High Court Rejects Appeal for R3.5 Billion Beachwood Development Land Use Approval
A high court review application concerning land use approvals for a proposed R3.5 billion residential estate on a 42-hectare site in Durban North, previously home to the Beachwood Golf Course, has been unsuccessful.
The application was submitted by the Friends of Beachwood, a voluntary group comprising individuals, organizations, and NGOs advocating for the preservation of the land as a recreational resource and open space for the residents and visitors of Durban, alongside James Te Reile, a resident adjacent to the property’s western boundary.
Read: FNB funds R800m for R3.5bn Durban North coastal estate
They aimed to contest both the provincial and municipal decisions that ultimately supported the development proposed by Beachwood Investments (Pty) Ltd, the developer.
The administrators responsible for the decisions under review included the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality, its Municipal Planning Tribunal, the Executive Committee Appeals Authority of the municipality, the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, and the KZN MEC for Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs.
When the Beachwood Golf Course property was acquired, its development prospects were hindered by restrictive title conditions and its designation as private open space.
Historically, since the 1930s, the property could only have been used as a golf course and for associated infrastructure accommodating a sports club.
Additionally, a road servitude crossed the property to facilitate public access to the beach on its eastern edge.
A significant portion of the land is environmentally sensitive, necessitating environmental authorization from the KZN provincial government for any development, and no development plan could be executed without municipal endorsement.
Ruling
In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, Judge Peter Olsen dismissed the application from the Friends of Beachwood and Te Reile for declaratory relief and to review and nullify the decisions made by municipal and provincial bodies.
ADVERTISEMENT
CONTINUE READING BELOW
Olsen determined that the applicants failed to provide a valid and justifiable explanation for their delay in initiating judicial review proceedings against the provincial decisions.
He stated that allowing the delay would significantly harm the interests of Beachwood Development, which has been proceeding with construction based on the legitimacy of both municipal decisions and the environmental authorization granted by the province.
Listen/read:
KZN emerges as SA’s next property powerhouse
Sell your city: eThekwini’s real estate head Thapelo Mmusinyane [May 2024]
Olsen indicated that affected parties are entitled to rely on the finality of unchallenged administrative decisions, concluding that the delay could not be excused and the application to review the decisions of the provincial representatives must fail.
Development application submitted in 2022
On 31 October 2022, Beachwood Development presented a comprehensive land development application to the eThekwini municipality regarding the proposed development of the northern section of the Beachwood property.
Olsen mentioned that should the municipality endorse the development, specific decisions must be made to enable the lawful implementation of the development plan.
He stated that the applicants were requesting an order to review and overturn eight such decisions.
“Granting such relief would halt further progression of the development.”
Olsen remarked that one decision they sought to review involved the municipality’s amendment of its Land Use Scheme to create a new zone labeled “Special Zone: Beachwood Coastal Estate.”
ADVERTISEMENT:
CONTINUE READING BELOW
This decision could only be made by the municipal council, while other decisions were made by the Municipal Planning Tribunal.
Olsen noted that the practice of imposing restrictive conditions to establish enforceable limitations has fallen out of favor due to the ongoing realization of the goal of integrating all land use within a land use scheme.
He further explained that under a section of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (Spluma), municipal planning tribunals are empowered to eliminate, modify, or suspend restrictive title conditions.
‘No evidence’
Olsen observed that the Friends of Beachwood and Te Reile claimed the decision by the Municipal Planning Tribunal to eliminate special conditions was unlawful.
However, he indicated that they did not present a compelling argument for the review of municipal planning decisions, asserting that insufficient attention had been given to matters such as sewerage, stormwater, road access, and infrastructure.
“Their submissions effectively amounted to a claim of what they believed should have been the appropriate outcomes on these issues, lacking any evidential support for their conclusions or for the assertion that the municipality did not adequately consider these matters.”
Not ‘unconstitutional’
Additionally, the Friends of Beachwood and Te Reile made various submissions contending that the identification of catalytic properties is unconstitutional, thereby necessitating a review and nullification of all related decisions.
However, Olsen affirmed that catalytic projects within the municipality must conform to the same planning procedures and protocols as other development projects.
ADVERTISEMENT:
CONTINUE READING BELOW
Olsen added that there was no evidence that classifying the Beachwood property as a catalytic project influenced the administrative adjudication of Beachwood Development’s proposed plans.
He observed that the arguments put forth by the Friends of Beachwood and Te Reile essentially suggest that it is illegal for the municipality to make policy decisions concerning development matters, while The Constitution mandates local government to “promote social and economic development.”
Olsen elaborated that establishing policies to advance these objectives is crucial for governance, and when a development application like that of Beachwood Development is presented, policy must yield to the legal provisions governing the assessment and processes related to the application.
“If it is believed that the grant or rejection of such an application was guided by policy rather than law, then evidence must be provided to substantiate that belief; should the belief be valid, it may be evident in the reasoning behind the decision, such as instances where the administrator considered irrelevant factors or overlooked relevant ones.
“No such case has been established,” he concluded.
Olsen ruled that the relief sought by the Friends of Beachwood and Te Reile concerning catalytic projects must be denied.
Beachwood Investments is spearheaded by Durban property developer Gavin Strydom along with various investment partners; listen to Strydom’s interview on The Property Pod concerning one of his other developments north of Durban (or read the transcript here):
You can also listen to this podcast on iono.fm here.