Concern over Table View plans
Stakeholders describe proposal as ‘pro development and anti basic services’
RESIDENTS in Table View are concerned that plans for the proliferation of high-rise buildings in the area will make it too congested, putting a strain on basic services.
The Greater Table View stakeholders have described the draft of the Blaauwberg District Spatial Plan as “pro development and anti basic services”. They were commenting on the review of the eight Integrated District Spatial Development Frameworks (SDFs) due on June 6.
The Greater Table View Action Forum (GTAF) said the City had tried to sneak in “developer friendly” items on the draft plan that would see a 2km district node around Bayside and Marine Circle, resulting in three- to five-storey flats in these nodes. The forum said this would also give developers the ability to develop most of the Table View area.
GTAF Planning and Biodiversity head David Ayres said the inclusion of a district node would conflict with many of the title deeds currently in the area, and would support mixed use development in areas that were not on an activity route.
“The inclusion of a district node is not compliant with the Tall Building policy nor is it compliant with the methodology to introduce gradual densification,” he added.
The forum raised concerns about Canary Crescent and Wessels Drive being earmarked for high density development, saying neither was on a main road or serviced by good public transport. It asked for these areas to be removed from the draftplan.
“Given that in the 10 years that the 2012 district plan has been in place the City has failed to implement the most basic of provisions of the plan and ignores the district plan. We would need to see commitments from the City in terms of accountability and punitive actions for City officials who ignore the provisions of the 2021 district plan,” Ayres said.
Table View Ratepayers’ Association chairperson Mandy da Matta said the planner that had drawn up the Blaauwberg District Plan had not been to the area to study its intricacies.
“If the existing infrastructure is already failing with the current people, how much further must we go before the current infrastructure fabric collapses because the planner didn't bother to plan properly? “There is no provision made for new roads, public schools, tourist draw cards, taxi holding areas, public health care facilities and the upgrading of critical infrastructure like the magistrate’s court and the facilities for the aged, as well as medical facilities that are public facilities, not private, in the area. There is a shortage of at least five public schools in Greater Table View, at least three in Dunoon and two in Joe Slovo in Milnerton,” she said.
Da Matta said the draft plan needed serious attention and had to go back to the drawing board.
Mayoral Committee Member for Spatial Planning and Environment, Marian Nieuwoudt, said this was a draft SDF and not a final document. She said the City would take into account all the comments received during the public participation process that would form part of the review of the draft document before submitting the final SDF to the council for approval.
Nieuwoudt said the presentations were summarised versions of much larger documents, and that not everything in the four district SDF documents could be included.