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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUAYS DEVELOPMENT IN STRUISBAAI HARBOUR: CRR 7.1.39 7.1.40 7.1.41 7.1.42 7.1.43 7.1.44 7.1.45 Louis Nell (74) Louis Pisani (96) Louis Pisani (96) Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) It is morally wrong for the developers to seek relief from the current height restrictions based on a poor business decision made when purchasing the property. At the time of making the decision to purchase the property they knew about the ruling height restrictions and chose to risk their money in the hope that the public will bail them out of an overpriced transaction. Part of my objection maybe nostalgic after spending at least 90% all of my December holidays in Struisbaai since 1982. I assume that one should always weigh up your personal requirements and needs with that of the bigger picture and the community as a whole. Please acknowledge receipt of my e-mail and ensure that my detail is on your database. I am tired of developers half truths, strategic omissions and lies and their various consultants doing whatever is necessary to support a profit model predicated on an idiotic purchase. Garden Falls chose to overextend themselves by spending too much on a property zoned for industrial use and not for what the purchaser intends should not garner any sympathy from anybody. Sound business is about measured risk. Golden Falls wants to make good on its investment without due consideration for the people of Struisbaai no matter the cost. Golden Falls must not expect anything other than a battle they won‟t win if they pursue this development. A new CAM SDF, dated 2009 has superceded the 2006 CAM SDF which had a height limitation of two stories. The new CAM SDF promotes development within the urban edge. Erf 848 is situated within the urban edge and height is now restricted in accordance with zonation, which is currently Industrial Zone 1 to be changed to Special Zone. Applicants response: Happy that the acquisition was prudent and responsible. In order to achieve all the objectives as stated, a critical mass is required. Noted. Please refer to Section 5.2.4 of the FEIR. We have acknowledged receipt of your e-mail and your details are captured on our I&AP register. Your concern is noted. Aurecon has remained independent and objective. Please refer to Section 7.1.39 of this comments and response report and Section 1.8 of the FEIR. Noted. Please refer to Section 7.1.39 of this comments and response report. The EIA process is a mechanism that is used to determine the potential impacts to the environmental, social and economic aspects in relation to the community of Struisbaai. Noted. The proponent has the right to develop Erf 848 (private property) within the confines of the CAMSDF (2009) as well as statutory requirements. Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\Public Participation\Comments & Response\EIR\CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].doc 184 of 193
EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUAYS DEVELOPMENT IN STRUISBAAI HARBOUR: CRR 7.1.46 7.1.47 7.1.48 7.1.49 7.1.50 7.1.51 7.1.52 Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) Les C. Freese (91) Heleen Rabe (118) Johannes P. Albertyn (117) Gawie Bruwer (76) I am convinced that the municipality would not approve this misguided quest for profit at the expense of common sense and the voting public. I am convinced that should approval be granted, opposition will be mobilised on both a political and legal level. I support all the facts contained in the response by Abrie Bruwer dated 13 November 2009 There is no way that fish processing will fit in with the activities of the proposed development. The developers seem to believe that winning the support of the fisherfolk in Struisbaai Noord will be easily achieved by empty promises. He has underestimated the sense of heritage and the level of dignity that exists within the Struisbaai Noord community. I haven‟t and can confidently predict that Struisbaai Noord will not support this pathetic attempt at making good on a poor business decision. Should the proposed development be approved, the developer will be subjected to a sustained protest that will be three times the size of the VMS protest of 2008. The developer has succeeded in at least providing something around which the two Struisbaai can unite. For that I thank them. I have been living here most of my life and do not wish to see the town ruined any further by insensitive builders and developers. There should be a tarred road along the coast from the Hermanus for whale watching to Cape Agulhas through the reserve to attract the tourists. This eventually boils down to the breaking of the local building regulations and the assurance that opposing parties will also combat this to the highest level. Noted. The CAM would need to apply their minds to the application, not only the EIA, but the planning application etc in the overall context. A right to appeal will be allowed for once DEA&DP issues a environmental authorisation decision. Noted. Noted. Please refer to Section 7.1.33 of this Comment and Response Report. Noted. The proponent has the right to develop Erf 848 (private property) within the confines of the CAMSDF (2009) as well as statutory requirements. Noted. The proposed development however aims to meet the requirements of the CAMSDF 2009 as well as any other statutory requirements. This falls outside of the mandate for this EIA, however suggestions such as proposed can be made to the Provisional Department of Transport and the CAM. The current proposal would exceed the height restriction of the Spatial Development Framework. The competent authority would need to make a decision on whether this is acceptable. Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\Public Participation\Comments & Response\EIR\CRR IV FEIR ~ 26042010 [FINAL].doc 185 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:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134: EIA FOR THE PROPOSED LANGEZANDT QUA
Page 183: 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?