News from Residents’
Association of
rahb@houtbay.org.za
www.houtbay.org.za
April
2009
Annual General Meeting
You are cordially invited to attend
this AGM in the Hout Bay Library Hall,
Wednesday 08 April 2009
19:00
Candidates standing for re-election:
Len Swimmer, Justin O’Riain, Penny
Brown, Robert Paterson, Pierre Steyn, Jill Paterson, Reinhard
Marx, Patrick Zicina, Veronica Reed, Harald Weber, Vanessa Davidson,
Pam Wooley.
New nominations:
Clive Friedberg, Tony Ferrie
HAVE A SAY IN THE AFFAIRS OF
GIVE YOUR CIVIC ASSOCIATION THE SUPPORT IT NEEDS TO
SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF!
Imizamo Yethu Option Five
Following the IY Focus
Group meetings mentioned in last month’s Hout and About, Len
Swimmer Chairman of RAHB, submitted a lengthy
and detailed response to Chand Environmental Consultants regarding the proposed
5th option that was intended to take into account the concerns and
objections of IAPs and the input of specialist studies.
The submission is
summarized below and a copy of the full submission can be viewed at
www.rahb.org.za.
General Comment
Over the past few years, our Association has participated in and made input into a number of process involving the development of Imizamo Yethu and its surrounds, including the current scoping and draft Basic Assessment proposals involving options 1-4 (June 2008) and now option 5 (Feb 2009) for the proposed development of the Forestry Area (site 2) and the Transitional Areas on either side of IY (sites 1 and 3) adjacent to Hughendon and Penzance residential estates respectively.
When all is said and done, the bottom line that continues to emerge is that before any new development proposal can be realistically dealt with, the underlying concerns (regarding the IY area as a whole and its development and management) need to be dealt with first.
When these underlying concerns are raised during an EIA process or LUPO application, they are disregarded by the consultants and officials who maintain that they are not part of the relatively narrow ‘terms of reference’ that they have been given to work with.
In the present process the consultant referred the IAPs to the Ward Forum which, he maintained, should deal with these ‘peripheral’ but very substantial and fundamental issues. Of course, the IAPs all know that that is almost impossible as the Ward Forum does not have those powers. So the issues are likely to remain unattended to and the ‘development’ of IY continues to flounder.
Our Association is convinced that what is actually needed is a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) (also called an Environmental Management Framework or EMF) for the ‘IY area’ as a whole so that development of the area be looked at holistically and in this way the various issues and areas can be considered in an integrative manner.
Basically, a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a process of systematic analysis of the environmental and social effects of development plans (or programs or policies and other proposed strategic actions). An SEA identifies and evaluates the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts that a plan is likely to have on the environment and people.
We strongly believe that this is the way to go, and urge the City to change tack slightly now and initiate such a process so as to give stakeholders some hope that eventually something positive will come out of the many processes we have endured to date without return.
The many processes
that the community has been involved in over the years (including the IJR
process), could have been (and still can be) collectively used in an
SEA. Now that we are more aware of the availability and function of the
SEA process, we find it difficult to understand why the professionals involved
have not thought about recommending its use. It is likely to be because
they are not commonly used as yet but this is no reason not to use a tool which
is designed for what we need here. So
many calls for a broader process and broader considerations should not go
unheeded.
The development
(or perhaps non-development) of IY is by far the biggest ‘development
project’ ever attempted in
Specific Comments
We list our more
specific comments below:
1. The comments in our previous letter (dated
30 June 2008) remain in force. We have
not had a response to any of the input we were at pains to make last year and
submitted in June 2008.
2. The 5th Option (or “public participation
input” option) is not an improvement on options 1-4, in fact, it may even be
worse, and certainly is in terms of visual impact.
3. The Focus Group meeting was not satisfactory
for various reasons including the fact that there was no interaction between
the three groups – they should have been run sequentially rather than
parallel so that everyone could participate or at least listen to the
proceeding of each group so as to ensure both transparency and understanding of
the whole process.
4. At the Technical and Civics session very
little information was made available – only a map and a table. There was no documentary back-up describing
the changes and justifying why and on what basis they were made. Apparently
there is no Business Plan for the proposed development – surely this
needs to be rectified.
5. Seven months after the previous meetings and
input, the four specialist studies (which were required) still have not been
made available nor reported on – and it is not clear whether they have even
been done. The results of these studies
should have been made available before the 5th option was even decided
on.
6. Heritage and Visual impacts: The Old Furrow (on Site 2) identified
in the Heritage Study has been retained and this is supported. However, the service road has been
moved right over towards
It appears that the heritage
importance of the trees has been virtually ignored on the borders of
Hughendon (site 1) and
7. Sites 1 and 3: Good integrative planning demands a reasonable
gradation between high density residential fabric in IY and the larger
more up-market erven in neighbouring areas.
We therefore do not support the proposal for concentrations of very
small flats (general residential for 2-3 storey walk-ups) in the interface
areas between IY and the neighbouring Hughendon (site 1) and
8. Site 2:
General
Residential: The housing component proposed for site 2
(Forestry Area) is General Residential for 2-3 storey walk-ups. We maintain that these should be zoned Single
Residential (possibly ‘Special Residential’) with conditional usage for cluster
or group housing and the normal 8 metre height restriction which will allow for
double storey possibly including a mezzanine if desired
Single
residential: On site 1, the five single residential erven
presumably applies to the existing housing.
It is sensible that these houses be retained as such. It is not clear who should benefit from these
erven.
Parking:
Virtually no provision has been made for parking except, perhaps, along
the service road – this is a significant short-coming in most of the options
and all sites. Provision for parking
is a fundamental imperative in any development because it will be very
difficult to solve at a later date.
Size of dwelling
units: The size of the dwelling units (flats) is unbelievably
small. Much has been said about this and
the social problems that it will cause, including older children moving out and
building shacks where they are not allowed to do so.
Family size needs to be researched properly (and reported)
and dwelling units planned that will accommodate a family, and the size of the
unit determined with this in mind.
Number of living units: We are
particularly concerned that the applicant (the City) is trying to squeeze too
many people onto the land thereby compromising both the community intended to
be housed within IY as well as the rest of
Commercial area: Three areas have been set aside for ‘Informal
Business / Market’ but no buildings – the consultant said they would trade
‘under the trees’ where there are trees.
This casual attitude to development poses problems.
Clearly the main
Detention Ponds: Three
detention ponds have been planned for localizing and collecting the urban
run-off from the un-serviced shacks further up the slope of the mountain. While perhaps this is being pragmatic, it
also suggests that the City has little intention of formalizing and cleaning up
the existing residential area above.
There is no
suggestion as to what the detention ponds will be used for once the need for
them is removed (i.e. the
rest of the settlement is formally developed and properly serviced). What guarantee is there that these detention
areas will be properly fenced off and serviced? These issues need to be dealt with.
Taxi Rank: Is
this big enough to accommodate parking for commuter and tourist buses in
addition to the taxis?
Schools: We
note that provision has been made for a primary school and a field (both are
supported), but not a high school. We
believe a high school is very necessary and should be provided for here. The
Education Department
have publicly promised that a high school will be provided for
Forestry Station:
remains on the erf although it is reduced in size from what it currently
is.
Medical
Facilities: The existing clinic is very much
over-subscribed and yet the proposed Medical Centre and Aids Clinic no longer
appear on Option 5. Land must be kept
for these sorts of facilities. It will
not be available again.
Traffic circle:
Proposed traffic circle on
Conclusion
Our Association
cannot support this 5th option and objects to it being called the
‘final option’.
Clearly we have not
yet arrived at a reasonable solution and so we suggest that the terms of
reference for the overall project of developing the larger Imizamo Yethu be
broadened into a Strategic Environmental Assessment. This mechanism is purposely designed to deal
with more complicated and broader planning issues.
Bay Magazine
The RAHB are delighted that Bay Magazine have offered a limited amount of space to highlight important issues in our community. Look out for us in the latest issue of Bay Magazine and thank you Danni for kindly supporting our Association with publication space.
Sibanye… Together we are One
The RAHB
heartily supports the efforts of Nathan Roberts and Andy McKnight in
establishing a restaurant in IY where they aim to make it “
“Each day Randy and I learned the tough way what it really takes to be entrepreneurs and restaurant owners, through long hours and sleepless nights, and each day public interest increased.”
With almost no financial backing Nathan says “we acted on our hearts, people truly showed us what “Sibanye” means. From close friends to complete strangers, we were blessed with everything from website design to building help.”
Every day Randy “cooks up an African storm”. According to a recent article in the
Draft Liquor By-law
The Association submitted a letter of support to the City regarding the draft Liquor By-Law.
The regularisation of the industry is necessary to curb the social ills of excessive alcohol consumption and the resultant cost to ratepayers and taxpayers. The Association supports the provision to stop the sale of alcohol in bars and clubs after 02h00. Whilst acknowledging that a time restriction is not the only way to address the problems of drunkenness, it is one way to curb drunken late-night revellers who may endanger the lives of early commuters or cyclists.
Buildings on the Beach Margin
Is the sand a problem, or is the development a problem? Photographs of the collapse of Law Enforcement offices’ ceilings under the weight of wind-blown sand point to the fact that the development may be the culprit.
Erven 547 and 559 had applications for development refused by the Subcouncil 16 on Thursday 19. There are only three privately owned erven on the beach, the two mentioned above and erf 7807.
Hout Bay beach is not Camps Bay beach or
Monwabisi; it is Hout Bay beach which has a different set of natural
circumstances and weather patterns which will not change and different rules of
development apply. The RAHB would
support a suggestion for owners to sell or cede their properties to the City,
as they cannot be developed due to their location within the dune system.
Princess Street is the natural boundary beyond which no development should take
place, according to the City’s experts on environmental issues.
Planning report
1. Application for rezoning departures
and conditional use: Erven 2293 to 2300,
2. Application for subdivision and
departure in terms of the LUPO 15/1985 Erf 7794
3. Application for subdivision and
departures in terms of LUPO 15/1985: Erf 4459,
4. Application
for subdivision and departures in terms of LUPO 15/1985: Erf 5623
5. Appliction for rezoning, conditional
use and departures: Remainder Erf 547,
6. Application for rezoning and
subdivision in terms of LUPO 15/1985: Remainder Erf 559 Hout Bay,
Application was refused by Subcouncil.
7.
Application for rezoning, subdivision and departure in terms of LUPO 15/1985:
Remainder Erf 840 and Erven 842, 2223 & 2829 Hout Bay, Marais Rd.
Recommended for refusal – E Pienaar. Refused by Subcouncil
8.
Application to run a B&B, erf 3446, 11 Nooitgedacht. This B&B has been
operating for some time and is now applying to regularise it and make it
lawful. While this Association has no problem with B&B’s, this particular B&B
has made an access to its property in Victoria Drive, before the traffic
lights, advertising its whereabouts with a number of large flags and lights on
the wall (lit up at night) and a bell to attract customers to this entrance.
Any cars enticed to stop at this entrance on this busy arterial road, not only
puts their own lives and passengers at risk but other drivers as well who come
down this road, at a very fast speed hoping to get through the traffic lights
while they are still green. We have put in a strenuous objection to this
application and will only withdraw all objections once the offending gate is
permanently removed or closed off, the flags and bell removed, the grey stones
removed at the entrance to the gate, as well as the lights on the wall. Then
vegetation plus shrubs and trees should be planted which will cover the ugly
watcrete wall and entrance. In effect what needs to be achieved is that there
is restitution of the area and it is placed in the position that it was in
originally, before this B&B embarked on the grand advertising and
enticement to attract cars to stop at this gate of its B&B in Victoria
Drive. The only entrance to this B&B should be the one in Nooitgedacht
road.
Smelly Fish Factory
A resident recently contacted the Association asking for advice on what
to do about the very bad smell emitted by the Fish factory in the Harbour,
especially with a southerly or south westerly wind.
The Association advised the following: Contact the Technical Director of
the Fish Factory: Mr Mike Copeland of Oceana 021 415 8500/082 572 1852, or
speak to the Managing Director, Mr Gavin Rhodes-Harrison. If you wish contact Law Enforcement and lay a
complaint against the fish factory for nuisance. The contact person is Shaun
Smith, Senior Inspector, Law Enforcement, Area West, Tel. 021 7995146 /
021 7037265
Disaster Management
Angelo Forbes of Disaster Risk Management for the City of
In a recent piece of correspondence confirmed the following facts:
Extrapolating
from these facts, Mr Forbes said that in a disaster scenario, a rupture in the
pipe during the winter season could potentially wash away the only two bridges
linking
Safety
and Security
Rob Patterson, RAHB Exco Portfolio for Safety and Security submitted the
following report for March:
SAPS advised us that the following officers have been promoted and are likely to be transferred in the near future.
Supt. H. Asaram current Station Commissioner of Hout Bay & Llandudno has been promoted to Senior Superintendent. It is assumed she will be transferred possibly in 3 months time once her replacement has been found.
Capt. Van den Berg 2 I/C
at the station, will leave by Friday 6th of March. His transfer
delayed since October 3rd 2008 enables him to take up his new role
in
Captain Bester from
Fishoek is expected to arrive in
Inspector Loukie Lourens who has been promoted to Captain and will take over the role of Administration previously held by Gerhard.
Captain F. Greef has
stepped up from Inspector and will possibly be transferred shortly. His role
was lecturing on the new finger print Data Base system all over the
Supt. K. Chetty of Metro Police has been promoted to Senior Superintent. Although based in Green Point under the leadership of Director Faro he will undoubtedly be transferred to his new assignment in the near future.
The Residents Association offer congratulations to all those officers promoted and we all wish them well in their new roles. Equally we WELCOME Capt. Bester to the Valley.
Mike Kokhuis working with Fouad Peterson of the Taxi Directorate have made “some progress” on the allocation of taxi permits which currently are limited to 50 - 65 plying their trade in the Valley. The CPF in conjunction with Metro and the Taxi impoundment Intervention Force hope to embark on a major taxi clean up by mid April.
We have attended two meetings of Metro Police and given constructive input to the Annual Police PLAN 2007/2008 and 2008/09. The Hout Bay CPF was one of the very few CPF’s who attended all the meetings plus the workshop on 31/01/09 regarding the Annual Police Plan for 2009/10 and as such the Hout Bay CPF were singled out and commended for their input. Special thanks to Jim McKenna.
During the last month talks via Disa Andre were initiated to iron out a number of points between the various response groups in the Valley and a professional understanding has now been formed enabling all parties attending comprising – EMS, NSRI, Surf Rescue, WSAF and CERT to understand where all parties fit in thus giving a better overall medical service to the Community.
The Surf Rescue 4 X 4 has received FULL REGISTRATION by the Provincial Fleet Manager of Emergency Medical Service Western Cape. Having achieved this it is imperative all Organisations within Hout Bay & Llandudno send in Letters of Endorsement which in turn may help Surf Rescue obtain necessary financial funding to keep their vehicle and equipment maintained in efficient working order. As we all know, Aqua Man and Beach Mandy are continually on the road on a 24 / 7 basis therefore those letters are required soon. Questions can be directed to Mike Romeo (Rigg) and / or Mark Muller (Aqua Man).
Re-cyling
Up and Running
Waste Plan have been awarded a 3 year contract
to handle re-cycling collection in the Valley.
Their services will extend to include Llandudno,
By now residents should all have received a starter pack explaining the
collection process and issuing of clear plastic bags for pick up.
According to Bertie Lourens, Pinelands has an 87% resident participation
in the programme and they suspect that
Any questions regarding re-cycling collection can be directed to Waste
Plan call centre 086 045 6786 or 021 9751288.
or visit their website www.wasteplan.co.za.
(R50 per couple, R30 per individual)
Forms from
Chairperson or Library. Association’s Banking Details:
FNB,
Subscriptions may be paid electronically (please use
your full name as a reference on the payment – to ensure that we correctly
credit your membership as this information appears on our Bank Statement
If you prefer, payment may also
be dropped into our wooden box at the Library (next to the Hall doors) or posted
to our Post Office Box: 27031
Chairperson,
Residents’ Assoc of
Tel:
790-0268, Email: lens@telkomsa.net