Cape Town – A David versus Goliath battle started in the
Western Cape High Court yesterday, as farmers
and activists challenged a 2011 provincial
government decision to rezone the urban
edge of prime agricultural land in the dwindling Philippi Horticultural Area (PHA) for
development.
After eight years of campaigning, the Philippi Horticultural Area Food and Farming Campaign yesterday went up against the City, the province and developers in court to fight for the protection and preservation of the fertile land in the heart of the Cape Flats.
They say developments on the land will threaten the livelihoods of emerging farmers and their workers, and place local food security, and the 630km² Cape Flats aquifer, in jeopardy.
The land in the PHA has been the subject of controversy in recent years, as those behind the campaign fought against the proposed U-Vest and Oaklands City developments.
The proposed 472.36 hectare Oakland City development includes plans for a private school, a prison, shopping malls and thousands of housing units.
The campaign charged in court yesterday that a 2011 decision by Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning MEC Anton Bredell to shift the urban edge of the land, essentially allowing for development, was where the rot started, and decisions following that decision were “fruit of the poisonous tree”.
The applicants are also seeking a declaratory order for protection of the full 3 000ha area of the PHA.
Outside court yesterday a number of farmworkers picketed in orange, emphasising that the PHA supplies Cape Town with
carrots and other vegetables.
They held up signs reading, “Wat moet ons nou eet, bakstene?”, (What must we now eat, bricks?), among others.
Advocate Murray Bridgeman, who is assisting the campaign pro bono, said Bredell’s decision was unlawful because he was only empowered to approve or reject an urban structure plan.
The campaign has also challenged research behind the decision, saying it did not consider the impact of development on the aquifer, which in itself was poorly understood.
Bridgeman said authorities should have adopted the “precautionary principle”.
“Parting with the land, for industrial development, would be an injustice to the sector and land reform objectives. The overflow of vegetables finds its way into the poorest of the poorest households; more food produced locally is for the benefit of the poor,” he said.
For the City, Ron Paschke SC said the land in question had not been used for farming and did not create jobs for the local community.
The Cape Town Spatial Development Framework of 2012 included Oakland’s land in the urban edge, designating it for urban development, he added.
Paschke charged that the campaign was against any development, and did not want jobs or houses.
He also cited research that farming was polluting the aquifer.
“The applicants don’t deal with what this development proposes, and the need for development in Cape Town, the need for dignified housing and jobs.
"That is something the City must consider. Expert reports on food security say that the problem of food security is not a shortage of food, but people not being able to afford to buy the food.
"In order for people to feed themselves, they need to have jobs. Jobs are created through development,” Paschke said.
Bredell’s spokesperson, James-Brent Styan, said the province had never wanted to “pave over” the PHA.
“The province can only consider applications for development in terms of the law, which it did, in this case in 2011. The province’s main goal is also to protect and look after the PHA farming area,” Styan said.
Mayco member for spatial planning and environment Marian Nieuwoudt said the City had taken careful consideration of the impact the proposed development might have on the aquifer and food security.
“We adopted a cautious approach, which requires the developer to submit a stormwater master plan and detailed stormwater plans for each precinct that will form part of the proposed development.”
The matter continues today.