Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout Environmental Impact Assessment - Nakop - 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 Ariamsvlei. The presence of the Namibian border post en route to South Africa 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 Namibia (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 Orange River 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: Karasburg On site Stated that the project will Council (Office in Noordoewer) consultation, (063) 270-759 contribute to development Fax in the region.