Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-07-13 17:29:59 +02:00 | Drummond | Yes I do | Heritage process is incomplete & misapplied | ||
2026-07-13 15:13:59 +02:00 | Mada | No I do not | Cumulative development pressure on local infrastructure | ||
2026-07-13 15:12:31 +02:00 | Marne | No I do not | Cumulative development pressure on local infrastructure | ||
2026-07-12 22:53:35 +02:00 | Pietet | No I do not | All of the above | Procedural flaws, misleading visuals & constrained public oversight | |
2026-07-12 15:09:30 +02:00 | Tienkie | No I do not | All of the above | Predetermination of outcomes by officials | According to reports, CocT wants to bypass the Heritage Law, models do not depict the true scale, many jobs will be lost and it will be a threat to level 1 trauma access at Vincent Paloti hospital |
Undoing Spatial Apartheid: Proponents argue that Oude Molen represents a massive opportunity to utilize well-located, under-densified public land near economic centers to bring working-class families closer to the city and undo historical spatial segregation.
Social and Affordable Housing Delivery: The Western Cape Government highlights the proposed 34% allocation for social and affordable housing units as a major victory for addressing Cape Town’s acute housing crisis.
Economic Stimulus & Job Creation: Pushing forward with mixed-use spaces, commercial offices, and retail infrastructure will stimulate the local economy, bring financial investment into the area, and create thousands of direct construction and service jobs.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): Planners argue that maximizing residential density along the urban transport corridor (adjacent to key hospital and rail hubs) reduces urban sprawl and builds an efficient, sustainable city layout.
Unlawful Heritage Procedural Bypassing: Opponents argue it is completely unlawful to push for land use and rezoning approvals while the legally mandated Heritage Impact Assessment stands officially rejected by Heritage Western Cape for violating the NHRA.
Erasure of Living Heritage: Critics point out that the developers use a narrow, outdated definition of heritage that ignores “horizontal” community transmission and mistakes “archival silence” (the colonial omission of marginalized group records) for an absence of living culture and First Nations history.
Destruction of a Fragile Social Ecosystem: Pushing high-density concrete blocks will permanently displace a 30-year-old self-sustaining village of tenants providing invaluable, free public services, including the Robin Trust medical care, two holistic schools, eco-gardens, and equestrian therapy facilities for disabled children.
Unenforceable Affordable Housing Claims: Financial fine print within the framework indicates that the “one-third affordable housing” pledge is non-binding and completely contingent on future private developer financial feasibility study outcomes.
Misleading Master Plans & Constrained Oversight: While the development framework fixes maximum height and bulk parameters, the illustrations provided to the public fail to depict these maximums, masking the true density. Once these land-use parameters are approved, subsequent processes are entirely constrained within those maxima, leaving the public with severely limited scope to influence or alter the scale of development at later stages.