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 Property Valuations for more details about your CV22

Friday, 12 April 2019

Documenting lessons from Day Zero

Members of the core team involved in the Cape Town Drought Response Learning Initiative and Film Library, from left are Professor Mark New, director of UCTs African Climate and Development Initiative, Associate Professor Gina Ziervogel, Research chair at ACDI, film library director, Victor van Aswegen of CineSouth Studios and Gareth Morgan, the City of Cape Towns Director of Resilience.
Last year this time Capetonians were facing the possibility of the taps running dry as the drought reached its peak.
Residents rallied to cut their water consumption and braced themselves for the prospect of having to queue at collection points for a 25-litre per person allocation of water if the dreaded Day Zero arrived.
The lessons learnt during the drought and the effect it had on residents has now been collated in the Cape Town Drought Response Learning Initiative (CTDRLI) and Film Library, which was launched on Tuesday March 26, at the V&A Waterfront Clocktower.
The CTDRLI is a collaboration between UCT’s African Climate and Development Initiative (ACDI), Conversations that Count and CineSouth Studios, and received support from the City of Cape Town’s Director of Resilience and corporate sponsors.
Peter Wills, director of Conversations that Count, says the CTDRLI is a three-phase process, which includes the film library that consists of 45 in-depth
interviews of people from various communities affected by the drought.
Phase one was the creation of the drought response film library.
Phase two will involve a learning dialogue on global and local level which could foster understanding about what builds resilience in a city and there will be a full-length documentary in phase three, which looks at Cape Town’s water crises, the lessons learned and how it relates globally.
“Since the story of what actually happened is tremendously rich and vivid, we wanted to make sure some of these perspectives were preserved, allowing us all to learn from what happened,” said Mr Wills.
Professor Mark New, director of UCT’s ACDI, said this was a great way to capture what people experienced in the drought.
“It’s still fresh in their minds so you get the best reflections. We are capturing people’s memories while we moved out of the drought so they can talk and share,” he said.
More than a hundred people attended the CTDRLI launch and saw 30 minutes of the film library, which included thoughts and views from different City of Cape Town departments, businesses and environmental agencies in the Western Cape.
The actual film library will include a one-hour interview with each of the subjects and will highlight important points that people can use as engagement for discussion on problem areas.
About 50 hours of footage is part of the film library, according to the film-maker, Victor van Aswegen of CineSouth Studios.
“We are applying the tools of film-making to document the lessons learned by key individuals involved in the drought response,” he said.
In extracts from the film library, various speakers raised important topics.
Feroz Koor, head of sustainability at a top South African retail chain, said a Day Zero would have massive implications for the economy if employees needed to leave work to queue for water.
Xanthea Limberg, mayoral committee member for informal settlements, water and waste services, said the City needed to do more planning in a climate of unpredictability.
“With the high cost needed for resources, it is hard to justify the need without the correct data,” she said.
Mike Mulcahy, CEO of Greencape, said there were many alien invasive species growing around the catchment areas which impacted the city’s water levels during the drought.
Helen Davies, chief director of Green Economy, said there should be investment in better systems for water efficiency in schools, businesses and homes.
Professor New said even though the extracts of the film library included views from expert sources from the City and environmental organisations, in the final documentary, Day Zero, they would like to interview people from different sectors to add their views on the drought.
Those who attended the launch held mixed views about the film library interviews shown.
Sindiswa Ndlwana, a UCT alumni who graduated with a BSc in Statistics, said the video lacked the practical principles of the water crisis. Ms Ndlwana said it did not include the broader community like the townships and how they can save water.
Nicholas Smallberg, CEO of a branding company, said not enough credit was given to citizens of the city for playing their part in saving water to avoid Day Zero.
“The movie is a good start; so much more can be done. I am disappointed that not enough Capetonian voices were heard. I stand by my statement that says that the people of Cape Town saved the city, not the politicians and aldermans,” he said.
Professor New said they were still looking for the other interview subjects who would take part in the final documentary.
Deputy Mayor of Cape Town Ian Neilson, who also contributed to the film library, said managing a crisis is different from managing any other plans that are medium to long-term.
“Your time and money are limited. In the end for us, there was really only one issue: we had to get the consumption down.
“There was nothing else that was really going to solve the problem,” he said.
Mr Neilson paid tribute to the people of Cape Town for their role in beating the drought.
“We achieved 40% to 50% reduction in water consumption, that would not have been possible unless the majority of the four million people were working together,” he said.
The film library will be a free online resource that citizens, businesses and schools and teachers can access in order to use as a learning tool.
Visit https://www.drought-response-learning-initiative.org/ for more information about the CTDRLI.
By Wesley Ford

Monday, 8 April 2019

Bo-Kaap heritage application


Philip Bam, secretary of the Greater Cape Town Civic Alliance
The Greater Cape Town Civic Alliance, representing a wide range of civic and environmental organisations in the greater Cape metropole, notes with great expectation the attention being given to the application for a heritage protection overlay zoning (HPOZ) for the Bo-Kaap.
The Bo-Kaap community’s struggle to protect the area’s cultural uniqueness against greedy developers is to be lauded.
Developers invariably argue that they will be creating jobs and that the opposition to inappropriate development will harm the economy.
It’s like saying the drug boss who dishes out money to the community while taking the hard-earned wages of the breadwinner is okay.
The dignity of the breadwinner to provide for his family means nothing to the drug boss. It is not acceptable to live by the notion that the end justifies the means.
The Bo-Kaap is a unique tourist attraction, well known for its vibrant unique community life which should not be spoilt by inappropriate development.
Whilst the GCTCA understands the need for development, it cannot be at all costs. Some things, such as our unique cultural spaces, should be sacrosanct.
Already gentrification is a major factor in destroying the unique cultural community life for future generations. The Bo-Kaap needs protection, otherwise one of Cape Town’s jewels will be tarnished if not completely destroyed.
The lack of an HPOZ has resulted in a mix of inappropriate architectural design, huge variations in height and style resulting in a built environment that detracts from the original ambience of the area.
The city council, over the years, approved out-of-character developments, and we urge developers and the planning approval authorities not to use the tortuous logic that a precedent has been set to allow more ugly anti-heritage developments.
We say it cannot always be about the money.
The City might see the inappropriate high-rise buildings as an opportunity to raise more rates, but we say Cape Town is world-renowned and an international attraction, not because of the rates but precisely because of its unique architecture and cultural experiences.
If this area is allowed to degrade into just another concrete jungle, why should tourists invest in coming to Cape Town? But, more importantly, it must be about the locals and their way of life.
The processes seem to take forever, and we are glad to hear the mayor’s utterances in support of the HPOZ.
The devil might be in the detail, so we urge the representatives of the Bo-Kaap to be exceptionally vigilant on the road to achieving the dream of protecting the culture of the Bo-Kaap.
The people with bags full of money will challenge the community. We say to those greedy developers, go somewhere else. Don’t trample on people’s cultural dignity.
Consult with the people if you wish to develop in their backyards, and let the desire of the people prevail.
We urge those who have the authority and responsibility to make decisions about the HPOZ to do right by the people and not be found wanting.
The GCTCA will be watching the heritage overlay process with a keen eye.

Friday, 5 April 2019

Bo-Kaap Heritage battle won

Municipal heritage status for the Bo-Kaap has been approved.
Bo-Kaap residents have been victorious in their plea for the area to be declared an heritage protection overlay zone (HPOZ) after it was approved by the council last Thursday, March 28.
This is a battle residents have been fighting since 2013.
In the past two years, they have been furiously protesting against massive developments going up and demanding that Bo-Kaap be declared a heritage site.
Former ward councillor Dave Bryant first proposed an HPOZ for the Bo-Kaap through a motion to Sub-council 16 in 2013, however, the process was stopped and the HPOZ put on hold indefinitely.
Due to the period of time that had passed after the first public participation, City officials from the heritage management department advised late last year that a new round of public participation would need to take place.
The public participation process ran from January 18 to February 22 this year and included a sector hearing where community-based organisations and the business sector made oral presentations.
About 2298 comments were received of which 2271 were in support of the proposal for the HPOZ.
The Bo-Kaap Civic and Ratepayers Association (BKCRA) said they welcomed the decision made by council.
Chairperson Osman Shaboodien said: “We know that it is not a magic wand that will solve all our problems, but it is a step in the right direction.”
The main purpose of an HPOZ is to, among other things, prevent inappropriate development and alterations within an area of significant heritage value. It also allows the City to impose conditions on an approval to ensure that the heritage value of the building or site is protected or enhanced.
According to the City, the HPOZ will become effective once published in the Provincial Gazette. Mayor Dan Plato said the council’s approval marks a pivotal moment for the Bo-Kaap.
“The City has officially committed to conserving the unique historical landscape and way of life in the Bo-Kaap by managing development in a sustainable and considered manner,” he said.
Mr Plato said the community was entering a new chapter where residents and landowners can actively promote it as a heritage tourist destination to the benefit of the local community, as well as the broader Cape Town.
“I personally want to thank all of those who have persevered, and I want to commend those who have participated in the recent public participation process for their commitment and constructive contributions,” he said.
The City’s mayoral committee member for spatial planning and environment, Marian Nieuwoudt said: “Evidently, those who participated want the City to protect the Bo-Kaap’s long-term sustainability as a cultural asset. By including the Bo-Kaap in an HPOZ we will ensure that this uniqueness is harnessed and promoted for future generations and visitors.”
However, Mr Shaboodien said they were disappointed to note that the amendments proposed by the ANC’s caucus leader Xolani Sotashe had bee rejected.
Mr Sotashe attended a community meeting last Tuesday, March 26, at which residents requested that he raise some of the issues with council.
According to Mr Sotashe, these issues included a legal representation to be given to Bo-Kaap residents whose properties were affected by current developments and a moratorium on all developments in Bo-Kaap.
Mr Sotashe said: “Residents complained that the developments in the area have negatively affected them and they seek reparations. I raised these issues to the council but the DA rejected all of them.”
Mr Shaboodien said: “We want to thank Councillor Sotashe for taking our request to council and we say ‘baie tramakasie’ to those councillors that supported his/our amendments. We again call on the mayor to launch an independent investigation into the deliberate delay of the HPOZ, the reasons why and who benefited. We further call for a moratorium on all development approved or pending while this investigation is happening, and we await the findings.”
By Sinazo Mkoko

Tuesday, 2 April 2019

CCT approves heritage protection for Bo-Kaap

City Council approved the inclusion of the Bo-Kaap area in a heritage protection overlay zone (HPOZ) yesterday.

The HPOZ will become effective once published in the Provincial Gazette. 

This follows months of protests by residents over plans to develop the area.

Mayor Dan Plato said: “Council’s approval marks a pivotal moment for the Bo-Kaap.  Residents’ plight in getting the Bo-Kaap area included in an HPOZ has been ongoing for nearly four years. The Bo-Kaap is entering a new chapter where residents and land owners can actively promote it as a heritage tourist destination to the benefit of the local community, as well as the broader Cape Town.”

The City conducted a public participation process about the proposal to include the Bo-Kaap area in an HPOZ. 

The process ran from Friday January 18 to Friday February 22. 

In the end, 2 298 comments were received of which 2 271 were in support of the proposal.

Mayoral committee member for spatial planning and environment, Marian Nieuwoudt, said: “Evidently, those who participated want the City to protect the Bo-Kaap’s long-term sustainability as a cultural asset. By including the Bo-Kaap in an HPOZ we will ensure that this uniqueness is harnessed and promoted for future generations and visitors.”

CCT Plannnig: Submit comments on 96 Camps Bay Drive

https://campsbayratepayers.blogspot.com/2018/06/court-rules-against-city-96-camps-bay.html




Ref 70427675-City approval of the development management scheme, removal of title deed restrictions, consent of a restrictive title deed condition, subdivision and departures

Erf 1169 Camps Bay, 96 Camps Bay Drive.

Notice is hereby given in terms of section 81 of the City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-Law (MPBL), 2015 that the application below has been received and is open to inspection at the office of the District manager at Media City Building, 2nd Floor, corner of Adderley Street and Hertzog Boulevard Cape Town, 8001. Alternatively, the application can be viewed by clicking on the PDF attachment in the document downloads section below.

Application details

District office: Table Bay District
Application number: 70427675
Applicant / owner details: Andre Andrew Pratt Town Planner / The Schaefer Partnership (Pty) Ltd.
Description and physical address:96 Camps Bay Drive, Camps Bay.
Submission period: 12 April - 13 May 2019

Purpose of the application

The application is to subdivide the property and allow two dwellings on each property. The following applications have been applied for:
  1. 1. Subdivision
  2. 1.1. Subdivision of erf 1169 Camps Bay into two portions (Portion 1: approximately 563m2 and Portion 2: approximately 575m2).
  3. 1.2. Subdivision to permit a reciprocal right of way servitude over both portions.
  4. 2. Removal of title deed conditions relating to the number of dwellings, built upon area, street and common boundary setbacks.
  5. 3. Council’s Consent in terms of a condition of title relating to the subdivision.
  6. 4. Departures:

    Portion 1:
  7. 4.1. Item 22(a): To permit a floor factor to be 1,17 in lieu of 1,0.
  8. 4.2. Item 22(c)(i): To permit the height of the wall-plate from base level to be 8,85 m in lieu of 8 m.
  9. 4.3. Item 22(c)(ii): To permit portions of a building, after the first 12 m from the street boundary within 3 m from the common boundary, to be 9,97 m in lieu of 4 m in height from base level to top of roof.
  10. 4.4. Item 22(d): To permit the swimming pool to be 0,704 m in lieu of 1 m from the western common boundary with Erven 1170 and 1171.
  11. 4.5. Item 22(d): To permit portions of the building (main and second dwelling) on the first, second and third storey to be setback 0 m in lieu of 3 m from the common boundary with portion 2.
  12. 4.6. Item 22(e)(i): To permit entrance doors to be 0 m in lieu of 1,5 m from the common boundary shared with portion 2.

    Portion 2:
  13. 4.7. Item 22(a): To permit a floor factor to be 1,15 in lieu of 1,0.
  14. 4.8. Item 22(c)(i): To permit the height of the wall-plate from base level to be 8,3 m in lieu of 8 m.
  15. 4.9. Item 22(c)(ii): To permit portions of a building, after the first 12 m from the street boundary within 3 m from the common boundary, to be 9,4 m in lieu of 4 m in height from base level to top of roof.
  16. 4.10. Item 22(d): To permit portions of the building (main and second dwelling) on the first, second and third storey to be setback 0 m in lieu of 3 m from the common boundary with portion 1.
  17. 4.11. Item 22(d): To permit the swimming pool to be 0,203 m in lieu of 1 m from the western common boundary with Erf 1171.
  18. 4.12. Item 22(e)(i): To permit entrance doors to be 0 m in lieu of 1,5 m from the common boundary shared with portion 1.
  19. 5. City Approval
  20. 5.1. Item 121(2): To permit buildings on portion 1 to be setback 4,5 m in lieu of 5 m from a designated metropolitan road (Camps Bay Drive).
  21. 5.2. Item 121(2): To permit buildings on portion 2 to be setback 4,49 m in lieu of 5 m from a designated metropolitan road (Camps Bay Drive).

Submit your comments

Submit your comments, objections and representations by email.

All submissions need to include the following:
  • The application reference number.
  • The details of the person submitting the comment or objection, including ithe full name, interest in the application, address, contact details and the method by which they can be contacted.
  • The reason for the objection, including the effect that the application will have on a person/area and any aspect of the application that you consider inconsistent with policy, and how.
Submissions in writing need to be made to the specified district office on or before the closing date.

View our guidelines on submitting objections / comments on land use applications, or to make oral submissions.

General conditions

  • An objection, comment or representation that does not meet the requirements above may be disregarded.
  • Late comments or objections will not be considered unless the City Manager has agreed in writing.
  • If you are unable to write, you may come to the specified district officeduring office hours where you will be assisted with transcribing your comment or objection and associated reasons.

Document downloads

Monday, 1 April 2019

Resident's opinion on COCT Tourism Development Framework

Hi Nicola

Herewith my attempt to address a serious situation with some humor.
Does the City ever listen to its citizens?

Further to this email I attach the COCT Tourism Development Framework in case it slipped your attention. It acknowledges that tourism growth is sub-optimal but does not recognize its role in this fact. Escalation of immutable costs deprive the tourism industry of revenues to promote itself, to employ staff and to maintain reasonable properties and prices. Developer friendly planning mistakes detract from the stated objective to "position Cape Town as the Most Beautiful City in the World". Its confused policies remove the stability required to make long term investments (eg: its plans to tax private PV electricity generation). Unfortunately I conclude that Cape Town's success to date has been in spite of, not because of, its government and administration. I have little hope that by increasing its role it will contribute anything but cost.

Regards Chris Marshall









CCT: Comment on existing contract Traffic Contravention Services


Comment on the amendment of existing contract 60S-2015-2016

We intend amending an existing contract relating to a service provider for Traffic Contravention Services.

About

We plan to extend the exisiting contract:

Contract details:
Tender Number and Project ManagerProject DescriptionCurrent Expiry date of contract:Reason for Amendment
Tender: 60S-2015-2016: Project Manager: Marius van Tonder Contract Service Provider For Traffic Contravention Services30 June 2019Increase in contract period:
Contract to be extended to 31 March 2020 or until new contract commences, whichever is earlier.
Notice is hereby given in term of section 116(3) of the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, No. 56 of 2003.
Notice is further given in accordance with section 21 of the Local Government Municipal Systems Act, No. 32 of 2000, that you can submit comments in respect of the proposed amendments.
Access the draft contracts:

Comment period

12 April – 26 April 2019
Comments and objections may be submitted from

Submit your comment

Submissions must be clearly marked: “Amendment of existing contracts 60S-2015-2016”.
Comments, recommendations or input may be submitted via the following channels:
Delivery
Deliver your comments to:
Office of Deputy Traffic Chief: KT Visser

1st Floor
Green Point Traffic Department
Somerset Road
Green Point
Cape Town
8000

Contact us

For more information contact:

Marius van Tonder

PLEASE NOTE

Our Public Participation Unit will assist you if you would like to submit comments but have a disability or are unable to read or write. See details below

Public Participation Unit

Telephone:
021 400 1766

Document downloads