WILLEMSTAD – Infrastructure Minister Charles Cooper has defended the construction of The Pyrmont Hotel in Penstraat by stating that Curaçao’s Island Development Plan (EOP) designates the area for tourism. However, a court ruling concerning the same development shows that the property on which the project is being built does not formally carry the EOP designation “Tourist Area.”
According to the 2023 ruling by the Court of First Instance, the majority of the property is designated “Urban Residential Area,” while the portion bordering Pietermaai falls under the “Inner City” designation.
The distinction has become relevant again after activists demonstrated Sunday against large-scale tourism and real-estate developments on Curaçao.
Responding to the protest on Facebook on Monday, Cooper said approximately 25 people had demonstrated near The Pyrmont and wrote in Papiamentu: “E EOP ta denominá e area aki komo area Turistiko,” meaning that the EOP designates the area as a tourist area.
Cooper followed his comments with an extensive timeline of the Pen Resort development dating back to 2003. He argued that rather than criticizing the project, it should be considered regrettable that a development of this nature has taken more than two decades to materialize.
However, the formal land-use designation played a central role in an earlier legal battle over the project and contradicts the minister’s description of the site.
Court established land designation
The issue was addressed explicitly in 2023 when three nearby residents challenged the building permit for Pen Resort, the previous name of what is now The Pyrmont.
The Court of First Instance determined that most of the property carries the EOP designation “Urban Residential Area.” The section adjoining Pietermaai is designated “Inner City.”
Kas di Pueblo is situated within the Urban Residential Area portion, while Cerro Bonito stands on the section classified as Inner City.
The formal designation “Tourist Area” was not identified by the court as applying to the project site.
The distinction is particularly significant because Cooper has headed the ministry responsible for Traffic, Transportation and Urban Planning (VVRP), which was itself involved in defending the permit before the court.
Hotel height triggered legal dispute
The EOP designation was not merely a technical issue. It directly affected the permitted height of the development.
For the Urban Residential Area section, a maximum construction height of eight meters applied. Plans for the hotel, however, included a highest section of approximately 20 meters.
The regulations allow the minister to deviate from the eight-meter limit, but doing so requires a proper assessment of the competing interests and an explanation of why the deviation should be permitted.
The court concluded that Cooper had not adequately done that when granting the original building permit.
On November 1, 2023, the Court of First Instance annulled the permit. The judgment found that the minister's decision did not sufficiently explain Pen Resort's interest in receiving such a substantial exemption from the maximum building height or demonstrate how the interests of nearby residents had been weighed.
The ruling did not prohibit construction of the hotel. Instead, Cooper was instructed to issue a new decision with a properly substantiated balancing of interests.
A new building permit was subsequently signed by Cooper on November 28, 2023.
At the time, VVRP legal adviser Giselle Hollander acknowledged that the original justification had been legally insufficient and needed to be expanded. In discussing the matter, she also explicitly referred to construction within an “urban residential area.”
Tourism development does not change EOP designation
The dispute also highlights an important distinction between allowing tourism-related development in an area and formally designating that land as a “Tourist Area” under the EOP.
Pietermaai has developed into an important tourism and hospitality district, and VVRP's own urban development plans recognize tourism as an important economic activity. Coastal areas can accommodate functions such as restaurants and city hotels.
At the same time, those plans emphasize maintaining and expanding residential functions and protecting the historic urban structure. Residential use is considered important for maintaining activity and social control within the neighborhood.
An area can therefore have substantial tourism potential and accommodate hotels without its formal EOP designation necessarily being “Tourist Area.”
That distinction was absent from Cooper's Facebook response.
Government also played role in delays
Cooper also suggested that the lengthy process surrounding Pen Resort should itself be considered a disgrace. However, the history of the development shows that not all delays can be attributed to protests or objections from residents.
The project and its permits changed over the years, and in 2023 the court intervened because the building permit issued under Cooper's responsibility had not been adequately justified.
The residents who challenged the permit were successful on that point, requiring the minister to reconsider and better substantiate his decision.
The latest political exchange therefore raises a broader issue about the government's communication surrounding controversial development projects.
Cooper can defend the policy decision to allow a hotel at the location and can argue that tourism development is appropriate for Penstraat and Pietermaai. But that is different from saying that the EOP formally designates The Pyrmont property as “Tourist Area.”
Based on the court's determination in the case concerning the project itself, most of The Pyrmont site is formally designated Urban Residential Area, while the remaining section is designated Inner City.