It has the best agricultural conditions within 120 km of Cape Town, but it isn’t the vineyards of Constantia or Somerset West. It contains fragments of some of the most critically endangered natural habitat in the region, but it isn’t found at the peaks of Table Mountain National Park. It holds among the best, most stable supply of usable water in the metropolitan area, but it isn’t Silvermine Dam or Newlands Springs. It is the southern portion of Cape Town’s Philippi Horticultural Area (“PHA”), and, unlike these other iconic features of Cape Town, it is the site for proposed and approved developments that would destroy these unique qualities.
That’s what the Western Province Department of Agriculture’s newest study focusing on the PHA confirmed last week. And while it’s findings reflect these key insights, the conclusions and strategy proposed going forward fails to advocate for full protection of this area. Instead, the study defers to land use decisions made by the City of Cape Town to allow redevelopment of nearly a third of this land into suburban development.
The study highlights the PHA’s unique importance as an agricultural and natural oasis within the metropolitan area of the Cape Town. With respect to agriculture, the area’s unique combination of climate, water and soil make it ideal for farming. The area also sits on top of the thickest and deepest part of the Cape Flats Aquifer, which holds billions of litres of water and has largely been untapped.
Within the PHA, the southernmost portion, which abuts the community of Strandfontein Village and False Bay, is the best of the best in terms of agricultural, natural, and water resources. According to the study, the southern PHA contains the best aquifer recharge areas in the City. That is also where the last remaining fragments of the intricate dune system that once covered most of the Cape Flats remain. The study finds that the dune thicket flora located in this area helps provide “an ecological link within the Cape Flats District.”
The study flags that the City’s land use decisions, particularly the approval of two major development applications in the south, has destabilised the policy certainty around the area. The Oaklands City development, which encompasses 470 hectares in the southeast PHA and has been fully approved by the City, and the UVest development in the southeast PHA, reflect the attractiveness of the PHA for greenfield urban development. The fact that the City rezoned the area to benefit these developments indicates that it is trailing developers, rather than leading development decisions in the City. Changes to the City’s spatial planning documents in 2011 and 2014 carved out large chunks of the PHA exactly where these developments were to take place. The City’s most recent Metropolitan Spatial Development Framework reflects this course of action, designating these areas as “urban development” rather than “high potential and unique agricultural land” as is the case with the rest of the PHA.
Given the study’s findings regarding the agricultural, environmental, and socio-economic importance of the PHA, and particularly the southern portion under threat of development, it is unsurprising that its findings conflict with the urban development activity occurring in this area. The study notes that “[t]he southern portion of the PHA has the highest agricultural potential and its loss to non-agricultural-related development is of serious concern and is not supported by the findings of this Study.” Regarding future plans for the city that focus urban development in areas other than the PHA, the study registers its “strong concern over planned private sector development in the southern portion of the PHA as they appear to fall outside of the City’s spatial investment targets and are located far from any planned public transport infrastructure.”
And yet, notwithstanding the contradiction between the study’s findings and the City’s conduct with respect to the southern PHA, the study incoherently states that “[t]he protection of the PHA for horticultural and sand mining purposes is consistent with the spatial development plans of the CCT and the WCG.” How is the City’s decision to allow suburban development of a third of the PHA, and its most agriculturally valuable portion, consistent with the study’s findings?
In public presentations, the Province and its consultants have argued that nothing can be done with respect to developments in the south that have already been approved. As a result, they contend that this area is already, unfortunately, lost. DA Provincial MPP and standing committee chairperson on economic opportunity and agriculture Beverley Shafer, commenting on the Oaklands City development, contended that nothing could be done in a “free market” to stop these developments once approval had been given, and inferred that to suggest otherwise would be to advocate authoritarianism.
This argument reflects the government’s abdication of its regulatory role in urban development for the benefit of its citizens, a core element of its mandate. The City’s poor planning and land use management decisions in the past with respect to the PHA does not mean it or the Province must stay the course. Land use and zoning re-designations, such as overlay zones protecting existing undeveloped land, are one viable option. Another would be conditions on provision of infrastructure, which will inevitably burden the City’s taxpayers significantly if development proceeds.
The City and Province would like you to believe that their hands are tied with respect to protecting and preserving the PHA’s most valuable lands. By stating that the City’s reprehensible conduct is consistent with protection of the PHA, the Province’s study provides cover for the City to continue down the wrong course.