PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION F Proof of Public Participation .pdfWorcester Hermanus 6850 7200 o23 346 8000 Vermont Conservation Trust Vermont Ratepayers & Environmental Assoc Att

1

LORNAY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING

PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH

Consultant:

Michelle Naylor | Env. Consultant | M.Sc., Pr. Sci. Nat., EAPSA cell: 083 245 6556| tel: 028 316 1769| fax: 086 585 2461 | [email protected] | www.lornay.co.za

PO Box 1990, Hermanus, 7200 Lornay Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd| Reg 2015/445417/07

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.lornay.co.za/

Lornay Environmental Consulting Proof of Public Participation

2

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF PROCESS ............................................................................................... 3

2. LIST OF INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES AND ORGANS OF STATE ......................................................... 4

3. WRITTEN NOTICE TO I&APS AND ORGANS OF STATE OF DRAFT BAR: ........................................................... 8

4. PROOF OF NOTICE TO I&APS AND ORGANS OF STATE ................................................................................. 10

5. NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT ..................................................................................................................... 21

6. NOTICEBOARDS ............................................................................................................................................ 26

7. COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT AND REGISTER FOR I&APS ................................................................ 29

8. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING DRAFT / PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................. 93

9. MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS DURING THE PRE-APPLICATION PHASE ................................................. 127

10. ADDITIONAL ROUND OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................... 136


3

1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF PROCESS

The Notice of Intent was submitted to the Competent Authority, the Department of Environmental Affairs and

Development Planning (DEA&DP) in August 2018. A pre-application meeting was held with the DEA&DP case

officer and supervisor – see minutes of meeting attached below.

The Public Participation Process was conducted in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

regulations as promulgated in the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998)

(NEMA) (as amended) and the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations promulgated in Government Gazette No. 38282

and Government Notice R983, R984 and R985 on 4 December 2014 (as amended). All potential interested and

affected parties (I&APS) and applicable organs of state were notified of the Draft / pre-application Basic

Assessment Report (BAR). The Draft BAR was made available for a 30-day period to I&APS and organs of state,

to register and comment. Noticeboards were placed on site and a newspaper advertisement was placed in the

local newspaper. All comments were recorded in a Comments and Response report and a Register for I&APS

was opened.

A site meeting and presentation was held after the first round of public participation was complete, on the 26

September 2019. The meeting was attended by the Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts

– Environmental Section, the Coastal Waters Discharge Section and Cape Nature, in order to provide more

information on the project.

The pre-application BAR was amended, and additional specialist studies conducted as required. All comments

received were addressed in the Comments and Response Report.

A meeting and project proposal presentation was also held on the 13 November 2019 for the Overstrand

Municipality. Attendees included the Town Planning Department, Engineering and the Environmental Section.

A second round of public participation was then conducted on the draft BAR (Pre-application) (Nov / Dec 2019)

in order to give the I&APS an opportunity to view the amended reports and additional specialist reports.

The Application for Environmental Authorisation will be submitted to the Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning (DEA&DP), and the mandatory fee payment will be made.

The Final BAR will be circulated to all registered I&APS and organs of state for a further 30-day public

participation period. All comments received during this period were recorded and responded to in the

Comments and Response Report and Register for I&AP’s. This document serves as proof of the public

participation carried out in line with Section 41 of the EIA Regulations (2014).


4

2. LIST OF INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES AND ORGANS OF STATE

In line with the requirements of NEMA, all potential Interested and Affected Parties (I&APS) were notified of

the project and provided with an opportunity to comment. This included applicable organs of state. See list

of I&AP’s identified for the project:

PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning Department of Water and Sanitation

Development Management Contact Person: John Roberts

Saa-rah Adams Tel: 021 950 7165

Registry Office [email protected]

1st Floor, Utilitas Buidling Address: Privaatsak X16

1 Dorp Street Sanlamhof

8001 7532

2 HC, 1 CD Letter

Cape Nature Overberg District Municipality

Rhett Smart / Chanel Rampartab / Vicky Hudson F. Kotze / R. Volschenk

Private Bag x5014 Private Bag x 22

Stellenbosch Bredasdorp

7599 7280

[email protected] F. Kotze

1 x HC, CD Letter, CD

BGCMA Overstrand Municipality

R. Le Roux Benjamin Kondokter

Private Bag x3055 PO Box 26

Worcester Gansbaai

6850 7200

023 346 8000 [email protected]

1 HC, CD 028 384 8300

Letter, CD

WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning

Air Quality Management Waste Management

Peter Harmse Lance McBain Charles

Private Bag X9086 Registry Office

Cape Town 1st Floor, Utilitas Building

8000 1 Dorp Street

Utilitas Building 8001

1 Dorp Street 021 483 2747

8001 [email protected]

CD CD





5

National Department of Public Works National Department of Public Works

Director General Chief Town Planner

Frederick Johnson Basson Geldenhuys

Private Bag x65 National Dept of Public Works

Pretoria Cape Town Regional Office

0001 Room 1419, Customs House

[email protected] Lower Heerengraght Street, cape Town


Letter 021 404 2174

Letter

Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Sustainable Aquaculture Management Land Management

Michelle Pretorius Cor van Der Walt

Private Bag x2 Private Bag x 1

Roggebaai Elsenburg

Cape Town 7607

8012 [email protected]

021 430 7034 Letter

[email protected] Tel: 021 808 5099

CD / Email Fax: 021 808 5092

WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning

Transport and Public Works Spatial Planning & Coastal Impact Mgmt

Provincial Roads Ieptieshaam Bekko

Grace Swanepoel Registry Office

PO Box 2603 1st Floor, Utilitas Building

Cape Town 1 Dorp Street

8000 8001

Ref: 17/1/11/B 021 483 3370

Letter CD [email protected]

1 HC, 1 CD relevant docs

WC Government Env Affairs & Dev Planning Heritage Western Cape

Pollution & Chemicals Management Stephanie Barnard

Wilna Kloppers Protea Assurance Building

Registry Office Green Market Square

1st Floor, Utilitas Buidling Cape Town

1 Dorp Street 8001

8001 021 483 9689

1 HC, 1 CD HC of HIA, VIA, AIA, cd

Overstrand Municipality DEA Oceans and Coasts

Operational Manager Nitasha Pillay / Mulalo Tshikotshi / Tandiwe Njajula

Theo Steenberg PO BOX 4390 Cape Town 8000

PO Box 26 cd email

Gansbaai 7220







6

[email protected]

T 028 384 8326

F 028 384 0241 Letter

Pearly Beach Ratepayers Association Pearly Beach Conservation

PO Box 53 0728904317

Pearly beach 7221 827 788 665 [email protected] [email protected]

Whale Coast Conservation Ward Councillor 11

Att. Rob Fryer / Sheraine van Wyk Cllr Dudley Coetzee

PO Box 1949 [email protected]

Hermanus 028 313 8058 Cell: 082 574 4404

7200

Farm 2 of 385

SEE TRUST

PO BOX 423

GANSBAAI

7220

Farm re/227

BRIERS FAMILY TRUST

PO BOX 487

BLOUBERGSTRAND

7436

Farm re/1/227

JP DE WET BLOM TRUST

PO BOX 423

GANSBAAI

7220





7

Farm re/223

AQUARELLA INV 139 (PTY)LTD

PO BOX 25555

MONUMENTPARK

0105


8

3. WRITTEN NOTICE TO I&APS AND ORGANS OF STATE OF DRAFT BAR:

The I&AP’s identified above were given written notice of the proposed development, via registered mail or

courier, as appropriate. The written notice included details of the applicable legislation, the proposed

expansion and means to provide comment or register as I&AP. See written notice below:


9


11 July 2019

NOTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR A BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS: PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY

DEA&DP Ref.: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 (NEMA) DEA: Ocean & Coasts Ref.: 2019/001/WC/Pearly Beach Seafarm Heritage Western Cape: HM/OVERBERG/PEARLY BEACH/PORTION OF REMAINDER OF FARM 385; Case No. 18090507SB1002E Notice is hereby given of a Public Participation Process for the following applications:

Basic Environmental Assessment in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulations as promulgated in

the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) (as amended) and the 2014 NEMA EIA

Regulations promulgated in Government Gazette No. 38282 and Government Notice R983, R984 and R985 on 4

December 2014 (as amended).

- Coastal Waters Discharge Permit in terms of Section 69 of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act No. 24 of 2008)

- Heritage Application in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) (Act No. 25 of 1999) and the Western Cape Provincial Gazette 6061, Notice 298 of 2003.

Proposal: It is proposed that an Aquaculture facility in the form of an Abalone Farm, be established on a portion of the

subject property

Location: Remainder of Farm 385, Pearly Beach

Applicant: Pearly Beach Seafarm (Pty) Ltd

Environmental Authorisation is required in terms of NEMA for the following Listed Activities:

Listing Notice 1; Activities No. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19A, 25, 27, 28, 30

Listing Notice 3; Activities No. 2, 4, 10, 12, 18,

A Basic Environmental Assessment Process is applicable. A copy of the Basic Assessment Report, Coastal Waters Discharge Permit and Heritage Impact Assessment is available for download on our website or upon request. Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP’s) are hereby invited to register as an Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) and / or comment on the proposed activity on / or before 13 August 2019, via the following contact details:


ATT. Michelle Naylor

PO Box 1990, Hermanus, 7200

Tel. 028 316 1769 | Fax. 086 585 2461

Email. [email protected] | Website. www.lornay.co.za

Michelle Naylor | Env. Consultant | M.Sc., Pr. Sci. Nat., EAPSA cell: 083 245 6556| tel: 028 316 1769| fax: 086 585 2461 | [email protected] | www.lornay.co.za

PO Box 1990, Hermanus, 7200 Lornay Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd| Reg 2015/445417/07






10

4. PROOF OF NOTICE TO I&APS AND ORGANS OF STATE

Written notice was provided to I&APs and Organs of State via registered mail or courier, as indicated in the

proofs below:


11


12


13


14


15


16


17


18


19


20


21

5. NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT

An advertisement was placed in the local newspaper, Hermanus Times, regarding the proposed development:


22


23


24


25

The application for lease agreement with Cape Nature was advertised in the Provincial Gazette as required in

terms of the Sea Shore Act (1935),


26

6. NOTICEBOARDS

Noticeboards were placed on site, as required in terms of the legislation. One noticeboard was placed on the

seafront of the property and one noticeboard was placed on the perimeter fence on the R43 at the entrance

to the property.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS:

PROPOSED ABALONE FARM

DEA&DP Ref.: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 (NEMA) DEA: Ocean & Coasts Ref.: 2019/001/WC/Pearly BeachSeafarm Heritage Western Cape: HM/OVERBERG/PEARLY BEACH/PORTION OF REMAINDER OF FARM 385; Case No. 18090507SB1002E

Notice is hereby given of a Public Participation Process for the following applications:

- Basic Environmental Assessment in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulations as promulgated in the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) (as amended) and the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations promulgated in Government Gazette No. 38282 and Government Notice R983, R984 and R985 on 4 December 2014 (as amended).

- Coastal Waters Discharge Permit in terms of Section 69 of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act No. 24 of 2008)

- Heritage Application in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) (Act No. 25 of 1999) and the Western Cape Provincial Gazette 6061, Notice 298 of 2003.

Proposal: It is proposed that an Aquaculture facility in the form of an Abalone Farm, be established on a portion of the subject property Location: Remainder of Farm 385, Pearly Beach Applicant: Pearly Beach Seafarm (Pty) Ltd Environmental Authorisation is required in terms of NEMA for the following Listed Activities: Listing Notice 1; Activities No. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19A, 25, 27, 28, 30 Listing Notice 3; Activities No. 2, 4, 10, 12, 18,

A Basic Environmental Assessment Process is applicable. A copy of the Basic Assessment Report, Coastal Waters Discharge Permit and Heritage Impact Assessment is available for download on our website or upon request. Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP’s) are hereby invited to register as an Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) and / or comment on the proposed activity on / or before 13 August 2019, via the following contact details:

LORNAY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING For Att. Michelle Naylor PO Box 1990, Hermanus, 7200 Tel. 028 316 1769 | Fax. 086 585 2461 Email. [email protected] | www.lornay.co.za


27


28


29

7. COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT AND REGISTER FOR I&APS

A Register was opened during the first round of public participation, to list all I&APs which wished to be

registered as such. The Register included contact details, date and comment made.

A Comments and Response report was also opened at the onset of the public participation. This report

contains the comment made by the I&AP, as well as formal response by the Environmental Assessment

Practitioner (EAP).

Note that three rounds of public participation were undertaken.


30


REGISTER FOR INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES

PROJECT: RE385, Pearly Beach

NAME: ORGANISATION: POSTAL ADDRESS:

TEL: EMAIL: COMMENT: DATE & REF:

Doret Taljaard Executive Mayor / Ward Councillor

PO Box 20, Hermanus, 7200


Email dated 10/07/2019 I am directed by the Executive Mayor, Ald Dudley Coetzee, to acknowledge receipt of your email below. The content of your correspondence will be discussed with the Ald Coetzee. Regards

10/07/19; no ref

Elrina Versfeld Pearly Beach Conservancy

PO Box 60, Pearly Beach, 7221

084 350 4107 028 381 9023

[email protected]

Email dated 11/07/2019 Request to be registered

11/07/2019; no ref.

Shirley Coetzee

Pearly Beach Rate PayerS Assoc

- - [email protected]

Registered as I&AP -








31

Lyle Martin Department of Transport and Public Works

PO Box 2603, Cape Town, 8000


Email dated 12/07/2019 Good Day 1. Receipt is herewith acknowledged of your

letter/email 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 dated 10 July 2019.

2. Kindly note that the matter is receiving attention

and that a further communication will be addressed to you as soon as circumstances permit.

12/07/2019; no ref.

Saa-rah Adams Western Cape Government of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning Directorate: Development Management, Region 1

Private Bag x9086, Cape Town, 8000


Email dated 19/07/2019 Acknowledgement of pre-application draft basic assessment report for the notice of intent to construction an aquaculture facility on the Remainder of farm no. 85, Pearly Beach.

16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18; 19/07/19

Michelle Pretorius DAFF: Sustainable Aquaculture Management

Department of Agriculture, forestry and Fisheries – Sustainable Aquaculture Management

Private Bag x2, Vlaeberg, Cape Town, 8018

T 021 402 3911 F 021 402 3009

[email protected]

Email dated 30/07/2019 COMMENT REGARDING THE PRE APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH BREDASDORP RD (DEADP REF: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18) The Aquaculture Environmental Impact Assessments Office of the Directorate: Sustainable Aquaculture Management, department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has reviewed the Pre Application Basic Assessment Report (pre app BAR) AND Environmental Management Programme (EMP) for Pearly Beach Seafarm. Please consider the following comments on the pre app BAR application: 1. On Page 10 of the pre app BAR it is stated that the DAFF prescribes the monitoring of the effluent waters however this is

31/07/2019; no ref










32

not correct, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is the mandated authority and the parameters for monitoring are prescribed in the Coastal Waters Discharge Permit administered by the DEA. 2. The pre app BAR indicate that processing will take place on site. A DAFF Marine Aquaculture Fish Processing Establishment (FPE) permit is required and should be applied for before processing any aquaculture products on site. The identified impact “Intake and the discharge of seawater” should include the following mitigation measure: Collection of broodstock shall comply with the Specific Conditions for Abalone as set out in the permit conditions set by the DAFF, ensuring that the movement of animals for the purposes of stocking shall not be allowed between genetic zones. Please note that the Department reserves the right to review and / or provide additional comments in future.

Hassan Parker DEADP: Pollution and Chemicals Management


T 021 483 6877 [email protected]

Email dated 12/08/2019 COMMENT ON THE PRE-APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPR): PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF THE FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH, BREDASDORP ROAD, OVERBERG The Directorate: Pollution and Chemicals Management (D:PCM) acknowledges receipt of the Pre-BAR and EMPr and has the following comment: 1. The development is geographically distant from other abalone farms hence reducing the risk of disease transfer, however, please provide a description of management practises to monitor the risk of disease introduction and the mitigation plans to minimise the likelihood of such outbreaks; 2. The proposed effluent water quality monitoring programme is supported to monitor nutrient rich effluent being discharged back into coastal water please indicate the frequency of the effluent WQ monitoring

19/3/2/4/ E2/29/PMIM050/19; 12/08/19





33

3. The result of the effluent water quality monitoring programme shall be made available on request to this directorate 4. The D:PCM supports the use of the treated sewage effluent following the proposed installation of the on-site package treatment plant, provided that it adheres to parameters set out by the Department of Water and Sanitation and supported by the local municipality 5. Indicate the ground water quality and the sustainable yield of the aquifer in view of ground water to be used as source of freshwater 6. No potable water us to be used for dust suppression 7. It is recommended that a water quality monitoring programme be implemented for the package treatment plant following implementation of the proposed future use of treated effluent for irrigation purpose 8. For supplementary guidance refer to the Department of Environmental Affairs Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline for Aquaculture in South Africa” 9. The D:PCM reminds the applicant of Section 28 of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No. 107 of 1998) i.e. Duty of Care, which states that: “Every person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment must take reasonable measures to prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring, or in so far as such harm to the environmental is authorised by law or cannot reasonable be avoided for stopped, to minimise and rectify such pollution or degradation of the environment” Kindly be informed that the D:PCM reserves the right to review the provided comments should additional information become available.

Rulien Volschenk

Overberg District Municipality

Private Bag x22,


Email dated 13/08/2019

18/5/5/4




34

Bredasdrop, 7280

RE: NOTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR A BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS: PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY DEA&DP Ref No.: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 (NEMA) The Overberg District Municipality’s department of Environmental management services values the opportunity to give input on the Basic Assessment Report. According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan some sections of the proposed development is categorised as both Critical Biodiversity Area and Ecological Support Area. With reference to the Overberg District Municipality’s Spatial Development framework of 2014, please note the following: CBA’S are categorised as Core 1b (CBAs outside of formally protected areas) in terms of the Spatial Planning Categories. The protection of endangered vegetation types and CBA’s are prioritised. The mitigation measures as proposed in the botanical assessment are supported together with the proposal of formally conserving the remaining nature vegetation on the property. Please indicate if the applicant will commit to a Stewardship Agreement or Conservation Easement for formal protection of the remaining Overberg Dune Strandveld and Agulhas Limestone Fynbos on the property. The construction will have an impact on the dune system. It is acknowledged that rehabilitation will be done after construction to mitigate these impacts. It is however proposed that a Dune Maintenance Management Plan be developed for the long-term management of the dune system. It is stated that a security fence will be erected to protect infrastructure and the abalone that is produced on site. Please note that in terms of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act of 2008 (Act 24 of 2008), the development cannot restrict or impede historical access to coastal public property. Please specify if there are any such access


35

points on the property, and if so, how the users of these access routes will be accommodated. Also please indicate if there will be any physical barrier or protection of infrastructure between the property boundary and the sea that will limit or impede access along the coast. Cognisance is taken of the proposed layout design which was informed by the draft Overberg Coastal Setback Line study. The concept of moving non-essential infrastructure behind the proposed setback line is supported. The Southern node development is situated within a High Risk Zone and therefore the applicant needs to take cognisance of the fact that this development is most likely to be impacted upon by coastal processes such as wind-blown sand, coastal erosion, sea-level rise and increased storm surges. Risk of infrastructure damage is solely the responsibility of the applicant. In terms of availability of service, with specific refence to the access from the main road 28 (R42), new authorisation must be obtained from Provincial Road Authority. Current authorisation is dated 07 April 2011 and needs to be revised. The development of a Day-care centre and Medical centre should be done in accordance with the Norms and Standard as set by the Department of health and The Department of Social Development. The Overberg District Municipal Health Service Bylaw of 2019 should also be adhered to. It is recommended that when developing these facilities, the applicant consult with a Municipal Health Practitioner to ensure compliance.

Abdullah Sullimen

Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Waste Management


021 483 8788 [email protected] [email protected]

Email dated 15/08/2019 COMMENTS ON THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. This correspondence serves as an acknowledgment of receipt of the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) dated 11 July 2019 and received by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Sub-Directorate: Waste Management Licensing on 10 July 2019.

19/2/5/3/E2/29/WL0102/19








36

2. This Sub-directorate has the following comments on the BAR: 2.1. The Report mentioned that 37.5% waste comprised of 30% shells and 7.5% viscera will be generated, thus is evident that waste will have to be managed at this aquaculture farm. The report must please specify the volume or mass of waste generated per day. The percentage of 960 tonnes of abalone equates to 360 tonnes of waste, which is substantial. 2.2. The report also mentioned that a workshop area, clinic, houses and a creche will be constructed in the northern and southern development nodes. The report needs to address these matters in more detail, as hazardous waste management may be required, the report needs to indicate how such waste and all other waste at the Facility will be stored, handled and used or disposed of etc. 2.3. The report must indicate more specifically, which external service provider, will be used to assist with the management of the waste at the facility. 2.4. The management of waste under all circumstances must be done in accordance with section 16, the “general duty in respect of waste management” of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEM:WA), 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008). 2.5. Any vegetation that is removed during the construction phase may not be illegally dumped under any circumstances. Such vegetation may be chipped for use or be take to a waste management facility that will process the waste prior to further use or disposal. The waste management hierarchy must be implemented as far as is possible and disposal of waste must be considered as a last resort. 2.6. In consideration of the contents of the BAR, it is advised that the applicability of the following be considered in the Environmental Management Programme - National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) -List of waste management activities that have, or are likely to have, a detrimental effect on the environment, 2013 -National Waste Information regulations, 2012


37

-Waste Classification and Management Regulations, 2013 and National Norms and Standard for the Storage of Waste, 2013 2.7. The proposed development will be pumping 18000 m³ of seawater per hour or 5 m³ of sea water per second, which is substantial. The impacts at the point of abstraction need to be considered in terms of the flow rate, size of conduit and coastal engineering aspects such as tidal behaviour. The specialist report, Marine Statement for the proposed facility, states that “Fish and marine fauna may become trapped against intake lines”. The report does not specify the significance of the impact. More details are kindly requested. 2.8. The report mentioned that the sea water will be pumped from the sump tanks into header tanks, where the sea water can be gravity fed into harvesting tanks. Clarity about the management of the flow through the facility is being requested. The engineers design report will be very informative as well. 2.9 At the point of discharge the facility needs to prevent any litter and waste from being discharged. 2.10 The brine discharge needs to be far enough behind the tidal build up to avoid returning of the brine to the beach area. 3. The Department reserve the right to revise its initial comments and request further information from you based on the information received.

Benjamin Kondoktor Overstrand Municipality

Overstrand Environmental Section

PO Box 26, Gansbaai, 7220


Email dated 19/08/2019 RE: PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF THE FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH, BREDASDORP Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this application. After review the pre-application basic assessment report of above mentioned application the Overstrand Environmental Management Section just wants to comment the following: - A dune maintenance management and rehabilitation plan has to be submitted by the applicant

-




38

- A proper design plan of the two water pipelines over the sandy shore into the sea should be submitted.

Faisal Fakier

Roads Planning Transport and Public Works WESTERN CAPE GOVERNMENT

PO Box 2603, Cape Town, 8000

T 083 408 9315 [email protected]

Email dated 20/08/2019 Dear Michelle, Cognisance is taken of the Pre-application Basic Assessment report dated 11 July 2019. It is noted that a Traffic Impact Statement has not been undertaken. We would require a TIS to address the following matters in the final report: 1. Trip generation and class of vehicles 2. Access details (width, stacking) 3. Turning lanes 4. Signage For this stage, the Branch offers no objection, but please note that we would require the TIS for the final report.

Job 27121

Saa-rah Adams Western Cape Government of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning Directorate: Development Management, Region 1



Email dated 30/08/2019 COMMENT ON THE PRE-APPLICATION DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT (“BAR”) FOR THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSTRUCT AN AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON TH REMAINDER OF FARM NO. 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. The above mentioned document and letter dated 11 July 2019, received by this Department on the 10 July 2019 and the Departments correspondence dated 19 July 2019, refer. 2. According to the information submitted to this Department, it is noted that the proposed entails the following; 2.1. The phased development of an abalone farm and associated infrastructure which includes pipelines, a pump house, sump, an on-site hatchery and a processing area with a total development footprint of approximately 19.42 ha. 2.2. The site is located along the rocky shoreline of Pearly Beach within the Coastal Public Property (“CPP”) as defined in the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal

16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18







39

Management Act 2014, within 100m of the high water mark of the sea. 3. This Department’s comments are as follows: 3.1. Having considered the information contained in the draft pre-application BAR, you are hereby advised that only those activities applied for will be considered for authorisation. The onus is on the application to ensure that all the applicable listed activities are applied for an assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) process. Omission of any activity may invalidate the application. 3.2. Please ensure the Construction and Operational Environmental Management Programme (“EMPr”) contains recommendations and mitigation measures based on the findings of the specialist and technical reports. The EMPr must include more detail with response to the methods that will be used for implementation, the frequency at which it will be implemented and the parties responsible for the required actions. In addition, the expected outcome (targets) for the on-going maintenance activities must be quantified. 3.3. The Department notes the recommendations made in the botanical Assessment Report dated June 2019, compiled by Fynbos Ecoscapes, which includes search and rescue operation of a red data species, bulb species and other plants of importance. This must be undertaken by a qualified botanical specialist prior to commencement of construction activities. The botanical specialist further recommends that a conservation management plan must be developed for the long term management of ecological processes of the area, which includes fire management, movement of fauna and pollination. This conservation management plan must form part of the EMPr to be submitted with the final BAR. 3.4. The proposed development is located seaward of the high water mark. It is recommended that either the operational section of the EMPr be amended to include a Maintenance Management Plan (“MMP”) for the future maintenance of


40

infrastructure seaward of the high water mark or the sea, or that a separate MMP document be drafted and included in the final BAR. 3.5. The Public Participation Process must comply with the requirements of Regulation 41 of the EIA Regulation 2014, and proof of compliance with all the steps undertaken must be included in the final BAR. 3.6. The Department notes the Visual Impact Assessment Report dated June 2019 compiled by Bernard Oberholzer and Quinton Lawson. Please ensure that the recommendations and mitigation measures pertaining to the assessment are incorporated in the final design layout of the proposed development. This must be included (in the) final BAR and EMPr. 3.7. Comments from, but not limited to, the following relevant authorities must be obtained during the Public Participation process and included in the BAR submitted for decision-making: - Cape Nature - Heritage Western Cape - Department of Public Works - Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts - Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Directorate Biodiversity and Coastal Management - Overberg District Municipality; and - Overstrand Municipality 3.8. Omission of any required information in terms of Appendices 1 and 4 of the EIA Regulations 2014, with regards to the final submission of the BAR and EMPr respectively to the Department, may result in the application for Environmental Authorisation being refused. 3.9. Be advised that an original signed and dated applicant declaration is required to be submitted with the final BAR to this Department for decision-making. It is important to note that by signing thus declaration, the applicant is confirming that they are aware and have taken cognisance of the contents of the report submitted for decision-making. Furthermore, through signing this


41

declaration, the applicant is making a commitment that they are both willing and able to implement the necessary mitigation, management and monitoring measures recommended within the report with respect to this application. 3.10. In addition to the above, please ensure that original signed and dated Environmental Assessment Practitioner (“EAP”) declaration is also submitted with the final BAR for decision-making. 4. Kindly quote the abovementioned reference number in any future correspondence in respect of the application. 5. Please note that it is an offence in terms of Section 49A(1)(a) of the NEMA for a person to commence with a listed activity unless the Competent Authority has granted an Environmental Authorisation for the undertaking of the activity. Failure to comply with the requirements of Section 24F of the NEMA will result in the matter being referred to the Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Directorate of this Department. A person convicted of an offence in terms of the above is liable to a fine not exceeding R10 million or to imprisonment for a person not exceeding 10 years, or to both such fine and imprisonment. 6. This Department reserve the right to revise or withdraw any comments or request further information from you based on any information received.

Rafeeq le Roux Breede Gouritz Catchment Management Agency (BGCMA)

Private Bag x3055, Worcester, 6849


Letter dated 28/08/2019 (Received 28/11/2019) COMMENT ON THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS FOR A BAISC ASSESSMENT PROCESS: PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY – REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH (BREDASDORP RD), DEADP REFERENCE NUMBER 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 With reference to the above mentioned report received by this office on the 10/07/2019. This office has reviewed the Preapplication Basic Assessment Report and has the following comments: 1. Section 21 Water Use:

4/10/1/G40M/FARM 385 (REM) PEARLY BEACH




42

The following Water Use in terms of Section 21 of the National Water Act, 1998 (ACT 36 OF 1998) ARE APPLICABLE:

- Section 21 (a) – taking water from water resource - Section 21 € - Waste Discharge Related Water Use in

terms of Section 21 e engaging in a controlled activity: irrigation of any land with waste or water containing waste generated through any industrial activity or by a water work

- Section 21 (g) – disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource

2. Water Use Authorisation: The above Water Uses require water use authorisation in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) i.e Water Use Licence or General Authorisation. This office notes that a previous General Authorisation with reference number 4/5/6G40M/1 FARM 385 HENDRIK CHRISTOFFEL DE WET TRUST was confirmed on 31/03/2014. This General Authorisation has since expired. Please note that an application must be made for Integrated Water Use Authorisation on the Electronic Water Use License and Authorisation Application System (e-WULAAS) for all the above identified water uses. Before new water use authorisation can be considered, the water user must provide a Water Balance and proof that the water use as authorised is paid up to date. The Water Use Application must be supported with a Waste and Water Quality Management Plan and a updated layout plan to indicate the location of all water and waste water related infrastructure. 3. A freshwater screening must be done by a suitably qualified SACNASP registered professional to determine if there are any watercourses as defined in the National Water Act, 1998 (ACT 36 OF 1998) on site and if Section 21 c and I water use is applicable. General Comments 4. All relevant sections and regulations of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) regarding water use must be adhered to.


43

5. No use of water and / or storage of water is permitted, unless the applicant has formally obtained a license in terms of Section 41 of the National Water Act (ACT 36 OF 1998) ABD / OR Formal Authorisation In terms OF General Authorisation issued under Section 39 (Government Notice 399 dated 26 March 2004) and or if it is authorised under Schedule 1 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) and / or if it is an Existing Lawful Water Use. 6. No pollution of surface water or groundwater resources may occur dur to any activity 7. No stormwater runoff from any premises containing waste, or water containing waste emanating from industrial activities and premises may be discharged into a water resource, 8. All relevant section and regulation of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) regarding the disposal of solid waste must be adhered to. Solid waste may only be disposed of not an authorised solid waste facility in terms of the above mentioned legislation. Please be advised that all relevant sections and regulations of the National Water Act (1998) (Act 36 of 1998) regarding water use must be adhered to. The use of water without the required authorisation in terms of the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) may be regarding as unlawful and a criminal offence. The onus remains on the registered property owner to confirm adherence to any relevant legislation with regards to the activities which might trigger and / or need authorisation for.

Mercia Liddle / Lynn Jacobs

Western Cape Government: Biodiversity and Coastal Management

Private Bag X9086, Cape Town, 8000


Email dated 03/09/2019 RE: PRE-APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. The request for comment from this Department sub directorate: Coastal Management on the above mentioned -pre-application Basic Assessment Report received on the 10 July 2019, refers. 2. The Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008, (Act No. 24 of 2008) (“NEM:ICMA”) is a Specific Environmental Management

042/2019




44

Act under the umbrella of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (“NEMA”). The NEM: ICMA sets out to manage the nations coastal resource, promotes social equity and best economic use of coastal resources whilst protecting the natural environment. In terms of Section 38 of NEM: ICMA, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (‘The Department”) is the provincial lead agency for coastal management in the Western Cape as well as the competent authority the “Management of public launch sites in the coastal zone (GN No. 4977, 27 June 2014 “Public Launch Site Regulations”. The Department, in pursuant of fulfilling its mandate, is implementing the Provincial Coastal Management Programme (“PCMP”). The PCMP is a five (5) year strategic document, and its purpose is to provide all department and organisation with an integrated, coordinated and uniform approach to coastal management in the Province. A key priority of the PCMP is the Estuary Management Programme, which is predominantly implemented through the Estuary Management Framework and Implementation Strategy (“EMFIS”) project. The Department is implementing estuary management in accordance with the NEM:ICMA and the National Estuarine Management Protocol (“NEMP”). Relevant guidelines, Estuarine Management Plans, Mouth Management Plans need to be considered when any listed activities are triggered in the Estuarine Functional Zone. 3. The sub-Directorate: Coastal Management (“SD:cm”) has reviewed the information as specified above and have the following commentary: 3.1. Due to the effects of climate change, it was predicted that the Western Cape would experience, inter alia; changes in temperature, decrease in rainfall and an increase in the frequency and magnitude of storm surges along the coats. It is in light of this complex and dynamic nature of the coastline that the NEM:ICMA was promulgated. The NEM: ICMA provides a framework for the integrated management of the coast with the aim of preserving, protecting, extending and enhancing the status of coastal public property and securing equitable access to the benefits and opportunities for the coast. As such, the NEM: ICMA


45

provides for various zones and provides a framework for the management of these zones. 3.2. The increased effects of climate change, sea level rise and increased storm surges in coastal environment obliges the Department to take a more cautious approach with regard to considering development along the coast. In 2016, the Department commissioned the refinement of the delineation of the Overberg Coastal management Line to ensure that development is regulated in a manner appropriate to risks and sensitivities in the coastal zone. The principle purpose of the coastal management line (“CML”) is to protect coastal public property (“CPP”), private property and public safety; to protect the coastal protection zone (“CPZ”) and to preserve the aesthetic value of the coastal zone. 3.3. The proposed development of an aquaculture facility will consist of two development nodes. It is note that the development is in line with the Provincial Spatial Development Framework (“PSDF”), the Overstrand Integrated development Plan (“IDP”) and within the objectives of Operation Phakisa’s Ocean’s Economy Programme. It is further noted that evidence of alleged poaching activities has been found on the Remainder of Farm 385. Where poaching activities are witnessed, such activities must be reported to relevant enforcement officials, i.e. Environmental Management Inspector or Fisheries Control Officers. 3.4. A significant portion of the proposed development fails seaward of the CML and is located within the CPZ as defined in Section 16 of the NEM:ICMA and delineated as part of the Overberg CML project in 2016. In terms of Section 17 of the NEM:ICMA, “The coastal protection zone is established for enabling the use of land that is adjacent to coastal public property or that plays a significant role in a coastal ecosystem to be managed, regulated or restricted in order to- i. protect the ecological integrity, natural character and the economic, social and aesthetic value of coastal public property; ii. avoid increasing the effect or severity of natural hazards in the coastal zone


46

iii. protect people, property and economic activities from risks arising from dynamic coastal processes, including the risk of sea-level rise; iv. maintain the natural functioning of the littoral active zone; v. maintain the productive capacity of the coastal zone by protecting the ecological integrity of the coastal environment; and vi. make land near the seashore available to organs of state and other authorised persons for- (i) performing rescue or (ii) temporarily depositing objects and material washed up by coastal waters” As such, Section 63 of the NEM:ICMA is therefore applicable to the proposed development and must be adequately considered. 3.5. The Basic Assessment Report (“BAR”) has considered alternatives in terms of the environmental footprint, locality, associated impacts and specialist recommendations. Based on the information provided: i. equitable public access to the coast is one of the objectives of the NEM:ICMA which is further provided for in the Western Cape Provincial Coastal Access Strategy and Plan (“WCPCASP”). Be advised that the Department has commissioned the ‘Overberg Coastal Access Audit and Pilot Study’ which was finalised in December 2018. The study notes that there is currently no access via the property however, longshore pedestrian access is possible. It is further noted that the intake and discharge pipelines will be located underneath the surface of the beach to ensure that longshore public access is note restricted. Be advised that the existing longshore access must continue and must not be prohibited. ii. The NEM:ICMA defines the littoral active zone as the following: “…any land forming part of or adjacent to, the seashore that is- a) Unstable and dynamic as a result of natural processes; and b) Characterised by dunes, beaches sand bars and other land forms composed of unconsolidated sand, pebbles or other such material which is either unvegetated or partially vegetated.


47

The proposed development is located in close proximity to an within the littoral active zone (as defined in NEM:ICMA) and is vegetated by indigenous vegetation which has covered the dune system and prevented sand migration over time. Due to the nature of the development, it is acknowledged that the intake and effluent pipelines must be installed below the high water mark, The pipelines have been designed to withstand extreme weather event associated with climate change by installing the pipeline underneath the fore dune and beach, as opposed to being above ground. In addition, public access to the coast will not be restricted. Of particular concern is the disturbance to the dune. The dune serves a specific function and any disturbance to the dune will completely change the functionality of the dune. As such, it is extremely important to implement the mitigation measures to minimise the risk of erosion and dune destruction. The BAR identified blasting as a means to secure intake and effluent channels at a desired depth below the surface. The SD;CM is opposed to any form of blasting in the coastal area as the effects on the receiving environmental is significant. Alternative must therefore be sought. iii. It is further proposed to artificially increase the dune height to decrease the visual impact f the development, and to allow for the dine to form part of the ecological corridor by incorporating a 100m buffer along the dune. The dune height increase is acceptable, provided that it is done in a manner that will not negatively impact on the system, and that measures be put in place to ensure the long term functioning of the dune system. iv. the farm is located within a Critical Biodiversity Area (“CBA”). According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Plan (“WCBSP”), 2017, the desired management objective for these areas is to maintain it in a natural or near-natural state with no further loss of habitat. Degraded area must be rehabilitated, and only low impact, biodiversity– sensitive land uses are appropriate. The


48

farm is also located within an Ecological Support Area (ESA) which supports the functioning of the surrounding CBA. The predominant vegetation on the site consists of Overberg Dune Strandveld (least threatened) and Agulhas Limestone Fynbos *Vulnerable). It is noted that the proposed development will result in the removal of only ~19 ha (two development nodes) of vegetation, leaving the remaining ~99ha intact. In addition, of concern is the impacts of the proposed development on faunal species which exist on the site. the development has the potential to fragment the habitats of these species, displacing them into the surrounding area. However, it is noted that ecological corridors will be maintained to allow these species to move without restriction. Furthermore, the SD:CM supports search and rescue of vulnerable vegetation being carried out. V. It is noted that the proposed development will have a number of socio-economic benefits such as housing opportunities, skills development and employment opportunities. It is further noted that the area is well known for extensive abalone poaching operation. This the SD:CM agrees that the site operations and presence of security infrastructure may act as a deterrent for poaching activities. vi. Be advised that driving excavators or vehicles on the beach is prohibited without an ORV permit as per the Control of Vehicles in the Coastal Zone Regulations, 2014. As such, the applicant may obtain the relevant form/documentation for an ORV permit form the National Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts [email protected] or Nontsasa Tonjeni [email protected] vii. The size and nature of the development will result in a significant visual impact as the area is rural in nature. The Visual Impact Assessment Report is noted and the SD:CM recommends that due consideration be given to the mitigation measures highlighted in the report. 3.6. It is evident that the applicant has considered provision within the relevant legislation. The mitigation measures and


49

monitoring included in the Environmental Managements Programme (EMPr) for both the construction and operational phases are noted. Due to the nature of the development and the locality thereof, it is imperative to implement these measures to ensure that the receiving environmental is not negatively affected. 4. The applicant must be reminded of their general duty of care and the remediation of environmental damage, in terms of Section 28(1) of NEMA, which, specifically states that: ‘…Every person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment must take reasonable measures or prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring, or, in so far as such harm to the environment is authorised by law or cannot be reasonably avoided or stopped, to minimise and rectify such pollution or degradation of the environment…” together with Section 58 of the NEM:ICMA which refers to one’s duty to avoid causing adverse effects on the coastal environment. 5. The SD:CM reserves the right to revise its comment and request further information based on any information that may be received

Chanel Rampartab

Cape Nature Private bag X29, Gatesville, 7766


Email dated 10/09/2019 Pre-application BAR for proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach (Theewaterskloof Municipality ref: 111) CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the application for a proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach. Please note that these comments only pertain to the biodiversity-related impacts and not to the overall desirability of the application. The farm is 117.84 ha in extent. The proposed development is approximately 19.42 ha, split into a southern (16.19 ha) and northern (3.23 ha) development node, to be developed in six phases over 20 years. A 2011 approval for the establishment of an aquaculture facility on the property has since lapsed. Due to

SSD14/2/5/1/7/2/385-re_abalone_PearlyBeach2




50

the inherent nature of such aquaculture facilities, the development is proposed below the coastal setback line. A. Alternatives proposed Three alternatives were proposed. Alternative 1 has been considered a no-go, and Alternative 2 did not account for biodiversity corridors and features. Since Alternative 3 accounts for recommendations made by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) and the botanical specialist, only Alternative 3 is discussed henceforth. B. Landscape conservation value According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (CapeNature, 2017), the desired management objective of a Critical Biodiversity Area that is in good condition (CBA1) is: “Keep natural, with no further loss of habitat. Degraded areas should be rehabilitated. Only low-impact, biodiversity-sensitive land-uses are appropriate.” The proposed development occurs in CBA1, which will limit the development potential of the site. Similarly, the desired management objective for Ecological Support Areas that are intact (ESA1) is: “Maintain in a functional, near-natural state. Some habitat loss is acceptable, provided the underlying biodiversity objectives and ecological functioning are not compromised.” The coastal edge of the property falls within an ESA1. According to the National Biodiversity Assessment (NBA 2011), the site contains Overberg Dune Strandveld, which is least threatened because it is well protected elsewhere. Although least threatened, the area contains atypically high levels of endemism and Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) and therefore has greater biodiversity value compared to typical Overberg Dune Strandveld. The botanical specialist ground-truthed patches of Agulhas Limestone Fynbos (vulnerable) in calcrete outcrops in the Overberg Dune Strandveld. The botanical specialist assigned a medium-high regional conservation value to the site. Three plant SCC were recorded in the development footprint. More SCC are likely to occur but were not detected due to the field survey taking place when flowering geophytes and annuals were not detectable. CapeNature recommends a spring field survey to avoid such type II false negative errors. Note that search and


51

rescue is considered as best practice and therefore does not constitute mitigation. A botanical specialist must be contracted to undertake search and rescue, and rehabilitation in accordance with a rehabilitation plan. C. Terrestrial development As outlined above, the development of the southern and northern nodes would result in the loss of CBA1. The existing jeep tracks will be upgraded and deviated from in some places. In addition to the municipal supply, a solar array and photovoltaic panels are proposed to provide electricity to the operation. Freshwater is supplied from an existing borehole with an existing General Authorisation, which will provide sufficient capacity for the construction and operation of the development. A conservancy tank is proposed for Phase 1, which will be upgraded to four on-site package plants in Phase 2. Conservancy tanks pose a significant risk to coastal and freshwater ecosystems; therefore, alternative sewage systems must be investigated. Solid waste is to be disposed at municipal sites. D. Coastal impacts A lease agreement in terms of the Sea-Shore Act, 1935 (Act No. 21 of 1935) with CapeNature is underway for the sections of the intake and effluent lines below the high-water mark. An application for a Coastal Waters Discharge Permit (CWDP) is underway. A marine statement has provided background information; however, CapeNature requests a detailed coastal impact study for an aquaculture facility of this proportion. The coastal impact study should provide detailed information on, inter alia: • Characterisation of the coastline, wave action, thermoclines and haloclines. • Operational limits o Through-screen intake velocity to reduce impingement and entrainment. o Effluent Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration to limit turbidity of receiving waters. o Effluent Nitrogen concentration to limit eutrophication of receiving waters.


52

o Effluent temperature in relation to the receiving waters to prevent localised and long-term impacts on species physiology and upwelling dynamics. • MMP to address: o Annual monitoring of the re-establishment of benthic community. o Annual water-jet cleaning of the mesh screen on the seaward end of the intake pipes. • Faunal impact assessment to determine faunal species present on both the coastal terrestrial environment and below the high water mark, and the associated mitigation measures to reduce impacts during both the construction and operation phase. Additionally, a human-wildlife interaction statement is needed to address the potential of Hartlaub’s gulls preying on the abalone on site. E. Conservation of remainder The remainder of the farm (98.42 ha) is proposed for conservation as a Conservation Area, and a Conservation Management Plan, including fire and invasive alien species management, has been drafted. When conserved, the site will form a corridor between two components of the Walker Bay Nature Reserve Complex, i.e. Uilkraalsmond Nature Reserve and Pearly Beach Nature Reserve, as well as other high conservation priority sites in the area. CapeNature requests further detail on the proposed mechanism for conservation. If the site is proposed for formal protection, then the proposed conservation area must be presented to the Western Cape Protected Areas Expansion and Stewardship Review Committee for a recommendation on which category of stewardship is required to adequately protect the remaining biodiversity on the property. Given that approximately 19 ha of CBA1 will be developed, a formal biodiversity offset may be required. In terms of the Draft National Biodiversity Offset Policy (Government Gazette No. 40733, 2017) and the Western Cape Guidelines on Biodiversity Offsets (DEA&DP 2015), a biodiversity offset may apply to (i) CBAs; (ii) threatened ecosystems; and (iii) important biodiversity process areas. Should a biodiversity offset be deemed necessary in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy, then a suitably qualified biodiversity offset specialist should be contracted to


53

identify and secure a biodiversity offset in terms of the abovementioned draft policy and guidelines. The 98.42 ha remainder of the site that is proposed for conservation may form part of this offset. F. Conclusion CapeNature supports the recommendations of the botanical specialist and requests: (i) a follow up spring botanical survey be undertaken; (ii) a detailed coastal impact study be undertaken; (iii) further details on the mechanism for proposed conservation; and (iv) the applicability of a biodiversity offset is determined. CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments and request further information based on any additional information that may be received.

Stephanie-Anne Barnardt

Heritage Western Cape



Email dated 11/09/2019 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT: PROPOSED ABALONE FARM, PEARLY BEACH SUBMITTED IN TERMS OF SECTION 38(8) OF THE NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT (ACT 25 OF 1999) The matter above has reference. This matter was discussed as the Impact Assessment Committee (IACom) meeting held on 15 August 2019.09.13 It was noted that The matter was tabled at Archaeology, Palaeontology and Meteorites Committee (APM) meeting held on the 21 July 2019 whereby the Committee recommended that the revised HOA include: a. The archaeologist survey tracks for the inland development footprint b. A comment from maritime section of SAHRA on the potential impacts of the pipelines for the abalone farm c. pre-construction and during the fencing of the four significant sites, an archaeologist must undertake test excavation under workplan. INTERIM COMMENT The committee will await the submission of the Final HIA which addresses concerns raised by the APM.

Case number 18090507SB1002E





54

HWC reserves the right to request additional information as required. Should you have any further queries, please contact the official above and quote the case number

Chanel Rampartab

Cape Nature Private bag X29, Gatesville, 7766


Email dated 10/10/2019 Dear Ms Naylor Response to comments regarding pre-application BAR for proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the response regarding the pre-application BAR for a proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach. Please note that these comments only pertain to the biodiversity-related impacts. The comment is structured in direct response to the sections set out in the response letter. 1. The information will be used to provide background to the coastal dynamics of the abalone farm site, and will assist the coastal specialist in determining the appropriate mitigation measures for the intake and effluent pipelines during the operational phase. 2. The passive intake will reduce the risk of impingement. The coastal specialist should account for this in the significance of impacts in the report. 3. The study referred to was not attached. The coastal specialist should account for the applicability of the study in the report. 4. The maintenance measures proposed are appropriate and should be further detailed in the MMP. 5. Noted. 6. Noted. 7. Noted. 8. As per previous comment, note that the Steering Committee will first assess the biodiversity value of the site in order to recommend an appropriate stewardship category (if any). 9. The applicability of the biodiversity offset is independent of the financial feasibility. If a biodiversity offset is deemed required, and the applicant is unable to finance the securing and

SSD14/2/5/1/7/2/385-re_abalone_PearlyBeach2




55

maintenance of the offset area, the environmental authorisation may not be granted by the competent authority. 10. CapeNature would like the opportunity to provide comment during the next round of public participation, specifically on the coastal impact study. CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments.

Funanani Ditinti The Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF): Oceans and Coasts

- 021 819 2499 [email protected]

Email dated 18/10/2019

The Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) in

its Branch Oceans and Coasts (OC) reviewed the Final Impact

Assessment Report. Comments and recommendations are

provided below:

1. The applicant “Pearly Beach Seafarm (pty) ltd “must take note

that the Branch OC has the mandate to ensure that the use of

natural resources in the coastal zone and development

associated with the coastal zone is socially and economically

justifiable and ecologically sustainable to ensure the achievement

of principles and objective of the National Environmental

Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act (Act No 24 of

2008) herein referred as (the “ICM Act), and guarantee that the

coastal environment will be managed, protected and conserved

throughout all phases of the proposed project.

2. Taking into account that activities associated with the

proposed Establishment of an Abalone Farm on the Remainder of

the Farm 385, Pearly Beach, Bresdasdorp Road, will be taking

place within the coastal zone, the competent authority is

reminded of their duty to adhere and implement Section 63 of

ICM Act by assessing the impacts of the proposed development

on but not limited to coastal public property, protection zone or

coastal access land by ensuring that the proposed development

will take place cautiously (avoiding, mitigating and managing

potential adverse impacts) in order to achieve the principles and




56

objectives ICM Act by conserving and protecting the coastal zone

as a whole.

The report outlines that it is based on specialist input, site factors

need and desirability and project requirements, that the finding

of this report identify Alternative 3 as the preferred layout

alternative. However, the Branch OC is of the opinion that this

report has failed to engage sufficiently in the comprehensive

assessment and description of the investigation of impacts

associated with each alternative. Furthermore, the report fails to

demonstrate that a comprehensive coastal impact assessment

was conducted to inform the selection of alternative 3 as the

most suitable alternative.

4. The Branch OC recommends that the coastal assessment

report includes, but not limited to the following:

1. A detailed description of the proposed construction activities

that are to be undertaken within coastal zone and associated

potential impacts for all the proposed project phases

2. The correct number of pipelines to be constructed and also

stipulating which of these will be intended for intake and

discharge for alternative presented

3. The maintenance / monitoring requirements for the pipelines

and assess potential impacts associated with the maintenance

activities for all alternatives

4. A detailed assessment of all alternatives (description of

material for the pipeline and associated impacts, methodology

and technology to be applied when installing the pipeline,

including their advantages and disadvantaged

5. Identification of two offshore zones for the proposed

establishment of abstraction and discharge of effluent pipelines.


57

Based on this it is a recommendation of this Branch that the EAP

impact assessment (advantaged and disadvantaged) associated

with the two identified zones; and

6. A detailed assessment of the proposed construction activities

on marine fauna, impacts of sediment removal, blasting on the

seabed, on the fore dune (coastal dynamics) and impacts of post

construction / maintenance activities on the coastal zone and

cumulative and unintended impacts of the proposed

development on the coastal one throughout all project phases.

5. The report stipulates that “it should be noted that it has been

confirmed that abalone effluent water originating from abalone

farms present no risk to the receiving environment due to the

nature of the effluent water which is very similar to the intake

water. This can be confirmed by the DAFF report by Probyn Et al.

2014. The Branch OC further requests the EAP to send this report

to the officials of the Department mentioned below to confirm

the information.

6. Should the Competent authority decide to grant an

authorisation for this proposed project, a construction and

maintenance ORV permit will be require for driving within the

coastal zone to carry out activities associated with the proposed

development (Maintenance activities associated with driving

within the coastal zone should be included within the

maintenance plan to be developed). The applicant must contact

the Branch: OC for more information, conditions, requirements

and application process to acquire a permit on

[email protected]

7. From the assessment of activities associated with the proposed

establishment of an Abalone Farm on the Remainder of the Farm

385, Pearly Beach, Bredasdorp Road, it is the conclusion of this



58

Branch that the proposed development has the potential of

causing adverse impacts on the marine environment if carried out

incautious approach. To ensure that the coastal zone is

protected, managed and conserved the applicant is advised to

familiarise themselves with Section 28 Duty of Care under the

National Environmental Management Act 1998 (Act Mo 107 of

1998) (NEMA) by taking reasonable measures to prevent

pollution or degradation to the coastal zone throughout all

proposed project phases.

8. The applicant is reminded that no listed activity may take place

in the coastal zone prior to an environmental authorisation and

additional activities that have not been assessed that requires

authorization (either in support or not of the proposed project)

may take place within the coastal zone without an authorisation

from the competent authority to avoid causing adverse effects on

marine environment. Failure to adhere to this requirement may

result in statutory enforcement measures being taken against the

applicant.

The Branch Oceans and Coasts recommends that the Draft Basic

Assessment report identify and provide sufficient remedial /

mitigation measures to avoid, manage, minimize or mitigate

potential impacts within the coastal zone.

Kindly note the following:

i. These comments must be sent to the competent authority for

consideration and implementation and the EAP is advised to

forward the Branch OC the proof.


59

ii. That the department reserves the right to revise our initial

comments and we may request further information based on any

additional information that might be received.

iii. All future correspondence and documentation (hard copy and

an electronic copy) must be submitted to our office for the

attention to Funanani Ditinti, Directorate Coastal Conservation

Strategies using the following contact details: Physical address:

Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) Branch

Oceans and Coasts, 2 East Pier Building, Est pier Road, Victoria

and Alfred Waterfront, Cape town 8001.

iv. For further information please don’t hesitate to contact the

following officials of the Branch OC responsible for Environmental

Impact Assessments:

Ms Funanani Ditinti

Mr Xolani Myanga

Mc Nontsasa Tonjeni

Elrina Versveld Pearly Beach Conservancy

PO Box 60, Pearly Beach, 7221

084 350 4107 028 381 9023

[email protected]

Email dated 30/10/2019 Dear Michelle Thank you for the opportunity to raise concerns and comments on the proposed abalone farm North West of Pearly Beach. We have grave concerns about the construction of the pump pipes and drainage access routes to the sea, (intake and outflow are in separate locations) as there is no viable bedrock and excavation would be necessary, possibly causing redistribution of sand along the coast negatively effecting Blue Water Bay, the official boat launching site and other beaches, including Castle Beach (new Blue flag status). Public access restrictions during construction and after completion is also a concern as the free movement of walkers, cyclists and general visitors to the coastal public area would be restricted and in the case of Danger Point Abalone farm prohibited all together.

-




60

Damage to sensitive primary and secondary dune systems during and after construction. Employment opportunities are zero or at best minimal for the local community of Pearly Beach, this has been the case for both abalone farms in Buffelsjag, where they employ from outside the community. Power required to run pumps and farm, where would this power come from and how much noise, air and visual pollution would this produce? The property is adjacent to a nature reserve with a sensitive category A river estuary: Is this the best place for an abalone farm? As the whole property is overgrown with aliens, it will be appreciated if it can be made a condition of approval to remove the alien vegetation on the property. Thank you for your time and looking forward to your feedback. Regards, Elrina Versfeld Secretary: Pearly Beach Bewarea Conservancy Posbus/P O Box 60, Pearly Beach 7221 084 350 4107 028 381 9023

Cor van der Walt

Western Cape Department of Agriculture

Private Bag X1, Elsenburg, Cape Town


Letter dated 16/10/2019 The Western Cape Department of Agriculture: Land Use Management, has no objection against the proposed application.

20/9/2/4/1/185

ADDITIONAL ROUND OF PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC PARTICIPATION




61


COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT

PROJECT: PROPOSED ABALONE FARM, RE 385, PEARLY BEACH

PRE-APPLICATION BAR

NAME: COMMENT: RESPONSE: REFERENCE: Doret Taljaard on behalf of Ald / Rdh Dudley Coetzee

Executive Mayor Overstrand Municipality

Email dated 10/07/2019 Dear Ms Naylor I am directed by the Executive Mayor, Ald Dudley Coetzee, to acknowledge receipt of your email below. The content of your correspondence will be discussed with the Ald Coetzee. Regards

Noted -

Elrina Versfeld Pearly Beach Conservancy

Email dated 11/07/2019 Request to be registered as I&AP

Registered as I&AP -

Shirley Coetzee Pearly Beach Ratepayers Association

- Registered as I&AP -


62

Lyle Martin Department of Transport and Public Works

Email dated 12/07/2019 Good Day 3. Receipt is herewith acknowledged of your letter/email

16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 dated 10 July 2019. 4. Kindly note that the matter is receiving attention and that a further

communication will be addressed to you as soon as circumstances permit.

Noted -

Saa-rah Adams of Western Cape Government of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning Directorate: Development Management, Region 1

Email dated 19/07/2019 Acknowledgement of pre-application draft basic assessment report for the notice of intent to construction an aquaculture facility on the Remainder of farm no. 85, Pearly Beach.

Noted 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18

Michelle Pretorius Department of Agriculture, forestry and Fisheries – Sustainable Aquaculture Management

Email dated 30/07/2019 COMMENT REGARDING THE PRE APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH BREDASDORP RD (DEADP REF: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18) The Aquaculture Environmental Impact Assessments Office of the Directorate: Sustainable Aquaculture Management, department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has reviewed the Pre Application Basic Assessment Report (pre app BAR) and Environmental Management Programme (EMP) for Pearly Beach Seafarm. Please consider the following comments on the pre app BAR application: 1. On Page 10 of the pre app BAR it is stated that the DAFF prescribes the monitoring of the effluent waters however this is not correct, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is the mandated authority and the parameters for monitoring are prescribed in the Coastal Waters Discharge Permit administered by the DEA. 2. The pre app BAR indicate that processing will take place on site. A DAFF Marine Aquaculture Fish Processing Establishment (FPE) permit is required and should be applied for before processing any aquaculture products on site. The identified impact “Intake and the discharge of seawater” should include the following mitigation measure:

Noted and amended accordingly Noted

12/08/2019 19/3/2/4/E2/29/PMIM050/19


63

Collection of broodstock shall comply with the Specific Conditions for Abalone as set out in the permit conditions set by the DAFF, ensuring that the movement of animals for the purposes of stocking shall not be allowed between genetic zones. Please note that the Department reserves the right to review and / or provide additional comments in future.

Noted and included

Hassan Parker Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Pollution and Chemicals Management

Email dated 12/08/2019 COMMENT ON THE PRE-APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPR): PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF THE FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH, BREDASDORP ROAD, OVERBERG The Directorate: Pollution and Chemicals Management (D:PCM) acknowledges receipt of the Pre-BAR and EMPr and has the following comment: 1. The development is geographically distant from other abalone farms hence reducing the risk of disease transfer, however, please provide a description of management practises to monitor the risk of disease introduction and the mitigation plans to minimise the likelihood of such outbreaks; 2. The proposed effluent water quality monitoring programme is supported to monitor nutrient rich effluent being discharged back into coastal water please indicate the frequency of the effluent WQ monitoring 3. The result of the effluent water quality monitoring programme shall be made available on request to this directorate 4. The D:PCM supports the use of the treated sewage effluent following the proposed installation of the on-site package treatment plant, provided that it adheres to parameters set out by the Department of Water and Sanitation and supported by the local municipality

1. A Biosecurity Plan will be formulated for the operational phase of the abalone farm. This is standard practice for such operations. Mitigation measures are varied and include, amongst others: - Admittance protocol - Use of footbaths and restricted areas - Quarantine for any potential new animals brought to the farm - Implementation of Biosecurity signage and biosecurity zones on the farm 2. The Water Quality monitoring will be done in accordance with the conditions of the Coastal Waters Discharge Permit to be issued by DEA: Oceans and Coasts. Please also refer to Appendix G for the Probyn et all study which confirms that abalone effluent water is low risk and close to ambient 3. Noted 4. The effluent waters will be tested on a regular basis in line with the requirements to be issued by the BGCMA in the authorisation

19/3/2/4/ E2/29/PMIM050/19


64

5. Indicate the ground water quality and the sustainable yield of the aquifer in view of ground water to be used as source of freshwater 6. No potable water us to be used for dust suppression 7. It is recommended that a water quality monitoring programme be implemented for the package treatment plant following implementation of the proposed future use of treated effluent for irrigation purpose 8. For supplementary guidance refer to the Department of Environmental Affairs Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline for Aquaculture in South Africa” 9. The D:PCM reminds the applicant of Section 28 of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No. 107 of 1998) i.e. Duty of Care, which states that: “Every person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment must take reasonable measures to prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring, or in so far as such harm to the environmental is authorised by law or cannot reasonable be avoided for stopped, to minimise and rectify such pollution or degradation of the environment” Kindly be informed that the D:PCM reserves the right to review the provided comments should additional information become available.

5. The groundwater will be tested on a regular basis and will meet the DWS Water Quality Standard in order to be used for drinking water. The abstraction is authorised under General Authorisation. 6. Noted 7. Noted and included as a condition in the BAR 8. Noted 9. Noted

Rulien Volschenk Overberg District Municipality

Email dated 13/08/2019 RE: NOTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR A BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS: PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY DEA&DP Ref No.: 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 (NEMA) The Overberg District Municipality’s department of Environmental management services values the opportunity to give input on the Basic Assessment Report. According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan some sections of the proposed development is categorised as both Critical Biodiversity Area and Ecological Support Area. With reference to the Overberg District Municipality’s Spatial Development framework of 2014, please note the following:

18/5/5/4


65

CBA’S are categorised as Core 1b (CBAs outside of formally protected areas) in terms of the Spatial Planning Categories. The protection of endangered vegetation types and CBA’s are prioritised. The mitigation measures as proposed in the botanical assessment are supported together with the proposal of formally conserving the remaining nature vegetation on the property. Please indicate if the applicant will commit to a Stewardship Agreement or Conservation Easement for formal protection of the remaining Overberg Dune Strandveld and Agulhas Limestone Fynbos on the property. The construction will have an impact on the dune system. It is acknowledged that rehabilitation will be done after construction to mitigate these impacts. It is however proposed that a Dune Maintenance Management Plan be developed for the long-term management of the dune system. It is stated that a security fence will be erected to protect infrastructure and the abalone that is produced on site. Please note that in terms of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act of 2008 (Act 24 of 2008), the development cannot restrict or impede historical access to coastal public property. Please specify if there are any such access points on the property, and if so, how the users of these access routes will be accommodated. Also please indicate if there will be any physical barrier or protection of infrastructure between the property boundary and the sea that will limit or impede access along the coast. Cognisance is taken of the proposed layout design which was informed by the draft Overberg Coastal Setback Line study. The concept of moving non-essential infrastructure behind the proposed setback line is supported. The Southern node development is situated within a High Risk Zone and therefore the applicant needs to take cognisance of the fact that this development is most likely to be impacted upon by coastal processes such as wind-blown sand, coastal erosion, sea-level rise and increased storm surges. Risk of infrastructure damage is solely the responsibility of the applicant. In terms of availability of service, with specific refence to the access from the main road 28 (R42), new authorisation must be obtained from Provincial Road Authority. Current authorisation is dated 07 April 2011 and needs to be revised. The development of a Day-care centre and Medical centre should be done in accordance with the Norms and Standard as set by the Department of health and The Department of

Noted – a site meeting was undertaken with Cape Nature and the means of conservation of the remainder was discussed with Cape Nature – it was greed that the applicant will implement a Voluntary Nature Reserve Status. A Dune Rehabilitation and Maintenance Management Plan has been completed for the property and is included in the BAR under Appendix App H. Noted – as per the coastal access audit it is noted that the property has no historical access routes to the coast. The pipelines which will cross the beach / CPP will be below ground and therefore will not affect public access along the beach. Noted In process. A Traffic Impact Statement has been completed as per request by the Department of Western Cape Transport and Public Works, and it was concluded that the traffic impact is low. Noted


66

Social Development. The Overberg District Municipal Health Service Bylaw of 2019 should also be adhered to. It is recommended that when developing these facilities, the applicant consult with a Municipal Health Practitioner to ensure compliance.

Abdullah Sullimen Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Waste Management

Email dated 15/08/2019 COMMENTS ON THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. This correspondence serves as an acknowledgment of receipt of the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) dated 11 July 2019 and received by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Sub-Directorate: Waste Management Licensing on 10 July 2019. 2. This Sub-directorate has the following comments on the BAR: 2.1. The Report mentioned that 37.5% waste comprised of 30% shells and 7.5% viscera will be generated, thus is evident that waste will have to be managed at this aquaculture farm. The report must please specify the volume or mass of waste generated per day. The percentage of 960 tonnes of abalone equates to 360 tonnes of waste, which is substantial. 2.2. The report also mentioned that a workshop area, clinic, houses and a creche will be constructed in the northern and southern development nodes. The report needs to address these matters in more detail, as hazardous waste management may be required, the report needs to indicate how such waste and all other waste at the Facility will be stored, handled and used or disposed of etc. 2.3. The report must indicate more specifically, which external service provider, will be used to assist with the management of the waste at the facility.

2.1. Year 1 to 4: Viscera 550 kg/month; shell 2200 kg/month Year 7 to 10: Viscera 1300 kg/month; shell 5200 kg/month Year 10 to 13: Viscera 2100 kg/month; shell 8400 kg/month The Overstrand Municipality has confirmed acceptance of the waste at the Municipal waste disposal site. Please note that the viscera and shells are a high value product, and as currently undertaken at existing abalone farms in the area, it is very likely that a private / outside contractor will purchase the viscera and shells for reuse in animal feed (viscera) and shell (jewellery). 2.2. The clinic will be a basic staff clinic with a qualified sister. Needles for injections will be the only hazardous waste generated in the clinic and a contract will be set up with relevant service provider for the collection and disposal of a sharps bin. General waste will be transferred to the Municipal waste disposal site in line with service confirmations. 2.3. The operator of the abalone farm will be responsible for the transfer of General Waste to the municipal waste disposal site as per the service agreements with the Overstrand Municipality. Mitigation is provided in the EMPr regarding

19/2/5/3/E2/29/WL0102/09


67

2.4. The management of waste under all circumstances must be done in accordance with section 16, the “general duty in respect of waste management” of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEM:WA), 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008). 2.5. Any vegetation that is removed during the construction phase may not be illegally dumped under any circumstances. Such vegetation may be chipped for use or be take to a waste management facility that will process the waste prior to further use or disposal. The waste management hierarchy must be implemented as far as is possible and disposal of waste must be considered as a last resort. 2.6. In consideration of the contents of the BAR, it is advised that the applicability of the following be considered in the Environmental Management Programme - National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) -List of waste management activities that have, or are likely to have, a detrimental effect on the environment, 2013 -National Waste Information regulations, 2012 -Waste Classification and Management Regulations, 2013 and National Norms and Standard for the Storage of Waste, 2013

reduction and reuse. JUNO will be responsible for the removal of sewage waste from the site and transfer to the municipal waste disposal site. 2.4. Noted 2.5. Noted 2.6. Added to EMP: The principles of the following must also be taken into account regarding waste management on site: - National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) - List of waste management activities that have, or are likely to have, a detrimental effect on the environment, 2013 – the thresholds outlined in this schedule are not applicable to the proposed development - National Waste Information Regulations, 2012 – the thresholds outlined in Annexure 1 of the regulation are not applicable to the proposed development - Waste Classification and Management Regulations, 2013 – A waste manifest should be implemented detailing waste type, quantity, frequency of disposal, responsible person etc., prior to transport to the municipal waste disposal site - National Norms and Standard for the Storage of Waste, 2013 – storage of waste generated on site will be temporary and will be transferred by the operator to the licenced municipal waste disposal site on a weekly or twice weekly, however the following principles are outlined the Norms and Standards and would be useful to apply to the temporary storage area: o Location of waste storage area should not have a negative impact on public health or environmental o Easily accessible and allow for easy handling and transportation


68

2.7. The proposed development will be pumping 18000 m³ of seawater per hour or 5 m³ of sea water per second, which is substantial. The impacts at the point of abstraction need to be considered in terms of the flow rate, size of conduit and coastal engineering aspects such as tidal behaviour. The specialist report, Marine Statement for the proposed facility, states that “Fish and marine fauna may become trapped against intake lines”. The report does not specify the significance of the impact. More details are kindly requested. 2.8. The report mentioned that the sea water will be pumped from the sump tanks into header tanks, where the sea water can be gravity fed into harvesting tanks. Clarity about the management of the flow through the facility is being requested. The engineers design report will be very informative as well. 2.9 At the point of discharge the facility needs to prevent any litter and waste from being discharged.

o Designed under consultation by appropriate professional o Liquid waste storage areas must have a firm, impermeable and chemical resistant floor and roof. Liquid waste container which are not stored under roof should be covered to prevent direct sunlight and rainwater entering the containers o Storage area to be suitably bunded. The bund must be capable of storing at least 110 % of the largest tank or 25% of the total storage capacity o Suitable access control with appropriate signage in applicable language o Free from odour or emissions o Sorted o Operate within design capacity o Prevent disposal by wind, rain, people or animals, including during loading o Appropriate training and PPE must be provided to the applicable person handling the waste area. 2.7. The abstraction and discharge of seawater will be undertaken in lien with the Coastal Waters Discharge Permit to be issued by DEA: Oceans and Coasts. This abstraction and discharge is similar to already existing abalone farms in the area. A Coastal Impact Study was also undertaken to assess this activity as attached under Appendix G of the BAR. The intake lines will abstract water via a flooded intake and therefore there will not be a noticeable intake current and therefore the impact of impingement is low to negligible. 2.8. Seawater will flow through a series of pipelines and channels through the grow-out tanks. This is standard operation of abalone farms and uses a combination of gravity feed and pumping to distribute water on the farm. 2.9. Mitigations for this potential impact are included in the BAR and EMPr as per standard practice of a abalone farm.


69

2.10 The brine discharge needs to be far enough behind the tidal build up to avoid returning of the brine to the beach area. 3. The Department reserve the right to revise its initial comments and request further information from you based on the information received.

2.10. Noted – abalone farm effluent water is similar to the intake water and the discharge area is in a high mixing zone off the coast. The discharge will be in line with the conditions of the CWDP to be issued by DEA: Oceans and Coasts

Benjamin Kondoktor Overstrand Municipality

Email dated 19/08/2019 RE: PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM ON THE REMAINDER OF THE FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH, BREDASDORP Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this application. After review the pre-application basic assessment report of above mentioned application the Overstrand Environmental Management Section just wants to comment the following:

- A dune maintenance management and rehabilitation plan has to be submitted by the applicant

- A proper design plan of the two water pipelines over the sandy shore into the sea should be submitted.

A Dune Maintenance Management and Rehabilitation Plan has been undertaken and is attached under Appendix H of the BAR. The design of the pipelines has been included in the BAR under Appendix B.

-

Faisal Fakier On behalf of the Chief Director: Road Network Management Directorate: Roads Planning Transport and Public Works Western Cape Government

Email dated 20/08/2019 Dear Michelle, Cognisance is taken of the Pre-application Basic Assessment report dated 11 July 2019. It is noted that a Traffic Impact Statement has not been undertaken. We would require a TIS to address the following matters in the final report:

1. Trip generation and class of vehicles 2. Access details (width, stacking) 3. Turning lanes 4. Signage

For this stage, the Branch offers no objection, but please note that we would require the TIS for the final report.

A Traffic Impact Statement has been completed by DECA Consulting Engineers; the conclusion is that the proposed abalone farm will have a LOW traffic impact.

Job 27121


70

Saa-rah Adams Western Cape Government of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Development Management

Email dated 30/08/2019 COMMENT ON THE PRE-APPLICATION DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT (“BAR”) FOR THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSTRUCT AN AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON TH REMAINDER OF FARM NO. 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. The above mentioned document and letter dated 11 July 2019, received by this Department on the 10 July 2019 and the Departments correspondence dated 19 July 2019, refer. 2. According to the information submitted to this Department, it is noted that the proposed entails the following; 2.1. The phased development of an abalone farm and associated infrastructure which includes pipelines, a pump house, sump, an on-site hatchery and a processing area with a total development footprint of approximately 19.42 ha. 2.2. The site is located along the rocky shoreline of Pearly Beach within the Coastal Public Property (“CPP”) as defined in the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act 2014, within 100m of the high water mark of the sea. 3. This Department’s comments are as follows: 3.1. Having considered the information contained in the draft pre-application BAR, you are hereby advised that only those activities applied for will be considered for authorisation. The onus is on the application to ensure that all the applicable listed activities are applied for an assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) process. Omission of any activity may invalidate the application. 3.2. Please ensure the Construction and Operational Environmental Management Programme (“EMPr”) contains recommendations and mitigation measures based on the findings of the specialist and technical reports. The EMPr must include more detail with response to the methods that will be used for implementation, the frequency at which it will be implemented and the parties responsible for the required actions. In addition, the expected outcome (targets) for the on-going maintenance activities must be quantified. 3.3. The Department notes the recommendations made in the botanical Assessment Report dated June 2019, compiled by Fynbos Ecoscapes, which includes search and rescue operation of a red data species, bulb species and other plants of importance. This must be undertaken by a qualified botanical specialist prior to commencement of construction activities. The botanical specialist further recommends that a conservation management plan must be developed for the long term management of ecological processes of the area,

3.1. Noted 3.2. Updated in EMP under Table 8 – Environmental Control Sheets 3.3. A Conservation Management Plan with a Fire Management Plan and Alien Vegetation Management Plan was completed and submitted to you as part of the Pre-Application public participation process.


71

which includes fire management, movement of fauna and pollination. This conservation management plan must form part of the EMPr to be submitted with the final BAR. 3.4. The proposed development is located seaward of the high water mark. It is recommended that either the operational section of the EMPr be amended to include a Maintenance Management Plan (“MMP”) for the future maintenance of infrastructure seaward of the high water mark or the sea, or that a separate MMP document be drafted and included in the final BAR. 3.5. The Public Participation Process must comply with the requirements of Regulation 41 of the EIA Regulation 2014, and proof of compliance with all the steps undertaken must be included in the final BAR. 3.6. The Department notes the Visual Impact Assessment Report dated June 2019 compiled by Bernard Oberholzer and Quinton Lawson. Please ensure that the recommendations and mitigation measures pertaining to the assessment are incorporated in the final design layout of the proposed development. This must be included (in the) final BAR and EMPr. 3.7. Comments from, but not limited to, the following relevant authorities must be obtained during the Public Participation process and included in the BAR submitted for decision-making: - Cape Nature - Heritage Western Cape - Department of Public Works - Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts - Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Directorate Biodiversity and Coastal Management - Overberg District Municipality; and - Overstrand Municipality 3.8. Omission of any required information in terms of Appendices 1 and 4 of the EIA Regulations 2014, with regards to the final submission of the BAR and EMPr respectively to the Department, may result in the application for Environmental Authorisation being refused. 3.9. Be advised that an original signed and dated applicant declaration is required to be submitted with the final BAR to this Department for decision-making. It is important to note that by signing thus declaration, the applicant is confirming that they are aware and have taken cognisance of the contents of the report submitted for decision-making.

3.4. A Dune Maintenance Management Plan and Rehabilitation Plan with a section on maintenance of infrastructure has been drafted and is attached under Appendix H. 3.5. Noted and to be included in final BAR 3.6. Noted All comments from Departments listed have been obtained. Department of Public Works has not been forthcoming with the comment. Department of Public Works and Transport has lodged a comment. 3.8. Noted 3.9. Noted


72

Furthermore, through signing this declaration, the applicant is making a commitment that they are both willing and able to implement the necessary mitigation, management and monitoring measures recommended within the report with respect to this application. 3.10. In addition to the above, please ensure that original signed and dated Environmental Assessment Practitioner (“EAP”) declaration is also submitted with the final BAR for decision-making. 4. Kindly quote the abovementioned reference number in any future correspondence in respect of the application. 5. Please note that it is an offence in terms of Section 49A(1)(a) of the NEMA for a person to commence with a listed activity unless the Competent Authority has granted an Environmental Authorisation for the undertaking of the activity. Failure to comply with the requirements of Section 24F of the NEMA will result in the matter being referred to the Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Directorate of this Department. A person convicted of an offence in terms of the above is liable to a fine not exceeding R10 million or to imprisonment for a person not exceeding 10 years, or to both such fine and imprisonment. 6. This Department reserve the right to revise or withdraw any comments or request further information from you based on any information received.

3.10. Noted

Rafeeq Le Roux Breede Gouritz Catchment Management Agency

Letter dated 28/08/19 (received 28/11/19) COMMENT ON THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS FOR A BAISC ASSESSMENT PROCESS: PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY – REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH (BREDASDORP RD), DEADP REFERENCE NUMBER 16/3/3/6/7/1/E2/29/1297/18 With reference to the above mentioned report received by this office on the 10/07/2019. This office has reviewed the Preapplication Basic Assessment Report and has the following comments: 1. Section 21 Water Use: The following Water Use in terms of Section 21 of the National Water Act, 1998 (ACT 36 OF 1998) ARE APPLICABLE: - Section 21 (a) – taking water from a water resource

4/10/1/G40M/FARM 385 (REM)

PEARLY BEACH


73

- Section 21 e - Waste Discharge Related Water Use in terms of Section 21 e engaging in a controlled activity: irrigation of any land with waste or water containing waste generated through any industrial activity or by a water work - Section 21 (g) – disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource 2. Water Use Authorisation: The above Water Uses require water use authorisation in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) i.e Water Use Licence or General Authorisation. This office notes that a previous General Authorisation with reference number 4/5/6G40M/1 FARM 385 HENDRIK CHRISTOFFEL DE WET TRUST was confirmed on 31/03/2014. This General Authorisation has since expired. Please note that an application must be made for Integrated Water Use Authorisation on the Electronic Water Use License and Authorisation Application System (e-WULAAS) for all the above identified water uses. Before new water use authorisation can be considered, the water user must provide a Water Balance and proof that the water use as authorised is paid up to date. The Water Use Application must be supported with a Waste and Water Quality Management Plan and a updated layout plan to indicate the location of all water and waste water related infrastructure. 3. A freshwater screening must be done by a suitably qualified SACNASP registered professional to determine if there are any watercourses as defined in the National Water Act, 1998 (ACT 36 OF 1998) on site and if Section 21 c and I water use is applicable. General Comments 4. All relevant sections and regulations of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) regarding water use must be adhered to. 5. No use of water and / or storage of water is permitted, unless the applicant has formally obtained a license in terms of Section 41 of the National Water Act (ACT 36 OF 1998) And / OR Formal Authorisation In terms OF General Authorisation issued under Section 39 (Government Notice 399 dated 26 March 2004) and or if it is authorised under Schedule 1 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) and / or if it is an Existing Lawful Water Use.

2. Application via EWULAA is currently underway for 21a for the abstraction of groundwater under GA – submitted via EWULAA Ref: CT11019). Phase one and Phase two of the proposed development will make use of a Closed Conservancy tank system which will be serviced by an outside contractor (JUNO) and transferred to the Pearly beach Treatment works (See Appendix E for Municipal Service confirmation). The installation of the package plants will only be required from Phase 3 (approx. Year 7 to 10). The General Authorisation which is likely to be applicable to the Section 21 e waste discharge / irrigation with wastewater and 21g disposing of waste applications, is only valid for five years. In addition, as per the updated service confirmation from the municipality, they have confirmed that a direct municipal connect to the Pearly Beach Treatment works is possible. This option may be explored further at the development progresses and capital is generated, in which case, there will be no need for the package plant(s). We request that the application for the irrigation and discharge of treated wastewater from the package plant, as well as the water balance and Waste and Water Quality Management Plan be included as a condition of Environmental Authorisation prior to the installation of the package plants. 4. Noted 5. Noted


74

6. No pollution of surface water or groundwater resources may occur dur to any activity 7. No stormwater runoff from any premises containing waste, or water containing waste emanating from industrial activities and premises may be discharged into a water resource, 8. All relevant section and regulation of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) regarding the disposal of solid waste must be adhered to. Solid waste may only be disposed of not an authorised solid waste facility in terms of the above mentioned legislation. Please be advised that all relevant sections and regulations of the National Water Act (1998) (Act 36 of 1998) regarding water use must be adhered to. The use of water without the required authorisation in terms of the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) may be regarding as unlawful and a criminal offence. The onus remains on the registered property owner to confirm adherence to any relevant legislation with regards to the activities which might trigger and / or need authorisation for.

6. Noted 7. Noted 8. Noted

Mercia Liddle / Lynn Jacobs Western Cape Government of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Biodiversity and Coastal Management

Email dated 03/09/2019 RE: PRE-APPLICATION BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED AQUACULTURE FACILITY ON REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH 1. The request for comment from this Department sub directorate: Coastal Management on the above mentioned -pre-application Basic Assessment Report received on the 10 July 2019, refers. 2. The Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008, (Act No. 24 of 2008) (“NEM:ICMA”) is a Specific Environmental Management Act under the umbrella of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (“NEMA”). The NEM: ICMA sets out to manage the nations coastal resource, promotes social equity and best economic use of coastal resources whilst protecting the natural environment. In terms of Section 38 of NEM: ICMA, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (‘The Department”) is the provincial lead agency for coastal management in the Western Cape as well as the competent authority the “Management of public launch sites in the coastal zone (GN No. 4977, 27 June 2014 “Public Launch Site Regulations”. The Department, in pursuant of fulfilling its mandate, is implementing the Provincial Coastal Management Programme (“PCMP”). The PCMP is a five (5) year strategic document, and its purpose is to provide all department and organisation with an integrated, coordinated

042/2019


75

and uniform approach to coastal management in the Province. A key priority of the PCMP is the Estuary Management Programme, which is predominantly implemented through the Estuary Management Framework and Implementation Strategy (“EMFIS”) project. The Department is implementing estuary management in accordance with the NEM:ICMA and the National Estuarine Management Protocol (“NEMP”). Relevant guidelines, Estuarine Management Plans, Mouth Management Plans need to be considered when any listed activities are triggered in the Estuarine Functional Zone. 3. The sub-Directorate: Coastal Management (“SD:cm”) has reviewed the information as specified above and have the following commentary: 3.1. Due to the effects of climate change, it was predicted that the Western Cape would experience, inter alia; changes in temperature, decrease in rainfall and an increase in the frequency and magnitude of storm surges along the coats. It is in light of this complex and dynamic nature of the coastline that the NEM:ICMA was promulgated. The NEM: ICMA provides a framework for the integrated management of the coast with the aim of preserving, protecting, extending and enhancing the status of coastal public property and securing equitable access to the benefits and opportunities for the coast. As such, the NEM: ICMA provides for various zones and provides a framework for the management of these zones. 3.2. The increased effects of climate change, sea level rise and increased storm surges in coastal environment obliges the Department to take a more cautious approach with regard to considering development along the coast. In 2016, the Department commissioned the refinement of the delineation of the Overberg Coastal management Line to ensure that development is regulated in a manner appropriate to risks and sensitivities in the coastal zone. The principle purpose of the coastal management line (“CML”) is to protect coastal public property (“CPP”), private property and public safety; to protect the coastal protection zone (“CPZ”) and to preserve the aesthetic value of the coastal zone. 3.3. The proposed development of an aquaculture facility will consist of two development nodes. It is note that the development is in line with the Provincial Spatial Development Framework (“PSDF”), the Overstrand Integrated development Plan (“IDP”) and within the objectives of Operation Phakisa’s Ocean’s Economy Programme. It is further noted that evidence of alleged poaching activities has been found on the Remainder of Farm 385. Where poaching activities are witnessed, such activities must be reported to relevant enforcement officials, i.e. Environmental Management Inspector or Fisheries Control Officers.


76

3.4. A significant portion of the proposed development fails seaward of the CML and is located within the CPZ as defined in Section 16 of the NEM:ICMA and delineated as part of the Overberg CML project in 2016. In terms of Section 17 of the NEM:ICMA, “The coastal protection zone is established for enabling the use of land that is adjacent to coastal public property or that plays a significant role in a coastal ecosystem to be managed, regulated or restricted in order to- i. protect the ecological integrity, natural character and the economic, social and aesthetic value of coastal public property; ii. avoid increasing the effect or severity of natural hazards in the coastal zone iii. protect people, property and economic activities from risks arising from dynamic coastal processes, including the risk of sea-level rise; iv. maintain the natural functioning of the littoral active zone; v. maintain the productive capacity of the coastal zone by protecting the ecological integrity of the coastal environment; and vi. make land near the seashore available to organs of state and other authorised persons for- (i) performing rescue or (ii) temporarily depositing objects and material washed up by coastal waters” As such, Section 63 of the NEM:ICMA is therefore applicable to the proposed development and must be adequately considered. 3.5. The Basic Assessment Report (“BAR”) has considered alternatives in terms of the environmental footprint, locality, associated impacts and specialist recommendations. Based on the information provided: i. equitable public access to the coast is one of the objectives of the NEM:ICMA which is further provided for in the Western Cape Provincial Coastal Access Strategy and Plan (“WCPCASP”). Be advised that the Department has commissioned the ‘Overberg Coastal Access Audit and Pilot Study’ which was finalised in December 2018. The study notes that there is currently no access via the property however, longshore pedestrian access is possible. It is further noted that the intake and discharge pipelines will be located underneath the surface of the beach to ensure that longshore public access is note restricted. Be advised that the existing longshore access must continue and must not be prohibited. ii. The NEM:ICMA defines the littoral active zone as the following: “…any land forming part of or adjacent to, the seashore that is- a) Unstable and dynamic as a result of natural processes; and b) Characterised by dunes, beaches sand bars and other land forms composed of unconsolidated sand, pebbles or other such material which is either unvegetated or partially vegetated.


77

The proposed development is located in close proximity to an within the littoral active zone (as defined in NEM:ICMA) and is vegetated by indigenous vegetation which has covered the dune system and prevented sand migration over time. Due to the nature of the development, it is acknowledged that the intake and effluent pipelines must be installed below the high water mark, The pipelines have been designed to withstand extreme weather event associated with climate change by installing the pipeline underneath the fore dune and beach, as opposed to being above ground. In addition, public access to the coast will not be restricted. Of particular concern is the disturbance to the dune. The dune serves a specific function and any disturbance to the dune will completely change the functionality of the dune. As such, it is extremely important to implement the mitigation measures to minimise the risk of erosion and dune destruction. The BAR identified blasting as a means to secure intake and effluent channels at a desired depth below the surface. The SD;CM is opposed to any form of blasting in the coastal area as the effects on the receiving environmental is significant. Alternative must therefore be sought. iii. It is further proposed to artificially increase the dune height to decrease the visual impact f the development, and to allow for the dine to form part of the ecological corridor by incorporating a 100m buffer along the dune. The dune height increase is acceptable, provided that it is done in a manner that will not negatively impact on the system, and that measures be put in place to ensure the long term functioning of the dune system. iv. the farm is located within a Critical Biodiversity Area (“CBA”). According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Plan (“WCBSP”), 2017, the desired management objective for these areas is to maintain it in a natural or near-natural state with no further loss of habitat. Degraded area must be rehabilitated, and only low impact, biodiversity– sensitive land uses are appropriate. The farm is also located within an Ecological Support Area (ESA) which supports the functioning of the surrounding CBA. The predominant vegetation on the site consists of Overberg Dune Strandveld (least threatened) and Agulhas Limestone Fynbos *Vulnerable). It is noted that the proposed development will result in the removal of only ~19 ha (two development nodes) of

A Dune Maintenance Management and Rehabilitation Plan has been drafted and is located under Appendix H of the BAR. Blasting will be used as a last resort and where blasting is required, NONEX will be used which is a low velocity product typically used in such environment. In addition, and as outlined in the EMP, a underwater survey will be conducted prior to blasting to relocate sedentary animals off the direct line, if required. A marine mammal survey will also be conducted prior to blasting.


78

vegetation, leaving the remaining ~99ha intact. In addition, of concern is the impacts of the proposed development on faunal species which exist on the site. the development has the potential to fragment the habitats of these species, displacing them into the surrounding area. However, it is noted that ecological corridors will be maintained to allow these species to move without restriction. Furthermore, the SD:CM supports search and rescue of vulnerable vegetation being carried out. V. It is noted that the proposed development will have a number of socio-economic benefits such as housing opportunities, skills development and employment opportunities. It is further noted that the area is well known for extensive abalone poaching operation. This the SD:CM agrees that the site operations and presence of security infrastructure may act as a deterrent for poaching activities. vi. Be advised that driving excavators or vehicles on the beach is prohibited without an ORV permit as per the Control of Vehicles in the Coastal Zone Regulations, 2014. As such, the applicant may obtain the relevant form/documentation for an ORV permit form the National Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts [email protected] or Nontsasa Tonjeni [email protected] vii. The size and nature of the development will result in a significant visual impact as the area is rural in nature. The Visual Impact Assessment Report is noted and the SD:CM recommends that due consideration be given to the mitigation measures highlighted in the report. 3.6. It is evident that the applicant has considered provision within the relevant legislation. The mitigation measures and monitoring included in the Environmental Managements Programme (EMPr) for both the construction and operational phases are noted. Due to the nature of the development and the locality thereof, it is imperative to implement these measures to ensure that the receiving environmental is not negatively affected. 4. The applicant must be reminded of their general duty of care and the remediation of environmental damage, in terms of Section 28(1) of NEMA, which, specifically states that: ‘…Every person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment must take reasonable measures or prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring, or, in so far as such harm to the environment is authorised by law or cannot be reasonably avoided or stopped, to minimise and rectify such pollution or degradation of the environment…” together with Section 58 of the NEM:ICMA which refers to one’s duty to avoid causing adverse effects on the coastal environment.

Noted




79

5. The SD:CM reserves the right to revise its comment and request further information based on any information that may be received

Chanel Rampartab Cape Nature

Email dated 10/09/2019 Pre-application BAR for proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach (Theewaterskloof Municipality ref: 111) CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the application for a proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach. Please note that these comments only pertain to the biodiversity-related impacts and not to the overall desirability of the application. The farm is 117.84 ha in extent. The proposed development is approximately 19.42 ha, split into a southern (16.19 ha) and northern (3.23 ha) development node, to be developed in six phases over 20 years. A 2011 approval for the establishment of an aquaculture facility on the property has since lapsed. Due to the inherent nature of such aquaculture facilities, the development is proposed below the coastal setback line. A. Alternatives proposed Three alternatives were proposed. Alternative 1 has been considered a no-go, and Alternative 2 did not account for biodiversity corridors and features. Since Alternative 3 accounts for recommendations made by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) and the botanical specialist, only Alternative 3 is discussed henceforth. B. Landscape conservation value According to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (CapeNature, 2017), the desired management objective of a Critical Biodiversity Area that is in good condition (CBA1) is: “Keep natural, with no further loss of habitat. Degraded areas should be rehabilitated. Only low-impact, biodiversity-sensitive land-uses are appropriate.” The proposed development occurs in CBA1, which will limit the development potential of the site. Similarly, the desired management objective for Ecological Support Areas that are intact (ESA1) is: “Maintain in a functional, near-natural state. Some habitat loss is acceptable, provided the underlying biodiversity objectives and ecological functioning are not compromised.” The coastal edge of the property falls within an ESA1. According to the National Biodiversity Assessment (NBA 2011), the site contains Overberg Dune Strandveld, which is least threatened because it is well protected elsewhere. Although least threatened, the area contains atypically high levels of endemism and Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) and therefore has greater biodiversity value compared to typical Overberg Dune Strandveld. The botanical specialist ground-truthed patches of Agulhas Limestone Fynbos (vulnerable) in calcrete outcrops in the Overberg

Incorrect reference contained in CN comment

SSD14/2/5/1/7/2/385-re_abalone_PearlyBeach


80

Dune Strandveld. The botanical specialist assigned a medium-high regional conservation value to the site. Three plant SCC were recorded in the development footprint. More SCC are likely to occur but were not detected due to the field survey taking place when flowering geophytes and annuals were not detectable. CapeNature recommends a spring field survey to avoid such type II false negative errors. Note that search and rescue is considered as best practice and therefore does not constitute mitigation. A botanical specialist must be contracted to undertake search and rescue, and rehabilitation in accordance with a rehabilitation plan. C. Terrestrial development As outlined above, the development of the southern and northern nodes would result in the loss of CBA1. The existing jeep tracks will be upgraded and deviated from in some places. In addition to the municipal supply, a solar array and photovoltaic panels are proposed to provide electricity to the operation. Freshwater is supplied from an existing borehole with an existing General Authorisation, which will provide sufficient capacity for the construction and operation of the development. A conservancy tank is proposed for Phase 1, which will be upgraded to four on-site package plants in Phase 2. Conservancy tanks pose a significant risk to coastal and freshwater ecosystems; therefore, alternative sewage systems must be investigated. Solid waste is to be disposed at municipal sites. D. Coastal impacts A lease agreement in terms of the Sea-Shore Act, 1935 (Act No. 21 of 1935) with CapeNature is underway for the sections of the intake and effluent lines below the high-water mark. An application for a Coastal Waters Discharge Permit (CWDP) is underway. A marine statement has provided background information; however, CapeNature requests a detailed coastal impact study for an aquaculture facility of this proportion. The coastal impact study should provide detailed information on, inter alia:

Characterisation of the coastline, wave action, thermoclines and haloclines. Operational limits

o Through-screen intake velocity to reduce impingement and entrainment. o Effluent Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration to limit turbidity of receiving waters. o Effluent Nitrogen concentration to limit eutrophication of receiving waters. o Effluent temperature in relation to the receiving waters to prevent localised and long-term impacts on species physiology and upwelling dynamics.

MMP to address: o Annual monitoring of the re-establishment of benthic community. o Annual water-jet cleaning of the mesh screen on the seaward end of the intake pipes.

A spring survey may not be possible due to timeframes associated with the project; however a search and rescue will be undertaken by a qualified Botanical Specialist and this will be included as a condition of authorisation. A closed conservancy tank is required for phase one and part of phase 2, due to the expense associated with the package plant. It is recommended that a float alarm be fitted to trigger at 75% capacity for timeous emptying. Regular inspections of the surrounding area can also be undertaken to detect any signs of leaking. Only SABS approved units will be used. A Coastal Impact Assessment (Marine Impact Assessment) has been undertaken and is attached under Appendix G which addresses the issues outlined in the comment. A MMP section has been included in the Operational Management Plan. The Coastal Assessment and Operational MP address the faunal impact and mitigation


81

Faunal impact assessment to determine faunal species present on both the coastal terrestrial environment and below the high water mark, and the associated mitigation measures to reduce impacts during both the construction and operation phase. Additionally, a human-wildlife interaction statement is needed to address the potential of Hartlaub’s gulls preying on the abalone on site. E. Conservation of remainder The remainder of the farm (98.42 ha) is proposed for conservation as a Conservation Area, and a Conservation Management Plan, including fire and invasive alien species management, has been drafted. When conserved, the site will form a corridor between two components of the Walker Bay Nature Reserve Complex, i.e. Uilkraalsmond Nature Reserve and Pearly Beach Nature Reserve, as well as other high conservation priority sites in the area. CapeNature requests further detail on the proposed mechanism for conservation. If the site is proposed for formal protection, then the proposed conservation area must be presented to the Western Cape Protected Areas Expansion and Stewardship Review Committee for a recommendation on which category of stewardship is required to adequately protect the remaining biodiversity on the property. Given that approximately 19 ha of CBA1 will be developed, a formal biodiversity offset may be required. In terms of the Draft National Biodiversity Offset Policy (Government Gazette No. 40733, 2017) and the Western Cape Guidelines on Biodiversity Offsets (DEA&DP 2015), a biodiversity offset may apply to (i) CBAs; (ii) threatened ecosystems; and (iii) important biodiversity process areas. Should a biodiversity offset be deemed necessary in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy, then a suitably qualified biodiversity offset specialist should be contracted to identify and secure a biodiversity offset in terms of the abovementioned draft policy and guidelines. The 98.42 ha remainder of the site that is proposed for conservation may form part of this offset. F. Conclusion CapeNature supports the recommendations of the botanical specialist and requests: (i) a follow up spring botanical survey be undertaken; (ii) a detailed coastal impact study be undertaken; (iii) further details on the mechanism for proposed conservation; and (iv) the applicability of a biodiversity offset is determined. CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments and request further information based on any additional information that may be received.

A Site visit was conducted with Cape Nature (Andrae Marais) the conclusion of the visit was that a Voluntary Nature Reserve will be pursued. The Conservation Management Plan with Alien vegetation and fire management appendices will guide this process. Noted i. Spring survey not possible but will be included as a recommendation to consider in search and rescue ii Costal impact – specialist appointed, and report complete iii. Noted - although not financially feasible at this stage of project development. The following written response was submitted to Cape Nature is response to their comment received on the 10/09/2019: 08/10/2019


82

For attention. Chanel Rampartab / Andrae Marais Ref.: SSD14/2/5/1/7/2/385-re_abalone_PearlyBeach Dear Chanel and Andrae PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF AN ABALONE FARM, REMAINDER OF FARM 385, PEARLY BEACH Your letter dated 10 September 2019 refers, please consider the following responses to your queries: 1. Characterisation of the coastline, wave action, thermoclines and haloclines South Africa is characterised by a high energy coastline which facilitates mixing. The intake water channel will extend to approximately 400 m out to sea and the discharge line will be located directly alongside the intake line and discharge at 300 m. The intake and discharge is constant. The longshore current will ensure that the effluent waters are dispersed. The intake and discharge of seawater from abalone farms is common practice in the area and inherent to the operation of an abalone farm. Please could you clarify the need to provide information on the coastline, wave action, thermoclines and haloclines and what this information will be able to assist you with? 2. Through-screen intake velocity to reduce impingement and entrainment Due to the relatively flat topography of the site, the intake line has been designed in such a way as to allow for a ‘flooded / passive intake’. The land based sump (storage reservoir) will be located below sea level thereby facilitating the passive movement of water from the sea and onto land. From this land based storage area, the water will be pumped to the tanks on the farm. This means that water is not actively abstracted or sucked from the sea and therefore the risk of impingement is marginal. Impingement is actually considered a nuisance as it negatively effects the rate (and cost) of intake of water. Grids will be placed on the lines to prevent the


83

movement of flora and fauna into the pipelines. The intake areas will require regular monitoring to ensure optimal intake of water and removal of kelp. 3. Effluent Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration to limit turbidity of receiving waters, Effluent Nitrogen concentration to limit eutrophication of receiving waters, Effluent temperature in relation to the receiving waters to prevent localised and long-term impacts on species physiology and upwelling dynamics Abalone require extremely good water quality in order to grow optimally. The water is abstracted from the sea, circulated through the farm and discharged back to sea again. The water therefore spends a maximum of two to three hours on the land before being discharged back to the marine environment. Water is constantly abstracted and discharged back to sea. The effluent water from an abalone farm is classed as a ‘Low Risk Effluent’ and issues such as TSS, Nitrogen and temperature are not significantly different in the effluent water. This has been proven in the Probyn et al (2014) study as attached hereto (commissioned by DAFF) – Please refer to this. In response to this study, abalone effluent waters have been rated as a ‘Low Risk Effluent’ and therefore the effluent does not have any localised or long-term impacts on receiving waters. In addition, a Coastal Waters Discharge Permit (CWDP) in terms of Section 69 of the Integrated Coastal Management Act (ICMA) (Act 24 of 2008) is applicable for the discharge of water from the farm. A CWDP application has been submitted to the Competent Authority, Department of Environmental Affairs: Oceans and Coasts (Rueben Molale; T 021 819 2493; E [email protected]) . The permit issued from DEA:O&C will contain various construction and operational management interventions, which are to be implemented and are audited by DEA on a regular basis, including regular water quality checks.


84

The DEA has also recently released the Draft General Discharge Authorisation, which is currently out for public participation, which if gazetted, would eliminate the need for a CWDP to be obtained for abalone farms (and other low risk effluents). 4. Maintenance management plan to address: • Annual monitoring of the re-establishment of benthic community • Annual water-jet cleaning of the mesh screen on the seaward end of the intake pipes. The pipelines, particularly in the interior, will require regular monitoring with cleaning dive teams, to ensure that the inside of the pipelines do not become overgrown with mussels and other colonising species as this negatively affects the rate and cost of intake and discharge of water. The grids on the sea end of the pipelines will also regular cleaning and maintenance. As part of these duties, the exterior of the pipeline itself will also be inspected. The re-establishment of benthic species can also be monitored at the same time. In addition to this, specialised concrete and coatings can be used which facilitate bio-fouling. The replanting of endemic species can also be implemented if required. Experience from existing abalone farms shows that biofouling is relatively quick post construction (and a nuisance). Note that once the lines have been established in each zone 1 and 2, there will be no further construction taking place in the sea or on the beach, which will allow for long term rehabilitation to take place. Similarly, the cleaning of the grids on the ends of the lines will take place as required to ensure optimal uptake of water. Mussels and kelp are particular problematic and require frequent cleaning. 5. Faunal impact assessment to determine faunal species present on both the coastal terrestrial environment and below the high water mark, and the associated mitigation


85

measures to reduce impacts during both the construction and operation phase A faunal specialist will be appointed. 6. Human-wildlife interaction statement is needed to address the potential of Hartlaub’s gulls preying on the abalone on site As with the existing abalone farms, operational management interventions are implemented. Existing farms use long ropes / lines (not netting) above the tanks. The lines confuse the birds and they do not enter the tank area. Flashers are also used to discourage the birds. The birds are more attracted to the abalone feed. However due to the high value of abalone as well as the costs associated with feed at such a scale, operational management interventions are implemented to prevent birds from feeding off the tanks. This proposal also included the establishment of a solar array above the grow out tanks and this alone will further mitigate the bird impact. These mitigations will be added to the operational EMP. 7. Spring survey Due to the timing on the project, an in-process spring survey will not be possible. However, it is recommended that a spring survey be included in the conditions of authorisation and implemented if possible, along with the proposed search and rescue. 8. Conservation of remainder A conservation management plan along with the Fire and Alien vegetation management plans was included in the Pre-application BAR and will be an addendum to the Operational EMP. Further to discussions with Andrae Marais during his site visit, the applicant will opt for a Voluntary conservation option. 9. Biodiversity offset


86

The implementation of a biodiversity offset is not financially feasible for the applicant, at this stage. 10. Conclusion Please would you consider the additional information attached and amend your comment as applicable. Should you wish to arrange a site meeting, we can set this up at the earliest convenience. Feel free to contact me, should you require any additional information.

Stephanie-Anne Barnardt Heritage Western Cape

Email dated 11/09/2019 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT: PROPOSED ABALONE FARM, PEARLY BEACH SUBMITTED IN TERMS OF SECTION 38(8) OF THE NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT (ACT 25 OF 1999) The matter above has reference. This matter was discussed as the Impact Assessment Committee (IACom) meeting held on 15 August 2019.09.13 It was noted that The matter was tabled at Archaeology, Palaeontology and Meteorites Committee (APM) meeting held on the 21 July 2019 whereby the Committee recommended that the revised HOA include: a. The archaeologist survey tracks for the inland development footprint b. A comment from maritime section of SAHRA on the potential impacts of the pipelines for the abalone farm c. pre-construction and during the fencing of the four significant sites, an archaeologist must undertake test excavation under workplan. INTERIM COMMENT The committee will await the submission of the Final HIA which addresses concerns raised by the APM. HWC reserves the right to request additional information as required.

Katie Smuts submitted the final HIA on the 12/11/2019. We update HWC’s final comment.

Case number 18090507SB1002E


87

Should you have any further queries, please contact the official above and quote the case number

Chanel Rampartab Email dated 10/10/2019 Dear Ms Naylor Response to comments regarding pre-application BAR for proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the response regarding the pre-application BAR for a proposed abalone farm on FA 385/Re, Pearly Beach. Please note that these comments only pertain to the biodiversity-related impacts. The comment is structured in direct response to the sections set out in the response letter. 1. The information will be used to provide background to the coastal dynamics of the abalone farm site, and will assist the coastal specialist in determining the appropriate mitigation measures for the intake and effluent pipelines during the operational phase. 2. The passive intake will reduce the risk of impingement. The coastal specialist should account for this in the significance of impacts in the report. 3. The study referred to was not attached. The coastal specialist should account for the applicability of the study in the report. 4. The maintenance measures proposed are appropriate and should be further detailed in the MMP. 5. Noted. 6. Noted. 7. Noted. 8. As per previous comment, note that the Steering Committee will first assess the biodiversity value of the site in order to recommend an appropriate stewardship category (if any). 9. The applicability of the biodiversity offset is independent of the financial feasibility. If a biodiversity offset is deemed required, and the applicant is unable to finance the securing and maintenance of the offset area, the environmental authorisation may not be granted by the competent authority. 10. CapeNature would like the opportunity to provide comment during the next round of public participation, specifically on the coastal impact study. CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments.

Noted

SSD14/2/5/1/7/2/385-

re_abalone_PearlyBeach2

Funanani Ditinti Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) in

Email dated 18/10/2019 The Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) in its Branch Oceans and Coasts (OC) reviewed the Final Impact Assessment Report. Comments and recommendations are provided below:


88

its Branch Oceans and Coasts (OC)

1. The applicant “Pearly Beach Seafarm (pty) ltd “must take note that the Branch OC has the mandate to ensure that the use of natural resources in the coastal zone and development associated with the coastal zone is socially and economically justifiable and ecologically sustainable to ensure the achievement of principles and objective of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act (Act No 24 of 2008) herein referred as (the “ICM Act), and guarantee that the coastal environment will be managed, protected and conserved throughout all phases of the proposed project. 2. Taking into account that activities associated with the proposed Establishment of an Abalone Farm on the Remainder of the Farm 385, Pearly Beach, Bresdasdorp Road, will be taking place within the coastal zone, the competent authority is reminded of their duty to adhere and implement Section 63 of ICM Act by assessing the impacts of the proposed development on but not limited to coastal public property, protection zone or coastal access land by ensuring that the proposed development will take place cautiously (avoiding, mitigating and managing potential adverse impacts) in order to achieve the principles and objectives ICM Act by conserving and protecting the coastal zone as a whole. 3. The report outlines that it is based on specialist input, site factors need and desirability and project requirements, that the finding of this report identify Alternative 3 as the preferred layout alternative. However, the Branch OC is of the opinion that this report has failed to engage sufficiently in the comprehensive assessment and description of the investigation of impacts associated with each alternative. Furthermore, the report fails to demonstrate that a comprehensive coastal impact assessment was conducted to inform the selection of alternative 3 as the most suitable alternative. 4. The Branch OC recommends that the coastal assessment report includes, but not limited to the following: 4.1. A detailed description of the proposed construction activities that are to be undertaken within coastal zone and associated potential impacts for all the proposed project phases 4.2. The correct number of pipelines to be constructed and also stipulating which of these will be intended for intake and discharge for alternative presented 4.3. The maintenance / monitoring requirements for the pipelines and assess potential impacts associated with the maintenance activities for all alternatives

4.1. Contained in the Coastal (Marine) Impact Assessment and updated I the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) 4.2. Updated and clarified in the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) 4.3. Added to BAR impact assessment section for the Operational phase. A Maintenance Management section has also been added to the Operational EMP. In additional A Dune / Coastal Maintenance Management and Rehabilitation plan has been drafted and included under Appendix H.


89

4.4. A detailed assessment of all alternatives (description of material for the pipeline and associated impacts, methodology and technology to be applied when installing the pipeline, including their advantages and disadvantaged - Identification of two offshore zones for the proposed establishment of abstraction and discharge of effluent pipelines. Based on this it is a recommendation of this Branch that the EAP impact assessment (advantaged and disadvantaged) associated with the two identified zones; and 4.5. A detailed assessment of the proposed construction activities on marine fauna, impacts of sediment removal, blasting on the seabed, on the fore dune (coastal dynamics) and impacts of post construction / maintenance activities on the coastal zone and cumulative and unintended impacts of the proposed development on the coastal one throughout all project phases. 5. The report stipulates that “it should be noted that it has been confirmed that abalone effluent water originating from abalone farms present no risk to the receiving environment due to the nature of the effluent water which is very similar to the intake water. This can be confirmed by the DAFF report by Probyn Et al. 2014. The Branch OC further requests the EAP to send this report to the officials of the Department mentioned below to confirm the information. 6. Should the Competent authority decide to grant an authorisation for this proposed project, a construction and maintenance ORV permit will be require for driving within the coastal zone to carry out activities associated with the proposed development (Maintenance activities associated with driving within the coastal zone should be included within the maintenance plan to be developed). The applicant must contact the Branch: OC for more information, conditions, requirements and application process to acquire a permit on [email protected] 7. From the assessment of activities associated with the proposed establishment of an Abalone Farm on the Remainder of the Farm 385, Pearly Beach, Bredasdorp Road, it is the conclusion of this Branch that the proposed development has the potential of causing adverse impacts on the marine environment if carried out incautious approach. To ensure that the coastal zone is protected, managed and conserved the applicant is advised to familiarise themselves with Section 28 Duty of Care under the National Environmental Management Act 1998 (Act Mo 107 of 1998) (NEMA) by taking reasonable measures to

4.4. The alternatives for the pipeline design as presented at the site meeting have been amended. The applicant is no longer assessing alternative designs. There will be two Phases of Marine Works. Phase one will include the development of 1 intake and 1 discharge line, both precast concrete culvert style. Phase two of marine works, may follow (if at all) several years later and will result in the installation of 2 intake and 2 discharge lines. These will also be precast concrete culvert style pipelines. The description and drawings have been added to the BAR and EMP’s. 4.5. Following the first round of public participation, a specialist was appointed to undertake and prepare a Coastal Impact Assessment (Marine Impact Assessment ) where these impacts were assessed. See Report attached under Appendix G. 5. Sent via email to your office on the 01/10/2019. Also attached under Appendix G. 6. Noted 7. Noted



90

prevent pollution or degradation to the coastal zone throughout all proposed project phases. 8. The applicant is reminded that no listed activity may take place in the coastal zone prior to an environmental authorisation and additional activities that have not been assessed that requires authorization (either in support or not of the proposed project) may take place within the coastal zone without an authorisation from the competent authority to avoid causing adverse effects on marine environment. Failure to adhere to this requirement may result in statutory enforcement measures being taken against the applicant. The Branch Oceans and Coasts recommends that the Draft Basic Assessment report identify and provide sufficient remedial / mitigation measures to avoid, manage, minimize or mitigate potential impacts within the coastal zone. Kindly note the following: i. These comments must be sent to the competent authority for consideration and implementation and the EAP is advised to forward the Branch OC the proof. ii. That the department reserves the right to revise our initial comments and we may request further information based on any additional information that might be received. iii. All future correspondence and documentation (hard copy and an electronic copy) must be submitted to our office for the attention to Funanani Ditinti, Directorate Coastal Conservation Strategies using the following contact details: Physical address: Department of Environment Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) Branch Oceans and Coasts, 2 East Pier Building, Est pier Road, Victoria and Alfred Waterfront, Cape town 8001. iv. For further information please don’t hesitate to contact the following officials of the Branch OC responsible for Environmental Impact Assessments: Ms Funanani Ditinti Mr Xolani Myanga Mc Nontsasa Tonjeni

8. Noted 9. Mitigation measures are included in the impact assessment section of the BAR as well as the Construction and Operational EMPS, Dune EMP and Coastal Impact Assessment Report Noted

Elrina Versveld Pearly Beach Conservancy

Email dated 30/10/2019 Dear Michelle


91

Thank you for the opportunity to raise concerns and comments on the proposed abalone farm North West of Pearly Beach. We have grave concerns about the construction of the pump pipes and drainage access routes to the sea, (intake and outflow are in separate locations) as there is no viable bedrock and excavation would be necessary, possibly causing redistribution of sand along the coast negatively effecting Blue Water Bay, the official boat launching site and other beaches, including Castle Beach (new Blue flag status). Public access restrictions during construction and after completion is also a concern as the free movement of walkers, cyclists and general visitors to the coastal public area would be restricted and in the case of Danger Point Abalone farm prohibited all together. Damage to sensitive primary and secondary dune systems during and after construction. Employment opportunities are zero or at best minimal for the local community of Pearly Beach, this has been the case for both abalone farms in Buffelsjag, where they employ from outside the community. Power required to run pumps and farm, where would this power come from and how much noise, air and visual pollution would this produce? The property is adjacent to a nature reserve with a sensitive category A river estuary: Is this the best place for an abalone farm?

The intake and outflow pipelines are directly alongside each other. Excavation will take place to bedrock on which the concrete culverts will be fastened. The excavated sand will then be backfilled. No excess sand will be dumped on the beach of at sea. The pipeline will be constructed in sections to ensure public access along the beach is maintained throughout the construction phase. A disturbance zone will be demarcated for construction activities. All areas outside this zone will be strictly no go areas. This will be monitored by an appointed Environmental Control officer; a Rehabilitation plan has been drafted to rehabilitate the disturbed areas and dune. The applicant is committed to providing employment opportunities for the communities of Pearly Beach and beyond as required. The business model focusses on employment of women instead of men who are typically employed at such operations. Eskom has confirmed capacity for phase 1 of the development. A solar array will be installed for future power generated. Any Generators which may be required from time to time during power outages will be located within closed generator rooms to reduce the noise. The proposed development has also been assessed by a Visual Impact Assessment specialist (Bernard Oberholzer) and amendments to the layout were implemented as outlined in the Basic Assessment Report. There is a agricultural property between the subject property at the Uilkraalsmond Nature Reserve. The Uilkraalsmond River Estuary is located approx.. 8.5 km west of the development and the river to the east of Pearly Beach is located approximately 5.8 km away from the proposed development area.


92

As the whole property is overgrown with aliens, it will be appreciated if it can be made a condition of approval to remove the alien vegetation on the property. Thank you for your time and looking forward to your feedback. Regards, Elrina Versfeld Secretary: Pearly Beach Bewarea Conservancy Posbus/P O Box 60, Pearly Beach 7221 084 350 4107 028 381 9023 [email protected]

A Conservation Management Plan has been drafted for the management of the remaining 99 ha of the farm. This management plan includes a Alien Vegetation Management Plan as well as a Fire Management Plan.

Cor van der Walt Department of Agriculture

Letter dated 16/10/2019 The Western Cape Department of Agriculture: Land Use Management, has no objection against the proposed application.

Noted 20/9/2/4/1/185

Second round of Public participation on Pre-application BAR


93

8. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING DRAFT / PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

See attached copies of the comments received during the first round of public participation.


94


95


96


97


98


99


100


101


102


103


104


105


106


107


108


109


110


111


112


113


114


115


116


117


118


119


120


121


122


123


124


125


126


127

9. MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS DURING THE PRE-APPLICATION PHASE

9. 1. A pre-application meeting was held with the Competent Authority, the Department of Environmental

Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) on the 24/09/2018.

See Meeting minutes below:


128


28/09/2018

PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WITH DEA&DP

PROPOSED ABALONE FARM ON RE 385, PEARLY BEACH

NOTES FROM MEETING 27/09/18

Attendance:

Mare-Liez Oosthuizen (DEA&DP)

Saa-rah Adams (DEA&DP)

Gavin Johnston (Applicant)

Michelle Naylor (EAP)

1. Former Environmental Authorisation (“EA”) issued for the site for a proposed fish farm, EA dated 24/02/2011; DEA&DP Ref E12/2/4/1-E2/29-2024/10, should form part of the Need and Desirability motivation for the new proposed Aquaculture Development of the site 2. Proposed nine residential dwellings should rather be clustered as opposed to spread across the site, this will limit the footprint and simplify service infrastructure etc. 3. Intake and discharge lines – sand movement critical to design, hence pipelines will be sunk into bedrock and placed in concrete tunnels.

• The impact of the effluent water temperature difference should be addressed in the Basic Assessment Report (“BAR”)

4. Intake and discharge lines will not affect public access across beach, however the land belongs to Department of Public Works. The Overstrand Maintenance Management Plan (“MMP”) which was drafted for the area, should be consulted (dune stabilisation and sand erosion).

• Consent from Department of Public Works (“DPW”) should be obtained • An MMP for the proposed development and pipelines crossing the beach should be drafted. This MMP

should not be contradictory to the existing Overstrand Municipalities MMP 5. The position of the previously approved intake and discharge lines should be determined 6. Discussions should be had with DEA&DP Coastal Management (Ieptieshaam Bekko) regarding the pipelines 7. It was noted that the inclusion of the seaweed / algae culture area was a contingency plan in the case of algal blooms where the seawater coming onto the farm would need to be shut off for extended periods. It may also be used as supplementary feed


129

8. Alternatives – important to include site selection criteria and why the site is considered to be the favourable site for aquaculture development 9. The use of wave energy was queried and whether it is a feasible option. The conclusion was that solar is preferred 10. A botanical assessment should be undertaken, particularly now in spring season, as per Cape Natures requirements for such assessments 11. Remainder of the property not included in the development proposal:

• Conservation management of the remainder of the site must be considered, including amongst others, alien clearing, fire management etc.

• The management of the remainder can form part of the Operational Environmental Management Plan (“EMP”), along with the MMP

• The option of linking with the nearby Uilkraals Conservation area may be recommended by Cape Nature and should be considered

12. Coastal Setback Lines

• The draft Coastal Setback Line is located close to the R43 on the northern extent of the property and not practically or financially feasible for placement of the aquaculture facility

• The residential dwelling located alongside the administration block may not be easy to motivate for and may need to be shifted backwards

• Motivation should be included as to why an abalone farm cannot be placed behind the setback line and by its nature will always need to be located in the high-risk zone

• Mitigation measures for location of infrastructure in high risk areas should be included • Office / administration buildings need to be located in close proximity to the grow-out / hatchery area

and the location in high risk zone can therefore be motivated for • A Site-Specific setback line report may not have any benefit at this stage • The requirement for a dune assessment should be considered in relation to on site conditions

13. It is important to ensure that the description of the proposed development is well written and thought out and includes what is required in terms of infrastructure now and at full production.

• i.e if a smaller pipeline can be used at initial stages, the description of the full production pipeline must be included so as to avoid an expansion trigger at a later stage

14. Sewerage

• Due to the location within the high-risk zone, a package plant may be more favourable • Alternative is to consider a pipeline connecting to municipal infrastructure, this could even service

phase 1 • Should conservancy tanks be used, they will need to be located in a safe area, and emptied and

removed off site once they are no longer in use

15. Way forward

Michelle

- Obtain quotes for a Botanical Specialist

- Consider need for Marine Impact Assessment and Dune Assessment

- Submit Heritage Notice in Intent to Develop to Heritage Western Cape

- Commence BAR report prep


130

Gavin

- Attend to Site Development Plan with WRAP / Richard

- Appoint surveyor as required by WRAP

- Determine whether a pipeline to municipal connection is feasible in terms of municipality capacity and

cost

- Liaise with Engineers re specifics of pipelines, either with a detailed drawing of dimensions, depths

etc. or a supplementary report, information on construction phase and mitigation / remediation

measures should also be included

- Obtain previous specialist studies from Etienne Hinrichsen

- Obtain previously approved location of pipelines from Etienne Hinrichsen

Kind regards,

MICHELLE NAYLOR

M.Sc.; Pr.Sci.Nat. 400327/13.; EAPSA; Cand. APHP


131

9. 2. A presentation and site meeting was held on the 26/09/2019. The project proposal was discussed after

which a site visit was undertaken.

See attendance register below


132


133


134

9.3. A project presentation and meeting was held with representatives of the Overstrand Municipality,

including the Town Planning Department, Engineering and the Environmental Section.

See attendance register attached below:


135


136

10. ADDITIONAL ROUND OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

An additional round of public participation was conducted on the Pre-Application BAR. All registered I&APS

and applicable organs of state were notified accordingly.

Documents

PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION F Proof of Public Participation .pdfWorcester Hermanus 6850 7200 o23 346 8000 Vermont Conservation Trust Vermont Ratepayers & Environmental Assoc Att