Introduction

[For the full 150-page document: http://tinyurl.com/u32p653k]

1. An Environmental Impact Assessment Report was submitted by PR Capital Ltd (thereafter referred to as the Promoter) on 31 August 2023 on a proposed Smart City Development Project at Roches Noires over an area of approximately 358 Ha.[1]

1.2 The EIA Report describes the Roches Noires Smart City thus (thereafter referred to as RNSC): “The master plan for the whole RNSC occupies an area of approximately 358 Ha located in the currently undeveloped land adjacent to the coastal residential zone and the village of Roches Noires.
The RNSC project is planned to be implemented over a 10-year (2032) phased development program which will reflect market demand and construction requirements under the Smart City Scheme (thereafter referred to as SCS). It is aimed at establishing a new residential and economic centre for the northeast of the island and integrating the environment / existing landscaping into the development to create a lifestyle living / Communal Living Space centred around the unique landscape scenery of Roches Noire.” (Non Technical Summary).

1.3       It is recalled that PML have sent concerns and objections to the previous EIA. We now have a second one for the entire RNSC which includes fresh information. We are somewhat comforted that this EIA was mandated by the Ministry of Environment because of the “sensitivity” of the site.  We note that the requirements to submit an EIA as per the Environment Protection Act have been strengthened as regards climate change related risks and mitigation measures (adaptation and mitigation) See Box 1at the end of this section.

1.4       Despite this heightened sensitivity, the EIA report failed to carry out and extend their baseline data acquisition to remedy to gaps that they themselves admitted in the first EIA report submitted.  First among equals, the Promoters and their Consultants failed to recognise that the Site is a forest land and that their project as elaborated in the masterplan will result in a major deforestation with more than 90 percent of the land will require clearing to accommodate the project.  How could this project be sustainable? This clearly shows that the statements made in the EIA such as sustainability, sustainable, sustainability and their likes are mere rhetoric.

1.5       Despite the opportunity provided by the Authorities to remedy their project by allowing them to review their masterplan given the site sensitivity, yet the Promoters’ insistence with the same masterplan and their failure to recognise the uniqueness of the Site is simply appalling. It is evident that ecological and environmental considerations of the Site are stranger to the intention of the Promoters, which is  clearly stated under the ‘ Do nothing’ Option:

20.1 ‘Do Nothing’ Option

“The ‘Do Nothing’ option would involve no development on the selected land. However, this option is not justified as the RNSC project is directly in line with the Smart City Scheme regulations 2015 and is located within the Eastern Development Tourism Zone. The ‘Do Nothing’ option will also affect the economic health of PR CAPITAL, thus not envisaged. Land is under receivership and as such the bank require investment on the land to recoup the funds.”

1.6 PML is submitted detailed comments as exhaustive as possible on the EIA report. Based on information disclosed in the EIA report as well as other relevant sources of information, PML concludes that the EIA report is severely flawed and does not conform to the requirements of EPA (2002) as subsequently amended.

1.7 PML reminds that the Roches Noires Site has been the object of at least three proposed extensive Development Projects since 2006 and all have failed to materialise.  The proposed RSNC is the fourth of its kind.

1.8 We express our concern over the fact that the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) has been amended in 2020 to bar any person from appealing to the Environment and Land Use Tribunal (ELUAT) against a decision regarding the issue of an EIA Licence if they have not submitted a Statement of Concern in response to a notice published under Section 20 of the EPA (S. 54 EPA). We contend that this is a curtailment of constitutional rights of Mauritians to seek redress before the judiciary.

1.9 The Ministry of Environment has been informed that thereis  a missing report pertaining to hydrogeological conditions in Chapter 11 Geotechnical Investigation of the EIA report accessed through the e-licensing platform of the EDB on 4 October 2023 as stated in the said report. The MoE has confirmed the absence of this report and has informed us that a copy of the missing report will be sent to us as soon as it is received from the Consultants, and this report will also be made public. As at Saturday 11 November 2023, the said report has not been made public.
We reserve the right to send additional comments after the deadline for submission of comments after the report is made available to us.

1.10 The EDB, in its Letter of Comfort for the RNSC, requires the Promoter to “protect all native species such as Bois D’Olive, Bois D’Ebene blanc, Bois d’Ebene Marbré amongst others and the habitat to several native fauna species to the satisfaction of the Forestry Services.” The EDB fails to recognize that the Site is a coastal forest land and contains what could be well the last remaining and best relic coastal forest in Mauritius.

1.11 This Project if implemented will be a major deforestation project with more than 90 percent of the land being cleared for the  RNSC Project which includes the construction of a 40-villa hotel, a mixed-use commercial cluster (office, retail), a research and development cluster, 1,700 residential units, a plant nursery, a professional training academy, sports centre, 2 golf courses (9-hole and 18-hole) cannot be reconciled.

1.12 Although there are several documented wetlands on the RNSC site, it is worthy of note that the EDB did not see it fit to include the issuance of a Ramsar Clearance as a condition to the issuance of a Smart City Certificate.

1.13 Furthermore, EDB cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Roche Noires region has several caves of importance in the vicinity of the RSNC Site and fails even to request a study on the presence/absence of caves within the RSNC Site as a condition of the Letter of Comfort. On the other hand, it is revealing that the EIA report fails to show explicitly all environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) not only within but in close vicinity of the Project Site, as requiredby EPA (2002) as subsequently amended.

1.14 Untested Government Policy for Roches Noires Smart City. Although there is an existing government policy for Smart City development under the Smart City Scheme, this policy is being severely tested with the RNSC through environmental, social and ecological constraints not having been evaluated as part of the policy formulation. The Smart City policy has not been the object of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) that would have recommended the most appropriate type of development that meets the environmental, social and economic objectives of the Site and its surroundings. Additionally, Azuri PDS, which is undertaking real estate cum Golf course development over 200 hectares, lies within a 2.5 km radius of RNSC. RNSC on its part proposes to develop a Resort Hotel, an extensive high density and low density residential development and two (2) Golf courses over 350 hectares. Yet, the zone has not been the object of a SEA.

1.15           We request that all additional information, including reports, pertinent to this EIA application be made public when they are received and a public notice published informing of same.

1.16           We again submit that the period of 21 days allowed to the public to send comments to EIA Reports is not only too short but also a severe constraint on the ability of citizens to exercise their right to participate actively in the development of the country.

1.17           We note that the request of NGOs (joint email sent on 9 October 2023) to the Minister to extend the deadline to eight weeks in an email to the MoE was not acceded to as the Minister extended the deadline to six weeks and not eight; this has imposed a heavy burden on the NGOs with the consequence that the comments do not cover all aspects of the report.

1.18           This report is organised as follows:

We provide our comments by each chapter/section of the EIA Report. The constraints of time preclude us from consolidating our individual comments, which do complement each other and we incorporate those of other experts consulted. The separate expert comments are in the annex. In our conclusion in each comment chapter, we succinctly summarise the grounds on which we object under each of the requirements of part IV of the EPA (2002) as subsequently amended. We also point to alternatives for the site which would better facilitate the implementation of plans and achievements of key national targets regarding interlocking climate, biodiversity and disaster risk reduction and management agendas.  

For the full 150-page document: http://tinyurl.com/u32p653k

---

[1] EDB website accessed 4 October 2023 https://tinyurl.com/2af87kpy