X hits on this document

669 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

98 / 206

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies note that the overall 2010 State Party report conclusions mirror those presented in 2008, with an emphasis on requesting financial and technical assistance for training, analysis and planning. They also note that as recommended in the 2008 joint UNESCO/ICOMOS Mission Report the work of recording the warehouses is urgent, and a commitment for their documentation is needed.

c)

Malindi Port Project

At its 32nd session meeting (Quebec City, 2008) the World Heritage Committee requested that the State Party carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment which would include a 3- 5 year monitoring project, in order to assess, and enable measures to mitigate, potential negative impacts of the 2008 Malindi Port project, which it regretted had already commenced. Similarly, at its 31st session meeting one year earlier, the World Heritage Committee had requested an independent Environmental Impact Assessment, prior to any approval of the proposed port project which it requested to be developed in consultation with the World Heritage Centre (31 COM 7B.49). The State Party has not met either of these requests. The port project has now been completed without the requested Environmental Impact Assessment, or related monitoring of the project’s potentially negative effects, as identified by the 2008 joint UNESCO/ICOMOS mission.

In its April 2010 State of conservation report, the State Party, represented by STCDA, the latter regrets that it could not complete ‘all process of facilitating the independent Environment Impact Assessment before the due date as requested by the World Heritage Committee. It also notes that they are ‘continuing to take some initiatives in monitoring the impact of the project’. There are no monitoring details provided and the monitoring section of the report (III.2) contains no information, as was the case in the 2008 State Party’s state of conservation report.

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies consider that these statements need to be clarified. The continued lack of any Environmental Impact Assessment or monitoring arrangements for the Malindi Port Project despite several requests from the World Heritage Committee - is of great concern considering that:

The port development has the potential to alter the waterfront conditions and the

coastal morphology, There are existing

resources,

including

completed

hydraulic baseline studies

undertaken by the European Commission during the feasibility-study phase of the wharf p r o j e c t , a n d a B e a c h E r o s i o n S t u d y r e p o r t e d t o b e u n d e r t a k e n b y t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e Environment Zanzibar, which could have formed a starting assessments and monitoring actions. point for impact

The State Party reports that they would try to include the long due Environmental Impact Assessment of the Malindi Port within the on-going Environmental and Social Impact Assessment undertaken by the World Bank for the proposed Sea Front Project phase II.

Finally, a previous project that included dredging in the Ferry terminal area, and extracting and depositing large amounts of sand into the nearby wetland was also undertaken without an Environmental Impact Assessment.

d)

Sea Front project – Phase II:

The State Party report notes that a part of the deteriorated seawall was re-constructed in the framework of the Aga Khan Project for the Forodhani Park improvement.

A separate document, Zanzibar Seafront Phase II, was provided to the World Heritage Centre by the Aga Khan Trust for Culture as the second phase to the recently completed

State of conservation of World Heritage properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

WHC-10/34.COM/7B.Add, p. 98

Document info
Document views669
Page views669
Page last viewedFri Dec 09 16:04:01 UTC 2016
Pages206
Paragraphs4734
Words99190

Comments