EFG Engineers (Pty) Ltd on behalf of WCG: DTPW (Road Design) 720.05043.00005 Basic Assessment Report for the Proposed Upgrade of Trunk Road 28, Section 1 - Lynx Road to Mimosa Street, Hermanus March 2021 APPENDIX I: SCREENING TOOL Appendix I1: Screening Tool Reports Appendix I2: Site Sensitivity Verification Report EFG Engineers (Pty) Ltd on behalf of WCG: DTPW (Road Design) 720.05043.00005 Basic Assessment Report for the Proposed Upgrade of Trunk Road 28, Section 1 - Lynx Road to Mimosa Street, Hermanus March 2021 Appendix I1: Screening Tool Reports SCREENING REPORT FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORIZATION OR FOR A PART TWO AMENDMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION AS REQUIRED BY THE 2014 EIA REGULATIONS – PROPOSED SITE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY EIA Reference number: TBC Project name: IMPROVEMENT OF TRUNK ROAD 28 SECTION 1 FROM BOTRIVIER AND HERMANUS Project title: Basic Assessment Report Date screening report generated: 19/05/2020 12:54:28 Applicant: Western Cape Government: Department of Transport and Public Works (Directorate: Road Design) Compiler: Rushdi Ariefdien Compiler signature: .....................................................................................................pp Page 1 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Table of Contents Proposed Project Location .................................................................................................................... 3 Orientation map 1: General location .................................................................................................. 3 Map of proposed site and relevant area(s) ........................................................................................... 4 Cadastral details of the proposed site ................................................................................................ 4 Wind and Solar developments with an approved Environmental Authorisation or applications under consideration within 30 km of the proposed area ................................................................... 5 Environmental Management Frameworks relevant to the application ............................................. 5 Environmental screening results and assessment outcomes ............................................................... 5 Relevant development incentives, restrictions, exclusions or prohibitions ....................................... 5 Map indicating proposed development footprint within applicable development incentive, restriction, exclusion or prohibition zones ............................................................................................ 6 Proposed Development Area Environmental Sensitivity .................................................................... 6 Specialist assessments identified ........................................................................................................ 7 Results of the environmental sensitivity of the proposed area. ........................................................... 9 MAP OF RELATIVE AGRICULTURE THEME SENSITIVITY ...................................................................... 9 MAP OF RELATIVE ANIMAL SPECIES THEME SENSITIVITY................................................................. 10 MAP OF RELATIVE AQUATIC BIODIVERSITY THEME SENSITIVITY ..................................................... 11 MAP OF RELATIVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE THEME SENSITIVITY .................. 12 MAP OF RELATIVE CIVIL AVIATION THEME SENSITIVITY .................................................................. 13 MAP OF RELATIVE PALEONTOLOGY THEME SENSITIVITY ................................................................. 14 MAP OF RELATIVE PLANT SPECIES THEME SENSITIVITY ................................................................... 15 MAP OF RELATIVE DEFENCE THEME SENSITIVITY ............................................................................. 17 MAP OF RELATIVE TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY THEME SENSITIVITY ............................................... 18 Page 2 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Proposed Project Location Orientation map 1: General location General Orientation: IMPROVEMENT OF TRUNK ROAD 28 SECTION 1 FROM BOTRIVIER AND HERMANUS Page 3 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Map of proposed site and relevant area(s) Cadastral details of the proposed site Property details: No Farm Name Farm/ Erf Portion Latitude Longitude Property No Type 1 HERMANUS 243 0 34°24'58.12S 19°13'11.35E Erven 2 HERMANUS 243 0 34°24'58.71S 19°13'11.26E Erven 3 VERMONT 927 0 34°24'33.86S 19°9'15.93E Erven 4 SANDBAAI 1291 0 34°24'41.09S 19°11'19.77E Erven (CALEDON) 5 VERMONT 1935 0 34°24'27.2S 19°9'44.74E Erven 6 VERMONT 1506 0 34°24'8.85S 19°9'21.62E Erven 7 ONRUSTRIVIER 2004 0 34°24'26.15S 19°9'54.81E Erven 8 ONRUSTRIVIER 3710 0 34°24'26.22S 19°10'13.59E Erven 9 ONRUSTRIVIER 5569 0 34°24'37.81S 19°11'37.5E Erven 10 HERMANUS 8381 0 34°24'48.19S 19°12'20.79E Erven 11 ONRUSTRIVIER 5057 0 34°24'26.55S 19°11'29.68E Erven 12 ONRUST RIVER 581 0 34°24'12.89S 19°10'16.63E Farm 13 ONRUST RIVER 581 0 34°24'46.24S 19°12'9.92E Farm 14 ONRUST RIVER 581 364 34°24'32.99S 19°11'10.12E Farm Portion 15 ONRUST RIVER 581 349 34°24'46.38S 19°12'9.55E Farm Portion 16 ONRUST RIVER 581 4 34°24'0.46S 19°11'2.22E Farm Portion 17 ONRUST RIVER 581 0 34°24'53.01S 19°10'13.85E Farm Portion 18 ONRUST RIVER 581 357 34°24'38.03S 19°11'37.51E Farm Portion Development footprint1 vertices: No development footprint(s) specified. 1 “development footprint”, means the area within the site on which the development will take place and incudes all ancillary developments for example roads, power lines, boundary walls, paving etc. which require vegetation clearance or which will be disturbed and for which the application has been submitted. Page 4 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Wind and Solar developments with an approved Environmental Authorisation or applications under consideration within 30 km of the proposed area No nearby wind or solar developments found. Environmental Management Frameworks relevant to the application No intersections with EMF areas found. Environmental screening results and assessment outcomes The following sections contain a summary of any development incentives, restrictions, exclusions or prohibitions that apply to the proposed development site as well as the most environmental sensitive features on the site based on the site sensitivity screening results for the application classification that was selected. The application classification selected for this report is: Infrastructure|Transport Services|Roads|Public|Roads - Public. Relevant development incentives, restrictions, exclusions or prohibitions The following development incentives, restrictions, exclusions or prohibitions and their implications that apply to this site are indicated below. No intersection with any development zones found. Page 5 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Map indicating proposed development footprint within applicable development incentive, restriction, exclusion or prohibition zones Project Location: IMPROVEMENT OF TRUNK ROAD 28 SECTION 1 FROM BOTRIVIER AND HERMANUS Proposed Development Area Environmental Sensitivity The following summary of the development site environmental sensitivities is identified. Only the highest environmental sensitivity is indicated. The footprint environmental sensitivities for the proposed development footprint as identified, are indicative only and must be verified on site by a suitably qualified person before the specialist assessments identified below can be confirmed. Theme Very High High Medium Low sensitivity sensitivity sensitivity sensitivity Page 6 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020 Agriculture Theme X Animal Species Theme X Aquatic Biodiversity Theme X Archaeological and Cultural X Heritage Theme Civil Aviation Theme X Paleontology Theme X Plant Species Theme X Defence Theme X Terrestrial Biodiversity Theme X Specialist assessments identified Based on the selected classification, and the environmental sensitivities of the proposed development footprint, the following list of specialist assessments have been identified for inclusion in the assessment report. It is the responsibility of the EAP to confirm this list and to motivate in the assessment report, the reason for not including any of the identified specialist study including the provision of photographic evidence of the site situation. N Specia Assessment Protocol o list assess ment 1 Agricult https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols ural /DraftGazetted_Agriculture_Assessment_Protocols.pdf Impact Assessm ent 2 Landsca https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols pe/Visu /DraftGazetted_General_Requirement_Assessment_Protocols.pdf al Impact Assessm ent 3 Archaeo https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols logical /DraftGazetted_General_Requirement_Assessment_Protocols.pdf and Cultural Heritage Impact Assessm ent 4 Palaeon https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols tology /DraftGazetted_General_Requirement_Assessment_Protocols.pdf Impact Assessm ent 5 Terrestri https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols al /DraftGazetted_Terrestrial_Biodiversity_Assessment_Protocols.pdf Biodiver sity Impact Assessm ent 6 Aquatic https://screening.environment.gov.za/ScreeningDownloads/AssessmentProtocols Biodiver /DraftGazetted_Aquatic_Biodiversity_Assessment.pdf sity Impact Assessm Page 7 of 18 Disclaimer applies 19/05/2020