And Moorreesburg (Km 33.90)

Home , Moorreesburg, N7 (South Africa), Swartland

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OF THE N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI (KM 7.49) AND MOORREESBURG (KM 33.90)

NATIONAL ROUTE 7, SECTION 2

Prepared for: South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd

Authority Ref: 14/12/16/3/3/1/2082

SLR Project No: 720.10018.00003 Report No: 1 Revision No: 1 January 2020 South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90)

DOCUMENT INFORMATION Title Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) Project Manager Conroy van der Riet Project Manager e-mail [email protected] Author Conroy van der Riet Reviewer Fuad Fredericks Keywords SANRAL, N7, Road Improvement, Basic Assessment Status Final Authority Reference No 14/12/16/3/3/1/2082 SLR Project No 720.10018.00003 Report No 1

DOCUMENT REVISION RECORD Rev No. Issue Date Description Issued By

0 18 October Draft issued for I&AP Review CvdR 2019

1 January 2020 Final submitted for decision-making CvdR

BASIS OF REPORT This document has been prepared by an SLR Group company with reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the manpower, timescales and resources devoted to it by agreement with the South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd (the Client) as part or all of the services it has been appointed by the Client to carry out. It is subject to the terms and conditions of that appointment.

SLR shall not be liable for the use of or reliance on any information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document for any purpose by any person other than the Client. Reliance may be granted to a third party only in the event that SLR and the third party have executed a reliance agreement or collateral warranty.

Information reported herein may be based on the interpretation of public domain data collected by SLR, and/or information supplied by the Client and/or its other advisors and associates. These data have been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work.

The copyright and intellectual property in all drawings, reports, specifications, bills of quantities, calculations and other information set out in this report remain vested in SLR unless the terms of appointment state otherwise.

This document may contain information of a specialised and/or highly technical nature and the Client is advised to seek clarification on any elements which may be unclear to it.

Information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document should only be relied upon in the context of the whole document and any documents referenced explicitly herein and should then only be used within the context of the appointment.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) is proposing to improve 26.41 km of the National Route 7 (N7), Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) located within the Swartland Local Municipality, Western Cape (see Figure 1).

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

The proposed project mainly entails the provision of additional climbing / passing lanes and widening the road and associated infrastructure in certain areas. The existing carriageway would be widened to the following cross-sections: • Where no climbing lanes are provided: two 3.7 m-wide lanes and two 3.5 m-wide shoulders; • Where a climbing lane is provided on one side only: a 1.5 m-wide shoulder (1.0 m surfaced) with 3.5m-wide slow lane and 3.7 m-wide fast lane. The side without the climbing lane would have a 3.7 m-wide lane and a 3.5 m-wide shoulder (3.0 m surfaced); and • In instances where climbing lanes are provided on both sides: each side would have a 1.5 m-wide shoulder (1.0 m surfaced) with a 3.5 m-wide slow lane and a 3.7 m-wide fast lane.

Four bridge structures and six major culverts would need widening along the route, and accesses which do not meet the SANRAL standards for sight distance will be further investigated during the final engineering design stage in order to determine how the sight distance could be improved. Ancillary works mainly include the following: • Installation of concrete-lined side drains with subsoil drains; • Replacement of minor culverts; and • Resurfacing of intersections with provincial roads and major farm accesses.

JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd was appointed by SANRAL (under Contract No. NRA N.007-020-2020/1F) to provide Consulting Engineering Services. SLR Consulting (South Africa) Pty Ltd (SLR) in turn, was appointed by JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd to complete the Basic Assessment process as part of an Application for Environmental Authorisation in terms of Chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as amended.

This final Basic Assessment Report (BAR) provides a description of the proposed project, the affected environment and the BA process followed, and an assessment of the identified potential impacts on the environment. The compilation of this report has, where applicable, been informed by comments received from interested and affected parties (I&APs) and authorities during the pre-application notification period and on the draft BAR. It should be noted that all significant changes to the draft report are underlined and in a different font (Times New Roman) to the rest of the text.

This report is submitted to the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) for consideration as part of an application for Environmental Authorisation in terms NEMA.

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) January 2020

FIGURE 1: LOCATION OF THE N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI AND MOORREESBURG

iii

NEED AND DESIRABILITY

The road forms part of the national road network of South Africa and carries regional and national traffic. The relevant section of road carries approximately 5 218 vehicles per day (both directions), of which 21% are heavy vehicles. A Stage 1 (Feasibility/Preliminary Design Stage) Road Safety Audit highlighted some concerns related to this section. As a result of the increased traffic and the findings of the Road Safety Audit, Section 2 of the N7 needs to be improved in order to conform to the Geometric Design (G2) Standards.

SUMMARY OF AUTHORISATION REQUIREMENTS

The proposed project triggers the need for a BA process to be undertaken in order for the DEFF to consider granting or refusing Environmental Authorisation.

Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (NHRA) requires a Notice of Intent to Develop (NID) to be submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC).

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Land Use and Character of the Surrounding Area The terrain is relatively flat in relation to the hills and deeper valleys of the areas that lie to the west and east of the road. Much of the area has been transformed for many decades by agricultural development and by the N7 road itself. As a result, most of the natural vegetation cover and aquatic features have been significantly modified. The nearest urban areas are the towns of Malmesbury, located close to the start point in the south, and Moorreesburg, at the end point in the north.

Climate Generally, the area has a Mediterranean climate with an average annual rainfall of approximately 305 mm and an average temperature of 18.6°C. The summer months typically have lower rainfall, higher temperatures and higher evaporation. During winter the area experiences high rainfall and lower temperatures with subsequent lower evaporation.

Topography The terrain along this section of road can be defined as flat and occasionally broken up by hills with grades varying between 1.5% and 4%. The elevation of the study area varies between 123 m and 293 m above mean sea level.

Geology and Geohydrology The geology of the broader study area is dominated by granite of the Paardeberg Pluton, Cape Granite Suite, greywacke and phyllite of the Moorreesburg Formation, Malmesbury Group and occasional diorite and gabbro of the Yzerfontein Suite. Boreholes within the study area potentially yield between 0.6 – 0.8 litres/second with a maximum volume of 15 000 – 25 000 m3/km2/annum being abstracted while preserving sustained abstraction within the aquifer system.

Freshwater Ecosystems The study area is located within the G21D, G10J and G10L quaternary catchments, but primarily G10L. These catchments are drained by the Diep River, as well as the Moorreesburgspruit and Sout River (tributaries of the Berg River) respectively. A number of smaller seasonal to ephemeral tributaries of these rivers occur along the road section. A number of valley bottom wetland areas are associated with the watercourses.

Vegetation A single main vegetation type (Swartland Shale Renosterveld) occurs in the study area with a limited occurrence of a second type (Swartland Granite Renosterveld) occurring along the southern parts of the route. These vegetation types are classified as part of the Fynbos Biome. Swartland Shale Renosterveld has been largely lost along the entire road section. This is ascribed to intense negative anthropogenic influences over a long period. The affected vegetation is currently all secondary vegetation that has established since the last road construction activities along the route.

Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystem Status There are various areas along the route which crosses Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) 1 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (river) and Ecological Support Area (ESA) 2 (Restore from other land use) areas. The entire route falls within a Critically Endangered (CR) (A1 & D1) area. “A1” indicates irreversible loss of natural habitat, where the remaining natural habitat is less than the biodiversity target for CR areas, while “D1” indicates threatened plant species associations, with more than 80% constituting threatened Red Data List species for CR areas. According to the botanical study no Species of Conservation Concern or IUCN Red List plant species were found along the road section.

Socio-Economic Aspects The population of the Swartland Local Municipality increased from 72 116 in 2001 to 133 762 in 2016. Swartland’s population in 2016 was strongly concentrated in the younger age cohorts. The proportion of poor people within the Swartland municipal area decreased slightly between 2011 and 2016. An increase in the number of indigent households between was experienced between 2014 and 2016. The Swartland contributed 28 % in 2015 to the West Coast District’s gross domestic product per region (GDPR). The sectors that contributed the most to Swartland’s GDPR in 2015 are manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, wholesale/retail trade, catering and accommodation. Overall, between 2004 and 2015, every economic sector in Swartland grew positively in terms of GDPR, except for the mining, electricity, gas and water sectors.

Cultural Heritage No heritage resources occur within close proximity to the proposed project. The Swartland is an important cultural landscape with strong agricultural characteristics. Occasional large gum trees occur along the road and are considered as being features of the Swartland cultural landscape. These occur in three places, i.e. km 20.50 northbound and km 29.67 – 32.80 southbound (in two locations).

IMPACT ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS

The majority of potential impacts are expected to occur during the construction phase of the proposed project. All potential negative impacts related to the proposed project (during both construction and operations) are rated as VERY LOW to LOW significance after mitigation. Socio-economic benefits related to employment opportunities is rated as VERY LOW (POSITIVE) significance after enhancement, while the improvement in road user safety and traffic accommodation is rated as HIGH (POSITIVE) significance after enhancement.

Implementation of the No-Go option would mean that the planned road improvement would not proceed. Implementation of the No-Go alternative would not make provision for the anticipated increase in future traffic along the road section and the related improvement of road user safety would not be realised.

A summary of the assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project is provided in the table below:

ISSUE / POTENTIAL Impact IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION WITH MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAND USE Impacts on the Land Use MEDIUM VERY LOW GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RELATED IMPACTS General construction related impacts VERY LOW VERY LOW FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Impacts on Aquatic Habitats HIGH MEDIUM Impacts on Surface Water Quality MEDIUM LOW VEGETATION Impact on Swartland Shale Renosterveld MEDIUM VERY LOW Impact on Fynbos patch (N7PM54) HIGH LOW BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems HIGH VERY LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS Employment VERY LOW (POSITIVE) VERY LOW (POSITIVE) Inconvenience to Road Users LOW VERY LOW Land Acquisition MEDIUM VERY LOW CULTURAL HERITAGE Cultural Heritage Impacts LOW LOW OPERATIONAL PHASE FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Impacts on Aquatic Habitats and Surface Water Quality LOW VERY LOW

ISSUE / POTENTIAL Impact IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION WITH MITIGATION VEGETATION Impacts on Vegetation LOW VERY LOW BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems LOW VERY LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS Road User Safety and Traffic MEDIUM (POSITIVE) HIGH (POSITIVE)

RECOMMENDATIONS

In light of the above, this study recommends that the proposed Improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90), if authorised, be implemented with due consideration of the recommendations outlined in this report. These mitigation measures are all considered to be feasible and have been included in the Environmental Management Programme for the proposed project.

The key recommendations are set out below:

Construction Phase: Land Use • Avoid as much land acquisition outside the road reserve as far possible during the design. • Avoid acquiring prime agricultural land (i.e. land currently under cultivations) as far as possible.

General Construction Related Impacts • Ensure that the generation of dust is minimised by implementing a dust control programme (with due consideration to conserving water). • Ensure vehicles and equipment are adequately maintained and in good working order. • Ensure that the exposed soil and material stockpiles are adequately protected against the wind. • Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum. • Ensure that the generation of dust is minimised and shall implement a dust control programme (with due consideration to conserving water). • Ensure that the exposed soil and material stockpiles are adequately protected against the wind. • Limit activities resulting in high noise levels (e.g. pile driving, grinding, road material loading/unloading, hammering, excavating, etc.) to the daytime.

Freshwater Ecosystems • Ensure the identified location-specific mitigation measures are implemented during construction in addition to the general mitigation measures as outlined below. • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. • Ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated a soon as possible.

vii

• Ensure construction adjacent to the watercourses and wetlands are undertaken during the drier months of the year as far as possible. • Ensure construction within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved disposal waste sites. • Once construction is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area). • Ensure that culvert and bridge structures do not concentrate the flow or alter the current watercourse channel shape and bed level from that upstream and downstream of the road. • Ensure that stormwater runoff from the road, particularly where there are steeper gradients, do not lead to erosion and sedimentation of the watercourses and wetland areas. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on- going basis according to appropriate methods. • Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. • Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands. • Do not place laydown areas or stockpiles within 32 m of the watercourses and wetlands.

Vegetation • Fence off and restrict access to the area of the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54 (S 33° 21’ 37.87”; E 18° 42’ 14.02”). The working zone in this area should not exceed a distance of 3 m from the current road edge. • Conserve shrubby vegetation (excluding alien invasive plant species) along the route where possible. • Disturbed areas must be seeded with Hyparrhenia hirta.

Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems • Ensure that the above mentioned operational phase mitigation measures for freshwater ecosystems and vegetation as described above, as well as those listed below, are implemented effectively. • Avoid construction work during the night-time where possible. • Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. • Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place. • Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum

viii

• Establish a Project Liaison Committee (PLC), comprising of representatives of SANRAL, the main contractor and members of the local community (as elected by the community). • Ensure that procurement specifications as stipulated in the SANRAL Procurement Policy is implemented, with a focus on project area-specific local employment.

Cultural Heritage • If possible, avoid removing or damaging the other mature Eucalyptus trees along the route. • The Contractor should develop and implement a cultural heritage Chance Find Procedure (with particular focus on excavations) prior to commencement of construction. This procedure shall contain steps on who to notify, and what to do in the event of discovering archaeological or heritage resources (including burial grounds/graves).

Operational Phase: Freshwater Ecosystems • Conduct maintenance works in accordance with an approved Routine Road Maintenance Programme. • Implement the following as part of the Routine Road Maintenance Programme: o Minimise the spatial extent of disturbance; o Minimise the frequency of (or requirement for) maintenance activities; o Do not impede the movement of aquatic and riparian biota; o Minimise alterations to flow- and sediment-capacity; o Rehabilitate and re-vegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible; o Clear alien invasive plant species; o Restrict maintenance activities to the dry season where possible; o Prevent erosion and rehabilitate eroded areas; o Use existing access routes as far as possible; o Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands; o Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites; o Ensure maintenance activities do not lead to channelization or canalisation of the watercourses; and o Remove cleared woody material from the areas adjacent to the watercourse and wetlands to prevent it being washed into the watercourses or wetlands.

Vegetation • The Routine Road Maintenance Programme should include specifications for alien vegetation control. Specific measures for the effective control of Acacia saligna (Port Jackson Willow) Pennisetum setaceum (fountain grass) must be included in the programme. • Ensure that steps are implemented during routine road maintenance to avoid blanket vegetation clearance at the Fynbos patch located at waypoint “N7PM54”.

Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems • Ensure that the above mentioned operational phase mitigation measures for freshwater ecosystems and vegetation as described above, as well as those listed below, are implemented effectively. • Implement the following during the routine road maintenance periods: o Avoid maintenance work during the night-time where possible. o Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. o Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place. o Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum. o Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. o Ensure maintenance work within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. o Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis in accordance with appropriate methods. o Once maintenance work is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area). o Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. o Conserve shrubby vegetation (excluding alien invasive plant species) along the route where possible.

Socio-Economic Aspects • Ensure that the above mentioned mitigation measures for the operational phase are included in the Routine Road Maintenance Programme and implemented effectively. • Other than the implementation of the safety and traffic accommodation measures as indicated in the proposed project design, no other enhancement measures have been identified.

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ...... 1 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND, NEED AND DESIRABILITY ...... 1 1.3 SUMMARY OF AUTHORISATION REQUIREMENTS ...... 3 1.4 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ...... 4 1.5 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT ...... 4

2 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ...... 6 2.1 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ...... 6 2.1.1 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 1998 ...... 6 2.1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS, 2014 (AS AMENDED) ...... 6 2.1.3 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2004 ...... 8 2.1.4 NATIONAL WATER ACT, 1998 ...... 8 2.1.5 NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT, 1999 ...... 9 2.1.6 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY ACT, 2004 – NATIONAL DUST CONTROL REGULATIONS ...... 9 2.2 GUIDELINES ...... 9 2.3 DETAILS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER ...... 10 2.3.1 DETAILS OF THE PROJECT TEAM ...... 10 2.3.2 QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF THE EAPS ...... 10 2.4 BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...... 11 2.4.1 OBJECTIVES ...... 11 2.4.2 PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND NOTIFICATION ...... 11 2.4.3 SPECIALIST STUDIES ...... 13 2.4.4 COMPILATION OF BAR FOR REVIEW ...... 13 2.4.5 COMPLETION OF BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...... 16

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 18 3.1 APPLICANT DETAILS ...... 18 3.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...... 18 3.3 AFFECTED PROPERTIES ...... 21 3.4 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ...... 21 3.4.1 LOCATION ALTERNATIVES ...... 21 3.4.2 MATERIAL SOURCE ALTERNATIVES ...... 22 3.4.3 DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ...... 22 3.4.4 NO-GO ALTERNATIVE ...... 23 3.4.5 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 23

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 24 4.1 LAND USE AND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA ...... 24 4.2 CLIMATE...... 25 4.3 TOPOGRAPHY ...... 25

4.4 GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY ...... 26 4.5 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS ...... 27 4.5.1 PLATKLIP TRIBUTARIES ...... 28 4.5.2 SOUT RIVER TRIBUTARIES ...... 29 4.5.3 MOORREESBURGSPRUIT ...... 30 4.6 VEGETATION ...... 31 4.7 BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM STATUS ...... 33 4.8 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ...... 36 4.8.1 DEMOGRAPHICS ...... 36 4.8.2 EDUCATION ...... 36 4.8.3 HEALTH ...... 36 4.8.4 POVERTY ...... 37 4.8.5 ACCESS TO SERVICES ...... 37 4.8.6 THE ECONOMY AND EMPLOYMENT ...... 37 4.9 CULTURAL HERITAGE ...... 38 4.10 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS ...... 38 4.10.1 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2030 ...... 38 4.10.2 WESTERN CAPE PROVINCIAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 39 4.10.3 SWARTLAND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK (2017 – 2022) ...... 39

5 DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 41 5.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE...... 41 5.1.1 LAND USE ...... 41 5.1.2 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RELATED IMPACTS ...... 42 5.1.3 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS ...... 43 5.1.4 VEGETATION ...... 47 5.1.5 BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS ...... 49 5.1.6 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ...... 51 5.1.7 CULTURAL HERITAGE ...... 53 5.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE ...... 54 5.2.1 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS ...... 54 5.2.2 VEGETATION ...... 56 5.2.3 BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS ...... 57 5.2.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ...... 58 5.3 NO-GO OPTION ...... 59

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 61 6.1 CONCLUSIONS ...... 61 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 63 6.2.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ...... 63 6.2.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE ...... 65 6.3 OPINION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER ...... 66

7 REFERENCES ...... 68

xii

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: LISTED ACTIVITIES TRIGGERED AND BEING APPLIED FOR AS PER LISTING NOTICE 1 ...... 7 TABLE 2: LISTED ACTIVITIES TRIGGERED AND BEING APPLIED FOR AS PER LISTING NOTICE 3 ...... 7 TABLE 3: DEA/DEA&DP GUIDELINES...... 9 TABLE 4: DETAILS OF SLR PROJECT TEAM ...... 10 TABLE 5: LIST OF SPECIALIST STUDIES AND ASSOCIATED SPECIALISTS ...... 13 TABLE 6: REQUIREMENTS OF A BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT IN TERMS OF THE EIA REGULATIONS, 2014 ...... 14 TABLE 7: APPLICANT DETAILS ...... 18 TABLE 8: PROJECT CO-ORDINATES ...... 18 TABLE 9: AFFECTED PROPERTIES ...... 21 TABLE 10: ROAD DESIGN OPTIONS ...... 22 TABLE 11: IMPACTS ON THE LAND USE ...... 41 TABLE 12: GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RELATED IMPACTS ...... 42 TABLE 13: IMPACTS ON AQUATIC HABITATS ...... 44 TABLE 14: IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER QUALITY ...... 44 TABLE 15: FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS – LOCATION-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 45 TABLE 16: IMPACT ON SWARTLAND SHALE RENOSTERVELD ...... 48 TABLE 17: IMPACT ON FYNBOS PATCH (N7PM54) ...... 49 TABLE 18: IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS ...... 50 TABLE 19: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - EMPLOYMENT ...... 52 TABLE 20: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - INCONVENIENCE TO ROAD USERS ...... 52 TABLE 21: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - LAND ACQUISITION ...... 52 TABLE 22: CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACTS ...... 54 TABLE 23: IMPACTS ON AQUATIC HABITATS AND SURFACE WATER QUALITY ...... 55 TABLE 24: IMPACT ON VEGETATION ...... 56 TABLE 25: IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS ...... 57 TABLE 26: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS – ROAD USE SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ...... 59 TABLE 27: OVERALL SUMMARY OF THE ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...... 62

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: LOCATION OF THE N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI AND MOORREESBURG ...... 2 FIGURE 2: AERIAL VIEW OF N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI AND MOORREESBURG ...... 20 FIGURE 3: LAND USES AROUND THE STUDY AREA ...... 24 FIGURE 4: TOPOGRAPHY OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 25 FIGURE 5: GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 26 FIGURE 6: THE MAPPED NFEPA WETLANDS AND RIVERS IN THE STUDY AREA ...... 27 FIGURE 7: FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM PROTECTED AREAS MAP FOR THE STUDY AREA ...... 28 FIGURE 8: VIEW OF ONE OF THE SMALLER TRIBUTARIES OF THE SOUT RIVER...... 29 FIGURE 9: VIEW OF THE SOUT RIVER AT THE N7 ...... 30 FIGURE 10: VIEW OF THE WIDER PHRAGMITES-DOMINATED CHANNEL OF THE KROM RIVER ...... 30 FIGURE 11: THE MOORREESBURGSPRUIT STREAM JUST UPSTREAM OF THE N7 ROAD ...... 31

xiii

FIGURE 12: GENERAL VEGETATION OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 32 FIGURE 13: EXTENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE FYNBOS VEGETATION PATCH LOCATED AT WAYPOINT N7PM54...... 33 FIGURE 14: BIODIVERSITY MAP OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 34 FIGURE 15: ECOSYSTEM THREAT STATUS OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 34 FIGURE 16: SENSITIVITY OVERLAY MAP INDICATING THE CBA LOCATION WITH SENSITIVE FYNBOS PATCH ...... 35

xiv

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Acronym / Abbreviation Definition BA Basic Assessment BAR Basic Assessment Report CEAPSA Certified Environmental Practitioner of South Africa CBA Critical Biodiversity Area CR Critically Endangered DEA&DP Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning DEFF Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries DHSWS Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner EA Environmental Authorisation EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMF Environmental Management Framework EMP Environmental Management Programme EN Endangered ESA Ecological Support Area FEPAs Freshwater Ecosystem Protected Areas GDPR Gross Domestic Product Per Region GN Government Notice ha Hectares HWC Heritage Western Cape IAIAsa The International Association for Impact Assessment – South Africa I&AP Interested and Affected Party IDP Integrated Development Plan IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature N7 National Route 7 N/A Not Applicable NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 107 of 1998) NEM: BA National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (No. 10 of 2004) NEM: WA National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (No. 59 of 2008) NDP National Development Plan NHRA National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999) NID Notice of Intent to Develop NWA National Water Act, 1998 (No. 36 of 1998) PLC Project Liaison Committee Pr.Sci.Nat. Professional Natural Scientist

Acronym / Abbreviation Definition PSDF Provincial Spatial Development Framework RMA Rational Method Alternative SAHRIS South African Heritage Resource Information System SANRAL South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited SDFM Standard Design Flood Method SDF Spatial Development Framework SG Surveyor General SLR SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd VU Vulnerable WCBSP Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan

xvi

1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the purpose of this report, provides a brief background to the proposed project and its need and desirability, summarises the authorisation requirements, outlines the assumptions and limitations and describes the structure of the report. This chapter also provides information on the opportunity to comment on the draft Basic Assessment Report (BAR).

1.11.11.1 PPURPOSEURPOSE OF THIS REPORTREPORTRTRT This Final BAR has been compiled and distributed for review and comment as part of a Basic Assessment (BA) that is being undertaken for the proposal by the South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd (SANRAL) to improve the National Route 7 (N7), Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) (please see Figure 1).

This report provides a description of the proposed project, the affected environment and the BA process followed, and an assessment of the identified potential project-related impacts on the environment.

The compilation of this report has, where applicable, been informed by comments received from interested and affected parties (I&APs) and authorities during the pre-application notification period and on the draft BAR. It should be noted that all significant changes to the draft report are underlined and in a different font (Times New Roman) to the rest of the text.

This final version of the BAR is submitted to the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) for consideration as part of an Application for Environmental Authorisation in terms of Chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as amended.

1.21.21.2 PPROJECTPROROPROJECTJECTJECT BACBACBACKGROUNDBACKGROUNDKGROUNDKGROUND,, NEED AND DESIRABILDESIRABILITYITYITYITY SANRAL is proposing to improve 26.41 km of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) (the route) located within the Swartland Local Municipality, Western Cape (the proposed project). The proposed project mainly entail the provision of additional climbing / passing lanes and widening the road and associated infrastructure in certain areas.

The existing carriageway would be widened to the following cross-sections: • Where no climbing lanes are provided: two 3.7 m-wide lanes and two 3.5 m-wide shoulders;

• Where a climbing lane is provided on one side only: a 1.5 m-wide shoulder (1.0 m surfaced) with 3.5m-wide slow lane and 3.7 m-wide fast lane. The side without the climbing lane would have a 3.7 m-wide lane and a 3.5 m-wide shoulder (3.0 m surfaced); and

• In instances where climbing lanes are provided on both sides: each side would have a 1.5 m-wide shoulder (1.0 m surfaced) with a 3.5 m-wide slow lane and a 3.7 m-wide fast lane.

FIGURE 1: LOCATION OF THE N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI AND MOORREESBURG

JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd was appointed by SANRAL (under Contract No. NRA N.007-020-2020/1F) to provide Consulting Engineering Services. SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (SLR) was in turn, appointed by JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd to complete the Basic Assessment process.

A Stage 1 (Feasibility/Preliminary Design Stage) Road Safety Audit highlighted some concerns related to this road section. Due to the increased traffic and findings of the Road Safety Audit, improvement of Section 2 of the N7 is required in order to conform to the Geometric Design (G2) Standards.

1.31.31.3 SSUMMARYUMMARY OF AUTHORISAAUTHORISATIONTION REQUIREMENTS The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2014 (as amended), promulgated in terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA, provide for the control of certain listed activities. Such activities are prohibited from commencing until written authorisation is obtained from the competent authority, which in this case is the DEFF. The proposed project triggers the need for a BA process to be undertaken in order for the DEFF to consider granting or refusing Environmental Authorisation (EA).

Registration of water uses in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (No. 36 of 1998; NWA) is also required where the proposed works cross drainage lines, and if water supply is required from a water resource other than municipal supply. The supply of water for construction is unconfirmed at this stage. If boreholes or surface water sources with lawful rights or municipal water supply cannot be obtained then an application in terms of Section 21(a) of the NWA must be submitted to the Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation (DHSWS) by the appointed construction contractor. Applications for Section 21(c) and Section 21(i) water uses have been submitted to the DHSWS on behalf of SANRAL for “impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse” and “altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse”.

Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (NHRA) requires a Notice of Intent to Develop (NID) to be submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC). On receipt of the NID submission, HWC responded that there is no reason to believe that the proposed development would impact on heritage resources, thus no further action under Section 38 of the NHRA is required.

1.41.41.4 AASSUMPTIONSSSUMPTIONS AND LLIMITATIONSIMITATIONSIMITATIONSIMITATIONS

The assumptions and limitations for this study are as follows: • The BA process assumes that SLR has been provided with all relevant project description information and that it was correct and valid at the time it was provided; • There will be no significant changes to the project description or surrounding environment between the completion of the report and implementation of the proposed project that could substantially influence findings, recommendations with respect to mitigation and management, etc.; • The BA process assumes that all recommended mitigation measures would be implemented as proposed; and • Specialists have been provided with the relevant information in order to produce accurate and unbiased assessments.

1.51.51.5 SSTRUCTURETRUCTURE OF THIS REREPORTPORTPORTPORT

This BAR has been prepared in compliance with Appendix 1 of the EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended) and is divided into various chapters and appendices, the contents of which are outlined below.

Section Contents

Executive Summary Provides a comprehensive synopsis of the outcomes of the Basic Assessment process. Chapter 1 Introduction Describes the purpose of this report, provides a brief background to the proposed project and its need and desirability, summarises the legislative authorisation requirements, outlines the assumptions and limitations, describes the structure of the report and sets out the opportunity for comment. Chapter 2 Approach and Methodology Outlines the key legislative requirements applicable to the BA process, describes the objectives of the study, presents details of the BA process undertaken and describes the way forward. Chapter 3 Project description Provides details of the applicant, presents a description of the proposed project and the affected properties, and provides information on the project alternatives considered. Chapter 4 Description of the Affected Environment Describes the existing biophysical and social environment that could potentially be affected by the proposed project. Chapter 5 Impact description and assessment Describes and assesses the potential impacts of the proposed project on the biophysical and socio-economic environment. It also presents mitigation or enhancement measures that should be implemented to reduce the significance of any negative impacts or enhance any benefits, respectively. Chapter 6 Conclusions and recommendations Provides conclusions to the study and summarises the recommendations for the proposed project. Appendices Appendix A: EAP Undertaking Appendix B: Curricula Vitae (including registrations) of the Project Team Appendix C: Site Photographs Appendix D: Public Participation Process Appendix D1: I&AP Database

Section Contents

Appendix D2: Authority/Key I&AP Notifications Appendix D3: Landowner Notifications Appendix D4: Site and Newspaper Notices Appendix D5: Comments and Responses Report (including written submissions) Appendix E: Specialist Studies Appendix E1: Botanical Impact Assessment Appendix E2: Freshwater Impact Assessment Appendix E3: Heritage Impact Assessment (NID) Appendix F: Convention for Assigning Significance Ratings to Impacts Appendix G: Environmental Management Programme Appendix H: Preliminary Design Drawings

2 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter outlines the key legislative requirements applicable to the BA process, describes the objectives of the study, presents details of the BA process undertaken and describes the way forward.

2.12.12.1 LLEGISLATIVEEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTSREQUIREMENTSENTSENTS 2.1.1 National Environmental Management Act, 1998

Section 2 of NEMA sets out a range of environmental principles that must be applied by all organs of state when taking decisions that significantly affect the environment. Included amongst the key principles is that all developments must be socially, economically and environmentally sustainable and that environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably. NEMA also provides for the participation of I&APs and stipulates that decisions must take into account the interests, needs and values of all I&APs.

Chapter 5 of NEMA outlines the general objectives and implementation of Integrated Environmental Management (IEM), which provides a framework for the integration of environmental issues into the planning, design, decision-making and implementation of plans and development proposals. Section 24 provides a framework for granting of EAs. In order to give effect to the general objectives of IEM, the potential impacts on the environment of listed activities must be considered, investigated, assessed and reported on to the competent authority. Section 24(4) provides the minimum requirements for procedures for the investigation, assessment and communication of the potential impacts of activities.

2.1.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (as amended)

The EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended) promulgated in terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA, and published in Government Notice (GN) No. R 982 (as amended by GN No. 326 of 7 April 2017) controls certain listed activities. These activities are listed in GN No. R 983 (Listing Notice 1; as amended by GN No. 327 of 7 April 2017), R 984 (Listing Notice 2; as amended by GN No. 325 of 7 April 2017) and R 985 (Listing Notice 3; as amended by GN No. 324 of 7 April 2017), and are prohibited until EA has been obtained from the competent authority. Such EA, which may be granted subject to conditions, will only be considered once there has been compliance with the EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended).

GN No. R 983 (as amended) sets out the procedures and documentation that need to be complied with when applying for EA. A BA process must be applied to an application if the authorisation applied for is in respect of an activity or activities listed in Listing Notices 1 and/or 3. A full Scoping and EIA process is required for activities listed in Listing Notice 2.

The proposed project triggers activities 12, 19, 48 and 56 contained in Listing Notice 1 (Table 1), and activities 12, 18 and 23 of Listing Notice 3 (Table 2), thus a BA process must be undertaken in order for the DEFF to consider the application in terms of NEMA and make a decision to grant or refuse EA.

TABLE 1: LISTED ACTIVITIES TRIGGERED AND BEING APPLIED FOR AS PER LISTING NOTICE 1 Listed Activity Description Relation to the applicable Activities Listed Activity 12 The development of - The proposed project would require the (ii) infrastructure or structures with a physical development of infrastructure with a combined footprint of 100 square metres or more; footprint greater than 100 m2 within where such development occurs - watercourses along the route, including (a) within a watercourse. widening of existing bridges and culverts. 19 The infilling or depositing of any material of more Some infilling of more than 10m3 of soil and/or than 10 cubic metres into, or the dredging, concrete would be required for the widening of excavation, removal or moving of soil, sand, shells, existing bridges and culverts. shell grit, pebbles or rock of more than 10 cubic metres from a watercourse. 48 The expansion of - Existing bridges and culverts would need to be (i) infrastructure or structures where the physical widened to accommodate the wider road footprint is expanded by 100 square metres or design. This would exceed 100 m2 when more; considering the combined footprint along the where such expansion occurs - entire route. (a) within a watercourse; 56 The widening of a road by more than 6 metres, or The proposed project would require road the lengthening of a road by more than 1 widening of more than 6 metres (i.e. 3 meters kilometre - on either side) at intersections and climbing (i) where the existing reserve is wider than 13,5 lanes. meters

TABLE 2: LISTED ACTIVITIES TRIGGERED AND BEING APPLIED FOR AS PER LISTING NOTICE 3 Listed Activity Description Relation to the applicable Activities Listed Activity 12 The clearance of an area of 300 square metres or Road construction would require clearance of more of indigenous vegetation except where such 300 m2 or more of indigenous vegetation in an clearance of indigenous vegetation is required for area mapped as Swartland Shale Renosterveld, maintenance purposes undertaken in accordance which is listed as a critically endangered with a maintenance management plan: ecosystem in terms of Section 52 of NEMBA. i) Western Cape: i. Within any critically endangered or endangered ecosystem listed in terms of section 52 of the NEMBA or prior to the publication of such a list, within an area that has been identified as critically endangered in the National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment 2004

18 The widening of a road by more than 4 metres, or The proposed project would require road the lengthening of a road by more than 1 widening of more than 4 metres (i.e. 2 meters kilometre. on either side) at intersections and climbing i. Western Cape lanes. Indigenous vegetation is present within ii. All areas outside urban areas: the proposed project footprint. (aa) Areas containing indigenous vegetation.

Listed Activity Description Relation to the applicable Activities Listed Activity 23 The expansion of - Existing bridges and culverts would need to be (ii) infrastructure or structures where the physical widened to accommodate the wider road footprint is expanded by 10 square metres or more design. This would exceed 10 m2 when where such expansion occurs - considering the combined footprint along the (a) within a watercourse; entire route. (c) if no development setback has been adopted, within 32 metres of a watercourse , measured from the edge of a watercourse: i. Western Cape i. Outside urban areas.

2.1.3 National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004

The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (No. 10 of 2004) (NEM:BA) provides for the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity and the protection of species and ecosystems that warrant national protection. NEM:BA regulates the carrying out of restricted activities, without a permit, that may harm listed threatened or protected species or activities that encourage the spread of alien or invasive species.

A national list of threatened terrestrial ecosystems was published in terms of NEM:BA in December 2011 (GN 1002). The listed ecosystems are regarded as threatened and in need of protection. Some sections of the route fall within CBAs and ESAs according to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan.

In addition, the Alien and Invasive Species Regulations, 2014 published under the NEM:BA provides for the requirement for control of Listed Invasive Species. These species have been categorised, and each category requires specific control measures depending on the species and location. Some listed alien or invasive species would need to be managed during the construction and maintenance phases of the proposed project.

2.1.4 National Water Act, 1998

The NWA, as amended, provides a legal framework for the effective and sustainable management of water resources in South Africa. It serves to protect, use, develop, conserve, manage and control water resources as a whole, promoting the integrated management of water resources with the participation of all stakeholders. This Act also provides national norms and standards, and the requirement for authorisation (either a Water Use Licence or General Authorisation) of certain water uses listed under Section 21, including: • Section 21 (a): Taking water from a water resource; • Section 21(c): Impeding and diverting the flow of water in a watercourse; and • Section 21(i): Altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse.

The supply of water for construction is unconfirmed at this stage. If boreholes or surface water sources with lawful rights or municipal water supply cannot be obtained then an application in terms of Section 21(a) of the NWA must be submitted to the DHSWS.

The activities within or adjacent to river channels or their associated wetland areas are likely to change the characteristics of the associated freshwater ecosystems and will therefore require authorisation from the DHSWS. Applications for Section 21(c) and Section 21(i) water uses have thus been submitted to the DHSWS on behalf of SANRAL for “impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse” and “altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse”.

2.1.5 National Heritage Resources Act, 1999

The requirements stipulated in Section 38 of the NHRA were considered as part of the BA process. A NID was submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC) on 14 March 2019. In correspondence dated 28 April 2019, HWC responded that there is no reason to believe that the proposed development would impact on heritage resources, thus no further action under Section 38 of the NHRA is required.

2.1.6 National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 – National Dust Control Regulations

The purpose of these Regulations is to prescribe general measures for the control of dust in all areas. These Regulations will be applicable to the construction phase of the proposed project when dust generation is expected, and sets out the standards for acceptable dustfall rates for Residential and Non-Residential areas. The Regulations also sets out the methods to be used for measuring dustfall rates.

2.22.22.2 GGUIDELINESUIDELINES

The Guidelines which been taken into account during this Basic Assessment process are listed in Table 3 below.

TABLE 3: DEA/DEA&DP GUIDELINES Governing Guideline Relevance body Guideline on Public Participation (March 2013) DEA&DP The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that an Updated Integrated Environmental DEFF adequate public participation process is undertaken Management Guideline - Public Participation during the BA process. guideline in terms of NEMA (March 2017) EIA Guideline and Information Document DEA&DP This guideline informs the consideration of Series: Guideline on Alternatives (March 2013) alternatives. Updated Integrated Environmental DEA&DP These guidelines inform the consideration of the Management Guideline - Guideline on Need need and desirability aspects of the proposed and Desirability (2017) project. Guideline on need and desirability in terms of DEFF the EIA Regulations (2014) Guideline on Specialist Studies (October 2011) DEA&DP This guideline provides information regarding specialist study requirements. Guideline Involving a Biodiversity Specialist in DEA&DP This guideline deals with specialist input on an EIA Process (2005) biodiversity to the EIA process. Guideline Involving a Heritage Specialist in an DEA&DP This guideline focuses on the involvement of EIA Process (2005) heritage specialists in EIA processes.

Governing Guideline Relevance body Guideline for the Review of Specialist Input in DEA&DP The purpose of this guideline is to improve the an EIA Process (2005) quality of specialist contributions to EIA processes by improving the robustness of all reviews of specialist inputs. Guideline on Environmental Management DEA&DP The overall purpose of the guideline is to inform and Plans (EMP) (2005) guide the preparation and implementation of EMPs in a manner that promotes the effectiveness of EMPs.

2.32.32.3 DDETAILSETAILS OF ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACPRACTITIONERTITIONERTITIONERTITIONER

2.3.1 Details of the Project Team

The details of the SLR Project Team involved in the preparation of this BAR are provided in Table 4.

SLR has no vested interest in the proposed project other than fair payment for consulting services rendered as part of the BA process and has declared its independence as required by the EIA Regulations 2014 (as amended). An undertaking by the Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs) is provided in Appendix A.

TABLE 4: DETAILS OF SLR PROJECT TEAM General Organisation SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd Postal address PO Box 10145, CALEDON SQUARE, 7905 Tel No. +27 (0)21 461 1118 / 9 Fax No. +27 (0)21 461 1120 Professional Experience Name Qualifications Tasks and roles registrations (Years) Pr.Sci.Nat., Fuad Fredericks M.Sc. (Botany) 20 Report and process reviewer. Member IAIAsa Management of the BA and public B.Sc. (Hons) participation process, including Pr.Sci.Nat., Conroy van der Riet (Environmental 12 process review, authority liaison, I&AP Member IAIAsa Geography) liaison, specialist study review and report compilation.

2.3.2 Qualifications and Experience of the EAPs Fuad Fredericks is a Director of SLR. He holds a Master’s Degree in Botany and has 20 years of relevant experience. He has expertise in a wide range of environmental disciplines, including EIAs, EMPs, Environmental Planning and Review, and Public Consultation. He has been responsible for management and quality control of environmental assessments dealing with a number of highly complex and controversial projects, such as the proposed toll roads on the national routes in the Western Cape and Eastern Cape/KwaZulu-Natal provinces of South Africa and in Mauritius. He also has extensive experience in the environmental assessment, monitoring

and auditing of projects related to railway facilities, landfill sites, wastewater treatment facilities, and water and sewage pipelines. Fuad is a Registered Professional Natural Scientist (Pr.Sci.Nat.), Environmental Science.

Conroy has more than twelve years of experience as an Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) consultant in the following areas: Environmental & Social Management Systems (IFC Performance Standards), ISO 14001 and ISO 45001 management systems, Environmental and Social Due Diligence assessments (ESDDs), Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) auditing and compliance support, Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs), Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), Management Plans/Programmes and project management across a wide range of projects, with focus on the renewable energy, agricultural, oil & gas, mining, power, food & beverage and manufacturing sectors. Conroy has formed part of and led multi-disciplinary teams on projects all over Sub-Saharan Africa, including South Africa, Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Mali, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Conroy is a Registered Professional Natural Scientist (Pr.Sci.Nat.), Environmental Science.

Relevant curricula vitae (including proof of registrations) are attached in Appendix B.

2.42.42.4 BBASICASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS

2.4.1 Objectives

In accordance with Appendix 1 of the EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended), the objectives of the BA process are to: • Identify the relevant policies and legislation relevant to the activity and determine how the activity complies with and responds to the policy and legislative context; • Present the need and desirability of the proposed activity, including the need and desirability of the activity in the context of the preferred location; • Identify and confirm the preferred activity, technology and sites related to the project proposal; • Undertake an impact assessment, inclusive of cumulative impacts, to determine the biophysical and socio-economic sensitivity of the project sites and assess the nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and probability of impacts occurring; • Assess the degree to which impacts can be reversed, may cause irreplaceable loss of resources and can be avoided, managed or mitigated; and • Identify suitable measures to avoid, manage or mitigate identified impacts and to determine the extent of residual risks that need to be managed and monitored.

The BA process consists of a series of steps to ensure compliance with these objectives and the EIA Regulations, 2014 as set out in GN No. R 982 (as amended by GN No. 326). The process involves an open, participatory approach to ensure that all potential impacts are identified and that decision-making takes place in an informed, transparent and accountable manner.

2.4.2 Pre-Application Public Consultation and Notification

The pre-application public participation process provided an opportunity for the general public and identified stakeholders to be notified about the proposed project, and for them to raise any initial issues or concerns regarding the proposed project. An I&AP Database and public participation information are contained in Appendix D. Steps undertaken during the pre-application public participation process are summarised below.

I&AP identification The I&AP Database was developed during January 2019 (and updated after the Public Open Day described below). This list includes the landowners and lawful occupiers of the affected properties, landowners/lawful occupiers of neighbouring properties and other key I&APs as listed below: • Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries; • Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation; • Heritage Western Cape; • Western Cape Government: Department of Agriculture; • Western Cape Government: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP); • CapeNature; • Western Cape Government: DEA&DP – Biodiversity and Coastal Management; • Western Cape Government: Department of Transport and Public Works; • West Coast District Municipality; and • Swartland Local Municipality.

Site Notices Site notices were placed at three points along the route (at areas vehicles can pull over) during February 2019, in order to notify the general public of the BA process. These notices were placed near the start, middle point and end of the project route.

Background Information Document (BID) All identified I&APs were notified of the proposed project, BA process and Water Use Authorisation application by means of a letter or email and BID on 30 April 2019. The purpose of the letter and BID was to convey relevant project-related information, as well as to invite I&APs to provide initial comment. The BID comment period was provided from 30 April to 03 June 2019 (30 days).

Advertisements Press advertisements providing notification of the proposed project, BA process, Public Open Day and availability of the BID were placed in Swartland Gazette (in English) on 30 April 2019 and Die Courant (in English) on 01 May 2019.

Public Open Day SLR presented the preliminary project information at the Public Open Day, held at the Moorreesburg Public Library, on 20 May 2019. All attendees were provided the opportunity to raise any comments or concerns regarding the proposed project.

The issues raised during the Public Open Day relate to the following: • Concerns that road construction contracts in the area do not manage local employment through the local municipality and their database;

• Other historic road construction projects that have not involved local employment suitably (i.e. people from other areas work on local contracts); • Misty conditions during winter and the possibility to increase visibility as part of the project; • The planning and approval process through SANRAL for the tenders; and • The project timeframe (estimated start and duration).

Comments Received during the pre-Application period The written comments received include the following: • A query from Transnet Freight Rail related to impacts on railway infrastructure; and • Confirmation from HWC that no further action under Section 38 of the NHRA is required.

The written comments received and the responses given were included in the Comments and Responses Report (see Appendix D5).

The draft BAR was duly informed by comments received during the pre-application public participation process.

2.4.3 Specialist Studies

Three specialist studies were commissioned to address the key issues that required further investigation and detailed assessment (see specialist reports in Appendix E). Details of these specialists are provided in Table 5.

The specialist studies involved the gathering of data (desktop and site visits) relevant to identifying and assessing environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the proposed project. These impacts were then assessed according to pre-defined rating scales (see Appendix F). Specialists also recommended appropriate mitigation or enhancement measures to minimise potential impacts or enhance potential benefits, respectively.

TABLE 5: LIST OF SPECIALIST STUDIES AND ASSOCIATED SPECIALISTS No. Name and Organisation Qualifications Specialist Input 1 Dr Dave McDonald – Ph.D. (Vegetation Ecology) Botanical Impact Assessment Bergwind Botanical Pr.Sci.Nat. (see Appendix E1) Surveys & Tours 2 Toni Belcher – M.Sc. (Environmental Management) Freshwater Impact Assessment BlueScience Pr.Sci.Nat. (see Appendix E2) 3 Jayson Orton – D.Phil (Archaeology) Heritage Impact Assessment (NID) ASHA Consulting (Pty) Associate Southern African Professional (see Appendix E3) Ltd Archaeologists (ASAPA) member

2.4.4 Compilation of the BAR The specialist findings and other relevant information were integrated into this BAR, which includes an Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) - see Appendix G. This BAR has been prepared in compliance with Appendix 1 of the EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended) and has been informed by comments received on the

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) draft version of the BAR. The required steps and location of relevant information within this report are set out in Table 6.

This report aims to present all information in a clear and understandable format suitable for easy interpretation by I&APs and authorities of all aspects of the proposed project and the findings of the impact assessment.

TABLE 6: REQUIREMENTS OF A BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT IN TERMS OF THE EIA REGULATIONS, 2014 Completed Appendix 1 Content of Basic Assessment Report Location in report (Y/N or N/A) 3(1)(a) (i & ii) Details and expertise of the Environmental Assessment Sections 2.3.1 and Y Practitioner (EAP) who prepared the report, including a CV. 2.3.2, and Appendix B (b) The location of the activity, including: (i) the 21 digit Surveyor General code of each cadastral land parcel; or Y Section 3.3, Table 9 (ii) where available, the physical address and farm name (iii) where the required information in items (i) and (ii) is not available, the coordinates of the boundary of the property or N/A N/A properties; (c) A plan which locates the proposed activity or activities applied for at Y Figure 1 an appropriate scale, or, if it is: (i) a linear activity, a description and coordinates of the corridor in Y Section 3.2 which the proposed activity or activities is to be undertaken; or (ii) on land where the property has not been defined, the N/A N/A coordinates within which the activity is to be undertaken. (d) A description of the scope of the proposed activity, including: (i) all listed and specified activities triggered; Section 2.1.2, Tables 1 Y and 2 (ii) a description of the activities to be undertaken, including Y Section 3.2 associated structures and infrastructure. (e) (I & ii) A description of the policy and legislative context within which the development is proposed including an identification of all legislation, policies, plans, guidelines, spatial tools, municipal development planning frameworks and instruments that are Y Sections 2.1 and 4.10 applicable to this activity and that have been considered in the preparation of the report and how the proposed activity complies with these. (f) A motivation for the need and desirability for the proposed development including the need and desirability of the activity in the Y Sections 1.3 and 3.4 context of the preferred location. (g) A motivation for the preferred site, activity and technology alternative. Y Section 3.4 (h) A full description of the process followed to reach the proposed

preferred activity, site and location within the site, including: (i) details of all the alternatives considered; Y Section 3.4 (ii) details of the public participation process undertaken in terms of Section 2.4.2 and Regulation 41 of the Regulations, including copies of the Y Appendix D supporting documents and inputs; (iii) a summary of the issues raised by interested and affected Section 2.4.2.6 and Y parties, and an indication of the manner in which the issues 2.4.2.7

Completed Appendix 1 Content of Basic Assessment Report Location in report (Y/N or N/A) were incorporated, or the reasons for not including them; (iv) the environmental attributes associated with the alternatives focusing on the geographical, physical, biological, social, Y Chapter 4 economic, heritage and cultural aspects; (v) the impacts and risks identified for each alternative, including the nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and probability of the impacts, including the degree to which these impacts Y Chapter 5 (aa) can be reversed; (bb) may cause irreplaceable loss of resources; and (cc) can be avoided, managed or mitigated. (vi) the methodology used in determining and ranking the nature, significance, consequences, extent, duration and probability of Y Appendix F potential environmental impacts and risks associated with the alternatives; (vii) positive and negative impacts that the proposed activity and alternatives will have on the environment and on the community Y Chapter 5 that may be affected focusing on the geographical, physical, biological, social, economic, heritage and cultural aspects; (viii) the possible mitigation measures that could be applied and level Chapter 5, Chapter 6 Y of residual risk; and Appendix G (ix) the outcome of the site selection matrix; Y Section 3.4 (x) if no alternatives, including alternative locations for the activity Y Section 3.4 were investigated, the motivation for not considering such; and (xi) a concluding statement indicating the preferred alternatives, Y Section 3.4.5 including preferred location of the activity. (i) A full description of the process undertaken to identify, assess and rank the impacts the activity will impose on the preferred location through the life of the activity, including: (i) a description of all environmental issues and risks that were identified during the environmental impact assessment process; Y Chapters 5 and 6 and (ii) an assessment of the significance of each issue and risk and an indication of the extent to which the issue and risk could be avoided or addressed by the adoption of mitigation measures.

(j) An assessment of each identified potentially significant impact and risk, including: (i) cumulative impacts; (ii) the nature, significance and consequences of the impact and risk; (iii) the extent and duration of the impact and risk; Y Chapter 5 (iv) the probability of the impact and risk occurring; (v) the degree to which the impact and risk can be reversed; (vi) the degree to which the impact and risk may cause irreplaceable loss of resources; and (vii) the degree to which the impact and risk can be avoided, managed or mitigated. (k) Where applicable, a summary of the findings and impact management measures identified in any specialist report complying with Appendix 6 Y Chapters 5 and 6 to the EIA Regulations 2014 and an indication as to how these findings and recommendations have been included in the final report.

Completed Appendix 1 Content of Basic Assessment Report Location in report (Y/N or N/A) (l) An environmental impact statement which contains: (i) a summary of key findings of the environmental impact Y Chapter 6 assessment; (ii) a map at an appropriate scale which superimposes the proposed activity and its associated structures and infrastructure on the Y Chapter 5 environmental sensitivities of the preferred site indicating any areas that should be avoided, including buffers; and (iii) a summary of the positive and negative impacts and risks of the Y Chapter 6 proposed activity and identified alternatives. (m) Based on the assessment, and where applicable, impact management Chapter 5, Chapter 6 measures from specialist reports, the recording of the proposed impact Y and Appendix G management outcomes for the development for inclusion in the EMPr; (n) Any aspects which were conditional to the findings of the assessment either by the EAP or specialist which are to be included as conditions of Y Chapter 6 authorisation. (o) A description of any assumptions, uncertainties, and gaps in knowledge which relate to the assessment and mitigation measures Y Section 1.5, Appendix E proposed. (p) A reasoned opinion as to whether the proposed activity should or should not be authorised, and if the opinion is that it should be Y Chapter 6 authorised, any conditions that should be made in respect of that authorisation. (q) Where the proposed activity does not include operational aspects, the The activity will have an period for which the environmental authorisation is required, the date N/A operational on which the activity will be concluded, and the post construction component. monitoring requirements once finalised. (r) An undertaking under oath or affirmation by the EAP in relation to: (i) the correctness of the information provided in the reports; (ii) the inclusion of comments and inputs from stakeholders and I&APs; (iii) the inclusion of inputs and recommendations from the specialist Y Appendix A reports where relevant; and (iv) any information provided by the EAP to interested and affected parties and any responses by the EAP to comments or inputs made by interested and affected parties. (s) Where applicable, details of any financial provision for the rehabilitation, closure, and ongoing post decommissioning N/A management of negative environmental impacts. (t) Any specific information that may be required by the competent N/A authority. (u) Any other matter required in terms of Section 24(4)(a) and (b) of the N/A Act.

2.4.5 Review of the draft BAR A draft version of the BAR was distributed for an extended review and comment period from 18 October to 04 December 2019. Copies of the draft BAR were made available on the SLR website and at the Moorreesburg Public Library for the duration of the review and comment period. A notification letter was sent to all I&APs registered on the project database. The letter informed them of the release of the draft BAR and where the report could be reviewed. Copies of the full report were also distributed to the following government departments:

• Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries; • Western Cape Government: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning; • Department of Agriculture; • Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation; • Western Cape Government: Department of Transport and Public Works; and • CapeNature.

Six written submissions were received during the formal review and comment period. Comments related to legislative requirements, the project extent, biophysical and socio-economic impacts and construction-related impacts. All written comments received were collated, and responded to, in a Comments and Responses Report (see Appendix D5). Copies of the written submissions are also included in Appendix D5.

2.4.6 Completion of Basic Assessment Process The draft version of the BAR has been updated to this final version and submitted to DEFF for consideration and decision-making. After DEFF has reached a decision, all I&APs on the project database will be notified of the outcome of the application and the reasons for the decision.

A statutory appeal period in terms of the National Appeal Regulations, 2014 (GN No. R993) will follow the issuing of the decision. In terms of Regulation 4(1)(a), an appellant must submit an appeal to the appeal administrator, and a copy of the appeal to the applicant, any registered I&AP and any organ of state with interest in the matter within 20 days from the date that the notification of the DEFF decision was sent to the registered I&APs by the applicant.

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This chapter provides details of the applicant, presents a description of the proposed project and the affected properties, and provides information on the project alternatives considered.

3.13.13.1 AAPPLICANTPPLICANT DETAILS The applicant details are provided in Table 7 below.

TABLE 7: APPLICANT DETAILS Applicant: South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) Address: SANRAL Private Bag X19, Bellville, 7530 Contact person: Mr. Randall Cable Tel: 021 957 4600 Email: [email protected]

3.23.23.2 DDESCRIPTIONESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSEPROPOSEROPOSEROPOSEDDDD PROJECTPROJECTPROJECT

The proposed project is located in the Swartland Local Municipality, between Rooidraai and Moorreesburg (refer to Figure 1). The length of the proposed road improvement is 26.41 km while the width is up to 14.5 m in some areas. See Figure 2 for an aerial view of the project.

The co-ordinates of the start, middle and end points of the route as well as bridge and major culvert locations are presented in Table 8 below:

TABLE 8: PROJECT CO-ORDINATES Coordinates of the Latitude (South) Longitude (East) Project (degrees.; minutes; seconds) (degrees.; minutes; seconds) Start 33° 23' 58.77" 18° 42' 36.43" Middle 33° 15' 43.01" 18° 40' 33.52" End 33° 10' 05.81" 18° 40' 51.10" Bridges Kromspruit B2422 33° 20' 03.56" 18° 41' 49.18" Kromspruit B2423 33° 18' 16.50" 18° 41' 13.95" Kromspruit B2424 33° 17' 57.42" 18° 41' 09.18" Kromspruit B4972 33° 10' 29.36" 18° 40' 50.66" Major Culverts C10191 (km20.01) 33° 17' 22.50" 18° 41' 00.50" C10192 (km21.59) 33° 16' 32.78" 18° 40' 46.19" No number (km24.59) 33° 14' 59.22" 18° 40' 41.04" No number (km26.66) 33° 13' 53.25" 18° 40' 26.62" No number (km28.4) 33° 12' 59.38" 18° 40' 24.71" C10158 (km33.49) 33° 10' 18.96" 18° 40' 51.15"

• In instances where climbing lanes are provided on both sides: each side would have a 1.5 m-wide shoulder (1.0 m surfaced) with a 3.5 m-wide slow lane and a 3.7 m-wide fast lane.

This section of the road currently consists of a single carriageway with surfaced lanes and shoulders. There are four sections with climbing lanes on the route. The road’s total surfaced width from km 7.49 to km 19.05 is approximately 10.4 m with 3.7 m-wide lanes and 1.5 m-wide surfaced shoulders. The road’s total surfaced width from km 19.05 to km 33.90 is 12.4 m with 3.7 m-wide lanes and 2.5 m-wide surfaced shoulders.

The existing intersections on this section of road have been classified as either T-junctions or farm road accesses. It is considered that most of the accesses have sufficient sight distance. Accesses which do not meet the SANRAL standards for sight distance will be further investigated during the final engineering design stage in order to determine how the sight distance could be improved.

Four bridge structures are located along this section. It is proposed that solid reinforced concrete deck widening be undertaken to match the existing geometry at all bridge structures. The proposed works would include the replacement of the existing barriers with cast in-situ F-shape barriers and the installation of new guardrails. The demolition of existing wingwalls and adjacent redundant road structures would also be undertaken, as appropriate.

Furthermore, six major culverts would be lengthened by means of cast in-situ reinforced concrete barrel extensions. The proposed works would include the replacement of the existing wingwalls and the installation of new guardrails.

Various ancillary works would also be undertaken as part of the proposed project, as appropriate. These include, amongst other ancillary works, the following: • Installation of concrete-lined side drains with subsoil drains; • Replacement of minor culverts; and • Resurfacing of intersections with provincial roads and major farm accesses.

Refer to Appendix H for Preliminary Design Drawings.

FIGURE 2: AERIAL VIEW OF N7, SECTION 2 BETWEEN ROOIDRAAI AND MOORREESBURG

3.33.33.3 AAFFECTEDFFECTED PROPERTIESPROPERTIESPROPERTIES A list of the affected properties (excluding the current SANRAL road reserve), with associated 21-digit Surveyor General (SG) codes, is presented in Table 9 below. The physical size of the proposed development together with its associated infrastructure is approximately 40 hectares.

TABLE 9: AFFECTED PROPERTIES Farm and Farm Name Portion Property Owners SG Code Number RHEEBOKSFONTYN RE/1/689 V R BOERDERY PTY LTD C04600000000068900001 KLIPFONTYN RE/6/598 SAAMSTAAN BELEGGINGS TRUST C04600000000059800006 KLIPFONTYN RE/598 SAAMSTAAN BELEGGINGS TRUST C04600000000059800000 KLIPFONTYN 8/598 SAAMSTAAN BELEGGINGS TRUST C04600000000059800008 KLIPFONTYN RE/9/598 SAAMSTAAN BELEGGINGS TRUST C04600000000059800009 KLIPFONTYN 7/598 Claassen Boerdery C04600000000059800007 DIEPKLOOF RE/1/599 Claassen Boerdery C04600000000059900001 DIEPKLOOF 2/599 Claassen Boerdery C04600000000059900002 KRUYWAGENS KRAAL RE/5/520 Claassen Boerdery C04600000000052000005 KOORNPLAATS RE/9/524 Claassen Boerdery C04600000000052400009 FARM 1063 RE/1063 P M STEYN FAMILY TRUST C04600000000106300000 KRUYWAGENS KRAAL RE/1/520 LOCHEIM PTY LTD C04600000000052000001 KRUYWAGENS KRAAL RE/11/520 LOCHEIM PTY LTD C04600000000052000011 VOGELSTRUISFONTEIN RE/471 C J DE WAAL TRUST C04600000000047100000 VOGELSTRUISFONTEIN RE/4/471 C J DE WAAL TRUST C04600000000047100004 VOGELSTRUISFONTEIN RE/3/471 C J DE WAAL TRUST C04600000000047100003 BOSCHJES VALLEY RE/474 G P L DE WAAL TRUST C04600000000047400000 BOSCHJES VALLEY RE/3/474 G P L DE WAAL TRUST C04600000000047400003 KOORNPLAATS RE/11/524 KORINGPLAAS TRUST C04600000000052400011 BOTTELFONTEIN RE/2/425 J W A BESTER FAMILIETRUST C04600000000042500002 BOTTELFONTEIN RE/11/425 J W A BESTER FAMILIETRUST C04600000000042500011 ZWARTFONTEIN RE/17/414 HANEKOMSHOOP TRUST C04600000000041400017

3.43.43.4 PPROJECTROJECTPROJECT ALTERNATIVES 3.4.1 Location Alternatives

As previously mentioned, the proposed project entails the improvement of an existing road, and associated infrastructure, along its current alignment. No location/site alternatives could thus be considered. In effect, this would have less of an impact on the environment when compared to the construction of a new road outside the current footprint.

3.4.2 Material Source Alternatives

Alternatives for material for construction of the road base were considered. This entailed the use of new borrow pits or the use of materials from road cuttings. Engineering investigations concluded that additional widening at cuttings would be sufficient to source the required road-construction materials. This would have less of an impact on the environment when compared to the development of new borrow pits.

3.4.3 Design Alternatives

Alternatives for the bridge designs, culvert designs, road designs and approach were considered by the project design engineers, JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd. An economic analysis was also undertaken in order to inform the final decisions.

The Standard Design Flood Method (SDFM), Rational Method Alternative 3 (RMA 3) as well as the Rational Method Alternative 2 (RMA 2) were used in determining the bridge and culvert design flows, based on the relevant catchment areas; with the primary input being based on estimated design rainfall depths. Site-specific design rainfall values were used rather than generic regional equations for the RMA 3.

The road improvement and widening (design) options which were considered for the proposed project are indicated in Table 10. The economic analysis confirmed that the long-term rehabilitation option (i.e. Option 3) using a Long Term Option G1 base would yield the greatest economic return in terms of both Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return. As such Option 3 was considered the preferred alternative.

TABLE 10: ROAD DESIGN OPTIONS Option Overview Option 1 Short-term A typical structural design period for a short-term action is 4 to 6 years. The short-term option would include localised base and surface repairs, pre-treatment works, followed by a 20 mm and double 7 mm split seal using a S-R1 tack coat and S-E1 penetration coat applied over the full width of the road. The existing shoulders would be widened to the standard SANRAL cross-section and additional climbing and passing lanes would be added. Option 2 Medium-term The medium-term option would be designed for a structural design period of 10 to 12 years. The medium-term design would include reconstructing the existing pavement, widening the shoulders and adding additional climbing and passing lanes. Option 3 Long-term (G1 base and Seal surfacing) The long-term option would be designed for a structural design period of 20 to 25 years. The long-term design would include upgrading the existing pavement, widening the shoulders and adding additional climbing and passing lanes. Option 4 Long-term (G2 base and 50mm asphalt surfacing) Option 4 would be an additional long-term option which utilises a G2 material for the base instead of a G1. The pavement analysis in this instance requires the application of a 50 mm thick asphalt surfacing layer to achieve the required structural design period of 20 to 25 years. The mechanistic analysis of the pavement (using MEPADS) yielded a low Safety Factor in the middle of the base layer due to the inferior

shear strength of the G2 material (compared to a G1). This would require additional cover (viz. asphalt layer), which would subsequently increase the Safety Factor in the G2 layer and would result in adequate structural strength.

3.4.4 No-Go Alternative The No-Go Alternative is the option of not proceeding with the proposed project, which would result in the status quo remaining and the negative impacts associated with the proposed project would not be realised (in particular removal of vegetation and potential impacts on watercourses). However, the current road configuration would not be able to adequately accommodate the anticipated future traffic volumes and would compromise the safety of road users.

3.4.5 Summary of Alternatives

The outcome of alternatives investigated above can be summarised as follows:

• No feasible site/location alternatives have been identified as the proposed project entails the improvement of an existing road section;

• No reasonable or feasible activity alternatives exist as the need for the proposed project was identified as to enhance the capacity and safety of an existing road section;

• Engineering investigations concluded that additional widening at cuttings would be sufficient to source the required road-construction materials (instead of the need for borrow pits);

• With respect to design alternatives, four possible design options were considered. Option 3 (Long- term rehabilitation - G1 base and Cape seal surfacing) was deemed to be the preferred alternative in terms of cost, safety risk and capacity to accommodate anticipated increases in traffic volumes over the next 20-25 years;

• No operational alternatives were identified for the proposed project; and

• The No-Go Alternative is not deemed to be environmentally or socially reasonable in the long-term due to the fact that the current road configuration would not be able to adequately accommodate the anticipated future traffic volumes and would compromise the safety of road users.

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

This chapter describes the existing biophysical and social environment that could potentially be affected by the proposed project.

4.14.14.1 LANDLAND USE AND CHARACTER OF THE SURSURROUNDINGROUNDING AREA

The terrain is relatively flat in relation to the hills and deeper valleys of the areas that lie to the west and east of the road. Much of the area has been transformed for many decades by agricultural development and by the N7 road itself. As a result, most of the natural vegetation cover and aquatic features have been significantly modified. The nearest urban areas are the towns of Malmesbury, located close to the start point in the south, and Moorreesburg, at the end point in the north.

The surrounding areas are mapped by National Landcover mapping as cultivated areas with natural vegetation cover occurring mainly along the watercourses (Figure 3).

FIGURE 3: LAND USES AROUND THE STUDY AREA

4.24.24.2 CCLIMATELIMATECLIMATE Generally, the area has a Mediterranean climate with an average annual rainfall of approximately 305 mm and an average temperature of 18.6°C. The summer months typically have lower rainfall, higher temperatures and higher evaporation. During winter the area experiences high rainfall and lower temperatures with subsequent lower evaporation.

The N7, Section 2 is situated within a dry to semi-arid area, with warm summers and cool winters. Mean maximum temperatures are 30.9°C in February and 17.4°C in July, with average minimum temperatures for these months being 16.8°C and 7.8°C respectively. The average annual rainfall recorded at the Langgewens weather station (located between Malmesbury and Moorreesburg) for the period between 1960 and 2016 is 396 mm.

4.34.34.3 TOPOGRAPHYTTOPOPTOPOGRAPHYOGRAPHYOGRAPHY

The terrain along this section of road can be defined as flat and occasionally broken up by hills with grades varying between 1.5% and 4% (Figure 4). The elevation of the study area varies between 123 m and 293 m above mean sea level.

FIGURE 4: TOPOGRAPHY OF THE STUDY AREA

4.44.44.4 GGEOLOGYEOLOGYGEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY The geology of the broader study area is dominated by granite of the Paardeberg Pluton, Cape Granite Suite, greywacke and phyllite of the Moorreesburg Formation, Malmesbury Group and occasional diorite and gabbro of the Yzerfontein Suite.

The route is underlain by Quaternary aged sediments, Namibian aged Moorreesburg Formation and the Cape Granite Suite Malmesbury batholith (Figure 5). The Moorreesburg Formation forms part of the Central / Swartland Terrane of the Malmesbury Group. The formation characteristically consists of interlayered greywacke and phyllite. The lower section of the formation is considered the most deformed and consists of arenitic layers such as chlorite–muscovite schist. The Cape Granite Suite represents intrusive igneous plutons of Precambrian to Cambrian age. The Malmesbury batholith intruded the Malmesbury Group and is composed of coarse-grained porphyritic with fine-grained leucocratic granite. Minor fine- to medium-grained porphyritic and medium-grained biotitic granitic variations are also present.

According to the 1:3 000 000 hydrogeological map, boreholes within the study area potentially yield between 0.6 – 0.8 litres/second with a maximum volume of 15 000 – 25 000 m3/km2/annum being abstracted while preserving sustained abstraction within the aquifer system.

FIGURE 5: GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA

4.54.54.5 FFRESHWATERRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMSECOSYSTEMSSS The study area is located within the G21D, G10J and G10L quaternary catchments, but primarily G10L. These catchments are drained by the Diep River, as well as the Moorreesburgspruit and Sout River (tributaries of the Berg River) respectively. A number of smaller seasonal to ephemeral tributaries of these rivers occur along the road section. A number of valley bottom wetland areas are associated with the watercourses. The National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPAs) mapping initiative has only mapped a number of artificial wetlands that are associated with farm dams in the area (Figure 6).

FIGURE 6: THE MAPPED NFEPA WETLANDS AND RIVERS IN THE STUDY AREA

There are two freshwater biodiversity conservation mapping initiatives of relevance to the study area, i.e. the NFEPA mapping and the 2017 Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WCBSP) which provides a map of the areas of biodiversity importance for the entire province (covering terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and estuarine ecosystems). The WCBSP maps are the product of a provincial-wide systematic biodiversity plan that delineates CBAs (Terrestrial and Aquatic), ESAs (Critical and Other) and Other Natural Remaining Areas for each local authority within the province. These are areas that require safeguarding to ensure the continued existence and functioning of species and ecosystems, including the delivery of ecosystem services. Of note within the WCBSP from an aquatic perspective, are aquatic CBAs that are associated with wetland habitat along the road section at the following distances:

• km 11.25 to km 11.4 at Klipfontein, associated with a tributary of the Krom River; • km 18.3: at Cruywagenskraal, associated with the Sout River; • km 26.6: near Bossiesvlei, associated with a tributary of the Sout River; and • km 33.2: near Hanekomshoop, associated with the Moorreesburgspruit.

All remaining watercourse habitats have been mapped as aquatic ESAs that provide valuable ecological services as corridors for the movement of water and biota within the transformed landscape.

NFEPAs are intended to provide strategic spatial priorities for conserving South Africa’s freshwater ecosystems and supporting sustainable use of water resources. The G21F catchment (Diep River) has been mapped as a Phase 2 NFEPA that should be rehabilitated. Although the catchment has been moderately modified, it should not be allowed to be degraded further. The Platklip River, a tributary of the Diep River, is located within the study area, but is unlikely to be significantly impacted. The Sout River Catchment has not been identified as a River NFEPA (Figure 7).

FIGURE 7: FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM PROTECTED AREAS MAP FOR THE STUDY AREA

4.5.1 Platklip Tributaries

The minor tributaries of the Platklip River drain the western side of the N7 north of Malmesbury up to approximately km 9.0. They are all small seasonal to ephemeral foothill streams. Most of the associated riparian vegetation along the streams has been removed and the surrounding areas cultivated. As the road is located along the watershed between the Platklip and Riebeeks Rivers, there are no watercourses in this area

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) crossed by the road. In addition, the very upper reaches of these watercourses have been completely modified by cultivation, only becoming visible approximately 400 m away from the road.

4.5.2 Sout River Tributaries

Most of the watercourses crossed by the road section are located within the upper Sout River Catchment and are smaller tributaries of the Sout River and its largest tributary, the Krom River. As for the Platklip River, majority of the natural vegetation surrounding these watercourses has been removed and replaced by cultivated areas. The tributaries mostly consist of shallow channels where only narrow strips of riparian vegetation remain. In many of the watercourses, Old Man Salt Bush Atriplex nummularia has been planted along the lower reaches of the watercourses and is invading the immediate area (Figure 8). The Sout River at the N7 comprises of smaller tributaries that have been significantly modified by agriculture and contain little instream or riparian vegetation (Figure 9).

The instream habitat that remains tend to be overgrown with invasive alien Port Jackson (Acacia saligna) and grasses such as the alien invasive kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum) or the indigenous kweek grass (Cynodon dactylon), with some sedges, reeds or rushes such as Juncus kraussii and Phragmites australis present. Substrate in the channels consist largely of alluvial and flow in the streams is seasonal to ephemeral with the Krom Tributaries tending to have more frequent flow that is reflected in their associated aquatic vegetation.

FIGURE 8: VIEW OF ONE OF THE SMALLER TRIBUTARIES OF THE SOUT RIVER

FIGURE 9: VIEW OF THE SOUT RIVER AT THE N7

The larger Krom River at the N7 comprises of a wide channel dominated by Phragmites reeds (Figure 10), Cultivated areas occur to within the riparian zone with any riparian zone comprising largely of invasive Port Jackson willows.

FIGURE 10: VIEW OF THE WIDER PHRAGMITES-DOMINATED CHANNEL OF THE KROM RIVER

4.5.3 Moorreesburgspruit

The Moorreesburgspruit rises in the low hills of the Swartland to the south-east of Moorreesburg. The stream flows in a north-westerly and north-easterly directly for approximately 40 kilometres over a relatively low gradient catchment that has been largely altered by agricultural activities before joining the Berg River at Misverstand Dam. Moorreesburg is the only large town in the catchment and is situated in the middle reaches of the stream. Valley bottom wetland areas occur along the Moorreesburgspruit River, upstream and

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) downstream of the N7 road (Figure 11). Very little of the indigenous riparian vegetation still remain within the valley bottom wetland areas. That remaining indigenous riparian vegetation consists mostly of the rush Juncus kraussii, together with common reed Phragmites australis patches of bulrushes Typha capensis and some sedges such as Bolboschoenus maritimus and Cynodon dactylon.

Invasive alien plants such as Acacia saligna and Pennisetum clandestinum occur together with the cultivated Atriplex nummularia.

FIGURE 11: THE MOORREESBURGSPRUIT STREAM JUST UPSTREAM OF THE N7 ROAD

4.64.64.6 VVEGETATIONEGETATION A single main vegetation type (Swartland Shale Renosterveld) occurs in the study area with a limited occurrence of a second type (Swartland Granite Renosterveld) occurring along the southern parts of the route (Figure 12). These vegetation types are classified as part of the Fynbos Biome.

Swartland Shale Renosterveld and Swartland Granite Renosterveld are shrubland formations which are similar in appearance but occur on different substrates as the names suggest. Swartland Shale Renosterveld is found on clay-rich soils derived from shales of the Malmesbury Group. The shrubland is moderately tall with renosterbos (Elytropappus rhinocerotis) dominant and a low stratum consisting of lower shrubs, grasses and geophytes. It is a widespread vegetation type but has been lost over extensive areas due to agriculture.

Swartland Granite Renosterveld occurs in a more fragmented pattern associated with coarse gravelly soils derived from granite.

FIGURE 12: GENERAL VEGETATION OF THE STUDY AREA

More detailed information on the vegetation along the route is presented in the Botanical Impact Assessment (Appendix E1). Swartland Shale Renosterveld has been largely lost along the entire road section. This is ascribed to intense negative anthropogenic influences over a long period. The affected vegetation is currently all secondary vegetation that has established since the last road construction activities along the route. In places the old road bed was evident, giving support to the observation that the environment has experienced a great deal of change over time.

The largest CBA1 unit was sampled at waypoint N7PM54 (S 33° 21’ 37.87”; E 18° 42’ 14.02”) (see Appendix E1). The extent of the potential impact of the proposed road improvement on this patch of vegetation is shown in Figure 13. This area was mapped by CapeFarmMapper (ver 2.2.1) as Swartland Granite Renosterveld but was found to have white sandy soil and is more akin to fynbos than Renosterveld.

FIGURE 13: EXTENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE FYNBOS VEGETATION PATCH LOCATED AT WAYPOINT N7PM54.

4.74.74.7 BBIODIVERSITYIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM STATUS According to CapeFarmMapper (ver 2.2.1) there are various areas along the route which crosses CBA 1 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (river) and ESA 2 (Restore from other land use) areas (see Figure 14).

The NEM:BA provides for the listing of threatened or protected ecosystems, in one of four categories: Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU) or Protected. The purpose of listing threatened ecosystems is primarily to reduce the rate of ecosystem and species extinction. This includes preventing further degradation and loss of structure, function and composition of threatened ecosystems. The purpose of listing protected ecosystems is primarily to preserve sites of exceptionally high conservation value.

According to CapeFarmMapper (ver 2.2.1) the entire route falls within a Critically Endangered (A1 & D1) area (Figure 15). “A1” indicates irreversible loss of natural habitat, where the remaining natural habitat is less than the biodiversity target for CR areas, while “D1” indicates threatened plant species associations, with more than 80% constituting threatened Red Data List species for CR areas.

According to the botanical study no Species of Conservation Concern or IUCN Red List plant species were found along the road section. As noted above, the largest CBA1 unit was sampled at waypoint N7PM54 (Figure 16). This area was mapped as Swartland Granite Renosterveld but was found to have white sandy soil and is more akin to fynbos than Renosterveld. Even at this location, the vegetation in the road reserve is degraded and would require special attention for it to be restored to a condition that would be ecologically beneficial.

FIGURE 14: BIODIVERSITY MAP OF THE STUDY AREA

FIGURE 15: ECOSYSTEM THREAT STATUS OF THE STUDY AREA

FIGURE 16: SENSITIVITY OVERLAY MAP INDICATING THE CBA LOCATION WITH SENSITIVE FYNBOS PATCH

4.84.84.8 SOCIO-SSOCIOOCIOSOCIO---ECONOMICECONOMIC ASPECTS The Swartland Local Municipality is situated in the West Coast District Municipality in the Western Cape Province. The size of the municipal area is 3 700 km2. The majority of the municipal area consists of farmlands, natural areas and coastal areas.

The information below was obtained from the Swartland Local Municipality Integrated Development Plan for 2017 – 2022, and is mostly based on the 2011 Census and 2016 Community Survey.

4.8.1 Demographics

The population increased from 72 116 in 2001 to 133 762 in 2016. The average growth rate between 2001 and 2011 was 4.7 % per annum while the growth between 2011 and 2016 decreased to an average growth of 3.3 % per annum. The population of the West Coast District increased by 2.2% per annum between 2011 and 2016. 65.1 % of the population is Coloured, 18.6% White, 15.7% Black African and 0.6 % Indian or Asian.

Swartland’s population in 2016 was strongly concentrated in the younger age cohorts with the largest proportions of people in the age groups of 0-4, 15-19 and 30-34. 61 % of the Swartland population in 2016 was 34 years of age and younger.

Afrikaans is the language most spoken in majority of the households. This is followed by IsiXhosa (12.3 %) and English (5.1 %).

4.8.2 Education

Literacy is used to indicate a minimum education level attained. The IDP report defines literacy as the successful completion of a minimum of 7 years of formal education. Since most learners start school at the age of 7 years, the literacy rate is calculated as the proportion of those 14 years and older who have successfully completed a minimum of 7 years of formal education.

The literacy rate in Swartland was recorded at 78.0 % in 2011 which is slightly lower than the average literacy rates of the West Coast District (79.1 %), the Western Cape (87.2 %) and the rest of South Africa (80.9 %).

4.8.3 Health

Primary healthcare facilities in the Swartland consist of 5 fixed clinics, 9 mobile/satellite clinics and 1 district hospital. Swartland has 0.47 ambulances per 10 000 population, lower than the District average of 0.64.

At the end of March 2016, the Province highlighted that anti-retroviral treatment (ART) was provided to over 200 000 persons in the Province, 1 854 of whom were in the Swartland municipal area. At the end of March 2016, Swartland Municipality acquired 413 new ART patients, being treated from 13 treatment sites. The information for Swartland indicated a mother-to-child transmission rate of 3.2 % which is significantly higher than the 1.4 % District and Provincial rates as well as the medium term annual target for 2016/17.

4.8.4 Poverty

The intensity of poverty is measured by calculating the Poverty Gap Index, which is the average poverty gap in the population as a proportion of the poverty line. The Poverty Gap Index estimates the depth of poverty by considering how far, on the average, the poor are from that poverty line. The Poverty Gap Index is a percentage between 0 and 100 %. A higher Poverty Gap Index means that poverty is more severe.

The proportion of poor people within the Swartland municipal area decreased slightly between 2011 and 2016 – the poverty headcount decreased from 1.0 % of Swartland’s population in 2011 to 0.9 % in 2016. The decreasing poverty headcount is positive as it entails less strain on municipal resources. The intensity of poverty, i.e. the proportion of poor people that are below the poverty line within the Swartland municipal area, also decreased from 40.6 % in 2011 to 39.9 % in 2016.

The Swartland municipal area experienced a significant increase (53.7 %) in the number of indigent households between 2014 and 2015 but between June 2015 and June 2016 it increased only slightly (3.9 %).

4.8.5 Access to services

The minimum service level is households that have access to water at least 200 m from their dwelling, and according to the IDP report 92.8 % of households met this minimum standard in 2016.

The main sources of energy for lighting includes electricity (98 %) and candles (0.4 %). The rest of the population rely on gas, paraffin and solar energy, or have no energy sources at all.

The minimum service level is a flush toilet connected to sewerage system or chemical toilet. 96.2 % of households met this minimum standard in 2016.

There has been a significant improvement between 2011 and 2016 in the number of households within Swartland that receives refuse removal services by the local authority at least once a week (83.5 % of households in 2016 compared to 76.2 % of households in 2011).

4.8.6 The economy and employment

Swartland contributed 28 % in 2015 to the West Coast District’s gross domestic product per region (GDPR). The GDPR growth of Swartland averaged 4.4 % per annum over the period 2004 – 2015. This is marginally above the average of the District (3.9 %) and the Province (3.3 %). GDPR growth in Swartland dropped to 0.8 % per annum during the recessionary period (2008 - 2009) and then increased again to 2.9 % per annum during the 2009 - 2015 recovery period. The GDPR of Swartland is forecasted to grow by 2.8 % on average between 2016 and 2021. The sectors that contributed the most to Swartland’s GDPR in 2015 are manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, wholesale/retail trade, catering and accommodation. Overall, between 2004 and 2015, every economic sector in Swartland grew positively in terms of GDPR, except for the mining, electricity, gas and water sectors.

Swartland employed 25.8 % of the District’s labour force in 2015, and employment growth remained fairly stagnant, averaging 1.2 % per annum since 2005 which was on par with the overall district employment growth rate of 1.1 % per annum. Employment growth has nevertheless picked up significantly in the post-recessionary period averaging 2.8 % per annum (which is close to the District’s rate of 2.7 % over the same period). Swartland has experienced significant job losses prior to and during the recession, but these jobs have been recovered and approximately 5 927 (net) additional jobs have been created since 2005. Most of the job losses experienced during the recession were in the agriculture, forestry and fishing sectors. The majority (40.6 %) of the formally employed workforce Swartland operate within the low-skill sector. The semi-skilled sector employed 27 % of the Swartland’s workforce, and grew by 0.7 % per annum on average since 2005. The informal sector (which employs 20.9 % of the area's workforce) experienced robust growth of 7.1 % per annum over the past decade and absorbed most of the job losses from the low and semi-skilled sectors. The skilled sector employed only 11.4 % of the workforce and grew at a moderate rate of 1.6 % per annum since 2005.

4.94.94.9 CCULTURALULTURAL HERITAGE

The Swartland is an important cultural landscape with strong agricultural characteristics. There are no structural heritage resources (e.g. buildings, wall structures, graves, etc.) that occur within close proximity to the proposed project. However, occasional large gum trees occur along the road and are considered as being cultural features of the Swartland cultural landscape. These occur in three places, i.e. km 20.50 northbound and km 29.67 – 32.80 southbound (in two locations).

Previous surveys and experience have shown that the Swartland typically does not contain archaeological materials. Nevertheless, rare isolated artefacts could be present in places and one flake fragment was found alongside a stream bed (beyond the project footprint).

The SAHRIS palaeosensitivity map shows the study area to be of zero (in the south of the route) and low (in the middle and north of the route) palaeontological sensitivity. Almond and Pether (2008 HWC technical report) report that, while it is theoretically possible that fossils may be present in the Malmesbury Group sediments of the area, none have yet been found.

As the proposed project would trigger Section 38 (1) (a) of the NHRA, a NID was submitted to HWC on 25 March 2019. In correspondence dated 4 April 2019, HWC responded that there is no reason to believe that the proposed development would impact on heritage resources, thus no further action under Section 38 of the NHRA is required (see Appendix D5).

4.104.104.10 PPLANNINGLANNING CONSIDERATIONSCONSIDERATIONSONSONS 4.10.1 National Development Plan 2030

The National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 provides the context for all growth in South Africa, with the overarching aim of eradicating poverty and inequality between people in South Africa through the promotion of development. The NDP provides a broad strategic framework, setting out an overarching approach to confronting poverty and inequality based on the six focused and interlinked priorities. One of the key priorities is “More efficient and competitive infrastructure”. As noted in the NDP, infrastructure development is

imperative to facilitate economic activity and it is conducive to growth and job creation. The NDP’s approach to enabling more efficient and competitive infrastructure is to strengthen and develop key services which, among other things, include commercial transport infrastructure. National and Provincial roads are the prime means of connecting people and moving cargo from small settlements and secondary towns to the centres of economic activity. The preservation, maintenance and expansion thereof are considered a priority.

4.10.2 Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework

The Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) sets out the policy framework within which the Western Cape Government can carry out its spatial planning responsibilities. The policy framework covers three interrelated themes and each theme contributes to the achievement of environmental preservation, social justice and economic efficiency. The themes relevant to the project are highlighted below:

Theme 2: Opening-up opportunities in the Provincial space-economy The Western Cape space economy is made up of the diverse economic activities in the Province’s urban and rural centres and the relationship of these places and spaces to the infrastructure that connects and supports them. Government can contribute to business success through the provision and maintenance of regional infrastructure. How infrastructure is organised in the space-economy fundamentally impacts on their viability, opens up livelihood and income earning opportunities, attracts private investment and promotes inclusive growth.

Theme 3: Developing Integrated and Sustainable Settlements The integrated and sustainable settlements agenda is holistic and covers five interrelated spatial themes namely, sense of place, access, land use and density, facilities and social services and housing. The provision of transport infrastructure would contribute towards improving the access to, and consequently, affordability to services.

The proposed road improvement is aimed at improving an existing road corridor.

4.10.3 Swartland Spatial Development Framework (2017 – 2022)

The Swartland Spatial Development Framework (SDF) sets out policy guidelines and proposals to direct spatial development in the municipal area in a desirable and sustainable manner. Future growth, development and land use planning in the municipal area must be based on the vision and principles which were agreed on to address spatial challenges to create and support integrated, sustainable and liveable environments and socio economic opportunities.

The N7 is the main road along this corridor which links Cape Town with the North West and Namibia, and the West Coast. According to the SDF the N7 forms an important national route to the north as well as a regional transport corridor that provides various opportunities for the Swartland. Malmesbury and Moorreesburg, two of the main towns, are located on this route, which also provides a link to the Cape Metropole. This link to the market provides support for further industrial development in Malmesbury and Moorreesburg. The rural area between Malmesbury and Kalbaskraal located on both sides of the N7 has been identified as part of the

Intensive Rural Development Corridor. This area is known for existing smallholdings including Tierfontein and Groen River. This corridor is supported by a good connection with the N7.

As part of the delineation of the urban edges of towns within the Swartland during 2018, an Intensive Rural Development Corridor was identified to facilitate opportunities and to stimulate the economy. The Intensive Rural Development Corridor is aimed at enhancing diversification of agricultural uses to allow for residential, industrial, commercial, tourism and open space networks. Such uses would optimise the economic viability of these enterprises allowing the establishment of a produce/craft corridor along the N7 and a tourism route. The relevant Land Use Management and Development Guidelines that apply to this Intensive Rural Development Corridor is the “N7 setbacks” which states “Maintain a 30 meter setback on both sides of the N7 from the edge of the road reserve for acoustic and visual protection of development along the N7. This will also facilitate the proposed future widening of the N7 as a dual carriageway. To ensure visual and acoustic protection introduce a 20 metre landscaped area, where indigenous shrubs and trees are utilized as well as where earth mounds can be used as a form of acoustic barrier”.

In light of the above, the proposed project is thus considered to be aligned with the Swartland SDF as it involves the improvement of the road mostly within the existing road reserve.

5 DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

This chapter provides a description and assessment of the identified key potential impacts that would result from the construction and operational phases of the project. Recommendations are also made to avoid, reduce, remediate or compensate for potential negative impacts and enhance potential benefits. The significance of potential impacts without and with mitigation (or enhancement) is provided. The methodology used to determine the significance of potential impacts is presented in Appendix F. The impacts that remain following mitigation are assessed and presented as residual impacts. The status of all impacts should be considered to be negative unless otherwise indicated.

5.15.15.1 CCONSTRUCTIONONSTRUCTION PHASE 5.1.1 Land Use

Description of the impact Strips of land ranging between 1 m and 25 m from the existing road reserve boundary, and mainly used for agricultural purposes, would need to be acquired in certain areas along the route in order to accommodate the road improvement. This land use would thus change from “agriculture” to “road reserve”.

Assessment In total approximately 14.3 ha of land would need to be acquired to accommodate the road improvement. Although the land use change would be permanent, the potential impact is expected to be of low intensity when considering the regional extent of potential impact, and would thus be of very low significance (after mitigation).

TABLE 11: IMPACTS ON THE LAND USE Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Permanent Permanent Intensity Low Very Low Probability Definite Definite Consequence Medium Very Low Confidence High High Significance MEDIUM VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Medium Mitigation potential Medium

Mitigation

• Avoid as much land acquisition outside the road reserve as far possible during the design. • Avoid acquiring prime agricultural land (i.e. land currently under cultivations) as far as possible.

Cumulative Impacts As the proposed project would have very limited impacts on the land use, it is likely that the potential residual cumulative impacts of the proposed project, particularly in the context of the entire N7 route, would also be of LOW to VERY LOW negative significance. With the effective implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the cumulative impacts on the land use would be maintained at an acceptable level.

5.1.2 General Construction Related Impacts

Description of the impact Construction activities such as vegetation clearing, earth moving, widening of road cuttings, road bed preparation, movement of vehicles, batching and soil stockpiling could lead to dust generation which may have an impact on local air quality, especially during the dry summer season. Exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles could also have an impact on local air quality, although to a much lesser extent than the dust generation described above. Given the rural nature of majority of the route, local receptors are generally located along urban areas and farm dwellings, and would thus not likely be materially affected. Other possible receptors would be users of the road when travelling past/through the site.

Some construction activities (e.g. pile driving, grinding, road material loading/unloading, hammering, excavating, material transport/storage, etc.) could lead to increased noise and dust generation that may affect nearby residents.

Assessment The extent of potential impacts on air quality during the construction phase is expected to be localised (i.e. limited to the construction areas) over the short term. After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on air quality, and the potential impacts as a result of noise and dust generation, is expected to be low, thus resulting in very low overall impact significance.

TABLE 12: GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RELATED IMPACTS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Short Term Short Term Intensity Medium Low Probability Definite Probable Consequence Very Low Very Low Confidence High Medium Significance VERY LOW VERY LOW

Reversibility Fully reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Low

Mitigation • Ensure that the generation of dust is minimised by implementing a dust control programme (with due consideration to conserving water). • Ensure vehicles and equipment are adequately maintained and in good working order. • Ensure that the exposed soil and material stockpiles are adequately protected against the wind. • Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum. • Ensure that the generation of dust is minimised and shall implement a dust control programme (with due consideration to conserving water). • Ensure that the exposed soil and material stockpiles are adequately protected against the wind. • Limit activities resulting in high noise levels (e.g. pile driving, grinding, road material loading/unloading, hammering, excavating, etc.) to the daytime.

Cumulative Impacts As the proposed project would have very limited general construction-related impacts it is likely that the potential residual cumulative impacts of the proposed project, particularly in the context of the entire road section, would also be of LOW to VERY LOW negative significance. With the effective implementation of the recommended mitigation measures the cumulative impacts would be maintained at an acceptable level.

5.1.3 Freshwater Ecosystems

Description of impact

The activities associated with the proposed project would take place within or adjacent to watercourses and wetland habitats (particularly at bridge and culvert expansion sites), and would therefore have impact on the aquatic habitats and surface water quality.

There are approximately 16 watercourses in total along this road section, while nine of these watercourses have some valley bottom wetland areas associated with them. Four bridge structures and six culverts require widening. The potential loss of wetland habitat is limited and comprises largely of degraded wetland fringe areas as many of the aquatic features have been impacted by agriculture and invasive alien plants.

Potential contamination of watercourses from activities such as fuel storage and refuelling, oil storage and handling, equipment/vehicle breakdowns, hazardous substance storage and handling, waste management, etc. could have an impact on surface water quality due to the proposed project activities. Most of the smaller tributaries along the route are seasonal to ephemeral.

Assessment

The road and associated structures (e.g. bridges and culverts) are already in existence adjacent to, or within, the freshwater features which have been significantly disturbed in most areas. The road, together the surrounding agricultural activities and with some other physical modifications to the freshwater features have resulted in the current ecological condition of the watercourses and wetland areas. It is expected that the potential impacts of the proposed project on aquatic habitats and surface water quality would be regional in extent (when considering the entire road section) but will take place over the short term (water quality) to long

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) terms (aquatic habitat). After mitigation the resultant significance ratings are thus assessed to be Low (for water quality) and Medium (for aquatic habitats).

TABLE 13: IMPACTS ON AQUATIC HABITATS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Medium Low Probability Definite Probable Consequence High Medium Confidence High Medium Significance HIGH MEDIUM

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Medium Mitigation potential Low

TABLE 14: IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER QUALITY Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Short Term Short Term Intensity High Medium Probability Definite Probable Consequence Medium Low Confidence High Medium Significance MEDIUM LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Low

TABLE 15: FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS – LOCATION-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES Location Mitigation measures Tributary of the Krom River • Ensure the watercourse channels at the crossings remain open and not constricted as a result of the works (i.e. (km 8.85 to km 16.0) the conveyance capacity of the channels must not be reduced). • Do not raise or deepen the base level of the watercourses at the culvert locations. • Should significant areas of vegetation cover be removed in the watercourse channels and associated wetland areas, ensure that these areas are revegetated with indigenous vegetation occurring within watercourse and wetland areas. • To minimise the impact thereof on the adjacent wetland areas, ensure that stormwater runoff from the road, particularly where there are steeper gradients, do not lead to erosion and sedimentation of the watercourses and wetland areas. • Do not place laydown areas or stockpiles within 32 m of the watercourses and wetlands. Remainder of the Krom River • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. Catchment • Ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated immediately afterwards. (km 16.0 to km 23.95) • Do not raise or deepen the base level of the watercourses at the culvert locations. • Prevent disturbed sediment from the works in the watercourses from impacting on the aquatic habitats downstream. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites. • Ensure that infilling of wetland habitats is avoided. • Ensure the watercourse channels at the crossings remain open and are not constricted as a result of the works (i.e. the conveyance capacity of the channels must not be reduced). • Should significant areas of vegetation cover be removed in the floodplain, ensure that these areas are revegetated with indigenous vegetation occurring within these wetlands (such as Juncus kraussii). • Limit the removal of indigenous reeds Phragmites australis. The reeds provide an important function in trapping of sediment, erosion protection and flood attenuation. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis according to appropriate methods. • Undertake regular monitoring of the culverts to ensure that they do not become blocked or eroded. Sout River Catchment • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible.

Location Mitigation measures (km 23.95 to km 31.24) • Ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated immediately afterwards. • Prevent disturbed sediment from the works in the watercourses from impacting on the aquatic habitats downstream. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites. • Ensure the watercourse channels at the crossings remain open and are not constricted as a result of the works (i.e. the conveyance capacity of the channels must not be reduced). • Do not raise or deepen the base level of the watercourses at the culvert locations. • Should significant areas of vegetation cover be removed in the watercourses and wetland areas, ensure that these areas are revegetated with indigenous vegetation occurring within the downstream wetland/watercourse. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis according to appropriate methods. • Undertake regular monitoring of the culverts to ensure that they do not become blocked or eroded. Moorreesburgspruit Catchment • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. (km 31.24 to km 33.9) • Do not raise or deepen the base level of the watercourses at the culvert locations. • Prevent disturbed sediment from the works in the watercourses from impacting on the aquatic habitats downstream. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites. • Ensure that infilling of the wetland habitats is avoided. • Ensure the watercourse channels at the crossings remain open and not be constricted as a result of the works (i.e. the conveyance capacity of the channels must not be reduced). • Should significant areas of vegetation cover be removed in the floodplain, ensure that these areas are revegetated with indigenous vegetation occurring within these wetlands (such as Juncus kraussii). • Limit the removal of indigenous reeds Phragmites australis. The reeds provide an important function in trapping of sediment, erosion protection and flood attenuation. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis according to appropriate methods. • Undertake regular monitoring of the culverts to ensure that they do not become blocked or eroded.

Mitigation

• Ensure the identified location-specific mitigation measures as indicated in Table 15 above are implemented during construction in addition to the general mitigation measures as outlined below. • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. • Ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated a soon as possible. • Ensure construction adjacent to the watercourses and wetlands are undertaken during the drier months of the year as far as possible. • Ensure construction within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved disposal waste sites. • Once construction is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area). • Ensure that culvert and bridge structures do not concentrate the flow or alter the current watercourse channel shape and bed level from that upstream and downstream of the road. • Ensure that stormwater runoff from the road, particularly where there are steeper gradients, do not lead to erosion and sedimentation of the watercourses and wetland areas. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on- going basis according to appropriate methods. • Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. • Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands. • Do not place laydown areas or stockpiles within 32 m of the watercourses and wetlands.

Cumulative Impacts The watercourses and wetland areas associated with the Sout and Moorreesburgspruit Tributaries within the Berg River Catchment have already been modified as a result of the current road, surrounding land use and ongoing road maintenance activities. Considering that the proposed project is an improvement of the existing road, with intended improvements to the hydraulic capacity of the structures along the road section, and have limited widening at the aquatic features, it is expected the potential cumulative residual impact of the proposed project on aquatic habitats and surface water quality would be of LOW to VERY LOW significance.

5.1.4 Vegetation

Description of impact The project activities would potentially have an impact on the vegetation in the form of vegetation clearing and potential spread of alien invasive plant species. However, the vegetation along the route has been significantly disturbed and alien invasive species were located at various areas along the route.

Construction activities such as earth moving, widening of road cuttings, road bed preparation, movement of vehicles, batching and soil stockpiling could lead to dust generation which may affect vegetation (including crop fields) located immediately adjacent to the road.

Assessment

The vegetation along the route is variable as a result of anthropogenic activities over a long period. Nowhere along the route were any intact stands of Swartland Shale Renosterveld found, and even the places with secondary vegetation were poor in species richness. It was found that there was a suite of pioneer species present at most of the sites sampled with a repeated pattern of the secondary plant community (with low sensitivity and conservation value) along virtually the entire route. The indigenous grasses Hyparrhenia hirta and Cynodon dactylon and the exotic invasive grass, Pennisetum setaceum, were by far the most dominant plant species with shrubs playing a much smaller role. The invasive shrub Maireana brevifolia is establishing in disturbed places that are brackish.

The only location where the impact would be potentially higher is at the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54. An assessment of the potential impacts on Swartland Shale Renosterveld in general, together with a separate assessment of potential impacts on the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54 are presented below.

Potential impacts of the proposed project on the Swartland Shale Renosterveld would be regional in extent over the long term. After mitigation the intensity of the impact on the Swartland Shale Renosterveld is expected to be zero to very low, thus resulting in very low impact significance, mainly due to the limited extent of intact stands of Swartland Shale Renosterveld along the project route.

Potential impacts of the proposed project on the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54 would be local in extent over the long term. After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on the Fynbos patch is expected to be low. The residual impact is thus rated as being of low significance.

TABLE 16: IMPACT ON SWARTLAND SHALE RENOSTERVELD Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Zero to Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence Medium Very Low Confidence High High Significance MEDIUM VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Medium

TABLE 17: IMPACT ON FYNBOS PATCH (N7PM54) Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity High Low Probability Definite Definite Consequence High Low Confidence High Medium Significance HIGH LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Medium Mitigation potential Medium

Mitigation

• Fence off and restrict access to the area of the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54 (S 33° 21’ 37.87”; E 18° 42’ 14.02”). The working zone in this area should not exceed a distance of 3 m from the current road edge. • Conserve shrubby vegetation (excluding alien invasive plant species) along the route where possible. • Disturbed areas should be seeded with Hyparrhenia hirta.

Cumulative Impacts Owing to the absence of any intact Swartland Shale Renosterveld units along the proposed project route, the road construction activities would not result in any further loss of this Critically Endangered vegetation. The cumulative residual impacts would therefore be of VERY LOW significance.

5.1.5 Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems

Description of impact Potential impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems could be expected as a result of construction activities such as vegetation clearance, disturbance of watercourse and wetland areas, dust generation, generation of noise and hunting/trapping of animals, etc. Potential spreading of alien invasive plant species as result of construction activities would also have an impact on biodiversity and ecosystems.

Assessment There are various areas along the route which crosses CBA 1 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (terrestrial), CBA 2 (river) and ESA 2 units while the entire route falls within a Critically Endangered (A1 & D1) area. However, based on the botanical assessment no SCC or Red Data List species were recorded. The largest CBA 1 (terrestrial) unit was sampled at waypoint N7PM54 (as described above). As previously mentioned, this area is mapped as Swartland Granite Renosterveld (CapeFarmMapper), but at this location it was found to have white sandy soil which is more akin to fynbos than Renosterveld. Even at this location, the vegetation in the road reserve is degraded and would require special attention for it to be restored to a condition that would be ecologically beneficial.

The instream aquatic habitats of tributaries of the Krom and Sout Rivers, as well as the Moorreesburgspruit are in a Moderately Modified ecological state along the proposed project route. The riparian habitat integrity of the tributaries of the Krom River, Sout River and Moorreesburgspruit are also degraded and are in a significantly modified ecological state. The degradation of these watercourses is largely the result of removal of the indigenous riparian zone vegetation, the growth of invasive alien plants and the channel modifications that have taken place over time. The Krom Tributary is considered to be of a Moderate Ecological Importance and Sensitivity (EIS) while the tributaries are considered to be low. The EIS of the Moorreesburgspruit is considered to be moderate to low. Due to the seasonal nature of the flow within the watercourses and the fact that the proposed project route crosses the upper reaches of the streams, it is unlikely that there are any indigenous fish present in the streams adjacent to the route. In terms of amphibians, the Cape Caco (Cacosternum capense), Cape River frog (Afrana fuscigula), common Platanna (Xenopus laevis) and Raucous Toad (Bufo rangeri) are known to occur in the area. The Cape Caco is listed as Near Threatened on the IUCN Red List; however, the habitats for these amphibians have already been significantly transformed by the surrounding farming activities. The valley bottom wetlands are of a moderate EIS, but are linked to the watercourses in which they occur with the larger wetlands associated with the Moorreesburgspruit and Krom River being of higher ecological importance and are able to provide greater ecological goods and services.

In light of the above the potential impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems is assessed to be regional in extent over the long term. After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems is expected to be low, resulting in a residual impact of very low significance.

TABLE 18: IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Medium Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence High Very Low Confidence Medium Medium Significance HIGH VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Medium

Mitigation • Ensure that the above mentioned operational phase mitigation measures for freshwater ecosystems and vegetation as described above, as well as those listed below, are implemented effectively. • Avoid construction work during the night-time where possible. • Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. • Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place.

• Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum.

Cumulative Impacts The watercourses and wetland areas adjacent to the proposed road improvements have already been modified as a result of surrounding land use activities, the current road, previous road construction activities and the ongoing road maintenance activities. In addition there is an absence of intact Swartland Shale Renosterveld in the proposed project road reserve and the construction activities should not result in any further loss of this Critically Endangered vegetation type. Taking this into consideration, and the fact that the proposed project is an improvement of the existing road (with limited widening), one can expect that the potential cumulative impacts of this proposed project on biodiversity and ecosystems to be of LOW to VERY LOW significance.

5.1.6 Socio-Economic Aspects

Description of impact The proposed project would create temporary employment opportunities and business opportunities during the construction phase.

The movement of construction vehicles and / or personnel to and from the construction site may lead to possible disruptions to traffic along the existing road and result in an inconvenience to road users.

As highlighted above, strips of private land (currently used for agricultural purposes or open fields) will need to be acquired in certain areas on the route in order to accommodate the road improvement.

Assessment The scale of temporary employment (including the level of local employment) and business opportunities which would be available as part of the proposed project is currently unclear as this will only be established in detail during the construction procurement stage. According to the SANRAL Procurement Policy, 80% and more of the work is to be executed by small contractors of which 90% is to be executed by black companies, and the contract must include specifications for targeting of local labour and women. This is expected to lead to a positive socio-economic impact of medium intensity, but is expected be local in extent over the short term and thus of very low significance (after enhancement).

Disruptions to traffic is expected be local in extent and over the short term (mainly as a result of lane deviations/closures, stop-and-go’s and movement of construction vehicles). After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on traffic is expected to be low, and of very low significance.

In total approximately 14.3 ha of land would need to be acquired to accommodate the road improvement. This could lead to potential economic impacts on the agricultural land owners (over the long term). However, this consists of strips of land ranging between 1 m and 25 m from the existing road reserve boundary which is spread across 22 farms along the proposed project route, and a “willing buyer willing seller” model would be implemented for the proposed land acquisition. Although the land acquisition would be permanent, the potential impact is expected to be of low to very low intensity within the regional context, and would thus be of very low significance (after mitigation).

TABLE 19: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - EMPLOYMENT Criteria Without Enhancement With Enhancement Extent Local Local Duration Short Term Short Term Intensity Low Medium Probability Probable Probable Consequence Very Low Very Low Confidence Medium Medium Significance VERY LOW (POSITIVE) VERY LOW (POSITIVE)

Reversibility Not Applicable (Positive Impact) Loss of resource Not Applicable (no resources impacted) Enhancement potential Very Low

TABLE 20: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - INCONVENIENCE TO ROAD USERS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Short Term Short Term Intensity Medium Low Probability Definite Probable Consequence Low Very Low Confidence High Medium Significance LOW VERY LOW

Reversibility Fully reversible Loss of resource Not Applicable (no resources impacted) Mitigation potential Low

TABLE 21: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS - LAND ACQUISITION Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Regional Regional Duration Permanent Permanent Intensity Low Very Low Probability Definite Probable Consequence Medium Very Low Confidence High Medium Significance MEDIUM VERY LOW

Reversibility Not reversible Loss of resource Medium Mitigation potential Medium

Mitigation • Ensure that the “willing buyer, willing seller” model is pursued for the proposed land acquisition as far as possible. • Provide fair and timely compensation to landowners affected by land acquisition. • Ensure that safe and effective traffic control is implemented during construction. • Provide sufficient signage to warn road users of the presence of construction works and of traffic arrangements.

Enhancement • Establish a Project Liaison Committee (PLC), comprising of representatives of SANRAL, the main contractor and members of the local community (as elected by the community). • Ensure that procurement specifications as stipulated in the SANRAL Procurement Policy is implemented, with a focus on project area-specific local employment.

Cumulative Impacts The potential residual cumulative impacts relating to employment are deemed to be of LOW to VERY LOW significance due to the relatively small scale of the proposed project when compared to larger/new road construction projects. The potential residual cumulative impacts relating to land acquisition are deemed to be of LOW to VERY LOW significance due to the fact that a total of 14.3 ha, spread over 22 farms across the region along the prosed project route. The potential residual cumulative impacts related to traffic inconvenience is deemed to be of LOW to VERY LOW significance due to the fact that construction will be undertaken over the short term and over phases along the proposed project route (instead of the entire project route being improved at once).

5.1.7 Cultural Heritage

Description of impact The Swartland is an important cultural landscape with strong agricultural characteristics. There are no structural heritages resources (e.g. buildings, wall structures, graves, etc.) that occur within close proximity to the proposed project. However, occasional large gum trees occur along the road and are considered as being cultural features of the Swartland cultural landscape. These occur in three places (km 20.50 northbound and km 29.67 – 32.80 southbound in two locations), and consist of a total of 4 mature trees that may be impacted upon by the proposed project (if they require removal). The road improvements would not change the character of the road and should therefore not affect the Swartland cultural landscape.

One flake fragment was found alongside a stream bed, but this was beyond the proposed project footprint.

Assessment The only impacts on cultural heritage likely to occur relate to the removal of mature Eucalyptus trees in three places (km 20.50 northbound, km 29.67 – 32.80 southbound in two locations). Only the stand of Eucalyptus trees at km 20.50 is currently expected to be affected during the construction phase as it is located within the proposed project footprint. Removal of mature Eucalyptus trees, should it occur, would be of a local extent,

TABLE 22: CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACTS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence Low Low Confidence Medium Medium Significance LOW LOW

Reversibility Irreversible Loss of resource Very Low Mitigation potential Very Low

Mitigation • If possible, avoid removing or damaging the other mature Eucalyptus trees along the route. • The Contractor should develop and implement a cultural heritage Chance Find Procedure (with particular focus on excavations) prior to commencement of construction. This procedure shall contain steps on who to notify, and what to do in the event of discovering archaeological or heritage resources (including burial grounds/graves).

Cumulative Impacts The cumulative impacts on cultural heritage resources (archaeological and palaeontological) is expected to be LOW to VERY LOW due the fact that very limited to no cultural heritage resources are located within the proposed project area of influence.

5.25.25.2 OOPERATIONALPERATIONAL PHASE 5.2.1 Freshwater Ecosystems

Description of impact

Potential operational phase impacts on the aquatic habitats and surface water quality are likely to occur as a result of routine road maintenance activities (e.g. work to bridges/culverts, vegetation management, etc.), the potential encroachment of invasive alien vegetation into the freshwater features over time and modification to stormwater runoff from the road (with associated sediment loads).

Assessment Potential impacts on the aquatic habitats and surface water quality are expected to be local in extent over the long term (the maintenance periods are of short duration but will need to take place many times over the

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) operational phase of the proposed project). After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on the aquatic habitats and surface water quality is expected to be zero to very low, this resulting in a residual impact of very low significance.

TABLE 23: IMPACTS ON AQUATIC HABITATS AND SURFACE WATER QUALITY Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Zero to Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence Low Very Low Confidence Medium Medium Significance LOW VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Very Low

Mitigation

• Conduct maintenance works in accordance with an approved Routine Road Maintenance Programme. • Implement the following as part of the Routine Road Maintenance Programme: o Minimise the spatial extent of disturbance o Minimise the frequency of (or requirement for) maintenance activities; o Do not impede the movement of aquatic and riparian biota; o Minimise alterations to flow- and sediment-capacity; o Rehabilitate and re-vegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible; o Clear alien invasive plant species; o Restrict maintenance activities to the dry season where possible; o Prevent erosion and rehabilitate eroded areas; o Use existing access routes as far as possible; o Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands; o Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites; o Ensure maintenance activities do not lead to channelization or canalisation of the watercourses; and o Remove cleared woody material from the areas adjacent to the watercourse and wetlands to prevent it being washed into the watercourses or wetlands.

Cumulative Impacts The watercourses and wetland areas associated with the Sout and Moorreesburgspruit Tributaries within the Berg River Catchment have already been modified as a result of the current road, surrounding land use and ongoing road maintenance activities. Considering that the maintenance periods are of short duration and low intensity, it is expected that the potential cumulative impacts on aquatic habitats and surface water quality during the operational phase would be of LOW to VERY LOW significance.

5.2.2 Vegetation

Description of impact Potential operational phase impacts on the vegetation are likely to occur as a result of routine road maintenance activities and the potential encroachment of invasive alien vegetation over time.

Assessment As noted above, the vegetation along the route is variable as a result of anthropogenic activities over a long period, and nowhere along the route were any intact stands of Swartland Shale Renosterveld found. The only location where the impact would be potentially higher is on the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54. Potential impacts on the vegetation are expected to be local in extent and occur over the long term (the maintenance periods are of short duration, but will need to take place many times over the operational phase of the proposed project). After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on vegetation is expected to be zero to very low, resulting in a very low impact significance.

TABLE 24: IMPACT ON VEGETATION Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Zero to Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence Low Very Low Confidence High High Significance LOW VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Very Low

Mitigation

• The Routine Road Maintenance Programme should include specifications for alien vegetation control. Specific measures for the effective control of Acacia saligna (Port Jackson Willow) Pennisetum setaceum (fountain grass) must be included in the programme. • Ensure that steps are implemented during routine road maintenance to avoid blanket vegetation clearance at the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54.

Cumulative Impacts Owing to the absence of any intact Swartland Shale Renosterveld units along the proposed project route, the road maintenance activities would not result in any further loss of this Critically Endangered vegetation. The cumulative impacts would therefore be of NEGLIGIBLE significance.

5.2.3 Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems

Description of impact Potential operational phase impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems are likely to occur as a result of routine road maintenance activities and the potential encroachment of invasive alien vegetation over time.

Assessment As noted above, the largest CBA1 (terrestrial) unit was sampled at waypoint N7PM54, but even at this location, the vegetation is degraded and would require special attention for it to be restored to a condition that would be ecologically beneficial. Based on the botanical assessment no SCC or Red Data List species were recorded. The majority of the instream aquatic habitats of tributaries of the Krom and Sout Rivers, as well as the Moorreesburgspruit, are in a Moderately Modified ecological state, and the riparian habitat integrity of these tributaries are also degraded and are in a Significantly Modified ecological state. Due to the seasonal nature of the flow within the watercourses and the fact that the proposed project route crosses the upper reaches of the streams, it is unlikely that there are any indigenous fish present in the streams adjacent to the route.

Potential impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems are assessed to be local in extent over the long term (the maintenance periods are of short duration but will need to take place many times over the operational phase of the proposed project). After mitigation the intensity of the potential impacts on the biodiversity and ecosystems is expected to be zero to very low, resulting in a very low impact significance.

TABLE 25: IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS Criteria Without Mitigation With Mitigation Extent Local Local Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Zero to Very Low Probability Probable Probable Consequence Low Very Low Confidence Medium Medium Significance LOW VERY LOW

Reversibility Partially reversible Loss of resource Low Mitigation potential Low

Mitigation • Ensure that the above mentioned operational phase mitigation measures for freshwater ecosystems and vegetation as described above, as well as those listed below, are implemented effectively. • Implement to the following during the routine road maintenance periods: o Avoid maintenance work during the night-time where possible. o Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. o Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place. o Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum. o Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. o Ensure maintenance work within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. o Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis in accordance with appropriate methods. o Once maintenance work is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area). o Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. o Conserve shrubby vegetation (excluding alien invasive plant species) along the route where possible.

Cumulative Impacts The watercourses and wetland areas adjacent to the proposed road improvements have already been modified as a result of surrounding land use activities, the current road, previous road construction activities and the ongoing road maintenance activities. In addition there is an absence of intact Swartland Shale Renosterveld in the proposed project road reserve, and routine road maintenance activities should not result in any further loss of this Critically Endangered vegetation type. In light hereof it is assessed that the potential cumulative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems during the operational phase would be of VERY LOW significance.

5.2.4 Socio-Economic Aspects

Description of impact The key aim of the proposed project is to improve overall road user safety and accommodate future anticipated traffic volumes. During the operational phase the proposed project would improve overall road user safety and accommodate future anticipated traffic volumes by providing additional climbing lanes and road widening in order to conform to the required SANRAL standards. The planned improvements to intersections would improve road user safety by providing dedicated left- and right-turning lanes and improving line of sight.

Assessment Improved road user safety would result in a positive socio-economic impact over the long term that is of medium intensity (with enhancement) and regional extent. Overall, the proposed project is expected have an impact of high significance on road user safety and traffic accommodation.

TABLE 26: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS – ROAD USE SAFETY AND TRAFFIC Criteria Without Enhancement With Enhancement Extent Regional Regional Duration Long Term Long Term Intensity Low Medium Probability Probable Definite Consequence Medium High Confidence Medium Medium Significance MEDIUM (POSITIVE) HIGH (POSITIVE)

Reversibility Not Applicable (Positive Impact) Loss of resource Not Applicable (no resources impacted) Enhancement potential Low

Enhancement • Ensure that the above mentioned mitigation measures for the operational phase are included in the Routine Road Maintenance Programme and implemented effectively. • Other than the implementation of the safety and traffic accommodation measures as indicated in the proposed project design, no other enhancement measures have been identified.

Cumulative Impacts The potential residual cumulative impacts relating to road user safety and traffic accommodation are deemed to be of HIGH significance, taking into consideration that various concerns were raised during the road safety audit and the proposed project design contains various safety and traffic accommodation measures in order to improve the N7, Section 2.

5.35.35.3 NNO-NOONO---GOGO OPTIONGO OPTION

The No-Go alternative is the option of not proceeding with the proposed project, which would result in the status quo remaining and the potential negative impacts associated with the proposed project not being realised (in particular removal of vegetation and potential impacts on watercourses). However, the implication is that the failure to improve the road as required would result in the road section not conforming to the required SANRAL standards to accommodate future increases in traffic volumes (including heavy vehicle traffic).

In relation to road safety, the key implication of the No-Go alternative is that the advantages to all road users of the provision of additional passing lanes for portions of the road section and improvement of intersections would not be realised. The short-term benefits of local employment creation and participation in the local economy by the contractor would also not accrue to the local community under the No-Go alternative.

Pursuit of the No-Go Option would be counter to SANRAL’s Duty of Care with respect to road safety (which is ensuring the integrity and availability of well-functioning national road transport infrastructure). Failure to

South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd 720.10018.00003 Basic Assessment Report for the proposed improvement of the N7, Section 2 between Rooidraai January 2020 (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90) undertake the proposed project is not a desirable alternative and would hold no benefits to society. It is therefore not considered to be a feasible or reasonable option for further assessment.

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter provides conclusions to the study and summarises the recommendations for the proposed project.

6.16.16.1 CCONCLUSIONSONCLUSIONS

The majority of potential impacts are expected to occur during the construction phase of the proposed project. All potential negative impacts related to the proposed project (during both construction and operation) are rated as VERY LOW to LOW significance after mitigation. Socio-economic benefits related to employment opportunities is rated as VERY LOW (POSITIVE) significance after enhancement, while the improvement in road user safety and traffic accommodation is rated as HIGH (POSITIVE) significance.

A summary of the assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project is provided in Table 27 below.

TABLE 27: OVERALL SUMMARY OF THE ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT ISSUE / POTENTIAL Impact IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION WITH MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAND USE Impacts on the Land Use MEDIUM VERY LOW GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RELATED IMPACTS General construction related impacts VERY LOW VERY LOW FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Impacts on Aquatic Habitats HIGH MEDIUM Impacts on Surface Water Quality MEDIUM LOW VEGETATION Impact on Swartland Shale Renosterveld MEDIUM VERY LOW Impact on Fynbos patch (N7PM54) HIGH LOW BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems HIGH VERY LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS Employment VERY LOW (POSITIVE) VERY LOW (POSITIVE) Inconvenience to Road Users LOW VERY LOW Land Acquisition MEDIUM VERY LOW CULTURAL HERITAGE Cultural Heritage Impacts LOW LOW OPERATIONAL PHASE FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Impacts on Aquatic Habitats and Surface Water Quality LOW VERY LOW VEGETATION Impacts on Vegetation LOW VERY LOW BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems LOW VERY LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS Road User Safety and Traffic MEDIUM (POSITIVE) HIGH (POSITIVE)

6.26.26.2 RRECOMMENDATIONSECOMMENDATIONS In light of the above, this study recommends that the proposed Improvement of the N7 Section 2 between Rooidraai (km 7.49) and Moorreesburg (km 33.90), if authorised, be implemented with due consideration of the recommendations outlined in this report. These mitigation measures are all considered to be feasible and have been included in the Environmental Management Programme for the proposed project.

The key recommendations are set out below:

6.2.1 Construction Phase

Land Use • Avoid as much land acquisition outside the road reserve as far possible during the design. • Avoid acquiring prime agricultural land (i.e. land currently under cultivations) as far as possible.

Freshwater Ecosystems • Ensure the identified location-specific mitigation measures as indicated in Table 15 above are implemented during construction in addition to the general mitigation measures as outlined below. • Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. • Ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated a soon as possible. • Ensure construction adjacent to the watercourses and wetlands are undertaken during the drier months of the year as far as possible. • Ensure construction within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. • Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved disposal waste sites. • Once construction is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area).

• Ensure that culvert and bridge structures do not concentrate the flow or alter the current watercourse channel shape and bed level from that upstream and downstream of the road. • Ensure that stormwater runoff from the road, particularly where there are steeper gradients, do not lead to erosion and sedimentation of the watercourses and wetland areas. • Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on- going basis according to appropriate methods. • Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. • Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands. • Do not place laydown areas or stockpiles within 32 m of the watercourses and wetlands.

Biodiversity and Terrestrial Ecosystems • Ensure that the above mentioned operational phase mitigation measures for freshwater ecosystems and vegetation as described above, as well as those listed below, are implemented effectively. • Avoid construction work during the night-time where possible. • Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. • Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place. • Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum.

Socio-Economic Aspects • Ensure that the “willing buyer willing seller” model is pursued for the proposed land acquisition as far as possible. • Provide fair and timely compensation to landowners affected by land acquisition. • Ensure that safe and effective traffic control is implemented during construction. • Provide sufficient signage to warn road users of the presence of construction works and of traffic arrangements • Establish a Project Liaison Committee (PLC), comprising of representatives of SANRAL, the main contractor and members of the local community (as elected by the community). • Ensure that procurement specifications as stipulated in the SANRAL Procurement Policy is implemented, with a focus on project area-specific local employment.

6.2.2 Operational Phase

Freshwater Ecosystems • Conduct maintenance works in accordance with an approved Routine Road Maintenance Programme. • Implement the following as part of the Routine Road Maintenance Programme: o Minimise the spatial extent of disturbance o Minimise the frequency of (or requirement for) maintenance activities; o Do not impede the movement of aquatic and riparian biota; o Minimise alterations to flow- and sediment-capacity; o Rehabilitate and re-vegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible; o Clear alien invasive plant species; o Restrict maintenance activities to the dry season where possible; o Prevent erosion and rehabilitate eroded areas; o Use existing access routes as far as possible; o Store and handle all hazardous materials and waste in a suitable manner, and at least 32 m outside of the watercourses and wetlands; o Remove excess spoil material and solid waste and ensure it is disposed of at approved waste disposal sites; o Ensure maintenance activities do not lead to channelization or canalisation of the watercourses; and o Remove cleared woody material from the areas adjacent to the watercourse and wetlands to prevent it being washed into the watercourses or wetlands. Vegetation • The Routine Road Maintenance Programme should include specifications for alien vegetation control. Specific measures for the effective control of Acacia saligna (Port Jackson Willow) Pennisetum setaceum (fountain grass) must be included in the programme. • Ensure that steps are implemented during routine road maintenance to avoid blanket vegetation clearance at the Fynbos patch located at waypoint N7PM54.

o Avoid maintenance work during the night-time where possible. o Instruct staff not to disturb, injure, capture or hunt any fauna. o Ensure that collection of wood (for fire) from areas with indigenous vegetation does not take place. o Ensure that vegetation clearance is kept to a minimum. o Limit work within the watercourses and wetland areas as far as possible. o Ensure maintenance work within the watercourses takes place during the no flow period (November to March) as far as possible. o Ensure invasive alien plants within the road reserve are monitored, removed and disposed on an on-going basis in accordance with appropriate methods. o Once maintenance work is complete, rehabilitate the area to resemble that of the surrounding natural landscape (using suitable local indigenous plants as occur at that particular area). o Prevent the direct discharge of potentially contaminated runoff into the watercourses and wetland areas. o Conserve shrubby vegetation (excluding alien invasive plant species) along the route where possible.

6.36.36.3 OOPINIONPINION OF ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACPRACTITIONERTITIONERTITIONERTITIONER Implementation of the proposed project would ensure that the current and anticipated increase in future traffic along the road section can be accommodated. Furthermore, the planned improvements to existing intersections are intended to improve road user safety. These outcomes, as well as the anticipated socio- economic benefits during the construction phase were deemed to be positive impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project. All potential negative impacts related to the project (during both construction and operation) are rated as very low to low significance after mitigation.

The key principles of sustainability, including ecological integrity, economic efficiency, and equity and social justice, are integrated below as part of the supporting rationale for providing a reasoned opinion on whether or not the proposed project should be approved.

Ecological integrity The proposed project would largely take place within the existing road reserve. The relatively limited footprint of the proposed project, limited Swartland Shale Renosterveld vegetation cover along the route, and strict mitigation proposed at the proposed bridge and culvert expansion locations would ensure that the potential negative impacts are kept at acceptably low levels.

Economic efficiency The proposed project is in line with the planning framework for the district and local municipal areas within which the proposed project is located. The economic analysis confirmed that the long-term rehabilitation option (i.e. Option 3) using a Long Term Option G1 base would yield the greatest economic return in terms of both Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return.

Equity and social justice The provision of local employment and business opportunities during the construction phase (short-term), and the improvement in road safety and traffic accommodation during the operational phase (long-term) would have a positive impact on the lives of those employed (and the well-being of their dependents) and the road users in general.

Conclusion It is the reasoned opinion of SLR that in terms of the sustainability criteria described above there is no reason why the proposed project should not receive a favourable decision with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

7 REFERENCES

JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd, 2018. Final Preliminary Design Report (CONTRACT NRA N.007-020-2020/1F), Pretoria, South Africa. D. MacDonald, 2019. Botanical Impact Assessment for the proposed upgrade of the N7 Section 2 between Rooidraai and Moorreesburg, Cape Town, South Africa. J. Orton, 2019, 2019. Notification of Intent to Develop: N7 Section 2, Cape Town, South Africa. T. Belcher and D. Grobler, 2019. Freshwater Assessment for the improvement of the National Route N7 Section 2 between Rooidraai (KM 7.49) and Moorreesburg (KM 33.90), Cape Town, South Africa. Swartland Municipality Integrated Development Plan for 2017-2022 (May 2017). Swartland Spatial Development Framework: Spatial Vision, Principles and Directives 2017-2022 (May 2017). Google Earth Pro ® https://gis.elsenburg.com/apps/cfm/ http://bgis.sanbi.org/

AFRICAN OFFICES

South Africa

CAPE TOWN T: +27 21 461 1118

FOURWAYS T: +27 11 467 0945

SOMERSET WEST T: +27 21 851 3348

Namibia

WINDHOEK T: + 264 61 231 287