Having the privilege of living here all the year round, CBRRA and the residents of Camps Bay cordially open their arms to and welcome the many thousands of visitors to our beautiful suburbs which in Clifton, Camps Bay and Bakoven contain arguably the Cape’s best and most popular beaches per square meter of leisure space !
We trust that you will enjoy every moment of your visit(s) here, that you will look after yourself in the sun, in the water and on the roads and that you will contribute to the enjoyment of all beachgoers by taking your surplus baggage and rubbish with you when you leave.
We wish you and your families compliments of the season and hope that you will celebrate it happily in whatever manner you usually do in the realisation of the fact that the two richest possessions in our lives are our health and our cordial relationships with others.
And have a safe trip home with the fondest of memories of this neck of the woods !
* Bumpersticker seen in Camps Bay last year : “Welcome oomie, welcome tannie, we just like your lekker money” !!
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
Sunday, 6 December 2009
CBRRA co-opted two new members onto ManCo
CBRRA Manco was strengthened when two additional members were co-opted onto the committee at the monthly meeting held on 2 December 2009. The members are Richard Dames, who lives in Geneva Drive, and Charles Wells, from Atholl Road. They are joining several sub committees including finance, planning, heritage, environmental issues and cleansing.
Manco welcomes them and sincerely hopes that they will find their participation in CBRRA matters stimulating and rewarding.
Manco continues to seek people who are interested and motivated to be a part of the CBRRA action. This is essential to ensure continuity of the committee which is a vital factor in assisting residents in their dealings with Municipal and Governmental authorities.
If you are interested to join CBRRA's committee, please email us at campsbayratepayers@gmail.com.
Manco welcomes them and sincerely hopes that they will find their participation in CBRRA matters stimulating and rewarding.
Manco continues to seek people who are interested and motivated to be a part of the CBRRA action. This is essential to ensure continuity of the committee which is a vital factor in assisting residents in their dealings with Municipal and Governmental authorities.
If you are interested to join CBRRA's committee, please email us at campsbayratepayers@gmail.com.
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
An Update on the Oudekraal Site
Following the recent judgement in the High Court, The Argus, in an article dated 12 November 2009, as follows :
Oudekraal site may still be developed
Like initial reports about American writer Mark Twains's supposed death, any suggestion that Oudekraal has now been unequivocally saved from development may be greatly exaggerated. A new process initiated in may to explore development opportunities for this privately owned property stretching along the slopes of the Twelve Apostles between Camps Bay and Llandudno, is continuing, the consultant co-ordinating the process confirmed this week. This is despite the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein recetly upholding a Cape High Court decision that there are no township development rights on one of five erven making up this elite property, and confirmation last week that the surveyor-general's office had finally stamped "cancelled" across the township plan that dates from the 1950s.
Oudekraal site may still be developed
Like initial reports about American writer Mark Twains's supposed death, any suggestion that Oudekraal has now been unequivocally saved from development may be greatly exaggerated. A new process initiated in may to explore development opportunities for this privately owned property stretching along the slopes of the Twelve Apostles between Camps Bay and Llandudno, is continuing, the consultant co-ordinating the process confirmed this week. This is despite the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein recetly upholding a Cape High Court decision that there are no township development rights on one of five erven making up this elite property, and confirmation last week that the surveyor-general's office had finally stamped "cancelled" across the township plan that dates from the 1950s.
Illegal structures on Camps Bay beach
In the second week of November 2009, there appeared on the lawns of the Camps Bay main beach, three structures which were purported to be public change rooms.
Made out of flimsy materials with no door locks and bolted to huge concrete blocks placed on the lawns for stability against the wind, the changing-rooms were festooned with what the Council termed “ambush marketing” promoting breakfast foods.
The structures rapidly became tatty as a result of their flimsiness and the action of the wind. There were signs of drug usage and faeces in the cubicles and it was obvious that they had to be removed without any delay.
The owners of the restaurants immediately behind them justifiably complained to the Council and were strongly supported by CBRRA, the Camps Bay Community Police Forum, Camps Bay Watch and the Camps Bay Community Security Initiative.
The “permit” which the advertisers had received from the Council for this project had erroneously been given to them by a junior clerk in the Council Sport and Recreation Department without any prior public participation or referral to CBRRA and the like.
In the face of extreme threats from the advertisers in respect of the legal consequences should they be forced to remove the structures, the Council gave them due notice of a deadline for the removal thereof in terms of the relevant advertising by-law. The deadline for the removal by the advertisers was not met and the Council duly removed the offending structures in the fourth week of November 2009.
CBRRA commends all the parties who took part in the wide public protest against these structures and thanks the Council for its prompt reaction. It wonders just how the advertisers ever thought that this campaign of theirs would ever further the cause of the products which they attempted to promote.
Made out of flimsy materials with no door locks and bolted to huge concrete blocks placed on the lawns for stability against the wind, the changing-rooms were festooned with what the Council termed “ambush marketing” promoting breakfast foods.
The structures rapidly became tatty as a result of their flimsiness and the action of the wind. There were signs of drug usage and faeces in the cubicles and it was obvious that they had to be removed without any delay.
The owners of the restaurants immediately behind them justifiably complained to the Council and were strongly supported by CBRRA, the Camps Bay Community Police Forum, Camps Bay Watch and the Camps Bay Community Security Initiative.
The “permit” which the advertisers had received from the Council for this project had erroneously been given to them by a junior clerk in the Council Sport and Recreation Department without any prior public participation or referral to CBRRA and the like.
In the face of extreme threats from the advertisers in respect of the legal consequences should they be forced to remove the structures, the Council gave them due notice of a deadline for the removal thereof in terms of the relevant advertising by-law. The deadline for the removal by the advertisers was not met and the Council duly removed the offending structures in the fourth week of November 2009.
CBRRA commends all the parties who took part in the wide public protest against these structures and thanks the Council for its prompt reaction. It wonders just how the advertisers ever thought that this campaign of theirs would ever further the cause of the products which they attempted to promote.
Guidelines on World Cup 2010
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to create awareness around probable business travel restrictions during the Soccer World Cup to be held June - July 2010.
Although the official World Cup is 11 June - 11 July 2010, the period between March and July 2010 will be an exceptionally busy period with the pre- and post- arrangements that will have a huge impact on business travel. The grid below indicates the magnitude of the disruption to business travel over this period which includes other major events beside the FIFA World cup.
School Holidays: 27 March - 11 April, 26 April 10 June - 11 July
Events
Cape Argus 14-Mar
Comrades 30-May
Cape Epic 21 - 28 March
Two Oceans 03-Apr
Durban July 03-Jul
Grahams Town Festival 20 June - 08 July
2010 World Cup 11 June - 11 July
Public Holidays Human Rights day 21-Mar
Public Holiday 22-Mar
Good Friday 02-Apr
Family Day 05-Apr
Freedom Day 27-Apr
Workers Day 01-May
Youth Day 16-Jun
Around 2010 World Cup
- Media Groups arrive 25 April and depart two weeks after final
- Teams Arrive around 03 May
- Supporters arrive around 6 June until departure after post tours
- FIFA Family arrive around 01 May until 2 weeks after final
Overview of what is to be expected during the World Cup:
1. Volume of Travellers expected
The World Cup is approximately 15 times bigger than the 1995 Rugby World Cup. The media contingent that will attend is estimated at 30 000. Business travel is disrupted purely due to the volume of supporters.
All indications are that approximately 220 000 long haul visitors will attend, 180 000 visitors from Africa and an average of 150 000 local supporters. On any match day it is envisaged that 100 000 travellers will need to use a travel commodity i.e. flight or road / rail transportation.
An additional 2 000 busses have been imported (overload on road transport) to carry these supporters. It is predicted that supporters will watch their team play every 3 or 4 days. When their teams are not playing, supporters will frequent the Fan Parks or embark on tours within the city of their choice.
2. Fan Parks
Fan Parks are situated in central areas so that general public can watch all the games. Entrance to the Fan Parks is free and it is expected that these Fan Parks will attract a lot of visitors. In Germany 2006 one Fan Park attracted 500 000 spectators to watch one game. To avoid large transport infrastructure expense, training venues will also double as public viewing sites.
Fan Parks in the Western Cape
The Grand Parade Somerset West Road
Stellenbosch Bellville Velodrome
Swartklip Atlantis
Khayelitsha Imizamo Yethu (Hout Bay)
Training Facilities in the Western Cape
Newlands Rugby Ground UCT Rugby Ground
UWC Soccer Field Bellville Rugby Ground
Stellenbosch Rugby Ground Athlone Stadium
Fan Parks in Johannesburg (list to be updated)
Mary Fitzgerald Square in the Newton precinct
Fan Parks in Soweto are to be expected.
Innes-Free Park in Sandton,
Walter Sisulu Square in Kliptown
Fan Parks in Durban (list to be updated)
The Durban Beach Front has been earmarked as one of Durban's preferred sites for one or more Fan Parks during 2010.
3. Flights
To date no airline has released any prices or strategies for the World Cup period.
On pre and post match-days flights into and out of the venue cities will be overbooked. Due to the sheer volume of travellers, huge delays can be expected.
World Cup teams will use charter aircrafts and plan to use 2nd tier airports however their supporters will use the general airports. These airports will focus on scheduled international and domestic flights.
4. Accommodation
All the major hotel brands within South Africa have contracted with MATCH at a pre-defined room rate and therefore the normal Corporate rates will not be available during this period.
According to FIFA there is an approximate shortfall of 18 000 rooms for the World Cup. This supply and demand scenario allows B&B's / Guesthouses to offer rooms at a premium.
5. Car Rental
It is most likely that all car rental companies will go on "stop-sale" for the period of the World Cup and rental cars will be scarce.
6. Road Closures
It is indicated that there will be limited access and in some instances complete road closures in the areas surrounding the stadium and fan parks. This will make it difficult for travellers to move freely between offsite meetings.
7. Critical Date
The next critical date for the WC2010 is the 4th December 2009 when the Pool draw is completed. This draw will indicate where the teams will be based and where their supporters will be spending most of their time.
8. Fixtures
The match schedule will be updated after the draw on the 4th December 2009. Games will be played at: 13h30, 16h00 and 20h30. Travellers need to allow for traffic congestion both at the stadium and the Fan Parks. It is advisable to allow 2hrs lead time if travelling to / from these areas.
Recommendations for travel during this period
The purpose of this document is to create awareness around probable business travel restrictions during the Soccer World Cup to be held June - July 2010.
Although the official World Cup is 11 June - 11 July 2010, the period between March and July 2010 will be an exceptionally busy period with the pre- and post- arrangements that will have a huge impact on business travel. The grid below indicates the magnitude of the disruption to business travel over this period which includes other major events beside the FIFA World cup.
School Holidays: 27 March - 11 April, 26 April 10 June - 11 July
Events
Cape Argus 14-Mar
Comrades 30-May
Cape Epic 21 - 28 March
Two Oceans 03-Apr
Durban July 03-Jul
Grahams Town Festival 20 June - 08 July
2010 World Cup 11 June - 11 July
Public Holidays Human Rights day 21-Mar
Public Holiday 22-Mar
Good Friday 02-Apr
Family Day 05-Apr
Freedom Day 27-Apr
Workers Day 01-May
Youth Day 16-Jun
Around 2010 World Cup
- Media Groups arrive 25 April and depart two weeks after final
- Teams Arrive around 03 May
- Supporters arrive around 6 June until departure after post tours
- FIFA Family arrive around 01 May until 2 weeks after final
Overview of what is to be expected during the World Cup:
1. Volume of Travellers expected
The World Cup is approximately 15 times bigger than the 1995 Rugby World Cup. The media contingent that will attend is estimated at 30 000. Business travel is disrupted purely due to the volume of supporters.
All indications are that approximately 220 000 long haul visitors will attend, 180 000 visitors from Africa and an average of 150 000 local supporters. On any match day it is envisaged that 100 000 travellers will need to use a travel commodity i.e. flight or road / rail transportation.
An additional 2 000 busses have been imported (overload on road transport) to carry these supporters. It is predicted that supporters will watch their team play every 3 or 4 days. When their teams are not playing, supporters will frequent the Fan Parks or embark on tours within the city of their choice.
2. Fan Parks
Fan Parks are situated in central areas so that general public can watch all the games. Entrance to the Fan Parks is free and it is expected that these Fan Parks will attract a lot of visitors. In Germany 2006 one Fan Park attracted 500 000 spectators to watch one game. To avoid large transport infrastructure expense, training venues will also double as public viewing sites.
Fan Parks in the Western Cape
The Grand Parade Somerset West Road
Stellenbosch Bellville Velodrome
Swartklip Atlantis
Khayelitsha Imizamo Yethu (Hout Bay)
Training Facilities in the Western Cape
Newlands Rugby Ground UCT Rugby Ground
UWC Soccer Field Bellville Rugby Ground
Stellenbosch Rugby Ground Athlone Stadium
Fan Parks in Johannesburg (list to be updated)
Mary Fitzgerald Square in the Newton precinct
Fan Parks in Soweto are to be expected.
Innes-Free Park in Sandton,
Walter Sisulu Square in Kliptown
Fan Parks in Durban (list to be updated)
The Durban Beach Front has been earmarked as one of Durban's preferred sites for one or more Fan Parks during 2010.
3. Flights
To date no airline has released any prices or strategies for the World Cup period.
On pre and post match-days flights into and out of the venue cities will be overbooked. Due to the sheer volume of travellers, huge delays can be expected.
World Cup teams will use charter aircrafts and plan to use 2nd tier airports however their supporters will use the general airports. These airports will focus on scheduled international and domestic flights.
4. Accommodation
All the major hotel brands within South Africa have contracted with MATCH at a pre-defined room rate and therefore the normal Corporate rates will not be available during this period.
According to FIFA there is an approximate shortfall of 18 000 rooms for the World Cup. This supply and demand scenario allows B&B's / Guesthouses to offer rooms at a premium.
5. Car Rental
It is most likely that all car rental companies will go on "stop-sale" for the period of the World Cup and rental cars will be scarce.
6. Road Closures
It is indicated that there will be limited access and in some instances complete road closures in the areas surrounding the stadium and fan parks. This will make it difficult for travellers to move freely between offsite meetings.
7. Critical Date
The next critical date for the WC2010 is the 4th December 2009 when the Pool draw is completed. This draw will indicate where the teams will be based and where their supporters will be spending most of their time.
8. Fixtures
The match schedule will be updated after the draw on the 4th December 2009. Games will be played at: 13h30, 16h00 and 20h30. Travellers need to allow for traffic congestion both at the stadium and the Fan Parks. It is advisable to allow 2hrs lead time if travelling to / from these areas.
Recommendations for travel during this period
- · Do not travel during these periods unless it is critical to travel.
- Plan your trip well in advance, changes to a ticket over this period will be extremely difficult and very expensive.
- Try to make appointments at a location that is in the opposite direction of a stadium / fan park..
- Take flights during the times of when the games are being played. Games start at 13h30.
- Allow for a minimum of 2 hours to get to the airport in Cape Town and possibly 3 hours for Johannesburg. The congestion on the roads both to and from the Airports is going to be chaotic - plan for delays.
- Parking at the airport will be virtually impossible and it is advisable to get someone to drop / collect you from the airports. Transfer companies will be busy with tourists and will also be very expensive.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Cape Town plans for a bumper holiday season
CITY OF CAPE TOWN MEDIA RELEASE
In anticipation of a higher than normal influx of visitors to Cape Town this summer, the City has launched a comprehensive safety and cleansing plan for the festive season. The final draw for the FIFA 2010 Soccer World Cup on Friday 04 December at the Cape Town International Convention Centre is expected to boost this year’s figure to over a million visitors.
Cape Town’s festive season will be officially launched on November 29 when Executive Mayor Dan Plato switches on the festive lights in Adderley Street followed by the traditional carnival parade. Other high-profile events linked to the final draw include a special mayoral welcome for the FIFA executives on 02 December and the Cape Town Final Draw Festival in Long Street on 04 December.
“The City of Cape Town extends a warm welcome to all visitors. The City will do its utmost to enhance their comfort and safety. At the same time, we appeal to visitors and residents to help keep our city clean and safe during the holiday period,” says Mayor Plato. As one of the most popular international holiday destinations, Cape Town offers a 307 km long coastline with 72 beaches and a vast variety of parks and nature reserves which will bustle with recreational and leisure activities over the next few months.
City Manager, Achmat Ebrahim, has established a dedicated Festive Season Co-ordination Committee, representing various City departments, to oversee the implementation of strategies to contribute towards a safe, clean and enjoyable experience for all visitors and residents during the festive season.
The committee, chaired by Richard Bosman, Executive Director: Safety and Security, has devised a co-ordinated plan to alleviate possible high risk eventualities including road traffic accidents, fires, safety and security at beaches, power failures, crowd surges and festival events.
“We particularly urge visitors to slow down and drive carefully at the major road construction sites such as the Koeberg Interchange on the N1 and to adhere to traffic rules at all times,” says Bosman. The following special measures have been put in place to enhance safety and cleanliness:
- The City's Disaster Management Team is on 24-hour full alert and is geared for all eventualities. The public may report any emergency (including medical, crime, fire and traffic) to the 107 emergency number from a Telkom line. Cellphone users need to dial 021 480 7700.
- Metro Police, Traffic Services, Law Enforcement, and Security and Specialised Services staff will be on duty over the festive season.
- Regular safety patrols will take place at tourist hot spots and other high risk crime areas. Targeted operations aimed at combating all forms of substance abuse as well as roadblocks will be executed throughout the festive season. The Metro Police's newly established dog unit will also be deployed for the first time during operations over the festive season.
- These safety initiatives include partnerships with other agencies such as the City Improvement Districts and Displaced Persons Support Unit.
- Fire and Rescue Services will be on high alert with over 700 full-time firefighters on a shift basis at 28 fire stations on standby across the city. An additional 116 seasonal firefighters will be deployed by December 15 to assist with bush and vegetation fires. Two helicopters, operating from the Newlands forestry station, will assist in aerial fire-fighting. All citizens are requested to heed fire warnings and practice fire safe measures at all times.
- The City’s partnership with Western Province Lifesaving will ensure that 115 multi-skilled lifeguards are on duty at 44 beaches, as well as at regional and community pools across the city.
- A total of 19 shark spotters are deployed at seven beaches, namely Muizenberg, St James, Kalk Bay, Fish Hoek, Noordhoek, Glencairn and Clovelly.
- Over R17 million has been budgeted for cleansing. Refuse removal will continue uninterrupted over this period (even on the public holidays). More than 900 additional cleansing staff will be appointed to clean-up business districts, scenic routes and beaches.
End
Issued by: Jan Kruger, Media Liaison Officer, Tel: 021 400-1292 or Cell: 084 300 0630
Media enquiries: Operational: Richard Bosman, Executive Director: Safety and Security, Tel: 400-3355 or Cell: 079 269 2239
2010 World Cup: Pieter Cronje, Director: Communication and 2010 WC spokesperson, Tel: 021 400 4592 or Cell: 082 465 4965
Road Closure Final Draw 2010 FIFA World Cup
The Final Draw for the 2010 FIFA World Cup will be held at 19h00 on Friday 4 Dec 09 at the CTICC. Prior to and during the event a number of road closures will be in place. Your particular attention is drawn to the road closures for the Long Street Festival as well as for the area around the CTICC. Your tolerance of any inconvenience caused will be appreciated and thank you for your co-operation in this. For information specifically regarding road closures contact 072-324-2476.
Click on the table below to enlarge ››
THE first official event to launch South Africa’s hosting of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ takes place in Cape Town on December 4 and the City of Cape Town is pulling out all stops to demonstrate its readiness to welcome thousands of soccer fans and dignitaries.
The FIFA Final Draw, which will determine the match schedule for the 32 participating teams in next year’s soccer tournament, will be held at 19:00 on Friday, December 4 at the Cape Town International Convention Centre (CTICC).
"About 3 000 international dignitaries and media representatives are expected to attend this milestone event which will be televised live to an estimated 150 million viewers across the globe. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Cape Town to put its best foot forward," says Lesley de Reuck, the City’s Director of 2010 Operations.
"To welcome VIPs at the CTICC, the City of Cape Town will host a ‘Red Carpet’ event as from 16:00. Although the Final Draw ceremony will be closed to the public, the City has organised a one day festival in Long Street where Capetonians can view the Final Draw on large TV screens," says De Reuck.
"Prior to and during the events, several roads will be closed temporarily to enable event organisers and various City and Provincial services to prepare and secure these venues," says De Reuck.
For the Final Draw event at the CTICC, there will be intermittent road closures on the Foreshore in the area of Lower Long Street, Coen Steytler and Cullinan Street, from 09:00 on Monday November 30 to 05:00 on Monday December 7.
For the Long Street Festival, there will be a full closure of Long Street, from Buitensingel to Buiten Street, and Loop Street, from 13:00 on November 30 to 05:00 on December 7.
From 01:00 on December 4 to 12:00 on December 5, there will be road closures in the area bound by Queen Victoria Street, Green Street, Buitensingel, Loop Street and Dorp Street.
Buiten Street, Bloem Street, Pepper Street, Leeuwen Street, Wale Street, Keerom Street and Vredenburg Lane will also be affected.
On-street stopping or parking will not be permitted on Long Street from Buitensingel to Buiten from 17:00 on Sunday 29 November.
Access control measures will enable businesses and residents entry to the affected areas.
"We apologise for any inconvenience caused by these street closures and wish to thank all Capetonians in advance for their co-operation.
"To minimise traffic disruptions, Cape Town Traffic services will be on duty to redirect motorists and pedestrians. There will also be sufficient signage pointing towards alternative routes," he says.
For more information on the Long Street road closures only, please contact 072 324 2476.
Ends
Issued by the Communication Department, City of Cape Town
Media queries:
Lesley de Reuck, Director of 2010 Operations, City of Cape Town, Tel: (021) 401 4001
Pieter Cronjé, 2010 Spokesperson, City of Cape Town, Tel: 021 400 4592 or Cell: 082 465 4965
The Crystal
THE CRYSTAL” - ANOTHER TOWNPLANNING CHALLENGE FOR THE CAMPS BAY RATEPAYERS AND RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (CBRRA)CBRRA ?
In recent years, CBRRA has been singularly successful in fighting excessive and unsympathetic developments in Camps Bay and environs.
To date, CBRRA has won five High Court cases against the Cape Town City Council in which it has applied for an urgent interdict for work on a project to be stopped until the High Court could review what it considered to be illegally passed plans on various projects in the area. These projects were on First Crescent, Camps Bay Drive, Geneva Drive, Blinkwater Road and Woodhead Close.
The ultimate success in the various projects have been varied, largely as a result of the City Council’s perceived support for the Developers / Owners.
What generally happened was that, having been interdicted and forced to stop works, Developers submitted rider plans which purported to legalise the project. With two significant exceptions (see one below) the Council almost immediately passed the rider plans and CBRRA was faced with having to reapply for the revised plans to be reviewed – a very expensive exercise and not always successful. The Blinkwater Road case has reached the Appeal Court and the judgement is pending any day now.
As you drive down Camps Bay Drive, just before you get to Woodford Avenue, you will observe on the right hand side, what is arguably one of the biggest structures being erected for forty one flats on the old “Troben Heights” Flats site.
In this instance, the Developer had plans passed in the latter half of 2008 without, in the Council’s opinion, having to have any zoning scheme departures or title deed restrictions modified or removed.
It is CBRRA’s legal opinion that the project illegal in respect of a number of alleged transgressions, namely :
* The building has five in lieu of only the three “floor levels” permitted
in the title deed.
* Certain facades are higher than the zoning scheme permitted 10
metre height above existing natural ground levels at any one point.
* The basement area exceeds the permissible “built upon “ area.
* The project has derogated the value of surrounding affected
properties (an adjacent residence lost a sale as a result of the
erection of the new building and the Seller could only sell
subsequently for ± R400 000 less). This was pointed out in a
written report by Valuer John van der Spuy, as being a striking
transgression of Section 7 of the National Building Regulations.
* Certain isolated retaining walls, erected to legalise the so-called
“basement” by the introduction of earth fill between them and the
basement (contrary to the spirit of the zoning scheme regulations)
are over the permitted zoning scheme heights..
What has compounded the problem, however, is that the Developer submitted rider plans at the beginning of 2009 which altered the design drastically. In September, the Council rejected these rider plans as being illegal, but has permitted the Developer to continue constructing the building not in accordance with the (now incorrect) original passed plans.
Apart from contesting the above issues, CBRRA strongly objects to this situation and has had a crucial meeting to clarify the above matters with the Council and the Developer postponed / cancelled four times by the Council over a period of six weeks - on the pretext that the Council was awaiting legal opinions before responding. It took CBRRA four days to obtain its legal opinions.
Every attempt by CBRRA to convene this meeting with all the top Planning Officials / Politicians has proved absolutely fruitless. In the meantime, the Developer is proceeding apace with the construction and this is a situation where clearly the Council appears to be on the side of the Developer and not the hugely affected neighbours or the community at large.
This experience supports the Peoples’ Post’s recent article which highlighted the unacceptable manner in which the City Planning Department conducts its duties in respect of planning matters.
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
In recent years, CBRRA has been singularly successful in fighting excessive and unsympathetic developments in Camps Bay and environs.
To date, CBRRA has won five High Court cases against the Cape Town City Council in which it has applied for an urgent interdict for work on a project to be stopped until the High Court could review what it considered to be illegally passed plans on various projects in the area. These projects were on First Crescent, Camps Bay Drive, Geneva Drive, Blinkwater Road and Woodhead Close.
The ultimate success in the various projects have been varied, largely as a result of the City Council’s perceived support for the Developers / Owners.
What generally happened was that, having been interdicted and forced to stop works, Developers submitted rider plans which purported to legalise the project. With two significant exceptions (see one below) the Council almost immediately passed the rider plans and CBRRA was faced with having to reapply for the revised plans to be reviewed – a very expensive exercise and not always successful. The Blinkwater Road case has reached the Appeal Court and the judgement is pending any day now.
As you drive down Camps Bay Drive, just before you get to Woodford Avenue, you will observe on the right hand side, what is arguably one of the biggest structures being erected for forty one flats on the old “Troben Heights” Flats site.
In this instance, the Developer had plans passed in the latter half of 2008 without, in the Council’s opinion, having to have any zoning scheme departures or title deed restrictions modified or removed.
It is CBRRA’s legal opinion that the project illegal in respect of a number of alleged transgressions, namely :
* The building has five in lieu of only the three “floor levels” permitted
in the title deed.
* Certain facades are higher than the zoning scheme permitted 10
metre height above existing natural ground levels at any one point.
* The basement area exceeds the permissible “built upon “ area.
* The project has derogated the value of surrounding affected
properties (an adjacent residence lost a sale as a result of the
erection of the new building and the Seller could only sell
subsequently for ± R400 000 less). This was pointed out in a
written report by Valuer John van der Spuy, as being a striking
transgression of Section 7 of the National Building Regulations.
* Certain isolated retaining walls, erected to legalise the so-called
“basement” by the introduction of earth fill between them and the
basement (contrary to the spirit of the zoning scheme regulations)
are over the permitted zoning scheme heights..
What has compounded the problem, however, is that the Developer submitted rider plans at the beginning of 2009 which altered the design drastically. In September, the Council rejected these rider plans as being illegal, but has permitted the Developer to continue constructing the building not in accordance with the (now incorrect) original passed plans.
Apart from contesting the above issues, CBRRA strongly objects to this situation and has had a crucial meeting to clarify the above matters with the Council and the Developer postponed / cancelled four times by the Council over a period of six weeks - on the pretext that the Council was awaiting legal opinions before responding. It took CBRRA four days to obtain its legal opinions.
Every attempt by CBRRA to convene this meeting with all the top Planning Officials / Politicians has proved absolutely fruitless. In the meantime, the Developer is proceeding apace with the construction and this is a situation where clearly the Council appears to be on the side of the Developer and not the hugely affected neighbours or the community at large.
This experience supports the Peoples’ Post’s recent article which highlighted the unacceptable manner in which the City Planning Department conducts its duties in respect of planning matters.
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
Objection to Proposed Cellular Base Station
Objection to Proposed Cellular Base Station on Erf 4 Camps Bay Beachfront by Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA).
SUBMITTED TO THE GOOD HOPE SUBCOUNCIL ON 19 NOVEMBER 2009
Thank you Mr, Chairman for this opportunity to object to your committee in respect of this proposal.
We have perused the highly detailed justification from the applicant and the Council officials as to why the base station should be allowed.
CBRRA is astounded that, although the Council has just proudly and widely announced that the centre portion of Camps Bay beach is now to again become an internationally recognised Blue Flag Beach with all the worthy qualities required for it to become so, it now proposes to place at a very low level a new cellular base station and mast in the very same area !
I would hazard a guess that this must be the first Blue Flag beach in the world with such an added attraction. You can imagine the public outcry when this fact becomes general knowledge.
So attractive is this installation that the financially well-healed applicant has offered to place a public bench and planters nearby which not only looks out at absolutely nothing but is situated within the five metre radius which the Council has stated must be a no-go area !
If there is absolutely no danger, why is there a 5m access restriction by the Council which the above park bench ignores.
Mr Chairman, much is made by your Council Officials and the Applicant that there is “a lack of scientific evidence to suggest that there is a health risk associated with cellular base stations. Both international and local medical and environmental authorities including Council’s Medical Officer of Health, are of this opinion”. This is a nice general spin statement which covers all and is intended to crush all contentions to the contrary.
It is CBRRA’s contention that the onus is NOT on the objectors to prove that the installation is dangerous, but that it is on the Council and the Applicant to produce irreversible proof and test results that such installations are NOT dangerous to humans, animals and plant life in any form or at any distance whatsoever.
If they are not dangerous, why does the Council want to impose a distance restriction and why did it reject the recent application for a similar installation on erf 355 in February 2004 (Application 152379) at Marine Heights Flats in Upper Tree Road Camps Bay ?
I would like to table a photo of the density of people which congregates around this building on occasions and I would like your Council and the Applicant to look me straight in the eye and guarantee unconditionally, without any shadow of a doubt, that not one of these people will ever suffer from the harmful effects of this installation.
Of course you cannot, otherwise why is the Council putting conditions such as ;
Should any further research link electromagnetioc radiation to health issues, this approval may be revised.
There is therefore some niggling doubt in the Council’s mind that something may not be entirely quite right and it is keeping its options open in case things go wrong. In the meantime, the public is at risk, no matter how small and this is not good enough for CBRRA.
I also wish to hand in 14 pages of research which contends that this type of installation IS harmful to humans, gathered from all around the world.
With the greatest respect, Mr. Chairman, I query your Subcouncil’s credentials to be the ultimate judges as to whether there should be a cellular base station in this position or not. It is not your fault that you are not qualified to make this ultimate final or semi-final judgement.
CBRRA accordingly hereby urgently requests that this application becomes the subject of an EIA public procedure process and also the necessary procedures which have to be executed in terms of the new Act / Bylaw which has recently been promulgated which requires an equally rigorous public participation process particularly on buildings which are situated within 100 metres of the sea shoreline.
Aesthetically we are going to be faced with an industrial installation, surrounded by a 2m high fence and razor wire on arguably one of Cape Town’s most picturesque beaches , which will also need maintenance and possibly vehicles travelling over the lawns to and from the area.
The other real problem, as you will readily acknowledge, Mr. Chairman, is that, let Vodacom onto this building, you will immediately get applications from MNnet and Cell C and what justifications will you have to refuse their applications as well ?. This will result in even more unsightly and yet more possibly dangerous installations appearing around the building in the future.
CBRRA fully understands the Applicant’s eagerness to provide an ever-better service (remembering always that this is ultimately always to increase profits and overcome competition) but fails to accept that this site is the only site which will solve its problems. It must therefore investigate other sites which are further away from human habitation or use – especially one as congested as this. Living and health standards cannot be subordinated to aspirations for commercial gain. There are plenty of ither open sites available.
Please therefore, Mr. Chairman, reject this application just as you rejected the previous (and hopefully the next) Upper Tree Road application for a cellular base station.
John Powell
For CBRRA
SUBMITTED TO THE GOOD HOPE SUBCOUNCIL ON 19 NOVEMBER 2009
Thank you Mr, Chairman for this opportunity to object to your committee in respect of this proposal.
We have perused the highly detailed justification from the applicant and the Council officials as to why the base station should be allowed.
CBRRA is astounded that, although the Council has just proudly and widely announced that the centre portion of Camps Bay beach is now to again become an internationally recognised Blue Flag Beach with all the worthy qualities required for it to become so, it now proposes to place at a very low level a new cellular base station and mast in the very same area !
I would hazard a guess that this must be the first Blue Flag beach in the world with such an added attraction. You can imagine the public outcry when this fact becomes general knowledge.
So attractive is this installation that the financially well-healed applicant has offered to place a public bench and planters nearby which not only looks out at absolutely nothing but is situated within the five metre radius which the Council has stated must be a no-go area !
If there is absolutely no danger, why is there a 5m access restriction by the Council which the above park bench ignores.
Mr Chairman, much is made by your Council Officials and the Applicant that there is “a lack of scientific evidence to suggest that there is a health risk associated with cellular base stations. Both international and local medical and environmental authorities including Council’s Medical Officer of Health, are of this opinion”. This is a nice general spin statement which covers all and is intended to crush all contentions to the contrary.
It is CBRRA’s contention that the onus is NOT on the objectors to prove that the installation is dangerous, but that it is on the Council and the Applicant to produce irreversible proof and test results that such installations are NOT dangerous to humans, animals and plant life in any form or at any distance whatsoever.
If they are not dangerous, why does the Council want to impose a distance restriction and why did it reject the recent application for a similar installation on erf 355 in February 2004 (Application 152379) at Marine Heights Flats in Upper Tree Road Camps Bay ?
I would like to table a photo of the density of people which congregates around this building on occasions and I would like your Council and the Applicant to look me straight in the eye and guarantee unconditionally, without any shadow of a doubt, that not one of these people will ever suffer from the harmful effects of this installation.
Of course you cannot, otherwise why is the Council putting conditions such as ;
Should any further research link electromagnetioc radiation to health issues, this approval may be revised.
There is therefore some niggling doubt in the Council’s mind that something may not be entirely quite right and it is keeping its options open in case things go wrong. In the meantime, the public is at risk, no matter how small and this is not good enough for CBRRA.
I also wish to hand in 14 pages of research which contends that this type of installation IS harmful to humans, gathered from all around the world.
With the greatest respect, Mr. Chairman, I query your Subcouncil’s credentials to be the ultimate judges as to whether there should be a cellular base station in this position or not. It is not your fault that you are not qualified to make this ultimate final or semi-final judgement.
CBRRA accordingly hereby urgently requests that this application becomes the subject of an EIA public procedure process and also the necessary procedures which have to be executed in terms of the new Act / Bylaw which has recently been promulgated which requires an equally rigorous public participation process particularly on buildings which are situated within 100 metres of the sea shoreline.
Aesthetically we are going to be faced with an industrial installation, surrounded by a 2m high fence and razor wire on arguably one of Cape Town’s most picturesque beaches , which will also need maintenance and possibly vehicles travelling over the lawns to and from the area.
The other real problem, as you will readily acknowledge, Mr. Chairman, is that, let Vodacom onto this building, you will immediately get applications from MNnet and Cell C and what justifications will you have to refuse their applications as well ?. This will result in even more unsightly and yet more possibly dangerous installations appearing around the building in the future.
CBRRA fully understands the Applicant’s eagerness to provide an ever-better service (remembering always that this is ultimately always to increase profits and overcome competition) but fails to accept that this site is the only site which will solve its problems. It must therefore investigate other sites which are further away from human habitation or use – especially one as congested as this. Living and health standards cannot be subordinated to aspirations for commercial gain. There are plenty of ither open sites available.
Please therefore, Mr. Chairman, reject this application just as you rejected the previous (and hopefully the next) Upper Tree Road application for a cellular base station.
John Powell
For CBRRA
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Heritage Site on Auction
Please note the date for the Stone Cottage Auction is on
19 November at the Grand Westin Hotel.
CBRRA CAMPAIGNS TO ENSURE THEIR PRESERVATION
Read the full article ‹‹here››
19 November at the Grand Westin Hotel.
CBRRA CAMPAIGNS TO ENSURE THEIR PRESERVATION
Read the full article ‹‹here››
Savile Row Auctions announced that its inaugural Cape Town auction will to be held on 19 November at The Grand Westin Foreshore in Cape Town.
The auction will offer a unique opportunity to the discerning property buyer with seven original stone cottages coming under the hammer.
Kim Faclier, Managing Director of the Savile Row Auctions Cape Town operation comments, "The cottages are more than 100 years old and have significant value in terms of their heritage. Based on research done and correspondence with the Camps Bay Rate Payers Association the property is protected as a heritage site under section 34 of the NHR Act as well as a Grade 3 (b) grading as per the Karin Strom survey."
Situated at the intersection of Camps Bay and Geneva Drive, the property enjoys prime locality to the Camps Bay beachfront as well as its CBD commercial area.
1-5 Geneva Drive is a freehold property that is a single erf improved with three separate dwelling cottages. The size of the erf is 887sqm and each cottage is approximately 85sqm. Cottages comprise of three bedrooms, outbuildings and a covered stoep.
13-19 Camps Bay Drive is also a freehold property that is a single erf improved with four separate dwellings. The stand is 707sqm and each cottage is approximately 70sqm. These are one bedroom cottages which include a covered stoep and staff quarters.
"As such, this beautiful property will appeal to a very specific type of buyer – a buyer that has an interest in heritage sites and has a passion for wanting to restore these historic homes to their original glory," says Faclier.
For more information contact Kim Faclier on 082 554 6295.
Article from property24.com
Thursday, 22 October 2009
Public Meeting Announcement
AGENDA
- Welcome and Chairperson’s Report
Trudi Groenewald - Approval of Minutes of last CBRRA General Meeting on 23 February 2009
- Municipal Ward Boundary Delimitation
Cllr Margo Haywood - Presentation by Camps Bay Community Medics
- Roundhouse Development
John Powell - Animal By-Laws
Trudi Groenewald - Safety & Security
- Police Station & Security Huts
John Powell - Financial Report
- Approval of Annual Financial Statements Dated 31 December 2009
- Amendments to the CBRRA Constitution
- New July 2009 Municipal Rates Valuation (Meeting With the City Valuation Dept)
John Powell - Planning Matters (Unicity Spatial Planning District Plans )
John Powell - High Court Cases
Chris Willemse
– Oudekraal
– Geneva Drive
– Blinkwater Roads - Any Other Business
Read more about the topics for the meeting below:
THE ROUNDHOUSE
The Roundhouse has been redeveloped into two restaurants. The concessionaires now wish to redevelop the adjacent Stan’s Halt building into a small boutique hotel with attached lodge premises. CBRRA and "the Friends of the Glen" are keeping a watch on proposals which, in due course, will be shown to the public at large for comment and approval.
MUNICIPAL RATES
The City Council has just completed its July 2009 municipal property rates revaluation throughout the Unicity. A new provisional Valuation Roll will be published in January 2010 – ratepayers will be given until April 2010 to object and new rates bills, based on the revised valuations, will be sent out in July 2010 subject to objection adjustments if any.
NEW MUNICIPAL WARD BOUNDARIES
The Delimitation Board has published its proposed new ward boundary maps for public comment by December 2009. These have serious consequences for Camps Bay. It is proposed to again split Camps Bay and environs (in the vicinity of the soccer field) so that part will remain with Camps Bay, Bakoven, Llandudno and Hout Bay as the constituency of Cllr Marga Haywood while the other part will be merged with the Sea Point constituency of Cllr J-P Smith. CBRRA considers this a very retrograde step and wishes to test public opinion.
ANIMAL BY-LAWS
The City of Cape Town has finalised is draft Animal By-Law. Several improvements have been proposed. A full copy of the draft by-law is included in the CBRRA blog ‹‹here››.
OUDEKRAAL
A property group has obtained an option to buy on the Kassie Wiehahn-owned Oudekraal estate stretching from Camps Bay to Llandudno. Since then Mr Wiehahn has lost another High Court case to restore his development rights on his above property. CBRRA hopes to report on the status of the option. See the full High Court judgement on the CBRRA blog ‹‹here››.
Read the proposed amendments to the CBRRA Constitution ‹‹here››.
Save the 100yr+ old Camps Bay Tramway Cottages
CBRRA CAMPAIGNS TO ENSURE THEIR PRESERVATION
The auction sale boards have been erected on some of Camps Bay’s most historically important cottages at the intersection of Geneva Drive and Camps Bay Drive. The sale is due on 19 November 2009 and CBRRA is busy alerting the media, all residents and the heritage authorities which have jurisdiction over the preservation of these magnificent relics of the unique tramline which passed through Camps Bay for the first three decades of the last century.
Not many residents are even aware of the existence of this amazing tourist facility which existed at the very inception of the modern history of this beautiful suburb. (See History of Camps Bay).
These houses were built by the Tramway Company for their drivers and staff. They were about the first houses built in “modern” Camps Bay in the early 1900’s simultaneously with the Rotunda Ballroom (now a part of the Bay Hotel), the timber Norwegian cottages in Crown Crescent and Camps Bay Drive (the latter now demolished), the tram shed and power station (which is now the Theatre on the Bay and Brighton Court) and the seawater warmed indoor swimming pool next to last on link Street (now demolished).
These houses therefore have an irreplaceable history which it is imperative to preserved forever into the future. The demolition or alterations thereof to any parts of their facades must never be permitted. CBRRA recognises the present and future owners’ rights to dispose of their ownership to others, but any future sale must be on condition and legally binding on new owners that the demolition of or external modifications to any or all of these houses will never be permitted.
After consulting the Town Planner Tommy Brummer, CBRRA has gone about this campaign as described in the extracts from letters between it and the relevant authorities and persons as follows:
From: Tommy Brummer
To: Chris Snelling
Sent: Thursday, 8 October 2009
Dear Chris We discussed the stone cottages on the lower reaches of Geneva Drive, Camps Bay, yesterday. Please confirm that the best strategy for the CBRRA to take is to write to Heritage Western Cape advising it that the cottages are being sold on auction shortly and that if any applications for demolition or alterations are submitted, then such applications must be advertised to the CBRRA. In addition it would be a good idea to inform the auctioneer of the fact that the buildings are graded and protected heritage assets.
Regards Tommy Brümmer
From : Chris Snelling
To: Tommy Brummer
Sent : Friday 9 October 2009
Hi Tommy,
Your e-mail and our telephonic discussion refers:
The Stone Cottages in Geneva Drive Camps Bay are essentially already protected in terms of Section 34 of the National Heritage Resources Act. As far as I am aware, indeed I am fairly certain that they have been afforded the Grading of the equivalent of either IIIB or possibly IIIA by the City of Cape Town and are listed as such in the survey that Karin Strom conducted for the City back in the 1990's. They, (the cottages), are of both architectural merit and certainly have high historic significance in regard to the history of Camps Bay. Indeed along with the Rotunda and the " Swiss", (Norwegian), wood cottages they are probably the most significant and landmark structures in the area.
Given the properties are at this stage only going up for auction it is difficult to give better advice in regard to the concerns as you have raised. Certainly at this stage one could not question the intent of any party wishing to purchase or bid for the properties and in this regard it would be difficult if not impossible for HWC to consider any form of formal provisional protection in terms of Section 29 of the NHR Act. It would however not be a bad idea to contact the Auctioneers and alert them to the significance of the structures and to inform them that demolition of the structures would be out of the question, (certainly in my opinion) and that any plans to alter or add to the buildings would entail having to get the consent of Heritage Western Cape to do so.
Such proposals are also likely to be strictly scrutinized. I would also advise the Ratepayers to put any concerns they may have in a formal letter to HWC, and ask that if any plans are submitted to HWC in regard to the building that they be notified immediately. Indeed, given the Ratepayers are registered with HWC as having an interest in the area this would be required by law in any event. It still would not hurt to write a formal letter in any event. I trust this is of assistance. Kind
Regards.
Chris Snelling
From : CBRRA
To : Heritage Western Cape – Mr. M Abrahams, Mr. Ralph Bruch – Owner, Ms Kim Faclier - Saville Row, Mr Johan Cornelius – City of Cape Town Environmental and Heritage Management Sent : 19 October 2009
CAMPS BAY RATEPAYERS AND RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (CBRRA)
Heritage Western Cape
Attention : Mr. M. Abrahams
Dear Sirs,
EXISTING PROPERTIES AT 1, 3 & 5 GENEVA DRIVE (ERF 178) AND 13, 15, 17 & 19 CAMPS BAY DRIVE (ERF 177), CAMPS BAY, CAPE
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA) has recently been informed that the above seven historic cottages are due to be auctioned for sale shortly, on 17 November 2009. While CBRRA fully understands that no future potential buyers are, as yet, known and therefore cannot be contacted in respect of these purchases, this letter serves to inform you that CBRRA and the Camps Bay population consider these particular properties to be of great historical and architectural value to the heritage of Camps Bay and environs, due to their age and importance in the early history of the area.
Any application in the future by any present or future owner of any or all of the buildings for the demolition of or alterations to the external facades of any or all of the buildings will be forcefully opposed by CBRRA and the local population by any means possible, legal or otherwise.
CBRRA refers you to the correspondence below between Planner Tommy Brummer and Heritage Consultant Chris Snelling, in which it seems to be that these buildings may already well have some form of protection in terms of Section 24 of the National Heritage Resources Act.
CBRRA respectfully hereby requests that you inform it whether this is so and, if so, the actual details of such legal protection, in order that it may inform the present Owner and the prospective Auctioneer of such facts so that they can inform all prospective buyers thereof before any sales are transacted.
Should no legal protection exist, can you kindly inform CBBRA as to how it may organise or apply for same, either now or in the future when or if demolition / alteration applications are submitted to you.
Should any such applications be made to you in the future, CBRRA requests being informed thereof without any delay, in order that it may register its objections thereto to you timeously.
Furthermore, CBRRA will appreciate you advising it how it can ensure, now or at the time of any future demolition application which may be submitted to you, how it, local residents and others can successfully oppose such application(s).
As the proposed auction sale is scheduled to take place on 17 November 2009, you can appreciate that this enquiry is of extreme urgency and CBRRA will appreciate your earliest possible reply to this matter. It will be willing to attend any meetings with you and / or any other relevant affected authorities in order that total clarity on the processes needed for opposition against demolition / external alterations can be properly obtained by CBRRA on behalf of the population in Camps Bay and elsewhere.
Yours faithfully,
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
From : CBRRA
To : Heritage Western Cape – Mr. M Abrahams , Mr. Ralph Bruch – Owner , Ms Kim Faclier - Saville Row , Mr Johan Cornelius – City of Cape Town Environmental and Heritage Management Sent : 19 October 2009
CAMPS BAY RATEPAYERS AND RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (CBRRA)
Mr. Ralph Bruch,
Owner of the existing properties listed below, Camps Bay C/o Saville Row Auctioneers
Attention : Ms. Kim Faclier
Dear Sirs / Madam
EXISTING PROPERTIES AT 1, 3 & 5 GENEVA DRIVE (ERF 178) AND 13, 15, 17 & 19 CAMPS BAY DRIVE (ERF 177), CAMPS BAY, CAPE
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA) hereby refers you to the correspondence below sent simultaneously with this letter to the relevant Heritage Authorities in connection with the pending proposed sale by your Client, Mr. Bruch, by auction of the above properties, about which CBRRA has recently been informed.
CBRRA and residents fully recognise the present Owner’s absolute right to dispose of the properties in question to whomever and in whatever manner he wishes. However, it is important to record here CBRRA’s and residents’ concerns that the sale could result in applications being made by the present or future Owners for the demolition of some or all of the above existing buildings or for permission to alter the external facades thereof.
CBRRA hereby wishes to inform you, the present Owner and the prospective Auctioneer, of its and the local population’s opposition to such applications which may be made in the future. It hereby requests that all prospective purchasers of the properties be properly informed before and at the proposed auction sale of the opposition to any such applications which will emanate from CBRRA and the local population and others should they, in due course, be made.
You will appreciate that, other than the Theatre On The Bay structure, these houses are the last vestiges of that portion of Camps Bay’s history which featured the unique tramline from central Cape Town to Camps Bay over Kloof Nek and back via Sea Point from about 1900 to 1930. The houses in question housed the drivers and staff of the trams and it will be absolutely unthinkable that they be damaged in any manner whatsoever at any time in the future.
CBRRA has researched the degree of heritage protection which the buildings currently enjoy and wishes to enforce all such protection which currently exists. CBRRA is willing to meet with the Owner’s representative and the prospective Auctioneer to discuss this matter at any time in order that all parties understand the issues at stake.
Please acknowledge receipt of this letter and inform CBRRA that the prospective buyers will informed as requested above.
Yours faithfully,
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
From : Kim Faclier of Saville Row
Dear John
Thank you very much for the call and this email, the contents all of which noted. I fully respect these gorgeous properties and no need to worry - the Heritage status will be totally protected in terms of clients requesting information as per the Bidder’s Information which we’ve done. As the owner of # 8 The Fairway, Camps Bay, know that I am totally on-board. Attached kindly find an invite to the auction for you all.
Warm wishes and take care;
Kim
From : Johan Cornelius
To : All
Sent : Tuesday 20 October 2009
Dear All The 4 e-mails above refer. We want to confirm that the buildings in question are all older than 60 years and therefore protected under section 34 of the NHR Act as stated by Chris Snelling and they enjoy a Grade 3 (b) grading as per the Karin Strom survey. Further to this, our section fully supports the contents of the e-mails below. In fact, it would also be helpful to bring Chris's letter, which explains the significance of the building, to the attention of the auctioneers
Best regards.
Johan Cornelius
Environmental & Heritage Management
Table Bay District
City of Cape Town
Residents can assist by writing to the above authorities to support CBRRA’s efforts to preserve these buildings.
The auction sale boards have been erected on some of Camps Bay’s most historically important cottages at the intersection of Geneva Drive and Camps Bay Drive. The sale is due on 19 November 2009 and CBRRA is busy alerting the media, all residents and the heritage authorities which have jurisdiction over the preservation of these magnificent relics of the unique tramline which passed through Camps Bay for the first three decades of the last century.
Not many residents are even aware of the existence of this amazing tourist facility which existed at the very inception of the modern history of this beautiful suburb. (See History of Camps Bay
These houses therefore have an irreplaceable history which it is imperative to preserved forever into the future. The demolition or alterations thereof to any parts of their facades must never be permitted. CBRRA recognises the present and future owners’ rights to dispose of their ownership to others, but any future sale must be on condition and legally binding on new owners that the demolition of or external modifications to any or all of these houses will never be permitted.
After consulting the Town Planner Tommy Brummer, CBRRA has gone about this campaign as described in the extracts from letters between it and the relevant authorities and persons as follows:
From: Tommy Brummer
To: Chris Snelling
Sent: Thursday, 8 October 2009
Dear Chris We discussed the stone cottages on the lower reaches of Geneva Drive, Camps Bay, yesterday. Please confirm that the best strategy for the CBRRA to take is to write to Heritage Western Cape advising it that the cottages are being sold on auction shortly and that if any applications for demolition or alterations are submitted, then such applications must be advertised to the CBRRA. In addition it would be a good idea to inform the auctioneer of the fact that the buildings are graded and protected heritage assets.
Regards Tommy Brümmer
From : Chris Snelling
To: Tommy Brummer
Sent : Friday 9 October 2009
Hi Tommy,
Your e-mail and our telephonic discussion refers:
The Stone Cottages in Geneva Drive Camps Bay are essentially already protected in terms of Section 34 of the National Heritage Resources Act. As far as I am aware, indeed I am fairly certain that they have been afforded the Grading of the equivalent of either IIIB or possibly IIIA by the City of Cape Town and are listed as such in the survey that Karin Strom conducted for the City back in the 1990's. They, (the cottages), are of both architectural merit and certainly have high historic significance in regard to the history of Camps Bay. Indeed along with the Rotunda and the " Swiss", (Norwegian), wood cottages they are probably the most significant and landmark structures in the area.
Given the properties are at this stage only going up for auction it is difficult to give better advice in regard to the concerns as you have raised. Certainly at this stage one could not question the intent of any party wishing to purchase or bid for the properties and in this regard it would be difficult if not impossible for HWC to consider any form of formal provisional protection in terms of Section 29 of the NHR Act. It would however not be a bad idea to contact the Auctioneers and alert them to the significance of the structures and to inform them that demolition of the structures would be out of the question, (certainly in my opinion) and that any plans to alter or add to the buildings would entail having to get the consent of Heritage Western Cape to do so.
Such proposals are also likely to be strictly scrutinized. I would also advise the Ratepayers to put any concerns they may have in a formal letter to HWC, and ask that if any plans are submitted to HWC in regard to the building that they be notified immediately. Indeed, given the Ratepayers are registered with HWC as having an interest in the area this would be required by law in any event. It still would not hurt to write a formal letter in any event. I trust this is of assistance. Kind
Regards.
Chris Snelling
From : CBRRA
To : Heritage Western Cape – Mr. M Abrahams, Mr. Ralph Bruch – Owner, Ms Kim Faclier - Saville Row, Mr Johan Cornelius – City of Cape Town Environmental and Heritage Management Sent : 19 October 2009
CAMPS BAY RATEPAYERS AND RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (CBRRA)
Heritage Western Cape
Attention : Mr. M. Abrahams
Dear Sirs,
EXISTING PROPERTIES AT 1, 3 & 5 GENEVA DRIVE (ERF 178) AND 13, 15, 17 & 19 CAMPS BAY DRIVE (ERF 177), CAMPS BAY, CAPE
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA) has recently been informed that the above seven historic cottages are due to be auctioned for sale shortly, on 17 November 2009. While CBRRA fully understands that no future potential buyers are, as yet, known and therefore cannot be contacted in respect of these purchases, this letter serves to inform you that CBRRA and the Camps Bay population consider these particular properties to be of great historical and architectural value to the heritage of Camps Bay and environs, due to their age and importance in the early history of the area.
Any application in the future by any present or future owner of any or all of the buildings for the demolition of or alterations to the external facades of any or all of the buildings will be forcefully opposed by CBRRA and the local population by any means possible, legal or otherwise.
CBRRA refers you to the correspondence below between Planner Tommy Brummer and Heritage Consultant Chris Snelling, in which it seems to be that these buildings may already well have some form of protection in terms of Section 24 of the National Heritage Resources Act.
CBRRA respectfully hereby requests that you inform it whether this is so and, if so, the actual details of such legal protection, in order that it may inform the present Owner and the prospective Auctioneer of such facts so that they can inform all prospective buyers thereof before any sales are transacted.
Should no legal protection exist, can you kindly inform CBBRA as to how it may organise or apply for same, either now or in the future when or if demolition / alteration applications are submitted to you.
Should any such applications be made to you in the future, CBRRA requests being informed thereof without any delay, in order that it may register its objections thereto to you timeously.
Furthermore, CBRRA will appreciate you advising it how it can ensure, now or at the time of any future demolition application which may be submitted to you, how it, local residents and others can successfully oppose such application(s).
As the proposed auction sale is scheduled to take place on 17 November 2009, you can appreciate that this enquiry is of extreme urgency and CBRRA will appreciate your earliest possible reply to this matter. It will be willing to attend any meetings with you and / or any other relevant affected authorities in order that total clarity on the processes needed for opposition against demolition / external alterations can be properly obtained by CBRRA on behalf of the population in Camps Bay and elsewhere.
Yours faithfully,
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
From : CBRRA
To : Heritage Western Cape – Mr. M Abrahams , Mr. Ralph Bruch – Owner , Ms Kim Faclier - Saville Row , Mr Johan Cornelius – City of Cape Town Environmental and Heritage Management Sent : 19 October 2009
CAMPS BAY RATEPAYERS AND RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (CBRRA)
Mr. Ralph Bruch,
Owner of the existing properties listed below, Camps Bay C/o Saville Row Auctioneers
Attention : Ms. Kim Faclier
Dear Sirs / Madam
EXISTING PROPERTIES AT 1, 3 & 5 GENEVA DRIVE (ERF 178) AND 13, 15, 17 & 19 CAMPS BAY DRIVE (ERF 177), CAMPS BAY, CAPE
The Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA) hereby refers you to the correspondence below sent simultaneously with this letter to the relevant Heritage Authorities in connection with the pending proposed sale by your Client, Mr. Bruch, by auction of the above properties, about which CBRRA has recently been informed.
CBRRA and residents fully recognise the present Owner’s absolute right to dispose of the properties in question to whomever and in whatever manner he wishes. However, it is important to record here CBRRA’s and residents’ concerns that the sale could result in applications being made by the present or future Owners for the demolition of some or all of the above existing buildings or for permission to alter the external facades thereof.
CBRRA hereby wishes to inform you, the present Owner and the prospective Auctioneer, of its and the local population’s opposition to such applications which may be made in the future. It hereby requests that all prospective purchasers of the properties be properly informed before and at the proposed auction sale of the opposition to any such applications which will emanate from CBRRA and the local population and others should they, in due course, be made.
You will appreciate that, other than the Theatre On The Bay structure, these houses are the last vestiges of that portion of Camps Bay’s history which featured the unique tramline from central Cape Town to Camps Bay over Kloof Nek and back via Sea Point from about 1900 to 1930. The houses in question housed the drivers and staff of the trams and it will be absolutely unthinkable that they be damaged in any manner whatsoever at any time in the future.
CBRRA has researched the degree of heritage protection which the buildings currently enjoy and wishes to enforce all such protection which currently exists. CBRRA is willing to meet with the Owner’s representative and the prospective Auctioneer to discuss this matter at any time in order that all parties understand the issues at stake.
Please acknowledge receipt of this letter and inform CBRRA that the prospective buyers will informed as requested above.
Yours faithfully,
Trudi Groenewald
Chairperson
CBRRA
From : Kim Faclier of Saville Row
Dear John
Thank you very much for the call and this email, the contents all of which noted. I fully respect these gorgeous properties and no need to worry - the Heritage status will be totally protected in terms of clients requesting information as per the Bidder’s Information which we’ve done. As the owner of # 8 The Fairway, Camps Bay, know that I am totally on-board. Attached kindly find an invite to the auction for you all.
Warm wishes and take care;
Kim
From : Johan Cornelius
To : All
Sent : Tuesday 20 October 2009
Dear All The 4 e-mails above refer. We want to confirm that the buildings in question are all older than 60 years and therefore protected under section 34 of the NHR Act as stated by Chris Snelling and they enjoy a Grade 3 (b) grading as per the Karin Strom survey. Further to this, our section fully supports the contents of the e-mails below. In fact, it would also be helpful to bring Chris's letter, which explains the significance of the building, to the attention of the auctioneers
Best regards.
Johan Cornelius
Environmental & Heritage Management
Table Bay District
City of Cape Town
Residents can assist by writing to the above authorities to support CBRRA’s efforts to preserve these buildings.
CBRRA supports Avon Justine iThemba Walkathon
CBBRA has given our support to the Avon Justine iThemba Walkathon breast cancer awareness campaign, to take place on Sunday 26 October 2009 at the Camps Bay High School. We urge the community to support this event.
Walkers can pre-register via www.ithembawalkathon.co.za. For more information see www.avonjustine.co.za and www.mybreast.org.za.
Walkers can pre-register via www.ithembawalkathon.co.za. For more information see www.avonjustine.co.za and www.mybreast.org.za.
CBRRA supports SpringTide
CBRRA has given its support to the Camps Bay United Church (CBUC) in their application for a permit for their annual youth outreach event "SPRINGTIDE". The event is to take place on Saturday 24th October 2009, on Camps Bay Beach & Glen Beach and at Camps Bay High School and Camps Bay Soccer Club.
As in the past 4 years, teenagers from all over Cape Town will compete in beach soccer, touch rugby and volleyball on Camps Bay Beach from 09h00 to 14h00. The beach sposrts will take place at the north end of the Camps Bay Beach. Skateboarders battle it out at Camps Bay High School. The Surfing competition will take place on Glen Beach till late.
CBUC has applied for a permit to erect a bedouin tent style stage on the north west corner of the Camps Bay Soccer Club area. The area will be temporarily fenced off. The Rescue, Dirty Skirts and Tree 63 have been signed up to play from 14h30 to 17h00. Sound checks will be from 11h00. In order to keep the disturbance as low as possible the stage will be erected facing the beach and playing towards the sea. There will be no disco this year.
CBUC has made the necessary arrangements for security and cleansing after the event and have consulted with neighbouring property owners, SAPS and the relevant City Council Departments and have provided a list of their portfolio managers.
For more information about the event, please log onto CBUS's website www.Spring-Tide.co.za.
As in the past 4 years, teenagers from all over Cape Town will compete in beach soccer, touch rugby and volleyball on Camps Bay Beach from 09h00 to 14h00. The beach sposrts will take place at the north end of the Camps Bay Beach. Skateboarders battle it out at Camps Bay High School. The Surfing competition will take place on Glen Beach till late.
CBUC has applied for a permit to erect a bedouin tent style stage on the north west corner of the Camps Bay Soccer Club area. The area will be temporarily fenced off. The Rescue, Dirty Skirts and Tree 63 have been signed up to play from 14h30 to 17h00. Sound checks will be from 11h00. In order to keep the disturbance as low as possible the stage will be erected facing the beach and playing towards the sea. There will be no disco this year.
CBUC has made the necessary arrangements for security and cleansing after the event and have consulted with neighbouring property owners, SAPS and the relevant City Council Departments and have provided a list of their portfolio managers.
For more information about the event, please log onto CBUS's website www.Spring-Tide.co.za.
Deadline for Public Comments on SPF
The deadline for public comments on the City’s draft plan for Cape Town’s future spatial development is drawing close.
Interested members of the public have until 31 October 2009 to comment on the plan, known as the Spatial Development Framework (SDF). The SDF sets out the City’s strategies and policies about how and where Cape Town should grow in the future, and is a required part of its Integrated Development Plan.
It is anticipated that the SDF will be submitted to Council and the Provincial Government of the Western Cape for approval during the course of 2010 when the public participation processes and redrafting to incorporate the input and comments received are complete.
In support of the plan, the City has also prepared:
A draft densification strategy
A draft Development Edges Policy
Integrated draft spatial development plans/environmental management frameworks for each of the City’s eight planning districts
These district plans identify:
a spatial vision per district
what should inform development in that district
what should be protected
where new development should go
Where there should be change to the existing urban environment and what this change should be.
They will also be submitted to the City Council for approval when the public participation processes are complete.
Once approved, the SDF and the district SDPs and EMFs will empower the City to review, update and replace the following existing Guide Plans approved in terms of the Physical Planning Act:
Guide Plan for the Cape Metropolitan Area, Vol 1: Peninsula (1988), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
Guide Plan for the Cape Metropolitan Area, Vol 3: Hottentots-Holland Basin (1988), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
Atlantis & Environs Guide Plan (1981), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
The City intends that the new plans will also, as far as possible and appropriate, replace and withdraw historic (five years or older) existing approved s4(6) Structure Plans for the Cape Town jurisdictional area, in terms of s4(7) of LUPO. Plans subject to further review may include:
Lansdowne Road Philippi Structure Plan (1995)
Inhofe Gift Local Structure Plan (1989)
Sir Lowry’s Pass Structure Plan (1997)
Gordon’s Bay Structure Plan (1989)
De Grendel Structure Plan (1989)
Goodwood Structure Plan (1988)
Lower Kuilsriver: Blue Downs Local Structure Plan (1987)
Weltevreden Valley Local Structure Plan (1986)
Tableview North Structure Plan (1991)
Lower Kuilsriver Area Urban Structure Plan (1986)
Benede- Kuilsrivier: Rotterdamgebied Plaaslike Struktuurplan (1987)
Gaylee Klainvlei Eersterivier Struktuurplan (1989)
as well as the following plans waiting for approval:
Helderberg Sub-Regional Structure Plan (2000)
Somerset West Structure Plan (2000)
Kommetjie-Oceanview & Environs Local Structure Plan (2000) ]
Fish Hoek Valley Local Structure Plan (2000)
Southern South Peninsula Local Structure Plan (1998)
Macassar Structure Plan (2002)
All of the draft plans are available for public viewing at subcouncil offices, libraries and the City’s Planning & Building Development Management Department district offices. They are also available for download here.
Questions and comments can be sent to futurecapetown@capetown.gov.za, PO Box 4511, Cape Town, 8000 or 021 425 4327 (fax).
The closing date for comments is 31 October 2009.
Interested members of the public have until 31 October 2009 to comment on the plan, known as the Spatial Development Framework (SDF). The SDF sets out the City’s strategies and policies about how and where Cape Town should grow in the future, and is a required part of its Integrated Development Plan.
It is anticipated that the SDF will be submitted to Council and the Provincial Government of the Western Cape for approval during the course of 2010 when the public participation processes and redrafting to incorporate the input and comments received are complete.
In support of the plan, the City has also prepared:
A draft densification strategy
A draft Development Edges Policy
Integrated draft spatial development plans/environmental management frameworks for each of the City’s eight planning districts
These district plans identify:
a spatial vision per district
what should inform development in that district
what should be protected
where new development should go
Where there should be change to the existing urban environment and what this change should be.
They will also be submitted to the City Council for approval when the public participation processes are complete.
Once approved, the SDF and the district SDPs and EMFs will empower the City to review, update and replace the following existing Guide Plans approved in terms of the Physical Planning Act:
Guide Plan for the Cape Metropolitan Area, Vol 1: Peninsula (1988), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
Guide Plan for the Cape Metropolitan Area, Vol 3: Hottentots-Holland Basin (1988), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
Atlantis & Environs Guide Plan (1981), which is now deemed to be a structure plan in terms of the Physical Planning Act
The City intends that the new plans will also, as far as possible and appropriate, replace and withdraw historic (five years or older) existing approved s4(6) Structure Plans for the Cape Town jurisdictional area, in terms of s4(7) of LUPO. Plans subject to further review may include:
Lansdowne Road Philippi Structure Plan (1995)
Inhofe Gift Local Structure Plan (1989)
Sir Lowry’s Pass Structure Plan (1997)
Gordon’s Bay Structure Plan (1989)
De Grendel Structure Plan (1989)
Goodwood Structure Plan (1988)
Lower Kuilsriver: Blue Downs Local Structure Plan (1987)
Weltevreden Valley Local Structure Plan (1986)
Tableview North Structure Plan (1991)
Lower Kuilsriver Area Urban Structure Plan (1986)
Benede- Kuilsrivier: Rotterdamgebied Plaaslike Struktuurplan (1987)
Gaylee Klainvlei Eersterivier Struktuurplan (1989)
as well as the following plans waiting for approval:
Helderberg Sub-Regional Structure Plan (2000)
Somerset West Structure Plan (2000)
Kommetjie-Oceanview & Environs Local Structure Plan (2000) ]
Fish Hoek Valley Local Structure Plan (2000)
Southern South Peninsula Local Structure Plan (1998)
Macassar Structure Plan (2002)
All of the draft plans are available for public viewing at subcouncil offices, libraries and the City’s Planning & Building Development Management Department district offices. They are also available for download here.
Questions and comments can be sent to futurecapetown@capetown.gov.za, PO Box 4511, Cape Town, 8000 or 021 425 4327 (fax).
The closing date for comments is 31 October 2009.
Monday, 12 October 2009
Public Meeting Announcement
AGENDA
- Chairperson’s report
- Approval of minutes of last general meeting dated 23 Feb ‘09
- Municipal Ward boundary delimitation
- Roundhouse redevelopment
- Animal By-laws
- Safety and Security (Police Station and Security Huts)
- Camps Bay Medics
- Financial Report and approval of Annual Financial Statements dated 31 Dec ‘08 Financial Report
- Amendments to the CBRRA Constitution
- New Jul ‘09 Municipal Rates valuation (Meeting with the City Valuation Department)
- Planning matters (Unicity Spatial Planning District Plans)
- High Court cases (Oudekraal, Geneva and Blinkwater Roads)
- Any other business
Read more about the topics for the meeting below:
THE ROUNDHOUSE
The Roundhouse has been redeveloped into two restaurants. The concessionaires now wish to redevelop the adjacent Stan’s Halt building into a small boutique hotel with attached lodge premises. CBRRA and "the Friends of the Glen" are keeping a watch on proposals which, in due course, will be shown to the public at large for comment and approval.
MUNICIPAL RATES
The City Council has just completed its July 2009 municipal property rates revaluation throughout the Unicity. A new provisional Valuation Roll will be published in January 2010 – ratepayers will be given until April 2010 to object and new rates bills, based on the revised valuations, will be sent out in July 2010 subject to objection adjustments if any.
NEW MUNICIPAL WARD BOUNDARIES
The Delimitation Board has published its proposed new ward boundary maps for public comment by December 2009. These have serious consequences for Camps Bay. It is proposed to again split Camps Bay and environs (in the vicinity of the soccer field) so that part will remain with Camps Bay, Bakoven, Llandudno and Hout Bay as the constituency of Cllr Marga Haywood while the other part will be merged with the Sea Point constituency of Cllr J-P Smith. CBRRA considers this a very retrograde step and wishes to test public opinion.
ANIMAL BY-LAWS
The City of Cape Town has finalised is draft Animal By-Law. Several improvements have been proposed. A full copy of the draft by-law is included in the CBRRA blog ‹‹here››.
OUDEKRAAL
A property group has obtained an option to buy on the Kassie Wiehahn-owned Oudekraal estate stretching from Camps Bay to Llandudno. Since then Mr Wiehahn has lost another High Court case to restore his development rights on his above property. CBRRA hopes to report on the status of the option. See the full High Court judgement on the CBRRA blog ‹‹here››.
Read the proposed amendments to the CBRRA Constitution ‹‹here››.
Proposed Amendments to the CBRRA Constitution
Proposed Amendments to the CBRRA Constitution to be voted on at the forthcoming CBRRA Public Meeting on Monday 26 October 2009
5. Membership
5.1 After “Atlantic Ocean between” add " the southern boundary of"
8. Powers of the Management Committee
Add "8.5 No member of Manco or sub committee or office bearer of the Association shall have any personal right over any asset of the Association."
9. Conduct of Management Committee Meetings
Add " 9.8 Minutes of Manco meetings shall be recorded and kept safely for consultation by members."
11. General Meetings & Procedures
Add "11.9 Minutes of all meetings shall be recorded and kept safely, and be available for members to consult."
15. Termination of the Association
15.2 After “trust on its behalf shall,” add "after paying off any debts", and after “Special General Meeting to” add "a non profit organisation with similar objectives to the Association."
5. Membership
5.1 After “Atlantic Ocean between” add " the southern boundary of"
8. Powers of the Management Committee
Add "8.5 No member of Manco or sub committee or office bearer of the Association shall have any personal right over any asset of the Association."
9. Conduct of Management Committee Meetings
Add " 9.8 Minutes of Manco meetings shall be recorded and kept safely for consultation by members."
11. General Meetings & Procedures
Add "11.9 Minutes of all meetings shall be recorded and kept safely, and be available for members to consult."
15. Termination of the Association
15.2 After “trust on its behalf shall,” add "after paying off any debts", and after “Special General Meeting to” add "a non profit organisation with similar objectives to the Association."
Saving Princess Vlei
By being an active member of the GCTCA , CBBRA is demonstrating that it is prepared to be active on a much larger stage than simply the interests of only it own area of jurisdiction. It is important that such activities embrace the full spectrum of all levels of society, regardless of locality and standards of living.
For details of the GCTCA see ‹‹here››
MEMORANDUM: PRESENTED TO THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR OF CAPE TOWN: ALDERMAN DAN PLATO
5 October 2009
Why the City should not sell ERF 82176 PRINCESS VLEI, much less allow a shopping centre on it
Princess Vlei is a lake between Grassy Park and Retreat which has been badly damaged and the surrounding vegetation invaded by alien plants and destroyed through urban activities. It is identified in the Spatial development Proposals that will shortly serve before council as a “green site” to be preserved.
For twelve years the City of Cape Town has worked to get all the necessary authorizations to be able to sell a part of the shoreline to a developer for the construction of a large shopping centre. Almost the only remaining step is the actual sale.
The GCTCA and LOGRA CIVIC, in consultation and collaboration with the Cape Flats Wetland Forum, the Zandvlei Trust, WESSA (the Wildlife & Environmental Society of Southern Africa), and other local civil society associations from all over Cape Town wishes to implore the City of Cape Town political heads to reconsider what we assess to be a bad planning decision and instead to use and care for the Princess Vlei area in a much more sustainable way.
We consider the proposed development of a retails shopping complex, with a taxi-rank and 600 parking bays to be an inappropriate development on current public open space which is eco-sensitive and has, hitherto unrecognised, cultural and heritage significance for the first nation people of the Southern tip of Africa whose descendants live all over the Flats today.
It is a place where local people have for years conducted baptisms and other religious ceremonies, fished, played sport and relaxed in the sun. This is where a poignant Khoi legend is reported to have taken place.
According to stories told by Khoi herders, passed on by slaves and recounted by Jose Burman in Safe To The Sea (Human & Rousseau 1962) the vlei was named for a powerful Khoi Princess whose headquarters was in what is today called the Elephant Eye cave on Constantiaberg, clearly visible from the vlei. She and her Gorachoqua people would bring their cattle down the Princess Kasteel Stream to the vlei. While bathing there in 1510, she was abducted by sailors from the ship of Portuguese explorer Francesco d’Almeida, who also died in a skirmish at the Cape, and either murdered or taken to Portugal. According to local tradition, her tears formed Little Princess Vlei and one person drowns each year in Princess Vlei in retribution.
During the 499 years that followed, the Gorachoqua and their descendants suffered enslavement, dispossession, deculturation, apartheid, forced removal and countless other injustices. Deprived of access to most of Cape Town’s recreational beaches and scenic sites, they nicknamed the northern shore of Princess Vlei “Claremont Beach” and the area around Little Princess Vlei “Galaland”. But although Princess Vlei remained a popular site for outdoor recreation, religious worship and baptism, it was poorly managed and badly neglected by the City, as for example when used on occasion to dump sand and rubble from roadworks on Prince George Drive and silt dredged from the lake.
Many Khoi descendants on the Cape Flats regard the cave, the vlei and the Princess Kasteel Stream connecting them, to be their culturally and historically most valued sites in Cape Town. A shopping centre on the vlei shore would destroy the site and be an insult to all descendants of the Khoisan.
There is now growing local opposition to the shopping centre.
The Baseline Study, EIA, public participation, RoD and approval process entirely failed to take into account the cultural and historical importance of Princess Vlei.
Our plea is that the undesirable and inappropriate development be taken under revision and that the sale of the land not proceeds. We would like to see the City holding on to the land in trust for the people and develop the site in a more appropriate way that would restore respect for the heritage value it holds. It could become the first real memory park, with appropriate spaces to highlight the cultural significance, which would be a tourism attraction as well. We need to display local history and Princess Vlei offers such an opportunity.
Furthermore, the original vegetation of the site earmarked for the development is classified nationally as Critically Endangered, which the City has a duty to rehabilitate and conserve.
The “Dressing the Princess” project of the Cape Flats Wetland Forum with local volunteers, schoolchildren and other partners is currently successfully restoring fynbos on part of the site. This demonstrates the local interest and potential for improved use of this valuable public open space.
We believe the proposed development is inappropriate and will destroy both the natural environment and the potential cultural, recreational and tourism value of the site. There is strong local opposition to the development for various cultural, economic, religious, recreational and ecological reasons. Capetonians have a history of living together and respecting all cultures and our beautiful environment and from all corners of the City of Cape Town, join us in this plea.
Many would see this development as sacrilege, both in respect of heritage and biodiversity significance.
PHILIP M BAM
CHAIRPERSON: LOGRA CIVIC and THE GREATER CAPE TOWN CIVIC ALLIANCE.
For details of the GCTCA see ‹‹here››
MEMORANDUM: PRESENTED TO THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR OF CAPE TOWN: ALDERMAN DAN PLATO
5 October 2009
Why the City should not sell ERF 82176 PRINCESS VLEI, much less allow a shopping centre on it
Princess Vlei is a lake between Grassy Park and Retreat which has been badly damaged and the surrounding vegetation invaded by alien plants and destroyed through urban activities. It is identified in the Spatial development Proposals that will shortly serve before council as a “green site” to be preserved.
For twelve years the City of Cape Town has worked to get all the necessary authorizations to be able to sell a part of the shoreline to a developer for the construction of a large shopping centre. Almost the only remaining step is the actual sale.
The GCTCA and LOGRA CIVIC, in consultation and collaboration with the Cape Flats Wetland Forum, the Zandvlei Trust, WESSA (the Wildlife & Environmental Society of Southern Africa), and other local civil society associations from all over Cape Town wishes to implore the City of Cape Town political heads to reconsider what we assess to be a bad planning decision and instead to use and care for the Princess Vlei area in a much more sustainable way.
We consider the proposed development of a retails shopping complex, with a taxi-rank and 600 parking bays to be an inappropriate development on current public open space which is eco-sensitive and has, hitherto unrecognised, cultural and heritage significance for the first nation people of the Southern tip of Africa whose descendants live all over the Flats today.
It is a place where local people have for years conducted baptisms and other religious ceremonies, fished, played sport and relaxed in the sun. This is where a poignant Khoi legend is reported to have taken place.
According to stories told by Khoi herders, passed on by slaves and recounted by Jose Burman in Safe To The Sea (Human & Rousseau 1962) the vlei was named for a powerful Khoi Princess whose headquarters was in what is today called the Elephant Eye cave on Constantiaberg, clearly visible from the vlei. She and her Gorachoqua people would bring their cattle down the Princess Kasteel Stream to the vlei. While bathing there in 1510, she was abducted by sailors from the ship of Portuguese explorer Francesco d’Almeida, who also died in a skirmish at the Cape, and either murdered or taken to Portugal. According to local tradition, her tears formed Little Princess Vlei and one person drowns each year in Princess Vlei in retribution.
During the 499 years that followed, the Gorachoqua and their descendants suffered enslavement, dispossession, deculturation, apartheid, forced removal and countless other injustices. Deprived of access to most of Cape Town’s recreational beaches and scenic sites, they nicknamed the northern shore of Princess Vlei “Claremont Beach” and the area around Little Princess Vlei “Galaland”. But although Princess Vlei remained a popular site for outdoor recreation, religious worship and baptism, it was poorly managed and badly neglected by the City, as for example when used on occasion to dump sand and rubble from roadworks on Prince George Drive and silt dredged from the lake.
Many Khoi descendants on the Cape Flats regard the cave, the vlei and the Princess Kasteel Stream connecting them, to be their culturally and historically most valued sites in Cape Town. A shopping centre on the vlei shore would destroy the site and be an insult to all descendants of the Khoisan.
There is now growing local opposition to the shopping centre.
The Baseline Study, EIA, public participation, RoD and approval process entirely failed to take into account the cultural and historical importance of Princess Vlei.
Our plea is that the undesirable and inappropriate development be taken under revision and that the sale of the land not proceeds. We would like to see the City holding on to the land in trust for the people and develop the site in a more appropriate way that would restore respect for the heritage value it holds. It could become the first real memory park, with appropriate spaces to highlight the cultural significance, which would be a tourism attraction as well. We need to display local history and Princess Vlei offers such an opportunity.
Furthermore, the original vegetation of the site earmarked for the development is classified nationally as Critically Endangered, which the City has a duty to rehabilitate and conserve.
The “Dressing the Princess” project of the Cape Flats Wetland Forum with local volunteers, schoolchildren and other partners is currently successfully restoring fynbos on part of the site. This demonstrates the local interest and potential for improved use of this valuable public open space.
We believe the proposed development is inappropriate and will destroy both the natural environment and the potential cultural, recreational and tourism value of the site. There is strong local opposition to the development for various cultural, economic, religious, recreational and ecological reasons. Capetonians have a history of living together and respecting all cultures and our beautiful environment and from all corners of the City of Cape Town, join us in this plea.
Many would see this development as sacrilege, both in respect of heritage and biodiversity significance.
PHILIP M BAM
CHAIRPERSON: LOGRA CIVIC and THE GREATER CAPE TOWN CIVIC ALLIANCE.
The GCTCA Constitution
MISSION STATEMENT
The GCTCA is a network of well over one hundred Ratepayers’ and Civic Associations representing diverse communities all over Cape Town. Its overall purpose is to strengthen the efforts of those member associations in order to improve the lives of people in their different areas. It distributes useful information and shares available knowledge, experience and expertise. Where issues arise that are too big for the individual Associations, it is able to join forces with them for the benefit of all ratepayers. The GCTCA is registered with the City.
CONSTITUTION OF THE GCTCA
NAME
1. The name shall be THE GREATER CAPE TOWN CIVIC ALLIANCE, henceforth referred to as “The Alliance”.
NATURE
2. The Alliance shall be a voluntary association which represents residents, ratepayers, civics and other interest groups within Cape Town, that are concerned with matters of government local and other spheres and are not aligned to any political party or other structure with a separate existence from their constituent members.
LEGAL IDENTITY & PERSONA
3. The Alliance is a “universitas personarum”, an independent legal persona or entity, distinct from the individuals who comprise it, having the capacity of acquiring rights of property, of incurring obligations and of suing or being sued in its own name and having perpetual succession, and neither members nor the Executive Committee shall be answerable for the debts or engagements of the Association.
AREA
4. The area of The Alliance shall be the municipal area administered by the CITY OF CAPE TOWN.
OBJECTIVES
5. The objectives of The Alliance shall be the following:
5.1 To protect and promote the interests of its members in regard to objectives 5.2 and 5.3
5.2 To obtain membership of any forum or similar body established for the discussion of, or negotiations on, the constitutional status of local government.
5.3 To make representations to and, where relevant, to gain access to any forum, committee, federation or like body established for the discussion of, or required to deal with, the constitutional, financial or organisational changes to government with the purpose of ensuring that any such changes to government in the area covered by The Alliance furthers the interests of its constituent members.
5.4 To work for and promote the recognition of The Alliance as a body whose prior participation in the decision process would first be sought to ensure the favourable outcome of government decisions affecting its area.
5.5 To set up effective public participation systems to ensure effective participation by the people in planned and proposed government processes.
5.6 The Alliance shall not normally concern itself with any issue which is parochial or peculiar to a member’s area unless the principles involved could affect other members, or unless support on an issue or issues is so requested by the affected area’s chairperson.
MEMBERSHIP
6. The members of The Alliance shall be those bodies that are ratepayers, tenants, residents, non-politically aligned civics associations or other bodies constituted for similar purposes, which are not members of any other regional or national body with aims or objects conflicting with those of The Alliance, and which;
6.1 Have a constitution with the aim or object of promoting its members’ interests in local government;
6.2 Have a provable list of members in good standing;
6.3 Accept the objectives of The Alliance and this Constitution by a
minuted resolution at a properly constituted general meeting of its members.
6.4 Notwithstanding that membership is restricted to organisations as referred to in 6 above, each member Body may be represented at any meeting of the Alliance whether General or Executive by not more that two participating members, excluding observing members and providing that those two members are duly mandated to represent the body they belong to.
6.5. It is hereby recorded that membership of The Alliance is granted to a member organisation and that the individuals so representing that organisation are understood to speak for and on behalf of their parent body and so carry that body’s mandate to express their views.
7. The bodies, which have attested to this Constitution, shall be the members of The Alliance together with any body that is admitted as a member in terms of Clause 8.
8.1 After the founding of The Alliance, any body which applies for membership shall, if it qualifies in terms of the provisions of Clause 6, be admitted as a member, excepting that The Alliance reserves the right to associate or disassociate itself with any other body in accordance with the provision of this Constitution.
8.2 It is hereby noted that the Ratepayers, Civics and Residents Associations that caused the formation The Alliance in June 2005 are automatically accepted as full members of The Alliance and, by virtue of their involvement in the inaugural meetings of the Association, hereby bind themselves to this Constitution : a list of such Ratepayers, Civic and Residents Associations will be attached to this Constitution as Annexure A.
SUSPENSION AND/OR TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP
9.1 The membership of any member more than six (6) months in arrears with subscriptions shall be suspended until such time as all amounts have been paid. The member shall be notified in writing of the suspension and, failing settlement within a further three (3) months, that membership shall be terminated.
9.2 The membership of any member who, in the opinion of the Executive Committee, acts in a manner conflicting with the aims and/or objectives of The Alliance, shall be suspended after due warning has been given in writing by the Executive Committee with details of the alleged offence if a satisfactory explanation has not been received within thirty (30) days of such warning.
9.3 Any member whose membership has been suspended shall have the right of appeal to a Special General Meeting, provided the appeal in writing is received within fourteen (14) days of the written notice of suspension, and the appeal must form part of the published agenda of the Special General Meeting. Failing the appeal being timeous, or failing the success of the appeal, the membership shall be terminated forthwith.
9.4 A member may voluntarily terminate its membership of the Alliance by giving thirty days written notice to The Secretary,
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
There shall be an executive committee to manage the affairs of The Alliance. The executive committee shall:
10.1 Hold office for one year and shall be elected at an Annual General Meeting. Such election shall constitute a mandate from the members;
10.2 Be representative of all regional interests and groupings comprising The Alliance with the right to delegate functions and co-opt individuals to undertake specific activities in the interests of attaining its objects;
10.3 Include a minimum of seven members, the office bearers of which shall comprise a Chairperson, one or two Vice Chairpersons, Secretary and Treasurer, who shall be elected by the executive committee as soon as may be possible after the Annual General Meeting.
10.3.1 The elected Chairperson may serve in that capacity for only two consecutive years and must stand down and not be available for re-election for a period of one year thereafter.
10.3.2 All other office bearers, with the exception of the secretary, shall be permitted to occupy their positions for a period of one year only, but may be elected to a post other than the one they have vacated.
10.4 Comprise of members on a voluntary, non-remunerative basis, excepting that members may be reimbursed for expenses incurred exceeding R100.00, provided such expenditure is authorised before it is incurred; and
10.5 Comprise a quorum when four committee members are present at the meeting.
10.6 Shall accept that, in the event of an elected member be unable to attend a meeting he may nominate another member to attend the meeting on his behalf. This nominate will be in written form and accepted by the member nominated and handed in to the Secretary before the nominee may take part in the proceedings.
10.7 Terminate the Executive Committee membership of any Committee member who fails to attend more than two (2) consecutive Executive Committee meetings without apology or proxy or reasonable explanation.
10.8 Propose, and submit to the Annual General Meeting for approval or adjustment, the amount of the subscription to be paid each year by each member.
FINANCE
11. The financial affairs of The Alliance shall be conducted so that:
11.1 Members shall make financial contributions towards the cost of managing the affairs of The Alliance in a manner and to the extent determined at an Annual General Meeting;
11.2 The Alliance shall be empowered to receive donations;
11.3 The Alliance shall open banking accounts and have books of account to reflect its transactions which will audited annually by a committee of three persons drawn from the membership and file their report to the Treasurer at the Annual General Meeting;
11.4 The financial year shall terminate on the thirtieth day of June each year, and
11.5 The liability of members shall not exceed the amount of their annual contributions.
11.6 The Executive Committee shall be empowered to call on members to contribute special levies for specific reasons during any financial year should the annual contributions prove insufficient to allow The Alliance to operate effectively in response to contingent circumstances arising.
MEETINGS
12. Meetings of the Alliance shall be:
12.1 GENERAL MEETING : Once per quarter, or more frequent should issues or circumstances demand.
12.2 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING : An Annual General Meeting which shall be held in the month of September which may be in lieu of a General Meeting envisaged in 11.1
12.2.1 Fourteen (14) days written notice, of such meeting shall be given to all members.
12.2.2 A Quorum at the Annual General Meeting shall comprise of a third of all members plus one, discarding fractions.
12.2.3 Each member shall have one vote.
12.2.4 In the event that a quorum should not be present, the commencement of the meeting shall be adjourned for thirty minutes. Should there still be insufficient members to form a quorum, the meeting will be adjourned to a new date that will be after seven days but before thirty days.
12.2.5 At the re-convened meeting the members present will be sufficient to proceed with the meeting notwithstanding the number of members.
12.2.6. The Annual General Meeting shall determine the number of Executive Committee members to be elected for the ensuing year; elect the members of the Executive Committee; approve, or otherwise, the audited accounts; approve or adjust the subscriptions for the ensuing year as proposed by the Executive Committee.
12.3 SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING : A Special General Meeting may be convened by the Chairperson, acting Chairperson or by a written request signed by one third of the participating members, provided that fourteen (14) days notice of such meeting shall be given to all members.
12.4 NOTICES OF MEETINGS : Notices of meetings shall be valid when delivered whether by way of postal, electronic, of facsimile means and in case of great urgency as regards the Executive Committee only, in the opinion of the Chairperson, telephonically.
12.5 MOTIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA : Motions for consideration at any meeting shall be submitted to The Chairperson in writing by not later that 21 days before the date of the meeting, provided that the Chairperson in matters of great urgency may submit a motion without notice.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND DISSOLUTION AND GUARDIANSHIP
13. The Constitution may be amended by a vote of two thirds of the members in good standing, either present and voting, or represented by a written proxy, at the Annual General Meeting or a Special General Meeting, provided that written notice of such amendment is first submitted to the Executive Committee thirty (30) days prior to such meeting for inclusion in the written agenda of the meeting.
14. The Dissolution of The Alliance may be decided at a meeting convened for the purpose under the identical provisions as for constitutional amendments in Clause 13, provided further that the net value of any assets is disposed of to members on a pro-rata basis of current subscription payments and/or that responsibility for any liabilities is apportioned on a similar pro-rata basis.
CUSTODIAL COMMITTEE
15. Should the members in good standing at any General Meeting decide that there are no current issues to warrant maintaining an executive or management structure, the Executive Committee may hand over guardianship of the name, Constitution, records and assets of The Alliance to a committee of three honorary custodians, nominated at the meeting, who shall be agreeable to such appointment, and who shall be known as the Custodial Committee. This Custodial Committee shall:
15.1 have no executive or financial powers attributable to The Alliance, except as in Clause 17;
15.2 upon the unavailability, temporary or permanent, of any one of their number, themselves appoint a substitute on a temporary or permanent basis;
15.3 have the discretion to hand back control of the guarded attributes of The Alliance to a General Meeting – refer to Clause 15 - to which all previous members of the Alliance who at any stage were in good standing are invited, when said Custodial Committee is called upon to do so by a minimum of five (5) such previous members, who shall each have the authority of a Resolution passed by their respective Executive Committees to make such a request. In support of such request the issue or issues motivating it shall be specified to the Custodial Committee, and the preparations for the meeting shall be executed by the applicant members once the request has been approved.
16. The General Meeting called under Clause 14.3 shall take the form of a re-inaugural meeting and an Executive Committee shall be elected in terms of Clause 9, and financial contributions determined in terms of Clause 10.
17. At the time of handing over of guardianship to the Custodial Committee as in Clause 14, the Secretary shall notify all previous members of the Alliance, who at any time were in good standing, of this status change and the procedures necessary to reinstate an active mode.
18. If, after a minimum of three (3) years under Custodial control, there has been no call to the Custodial Committee to hand control to a General Meeting, such Committee shall, at their discretion, have the mandate to dissolve The Alliance at any time thereafter, and to donate the financial assets to the Red Cross Children’s Hospital.
POSTAL ADDRESS
19. The postal address of the Association shall be the residence of the Secretary or any other place that the Executive Committee (ExCo) may designate.
The GCTCA is a network of well over one hundred Ratepayers’ and Civic Associations representing diverse communities all over Cape Town. Its overall purpose is to strengthen the efforts of those member associations in order to improve the lives of people in their different areas. It distributes useful information and shares available knowledge, experience and expertise. Where issues arise that are too big for the individual Associations, it is able to join forces with them for the benefit of all ratepayers. The GCTCA is registered with the City.
CONSTITUTION OF THE GCTCA
NAME
1. The name shall be THE GREATER CAPE TOWN CIVIC ALLIANCE, henceforth referred to as “The Alliance”.
NATURE
2. The Alliance shall be a voluntary association which represents residents, ratepayers, civics and other interest groups within Cape Town, that are concerned with matters of government local and other spheres and are not aligned to any political party or other structure with a separate existence from their constituent members.
LEGAL IDENTITY & PERSONA
3. The Alliance is a “universitas personarum”, an independent legal persona or entity, distinct from the individuals who comprise it, having the capacity of acquiring rights of property, of incurring obligations and of suing or being sued in its own name and having perpetual succession, and neither members nor the Executive Committee shall be answerable for the debts or engagements of the Association.
AREA
4. The area of The Alliance shall be the municipal area administered by the CITY OF CAPE TOWN.
OBJECTIVES
5. The objectives of The Alliance shall be the following:
5.1 To protect and promote the interests of its members in regard to objectives 5.2 and 5.3
5.2 To obtain membership of any forum or similar body established for the discussion of, or negotiations on, the constitutional status of local government.
5.3 To make representations to and, where relevant, to gain access to any forum, committee, federation or like body established for the discussion of, or required to deal with, the constitutional, financial or organisational changes to government with the purpose of ensuring that any such changes to government in the area covered by The Alliance furthers the interests of its constituent members.
5.4 To work for and promote the recognition of The Alliance as a body whose prior participation in the decision process would first be sought to ensure the favourable outcome of government decisions affecting its area.
5.5 To set up effective public participation systems to ensure effective participation by the people in planned and proposed government processes.
5.6 The Alliance shall not normally concern itself with any issue which is parochial or peculiar to a member’s area unless the principles involved could affect other members, or unless support on an issue or issues is so requested by the affected area’s chairperson.
MEMBERSHIP
6. The members of The Alliance shall be those bodies that are ratepayers, tenants, residents, non-politically aligned civics associations or other bodies constituted for similar purposes, which are not members of any other regional or national body with aims or objects conflicting with those of The Alliance, and which;
6.1 Have a constitution with the aim or object of promoting its members’ interests in local government;
6.2 Have a provable list of members in good standing;
6.3 Accept the objectives of The Alliance and this Constitution by a
minuted resolution at a properly constituted general meeting of its members.
6.4 Notwithstanding that membership is restricted to organisations as referred to in 6 above, each member Body may be represented at any meeting of the Alliance whether General or Executive by not more that two participating members, excluding observing members and providing that those two members are duly mandated to represent the body they belong to.
6.5. It is hereby recorded that membership of The Alliance is granted to a member organisation and that the individuals so representing that organisation are understood to speak for and on behalf of their parent body and so carry that body’s mandate to express their views.
7. The bodies, which have attested to this Constitution, shall be the members of The Alliance together with any body that is admitted as a member in terms of Clause 8.
8.1 After the founding of The Alliance, any body which applies for membership shall, if it qualifies in terms of the provisions of Clause 6, be admitted as a member, excepting that The Alliance reserves the right to associate or disassociate itself with any other body in accordance with the provision of this Constitution.
8.2 It is hereby noted that the Ratepayers, Civics and Residents Associations that caused the formation The Alliance in June 2005 are automatically accepted as full members of The Alliance and, by virtue of their involvement in the inaugural meetings of the Association, hereby bind themselves to this Constitution : a list of such Ratepayers, Civic and Residents Associations will be attached to this Constitution as Annexure A.
SUSPENSION AND/OR TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP
9.1 The membership of any member more than six (6) months in arrears with subscriptions shall be suspended until such time as all amounts have been paid. The member shall be notified in writing of the suspension and, failing settlement within a further three (3) months, that membership shall be terminated.
9.2 The membership of any member who, in the opinion of the Executive Committee, acts in a manner conflicting with the aims and/or objectives of The Alliance, shall be suspended after due warning has been given in writing by the Executive Committee with details of the alleged offence if a satisfactory explanation has not been received within thirty (30) days of such warning.
9.3 Any member whose membership has been suspended shall have the right of appeal to a Special General Meeting, provided the appeal in writing is received within fourteen (14) days of the written notice of suspension, and the appeal must form part of the published agenda of the Special General Meeting. Failing the appeal being timeous, or failing the success of the appeal, the membership shall be terminated forthwith.
9.4 A member may voluntarily terminate its membership of the Alliance by giving thirty days written notice to The Secretary,
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
There shall be an executive committee to manage the affairs of The Alliance. The executive committee shall:
10.1 Hold office for one year and shall be elected at an Annual General Meeting. Such election shall constitute a mandate from the members;
10.2 Be representative of all regional interests and groupings comprising The Alliance with the right to delegate functions and co-opt individuals to undertake specific activities in the interests of attaining its objects;
10.3 Include a minimum of seven members, the office bearers of which shall comprise a Chairperson, one or two Vice Chairpersons, Secretary and Treasurer, who shall be elected by the executive committee as soon as may be possible after the Annual General Meeting.
10.3.1 The elected Chairperson may serve in that capacity for only two consecutive years and must stand down and not be available for re-election for a period of one year thereafter.
10.3.2 All other office bearers, with the exception of the secretary, shall be permitted to occupy their positions for a period of one year only, but may be elected to a post other than the one they have vacated.
10.4 Comprise of members on a voluntary, non-remunerative basis, excepting that members may be reimbursed for expenses incurred exceeding R100.00, provided such expenditure is authorised before it is incurred; and
10.5 Comprise a quorum when four committee members are present at the meeting.
10.6 Shall accept that, in the event of an elected member be unable to attend a meeting he may nominate another member to attend the meeting on his behalf. This nominate will be in written form and accepted by the member nominated and handed in to the Secretary before the nominee may take part in the proceedings.
10.7 Terminate the Executive Committee membership of any Committee member who fails to attend more than two (2) consecutive Executive Committee meetings without apology or proxy or reasonable explanation.
10.8 Propose, and submit to the Annual General Meeting for approval or adjustment, the amount of the subscription to be paid each year by each member.
FINANCE
11. The financial affairs of The Alliance shall be conducted so that:
11.1 Members shall make financial contributions towards the cost of managing the affairs of The Alliance in a manner and to the extent determined at an Annual General Meeting;
11.2 The Alliance shall be empowered to receive donations;
11.3 The Alliance shall open banking accounts and have books of account to reflect its transactions which will audited annually by a committee of three persons drawn from the membership and file their report to the Treasurer at the Annual General Meeting;
11.4 The financial year shall terminate on the thirtieth day of June each year, and
11.5 The liability of members shall not exceed the amount of their annual contributions.
11.6 The Executive Committee shall be empowered to call on members to contribute special levies for specific reasons during any financial year should the annual contributions prove insufficient to allow The Alliance to operate effectively in response to contingent circumstances arising.
MEETINGS
12. Meetings of the Alliance shall be:
12.1 GENERAL MEETING : Once per quarter, or more frequent should issues or circumstances demand.
12.2 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING : An Annual General Meeting which shall be held in the month of September which may be in lieu of a General Meeting envisaged in 11.1
12.2.1 Fourteen (14) days written notice, of such meeting shall be given to all members.
12.2.2 A Quorum at the Annual General Meeting shall comprise of a third of all members plus one, discarding fractions.
12.2.3 Each member shall have one vote.
12.2.4 In the event that a quorum should not be present, the commencement of the meeting shall be adjourned for thirty minutes. Should there still be insufficient members to form a quorum, the meeting will be adjourned to a new date that will be after seven days but before thirty days.
12.2.5 At the re-convened meeting the members present will be sufficient to proceed with the meeting notwithstanding the number of members.
12.2.6. The Annual General Meeting shall determine the number of Executive Committee members to be elected for the ensuing year; elect the members of the Executive Committee; approve, or otherwise, the audited accounts; approve or adjust the subscriptions for the ensuing year as proposed by the Executive Committee.
12.3 SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING : A Special General Meeting may be convened by the Chairperson, acting Chairperson or by a written request signed by one third of the participating members, provided that fourteen (14) days notice of such meeting shall be given to all members.
12.4 NOTICES OF MEETINGS : Notices of meetings shall be valid when delivered whether by way of postal, electronic, of facsimile means and in case of great urgency as regards the Executive Committee only, in the opinion of the Chairperson, telephonically.
12.5 MOTIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA : Motions for consideration at any meeting shall be submitted to The Chairperson in writing by not later that 21 days before the date of the meeting, provided that the Chairperson in matters of great urgency may submit a motion without notice.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND DISSOLUTION AND GUARDIANSHIP
13. The Constitution may be amended by a vote of two thirds of the members in good standing, either present and voting, or represented by a written proxy, at the Annual General Meeting or a Special General Meeting, provided that written notice of such amendment is first submitted to the Executive Committee thirty (30) days prior to such meeting for inclusion in the written agenda of the meeting.
14. The Dissolution of The Alliance may be decided at a meeting convened for the purpose under the identical provisions as for constitutional amendments in Clause 13, provided further that the net value of any assets is disposed of to members on a pro-rata basis of current subscription payments and/or that responsibility for any liabilities is apportioned on a similar pro-rata basis.
CUSTODIAL COMMITTEE
15. Should the members in good standing at any General Meeting decide that there are no current issues to warrant maintaining an executive or management structure, the Executive Committee may hand over guardianship of the name, Constitution, records and assets of The Alliance to a committee of three honorary custodians, nominated at the meeting, who shall be agreeable to such appointment, and who shall be known as the Custodial Committee. This Custodial Committee shall:
15.1 have no executive or financial powers attributable to The Alliance, except as in Clause 17;
15.2 upon the unavailability, temporary or permanent, of any one of their number, themselves appoint a substitute on a temporary or permanent basis;
15.3 have the discretion to hand back control of the guarded attributes of The Alliance to a General Meeting – refer to Clause 15 - to which all previous members of the Alliance who at any stage were in good standing are invited, when said Custodial Committee is called upon to do so by a minimum of five (5) such previous members, who shall each have the authority of a Resolution passed by their respective Executive Committees to make such a request. In support of such request the issue or issues motivating it shall be specified to the Custodial Committee, and the preparations for the meeting shall be executed by the applicant members once the request has been approved.
16. The General Meeting called under Clause 14.3 shall take the form of a re-inaugural meeting and an Executive Committee shall be elected in terms of Clause 9, and financial contributions determined in terms of Clause 10.
17. At the time of handing over of guardianship to the Custodial Committee as in Clause 14, the Secretary shall notify all previous members of the Alliance, who at any time were in good standing, of this status change and the procedures necessary to reinstate an active mode.
18. If, after a minimum of three (3) years under Custodial control, there has been no call to the Custodial Committee to hand control to a General Meeting, such Committee shall, at their discretion, have the mandate to dissolve The Alliance at any time thereafter, and to donate the financial assets to the Red Cross Children’s Hospital.
POSTAL ADDRESS
19. The postal address of the Association shall be the residence of the Secretary or any other place that the Executive Committee (ExCo) may designate.
The Greater Cape Town Civic Alliance (GCTCA)
The GCTCA was started in 2005 to co-ordinate the ratepayer’s response to Draft 2 of the City’s Integrated Zoning Scheme (IZS). It was revived in May 2007 to respond to Draft 3 of the IZS and is now involved in many facets of municipal and governmental issues. These include the public’s responses to the City’s newly advertised Draft Spatial Development Framework”, other controversial planning projects, municipal rates valuations and rates policies, as well as crime, housing and general public participation, amongst other issues of common interest (eg the campaign to prevent the public open space adjacent to Princess Vlei being sold by the City for the construction of a very large shopping mall and adjacent parking area (See “Saving Princess Vlei” ‹‹here››).
CBBRA is a founding member of the GCTCA and, since its inception, has been represented on the Alliance’s Executive Committee (EXCO). Please contact EXCO member John Powell on should you wish to be informed further in respect of the GCTCA’s activities or have any queries.
Please find the Mission Statement and Constitution ‹‹here››.
CBBRA is a founding member of the GCTCA and, since its inception, has been represented on the Alliance’s Executive Committee (EXCO). Please contact EXCO member John Powell on should you wish to be informed further in respect of the GCTCA’s activities or have any queries.
Please find the Mission Statement and Constitution ‹‹here››.
When your neighbours start building...
WHAT TO DO ABOUT THAT NEW BUILDING BEING BUILT NEXT TO YOUR PROPERTY
CBRRA often receives indignant and urgent enquiries from residents about the fact that a new building is being built right next to their property without them having been told about it and without them having been given a chance to comment or complain about it before it started.
The following is a typical enquiry letter to CBRRA and its reply, which will give you an idea as to where you stand in a situation such as this:
A typical letter from a resident:–
“I do not know if you are aware of it, but, some time ago, the property on Erf. XXXX in XXXXXXXXX Road was sold and subsequently the new owner has demolished the entire existing house, excavated almost the entire site down to a depth of some 3 to 4 meters below the average road level and is now building a new building there.
As no one in our area, to the best of my knowledge, has ever been approached nor informed, I would like to know if you are aware of what building is to be erected, for what purpose and to what height, width and depth, before it gets out of hand and why no one has ever informed me about it.
It may all be OK and in accordance with the Council zoning scheme and title deed restrictions, but I for one am concerned and afraid that something may get out of hand before it is too late to do something about this possibly illegal construction going too far before it can be stopped.
It would be appreciated if you could enlighten me on this issue”.
CBRRA’s reply:–
“Thank you for your enquiry in respect of the new building being constructed on Erf XXXX next to your property.
CBRRA’s response thereto is as follows :
If a person has submitted a plan for the construction of a building on his / her property and the Council considers that it conforms entirely with the title deed and the zoning scheme, the Council will pass it with no legal obligation on its part to refer the plan to any third party for their opinion or permission to do so.
However, should, in submitting the plan for approval, the applicant have to apply in addition for the removal of or modifications to restrictions in the title deed and / or zoning scheme, which would prevent the Council from passing the plan until it has received the response of CBRRA and the owners of the surrounding affected properties, the whole advertised public participation process must be initiated and concluded before the Council can approve the application. This can sometimes take up to two years if there are objections.
If you now have a building nearby you on Erf XXXX which is being built and you have not had any opportunity to comment on it, obviously the Council was of the opinion that the planning application in respect of the new buildings conforms in all respects to all the relevant regulations and has already passed the plan
Unfortunately, CBRRA’s experience with the Council is that it is not always correct in its adjudication of applications and has, on occasions, incorrectly passed an application when, in fact, it should have referred it to the public and CBRRA for comments before its approval.
You do not say in your letter whether you think the proposed works on Erf XXXX are illegal or not. CBRRA has not been informed of what is going to be built on this erf, so it can only assume that the Council has passed the original plans, without advertising them for comment by the public, because it considered that they conformed entirely with the relevant regulations.
In an instance such as this, CBRRA is here to assist residents and ratepayers in their dealings with the Council. Please , therefore telephone the Building Inspector, Steve Wilkinson, on 021 400 1111 on weekdays before 10 am and ask him on your and CBRRA’s behalf to check whether
(1) plans have been passed for the works on the property?
(2) whether they needed departures or amendments to or deletions from the title deed and the zoning scheme ? (3) if so, when were these advertised for the public’s approval?
(4) is the building being built according to the passed plans? and
(5) can he meet you and CBRRA on the site to show us what is being built? Alternatively, can you and CBRRA come into his office to inspect the plans and have them explained to us ?
If deep excavations have been or are being executed up to the boundaries between Erf XXXX and adjacent erven, you must ascertain from the Council what measures have been taken by the Owner to prevent the collapse of the excavated faces, which, if they do collapse, will cause extensive damage to nearby buildings on the adjacent erven. Whatever the response, report the situation to the insurers of your house.
After you have done all the above, please contact CBRRA again and it will attend any meetings you have arranged and assist you and advise you further”.
What the above is demonstrating is that CBRRA acts as a support for residents in their dealings with the authorities and reinforces their efforts to obtain clarity on issues such as this.
In essence, residents are encouraged to instigate the enquiry in respect of their concerns with the authority and CBRRA will subsequently assist them to obtain a proper response should they not be successful in their attempts to receive a satisfactory answer.
For assistance and guidance in matters such as the above, contact CBRRA on campsbayratepayers@gmail.com.
CBRRA often receives indignant and urgent enquiries from residents about the fact that a new building is being built right next to their property without them having been told about it and without them having been given a chance to comment or complain about it before it started.
The following is a typical enquiry letter to CBRRA and its reply, which will give you an idea as to where you stand in a situation such as this:
A typical letter from a resident:–
“I do not know if you are aware of it, but, some time ago, the property on Erf. XXXX in XXXXXXXXX Road was sold and subsequently the new owner has demolished the entire existing house, excavated almost the entire site down to a depth of some 3 to 4 meters below the average road level and is now building a new building there.
As no one in our area, to the best of my knowledge, has ever been approached nor informed, I would like to know if you are aware of what building is to be erected, for what purpose and to what height, width and depth, before it gets out of hand and why no one has ever informed me about it.
It may all be OK and in accordance with the Council zoning scheme and title deed restrictions, but I for one am concerned and afraid that something may get out of hand before it is too late to do something about this possibly illegal construction going too far before it can be stopped.
It would be appreciated if you could enlighten me on this issue”.
CBRRA’s reply:–
“Thank you for your enquiry in respect of the new building being constructed on Erf XXXX next to your property.
CBRRA’s response thereto is as follows :
If a person has submitted a plan for the construction of a building on his / her property and the Council considers that it conforms entirely with the title deed and the zoning scheme, the Council will pass it with no legal obligation on its part to refer the plan to any third party for their opinion or permission to do so.
However, should, in submitting the plan for approval, the applicant have to apply in addition for the removal of or modifications to restrictions in the title deed and / or zoning scheme, which would prevent the Council from passing the plan until it has received the response of CBRRA and the owners of the surrounding affected properties, the whole advertised public participation process must be initiated and concluded before the Council can approve the application. This can sometimes take up to two years if there are objections.
If you now have a building nearby you on Erf XXXX which is being built and you have not had any opportunity to comment on it, obviously the Council was of the opinion that the planning application in respect of the new buildings conforms in all respects to all the relevant regulations and has already passed the plan
Unfortunately, CBRRA’s experience with the Council is that it is not always correct in its adjudication of applications and has, on occasions, incorrectly passed an application when, in fact, it should have referred it to the public and CBRRA for comments before its approval.
You do not say in your letter whether you think the proposed works on Erf XXXX are illegal or not. CBRRA has not been informed of what is going to be built on this erf, so it can only assume that the Council has passed the original plans, without advertising them for comment by the public, because it considered that they conformed entirely with the relevant regulations.
In an instance such as this, CBRRA is here to assist residents and ratepayers in their dealings with the Council. Please , therefore telephone the Building Inspector, Steve Wilkinson, on 021 400 1111 on weekdays before 10 am and ask him on your and CBRRA’s behalf to check whether
(1) plans have been passed for the works on the property?
(2) whether they needed departures or amendments to or deletions from the title deed and the zoning scheme ? (3) if so, when were these advertised for the public’s approval?
(4) is the building being built according to the passed plans? and
(5) can he meet you and CBRRA on the site to show us what is being built? Alternatively, can you and CBRRA come into his office to inspect the plans and have them explained to us ?
If deep excavations have been or are being executed up to the boundaries between Erf XXXX and adjacent erven, you must ascertain from the Council what measures have been taken by the Owner to prevent the collapse of the excavated faces, which, if they do collapse, will cause extensive damage to nearby buildings on the adjacent erven. Whatever the response, report the situation to the insurers of your house.
After you have done all the above, please contact CBRRA again and it will attend any meetings you have arranged and assist you and advise you further”.
What the above is demonstrating is that CBRRA acts as a support for residents in their dealings with the authorities and reinforces their efforts to obtain clarity on issues such as this.
In essence, residents are encouraged to instigate the enquiry in respect of their concerns with the authority and CBRRA will subsequently assist them to obtain a proper response should they not be successful in their attempts to receive a satisfactory answer.
For assistance and guidance in matters such as the above, contact CBRRA on campsbayratepayers@gmail.com.
Sunday, 11 October 2009
ManCo Meeting Notes 06 Oct '09
Helping Neighbours, Schools and Heritage – Notes from the CBRRA management committee October 2009 meeting.
Looking to protect part of Camps Bay heritage, helping the Camps Bay Primary School and coming to the aid of a beleaguered neighbour were discussed at the October meeting of CBRRA’s management committee.
The seven historic stone cottages at the intersection of Camps Bay Drive and Geneva Drive are for sale by auction shortly. Originally built for the drivers of the trams that ran between Camps Bay and Cape Town in the first three decades of the last century, these are a very important part of Camps Bay’s historical and architectural heritage and it is imperative that they do not get demolished. CBRRA is embarking on a campaign to inform the present owner, relevant authorities, estate agents and the auctioneers, etc that there will be strong opposition to any demolition by any owner in the future.
The lease for the sports field of Camps Bay Primary School must be renewed. This land is under the control of the Dept of Public Works, which is resisting giving the school a lease for as long as 15 years. Anything less would leave the school in a difficult position and unable to justify further improvements and maintenance costs. CBRRA is lending its support and advice to the School.
Individuals often appeal to CBRRA for assistance, when the weight of the Association’s membership and status can exert far more pressure than a lone individual. Developers working at the rear of 11 Berkeley Road have left a very large unsightly boundary wall. CBRRA is pressing Council to force the Developer to plaster and paint the wall and make good the damaged garden landscaping and telephone installation..
Just part of the CBRRA service.
***Don’t forget***:
CBRRA Public meeting, 7.30 pm Mon 26 Oct '09 at the Rotunda. All Welcome! Details and agenda available ‹‹here››
Also up for discussion:
• The Delimitation Board has proposed changes to existing ward boundaries which will split Camps Bay into two separate constituencies – part linked to Sea Point, the rest to be considered as part of the Hout Bay ward, as was done some years ago and then changed. This is strongly opposed by the CBRRA committee which wants to ascertain the views of the community. It hopes to have both relevant Councillors present to lend substance to the discussion.
• The United Church is considering alterations and additions to its premises and will give a brief illustrated presentation of what it proposes for information to and feedback from residents.
Photo: 11 Berkley Road
Looking to protect part of Camps Bay heritage, helping the Camps Bay Primary School and coming to the aid of a beleaguered neighbour were discussed at the October meeting of CBRRA’s management committee.
The seven historic stone cottages at the intersection of Camps Bay Drive and Geneva Drive are for sale by auction shortly. Originally built for the drivers of the trams that ran between Camps Bay and Cape Town in the first three decades of the last century, these are a very important part of Camps Bay’s historical and architectural heritage and it is imperative that they do not get demolished. CBRRA is embarking on a campaign to inform the present owner, relevant authorities, estate agents and the auctioneers, etc that there will be strong opposition to any demolition by any owner in the future.
The lease for the sports field of Camps Bay Primary School must be renewed. This land is under the control of the Dept of Public Works, which is resisting giving the school a lease for as long as 15 years. Anything less would leave the school in a difficult position and unable to justify further improvements and maintenance costs. CBRRA is lending its support and advice to the School.
Individuals often appeal to CBRRA for assistance, when the weight of the Association’s membership and status can exert far more pressure than a lone individual. Developers working at the rear of 11 Berkeley Road have left a very large unsightly boundary wall. CBRRA is pressing Council to force the Developer to plaster and paint the wall and make good the damaged garden landscaping and telephone installation..
Just part of the CBRRA service.
***Don’t forget***:
CBRRA Public meeting, 7.30 pm Mon 26 Oct '09 at the Rotunda. All Welcome! Details and agenda available ‹‹here››
Also up for discussion:
• The Delimitation Board has proposed changes to existing ward boundaries which will split Camps Bay into two separate constituencies – part linked to Sea Point, the rest to be considered as part of the Hout Bay ward, as was done some years ago and then changed. This is strongly opposed by the CBRRA committee which wants to ascertain the views of the community. It hopes to have both relevant Councillors present to lend substance to the discussion.
• The United Church is considering alterations and additions to its premises and will give a brief illustrated presentation of what it proposes for information to and feedback from residents.
Photo: 11 Berkley Road
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)