The Editor, Cape Times
Box 11
Cape Town 8000
Per ctletters@inl.co.za
Dear Sir
Proposed takeover of the Camps Bay Bowling Club by the Camps Bay Prep School.
The various letters appearing on this page, written by certain members of a grouping called the Concerned Parents Group of the Camps Bay Prep School (CPG) and the article by Suzanne Maier (Camps Bay bowling club “is a glorified liquor outlet for white males, Cape Times 14th April) cannot go unchallenged as they constitute unjustified, unsubstantiated and, in Ms Maier’s case, accusations that are probably libelous and which might land her in the Equality Court with a case to answer.
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA) is the only properly constituted civic association for the Camps Bay, Clifton and Bakoven area. In this capacity, the CBRRA has been attempting to broker a sensible and sustainable accommodation between the Club and the School since 2011 and believes that a solution has been found. This will involve a partitioned land option, resulting in the School taking over the current parking area and a sizeable portion of the existing building structure – totaling over 1000m2, which is enough for the required classroom and play area expansion. The Club will retain its two bowling greens and the current hall.
The plan envisages a strong division line between the two entities to ensure compliance with all aspects of the SA Schools’ Act, particularly those aspects relating to liquor sales and consumption. The current School building shares a common boundary with a building that has an on-consumption liquor license and also houses a nightclub, so this does not set any precedent.
Interestingly, this plan offers the School more land and existing building area than that which it originally requested or, more importantly, claimed that it required. It would appear that the notion of political patronage, as referred to by Guy Hobbs in his letter (“roll out land to school”, Cape Times, 15th April), has transformed the School’s need into greed. Strangely, since the Premier’s office showed an interest in this matter, it has refused to respond to any queries from the CBRRA.
The CBRRA plan accommodates both the School in its proposed expansion and the almost century-old Bowling Club in its continued existence – creating a synergy between the young and not so young members of the community, whilst protecting the precious public open space and “green lung” that belongs to all citizens of this City. Once the Provincial Government gets its hands on this land, the lease will in all likelihood turn into a convenient “sale” based upon the rezoning to educational purposes and consequent loss of “value” on the open market. The Provincial Government is not accountable to the ratepayers of Camps Bay or the wider City. The notion that the school needs over 6000m2 of land for an extra 90 children is untenable (even if that figure is doubled) and the temptation to sell off “surplus” land to developers will be difficult to resist sometime in the future.
No doubt, the refrain of “this sale will benefit education and the children” will be raised again. The fact that there are existing, open parcels of land in Camps Bay, which are zoned for educational purposes seems to have escaped the Authorities and the School but possibly that is because they want buildings and infrastructure at no cost to themselves but ultimately at the expense of the Club and community. The Club premises are used for many additional activities and functions and the facility serves as the only community hall in Camps Bay. To suggest that the School, if given this facility, would continue to allow the public use of the hall, is incorrect as the prohibition of alcohol on school premises will exclude many social gatherings.
In short, the City cannot be allowed to alienate public open space, which belongs to its citizens, to an unaccountable Provincial authority.
It must also be pointed out that, contrary to the emotional and distorted views of Ms Maier, the Camps Bay Bowling Club, aside from its social players, fields 2 competitive teams of 40 players and despite their purported gender, race and dubious sobriety, as Ms Maier would have you believe, have managed to win promotion to the Premier League, in the case of the first team, and promotion to the 3rd league by the second team. One would imagine that congratulations, rather than public slander, should be in order.
The CBRRA plan was submitted to the City officials during the public participation phase, where the City invited public comment for the proposed cancellation of the Club lease in favour of a new lease with the Provincial Government, with a detailed motivation of the scheme. Strangely, the views of the community, as expressed by its ratepayers association, were ignored in the official report to Council.
However, the official report, possibly to circumvent any claim that the Club may lodge against the City for compensation for its assets in the event of early eviction, recommended that the Club’s current lease remain in place until its expiry in 2018. This has clearly angered the School and CPG, judging by the vindictive tone of their letters. They want it all and they want it now.
The report also fails to interrogate the actual needs of the School, nor does it assess the viability of the Club. In fact, it is debatable whether this proposed increase in Grade 2 pupils could even be accommodated in the current Grade 3 availability.
This will make any decision taken by Council susceptible to review and setting aside by a Court of law. What is noteworthy is the fact that the public participation process elicited 87 formal objections, 901 petition signatures and only 5 letters of support. Again, this seems to have had little effect on the drafters of the report.
The CBRRA continues to promote the partitioned solution as the only option that will benefit both parties - and ensure that the School can access a suitable and sufficient piece of land in the shortest time. In this regard, Ms Sara Dane, (in her “Sharing’s a pipe dream”, Cape Times, 14th April) reluctantly concedes that if a mutually beneficial solution can be found, then the parents are keen to “proceed apace”. Sadly, this does not seem to be the stance of the Camps Bay Schools’ Governing Bodies, which have twice in the space of the past few weeks refused to meet with the CBRRA to discuss the matter, stating that “they are not prepared to engage in further communication on this issue at this late stage”.
Clearly, they too see political patronage as the means to an end.
Ms Dane also accuses the Club of being obstructive to the process. She seems to forget that as early as mid-2011, representatives of the School held official meetings with senior City officials and the Deputy Mayor where they made a detailed presentation and demanded that the Club lease be unilaterally cancelled by the City in order that the School could access the property by the beginning of 2012.
This could hardly be described as negotiating in good faith.
The way forward must be clear to all objective and genuinely concerned people:
The parties must return to the negotiating table and seek a fair and reasonable compromise that benefits the School, the Club and the community and heads off any attempt by another authority (the Provincial government) to commandeer valuable public land that is the property of the citizens of Cape Town.
Regards
CHRIS WILLEMSE
CHAIRPERSON
No comments:
Post a Comment