ATC151023:Report of the Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation on Petition from Residents of Orlando East, submitted in terms of Rule 312 (Mr T W Mhlongo) dated 13 October 2015.

Sports, Arts and Culture

 

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation on Petition from Residents of Orlando East, submitted in terms of Rule 312 (Mr T W Mhlongo) dated 13 October 2015.

 

The Portfolio Committee on on Sport and Recreation, having considered the Petition from Residents of Orlando East, referred to it on 5 May 2015, reports as follows:

 

Mr T W Mhlongo, MP, briefed the committee on 8 September 2015 about the petition from residents of Orlando East requesting intervention regarding plans to build student housing on Number One Grounds, a rugby field used by the community.

 

Mr Mhlongo informed members that:

 

  • Number One Grounds was a heritage site;
  • The community had to be consulted before a housing development was constructed on an existing sport field;
  • The petitioners had sent the petition to the City of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Legislature. The Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA) responded, but a response was awaited from the City of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Legislature;
  • At the time of the meeting the process had been halted because the community did not welcome it;
  • The plan was not included in the municipality's Infrastructure Development Plan (IDP);
  • Promotion of sport was so important to the community that they did not agree to the municipality closing the field, even if housing was important;
  • Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA) is a development agency. JDA wanted to make sure that the community had a buy-in, and the possibility was raised that a budget be allocated for the first phase. The community agreed, on condition that it would not be mixed housing;
  • The contractor had been on site. The zone application to change the zoning from heritage site to mixed development had not been submitted;
  • There was not a clear understanding on who would benefit from the development, for instance, from the rental stock income;
  • Land had been earmarked between Orlando and Diepkloof, therefore land was available next to Orlando, in section 79 of the City of Johannesburg.

 

The committee noted that:

 

  • JDA had responded and consultation had commenced;
  • The City of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Legislature did not respond to the petitioners by 8 September 2015;
  • Further information was necessary regarding the consultation process with all the relevant entities, like the City of Johannesburg and Gauteng Legislature;
  • It is concerned about the heritage merits that is being attributed to the field in question and the legal implications thereof;
  • The petitioners required recourse to set up engagement with the respective role players.

 

The committee recommends that:

 

  • All applicable formal processes between the residents and the City of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Legislature be completed;
  • The committee's report be communicated to the Gauteng Legislature for their attention.

 

Report to be considered.

 

Documents

No related documents