final basic assessment report - boland enviro wilgen bar/de_wilgen_final_bar... · 2013-09-11 ·...

FINAL Basic Assessment Report in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998)

and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations of 2010

CLEARING OF VIRGIN LAND FOR VINEYARD DEVELOPMENT ON

DE WILGEN, FARM 91 PORTION 10, ROBERTSON

Applicant: De Wilgen Boere CC Date: September 2013

Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning Ref No.: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13

Consultants: Boland Environmental Consultants CC

PO Box 250, Worcester, 6849

Tel 023 347 0336 Fax 023 347 5336

[email protected]

FINAL BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT – CLEARING OF VIRGIN LAND FOR VINEYARD DEVELOPMENT ON DE WILGEN, FARM 91, PORTION 10, ROBERTSON.

DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE CONTENT OF THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: ................. 6 SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 9

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 9

2. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY ......................................................................................... 11

3. SITE ACCESS ............................................................................................................................ 11

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN

AND THE LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY ............................................ 12

5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS .............................................................................................................. 13

SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ......................................................... 14 1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE ......................................................................................................... 14

2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE ..................................................................................................... 14

3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE ............................... 15

4. SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................................... 16

5. BIODIVERSITY .......................................................................................................................... 17

6. LAND USE OF THE SITE .......................................................................................................... 18

7. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA ............................................................ 19

8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ................................................................................................. 20

9. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS ............................................................................... 21

10. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES ........................................... 22

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .............................................................................................. 24 SECTION D: NEED AND DESIRABILITY ............................................................................................ 27 SECTION E: ALTERNATIVES .............................................................................................................. 35 SECTION F: IMPACT ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES ........................................................................................................................................... 39

(a) Geographical and physical aspects: ............................................................................................. 39

(b) Biological aspects: ........................................................................................................................ 39

(c) Socio-Economic aspects: .............................................................................................................. 40

(d) Cultural and historic aspects: ........................................................................................................ 40

2. WASTE AND EMISSIONS ......................................................................................................... 40

3. WATER USE .............................................................................................................................. 41

4. POWER SUPPLY ....................................................................................................................... 42

5. ENERGY EFFICIENCY .............................................................................................................. 42

6. DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS PRIOR TO AND

AFTER MITIGATION .......................................................................................................................... 43

6.1 Impacts that may result from the planning, design and Construction Phase .......................... 43

6.2 Impacts that may result from the Operational Phase .............................................................. 55

6.3 Impacts that may result from the Decommissioning Phase .................................................... 63

6.4 Any other impacts .................................................................................................................... 63

7. SPECIALIST INPUTS/STUDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 64

8. IMPACT SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 66

9. OTHER MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES ............................. 68

SECTION G: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES AND CRITERIA, GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE, UNDERLAYING ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES ................................................................. 69 SECTION H: RECOMMENDATION OF THE EAP ............................................................................... 76 SECTION I: APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 78


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 3

FIGURES

Figure 1: Google Earth map (imagery date 2012) indicating the location of De Wilgen, Farm 91/10 Robertson (yellow boundary) in relation to the surrounding landscape, including the proposed (red polygon) and alternative (orange polygon) sites in the northern section of the farm. Figure 2: Extract from the 1:250 000 Geological Series map 3319 showing the geological formations of the proposed site (green boundaries) on De Wilgen, Farm 91/10, Robertson (white boundaries).

TABLES

Table 1: Impact summary tables

Table 2: BolandEnviro Environmental Impact Assessment Rating System Used to Classify Impacts.

APPENDICES

Appendix Tick the box if Appendix is attached

Appendix A: Locality map ��

Appendix B: Site plan(s) ��

Appendix C: Photographs ��

Appendix D: Biodiversity overlay map ��

Appendix E: Permit(s) / license(s) from any other organ of state including service letters from the municipality

��

Appendix F:

Public participation information: including a copy of the register of interested and affected parties, the comments and responses report, proof of notices, advertisements and any other public participation information as required in Section C above.

��

Appendix G: Specialist Report(s) ��

Appendix H : Environmental Management Programme ��

Appendix I: Curriculum vitae ��

Appendix J: Additional information related to listed waste management activities (if

applicable) N/A


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 4

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

(AUGUST 2010)

Basic Assessment Report in terms of the NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations, 2010

AUGUST 2010

Kindly note that:

1. This Basic Assessment Report is the standard report required by DEA&DP in terms of the EIA Regulations, 2010 and must be

completed for all Basic Assessment applications. 2. This report must be used in all instances for Basic Assessment applications for an environmental authorisation in terms of the

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as amended, and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010, and/or a waste management licence in terms of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) (NEM: WA), and/or an atmospheric emission licence in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004) (NEM: AQA).

3. This report is current as of 2 August 2010. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / EAP to ascertain whether subsequent

versions of the report have been published or produced by the competent authority.

4. The required information must be typed within the spaces provided in the report. The sizes of the spaces provided are not necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. It is in the form of a table that will expand as each space is filled with typing.

5. Incomplete reports will be rejected. A rejected report may be amended and resubmitted. 6. The use of “not applicable” in the report must be done with circumspection. Where it is used in respect of material

information that is required by the Department for assessing the application, this may result in the rejection of the report as provided for in the regulations.

7. While the different sections of the report only provide space for provision of information related to one alternative, if more

than one feasible and reasonable alternative is considered, the relevant section must be copied and completed for each alternative.

8. Unless protected by law all information contained in, and attached to this report, will become public information on

receipt by the competent authority. If information is not submitted with this report due to such information being protected by law, the applicant and/or EAP must declare such non-disclosure and provide the reasons for the belief that the information is protected.

9. This report must be submitted to the Department at the postal address given below or by delivery thereof to the Registry

Office of the Department. No faxed or e-mailed reports will be accepted. Please note that for waste management licence applications, this report must be submitted for the attention of the Department’s Waste Management Directorate (tel: 021-483-2756 and fax: 021-483-4425) at the same postal address as the Cape Town Office Region A.

10. Unless indicated otherwise, two electronic copies (CD/DVD) and three hard copies of this report must be submitted to the

Department.

DEPARTMENTAL DETAILS

CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION A

(Cape Winelands, City of Cape Town:

Tygerberg and Oostenberg

Administrations)

CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION B

(West Coast, Overberg, City of Cape Town:

Helderberg, South Peninsula, Cape Town

and Blaauwberg Administrations

GEORGE OFFICE

(Eden and Central Karoo)

Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning

Attention: Directorate: Integrated

Environmental Management (Region

A2)

Private Bag X 9086

Cape Town,

8000

Registry Office

1st Floor Utilitas Building

1 Dorp Street,

Cape Town

Queries should be directed to the

Directorate: Integrated Environmental

Management (Region A2) at:

Tel: (021) 483-4793 Fax: (021) 483-3633

Department of Environmental Affairs and

Development Planning


Environmental Management (Region B)

Private Bag X 9086

Cape Town,

8000

Registry Office

1st Floor Utilitas Building

1 Dorp Street,

Cape Town



Management (Region B) at:

Tel: (021) 483-4094 Fax: (021) 483-4372

Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning


Environmental Management (Region

A1)

Private Bag X 6509

George,

6530

Registry Office

4th Floor, York Park Building

93 York Street

George



Management (Region A1) at:

Tel: (044) 805 8600 Fax: (044) 874-2423


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 5

View the Department’s website at http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp for the latest version of this document.

DEPARTMENTAL REFERENCE NUMBER(S) File reference number (EIA): DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13

File reference number (Waste): N/A

File reference number (Other): N/A

PROJECT TITLE

Clearing of virgin land for vineyard development on De Wilgen, Farm 91, Portion 10, Robertson.

DETAILS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP)

Environmental Assessment

Practitioner (EAP): Boland Environmental Consultants CC (BolandEnviro CC)

Contact person: Project Practitioners: Ms Marizanne Vos / Ms Stephnie Kot

Director: Mr Nik Wullschleger

Postal address: PO Box 250

Worcester Postal code:

6849

Telephone: (023) 347 0336 Cell: 082 554 2910

E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (023) 347 5336

EAP Qualifications

Ms Marizanne Vos (Project Practitioner):

• BTech Nature Conservation (NMMU)

• M.E.M Environmental Management (UFS)

Mr Nik Wullschleger (Director):

• B.Sc. (UCT)

• B.Sc Hons Geology (UCT)

• Registered Professional Natural Scientist (Pri.Sci.Nat) Reg No. 400010/98

EAP Registrations/Associations

Ms Marizanne Vos (Project Practitioner):

• SAWMA

Mr Nik Wullschleger (Director):

• Pri.Sci.Nat (Reg No. 400010/98)

• IAIAsa

Details of the EAP’s expertise to carry out Basic Assessment procedures

Project Practitioner: Ms Marizanne Vos

• Qualifications: BTech Nature Conservation (NMMU), M.E.M Environmental Management (UFS)

• EAP Expertise: 5 years experience in facilitation of EIA processes

Company Director: Mr Nik Wullschleger

• Qualifications: B.Sc. Climate and Ocean Science (UCT), B.Sc Hons Geology (UCT)

• Registered as a Professional Natural Scientist (Pr.Sci.Nat.), with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP), in 1998 (Reg no. 400010/98).

• EAP Expertise: 7 years experience in facilitation of EIA processes, 15 years experience as natural resource management consultant.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE CONTENT OF THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT:

Application: This is an application for Environmental Authorization for the clearing of natural vegetation (virgin land) for the cultivation of 40 ha vineyards on De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson. The listed activities that will be triggered by the proposed development, and which are being applied for in this Basic Assessment Report are:

• GN No. 546 – Activity 13

• GN No. 546 – Activity 14 Property details and rationale for the development: De Wilgen (Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson, hereafter referred to as “the Property”) is located approximately 15km south-west of Robertson, within the Robertson Wine Valley, in the Western Cape of South Africa. The Property is 320 ha in extent, of which 180 ha is already under cultivation (vineyards). Two earth-dams, several homesteads, a shed, and workers housing can also be found on the property. The northern and south-eastern sections of the property are currently undeveloped, and consist of natural vegetation of varying condition. The proposed development is an extension of the existing farming operation on De Wilgen, and will serve to increase the annual grape production on the property. The development will increase the agricultural potential and economic value of the property, and will increase the economic viability of the farming operation as a whole, which will help to sustain current (and future) employment opportunities on De Wilgen. Development Site: The proposed development site is ±40 ha in extent, located in the northern section of De Wilgen (Farm 91/10), Robertson. The area that has been earmarked for cultivation is currently untransformed natural veld, in relatively good condition. No buildings are present on the proposed development site. Receiving Environment: De Wilgen is located within the rural area of the Robertson Wine Valley, approximately 15 km south-west of Robertson. The proposed development is in keeping with the land-use of the surrounding area, which is largely agriculture-related (vineyards, orchards, farm dams, workers’ housing, homesteads etc.). Large natural (untransformed) areas can be found to the east and south of the Property, and the proposed development will not fragment these natural areas. The development will result in the loss of 40 ha natural vegetation. The site furthermore falls within a small isolated terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) on the Property, identified to meet vegetation-type thresholds. The affected CBA is relatively small (±55 ha) and isolated in the landscape, and does not form any direct linkages with nearby natural areas or other CBAs. It is believed that this area was designated as a CBA based on the SA Vegetation Map of South Africa (2006), which identified the entire site as Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which was listed as Endangered at the time the CBA maps were complied. Ground-truthing in 2012 by a botanical specialist, however, confirmed that the site is ecotonal and only the southern section of the CBA consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (now listed as Vulnerable according to the latest 2011 List of Threatened Ecosystems). The remainder of the CBA consists of Robertson Gannabos Thicket (listed as Least Threatened under the NSBA 2009 status). The vegetation of the section of CBA earmarked for development is made up of ±14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and ±26 ha Robertson Gannabos Thicket. Note that the Botanical Report indicates that 12 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld will be transformed

by the proposed development. The size has, however, increased to 14 ha due to slight changes to the

proposed layout since the botanical field visit was conducted.

Breede Alluvium Renosterveld was considered endangered at the time of mapping the South African vegetation map (Mucina and Rutherford 2006). The latest National List of Threatened Ecosystems gazetted in 2011, however, lists this vegetation type as Vulnerable. According to CapeNature it does however, contain a large number of rare plant species and they are of the opinion that its status should have remained


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 7

Endangered. The proposed alternative layouts (Section E) allow for a natural corridor along the southern and north-eastern boundaries of the property to help create and maintain connections to adjacent natural areas and to hopefully re-establish connections to nearby CBAs in the future. Consideration of alternatives: Three layout alternatives have been considered, for the purpose of this application: 1. Alternative A1 (Applicant’s preferred alternative)

• Entails the clearing of 40 ha natural vegetation in the north of the property, adjacent to the existing water and electricity supply points on the property.

• Approximately 36 ha of a terrestrial CBA (identified for vegetation threshold purposes) will be transformed.

• Approximately 14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld will be lost (listed as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011) if alternative A1 is authorised.

• No additional service infrastructure (roads/ powerlines/ pipelines) need to be built.

• The potential grave site found by the archaeological specialist is excluded from this alternative.

• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern boundary of the vineyard block. 2. Alternative A2


• Approximately 29.5 ha of a terrestrial CBA will be transformed of which ±7.5 ha consist of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (listed as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011).

• This layout excludes a pocket of terrestrial CBA that consists of relatively intact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, and in turn includes a pocket of CBA to the west of the proposed layout that is highly disturbed (currently used as a dumping site).

• The site is close to an existing water-pipe and electricity supply point on the property and NO additional service infrastructure (roads/ powerlines/ pipelines) will need to be built.


• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern boundary of the vineyard block. Alternative A2 aims to reduce the impact on the CBA and, and specifically the pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (Vulnerable at a National level) that occurs on the property. 3. Alternative A3 (No-Go)

• This alternative implies that the status quo remains, and that no development takes place

• No natural vegetation will be cleared and no cultivation of vineyards will occur There are no feasible activity, property or process alternatives for this application. Significant impacts: The most significant negative impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development will be the loss of Vulnerable vegetation-type (Breede Alluvium Renosterveld), and the associated loss of habitat and the localized loss of indigenous plant species. The Applicant’s preferred layout (Alternative A1) would transform 36 ha of CBA of which 14 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. The alternative option (A2) would transform approximately 29.5 ha CBA of which 7.5 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. Alternative A2 is more environmentally friendly since it excludes a pocket of intact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and includes a highly disturbed section west of the development site (currently used as a dumping site for rocks, etc.). These negative impacts are of medium significance before and after the application of suitable mitigation measures. All other impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development are of Medium-Low or Low impact prior to mitigation. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures should reduce the significance of most negative impacts to Low. The operational phase of the development will have only limited negative impacts of Low or Medium-low significance. Stormwater and drainage problems were specifically identified as a potential problem during the


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 8

commenting periods, but with the proposed installation of a subsurface drainage system designed by the Department of Agriculture, the significance of impact is scored as Low. The proposed development will also generate positive socio-economic impacts during both the construction and operational phases. These positive impacts include the generation of additional employment opportunities, a contribution to local economic development, and an increase in the agricultural potential and economic viability of De Wilgen, which will help to sustain current (and future) employment opportunities. Specialist studies: Specialist studies conducted on the proposed development site include an Agricultural Soil Potential Study, a Botanical Impact Assessment as well as a Heritage Impact Assessment that consists of an Archaeological Impact Assessment (refer to Appendix G). The Department of Agriculture has also surveyed the site and designed a subsurface drainage system to prevent drainage problems that might be brought about by the proposed block of vineyard. Recommendations and mitigation measures proposed by the specialists were incorporated into the Final BAR and Environmental Management Programme. Public Participation Process: The draft Basic Assessment Report was released for a 40-day public commenting period (12 February – 25 March 2013). A copy of the draft report was circulated to all potential Interested and Affected parties, Commenting Authorities as well as the Competent Authority (DEA&DP). All comments received were addressed and incorporated into the final report which was released for a final 21-day commenting period (9 September 2013) before being submitted to the DEA&DP for assessment. Refer to Appendix F for a more detailed description of the PPP.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 9

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

(a) Is the project a new development? YES NO �

(b) Provide a detailed description of the development project and associated infrastructure.

Mr Danie De Wet, hereafter referred to as “the Applicant”, intends to extend the vineyard footprint on his Farm,

De Wilgen (Farm 91, Portion 10, Robertson - hereafter referred to as “the Property”) by approximately 40

hectares (ha). This will entail the clearing of 40 ha natural vegetation. The Property is 320 ha in extent, and

180 ha of the Property are already under cultivation. Existing roads and infrastructure will be utilized by the

proposed development (preferred Alternative A1).

(c) List all the activities assessed during the Basic Assessment process:

GN No. R. 544

Activity No(s):

Describe the relevant Basic Assessment

Activity(ies) in writing as per Listing Notice 1

(GN No. R. 544)

Describe the portion of the development as per the

project description that relates to the applicable listed

activity.

Not Applicable

GN No. R. 546

Activity No(s):

Describe the relevant Basic Assessment

Activity(ies) in writing as per Listing Notice 3

(GN No. R. 546)



activity.

13

The clearance of an area of 1 hectare or more of vegetation where 75% or more of the vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation. (a) Critical biodiversity areas and ecological support areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the competent authority.

The proposed development would entail the clearing of approximately 40 ha of vegetation where 75% of the vegetation cover constitutes indigenous vegetation within a terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA), identified by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project.

14

The clearance of an area of 5 hectares or more of vegetation where 75% or more of the vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation, (a) In Western Cape: All areas outside urban areas.

The proposed development would entail the clearing of approximately 40 ha of vegetation where 75% of the vegetation cover constitutes indigenous vegetation.

Please note that GNR 546 No. 12 “The clearance of an area of 300 square metres or more of vegetation where 75% or more of the vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation.

(a) Within any critically endangered or endangered ecosystem listed in terms of section 52 of the NEMBA or prior to the publication of such a list, within an area that has been identified as critically endangered in the National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment 2004;”

was considered, however, this activity will NOT be triggered.

According to the Vegetation Map of South Africa (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006) the proposed 40 ha site consists

of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. According to the more recent C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 10

Project, the site consists of Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation. The Botanical field visit confirmed that

approximately 12 ha of the proposed development site consist of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld vegetation,

while the remainder of the site is Robertson Gannabos Thicket.

Note that the Botanical Report indicates that 12 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld will be transformed

by the proposed development. The size has, however, increased to 14 ha due to slight changes to the

proposed layout.

Breede Alluvium Renosterveld was considered Endangered by the National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

(NSBA) 2004. This vegetation type is now listed as Vulnerable in the NEMBA National List of Threatened

Ecosystems (National Biodiversity Assessment 2011) which supersedes the NSBA 2004.

No critically endangered or endangered ecosystems will be affected by the proposed development and Activity 12 of GNR 546 is thus not triggered.

If the application is also for activities as per Listing Notice 2 and permission was granted to subject the application to Basic

Assessment, also indicate the applicable Listing Notice 2 activities:

GN No. R. 545

Activity No(s):

If permission was granted in terms of Regulation 20,

describe the relevant Scoping and EIA Activity(ies)

in writing as per Listing Notice 2 (GN No. R. 545)



activity.

Not Applicable

Waste management activities in terms of the NEM: WA (Government Gazette No. 32368):

GN No. 718 - Category A

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant Category A waste management activity in writing.

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Please note: If any waste management activities are applicable, the Listed Waste Management Activities Additional

Information Annexure must be completed and attached to this Basic Assessment Report as Appendix I.

If the application is also for waste management activities as per Category B and permission was granted to subject the

application to Basic Assessment, also indicate the applicable Category B activities:

GN No. 718 – Category B

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant Category B waste management activity in writing.

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Atmospheric emission activities in terms of the NEM: AQA (Government Gazette No. 33064):

GN No. 248

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant atmospheric emission activity in writing.

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

(d) Please provide details of all components of the proposed project and attach diagrams (e.g. architectural drawings or

perspectives, engineering drawings, process flow charts etc.).

Buildings YES NO �

Provide brief description:

The proposed development does not involve the construction of any new buildings.

Infrastructure (e.g. roads, power and water supply/ storage) YES NO �


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 11


Existing roads and infrastructure will be utilized by the proposed development. The proposed development is located directly adjacent to existing vineyards and the existing water pipeline and electricity supply point on the Property. Power is already supplied to the Property by the Langeberg Municipality. Processing activities (e.g. manufacturing, storage, distribution) YES NO �


No storage or processing will take place on the Property. All farm produce (wine grapes) arising from the proposed vineyard development will be delivered to an existing cellar in Robertson. Storage facilities for raw materials and products (e.g. volume and substances to be stored)

Provide brief description YES NO �

No such storage facilities are required. Storage and treatment facilities for solid waste and effluent generated by the project Yes NO �

Provide brief description

No such facilities are required.

Other activities (e.g. water abstraction activities, crop planting activities) Yes � No

Provide brief description

Vineyards will be established on 40 ha of newly cleared land.

2. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

Size of the property:

(a) Indicate the size of the property (cadastral unit) on which the activity is to be undertaken. 320 ha / 3 200 000 m2

Size of the facility:

(b) Indicate the size of the facility (development area) on which the activity is to be

undertaken. 40 ha / 400 000m

2

Size of the activity:

(c) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity together with its associated infrastructure: 40 ha / 400 000m2

(d) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity: 40 ha / 400 000m2

(e) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the associated infrastructure: 0 m2

and, for linear activities:

Length of the activity:

(f) Indicate the length of the activity: Not Applicable 0 m

3. SITE ACCESS

(a) Is there an existing access road? Yes � NO

(b) If no, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built? Not Applicable 0 m

(c) Describe the type of access road planned:

Not Applicable

Please Note: indicate the position of the proposed access road on the site plan.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 12

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND THE

LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY

(a) Provide a description of the property on which the activity is to be undertaken and the location of the activity on the

property.

Farm De Wilgen (Farm 91, Portion 10, Robertson) is located in the Langeberg Municipal area, approximately 15 km south-west of Robertson, and 1.5 km south of the Breede River. The Property is 320 ha in extent, with 180 ha of the Property already developed by agricultural activities (primarily vineyard and fruit tree cultivation). The area identified for the proposed 40 ha vineyard development is located in the undeveloped northern portion of the property, adjacent to existing vineyards and the existing water pipeline and electricity supply point on the property. The Poesjenels River (a tributary of the Breede River) flows along the north-western border of the farm. A non-perennial stream (Matjiesleegte) traverses the Property, directly south of the proposed development site (between the proposed development site and the existing vineyards on the property). Two farm dams are located on the Property, both approximately 1 km south of the proposed development site. Buildings that are present on the Property include workers’ housing (located south-west of the proposed development site), a storage shed (south of the development site) and several homesteads.

(b) Please provide a location map (see below) as Appendix A to this report which shows the location of the property and the

location of the activity on the property; as well as a site map (see below) as Appendix B to this report; and if applicable all

alternative properties and locations.

Locality map:

Appendix

A

The scale of the locality map must be at least 1:50 000. For linear activities of more than 25 kilometres, a

smaller scale e.g. 1:250 000 can be used. The scale must be indicated on the map. The map must indicate

the following:

• an accurate indication of the project site position as well as the positions of the alternative sites, if any;

• road names or numbers of all the major roads as well as the roads that provide access to the site(s)

• a north arrow;

• a legend;

• the prevailing wind direction (during November to April and during May to October); and

• GPS co-ordinates (Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and longitude of the centre

point of the site for each alternative site. The co-ordinates should be in degrees and decimal minutes.

The minutes should have at least three decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The projection that

must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection).

Site Plan:

Appendix

B

Detailed site plan(s) must be prepared for each alternative site or alternative activity. The site plan must

contain or conform to the following:

• The detailed site plan must be at a scale preferably at a scale of 1:500 or at an appropriate scale. The

scale must be indicated on the plan.

• The property boundaries and numbers of all the properties within 50m of the site must be indicated on

the site plan.

• The current land use (not zoning) as well as the land use zoning of each of the adjoining properties must

be indicated on the site plan.

• The position of each element of the application as well as any other structures on the site must be

indicated on the site plan.

• Services, including electricity supply cables (indicate above or underground), water supply pipelines,

boreholes, sewage pipelines, storm water infrastructure and access roads that will form part of the

development must be indicated on the site plan.

• Servitudes indicating the purpose of the servitude must be indicated on the site plan.

• Sensitive environmental elements within 100m of the site must be included on the site plan, including (but

not limited to):

o Rivers.

o Flood lines (i.e. 1:10, 1:50, year and 32 meter set back line from the banks of a river/stream).

o Ridges.

o Cultural and historical features.

o Areas with indigenous vegetation (even if it is degraded or infested with alien species).


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 13

• Whenever the slope of the site exceeds 1:10, then a contour map of the site must be submitted.

(c) For a linear activity, please also provide a description of the route.

Not Applicable

Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and

longitude of the centre point of the site. The co-ordinates

must be in degrees, minutes and seconds. The minutes should

be given to at least three decimals to ensure adequate

accuracy. The projection that must be used in all cases is the

WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection.

Please note: the centre point of the preferred alternative A1 is indicated here.

Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

33o

51‘ 51.62“ 19o 43‘ 49.29“

(d) or:

For linear activities: Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

• Starting point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “

• Middle point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “

• End point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “

Please Note: For linear activities that are longer than 500m, please provide and addendum with co-ordinates taken every 100

meters along the route.

5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS – APPENDIX C

Colour photographs of the site and its surroundings (taken of the site and from the site) with a description of each photograph.

The vantage points from which the photographs were taken must be indicated on the site plan, or locality plan as applicable. If

available, please also provide a recent aerial photograph. Photographs must be attached as Appendix C to this report. It

should be supplemented with additional photographs of relevant features on the site. Date of photographs must be included.

Please note that the above requirements must be duplicated for all alternative sites.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 14

SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

Site/Area Description

For linear activities (pipelines, etc.) as well as activities that cover very large sites, it may be necessary to complete copies of this

section for each part of the site that has a significantly different environment. In such cases please complete copies of Section

B and indicate the area which is covered by each copy No. on the Site Plan.

1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE

Indicate the general gradient of the sites (highlight the appropriate box).

Flat � Flatter than 1:10 � 1:10 – 1:4 Steeper than 1:4

2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE

(a) Indicate the landform(s) that best describes the site (highlight the appropriate box(es).

Ridgeline Plateau Side slope of

hill/mountain

Closed

valley

Open

valley � Plain

Undulating

plain/low

hills

Dune Sea-front

(b) Please provide a description of the location in the landscape.

Farm De Wilgen (Farm 91, Portion 10, Robertson) is located in the Langeberg Municipal area, in a flat open valley approximately 15 km south-west of Robertson, and 1.5 km south of the Breede River (Figure 1). The Poesjenels River (a tributary of the Breede River) flows along the westernmost border of the farm. A non-perennial stream (Matjiesleegte) traverses the Property, directly south of the proposed development site. Sandberg mountain lies approximately 3 km north-east of the proposed development site, while the Kilpberg mountain range lies approximately 4 km south-east of the development site. The land-use in the immediate surrounding landscape is primarily agriculture-related, including cultivated fields (vineyards and orchards), farm dams, irrigation canals, worker housing and farm homesteads. Uncultivated land (i.e. natural veld of varying condition) is also evident in the surrounding area.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 15

Figure 1: Google Earth map (imagery date - January 2012) indicating the location of De Wilgen, Farm 91/10 Robertson (red boundary) in relation to the surrounding landscape, including the proposed/preferred (orange polygon) and alternative (yellow polygon) sites in the northern section of the farm.

3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE

(a) Is the site(s) located on or near any of the following (highlight the appropriate boxes)?

Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) YES NO � UNSURE

Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies) YES NO � UNSURE Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil YES NO � UNSURE Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) YES NO � UNSURE Soils with high clay content YES NO � UNSURE Any other unstable soil or geological feature YES NO � UNSURE An area sensitive to erosion YES NO � UNSURE An area adjacent to or above an aquifer. YES NO � UNSURE An area within 100m of the source of surface water YES � NO UNSURE

(b) If any of the answers to the above are “YES” or “unsure”, specialist input may be requested by the Department.

(Information in respect of the above will often be available at the planning sections of local authorities. Where it exists, the

1:50 000 scale Regional Geotechnical Maps prepared by Geological Survey may also be used).

(c) Please indicate the type of geological formation underlying the site.

Granite Shale Sandstone Quartzite Dolomite Dolorite Other

(describe)

Please provide a description.

Breede River

Poesjenelsriver

Le Chasseur

Farm 91/10,

De Wilgen

Existing

vineyards

Proposed &

alternative sites

Rooiberg

Kleinberg

Breede River


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 16

According to the 1:250 000 Geological Series Map (Issued by the Geological Survey of South Africa, 1988) the proposed development site is covered by light-grey to pale red sandy soil, with windblown sand (Figure 2). These soils are largely the result of weathering of Table Mountain sandstone, and can be found in many major intermontane basin floors and valleys in the Breede Valley area. The shell-bearing dune sand covering the site is of the Holocene Strandveld Formation, which forms part of the Bredasdorp Group. The Bredasdorp group consists of marine to Aeolian sediments of the Pliocene to Late Pleistocene age, with the more recent dune sand of the Holocene Strandveld formation deposited on top of these older formations.

Figure 2: Extract from the 1:250 000 Geological Series map 3319 showing the geological formations of the proposed site (green boundaries) on De Wilgen, Farm 91/10, Robertson (white boundaries).

4. SURFACE WATER

(a) Indicate the surface water present on and or adjacent to the site and alternative sites (highlight the appropriate boxes)?

Perennial River YES NO � UNSURE

Non-Perennial River YES � NO UNSURE

Permanent Wetland YES NO � UNSURE

Seasonal Wetland YES NO � UNSURE

Artificial Wetland YES NO � UNSURE

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland YES NO � UNSURE

(b) Please provide a description.

Light-grey to pale-red sandy soil;

wind-blown sand

Farm 91/10,

De Wilgen

Proposed site


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 17

A non-perennial drainage line (Matjiesleegte) traverses the Property in a roughly westerly direction, approximately 54 m south of the most southern point of the preferred development site (A1), and approximately 50 m south of the most southern point of alternative A2 (Figure 1). The nearby perennial Poesjenels River (a tributary of the Breede River) flows in a north-easterly direction, approximately 1 km west of the proposed development site.

5. BIODIVERSITY

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the biodiversity occurring on the

site and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. To assist with the identification of the biodiversity occurring on site and

the ecosystem status consult http://bgis.sanbi.org or [email protected]. Information is also available on compact disc (cd)

from the Biodiversity-GIS Unit, Ph (021) 799 8698. This information may be updated from time to time and it is the applicant/ EAP’s

responsibility to ensure that the latest version is used. A map of the relevant biodiversity information (including an indication of

the habitat conditions as per (b) below) and must be provided as an overlay map to the property/site plan as Appendix D to

this report.

Highlight the applicable biodiversity planning categories of all areas on site and indicate the reason(s) provided in the

biodiversity plan for the selection of the specific area as part of the specific category).

Systematic Biodiversity Planning Category If CBA or ESA, indicate the reason(s) for its selection in biodiversity

plan

Critical

Biodiversity

Area

(CBA) ��

Ecological

Support

Area (ESA)

Other

Natural

Area (ONA) ��

No Natural

Area

Remaining

(NNR)

The proposed development site falls within a terrestrial CBA, identified to meet vegetation type thresholds. A small section (0.2 ha) of the north-eastern corner of the proposed development site is indicated as an ONA. (See Appendix D – Biodiversity Overlay Maps).

Highlight and describe the habitat condition on site.

Habitat Condition

Percentage of

habitat

condition class

(adding up to

100%)

Description and additional Comments and Observations

(including additional insight into condition, e.g. poor land management

practises, presence of quarries, grazing/harvesting regimes etc).

Natural �� 90 %

The full extent of the preferred development site is currently natural habitat, in good condition. Approximately 10 % of the alternative site is degraded, i.e. being used as a dumping site (tree stumps, rocks, etc.) The southernmost section of the site is comprised of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, while the northern section is Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation (see Botanical Report in Appendix G).

Near Natural

(includes areas with low

to moderate level of alien

invasive plants)

%

Degraded

(includes areas heavily

invaded by alien plants)

10 % Approximately 10 % of the alternative site is degraded, i.e. being used as a dumping site (tree stumps, rocks, etc.).

Transformed

(includes cultivation,

dams, urban, plantation,

roads, etc)

%

(c) Complete the table to indicate:

(i) the type of vegetation, including its ecosystem status, present on the site; and

(ii) whether an aquatic ecosystem is present on site.

Terrestrial Ecosystems Aquatic Ecosystems

Ecosystem threat status as per the

National Environmental Management:

Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004)

Critical Wetland (including rivers,

depressions, channelled

and unchanneled

Estuary Coastline Endangered


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 18

Please provide a description of the vegetation type and/or aquatic ecosystem present on site, including any important

biodiversity features/information identified on site (e.g. threatened species and special habitats)

The southernmost section of the proposed development site comprises of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (± 14 ha), while the northern section supports Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation (± 26 ha), as confirmed in-field by the Botanist. Both vegetation types are in good condition on the proposed development site. (See Appendix G – Botanical Report). Breede Alluvium Renosterveld was listed as endangered in the National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (NSBA) 2004. However, Breede Alluvium Renosterveld is now listed as Vulnerable (VU) in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011 (G 34809, GoN 1002), which supersedes the NSBA 2004. Robertson Gannabos Thicket is listed as Vulnerable at a local level by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project (see C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Systematic Conservation Planning Assessment: Technical Report (Pence 2008)). More than 80 different plant species were identified on site by the botanist, during a botanical site visit on 3 October 2012. No Rare, Endangered or Critically Endangered plants (as per the SANBI Red List of SA Plants) were recorded, however one species listed as Declining – namely Boophone disticha (gifbol) – was recorded on site.

Note: the SA Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006) indicates that the entire area of the proposed development site consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, while the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project indicates that the site is entirely Robertson Gannabos Thicket. However, the botanical site visit confirmed that the vegetation on site is ecotonal, consisting of a combination of the two vegetation types, with the northern section comprising Robertson Gannabos Thicket and the southern section Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. It should also be noted that the pocket (fragment) of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld that occurs on the Property is isolated from other areas of the same vegetation type (with ±14 ha of this vegetation type falling within the proposed development site). Due to this isolation and the lack of any plant species of special concern, this fragment is regarded as having Low conservation value from a botanical perspective (See Appendix G – Botanical Report).

6. LAND USE OF THE SITE

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the land use character of the

area and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies.

Untransformed area �� Low density

residential

Medium density

residential

High density

residential Informal residential

Retail Commercial &

warehousing Light industrial Medium industrial Heavy industrial

Power station Office/consulting

room

Military or police

base/station/compound

Casino/entertainment

complex

Tourism &

Hospitality facility

Open cast mine Underground

mine Spoil heap or slimes dam

Quarry, sand or

borrow pit Dam or reservoir

Hospital/medical center School Tertiary education facility Church Old age home

Sewage treatment plant Train station or

shunting yard Railway line

Major road (4 lanes or

more) Airport

Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station

Landfill or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture River, stream or

wetland

Nature

conservation area

Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site

��

Vulnerable �� wetlands, flats, seeps

pans, and artificial

wetlands) Least

Threatened �� YES NO �� UNSURE YES NO �� YES NO ��


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 19

Other land uses (describe):

(a) Please provide a description.

The proposed development site is currently untransformed, and consists almost entirely of natural vegetation, apart from a degraded area used as a dumping site (for rocks, trees stumps, etc.) in the western-most corner of the proposed alternative layout. A potential gravesite was identified by the Archaeological Specialist during a Heritage Impact Assessment (See Appendix B and G2). It is however excluded from both alternative layouts.

7. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA

(a) Highlight the current land uses and/or prominent features that occur within +/- 500m radius of the site and neighbouring

properties if these are located beyond 500m of the site.

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the land use character of the

area and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies.

Untransformed area �� Low density

residential

Medium density

residential

High density

residential Informal residential

Retail Commercial &

warehousing Light industrial Medium industrial Heavy industrial

Power station Office/consulting

room

Military or police

base/station/compound

Casino/entertainment

complex

Tourism &

Hospitality facility

Open cast mine Underground

mine Spoil heap or slimes dam

Quarry, sand or

borrow pit Dam or reservoir ��

Hospital/medical center School �� Tertiary education facility Church Old age home

Sewage treatment plant Train station or

shunting yard Railway line

Major road (4 lanes or

more) Airport

Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station

Landfill or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture �� River, stream or

wetland

Nature

conservation area

Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site

Other land uses (describe):

(b) Please provide a description, including the distance and direction to the nearest residential area and industrial area.

The land-use of the surrounding landscape is predominantly agriculture-related, including cultivated fields (primarily vineyards and fruit orchards), farm dams, workers’ housing and farm homesteads – both on the subject Property and neighbouring properties. A small school is located adjacent (within ± 50 m) to the western boundary of the proposed development site (see map in Appendix B). A dirt road and water canal run adjacent to the western edge of the proposed development site, separating the site form the neighbouring farms (and the school). Nearby natural areas of varying condition can be found to the east and south of the proposed development site. The nearest residential and industrial area is Robertson, located approximately 15 km north-east of the proposed development site.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 20

8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS

Describe the existing social and economic characteristics of the community in order to provide baseline information.

The site of the proposed development (De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson) lies within the rural area of the Langeberg Municipality, which is part of the Cape Winelands District. The Socio-Economic information detailed below was obtained from the Langeberg Municipality Integrated Development Plan (IDP) for 2012 – 2016, published in May 2012. The Langeberg Municipality covers an area of approximately 4 517.4 km

2, and includes the towns of

Robertson, Montagu, McGregor, Bonnievale and Ashton, as well as all rural areas adjacent to and between these towns. According to the 2007 Community Survey, the Langeberg Municipality is the fourth largest population in the Cape Winelands District, with a population size of 80 119 people. The Municipality’s population decreased at an average annual rate of 0.24% from 81 272 in 2001, to 80 119 in 2007. The rural area of the Langeberg Municipality covers an area of 4520 km

2, with over 800 farms and a population of

±33000 people. The economically active portion of the population (i.e. those persons between 15-64 years of age) was 66.3% in 2007, while children (0-14 years) accounted for 28.4% and the elderly (65+ years) 5.8% of the population. The gender distribution is roughly equal, with 52.9% of the Municipality’s population being female and 47.1% of the population being male, as at 2007. Coloureds represent the largest portion of the workforce in the Langeberg Municipality (74.2%), followed by Black African populations (15.7%), Whites (10.0%) and Asians (0.1%). Unemployment in the region is concentrated in the Coloured population (67.1% of the total unemployed labour force), while Black populations account for 29% of the unemployed labour force, and Whites 3.8%. Unemployment is concentrated in the youth (15 – 35 years), which constitute 71.8% of the unemployed workforce. The Langeberg’s regional gross value added (GVA) in 2009 was R2.048 billion, which accounted for 9.5% of the Cape Winelands District’s economy. The Langeberg’s GVA increased at an average rate of 2.8% per year, from 2001 to 2009. The Cape Winelands District’s annual average growth rate over the same period was 3.2% per annum (note: GVA is similar to GDP, but excludes taxation and subsidies which are included in GDP calculations). The largest contributors to the Langeberg’s economy are Agriculture (including hunting, fishing & forestry), Manufacturing, and Community Services, which together account for roughly 60% of the Langeberg GVA. In 2009, the Agricultural sector (including hunting, fishing & forestry) made the single largest contribute to the Langeberg GVA, at ±23%. The closest town to the proposed development site (De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10) is Robertson, located approximately 15 km north-east of the Property. Robertson is one of the largest wine-producing regions in South Africa and the Robertson Wine Valley forms part of the longest wine route in the world, Route 62 (Langeberg IDP 2012-2016). Robertson and the surrounding area is well known for its award-winning wines, and a large number of wine farms, private estates, wine cellars and co-operatives can be found in the area.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 21

9. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS

(a) Please be advised that if section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), is applicable to your

proposed development, then you are requested to furnish this Department with written comment from Heritage Western

Cape as part of your public participation process. Section 38 of the Act states as follows: “38. (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, power line, 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 50m in length;

I 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.”

(b) The impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2), excluding the national estate contemplated in section

3(2)(i)(vi) and (vii), of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), must also be investigated, assessed

and evaluated. Section 3(2) states as follows: “3(2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the national estate may

include—

(a) places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance;

(b) places to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage;

I historical settlements and townscapes;

(d) landscapes and natural features of cultural significance;

(e) geological sites of scientific or cultural importance;

(f) archaeological and palaeontological sites;

(g) graves and burial grounds, including—

(i) ancestral graves;

(ii) royal graves and graves of traditional leaders;

(iii) graves of victims of conflict;

(iv) graves of individuals designated by the Minister by notice in the Gazette;

(v) historical graves and cemeteries; and

(vi) other human remains which are not covered in terms of the Human Tissue Act, 1983 (Act No. 65 of 1983);

(h) sites of significance relating to the history of slavery in South Africa;

(i) movable objects, including—

(i) objects recovered from the soil or waters of South Africa, including archaeological and palaeontological objects

and material, meteorites and rare geological specimens;

(ii) objects to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage;

(iii) ethnographic art and objects;

(iv) military objects;

(v) objects of decorative or fine art;

(vi) objects of scientific or technological interest; and

(vii) books, records, documents, photographic positives and negatives, graphic, film or video material or sound

recordings, excluding those that are public records as defined in section 1(xiv) of the National Archives of South Africa

Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996).”

Is section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, applicable to the development? YES � NO

UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

The proposed development will entail the clearing of 40 ha of natural habitat, which will change the character of the site exceeding 5 000m

2 (0.5 ha) in extent. Section 38 (b)(i) of

the Heritage Resources Act is therefore relevant. Heritage Western Cape (HWC) was notified of the proposed development via the standard Notice of Intent to Develop (NID) form. They requested that a Heritage Impact Assessment, consisting of an Archaeological Impact Assessment, be done (Please refer to Appendix E for the Interim comment on the NID from HWC). Final comment was obtained from them on 17 April 2013, stating that they have no objection against the proposed development. Conditions were incorporated into the Environmental Management Programme.

Will the development impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National

Heritage Resources Act, 1999?

YES NO

UNCERTAIN �


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 22

If YES, explain:

An archaeological specialist, Mr. Jonathan Kaplan, was appointed to conduct the Heritage Impact Assessment. Thirty seven archaeological occurrences, numbering 43 stone implements were documented over the entire site. A possible grave was found at point 876 though no associated material was found in the vicinity. The potential gravesite is excluded from all alternative layouts and will not be impacted on by the development. All recommendations and mitigation measures proposed by the specialist as well as conditions from Heritage Western Cape have been incorporated into the Final BAR and Environmental Management Programme.

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way? YES NO � UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Please Note: If uncertain, the Department may request that specialist input be provided.

10. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES

(a) Please list all legislation, policies and/or guidelines that have been considered in the preparation of this Basic Assessment

Report.

LEGISLATION ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY

TYPE

Permit/ license/

authorisation/comment / relevant

consideration (e.g. rezoning or

consent use, building plan approval)

DATE

(if already

obtained):

The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) – Act 107 of 1998, as amended

Department of Environmental Affairs (National Level) and Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning (Western Cape Province)

Legislation considered in the compilation of this Basic Assessment application

Pending

The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations GN R543-R547, as amended by R660, August 2010.

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

Considered legislation, this application.

Pending

Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999)

Heritage Western Cape (HWC)

NID, Basic Assessment Report and Archeological Impact Assessment to be submitted to HWC for comment.

17 April 2013

Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983) CARA

Department of Agriculture Western Cape (Land Care)

Application for the cultivation of virgin soil.

Pending

POLICY/ GUIDELINES ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY

Langeberg Municipality Spatial Development Framework (review 2010)

Langeberg Municipality

Langeberg Municipality IDP 2012 - 2016 Langeberg Municipality

Census 2011 Community Profiles interactive DVD Statistics South Africa

Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework (2005)

Western Cape Government

Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework - Rural Land Use Planning & Management Guidelines (2009)

Western Cape Government

Guideline on Public Participation (2010) DEA&DP

Guideline on Alternatives (2010) DEA&DP

Guideline on Need and Desirability (2010) DEA&DP

Guideline for Involving Heritage Specialists in EIA Processes (2005)

DEA&DP

Guideline for Involving Biodiversity Specialists in EIA Processes (2005)

DEA&DP

Guideline for Environmental Management Plans (2005) DEA&DP

The Biodiversity Sector Plan for the Witzenberg, Breede Valley and Langeberg Municipalities (2010), produced as part of the C.A.P.E.Fine-scale Biodiversity Planning Project.

CapeNature


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 23

(b) Please describe how the legislation, policies and/or guidelines were taken into account in the preparation of this Basic

Assessment Report.

LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE DESCRIBE HOW THE LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

(e.g. describe the extent to which it was adhered to, or deviated from, etc).

Langeberg Municipality Spatial Development Framework (review 2010)

Considered in the assessment of need and desirability and alignment with the objectives of the Langeberg Municipality SDF.

Langeberg Municipality IDP 2012 - 2016

Considered in the assessment of need and desirability, also used as a source of baseline Socio-Economic information for the community surrounding the proposed development.

Census 2011 Community Profiles interactive DVD (Statistics SA)

Used as a source of the Socio-Economic characteristics of the community surrounding the proposed development (Langeberg Municipality)

Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework (DEA&DP 2005)

Considered in the assessment of need and desirability, and alignment with the objectives of the WC PSDF.

Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework (2005)

Considered in the assessment of need and desirability

Guideline on Public Participation (DEA&DP 2010)

Considered in conducting the Public Participation component of this Basic Assessment

Guideline on Alternatives (DEA&DP 2010)

Considered in the identification and assessment of site and activity alternatives for the proposed development

Guideline on Need and Desirability (DEA&DP 2010)

Considered in the assessment of the need and desirability of the proposed development

Guideline for Involving Heritage Specialists in EIA Processes (DEA&DP 2005)

Considered in conducting the Heritage / Cultural / Palaeontological impact assessment of the proposed development

Guideline for Involving Biodiversity Specialists in EIA Processes (DEA&DP 2005)

Informed the involvement of the Botanical Specialist in the Basic Assessment process

Guideline for Environmental Management Plans (DEA&DP 2005)

Considered in the compilation of the draft Environmental Management Plan included in this BAR (Appendix H)

The Biodiversity Sector Plan for the Witzenberg, Breede Valley and Langeberg Municipalities (CapeNature 2010)

The GIS shape files generated by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project were consulted in the identification of vegetation types and the presence of CBAs. Biodiversity Sector Plan Handbooks were consulted to determine the ecosystem status of vegetation on site, and consulted for how the CBA maps should be used in.

Please note: Copies of any permit(s) or licences received from any other organ of state must be attached this report as

Appendix E.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 24

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The public participation process must fulfil the requirements outlined in NEMA, the EIA Regulations, and if applicable the NEM:

WA and/or the NEM: AQA. This Department’s Guideline on Public Participation (August 2010) and Guideline on Exemption

Applications (August 2010), both of which are available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp),

must also be taken into account.

Please highlight the appropriate box to indicate whether the specific requirement was undertaken or whether there was a

deviation that was agreed to by the Department.

1. Were all potential interested and affected parties notified of the application by –

(a) fixing a notice board at a place conspicuous to the public at the boundary or on the fence of -

(i) the site where the activity to which the application relates is to be undertaken; and YES �� DEVIATED

(ii) any alternative site mentioned in the application;

(Not Applicable – all alternative sites mentioned in this application fall on the same property, that is Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson)

YES DEVIATED

(b) giving written notice to –

(i) the owner or person in control of that land if the applicant is not the owner or person in

control of the land; YES N/A

(ii) the occupiers of the site where the activity is to be undertaken and to any alternative

site where the activity is to be undertaken;

(Not Applicable – the Applicant is the occupier of the site) YES DEVIATED

(iii) owners and occupiers of land adjacent to the site where the activity is to be

undertaken and to any alternative site where the activity is to be undertaken; YES �� DEVIATED

(iv) the municipal councillor of the ward in which the site and alternative site is situated

and any organisation of ratepayers that represent the community in the area; YES �� DEVIATED

(v) the municipality which has jurisdiction in the area; YES �� DEVIATED

(vi) any organ of state having jurisdiction in respect of any aspect of the activity; and YES �� DEVIATED

(vii) any other party as required by the competent authority; YES �� DEVIATED

I placing an advertisement in -

(i) one* local newspaper; and YES �� DEVIATED

(ii) any official Gazette that is published specifically for the purpose of providing public

notice of applications or other submissions made in terms of these Regulations; YE S DEVIATED

N/A

��

(d) placing an advertisement in at least one* provincial newspaper or national newspaper, if the activity has or may have an impact that extends beyond the boundaries of the

metropolitan or local municipality in which it is or will be undertaken.

YE S DEVIATED N/A

��

* Please note: In terms of the NEM: WA and NEM: AQA a notice must be placed in at least two newspapers circulating in the

area in which the activity applied for is to be carried out.

3. Please provide an overall summary of the Public Participation Process that was followed. (The detailed outcomes of

this process must be included in a comments and response report to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report

(see note below) as Appendix F).

2. Provide a list of all the state departments that were consulted:

1. Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning 2. Department of Agriculture – Western Cape, Directorate: Sustainable Resource Management, 3. Department of Agriculture – Western Cape, Directorate: LandCare 4. Cape Winelands District Municipality, Municipal Manager 5. Langeberg Municipality, Municipal Manager 6. Langeberg Municipality, Municipal Ward Councillor (Ward 5) 7. CapeNature: Scientific Services 8. CapeNature: Langeberg Conservation Services 9. Heritage Western Cape 10. Breede Overberg Catchment Management Agency (BOCMA) (DWA delegated authority) 11. Central Breede River Water Users Association


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 25

• The addresses of all neighbours of Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson (De Wilgen) were obtained

from the Langeberg Municipality Treasury department and entered into the Interested and

Affected Persons database.

• An advert describing the proposed development, the activities (in terms of the EIA Regulations

2010) that will be triggered, details of the public participation process and including an invitation

to comment on the draft BAR was placed in English and Afrikaans in the local newspaper, the

Breede Gazette (Robertson), on the 12 February 2013.

• Notices describing the proposed development, the activities (in terms of the EIA Regulations

2010) that will be triggered, the public participation process and including an invitation to

comment, were sent via registered and normal postage to the neighbouring properties of the

Farm De Wilgen.

• In addition, registered letters and digital/hard copies of the draft Basic Assessment Report were

sent to the relevant commenting authorities (see Section 2(c) above, and Appendix F for a list

of commenting authorities that were approached).

• An A1 sized site notice, in English and Afrikaans, describing the proposed development, the

activities (in terms of the EIA Regulations 2010) that will be triggered, the public participation

process, and inviting comment on the draft BAR, was erected at the proposed site (for the

duration of the commenting period and Environmental Assessment Process).

• Copies of the draft Basic Assessment Report were made available for public view at the

Robertson Public Library, the BolandEnviro offices in Worcester and on the website

www.BolandEnviro.co.za/projects for the duration of the commenting period.

• The draft BAR was released for a 40 day comment period, from 12 February – 25 March 2013.

• All comments received during the comment period were addressed and incorporated into the

draft BAR as Appendix F (Comments & Response Report) and integrated into the BAR itself as

appropriate.

• The updated (final) BAR were released for a further 21 day comment period (9 September

2013) to all commenting authorities and registered I&APs. Comments received during this

comment period will be included in Appendix F (Comments & Response Report) of the final

BAR which will be submitted to DEA&DP.

Please note:

Should any of the responses be “No” and no deviation or exemption from that requirement was

requested and agreed to /granted by the Department, the Basic Assessment Report will be rejected.

A list of all the potential interested and affected parties, including the organs of State, notified and a list

of all the register of interested and affected parties, must be submitted with the final Basic Assessment

Report. The list of registered interested and affected parties must be opened, maintained and made

available to any person requesting access to the register in writing.

The draft Basic Assessment Report must be submitted to the Department before it is made available to

interested and affected parties, including the relevant organs of State and State departments which

have jurisdiction with regard to any aspect of the activity, for a 40-day commenting period. With regard

to State departments, the 40-day period commences the day after the date on which the Department

as the competent/licensing authority requests such State department in writing to submit comment. The

applicant/EAP is therefore required to inform this Department in writing when the draft Basic Assessment

Report will be made available to the relevant State departments for comment. Upon receipt of the Draft


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 26

Basic Assessment Report and this confirmation, this Department will in accordance with Section 24O(2)

and (3) of the NEMA request the relevant State departments to comment on the draft report within 40

days.

All comments of interested and affected parties on the draft Basic Assessment Report must be recorded,

responded to and included in the Comments and Responses Report included as Appendix F to the final

Basic Assessment Report. If necessary, any amendments in response to comments received must be

effected in the Basic Assessment Report itself. The Comments and Responses Report must also include a

description of the public participation process followed.

The final Basic Assessment Report must be made available to registered interested and affected parties

for comment before submitting it to the Department for consideration. Unless otherwise indicated by the

Department, a final Basic Assessment Report must be made available to the registered interested and

affected parties for comment for a minimum of 21-days. Comments on the final Basic Assessment Report

does not have to be responded to, but the comments must be attached to the final Basic Assessment

Report.

The minutes of any meetings held by the EAP with interested and affected parties and other role players

which record the views of the participants must also be submitted as part of the public participation

information to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix F.

Proof of all the notices given as indicated, as well as of notice to the interested and affected parties of

the availability of the draft Basic Assessment Report and final Basic Assessment Report must be submitted

as part of the public participation information to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as

Appendix F.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 27

SECTION D: NEED AND DESIRABILITY

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Need and Desirability (August 2010)

available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

1. Is the activity permitted in terms of the property’s existing land use rights? YES � NO Please explain

The property (Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson) is currently zoned for Agricultural use (Agriculture I) 2. Will the activity be in line with the following?

(a) Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) YES � NO Please explain

The proposed development is consistent with the Western Cape PSDF. The Western Cape PSDF recognizes agriculture as the basis of the Western Cape rural economy, creating 11% of all jobs within the province and contributing 6% to the GGP (Gross Geographic Product). At a provincial level, one of the strategic objectives of the PSDF is to “Protect Biodiversity and Agricultural Resources”. The PSDF aims to achieve this objective by consolidating agricultural landscapes and preventing their fragmentation, by protecting agriculture as a dominant land-use in rural landscapes, by maintaining viable agricultural units and by encouraging sustainable farming practices. The PSDF further aims to conserve and strengthen the sense of place of the Western Cape’s important natural, cultural and productive landscapes. The Western Cape PSDF Rural Land Use Planning & Management Guidelines further indicate that two of the key objectives for Agriculture within the province are:

– To protect agriculture as a dominant land use in rural areas – To improve the economic viability of farmland through intensification, diversification and value adding.

At a district level, the PSDF indicates that controlled development needs to be encouraged in the Cape Winelands District (the site of the proposed development falls within this district). Furthermore, the PSDF states that one of the key strategies for the Cape Winelands region is to “Support agriculture and agro-industry as the main economic backbone, together with tourism”. The proposed development entails the expansion of an existing agricultural development, on land zoned for Agriculture I. The proposed development site is located adjacent to existing vineyards on the property and on neighbouring properties, and therefore prevents fragmentation of the agricultural landscape. The proposed development will improve the economic value and viability of the farm, and will contribute to the economic development and agricultural character of the area. The proposed development is therefore aligned with the objectives of the PSDF and does not compromise any of the objectives of the PSDF.

(b) Urban edge / Edge of Built environment for the area YES � NO Please explain

The development entails agricultural activities within an area zoned for agricultural use (Agriculture I). The development falls outside of the demarcated urban edge of the closest town (Robertson, 15km north-east of the proposed development site).

(c) Integrated Development Plan and Spatial Development Framework of the

Local Municipality (e.g. would the approval of this application compromise the

integrity of the existing approved and credible municipal IDP and SDF?).

YES � NO Please explain

The site of the proposed development (De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson) falls within the Langeberg Municipality, and the current Langeberg IDP (2012 – 2016) and SDF (2010) are therefore relevant. The Langeberg IDP for 2012 – 2016 identifies “Growth and Economic Development” as a key strategic objective for the Municipal area. The IDP further indicates that local economic development activities and the creation of jobs for the local community should be facilitated, and that rural development in general should be promoted in the Langeberg area. The Langeberg SDF (2010) also highlights local economic development and the reduction of local unemployment as key priorities. The proposed development on De Wilgen will contribute to the economic development of the Langeberg area, by increasing the economic value (and viability) of the farm, and by creating additional local employment opportunities. The proposed development is therefore in line with the local IDP and SDF, and will not compromise any of the strategic objectives, goals or mission statements of the IDP or SDF.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 28

(d) Approved Structure Plan of the Municipality YES NO Please explain

Not Applicable

(e) An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) adopted by the Department

(e.g. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing

environmental management priorities for the area and if so, can it be justified in

terms of sustainability considerations?)

YES NO Please explain

Not Applicable. An EMF has not yet been adopted for the Cape Winelands District.

(f) Any other Plans (e.g. Guide Plan) YES NO � Please explain

No other Plans are relevant to the proposed development activities

3. Is the land use (associated with the activity being applied for) considered

within the timeframe intended by the existing approved Spatial Development

Framework (SDF) agreed to by the relevant environmental authority (i.e. is the

proposed development in line with the projects and programmes identified as

priorities within the credible IDP)?


The Property is currently zoned for agricultural use (Agriculture I). The proposed development will expand the area under cultivation and increase the economic viability of the property, and will also contribute to local economic development and the creation of local employment opportunities. One of the Strategic Objectives identified as a priority in the 2012 – 2016 Langeberg IDP is “Growth and Economic Development”, which includes the facilitation of local economic development opportunities and the promotion of rural development in general in the Langeberg area. The proposed development will make a small contribution to the fulfillment of this Strategic Objective. The land use of the proposed activity is therefore considered within the timeframe of the existing Langeberg IDP (2012 – 2016) and is in line with certain priorities identified in the SDF and IDP. The proposed development will not compromise any of the projects/ programmes identified as priorities in the IDP.

4. Should development, or if applicable, expansion of the town/area concerned

in terms of this land use (associated with the activity being applied for) occur

here at this point in time?


The proposed development will expand the area under vineyard cultivation on De Wilgen and will increase the economic value of the property, and the economic viability of the farming unit. This will help to sustain the current farming operation and current employment opportunities. The development will also result in the creation of 10 new employment opportunities and will make a minor contribution to the general economic development of the area. These socio-economic benefits are desirable at this point in time, as they will contribute to the fulfilment of certain Strategic Objectives identified in the current local (Langeberg Municipality) IDP and SDF. In particular, the proposed development will contribute to the Strategic Objective for “Growth and Economic Development” (Langeberg IDP 2012 – 2016). It should also be noted that the Langeberg IDP (2012 – 2016) identifies a reduction in agricultural activity, over the 2001 – 2009 period, as a threat to employment that may result in job losses and which will affect the sustainability of employment patterns in the area. The proposed vineyard development on De Wilgen may play a minor role in redressing this concern, through the creation of additional employment opportunities for the local community. The proposed development is therefore desirable in the Langeberg area, on De Wilgen, at this point in time. 5. Does the community/area need the activity and the associated land use

concerned (is it a societal priority)? (This refers to the strategic as well as local

level (e.g. development is a national priority, but within a specific local context

it could be inappropriate.)


The proposed development will increase the economic viability of the farming unit, which will help to sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities on the farm. The development will also create new employment opportunities for the local community, and will contribute to local economic development. The development may also play a small role in contributing to the agricultural character and “sense of place” of


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 29

the area (i.e. the Robertson Wine Valley), which is an important factor in attracting tourists and associated economic development to the region (particularly with regard to those tourists in search of a “winelands experience”). The Western Cape PSDF indicates that a key strategy for the Cape Winelands is to “Support agriculture and agro-industry as the main economic backbone, together with tourism”. The Langeberg Municipality IDP (2012 – 2016) and the Cape Winelands District IDP (2012/2013 – 2016/2017) both indicate that there is a need to promote responsible rural development and economic development within the area/ community surrounding the proposed development. Local economic development is also identified as a Key Performance Area at a national level. Although the proposed activity will offer a relatively small benefit to society in general and may not be considered a “societal priority”, it will never-the-less have a positive benefit for the local community (through job creation and local economic development) and will play a minor role in supporting the strategic objectives for rural economic growth of the local and district IDPs and the provincial SDF.

6. Are the necessary services with adequate capacity currently available (at the

time of application), or must additional capacity be created to cater for the

development? (Confirmation by the relevant Municipality in this regard must

be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix E.)


The proposed development entails the expansion of an existing agricultural operation. The necessary services with adequate capacity are currently available, and no additional capacity or service infrastructure is required. Electricity: There is an existing electricity supply point (Langeberg Municipality) on the property, which is used to service the existing agricultural operation on De Wilgen. This supply point will be used to supply electricity for the pumping of water for irrigation on the proposed new 40 ha vineyard development. Proof of existing electricity supply by Langeberg Municipality will be attached in the Final BAR. Water: The applicant does not require an application for additional water use. The Applicant has sufficient water use rights and storage capacity on the farm to sustain current activities as well as the proposed expansion. See proof of sufficient water availability and storage capacity attached in Appendix E.

7. Is this development provided for in the infrastructure planning of the

municipality, and if not what will the implication be on the infrastructure

planning of the municipality (priority and placement of services and

opportunity costs)? (Comment by the relevant Municipality in this regard must

be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix E.)


No additional infrastructure is required from the municipality.

8. Is this project part of a national programme to address an issue of national

concern or importance? YES NO � Please explain

The proposed development is not directly part of a national programme to address an issue of national concern. However, the proposed development will make a small contribution to the creation of job opportunities and economic development in a rural area, which may be viewed as an issue of national concern.

9. Do location factors favour this land use (associated with the activity applied

for) at this place? (This relates to the contextualisation of the proposed land

use on this site within its broader context.)


The proposed development entails the cultivation of 40 ha of vineyards, and is an expansion of an existing agricultural operation on land zoned for agriculture (Agriculture I). The proposed development site is immediately north of existing vineyards on the property (excluding a small non-perennial drainage line), and adjacent to existing vineyards on a neighbouring property. The proposed development site is located in the Langeberg Municipality of the Cape Winelands District and is located approximately 15km south-west of Robertson. Robertson is one of the largest wine-producing regions in South Africa and the Robertson Wine Valley forms part of the longest wine route in the world, Route 62 (Langeberg IDP 2012-2016). Robertson and the surrounding area is well known for its award-winning wines, and a large number of wine farms, private estates, wine cellars and co-operatives can be found in the area.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 30

The land use on the properties surrounding the proposed development site is largely agriculture-related, including vineyards, fruit orchards, farm dams, workers’ housing and farm homesteads. The proposed vineyard development is therefore in keeping with the land-use of the surrounding landscape, and will not detract from the “sense of place” or unique character of the area. 10. How will the activity or the land use associated with the activity applied for,

impact on sensitive natural and cultural areas (built and rural/natural

environment)?


There are currently no buildings on the proposed development site and the proposed activity (clearing of land for vineyard cultivation) will therefore not impact any culturally significant/ sensitive built structures. Feedback, regarding whether any sensitive artifacts are present on the site, is awaited from the archaeological specialist conducting the Heritage Impact Assessment. This will be included in the Final BAR. The proposed vineyard development entails the clearing of 40 ha natural vegetation, and will therefore have an impact on the natural environment. Of the 40 ha natural vegetation that are proposed to be cleared (preferred alternative), 14 ha currently supports Breede Alluvium Renosterveld vegetation, which is identified as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems (2011). The proposed development will result in the irreversible loss of 14 ha of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which is ± 0.056% of remaining natural area of this vegetation type. However, the pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld located on the subject property (De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10) is relatively small (40 ha total extent), is partially disturbed, and is isolated from other areas of the same vegetation. The conservation value of this pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld is therefore regarded as Low, and the impact of the loss of this vegetation is regarded as having medium-low significance from a botanical perspective (Refer to Appendix G – Botanical Specialist Report). The proposed development site (preferred alternative) is also located within a terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) indicated in the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project. However, this CBA is isolated in the landscape, and does not form part of a larger CBA, is not connected to any other CBAs in the surrounding landscape and does not form part of a continuous biodiversity corridor. The loss of this CBA is regarded as having an impact of medium significance before mitigation, and medium-low significance after application of appropriate mitigation measures.

11. Will the development impact on people’s health and wellbeing (e.g. in terms

of noise, odours, visual character and sense of place, etc.)? YES NO � Please explain

The proposed development is an expansion of the existing land use (vineyard development) on the property. The development will not generate significant noise, odours or waste over and above that already produced by the current farming operation on De Wilgen. No storage or processing activities will take place on the property. The development is consistent with the surrounding land use and will not detract from the sense of place of the area. The proposed development should not negatively impact on people’s health or wellbeing.

12. Will the proposed activity or the land use associated with the activity applied

for, result in unacceptable opportunity costs? YES NO � Please explain

The most significant opportunity cost associated with the development will be the loss of natural vegetation within a CBA. Alternative layouts and mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize the impact on the CBA. The proposed site for land clearing is currently undeveloped (not utilized for agricultural or any other purpose) and is of low economic value to the Applicant (the landowner). The proposed development will increase the agricultural potential and economic value of this property, and will improve the long-term economic viability of the existing farming operation on De Wilgen, which will help to sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities. The proposed development will also create additional employment opportunities during both the construction and operational phases of the development. The opportunity cost of NOT proceeding with the proposed development (i.e. maintain the status quo) will be the forgoing of new employment opportunities, local economic development and increased agricultural potential on the property. With mitigation measures taken into account, the proposed development will not result in any unacceptable opportunity costs. 13. What will the cumulative impacts (positive and negative) of the proposed YES � NO Please explain


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 31

land use associated with the activity applied for, be?

Negative Cumulative Impacts: The proposed development will entail the clearing of approximately 14 ha (±0.056% of remaining natural extent) of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld vegetation. Breede Alluvium Renosterveld is listed as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011. The proposed development also entails the clearing of land within a terrestrial CBA, identified to meet vegetation thresholds. This particular CBA is relatively small and isolated in the landscape and does not form any direct linkages with other nearby CBAs, and its value in terms of preserving biodiversity and ecosystem functioning is therefore relatively low. However, any development within a CBA will have a cumulative negative impact by further reducing and fragmenting networks of natural sites identified to meet biodiversity pattern and/or process thresholds. Positive Cumulative Impacts: The proposed activity will create additional employment opportunities for the local community, and will contribute to local economic development. The development will also increase the economic viability of the farming operation, which will sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities on De Wilgen. The development will make a small contribution to the agricultural/ winelands “sense of place” of the region – this winelands character plays a role in attracting tourists (and associated economic development) to the area.

14. Is the development the best practicable environmental option for this

land/site? YES � NO Please explain

The property of the proposed development site (Farm De Wilgen) - is zoned for agriculture (Agriculture I) and approximately 55% of the property is already developed, largely under vineyard cultivation. The proposed development will therefore be consistent with existing land-use on the property and on neighbouring properties. The proposed development site is the most practicable site on for further vineyard development on De Wilgen as it is located adjacent to existing vineyards on the property (excluding the small non-perennial stream that lies between the existing vineyards and the proposed development site), and adjacent to the existing water pipeline and electricity supply point on the property. The proposed development site is located in an undeveloped (natural) section in the north of De Wilgen. This undeveloped (natural) fragment is surrounded by transformed/ cultivated land on all sides, and is not directly connected to nearby natural areas. In its current state, the proposed development site is regarded as making a relatively low contribution to the preservation of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, due to the site’s isolation from nearby CBAs and larger areas of similar vegetation. Maintaining the site in its current state will not make a significant contribution to biodiversity conservation, and the development of this site is therefore a practicable option. There are other undeveloped areas on the property, but these areas are either unsuitable for cultivation (too steep or rocky), or would result in the fragmentation of vineyards, or would require significant infrastructure (roads/ powerlines/ pipelines) expansion. These other undeveloped areas are also larger than the undeveloped section in the north of De Wilgen and are better connected to nearby natural areas, and are therefore regarded as having higher conservation value than the proposed development site. 15. What will the benefits be to society in general and to the local communities? Please explain

It is unlikely that the proposed development will make a significant contribution to society in general, however the development will make a small positive contribution to local economic development and will benefit the local community by creating 10 new employment opportunities. The proposed development will also expand the existing production of the current farming operation and increase the economic viability of the farming unit, which will also help to sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities. The proposed development will also add to the unique agricultural (“winelands”) character of the area. This “sense of place” plays an important role in attracting local and international tourists to the region. Agri-Tourism (and tourism in general) is an important contributor to local economic development (Langeberg IDP 2012 – 2016). 16. Any other need and desirability considerations related to the proposed activity? Please explain


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 32

(17) Please describe how the general objectives of Integrated Environmental Management as set out in section 23 of NEMA

have been taken into account:

The general objectives stated in Section 23 of NEMA are intended to promote and ensure the integrated environmental management of activities that may have a significant impact on the environment. These general objectives aim to identify, predict and evaluate the actual and potential impact on the natural environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, to assess the risks, consequences and alternatives and to propose mitigation options that will minimize negative impacts while promoting positive benefits. For this application, potential impacts on the natural and socio-economic environments were identified and assessed in consultation with various specialists (see Appendix G) and commenting authorities, and with reference to the EIA guideline series issued by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Various sources of credible natural and socio-economic information (e.g. C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Planning Project, Census 2011 data, local/ district / provincial IDPs and SDFs) were also consulted throughout the Environmental Impact Assessment Process. Alternative options for the development have also been considered and assessed to determine where and how potential negative impacts on the environment can be reduced, and where/how positive effects can be promoted. Mitigation measures have been proposed for the duration of the construction and operational phases, in order to avoid or minimize the negative impacts and to enhance positive impacts associated with the development. In accordance with Integrated Environmental Management methodology, adequate and appropriate opportunity was provided for members of the public, various commenting authorities and state departments to participate in the decision-making concerning the proposed development. A Public Participation Process (PPP) in line with the guidelines issued by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning was undertaken (refer to Section C and Appendix F of this Basic Assessment Report for further information regarding the PPP).

(18) Please describe how the principles of environmental management as set out in section 2 of NEMA have been taken into

account:

Not Applicable


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 33

The applicable principles of environmental management as set out in Section 2 of NEMA emphasize consideration of the following:

• Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably – Interested and affected parties (including the general public, commenting authorities and relevant state departments) were given adequate and appropriate opportunity to partake in the decision-making concerning the proposed development, and to raise any issues or concerns pertaining to the proposed development. In addition, the proposed development will be consistent with the land use on the property and surrounding area, and will not infringe on the physical, psychological, development, cultural or societal needs of the local community, or society in general.

• Development must be socially, environmentally and economically sustainable – The potential impacts that the proposed development may have on the natural, social and economic environments have been considered and balanced as far as possible, so that the proposed development option represents the alternative with the greatest benefit and least opportunity cost to the socio-economic and natural environments. With adequate management and the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the development will have limited detrimental impact on the environment. The proposed development will increase the economic value of the land, and will create a positive socio-economic benefit in the form of additional employment opportunities for the local community. The increase in grape production will make the farming unit more economically viable, which will contribute to the ongoing economic sustainability of this specific farming operation.

• Disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity must be avoided, minimized or remedied – The proposed development entails cultivation (± 40 ha) within a small terrestrial CBA, identified to meet vegetation thresholds. However, due to its isolation in the landscape, this CBA is regarded as making a relatively low contribution to biodiversity conservation and the preservation of ecosystem functioning. This CBA is not directly connected to any other recognized CBAs, and does not form part of any larger biodiversity corridors. Of the ±40 ha that are proposed to be cleared, approximately 26 ha comprises Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation which is well represented in natural areas surrounding the development site. The remaining 14 ha of the proposed development site consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which is regarded as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems. The pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld located on the property is relatively small, partially disturbed and isolated from other areas of similar habitat and therefore does not contribute significantly to biodiversity conservation (See Appendix G - Botanical Report). Alternative layouts that will prevent the loss of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and reduce the loss of the CBA are considered and assessed in this Basic Assessment Report.

• Pollution and degradation of the environment must be avoided, and waste should be avoided minimized, reduced, re-used or recycled – The proposed development is not expected to produce any significant waste or pollution. With the implementation of the mitigation measures proposed in this report it is not anticipated that any significant waste, pollution or significant environmental degradation will occur.

• Disturbance of landscapes and sites that constitute the nation’s cultural heritage must be avoided – The proposed development will not change the cultural landscape characteristics of the area. It is not foreseen that any significant cultural artefacts are present on the site. Feedback from the archaeological specialist will be included in the Final BAR and mitigation measures included in the EMP, if necessary.

• Use of non-renewable resources must be responsible and equitable – Water efficient irrigation will be used in the new vineyards.

• Negative Impacts on the environment and people’s environmental rights must be anticipated and prevented, and where they cannot be prevented are minimized and remedied. The proposed development will entail the removal of natural vegetation, which cannot be avoided on this property. Alternative layout options are considered to minimize the loss of Vulnerable vegetation (Breede Alluvium Renosterveld) and to minimize the loss of a designated terrestrial CBA.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 34

• The participation of all Interested and Affected Parties in environmental governance should be promoted, and decision-making should take into account the interests, needs and values of all interested and affected parties – A Public Participation Process that provided all Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) with adequate opportunity to comment on the proposed development and to partake in the decision-making regarding the proposed development, was undertaken. Refer to Section C and Appendix F for further details regarding this Public Participation Process.

• Transparency and access to information – The public were informed of the proposed development via a notice board placed at the access point of the proposed development site and a notice placed in the local newspaper (Breede Gazette). Neighbouring landowners, relevant state departments and commenting authorities were notified in writing of the proposed development. The draft BAR and all Appendices will be available for review by all I&APs at the Robertson Public Library, BolandEnviro offices in Worcester and on the BolandEnviro website. All relevant documentation will also be provided (digital or hard copy) to commenting authorities and registered I&APs. Refer to Section C and Appendix F for further information regarding the Public Participation Process.

• The use of environmental resources must serve the public interest and the environment must be protected as the people’s common heritage – The proposed development will entail the loss of 40ha natural vegetation which is regarded as having relatively low conservation value, but will result in the creation of additional employment opportunities and will contribute to local economic development in the area. The proposed development is therefore considered to be a responsible use of natural resources, which will serve the public interest.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 35

SECTION E: ALTERNATIVES

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Alternatives (August 2010) available on

the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

“Alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity, means different means of meeting the general purposes and requirements of

the activity, which may include alternatives to –

(a) the property on which, or location where, it is proposed to undertake the activity;

(b) the type of activity to be undertaken;

I the design or layout of the activity;

(d) the technology to be used in the activity;

(e) the operational aspects of the activity; and

(f) the option of not implementing the activity.

The NEMA prescribes that the procedures for the investigation, assessment and communication of the potential consequences

or impacts of activities on the environment must, inter alia, with respect to every application for environmental authorisation –

• ensure that the general objectives of integrated environmental management laid down in NEMA and the National

Environmental Management Principles set out in NEMA are taken into account; and

• include an investigation of the potential consequences or impacts of the alternatives to the activity on the environment

and assessment of the significance of those potential consequences or impacts, including the option of not implementing

the activity.

The general objective of integrated environmental management is, inter alia, to “identify, predict and evaluate the actual and

potential impact on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and consequences and

alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a view to minimising negative impacts, maximising benefits, and

promoting compliance with the principles of environmental management” set out in NEMA.

1. In the sections below, please provide a description of any indentified and considered alternatives and alternatives that

were found to be feasible and reasonable.

Please note: Detailed written proof the investigation of alternatives must be provided and motivation if no reasonable

or feasible alternatives exist.

(a) Property and location/site alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise

positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

No feasible Property or Location / Site alternatives exist: The proposed development site is located on property which is owned by the Applicant, and the Applicant does not own any other property that would be suitable for vineyard cultivation. Any alternative property sites would require the landowner to purchase additional property at significant opportunity costs, which would not be feasible. There are other natural, undeveloped sites located elsewhere on the property, to the south and east of the proposed development site. However, these alternative locations on De Wilgen are either too steep or too rocky for vineyard cultivation, and/or would require significant infrastructure development (roads, power lines, water pipelines). These sites are therefore not feasible alternatives for the Applicant. In addition, these natural areas are larger and better connected to surrounding natural areas, and are therefore regarded as having higher conservation value than the proposed development site (refer to Botanical Report – Appendix G). Cultivation in these other undeveloped sites on the Property would encroach on these larger natural areas, which is not desirable.

(b) Activity alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or

detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

No feasible activity alternatives exist. The Applicant will require the clearing of natural vegetation (undeveloped land) on the Property for the cultivation of new vineyards. In its current state, the undeveloped land on the property has low agricultural potential and is of little economic value to the Applicant. Should the land not be cleared, this area on the property will remain undeveloped, and the economic viability of the farming unit and the overall economic value of the property cannot be increased.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 36

(c) Design or layout alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive

impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Three layout alternatives have been considered, for the purpose of this application: 1. Alternative A1 (Applicant’s preferred alternative)



• Approximately 14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld will be lost (listed as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011) if this alternative is authorised.



• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern side of the vineyard block. 2. Alternative A2






• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern side of the vineyard block. Alternative A2 aims to reduce the impact on the CBA and, and specifically the pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (Vulnerable at a National level) that occurs on the property. 3. Alternative A3 (No-Go)


• No natural vegetation will be cleared and no cultivation of vineyards will occur There are no feasible activity, property or process alternatives for this application.

(d) Technology alternatives (e.g. to reduce resource demand and resource use efficiency) to avoid negative impacts, mitigate

unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives

exist:

No Feasible Technological Alternatives exist. The proposed development will make use of best practise and the latest viticulture techniques and cultivation practices and efficient drip irrigation systems.

(e) Operational alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts,

or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 37

No Feasible Operational Alternatives exist The Applicant is only considering the cultivation of vineyards on the proposed development site. The Applicant has existing experience and expertise in the cultivation of vineyards and is most familiar with the operational requirements of grape production. Approximately 180 ha of the property are already under vineyard cultivation, and all required infrastructure, equipment and operational processes for successful vineyard cultivation are already in place and can easily be expanded to accommodate the proposed development. Other operational alternatives would require additional knowledge, infrastructure and/or facilities, which would not be feasible for the Applicant at this point in time. The cultivation of vineyards is therefore the only feasible operational alternative for the Applicant.

(f) the option of not implementing the activity (the No-Go Option):

The No-Go option has been assessed as Alternative A3. The No-Go option implies that the undeveloped land of the proposed development site will not be cleared, and that vineyards will not be cultivated on this site (i.e. the status quo remains). In its current state, the proposed development site is undeveloped and of low economic value to the Applicant. If the site is not developed, the economic value of the property will not be increased, and the economic viability of the existing farming operation will not be increased. Additional employment opportunities that would be associated with the new development will also not be created. The No-Go option will preserve the small, isolated CBA on the property – however this CBA is regarded as having relatively low value in terms of biodiversity conservation and the preservation of ecosystem processes (see Appendix G – Botanical Report). The No-Go option is not desirable, as it will involve significant opportunity cost to the Applicant and the surrounding community, with comparatively little benefit to the natural environment.

(g) Other alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or

detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Not Applicable.

(h) Please provide a summary of the alternatives investigated and the outcomes of such investigation:

Please note: If no feasible and reasonable alternatives exist, the description and proof of the investigation of alternatives,

together with motivation of why no feasible or reasonable alternatives exist, must be provided.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 38

Three layout alternatives have been considered, for the purpose of this application: 1. Alternative A1 (Applicant’s preferred alternative)



• Approximately 14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld will be lost (listed as Vulnerable in the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011) if this alternative is authorised.



• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern side of the vineyard block. 2. Alternative A2






• A natural corridor is maintained along the southern and north-eastern side of the vineyard block. Alternative A2 aims to reduce the impact on the CBA and, and specifically the pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (Vulnerable at a National level) that occurs on the property. 3. Alternative A3 (No-Go)


• No natural vegetation will be cleared and no cultivation of vineyards will occur There are no feasible activity, property or process alternatives for this application. Summary of the sizes of areas that will be transformed by the proposed alternative layouts:

Alternative 1 (Applicant’s preferred)

Alternative 2 Alternative 3

(No-Go)

Total development footprint 40 ha 36 ha 0 ha

CBA transformed by the development 36 ha 29.5 ha 0 ha

Intact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (Vulnerable) transformed by the development

14 ha 7.5 ha 0 ha

Robertson Gannabos Thicket (Least Threatened) transformed by the development

26 ha 26 ha 0 ha


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 39

SECTION F: IMPACT ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT,

MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES Please note: The information in this section must be duplicated for all the feasible and reasonable alternatives (where relevant).

1. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPACT ON THE FOLLOWING

ASPECTS:

(a) Geographical and physical aspects:

No significant landscape features will be impacted by the proposed development. The development will be consistent with the land-use of the surrounding area and will have no significant visual impact during the construction or operational phases. A non-perennial watercourse (“Matjiesleegte”, designated as an Other Ecological Support Area by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Planning Project) traverses the property; more than 100m south of the proposed development site (See Appendix D – Biodiversity Overlay Maps). Mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure that any disturbance to this watercourse is avoided or minimized.

(b) Biological aspects:

Will the development have an impact on critical biodiversity areas (CBAs) or ecological support areas (CSAs)? YES �

NO

If yes, please describe:

The proposed development area falls within a terrestrial CBA, identified to meet vegetation-type thresholds. Approximately 40 ha of the CBA will be transformed by the proposed development (preferred Alternative A1). This particular CBA is relatively small (±55 ha total extent), and isolated in the landscape. This CBA is not directly connected to any larger CBAs and does not form part of a continuous corridor/ linkage between nearby biodiversity areas (See Appendix D – Biodiversity Overlay Maps). No Ecological Support Areas will be impacted by the proposed development. Will the development have an impact on terrestrial vegetation, or aquatic ecosystems ( wetlands, estuaries or

the coastline)? YES �

NO


The development will have an impact on terrestrial vegetation. The proposed development will entail the clearing of 40 ha natural vegetation, which is currently in a relatively good condition. Of the 40 ha that will be cleared, ±14 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which is listed as Vulnerable at a national scale by the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011. The remainder of the proposed development site consists of Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation, regarded as Vulnerable at a local level by the C.A.P.E Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project (2008). No plant species of special concern were recorded on site, however one species detected during the botanical site visit – namely Boophone disticha (gifbol) – is listed as Declining in the SANBI Red List of SA Plants. Boophone disticha is however long-lived and widely distributed throughout South Africa (See Appendix G – Botanical Report). The pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld that occurs on the property 14 ha of which will be directly impacted by the proposed development) is already partially disturbed south-west of the development site, and is isolated from other areas of the same vegetation type. The proposed development will not impact on any aquatic ecosystems. Will the development have an impact on any populations of threatened plant or animal species, and/or on any

habitat that may contain a unique signature of plant or animal species? YES

NO �


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 40


The Botanical Report (See Appendix G) indicates that at least 10 Red Data List plant species are known to occur in the Breede Alluvium Renosterveld ecosystem, however no rare, endangered or critically endangered plant species were recorded during the botanical assessment of the development site. No threatened animal species will be impacted by the proposed development.

Please describe the manner in which any other biological aspects will be impacted:

Not Applicable

(c) Socio-Economic aspects:

What is the expected capital value of the activity on completion? R 4 000 000 What is the expected yearly income or contribution to the economy that will be generated by or as a result

of the activity? R 1600000

Will the activity contribute to service infrastructure? YES NO �

How many new employment opportunities will be created in the construction phase of the activity? -

What is the expected value of the employment opportunities during the construction phase? R -

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? %

How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

Farm workers currently working on De Wilgen will be tasked with clearing the land and planting vineyards. How many permanent new employment opportunities will be created during the operational phase of the

activity? 10

What is the expected current value of the employment opportunities during the first 10 years? R 2 000 000

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? 100%

How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

Black and coloured people will be employed.

Any other information related to the manner in which the socio-economic aspects will be impacted:

Not Applicable

(d) Cultural and historic aspects:

The proposed development is in line with the land use of the surrounding area, and will not impact or detract from any cultural landscapes. No buildings, structures or sites of cultural/ historical significance will be impacted by the development. Thirty seven archaeological occurrences, numbering 43 stone implements were documented over the entire site by an archaeological specialist, Mr Jonathan Kaplan. A possible grave was found at point 876 though no associated material was found in the vicinity. The potential gravesite was excluded from all alternative layouts and will not be impacted by the development.

2. WASTE AND EMISSIONS

(a) Waste (including effluent) management

Will the activity produce waste (including rubble) during the construction phase? YES NO �

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and

estimated quantity per type? M3

Not Applicable

Will the activity produce waste during its operational phase? YES � NO

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and ±1 m3/ month


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 41

estimated quantity per type?

A small amount of non-hazardous solid waste typical of the existing farming operation (vineyards) on De Wilgen, may be produced. There will be no storage, packaging or processing of grapes on the property. No form of hazardous waste or effluent will be produced on site. Grapes produced on the property will be processed at the Robertson Winery. Irrigation return flows from subterranean drainage will be kept to a minimum through the use of efficient irrigation and soil moisture monitoring.

Where and how will the waste be treated / disposed of (describe)?

Any waste generated by the proposed development will be disposed of at the local Municipal landfill site, at the Applicant’s own expense. Has the municipality or relevant authority confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of

the waste to be generated by this activity(ies)? If yes, provide written confirmation from Municipality or

relevant authority

No additional waste treatment / disposal services are required, as the proposed development will generate only small (negligible) amounts of solid waste during the construction and operational phases.

YES

NO �

Will the activity produce waste that will be treated and/or disposed of at another facility other than into a

municipal waste stream? YES

NO �

If yes, has this facility confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the waste to be

generated by this activity(ies)? Provide written confirmation from the facility and provide the following

particulars of the facility: Not Applicable YES NO

Does the facility have an operating license? (If yes, please attach a copy of the license.) Not Applicable YES NO

Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce, reuse or recycle waste:

Very little waste will be generated by the proposed development. Wherever possible, any spare material such as wire or poles used in the establishment of new vineyards will be reused elsewhere in the farming operation.

(b) Emissions into the atmosphere

Will the activity produce emissions that will be disposed of into the atmosphere? YES NO �

If yes, does it require approval in terms of relevant legislation? YES NO �

Describe the emissions in terms of type and concentration and how it will be treated/mitigated: Not Applicable

3. WATER USE

Please indicate the source(s) of water for the activity by ticking the appropriate box(es)

Municipal Water board Groundwater River, Stream,

Dam or Lake � Other The activity will not use water

If water is to be extracted from a groundwater source, river, stream, dam, lake or any other natural feature, please indicate

the volume that will be extracted per month:

7 200 m3/ha/year

± 288 000 m3 in total (40 ha)

24 000 m3

per month (average)

Please provide proof of assurance of water supply (eg. Letter of confirmation from municipality / water user associations, yield

of borehole)

Does the activity require a water use permit / license from DWAF? YES NO �

If yes, please submit the necessary application to Department of Water Affairs and attach proof thereof to this application.

According to Mr. Smit from BreëRivier Irrigation (on behalf of the Applicant), the farm De Wilgen has sufficient


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 42

water use rights to accommodate the additional 40 ha vineyards. The farm currently has a total of 1 759 305 m3 water per annum, which comprises 71 ha canal water (528 950 m3), 80.5 ha (599 725 m3) water from the Breede River and 630 630 m3 stored winter water which is stored in 3 existing dams. The current water need on the farm comprises a total of 1 405 950 m3 for 184 ha existing vineyards and fruit. The proposed 40 ha vineyards would need an additional 288 000 m3 per annum which amounts to 224 ha which requires a total of 1 693 950 m3 per annum. This is below the current 1 759 305 m3 available water. According to information supplied by the Applicant, there is thus sufficient available water use rights and storage capacity on De Wilgen to accommodate the proposed expansion of 40 ha. Refer to Appendix E for proof of Water Use Rights.

Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce water demand, and measures to reuse or recycle water:

Water efficient drip irrigation and efficient irrigation scheduling will be used in the expanded vineyard development.

4. POWER SUPPLY

Please indicate the source of power supply eg. Municipality / Eskom / Renewable energy source

Langeberg Municipality The property of the proposed development (De Wilgen, Farm 91 Portion 10, Robertson) has an existing municipal power supply which is used in the existing farming operation. Proof of existing electricity supply from the Langeberg Municipality is included in Appendix E.

If power supply is not available, where will power be sourced from? Not Applicable

5. ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Describe the design measures, if any, that have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient:

Not Applicable to the current application

Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity, if any:

Not Applicable to the current application


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 43

6. DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS PRIOR TO AND

AFTER MITIGATION Please Note: The potential impacts associated with the proposed development have been assessed for each Alternative individually: A1(preferred alternative), A2 (alternative layout) & A3 (No-Go option). Significant ratings were calculated as a percentage (%) and categorised as Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High (Refer to Section G for details on the assessment criteria and methodology used).

6.1 Impacts that may result from the planning, design and Construction Phase

6.1.1 Alternative A1 (Applicant’s preferred layout): Cultivation of 40 ha virgin land This alternative entails the cultivation of 40 ha vineyards in an area adjacent (north) to existing vineyards on the property (excluding the non-perennial stream Matjiesleegte) and adjacent to the existing power-supply point and water pipeline on the property. 36 ha CBA will be transformed. 14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and 26 ha Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation will be cleared.

6.1.1.1. Storm Water Run-off and Drainage

Description:

Additional storm water run-off may occur as a result of the removal of natural vegetation cover. Stormwater drainage problems are also known to occur along the District Road that runs along the northern boundary of the farm and proposed development site. This has created problems for school children walking to the Le Chasseur school, maintenance problems for the Department of Transport as well as neighbouring landowners.

Nature of impact: Negative

Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site and immediate surroundings Short-term

Probability of occurrence: High Probability

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partially Reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: Marginal Loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (31%)

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: The Impact can be mitigated

Proposed mitigation:

• Install the drainage system designed by the Department of Agriculture (LandCare) for this proposed block of vineyards – more detail provided in the EMP. It is anticipated that the drainage system will sufficiently drain excess storm- and irrigation water and prevent drainage problems on neighbouring farms.

• Cleared areas should be exposed for the minimum time possible before planting with vineyards.

• Vineyard rows should be planted parallel to the natural contours of the site.

• Land-clearing should preferably take place in the dry season, and not during the wet winter months.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact after mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (14%)

6.1.1.2. Erosion

Description: Exposed land will be sensitive to soil erosion


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site and immediate surroundings


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 44

Short term

Probability of occurrence: Likely

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: Medium loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation




• Land-clearing should take place during the dry season and not during the wet (rainy) winter months.

• Cleared areas should be exposed for the minimum time possible before planting with vineyards.


• Suitable mulch or a cover crop (inter-crop) should be established between the new rows to protect exposed soil.

• Regular monitoring for erosion should take place, and any identified erosion sites should be repaired as soon as possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (Negative) (12%) Significance rating of impact after mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Negligible

6.1.1.3.a Biological: Loss of indigenous plant species

Description:

The proposed development entails the clearing of 40 ha natural vegetation and will result in the localized loss of indigenous plant species on site. Over 83 plant species were recorded on site and it is likely that more species could be found in the target area. Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (which constitutes 14 ha) is known to support at least 10 Red Data List plant species, however no rare or endangered plant species were recorded during the botanical assessment. One Plant species listed as Declining (Boophone disticha (gifbol)) was found on site – however, this species is long lived and widely distributed throughout South Africa. All other recorded plant species have a fairly wide distribution in South Africa. It is highly likely that all Robertson Gannabos Thicket plant species found on the development site will be present in the surrounding natural areas (east and south of development site), which have similar habitat type.


Extent and duration of impact: Local Permanent – but mitigation can reduce the impact

Probability of occurrence: Certain/ definite



Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (49%)

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: The Impact can be partly mitigated


• Only the area targeted for the vineyard development should be cleared.

• Existing farm tracks/ roads should be used to access the site to avoid trampling of surrounding natural areas.

• Cleared vegetation and rocks should not be dumped on surrounding natural vegetation.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 45

• Dust levels must be kept to a minimum to avoid smothering of nearby vegetation (see 6.1.1.7)

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium (Negative) (42%) Significance rating of impact after mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium

6.1.1.3b. Biological: Loss of vegetation type

Description:

The proposed development will entail the clearing (loss) of 40 ha of natural vegetation, which comprises ±14 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and ±26 ha Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation. Breede Alluvium Renosterveld is classified as Vulnerable by the National List of Threatened Ecosystems 2011. The original extent of this vegetation type was ±50 000 ha of which ±50% (±25 000 ha) is still remaining (NSBA 2009). A loss of 14 ha of this vegetation type will constitute a loss of 0.056% of the natural remaining area. However, it is likely that the current (2013) remaining extent of this vegetation has already been reduced by other development and the impact on this vegetation may in fact be slightly higher. The pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld located on the property is relatively small, (± 40ha total extent), partially disturbed and isolated from other areas of similar vegetation, and is therefore regarded as having relatively low conservation value. Robertson Gannabos Thicket is considered Vulnerable at a local level by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project (2008). According to the FSP data the original extent of this vegetation type was 11276.55 ha of which 54.44% remains.













• Dust levels must be kept to a minimum to avoid smothering of nearby vegetation (see 6.1.1.7).

• No dumping or further disturbance should be allowed on the remaining pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld on the property

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium (Negative) (45%) Significance rating of impact after mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium

6.1.1.3c. Biological: Loss of habitat

Description: The development will result in the localized loss of 40 ha natural habitat (Breede Alluvium Renosterveld & Robertson


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 46

Gannabos Thicket vegetation). However, most fauna and other organisms found in the target area will have similar habitat available to them nearby, particularly in the natural areas to the east of the development site. The site is located adjacent to existing vineyards on the property, and although the development will encroach on natural habitat it will not fragment the remaining natural area on the property into additional smaller units.










• Only the area targeted for the vineyard development should be cleared of vegetation.



• Any animals encountered during land clearing should not be harmed and should be allowed to passively vacate the area, or should be physically relocated to a nearby natural area.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium Significance rating of impact after mitigation


6.1.1.3d. Biological: Loss of ecological processes

Description:

The development will result in the localized loss of natural Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (14 ha) and Robertson Gannabos Thicket (26 ha), and the associated ecological processes they support (e.g. pollination and migration of species). However, it is unlikely that the development will have a significant impact on ecological processes as the proposed development site is located on a relatively isolated natural fragment that is already surrounded by vineyards, and is not directly connected to any nearby natural areas. In its current state, the development site is likely to make only a minor contribution to ecological processes.


Extent and duration of impact: Local Project Life


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly reversibly Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

Medium-low loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (31%)



• Only the area targeted for vineyard development should be cleared.

• Existing farm tracks/ roads should be used to access the site.

• The non-perennial water course (Matjiesleegte) must be


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 47

excluded from the development.

• No movement of vehicles or machinery should be allowed through the Matjiesleegte watercourse (except via existing farm roads).

• Cleared vegetation or excavated rocks should not be dumped onto surrounding natural vegetation or into the Matjiesleegte non-perennial watercourse.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (22%)

6.1.1.3e. Biological: Reduction of a CBA

Description:

The proposed development will result in the fragmentation and transformation of ±36 ha of a terrestrial CBA, identified to meet vegetation type thresholds. This specific CBA is relatively small (±55 ha total extent) and is isolated from other nearby Critical Biodiversity Areas. This CBA does not form any direct linkages with nearby CBAs or natural areas, and the transformation of this CBA will not result in the obstruction of any biodiversity corridors.

(Note: it is believed that this area was designated as a CBA based on the SA Vegetation Map of South Africa (2006), which identified the entire site as Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which was listed as Endangered at the time the CBA maps were complied. Ground-truthing in 2012 has confirmed that only 14 ha of the development site is in fact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which is now listed as Vulnerable).



Probability of occurrence: Certain / definite


Medium loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (44%)





• No movement of vehicles or machinery should be allowed through the surrounding CBA fragments.

• Cleared vegetation or excavated rocks should not be dumped onto the surrounding CBA fragments.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (38%)

6.1.1.4. Heritage: Archaeological

Description:


2 (0.5 ha) in extent. Section 38 (b)(i) of the

Heritage Resources Act is therefore relevant. Thirty seven archaeological occurrences, numbering 43 stone implements were documented over the entire site. A possible grave was found at point 876 though no associated


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 48

material was found in the vicinity. The potential gravesite is excluded from all alternative layouts and will not be impacted on by the development.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited Permanent – but mitigation can reduce the impact



Marginal loss of heritage resources

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (20%)



• The specialist recommended that the possible grave site must be fenced off prior to any land clearing.

• Note that the grave site has been excluded from both proposed layout alternatives and will not be impacted upon by the development.

• The movement of vehicles or machinery should be restricted to the target area and not be allowed in the surrounding natural veld.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (16%)

6.1.1.5a. Socio-economic: Employment Opportunities

Description:

The development will result in the creation of potential employment opportunities during the construction phase of the development.

Nature of impact: Positive



Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Positive) (40%)

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Not Applicable


No mitigation measures required. However it is recommended that the employment opportunities are awarded to people from the local community, wherever feasibly possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Positive) (40%)

6.1.1.5b. Socio-economic: Financial Viability

Description:

The proposed development site is located adjacent to an existing electricity supply point and water pipeline on the property. No additional service infrastructure is required and the development is therefore the most economically viable option for the Applicant.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site & immediate surroundings Medium term


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not Applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 49

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Positive) (32%)


Proposed mitigation: Not Applicable

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Positive) (32%)

6.1.1.6. Dust

Description:

Earth moving activities during vegetation clearing and soil preparation may give rise to temporarily increased dust levels.


Extent and duration of impact: Local Short term

Probability of occurrence: High probability

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Completely reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (22%)



• Cleared land should be exposed for the minimum amount of time before planting with vineyards.

• A suitable mulch or cover-crop should be established between the newly planted vineyard rows to protect exposed soil.

• Land clearing should not take place during strong windy conditions.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (14%)

6.1.1.7. Noise

Description: Increased noise levels due to earth moving activities during land-clearing and vineyard establishment.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site & immediate surroundings Short term


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (18%)


Proposed mitigation: • The use of heavy machinery and any earth-moving

equipment should be restricted to normal working hours. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (16%)

6.1.1.8. Visual

Description: Land clearing and soil preparation may create a temporary visual impact


Extent and duration of impact: Local Short term


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly reversible

Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss No loss


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 50

of resources:

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (18%)




• Cleared land should be exposed for the minimum amount of time before planting with vineyards.

• A suitable mulch or cover-crop should be established between the vineyard rows to protect exposed soil.


6.1.2 Alternative A2: Cultivation of 36 ha virgin land

This alternative entails the cultivation of 36 ha vineyards in an area adjacent (north) to existing vineyards on the property (excluding the non-perennial stream Matjiesleegte) and adjacent to the existing power-supply point and water pipeline on the property. 29.5 ha CBA will be transformed. 7.5 ha Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and 26 ha Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation will be cleared.

6.1.2.1. Storm Water

Same as for Alternative A1 (6.1.1.1)

6.1.2.2. Erosion


6.1.2.3a. Biological: Loss of indigenous plant species

Description:

The proposed development will entail the loss of 36 ha natural vegetation. The majority of plant species recorded on site has a wide distribution throughout South Africa. It is highly likely that all plant species in the target area will be found in the nearby natural areas (east and south of the development site) which have similar vegetation. The development will therefore not destroy local plant populations entirely.


Extent and duration of impact: Local Permanent – but mitigation can reduce impact











• Dust levels must be kept to a minimum to avoid smothering of nearby vegetation (see 6.1.1.7)

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 51

Significance rating of impact after mitigation



Description:

Loss of 36 ha natural Robertson Gannabos Thicket vegetation, which is considered Vulnerable at a local level by the C.A.P.E. Fine-Scale Biodiversity Planning Project (2008).












• The non-perennial water course (Matjiesleegte) must be excluded from the development.

• No movement of vehicles or machinery should be allowed through the Matjiesleegte watercourse or the pocket of Breede Alluvium Fynbos located south and south-east of the site (except via existing farm roads).


Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation

(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium-Low (Negative) (38%)


Description:

The development will result in the localized loss of 36 ha natural habitat. However, most fauna and other organisms found in the target area will have similar habitat available to them nearby, particularly in the natural areas to the south and east of the development site. The development is located north of existing vineyards on the property and will result in the slight fragmentation of the remaining natural area located in the northern section of De Wilgen.






Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation




• Only the area targeted for the vineyard development should be cleared of vegetation.




DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 52

• Any animals encountered during land clearing should not be harmed and should be allowed to passively vacate the area, or should be physically relocated to a nearby natural area.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact after mitigation



Description:

The development will result in the localized loss of 36 ha natural vegetation, and the associated ecological processes it supports (e.g. pollination and migration of species). However, it is unlikely that the development will have a significant impact on ecological processes as the proposed development site is located on a relatively isolated natural fragment that is already surrounded by vineyards, and is not directly connected to any nearby natural areas. In its current state, the development site is likely to make only a minor contribution to ecological processes.




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

Medium-low loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (31%)





• The non-perennial water course (Matjiesleegte) must be excluded from the development.

• No movement of vehicles or machinery should be allowed through the Matjiesleegte watercourse (except via existing farm roads).


Cumulative impact post mitigation: low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (22%)


Description:

The proposed development will result in the transformation of 29.5 ha CBA, identified to meet vegetation type thresholds.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site & immediate surroundings Permanent – but mitigation can reduce impact



Medium loss



Proposed mitigation: • Only the area targeted for vineyard development should

be cleared.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 53


• No movement of vehicles or machinery should be allowed through the surrounding CBA fragments.

• Cleared vegetation or excavated rocks should not be dumped onto the surrounding CBA fragments.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (35%)


Description:



Heritage Resources Act is therefore relevant. Thirty seven archaeological occurrences, numbering 43 stone implements were documented over the entire site. A possible grave was found at point 876 though no associated material was found in the vicinity. The potential gravesite is excluded from all alternative layouts and will not be impacted on by the development.














Same as for Alternative A1 (6.1.1.5a.)


Description:

Additional water and electricity service infrastructure will need to be developed, at an additional cost to the Applicant. This additional cost will negatively impact the financial viability and economic sustainability of the proposed development.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited Medium term

Probability of occurrence: High Probability


Medium-low loss of Applicant financial resources


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 54

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (23%)

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Cannot be mitigated


No mitigation is possible, other than to ensure that the service infrastructure expansion is done as cost effectively as possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium - Low (Negative) (23%)

6.1.2.6. Dust


6.1.2.7. Noise


6.1.2.8. Visual


6.1.3 Alternative A3: No-Go


Description: No additional storm water run-off is expected

6.1.3.2. Erosion

Description: No additional erosion will occur on site

6.1.3.3a. Biological: Loss of indigenous plant species

Description: No loss of plant species


Description: No loss of vegetation type


Description: No loss of habitat


Description: No loss of ecological processes


Description: No loss of CBAs


Description: No impact on Archaeological resources

6.1.3.5a. Socio-economic:

Description:

No additional part-time or permanent employment opportunities will be created for the local community. There will be no additional local economic development.


Extent and duration of impact: Local Permanent


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable

Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss No loss


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 55

of resources:

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (45%)


Proposed mitigation: No mitigation is possible

Cumulative impact post mitigation: low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (45%)


Description:

The agricultural potential and economic value of the property will not be increased. Grape-production will not be increased and the financial viability of the farming operation on De Wilgen will not be improved.




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: low Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (42%)


Proposed mitigation: No mitigation is possible

Cumulative impact post mitigation: low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (42%)

6.1.3.6. Dust

Description: No additional dust be will be created

6.1.3.7. Noise

Description: No additional noise will be created

6.1.3.8. Visual

Description: No visual impact will be created

6.2 Impacts that may result from the Operational Phase

6.2.1 Alternative A1 – Applicants Preferred Layout

6.2.1.1. Storm Water and Drainage

Description:

Stormwater run-off and irrigation return-flows may drain into the lower-lying areas, specifically affecting the District Road and neighbouring farms (Farms 94/RE and 94/9) that lies adjacent to the northern border of the proposed new vineyards.





loss of resources: Marginal loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation


Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: The impact can be mitigated


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 56


• Install the subsurface drainage system designed by the Western Cape Department of Agriculture (LandCare, Worcester).

• Effective soil moisture monitoring and irrigation scheduling should be implemented, to prevent unnecessary run-off to downslope areas.

• Use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides should be restricted to only that which is strictly necessary (to prevent run-off of excess chemicals), and applied at appropriate volume and concentration according to standard Best Practice.

• Organic or "eco-friendly" fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, fungicide etc products should be utilized wherever reasonably possible.

• An appropriate mulch or cover-crop (intercrop) should be established between vineyard rows to protect exposed soil (particularly during the rainy winter season).



6.2.1.2. Erosion

Description: Soil erosion may occur in the newly cultivated areas.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site & immediate surroundings Long term

Probability of occurrence: Probable


loss of resources: Marginal loss



Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: The impact can be partly mitigated


• An appropriate mulch or cover-crop (intercrop) should be established between vineyard rows to protect exposed soil (particularly during the rainy winter season).

• Tilling should be kept to a minimum.

• Regular monitoring for erosion should take place, and any identified erosion sites must be rehabilitated as soon as possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact after mitigation


6.2.1.3. Biological: Fauna, Flora and Ecological Processes

Description:

Operational activities may impact directly or indirectly on the adjacent natural areas, and may result in the degradation of the remaining CBA fragments and other adjacent natural areas on De Wilgen. The non-perennial watercourse located south of the development site may be vulnerable to physical disturbance and degradation by operational activities.



Probability of occurrence: Definite


loss of resources: High loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 57

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation


Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Partly mitigated


• A fence line will be erected around the new vineyard block to protect the surrounding natural veld.

• The development must be restricted to the proposed footprint area.

• Existing farm roads/tracks should be utilized to access the new vineyard development.

• No movement of vehicles/ machinery should be allowed through the Matjiesleegte watercourse or surrounding natural areas (other than via existing roads/tracks).

• Trampling of the surrounding natural areas should not be allowed.

• No dumping of any debris should be allowed on surrounding natural areas or in the Matjiesleegte watercourse.

• Poisons (pesticides and herbicides) should only be used when strictly necessary, and then applied in the appropriate volume & concentration according to Best Practise procedures. Care must be taken not to spray the surrounding natural areas.

• Organic/ "eco-friendly" pesticides & herbicides should be used where ever possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium Significance rating of impact after mitigation



Description:







Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly reversibly Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: Marginal loss of heritage resources









DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 58


Description:

The operational phase of the proposed development will generate 10 new employment opportunities, and will contribute to local economic development




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: No loss


(Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Positive) (40%)



No mitigation required. However it is recommended that employment opportunities are awarded to people from the local community whenever possible.



6.2.1.5b. Socio-economic: Agricultural Potential & Financial Viability

Description:

The proposed development will increase the agricultural potential and economic value of De Wilgen. The development will also increase grape production on the property, which will improve the economic viability of the existing farming operation, and help to sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities.


Extent and duration of impact: Limited to site & immediate surroundings Permanent


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss





6.2.1.6. Dust

Description:

The proposed development is not expected to produce any additional dust, over and above that produced by the existing farming operation.


Extent and duration of impact: Very Limited Immediate

Probability of occurrence: Rare

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Completely reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Negligible Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (4%)



Cumulative impact post mitigation: Negligible


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 59

Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (Negative) (4%)

6.2.1.7. Noise

Description:

The proposed development is not expected to produce any additional noise, over and above that already produced by the existing farming operation




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Irreversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: No loss





6.2.1.8. Visual

Description:

The operational phase of the development will not produce a visual impact. The proposed development is in line with the existing land use on the property and on adjacent properties, and is in keeping with the agricultural character of the surrounding landscape.




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Partly/ completely reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources:

No loss





6.2.2 Alternative A2



6.2.2.2. Erosion



Description:

Operational activities may impact directly or indirectly on the adjacent natural areas, and may result in the degradation of the remaining CBA fragment and the isolated pocket of Vulnerable Breede Alluvium Renosterveld south of the development site. Alternative A2 does, however, exclude a section of intact CBA/Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, and include a disturbed piece of CBA. The non-perennial


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 60

watercourse located >350 m south of the development site may be vulnerable to physical disturbance and degradation by operational activities.








Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: The impact can be mitigated


• The parcel of CBA/Breede Alluvium Renosterveld must be excluded from the development as indicated in the layout maps (Appendix B).

• The development must be restricted to the proposed footprint area.

• A fence line will be erected around the new vineyard block to protect the surrounding natural veld.

• Existing farm roads/tracks should be utilized to access the new vineyard development.

• No movement of vehicles/ machinery should be allowed through the Matjiesleegte watercourse or surrounding natural areas (other than via existing roads/tracks).

• Trampling of the surrounding natural areas should not be allowed.

• No dumping of any debris should be allowed on surrounding natural areas or in the Matjiesleegte watercourse.

• Poisons (pesticides and herbicides) should only be used when strictly necessary, and then applied in the appropriate volume & concentration according to Best Practise procedures. Care must be taken not to spray the surrounding natural areas. Organic/ "eco-friendly" pesticides & herbicides should be used where ever possible.




Description:









Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 61

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Low (20%)








Description:

The operational phase of the proposed development will generate 10 new employment opportunities, and will contribute to local economic development.




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable






No mitigation required. However it is recommended that employment opportunities are awarded to people from the local community whenever possible.




Description:

The proposed development will increase the agricultural potential and economic value of De Wilgen. The development will also increase grape production on the property, which will improve the economic viability of the existing farming operation, and help to sustain existing (and future) employment opportunities.





No loss





6.2.2.6. Dust



DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 62

6.2.2.7. Noise


6.2.2.8. Visual


6.2.3 Alternative A3 – No-Go

6.2.3.1. Storm Water Run-off and Drainage

Description:

No additional impact on the neighbouring farms and District Road that runs adjacent to the proposed new vineyard block.

6.2.3.2. Erosion

Description: No additional erosion is expected


Description: No additional impact on fauna or flora, or ecological processes

6.2.3.4. Heritage

Description: No additional impact on heritage resources


Description: No additional employment opportunities will be created. There will be no contribution to local economic development.




Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not Applicable Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable





Proposed mitigation: No mitigation is possible.




Description:

The agricultural potential of the property will not be increased. The economic value of the property will not be increased, and the economic viability of the current farming operation will not be improved.





No loss



DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 63


Proposed mitigation: No mitigation is possible.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium-low Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High or High) Medium (Negative) (46%)

6.2.3.6. Dust

Description: No additional dust will be created

6.2.3.7. Noise

Description: No additional noise will be created

6.2.3.8. Visual

Description: No visual impact will be created

6.3 Impacts that may result from the Decommissioning Phase It is highly unlikely that the proposed vineyard development will ever be decommissioned, and the impacts that would be associated with the decommissioning phase are not addressed in this report. However, should the Applicant decide to decommission the vineyard at some point in the future, the following recommendations apply:

• An adequate cover crop should be established on the site, to stabilize the soil and prevent erosion

• The site should be rehabilitated back to a natural state. Cape Nature can be contacted for details and guidance on how to rehabilitate the site

• Alien vegetation must not be allowed to become established on the decommissioned site. Regular monitoring and removal of alien vegetation should take place

6.4 Any other impacts

Not Applicable


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 64

7. SPECIALIST INPUTS/STUDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Please note: Specialist inputs/studies must be attached to this report as Appendix G. Also take into account the Department’s

Guidelines on the Involvement of Specialists in EIA Processes available on the Department’s website

(http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

Botanical Impact Assessment A Botanical Impact Assessment was conducted by Ms Johlene Krige. The Botanical report is included in Appendix G. Recommendations made by the botanist in the botanical report are repeated below. Note that these recommendations/ mitigations have been integrated into the EMP (Appendix H). Recommendations & Proposed Mitigation:

• The Matjiesleegte stream should be avoided as far as possible. No disturbances should take place

within this ecological support area.

• Rocks and vegetation debris should not be dumped onto adjacent natural vegetation.

• Dust levels should be kept to a minimum to avoid smothering of sensitive areas by windblown

sediments.

• Effective measures must be implemented to prevent soil erosion within the new cultivated areas.

• Any animals encountered during the land clearing activities should be left unharmed and relocated to

adjacent natural areas.

• The remaining area of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld should remain intact (should not be developed in

future).

• An alternative layout plan, where the Breede Alluvium Renosterveld section on the property is

completely excluded from the development site, should be considered as part of the EIA. The

ecological benefits should be measured against potential negative socio-economic impacts.

• An alternative area on the property (which is better connected to other natural areas within the local

area) can be safeguarded from any development to compensate for the loss of CBA.

Archaeological Impact Assessment ACRM was appointed to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed development of 40 ha of virgin agricultural land on Portion 10 of Farm 91 De Wilgen (Appendix G2). Commenting on the required Notification of Intent to Develop (NID), Heritage Western Cape (HWC) (Case no. 130121TS06) requested that a HIA, consisting of an archaeological study must be done. Thirty-seven archeological occurrences numbering 43 stone implements were counted and mapped with a hand held GPS device. The very small numbers and isolated context in which they were found mean that the archaeological heritage on De Wilgen has been rated as having low (Grade 3C) significance. A possible pre-colonial grave was documented in the north eastern portion of the proposed alternative development sites. The ‘grave’ has potentially been rated as having moderate/high (Grade 3B) significance. The overall results of the study indicate that the proposed development on De Wilgen will not have an impact of great significance on the archaeological heritage. The following recommendations were made by the specialist:

1. No archaeological mitigation is required. 2. Monitoring of vegetation clearing operations is not required. 3. The possible grave in the proposed alternative development site must be fenced off prior to any land

clearing commencing.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 65

4. Should any unmarked human remains be uncovered or exposed during excavations these must immediately be reported to the archaeologist (Jonathan Kaplan 082 321 0172) or Heritage Western Cape (Troy Smuts 021 483 9692).

Soil Potential Study A Soil Potential Study was conducted by Mr Francois Roux on the 15

th of April 2013 on De Wilgen (Farm

91/10), Robertson. The aim of the study was to assess the suitability of the soil for the establishment of vineyards (wine grapes). A soil map was provided together with the soil report and is attached in Appendix G. According to the soil scientist the soil in the proposed area is suitable for vineyard cultivation since it is mostly more than 80 cm deep (65% of the soil surface). The deeper the soil, the higher the potential for cultivation. The low clay content and high percentage of rocks do however affect the soil’s potential to hold water. This is not seen as problematic, however, and can be controlled by means of effective irrigation management and a fertilization programme. According to the scientist the lower-potential soils are more concentrated in the northern section of the proposed site. See soil potential map. A series of soil preparation steps is included in the specialist report (Appendix G3).

Drainage Study done by Department of Agriculture (LandCare) Officials from the Department of Agriculture (LandCare) visited De Wilgen (Farm 91/10), Robertson on 24 June 2013. A soil analysis and a topographical survey were conducted on the demarcated area, which determined that a subsurface drainage system is required to prevent the salination of soil through long-term irrigation. A draft drainage plan was designed by LandCare and discussed with the Applicant. The final design will be provided to the Applicant once it is finalised and signed off by the head engineer. The Dept. of Agriculture requested that the drainage system be installed at the same time land clearing commences.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 66

8. IMPACT SUMMARY

Please provide a summary of all the above impacts.

The most significant negative impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development will be the loss of Vulnerable vegetation-type (Breede Alluvium Renosterveld), and the associated loss of habitat and the localized loss of indigenous plant species. The Applicant’s preferred layout (Alternative A1) would transform 36 ha of CBA of which 14 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. The alternative option (A2) would transform approximately 29.5 ha CBA of which 7.5 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. Alternative A2 is more environmentally friendly since it excludes a pocket of intact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and includes a highly disturbed section west of the development site (currently used as a dumping site for rocks, etc.). These negative impacts are of medium significance before and after the application of suitable mitigation measures. All other impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development are of Medium-Low or Low impact prior to mitigation. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures should reduce the significance of most negative impacts to Low. The operational phase of the development will have only limited negative impacts of Low or Medium-low significance. Stormwater and drainage problems were specifically identified as a potential problem during the commenting periods, but with the proposed installation of a subsurface drainage system designed by the Department of Agriculture, the significance of impact is scored as Low. The proposed development will also generate positive socio-economic impacts during both the construction and operational phases. These positive impacts include the generation of additional employment opportunities, a contribution to local economic development, and an increase in the agricultural potential and economic viability of De Wilgen, which will help to sustain current (and future) employment opportunities. Impact summary tables are provided below. The following colour schemes were attributed to specific impact ratings.

NEGATIVE Threshold limits POSITIVE Threshold limits

High High

High - Medium High - Medium

Medium Medium

Medium - Low Medium - Low

Low Low

Table 1: Im

pact summary tables

Imp

act

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

1S

torm

Wate

r R

un

-off

an

d D

rain

ag

eM

ediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)31

Low

(N

egative

)14

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)31

Low

(N

egative

)14

-0

-0

2Ero

sio

nM

ediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)20

Low

(N

egative

)12

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)20

Low

(N

egative

)12

-0

-0

3a

Bio

log

ical:

Lo

ss

of

ind

ige

no

us

pla

nt

sp

ec

ies

Mediu

m (

Negative

)49

Mediu

m (

Negative

)42

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)38

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)33

-0

-0

3b

Bio

log

ical:

Lo

ss

of

ve

ge

tati

on

typ

eM

ediu

m (

Negative

)51

Mediu

m (

Negative

)45

Mediu

m (

Negative

)43

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)38

-0

-0

3c

Bio

log

ical:

Lo

ss

of

ha

bit

at

Mediu

m (

Negative

)46

Mediu

m (

Negative

)40

Mediu

m (

Negative

)43

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)38

-0

-0

3d

Bio

log

ical:

Lo

ss

of

ec

olo

gic

al

pro

ce

ss

es

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)31

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)22

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)31

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)22

-0

-0

3e

Bio

log

ical:

Re

du

cti

on

of

a C

BA

Mediu

m (

Negative

)44

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)38

Mediu

m (

Negative

)40

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)35

-0

-0

4H

eri

tag

e:

Arc

hae

olo

gic

al

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)21

Low

(N

egative

)16

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)21

Low

(N

egative

)16

-0

-0

5a

So

cio

-ec

on

om

ic: e

mp

loy

me

nt

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Negative

)45

Mediu

m (

Negative

)45

5b

So

cio

-ec

on

om

ic: F

ina

ncia

l via

bilit

yM

ediu

m -

Low

(P

ositiv

e)

32

Mediu

m -

Low

(P

ositiv

e)

32

Mediu

m -

Low

(P

ositiv

e)

23

Mediu

m -

Low

(P

ositiv

e)

23

Mediu

m (

Negative

)42

Mediu

m (

Negative

)42

6D

us

tM

ediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)22

Low

(N

egative

)14

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)22

Low

(N

egative

)14

-0

-0

7N

ois

eLow

(N

egative

)18

Low

(N

egative

)16

Low

(N

egative

)18

Low

(N

egative

)16

-0

-0

8V

isu

al

Low

(N

egative

)18

Low

(N

egative

)14

Low

(N

egative

)16

Low

(N

egative

)14

-0

-0

Imp

act

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

Sig

nif

ica

nce

(%)

1S

torm

Wate

r R

un

-off

an

d D

rain

ag

eM

ediu

m (

Negative

)43

Low

(N

egative

)20

Mediu

m (

Negative

)43

Low

(N

egative

)20

-0

-0

2Ero

sio

nM

ediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)21

Low

(N

egative

)12

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)21

Low

(N

egative

)12

-0

-0

3

Bio

log

ical:

Fau

na

, F

lora

an

d e

co

log

ica

l

pro

ce

ss

es

Mediu

m (

Negative

)42

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)32

Mediu

m -

Low

(N

egative

)31

Low

(N

egative

)17

-0

-0

4H

eri

tag

eLow

(N

egative

)20

Low

(N

egative

)16

Low

(N

egative

)20

Low

(N

egative

)16

-0

-0

5a

So

cio

-ec

on

om

ic: E

mp

loym

en

t o

pp

ort

un

itie

sM

ediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Negative

)48

Mediu

m (

Negative

)48

5b

So

cio

-ec

on

om

ic: A

gri

cu

ltu

ral

po

ten

tia

l &

fin

an

cia

l v

iab

ilit

yM

ediu

m (

Positiv

e)

43

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

43

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Positiv

e)

40

Mediu

m (

Negative

)46

Mediu

m (

Negative

)46

6D

us

tLow

(N

egative

)4

Low

(N

egative

)4

Low

(N

egative

)4

Low

(N

egative

)4

-0

-0

7N

ois

eLow

(N

egative

)5

Low

(N

egative

)5

Low

(N

egative

)5

Low

(N

egative

)5

-0

-0

8V

isu

al

Low

(N

egative

)2

Low

(N

egative

)2

Low

(N

egative

)2

Low

(N

egative

)2

-0

-0

No

-Go

Op

tio

n (

A3)

Pre

-mit

iga

tio

nP

ost

-mit

iga

tio

n

No

-Go

Op

tio

n (

A3)

Pre

-mit

iga

tio

nP

ost

-mit

iga

tio

nO

pe

rati

on

al

Ph

ase

Pre

ferr

ed

La

yo

ut

Op

tio

n (

A1)

Alt

ern

ati

ve

La

yo

ut

Op

tio

n (

A2)

Pre

-mit

iga

tio

nP

ost

-mit

iga

tio

nP

re-m

itig

ati

on

Po

st-m

itig

ati

on

Co

nst

ructi

on

Ph

ase

Pre

ferr

ed

La

yo

ut

Op

tio

n (

A1)

Alt

ern

ati

ve

La

yo

ut

Op

tio

n (

A2)

Pre

-mit

iga

tio

nP

ost

-mit

iga

tio

nP

re-m

itig

ati

on

Po

st-m

itig

ati

on

9. OTHER MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES

(a) Over and above the mitigation measures described in Section 6 above, please indicate any additional management,

mitigation and monitoring measures.

Not Applicable

(b) Describe the ability of the applicant to implement the management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

It is anticipated that the Applicant will be able to implement all proposed mitigation measures. The development entails the expansion of an existing farming operation. The management processes and practices that are already in place can be relatively easily expanded and amended to accommodate the new development and to ensure that the development is managed in accordance with the proposed management, mitigation and monitoring measures proposed in this report. Most of the impacts associated with the development are of Medium – Low significance, and do not require complex mitigation. A draft Environmental Management Programme (EMP) is included with the BAR (Appendix H), and it provides clear guidelines on the mitigation and monitoring measures that must be put in place. Start-up/ construction and operational checklists are included that will assist the Applicant, the Environmental Officer and/or Environmental Control Officer (if applicable) in ensuring that all management, mitigation and monitoring measures prescribed in the final BAR are adhered to.

Please note: A draft ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME must be attached this report as Appendix H.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 69

SECTION G: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES AND

CRITERIA, GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE, UNDERLAYING

ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES

(a) Please describe adequacy of the assessment methods used.

Assessment methods used include the following:

• Site visits to determine the nature and sensitivity of the site and the surrounding environment.

• Consulting with the Applicant to gain an understanding of the need for the proposed activity.

• Consulting with relevant commenting authorities.

• Obtaining input from an Archaeological Specialist (see Archaeological Specialist Report – Appendix G).

• Obtaining botanical input (see Botanical – Ecological Specialist Report – Appendix G).

• Consulting with the DEA&DP

• Consideration of the applicable Legislation, Guidelines and Policies

• Consideration of 2001 / 2011 Census data and the current local, district and provincial IDPs, SDFs in order to understand the socio-economic context of the proposed development

The assessment methods proved adequate to determine the nature and extent of all impacts that the proposed development may have on the natural, social and economic environments.

(b) Please describe the assessment criteria used.

According to DEAT

1 (2006) risk is determined by three main factors:

1. How often it occurs (likelihood, frequency, probability) 2. Severity of the event (consequence, severity, magnitude, impact) 3. How long it will occur (exposure) Risk was calculated using the following formula:

Risk (Significance) = likelihood x consequence These attributes were further refined to the following:

LIKELIHOOD = frequency + probability EXPOSURE = extent / scale (geographical or spatial) + duration SEVERITY is determined by the MAGNITUDE of the action - MAGNITUDE considers different fields including:

• Social (health, safety, community, cultural heritage);

• Economic;

• Natural Environment (faunal, floral, biophysical); CONSEQUENCE = exposure + severity SIGNIFICANCE = LIKELIHOOD X CONSEQUENCE

The method used to assess impacts for the purpose of this report, utilizes a spreadsheet with a list of identified aspects (that may be impacted upon) and uses the attributes listed above to calculate the significance of potential impacts, before and after mitigation, on these aspects. Each attribute/ criterion is assigned a numerical value and with the relevant calculation a significance risk rating ranging from Low; Low – Medium; Medium; Medium – High; High is determined. The following criteria (including an allocated point system) were used for the assessment of potential impacts (Table 2):

1 DEAT. 2006. Risk management, integrated environmental management information series 23. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

(DEAT).

Ta

ble

2:

Bo

land

En

vir

o E

nvir

onm

en

tal Im

pa

ct

Asse

ssm

ent

Rating S

yste

m U

se

d to

Cla

ssify

Impa

cts

.

Pa

ram

ete

r W

eig

hti

ng

: N

OT

E:

This

table

serv

es a

s a

basis

fro

m w

hic

h t

he a

ssessm

ent

was d

one.

Th

e n

ecessary

ada

pta

tio

ns a

re m

ade f

or

each c

rite

rion a

s t

he

y a

re p

roje

ct

specific

(e.g

. very

fr

eq

uent

can b

e o

nce a

day o

r once a

month

, depe

ndin

g o

n t

he n

atu

re o

f th

e p

roje

ct

and im

pact)

.

Att

rib

ute

& D

efi

nit

ion

V

alu

e

Exp

os

ure

/ P

rob

ab

ilit

y

Fre

qu

en

cy

D

esc

rip

tio

n

Natu

re o

f th

e i

mp

act:

A d

escription o

f positiv

e o

r ne

gative e

ffect

of th

e p

roje

ct

on th

e a

ffecte

d e

nvir

onm

ent,

or

vic

e v

ers

a.

P

ositiv

e

N

egative

D

irect

In

dir

ect

C

um

ula

tive

S

ynerg

istic

Fre

qu

en

cy o

f acti

on

hap

pen

ing

:

The n

um

ber

of tim

es that a

n e

ve

nt occurs

w

ithin

a g

iven p

eri

od;

rate

of re

curr

ence.

7

Continuous

> 1

/day;

once p

er

shift

6

Very

fre

qu

ent

1/d

ay

5

Fre

quent

1/

month

4

Occasio

nal

> 1

/ye

ar

3

Unusual/ra

re

> 1

/5 y

ears

2

Very

rare

>

1/1

0 y

ears

1

Rem

ote

>

1/1

00 y

ears

Pro

bab

ilit

y /

Ris

k p

ote

nti

al:

D

escri

bes th

e lik

elih

ood o

f th

e im

pact

actu

ally

occurr

ing.

7

Cert

ain

/ D

efinite

> 1

/w

eek

Happ

ens f

req

uently;

the im

pact w

ill o

ccur

reg

ard

less o

f th

e im

ple

me

nta

tion o

f a

ny

pre

venta

tive o

r corr

ective a

ctions.

6

Alm

ost cert

ain

/ H

igh p

rob

abili

ty

> 1

/m

onth

H

app

ens o

fte

n; It

is m

ost lik

ely

that

the im

pact

will

occur.

5

Lik

ely

>

1/y

ear

Could

easily

ha

ppe

n /

The im

pact

may o

ccur.

4

Pro

bable

1/5

ye

ars

C

ould

hap

pen / H

as o

ccurr

ed h

ere

or

els

ew

here

.

3

Unlik

ely

/ L

ow

pro

ba

bili

ty

1/3

0 y

ears

H

as n

ot

happ

ene

d y

et,

but co

uld

happ

en o

nce

in the lifetim

e o

f th

e p

roje

ct. T

here

is a

possib

ility

that th

e im

pact

will

occur.

FIN

AL B

AS

IC A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T R

EP

OR

T –

CLE

AR

ING

OF

VIR

GIN

LA

ND

FO

R V

INE

YA

RD

DE

VE

LO

PM

EN

T

ON

DE

WIL

GE

N,

FA

RM

91, P

OR

TIO

N 1

0,

RO

BE

RT

SO

N.

DE

A&

DP

RE

F:

16/3

/1/1

/B1/1

4/1

00

7/1

3

71

2

Rare

/ I

mpro

ba

ble

1/1

00 y

ears

Conceiv

able

, b

ut o

nly

in e

xtr

em

e

circum

sta

nces.

Has n

ot h

ap

pened d

uri

ng

lifetim

e o

f th

e p

roje

ct, b

ut

has h

app

en

ed

els

ew

here

. T

he p

ossib

ility

of

the im

pact

mate

rialis

ing is v

ery

low

as a

result o

f d

esig

n,

his

toric e

xp

eri

ence o

r im

ple

me

nta

tio

n o

f ade

quate

mitig

ation m

easure

s.

1

Hig

hly

unlik

ely

/ N

one

1/1

000 y

ears

E

xpecte

d n

ever

to h

app

en. Im

pact w

ill n

ot

occur.

LIK

EL

IHO

OD

(F

req

uen

cy +

Pro

bab

ilit

y):

T

he p

ossib

ility

of

an u

ncert

ain

futu

re e

ve

nt

occu

rrin

g.

It is d

ete

rmin

ed b

y th

e f

req

ue

ncy o

f th

e a

ction t

hat ca

n lead to a

n e

vent,

to

geth

er

with t

he p

robabili

ty o

f th

e e

vent h

appe

nin

g.

Geo

gra

ph

ical

Exte

nt

/ S

cale

:

A

measure

of

ho

w w

idely

th

e im

pact

would

occur.

7

Inte

rnational

T

he e

ffect w

ill o

ccur

acro

ss inte

rnatio

nal

bord

ers

6

Natio

nal

W

ill a

ffect

the e

ntire

countr

y

5

Pro

vin

ce / R

egio

n

W

ill a

ffect

the e

ntire

pro

vin

ce o

r re

gio

n

4

Munic

ipal are

a

W

ill a

ffect

the w

hole

mu

nic

ipal are

a

3

Local

E

xte

ndin

g o

nly

as f

ar

as t

he d

evelo

pm

ent

site

are

a a

nd th

e im

media

te s

urr

oundin

gs

2

Lim

ited

Lim

ited to t

he s

ite

1

Very

lim

ited

Lim

ited to s

pecific

isola

ted p

art

s o

f th

e s

ite

Du

rati

on

:

A m

easure

of

the lifespa

n o

f th

e im

pact(

s)

associa

ted w

ith t

he p

rop

ose

d a

ctivity.

7

Perm

anent -

no m

itig

ation

No m

itig

atio

n m

easure

s o

f natu

ral pro

cess w

ill

red

uce t

he im

pact

after

imple

menta

tion

6

Perm

anent -

mitig

ate

d

M

itig

ation m

easure

s o

f natu

ral pro

cess w

ill

red

uce t

he im

pact

5

Pro

ject lif

e

T

he im

pact w

ill c

ease a

fter

the

op

era

tio

nal lif

e

spa

n o

f th

e p

roje

ct

4

Lon

g t

erm

6-1

5 y

ears

; be

yon

d t

he o

pera

tion

al p

hase,

but

not

perm

an

ently

3

Mediu

m t

erm

1-5

ye

ars

; d

uri

ng p

art

or

all

of

the o

pera

tio

nal

phase

2

Short

term

Less th

an o

ne y

ear;

durin

g t

he

constr

uction

phase)

1

Imm

edia

te

Less th

an o

ne m

onth

FIN

AL B

AS

IC A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T R

EP

OR

T –

CLE

AR

ING

OF

VIR

GIN

LA

ND

FO

R V

INE

YA

RD

DE

VE

LO

PM

EN

T

ON

DE

WIL

GE

N,

FA

RM

91, P

OR

TIO

N 1

0,

RO

BE

RT

SO

N.

DE

A&

DP

RE

F:

16/3

/1/1

/B1/1

4/1

00

7/1

3

72

EX

PO

SU

RE

(G

eo

gra

ph

ical

Exte

nt

+ D

ura

tio

n):

Dete

rmin

ed b

y th

e d

ura

tio

n o

f th

e a

ction t

ogeth

er

with t

he g

eogra

phic

al e

xte

nt/scale

of th

e e

ve

nt.

Natu

ral

En

vir

on

men

t:

7

Very

sig

nific

ant

impact

on t

he

enviro

nm

ent.

Irr

epara

ble

dam

ag

e t

o

hig

hly

valu

ed s

pecie

s,

ha

bitat

or

ecosyste

m.

Pers

iste

nt

sever

dam

age.

6

Sig

nific

ant

impact o

n h

ighly

va

lued

specie

s,

ha

bitat

or

ecosyste

m.

5

Very

seri

ous lo

ng-t

erm

envir

onm

enta

l im

pair

ment

of ecosyste

m f

unction

that m

ay t

ake s

evera

l years

to

reh

abili

tate

.

4

Sero

us m

ediu

m-t

erm

enviro

nm

enta

l effects

. E

nvir

onm

enta

l dam

ag

e c

an

be r

evers

ed in less t

han a

ye

ar.

3

Modera

te,

short

-term

eff

ects

but n

ot

affectin

g e

cosyste

m f

unction.

Rehabili

tatio

n r

equir

es inte

rve

ntio

n o

f exte

rnal specia

lists

and c

an b

e d

one

in less t

han a

mo

nth

.

2

Min

or

eff

ects

on b

iolo

gic

al or

physic

al

enviro

nm

ent.

Enviro

nm

enta

l d

am

age

can b

e r

eha

bili

tate

d inte

rnally

w

ith/w

itho

ut

help

of

exte

rnal

consulta

nts

.

1

Lim

ited d

am

age to m

inim

al are

a o

f lo

w s

ignific

ance (

e.g

. ad h

oc s

pill

s

within

pla

nt

are

a).

Will

have n

o

impact

on e

nviro

nm

ent.

So

cia

l:

7

Irre

para

ble

dam

age to h

ighly

valu

ed

item

s o

f gre

at cultura

l sig

nific

ance o

r com

ple

te b

reakdow

n o

f socia

l ord

er.

6

Irre

para

ble

dam

age to h

ighly

valu

ed

item

s o

f cultura

l sig

nific

ance o

r bre

akd

ow

n o

f socia

l ord

er.

5

Very

seri

ous w

idespre

ad s

ocia

l im

pacts

. Ir

repara

ble

dam

ag

e t

o

hig

hly

valu

ed ite

ms.

FIN

AL B

AS

IC A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T R

EP

OR

T –

CLE

AR

ING

OF

VIR

GIN

LA

ND

FO

R V

INE

YA

RD

DE

VE

LO

PM

EN

T

ON

DE

WIL

GE

N,

FA

RM

91, P

OR

TIO

N 1

0,

RO

BE

RT

SO

N.

DE

A&

DP

RE

F:

16/3

/1/1

/B1/1

4/1

00

7/1

3

73

4

Ongoin

g s

erio

us s

ocia

l is

sues.

Sig

nific

ant

dam

age to

str

uctu

res/ite

ms o

f cultura

l sig

nific

ance.

3

Ongoin

g h

ealth o

r socia

l is

sues.

Dam

ag

e t

o ite

ms o

f cultura

l sig

nific

ance.

2

Min

or

mediu

m-t

erm

socia

l im

pacts

on

local popula

tion. M

ostly r

ep

air

able

. C

ultura

l fu

nctions a

nd p

rocesses n

ot

affecte

d.

1

Low

-level im

pacts

.

Eco

no

mic

: 7

Perm

anent sig

nific

ant

eco

nom

ic

constr

ain

ts.

6

Pro

longed c

onstr

ain

t, c

an b

e

mitig

ate

d.

5

Serio

us lon

g term

econ

om

ic

constr

ain

ts

4

Sig

nific

ant

econom

ic c

onstr

ain

ts.

3

Min

or

eco

nom

ic c

onstr

ain

ts (

local

exte

nt)

.

2

Min

or

eco

nom

ic c

onstr

ain

ts

(im

media

te e

xtent)

.

1

Insig

nific

ant.

SE

VE

RIT

Y (

Mag

nit

ud

e / I

nte

nsit

y):

D

ete

rmin

ed b

y t

he m

agnitud

e o

r in

tensity o

f th

e a

ction (

En

viro

nm

ent,

Socia

l/C

ultura

l, E

conom

ic)

CO

NS

EQ

UE

NC

E (

Se

veri

ty +

Scale

+ D

ura

tio

n):

A r

esult, effect or

outc

om

e o

f a p

revio

us o

ccurr

ence.

SIG

NIF

ICA

NC

E (

Lik

eli

ho

od

x C

on

seq

uen

ce)

D

eg

ree o

f R

ev

ers

ibil

ity: T

his

descri

bes

the d

egre

e t

o w

hic

h a

n im

pact

on a

n

envir

onm

enta

l para

mete

r ca

n b

e

successfu

lly r

evers

ed u

po

n c

om

ple

tion o

f

1

Com

ple

tely

revers

ible

The im

pact is

revers

ible

with im

ple

menta

tion o

f m

inor

mitig

ation m

easure

s

2

Part

ly r

evers

ible

The im

pact is

part

ly r

evers

ible

but m

ore

in

tense m

itig

ation m

easure

s

FIN

AL B

AS

IC A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T R

EP

OR

T –

CLE

AR

ING

OF

VIR

GIN

LA

ND

FO

R V

INE

YA

RD

DE

VE

LO

PM

EN

T

ON

DE

WIL

GE

N,

FA

RM

91, P

OR

TIO

N 1

0,

RO

BE

RT

SO

N.

DE

A&

DP

RE

F:

16/3

/1/1

/B1/1

4/1

00

7/1

3

74

the p

rop

ose

d a

ctivity.

3

Bare

ly r

evers

ible

The im

pact is

unlik

ely

to b

e r

evers

ed e

ve

n w

ith

inte

nse m

itig

ation m

easure

s

4

Irre

vers

ible

The im

pact is

irr

evers

ible

and n

o m

itig

ation

measure

s e

xis

t

Deg

ree o

f M

itig

ati

on

: T

his

describes t

he

degre

e t

o w

hic

h a

n im

pact

on a

n

envir

onm

enta

l para

mete

r ca

n b

e

successfu

lly m

itig

ate

d u

po

n c

om

ple

tio

n o

f th

e p

rop

ose

d p

roje

ct.

1

The im

pact

can b

e m

itig

ate

d

T

he im

pact can b

e c

om

ple

tely

mitig

ate

d

2

The im

pact

can b

e p

art

ly m

itig

ate

d

T

he im

pact is

part

ly a

ble

to b

e m

itig

ate

d

3

Bare

ly m

itig

ate

d

T

he im

pact is

bare

ly a

ble

to b

e m

itig

ate

d

4

Not

able

to m

itig

ate

The im

pact is

unable

of

bein

g m

itig

ate

d

Irre

pla

ceab

le L

os

s o

f R

eso

urc

es: T

his

describ

es t

he d

egre

e t

o w

hic

h r

esourc

es

will

be irr

epla

ce

ably

lost

as a

result o

f a

pro

posed a

ctivity.

1

No loss o

f re

so

urc

e

T

he im

pact w

ill n

ot

result in t

he loss o

f any

resourc

es

2

Marg

inal lo

ss o

f re

so

urc

e

T

he im

pact w

ill r

esult in m

arg

inal lo

ss o

f re

sourc

es

3

Sig

nific

ant

loss o

f re

sourc

es

T

he im

pact w

ill r

esult in s

ignific

ant

loss o

f re

sourc

es

4

Com

ple

te loss o

f re

so

urc

es

T

he im

pact w

ill r

esult in a

com

ple

te loss o

f all

resourc

es

Cu

mu

lati

ve Im

pa

ct:

This

descri

bes th

e c

um

ula

tive e

ffect of th

e

impacts

on th

e e

nvir

onm

enta

l para

mete

r. A

cum

ula

tive e

ffect/

impact

is a

n e

ffect

whic

h

in its

elf m

ay n

ot

be s

ignific

ant,

but m

ay

becom

e s

ignific

ant

if a

dded t

o o

ther

exi

sting o

r pote

ntial im

pacts

em

an

atin

g

from

oth

er

sim

ilar

or

div

ers

e a

ctivitie

s a

s a

re

sult o

f th

e p

roje

ct

activity in q

uestion.

1

Neglig

ible

The im

pact w

ould

result in n

eg

ligib

le to n

o

cum

ula

tive e

ffects

2

Low

The im

pact w

ould

result in insig

nific

ant

cum

ula

tive e

ffects

3

Mediu

m

T

he im

pact w

ould

result in m

inor

cum

ula

tive

effects

4

Hig

h

T

he im

pact w

ould

result in s

ignific

ant

cum

ula

tive e

ffects

S

ou

rce

s:

•

AU

CA

MP

, P

.J.

20

09.

En

vir

on

me

nta

l Im

pa

ct

Assessm

ent: a

pra

ctica

l g

uid

e f

or

the

dis

cern

ing

pra

ctitio

ner.

Van S

ch

aik

Pub

lish

ers

, P

reto

ria

.

•

BR

OW

NLIE

, S

. 20

05. G

uid

elin

e f

or

involv

ing b

iodiv

ers

ity s

pe

cia

lists

in

EIA

pro

cesse

s:

Ed

itio

n 1

. C

SIR

Re

port

No

EN

V-S

-C 2

005 0

53 C

. R

epu

blic

of

Sou

th A

fric

a,

Pro

vin

cia

l G

overn

ment

of th

e W

este

rn C

ap

e,

Dep

art

me

nt

of

Environ

menta

l A

ffairs &

De

ve

lop

men

t P

lann

ing

, C

ape

To

wn

.

•

SIV

ES

T E

nvir

on

men

tal R

ating S

yste

m U

se

d t

o C

lassify

Imp

acts

(c) Please describe the gaps in knowledge.

There are no significant gaps in knowledge.

(d) Please describe the underlying assumptions.

• It is assumed that no activities will take place outside the proposed development footprint.

• It is assumed that all the relevant mitigation measures specified in this report will be implemented, in order to ensure that the impact on the surrounding environment is minimized, to an acceptable level.

• It is assumed that all information on which this report is based is both correct and truthful and without omission.

(e) Please describe the uncertainties.

The botanical site visit was conducted in early October 2012, and there were thus some seasonal constraints in identifying autumn and early spring flowering geophytes. It is thus possible that additional plant species, not recorded during the botanical visit, may be found on site. There are no other significant uncertainties.


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 76

SECTION H: RECOMMENDATION OF THE EAP

In my view (EAP), the information contained in this application form and the documentation attached

hereto is sufficient to make a decision in respect of the activity applied for. YES � NO

If “NO”, list the aspects that should be further assessed through additional specialist input/assessment or whether this

application must be subjected to a Scoping & EIR process before a decision can be made:

Not Applicable

If “YES”, please indicate below whether in your opinion the activity should or should not be authorised:

Activity should be authorised: YES � NO

Please provide reasons for your opinion

The proposed development will have Medium to Low negative impacts on the environment, while offering positive socio-economic benefits to the Applicant and the local community. Although the development will result in the loss of 36 - 40 ha natural vegetation within a CBA (identified to meet a vegetation type threshold), the CBA is small, relatively isolated in the landscape and not well connected to nearby natural areas. It is furthermore believed that this area was designated as a CBA based on the SA Vegetation Map of South Africa (2006), which identified the entire site as Breede Alluvium Renosterveld, which was listed as Endangered at the time the CBA maps were complied. Ground-truthing in 2012 by a botanical specialist, however, confirmed that the site is ecotonal and only the southern section of the CBA consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld (now listed as Vulnerable according to the latest 2011 List of Threatened Ecosystems). The remainder of the CBA consists of Robertson Gannabos Thicket (Least Threatened). Alternative A1 (Applicant’s preferred alternative) would transform 36 ha of CBA of which 14 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. The alternative option (A2) would transform approximately 29.5 ha CBA of which 7.5 ha consists of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld. Alternative A2 is more environmentally friendly since it excludes a pocket of intact Breede Alluvium Renosterveld and includes a highly disturbed section of CBA west of the development site (currently used as a dumping site for rocks, etc.). The proposed development fits in with the surrounding land uses, i.e. agriculture, and will not detract of the sense of place. Both alternatives also allow for a natural corridor along the southern and north-eastern boundaries of the property to help create and maintain connections to adjacent natural areas and to hopefully re-establish connections to nearby CBAs in the future. In its current state, the proposed development site makes only a minor contribution to biodiversity conservation and ecosystem functioning. The development of this site (conducted in accordance with the management, mitigation and monitoring measures specified in the Environmental Management Programme) will therefore not result in an unacceptable loss of natural resources. The site (both Alternatives A1 and A2) is the most attractive site on the property for further vineyard expansion, as it is adjacent to existing vineyards on the property, and the existing water and electricity supply points. Other undeveloped sites on the property are not suitable for cultivation (too steep or rocky) or are better connected to large natural areas south and east of the property and therefore have higher conservation value than the proposed site. Development of the other natural areas on De Wilgen is therefore undesirable. The development will play an important role in increasing the agricultural potential of the property and the long-term economic viability of the existing farming operation – which will help to sustain existing and future employment opportunities. Should the development not be authorized, these positive benefits will not be realized and the long-term viability of the existing farming operation may be compromised. The proposed development represents a responsible and sustainable balance between socio-economic development and responsible use of natural resources. If you are of the opinion that the activity should be authorised, then please provide any conditions, including mitigation

measures that should in your view be considered for inclusion in an authorisation.

The mitigation measures as proposed in the Environmental Management Programme should be included as conditions of authorization. In summary, these mitigation measures are:


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 77

• The Applicant may clear only the target area necessary to accommodate the development, and the development must be restricted to the footprint area as indicated in the layout plans attached to this report.

• A fence line should be erected around the vineyard block to protect surrounding natural areas from vehicle movement.

• Effective storm water and erosion monitoring and management measures must be in place throughout the lifetime of the project

• The Applicant must install the subsurface drainage system designed for this development by the Department of Agriculture (LandCare, Worcester). Installation should only commence if, and after Environmental Authorisation is granted by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Installation of the drainage system should furthermore be installed as soon as the land clearing for cultivation starts.

• Cleared land should be exposed for the minimum amount of time possible, before being provided with a suitable mulch or cover-crop.


• The non-perennial water course (Matjiesleegte) must be excluded from the development, and must be protected from disturbance during the construction and operational phases.

• Disturbance to the surrounding natural areas must be avoided or minimized. No dumping on natural vegetation should be allowed.

• The pocket of Breede Alluvium Renosterveld south-west of the proposed Alternative layout A2 must be conserved, should this alternative (A2) be authorized (refer to Appendix B – Layout Plans, for an indication of where the pocket of Renosterveld is located). The surrounding natural landscape must furthermore be kept intact.

• The possible ‘grave’ site is excluded from both alternatives, but care should be taken to not disturb the area.

• Existing farm roads/ tracks must be utilized to access the development site. No vehicles or heavy machinery may traverse through Matjiesleegte or the natural veld in order to access the site.

• Effective soil moisture monitoring and irrigation scheduling must be implemented during the operational phase, in order to ensure that water is used responsibly on site, and that over-watering is avoided and irrigation return-flows are minimized.

• Fertilizers and poisons (pesticides, herbicides, fungicides etc) must only be utilized when strictly necessary, and then applied in appropriate concentration and volume according to standard best practice. Organic or “eco-friendly” products should be utilized wherever reasonable possible.

Duration and Validity:

Environmental authorisations are usually granted for a period of three years from the date of issue. Should a longer period be

required, the applicant/EAP is requested to provide a detailed motivation on what the period of validity should be.

Five year authorization is adequate


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 78

SECTION I: APPENDICES The following appendices must be attached to this report:

Appendix

Tick the box

if Appendix

is attached

Appendix A: Locality map ��

Appendix B: Site plan(s) ��

Appendix C: Photographs ��

Appendix D: Biodiversity overlay map ��

Appendix E: Permit(s) / license(s) from any other organ of state including service letters

from the municipality ��

Appendix F:

Public participation information: including a copy of the register of interested

and affected parties, the comments and responses report, proof of notices,

advertisements and any other public participation information as required in

Section C above.

��

Appendix G: Specialist Report(s) ��

Appendix H : Environmental Management Programme ��

Appendix I: Additional information related to listed waste management activities (if

applicable) N/A

Appendix J: Any Other (if applicable) (describe) N/A


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 79

DECLARATIONS

THE APPLICANT

I …………………………………., in my personal capacity or duly authorised (please circle the applicable

option) by ……………..................................………………… thereto hereby declare that I:

• regard the information contained in this report to be true and correct, and

• am fully aware of my responsibilities in terms of the National Environmental Management Act of

1998 (“NEMA”) (Act No. 107 of 1998), the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (“EIA

Regulations”) in terms of NEMA (Government Notice No. R. 543 refers), and the relevant specific

environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with these requirements may

constitute an offence in terms of the environmental legislation;

• appointed the environmental assessment practitioner as indicated above, which meet all the

requirements in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R. 543, to act as the independent environmental

assessment practitioner for this application;

• have provided the environmental assessment practitioner and the competent authority with

access to all information at my disposal that is relevant to the application;

• will be responsible for the costs incurred in complying with the environmental legislation including

but not limited to –

o costs incurred in connection with the appointment of the environmental assessment

practitioner or any person contracted by the environmental assessment practitioner;

o costs incurred in respect of the undertaking of any process required in terms of the regulations;

o costs in respect of any fee prescribed by the Minister or MEC in respect of the regulations;

o costs in respect of specialist reviews, if the competent authority decides to recover costs; and

o the provision of security to ensure compliance with the applicable management and

mitigation measures;

• am responsible for complying with the conditions that might be attached to any decision(s) issued

by the competent authority;

• have the ability to implement the applicable management, mitigation and monitoring measures;

• hereby indemnify, the government of the Republic, the competent authority and all its officers,

agents and employees, from any liability arising out of, inter alia, the content of any report, any

procedure or any action for which the applicant or environmental assessment practitioner is

responsible; and

• am aware that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 71 of GN No. R. 543.

Please Note: If acting in a representative capacity, a certified copy of the resolution or power

of attorney must be attached.

Signature of the applicant:

Name of company:

Date:


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 80

THE INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP)

I ……………………………………, as the appointed independent environmental practitioner (“EAP”)

hereby declare that I:

• act/ed as the independent EAP in this application;

• regard the information contained in this report to be true and correct, and

• do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than

remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

• have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding;

• have disclosed, to the applicant and competent authority, any material information that have or

may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of

any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact

Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

• am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental Impact

Assessment Regulations, 2010 (specifically in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R. 543) and any

specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with these requirements may

constitute and result in disqualification;

• have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the application was

distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and that

participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a manner that all

interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable opportunity to participate and

to provide comments;

• have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties were considered,

recorded and submitted to the competent authority in respect of the application;

• have kept a register of all interested and affected parties that participated in the public

participation process;

• have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal regarding

the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not; and


Note: The terms of reference must be attached.

Signature of the environmental assessment practitioner:

Name of company:

Date:


DEA&DP REF: 16/3/1/1/B1/14/1007/13 81

THE INDEPENDENT PERSON WHO COMPILED A SPECIALIST REPORT OR UNDERTOOK A SPECIALIST PROCESS

I ……………………………………, as the appointed independent specialist hereby declare that I:

• act/ed as the independent specialist in this application;

• regard the information contained in this report as it relates to my specialist input/study to be true

and correct, and

• do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than

remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

• have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding;

• have disclosed, to the applicant, EAP and competent authority, any material information that

have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the

objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

• am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental Impact

Assessment Regulations, 2010 (specifically in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R. 543) and any

specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with these requirements may

constitute and result in disqualification;

• have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the specialist input/study

was distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and that

participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a manner that all

interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable opportunity to participate and

to provide comments on the specialist input/study;

• have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties on the specialist

input/study were considered, recorded and submitted to the competent authority in respect of

the application;

• have ensured that the names of all interested and affected parties that participated in terms of

the specialist input/study were recorded in the register of interested and affected parties who

participated in the public participation process;

• have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal regarding

the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not; and


Note: The terms of reference must be attached.

Signature of the specialist:

Name of company:

Date:

final basic assessment report - boland enviro wilgen bar/de_wilgen_final_bar... · 2013-09-11 ·...

Documents