Author
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
i
DARDLEA Ref: 1/3/1/16/1 G-131
Residential
Establishment, Leandra
– Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality
Draft Environmental Impact
Assessment Report
ii
Proposed Residential Establishment, Leandra, Govan Mbeki Local Municipality
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENT REPORT
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Henopath (Pty) Ltd
P.O. Box 35465
Menlo Park
Pretoria
0102
Green-Box Consulting
P.O. Box 37738
Langenhovenpark
Bloemfontein
9330
August 2019
iii
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT TITLE: Proposed Residential Establishment on Portion
2 of the Farm Rietfontein 313- Leandra,
Mpumalanga Province.
PROJECT PROPONENT: Henopath (Pty) Ltd
Contact Person: Byron Lee Smith
P.O. Box 35465
Menlo Park
Pretoria
0102
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANT: Green-Box Consulting
P.O. Box 37738
Langenhovenpark
9330
Phone: 082 435 2108
Email: [email protected]
LEAD EAP: Danie Krynauw
Email: [email protected]
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
TEAM: D. Krynauw
N. Badenhorst
DOCUMENT STATUS: Draft EIA Report for 30-day public review
period
DARDLEA REF: 1/3/1/16/1 G-131
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Ms. Sindisiswe Mbuane
DATE: August 2019
iv
Green-Box Consulting Report Revision and Tracking
Schedule
Document Title Proposed Establishment of a new Mixed Residential
Development on the Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein
313- Leandra, Mpumalanga Province.
Client Henopath (Pty) Ltd
Document Reference DK/17/54
Status Drat EIA Report for 30-day public review period
Issue Date After acceptance of Final Scoping Report
Lead Authors Mr. Danie Krynauw
Reviewer Mr. Niël Badenhorst
EAP Mr. Danie Krynauw
Report Distribution Circulate to No. of hard
copies
No.
electronic
copies
DARDLEA – Draft EIA
(version 1 – Draft)
1 1
This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of Green-Box Consulting appointment and contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by copyright in favour of Green-Box Consulting. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of Green-Box Consulting. This document is prepared exclusively for use by GBC‘s client. GBC accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of GBC. The document is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets rules, intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.
v
Contents:
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 1
1.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION (EA) ..................................... 1
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS AND EIA TEAM .......................................................... 2
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THIS EIA REPORT .................................................................................... 3
1.6 PROJECT MOTIVATION .................................................................................................... 6
1.7 NEED AND DESIRABILITY ................................................................................................. 7
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 1
2.1 PROJECT SITE SELECTION AND OVERVIEW ...................................................................... 1
2.2 PRESENT LAND USE ......................................................................................................... 2
2.3 KEY COMPONENTS OF THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................................. 3
2.4 ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES ....................................... 5
2.4.1 Water ............................................................................................................................. 6
2.4.2 Sanitation ...................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.3 Electricity ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.4.4 Roads and Stormwater ................................................................................................ 7
2.4.5 Traffic ............................................................................................................................. 7
2.5 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT CYCLE ...................................................................................... 8
2.5.1 Construction ................................................................................................................. 8
2.5.2 Operation ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.5.3 Decommissioning ........................................................................................................ 9
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................................................... 9
3.1 BIOPHYSICAL .................................................................................................................. 10
3.1.1 Climate ........................................................................................................................ 10
3.1.2 Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................... 10
3.1.3 Vegetation and Conservation Status ....................................................................... 11
4. APPROACH TO THE EIA & PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................................... 16
4.2 OVERVIEW OF THE EIA PROCESS ................................................................................... 26
4.2.1 Scoping Phase ............................................................................................................ 28
vi
4.2.2 EIA Phase ..................................................................................................................... 29
4.2.3 Public Participation Process (PPP) ........................................................................... 30
4.3 APPROACH TO UNDERTAKING THE EIA ......................................................................... 33
4.4 SPECIALIST STUDIES ....................................................................................................... 36
4.4.1 Summary of Ecological and Wetland Impact Assessment ................................... 37
4.4.3 Summary Engineering Bulk Civil Services Report & Electrical ............................. 41
4.4.4 Summary Traffic Impact Study ................................................................................ 44
5. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................................. 45
5.1 Fundamental Alternatives .................................................................................................. 45
5.1.1 Developer Alternatives .............................................................................................. 45
5.1.2 Location Alternatives ................................................................................................. 46
5.1.3 Incremental Alternatives ........................................................................................... 46
5.1.4 “No- Go Alternative” .................................................................................................. 46
6. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ........................................................................ 49
6.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS ........................................................................................ 49
6.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS ........................................................................................... 62
6.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ........................................................................................................ 66
6.4 ASSESSMENT OF NO-GO ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................... 66
7. DESCRIPTION OF KEY ASSUMPTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS ............................. 67
8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 68
9. IMPACT STATEMENT .......................................................................................................... 70
10. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 71
Appendix: A ................................................................................................................................ 72
CURRICULUM VITAE AND EAP DECLARATION .................................................................... 72
Appendix: B ................................................................................................................................ 81
LOCALITY MAP ........................................................................................................................... 81
Appendix: C ................................................................................................................................ 83
SITE PHOTOS ............................................................................................................................. 83
Appendix: D ................................................................................................................................ 87
FACILITY ILLUSTRATION(S) ....................................................................................................... 87
vii
Appendix: E ................................................................................................................................ 89
SPECIALIST REPORTS .............................................................................................................. 89
Appendix: F ................................................................................................................................. 90
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................................................................................................ 90
Appendix: G .............................................................................................................................. 111
LIST OF APPLICABLE LEGISLATION ...................................................................................... 111
viii
ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT
BID : Background Information Document
CBD : Central Business District
DARDLEA : Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental
Affairs
DEA : Department of Environmental Affairs
DWAF : Department of Water Affairs
DWS : Department of Water and Sanitation
EA : Environmental Authorisation
EAP : Environmental Assessment Practitioner
EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment
EIAr : Environmental Impact Assessment Report
EMP : Environmental Management Plan
EMPr : Environmental Management Programme
FSR : Final Scoping Report
GBC : Green-Box Consulting
GDP : Gross Domestic Product
GN : Government Notice
I&AP : Interested and Affected Party
IDC : Industrial Development Corporation
IEM : Integrated Environmental Management
NEMA : National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998)
NEM:PAA : National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (No. 57 of 2003)
NEM:WA : National Environmental Management: Waste Act (No. 59 of 2008)
NHRA : National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999)
NWA : National Water Act (No. 59 of 2008)
PGDS : Provincial Growth and Development Strategy
PoSEIA : Plan of Study for Environmental Impact Assessment
PPP : Public Participation Process
PSDF : Provincial Spatial Development Framework
1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
Henopath (Pty) Ltd (the project proponent) is proposing the establishment of a
new mixed typology Residential Development and its associated infrastructure
outside the town of Leandra. The project footprint is approximately 545 hectares
and is situated on Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein no 313 in the province of
Mpumalanga. The property is owned by Henopath (Pty) Ltd and represents an
opportunity to fulfill the Proponents economic and environmental objectives.
Refer to Error! Reference source not found. for a locality map depicting the
locality of the proposed project. The new Mixed Residential Development will
consist of various types of land uses such as:
Social Housing (3 -Story);
Business Stands;
Free Standing Units;
Community Facilities;
Open Spaces;
Central Community points; and
Internal road network.
The primary objective of this initiative is to establish mixed formal residential
housing and related infrastructure for the residents of Leandra. Several land uses
are proposed for the development with residential and business stands
proposed. Community, open spaces and central community points are also
proposed to form part of the layout.
The provisional assumption is that the proposed development of the mixed
Residential Development will only take place after the upgrading of vital services
/ infrastructure has taken place in order to accommodate the new development.
Bulk water supply, Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) as well as electricity
supply networks needs to be upgraded as per the included services reports in
order to accommodate the said proposed development.
1
Figure 1.1: Locality map of the project site
1
1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
A great need for middle income residential units (mixed land-uses) has been
identified, which will include communal and open spaces as well. The area is well
suited as it will be situated next to an existing residential area with access being
gained through the R29 road, which is also the southern border of the proposed
site. Installation and connection to associated bulk services infrastructure will
form part of the development proposal. A township Establishment has been
approved on the open area between the proposed development and Leandra.
This proposal will further link the residential areas linking Eendracht to Leandra.
A conceptual layout has been prepared for the project which depicts the typical
mixed residential layouts that will be constructed within the proposed
development area (refer to Error! Reference source not found.).
Associated infrastructure includes bulk water provision, wastewater removal
infrastructure, roads and electricity supply. A detailed project description (based
on the conceptual design) is provided in Chapter Error! Reference source not
found. of this EIA Report.
A Feasibility Project Team was appointed to complete a feasibility study, and
concluded with the following key findings:
The town of Leandra (Govan Mbeki Local Municipality) is technically
viable with a proper demand for a new Mixed Residential Development &
the feasibility thereof;
Site is well located next to existing residential ervens;
Easy access to main roads;
Bulk service connection on perimeter of site;
Environmental risk can be managed; and
No topographical and ecological concerns.
1.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION (EA)
In terms of the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998, as
amended) (NEMA) and the NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Regulations (hereafter referred to as the “EIA Regulations”) promulgated in
Government Gazette 40772 and published in Government Notices (GN) R326,
R327, R325 and R324, the development of the proposed Mixed Residential
Development requires Environmental Authorisation (EA) from the Competent
Authority (CA) subject to the completion of a full Scoping and EIA process.
2
A detailed list of activities contained in Listing Notice 1 (GN R327), Listing Notice
2 (GN R325), and Listing Notice 3 (GN R327) which may be triggered by the
various project components and thus form part of this EIA Process is provided in
Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
The Mpumalanga Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and
Environmental Affairs (DARDLEA) has been identified as the Competent
Authority (CA) for the project and is thus responsible for granting EA for the
project. The DARDLEA reference number for this project is: 1/3/1/16/1 G-131.
The purpose of the EIA is to identify, assess and report on any potential impacts
the proposed project may have on the receiving environment if implemented.
The environmental assessment therefore needs to show the Competent
Authority, DARDLEA, and the project proponent, Henopath (Pty) Ltd, what the
consequences of their choices will be in terms of impacts on the biophysical and
socio-economic environment and how such impacts can be, as far as possible,
enhanced or mitigated and managed as the case may be.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS AND EIA TEAM
In accordance with Regulation 12 of the EIA Regulations (GN R326) Henopath
(Pty) Ltd has appointed Green-Box Consulting as the independent environmental
consultants responsible for managing the application for EA, and supporting
Scoping and EIA process, inclusive of specialist studies and public participation
process.
Over the past 8 years Green-Box Consulting has been involved in the
management and execution of environmental assessment and management
studies for a multitude of projects across South Africa. These include projects
for both public and private sector clients. The Green-Box Consulting team
consequently offers a wealth of experience and appreciation of the
environmental and social priorities, and national policies and regulations in
South Africa.
The EIA project team is being led by Danie Krynauw, who is also the registered
Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) on the project. Danie will be
supported by Niel Badenhorst in the role of Technical Advisor.
Danie Krynauw is a Senior EAP at Green-Box Consulting and has a Master’s
Degree in Town and Regional Planning. Danie has over 15 years’
experience in the Environmental Management field, and has been involved
3
in various Basic Assessments, EIAs, and EMPs, in the land transformation
fields.
Niël Badenhorst is a Junior EAP at Green-Box Consulting and has a BA
Degree in Geography and Environmental Management. Niel has 5 years’
experience in environmental assessment studies. He has experience in the
Environmental Management field and has been involved in a diverse range
of Basic Assessments, and EIAs.
The EIA team involved in the EIA Process being conducted for the proposed
Mixed Residential Development is listed in Table 1.1. This team includes a
number of specialists which have been involved in or provided input into the EIA
Process.
Table 1.1: EIA Team
Name Organisation Role
Environmental Consultants
Danie Krynauw Green-Box Consulting Lead EAP
Niël Badenhorst Green-Box Consulting EAP Assistant
Specialists
Rikus Lampbrecht EcoFocus Consulting Ecological and Wetland
Specialist
Lloyd Rossouw Palaeo Field Services Heritage Impact
Assessment
Petrus J. Oosthuizen MVD Kalahari Engineering Bulk Civil
Services Report
S. Wessels S & W Consulting Electrical Services Report
Hendrik Wouter Swart Hamatino Consulting
Engineers
Traffic Impact Study
A Curriculum Vitae detailing the EAPs relevant experience and expertise, and a
signed EAP declaration of interest are included in Error! Reference source not
found. of this EIA Report.
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THIS EIA REPORT
This EIA Report has been prepared as part of the EIA process being conducted in
support of an application for EA for the proposed development of a new mixed
Residential Development. The primary objective of this EIA Report is to present
stakeholders, Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) and the Competent
Authority- Mpumalanga Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Land
4
and Environmental Affairs (DARDLEA) with an overview of the predicted impacts
and associated management actions required to avoid or mitigate the negative
impacts; or to enhance the benefits of the proposed project. In broad terms, the
EIA Regulations (GN R326) stipulates that the EIA Process must be undertaken in
line with the approved Plan of Study for the EIA, and must include a description
of the potential environmental impacts, mitigation and closure outcomes, as well
as the residual risks of the proposed activity.
This EIA Report was preceded by a comprehensive Scoping Phase. During the
Scoping Phase, the Scoping Report was made available to Interested and
Affected Parties (I&APs) and stakeholders for a 30-day review period extending
from 25 June 2019 to 26 July 2019. Comments received during the 30-day
review period were incorporated into the Scoping Report (where required), and
the finalised Scoping Report was submitted to DARDLEA for acceptance.
Regulation 23 of the EIA Regulations (GN R326) refers to the submission and
consideration of EIA Reports and Environmental Management Programmes
(EMPrs), and states that:
(1) The applicant must within 106 days of the acceptance of the scoping report
submit to the competent authority –
(a) An environmental impact assessment report inclusive of any specialist
reports, and an EMPr, which must have been subjected to a public
participation process of at least 30 days and which reflects the
incorporation of comments received, including any comments of the
competent authority
(3) An environmental impact assessment report must contain all information
set out in Appendix 3 to these Regulations or comply with a protocol or
minimum information requirements relevant to the application as
identified and gazetted by the Minister in a government notice and, where
the application is for an environmental authorisation for prospecting,
exploration, extraction of a mineral or petroleum resource, including
primary processing or activities directly related thereto, the environmental
impact assessment report must contain attachments that address the
requirements as determined in the regulations, pertaining to the financial
provision for the rehabilitation, closure and post closure of prospecting,
exploration, mining or production operations, made in terms of the Act.
1
This EIA Report has been released to stakeholders for a 30-day review period in
accordance with the requirements of Regulations 43 and 44 (GN R326). All
I&APs on the current database for this EIA (refer to Error! Reference source not
found.) have been informed in writing of the release of the EIA Report for a 30-
day comment period. Comments received during the 30-day review period will
be included in the finalised EIA Report, to be submitted to DARDLEA for
decision-making.
A crucial objective of the EIA Report is to satisfy the requirements of Appendix 3
of the EIA Regulations (as noted in Regulation 23(3) of the GN R326). This
section regulates and prescribes the content of the EIA Report and specifies the
type of supporting information that must accompany the submission of the EIA
Report to the Competent Authority. An overview of where the requirements of
Appendix 3 of the EIA Regulations (GN R326) are addressed in this EIA Report is
presented in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2: Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of Appendix 3 of the
2014 NEMA EIA Regulations as amended
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(a)
Details of –
(iii) The EAP who prepared the report, and
(iv) The expertise of the EAP, including a
curriculum vitae.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(b)
The location of the activity, including –
(i) The 21-digit Surveyor General code of each
cadastral land parcel,
(ii) Where available, the physical address and farm
name, and
(iii) Where the required information in items (i) and
(ii) is not available, the coordinates of the
boundary of the property or properties.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(c)
A plan which locates the proposed activity or
activities applied for as well as the associated
structures and infrastructure at an appropriate scale,
or, if it is –
(i) A linear activity, a description and coordinates
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
2
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
of the corridor in which the proposed activity
or activities is to be undertaken, or
(ii) On land where the property has not been
defined, the coordinates within which the
activity is to be undertaken.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(d)
A description of the scope of the proposed activity,
including –
(i) All listed and specified activities triggered and
being applied for, and
(ii) A description of the associated structures and
infrastructure related to the development.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(e)
A description of the policy and legislative context
within which the development is located and an
explanation of how the proposed development
complies with and responds to the legislation and
policy context.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(f)
A motivation for the need and desirability for the
proposed development, including the need and
desirability of the activity in the context of the
preferred development footprint within the
approved site as contemplated in the accepted
scoping report.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(g)
A motivation for the preferred development
footprint within the approved site as contemplated
in the accepted scoping report.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(h)
A full description of the process followed to reach
the proposed development footprint within the
approved site as contemplated in the accepted
scoping report, including:
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
3
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
(i) Details of the development footprint
alternatives considered,
(ii) Details of the public participation process
undertaken in terms of regulation 41 of the
Regulations, including copies of the supporting
documents and inputs,
(iii) A summary of the issues raised by interested
and affected parties, and an indication of the
manner in which the issues were incorporated,
or the reasons for not including them,
(iv) The environmental attributes associated with
the development footprint alternatives
focusing on the geographical, physical,
biological, social, economic, heritage and
cultural aspects,
(v) The impacts and risks identified, including the
nature, significance, consequence, extent,
duration and probability of the impacts,
including the degree to which these impacts –
(aa) can be reversed,
(bb) may cause irreplaceable loss of resources,
and
(cc) can be avoided, managed or mitigated,
(vi) The methodology used in determining and
ranking the nature, significance, consequences,
extent, duration and probability of potential
environmental impacts and risks,
(vii) Positive and negative impacts that the
proposed activity and alternatives will have on
the environment and on the community that
may be affected focusing on the geographical,
physical, biological, social, economic, heritage
and cultural aspects,
(viii) The possible mitigation measures that could be
applied and level of residual risk,
(ix) If no alternative development footprints for the
activity were investigated, the motivation for
not considering such, and
(x) A concluding statement indicating the location
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
4
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
of the preferred alternative development
footprint within the approved site as
contemplated in the accepted scoping report.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(i)
A full description of the process undertaken to
identify, assess and rank the impacts the activity and
associated structures and infrastructure will impose
on the preferred development footprint on the
approved site as contemplated in the accepted
scoping report through the life of the activity,
including –
(i) A description of all environmental issues and
risks that were identified during the
environmental impact assessment process, and
(ii) An assessment of the significance of each issue
and risk and an indication of the extent to
which the issue and risk could be avoided or
addressed by the adoption of mitigation
measures.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(j)
An assessment of each identified potentially
significant impact and risk, including –
(i) Cumulative impacts,
(ii) The nature, significance and consequences of
the impact and risk,
(iii) The extent and duration of the impact and risk,
(iv) The probability of the impact and risk
occurring,
(v) The degree to which the impact and risk can be
reversed;
(vi) The degree to which the impact and risk may
cause irreplaceable loss of resources, and
(vii) The degree to which the impact and risk can be
mitigated.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(k)
Where applicable, a summary of the findings and
recommendations of any specialist report complying
with Appendix 6 to these Regulations and an
indication as to how these findings and
recommendations have been included in the final
assessment report.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3 An environmental impact statement which contains Chapter
5
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
–
3.(1)(l)
–
(i) A summary of the key findings of the
environmental impact assessment,
(ii) A map at an appropriate scale which
superimposes the proposed activity and its
associated structures and infrastructure on the
environmental sensitivities of the preferred
development footprint on the approved site as
contemplated in the accepted scoping report
indicating any areas that should be avoided,
including buffers, and
(iii) A summary of the positive and negative
impacts and risks of the proposed activity and
identified alternatives.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(m)
Based on the assessment, and where applicable,
recommendations from specialist reports, the
recording of proposed impact management
outcomes for the development for inclusion in the
EMPr as well as for inclusion as conditions of
authorisation.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Part B
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(n)
The final proposed alternatives which respond to the
impact management measures, avoidance, and
mitigation measures identified through the
assessment.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(o)
Any aspects which were conditional to the findings
of the assessment either by the EAP or specialist
which are to be included as conditions of
authorisation.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(p)
A description of any assumptions, uncertainties and
gaps in knowledge which relate to the assessment
and mitigation measures proposed.
Chapter
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3 A reasoned opinion as to whether the proposed Chapter
6
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
–
3.(1)(q)
activity should or should not be authorised, and if
the opinion is that it should be authorised, any
conditions that should be made in respect of that
authorisation.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(r)
Where the proposed activity does not include
operational aspects, the period for which the
environmental authorisation is required and the date
on which the activity will be concluded, and the post
construction monitoring requirements finalised.
N/A
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(s)
An undertaking under oath or affirmation by the
EAP in relation to –
(i) The correctness of the information provided in
the reports,
(ii) The inclusion of comments and inputs from
stakeholders and I&APs,
(iii) The inclusion of inputs and recommendations
from the specialist reports where relevant, and
(iv) Any information provided by the EAP to
interested and affected parties and any
responses by the EAP to comments or inputs
made by interested or affected parties.
Error!
Reference
source not
found.
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(t)
Where applicable, details of any financial provision
for the rehabilitation, closure, and ongoing post
decommissioning management of negative
environmental impacts.
N/A
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(u)
An indication of any deviation from the approved
scoping report, including the plan of study,
including –
(i) Any deviation from the methodology used in
determining the significance of potential
environmental impacts and risks, and
(ii) A motivation for the deviation.
N/A
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(v)
Any specific information that may be required by the
competent authority.
N/A
Appendix 3
–
3.(1)(w)
Any other matters required in terms of section
24(4)(a) and (b) of the Act.
N/A
Appendix 3 Where a government notice gazetted by the N/A
7
EIA
Regulation
Requirements for an EIA Report in terms of
Appendix 3 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations
(GN R326)
Location
in this EIA
Report
–
3.(2)
Minister provides for any protocol or minimum
information requirement to be applied to an
environmental impact assessment report the
requirements as indicated in such notice will apply.
1.6 PROJECT MOTIVATION
The proposed new Mixed Residential development will consist out of a number
of different housing and services which will be contained in the proposed
development area. The primary objective of the project is to supply additional
business, community facilities, open spaces, central community points and
different residential erven to the residents of Leandra / Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality area. This proposal will further link the residential areas linking
Eendracht to Leandra as a township Establishment has been approved on the
open area between the proposed development and Leandra.
The town of Leandra is situated in an area which is known to for its coal mining
activities, with 83% of South Africa’s coal production taking place in the province
of Mpumalanga. There are also platinum, gold and copper mines in the area
which attracts numerous jobseekers as well as families to the area. Due to these
factors a great need for especially residential, but also mixed land uses have
been identified. The conceptual layout depicts these typical ranges of facilities
(housing) and services that will be housed and include:
Social Housing (3 -Story);
Business Stands;
Free Standing Units;
Community Facilities;
Open Space;
Central Community points;
Main Roads and street networks.
Land Use m² HaProposed
Number Of Units Units Per Ha
% of
Development
Blue - Social Housing (3 Storey) 813240 81.32 6480 80 Units / Ha 14.75
Red - Business Stands 268503 26.8503 n/a n/a 4.87
Orange - Multey Storey Cru -Units 1115266 111.5266 8880 80 Units / Ha 20.23
Yellow - Free Standing Units 671814 67.1814 1340 20 Units / Ha 12.19
Purple - Community Facilities 375108 37.5108 n/a n/a 6.80
Green - Open Space 1227143 122.7143 n/a n/a 22.26
Ligh Green - Central Community point 60293 6.0293 n/a n/a 1.09
Main Roads 981439 98.1439 n/a n/a 17.80
5512806 551.2806 16700 Units 100
8
Figure 1.2: Unit proposal
1.7 NEED AND DESIRABILITY
One of the objectives of the EIA Process as defined by the 2014 EIA Regulations
(GN R326) is to:
“Describe the need and desirability of the proposed activity, including the need
and desirability of the activity in the context of the development footprint on the
approved site as contemplated in the accepted Scoping Report.”
The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) published a Guideline on Need
and Desirability in 2017. The Guideline contains information on best practice
and how to meet the requirements prescribed by NEMA and sets out the
context for the consideration of the need and desirability of a development
involving any one of the NEMA listed activities. Need and desirability is based
on the principle of sustainability, set out in the Constitution and in NEMA, and
provided for in various policies and plans, including the National Development
Plan 2030 (NDP). Addressing the need and desirability of a development is a
way of ensuring sustainable development (i.e. ensuring that a development is
ecologically sustainable and socially and economically justifiable) and ensuring
the simultaneous achievement of the triple bottom-line.
The Guideline sets out a list of questions which should be addressed when
considering the need and desirability of a proposed development. These are
divided into questions that relate to ecological sustainability, and justifiable
economic and social development. The questions that relate to ecological
sustainability include how the development may impact ecosystems and
biological diversity, pollution, and renewable and non-renewable resources.
When considering how the development may affect or promote justifiable
economic and social development, the relevant spatial plans must be
considered, including Municipal Integrated Development Plans (IDPs), Spatial
Development Frameworks (SDFs) and Environmental Management Frameworks
(EMFs). In accordance with the Guidelines, assessment reports need to provide
information as to how the development will address the socio-economic impacts
9
of the development, and whether any socio-economic impact resulting from the
development impact on people’s environmental rights.
Table 1.3 contains the list of questions from the DEA’s Guideline on Need and
Desirability, as well as the responses provided to the questions from the context
of the proposed new Mixed Residential development.
1
Table 1.3: “Need and Desirability” of the proposed project
Question Response
“Securing ecological sustainable development and use of natural resources”
1. How will this development (and its separate elements /
aspects) impact on the ecological integrity of the area)?
The manner in which the proposed development will impact on
the ecological integrity of the area has been assessed as part of
this EIA process, and is reported on in Chapter Error! Reference
source not found. of this EIA Report. Environmental
sensitivities present on site were assessed within the Ecological
and surface water assessment conducted for the project and
attached as Error! Reference source not found. to this EIA
Report.
1.1. How were the following ecological integrity
considerations taken into account?
1.1.1. Threatened Ecosystems.
1.1.2. Sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or
stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores,
estuaries, wetlands, and similar systems
require specific attention in management and
planning procedures, especially where they are
subject to significant human resource usage
and development pressure.
1.1.3. Critical Biodiversity Areas ("CBAs") and
Ecological Support Areas ("ESAs").
1.1.4. Conservation targets.
1.1.5. Ecological drivers of the ecosystem.
1.1.5. Ecological drivers of the ecosystem.
1.1.6. Environmental Management Framework.
1.1.7. Spatial Development Framework.
1.1.8 Global and international responsibilities
relating to the environment (e.g. RAMSAR
sites, Climate Change, etc.).
2
Question Response
1.2. How will this development disturb or enhance
ecosystems and / or result in the loss or protection of
biological diversity? What measures were explored to
firstly avoid these negative impacts, and where these
negative impacts could not be avoided altogether,
what measures were explored to minimise and remedy
(including offsetting) the impacts? What measures
were explored to enhance positive impacts?
The manner in which the proposed development will impact on
the ecological integrity of the area has been assessed as part of
this EIA process, and is reported on in Chapter Error! Reference
source not found. of this EIA Report and the Ecological and
Wetland Impact Assessment / Surface Water Assessment
conducted for the project and attached as Error! Reference
source not found. to this EIA Report..
Measures with which to avoid, remedy, mitigate and manage
identified impacts are included within the Environmental
Management Programme (EMPr) prepared for the project and
included as Part B of this EIA Report.
1.3. How will this development pollute and / or degrade
the biophysical environment? What measures were
explored to firstly avoid these impacts, and where
impacts could not be avoided altogether, what
measures were explored to minimise and remedy
(including offsetting) the impacts? What measures
were explored to enhance positive impacts?
Measures with which to avoid, remedy, mitigate and manage
identified impacts are included within the Environmental
Management Programme (EMPr) prepared for the project and
included as Part B of this EIA Report.
1.4. What waste will be generated by this development?
What measures were explored to firstly avoid waste,
and where waste could not be avoided altogether;
what measures were explored to minimise, reuse and /
or recycle the waste? What measures have been
explored to safely treat and / or dispose of
The manner in which the proposed development will impact on
the ecological integrity of the area has been assessed as part of
this EIA process, and are reported on in Chapter Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report and the
Ecological and Wetland Impact Assessment/ Surface Water
Assessment conducted for the project and attached as Error!
3
Question Response
unavoidable waste? Reference source not found. to this EIA Report.
Measures with which to avoid, remedy, mitigate and manage
identified impacts are included within the Environmental
Management Programme (EMPr) prepared for the project and
included as Part B of this EIA Report.
1.5. How will this development disturb or enhance
landscapes and / or sites that constitute the nation's
cultural heritage? What measures were explored to
firstly avoid these impacts, and where impacts could
not be avoided altogether, what measures were
explored to minimise and remedy (including offsetting)
the impacts? What measures were explored to
enhance positive impacts?
A Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment has been undertaken as
part of the EIA process. The results of the assessment are
provided in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this
EIA Report, and a copy of the report is provided in Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
Measures with which to avoid, remedy, mitigate and manage
identified heritage impacts are included within the
Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) prepared for
the project and included as Part B of this EIA Report.
1.6. How will this development use and / or impact on
non-renewable natural resources? What measures
were explored to ensure responsible and equitable use
of the resources? How have the consequences of the
depletion of the non-renewable natural resources
been considered? What measures were explored to
firstly avoid these impacts, and where impacts could
not be avoided altogether, what measures were
explored to minimise and remedy (including offsetting)
An Ecological and Wetland Impact Assessment / Surface Water
Assessment has been undertaken as part of the EIA process.
The results of the assessment are provided in Chapter Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report, and a copy of
the report is provided in Error! Reference source not found. of
this EIA Report.
Measures with which to avoid, remedy, mitigate and manage
identified environmental impacts are included within the
4
Question Response
the impacts? What measures were explored to
enhance positive impacts?
Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) prepared for
the project and included as Part B of this EIA Report.
1.7. How will this development use and / or impact on
renewable natural resources and the ecosystem of
which they are part? Will the use of the resources and
/ or impact on the ecosystem jeopardise the integrity
of the resource and / or system taking into account
carrying capacity restrictions, limits of acceptable
change, and thresholds? What measures were
explored to firstly avoid the use of resources, or if
avoidance is not possible, to minimise the use of
resources? What measures were taken to ensure
responsible and equitable use of the resources? What
measures were explored to enhance positive impacts?
An overview of the resources required by the project is provided
in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA
Report. An Engineering Services Study and Electrical Services
Study have also been conducted for the project. Summaries of
the studies are provided in Chapter Error! Reference source
not found. while copies of the reports are attached in Error!
Reference source not found. to this EIA Report.
1.7.1. Does the proposed development exacerbate
the increased dependency on increased use of
resources to maintain economic growth or
does it reduce resource dependency (i.e. de-
materialised growth)? (note: sustainability
requires that settlements reduce their
ecological footprint by using less material and
energy demands and reduce the amount of
waste they generate, without compromising
their quest to improve their quality of life).
1.7.2. Does the proposed use of natural resources
5
Question Response
constitute the best use thereof? Is the use
justifiable when considering intra- and
intergenerational equity, and are there more
important priorities for which the resources
should be used (i.e. what are the opportunity
costs of using these resources of the proposed
development alternative?).
1.7.3. Do the proposed location, type and scale of
development promote a reduced dependency
on resources?
1.8. How were a risk-averse and cautious approach applied
in terms of ecological impacts?:
The precautionary approach has been adopted for this
assessment, i.e. assuming the worst-case scenario will occur and
then identifying ways to mitigate or manage these impacts.
This EIA is being undertaken without specific technology
providers in mind, and therefore EA granted for the project will
need to cater for a range of industry profiles. The EIA will be
based on the project “envelope” approach, whereby a range of
potential project inputs and outputs will be specified (e.g. in
terms of maximum project footprint, bulk and scale of
structures), and the impact assessment provided for this project
envelope. Then provided that the detailed project design is
within this envelope, the assessment will remain valid.
1.8.1. What are the limits of current knowledge
(note: the gaps, uncertainties and assumptions
must be clearly stated)?
1.8.2. What is the level of risk associated with the
limits of current knowledge?
1.8.3. Based on the limits of knowledge and the level
of risk, how and to what extent was a risk-
averse and cautious approach applied to the
development?
1.9. How will the ecological impacts resulting from this
development impact on people's environmental right
The proposed project is not anticipated to impact on people’s
environmental right with regards to access to resources. The
6
Question Response
in terms following: project is proposed on land, which is owned by the Project
Proponent, Henopath (Pty) Ltd, and is currently used for animal
grazing purposes, with minimal other agricultural activities
taking place on the site. An EMPr has been compiled for the
proposed project to ensure that all potential negative impacts
identified are suitably managed and mitigated, and potential
positive impacts are enhanced, and is attached as Part B to this
EIA Report.
1.9.1. Negative impacts: e.g. access to resources,
opportunity costs, loss of amenity (e.g. open
space), air and water quality impacts, nuisance
(noise, odour, etc.), health impacts, visual
impacts, etc. What measures were taken to
firstly avoid negative impacts, but if avoidance
is not possible, to minimise, manage and
remedy negative impacts?
1.9.2. Positive impacts: e.g. improved access to
resources, improved amenity, improved air or
water quality, etc. What measures were taken
to enhance positive impacts?
1.10. Describe the linkages and dependencies between
human wellbeing, livelihoods and ecosystem services
applicable to the area in question and how the
development's ecological impacts will result in socio-
economic impacts (e.g. on livelihoods, loss of heritage
site, opportunity costs, etc.)?
The project is proposed on land which is owned by the Project
Proponent, Henopath (Pty) Ltd, and is currently used for animal
grazing purposes, with minimal other agricultural activities
taking place on the site, the proposed mixed residential
development will result in the area no longer be used for
agricultural purposes, however the area will contribute to socio-
economic objectives of the municipality.
An EMPr has been compiled for the proposed project to ensure
that all potential negative impacts identified are suitably
managed and mitigated, and potential positive impacts are
enhanced, and is attached as Part B to this EIA Report.
7
Question Response
1.11. Based on all of the above, how will this development
positively or negatively impact on ecological integrity
objectives / targets / considerations of the area?
The project is proposed on land, which is owned by the Project
Proponent, Henopath (Pty) Ltd, and is currently being used for
agricultural (animal grazing) purposes. The proposed project
would therefore result in the transformation of the natural area
into the mixed residential development area.
An EMPr has been compiled for the proposed project to ensure
that all potential negative impacts identified are suitably
managed and mitigated, and potential positive impacts are
enhanced, and is attached as Part B to this EIA Report.
1.12. Considering the need to secure ecological integrity
and a healthy biophysical environment, describe how
the alternatives identified (in terms of all the different
elements of the development and all the different
impacts being proposed), resulted in the election of
the "best practicable environmental option" in terms of
ecological considerations?
An assessment of different project alternatives is provided in
Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
1.13. Describe the positive and negative cumulative
ecological / biophysical impacts bearing in mind the
size, scale, scope and nature of the project in relation
to its location and existing and other planned
developments in the area?
An assessment of cumulative impacts is provided in Chapter
Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
“Promoting justifiable economic and social development”
2.1. What is the socio-economic context of the area, based
on, amongst other considerations, the following
The proposed project will be supportive of the IDP’s objective of
creating more job opportunities. The proposed facility will
8
Question Response
considerations? assist in local job creation during the construction and
operation phases of development. However, employment
opportunities will be temporary during the construction phase
and long-term during the operational phase of the proposed
mixed residential development. The development will however
more sow focus on the supply of housing and business
opportunities for residents, and job seekers to the area.
2.1.1. The IDP (and its sector plans' vision, objectives,
strategies, indicators and targets) and any
other strategic plans, frameworks of policies
applicable to the area.
2.1.2. Spatial priorities and desired spatial patterns
(e.g. need for integration of segregated
communities, need to upgrade informal
settlements, need for densification, etc.).
The purpose of the Mpumalanga Provincial Spatial
Development Framework (PSDF) is to:
Be the spatial expression of the Provincial Growth and
Development Strategy (PGDS).
Guide (metropolitan, district and local) municipal
integrated development plans (IDPs) and spatial
development frameworks (SDFs) and provincial and
municipal framework plans (ie. sub-SDF spatial plans).
Help prioritise and align investment and infrastructure
plans of other provincial departments, as well as national
departments' and parastatals' plans and programmes in
the Province.
Provide clear signals to the private sector about desired
development directions.
Increase predictability in the development environment,
for example by establishing no-go, conditional and "go"
2.1.3. Spatial characteristics (e.g. existing land uses,
planned land uses, cultural landscapes, etc.)
2.1.4. Municipal Economic Development Strategy
("LED Strategy").
9
Question Response
areas for development and redress the spatial legacy of
apartheid.
The establishment of the Mixed Residential Development in
Leandra will promote the area for further investment, stimulate
and contribute towards the economy as well as created a
number of much needed housing facilities in the area. These
goals / outcomes that will result from the proposed
development are in line with long-term plans for the
municipality. Leandra has also been identified as one of the
areas with the potential to develop mixed residential
development- because of mines located in the province, and a
great need for residential and business properties in the area.
2.2. Considering the socio-economic context, what will the
socio-economic impacts be of the development (and
its separate elements / aspects), and specifically also
on the socio-economic objectives of the area?
There are also a number of positive socio-economic benefits will
result as a direct and indirect effect of this activity. The most
notable being:
Housing and Business supply in the area.
Job Creation.
Growth of the local, regional and provincial economies.
2.2.1. Will the development complement the local
socio-economic initiatives (such as local
economic development (LED) initiatives)?
2.3. How will this development address the specific
physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and
social needs and interests of the relevant
communities?
Developments such as the Leandra Mixed Residential
Development been identified as a priority project for
Mpumalanga to provide strategic housing, business and
investment opportunities.
2.4. Will the development result in equitable (intra and The proposed mixed residential development has been
10
Question Response
inter-generational) impact distribution, in the short-
and long term? Will the impact be socially and
economically sustainable in the short- and long-term?
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga to provide
strategic investment opportunities. The proposed development
will result in social cohesion through the supply of housing and
business opportunities for residents and newcomers to the area,
the local economy will be stimulated through this development.
As long as the development is operational the positive effects
will be applicable to residents /businesspeople of the area.
2.5. In terms of location, describe how the placement of
the proposed development will:
The proposed development area is located west of the town of
Leandra in Mpumalanga province.
2.5.1. Result in the creation of residential and
employment opportunities in close proximity
to or integrated with each other.
2.5.2. Reduce the need for transport of people and
goods.
The proposed development area is located west of the town of
Leandra in Mpumalanga province.
2.5.3. Result in access to public transport or enable
non-motorised and pedestrian transport (e.g.
will the development result in densification
and the achievement of thresholds in terms
public transport).
The proposed development area is located west of the town of
Leandra in Mpumalanga province.
2.5.4. Compliment other uses in the area. The Mixed Residential Development project has been identified
as a priority project for Mpumalanga to provide housing and
business stands for the area, which has in recent years seen an
increase of residents, especially lower to middle income
individuals.
2.5.5. Be in line with the planning for the area.
2.5.6. For urban related development, make use of The land proposed for the development is well located between
11
Question Response
underutilised land available with the urban
edge.
the town of Leandra, Leandra’s residential extensions, and
Residential extension of Eendracht. Integration of these areas
will be achieved through the proposal.
2.5.7. Optimise the use of existing resources and
infrastructure.
An overview of the resources required by the project is provided
in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA
Report. An Engineering Services Study and Electrical Services
Study have also been conducted for the project. Summaries of
the studies are provided in Chapter Error! Reference source
not found. while copies of the reports are attached in Error!
Reference source not found. to this EIA Report.
2.5.8. Opportunity costs in terms of bulk
infrastructure expansions in non-priority areas
(e.g. not aligned with the bulk infrastructure
planning for the settlement that reflects the
spatial reconstruction priorities of the
settlement).
An overview of the resources required by the project is provided
in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA
Report. An Engineering Services Study and Electrical Services
Study have also been conducted for the project. Summaries of
the studies are provided in Chapter Error! Reference source
not found. while copies of the reports are attached in Error!
Reference source not found. to this EIA Report.
2.5.9. Discourage "urban sprawl" and contribute to
compaction / densification.
The land proposed for the development is well located between
the town of Leandra, Leandra’s residential extensions, and
Residential extension of Eendracht. Integration of these areas
will be achieved through the proposal.
2.5.10. Contribute to the correction of the historically
distorted spatial patterns of settlements and to
the optimum use of existing infrastructure in
excess of current needs.
The proposed Mixed Residential Development in Leandra will
afford people the opportunity to live and work in the area, in
the past much of the area was not available to live in and
workers had to travel far from work to home on a daily basis.
12
Question Response
2.5.11. Encourage environmentally sustainable land
development practices and processes.
Based on the findings of this EIA, the proposed project would
not have a significant (“high”) negative impact on the receiving
environment, with the implementation of suitable mitigation
measures. No impacts of high significance (with the
implementation of mitigation measures) were identified in the
EIA. Currently, the site is mostly used for agricultural purposes.
2.5.12. Take into account special locational factors
that might favour the specific location (e.g. the
location of a strategic mineral resource, access
to the port, access to rail, etc.).
No special location factors were identified the proposed
property is partly utilised as grazing fields, therefore an
agricultural land use.
2.5.13. The investment in the settlement or area in
question will generate the highest socio-
economic returns (i.e. an area with high
economic potential).
Investment in the area has been identified as a priority s there is
currently a lack of housing / business opportunities in the area.
The proposed Mixed Residential Development will result in high
economic potential and will uncourtly stimulate the local
community, as well as Mpumalanga’s economy in a positive
way.
2.5.14. Impact on the sense of history, sense of place
and heritage of the area and the socio-cultural
and cultural-historic characteristics and
sensitivities of the area.
A Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment has been undertaken as
part of the EIA process. The results of the assessment are
provided in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this
EIA Report, and a copy of the report is provided in Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
2.5.15. In terms of the nature, scale and location of
the development promote or act as a catalyst
to create a more integrated settlement.
The supply of housing in the area through the mixed residential
development has been identified as a priority project for
Mpumalanga to provide strategic investment opportunities.
The proposed area is currently only utilized as agricultural land,
13
Question Response
with cattle grazing on the area, the proposed site is also located
next to the town of Leandra and will therefore integrate with
existing residential / business practices.
2.6. How were a risk-averse and cautious approach applied
in terms of socio-economic impacts?
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
2.6.1. What are the limits of current knowledge
(note: the gaps, uncertainties and assumptions
must be clearly stated)?
2.6.2. What is the level of risk (note: related to
inequality, social fabric, livelihoods, vulnerable
communities, critical resources, economic
vulnerability and sustainability) associated with
the limits of current knowledge?
2.6.3. Based on the limits of knowledge and the level
of risk, how and to what extent was a risk-
averse and cautious approach applied to the
development?
2.7. How will the socio-economic impacts resulting from
this development impact on people's environmental
right in terms following:
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
2.7.1. Negative impacts: e.g. health (e.g. HIV Aids),
safety, social ills, etc. What measures were
taken to firstly avoid negative impacts, but if
avoidance is not possible, to minimise,
manage and remedy negative impacts?
14
Question Response
2.7.2. Positive impacts. What measures were taken
to enhance positive impacts?
2.8. Considering the linkages and dependencies between
human wellbeing, livelihoods and ecosystem services,
describe the linkages and dependencies applicable to
the area in question and how the development's
socioeconomic impacts will result in ecological impacts
(e.g. over utilisation of natural resources, etc.)?
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
2.9. What measures were taken to pursue the selection of
the "best practicable environmental option" in terms of
socio-economic considerations?
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
2.10. What measures were taken to pursue environmental
justice so that adverse environmental impacts shall not
be distributed in such a manner as to unfairly
discriminate against any person, particularly vulnerable
and disadvantaged persons (who are the beneficiaries
and is the development located appropriately)?
Considering the need for social equity and justice, do
the alternatives identified, allow the "best practicable
environmental option" to be selected, or is there a
need for other alternatives to be considered?
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
2.11. What measures were taken to pursue equitable access
to environmental resources, benefits and services to
meet basic human needs and ensure human wellbeing,
and what special measures were taken to ensure
The proposed Mixed Residential Development project has been
identified as a priority project for Mpumalanga.
15
Question Response
access thereto by categories of persons disadvantaged
by unfair discrimination?
2.12. What measures were taken to ensure that the
responsibility for the environmental health and safety
consequences of the development has been addressed
throughout the development's life cycle?
An EMPr has been developed to address health and safety
concerns. An Environmental Control Officer will be appointed
to monitor compliance.
2.13. What measures were taken to: An overview of the PPP is provided in Chapter Error! Reference
source not found. of this EIA Report and supporting
documentation pertaining to the PPP is attached as Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
2.13.1. Ensure the participation of all interested and
affected parties.
2.13.2. Provide all people with an opportunity to
develop the understanding, skills and capacity
necessary for achieving equitable and effective
participation.
2.13.3. Ensure participation by vulnerable and
disadvantaged persons.
2.13.4. Promote community wellbeing and
empowerment through environmental
education, the raising of environmental
awareness, the sharing of knowledge and
experience and other appropriate means.
2.13.5. Ensure openness and transparency, and access
to information in terms of the process.
2.13.6. Ensure that the interests, needs and values of
all interested and affected parties were taken
16
Question Response
into account, and that adequate recognition
were given to all forms of knowledge,
including traditional and ordinary knowledge.
2.13.7. Ensure that the vital role of women and youth
in environmental management and
development were recognised and their full
participation therein was promoted.
2.14. Considering the interests, needs and values of all the
interested and affected parties, describe how the
development will allow for opportunities for all the
segments of the community (e.g. a mixture of low-,
middle-, and high-income housing opportunities) that
is consistent with the priority needs of the local area
(or that is proportional to the needs of an area)?
An overview of the PPP is provided in Chapter Error! Reference
source not found. of this EIA Report and supporting
documentation pertaining to the PPP is attached as Error!
Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
2.15. What measures have been taken to ensure that current
and / or future workers will be informed of work that
potentially might be harmful to human health or the
environment or of dangers associated with the work,
and what measures have been taken to ensure that the
right of workers to refuse such work will be respected
and protected?
An EMPr has been developed to address health and safety
concerns. An Environmental Control Officer will be appointed
to monitor compliance.
2.16. Describe how the development will impact on job
creation in terms of, amongst other aspects:
During the construction phase, both skilled and unskilled
temporary employment opportunities will be created. It is
difficult to specify the actual number of employment
opportunities that will be created at this stage; however it is
2.16.1. The number of temporary versus permanent
jobs that will be created.
17
Question Response
2.16.2. Whether the labour available in the area will
be able to take up the job opportunities (i.e.
do the required skills match the skills available
in the area).
expected that more than 100 opportunities will be created. This
EIA is being undertaken without specific technology providers in
mind, and it is therefore not possible to determine the number
of jobs that would be available during the operational phase of
development. 2.16.3. The distance from where labourers will have to
travel.
2.16.4. The location of jobs opportunities versus the
location of impacts (i.e. equitable distribution
of costs and benefits).
2.16.5. The opportunity costs in terms of job creation
(e.g. a mine might create 100 jobs, but impact
on 1000 agricultural jobs, etc.).
2.17. What measures were taken to ensure: Legislation, policies and guidelines, which could apply to
impacts of the proposed project on the environment, have been
considered. The scope and content of this EIA Report has been
informed by applicable integrated environmental management
legislation and policies. Chapter Error! Reference source not
found. of this EIA Report and the specialist studies included in
Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report also
provide a description of the relevant applicable legislation that
the proposed development complies with.
2.17.1. That there were intergovernmental
coordination and harmonisation of policies,
legislation and actions relating to the
environment.
2.17.2. That actual or potential conflicts of interest
between organs of state were resolved
through conflict resolution procedures?
Public Participation has been undertaken as part of the Scoping
Phase for this EIA process, and to date no information on
potential conflicts of interest have been received. A Comments
and Response Report containing all the comments received to
18
Question Response
date is attached as Error! Reference source not found. of this
EIA Report.
2.18. What measures were taken to ensure that the
environment will be held in public trust for the people,
that the beneficial use of environmental resources will
serve the public interest, and that the environment will
be protected as the people's common heritage?
Public participation forms an integral part of the EIA Process
and assists in identifying issues and possible alternatives to be
considered during the EIA Process. An overview of the PPP is
provided in Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this
EIA Report and supporting documentation pertaining to the
PPP is attached as Error! Reference source not found. of this
EIA Report.
2.19. Are the mitigation measures proposed realistic and
what long-term environmental legacy and managed
burden will be left?
The proposed mitigation measures included in the EMPr
prepared for the project and attached as Part B to this EIA
Report have been informed by the specialist studies undertaken
and includes a detailed assessment of the environment as well
as the impacts associated with the proposed development.
2.20. What measures were taken to ensure that the costs of
remedying pollution, environmental degradation and
consequent adverse health effects and of preventing,
controlling or minimising further pollution,
environmental damage or adverse health effects will
be paid for by those responsible for harming the
environment?
The EMPr prepared for the project and attached as Part B to this
EIA Report must form part of the contractual agreement and be
adhered to by Project Proponent, and Contractor(s) / workers.
2.21. Considering the need to secure ecological integrity
and a healthy bio-physical environment, describe how
the alternatives identified (in terms of all the different
elements of the development and all the different
An assessment of different project alternatives is provided in
Chapter Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
19
Question Response
impacts being proposed), resulted in the selection of
the best practicable environmental option in terms of
socio-economic considerations?
2.22. Describe the positive and negative cumulative socio-
economic impacts bearing in mind the size, scale,
scope and nature of the project in relation to its
location and other planned developments in the area?
An assessment of cumulative impacts is provided in Chapter
Error! Reference source not found. of this EIA Report.
1
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This chapter provides an overview of the conceptual project design and project
site identified for the proposed development of the Mixed Residential
Development in Leandra.
The purpose of this chapter is to present sufficient project information to inform
the EIA Process in terms of design parameters applicable to the project. It is
important to note that the project description details presented in this EIA
Report are preliminary in nature at this early stage of the project life-cycle and it
is therefore likely that some of the design features, presented herein may
change during the detailed design phase. However, the project description (and
design) utilised in this EIA Process assumes a worst-case scenario, where the
maximum development footprint and requisite infrastructure is considered.
Error! Reference source not found. presents the preliminary “footprint” of the
proposed facility (bearing in mind that the entire site is to be cleared).
Consequently, should any changes in project design be affected; such changes
will only serve to reduce the overall infrastructure requirement and / or
development footprint.
2.1 PROJECT SITE SELECTION AND OVERVIEW
The study area falls within the jurisdiction of the Govan Mbeki Local Municipality
and Gert Sibande District Municipality. The proposed site is situated
approximately 2km north-west of the town of Leandra Central Business District
(CBD), which is located in the province of Mpumalanga. (see Map 2). The R29 is
located on the southern border of the proposed new mixed residential
development, the R29 road enters the town of Leandra from the east. The
proposed area falls almost entirely on undisturbed Themeda triandra fields, with
most of the area still in moderate to good state. The area has a localised
topographic highpoint/ridge apex which roughly traverses through the centre of
the assessment area in a north-south direction. This highpoint acts as a surface
water drainage separation between the areas west and east of the ridge apex
and surface water from the assessment area therefore drains in an easterly and
westerly direction respectively. This has resulted in the entire assessment area
forming part of a localised catchment and surface water drainage area which
feeds into numerous first order ephemeral water drainage lines within the
assessment area. These drainage lines subsequently join a number of significant
2
second and third order watercourses downstream outside to the east and west
of the assessment area. The assessment area therefore forms an important part
of the upper commencement portion of a quaternary surface water catchment
and drainage area which regionally drains towards the north.
The assessment area can be divided into four separate ecological components
namely:
Terrestrial
o Undulating grassland slopes and hills
o Isolated rocky outcrops
o Transformed and Degraded areas
Aquatic
o Watercourses and Wetland area
It must however be kept in mind that although the assessment area is being
artificially divided into separate components for practical reporting purposes,
the components do not function independently and should not be viewed as
separate, isolated units, but rather form part of a larger interrelated ecological
network associated with the entire assessment area and broader surrounding
ecosystem.
Undulating Grassland Slopes and Hills
The overwhelming majority of the assessment area constitutes homogenous
undulating medium height open grassland slopes and hills. These grassland
areas are mainly in a relatively natural condition although lower grass tuft
densities and biomass within the northern camps of the assessment area relative
to the southern camps are evident which indicate a slight degree of overgrazing.
It is likely that these northern camps were utilised as winter feed during the
previous dry season, hence the lower biomass.
The grassland areas are situated on dark, high clay content vertic soils as
opposed to the expected deep reddish soils typically associated with the
relevant Soweto Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8). It is therefore
3
evident that the assessment area does not necessarily constitute a representative
‘type’ sample of the nationally vulnerable Soweto Highveld Grassland vegetation
type (Gm 8) but rather forms part of the more clayey vegetation types
associated with the Mpumalanga Province.
The grassland areas are mainly dominated by the species Eragrostis chloromelas
& Themeda triandra while other grass species also found to be present include
Eragrostis curvula, E capensis, Cynodon dactylon, Hyparrhenia hirta,
Cymbopogon pospischilii & Aristida spp. Forb species found to be present
include Helichrysum spp., Gnidia burchellii, Falkia oblonga, Oenothera tetraptera,
Aptosimum indivisum, Gazania krebsiana subsp krebsiana & subsp serrulata,
Euphorbia clavaroides, Convolvulus saggitatus subsp. saggitatus, Lessertia
stricta, Jamesbrittenia aurantiaca, Conyza podocephala, Ledebouria revoluta &
Hermannia depressa. Only a single individual of the provincially protected
species Boophone disticha was found to be present within the grassland areas; it
is however likely that more individuals of this species might be present.
Individuals of the low growing woody shrub species Seriphium plumosum are
sparsely scattered throughout the northern camps of the assessment area.
Due to the natural state of the grassland areas, these areas are likely utilised by a
variety of common and specialised small antelope, burrowing and predatory
mammals as well as reptilian species for breeding, foraging and persistence
purposes. Although the assessment area and surrounding landscape does not
fall within any Important Bird Area (IBA) as per the latest IBA map obtained from
the Birdlife SA website (www.birdlife.org.za/conservation/important bird
areas/iba-map), the grassland areas also provide significant natural breeding,
foraging and persistence habitat for numerous avifaunal species.
The potential presence of the provincially protected and Red Data Listed
vulnerable species Tyto capensis (African grass owl) forms one of the core
features resulting in the demarcation of the relevant CBA optimal within north-
western portion of the assessment area. No individuals or nests of this species
were however encountered during the site visit. The absence of optimal habitat
in the form of very tall dense grassland with specific mention to the absence of
the grass species Imperata cylindrica (often favoured for nesting) also reduces
the likelihood of the potential presence of this species. The continued presence
and activities of large herds of livestock utilising the area, further reduces the
4
probability of presence. It can therefore be reasonably assumed that there is
merely a low to moderate possibility of this species utilising the grassland areas
for breeding and persistence purposes. No Red Data Listed or nationally
protected species or any other species of conservational significance were found
to be present within the grassland areas.
Isolated Rocky Outcrops
Four distinct linear rocky ridges/outcrops are exposed at separate locations
within the grassland areas along the western boundary of the assessment area.
Diagnostic vegetation species associated with the rocky ridges/outcrops, which
are absent from the surrounding grassland areas include the ferns Pellaea
calomelanos & Cheilanthes eckloniana, the forbs Eulophia clavicornis
(provincially protected), Cyrtanthus tuckii (provincially protected) Gerbera
piloselloides as well as the woody species Diospyros austro-africana, D lycioides
& Kiggelaria africana.
Remnants of an historic farm homestead are evident on the upper plateau of the
most southerly situated rocky ridge/outcrop. A clump of the legally declared
invasive species Eucalyptus camaldulensis (Category 1b) is subsequently present
in this area which was probably planted by the historic occupants of the
homestead.
Although not necessarily viewed as being of high conservational significance,
these rocky ridges/outcrops possess locally unique/distinct habitat attributes
due their increased exposure of surface rockiness and subsequent shallower soils
as well as their sheltering nature. It is therefore reasonably expected that these
areas are utilised by various specialised reptilian species as refuge and for
breeding/persistence purposes. With the exception of the most southerly
situated rocky ridge/outcrop, the rest fall within the CBA optimal which is
present in the north-western portion of the assessment area. It is therefore
recommended that these portions of the rocky ridges/outcrops should be
adequately buffered out of the proposed development footprint area.
No Red Data Listed or nationally protected species or any other species of
conservational significance were found to be present within the rocky
ridges/outcrops.
5
Transformed and Degraded Areas
The small southern and northern portions of the assessment area have been
completely transformed through cultivated lands and virtually no natural
vegetation remains. The ecological functionality and value of these two areas
have therefore been completely lost. The southern portions are being planted
under grass pasture such as Eragrostis curvula for baling and livestock fodder.
A number of small ephemeral water drainage lines, which form part of the
localised catchment and drainage area, however still run through the cultivated
northern portion. It is therefore recommended that these drainage lines be
adequately buffered out of the proposed development footprint.
Two portions along the western boundary of the assessment area have also
been densely infested by the shrub species Seriphium plumosum (bankrupt
bush). This species is classified as an undesired indicator species of bush
encroachment in accordance with the Conservation of Agricultural Resources
Development Act (Act 43 of 1983) Regulations: Regulation 16. It is a significant
problematic plant throughout Mpumalanga which invades natural grassland by
outcompeting and replacing the natural grass and forbs species present. The
species also possesses allelopathic characteristics which means that a toxic
chemical substance is available within the leaves which prevents other plant
seeds from germinating and establishing in the immediate vicinity of the
bankrupt bush individuals. This adds to a considerable decrease in natural grass
species establishment within such infested areas which in turn, leads to a
decrease in ecological veld condition. It is recommended that active
management/eradication measures be implemented within the infested areas as
soon as practicably possible in order to prevent further increase in density and
spreading of the infestation throughout the farm over time.
Watercourses and Wetland Area
Due to the undulating topography of the assessment area, numerous ephemeral
water drainage lines/areas are present which subsequently feed into a number
of significant second and third order watercourses downstream outside to the
east and west of the assessment area. The entire assessment area therefore
forms an important part of the upper commencement portion of a quaternary
6
surface water catchment and drainage area which regionally drains towards the
north. Small earth dams have subsequently been constructed within three of
these water drainage lines/areas.
Due to the ephemerality of these drainage lines/areas within the assessment
area, they possess no distinct riparian zones or significant variation in vegetation
species composition relative to the surrounding grassland areas.
A single significant ephemeral watercourse and associated narrow channelled
valley-bottom wetland area traverses the western portion of the assessment
area. It then exits the assessment area after which it briefly re-enters the
assessment area in the north-western corner, where it forms a slightly broader
valley-bottom wetland area. A small earth dam has also subsequently been
constructed within the watercourse.
This watercourse and associated wetland area possess a distinct aquatic
vegetation component mainly dominated by the hydrophytic species Typha
capensis & Cyperus spp. The watercourse and associated wetland area
subsequently provide significant natural breeding, foraging and persistence
habitat for a diversity of specialised amphibian, aquatic avifaunal and
invertebrate species. The potential presence of the provincially protected species
Pyxicephalus adspersus (African giant bullfrog) forms one of the core features
resulting in the demarcation of the relevant CBA optimal within north-western
portion of the assessment area. Although no individuals of this species were
encountered, and no calls detected during the site visit, the watercourse and
associated wetland area provide suitable habitat for its potential presence. It can
therefore be reasonably assumed that there is a moderate possibility of this
species utilising the areas for breeding and persistence purposes.
7
Table 2.1: Overview of Project Site
FEATURE DETAIL
Land Portion
Number Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein 313
Size 545 hectares
Registered Owner Henopath (Pty) Ltd
Title Deed
Number T42505/2007
Access Direct access along the R29
Land use Agriculture - Cattle grazing
Occupancy Vacant
Ground conditions Dominated by natural grass groundcover- Themeda
triandra
Corner coordinates of the proposed development site (refer to Figure 2.1) are
presented in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Corner coordinates of the proposed development site.
Corner Point Latitude Longitude
A 26°22'29.21"S 28°54'4.88"E
B 26°20'14.81"S 28°52'41.15"E
C 26°20'30.48"S 28°51'51.80"E
D 26°20'41.17"S 28°51'55.86"E
E 26°20'27.19"S 28°52'40.16"E
F 26°21'55.91"S 28°52'40.73"E
G 26°22'5.33"S 28°52'50.27"E
H 26°22'12.40"S 28°53'3.25"E
I 26°22'21.80"S 28°53'7.59"E
J 26°22'26.52"S 28°53'7.35"E
K 26°22'54.12"S 28°53'41.85"E
1
Figure 2.1: Locality map of the project site
2
Figure 2.1: Map showing corner points of the proposed development site.
2.2 PRESENT LAND USE
The investigated site is located roughly 2,0 km west of the town centre of
Leandra, north of the R29 road which snakes from Devon in the west to Leandra,
east of the proposed site. Access to theproposed rresidential development can be
gained through the R29.
In accordance with the Govan Mbeki Spatial Development Framework 2014 -2034
(SDF), the assessment area falls inside the urban edge and is zoned for residential
and mixed use development. Currently the land is vacant and consits of
eragrostis grass cultivation on the southern portion , with grassveld on the rest.
The western side is in close proximity toa drainage line. Active land use only
relates to gattle grasing. The assessment area consists of a single surface
footprint area of approximately 545 hectares in size and is situated on Portion 2
of the Farm Rietfontein 313 outside of the town of Leandra, and north-east of
Eendracht.
3
The proposed site (assessment area) is situated in the Gert Sibande District
Municipality, in the Mpumalanga Province. In accordance with the Spatial
Development Framework (SDF) within the Govan Mbeki Local Municipality
Integrated Development Plan 2017 – 2022 (IDP), the assessment area falls outside
the urban edge. Access to the assessment area is obtained via the R 29 provincial
road which is situated south of the site.
2.3 KEY COMPONENTS OF THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The project footprint is approximately 545 hectares and is situated on Portion 2
of the Farm Rietfontein no 313. The conceptual layout depicts these typical
ranges of facilities (housing) and services that will be housed and include:
Social Housing (3 -Story);
Business Stands;
Free Standing Units;
Community Facilities;
Open Space;
Central Community points;
Main Roads and street networks.
Land Use m² HaProposed
Number Of Units Units Per Ha
% of
Development
Blue - Social Housing (3 Storey) 813240 81.32 6480 80 Units / Ha 14.75
Red - Business Stands 268503 26.8503 n/a n/a 4.87
Orange - Multey Storey Cru -Units 1115266 111.5266 8880 80 Units / Ha 20.23
Yellow - Free Standing Units 671814 67.1814 1340 20 Units / Ha 12.19
Purple - Community Facilities 375108 37.5108 n/a n/a 6.80
Green - Open Space 1227143 122.7143 n/a n/a 22.26
Ligh Green - Central Community point 60293 6.0293 n/a n/a 1.09
Main Roads 981439 98.1439 n/a n/a 17.80
5512806 551.2806 16700 Units 100 Table 3: Unit proposal
This EIA is being undertaken without specific technology providers in mind, and
therefore EA granted for the project will need to cater for a range of housing and
business profiles. The EIA will be based on the project “envelope” approach,
whereby a range of potential project inputs and outputs will be specified (e.g. in
terms of maximum project footprint, bulk and scale of structures), and the impact
4
assessment provided for this project envelope. Then provided that the detailed
project design is within this envelope, the assessment will remain valid.
Figure 2.3: Concept layout with components of mixed residential
development
N
5
2.4 ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
Rand Water is the only supplier of potable water to the town of Leandra through
a bulk water supply line and a series of reservoirs. No boreholes are in operation
for the supply of additional water to the bulk supply network. No water treatment
works are therefore found within the municipal boundaries of the town.
The town of Leandra is being supplied off the East Dump Mine –
Wildebeesfontein reservoir pipelines. These pipes are rising mains supplied from
the RW Bloemendal booster pump station with the estimated maximum pumping
capacity of 120 Mℓ/day (2 x 60 Mℓ/day). Currently the Bloemendal booster pump
station is operating at its maximum capacity, hence the East Dump
Mine/Wildebeestfontein reservoir system has insufficient water to supply the
proposed new development in Leandra. Rand Water is currently in the planning
stage of increasing the capacity by the implementing of an upgrade schedule.
Time frames however are not known at this stage. The total demands required for
this proposed development has been supplied to Rand Water to be used for their
long-term planning.
In terms of sanitation the current capacity of the Waste Water Treatment Works
(WWTW) of Leandra is 8.5 Mℓ/day with a spare capacity of 3 Mℓ/day. This has
been confirmed by the District Municipality in a meeting at the Govan Mbeki
District Municipality in Secunda with Mr. Rofhiwa Mulaudzi, Acting Deputy
Director.
The WWTW is some 1,5km east of the proposed development. Also shown is the
existing bulk sewer lines closest to the proposed development which is made up
of gravity and rising mains.
The proposed Leandra Integrated Housing Development is bordered in the south
by the R29 which is a provincial road connecting Springs, Devon and Leandra.
The N17 National Route is further south and runs parallel to the R29. Also
indicated on the layout are several other entrance/exits to the proposed
development.
6
The main access initially to the development will be from the R29.
2.4.1 Water
As per Engineering Services Report, 2019, various options for securing sources for
future bulk water supply to this area as well as the upgrading of the bulk water
storage and distribution infrastructure for the region as a whole will have to be
considered. Discussions with Rand Water which is the sole potable water supply
agent to the town of Leandra indicated that they are currently in the process of
addressing this situation. The demand figures for this proposed development
have been forwarded to Rand Water, Me. Hape Sebatana, Senior Planning
Engineer: Rand Water for planning purposes.
The design of the potable water network will comply with the design standards
and criteria as set out in the “Guidelines for Human Settlement Planning and
Design”. In accordance with the water demand calculations the study area will
need at least 42 Mℓ (48-hour storage capacity) combined low level reservoirs with
a demand of 243ℓ/s at peak flow demand. Several elevated storage reservoirs will
also be required to cater for the peak demands for the different areas which will
be determined in the prefeasibility design phase.
2.4.2 Sanitation
The sewer system for the proposed development will be water borne and will
incorporate a network of uPVC pipes with diameters ranging from 160mm to
250mm. Due to the topography of the site; the development site can be divided
into 3 drainage zones. The 3 zones will have to be sub-divided into sub-zones
due to the size of the proposed development to prevent too deep excavations for
gravity pipelines.
Once a geotechnical report of the area has been compiled, the economic
comparison will be done between deeper excavations for a gravity pipelines
versus shallower pumping lines.
A new WWTW is to be constructed with a capacity of at least 15 Mℓ/day
including bulk infrastructure pipelines connecting the study area with the new
7
WWTW. It is envisaged that the entire internal sewer network will require main
collectors ranging from 200mm Ø to 355mm Ø to handle the PWWF for the
various sub-areas. The terrain lends itself to gravity pipelines for most of the
development but will require several pump stations with rising sewer mains to
transfer sewer from these low points (due to the drainage zones encountered on
this site) to the new WWTW. The collector lines will gravitate to a low point from
where it will be pumped to the WWTW. It is also possible for some drainage
areas within the study area to gravitate to the WWTW. This will however be
determined during the pre-feasibility design phase.
2.4.3 Electricity
Leandra electricity network falls under the jurisdiction of ESKOM and is supplied
from the local Eskom 132kV substation referred to as the Lebohang/Wildebees
SS. S&W Consulting (2019) determined that there is currently not enough
capacity at the Lebohang SS and the sufficient electivity supply to the Rietfontein
Town Establishment is dependent on one of the strengthening projects planned
by Eskom.
2.4.4 Roads and Stormwater
The provincial road R29 will connect the proposed development with the town of
Leandra amongst other. Other entrance/exit roads are also shown on the town
layout but most of the shown entrance/exit roads’ link roads have not been
constructed yet.
All minor storm water will be accommodated in the underground storm water
system and the surfaced streets, bus and taxi routes. Culverts will also be
introduced to convey storm water underneath roads at crossing of natural
drainage lines.
2.4.5 Traffic
Based on the conclusions that have been derived from this Traffic Impact Study
(TIS), the following are recommended:
That the development be supported from a traffic engineering point of view;
8
That the following intersection be upgraded by the developer:
R29 (P5/1) / Scheepers Street intersection;
R29 (P5/1) / Bezuidenhout Street intersection;
R29 (P5/1) / R50 intersection;
That an additional new access to the development be provided on the R29
road;
Bus lay buy shall be provided along the main access and internal road at
distances of approximately 600m apart.
2.5 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT CYCLE
2.5.1 Construction
The construction phase will take place subsequent to the issuing of EA. The
construction phase is expected to take past over a number of years in phases, as
the development area will consists out of various land uses. It is therefore
foreseen that the construction phase will take around 2 to 3 years to be
completed, the exact timeframes are however not known at this stage. The
construction phase will involve the removal of vegetation as is currently on the
site, transportation of personnel, construction material and equipment to the site,
and personnel away from the site. In terms of site establishment, laydown areas
will be required at the outset of the construction phase, as well as dedicated
access routes from the laydown areas to the working areas. Haul roads for
construction traffic (for the delivery of concrete, road materials and other
construction materials) will be required.
The laydown areas will be located at the project site. It is expected that the
laydown areas will be temporary in nature (for the duration of the construction
phase) and will include the establishment of construction site camps (including
site offices and other temporary facilities for the appointed Contractors). The
laydown areas are expected to cover a maximum area of 500m² to 800m²
(depending on the contracting strategy at the time). If the laydown area is
located outside of the footprint of Mixed Residential Development area, the area
9
will be rehabilitated (i.e. returned to its pre-construction condition) at the end of
the construction phase.
All efforts will be made to ensure that all construction work will be undertaken in
compliance with local, provincial and national legislation, local and international
best practice, as well as the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr)
included as Part B to this EIA Report. During the construction phase, both skilled
and unskilled temporary employment opportunities will be created. It is difficult
to specify the actual number of employment opportunities that will be created at
this stage, however it is expected that more than 100 opportunities will be
created.
2.5.2 Operation
The proposed project is expected to become fully operational in the beginning of
2022. During operation the Mixed Residential Development will provide
infrastructure to support the development of targeted housing and business
opportunities in the area- Govan Mbeki Local Municipality. Housing and
business opportunities for residents in the Govan Mbeki, but more specifically the
town of Leandra will be realised.
2.5.3 Decommissioning
The main aim of decommissioning is to return the land to its original, pre-
construction condition. Should the unlikely need for decommissioning arise (i.e.
if the Mixed Residential Development becomes outdated, the housing / business
area becomes uninhabitable or the land needs to be used for other purposes),
the decommissioning procedures will be undertaken in line with the EMPr and
the site will be rehabilitated and returned to its pre-construction state.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
This chapter provides an overview of the receiving environment that may be
affected by the proposed Mixed Residential Development. The receiving
environment is understood to include biophysical, socio-economic and heritage
aspects which could be directly, indirectly or cumulatively affected by the
10
proposed development or which in turn might impact on the proposed
development.
This information is provided to identify the potential issues and impacts of the
proposed project on the environment. The information presented here has been
sourced from:
o EIA input from the specialists that form part of the project team;
o Information available on the South African National Biodiversity Institute
(SANBI) Biodiversity Geographical Information System (BGIS) and
Agricultural Geo-Referenced Information System (AGIS).
o Govan Mbeki Local Municipality’s IDP and SDF.
3.1 BIOPHYSICAL
3.1.1 Climate
The rainfall of the region peaks during the summer months and the Mean Annual
Precipitation (MAP) of the area is approximately 689 mm (www.climate-data.org).
The average monthly temperature is approximately 20°C in the summer months
and approximately 8.8°C during the winter. Average maximum monthly
temperatures can reach up to 26.4°C in the summer months and dip to as low as
0°C during the winter.
3.1.2 Geology and Soils
According to Mucina & Rutherford (2006) the geology of the landscape and
associated vegetation type can be described as the following:
Shale, mudstones, sandstones and shale of the Madzaringwe Formation Beaufort
Group or the intrusive Karoo Suite dolerites which feature prominently. Soils are
deep redish and land types include Ea, Ba and Bb. In accordance with the Govan
Mbeki Spatial Development Framework 2014 – 2034 (SDF), the geology of the
assessment area is classified as dolerite while the soil formation association is Rg
and AR.
11
3.1.3 Vegetation and Conservation Status
According to SANBI (2006- ), the entire assessment area falls within the Soweto
Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8). This vegetation type mainly consists
of gently to moderately supporting short- to medium height dense tufted
grassland dominated almost entirely by the species Themeda triandra. Other
frequent grasses also include Elionurus muticus, Eragrostis recemosa,
Heteropogon contortus & Tristachya leucothrix. The vegetation type is classified
as endangered because of significant transformation and degradation mostly
caused by agricultural, urban and mining activities (SANBI, 2006- ). The Soweto
Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8) was however subsequently officially
classified as having a nationally vulnerable status in terms of the National
Department of Environmental Affairs’ (DEA) National Threatened Ecosystems
System (Government Gazette No 34809, 9 December 2011). This renders the
entire vegetation type a priority ecosystem type for conservation on a national
scale.
The majority of the assessment area is categorised as Other Natural Areas (ONA)
in accordance with the Mpumalanga Provincial Spatial Biodiversity Plan which
sets out biodiversity priority areas in the province. An area within the north-
western portion of the assessment area is however classified as a Critical
Biodiversity Area optimal (CBA). Critical Biodiversity Areas are areas that are
irreplaceable or near-irreplaceable (CBA 1) or reflect an optimum configuration
(CBA 2) for reaching provincial biodiversity targets for ecosystem types, species
or ecological processes (Collins, 2017). Such an area must be maintained in a
natural or near-natural state in order to meet biodiversity targets (Collins, 2017).
The remaining portions of the assessment area are categorised as moderately to
heavily modified.
The proposed residential development and infrastructure will in all probability
completely transform the majority of the existing surface vegetation on the
assessment area.
12
Map 3.1: Vegetation map of proposed site
13
Map 3.2: Sensitivity map illustrating the sensitive areas associated with the
assessment area
3.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Regional-economic information and data has been gathered from the following
key source:
Economic development and planning documents such as growth
strategies, Integrated Development Plans (IDP), Local Economic
Development (LED) strategies and Spatial Development Frameworks (SDF).
14
Table 3.1: Population distribution within the Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality 1996-2016.
Govan Mbeki is the most prominently 2nd fastest growing population with an
annual population growth rate of 3.10% in the whole of the Mpumalanga
Province after Steve Tshwete with a population growth of 4.29% A population
growth of this proportion is likely to place strain on existing backlogs and the
municipality’s ability to effectively service the community. Because of the increase
in households which directly demand services.
15
Table 3.2: Population growth rate within the Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality 1996-2016.
Table 3.3: Economically active people in Govan Mbeki Local Municipality
16
4. APPROACH TO THE EIA & PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This chapter presents the approach to the EIA process, and provides the
legislative context within which the EIA is being conducted. It also provides
information on the Scoping, and Public Participation components of the EIA.
4.1 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES
There are various gazetted Acts and Regulations that regulate environmental
management in South Africa.
These regulatory documents must be considered in order to guide development
initiatives and therefore assist in proper decision making. EIAs, when conducted
with the purpose of obtaining EA for a proposed development activity, are also
regulated by this legislation. South African Environmental Law is founded in the
Constitution of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996). Section 24 of the Bill of Rights
states that:
Everyone has the right:
To an environment that is not harmful to their heath or well-being, and
To have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future
generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that –
Prevent pollution and ecological degradation,
Promote conservation, and
Secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources
while promoting justifiable economic and social development.
The National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) expands
on and specifies these principles. The Act states that the principles of Integrated
Environmental Management (IEM) should be adhered to in order to ensure
sustainable development. Accountability to the various parties that may be
interested in and / or affected by the proposed development forms an integral
part of the IEM procedure. This procedure requires public participation, starting
during the scoping phase, when potentially significant environmental impacts
have to be identified. The purpose of the IEM procedure is to ensure that the
environmental consequences of a development proposal are understood and
17
adequately considered and that negative aspects are resolved or mitigated, and
positive aspects enhanced.
Government Notices R326, R327, R325, and R324, in Government Gazette No
40772 (dated 07 April 2017), published in terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA (as
amended), contain the EIA Regulations (GN R326), as well as a schedule of
activities that may not commence without environmental authorisation from the
competent authority. The listed activities associated with the development of the
proposed Mixed Residential Development are listed in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Listed Activities
Government
Notice
Activity
No.
Activity Description
GNR 325 15 The clearance of an area of 20
hectares or more of indigenous
vegetation.
The development proposal will
have a total footprint of more
than 20ha in extent. (Exact
development area is not known
at this stage). More than 20ha
of indigenous vegetation will be
affected.
GNR 327 28 (ii) Residential, mixed, retail,
commercial, industrial or
institutional developments
where such land was used for
agriculture or afforestation on or
after 01 April 1998 and where
such development:
(ii) will occur outside an urban
area, where the total land to be
developed is bigger than 1
hectare.
Parts of the proposed
development area is utilised for
agricultural purposes, including
grazing and grazing grass
cultivation.
GNR 327
24(ii) Development of a road –
(ii) with a reserve wider than
13,5 meters, or where no reserve
exists where the road is wider
than 8 meters.
The development includes the
installation of an internal road
network and connection to
existing main access roads,
these might be wider than 8
meters.
GNR 327
19 The infilling or depositing of any
material of more than 10 cubic
meters into, or the dredging,
excavation, removal or moving
of soil, sand, shells, shell grit,
Internal road infrastructure and
network might cross the
applicable drainage lines on the
development property, and
therefore the removal of soil for
18
pebbles or rock of more than 10
cubic meters from a
watercourse.
the construction of bridges, and
other service infrastructure
related to water supply and
sewerage removal.
GNR 327
12(ii)(c) The development of—
(ii) infrastructure or structures
with a physical footprint of
100 square metres or
where such development
occurs—
(c) if no development setback
exists, within 32 metres of a
watercourse, measured from the
edge of a watercourse.
Water courses inside the
development footprint are
applicable, structures and/or
infrastructure might be within 32
meters of these drainage lines.
GNR 327
10(i)(ii) The development and related
operation of infrastructure
exceeding 1 000 metres in
length for the bulk
transportation of sewage,
effluent, process water,
wastewater, return water,
industrial discharge or slimes –
(i) with an internal diameter of
0,36 metres or more; or
(ii) with a peak throughput of
120 litres per second or more.
Associated infrastructure for the
development will include
connection to existing bulk
sewerage removal services, as
well as internal sewerage
removal networks.
GNR 327
9(i)(ii) The development of
infrastructure exceeding 1 000
metres in length for the bulk
transportation of water or storm
water—
(i) with an internal diameter of
0,36 metres or more; or
(ii) with a peak throughput of
120 litres per second or
more.
Associated infrastructure for the
development will include
connection to existing bulk
water and stormwater services,
as well as internal water supply
networks.
An application for EA subject to the completion of a Scoping and EIA process is
currently being undertaken for the proposed development of the Mixed
Residential Development in Leandra. In addition to its function as a decision-
making aid in terms of EA, an EIA is an effective planning and decision-making
tool for the project developer as it allows for the identification and management
19
of potential environmental impacts, as well as the identification of other
applicable legislation that must be considered and adhered to.
Other applicable legislation and policies include:
National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999)
In section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, Act No. 25 of 1999, the
following is stipulated:
“(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (7), (8) and (9), any person who
intends to undertake a development categorised as—
(a) the construction of a road, wall, powerline, pipeline, canal or other similar
form of linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in length;
(b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50 m in length;
(c) any development or other activity which will change the character of a
site—
(i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent; or
(ii) involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof; or
(iii) involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been
consolidated within the past five years; or
(iv) the costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by
SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority;
(d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent; or
(e) any other category of development provided for in regulations by SAHRA
or a provincial heritage resources authority, must at the very earliest stages of
initiating such a development, notify the responsible heritage resources
authority and furnish it with details regarding the location, nature and extent
of the proposed development.
(2) The responsible heritage resources authority must, within 14 days of receipt of
a notification in terms of subsection (1)—
(a) if there is reason to believe that heritage resources will be affected by
such development, notify the person who intends to undertake the
development to submit an impact assessment report. Such report must be
compiled at the cost of the person proposing the development, by a person
or persons approved by the responsible heritage resources authority with
relevant qualifications and experience and professional standing in heritage
resources management; or
20
(b) notify the person concerned that this section does not apply.
The responsible heritage resources authority in this case is the Mpumalanga
Provincial Heritage Resources Agency and/or the South African Heritage
Resources Agency (SAHRA). A Heritage Impact Assessment has been conducted
to inform SAHRA of any findings.
Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983)
Section 5 of the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, Act No 43 of
1983 (CARA), prohibits the spreading of weeds and Section 6 and Regulation 15
and 15 E of GN R 1048 addresses the implementation of control measures for
alien and invasive plant species.
The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development is guided by
this Act. With the development of the mentioned activities the developer must
take care of the following:
Article 7. (3)b of Regulation 9238: Conservation of Agriculture Resources, 1983
(Act 43 of 1983) states as follow:
Utilisation and protection of vlei, marshes, water sponges and water courses
7.(1) “…no land user shall utilize the vegetation in a vlei, marsh or water
sponge or within the flood area of a water course or within 10 metres
horizontally outside such flood area in a manner that causes or may cause
the deterioration of or damage to the natural agricultural resources.”
Relevance to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
An Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment has been conducted for the
project and the results are appended in Error! Reference source not
found. of this EIA Report.
No person may alter or demolish any structure or part of a structure,
which is older than 60 years or disturb any archaeological or
palaeontological site or grave older than 60 years without a permit issued
by the relevant provincial heritage resources authority.
No person may, without a permit issued by the responsible heritage
resources authority destroy, damage, excavate, alter or deface
archaeological or historically significant sites.
21
(3) “Except on authority of a written permission by the executive officer, no
land user shall (b) cultivate any land on his farm unit within the flood area of
a water course or within 10 metres horizontally outside the flood area of a
water course.”
National Forests Act (Act No 84 of 1998)
The National Forests Act (NFA) as amended and Regulations, Section 7 conclude
that: No person may cut, disturb, damage or destroy any indigenous, living tree
in a natural forest, except in terms of a licence issued under Section 7(4) or
Section 23; or an exemption from the provisions of this subsection published by
the Minister in the Gazette. Sections 12-16 (read with S 62(2)(c)) deal with
protected trees, with the Minister having the power to declare a particular tree, a
group of trees, a particular woodland, or trees belonging to a certain species, to
be a protected tree, group of trees, woodland or species. In terms of Section 15,
no person may cut, disturb, damage, destroy or remove any protected tree; or
collect, remove, transport, export, purchase, sell, donate or in any other manner
acquire or dispose of any protected tree, except under a licence granted by the
Minister. The list of protected tree species was published in GN 716 of 7
September 2012.
The Branch: Forestry and Natural Resource Management, DAFF, is mainly
concerned about the potential impacts on protected tree species. See the
National Forests Act, Act 84 of 1998 (NFA) as amended, section 12(1)(d) read with
s15(1) and s62(2)(c). The list of protected tree species was published in GN 877 of
22 November 2013. No protected tree may be cut, removed, damaged, disturbed
or destroyed without a valid Forest Act License.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at Leandra:
If any declared weed and/or invader species listed in terms of this Act is
present on site, it will have to be removed.
Department of Agriculture will have to consider development proposals
on economic viable agriculture units where applicable.
22
National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004)
The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, Act No 10 of 2004
(NEM:BA) provides for the MEC/Minister to list ecosystems which are threatened
and in need of protection (Section 52) and to identify any process or activity in
such a listed ecosystem as a threatening process (Section 53). A list of threatened
& protected species has been published in terms of Section 56 (1) GG 29657 GN
R 151 and GN R 152, Threatened or Protected Species Regulations. The act also
deals with restricted activities involving alien species; restricted activities involving
certain alien species totally prohibited; and duty of care relating to listed invasive
species.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
If any protected trees in terms of this Act occur on site, the developer
will require a licence from the DWAF to perform any of the above-listed
activities.
23
National Environmental Management Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008)
The National Environmental Management Waste Act, Act No 59 of 2008 (NEM:
WA) reforms the law regulating waste management in order to protect health
and the environment by providing reasonable measures for the prevention of
pollution and ecological degradation and for securing ecologically sustainable
development.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
The Biodiversity Act allows for the publishing of bioregional plans to
provide a map of critical biodiversity areas with accompanying land use
planning and decision-making guidelines, to inform land-use planning,
environmental assessment and authorisations and natural resource
management by a range of sectors whose policies and decisions
impact on biodiversity. Such a biodiversity plan has been developed
for the Mpumalanga Province, however not published. This
biodiversity plan will be used as a guideline to inform the proposed
development proposal, its layout and sustainable functioning. It
should be clearly noted that the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Plan is not
gazetted and serve as a guideline document. It is in this light that the
Plan will be used to inform the development proposal towards a
sustainable proposal.
The proposed development must consider endangered ecosystems,
protect and promote biodiversity;
Must assess the impacts of the proposed development on any
endangered ecosystems;
No protected species may be removed or damaged without a permit;
The proposed site must be cleared of alien vegetation using
appropriate means.
24
National Environmental Management Act: Protected Areas Act (Act 57 of
2003)
The National Environmental Management Act: Protected Areas Act (Act No. 57 of
2003) (NEM:PAA) provides for the protection and conservation of ecologically
viable areas representative of South Africa’s biological diversity and its natural
landscapes and seascapes; for the establishment of a national register of all
national, provincial and local protected areas; for the management of those areas
in accordance with national norms and standards; for intergovernmental co-
operation and public consultation in matters concerning protected areas; and for
matters in connection therewith.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
All reasonable measures must be taken to avoid the generation of
waste and where such generation cannot be avoided, minimise the
toxicity and amounts of waste that are generated; reduce, re-use,
recycle and recover waste; where waste must be disposed of, ensure
that the waste is treated and disposed of in an environmentally sound
manner;
Manage the waste in such a manner that it does not endanger human
health or the environment or cause a nuisance through noise, odour
or visual impacts;
Prevent any employee or any person from contravening this Act; and
prevent the waste from being used for an unauthorised purpose.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
The areas where the proposed mixed residential area will be
situated is not listed in a national register as a protected area.
25
National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998)
In terms of the definitions contained in Section 1 of the National Water Act, Act
No 36 of 1998, (NWA) a “water resource” includes a watercourse, surface water,
estuary, or aquifer. “Aquifer” means a geological formation which has structures
or textures that hold water or permit appreciable water movement through them.
“Watercourse” means a river or spring; a natural channel in which water flows
regularly or intermittently; a wetland, lake or dam into which, or from which,
water flows; and any collection of water which the Minister may, by notice in the
Gazette, declare to be a watercourse, and a reference to a watercourse includes,
where relevant, its bed and banks.
Furthermore, in terms of the definitions contained in Section 1 of the National
Water Act, waste “includes any solid material or material that is suspended,
dissolved or transported in water (including sediment) and which is spilled or
deposited on land or into a water resource in such volume, composition or
manner as to cause, or to be reasonably likely to cause, the water resource to be
polluted”.
The Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs is allowed to regulate activities
which have a detrimental impact on water resources by declaring them to be
controlled activities. No person may undertake a controlled activity unless such
person is authorised to do so by or under this Act.
Duty of Care to prevent and remedy the effects of pollution to water resources is
addressed in Section 19. Section 20 addresses the procedures to be followed, as
well as control of emergency incidents which may impact on a water resource.
Recognised water uses are addressed in terms of Section 21 and the
requirements for registration of water uses are stipulated in Section 26 and
Section 34.
Implications to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
All Section 21 water uses, such as infrastructure crossing water
courses, storage of water, use of effluent water, groundwater use, etc.
must be licensed by Department of Water and Sanitation.
26
National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998)
Section 28 of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998
(NEMA) requires duty of care where reasonable measures are taken to prevent
pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring, or, where this is
not possible, to minimise and rectify pollution or degradation of the
environment. Section 29 addresses the protection of workers refusing to do
environmental hazardous work. Procedures to be followed in the event of an
emergency incident which may impact on the environment are addressed in
Section 30. Section 31 addresses access to environmental information and
protection of whistle blowers.
4.2 OVERVIEW OF THE EIA PROCESS
The EIA Process is a planning, design and decision-making tool used to
demonstrate to the responsible authority, DARDLEA, and the project proponent,
Henopath (Pty) Ltd what the consequences of their choices will be in biophysical,
social and economic terms. As such it identifies potential impacts (negative and
positive) that the project may have on the environment. The EIA makes
recommendations to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive impacts
associated with the proposed project.
An EIA process as prescribed by the EIA Regulations (GN R326) comprises of two
distinct phases, namely a Scoping Phase, and an EIA Phase. The sequence of
documents, legislative process, and opportunities to comment within the broader
EIA Process are depicted in the process flow chart (refer to Figure 4.1).
Relevance to the proposed new Residential establishment at - Leandra:
The developer must be mindful of the principles, broad liability and
implications associated with NEMA and must eliminate or mitigate
any potential impacts;
The developer must be mindful of the principles, broad liability and
implications of causing damage to the environment.
27
Sco
pin
g P
hase
PROCESS PRODUCT OPPORTUNITY TO
PARTICIPATE
Undertake baseline studies Baseline studies
Complete Application Form Formal Application
Place Media Notices Media notices Response to notice
Compile information sheet
(Background Information
Document (BID))
Information sheet
(BID)
Comment on
Information Sheet
(BID)
Compile draft Scoping
Report Draft Scoping
Report Comment on Draft
Scoping Report
Compile Final Scoping
Report Final Scoping
Report
Address comments and
finalise Scoping Report
Final Scoping
Report for
submission
EIA
Ph
ase
Undertake specialist studies Specialist reports
Compile draft EIA Report Draft EIA Report Comment on Draft
EIA Report
Address comments and
finalize EIA Report Final EIA Report We are here
Submit final report to
DARDLEA for Environmental
Authorisation
Environmental
Authorization from
DARDLEA
Notify all registered I&APs
of Environmental
Authorization
Notification letters
to I&APs
Appeal period
Figure 4.1: EIA process flow chart
28
4.2.1 Scoping Phase
The objectives of the Scoping Process as contained in Appendix 2 of the EIA
Regulations (GN R326) is to, through a consultative process –
Identify the relevant policies and legislation relevant to the activity.
Motivate the need and desirability of the proposed activity, including the
need and desirability of the activity in the context of the preferred
location.
Identify and confirm the preferred activity and technology alternative
through an identification of impacts and risks and ranking process of such
impacts and risks.
Identify and confirm the preferred site, through a detailed site selection
process, which includes an identification of impacts and risks inclusive of
identification of cumulative impacts and a ranking process of all the
identified alternatives focusing on the geographical, physical, biological,
social, economic, and cultural aspects of the environment.
Identify the key issues to be addressed in the assessment phase.
Agree on the level of assessment to be undertaken, including the
methodology to be applied, the expertise required as well as the extent of
further consultation to be undertaken to determine the impacts and risks
the activity will impose on the preferred site through the life of the activity,
including the nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and
probability of the impacts to inform the location of the development
footprint within the preferred site.
Identify suitable measures to avoid, manage or mitigate identified impacts
and to determine the extent of the residual risks that need to be managed
and monitored.
In accordance with the requirements of Appendix 2 of the EIA Regulations (GN
R326) a Scoping Report must contain the information that is necessary for a
proper understanding of the process, informing all preferred alternatives,
including location alternatives, the scope of the assessment, and the consultation
process to be undertaken through the EIA process. A Scoping Report was
prepared for the project in accordance with the requirements of Appendix 2 of
the EIA Regulations (GN R326). The Scoping Report was made available to I&APs
and stakeholders for a 30-day review period extending from 25 July 2019 to 25
August 2019. Comments received during the 30-day review period were
incorporated into the Scoping Report (where required), and the final Scoping
Report was submitted to DARDLEA on 26 August 2019.
29
4.2.2 EIA Phase
The objective of the EIA Phase as described in Appendix 3 of the EIA Regulations
(GN R326) is to through a consultative process:
Determine the policy and legislative context within which the activity is
located and document how the proposed activity complies with and
responds to the policy and legislative context.
Describe the need and desirability of the proposed activity, including the
need and desirability of the activity in the context of the development
footprint on the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping
report.
Identify the location of the development footprint within the approved site
as contemplated in the accepted scoping report based on an impact and
risk assessment process inclusive of cumulative impacts and a ranking
process of all the identified development footprint alternatives focusing on
the geographical, physical, biological, social, economic, heritage and
cultural aspects of the environment.
Determine the –
Nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and probability of the
impacts occurring to inform identified preferred alternatives.
Degree to which these impacts –
- Can be reversed.
- May cause irreplaceable loss of resources.
- Can be avoided, managed or mitigated.
Identify the most ideal location for the activity within the development
footprint of the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping
report based on the lowest level of environmental sensitivity identified
during the assessment.
Identify, assess, and rank the impacts the activity will impose on the
development footprint on the approved site as contemplated in the
accepted scoping report through the life of the activity.
Identify suitable measures to avoid, manage or mitigate identified impacts.
Identify residual risks that need to be managed and monitored.
In accordance with the requirements of Appendix 3 of the EIA Regulations (GN
R326) an EIA process must be undertaken in line with the approved Plan of Study
for EIA, and an EIA Report that sets out the environmental impacts, mitigation
and closure outcomes as well as the residual risks of the proposed activity must
be prepared.
30
All registered I&APs on the project database have been notified in writing of the
release of the EIA Report for review. Comments raised during the review of the
EIA Report, through written correspondence (e-mails, comments) will be captured
in a Comments and Response Report for inclusion in the Final EIA Report that will
be submitted to DARDLEA for decision-making in terms of Regulation 23 (1) (a)
of the EIA Regulations (GN R326). Comments raised will be responded to by the
EIA team and / or the applicant. These responses will indicate how the issue has
been dealt with in the EIA Process. Should the comment received fall beyond the
scope of this EIA, clear reasoning will be provided.
An EMPr has also been prepared for the project in accordance with Appendix 4 of
the EIA Regulations (GN R326) and is attached as Part B to this EIA Report. The
EMPr is based broadly on the environmental management philosophy presented
in the ISO 14001 standard, which embodies an approach of continual
improvement. Actions in the EMPr are drawn primarily from the management
actions in the specialist studies for the construction and operational phases of
development. If the project components are decommissioned or re-developed,
this will need to be done in accordance with the relevant environmental
standards and clean-up / remediation requirements applicable at the time.
4.2.3 Public Participation Process (PPP)
Public participation is one of the most important aspects of the EA Process. This
stems from the requirement that people have a right to be informed about
potential decisions that may affect them and that they must be afforded an
opportunity to influence those decisions. Effective public participation also
improves the ability of the Competent Authority (CA) to make informed decisions
and results in improved decision-making as the view of all parties are considered.
In 2017 DEA published a Public Participation Guideline in terms of NEMA and the
EIA Regulations. The Guidelines states that at a minimum, the Public
Participation Process (PPP) must allow for the following:
To provide for the opportunity for all role players including potential and
registered I&APs, EAPs, state departments, organs of state, and the
competent authority (CA) to obtain clear, accurate and understandable
information about the environmental impacts of the proposed activity or
implications of a decision.
To provide for role- players to voice their support, concerns and questions
regarding the project, application or decision.
31
To provide the opportunity for role-players to suggest ways for reducing
or mitigating any negative impacts of the project and for enhancing its
positive impacts.
To enable the person conducting PP to incorporate the needs, preferences
and values of potential or registered I&APs into its proposed development
that becomes the subject of an application for an Environmental
Authorisation (EA).
To provide opportunities for clearing up misunderstandings about
technical issues, resolving disputes and reconciling conflicting interests.
To encourage transparency and accountability in decision-making.
To contribute toward maintaining a healthy, vibrant democracy.
To give effect to the requirement for procedural fairness of administrative
action as contained in the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000
(Act No. 3 of 2000).
The PPP being conducted for this EIA Process is being driven by a stakeholder
engagement process that includes inputs from authorities, I&APs, technical
specialists and the project proponent.
4.2.3.1 Public Participation during the Scoping Phase
Identification of Stakeholders
In line with the requirements of the EIA Regulations (GN R326), relevant local,
provincial and national authorities, conservation bodies, local forums, and
representatives of affected landowners and occupants have been notified during
the EIA process.
The following stakeholders have been identified:
The following stakeholders have been identified:
Affected surrounding landowners;
Local Municipality, Town Planner, Municipal Manager; and Environmental
Officer;
Department of Agriculture Mpumalanga, Land Use Management;
Mpumalanga Heritage Resources Agency;
Department of Water and Sanitation;
Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental
Affairs, Mpumalanga,
32
Department of Human Settlements;
Area Ward Councillors;
Provincial Department of Police, Roads and Transport.
Register of I&APs
A register of I&APs has been opened and is being maintained throughout the EIA
Process (refer to Error! Reference source not found.).
Notification of Assessment Process
A BID containing information about the proposed project and the Scoping / EIA
process was compiled and distributed to the initial list of key stakeholders by
post and / or email.
A newspaper advertisement announcing the commencement of the process, and
inviting members of the public to register was placed in English in the ECHO
News local newspaper on 14 December 2018 (refer to Error! Reference source
not found.).
Two site notices were also placed, notice one were placed in front of the Dutch
Reformed Church in Eendracht, west of the proposed site- 26°22'33.41"S;
28°53'1.68"E. Notice two were placed on the R50 road which enters the town of
Leandra from the north, the R50 is situated east of the proposed site-
26°20'46.16"S; 28°54'40.47"E (refer to Error! Reference source not found.).
Review of Documentation
I&APs registered on the project database were notified of the release of the
Scoping Report for a 30-day review period and invited to provide comment
thereon (refer to Error! Reference source not found.)for a sample of the
notification letter which was distributed to I&APs).
Comments and Response Report
A Comments and Response Report containing all comments received from
stakeholders, I&APs, and organs of state has been prepared for the project and
will be maintained throughout the EIA Process (refer to Error! Reference source
not found.).
33
4.2.3.2 Public Participation Process during the EIA Phase
In accordance with the Plan of Study for EIA prepared for the project the
following processes will be conducted as part of the EIA Phase:
All I&APs will be notified of the comments raised by DARDLEA regarding
the Scoping Report.
A register will be kept of all I&APs that register as concerned parties.
All new comments received by I&APs as well as the previous comments by
I&APs will be addressed in detail and mitigation measures will be
discussed.
Registered I&APs will be kept up to date on the EIA progress and
comments received from DARDLEA.
The EIA Report will be circulated to all Registered I&APs.
The comments received from DARDLEA on the EIA Report will be
circulated to all registered I&APs.
4.3 APPROACH TO UNDERTAKING THE EIA
The impact assessment methodology has been aligned with the requirements for
EIA Reports as stipulated in Appendix 3 of the EIA Regulations (GN R326). In
accordance with Appendix 3 an EIA Report must contain the information that is
necessary for the CA to consider and come to a decision on the application, and
must include, amongst other things:
(j) An assessment of each identified potentially significant impact and risk,
including –
(i) Cumulative impacts.
(ii) The nature, significance and consequences of the impact and risk.
(iii) The extent and duration of the impact and risk.
(iv) The probability of the impact and risk occurring.
(v) The degree to which the impact and risk can be reversed.
(vi) The degree to which the impact and risk may cause irreplaceable loss
of resources.
(vii) The degree to which the impact and risk can be mitigated.
34
The following criteria were used to determine the significance of impacts
associated with the proposed development of the Agricultural & Forestry
Technology Park. The criteria take into account the nature of the impact, the
extent and duration, the magnitude, and the likelihood of occurrence to
determine the significance of the potential impact. Also taken into account were
cumulative impacts, a cumulative impact being defined as the impact on the
environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added
to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future developments or
actions regardless of who undertakes them.
The nature of the impact provides a description of what causes the effect, what
will be affected, and how it will be affected. It is discussed under the subheading.
The extent, wherein it is indicated whether the impact will be local (limited to the
immediate area or site of development), regional, national or international. A
score of between 1 and 5 is assigned as appropriate (with a score of 1 being low
and a score of 5 being high). The scores are as follows:
1 – Local immediate area
2 – Local immediate area and surroundings
3 – Regional
4 – National
5 – International
The duration was assigned a score of 1 to 5 where:
1 – The lifetime of the impact will be of a very short duration.
2 – The lifetime of the impact will be of a short duration.
3 – Assigned to medium-term (5 – 15 years)
4 – Assigned to long term (> 15 years)
5 – Permanent.
The magnitude, quantified on a scale from 0 – 10, where a score is assigned:
0 is small and will have no effect on the environment
2 is minor and will not result in an impact on processes
4 is low and will cause a slight impact on processes
6 is moderate and will result in processes continuing but in a modified way
8 is high (processes are altered to the extent that they temporarily cease)
10 is very high and results in complete destruction of patterns and permanent
cessation of processes
35
The probability of occurrence, which describes the likelihood of the impact
actually occurring. Probability is estimated on a scale, and a score assigned:
Assigned a score of 1 – 5, where 1 is very improbable (probably will not happen)
Assigned a score of 2 is improbable (some possibility, but low likelihood)
Assigned a score of 3 is probable (distinct possibility)
Assigned a score of 4 is highly probable (most likely)
Assigned a score of 5 is definite (impact will occur regardless of any prevention
measures)
The significance, which is determined through a synthesis of the characteristics
described above (refer formula below) and can be assessed as low, medium or
high. The significance is determined by combining the criteria in the following
formula:
S = (E+D+M) P, where
S = Significance weighting
E = Extent
D = Duration
M = Magnitude
P = Probability
The status of the impact describes whether the impact will have positive,
negative or neutral ramifications of the environment.
The significance weightings for each potential impact are as follows:
Value Significance
< 30 points Low (i.e. where this impact would not have a direct influence on the
decision to develop in the area)
30 – 60 points Medium (i.e. where the impact could influence the decision to develop in
the area unless it is effectively mitigated)
> 60 points High (i.e. where the impact must have an influence on the decision process
to develop in the area)
As the applicant, Henopath (Pty) Ltd has the responsibility to avoid or minimise
impacts and plan for their management (in terms of the EIA Regulations (GN
R326)), the mitigation of significant impacts is discussed. Assessment of impacts
with mitigation is made in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
36
proposed mitigation measures. An EMPr which includes the mitigation measures
has been prepared and is included as Part B to this EIA Report.
Other aspects to be taken into consideration in the assessment of impact
significance are:
Impacts are evaluated for the construction and operation phases of the
development. The assessment of impacts for the decommissioning phase
is brief, as there is limited understanding at this stage of what this might
entail. The relevant rehabilitation guidelines and legal requirements
applicable at the time will need to be applied.
Impacts have been evaluated with and without mitigation in order to
determine the effectiveness of mitigation measures on reducing the
significance of a particular impact.
The impact evaluation has, where possible, taken into consideration the
cumulative effects associated with this and other facilities / projects which
are either developed or in the process of being developed in the local
area.
The impact assessment attempts to quantify the magnitude of potential
impacts (direct and cumulative effects) and outline the rationale used.
Where appropriate, national standards are to be used as a measure of the
level of impact.
4.4 SPECIALIST STUDIES
In accordance with the Plan of Study for EIA prepared for the project the
following specialist studies have been conducted for the project and will be
submitted to DARDLEA together with the EIA Report:
Ecological / Vegetation and Wetland Specialist Study:
Habitats.
Wetlands.
Vegetation.
Heritage Impact Assessment.
Engineering Bulk Civil Services Report.
Electrical Services Report.
Traffic Impact Study.
37
4.4.1 Summary of Ecological and Wetland Impact Assessment
The assessment area consists of a single surface footprint area of approximately
545 ha in size and is situated on Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein no 313 directly
north-west of the town of Leandra which forms part of the Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality, Mpumalanga Province. In accordance with the Govan Mbeki Spatial
Development Framework 2014 -2034 (SDF), the assessment area falls inside the
urban edge and is zoned for residential and mixed-use development. Access to
the assessment area is obtained via R 29 provincial road from the south.
According to SANBI (2006- ), the entire assessment area falls within the Soweto
Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8). This vegetation type mainly consists
of gently to moderately supporting short- to medium height dense tufted
grassland dominated almost entirely by the species Themeda triandra. Other
frequent grasses also include Elionurus muticus, Eragrostis recemosa,
Heteropogon contortus & Tristachya leucothrix. The vegetation type is classified
as endangered because of significant transformation and degradation mostly
caused by agricultural, urban and mining activities (SANBI, 2006- ). The Soweto
Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8) was however subsequently officially
classified as having a nationally vulnerable status in terms of the National
Department of Environmental Affairs’ (DEA) National Threatened Ecosystems
System (Government Gazette No 34809, 9 December 2011). This renders the
entire vegetation type a priority ecosystem type for conservation on a national
scale.
The majority of the assessment area is categorised as Other Natural Areas (ONA)
in accordance with the Mpumalanga Provincial Spatial Biodiversity Plan which
sets out biodiversity priority areas in the province. An area within the north-
western portion of the assessment area is however classified as a Critical
Biodiversity Area optimal (CBA). Critical Biodiversity Areas are areas that are
irreplaceable or near-irreplaceable (CBA 1) or reflect an optimum configuration
(CBA 2) for reaching provincial biodiversity targets for ecosystem types, species
or ecological processes (Collins, 2017). Such an area must be maintained in a
natural or near-natural state in order to meet biodiversity targets (Collins, 2017).
The remaining portions of the assessment area are categorised as moderately to
heavily modified.
38
Although the natural undulating grassland slopes and hills of the assessment area
form part of the nationally vulnerable Soweto Highveld Grassland vegetation type
(Gm 8), it is evident that the assessment area does not necessarily constitute a
representative ‘type’ sample of this vegetation type due to variations in soil type
but rather forms part of the more clayey vegetation types associated with the
Mpumalanga Province. The small southern and northern portions of the
assessment area have also been completely transformed through cultivated lands
and virtually no natural vegetation remains. The ecological functionality and value
of these two areas have therefore been completely lost. Only a single individual
of the provincially protected species Boophone disticha was found to be present
within the grassland areas; it is however likely that more individuals of this
species might be present. No Red Data Listed or nationally protected species or
any other species of conservational significance were found to be present within
the grassland areas and there is merely a low to moderate possibility of the
provincially protected and Red Data Listed vulnerable species Tyto capensis
(African grass owl) utilising the grassland areas for breeding and persistence
purposes. The undulating grassland slopes and hills are therefore viewed as being
of moderate conservational significance for habitat preservation and ecological
functionality persistence in support of the surrounding ecosystem, broader
vegetation type and regional surface water catchment and drainage area.
Although not necessarily viewed as being of high conservational significance, the
distinct linear rocky ridges/outcrops situated along the western boundary of the
assessment area, possess locally unique/distinct habitat attributes due their
increased exposure of surface rockiness and subsequent shallower soils as well as
their sheltering nature. It is therefore reasonably expected that these areas are
utilised by various specialised reptilian species as refuge and for
breeding/persistence purposes. Furthermore, the majority of the rocky
ridges/outcrops fall within the CBA optimal which is present in the north-western
portion of the assessment area.
Although no Red Data Listed or nationally protected species or any other species
of conservational significance were found to be present within the rocky
ridges/outcrops, two provincially protected species were found to be diagnostic
of the rocky ridges/outcrops and absent from the surrounding grassland areas
namely Eulophia clavicornis & Cyrtanthus tuckii. The isolated rocky outcrops are
39
therefore viewed as being of relatively high conservational significance for habitat
preservation and ecological functionality persistence in support of the
surrounding ecosystem, broader vegetation type and CBA optimal. It is therefore
recommended that the portions of the rocky ridges/outcrops falling within the
CBA optimal should be adequately buffered out of the proposed development
footprint.
The numerous ephemeral water drainage lines/areas present within the
assessment area, subsequently feed into a number of significant second and third
order watercourses downstream outside to the east and west of the assessment
area. A single significant ephemeral watercourse and associated channelled
valley-bottom wetland area also traverses the western portion of the assessment
area. The entire assessment area therefore forms an important part of the upper
commencement portion of a quaternary surface water catchment and drainage
area which regionally drains towards the north. The significant ephemeral
watercourse and associated wetland area further provide significant natural
breeding, foraging and persistence habitat for a diversity of specialised
amphibian, aquatic avifaunal and invertebrate species. There is also a moderate
possibility of the provincially protected species Pyxicephalus adspersus (African
giant bullfrog) utilising the watercourse and associated wetland area for breeding
and persistence purposes.
The watercourses and wetland area are therefore viewed as being of relatively
high conservational significance for habitat preservation and ecological
functionality persistence in support of the surrounding ecosystem, broader
vegetation type, CBA optimal and regional surface water catchment and drainage
area. It is therefore recommended that the watercourses and drainage lines be
adequately buffered out of the proposed development footprint. A minimum 40
m buffer area must be implemented around the significant ephemeral
watercourse and associated wetland area as indicated on the Sensitivity Map
under heading 8.6 and no development is allowed to take place within the
buffered areas. Development and layout designs should also include adequate
storm water management measures to ensure that sufficient volumes and quality
of surface water runoff from the footprint area is still channelled back into the
localised catchment in order to maintain the ecological functionality and integrity
of the broader surface water catchment and drainage area.
40
It is in the opinion of the specialist that although there are a number of
potentially highly significant ecological impacts which the proposed development
could pose to the local and broader surrounding environment, these impacts can
be suitably reduced and mitigated to within acceptable levels. The project should
therefore be considered by the competent authority for environmental
authorisation and approval. The proposed development may however only
continue if all recommended mitigations measures as per this ecological report
are adequately implemented and managed for both the construction and
operational phases of the proposed project. All necessary authorisations and
permits must also be obtained prior to any commencement.
4.4.2 Summary of Heritage Impact Assessment
Based on the assessment of the area it was found that the terrain is primarily
underlain by Jurassic-age dolerites (Jd), but coarse-grained Vryheid Formation
sandstones are primarily exposed along the western margins of the study area
where no fossils or fossil localities were observed. The area is covered by a well-
developed residual soil overburden, but it has been severely degraded by
previous agricultural activities. A pedestrian survey revealed no evidence of
Quaternary fossils or fossil exposures within Ecca Group, Vryheid Formation
outcrop. Given the predominance of palaeontologically insignificant dolerite
bedrock and degraded Quaternary overburden, most of the study area is
generally regarded as of low palaeontological significance, three smaller areas are
underlain by potentially sensitive argillaceous rocks that are more or less buffered
by superficial overburden. Given the nature and potential scale of the
development excavations larger than 1 m2 that exceeds depths of >1 m into
potentially unweathered Vryheid Formation sediments will need further
monitoring by a professional palaeontologist during the construction phase of
the project.
Except for indication of modern farming activities, the pedestrian survey revealed
no evidence of in situ Stone Age archaeological sites or scatters, prehistoric
structures related to the occupation by early agricultural societies, graves or
graveyards or historically significant structures older than 60 years. The effect of
modern farming practices on the landscape is clear with the result that the study
41
area is also not considered to be archaeologically sensitive. It is assigned site
rating of Generally Protected C (GP.C).
4.4.3 Summary Engineering Bulk Civil Services Report & Electrical
Rand Water is the only supplier of potable water to the town of Leandra through
a bulk water supply line and a series of reservoirs. No boreholes are in operation
for the supply of additional water to the bulk supply network. No water treatment
works are therefore found within the municipal boundaries of the town. The town
of Leandra is being supplied off the East Dump Mine – Wildebeesfontein
reservoir pipelines. These pipes are rising mains supplied from the RW
Bloemendal booster pump station with the estimated maximum pumping
capacity of 120 Mℓ/day (2 x 60 Mℓ/day). Currently the Bloemendal booster pump
station is operating at its maximum capacity, hence the East Dump
Mine/Wildebeestfontein reservoir system has insufficient water to supply the
proposed new development in Leandra. Rand Water is currently in the planning
stage of increasing the capacity by the implementing of an upgrade schedule.
Time frames however are not known at this stage. The total demands required for
this proposed development has been supplied to Rand Water to be used for their
long-term planning.
In terms of sanitation the current capacity of the Waste Water Treatment Works
(WWTW) of Leandra is 8.5 Mℓ/day with a spare capacity of 3 Mℓ/day. This has
been confirmed by the District Municipality in a meeting at the Govan Mbeki
District Municipality in Secunda with Mr. Rofhiwa Mulaudzi, Acting Deputy
Director.
The WWTW is some 1,5km east of the proposed development. Also shown is the
existing bulk sewer lines closest to the proposed development which is made up
of gravity and rising mains.
The proposed Leandra Integrated Housing Development is bordered in the south
by the R29 which is a provincial road connecting Springs, Devon and Leandra.
The N17 National Route is further south and runs parallel to the R29. Also
42
indicated on the layout are several other entrance/exits to the proposed
development.
The main access initially to the development will be from the R29.
4.4.3.1 Water
As per Engineering Services Report, 2019, various options for securing sources for
future bulk water supply to this area as well as the upgrading of the bulk water
storage and distribution infrastructure for the region as a whole will have to be
considered. Discussions with Rand Water which is the sole potable water supply
agent to the town of Leandra indicated that they are currently in the process of
addressing this situation. The demand figures for this proposed development
have been forwarded to Rand Water, Me. Hape Sebatana, Senior Planning
Engineer: Rand Water for planning purposes.
The design of the potable water network will comply with the design standards
and criteria as set out in the “Guidelines for Human Settlement Planning and
Design”. In accordance with the water demand calculations the study area will
need at least 42 Mℓ (48-hour storage capacity) combined low level reservoirs with
a demand of 243ℓ/s at peak flow demand. Several elevated storage reservoirs will
also be required to cater for the peak demands for the different areas which will
be determined in the prefeasibility design phase.
4.4.3.2 Sanitation
The sewer system for the proposed development will be water borne and will
incorporate a network of uPVC pipes with diameters ranging from 160mm to
250mm. Due to the topography of the site; the development site can be divided
into 3 drainage zones. The 3 zones will have to be sub-divided into sub-zones
due to the size of the proposed development to prevent too deep excavations for
gravity pipelines.
Once a geotechnical report of the area has been compiled, the economic
comparison will be done between deeper excavations for a gravity pipelines
versus shallower pumping lines.
43
A new WWTW is to be constructed with a capacity of at least 15 Mℓ/day
including bulk infrastructure pipelines connecting the study area with the new
WWTW. It is envisaged that the entire internal sewer network will require main
collectors ranging from 200mm Ø to 355mm Ø to handle the PWWF for the
various sub-areas. The terrain lends itself to gravity pipelines for most of the
development but will require several pump stations with rising sewer mains to
transfer sewer from these low points (due to the drainage zones encountered on
this site) to the new WWTW. The collector lines will gravitate to a low point from
where it will be pumped to the WWTW. It is also possible for some drainage
areas within the study area to gravitate to the WWTW. This will however be
determined during the pre-feasibility design phase.
4.4.3.3 Roads and Stormwater
The provincial road R29 will connect the proposed development with the town of
Leandra amongst other. Other entrance/exit roads are also shown on the town
layout but most of the shown entrance/exit roads’ link roads have not been
constructed yet.
All minor storm water will be accommodated in the underground storm water
system and the surfaced streets, bus and taxi routes. Culverts will also be
introduced to convey storm water underneath roads at crossing of natural
drainage lines.
4.4.3.4 Electricity
Leandra electricity network falls under the jurisdiction of ESKOM and is supplied
from the local Eskom 132kV substation referred to as the Lebohang/Wildebees
SS. S&W Consulting (2019) determined that there is currently not enough
capacity at the Lebohang SS and the sufficient electivity supply to the Rietfontein
Town Establishment is dependent on one of the strengthening projects planned
by Eskom.
44
4.4.4 Summary Traffic Impact Study
The Traffic Impact Study found that All of the analysed intersections are currently
(2018) prior to development operating at an acceptable level of service during
both the am and pm peak hours. No intersection upgrading is required in order
to be able to accommodate the 2018 background traffic demand;
· The trip generation of the development is expected to be as follow:
4063 AM trips (1016 in; 3047 out);
4063 PM trips (2641 in; 1422 out).
All of the analysed intersections will not be able to accommodate the
development traffic demand and need to be upgraded prior to
development completion by the developer;
Sufficient sight distances are available at the existing access localities;
Based on the conclusions that have been derived from this study, the following
are recommended:
That the development be supported from a traffic engineering point of
view;
That the following intersection be upgraded by the developer in accordance with
section 7 of this report:
R29 (P5/1) / Scheepers Street intersection;
R29 (P5/1) / Bezuidenhout Street intersection;
R29 (P5/1) / R50 intersection;
That an additional new access to the development be provided on the R29
road;
Bus lay buy shall be provided along the main access and internal road at
distances of approximately 600m apart. These bus lay-bys shall be
designed in accordance with TMH 16 Vol 2.
45
5. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
This chapter provides an overview of the alternatives considered and assessed for
the Mixed Residential Development as part of the EIA Process. The 2014 EIA
Regulations (GN R326) define “alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity as:
Different means of meeting the general purpose and requirements of the activity,
which may include alternatives to the:
Property on which or location where the activity is proposed to be undertaken,
Type of activity to be undertaken,
Design or layout of the activity,
Technology to be used in the activity, or
Operational aspects of the activity
And includes the option of not implementing the activity.
Alternatives are typically accepted as being “different means of meeting the
general purpose and requirements of the activity” and must be feasible and
reasonable. The “feasibility” and “reasonability” of an alternative can be
measured against the general purpose, requirements and need of the activity and
how it impacts on the environment and any communities that may be affected by
the activity. It is therefore necessary to consider the need and desirability of the
proposed activity when identifying alternatives.
There are two types of alternatives, namely fundamental alternatives and
incremental alternatives
5.1 Fundamental Alternatives
Fundamental alternatives are alternatives which are completed different to the
proposed project and usually involve a different type of development on the
proposed site, or a different location for the proposed development.
5.1.1 Developer Alternatives
The proposed township establishment as a development type has the following
mission statement –
46
To provide needed residential space and be a node attracting businesses into a
shared multi character environment.
Its goals and objectives include –
• To provide needed housing for the growing Leandra and its surrounds.
• To provide for the accommodation of several typology type housing erven, in
close proximity to open spaces, places of worship and business complexes.
For these reasons no activity alternative will be considered.
5.1.2 Location Alternatives
Land proposed for the residential extension is best suited to link a new approved
residential area next to Leandra, and therefore allows for proper town planning
integration. The property applicable were scrutinized through a feasibility
assessment and determined to be of best located, no location alternatives will be
considered.
5.1.3 Incremental Alternatives
Incremental alternatives are modifications or variations to the design of a project
that provide different options to reduce or minimise environmental impacts.
There are several incremental alternatives that can be considered, including:
The design or layout of the development proposal;
The services technology to be used, and
The operational aspects of the development.
These alternatives will be considered and assessed.
5.1.4 “No- Go Alternative”
The ‘no-go’ option assumes the site remains in its current state, i.e. used for
grazing / agricultural activities. It may be argued from an environmental
perspective that the no-go option is the favourable alternative as the surface area
47
will not be transformed, however The countries president has identified and aims
to eradicate informal settlements, this proposal serve a social function in that
formal housing will be presented and therefore assist in addressing the housing
and business needs being experienced.
It is therefore recommended that the ‘no-go ‘option may not be viable in terms
of social and economic sustainability. It will however be used as a baseline
throughout the assessment process against which potential impacts will be
compared in an objective manner.
The costs / implications and benefits of implementing the “no-go” alternative is
presented in Table 5.1. Implementing the “no-go” alternative would result in the
Mixed Residential Development not being developed and contributing to
environmental, social and economic change (positive and / or negative) in the
area surrounding the proposed project site near Leandra.
Table 5.1: Cost Benefit Analysis of the “no-go” alternative.
COST BENEFITS
The establishment of a Mixed
Residential Development will
not take place, and the area
will remain as is.
The construction and
development of several
diverse mixed residential,
including business facilities
will not take place after EA
has been obtained.
No additional employment
opportunities will be created.
Both skilled and unskilled
employment opportunities
are anticipated to be created
for the construction and
operation of the Mixed
Residential Development.
No vegetation clearance-
consisting mainly out of dense
tufted grassland dominated almost
entirely by the species Themeda
triandra will take place.
No strategic investment
opportunities in the area of
Leandra will take place
No supply of formalised housing
and other services will take place.
No influx of job seekers to the
province, including professional
and unskilled individuals.
48
COST BENEFITS
No additional opportunities
for skills transfer and
education / training of local
communities created.
Potential positive socio-
economic impacts likely to
result from the project, such
as the supply of formalised
housing and business
facilities and the creation of
local employment
opportunities, will not be
realised.
The development of a Mixed Residential Development in Leandra will supply
much needed formalized housing and business opportunities for the residents of
Leandra and the wider Govan Mbeki Local Municipality. The area has been
selected as it borders Leandra and Eendracht. The proposed development will not
only supply much needed housing and small-scale business opportunities, but
will also lead to job creation, which will take place especially during the
construction but also during the operational phases of the developments.
The proposed development area is currently being used for agricultural activities
(animal grazing) with several perennial and non-perennial watercourses identified
which will dictate the layout of the proposed development. The area is however
not seen as having a high ecological value.
The positive economic effects the proposed development of the Mixed
Residential Development will have on the area is therefore seen as being greater
than the total transformation of the development area. The specialist / services
reports should however be adhered to in order to successfully establish the
mixed residential development.
49
6. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS
The issues and impacts presented in this chapter have been identified via the
baseline of the receiving environment (environmental, social and heritage
features present on site – as discussed in Chapter Error! Reference source not
found. of this EIA Report), a review of environmental impacts from other similar
projects and input from specialists that form part of the EIA project team.
The proposed Mixed Residential Development near Leandra is anticipated to
impact on a range of aspects of the biophysical and socio-economic
environment. One of the main purposes of the EIA process is to understand the
significance of these potential impacts and to determine if the potential impacts
can be mitigated or minimised. Potential impacts identified as part of the EIA are
anticipated to occur during the construction and operational phases of
development. While some impacts may occur during the decommissioning
phase of development, these are anticipated to be similar to those associated
with the construction phase of development but of lower significance.
6.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Transformation of terrestrial and aquatic vegetation
on the assessment area associated with the Soweto
Highveld Grassland vegetation type (Gm 8), and
grassland dominated almost entirely by the species
Themeda triandra.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Long term (4) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Local (2) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
Moderate (3) -
Reversibility of Impact Low (4) -
50
Assessment Area No go alternative
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium-high (76) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
The delineated ephemeral water drainage lines
situated within the west, south-west and north
western portion of the assessment area, must
be adequately buffered out of the proposed
development footprint.
A minimum 40m buffer area must be
implemented around the ephemeral water
drainage line and no development is allowed
to take place within the buffered area.
The proposed development must adhere to
conditions as stipulated by the Ecological
Assessment. (Report attached to this EIA
Report)
The project construction footprints must be
kept as small as practicably possible to reduce
the actual surface impact on vegetation and
no unnecessary / unauthorised footprint
expansion into the surrounding areas may take
place.
The proposed development must refrain from
encroaching into- and significantly impacting
on the remaining natural / agricultural area
situated adjacent of the assessment area.
No site construction camp to be established
within the recommended buffer zone or in any
natural surrounding areas outside the
assessment area. Site construction camps only
to be established within the plantation areas
and specifically within the recommended
development area.
Adequately fencing off the construction areas
and ensure that no construction activities,
machinery or equipment operate or impact
51
Assessment Area No go alternative
outside the fenced off areas or within the
buffer zone or the remaining natural /near
natural area situated directly adjacent to the
assessment area.
Existing roads and dirt tracks in close proximity
to the proposed project area must be used
during construction. No new roads or dirt
tracks to be constructed or implemented
outside the fenced off construction areas or
within the buffer zone or the remaining natural
area.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (48) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Terrestrial and aquatic alien invasive species
establishment.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Short term (2) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Local (2) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
Moderate (3) -
Reversibility of Impact High (2) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
Medium (3) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Low (45) -
52
Assessment Area No go alternative
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
Alien invasive species individuals currently on
site must be actively eradicated from the
assessment area and adequately disposed of
in accordance with the National Environmental
Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004);
Alien and Invasive Species Regulations, 2014.
An active alien invasive species clearance and
eradication initiative must be implemented for
the improvement of the ephemeral water
drainage lines ecological integrity.
Implement an adequate Alien Invasive Species
Establishment Management and Prevention
Plan during the construction phase. Such a
management plan must be compiled by a
suitably qualified and experienced ecologist.
Areas within and immediately surrounding the
proposed development footprints must be
adequately rehabilitated as soon as practicably
possible after construction in order to prevent
significant alien invasive species establishment.
No site construction camp to be established
within the recommended buffer zone or in any
natural surrounding areas outside the
assessment area. Site construction camps only
to be established within the plantation areas
and specifically within the recommended
development area.
Adequately fence off the construction areas
and ensure that no construction activities,
machinery or equipment operate or impact
outside the fenced off areas or within the
buffer zone or the remaining natural area
adjacent to the assessment area.
Existing roads and dirt tracks in close proximity
to the proposed project area must be used
during construction. No new roads or dirt
tracks to be constructed or implemented
outside the fenced off construction areas or
within the buffer zone or the remaining natural
area adjacent to the assessment area.
53
Assessment Area No go alternative
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (12) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Surface material erosion.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Short term (2) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Local (2) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
Moderate (3) -
Reversibility of Impact High (2) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium (60) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
construction phase. This must be done to
sufficiently manage storm water runoff in
order to prevent any significant erosion from
occurring.
Areas within and immediately surrounding the
proposed development footprints must be
adequately rehabilitated as soon as practicably
possible after construction in order to prevent
54
Assessment Area No go alternative
significant erosion.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (24) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Dust generation and emissions.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Low (4) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Short term (2) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Local (2) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
Moderate (3) -
Reversibility of Impact High (2) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
Medium (3) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Low (39) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
Implement suitable dust management and
prevention measures during the construction
phase.
Construction roads and camps must be
adequately wetted-down on a continual basis,
special care should be taken at areas situated
next to Eendracht.
The water being used for wetting-down areas
must be of sufficient quality in order to
prevent significant contamination of the
55
Assessment Area No go alternative
surrounding areas.
Areas within and immediately surrounding the
proposed development footprints must be
adequately rehabilitated as soon as practicably
possible after construction in order to prevent
significant dust emissions.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (10) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Impeding of the ephemeral water drainage line’s,
catchment areas and flow regimes.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Short term (2) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Regional (3) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
High (4) -
Reversibility of Impact Moderate (3) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium (72) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
The delineated ephemeral water drainage lines
situated within the west, south-west and north
western portion of the assessment area of the
assessment area, must be adequately buffered
out of the proposed development footprint.
56
Assessment Area No go alternative
A minimum 40m buffer area must be
implemented around the ephemeral water
drainage lines and no development is allowed
to take place within the buffered area.
The proposed development must be focussed
within the selected areas as depicted in the
layout and specifically within the
recommended development area.
The project construction footprints must be
kept as small as practicably possible to reduce
the actual surface impact on vegetation and
no unnecessary / unauthorised footprint
expansion into the surrounding areas may take
place.
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
construction phase. This must be done to
ensure and sufficiently manage storm water
runoff quality, quantities and flow speed
towards the watercourses in order to maintain
their ecological functionality and integrity.
Development and layout designs for the
proposed project should include adequate
storm water management measures to ensure
that sufficient volumes and quality of surface
water runoff from the footprint area is still
channelled back into the ephemeral water
drainage line and through the culverts into
applicable drainage lines watercourses. This
must be done in order to maintain the
ecological functionality and integrity of the
broader surface water catchment and drainage
area.
A Water Use License Application (WULA) must
be submitted to the Department of Water and
Sanitation if required in accordance with the
National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998) (NWA).
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation Low -
57
Assessment Area No go alternative
implementation
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (28) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Contamination of the ephemeral water drainage line
and subsequent downstream watercourses.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Short term (2) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Regional (3) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
High (4) -
Reversibility of Impact Low (4) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium-High (76) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
The delineated ephemeral water drainage line
situated west, south-west and north western
portion of the assessment area must be
adequately buffered out of the proposed
development footprint.
A minimum 40m buffer area must be
implemented around the ephemeral water
drainage lines and no development is allowed
to take place within the buffered area.
The proposed development must be focussed
within the proposed layout / development
areas and specifically within the recommended
development area.
58
Assessment Area No go alternative
The project construction footprints must be
kept as small as practicably possible to reduce
the actual surface impact on vegetation and
no unnecessary / unauthorised footprint
expansion into the surrounding areas may take
place.
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
construction phase. This must be done to
ensure and sufficiently manage storm water
runoff, clean / dirty water separation and
erosion towards watercourses in order to
maintain their ecological functionality and
integrity.
Development and layout designs for the
proposed project should include adequate
storm water management measures to ensure
that sufficient volumes and quality of surface
water runoff from the footprint area is still
channelled back into the ephemeral water
drainage line and through the culverts into the
watercourses. This must be done in order to
maintain the ecological functionality and
integrity of the broader surface water
catchment and drainage area.
If hydrocarbons or other chemicals are to be
stored on site during the construction phase,
the storage areas must be situated as far away
as practicably possible from the watercourses
and buffer zone.
It is recommended that hydrocarbon and
other chemical storage areas be situated
within the eastern or southern portions of
both the assessment area.
Hydrocarbon and other chemical storage areas
must be adequately bunded in order to be
able to contain a minimum of 150% of the
capacity of storage tanks / units.
Adequate hydrocarbon and other chemical
59
Assessment Area No go alternative
storage, handling and usage procedures must
be developed, and all relevant construction
personnel must be sufficient trained on- and
apply these procedures during the entire
construction phase.
Process water, waste water and any other
chemical / artificial by-products must be
adequately contained and disposed of in a
lawful and environmentally responsible
manner.
No process water or any form of contaminated
wastewater or any other chemical / artificial
by-products resulting from any construction
activities is allowed to be unlawfully
discharged directly or indirectly into any
watercourses areas. If any form of process- or
waste water or any other chemical / artificial
by-products needs to be discharged into any
watercourses (perennial or non-perennial) this
must be lawfully done in accordance with all
relevant legal requirements and the quality of
the water must continuously meet legal
discharge quality and quantity standards.
A Water Use License Application (WULA) must
be submitted to the Department of Water and
Sanitation if required in accordance with the
National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998) (NWA).
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (30) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Transformation of CBA areas associated with the
development area
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
60
Assessment Area No go alternative
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Long term (4) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Regional (3) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
High (4) -
Reversibility of Impact Low (4) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium-high -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium-High (84) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
The delineated watercourses and drainage lines
must be adequately buffered out of the
proposed development footprint.
A minimum 40 m buffer area must be
implemented around the significant ephemeral
watercourse and associated wetland area as
indicated under heading 8.6 and no
development is allowed to take place within the
buffered areas.
Development and layout designs should also
include adequate storm water management
measures to ensurethat sufficient volumes and
quality of surface water runoff from the footprint
area is still channelled back into the localised
catchment in order to maintain the ecological
functionality and integrity of the broader surface
water catchment and drainage area.
It is recommended that the portions of the rocky
ridges/outcrops falling within the CBA optimal
should be adequately buffered out of the
proposed development footprint area.
The project construction footprints must be kept
as small as practicably possible to reduce the
actual surface impact on vegetation and no
unnecessary/unauthorised footprint expansion
into the surrounding areas may take place.
61
Assessment Area No go alternative
No site construction camps to be established
within the recommended buffer zones or in any
natural surrounding areas outside the
assessment area.
Adequately fence off the construction areas and
ensure that no construction activities, machinery
or equipment operate or impact outside the
fenced off areas or within the buffer zones.
Existing roads and dirt tracks in close proximity
to the proposed project area must be used
during construction. No new roads or dirt tracks
to be constructed or implemented outside the
fenced off construction areas or within the buffer
zones.
Construction activities should follow a phased
approach over an extended period of time in
order to limit the amount of construction
disturbances at a specific time to restricted
portions of the assessment area.
This will extend the continued ecological
functionality of the broader assessment area and
ecosystem until the phased development
reaches the furthest areas.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (32) -
62
6.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Continued impeding of the ephemeral water
drainage line’s catchment area and flow regime.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
High (8) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Long term (4) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Regional (3) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
High (4) -
Reversibility of Impact Low (4) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium-high -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium-High (92) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
operational phase. This must be done to
ensure and sufficiently manage storm water
runoff quality, quantities and flow speed
towards the watercourses in order to maintain
their ecological functionality and integrity.
Development and layout designs for the
proposed project should include adequate
storm water management measures to ensure
that sufficient volumes and quality of surface
water runoff from the footprint area is still
channelled back into the ephemeral water
drainage line and through the culverts into
appropriate storm water management
infrastructures. This must be done in order to
maintain the ecological functionality and
63
Assessment Area No go alternative
integrity of the broader surface water
catchment and drainage area.
The minimum 40m buffer area implemented
around the ephemeral water drainage lines
must be adequately maintained and no
development is allowed to take place within
the buffered area.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (38) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Continued contamination of the ephemeral water
drainage lines and subsequent downstream
watercourses.
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Long term (4) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Regional (3) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
High (4) -
Reversibility of Impact Low (4) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium-high -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium-high (84) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
64
Assessment Area No go alternative
operational phase. This must be done to
ensure and sufficiently manage storm water
runoff and clean / dirty water separation
towards the watercourses in order to maintain
their ecological functionality and integrity.
Development and layout designs for the
proposed project should include adequate
storm water management measures to ensure
that sufficient volumes and quality of surface
water runoff from the footprint area is still
channelled back into the ephemeral water
drainage line and through the culverts into the
formalised storm water management features
This must be done in order to maintain the
ecological functionality and integrity of the
broader surface water catchment and drainage
area.
A comprehensive South African Scoring
System 5 (SASS 5) aquatic bio-monitoring
assessment must be conducted of the
watercourses directly downstream of the
proposed project area on an annual basis in
order to ensure that the ecological
functionality and integrity of the watercourses
is maintained. This information must then be
compared to the baseline data collected
during the initial assessment prior to the
commencement of the construction phase.
Such an assessment must be conducted by a
suitably qualified and experienced ecologist.
Water sample chemical and biological analyses
of the watercourses directly downstream of
the proposed project area must be continually
conducted on a 6-month basis in order to
ensure that the water quality of the
watercourses is maintained. This information
must then be compared to the baseline data
collected during the initial analyses prior to
the commencement of the construction phase.
If any reduction in SASS 5 scores or chemical
65
Assessment Area No go alternative
and biological water quality is determined due
to the project, the competent authority must
immediately be notified and the necessary
steps must be followed by the project owner
to locate and remediate the source of
contamination / health reduction as soon as
practicably possible.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (34) -
Assessment Area No go alternative
Identified Environmental
Impact
Continued surface material erosion
Magnitude of Negative
or Positive Impact
Medium (6) -
Duration of Negative or
Positive Impact
Long term (4) -
Extent of Positive or
Negative Impact
Local (2) -
Irreplaceability of Natural
Resources being
impacted upon
Moderate (3) -
Reversibility of Impact Moderate (3) -
Probability of Impact
Occurrence
High (4) -
Cumulative Impact Rating
prior to mitigation
Medium -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating prior to mitigation
Medium (72) -
Mitigation Measures to
be implemented
An adequate Storm Water and Erosion
Management Plan must be implemented for
the entire assessment area during the
66
Assessment Area No go alternative
operational phase. This must be done to
sufficiently manage storm water runoff in
order to prevent any significant erosion from
occurring.
Cumulative Impact Rating
after mitigation
implementation
Low -
Environmental
Significance Score and
Rating after mitigation
implementation
Low (30) -
6.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative impacts include the supply of formalized residential and business
facilities as well as creation of permanent employment and development
opportunities for members from the local community. This will create an
addition and cumulative impact on the employment opportunities in the area.
Whilst the additional impact might be minor it will be long term in nature and will
contribute to the amount of formal housing facilities available in the area and will
also reduce unemployment figures in the area.
6.4 ASSESSMENT OF NO-GO ALTERNATIVE
It has been determined following an assessment of potential environmental
impacts associated with the project that the potential negative impacts
associated with the proposed Mixed Residential Development can be mitigated
to within acceptable levels (i.e. low significance) with the application of
appropriate mitigation measures. In the event that the proposed Mixed
Residential Development is not constructed, the objectives associated with the
development of a mixed residential, including social housing, business,
community facilities and related structures will not be realised. These include:
Development of much needed formalised housing in the area
Development of business stands for the residents of the housing areas,
and adjacent communities
Promoting cohesion between local communities within the area and wider
municipal areas
67
Attracting a number of skilled workers to the area
Stimulating the economy, alleviating poverty and reducing unemployment
within the region.
The purpose of the project, which is to create a positive and sustainable socio-
economic impact in Leandra but also the greater Govan Mbeki Local Municipality
area through job creation, residential development and stimulation of local
communities.
The economic benefits associated with the development of the Mixed Residential
Development outweigh the benefits associated with the current agricultural
activities (animal grazing) occurring onsite. From an economical perspective the
Mixed Residential Development will generate revenue for the Govan Mbeki Local
Municipality on a continual basis. It is therefore recommended that the “no-go”
alternative not be considered a viable option in terms of economical
sustainability.
7. DESCRIPTION OF KEY ASSUMPTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS
In undertaking this investigation and compiling the EIA Report, it has been
assumed that:
The information provided by the project proponent and specialists is
accurate and unbiased.
The scope of this investigation is limited to assessing the environmental
impacts associated with the proposed development of the proposed
Mixed Residential Development and associated infrastructure.
Should the proposed project be authorised, the applicant (Henopath (Pty)
Ltd) will incorporate the recommendations and mitigation measures
outlined in the specialists’ investigations and the final EIA Report for the
proposed Mixed Residential Development in Leandra
68
8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The findings of the studies undertaken within this EIA to assess both the benefits
and potential negative impacts anticipated from the proposed development of
Mixed Residential Development near Leandra conclude that:
There are no environmental fatal flaws that should prevent the proposed
development of the Mixed Residential Development provided that:
The recommendations provided are considered.
The recommended mitigation and management measures in the EIA
and EMPr are implemented and given due consideration during the
formalisation process.
The required additional capacity for bulk service supply is made
available by the municipality to fully cater for the requirements of the
project (this can however be implemented across a phased
development approach).
The area is already largely transformed due to agricultural activities on site
as well as the area currently being used for animal grazing purposes,
therefore the impact on fauna and flora is considered to be low.
The cumulative significance of all the negative potential impacts on the
natural environment is considered low.
The social significance is seen as positive based on the fact that the
development of the Mixed Residential Development is likely to contribute
towards socio-economic development within the region.
Table 8.1 provides an overview of Environmental Significance Score & Ratings of
impacts identified for the proposed project both prior to mitigation and after
mitigation. From this table it is evident that while a number of potential impacts
of medium, and medium-high significance have been identified for the project, all
of these can successfully be reduced to low significance rating with the
implementation and application of appropriate mitigation measures.
69
Table 8.1: Environmental Significance Score & Ratings of impacts
identified for the proposed project considered both prior to
after mitigation.
Environmental
Significance Score &
Rating prior to
mitigation
Environmental
Significance Score &
Rating after
mitigation
Construction Phase Impacts
Transformation of terrestrial
and aquatic vegetation Medium (76) Low (48)
Terrestrial and aquatic alien
invasive species establishment. Low (45) Low (12)
Surface material erosion. Medium (60) Low (24)
Dust generation and
emissions. Low (32) Low (10)
Impeding of the ephemeral
water drainage line’s
catchment area and flow
regime.
Medium (72) Low (28)
Contamination of the
ephemeral water drainage line
and subsequent downstream
watercourses
Medium-High (76) Low (30)
Transformation of CBA optimal
areas associated with
development proposal
footprint
Medium-High (84) Low (32)
Operational Phase Impacts
Continued impeding of the
ephemeral water drainage
line’s catchment area and flow
regime.
Medium-High (92) Low (38)
Continued contamination of
the ephemeral water drainage
line and subsequent
downstream watercourses.
Medium-High (84) Low (34)
Continued surface material
erosion Medium (72) Low (30)
70
9. IMPACT STATEMENT
Based on the nature and extent of the proposed project, the local level of
disturbance predicted as part of the proposed Mixed Residential Development
near Leandra and associated infrastructure, the findings of the EIA, and the
understanding of potential environmental impacts, it is the opinion of the EIA
project team that environmental impacts associated with the application for EA
for the proposed development of an Mixed Residential Development on the
preferred project site (i.e. Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein 313- Mpumalanga
Province) can be mitigated to an acceptable level.
The following conditions would require being included within an authorization
issued for the project.
Recommendations and mitigation measures contained within this EIA
Report and the specialist studies attached as Error! Reference source not
found. must be implemented.
Once finalised the EMPr contained within Part B of this EIA Report should
form part of the contract with the contractors appointed work in the area
and will be used to ensure compliance with environmental specifications
and management measures. The implementation of this EMPr is
considered key in achieving the appropriate environmental management
standards as detailed for this project.
Applications for all other relevant and required permits / licences /
agreement required to be obtained by Henopath (Pty) Ltd (the project
proponent) must be obtained from the relevant regulating authorities.
During construction, unnecessary disturbance to habitats should be strictly
controlled and the footprint of the impact should be kept to a minimum
and disturbed areas should be rehabilitated as quickly as possible. Special
caution should also be taken when working close to any watercourses on
the proposed development site.
71
10. REFERENCES
LAMPBRECHT, R. 2018. Ecological Impact Assessment Report, Leandra Township
Establishment
OOSTHUIZEN, P.J. 2019. Engineering Bulk Services Civil Services Report:
Integrated Housing Development, Mpumalanga- Leandra
WESSELS, S. 2019. Township Establishment- Integrated Housing Development on
Remainder of Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein 313 IR (Mpumalanga- Leandra):
Electrical Services Report
RUSSOUW, L. 2018. Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment of the Farm Rietfontein
313 near Leandra, Mpumalanga Province
72
Appendix: A
CURRICULUM VITAE AND EAP DECLARATION
73
DETAILS AND EXPIRIENCE OF PERSON PREPAIRING REPORT
REPORT PREPARED BY: Danie Krynauw
CONTACT DETAILS: Email: [email protected]
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING Green Box Consulting
COMPANY: P.O. Box 37738
Langenhovenpark
9330
Tel: 082 435 2108
Fax: 086 66 34343
QUALIFICATIONS OF EAP: Danie Krynauw has a Master’s degree in Town and
Regional Planning (UFS), and completing his dissertation
to obtain a Master in Environmental Management (UFS).
D. Krynauw has over 18 years’ experience in the
environmental management field, and is a member of the
International Association of Impact Assessments South
Africa.
75
ONE PAGER - CURRICULUM VITAE
DANIE KRYNAUW
1. Family name: Krynauw
2. First name: Daniël
3. Date of birth: 1971/12/14
4. Nationality: South African
5. Contacts: Cell: 0824352108 / e-mail: [email protected]
6. Education:
Institution Degree(s) or Diploma(s) obtained
University of the Free State 2001 -
2002
Master in Environmental Management – Dissertation
pending
University of the Free State 1996-
1998
Masters in Urban and Regional Planning (UFS)
University of the Free State 1993-
1995
BA Geography and Sociology (UFS)
7. Membership of professional bodies:
International Association of Impact Assessment South Africa (IAIAsa)
8. Present position: Environmental Scientist / Director – Green-Box Consulting
9. Current Responsibilities:
Liaising with clients in both the private and public sectors.
Conduct Environmental Impact Assessments and other Environmental Technical
Investigations.
Apply and obtain waste licenses, water licenses, mining permits and environmental
authorizations for clients.
Use different GIS datasets in order to create new information or investigate patterns
for projects.
Conduct environmental compliance and other environmental audits.
Provide technical-level support for environmental remediation and mitigation projects,
including remediation system design and determination of regulatory applicability for
incoming projects.
Collaborate with other environmental scientists, planners, engineers, and other
specialists, and experts in law and business etc. to address environmental problems for
clients.
Conduct Environmental training.
76
10. Years within the organization: 8 years
11. Other skills (e.g. computer literacy, etc.): All suits of Microsoft Office, Arc View, ReGIS,
and Project Professional.
12. Professional experience:
Date 2011 - Current
Organisation Green-Box Consulting (Environmental Consultants)
Position Environmental Scientist (Owner and Director)
Date 2009 - 2016
Organisation Terra Works Environmental Consultants
Position Senior Environmental Scientist and COO
Date 2001 - 2009
Organisation Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental
Affairs, Free State
Position Principal Environmental Officer
Description of
duties
Review Environmental Impact Assessments
Review Environmental Management Programmes
Issuing Environmental Authorisations
77
DETAILS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER, DECLARATION OF INTEREST AND UNDERTAKING UNDER OATH
(For official use only)
File Reference Number:
NEAS Reference Number: DEA/EIA/
Date Received:
Application for authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998, as amended and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2014, as amended (the Regulations)
PROJECT TITLE Proposed Residential Establishment on Portion 2 of the Farm Rietfontein 313- Leandra, Mpumalanga Province.
Kindly note the following: 1. This form must always be used for applications that must be subjected to Basic Assessment or Scoping &
Environmental Impact Reporting where this Department is the Competent Authority.
2. This form is current as of 01 September 2018. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / Environmental Assessment
Practitioner (EAP) to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the
Competent Authority. The latest available Departmental templates are available at
https://www.environment.gov.za/documents/forms.
3. A copy of this form containing original signatures must be appended to all Draft and Final Reports submitted to the
department for consideration.
4. All documentation delivered to the physical address contained in this form must be delivered during the official
Departmental Officer Hours which is visible on the Departmental gate.
5. All EIA related documents (includes application forms, reports or any EIA related submissions) that are faxed; emailed;
delivered to Security or placed in the Departmental Tender Box will not be accepted, only hardcopy submissions are
accepted.
Departmental Details
Postal address: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations Private Bag X447 Pretoria 0001 Physical address: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations Environment House 473 Steve Biko Road Arcadia Queries must be directed to the Directorate: Coordination, Strategic Planning and Support at: Email: [email protected]
1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP) INFORMATION
EAP Company Name: Green-Box Consulting
B-BBEE Contribution level (indicate 1 to 8 or non-compliant)
Level 4 EME
Percentage Procurement recognition
100%
EAP name: Danie Krynauw
EAP Qualifications: Master in Environmental Management (Dissertation pending) Masters in Urban and Regional Planning BA in Geography and Sociology
Professional affiliation/registration:
International Association of Impact Assessment South Africa (IAIAsa)
Physical address: 51 Willie du Plessis Fichardtpark Bloemfontein
Postal address: 51 Willie du Plessis Fichardtpark Bloemfontein
Postal code: 9301 Cell: 082 435 2108
Telephone: - Fax: -
E-mail: [email protected]
The appointed EAP must meet the requirements of Regulation 13 of GN R982 of 04 December 2014, as amended.
79
2. DECLARATION BY THE EAP
I, Danie Krynauw , declare that –
I act as the independent environmental assessment practitioner in this application;
I have expertise in conducting environmental impact assessments, including knowledge of the Act, Regulations and
any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;
I will comply with the Act, Regulations and all other applicable legislation;
I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that
are not favourable to the applicant;
I will take into account, to the extent possible, the matters listed in Regulation 13 of the Regulations when preparing the
application and any report relating to the application;
I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the Competent Authority all material information in my possession that
reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the
Competent Authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to
the Competent Authority, unless access to that information is protected by law, in which case it will be indicated that
such information exists and will be provided to the Competent Authority;
I will perform all obligations as expected from an environmental assessment practitioner in terms of the Regulations;
and
I am aware of what constitutes an offence in terms of Regulation 48 and that a person convicted of an offence in terms
of Regulation 48(1) is liable to the penalties as contemplated in Section 49B of the Act.
80
Disclosure of Vested Interest (delete whichever is not applicable)
I do not have and will not have any vested interest (either business, financial, personal or other) in the
proposed activity proceeding other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the Regulations;
I have a vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding, such vested interest being:
Danie Krynauw
Signature of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner:
Green-Box Consulting
Name of Company:
Date:
81
Appendix: B
LOCALITY MAP
82
83
Appendix: C
SITE PHOTOS
84
Photo 1: Some areas denuded of vegetation
Photo 2: Typical grazing veld, centre of development area
85
Photo 3: Southern portion planted with eragrostis grass
Photo 4: Small graveyard middle of development site
86
Photo 5: Natural vegetation cover
Photo 6: Some Exotic trees located at the western border, however localised
87
Appendix: D
FACILITY ILLUSTRATION(S)
88
89
Appendix: E
SPECIALIST REPORTS
90
Appendix: F
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
1. Advert placed in newspaper ECHO on 14/12/2018. 2. Two (2) site notices placed, one in town and two along the site access routes; 3. Draft Scoping Report submitted to registered I&APs, and applicable Sector
Departments. 4. Proof of the Draft Scoping Report sent to the I&APs, and applicable Sector
Departments. 5. Comments and Response form from relevant I&APs, and applicable Sector
Departments.
91
ECHO Newspaper Advertisement
92
Advert placed in the ECHO News (Local Newspaper)- 14 December 2018
93
Site Notices Placed
Site Notice 1: Placed on the R50 road which
enters the town of Leandra from the north, the
R50 is situated east of the proposed site-
26°20'46.16"S; 28°54'40.47"E.
Site Notice 2: Placed in front of the Dutch
Reformed Church in Eendracht, west of the
proposed site- 26°22'33.41"S; 28°53'1.68"E.
94
Mixed Residential Establishment- Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP) Database
Name of Department Contact person Address Email Address Phone number
Goven Mbeki Municipality Mr. Nic van der Merwe
Private Bagx1005 Balfour 2410
[email protected] 017-620 6061
Gert Sibande District Municipality
Mr. M.P.P. Nhlabathi
PO Box 24 Carolina 1185
[email protected] 017-8434000
Department Agriculture & Rural Development
Ms. O.G. Xaba Private Bag x9071 Ermelo 2350
[email protected] 017-8192076
Department of Water Affairs Mr. F. Guma Private Bag x11259 Nelspruit 1200
[email protected] 013-7597310
Department of Human Settlements
Mr. G. Sihlangu Private Bag x 11328 Mbombela 1200
[email protected] 081 8425704
Department of Public Works, Roads and Transport
Mr. David Nkambule
Private Bag X11302 Mbombela 1200
[email protected] 013-766 6887
Goven Mbeki Municipality- Planning and Development Department
Mr. Caiphus Ncobizizwe Methula
- [email protected] 017-6206058 / 071 293 7218
Goven Mbeki Municipality- Ward Councillor (Ward 01)
Cllr. L. M. Mbonani
- [email protected] 073 535 4022
Adjacent landowner Mr. Izak de Lange - [email protected] 082 920 8004
Registered Interested and Affected Party
Mr. Lazarus - [email protected] 017-6322939
95
Proof of the Draft Scoping Report sent to the I&APs, and applicable Sector Departments
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
Example of letters Sent to I&APs
108
109
Comments and Response Report- Final Scoping Report
The Draft Scoping Report was e-mailed and posted to stakeholders for
comment/s on Thursday, 25 July 2019, together with a letter explaining the
project and the timeframe in which comments can be directed to the EAP. It must
be noted because of corrupted / sending errors experienced on various I&AP’s
email addresses some Draft Scoping Reports were both emailed as well as posted
to the relevant I&AP’s
The Draft Scoping Report was sent to the following stakeholders (sector
departments):
Goven Mbeki Local Municipality;
Gert Sibande District Municipality;
Department Agriculture & Rural Development;
Department of Water Affairs;
Department of Human Settlements;
Department of Public Works, Roads and Transport;
Goven Mbeki Municipality- Planning and Development Department.
The Draft Scoping Report was also sent to Goven Mbeki Local Municipality- Ward
Councillor (Ward 01)- Cllr. L. M. Mbonani.
In addition, the Draft Scoping Report was also e-mailed to a number of I&APs
who registered during the initial phase one stakeholder engagement process:
Mr. Izak de Lange;
Mr. Lazarus.
110
Comments and Response Table
Authority or Stakeholder Comment/s Received Response given by EAP
Goven Mbeki Local Municipality No Comment Received No Response Given
Gert Sibande District Municipality No Comment Received No Response Given
Department Agriculture & Rural Development No Comment Received No Response Given
Department of Water Affairs No Comment Received No Response Given
Department of Human Settlements No Comment Received No Response Given
Department of Public Works, Roads and Transport No Comment Received No Response Given
Goven Mbeki Municipality- Planning and
Development Department
No Comment Received No Response Given
Goven Mbeki Municipality- Ward Councillor (Ward
01)
No Comment Received No Response Given
Mr. Izak de Lange- Adjacent landowner No Comment Received No Response Given
Mr. Lazarus- Registered Interested and Affected
Party
No Comment Received No Response Given
111
Appendix: G
LIST OF APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
112
ISSUE PRIMARY LEGISLATION
General Duty of Care and
remediation of environmental
damage
Constitution of South Africa Act No 108 of 1996.
National Environmental Management Act (No.107 of
1998)
Environment Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989) (ECA)
Water related issues National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998)
Water Services Act (No. 108 of 1997)
Soil erosion Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (No. 43 of
1983)
Air quality issues National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (No.
39 of 2004)
Noise issues Environment Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989.) (ECA)
Occupational Health and Safety Act (No. 85 of 2003)
(OHSA)
Waste disposal National Environmental Management: Waste
Management Act (No. 59 of 2008) (NEM:WA)
Cultural heritage and historical
issues
National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999) (NHRA)
Ecosystems and wildlife National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act
(No. 10 of 2004)
National Forests Act (No. 84 of 1998)
National Environmental Management: Protected Areas
Act (No. 57 of 2003)
Alien Invasive Species Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (No. 43 of
1983) (CARA)
National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act
(No. 10 of 2004) (NEM:BA)
Fertilizers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock
Remedies Act (No. 36 of 1947) (FFFARSRA)
Public health related issues National Health Act (No. 61 of 2003) (NHA)
Occupational Health and Safety Act (No. 85 of 1993)
(OHSA)
Public Nuisance National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of
1998) (NEMA)
Common-Law Controls
Hazardous substances Environment Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989) (ECA)
Hazardous Substances Act (No. 15 of 1973)
Borrow areas Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Act (No.
28 of 2002) (MPRDA)
Mine Health and Safety Act (No. 29 of 1996) (MHSA)
Blasting Explosives Act (No. 15 of 2003)
Occupational Health and Safety Act (No. 85 of 2003)
(OHSA)
Mine Health and Safety Act (No. 29 of 1996) (MHSA)
Traffic related issues Road Traffic Act (No. 93 of 1996) (RTA)
National Road Traffic Regulations 2000
Note: This list is not exhaustive
113