GOVERNMENT has given the Swakopmund Waterfront developers 21 days to remove a wall they built at the Vineta beachfront and return the area to its natural state or face legal action.
The tide around the controversial Platz am Meer Waterfront coastal project, owned by Safari Investments, is refusing to settle with government arguing that building a wall, between two and four metres high and extending into the sea, is not part of the agreed environmental plan.
Safari Investment Namibia, the company that took over the N$400 million project from the previous developers, was granted permission by the Swakopmund municipality to develop the beachfront area that excluded sea-based activities. However, the construction of the wall that was put in place to prevent high tides flooding the development has put the company in the firing line with government once again and could jeopardise the project following government’s orders to bring it down.
The Ministry of Environment and Tourism has threatened to take legal action if the wall is not brought down soon, arguing that the developers have built beyond the agreed area earmarked for development and that they were contravening environmental laws.
In a letter dated 31 July 2015, environmental commissioner Teofilus Nghitila said he has “noted with concern” that the company’s undertaking of sea water-based activities was done outside the scope of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) without an Environmental Clearance Certificate.
“Such action has resulted in your company contravening regulations of the Environmental Regulation of February 2012,” Nghitila said.
Nghitila ordered the developers to “immediately stop and refrain from sea-based activities, including the construction of water-break structures and within 21 days, rehabilitate the affected area by bringing it to the natural state it was before your interventions,” he said.
Nghitila further warned the developers that failure to comply with the order will force his office to take legal action against the company and ordered the developers to respond within seven days if they have any objections against his order.
A senior manager at Safari Investments, who did not wish to be named in the absence of the company’s CEO Francois Marais, confirmed that they received the letter from the commissioner, but said they were going to oppose it.
“The company is indeed objecting against the compliance order which objection will take the form of a review application to the minister of environment and tourism as is provided for in the Environmental Management Act,” he said.
Nghitila confirmed that the company has responded through its lawyers.
He said the ministry had several consultations with the company about its EIA concerns but the company still refused to comply.
The Waterfront project, a state-of-the-art beachfront complex that includes the construction of more than 16 000 square metre supermarket and a retail centre plus a 100-bed hotel and 29 luxury residential units, has been mired in controversy and endured several financial and political tides since being passed down from one developer to another over the years.
This year in February, the project was also challenged after it emerged that government and the Ombudsman were keeping a close eye on the development following a Swakopmund-based community group, Paddock Gardens Trust’s complaint to the line ministry about several issues regarding the project.
Lobby groups at the town also objected against the project in 2012, claiming Safari Investment’s EIA had expired and was compromised.
Members of the public also complained that the development was “obstructing their view of the beach”.
Residents also argued that some of the developments were preventing normal beach activities such as fishing and that they were not properly consulted on the area they consider to be a public space since consultations began in 2001.
