Water & Power Report – June 2020June 15, 2020
Your Choice: New Mayoral Car Or Helping The UnemployedJuly 15, 2020
16 June 2020
With reference to the attached notification from the Municipality, the following is the current situation regarding Erf 4367, Shell Ultra City.
The Ratepayers Association together with many other objectors put in very strong objections in writing last year and we, together with the majority of objectors, attended the Planning Tribunal hearing on 19 February 2020, when this application was up for final consideration. Several of the objectors, including ourselves, put forward final strong verbal objections to the scheme as was envisaged then.
At the hearing, one of the Tribunal members put forward a suggestion that a committee be formed to collate/discuss/”filter” the various objections before a final decision was taken. This was turned down by the chairman and he pushed through his decision unilaterally.
However, in the above attachment, several of the more significant objections/recommendations that we put forward have been incorporated (see comments below).
As regards FLISP housing, this is now policy both at provincial and national level, where densification for middle income people is becoming a requirement, so at this stage, as regards this planned development, there is not much that can be done short of now following the appeal route as specified. I would imagine that new arguments/evidence would have to be submitted before any headway is made with an appeal. The next step would be taking the matter to the courts, which, in view of current policy, would be problematic.
Comments with reference to the attached letter from the Municipality re the Rezoning:- The objections we raised that have been dealt with are, namely:
B i. Providing proper Municipal services.
B ii. That any conditions imposed by SANRAL be adhered to,
B vi. That an appropriate management body be established to run the complex.
B vii. Although not aware of the stated Traffic Statement of 23 August 2019, we did insist that a proper traffic study be done to establish the traffic impact of the development on the surrounding road and residential area.
We also strongly opposed the request for relaxation of height restrictions and the establishment of 4 storeys, which has thankfully been refused as per C i, ii, and iii. Only 3 storeys will be permitted, similar to Santini Village adjacent to this development.
Please Note. The attached letter of Notification from the Municipality states that “A person whose rights are affected by this decision may appeal in writing………. etc.” (see attached letter). This, therefore, precludes the Ratepayers Association and anyone whose rights are not affected, from appealing the decision. The Association will, as a result, not be appealing but we will be engaging with the Municipality to ensure the development fits in with the surrounding buildings of Santini Village, and that matters like parking, unit washing areas, traffic control, etc. which we brought up at the Tribunal hearing, are acceptable.
However, we would ask all who consider their rights to be prejudiced to enter an appeal. Reasons should be stated, for example reduction in property value, excessive traffic in the adjacent roads, additional pedestrian traffic and traffic noise in the area, and any other reason which occurs to you.
The details of where the appeal is to be lodged are in the last paragraph of the attached letter. Kindly note that the appeal MUST be lodged by no later than Tuesday 30 June 2020. E-mails to be addressed for Attention: A Stander at email@example.com and marked clearly as an “Appeal regarding decision re Erf 4367, Plettenberg Bay.”
To View The Document Please Click Below: