ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) FOR THE PROPOSED NATIONAL ROAD 3: KEEVERSFONTEIN TO WARDEN (De Beers Pass Section) EIA: 12/12/20/1992

Transcription

1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) FOR THE PROPOSED NATIONAL ROAD 3: KEEVERSFONTEIN TO WARDEN (De Beers Pass Section) EIA: 12/12/20/1992 RECORD OF MEETING WITH DE BEERS PASS LANDOWNERS OAKLANDS COUNTRY LODGE, VAN REENEN

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ATTENDANCE ATTENDANCE LANDOWNERS ATTENDANCE SANRAL ATTENDANCE N3 TOLL CONCESSION (PTY) LTD (N3TC) ATTENDANCE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING TEAM (EIA TEAM) WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND MEETING OBJECTIVES BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT AND PRESENTATION DISCUSSION WAY FORWARD CLOSING REMARKS... 7 APPENDIX A: ATTENDANCE REGISTER... 8

3 1. ATTENDANCE 1.1. Attendance Landowners Name Mr Flip Geel Mr Martiens Jansen Mr Flip de Jager Mr Johan Jansen Mrs Margaret Hobbs Mr Graham Hobbs Mr Roland Henderson Representing (Property/Farm Details) Wapad Trust Wapad and Pitchers Rest Farms Phillipus de Jager Trust Boschfontein and Wapad Tandjiesberg Trust Tandjiesberg Trust Oupaskraal and Strathmorn Farms 1.2 Attendance SANRAL Name Mr Ron Harmse Mr Thabiso Malahleha Position/Role Project Manager Project Manager 1.3 Attendance N3 Toll Concession (Pty) Ltd (N3TC) Name Position/Role Mr Douglas Judd Technical Manager 1.4 Attendance Environmental Consulting Team (EIA Team) Name Organisation Role in the project Mr Alan Cave Cave Klapwijk and Associates Environmental Assessment Practitioner Mrs Terry Calmeyer ILISO Consulting Environmental Assessment Practitioner Ms Bongi Shinga ACER Public Participation Consultant 2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr Alan Cave, Cave Klapwijk and Associates (CKA), introduced himself and the study team and welcomed all landowners to the meeting. He further thanked all landowners for making time to attend the meeting. 3. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND MEETING OBJECTIVES As a way of introduction, Mr Cave highlighted the following key points as a background to the meeting: The meeting provides landowners information on the progress of the project and the possible deviations that are being investigated. The proposed deviations are communicated to the directly affected landowners prior to informing the general public in order to provide an opportunity for discussion.

4 The meeting forms part of the EIA being done for the proposed N3 Keeversfontein to Warden (De Beers Pass section), which commenced in August The N3TC proposes to design, construct, operate and maintain the De Beers Pass Route - or one of two alternative alignments (Alternative A or Alternative C) - on the N3 between Keeversfontein (Tugela Toll Plaza), in KwaZulu-Natal and Warden in the Free State. 4. BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT AND PRESENTATION Mr Ron Harmse, Project Manager representing SANRAL presented the progress on the investigations as they relate to the alternative route alignments. Using a map, Mr Harmse presented issues associated with the current DBPR alignment and shared proposed mitigation deviations to avoid sensitive areas and/or previously identified impacts. 5. DISCUSSION Comments raised and discussed following Mr Harmse s presentation are captured below: No Comment and Response/Discussion Point 1 Mr Roland Henderson asked if it would be possible for landowners to receive drawings of the proposed deviations to enable them to provide comments on how they could be impacted. Mr Douglas Judd, N3TC, informed landowners that they will need to fly the route to get updated aerial photography and determine the alignment that is feasible. He also requested permission from landowners to access their properties for alignment survey purposes and for the specialists investigations. Landowners were made aware that this exercise of producing drawings will take a considerable time to complete. It was agreed that project team will prepare drawings showing the proposed mitigation deviations as related to directly affected landowners and made available upon completion. 2 It was questioned why Alternative B up the escarpment has not been considered any further and if there are opportunities of reconsidering it as part of the assessment. Mr Cave explained that the key reasons for scoping out Alternative B up the escarpment were as follows: Alternative B would have fragmented a number of large farms affecting their economic viability. The analysis of the wetlands revealed that wetlands on Alternative B were as sensitive as the DBPR. 3 Mrs Margaret Hobbs asked if SANRAL is considering the DBPR route and the associated deviations seriously. Mr Harmse responded to the affirmative, i.e. SANRAL is seriously considering DBPR alternative in addition to other alternatives already identified as part of the EIA. 4 Mr Roland Henderson enquired about the timeline of the investigations. Based on latest developments and the investigations required for the mitigation deviations,

5 No Comment and Response/Discussion Point the draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report will be available for public review during the 2 nd half of the year, Mr Harmse also added that a Resource Economics Study has also been commissioned which will be focussing on the impacted wetlands and associated impacts and taking into account the recommendations from the previous EIA. The findings on the Resource Economics will be incorporated into the draft EIA Report. 5 Landowners also questioned the reasons for the proposed National Road 3 (N3). Mr Harmse explained that N3 is a critical corridor in South Africa as it connects the heartland of the country (Gauteng Province) with its principal port (Durban). National roads are provided primarily for economic reasons and are strategic national economic assets which are vital to the ability of the country to support and improve economic growth, industrial development and exports. He further explained that national road networks are primarily designed to facilitate the service of safe and efficient movement of people and goods over medium to long distances between economic centres. Public and commercial heavy vehicles use the national road network to satisfy the needs and requirements of the economy. It is therefore desirable for the entire route to comply with the National Road standard of a design speed of 120km/h. Therefore, the section of new road between Keeversfontein and Warden needs to comply with the requirements of a design speed of 120km/h. 6 Mrs Margaret Hobbs questioned why the government is not considering a development of another harbour, as an example, in Richards Bay. It was explained that there are few bonded containers which travel via road. Richards Bay does not have facilities to deal with additional freight. 7 It was also questioned as to why the costs for the DBPR are less compared to other alternatives. Construction and maintenance costs are related to the distance and grades. As an example, in order to accommodate grades in (which do not exceed 5%), significant cuts and fills will be necessary on Alternative C. These cuts and fills will also be necessary for Alternative A. DBPR is the most economical route but there is a need to assess the value of the impact on the environmental resources. 8 Mrs Margaret Hobbs stated that South Africa is dependent on water. She is however concerned that there is a large dam site on the Wilge River and that the proposed DBPR will impact on a potential dam site that could be required in future. She queried if the study team has considered this possibility. The issue on potential dam site was noted for further investigation. Subsequent to the meeting, DWA confirmed that there are no dam sites which are envisaged in the Wilge River. 9 Mr Roland Henderson asked where do the Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) come from. He also requested access to economic information in terms of the national interest. The NPV and IRR values come from the economic studies.

6 No Comment and Response/Discussion Point 10 Mrs Hobbs asked how SANRAL will deal with District Roads and bridges. In order for the new road to comply with the requirements for a design speed of 120km/h: SANRAL will build bridges. At-grade intersections are not permitted. The DBPR will have interchanges. 11 Mr Graham Hobbs enquired about the Collings Pass District Road. SANRAL will build bridges to cross roads. There is no intention to close them. Mr Judd added that cross access will be maintained. Written requests for interchanges at some district roads will be considered. 12 Is extending the existing N3 no longer under consideration? The extension of the existing N3 is one of the alternatives that are being investigated a part of the EIA. Mr Harmse added that any route that connects back to the existing N3 will be more expensive compared to the DBPR. Alternative A requires a viaduct/long bridge which makes it expensive. 13 Mr Henderson requested that stakeholders are given an opportunity to also review the numbers that will be presented in the economic study so that they can examine material and provide their comments. He was concerned that information will be made available to stakeholders during the final stages when they are unable to provide their inputs or comments. All specialist findings will be used to produce an integrated report referred to as draft EIA Report. Copies of specialist studies will also be made available at the time of releasing the draft EIA Report. All interested and affected parties will be advised of the availability of these reports and of the opportunity to review them. 14 What is the main reason for deviating around Alex Pan? Mr Cave explained that Alex Pan is an Important Bird Area, with red data bird species, e.g. blue cranes, crowned crane, etc. and must be avoided. Mrs Margaret and Graham Hobbs explained that cranes follow food, e.g. high agricultural grain fields and weather patterns. As a result cranes will subsequently move from Alex Pan to other areas depending on food source and weather patterns. Mr Cave further explained that it is not only one pan but a series of pans which form a corridor in the area. 15 A sentiment was expressed that farmers present at the meeting are totally opposed to the De Beers Pass Route. 16 Mrs Margaret Hobbs requested an explanation of the legal requirement to build DBPR. Mr Harmse explained that there are a number of conditions in the 1999 ROD that need to be addressed in terms of avoidance and mitigation. 17 Mrs Margaret Hobbs questioned how SANRAL is planning to deal with the land that was

7 No Comment and Response/Discussion Point expropriated in 1996 in the eventuality that DBPR alignment/deviations are accepted. It was explained that there is a set of rules and procedures that are applied by SANRAL in dealing with the land previously acquired and no longer required. Landowners further requested access to a copy of these rules and procedures. It was confirmed that the policy of disposal of land will be made available to the DBPR landowners. 18 Mr Graham Hobbs indicated that DBPR was only proclaimed in 1989, which was after the promulgation of the Environmental Conservation Act. He then questioned why SANRAL continued with the expropriation of properties knowing well that they still required environmental authorisation. His understanding is that expropriation is done for a definite reason. Mr Cave explained that the Department of Environmental Affairs issued a Record of Decision (ROD) which said rehabilitation and repair of the existing N3 could go ahead but there were conditions attached to the approval. 19 Mrs Hobbs questioned how SANRAL is planning to address issues of the past because they are conditions of the ROD. Mr Harmse indicated that SANRAL will not be dealing with issues of the past. 20 Mr Flip de Jager referred to Mr Hobbs issue and stated that landowners who lost their land for the road reserve have the right to get their land back. Mr Harmse indicated that to address the issue, the landowner will need to go to court. 21 Landowners requested information on the cost of deviations and when the costs will be incorporated into the study. 22 It was also mentioned that the squatters in Uitvlugt area are causing problems and stock theft is affecting landowners negatively in the area. 23 Mrs Margaret Hobbs asked about the specialists that will be visiting the farms. It was explained that only the Resource Economics specialists will be visiting the farms of potentially affected landowners. In this regard, requests for permission to access properties will be sought from the relevant landowners. 24 Mrs Margaret Hobbs suggested that SANRAL and landowners should be negotiating how expropriation will take place to avoid problems later in the process. 25 Mr Roland Henderson asked when landowners will have an opportunity to raise specific issues related to their properties. One-on-one interactions will be arranged when the drawings are complete and Ms Shinga (ACER) will communicate the dates to landowners. 26 Mr Roland Henderson asked if it will be possible for landowners to interact with the resource economics team. Mr Cave indicated that information of potentially affected landowners will be shared with the specialists. 27 Mr Flip Geel requested information on property that is allegedly going to be sold or given to the Department of Land Affairs. 6. WAY FORWARD It was agreed that the project team will prepare drawings showing the proposed mitigation deviations as related to directly affected landowners and made available upon completion.

8 Thereafter, one-on-one meetings will be arranged with affected landowners to provide an opportunity to discuss the mitigation deviations. 7. CLOSING REMARKS Mr Cave thanked everyone for their attendance and input and then closed the meeting.

9 APPENDIX A: ATTENDANCE REGISTER