Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout Environmental Impact Assessment - Corridor -
1 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA): CORRIDOR 1.1 INTRODUCTION Corridor is a small farming community approximately 70km from Aminuis and 8km from the eastern border between Namibia and Botswana. 1.2 RATIONALE FOR SITE Due to the remoteness of the village, telecommunication is very important to the residents of the town for obtaining information of planned community activities and news in general. A newly built MTC tower is located 500m north of the DR3816 road. This tower could be used for the proposed NBC infrastructure. The predicted coverage from this position is portrayed in Figure 1. Figure 1: Predicted coverage from the existing infrastructure in Corridor.
2 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION For this particular site the current position of the broadcasting infrastructure was considered. The existing MTC mast is located far enough from the road to not be visible and is further obscured by the surrounding vegetation which consists of large trees (primarily Acacia species) and grasslands (Figure 2). Even though the site is not expected to be particularly sensitive in terms of birds, some raptors (e.g. Bateleurs, Martial and Tawny eagles) are expected to occur in the proximity of the site. The assessment form below was completed during the site visit based on the visual observations and technical information available at the existing MTC site. Below (in Table 1) follows the completed assessment form for the Corridor site, highlighting information for the investigated alternative: N Figure 2: Position of the existing MTC mast near Corridor in relation to other landmarks.
3 Table 1: Assessment form for the Corridor site. ACTIVITY INFORMATION 1 Position of the site 2 Footprint of mast 3 Land ownership Latitude Longitude Proposed height of mast Diameter of stay wires Describe how the stay wires will be anchored to the ground (e.g. concrete, rock foundation). To who does the land on which the proposed site is located, belong? (E.g. Private land, state land, town lands, etc.) PROPOSED POSITION (MTC MAST) 23 29'39.30"S 19 53'27.80"E 150m 26mm 48mm Depending on localised geology: cement anchor blocks/rock anchors drilled into bedrock State land 4 Description of General locality, surrounding landscape, Flat, camelthorn savanna the site etc. 5 Project outputs Define any nuisances or negative impacts that could result from the project during Dust, noise, increased traffic on road (associated with the upgrade of infrastructure) the construction and operation (e.g. vibration, noise, radiation, dust). 6 Access to site Existing Road (Yes/No) Yes New Road (Yes/No) Distance of new road Grading of new road (tar or gravel, etc.) Yes, extension needed to the site Approximately 200m To gravel standard Slope where new road will be situated Gradual (gradual, moderate, steep) Best position for new road. Impact will be the same as long as large trees are avoided. 7 Civil Aviation Distance to the nearest airport More than 8km from an airstrip. 8 Waste generation 9 Energy provision Distance to nearest dump site In Aminuis, 70km from the site Distance to nearest power line Power is provided to the site (Figure 3) Required structures (e.g. substations, n/a steel structures) Length of the required power line n/a Is the power line more than 2 km? If yes, then the assessment of the proposed location for the power line should be included in the assessment of the site for the mast. n/a
4 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 Landscape Describe the surrounding landscaped, e.g. Ridgeline, plateau, side slope of hill/mountain, closed valley, open valley, plain, undulating plain/low hills. How accessible is the site by vehicle? Flat area Easy access 2 Soil and Geology Unstable rocky slopes/ steep slopes with loose soil Describe soil (e.g. clay, sand, etc.) Identify areas where erosion is likely. n/a Sandy n/a 3 Habitat Natural veld in good condition, natural veld with scattered aliens, natural veld with heavy alien infestation, build-up area, bare soil. A Vegetation Describe the natural vegetation on the site (e.g. dwarf-shrubland). B Birds Is the area likely to be sensitive for birds (i.t.o. Cliffs, Ridges, possible flight paths, trees, water sources)? C Reptiles Is the area likely to be sensitive for reptiles (e.g. rocky outcrops)? D Archaeology Take a picture facing towards the proposed site. E Surface Water Is there any surface water sources located close to the proposed site (e.g. Rivers, Pans, dams, farms dams, oshanas, etc.)? Estimate the distance from the site. Are there any signs of a wetland located close to the proposed site (e.g. mottled soil, grass with plumes, reeds, two-tone vegetation, standing water, birdlife)? Estimate the distance from the site. 4 Visual Consider the aesthetic value of the area (Is it located in a scenic area, what are the lines of sight, are there tourism activities in the area?). Identify possible sensitive receptors (e.g. neighbours, road users, tourism ventures etc.) Natural veld in good condition (Figure 3) Camelthorn savanna (Figure 3) Some sensitive bird species (e.g. Bateleurs, Martial and Tawny eagles) are expected to occur in the area. No None n/a n/a Community-based campsites in the area Road users and tourists
5 If a new road will be constructed to the Will be out of sight for the largest group of sensitive site, what will the visual impact be? (E.g. receptors. will it be highly visible or will it be out of sight for the largest group of sensitive receptors). SITE DESCRIPTION Consider the following: * The potential location of a development on landform features within the landscape will influence the visual absorption capacity. For example, structures will be difficult to hide on a ridgeline compared to a deeply incised valley. * Developments on lower slopes will be potentially easier to hide than those on upper slopes. * The visibility of a location of a structure is also influenced by the location height relative to the heights of surrounding topographic features. For example, if a location is lower than the majority of the immediately surrounding landscape it will be less visible and intrusive than a location which is generally higher than the immediate surrounds. * A potential tower location will be easier to hide in a very rugged/diverse landscape and more difficult to do so if the landscape is more homogenous, such as a plain. 5 Social context Describe the surrounding community and land uses (e.g. farm land, town lands, residential area etc.). How far is the nearest inhabited area from the centre point of the mast? (I.t.o. the radiation). Give a short description of the populated area. What type of settlement is it? Site is obscured by the surrounding vegetation. Not visible from the road. Higher trees obscure the visibility of the site. Landscape is diverse North open land, East open land, South open land, West open land 1 km from various small settlements including Corridor.
6 Figure 3: Landscapes, vegetation and infrastructure of the associated with the existing position of the broadcasting infrastructure for Corridor
7 1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION No on site public participation was done during the site visit. Communication with key stakeholders after the site visit also presented some problems due to the lack of communication services such as email or fax. The only stakeholder consulted during the process was the Omaheke Region Council. Their capacity and the comments received are contained in Table 2 below: The aim is to repeat the consultation process just before commencing with the construction phase. Table 2: Capacity of and comments received from the consulted members of the public in Corridor. NAME AFFILIATION POSITION MANNER CONTACTED: CONTACT DETAILS COMMENTS Hon. E.G. Omaheke Region Councillor: Fax (063) 273-189 Uanguta Council Aminuis 081-262-4030 or 081-201-2014 1.5 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS 1.4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED SITE In order to determine whether the proposed site would require a full environmental assessment with specialist input or whether the available information is sufficient to draw conclusions regarding the true sensitivity of the site, a screening process is applied to the potential impacts of the project (Figure 4).
8 Do we have sufficient information to address the issue? YES NO Can issue be addressed through the implementation of a generic EMP? Specialist input required Full EIA YES NO Issues addressed in Generic EMP An Additional Appendix is required to the Generic EMP that contains site specific mitigations. Figure 4: Questions used to screen the potential impacts associated with the development. The Corridor site follows the indicated orange route which implies that most issues can be addressed through a Generic EMP, but that an additional appendix is required to address some site specific issues. Impacts that can sufficiently be addressed through the implementation of a Generic EMP are indicated. Key issues (those impacts that do not necessarily require specialist inputs but requires detailed attention), on the other hand, are indicated and specific management measures are prescribed in an Additional Appendix (Site Specific EMP). Table 3 below indicates how the screening process was applied to the identified impacts at the proposed Corridor site: Table 3: Assessment of potential impacts associated with the proposed site in Corridor. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DESCRIPTION KEY IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH FEATURE DEGREE OF SENSITIVITY ISSUE ADDRESSED IN: Climate Extreme temperatures Health and safety Low sensitivity Generic EMP associated with the of workforce Kalahari could impact negatively on the
9 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DESCRIPTION KEY IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH FEATURE DEGREE OF SENSITIVITY ISSUE ADDRESSED IN: health and safety of the workforce. Wind direction Dust generated during construction could impact negatively on people living in the proximity of the site. Vegetation Some plant species such as camelthorn trees were observed on site. Reptile/ Small Occurrence of these mammals species on the site. Bird species Occurrence of these species on the site. Occurrence of these species on the site. Socio-Economic Change in available environment visual resources. Civic aviation Disturbance of archaeological landscape Control of construction personnel on construction site Impact on health of residents due to radiation Dust generation during construction. Low sensitivity Generic EMP Loss of protected/ Low sensitivity Generic EMP sensitive plant species. Disturbance to Low sensitivity Generic EMP nests and habitats Loss of biodiversity Medium Site specific EMP sensitivity Bird collisions to Medium Site specific EMP guy ropes of sensitivity mast. Visual impact Low sensitivity Generic EMP More than 8km Low sensitivity Generic EMP from an airstrip Heritage impact Low sensitivity Generic EMP Unsupervised movement of construction workers on site. Damage to private property of farm owner. Low sensitivity Generic EMP Radiation impact Medium Site specific EMP sensitivity Other impacts associated with the construction and operation of the mast Waste management during the construction and operation phases Littering Impact on existing infrastructure Low sensitivity Generic EMP
Implication Description 10 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DESCRIPTION KEY IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH FEATURE DEGREE OF SENSITIVITY ISSUE ADDRESSED IN: Additional strain on Impact on Low sensitivity Generic EMP resources in Corridor infrastructure, due to the occurrence including water, of construction workers. electricity & sewer systems. 1.4.2 OVERALL SENSITIVITY OF THE PROPOSED SITE Based on the assessment in Table 3 above, one can establish the overall potential sensitivity of the proposed site (Table 4). Table 4: Sensitivity ratings of the investigated proposed site and the associated implications. LOW MEDIUM HIGH The site is not sensitive at all. No additional specialist studies are required. Generic EMP is sufficient The site is moderately sensitive and although specialist inputs are not required, it requires specific management measures. An additional Appendix is required to the document that contains site specific mitigation X measures. The site has sensitive elements that need to be further investigated by a specialist. Sites that have a "high" sensitivity rating should only be used as the proposed site once all other options have been eliminated. Specialist investigations are required. 1.6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION From the findings in this report it appears that constructing a mast at the proposed position in Corridor will not exert a high impact on the surrounding biophysical and social environment. Although the presence of the existing infrastructure (i.e. mast and power line) reduces the risk of collisions, the occurrence of sensitive bird species such as martial eagles, warrants specific mitigation measures. This will reduce the risk associated with the upgrade of the existing infrastructure.
11 Due to the close proximity between the proposed site and the nearest residents, the project could pose a health risk to nearby residents. For this reason mitigation measures have been prescribed in a site specific EMP that should be used in conjunction with the generic EMP to ensure that the minimum negative impact is exerted on the surrounding biophysical and social environment.