The objections from the community did not have any effect on Council’s planning for the development of the sensitive Green Belt area.

The municipal spokesperson, Mr Peter Magwala, stated in a letter dated June 20 that "the objections received were considered, but they did not affect or change the planning of the project." Magwala also said that the guarantees had been paid by the client.

The client is Wadanga-I-Tole Entertainment Park (Pty) Ltd "which is now called Daybreak Properties 7 (Pty) Ltd."

The enquiry as to what aspects of development were included in the final development plan, was met with the written answer that "the original items included in the initial proposal are in the final development plan."

The area in question is west of the N1 and north of Stubbs Street, or Extension 9 West, often referred to as the Green Belt area.

The area is a sensitive water-catchment area and home to indigenous Fauna and Flora, including the Clawless Otter, Bushbuck, Red Duiker, Bandit Mongoose, rare bird species and more than 300 indigenous tree species.

Local conservationists have cited these species in letters of objection, one of which was written last year and directed to the office of the minister of Environmental Affairs, Mr Marthinus van Schalkwyk.

In 2005, many residents were shocked to read in the Zoutpansberger of Council’s ambitious plans for the town’s green belt area. The tender had been awarded to the client Wadanga-I-Tole Entertainment Park (Pty) Ltd. The tender amount was R15 300 000 and the area was 53,5 hectares. The original project description included a hotel, entertainment centre, traditional village, eco-park, man-made lake, a cable car and a filling station. The directors of the company were mentioned as dr. Ngwilimeni Aaron Funyufunu, Jerry Ndou, Shanti Dosa en Vino Ramjee.

A year ago, Council‘s executive committee resolved that the client should investigate the possibility of including a botanical garden. Another condition was that the filling station should be withdrawn. Other conditions included the EIA to be done by an independent consultant as well as an Environmental Management Plan that had to be submitted during and after the construction period.

Those objecting to the development got their hopes up when they heard nothing about the development for about a year. Council broke the silence and said at an integrated development planning (IDP) forum on May 23 that the proposed housing and commercial developments in the green belt were going ahead, despite objections.

On hearing this, Ms Inga Gilfillan of the Chairpersons Association and Ms Annette Keneally of the Soutpansberg Ratepayers Association met with Mr Karidzha of the municipality’s legal department. "We learnt from him on May 25 that the municipality decided to waive the requirement that an EIA be done on this highly ecologically sensitive green belt area. According to Mr Kharidza, the original town planner, Louis Cloete, has  been sacked and apparently the developers want to appoint new town planners," Ms Gilfillan said.

The municipal spokesperson declined to answer questions regarding the town planners or the places of residence of the directors of the company. He did mention telephonically that the directors could still be the same as in the initial proposal. The answer to the question regarding the EIA was not included in the media statement.

In 2002, when it was proposed that the town’s natural asset be rezoned into business stands, an outcry by nature conservationists was reported and it was said that "this will mean the final, permanent and total destruction of a prominent part of the town´s coveted Green Belt Area, over which responsible residents guarded jealously for the past quarter of a century and which, from a tourism point of view, is a major ingredient in the natural attraction of the town."

Previously, in 1998, Council discontinued the development of the area, due to serious objection by the community.