| Scrub Is. issued compliance letter |
|
|
|
| Written by Webmaster | |
| Wednesday, 02 May 2007 | |
|
Scrub Island developers received a letter last weekend stating that they will need to follow several planning department recommendations in order to proceed with construction works without being fined.
In a compliance notice signed by Chief Planner Louis Potter, the development is held “responsible for carrying out unauthorised development at property situated at Scrub Island” under the Physical Planning Act of 2004. The “breach” includes “the construction of a temporary barge ramp, the construction of a breakwater and dredging for the marina, and lack of adequate environmental management.” The Main Sail Development Group has been overseeing the construction of a $70-million dollar boutique, luxury villa and marina resort on the 230-acre island. One of the Environmental Impact Assessment recommendations was to relocate any corals that might be impacted during the marina’s construction. For the process, government asked Virgin Islands Project Manager, who acts for the developer, to hire an expert on coral and sea grass mitigation. The company selected Applied Technology Management, which also carried out the EIA’s for the Beef Island and Scrub Island developments. But the compliance letter states that due to the “extent of marine and terrestrial environmental components” — including coral and seagrass transplanting, coastal engineering, and bird and plant relocation — “the current environmental management is not qualified to carry out all the environmental aspects of the project.” In order to address this issue, an environmental team that includes experts in marine, terrestrial and coastal engineering components must be established, according to the letter. The names and qualifications of the team members must be submitted to the planning authority, the Environmental Committee and the Conservation and Fisheries Department for approval. According to the notice, failure to remedy the breach would constitute an offence liable to summary conviction of $25,000 and, on indictment, to a fine not exceeding $50,000. On second offence the parties responsible would be fined up to $100,000. “We have no issues with the compliance letter,” Jonathan McCarthy, the VIPM project manager, said Tuesday. “We’ve had a positive dialogue with the government and we’re pleased that the government is monitoring our job.” |
|
| Last Updated ( Friday, 04 May 2007 ) |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|