Strubens Road HIA 2019

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Submitted in terms of Section 38 (3) of the National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) for a proposed redevelopment
of
No 1, 3 & 5 Strubens Road Mowbray, Erven 28900, 20901 & 28902 Cape Town
HWC APPLICATION REFERENCE NUMBER: 18061903ZK0620E
16 February 2019
JOHAN CORNELIUS ARCHITECT & HERITAGE CONSULTANT

9 Newport Street Gardens, Cape Town 8001
Mobile 082 78 11 7 22
efistran@iafrica.com
HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT ERF 28900, 28901 & 28902, MOWBRAY, CAPE TOWN 1
ABSTRACT
the new development is located in between the proclaimed Mowbray Station Heritage Protection Overlay Zone
and a proposed Heritage Protection Overlay Zone and this requires that the new development should take
cognisance of its location in relation to the two conservation areas
The aim from a contextual perspective is to contribute to an area in transition between the two conservation areas
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 What is a Heritage Impact Assessment Report?.......................................................................................... 00
1.2 Project Team…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
1.3 Heritage Specialists…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
1.4 Declaration of Independence…………………………………………………………………………………….. 00
1.5 Public Participation Process………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
1.6 Study Methodology and Terms of Reference………………………………………………………………….. 00
2.0 LEGAL FRAMWEWORK……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00

2.1 The National Heritage Resources Act……………………………………………………………………………. 00
2.2 The response from HWC to the NID………………………………………………………………………………. 00
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND…………………………………………………………………………………… 00
4.0 CITY OF CAPE TOWN MUNICIPAL PLANNING BYLAW………………………………………………………………….. 00
5.0 LOCALITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00
6.0 HERITAGE CONTEXT AND SURROUNDING HERITAGE RESOURCES…………………………………………………… 00

6.1 Overview………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 00
6.2 Cultural Significance………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
6.3 Context and Graded Cultural Resources……………………………………………………………………….. 00
7.0 IDENTIFICATION, MAPPING AND ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE RESOURCES………………………………………….. 00

7.1 Previous Conservation Study 1 – Rondebosch & Mowbray Conservation Study (Todeschini/Japha) 00
7.2 Previous Conservation Study 2 – Cape Town/AEGISViewer 2015 Survey…………………………………. 00
7.3 The Heritage Value of the Three Structures on the Subject Site…………………………………………….. 00
7.3.1 No 5 & 3 Strubens Road……………………………………………………………………………………. 00
7.3.2 No 1 Strubens Road…………………………………………………………………………………………. 00
8.0 IDENTIFIED HERITAGE RESOURCES…………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
9.0 TOWN PLANNING AND LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS…………………………………………………………………… 00

9.1 The Subject Site………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 00
9.2 Surrounding Land Uses……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00
9.3 Heritage Overlay Influences………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
9.4 Overview of Proposed Development…………………………………………………………………… 00
9.5 Land Use Application to City of Cape Town…………………………………………………………………….. 00
9.6 Policy Alignment.………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 00
9.6.1 Overview………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
9.6.2 Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) 2013…………………………………. 00
9.6.3 Provincial Spatial Development Framework 2014………………………………………………………. 00
9.6.4 Municipal and Southern District Spatial Development Framework…………………………………. 00
9.6.5 Cape Town Urban Design Policy…………………………………………………………………………… 00
9.6.6 Design and Management Guidelines for a Safer City………………………………………………… 00
9.6.7 Cape Town Densification Policy…………………………………………………………………………… 00
10.0 DESIGN INDICATORS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
12.0 THE NEW PROPOSAL……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 00
13.0 COMPLIANCE WITH THE NHRAct……………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
13.0 PUBLIC COMSULTATION………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00
14.0 RECOMMENDATION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 14: The Key to the graded structures in the context.
Figure 1: Record of Decision following the submission of a

Notification of Intent to Develop Figure 15: The Todeschini/Japha Map indicating Noteworthy
Elements in the study area including the Noteworthy
Figure 2: The three subject Erven 28900, 28901 & 28902 Buildings
Figure 3: The Current Zoning Diagram – City of Cape Town Figure 16: Todeschini/Japha Map indicating the Conservation
EAGISViewer and Special Areas
Figure 4: The Location of the subject site in the wider context Figure 17: City of Cape Town/EGISViewer grading map based
on the 2015 Survey indicating the location of the
Figure 5: Prominent features of the context Baker building
Figure 6: The Relation of the subject site with the Public Figure 18: City of Cape Town/EGISViewer indicating the
Transport Systems boundaries of the Mowbray Station HPOZ, the
proposed HPOZ and the location of the subject site
Figure 7: 1953 Aerial Photograph sandwiched between the two conservation areas
and the exclusion of the street blocks to the north
from the proposed HPOZ
Figure 8: Aerial Photo 1945 (City of Cape Town)
Figure 19: The graded structures on the street block with the
Figure 9: 1953 Aerial Photograph
Grade IIIC structures in blue and the Proposed Grade
IIIC structures in green
Figure 10: 2018 Aerial Photograph
Figure 20: The rest of the Grade IIIC structures and Proposed
Figure 11: Cape Town EgisViewer 2015 Grading Map
Grade IIIC structures in blue and green
Figure 12: The map above indicates the extent of the HPOZ in
relation to the position of the subject site Figure 21: No 5 Strubens Road
Figure 13: The same map as above but it also indicates the Figure 22: No 3 Strubens Road
extent of the proposed HPOZ in the creamy colour
Figure 23: No 1 Strubens Road
Figure 24&25: The Front enterance and passage Figure 41: No 46 on Durban
Figures 26 to 32: Photographs of the passage, kicthen and Figure 42: The Taxi Rank at the Bus Terminus
bathroom
Figure 43: The building at 6 Strubens Road, 3 storey flats
Figure 33 to 38: Internal Spaces and Street Views
Figure 44: View looking from Durban Road up into Strubens
Figure 39: The Surveyor General Diagram of 1921 Road
Figure 40: Surrounding Land Uses
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Heritage Impact Assessment Report pertains to three erven in Mowbray, located at No 1, 3 & 5 Strubens Road and the intend of
study is to address the demolition of the three extant buildings on the property which are all older than 60 years and the impact of the
redevelopment on any heritage resources after the three properties have been through a process of consolidation.
1.1 What is a Heritage Impact Assessment Report?
A Heritage Impact Assessment Report is an instrument for the heritage authorities and other interested and affected parties to
make an informed appraisal on a proposed development. It also provides a mechanism to ensure that development occurs in
such a manner as to minimise negative impacts on the heritage value of a place. It often adds significant value to a
development by informing how a development may maximise its historical potential and best respond to its physical
environment.
In some cases where the heritage resources are especially significant or fragile, a heritage impact assessment may recommend
that a development does not receive an approval from the heritage authorities or it may recommend certain alternative
development possibilities.
[Urban Design Services; August 2018]
1.2 Project Team
The project client is One Life Projects and the project consultants are as follows:
- Town Planners: Arch Town Planners

- Architectects: Gordon Hart Architects
- Heritage Consultant: Johan Cornelius Architect & Heritage Consultant
- Civil & Structural Engineers:
- Land Surveyor: Riaan van Brakel
- 3D Specialists: Gordon Hart Architects
- Lanscape Architect: Greenspiration Landscape Architecture
1.3 Heritage Specialists
Johan Cornelius Architect & Heritage Consultant (B.Arch Pr Arch Reg. No. 5546) was approached to assist with the submission of a
Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) as well as with the submission of the Heritage Impact Assessment Report (HIA) and this report as
well as architectural drawings by Gordon Hart Architects will form the basis for this heritage application.
1.4 Declaration of Independence
Johan Cornelius Architect & Heritage Consultant has no legal or personal ties with the developer or other consultants involved in this
proposal, nor to any entities or companies that may be involved in the proposal or any bidding process related to the development.
Please note that the author is required to act as an independent consultant to the project team, and the primary priority and responsibility
is towards the conservation and enhancement of heritage and cultural significance.
1.5 Public Participation Process
Sections 27 and 38(3)
Heritage Western Cape requires that any application made to HWC for a decision or comment in terms of Sections 27 and 38(3) of the
NHRA, is advertised as follows:
– An advertisement to be placed in a local newspaper.

– An A3 size laminated copy of the notice placed in clear view on the property or site to which the application pertains for a minimum
of 30 days.
– Email or other written correspondence with the relevant registered Conservation Body/Bodies allowing a minimum of 30 days for
comment
Proof of Consultation Process
For all applications made to HWC that require a decision in terms of Sections 27 or Section 38(3) of the NHRA, HWC requires proof of
consultation in terms of the Notice and Comment Procedure. Such proof includes:
– A copy of the published newspaper notice if applicable
– Photographs of the notice on the site
– Copies of any comments received
– Contact details of any person who has indicated their interest
in the application
– Copies of correspondence with registered Conservation Bodies
1.6 Study Methodology and Terms of Reference
The methodology employed in this application is to address Section 38(3) of the National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) which
requires:
(3) The responsible heritage resources authority must specify the information to be provided in a report required in terms of subsection (2)(a): Provided
that the following must be included:
(a) The identification and mapping of all heritage resources in the area affected;
(b) an assessment of the significance of such resources in terms of the heritage assessment criteria set out in section 6(2) or prescribed under
section 7;
(c) an assessment of the impact of the development on such heritage resources;
(d) an evaluation of the impact of the development on heritage resources relative to the sustainable social and economic benefits to be derived
from the development;
(e) the results of consultation with communities affected by the proposed development and other interested parties regarding the impact of the
development on heritage resources;
(f) if heritage resources will be adversely affected by the proposed development, the consideration of alternatives; and
(g) plans for mitigation of any adverse effects during and after the completion of the proposed development.
In addition to this, the study will comply with HWC’s response to the NID dated 4 July 2018 which specified that:
- The identification of appropriate design indicators, which will demonstrate how the proposed redevelopment will impact on the site, and its contextual
environs;
- Impacts of the proposed redevelopment on the visual and the contextual urban landscape;
- Impacts of the proposed redevelopment on the existing townscape.
2.0 LEGAL FRAMWEWORK
2.1 The National Heritage Resources Act
The legal trigger for this application in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act (1999) is as follows:
38. (1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (7), (8) and (9), any person who intends to undertake a development categorised as—
(a) the construction of a road, wall, powerline, pipeline, canal or other similar form of linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in length;
(b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50 m in length;
(c) any development or other activity which will change the character of a site—
(i) exceeding 5 000 sq.m. in extent; or

(ii) involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof; or
(iii) involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been consolidated within the past five years; or
(iv) the costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority;
(d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m² in extent; or
(e) any other category of development provided for in regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority,
must at the very earliest stages of initiating such a development, notify the responsible heritage resources authority and furnish it with details regarding the location, nature
and extent of the proposed development.
(2) The responsible heritage resources authority must, within 14 days of receipt of a notification (NID) in terms of subsection (1)—
(a) if there is reason to believe that heritage resources will be affected by such development, notify the person who intends to undertake the development to submit
an impact assessment report. Such report must be compiled at the cost of the person proposing the development, by a person or persons approved by the responsible
heritage resources authority with relevant qualifications and experience and professional standing in heritage resources management; or
(b) notify the person concerned that this section does not apply.
The parts in bold in the text above pertains to the subject property.
2.2 The response from HWC to the NID
A Notification of Intend to Develop (NID) and supporting documentation was submitted to Heritage Western Cape in June 2018. The
Response to the NID was issued stating that a Heritage Impact Assessment is required with specific reference to the following:
- The identification of appropriate design indicators which will demonstrate how the proposed redevelopment will impact on site
and its surrounding contextual environs;
- Impacts of the proposed redevelopment on the visual and contextual urban landscape
- Impacts of the proposed redevelopment on the existing urban townscape
Figure 1: Record of Decision following the submission of a Notification of Intent to Develop
NOTE: The decision of the Heritage Official’s meeting is not clear and the difference between the second and the third bullet is not
understood. The interpretation which this HIA will give to the decision is for the identification of appropriate design indicators and the
impact that the proposal will have on the existing urban landscape.
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The buildings on the said erven are currently still occupied. Erf
28902 (5 Strubens Road) currently has tenants in the home whilst
The site in question is made up of three erven namely erven the remaining two homes are owned by its occupants. The
28900, 28901 and 28902, Strubens Road Mowbray. All three developer has recently made offers to purchase pending the
erven are currently zoned as General Residential, sub-zone 4 approval of the proposals. It is proposed to build a multi-storey
and presently, it is used for residential purposes. Erven 28901 and residential block of flats, to be used for entry level home owners,
28902 have been deemed not to have any conservation worthy with a portion to be held by the developer as rental stock. The
elements whilst erf 28902 has been identified by the City of Cape Land Use application i.e. consolidation of erven and removal of
Town as a potential Grade IIIC site, having some elements such Title Deed restrictions, are in its preliminary stages and research
as a verandah, windows and some internal fabric still intact. The is being completed.
location of the adjoining erven is indicated at local and site-
specific level in Figure 2.
The area is characteristic of a transport interchange and is a

junction of major highways. Drie Koppen as it was historically
known became a juncture of routes early on in the development
of the area and has maintained and grown in its character as a
confluence area of varying transport modes. Mowbray is bound
on the west by the M3 beyond which lies Devil’s Peak. To the
north is the N2 and to the east is the M5. The subject site falls
within this transient area immediately opposite the taxi and bus
terminus, overlooking a tarred parking lot. In close vicinity to the
south of Durban Road is the Mowbray Maternity Hospital and
blocks of flats. The dominant housing typology is single story
residential building mostly from the late Victorian to Edwardian
era. This particular section of Strubens Road has a high
pedestrian traffic volume as well as vehicular traffic, with
Strubens Road connecting Mowbray to Observatory across the Figure 2: The three subject Erven 28900, 28901 & 28902
N2.
4.0 CITY OF CAPE TOWN MUNICIPAL PLANNING BYLAW
The three erven are zoned as General Residential Zone 4. The following are permitted in this zone and Figure 3 indicates the zoning
pattern of the area which is predominantly zoned as General Residential.
Figure 3: The Current Zoning Diagram – City of Cape Town EAGISViewer
GR4: General Residential 4
• PRIMARY USES: Dwelling house, second dwelling, group housing, boarding house, guest house, flats, private road and open
space
• CONSENT USES: Utility service, place of instruction, place of worship, institution, hospital, place of assembly, home occupation,
shop, hotel, conference facility and rooftop base telecommunication station
• FLOOR FACTOR: 1,5
• COVERAGE: 60%
• HEIGHT: 24,0 m
• STREET BOUNDARY SET-BACK: 4,5 m
• COMMON BOUNDARY SET BACK: 4,5 m or 0,6 H (0,0 m up to 15,0m height for 18,0m from street)
• STREET CENTRE LINE SETBACK: 8,0 m
11.0 LOCALITY
The three subject sites are in Mowbray to the east of the railway line and they are located on a street block which is bounded by
Strubens, Durban, Malleson and Inneskillen Road.
M2
GROOTE SCHUUR
HOSPITAL
M3
M5
Figure 4: The Location of the subject site in the wider context
STATION
LIESBEEK
PARKWA
Y
TAXI RANK
DURBAN
ROAD
Figure 5: Prominent features in the context
MOWBRAY STATION
TAXI RANK
Figure 6: The Relation of the subject site with the Public Transport Systems
12.0 HERITAGE CONTEXT AND SURROUNDING HERITAGE RESOURCES
6.1 Overview
Todeschini and Jaffa (Rondebosch and Mowbray Conservation Study, 1990) gives a comprehensive overview of the development of
Mowbray from the colonial period onwards touching on the precolonial narrative of the area which is paramount to recognise and
remember. A brief summary of the findings are as follows:
The sites are found along the western side of the Liesbeek River, an area utilised by the indigenous people groups who
would have used the land for pasture and as nomadic route from inland to the sea. The area was later colonised.
In search of timber during the development of the Table Bay area, wagon routes started to emerge between Table Bay and Newlands
and beyond, leading to the development of a complex system of tracks. A significant track would later become known as Main Road
as the axis got strengthened.
Development continued organically along these linear routes and junctions such as at Mowbray were established where major routes
intersected. These routes together with the linear nature of Liesbeek River Valley and subsequent east-west transport connections,
resulted in residential developments around the system, formed in a Delta configuration of routes and activity. This eventually evolved
into a terminus of transport modes i.e. road and rail with a mix of residential typologies including villas and semi-detached homes.
The continuing development of Mowbray along the same trajectory has resulted in a junction of activity where the subject properties
are located. The layering of history is evident by changing urban landscapes including more multi-story additions during the 20th century.
Vehicular traffic has intensified significantly and the heritage value at this juncture has understandably been compromised.
In present day, the grain and texture of the area as one moves north towards Observatory is still very much intact. This area to the north
has been declared a Heritage Protected Overlay Zone. It contains a number of good architectural examples of the late Victorian and
early Edwardian era, worthy of conservation.
The aerial photos and maps below show the immediate area as it has changed over time:
c1909
A group of
buildings no
longer existing
having made
way
for the
interchange
Figure 7: Map c1909 of the context (City of Cape Town) Figure 8: Aerial Photo 1945 (City of Cape Town)
Figure 9: 1953 Aerial Photograph Figure 10: 2018 Aerial Photograph

6.2 Cultural Significance
The grading pattern in the area can be seen on the map below followed by a reference map and photographic record of the
resources in the immediate area.
Figure 11: Cape Town EgisViewer 2015 Grading Map
Figure 12: The map above indicates the extent of the HPOZ in relation to the position of the subject site
Figure 13: The same map as above but it also indicates the extent of the proposed HPOZ in the creamy colour
6.3 Context and Graded Cultural Resources
The buildings in Strubens Road are a mixture of style and period but the predominant typology is from the Arts & Crafts period, some
with sparsely decorated late Victorian features. According to the Todeschini/Japha study of 1989/1990, the buildings on the street
block are all dating back to pre-1936 and it was built for the working classes with fairly consistent scale and massing. That being said,
there are also a few double storey and multi storey buildings in the area but the immediate context has a predominantly low scale
residential character with a fine grain. On the opposite side of Durban Road are a number of high-rise buildings which are in full contrast
to the more single residential character of the immediate context of the subject site.
The three subject buildings and the neighbouring residences in Strubens and Malleson Road are indicated on the following pages and
the key relating to these buildings is directly below.
19 20
21
32
10 9 31
30
8
11 29
7
28
12 6
27
5 26
4
13
25
3
24
2
17
16
1
18 33
3
36
14 34
15
35
Figure 14: The Key to the graded structures in the context. - The numbering on the map above corresponds with that of the series of photographs below
which attempts to provide street views of the buildings within this context.
The area suffers from urban decay and because of the taxi rank and the train station across the road from the subject site, the dominant
feature of the locale is one of extremely high pedestrian and vehicular movement. This is one of the contributors to crime and other
anti-social behavior in the area but it also has a very exposed and rather public urban character with very little privacy, specifically
Strubens Road across the taxi rank more so than in Malleson Road. The grading indicated below each photograph relates to the latest
2015 Grading Survey of the City of Cape Town and in some instances, the grading is disputed and it is so indicated.
1. GRADE IIIC 2. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIC (Subject Site) 3. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY (Subject Site)
DISPUTED
4. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY (Subject Site) 5. GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 6. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY
7. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 8. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 9. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY
10. GRADE IIIB 11. NEVER SURVEYED BEFORE (not conservation worthy) 12. NEVER SURVEYED BEFORE
14. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY
13. NEVER SURVEYED BEFORE
15. NEVER SURVEYED BEFORE 16. GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 17. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY
18. GRADE IIIC 19. GRADE IIIC 20. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY
22. STRUBENS ROAD STREETCAPE VIEW FROM

21. GRADE IIIC CNR DURBAN ROAD
23. MALLESON ROAD (PROPOSED HPOZ) 16. GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 33. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY (across the road from 16)
STREETSCAPE FROM DURBAN
24. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIIC DISPUTED 25. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIIC 26. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIC DISPUTED
28. GRADE IIIC This is the only building with an undisputed grading
29. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY 30. GRADE IIIC DISPUTED 31. GRADE IIIC

32. POTENTIAL GRADE IIIC DISPUTED
34. GRADE IIIC 35. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY 36. VIEW OF DURBAN ROAD TOWARDS THE TAXI
RANK ENTRANCE
7.0 IDENTIFICATION, MAPPING AND ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE RESOURCES
7.1 Previous Conservation Study 1 – Rondebosch & Mowbray Conservation Study (Todeschini/Japha)
One of the most prominent and authoritative studies of the area is the Rondebosch and Mowbray Conservation Study by Todeschini &
Japha Architects and Town Planners, dated 1989/1990. The study was intended to contribute to the conservation of individual buildings
and other features of merit in the study area, by drawing the attention of both the then National Monuments Council and the Cape
Town city Council to their existence.
In the methodological statement, Todeschini/Japha claimed that the main aim of assessing the significance of the area was amongst
others to
• proclaim conservation areas within the study area with aesthetic controls to protect the historical character of such an area
and;
• to proclaim special areas with zoning controls to protect the environmental character of the area.
The determination of significance was made using both intrinsic and contextual criteria. First, all buildings with some degree of intrinsic
significance were identified, using two primary screens: age combined with reasonable preservation or sympathetic alteration, and
architectural or aesthetic quality. Authorship was used as well in the case of some of the buildings, but not in all cases due to the huge
number of buildings.
All buildings judged in the field to be significant in terms of these criteria were mapped and the parameters of the Mowbray Heritage
Protection Area was largely based on the recommendation made by this study.
The study described three important historical periods which occurred in the study area after the pre-colonial history namely the
settlement periods during Early Colonial and Preindustrial time, the Laissez-faire and the so-called Modern Town Planning.
Early Colonial and Pre-Industrial:
The study area was utilised on a regular seasonal basis by Khoi pastoralists long before the advent of foreign colonists. Colonial
settlement obliterated the traces of this use as it intensified over the years in waves of development, infill, and redevelopment. The
importance of the Colonial and Pre-Industrial period is that developments in the study areas at that time were responsible for laying
down a geometry of settlement that has endured to the present day. During this period wagon routes were established in search of
timber which were linked by a network of secondary pathways. The inconsistent orthogonality layout of the street blocks in the wider
area is as a result of these early complex transport system of tracks.
Laissez-faire:
Todeschini/Japha further states that during the latter half of the 19th century, population increased, economic and cultural ties altered,
mineral discoveries were made in the interior and the Anglo-Boer war occurred. These factors contributed to processes of change that
were to transform the scale and character of Cape environments which resulted when laissez-faire really became dominant in:
• revolutionary change in transport technology on land and sea;

• the establishment of a range of commercial, semi-industrial, financial, administrative, educational, religious and cultural
institutions and functions;
• the establishment of municipal governments;
• the 'modernized' practice of land subdivision and the provision of essential services;
• more industrialized building components and technology generally.
By the 1880s the little village of Drie Koppen (now Mowbray) showed signs of expansion. In 1890 Mowbray joined the Rondebosch to
Wynberg united municipality, called the Liesbeek municipality. By the last decade of the century the village had become a prosperous
little suburb, expanding northwards to meet development from Observatory.
The Modern Town Planning Period:
Fueled by the general unease and public outcry which followed the 1918 influenza epidemic in which many thousands lost their lives,
numerous moves towards the importation of British and American Town Planning thought and practice emerged at the Cape in the
second decade of the century. Parliamentarians and other officials actively lobbied for town planning controls.
Both the 'Garden City' thinking and the controls which eventually took shape as a result of the 1927 Provincial Ordinance and later
variants, were based on conceptions of urban environments at odds with the products of the laissez-faire Victorian-Edwardian era.
Moreover, the image of the detached villa set in a "garden suburb" gained considerable preference amongst the middle class.
Preliminary work directed towards the preparation of the 'Proposed Town Planning Scheme' in the 1930's, brought with it extensive
surveys as well as orders of land-use analysis. The analysis was informed by categories which were the precursors of the road and zoning
system to be adopted in the first portion of the preliminary scheme for Cape Town published in 1939.
All three settlement periods are visible in the urban morphology of the wider context of the subject site. The immediate context has
evidence of a linear street grid block layout and a consistent street edge and side setbacks of the individual buildings. The built typology
is also from the early quarter of the previous century.
Following the methodology in the Todeschini/Japha study mentioned earlier, a series of maps were produced by the study to record
the significant elements in the study area. A map which shows the significant buildings and another which shows the areas which were
later designated as Conservation and Special Areas are inserted below.
Figure 15: The Todeschini/Japha Map indicating Noteworthy Elements in the Study Area including the Noteworthy Buildings
The map above indicates the identified buildings with a variety of significances and the smaller map adjacent gives the location of the
subject site and its relationship and vicinity to the nearest graded buildings. It must be noted that none of the buildings located on the
four street blocks had been identified as significant and contrary, the buildings in the Baker precinct were graded and included in the
Mowbray Station HPOZ.
As a result of the concentration of significances, Conservation and Special Areas were proposed which were following the aims of the
study. These areas are indicated in the map below and it also illustrates the relationship of the subject site with the proposed identified
areas.
Figure 16: Todeschini/Japha Map indicating the Conservation and Special Areas with the arrow showing the subject site
Conclusion – In both instances, the subject sites and their neighbours were not considered to be worthy of any form of protection. It is
accepted that the criteria which Todeschini/Japha applied were different to what is now taken up in the NHRAct but the contextual
photographs shown earlier in the report, confirms the lack of measurable and noticeable heritage significance.
7.2 Previous Conservation Study 2 – Cape Town/AEGISViewer 2015 Survey
The map below shows the block on which the subject site is located, with the gradings of each of the buildings according to the survey
undertaken by the City. The green colour refers to potential Grade IIIC sites and the blue colour refers to the Grade IIIC sites. What is
significant about this survey is that the Baker building mentioned by Todeschini/Japha only has a Grade IIIB grading when a Grade IIIA
would have been more appropriate. This also applies to some of the other buildings in this group which brings the accuracy of this
survey in question.
In regards to the category of a “Potential Grade IIIC” structure, it must be pointed out that the NHRAct does not provide for such a
category and it is questionable whether it is necessary or, when will the potential designation be finalized and altered to a permanent
status of Grade IIIC or alternatively, to a structure which is not conservation worthy. This is an important question because the green
category is treated by the authorities as if these structures are indeed proclaimed Grade IIIC heritage resources, which is not only
incorrect but it is indiscriminate and also confusing.
The NHRAct provides for provincial and local authority heritage agencies to draft significance criteria that supplement the mandatory
criteria for determining heritage significance in Section 3(3) of the Act. In this instance, the City of Cape Town has refined Grade III
heritage resources into Grade IIIA, Grade IIIIB and Grade IIIC categories with their corresponding heritage management objectives.
With regards to the Grade IIIC category, the following criteria was set out:
Grade IIIC (streetscape). - Heritage resources that have significance within their immediate context. They contribute to the streetscape and historical
character of the surrounds. Alterations and additions may be evident, but the building remains representative example of the typology. Heritage value
can be improved or rehabilitated.
From the above it is clear that the emphasis portrayed by this grading is on the level of contribution which a heritage resource makes
to the streetscape and/or context. What is therefore unclear is what volume of further research, if any, is needed to finalize the street
contribution and thus the grading status of a potential Grade IIIC? This adds further to the confusion presented by the green
designation.
The second interesting aspect of this survey is that the two street blocks to the north of the subject site, bounded by Inniskillen, Dixton,
Koornhoop and Strubens Road have more graded sites than the other street blocks, yet, they were excluded from the Proposed
Heritage Protection Overlay Zone. This is illustrated by the two maps below.
Baker building
as a Grade IIIB
Figure 17: City of Cape Town/EGISViewer grading map based on the 2015 Survey, indicting the location of the Baker building
Mowbray
Station HPOZ
Proposed HPOZ
Figure 18: City of Cape Town/EGISViewer indicating the boundaries of the Mowbray Station HPOZ, the proposed HPOZ and the location of the subject site
sandwiched between the two conservation areas and the exclusion of the street blocks to the north from the proposed HPOZ
The third matter of interest is that it is not clear why the western edge of Malleson Road was included within the boundary of the
proposed HPOZ and why the last three Grade IIIC properties on this edge was excluded from protective measures. Conservatively, only
three buildings on this edge warrants a Grade IIIC status which is confirmed by the contextual photographs. The rest are not
conservation worthy whatsoever.
Conclusion – The three arguments above suggests that the boundaries of the proposed HPOZ were not well considered and has been
established in an arbitrary fashion. Secondly, the gradings of the various buildings are unargued and also arbitrary or in some instances
not applicable. This poses the question whether the boundaries of the conservation area are realistic and whether there are any heritage
resources which need protection. Most of the buildings on the block will not satisfy Section 34 (2) of the NHRAct and should therefore
not enjoy any form of protection. The built typology of the area is remotely consistent but it is well represented and protected inside the
proclaim HPOZ as well as in the proposed HPOZ. There is no need for further protection of ordinary built typologies outside of the
conservation areas and densification should be promoted.
Figure 19: The graded structures on the street block with the Grade IIIC structures in blue and the Proposed Grade IIIC structures in green
Figure 20: The rest of the Grade IIIC structures and Proposed Grade IIIC structures in blue and green
Conclusion - It is important to realize that none of the buildings above can satisfy Section 34 (2) of the NHRAct and they should
therefore not enjoy any form of protection.
Secondly, the Baker precinct will not be affected by the proposal due to the large distance these buildings are away from the new
development.
Thirdly, there are multi-storey buildings on Durban Road as well as Strubens Road and this are should ideally be densified.
Fourthly, the new development is located in between the proclaimed and proposed HPOZ and this requires that the new development
should take cognizance of its location in relation to the two conservation areas. The aim from a contextual perspective is to contribute
to an area in transition between the two conservation areas.
7.3 The Heritage Value of the Three Structures on the Subject Site
7.3.1 No 5 & 3 Strubens Road
The EGISViewer 2015 of the City of Cape Town has indicated that these two buildings are not conservation worthy which is also
endorsed in this assessment. Any further evidence to illustrate their status is therefore not required and the buildings should be
permitted to be demolished.
Figure 21: No 5 Strubens Road Figure 22: No 3 Strubens Road

7.3.2 No 1 Strubens Road
The building at No 1 Strubens Road is indicated on the City’s EgisViewer as a structure which is a potential Grade IIIC. It was previously
argued that this category of grading status is not provided for in the NHRAct, that the grading status is unargued but this despite, the
lack of significance will nevertheless be illustrated by the photographs below.
Figure 23: No 1 Strubens Road Figure 24&25: The Front enterance and passage
Figures 26 to 32: Photographs of the passage, kicthen and bathroom
Figure 33 to 38: Internal Spaces and Street Views
No 3 Struben Road – Levels of Significance
• The building is set back a generous 6m from the street boundary and it forms a consistent built edge with the other two subject
properties. The garden space at the rear is approximately double this distance.
• Both this building and the other subject buildings directly adjacent have two mature trees which contributes positively to the
public realm.
• The building has a front stoep with a roof which is integrated with the main roof and which is suspended by four columns. This is
the only significant feature seen from the public realm and most probably the reason why it has a status as a potential Grade
IIIC building. It has an unsympathetic extension to the north elevation which diminishes the heritage value which this building
might have.
• The building has a conspicuous arch in the passage which is of limited heritage significance.
• It has parquet flooring in some areas but not throughout.
• Most of the internal doors and architraves had been removed and have never been replaced.
• The building still has its original soft board ceilings which is very ordinary.
• The kitchen had been modernized.
• The building is seriously neglected possibly with numerous latent defects.
The building cannot satisfy the requirements of Section 34(2) and it therefore does not warrant any form of protection.
8.0 TOWN PLANNING AND LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
A land-use application will be submitted to the City of Cape Town and a planning and motivational report entitled Proposed
Development of Flats on the Consolidation of Erven 28900, 28901 AND 28902, Strubens Road, Mowbray; August 2018 was prepared by
Arch Town Planners. The following planning information depicted in Section 8 are extracts that were taken directly from this report and
the use of these extracts is respectfully hereby acknowledged.
8.1 The Subject Site
According to the original SG Diagrams for each of the three erven, the properties were originally surveyed in 1921, and were previously
referred to as Lots 13, 15 and 17 of Block F, Mowbray. They were amalgamated with the City of Cape Town through a freehold grant
given to H.W. Strubens on the 10th of January, 1890 and originally formed part of the Farms Koornhoop, Westoe and Molenvliet. An
extract of the SG Diagram from 1921 is shown below.
Figure 39: The Surveyor General Diagram of 1921
8.2 Surrounding Land Uses
This section should be read in conjunction with Figure 40 below.
The area surrounding the subject site is characteristic of a transport interchange and is a junction of major highways. Mowbray is bound
on the west by the M3, the N2 to the north and the M5 to the east. The subject site falls within this transient area immediately opposite
the taxi and bus terminus, overlooking a tarred parking lot. This particular section of Strubens Road has a high pedestrian traffic volume
as well as vehicular traffic, with Strubens Road connecting Mowbray to Observatory across the N2.
Figure 40: Surrounding Land Uses
Approximately 30-meters south of the subject site, on the south-eastern corner of Strubens Road and Durban Road is a four-storey (plus
semi-basement) student dormitory called 46 on Durban; (erf 173647) while just further east on Durban Road is another large student
residential complex, Liesbeek Gardens. The Mowbray Maternity hospital is also within a 100-meter radius of the application site. There
is also a three-storey block of flats situated at 6 Strubens Road, directly north of the taxi rank and diagonally opposite the application
site. Three residences on the subject block fronting on Durban Road are also utilised for student housing.
Figure 41: No 46 on Durban Figure 42: The Taxi Rank at the Bus Terminus
Figure 43: The building at 6 Strubens Road, 3 storey flats
Figure 44: View looking from Durban Road up into Strubens Road
It is clear that the area is characterised by mixed-use development, which includes a variety of transport, business and residential uses;
the latter of which includes both single-residential dwellings, as well as multi-storey apartment blocks. Given the proximity of the site to
the University of Cape Town (UCT) campus and associated Jammie-shuttle route, there is significant precedent for students and young
professionals to live within the surrounds.
8.3 Heritage Overlay Influences
It should be noted that the subject site is not located in either a proclaimed or a proposed Heritage Overlay Zone. It is located
immediately adjacent to a proposed heritage overlay zone and it should be noted that, while there are no mandated heritage
requirements for development that occurs between heritage zones, the architectural design of the proposed block of apartments has
been prepared to ensure that the proposed development is sensitive to the existing architectural character of the area and
complementary to existing land uses. The building forms part of a potential buffer zone between the existing and proposed heritage
overlay zones.
8.4 Overview of Proposed Development
The proposed development will entail the construction of a 4-storey block of apartments on the consolidated application site aimed at
providing accommodation for students and young professionals. Due to the strategic location of the application site to the University
of Cape Town, it is anticipated that most residents will be students. While the majority of new developments in the area seems to be
targeting the higher income market, this development will aim to provide more affordable units to the middle-income group who
cannot afford the exceptionally high cost of accommodation closer to the city or UCT.
8.5 Land Use Application to City of Cape Town
Arch Town Planners will submit the relevant land use application, in terms Section 42 (b), (f) and (g) of the Cape Town Municipal
Planning By-Law, to allow for the following:
1) The removal of title deed conditions C(3) – C(6) from Title Deed T058756/2001 of Remainder Erf 28901, Cape Town;
2) The removal of title deed condition C from Title Deed T21597/2018 of Erf 28902, Cape Town;
3) The removal of title deed conditions B(3) – B(6) from Title Deed T79317/2000 of Erf 28900, Cape Town
4) The consolidation of erven 28900, RE/28901 and 28902;
5) A permanent departure from the By-Law in order to provide a parking ratio of 0.7 per unit, in lieu of 1.25 on the consolidated
erf (comprising of erven 28900, RE/28901 and 28902);
8.6 Policy Alignment
8.6.1 Overview
The proposed development is well-aligned with current spatial planning frameworks and policies that exist, at all levels of decision-
making, from the provincial, municipal and local levels. As part of this application, a thorough evaluation of the following By-Laws and
Policies have been undertaken, to ensure that the proposal is well aligned with the vision for the City of Cape Town and Mowbray:
8.6.2 Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) 2013
SPLUMA is a framework planning policy that outlines five core principles that must be considered in land-use decisions within all levels
of governance in South Africa. These principles are presented below, with a rationale of how each principle relates to the application:
• Principle of Spatial Justice:
The principle of spatial justice generally refers to ensuring that land is made fairly available to those who need it, within well-integrated
urban areas. The outlined development is in line with this principle, as it proposes to offer apartments that will be marketed
predominantly to students, young professionals and small families in an area which is easily accessible to a wide array of urban
conveniences, social services and transportation options for residents of middle-income backgrounds.
• Principle of Spatial Sustainability
The principle of spatial sustainability refers to town planning that is cognisant of the need to use land in a way that is environmentally,
economically and socially responsible. For instance, spatial sustainability would priorities land-use decisions that allow humans to live
closer to work, to minimize traffic congestion and allow for denser, more efficient settlements. This proposed development is well-
aligned with this principle, since it proposes the development of high-density apartments in an accessible area of the City, which
facilitates the use of non-motorised and public transportation and is within close proximity to work, study and recreational opportunities.
• Principle of Spatial Resilience
This principle refers to land use decisions that allow human beings to be less susceptible to the negative effects of external factors, such
as natural disasters (flooding, fires, climate change, etc.), which would impact their health and livelihood. It should be noted that this
development is a brownfield development in an area of the City that has already been urbanized. Thus, through this development,
there will be no negative impact on vulnerable agricultural and/or natural areas; nor would there be any additional risk to the resilience
of human residents in the area.
• Principle of Efficiency
The efficiency principle refers to land-use decisions that seek to make use of existing infrastructures and discourage urban sprawl, in
order to avoid the high development costs of installing new infrastructure associated with greenfield development. Again, this
development is a brownfield site, that will make use of existing urban infrastructure. While this infrastructure may need to be upgraded
slightly to accommodate the increased residential density of the area, these costs will be minimal compared to development in a non-
urban area.
• Principle of Good Administration
Finally, the principle of good administration refers to land use decisions that are well-planned, timely and based on sound planning
principles. This proposal is very much in-line with the City’s existing densification policies; promotes healthy, integrated and livable urban
communities; and presents an aesthetically-pleasing public-street interface that complements existing land uses. Hence, the approval
of this application would be in the best interest of the City as a whole.
8.6.3 Provincial Spatial Development Framework 2014
The PSDF provides a broad vision of land use goals and challenges for the entire Western Cape and it also echoes many of SPLUMA’s
principles, while identifying three key spatial goals:
• more inclusivity, productivity, competitiveness and opportunities in urban and rural space-economies;
• better protection of spatial assets (e.g. cultural and scenic landscapes) and strengthened resilience of natural and built
environments; and
• improved effectiveness in the governance of urban and rural areas.
This proposal is well-aligned with all three of these goals. By encouraging densification in accessible and well-resourced areas of the
City, housing becomes more affordable to a wider income group. No cultural or scenic landscapes will be altered through this
development, but the resilience of the built environment will be strengthened through the addition of a modern but complementary
architecture to the area, which promises to draw new residents and a renewed sense of place, safety and upliftment to the Mowbray
community.
The PSDF also strongly promotes densification thought infill development in areas within walking distance from major transport nodes
and amenities such as the proposed development.
8.6.4 Municipal and Southern District Spatial Development Framework
In terms of the current MSDF, the application site is located within a regional node, which is an area identified for densification in terms
of jobs and residential opportunities. The development of apartments, next to Mowbray train station, is well-aligned to the parameters
of development within a regional node. In addition, the subject site is located less than 500 meters east of Main Road, which has been
identified as a development corridor, and ten meters north of Durban Road, which the Southern District SDF identifies as an Urban
Development Zone. As per the MSDF, densification should be focused in areas such as regional nodes, especially in close vicinity of
transport corridors and brownfields where it will not be detrimental to environmental and cultural precincts.
Hence, from a City and District level, the proposed development is well-aligned to the City’s spatial vision for the area.
8.6.5 Cape Town Urban Design Policy
The site development plan and building designs have been prepared to align closely with the Urban Design policy. All parking for the
proposed flats will be provided either exclusively behind the ground floor units, which will allow for the main building to be positioned in
close proximity to the street. In addition, all ground-floor units will include private, walk-out gardens that will have direct visual access
to the street. The planned fence will allow for visual permeability between the street and buildings. These design parameters allow for
the creation of an active-street front, which promotes safe, enjoyable and visually diverse areas.
8.6.6 Design and Management Guidelines for a Safer City
The ‘Safer City’ guidelines advocate for urban design which facilitates safer urban places. The relevant objectives of the policy include
improved surveillance and visibility; safe access and movement; a positive image; as well layered spaces. The proposed design of the
site strives to meet these objectives in a number of ways.
Firstly, all street-facing units contain (at least) ‘Juliet’-style balconies, and the height of the building promotes multiple levels of ‘eyes on
the street.’ This passive surveillance, as a result of the development, will facilitate an increased sense of safety for pedestrians passing
by the site, and/or waiting for trains and taxis in the evenings or early mornings. This potential improvement for street safety will be
significantly more effective than the current single-residential structures, all of which have dilapidated fencing that allows for little visibility
of the street, with no potential for surveillance.
The intended block of flats will also reverse and guard against environmental and urban decay, through the development of new and
desirable housing that will draw interest and opportunity to the neighbourhood. As explained above, the design seeks to create an
active street frontage, visually permeable fencing and will contribute to the effective lighting of the area for increased safety at night.
8.6.7 Cape Town Densification Policy
This policy document recognises the need to limit urban sprawl and the associated issues of traffic congestion and increased pollution
through the creation of denser, centrally located housing and efficient public transportation. The policy suggests that “Density Priority
Zones” should be identified using a number of parameters, including “development and activity routes around rail and IRT stations;”
through the existing “zoning rights” of the area, and others.
It is clear that the application site falls within a density priority zone, due to its immediate proximity to an existing rail station, as well as
the GR4-zoning of the application site and surrounding properties, which allows for higher-density development such as what is
proposed.
9.0 IDENTIFIED HERITAGE RESOURCES
The Immediate Context – The maps and the photographs in the report indicate the graded buildings in the immediate vicinity of the
subject site according to the City’s latest 2015 survey. These are the heritage resources on the subject street block and in the immediate
context which could be potentially under threat by the new proposal. The map below indicates that the subject block has 7 Grade
IIIC structures, 7 potential Grade IIIIC structures and 7 structures which are not conservation worthy.
The grading of four of the seven indicated Grade IIIIC structures is in dispute and six of the seven potential Grade IIIC are also disputed.
This leaves three Grade IIIC and one potential Grade IIIC which have some cultural value. Of these only one Grade IIIC and one
potential Grade IIIC are inside the proposed HPOZ which confirms the statement that the western edge of Malleson Road should not
be inside the proposed HPOZ.
The only structures with cultural significance who could potentially be under threat by the proposal are not those graded residences on
the eastern of Malleson Road but the views towards the mountain from the public realm in Malleson Road. This threat is rather small
because the proposal will be screened off by the residences on the western edge in Malleson Road.
Figure 45: Graded buildings on the subject street block
The Baker Precinct – The second group of heritage resources, of which the Baker building forms part, is situated closer to the M2 to the
north and although they are all Grade IIIB heritage sites, they will not be affected by the new proposal as they are at a distance away.
The one closest to the subject site sits 95m away and the furthest of the group up to the N2 is 210m away.
The Conservation Areas – The third group of heritage resources are the proclaimed Mowbray Station HPOZ and the proposed HPOZ of
which the closest boundary to the subject site is disputed.
The Spatial Legacy and the Transport Node – In the section following above which deals with the planning issues of the proposal,
densification is discussed and motivated at length especially along transport nodes consisting of a multi transport typology. Although
this is a town planning consideration, urbanization and the need to be closer to work opportunities became a non-tangible socio-
political conundrum which is as a result of a political legacy. This is part of South Africa’s heritage and the land hunger of citizens
morphed into a need with a cultural dimension.
The rate of urbanization and urban sprawl puts pressure on the peri-urban areas which renders the winelands very vulnerable and
densification is most probably the most important effort to redress this phenomenon.
10.0 DESIGN INDICATORS
Following the submission of the Notice of Intent to Develop (NID) and the response which was received from Heritage Western Cape,
the following design indicators were identified:
- the subject structures and their neighbours on the street block belong to a cultural landscape with limited significance and they
are not considered to be worthy of any form of protection. This is confirmed by contextual photographs, in loco inspection and
the Todeschini/Japha Survey and no individual significant heritage resource on the street block will be under threat by the
presence of the new proposal. The only heritage resources which might be impacted on are the two Grade IIIC buildings on the
corner of Strubens and Durban Road.
- the subject site is located in between the proclaimed Mowbray Station and proposed HPOZ and this requires the new
development to take cognizance of its location in relation to the two conservation areas. The status of the two conservation
areas is acknowledged in the NHRAct and special design measures are required.
- There are a number of high-rise buildings in the area and a building of larger proportions than the extant massing and bulk will
not be foreign to the context. However, the street block is occupied by small scale structures yet they are insignificant and the
accommodation of a larger new structure becomes a town planning consideration and not one on heritage grounds.
- The smaller scale residences on the western edge of Malleson Road are not significant but they act as a buffer to protect the
buildings inside the proposed HPOZ from any adversarial impact.
- The contextual roof typology is one of double pitches with hipped ends and the wall finishes are predominantly plastered with
face brick elements in some areas.
- There are well defined public, semi-public and private areas at each of the properties and the semi-public areas should be well
vegetated.
- Side spaces are well defined and should be well vegetated
- The street fencing should be a visually permeable street interface which must contribute positively to the public realm but also
provide opportunity for surveillance in order to reinforce the elements for a safer urban space.
- The buildings in the wider area and inside the conservation areas are at a fine grain, scale and massing and although the
development rules in the Planning Bylaw permits structures with a larger envelope for this area, the new building should be
sensitive to scale and should be contained to the allowable development envelope to prevent over bulking.
- From the public realm, the building should not have any piloti features and it should meet the ground in a traditional, solid
manner.
- Design measures should be introduced to emphasize verticality in order to break any linear over bulking.
- The new development must make a positive contribution to this urban place.
11.0 THE NEW PROPOSAL
The proposed development will entail the construction of a 4-storey block of apartments which is set back from the street boundary
and aligning itself to the existing built edge. The new building will be setback at a considerable distance from the rear boundary in
order to create spatial and visual relieve between itself and the residences on the western edge of Malleson Road.
The building will have parking on the ground with three storeys of apartments above. All parking will be shielded from Strubens Road
by residential units on the ground floor, a refuse room and the service store. Access to the proposed development will be directly from
Strubens Road on the south western corner of the property.
A total number of 61 units are proposed, of which the majority (50 units) will be bachelors units ranging between ±26 – 40m². The
remainder of the units will be made up by 3x one-bedroom and 8x two-bedroom units. The three ground floor units will each have their
own private garden area. The west-facing units on the 2nd and 3rd storey will each have Juliet balconies while all other units will have
access to balconies. These balconies will provide beautiful, sweeping views towards Table Mountain and there are no balconies
proposed directly on the common boundaries in order to avoid overlooking features.
In keeping with the character of the area, the proposed development will have a double pitched roof and plastered walls painted in
different shades of grey with alternative face brick sections. The gutter line will be approximately 12.8m above the base level and the
height, coverage and bulk will be zoning compliant.
It should be noted that the parking has been placed at the rear of the subject site to allow for the building to be positioned to the front
of the property, to create an active street interface as well as passive and active observation opportunities from the garden areas and
the balconies.
12.0 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSAL
• The building stretches in length from boundary to boundary in a north-south direction and could visually appear to be a long
linear structure. The west elevation however provides vertical elements which breaks the linearity but these elements needs to
be accentuated in bold colour contrasts to be effective.
• The staircase shafts on both ends of the building must be in a dark coloured paint and plaster or a deep colour brick in order to
contain the width of the building seen from the street. The landscaping elevation illustrates this point very effectively.
• The double pitched roof of the building is supported as it mimics the roof type of the area. The gables also echo an element in
the area and it helps to break the linear dimension of the building. The staircase shafts could have been provided with flat
concrete roofs, again to assist with the linearity of the building.
• The visual impact of the building seen from Durban Road on the Grade IIIC building on the corner of Strubens and Durban Road
will be minimized if the staircase shafts have flat roofs. This will bring the building mass directly behind the building to a lower
level.
• The distance which the building is set back from the boundary at the rear is strongly supported to minimize the visual impact on
the properties behind. Although they are not defined as heritage sites by the NHRAct, the visual relief afforded by this set back
is commendable from an urban planning perspective.
• The side elevation showing the view lines from Malleson Road illustrates that the building will not be seen over the roof tops from
the side walk on the western edge of the street and a minimal view of only the top floor will be seen from Malleson Road’s eastern
edge. This however does not have an effect on significant heritage resources though.
• The street interface is visually permeable which is strongly supported and the generous set back of the building edge allows for
well vegetated front gardens which contribute positively to the urban environment. This will prevent sterility of the street and it
fits in with the residential character of the street. The permeable views towards the street will also allow passive surveillance
opportunities.
• The building footprint stretches over the current three properties which is contained in terms of the other multi storey structures of
the area. The proposal will be in line with the densification strategy along the public transport nodes and it will have a
comfortable fit of the bulked-up terrain between the two conservation areas.
13.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
Notice in the Newspaper – The public participation process was done in three phases starting with the placement of a notice in the
Cape Times and it appeared in the newspaper on Monday, 18 February 2018 and a copy of the notice appears hereunder.
On Site Notice – A notice was placed and each of the three properties which explained the intent and invite comment or objections
On site Notice as it was displayed at No 1 Strubens Road, Mowbray
Interested & Affected Parties – Invitation for comment was send to Environmental & Heritage Management, City of Cape Town as well
as to the Rosebank & Mowbray Planning & Aesthetics Committee (RAMPAC) who is the only registered heritage body for this area with a
closing date of 18 March 2019.
Letter box Drops – An amount of twenty notices were dropped into letter boxes in Strubens Road and on both sides in Malleson Road with a
similar closing date of 18 March 2018.
The Immediate Context – The maps and the photographs in the report indicate the graded buildings in the immediate vicinity of the
subject site according
The Baker Precinct – The second group of heritage resources, of which the Baker building forms part, is situated closer to the M2 to the
north and although they are all Grade IIIB heritage sites, they will not be affected by the new proposal as they are at a distance away.
The one closest to the subject site sits 95m away and the furthest of the group up to the N2 is 210m away.
The Conservation Areas – The third group of heritage resources are the proclaimed Mowbray Station HPOZ and the proposed HPOZ of
which the closest boundary to the subject site is disputed.
The Spatial Legacy and the Transport Node – In the section following above which deals with the planning issues of the proposal,
densification is discussed and motivated at length especially along transport nodes consisting of a multi transport typology. Although
this is a town planning consideration, urbanization and
14.0 IN CONCLUSION
Under Section 9, earlier in the report, four different types of heritage resources were identified which were potentially under threat by
the new proposal and it the threats which were in different form were duly discussed and summerised below.
The Immediate Context

The subject site is within 150 meters from one of the largest buildings in Mowbray if not the southern suburbs, which also happened to
be inside the proposed HPOZ. In addition, it is approximately 60 meters away from the five storey block of student apartments which is
of considerable larger massing and a similar distance away from other blocks of apartments with footprints equal or even larger than
the proposed new development. The immediate context of the subject site consists of single storey, insignificant buildings in an area
which is earmarked by the City for future densification and bulking up. It does not pose any negative impact on significant heritage
resources and this opinion is thoroughly explained by this impact assessment.
The Baker Precinct – Although this precinct consists of very significant structures, its nearest building is almost 100meters away and it
stretches beyond the N2 in Strubens Road. The new development will not affect this precinct whatsoever.
The Conservation Areas – The boundaries of the proposed HPOZ and the graded buildings in the neighbourhood were most probably
the trigger for the request to submit a Heritage Impact Assessment Report. In both instances it was illustrated that no evidence could
be established that the insertion of this building in the context would harm the cultural landscape or significant heritage resources. The
boundaries of the proposed HPOZ was questioned but even if it was not, the new proposal has incorporated all the design informants,
except for the grain and massing, into account and it responds positively to the roofscapes and roof typology as well as to the materiality
of the adjacent built landscape.
The Spatial Legacy and the Transport Node – This assessment under Section 8 explained the City’s vision, aims and policy with regards
to the legacy of the spatial planning politically enforced in the past inside the boundaries of the City. The desirability of this type of
built form and land-use inside this transport mode is following the City’s planning principles to the word and the resistance which the
new development might evoke from a conservation perspective visa vis the urgency to restore previous planning deficiencies, is out of
balance and the status quo must be addressed. This is socially and culturally a most urgent need.
15.0 RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Heritage Western Cape endorse the Heritage Impact Assessment Report and issue a positive decision in support
of the new development.
Johan Cornelius Heritage Consultant

Strubens Road HIA 2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Strubens Road HIA 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

HWC APPLICATION REFERENCE NUMBER: 18061903ZK0620E

JOHAN CORNELIUS ARCHITECT & HERITAGE CONSULTANT

2.0 LEGAL FRAMWEWORK……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 00

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND…………………………………………………………………………………… 00

4.0 CITY OF CAPE TOWN MUNICIPAL PLANNING BYLAW………………………………………………………………….. 00

6.0 HERITAGE CONTEXT AND SURROUNDING HERITAGE RESOURCES…………………………………………………… 00

7.0 IDENTIFICATION, MAPPING AND ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE RESOURCES………………………………………….. 00

9.0 TOWN PLANNING AND LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS…………………………………………………………………… 00

10.0 DESIGN INDICATORS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00

12.0 THE NEW PROPOSAL……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 00

13.0 COMPLIANCE WITH THE NHRAct……………………………………………………………………………………………… 00

13.0 PUBLIC COMSULTATION………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 00

Figure 1: Record of Decision following the submission of a

Figure 40: Surrounding Land Uses

1.1 What is a Heritage Impact Assessment Report?

1.2 Project Team

- Town Planners: Arch Town Planners

1.4 Declaration of Independence

1.5 Public Participation Process

Sections 27 and 38(3)

– An advertisement to be placed in a local newspaper.

Proof of Consultation Process

1.6 Study Methodology and Terms of Reference

- Impacts of the proposed redevelopment on the existing townscape.

2.1 The National Heritage Resources Act

(b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50 m in length;

(i) exceeding 5 000 sq.m. in extent; or

(d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m² in extent; or

Figure 1: Record of Decision following the submission of a Notification of Intent to Develop

The area is characteristic of a transport interchange and is a

Figure 3: The Current Zoning Diagram – City of Cape Town EAGISViewer

GR4: General Residential 4

Figure 4: The Location of the subject site in the wider context

Figure 9: 1953 Aerial Photograph Figure 10: 2018 Aerial Photograph

Figure 11: Cape Town EgisViewer 2015 Grading Map

6.3 Context and Graded Cultural Resources

22. STRUBENS ROAD STREETCAPE VIEW FROM

33. NOT CONSERVATION WORTHY

Early Colonial and Pre-Industrial:

• revolutionary change in transport technology on land and sea;

The Modern Town Planning Period:

7.3.1 No 5 & 3 Strubens Road

Figure 21: No 5 Strubens Road Figure 22: No 3 Strubens Road

8.1 The Subject Site

Figure 39: The Surveyor General Diagram of 1921

This section should be read in conjunction with Figure 40 below.

Figure 40: Surrounding Land Uses

Figure 43: The building at 6 Strubens Road, 3 storey flats

8.3 Heritage Overlay Influences

8.5 Land Use Application to City of Cape Town

8.6 Policy Alignment

• Principle of Spatial Sustainability

• Principle of Spatial Resilience

8.6.3 Provincial Spatial Development Framework 2014

8.6.4 Municipal and Southern District Spatial Development Framework

8.6.5 Cape Town Urban Design Policy

8.6.6 Design and Management Guidelines for a Safer City

8.6.7 Cape Town Densification Policy

9.0 IDENTIFIED HERITAGE RESOURCES

- Side spaces are well defined and should be well vegetated

11.0 THE NEW PROPOSAL

On site Notice as it was displayed at No 1 Strubens Road, Mowbray

The Immediate Context

Johan Cornelius Heritage Consultant

You might also like