E N V IR O N M E N T A L IM P A C T A S S E S S M E N T :
P R O P O S E D D E V E L O P M E N T O F L A N G E Z A N D T Q U A Y S , S T R U IS B A A I, W E S T E R N C A P E
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
The purpose of the Environmental Impact Report
Phase is to investigate and assess the biophysical
and social potential positive and negative
environmental impacts identified during the
Scoping Phase associated with the proposed
project.
Please review this Executive Summary and
preferably the full draft Environmental Impact
Report, and submit your comments on the
proposed project by 17 November 2009. Either
complete a Response Form, write a letter or e-
mail. All EIA documents will also be available on
the Aurecon website:
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTS WILL BE HELD AS
FOLLOWS:
Friday, 30 October 2009
16h00 – 18h00
10h00 – 12h00
Simon Van Wyk and John Foord
Aurecon
P O Box 494 Cape Town, 8000
Tel: (021) 481 2400
Fax: (021) 424 5588
Email: Simon.VanWyk@af.aurecongroup.com
John.Foord@af.aurecongroup.com
1
OCTOBER 2009
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Golden Falls Trading 193 (Pty) Ltd is
proposing to develop a hotel, residential
and retail complex on Erf 848. The site is
situated in the harbour precinct of
Struisbaai, Western Cape.
The site is surrounded by many different
land uses. To the south of the site is an open
area utilised for informal parking followed
by residential homes beyond Heide Road.
To the immediate east of the site is a
protected coastal dune area, while to the
south-east beyond Kusweg East are
residential homes. Adjacent (West) to the
www.aurecongroup.com site are the Marine & Coastal Management
buildings and the formal parking within the
harbour. To the south-west are residential
homes extending along Kusweg Noord. The
site currently comprises a “low key” tourist
and fishing development. The harbour is
actively used by commercial and
recreational fisherfolk, some of whom still
OPEN HOUSE use the traditional chakkies.
Struisbaai North
Library
Saturday, 31 October 2009
PUBLIC MEETING
Struisbaai North
Library
CONTACT DETAILS
SITE LOCALITY MAP
There are currently three single story
buildings on site that include the popular
Pelicans Restaurant, a fish processing plant
or
 called Harbour Catch, marketing offices for
Langezandt Fishermen’s Village and an
office for Way Down Africa tour operators.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The buildings are approximately 9 m above
mean sea level (amsl.), which equates to
±5 m above natural ground level (ngl.).
Harbour Catch processes approximately
50% of the fish landed in the harbour and
provides ice and bait to the fisherfolk.
Harbour Catch made use of a portion of Erf
848 for boat repairs, however it is
recognised that the fisherfolk make use of
the portion of in-filled land between the site
and the ocean for boat repairs.
The National Sea Rescue Institute (NSRI)
used to be housed in a container on the
site, but has since acquired premises
outside of the harbour. In terms of existing
vegetation on Erf 848, the site
predominately comprises of kikuyu grass
and thus the site does not contain any
vegetation of conservation value.
Aurecon (previously known as Ninham
Shand) was appointed by Golden Falls
Trading 193 to undertake an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) process, in terms of
the National Environmental Management
Act (No. 107 of 1998) as amended, for the
proposed development activities.
The Scoping Phase of this EIA process was
completed and a Final Scoping Report
(FSR) was submitted to the competent
authority, namely the Department of
Environmental Affairs and Development
Planning (D: EA&DP), in July 2008. The FSR
and associated Plan of Study for EIA were
approved in August 2008, allowing the
proponent to proceed to the next phase of
the EIA process.
Owing to public interest and concern
relating to the alternatives presented during
the Scoping Phase, the proponent
proposed another alternative, which
comprised of a multi level and multi
functional building (referred to as the
2
proposed development, Alternative 6),
during an Open Day in December 2008,
which has been carried through into the EIA
phase.
Project Description
The proposed development encompasses
a multifunctional waterfront constituted of
approximately 30% retail and 70%
combination of residential accommodation
and hotel accommodation. The proposed
development has been designed to cater
for touring groups and visitors in the hotel,
fractional title residential apartments as well
as retail in the form of restaurants and
shops. The proponent’s vision is to include
use by local residents, tourists and visitors. It
is recognised that the current quiet winter
periods are a challenge in terms of
employment security, especially for
previously disadvantaged people. The
development proposal aims for all year
round occupancy would be achieved by
fractional title residential apartments and
encouraging conferences and weddings.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (ALTERNATIVE 6)
The retail component is proposed to
include a fish handling facility that is
intended to purchase fish from the local
fisherfolk and process it for the in-house
restaurants and the fish market. The
proponent expects this to add value to the
fish and provide a better price to the
fisherfolk.
 Alternatives

It is a requirement of the EIA process that

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

due consideration is given to reasonable

and feasible alternatives, although not all
alternatives need to be investigated at the
same level of detail. The activity, scale and
design alternatives are the most pertinent
to this EIA process, and were explored in
the Scoping Phase. The following sections
summarise the outcome of the Scoping
Phase and hence describe the proposed ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED DURING SCOPING PHASE

project alternatives.
The activity alternatives being evaluated in
Erf 848 is the only site available to the this EIR therefore are the mixed residential
developer for this development as they are and retail development (Alternative 6) and
the landowners. The proponent identified the “no-go” option (Alternative 5).
this site as a location that possessed a
unique quality to compliment a
“waterfront” style development. There are
thus no other location alternatives available
to the developer that will fulfill these criteria.
Site location alternatives are thus not
considered.

As the site is limited in size (3,805m2),

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE (ALTERNATIVE 6)
maximum use is proposed for the site for the
project to be financially optimised. Site
layout alternatives are thus limited. Site Proposed Design
layout alternatives have been considered
in the design iterations. Only one feasible
The building would consist of a multi-level
layout is therefore assessed.
structure ranging between two storey (< 8
m) to four storey’s (< 16 m) above natural
Activity and Design Alternatives:
ground level and a basement parking area
During the Scoping Phase a number of
below ground level.
activity alternatives were proposed
including an Industrial development for fish
The proposed development comprises
processing or boat repair and residential
three distinct blocks (North, South-West and
development ranging from four to six
East facing blocks). This design aims to
storeys. As none of these alternatives were
break the bulk effect and the architecture
seen as broadly acceptable for the area
on the town facing façades and to
they were scoped out and will no longer be
respond to the historic fishermen’s cottage
considered.
milieu that once existed in the vicinity. The
harbour facing façade (North block) has a
modern “waterfront” architecture with a
staggered design to reduce the height /
visual effect.

3

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
THREE PROPOSED BLOCKS
The basement parking is proposed to have
capacity for 131 parking bays. Fifty Four
bays would be for the hotel clients, 22 bays
for the Fractional Title Residential
Apartments, and 55 bays for the
commercial sector. The basement would
have an area of 3,659m2, which is
equivalent to the surface area of the
proposed Langezandt Quays
development.
The ground level is proposed to have a
retail component, informal restaurant(s),
hotel apartments and Fractional Title
Residential Apartments. The first level would
have formal restaurants, hotel apartments
and residential apartments. The second
and third level would only have hotel
apartments and residential apartments.
The first and second level would
furthermore have courtyards in the centre
of the development creating a more open
effect.
3D RENDER DEPICTING PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
4
Identified Impacts
The Scoping Phase of this process identified
several operational and construction phase
impacts that were proposed to be assessed
in the EIA Phase, which are as follows:
Operational Phase Impacts:
o Impact on municipal services;
o Impact on traffic flow and parking;
o Access to harbour;
o Competition and opportunities for other
businesses and activities;
o Impact on character of Struisbaai and
harbour;
o Impact of fisherfolk on development;
o Impact of development on fisherfolk;
o Impact on property values;
o Impact on dune processes;
o Impact on fauna and flora in adjacent
dune area; and
o Impact of the surrounding environment
on the development.
Construction Phase Impact:
o Impact on municipal services;
o Traffic, particularly heavy construction
vehicles;
o Noise disturbance to surrounding land
users;
o Vibration should there be rock;
o Windblown dust from construction site;
o Litter/ waste pollution;
o Environmental damage due to
hydrocarbon spillage;
o Visual blight;
o Impact on safety and security;
o Impact on fauna and flora;
o Job creation; and
o Skills development.
Specialists were consulted on the impacts
listed above and consequently Aurecon
(the Environmental Assessment Practitioner)
have collated and processed the
information by undertaking an assessment
of each impact. The methodology utilised is
further detailed below.
 Public Participation Process
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The public participation process forms an
integral component of the EIA process. The
process to date has involved the following
aspects described below:
• A number of adverts were placed in
both national and local newspapers
advertising the various EIA phases.
• The local newspaper adverts in August
2007 advertised the commencement of
the EIA process. The advertisements
served to advertise the initiation of the
study and invited Interested and
Affected Parties (I&APs) to register and
provide comment as well as to attend
an Open House session to discuss the
proposed development.
• The Background Information Document
(BID) was distributed to identified I&APs
on the 24 August 2007, inviting them to
raise any issues or concerns and to
indicate any other potential I&APs that
should be contacted.
• The draft Scoping Report (DSR) was
lodged in the Struisbaai North Library,
Cape Agulhas Municipality and on the
Environmental Assessment Practitioner’s
(EAP’s) website.
• The reports were made available for
public review and comment from 10
December 2007 to 10 February 2008.
• I&APs were invited on 24 April 2008 to
comment on the final Scoping Report
lodged in the various locations
mentioned above.
• A letter was then distributed to all
registered I&AP’s informing them of the
submission of the Final Scoping Report
(FSR) to DEA&DP on 25 July 2008.
• I&APS were invited to an Open House
session on 18 December 2008 in the
Struisbaai North Library to consider
another alternative and updated Plan of
Study for EIA, that of the proposed
development (Alternative 6).
5
Methodology & Assessment
The methodology applied during this EIA
process is broadly consistent with
Regulation 385 of NEMA and with DEAT’s
Guideline Document on the EIA Regulations
(1998). The methodology was outlined in
the Plan of Study for EIA. Using a tabulated
rating system, each impact is described
according to its extent (spatial scale),
magnitude (size or degree scale) and
duration (time scale). These criteria are
used to ascertain the significance of the
impact, firstly in the case of no mitigation
and then with the most effective mitigation
measures in place. Once the significance
of an impact has been determined, the
probability of this impact occurring as well
as the confidence in the assessment of the
impact is determined. Lastly, the
reversibility of the impact is estimated.
Challenges faced during the application of
the methodology as described relate to the
subjectivity in assigning significance to an
impact.
Key indicating the colour coding for the
significance of the various impacts
High negative Red
Medium negative Orange
Low negative Yellow
Very Low negative Green
Neutral / NA Not shaded
Very Low Positive impact Blue
Low Positive impact Turquoise
Medium positive impact Rose
High Positive impact Pink
In recognising the extent of the information
available at this stage of the project, the
confidence in the environmental
assessment undertaken is regarded as
acceptable for making an informed
environmental decision making.

Conclusions
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on the outcome of the EIA Phase the
potential impacts assessed in this report,
provide a comprehensive investigation and
assessment of the environmental issues
raised during the Scoping Phase by I&APs,
commenting authorities and the EIA project
team.
The “no go” option would entail
maintaining the status quo. No further
development would occur on the site and
the current retail and fish processing would
continue. There would be no facilities
developed by the proponent to retain bus
groups and tourists in Struisbaai and the
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA)
would be required to develop facilities for
the harbour at its own cost.
CONCLUSIONS
Operational Phase Impacts
The following impact was assessed to have
the most significant impact with essential
mitigation:
o Visual impact of the developmentFrom a
visual impact perspective it is
paradoxical as it has the potential to be
both a positive as well as a negative
impact, depending on one’s perceived
opinion on the status quo. To elaborate,
6
various I&APs have supported the
proposed development as it would
significantly upgrade the harbour
infrastructure, however many others
value the status quo as a quaint fishing
harbour. As a component of the visual
impact the height of the building has
been assessed using the existing
precedent with Struisbaai and its
surrounds (refer to Annexure O of the
EIR).
Appropriate mitigation measures
(essential/optional) can effectively
reduce the significance of the negative
aspects, however this impact remains
significant.
Other significant impacts include:
o Bulk municipal services (water,
electricity, sewage and stormwater);
o Parking in the harbour area;
o Impact to the character of the harbour;
and
o Impact of the rising sea level.
The impact assessment is undertaken in
chapter 5 and summarised in chapter 6 of
the EIR. Below is a summary table of the
significance and probability of the assessed
impacts associated with the proposed
development.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Construction Phase Impacts
None of the construction phase impacts
were deemed to have a highly significant
impact on the environment, given their
short duration and localised extent. The
most significant potential negative impacts
relevant to the construction of this project
are as follows:
o Traffic, particularly heavy construction
vehicles;
o Noise disturbance to surrounding land
users;
o Dust creation during construction;
o Visual blight; and
o Impact on safety and security.
However, many of the construction phase
impacts are of low significance and a suite
of mitigation measures can be
implemented to avoid and/or minimise
impacts on the biophysical and social
environment.
A Construction Phase Environmental
Management Programme (CEMP) has
been developed to guide the construction
and operational phases respectively. The
implementation of the CEMP would
minimise possible negative impacts on
7
design, construction, operation and assigns
responsibility for environmental controls.
Needs
Needs & Desirability
The proposed development is supported by
the strategic documents such as Cape
Agulhas Municipality Spatial Development
Framework as discussed in section1.4 in the
EIR.
As noted in the impact section the visual
impact remains one of the most
challenging aspects. Considering of the
elements of sustainable development viz.
environmental, social and economic
factors the following should be considered.
The proposed development does not
contravene any of the NEMA sustainability
principles (Refer to Section 6.1.3 of the
DEIR). It is however evident that the
proposed development has the capability
of providing social and economic benefits
in the form of increased tourism to a
destination that appears to lack adequate
hotel accommodation, the increase in
local economy expenditure as well as the
provision of jobs during the construction
and operational phase. This proposed
 development has the potential to
contribute positively to the economy as
well as to build towards a more sustainable
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
tourism sector within Struisbaai.
In terms of the needs and desirability, it is
therefore concluded that despite the visual
impact and height concerns, the
environmental impacts are medium to very
low and the social and economic impacts
are viewed as positive overall. Therefore,
based on the findings of this EIA process
and subject to the consideration of the
acceptability of the visual and height
impacts (to be considered by both local
and provincial government); it is the EAP’s
opinion that the proposed development is
considered to be acceptable from an
environmental perspective if the essential
mitigation measures as proposed per
respective impact are implemented.
Recommendations
With reference to the operational impacts
described above, it can be noted that their
significance levels could generally be
reduced by implementing the identified
essential mitigatory measures as highlighted
in Chapter 5 of the EIA Report.
Although these essential mitigation
measures would not reduce the potential
environmental impacts completely, it is the
opinion of the EAP that these impacts
would not be unacceptably high, except
possibly for the visual impact of the overall
height of the development.
Summary of Essential Mitigation
Measures
Impact on municipal services
Water supply
Essential mitigation measures
8
The impact on the water supply from the
CAM to the proposed development could
be reduced by:
• Contributing the costs of developing the
required water reticulation and borehole
infrastructure.
• Desalinating the water from an existing
borehole that is currently not used due
to the saline quality of the water.
• Reduce the demand for water by using
various water demand management
techniques and design.
Electrical supply
Essential mitigation measures
• Install Solar Hot Water Systems.
• Reduce maximum temperature in hot
water systems to appropriate level.
• Lag all hot water pipes.
• Design buildings to optimize on natural
energy e.g. North Facing & Windows
shaded in summer.
• Ensure that buildings are well insulated.
• Use energy saving technology e.g. LED
or CFL bulbs.
Sewage management
Essential mitigation measures
• Encourage staff and guests not to
dispose of hazardous chemicals or solid
waste into sewage system.
• Reduce the amount of water wasted.
• The development should make provision
for the installation and maintenance of
a sewage pump on the premises.
Stormwater management
Essential mitigation measures
• Avoid disposing of hazardous substances
or solid waste into stormwater systems.
• Keeping outside surfaces clear of solid
waste to prevent them from blowing
and/or washing into stormwater systems;
and
• Keep stormwater drains clear of
obstructions.
 Solid waste management
Essential mitigation measures Essential mitigation measures
• Ensure that all solid waste is collected • The traffic management alternative
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

and stored in an appropriate location for (Option 4) should be implemented to

collection and not strewn around; reduce the congestion around the
• Ensure that the waste is disposed of in an harbour entrance, provide formalised
appropriate licensed waste parking for peak periods and multiple
management site; entrances and exits to service the
• Ensure that hazardous chemicals, development.
materials and products are removed by • Access right of way would have to be
a licensed operator and disposed of in obtained across Erf 921.
an appropriate licensed waste • An effective and efficient access road
management site; and to Erf 848 / Erf 921 should be positioned
• Separating waste for recycling by the directly opposite the Harbour Road /
municipality or local service provider. Kusweg North to form a cross roads and
it should include a pedestrian crossing.
Impact on traffic flow and parking • The access roads should be surfaced
Traffic flow (paved or tarred) with a surface width of
Traffic flow in the vicinity of the harbour at least 5.5 metres.
entrance can be improved during peak • Provide alternative access and exit
season by implementing the following routes through the parking area to Erf
measures: 848 to avoid traffic congestion at the
Harbour Road / Kusweg North junction
during peak holiday season.

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OPTION 4

9
 • Provide facilities for busses to drop off
tourists that are not positioned on
Harbour Road and would thus not
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
exacerbate traffic congestion.
Parking utilisation
Parking utilisation in the harbour area can
be improved during peak season by
implementing the following measures:
Essential mitigation measures
• Ensure that there is sufficient parking on
Erf 848 to cater for the parking
requirements of the development.
• Parking bays should have dimensions of
2.5 x 5 metres, with an aisle width of
preferably 7.5 and minimum 7 metres to
optimise space utilisation and to ensure
efficient access.
• Arrangements for loading bays and
refuse collection for the development
should be factored into the final design
drawings.
• Provide parking for staff or arrange
transport
Competition and Opportunities for Other
Businesses and Activities
Impact on Tourism
Essential mitigation measures
• Any outdoor lighting should be directed
downwards, have low power output and
used decoratively.
• Avoid using white for the building and
create a matt texture to further reduce
the lighter colour impact.
Impact on Fishing and Associated Activities
Essential mitigation measures
• Ensure that there is sufficient parking
provided for the proposed development
on the property avoid conflict with the
fisherfolk;
• Access Option 4 should be implemented
to reduce the congestion around the
harbour entrance, provide formalised
parking for peak periods and multiple
10
entrances and exits to service the
development. ;
• An effective and efficient access road
to Erf 848 / Erf 921 should be positioned
directly opposite the Harbour Road /
Kusweg North to form a cross roads and
it should include a pedestrian crossing;
• Provide alternative access and exit
routes through the parking area to Erf
848 to avoid traffic congestion at the
Harbour Road / Kusweg North junction
during peak holiday season; and
• Provide facilities for busses to drop off
tourists that are not positioned on
Harbour Road and would thus not
exacerbate traffic congestion.
Impact on Heritage Resources
Essential mitigation measures
• Incorporate a fish handling facility into
the development.
Impact on Visual Aesthetics
Essential mitigation measures
• Any outdoor lighting should be directed
downwards, have low power output and
used decoratively.
• Avoid using white paint for the building
and create a matt texture to further
reduce the lighter colour impact.
Impact on Character of Harbour Area
Essential mitigation measures
• Create three or more distinct buildings to
break the mass of the development.
• Architecture should allude to the
traditional fishermen’s cottages town
frontages and the more contemporary
horizontal and colourful features facing
the harbour.
• Any outdoor lighting should be directed
downwards, have low power output and
used decoratively.
• Avoid using white paint for the building
and create a matt texture to further
reduce the lighter colour impact.
• Create an atmosphere for the proposed
restaurant that would be situated
adjacent to the servitude, similar to that
 of Pelican’s, that would make people
feel comfortable to have a meal and
socialize while dressed casually.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Provide for businesses which encourage
the fishing activities of the traditional
local fisherfolk as currently practiced.
Impact on Dune Processes, Fauna and Flora
Impact of Building on the Dune Processes
Impact of building on the dune
Essential mitigation measures
• The building must be fragmented to
reduce the eddy effect and vacuum
created on the leeward side of the
building when the westerly winds blow.
• The dune vegetation should not be
disturbed and damaged, thereby
exposing the sand. Hotel guests should
be encouraged to stay on the existing
paths if they walk in the dunes.
Impact on fauna and flora
Essential mitigation measures
o Provide environmental educational
material to guests.
• Minimise the amount of light that is
emitted from the development on the
dunes, by using low intensity lights that
are appropriately shielded.
Impact of the Environment on the Proposed
Development
Impact of rising sea level
Essential mitigation measures
• Design the proposed development with
the floor height taking a sea rise of
greater than 0.34 m over the next 50
years into consideration.
• Build a low re-curve wall around the
development to reduce the effect of
wave run-up.
• Emergency exits and Evacuation plans
must be designed and implemented to
allow for safe exit in the event of
significant storm surges.
11
Impact of Water Table
Essential mitigation measures
• Design the basement level adequately
to keep water out should the water
table rise.
• Ensure that the water extraction system is
adequately designed, implemented
and maintained.
Impact of Harbour Activities
Essential mitigation measures
• Design the building to minimise noise
transfer into the building e.g. double
glazing of windows, angle and design of
entrances.
• Note in the deed of sale the particular
environment the owner is entering into
and that harbour noise is to be
expected. Hotel guests should be
similarly informed.
Way Forward
The next stage of this EIA process involves
lodging the draft Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for public review and
comment. The opportunities for public
involvement are as follows:
o Commenting on the Draft EIR, which will
be lodged at the Struisbaai North library,
the Cape Agulhas municipal office in
Bredasdorp, Cape Town Public Library,
Johannesburg Public Library as well as
on the Aurecon website
(www.aurecongroup.com) (Public
Participation link);
o The public will have until 11 November
2009 to submit written comment on the
Draft EIA Report to Aurecon;
o A Open House session will take place on
the 30 October 2009 as well as a Public
Meeting on the 31 October 2009; and
o All registered I&APs will have been
notified of the availability of the draft EIA
Report by means of a letter which
includes a copy of this draft EIA Report
Executive Summary.
 The EIR will be revised on the basis of the
I&AP comment as appropriate. All
comments received will be included in the
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

documentation. The final EIA Report will

then be made available to I&APs for an
additional 21 day comment period. Upon
completion of this comment period, any
additional comments received would be
attached to the Final EIA Report and
submitted to D: EA&DP for review and
decision making. Their decision will be
documented in an Environmental
Authorisation Decision and registered I&APs
will be notified of the decision and their
opportunity to appeal the decision to the
Provincial MEC in terms of the National
Environmental Management Act.
I:\ENV\PROJECTS\401807~Struisbaai\EIA\Draft EIR\Executive Summary\New
06102009\English Executive Summary draft EIR ~ FINAL.doc

Please review this Executive Summary and

preferably the full draft Environmental Impact
Report, and submit your comments on the
proposed project by 17 November 2009. All
EIA documents will also be available on the
Aurecon website: www.aurecongroup.com

CONTACT DETAILS

Simon Van Wyk and John Foord

Aurecon
P O Box 494 Cape Town, 8000
Tel: (021) 481 2400
Fax: (021) 424 5588
Email: Simon.VanWyk@af.aurecongroup.com or
John.Foord@af.aurecongroup.com

12