Transcript PROPOSED BRT BUS DEPOT IN MEADOWLANDS, SOWETO

Deepening, Lengthening and Widening
of Berth 203 to 205, Container Terminal,
Pier 2, Port of Durban
PUBLIC OPEN DAY:
12 April 2012
WELCOME & INTRODUCTION
WELCOME!
Thank you for taking the time to attend the Public Open Session.
Your presence is appreciated ...Please take a seat and watch the
presentation.
After the presentation you will have an opportunity to ask the
technical and environmental teams questions. Should you have any
comments please complete a reply form. We value your contribution
to the EIA process.
2
VENUE LAYOUT
3
MEET THE PROJECT TEAM
Proponent
Representative
Responsibility
Ivan Moonsamy
Senior Project Manager
Miriam Haffejee
Environmental Manager
Paris Foolchand
Project Manager
Organisation
Transnet National Ports Authority
(TNPA)
Transnet Capital Projects (TCP)
Joe McMahon
Environmental Manager
Consultants
Representative
Vanessa Brueton
Responsibility
Organisation
Environmental Assessment
Practitioner
Nemai Consulting
Ann Burke
Conservation Specialist
Nicky Naidoo
Project Manager
4
WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY???
1. To provide an introduction, background and
overview to the project to you;
2. To discuss the environmental authorisation
processes; and
3. To provide an opportunity for you to submit and
raise your comments for consideration by the
project team.
5
WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY???
1.
The current quay walls at Berth 203 to 205 are over 50 years old and is
beyond its original design limits. Hence, the quay walls are considered
unsafe and need to be upgraded.
2.
At the same time the Port of Durban has experienced a steady growth in
container numbers and vessel sizes. Therefore, the design for the upgrade
to the existing quay walls needs to take into account the larger vessels
entering the Port.
3.
As the berth channel is not deep enough, large vessels can only enter and
leave the Port at high tide which negatively impacts the efficiency of the
Port. Further, the Port of Durban is considered a ‘hub’ port and to maintain
this status, it needs to accommodate the larger vessels which will improve
its efficiency.
4.
Hence, the upgrade of the unsafe quay walls presents an opportunity to
improve the safety and efficiency of the Port of Durban.
6
WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED???
FOCUS OF THE PROPOSED
PROJECT IS PIER 2
DURBAN CONTAINER
TERMINAL
COMPRISES OF 15 BERTHS
CAN ACCOMADATE 8 POST PANAMAX VESSELS
WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED?
203
204
205
WATER DEPTH -12.8m CDP
TOTAL EXISTING BERTH LENGTH OF 914m
EXISTING SANDBANK
EXISTING CRANE
ASSEMBLEY AREA
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS???
1. It was built in the 1960s and does not meet the
minimum Eurocode 7 Safety Standards;
2. The berth channel is not deep enough as a result
scour holes have formed which has undermined
the structural stability of the existing quay wall;
3. The berths are only 914m long and it needs to be
1190m to accommodate three Super Post
Panamax vessels; and
4. The current quay wall cannot safely
accommodate the larger Ship to Shore cranes.
9
WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT???
The project involves:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;
The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;
The widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m;
The deepening of the Berth channel, approach
channel, and vessel turning basin from the current 12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP;
Excavating the trench for the new quay wall structure
from -12.8m CDP to -19m CDP (for caisson option
only);
The offshore disposal of dredge material;
The offshore sand winning for infill material; and
The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes
and associated infrastructure.
10
WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED?
The EIA Regulations require that we consider different alternatives. For this
project no location alternatives were considered as the upgrade is
confined to the existing unsafe quay walls. Instead, technical alternatives
were identified. Initially, seven different technical quay wall types were
assessed and the following three were found to be most feasible:
1.
Deck on Pile Quay Wall;
2.
Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and
3.
Caisson Quay Wall.
11
TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT
Now that you understand where the project is located, why
it is necessary and what it will entail, please welcome Mr.
Ivan Moonsamy, Project Manager from TNPA who will take
you through the technical aspects of the project. Please
raise all questions at the technical table and not during the
presentation. All questions will be recorded and included
in the final Scoping Report.
12
VESSEL SIZES AT DCT
The original quaywall was
designed to accommodate a
1000 TEU vessel with wharf
cranes
DCT is presently operating vessels of
6000 TEU and greater
1
EXTENSIONS
170m Extension of
Berth 205
1
BAYHEAD LOT10
Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Area
to be used during the proposed project
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Deck On Pile Quay Wall
16
DECK ON PILE
17
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Sheet Pile Quay Wall
18
SHEET PILE
19
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Caisson Quay Wall
20
CAISSON
21
DCT BERTH DEEPENING PROJECT – BERTHS 203 TO 205
HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED???
PHASE 1 – JULY 2013 TO DECEMBER 2014
EXTEND BERTH 205 AND DREDGE
APPROACH CHANNEL AND BASIN
PHASE 2 – JAN 2015 TO JULY 2016
PHASE 3 – AUG 2016 TO DECEMBER 2017
EXTEND BERTH 203
DREDGING
AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
Approach Channel and basin will be deepened from
existing -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP by dredging.
Estimated 4.5 million m3 of material will be dumped offshore
Lot 10 Casting Yard
and Storage Yard
2
DREDGING
AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
•
Disposal of material at current offshore
disposal site
24
DREDGING
AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
•
Disposal of material at current offshore
disposal site
25
OFFSHORE BORROW AREAS
Thank you Ivan.
By now you should have a better understanding of the
details of this project. The following slides are about the
environmental process that will be followed. If you are not
interested in watching the remaining 12 slides, please
proceed to the technical table.
27
ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION
PROCESSES
28
ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION
PROCESSES
1. Proposed Approach
NEMA - EIA
2. Proposed Approach
MPRDA –
Offshore Borrow Pits
3. Proposed Approach
NEM: ICM –
Dumping at Sea Permit
29
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATE
 To date the following as been undertaken:

The landowner (Transnet) was notified;

A focus group was convened;

A random survey was conducted;

Adjacent landowners within 100m were notified;

On site notices and adverts were placed; and

A project specific website domain was registered.
30
PROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATION
OUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEY
32
PROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATION
33
LOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT
The draft Scoping Report was made available at the following
venues for review. I&APs on the Durban Bay Estuarine
Management Plan Database were notified and encouraged to
review the scoping report.

Seafarers Club

Central Library
In addition, the draft Scoping Report was made available on the
project website : www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za
The draft Scoping Report is available for public review from 9 March
2012 to 30 April 2012 (50 days)
34
AUTHORITIES MEETING
 The following authorities were invited to a
meeting held on 29 February 2012 to discuss
the project:
• DEA
• KZN DAEARD
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife
• KZN DMR
• DWA Regional Office
• SAHRA- Maritime Archaeology
• eThekwini Metropolitan
Municipality
• KZN Department of Transport
• DAFF
35
OTHER LICENSING PROCESSES
 A Mining permit for the offshore borrow pit will
be made to DMR in terms of the MPRDA.
 A Dumping At Sea Permit for the offshore
disposal site for the dredge material will be
made to the DEA in terms of the NEM:ICM.
36
SPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKEN
1. Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
2. Marine Archaeology Assessment;
3. Local Economic Impact Assessment;
4. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
5. Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank;
6. Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon;
7. Sediment Plume Analysis for Offshore Sand Winning;
8. Shoreline Stability for Offshore Sand Winning;
9. Wave Energy Analysis as part of Technical Studies; and
10.Geotechnical Study as part of Technical Studies.
37
WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 RoD???
Phase 1, which would have
involved
the
Not granted 1.
westward
Stakeholders consulted throughout the IEM process recommended that phase 1 should be
deferred;
expansion of Pier 2 to create
2.
Phase 1 is proposed within the most ecologically sensitive parts of the Bay;
berths
3.
The findings of the EIR indicate that the ecological impacts of phase 1 are irreversible and
206/207
dredging
of
the
and
the
channel
significantly high
through the central banks
4.
The ecological impacts of the phase will result in:
a.
Permanent loss of habitat for juvenile fish and migrant wading birds. South Africa is a
signatory to the Bonn Convention and therefore should put measures in place to honour her
commitment to the convention
b.
Dredging of the channel would separate the remaining sandbanks from the mangroves
leading to the destruction of the Natural Heritage Site which lies within the Little Lagoon
5.
Future approval of Phase 1 would dependent of the outcome of a habitat, rehabilitation, creation
and monitoring programme led by Portnet.
In 1999, the latter was clarified with the Authorities:
“Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme
referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success based
on future evidence to be provided in a possible application.”
Phase 3, which entailed the
Authorised
“Authorisation is granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result
creation of Deepwater Berths
of infilling.”
‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point and the
This point was clarified with the Authorities in 1999. The Clarification states that the “no
relocation
further loss of water area” means that there should be no further infill of the sea to the
of
breakbulk
business from Pier 1 to the
new terminal;
order of magnitude of phase 3.
38
This brings us to the end of the presentation. We trust that
you have sufficient information on the project. Please raise
all questions at the technical station. We encourage you to
complete a reply form before you leave if you have any
comments. Should you prefer, please free comment
anonymously.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
39