While nearly 600 objections have been lodged against the building departure applications for a planned affordable housing development in Ruwari, a formal complaint has been lodged with the Public Protector concerning possible zoning differences.
The complaint was brought on behalf of the Brackenfell Ratepayers Association by City councillor Sandra Dickson, who has been assisting residents since 2019 in their objections against the development.
Dickson, a Brackenfell resident and founder of civic action organisation Stop COCT, has also been named the GOOD Party’s candidate for Ward 8 in Brackenfell in the coming local elections.
“Our community participation app has now facilitated 580 comment emails to the City concerning Erf 9702. This demonstrates the extent of public engagement with the proposed development. Our investigation has also uncovered a serious, unresolved contradiction in the City’s own zoning records. Some records identify the property as Open Space 2 (OS2), while others identify it as Local Business 2 (LB2). The contradiction was known internally as far back as May 2025,” Dickson said in a statement to the media.
ALSO READ: Ruwari housing plan faces objections as building departures are sought
“We are not claiming that either zoning is definitively correct. We are asking the City to produce the legal record establishing the applicable zoning and explain how the disposal, tender and development processes proceeded despite these conflicting records. We submitted a comprehensive, evidence-based report on 10 September and presented it formally on 15 September. Our position is that the City should resolve this fundamental issue before proceeding with the current application. Residents deserve accurate information and a fair opportunity to participate in decisions affecting their neighbourhood.”
Investigation requested
In her complaint to the Public Protector, Dickson points to City GIS evidence from 20 August that shows an OS2 zoning entry returned by the parcel-specific split zoning level.
“That entry subsequently disappeared. In correspondence dated 17 September, the Northern District Manager confirmed that the zoning layer on City Viewer had been changed, describing this as a rectification. The City has not provided the original and amended dataset records, the GIS edit and audit history, authorisation, or the procedural decision establishing precisely what was changed and under which legal authority,” she says.
“I request an investigation into whether the change was properly authorised and complied with the applicable City of Cape Town Municipal Planning By-law, including section 30(6) if the statutory zoning map was corrected; whether its effects on neighbouring residents and public participation were properly considered; and whether the City’s historical OS2 and LB2 records have been adequately reconciled. I am asking for an investigation and documentary findings, not making a concluded allegation that a named official personally altered the database or acted dishonestly.”
ALSO READ: Ruwari residents oppose City of Cape Town’s social housing plans
Dickson attached a 31-page formal complaint and evidence pack, including a chronology, historic exhibits, a legal framework, relevant court judgments and emails received from the City.The related departures application is open for public comment until 28 September.
The newspaper sent a media enquiry to the City requesting the current zoning for Erf 9702 in Ruwari, Brackenfell, and asking whether the property was ever zoned as Open Public Space, and if so, when the change occurred. No response had been received by the time of publication.
