ERIK BUITEN

PLANNING PORTFOLIO – 20 APRIL 2022

OLD PRETORIA EAST RESIDENTS’ AND RATEPAYERS’ ALLIANCE (OPERRA)

Many changes welcomed, but Concerned about….

• Increased dictionary powers given to the Executive (“Department responsible for Development Planning”) to take decisions that will determine the outcome of the land development process
• Shrinking civil and political participation in determining the outcome of the land development process.
• They don’t align in key respects with SPLUMA, SPLUM Regulations and local government legislation governing the By Law.
• Will further discourage communities from expressing their views and protecting their rights in relation to land development applications.
• Will also further undermine the policy making role of councillors and Council

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• How to interpret policy.

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• What should be considered & recorded when taking land development decisions.

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• What should be considered & recorded when taking land development decisions.
• Site-specific circumstances justify a departure from the provisions of such municipal spatial development framework – subsection 22(2)
• Such departure does not materially change the municipal spatial development framework – subsection 22(3)

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• What should be considered & recorded when taking land development decisions.

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• When to conduct written versus oral hearings.

“Rubberstamp” what is already happening in practice: Increased discretionary powers given to the Executive

• What appeal cases can be hear by the Municipal Appeals Tribunal.

Additional restrictions and requirements for public participation

• Limiting land development application notices.
• Setting additional requirements to be met by residents’ association as objectors

Composition of the Municipal Planning Tribunal

SMT composition does not comply with the requirements of section 38 of SPLUMA

According to section 38 (4) (c) of SPLUMA a member of the Tribunal has a conflict of interest if:

“The member is an official in the employ of national, provincial or local government, if the department by which such an official is employed, has a direct or substantial interest in the outcome of the matter.”

We have on numerous occasions pointed out that a conflict of interest has been created by the CoT by appointing members of the “Department responsible for Development Planning” (that are required to make recommendations to the MPT) to also serves on (and chair) the MPT.

This puts unfair pressure on planning officials to serve both as “referees and players” .

Note that these officials also sit in as support staff during MAT hearing.