<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vine Road Heritage Challenges</title>
	<atom:link href="http://woodstock.org.za/2008/03/08/vine-road-heritage-challenges/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://woodstock.org.za/2008/03/08/vine-road-heritage-challenges/</link>
	<description>The online presence of the Upper Woodstock Residents Association</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 13:51:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: teun1</title>
		<link>http://woodstock.org.za/2008/03/08/vine-road-heritage-challenges/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>teun1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 12:54:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uwra.wordpress.com/?p=86#comment-5</guid>
		<description>Latest news on the Vine Road property (May 2008):

During the month of April 2008 UWRA followed up the issue of the Vine Road property (described below in the People’s Post article) on behalf of the residents in the immediate area with the Ward Councillor and council officials. Thanks to Ward Councillor, Cedric Thomas, we received the first clear answer from council officials: Heritage Western Cape approval to demolish does not constitute approval to demolish a building.  It only confirms that they do not have an objection to the building being demolished from their point of view and that there are no reasons in their opinion why the building needs to be preserved in terms of the relevant Heritage Legislation.  They only provide the Local Authority with input from a Heritage conservation point of view.  They are not the controlling authority who issues Demolition Permits in terms of the National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act, Act 103 of 1977, as amended; the Local Authority is.

The owner or developer of the building still needs to apply for a permit from the Local Authority (City of Cape Town) to demolish the property if he wishes to do so. Demolition of a building without obtaining approval in writing from the Local Authority is a serious offence.  The owner of the Vine Road house will be made aware of this by the City of Cape Town.

UWRA and the residents in the vicinity of the property are very happy with this response. UWRA is sure that, should an application to demolish come in, they are going to be informed of that and can take the appropriate action.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Latest news on the Vine Road property (May 2008):</p>
<p>During the month of April 2008 UWRA followed up the issue of the Vine Road property (described below in the People’s Post article) on behalf of the residents in the immediate area with the Ward Councillor and council officials. Thanks to Ward Councillor, Cedric Thomas, we received the first clear answer from council officials: Heritage Western Cape approval to demolish does not constitute approval to demolish a building.  It only confirms that they do not have an objection to the building being demolished from their point of view and that there are no reasons in their opinion why the building needs to be preserved in terms of the relevant Heritage Legislation.  They only provide the Local Authority with input from a Heritage conservation point of view.  They are not the controlling authority who issues Demolition Permits in terms of the National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act, Act 103 of 1977, as amended; the Local Authority is.</p>
<p>The owner or developer of the building still needs to apply for a permit from the Local Authority (City of Cape Town) to demolish the property if he wishes to do so. Demolition of a building without obtaining approval in writing from the Local Authority is a serious offence.  The owner of the Vine Road house will be made aware of this by the City of Cape Town.</p>
<p>UWRA and the residents in the vicinity of the property are very happy with this response. UWRA is sure that, should an application to demolish come in, they are going to be informed of that and can take the appropriate action.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sandy Shepherd</title>
		<link>http://woodstock.org.za/2008/03/08/vine-road-heritage-challenges/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandy Shepherd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uwra.wordpress.com/?p=86#comment-4</guid>
		<description>To: hwc@pgwc.gov.za
Subject: Attn. Dr Townsend: A house of integrity

Dear Dr Townsend,

Take a house built in the mid-1930s, still standing today in a residential area. It has its original double columns and front stoep, teak windows with casement tops, balustrading and bay windows. It&#039;s modest, but it&#039;s of its time and it has integrity. The style of its exterior has not been altered for some 70 years. Most of all, it has an architectural character that fits its neighbourhood because there are a significant number of other houses like it. Yet this is a house that in your wisdom you have decided is &#039;of no historical or cultural significance&#039;. I am writing about 2 Vine Road, Upper Woodstock and you have approved a permit for it to be demolished.

Is this the fate we can expect for all other houses of this type around Cape Town, since by implication they too have no significance? Is a suburb&#039;s architectural character of no matter to heritage? How can you, the CEO of Heritage Western Cape, take this excellent example of its style out of context and so dismissively relegate it to the rubble heap? And what of the Act that is supposed to protect buildings older than 60 years? Are we to assume that this holds no significance too? Where is your integrity?

I would welcome an exercise in public participation over this matter in which the public could convey to you what heritage means to them.

Yours,

Sandy Shepherd</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To: <a href="mailto:hwc@pgwc.gov.za">hwc@pgwc.gov.za</a><br />
Subject: Attn. Dr Townsend: A house of integrity</p>
<p>Dear Dr Townsend,</p>
<p>Take a house built in the mid-1930s, still standing today in a residential area. It has its original double columns and front stoep, teak windows with casement tops, balustrading and bay windows. It&#8217;s modest, but it&#8217;s of its time and it has integrity. The style of its exterior has not been altered for some 70 years. Most of all, it has an architectural character that fits its neighbourhood because there are a significant number of other houses like it. Yet this is a house that in your wisdom you have decided is &#8216;of no historical or cultural significance&#8217;. I am writing about 2 Vine Road, Upper Woodstock and you have approved a permit for it to be demolished.</p>
<p>Is this the fate we can expect for all other houses of this type around Cape Town, since by implication they too have no significance? Is a suburb&#8217;s architectural character of no matter to heritage? How can you, the CEO of Heritage Western Cape, take this excellent example of its style out of context and so dismissively relegate it to the rubble heap? And what of the Act that is supposed to protect buildings older than 60 years? Are we to assume that this holds no significance too? Where is your integrity?</p>
<p>I would welcome an exercise in public participation over this matter in which the public could convey to you what heritage means to them.</p>
<p>Yours,</p>
<p>Sandy Shepherd</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
