Concerns that social justice groups are stalling developments in Cape CBD

[quovadis]

No, it's only been falling in last ~1/2 years, and falling very slowly as most would rather just keep it on the market. I've only recently seen them starting to drop the price by ~5%. I've been keeping up on R5m+ properties in Camps Bay, Clifton and there at the top of Gardens.

Also been looking at Plattekloof (so R2.5-5m), most of that's just staying "stable", with it just not increasing with inflation in the last year or two, otherwise most areas kept increasing a little.

Most of the developments inner city are all apartment stuff, and that's been sitting halfway empty, been fun seeing the cement shortcuts in e.g. the ones in Sea Point and seeing them have to take a sledgehammer to sections and recast it. Those two brothers that run those developments were talking a lot of shortcuts, think they're in money issues now, haven't been keeping up on that.

The pricing isn't an indication of churn - there's not alot of movement in general on the luxury segment sales if I'm not mistaken.

 

[TrueSeeker]

Why is a social justice group, primarily concerned with spatial integration, holding up a development on a technical point that the developers did not pay enough?
Can somebody please explain this to me? From my perspective if the city saw fit to sell the land at a discount to encourage a rather large development that can enhance the city economy, then it is the city's prerogative. Surely?

 

[Grant]

Why is a social justice group, primarily concerned with spatial integration, holding up a development on a technical point that the developers did not pay enough?
Can somebody please explain this to me? From my perspective if the city saw fit to sell the land at a discount to encourage a rather large development that can enhance the city economy, then it is the city's prerogative. Surely?

R140m is a rather generous discount.
for example - we complain about the condition of state hospitals, now consider the benefit of that R140m injected into one hospital.
or a number of rdp houses could have been built.
a school could have been built
or even a well deserved upgrade to the chicken coop at nkandla

 

[TrueSeeker]

R140m is a rather generous discount.
for example - we complain about the condition of state hospitals, now consider the benefit of that R140m injected into one hospital.
or a number of rdp houses could have been built.
a school could have been built
or even a well deserved upgrade to the chicken coop at nkandla

Yes, but in the long run something like this development can provide handsome returns for the city. Rates, taxes, services, and in general more economic activity. Far exceeding that figure. Which is the clever way to go about things.
My question is not why they would give a discount - That is obvious to me. My question is why these groups are using it as an argument. This much additional housing could seriously alleviate pressure on the housing market which in CT has been running a bit hot for quite some time now. Mitigation of which should be in line with their objectives - More opportunities for affordable housing in CT.

I mean I'm not a fan of all the Neo-Liberal tricklenomics BS, but this is just pure economic stimulation. It is still a valid, and desirable, goal even though the concept has been sullied to some extent through extremist approaches.

 

[noxibox]

I don't see a problem with challenging developments. Of course the developers and their lobby groups would like to have free reign to do as they please. And naturally they are going to whine about it when they don't get it. Progress and development is important, but that doesn't mean that business should be able to do whatever they like.

This is not necessarily Growthpoint’s fault, and instead reflects on the City of Cape Town’s failure to accurately value and advertise the property.

I'm inclined to think Growthpoint was well aware that the city had made a mistake.

Aaaw, social housing next to multi million rand apartments, always the right idea. Lets all be for it and not make money

Yes, it is a good idea to have mixed housing.

Yes, but in the long run something like this development can provide handsome returns for the city. Rates, taxes, services, and in general more economic activity. Far exceeding that figure. Which is the clever way to go about things.
My question is not why they would give a discount - That is obvious to me. My question is why these groups are using it as an argument. This much additional housing could seriously alleviate pressure on the housing market which in CT has been running a bit hot for quite some time now. Mitigation of which should be in line with their objectives - More opportunities for affordable housing in CT.

I mean I'm not a fan of all the Neo-Liberal tricklenomics BS, but this is just pure economic stimulation. It is still a valid, and desirable, goal even though the concept has been sullied to some extent through extremist approaches.

It might spread the payment of rates onto a handful of additional people, but won't increase the total rates the city receives. What extra taxes is the city going to receive? Maybe they'll get some extra money from services.

The affordable housing has to be closer to where people work. Has the cost of properties in and near the CBD dropped at all as more flats have been built? How much housing in or near the CBD is affordable to buy for a middle class couple with two children?

Why is the city even selling any land? Use long term leases like Hong Kong always did.

Neo-liberal/classical economics is fundamentally anti-free market.

 

[saturnz]

Neo-liberal/classical economics is fundamentally anti-free market.

glad someone else said this

 

[Nanfeishen]

It might spread the payment of rates onto a handful of additional people, but won't increase the total rates the city receives. What extra taxes is the city going to receive? Maybe they'll get some extra money from services.

It will have a knock-on effect on the surrounding zones , putting additional pressure on long term residents and raising their rates.
Happening in Woodstock and surrounds, with every new development of fancy apartments and houses in the upper area, it is forcing long term residents in the lower part out due to rates increases.

Its all well and good to have developments in and around the inner city, however it is high time those developments were geared toward addressing actual affordable housing rather than a few apartments for the elite.

 

[rietrot]

Why does anyone take the social justice groups seriously? Why stop a development for them.

If I walk up to a growth point development and ask them to stop are they going to listen? Do they do this for everyone?

 

[Nanfeishen]

Why does anyone take the social justice groups seriously? Why stop a development for them.

If I walk up to a growth point development and ask them to stop are they going to listen? Do they do this for everyone?

Bad press has a habit of exposing that which people would rather hide, cut backs, under hand deals, who sits on what board, who pays who for favours etc etc.
Being S.A. with corruption in the news on a daily basis, even a hint of it can affect outside or foreign investment.
Nobody nowadays is squeaky clean.

 

[rietrot]

Bad press has a habit of exposing that which people would rather hide, cut backs, under hand deals, who sits on what board, who pays who for favours etc etc.
Being S.A. with corruption in the news on a daily basis, even a hint of it can affect outside or foreign investment.
Nobody nowadays is squeaky clean.

If they already started building all the plans(legalities) would have been in place. Why stop if some SJWs are making a noise.