6 Mar 2013: The MEC has upheld the appeal, and has referred the matter back to HoD.
MEC "I am also of the view that the proposed development may be allowed subject to the following conditions..."
See 2013-03-06-MEC-SKMBT_22313030115200.pdf below for the MEC response.
25 Feb 2013: We've submitted comments to the MEC wrt LEAP/CalgroM3's appeal -
See 2013-02-25-Applicants-Responding-Statement-REF-GAUT-002.11-12.E0042.pdf below.
26 Nov 2012: CalgroM3/LEAP have submitted the appeal to GDARD's RoD
The cover letter of the appeal:
16 Nov 2012
Attention: MEC Nandi Mayathula Koza
Dear MEC,
RE: SOUTH HILLS EXT 2 (MOFFAT PARK)... / GAUT 002/11-12/E0042
The above matter refers.
Madam, we wish to thus submit the Appeal with the necessary annexures.
The grounds for appeal are threefold:
The information provided to the department was not adequately reviewed.
The time frames followed by the Department was not conducive to adequate review.
The benefits of the project were not adequately reviewed.
We hope you find this in order and request written confirmation of this submission please.
Dr Theron
The main appeal documents can be downloaded below.
Submission-to-MEC-on-intention-to-appeal.pdf
20121126_EIA_Appeal_Cover_Letter.jpg
2012-11-16-TM-Grounds-for-appeal-ko-comment.pdf
2012-11-16-South Hills-Socio-economic-benefits-to-community.pdf
Technical-Memorandum-History-of-Events.pdf
We will be sending comments on the appeal documents to the MEC and GDARD