Thank you for making your voice heard. We have submitted 55 objections
from our side to the unwanted development. Jemima McDonnell of Upper
Houghton wants you to know that the time you took to sign your
objection is really appreciated!
No date for a tribunal has been set yet, but we'll keep you posted on what is happening there.
Posted 29 August 2007 by
I have sent a document, ORAobject2.doc per e-mail for you to sign as a voice supporting us in saying NO to a proposed development of 20 townhouses at the site of the Iranian Embassy in Ridge Road, Upper Houghton. Apart from an already ineffective infrastructure that won't handle this type of development, we must preserve our ridges according to our precinct plan - and the property also has historical value: the Shah of Iran spent years in exile there.
Should you agree with ORA and Upper Houghton's objection, please sign the document and e-mail it to
or fax it to me on 0866544781.
All objections must be submitted by 8 August.
The department won't accept a signed petition so we have to hand in individual letters - and we all know unity is strength. Please make your voice heard!
The Observatory Ratepayers Association and Upper Houghton Association object as follows:
23 July 2007
Office of the Executive Director Department of Development Planning and Urban Management P.O. Box 30733 Braamfontein 2017 PER E-MAIL
Dear Sirs
PROPOSED REZONING AND REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS : ERVEN 2237, 2238 AND 2239 HOUGHTON ESTATE AND ERF 19 MOUNTAIN VIEW
We, as the Observatory Ratepayers’ Association representing the residents of Observatory, strongly object to the proposed rezoning and removal of restrictions of the above erven in Mountainview.
We support the Upper Houghton Association’s objection in full and would like add:
The residents have accepted a formal Precinct Plan for our suburb.
The plan was submitted to council for initial assessment by the City of Johannesburg, Precinct Planning Evaluation Committee (PPEC) in March 2007. The committee accepted the plan and recommended it for approval by Council.
Our Precinct Plan clearly states NO densification and NO subdivision on the ridges in our area, which includes the Mountainview Ridge. This followed advice from Michele Pfab, Principle Nature Conservation Scientist, Gauteng Nature Conservation, Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, in order to establish clear guideline. Michele is the author of the Gauteng Ridges Policy.
The Precint Plan also clearly states no subdivisions lees than 1 000 square meters, with only one main dwelling not exceeding 2-storeys to preserve the unique character of Observatory and its surrounding suburbs like Mountain view and Upper Houghton.
We stress: In terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, matters of heritage preservation will take precedence over those of development, and note that the original house has been identified as a Property of Merit.
We can, as a representative association, only conclude that the proposed development would impact negatively on our suburb, which leaves us no choice but to object strenuously to it. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any queries. Regards
Carine Hartman Chair: Observatory Ratepayers Association www.observatory.za.net
The Upper Houghton objection reads as follows:
Our Ref : 2059 Your Ref : 13-7896 23 July 2007
Office of the Executive Director Department of Development Planning and Urban Management P.O. Box 30733 Braamfontein 2017 BY HAND
Dear Sirs
PROPOSED REZONING AND REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS : ERVEN 2237, 2238 AND 2239 HOUGHTON ESTATE AND ERF 19 MOUNTAIN VIEW
We refer to the above application, and can advise as follows:
We act on behalf of the Upper Houghton Association, and have the following comments to make :
Development in Upper Houghton is guided and determined by the provisions of the Amended Upper Houghton Neighbourhood Development Framework (UHNDF), which forms part of the Region E RSDF documents. Scant mention is made in the application to this Framework.
In terms of the Framework, the site is located in Precinct C (The Ridge Area), where the following development controls are applicable:
Subdivisions to 1 000m²;
Consolidation to a maximum of 3 000m²;
Height : 3 storeys, including basements ;
F.A.R. : 0,75;
Coverage : 35%;
Building Line : as per Scheme
All development on site to be in accordance with a Site Development Plan, to be submitted to the UHA for comment prior to submission to Council;
Only one main dwelling house and one bona fide unit not exceeding 55m² for domestic accommodation shall be permitted on any subdivided portions.
Established trees and vegetation shall be retained. No trees shall be removed without the written approval of the Council;
Existing stone boundary walls to be retained;
In this precinct, it is proposed that intensity of new development in this area be limited so as to protect and enhance the character of the ridge. The vision and overarching ethos of the Framework is the protection and enhancement of the character of the area. The above controls were stipulated in the interests of protecting the character of the area, and of the sensitive ridge area.
The unique character of the area has not only been acknowledged by Council, but also the National Monuments Council (Heritage Resource Agency). This character is comprised of environmental, historical and architectural elements. It must be noted that these controls supercede those of the Johannesburg Town Planning Scheme, 1979.
It must be noted that the original house on the property has been identified as a Property of Merit (worthy of conservation) in the heritage scoping report prepared by Barlin & Chaskelson Architects, in support of the process to declare Upper Houghton a Heritage Area in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, which is in the process of being dealt with by the Provincial Heritage Resources Agency of Gauteng (PHRAG). In terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, matters of heritage preservation will take precedence over those of development.
In light of the above, the Upper Houghton Association objects to the application on the following grounds :
As the UHNDF specifically stipulates a minimum erf size of 1 000m², we are opposing a density zoning of units per hectare, as this could give rise to disparate erf sizes and erven below 1 000m². This is particularly important on the ridge, where steep slopes render part of the erf undevelopable, thus resulting in development being condensed onto part of the site were a per hectare density to apply.
In light of the above, a “Residential 2” zoning is considered unnecessary. The development proposals can be achieved with a “Residential 1” zoning.
The coverage of 50% as applied for exceeds the 35% currently allowed in the UHNDF. No Floor Area Ratio provision is stipulated, but the “As Per Scheme” provisions exceed the 0,75 allowed in the Framework.
The applicant makes no mention of the Site Development Plan being referred to the Upper Houghton Association for comment, and thus ignores the provisions of the Framework.
The Framework makes provision for a maximum consolidation size of 3 000m². This site measures nearly 2 hectares in extent, and we are concerned about the impact that such a monolithic development will have on the character of the ridge.
We look forward to receiving a copy of the Traffic Impact Study and Water and Sewer capacity report that will be required by the relevant utilities, as well as a copy of the Heritage Impact Assessment that will be required by PHRAG.
We trust that the above information suitably clarifies the position of the Upper Houghton Association. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any queries.
