ANNOUNCEMENTS

ACHIEVEMENTS what CBCRA do in the community
BECOME A MEMBER and raise the level of community spirit
SEND US your suggestions and comments
READ MORE about City of Cape Town’s activities & policies
FAULT REPORT system introduced by the City Council
VISIT Waste Control for more details about your recycling

Thursday, 30 November 2017

A proposal has been put forward to rename the Little Glen Nature Reserve.
The City of Cape Town has begun the public participation process to rename the Little Glen Nature Reserve in Camps Bay after the late Arthur Shephard.
This comes after the Camps Bay Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association (CBRRA) submitted a proposal to the City in 2015 that the Little Glen Nature Reserve be renamed in honour of Mr Shephard who was a Camps Bay resident.
The chairperson of the City’s Naming and Nomination Committee, Brett Herron, said in a statement on Friday November 24: “According to Chris Willemse, the chairperson of the CBRRA, Mr Shephard contributed a lot of his personal time and money to transform this gem. The local community, volunteers, and the City assisted him in realising this dream.
“Following on from the discussion, the committee recommended to the City’s executive mayor, Patricia de Lille, that the City undertake a public participation process for the renaming of the reserve to Arthur Shephard’s Little Glen Nature Reserve.”
Mr Herron added that once the mayor has approved this recommendation, the City’s public participation unit will commence with the process of requesting comment and input from residents and interested and affected parties in Camps Bay.
Mr Willemse stressed that they did not want to see the iconic name of “Little Glen” disappear, rather, they wanted to see it renamed as Arthur Shephard’s Little Glen Nature Reserve.
Mr Willemse said it was worthy of a member of the community who turned the space around from something that was disused into a vibrant community park.
“The man deserves a lot of credit.”
Mr Willemse added that Mr Shephard used a lot of his own time and resources to turn the place around.
Mr Willemse described the work done by Mr Shephard as phenomenal and said that this would be a worthy honour for a dedicated community member. “We don’t want to see the name of Little Glen disappear. We submitted the application two years ago so we don’t know how long the process will take,” he added.
Mr Shephard passed away two years ago.
This article was created by Matthew Hirsch and can be found here https://www.atlanticsun.co.za/news/renaming-planned-12205140

Blue Heritage Plaque



■ Camps Bay Primary School’s Preparatory School building was recently awarded Blue Heritage Plaque status. A plaque was unveiled at a special assembly on Monday November 27. The architecturally significant stone building, designed in 1913 by E A Cook for the Camps Bay Public School (founded 1906), has survived as one of the few heritage buildings in Camps Bay during times of rapid change and development. Pictured are Grade 1 and 2 pupils, Camps Bay Primary School principal Stuart Collier; head of the Camps Bay Preparatory School Campus Linda Murray; and chairperson of the Simon van der Stel Foundation, Ian Pretorius.

By Atlantic Sun
https://www.atlanticsun.co.za/news/blue-heritage-plaque-12205137

No more fireworks at Maiden’s Cove

    Maidens Cove will no longer be one of the designated fireworks sites.

Maiden’s Cove in Camps Bay will no longer be a designated place for fireworks to be set off after a motion was submitted to sub-council.
The matter was discussed at a recent Ward 54 committee meeting.
The move has been supported by various role-players, citing safety as the biggest reason for supporting the decision. Maiden’s Cove has been a designated fireworks site in the city for more than a decade.
The site has been used for fireworks on certain special events such as Diwali, Guy Fawkes as well as New Year’s Eve.
Ward 54 councillor Shayne Ramsay said the request to remove the area as a designated site was made by the Bungalow Owners’ Association.
“Each time fireworks come up for discussion, I receive a number of complaints about the fire risk they cause and the potential risk of injury to children and animals.
“The Bungalow Owners’ Association in particular submitted a request to have Maiden’s Cove removed as a site due to the fire risk to their wooden bungalows, particularly during the drought.”
She said that the motion was unanimously supported at sub-council on Monday November 20.
“We will be holding a meeting with key City officials to determine whether or not an additional site is required. The news was welcomed by ward committee members,” said Ms Ramsay.
Nele Vermaak, chairperson of the Bungalow Owners’ Association, said they were happy with the outcome.
She said that while everyone enjoyed fireworks it was a question of discharging it safely. “In a severe drought and during the windy season, it is just not safe to have it anywhere near wooden structures.”
Ms Vermaak added that the association had received a lot of complaints regarding the matter. She said there have also been incidents where children had been hurt.
According to Ms Vermaak, with vegetation being close to the site, it just didn’t make sense for fireworks to be allowed there, particularly after the recent fire in Camps Bay at the 12 Apostles hotel. “There are safer spaces to have it such as the V&A Waterfront,” she said.
Chris Willemse, chairperson of the Camps Bay Residents’ and Ratepayers’ Association (CBRRA), said they supported the decision. “It is just too dangerous with green belts being near the site and it is incredibly disturbing for animals. We’re happy to hear that (the site) has been taken away.”
He said the few moments of joy from fireworks were not worth the stress that it caused animals.
Mr Willemse agreed with Ms Vermaak, saying that the V&A Waterfront site would be a more suitable venue.
By
 MATTHEW HIRSCHhttps://www.atlanticsun.co.za/news/no-more-fireworks-at-maidens-cove-12205142

Renaming of Little Glen planned


https://www.atlanticsun.co.za/news/renaming-planned-12205140
November 30, 2017
The City of Cape Town has begun the public participation process to rename the Little Glen Nature Reserve in Camps Bay after the late Arthur Shephard.
This comes after the Camps Bay Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association (CBRRA) submitted a proposal to the City in 2015 that the Little Glen Nature Reserve be renamed in honour of Mr Shephard who was a Camps Bay resident.
The chairperson of the City’s Naming and Nomination Committee, Brett Herron, said in a statement on Friday November 24: “According to Chris Willemse, the chairperson of the CBRRA, Mr Shephard contributed a lot of his personal time and money to transform this gem. The local community, volunteers, and the City assisted him in realising this dream.
“Following on from the discussion, the committee recommended to the City’s executive mayor, Patricia de Lille, that the City undertake a public participation process for the renaming of the reserve to Arthur Shephard’s Little Glen Nature Reserve.”
Mr Herron added that once the mayor has approved this recommendation, the City’s public participation unit will commence with the process of requesting comment and input from residents and interested and affected parties in Camps Bay.
Mr Willemse stressed that they did not want to see the iconic name of “Little Glen” disappear, rather, they wanted to see it renamed as Arthur Shephard’s Little Glen Nature Reserve.
Mr Willemse said it was worthy of a member of the community who turned the space around from something that was disused into a vibrant community park.
“The man deserves a lot of credit.”
Mr Willemse added that Mr Shephard used a lot of his own time and resources to turn the place around.
Mr Willemse described the work done by Mr Shephard as phenomenal and said that this would be a worthy honour for a dedicated community member. “We don’t want to see the name of Little Glen disappear. We submitted the application two years ago so we don’t know how long the process will take,” he added.

Mr Shephard passed away two years ago.

Tuesday, 28 November 2017

Have a say on Little Glen

A public participation process is set to take place for the renaming of the Little Glen Nature Reserve in Camps Bay.
The City of Cape Town’s naming and nomination committee made the recommendation to carry out the process earlier this month.
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents’ Association (CBRRA) submitted a proposal to the City that the nature reserve be renamed in honour of the late Arthur Shephard.
Shephard coordinated the transformation of this nature reserve from a run-down underused public space to an area that is beautifully landscaped, secure and popular among visitors and the local community of Camps Bay, explains committee chairperson Brett Herron.
“According to Chris Willemse, chairperson of the CBRRA, Shephard contributed a lot of his personal time and money to transform this gem. “The local community, volunteers and the City assisted him in realising this dream,” he says.
“Once the mayor has approved this recommendation, the City’s public participation unit will commence with the process of requesting comment and input from residents and interested and affected parties in Camps Bay.”
This article was published on News 24 for the Peoples Post and can be found here https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Local/Peoples-Post/have-a-say-on-little-glen-20171127

Saturday, 11 November 2017

CCT sewage shame

In December last year, I made a short documentary called ‘Bay of Sewage’. It went viral, getting 50,000 hits in the first 10 days. I’m planning a sequel, called ‘Cape of Sewage’. Actually, I hope to call it ‘Sewage Solutions’. Because sewage is not rocket science, and with the right people, we can easily fix this crisis.
What? Another crisis?

Let me explain. In the 60s and 70s, the world tragically gave Thalidomide to pregnant mothers, and sprayed DDT to kill mosquitoes. And we thought that pumping raw sewage out to sea was alright.  Since then, the world has moved on. But in terms of marine sewage outfalls, Cape Town hasn’t progressed.
At Camps Bay, Hout Bay, and Mouille Point, we pump out a combined total of about 47Ml per day.That’s 19 Olympic-sized swimming pools.  A lot of human waste (and a lot of recyclable water).
But since the 70s, something else has changed too. Cape Town, Camps Bay, and Hout Bay have doubled, quadrupled or grown ten-fold in size. So we’re discharging much more sewage than ever before.
And our ‘chemical load’ in that wastewater is higher than ever.  Think pharmaceuticals, household detergents, anti-bacterial soaps and on and on. Some of it carcinogenic. Or endocrine-disrupting, fish-fertility-killing stuff.
The latest study, from the University of the Western Cape (which I’ve seen) shows our chemicals are massively bio-accumulating (building up) in Atlantic Seaboard marine life. Especially in mussels, which you might eat. (Hint for lovers of sea life: please use biodegradable detergents.)
The Cape Peninsula is a Protected Marine Reserve. So we’re pooing in our Reserve, if you’ll excuse my French. But the city denies that dumping sewage there is illegal. Fortunately, the Camps Bay Ratepayers sought senior legal counsel on this, and the latest opinion, I’ve been led to believe, states the opposite. So expect a legal battle.
The city also denies they are pumping raw sewage. They called it pre-treated, or something. But the science is clear. There are 4 stages of treatment. And the city only does Stage 0, which is screening for large objects (think tampons and nappies). That is called preliminary-treatment, something which happens before you properly chemically-treat anything. So to me and many others, our sewage effluent is ‘raw’. (And I have a BSc in Civil Engineering. I spent 2 of a 4 years course studying this stuff, literally.)
But does the city even always do Stage 0? Has anyone seen trucks lining up at the Camps Bay pumping station to remove the screened waste from the Olympic-pool-size quantities passing through? Some suspect all that happens there is maceration – grinding material into a pulp, then pumping it out.
The city often claims that since Sydney pumps sewage to sea,  it must be fine for us, too. Except … um… surely the city knows that Sydney DOESN’T pump out raw sewage? They screen it, like we do, then they treat it to stage 1 (primary treatment, sinking solids) and then to stage 2 (secondary, UV treatment).
And it goes out 3km, as opposed to around 700m from our Maiden’s Cove beach. And in Sydney, it goes into open seas, unlike ours which goes into our Table Bay, or much worse, into little Hout Bay.  And theirs is discharged at a depth of 60m, versus Camps Bay’s 30m.
And guess what? Sydney STILL has problems. I know this, because last week, I interviewed an oceanographer, who was once officially employed in Sydney to study the issue. So is our city perhaps intentionally misleading the public?
Our city also claims they test our sea-water regularly, so everything is fine. But I have good reason to believe their testing is inadequate. An award-winning public health expert explained it to me. That’ll be in the next video too.
And yes, at Camps Bay we have so-called ‘Blue Flag’ status. Except only half the beach is Blue Flag – because, by Blue Flag’s own rules, you can’t get certification with a pump-station on the beach. So does the city ever announce that Blue Flag covers only half the beach?
And the latest from WESSA, the wildlife society who are supposed to monitor the situation, is an admission that city-testing was ‘not fully independent and could be improved on’ in 2016. Will the city tell anyone? Um… probably not.
And the city says they employed the CSIR to do an independent sewage impact study. Which is true; they did employ the CSIR. But guess what? I don’t believe that report is fully independent. Because when I phoned the CSIR, they confirmed the city supplied much of the data for that report. Scandalous. And the city has thus far refused to release that report to the public, despite promising it in December last year.
But just think, if pumping sewage to sea was perfectly safe, then New York, for example, could shut its 26 (treatment) plants and just pump it to sea. The same for Barcelona and every coastal city worldwide. Billions of dollars would be saved. Except that would be nonsense.
Yet when I posed this conundrum to a top city official, I believe his response was:  yes, he would love to shut every plant in Cape Town and pump it all out to sea. Only the cost of pipes was holding him back. And this response was from an official in charge of treating sewage! It is ridiculous. This is what we’re dealing with.
I could go on. But you get the picture? Our city really, really doesn’t want to treat that sewage. But why are they so incredibly obstinate on this issue?
Is it a question of cost? How much would a treatment plant in Camps Bay or Hout Bay cost? (Bearing in mind the city gets close to R1m/month in sewage levies from Camps Bay alone, and it’s 40 years since they last built a pumping station there, so that’s R500m that should have been set aside…). How much would it cost to pump the 37Ml from Mouille Point to a proper treatment works, where that water could be recycled? Has the city bothered to get those figures?
And what about the losses when fewer tourists come to South Africa’s tourist golden-miles of Camps Bay and Hout Bay? Because yes, foreign tourists do actually care about this, er… poo.
I have another theory, though. Firstly, I believe our mayoral committee is obsessed with selling off public land, rather than preserving it for the public good.
Stories of our city siding with developers over ratepayers, and even fighting them in court, are frighteningly common. I won’t go on about it here. Scroll through Facebook.com/SaveCapeTown and read it there.
My point is, the people who run our city, seem intent on running it like a business. Are they trying to turn a cash profit, rather than run a public service for citizens? 
They certainly don’t seem to be listening to our engineers and planners often enough, or investing properly in infrastructure. Hence our water and sewage crises.
You see, it might be all the same issue – bad management. Suffer the people. Our city slogan used to be ‘This city works for you’. Clearly, that was no longer appropriate.
But is it more than just bad management? Let’s look specifically at Maiden’s Cove reserve, the only public space left in Camps Bay, on which we could build a primary-treatment plant, to take out 60% of sewage. Odourless and underground, they have such plants in cities like New York. But, oops! That land has just been sold.
Yes, since 2015, instead of putting all her energy into sewage and water, our mayor seems to have diverted large council resources into plotting the sale of Maiden’s Cove land. Why? And why was it suddenly sold last month?
Let’s speculate. Is it because the mayor is under huge pressure from the water crisis? And perhaps on her way out?
While we debate this, let’s please stop that sale. But let’s not take too long. Our sewage, which could be recycled, is still being pumped into our bays, killing-off our marine life, and surely floating back to shore.

Thursday, 2 November 2017

Tribunal lashed


Camps Bay residents are considering legal action against the City of Cape Town’s Municipal Planning Tribunal.
This comes after a recent decision by the tribunal relating to title deeds on a property in the suburb.
The Camps Bay and Clifton Ratepayers’ Association (CBCRA) says there is a lack of transparency when it comes to decision-making by the tribunal.
This is not the first time a decision made by the tribunal, established in 2015, has been met with criticism.
CBCRA chair Chris Willemse said they had instructed the association’s legal team to consider the merits of bringing an application before the Western Cape High Court to review, and have set aside the decision.
Mr Willemse said the owner had applied to have the property rezoned from single residential, to allow multiple units to be built on the property. He did not want to divulge the address of the property.
“It is common cause among all civic groupings in Cape Town that the DA-led City panders to the development industry and that the relationship is certainly not in the interests of property owners and ratepayers in the city.”
Mr Willemse also accused the tribunal and the City of favouring big developers when it came to making decisions. “The City argues that it cannot control the influx of people into the city, which is true. However, the emphasis on allowing huge upmarket developments, which result in rich pickings for the development industry, only puts additional stress on the already strained supply system (water, roads etc) without really dealing with the actual housing problems on the ground.
“Of course, upmarket development is where the money is – so there one finds the politicians and their fellow travellers.”
Mr Willemse said that the title deed conditions of a property were considered as real rights and therefore could not be removed without due process or compensation.
Osman Shaboodien, chairperson of the Bo-Kaap Civic and Ratepayers’ Association, said he fully supported the actions taken by the CBCRA. He agreed with Mr Willemse that decisions made by the tribunal favoured developers rather than residents.
He added that the BKCRA had been before the tribunal three times recently and that all decisions had gone against the people of Cape Town. “The biggest challenge that we have with the tribunal is that it is a biased body. It is all about a push to further the coffers.”
Mr Shaboodien also suggested that the Public Protector investigate the tribunal. “All of the decisions were stacked against the people of Cape Town. It is time that the people of Cape Town stand together and take a stand.”
He said decisions needed to be made neutral and benefit all people in Cape Town and not just a wealthy minority.
Dave Daniels, chairperson of the Municipal Planning Tribunal, welcomed any action by the CBCRA, adding that the association was fully within its rights to challenge any decision of the tribunal – via an appeal, or if that fails, in a court of law. “I support such applications because these assist to ensure that the tribunal makes decisions that are not only fair, but also legally sound.”
Mr Daniels added that all objections into a matter bought before the tribunal were taken into account. “When the tribunal decides against an objection it does not mean that objections were not taken cognisance of.
“The tribunal has refused a number of applications based, among others, on the reasonableness of objections made against applications.”
The tribunal meets every Tuesday at 10am and meetings are open to the public. “Any member of the media and the public is welcome to attend the meetings and then judge for themselves whether we conduct our business in a fair manner.”