Chapt 6 - Mauritius Wind Speed

Extension and Strengthening of the MCT Quay
at Port Louis Harbour EIA Report

6-1

6 BASELINE ENVIRONMENT
6.1 General Climatic Conditions
Mauritius has a moderate tropical climate characterized by a hot, humid summer between
November and April (average mid-day temperature 25C on the Central Plateau and 30C on
the coast), followed by cooler and drier winter period (19C and 24C respectively). Seasonal
rainfall patterns are distinct, with about 50% of the annual rainfall (average 1,200 mm)
occurring between J anuary and March, and often little or no rainfall during November to
December.

6.1.1 Wind Regime
Mauritius is situated in the equator-ward belt of the southern sub-tropical anticyclone system.
Atmospheric pressures at the surface increase southward in this belt, creating a gradient,
which maintains a general easterly flow.

The prevailing wind pattern in Mauritius is the South Eastern trade winds, except for short
periods in the summer months when tropical storms approach the island. The trade winds
are stronger and more persistent in winter when strong anticyclones pass to the South and
close to the island. In the area of Port Louis, the wind pattern is modified by the arc of
mountains lying on the eastern side of Port Louis as shown in Figure 12 below (source:
Mauritius Meteorological Station).


6-2

Figure 12: Wind Rose for Fort William (2006-2007)

The strongest gusts recorded instrumentally in Mauritius have been of 280 kilometres per
hour (Feb 1975) and records of gusts of over 250 km per hour have been made in earlier
cyclones.

The values for 3 second gusts proposed by the Mauritius Meteorological Service in a paper
dated May 1994 is as follows:
Return Period of 50 years : 240 km/hr (67 m/s)
Return Period of 100 years : 280 km/hr (76 m/s)

The Mauritius Ports Authority and other authorities have recommended the use of a basic
wind speed of 300 km/hr (83 m/s) for recent projects.


6-3

6.1.2 Temperature
Mean maximum and mean minimum monthly temperatures for the western region, i.e.
Medine meteorological station are reported in Table 5 below (CSO/MMS, 1991-2000).

Mean minimum temperatures are recorded during the winter season in J uly and August.
Mean maximum temperatures are recorded during the summer season from December to
March.

The design temperatures extremes are 38C max and 10C minimum.

Seasonal temperature variations should cause no effect to and from the proposed project
due to the type of activity involved.

MONTH MEAN MAX TEMP
(C)
MEAN MIN TEMP (C)
January 30.4 22.5
February 30.3 22.7
March 30.2 22.3
April 29.5 21.3
May 28.1 19.5
June 26.4 17.7
July 25.8 17.0
August 25.9 17.0
September 26.7 17.5
October 27.8 18.6
November 29.1 20.0
December 30.0 21.9

Table 5: Temperatures records Medine

6.1.3 Rainfall
6.1.4 Rainfall Regime
The comparative low annual rainfall for Port Louis and the western coast in general arises
from the prevailing pattern of the south eastern trade winds.

6-4

These winds rise over the island and cause precipitation mainly on the higher Central
Plateau and its eastern slopes. When the winds reach the lower regions, and the north
western coast, they have already dropped most of their moisture.

Average monthly rainfall for the western region, i.e. Medine meteorological station is reported
in Table 6 below (CSO/MMS, 1991-2000).

The months from J uly to November are the driest months. December to March figures are
above 100mm monthly rainfall.

Seasonal rain variations should cause no effect to and from the proposed project due to the
type of activity and to the small extent of site involved.

MONTH AVERAGE
RAINFALL (MM)
NO. DAY WITH
RAINFALL >5MM
January 153.2 9
February 181.8 10
March 86.2 8
April 87.6 8
May 42.7 5
June 29.0 4
July 15.4 3
August 14.8 3
September 12.5 2
October 16.5 2
November 25.7 3
December 115.6 7
TOTAL 781

Table 6: Mean monthly rainfall Medine


6-5

6.1.5 Cyclones and Natural Catastrophes
6.1.5.1 Cyclones

Mauritius is subjected to possible seasonal tropical cyclones in the months of December to
March/April. Cyclones are characterised by low pressure conditions and high wind systems.
From records available at the Mauritius Meteorological Services, over the period 1960-70,
39% of cyclones were classified as Weak, 42% as Moderate and 19% as Strong with
gust speeds over 80km/h.

Mauritius has been visited by major cyclones on an average frequency of one in about 15
years. However, it should not be thought that there is a regular succession of cyclones
occurring once every fifteen years. There is considerable irregularity in their occurrence.

Since cyclone Dina in 2001, Mauritius has not been subject to strong cyclones.

6.1.5.2 Natural Catastrophes

Seismic Activity in the Project Area
Mauritius is part of the Mascarene Islands which were formed in a series of volcanic
eruptions 8 million years ago, as the African tectonic place drifted over the Reunion hotspot.
Mauritius is no longer volcanically active, however the neighbouring island of Reunion still
has active volcanoes. The most recent activity was an earthquake in 2010 measuring 6.2 on
the Richter scale with the epicentre 902km east-northeast of Port Louis. The Uniform
Building Code (UBC) defines Mauritius as Zone 0, therefore it is not considered critical to the
design.

Risks of Tsunami
Mauritius was not affected by the Tsunami in December 2004, however the island may be
subject to a tsunami and an observatory for the same has been established in Mauritius.

Elevations in sea levels which have been recorded from North to East of the island have not
exceeded 2.0m following the 2004 tsunami.


6-6

Sea level rise
Sea level rise is predicted by the Proudman Institute at 5mm per year for the next 50 years to
100 years.

Elevations in sea levels caused by cyclones do not exceeded 2.0m as explained below,
however high wind systems over the sea can contribute to formation of occasional waves
exceeding this value.

In the event of a cyclone occurring in a period of High Springs tides, the total rise in sea level
would be, at least:

Sea level rise due to Inverse Barometric Effect: 0.80m re MSL.
Sea Level rise under high Springs: 0.30m re MSL.
Total possible sea level rise1.10m re MSL

To the Inverse Barometric Effect concurrent with high Springs, a piling up of water at the
shore line due to wind and wave effects and the prevailing tidal influence, must also be
expected. Thus, the swash line will reach rather high up the beach: ~1.97m above MSL
which has been observed in some areas along the coast.

6.2 Site and Project Area
6.2.1 Description of Site
The site of the Mauritius Container Terminal (MCT) is located in Mer Rouge at Port Louis.

The Port Louis Harbour is the sole maritime gateway of Mauritius which provides terminal
facilities and services to both international and inter-island shipping. It is located in a natural
protected bay on the North West coast of the island and covers an area of about 300
hectares as shown on Figure 2: Project Location.

The MCT comprises a modern Container terminal of approximately 27 hectares with a 560
metre long quay equipped with 5 post panamax Rail Mounted Quay Cranes (RMQCs)
including a Container Park spanning over 13 ha. The MCT also involved the creation of an
independent access channel 400 metres wide with a turning circle of 425 metres diameter at
a dredged depth of 14 metres.

6-7

Other facilities include a Customs Verification Centre, a Workshop Complex, an
Administration Building and unpaved areas reserved for future yard expansion.

Mer Rouge Port area also accommodates the Mauritius Freeport Development Co Ltd, the
Petroleum jetty, the LPG storage facilities and coal storage area.

The Maintenance dredging area is located in the channel facing Quay 1. This area also
comprises the shipyard/dry docks, the tank farm/open bulk storage, Fort George and the
chemical fertilizer compound. The Bulk Sugar Terminal is located on the western side of the
channel.

Land in the port area is under the control of the Mauritius Ports Authority and access to the
port area is restricted to authorised personnel and visitors with valid passes.

6.2.2 Project Area
The Project area comprises land within 1,000 m of the site boundaries, which is the extent of
the area commonly considered in Environmental Impact Assessment studies in Mauritius.

The Area of Environmental Influence for this project is considered to be much smaller than
the project area and can be reduced to 500 m from the site boundary.

The Project Area and Area of Environmental Influence are shown in Figure 13 below and
referenced as Drawing No. 10/149/L1 in the Drawing Section of the EIA report.


6-8

Figure 13: Project Area and Area of Environmental Influence

The Project area as indicated on Figure 13 includes the following main man-made features:

Residential Areas
o To the north east: Tombeau Bay
o To the south east: Roche Bois
o To the south west: Les Salines

Port Activities
o From east to south all other sectors of the Port

Project Area (1000m
Area of Environmental
Influence (500mradius)

6-9

The Project area as indicated on the Location Plan includes the following main natural water
features:

Port Louis Harbour and further west the open sea
Rivulet Terre Rouge estuary: 515m from the existing quay
Latanier River and La Paix are located outside the project area at some 1.4kms

The Fort William area is located on the southern side of the main navigation channel into Port
Louis harbour.

The main existing installations in Fort William are:

the Bulk Sugar Terminal
the National Coast Guards headquarters
the new fish auction market
two storage tanks for heavy fuel oil

Photographs of site and study area are shown in Appendix A.

6.3 Site Topography & Bathymetry
6.3.1 Site Topography
Land in and around the project area of Mer Rouge has been modified extensively over the
years from the first reclamations to the more recent work carried out to form the Mauritius
Container Terminal.

A topographic survey was carried out in November 2011 by Servansingh J adav and Partners
Consulting Engineers Ltd and is shown in Figure 14 below and referenced as Drawing No.
DD-YD-304 in the Drawing Section of the EIA report.

The landform of the project area consists of flat land bordering the harbour and lying between
1.4 and 2.5 m ACD in altitude. The existing MCT quay is at 2.6m ACD.

Land in and around the project area of Fort William has also been modified; it comprises
about 32.5 hectares of land, including a land area of about 15 hectares which has been

6-10

reclaimed over the last decade. Substantial land filling has taken place with dredged material
from the deepening of the navigational channel to the Mauritius Container Terminal. Some
500,000 cum of dredged material is still stockpiled there pending its use for proposed further
reclamation works in that area.
Offshore of the Fort William area there are extensive shallow areas which will allow
reclamation of additional prime port land. The water averages about 1.5 meters depth for a
distance of approximately 650 to 800 meters from the shore before dropping off to a 5 to 10
meter depth.

Figure 14: Topographic Map


6-11

6.3.2 Site Bathymetry
The latest bathymetric survey of Mauritius Container Terminal commissioned by the
Mauritius Ports Authority was carried out in November 2006 by the Netherlands-based
company Royal Boskalis Westminster N.V.
The bathymetric plan is shown on Figures 15 and 16 below and referenced Drawings No.
BKI-480-10000-06-11-144 and BKI-480-10000-06-11-145 in the Drawing Section of the EIA
report.
The bathymetric survey shows that the sea bed is currently dredged to a level of -14.5m CD
with a large, naturally occurring pocket in excess of -16.5m CD which shall remain as is.

Figure 15: Bathymetric Map Channel (Sheet 1 of 2)


6-12

Figure 16: Bathymetric Map - MCT (sheet 2 of 2)

6.4 Site Geomorphology
6.4.1 Site Geology and Pedology
The geology of Mauritius is dominated mostly by deposits of basaltic lavas following volcanic
activities which occurred during two distinct periods. The general series of basaltic rocks are
as described in Table 7 below.

LAVA SERIES AGE (MILLION YEARS BC.)
Younger Volcanic
Series
Late Lavas
Intermediate Lavas
Early Lavas
0.025 to 0.2
0.5 to 0.7
1.7 to 3.5
Older Volcanic Series 6.8 to 7.8

Table 7: Volcanic Series

The extract of the Land Resource and Suitability Map, FAO/MSIRI relevant to the Project
Area is reproduced in Figure 17 below.


6-13

Figure 17: Geological Map - Land Resource and Suitability Map

The comparison between the above geological map and the aerial picture shown on Figure 2
shows clearly that:
The area of the Mauritius Container Terminal has been reclaimed over Mer Rouge up
to Fort George and Tonneliers Island which are classified as a Sand Beaches and
Dunes land complex (land unit mapping symbol 13.1),
The area of Fort William has undergone extensive reclamation also

Major reclamation works were carried out in 1990, whereby some 110 ha of land were
reclaimed in the Mer Rouge area.

Based on the geotechnical report entitled Geotechnical Investigations in Mer Rouge Area for
the Construction of an Oil J etty and Extension of Existing Container Terminal at Mauritius by

6-14

Aqualia Ltd, the geological units encountered in the available boreholes and cone penetration
test can be generalized as follows:

Fill material made up of dredged coral sand and fragments;
Marine deposits consisting of very loose to loose sand, soft clayey silt, coral
fragments and shells (Delatic / Esturine);
Medium dense sand and/ or firm to stiff silt/clay;
Cemented coral sand and shells, calcarenite and calcareous silt/clay (Buried Reef); or
Highly weathered to fresh vesicular and compact basalt.

The stratigraphy of the project can generally be described as a Pleistocine sequence of
basalt overlain by a variable thickness of weathered basalt, sand coral, fossileferous
limestone (cemented coral & shell), calcarenite and calcareous silts or clays.

The current nominal finished landside level is around +2m to +3m ACD based on the land
boreholes.

6.4.2 Site Geotechnical Conditions
The land area has been reclaimed by the placement of 5 to 6m of dredged sand and coral
debris (fill) from the nearby channel area.

The seabed level in front of the berth is generally at an average of -11m to -15m CD.
Underneath this fill layer is a bed (approximately 20-50m thick) of very loose to loose sand,
soft marine soils (silt, clay & sand) and coral layers.

The bores in the report by Aqualia Ltd also identified a bedrock unit which is comprised of
vesicular closely jointed basalt and compacted basalt underlies the port area with a varying
elevation of -12m to -62.5m ACD.

A summary of the geotechnical conditions gathered during previous geotechnical studies is
provided in Table 8 below.


6-15

TOP ELEVATION
(m CD)
DESCRIPTION
sat
(kN/m
3
)
c
0 Fill 17 0 30
-13.5 Natural Deposits 18 0 33

Table 8: Soil Properties for Container Terminal

Notes:
sat =Soil saturated unit weight
c =drained cohesion
=drained effective friction angle

6.4.3 Site Hydrogeology and Hydrology
6.4.3.1 Site Hydrogeology

The hydrogeology of a site pertains to the underground water features.

As per the Hydrology Data Book (2000 2005), the project area lies within the coastal area
of sea water intrusion, outside aquifer V of the Northern Plains for Mer Rouge area and
aquifer II of Phoenix/Beau-Bassin: Albion-Moka/Coromandel for Fort William area.

6.4.3.2 Site Hydrology

The hydrology of a site pertains to the surface water features.

As per the Hydrology Data Book (2000 2005), the project area lies within the catchment
area of Port Louis (catchment XY) of an extent of 51km as shown in Figure 18 below.

6-16

Figure 18: Port Louis Catchment Area

There is no information specific of this catchment area in the documentation.
Rivers flowing in the project area have been identified as follows:
South of the project site: Lataniers River and the Old Moat flowing to Trou Fanfaron
basin. These water features are located 1.4km from the MCT quay and will not be
affected by the development
North of the project site: Rivulet Terre Rouge. The rivulet proper is located 1.3km
from the MCT quay and will not be affected by the development
Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary which is the interface between fresh and sea water is
located some 600m from the MCT quay. The likelihood of any impact from the project
on the estuary is assessed further in the report.

6.5 Baseline Data on Terrestrial Environment
6.5.1 Introduction
Land in the Port Area is extremely scarce and has been fully optimised; Mer Rouge area
mostly consists of reclaimed land and most of it has either been developed or earmarked for

6-17

port related installations, e.g. Mauritius Container Terminal, Mauritius Freeport Development
Co Ltd, the Petroleum jetty, the LPG storage facilities and coal storage area.

The terrestrial biodiversity in the core project area, i.e. 500m radius from the project site is
thus limited.

The outer project area, i.e. between 500m to 1000m radius from the project site, includes the
declared Environmental Sensitive Areas of (i) Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary and (ii) Wetland
No 87 at Fort William, as furthermore developed in the next sections.

The area to be covered by the hardstand extension is currently covered with alien vegetation
and is deprived of any specific habitats and biodiversity.

An Ecological Survey was carried out for the purpose of the present EIA in the environmental
sensitive areas, results of which are presented below.

Aerial identification of zones and vegetation types was carried out with the help of Google
Earth Satellite Photographs. Ground surveys were also performed to identify the flora and
fauna present and to locate all native plants present. Available data on (i) Bird Count and (ii)
Fauna & flora in the RAMSAR site which were obtained from the Ministry of Agro-Industry
and Food Security was reviewed.

6.5.2 Classified Environmental Sensitive Areas
According to the Environmental Sensitive Areas Classification Report (ESA Report) of the
Ministry of Environment & NDU (2009), there are two wetlands systems - being coastal
freshwater and upland marsh systems - in the project area as shown in Figure 19 below,
namely:

Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary Bird Sanctuary (wetland No. 178)
Fort William marsh (wetland No. 87) which is classified as an isolated marsh with
nearest neighbour at 2,521m.


6-18

Figure 19: Wetland Systems (ESA Report)

6.5.3 Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary Bird Sanctuary
The Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary Bird Sanctuary (RTREBS), classified as a RAMSAR Site, is
situated at Mer Rouge near the village of Roche Bois and is only 2 km from the city centre of
Port Louis; Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary is one of the largest estuaries found in Mauritius

Its main characteristics as a coastal/marine wetland are:

Intertidal mud/ sand flats
Permanent shallow marine waters in most cases less than six metres deep at low
tide;
Estuarine system and waters; permanent water of estuaries

The sanctuary occupies an area of about 26 ha but does not occupy the whole of the
estuary. Its boundary is shown in Figure 20 below.

178
87

6-19

The Rivulet Terre Rouge buffer zone includes stretches of sandy areas surrounding the
wetland encompassing the foot trail to the mudflat and the mouth of the river entering the
sea.

Figure 20: RTEBS Site Location and Boundary Outline (in red)

It is unique on the island in the sense that it is an important wintering ground and refuge for
hundreds of migratory birds which escape the rigorous winter prevailing in the northern
hemisphere. Many of these birds come from Europe, Siberia and the Near East.

The site is important for the following habitats:
Estuarine and shallow marine waters;
Intertidal mud, sand or salt flats;
Three species of endemic plants; and
Fourteen species of regularly visiting migratory birds


6-20

6.5.3.1 Flora

The site is known to harbour several species of flora which are either endemic to Mauritius or
indigenous to the Mascarene. The unique species Sesuvium ayresii (endemic to Mauritius
and Reunion Island) is thriving on the site together with a number of typically marshy plants
of the Cyperaceae family.

Weeding of the site has been undertaken and portions of the sanctuary have been replanted
with coastal indigenous and endemic vegetation. These include Barleria observatrix,
Hyophorbe lagenicaulis, Latania loddigesii,Diospyros egrettarum, Cassine orientalis,
Dracaena concinna and Stadmania oppositifolia.

Unfortunately, though alien invasive species are being removed, many of these plants such
as Tabebuia pallida, Pongamia pinnata, Pithecellobium dulce, Lantana camara and Senna
occidentalis are still found on the site with varying degrees of abundance.

6.5.3.2 Fauna

The estuary seasonally houses migratory birds that fly away from harsh northern winters
from as far off as Siberia to enjoy the warmer temperatures of the island. Birds start arriving
in September/October each year, their numbers reaching a peak in December/J anuary. By
late February/March the birds have returned North.

The site is visited every year by about 1200 birds with 13 regular migrant species and 6 rare
migrants. All the 19 bird species are covered by the Ramsar Agreement.

The list of Migratory Birds and Marsh Birds obtained from the National Parks and
Conservation Services of the Ministry of Agro-Industry and Food Security is reproduced in
Table 9 below:


6-21

COMMON NAME FRENCH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME FAMILY
Migrants
Common Ringed
plover
Charadrius hiaticula Charadriidae
Greater Sandplover Pluvier de Leschenault Charadrius leschenaultii Charadriidae
Grey Plover Pluvier argent Pluvialis squatarola Charadriidae
Crab Plover Pluvier crabier Dromas ardeola Dromadidae
Common Sandpiper Guignette Actitis hypoleucos Scolopacidae
Ruddy Turnstone Tourne Pierre Arenaria interpres Scolopacidae
Sanderling Bcasseau sanderling Calidris alba Scolopacidae
Curlew Sandpiper Bcasseau cocor Calidris ferruginea Scolopacidae
Little Stint Bcasseau Minute Calidris minuta Scolopacidae
Eurasian Curlew Courlis Cendr Numenius arquata Scolopacidae
Whimbrel Courlis
Corlieu/Corbijeau
Numenius phaeopus Scolopacidae
Common
Greenshank
Chevalier Aboyeur Tringa nebularia Scolopacidae
Terek Sandpiper Bargette Cendre Xenus cinereus Scolopacidae
Lesser Crested Tern Sterna bengalensis Sternidae
Common Tern Sterne Pierre Garrin Sterna hirundo Sternidae
Resident
Little Green Heron Gasse Butorides striatus Ardeidae

Table 9: Migratory and Resident Birds found at RTREBS

The estuary is populated with a number of macro organisms like molluscs, crabs, worms and
bivalves upon which the migratory birds feeds.

6.5.3.3 Site Classification

Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary was listed as a Category 1 high priority rating Ramsar Site of
International Importance on 30 September 2001. The Wetland Reserve status was
maintained for protection and conservation reasons.
The site was proclaimed an Environmentally Sensitive Area in the ESA Report (J une 2009)
and approved by Cabinet. The rating was given in Table 10 below.


6-22

ID
LOCATION
PROXIMITY DESIGNATION CATEGORY PI
SCORE
VI
SCORE
PRIORITY
39
Ruisseau
Terre
Rouge
<500 RAMSAR 1 4 16 High

Table 10: ESA Classification

The site covers the whole estuary and includes a portion of the stream almost up to the
bridge on the B29 road as shown in Figure 21 below extracted from the Environmental
Sensitive Areas Classification Report of the Ministry of Environment & NDU (2009).

Figure 21: Wetland No 178 (ESA Report)

RTREBS is located in close proximity to MCT. Various polluting activities such as a solid
waste dump site were operational in the vicinity in the past. These have all been stopped or
removed when the proclamation of the estuary as a wetland reserve and a Ramsar site came
into effect. However, the past activities in the vicinity of the estuary will likely have had an
impact with an accumulation of pollutants in the deposits of the mud flats.

6-23

6.5.4 Fort William Wetland
The location of Wetland No 87 is shown in Figure 22 below extracted from the Environmental
Sensitive Areas Classification Report of the Ministry of Environment & NDU (2009).

Figure 22: Wetland No 87 (ESA Report)

6.5.4.1 July 1997 Observations

The survey carried out by Diospyros Ltd in J uly 1997 showed that the plants found at the site
were Boerhavia coccinea, Atriplez halimus, L. var granulata Chevall, Paspalum distichum,
Phyllanthus tenellus, Sesuvium ayresii,Fimbristylis dichotoma (L) vahl, Cyperus rotondus.
The last three only are native but not threatened and of no significant conservation value at
the site.

An abundance of small fish locally called "million" was also found in the wetland. This is an
exotic fish and of no significance.

There were also some wading birds which can also be found at the other sites such as the
Terre Rouge estuary.

6-24

The assessment of the area in 1997 noted that the site at Fort William had lost its ecological
value. (ref: Gibb, 1997).

6.5.4.2 July 2011 observations

The survey carried out by Diospyros Ltd in J uly 2011 showed that piling up of sand has taken
place in the area and it is difficult to evaluate the degree of disturbance that has taken place
since 1997.

The wetland is at ground level and has an area of about one hectare. A ditch/canal branches
off the existing Canal all the way past the Coast Guards station where it exits to the sea. The
wetland site was dry except for this drainage ditch

It is vegetated with a small area of Typha domingensis (voune), Ipomea pes- caprae, a
variety of grasses and cyperaceae and a few Thespesia popullnea trees. Two native birds
were seen, one gasse or striated heron and one whimbrel.

6.5.4.3 Site Classification

Fort William is classified as a wetland of moderate conservation value (Category II ESA
designation as delimited in the Environmental Sensitive Areas Classification Report of the
Ministry of Environment & NDU (2009).

Given its inland location, wetland No 87 will not be affected by the proposed reclamation at
sea.

6.6 Baseline Data on Marine Environment
6.6.1 Introduction
The marine baseline was gathered from desk review of available data and from specific
surveys carried out for the purposes of the present EIA.


6-25

6.6.2 Wave Data
The wave climate in deep water off Port Louis is relatively quiet, with waves and swells from
open sea occurring approximately 10% of the time.

Offshore waves in the vicinity of Port Louis are predominantly from the west. Extreme wave
conditions are generated by cyclones, the severity of which is dependent upon the path of
the cyclone, the speed with which it moves, the pressure and wind speed.

A table of significant wave events in three-hour storms for inshore and offshore locations
presented by Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners 1993, prepared using MNIMET, is presented in
Table 11 below:

RETURN
PERIOD
(YEARS)
SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT (M) - OFFSHORE
LOCATIONS
SIGNIFICANT WAVE
HEIGHT (M) INSHORE
LOCATIONS
(AT -25M CONTOUR)
SW WSW WNW NW NNW NNE A B C
2

1 5.4 3.5 4.8 5.3 4.2 4.1 4.9 5.1 6.6
10 7.1 4.9 6.7 7.5 5.7 5.5 6.6 7.1 9.9
25 7.8 5.3 7.4 8.3 6.3 6.0 7.3 7.7 11.1
50 8.2 5.7 7.9 8.9 6.7 6.3 7.8 8.1 12.0
100 8.7 6.0 8.4 9.5 7.2 6.7 8.3 8.6 13.2

Table 11: Significant Wave Heights at Port Louis (Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners 1993)

Locations A, B and C are shown in Figure 23 below.

2
Waves from direction between 270 and 308 offshore are heavily focused by caustics near C

6-26

Figure 23: Location of points A, B and C (Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners 1993)

A wave buoy from the MPA recorded wave heights of up to 5.5m during cyclone Daniella at
20m depths. It is understood that, in terms of waves in Port Louis, cyclone Daniella was the
most severe cyclone.

Considering the several studies of waves at Port Louis, the values shown in Table 12 below
are recommended for design of berth structures.

LOCATION SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT Hs (m)
Berthing Structures 5.1
Revetments adjacent to berthing structures 5.1
Reclamation area (north), Fort George 3.4
Reclamation area (south), Fort William 1.0

Table 12: Recommended Design Waves

6.6.3 Tidal Data
The tides in Port Louis Harbour are semi-diurnal and have a range of approximately one
metre between extreme tides. The present day tidal data from Admiralty charts is presented
in Table 13 below:


6-27

TIDE REFERENCE ELEVATION
(m ACD)
Mean High Water Springs MHWS 0.7
Mean High Water Neaps MHWN 0.5
Mean Sea Level MSL 0.44
Mean Low Water Neaps MLWN 0.4
Mean Low Water Springs MLWS 0.2

Table 13: Tidal Levels for Port Louis (Admiralty Tide Tables, Vol2)

6.6.4 Sediment Data
6.6.4.1 Marine Sediment Petrography

Petrographic examination of 5 seabed sediment samples was previously carried out as part
of the investigation for the then proposed New Container Terminal at Mer Rouge. (DDS
Irrigation,1996). All samples appeared to be fine-grained sands with variable amount of
organic carbon present. Samples rich in organic matter are characterized by a dark greenish
colour that is apparently irregular distributed in a light-gray sandy matrix (samples Mauritius-
11, Mauritius-12, Mauritius-22). Samples 6 and 18 appeared to be devoid of organic matter
and are characterized by a light gray to yellowish colour. All samples were found to be
composed of aragonite and Mg-calcite quartz, the feldspar mineral albite and a kaolinite-type
clay mineral were identified in tract amounts in some samples.

The relative weight of the three size fractions obtained by sieving illustrates clearly the
predominance of silt and fine sand as compared to coarse and very coarse sand, granules
and pebbles as summarised in Table 14 below. Four of the five samples are composed of
60-70% of fine sand or silt, and about 30-40% of coarse and medium sand. Coarser material
constitutes less than 1%. Only sample, 6 deviates from this pattern in that it contains less
than 10% of coarse and medium sand, but more than 90% of fine sand and silt. Samples rich
in organic matter contain slightly more coarse material than those devoid of organic matter.


6-28

SAMPLES
NO
C
(sediment size, g,
d>0.833mm)
M
(g, 0.833 mm >d>0.180
mm)
F
(g, d<0.180mm)

granules, very course sand coarse and medium
sand
fine sand-silt
absolute (g) relative (%) absolute (g) relative
(%)
absolute
(g)
relative
(%)
6 0.01 0.1 0.90 9.7 8.37 90.2
11 0.05 0.9 2.21 41.7 3.04 57.4
12 0.06 0.6 3.0 28.2 7.59 71.2
18 0.02 0.2 3.59 37.4 5.99 62.4
22 0.02 0.4 1.77 34.9 3.28 64.7

Table 14: Absolute and relative amounts of size fractions obtained by sieving

All samples can be classified as fine to medium grained marine biogenic carbonate sands. A
log-normal distribution function was applied to fit the sediment sample; a sediment size of
D50 was found to be 0.12mm.

Additional sediments analysis data obtained in 2011 from a dive survey was reviewed (refer
Table 15 below location of sites is shown in Figures 24 and 25). The sites were selected as
part of the marine survey with sites chosen to provide baseline data generally on the area
between Baie de Tombeau and Point Aux Sables with some site situated where proposed
works will be undertaken and others at sites of interest or for future monitoring.

From this review, it can be concluded that:

the sediment size D50 from the 2011 sediment is generally coarser than the above-
mentioned sediment size D50; thus using D50 =0.12mm referred to above and used
for modelling work as part of this EIA is conservative, and
the finest of the 2011 sediment can be found at Site 5, and this material has a D50 =
0.1mm this is very close to the D50=0.12mm referred to above.


6-29

SITE SIEVE SIZE
(MM)
% RETAINED SITE SIEVE SIZE
(MM)
%
RETAINED
1 0.3 - 1.18 85.5 11 0.3 - 1.18 90.9
2 0.3 - 1.18 67.1 12 0.3 - 1.18 76.1
3 0.3 - 1.18 80.8 13 0.3 - 1.18 83.4
4 0.3 - 1.18 57.8 14 0.6 2.36 43
5 0.0075-0.3 46.7 15 25-50 85.4
6 0.3 - 1.18 66 16 0.3 - 1.18 79.3
7 0.15 0.6 97.4 17 0.3 - 1.18 54.1
8 0.3 - 1.18 53.4 18 0.6 2.36 85.1
9 0.15 0.6 91.3 19 0.3 - 1.18 73.9
10 0.6 2.36 82.7 20 0.6 2.36 86.5

Table 15: Sediment Size Characterisation

6-30

Figure 24: Location of Survey Sites 1 to 11 North Port Area


6-31

Figure 25: Location of Survey Sites 12 to 20 South Port Area

6.6.4.2 Marine Sediment Quality

The Terre Rouge Estuary and the nearby marine environment is known to have received a
number of waste water and similar discharges in the past, that may have impacted estuarine
sediments. Potential historical discharges include those from textile and dye industries,
sewage discharges, diffuse agricultural runoff and leachate from a landfill site situated at the
head of the Estuary. Many potential compounds associated with these types of discharges,
such as some heavy metals, biocides and pesticides, are of a persistent nature and can
remain for long periods within marine sediments. If such compounds and chemicals are
present in the areas to be dredged, they may be remobilised during the dredging and the
subsequent land reclamation process and negatively impact water quality, marine ecology
and human health.

No records of baseline marine sediment quality appear to be available for the proposed
dredge area or vicinity.

A marine sediment sampling and sediments analysis program to assess physical and
chemical conditions of the proposed dredge area and assess their suitability for use in the

6-32

land reclamation area, was commissioned by MPA and undertaken by Water Research Co
Ltd in late 2011. The program included:
22 sediment sampling sites within in the area to be dredged in front of MCT;
2 marine sites and 3 land based sites in the Terre Rouge estuary which are not to be
dredged;
10 land based sites in the material at Fort William to be used for the reclamation bund
construction; and
7 marine sites off in the area to be dredged off Quay 1 in Port Louis Harbour.

The test results are presented and assessed in an interpretive report prepared by AECOM
(AECOM, 2012).

Figure 26 below - referenced as Drawings No. DD-SI-033 in the Drawing Section of the EIA
report - shows the marine based sampling locations in front of the MCT, the marine based
sampling location in the estuary and the land based sampling location in the estuary.

Figure 26: Location of Marine and Land based Sediment Sampling (MCT and Estuary)


6-33

Figure 27 below - referenced as Drawings No. DD-SI-034 in the Drawing Section of the EIA
report - shows the marine and land based sampling location at Fort William.

Figure 27: Location of Marine and Land based Sediment Sampling (Fort William)


6-34

Figure 28 below - referenced as Drawing No. DD-SI-035 in the Drawing Section of the EIA
report shows the marine sampling locations off Quay 1.

Figure 28: Location of Marine Sediment Sampling (Quay 1)

The material to be dredged in this project is not being dumped at sea but will be used
beneficially in bunded reclamation areas to create valuable additional port land at Fort
William and Fort George.

As noted in Section 3.3, Mauritius is a signatory to the Nairobi Convention for the Protection
and Management and development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern
African Region, 2010.

In the absence of specific or detailed Mauritian Standards or Guidelines for sediment quality
of dredged material, and to comply with general requirements of the EPA (2002) as outlined
in Section 3.2, the obligations and general assessment guidelines from the London
Convention and Protocol have been used as a guide to assess sediment quality for the

6-35

proposed project component. These guidelines provide direction for dealing with the
dumping of dredged material at sea, as well as specific sediment chemical quality action
levels for dredged material in common use internationally
Results from the sediment quality testing have been compared against appropriate sediment
quality guidelines and standards to assess suitability for the intended beneficial use as
reclaimed land. In this respect the following guidelines for sediment quality have been
referenced:
OSPAR (2000, 2007)
UK CEFAS; and
Dutch (2008)
Ecotoxicological Assessment Criteria (EAC) as proposed by OSPAR (Oslo Paris Convention
for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic) are used for
monitoring of seabed sediments. The EAC provide a range of values for concentration levels
of substances above which concern is expressed. Generally the values given are provisional
and do not have legal significance.

The Dutch (2008) standards have long been internationally recognised for assessing the
chemical quality of dredged material and have, therefore, provided a benchmark against
which to evaluate the sediment quality status of material to be dredged. The UK CEFAS
guidelines have been included to provide an additional measure for compounds not included
in either of the first two guideline documents.

The OSPAR, UK and Dutch guidelines are used for assessing the suitability of dredged
material for unconfined disposal to open waters or a specific beneficial use and are
summarised in Table 16 below. It is noted that not all guidelines or standards exist for the
same substances. Generally, if sediment quality levels are below those indicated for the
lower level, the material is deemed to be suitable for unconfined ocean disposal.

For OSPAR, the lower EAC value is a concentration derived for protection of all marine
species from chronic effects, including the most sensitive species. The upper EAC is defined
as the highest (transient) concentration that is expected not to cause acute toxic effects.

Under the UK Action levels, Level 1 is the contamination level below which there
contaminants are considered to be of no concern and Action Level 2 is the level above which
the materials are considered to be unsuitable for disposal at sea. Where sediment chemical

6-36

quality falls between the two further assessments of risk is required to demonstrate minimal
impact to the environment and human health

Under the Dutch standards the Target Value is the level below which the risks to the
environment are considered to be negligible. The Intervention Level is the level of
contamination above which a serious case of soil contamination exists. If levels for priority
substances within a sample are exceeded, the material of the whole compartment
represented by the sample cannot be dumped at sea and must be stored on land.

Chemical
OSPAR
UK Cefas Guidelines
Dutch Standards
(2009)
EAC
2
Action
Level 1
Action
Level 2
Target
Value
Intervention
Level
Arsenic (mg/kg) 110 20 100 29 29
Cadmium (mg/kg) 0.11 0.4 5 0.8 4
Chromium (mg/kg) 10100 40 400 100 120
Copper (mg/kg) 550 40 400 36 60
Lead (mg/kg) 550 50 500 85 110
Mercury (mg/kg) 0.050.5 0.3 3 0.3 1.2
Nickel (mg/kg) 550 20 200 35 45
Zinc (mg/kg) 50-500 130 800 140 365
TPH C6-C40 (mg/kg) - - 1,250
PAH, Total Detected (g/kg) - - - 8,000
PCBs, Total ICES 7 (g/kg) 110 10 - - 100
Tributyl tin (g/kg)
1
100 1,000 - 2,500
Triphenyl tin (g/kg)
1
100 1,000 - 2,500
Dibutyl tin (g/kg) 100 1,000 - 2,500

Table 16: Standards and Guidelines for Assessing Contamination of Dredged
Materials

Notes: 1. There are no specific guidelines on levels for Triphenyl tin however as tributyltin and
triphenyltin compounds have similar effects on humans and organisms in the environment, the levels
for TBT have been adopted

2. Levels for OSPAR are provisional


6-37

Chemical analyses were undertaken on sediment samples that were collected during the site
investigation program conducted in late 2011. Sediment cores were taken and samples
tested for a range of heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), Total Petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), a suite of tributyltin compounds
(TBT, TPT and DBT) and selected pesticides.
The results for each of the three areas from which material is to be taken and placed into the
reclamation areas are assessed separately below.

The level of pesticides in all areas is well below the OSPAR, UK and Dutch lower action
levels.

MCT Dredge Area

A total of 55 samples were tested across the 22 sample sites. For the 1,000,000 cum to be
dredged from this area, this equates to approximately one sample for each 18,000 cum.

The results are compared to the OSPAR, UK Action Levels and Dutch Standards in Table 17
below. With few exceptions the sediments proposed to be dredged showed relatively low
levels of impact from the tested metals and chemicals.

Overall, the average of each contaminant collected spatially over the area to be dredged was
below all of the lower action levels indicated in Table 16. Except as noted below, in all cases,
none of the sediments tested exceeded the OSPAR, UK Level 2 or Dutch Intervention
Levels.

There were two test results from samples in the northern part of the MCT dredge area that
exceeded the OSPAR and Dutch Nickel Intervention Level, 130mg/l at MS09 and 75.2mg/l at
MS11. The samples pass Action Level 2 under the UK guidelines.

Copper levels (50.3 mg/kg) at MS09 exceeded the OSPAR and UK and Dutch lower action
levels. At MS09 (54.3 mg/kg) and MS23 (47.5 mg/kg) the Chromium level of exceeded the
lower UK level.


6-38

Contaminant Average Maximum
OSPAR
No. samples >
UK Cefas
Guidelines
No. samples >
Dutch Standards
(2009)
No.
Samples
> EAC
Action
Level 1
Action
Level 2
Target
Value
Interv.
Level
Arsenic (mg/kg) 4.80 7.47 0 0 0 0 0
Cadmium (mg/kg) 0.10 0.253 0 0 0 0 0
Chromium
(mg/kg)
16.83 54.3
0 2 0 0 0
Copper (mg/kg) 7.80 50.3 1 1 0 1 0
Lead (mg/kg) 4.45 21.7 0 0 0 0 0
Mercury (mg/kg) <0.14 <0.14 0 0 0 0 0
Nickel (mg/kg) 11.81 130 2 3 0 2 2
Zinc (mg/kg) 15.92 60.6 0 0 0 0 0
TPH C6-C40
(mg/kg)
66.64 196
-
- - - 0
PAH, Total
Detected (g/kg)
280.62 691
-
0 0 0 0
PCBs, Total ICES
7 (g/kg)
<21 <21
0
0 - - 0
Tributyl tin
(g/kg)
- 79
-
0 0 - 0
Triphenyl tin
(g/kg)
- <50
-
0 0 - 0
Dibutyl tin
(g/kg)
- 128
-
1 0 - 0

Table 17: Average, Maximum and Exceedances for Contaminant Levels in MCT
Dredging Area

Fort William Sand Stockpile

The results are compared to the OSPAR, UK Action Levels and Dutch Standards in Table
18. With only one exception the sediments proposed to be used showed relatively low levels
of impact from the tested metals and chemicals.

Overall, the average of each contaminant collected spatially over the area to be used as core
material for the bund construction is below all of the lower action levels indicated in Table 16.
One site, LS05, showed elevated Nickel levels (111mg/kg) that exceeded the OSPAR and
Dutch Intervention Level and slightly elevated Copper levels (40.9mg/kg) which slightly
exceeded both UK and Dutch lower action levels.

6-39

OSPAR
No samples >
UK Cefas
Guidelines
No samples >
Dutch Standards
(2009)
No.
Samples
> EAC
Action
Level 1
Action
Level 2
Target
Value
Interv.
Level
Arsenic (mg/kg) 4.15 6.32 0 0 0 0 0
Cadmium (mg/kg) 0.08 0.131 0 0 0 0 0
Chromium (mg/kg) 4.80 48.6 0 1 0 0 0
Copper (mg/kg) 3.78 40.9 0 1 0 1 0
Lead (mg/kg) 1.82 2.4 0 0 0 0 0
Mercury (mg/kg) <0.14 <0.14 0 0 0 0 0
Nickel (mg/kg) 4.38 111 1 1 0 1 1
Zinc (mg/kg) 7.29 56.1 0 0 0 0 0
TPH C6-C40
(mg/kg) 40.56 151
-
PAH, Total
Detected (g/kg)
<118 <118 -
PCBs, Total ICES
7 (g/kg)
<21 <21 0
Tributyl tin (g/kg) <20 <20 - 0 0 0 0
Triphenyl tin
(g/kg)
<50 <50 -
0 0 0 0
Dibutyl tin (g/kg) <20 <20 - 0 0 0 0

Table 18: Average, Maximum and Exceedances for Contaminant Levels for Fort
William Sand Stockpile

Quay 1 Maintenance Dredging

A total of 13 samples from the 7 locations were tested. For the 150,000 cum to be dredged
from this area, this equates to approximately one sample for each 12,000 cum. The results
are compared to the OSPAR, Dutch Standards and UK Action Levels in Table 19 below.

Overall, the average of each contaminant collected spatially over the area to be dredged was
below all of the lower action levels indicated in Table 16. All sample test results were below
the OSPAR EAC levels.

The Cadmium level at MS810 of 0.409mg/kg was only marginally above the UK Action Level
1 value of 0.4mg/kg.


6-40

The Chromium level at MS814 of 51.4mg/kg was above the UK Action Level 1 value of 40
mg/kg.

The Nickel level at MS814 of 48.1mg/kg exceeded the Dutch Nickel Intervention Level. The
sample passed Action Level 2 under the UK guidelines.

At MS814 and MS815 Triphenyl Tin readings were 203 g/kg and 112 g/kg respectively and
were above the adopted Action Level 1.

OSPAR
No. samples >
UK Cefas
Guidelines
No. samples > Dutch
Standards (2009)
No.
Samples
> EAC
Action
Level 1
Action
Level 2
Target
Value
Interv.
Level
Arsenic (mg/kg) 6.70 8.18 0 0 0 0 0
Cadmium (mg/kg) 0.12 0.409 0 1 0 0 0
Chromium
(mg/kg) 23.18 51.4
0
1 0 0 0
Copper (mg/kg) 15.41 38.4 0 0 0 1 0
Lead (mg/kg) 13.33 36 0 0 0 0 0
Mercury (mg/kg) <0.14 <0.14 0 0 0 0 0
Nickel (mg/kg) 17.05 48.1 0 4 0 1 1
Zinc (mg/kg) 32.51 79.4 0 0 0 0 0
TPH C6-C40
(mg/kg)
88.22 355 -
- - - 0
PAH, Total
Detected (g/kg)
280.62 4070 -
- - - 0
PCBs, Total ICES
7 (g/kg)
<21 <21 0
0 - - 0
Tributyl tin (g/kg) 36 - 0 0 - 0
Triphenyl tin
(g/kg)
203 - 2 0 - 0
Dibutyl tin
(g/kg)
50 - 0 0 - 0

Table 19: Average, Maximum and Exceedances for Contaminant Levels in Quay 1
Dredging Area


6-41

6.6.5 Marine Water Quality
6.6.5.1 Seawater Water Quality

Water quality sampling and analysis was carried out in December 2010 for the purpose of the
present EIA. Water quality samples were collected at sampling locations shown in Figures 24
and 25. Results for the main physic-chemical parameters at the sampling stations are
reported in Table 20 below.

SITE PH
DO
mg/l
SALINITY
/
OO

T
C
NITRATE
mg/l
PHOSPHATE
g/l
TSS
mg/l
1 8.24 14.6 36 26.7 19.96 1.18 2.74
2 8.2 15.1 35 26.8 18.60 1.16 3.58
3 8.83 6.1 35 26.7 36.52 3.56 3.60
4 8.2 6.1 36 26.7 26.41 1.17 6.20
5 8.2 6.2 36 26.6 15.13 0.59 3.13
6 8.19 6.5 36 27 15.00 1.17 7.80
7 8.03 15 35 27 5.58 0.61 4.24
8 8.07 6.3 35 27 16.28 1.21 0.35
9 8.14 9.7 36 26.9 20.65 1.21 0.15
10 8.19 5.6 35 26.9 7.07 0.61 2.88
11 8.15 5.8 36 26.9 14.88 1.21 3.07
12 7.91 20.1 36 26.8 14.69 1.17 3.08
13 8.18 18.8 35 26.9 4.53 0.61 1.40
14 7.57 17.0 36 27.1 21.08 1.77 4.92
15 7.75 16.7 35 27.5 5.39 0.63 1.50
16 8.15 17.1 36 27 4.65 0.58 2.91
17 8.13 16.9 36 27 4.84 0.60 3.58
18 8.15 15.2 35 26.9 6.76 0.60 3.22
19 8.12 16.5 36 27 89.09 4.73 8.46
20 8.16 15.8 36 27.1 7.07 0.60 1.50
DoE
Guidelines
3

7.0
9.0
>2 - - 1.0
100
(0.1 mg/l)
15

Table 20: Seawater Quality at Survey Sites

3
Guidelines for Coastal Water Quality (Department of Environment) D Industrial Areas

6-42

The concentration of nitrate in seawater samples fluctuated between 4.53 mg/L at site 13 to
89.09 mg/L at site 19. Nitrate concentrations at all sites sampled were well above the set
guideline levels (1.00 mg/L maximum for industrial areas) for the standards for coastal water
quality in Mauritius shown in table 20 above (Ministry of Local Government and Environment,
1999).
Although the high nitrate levels recorded during the survey of December 2010 may be
partially explained by known discharges from households, industries and agricultural sources
to the various rivers and rivulets in the vicinity, the results recorded are still higher than would
be anticipated.

Phosphate surface sea water values varied between 0.00058 mg/l at site 16 and 0.0047
mg/L at site 19. All samples were well below the guideline levels for industrial areas (0.1
mg/l) for the standards for coastal water quality in Mauritius shown in Table 20 above
(Ministry of Local Government and Environment, 1999).

Total suspended solids in seawater samples varied between 0.15 mg/L at site 9 and 8.46
mg/L at site 19. The established norm for suspended solids is 15 mg/L (Guidelines for
Coastal Water Quality Ministry of Local Government and Environment, 1998 shown in Table
20 above and attached at Appendix B). Site 6 had higher values and the rest of sites lower
values than recommended standard.

6.6.5.2 Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary Water Quality

The information provided in this section has been obtained from the Fisheries Division of the
Ministry of Agro Industry and Food Security.

Water quality monitoring in the Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary is undertaken on a weekly basis
by the Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agro Industry and Food Security.
Results obtained from the Fisheries Division at two locations for the months of September
2008, J une and J uly 2009 are summarised in Table 21 below:


6-43

STATION TEMP
c
SALINITY
ppt
PH DO mg/l COD
mg/l
NO
3
-N
mg/l
PO
4

mg/l
September 2008
Bird Sanctuary 1 26 32.5 8.3 9.1 1.0 <0.1 0.08
Bird Sanctuary 2 26 32.5 8.4 8.2 0.6 <0.1 0.07
June 2009
Bird Sanctuary 1 30 32.9 8.2 10.9 0..8 <0.1 0.1
Bird Sanctuary 2 30 33.0 8.2 9.7 0.1 <0.1 0.05
July 2009
Bird Sanctuary 1 22 27.8 8.4 8.3 0.7 <0.1 0.19
Bird Sanctuary 2 22 28.3 8.2 6.7 0.6 <0.1 0.14

Table 21: Water Quality Data at Terre Rouge Bird Sanctuary (Fisheries Division, 2009)

The results indicate that the water quality in the bird sanctuary is generally within the coastal
water quality guidelines limits, with the exception of phosphate, which exceeded the
guidelines on a number of occasions.

6.6.5.3 River Water Quality

No results of water quality in the Rivulet Terre Rouge and Latanier River have been obtained.

From visual observations, Rivulet Terre Rouge and Latanier River entering the harbour are
polluted by solid matters and impacted by anthropogenic activities located further upstream.

6.6.6 Marine Ecology
A marine biodiversity survey was carried out in December 2010 and J anuary 2011 for the
purpose of the present EIA. Marine ecology data collected at all sample stations is reported
in Table 22 below.


6-44

Site
No
Depth
(m)
Horiz.
visibility
(m)
coral
cover
(%)
algae
cover
(%)
bare
substrate
(%)
No coral
spec.
observed
No fish
spec.
observed
Total No.
fish
countered
1 11 7 24 53 24 30 18 109
2 9 7 18 56 26 17 19 193
3 12 5 22 61 18 24 30 182
4 6 3 17 69 15 12 24 1320
5 5 1 11 80 10 13 17 209
6 5 1 1 84 16 4 13 137
7 4 5 12 57 32 7 10 196
8 0.8 1 3 97 0 4 5 17
9 1.5 5 0 93 7 3 11 72
10 7 5 4 73 24 13 18 113
11 5 3 10 80 10 17 25 1296
12 6 5 6 73 18 8 17 165
13 8 5 6 71 22 10 14 271
14 1.5 10 2 98 0 11 10 219
15 1.3 1 0 100 0 1 0 0
16 5 6 2 90 8 7 24 1149
17 2.5 7 1 87 12 6 16 278
18 4 5 2 80 18 8 20 220
19 5 7 2 94 4 8 17 148
20 12 7 6 70 24 17 19 124

Table 22: Summary of marine biodiversity observations made at all sites during in-situ
survey

A comparison of the above findings from the 2010/2011 dive surveys with prior surveys
carried out in 1995 shows that the marine environment has been heavily degraded over
these 16 years. The coral cover in the dredge area and at Fort George sites is on average
less than10% and no corals were found at Fort William site. Coral patches are found further
west.


6-45

The 2011 survey concluded that

The areas especially around Les Salines area at Fort William is massively covered
with macroalgae and these are indication of poor water quality and reef health.

The area in close proximity to the container terminal appears to have been in similar
condition from 1995 to present notwithstanding the fact that a large part has been
dredged and some land reclamation works have been made. The benthos in this area
is covered with a layer of silt which most likely comes from the rivulet Terre Rouge.

In general, the area from Baie du Tombeau to Pointe Aux Sable is in a degraded
state mainly due to the fact that the water quality in the area is relatively poor. The
turbidity of the water along with discharge from several streams and re-suspension of
fine sediments caused by ships further contributes to this poor water quality and
eventually to the relatively poor reef health.

The individual coral colonies that are present in the area are in relatively good health
but these are small in size and their coverage is quite minimal. It should be pointed
out that the species observed in the areas surveyed are of the resistant and resilient
type which eventually explains their presence and the fact that they are thriving well.
In the areas where dredging works were undertaken in the past, new colonies of
corals are now seen to grow but these remains of the encrusting and massive type.

The reef health immediately north of the studied area is relatively better and with a
greater coral cover than in the southern area. This could be for the fact that there
exist a residual tidal current that goes south along the western coast of Mauritius and
thus the pollutants, nutrients and suspended particles rich water moves generally in a
southern direction.

The fish present were mainly herbivores with a marked presence of those from the
family of Chaetodontidae, Pomacentridae, Acanthuridae, Scaridae and Mullidae. Only
rare individual of carnivores were observed in the area and no predators have been
seen. The complete food chain in terms of fish is not present in the area. The number
of fish present in the area is relatively low as compared to much healthier reefs
around Mauritius and this further shows that the health of the reef is relatively poor.


6-46

Based on the findings of the dive survey, a Sensitivity Map of the area based on the
biodiversity and reef ecology was drawn for the North Port Area as shown in Figure 29
below.

Three zones were identified, namely:

Zone A, The Terre Rouge Rivulet Estuary, classified as sensitive with respect to its
classification as a Ramsar Site and hence measures should be taken to avoid
disruption of the sensitive ecology at this particular site.

Zone B, representing the area of reef in the northern part of the port. This area is not
considered very high sensitivity especially when compared to the other regions of
Mauritius. However the reef health is relatively better in this zone as compared to
other sites in the area and should be protected where necessary (in other words in
the case of polluting activities in the vicinity which may impact the area).

Zone C is not sensitive ecologically as biological characteristics as shown above is
minimal for that area. This part is however sensitive hydrodynamically and as such
effort to maintain the dynamics in the areas should be made. It would be damaging to
this region to be clogged or saturated with sediments from the construction and
dredging work.


6-47

Figure 29: Sensitivity Map - North Port Area


6-48

No Sensitivity Map was drawn for the South Port Area (refer Figure 25) as no sensitive areas
could be identified except for the coral reef flat which was found not to be very healthy.

6.7 Air Quality and Noise
6.7.1 Air Quality
The information provided in this section is extracted from the Digest of Environment Statistics
prepared by the Central Statistics Office.

The Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development has both stationary and mobile
air quality monitoring stations that have been operational since 2001. The main pollutants
under investigation are Dust (PM 10), Dust (PM 2.5), Black Carbon, Sulphur Dioxide,
Nitrogen Dioxide and Carbon Monoxide.

The results for all the pollutants under study at Medco Cassis fixed station and mobile
stations are reported when available in Table 23 below:


6-49

Ambient
air
quality
standard
4
Medco Cassis 2003 &
2004 (fixed)
5

Mer Rouge
2005 (Mobile)
Min Max 24hr
Av for
yr
Min Max 24hr
Av for
yr

Pollutant
Units
Dust (PM
10
) g/m
3
100.0 10.0 119.2 25.0 19 119 25
Ozone (O3) ppb 46.7 0.0 24.0 15.0 8 26 15
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) ppb 70.0 0.0 4.0 0.9 7 3
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
ppb 97.5 0.0 27.0 9.0 11 27 9
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
ppm 8.0 1.0 1.6 1.2 0.15 8 0
Total Suspended
Particles (TSP)
g/m
3
150.0 29.6 107.5 56.4
Lead g/m
3
1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0

Ambient
air
quality
standard
6
Terre Rouge
Nov/Dec 2008 (Mobile)
Aapravasi Ghat
Nov/Dec 2009 (Mobile)
Min Max 24hr
Av for
yr
Min Max 24hr
Av for yr

Pollutant
Units
Dust (PM
10
) g/m
3
100.0 6.5 14.9 10.9
Dust (PM
25
) g/m
3
N/A 3.5 5.2 4.2
Black Carbon g/m
3
N/A 1.0 3.0 2.0
Ozone (O3) ppb 46.7
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) ppb 70.0 3.0 7.0
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
ppb 97.5 4.5 11
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
ppm 8.0 1.28 1.9
Total Suspended
Particles (TSP)
g/m
3
150.0
Lead g/m
3
1.5

Table 23: Air quality monitoring at fixed and mobile stations

Note: No location map of the monitoring stations has been obtained; however Medco Cassis
and Aapravasi Ghat are known locations.

4
24-hour standard except for Ozone, Carbon monoxide and lead which are based on 1 hour , 8 hour
and 3 month averages respectively.
5
Medco Cassis : 2003 data for Dust PM
10
, NO
2
, TSP, Lead
6
24-hour standard except for Ozone, Carbon monoxide and lead which are based on 1 hour , 8 hour and 3 month
averages respectively.

6-50

All monitoring stations showed that the levels of ambient pollutants for the 24 hour averages
were well below the norms shown on the 3
rd
column of Table 19 above and attached at
Appendix B (Environment Protection (Standards for Air) Regulations 1998).

It can be derived from the above that the overall quality of the ambient air in the monitoring
areas is at a good and permissible level.

6.7.2 Noise
An ambient noise survey was commissioned for EIA purposes and was carried out in May
2011; results of which are reported below.

The purpose of the ambient noise monitoring was:
(i) To measure environmental noise levels during day and night at predetermined
monitoring stations around the MCT area, and more precisely to:
a. Evaluate the contribution of MCT activities within the background noise
b. Evaluate the noise level at RAMSAR Site
c. Evaluate the noise level at the closest residence (Baie du Tombeau)
(ii) To compare measured noise levels to prescribed environmental noise exposure
limits in Mauritius (GN17/1997) in residential areas
(iii) To enable further modelling to be carried out for the assessment of the likely noise
level at the selected locations once the quay has been extended

The ambient noise monitoring enabled the evaluation of the noise level at three
predetermined locations relevant to the proposed project shown in Figure 30 below, namely
stations ST2 to ST4, around the MCT during three typical conditions, namely:
Day monitoring when there was no activity at the MCT
Day monitoring when there was activity at the MCT
Night monitoring when there was activity at the MCT


6-51

Figure 30: Location of Noise Monitoring Stations (Enviro-Consult Ltd)

Station ST2: Evaluation of the background noise level at the future boundary of MCT
after extension of quay; noise will be the contribution of the existing Container
Terminal facilities and neighbourhood activities within the background of sector 1 of
the port area (towards Rivulet Terre Rouge). ST2 is located 355m from the quay
o Mean Noise level: 44dB(A) Leq day & night
o Day noise levels with or without activity at MCT are comparable; which
demonstrates that noise level at this location is not primarily influenced by
MCT activities
o Noise contributors during day time at station ST2 are neighbourhood and
natural contributors
o Noise levels at night were higher than during the day; the contributors during
night time at station ST2 are natural contributors being the crickets

Station ST3: Evaluation of the noise level at RAMSAR Site. Monitoring station ST3
was located on the mud flat - where migratory birds are found and it is the closest
area from the MCT as per the recommendation of the National Parks &
Conservation. ST3 is located some 740m from the quay
MCT
Baie du
Tombeau
Roche
Bois area
Freeport
Zone
RTREB

6-52

o Mean Noise level: 45 dB(A) Leq during the day with or without activity at MCT
o Day noise levels with or without activity at MCT are comparable; which
demonstrates that noise level at this location is not primarily influenced by
MCT activities
o Noise level at ST3 is higher than ST2 which also demonstrates that noise
level at this location is not primarily influenced by MCT activities
o Noise contributors during day time at station ST3 are primarily natural
contributors being the birds on the mud flat and occasional neighbourhood
contributors being from fishermens boats on the estuary

Station ST4: Evaluation the noise level at the closest residence being in Baie du
Tombeau area. ST4 is located some 705m from the quay

o Mean Noise level: 42.5 dB(A) Leq day & night, with or without activity at MCT
o Noise levels obtained at this location shows that the noise level at this
location is not primarily influenced by MCT activities
o Noise contributors during day time at station ST4 are primarily neighbourhood
contributors
o Noise levels at night were higher than during the day; the contributors during
night time at station ST4 are natural contributors being the crickets
o Noise level at this residential location are within standards both during day
time (60 dB(A) Leq) and night time (55 dB(A) Leq
o Noise levels obtained at ST4 once the quay has been extended will not
exceed the prescribed limits of industrial noise towards residential
neighbourhood

The mean noise levels for monitoring station ST2 to ST4 is summarized in Table 24 below
and compared to prescribed environmental noise exposure limits shown on the 6
th
column of
the table and attached at Appendix B (Environment Protection (Environmental Standards for
Noise) Regulations 1997).


6-53

STATION
LOCATION
LOCATION
TYPE
PERIOD No activity at
MCT
07 May 2011
Activity at
MCT
12 May 2011
Environmental
Noise Exposure
Limit (industrial)
Noise levels in dB(A) Leq
ST2 MPA
boundary
Day 43.7 43.1 60
Night --- 45.3 55
ST3 RAMSAR Day 45.0 45.1 60
Night --- --- 55
ST4 Residential Day 42.4 39.8 60
Night --- 45.4 55

Table 24: Mean Noise Levels at Monitoring Stations

The legislation provides an environmental noise exposure limit for industrial noise in
residential areas (refer column 6). There are no standards for industrial noise in non
residential areas; however, the same standards have been used here to assess the noise
levels recorded.

Based on the above, the noise levels obtained at all stations are within standards both during
day time (60 dB(A) Leq) and night time (55 dB(A) Leq).

6.8 Built environment
6.8.1 Socio-Cultural Conditions
The population of Mauritius, according to the Central Statistics Office of the Ministry of
Finance and Economic Development (MFED), was estimated at 1,233,669 in J uly 2004
based on 2000 Census. Salient features of the Mauritius Demography are:
according to the medium variant population projections, the population of
Mauritius will grow from 1,186,873 in 2000 to around 1,486,000 in 2040, at an
average annual rate of 0.56%;
a sex composition of the population, that, from a slight excess of males over
females in 1972, has reversed in 1983, to reach 610,294 males against 623,375
females in 2004, giving a sex ratio of 97.9 in 2040 due to lower mortality prevailing
among female;

6-54

the Republic of Mauritius, with a total land area of 2,040 square kilometres, had
a population density of around 605 per square kilometres in mid-2004.

6.8.1.1 Existing Settlements

The existing settlements and population - as per census 2000 - within the project area are
provided in Table 25 below:

CLUSTER SETTLEMENT/
VILLAGE COUNCIL AREA
POPULATION
(CENSUS 2000)
AREA
Greater
Port Louis
City Proper 127,855 Inner core
North:
Baie du Tombeau
Terre Rouge
Le Hochet

12,011
8,736
13,878

Inner core
Outer core
Outer core
South:
Pailles
Pointe aux Sables/La tour
Koenig

9,954
16,448

Outer core
Inner core

Table 25: Existing Settlements in the Project Area

The catchment area was divided into:

An inner core with settlements located in or adjoining the area of environmental
influence
An outer core with settlements located outside the area of environmental influence

The closest residential suburbs of Port Louis to the proposed development site are Roche
Bois and Baie du Tombeau. Roche Bois residential areas are located east of the Freeport
development; the closest being the Roche Bois CHA Estate which is separated from the
Reclaimed Land at Mer Rouge by a land stretch about 200 metres wide. Within the Roche
Bois residential areas there are numerous industrial, agricultural and commercial activities.
Industrial activities include a Tannery, Textile processing plants, a match factory and
workshops for automobiles, carpentry and panel beating. There are also pig farmers close to

6-55

Rivulet Terre Rouge and historically an animal quarantine station, which has been the main
source of complaints from the local inhabitants.

The Baie du Tombeau Residential area is located north of the proposed development site on
the other side of the Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary. The Docker's Flats along the bank of the
estuary have now been decommissioned and the buildings have been demolished leaving
place to a vacant grassy land which is regularly maintained. Other residential areas close to
the Terre Rouge Estuary are Elisabethville and La Cocoterie. Baie du Tombeau forms part of
the Terre Rouge Village Council Area which includes Bois Marchand, Terre Rouge, Riche
Terre, Le Hochet and Baie du Tombeau.

The Baie du Tombeau Residential areas also include various industrial activities such as
textile dye houses viz., St Malo Exports Ltd, Original Confection Ltd, Tropic Knits Ltd. among
others. A Rum Bottling Plant (New Goodwill Co Ltd) and other Garment Manufacturing plants
are present as well. There are also a number of workshops from automobile repairs to wood
carpentry and scrap/metal shops.

6.8.1.2 Social Infrastructure

All social infrastructures are available in the greater Port Louis area, namely:
Community/social
Education
Health
Leisure
Religious
Sports

The shopping, hotel and leisure facilities, which form part of Le Caudan Waterfront
Development, have been constructed relatively recently and have created an important focus
for tourist activities and shopping.


6-56

6.8.2 Socio- Economic Conditions
6.8.2.1 Population Characteristics

In comparison to other municipalities, the greater Port Louis has the highest population with
17% of the national population and 35% of the population of the conurbation being the
greater Port Louis & Plaines Wilhems (census 2000).

In terms of housing units, again the greater Port Louis has the highest percentage with
16.9% of the national housing units and 34% of the housing units of the conurbation (census
2000).

6.8.2.2 The Economic Situation

The greater Port Louis contains 5,064 workplaces which represents 26.6% of the national
workplaces which is about 50% of the number of workplaces of the conurbation.

The annual intercensal increase (1990-2000) is of 1.6% for the greater Port Louis and a
breakdown of +0.8% for the city proper, +4.7% for the outer area North and +5.3% for the
outer area south.

Business activities in Port Louis

Port Louis remains the primary administrative and commercial centre for Mauritius but it
faces increasing competition from other urban centres, particularly the Plaines Wilhems
towns. A decentralisation trend is being experienced from within the city where both
population and the level of non-residential floorspace permissions have declined over the last
few years.

Statistics on business activities undertaken in the Island of Mauritius for the period J uly 2009
to J une 2010 show that the total number of licences as at J une 2010 was to 101,697,
representing an increase of around 7% over the figure of 94,609 as at end of J une 2009.
During the period J uly 2009 to J une 2010, some 9,798 new licences were issued, the
majority of which (6,542 or 67%) was in the industry group Wholesale and retail trade; repair
of motor vehicles, personal and household goods. For the period under review 2,710
licences were cancelled.


6-57

Adjusted licences and registrations by industry group for Port Louis as at J une 2010 as
provided in Table 26 below:

NSIC INDUSTRY GROUP NUMBER
D Manufacturing 1,287
F Construction 186
G Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles,
personal household goods
12,260
H Hotels & restaurants 929
I Transport, storage & communication 4,123
J Financial intermediation 154
K Real estate, renting & business activities 2,491
M Education 304
N Health & social work 158
O Other community, social & personal services 741

Table 26: Adjusted licences and registrations by industry group

The Port

The Mauritius Ports Authority (MPA) operates the port which lies within the city limits of Port
Louis, north west of the Central Business District, but from which it is effectively severed by
the dual carriageway north-south M1 motorway running along the Caudan Waterfront. The
MPA is a major land owner and the port plays a vital role in the economy of Port Louis and
the country as a whole, since it handles 99% of the country's imports and exports.

Coastal Activities

Coastal activities National overview

In addition to the creation of the Marine Parks Balaclava Marine Park (485 ha) and Blue Bay
Marine Park (353 ha) - , proclaimed under the Fisheries Act and the National Park and
Wildlife Act., six Fishing Reserves were proclaimed under the Fisheries Act in 2000. Within
these Fishing Reserves restrictions are placed on activities to protect fish stock, breeding
grounds and sensitive marine ecosystems.


6-58

These Fishing Reserves are as follows:
Port Louis Fishing Reserve 331 ha;
Poudre dOr Fishing Reserve 2,542 ha;
Poste Lafayette Fishing Reserve 280 ha;
Trou dEau Douce Fishing Reserve 574 ha;
Grand Port Fishing Reserve Zone A 1,716 ha and Zone B 112 ha;
Black River Fishing Reserve 787 ha.

The Fishing Reserves not only assist in replenishing fish stocks within the marine ecosystem
but also protect the livelihood of local fishermen.

Data from the artisanal fishery at national level was gathered from the Annual Report 2009 of
the Fisheries Division. The data was collected monthly from 25 fish landing stations selected
randomly from the 61 existing ones around the island to estimate the catch and effort by fish
species and gear.

The catch was estimated at 820 tonnes in 2009 and comprised 496 tonnes from the lagoon
and 324 tonnes from off-lagoon.
The average catch per fishermen-day (CPFD) was 6.4 kg.

Coastal activities in the Project Area

There are two Fisheries Posts in the project area, namely:
Tombeau Bay Fisheries Post which includes Tombeau Bay and Roche Bois Fish
Landing Stations
Pointe aux Sables Fisheries Post which includes Bain des Dames and GRNW Fish
Landing Stations

The number of registered fishermen for the two above-mentioned areas, according to the
Annual Report 2009 of the Fisheries Division, is provided in Table 27 below:


6-59

FISHING GROUND NUMBER OF FISHERMEN
Code Definition Pointe aux
Sables
Areas
Tombeau Bay & Roche
Bois
Areas
Total
L Lagoon 2 0 2
L/OL Lagoon/off
lagoon
82 48 130
OL Off lagoon 80 95 175
Total 164 143 307

Table 27: Number of Fishermen in the Project Area (Fisheries Division, 2009)

There are 2 registered fishermen fishing in the lagoon only and 130 fishermen fishing both in
the lagoon and off lagoon.

Data from the artisanal fishery in the project area, obtained from the Ministry of Fisheries for
the two above-mentioned areas for the year 2010 is provided in Table 28 below:

AREA CATCH (KG)
FOR YEAR 2010
CPFD (KG)
FOR YEAR 2010
Baie du Tombeau 4,222 5.9
Roche Bois 2,466 5.2
Bain des Dames 2,830 4.2
Grand River North West 2,124 3.5
Pointe aux Sables 1 8,112 3.5
Pointe aux Sables 2 Not sampled --

Table 28: Catch & CPFD in the Project Area (Fisheries Division, 2009)

The average catch per fishermen-day (CPFD) in the project area is lower than the national
average.

It should be recalled that in accordance with the Ports (Operations and Safety) Regulations
2005, fishing is not permitted within the limits of a port.

6-60

Data on the abundance of fish in the project area was gathered from the Annual Report 2009
of the Fisheries Division; data is provided in Table 29 below:

SITE/TYPE
OF REEF
YEAR POMACENTRIDAE &
CHAETODONTIDAE
ACANTHURIDAE LABRIDAE SCARIDAE
Baie du
Tombeau
Back reef
2008 >1000 0-10 0-10 Not
observed
2009 >1000 Not observed Not
observed
Not
observed
Pointe aux
Sables
Back reef
2008 50-100 10-50 0-10 10-50
2009 Not observed Not observed Not
observed
0-10
Pointe aux
Sables
Fore reef
2009 0-10 0-10 10-50 0-10

Table 29: Abundance of Fish in the Project Area (Fisheries Division, 2009)

Common names of the above mentioned fishes are provided in Table 30 below for ease of
reference.

FISH SPECIES COMMON MAURITIAN NAME
Pomacentridae demoiselle
Chaetodontidae pavillon
Acanthuridae chirurgien
Labridae columbine
Scaridae cateau

Table 30: Common Names of Fish Species Observed


6-61

6.9 Services
6.9.1 Water Supply
The Central Water Authority (CWA) is responsible for the supply of potable water across the
country.

The water supply for the MCT extension works will come from the existing supply of the
MCT.

The expansion to the container terminal will not have a significant impact on the water
requirements of the site. A new toilet block is proposed at the north of the site. The new toilet
block will require water and a septic tank.

6.9.2 Electricity Supply
The Central Electricity Board (CEB) is responsible for the supply of electricity across the
country.

The existing electrical distribution system to Mauritius Container Terminal (MCT) consists of
a double-ended switchgear fed by two 22kV lines. These lines are served by C.E.B. and
originate from Fort Georges Power Station.
The available electrical power supply from the power station to MCT is 10MVA. Based on the
anticipated loads, it is apparent that there is sufficient power supply from the current 10MVA
supply without the need for future increase in supply from CEB

6.9.3 Sewerage System
The Wastewater Management Authority (WMA) is responsible for the collection and
treatment of wastewater in sewered areas.

The existing Container Terminal is not connected to the national sewerage network and
therefore has its own on site disposal system.


6-62

6.9.4 Solid Waste
Domestic Solid waste generated within MCT includes domestic waste, maintenance material
waste and ships waste.

Domestic waste is collected by the scavenging units of each municipal or district council
areas and disposed of at Mare Chicose Landfill site.
Maintenance waste such as scrap metal, components and machinery would usually be
recycled where practicable.

Generally there is minimal ships waste as whilst in port container ships usually keep all
waste on board the vessel. Any ship generated waste is collected by a specialist contractor
working under a contract with MPA.

6.9.5 Hazardous waste
Liquid or solid hazardous wastes are handled separately and for some wastes can be
disposed of at Mare Chicose Landfill site.

Other hazardous wastes such as used oil are to be collected and collected by licensed use
oil carriers for further re-use or recycling.

6.10 Traffic
6.10.1 Marine Traffic
The proposed improvement of the container terminal i.e. strengthening the existing structure
to allow deepening of the berthing basin, extension of the quay structure and extension of the
hardstand area, find its justification in the increasing vessel dimensions rather than in the
increasing traffic forecast which stands at 3.7% growth per annum for the captive trade and
1% for the transhipment trade to the horizon 2030.


6-63

6.10.2 Terrestrial Traffic
The container terminal operates 24/7 all year round. The terrestrial traffic is directly linked
and proportional to the marine traffic and consists mainly of container trucks loaded with 20
and 40 containers.

The access to the container terminal is off the M2 motorway at Mer Rouge roundabout.

Based on the above historic cargo growth, the terrestrial traffic growth would be in the same
range and would have no bearing on the current Level of Service of M2.

The Level of Service (LOS) of M2 is directly linked to the working hours and varies from LOS
A during the week-ends i.e. traffic and roadway conditions with little or no restriction in
manoeuvrability due to the presence of other vehicles, and drivers can maintain their desired
speeds with little or no delay - to LOS B, C, or D during week days off peak hours i.e.
conditions with increasing restrictions in manoeuvrability while still maintaining unstressed
traffic mobility to LOS E i.e. traffic flow at or near capacity or even LOS F i.e. forced
flow operation at low speeds during the morning peak hours.

The classification of Levels of Service is provided in Table 31 below.

LEVEL OF
SERVICE
FLOW CONDITIONS
A Free flow conditions. Individual users are virtually unaffected by the presence
of others in the traffic stream
B In the range of stable flow, but the presence of other users in the traffic
stream begins to be noticeable
C In the range of stable flow, but marks the beginning of the range of flow in
which the operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by the
interactions with others in the traffic stream.
D High-density, but stable, flow conditions. Small increases in traffic flow will
generally result in the occurrence of operational problems at this level.
E Operating conditions at or near the capacity level of a given facility.
Operations at this level are usually unstable, because small increases in flow
or minor disturbances in the traffic steam to breakdown.
F Forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists whenever the amount of
traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point.
Queues form behind such locations. Operations within the queue are
characterized by stop-and-go waves, and they are extremely unstable

Table 31: Classification of Levels of Service


6-64

The infrastructure upgrade works proposed in the context of the Road Decongestion
Programme prepared by the Road Development Authority will increase the manoeuvrability
on M2.

6.11 National Heritage
According to the National Heritage Fund Act 2003, there are 79 features listed as national
heritage of Mauritius in the Port Louis District.

Within the project area are found Fort George and Signal Tower (Harbour and Quays)
Outside the project area at almost 2 kms from the container terminal - is found the
Aapravasi Ghat and the remaining part of the structure comprising it; this heritage being
inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

Neither the proposed improvement of the container terminal nor the proposed land
reclamation will have a bearing on the national heritage of Mauritius.

6.12 Landscape and Visual Environment
The landscape character surrounding the port is dominated by infrastructure supporting the
port activities including access roads, warehouses, port security, offices, loading/unloading
facilities, fuel storage and bunkering. The closest residential area lies directly to the east of
the container terminal, between the terminal and the M2 highway.
A summary of the main landscape character in the vicinity of the port is summarised below:
Marine water frontage adjacent the harbour and quay operations
Buildings, including warehouses, offices and equipment associated with the loading
and unloading facilities
Promenade areas, hotels, shops and restaurants at the end of the harbour
Residential area to the east of the container terminal
Fishing and recreational activity in Terre Rouge Estuary
Rivulet Terre Rouge Estuary Bird Sanctuary

As shown on the location plan (figures 2 and 13), the container terminal is located some 1.8
kms from the motorway M2. Ground activities are not seen from inland; the cranes are on the
other hand well visible.

6-65

The container terminal is visible from Tombeau Bay area or from higher grounds and
constitutes one of the many activities in the Port Area.

The proposed improvement of the container terminal will have no significant additional visual
impact in an already dense harbour built environment.

Chapt 6 - Mauritius Wind Speed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapt 6 - Mauritius Wind Speed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Extension and Strengthening of the MCT Quay

at Port Louis Harbour EIA Report

You might also like