Case Decision - 197734

SAHRA would like to thank you for submitting the Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) for the proposed Small Bay Seawall Upgrade and Area Rehabilitation Project, Blaaubergstrand, Cape Town. 
The NID has already been reviewed by Heritage Western Cape (HWC) who are the relevant heritage authority for terrestrial heritage. However, in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, No 25 of 1999 (NHRA), Sections 2 and 35 stipulates that any wreck, being any vessel or aircraft or any part thereof older than 60 years old lying in South Africa's territorial waters or maritime cultural zone is protected and falls under the jurisdiction of SAHRA's Maritime and Underwater Cultural Heritage Unit. SAHRA has been asked to comment on the possible disturbance of any maritime heritage during the upgrading particularly in respect to the repairs to the existing seawall which has deteriorated to such an extent that it has to be re-constructed.  
The key components of the project are repairs and refurbishment to the existing seawall, sewer and roadway which have all deteriorated. The existing footprint and configuration of the re-constructed infrastructure/components are similar to the existing (like-for-like) though there are minor changes to the re-constructed infrastructure. 
The seawall that lies behind the beach and in front of the adjacent streets needs urgent repairs and upgrades. The design for these repairs shows that there will be little change when it comes to the location, orientation, footprint, structure type (gravity block wall), and structure height. There will be minor changes in the structural design (e.g. anchoring of block wall to bedrock) as well as a handrail for public safety. 
With regard to maritime and underwater cultural heritage, Table Bay and Blaauberg have a strong history of recorded wrecking incidents, though there are no known wrecks in the vicinity of the proposed project. As the proposed work is to be undertaken in an area that has already been highly disturbed SAHRA considers the likelihood of uncovering heritage resources to be very low. 
It has been recommended in the NID that an Environmental Management Programme (EMPR) will be included with the construction tender to mitigate any environmental or heritage impacts.
It is further recommended that archaeological monitoring be implemented in the EMPr with specific instructions to the EP in order to facilitate the mitigation of heritage resources accidentally impacted, should it be necessary to mitigate. These include:

Should concentrations of shell be observed that work in that area cease until it can be inspected (Metro office archaeologists can assist to identify whether occurrence is natural or cultural), and HWC must advise as to the mitigation process.
Should any human remains be disturbed, work in the area must cease immediately and the site secured. SAPS and HWC must be notified immediately in order to confirm whether the remains are recent or archaeological. If the remains are recent, SAPS processes will be followed. Should the remains be archaeological, HWC must advise on the mitigation process. 

SAHRA supports these recommendations but would like to add that should any shipwreck material be uncovered during the work that work must cease immediately and SAHRA must be informed of its discovery without delay. In this event, work may not commence until feedback has been received from SAHRA. 
If cultural heritage material is discovered in the development area and is at risk of damage or disturbance as the result of the associated works, a permit shall be required in order for the works to continue. SAHRA may impose no-go zones for development on the basis of the presence of cultural heritage material.