MPT North Eastern

Resolution details

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED:

a. Removal of restrictive title conditions a - d of Title Deed T 52366/2015 relating to Erf 864, Durbanville BE APPROVED in terms of Section 98(b) of the City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-Law, 2015, subject to the conditions contained in Annexure A.

b. Rezoning of Erf 864, Durbanville from Single Residential Zoning 1: Conventional Housing to Local Business Zoning 1: Intermediate Business for offices BE APPROVED in terms of in terms of Section 98 (b) of the City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-law, 2015, in accordance with the site plan attached as Annexure C and subject to the conditions contained in Annexure A.

c. Regulation departure from the common building line along the boundary abutting erf 863 and 855 from 3m to 0m to accommodate a future office extension and store room, respectively, on Erf 864, Durbanville, BE APPROVED in terms of Section 98 (b) of the City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-law, 2015, in accordance with the Site Plan attached as Annexure C and subject to the conditions contained in Annexure A.

d. Regulation departure from the height restriction of 4m to 5,8m for the store and 8,4m for the offices within the 3m common building lines on Erf 864, Durbanville, BE APPROVED in terms of Section 98 (b) of the City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-law, 2015, in accordance with the Site Plan attached as Annexure C and subject to the conditions contained in Annexure A.

REASONS FOR DECISION:

1. Erf 864, Durbanville is situated within the Secondary Business District of Durbanville and the application will consequently support the vision for the area in terms of the approved City of Cape Town policies as discussed in the planning report.
2. The proposal is supported from an Urban Design point of view considering the function of Oxford Street (as a Class 4 road: local distributer and important link road) and in consideration of the principles contained in the Urban Design Framework.
3. The departures are not regarded as having an adverse impact when considering the position of the existing structures in relation to the common boundaries in general and in relation to the application site, the existing and proposed landscaping, and the proposed design in terms of the layout and the roof structure.
4. The impact of the proposal was considered by the relevant internal departments. No objections were raised in this regard and the relevant requirements have informed the conditions of approval (refer Annexure A).
5. Heritage Western Cape issued a permit confirming that the structure is not conservation worthy.
6. The traffic, parking and access requirements conforms to the Transport for Cape Town requirements.
7. Considering the above, the proposal is not regarded to have an adverse impact on the health, wellbeing or safety of the surrounding community.
8. The proposed removal of the restrictions is not regarded to have a detrimental impact on the financial values, personal or social benefits of the applicant or surrounding owners as addressed in the paragraph 6.3 of the report.
9. The conditions of the approval attached as Annexure A to this report are informed by the application process and departmental comments received. It is regarded to sufficiently mitigate the possible impacts.

FOR INORMATION:
ACTION: A SMIT / S VAN RENSBURG