Appendix C.

1: Public Participation Report

 PENHILL GREENFIELDS
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Public Participation Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction 1

2 I&AP Database 1
3 Pre-application Phase consultation 6
3.1 Site Notices 7
3.2 Newspaper adverts 8
3.3 Background Information Document (BID) 25
4 Scoping Phase consultation 26

5 Comments and responses 26

6 Way Forward 66

Related Appendices
Appendix C.2: I&AP Notification
Appendix C.3: Pre-Application Meetings
Appendix C.4: Background Information Document
Appendix C.5: Proof of Delivery (to be populated for FSR)
Appendix C.6: Comments and Responses
Figures
Figure 1: English advert 7
Figure 2: Afrikaans advert 8
Figure 3: English Advert in the Cape Times on 29 March 2017 9
Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017 10
Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017 11
Figure 6: Afrikaans Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017 12

Tables
Table 1: I&AP Database 2
Table 2: Pre-application consultation activities 6
Table 3: Details of site notices 13
Table 4: Scoping Phase PPP summary 26
Table 5: List of I&AP submissions 27
Table 6: Comments and responses 29
1 Introduction
The proposed Penhill Greenfields Development is located on the eastern boundary of the City of Cape
Town, within the urban edge, east of the urban nodes of Blackheath and Eersterivier. The proposed
Penhill Greenfields Development requires environmental authorisation in terms of the National
Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA). The 2014 Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) Regulations pursuant to NEMA (General Notice (GN) R982) require that an EIA
process, consisting of a Scoping Report and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), be submitted to the
provincial Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) for environmental
authorisation. In order to provide a transparent and meaningful process, this EIA process must include
a Public Participation Process (PPP).

This PPP must be undertaken in accordance with regulations 39 – 44 of the EIA Regulations. Additional
guidance has been incorporated from the DEA&DP Guideline Document on Public Participation (March
2013) and the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) Public Participation guideline in terms of
NEMA (2017).

This Public Participation Report (PPR) has therefore been compiled to collectively represent the
consultation process that has been undertaken through the PPP. The following sections include:

Section 2: A database of interested and affected parties (I&APs) was created in the pre-application
phase of the proposed greenfields development. This database will be updated and maintained
throughout the EIA process.

Section 3: The consultation that was undertaken during the pre-application phase of the proposed
Penhill Greenfields development has been described. Proof of advertisements and site notices are
included in the report.
Section 4: The consultation that will be undertaken during the scoping phase is described.

Section 5: Comments and responses have been summarised into a table in this section. All original
comments and responses are attached as an appendix in the Scoping Report.
Section 6: The way forward has been identified in this section.

2 I&AP Database
During the pre-application phase, affected parties were identified, including: landowners, adjacent
landowners, national, provincial and municipal authorities, as well as other key stakeholders. Additional
interested parties have been identified through the preliminary notification processes (Section 3) and
have been added to the database.

Table 1 summarises the I&AP database for the project. Please note that contact details have been
omitted for privacy reasons.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 1

Table 1: I&AP Database

Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response

Competent Authority
Alvan Gabriel Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017
Taryn Dreyer Email, 28/03/2017
Western Cape Government, DEA&DP
Melanese Schippers Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017
Andre Oosthizen Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 28/02/2017
National authorities
Warren Dreyer National Dept of Water and Sanitation Meeting, 09/05/2017

Shaddai Daniel National Dept. of Water and Meeting, 09/05/2017

Sanitation
Puseletso Loselo National Dept. of Water and Email, 28/03/2017
Sanitation
John Roberts National Dept. of Water and Email, 28/03/2017
Sanitation
Lameez Salim National Dept. of Water and Email, 28/03/2017
Sanitation
Jenifer Mirembe National Dept. of Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017
Mbulelo Tshangana National Dept. of Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017
MM Mlengana National Dept. of Agriculture, Forestry Email, 28/03/2017
and Fisheries
Joe Kgobokoe National Dept. of Agriculture, Forestry Email, 28/03/2017 (c/o
and Fisheries: Policy, Planning and MokutuleK@daff.gov.z
Monitoring and Evaluation a)
Tommie Bolton National Dept. of Rural Development Email, 28/03/2017
and Land Reform
Provincial authorities (Western Cape Government)
Ronald Mukanya DEA&DP, Director: Sustainability Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 07/03/2017
Cor Van der Walt Dept. of Agriculture, Land Use Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 26/04/2017
Management
Andre Roux Dept. of Agriculture, Director: Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 26/04/2017
Sustainable Resource Manager
Danie Niemand Dept. of Agriculture, Director: Farm Email, 28/03/2017
Worker Development
Solly Fourie Dept. of Economic Development and Email, 28/03/2017
Tourism
Martie Carstens Dept. of Economic Development and Email, 28/03/2017
Tourism
Jacqui Gooch Dept. of Transport and Public Works Email, 28/03/2017
Robert Macdonald Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017
Annemie Van Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017
Reenen
Heinrich Magerman Dept. of Provincial Local Government Email, 28/03/2017
Caesar Sauls Dept. of Social Development Email, 28/03/2017
Gideon Morris Dept. of Community Safety Email, 28/03/2017
Douw Steyn Dept. of Community Safety Email, 28/03/2017
Municipal (City of Cape Town)
Achmat Ebrahim City Manager Email, 28/03/2017
Rayan Rughubar Human Settlements Email, 28/03/2017
Alexander Forbes Environmental Resource Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 19/04/2017
Management Branch Letter, 19/05/2017

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 2

 Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response
Lewine Walters Environmental Resource - Meeting, 19/04/2017
Management Branch, Biodiversity
Management Branch
Dilshard Modak Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017
Marco Geretto Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 29/03/2017
Charles Rudman Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017
Nigel Titus Spatial Planning and Urban Design Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 03/04/2017
Cheryl Walters Planning and Building Development Email, 28/03/2017
Management Dept.
Rustim Keraan Solid Waste Management Dept. Email, 28/03/2017
Melissa Whitehead Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Email, 28/03/2017
Authority
Sean Glass Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/03/2017 (to
Authority (Manager: Network be removed)
Facilitation & Development)
Bill Jones Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Email, 28/03/2017
Authority
Nuran Nordien Transport for Cape Town (TCT) Email, 28/03/2017 (Via
Authority: Transport Impact Sean Glass)
Assessment & Development Control
Peter Flower Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017 Letter, 19/05/2017
Shamile Manie Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 19/05/2017
Email via SMEC,
21/09/2017
Jaco de Bruyn Water and Sanitation Dept. Email, 28/03/2017
Wayne Davids Roads and Stormwater Email, 28/03/2017
Konanani Phadziri Recreation and Parks Email, 28/03/2017
Franz von Moltke Roads and Stormwater Email, 28/03/2017
Roelof Mare Ward 14 Email, 28/03/2017
Ernest Sonnenberg Subcouncil 22 Email, 28/03/2017
Chantal Cerfontein Subcouncil 22 Email, 28/03/2017
Gerrie Hattingh City of Cape Town - Email, 03/04/2017
Mervyn August Sustainable Urban Development - Email, 04/04/2017
Jens Kuhn Human Settlements Land and - Email, 04/04/2017
Planning
Elize Joubert Heritage Professional Reg by Alex Forbes
Kevin Balfour Water and Sanitation Dept: Bulk - Email via SMEC,
Water 26/09/2017
Landowners
WCG: Dept. of R/E 3/410, R/E 8/410, R/E 5/468, R/E Email, 28/03/2017
Human Settlements 25/468, R/E 26/468, R/E 31/468,
(site and access 32/468, 35/468, R/E 36/468, R/E
road) 42/468, 30/410, 31/410, 31/468,
1/644, RE/ 644
Western Cape 1/644, RE/644 Identified post pre-
Government (sewer application PPP
pipeline)
Bluegum Grove 6/468, 7/468 Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/04/2017
Trust: Danie Meeting, 13/07/17
Carinus & Johan
Carinus
(bulk water pipeline
and reservoir)

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 3

 Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response
City of Cape Town 16/468, 57/468 Identified post pre-
(bulk water application PPP
pipelines)
City of Cape Town RE/22/410 The CoCT is a partner
(Eskom servitude) in the project and has
City of Cape Town 17/468, 61/468, RE/18/468 been notified through
(bulk sewer various divisions (see
above officials at
pipeline)
CoCT)
City of Cape Town 111/468, 112/468, 113/468 & 114/368
(stormwater ponds)
City of Cape Town 30/410, 31/410, 29/410, RE/22/410
(access road)
Ferguson Lynda RE/116 Identified post pre-
Anne Family (bulk application PPP
sewer pipeline)
Tuscan Mood 158 15/653 Identified post pre-
Pty (Ltd) (bulk application PPP
sewer pipeline)
Transnet (bulk 637 Identified post pre-
sewer pipeline) application PPP
Street Parcel / 60/468, 62/468, 65/468, 6788 Identified post pre-
Servitude areas application PPP
(bulk sewer
pipeline)
Adjacent landowners
Danie Carinus & No farm name 6/468 & 7/468 Email, 28/03/2017 Email, 28/04/2017
Johan Carinus Meeting, 13/07/17
Willem Dumas No farm name RE/1540 Email, 28/03/2017
Villiers Carinus No farm name 76/468 Email, 28/03/2017
Christiaan Prins Blackheath Siding RE/12/416 Email, 28/03/2017
City of Cape Town Jacobsdal RE/22/410; 15/468; The CoCT is a partner
16/468; 17/468; 65/468; 114/468; in the project and has
113/468; 112/468; and 111/468 been notified through
various divisions (see
above officials at
CoCT)
Various private and 17/468; 31/468; RE/18/468; Erf 1; 637; Identified post pre-
public landowners 6787; 6788; 1080; 3; RE/644; 1/644; application PPP
including residential, RE/634; 953; 7098; 64; RE/645; 953;
open space, 14/653; 15/653; RE/116; 647; 5541;
community, public 1082; 6093; 3884; 5763; 3913; 6270;
road, public parking, 6271; 6272; 393; 4182; 4183; 4184;
general business, 4185; 5574; 3780; 3781; 3782; 3783;
and agricultural land 3784; 3785; 3786; 3793; 3794; 3795;
us 3796; 3797; 3768; 5561; 5560; 1055;
(Sewer pipeline 1054; 1053; 1052; 1051; 1050; 1049;
adjacent 1048; 1047; 1021; 1020; 272; 271;
landowners) 269; 268; 267; 266; 265; 264; 614;
613; 259; 258; 257; 256; 1982; 1981;
1980; 1946; 1906; 1945; 1905; 1904;
6161; 2002; 170; 173; 7076; 171;
3042; 3041; 3040; 3039; 3038; 6158;
5861; 155; 314; 313; 312; 311; 310;
309; 308; 307; 306; 305; 304; 303;
302; 301; 300; 1318; 372; 371; 370;
369; 368; 367; 366; 365; 364; 17/468;
362; 361; 360; 359; 357; 72/468;
10/468; 63/468; 1/468; 61/468;
RE/18/468; RE/18/468; 1170; 1080; 2;
16; 15; 14; 17; 32; 31; 30; 34; 35; 36;

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 4

 Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response
59; 58; 65; 66; 67; 597; 1/644; RE/644;
3786; 3793; 3794; 3795; 3796; 3797;
3768; 3767; 3766; 3765; 3764; 3763;
3762; 3761; 3754; 3753; 1107; 1108;
1109; 1110; 1111; 1112; 1113; 7105;
7106; 7107; 7108; 7109; 7110; 7111;
7112; 7113; RE/647; RE/643; RE/953;
1082; RE/125; 8821; 5541; 14/653;
and RE/653

Key stakeholders
John Geeringh Eskom Email, 28/03/2017
Henk Landman Eskom Email, 28/03/2017
Justine Wyngaardt Eskom Email, 28/03/2017
Lungile Motsisi Eskom - Post, 04/05/2017
Barbara van Geems Eskom Email, 28/04/2017
Shaun Swanepoel Eskom - Post, 13/04/2017
Rhett Smart CapeNature Email, 28/03/2017 Meeting, 18/04/2017
Email, 11/05/2017
Andrew September Heritage Western Cape Email, 28/03/2017
SAPS Kleinvlei Email, 28/03/2017
Other identified and / or registered parties
Gavin Gossman Penhill Resident Email, 29/03/2017 Email, 16/03/2017
Ivan Cloete AFASA Western Cape Email, 29/03/2017 Email, 16/03/2017
Morgan Griffiths WESSA Email, 28/03/2017
Brendan van der Blackheath City Improvement District Email, 28/03/2017
Merwe
The Secretary Saxenburg Park 2 Ratepayers Email, 28/03/2017
The Secretary Rustdal Ratepayers Email, 28/03/2017
The Secretary Stellenbosch Ratepayers Association Email, 28/03/2017
Percy Knight Power Constructions Referred from Alex
Davids (below)
Alex Davids Power Group Email, 30/03/2017
Abubaker Francis Private farmer Email, 30/03/2017
Trevor Lodewyk iThemba Farmers Association Email, 31/03/2017
Paul Clarke Penhill Home Owners And Residents Email &Telephone,
Association 03/05/2017
Wallace Maritz Penhill Estate Post, 20/04/2017
Malcom AFASA Western Cape Email, 29/04/2017
Loggenstein
Notified via newspaper
Thaakirah Marcus University of Western Cape / site notices / word of Email, 02/05/2017
Johan Carinus Bluegum Grove Trust mouth / manual Email, 28/04/2017
delivery of BID
Jacqueline Cox Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017
Craig Jonkers Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017
Rose Pedo Ithemba PFA 04/04/2017
Dieter Heinze Preem Brokerage Email, 03/05/2017
Cheran Young Penhill Home Owners and Residents Email, 03/05/2017
Association
Maria Katsoulis Penhill Home Owners and Residents Email, 04/05/2017
Association

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 5

 Contact Organisation Pre-App Notification Register / Response
Kirk Young Penhill Home Owners and Residents Email, 05/05/2017
Association
Jacqui Farr Penhill Resident Email, 05/05/2017
Shaney-Lee None provided Identified post pre- Email, 24/07/2017
Philander application PPP
Identified post pre- Email, 12/07/2017 &
Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident
application PPP 09/10/2017

3 Pre-application Phase consultation

During the pre-application phase, the following PPP activities were undertaken (refer to Table 2).

Table 2: Pre-application consultation activities

Task Description Date

I&AP An I&AP database was developed for the project by February 2017 -
identification establishing the jurisdiction of organisations in respect of the ongoing
project as well as those living or working in proximity to the
project. The database of I&APs includes the landowner, the
adjacent landowners, the local municipal officials, relevant
national and regional government officials, and organisations
in the area.
Pre-application A pre-application meeting was held with DEA&DP to inform 28 February 2017
meeting with DEA&DP of the proposed project and to request input on the
DEA&DP Listed Activities to be applied for, the specialist studies to be
conducted and other procedural matters.
Placement of site Site notices were put up to inform the general public of the 29 March 2017
notices proposed projects and the public participation process. These
were placed onsite, Welmoed Cemetery Boundary, Blue
Downs Shoprite Checkers, Kleinvlei Secondary School,
Melton train station/taxi rank, Kleinvlei South African Police
Service (SAPS), Melton Rose Library, Kleinvlei Community
Health Care Centre,
RR Franks Primary School, Dennemere Primary School,
Blackheath Nativity Church, Blackheath Primary School and
Blackheath Secondary School.
Newspaper Adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and 29 March 2017
advertisement Tygerburger on 29 March 2017.
Circulation of BID Emailed to identified I&APs and sent to I&APs that registered. 28 March - 4 May
Dropped off by hand to a representative farmer on the site as 2017
well as with the iThemba Farmers.
Meeting with key  National Department of Water and Sanitation April – May 2017
authorities  Western Cape Government, Department of Agriculture
 CoCT, Environmental Resource Management Department
 CapeNature

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 6

3.1 Site Notices
Site notices in English and Afrikaans were fixed at various locations to inform the general public of the
proposed project and the public participation process. The content of the site notice is included in
English and Afrikaans below (refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2). This is followed by details and proof of
placement of the site notices in Table 3. The combined English and Afrikaans notice met the
requirements of the relevant DEA&DP Guidelines in terms of size and content.

Figure 1: English advert

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 7

Figure 2: Afrikaans advert

3.2 Newspaper adverts

Adverts were published in two provincial newspapers, The Cape Times in English and Die Burger in
Afrikaans; as well as a local newspaper, the Tygerburger in English and Afrikaans, on 29 March 2017.
The content of the adverts was the same as the site notices (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Proof of advert
placement is included in Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 8

Figure 3: English Advert in the Cape Times on 29 March 2017

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 9

Figure 4: Afrikaans Advert in Die Burger on 29 March 2017

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 10

Figure 5: English Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 11

Figure 6: Afrikaans Advert in the Tygerburger on 29 March 2017

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 12

Table 3: Details of site notices

Notice site: Farm Jacobsdal Boundary

Size: 2 x A2
Coordinates: 33° 58’ 37.84’’ S 18° 42’ 49.10’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 13

Notice site: Welmoed Cemetery Boundary
Size: 2 x A2
Coordinates: 33° 57’ 44.23’’ S 18° 42’ 3.19’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 14

Notice site: Shoprite Checkers
Size: 2 x A4
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 8.65’’ S 18° 41’ 18.69’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 15

Notice site: Kleinvlei Secondary School
Size: 2 x A4
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 15.12’’ S 18° 42’ 44.75’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 16

Notice site: Melton train station/taxi rank
Size: 2 X A3
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 20.85’’ S 18° 43’ 13.34’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 17

Notice site: Kleinvlei SAPS
Size: 2 X A4
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 20.85’’ S 18° 43’ 13.37’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 18

Notice site: Melton Rose Library
Size: 2 X A4
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 15.49’’ S 18° 43’ 00.57’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 19

Notice site: Kleinvlei Community Health Care Centre
Size: 2 X A4
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 14.06’’ S 18° 43’ 03.43’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 20

Notice site: RR Franks Primary School
Size: 2 X A3
Coordinates: 33° 59’ 3.76’’ S 18° 42’ 39.96’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 21

Notice site: Dennemere Primary School
Size: 2 X A3
Coordinates: 33° 58’ 44.44’’ S 18° 42’ 16.15’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 22

Notice site: Blackheath Nativity Church
Size: 2 X A4
Coordinates: 33° 58’ 29.32’’ S 18° 42’ 29.08’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 23

Notice site: Blackheath Primary School
Size: 2 X A3
Coordinates: 33° 58’ 41.43’’ S 18° 41’ 57.35’’ E

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 24

Notice site: Blackheath Secondary School
Size: 2 X A3
Coordinates: 33° 58’ 59.91’’ S 18° 42’ 15.50’’ E

3.3 Background Information Document (BID)

A BID was compiled to notify potential stakeholders of the proponent’s intended activities, provide
information on the proposed project, set out the EIA process and inform stakeholders how they can
participate in the project. The BID was written in simple English, Afrikaans and IsiXhosa and was
distributed to identified stakeholders during the pre-application phase. Stakeholders who registered
during the lifecycle of the EIA process will be sent the BID to provide the basic information of the project.

The English BID is been included as Appendix C4 to the Scoping Report.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 25

4 Scoping Phase consultation
The PPP during the scoping phase has been summarised as follows:

Table 4: Scoping Phase PPP summary

Task Description Date

Written notification Registered I&APs as well as non-registered organs of state 17 January
are emailed the notification letter including a Non-Technical 2018
Summary. The letter provides details of the process,
availability of the documentation for comment, as well as
timeframes for comment between 17 January 2018 and 18
February 2018.
Libraries Hard copies of the Scoping Report were deposited in the 17 January
Melton Rose and Eerste River public libraries. 2018
Website The Scoping Report is available on the Aurecon website: 17 January
http://www.aurecongroup.co.za/en/public- 2018
participation.aspx
Placement of site Site notices were put up to inform the general public of the 17 January
notices proposed projects and the public participation process. 2018
These were placed onsite as well as in various community
facilities in the wider area (these locations will be updated
in the Final Scoping Report).
Newspaper Adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and 17 January
advertisement Tygerburger. 2018
Public open house A public open house is proposed on 7 February 2018 and 7 February
all I&APs that received written notification, were notified of 2018
the meeting.

5 Comments and responses

This Comments and Response Report reflects the comments received during the Pre-Application public
comment period (29 March 2017 to 04 May 2017). It will be revised to include the comments received
during the subsequent Scoping and EIA Phases. Note that Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP’s)
submissions are include in Table 5, below and Table 6 includes the specific Comments and associated
Responses.

In cases where I&APs commented in any language other than English, a translation (to English) will be
provided in italics together with the original text that was received during the public comment period.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx 15 January 2018 Revision 2 Page 26

Table 5: List of I&AP submissions

No Name Organisation Date of Comment Date of Response Method

Pre-application Phase
N/A (outside EIA
1. Ivan Cloete AFASA Western Cape 16/03/2017 Email
process)
2. Alex Davids Power Group 29/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email
3. Abubaker Francis Private Farmer 29/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email
4. Marco Geretto City of Cape Town: Senior Urban Designer for Urban Integration 28/03/2017 30/03/2017 Email
5. Gerrie Hattingh City of Cape Town 31/03/2017 31/03/2017 Email
6. Trevor Lodewyk IThemba Farmers Association 31/03/2017 03/04/2017 Email
7. Nigel Titus City of Cape Town Transport & Urban Development Authority 03/04/2017 03/04/2017 Email
8. Mervyn August City of Cape Town: Sustainable Urban Development 04/04/2017 04/04/2017 Email
9. Wallace Maritz Adjacent Landowner: Penhill Estate 05/04/2017 20/04/2017 Post
10 Shaun Swanepoel Eskom 13/04/2017 22/05/2017 Email
11. Danie Carinus Bluegum Grove Trust 28/04/2017 29/04/2017 Email
12 AFASA Western Cape AFASA Western Cape 29/04/2017 29/04/2017 Email
13. Thaakirah Marcus University of the Western Cape 01/05/2017 02/05/2017 Email
14 DLC Motsisi Eskom 02/05/2017 04/05/2017 Post
Telephone &
15. Paul Clarke Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 03/05/2017 03/05/2017
Email
16. Dieter Heinze Preem Brokerage 03/05/2017 03/05/2017 Email
17. Cheran Young Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 03/05/2017 03/05/2017 Email
18. Maria Katsoulis Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 04/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email
19. Kirk Young Penhill Home Owners & Ratepayers Association 04/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email
20. Jacqui Farr Penhill Estate Resident 05/05/2017 05/05/2017 Email
21. Rhett Smart CapeNature 11/05/2017 11/05/2017 Email
24/02/2017
22a Shamile Manie (on behalf of 28/07/2017 (c/o
City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department (received Email
. Peter Flower) SMEC)
19/05/2017)
22b Shamile Manie (on behalf of 22/05/2017
City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department 19/05/2017 Email
. Peter Flower) (acknowledged)
Shamile Manie (on behalf of 16/11/2017 (c/o
22c. City of Cape Town: Water and Sanitation Department 21/09/207 Email
Peter Flower) SMEC)

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 27

No Name Organisation Date of Comment Date of Response Method
30/05/2017
23. Andrew September Heritage Western Cape (received 13/07/2017 Email
30/06/2017)
Eskom: Land Development (c/o Joyce Mtimkulu of Motla Consulting
24. Owen Peters 21/06/2017 c/o Motla Email
Engineers)
25. Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident 12/07/2017 12/07/2017 Email
26. Pedro McAllister Blackheath Resident 21/09/2017 28/09/2017 Email
Johan Carinus and Danie
27. Bluegum Grove Trust (landowner of proposed reservoir) 13/07/2017 13/07/2017 Meeting
Carinus
28. Kevin Balfour City of Cape Town 26/09/2017 N/A (c/o SMEC) Email

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 28

Table 6: Comments and responses
No. From Comments received Response/Comment
1. Ivan Cloete This is a submission from AFASA W/C on behalf of the Jacobsdal farming Interactions and negotiations with the existing informal farmers residing on
(Penhill farmer community. the Penhill landholdings regarding their future on the land and the agricultural
and AFASA options available to them are ongoing.
Hereby we would like to put to you our current position in response to the
Western Cape)
meeting on 14th March'17 between ourselves, Dept. of Human Settlements,
other stakeholders and other affected parties in relation to the planned
development on Jacobsdal farm.
“The Bill of Rights is the most important part of our constitution and is stated
under 7 (1) to be the cornerstone of democracy in South Africa. This Bill
requires the DoHS to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights guaranteed
in the Bill of Rights. Anything that is inconsistent with our Constitution, both law
and conduct is invalid; therefore Provincial Government's practices have to be
constitutionally compliant.
We are therefore of the view that our rights has been infringed and disrespected
by the Dept. of Human Settlements. The fact that there was not proper
consultation and no participation in drafting the “desktop development plan "
makes the entire exercise a one-sided affair and invalid.
In the light of the aforesaid we would like to suggest the following;
1. the Dept. of Agriculture W/C , DRDLR / PSSC W/C , Dept. of Water and
Sanitation and Dept. of Social Services should be included in this process as
major stakeholders;
2. We withdraw from all negotiations concerning the Penhill / Jacobsdal Project
until these role players are part of the negotiations;
3. Abovementioned stakeholders should together with the Penhill farming
community reps, design a “workable desktop plan " which include a needs
analyses for the farmers and people residing on the property; this should be a
dual process and runs parallel with the consultation process.
4. we also want to make it clear that we're not oppose to the planned
development but object to the 40ha of land that will be made available for urban
agricultural activities whereas we are mostly pig farmers.
2. Alex Davids Kindly register Mr Percy Knight from Power Construction, contact number 082 Acknowledged.
(Power Group) 442 6019 / 021 907 1300 as an interested & effective party on the above-
Alex Davids and Mr Percy Knight were registered as I&APs.
mentioned project.
Please contact me should you require any additional information.
3. Abubaker Francis The existing small farmers with livestock adjacent to cemetery will they be Acknowledged.
(Private Farmer) relocated or will their operations be within the proposed development area.
1. Mr Francis was informed that it is the intention of the project to make
provision for an agricultural component to accommodate urban
agriculture for farmers from both Penhill and iThemba, the details of
which are still being investigated. A copy of the Background
Information Document with a cover letter was sent to Mr Francis for

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 29

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
additional information. In addition Mr Francis was notified that
further details would be made available during the Scoping and
Environmental Impact Assessment phases. All registered I&APs will
be informed of the commenting period during scoping.

2. Mr Francis has been registered as I&AP.

4. Marco Geretto Marco Geretto stated that he was intimately involved in the intergovernmental Acknowledged.
(City of Cape team providing input into the development. It is more effective for him to engage
Marco Geretto was registered as an I&AP.
Town: Urban through that process than the EIA process. He will provide comment on the Draft
Integration) BAR/ EIA when it is circulated.
5. Gerrie Hattingh Requested for a copy of the Background Information (BID) and letter that was Acknowledged.
(City of Cape sent to I&APs. In addition Gerrie Hattingh requested that Mr Roelof Mare and
1. A copy of the BID and letter to I&APs was sent to Mr Hattingh as per
Town) Penhill Home Owners And Residents Association be added on the I&AP
request.
database.
2. Mr Hattingh along and the Penhill Home Owners and Residents
Association have been registered as I&APs. Mr Mare was already
on the I&AP database and had received notification.
6. Trevor Lodewyk Trevor Lodewyk indicated that the following issues should be considered in the Acknowledged.
(iThemba Farmers Environmental Impact Assessment Process:
1. Mr Lodewyk was informed that all comments submitted during the
Association)
 Livestock Farming PPP period would be considered and included for submission to
 Agriculture DEA&DP. The comments made therein will be considered when
 Piggery undertaking the Environmental Impact Assessment, specifically as
part of the Agricultural Impact Assessment and Social Impact
Assessment. Further details would be made available during the
Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. In addition
all registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period
during scoping.
2. The Department of Agriculture is a commenting authority that have
and will be consulted further during the EIA process, as well as other
project processes underway.
3. Mr Lodewyk was registered as I&AP.
7. Nigel Titus Requested for a copy of the Background Information and letter that was sent to Acknowledged.
I&APs.
(City of Cape 1. A copy of the BID and letter to I&APs was sent to Mr Titus as per
Town: Transport request.
& Urban 2. Mr Titus has been registered as I&AP.
Development
Authority)
8. Mervyn August Kindly register me on the I&AP database along with Jens Kuhn. Acknowledged.
(City of Cape
1. Mr Mervyn August and Mr Jens Kuhn have been registered as
Town:
I&APs.
Sustainable
Urban
Development)

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 30

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
th
9. Wallace Maritz In response to the Advertisement which appeared in the Tygerburger on 29 Acknowledged.
(Adjacent March 2017 I would request to be registered as an INTERESTED
1. Wallace Maritz has been registered as I&AP on the I&AP and
Landowner: PARTICIPANT. I would be most interested in a plan of the intended
adjacent landowners Database.
Penhill Estate) development, as it would seem to be adjacent to the existing Penhill Estate.
2. A Background Information Document (BID) was sent by post to
Preferred method of communication POST Wallace Maritz on 20 April 2017.
Name and address & Phone No
Wallace Maritz, Plot 160, Kingfisher Rd., Penhill, 7100
Tel : 021 904 1494
10. Shaun Swanepoel Penhill Greenfields Development Project- Environmental Impact Assessment. Acknowledged (by email).
(Eskom)
Ref: 01024/17 1. Shaun Swanepoel has been registered as I&AP on the I&AP
Database.
I refer to your email dated 28 March 2017.
He was informed that colleagues at Motla are also engaging directly with the
This application affects the following Eskom Power lines
respective departments within Eskom regarding the technical aspects of the
 Blackheath 11kV overhead powerline project.
 Blackheath/Eersterivier 66kV overhead powerline
 Bluedowns/Stikland 132kV overhead Powerline
 Palmiet/ Stikland 400kV overhead Powerline
Lungile Motsitsi, Eskom: Transmission must be contacted on 011 800 5734 to
comment on behalf of the 400kV overhead Powerlines, no work within this
servitude or underneath powerlines is allowed until comment from Eskom
Transmission has been obtained.
I hereby inform you that Eskom approves the proposed work indicated on your
drawing in principle subject to the following. This approval is valid for 12 Months
only, after which reapplication must be made if work has not yet commenced.
a) The following building and tree restriction on either side of the centre
line of overhead powerline must be observed.
Voltage: Building restriction either side of centre
line:
11kV 9.0m
66kV 11.0m
132kV 15.5m
b) No construction work may be executed closer than 6 (Six) metres from
any Eskom structure or structure-supporting mechanism.
c) No work or no machinery nearer than the following distances from
the conductors
Voltage: Not closer than (distance):

11kV 3.0m

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 31

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
66kV 3.2m
132kV 3.8m
d) Natural ground level must be maintained within Eskom reserve areas
and servitudes.
e) That a Minimum ground clearance of the overhead power line must be
maintained to the following clearance :
Voltage Safety clearance above road:
11kV 6.3m
66kV 6.9m
132kV 7.5m
f) The existing Eskom Power lines and infrastructure are acknowledged
as established infrastructure on the properties and any routing or
relocation would be for the cost of the applicant/developer.
g) That Eskom rights or servitude, including agreements with any of the
land owners, obtained for the operation and maintenance of these
existing power lines and infrastructure be acknowledged and
honoured throughout its lifecycle which include, but are not limited to:
i. Having 24 hour access to its infrastructure according to
the rights mentioned in (a) above,
ii. To perform maintenance (Structural as well as servitude-
vegetation management) on its infrastructure according to
its maintenance programmes and schedules,
iii. To upgrade or refurbish its existing power lines and
infrastructure as determined by Eskom,
iv. To perform any other activity listed above to ensure the
safe operation and maintenance of the Eskom power lines
or infrastructure,
h) Eskom must have at least a 10m obstruction free zone around all
pylons (not just a 10m radius from centre).
i) Eskom shall not be liable for the death or injury of any person, or for
loss or damage to any property, whether as a result of the
encroachment or use of the area where Eskom has its services, by the
applicant, his/her agents, contractors, employees, successors in tittle
and assignee.
j) The applicant indemnifies Eskom against any loss, claims or
damages, including claims pertaining to interference with Eskom
services, apparatus or otherwise.
k) Eskom shall at all times have unobstructed access to and aggress
from its services.
l) Any development which necessitates the relocation of Eskom’s
services will be to the account of the developer.
m) Thys Cronje, POLKADRAAI CNC must be contacted on 021 900
5663/8 before working in close proximity to the overhead power lines.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 32

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Kindly contact Shaun Swanepoel at Tel: 021 980 3913, should you require any
further information.

11. Danie Carinus Danie Carinus indicated that the following issues should be considered in the 1. Danie Carinus was informed that all comments submitted during the
(Adjacent Environmental Impact Assessment Process: PPP period would be considered and included for submission to
landowner: DEA&DP. Potential impacts to adjacent landowners have been
“Low costing housing adjacent to farms where edible farms are being farmed,
Bluegum Grove considered during the layout selection of the proposed development
cannot and has never worked. There will be a need for a substantial buffer
Trust) and will be investigated during the EIA phase by various specialists
between the metropoles boundary and farming along the proposed
(Visual, Agricultural and Social Impact Assessments form part of the
development boundary.”
EIA study). Further details would be made available during the
In addition Danie Carinus requested that V Carinus be added to the I&AP Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases. All
database. registered I&APs would be informed of the commenting period
during scoping.
Danie Carinus and V Carinus were registered as I&APs.
12. AFASA Western According to your legal Notice DEA&DP Number 13/3/3/6/7/2/A4/17/3044/17, Acknowledged.
Cape AFASA W/C together with Penhill Farming Community (Including Mr Malcom
Response sent by Nashieta Holtman (Mzi Development Services) as part of
Loggenstein and Ivan Cloete) as affected parties would like to register to be part
the direct ongoing stakeholder management communications for the project:
of the public participation process.
1. AFASA W/C was informed that a meeting was held with Mr. Joe
At this stage we are unclear about all the details i.t.o the intended farming
Barends – DLRC / FAPRO and Mr. Godfrey Domingo – CoCT Urban
activities on the property and still waiting for the Department of Agriculture W/C,
Agriculture on 20 April 2017 at the Elsies River Department of
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform W/C, Department of Water
Human Settlements offices. The purpose of the meeting was to
and Sanitation and Department of Social Development to become part of the
identify how the consultant team and the DoHS can commence the
process in order for us to submit meaningful comments.
parallel engagement with the farmers particularly focussing on the
Can you forward us an acknowledgement of this registration request. agriculture component.
It was agreed that a follow up engagement with all stakeholders
Thanking you.
together with the farmers will be scheduled for the week of 8 May
2017. DoHS and the consultant team is in the process of liaising
with the key role players from the departments of Agriculture and
Rural Development and Land Reform and is hoping to finalise the
date of the meeting by end of this week (week ending 05 May 2017).
Mr Ivan Cloete will be contacted with further feedback.
Response as part of the EIA process:
Mr Malcom Loggenstein was registered as I&AP.
13. Thaakirah Marcus I would like to be involved and receive information regarding the proposed Acknowledged.
(University of Penhill Development. I would like to register as an I&AP for this proj ect.
Thaakirah was registered as I&AP. In addition Thaakirah was notified that
Western Cape)
Attached is my contact details. further details will become available during the Scoping and Environmental
Impact Assessment Phases of the project. All registered I&APs will be notified
of the commenting period.
14. DLC Motsisi With reference to The Environmental Authorisation Application Process for the Acknowledged.
(Eskom) proposed Penhill Greenfields Development, Cape Town. DLC Motsisi submitted
The conditions provided by Eskom are noted and will be adhered to in the
the following comments:
design of the proposed development. Where relevant they can be included in
the Construction Environmental Management Programme which sets out

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 33

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
I refer to your document not dated in this regard and wish to inform you that measures to ensure contractor compliance with the relevant legislation and to
Eskom Transmission (Tx) Palmiet-Stikland 400kV power lines will be affected mitigate environmental impacts. If any deviation from the conditions is
by this application. required, permission from Eskom will be sought in advance through the
relevant processes.
The extent and width of the servitude is 27.5m on either side of the centre lines
of the power lines.
Eskom Tx will raise no objection to the EIA process, provided its rights and
services are acknowledged and respected at all times. The following terms and
conditions must be borne in mind:
Eskom Tx’s rights and services must be acknowledged and respected at all
times.

Eskom Tx shall at all times retain unobstructed access to and egress from its
servitudes.

Eskom Tx’s consent does not relieve the applicant from obtaining necessary
statutory, land owner or municipal approvals.

The applicant will adhere to all relevant environmental legislation. Any cost
incurred by Eskom Tx as a result of non-compliance will be changed to the
applicant.
All work within Eskom’s servitude areas shall comply with the relevant Eskom
earthing standards in force at the time.

No construction or excavation work shall be executed within the above specified

voltage metres from any Eskom powerline structure.

If Eskom Tx has to incur any expenditure in order to comply with statutory

clearance or other regulations as a result of the application’s activities or
because of the presence of his equipment or installation within the servitude
restricted area, the applicant shall pay such costs to Eskom Tx on demand.
The use of explosives of any type within 500 metres of Eskom’s Tx’s Services,
shall only occur with Eskom Tx’s previous permission. If such permission is
granted the applicant must give at least fourteen working days prior notice of
the commencement of blasting. This allows time for arrangements to be made
for supervision and/or precautionary instructions to be issued in terms of the
blasting process. It is advisable to make application separately in this regard.
Changes in ground level may not infringe statutory ground to conductor
clearances. After any changes in ground level, the surface shall be rehabilitated
and stabilised so as to prevent erosion. The measures taken shall be to Eskom
Tx’s requirements.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 34

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Eskom Tx shall not be liable for the death of any person or for the loss of or
damage to any property whether as a result of the encroachment or of the use
of the servitude area by the applicant, his agent, contractors, employees,
successors in tittle and assignee. The applicant indemnifies Eskom Tx against
loss, claims or damages including claims pertaining to consequential damages
by third parties and whether as a result of damage to or interruption of or
interference with Eskom Tx’s services or apparatus or otherwise. Eskom Tx will
not be held responsible for damage to the applicant’s equipment.
No mechanical equipment, including mechanical excavators or high lifting
machinery, shall be used in the vicinity of Eskom’s apparatus and/or services,
without prior written permission having been granted by Eskom Tx. If such
permission is granted the applicant must give at least seven working days’
notice prior to commencement of work. This allows time for arrangements to be
made for supervision and/or precautionary instructions to be issued by Eskom
North East Region Lines and servitude manager.
Eskom Tx’s rights and duties in the servitude shall be accepted as having prior
right at all times and shall not be obstructed or interfered with. Note where
electrical outage is required, at least fourteen work days are required to arrange
it.
Under no circumstances shall rubble, earth or other material be dumped within
the servitude restriction area. The applicant shall maintain the area concerned
to Eskom Tx’s satisfaction. The applicant shall be liable to Eskom Tx for the cost
of any remedial action which has to be carried out by Eskom Tx.
The clearance between Eskom Tx’s live electrical equipment and the proposed
construction work shall be observed as stipulated by the Regulation 19 of
electrical Machinery Regulations 2011 (with reference to SANS10280-1) of the
occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act 85 of 1993).
Equipment shall be regarded electrically live and therefore dangerous at all
times.

In spite of the restrictions stipulated by Regulation 15 of the Electrical Machinery

Regulations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act 85 of 1993),
as an additional safety precaution, Eskom Tx will not approve the erection of
houses, or structures occupied frequently by human beings under the power
lines or within the servitude restriction area.
Eskom Tx may stipulate any additional requirements to eliminate any possible
exposure to Customers or Public to coming into contact or to be exposed to any
dangers of Eskom Tx plant.
It is required of the applicant to familiarise himself with all safety hazards related
to Electrical plant.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 35

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
This letter and comments should not be deemed a wayleave of any kind. Once
more details regarding the pipeline becomes available, this should be forwarded
to Eskom for approval on a different level.
15. Paul Clarke With reference to the Proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Mr Paul Acknowledged.
(Penhill Home Clarke on behalf of the Penhill Ratepayers association raised the following
Owners & concerns: 1. Mr Paul Clarke was registered as I&AP.
Ratepayers 2. Mr Paul Clarke was notified that at this stage, this was the first round
Association)  Accessibility of project information for some I&APs such as Penhill and of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the
IThemba Farmers who may not have access to emails, etc. Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process, all
 The potential risk of service delivery protests with potential disruption I&APs will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping
to accessibility and damage of infrastructure. Report and EIA Report which will include further details of the
 Devaluation of property in close proximity to the proposed development and outcomes of the specialist studies.
development area.
Refer to the issue specific responses below:
 Properties and neighbouring communities vulnerable to crime.
 Escalation of an existing crime problem in general.
 Lack of job opportunities for the new residents, given that there won’t
only be 8 000 but there will be a substantially higher number
depending on occupancy of units.
 Accessibility of the development and a potential increase of foot traffic
through the train stations.
Please note that that this issue is of major concern to the residents and
businesses in around the Eersterivier, Blackheath, Kuilsrivier and Penhill
residential, commercial and industrial areas. The influence and impact may
even be far further reaching. Please allow me to expand on the noted concerns
raised:
Safety: The community around the proposed development (especially the Potential Socio-economic Impacts will be assessed during the EIA phase by
residential areas) is largely not secure in terms of fencing, CCTV, 24 armed the specialist as part of the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (SIA).
response and access controlled. The development poses a realised threat to
the safety and security of all parties who are in the specified radius around the
proposed development. As a community as we stand now we are plagued with
crime in and around our area. The existing police infrastructure can’t cope with
the ballooning crime stats in the area as it is.
The naming “Penhill Greenfields Development”: The name ‘Penhill’ is The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
associated with Penhill residential estate. Penhill Estate is an unique residential as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
area situated in the Western Cape. We find the use of the name ‘Penhill (Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
Greenfields Development’ reckless as it will be associated with an established and used for administration purposes at this stage.
residential area and we would like no part of association with the proposed low
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
cost housing that is been developed.
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
Service Delivery Issues: As you are well aware, in low cost housing Service delivery issues are acknowledged as a widespread issue across
communities, serious and malicious demonstrations are held regularly should South Africa and are often unpredictable and outside the control of
there be any dispute regarding service deliveries or any services in general, on government in many cases. Whilst the City of Cape Town will be the owner of
a local or National level. Communities don’t demonstrate and tear their own

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 36

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
houses up, they take their aggression and dissatisfaction onto the streets and the development and responsible for most services in the site and surrounding
neighbouring areas. For example, if Khayelitsha has an issue, they demonstrate areas, it cannot necessary take responsibility for such protests.
onto the N2 or Baden Powel Rd, burning tires, throwing stones, throwing human
faeces etc. Du Noon near Table View, brake down the City’s Bus Transport
Stops, stone cars and cause the road leading to Killarney Industrial and Table
View to be closed. There are many more actual examples of violent
demonstrations recorded should you require more. For the City or council to
think they would be able to manage delivery issues would be naïve. Please let
me explain: The city can’t control water restrictions. The city can’t control rolling
blackouts. The city can’t control transport strikes or many other national crisis
that we find ourselves exposed to on a regular basis. Every time such issues
should arise, the surrounding areas will find themselves at risk of very
dangerous and unpredictable results.
Existing Transport: The proposed development would like to build a few It is estimated that approximately 37,000 people could be accommodated on
thousand low cost homes. How many people are generally living in homes once the site. A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the
established? Maybe 5, maybe 6. The closest public transport to feed this Rezoning process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being
development area at the moment would be Eerste River train station, Melton undertaken separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all
Rose and Black Heath Station. This would cause an unbelievable amount of private, public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating
foot traffic through all areas in the way of the proposed development and measures will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA
existing public transport. will be included in the EIA.
Transport Taxis: In all low cost areas Mini Bus Taxis become prolific. This is A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the Rezoning
of great concern as there are many people who make regular use of the road to process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being undertaken
go to work and home, there are as it is, many accidents on the road already, separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all private,
this will be further compounded. public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating measures
will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA will be
included in the EIA.
Pollution: The water that flows to the R102 road, comes from the water of the The stormwater systems designed for the proposed development will be
reserve just above the proposed development. As it is, there is too much subject to the City of Cape Town standards and approval.
pollution from the existing communities that are been washed down the road
During the EIA, the Freshwater Impact Assessment, Groundwater Impact
and flows between Penhill and the R102. Should there be a development with
Assessment and Surface Water Impact Assessment will consider impacts to
even more people relocated the amount of environmental pollution will be
freshwater ecology, surface water and groundwater and mitigation measures
horrific.
for inclusion in the EMPr will be recommended where relevant. Furthermore,
a Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification
of waste management measures for domestic and construction waste.
Advertising: Please could you let me know what papers and the dates the As part of the Public Participation Process (PPP) Site notices were put up to
advertisement for the proposed development was printed. The residents of inform the general public of the proposed projects and the public participation
Penhill and other concerned parties are not aware of the advert. process. These were placed onsite, Welmoed Cemetery Boundary, Blue
Downs Shoprite Checkers, Kleinvlei Secondary School, Melton train
station/taxi rank, Kleinvlei South African Police Service (SAPS), Melton Rose
Library, Kleinvlei Community Health Care Centre, RR Franks Primary School,
Dennemere Primary School, Blackheath Nativity Church, Blackheath Primary
School and Blackheath Secondary School on 29 March 2017. In addition
adverts were placed in The Cape Times, Die Burger and Tygerburger on 29
March 2017.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 37

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
General Information For all groups concerned: Accessibility of project As part of the Public Participation Process (PPP) a copy of the BID was
information for some I&APs such as the ‘Penhill’ (The farming community provided to the Penhill Farmers and the iThemba farmers through their
existing in the area are not called Penhill Farmers), and iThemba Farmers who representatives.
may not have email etc.
Devaluation of existing properties: The broader community is concerned that This impact will be considered in the Socio-economic Impact Assessment as
there investments are going to also lose value. This is looking at places where part of the EIA phase.
low cost housing has been built next to existing residential areas. The
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
association with the name ‘Penhill Greenfields Development Project’ to Penhill
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
Estate as a poor low cost area. Crime etc. How will we be compensated by the
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
city for loss of value of our investments due to a development been carelessly
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
built disregarding all residents, businesses etc. disapproval in the area? Please
note that our rates are also worked out according to the value of our properties. Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
A devaluation in property prices across the board also amounts to loss of Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
revenue to the council. a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
Lack of job opportunities in the area: Please look at Google maps. You will Some of the housing opportunities will be for people who qualify for subsidies,
see that the proposed area is not suitable for sustainable employment in and in other words they have secure sources of income already. Further, the
around the immediate area. The surrounds are established. This means that the development includes a light industrial / commercial component and facilities
existing infrastructure regarding jobs is already established in the surrounding such as clinics and schools, which will also create sources of employment.
area. The existing established Industrial area will be at full employment. (Has
This impact will be considered in the Socio-economic Impact Assessment as
anyone gone factory to factory and asked how many new people they plan to
part of the EIA phase.
employ in the next few months to a year?) This will be crucial as this means that
unless everyone that moves into the proposed low cost housing development
has a job already, where they are going to work. As they aren’t close to work
opportunities what are they going to do when they have mouths to feed and no
income. The development under such circumstances puts the area at great risk
as theft and crime may be looked at as an easy solution to put food on the table.
There are many vulnerable families at risk of the decision making going forward.
Please consider the above. We would like to be further involved and kept up to The Penhill landholdings comprise state-owned land that has been in the
date. We are an active community who live in the area for its tranquillity beauty custodianship of the Department of Human Settlements for a number of years,
etc. specifically for the provision of housing. This ±200ha landholding represents
the largest tract of ‘vacant’ land owned by the Department within the City of
This would change the general existing lifestyle of everyone concerned around
Cape Town, which upon development, will allow the Department to address
the proposed development. What I don’t understand is that the City is
the immense housing backlog experienced in the City of Cape Town, by
desperately looking for graveyard space, this would be a suitable space for a
providing housing opportunities at scale. Owing to its size, the site can
graveyard area. Also, farmers that are already there have lived there for years
accommodate whole existing communities (thereby minimising impacts on
(Which has also been a unique living arrangement) and now their living
existing social networks).
arrangements have to be changed. What is the proposed land at iThemba labs
once the farmers are evicted? The land at iThemba labs is also proposed for mixed use (including
residential) development.
We as the community and greater community in the area would like to attend
and have input to any meetings or dialogs as to the way forward and would like Similarly, the Department is also undertaking a mixed-use development on
to note that we a strongly against any proposed development of the area. their landholdings at Ithemba, located in the greater Blue Downs area.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 38

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
The project is currently registered with the Department of Human Settlements
as the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, which relates to the location
(Penhill) and type of development (Greenfields). This name is only temporary
and used for administration purposes at this stage.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 39

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Once planning approval is obtained the development will be registered in the
Deeds office under a new, more suitable name. Such name will be subject to
a full public participation process and this new name will be reflected in the
township register to be opened in due course.
As registered I&APs you will be kept informed of opportunities for future
participation during the EIA process.
16. Dieter Heinze In line with Pauls e-mail (please refer to comment 15) I can say that fully and Acknowledged.
wholeheartedly agree. I take personal objection to the poor attempt to consider
(Penhill Home 1. Dieter Heinze was notified that at this stage, this was the first round
any of the surrounding neighbourhoods and I severely doubt that this would
Owners & of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the
classify as a fair chance to any of us to comment.
Ratepayers Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process All I&APs
Association) Please take it seriously when it is mentioned the police currently take over an will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping Report and
hour to respond to urgent matters and even do not respond at all very often. I EIA Report which will include further details of the development and
would greatly like to see the plans in place to show that this will be a safe and outcomes of the specialist studies. In addition responses to the
viable option not only for the current residents but also the proposed several comments submitted by Dieter will be included as part of the
10’s of thousands of people supposedly moving in. response to Paul Clarke (PHORA).
2. Dieter Heinze has been registered as I&AP.
We object strongly to the use of the name as well… This process should include
3. Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 14).
all the neighbourhoods surrounding
The area and until such time as you have achieved this it is shocking to think
that any go-ahead could be considered.
17. Cheran Young I am a resident of Penhill and a member of PHORA I completely agree with Paul Acknowledged.
Clark's concerns (please refer to comment 15) over the development and ask
(Penhill Home 1. Cheran Young was informed that all comments submitted during the
that you please include me as an effected party against the development.
Owners & Pre-Application PPP period would be considered and included for
Ratepayers submission to DEA&DP. Further details would be made available
Association) during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases.
In addition all registered I&APs would be informed of the
commenting period during scoping. Responses to Cheran Young’s
Comments will be included in the response to Paul Clarke (PHORA).
2. Cheran Young has been registered as I&AP.
18. Maria Katsoulis I have been a resident and property owner in Penhill Estate for close to 20 years. Acknowledged.
(Penhill Home Therefore it's with great concern that the proposed development which is on our
1. Maria Katsoulis was notified that at this stage, this was the first
Owners & doorstep has not involved public participation thus far.
round of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the
Ratepayers
1. When are the residents of Penhill Estate going to be consulted on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIA) process, all
Association)
such a huge project including our neighbours across the railway line? I&APs will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping
2. How is such a development going to be managed regarding rules and Report and EIA Report which will include further details of the
regulations once the occupants have moved into their homes i.e. most development and outcomes of the specialist studies. In addition
of the low cost homes have unsightly extensions to accommodate as responses to the comments submitted by Dieter will be included as
many friends and family. part of the response to Paul Clarke (PHORA). All comments
3. Has our security been taken into consideration. We struggle to get law submitted during the Pre-Application PPP period would be
enforcement to apply the rule of law just as we are right now. No one considered and included for submission to DEA&DP.
regards the law and are law into themselves. 2. Maria Katsoulis has been registered as I&AP.
4. I certainly did not invest my life savings buying my home to support 3. Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).
the deterioration of the area. Just look at what is happening in

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 40

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Eersterivier the litter is everywhere so much so that people are just
dumping their old stuff on the side of the road.
5. What about our property value that will definitely deplete especially
since this proposed development has our namesake?
19. Kirk Young With regards to the below email (comments from Paul Clarke) from the PHORA Acknowledged.
chairman, I'd like to request that you also please add my address to the list of
(Penhill Home 1. Kirk Young was informed that the comments submitted would be
affected parties.
Owners & included in any response issued to Paul Clarke.
Ratepayers I am in agreement with what has been listed below. 2. Kirk Young has been registered as I&AP.
Association)
20. Jacqui Farr Key concerns with the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project
include:
(Penhill Estate
Resident)
Safety and Security: Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).
 Residents of Penhill Estate have already felt the effects of the
economic challenges with Eerste River, Meltonrose and Blackheath
nearby and the increase in petty crime. The result of this is that the
areas has had to become more security conscience. The addition of
more low cost housing so close to Penhill Estate has the potential to
impact on the residents’ safety and security.
There are already issues with the lack of resources for the local Police stations
(the 2 closest to Penhill include Eerste River and Melton Rose police stations)
in addressing safety concerns in the area. The increase in local population will
put further pressure on these services. How will this be addressed?
Provision of services:  The consultant team has been in communications with the City of
Cape Town and Eskom regarding the sewage, water and electrical
 Penhill Estate has been promised improved services – specifically
services. Additional bulk services will be installed by the authorities
mainline water and sewerage – which has yet to materialise. That
to serve this project as well as other development needs in the area.
being said, how is the current lack of water, and related services, in
The competent authority (the Department of Environmental Affairs
the area going to be accommodated with this new development? And
and Development Planning) requires confirmation of services from
how will this impact on the areas as a whole? Should there be
the relevant authorities and considers this during their decision-
difficulties with service delivery to the new development we have the
making processes for the application. If necessary the development
added concern of possible protests – this then becomes an issue of
will need to be phased in line with the availability of bulk services. It
safety and security again.
is also noted that future residents of the development are already
 Local schools are already running at capacity, with the addition of
residing elsewhere within the City of Cape Town and therefore
8000 families, assuming only 1 child per house hold, the ability of our
making use of existing services where available, or living in informal
schools to accommodate the additional students is seriously in
areas where services are lacking and health and quality of life are
question. How will this be addressed?
compromised. The aim is to improve their standard of living and
 Eerste River, Melton Rose and Blackheath are currently being facilitate better access to services being provided.
serviced by community several clinics and one hospital run by the
 Community facilities and services include primary and secondary
Government. These services are already under pressure due to the
schools, crèches, places of worship, a community centre, sports
needs of the local residents (most of which are low income and
fields and open spaces will be provided for in the development plan.
therefore cannot afford private medical services). The additional
The implementation of some of these facilities will require funding

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 41

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
residents for the proposed development will need access to health from other government agencies and liaison with these agencies
services – how will this be addressed? has commenced.
 The development plan includes sites for community facilities which
will include primary health care facilities. It is usual for a clinic to be
integrated with other community facilities and this is the intention,
although detailed design has not yet been undertaken.
Waste: The issue of pollution is already a challenge in Eerste River with the A Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification
level of localised pollution on our roads steadily increasing. This impacts not of waste management measures.
only the environment but also the desirability of the area – especially for Penhill
Estate – having to drive through Eerste River and past Melton Rose and
Blackheath where roadside pollution is increasing makes prospective property
buyers unlikely to want to invest. The addition of over 8000 new residents will
add to the level of pollution in the surrounding areas. What municipal systems
and services have been identified and will be responsible for addressing this?
Use of the name Penhill: Penhill Estate is a unique residential area. Most of Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).
the residents have bought property here based on this uniqueness. The use of
the name Penhill as part of the new development will take away part of this.
Should the proposed development go ahead, our neighbourhood will be
associated with this low cost housing development which will impact on local
property pricing and the desirability of living in the area.
Property prices: Buying property is an investment – for many of us the only Refer to responses to Paul Clark above (comment 15).
major investment we can afford. The fact the Penhill Estate falls under Eerste
River already impacts on the property prices in the area, the addition of another
low cost housing development so close will further devalue this investment. How
will this be mitigated and local residents compensated for this loss?
Existing infrastructure: A Transport Impact Assessment is a part-requirement of the Rezoning
process, in-line with City of Cape Town regulations; and is being undertaken
 The R102 which is the main access route to the surrounding areas,
separately to the EIA process. This will consider the impacts of all private,
including Cape Town, Stellenbosch and Somerset West. This road is
public and non-motorised transport on the local network. Mitigating measures
already incredibly busy and it is impossible to see how this transport
will be recommended where required. The outcomes of the TIA will be
route will be able to accommodate the addition of an additional 8000
included in the EIA.
residents – this is assuming only 1 working person per household.
Taking into account additional transport requirements for local
schools, shopping, public transport and health services and this then
becomes a critical issue.
 There are already numerous accidents in the area due to the increase
usage of the R102 and other main arteries in the areas. The ripple
effect of this include:
 Increased pressure on a struggling (and failing) health system
 Increased pressure on existing police resources
 Negative impact on local residents due to time delays, access to
these main arteries and noise pollution.
 The increase in public transport requirements will tax an already
defunct transport system. With this said, the increase of taxis that will
be required will impact on our current road infrastructure and possible

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 42

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
violence, should strikes occur or disputes on transport prices, etc, will
affect the services lifted above and become an issue of safety and
security again.
Pollution: The local area has several industrial developments which impacts A Waste Impact Assessment is being undertaken and includes identification
on the local environment (noise, air and environmental pollution), the existing of waste management measures.
low income residential areas impact on the level of roadside pollution which is
The consultant team has been in communications with the City of Cape Town
on the rise, the overburdened sewerage and water management systems has
and Eskom regarding the sewage, water and electrical services. The
the potential to become a serious health threat.
competent authority (the Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning) requires confirmation of services from the relevant
authorities and considers this during their decision-making processes for the
application.
Over and above the above concerns listed, with the inclusion of low cost housing The proposed project is a mixed use development and is planned to provide
in the proposed development makes me wonder whether the low cost housing for the following housing opportunities:
is planned as an RDP type housing or will they be for sale at market related
 Integrated Residential Development Programme (IRDP) houses;
prices. If the housing is RDP housing - I question where the new residents for
the proposed development will come from - where will they work, and how will  Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLISP) houses;
the area be managed – specifically when the other RDP housing development  Market houses;
have generally not only had to accommodate the families that acquire the  Social housing units (flats) and for rental; and
houses, but often their extended families housed in Wendy houses, or poorly  Backyard rental units.
built extensions. In addition, there will be a commercial / industrial component, agricultural land
and community facilities and services which include schools, crèches, places
of worship, a community centre, sports fields and open spaces.
More information on these components and the proposed layouts will be
provided in the Scoping Report
Please could you keep us informed regarding the ongoing process as relates to Jacqui Farr has been registered as I&AP.
the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project.

21. Rhett Smart Comment from CapeNature on the Pre-application consultation for the Acknowledged.
(CapeNature) proposed Penhill greenfields Development on various Portions of Farms
1. Rhett Smart was informed that all comments submitted during the
Welmoed 468 and Jacobsdal 410, Cape Town:
Pre-Application PPP period would be considered and included for
CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the submission to DEA&DP. Further details would be made available
proposed development and would like to make the following comments. Please during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment phases.
note that our comments only pertain to the biodiversity related impacts and not In addition all registered I&APs would be informed of the
to the overall desirability of the proposed development. commenting period during scoping.
2. Aurecon responded indicating that the findings of the scoping report
Background:
would shape the alternatives to be assessed in the EIR.
According to the Biodiversity Network (BioNet) for the City of Cape Town the 3. The alternatives and offset sites would be made available in a few
southern section of the subject property are classified as Critical Biodiversity months’ time, when the Scoping/EIR reports circulated for public
Area (CBA) 2 (irreplaceable restorable sites), which in turn is classified as CBA: comment period. Potential impacts on biodiversity have been
Degraded according to the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WCBSP). considered during the scoping and site selection phase of the
The natural vegetation is mapped as Cape Flats Sand Fynbos across most of proposed development and will be investigated during the EIA
the site, with a small patch of Swartland Shale Renosterveld in the east, both of phase by various specialists (see Section 7 of the Scoping Report).
which are listed as Critically Endangered. During the EIA phase specific mitigation measures pertaining
biodiversity will be identified for inclusion into the EMPr.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 43

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Various wetlands have been mapped for the site according to the BioNet, with 4. Sensitive areas as identified by the Ecological, Wetland and
a chain of five stormwater attenuation ponds along the western boundary and Botanical Reports will be mapped and overlaid by the development
other natural wetlands scattered in the northern and central sections. footprint in the EIR. These reports will be made available to
registered I&APs and authorities during the EIA Phase.
A botanical specialist study and freshwater specialist study have been provided
to CapeNature as part of the pre-application consultation. The above recommendations will be included in the EIR to ensure that
biodiversity features are adequately identified and potential impacts mitigated.
Terrestrial Biodiversity:
The botanical specialist study found that the site is highly disturbed with a very
low diversity of species, most of which are not representative of the vegetation
types naturally occurring on the site.
It should be noted that the CBA classification is based on the restoration
potential of the site, as denoted by the CBA 2 status. Both vegetation types have
remaining extents below the threshold required to meet conservation targets,
therefore even the highly degraded fragments that currently have low
conservation value status, but are potentially restorable, are selected as CBA.
The botanical specialist report indicates that the passive restoration potential
ranges from poor to moderate, and that active restoration would be required in
order to re-establish Cape Flats Sand Fynbos to the site and restore the
conservation value of the site. Active restoration would be very costly and the
existing on-going impacts would need to be considered if the site were to be
retained and conserved, in addition to other secondary impacts that would occur
associated with the development proposal.
Only two sections of the site were considered of medium or more sensitivity. An
area of medium sensitivity was identified in the north-western corner which was
associated with a wetland, discussed further below. An area of medium-high
sensitivity falls within the southern section of the Eskom powerline servitude,
and is probably as a result of prevention of the activities occurring within the
surrounding area and the removal of alien invasive trees. One Plant Species of
Conservation Concern was encountered on the site and was restricted to the
Eskom servitude.
Freshwater Biodiversity:
The Freshwater specialist study delineated the wetlands on site based on a site
visit which differs from the BioNet wetland mapping. The wetland in the north
west corner (as mentioned above) was verified, as were the constructed
stormwater detention ponds along the western boundary. Artificial depressions
were identified scattered across the site, in addition to artificial channels draining
in a westerly direction. The large wetlands in the northern and central sections
as mapped on the BioNet were not verified.
Figure 11 which indicates the freshwater features on sites has not included the
remnant hillslope seeps. It is also noted that the site visit was undertaken at the
end of the dry season and the report states that additional ground-truthing is
required during the wet season to more accurately delineate the wetlands on
site. Figure 11 would therefore also need to be updated.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 44

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
However, the description of the condition of the wetlands indicates that the
north-western wetland is moderately modified whereas the depressions and
hillslope seeps are seriously modified.
The development layout presented proposes to develop the site including the
wetlands, and to accommodate the hydrological function within new stormwater
ponds and expansion of the existing stormwater ponds. The freshwater
specialist study indicates that the ecological value of these wetlands is low
therefore this could be considered acceptable. The creation of the new
stormwater attenuation ponds can offset the ecological and hydrological
functioning of these wetlands.
The freshwater specialist study has however proposed an additional
development layout which consists of excluding development of the north-
western wetland including a buffer, as this wetland was identified as having
higher ecological value than the other freshwater features.
Biodiversity Offset:
The botanical specialist study has recommended that a biodiversity offset
should be considered due to the loss of Critically Endangered restorable habitat.
The loss of vegetation on site was assessed to have Medium to High
significance, which in accordance with the relevant national and provincial offset
policy and guidelines would qualify as requiring a biodiversity offset to mitigate
the residual impact.
In terms of feasible mitigation measures, a biodiversity offset may be considered
more feasible and potentially a better biodiversity outcome than to implement
active restoration on the site. The surrounding areas need to be taken into
consideration in this regard.
The Penhill Conservation Area is located to the south of the proposed
development and forms one of the 16 municipal properties for which a
Biodiversity Agreement has been signed with CapeNature. It should be noted
that the Biodiversity Agreement refers to three cadastres (Portions 18, 19 and
20 of Farm 468) which total 43.69 ha, however in the agreement the area is
indicated as approximately 50 ha. The WCBSP and latest version of the BioNet
has however included Portion 15 of Farm 468 as also forming part of the
Conservation Area. Earlier versions of the BioNet had only indicated sections of
15/468 as part of the Conservation Area. It is therefore evident that the exact
extent of the Penhill Conservation Area requires further clarity.
Should a biodiversity offset be considered further, existing conservation areas
must be excluded from consideration, as a biodiversity offset must be in addition
to the existing conservation estate. Expansion of existing conservation areas
can however be considered. Investigation of the biodiversity offset may also
need to include areas within the neighbouring Stellenbosch Municipality, such
as the CBA directly to the east of the Penhill Estate. There are however other
factors which must be considered such as land ownership etc. which may affect

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 45

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
the feasibility of the offset. The feasibility must be investigated within the NEMA
authorisation process.
It is noted that the freshwater specialist study has also made reference to a
wetland offset. There are two components which need to be considered for
wetland offsets, namely the water resource function and the ecological value.
The former is within the mandate of the Department of Water and Sanitation,
whereas the latter is within CapeNature’s mandate. In terms of the latter, the
north-western wetland is considered of biodiversity value.
Associated Infrastructure:
The botanical specialist study has also assessed associated infrastructure. The
proposed bulk sewer pipeline would need to connect near to the intersection of
the N2 and the R310 and one area of high sensitivity and one area of very high
sensitivity were identified within the route of the pipeline. CapeNature is aware
of the area of very high sensitivity that will be traversed adjacent to the
Vergenoegd Farm, as this site was historically subject to a development
process.
CapeNature will comment further on this within the process once more detailed
information and project proposals are available. It is recommended that routing
of all linear infrastructure should attempt to avoid areas of biodiversity value as
far as possible.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, CapeNature agrees with the findings of both the botanical
specialist study and the freshwater specialist study. In terms of the impacts on
terrestrial biodiversity, further investigation is required of retention of vegetation
remnants on site along with active restoration versus securing a biodiversity
offset. Consideration of a biodiversity offset must be in terms of the National
Biodiversity Offset Policy and the Western Cape Guideline on Biodiversity
Offsets.
In terms of impacts on freshwater resources, the freshwater specialist study
must be updated following fieldwork undertaken during the wet season including
updated wetland delineation. The additional layout alternative proposed by the
freshwater specialist must be included for further evaluation in the process.
Following on from this the need for wetland offsets should be considered further.
CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments and request further
information based on any additional information that may be received.
22a. Shamile Manie Background SMEC met with CoCT and discussed corrections which were made and
(on behalf of submitted as annotations to this letter. This was submitted by SMEC on 3
This letter serves as comment on water and sewer network and bulk services
Peter Flower, City March 2017.
capacity on the proposed Penhill low income greenfields development.
of Cape Town:
This CoCT letter was submitted to Aurecon via the CoCT environmental
Water and As per our model data base used for Integrated Master Planning (IMP), the farm
branch, along with the letter from SMEC dated 19 May 2017 below:
Sanitation is vacant.
Department) This is a re-submission of our original application dated 14 September 2016.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 46

 No. From Comments received Response/Comment
The information provided in this report is based on City of Cape Town master This re-submission is based on the following :
plan model as well as comments from relevant branches of the department. The
1. Our original letter dated 14 September 2016.
report provides an overview of the existing water and sewer infrastructure near
2. Your response dated 24 February 2017.
the development, associated conditions and technical requirements to be
3. Our subsequent meeting, clarification email and annotated letter
implemented with respect to this application.
dated 3 March 2017.
The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants 4. Your letter dated 12 June 2017 approving the moderated water
as follows: demand design criteria proposed by SMEC SA.
5. On 10 May 2017 the Provincial Head of the Department of Human
Settlements wrote directly to your Director of Water and Sanitation
requesting that the waste water treatment capacity and upgrades be
funded and prioritised to accommodate the complete Penhill
Project.
We understand that your department is presently considering this
request.
6. A review of the Directives for the Planning, Design and
Implementation of Human Settlement Projects in Cape Town
(Directives) of 28 April 2016.
Copies of the above correspondence are attached for your reference.
It should be noted that the demands reflected in the table is estimated on the
increased density planning directive to accommodate up to four dwellings per Re-submission
75 m2 plot. Each plot will contain a single dwelling with an addition backyard SMEC South Africa and BSP Consulting Engineers have been appointed as
sewer connection but that the additional dwellings will occur over time at the Civil Engineering Consultants by the Western Cape Government Department
discretion of the home owner. of Human Settlements (Province) to plan the development of several
Taking into account the water and sewer capacity requirements reflected in the properties collectively known as Penhill Farms in Blue Downs near
table above the consultant Mike King of SMEC Consulting Engineers has Blackheath for 8 000 subsidised housing opportunities.
proposed a rational approach to the calculation of the water demand. The The land comprises portions 3 and 8 of Farm 410 and Portions 5, 25, 26, 31,
approach appears to be sound with respect to reduced household size as 32, 35, 36 and 42 of Farm 468 amounting to some 200ha of open land. The
reflected in the latest censes (3.5 persons/hh) and to calculate water demand development is located to the east of the Van Riebeeck Road (R102) as
per person rather than per household. The proposed demand of 125l/person is shown on the attached District Context Plan. The same land has been subject
put forward as a bases for designing the demand per plot with a maximum of 3 to several planning reports in recent years for the Department, but was called
dwellings as opposed to a maximum 4 dwellings stated in the planning directive. Jacobsdal Farms.
Water Reticulation The Penhill Conceptual Development Framework Report of May 2017 has an
The area has been identified as a potential site for potential future growth. The assumed breakdown of the housing types for the preferred Alternative Layout
departments water master plan indicated that the development could be A. These assumptions are currently being tested with more detailed layout
supplied from the Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water main, design. The current assumed development yield is set out in the following
however this is no longer a viable option. This is as a result of the increased table1 together with assumed servicing criteria.
water demand as proposed by the consultant, which would then increase in the
velocity in the bulk main to an excess of 2.3m/s. Given that the revised scenarios

1
Note that the assumptions differ slightly from what has been used in the Scoping Report as the process of establishing the mix of housing types on the site has evolved with time. The EIA Report will include the latest mix
of housing types based on more detailed design.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 47

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
as indicated above specified a decrease in the expected water demands, the
network surrounding the proposed development was reanalysed.
Scenario 1: A connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from the
750mm diameter Steenbras high pressure main as well as a second connection
off the 200mm diameter would be required to supply the proposed development.
An inline pressure booster would have to be considered given that a pressure
drop of below 20m is expected under these conditions. There is a PRV on the
300mm diameter main which upon consultation with the reticulation branch
could be reset to ensure that there is sufficient pressure available to supply the
development.
Scenario 2 and 3: The existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed
development has insufficient capacity to supply the proposed development. It is
therefore advised that possibly an independent reservoir be considered order to
supply the development under the conditions proposed for scenario 2 and 3.
However the need for an inline booster or adjustment to the PRV setting would
still be required to fill a suitably positioned reservoir with sufficient elevation to
provide the appropriate network pressure. The surrounding topography allows The construction of Penhill is programmed to be completed by December
for this but the need for pipeline servitudes and reservoir land on private 2022. This will be undertaken in several phases each with a construction
farmland will have to be obtained. Scenario 3 requires a 30 Ml reservoir in to contract. It is anticipated that the first phase of subsidised houses will be
cover 48 hr storage. delivered by December 2020.
Refer to figure 1 for the existing water infrastructure. The primary Project Stage of the Penhill development will see the Province
Bulk Water deliver approximately 8 000 subsidised and affordable dwellings or serviced
plots. Subsequently the incremental densification of the sites (as promoted by
A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure 1 500 Directives) by the additional dwellings on the plot will take place. The rate of
mm ON bulk water pipeline which is owned, operated and maintained by the densification will occur outside the Province`s jurisdiction, and will be subject
City of Cape Town's Bulk Water Branch. The pipeline is protected by a 12 m to control by the City of Cape town. For the purpose of estimating the ultimate
wide servitude (LG No. 7901/80). servicing requirements we have used the City`s Directives for Human
The position of the pipeline is shown on the following copies of: Settlement Projects which requires that the designs for subsidised housing
have the capacity of accommodating a primary dwelling plus 2 additional
* Drawing number WO 3805 Sheet 5 dwellings. The amount of the actual future additional dwellings and people
* Colour GIS Extract occupying the plots is still uncertain and might be lower than these
assumptions.
* LG No. 7901/80
The ultimate servicing requirements based on the Directive`s requirement for
Whilst the Bulk Water Branch has no "in principle" objection to the proposed sewer and water networks to meet the above assumptions are indicated in
development, cognizance must be taken of the bulk water pipeline and the following table under Ultimate Servicing Requirements.
servitude, and is subject to the following conditions:
Assumed Servicing Requirements 1:
1. A proposed site development plan (SOP) and/or subdivision plan shall be
submitted to the Bulk Water Branch (Mr F Els, 9th Floor, 38 Wale Street, Cape
Town, tel.: 021 444 7696; email: francois.els@capetown.gov.za) for acceptance
prior to finalisation.
2. Drawings showing the layout and level details of the proposed platforms,
roads and civil engineering services that are planned to cross over and/or be
installed adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude shall be submitted
to the Bulk Water Branch for acceptance.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 48

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
3. The Conditions of Servitude shall be strictly adhered to.
4. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted access
to the bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and maintenance
purposes.
5. The subdivision and/or fencing of portions of the servitude into individual
erven will not be permitted for reasons of access and control. The servitude shall
remain as one continuous entity.
6. No development shall take place, structures erected or services installed
within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the centreline of the bulk
water pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
7. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest, shall not be
altered.
Cognisance shall be taken of the bulk water pipeline servitude, bulk water
pipeline and its appurtenance (i.e. related chambers) throughout the planning,
design and construction processes as no changes to the bulk water pipeline
infrastructure will be considered. Table notes:
It must be noted that the above bulk water pipeline is of strategic importance to The indicated water demand and sewage flows are based on the City
the City of Cape Town and forms an intricate part of the City's integrated Bulk Minimum Standards for Civil Engineering Services I Townships.
Water supply system. Due its strategic importance, no disruption can be
The water demand for FLISP, Market Houses and Social Units is based on
entertained.
600 litres/erf/day as per the Red Book for low cost housing (7 persons per
If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If unavoidable, dwelling).
then road construction works or the installation of civil engineering and other
In consultation with the City`s officials and planners it was agreed that the
services in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline servitude may require certain
average people per dwelling unit would be closer to 3.5 or less
physical protective measures to be taken to ensure safety of the bulk water
people/dwelling unit. Therefore the water and sewage flows and demand
pipeline. All costs associated with the protection of the bulk water pipeline shall
should be moderated.
be for the developer's account.
The water demand for IRDP subsidised houses and services pots is based
Following acceptance by the City's Bulk Water Branch of the SOP, full details of
on 900 litres/erf/day as per CoCT moderated water demand for high density
any proposed services and development in the immediate vicinity of the bulk
low cost housing, implemented in terms of the Directives with three (3.5
water pipeline and servitude shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for
person) dwellings per erf at 300 litres/dwellings/day.
acceptance.
The sewage flows for FLISP, Market Houses and Social Units based on 500
Following acceptance of the design, the contractor tasked with construction
litres/erf/day as per the Red Book for lower income housing (7 persons per
shall apply to the Bulk Water Branch for a wayleave to work in the vicinity of the
dwelling) plus 15% infiltration (575 litres/erf/day).
bulk water pipeline and servitude at least two weeks prior to commencing work
on site. No construction may take place without a Bulk Water Branch wayleave The sewage flows for IRDP subsidised houses and services plots is
(application to: bulkwater.info@capetown.gov.za ). proportionately based on the moderated water demand flows above, at 750
litres/erf/day for high density low cost housing, implemented in terms of the
Cognisance shall be taken of the following conditions when preparing the SOP,
Directives with three (3.5 person) dwellings per erf at 250 litres/dwelling/day.
platform design and engineering services design:
15% infiltration must be added to the above flows.
1. No services (viz. stormwater , sewer, water , electricity) shall be laid or
Please bear in mind that the formal development (primary project) for 8 000
structures (viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street
dwelling units to be phased over approximately 5 years. Subsequent
furniture (signs, traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline servitude
or within 6 m of the centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 49

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
greatest. However, a perpendicular crossing of the bulk water pipeline servitude incremental densification is likely to take longer, and might not end up as an
is allowed (see 2 below). average of 3 dwelling units per plot assumed.
2. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be Could you please confirm the available capacity for the Primary Project Stage
perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline. of the development and provide us with extracts of the masterplans of the
various services in order for us to take the engineering services designs to
3. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of 100
the next level of detail.
mm shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline.
Our client is in the process of implementing the new bulk water and sewer
4. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method of
infrastructure as advised in your original response dated 24 February 2017.
supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance.
This infrastructure (including a bulk water sewer outfall and water supply
5. No activity (viz. blasting, excavation or jacking method) that will result in pipelines, pump station and reservoir) will be sized for ultimate servicing
vibrations with peak particle velocities exceeding 5 mm/s at the bulk water requirements and will be constricted in the Primary Project Stage by the
pipeline shall be permitted. Province.
6. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in The City of Cape Town will need to address the provision of additional waste
accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm thick water treatment capacity for subsequent incremental densification of the sites.
layers to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO.
We trust you find this in order and are able to meet with you to discuss further,
7. Only light compacting plant (1.5 –2.0 tonne e.g. Bomag BW 80, 90, 100) shall if necessary.
be used in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline until 800 mm compacted cover
We require confirmation of bulk service availability for the Primary Project
has been obtained. Thereafter approved larger compacting plant may be used.
Stage of the development in order to submit the Environmental Scoping
All compacting plant shall be operated in low amplitude/low frequency mode in
Report which is presently outstanding.
the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline.
8. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the vicinity
of the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line and level
drawings etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for acceptance.
The City of Cape Town's bulk supply system has sufficient water resource,
treatment, bulk storage and conveyance capacity to supply the estimated
annual average daily demand of 14400 kl/day (Scenario3) of the proposed
development.
Sewer Reticulation
The proposed development falls within the SDF (Spatial Development Frame
work) and provision has been made for this development within the Master Plan.
However, the scenario 2 & 3 proposes is higher than planned the planned
density.
There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed
development.
As per the Sewer Master Plan the future model shows 150mm, 190mm and
235mm diameter sewer main that could serve the development with sufficient
hydraulic spare capacity for the planned ADDWF. The mentioned sewer mains
are gravitating to the future pump station situated downstream of the
development connected to 300mm existing sewer collector running at Forest
Road and to 500mm sewer bulk line changing in diameter to Zandvliet
Wastewater Treatment Works. It appears that sewer network could cope for
Scenario 1 provided the development would be constructed in phases.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 50

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
For the Scenario 2 and 3 the collect and bulk sewer network is not able to handle
the flow that will be generated by this High density Scenario. The mentioned
existing 300mm sewer collector and bulk mains downstream to Zandvliet
Wastewater Treatment Works need to be upgraded before the full development
for any of the Scenarios.
See attached layout of infrastructure.
Wastewater treatment
The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
Works which is currently operating above its capacity. There are however future
plans to upgrade the facility capacity that will then be able to accommodate the
development as reflected in Scenario 1.
The increase treatment capacity at Zandvliet is scheduled to be completed by
December 2021. The scenario 2 and 3 does bring into question what the
ultimate size of the wastewater treatment works should be if similar densities as
expressed in scenario 2 and 3 is applied to all low income housing
developments in the Zandvliet catchment.
Conclusion
 The existing water infrastructure has certain limitations and will
therefore not be able to supply the proposed development without
certain network reinforcements. The pressures in the area are fairly
low and therefore an inline pressure boosting and or adjustments to
the existing PRV would have to be considered to ensure there is
sufficient pressure to supply the development. The design of the water
network to cover all Scenarios 1-3 may have to include a new 48 hr
reservoir an associated pipe-lines in registered servitudes.
The modelled impact of Scenario 1 shows that the collector and bulk sewer
network is able to cope. The higher density of the proposed development will
require major water and sewer bulk infrastructure including the upgrading of the
mentioned water and sewer infrastructure downstream to Zandvleit Waste
Water Treatment Works. Zandvliet WWTW can accommodate the development
when the upgrade is completed in December 2021.
Conditions
The following conditions need to be implemented:
 Development contributions will be payable, to be quantified by the
Reticulation District Head.
 All costs relating to connection, alterations to or provision of new water
and sewerage services will be for the account of the applicant.
 An appropriate link services is required at the developers cost prior to
the transfer of individual erven.
 Appropriate Bulk services are required to be in place to accommodate
reticulation and link services prior to the transfer of individual erven.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 51

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Technical Requirements
 Application must be made for any new water metered connections to
the Reticulation District Head.
 Any Municipal services to be designed to departmental standards
(found on http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Water/Documents/). Its
design, construction and final as-built record to be approved and
handed over to the Reticulation District Head.
 The applicant must advise this Directorate when all conditions have
been complied with, in order to have the work inspected.
 The water and sewer capacities allocated according to this document,
if not taken up, shall not be reserved beyond the lesser of 5 years or
the approved development period.
22b. Shamile Manie Background Comments received per letter dated 19 May 2017 and acknowledged via
(on behalf of Alexander Forbes (City of Cape Town: Environmental Management
This letter serves to inform the reader of the key EIA informants relating to the
Peter Flower, City Department).
Water and Sanitation services for the Low Cost Housing Greenfield
of Cape Town:
Development in Penhill. This letter is based on a similar letter dated 24 February 2017 received by
Water and
SMEC SA also from Mr S Manie, commenting on the water and sanitation
Sanitation The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants
infrastructure capacity.
Department) as follows:
This table is based on the following:
• design criteria 500l/day sewage & 600l/day water per dwelling.
• Scenario 1 (4000 units) is the current allocation for the site in the W&S
Masterplan.
• Scenario 2 (8000 units) is the number of residential erven/ or subsidised
housing opportunities in the Penhill project.
• Scenario 3 (24000 units) is the total number of dwellings including the
second and third dwellings on each site.
• The CoCT Directives for new human settlements requires that water
and sewer services meet the demand of 3 dwellings per plot.
Key EIA Informants:
1. The area has been identified as a potential site for potential future growth. These conditions for the bulk water requirements are noted.
The departments water master plan indicated that the development could
be supplied from the Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water
main, however this is no longer a viable option.
2. Scenario 1: A connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from
the 750mm diameter Steenbras high pressure main as well as a second
connection off the 200mm diameter would be required to supply the
proposed development.
3. Scenario 2 and 3: The existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed
development has insufficient capacity to supply the proposed
development. It is therefore advised that possibly an independent
reservoir be considered order to supply the development under the
conditions proposed for scenario 2 and 3.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 52

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
4. The development will require a suitably positioned reservoir with sufficient
elevation to provide the appropriate network pressure. The surrounding
topography allows for this but the need for pipeline servitudes and
reservoir land on private farmland will have to be obtained. Scenario 3
requires a 30 Ml reservoir in to cover 48 hr storage.
5. A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure These conditions for the 1500 Bulk Water Pipeline are noted.
1 500 mm ON bulk water pipeline The pipeline is protected by a 12 m
wide servitude
6. Platforms, roads and civil engineering services are planned to cross over
and/or be installed adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude will
have to conform to strict conditions put forward by the Bulk Water Branch
7. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted
access to the bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and
maintenance purposes.
8. No development shall take place, structures erected or services installed
within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the centreline of the
bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
9. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of
the centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest, shall
not be altered.
10. If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If
unavoidable, then road construction works or the installation of civil
engineering and other services in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline
servitude may require certain physical protective measures to be taken to
ensure safety of the bulk water pipeline.
11. No services (viz. stormwater, sewer, water, electricity) shall be laid or
structures (viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street
furniture (signs, traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline
servitude or within 6 m of the centreline of the bulk water pipeline,
whichever is the greatest. However, a perpendicular crossing of the bulk
water pipeline servitude is allowed
12. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be
perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline
13. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of
100 mm shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline.
14. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method
of supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance.
15. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in
accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm
thick layers to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO.
16. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the
vicinity of the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line
and level drawings etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for
acceptance.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 53

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
17. Scenario 2 & 3 proposes is higher than planned in the planned density in These comments relating to the sewer are noted.
the SDF Masterplan.
18. There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed
development.
19. As per the Sewer Master Plan the future model shows 150mm, 190mm
and 235mm diameter sewer main that could serve the development.
20. For the Scenario 2 and 3 the collector and bulk sewer network is not able
to handle the flow that will be generated by this High density Scenario.
The mentioned existing 300mm sewer collector and bulk mains
downstream to Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works need to be
upgraded before the full development for any of the Scenarios.
The pipework downstream towards the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
21. Alternative to 20. above the could be a new bulk sewer that could flow a Works will need to be upgraded, but not the whole way to Zandvliet.
more efficient route to the bulk outfall sewer.
A new 6 km outfall sewer from Penhill to the New Delft Sewer is a possible
alternative. This has been identified as bulk service infrastructure required for
the development.
22. The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater The future plans to upgrade the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works, will
Treatment Works, there are future plans to upgrade the facility capacity meet the masterplan allocation of only 4000 dwelling units at Penhill.
that will then be able to accommodate the development as reflected in
Scenario 1.
23. The increase treatment capacity at Zandvliet is scheduled to be The upgrade is scheduled to be complete in December 2021.
completed by December 2021. The scenario 2 and 3 does bring into
question what the ultimate size of the wastewater treatment works should
be if similar densities as expressed in scenario 2 and 3 is applied to all
low income housing developments in the Zandvliet catchment.

This confirms that there will only be treatment capacity for 4000 dwellings at
Penhill (as per their masterplan) when the current upgrades to the treatment
works is completed. This is planned for December 2021.
There is no planned capacity increases to accommodate more than 4000
dwellings at Penhill.
24. The existing water infrastructure has certain limitations and will therefore These have already been identified as bulk service infrastructure required for
not be able to supply the proposed development without certain network the development.
reinforcements.
25. The design of the water network to cover all Scenarios 1-3 may have to
include a new 48 hr reservoir an associated pipe-lines in registered
servitudes.
26. All appropriate link services are required to be in place at the developers These have already been identified as bulk service infrastructure required for
cost prior to the transfer of individual erven. the development.
27. Appropriate Bulk services are required to be in place to accommodate
reticulation and link services prior to the transfer of individual erven.
22c. Shamile Manie Background Response to CoCT provided by Mike King of SMEC via letter on 16 November
(on behalf of 2017:
This letter is a revised comment on water and sewer network and bulk services
Peter Flower, City
capacity on the proposed Penhill low income greenfields development. The
of Cape Town:

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 54

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Water and development is on the land parcel made up of Portions 3 and 8 of Farm 410 and With reference to your letter dated 21 September 2017 confirming the water
Sanitation Portions 5, 25, 26, 31, 32 35, 36 and 42 of Farm 468 totalling 200 ha. The land and sewer availability for the Penhill Greenfields Project and the meeting
Department) is currently vacant. arranged by Mr Peter Silbernagl of the Provincial Human Settlement with your
Officials and other Consulting Engineers with the Southern Corridor
The information provided in this report is based on City of Cape Town master
Programme projects, on the 11 October 2017 at your offices.
plan model as well as comments from relevant branches of the department. The
report provides an overview of the existing water and sewer infrastructure near At the meeting it was confirmed that the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
the development, associated conditions and technical requirements to be Works can only accommodate the complete Penhill Development once the
implemented with respect to this application. first phase of the treatment upgrade is completed in December 2022. This
statement will be used in the Scoping Report for the Penhill Project that is
The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants
being prepared for submission.
as follows:
Furthermore, it was discussed that the overall programme of the Southern
Corridor Projects would be reviewed, considering the various updated
individual project programmes and critical relocations to Penhill necessary to
release land construction on other sites comprised under the Southern
Corridor group of projects. The construction phasing of Penhill will be
considered and proposal for limited occupation prior to December 2022, may
be submitted to the City.
In addition, we have been asked by the Department to investigate alternatives
due to the lack of capacity at Zandvliet WWTW, including the option of a
contract for Design, Build, Operate and Relocate of a temporary package
plant for Penhill Project in the interim.

It should be noted that the demands reflected in the table is estimated on the
increased density planning directive to accommodate up to 3 dwellings per 75
m2 plot. Each plot will contain a single dwelling with an additional sewer
connection to facilitate accommodation of up to 2 backyarder opportunities.
The moderated service demands used above is as per the moderated demand
approval provided on the 12 June 2017.
Water Reticulation
A portion of the proposed development area was identified as a future
development area in the 2014/15 City Water and Sanitation Master Plan. The
planned development was of a much lower density and scale (169 ha) with an
AADD of 2014.7 kl/d.
The Water Master Plan indicated that the development could be supplied from
the Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water main, however this
additional connection off the bulk system was rejected by the Bulk Water
Branch. In addition, the proposed demand would have pushed the peak velocity
up in the bulk main significantly.
If the development is phased and the initial phase is limited to 4000 units without
backyarders a 2 connection supply off the existing system would be required. A
connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from the 750mm diameter
Steenbras high pressure main. A second connection off the surrounding

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 55

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
network to the north of the site to a minimum 200mm diameter main would also
be required. In addition, an inline pressure booster would have to be considered
given that a pressure drop to below 20m is expected. There is a PRV on the
300mm diameter main which upon consultation with the reticulation branch
could be reset to ensure that there is sufficient pressure available to supply the
initial phase.
For the full development of 8000 formal opportunities and 11 730 backyarders
the existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed development has
insufficient capacity. It is therefore advised that an independent reservoir be
considered to supply the development. However, the need for an inline booster
or adjustment to the PRV setting would still be required to fill a suitably
positioned reservoir with sufficient elevation to provide the appropriate network
pressure. The surrounding topography allows for this but this require pipeline
servitudes and reservoir land on private farmland. The full development with
backyarder opportunities will require a minimum 15 Ml reservoir storage.
See figure 1 for the existing water infrastructure.
Bulk Water
A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure 1 500
mm ON bulk water pipeline which is owned, operated and maintained by the
City of Cape 3
Town's Bulk Water Branch. The pipeline is protected by a 12 m wide servitude
(LG No. 7901/80).
The position of the pipeline is shown on the following copies of:
* Drawing number WO 3805 Sheet 5
* Colour GIS Extract
* LG No. 7901/80
Whilst the Bulk Water Branch has no "in principle" objection to the proposed
development, cognizance must be taken of the bulk water pipeline and
servitude, and is subject to the following conditions:
1. A proposed site development plan (SOP) and/or subdivision plan shall
be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch (Mr F Els, 9th Floor, 38 Wale
Street, Cape Town, tel.: 021 444 7696; email:
francois.els@capetown.gov.za) for acceptance prior to finalisation.
2. Drawings showing the layout and level details of the proposed
platforms, roads and civil engineering services that are planned to
cross over and/or be installed adjacent to the bulk water pipeline
and/or servitude shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for
acceptance.
3. The Conditions of Servitude shall be strictly adhered to.
4. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted
access to the bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and
maintenance purposes.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 56

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
5. The subdivision and/or fencing of portions of the servitude into
individual erven will not be permitted for reasons of access and
control. The servitude shall remain as one continuous entity.
6. No development shall take place, structures erected or services
installed within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
7. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m
of the centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest,
shall not be altered.
Cognisance shall be taken of the bulk water pipeline servitude, bulk water
pipeline and its appurtenance (i.e. related chambers) throughout the planning,
design and construction processes as no changes to the bulk water pipeline
infrastructure will be considered.
It must be noted that the above bulk water pipeline is of strategic importance to
the City of Cape Town and forms an intricate part of the City's integrated Bulk
Water supply system. Due its strategic importance, no disruption can be
entertained.
If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If unavoidable,
then road construction works or the installation of civil engineering and other
services in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline servitude may require certain
physical protective measures to be taken to ensure safety of the bulk water
pipeline. All costs associated with the protection of the bulk water pipeline shall
be for the developer's account.
Following acceptance by the City's Bulk Water Branch of the SOP, full details of
any proposed services and development in the immediate vicinity of the bulk
water pipeline and servitude shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for
acceptance.
Following acceptance of the design, the contractor tasked with construction
shall apply to the Bulk Water Branch for a wayleave to work in the vicinity of the
bulk water pipeline and servitude at least two weeks prior to commencing work
on site. No construction may take place without a Bulk Water Branch wayleave
(application to: bulkwater.info@capetown.gov.za).
Cognisance shall be taken of the following conditions when preparing the SOP,
platform design and engineering services design:
1. No services (viz. stormwater , sewer, water , electricity) shall be laid or
structures (viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street
furniture (signs, traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline
servitude or within 6 m of the centreline of the bulk water pipeline,
whichever is the greatest. However, a perpendicular crossing of the bulk
water pipeline servitude is allowed (see 2 below).
2. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be
perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline.
3. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of
100 mm shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 57

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
4. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method
of supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance.
5. No activity (viz. blasting, excavation or jacking method) that will result in
vibrations with peak particle velocities exceeding 5 mm/s at the bulk water
pipeline shall be permitted.
6. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in
accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm
thick layers to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO.
7. Only light compacting plant (1.5 –2.0 tonne e.g. Bomag BW 80, 90, 100)
shall be used in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline until 800 mm
compacted cover has been obtained. Thereafter approved larger
compacting plant may be used. All compacting plant shall be operated in
low amplitude/low frequency mode in the vicinity of the bulk water
pipeline.
8. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the
vicinity of the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line
and level drawings etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for
acceptance.
The City of Cape Town's bulk supply system has sufficient water resource,
treatment, bulk storage and conveyance capacity to supply the estimated
annual average daily demand of 6 560 kl/day of the proposed development.
Sewer Reticulation
As per the water reticulation comment the site proposed for development has
been identified in the sewer Master Plan. The scale and density being proposed
is significantly higher than planned.
There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed
development. The sewer master plan has identified the need for reticulation
system and a new pump station to the south west corner of the site. This pump
station would then transfer sewer to the 300 mm collector downstream of the
development.
The existing 300 mm collector sewer has insufficient capacity to accommodate
the combined formal and backyarder development totalling 19 730 units. Due to
the size of the development and the lack of capacity in the downstream network
it is advised to in consultation with the district officials consider an alternative
route for the sewer link service. This new link sewer would be between the
development and bulk sewer outfall.
The bulk outfall sewer consisting of an 800 mm and a 1900 mm parallel main
along Baden Powell Drive has sufficient spare capacity to Zandvliet WWTW.
See Figure 2 for network constraints.
See Figure 3 to 5 for details of the downstream network to the bulk sewer at
Baden Powell Drive.
Wastewater treatment

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 58

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
Works (WWTW) which is currently operating overcapacity. There is an upgrade
of the works currently underway with an expected completion date of December
2022. This upgrade will increase the capacity by 18 Ml/d.
The formal housing delivery will occur over a 2-year period from December 2020
to December 2022. The backyarder accommodation is expected to occur over
time and would be difficult to manage or restrict. This sewer load cannot be
accommodated prior to the first phase of the Zandvliet upgrade being
completed.
A second upgrade of the works is planned that will provide another 60Ml/d and
is expected to be completed by 2024. The Zandvliet WWTW is only able to
accommodate the development after December 2022.
Conclusion
The existing water infrastructure has limitations and will therefore not be able to
supply the proposed development without network reinforcements. The
pressures in the area are fairly low and therefore an inline pressure boosting
and or adjustments to the existing PRV would have to be considered to ensure
there is sufficient pressure to supply the development. The design of the water
network to cover the full development will require a new reservoir an associated
pipe-lines in registered servitudes
A new link sewer to the bulk sewer outfall is required to accommodate the full
development. The Zandvliet WWTW can accommodate the development once
the first phase of the treatment works upgrade is completed in December 2022.
Conditions
The development is able to proceed if the following conditions are met:
Development contributions is payable as per the DC Policy, to be quantified by
the Reticulation District Head.
A bulk water supply that includes a connection to the bulk supply, a pump station
and a dedicated reservoir with associated pipe work to be implemented.
A sewer link service between the development and the bulk sewer outfall to be
in place prior to the transfer of individual erven. Sewer flow from development
can only be accommodated once the first phase of Zandvliet WWTW upgrade
is completed.
Additional Technical Requirements
All costs relating to connection, alterations to or provision of new water and
sewerage services will be for the account of the applicant.
Any Municipal services to be designed to departmental standards (found on
http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Water/Documents/). Its design, construction
and final as-built record to be approved and handed over to the Reticulation
District Head. The water and sewer capacities allocated according to this

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 59

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
document, if not taken up, shall not be reserved beyond the lesser of 5 years or
the approved development period.
General/ Disclaimer
1. Information provided is based on best available data.
2. The flows and pressures provided in this comment are theoretical and
not measured
3. Costs provided are estimated and may vary (if applicable)
23. Andrew Heritage Western Cape is in receipt of your application for the above mentioned Acknowledged, this HIA will be undertaken as part during the EIA phase.
September: matter on 04 May 2017. The matter was discussed at the Heritage Officers
Heritage Western meeting held on 29 May 2017.
Cape
You are hereby notified that, since there is a reason to believe that the proposed
development will impact on heritage resources, HWC requires that a Heritage
Impact Assessment (HIA) that satisfies the provisions of section 38(3) of the
NHRA be submitted. This HIA must have specific reference to the following:
Visual impacts to the cultural landscape.
The required HIA must have an integrated set of recommendations.
The comments of relevant registered conservation bodies and the relevant
Municipality must be requested and included in the HIA where provided. Proof
of these requests must be supplied.
Please note, should you require the HIA to be submitted as a Phased HIA, a
written request must be submitted to HWC prior to submission. HWC reserves
the right to determine whether a phased HIA is acceptable on a case by case
basis.
HWC reserves the right to request additional information as required.
24. Owen Peters The following comments were received from our environmental section: This is noted and the necessary permits are still under investigation.
(Eskom: Land
1. Apply for any permits/licences that will be required i.e. WULA, GA, Heritage
Development)
RoD, CapeNature for the maintenance of the servitude etc. If GA/WULA is
required, the servitude must be registered as a water user. Eskom will need
to be the applicant.
2. Highlight any protected species, sensitive environment where feasible No protected species occur within either the new or existing servitude which
adjacent or interacting with the operation and maintenance of the line. will be decommissioned. Similarly, the botanical sensitivity within the
proposed new or existing servitude which will be decommissioned are either
low-medium sensitivity, or not sensitive. The findings are reported and
mapped in the Scoping Report.
3. The client should rid (clear) the servitude of alien vegetation/or any trees
interacting with the safe operation of the line.

4. If any special access to the area, servitude is required for Eskom staff
during operation and maintenance must be obtained in writing. The written

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 60

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
agreement needs to highlight that, access may be required in an
emergency.

5. If there is any waterbody around, the client to ensure the line is fitted with This will be a requirement because the new servitude will cross between an
bird flappers. existing stormwater detention ponds and waste water treatment ponds in the
adjacent Blackheath Waste Water Treatment Facility.
6. Draw up an operation and maintenance plan for approval by the Eskom will have an opportunity to comment on the Environmental
Department. Eskom must comment before approval by the Department. Management Programme (EMPr) for the project including site specific
requirements for operation and maintenance of the realigned section of the
line.
7. If the area is within the nature reserve, protected areas, heritage area, The study is not within a protected area as defined in the National
national park, Stewardship, Common etc., National Environmental Environmental Management Protected Areas Act (57 of 2003).
Management Protected Areas Act will be applicable in giving Eskom as a
state entity or organ of the state, access. This is contained in Part 3:
Access to Protected Areas, Section 45-46: Access to special nature
reserve and access to national park, nature reserve and world heritage
site.
8. Please register the author of this letter together with the following people These people have been registered as I&APs for the project.
as I&APs for his project:
 Donald Matjuda – Eskom Distribution 021 980 3364 /
MatjudD@eskom.co.za
 Lungile Motsisi – Eskom Transmission 011 800 5734
MotsisL@eskom.co.za
25. Pedro McAllister I have not seen any feedback in the newspapers or local forums (Unless I To date no approvals have been issued, neither for the Environmental Impact
(Blackheath have missed them somehow). Assessment (EIA) process, nor the separate land use planning process.
Resident)
Your contact details are supplied as the liaison person. I would like to get As part of the EIA process, to date we have undertaken a ‘pre-application
feedback on the proposal. Apparently it was going to be 4000 housing units, consultation process’ which involved I&AP identification, placement of site
but is now 8000 in the report I received and read through from a neighbor. notices and newspaper advertisements in March/April 2017. The only official
How far down the road is the project and are you still accepting proposal for documentation that was made public is the Background Information
consideration? Document (BID) and cover letter (English copy attached, also available in
Afrikaans and isiXhosa).
The next step is to commence the official EIA process with the submission of
the Application Form to the Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning (DEA&DP). At the same time the Draft Scoping Report
will be circulated for a 30 day public comment period.
The process that will follow once this Application Form is submitted and the
Draft Scoping Report goes public, is from then on governed by statutory
timeframes as set out in the 2014 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Regulations.
Any interested and affected parties (I&APs) will have an opportunity to
comment on both the Draft Scoping Report and the Draft Environmental

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 61

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
Impact Assessment Report, as well as to submit any comments throughout
the process.
These will get captured in a Comments and Responses Report (CRR), and it
will be indicated if and how these comments have been addressed in the
Reports. This CRR will be attached to all Reports and updated throughout the
process. You will be registered on our I&AP database to receive information
regarding the process.
Please advise if this project has been approved by council and how it has To date no approvals have been issued, neither for the Environmental Impact
taken the current (and going forward) water shortage into account. Assessment (EIA) process, nor the separate land use planning process.
The feasibility of sustainable technologies will be investigated in the detailed
design phase of the project.
26. Pedro McAllister Please advise if there is a cutoff date for any response to be made and provide The public meeting last week (19 September 2017) and the deadline you
(Blackheath more information so that we are able to give appropriate input not based on mention below is for the first of the town planning applications.
Resident) hearsay. I also await a response from our local residents association. I am in
Our process will only formally commence in a few months (although we have
favor of properly and carefully planned urbanization, but firmly believe that the
undertaken some pre-application consultation already) and the process is
following still needs to be taken into account in this instance for the immediate
explained in my original email dated 12 July 2017.
surrounding:
Your details are on our database so you will be informed when the process
 Over-development of Eersterivier to Kuilsriver Corridor meaning commences and there are opportunities to comment.
 More Houses and more houses meaning,
 Gridlock of Road infrastructure, which is already a problem….
 Water restrictions should mean a halt on all proposed developments
overall till further notice as you cannot use recycled water in building
materials….or am I wrong?
 Can Mfuleni police station take on the added responsibility of policing
the new area? No mention of a new police station in the drawing…
 Number of residences not clearly specified in the last info you sent
me…I am hearing of 4000 to 8000----even a lay man like me knows that
the proposed area simply cannot accommodate 8000 households
(multiplied by minimum of 4 heads per household) ---maybe only 1000
households at best only should be accommodated---demographically,
the bulk of the residents would be children---so…..
 Can the proposed schools cope? What type of schools----no mention of
foundation/pre/high schools in the drawing…Consider a phased
approach especially regarding the schools to be built----you need to
build those first to accommodate the surrounding and existing areas 1st
to prevent us from travelling great distances all these years…. Please
explain what a “campus of schools?” is
 Since the report does not specify the actual type of housing
densities…from my view it definitely looks more like tenement flats----we
should move away from this hi-density type of housing as it is not
aesthetically pleasing for the surrounding agricultural lands and not
psychologically sound in my opinion---I prefer not to see any form of hi-
rise blocks in the area to which the scales drawing alludes to

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 62

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
 The mini pre-report does not specify the potential mixed use
businesses---I know it’s still early stages but are there potential buy in
from major companies who will play a part in employment opportunities--
--Saxenburg park 1 + 2 are not fully utilized or are they intending to
expend due to proposed growth of area …The proposed development
needs to be tied into the current Macro-Economic downturn of the WC
and country as a whole at present---will the proposed mixed use areas
be a catalyst for entrepreneurship? Remember the building of proposed
infrastructure will only be short term. Is CCT seeing another set of
residents as a cash cow for rates and taxes…but since this is
specifically for part subsidized housing as per report, who and how are
they being subsidized and at whose expense….
 All this new development and we in Rustdal are still waiting more than
almost 20 years for simple proper channeling verges, storm water
drainage systems to be installed at certain areas , roads upgrade and
traffic calming devises….
 The proposed development needs to take MYCITY + Metrorail (even if
we have an extra 4000 neighbors) parlous states into account as these
current infrastructures are bursting at the seams, almost nonexistent due
to cut backs and also require major upgrades to cope with current
population of surrounding area. Please can someone convince me how
will the situation improve with more people into the equation---therefore
as I say, this must be a phased approach.
These are some of my concerns that should be looked at and will send to my
local councilor as well.
----------------------------
Good day Kirsten, not to worry I have finally received info via our Residents
Association as well and will follow protocol as an interested and affected party
to channel my inputs by due date re the proposal. Due date 09/10/2016.
27. Johan Carinus Refer to Appendix C3 of the Scoping Report for minutes.
and Danie
Carinus (Bluegum
Grove Trust)
28. Kevin Balfour Following Bulk Water Branch’s initial comments on the proposed Penhill These conditions will be taken into account by SMEC and BSP in the
(City of Cape housing project (W&S letter dated 24 February 2017), SMEC submitted a draft engineering design.
Town: Buk Water) SDP (meeting held 18 August 2017 and email dated 30 August 2017). The Bulk
Water comments on the draft SDP as follows:
Sections of the project are traversed by the 1500mm DN bulk water pipeline
which is owned, operated and maintained by the City of Cape Town’s Bulk
Water Branch. The bulk water pipeline is protected by a 12m servitude (LG
No.7901/80).
The position of the pipeline is shown on the previously supplied copies of:

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 63

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
 W0 3805 Sheet 5
 Colour GIS extract
1. Roads:
Whilst not desired, the Bulk Water Branch will accept the 6 roads crossing and
entrance over the Bulk Water pipeline on the following conditions:
1.1 Physical protective measures will be required to protect the bulk water
pipeline. These protective measures shall be in the form of protective
concrete slabs over the bulk water pipeline. The protective slabs shall be
of such a nature that each slab must be able to be lifted by a crane on a
truck. All costs associated with the protection of the bulk water pipeline
shall be the developer’s account.
1.2 Whilst the drawings given at meeting held at the Bulk Water Branch
offices on 18 August 2017 gives an indication of the proposed
development layout, a proposed detailed site development plan (SDP)
and/or subdivision plan shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch (Mr
F Els, 8th Floor, 38 Wale Street, Cape Town, tel.: 021 444 7697; email:
Francois.els@capetown.gov.za) for acceptance prior to finalisation.
1.3 Drawings showing the layout and level details of the proposed platforms,
roads and civil engineering services that are planned to cross over and/or
be installed adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude shall be
submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for acceptance.
1.4 No street furniture (Street lights, electrical poles) erected within the
servitude or 6m from the centreline, whichever is greatest, of the 1500mm
DN bulk water pipeline.
1.5 The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right uninterrupted access
to the bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and maintenance
purposes.
2. Stormwater channel on Bulk Water Branch Property:
The Bulk Water Branch shall allow the storm water channel in their property on
the following conditions:
2.1 The channel shall be designed so as to accommodate overflow from the
Bulk Water Reservoir in the case of overflow conditions.
3. Further to the above, the design of the proposed services shall
comply with the following:
3.1 Following acceptance of the design, the contractor tasked with
construction shall apply to Water & Sanitation for a wayleave to work in
the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline and servitude at least two weeks
[prior to commencing work on site. No construction may take place
without a Water and Sanitation wayleave.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 64

No. From Comments received Response/Comment
3.2 Cognisance shall be taken of the bulk water pipeline and its appurtenance
(i.e related chambers) throughout the planning, design and construction
processes as no changes to the bulk water pipeline infrastructure will be
considered.
3.3 It must be noted that the above mentioned bulk water pipeline is of
strategic importance to the City of Cape Town and forms an intricate part
of the City’s integrated Bulk Water supply system. Due to its strategic
importance, no disruption can be entertained.
3.4 Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of
100mm shall be allowed between the services and the bulk water pipeline.
3.5 If it is proposed to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method of
supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to Mr. F Els of the
Bulk Water Branch (tel. 021 444 7696 )
3.6 No tress/Shrubs/bushes with a root depth greater than 750mm shall be
planted within the servitude or within the 6m from the centreline of the
1500mm DN bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
3.7 All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipeline shall be compacted
in 150mm thick layers to a minimum of 95% of MOD AASHTO.
3.8 Only light compacting plant (1.5 – 2.0 tonne e.g. Bomag BW 80, 90, 100)
shall be used in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline until 800mm compact
cover has been obtained. thereafter approved larger compacting plant
may be used. All compacting plant shall be operated in low amplitude/low
frequency mode in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline.
3.9 Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the
vicinity of the bulk water pipeline, full details (method statement, line and
level drawings etc.0 for this operation shall be submitted for acceptance
to Mr. F Els, prior to the commencement of any work on site.
3.10 All work shall conform to my ‘Standard Procedures for Construction
Works Near Bulk Water Services”, a copy of which is attached.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 65

6 Way Forward
This Public Participation Report was compiled for the draft Scoping Report for Proposed Penhill
Greenfields Development Project and will be updated following the 30 day public comment period.

Following this comment period, the report will be updated to reflect any additional comments that were
received regarding the project. It will then form an appendix to the final Scoping Report for the Proposed
Penhill Greenfields Development Project which will be submitted to the DEA&DP for review and decision
making on whether to proceed on to the EIA phase.

This document should be seen as a live document which will be updated and circulated with the draft
and final EIRs.

Project 113371 File Penhill_DSR_PPP Report_Final.docx Date Revision 0 Page 66

Appendix C.2: I&AP Notification
Cape Town T +27 21 526 9400
Aurecon Centre F +27 21 526 9500
1 Century City Drive E capetown@aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct W aurecongroup.com
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa
*This letter is also available in IsiXhosa on request from the undersigned.

28 March 2017

Dear Sir / Madam

PROPOSED PENHILL GREENFIELDS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, CAPE TOWN: REGISTRATION

AS INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTY
This letter serves to inform you of the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlement’s proposed
Penhill Greenfields Development Project. We would also like to notify you of your opportunity to register as an
Interested and Affected Party and to provide written comments.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements together with the City of Cape Town proposes
to establish a catalytic human settlements programme termed the Southern Corridor Integrated Human Settlements
Programme. The programme is a cluster of discrete projects to upgrade existing informal settlements and to
establish greenfields human settlements in the vicinity of the N2. The subject of this notice is the Penhill Greenfields
Development Project, which includes approximately 8,000 housing opportunities (predominantly subsided however
it will provide a range of unit types and affordability categories, including housing for the GAP market) as well as a
commercial / industrial component and appropriate community facilities, such as parks, schools and places of
worship. It will also make provision for agricultural land for farming and livestock operations.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd has been appointed as the independent Environmental Assessment Practitioner
(EAP) to undertake the requisite Integrated Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), in terms of the EIA
Regulations (Government Notice R982, R983, R984 and R985, of 4 December 2014) in terms of the National
Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA). The NEMA EIA Regulations identify certain activities
which could have a substantial detrimental effect on the environment. These activities require Environmental
Authorisation from the competent environmental authority, i.e. the Western Cape Government: Department of
Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP). The Penhill Greenfields Development Project
includes such activities and will therefore require environmental authorisation in terms of the EIA Regulations.

OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE

Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) are invited to register and/or provide written comments. All comments
should be submitted together with their name, contact details (preferred method of notification e.g. email) and an
indication of any direct business, financial, personal or other interest that they have in the application to the contact
person indicated below by 1 May 2017. Once registered, I&APs will be contacted for further opportunities to
comment on the Scoping and EIA Reports.

The Background Information Document (BID) provides a summary of the project and the EIA process, and is
available on request or for download from Aurecon’s website (http://www.aurecongroup.co.za/en/public-
participation.aspx - please register on the website to download the documents).

For further information please contact:

Simamkele Ntsengwane, Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd
Telephone: (021) 526 9560
Email: Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com
Fax: 021 526 9500 or Post: PO Box 494, Cape Town, 8000

Yours faithfully

Kirsten Jones: Environmental Assessment Practitioner (Pr.Sci.Nat)

Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd Reg No 1977/003711/07 ISO 9001 Certified
Member of CESA and ASAQS
Board of Directors (09/2016) Member of the Ethics Institute of South Africa
NN Gwagwa (Chairperson)*, MJ Breed, ZB Ebrahim*, Silver Founding Member of the Green Building
PJ Hendricks, NVB Magubane*, F Nell, GJ Swiegers Council of South Africa
*Non-Executive Director
Under licence from Aurecon Group Brand (Pte) Ltd Reg no 200903592H
Cape Town T +27 21 526 9400
Aurecon Centre F +27 21 526 9500
1 Century City Drive E capetown@aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct W aurecongroup.com
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa
* Hierdie brief is ook beskikbaar in IsiXhosa op aanvraag deur die ondergetekende.

28 March 2017

Geagte Meneer / Dame

VOORGESTELDE PENHILL GROENLAND ONTWIKKELING PROJEK, KAAPSTAD:

REGISTRASIE VAN GEïNTERESEERDE EN GEAFFEKTEERDE PARTYE
Hierdie skrywe dien om u in te lig van die Wes Kaapse Regering: Departement van Menslike Nedersettings se
voorgestelde Penhill Groenland Ontwikkeling Projek. Hiermee wil on sook u in kennis stel aan die geleentheid om
te registreer en kommentaar te lewer.

AGTERGROND INLIGTING

Die Wes-Kaapse Regering (WKR): Departement van Menslike Nedersettings tesame met die Stad Kaapstad (SK)
is van voorneme om 'n katalitiese menslike nedersettings program te vestig, genoem die Suider-Korridor
Geïntegreerde Menslike Nedersettings Program. Die program bestaan uit 'n groep diskrete projekte met die doel
om bestaande informele nedersettings op te gradeer en sogenaamde groenland menslike nedersettings te vestig
in die omgewing van die N2 hoofweg. Die onderwerp van hierdie kennisgewing is die voorgestelde Penhill
Groenland Ontwikkelingsprojek, wat ongeveer 8000 behuisingsgeleenthede (oorwegend gesubsidieerde behuising,
asook ‘n verskeidenheid van eenheid tipes en bekostigbaarheid kategorieë, insluitend behuising vir die GAP mark)
sowel as toepaslike sosiale en kommersiële fasiliteite sal insluit. Dit sal ook beperkte voorsiening maak van
landbougrond vir gewasse en vee bedrywighede.

WETLIKE RAAMWERK

Aurecon Suid Afrika (Edms) Bpk is aangestel as die onafhanklike Omgewingsimpak Bepalings Praktisyn (OIBP)
om the vereiste Omgewingsimpak Bepaling (OIB) te onderneem, in terme van die OIB Regulasies (Regering
Kennisgewing R982, R983, R984 en R985, van 4 Desember 2014) in terme van die Nasionale Wet op
Omgewingsbestuur (NWOB), Wet 107 van 1998. Die NWOB OIB Regulasies identifiseer sekere aktiwiteite wat
moontlik ‘n aansienlike nadelige gevolg vir die omgewing kan inhou. Hierdie aktiwiteite verlang Omgewings
Magtiging van die bevoegde owerheid, in hierdie geval die Wes Kaap Regering: Departement van Omgewingsake
en Ontwikkelingsbeplanning (DOSOB). Die Penhill Groenland Ontwikkeling Projek sluit sulke aktiwiteite in en sal
dus Omgewings Magtiging verlang in terme van die OIB Regulasies.

GELEENTHEID VIR DEELNAME

Belanghebbende en Geaffekteerde Partye (B&GPe) word uitgenooi om te registreer en om skriftelike kommentaar

te lewer. Alle kommentaar moet tesame met hul naam, kontakbesonderhede en ‘n aanduiding van enige direkte
besigheids-, finansiële, persoonlike of enige ander belange in die projek verskaf word. Dit moet gestuur word aan
die kontak persoon soos hieronder aangedui voor 1 Mei 2017. Na registrasie sal alle B&BPe in kennis gestel word
van verdere geleenthede om kommentaar te lewer op die Omvangbepaling en OIB verslae.

‘n Oorspronklike Agtergrond Inligting Dokument (AID) verskaf ‘n opsomming van die voogestelde projek en die OIB
proses; en sal beskikbaar wees op aanvraag. Elektroniese afskrifte van die verslag sal ook beskikbaar wees op
Aurecon se webwerf (http://www.aurecongroup.com/en/public-participation.aspx - registreer asseblief op die
webtuiste om toegang tot die dokumente te kry).

Vir meer inligting kontak asseblief:

Kontak: Simamkele Ntsengwane, Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd
Epos: Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com Tel: 021 526 9560,
Faks: 021 526 9500, of Per pos: Posbus 494, Kaapstad, 8000

Die uwe

Kirsten Jones: Omgewingsimpak Bepaling Praktisyn (Pr.Sci.Nat)

Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd Reg No 1977/003711/07 ISO 9001 Certified
Member of CESA and ASAQS
Board of Directors (09/2016) Member of the Ethics Institute of South Africa
NN Gwagwa (Chairperson)*, MJ Breed, ZB Ebrahim*, Silver Founding Member of the Green Building
PJ Hendricks, NVB Magubane*, F Nell, GJ Swiegers Council of South Africa
*Non-Executive Director
Under licence from Aurecon Group Brand (Pte) Ltd Reg no 200903592H
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 03 April 2017 10:16
To: 'phoracommittee@gmail.com'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

You have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development
Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of
Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please refer any other I&APs that may be interested or affected by the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 29 March 2017 13:52
To: 'afasacmetro@gmail.com'; 'gavingossman@yahoo.com'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane; 'i.murison@attorneys.law.za';
isak@imurisonattorneys.co.za
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an occupant of the site, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill
Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human
Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also pass this information on to other occupants or stakeholders that may be relevant to the Project, or provide us
with their details so that we may be in touch.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 16:39
To: 'Thando.Mguli@westerncape.gov.za'; Ilani Nel; 'Michael.Webster@westerncape.gov.za'
Cc: 'Du Bruyn Jonker (Cape Town)'; 'Crystal Kros (Cape Town)'; Charles Norman; Simamkele
Ntsengwane
Subject: FW: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As representative of the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements, which is the applicant and
landowner of the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier, we would like to notify you that the Pre-
Application Public Participation Process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998)
(NEMA) has commenced.

The attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) has been sent to a number of Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) by email. Newspaper
adverts will appear tomorrow in The Cape Times, Die Burger and the Tygerburger. We are also placing notices on the site
and at various public facilities in the area and dropping off printed copies of the Background Information Document to the
occupants.

The preliminary comment and registration period for Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) ends on 2 May 2017.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 16:47
To: 'Rayan.Rughubar@westerncape.gov.za'
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party
(I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government:
Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:10
To: 'ronald.mukanya@westerncape.gov.za'; 'ecohead@westerncape.gov.za';
'Martie.Carstens@westerncape.gov.za'; 'Jacqui.Gooch@westerncape.gov.za';
'Sharonette.Webb@westerncape.gov.za'; 'Robert.Macdonald@westerncape.gov.za';
'Annemie.vanReenen@westerncape.gov.za'; 'Heinrich.Magerman@westerncape.gov.za';
'Caesar.Sauls@westerncape.gov.za'; 'Hod.Comsafe@westerncape.gov.za';
'Douw.Steyn@westerncape.gov.za'; 'hwc.hwc@westerncape.gov.za';
'andrew.september@westerncape.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane; 'Alvan.Gabriel@westerncape.gov.za';
'Taryn.Dreyer@westerncape.gov.za'; 'Melanese.Schippers@westerncape.gov.za';
'Andre.Oosthuizen@westerncape.gov.za'; Ilani Nel
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'ronald.mukanya@westerncape.gov.za'

'ecohead@westerncape.gov.za'

'Martie.Carstens@westerncape.gov.za'

'Jacqui.Gooch@westerncape.gov.za'

'Sharonette.Webb@westerncape.gov.za'

'Robert.Macdonald@westerncape.gov.za'

'Annemie.vanReenen@westerncape.gov.za'

'Heinrich.Magerman@westerncape.gov.za'

'Caesar.Sauls@westerncape.gov.za'

'Hod.Comsafe@westerncape.gov.za'

'Douw.Steyn@westerncape.gov.za'

'hwc.hwc@westerncape.gov.za'

'andrew.september@westerncape.gov.za'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:11 Read: 28/03/2017 15:22

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:11 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

'Alvan.Gabriel@westerncape.gov.za'

'Taryn.Dreyer@westerncape.gov.za'

'Melanese.Schippers@westerncape.gov.za'

'Andre.Oosthuizen@westerncape.gov.za'

Ilani Nel

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the Western Cape Government, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected
Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape
Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.
1
Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

2
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 14:49
Cc: Simamkele Ntsengwane; Charles Norman
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

Simamkele Ntsengwane Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 14:50 Read: 28/03/2017 15:20

'dumas@iafrica.com'

'daniecarinus@gmail.com'

'vcarinus@gmail.com'

'christiaan@delmontehiringservices.co.za'

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As neighbouring landowners, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill
Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human
Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:47
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:47 Read: 28/03/2017 15:58

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:47 Read: 28/03/2017 15:48

'morgan.griffiths@wessa.co.za'

'admin@wessa.co.za'

'bcid@kingsley.co.za'

'admin@bcid.co.za'

'eersterivercommunity@outlook.com'

'antheajp@gmail.com'

'nhickman@telkomsa.net'

'paul@nu-line.co.za'

'secretary@stellenboschratepayers.org'

'KleinvleiSAPS@saps.org.za'

'meltonrose.library@capetown.gov.za'

'eleanore.pietersen@capetown.gov.za'

'eersterivier.library@capetown.gov.za'

'rene.jashim@capetown.gov.za'

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

You have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development
Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of
Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please refer any other I&APs that may be interested or affected by the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:12
To: 'john.geeringh@eskom.co.za'; 'henk.landman@eskom'; 'WyngaaJO@eskom.co.za';
'vgeemsb@eskom.co.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'john.geeringh@eskom.co.za'

'henk.landman@eskom'

'WyngaaJO@eskom.co.za'

'vgeemsb@eskom.co.za'

Charles Norman Read: 28/03/2017 15:22

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:12 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing Eskom, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the
Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of
Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:26
To: 'AngeliqueS@elsenburg.com'; 'DanieN@elsenburg.com'; 'info@elsenburg.com'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'AngeliqueS@elsenburg.com'

'DanieN@elsenburg.com'

'info@elsenburg.com'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:26 Read: 28/03/2017 15:27

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:26 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the Western Cape Government: Department of Agriculture (Elsenburg), you have been
identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste
Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 14:55
To: 'Centralp@dws.gov.za'; 'LoseloP@dws.gov.za'; 'Robertsj@dwa.gov.za'; 'HendriksL2
@dwa.gov.za'; 'SalimL@dws.gov.za'; 'dreyerw@dws.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane; 'dana grobler'; 'Toni Belcher'
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'Centralp@dws.gov.za'

'LoseloP@dws.gov.za'

'Robertsj@dwa.gov.za'

'HendriksL2@dwa.gov.za'

'SalimL@dws.gov.za'

'dreyerw@dws.gov.za'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 14:56 Read: 28/03/2017 15:21

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 14:56 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

'dana grobler'

'Toni Belcher'

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the Department of Water and Sanitation, you have been identified as a potential Interested and
Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape
Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:00
To: 'tommie.bolton@drdlr.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'tommie.bolton@drdlr.gov.za'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:00 Read: 28/03/2017 15:21

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:00 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, you have been identified as a
potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed
by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:27
To: 'Mbulelo.Tshangana@dhs.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'Mbulelo.Tshangana@dhs.gov.za'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:28 Read: 28/03/2017 15:29

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:28 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Dear Sir,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As a representative of the National Department of Human Settlements, you have been identified as a potential Interested
and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape
Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:31
To: 'Jennifer.Mirembe@dhs.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.PDF; 20170327_BID_ENG.PDF; 20170327
_BID_AFR.PDF

Dear Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As a representative of the National Department of Human Settlements, you have been identified as a potential Interested
and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape
Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 14:58
To: 'MokutuleK@daff.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, you have been identified as a potential
Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the
Western Cape Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:25
To: 'roelof.mare@capetown.gov.za'; 'Ernest.Sonnenberg@capetown.gov.za';
'Chantal.Cerfontein@capetown.gov.za'
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As councillors representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party
(I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government:
Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 16:03
To: 'Dilshard.Modak@capetown.gov.za'; 'achmat.ebrahim@capetown.gov.za';
'Rayan.Rughurbar@capetown.gov.za'
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party
(I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government:
Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:20
To: 'Rayan.Rughurbar@capetown.gov.za'; 'enviro@capetown.gov.za';
'Dilshard.Modak@capetwon.goc.za'; 'marco.geretto@capetown.gov.za';
'Charles.Rudman@capetown.gov.za'; 'Nigel.Titus@capetown.gov.za';
'Cheryl.Walters@capetown.gov.za'; 'wastewise.user@capetown.gov.za';
'melissa.whitehead@capetown.gov.za'; 'bill.jones@capetown.gov.za';
'sean.glass@capetown.gov.za'; 'water.info@capetown.gov.za';
'peter.flower@capetown.gov.za'; 'Jaco.deBruyn@capetown.gov.za';
'shamile.manie@capetown.gov.za'; 'wayne.davids@capetown.gov.za';
'Franz.VonMoltke@capetown.gov.za'; 'konanani.phadziri@capetown.gov.za';
'Achmant.ebrahim@capetown.gov.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

'Rayan.Rughurbar@capetown.gov.za'

'enviro@capetown.gov.za'

'Dilshard.Modak@capetwon.goc.za'

'marco.geretto@capetown.gov.za'

'Charles.Rudman@capetown.gov.za'

'Nigel.Titus@capetown.gov.za'

'Cheryl.Walters@capetown.gov.za'

'wastewise.user@capetown.gov.za'

'melissa.whitehead@capetown.gov.za'

'bill.jones@capetown.gov.za'

'sean.glass@capetown.gov.za'

'water.info@capetown.gov.za'

'peter.flower@capetown.gov.za'

'Jaco.deBruyn@capetown.gov.za'

'shamile.manie@capetown.gov.za'

'wayne.davids@capetown.gov.za'

'Franz.VonMoltke@capetown.gov.za'

'konanani.phadziri@capetown.gov.za'

'Achmant.ebrahim@capetown.gov.za'

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:20 Read: 28/03/2017 15:22

Simamkele Ntsengwane Delivered: 28/03/2017 15:20 Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

1
As an official representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party
(I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government:
Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

2
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 15:13
To: 'rsmart@capenature.co.za'
Cc: Charles Norman; Simamkele Ntsengwane
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing CapeNature, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for
the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of
Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

1
Kirsten Jones

From: Kirsten Jones

Sent: 28 March 2017 14:49
Cc: Simamkele Ntsengwane; Charles Norman
Subject: Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Opportunity to Register & Comment
Attachments: 170328_Penhill_Ltr to IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf; 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327
_BID_AFR.pdf

Tracking:
Tracking Recipient Delivery Read

Simamkele Ntsengwane Read: 28/03/2017 17:16

Charles Norman Delivered: 28/03/2017 14:50 Read: 28/03/2017 15:20

'dumas@iafrica.com'

'daniecarinus@gmail.com'

'vcarinus@gmail.com'

'christiaan@delmontehiringservices.co.za'

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As neighbouring landowners, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for the Penhill
Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government: Department of Human
Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).

If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document.

Kind regards

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

1
Appendix C.3: Pre-Application Meetings
Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd T +27 21 526 9400
Reg No 1977/003711/07 F +27 21 526 9500
Aurecon Centre E capetown@aurecongroup.com
1 Century City Drive W aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa

Meeting Record Item Topic

CN explained that the Department of Human Settlements are the owners of the
Action by

property, however some land invaders are currently occupying the site, a court order
Project number 113371 Meeting date 18 April 2017 and eviction notices have been submitted to the current land occupants.
Simamkele RS enquired about the properties adjacent to the proposed development site, whether
Project name Penhill Greenfields Development Recorded by
Ntsengwane they were private properties or belonged to the City of Cape Town? CN provided an
Meeting/subject CapeNature Pre-application meeting Total pages explanation using the locality map as reference, highlighting City property, the private
properties and the urban edge.

CN & KJ provided an overview of the existing features on the site, which includes
transmission lines, stormwater detention ponds, stormwater channels and avenues of
Apology
Present

Name Organisation Contact details

Copy

Eucalyptus trees.

þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Rhett Smart CapeNature rsmart@capenature.co.za CN enquired whether the stormwater channels would be of any interest to
CapeNature? RS explained that they would most likely be interested in the wetland
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Charles Norman Aurecon Charles.Norman@aurecongroup.com areas mapped across the site.
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Kirsten Jones Aurecon Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
KJ gave a brief explanation of the proposed conceptual designs and the preferred L-
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Simamkele Ntsengwane Aurecon Simamkele.ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com shape design based on the agricultural interface with the adjacent agricultural land
(Alternative A) and the option of the consolidated block of agricultural land to provide
Item Topic Action by for a 500m cemetery buffer (to the south) from any residential dwelling, as required by
the National Health Act. KJ also mentioned that the preferred layout is the layout with
01 Introductions the L-shaped agricultural component.
CN introduced the Aurecon team to RS and highlighted the intention and importance of
KJ described the project’s components and designs. Highlighting that the Conceptual
meeting with CapeNature as a commenting authority before the application for Design Framework that was conducted by Planning Partners (Pty) Ltd and the team of
Environmental Authorisation is submitted to DEA&DP. Those in attendance have the consultants.
following roles;
The project also includes commercial, industrial and agricultural components, with 40
· Rhett Smart; representative of Scientific Servicers, CapeNature; ha allocated for urban agricultural use.

· Charles Norman; from Aurecon as the project leader for the Environmental RS enquired whether the Department of Agriculture was involved in the project or the
allocation of the agricultural component of the project?
Impact Assessment (EIA) process for the project;
CN advised that they would be engaged with along with the Department of Rural
· Kirsten Jones from Aurecon as the Environmental Consultant appointed by the Development and Land Reform.
Department of Human Settlements to undertake the EIA process; and
CN & KJ further explained the Department of Agriculture would also assist in guiding
· Simamkele Ntsengwane; from Aurecon as the EAP support project staff. what form of urban agriculture would be suitable for the site, according to the City’s
urban agriculture policy.
Meeting minutes were recorded by SN of Aurecon and will be distributed to attendees. Aurecon RS enquired whether the agricultural component would not serve as 500 m buffer?

02 Project Overview KJ explained that Alternative B included a block to the south that would serve as the
500m cemetery buffer. KJ also explained that an application for exemption of the 500 m
KJ provided a brief overview of the project, the site locality and current site features. had been submitted by the applicant.
KJ provided the proposed project programme. Highlighting the different phases of the Supporting Infrastructure
programme. KJ mentioned that the project is currently in the concept and viability stage 03
of the programme, which includes the EIA process that started in early January with the KJ provided an overview of the supporting infrastructure on the site, including roads,
aim of concluding in April 2018. bulk water (which requires a pipeline and reservoir), sewage (which requires a 6km
pipeline connection), electricity (there is existing electrical infrastructure on site within a
RS enquired who submitted the application for an EA? Whether it was the provincial servitude), and expansion of existing stormwater infrastructure (there is currently a
Department of Human Settlements, National Department of Human Settlements or the channel and detention ponds adjacent to the western site boundary that may require
City of Cape Town? KJ advised that it was the Western Cape Government, Department expansion).
of the Human Settlements who was responsible for the application. The City of Cape
Town is a proponent of the proposed development as it is being undertaken jointly. KJ also added that the plan was to accommodate 8 000 housing units and other related
mixed uses.
KJ provided background to the area and explained the current land use on the site and
the total footprint of the project. Highlighting the current activities on site. CN explained that for the linear supporting infrastructure off-site, such as water supply
and sewage pipelines, the routing but would be included as part of the assessment.
RS enquired whether the current activities on site were formal or informal activities? KJ
explained that the activities were informal activities, which include livestock farming. The electrical infrastructure comprising a relocation of the 66kV line and substation
would most likely require a separate application with DEA. The linear supporting
infrastructure was to be considered in relation to the proposals for the site and the
development as a whole.

Project 113371 File 20170418 CapeNature Pre-application-v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 1 Project 113371 File 20170418 CapeNature Pre-application-v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 2
Item Topic Action by Item Topic Action by
RS explained that it was important to consider that part of the site was identified as a RS explained that recommending an offset for government sponsored projects is often
CBA, in addition he brought to the attention of the EAP team the recent release of the tricky as there are funding issues, in addition RS made reference to the arrestor bed
2017 Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WCBSP) which is a new CBA layer project.
generated by CapeNature. The 2016 BioNet plan has been retained.
RS noted that there were biodiversity offset guidelines that should be consulted.
04 Biodiversity Mapping RS advised that it would be best to speak to the CoCT in terms of identifying potential
areas for an offset, as they manage the conservation areas.
KJ provided a brief summary of the biodiversity mapping and the botanical specialist’s
(Nick Helme) findings. Highlighting that according to the CoCT biodiversity network RS indicated that CapeNature will be meeting the CoCT housing department on the
~40% of the site is a CBA2 and the remainder of the site does not appear to have any 10th May 2017 to discuss issues around off-sets in a similar housing development in
remaining natural vegetation of importance. The CBA2 category is described as Kraaifontein.
“Restorable Irreplaceable Site”.
05 Water Resources
KJ added that there is an adjacent conservation area which is identified as “protected in
perpetuity.” The conservation area supports some high quality habitat and various KJ provided an overview of the water resources, highlighting the mapped watercourses
threatened and localised plant species. RS stated this area was managed by the CoCT Aurecon to and wetlands. KJ added that based on the site visit with the hydrology and freshwater
and they should be able to provide further information on the status of this site. discuss with specialists, man-made and natural watercourses where identified on site. Not much
CoCT on 19 sensitivity has been identified.
The study area is mapped as Cape Flats Sand Fynbos with minor elements of
April 2017
Swartland shale Renosterveld. Both vegetation types are Critically Endangered,
CN enquired whether the wetlands and wetland vegetation would be of interest to
although it was found that only Cape Flats Sand Fynbos is represented on site. Aurecon to
CapeNature? RS advised that there were wetland constraints due to the seasonality of
send report
KJ explained that according to the botanical study “The majority of the site supports the wetlands in the area.
if
little or no vegetation of any conservation significance, most of the remaining vegetation RS requested a copy of the freshwater assessment if there were contentious findings. necessary
is of Low conservation value (or sensitivity). It is estimated that >20ha of natural
vegetation remains, although much of this is the tough perennial pasture grass and 06 Environmental Constraints
resilient, unpalatable species.” In addition a single plant species of conservation
concern (SCC) had been recorded on site. KJ outlined other environmental constraints on site, highlighting freshwater ecology
associated with the stormwater ponds and potentially with drainage lines, loss of
A copy of the Botanical Assessment report was given to RS Aurecon agricultural potential and suitability for the future agricultural allocation, the location of
the graveyard and potential constraints for development in terms of human health.
RS enquired whether there was any plans for the medium-high sensitive vegetation
within the servitude area. RS mentioned that the social constraints on site might be a bigger problem than the
biodiversity and other environmental constraints.
KJ explained that the rehabilitation potential of the site is poor to moderate, due to the
long history of soil disturbance and likely future disturbances. In the botanical EIA process
specialist’s recommendations, parts of the study area have moderate rehabilitation 07
potential but this this would be difficult, time consuming and costly to achieve, KJ provided an overview of the EIA programme.
particularly in the prevailing environment. Therefore an off-set is recommended for the
sensitive vegetation. CN indicted that Aurecon is communicating with CoCT and other commenting
authorities before submitting the application to receive comments from them that would
Aurecon to be beneficial for inclusion in the scoping phase. This would allow issues to be
request addressed upfront, rather than in the limited timeframes prescribed by the EIA
RS queried whether a search and rescue or translocation had been recommended. botanist to Regulations.
consider
this CN added that Aurecon would appreciate if they received comments from CapeNature
by the 2nd May 2017.
RS explained that it was important to consider the CBA status of the area and is aware
of the constraints of rehabilitating the area. RS mentioned the Tokai and Blaauwberg CapeNature
nature reserves as cases of restoration of Cape Flats Sand Fynbos. to provide
RS requested an extension until the 4th May 2017, this was accepted as the holidays in
between where taken into consideration. comment
KJ continued stating that the associated infrastructure was not assessed in detail by the
by 4 May
Botanical specialist and would require ground truthing. However from initial
2017
observations, it appears that the only significant botanical impacts would be associated
with portions of the bulk sewer pipeline (together about 700m long) with potentially High 08 Way Forward
and Very High botanical sensitivity along the Vergenoegd Farm section of the route
(southern end), which is also a recognised site of high botanical conservation value. KJ indicated that Aurecon would liaise with CapeNature prior to the lapsing date of the
pre-application PPP.

Next meeting: N/A

Project 113371 File 20170418 CapeNature Pre-application-v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 3 Project 113371 File 20170418 CapeNature Pre-application-v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 4
Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd T +27 21 526 9400
Reg No 1977/003711/07 F +27 21 526 9500
Aurecon Centre E capetown@aurecongroup.com
1 Century City Drive W aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa

Meeting Record Item Topic

KJ provided a brief project background, highlighting that the CoCT and the DHS are
Action by

jointly planning a catalytic human settlements programme termed the Southern Corridor
Project number 113371 Meeting date 19 April 2017 Integrated Human Settlements Programme and the Penhill Greenfields Development
Simamkele forms part of that programme. KJ also added that this was the main greenfields
Project name Penhill Greenfields Development Recorded by development included as part of the Southern Corridor programme.
Ntsengwane
Meeting/subject City of Cape Town Pre-application meeting Total pages KJ provided background to the area explaining the current land use on the site and the
total footprint of the project, and highlighted the current activities on site, the project and
site locality, and current site features. CN provided an explanation of the location of the
project using the locality map as reference, highlighting City property, the private
properties and the urban edge.
Apology
Present

Name Organisation Contact details

Copy

KJ explained that for the linear supporting infrastructure such as water supply and
sewage pipelines, the routing would be offsite. The routing was indicated in the
þ ‫܆ ܆‬ City of Cape Town:
Alexandes Forbes (AF) Alexander.Forbes@capetown.gov.za presentation.
Environment
þ ‫܆ ܆‬ LW mentioned that there is sensitive Renosterveld vegetation in the vicinity of the film
City of Cape Town:
Lewine Walters (LW) Lewine.Walters@capetown.gov.za studios. CN was in agreement and mentioned that it was highlighted in the Botanical
Biodiversity
Specialists findings. The sensitive areas that would be affected by the linear
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Charles Norman (CN) Aurecon Charles.Norman@aurecongroup.com infrastructure are adjacent to the Vergenoegd Farm.
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Kirsten Jones (KJ) Aurecon Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
LW indicated that there was a conservation area (Penhill Conservation area) adjacent
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Simamkele Ntsengwane (SN) Aurecon Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com to the site that Cape Flats Sand Fynbos remains in this area as well as around the
cemetery and in patches within the site boundary. KJ was in agreement and referred to
Item Topic Action by the biodiversity maps in the presentation.

01 Introductions CN mentioned that the conservation status of the Conservation Area is defined as
‘protected in perpetuity’, in addition CN enquired whether the area was suitable for an
Introductions were made around the table, Those in attendance have the following off-set for the sensitive vegetation? LW advised that it could be suitable but that an
roles: agreement between CoCT and with CapeNature has been implemented with regards to
· Alexandes Forbes; the Environmental Management Department of the City of the conservation of the area.
Cape Town;
AF indicated that there was a Basic Assessment which had been submitted to them for
· Lewine Walters; Biodiversity Area Co-ordinator, Biodiversity Management commenting, for a new residential development on farm RE/643 Eersterivier, close to
Branch, Environmental Management Department, of the City of Cape Town. Aan De Wijnlanden. AF mentioned that he would make the report available to the EAP. CoCT
· Kirsten Jones: from Aurecon as the Environmental Consultant appointed by [Aurecon has since located the report on the internet]
the Department of Human Settlements to undertake the EIA process; KJ mentioned that the report would be useful in the cumulative impacts assessment,
· Charles Norman; from Aurecon as the project leader for the Environmental particularly for the linear infrastructure.
Impact Assessment (EIA) process for the project; and
AF mentioned that according to his knowledge there were very limited farming activities
· Simamkele Ntsengwane; from Aurecon as the EAP support project staff. on the site and the site in its current form is considered wasted space.

AF briefly explained his role within the Environmental Branch in the City of Cape Town 03 Components and design
(CoCT) and the role played by LW and the biodiversity branch with regards to KJ described the project’s components and designs indicated in the presentation. The
commenting on Basic Assessment Reports, Scoping Reports and EIRs. designs are the product of the Conceptual Design Framework developed by Planning
Meeting minutes were recorded by SN of Aurecon and will be distributed to attendees. Partners (Pty) Ltd and the team of consultants. The main land use proposed is for
Aurecon
various types of housing but the project also includes commercial, community,
CN requested that AF coordinates internally with the rest of the departments within the industrial and agricultural components, with 40 ha allocated for urban agricultural use.
CoCT to ensure that all Departments incorporate their comments before the application KJ described that there were plans for co-use of space within the Eskom servitude.
is submitted. CN added that it will be important for all the CoCT departments to
comment in order for the EAP to be aware of all issues before the Application is AF mentioned that the development was targeted at low income groups therefore the
submitted. maintenance of open areas and ponds would become an issue.
Making reference to backyarders, AF mentioned that often such projects did not make
AF mentioned that he was aware of the Penhill Greenfields Development Project, he adequate provision for sewage and the lack of sewage capacity was detrimental for the
sat in the earlier meetings and was aware there was a court case with the current land stormwater system as much of the sewage ends up in the stormwater system. AF
occupants. AF added that from his observations sewage capacity would be the major emphasised that it would be beneficial if the project included the backyarders in the
issue, as this was the case with most housing developments in the region. provisions for sanitation. AF also stressed that backyarders occupation could not be
CN explained that it is the intention of the Western Cape Government Department of phased and they would likely occupy all available areas almost immediately.
Human Settlements (DHS) to phase the implementation of the project according the Layouts
04
availability of sewage capacity.

02 Project Overview

Project 113371 File 20170419 CoCT Pre-application_Meeting Notes_v0.docx 15 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 1 Project 113371 File 20170419 CoCT Pre-application_Meeting Notes_v0.docx 19 April 2017 Revision 0 Page 2
Item Topic Action by Item Topic Action by
KJ gave a brief explanation of the proposed conceptual designs and the preferred L- KJ added that DEA&DP Sustainability Department recommended rainwater tanks. This
shape design (Alternative A) based on the extended agricultural interface with the could contribute to stormwater control.
adjacent agricultural land versus the option to provide for a 500m cemetery buffer (to
the south), as required by the National Health Act. AF recommended that the EAP consults with the Department of Water and Sanitation
in the initial stages of the EIA process to gather clarity for their requirements with
AF made reference to a similar issue in Khayelitsha where the 500m cemetery buffer regards to WULA and associated timeframes.
was implemented.
06 Timeframes
With regards to the beneficiaries of the 40ha of the agricultural portion, AF enquired
who the beneficiaries where? KJ gave an overview of the EIA timeline, showing that the process is in the Pre-
CN mentioned that the beneficiaries would be the Penhill Farmers and iThemba application phase and comments are being sought as early as possible with authorities.
Farmers, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Rural Development and EIA Process
07
Land Reform would be consulted on how to best to accommodate them.
KJ explained that the specialists had been on site, in addition KJ provided a list of
AF mentioned that he was aware of the developments planned for the iThemba area, specialists that had been appointed; the specialists include:
therefore he would understand the strong push for the relocation of the iThemba
farmers. AF added that he would liaise with the Urban Agriculture officials for CoCT · Toni Belcher and Stuart Barrow: Aquatic Ecologists/Freshwater specialists
comments on the agricultural portion of the development · Nick Helme: Botanical Specialist
· Louis Stroebel: Groundwater Specialist
With regards to the agricultural space, LW indicated that it would be difficult to restrict · Tim Hart: Heritage Specialist
animal movement and encroachment onto adjacent areas. The City normally does not · Nick Walker: Hydrologist
support conservation areas adjacent to open spaces due to such risks. The stormwater · Adrian Jongens: Noise Specialist
ponds could be at risk of dumping. Further, fencing would be an issue around the · Johann Lanz: Agricultural Specialist
agricultural area and to stop animals encroaching into the neighbouring farming and
· Steve Stead: Visual Specialist
conservation areas, and cemetery.
· Shaun Devine: Waste Specialist
In addition LW added that waste generation, refuse and accumulation of rubble would · Tony Barbour: Social Specialist
also become a problem if mitigation measures are not implemented. LW recommended
that roads should not have ‘dead ends’ at the site boundary or adjacent to unoccupied A traffic impact assessment is being undertaken by a separate consultant and will feed
land because it provided easy access for such dumping. into the EIA.
KJ advised that there is a waste specialist has been appointed, the EAP would mention KJ highlighted the botanical findings based on the Biodiversity mapping and the
the factors to the waste specialist for their consideration. botanical studies undertaken by Nick Helme. Although the site is within the original
extent of the Critically Endangered Cape Flats Sand Fynbos, the majority of the site
LW recommended that a road or hardened surface should separate areas of supports little or no vegetation of any conservation significance and is of low sensitivity.
conservation or agriculture and residential areas to discourage tipping of waste over the This is due to previous agricultural activities, human disturbance and alien plant
back walls of dwellings. invasion. Two small medium to medium-high sensitivity patches of vegetation were
KJ expanded that there was a condition that stipulated that no dwellings are to be identified in the north west corner and the eastern extent of the transmission line
erected within the agricultural portion. It was the intention that any farmers that qualify servitude (which included one threatened species). As the rehabilitation potential of the
for housing would have their residential units of adjacent to the agricultural portion. site is poor to moderate, an offset in this regard has been recommended due to the
limited remaining extent of this vegetation type.
LW mentioned that she preferred Alternative B layout because it consolidated the open
spaces and thus reduced the residential / open space interface. KJ enquired whether translocation of the threatened species would be feasible.
LW advised that Penhill conservation area is the closest area for the relocation of any
CN mentioned that a heritage assessment formed part of the EIA process and this species found in a search and rescue that can be translocated.
included submitting a NID (notice of intent to develop). CN further enquired if would it
be suitable if the heritage specialist communicated directly with the city’s heritage LW stated that other potential offset sites include Macassar Dunes Conservation Area
department. which is state-owned and managed by the City. LW described the biodiversity network
along Macassar dunes and the coast and the City’s plans to expand the biodiversity
AF indicated that he would liaise with the heritage department and City Parks and network.
would include them in the site visits. The heritage official is Elize Joubert.
AF mentioned that the Atlantis side is more viable for offsets due to the availability of
CN indicated that the heritage concerns on site were the Eucalyptus trees, which are land.
older than 60 years.
LW stated that offsets can be discussed with the biodiversity coordinator (Pat Holmes)
AF recommended that the trees be kept on site, however City Parks and heritage and the Stewardship Coordinator (Clifford Dorse). Nick Helme, as the biodiversity
department would advise better on the matter. specialist, should contact LW and she can liaise with them. It is better to address this
sooner rather than later as it could take time to resolve. Aurecon
05 Water resources
AF indicated that DEA&DP considers the requirement and viability of offsets and
KJ provided an overview of the water resources, highlighting the mapped watercourses
mentioned examples where Environmental Authorisation was withheld for housing
and wetlands. KJ added that based on the site visit with the hydrology and freshwater
developments in Mitchells Plain and Mfuleni due to unsatisfactory commitments by the
specialists, man-made and natural watercourses where identified on site.
city.
AF enquired whether the SUDS principles were to be implemented as part of the Environmental and social constraints
development. KJ advised that the specialist was recommending that the SUDS 08
principles should be adopted and had been consulting with the stormwater engineers.

Project 113371 File 20170419 CoCT Pre-application_Meeting Notes_v0.docx 19 April 2017 Revision 0 Page 3 Project 113371 File 20170419 CoCT Pre-application_Meeting Notes_v0.docx 19 April 2017 Revision 0 Page 4
 Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd T +27 21 526 9400
Reg No 1977/003711/07 F +27 21 526 9500
Aurecon Centre E capetown@aurecongroup.com
1 Century City Drive W aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa

Item Topic
KJ outlined other environmental constraints on site, highlighting potential Freshwater
Action by
Meeting Record
Ecology associated with stormwater ponds and drainage lines, loss of agricultural
potential and the suitability for the future agricultural allocation; and location of the Project number 113371 Meeting date 26 April 2017
graveyard as a potential constraint for development in terms of human health
Project name Penhill Greenfields Development Recorded by Pearl Rakeepile
KJ requested the Basic Assessment which had been submitted to the City for
Department of Agriculture: Pre-application
commenting, for a new residential development on farm RE/643 Eersterivier, close to Meeting/subject Total pages 4
Aan De Wijnlanden. Which will be useful in the assessment of cumulative impacts. meeting
[Aurecon has since located the report on the internet]
AF mentioned that minor issues could prove problematic, such as the current land

Apology
Present
Name Organisation Contact details

Copy
occupants, the issue of addressing offsets and the encroachment of the site by other
illegal occupants.
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬André Roux Department of Agriculture AndreR@elsenburg.com
KJ highlighted that the noise specialist mentioned that the noise from Van Riebeeck
road could also be a potential constraint. CN mentioned that the specialist þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Cor van der Walt Department of Agriculture CorvdW@elsenburg.com
recommended berms and walls as mitigation. CN added that the resurfacing of Van þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Ilani Nel Department of Human Settlements ilani.nel@westerncape.gov.za
Riebeeck road could be a potential mitigation.
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Du Bruyn Jonker iX Engineers dubruyn.j@ixengineers.co.za
AF noted that the resurfacing of that road had recently taken place, but recommended
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Kirsten Jones Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
that the traffic impact assessment should consider it.
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Pearl Rakeepile Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd Pearl.Raekeepile@aurecongroup.com
08 Way Forward
‫ ܆‬þ ‫ ܆‬Toni Xaba Department of Agriculture ToniX@elsenburg.com
CN stated that Aurecon would appreciate receiving comments from CoCT by the 2nd
CoCT ‫ ܆‬þ ‫ ܆‬Mogale Sebopetsa Department of Agriculture MogaleS@elsenburg.com
May 2017.
‫ ܆‬þ ‫ ܆‬Danie Niemand Department of Agriculture DanieN@elsenburg.com
LW requested an electronic copy of the layouts and the botanical report. Aurecon
KJ indicated that Aurecon would liaise with CoCT prior to the lapsing date of the pre- Item Topic Action by
application PPP. Purpose of the Meeting
Summary of Key Issues To discuss the Penhill Greenfields Development Project as proposed by the Department
of Human Settlements. This meeting is part of the Pre-Application consultation phase as
· The location of the agricultural areas would encourage grazing to encroach on part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. The aim is to gain
the Welmoed Cemetery and the Penhill Conservation Area to the south and comment from the Department of Agriculture on the development proposal since the
potentially the private agricultural land to the east. land is zoned as agricultural land, it is currently used by informal small-scale farmers and
· If capacity for backyarders is not catered for in the sewage system, sewage will the development includes an agricultural component proposed for urban agriculture. The
be dumped into the stormwater infrastructure. If phasing of backyarders is following attendees were present:
envisioned, one must expect backyarders to move in immediately, therefore · André Roux - Department of Agriculture – Sustainable Resource Management
capacity should be provided at that stage. KJ · Cor van der Walt - Department of Agriculture - Land Use Management
· If backyarders are not accommodated in waste removal capacity, waste will be · Ilani Nel – Department of Human Settlements
tipped into adjacent open spaces and private land. The stormwater ponds could
· Kirsten Jones – Aurecon - Environmental Assessment Practitioner
be at risk of dumping.
· Pearly Rakeepile – Aurecon – Environmental Project Staff
· Rubble which is generated on site due to construction activities by the residents
Apologies from:
is also likely to be dumped onto adjacent open spaces and private land.
· Toni Xaba - Department of Agriculture – Rural Development
· ‘Dead ends’ of roads up to the site boundary and unoccupied land (open space
· Mogale Sebopetsa - Department of Agriculture - Farmer support and
and/or agricultural) were discouraged because it provided easy access for such
development
dumping.
· Danie Niemand – Department of Agriculture- Farm worker development
· It is recommended that a road or hard surface separates the residential areas
from any adjacent open spaces to discourage tipping of waste over the back
walls of dwellings. Presentation
· Layout B is preferred as it consolidates the open space (agricultural areas). Kirsten Jones of Aurecon as the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP)
· Macassar Dunes Conservation Area is recommended for the consideration of presented the project overview as well as the findings of the Agricultural (Soil) Scoping
offsets. Offsets can be discussed with the biodiversity coordinator (Pat Holmes) Report.
and the Stewardship Coordinator (Clifford Dorse). Nick Helme as the biodiversity KJ Refer to the Presentation and Report (as circulated after the meeting).
specialist should contact LW and she can liaise with them. It is better to address
sooner than later as it could take time to resolve. It was noted that the two layout alternatives were based on the configuration of the
proposed agricultural land. Alternative A has an L-shape and Alternative B has a block
· Offsets are considered seriously by DEA&DP and could result in a refusal of an
shape near the south of the site to accommodate a 500m buffer from the Welmoed
environmental authorisation if not adequately addressed.
Cemetery.
Next meeting: N/A

Project 113371 File 20170419 CoCT Pre-application_Meeting Notes_v0.docx 19 April 2017 Revision 0 Page 5 Project 113371 File 20170426_Pre-App Dept of Agric_Meeting Notes_v1.docx 26 April 2017 Revision 1 Page 1
Item Topic Action by Item Topic Action by
With regards to the layout IN stressed that the Layout A, the L-shaped agricultural The impact on adjacent agriculture must also be considered.
component was the preferred layout as it provides an interface with the private farms to There is the case in Kayamandi whereby encroachment onto an adjacent wine farm
the east and integrates with the Stellenbosch agricultural areas. occurred and people were stealing from the farmer. The farmer moved and sold the land
KJ noted that the City of Cape Town preferred Layout B which was a consolidated block to Stellenbosch Municipality and Kayamandi was extended. Probably the problem will
of land which had reduced interface with the residential areas and therefore less occur now on the farm adjacent to the extension.
IN interface for dumping of waste. AR
The interface with the adjacent agricultural areas is very important.
IN notes that that the proposed 40ha of land would be used for urban agriculture. The If people are allowed to keep animals, they will keep them. In the recent drought which
development team needs the details of the current activities to establish what will be has been declared as a disaster, the City brings fodder for the legal animals. However, it
feasible. No farmers would be living on the agricultural land but could be living in the is estimated that only 5% of the animals in the City are legal. There are about 35,800
units adjacent. The agricultural land will probably be managed by the Department of cattle, sheep and goats in the City which form part of people’s livelihoods.
Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR).
In the long term you must be cautious of creating a poverty trap, where the farmers have
The use of the stormwater ponds for agriculture was discussed, this was not possible CvDW no money, water etc and farming is not viable.
due to the seasonality of the ponds.
CvdW asked where the water in the ponds comes from. There are plans for a social survey of the farmers to establish the current activities.
CvdW DJ Once we have this, would it be possible to get advice from the farmer support or
DJ stated it was the overflow from the Waste Water Treatment Works (WTW).
engineering programmes?
CvdW suggested that using the water from the stormwater ponds for agriculture should
be explored. Once there is more information - like the availability of water, what agricultural activities
can take place based on soil, water, climate etc, we can consider what options would
With reference to the stormwater ponds, the northern pond is very green which suggests CvdW work best, for example grazing, vegetable, or tunnels. The Programme: Farmer Support
there is standing water. This area could be used for grazing. and Development (Elsenburg) can assist with a business plan for the best use of the
CvdW CvdW recommends a full survey to be done to see how much land is used for grazing. land.
The site could be cultivated, potentially using water from the sludge drying ponds, Once we know what is viable, provision can be made. If it is not viable, housing
however, you would need to guarantee that you can provide water all year round. DJ opportunities can be considered.
IN noted that the mandate of DHS is to provide housing and agriculture is not their In terms of legislation since the Department of Human Settlements is the owner of the
IN expertise. CvdW land, the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act (70 of 70) may not apply.
The site cannot support chickens and pigs as it is too close to housing and presents a The application has already been submitted.
IN
bio-security issue.
CvdW IN to send
Water is needed for vegetables and fodder is needed for grazing. 32 farmers cannot be Please send the application and we can clarify with Annette. It could possibly be
supported on 40 ha. CVdW withdrawn, or exempted. Act 70 of 70
Application
KJ noted that if the agricultural component is not fully utilised, infill with informal housing Does any other legislation apply, such as Conservation of Agricultural Land Act (43 of
KJ could occur. KJ 1983)?
The farmers have been on the land for 20 years illegally, therefore they can be legally Only if the land will be cleared for cultivation.
CvdW
evicted.
IN The impact of abutting farms on the development should also be considered.
It is the intention that there will be a clause that if the agricultural land fails, the land
would be returned to Human Settlement for housing purposes. For example, spraying of crops. There was a case in Riebeeks Kasteel whereby there
were accounts of people getting sick from spraying. But there is the argument that the
In summary if the land is to be used for agriculture the following is needed: AR farms where there first and that they have a right to farm. Wind direction should be
· Guarantee that water is available – the source and price needs to be factored considered but in some cases it is not possible to always spray in the right conditions.
in, it cannot be municipal water Therefore an agricultural buffer is preferred.
· Boreholes could be used – a general authorisation (GA) or extension would be
CvdW required The water reservoir on private agricultural land is also noted. This only supplies water for
DB the development. The respective process will be followed with regards to acquiring the
· Water quality requirements depend on the activities and animals that will be land.
kept
The development is within the urban edge and is mentioned in the SDF, therefore the
· If animals are being kept, they will need fodder in December – March IN location has been considered suitable by the City.
It needs to be emphasised that this is not an agricultural project, it is a housing project.
In terms of the occupants, the process is to issue an eviction notice in the next 6 months,
However promises have been made by the Department. Some of the farmers have been
DJ IN whereby the occupants can make a representation why not to be evicted. This is a
on the land for 20 years so are rightly concerned about their future. The project
parallel process.
proponent is looking to work with DRDLR so that we can try to accommodate them.
Are there business opportunities for the farmers instead, since it is opposite the industrial
The farmers will have to vacate when the site is cleared and if they have nowhere to go,
AR areas along Van Riebeeck Road? There could be opportunities to open small spazas
they could go here. Unless DRDLR can offer them another option. The Department is
IN etc.
trying to do the right thing by offering the land. If they qualify they will get a BNG house,
if not, they can get a serviced site.
DJ The idea is to lease the land. There is a risk that illegal structures be erected.

Project 113371 File 20170426_Pre-App Dept of Agric_Meeting Notes_v1.docx 26 April 2017 Revision 1 Page 2 Project 113371 File 20170426_Pre-App Dept of Agric_Meeting Notes_v1.docx 26 April 2017 Revision 1 Page 3
 Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd T +27 21 526 9400
Reg No 1977/003711/07 F +27 21 526 9500
Aurecon Centre E capetown@aurecongroup.com
1 Century City Drive W aurecongroup.com
Waterford Precinct
Century City
Cape Town 7441
PO Box 494
Cape Town 8000
South Africa

Item Topic
The red block on the layout is a commercial hub. There is also the opportunity for small
Action by
Meeting Record
shops – it is a large housing development, in terms of scale it has 3 schools with 37 000-
IN 50 000 people living there. Project number 113371 Meeting date 9 May 2017
There could be an anchor like Spar or Pick ‘n Pay, plus small trading shops like Spazas. Simamkele
Project name Penhill Greenfields Development Recorded by
It has been a request of the project team to investigate business opportunities. Ntsengwane
It is proposed that produce could be sold in the commercial areas.
Department of Water and Sanitation Pre-
DJ Meeting/subject Total pages
application meeting
You could look into including more industrial areas in the proposal e.g. Blackheath is a
CvdW popular industrial area and is growing fast, you could use the agricultural component for
industries rather, and this would provide opportunities for jobs and trade.

Apology
Some of the potential constraints to urban agriculture:

Present
Name Organisation Contact details

Copy
· If you have tunnels you require water – is borehole water available?
· Tunnels require intensive farming systems in need of higher level of
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Warren Dreyer DWS: Berg Olifant CMA dreyerW@dws.gov.za
management, they will require semi-skilled persons and the resident farmers
may not have the skills. þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Shaddai Daniel DWS: Resource Protection DanielS@dws.gov.za
AR
· Vegetables require weekly watering þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬N du Buisson DWS: Berg Olifants CMA dubuissonn@dws.gov.za
· Safety of the ponds is an issue if used for grazing, need to be fenced þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Ilani Nel DoHS: Planning Ilani.Nel@westerncape.gov.za
· Interface with the private farms is important
þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Crystal Burger ix Engineers Crystal.b@ixengineers.co.za
In summary, urban agriculture may not necessarily the best option for that site given the
intensive farming and associated skills required for some of the options eg. tunnels. þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Toni Belcher BlueScience toni@bluescience.co.za
It is assumed that there is no water allocation for the current farmers since they are þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Stuart Barrow BlueScience stuart@bluescience.co.za
CvdW illegal – this would have been a deciding factor for if site is viable for agriculture or not. þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Charles Norman Aurecon Charles.Norman@aurecongroup.com
Way Forward þ ‫ ܆ ܆‬Simamkele Ntsengwane Aurecon Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com
· IN to send Act 70 of 70 Submission to CvdW
· KJ to send Agricultural Report Item Topic Action by
· DJ to contact Douglas Chitepo from the CoCT as the official that can offer 01 Introductions
assistance with urban agriculture. Contact 021-8085479 Introductions were made around the table, Those in attendance have the following roles:
· CvdW / AR to request comments from TX and MS
· Toni Belcher (TB): Freshwater Specialist/ Aquatic Ecologists ;
Summary · Ilani Nel (IN): Client Representative (Department of Human Settlements);
· Social survey required to establish activities on the land · Stuart Barrow (SB): Freshwater Specialist/ Aquatic Ecologists ;
· Need to establish if conditions are favourable for agriculture · Shaddai Daniel (SD): Department of Water and Sanitation: Resource
· Explore potential use of WTW water for agriculture Protection:
· Explore options of boreholes
· Warren Dreyer (WD): Department of Water and Sanitation: Berg Olifants CMA;
· Explore potential of using ponds for grazing (although a potential hazard
during wet season and needs fencing) · N du Buisson (ND): Department of Water and Sanitation: Berg Olifants CMA;
· If grazing allowed - fodder required during certain seasons · Crystal Burger (CB): Engineering Project Manager;
· Pigs and chickens not suitable due to biohazard · Charles Norman (CN): Aurecon, Project Leader for EIA; and
· Vegetables are water intensive
· Simamkele Ntsengwane (SN): Aurecon, EAP project support staff.
· Tunnels a potential option but require semi-skilled workers / managers.
· Interface with private farms a concern (both for encroachment to private
farmers and for health and safety of residents due to spraying) CN Briefly highlighted the Agenda of the meeting and the intention of the direct
· Consider other land uses instead of farming which could provide jobs consultation with the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) in the initial stages of
· Act 70 of 70 application probably not a requirement the EIA process to clarify their requirements with regards to WULA and associated
· Further consultation required with colleagues from Elsenburg and CoCT timeframes.
regarding urban agriculture
Meeting minutes were recorded by SN of Aurecon and will be distributed to attendees AURECON
Next meeting: N/A along with the meeting register.

Project 113371 File 20170426_Pre-App Dept of Agric_Meeting Notes_v1.docx 26 April 2017 Revision 1 Page 4 Project 113371 File 20170509_DWS Meeting Minutes_v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 1
Item Topic Action by Item Topic Action by
02 EIA Process CN explained that the project also includes commercial, community, industrial and
agricultural components for urban agricultural use. CN also described that there were
CN gave an overview of the EIA process that is to be followed for the Proposed project, plans for co-use of space within the Eskom servitude.
showing that the process is in pre-application phase and comments are being sought as
early as possible from authorities prior to the submission of the application to DEA&DP, CN gave a brief explanation of the proposed conceptual designs and the preferred L-
the Competent Authority. CN added that the pre-application phase comment period shape design (Alternative A) based on the extended agricultural interface with the
lapsed on the 2 May 2017. adjacent agricultural land.
IN explained that the project planned to accommodate 8 000 formal urban housing units
03 Project Overview
and backyarders, the provisions for backyarders will be implemented according to CoCT
CN provided a brief project background, highlighting that both the DoHS and the CoCT standards. IN also explained that the allocation of the units will also consider the profile
are jointly planning a Catalytic Human Settlements Programme termed the Southern of the applicant whether they qualify for a FLISP unit, RDP unit or Social unit (flats).
Corridor Integrated Human Settlements Programme to Upgrade of 27 informal ND requested that the mapping of the proposed design layouts include existing
settlements in the proximity of the N2 that will benefit over 50,000 households. CN added watercourses. TB & CN advised that mapping was available and would be explained
that the project is a cluster of discrete projects to upgrade informal settlements in-situ, later in the presentation as part of the Freshwater Ecology findings.
provision of opportunities for back-yarders, and to establish greenfield human
CN indicated that supporting infrastructure for the proposed project included; roads, bulk
settlements around the N2 and airport precinct. The Penhill Greenfields Development
water supply, sewage infrastructure, electricity reticulation and stormwater services. CN
forms part of that programme.
explained that it is the intention of the Western Cape Government Department of Human
IN also added that the project formed part of the National Catalytic Human Settlements Settlements (DHS) to phase the implementation of the project according to the
project. availability of capacity.
CN provided an explanation of the location of the project using the locality map as ND enquired whether the upgrades of supporting infrastructure would be entirely new
reference, highlighting City property, the private properties, Van Riebeeck Road, infrastructure or upgraded in terms of existing infrastructure? IN advised that bulk
Eersterivier and the urban edge. services would be upgrades of existing infrastructure, in addition no new upgrades would
CN provided background to the area explaining the current land use on the site, which is commence without the relevant approvals.
predominantly agricultural activities and current site features that include Eucalyptus WD enquired whether the proposed development would be accommodated for in the
trees, multiple servitudes (11kV, 66kV, 132kV and 400kV overhead lines), gravel roads, Zandvliet WWTW Upgrades? IN advised that 4 000 units would be accommodated in
and stormwater channels. CN added that there was no sewage infrastructure on site. the new upgrades. In addition the phasing of the project would consider the number of
ND enquired whether the site has been rezoned from agriculture or whether an units that would be accommodated by the infrastructure over time.
application has been submitted for rezoning? IN advised that a rezoning application will
CN requested TB to present the freshwater ecology findings.
be submitted as part of the processes to be followed for development approval.
SD advised that DWS would require proof of rezoning. IN indicated that all relevant 04 Freshwater Ecology Findings
authorisations would follow the NEMA process. IN also added that the Department of General Comments from TB regarding the Freshwater Ecology Findings (using the
Agriculture, the Department of Rural Development & Land Reform and the CoCT were maps generated for Freshwater Ecology Specialist report as reference) :
consulted to determine the applicability rezoning application as the land is state owned –
this is still to be confirmed.
CN added that Eucalyptus trees border some of the site, although not all are entirely on · TB explained that the CoCT wetland cover mapping was used when mapping
the site. Their Heritage value and significance (Whether they were older than 60 years) the watercourses on site.
was being investigated as part of the Heritage Impact Assessment. · 1938 Imagery was also used which indicated wetland areas and removed
CN described the project’s components and designs indicated in the presentation. The vegetation. The imagery was useful in illustrating the history of the area.
designs are the product of the Conceptual Design Framework developed by Planning · The site watercourses have been manipulated for cultivation purposes.
Partners (Pty) Ltd and the team of consultants. · TB explained that there are a couple of watercourses that cross the site, with
ND enquired whether the conceptual design incorporated the finding from freshwater the majority of the watercourses being straightened and modified as they enter
studies and other environmental studies? IN advised that part of the conceptual studies the site.
include the EIA programme that is running concurrently. · A number of drainage channels flow onto the site from the farmlands to the
north-east, becoming less distinct within the site. Only wide hill slope seep
CN explained that The main land use proposed is for various types of housing which areas occur where the subsurface flow crosses the lower, western portion of the
include IRDP houses, FLISP houses, Market houses and Social units (flats) for rental. site.
CN added that the proposed Project makes provisions for backyard dwellers. In total the
· A substantial wetland area occurs in the north western corner of the site. This
project will be able to accommodate 14 000 units and 37 000 people.
wetland is fed by channels which appear to be linked with Blackheath Water
SD enquired whether the beneficiaries of the development would be the people currently Treatment Works ponds north of the site.
occupying the site? IN advised that the beneficiaries would be according to the CoCT · The drainage channels are considered to be seriously modified and of low
housing Database and it was the intention of the project to relocate people from the ecological importance and sensitivity. This is largely due to dumping and infilling
surrounding communities. IN also added that the current occupiers of the land are there into the channels and invasion by Port Jackson.
illegally, a court case ruled in favour of the DoHS therefore they reserve the right to · The hill slope seeps within this area are also considered to be seriously
serve eviction notices to them, however they will also make provision for an agricultural modified and of a low ecological importance and sensitivity as they have been
component to accommodate the farmers on the site and those at iThemba. modified by agricultural activities.
IN mentioned that the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Rural · Hand dug wells are found on site, apparently in order to access the shallow
Development and Land Reform would be consulted on how to best to accommodate groundwater table.
Urban Agriculture.

Project 113371 File 20170509_DWS Meeting Minutes_v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 2 Project 113371 File 20170509_DWS Meeting Minutes_v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 3
Item Topic Action by Item Topic Action by
TB explained that a Present Ecological Status (PES) and Ecological Importance and IN enquired whether the meeting minutes could be considered as comments from DWS?
Sensitivity (EIS) method was used to establish the significance of the wetlands and other WD agreed that the meeting minutes could be considered as comments, however they
freshwater features. will provide formal comments in two weeks.
CN added that the area was very sandy with a shallow water table. WD added that it is important to take note of offsets and associated costs (over and
above the cost of mitigation and rehabilitation) in relation to the cost of the entire project
SD enquired who the landowners of the site where? IN advised that the DoHS
purchased the land portion primarily for future housing developments. The Penhill site is as well as to include the management of offsets in any form of land transfer from one
largely vacant and offers an opportunity to help decant settlements. Owing to its size the party to another. WD also briefly described the New WUL procedural regulations, which
Penhill site will accommodate whole existing communities. prescribe onerous timelines for submission of deliverables and a decision within 300
TB explained that the stormwater ponds as artificial wetlands have moderate ecological days of submitting an application.
importance. TB added that there was a possibility to retain some of the watercourses ND requested that the EAP and specialist make use of maps and pictures in their
within the agricultural portion. reports, as this was very useful in mapping out the area.
TB pointed out that additional stormwater detention ponds were proposed within the 08 Way Forward
Eskom servitude. ND enquired whether Eskom was consulted with regards to retaining
some freshwater features within the servitude? IN advised that Eskom was on board with DWS will be providing comments in week ending 26 May 2017. DWS
the use of the servitude area.
TB mentioned that it was important to consult with DWS in terms of Water and Next meeting: N/A
freshwater site features early in the process as to obtain substantial comments.
IN added that it was important to cover all the basis before submitting the application for
EA as CN had mentioned earlier.
05 Discussions
WD explained that the project would require a water use license and Off-set. TB agreed
that a Water Use Licence Application was part of the scope of work.
IN enquired whether an offset could be accommodated within the agricultural land? WD
mentioned that offsets are usually on non-development designated land and preferably
on site. It could be feasible within the servitude, if designed to contain the seep
movement.
SD advised that the offset should be done in accordance with the DWS offset guideline.
SD enquired on the responsible party for the maintenance of detention ponds? IN
advised that they were off-site and where managed by the CoCT.
SD explained that DWS would require a letter of acknowledgement from the relevant
CoCT departments (stormwater management etc.) committing to the management and
control of the offsets. In addition SD mentioned that offset recommendations be included
with the WULA. The overall concerns would be stormwater corridor, seepage area and
existing natural drainage lines. CN pointed out that all drainage lines would likely be
developed and thus the natural features would be lost.
CN requested clarity on the off-set guidelines; SD confirmed that they are DWS
guidelines.
ND enquired whether the form of agriculture on site for the proposed development was
considered in terms of water quality? IN explained that the CoCT urban agriculture
department has guidelines with strict recommendations and conditions for urban
agriculture, these guidelines would inform the type of urban agriculture permitted on site.
IN added that DoA is also involved in the process as the Agricultural portion will later be
transferred to them.
WD stated that any additional ponds must not be near to Eskom pylons and that the
proposed interventions must be compliant with Eskom requirements and the NWA.
CN indicted that Aurecon is planning to submit the application for EA in parallel with the
Scoping report. Communication with other commenting authorities has been done, it
would be beneficial to include all comments in the scoping phase.
CN added that Aurecon would appreciate if they received comments from DWS.
DWS to
provide
comments
WD indicated that DWS would provide formal comment in two weeks.
on the week
ending 26
May 2017

Project 113371 File 20170509_DWS Meeting Minutes_v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 4 Project 113371 File 20170509_DWS Meeting Minutes_v0.docx 24 May 2017 Revision 0 Page 5
Appendix C.4: Background Information Document
 ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED?
PROPOSED PENHILL GREENFIELDS DEVELOPMENT, CAPE TOWN The Southern Corridor Integrated Human Settlements Programme includes a cluster of discrete projects to upgrade
DEA&DP Reference Number: 16/3/3/6/7/2/A4/17/3044/17 existing informal settlements and to establish new greenfield human settlements in the vicinity of the N2. The housing
provision will predominantly target subsidised housing, however it will provide a range of unit types and affordability
categories, including housing for the ‘GAP’ market1. Also included is a commercial / industrial component and provision
BACKGROUND INFORMATION DOCUMENT
of agricultural land for farming and livestock operations, to accommodate the Penhill farmers on the site as well as
farmers to be relocated from iThemba. Community services will include parks, schools, places of worship and other
PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
community facilities. The site location is considered accessible in terms of public transport, work opportunities and
What deliverables can be expected through the
The purpose of this Background Information Document regional community facilities such as hospitals. It is intended that the development will be well integrated with the
environmental authorisation process for the proposed
(BID) is to provide Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) surrounding area. Figure 1 represents the preferred conceptual layout proposed at this stage and Figure 2 depicts the
Penhill Greenfields Development Project?
with information about the Environmental Impact site location for the proposed development.
A Scoping and EIA process will be followed for the project
Assessment (EIA) process that is being conducted for the
and will involve the following deliverables:
proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project, in
Eerste Rivier in the Cape Town Metropole, Western Cape. Scoping Report: A scoping report provides a brief
By registering as an I&AP for the project, one can submit description of the baseline environment and
comments on the project and be kept informed throughout through a high level evaluation of the proposed
the EIA process. alternatives, identifies any issues and impacts for
further investigation in the EIA phase. It sets out a
This BID includes the following sections:
proposed way forward for the EIA phase.
· Introduction
Environmental Impact Report (EIR): An EIR builds on
· What is being proposed?
the Scoping Report and assesses the impacts of
· Where is it located?
the proposed development on the surrounding
· Potential environmental impacts associated with
environment. This process includes a detailed
the project
assessment of the preferred alternative for the
· Legal requirements project and provides mitigation measures to
· The EIA process minimise negative impacts and optimise positive
· How you can get involved impacts.

INTRODUCTION

The City of Cape Town (CoCT) and the Western Cape Government Department of Human Settlements (the
Department) are jointly planning a catalytic human settlements programme termed the Southern Corridor Integrated
Human Settlements Programme. The programme will upgrade 27 informal settlements in the proximity of the N2 and
benefit over 50,000 households. The Penhill Greenfields Development Project is one of the projects and is the Figure 1: Proposed preferred conceptual layout for the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development2
subject of this document. The development proposal includes 8,000 housing opportunities and other related mixed
Associated infrastructure for the proposed project will include roads, water and sewage pipelines, stormwater detention
uses. The Penhill site is approximately 192 ha in size and comprises 10 separate publically owned land units; current
and electrical reticulation. A new internal road network will be required as well as new or upgraded intersections to
land uses include small scale farming, dwellings and fields on land zoned as agricultural land.
provide access to the road network from Van Riebeeck Road (as illustrated in Figure 3).
Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd (Aurecon) has been appointed as the independent Environmental Assessment
Practitioner (EAP) to undertake the requisite environmental process on behalf of the Department of Human
Settlements as required in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as
amended. The Competent Authority, the Western Cape Government, Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning (DEA&DP), will make a decision to authorise or refuse permission for the Project in
accordance with NEMA.
1 The ‘GAP’ market includes those people who earn too much for a full government subsidy, but not enough to afford a bond.
2
Colab Concepts & Jakupa Architects and Urban Designers, 2016. Penhill Southern Corridor Integrated Human Settlements
Projects, Urban Design Framework. Prepared for Western Cape Provincial Government, Department of Human Settlements.

Background Information Document Page 1 Background Information Document Page 2

 Figure 2: Locality Map of the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development

Background Information Document Page 3

Figure 3: General project plan and typical infrastructure associated with Penhill Greenfields Development3

3
Colab Concepts & Jakupa Architects and Urban Designers, 2016. Penhill Southern Corridor Integrated Human Settlements Projects, Urban Design Framework. Prepared for Western Cape
Provincial Government, Department of Human Settlements.

Background Information Document Page 4

WHERE IS IT LOCATED? THE EIA PROCESS
The proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project is located at the eastern boundary of the City of Cape Town An EIA is a systematic process to identify positive and negative impacts on the environment (biophysical, socio-
(Figure 2). It is within the urban edge, east of the urban nodes of Blackheath and Eersterivier, with the Stellenbosch economic and cultural conditions) associated with a proposed activity and the evaluation of alternatives or
agricultural areas to the east of the site. The proposed site is bordered by and accessible from Van Riebeeck Road management measures to minimise negative and optimise positive impacts, thereby preventing substantial
to the west. The site consists of 10 publically owned properties as set out in Table 1 below: detrimental impacts on the environment. An EIA is conducted in phases, namely: Pre-Application Phase, Scoping
Table 1: List of properties required for the proposed development Phase, Impact Assessment Phase and Decision Making Phase, as indicated in Figure 4 below. A Scoping Report
and an EIA Report will be compiled for the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project. The reports compiled
Property Name and Number Owner
during the Scoping Phase and the EIA Phase will each be evaluated by the competent authority (DEA&DP) and each
Remainder (a portion of Portion 3) of the Farm Jacobsdal Number 410 Provincial Government Western Cape
will be made available to the public as discussed below.
Remainder (a portion of Portion 8) of the Farm Jacobsdal Number 410 Provincial Government Western Cape
Remainder (a portion of Portion 5) of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Remainder (a portion of Portion 25) of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Housing Development Agency
Portion 26 of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Remainder (a portion of Portion 31) of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Portion 32 of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Portion 35 of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Remainder (a portion of Portion 36) of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape
Remainder (a portion of Portion 42) of the Farm Welmoed Estate 468 Provincial Government Western Cape

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

The EIA Regulations (Government Notice Regulation (GN) R982-985 of December 2014), promulgated in terms of
NEMA, identify certain activities which “could have a substantial detrimental effect on the environment”. These listed
activities require Environmental Authorisation from the competent environmental authority, i.e. the DEA&DP, prior to
commencing. The proposed projects would trigger several listed activities in terms of GN R983, GN R984, and GN
R985. These activities will require that a Scoping and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process is undertaken.

Over and above the NEMA and EIA regulations, additional environmental and development legislation will be
considered which includes, but is not limited to those listed below. These will be expanded on further during the
Scoping Phase:

· National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998)

· National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999)
· National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004)
· National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 58 of 2009)
· Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983)
· National Health Act (Act 61 of 2003)
· Western Cape Nature Conservation Laws Amendment Act, No. 3 of 2000 Figure 4: The EIA Process in terms of NEMA

Background Information Document Page 5 Background Information Document Page 6

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT HOW YOU CAN GET INVOLVED

The proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project could result in a range of biophysical and socio-economic If you or your organisation would like to be involved in the process and continue to receive information, or know of
impacts. Based on the nature of the development and the site specific characteristics, the following impacts have any individual or organisation who would like to participate, please submit contact details to Sima Ntsengwane
been identified and are listed in Table 2, along with the appointed specialist team. Informed by fieldwork, each (details below) for registration as an I&AP on the project database.
specialist will assess the significance of the impact of each of the various development alternatives during the
Scoping Phase, for inclusion in the Scoping Report. Should the impacts be deemed significant, they will provide an
impact assessment report for inclusion in the EIR. Requests to register, comments, inputs and suggestions to the EIA Public Participation team can be
submitted to:
Table 2: Potential impacts associated with the Penhill Greenfields Development
Potential impacts Identified specialist Sima Ntsengwane Tel: 021 526 9560 Email: Simamkele.Ntsengwane @aurecongroup.com
Biophysical impacts: Fax: 021 526 9500 Postal Address: PO Box 494, Cape Town, 8000
Freshwater ecology (including wetlands) Ms Toni Belcher / Dana Grobler / Mr Stuart Barrow (Blue Science)
Groundwater Mr Louis Stroebel (Aurecon) Project document website:
Surface water (hydrology) Mr Nick Walker and Mr Lloyd Fisher-Jeffes (Aurecon) http://www.aurecongroup.com/en/public-participation.aspx
Botany Mr Nick Helme (Independent consultant)
Socio-economic impacts: Get involved and register now!
Impact on local community and economy Mr Tony Barbour (Independent consultant)
Waste management Mr Shaun Devine (Aurecon) Registered I&APs will be notified of the availability of reports for the Scoping Report and EIA Report for the proposed
Agricultural resources Mr Johann Lanz (Independent consultant) Penhill Greenfields Development. During the Scoping Phase, a public open day will also be arranged and two weeks’
Noise Mr Adrian Jongens (Jongens Keet Associates) prior notice will be given to all registered I&APs. Should you have any queries on the project please contact
Heritage resources Mr Tim Hart (ACO Associates cc) Mr Sima Ntsengwane of Aurecon.
Visual Mr Stephen Stead (Visual Resource Management Africa (VRMA))

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT
Stakeholder engagement is an important component to ensure that a project is undertaken in a fair, open, transparent BID Background Information Document
and inclusive way. South African EIA legislation and guidelines have formalised stakeholder engagement in the EIA CoCT City of Cape Town
process and refer to it as the Public Participation Process (PPP). PPP therefore forms an integral part of this DEA&DP Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (Western Cape Government)
investigation and enables parties that are directly or indirectly affected by the project (such as landowners, organs EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner
of state and other key stakeholders such as conservation groups), or simply interested in the project (such as the EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
greater public), to be included in the process. Within the PPP process, these stakeholder groups are therefore EIR Environmental Impact Report
referred to as interested and affected parties (I&APs). EMPr Environmental Management Programme
GN R Government Notice Regulation
The contributions of I&APs are valued and provide important input into the planning of the project. The PPP is
I&APs Interested and Affected Parties
designed to objectively enable I&APs to:
NEMA National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998)
· Raise issues of concern and make suggestions for alternatives and enhanced benefits;
PPP Public Participation Process
· Contribute local knowledge;
· Verify that their issues have been captured and considered by the technical investigations; and
· Comment on the findings of the Scoping Report and EIA Report.

The PPP is designed to solicit a joint effort by stakeholders to produce better decisions than if they had acted
independently. Successful PPP therefore provides an opportunity for I&APs to gain more knowledge about the
proposed project, to provide input through the review of documents / reports, and to voice any issues of concern at
various stages throughout the EIA process (as illustrated above in Figure 4). This process ultimately facilitates better
decision-making.

Background Information Document Page 7 Background Information Document Page 8

 ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSED PENHILL GREENFIELDS
DEVELOPMENT, CAPE TOWN
BACKGROUND INFORMATION DOCUMENT
REGISTRATION AND COMMENT FORM

Attention: Mr Simamkele Ntsengwane

Post: PO Box 494, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: 021 526 9560
Fax: 021 526 9500 Email: Simamkele.Ntsengwane @aurecongroup.com

Please complete and return to Aurecon in order to be included in the public participation process:

TITLE FIRST NAME

INITIALS SURNAME
ORGANISATION

POSTAL ADDRESS
POSTAL CODE
TEL NUMBER FAX NUMBER
CELL NUMBER
E-MAIL

COMMENTS: (please use separate sheets if you wish)

1. The following issues must be considered in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process:
…………………………………………………………………………………………..……….………………………
…………………………………………………………………………...………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………...………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………...………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………...………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………...………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………...………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………...………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………...………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………...………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Please add the following colleagues/ friends to the mailing list:
……………………………………………………………………………………………...……………………………
………………………………………………………………………………...…………………………………………
…………………………………………………...………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………...………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………...………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
We thank you for your participation
Appendix C.5: Proof of Delivery (to be populated
for FSR)
Appendix C.6: Comments and Responses
 Thanking you

Regards

Ivan Cloete

!" #$ %&'()*+&, &# -./ '( 0.-12 3 4-(,&1-(. ( 15$-# #-/51*

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message -------- Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

From: afasacmetro <afasacmetro@gmail.com>
Date: 2017/03/16 22:17 (GMT+02:00)
To: nashholtman@gmail.com, issk@imurisonattorneys.co.za, Nazeema Pillay <npillaymzi@imurisonattorneys.co.za>,
gavingossman@yahoo.com
Subject: Fwd: RE: JACOBSDAL FARMING COMMUNITY - VIOLATION OF THEIR RIGHTS

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------

From: afasacmetro <afasacmetro@gmail.com>
Date: 2017/03/14 23:28 (GMT+02:00)
To: gavingossman@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: JACOBSDAL FARMING COMMUNITY - VIOLATION OF THEIR RIGHTS

Dear Mr Murison ;

This is a submission from AFASA W/C on behalf of the Jacobsdal farming community.

Hereby we would like to put to you our current position in response to the meeting on14th March'17 between ourselves ,
Dept of Human Settlements , other stakeholders and other affected parties in relation to the planned development on
Jacobsdal farm .

" The Bill of Rights is the most important part of our constitution and is stated under 7 (1) to be the cornerstone of
democracy in South Africa . This Bill requires the DoHS to respect , protect , promote and fulfil the rights guaranteed in
the Bill of Rights . Anything that is inconsistent with our Constitution , both law and conduct is invalid ; thetefore Provincial
Government's practices have to be constitutionally compliant .

We are therefore of the view that our rights has been infringed and disrespected by the Dept of Human Settlements . The
fact that there was not proper consultation and no participation in drafting the " desktop development plan " makes the
entire exercise a one-sided affair and invalid .

In the light of the aforesaid we would like to suggest the following ; 1. the Dept of Agriculture W/C , DRDLR / PSSC W/C ,
Dept of Water and Sanitation and Dept of Social Services should be included in this process as major stakeholders ; 2.
we withdraw from all negotiations concerning the Penhill / Jacobsdal Project until these role players are part of the
negotiations ; 3. abovementioned stakeholders should together with the Penhill farming community reps , design a "
workable desktop plan " which include a needs analyses for the farmers and people residing on the property ; this should
be a dual process and runs parallel with the consultation process .
4. we also want to make it clear that we're not oppose to the planned development but object to the 40ha of land that will
be made available for urban agricultural activities whereas we are mostly pig farmers ;
 !" # $% &%' %( '()
* +'
,- .% / " 0' 0 1' . 0 '2
345"3 6,(% 7$ 345"3- 1(% 7$ 30 38 '
5 0 3- 19 6,(% 7

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good Morning, DISCLAIMER
This email is subject to the company disclaimer, which can be viewed online at
Thank you for your email and for your interest in the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project.
I have registered you as an Interested and Affected Party on our I&AP database. www.powergrp.co.za/disclaimer.html
or to receive Disclaimer by email, send blank email addressed to disclaimer@powergrp.co.za
Please find attached the letter and Background information Document that has been sent to registered Interested and ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Parties for your information.

Kind Regards
Simamkele Ntsengwane
Environmental Intern, Aurecon
T +27 21 526 9560 M +27 76 225 3548
Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

! "#$ % &' (
) * + ,) * + - - .
( / , * .
0 1 ( ( 2 0 ** ( 3 *

Dear Simamkele

Kindly register Mr Percy Knight from Power Construction, contact number 082 442 6019 / 021 907 1300 as
an interested & effective party on the above-mentioned project.

Please contact me should you require any additional information.

Regards
Alex

Alex Davids
) 4 5 6( /
( 2 -

7 8 $ # !"$ #9"" : 8 $ # !"$ #9'% :

; 8 $ # !"& &'9!
Simamkele Ntsengwane

From: Simamkele Ntsengwane

Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 8:54 AM
To: Abubaker Francis
Cc: Kirsten Jones; i.murison@attorneys.law.za
Subject: RE: Proposed Penhill greenfields dev project.
Attachments: 20170327_BID_ENG.pdf; 20170327_BID_AFR.pdf; 170328_Penhill_Ltr to
IAPs_ENG&AFR.pdf

Good Morning,

Thank you for your email and for your interest in the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project.
I have registered you as an Interested and Affected Party on our I&AP database.

It is the intention to make provision for an agricultural component to accommodate urban agricultural development for
farmers from Penhill and IThemba. The details of which are still being investigated.

Please find attached the letter and Background information Document that has been sent to registered Interested and
Affected Parties for your information.

Kind Regards
Simamkele Ntsengwane
Environmental Intern, Aurecon
T +27 21 526 9560 M +27 76 225 3548
Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER
From: Abubaker Francis [mailto:zonal.projects8@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 6:01 PM
To: Simamkele Ntsengwane <Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com>
Subject: Propose penhill greenfields dev project.

Good day.
The existing small farmers with live stock adjacent to cemetery will they be relocated or will their
operations be within the proposed development area.
Best Regards.

1
 If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA process,
please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May 2017.
Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

!" Kind regards

#$ %
&' ( $)) *$ ) + ) , ( - ./ 0 $ & $ 1 2 ,, Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

! !

"# $ %& '% ( ( %

") * + %( & % ,---

. )/ )" 0-- 100)

. )/ )" 0)" #)-1
.)/ /, ,#, 2"#, DISCLAIMER
Disclaimer: This e-mail (including attachments) is subject to the disclaimer published at:
http://www.capetown.gov.za/general/email-disclaimer Please read the disclaimer before opening any
attachment or taking any other action in terms of this e-mail. If you cannot access the disclaimer, kindly send an
email to disclaimer@capetown.gov.za and a copy will be provided to you. By replying to this e-mail or opening
any attachment you agree to be bound by the provisions of the disclaimer.

!" #
$ $ % & '( )* ' + ), - & ( ) . )/
$ )0 )/ 1 )1 & + ) 1 )2 )3 . )1 4 5 )#
6 & ) 2 )3 )1 , ' )6 (7 - ) # ( )
8 % & '(
/ 0 )3 - 0 &
# . 5 , ' # 9 :; $ </

Dear Sir / Madam,

Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

As an official representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected Party
(I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape Government:
Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
1998) (NEMA).
 DISCLAIMER

2 , (( # 3 ( 2 !, (( # " $ ( / !# 4!5 6
0 7
-++ $ . / $ . / " # $! %
! " ) ( * + # $!
# $ " %& ,#
'( ) " * + % ,-

Hi JL

It must be the BID that was released this week. I will forward him the email Kirsten sent to all City officials on our list.

Sima/Kirsten, please can you add him on our I&AP database. Authority/project reference no.: DEA&DP Ref: 16/3/3/6/7/2/A4/17/3044/17 | Aurecon Ref: 113371
Thanks
! "
C

Charles Norman
Principal Environmental Practitioner, Aurecon
#$% &## $'()
T +27 44 8055433 F +27 44 8055454 M +27 82 8977071
#(* $#$ ($'*
Charles.Norman@aurecongroup.com
+ , -.

DISCLAIMER

Disclaimer: This e-mail (including attachments) is subject to the disclaimer published at:
http://www.capetown.gov.za/general/email-disclaimer Please read the disclaimer before opening any
! " # $! %& ' ( ' ( ! " # $! % attachment or taking any other action in terms of this e-mail. If you cannot access the disclaimer, kindly
) ( * + # $!
send an email to disclaimer@capetown.gov.za and a copy will be provided to you. By replying to this e-mail
,#
or opening any attachment you agree to be bound by the provisions of the disclaimer.
Hi, do you know anything about this?

I am not aware of any authorisation.

Kind regards

Jeanne-Louise Wiese Cert. Sci. Nat, BSc (Hons)

Senior Environmental Practitioner, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266024 F +27 21 5269500 M +27 73 1636409
Jeanne-Louise.Wiese@aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

-++ $ . /
0 1
! " # $! %
) ( * + # $!
,#

FYI

Fatima Abrahams
Administrative Assistant, Aurecon
T +27 21 5269433 F +27 21 5269500 M +27 73 3613222
Fatima.Abrahams@aurecongroup.com
 not the intended recipient of this e-mail you may not use, disclose, copy, redirect or print the content. If this e-mail
is not related to the business of UCT it is sent by the sender in the sender's individual capacity.

) * , ) * ,
! "#!$ !! #& '
! " 7
# $ /0 ( *1 1
% & ' (

Good Day,

Thank you for your email and for your interest in the proposed Penhill Greenfields Development Project.
I have registered you as an Interested and Affected Party on our I&AP database.

We wish to notify you that all comments and responses will be considered and included for submission to DEA&DP

Further details will become available during the Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) phases of the
project.
All registered I&APs will be notified of the commenting period.

Kind Regards
Simamkele Ntsengwane
Environmental Intern, Aurecon
T +27 21 526 9560 M +27 76 225 3548
Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

! "#!$ !! %& '

( ) * * +( ) * * * , -
. /0 ( *1 1

2 **

3 4* 4 ,

5* 6

Trevor Lodewyk
Graduate School of Business
University of Cape Town
Main Switchboard: 0860 UCTGSB (828472)
Email: trevor.lodewyk@gsb.uct.ac.za
Website: www.gsb.uct.ac.za

This e-mail is subject to the UCT ICT policies and e-mail disclaimer published on our website at
http://www.uct.ac.za/about/policies/emaildisclaimer or obtainable from +27 21 650 4500. This e-mail is intended only
for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If the e-mail has reached you in error, please notify the author. If you are
 ! ! "
# $ % & '( $ # $) $ ) * ! $ ) + $$ , "$ ) - .
/$ * + , &$ ) 0 / 12 $3 1
"
# # $ ' & , & &3 $ ' (*
! " # $%
$ $$ " . $ 0 $ 4& 5 6 744 % ( 8 # &&
&' ( % ) * + , ( - . /0 & 1$
23( % 34 5 ( 3' )1 6&7(+6# 385+3' )7(+6# Dear Sir / Madam,
385+3 6&7(+6
Penhill Greenfields Development Project - Environmental Impact Assessment

Dear Nigel, As an official representing the City of Cape Town, you have been identified as a potential Interested and Affected
Party (I&AP) for the Penhill Greenfields Development Project in Eerste Rivier proposed by the Western Cape
Sure, please see attached, Government: Department of Human Settlements and the City of Cape Town.

Kind regards, Please find attached cover letter and Background Information Document which describes the project and the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci) 1998) (NEMA).
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
If you wish to provide preliminary comments and/or register as an I&AP for future correspondence during the EIA
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
process, please respond with your details as per the form attached to the Background Information Document by 2 May
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
2017. Please also identify other colleagues that may be relevant to the Project.

Kind regards
DISCLAIMER

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
! " #! " $ T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
%& ' ( ) * + , ' - ./ 0 % 12 Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City South Africa 7441
, ! PO Box 494, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
aurecongroup.com

' +0 + + ( ( 3
( 4

! "
#$ % & " '((( DISCLAIMER
Disclaimer: This e-mail (including attachments) is subject to the disclaimer published at:
) #* # +(( +,-* http://www.capetown.gov.za/general/email-disclaimer Please read the disclaimer before opening any
) #* '# ', (#(' attachment or taking any other action in terms of this e-mail. If you cannot access the disclaimer, kindly
send an email to disclaimer@capetown.gov.za and a copy will be provided to you. By replying to this e-
mail or opening any attachment you agree to be bound by the provisions of the disclaimer.
 !"# $
%& '%('( &) '& * ++ ,%&& - &+) )&.&+(' & / '%($& / 01

Good Day Mr Cloete,

! " " # $ % # " $ & #
Response sent by Nashieta Holtman (Mzi Development Services) on 03 May 2017 as part of the direct ongoing % & ' & # " $ !&
stakeholder management communications for the project has reference. () *(+*+,)- *)./ 00 1()).2 )0-, -)3)0+* ).4 *(+5) 4 67

Thank you for your interest in the Proposed Penhill Greenfields Project.
Dear Mr Simamkele Ntsengwane ;
This email serves as acknowledgement to your request along with Mr Gossman to be registered as I&APs for the
proposed Project.
We have added you to the Interested and Affected Parties database. All registered I&APs will be informed of the
According to your legal notice DEA & DP Reference Number 16/3/3/6/7/2/A4/17/3044/17 , AFASA W/C
commenting period during the scoping Phase. together with the Penhill Farming Community
( including Mr Malcolm Loggenstein and Ivan Cloete ) as affected parties would like to register to be part of the
Kind Regards public participation process .
Simamkele Ntsengwane BSc (Hons) Env. Geography
Environmental Consultant, Aurecon At this stage we are unclear about all the details i.t.o the intended farming activities on the property and are still
T +27 21 526 9560 M +27 76 225 3548 waiting for the Dept of Agriculture W/C , Dept of Rural Development and Land Reform W/C , Dept of Water
Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com
and Sanitation and Dept of Social Development to become part of the process in order for us to submit
meaningful comments .
DISCLAIMER
Can you forward us an acknowledgement of this registration request .
! "
Thanking you .
#$% & #' ( ) *+ , - ). ', - ). / ) / *+
) % ) + - / + / .
Yours Sincere
01 20323,14 21 $55 6011 7$154, 4181532 1 9 203:1&9 ;&
Ivan R.Cloete
6 4 &
Signed on 29th April 2017
9/ / .

2 < ( ). . : = > 450& ; 7"203 6 ( 4 ) > &3&9

?< ") / / " ! 1 0% 4 , (( 9 / ( ). ( ..
) ) . ( / ( / ) ) / /

$ . ) ( ./ ) ) . - ) . ( . < / ( @
. - ( ). - ( ( ") / / 0/
4 % ) ( ( )< ( . -

$. < . / $) ( < -

, / / % A/
 : # ! <+ . + .. 5 9 + . : #
33 #8 58 B . . . <+ . 5 .
+ + 3 . 3 (+ + 3 . . . + .
. 5 C ( . (( # .( + . . <+
A # 3 ? ( + + 0 # +
! " #$ : $ $%& $' # $( ) * <+ D + ? .( + + .
%& ' ( ) * + , - . + 1 > . . + 7 * 7 3 . + 3 +
D + 2 3 . 4 5 ? & ( 0 .( + 0 + . .
.( ( . & 3 ( + + . ( + # + 0 . 5 .
Hi Paul, : ) $( ) !$+ C ( ( 8 ( + # 8 .
. + . # + . + 0 . # . # 5 . 5 5
This is to confirm receipt of the email after our conversation about technical difficulties. We note your points and will # 8 ' 5 * . ? . . + ( + 8 +
send a more formal response,
& + ## .. 3 + . #+0 # E A 8 3 + +
Kind regards + 8 + . + ' @ . ( -.8 0 # 8 + ( # 8 + ( #
Kirsten + 3 4 ' < 0 F (8 0 & . ( + * ? @ < % 8 .
+ . . # = . .< 0 F ( 0 . <+
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci) A 35 . . . + . > E + * + & +
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon ( .0 0 # . 5 ( .0 G5 A <+ ? (
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500 <+ ? #0 & <+ ? & +
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
+ ( 3 . 5 A . # 0 15 + + . 8 +
. # ( 3 . + 5 & 35 . # . . 0
DISCLAIMER B: < 1A # <+ .. 5 ( . & 0 . 3 ( + . ( + ; (
# 5 # + 0 + .H 0 I8 0 <+ 0
3 . + . 5 + ( .0 1 -5 8 - .@ &
! " ! # $ ; +% <+ ( . 0 5 0 33 33 + #+ + ( 3 +
% & ' #( "% & ' #( # $) *+ ' .. 5 . A # 0
"*+ ' # $) ,- + ' ," + $) . ) ,*+ I: < < A = ( @ < A 0 3 <+ 3# +
/ #, " + # # $) ,- + . - 0 , "- + . - 0 # 0 # $) (+ & # 3 + . # ( & .+ 8 + 8 .
& & + . . 8 + ( 0 3 + . .
-1 + 2 3 . 4 5 6 * : <+ ( + 3 ( + - .8 3 + ( 3 + 5 6 0 5 +
.. 5 C 8 + + 3 + A # + 0
( + .. ( + . .3 ( 0 ( + . + - %+ . + 0 . 5 ( + 5
. + 3 5 ( 0 + 3
: C.5 # . & ( (+ . + . + .5 3 + .
. 5 ( . <+ . 3 + . + . ( 3 + .5
7 . . 8
: 2 = 3 E # . C 0 3 6 3 3 =JC +
, ! ," $
+ D + ? 9<+ 3 # A # + . + E :8 . <+ 0
,% & ' #( ," $) ,*+ ' ,
E (+ + 5
" $) - + ' 9 :" $)
K: 4 5 3 1A # <+ 0 . . + + 5 # #
4 ; " $9 :" $) *+ / #
5 <+ & # (+ ( + #+ 0 0 A A # .
9 ! :" ! $) ,- + . - 0 , "" " ! $)
<+ ( + + D + 2 3 . 4 5 6 ? + 1
, & & ," $
( * ; (( ( 0 .0 + 3 35 3 5 .
-1 + 2 3 . 4 5 6 *
. 5 0 0 . # . # . 80 . 5 + H
; + ( & . . # + 5 3 C. 5
+ 0 . 3 5 +
<+ & 3 # . + : L & 36 0 + & 2 # / ( + + .
0 3 0 . . + . <+ . 0 + . <+
=( . & # 3 # = 5 3 > .+ 5 0 *+ .# 0 & + + A # 3 # . #6 0 . 0 + . + . # <+
( & =+ . . . . . ? 3 8+ + . . A # 0 + .= . ( 0 3 9; # 3 3 . & .
+ ( ( + + A 3 ( + H: <+ ( 0 +
<+ 0 5 0 .8 + + 3 6 + . .0 . + + 5 + 5 + . ( + #. 5 + 6 0 . 8
1 5 8 @ &+ +8 5 . + . 8 . . <+ 3 . (+ + # # ( & C + ? ( & (+ + # # . (+
5 0 3 3 + + # + + 5 + 3 . . <+ . 5 . + + #
& + 3 . 0 & . 3 . + 0 <+
( A . + . . 5 0 3 & 3 + . & ## #3 ( .
 . + 0 5 7 ( . & 0 3 + 5 5 . .& . 7 5
(+ 5 + 3 > 0
<+ ( . + # + # A # 3 3 5 . . + .. 5
7+ = . ? . . + + . & #3 # 5 . 8 + ( .0 0 3
# 5 .
C 8 + 3 + . + + 5 5 . + 3 97+ + + 0 > 5 # # :
. ( + 5 # # + 5 0 + # .
7+ .3 + . <+ 0 0 + 3 5 .H

7 .# + ( . & . .+ 5 #
. # + ( 3 ( . .( . & + ( # # .. 5 3 +

& . .

* &
;M-C *+
 > 6
! )

! $ )
! "#$ % & < )? ) ) $
' ( # ) *+ $ ,- # )
./ ! - ## 0 1 # 2 # ! 3 4,
@ .

9 # $ 8 9
) ) ,A $

B $
@ !
,9 $ $%& $' # $( ) * $ C !
< > " 6 "
C = & !
!
*9 ) $( ) $+ B ) )

" #$ ) 4 6 ! )
D @ )
) 4, ? 7 ) ) )
% & 4 $ E ) 6 ! ? $ 3 )
& $ E $
@ > D 6
F @ .$ !
$ ! $ !
@ < )

A9 $ <@ .$
G+ H) I $
< 7 )+ 7 ?
3 $
@
H9 $ $ @ . + ? $ @ $
!" ) )
#$$ % ! " ! )
&' (% ( I9 .$ 7 , )
B ) @
7 , 3

' ( -9 B .
" ) *+ , - *. + $
/ 0 /1 2 J9 = D .B KB
/3 4 /1 25 /6 4 / C ! 8$ @ D 9) $
1 25 7 4 8 91 25 D
& : 1 28 91 25 6 % L9 & <@ .$
8 91 25 /7 7 /1 ! ! 25 $ @ @
/ ; /1 2 $ C = & ! <
!" 7<. = & 6 6
) G
B

$
 9M . = %
$ $
@ $
@ 8
@ G9 $
)
B !
$
$

" "
>
$ @
" ! )

B ) 8" > 9

" $ G

"

6
N7B 6
 - 3 ) 3 '5 # & + ' '3 '
6 ) 57 . 5 ) '* ' 5 ' ' - & ' #
) 3 & &

! " # $ % " # * 1 8# ' ' '

&' ( ) " * + " , - . /

Thank you for your email Cheran, your comments are noted and we will include you in any response to Paul Clark. 9 - ' # # '' ) # : # ' 9
&& 5 )5 ; ' # ' ' - ' ) # # '
We will add you to our database of Interested and Affected Parties,
& ' & # 1 # & ' ' ' # # '
Kind regards ' ) # < 1 ' 11 # '1 ' ' -
Kirsten 8 # & 4 # 1 3
9 - =* 4 '1 * '
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci) * 6 2 ' ' > # > & ' &
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon =* % & ' ( ) # 4 . 1 3 '1 3 ' '
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500 '1 1 ' . # & 1 # # ' 1 3 ' ) # '
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
9 < 1 1 5 1 5 '
' ' ' 3 ' # ' ) ' ) )
DISCLAIMER 5 ? ) ' 4 ' ' 1 #5
. '' & ' 3 @ 8 # 5 &
5 ' ? 7 ' * 1 A'5 3 5 1 5 1
! " ! # $ & ( ? - 3 B 15 3 . ' 1 4 7 - # C #5 '
% & ' ( ) # * + ' ' 0 ' '- 3 B 1 3 ' -
8 # &) ' ' ' ' 2 @ .
1 '3 3 ' ) 1 '3 D) * 8# - 4 1
, - 4 3 . - 4 # .
1 & ' ) 8# ' 3 6) ' 5
I am a resident of Penhill and a member of Phora I completely agree with Paul Clark's concerns over the ' 1 & ' ) . &) ' ' # ' 3
development and ask that you please include me as an effected party against the development. ;9 - # 68 - # # '' ) # 1 ' . 3 ' & 1 ' 1 , 1
# # ) 3 'E 3 5 3 - # 3 #
Thank you and regards & ' ' ) # 1 '3 6 A) 5 A '7 .
, C - 1 ' 3 ) 3 && && 1 &
Cheran Young # # '' ) # ' 8 # 3 #
9 - # - 8 0 1 7 - 8 3 # & - &
PHORA Committee # # 1 . & ' 1 . ' 5 5 '
' ' 5 1 3 & # ' '
9 * - 1 & 1 A '5 & 1 & ) + 3 )
# # '' ) # < 5 # & 8 3
, 1 '' 1 ' '& 1 3 1 * ' A C ' 3 ' ) # 1 )
# # ' & ) # 1 3 &
9 <') * ' . 11 # # ' ' ') &
# # '' ) # 1 # ' - ' &* ' '# 1 &
- . & ' # # / # ')
F9 % 0 & @ # ' < 3 &# + & & 0G<*
=* 4 :- & 8 '* @ 95 ' - 3
@ 1 )
01 ' . # & 0 ) & 2 ' ) 3 ' 3 . H9 ( ) & 68 * # - 3 ' ' )
1 . 0 ' ' ' ' ' 4 & 5 ' ' # ) - . # 1 1 3 3 8 8
' - 1 =* % & ' ( ) # * + 4 * 6
# 1 , 11 1 3 # '3 & &) &
) ' ' ) # 3 3 ' ' ' 53
' ## ) E* 1 . ' ' ) &
# # <' ) # # # 3 ' & )
 9 I . & + 3 ## * . % # 1 # # '
3 & 3 # ' ' ' - ' 3 '
- 8 & ' + 3 ' 3 ' ' -
8 3 '0 ' 1 3 & # :, & & ' . '
1 1# # # # 8 & 1 E9 - 1 3
) ) # # ' 1 ' ) # + 3 ' 5
1 1 . < 4 1 . ## 1 ' 1
) & ' ' - ' ) # ' #
. & ' 3 . ' # & ' 3 -
) 3 & . & ' . & 1 '

* ' 3 ) > 1 ' . 3 & ) ) ' '. # # ' > )

1 ) & 2 3

- 1 ' 8 & & ) ' ' # # '' ) #

> 0' 4 ' ' ' # . & ) ' # 5 1 '3 3 # &

) '

< 5 & ' ) ) ' & :> 3 2 ) 9

' 1 ) ) 3 '

> # # '& ' - 3 3 & ) 'E

> ' 1 ' . ' ' ) #

' 1 & 1 ' '1 ' . 1 # # '' ) # &

* . # #' '

* .

*,JA<
 I would appreciate that transparency be the oder of the day and that we are able to be part take in any
decision regarding the future of Penhill and the progress of the new development.

Regards
Maria Katsoulis

! "# "$ % & ' () %* '

+, - . / 0 1

Thank you for your email Maria, your comments are noted and we will issue a formal response. Sent from my Samsung device

Just to note that this is the first round of consultation (as part of the Pre-Application Phase) of the Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) process, you will have further opportunity to comment on the Scoping Report and EIA
Report which will include further details of the development and outcomes of the specialist studies.

We will add you to our database of Interested and Affected Parties,

Kind regards
Kirsten

Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)

Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com

DISCLAIMER

!
" #
$ % & ' () *

Hi Kristen

I have been a resident and property owner in Penhill Estae for close to 20 years. Therefore it's with great
concern that the proposed development which is on our doorstep has not involved public participation thus
far.

1/ When are the residents of Penhill Estate going to be consulted on such a huge project including our
neighbours across the railway line.

2/ How is such a development going to be managed regarding rules and regulations once the occupants have
moved into their homes ie most of the low cost homes have unsightly extententions to accommodate as
many friends and family.

3/ Has our security been taken into consideration. We struggle to get law enforcement to apply the rule of
law just as we are right now. No one regards the law and are law into themselves.

4/ I certainly did not invest my life savings buying my home to support the deteriation of the area. Just look
at what is happening in Eersteriver the litter is everywhere so much so that people are just dumping their old
stuff on the side of the road.

5/ What about our property value that will definitely deplete especially since this proposed development has
our namesake.
 6

;* , & * 0

! " #$
%& %& ' $ ( ) * + , ' - . /#
8% & , 8 . , : &* . 5 1* & 5
% 8* & & & & & < , 3* * & &
Thank you for your email Kirk, your comments are noted and we will include you in any response to Paul.

We will add you to our database of Interested and Affected Parties,

Kind regards ;* 5 . 5 &3 * * , / * & &5 & *

Kirsten ( . 3= * *3 . &) * & 3 & & ;* , &
. 5 , , * *
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci)
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
) % > & * & &

DISCLAIMER

? ;* & * && . @ * & ?

! " ! # ,, 3 .3 & & & ;* & . & *
$%& '( ) * + , & - . ) / 01 * , & , %* * , & & & * && . 2
% & %% &% * & & ;* > ,
< % * * 5 *

+ & 2, 3 ? ;* A) * < &% *) * &

) * ( : & & * 4 1 4 , & * , * A) *
+ , & - . < % 5 &% * 5 * & & &% % &
, % * * & % * * 5 & . &
4 * & * 5 % , * )67'2 * 3 89& : * && &&
* , ,, & B? % % 3 2 % * 3 &
& * & * & * 5 & & . & . .
3 C. 1 & < & & * % * 3 * *
&& , * & *5 $ > 3 , * * * 3
8 % * %* * 5 &5 % * & * C = & ) % '&3 5 3 * % 3 * % * , -
C ; 5 D %3 5 & % * 1 < = ; E 3 & * & &
8 & &; 5 D % 5 & ;* > ,. &
& & * & : $ * 1 * * % &5 5 & .
% &5 F. ) > ;* < % ;* <
5 ;* < * * % , & . > &
5 (. * * & 3 * & % , & * . ,.
)67'2 ;
& & & 5

? ; (> ;* && . % & 5 & , % * & % * 6 %

. * 5 * &G 5 H3 5 ;* 5 , & *
& . * % &5 ( '. 3 ' &= 6 *E ;*
% & 5 . 5 ,, ,, * * * % , * && . &
> 5

'( ) * + , & - . ) / 01
H? ; ; > 8 % = ; > 5 , ;* , *
%* , * & % &* 3 * 3 & * &
& 3 * % 5 , * & & ) & &

? ) ;* % * , % * ' &3 , * % , * . / 5 . * &

& . 2 3 * * , * > * 5 % * && % *
& &, % 5 % ) * & * ' E* & * 5 & . % * . & * ) 1
, . % 5 * ,
)67'2 1*
? 2&. ) & % %* & * & * &. , * &
& . % & ;* & ,) * & * & % , * &.

? + 8 , $ & 2 5 , / , , 8I2) * *
A) * < @;* , > * &) * $ ?3 & ;* 5 $ %*
* .

J? - . , (> ) ;* 5 & & * * .

Virus-free. www.avast.com
. ;* %* % * * 5 5 > > & ;*
% * * A) * + , & - . ) / < ) * ( %
1 6 %% % 5 &5 * , ,. , . & & .
5 5 & & & 35 & . * G) *
% & & * . , 2& . * 5 &
, . *

?K ,/ 5 * ) + % * * &
5 , 5 & * & & ;* & 5 * & ;*
* * > , & &/ 5 5 * & * & ;* >
5 * &8 & % 5 , @6 , , & &* %
% * * > , % * G? ;* % 5 * *
. * . * & % * & . * / 5 & 3 %* *
% 2 * < % %* * & %* * * . * , & &
;* & . & * * * , & 5 &
, & * 5 ;* . 5 , , * &
, % &

) & * 5 . 4 % & 5 , * . . & & & 4 .

%* . * , : 5

;* % & * * > , , . & & * && .

4* 8& < & & * * & , . & 3 * % &5 5

, . &

2 3 * , * & * * . . & * , @4* * * 5 : .

? & % * . * . 5 * &

4* &, * & ;* 5 5 * , . &G

4 & * % & & &* .

& * % , % & &% & * % && . , *
 o * )/ 1 ) -5 6 4 % / -4 /
- & 4 , / 7 / - - & -
- - 2 9 2 - -& /
- / : 7
-- - & & -- / & 2 -
/ = 22 4 -- -<
o 7 & - % * )/ 2 / -&
! !" # $ % %& ' () # *+ ' % - - % 7 & / 4 - 4
,- ,- + . / 0 1 % 2 * %% = & + * = / % - / % * )/ -& ) -
5 6 2 - - & % 6 & & / & & 4 6
2 / 7 -- / A 2 - 2 -- / &
Thank you for your email Jacqui, your comments are noted and we will send a formal response. - % B & - / / 4 - - -2 4
& 4 -- % <
We will add you to our database of Interested and Affected Parties,
• + * - - / 4 %
Kind regards & & 4 - 7 + & 2- / & 2
Kirsten 6 2 & ? - & & -- / & % -1 % 4 -2 4 -
2 2 %- / & 2 2 & & & & % - - 4
/ %
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci) • 5 %& & / = / 2
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon - 7 + * - * )/ - & & & & 1
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
-- 2 %- / & 2 - / / ; 22
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
4 % - - - & - <
•
DISCLAIMER o 7 ) 2 - % 1 - %0 & 7 2 1
? 4 -? B 7 - - -4 4 - & 4 2
! " & 2 4 4 - -- -- A - =
# $# % & ' % 2 6 %& & - 7 6 % -- &
& ( 1 && %1 & 4 & - / - 4
)* )* + , - . / & + (0
o 7 - - - % ) -
. # 1 7 && -
3 -& %% % 9 - %:
& % 2 3 - - & & & -+ , - . / & + 13 3 -& %&
% - 2 2 4 & /- % - % C % / & - - - 1 -
& & -- / & &
o 7 & 4 & 2 - - & B
# 2 & & -+ , - . / & + - -1 2 4 -2 & - -
& 4 / 1 - 6 - & & & 1 12 /
• - 4 / -4 - %
o ) - + * / - % 2 * )/ 1 • / - - / & 2 & / 9 1
-5 6 4 - & 7 - / & :1 % 2 - & / - -
- 4 7 -- 2 % & 2 1 / 4 - - 2 % -2 % &
+ * & & - 8 - 4
o 7 - 2 6 + 9
+ - * )/ - ) & : -- % D/ - 4 / 4 / -1 2 2 % & & -- / &
7 & & 2 & & / ; 22 4 6 2 - 2 2 % & - ).+ & % 2 4 6
-- -< -& 3 % ).+ %(3 2 2 - & & -- / & 2
• (2 2 2 61 - 2 2 4 % -= & 2 ).+ %
o + * & / - / 4 = & & - 2 - 2 % = - / & / % - - 14
2 7 4 % -1 2 6 2 1 - - / 1 - - - B - 1 & 4
% % 4 - -2 2- / & <> - 22 &
2 <? - 4 - 2 / - / 2- / & 2 / + - 6 & - % - % % %& & & -+ , -
-- - & 4 & = 4 - % . / & +
o @ - % & 12 -- A 1 %
-& -1 4 - -- - ?
; 22 4 -- -<
 EF A ; 26 ) -
+ *
 Disclaimer: This electronic message and any attachments is
intended for the addressee only and is confidential and
privileged. If you have received this message in error please
delete it and notify the sender. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
! "# ! unauthorised use, copying or dissemination is prohibited.
CapeNature shall not be liable for the message if altered,
$ %&'' ( ! #! ! ) * + , !' changed or falsified. Any unauthorized disclosure may be
unlawful. CapeNature does not warrant that this message or
any attachment is free of viruses. CapeNature accepts no
liability or legal responsibility for any damages resulting
Good Day Rhett directly or indirectly from accessing this electronic message
or the attachment.
Sorry to hear about the unfortunate situation that happened in your offices.

This is to acknowledge receipt of your comments.

The draft scoping report has not been made available for comment yet. We will be sure to inform you of its availability.

Kind Regards
Simamkele Ntsengwane BSc (Hons) Env. Geography
Environmental Consultant, Aurecon
T +27 21 526 9560 M +27 76 225 3548
Simamkele.Ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com
! " #

DISCLAIMER

!" #
$ % &' ( $ % &' & )
* + (* + & ), - % (- % & )
# ./ - # 0 1 2 3
4&

# 1 1 - % # ./ - 1 # #
0 1 2 3 5 # 16 7 "89 + : " - '

7 & 1 : 1 # : 11 1 11 :
' ; ' 1 2 1 & ' 3 ; < &
& 3 : 11 ' : # $ '

&

Rhett Smart
Scientist: Land Use Advisor | Scientific Services

tel +27 21 866 8017 | fax +27 86 529 4992 | cell +27 72 835 8741
email rsmart@capenature.co.za | postal Private Bag x5014 Stellenbosch 7599
physical Assegaaibosch Nature Reserve, Jonkershoek, Stellenbosch, 7599
www.capenature.co.za
 The botanical specialist report indicates that the passive restoration potential ranges from
SCIENTIFIC SERVICES poor to moderate, and that active restoration would be required in order to re-establish Cape
Flats Sand Fynbos to the site and restore the conservation value of the site. Active
postal Private Bag X5014 Stellenbosch 7599 restoration would be very costly and the existing on-going impacts would need to be
physical Assegaaibosch Nature Reserve Jonkershoek considered if the site were to be retained and conserved, in addition to other secondary
website www.capenature.co.za impacts that would occur associated with the development proposal.
enquiries Rhett Smart
telephone +27 21 866 8000 fax +27 21 866 1523
Only two sections of the site were considered of medium or more sensitivity. An area of
email rsmart@capenature.co.za
medium sensitivity was identified in the north-western corner which was associated with a
reference SSD14/2/6/1/4/4/mixed use_Penhill
date 11 May 2017
wetland, discussed further below. An area of medium-high sensitivity falls within the
southern section of the Eskom powerline servitude, and is probably as a result of prevention
Aurecon of the activities occurring within the surrounding area and the removal of alien invasive
P.O. Box 494 trees. One Plant Species of Conservation Concern was encountered on the site and was
Cape Town restricted to the Eskom servitude.
8000
Freshwater Biodiversity
Attention: Sima Ntsengwane
By email: simamkele.ntsengwane@aurecongroup.com The freshwater specialist study delineated the wetlands on site based on a site visit which
differs from the BioNet wetland mapping. The wetland in the north west corner (as
Dear Sima mentioned above) was verified, as were the constructed stormwater detention ponds along
the western boundary. Artificial depressions were identified scattered across the site, in
Pre-Application Consultation for the Proposed Penhill Greenfields Development on addition to artificial channels draining in a westerly direction. The large wetlands in the
Various Portions of Farms Welmoed 468 and Jacobsdal 410, Cape Town northern and central sections as mapped on the BioNet were not verified.

CapeNature would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Figure 11 which indicates the freshwater features on sites has not included the remnant
development and would like to make the following comments. Please note that our hillslope seeps. It is also noted that the site visit was undertaken at the end of the dry
comments only pertain to the biodiversity related impacts and not to the overall desirability season and the report states that additional ground-truthing is required during the wet
of the proposed development. season to more accurately delineate the wetlands on site. Figure 11 would therefore also
need to be updated.
Background
However, the description of the condition of the wetlands indicates that the north-western
According to the Biodiversity Network (BioNet) for the City of Cape Town the southern wetland is moderately modified whereas the depressions and hillslope seeps are seriously
sections of the subject property are classified as Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) 2 modified.
(irreplaceable restorable sites), which in turn is classified as CBA: Degraded according to
the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WCBSP). The natural vegetation is mapped as The development layout presented proposes to develop the site including the wetlands, and
Cape Flats Sand Fynbos across most of the site, with a small patch of Swartland Shale to accommodate the hydrological function within new stormwater ponds and expansion of
Renosterveld in the east, both of which are listed as Critically Endangered. the existing stormwater ponds. The freshwater specialist study indicates that the ecological
value of these wetlands is low therefore this could be considered acceptable. The creation
Various wetlands have been mapped for the site according to the BioNet, with a chain of five of the new stormwater attenuation ponds can offset the ecological and hydrological
stormwater attenuation ponds along the western boundary and other natural wetlands functioning of these wetlands.
scattered in the northern and central sections.
The freshwater specialist study has however proposed an additional development layout
A botanical specialist study and freshwater specialist study have been provided to which consists of excluding development of the north-western wetland including a buffer, as
CapeNature as part of the pre-application consultation. this wetland was identified as having higher ecological value than the other freshwater
features.
Terrestrial Biodiversity
Biodiversity Offset
The botanical specialist study found that the site is highly disturbed with a very low diversity
of species, most of which are not representative of the vegetation types naturally occurring The botanical specialist study has recommended that a biodiversity offset should be
on the site. considered due to the loss of Critically Endangered restorable habitat. The loss of
vegetation on site was assessed to have Medium to High significance, which in accordance
It should be noted that the CBA classification is based on the restoration potential of the site, with the relevant national and provincial offset policy and guidelines would qualify as
as denoted by the CBA 2 status. Both vegetation types have remaining extents below the requiring a biodiversity offset to mitigate the residual impact.
threshold required to meet conservation targets, therefore even the highly degraded
fragments that currently have low conservation value status, but are potentially restorable, In terms of feasible mitigation measures, a biodiversity offset may be considered more
are selected as CBA. feasible and potentially a better biodiversity outcome than to implement active restoration on
The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board trading as CapeNature the site. The surrounding areas need to be taken into consideration in this regard.
Board Members: Ms Merle McOmbring-Hodges (Chairperson), Dr Colin Johnson (Vice Chairperson), Mr Mervyn Burton, Prof Denver Hendricks,
Dr Bruce McKenzie, Adv Mandla Mdludlu, Mr Danie Nel, Prof Aubrey Redlinghuis, Mr Paul Slack The Penhill Conservation Area is located to the south of the proposed development and
forms one of the 16 municipal properties for which a Biodiversity Agreement has been
signed with CapeNature. It should be noted that the Biodiversity Agreement refers to three Yours sincerely
cadastres (Portions 18, 19 and 20 of Farm 468) which total 43.69 ha, however in the
agreement the area is indicated as approximately 50 ha. The WCBSP and latest version of
the BioNet has however included Portion 15 of Farm 468 as also forming part of the
Conservation Area. Earlier versions of the BioNet had only indicated sections of 15/468 as
part of the Conservation Area. It is therefore evident that the exact extent of the Penhill
Conservation Area requires further clarity.
Rhett Smart
Should a biodiversity offset be considered further, existing conservation areas must be
For: Manager (Scientific Services)
excluded from consideration, as a biodiversity offset must be in addition to the existing
conservation estate. Expansion of existing conservation areas can however be considered.
Investigation of the biodiversity offset may also need to include areas within the
neighbouring Stellenbosch Municipality, such as the CBA directly to the east of the Penhill
Estate. There are however other factors which must be considered such as land ownership
etc. which may affect the feasibility of the offset. The feasibility must be investigated within
the NEMA authorisation process.

It is noted that the freshwater specialist study has also made reference to a wetland offset.
There are two components which need to be considered for wetland offsets, namely the
water resource function and the ecological value. The former is within the mandate of the
Department of Water and Sanitation, whereas the latter is within CapeNature’s mandate. In
terms of the latter, the north-western wetland is considered of biodiversity value.

Associated Infrastructure

The botanical specialist study has also assessed associated infrastructure. The proposed
bulk sewer pipeline would need to connect near to the intersection of the N2 and the R310
and one area of high sensitivity and one area of very high sensitivity were identified within
the route of the pipeline. CapeNature is aware of the area of very high sensitivity that will be
traversed adjacent to the Vergenoegd Farm, as this site was historically subject to a
development process.

CapeNature will comment further on this within the process once more detailed information
and project proposals are available. It is recommended that routing of all linear infrastructure
should attempt to avoid areas of biodiversity value as far as possible.

Conclusion

In conclusion, CapeNature agrees with the findings of both the botanical specialist study and
the freshwater specialist study. In terms of the impacts on terrestrial biodiversity, further
investigation is required of retention of vegetation remnants on site along with active
restoration versus securing a biodiversity offset. Consideration of a biodiversity offset must
be in terms of the National Biodiversity Offset Policy and the Western Cape Guideline on
Biodiversity Offsets.

In terms of impacts on freshwater resources, the freshwater specialist study must be

updated following fieldwork undertaken during the wet season including updated wetland
delineation. The additional layout alternative proposed by the freshwater specialist must be
included for further evaluation in the process. Following on from this the need for wetland
offsets should be considered further.

CapeNature reserves the right to revise initial comments and request further information
based on any additional information that may be received.

The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board trading as CapeNature

Board Members: Ms Merle McOmbring-Hodges (Chairperson), Dr Colin Johnson (Vice Chairperson), Mr Mervyn Burton, Prof Denver Hendricks,
Dr Bruce McKenzie, Adv Mandla Mdludlu, Mr Danie Nel, Prof Aubrey Redlinghuis, Mr Paul Slack
 2
Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Munisipale Kantoor
Cnr Queen & Oxford Street Cnr Queen & Oxford Street H/V Queen & Oxford Straat
Durbanville 7500 Durbanville 7500 Durbanville 7500
Tel: +27 21 444 0739 Umnxeba: +27 21 444 0739 Tel: +27 21 444 0739 Taking into account the water and sewer capacity requirements reflected in the table
Fax: +27 21 970 3140 Ifeksi: +27 21 970 3140 Faks: +27 21 970 3140 above the consultant Mike King of SMEC Consulting Engineers has proposed a rational
E-mail: http://www.capetown.gov.za
approach to the calculation of the water demand. The approach appears to be sound
Evaluator: B. Sithela
with respect to reduced household size as reflected in the latest censes (3.5 persons/hh)
24 February 2017 and to calculate water demand per person rather than per household. The proposed
Mike King demand of 125l/person is put forward as a bases for designing the demand per plot
SMEC South Africa with a maximum of 3 dwellings as opposed to a maximum 4 dwellings stated in the
Engineering Consultants planning directive.
mike.king@smec.com
Water Reticulation
COMMENT ON WATER AND SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY FOR PENHILL HOUSING The area has been identified as a potential site for potential future growth. The
PROJECT departments water master plan indicated that the development could be supplied
from the Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water main, however this is no
Background longer a viable option. This is as a result of the increased water demand as proposed by
This letter serves as comment on water and sewer network and bulk services capacity the consultant, which would then increase in the velocity in the bulk main to an excess
on the proposed Penhill low income greenfields development. of 2.3m/s. Given that the revised scenarios as indicated above specified a decrease in
the expected water demands, the network surrounding the proposed development
As per our model data base used for Integrated Master Planning (IMP), the farm is
was reanalysed.
vacant.

The information provided in this report is based on City of Cape Town master plan Scenario 1: A connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from the 750mm
model as well as comments from relevant branches of the department. The report diameter Steenbras high pressure main as well as a second connection off the 200mm
provides an overview of the existing water and sewer infrastructure near the diameter would be required to supply the proposed development. An inline pressure
development, associated conditions and technical requirements to be implemented booster would have to be considered given that a pressure drop of below 20m is
with respect to this application.
expected under these conditions. There is a PRV on the 300mm diameter main which
The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants as upon consultation with the reticulation branch could be reset to ensure that there is
follows: sufficient pressure available to supply the development.
Description Potable Water Demand Sewer Flow

Application Peak Flow (Dry Scenario 2 and 3: The existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed development
Total AADD Peak Flow (l/s) Total ADWF
Farm (Low Cost
(kl/d) (PF=3.0) (kl/d)
weather) (l/s) has insufficient capacity to supply the proposed development. It is therefore advised
Residential) (PF=2.5)
that possibly an independent reservoir be considered order to supply the development
Scenario 1- 4000 under the conditions proposed for scenario 2 and 3. However the need for an inline
Residential 2400 83 1680 49
units booster or adjustment to the PRV setting would still be required to fill a suitably
positioned reservoir with sufficient elevation to provide the appropriate network
Scenario 2- 8000
units
Residential 4800 167 3360 97 pressure. The surrounding topography allows for this but the need for pipeline servitudes
and reservoir land on private farmland will have to be obtained. Scenario 3 requires a
Scenario 3- 24000 30 Ml reservoir in to cover 48 hr storage.
Residential 14400 500 10080 292
units

Refer to figure 1 for the existing water infrastructure.

It should be noted that the demands reflected in the table is estimated on the
increased density planning directive to accommodate up to four dwellings per 75 m2 Bulk Water
plot. Each plot will contain a single dwelling with an addition backyard sewer A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure 1 500 mm ON
connection but that the additional dwellings will occur over time at the discretion of the bulk water pipeline which is owned, operated and maintained by the City of Cape
home owner.
www.capetown.gov.za

Making progress possible. Together.

 3 4

Town's Bulk Water Branch. The pipeline is protected by a 12 m wide servitude (LG No. If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If unavoidable, then
7901/80). road construction works or the installation of civil engineering and other services in the
The position of the pipeline is shown on the following copies of: vicinity of the bulk water pipeline servitude may require certain physical protective
measures to be taken to ensure safety of the bulk water pipeline. All costs associated
* Drawing number WO 3805 Sheet 5
with the protection of the bulk water pipeline shall be for the developer's account.
* Colour GIS Extract
* LG No. 7901/80 Following acceptance by the City's Bulk Water Branch of the SOP, full details of any
Whilst the Bulk Water Branch has no "in principle" objection to the proposed proposed services and development in the immediate vicinity of the bulk water
development, cognizance must be taken of the bulk water pipeline and servitude, and pipeline and servitude shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for acceptance.
is subject to the following conditions:
Following acceptance of the design, the contractor tasked with construction shall
1. A proposed site development plan (SOP) and/or subdivision plan shall be apply to the Bulk Water Branch for a wayleave to work in the vicinity of the bulk water
submitted to the Bulk Water Branch (Mr F Els, 9th Floor, 38 Wale Street, Cape pipeline and servitude at least two weeks prior to commencing work on site. No
Town, tel.: 021 444 7696; email: francois.els@capetown.gov.za ) for acceptance construction may take place without a Bulk Water Branch wayleave (application to:
prior to finalisation. bulkwater.info@capetown.gov.za ).

2. Drawings showing the layout and level details of the proposed platforms, roads Cognisance shall be taken of the following conditions when preparing the SOP,
platform design and engineering services design:
and civil engineering services that are planned to cross over and/or be installed
adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude shall be submitted to the
Bulk Water Branch for acceptance. 1. No services (viz. stormwater , sewer, water , electricity) shall be laid or structures
(viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street furniture (signs,
3. The Conditions of Servitude shall be strictly adhered to. traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest. However, a
4. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted access to the perpendicular crossing of the bulk water pipeline servitude is allowed (see 2
bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and maintenance purposes. below).

5. The subdivision and/or fencing of portions of the servitude into individual erven 2. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be
will not be permitted for reasons of access and control. The servitude shall remain perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline.
as one continuous entity.
3. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of 100 mm
6. No development shall take place, structures erected or services installed within shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline.
the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the centreline of the bulk water
pipeline, whichever is the greatest. 4. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method of
supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance.
7. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest, shall not be 5. No activity (viz. blasting, excavation or jacking method) that will result in
altered. vibrations with peak particle velocities exceeding 5 mm/s at the bulk water
pipeline shall be permitted.
Cognisance shall be taken of the bulk water pipeline servitude, bulk water pipeline and
its appurtenance (i.e. related chambers) throughout the planning, design and 6. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in
construction processes as no changes to the bulk water pipeline infrastructure will be accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm thick layers
considered. to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO.

It must be noted that the above bulk water pipeline is of strategic importance to the 7. Only light compacting plant (1.5 –2.0 tonne e.g. Bomag BW 80, 90, 100) shall be
City of Cape Town and forms an intricate part of the City's integrated Bulk Water supply used in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline until 800 mm compacted cover has
system. Due its strategic importance, no disruption can be entertained. been obtained. Thereafter approved larger compacting plant may be used. All
compacting plant shall be operated in low amplitude/low frequency mode in
the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline.
 5 6

adjustments to the existing PRV would have to be considered to ensure there is

8. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the vicinity of sufficient pressure to supply the development. The design of the water network to
the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line and level drawings cover all Scenarios 1-3 may have to include a new 48 hr reservoir an associated
etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for acceptance.
pipe-lines in registered servitudes
The City of Cape Town's bulk supply system has sufficient water resource, treatment,
bulk storage and conveyance capacity to supply the estimated annual average daily The modelled impact of Scenario 1 shows that the collector and bulk sewer network is
demand of 14400 kl/day (Scenario3) of the proposed development. able to cope. The higher density of the proposed development will require major water
and sewer bulk infrastructure including the upgrading of the mentioned water and
Sewer Reticulation sewer infrastructure downstream to Zandvleit Waste Water Treatment Works. Zandvliet
The proposed development falls within the SDF (Spatial Development Frame work) and WWTW can accommodate the development when the upgrade is completed in
provision has been made for this development within the Master Plan. However, the
December 2021.
scenario 2 & 3 proposes is higher than planned the planned density.

There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed development. Conditions
The following conditions need to be implemented:
As per the Sewer Master Plan the future model shows 150mm, 190mm and 235mm · Development contributions will be payable, to be quantified by the Reticulation
diameter sewer main that could serve the development with sufficient hydraulic spare
District Head.
capacity for the planned ADDWF. The mentioned sewer mains are gravitating to the
· All costs relating to connection, alterations to or provision of new water and
future pump station situated downstream of the development connected to 300mm
existing sewer collector running at Forest Road and to 500mm sewer bulk line changing sewerage services will be for the account of the applicant.
in diameter to Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works. It appears that sewer network · An appropriate link services is required at the developers cost prior to the transfer of
could cope for Scenario 1 provided the development would be constructed in phases. individual erven.
· Appropriate Bulk services are required to be in place to accommodate reticulation
For the Scenario 2 and 3 the collect and bulk sewer network is not able to handle the and link services prior to the transfer of individual erven.
flow that will be generated by this High density Scenario. The mentioned existing
300mm sewer collector and bulk mains downstream to Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
Technical Requirements
Works need to be upgraded before the full development for any of the Scenarios.
· Application must be made for any new water metered connections to the
See attached layout of infrastructure.
Reticulation District Head.
Wastewater treatment · Any Municipal services to be designed to departmental standards (found on
The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Water/Documents/). Its design, construction and
which is currently operating above its capacity. There are however future plans to final as-built record to be approved and handed over to the Reticulation District
upgrade the facility capacity that will then be able to accommodate the Head.
development as reflected in Scenario 1. · The applicant must advise this Directorate when all conditions have been complied
with, in order to have the work inspected.
The increase treatment capacity at Zandvliet is scheduled to be completed by · The water and sewer capacities allocated according to this document, if not taken
December 2021. The scenario 2 and 3 does bring into question what the ultimate size of up, shall not be reserved beyond the lesser of 5 years or the approved development
the wastewater treatment works should be if similar densities as expressed in scenario 2 period.
and 3 is applied to all low income housing developments in the Zandvliet catchment.
General/ Disclaimer
Conclusion
· The existing water infrastructure has certain limitations and will therefore not be able 1. Information provided is based on best available data.
to supply the proposed development without certain network reinforcements. The 2. The flows and pressures provided in this comment are theoretical and not measured
pressures in the area are fairly low and therefore an inline pressure boosting and or 3. Costs provided are estimated and may vary (if applicable)
 7

Yours Faithfully
2017/02/25

Signed by: Shamile Manie

On behalf of
Peter Flower
DIRECTOR: WATER & SANITATION DEPARTMENT
 Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Munisipale Kantoor
Cnr Queen & Oxford Street Cnr Queen & Oxford Street H/V Queen & Oxford Straat
Durbanville 7500 Durbanville 7500 Durbanville 7500
Tel: +27 21 444 0739 Umnxeba: +27 21 444 0739 Tel: +27 21 444 0739
Fax: +27 21 970 3140 Ifeksi: +27 21 970 3140 Faks: +27 21 970 3140
E-mail: http://www.capetown.gov.za
Evaluator: B. Sithela

19 May 2017
Alexander Forbes
Environmental Professional
Environmental Management Department
Areas: Environment and Heritage Management
2nd Floor Stocks & Stocks, Cnr NTlazane & NTlakhlaza Roads,
Tel: +27 21 360 1124 (Mon- Fri)
Fax: 086 624 8526
Email: Alexander.forbes@capetown.gov.za

KEY INFORMANTS ON WATER AND SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE EIA FOR PENHILL
HOUSING PROJECT

Background
This letter serves to inform the reader of the key EIA informants relating to the Water and
Sanitation services for the Low Cost Housing Greenfield Development in Penhill.

The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants as
follows:
Description Potable Water Demand Sewer Flow

Application Peak Flow (Dry

Total AADD Peak Flow (l/s) Total ADWF
Farm (Low Cost weather) (l/s)
(kl/d) (PF=3.0) (kl/d)
Residential) (PF=2.5)

Scenario 1- 4000
Residential 2400 83 1680 49
units

Scenario 2- 8000
Residential 4800 167 3360 97
units

Scenario 3- 24000
Residential 14400 500 10080 292
units

Key EIA Informants

1. The area has been identified as a potential site for potential future growth. The
departments water master plan indicated that the development could be
supplied from the Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water main, however
this is no longer a viable option.

www.capetown.gov.za

Making progress possible. Together.

 2 3

2. Scenario 1: A connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from the 12. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be
750mm diameter Steenbras high pressure main as well as a second connection perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline
off the 200mm diameter would be required to supply the proposed
13. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of 100 mm
development.
shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline.
3. Scenario 2 and 3: The existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed 14. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method of
development has insufficient capacity to supply the proposed development. It is supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance.
therefore advised that possibly an independent reservoir be considered order to
supply the development under the conditions proposed for scenario 2 and 3. 15. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in
accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm thick layers
4. The development will require a suitably positioned reservoir with sufficient to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO.
elevation to provide the appropriate network pressure. The surrounding
16. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the vicinity of
topography allows for this but the need for pipeline servitudes and reservoir land
the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line and level drawings
on private farmland will have to be obtained. Scenario 3 requires a 30 Ml reservoir etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for acceptance.
in to cover 48 hr storage.
17. Scenario 2 & 3 proposes is higher than planned in the planned density in the SDF
5. A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure 1 500 Masterplan.
mm ON bulk water pipeline The pipeline is protected by a 12 m wide servitude
18. There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed
development.
6. Platforms, roads and civil engineering services are planned to cross over and/or
be installed adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude will have to
19. As per the Sewer Master Plan the future model shows 150mm, 190mm and
conform to strict conditions put forward by the Bulk Water Branch
235mm diameter sewer main that could serve the development.
7. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted access to the
20. For the Scenario 2 and 3 the collector and bulk sewer network is not able to
bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and maintenance purposes.
handle the flow that will be generated by this High density Scenario. The
mentioned existing 300mm sewer collector and bulk mains downstream to
8. No development shall take place, structures erected or services installed within
Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works need to be upgraded before the full
the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the centreline of the bulk water
development for any of the Scenarios.
pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
21. Alternative to 20. above the could be a new bulk sewer that could flow a more
9. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
efficient route to the bulk outfall sewer.
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest, shall not be
altered.
22. The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment
10. If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If unavoidable, Works, there are future plans to upgrade the facility capacity that will then be
then road construction works or the installation of civil engineering and other able to accommodate the development as reflected in Scenario 1.
services in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline servitude may require certain
physical protective measures to be taken to ensure safety of the bulk water 23. The increase treatment capacity at Zandvliet is scheduled to be completed by
pipeline. December 2021. The scenario 2 and 3 does bring into question what the ultimate
size of the wastewater treatment works should be if similar densities as expressed
11. No services (viz. stormwater, sewer, water, electricity) shall be laid or structures
in scenario 2 and 3 is applied to all low income housing developments in the
(viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street furniture (signs,
Zandvliet catchment.
traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest. However, a
perpendicular crossing of the bulk water pipeline servitude is allowed
 4
Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Municipal Office Durbanville Munisipale Kantoor
24. The existing water infrastructure has certain limitations and will therefore not be Cnr Queen & Oxford Street
Durbanville 7500
Cnr Queen & Oxford Street
Durbanville 7500
H/V Queen & Oxford Straat
Durbanville 7500
able to supply the proposed development without certain network Tel: +27 21 444 0739 Umnxeba: +27 21 444 0739 Tel: +27 21 444 0739
Fax: +27 21 970 3140 Ifeksi: +27 21 970 3140 Faks: +27 21 970 3140
reinforcements. E-mail: http://www.capetown.gov.za
Evaluator: B. Sithela
25. The design of the water network to cover all Scenarios 1-3 may have to include a 21 September 2017
new 48 hr reservoir an associated pipe-lines in registered servitudes
Mike King
SMEC South Africa
26. All appropriate link services are required to be in place at the developers cost Engineering Consultants
prior to the transfer of individual erven. mike.king@smec.com

27. Appropriate Bulk services are required to be in place to accommodate COMMENT ON WATER AND SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY FOR PENHILL HOUSING
reticulation and link services prior to the transfer of individual erven. PROJECT

Background
Yours Faithfully This letter is a revised comment on water and sewer network and bulk services capacity
2017/05/20 on the proposed Penhill low income greenfields development. The development is on
the land parcel made up of Portions 3 and 8 of Farm 410 and Portions 5, 25, 26, 31, 32
35, 36 and 42 of Farm 468 totalling 200 ha. The land is currently vacant.
X
The information provided in this report is based on City of Cape Town master plan
Signed by: Shamile Manie
model as well as comments from relevant branches of the department. The report
provides an overview of the existing water and sewer infrastructure near the
development, associated conditions and technical requirements to be implemented
On behalf of
with respect to this application.
Peter Flower
DIRECTOR: WATER & SANITATION DEPARTMENT The proposed water and sewer requirements were provided by the consultants as
follows:
Description Potable Water Demand Sewer Flow

AADD Unit Peak Flow (Dry

Housing Type Total AADD Peak Flow (l/s) Total ADWF
demand weather) (l/s)
(No Units) (kl/d) (PF=4) (kl/d)
(l/day/unit) (PF=1.8)
Primary Project
IRDP House (4 140)
300 1 760 82 1 584 33
IRDP enhanced serviced
sites (1 725)
FLISP House (690)
Market House (345) 600 1 281 59 1 153 24
Social Housing (1 100)

Backyard or rental
300 3 519 163 3 167 66
2 per IRDP erven (11 730)

Total 6 560 304 5 904 123

It should be noted that the demands reflected in the table is estimated on the
increased density planning directive to accommodate up to 3 dwellings per 75 m2 plot.

www.capetown.gov.za

Making progress possible. Together.

 2 3

Each plot will contain a single dwelling with an additional sewer connection to facilitate Town's Bulk Water Branch. The pipeline is protected by a 12 m wide servitude (LG No.
accommodation of up to 2 backyarder opportunities. 7901/80).
The position of the pipeline is shown on the following copies of:
The moderated service demands used above is as per the moderated demand
* Drawing number WO 3805 Sheet 5
approval provided on the 12 June 2017.
* Colour GIS Extract
Water Reticulation * LG No. 7901/80
A portion of the proposed development area was identified as a future development Whilst the Bulk Water Branch has no "in principle" objection to the proposed
area in the 2014/15 City Water and Sanitation Master Plan. The planned development development, cognizance must be taken of the bulk water pipeline and servitude, and
was of a much lower density and scale (169 ha) with an AADD of 2014.7 kl/d. is subject to the following conditions:

The Water Master Plan indicated that the development could be supplied from the 1. A proposed site development plan (SOP) and/or subdivision plan shall be
Blackheath Lower bulk 1500mm diameter water main, however this additional submitted to the Bulk Water Branch (Mr F Els, 9th Floor, 38 Wale Street, Cape
Town, tel.: 021 444 7696; email: francois.els@capetown.gov.za ) for acceptance
connection off the bulk system was rejected by the Bulk Water Branch. In addition, the
prior to finalisation.
proposed demand would have pushed the peak velocity up in the bulk main
significantly. 2. Drawings showing the layout and level details of the proposed platforms, roads
and civil engineering services that are planned to cross over and/or be installed
If the development is phased and the initial phase is limited to 4000 units without adjacent to the bulk water pipeline and/or servitude shall be submitted to the
backyarders a 2 connection supply off the existing system would be required. A Bulk Water Branch for acceptance.
connection off the 300mm diameter Kleinvlei supply from the 750mm diameter
3. The Conditions of Servitude shall be strictly adhered to.
Steenbras high pressure main. A second connection off the surrounding network to the
north of the site to a minimum 200mm diameter main would also be required. In 4. The Bulk Water Branch shall always have the right of uninterrupted access to the
addition, an inline pressure booster would have to be considered given that a pressure bulk water pipeline and servitude for operational and maintenance purposes.
drop to below 20m is expected. There is a PRV on the 300mm diameter main which
upon consultation with the reticulation branch could be reset to ensure that there is 5. The subdivision and/or fencing of portions of the servitude into individual erven
sufficient pressure available to supply the initial phase. will not be permitted for reasons of access and control. The servitude shall remain
as one continuous entity.

For the full development of 8000 formal opportunities and 11 730 backyarders the 6. No development shall take place, structures erected or services installed within
existing infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed development has insufficient the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m the centreline of the bulk water
capacity. It is therefore advised that an independent reservoir be considered to supply pipeline, whichever is the greatest.
the development. However, the need for an inline booster or adjustment to the PRV
setting would still be required to fill a suitably positioned reservoir with sufficient 7. The ground level within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest, shall not be
elevation to provide the appropriate network pressure. The surrounding topography
altered.
allows for this but this require pipeline servitudes and reservoir land on private farmland.
The full development with backyarder opportunities will require a minimum 15 Ml Cognisance shall be taken of the bulk water pipeline servitude, bulk water pipeline and
reservoir storage. its appurtenance (i.e. related chambers) throughout the planning, design and
construction processes as no changes to the bulk water pipeline infrastructure will be
See figure 1 for the existing water infrastructure. considered.

It must be noted that the above bulk water pipeline is of strategic importance to the
Bulk Water
City of Cape Town and forms an intricate part of the City's integrated Bulk Water supply
A section of the proposed development is traversed by the high pressure 1 500 mm ON
system. Due its strategic importance, no disruption can be entertained.
bulk water pipeline which is owned, operated and maintained by the City of Cape
 4 5

If possible, no roads shall cross the bulk water pipeline servitude. If unavoidable, then
road construction works or the installation of civil engineering and other services in the 8. Should it be proposed to use thrust boring or directional drilling in the vicinity of
vicinity of the bulk water pipeline servitude may require certain physical protective the bulk water pipeline, full details (methods statements, line and level drawings
measures to be taken to ensure safety of the bulk water pipeline. All costs associated etc.) for this operation shall be submitted for acceptance.
with the protection of the bulk water pipeline shall be for the developer's account.
The City of Cape Town's bulk supply system has sufficient water resource, treatment,
Following acceptance by the City's Bulk Water Branch of the SOP, full details of any bulk storage and conveyance capacity to supply the estimated annual average daily
proposed services and development in the immediate vicinity of the bulk water demand of 6 560 kl/day of the proposed development.
pipeline and servitude shall be submitted to the Bulk Water Branch for acceptance.
Sewer Reticulation
Following acceptance of the design, the contractor tasked with construction shall As per the water reticulation comment the site proposed for development has been
apply to the Bulk Water Branch for a wayleave to work in the vicinity of the bulk water identified in the sewer Master Plan. The scale and density being proposed is significantly
pipeline and servitude at least two weeks prior to commencing work on site. No higher than planned.
construction may take place without a Bulk Water Branch wayleave (application to:
bulkwater.info@capetown.gov.za ). There is no sewer network in the immediately vicinity of the proposed development. The
sewer master plan has identified the need for reticulation system and a new pump
Cognisance shall be taken of the following conditions when preparing the SOP, station to the south west corner of the site. This pump station would then transfer sewer
platform design and engineering services design: to the 300 mm collector downstream of the development.

1. No services (viz. stormwater , sewer, water , electricity) shall be laid or structures The existing 300 mm collector sewer has insufficient capacity to accommodate the
(viz. houses, manholes, catchpits, chambers) erected or street furniture (signs, combined formal and backyarder development totalling 19 730 units. Due to the size of
traffic signals) installed within the bulk water pipeline servitude or within 6 m of the the development and the lack of capacity in the downstream network it is advised to in
centreline of the bulk water pipeline, whichever is the greatest. However, a consultation with the district officials consider an alternative route for the sewer link
perpendicular crossing of the bulk water pipeline servitude is allowed (see 2 service. This new link sewer would be between the development and bulk sewer outfall.
below).
The bulk outfall sewer consisting of an 800 mm and a 1900 mm parallel main along
2. Where services cross above the bulk water pipeline, the crossing shall be Baden Powell Drive has sufficient spare capacity to Zandvliet WWTW.
perpendicular to the bulk water pipeline.
See Figure 2 for network constraints.
3. Where open cut trenching is proposed, a minimum vertical clearance of 100 mm
shall be allowed between the services and the pipeline. See Figure 3 to 5 for details of the downstream network to the bulk sewer at Baden
Powell Drive.
4. Should it be necessary to cross below the bulk water pipeline, the method of
supporting the bulk water pipeline shall be submitted to for acceptance. Wastewater treatment
The development falls in the catchment of the Zandvliet Wastewater Treatment Works
5. No activity (viz. blasting, excavation or jacking method) that will result in (WWTW) which is currently operating overcapacity. There is an upgrade of the works
vibrations with peak particle velocities exceeding 5 mm/s at the bulk water
currently underway with an expected completion date of December 2022. This
pipeline shall be permitted.
upgrade will increase the capacity by 18 Ml/d.
6. All backfilling of trenches over the bulk water pipelines shall be done in
accordance with SANS 2001-BE1, and shall be compacted in 150 mm thick layers The formal housing delivery will occur over a 2-year period from December 2020 to
to a minimum of 95% MOD AASHTO. December 2022. The backyarder accommodation is expected to occur over time and
would be difficult to manage or restrict. This sewer load cannot be accommodated
7. Only light compacting plant (1.5 –2.0 tonne e.g. Bomag BW 80, 90, 100) shall be prior to the first phase of the Zandvliet upgrade being completed.
used in the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline until 800 mm compacted cover has
been obtained. Thereafter approved larger compacting plant may be used. All
compacting plant shall be operated in low amplitude/low frequency mode in A second upgrade of the works is planned that will provide another 60Ml/d and is
the vicinity of the bulk water pipeline. expected to be completed by 2024.
 6 7

The Zandvliet WWTW is only able to accommodate the development after December General/ Disclaimer
2022.
1. Information provided is based on best available data.
2. The flows and pressures provided in this comment are theoretical and not measured
Conclusion 3. Costs provided are estimated and may vary (if applicable)
The existing water infrastructure has limitations and will therefore not be able to supply
the proposed development without network reinforcements. The pressures in the area
are fairly low and therefore an inline pressure boosting and or adjustments to the Yours Faithfully
existing PRV would have to be considered to ensure there is sufficient pressure to supply 2017/09/21

the development. The design of the water network to cover the full development will
require a new reservoir an associated pipe-lines in registered servitudes X

A new link sewer to the bulk sewer outfall is required to accommodate the full
Signed by: Shamile Manie
development. The Zandvliet WWTW can accommodate the development once the
first phase of the treatment works upgrade is completed in December 2022.
On behalf of
Peter Flower
Conditions
DIRECTOR: WATER & SANITATION DEPARTMENT
The development is able to proceed if the following conditions are met:
1. Development contributions is payable as per the DC Policy, to be quantified by the
Reticulation District Head.
2. A bulk water supply that includes a connection to the bulk supply, a pump station
and a dedicated reservoir with associated pipe work to be implemented.
3. A sewer link service between the development and the bulk sewer outfall to be in
place prior to the transfer of individual erven.
4. Sewer flow from development can only be accommodated once the first phase of
Zandvliet WWTW upgrade is completed.

Additional Technical Requirements

5. All costs relating to connection, alterations to or provision of new water and
sewerage services will be for the account of the applicant.
6. Any Municipal services to be designed to departmental standards (found on
http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Water/Documents/). Its design, construction and final as-
built record to be approved and handed over to the Reticulation District Head.
7. The water and sewer capacities allocated according to this document, if not taken
up, shall not be reserved beyond the lesser of 5 years or the approved development
period.
 - ! /
( ' 6

! "# $ % &'
(
) * +, - .
/0$ + $ "# 1"! 1 2& ) -- 3 0 / 4 % / 0 12 5 /
% .56 /0 &7. 0 8"# 1"! 1 9 10 3 !" # # 34" " " 5 5 5
$ , !
% %$#
&'( % & -.
) $&*
(+ *

! "
#
$%%&

' ! "
' #$ #%&' %& &( )* 6 7 7 #
# '+ , -+ ! . /
', 0 - ! 1 /2 3 -3 ! /
( '3 &'%4&#%4 5) 0 6 7
" ' %( % & -* %* /'& %
Dear Andrew, % 7 8 % - '
As discussed, Tim Hart was in touch with HWC with regards to the Case no: 17041204 (Pen Hill farms Eerste River),
9 && # &% * ,* 7
for which the NID that was submitted at beginning of May 2017 (see attached and details in the email below). It seems
this NID was mislaid. : ; ! % /<*
- ' .&
I wanted to know if a response to this case could be expedited, due to the fact that it is a national catalytic project for
the Department of Human Settlements, and we have been waiting already 2 months. We are about to commence PPP
on our Draft Scoping Report (a week or two) and would like to have a decision on the way forward on the HIA, if ! "# $! " %"&
required.
' ((!!!" ! " "&
If there is anything we, or our client Dept Human Settlements, can do to speed this up, please let me know, # )
Kind regards
Kirsten ', 0 ! 1 "
' #% #%&' && #: +*
Kirsten Jones Pr.Sci.Nat., MSc (Env Sci) # '8 -8 ! . /
Senior Environmental Scientist, Aurecon ( '
T +27 21 5266991 F +27 21 5269500
Kirsten.Jones@aurecongroup.com
Hope you can read it. Thanks. Tim.

DISCLAIMER = & &' & +' %$ %& ( 7 % %% $( % %$ & %$ & &% > %
%$ &' & & %$ 8 % - ' :& ( % 0%$ 8-:1? 3& (' &> & %$ 8-: %% %& & * 7
'8 8 ! . " & % %& $ & %$ 8-: * $ $ &* % 7 & & %$ 8-:# & $ & $ *%$& ' % % ? .$
' #% #%&' && 94 & ( %& & % %$ ( 7 % %% $( % ( > & % & ' 7 & %$ * & %$ ( ' %
& ># + '% $ %$ ' > % % &%$ ? 4 >&* &% %$ % ' % >&* ( > &% &'> & %$
# ', 0 - ! 1 /2 + , -+ ! . /2 ( 7 %& >& ?=
= & &' & +' %$ %& ( 7 % %% $( % %$ & %$ & &% > %
%$ &' & & %$ 8 % - ' :& ( % 0%$ 8-:1? 3& (' &> & %$ 8-: %% %& & * 7
& % %& $ & %$ 8-: * $ $ &* % 7 & & %$ 8-:# & $ & $ *%$& ' % % ? .$
& ( %& & % %$ ( 7 % %% $( % ( > & % & ' 7 & %$ * & %$ ( ' %
& ># + '% $ %$ ' > % % &%$ ? 4 >&* &% %$ % ' % >&* ( > &% &'> & %$
( 7 %& >& ?=