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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUAYS DEVELOPMENT IN STRUISBAAI HARBOUR: CRR 3.1.141 3.1.142 3.1.143 3.1.144 Johan Liebenberg, Dorel Van der Westhuizen, Kobus Viljoen, Abrie Bruwer, Chris Moll, Stuart Du Plessis, G. R. Youldon, Johan Venter (59, 73, 69, 66, 65, 172, 93, 78) Johan Liebenberg, Dorel Van der Westhuizen, Kobus Viljoen, Abrie Bruwer, Chris Moll, Stuart Du Plessis, G. R. Youldon, Johan Venter (59, 73, 69, 66, 65, 172, 93, 78) Johan Liebenberg, Dorel Van der Westhuizen, Kobus Viljoen, Abrie Bruwer, Chris Moll, Stuart Du Plessis, G. R. Youldon, Johan Venter (59, 73, 69, 66, 65, 172, 93, 78) Johan Liebenberg, Dorel Van der Westhuizen, Kobus Viljoen, Abrie Bruwer, Chris Moll, Stuart Du Plessis, G. R. Youldon, Johan Venter (59, 73, 69, 66, 65, 172, 93, 78) I demand that each objection be listed and the number of IAP‟s objecting to that particular point be listed. As it currently stands it seems that the objections are only against the alternatives. How can the best decision be taken if the numbers of the objecting I&AP‟s are not reflected? I have been informed by some I&APs that they were not informed of the public meetings and this report. I strongly object to this and this is unfair to the individual and everyone and jeopardizes this process. They have the right to ask for a restart. I further object to these meetings being held off-season i.e. the open day was six weeks before the school holidays, surely it could have waited until then. You would have a much fairer and objective report with more input from the majority of property owners who only visit in the holidays. I urge you to allow comments obtained in the holiday period of 2009 and if not, then to state that in this report. The DEIR states that the local traditional fishermen will be accommodated as best they can with a fish processing facility in the proposed building, however the architect could not point out the location of such a facility at the Open Day meeting. Once again an empty promise. Please refer to Section 3.1.140 of this Comment and Response Report and Volume 2 of the FEIR to see how many people are opposed to the proposed development. The decision is not based on a popularity poll but on all facts presented to the authorities. Every effort is made to ensure all registered I&APs are informed/notified throughout the EIA process. We did experience a technical fault with email correspondence, however other media was utilised to ensure notification to all registered I&APs was achieved. Please refer to section 3 of the FEIR. The EIA process to date has spanned 32 months and all the information for the draft EIR phase produced was made available for public comment between 09/10/2009 – 17/11/2009. The EIA regulations do not stipulate that public meetings are required for the review period of the DEIR, however to ensure I&APs had a platform for engagement the public meetings between 30/31 October 2009 were deemed suitable in line with the project programme. Please refer to Chapter 3 of the FEIR. The architect was not mandated to design the retail section in detail. The Environmental Assessment Practitioner was however informed by the proponent from the beginning of the EIA process that there would be a fish market/handling facility and this has been conveyed to I&APs on numerous occasions. Please refer to Section 2.4.8 of the FEIR. Process Process Process Process I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\Public Participation\Comments & Response\EIR\CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].doc 164 of 193
EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUAYS DEVELOPMENT IN STRUISBAAI HARBOUR: CRR 3.1.145 Johan Liebenberg, Dorel Van der Westhuizen, Kobus Viljoen, Abrie Bruwer, Chris Moll, Stuart Du Plessis, G. R. Youldon, Johan Venter (59, 73, 69, 66, 65, 172, 93, 78) It is unacceptable to state that the development will have a positive impact on the harbour. This is the last unspoilt commercial harbour in the country, where the traditional chukkies are moored without yacht marinas and constructions as proposed. It is absurd to rate this intrusion as positive. You have received over 1000 complaints stating that the harbour is unspoilt and yet this has not been reflected in your Draft EIA Report. Incorrect all comments received have been included in the reports and summarized in relevant Comment Response reports. Please refer to Sections 3, 5.2.4 and 5.2.5 of the FEIR. Process 3.1.146 81, 79, 95, 85, 84, 90, 160, 162, 164, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 153, 150, 151, 116, 102, 103, 101, 99, 100, 98, 92, 94, 163, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 33, 179, 180, 181, 182 I know of many I&APs who submitted letters of protest but are not on the database therefore we must assume their disapproval has been mislaid or lost. Please check Volume 2 of the FEIR to determine if their objection has reached Aurecon. Aurecon takes all reasonable steps to ensure the inclusion of every comment received during the EIA whether the comments are positive or negative. Process 3.1.147 Justine Sweet (97) The significant noise created by the fishermen, created at all times of the day and night, could pose a significant nuisance to residents and hotel guests within the proposed development [p. 141-142 of dEIR]. It is unclear whether the essential mitigation measures suggested would be sufficient to ensure that this nuisance does not result in the alienation of the fishermen as a result of persistent complaints being lodged against them. If double glazing is required to accommodate this noise concern, air conditioning would follow as a matter of course. No provision has been made for this and once again, this demonstrates a failure to consider all relevant considerations and associated impacts. EAP response: It has been stated on numerous occasions throughout the EIA that the appropriate design imperatives would be included into the construction. Stauch Vorster: Double glazing was intended from the beginning of the design stage. Noise I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\Public Participation\Comments & Response\EIR\CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].doc 165 of 193
Page 1 and 2:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EI
Page 3 and 4:
EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUA
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
1.3.47 1.3.48 1.3.49 1.3.50 1.3.51
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114: EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUA
Page 163: EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUA
Page 193: EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUA
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?