Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout

Environmental Impact Assessment - -

1

1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: NAKOP

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The farm Nakop is privately owned, belonging to Mr and Mrs Tonnemacher. The farm is located approximately 5km east of the Namibian Border post and approximately 6km east of the nearest settlement which is called . The presence of the Namibian border post en route to contributes to a large average number of tourists passing through the town annually.

1.2 RATIONALE FOR SITE

The position of the existing microwave tower at Nakop has very good coverage even beyond the Namibian border into South Africa, covering large parts of the south-eastern extremities of (Figure 1-1). This microwave tower is however very visible from the B3 road to South Africa. For this reason the proposed site is located close to the existing infrastructure but further back from the edge of the plateau to ensure that it is not quite as visible as the existing infrastructure. Figure 1-1: Predicted coverage of the existing microwave tower at Nakop.

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 2

1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION

Ariamsvlei is located at the foot of a plateau and as one approaches the approximately 40km south of the town, there is a sharp decrease in elevation. The surrounding area forms part of the Nama Karoo biome and comprises of a combination of small succulents and grass species. Although not particularly high in faunal diversity, the rocky side slopes of the plateau are an optimal niche for the occurrence of a variety of reptiles and birds.

During the site visit the proposed site for the erection of the NBC transmitter was investigated. The position of the proposed site in relation to other landmarks is indicated in Error! Reference source not found.:

Figure 1-2: Position of the proposed site investigated to put up a NBC mast at the Nakop site.

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 3

An assessment form was completed during the site visit based on the visual observations and technical information available. Below follows the completed assessment form for Nakop, highlighting information of the proposed site.

Table 1-1: Site Assessment Form ACTIVITY INFORMATION PROPOSED SITE

1 Position of Latitude S 28°06'37.3" the site Longitude E 19°54'14.1" Elevation 849 m 2 Footprint of Proposed height of mast 60 m mast Diameter of stay wires 26mm – 48mm

Describe how the stay wires will be Depending on localised geology: cement anchor anchored to the ground (e.g. concrete, rock blocks/rock anchors drilled into bedrock foundation). 3 Land To who does the land on which the Private land ownership proposed site is located, belong? (E.g. Private land, state land, town lands, etc.)

4 Description General locality, surrounding landscape, etc. 500m from the current position of the tower, further back of the site northwards on same mountain as current infrastructure

5 Project Define any nuisances or negative impacts None, except for the movement on privately owned land. outputs that could result from the project during the The site is too isolated to cause any disturbance. construction and operation (e.g. vibration, noise, radiation, dust). 6 Access to Existing Road (Yes/No) Yes but need an extension of the existing road site New Road (Yes/No) Yes, extension needed

Distance of new road Less than 50m

Grading of new road (tar or gravel, etc.) Gravel

Slope where new road will be situated (gradual, moderate, steep) Gradual slope on top of the mountain Best position for new road. Damage will be the same, as long as it doesn't pass over the side slopes of the mountain

7 Civil Distance to the nearest airport 6.5km Aviation 8 Waste Distance to nearest dump site In Ariamsvlei less than 10kms from the site generation 9 Energy Distance to nearest power line 300m provision Required structures (e.g. substations, steel structures) Length of the required power line Less than 500m

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 4

Is the power line more than 2 km? If yes, Not more than 2 km then the assessment of the proposed location for the power line should be included in the assessment of the site for the mast. SITE DESCRIPTION 1 Landscape Describe the surrounding landscaped, e.g. Ridgeline, plateau, side slope of On top of a mountain hill/mountain, closed valley, open valley, plain, undulating plain/low hills, dune, sea- front How accessible is the site by vehicle? Easy access 2 Soil and Unstable rocky slopes/ steep slopes with Should not be a problem if construction takes place on Geology loose soil the site that was selected. Describe soil (e.g. clay, sand, etc.) Strong shale component Identify areas where erosion is likely. Closer to the side slopes of the mountain 3 Habitat Natural veld in good condition, natural veld Natural veld in good condition. with scattered aliens, natural veld with heavy alien infestation, build-up area, bare soil. A Vegetation Describe the natural vegetation on the site Dwarf shrubland with some protected plant species at the (e.g. dwarf-shrubland). base of the mountain. e.g. Boscia albutrunca and Parkinsonia Africana. B Birds Is the area likely to be sensitive for birds No (i.t.o. Cliffs, Ridges, possible flight paths, trees, water sources)? C Reptiles Is the area likely to be sensitive for reptiles No (e.g. rocky outcrops)?

D Archaeology Take a picture facing towards the proposed None site.

E Surface Is there any surface water sources located Orange River – approximately 40 km south of site Water close to the proposed site (e.g. Rivers, Pans, dams, farms dams, oshanas, etc.)? Estimate the distance from the site. Are there any signs of a wetland located None close to the proposed site (e.g. mottled soil, grass with plumes, reeds, two-tone vegetation, standing water, birdlife)? Estimate the distance from the site. 4 Visual Consider the aesthetic value of the area (Is it Aesthetic value of the area is not high. located in a scenic area, what are the lines of sight, are there tourism activities in the area?). Identify possible sensitive receptors (e.g. Owner of the farm, B3 road users, neighbouring farmers neighbours, road users, tourism ventures etc.) If a new road will be constructed to the site, In view of the largest group of sensitive receptors – what will the visual impact be? (E.g. will it be tourist route highly visible or will it be out of sight for the largest group of sensitive receptors). Consider the following: *The potential location of a development on Site is located further back from the tip of the plateau and landform features within the landscape will is therefore less visible from the ground. The tip of the influence the visual absorption capacity. For mast may be visible from an eastern and western example, structures will be difficult to “hide” direction. on a ridgeline compared to a deeply incised valley

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 5

* Developments on lower slopes will be Although located on the top of the mountain, the potentially easier to hide than those on structure is likely to be hidden due to the height upper slopes. differences between the ground and the top of the mountain. * The visibility of a location of a structure is Structure to be erected will be higher than the mountain also influenced by the location height (i.e. on top of the mountain) and therefore more visible. relative to the heights of surrounding topographic features. For example, if a location is lower than the majority of the immediately surrounding landscape it will be less visible and intrusive than a location which is generally higher than the immediate surrounds. * A potential tower location will be easier to On top of a mountain “hide” in a very rugged/diverse landscape and more difficult to do so if the landscape is more homogenous, such as a plain. 5 Social Describe the surrounding community and North - farmland, East - farmland, South - existing tower, context land uses (e.g. farm land, town lands, West - farmland, Ariamsvlei, Namibian border post residential area etc.).

How far is the nearest inhabited area from The closest populated area is the border post which is the centre point of the mast? (I.t.o. the more than 5km from the site. radiation). Give a short description of the populated area. What type of settlement is it?

Figure 1-2: Vegetation, landscapes and infrastructure associated with the existing as well as the proposed sites at Nakop.

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 6

1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

On-site public participation was done by consulting with the Karas Regional Counsellor, Hon. Ephraim, at his office in Noordoewer.

The two farmers who might be affected by the proposed project, namely Mr Tonnemacher (owner of farm Nakop) and Mr Strauss (owner of farm Ukamas) were consulted on site during which the proposed project was explained and the farmers were given the opportunity to raise comments and concerns. Both of the farmers seemed keen on giving their cooperation.

The consulted members of the public as well as their capacity and the comments received, are contained in Table 1-2 below:

Table 1-2: Capacity of and comments received from the consulted members of the public in Ariamsvlei.

MANNER CONTACT NAME AFFILIATION POSITION COMMENTS CONTACTED: DETAILS Hon P. Ephraim Karas Regional Councillor: On site Stated that the project will Council (Office in Noordoewer) consultation, (063) 270-759 contribute to development Fax in the region. 081-274-4773

Mr B. Nakop Farm Farmer On site Seemed keen to assist in Tonnemacher owner consultation (063) 280-063 bringing development to the area Mr E. Strauss Ukamas Farm Farmer On site Seemed keen to assist in owner consultation (063) 280-000 bringing development to the area

Because consultation was done in 2010 and many officials and local I&APs are likely to have changed throughout the course of the project, consultation could become out dated.

The aim is therefore to repeat the consultation process just before commencing with the construction phase.

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 7

1.5 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

1.5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED SITE

It is necessary to determine whether the proposed site requires a full environmental assessment with specialist input or whether the available information is sufficient to draw conclusions regarding the true sensitivity of the site. To do this a screening process is applied to the potential impacts of the project (Figure 1-3).

Do we have sufficient information to address the issue?

YES NO

Can issue be addressed through the Specialist input required implementation of a generic EMP?

Full EIA

YES NO

Issues addressed in A Site Specific EMP is required to Generic EMP the Generic EMP that contains site specific mitigations.

Figure 1-3: Questions used to screen the potential impacts associated with the development. The Nakop site follows the indicated “green” route which implies that all issues can sufficiently be addressed through a Generic EMP.

Impacts that can sufficiently be addressed through the implementation of a Generic EMP are indicated as such without further investigation. Table 1-3 below indicates how the screening process was applied to the identified impacts at the proposed Nakop site:

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 8

Table 1-3: Assessment of potential impacts associated with the proposed site.

KEY IMPACT ISSUE DEGREE OF ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DESCRIPTION ASSOCIATED ADDRESSED SENSITIVITY WITH FEATURE IN:

Temperature High temperatures associated Health and Low Generic EMP with summer could impact safety of sensitivity negatively on the health and workforce safety of the workforce. Wind direction Dust generated during Dust Low Generic EMP construction could impact generation sensitivity negatively on people driving during on the B3. construction. Topography and soils The mountainous surrounds Visual impact Low Generic EMP contribute to the aesthetic sensitivity value of the area. Habitat/ Vegetation Encroachment of alien Spread of Low Generic EMP invasive spp. alien invasive sensitivity species Sensitive/protected Loss of Low Generic EMP vegetation occurring on the biodiversity sensitivity site. Reptile/ Small mammals/ Occurrence of these species Disturbance Low Generic EMP bird species on the site. to nests and sensitivity habitats Loss of Low Generic EMP biodiversity sensitivity Bird collisions Low Generic EMP to guy ropes sensitivity of mast. Side slopes of mountains Erosion on side slopes of Erosion Low Generic EMP mountain due to construction sensitivity activities and movement of vehicles.

Socio-Economic Change in available visual Visual impact. Low Generic EMP environment resources. sensitivity Civil Aviation Less than 8km Low Generic EMP from an sensitivity airstrip Disturbance of archaeological Heritage Low Generic EMP landscape impact sensitivity Impact on health of residents Radiation Low Generic EMP due to radiation. impact sensitivity

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 9

KEY IMPACT ISSUE DEGREE OF ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DESCRIPTION ASSOCIATED ADDRESSED SENSITIVITY WITH FEATURE IN:

OTHER IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE MAST Waste management during Littering Low Generic EMP the construction and Impact on sensitivity operation phases existing infrastructure Additional strain on resources Impact on Low Generic EMP in Ariamsvlei due to the infrastructure, sensitivity occurrence of construction including workers. water, electricity & sewer systems.

1.5.2 OVERALL SENSITIVITY OF THE PROPOSED SITE

Based on the assessment in Table 1-3 above, one can establish the overall potential sensitivity of the proposed site (Table 1-4).

Table 1-4: Sensitivity ratings of the proposed site and the associated implications.

LOW MEDIUM HIGH The site is not sensitive The site is moderately The site has sensitive at all. No additional sensitive and although elements that need to be specialist studies are specialist inputs are not further investigated by a required. required, it requires specialist. Sites that have a specific management "high" sensitivity rating measures. should only be used as the

Description preferred alternative once all other options have been

X eliminated.

An additional Appendix is Generic EMP is required to the document Specialist investigations are sufficient that contains site specific required.

mitigation measures. Implication

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013 10

1.6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

From the findings obtained during the site assessment it is found that the proposed site is sufficient for the construction of the NBC masts. The site is obscured by the high altitude of the mountain and the buildings of the structure will therefore not be visible from the main sensitive receptors which are the B3 road users, the Namibian border post and the residents of Ariamsvlei. In terms of the ecological sensitivity of the site, no uniquely sensitive vegetation species occur on the site, and it is not anticipated that the habitat supports any significant bird, mammal or reptile species.

The existing infrastructure should be moved to the new location and the site completely removed and rehabilitated.

Aspects that need consideration during the construction phase (including waste management, steering clear of steep edges of the mountain and abstaining from unnecessary damage to the habitats surrounding the development) can sufficiently be addressed in a generic EMP.

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout – NBC EIA - Nakop August 2013