CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].pdf - Environmental Projects

EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUAYS DEVELOPMENT IN STRUISBAAI HARBOUR: CRR
1.9.16
1.9.17
1.9.18
1.9.19
1.9.20
1.9.21
1.9.22
Lois Albertyn (109)
Erla Rabe (83)
Evan Meirion
Williams (31)
Meg Cowper Lewis
(SEA) (48)
Stephen Knobel
(137)
D.G. & J.L. Falck
(64)
D.G. & J.L. Falck
(64)
Rather develop someplace else where it will
not cause so much damage.
Struisbaai‟s harbour and coastline do not
need any more disturbances. The
swimming beach has already been washed
away due to developments directly on the
coast.
Sea level and global warming is a concern
How is it possible that a development of this
size is attempting to overcome the
restriction from building within 100m from
the high-water mark?
Although the proposed new legislation of
Coastal Management Act is not enforced
yet, and with global warming taking place, I
cannot see how can you rate rising of sea
levels as a low negative impact
Sea levels is a further concern. The City of
Cape Town has adopted a policy where no
development will be allowed between the
coast and Baden Powell Drive, near
Muizenberg, for fear of the effect of rising
sea levels, however here in Struisbaai a
development is planned within 5m of the
water table.
What would happen to the proposed
development during the event of a natural
disaster?
In terms of environmental damage the
outcome of this EIA is that the proposed
development would not cause significant
biophysical environmental damage. Please
refer to Section 7.5 of the FEIR.
Please refer to Section 5.2.8 of the FEIR. Erf
848 is on the hardened inland area and does
not have a marine or coastal component and
therefore no marine disturbance is
anticipated.
Agreed which is why a specialist comment
was included in the reporting. Please refer to
Section 5.2.8 of the FEIR.
Development within 100 m of the high water
mark is what triggered the assessment
amongst other triggers, hence the
requirement to undertake an EIA.
Please refer to the revised Section 1.3.5 of
the FEIR with regard to Integrated Coastal
Management Act (ICMA). The ICMA was
enacted on 1 December 2009 and thus now
applies. It is rated low more because of its
localised impact with regard to the
development. Please refer to Section 4.2 of
the FEIR which details the assessment
methodology utilized. Section 5.2.8 of the
FEIR explains how this assessment was
concluded as the services of WSP
Environmental was used to determine the
potential impact of sea level rise.
Your point is noted. There is a degree of risk
attached to this development, however the
potential environmental impacts have been
assessed as being acceptable.
The proposed development like all other
development will be at risk. Please refer to
Section 5.2.8 of the FEIR.
Environment
effect
Environment
effect
Rise in Sea
Level
Rise in Sea
Level
Rise in Sea
Level
Rise in Sea
Level
Rise in Sea
Level
I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\Public Participation\Comments & Response\EIR\CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].doc 101 of 193