- A proposal to use a Sidmouth Road parking lot in Muizenberg for a homeless safe space has met with opposition from the Muizenberg Improvement District (MID).
- The MID argues that the location could negatively impact tourism and local businesses.
- Despite these concerns, Subcouncil 19 supports reserving the space for the Community Services and Health Directorate, and the proposal will proceed through the necessary processes.
A proposal to utilise a parking lot in Sidmouth Road, Muizenberg, as the location for a homeless safe space, has drawn concern and criticism from the Muizenberg Improvement District (MID).
Earlier this month, the City of Cape Town announced a financial boost of R4 million from the Mayoral Fund to create a dignified shelter for the homeless in Muizenberg (“Homeless safe space on the cards,” People’s Post, 9 July).
ALSO READ: R4m grant from Cape Town Mayoral Fund kickstarts Muizenberg homeless shelter
The facility is expected to offer transitional shelter and social interventions to help get the homeless off the streets.
At the time, the City refrained from commenting on the possible locations for the safe space.
A proposal to have the parking lot, which falls under the Safety and Security Directorate in Sidmouth Road, reserved for the Community Services and Health Directorate to be transformed into a safe space, was on the agenda for approval at Subcouncil 19 last week.
“Impact tourism”
In a statement, MID chair Simon Roberts said the proposed location for the Muizenberg safe space would impact tourism, among other factors.
“The proposed location is in the middle of our beachfront CBD and could severely impact tourism and businesses, undermining many years of urban renewal efforts by the MID, and the private and public sector,” he said.
Roberts said the failure of the Economic Development Directorate from commenting on the agenda item was a major oversight.
he added.
READ: Residents reject proposed site for homeless safe space in Muizenberg
The MID requested Subcouncil 19 to refrain from discussing the matter at a meeting on Monday 15 July.
“Postponing this item would allow sufficient time for the ward committee to discuss the matter and ensure public participation before any land reservation is changed,” he said. “There has already been an outcry among the citizens and much talk about potential legal interdicts, negative social media and press campaigns, as well as a public petition.”
Consultation
Roberts added that it was unclear why the public had not been consulted.
“It is unclear as to why this is the only possible option, and the rationale for the location in Muizenberg in particular is unclear.”
Responding to the MID’s request to have the proposal removed from the Subcouncil 19 agenda last week, chair Simon Liell-Cock said, unfortunately, the request could not be accommodated.
“At the Subcouncil meetings, you can’t raise a topic from the floor, it must be on the agenda first,” said Liell-Cock. “This was not on the agenda so we could not entertain the discussion but it is something we later discussed internally.”
READ: Homeless in Muizenberg roped in to ensure a ‘clean environment’
Liell-Cock added that Subcouncil 19 supported the reservation of the parking lot to be used by the Community Services and Health Directorate.
“The next step is proposals and comments, this process must be followed and out of that process will come a decision,” he said.
No other option
Explaining the process, Liell-Cock said the space has to be reserved before any applications, proposals and public comment can take place.
“We have to approve and support the reservation by community and health, they have to reserve the space before they can apply for anything,” he said.
Liell-Cock added that there was no other viable options for the location of the safe space.
“The traffic office in Lakeside is not an appropriate location for example,” he said.
“The Subcouncil put millions into a traffic office and we need more of them, so that premises in Lakeside was not appropriate.”
