Road To Nature

Constantia
16 November 2002

Ms Emily Herschell
Chand Environmental Consultants
PO Box 6997
ROGGEBAAI
8012

Dear Ms Herschell

Proposed Peninsula Expressway: comments on environmental impact

I am writing to object to the proposals for the Peninsula Expressway for two reasons:

because they conflict with the following portions of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998
because the fundamental issue of public transport has been ignored.

1. Conflict with National Environmental Management Act of 1998

Below I have quoted portions of the Act, and have followed each quote from the Act with an explanation (in light-grey boxes) of how the proposals for the Peninsula Expressway conflict with that portion of the Act.

The Act says:

(4) (a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:
(i) That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity are avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;

The proposed Toll Road will cause an appreciable disturbance of the ecosystems in the Cape Flats water treatment works, Zeekoevlei, Rondevlei, the Zandvlei Estuary and the Westlake Wetlands. These disturbances can easily be avoided altogether by eliminating the part of the Road which runs through these areas. The developers of the Toll Road claim that the Road has to be built as an all-or-nothing project, but this commercial argument cannot take precedence over an Act of Parliament.

The Act says:

(4) (a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:
(vii)that a risk-averse and cautious approach is applied, which takes into account the limits of current knowledge about the consequences of decisions and actions; and

The proposed Toll Road will expose the ecosystems mentioned above to risks which are likely to be long-lasting and large but cannot be estimated accurately. Therefore a risk-averse approach is not applied by the proposals, and the limits of current knowledge about the consequences of decisions and actions are being ignored.

The Act says:

(4) (a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:
(viii)that negative impacts on the environment and on people's environmental rights be anticipated and prevented, and where they cannot be altogether prevented, are minimised and remedied.

The proposed Toll Road will cause appreciable negative impacts on the environment. These impacts can easily be remedied, by eliminating the part of the Road which runs through the areas of Rondevlei, Zeekoevlei, the Cape Flats water treatment works, the Zandvlei Estuary and the Westlake Wetlands. The proposed project ignores this simple remedy.

The Act says:

Sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores, estuaries, wetlands, and similar systems require specific attention in management and planning procedures, especially where they are subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure.

The areas of Rondevlei, Zeekoevlei, the Cape Flats water treatment works, the Zandvlei Estuary and the Westlake Wetlands are all examples of "sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores, estuaries, wetlands" as listed in the Act. The proposed Toll Road should therefore not be allowed to traverse these areas.

2. Public transport has specifically been ignored

New multi-lane roads elsewhere in the world have generally failed to improve traffic flows after a short time, and have become congested because they attract traffic. The M23 orbital motorway around London is perhaps the most obvious example of a failed new multi-lane road. In contrast, improving public transport makes ecological sense, benefits poor communities and is much cheaper. However, improving public transport has been ignored by the Penway consortium because it is considered to be a problem that the government must address and the specialists have not been asked to address it (S Chand, Focus group meeting no 2, Thursday, 11 April 2002, Tokai Library). This statement by Chand, whose fees are paid by the Penway consortium, strongly suggests that the commercial aims of the consortium conflict with the interests of the people of the Western Cape.

Yours sincerely

M V Madden

Cc: Mr C Oertel, PO Box 26445, Hout Bay, 7872.

Comment on the R300 (N21) Toll Road proposal

Letter from M V Madden - Private Individual

Proposed Peninsula Expressway: comments on environmental impact

1. Conflict with National Environmental Management Act of 1998

2. Public transport has specifically been ignored