APPROVED MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF HERITAGE WESTERN CAPE (HWC) ARCHAEOLOGY, PALAEONTOLOGY AND METEORITES COMMITTEE (APM) Held on Wednesday, 3 June 2020, on Microsoft Teams, Cape Town at 09:00 AM
1. Opening and Welcome
The Chairperson, Dr Lita Webley (LW), officially opened the meeting at 9:04 and welcomed everyone present.
2. Attendance
Members Members of Staff Dr Lita Webley (LW) Ms Penelope Meyer (PM) Ms Emmylou Bailey (EB) Ms Stephanie Barnardt (SB) Dr Jayson Orton (JO) Ms Cathy-Ann Potgieter (CP) Ms Cecilene Muller (CM) Mr Jonathan Windvogel (JW) Mr John Gribble (JG) Ms Colette Scheermeyer (CS) Dr Ragna Redelstorff (RR) Ms Nuraan Vallie (NV) Ms Ameerah Peters (AP) Ms Nosiphiwo Tafeni (NT) Dr Mxolisi Dlamuka (MX)
Visitors Ms Katie Smuts Mr Nick Wiltshire Mr Jonathan Kaplan
Observers None
3. Apologies Dr Wendy Black
Absent None
4. Approval of Agenda 4.1 Dated 3 June 2020 The Committee approved the agenda dated 3 June 2020 with minor changes including additional items.
5. Approval of Minutes and Matters Arising from Previous Meeting 5.1 APM Minutes dated 6 May 2020. The Committee reviewed the minutes dated 6 May 2020 and approved the minutes with amendments.
6. Disclosure of Interest
6.1 Recusals
Page 1 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
• JO: Item 16.2 7. Confidential Matters
7.1 None
8. Appointments
8.1 None
9. Administrative Matters
9.1 Outcome of appeals and tribunals
9.1.1 Proposed Additions and Alterations, Erf 172004. 212A Buitengracht Street , Bo-Kaap (Section 34) HM/ CAPE TOWN METROPOLITAN/ BOKAAP/ ERF 172004
Case No: 19080614LB0807E
Matter from BELCOM.
9.1.2 Proposed Additions and Alterations To Erf 1444, 24 Davenport Road, Vredehoek (Section 34) HM/ CAPE TOWN METROPOLITAN/ VREDEHOEK/ ERF 1444
Case No: 198080508WD0807E
Matter from BELCOM
9.1.3 Athlone Power Station, cnr Bhunga Avenue and N2, Athlone (Section 34) HM/CAPE TOWN/ATHLONE/ERF 32564
Case No: 19053115HB0604E
Matter from BELCOM
9.2 Archaeological representation on BELCom. LW enquired whether there was archaeological representation on BELCom after the appointment of the new committees in February 2020. This was standard procedure in the past to ensure that potential impacts to historical archaeology, particularly in the City of Cape Town (CoCT), could be flagged prior to development. CS to enquire from the CEO.
9.3 S35 Prior to a NID. JO raised the issue of applying for a S35 permit to mitigate an archaeological site of low significance, prior to commencing the NID process. It was recommended that he prepare a discussion document for the Committee to consider.
Page 2 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
10. Standing Items
10.1 Erf 4998, Sayers Lane, Simons Town(Reburial) No further developments.
10.2 Kasteelberg nomination No further developments.
10.3 Circulation/Workshop of Accidental Finds of Human Remains Protocol SB reported that she is waiting for the lifting of lockdown regulations to commence with workshops to introduce the protocol to the South African Police Services (SAPS). The Committee would assist in providing illustrative material for any workshop presentations.
10.4 Updating of HWC Minimum Standards for AIA reports The Committee noted that the current document was approved by Council in June 2016. There is a need for the document to be updated, particularly on those aspects relating to the recording and mapping of archaeological resources, especially those that would not be studied further. SB to circulate the document to the Committee for their comments.
10.5 Uploading reports to South African Heritage Resources Information System (SAHRIS) This matter was raised at Council. Reports of the HWC files are stored with the DCAS registry services. Such reports may be accessed through the PAIA process. HWC is working with SAHRA to move to online applications, using SAHRIS as a platform. HWC is presently engaged in discussions with SAHRA about the process, but until agreement is reached, no reports or permit applications related to HWC are being processed by HWC on SAHRIS.
10.6 Site Inspection Council was of the opinion that site inspections were not allowed under lockdown Level 3 regulations. HWC is not in the position to issue permits to committee members and its staff cannot go to site under Level 3. Accordingly, HWC will only undertake site inspections under Level 2. Emergency cases, such as the accidental discovery of human remains, will have to be addressed on a case by case basis.
10.7 Site Inspection Report
10.7.1 None
10.3 Report back on Council The Council considered Risk Assessment, Provisional Protections, SAHRIS and Site Inspections
11. POLICY AND PROCEDURES
11.1 SAPS and HWC Accidental Finds Protocol and Procedure
Nothing to report.
Page 3 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
MATTERS DISCUSSED
NEW MATTER
12. SECTION 35 PERMIT REPORT
12.1 Proposed Analysis, Collection, Disturbance, Excavation and Removal of Original Position of the Potteberg Estate, Midden, De Hoop Nature Reserve; Farm 516/20 HM/ AGULHAS/ DE HOOP / DE HOOP NATURE RESERVE,FARM 516/20
Case No: 19100205AS1114E
Ms Katie Smuts, the applicant, was present via video conference and took part in the discussion.
DISCUSSION Amongst other things, the following was discussed: • Ms Smuts discussed the content of the letter (28 May 2020) she had addressed to the APM Committee regarding their proposals at the meeting of the 6 May 2020. • There was no funding for the project. She was undertaking the archaeological testing along the proposed fence around the archaeological midden, pro bono. • There was some distance and elevation between the location for the new penguin colony and the archaeological shell midden. • It seemed unlikely that the site would be negatively impacted by the burrowing of the penguins. However, the penguin colony would be monitored on a regular basis, and any impacts on the midden would be noticed immediately.
DECISION The committee approved the permit application by Ms Smuts subject to the following requirements: 1. If any burrowing by the penguins into the midden is observed during regular monitoring, then archaeological mitigation will be required; 2. Amendments to the Conservation Management Plan (CMP) dealing specifically with the midden, must include recommendations for reporting of threats and any damage to HWC.
SB MATTERS ARRISING
13. PERMIT REPORTS
13.1 None
14. SECTION 38 WORKPLAN APPLICATIONS
14.1 Proposed Abalone Processing Facility along with associated Infrastructure on Remainder of Farm Klipfontein 711, Gansbaai
Page 4 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
HM/GANSBAAI/FARM KLIPFONTEIN 711
Case No: 17112117AS1208E
Mr Jonathan Kaplan representing the applicant was present via video conference and took part in the discussion.
DISCUSSION Amongst other things, the following was discussed: • JK informed the Committee that the site had not yet been cleared of vegetation. He would be undertaking shovel testing across the site. • The Committee noted that in view of the size of the proposed development, 15 test pits were not sufficient and they recommended approximately 50. These should be distributed across the site, in order to maximise spatial coverage of the area. • The Committee enquired whether the SAHRA MUCH (Marine and Underwater Cultural Heritage) unit had responded to the proposal to construct eight abstracton pipelines along the sea bed. A SAHRIS search revealed that no application was submitted on SAHRIS and as such no comment from SAHRA MUCH Unit was issued. • The Committee noted that in its Final Comment (12 November 2018), it had observed that the results of the shovel tests would determine whether any further work (such as monitoring, excavations and/or a CMP) would be required.
DECISION The Committee approved the Workplan application with the following condition: 1. The number of shovel test pits be increased to as close to 50 as possible given the time constraints and the excavations to be spread across the site as far as possible given the vegetation constraints. 2. The HIA to be submitted to the SAHRA MUCH unit for their records.
SB
15. SECTION 38 (4)
15.1 None
16. SECTION 38 (8) TO OTHER AUTHORITIES
16.1 Proposed Subdivision and Mixed-Used Development on the Remainder of Farm Langeberg 188 HM/SALDANHA BAY/ REMAINDER OF FARM LANGEBERG 188
Case No: 19051309AS0523E
HIA documentation was tabled.
Mr Nick Wiltshire, representing the applicant, was present via video conferencing and took part in the discussion.
DISCUSSION Amongst other things, the following was discussed: • No significant archaeological finds were discovered during the survey.
Page 5 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
• Although the cluster of buildings nearby included a 19th century structure, this would not be impacted. • The development would be visible from the West Coast Fossil Park berms but not from the museum and display areas inside the berms. • The palaeontological findings were endorsed and monitoring was essential in view of the proximity of the site to the West Coast Fossil Park (WCFP). • The West Coast Fossil Park had not commented on the development, although they had been afforded the opportunity to do so.
FINAL COMENT The Committee endorses the report including the following recommendations: 1. There is no preference for either proposed alternative based on impacts to heritage resources. 2. No mitigation is required prior to construction commencing. 3. The HWC Chance Fossil Finds Procedure must be implemented during the construction phase of development, and included in the EMP. 4. Daily palaeontological monitoring of the excavations for the proposed development (for both the foundations and the fuel tanks) is required by a suitably qualified and experienced palaeontologist. Should any significant fossils be identified during excavation activities, a Workplan Application must be submitted to HWC for the appropriate removal and curation of this fossil material. 5. Confirmation of the arrangements for the implementation of the palaeontological monitoring (i.e. schedule, method and the appointed specialist) must be provided to HWC and WCFP before excavation commences. 6. If any unmarked human remains are uncovered or exposed during development these must immediately be reported to HWC. Burials must not be disturbed or removed until inspected by a professional archaeologist and approval given by the relevant authority.
SB
16.2 Proposed Residential Development on Erven 326 & 327, Cnr Beach Road & 10th Avenue, Melkbosstrand HM/MELKBOSSTRAND/ERVEN 326 & 327
Case No: 19111219AS1208E
Mr Jayson Orton recused himself and was disconnected from the meeting.
DISCUSSION Amongst other things, the following was discussed: • Both test pits and geotechnical excavations had been undertaken across the site, and no archaeological material had been discovered. • In view of the proximity of the site to the coast, it seemed unlikely that any archaeological remains would be uncovered, although human remains are always a possibility.
RECOMMENDATION to IACom The APM Committee endorses the recommendation on page 13 of the Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) prepared by ASHA Consulting dated 16 January 2020 with the addition that the Fossil Finds Protocol must be included in the final recommendation.
SB
Page 6 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
17. SECTION 27: PROVINCIAL HERITAGE SITE
17.1 None
18. REQUEST FOR EXCEPTION / OPINION / ADVICE
18.1 None
19. REPORT BACK FROM OTHER MEETINGS WHEN RELEVANT
19.1 None
20. OTHER MATTERS
20.1 Proposed Expansion of an existing Dam, Farm 9/441, 10/441 and RE 700, Worcester
Mr Jayson Orton was reconnected to the meeting.
Mr Nick Wiltshire, representing the applicant, was present via video conference and took part in the discussion.
Discussion Amongst other things, the following was discussed: • Mr Wiltshire explained that the amended AIA included a more detailed table of archaeological finds, more photographs and more elaboration on the finds. • The Committee noted that the artefacts were in an interesting context, eroding out of the surface soils. Although it is known that MSA occurrences are found in the area, very little is know about the material. There are no collections in Museums and the material has not been described by an MSA specialist. • The Committee commented that once the sites were destroyed, the information would be lost forever. There was an opportunity to make a small collection, and record and describe the material. The described collection would be valuable for future research in the area.
FINAL COMMENT The Committee endorsed the report and noted that there is a concentration of Middle Stone Age artefacts in this specific area of the Breede Valley. Very little is known of the MSA in this area. The Committee requires that a number of small collections be sampled across the area and the typology recorded. The desktop PIA is accepted with the Fossil Finds Procedure supported.
SB
21. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND DECISIONS The Committee adopted the resolutions and decisions.
22. CLOSURE: The meeting adjourned at: 12:39
23. DATE OF NEXT MEETING: 1 July 2020
Page 7 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020
CHAIRPERSON______DATE______
SECRETARY______DATE______
Page 8 of 8 Approved APM Minutes 3 June 2020