Heritage Cases

THIS IS THE ARCHIVE FOR SAHRIS 1.0


THIS SITE IS NOW AN ARCHIVE AND IS NOT SUITABLE FOR MAKING APPLICATIONS

Please be aware that no content and application creation or changes to information on this version of SAHRIS will be retained.

To make applications or utilise SAHRIS for the creation of information, please use the new site:

https://sahris.org.za

Changes to SAHRIS!

The South African Heritage Resources Information System (SAHRIS) has undergone a generational upgrade and restructure. These changes to the site include, but are not limited to:

  • A new & modernised look and layout
  • Improved site usage flows with respect to applications and content creation
  • Improved site performance and stability

Launch for the new version of SAHRIS occurred on Monday the 30th of October 2023.

The new site can be found here:

SAHRIS | SAHRIS

SAHRA Application Closure

Please note the following concerning applications submitted to the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) during the December 2023 to January 2024 period.

The full notice is available here: Notice

Special Notice

Following comments received on the proposed Revised Schedule of Fees for applications made to the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA), made in terms of Section 25(2)(l) of the National Heritage Resources Act No. 25 of 1999 (NHRA) and published in the Government Gazette of 22 July 2022, SAHRA hereby publishes the final Revised Schedule of Fees for Applications made to SAHRA. Applications for provision of services submitted to the South African Heritage Resources Authority (SAHRA), in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, No. 25 of 1999 (NHRA) must be accompanied by a payment of the appropriate fee, taking effect from 1 January 2023

Revised Schedule of Fees for Applications made to the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA)

S24G Application for the rectification of the unlawful commencement and continuation of the development situated at 56 Ocean Terrace, Isipingo Beach

CaseViews

CaseHeader

Status: 

HeritageAuthority(s): 

ProposalDescription: 

1World Consultants (Pty) Ltd have been appointed by AKR Property Development (Pty) Ltd to undertake the required environmental services for the rectification of the unlawful commencement and continuation of a listed activity for AKR Property Development (Pty) Ltd situated at 56 Ocean Terrace, Isipingo Beach located within eThekwini Municipality. AKR Property Development (Pty) Ltd has commenced with the afore-mentioned activity, which was, at all relevant times, listed pursuant to section 24(2) of NEMA as an activity that requires environmental authorisation prior to commencement. The construction of the multi-storey residential complex necessitated excavation of soils within 100m of the High-Water mark of the sea. The KZN Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs (EDTEA), was informed on 18 May 2017 regarding the construction of a multi-storey residential complex located at 56 Ocean Terrace, Isipingo Beach. A site visit was conducted on 18 July 2017 b y the department officials to verify the activities on site. It was then noted and confirmed by the department that the property was located within 100m from the High-Water Mark of the sea triggering listed activities as per EIA Regulations. Additionally, it was observed that construction activities had already commenced, and two levels of the multi-storey complex was already under construction. A warning letter was issued to the client on 11 September 2017 and the department had advised that the matter can be resolved by means of retrospectively authorising the construction of the multi-storey residential complex via the NEMA section 24G process, Rectification of the unlawful commencement of activity. An S24G application was submitted to the department on 31 October 2017 and a site visit followed on 12 December 2017 with the EAP and officials of the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Unit of the Department. It was observed that the construction is near completion and would be ready to be sold from February 2018. A Directive was issued to the client and EAP in terms of section 24G of NEMA 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) following an application for the rectification of the unlawful commencement and continuation of a listed activity for AKR Property Development (Pty) Ltd situated at 56 Ocean Terrace. A Section 24G application will be lodged with the department for review and consideration. AKR Property Development (Pty) Ltd has commenced with the unlawful construction of a multi-storey residential complex, which necessitated excavation of soils within 100m of the High-Water mark of the sea. The subject site is located at 56 Ocean Terrace, Isipingo, on the South Coast of the eThekwini Municipality. Map 2 above is a zoomed in image providing an indication of the general locality of the development site and the distance from the HWM of the sea. The development is limited to the site Erf 986 Isipingo. The site extent is 1921m2 and the development covers approximately 83% of the site. The height is within the town planning allowances of three storeys. The development includes: • New Entrance Driveway (via Delta Road) • New Boundary Wall • Basement and Upper Floor • Ground Floor (Parking Deck) • Third Floor (Additional 3 units) The development has two lower levels and three upper levels, comprising a parking level and 18 apartments in total. A traffic impact assessment was completed, and the parking area in terms of capacity was designed accordingly. The plumbing and electrical design of the development also aligns to the proposed development capacity in terms of residential usage. The design of the house does take into consideration the risks that are posed by rise in sea levels. However, the distance from the HWM of the sea to the boundary of the property is 57.9m. The new boundary wall will be maintained at a height of 2m. All of the boundary’s walls will be within the site boundary of Erf 986. The property itself is situated above road level. The building will also be situated at least 3m above sea level reducing the risk of being affected by rise in sea level. The nature of the material which will be removed during the rehabilitation phase will be of the building and construction material such as concrete, bricks, timber etc. and most of the infill will be consisted from the existing original natural site material by means of reusing any excavated material, that may have occurred from the preparation work for the new structure.

Expanded_Motivation: 

Section 24G of the NEMA, without affecting any criminal liability of a person who has acted in contravention of, makes provision for that person to submit an application to the relevant MEC/ Minister, which, if successful, will enable that person lawfully to continue with the listed or specified activity and/or legalise an otherwise unlawful structure, with effect from the date on which the authorisation is issused. Ultimately, the outcome of a S24G application must be to provide the Competent Authority, the Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs (EDTEA), with sufficient information to provide an informed decision on the Application, in terms of Environmental Authorisation (EA), in order to avoid or mitigate any detrimental impacts that the activity may inflict on the receiving environment. The property owner, Rabindra Dukhi, of AKR Developments (Pty) Ltd purchased the property in May 2016, with the intention of completing the already commenced construction. He also amended the building plans to include an additional storey on the building. His attention was only brought to the environmental authorisation requirements, when he enquired it at the Municipality level, following recommendation by his architect to ensure that authorisations were in place. Mr. Dukhi then contacted the relevant authorities himself. The commencement of construction was not maliciously intended to circumvent the laws. In fact, Mr. Dukhi had contacted the authorities himself. Mr. Dukhi is now keen to correct and rectify the unlawful activity via Section 24G as recommended. Mr. Dukhi was not aware of the need for environmental authorisation. His architect, appointed for amending the plans, brought his attention to it possibly being required. He has not disagreed with the legislation but was simply ignorant of the fact that it is required for his development. This appeals process is to rectify the matter, not to dispute it. Consequently, he has timeously appointed an EAP to handle the appeals process and prepare the required report.

ApplicationDate: 

Monday, February 12, 2018 - 10:07

CaseID: 

12212

OtherReferences: 

ApplicationTypeDeadlineDateContactPerson
20/07/2018

Heritage Reports: 

ReferenceList: 

 
 

Search form