AN EIA OF RIETVLEI FARM’S DEVELOPMENT AS A CONSERVATION AREA WITHIN JMOSS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
BY
LISELLE VAN NIEKERK
SHORT DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
IN THE FACULTY OF SCIENCE
AT THE
RAND AFRIKAANS UNIVERSITY
SUPERVISOR : DR L G C SCHEEPERS
NOVEMBER 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND THANKS
To:
My Creator who through this research taught me patience, and gave me the strength to finish what I had started;
Willie, my husband, for your encouragement, patience and love;
Paul and Saskia for all your time, assistance and encouragement;
Willie Botha for your precious time that you gave up to help me;
Dr Scheepers for your guidance and encouragement;
My children for still loving me after all of this;
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The form of a city is shaped by the forces of urbanisation and development. In turn the size and shape of a city, impacts on the quality of life of the urban dweller. A city has limited natural resources. The built environment therefore has a significant impact on the availability of natural resources. Traditionally the importance of development has always preceded that of the environment.
The increased awareness amongst the urban population regarding access to open space, has motivated the need for this study. Open space is regarded as an important requirement for a better quality of life in urban areas. The aim of the study is to firstly, determine whether conservation and positive economic development can form an integral part of a sustainable, thriving urban society. Secondly, can the current environmental impact assessment techniques, specifically the Scoping process as prescribed by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, encourage sustainable economic development within environmentally sensitive areas?
To place the study within the required theoretical background the following information sets were analysed: (1) Johannesburg Municipal Open Space System (JMOSS) is the environmental management tool used to assess the role and function of existing open spaces located within the boundaries of the Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; (2) Rietvlei 101 IR, Johannesburg, was chosen as the study area, due to its location within a protected environmental corridor; and (3) the Scoping process, as an analytical technique to assess the impacts of two specific development proposals, on the ecological sensitive, Rietvlei study area.
The two development proposals for the Rietvlei study area, consists of: phase 1, a hotel and conference centre; and phase 2, a commercial development. An impact assessment matrix was used to determine the significance of all potential impacts. Mitigation measures were proposed to mitigate the various significant impacts identified.
3 The conclusions reached by the impact assessment is summarised as follow:
The Rietvlei study area is an ecologically sensitive area. The study area, as an ecological sensitive area, will form part of the primary open space system, as described in JMOSS. Within the framework of JMOSS, it can be argued that the Rietvlei study area is too sensitive to be developed. The “no-go” alternative should therefore be considered as an option. The “no-go” option implies that the study area is left in its present undeveloped state.
The scoping document, as an analitical technique, allows for the mitigation of the various significant impacts identified. The mitigatory measures proposed, within the scoping document, can successfully mitigate the significant impacts identified. Taking into account the current degraded state of the natural environment, it is perceived that without any management or investment, the study area will continue to deteriorate and it will lose its economic potential and environmental value. The “no- go” option is therefore not regarded as an environmentally sustainable option.
The study undertaken has shown that, through the various proposed mitigation measures, the scoping process can successfully allow positive economic development on ecological sensitive areas. The scoping process can therefore, successfully be used as an environmental management technique. The research has however indicated that there is a need to research the environmental significance of land as perceived by urban societies, as opposed to the traditionally economic potential associated with land.
4 OPSOMMING
Verstedeliking het ‘n bepalende impak op die ontwikkeling van ‘n stad. Die grootte en vorm van ‘n stad, oefen ‘n direkte invloed op die lewenskwaliteit van ‘n stedeling uit. Natuurlike hulpbronne binne ‘n stad word beperk deur die teenwoordigheid van glas en beton. Die bewaring van die stad se natuurlike hulpbronne, is nog altyd as minder belangrik as die voortgesette en snelle ontwikkeling van die stad beskou.
‘n Groter bewuswording by stedelinge ten op sigte van toegang tot oopruimtesisteme het aanleiding gegee tot hierdie studie. Hierdie studie het ‘n tweeledige doel. Ten eerste, kan bewaring en positiewe ekonomiese ontwikkeling saamwerk teneinde ‘n geintegreerde volhoubare omgewing daar te stel? Tweedens, kan die “Scoping-proses’ gebruik word, om positiewe ekonomiese ontwikkeling toe te laat op ‘n ekologies sensitiewe omgewing?
Die volgende inligtingstelle is geanaliseer ten einde die studie binne die korrekte teoretiese raamwerk te plaas: (1) Die oopruimtesisteem van die Johannesburg Stedelike Munisipaliteit (JMOSS), ten einde ‘n aanduiding te kry van die rol en funksie van bestaande oopruimtes binne die grense van die Munisipalitiet, (2) Die Rietvlei 101 JR, wat gekies is as studiegebied weens sy ligging binne ‘n sensitiewe bewaringsgebied en (3) die “Scoping-proses” wat gebruik is om die impak van die twee ontwikkelingvoorstelle op die ekologies sensitiewe studiegebied, te analiseer.
Die ontwikkelingsvoorstelle van die studie gebied sluit twee fases in. Gedurende fase 1 sal ‘n hotel en konferensiefasiliteit ontwikkel word. Fase 2 sal bestaan uit die ontwikkeling van verskeie kommersiële aktiwiteite. Die onderskeie ontwikkelingsfases het elkeen sy eie potensiële impakte. ‘n Impakmatriks is gebruik om die omvang van hierdie potensiële impakte te analiseer. Omgewingsbestuurstegnieke is geformuleer om die potensiële impakte te minimaliseer. Hier volg ‘n opsommende gevolgtrekking van die geanaliseerde impakte:
5 Die studiegebied, Rietvlei 101 JR, is ‘n sensitiewe ekologiese gebied en vorm deel van die primêre oopruimtesiteem, in JMOSS. Binne die raamwerk van JMOSS word geen ontwikkeling toegelaat op ekologies sensitiewe gebiede nie. Gevolglik moet die “geen ontwikkelings-opsie” gevolg word. Die uitvoering van hierdie opsie, sal tot gevolg hê dat die studiegebied onaangeraak bly. Deur die toepassing van die “Scoping-proses” word verskeie potensiële impakte geidentifiseer. Die omgewingsbestuurstegnieke wat geformuleer is, slaag daarin om die potensiële impakte te minimaliseer.
Sonder bewaring sal die studiegebied net verder verwaarloos en agteruit gaan. Investering is dus nodig. Dit sal verhoed dat die studiegebied, as ‘n bewaringsgebied, sy ekonomiese potensiaal verloor. Die “geen ontwikkelingsopsie” sal dus nie bydra tot die suksesvolle bewaring van die studiegebied nie.
Die studie het aangetoon dat, die “Scoping-proses” suksesvol ingespan kan word om die impak van positiewe ekonomiese ontwikkeling op ecologies-sensitiewe gebiede te analiseer. Die analise het egter aangedui dat daar ruimte is vir navorsing rondom die konsep van grond as ‘n natuurlike hulpbron, teenoor die konvensionele definisie van
6 CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: ORIENTATION
1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Urban Growth and Development: Problems and Constraints 3 1.3 Urban Open Space 4 1.4 Conservation Versus the Development of Urban Open Space – Global Perceptions 9 1.5 Management and Provision of an Open Space System (JMOSS) – A Local Perspective 11 1.6 Regulation and Assessment of Open Space – EIA and Scoping 13 1.7 The Research Problem and Data Acquisition 16 1.8 Research Methodology 17
CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: JMOSS, EIA AND THE STUDY AREA - RIETVLEI 101 IR
2.1 JMOSS 20 2.2 The Study Area – Rietvlei 101, I.R. 27 2.3 EIA: Scoping Process 39
CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS
3.1 Introduction 44 3.2 Development Proposals 44 3.3 The Study Area within the Context of JMOSS 47 3.4 Analyses of Study Area: Scoping Process 55 3.5 Conclusion 79
7 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND SYNTHESIS
4.1 Introduction 80 4.2 Analysis 82 4.3 Conclusions 86 4.4 Synthesis 92
5. REFERENCES 95
8 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Benefits of Open Space: Global Perspective 6 Table 1.2: Categories of Open Space according to Function 6 Table 2.1: Proposed Categories and Sub-Categories of Open Space, Formulated in JMOSS, 2002 21 Table 2.2: The four Categories of Probability 42 Table 2.3: Description of the various forms of Significance 42 Table 3.1: Existing Open Space Provision per Local Authority 49 Table 3.2: Statistics for the six open space categories 51 Table 3.3: Statistics for the Primary (ecological) Open Spaces 52 Table 3.4: Statistics for the Secondary Open Space System 53 Table 3.5: Statistics for the Tertiary (prospective) Open Spaces 54 Table 3.6: Categories identified for the evaluation of the Environmental Sensitivity of the Study Area 58 Table 3.7: List of Environmental Aspects with possible relevance to Project 58 Table 3.8: Impact Summary Matrix for Air Quality 60 Table 3.9: Impact Summary Matrix for Cultural Aspects 61 Table 3.10: Impact Summary Matrix for Cultural Aspects 63 Table 3.11: Impact Summary Matrix for Flora 64 Table 3.12: Impact Summary Matrix for Hydrology 66 Table 3.13: Impact Summary Matrix for Land Use 67 Table 3.14: Impact Summary Matrix for Open Space 68 Table 3.15: Impact Summary Matrix for Soils and Topography 70 Table 3.16: Visual Assessment Criteria 71 Table 3.17: Impact Summary Matrix for potential Visual Impacts 72 Table 3.18: Impact Summary Matrix for Waste Generation 73 Table 3.19: Potential Environmental Impacts Associated with the Proposed Development 74 Table 3.20: Environmental Sensitivity of the Study area and Mitigation Measures 77
9 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: The Greater Johannesburg Area 12 Figure 1.2: The EIA process as formulated by Gauteng Department Of Agriculture, Conservation And Environment 14 Figure 1.3: Research Methodology 19 Figure 2.1: Categories within the Primary Open Space Network 25 Figure 2.2: Connecting Secondary Open Space 26 Figure 2.3: Supplementary Open Space 26 Figure 2.4: Isolated Secondary Open Space 27 Figure 2.5: The Rietvlei Study Area in Regional Context 30 Figure 2.6: The Rietvlei Study Area – Local Context 31 Figure 2.7: Contour Map of the Reitvlei Study Area 32 Figure 2.8: Location of Archeological Sites: Rietvlei Study Area 35 Figure 3.1: Development Proposals for the Rietvlei Study Area 46 Figure 3.2: Availability of Open Space Areas within the Greater Johannesburg Area 48 Figure 3.3: Composition of Open Space System 54 Figure 3.4: Environmental Sensitivity Classification of the Rietvlei Study Area 57
10 CHAPTER 1: ORIENTATION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
“Land is essential for the provision of food, water and energy for many living systems, and is critical to human activity.” (http;//www.un.org/esa/agenda21)
Currently approximately fifty percent of the total human population lives within urban areas and the percentage is rising. In our rapidly growing urban areas access to land is rendered increasingly difficult due to the competing demands of housing, industry, commerce, infrastructure, transport, and agriculture. Cities consume more than seventy five percent of global resources and generate more than seventy five percent of global waste (Girardet, 1999; Pradhan, 2001). It is clear that the provision of land within urban areas to accommodate the needs of the ever-growing urban population has become a managerial nightmare. Poorly managed urban sprawl has resulted in the loss of urban space that is important to the safety of the urban population, e.g. floodways, loss of important agricultural land, parks as well as the loss of green “lungs” providing relief from the densely built urban environment. There is therefore, an ever-growing need for the provision of open spaces and green areas, as well as the protection of our fragile ecosystems. It is clear that there is an ever-greater need for development.
Johannesburg, the largest city in Gauteng Province forms one of the largest urban complexes in South Africa. Johannesburg has an urbanisation level of 97%. The city is home to a population of 2,83 million people of which 33% are housed in less than adequate accommodation (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997). Rapid urbanisation within the greater Johannesburg area and the resulting pressure on the environment has created a conflict between development pressures created by urbanisation and the principles of sustainable environmental management. The rapid loss of urban open space resources within the city of Johannesburg needs to be recognised.
11 The question to be asked is, whether one purely preserves the existing green open spaces within the urban area, or does one allow positive economic development of the existing urban open spaces so as to stimulate economic growth?
Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa states that everyone has the right “…to have the environment protected through reasonable legislative and other measures that promote conservation and secure ecologically sustainable development and the use of natural resources, while promoting justifiable economic and social development.” (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997, p. 2)
The principles of the New Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA), state that environmental management must form part of an integrated approach. It must acknowledge the relationship between all elements of the environment, and take into account the cumulative impacts of all decisions taken on the environment and the people living in that environment (NEMA, 1998, 2(4b)).
NEMA (1998, 2(4r)) recognizes the importance of sensitive ecological areas and points out that these areas require specific attention during the development process especially where “…they are subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure.”
The above, as well as the increased awareness amongst the urban population regarding access to open space, has motivated the need for this study, and highlights access to open space as an important requirement for a better quality of life in urban areas. The aim of the study is to firstly, determine whether conservation and positive economic development can form an integral part of a balanced, thriving urban society. Secondly, can the current environmental impact assessment techniques, with specific reference to the Scoping process as prescribed by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, encourage sustainable economic development within environmentally sensitive areas?
12 As funding is needed for conservation, rehabilitation and maintenance of open space areas, it would be necessary to acknowledge the role open space plays in the maintenance of an acceptable quality of life for all urban communities.
1.2 URBAN GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT: PROBLEMS AND CONSTRAINTS
Urban development, as well as urban growth, centers around one critical and scarce resource, namely land (Wurtzebach, et al, 1994). The results of urbanisation are the replacement of natural landscapes such as forests, wetlands, and grasslands with streets parking lots, rooftops, and other man made artificial surfaces. This places undue pressure on the existing natural resources left within the city. The urgent socio-economic needs created by rapid urbanisation shift the attention and investment of resources away from the natural resources. As a result the conservation of biodiversity is threatened, as well as the preservation of sensitive ecological systems found within the urban area.
It can be concluded that the loss of natural open space impacts on the environment in multiple ways. Firstly, many of the natural landscape features we value, such as forests and wetlands, are threatened by development. Secondly, the functions that these features provide such as runoff control, wildlife migration, etc. disappear.
Valuable open space areas located on the edge of urban areas, such as Johannesburg, is especially threatened by economic development. These areas remain attractive to developers. This land is very accessible, land costs are lower, and there is a greater potential for developers to assemble large parcels of land for large-scale developments such as regional shopping centres. Zoning requirements in these areas are often easier to comply with. There are fewer existing developments that new construction must complement, and a relative absence of residents who might object to the inconvenience or disruption caused by any new development.
Due to the scarcity of land within the urban area and the high demand for it, land is considered to be valuable. Therefore land creates value, whether financially or as a sound investment (Cervera, 1999; Staley et.al, 1997). There is currently a realization that
13 open space should also be considered to be of value. Once this view is held, an economic value to open space can be assigned, and more informed decisions can be made regarding the management of open space. It is ironic that the natural environment with it’s intrinsic value, that attracts people to a specific place or region, is at risk of being lost or compromised due to the ever-growing influx of people to urban areas (MaGuire, 2000; Mauz, 1999; Orton, 1999).
It can be concluded that the main problems associated with the rapid loss of open space within urban areas are: firstly, the replacement of the natural landscape with an artificial urban environment; secondly, the resulting loss of valuable services rendered by urban open space areas; and thirdly, the high economic value of land within the urban area, due to the scarcity of land.
There is a need to improve the quality of life within the urban area. Every urban dweller needs to have access to some form of open space. The question that needs to be asked is, what constitutes urban open space and why do urban dwellers need open space areas? In the next section open space is defined to ascertain the need and function of open space within the ever-changing urban environment.
1.3 URBAN OPEN SPACE 1.3.1 Definition
Traditionally, urban open space has been perceived to be ‘green space’ such as parks, rivers, corridors, and sport fields. Traditionally, within Town Planning, it was viewed as ‘left over space’ that had to be assigned a function, once all other urban functions had been catered for. According to Cervera (1999), Chitteden, et al (2000), open space is defined as an outdoor area within the metropolitan region. This definition is very comprehensive, and includes public meadows, parks, as well as unfenced vacant lots and abandoned waterfronts. In addition the definition concludes that such open space should be open to spontaneous activity, movement, or visual exploration by a significant number of the urban population.
14 Today, the perception of open space has become increasingly more holistic, and open space is currently viewed as the unbuilt component located inside the urban boundary that serves a variety of purposes and functions (Varangu, 1998). It is therefore any space that is not used for a building or a structure.
Open space, therefore, has no necessary relation to ownership, size, type of use, or landscape character ( Arendt, 1992; Chitteden, et al, 2000).
The city of Johannesburg has defined open space as “any undeveloped vegetated land within and beyond the urban edge, belonging to any of the following six open space categories: ecological, social, institutional, heritage, agricultural and prospective land.”(Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997, p. 6). The city of Johannesburg does not recognise within this definition any “hard” open space areas, such as streets, pavements, etc. The focus is only on ecological “green” areas.
To summarise, open space exists in a variety of forms. Open space should include, but should not be limited to, space around buildings, the landscape, plazas, recreational parks, bodies of water, rivers and streams, flood plains, institutional lands, farm lands, forest land and even cemeteries (Scarlett, et al, 1997). Each of these forms of open space, have their own characteristics, qualities and functions that determines who will use it and how it will be utilised.
1.3.2 Benefits of Urban Open Space
Each type of open space mentioned has specific benefits. Those who frequently make use of a specific open space mainly enjoy these benefits. The benefits of open space can be summarised as follow in table 1.1. This study will focus on the social, ecological as well economic benefits derived from the use of a specific open space area by the urban population. The various benefits listed in table 1.1 reiterates the fact that urban open space should be viewed as an extremely valuable commodity, and should reflect community values and respond to the needs of citizens.
15 Table 1.1: Benefits of Open Space: Global Perspective (Cervera, 1999)
SOCIAL Recreation, Education, Cultural Heritage Conservation, Social BENEFITS Integration and Urban Regeneration.
ES ENGINEERING Storm Water Management, Water Treatment, Servitude for Services BENEFITS and Flood Attenuation. ECOLOGICAL Nutrient Cycling, Pollination for Crops, Biodiversity Conservation, BENEFITS Waste Treatment, Erosion Control and Water Supply. ECONOMIC Tourism, Markets for Traders, Food Production, Resource Harvesting, BENEFITS Infrastructure Saving and Property Values. OPEN SPACE US
To utilise the various benefits of urban open space (table 1.1), and understand the value thereof, urban open space must be classified, and the function of each open space category clearly defined. Table 1.2 gives a general classification of open space according to the function assigned to that particular type of open space:
Table 1.2: Categories of Open Space according to Function (Cervera, 1999)
CATEGORY FUNCTION FUNCTIONAL OPEN Open space that is a designed element of the development and has SPACE a functionally described and planned use as amenity for the direct benefit of the residents of a development, with not more than three percent of man-made impervious surface within such designated areas. Examples include landscaped areas which provide visual relief, shade, screening, buffering and other environmental amenities; nature trails; exercise trails; open playgrounds, e.g., baseball, multi-use; picnic areas and facilities; recreation areas and facilities, e.g. swimming pools, tennis courts; and golf courses. NATURAL OPEN SPACE Any area of land improved or unimproved, that is set aside, dedicated or reserved in perpetuity for public or private enjoyment as a preservation of a conservation area.
16 Table 1.2 defines open space areas as multi-functional areas, and not as areas limited to one single function, i.e. areas where people carry on either active or passive recreation activities. This classification supports the holistic perception, as defined by Scarlett (1997), where no formal definition or function is assigned to open space.
The design of open space areas should therefore help to reduce the densities and built-up form of the urban metropolitan areas. Urban open space should therefore be viewed as an integral part of the planning and design process, and managed through a sound environmental process driven by the community.
1.3.3 Function
To enable the use of urban open space as a design tool, it is necessary to clearly define the function of each open space area identified within a specific open space category. When this is not done, research (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997, p. 2) has shown that the majority of open space areas form a mere collection of fragmented, isolated areas, used infrequently by the surrounding communities.
Hennessy (2001) describes the inherent value or function of an specific open space area, as the ability of the open space to provide clean air, clean water, buffers to adjacent land uses, and opportunities for passive or active recreation. The function of an open space area is directly linked to the benefit derived from the use of that open space. People benefit directly from the use of recreational services and activities supplied by urban open spaces and parks. Non-user benefits, such as the aesthetic value of a scenic view, are also afforded by open space (Hennessy, 2001, p. 3). Other benefits include the intrinsic value of the flora and fauna preserved within open space, the role of open space as habitat in sustaining genetic diversity or stability in ecosystems, and the security of knowing that valuable natural areas will be available for appreciation by future human generations. It is clear that an urban open space serves three primary functions namely the:
(a) Maintenance of natural processes such as the water-, gaseous-, and nutrient cycles and support of the existing flora and fauna;
17 (b) Enhancement of the aesthetic and physical conditions of the urban environment; and (c) Provision of space for recreational activity.
Of the three primary functions described, (a) and (b) is regarded as the inherent value of open space areas.
No appropriate measurement tool has been formulated as yet, which can be used to measure the inherent value of open space (Brown, 1999, p. 3). It is therefore essential that within any urban area the functions of the existing, as well as perceived future open space areas, should be clearly defined (Hennessy, 2001, p. 4).
From the definition of open space in 1.3.1, two types of open space were identified. They are functional open space and natural open space. Taking into account the function of open space as discussed above, it is clear that the current definition given is inadequate and should be refined to include the following:
“Public and private open spaces that includes: (a) man-made or delineated spaces, (b) undeveloped spaces, (c) disturbed ‘natural’ spaces and (d) undisturbed or pristine natural spaces. Research indicated that isolated areas of ‘hard open space’ such as squares, open malls, historical sites and even pavements, are also significant urban open space areas and also provide important open space linkage opportunities.” (Gobster, 2001, p. 2).
In the discussion of the definition and function of open space we have ascertained that: firstly, the categories of open space, as well as the functions thereof, have to be clearly defined. This will ensure the optimum usage of open space areas within the urban environment. Secondly, there is no adequate measurement technique to ascertain the inherent value of urban open space. In light of the above it is necessary to determine the importance of open space preservation in light of the development pressures found within the modern urban society.
18 1.4 CONSERVATION VERSUS THE DEVELOPMENT OF URBAN OPEN SPACE – GLOBAL PERCEPTIONS
Globally the perception is held that any open space system found within a city should enable the ecological processes to meet the absorptive, extractive, economic and amenity demands of the population of that city, i.e. lead to sustainable development.
The key goals of sustainable development are: a prosperous economy, a quality environment, and social equity through an integrated planning process (Girardet, 1999; Hennessy, 2001). This requires that a fine balance be achieved between human settlement demands and that of the ecological processes.
The common thread among different views of sustainable development is that sustainable development does not imply no-growth. Sustainable development seeks to revitalise the urban environment, by promoting efficient development within the built environment, and simultaneously creating more livable communities (Henton, 1998; Satterthwaite, 1992, p. 4). It centres on the containment of urban development, which threatens open space and prime agricultural lands at the urban edge.
Johannesburg is currently experiencing the negative effect of un-contained urban development. The development of informal settlements and low cost housing projects on the urban edge, place additional pressure on the natural environment. Due to rapid urban growth, greater effort is made to expand the built environment, than to conserve the natural environment (Council for the Environment, 1987).
The importance of development has always preceded the conservation and protection of the environment. The use of conventional zoning as a blueprint for development, has negatively impacted on the protection of open space areas and the conserving of the rural character of the urban edge (Hollis, et al, 2002, p. 10). Large parcels of land are subdivided into erven and streets, with no room left for open space areas.
The promulgation of the Environment Conservation Act (ECA) in 1989, has changed this perception. The ECA imposed specific obligations on person’s whishing to undertake
19 activities that could harm the natural environment through the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (EIA). The EIA regulations were signed into law in 1997 under the ECA. The New Environmental Management Act (NEMA) was promulgated in 1998 (Act 107 of 1998), and the main objective of NEMA is to ensure that all development is socially, environmentally, and economically sustainable. Under NEMA, the EIA regulations are the binding rules used to assess activities that can or will impact negatively on the environment (Smith, 2002).
NEMA enforces the concept of sustainable development. The concept of sustainable development is a new concept in South Africa, and has gained importance since the Earth Summit in 1992, and more recently, the World Summit on Sustainable Development, 2002, held in Johannesburg, Gauteng. Through NEMA, the concept of sustainable development integrates two important elements of human existence: nature and people (Gasson, 2002). The concept of nature relates to the sustainable component, and emphasises the importance of conserving, restoring, enhancing, and utilizing in a responsible manner, the ecological life-support systems. The people concept refers to the development component that emphasises the process of social upliftment, through the utilisation of resources of individuals, households, and communities (Satterthwaite, 1992; Stohr, 1981).
The literature reviewed, focused primarily on the regulation of land use rather than on the use of open space as a design tool to help shape metropolitan areas (Cervera, 1999). The relationship between the conservation and preservation of open space and growth management is not critically examined, and no attempt is made to link open space programs and growth management conceptually (Arendt, 1992). It is clear that growth management and open space preservation has always been considered as two separate issues, the one related to the regulatory policies regarding land acquisition as well as the development potential of the land acquired, the other concentrating on the intrinsic value of the land (Gasson, 2002).
Experience has shown that sustainable development and economic development cannot be seen as separate issues, as they are strongly interlinked. Sustainable development
20 implies a holistic approach to development, by considering social, economic, and ecological factors, in an integrated manner. Sustainable development should be driven and implemented by the public as well as the private sector (Hollis, et al, 2002, p. 12).
Due to past policy and legislation, the Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality, has failed to provide the urban population with all the benefits of an integrated municipal open space system. In the next section an overview will be given on the attempts made to redefine the open space policy within the greater Johannesburg area, with the objective to optimise the provision of open space within the city.
1.5 MANAGEMENT AND PROVISION OF AN OPEN SPACE SYSTEM (JMOSS) – A LOCAL PERSPECTIVE
Johannesburg is the largest city in the country. In-migration is the main driving force behind the rapid growth of Johannesburg. Between 1996 and 2001 the migration of people in the age bracket 15 to 34 increased by 27,8% (Gotz, et al, 2004, p. 29). The City of Johannesburg, shown in figure 1.1, has a fragmented open space system. The absence of a comprehensive policy framework or guidelines for the protection, management and optimisation of open space areas within the city has resulted in the ongoing loss of valuable open space resources. Furthermore, a high population density and the rapid rate of urbanisation, has increased the demand for housing, services and infrastructure, as well as employment. This places extreme pressure on the city’s natural resources. The absence of an integrated open space management system threatens not only the conservation of biodiversity and ecological systems, but also the recreational amenity of residents and the provision of other important services open spaces provide to the city, such as storm water attenuation, pollution mitigation etc.
The impact of new developments on open space areas, were done on an ad hoc basis, and not placed within an integrated open space policy framework (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997, p. 3). This impacts negatively on the future development of areas, as well as the current planning processes.
21
1 – 10: Regional Divisions
Figure 1.1: The Greater Johannesburg Area (http://www.joburg.org.za)
The promulgation of the ECA, replaced by NEMA and the subsequent EIA regulations, aim to rectify this fragmented approach, through the development of a Metropolitan Open Space System (JMOSS) for the greater Johannesburg area. The aim is too use JMOSS as a decision support tool and spatial planning tool to enable the sustainable management of open space within the Greater Johannesburg area.
22 JMOSS should enable the establishment and maintenance of an efficient open space system that will link established and potential conservation areas within the City of Johannesburg.
The Johannesburg Metropolitan Open Space System can be summarised as: “…an inter- connected and managed network of open spaces, which supports interactions between social, economic and ecological activities, sustaining and enhancing both ecological processes and human settlements. MOSS comprises public and private spaces, human- made or delineated spaces, undeveloped spaces, disturbed 'natural' spaces, and undisturbed or pristine natural spaces.” (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997).
The inherent qualities of urban open space identified in the Community Open Space Policy (2000), were used as a guideline for the establishment of JMOSS. Open space areas included, had to be accessible, safe, diverse, connected ecologically, funded and should motivate communities to care and appreciate the natural environment.
In order to achieve the above, JMOSS has identified two general types of open spaces. The first type of open space area identified is Existing Open Space, where the categories of open space are still based on current land use as well as provincial planning and decision support tools. It includes existing potential open spaces that still need to be included in JMOSS. The second type of open space is categorised as Desired Open Space. Here the importance of each component within the open space network is indicated. Desired potential open space areas identified to be included in JMOSS, falls within this category.
1.6 REGULATION AND ASSESSMENT OF OPEN SPACE – EIA AND SCOPING
The successful completion of any development project within the two general categories of open space identified above, depends on the outcome of the EIA process followed.
23 The completion of an EIA is a legal requirement for many types of development projects including all forms of land transformation, such as conversion of natural veld to agriculture or forestry. In South Africa, EIA is regarded as being an extremely important and useful technique, and the primary legislative test, on most forms of development.
Once applied, the test should subsequently result in developments that are more environmentally acceptable. The Department of Environment Affairs has the statutory authority to apply the EIA process (figure 1.2) to all development, through NEMA.
RECEIPT OF REQUEST
Listed Activity Not Listed Activity
Application Process Exemption Process
Receipt of Application Form Exemption Approved/Not Approved
Refer to DEAT Refer to Local Authority Accepted for Departmental Review
Plan of Study for Scoping
Approve Plan of Study Request Amendments to Plan of Study Receive Scoping Report Request Amendments Approve Scoping Report
EIA Required No EIA required
Figure 1.2: The EIA process as formulated by Gauteng Department Of Agriculture, Conservation And Environment (EIA Review Manual, 1999)
The EIA process as illustrated in figure 1.2, is applied to all listed activities identified within the EIA regulations. All of these activities are perceived as having a significant impact on the environment.
24 Within the whole EIA process the scoping process is viewed as “…a critical stage in the Integrated Environmental Management procedure.”(DEAT, 1992b, p. 20).
The success of any development proposal is determined by the adequacy of the scoping process. The adequacy of the scoping exercise is measured against the following important principles for good environmental assessment practice, as described by the United Nations Environmental Programme (1998):
Focus on the main issues;
Involve all relevant interested and affected parties;
Link information to decisions about the project;
Present clear options for the mitigation of impacts;
Present information in a usable form to the decision makers (DEAT, 2002, p. 4).
The aim of the scoping document is to highlight the concerns raised by the interested and affected parties, and to ensure that the results of the assessment provide the answers to these concerns raised. Weaver, et al (1999) states that the “why” answer to a particular question is just as important as what the question is. In essence the scoping process can be viewed as a platform where all parties, i.e. relevant authorities, residents, business and developer, can consult on the project, and all issues arising from it.
The greatest challenge facing the city of Johannesburg is to plan in a new integrated way, by incorporating perceptive means for the conservation of the natural and the cultural environment without compromising economic development. The problem should be addressed and managed within the current economic climate as well as the restraints imposed on development through the NEMA, and in specific the EIA regulations. The challenge between the conservation of the natural and cultural environment and the acquisition of land for development, has initiated the research for this study.
25 1.7 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND DATA ACQUISITION
1.7.1 The Problem
The aim of this study is firstly, to find a middle ground where development and conservation can be accommodated within the current JMOSS. Secondly, to assess whether the scoping process, as defined within the EIA, is an effective assessment technique to assess positive economic development on ecological sensitive areas, as defined within JMOSS.
An ecological sensitive area has been identified namely, Rietvlei 101 I.R. The Rietvlei area is located within the southern parts of Johannesburg and will be used as study area for the research project.
The research will focus on the Rietvlei study area and the proposed development of the study area. The ecological sensitivity of the study area will be evaluated in terms of JMOSS. The impact of the different development proposals on the Rietvlei study area will be evaluated through the scoping report. The research will therefore be limited to answering the following questions:
i) How are ecological sensitive areas defined within JMOSS? ii) How is Rietvlei 101 I.R categorised within JMOSS? iii) Is scoping, as an assessment tool, effective to determine whether positive economic development can be accommodated on ecological sensitive areas, as classified by JMOSS?
1.7.2 Data Acquisition
The research undertaken in this study can be described as quantative, non-experimental and descriptive in nature. It is a systematic, empirical enquiry where the variables are analysed. The analytical techniques used should enable the researcher to formulate an objective conclusion regarding the research problem.
26 The research problem forms the basis of the research, and is based on the current open space system and open space policy used in Johannesburg. The study focuses on specific processes and the impact thereof on the study area.
1.7.2.1 Composition of Data
The relevant data collected will enable the researcher to answer the research problem as set out in 1.7.1. The primary data collected centres around a review of JMOSS, a discussion regarding the characteristics of the Rietvlei study area, as well as a review of the EIA process, specifically the scoping process. The assessment of the development proposals and the impact thereof on the Rietvlei study area will be evaluated in the form of a scoping report. The scoping report will consists of an analysis of the various impacts of the development proposals, through an impact assessment matrix. Measures that should be implemented to mitigate the impacts identified, will be proposed.
1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research will be done in terms of the scientific method. The scientific method places the research within a research framework so as to allow the logic deployment of the research project. The research project has been divided into four phases, as illustrated in figure 1.3.
The first phase of the research project orientates the reader regarding the nature of the research project and the background to the problem through the literature review. It is aimed at explaining to the reader why urban open spaces are considered to be valuable and the problems faced in the preservation of open spaces located within the urban area. It takes the reader from a global perspective to a local perspective, explaining why there is a perceived need for a municipal open space system in the City of Johannesburg. The research problem is introduced to the reader and explained in terms of the specific questions asked as well as the data that is needed to address the questions asked.
27 PHASE 1 ORIENTATION and LITERATURE REVIEW
CHAPTER 1
PHASE 2
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND:
Study Area JMOSS EIA: Scoping Process
CHAPTER 2
PHASE 3
Development initiates and the impact thereof evaluated through the scoping process, within the framework of JMOSS
ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA
CHAPTER 3
PHASE 4
SYNTHESIS
CHAPTER 4
Figure 1.3: Research Methodology
28 Background regarding the Rietvlei study area, JMOSS, and the EIA with specific reference to the scoping process, will be introduced to the reader during the second phase of the research project. JMOSS is analised in terms of the classification system used. The Rietvlei study area will be analised by addressing the status quo of the area. The aim is to introduce the reader to the natural and cultural sensitivity of the area. A general introduction to the EIA process as well as the scoping report is given in phase 2.
Phase three entails the analyses of the different development proposals for the Rietvlei study area in terms of the scoping report. The sensitivity of the study area will be determined in accordance with JMOSS and all significant impacts will be identified and rated.
In the last phase of the research project, phase four, all the results obtained on how development and conservation can be accommodated within the current JMOSS will be evaluated and discussed. The effectiveness of the scoping process as an environmental assessment tool will furthermore be evaluated in terms of the findings of the environmental impact assessment done for the Rietvlei study area. Figure 1.3 represents a summary of the research methodology.
The next chapter, will focus on a theoretical analysis of the three main components of the research project namely, JMOSS, Rietvlei 101 I.R as the study area, and the EIA process with specific reference to the scoping document.
29 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: JMOSS, EIA AND THE STUDY AREA - RIETVLEI 101 IR
Environmentally sensitive areas, such as the Rietvlei study area are protected from development through NEMA and JMOSS. The first priority is to ascertain the role and function of the Rietvlei study area within the area where it is located. Secondly, the study area must be critically discussed within the framework of JMOSS. Chapter two therefore forms the theoretical foundation for the analyses done in chapter three pertaining to the research of the project.
In chapter three a research analyses will be done in terms of the scoping process. To understand the role and function of the scoping process within the EIA process, an overview will be given of the EIA process, with emphasis on the role and function of the scoping process.
2.1 JMOSS
The classification of urban open space within the city of Johannesburg was guided by a set of principles, rather than fixed standards. The municipal open space system had to comply with the following principles identified:
Integration, linkage and continuity of the system;
A hierarchy of space;
Appropriate levels of public accessibility in keeping with plans for its use;
Using a MOSS as a means to contain and manage city growth;
The need to conserve resources, scenery and biodiversity; and
Use of a MOSS to provide for complimentary land-uses (SMLC, 1997).
Different categories of urban open space areas were identified. The proposed categories relate to current land use as well as the numerous provincial planning and decision support tools. The six main categories identified and discussed in table 2.1, are:
30 1. Ecological open space, consisting of existing open space and desired open space; 2. Social open space; 3. Institutional open space; 4. Heritage open space; 5. Agricultural open space; and 6. Prospective open space: degraded sites (e.g. slimes dams, landfill sites) that, after rehabilitation, may have the potential of becoming part of the ecological open space network. For each of these categories, a number of sub-categories where identified as set out in table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Proposed Categories and Sub-Categories of Open Space, Formulated in JMOSS (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997) MAIN CATEGORY SUB-CATEGORIES
• Nature reserves
• Botanical gardens
• Waterbodies (buffered by 50 m) Existing • Undeveloped ridges
• Bird sanctuaries
• Nature trails
• Areas of “high” conservation value (as determined by Ecological specialist ecologist) open space • Areas with “high” habitat diversity (as determined by specialist ecologist)
Desired • Areas with a low disturbance (as determined by specialist ecologist)
• Red Data fauna (from GDACEL)
• Red Data flora (from GDACEL)
• “Natural” land cover categories
• Zoological gardens
Social open space • Sports facilities
• Recreational facilities
31 MAIN CATEGORY SUB-CATEGORIES
• Places of interest
• Places of worship
• Libraries
• Community centers
• Municipal facilities
• Airports/airfields
• Educational facilities
Institutional • Public service facilities (e.g. police stations, post offices etc.)
• Health facilities (i.e. hospitals and clinics)
• Cemeteries
• Historical monuments
• Museums
• Art galleries Heritage • Cemeteries of historical importance
• Archaeological sites
• Cultural sites
Agricultural • Agricultural lands (including urban agriculture)
• Refuse sites
• Mine dumps Prospective open • Slimes dams space • Landfill sites
• Mining land & quarries
Table 2.1 categorised ecological open space as existing and still to be identified sensitive ecological areas, located within the urban area. Social open spaces are identified as all existing recreational areas as well as areas used for community activities.
It is interesting to note that all municipal facilities such as municipal servitudes, police stations, and schools are included in the municipal open space system as institutional open spaces.
32 All land-use zoned as agricultural within the urban area, as well as, areas used for agricultural purposes within the urban area, have been included in the category “Agricultural”.
All existing heritage sites, art galleries as well as land used for cultural activities have also been included in the municipal open space system. The categories identified are very broad and allow a wide range of activities to be included in the open space system.
A category was introduced that aims to identify all areas that could be used as open space areas, once rehabilitated. These areas include mine dumps, refuse sites, slimes dams etc., and are listed in the category prospective open space. Currently these forms of open space, are viewed as “wasted” open space areas, as they cannot be utilised by the surrounding urban population, due the type of activity that takes place on the land.
As a development control measure, all waterbodies, including rivers (for which floodline information was not available) and certain wetlands (for which digital data was available), were buffered by 50m on either side. Meaning, that no development could take place within the 50m buffer zone. This buffer size is based on reference to floodplains in the previous Water Act 1954 (Act 56 of 1954), which states that rivers should be buffered by 50m on either side, should the 1 in 100 year floodline be undetermined. This is in line with the Spatial Development Framework for the City of Johannesburg (2001), which stipulates that no development is to take place within the 1 in 100 year floodline. Wetlands were also buffered by a 50m floodline because of their importance and sensitivity.
An important feature of the classification of open space is that no cut-off size for open space areas were included in the formulation of JMOSS, as the view was held that the intrinsic value of land should take preference over a set standard, so as to ensure that no valuable open spaces in areas are excluded, where the set standards are exceeded (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997).
33 2.1.1 Grouping of Open Spaces
After the various open space categories were identified (table 2.1), the categories were further grouped into three main classes, namely primary, secondary and tertiary open space. The primary open space areas form the main network of the open space system. These areas are larger and more ecologically diverse, with limited human disturbance. They form the core ecological areas and determine the sustainability of the whole open space system. The primary open space network is supplemented by secondary and tertiary open spaces. The secondary and tertiary open spaces form the vital links between the primary or ecological open spaces. All three of these open space groups, function as corridors that promote and enable the flow of energy, water, nutrients, genetic material and plants and animals between each other across the city.
The three groups identified are defined as follows:
2.1.1.1 Primary open space network
The existing ecological opens space areas, as well as ecological areas still to be included into the open space system, fall in the primary open space network.
Existing ecological open spaces represent the core areas of the JMOSS and no distinction is made between, for example nature reserves and botanical gardens. All of these areas are regarded as no-go areas, where no development will be approved. Not all ecological open spaces will fall within the primary open space network. Isolated patches of ecological open space, located outside of the main primary open space network, can remain, functioning as independent ecological systems. Below is a diagrammatic representation of the classification for ecological open space according to the JMOSS.
34 PRIMARY OPEN SPACE NETWORK
Isolated Existing Desired ecological ecological open ecological open spaces spaces
Figure 2.1: Categories within the Primary Open Space Network (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
The isolated ecological open spaces are open spaces that, due to their location, cannot physically connect to the broader primary open space system, either through the secondary or the tertiary open spaces. They will therefore remain as isolated patches of ecological open space, helping to maintain the ecological viability and sustainability of the primary open space network.
2.1.1.2 Secondary open space
The open space identified within the social open space, institutional-, heritage- and agricultural categories form part of the secondary open space system. These areas are regarded as areas that can be developed so as to complement the primary open space network. The following three categories have been identified within the secondary open space system:
Connecting secondary open spaces
As illustrated in Figure 2.2, these open spaces form links between different primary open spaces and contribute to the connectivity of the primary open space network.
35 Agricultural land located between two sensitive ecological open spaces, is an example of a connecting secondary open space.
Primary open space
Connecting secondary open space
Figure 2.2: Connecting Secondary Open Space (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
Supplementary secondary open spaces
They form part of the primary open space network, extending beyond water bodies and/or ridges, for example where a stream or a river runs through a public park or where a dam is located within public or private grounds, this will increase the surface area of the primary open space network indirectly, even though with areas that are ecologically seen as being less functional. Primary open space i.e. river
Supplementary secondary open space i.e. recreational facility Figure 2.3: Supplementary Open Space (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
36 Isolated secondary open spaces As illustrated, the isolated secondary open space cannot be integrated with the primary open space system, although it still plays a valuable role within the system.
Isolated secondary open space
Primary open space
Figure 2.4: Isolated Secondary Open Space (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
2.1.1.3 Tertiary open space
Tertiary open spaces consist of desired ecological open spaces as well as prospective open space areas. These open space areas have to be identified and can be developed in terms of the current relevant environmental legislation. These areas must complement the primary open space network. The tertiary open space system has been divided into: connecting tertiary open spaces, supplementary tertiary open spaces, and isolated tertiary open spaces.
It is important to note that the potential of any municipal open space system to deliver the best range of open space services depends on all of the abovementioned open space systems being managed communally, as part of an overall integrated open space system. Within the scope of the research the focus will fall on the primary open space system, and how development will impact on this sensitive natural environment.
In order to assess the function and role of Rietvlei, as study area within JMOSS, a current situational analysis of the Rietvlei study area will be done in the next section.
37 2.2 THE STUDY AREA – RIETVLEI 101, I.R. 2.2.1 Introduction
The Klipriviersberg area is valued as being one of Johannesburg’s, and arguably one of Gauteng’s most valuable environmental and recreational assets. In October 1984, the former Johannesburg City Council proclaimed the Klipriviersberg Nature reserve, situated on the farm Rietvlei 101 IR, covering an extent of over 600 hectares. Historically there has been no overall environmental management system in the area. The environmental quality of the area has until now been controlled by many departments; this has resulted in either no environmental control or total control.
The study area is located within the ecological sensitive Klipriviersberg range of Hills, and has until now not been managed as an environmental area. This has lead to degradation of the natural environment as well as the cultural elements found in the study area. With the formulation of JMOSS, the Rietvlei study area can now be managed and preserved within an integrated urban open space system. An analysis of the current situation of the study area will give an indication of the role and function of the Rietvlei area, within JMOSS.
2.2.2 Location within Local Context The study area is approximately 132 hectares in extent and comprises of portions 38, 44, 56 and 67 of the farm Rietvlei 101 IR. The study area is located within Region 9, sub- area 19, of the greater Johannesburg area. The study area forms part of the Klipriviersberg range of hills that extends from Alberton to Eldorado Park (figure 2.5). The Klipriviersberg range of hills, have been classified as an existing ecological open space according to JMOSS and falls within the primary open space network. The Klipriviersberg area hosts a diverse range of flora, small species of fauna and the archaeological remains of over 160 baTswana villages of between 200 and 600 years old (Bohlweki Environmental, 1999).
38 The Bloubosspruit cuts through the hills and flows southwards down the middle of the Klip Riversberg Nature Reserve and joins the Klip River 3km further on.
A large portion of the Klipriviersberg range of hills form, part of the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve owned by the Johannesburg Council.
Smaller portions of the Klipriviersberg range of hills, in the vicinity of the Nature Reserve, remain as undeveloped land. The Rietvlei study area is one of these portions of undeveloped land. It is these smaller portions of undeveloped land that are under threat by development from the rapid growing city of Johannesburg.
The study area (figure 2.6) is located within the southern foothills of the Klipriviersberg, approximately 10 km south of the Johannesburg Central Business District. The northwestern boundary of the site is Impala Road, with the Klip Riversberg Nature Reserve, situated on the western side of Impala Road, forming the northern boundary.
The head office of Rand Water is located to the northeastern side of the site, with agricultural holdings forming the southern and eastern boundaries of the site.
2.2.3 Location within the Regional Context Within a regional context the study area is located within Klipriviersberg, approximately 10 kilometers south of the Johannesburg Central Business District, between the suburbs of Winchester Hills and Suiderood to the north, Impala Drive and Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve to the west, Glenvista to the East and Kibler Park and Mayfield Park to the south (figure 2.5).
The site is surrounded by predominantly middle to upper class residential suburbs with a small strip of agricultural holdings located to the south, along the banks of the Klip River.
39
Figure 2.5: The Rietvlei Study Area in Regional Context 40 2.2.4 Land Use Assessment In order to assess the current state of the site, an analysis of the physical environment was done. Simultaneously, a general land use analyses of the surrounding area in which the Rietvlei study area is located was done to explain and emphasise the uniqueness of the site in terms of the urban area in which it is located.
2.2.4.1 The Study Area In terms of the Johannesburg Town Planning Scheme (1979) the study area is zoned “undetermined”. The site is affected by two servitudes. The first is the main outfall sewer pipe that runs relatively deep underground and poses little intrusion into the development of the site. The second servitude belongs to ESCOM and runs diagonally northwest across portion 44 and portion 46. The power lines have been removed but the servitude still exists (figure 2.6).
Figure 2.6: The Rietvlei Study Area – Local Context
41 a) Physical Environment The topography of the site is characterised by rocky hills and ridges in the central- western portion, becoming more level towards the south-east. The gradients on the site vary from steep with a gradient of 1:3 to gentle with a gradient of 1:2 (figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7: Contour Map of the Rietvlei Study Area
The climatic conditions experienced on the site is typical of the Highveld Region, with summer rain fall that is characterized by thunderstorms and dry cold winters. The site is underlain by balsaltic lava and agglomerates of the Klipriversberg Group, which forms part of the Ventersdorp Supergroup. Large areas of exposed rock faces can be found on the site as well as areas that are characterised by loose rocks or boulders.
42 The predominant soils found on the site are gravelly gray/red to yellow/red soils with a high clay content (between 40 and 30 percent Bohlweki Environmental, 1999). Isolated areas of expansive clay (black turf) can be found along the stream banks.
The vegetation found in this area can be classified as Bankenveld – Central Variation (Acocks veld type 61b) (Acocks, 1988). Due to the topography four distinct variations in the vegetation can be identified: i) Grasslands found at the foot of the slopes. This vegetation is dominated by Hyparrhenia hirta, Trachypogon spictatus, Eragrostis chloromelas and Themeda trianda. This vegetation can be described as sweet to sour grassland. The total plant cover is low due to past grazing activities with bare soil patches to be found through- out the veld. The vegetation is not in a pristine state, but due to its resilient nature will recover over time. ii) Vegetation associated with the watercourse in the south-eastern part of the site. The banks of the watercourse are dominated by Hyparrhenia hirta, Eragrostis chloromelas, Cynodon dactylon, Heteropogon contortus and Aristida canescens. The banks of the watercourse as well as the vegetation have been over-utilised and mismanaged through past grazing activities. Heteropogon contortus is a sweet grass found on the clay banks of rivers and watercourses and promote grazing in these areas. Hyparr tamba, an invasive grass, has destroyed many of the sensitive inhabitants found in wet, marshy areas. iii) Woodland vegetation found at the steep rocky slopes and outcrops. This form of vegetation is typical Bankenveld. The most dominant tree specie found is the Acacia caffra. Other vegetation includes the Aloe greatheadi variance davyana, Cussonia paniculata and Zizphus mucronata. The dominance of the Acacia caffra indicates a serious state of bush encroachment by this specie. iv) Grassland vegetation found on the steep slopes and crests. This form of vegetation is sour grassland and is dominated by Trachypogon spictatus, loudetia simplex and hyparrhenia hirta. This vegetation is in good condition with a good grass cover.
43 The sour nature of the grassland has diverted grazing from this area to the sweeter grassland of the lower lying areas and watercourse (Bohlweki Environmental, 1999, p. 25-26).
The site has no wetland area or perennial watercourse. A non-perennial watercourse can be found on the eastern portion of the site and surface water flow is confined to periods after heavy rainfall. The non-perennial watercourse is marshy due to the ground water found within the natural drainage line. No detailed information is readily available on the groundwater in the area. The dolomitic areas in the Klip River Valley, located to the south of the site, are seen as high recharge areas (Bohlweki Environmental, 1999).
It can be concluded that the current undeveloped state of the study area has left the vegetation in a degraded state. The steep slopes of the hillcrest are the only areas where the vegetation is in a good condition, and where specie diversity is high. The following summarises the condition of the veld found in the study area:
1) Uncontrolled grazing practices have replaced the palatable grasses with a high grazing value, with grass species with a low biomass production and low grazing value. 2) The clearing of certain bulbous plants such as Hypoxis hemerocallidae, for medicinal practices, has left large patches of soil disturbed and vegetation destroyed. 3) The banks of the watercourse have been over-utilised and mismanaged. There is minimal variation of grass species resulting in a low bio-diversity within the ecosystem along the watercourse. 4) Serious bush encroachment and severe over utilization is characteristic of the steep rocky slopes and rock outcrops. An infestation of exotic trees and shrubs such as the acacia mearnsii is evident on the steep slopes. 5) The grassland vegetation of the steep slopes and hillcrests are in a much better condition. Specie diversity is high.
44 In its present state, the Rietvlei study area can not be regarded as a sustainable environmental area. It is therefore not viewed as being an ecological sensitive area and conservation of the area in its current state is not regarded as a viable option.
Sixb) historicalArchaeological/Cultural features can be found Intereston the site (figure 2.8). Johannesburg has one of the richest concentrations of Stone Age and Iron Age archaeological sites (Plan Practice et al, 1999). The ruins found on the site are of Sotho-Tswana origin. The first Sotho-Tswana settlers, settled in the Klipriviersberg area around 1600 AD. They built stonewalled settlements consisting of a central kraal surrounded by reed or wattle-enforced clay huts, within an outer circle of stone walls. The ruins found on the site resemble these outer stonewalls built by the Sotho-Tswana settlers.
K LI PR IV IE RS BE RG D RI VE
KLIPRIVIERSBERG NATURE RESERVE
ER L SEW UTFAL MAIN O
RAND WATER
ESCOM SERVITUDE SITE 5 SITE 4 SITE 6 SITE 3 SITE 1
SMLC SITE 2 LAND
ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES
Figure 2.8: Location of the Archaeological Sites: Rietvlei Study Area
45 Three of the sites found on the Farm Rietvlei have been dated from approximately 1750 AD to 1823 AD, that is when Mzilikazi settled nearer Heidelberg (Rasmussen, 1975). Two of the sites dates back to the 16th century when according to Rasmussen (1975) the Sotho-Tswana people moved north from the Free State in search of good agricultural land. There are six sites in total. Only two sites are deemed to have archaeological value. These sites date back to the 16th century and are less common than the rest.
There are indications that some of the ruins have been disturbed by illegal occupants. Stone walls have been realigned to form houses for farm labourers. Metal objects found at some of the ruins are indications of more recent occupation.
Taking into consideration the location of the site, the existing natural environment, as well as the cultural history of the site it is clear that the study area is environmentally as well as culturally very sensitive. It is within this context that the owners of the site would like to develop the site. The perception is held that leaving the site undeveloped and unmanaged will be to the detriment of the cultural significance of the site as well as the existing natural environment. c) Surrounding Urban Environment As shown in figure 2.5, the Klipriviersberg area is located to the south of the built up area and is surrounded by an industrial and mining belt to the north and the residential areas south of the mining area and the M2. The head office of Rand Water, located to the northeastern side of the site is zoned “Special Purpose”. The undeveloped portion of the property has high conservation value. Unused development rights exist on the property. It is anticipated that Rand Water will maintain a considerable portion of the land in a natural state although additional reservoirs and buildings are planned (RSDF, 2003). Land located between Impala Drive and the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve is zoned agricultural. The area has a high environmental rating according to JMOSS and should be incorporated into the Klipriviersberg Nature reserve.
46 Due to activities on portions of the agricultural holdings, the land is not in pristine condition. The agricultural holdings located in this strip, is visible from Impala Drive and the Nature Reserve.
Kibler Park is located to the west of the study area adjacent to the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve. Kibler Park is a well-established middle class residential area. This area is by far the most developed and built up in the southern portion of Region 9. The only land left for development is located towards the south, across Main Road.
Mayfield Park is a small residential area located to the east of Kibler Park. Rispark and Patlynne are agricultural holdings located to the south of the study area. These areas used to be located on the old Johannesburg Municipal boundary. The agricultural holdings are now being developed into upmarket housing units. No farming activities occur in this area. A few holdings carry livestock, mostly horses for private use. Illegal land uses such as builders’ yards, furniture manufacturers and transport companies can be found on certain holdings.
To the northern side of the study area, north and east of Kliprivier Road the residential areas of Mondeor, Winchester Hills, Suideroord, Glenvista and Mulbarton are located. These areas are predominantly residential areas. The residential areas are adequately served with amenities. There are a number of office developments. Winchester Hills is an environmentally sensitive area due to its location adjacent to the Klipriversberg Nature Reserve. It has been found that development in Winchester Hills has been undertaken with little consideration for the sensitivity of the natural environment of the area.
The land to the east of the study area, east of Kliprivier Drive is hilly with a high conservation rating due to the presence of various red data plant species. Glenanda, Glenvista, Mulbarton, Bassonia and Liefde-En-Vrede are all residential suburbs, with high to low residential densities.
47 The major routes in the area include:
Kliprivier Drive.
Bellairs Drive. It serves local residents as well as a connector to Alberton through Michelle Avenue.
Vorster Avenue / True North Road (mobility road) has facilities at various points along its length. The most northerly portion serves as a major access west and north- west link to the Gleneagles node. The impact on residential uses along True North Road is not significant. Camaro Road is an important link to the Southern Bypass through Rosettenville.
The Regional Spatial Development Framework (2003), proposed that no development that has a high visibility, be allowed along Klipriver Drive due to the environmental sensitivity of the area. Kliprivier Drive is viewed as the gateway to the city of Johannesburg and land along the eastern side should be maintained in its natural state to complement the nature Reserve on the west (RSDF, 2003).
The Alpha Stone Quarry, located to the west of the study area, west of Kibler Park, has high conservation value. The Quarry is an important source of high quality building material but has had a major negative impact on the Klipriviersberg area. The area to the west of the Alpha Stone Quarry has high conservation value. It is zoned as Residential 1 with a density zoning of 1 dwelling per 4000m2 (RSDF, 2003). The land consists of unproclaimed farm portions. The area is as large as the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve itself and therefore forms a major component of the Klipriviersberg environment. Within the JMOSS framework this piece of land can be categorized as an isolated ecological open space area It is clear that the distinct topographical features of the Klipriviersberg range of hills have had an impact on the settlement pattern found in the area. Development has been directed towards the lower lying areas along the major transportation routes found in the area. Located within this densely built up urban area, three major open space areas can be identified namely, the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve, the pocket of undeveloped land
48 formed by the Rietvlei study area boarded by the headquarters of Rand Water Board, and the Alpha Stone Quarry. All three of these areas have been identified as areas with a high conservation value. Taking into consideration the classification system used in JMOSS, the Kilpriversberg Nature Reserve, will according to JMOSS, be classified as an ecological sensitive open space area. It will therefore form part of the primary open space system. The Alpha Stone Quarry can be classified as a prospective open space area and will therefore form part of the tertiary open space system. From the analyses of Rietvlei, due to its location within the Klipriversberg range of hills, it will form part of the primary open space system. The existing urban areas place great pressure on the undeveloped Rietvlei study area as seen in the unlawful practices taking place in the study area. Rietvlei is viewed as a prime development location due to its location adjacent to Klip River Drive and the surrounding residential suburbs. It is therefore necessary to determine the best possible development proposals for the study area, taking into consideration the environmental sensitivity of the study area. This can only be done through the EIA process and in specific the scoping document as the relevant impact assessment tool. The next section will explain the role and function of the scoping document.
2.3 EIA: SCOPING PROCESS
Scoping is an open, interactive process that limits the environmental assessment process to the significant issues identified and the reasonable alternatives to mitigate the various issues. Scoping is therefore an open process where feasible alternatives are identified and selected for further assessment. Scoping should commence at the start of the development process. Stakeholder participation forms an important part of the scoping process and is accommodated through the public participation process. The public participation process is formally described in sections 21, 22 and 26 of the Environmental Conservation Act, Act 73 of 1989 (Weaver, et al, 1999).
49 Scoping is seen as a complete document where all the issues raised, are assessed and reviewed. A scoping document should be flexible to allow the increase or decrease of the scope of the investigation, as new issues emerge or others are eliminated.
2.3.1 Scoping Method
There is a generic procedure to be followed as explained in DEAT (2002). Scoping can be divided into three phases: Phase 1 is the planning phase where an outline is given to Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, explaining the type of development to take place, as well as who the affected Interested and Affected Parties are. Phase 2 forms the public participation process where all relevant issues are raised and the most significant impacts are identified. The formal report forms the core of phase three. The proposed development must be evaluated in terms of relevant criteria so as to identify the key issues/impacts that may occur as a direct result of the proposed development. Each of the key issues/impacts must be assessed according to the project stages from the planning stage through to the operational stage. Proposals for the mitigation of impacts are specified where necessary.
As a means of determining the significance of the various impacts that can or may be associated with the proposed project, a series of assessment criteria were used for each impact. These criteria include an examination of the nature, extent, duration, intensity and probability of the impact occurring, and assessing whether the impact will be positive or negative for the natural as well as biophysical environments at, and surrounding, the site. The following criteria have been adapted from those proposed in the EIA Guideline Document (DEAT, 2002) and will be used to assess the impact of the various development proposals on the study area:
2.3.1.1 Nature The nature of the impact can be either positive or negative, and it describes what is being affected and how it is being affected.
50 2.3.1.2 Extent This indicates the spatial area that may be affected by the impact and further describes the possibility that adjoining areas may be impacted upon. This includes four classes that are listed as follows:
Local (extending only as far as the site);
Limited (limited to the site and it’s immediate surrounds);
Regional (extending beyond immediate surrounds to affect a larger area); and
National or international.
2.3.1.4 Duration
Indicates the period of time that the impact may be operative (i.e. the lifetime of the impact). This includes the following four classes that are listed as follows:
Short term: 0 to 6 months (construction phase of the project)
Medium term: 6 months to 2 years (stabilisation period of the operational phase)
Long term: the impact will only cease after the operational life of the activity either due to natural processes or by human intervention.
Permanent: where mitigation either by natural process or by human intervention will not occur in such a way or in such a time span that the impact can be considered transient.
2.3.1.5 Intensity Is used to establish whether the impact is likely to be destructive or have a lesser effect. Three classes of intensity have been identified:
Low: the effect of the impact on the natural, cultural or social environment is of such a nature that natural, social and cultural functions and processes are not affected.
51 Medium: the effect of the impact on the natural, cultural or social environment is of such a nature that natural, social and cultural functions and processes can continue in a modified positive or negative way.
High: the effect of the impact on the natural, cultural or social environment is of such a nature that natural, social and cultural functions and processes temporarily or permanently cease (negative) or change (positive).
2.3.1.6 Probability Describes the likelihood of the impact actually occurring. The following six classes are used to describe the probability of the impact: Table 2.2: The six Categories of Probability Probability Occurrence (%) Description Improbable <25% Very small chance that impact may occur due to historical or design experience. Possible 26%-50% Small likelihood that impact may occur. Probable 51%-75% Distinct likelihood that impact may occur. Highly probable 76%-99% Impact most likely to occur. Definite 100% Impact will occur regardless of any mitigation. Uncertain ? The probability can not be established due to a lack of information or knowledge.
2.3.1.6 Significance How significant the impact will be is determined through an evaluation of all the above criteria. Significance can be described as:
52 Table 2.3: Description of the various forms of Significance Significance Description Negligible The impact will not have any effect on the environment, the people or the activity. Low The impact that may occur will not have any influence on decisions regarding the activity. Medium The impact should have an influence and should be mitigated. High The impact will definitely have an influence and must be mitigated. Uncertain The significance can not be established due to a lack of information.
The above criteria, attempts to bridge the gap between the scientific approach to assessment and the political nature of decision making.
In the next chapter follows a data analyses on the current situation of the Rietvlei study area. Firstly, the development proposals for the Rietvlei study area will be discussed. This includes two development phases, namely a hotel and conference centre and the development of a commercial and residential node. Secondly, the Rietvlei study area will be evaluated in the context of the JMOSS classification system. Discussions will thirdly elaborate on the assessment criteria as set out in the scoping process.
53 CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS: STUDY AREA
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The study area has been purchased with the intention of developing it for the eco-tourism market. Tourism in terms of the proposed development can be defined as the travel to a destination with the purpose of recreation and relaxation (Mills and Morrison, 1992). Tourism attracts people to specific areas. Natural resources as well as human activities form an integral part of any tourism package. For the purpose of the analysis, Eco- tourism can be described as “ the travel to relatively undisturbed or unpolluted areas with the specific purpose to study, admire and enjoy the scenic beauty, plants and animals as well as existing cultural manifestations in the area.” (Blamey, 1997).
Eco-tourism is firstly, based on the concept of sustainable utilisation of the environment so that the economic, social and aesthetic needs of the population can be satisfied. Simultaneously eco-tourism enables the preservation of the cultural aspects, ecological processes, biological diversity, and sensitive ecological systems. Secondly, no development will have zero impact on the environment and therefore the aim of eco- tourism is for the impact on the environment to be as minimal as possible.
Taking the above into consideration, the proposed development will comprise of two phases described below.
3.2 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 3.2.1 Phase 1: Hotel/Conferencing Developments
During the first phase of development, a hotel, as well as a conference centre, restaurant and four guesthouses will be developed on the intermediate plateau on the proposed site (figure 3.1).
54 This development will consist of a single group of buildings located on 2,3 ha of the site. The existing Tswana ruins on the site will be restored to serve as a tourist attraction within the first phase of the development (figure 3.1).
The site is regarded as environmentally, as well as culturally sensitive, therefore architecturally the proposed development must blend in with the natural environment and be responsive to the climatic conditions experienced on the Highveld. It is proposed that the building materials used, will be where possible, natural stone from the site and colours selected will blend in with the colours and textures found within the surrounding environment. To minimise the visibility of the proposed buildings on the site, the slope of the roof of the main complex will follow the slope of the hill against which it will be placed. During the landscaping phase, the natural veld will be left un-spoilt close to the buildings and all indigenous trees will be protected. Alien vegetation will be removed and indigenous species will be planted. The use of high mast lighting will be avoided around the main buildings to ensure minimal light intrusion.
3.2.2 Phase 2: Commercial Development
Phase 2 will consist of the development of a commercial node. This is necessary to ensure the financial viability of the proposed project. The commercial node will be established in a concealed valley on the site (figure 3.1). The commercial node will be developed on 19 ha of the site. The commercial development will include the following:
Establishment of a specialist school such as an equestrian centre;
Establishment of an Office Park;
Establishment of a small residential township of approximately thirty to fifty stands and;
Establishment of a golf training centre with driving range and related facilities.
The remainder of the property not affected by the phase 1 and two developments will be utilised as a conservation area.
55 Due to the sensitive nature of the site as well as its strategic location within the Klipriviersberg area, the aim of the proposed development of the study area is to take ownership of the site through development that support the overall conservation aims of the local authority whilst unlocking some of the financial potential of the area for the benefit of conservation.
Phase 1 of the proposed development will only affect 7% of the study area, where-as phase 2 of the proposed development will affect 15% of the site. Both development proposals will have significant impact on the study area. Phase 2 is viewed as having potentially the most significant impact on the study area. Therefore, to ascertain the ecological value of the study area within the greater municipal open space system, it has to be analysed in terms of JMOSS. K LI PR IV IE RS BE RG D RIV E
KLIPRIVIERSBERG NATURE RESERVE
L SEWER UTFAL MAIN O
RAND WATER
HOTEL / CONFERENCE ESCOM SERVITUDE
SITE 5 G/HOUSE SITE 4 SITE 6 SITE 3 ENVIRO SITE 1 RESIDENTIAL CENTRE
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
SMLC SITE 2 LAND
ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES
Figure 3.1: Development Proposals for the Rietvlei Study Area
56 3.5 THE STUDY AREA WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF JMOSS
The Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Local Council has adopted an environmental policy where the overall objective is to ensure a safe, healthy and sustainable urban environment for the urban population through the implementation of the environmental principles and objectives contained in NEMA and the ECA (RSDF, 2003).
A vision for the Klipriviersberg area has been formulated and is “to secure the Klipriviersberg as Greater Johannesburg’s leading outdoor and leisure experience and to promote compatible and mixed use development on the lowlands.” (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997, p. 46).
It is therefore clear that the study area is perceived as an ecological, cultural sensitive area, and should be protected and managed within a municipal open space system such as JMOSS.
3.5.1 General Analysis of Open Space within Greater Johannesburg Area
As illustrated in figure 3.2 the greater Johannesburg area is characterised by built up and fully developed areas with insufficient open space areas left within the urban environment. The many pieces of unutilised land that are left within the metropolitan area have a lot of potential for both environmental use as well as development. The development or conservation of these areas depend on whether the land has been subjected to any mining activity or the type of development taking place in and around these open spaces, as well as the appropriate land use for the area.
It is clear that in the far north a combination of rural open space and unutilised land is found, with small tracts of degraded land. As seen in figure 3.2, the Randburg, Roodepoort, Sandton, and Alexandra areas are built up, with little open space and parks. To the west of Randburg a dam and cemetery provide open space, together with a few areas of degraded land (i.e. land with soil erosion and loss of soil fertility) to the east.
57
Provision of Open Space:
Poor Provision Adequate provision More than adequate Open Areas to be developed Non-residential use
Figure 3.2: Availability of Open Space Areas within the Greater Johanneburg Area (Strydom, 1993, p.69)
To the north, northeast, and northwest of the Johannesburg CBD open space in the form of cemeteries, recreation/sports facilities and institutional enclosures are found.
To the south of the CBD, as well as in Soweto, large areas of unutilised land can still be found. To the east of Soweto large tracts of degraded land can be seen next to cultivated land, while some cemeteries are located to the west. Cultivated land can be found to the south of Lenasia.
It was found that suburban gardens occupy a large proportion of the Johannesburg environment.
58 On average in the northern residential suburbs of Greater Johannesburg people have more than 21m2 of open space per person, whilst the southern areas have less than 10m2 per person (RSDF, 2003). In the western part of Johannesburg open land constitute 7,8% of the available land. This open land have not been categorised, therefore the function of the land cannot as yet be determined. It is however assumed that the land will be used for housing development as land for housing is in high demand in this area. Figure 3.2 reiterates the fact that the availability and quality of open space is relatively poor throughout the Greater Johannesburg Area. This can be contributed to the absence of an integrated, well managed open space system.
3.3.2 Analysis of Open Space in the Context of JMOSS
The availability of open space is analysed in accordance with the open space system as identified in JMOSS namely: primary, secondary and tertiary open space system, including the various categories identified in chapter two. It must be noted that throughout JMOSS the primary open space system is also referred to as the ecological open space system. The provision of existing open space per local authority within the greater Johannesburg Area is shown in table 3.1:
Table 3.1: Existing Open Space Provision per Local Authority (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
LOCAL TOTAL EXISTING ETOS RATIO OF EXISTING RATIO OF AUTHORITY LAND TOTAL AS % ETOS TO 1000 DEVELOPED EDOS TO 1000 AREA OPEN OF POPULATION OPEN POPULATION (ha) SPACE LAND SPACE (ETOS)(ha) AREA (EDOS) (ha)
Alexandra 481 34 7.1 0.17 <1 0.00
Diepmeadow 1525 188 11.8 0.6 5 0.02
Dobsonville 475 48 6.9 0.6 7 0.09
Johannesburg 44981 2351 5.2 2.9 1547 1.90
Randburg 8817 316 3.6 2.42 126/195 0.96/1.49
59 LOCAL TOTAL EXISTING ETOS RATIO OF EXISTING RATIO OF AUTHORITY LAND TOTAL AS % ETOS TO 1000 DEVELOPED EDOS TO 1000 AREA OPEN OF POPULATION OPEN POPULATION (ha) SPACE LAND SPACE (ETOS)(ha) AREA (EDOS) (ha)
Roodepoort 16958 1285 7.5 7.7 817 4.90
Sandton 12841 488 3.8 3.3 312 2.10
Soweto 6980 1312 18.8 1.7 184 0.26
When taking into account the total land area, Johannesburg, Soweto and Roodepoort, are the three municipalities that currently have the most existing open space per hectare available. Johannesburg is, 44 981 hectare in extent. Of that, 2 351 hectare of developed as well as undeveloped open space areas can be found within Johannesburg. Soweto is a small local municipality of 6 980 hectares with 1 312 hectares of developed and undeveloped open space areas. However, in terms of population density, it is clear that Soweto has less open space available per thousand of its population, than Johannesburg and Roodepoort. This gives an indication of the high population densities found within Soweto and Johannesburg, exerting pressure on the availability of open space areas. Table 3.1 furthermore shows that 7,5% of the total municipal area of Roodepoort, is classified as open space area. Of the 1 285 hectares of available open space area, 817 hectares has been developed. Soweto on the other hand has only developed 184 of the available 1 312 hectares of open space area, located within the municipality. Furthermore, areas such as Soweto, Dobsonville and Alexandra, have no or little open space areas left, as most of the available open space areas are used for housing, legally or illegally.
In tables 3.2 and 3.3, the “% of total” field indicates the percentage area occupied by a particular open space category/network in relation to the total size of the greater Johannesburg area namely: 164 458,48 hectares in extent.
60 Table 3.2: Statistics for the six open space categories (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
GREATER JOHANNESBURG AREA (GJA): 164 458 ha OSC % OF TOTAL OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE AREA GJA AREA CATEGORY (OSC) SYSTEM (ha) Existing 30219.78 18.37 Primary Open Space Ecological Desired 55123.00 33.52 System Social 9436.19 5.74 Institutional 4883.01 3.00 Secondary Open Space Heritage 111.17 0.07 System Agricultural 21952.26 13.35 Tertiary Open Space Prospective 7636.51 4.64 System Total 74238.91 45.14
The greater Johannesburg area is 164 458 hectares in extent. The municipal open space system, as classified by JMOSS, will comprise 45,14% of the total area of the greater Johannesburg area. Within the primary open space system, a significant percentage of land (33,52%) has been identified as having a high ecological value. These parcels of land that have not yet formally been integrated into the ecological open space system, are areas such as the Rietvlei study area. They constitute the bulk of the primary open space system, and have been identified as vital for the preservation of ecological sensitive fauna and flora species.
From table 3.2, it is clear that agriculture is still a significant land use, even within a major urban area such as the greater Johannesburg area. Why Agriculture is still a significant land use, can be explained by looking at the Johannesburg Town Planning Scheme.
61 Various parcels of land located within the urban area of Johannesburg, is still zoned “agricultural” although these areas are not primarily used for purely agricultural purposes. These parcels of land have been identified within the Gauteng Open Space Policy (GOSP) as land that does not have a high agricultural potential, or land that is not environmentally sensitive.
Table 3.2 includes all isolated open space areas identified. Table 3.3 shows that from the total area evaluated within the greater Johannesburg area, the primary open space network (existing ecological open space areas as indicated in table 3.2), excluding the isolated open space areas, will constitute 16, 41% of the total area of the Metropole. Isolated areas identified will only form 1,96% of the total area of the primary open space system.
Table 3.3: Statistics for the Primary (ecological) Open Spaces (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
Greater Johannesburg Area: 164 458 ha
OPEN SPACE TYPE AREA (ha) % OF TOTAL AREA Isolated Open Space 3217.79 1.96 Primary Open Space 27002.0 16.41 Network Total 30219.78 18.37
The secondary open space system forms 22,12% of the total area of the Metropole of which 13.35% is agricultural land.
Although statistically one can interpret that there are ample areas left for agriculture, one must take into consideration that all agricultural holdings as well as urban areas zoned agricultural, is reflected within this figure.
It is important to refer back to figure 3.2 that illustrates the cultivated areas within the Metropole. Table 3.2 clearly shows the lack of cultivated areas within the Metropole.
62 Areas used for recreational or social purposes, only forms 5,74% of the secondary open space network. This highlights once again the few recreational or social areas available to all citizens within the metropole.
Table 3.4: Statistics for the Secondary Open Space System (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
% OF OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE AREA (ha) TOTAL CATEGORY TYPE AREA 1 12773.97 7.77 Agriculture 2 6297.32 3.83 3 2880.97 1.75
ACE SYSTEM 1 6.49 0.00 SP Heritage 2 10.10 0.01
3 94.58 0.06 1 982.70 0.60 Institutional 2 1357.45 0.85 3 2542.86 1.55 1 2189.34 1.35
SECONDARY OPEN Social 2 4626.73 2.81 3 2620.12 1.58 Total 36382.63 22.16 1 Connecting open spaces 2 Supplementary open spaces 3 Isolated open spaces In table 3.5, the areas to be included within the tertiary open space system have been identified. The tertiary open space system forms only 4,64% of the total area evaluated. It once again indicates the lack of integrated planning and subsequently the small percentage of suitable land that is still available for use as open space areas.
63 Table 3.5: Statistics for the Tertiary (prospective) Open Spaces (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997)
OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE % OF TOTAL AREA (ha) CATEGORY TYPE AREA 1 5109.97 3.11 Prospective 2 1168.91 0.71 3 1357.62 0.83 Total 7636.51 4.64 1 Connecting open spaces 2 Supplementary open spaces 3 Isolated open spaces Figure 3.3 graphically illustrates the composition of the municipal open space system proposed for the greater Johannesburg area, as set out in table 3.2.
Composition of the Different Open Space Systems Identified
4.64 22.12 Ecological
Secondary 51.89 Tertiary
Figure 3.3: Composition of Open Space System
Figure 3.3 further emphasises the importance of the primary open space system as the backbone of the total open space network, supported by the secondary and tertiary open space systems.
It is concluded that, as indicated within the various tables and figure 3.2, there are limited areas available for conservation within the greater Johannesburg area. Analysis have shown that the highest potential can be found in an east-west zone from the west of
64 Roodepoort to the north of the Johannesburg CBD, as well as to the south of Southgate. This includes the Klipriversberg area.
All of these areas fall within the primary open space network and include natural features, such as rivers and ridges, as well as already proclaimed and protected areas. Significant amounts of open space within the southern parts of Johannesburg are currently being used for commercial purpose or urban agriculture. It is clear that the driving forces of urban development i.e. population growth, industrialisation etc. have created a loss of agricultural land and open space areas especially within the southern parts of Johannesburg.
Looking at figure 3.2, other areas that can be identified for conservation are located in the far north, west of Dobsonville, north and south of Lenasia, west and south of Ennerdale, southeast of Orange Farm and east of Weilers Farm. The conservation potential in the Johannesburg CBD area as well as in the northern suburbs has been identified as being relatively low.
From a holistic perspective and moving to the study area it self, the next section will analyse the development potential of the study area, bearing in mind that the main objective for the study area is to preserve it as an important ecological area for the benefit of the Greater Johannesburg Area, whilst staying financially viable.
3.6 ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA: SCOPING PROCESS 3.6.1 Methodology
The study area forms part of the primary open space network as identified within JMOSS. It is classified as an existing ecological area that is environmentally sensitive and therefore must be conserved. Taking these facts into consideration the EIA process has indicated that an in depth analyses is needed to assess the potential impacts of the proposed development on the site. The analysis have been done in the form of a Scoping Report. The aim of the Scoping Report is to evaluate the study area with the objective to assess the following:
65 Any fatal environmental flaws identified such as unstable geological formations, presence of a number of endangered species should indicate to the developers as well as DACEL that the proposed development should not take place at all;
All potential negative environmental impacts pertaining to the proposed development should be identified and rated. The necessary mitigation measures should be proposed, and
All possible positive impacts identified that could support the proposed development, i.e. promotion of sustainable economic development to ensure the conservation of the study area.
The analysis of the site will be done in terms of the criteria set out in chapter two. The potentially negative or positive impacts of the proposed development will be identified. Proposed mitigatory measures will describe possible actions for the mitigation of the identified potential negative environmental impacts. The aim of the mitigation of impacts is to reduce the impact at the source, to manage residual impacts through monitoring and control and to involve all interested and affected parties in the consideration of mitigating measures.
3.6.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts on Study Area The open space analyses done in section 3.2 indicates that the entire site has been identified as being of high conservation value, and an environmental control zone in terms of protecting ridges and river valleys, with low development potential. For this reason the environmental sensitivity of the site has been assessed in terms of three categories (figure 3.4):
66 K LI PR IV IE RS BE RG D RI VE
KLIPRIVIERSBERG NATURE RESERVE
ER LL SEW OUTFA MAIN
RAND WATER
HOTEL / CONFERENCE ESCOM SERVITUDE
G/HOUSE
RESIDENTIAL ENVIRO CENTRE LEGEND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES HIGH SENSITIVITY SMLC MEDIUM SENSITIVITY LAND LOW SENSITIVITY
Figure 3.4: Environmental Sensitivity Classification of the Rietvlei Study Area.
Figure 3.4 shows the location of the development proposals, as well as the environmental sensitivity zone in which the development will take place. The environmental sensitivity categories is summarised in table 3.6.
67 Table 3.6: Categories identified for the evaluation of the Environmental Sensitivity of the Study Area CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
LOW Areas most suitable for development.
SENSITIVITY Areas that have no archaeological sites or degraded vegetation.
Areas where the visual impact will be minimal.
Areas that have moderate slopes.
Areas that have a medium conservation value and moderate development potential.
MEDIUM Areas that have a combination of different high conservation SENSITIVITY values. These areas will have steep slopes, good vegetation, and are less sensitive as areas with degraded vegetation.
HIGH It includes areas with a high quality of vegetation and steep slopes.
SENSITIVITY The archaeological sites found here are sensitive and any development within these areas will have a high visual impact.
In the initial assessment of the study area the relevant environmental aspects found on the site that may be affected by the proposed development has been listed in table 3.7. An environmental aspect here refers to a potential environmental impact that may arise as a result of the development. Where it is known or where it has been recorded that such an impact does occur at the site, this has also been included in table 3.7.
Table 3.7: List of Environmental Aspects with possible relevance to Project
Environmental Aspect Relevant 1) Air Quality X 2) Cultural Issues √ 3) Faunal Abundance and Diversity √ 4) Floral Abundance and diversity √ 5) Geology X 6) Hydrology √ 7) Land Use √ 8) Open Space √ 9) Soils & Topography √
68 Environmental Aspect Relevant 10) Visual Impact √ 11) Waste management √
The land use assessment done in chapter two on the study area as well as the assessment of JMOSS was used to determine the list of relevant environmental aspects. Geology and air quality are the only two impacts identified that will not be significantly affected by the different development proposals. The impact of the development proposals on the relevant environmental issues of significance, identified in table 3.7 will now be discussed in more detail below. Mitigation measures are proposed for the meaningful management and monitoring thereof.
3.4.2.1 Assessment of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
1) Air Quality
The quality of air in the specific area is reasonably good and the only localised air pollution occurs with veld fires.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction The proposed development phase may have a negative impact on the air quality as a result of the earth moving activities that will create dust. It is proposed that the impact on the air quality during the construction phase is likely to be of limited extent, short duration, medium intensity and probable occurrence.
Operational During this phase the completed new established hotel and conference center would eliminate the occurrence of dust and apart from the limited pollution by emissions from the motor vehicles, the project should not have any significant impact on the surrounding environment. The impact on the air quality during this phase is therefore likely to be of limited extent, long duration, low intensity and improbable occurrence.
69 The impact of the proposed development on the air quality of the study area is summarised in table 3.8: Table 3.8: Impact Summary Matrix for Air Quality
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ None
Operation √ None
The following mitigation measures are proposed during the construction phase: Water or any other relevant dust suppressive methods should be applied to temporary road surfaces during construction and no open fires should be allowed on the construction site or any other part of the sturdy area, during the construction period.
2) Cultural Issues
All archeological sites should be mapped and the present condition, recorded. All of the archeological ruins are of archeological value, although not regarded as rare, and proposals and comments regarding the preservation of the ruins need to be obtained from the South African Heritage Resource Association (SAHRA).
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction The development phase may have a negative impact on one of the ruins located adjacent to the proposed hotel and conference center. It is proposed that the ruin be rehabilitated for tourism purposes. It is proposed that the developer liaise with trained archeologists regarding the restoration and protection of the ruin during the construction phase. Ruins not affected during phase 1, need to be fenced off during construction.
70
During phase 2 of the development, ruins located in the vicinity of the residential complex and the golf driving range, may be disturbed during the construction period and should be treated in the same manner as in phase 1.
It is proposed that the impact on the archeological sites during the construction phase is likely to be of limited extent, short duration, medium intensity and probable occurrence.
Operational During phases one and two of the project the completed hotel and conference center as well as the small commercial node, would not impact on the ruins as the ruins will be protected and managed. The completed project should not have any significant impact on the sensitive archeological sites. The impact on the archeological sites during this phase is therefore likely to be of limited extent, long duration, low intensity and improbable occurrence.
The impact of the proposed development on the cultural issues of the Rietvlei study area is summarised in table 3.9: Table 3.9: Impact Summary Matrix for Cultural Aspects
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ None
Operation √ None
It is proposed that all ruins located within the study area are identified and mapped. The sensitivity of the ruins should be determined. Ruins should be fenced off during the construction phase of phases one and two.
71 3) Faunal Abundance and Diversity
Two red data species can be found in the larger Klipriviersberg area namely, the South African Hedgehog and the African Weasel.
The South African Hedgehog is listed as rare in the red Data Book of Terrestrial Mammals (Smithers, 1986). The decline in numbers of the hedgehog can be contributed to a loss in habitat due to agricultural activities. This animal is used by communities for traditional medicine and as a food source.
The African Weasel is listed as rare in the red Data Book of Terrestrial Mammals (Smithers, 1986). The reduction in the numbers of competing species such as rodents, and dogs has limited the abundance of food, leading to a decline in the specie.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
The proposed project will have an ongoing impact on the fauna. During the construction period of both phase 1 and two, the impact will be significant. Once construction has been completed there will be a period of readjustment of the natural habitat, before balance in the ecology will be achieved.
It is proposed that a comprehensive veld and game management plan be introduced to ensure the protection of the natural habitat of the two species identified as well as the other fauna found in the study area. It is proposed that the impact on the fauna during the construction phase is likely to be of limited extent, short duration, high intensity and probable occurrence.
To mitigate, a veld management plan should be compiled. Proper management of the veld as well as the introduction of indigenous species will in the long term ensure the rehabilitation of the veld. The construction sites should be monitored so as to ensure minimal disturbance to the natural environment.
72 Table 3.10: Impact Summary Matrix for Cultural Aspects
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ None
Operation √ None
4) Flora
The current condition of the veld, as described in chapter two, is for the most part degraded to less than 70% of its optimal capacity. Therefore the viability and integrity of the existing natural veld will only be impacted on, to a limited extent, during phase 1 of the proposed development and to a greater extent during phase 2 of the proposed development.
No red data species occur in the study area, due to overgrazing and the absence of specific habitats inductive to certain red data species. Several species do occur in the larger Klipriviersberg area, but were not found in the study area.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction Construction activities typically impact negatively on the natural environment owing to the impacts of stormwater runoff, erosion, noise and the general increase in activity, pollution and the like. These impacts are however localised and will be contained to the area where development will take place.
A program should be introduced to clear all alien vegetation and weeds from the site. This should be done by physical or biological means.
73 Chemical removal of weeds and alien vegetation should be kept to a minimum and if used monitored through a specific environmental management plan.
The impact of the proposed development during phases one and two is likely to be of limited extent, short duration, medium intensity and probable occurrence.
Operation Habitat fragmentation could result from the proposed phase 1 and two developments. Land will be lost to buildings and alternative land uses. The remaining natural veld left will be smaller in size. The introduction of a veld management plan will help to improve the quality of the veld and contribute to the protection of indigenous plants in the study area. The study area will therefore re-accommodate species that occurred in the area previously and will also attract additional species as a result of the introduction of indigenous trees and other vegetation. The anticipated improved water management system after construction should have a positive impact on the micro ecology of the site. The impact of the completed project on the flora is likely to be of limited extent, long duration, high intensity and highly definite occurrence.
Table 3.11: Impact Summary Matrix for Flora
Significance of the Impact
Phase None Low Medium High With Mitigation
Low occurrence of Construction √ disturbance
Positive Operation √ rehabilitation of flora
A veld management plan should be compiled in conjunction with the Klipriversberg Nature Reserve so as to ensure the rehabilitation of the veld. Proper specie management should be implemented and all alien vegetation and weeds should be eradicated.
74 Landscaping should be limited and only indigenous species should be planted. The construction sites should be monitored so as to ensure minimal disturbance to the natural environment.
5) Geology
The land is located in an area where the development proposal will have no significant impact on the geology of the area.
6) Hydrology
The non-perrenial watercourse lies within the natural drainage line and is fed by groundwater. There are three boreholes on the site. Two are dry, whilst the one located on the northern slopes is still functioning. The impact of the proposed project will only be significant during phase 2 of the proposed development. The proposed residential development will be located across a natural watershed. This will result in an increase in run -off due to paved surfaces, buildings etc.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction The removal of the trees will not have a short-term impact on the quantity of ground water. Changes in quantities will only be noticeable over the long term. The construction of township services and houses will not impact on the ground water quality or quantity. The proposed development phase is likely to be of limited extent, short duration, low intensity and probable occurrence.
Operational
Measures should be put into place to prevent excessive stormwater run-off from the developed areas entering into the natural drainage courses.
75 An increase in the quantity of ground water may be experienced over the long term due to the restoration of the natural environment. This may have a positive impact on the lower laying areas and proposed water features. The development will not have an effect on the quality of the ground water. This phase is likely to be of limited extent, long duration, low intensity and probable occurrence. Table 3.12: Impact Summary Matrix for Hydrology
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Low
Operation √ None
A series of retention ponds should be designed to ensure the retention of stormwater before it is channelled into the natural watercourse. A stormwater management plan should be compiled. The non-perennial watercourse should be protected and the banks rehabilitated.
7) Land Use
Currently the land is not used for any specific purpose. Although the land is zoned ‘Undetermined’ or agricultural, in terms of the Johannesburg Town Planning Scheme, no agricultural activities is taking place on the property. A definition of open space or recreational facilities can also not be given to the land due to the fact that the land is basically utilised for illegal occupation, dumping, as well the illegal harvesting of plants by the local communities.
As identified within JMOSS, the study area falls within the primary open space system that consists of ecological open space areas. From this point of view the impact of the proposed development on the study area, is seen as being significant.
76 Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction
During this phase the normal township services will be installed and the hotel, conference, residential and commercial component will be developed. This is a normal process of any development with no significant impact on the adjacent properties. The construction activities will take place on designated areas within the study area and will therefore be confined to such areas. The proposed development phase is likely to be of local extent, short duration, medium intensity and definite occurrence.
Operational The land use during this phase will be of a similar nature to that of the existing surrounding land uses. The natural character of the environment should be maintained. Sound environmental practices will ensure that the ecological sensitivity of the site is preserved.
As it is an ecological sensitive area it must be managed according to the stipulation of JMOSS, focusing on the preservation of the ecological system found in the study area. The operational phase is likely to be of local extent, long duration, high intensity and a definite occurrence. Table 3.13: Impact Summary Matrix for Land Use
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Low
Operation √ Low
All stipulations within JMOSS as well as the RSDF should be adhered to.
77 8) Open Space
The study area forms part of JMOSS. It falls within the category of primary open space, sub-category ecological open space. The study area is viewed as environmentally sensitive and has a high conservation value. The RSDF (2003) states categorically that “…open spaces will as far as possible be managed as natural areas.” Furthermore it is stipulated that the existing Environmental Policy should be applied (RSDF, 2003). In terms of the RSDF (2003), river corridors such as the Klip River, may either be zoned public open space, private open space or in terms of whatever appropriate conservation zone is adopted in terms of proposed amendments to the Johannesburg Zoning Scheme. The river corridors could also be zoned as Environmental Control Zones. This will serve as an added conservation measure.
The study area falls within the environmental control zone of the Klip River and is therefore subjected to all of the abovementioned control measures. It can be concluded that the impact of the proposed development on the study area is likely to be of medium extent, long duration, high intensity and definite occurrence. Table 3.14: Impact Summary Matrix for Open Space
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Positive
Operation √ Positive
All stipulations within JMOSS as well as the RSDF should be adhered to.
78 9) Soils & Topography
The study area has steep to moderate slopes with most of the proposed developments to be concentrated on the lowlands. The proposed development will therefore not impact significantly on the topography of the area. The water flow patterns will be maintained and no major alterations will be made to the current ground levels. The only changes will be to the disturbed areas as part of the rehabilitation process.
The soils on the property are a mixture of weathered material with exposed rock faces and areas characterized by loose boulders. These areas could be prone to erosion once disturbed. Alluvial clay and black turf can be found along the watercourse.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction
The proposed development will have a significant impact on the soils of the site, especially if blasting is required. Due to the nature of the topography, physical degradation of the study area as well as the potential increase in erosion can be anticipated during the construction phase. The impact of the development on the soils and the topography during this phase is likely to be of local extent, short duration, medium intensity and definite occurrence.
Operational
During this phase the geology and soils should be stable and should not have any significant impact on the surrounding environment. The impact of the development during this phase is likely to be of local extent, long duration, low intensity and probable occurrence.
79 Table 3.15: Impact Summary Matrix for Soils and Topography
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Low
Operation √ None
A geotechnical study should be done so as to determine the stability of the underlying formations.
10) Visual Impacts
The visual character of the area has not significantly been altered over the years by the surrounding urban developments. The Rietvlei study area has maintained its natural character, due to its location close to the Klipriviersberg nature reserve, as well as, the high conservation value assigned to it by JMOSS and the RSDF.
The visual quality of the area has however been disturbed by the illegal land uses that have established themselves on the agricultural holdings located to the south of the study area.
The property of Rand Water Board adjacent to the study area, has maintained its natural character and Rand Water has been encouraged to pursue their interest in the concept of the Nature Conservancy with abutting landowners. Rand Water has been requested to reduce the future visual impact of new development planned by the company (RSDF, 2003). In light of the development proposals, from a visual point of view, the proposed development will not have a significant impact on the surrounding area.
80 The following visual assessment criteria have been developed for the Rietvlei study area, to determine the impact of the proposed new road project on the state of the environment. The significance of the impacts is rated as high, medium and low.
Table 3.16: Visual Assessment Criteria
Impact Criteria High Medium Low 1. Visibility A particularly definite place A place which projects a A place having little or no with an almost tangible loosely defined theme or ambience with which it can dominant ambience or theme ambience be associated 2. Visual Quality A very attractive setting A setting which has some A setting which has little or with great variation and aesthetic and visual merit no aesthetic value interest but no clutter 3. Surrounding Cannot accommodate Can accommodate the Ideally suits or matches the Landscape proposed development proposed development proposed development Compatibility without it appearing totally without appearing totally out of place visually out of place 4. Character The site or surrounding The site or surrounding area The site or surrounding area area exhibits a definite exhibits some character exhibits little or no character character 5. Scale A landscape which has A landscape with some Where vertical variation is horizontal and vertical horizontal and vertical limited and most elements elements in high contrast to elements in some contrast to are related to the human human scale human scale and horizontal scale 6. Visual The ability of the landscape The ability of the landscape The ability of the Absorption not to accept a proposed to less easily accept visually landscape to easily accept Capacity development because of a a particular type of visually a particular type uniform texture, flat slope development because of a of development because of and limited vegetation cover less diverse landform, its diverse landform, vegetation and texture vegetation and texture 7. View Distance If uninterrupted view If uninterrupted view If uninterrupted view distances to the site are > distances to the site are < distances to the site are > than 5km than 5km but > 1km than 500m and < 1000m 8. Critical Views Views of the site seen by Some views of the site from Limited or partial views to people from sensitive view sensitive view sheds the site from sensitive view sheds, e.g. farms, nature sheds areas, hiking trails, etc.
It is evident from the above that the development proposals could have some visual impact on the natural state of the environment. The impact of the different development proposals, will however, be of limited scale as the development will be designed to blend in with the natural landscape. The visual impact of the proposed development is likely to be of limited extent, long duration, low intensity, and definite occurrence.
81 Table 3.17: Impact Summary Matrix for potential Visual Impacts
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Low
Operation √ Positive
11) Waste Management
The southern and western portions of the study area are used as an illegal waste disposal site. The waste generated by the proposed project, should be removed as part of the municipal service in the area.
Impact Assessment for the Development Phases:
Construction
Construction activities are likely to generate waste. All waste should be removed to an approved waste disposal site. The impact is likely to be of local extent, short duration, low intensity, and highly probable occurrence.
Operational
Waste during this phase will be removed as part of the municipal services. The potential impact on the air quality is likely to be of limited extent, long duration, low intensity and highly probable occurrence.
82 Table 3.18: Impact Summary Matrix for Waste Generation
Significance of the Impact
With Phase None Low Medium High Mitigation
Construction √ Low
Operation √ Low
The impact assessment has taken into account all potential impacts identified in table 3.7. From the assessment done it can be concluded that the nature and extent of the potential environmental impacts identified, are generally low in both extent and severity.
From the impact assessment, faunal, flora, hydrology and cultural issues are identified as the more significant environmental aspects. The developments proposed for phase 2 will impact on these elements and mitigation is necessary to limit the extent of these impacts. On all other environmental aspects identified, the significance of the impacts is considered to be low and should not require any further detailed investigations.
If the cumulative impact of whole development is taken into consideration the environmental and cultural issues presented could be reduced to acceptable levels by means of mitigation measures. The mitigation and management measures proposed with respect to potential impacts or issues should result in limited negative impacts on the natural environment.
Table 3.19 represents a summary of the environmental aspects addressed.
83 Table 3.19: Potential Environmental Impacts Associated with the Proposed Development
POTENTIAL EXTENT DURATION INTENSITY PROBABILITY OF SIGNIFICANCE STATUS IMPACTS OCCURRENCE Topography Immediate area of Short Term Low Probable Medium Negative development Flora – Red Data Species Immediate area of Permanent High Improbable Medium Negative development Air Quality/Noise Local Area Short Term Low Probable Low Negative Visual Quality Local Area Permanent Low Definite Medium Negative Archaeological Immediate area of Permanent High Definite High Positive Site/restoration development Services-roads, Local Area Permanent Medium Definite Medium Negative power,sewage etc. Site coverage & Local Area Permanent High Definite High Positive sensitivity Job creation Local Area Short Term Low Definite High Positive POTENTIAL EXTENT DURATION INTENSITY PROBABILITY OF SIGNIFICANCE STATUS IMPACTS OCCURRENCE Topography Immediate area of Short Term Low Probable Medium Negative development Flora – Red Data Species Immediate area of Permanent High Improbable Medium Negative development Air Quality/Noise Local Area Short Term Low Probable Low Negative
84 POTENTIAL EXTENT DURATION INTENSITY PROBABILITY OF SIGNIFICANCE STATUS IMPACTS OCCURRENCE Hydrology Immediate area of Permanent Low Probable Low Negative development Visual Quality Local Area Permanent Low Definite Low Negative Archaeological Immediate area of Permanent High Highly Probable High Negative Site/restoration development Services-roads, power, Local Area Permanent Medium Definite Medium Negative sewage etc. Site coverage & Local Area Permanent High Definite High Negative sensitivity Job creation Local Area Short Term Low Highly Probable High Positive Hiking/Horse trials Local Area Permanent Low Definite Medium Positive Introduction of Game & Local Area Permanent Low High Positive veld improvement
85 In conclusion, it is evident that there are potential environmental impacts associated with both phases of the proposed development. The environmental impacts identified in phase 1 of the project is not considered to be significant and can be controlled through adequate mitigatory measures (table 3.19 and table 3.20). Soil erosion and the destruction of the natural vegetation are two of the most significant impacts that can occur during the construction of the hotel and conference centre. Correct management of the site through a specific Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will minimise these impacts and ensure the rehabilitation of the natural environment after construction. The general scope of phase 1 of the project adheres to the objective of conserving the Klipriviersberg area as identified within JMOSS as well as the RSDF for the Johannesburg area. Phase 1 of the proposed project is thus regarded as being environmentally sound and financially viable.
The opinion is held that, phase 2 of the project, i.e. the planned residential and commercial development on a portion of the Rietvlei Study area, will have a significant impact in the study area. The installation of services for the residential erven as well as the expected increase in stormwater run-off could impact significantly on the soil, vegetation, and fauna. A detailed investigation into the retention of stormwater and the formulation of a stormwater management plan should minimise the impacts of the proposed developments. The other significant impacts identified such as, the degrading of the natural veld as well as the disturbance of archaeological sites etc. can be mitigated through environmental monitoring and control, during the construction phase of the development.
Table 3.20 provides a summary of the mitigation measures that can be implemented to control and monitor the potential negative impacts identified in table 3.7. These measures have been applied to the three categorise of environmental sensitivity as identified in table 3.6.
86 Table 3.20: Environmental Sensitivity of the Study area and Mitigation Measures
CATEGORY ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES
LOW Area is less visible from the Environmental Management Plan should be approved so as to ensure construction highest point of the Klipriviersberg impacts at the designated building sites are minimised and areas disturbed are Nature Reserve; rehabilitated;
Slopes in this area range between Sites allocated for development should be inspected for any prevailing Red Data 1:7 and less than 1:7; Species;
The archaeological sites identified Preventative measures should be put into place to prevent excessive storm water run- in the area do not have any off from areas earmarked for development;
potential for tourism; Design should minimise the visual impact;
Degraded grassland vegetation can Disturbed areas should be rehabilitated with indigenous vegetation and alien weed be found in this area. species should be eradicated;
Construction activities should be limited to day time.
MEDIUM Visual impact is high in this area; Limit use of the natural rock as building material – supplement from alternative
Slopes are more that 1:7; sources;
Archaeological Sites of Tourism Veld management plan to be implemented to ensure that existing veld is protected and value have been identified; veld quality is improved;
A combination of degraded A suitable fire management plan should be implemented;
grassland and woodland vegetation Trails should be designed in such a way that impacts on the vegetation is limited;
on the steep slopes and rocky Provision should be made for erosion control;
outcrops can be found here. Ruins affected by the proposed development should be fenced of during construction;
87 CATEGORY ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES
Consultation with surrounding property owners should be ongoing so as to minimize impacts.
HIGH High visual impact; Limit use of the natural rock as building material – supplement from alternative
Slope of more than 1:7; sources;
Archaeological site that have a high Provision should be made for erosion control;
tourism value; Veld management plan to be implemented to ensure that existing veld is protected and
Grassland vegetation of steep slopes veld quality is improved;
and crests are in a good condition. Liase with archaeologists for the restoration of any ruins.
88 The most sensitive environmental areas identified, are the high lying areas of the Rietvlei study area. Limited development should be allowed in these areas. Geological investigation should be carried out at the proposed building areas, to establish founding conditions for construction purposes. The lowlands are identified as being the least sensitive areas for development. This part of the study area has been the most disturbed due to over grazing and past land use practices. Here mitigation measures will adequately control any possible environmental impact.
3.5 CONCLUSION
The impact assessment has confirmed the ecological sensitivity of the Rietvlei study area. It furthermore confirms that the study area is an ecological sensitive area. The Rietvlei study area, as an ecological sensitive area, will form part of the primary open space system, as described in JMOSS (Strategic Environmental Focus, 1997). Within the framework of JMOSS, it can be argued that the Rietvlei study area is too sensitive to be developed. The “no-go” alternative should therefore be considered as an option. The “no-go” option implies that the study area is left in its present undeveloped state.
The scoping document however, allows for the mitigation of the various significant impacts identified. The mitigatory measures proposed, can successfully mitigate the significant impacts identified. Taking into account the current degraded state of the natural environment, it is perceived that without any management or investment, the study area will continue to deteriorate and it will lose its economic potential and environmental value. The “no-go” option is therefore not regarded as an environmentally sustainable option.
The analyses done in this chapter clearly indicates that the scoping process is a tool that firstly assesses all available data on the study area. Secondly through the analyses of the data it is possible to identify perceived negative as well as positive impacts. Thirdly the scoping process proposes measures that can be put into place to successfully manage all perceived impacts identify.
89 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND SYNTHESIS
4.5 INTRODUCTION
The urban built environment of Johannesburg is unable to adequately accommodate the sheer size of its population. With an estimated population of 3 225 812 in 2001, and a municipal area that is 1 644 km² in extent, the congestion caused by the movement of people and goods, and the waste and pollution from industry and household consumption, have severely compromised the quality of the urban environment (Gotz, et. al, 2004, p. 110; Richwine, 1999).
The poor quality of the urban environment found within the Greater Johannesburg area raises two critical issues. Firstly, how does rapid urbanisation impact on the natural environment found within the city? Secondly, how does the fast developing built environment impact on the natural resource base found within the city, which makes life bearable for the urban dweller?
The urban environmental challenge faced by all developing cities is therefore to find the critical limit of city size and form that a store of natural resources can safely carry (Gotz, et. al, 2004, p. 110). Within the existing limited environmental management techniques, legislation and policies, one has to find the point where a city such as Johannesburg becomes sustainable. Cities can grow larger if they are able to carefully manage the pressures that the built environment imposes on the natural environment (Bolan, et al, 1997; Gotz, et. al, 2004, p. 110). When compared to cities such as Mexico City and Mumbai, Johannesburg is not yet at the point where due to sheer size the city has become unsustainable. Apartheid planning, has however, created features within the built environment that had a significant impact on the size and form of the city. Undersized, sprawling cities is one of the consequences of apartheid planning. A city such as Johannesburg was designed with a specific population size in mind. South African cities are very spread out and characterised by low densities in certain areas and high densities in other areas of the city.
90 If not corrected by authorities, features such as these, may affect the sustainability of a city such as Johannesburg over the long-term. The challenge facing authorities are therefore daunting. Better urban planning, the formulation of environmental management policies and strategies such as the Johannesburg Municipal Open Space System, are but a few instruments that can be used to combat unmanageable urban cities.
From the research, it is concluded that a post-apartheid city such as Johannesburg has a significant impact on the remaining natural environment. The built environment firstly, has an impact on open space that is essential to sustain urban life. Secondly, it affects the environmental health of the city, intra-city mobility and the sustainability of the energy of the city (Gotz, et. al, 2004, p. 115).
The limitations of existing environmental technologies and techniques, and the challenges facing local authorities to develop better tools for open space management forms the focus of this study. The study aims to assess the effectiveness of the scoping process as an environmental impact assessment tool, to allow environmentally sound development on sensitive environmental areas within the urban framework.
The New Environmental Management Act (NEMA) clearly defines sensitive ecological areas, as areas that require specific attention during the development process especially where “…they are subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure” (NEMA, 1998, 2(4r)).
Ecological open spaces are grouped within the primary open space network, within JMOSS. The primary open space network forms the main network of the open space system. These areas are perceived as being large areas that are ecologically more diverse. They form the core ecological areas and determine the sustainability of the whole open space system. Due to its location within the Klipriviersberg range of hills, the Rietvlei study area forms part of an ecological sensitive area. The Rietvlei study area is therefore considered as being part of the primary open space system.
91 The main objective of the study was to determine whether positive economic development could be accommodated on an ecological sensitive area, as classified within NEMA and JMOSS. Two main focus points emerged from the problem statement. They are: (1) The classification of ecological sensitive areas within the current open space system namely JMOSS, and (2) Is the scoping process an effective decision making tool when applied to an ecological sensitive area?
After reviewing the nature of the problem and the limitations of the study area as well as the data set used, it became clear that within the scope of this research it will only be possible to focus on the scoping process within the EIA process. JMOSS was used as a framework to assess the importance of ecological sensitive areas within the urban area. The Scoping Report was used as a tool to analyse the impact of the planned development on the study area.
The results of the data analysis phase, is discussed in this chapter. The resulting conclusions will attempt to reflect the complexity of managing the impact of the built environment on valuable open space.
4.6 ANALYSIS
In Chapter 2 different sets of data is discussed. JMOSS, the Rietvlei study area and the Scoping Process, is discussed separately. This forms the theoretical background to the analysis done in chapter 3 of the study. Each data set will now be reviewed.
4.6.1 The Rietvlei Study Area
Open space is essential to sustain urban life. In the city of Johannesburg open space areas have been developed in the form of parks, botanical gardens or semi-developed in the form of nature reserves. Open space areas add significantly to the quality of life of the urban dweller and compensates for factors such as pollution and traffic congestion that harms the aesthetic value of the built environment.
92 The study area, Rietvlei 101 I.R, is an ecologically sensitive, portion of undeveloped land located within the Klipriviersberg range of hills. The Rietvlei study area is located within an identified environmental conservation belt located along the Klip River in the south of Johannebsurg (http://cerio.net/reports/johannesburg/). The Rietvlei study area is considered sensitive in that it forms part of the larger Klipriviersberg local area that has been identified by the Regional Spatial Development Framework (RSDF), as a green belt area.
The study area is located approximately 10 km south of the Johannesburg central business district, between the suburbs of Winchester Hills and Suiderood to the north, Impala Drive and Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve to the west, Glenvista to the East and Kibler Park and Mayfield Park to the south. The site is therefore surrounded by predominantly middle to upper class residential suburbs with a small strip of agricultural holdings located to the south, along the banks of the Klip River. The headquarters of the Rand Water Board is located to the northeast of the study area, on the property adjoining the site. The Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve is located to the northwest of the study area. Impala road forms the northwestern boundary of the study area.
The Rietvlei study area is currently not utilised. Uncontrolled grazing practices in the past have left the vegetation of the study area in a degraded state. The removal of various plant species for traditional use has left the study area with low specie diversity. No red data species could be found in the study area, although red data species have been recorded in the adjacent Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve.
To conserve and rehabilitate this significant parcel of natural and historical open space, controlled development of the Rietvlei study area is proposed. The conservation of the Rietvlei study area, through positive economic development, aim to achieve three main objectives. Firstly, to ensure the optimal protection of undeveloped land as a natural asset for the benefit of the Greater Johannesburg area. Secondly, the formation of a public/private partnership with the aim of establishing an enlarged, single Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve. Thirdly, to unlock the financial potential of the area for the benefit of conservation.
93 This can be achieved through restricted development that supports the overall conservation aims of NEMA, Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, and the Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (Bohlweki, 1999, p. 92).
Development in the form of a Hotel and Conference centre (phase 1), and Commercial development with a small residential component (phase 2), is proposed. Significant impacts have been identified for both phases of the proposed development. The potential impacts associated with phase 1 are not considered to be significant and can be mitigated. Phase 1 will enhance the conservation objectives set out in the Regional Spatial Development Framework (RSDF). Phase 2 of the proposed development is considered to be more problematic. Impacts identified are significant and detrimental to the environment.
The analysis of the study area enables the researcher to determine the ecological value of the specific area, in relation to the surrounding urban area. From the analysis it was possible to place the study area within the classification of JMOSS. This enabled the researcher to assess the value and function of the study area as classified by JMOSS.
It was concluded that the study area could not function as an ecological sensitive area, due to the low biodiversity recorded in the study area as well as the lack of proper plans in place to rehabilitate the natural environment of the study area. Although in close proximity to the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve, the environmental quality of the study area has severely been compromised by the rapid development of the surrounding urban areas and mismanagement.
From the RSDF it is concluded that there is a need to conserve the study area. Investment is considered a to be a key factor, that will enable the conservation and rehabilitation of the study area.
4.6.2 JMOSS
Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality has developed a Municipal Open Space System (JMOSS) as part of their Spatial Development Framework.
94 JMOSS is a clear framework in which the pressure to develop new land, is balanced by the goal of maintaining environmentally sensitive land for the benefit of future generations.
An analysis of JMOSS gives insight into how an ineffective open space management system can lead to the mismanagement and loss of valuable open space within an urban area. JMOSS is an attempt to integrate all open space areas located within the urban area, into an effective management system. The analysis of JMOSS showed that within the different classifications each specific open space area has been assigned a function. The function assigned is an indication of the importance of the specific open space, and the role that it will play within the whole system.
Within the three categories identified namely: Primary Open Space, Secondary Open Space and Tertiary Open Space, the primary open space network is viewed as the most important network. Ecological areas included in this network are regarded as sensitive and crucial to the sustainability of the whole open space system. All of these areas are regarded as “no-go” areas where no development will be allowed.
The Rietvlei study area is regarded as part of the primary open space system, and is therefore viewed as an ecological sensitive area. The implication of this classification is that no development will, in theory, be allowed in the study area. In reality it is clear that the study area cannot be viewed as a pristine natural environment. Mismanagement has resulted in a degraded natural environment. Consequently the Rietvlei study area cannot, in its present state, be viewed as an ecological sensitive area.
4.2.3 The Scoping Process
Development of the Rietvlei study area is perceived as an economically viable option that will allow the conservation of the study area.
In order to assess the impact of the proposed development on the study area, it was necessary to use an impact assessment tool.
95 The scoping process and in specific the scoping document was used. The analysis is an environmental assessment that is done on a specific area, namely the study area.
The scope of an environmental assessment is defined by the range of issues and alternatives it considers, and the approach towards the assessment that it will follow (DEAT, 1992b, p. 5). Scoping is therefore a critical stage in the environmental management process, as it integrates environmental considerations into all stages of the development process.
Scoping was used as an assessment technique, as it is regarded as a concise process that identifies all significant impacts, and allows priorities to be set. Furthermore scoping as an assessment technique focuses on the decision-making process. It initiates consultation between the developer, the relevant authority, and all interested and affected parties at an early stage in the development process.
For the Rietvlei study area, the two proposed development phases were assessed in terms of what the specific development proposal for each phase entails, and the impact thereof on the study area. The various impacts, their significance, and duration was identified and analised. Various mitigation methods were identified in order to emphasise that all impacts identified can be reduced through mitigation.
4.7 CONCLUSIONS 4.7.1 JMOSS
The analysis of JMOSS showed that:
(i) Currently Johannesburg has a fragmented open space system. (ii) The major business nodes are concentrated in the northern half of the metropolitan area to just south of the Johannesburg CBD. This forms the core of the built environment. (iii) The absence of an integrated open space management system threatens the conservation of biodiversity and ecological systems.
96 (iv) Other important services provide by open spaces to the city, such as, recreational amenity for residents, storm water attenuation, pollution mitigation etc. are threatened as well. (v) It was furthermore found that, in the past assessments done on the impact of new developments on open space, were done on an ad hoc basis without being placed within an integrated open space framework. (vi) The northern and western parts of Johannesburg have adequate open areas in relation to the population density. Protected and proclaimed areas are located around Roodepoort, stretching eastwards to the northern areas of Johannesburg. The southern parts of Johannesburg have a high population density and a limited number of open space area. (vii) The mining belt located south of the CBD, has been identified as “wasted” open space, space that cannot be utilised. (viii) Ecological sensitive open space areas, such as the study area, falls within the primary open space system and play an important role in the preservation of the whole open space system.
Conservation areas are therefore only found on the outskirts, and along ridges and rivers of the metropolitan area. The existing environmental corridors identified include the Jukskei River system and the Klip River system in the south, stretching from east to west to the south of Kibler Park. Environmental corridors are also located south of Ennerdale and south of Lenasia. Large conservation areas are located around Kibler Park with very important ecological areas located around the Klip River in the south. All of the aforementioned forms part of the Primary Open Space System. All are classified as “No- Go” areas where no development will be allowed.
4.7.2 STUDY AREA
The study area, 132 hectares of undeveloped land on the farm Rietvlei 101 IR, is considered sensitive, according to JMOSS, in that it forms part of the larger Klipriviersberg Local Area.
97 According to the JMOSS classification system it forms part of the primary open space network and is classified as an existing ecological open space performing important ecological functions within the open space system. These areas are regarded as no-go areas where no development will be allowed.
The importance of the Rietvlei study area and the Kliprieviersberg it is located in, is summarised as follow:
(i) The Rietvlei study area is located adjacent to the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve where there are 2 known red data plant species and another 9 may exist. (ii) Due to its close proximity to the Nature reserve it is believed that it may be viable to reintroduce Highveld species of game. (iii) The numerous archeological sites scattered across the slopes of the Rietvlei study area, makes Johannesburg one of the few cities in the world where archeological sites preserving a record of hunter-gatherer camps and villages occur within the city boundaries. (iv) The location of the study area on a natural watershed within the Klip River, environmental corridor, prohibits any development as set out in the RSDF. (v) The topography of the study area will influence the scale of the development. Any proposed development will have to be visual unobtrusive so as to preserve the natural environment, as stipulated in the RSDF. (vi) Due to over grazing as well as the poaching of plants by the surrounding community, the condition of the natural veld is poor. (vii) The Tswana ruins located on the site has been disturbed and an assessment will show which of these sites are of any archeological value. (viii) The property of Rand Water Board has been developed in such a way that the natural environment has been preserved.
The location of the study area within a densely built urban environment enhances the ecological importance of the study area. The study area is highly accessible via major arterials such as Kliprivier Drive and Camaro Road.
98 Camaro Road is an important link to the Southern Bypass through Rosettenville. Of the surrounding residential suburbs, Winchester Hills is an environmentally sensitive area due to its location adjacent to the Klipriversberg Nature Reserve. It has been found that development in Winchester Hills has been undertaken with little consideration for the sensitivity of the natural environment of the area. The land located to the east of the Rietvlei study area, east of Kliprivier Drive, has a high conservation rating due to the presence of various red data plant species.
Taking the aforementioned into consideration, it is clear that the current role and function of the Klipriviersberg area should be preserved. The Rietvlei study area plays an important role in the preservation and maintenance of the natural ecological processes of the Klip River environmental corridor.
The impact of the surrounding built environment on the study area has been significant. The study area has no or little environmental merit due to its current degraded state. Most of the natural flora species have been replaced by exotic species. Housing and domestic animals have depleted most of the natural habitats of mammals and reptiles. Water scarcity and the polluted state of the Klip River, have severely impacted on the breeding habits of frogs and fish species. Leaving the land undeveloped involves the risk of expediting the degradation of the study area. This would result in the loss of the intrinsic value of the site as well as any potential revenue that could have been generated through eco-tourism.
To summarise, the analysis of the Rietvlei study area has confirmed that: firstly, the study area plays an important role within the Klip River Environmental corridor. Secondly, in its current degraded state the study area has no environmental merit and can therefore not actively contribute to the ecological system of the Klip River corridor. Thirdly, without active management, the open space area will continue to deteriorate and lose its potential environmental value. Rehabilitation of the study area is therefore essential. Development of the study area will provide the financial investment necessary to conserve and protect the study area.
99 The scoping document therefore describes possible actions for mitigation of the identified impacts, to ensure that the development proposals will contribute to positive economic development of this sensitive ecological area.
4.7.3 SCOPING PROCESS
By implementing the scoping process as an assessment tool, it was possible to evaluate the impact of the proposed development of the study area in terms of the two development phases planned on the site. Phase 1, the hotel and conference center with the initial development being that of a house and a restaurant on the property, and phase 2 the development of a commercial area that includes a residential area.
The potential environmental impacts identified within the Scoping document, were summarised in table 19 in terms of extent, duration, intensity, probability, and significance. Mitigatory measures were proposed in table 20. The philosophy of identifying mitigation measures for negative impacts is based on the reduction of the impact at the source, and the management of residual impacts through monitoring and control (Bohlweki, 1999, p. 50).
It has been possible through the application of the scoping process, to identify significant impacts for both of the development phases. In addition the application of the scoping process evaluated the environmental sensitivity of the site. In the analysis the study area was divided into three categories, namely low environmental sensitivity, medium environmental sensitivity and high environmental sensitivity. This classification enabled the identification of areas where firstly, development could be allowed and the impact thereof will be minimal (low environmental sensitivity). Secondly, areas where development could be allowed, subject to the implementation of satisfactory mitigation measures (medium environmental sensitivity). Thirdly, “no-go” areas, where the natural environment is regarded as to sensitive (high environmental sensitivity).
In terms of these three categories, the impacts identified in phase 1, is not considered to be of great significance.
100 The hotel and conference centre will be developed on an area that is classified as having a low environmental sensitivity. Adequate mitigatory measures can be implemented to minimise the impact of the proposed development.
The proposed hotel and conference centre can be developed in such a way that it adheres to the stipulations of the RSDF as well as JMOSS and NEMA. The analysis done in the scoping document, and the proposed mitigation measures, indicates that phase 1 of the proposed development can be approved.
Phase 2 of the proposed development is evaluated by the scoping document as being more problematic due to the type of development proposed as well as the proposed location for the development. The proposed development will be located in areas that have a medium to high environmental sensitivity classification. These areas are characterised by a high vegetation quality, steep slopes, high visual impact, and archaeological sites scattered throughout the area. The development of the commercial center across the natural watershed and the expected increase in runoff due to the creation of artificial surfaces could cause problems, if an appropriate stormwater management system is not implemented. It can be concluded that more alternatives need to be explored for phase 2.
For both development phases it can furthermore be concluded that:
(i) All proposed developments should be subject to a geotechnical investigation. (ii) A detailed veld management plan should be drawn up to manage the natural veld. A weed eradication programme should be introduced. (iii) The phase 2 development, should be delayed to allow further investigation into different options such as the combined management of the study area, the property of Rand Water Board and the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve. (iv) An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) should be formulated and implemented, to ensure adequate implementation of all proposed mitigation measures as well as adequate monitoring during the various development phases.
101 The various proposed mitigatory measures, will ensure that any possible environmental damage that can occur, is minimised.
Rehabilitation of the study area forms a crucial part of all proposed actions. This will restore the environmental value of the study area. It can be concluded that the Scoping process has managed to achieve the greatest benefit possible for the use of the study area without the potential degradation of the ecological sensitive area.
4.8 SYNTHESIS
The natural environment in all its dimensions, fall within the Geographical Sciences. Natural Open space is but one component of the natural environment. The problem of open space management and the regulation of open space can therefore be classified as part of the Geographical Sciences, more particular that of Environmental Management. The term “Environmental” means different things to different people. An environmental approach, for some, means placing a high value on safeguarding the interests of the natural environment, perhaps even valuing nonhuman needs more than human satisfaction. This approach is viewed as unacceptable to others because it indicates a threat to human happiness and the existing status quo. The values embraced by society, are at the heart of disagreements about the meaning of the term “environmental: (Arendt, 1992; Varangu, 1998).
The management of open space within the Greater Johannesburg area, has always been controlled by the prevailing Town Planning Scheme, the Environmental Conservation Act, and NEMA. It is only recently that a clear open space policy has been formulated to guide the management of open spaces within the Greater Johannesburg Area, namely JMOSS.
Together with the current EIA regulations attempts are being made to preserve the important ecological areas within the city. Based on the initial conclusions reached it is proposed that during the scoping stage the study should have been broaden to cover a larger area. The Rietvlei study was done on a very small scale, focussing only on the identified study area.
102 If the scope of the study is increased to include a larger area, the database from which decisions will be taken will broaden. Furthermore, the scoping process as applied on the Rietvlei study area, does not address the additive impacts of developments that do not require an EIA.
The application of the scoping process within a broader development framework, will therefore initiate the assessment of the cumulative effects of several projects within the surrounding environment of the study area. This will link all perceived development projects within the broader environment, to a sustainability analysis (Therivel et al, 1992). An analysis of the study area within its context will emphasise the important role that environmentally sensitive economic development of the Klip River environmental corridor could play. Such an analyses will focus on stimulating economic development within a region of Johannesburg that is in desperate need of development. In addition it will ensure that the ecological function assigned to the study area through JMOSS, the RSDF, and NEMA, is realised.
The research indicated that, the Town Planning Process used by the prevailing Local Authority as well as the municipal open space system, should stipulate from the start of the development process, the type of circumstances that would lead to an EIA being required. This should be made specifically relevant to a particular site or to a particular area. Ecological sensitive areas should therefore be identified within an integrated development plan and the role and function of each area should be clearly defined.
Although the results of the research project may not have taken into consideration all of the relevant variables they do indicate that the development process and the EIA process, can combined and related to one another, to establish an impact assessment process. The impact assessment process established must have different levels of environmental investigation, prediction, evaluation, auditing and reporting.
It must be possible to make adjustments at different levels of the project and planning cycle, feeding into each other in an integrated planned manner.
103 The main objective of an EIA process must be to serve the goal of environmental accountability, as well as the broader goals of economic development and social upliftment. The research showed that there is, a lack of a deeper understanding of development as an environmental issue, and land available for development as a natural resource (Hollis et al, 2002).
The specific circumstances found witihin South Africa, has shaped the current debates surrounding economic development and conservation. Due to the pressures of urbanisation, land is viewed as an economic good and not as a natural resource with an intrinsic environmental value. The development proposals, for the Rietvlei study area, is in direct conflict with the conservation goals outlined for the Klip River Environmental Corridor. Therefore any significant land use change becomes a dominant issue (Varangu, 1998). There is no measurement as yet, to measure the inherent value of land. The scoping process is currently, the only process that can be applied to give an indication of the environmental value of land.
Within the boundaries set out by the research, it is concluded that economic development, town planning and environmental management need to find a common ground. There is a definite need for the integration of the different approaches to knowledge and understanding, and a need for people with different backgrounds and from different disciplines, to work together.
104 5. REFERENCES
Anon, 1997: Land Development Objectives. NMLC, WMLC, SMLC.
Anon, 1999: EIA Review Manual. Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment. Directorate: Environment. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Anon, 2001: Agenda 21 - South Africa. http;//www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/safrica/nature.htm
Anon, 2001: What is an Environmental Site Assessment? http://www.dot.state.oh.us/us/oes/servo3.htm
Anon, 2001: Geo-Environmental Solutions. http://www.geosolutions.com/assess.htm
Anon, 2001: Phase I & II Environmental Assessments. http://www.sperocorp.com/phase 1&2.htm
Acocks, J.P.H., 1988: Veld Types of South Africa, 3rd Edition. South Africa: Botanical Research Institute.
Arendt, R. 1992: “Open Space” Zoning: What it is and Why it Works. http://www.plannersweb.com
Bartlett, R.V. 1989: Policy through Impact assessment: Institutional Analysis as a Policy Strategy. New York: Greenwood Press.
Berry, D., 1976: Preservation of open Space and the Concept of Value. http://ehostvgw6.epnet.com
105 Biddulph, M. 1999: Urban Design Strategies in Practice: An Introduction. Built Environment, Vol. 25, Nr. 4, 281.
Blamely, R.K., 1997: Ecotourism: The search for an Operational Definition. Journal for Sustainable Tourism. Vol. 5, No.2, 109-129.
Bohlweki Environmental (PTY) Ltd, 1999: Detailed Environmental Scoping Report for The Thaba Ya Batswana Development on Portions of the Farm Rietvlei 101 IR.
Bolan, R., Luce, T., Lam, K.H., 1997: Can Urban Growth be Contained? University of Minnesota: Humphrey Institute. http://www.asu.edu/caed/proceedings97/bolan.html.
Brown, P.J. 1999: A Method for Valuing Town Conservation Land. Assessment Journal, Vol. 8, 20.
Canter, L.W. 1996: Environmental Impact Assessment. (2nd Ed.) USA: McGraw-Hill.
Cervera, L., 1999: Open Space Issues in Expanding Urban Environments: An Integrated Assessment for the Municipalities of Tucson and Vail, Pima County, Arizona: Chapter 2 Multiple Definitions of Open Space. http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/planning/luc/luc.htm.
Chasek, P.S., 2000: The Global Environment in the Twenty-First Century: Prospects for International Cooperation. New York: United Nations University Press.
Chittenden, N., et al, 2000. CMOSS Phase 1: Defining, Mapping and Managing Moss in the CMA.
City of Johannesburg, 2001. Spatial Development Framework.
Cole, K., 1994: Sustainable Development for a Democratic South Africa. London: Earthscan.
106 Conyers, D., Hills, P., 1984: An Introduction to Development Planning in the Third World. New York: Wiley.
Council for the Environment, 1987: Guidelines for the Planning and Development of Natural Open Space in Urban Areas. http://ceroi.net/reports/johannesburg/csoe/html
Daly, H.E., 1996: Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston: Beacon Press.
Department of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Land Affairs, 2001: Public Consultation on Selected Policies and Administrative Guidelines: Environment. Discussion Document.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 1992: The Integrated Environmental Management Procedure. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 1992: Guidelines for Scoping. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 1992: Glossary of terms used in Integrated Environmental Management. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Fabos, J.G., 1985: Land Use Planning: From Global to Local Challenge. London: Chapmann and Hall.
Fitzgerald, P., Mc Lennan, A., Munslow, B., 1997: Managing Sustainable Development in South Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Frey, H.W. 2000: Not Greenbelts but Green Wedges: The Precarious Relationship between City and Country. Urban Design International, Vol. 5, Nr.1, 13 - 25.
107 Fuggle, R.F. 1989: Integrated Environmental Management: An Appropriate Approach to Environmental Concerns in Developing Countries. Impact Assessment Bulletin, 8, 169- 176.
Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation, and Environment, 1999: EIA Review Manual.
Gilpin, A., 1996: Dictionary of Environment and Sustainable Development. Chichester: Wiley.
Glasson, J., Therivel, R., Chadwick, A., 1994: Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment: Principles and Procedures, Process, Practice and Prospects. London: UCL Press.
GJMC, 1997: Information gathering exercise on the Local Agenda 21 Process in the GJMC area.
Gobster, P., 2001: Neighbourhood – Open Space Relationships in Metropolitan Planning: A look across four scales of concern. http://ehostvgw6.epnet.com
Gotz, G., Allan, K., Harrison, K., 2004: State of the Cities Report. South Africa: South African Cities Network.
Gould, S., 1998: Urban Design and Conservation. Urban Design, Issue Nr. 66, 20.
Grobler, C.H., 1996: Guidelines for the Conservation of Natural Open Spaces in the Gauteng Province. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Harrigan, K., 1999: Report recommends Holistic Approach to Regulating. http://ehostvgw18.epnet.com
Hennessy, K., 2001: Towards a Metropolitan Open Space System for the City of Cape Town. Cape Town: Cape Town City Council.
108 Henton, D., Walesh, K., 1998: Linking the New Economy to the Livable Community. San Francisco: James Irvine Foundation.
Hoff, M.D., 1998: Sustainable Community Development: Studies in Economic, Environmental, and Cultural Revitalization. Lewis: Boca Raton Fla.
Hollis, L.E., Fulton, W., 2002: Open Space Protection: Conservation Meets Growth Management. http://www.brookings.edu/urban
Jacobs, P., Sadler, B., 1989: Sustainable Development and Environmental Assessment: Perspectives for Planning for a Common Future. Quebec: Canadian Environmental Research Council.
Johannesburg City Parks, 2001: Business Plan for the Development of the Klipriviersberg Nature Reserve.
Koplan Consultants (Pty) Ltd, 2000: Addendum to Environmental Scoping Report for Thaba ya Batswana.
Koplan Consultants (Pty) Ltd, 2003: Regional Spatial Development Framework: Administrative Region 9.
Lafferty, W.M., Eckerberg, K., 1998: From the Earth Summit to Local Agenda 21 : Working towards Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan.
MacDevette, D.R., 1994: An Overview of Environmental Information Systems in South Africa. http://easd.org.za/publicat/saeis94.htm
Mauz, K., 1999: Open Space Issues in Expanding Urban Environments: An Integrated Assessment for the Municipalities of Tuscon and Vail, Pima County Arizona. http://aria.arizona.edu
109
Mawhinney, M., 2002: Sustainable Development: Understanding the Green Debates. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Modak, P., Biswas, A.K., 1999: Conducting Environmental Impact Assessment for Developing Countries. USA: United Nations University Press.
Morgan, R.K., 1995: Progress with implementing the Environmental Assessment Requirements of Resource Management. http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com
Orton, K.M., 1999: A History of Growth and Land Use Planning Policies affecting Open Space Resources in eastern Pima County. http://aria.arizona.edu
Planpractice and Environpractice, 1999: Klipriviersberg Management Framework. Part Four: Historical Attributes.
Pradhan, G., Pradhan, R.K., 2001: Hybrid Cities: A Basis for Hope. http://www.nae.edu.nae
Pritchard, D.E., 1996: Environmental Impact Assessment and the RAMSAR Convention. http://www.ramsar.org
Rasmussen, R.K., 1975: Ndebele Wars and Migrations. Unbuplished Doctoral Dissertation. University of California: Department of Anthropology.
Republic of South Africa, 1989: Environmental Conservation Act, 1989 (Act 73 of 1989). Pretoria: Government Printer.
Republic of South Africa, 1996: Constitution of South Africa, 1996 (Act 108 of 1996). Pretoria: Government Printer.
110 Republic of South Africa, 1998: New Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998). Pretoria: Government Printer.
Rickson, R.E, Rabel, J.B., Armour, A., 1990: Integrating Impact Assessment into the Planning Process: International Perspectives and Experiences. Impact Assessment Bulletin, 8, 1-2 & 357.
Riha, S., Levitan, L., Hutson, J., 2001: Environmental Impact Assessment: The Quest for a Holistic Picture. New York: USDA
Sadler, B., 1996: Final Report - Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve performance. http://www.ea.gov.au/assessments/eianet
Sandton Town Council, 1993: An Open Space Plan for Sandton.
Scarlett, L., Staley, S., 1997: Market Orientated Planning: Principles and Tools.
Schwabe, C., 2002: Information: The foundation of sustainable development. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.
Smith, G., 1993: Impact Assessment and Sustainable Resource Management. Harlow: Longman.
Smithers, R.H.N., 1986: South African Red Data Book: Terrestrial Mammals. South African National Scientific Programmes Report, No. 125, 101-103.
Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 1998: Environmental Assessment and Spatial Framework: Klipriviersberg Area.
Southern Metropolitan Local Council, 2001: Southern Suburbs/Klipriviersberg Integrated Development Plan.
111
Steiner, F.R., 1991: The Living Landscape: An Ecological Approach to Landscape Planning. USA: McGraw-Hill.
Strategic Environmental Focus (Pty) Ltd, 1997: Johannesburg Municipal Open Space System.
Strydom, S.M., 1993: Ruimtelike Analise van Oopruimtevoorsiening in Johannesburg. Ongepubliseerde Verhandeling. Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit: Departement Geografie.
Tennille, N., 1996: The Role of Law in Environmental Protection and Nature Conservation in South Africa. South Africa Environment Project. http://www.environment97.org/
Therivel R., Morris, P., 1995: Methods of Impact Assessment. London: UCL Press.
United Nations Human Settlement Programme, 1998: United Nations Environmental Programme. http://www.unhabitat.org
Varangu, A., 1998: Taking a holistic approach to suburbs. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 12, 469.
Vorhies, F., Vorhies, D.N., 1993: An ecological Economic review of the Environmental Impact Assessment of Conserving or Mining the St Lucia Dunes. Johannesburg: Wild Life Society of Southern Africa.
Walmsley Environmental Consultants, 1994: Klipriviersberg Nature Park: Master Plan Report. Report No W062. Walmsley Environmental Consultants, 1997: GJTMC Integrated Metropolitan Development Plan - Report No. W262.
112
Walter, B., Arkin, L., Crenshaw, R., 1992: Sustainable Cities: Concepts and Strategies for Eco-City Development. Los Angeles: Eco-Home Media
Warburton, D., 1998: Community and Sustainable Development: Participation in the Future. London: Earthscan.
Weaver, J.H., Rock, M.T., Kusterer, K., 1997: Achieving Broad-based Sustainable Development: Governance, Environment and Growth with Equity. West Hartford: Kumarian Press.
Wurtzebach, C.H., Miles, M.E., 1994: Modern Real Estate. New York: Wiley.
113