Notes from the Aesthetics committee meeting held on 26 February 2018 at 9:00 in the Health Department.
The meeting venue was moved as there were other meetings in the Council Chamber and Mayoral Chamber.
- 1. Present: Cllr B Jackson (Chairman), Ms G Mfeti, Ms N Nkasela, Mr D Budaza, Mr T Lankester, Ms F Way-Jones
- Application for leave of absence:
Apologies: Mrs B Tudge, Prof H Nel (attendance only at 9:00), Cllr E Louw, Mrs G Meaton (Town Planning).
Absent: Mr M Roberts (SAHRA)
- No presentation from outside bodies, announcement or disclosure of interest.
- Confirmation of minutes. (5 June 2017)
Addition of T Lankester (apologies); correction of spelling: Mrs B Tudge, Ms F Way-Jones.
- Any matters deferred from the previous meetings: see additional items for agenda
- Reports by LED Director: none
- Action Sheet.
A.8.2 Inyama Rama additions were referred to ECPHRA
A.8.3 Noted: ECPHRA had not approved the office block at College of Transfiguration.
A.8.4 Splashy Press signage was approved;
A.8.5 BUCO signage was approved with 15% rule.
- Additional Item; Letter from Mr R van der Merwe, Town Planning re 38 Somerset Street (Erf 3739)
Ms Mfeti showed the committee the revised plans as the neighbour did not give permission to use the servitude.
The Chair noted the public concerns about the wall, Ms Way-Jones’ article regarding the dating of the wall and Ms Tudge’s comments. Ms Mfeti noted that the first plans had been passed and the building regulations for Business Zone 1 allowed building on the boundary line without the neighbour’s (no 137 High Street) permission. The chair noted that there were a number of local and national heritage laws had been broken including the NHRA of 1999 and that neither the first or revised plans had been submitted to the Aesthetics Committee for consideration and there had been no permission by ECPHRA to demolish the historic wall. The matter needs to be referred to LED and even Council.
Mr Lankester stated that the Festival leases space from the owners of the Gallery as a permanent gallery adjacent to the coffee shop. There would be a number of businesses included in the additions.
He futher requested exactly which bylaws and regulations had been broken and whether or not it was in the ambit of the Aesthetics Committee to regulate those.
- Agenda items:
A.8.2 Proposed demolition of building at 28 Beaufort Street (Ranchhod).
As no one had seen this building which was behind a double storey building on Beaufort Street, a site meeting was held after the main meeting. The small plastered outbuilding has no special features except an historic fanlight and a stone wall at the back. The decision was referred to ECPHRA but a note was to be added that if the demolition were approved, the stone wall was to be preserved.
A.8.3 Advertising on Rubbish Bins
The discussion was about the contract with the company that is advertising on grey noticeboards on lampposts along African, Somerset, High and Bathurst Streets. The rubbish bins advertising was in contravention of the contract. Mr Lankester questioned the “supply chain policy” in a town where enterprise needs to be encouraged. He also stated that these boards would affect the positioning of the Festival posters which were usually on lampposts. Ms Mfeti stated that this was a legal matter. Ms Way-Jones asked about the Estate Agent’s payment for street signs. Ms Mfeti stated that they paid once a year. Mr Lankester asked if this could be applied to the organisers of the bins and that they leased the space for the bins. This seemed possible according to the officials. The signage on the bins did comply with Municipal stipulations (Ms Mfeti).
As there were competing contracts, the Chair stated that this matter would be left for the legal department to sort out.
A.8.4 Alterations to the Existing building: Erf no 1575 no 25 Chapel Street, Grahamstown. (Business 1 Zone)
The Radford Report copy stating that the building was Category C and in a poor state in the 1990s.
Mr Behrens’s description stated the 2 double doors would be added to the Chapel Street wall (3 on the plans) and the building would be painted. However, Ms Mfeti noted that the building was painted orange. The Committee advised that the colour should be heritage colours – cream or off white walls with heritage green roof. The plans were approved subject to ECPHRA’s approval.
- Environmental Education Dept. wall collapsing: this item was noted.
- Checkers development: the plans for this development were not approved. Ms Tudge’s query about the electricity supply could not be answered.
- 38 Somerset street wall; this had been addressed under pt. 8 Additional item.
- Naran’s Building: Ms Mfeti said that she had spoken to Mr Naran who was waiting for his son as he did not have the money to repair the building. The Committee noted that there should be a policy about ruins.
- Constructive aspects:
Mr Lankester noted that the Old Gaol was being renovated and that SAHRA should be thanked for that. Ms Way-Jones stated that the builders said that the cells would not be painted as there was historic graffiti on the walls.
Civic Associations including the GRA and Makana Revive should be thanked for the clean-ups; it was appreciated. The Chairman suggested that the acting MM or the Mayor be asked to write these appreciations.
St Andrew’s should be thanked for the paving along Worcester Street;
The chairman added that the Milner Street residents had also cleaned verges etc.
- Buildings needing attention: The old Provost
Mr Lankester stated that the building needs a coat of paint. Also that posters should not be allowed on the Drostdy Arch. The officials would be writing to the Albany Museum about the state of the Provost and not allowing posters on the Drostdy Arch.
The meeting ended at 10:15.
Thereafter a site meeting was held at 28 Beaufort Street.