’s belongings to the allotted house. The informal housing official will show the truck driver which household to load at the departure point. All necessary documentation will be signed on site or at the ward councillor’s office. Arrangements will be made should there be further relocations to be done during weekends and public holidays. An Informal Housing Official shall be available at the destination point so as to allocate the correct erven to the relocated household. In the event of unfavourable weather conditions, relocations will be rescheduled. With the assistance of the disaster management office, weather forecast will be determined before the day of relocation by the informal housing official. After the successful relocation, the informal housing official will submit all documentation to the SDEA office to be checked. Once these are checked payment certificates will be prepared by the designated official.


6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The EIA Regulations specify that a public participation process must be conducted as an integral part of the EIA. This chapter outlines the public participation process followed.

6.1 Identification of Interested and Affected Parti es

Section 56 (6) of the EIA Regulations stipulates that the EAP conducting the public participation process must ensure that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the application is made available to potential interested and affected parties (I&APs), and that participation by I&APs is facilitated in such a manner that all are provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the application in question. The regulations thus imply that all I&APs and organs of state must be successfully identified before notification of the proposed development can commence. A steering committee consisting of key stakeholders from the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, consulting engineers (GOBA), and sub-consultants drives the development and implementation of the project, while ensuring compliance to environmental, socio-economic and heritage resource regulations. The EAP (Arcus Gibb) also attends the steering committee meetings but remains an independent entity. During monthly steering committee meetings information regarding the engineering, social and environmental aspects of the project is discussed. The members of the steering committee are included in Appendix D. Organs of state were identified on the basis that they may have jurisdiction over one or more aspects of the proposed development. These are listed in (Table 9). Table 9: Organs of state notified during the EIA.

Authority Contact person

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Housing and Land Directorate

S. Potgieter, Assistant Director of Land Planning and Management

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Directorate of Environmental Health J. Mkosana, Director

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Infrastructure and Engineering Directorate Khaya Mconi

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Social Development, Education & Administration Directorate

Odwa Malamlela

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Water Division Stan Groenewald Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs Andries Struwig

SAHRA – East London T. Lungile, Provincial manager

SAHRA – Cape Town Dr. Antonieta Jerardino, Archaeological Heritage Impact Assessor

SAHRA – Cape Town Colette Scheermeyer


Authority Contact person SAHRA – Cape Town Phillip Hine EC Provincial Department of Housing and Safety and Liaison S. Gcora

NMBM Ward Councillors (23, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 and 60)

T. Barnes; L. Mlomo; L. Matebese; N. Magopeni; F. Desi; N. Jantjies; F. Frans; S. Mnyaka

Direct neighbours located within 100 m from the boundary of the proposed development (Table 10) were identified from property ownership records sourced from the NMBM.

Table 10. Directly affected neighbours within 100 m of the proposed development

Direct neighbour Contact person Contact details Method of notification

Nu-Way Housing Developments (Pty) Ltd on Coegas Kop no. 316 to the north

Mr. Jordan Mann

011 789 334, 082 775 0580 [email protected]

BID per email

National Salt Ltd (Cerebos) on Farm 434 Uitenhage in the west and in the south

Mr. Patrick Hill 041 403 6700 [email protected]

Hand delivered BID, meeting at Cerebos offices, Hougham Park

The remaining adjacent properties are owned by the applicant (NMBM). A small group of people are residing on cleared ground at the centre of the site near the Motherwell water reservoir (Figure 9). Several shacks, outbuildings and animal kraals have been established. Although these persons occupy the land without the express or tacit consent of the land owner they are probably protected from eviction in terms of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997, as they resident on the land for more than a year. Due to their presence they are a key affected party. This group of people was notified of the proposed development though verbal communication via the ward councillor’s office and through verbal communication with the EAPs. These I&APs were consulted on two separate focus group meeting held on the 14 May 2009 and 19 June 2009 at the area of interest near the Motherwell reservoir (Figure 9) in order to capture their comments and concerns.


Figure 9. Images showing the informal houses and li vestock enclosures.

Members of the general public with an interest in the proposed development were identified through the notification process (background information document, newspaper advertisements and on-site poster), where they were invited to register as Interested and Affected Parties by returning their comments or concerns together with full contact details including name, affiliation, address, contact numbers and email address. A comments page was included in the BID where I&APs could state their contact details and provide comments regarding the proposed development. A list of registered I&APs are provided in Appendix D.

6.2 Notification of Interested and Affected Parties

Section 56 of the EIA Regulations outlines the requirements for the notification of all potential interested and affected parties. These requirements typically include the following: • Fixing a notice board at a conspicuous place on site. • Giving written notice to:

– the landowners and occupiers of the sites and those within 100 m of the alternative sites or those directly influenced by the activity under consideration;

– the municipal councillor of the affected ward(s);


– the municipality which has jurisdiction in the area; and – any organ of state having jurisdiction in respect of any aspect of the activity.

• Placing an advertisement in a newspaper.

6.2.1 Notice board The EIA Regulations stipulate that a notice board detailing the proposed activity as well as the contact details of the EAP is placed on all alternative sites, if there are any. The notice board was put up on 3 April 2009 at the corner of the MR460 and Tyrina Street (Figure 10), which is at the junction of two major transport axes. Furthermore, the location serves as an informal taxi-rank where many of the residents of Motherwell NU 29, NU 30 and NU 12 are picked up or dropped off and can read the notice in full view. An A3 copy of the original A1 poster notification can be viewed in Appendix C.

6.2.2 Notification of landowners and authorities The adjacent landowners were notified of the proposed development by means of personal visits. Organs of state were notified by sending the Background Information Document via electronic mail coupled with a request to raise any issues that they may have.

6.2.3 Notification of informal settlers near the Mo therwell reservoir. Owners of the informal dwellings located just south of the Motherwell reservoirs were informed through background information documents handed to them personally by the EAPs on 14 and 22 May 2009 (See Appendix G). The proposed Motherwell housing development and how it would impact the informal dwellers were explained to them and they were given the opportunity to raise their concerns or deliver comment. Their comments were captured and were included in the issues and response report.

6.2.4 Background information Document (BID) At commencement of the EIA (February 2009), a Background Information Document (BID) was prepared that provided a summary of the details of the proposed project as well as the EIA process that was to follow (See Appendix C). The BID was distributed by email, fax and in hard copy to all relevant stakeholders on the 4th May 2009. The BID was written in English only.


Figure 10. Location of the public notice at the cor ner of the MR460 and Tyinira Street.

6.2.5 Newspaper advertising

Advertisements were placed in English only in two newspapers informing I&APs that the EIA process for the Motherwell housing development was occurring and therefore called for registration of all I&APs. The advertisement appeared in the following local newspapers:

• The Herald (1 April 2009); and • Port Elizabeth Express (8 April 2009)

Refer to Appendix C for copies of the advertisements.

6.3 Public meetings

A public meeting was held on the 19 June 2009 during the scoping phase of the EIA process. The attendance of this meeting by the residents was very low due to time constraints. The report on this meeting together with a register of the residents who attended can be found in Appendix G_4. A second public meeting will be arranged to which the ward councillors of Ward 54 and 56 will also be invited to attend.

6.4 Focus group meetings

The EAP met with the Councillors Forum on the 5th May 2009. Mr F. Frans, the secretary of this forum chaired this meeting. The attendance register for this meeting can be found in Appendix G. The purpose of the meeting was to brief the councillors


on the background of this housing project, describe the EIA process to be followed by the EAP and to get their feedback on the matter. A second focus group meeting between the the EAPs and the subsistence farmers at the Motherwell water reservoir were held on 19 June 2009 (See Appendix G). Further information was required by these I&APs. It was decided that a minuted meeting should be held with representatives from the relevant departments of the NMBM, whereafter another focus group meeting will be held during the scoping phase with the subsistence farmers to inform them of the outcome of the meeting with the representatives of the NMBM. In addition to the above mentioned focus group meetings, email correspondence and telephonic discussions have been held with I&APs regarding the need for the development, likes and dislikes and the status of the project.

6.5 Register of I&APs

A register of Interested and Affected Parties detailing all contact information has been maintained and updated throughout this project. Refer to Appendix D for a copy of the register. As at May 2009, the total number of people registered on the I&AP Register amounts to 56.

6.6 Comments register

No written comments, concerns and issues raised by I&APs and key stakeholders were received in hard copy and thus a register could not be compiled. However, the comments received during the Public Participation Process were recorded under Section 7.2 below.

6.7 Comments and response report

All I&AP comments has been grouped into relevant issues, concerns and queries regarding the proposed development. A response to each comment has been provided by ARCUS GIBB. A consolidation of the key issues and responses is given in Section 7.2. A comprehensive Issues and response trail will be produced once comments and issues originating from the public review process have been received.


7 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND IMPACTS I DENTIFIED

7.1 Identification of key environmental issues

An environmental issue is defined as “a generally expressed concern or impact” raised in an EIA process. Scoping is the process whereby potential issues that may affect the biological, cultural and socio-economic environment are identified and investigated by a competent assessor with regards to a proposed activity. An important element of Scoping is to evaluate the issues that were raised during the public participation and technical processes and ensure that those identified as key issues are assessed within the scope of the EIA process. All environmental issues raised during the Scoping phase of the proposed development are summarised in Section 7.2. The Issues Trail categorises the issues and avoids any duplication. A tabulated summary is provided in Table 11.

7.2 Issues raised by the I&APs and responses by EAP

Direct neighbours and residents of the informal settlement situated on the study site are primarily concerned about the issues affecting them directly and not particularly the vegetation and environment around them. Issues raised pertain to:

7.2.1 Lack of water for farming practises Their concerns include the lack of reliable water sources to sustain the farming activities. Currently occupants make use of water from the reservoir or leaking water pipes near the entrance when the NMBM does not deliver water to them on time. The water is then collected in canisters and stored on the property for use throughout the day. The water collected is untreated (Figure 11) and is therefore a health risk, but it was said that there is no other option. EAP response: The Social development, Education and Administration division of the NMBM has been informed of the discontent of the subsistence farmers at the proposed site. Further consultation with the relevant departments of the NMBM is envisaged during the public review period culminating in a public meeting towards the end of the public review period where affected farmers, current and previous ward councillors, the EAP and representatives from the metro will discuss the raised issues and plot a way forward. All parties will be informed of the details of the public meeting well in advance.


Figure 11. A couple of residents collecting water.

7.2.2 Fears that subsistence farmers will be forced to find alternate means to support themselves

Residents are concerned that the new development would not relate to their current way of living. As they are urban subsistence farmers, an example can be found by the space needed for the kraals they require when transporting animals. It became obvious that change would be needed from their side which is a situation they do not entertain positively. EAP response: It is a requirement of the EIA that a clear way forward must be reached ensuring that all parties’ rights have not been violated before the EIA is submitted to the DEDEA for environmental authorisation.

7.2.3 Unwilling to move to an unsuitable farming lo cation The residents also queried whether they would have to move again and where they would be moved to. Some mentioned that this was only a temporary space that the NMBM has provided to them until a suitable place has been found. The residents and workers do not object to moving, as long as they can continue their farming activities where there is enough water and as long as it is a permanent settlement. EAP response: Awaiting response from the NMBM.

7.2.4 Impediment of livestock movement During the second focus group meeting it was noted that trenches had been dug for pipes coming from the Motherwell water reservoir. The quandary was that the trenches were dug directly in front of the entrances to the farms. This makes it impossible for livestock to move on and off the farms. It is also a hindrance for the farmers themselves to get onto their farming area to feed their animals. EAP response: The affected farmers are encouraged to approach the contractor or designing engineers of the construction works to provide access for livestock. These


works are not related to the proposed Motherwell NU31 development as no environmental authorisation has been granted for the proposed development.

7.2.5 Lack of communication They feel that there is a lack of communication between all the parties involved. The information they are receiving is in bits and pieces and makes it very difficult to understand. Surveyors have already approached the small community with questions but gave very information themselves. Apparently a representative from the council, known only as Kujela, has formulated a list of all the persons living and working on the land including the animals that are being farmed there. However, there is no contact number for this person. Those present agreed that another meeting should be scheduled at a later date so that more people could attend. It was also stated that the ward councillors of Wards 56 and 54, Mr Desi and Mr Madlazu respectively, should attend this meeting together with a representative from the NMBM and Arcus Gibb. The meeting can be held in the NU 13 Community Hall. With such a meeting all the facts may be set out and would allow them to ask appropriate questions and allow the municipality to make the necessary decisions. It was requested however that they get informed about the meeting at least a week before the time so as to invite as many farmers of that area as possible. EAP response: The EAP will encourage communication between the NMBM, councillors and the affected subsistence farmers during the public participation period. However, the EAP cannot act as a liaison between the different parties. Channels of communication will be established leading up to and at the public meeting reserved towards the end of the public review period.

7.2.6 Vandalism and theft at the Motherwell reservo ir Currently, vandalism and theft is occurring at the Motherwell reservoir. Vandalism and theft of the fencing and wire mesh and water theft is the main issues. Water valves are being broken allowing water to form shallow ponds. This serves as watering point for cattle and goats grazing around the water reservoir. The key stakeholder (Water Division: NMBM) feels that this behaviour is likely to continue once the NU 31 development has been completed. EAP response: Vandalism and theft in the area is an ongoing issue. The development layout design does reserve space for community amenities. The EAP thus suggest that, as a minimum, a satellite police station be included in the new development to efficiently serve NU 31, as well as NU 29 and NU 30.

7.2.7 Stormwater related issues Three very preliminary alternatives were introduced to Cerebos in order to deal with stormwater runoff draining westward towards their salt works in Motherwell. The three preliminary options include formalisation of the existing natural ponds next to the salt works, construction of a pond and stormwater canal to intercept runoff and discharge into the Swartkops Estuary, and, thirdly, a land exchange option suggesting an exchange of a section of the NMBM land for a section of Cerebos land further south which can be successfully drained of stormwater. The minutes of the meeting between the EAP and Cerebos is included in Appendix F. Cerebos is not in favour of the pond formalisation, but will consider relinquishing the ponds if the the NMBM constructs a new pond elsewhere close to the salt works. Cerebos is further not in favour of the stormwater canal past the salt work and is


concerned that pollution entrained in the stormwater will affect the water quality of the seawater extracted by the salt works plant. This has finaicial and quality implications for Cerebos. Lastly, Cerebos is not in favour of the land exchange alternative, but is willing to sell a section of their land at a market related price to the NMBM. EAP response: The detailed stormwater investigation and design by the designing engineers is not yet available. Further comprehensive engagement with Cerebos is planned once this information becomes available. This is expected during the EIA phase of the project. (a) Safety and security Cerebos is concerned that the general safety and security will be compromised if the Motherwell NU 31 development is implemented as proposed. Cerebos predicts that the development will lead to further informal extension of Motherwell NU 31 westward. This potential extension may result in safety and security issues, including related issues such as trespassing, vandalism and grazing of livestock on Cerebos land. EAP response: The development layout design does reserve space for community amenities. The EAP thus suggest that, as a minimum, a satellite police station be included in the new development to efficiently serve NU 31, as well as NU 29 and NU 30.

7.3 Potential environmental issues identified by th e EAP

Environmental impacts are defined as “the positive or negative effects on human well-being and/or on the environment, DEAT (2004).” With regards to the Housing Development, three phases to the project are recognised when environmental impacts can occur: Planning Phase, Construction Phase and the Operational Phase. Impacts can have a direct and indirect or a cumulative effect. Several negative and positive impacts have been identified by the EAP during the assessment of the proposed development. These are listed below.

7.3.1 Removal of vegetation More than half of an existing patch of disturbed, semi-intact Motherwell Karroid Thicket will be removed by the proposed NU 31 development. The eastern half of the existing patch of Motherwell Karroid Thicket has already been removed during the site preparation for the construction of the NU 29 housing infrastructure. Potential impacts associated with vegetation include: (a) Loss of ecological function of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket. The extent if such a

function still occurs will only be measured in the EIA phase of the project, (b) Loss of local fauna and flora biodiversity within the Motherwell Karroid Thicket, (c) Loss of refugia and micro-habitat for local fauna and birds, (d) Loss of species of special ecological or conservation concern, (e) Possible establishment and spread of alien species in disturbed areas. (f) Loss of soil moisture content and dust pollution A positive impact that could occur during the clearing and construction phase is the eradication of invasive alien species within the planned public open space areas.


7.3.2 Stormwater management Stormwater management in the Motherwell NU 31 development area will be very challenging in all respects. The largest part of the development area is very flat making the natural gravity feed of stormwater into new infrastructure very difficult. Clearing of the natural vegetation will furthermore increase the stormwater runoff to lower lying areas substantially. Potential impacts that may be associated with stormwater management in the development area include: (a) Increased quantities of stormwater runoff reaching the Cerebos Salt Works plant, (b) Pollution of the surface waters through decreased surface water quality in the

development area, (c) Pollution of the Swartkops estuary if the stormwater is channelled to the estuary, (d) Erosion of disturbed areas occurring where stormwater follows the natural

drainage lines, especially in the western region of the development area.

7.3.3 Loss of topsoil The loss of topsoil is of major concern within the Motherwell area. The topsoil contains the seed bank for all existing species, including dormant species, within the Motherwell Karroid Thicket. Although rehabilitation of thicket is very difficult or even thought to be impossible, some degree of rehabilitation of thicket with the return of a number of species has been found in heavily fragmented and transformed thicket patches. The seed bank furthermore contains the correct soil mixtures and all the required nutrients and minerals needed for post construction rehabilitation and landscaping of the development area. Potential impacts may include: (a) Loss of seed bank causing potential local extinction of species of special

concern, especially of dormant species, (b) Failed or expensive post construction rehabilitation, (c) Sedimentation of the Cerebos Salt Works and/or the Swartkops estuary in the

worst case scenario.

7.3.4 Pollution of the environment and health risks to humans Pollution of the environment is always a major concern in any development and may occur at any or all stages of a development. Pollutants can be in liquid or solid form and could originate from construction material such as cement, stormwater carrying pollutant residues from hardened surfaces, or from day to day household refuse that is dumped illegally. The contamination of the environment with raw sewage and household refuse has been an ongoing issue in informal settlements along the Swartkops Estuary and Motherwell in recent times. The potential of sewage to contaminate the surrounding environment is good even though erven in the proposed development will be serviced. Potential impacts may include: (a) Pollution of water resources due to ineffective sewage, waste and hazardous

material management during the construction and operational phases, (b) Illegal dumping of household refuse in the nearby area, (c) Unacceptable health risks to residents and communities exposed to pollutants

such as raw sewage, (d) Odour, (e) Visual impact, (f) Decrease in ecosystem resilience, stability and biodiversity, (g) Decreased ecosystem functionality and benefits derived from ecosystem

services, (h) Increased incidences of aids related deaths due to exposure to disease-causing

agents and poor health conditions.


7.3.5 Illegal hunting, snaring and plant collection Illegal hunting, poaching and plant collection may become a serious issue especially in the Motherwell area. The communities living in the Motherwell area are generally poor and are thus dependant to some degree on the natural resources in their area of residence. Several traditional healers may be or will become active in the area collecting medicinal plants. The Swartkops estuary serves as an important source of natural resources for poor communities around the estuary. Establishing new communities in Motherwell from far off places in the NMBM will increase the impact on natural resources even further. Impacts may thus include: (a) Illegal hunting and snaring of animals in adjacent vegetation, (b) Tree and plant collection for medicinal purposes and fire wood, (c) Edge effect causing fragmentation and transformation of vegetation (cumulative), (d) Impact on the fish and invertebrate resources of the Swartkops estuary causing

changes in fish and invertebrate community structures.

7.3.6 Jobs and economic investment The development of communities in Motherwell NU 31 with a strong sense of self-sustainability will no doubt create sustainable employment opportunities in the long term. The establishment of prominent business corridors and sites have been identified to aid this vision. During the short term, local construction workers with the necessary skills can find employment with construction companies building the housing and support infrastructure. Long term employment opportunities will come from the business zones within the NU 31 development. The impacts will thus mainly be positive and will include: (a) Employment opportunities for local unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled labour

during the construction phase, (b) Business opportunities for service providers, goods merchants and entrepreneurs

to establish themselves, as well as employment for local residents in this business sector,

(c) Increased economic benefits and growth on a local and provincial scale, (d) Poverty alleviation, (e) Establishment of functional community units creating a sense of place and pride

for residents (cumulative).

7.3.7 Service infrastructure and availability Poor service delivery has been a burning issue for impoverished local citizens at grass roots in recent times. Central to the issue of service delivery is the lack of proper maintenance of service infrastructure, and community education and awareness promoting sustainable and responsible use and the impacts and consequences of the abuse of services. Further, acquiring services such as electricity through illegal means is a common phenomenon in informal settlements. With the establishment of formal housing and infrastructure, many of the beneficiaries will be expected to forthwith pay for services such as electricity through the installation of electricity meters in each home. Impacts may thus include: (a) Provision of services and improved service delivery and meeting service delivery

targets set for the NMBM (Positive), (b) Increased incidences of acquiring of services such as electricity by illegal means, (c) Increased incidences of injury and death as a result of tampering with service

infrastructure, (d) Continued strike action in protest of poor service delivery, (e) Illegal dumping of household and construction waste.


7.3.8 Fire risks

During a large multifaceted project such as the Motherwell NU 31 development, several contractors may work in different areas at the same time. This makes the management of the construction site by the project manager and ECO very difficult. Open fires such as those that are made by construction workers for cooking may cause bush fires. This in combination with windy conditions has the potential to cause runaway fires. Impacts may include: (a) Damage to infrastructure and vegetation, (b) Injury to or death of workers or animals.

7.3.9 Dust

The clearing of vegetation and general construction activities on the proposed site during the construction phase will cause dust pollution. Coupled with strong winds the dust pollution may detrimentally affect the surrounding environment. Impacts may include: (a) Settling of dust on the adjacent Cerebos salt ponds, (b) Settling of dust on nearby thicket vegetation, thereby potentially decreasing

photosynthetic and carbon sequestering efficiency, (c) Dust pollution nuisance experienced by construction staff and nearby residents.

7.3.10 Noise Operating construction plant and equipment during the construction phase may cause noise pollution in the immediate vicinity of the development. Impacts may include: (a) Noise pollution nuisance during work or after hours experienced by nearby

residents, (b) Impact on construction staff’s ability to hear if construction plant or equipment is

not in good working order.

7.3.11 Trenching and fencing Trenching and fencing and constructing stormwater canals to carry stormwater peaks could potentially trap fauna, especially reptiles and amphibians on site or in stormwater canals during the construction and operational phase. Impacts may include: (a) Trapping of fauna in canals and trenches (b) Injury to construction staff sustained from dangerous reptiles such as snakes.

7.3.12 Aesthetics of the development Unpleasant visual impact due to dirty and unmanaged construction site is a possibility. Without proper SHEQ management construction sites are often left in a bad state with building rubble scattered all over the site. This is dangerous and could cause serious injury to humans and animals. The visual appearance of an area also influences human sense of place. An untidy neighbourhood could lead to a general sense of apathy towards their surroundings. (a) Unpleasant visual impacts associated with an unmanaged construction site, (b) Lack of sense of place and belonging.

7.3.13 Increased traffic volumes The construction of the north-south main arterial dissecting NU 31, and the NU29/NU30 development will add to the traffic volumes experienced along the


MR460 during the construction and operational phase of the proposed development. The need for traffic calming measures will have to be assessed as several connections to the MR460 is envisaged from the NU 31 development, as well as from NU 29 and NU 30. Impacts include: (a) Traffic congestion, (b) Speeding along the north-south arterial and MR460, (c) Increased risk of motorist accidents and harm to pedestrians, (d) Growth in small business potential along the arterial routes (Positive).

7.3.14 Heritage impacts The intactness of a large section of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket within the development area and the close proximity of the proposed development to the ocean makes the area prone to intact archaeological and palaeontological fossils. The likelihood is further substantiated by the presence of an important archaeological find approximately 9 km northwest of the proposed development site, which is reported to be the only Early Stone Age site that has been excavated in the Eastern Cape. Potential impacts thus include: (a) Loss of important archaeological or palaeontological fossils within the

development area, (b) Discovery of important archaeological or palaeontological fossils within the

development area.

7.3.15 Crime Crime has always been associated with poverty and it is one of the main consequences thereof. Implementation of the proposed development will increase incidences of crime within the new development, in the adjacent developments of NU 29, NU 30 and NU 12, and as far as the Swartkops and Blue Water Bay communities. Possible impacts include: (a) Increased incidences of crime committed in the proposed development, as well

as the existing adjacent communities, (b) Trauma and increasing feelings of despondency by newly settled residents, (c) Breakdown of healthy community relations and the emergence of feelings of

community rejection.

7.3.16 Political instability The potential for political instability may exist in that beneficiaries from many wards across the metro are relocated to one neighbourhood unit. These beneficiaries are likely to have different political affiliations and are now expected to co-exist with strangers that don’t share the same political affiliation. This is especially prevalent in light of unsubstantiated claims by some communities of intimidation by supporters of some political parties. Impacts may thus include: (a) Violence among residents within the newly established community due to

differing political views.


Table 11. Issues and potential impacts associated w ith the proposed development. C = Construction phas e, O = operational phase.

Issue Potential impact Phase Nature of impact Direction of impact (+)/(-

)

Habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat C Direct -

Loss of diversity C Direct -

Loss of SSC causing local extinction C Direct -

Alien plant invasion O Indirect, cumulative -

Soil compaction C, O Indirect -

Loss of indigenous vegetation

Loss of soil moisture content and dust pollution C, O Direct -

Erosion C, O Direct, cumulative -

Sediment deposition C, O Direct, cumulative -

Litter pollution (solids) C, O Direct, cumulative -

Mineral and organic pollution (dissolved) C, O Dire ct, cumulative -

Loss of top soil C, (O) Cumulative -

Stormwater runoff management

Impacts on the Swartkops estuary O Direct, indirect , cumulative

-

Surface and groundwater contamination (C), O Direct , cumulative - Liquid waste management (sewage)

Health risk C, O Indirect -



)

Odour C, O Direct -

Visual impact C, O Direct - Solid waste management (dumping of waste and littering)

Health and environmental risk C, O Direct -

Illegal hunting, snaring or trapping Loss of divers ity, local extinctions C, O Direct -

Unpleasant visual impact C Direct -

Noise C Direct -

Dust C Direct -

Disruption of services C Direct -

Construction activities

Safety C Direct -

Damage to infrastructure and vegetation C, O Indire ct - Fire

Injury or death to humans and animals C, O Indirect -

Trapping of fauna in canals and trenches C, O Direc t, cumulative - Trenching and fencing

Injury risk to humans due to dangerous reptiles, e. g. snakes

C, O Indirect -

Traffic congestion C, O Direct, Indirect -

Speeding O Indirect -

Traffic

Increased risk of motorist accidents and harm C, O Direct, Indirect -



)

to pedestrians

Growth in business potential along arterial routes

O Indirect +

Loss of important archaeological /palaeontological fossils

C Direct - Heritage

Discovery of important archaeological /palaeontological fossils

C Direct +

Provision of houses O Direct +

Provision of infrastructure and services O Direct +

Employment opportunities O Indirect +

Social stability O Indirect, cumulative +

Social upliftment

Alleviation of crime O Indirect +

Tampering with or acquiring services by illegal means

O Indirect -

Illegal dumping of household and construction waste

O Indirect -

Increased incidences of crime in development and adjacent area

O Indirect, cumulative -

Crime

Despondency felt by newly settled residents O Indir ect, cumulative -



)

Political instability Violence and intimidation in development and adjacent areas

O Indirect, cumulative -


8 PLAN OF STUDY FOR THE EIA

8.1 Introduction

This Plan of Study for the EIA details the proposed approach to the EIA Phase of the study. The aim of the EIA Phase is to address the significant issues highlighted in the Scoping Phase through specialist investigation and detailed impact assessment. The objectives of the EIA Phase are to: • Address all issued raised during the Scoping Phase; • Assess layout and design alternatives in order to minimise potential impacts; • Assess alternatives to the proposed activity in a comparative manner; • Assess, rate and mitigate all identified potential impacts and determine the

significance of each impact; and • Document findings in an Environmental Impact Report in order to inform the

authorities with regard to issuing an environmental authorisation. Public Participation is an essential part of the EIA process. The POS outlines the second round of public consultation which will inform registered interested and affected parties of the outcome of the Scoping Phase, the outcome of the specialist studies and impact assessment, the availability of the environmental impact report (EIR) for comment, and whether environmental authorisation has been granted by the competent authority. During the EIA Phase, public participation is conducted in accordance with the plan of study for EIA as opposed to the minimum requirements set out in the regulations. After the different aspects of the assessment have been undertaken, including any specialist studies and specialised processes, an EIA report is compiled, which must contain at least the information listed in the Regulations, including a draft environmental management plan.

8.2 Proposed process for the EIA phase

Key tasks associated with the EIA Phase include: • Reviewing the Scoping and Plan of Study for EIA approval and subsequent

consultation with DEDEA; • Appointment of specialists; • Continued public participation; • Conducting specialist investigations on all the significant issues raised during the

Scoping Phase; • Review of specialist reports by the EAP; • Undertaking a detailed impact assessment process, assessing alternatives, and

listing potential mitigation measures; • Documenting the findings of the Impact Assessment into an Environmental

Impact Report (EIR); and • Compiling a framework Environmental Management Plan. Figure 12 illustrates the proposed process for the Assessment Phase.


Acceptance of Scoping and Plan of Study for EIA by DEDEA

Advise I&APs of Authority acceptance

Appointment of Specialists

Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and EMP

Appeal (if necessary)

Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)

DEDEA Environmental Authorization

Minister’s Decision Approve project Amend project Reject project

FEIR for I&AP Viewing

I&APs notified of DEIR I&AP comments (30 days)

END OF EIA

Specialist Studies and Reports

Screening/ Mapping & Identification of Red Flag areas

Engineers provide detailed plans and designs

Specialists undertake detailed assessment of development

I&APs notified of Environmental Authorisation

Open House Day (Public)

Specialist S

creening S

pecialist Assessm

ent E

IR R

eporting

Collection of comments

Collection of comments

Stage Task Public Input

Figure 12. Proposed process for the Assessment Phas e


8.3 Environmental assessment report and EMP

The results of the specialist studies and impacts assessment will be summarised and integrated into the Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report. That methodology utilised for the identification and ranking of impacts is outlined in detail in Section 8.5 below. Once completed, the Draft EIA will be released for a 30 day I&AP and authority review period. All registered I&APs will be notified in writing of the release of the Draft EIA for review. It is proposed that during this period a public meeting is held as well as focus group meetings with key I&APs, given sufficient interest in the project. The purpose of these meetings will be to provide an overview of the outcome and recommendations from the specialist assessments as well as provide opportunity for comment. Comments raised, through written correspondence (emails, comments forms) and at meetings held (public meetings and focus group meetings) will be captured for inclusion in a Comments and Responses Trail for inclusion in the Final EIA. Comments raised will be responded to by the EAP, applicant and/or relevant specialist which will indicate how the issue raised is dealt with in the EIA or in the EMP. Should the comment received fall beyond the scope of this EIA clear reasoning will be provided. Further, all comments received will be attached as an appendix to the Final EIA. The Draft EIA will include a draft EMP which will be prepared in compliance with the relevant regulations. Actions in the EMP will be drawn primarily from the management actions in the specialist studies for the construction and operational phases of the project.

8.4 Public Participation Process

The public participation process that was followed during the Scoping Phase is outlined in chapter six. Public participation will continue throughout the EIA Phase of the project. The following will be undertaken as per the EIA regulations G.N. 385:

8.4.1 Informing I&APs of the acceptance of the Scop ing Report and commencement of EIA phase After submission of the Final Scoping Report and Plan of Study to the DEDEA, all registered I&APs will be informed of the acceptance of the FSR and POS. This is followed by commencement of the identified specialist studies and environmental impact assessment process. Throughout the EIA Phase the register of I&APs will be maintained and updated as new I&APs register as interested or affected parties. The Comments Register will be updated as comments and concerns are received from the I&APs.

8.4.2 Notifying I&APs of the availability of the dr aft Environmental Impact Report; and All I&APs will be notified of the availability of the draft EIR and EMP. Organs of state, authority stakeholders and I&APs will be given 30 days to review and deliver comment on the draft EIR. The following notification process will be followed as part of the PPP in order to facilitate access to information and receive comments on the draft EIR and EMP: (a) All registered I&APs on the project database will be notified in writing of the release of the draft EIR and EMP for public review, where and how long it will be available for review and the exact deadline date any comments must be received by


the EAP. An executive summary of the Draft EIA and comment form will be included with this notification. (b) Advertisements will be placed in one local and one regional newspaper. (c) A copy of the draft EIA will be made available at the office of the councillor (ward 54), the closest library to the proposed development, at key organs of state, and the offices of the EAP, for public review. (d) The report will further be placed on the project website: http://projects.gibb.co.za, (e) Focus Group Meetings with key I&APs will continue to be held during the 30 day public review period. It is further proposed that meetings are held with the following key I&APs during the public review period: • the NMBM Environmental Sub Directorate and • councillor for the area and ward committee representatives. Notes from the focus

group meetings will be included as an appendix to the Final EIA Report as well as be included in the comments and responses trail.

(f) A public meeting is not planned during the EIA Phase, but may be held should requests for such be received. (g) Authority Consultation – key affected organs of state will be consulted and their input will be included in the Final EIA.

8.4.3 Comments and Response Trail An integral part of the EIA process is to document and respond to all comments and concerns received during the public participation process and EIR review period. All comments received will be categorised and summarised into a Comments and Response Trail. The Comments and Response Trail will further indicate the nature of the comment, when the comment was made and who made it. All comments will be considered by the EAPs and appropriate responses provided by the EAP or specialist. The EAP’s responses will indicate how the comment received has been considered in the Final EIA, in the project design or EMP for the project. The Comments and response Trail will accompany the draft EIR report during the review period.

8.4.4 Compilation of final EIR and submission to th e Competent Authority

The final EIR is compiled for submission to the competent authority once the draft EIR review period has expired and all comments captured, assess and responded to. The final EIR will be distributed to the client, key organs of state, and will be placed on the project website, http://projects.gibb.co.za. All registered I&APs will be notified in writing of the submission of the final EIR to the competent authority.

8.4.5 Notifying I&APs of the Environmental Authoris ation.

All I&APs on the project database will be notified in writing of the issuing of the Environmental Authorisation and commencement of the Appeal period. This notification will include the locations where the Record of Decision may be viewed and the procedures on how to lodge an appeal. Copies of the Record of Decision will be available for viewing at the following locations: (a) A copy of the draft EIA will be made available at the office of the councillor (ward 54), the closest library to the proposed development, at key organs of state, and the offices of the EAP, (b) The report will further be placed on the project website: http://projects.gibb.co.za. All registered I&APs will be notified in writing of the outcome of the appeal period.


8.5 Specialist studies

8.5.1 Introduction

This chapter defines the terms of reference for the required specialist studies. The specialist studies themselves may be refined in scope through public comment and as per DEDEA recommendation. All studies should firmly demonstrate ways to ensure that the proponent will comply with the following National Environmental Management Principles (Section 2, NEMA), which inter alia dictate that environmental management should: • Avoid, minimise or remedy disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity; • Avoid degradation of the environment; • Avoid jeopardising ecosystem integrity; • Pursue the best practicable environmental option by means of integrated

environmental management; • Protect the environment as the people’s common heritage; • Control and minimise environmental damage; and • Pay specific attention to management and planning procedures pertaining to

sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems. These principles serve as guidelines for all decision-making that may affect the environment. As such, it is incumbent upon the proponent to show how proposed activities would comply with these principles and thereby contribute towards the achievement of sustainable development as defined by NEMA, as amended. As a rough guide, the specialist studies will cover the area south of the MR460 (north) from the Cerebos Salt works boundary in the west and south-west to the boundary of Motherwell NU 29 and 30 in the east. However, the specialist may redefine the spatial scope of their assessments using their own professional judgement.

8.5.2 Assessment procedure for specialists The specialist studies and report structure shall be based on the assessment guidelines outlined below. (a) Approach to the study The specialist must provide an outline of the approach used in the study, as well as the assumptions made and sources of information and literature consulted. (b) Description of the affected environment The specialist must provide a description of the affected environment. The specialist must further assess the transformation and/or fragmentation of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket present on the study site. Species of special conservation concern must be identified and mitigation measures proposed to prevent local or regional extinction. (c) Impact identification and assessment The specialist must identify and assess all potential impacts the identified preferred project activity and its proposed alternatives may have on the vegetation type or species present on the proposed development area. The specialist shall furthermore identify any adverse environmental impacts (‘Red flags’) which cannot be mitigated or


which will prevent environmental authorisation of the project. Specialists shall assess and rate all identified impacts in terms of the criteria presented in section 8.5.4 below. (d) Recommended mitigation measures The specialist is required to recommend mitigation measures or management actions that will minimise or eliminate negative environmental impacts and enhance positive environmental impacts and project benefits. The specialist is further required to recommend a monitoring and review programme which can track the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. (e) Environmental acceptability of identified alternatives The specialist is required to provide comment on the environmental acceptability of each of the identified alternatives, relative to the focus of the specialist investigation. (f) Report The specialist is required to produce a report highlighting the findings of the specialist investigations, impact ratings and recommended mitigation measures.

8.5.3 Criteria used to determine the significance r atings Impacts should be assessed in terms of the criteria presented in Table 12.

Table 12. Criteria used to determine the significan ce ratings

Criteria Description

Spatial extent The extent of impact describes the region in which the impact will be experienced: • Site specific • Local (< 2km from site) • Regional (within 30km of the site) • National

Intensity or Magnitude of impact

The intensity describes the magnitude or size of the impact: • High: Natural and/or social functions and/or processes are severely altered • Medium: Natural and/or social functions and/or processes are notably altered • Low: Natural and/or social functions and/or processes are negligibly altered

Duration The duration is the time frame in which the impact will be experienced: • Temporary (<1 year) • Short term (1 to 6 years) • Medium term (6 to 15 years) • Long term (15 to 30 years) • Permanent

Probability The probability of the impact occurring: • Improbable (little or no chance of occurring) • Probable (< 50% chance of occurring) • Highly probable (50% - 90% chance of occurring) • Definite (>90% chance of occurring)

The impacts should be assessed (rated) in terms of their significance (high, medium, low), status and confidence through a synthesis of the criteria in Table 12. The rating system is outlined in Table 13 below.


Table 13. Method for rating impacts

Class Description Significance • High: impacts of high magnitude locally for longer than 6 years and/or regionally

and beyond. The impact results in major alterations to the environment even if effective mitigation measures are implemented and will have an influence on decision-making.

• Medium: impacts of moderate magnitude locally to regionally in the short term. The impact results in medium alterations to the environment and can be reduced or eliminated by the implementation of effective mitigation measures.

• Low to very low: impacts will be localised and temporary. Impacts result in minor alterations to the environment and can easily be alleviated by the implementation of effective mitigation measures.

• No impact: a potential concern or impact, which, upon evaluation, is found to have no significant impact at all.

Status The status is the overall effect on the environment: • Positive - a 'benefit' • Negative - a 'cost' • Neutral

Confidence The degree of confidence in predictions based on available information and specialist knowledge: • Low • Medium • High

Impacts should be assessed both with and without suggested mitigation measures and presented in the format prescribed by way of example in Table 14. Suggested mitigation measures may be included in bullet form in the impact ratings table. Impacts will be evaluated for the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the development. Further, the impact evaluation will, where possible, take into consideration the cumulative effects associated with this and other facilities/projects which are either developed or in the process of being developed in the local area.

Table 14. Example of impacts and mitigation ratings table for the direct impacts during the construction phase.

Construction Phase Direct Impacts Impact and Mitigation Extent Duration Intensity Probability Significance

without mitigation

Significance assuming mitigation

Status

Confi-dence

Impact: Loss of habitat Mitigation: Only footprints required for infrastructure should be disturbed.

Site specific

Moderate Long term

Highly probable

Medium Medium - High

Impact: Mitigation:

Construction Phase Indirect Impacts Impact: Mitigation:

8.5.4 Identified specialist studies, Specialists an d Terms of Reference Following the key issues that emerged through the scoping process, the following specialist studies have been identified as necessary in the Assessment Phase:


(a) Vegetation specialist study Karroid Motherwell Thicket covers the entire developable area within the proposed development area. It is a mosaic type of Valley Thicket occurring in a matrix of succulent karoo. As a result Motherwell Karroid Thicket is considered a more fragmented and transformed form of traditional Valley Thicket. Ecosystem and/or ecological functions traditionally associated with intact thicket vegetation are expected to be diminished to some degree or perceivably absent in some areas. Ecological goods and services derived from Motherwell Karroid Thicket are also expected to be diminished. This is largely the result of the Motherwell area being identified in the SDF of the NMBM for housing development. The north-west portion of Motherwell has been earmarked for low-cost housing development (SDF 2007) in order to help address the housing backlog currently experienced in the metro. Commencement of new low-cost housing developments along the eastern boundary of the proposed development area have already been granted authorisation early in 2009 and will remove a noteworthy portion of Motherwell Karroid Thicket considered to be fairly intact condition. Specific conditions that should be assessed by the specialist include: • The review of existing applicable studies and literature; • Review of the Scoping report containing the details of the proposed activity and

identified impacts; • Assess the overall sensitivity of the vegetation at the proposed development site

using the above criteria, including notes on relative conservation and ecological importance of the vegetation communities, presence of indigenous species of special concern (SSC’s) and extent of invasion, as well as the degree to which successful rehabilitation can take place;

• A review of the potential ecosystem and/or ecological function of the remaining Motherwell Karroid Thicket, with notes on any potential ecosystem goods and services that may be derived from it;

• Identification, reporting and mapping of conservation significant, rare or endangered vegetation or species of special concern that may occur within the study site;

• Assessment and description of the potential impact that the new development may have on the vegetation on the fringe of the study site, e.g. fragmentation of the thicket and “edge” effect;

• Compile a list of plant species occurring on the proposed development site, including both declared Alien Invasive Plant species (according to the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act 43 of 1983 (CARA) and the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Regulations) and protected plant species (according to the National Forests Act 84 of 1998 (NFA) and the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance;

• Identification of any plant species of cultural or historical significance within the study site, e.g. species that may be collected by herbalists;

• A basic Revegetation, Rehabilitation and Landscaping plan should be compiled commenting on the most environmentally suitable species and approach to landscape the open space system included in the development plans;

• Identification and description of any further impacts not identified during the scoping phase; and

• Development of mitigation measures for inclusion into an Environmental Management Plan (EMP).


(b) Socio-economic impact study The site inspection and Public Participation Process highlighted the existence of a group of subsistence farmers occupying the land immediately south of the Motherwell reservoir. It emerged that the NMBM have previously moved these subsistence farmers from elsewhere in the metro where development were to take place to their current location. Local government officials allegedly instructed the farmers to locate a suitable farm and willing seller which the NMBM would then acquire to allow these farmers to continue their practices. Since, a suitable farm and willing buyer have been identified by the group of farmers. This was communicated to the local authority, however the farmers claim no further action has been taken by the local authority regarding the situation. It was concluded that although these farmers are willing to move, they don’t want to move to an unsuitable location or where they cannot continue their farming practices. The NMBM have indicated that the services of a social and housing specialist will be contracted to assess and manage all social and housing aspects associated with the proposed development. The EAP proposes to engage with this specialist to ensure that the issues that arose during the PPP is included in the specialist’s scope and addressed in the investigations. If this is the case, the terms of reference developed by Arcus Gibb will form part of those deceloped by the NMBM for the social and housing specialist. Specific conditions that should be assessed by the specialist include: • Profile the proposed development from a social and economic perspective to

inform the impact assessments; • Investigate the claims of the subsistence farmers and other affected parties

regarding the conditions upon which the subsistence farmers were allowed to occupy the land;

• Identify the key social and economic issues in the local community which could be affected or influenced by the project;

• Perform social and economic impact assessments, for each of the proposed alternatives, according to the prescribed methodology

• Formulate management guidelines and a monitoring framework, incorporating mitigation strategies to reduce the potential negative social impacts of the development and interventions to maximize the potential positive impacts;

• Engage actively with other specialists, particularly where spheres of influence may overlap;

• Assess and quantify the economic spins off associated with the project, direct and indirect;

• Estimate direct and indirect job creation; • The identification of affected parties on site and the development of a

Resettlement Policy Framework. (c) Palaeontological, Archaeological and Heritage impact study Certain cultural and heritage resources are protected under the National Heritage Resources Act, No 25 of 1999. These may include structures older than 60 years, archaeological and palaeontological sites and materials, meteorites, certain burial grounds and graves, sites of cultural significance, landscapes, living heritage, declared heritage objects, and declared heritage sites. The only archaeological and palaeontological information close to the proposed site originates from farm 294 (Amanzi Estate) and erf 296 (Rietheuwel). The Amanzi springs site is reportedly the only Early Stone Age site in the Eastern Cape which has


been excavated. This site is located approximately 9 km northwest (as the crow flies) of the study site. Sediments of the Alexandria and the Sundays River Formations present at the proposed development site are known to contain both vertebrate and invertebrate fossils. In addition to plant fossils the formation reportedly contains reptile remains, as well as fossilized invertebrate shells of freshwater, estuarine and marine origin. The Sundays River formation was deposited under shallow marine or estuarine conditions and while fossilized molluscs are common, vertebrate remains are rare in these sediments. Additional fossilized features in these rocks include ripple marks, trace fossils and bioturbation. A variety of stone implements having been reported from the surrounding area. These include Early Stone Age (E.S.A.) artefacts of 2 million to 125 000 years in age. In terms of section 38 of the act this development requires a heritage impact assessment. Specific conditions that should be assessed by the specialist include: • Review the Final Scoping Report to determine the issues and concerns that are

relevant to the study; • Review and provide a short summation of the existing records, studies and data

on the historical, cultural and archaeological context of the study area and surrounds;

• Identify and map potential heritage and archaeological resources on the proposed site, and immediate surrounding area;

• Determine the importance of the heritage and archaeological resources, in terms of the broader heritage context;

• Survey the area to find as many visible archaeological sites and historical features as possible.

• All sites, features and material will be recorded by GPS coordinates and plotted. • Site, features, material and general environment will be photographically

recorded. • Make appropriate management or mitigation recommendations in order to

address the impacts identified. • The significance of the above impacts and benefits must be assessed using the

methodology prescribed by Arcus Gibb (See Section 8.5 of this chapter)

8.5.5 Further specialist input This section refers to specialist studies and assessments that will be commissioned by the project managers in order to inform all aspects of the proposed development and the EIA. These investigations will be conducted by independent parties or specialists sub-contracted by the NMBM. Copies of these specialist reports will be included in the final EIA to be submitted to the DEDEA. Further specialist investigations include: (a) Specialist geotechnical investigation Specialist geothechnical investigations are being conducted by SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists for the proposed study area, NU 31, including NU 12, NU 29 and NU 30. (b) Traffic impact assessment (TIA) The provision of an effective public transport hub is an important aspect of the success of the proposed development. This includes the development and


construction of a major north-south arterial road as well as internal roads that will service the housing units in Motherwell NU 31 and surrounding areas. The TIA will advise on road and lane configurations and inform the greater development and EIA. (c) Social and housing specialist/consultant The NMBM proposes to appoint a social and housing specialist to manage all social and housing related aspects of the proposed development. Duties of the specialist must include assessment of the social impacts of the proposed development on the subsistence farmers and other affected parties, ensuring equitable allocation of houses to recipients, efficient movement of recipients to their allocated houses and clear and transparent communication and cooperation with the responsible sub directorates of the NMBM, amongst others.

8.6 Programme for EIA Phase

Specialists will be appointed depending on DEDEA’s requirements in response to this Scoping Report. The following programme (Table 15) is proposed but depends on DEDEA’s decision regarding the final Scoping Report and Plan of Study for EIA.

Table 15. Proposed programme for Assessment Phase.

Activity Time frame

Reviewing the Scoping and Plan of Study for EIA approval and subsequent consultation with DEDEA.

45 days

Finalising ToR and appointment of specialists 1 week

Continued public participation Throughout the EIA

process (+/- 5 months)

Conducting specialist investigations on the issues raised in the Scoping Process 3 months

Production and review of specialist reports, including specialist coordination workshop 1 month

Undertaking a detailed impact assessment process, assessing alternatives, and listing potential mitigation measures 2 weeks

Draft EIR 2 weeks

I&AP review of the Draft EIR 1 month

Compilation of Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) 3 weeks

Compilation of Draft Construction Environmental Management Plan. 2 weeks

Authority decision making period and appeals As per regulations


9 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Motherwell NU 31 housing development requires a full Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment as stipulated in the National Environmental Management Act, No 107 of 1998 and relevant amendments. This EIA process is being managed by Arcus Gibb Engineering and Science on behalf of the proponent. The EIA process is divided into two phases – the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phase. The key objectives of the Scoping Phase are to describe the proposed project, undertake a public participation process and record issues and concerns raised by I&APs. This Final Scoping Report provides a description of the outcomes of the Scoping phase. The study site is entirely located in Motherwell Karroid Thicket . A large portion of the Thicket is transformed with a section north of the Motherwell reservoir being largely intact. The development will remove most of the Motherwell Karroid Thicket. A Public Participation Process was conducted informing all authority stakeholders and any interested and affected parties of the proposed development. Key stakeholders identified included representatives of the Motherwell reservoir (NMBM), subsistence farmers located south of the Motherwell reservoir, and Cerebos salt works located directly south west of the proposed development. These key stakeholders were consulted in person to gauge their comments and concerns. Little response was forthcoming from the general public. Potential impacts identified during the scoping phase include: • Removal of vegetation • Stormwater management • Loss of topsoil • Pollution to the environment and health risks to humans • Illegal hunting, snaring and plant collection • Jobs and economic investment • Service infrastructure and availability • Fire risks • Dust • Noise • Trenching and fencing • Aesthetics of the development • Increased traffic volumes • Crime • Political instability Based on the issues identified during the scoping phase the following specialist studies are recommended to address the main issues identified: (a) Vegetation specialist study (b) Social and cultural impact study (if the project leader don’t commission a social and housing specialist) (c) Heritage impact study An independent traffic impact assessment (TIA) study is to be commissioned by the project leaders to inform the EIA. A social and housing specialist is expected to be contracted to assess and manage all social and housing aspects. Furthermore, specialist stormwater design investigations will be conducted by the designing


engineers in the impact assessment phase to define and mitigate identified stormwater concerns. Way Forward – The EIA Phase The Scoping process is the first phase of the EIA process and defines the scope of investigations for the larger EIA phase. The EIA phase will include the following: 1. The Public Participation Process initiated in the Scoping Phase will continue in the EIA Phase. Once again, the PPP will provide a forum within which all I&APs have the right to voice their concerns and issues regarding the project. 2. Specialist will need to provide a detailed and thorough examination of key issues and environmental impacts. Specialists will gather relevant data to identify and assess environmental impacts that might occur on the specific component of the environment that they are studying (e.g. vegetation, water quality, and pollution). 3. The EIA will assess the significance of impacts based on specialist input. The significance will include the spatial and temporal scale, the likelihood of the impact occurring and the severity of impacts or potential benefits. 4. The EIA will provide practical and reasonable mitigation measures and recommendations. These recommendations will establish the needed actions that are needed in order to avoid, minimise or offset any negative impacts from the development. 5. The EIA will actively engage and contribute to the planning process so as to mitigate environmental impacts through improved design and layout. 6. An EIR will be produced in order to provide a synthesis of the environmental setting, the nature of the project and specialist studies. The overall objective of the EIR is to provide the approving authorities with sufficient information regarding the project and its associated environmental and social impacts to make an informed decision and set conditions of approval. 7. An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will be produced and provide a set of practical and actionable mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken into account during implementation and operation to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels. A critical outcome of the EIA process will be the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the Environmental Management Plan. These reports will be released for public comment before it being finalised and presented to the relevant authorities. Once the environmental authorisation is issued by the relevant authority the decision will be advertised and registered I&APs informed in writing.


10 REFERENCES Municipal Demarcation Board, 2006. http://www.demarcation.org.za. Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality. 2008. Integrated Development Plan (IDP). Pierce, S.M. 2003. The STEP Handbook. Integrating the natural environment into land use decisions at the Municipal level: towards sustainable development. Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit Report No. 47, University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Sandula Concervation. 2009. Fauna survey for the Motherwell Area. Unpublished short report, Arcus Gibb Consulting Engineers, Port Elizabeth. South African Weather Service. 2008. Available at: http://www.weathersa.co.za Stewart W.I., Cowling, R.M., Martin, A.P, du Preez, D.R. & Lombard, A.T. 2005. A Biodiversity Conservation Assessment and Framework for an Open Space System Plan for the Nelson Mandela Metropole, Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Technical Report. A report of the C.A.P.E. Project for the Table Mountain Fund (WWF-SA) April 2005. Stewart W.I & van Gend, R. 2008. Strategic Environmental Assessment of the NMBM Draft Spatial Development Framework. SRK Consulting. Stone, A.W., Weaver, A.V.B. & West, W.O. 1998. Climate and weather. In: Lubke, R. & De Moor, I. (eds.) Field guide to the eastern and southern Cape coasts. University of Cape Town Press. pp 41-49. Statistics South Africa. 2008. Community Survey 2007: Statistical Release Basic Results Municipalities. Statistical release P0301.1. Available at http://www.statssa.gov.za. Wren S, Steyn PP, Lochner P, 2008: Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Amanzi Country Estate, Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (ECm1/387/M/07-134) Final Scoping Report.

environmental impact assessment for the proposed ...projects.gibb.co.za/portals/3/projects/200906...

Documents