Latest update August 15th, 2026 10:49 AM
Latest News
- Wales project to startup by year end but no 50% promised reduction in light bills until plant reaches full capacity – PM
- Blackouts will continue until all power lines, substations fixed – Indar
- Two slicks appear in Gulf as huge oil spill off Oman threatens disaster
- Newly built $208M school to get another $384M to build dorms
- CCJ President Anderson breaks silence on misconduct allegations
Is this not in contravention of the Sea Defence Act?
Dear Editor,
In accordance with the Sea Defence Act it is illegal for the owners of the Celina Resort to be granted a lease and allowed to build the Resort over an existing grouted boulder slope sea wall.
I refer to an article in both SN and Kaieteur News dated 14/01/11 on the Celina Resort and it would be interesting to know if the Sea Defence Board who is the legal authority or someone higher up gave permission to the owners to build this resort on top of an existing boulder sea wall, which consists of a concrete coping, grouted concrete boulder berm and slope, steel piling and four layers of gabion baskets.
The present shell built up over the existing wall can easily disappear overnight during an erosion cycle causing the Resort’s foundations to collapse and damage the grouted boulder wall below. I designed and built this wall in 1968 due to imminent eroding conditions of the foreshore at that time. Over 400 feet of courida trees on the foreshore in front of the wall were uprooted by erosion and disappeared shortly after construction of the wall.
Only in rare cases permission is granted by the Board to build minor structures (for religious purposes) seaward of the sea dam and the responsibility to remove same during an erosion cycle rests with the owners.
On account of severe erosion on the East Coast during the late 60’s Parliament on the advice of myself and other engineers in the Hydraulics Division amended the Sea Defence Act preventing construction of buildings and other structures in several areas of the coast landwards from 50 feet to 1000 feet from the centre line of the sea dam. Hansard ratified this amendment at that time and as far I know it is still the law.
I will further like to enquire if this is the case, isn’t the ‘Pradoville 2’ Housing Scheme at Sparendaam, which is one of the areas mentioned above where the President is presently building his mansion is not in contravention of the Sea Defence Act?
M. Alli
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.