Appendix C.1: Public Participation Report - SAHRIS | SAHRA...Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017 10 Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017

Appendix C.1: Public Participation Report

PENHILL GREENFIELDS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Public Participation Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction 1

2 I&AP Database 1

3 Pre-application Phase consultation 6

3.1 Site Notices 7

3.2 Newspaper adverts 8

3.3 Background Information Document (BID) 25

4 Scoping Phase consultation 26

5 Comments and responses 26

6 Way Forward 66

Related Appendices

Appendix C.2: I&AP Notification

Appendix C.3: Pre-Application Meetings

Appendix C.4: Background Information Document

Appendix C.5: Proof of Delivery (to be populated for FSR)

Appendix C.6: Comments and Responses

Figures

Figure 1: English advert 7

Figure 2: Afrikaans advert 8

Figure 3: English Advert in the Cape Times on 29 March 2017 9

Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017 10

Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017 11

Figure 6: Afrikaans Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017 12

Tables

Table 1: I&AP Database 2

Table 2: Pre-application consultation activities 6

Table 3: Details of site notices 13

Table 4: Scoping Phase PPP summary 26

Table 5: List of I&AP submissions 27

Table 6: Comments and responses 29

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 1

1 Introduction

The proposed Penhill Greenfields Development is located on the eastern boundary of the City of Cape

Town, within the urban edge, east of the urban nodes of Blackheath and Eersterivier. The proposed

Penhill Greenfields Development requires environmental authorisation in terms of the National

Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA). The 2014 Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) Regulations pursuant to NEMA (General Notice (GN) R982) require that an EIA

process, consisting of a Scoping Report and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), be submitted to the

provincial Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) for environmental

authorisation. In order to provide a transparent and meaningful process, this EIA process must include

a Public Participation Process (PPP).

This PPP must be undertaken in accordance with regulations 39 – 44 of the EIA Regulations. Additional

guidance has been incorporated from the DEA&DP Guideline Document on Public Participation (March

2013) and the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) Public Participation guideline in terms of

NEMA (2017).

This Public Participation Report (PPR) has therefore been compiled to collectively represent the

consultation process that has been undertaken through the PPP. The following sections include:

Section 2: A database of interested and affected parties (I&APs) was created in the pre-application

phase of the proposed greenfields development. This database will be updated and maintained

throughout the EIA process.

Section 3: The consultation that was undertaken during the pre-application phase of the proposed

Penhill Greenfields development has been described. Proof of advertisements and site notices are

included in the report.

Section 4: The consultation that will be undertaken during the scoping phase is described.

Section 5: Comments and responses have been summarised into a table in this section. All original

comments and responses are attached as an appendix in the Scoping Report.

Section 6: The way forward has been identified in this section.

2 I&AP Database

During the pre-application phase, affected parties were identified, including: landowners, adjacent

landowners, national, provincial and municipal authorities, as well as other key stakeholders. Additional

interested parties have been identified through the preliminary notification processes (Section 3) and

have been added to the database.

Table 1 summarises the I&AP database for the project. Please note that contact details have been

omitted for privacy reasons.


Table 1: I&AP Database

Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response

Competent Authority

Alvan Gabriel

Western Cape Government, DEA&DP

Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017

Taryn Dreyer Email, 28/03/2017

Melanese Schippers Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017

Andre Oosthizen Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017

National authorities

Warren Dreyer National Dept of Water and Sanitation Meeting, 09/05/2017

Shaddai Daniel National Dept. of Water and Sanitation

Meeting, 09/05/2017

Puseletso Loselo National Dept. of Water and Sanitation

Email, 28/03/2017

John Roberts National Dept. of Water and Sanitation

Email, 28/03/2017

Lameez Salim National Dept. of Water and Sanitation

Email, 28/03/2017

Jenifer Mirembe National Dept. of Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017

Mbulelo Tshangana National Dept. of Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017

MM Mlengana National Dept. of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Email, 28/03/2017

Joe Kgobokoe National Dept. of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries: Policy, Planning and Monitoring and Evaluation

Email, 28/03/2017 (c/o [email protected])

Tommie Bolton National Dept. of Rural Development and Land Reform

Email, 28/03/2017

Provincial authorities (Western Cape Government)

Ronald Mukanya DEA&DP, Director: Sustainability Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 07/03/2017

Cor Van der Walt Dept. of Agriculture, Land Use Management

Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 26/04/2017

Andre Roux Dept. of Agriculture, Director: Sustainable Resource Manager

Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 26/04/2017

Danie Niemand Dept. of Agriculture, Director: Farm Worker Development

Email, 28/03/2017

Solly Fourie Dept. of Economic Development and Tourism

Email, 28/03/2017

Martie Carstens Dept. of Economic Development and Tourism

Email, 28/03/2017

Jacqui Gooch Dept. of Transport and Public Works Email, 28/03/2017

Robert Macdonald Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017

Annemie Van Reenen

Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017

Heinrich Magerman Dept. of Provincial Local Government Email, 28/03/2017

Caesar Sauls Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017

Gideon Morris Dept. of Community Safety Email, 28/03/2017

Douw Steyn Dept. of Community Safety Email, 28/03/2017

Municipal (City of Cape Town)

Achmat Ebrahim City Manager Email, 28/03/2017

Rayan Rughubar Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017

Alexander Forbes Environmental Resource Management Branch

Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 19/04/2017

Letter, 19/05/2017



Lewine Walters Environmental Resource Management Branch, Biodiversity Management Branch

- Meeting, 19/04/2017

Dilshard Modak Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017

Marco Geretto Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 29/03/2017

Charles Rudman Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017

Nigel Titus Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 03/04/2017

Cheryl Walters Planning and Building Development Management Dept.

Email, 28/03/2017

Rustim Keraan Solid Waste Management Dept. Email, 28/03/2017

Melissa Whitehead Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Authority

Email, 28/03/2017

Sean Glass Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Authority (Manager: Network Facilitation & Development)

Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/03/2017 (to be removed)

Bill Jones Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Authority

Email, 28/03/2017

Nuran Nordien Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Authority: Transport Impact Assessment & Development Control

Email, 28/03/2017 (Via Sean Glass)

Peter Flower Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017 Letter, 19/05/2017

Shamile Manie Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 19/05/2017 Email via SMEC, 21/09/2017

Jaco de Bruyn Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017

Wayne Davids Roads and Stormwater Email, 28/03/2017

Konanani Phadziri Recreation and Parks Email, 28/03/2017

Franz von Moltke Roads and Stormwater Email, 28/03/2017

Roelof Mare Ward 14 Email, 28/03/2017

Ernest Sonnenberg Subcouncil 22 Email, 28/03/2017

Chantal Cerfontein Subcouncil 22 Email, 28/03/2017

Gerrie Hattingh City of Cape Town - Email, 03/04/2017

Mervyn August Sustainable Urban Development - Email, 04/04/2017

Jens Kuhn Human Settlements Land and Planning

- Email, 04/04/2017

Elize Joubert Heritage Professional Reg by Alex Forbes

Kevin Balfour Water and Sanitation Dept: Bulk Water

- Email via SMEC, 26/09/2017

Landowners

WCG: Dept. of Human Settlements (site and access road)

R/E 3/410, R/E 8/410, R/E 5/468, R/E 25/468, R/E 26/468, R/E 31/468, 32/468, 35/468, R/E 36/468, R/E 42/468, 30/410, 31/410, 31/468, 1/644, RE/ 644

Email, 28/03/2017

Western Cape Government (sewer pipeline)

1/644, RE/644 Identified post pre-application PPP

Bluegum Grove Trust: Danie Carinus & Johan Carinus

(bulk water pipeline and reservoir)

6/468, 7/468 Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/04/2017

Meeting, 13/07/17



City of Cape Town (bulk water pipelines)

16/468, 57/468 Identified post pre-application PPP

City of Cape Town (Eskom servitude)

RE/22/410 The CoCT is a partner in the project and has been notified through various divisions (see above officials at CoCT)

City of Cape Town (bulk sewer pipeline)

17/468, 61/468, RE/18/468

City of Cape Town (stormwater ponds)

111/468, 112/468, 113/468 & 114/368

City of Cape Town (access road)

30/410, 31/410, 29/410, RE/22/410

Ferguson Lynda Anne Family (bulk sewer pipeline)

RE/116 Identified post pre-application PPP

Tuscan Mood 158 Pty (Ltd) (bulk sewer pipeline)

15/653 Identified post pre-application PPP

Transnet (bulk sewer pipeline)

637 Identified post pre-application PPP

Street Parcel / Servitude areas (bulk sewer pipeline)

60/468, 62/468, 65/468, 6788 Identified post pre-application PPP

Adjacent landowners

Danie Carinus & Johan Carinus

No farm name 6/468 & 7/468 Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/04/2017

Meeting, 13/07/17

Willem Dumas No farm name RE/1540 Email, 28/03/2017

Villiers Carinus No farm name 76/468 Email, 28/03/2017

Christiaan Prins Blackheath Siding RE/12/416 Email, 28/03/2017

City of Cape Town Jacobsdal RE/22/410; 15/468; 16/468; 17/468; 65/468; 114/468; 113/468; 112/468; and 111/468

The CoCT is a partner in the project and has been notified through various divisions (see above officials at CoCT)

Various private and public landowners including residential, open space, community, public road, public parking, general business, and agricultural land us

(Sewer pipeline adjacent landowners)

17/468; 31/468; RE/18/468; Erf 1; 637; 6787; 6788; 1080; 3; RE/644; 1/644; RE/634; 953; 7098; 64; RE/645; 953; 14/653; 15/653; RE/116; 647; 5541; 1082; 6093; 3884; 5763; 3913; 6270; 6271; 6272; 393; 4182; 4183; 4184; 4185; 5574; 3780; 3781; 3782; 3783; 3784; 3785; 3786; 3793; 3794; 3795; 3796; 3797; 3768; 5561; 5560; 1055; 1054; 1053; 1052; 1051; 1050; 1049; 1048; 1047; 1021; 1020; 272; 271; 269; 268; 267; 266; 265; 264; 614; 613; 259; 258; 257; 256; 1982; 1981; 1980; 1946; 1906; 1945; 1905; 1904; 6161; 2002; 170; 173; 7076; 171; 3042; 3041; 3040; 3039; 3038; 6158; 5861; 155; 314; 313; 312; 311; 310; 309; 308; 307; 306; 305; 304; 303; 302; 301; 300; 1318; 372; 371; 370; 369; 368; 367; 366; 365; 364; 17/468; 362; 361; 360; 359; 357; 72/468; 10/468; 63/468; 1/468; 61/468; RE/18/468; RE/18/468; 1170; 1080; 2; 16; 15; 14; 17; 32; 31; 30; 34; 35; 36;

Identified post pre-application PPP



59; 58; 65; 66; 67; 597; 1/644; RE/644; 3786; 3793; 3794; 3795; 3796; 3797; 3768; 3767; 3766; 3765; 3764; 3763; 3762; 3761; 3754; 3753; 1107; 1108; 1109; 1110; 1111; 1112; 1113; 7105; 7106; 7107; 7108; 7109; 7110; 7111; 7112; 7113; RE/647; RE/643; RE/953; 1082; RE/125; 8821; 5541; 14/653; and RE/653

Key stakeholders

John Geeringh Eskom Email, 28/03/2017

Henk Landman Eskom Email, 28/03/2017

Justine Wyngaardt Eskom Email, 28/03/2017

Lungile Motsisi Eskom - Post, 04/05/2017

Barbara van Geems Eskom Email, 28/04/2017

Shaun Swanepoel Eskom - Post, 13/04/2017

Rhett Smart CapeNature Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 18/04/2017

Email, 11/05/2017

Andrew September Heritage Western Cape Email, 28/03/2017

SAPS Kleinvlei Email, 28/03/2017

Other identified and / or registered parties

Gavin Gossman Penhill Resident Email, 29/03/2017 Email, 16/03/2017

Ivan Cloete AFASA Western Cape Email, 29/03/2017 Email, 16/03/2017

Morgan Griffiths WESSA Email, 28/03/2017

Brendan van der Merwe

Blackheath City Improvement District Email, 28/03/2017

The Secretary Saxenburg Park 2 Ratepayers Email, 28/03/2017

The Secretary Rustdal Ratepayers Email, 28/03/2017

The Secretary Stellenbosch Ratepayers Association Email, 28/03/2017

Percy Knight Power Constructions Referred from Alex Davids (below)

Alex Davids Power Group

Notified via newspaper / site notices / word of mouth / manual delivery of BID

Email, 30/03/2017

Abubaker Francis Private farmer Email, 30/03/2017

Trevor Lodewyk iThemba Farmers Association Email, 31/03/2017

Paul Clarke Penhill Home Owners And Residents Association

Email &Telephone, 03/05/2017

Wallace Maritz Penhill Estate Post, 20/04/2017

Malcom Loggenstein

AFASA Western Cape Email, 29/04/2017

Thaakirah Marcus University of Western Cape Email, 02/05/2017

Johan Carinus Bluegum Grove Trust Email, 28/04/2017

Jacqueline Cox Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017

Craig Jonkers Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017

Rose Pedo Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017

Dieter Heinze Preem Brokerage Email, 03/05/2017

Cheran Young Penhill Home Owners and Residents Association

Email, 03/05/2017

Maria Katsoulis Penhill Home Owners and Residents Association

Email, 04/05/2017



Kirk Young Penhill Home Owners and Residents Association

Email, 05/05/2017

Jacqui Farr Penhill Resident Email, 05/05/2017

Shaney-Lee Philander

None provided Identified post pre-application PPP

Email, 24/07/2017

Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident Identified post pre-application PPP

Email, 12/07/2017 & 09/10/2017

3 Pre-application Phase consultation

During the pre-application phase, the following PPP activities were undertaken (refer to Table 2).

Table 2: Pre-application consultation activities

Task Description Date

I&AP

identification

An I&AP database was developed for the project by

establishing the jurisdiction of organisations in respect of the

project as well as those living or working in proximity to the

project. The database of I&APs includes the landowner, the

adjacent landowners, the local municipal officials, relevant

national and regional government officials, and organisations

in the area.

February 2017 -

ongoing

Pre-application

meeting with

DEA&DP

A pre-application meeting was held with DEA&DP to inform

DEA&DP of the proposed project and to request input on the

Listed Activities to be applied for, the specialist studies to be

conducted and other procedural matters.

28 February 2017

Placement of site

notices

Site notices were put up to inform the general public of the

proposed projects and the public participation process. These

were placed onsite, Welmoed Cemetery Boundary, Blue

Downs Shoprite Checkers, Kleinvlei Secondary School, Melton train station/taxi rank, Kleinvlei South African Police

Service (SAPS), Melton Rose Library, Kleinvlei Community

Health Care Centre,

RR Franks Primary School, Dennemere Primary School,

Blackheath Nativity Church, Blackheath Primary School and

Blackheath Secondary School.

29 March 2017

Newspaper

advertisement

Adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and

Tygerburger on 29 March 2017.

29 March 2017

Circulation of BID Emailed to identified I&APs and sent to I&APs that registered.

Dropped off by hand to a representative farmer on the site as

well as with the iThemba Farmers.

28 March - 4 May

2017

Meeting with key

authorities National Department of Water and Sanitation

Western Cape Government, Department of Agriculture

CoCT, Environmental Resource Management Department

CapeNature

April – May 2017


3.1 Site Notices

Site notices in English and Afrikaans were fixed at various locations to inform the general public of the

proposed project and the public participation process. The content of the site notice is included in

English and Afrikaans below (refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2). This is followed by details and proof of

placement of the site notices in Table 3. The combined English and Afrikaans notice met the

requirements of the relevant DEA&DP Guidelines in terms of size and content.

Figure 1: English advert


Figure 2: Afrikaans advert

3.2 Newspaper adverts

Adverts were published in two provincial newspapers, The Cape Times in English and Die Burger in

Afrikaans; as well as a local newspaper, the Tygerburger in English and Afrikaans, on 29 March 2017.

The content of the adverts was the same as the site notices (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Proof of advert

placement is included in Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6.

.


Figure 3: English Advert in the Cape Times on 29 March 2017


Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017


Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017


Figure 6: Afrikaans Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017


Table 3: Details of site notices

Notice site: Farm Jacobsdal Boundary

Size: 2 x A2

Coordinates: 33° 58’ 37.84’’ S 18° 42’ 49.10’’ E


Notice site: Welmoed Cemetery Boundary

Size: 2 x A2

Coordinates: 33° 57’ 44.23’’ S 18° 42’ 3.19’’ E


Notice site: Shoprite Checkers

Size: 2 x A4

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 8.65’’ S 18° 41’ 18.69’’ E


Notice site: Kleinvlei Secondary School

Size: 2 x A4

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 15.12’’ S 18° 42’ 44.75’’ E


Notice site: Melton train station/taxi rank

Size: 2 X A3

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 20.85’’ S 18° 43’ 13.34’’ E


Notice site: Kleinvlei SAPS

Size: 2 X A4

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 20.85’’ S 18° 43’ 13.37’’ E


Notice site: Melton Rose Library

Size: 2 X A4

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 15.49’’ S 18° 43’ 00.57’’ E


Notice site: Kleinvlei Community Health Care Centre

Size: 2 X A4

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 14.06’’ S 18° 43’ 03.43’’ E


Notice site: RR Franks Primary School

Size: 2 X A3

Coordinates: 33° 59’ 3.76’’ S 18° 42’ 39.96’’ E


Notice site: Dennemere Primary School

Size: 2 X A3

Coordinates: 33° 58’ 44.44’’ S 18° 42’ 16.15’’ E


Notice site: Blackheath Nativity Church

Size: 2 X A4

Coordinates: 33° 58’ 29.32’’ S 18° 42’ 29.08’’ E


Notice site: Blackheath Primary School

Size: 2 X A3

Coordinates: 33° 58’ 41.43’’ S 18° 41’ 57.35’’ E


3.3 Background Information Document (BID)

A BID was compiled to notify potential stakeholders of the proponent’s intended activities, provide

information on the proposed project, set out the EIA process and inform stakeholders how they can

participate in the project. The BID was written in simple English, Afrikaans and IsiXhosa and was

distributed to identified stakeholders during the pre-application phase. Stakeholders who registered

during the lifecycle of the EIA process will be sent the BID to provide the basic information of the project.

The English BID is been included as Appendix C4 to the Scoping Report.

Notice site: Blackheath Secondary School

Size: 2 X A3

Coordinates: 33° 58’ 59.91’’ S 18° 42’ 15.50’’ E


4 Scoping Phase consultation

The PPP during the scoping phase has been summarised as follows:

Table 4: Scoping Phase PPP summary

Task Description Date

Written notification Registered I&APs as well as non-registered organs of state

are emailed the notification letter including a Non-Technical

Summary. The letter provides details of the process,

availability of the documentation for comment, as well as

timeframes for comment between 17 January 2018 and 18

February 2018.

17 January

2018

Libraries Hard copies of the Scoping Report were deposited in the

Melton Rose and Eerste River public libraries.

17 January

2018

Website The Scoping Report is available on the Aurecon website:

http://www.aurecongroup.co.za/en/public-

participation.aspx

17 January

2018

Placement of site

notices

Site notices were put up to inform the general public of the

proposed projects and the public participation process.

These were placed onsite as well as in various community

facilities in the wider area (these locations will be updated

in the Final Scoping Report).

17 January

2018

Newspaper

advertisement

Adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and

Tygerburger.

17 January

2018

Public open house A public open house is proposed on 7 February 2018 and

all I&APs that received written notification, were notified of

the meeting.

7 February

2018

5 Comments and responses

This Comments and Response Report reflects the comments received during the Pre-Application public

comment period (29 March 2017 to 04 May 2017). It will be revised to include the comments received

during the subsequent Scoping and EIA Phases. Note that Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP’s)

submissions are include in Table 5, below and Table 6 includes the specific Comments and associated

Responses.

In cases where I&APs commented in any language other than English, a translation (to English) will be

provided in italics together with the original text that was received during the public comment period.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 27

Table 5: List of I&AP submissions

No Name Organisation Date of Comment Date of Response Method

Pre-application Phase

1. Ivan Cloete AFASA Western Cape 16/03/2017 N/A (outside EIA process)

Email

2. Alex Davids Power Group 29/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email

3. Abubaker Francis Private Farmer 29/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email

4. Marco Geretto City of Cape Town: Senior Urban Designer for Urban Integration 28/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email

5. Gerrie Hattingh City of Cape Town 31/03/2017 31/03/2017 Email

6. Trevor Lodewyk IThemba Farmers Association 31/03/2017 03/04/2017 Email

7. Nigel Titus City of Cape Town Transport & Urban Development Authority 03/04/2017 03/04/2017 Email

8. Mervyn August City of Cape Town: Sustainable Urban Development 04/04/2017 04/04/2017 Email

9. Wallace Maritz Adjacent Landowner: Penhill Estate 05/04/2017 20/04/2017 Post

10 Shaun Swanepoel Eskom 13/04/2017 22/05/2017 Email

11. Danie Carinus Bluegum Grove Trust 28/04/2017 29/04/2017 Email

12 AFASA Western Cape AFASA Western Cape 29/04/2017 29/04/2017 Email

13. Thaakirah Marcus University of the Western Cape 01/05/2017 02/05/2017 Email

14 DLC Motsisi Eskom 02/05/2017 04/05/2017 Post

15. Paul Clarke Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 03/05/2017 03/05/2017 Telephone & Email

16. Dieter Heinze Preem Brokerage 03/05/2017 03/05/2017 Email

17. Cheran Young Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 03/05/2017 03/05/2017 Email

18. Maria Katsoulis Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 04/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email

19. Kirk Young Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 04/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email

20. Jacqui Farr Penhill Estate Resident 05/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email

21. Rhett Smart CapeNature 11/05/2017 11/05/2017 Email

22a.

Shamile Manie (on behalf of Peter Flower)

City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department 24/02/2017 (received 19/05/2017)

28/07/2017 (c/o SMEC)

Email

22b.

Shamile Manie (on behalf of Peter Flower)

City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department 19/05/2017 22/05/2017 (acknowledged)

Email

22c. Shamile Manie (on behalf of Peter Flower)

City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department 21/09/207 16/11/2017 (c/o SMEC)

Email


No Name Organisation Date of Comment Date of Response Method

23. Andrew September Heritage Western Cape 30/05/2017 (received 30/06/2017)

13/07/2017 Email

24. Owen Peters Eskom: Land Development (c/o Joyce Mtimkulu of Motla Consulting Engineers)

21/06/2017 c/o Motla Email

25. Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident 12/07/2017 12/07/2017 Email

26. Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident 21/09/2017 28/09/2017 Email

27. Johan Carinus and Danie Carinus

Bluegum Grove Trust (landowner of proposed reservoir) 13/07/2017 13/07/2017 Meeting

28. Kevin Balfour City of Cape Town 26/09/2017 N/A (c/o SMEC) Email


Table 6: Comments and responses

No. From Comments received Response/Comment

1. Ivan Cloete (Penhill farmer and AFASA Western Cape)

This is a submission from AFASA W/C on behalf of the Jacobsdal farming community.

Hereby we would like to put to you our current position in response to the meeting on 14th March'17 between ourselves, Dept. of Human Settlements, other stakeholders and other affected parties in relation to the planned development on Jacobsdal farm.

“The Bill of Rights is the most important part of our constitution and is stated under 7 (1) to be the cornerstone of democracy in South Africa. This Bill requires the DoHS to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Anything that is inconsistent with our Constitution, both law and conduct is invalid; therefore Provincial Government's practices have to be constitutionally compliant.

We are therefore of the view that our rights has been infringed and disrespected by the Dept. of Human Settlements. The fact that there was not proper consultation and no participation in drafting the “desktop development plan " makes the entire exercise a one-sided affair and invalid.

In the light of the aforesaid we would like to suggest the following;

1. the Dept. of Agriculture W/C , DRDLR / PSSC W/C , Dept. of Water and Sanitation and Dept. of Social Services should be included in this process as major stakeholders;

2. We withdraw from all negotiations concerning the Penhill / Jacobsdal Project until these role players are part of the negotiations;

3. Abovementioned stakeholders should together with the Penhill farming community reps, design a “workable desktop plan " which include a needs analyses for the farmers and people residing on the property; this should be a dual process and runs parallel with the consultation process.

4. we also want to make it clear that we're not oppose to the planned development but object to the 40ha of land that will be made available for urban

agricultural activities whereas we are mostly pig farmers.

Interactions and negotiations with the existing informal farmers residing on the Penhill landholdings regarding their future on the land and the agricultural options available to them are ongoing.

2. Alex Davids (Power Group)

Kindly register Mr Percy Knight from Power Construction, contact number 082 442 6019 / 021 907 1300 as an interested & effective party on the above-mentioned project.

Please contact me should you require any additional information.

Acknowledged.

Alex Davids and Mr Percy Knight were registered as I&APs.

3. Abubaker Francis (Private Farmer)

The existing small farmers with livestock adjacent to cemetery will they be relocated or will their operations be within the proposed development area.

Acknowledged.

1. Mr Francis was informed that it is the intention of the project to make provision for an agricultural component to accommodate urban agriculture for farmers from both Penhill and iThemba, the details of which are still being investigated. A copy of the Background Information Document with a cover letter was sent to Mr Francis for



additional information. In addition Mr Francis was notified that further details would be made available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. All registered I&APs will

be informed of the commenting period during scoping.

2. Mr Francis has been registered as I&AP.

4. Marco Geretto (City of Cape Town: Urban Integration)

Marco Geretto stated that he was intimately involved in the intergovernmental team providing input into the development. It is more effective for him to engage through that process than the EIA process. He will provide comment on the Draft BAR/ EIA when it is circulated.

Acknowledged.

Marco Geretto was registered as an I&AP.

5. Gerrie Hattingh (City of Cape Town)

Requested for a copy of the Background Information (BID) and letter that was sent to I&APs. In addition Gerrie Hattingh requested that Mr Roelof Mare and Penhill Home Owners And Residents Association be added on the I&AP database.

Acknowledged.

1. A copy of the BID and letter to I&APs was sent to Mr Hattingh as per request.

2. Mr Hattingh along and the Penhill Home Owners and Residents Association have been registered as I&APs. Mr Mare was already on the I&AP database and had received notification.

6. Trevor Lodewyk (iThemba Farmers Association)

Trevor Lodewyk indicated that the following issues should be considered in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process:

Livestock Farming

Agriculture

Piggery

Acknowledged.

1. Mr Lodewyk was informed that all comments submitted during the

PPP period would be considered and included for submission to DEA&DP. The comments made therein will be considered when undertaking the Environmental Impact Assessment, specifically as part of the Agricultural Impact Assessment and Social Impact Assessment. Further details would be made available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. In addition all registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period

during scoping. 2. The Department of Agriculture is a commenting authority that have

and will be consulted further during the EIA process, as well as other project processes underway.

3. Mr Lodewyk was registered as I&AP.

7. Nigel Titus

(City of Cape Town: Transport & Urban Development Authority)

Requested for a copy of the Background Information and letter that was sent to I&APs.

Acknowledged.

1. A copy of the BID and letter to I&APs was sent to Mr Titus as per request.

2. Mr Titus has been registered as I&AP.

8. Mervyn August (City of Cape Town: Sustainable Urban

Development)

Kindly register me on the I&AP database along with Jens Kuhn. Acknowledged.

1. Mr Mervyn August and Mr Jens Kuhn have been registered as I&APs.



9. Wallace Maritz (Adjacent Landowner:

Penhill Estate)

In response to the Advertisement which appeared in the Tygerburger on 29th March 2017 I would request to be registered as an INTERESTED PARTICIPANT. I would be most interested in a plan of the intended

development, as it would seem to be adjacent to the existing Penhill Estate.

Preferred method of communication POST

Name and address & Phone No

Wallace Maritz, Plot 160, Kingfisher Rd., Penhill, 7100

Tel : 021 904 1494

Acknowledged.

1. Wallace Maritz has been registered as I&AP on the I&AP and

adjacent landowners Database. 2. A Background Information Document (BID) was sent by post to

Wallace Maritz on 20 April 2017.

10. Shaun Swanepoel (Eskom)

Penhill Greenfields Development Project- Environmental Impact Assessment.

Ref: 01024/17

I refer to your email dated 28 March 2017.

This application affects the following Eskom Power lines

Blackheath 11kV overhead powerline

Blackheath/Eersterivier 66kV overhead powerline

Bluedowns/Stikland 132kV overhead Powerline

Palmiet/ Stikland 400kV overhead Powerline

Lungile Motsitsi, Eskom: Transmission must be contacted on 011 800 5734 to comment on behalf of the 400kV overhead Powerlines, no work within this servitude or underneath powerlines is allowed until comment from Eskom Transmission has been obtained.

I hereby inform you that Eskom approves the proposed work indicated on your drawing in principle subject to the following. This approval is valid for 12 Months

only, after which reapplication must be made if work has not yet commenced.

a) The following building and tree restriction on either side of the centre line of overhead powerline must be observed.

Voltage: Building restriction either side of centre line:

11kV 9.0m

66kV 11.0m

132kV 15.5m

b) No construction work may be executed closer than 6 (Six) metres from any Eskom structure or structure-supporting mechanism.

c) No work or no machinery nearer than the following distances from the conductors

Voltage: Not closer than (distance):

11kV 3.0m

Acknowledged (by email).

1. Shaun Swanepoel has been registered as I&AP on the I&AP Database.

He was informed that colleagues at Motla are also engaging directly with the respective departments within Eskom regarding the technical aspects of the project.



66kV 3.2m

132kV 3.8m

d) Natural ground level must be maintained within Eskom reserve areas and servitudes.

e) That a Minimum ground clearance of the overhead power line must be maintained to the following clearance :

Voltage Safety clearance above road:

11kV 6.3m

66kV 6.9m

132kV 7.5m

f) The existing Eskom Power lines and infrastructure are acknowledged as established infrastructure on the properties and any routing or relocation would be for the cost of the applicant/developer.

g) That Eskom rights or servitude, including agreements with any of the land owners, obtained for the operation and maintenance of these existing power lines and infrastructure be acknowledged and honoured throughout its lifecycle which include, but are not limited to:

i. Having 24 hour access to its infrastructure according to the rights mentioned in (a) above,

ii. To perform maintenance (Structural as well as servitude- vegetation management) on its infrastructure according to its maintenance programmes and schedules,

iii. To upgrade or refurbish its existing power lines and

infrastructure as determined by Eskom, iv. To perform any other activity listed above to ensure the

safe operation and maintenance of the Eskom power lines or infrastructure,

h) Eskom must have at least a 10m obstruction free zone around all pylons (not just a 10m radius from centre).

i) Eskom shall not be liable for the death or injury of any person, or for loss or damage to any property, whether as a result of the encroachment or use of the area where Eskom has its services, by the applicant, his/her agents, contractors, employees, successors in tittle and assignee.

j) The applicant indemnifies Eskom against any loss, claims or damages, including claims pertaining to interference with Eskom services, apparatus or otherwise.

k) Eskom shall at all times have unobstructed access to and aggress from its services.

l) Any development which necessitates the relocation of Eskom’s services will be to the account of the developer.

m) Thys Cronje, POLKADRAAI CNC must be contacted on 021 900

5663/8 before working in close proximity to the overhead power lines.



Kindly contact Shaun Swanepoel at Tel: 021 980 3913, should you require any further information.

11. Danie Carinus (Adjacent landowner: Bluegum Grove Trust)

Danie Carinus indicated that the following issues should be considered in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process:

“Low costing housing adjacent to farms where edible farms are being farmed, cannot and has never worked. There will be a need for a substantial buffer between the metropoles boundary and farming along the proposed development boundary.”

In addition Danie Carinus requested that V Carinus be added to the I&AP database.

1. Danie Carinus was informed that all comments submitted during the PPP period would be considered and included for submission to DEA&DP. Potential impacts to adjacent landowners have been considered during the layout selection of the proposed development and will be investigated during the EIA phase by various specialists (Visual, Agricultural and Social Impact Assessments form part of the

EIA study). Further details would be made available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. All registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period during scoping.

Danie Carinus and V Carinus were registered as I&APs.

12. AFASA Western Cape

According to your legal Notice DEA&DP Number 13/3/3/6/7/2/A4/17/3044/17, AFASA W/C together with Penhill Farming Community (Including Mr Malcom Loggenstein and Ivan Cloete) as affected parties would like to register to be part of the public participation process.

At this stage we are unclear about all the details i.t.o the intended farming

activities on the property and still waiting for the Department of Agriculture W/C, Department of Rural Development and Land Reform W/C, Department of Water and Sanitation and Department of Social Development to become part of the process in order for us to submit meaningful comments.

Can you forward us an acknowledgement of this registration request.

Thanking you.

Acknowledged.

Response sent by Nashieta Holtman (Mzi Development Services) as part of the direct ongoing stakeholder management communications for the project:

1. AFASA W/C was informed that a meeting was held with Mr. Joe Barends – DLRC / FAPRO and Mr. Godfrey Domingo – CoCT Urban

Agriculture on 20 April 2017 at the Elsies River Department of Human Settlements offices. The purpose of the meeting was to identify how the consultant team and the DoHS can commence the parallel engagement with the farmers particularly focussing on the agriculture component. It was agreed that a follow up engagement with all stakeholders

together with the farmers will be scheduled for the week of 8 May 2017. DoHS and the consultant team is in the process of liaising with the key role players from the departments of Agriculture and Rural Development and Land Reform and is hoping to finalise the date of the meeting by end of this week (week ending 05 May 2017). Mr Ivan Cloete will be contacted with further feedback.

Response as part of the EIA process:

Mr Malcom Loggenstein was registered as I&AP.

13. Thaakirah Marcus (University of Western Cape)

I would like to be involved and receive information regarding the proposed Penhill Development. I would like to register as an I&AP for this project.

Attached is my contact details.

Acknowledged.

Thaakirah was registered as I&AP. In addition Thaakirah was notified that

further details will become available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment Phases of the project. All registered I&APs will be notified of the commenting period.

14. DLC Motsisi (Eskom)

With reference to The Environmental Authorisation Application Process for the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development, Cape Town. DLC Motsisi submitted the following comments:

Acknowledged.

The conditions provided by Eskom are noted and will be adhered to in the

design of the proposed development. Where relevant they can be included in the Construction Environmental Management Programme which sets out



I refer to your document not dated in this regard and wish to inform you that Eskom Transmission (Tx) Palmiet-Stikland 400kV power lines will be affected by this application.

The extent and width of the servitude is 27.5m on either side of the centre lines of the power lines.

Eskom Tx will raise no objection to the EIA process, provided its rights and services are acknowledged and respected at all times. The following terms and conditions must be borne in mind:

measures to ensure contractor compliance with the relevant legislation and to mitigate environmental impacts. If any deviation from the conditions is required, permission from Eskom will be sought in advance through the

relevant processes.

Eskom Tx’s rights and services must be acknowledged and respected at all times.

Eskom Tx shall at all times retain unobstructed access to and egress from its servitudes.

Eskom Tx’s consent does not relieve the applicant from obtaining necessary statutory, land owner or municipal approvals.

The applicant will adhere to all relevant environmental legislation. Any cost incurred by Eskom Tx as a result of non-compliance will be changed to the

applicant.

All work within Eskom’s servitude areas shall comply with the relevant Eskom earthing standards in force at the time.

No construction or excavation work shall be executed within the above specified voltage metres from any Eskom powerline structure.

If Eskom Tx has to incur any expenditure in order to comply with statutory clearance or other regulations as a result of the application’s activities or because of the presence of his equipment or installation within the servitude restricted area, the applicant shall pay such costs to Eskom Tx on demand.

The use of explosives of any type within 500 metres of Eskom’s Tx’s Services, shall only occur with Eskom Tx’s previous permission. If such permission is granted the applicant must give at least fourteen working days prior notice of the commencement of blasting. This allows time for arrangements to be made for supervision and/or precautionary instructions to be issued in terms of the blasting process. It is advisable to make application separately in this regard.

Changes in ground level may not infringe statutory ground to conductor clearances. After any changes in ground level, the surface shall be rehabilitated and stabilised so as to prevent erosion. The measures taken shall be to Eskom Tx’s requirements.



Eskom Tx shall not be liable for the death of any person or for the loss of or damage to any property whether as a result of the encroachment or of the use of the servitude area by the applicant, his agent, contractors, employees,

successors in tittle and assignee. The applicant indemnifies Eskom Tx against loss, claims or damages including claims pertaining to consequential damages by third parties and whether as a result of damage to or interruption of or interference with Eskom Tx’s services or apparatus or otherwise. Eskom Tx will not be held responsible for damage to the applicant’s equipment.

No mechanical equipment, including mechanical excavators or high lifting machinery, shall be used in the vicinity of Eskom’s apparatus and/or services, without prior written permission having been granted by Eskom Tx. If such permission is granted the applicant must give at least seven working days’ notice prior to commencement of work. This allows time for arrangements to be made for supervision and/or precautionary instructions to be issued by Eskom

North East Region Lines and servitude manager.

Eskom Tx’s rights and duties in the servitude shall be accepted as having prior right at all times and shall not be obstructed or interfered with. Note where electrical outage is required, at least fourteen work days are required to arrange it.

Under no circumstances shall rubble, earth or other material be dumped within the servitude restriction area. The applicant shall maintain the area concerned to Eskom Tx’s satisfaction. The applicant shall be liable to Eskom Tx for the cost of any remedial action which has to be carried out by Eskom Tx.

The clearance between Eskom Tx’s live electrical equipment and the proposed construction work shall be observed as stipulated by the Regulation 19 of

electrical Machinery Regulations 2011 (with reference to SANS10280-1) of the occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act 85 of 1993).

Equipment shall be regarded electrically live and therefore dangerous at all times.

In spite of the restrictions stipulated by Regulation 15 of the Electrical Machinery Regulations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act 85 of 1993), as an additional safety precaution, Eskom Tx will not approve the erection of houses, or structures occupied frequently by human beings under the power lines or within the servitude restriction area.

Eskom Tx may stipulate any additional requirements to eliminate any possible exposure to Customers or Public to coming into contact or to be exposed to any dangers of Eskom Tx plant.

It is required of the applicant to familiarise himself with all safety hazards related to Electrical plant.



This letter and comments should not be deemed a wayleave of any kind. Once more details regarding the pipeline becomes available, this should be forwarded to Eskom for approval on a different level.

15. Paul Clarke (Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association)

With reference to the Proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Mr Paul Clarke on behalf of the Penhill Ratepayers association raised the following concerns:

Accessibility of project information for some I&APs such as Penhill and IThemba Farmers who may not have access to emails, etc.

The potential risk of service delivery protests with potential disruption to accessibility and damage of infrastructure.

Devaluation of property in close proximity to the proposed development area.

Properties and neighbouring communities vulnerable to crime.

Escalation of an existing crime problem in general.

Lack of job opportunities for the new residents, given that there won’t only be 8 000 but there will be a substantially higher number depending on occupancy of units.

Accessibility of the development and a potential increase of foot traffic through the train stations.

Acknowledged.

1. Mr Paul Clarke was registered as I&AP. 2. Mr Paul Clarke was notified that at this stage, this was the first round

of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process, all

I&APs will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping Report and EIA Report which will include further details of the development and outcomes of the specialist studies.

Refer to the issue specific responses below:

Please note that that this issue is of major concern to the residents and businesses in around the Eersterivier, Blackheath, Kuilsrivier and Penhill residential, commercial and industrial areas. The influence and impact may even be far further reaching. Please allow me to expand on the noted concerns raised:

Safety: The community around the proposed development (especially the

residential areas) is largely not secure in terms of fencing, CCTV, 24 armed response and access controlled. The development poses a realised threat to the safety and security of all parties who are in the specified radius around the proposed development. As a community as we stand now we are plagued with crime in and around our area. The existing police infrastructure can’t cope with the ballooning crime stats in the area as it is.

Potential Socio-economic Impacts will be assessed during the EIA phase by

the specialist as part of the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (SIA).

The naming “Penhill Greenfields Development”: The name ‘Penhill’ is

associated with Penhill residential estate. Penhill Estate is an unique residential area situated in the Western Cape. We find the use of the name ‘Penhill Greenfields Development’ reckless as it will be associated with an established residential area and we would like no part of association with the proposed low

cost housing that is been developed.

The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location (Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary and used for administration purposes at this stage.

Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the

Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the township register to be opened in due course.

Service Delivery Issues: As you are well aware, in low cost housing

communities, serious and malicious demonstrations are held regularly should there be any dispute regarding service deliveries or any services in general, on a local or National level. Communities don’t demonstrate and tear their own

Service delivery issues are acknowledged as a widespread issue across South Africa and are often unpredictable and outside the control of government in many cases. Whilst the City of Cape Town will be the owner of



houses up, they take their aggression and dissatisfaction onto the streets and neighbouring areas. For example, if Khayelitsha has an issue, they demonstrate onto the N2 or Baden Powel Rd, burning tires, throwing stones, throwing human

faeces etc. Du Noon near Table View, brake down the City’s Bus Transport Stops, stone cars and cause the road leading to Killarney Industrial and Table View to be closed. There are many more actual examples of violent demonstrations recorded should you require more. For the City or council to think they would be able to manage delivery issues would be naïve. Please let me explain: The city can’t control water restrictions. The city can’t control rolling

blackouts. The city can’t control transport strikes or many other national crisis that we find ourselves exposed to on a regular basis. Every time such issues should arise, the surrounding areas will find themselves at risk of very dangerous and unpredictable results.

the development and responsible for most services in the site and surrounding areas, it cannot necessary take responsibility for such protests.

Existing Transport: The proposed development would like to build a few

thousand low cost homes. How many people are generally living in homes once established? Maybe 5, maybe 6. The closest public transport to feed this development area at the moment would be Eerste River train station, Melton Rose and Black Heath Station. This would cause an unbelievable amount of foot traffic through all areas in the way of the proposed development and existing public transport.

It is estimated that approximately 37,000 people could be accommodated on

the site. A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the Rezoning process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being undertaken separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all private, public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating measures will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA will be included in the EIA.

Transport Taxis: In all low cost areas Mini Bus Taxis become prolific. This is

of great concern as there are many people who make regular use of the road to go to work and home, there are as it is, many accidents on the road already, this will be further compounded.

A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the Rezoning process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being undertaken separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all private, public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating measures will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA will be included in the EIA.

Pollution: The water that flows to the R102 road, comes from the water of the reserve just above the proposed development. As it is, there is too much pollution from the existing communities that are been washed down the road and flows between Penhill and the R102. Should there be a development with even more people relocated the amount of environmental pollution will be horrific.

The stormwater systems designed for the proposed development will be subject to the City of Cape Town standards and approval.

During the EIA, the Freshwater Impact Assessment, Groundwater Impact Assessment and Surface Water Impact Assessment will consider impacts to freshwater ecology, surface water and groundwater and mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr will be recommended where relevant. Furthermore, a Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification of waste management measures for domestic and construction waste.

Advertising: Please could you let me know what papers and the dates the advertisement for the proposed development was printed. The residents of Penhill and other concerned parties are not aware of the advert.

As part of the Public Participation Process (PPP) Site notices were put up to inform the general public of the proposed projects and the public participation process. These were placed onsite, Welmoed Cemetery Boundary, Blue

Downs Shoprite Checkers, Kleinvlei Secondary School, Melton train station/taxi rank, Kleinvlei South African Police Service (SAPS), Melton Rose Library, Kleinvlei Community Health Care Centre, RR Franks Primary School, Dennemere Primary School, Blackheath Nativity Church, Blackheath Primary School and Blackheath Secondary School on 29 March 2017. In addition adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and Tygerburger on 29

March 2017.



General Information For all groups concerned: Accessibility of project information for some I&APs such as the ‘Penhill’ (The farming community existing in the area are not called Penhill Farmers), and iThemba Farmers who

may not have email etc.

As part of the Public Participation Process (PPP) a copy of the BID was provided to the Penhill Farmers and the iThemba farmers through their representatives.

Devaluation of existing properties: The broader community is concerned that there investments are going to also lose value. This is looking at places where low cost housing has been built next to existing residential areas. The association with the name ‘Penhill Greenfields Development Project’ to Penhill Estate as a poor low cost area. Crime etc. How will we be compensated by the city for loss of value of our investments due to a development been carelessly built disregarding all residents, businesses etc. disapproval in the area? Please note that our rates are also worked out according to the value of our properties. A devaluation in property prices across the board also amounts to loss of revenue to the council.

This impact will be considered in the Socio-economic Impact Assessment as part of the EIA phase.


Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the

township register to be opened in due course.

Lack of job opportunities in the area: Please look at Google maps. You will

see that the proposed area is not suitable for sustainable employment in and around the immediate area. The surrounds are established. This means that the existing infrastructure regarding jobs is already established in the surrounding area. The existing established Industrial area will be at full employment. (Has

anyone gone factory to factory and asked how many new people they plan to employ in the next few months to a year?) This will be crucial as this means that unless everyone that moves into the proposed low cost housing development has a job already, where they are going to work. As they aren’t close to work opportunities what are they going to do when they have mouths to feed and no income. The development under such circumstances puts the area at great risk

as theft and crime may be looked at as an easy solution to put food on the table. There are many vulnerable families at risk of the decision making going forward.

Some of the housing opportunities will be for people who qualify for subsidies, in other words they have secure sources of income already. Further, the development includes a light industrial / commercial component and facilities such as clinics and schools, which will also create sources of employment.

This impact will be considered in the Socio-economic Impact Assessment as

part of the EIA phase.

Please consider the above. We would like to be further involved and kept up to date. We are an active community who live in the area for its tranquillity beauty etc.

This would change the general existing lifestyle of everyone concerned around the proposed development. What I don’t understand is that the City is desperately looking for graveyard space, this would be a suitable space for a graveyard area. Also, farmers that are already there have lived there for years (Which has also been a unique living arrangement) and now their living arrangements have to be changed. What is the proposed land at iThemba labs

once the farmers are evicted?

We as the community and greater community in the area would like to attend and have input to any meetings or dialogs as to the way forward and would like to note that we a strongly against any proposed development of the area.

The Penhill landholdings comprise state-owned land that has been in the custodianship of the Department of Human Settlements for a number of years, specifically for the provision of housing. This ±200ha landholding represents the largest tract of ‘vacant’ land owned by the Department within the City of Cape Town, which upon development, will allow the Department to address the immense housing backlog experienced in the City of Cape Town, by providing housing opportunities at scale. Owing to its size, the site can accommodate whole existing communities (thereby minimising impacts on existing social networks).

The land at iThemba labs is also proposed for mixed use (including residential) development.

Similarly, the Department is also undertaking a mixed-use development on their landholdings at Ithemba, located in the greater Blue Downs area.

The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements

as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location



(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary and used for administration purposes at this stage.

Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the township register to be opened in due course.





The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location

(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary and used for administration purposes at this stage.



Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the

Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the township register to be opened in due course.




Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the

township register to be opened in due course.

As registered I&APs you will be kept informed of opportunities for future participation during the EIA process.

16. Dieter Heinze

(Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association)

In line with Pauls e-mail (please refer to comment 15) I can say that fully and wholeheartedly agree. I take personal objection to the poor attempt to consider any of the surrounding neighbourhoods and I severely doubt that this would classify as a fair chance to any of us to comment.

Please take it seriously when it is mentioned the police currently take over an hour to respond to urgent matters and even do not respond at all very often. I would greatly like to see the plans in place to show that this will be a safe and

viable option not only for the current residents but also the proposed several 10’s of thousands of people supposedly moving in.

We object strongly to the use of the name as well… This process should include all the neighbourhoods surrounding

The area and until such time as you have achieved this it is shocking to think that any go-ahead could be considered.

Acknowledged.

1. Dieter Heinze was notified that at this stage, this was the first round of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process All I&APs will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping Report and EIA Report which will include further details of the development and outcomes of the specialist studies. In addition responses to the

comments submitted by Dieter will be included as part of the response to Paul Clarke (PHORA).

2. Dieter Heinze has been registered as I&AP. 3. Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 14).

17. Cheran Young


I am a resident of Penhill and a member of PHORA I completely agree with Paul Clark's concerns (please refer to comment 15) over the development and ask that you please include me as an effected party against the development.

Acknowledged.

1. Cheran Young was informed that all comments submitted during the Pre-Application PPP period would be considered and included for submission to DEA&DP. Further details would be made available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases.

In addition all registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period during scoping. Responses to Cheran Young’s Comments will be included in the response to Paul Clarke (PHORA).

2. Cheran Young has been registered as I&AP.

18. Maria Katsoulis


I have been a resident and property owner in Penhill Estate for close to 20 years.

Therefore it's with great concern that the proposed development which is on our doorstep has not involved public participation thus far.

1. When are the residents of Penhill Estate going to be consulted on such a huge project including our neighbours across the railway line?

2. How is such a development going to be managed regarding rules and regulations once the occupants have moved into their homes i.e. most of the low cost homes have unsightly extensions to accommodate as many friends and family.

3. Has our security been taken into consideration. We struggle to get law enforcement to apply the rule of law just as we are right now. No one regards the law and are law into themselves.

4. I certainly did not invest my life savings buying my home to support

the deterioration of the area. Just look at what is happening in

Acknowledged.

1. Maria Katsoulis was notified that at this stage, this was the first round of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process, all I&APs will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping Report and EIA Report which will include further details of the development and outcomes of the specialist studies. In addition responses to the comments submitted by Dieter will be included as part of the response to Paul Clarke (PHORA). All comments submitted during the Pre-Application PPP period would be considered and included for submission to DEA&DP.

2. Maria Katsoulis has been registered as I&AP. 3. Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).



Eersterivier the litter is everywhere so much so that people are just dumping their old stuff on the side of the road.

5. What about our property value that will definitely deplete especially

since this proposed development has our namesake?

19. Kirk Young


With regards to the below email (comments from Paul Clarke) from the PHORA chairman, I'd like to request that you also please add my address to the list of affected parties.

I am in agreement with what has been listed below.

Acknowledged.

1. Kirk Young was informed that the comments submitted would be included in any response issued to Paul Clarke.

2. Kirk Young has been registered as I&AP.

20. Jacqui Farr

(Penhill Estate Resident)

Key concerns with the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project include:

Safety and Security:

Residents of Penhill Estate have already felt the effects of the economic challenges with Eerste River, Meltonrose and Blackheath nearby and the increase in petty crime. The result of this is that the areas has had to become more security conscience. The addition of more low cost housing so close to Penhill Estate has the potential to impact on the residents’ safety and security.

There are already issues with the lack of resources for the local Police stations (the 2 closest to Penhill include Eerste River and Melton Rose police stations) in addressing safety concerns in the area. The increase in local population will put further pressure on these services. How will this be addressed?

Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).

Provision of services:

Penhill Estate has been promised improved services – specifically mainline water and sewerage – which has yet to materialise. That being said, how is the current lack of water, and related services, in the area going to be accommodated with this new development? And how will this impact on the areas as a whole? Should there be

difficulties with service delivery to the new development we have the added concern of possible protests – this then becomes an issue of safety and security again.

Local schools are already running at capacity, with the addition of 8000 families, assuming only 1 child per house hold, the ability of our schools to accommodate the additional students is seriously in question. How will this be addressed?

Eerste River, Melton Rose and Blackheath are currently being serviced by community several clinics and one hospital run by the Government. These services are already under pressure due to the needs of the local residents (most of which are low income and therefore cannot afford private medical services). The additional

The consultant team has been in communications with the City of Cape Town and Eskom regarding the sewage, water and electrical services. Additional bulk services will be installed by the authorities to serve this project as well as other development needs in the area. The competent authority (the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning) requires confirmation of services from

the relevant authorities and considers this during their decision-making processes for the application. If necessary the development will need to be phased in line with the availability of bulk services. It is also noted that future residents of the development are already residing elsewhere within the City of Cape Town and therefore making use of existing services where available, or living in informal

areas where services are lacking and health and quality of life are compromised. The aim is to improve their standard of living and facilitate better access to services being provided.

Community facilities and services include primary and secondary schools, crèches, places of worship, a community centre, sports fields and open spaces will be provided for in the development plan.

The implementation of some of these facilities will require funding



residents for the proposed development will need access to health services – how will this be addressed?

from other government agencies and liaison with these agencies has commenced.

The development plan includes sites for community facilities which will include primary health care facilities. It is usual for a clinic to be integrated with other community facilities and this is the intention, although detailed design has not yet been undertaken.

Waste: The issue of pollution is already a challenge in Eerste River with the

level of localised pollution on our roads steadily increasing. This impacts not

only the environment but also the desirability of the area – especially for Penhill Estate – having to drive through Eerste River and past Melton Rose and Blackheath where roadside pollution is increasing makes prospective property buyers unlikely to want to invest. The addition of over 8000 new residents will add to the level of pollution in the surrounding areas. What municipal systems and services have been identified and will be responsible for addressing this?

A Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification of waste management measures.

Use of the name Penhill: Penhill Estate is a unique residential area. Most of

the residents have bought property here based on this uniqueness. The use of the name Penhill as part of the new development will take away part of this. Should the proposed development go ahead, our neighbourhood will be associated with this low cost housing development which will impact on local property pricing and the desirability of living in the area.


Property prices: Buying property is an investment – for many of us the only major investment we can afford. The fact the Penhill Estate falls under Eerste River already impacts on the property prices in the area, the addition of another low cost housing development so close will further devalue this investment. How will this be mitigated and local residents compensated for this loss?


Existing infrastructure:

The R102 which is the main access route to the surrounding areas, including Cape Town, Stellenbosch and Somerset West. This road is already incredibly busy and it is impossible to see how this transport route will be able to accommodate the addition of an additional 8000 residents – this is assuming only 1 working person per household.

Taking into account additional transport requirements for local schools, shopping, public transport and health services and this then becomes a critical issue.

There are already numerous accidents in the area due to the increase usage of the R102 and other main arteries in the areas. The ripple effect of this include:

Increased pressure on a struggling (and failing) health system

Increased pressure on existing police resources

Negative impact on local residents due to time delays, access to these main arteries and noise pollution.

The increase in public transport requirements will tax an already defunct transport system. With this said, the increase of taxis that will be required will impact on our current road infrastructure and possible

A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the Rezoning process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being undertaken separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all private, public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating measures will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA will be included in the EIA.



violence, should strikes occur or disputes on transport prices, etc, will affect the services lifted above and become an issue of safety and security again.

Pollution: The local area has several industrial developments which impacts

on the local environment (noise, air and environmental pollution), the existing low income residential areas impact on the level of roadside pollution which is on the rise, the overburdened sewerage and water management systems has the potential to become a serious health threat.

A Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification of waste management measures.

The consultant team has been in communications with the City of Cape Town and Eskom regarding the sewage, water and electrical services. The competent authority (the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning) requires confirmation of services from the relevant authorities and considers this during their decision-making processes for the application.

Over and above the above concerns listed, with the inclusion of low cost housing in the proposed development makes me wonder whether the low cost housing

is planned as an RDP type housing or will they be for sale at market related prices. If the housing is RDP housing - I question where the new residents for the proposed development will come from - where will they work, and how will the area be managed – specifically when the other RDP housing development have generally not only had to accommodate the families that acquire the houses, but often their extended families housed in Wendy houses, or poorly built extensions.

The proposed project is a mixed use development and is planned to provide for the following housing opportunities:

Integrated Residential Development Programme (IRDP) houses;

Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLISP) houses;

Market houses;

Social housing units (flats) and for rental; and

Backyard rental units.

In addition, there will be a commercial / industrial component, agricultural land and community facilities and services which include schools, crèches, places of worship, a community centre, sports fields and open spaces.

More information on these components and the proposed layouts will be provided in the Scoping Report

Please could you keep us informed regarding the ongoing process as relates to the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project.

Jacqui Farr has been registered as I&AP.

21. Rhett Smart (CapeNature)

Comment from CapeNature on the Pre-application consultation for the proposed Penhill greenfields Development on various Portions of Farms Welmoed 468 and Jacobsdal 410, Cape Town:

CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed development and would like to make the following comments. Please note that our comments only pertain to the biodiversity related impacts and not to the overall desirability of the proposed development.

Background:

According to the Biodiversity Network (BioNet) for the City of Cape Town the southern section of the subject property are classified as Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) 2 (irreplaceable restorable sites), which in turn is classified as CBA: Degraded according to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WCBSP). The natural vegetation is mapped as Cape Flats Sand Fynbos across most of the site, with a small patch of Swartland Shale Renosterveld in the east, both of

which are listed as Critically Endangered.

Acknowledged.

1. Rhett Smart was informed that all comments submitted during the Pre-Application PPP period would be considered and included for

submission to DEA&DP. Further details would be made available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. In addition all registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period during scoping.

2. Aurecon responded indicating that the findings of the scoping report would shape the alternatives to be assessed in the EIR.

3. The alternatives and offset sites would be made available in a few months’ time, when the Scoping/EIR reports circulated for public comment period. Potential impacts on biodiversity have been considered during the scoping and site selection phase of the proposed development and will be investigated during the EIA phase by various specialists (see Section 7 of the Scoping Report).

During the EIA phase specific mitigation measures pertaining biodiversity will be identified for inclusion into the EMPr.



Various wetlands have been mapped for the site according to the BioNet, with a chain of five stormwater attenuation ponds along the western boundary and other natural wetlands scattered in the northern and central sections.

A botanical specialist study and freshwater specialist study have been provided to CapeNature as part of the pre-application consultation.

Terrestrial Biodiversity:

The botanical specialist study found that the site is highly disturbed with a very

low diversity of species, most of which are not representative of the vegetation types naturally occurring on the site.

It should be noted that the CBA classification is based on the restoration potential of the site, as denoted by the CBA 2 status. Both vegetation types have remaining extents below the threshold required to meet conservation targets, therefore even the highly degraded fragments that currently have low

conservation value status, but are potentially restorable, are selected as CBA.

The botanical specialist report indicates that the passive restoration potential ranges from poor to moderate, and that active restoration would be required in order to re-establish Cape Flats Sand Fynbos to the site and restore the conservation value of the site. Active restoration would be very costly and the existing on-going impacts would need to be considered if the site were to be retained and conserved, in addition to other secondary impacts tha

Documents

Appendix C.1: Public Participation Report - SAHRIS | SAHRA...Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017 10 Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017