CANAL DISTRICT PRECINCT PLAN

Supplementary Information to the Heritage Indicators Report Case Number: 17062901AS0627E

27TH NOVEMBER 2017 CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND 3

2. EVOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT OF THE V&A WATERFRONT 4 2.1. National and Local Authority Policy Context 4 2.2. Development Context 5

3. THE V&A WATERFRONT’S SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS AND INVESTMENTS 6 3.1. V&A Waterfront Ownership and Investment Context 6 3.2. Socio- Economic Value 6

4. V&A WATERFRONT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS 8 4.1. The Package of Plans Approach 8 4.2. The Evolution of the Precinct Plan and Boundaries 10 4.3. Approved Precinct Plan 10

5. V&A WATERFRONT BUILT FORM AND DEVELOPMENT CHARACTER 12 5.1. Urban Grain and Building Typologies 12 5.2. Investments in the Public Realm, Heritage and Cultural Resources and the Public Realm 14

6. CURRENT CHARACTER AND QUALITIES OF PRECINCT 16 6.1. Character and History of Gateway Precinct (Canal District) 16 6.2. Existing Grain and Massing 16 6.3. State of Precinct Heritage Resources 18 6.4. Streets and Public Realm 20

7. HERITAGE INDICATORS & PRECINCT PLAN RESPONSES 22 7.1. The Amsterdam Battery remnants and axis 23 7.2. Views of from Battery Park and Battery remnants 24 7.3. The Original Coastline 25 7.4. View of the Synchro-lift and Silo Elevator Building from Dock Road and Transit Plaza 26 7.5. Views of the harbour from Signal Hill over the Canal District 27 7.6. The historic Queens Hotel and Dock Road remnants 28 7.7. The Waterfront Theatre School 29 7.8. Visual indication of the battery from Dock Road & the Canal 30 7.9. Harbour Views Down Buitengracht Street 31

8. VIA RECOMMENDATIONS 32

9. CONCLUSIONS 34

2 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The Central City As A Key Investment Node In The Ct Sdf 7 Figure 2. Amsterdam Battery Connected To The Wider Network Of Heritage And Cultural Landmarks 7 Figure 3. Canal And Granger Bay Transit Plazas And Public Transport Network 9 Figure 4. The V&A Waterfront As A Regional Destination (2015) 9 Figure 5. Package Of Plans 10 Figure 6. V&A Development Framework 1991 11 Figure 7. V&A Character Districts 11 Figure 8. Gateway Precinct 1991 13 Figure 9. Gateway Precinct 1992 13 Figure 10. Gateway Precinct 1994 Amendment 13 Figure 11. Roggebaai Canal Precinct 13 Figure 12. Ferrymans: Fine Grain - Single Storey 14 Figure 13. Harbour Cafe: Victorian Pavilions 14 Figure 14. Portswood: Low Rise Medium Grain - 3-4 Storey 14 Figure 17. Gradation Of Grain And Scale From V&Aw Core 15 Figure 15. Boe/Silo District: Large Footprint, Taller Buildings 15 Figure 16. Hotel: Large Footprint, Taller Buildings 15 Figure 18. Heritage Resources Enhanced And Protected By The V&Aw 16 Figure 19. Canal District Transit Plaza 17 Figure 20. Silo District 17 Figure 21. The Canal District Within Its Context 18 Figure 22. The Existing Building Footprints Of The Canal District 18 Figure 23. Heritage Resources Within The Canal District 20 Figure 24. Existing Public Realm 22 Figure 25. Built Form - Edge Conditions And Height 22 Figure 26. Heritage Informants 24 Figure 27. The Amsterdam Battery Remnants And Axis 25 Figure 29. Proposed Battery Park (Dhk And Planning Partners) 25 Figure 28. Yacht Club Building Obstructing Visual Axis From Battery Park 25 Figure 30. View Axis From Signal Hill 26 Figure 31. Massing Stepped To Retain View To Signal Hill From Battery Park 26 Figure 32. Signal Hill From Dock Road And Trough Waterway House 26 Figure 33. The Original Coastline 27 Figure 34. Landscape Upgrades Erf 9588 (Ovp) 27 Figure 35. Canal Pedestrian Upgrades (Ovp) 27 Figure 36. Canal Pedestrian Upgrades (Ovp) 27 Figure 37. Canal Pedestrian Upgrades (Ovp) 27 Figure 38. View Of The Synchro-Lift And Silo Elevator Building From Dock Road And Transit Plaza 28

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 3 Figure 40. View Of Synchro-Lift And Silo From The Transit Plaza 28 Figure 39. Current View Of The Synchro-Lift And Silo Elevator Building From Dock Road 28 Figure 41. View Of The Harbour From Signal Hill Over The Canal District 29 Figure 42. Section Illustrating Visual Connection From Signal Hill To The Harbour Maintained 29 Figure 43. View Over The Canal District From Signal Hill 29 Figure 44. The Historic Queens Hotel And Dock Road Remnants 30 Figure 45. Queens Hotel Restoration And Re-Purposing 30 Figure 46. Section Through Alfred Street 30 Figure 47. View Across Landscaped Space To Queens Hotel And Old Dock Road 30 Figure 48. The Waterfront Theatre School 31 Figure 50. View Of The New Shared Forecourt Between The Theatre And Development Parcel I 31 Figure 49. The Waterfront Theatre School Precinct Plan Response 31 Figure 51. View Of The Battery Remnants From Dock Road & The Canal 32 Figure 52. View Across Landscaped Space To Queens Hotel And Old Dock Road 32 Figure 53. View Across Landscaped Space To Queens Hotel And Old Dock Road 32 Figure 54. Harbour Views Down Buitengracht Street 33 Figure 57. View Corridor Maintained - Canal District Development From Buitengracht Pedestrian Bridge 33 Figure 55. Existing View From Waterkant Street Pedestrian Bridge 33 Figure 56. Development Proposal For Erf 9588 As Per 2016 R.O.D. From H.W.C. 33 Figure 58. View Of The Precinct With In The Background 35 Figure 59. View Along Buitengracht Street Towards The Precinct And The Harbour 35 Figure 60. View Of The Precinct From Signal Hill 35 Figure 61. Enhanced Public Realm In The City And Waterfront : Battery Park And Canal, Plaza & Walkways 36 Figure 62. Canal District Precinct Plan (November 2017) 37

4 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 1. PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND

In September 2017 a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) of the V&AW Canal District (formerly Gateway) Precinct Plan was submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC). Following the assessment of the HIA at the Impact Assessment Committee (IACOM) on 11 October, an Interim Comment from HWC was issued on 1 November 2017. This supplementary report is a response to the Interim Comment. The report addresses the following: The evolution of the development context over the last 25 years and the Victoria & Alfred Waterfront’s response; The background to the V&AW’s planning and development parameters; The built form and character of the V&AW; V&AW socio-economic impacts and investments; Character and built form qualities of the precinct; Heritage Indicators and Precinct Plan Responses; Visual Impact Assessment Findings; Conclusions.

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 5 2. EVOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT OF THE V&A WATERFRONT

2.1. National and Local Authority Policy Context

Since commencement of development in the V&A in 1990, national planning legislation has been rd nd rnd o nr ddr rd urn gro unou rong country’s natural and heritage resources. Legislation such as SPLUMA, NEMA and NHRA (National Heritage Resources Act) have been enacted to achieve these objectives and have informed the City of ’s planning and development policies and by-laws. In 2017 the Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) is the overarching policy guide for cities. The IUDF aims are to unlock the development synergy that comes from coordinated investments in people and places to achieve more inclusive, resilient and liveable cities and towns. The IUDF highlights the unique conditions and challenges facing ’s cities and towns, including the drastic reduction in government funding and the need to work with the private sector to achieve spatial transformation. It provides a new approach to urban investment by the developmental state, which in turn guides the private sector and households. The IUDF is framed around four overall strategic objectives that are being embedded at the national level into departmental and sector policies and budgeting processes. These are: • Access: To ensure people have access to social and economic services, opportunities and choices; • Growth: To harness urban dynamism for inclusive, sustainable economic growth and development; • Governance: To enhance the capacity of the state and its citizens to work together to achieve social integration; • Spatial transformation: To forge new spatial forms in settlement, transport, social and economic areas. At the level of the , the SDF, Integrated Transport Plan and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Framework all have a bearing on how development in the V&A Waterfront should be managed. “The City is intent on building a more inclusive, integrated and vibrant city that addresses g o rd r ng n n druon o drn o residential development, and avoids the creation of new structural imbalances in the delivery of services. It regards transport as a key driver for addressing Cape Town’s spatial reality and is aiming to achieve a spatial transformation through transit-oriented development (TOD) and od dnon ) n ror oror r ro n n o r congestion in the CBD while simultaneously redressing spatial inequalities of metropolitan development over the past half century. Integral to the project is the provision of affordable housing and development of City-owned land in the Foreshore precinct and Green Point area. Integral to the project is the maximization of funds to be made available by the private sector via the development of these sites. This project acknowledges that development in the City will not be able to sustain mobility via motor vehicles and that more people will need to live and work in the central city. At the local level the Table Bay District Plan, the Canal District is located within the “mixed-use nnon on o don rood n rn n no consideration in terms of mix of use, density and height.

6 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 2.2. Development Context

Over the past 27 years the context of the V&A Waterfront, and even more so, the Gateway rn no n r) ngd un drd rdn dnon nd conversion has taken place in the CBD, and Green Point. The combined urban management efforts of the City’s CCID and the V&A Waterfront have seen the central city transform into a the most vibrant, pedestrian and transit friendly of all SA cities. This has come hand in hand with increasing scale and densities in the surroundings areas of the CBD, De Waterkant, CBD, Green Point as the central city becomes a place to live-work and play. Challenges of inclusivity remain and it is acknowledged that in addition to improved access by public transport, and greater walkability, more affordable spaces (to live and work) are needed in the central city. As these contexts have evolved, the V&A Waterfront has invested in improving public transport and pedestrian connections into the CBD, Green Point and Mouillie Point.

The PRINCIPLES informing the implementation of TOD Affordability - reduce the cost of public transport for Commuters and the City; Accessibility - facilitate equal access to social and economic activity; n rdu r ng and dependence on private vehicles; nnon non - manage the desired form, composition and location of urban development conducive to affordable, accessible and n u rnor FIGURE 1. THE CENTRAL CITY AS A KEY INVESTMENT NODE IN THE CT SDF

FIGURE 2. AMSTERDAM BATTERY CONNECTED TO THE WIDER PHOTOGRAPH 1. V&A WATERFRONT BROADER CONTEXT NETWORK OF HERITAGE AND CULTURAL LANDMARKS Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 7 3. THE V&A WATERFRONT’S SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS AND INVESTMENTS

3.1. V&A Waterfront Ownership and Investment Context

Initial development of the V&A Waterfront was funded by the parastatal Transnet and later the rnn non und r rn o undng o gn dro o n entity unfamiliar with commercial development, during an economic recession and at a time of extreme political uncertainty in the country. Once management proved that development in the Waterfront was a worthwhile investment, further funding became available and spurned consumer and investment interest in the V&AW. In 2006, the property was sold to a consortium of Dubai World and London & Regional Property as a means for raising capital for Transnet. Development from 2006 to 2011 was constrained by the owners’ investment model which limited the injection of additional capital into the project. In 2011, the property was purchased by Growthpoint Properties and the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF), represented by the Public Investment Corporation Limited (PIC). While onr o ondr nn rour u nod undng or projects is in competition with many other properties in South Africa and globally, which may be developed with fewer regulatory and environmental constraints than the V&AW. In addition, all ro r u o rgorou nn run r nu nn rr r d u don n n r rur rudn nd n u o ng development rights in the Waterfront. rron onnu o gnn nn n u u rnor and cultural amenities. The creation of the Canal Transit Plaza is part of this broader investment in MyCiti infrastructure and park and ride facilities, services and incentives to tenants.

3.2. Socio- Economic Value

The NHRA, Section 38(3) (d) reads; ‘The following must be included: an evaluation of the impact of the development on heritage resources relative to the sustainable social and economic benefits to be derived from the development’. n on rron gnn r n gon nd National economy. The V&A Waterfront currently accommodates: 180 business tenants; 624 sectional title apartments + 259 Mid-range apartments; 13 hotels comprising 1800 rooms; Over 450 shops; and 101 Entertainment activities with residents and visitors spending an average of 4hrs per visit. In 2016 the V&A Waterfront contributed R39 billion to the national economy and R34 billion to the Western Cape GDP. The number of jobs created are: 21,790 direct jobs; and 17,516 indirect jobs. ong rnd ru orng rour rr gurdng rr ng the dry dock, tugs and so on.

8 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report Figure 3. CANAL AND GRANGER BAY TRANSIT PLAZAS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK

Figure 4. THE V&A WATERFRONT AS A REGIONAL DESTINATION (2015)

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 9 4. V&A WATERFRONT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS 4.1. The Package of Plans Approach

The Canal District Precinct Plan has been prepared in terms of the V&A Waterfront Development Framework and according to the Package of Plans process for local authority assessment of development proposals in the V&A Waterfront. The development rights (bulk of 613 859 m2) development controls and planning approval process , contained in the unique zoning for the rron on on r on u or rordd in the Municipal Planning Bylaw 2015. This zoning allows for the preparation of a hierarchy of plans nrng o nnng nd don rogr ro onu level to the scale of individual building plans. The initial allocation of bulk per precinct is indicated in the table below. However, as development has progressed from conceptualisation to implementation the allocation of bulk per precinct has ngd on on o or fl gnr druon o u nd nd u u rod oun o rn nnng nd oon of bulk to sites is dealt with in an SDP. This process of clarifying use and physical distribution of bulk as development moves from the general to the particular is consistent with the Package of Plans approach to planning. This approach to development was considered appropriate to a large site, charecterised by a range of land uses and operations, such as ship repair and residential units, to be developed over an extended period of time. ndd on o or n o on ror o o or fl or o ood ngng r dnd n o on Development Framework and Policies is ensured in the zoning of the Waterfront where “the spatial distribution throughout the Property of the development uses …. shall be approved by the un

CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK Broad land use policy for the development and the surrounding area no onfl n

DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK Broad policy,goals and principles Infrastructure requirements Development principles and guidelines Any limits within the development including but not Range of uses in precincts d o dn nd floor General spatial distribution and extent of uses no onfl onu ror Transport and pedestrian linkages

PRECINCT PLAN o r n don Transport and pedestrian linkages framework Floor Space and environmental management Development objectives and intentions no onfl on ror Urban form Land use

SITE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK Depict detail design and development provisions Show detailed provisions relating to the position or n rn and appearance of buildings, open space, o dd roon nd u floor drn n nd r on space,building lines, height, parking, site no onfl rn n circulation, landscaping etc.

BUILDING PLAN d on rurd n on Ensure compliance with Development Levy Building Regulations requirements Ensure compliance with all other aspects of Site Approval authorises construction of buildings to Development Plans and all other conditions of commence approval (includes EIA and HIA) no onfl on n

FIGURE 5. PACKAGE OF PLANS

10 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report As with all Precinct Plans and SDP’s and amendments thereto, the allocation of bulk to a precinct and consequent built form must have due regard for inter alia, heritage informants, public drn on nd ur r nd on nd development policies. The submission of this precinct plan to Heritage Western Cape is the commencement of the precinct plan approval process.

1. Pierhead 2. Granger Bay 3. Breakwater 4. New Basin 5. Upper Basin 6. Outer Basin 7. Gateway 8. Clocktower

Existing Waterfront & Precinct Plans Precinct Summary

FIGURE 6. V&A DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 1991 CHARACTER bulk register may 2012 1 PIERHEAD PRECINCT DISTRICTS/ land area: 107,965 sqm REBRANDING: approved bulk: 603,859 sqm approved bulk: 76,898 sqm developed bulk: 403,953 sqm developed bulk: 67,398 sqm 1. Pierhead total available: 199,906 sqm total available: 9,500 sqm 10 2. Granger Bay 3. Breakwater 2 2 GRANGER BAY 3 BREAKWATER PRECINCT 3 4. New Basin area: ca 73,830 sqm area: 94,388 sqm 1 5. Upper Basin 6 approved bulk: 72,000 sqm approved bulk: 56,687 sqm 6. Outer Basin developed bulk: 0 sqm developed bulk: 45,633 sqm 7. CANAL DISTRICT total available: 72,000 sqm total available: 11,054 sqm 11 8. SILO DISTRICT

4 NEW BASIN PRECINCT 5 UPPER BASIN PRECINCT area: 59,457 sqm area: 77,597 sqm 9 approved bulk: 53,643 sqm approved bulk: 60,251 sqm 8 developed bulk: 42,744 sqm developed bulk: 60,251 sqm total available: 10,899 sqm total available: - sqm 4

5 6 OUTER BASIN PRECINCT 7 GATEWAY PRECINCT area: ca 10,090 sqm area: 79,421 sqm approved bulk: 800 sqm approved bulk: 61,266 sqm developed bulk: 0 sqm developed bulk: 29,483 sqm total available: 800 sqm total available: 31,783 sqm 7

8 CLOCKTOWER PRECINCT 9 PORTSWOOD PRECINCT area: 68,237 sqm area: 84,946 sqm approved bulk: 110,00 sqm approved bulk: 57,814 sqm FIGURE 7. V&A CHARACTER DISTRICTS developed bulk: 55,831 sqm developed bulk: 48,113 sqm Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 total available: 54,169 sqm total available: 9,701 sqm 11

current v&a precinct outlines 10 EAST PIER PRECINCT 11 SOUTH ARM PRECINCT area: ca 28,585 sqm land area: ca 65,122 sqm approved bulk: 21,339 sqm approved bulk: 33,161 sqm developed bulk: 21,339 sqm developed bulk: 33,161 sqm total available: - sqm total available: - sqm

12 Development Vision V&A Waterfront | Existing Waterfront Precinct Plans Victoria & Alfred Waterfront Cape Town 4.2. The Evolution of the Precinct Plan and Boundaries

Planning for Canal District (Gateway) Precinct commenced at a stage when the notion of a canal linkage with the city was on an alignment past the current Cullinan Hotel. Intially, the precinct on the eastern side of Dock Road , called Gateway Precinct, extended into the harbour area , as this was thought to be redundant to the harbour’s needs. The area then became the Roggebaai Canal Precinct with its hotels and residential units In 1991/1992, there was a proposal for a hotel at the entrance to the Waterfront and hence, in terms of the Package of Plans, a Precinct Plan was required prior to a Site Development Plan which would ultimately enable the submission of building plans. The 1992 Gateway Precinct Plan therefore comprised detail for the hotel site, but little detail for the balance of the precinct, save for the existing buildings and Missions to Seamen building. Later, a proposal for the Caltex Filling Station was mooted and hence the 1993 Amendment to permit don n o od nd or n r urr ron to enable development of a large building for Auto Atlantic, now the site for Audi Motor Cars (Figure 10). The amendments and revisions to the Precinct Plan demonstrate that the Package of Plans allows or fl r rg u rron o dod or ong rod of time. In assessing and endorsing precinct plan amendments over the years, the authorities have taken cognisance of the overall basket of rights and the need to allocate bulk and uses gogr don roo rnor ro gnr o Precinct Plan approvals for Gateway Precinct have been as follows: 1. u o ro or o nd rdn don 2. 1993 -03- 03 bulk of 46 000m2 plus bulk of 3 000m2 from erf 9588 and 10 000m2 from KIC (now Waterfront studios) site; 3. 1994- 04- 21 no additional bulk allocated; additional land area for Audi site.

4.3. Approved Precinct Plan

gnn ur o rn n gur ) nd uun ndn canal and the scale and shape of this proposed water body. Another major feature was a route for Light Rail Transit.in the median of Dock Road. Today, development around the canal has been establised but the footprint and alignment (it now extends to Roggebaai Precinct and not across erf 9588) have changed. Similarly, the LRT route has been replaced by the City’s public transport system, the Integrated Rapid Transit (IRT) system. Apart from a more explicit acknowledgement of the form and siginifance of the Amsterdam Battery, planning objectives for the precinct have remained largely unchanged since 1992, namely: To provide pedestrian routes that integrate the Waterfront and the City, To provide a sense of arrival at the Waterfront by providing visual and physical connections with the water, To provide a continuous pedestrian route along the canal between the City and the Waterfront, and To provide a resident population within the precinct.

12 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report Figure 8. GATEWAY PRECINCT 1991 Figure 11. ROGGEBAAI CANAL PRECINCT

Figure 9. GATEWAY PRECINCT 1992

Figure 10. GATEWAY PRECINCT 1994 AMENDMENT Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 13 5. V&A WATERFRONT BUILT FORM AND DEVELOPMENT CHARACTER

5.1. Urban Grain and Building Typologies

rron d u o n rd rr r drn or ur nd udng oog n gnr r r grduon ro n grnd low rise core outwards to precincts featuring larger scaled buildings and a coarser grain. These rr on u nd rngr ) or undnd dn nd are more strongly connected with the surrounding neighborhoods such as the CBD, Moulle Point, Green Point and De Waterkant. As the context changes and development unfolds under the package of plans process. It makes n o dr u o rr r r nd rg on n grnd historic core can be best mitigated.

GRAIN AND SCALE Ferrymans Portswood

FIGURE 12. FERRYMANS: FINE GRAIN - SINGLE STOREY FIGURE 14. PORTSWOOD: LOW RISE MEDIUM GRAIN - 3-4 STOREY TYPOLOGIES Harbour Cafe East Quay / Victoria & Alfred

FIGURE 13. HARBOUR CAFE: VICTORIAN PAVILIONS PHOTOGRAPH 2. EAST QUAY: LINEAR SHEDS

14 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report FIGURE 17. GRADATION OF GRAIN AND SCALE FROM V&AW CORE BOE/ Silo Table Bay Hotel

FIGURE 15. BOE/SILO DISTRICT: LARGE FOOTPRINT, TALLER BUILDINGS FIGURE 16. TABLE BAY HOTEL: LARGE FOOTPRINT, TALLER BUILDINGS

GSB Port Captain & Silo

PHOTOGRAPH 3. GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: PERIMETER PHOTOGRAPH 4. : PORT CAPTAIN BUILDING AND THE GRAIN BLOCK SILO’S: TOWER TYPOLOGY

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 15 5.2. Investments in the Public Realm, Heritage and Cultural Resources and the Public Realm

Substantial investment has been made by the V&AW into public space and landscaping by within the Canal District. This includes the new battery park (OVP & Planning Partners), the canal walkway and links upgrading, the development of the Canal Transit Plaza and Dock Road Junction. These are public amenities open to all visitors and residents and will dramatically improve the experience of heritage resources such as the Amsterdam Battery, Synchrolift (essential part of the harbour character), Queens Hotel and Silo Complex. The V&AW has od gnn undng o nd rour 1. on r r rg nnng nd rng rnn nd gnn o Amsterdam Battery. 2. on n nd ro o rg r r rong n ron o nro 3. R70 m on Queens Hotel , Amway building, Old Dock Road and landscaping of open spaces & pedestrian walkways. 4. on ddon drn n n n r rong onn o rd Battery Park.

FIGURE 18. HERITAGE RESOURCES ENHANCED AND PROTECTED BY THE V&A WATERFRONT

16 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report west quay road south afrm road

WEST QUAY

tuk tuk stop and drop

DEVELOPMENT stop tour bus PARCEL N stop (tour bus parking dock road on ground floor)

myciti stop

DEVELOPMENT PARCEL’S D & E

DEVELOPMENT V&A Canal District: WATERWAY PARCEL M2 Transport Plaza HOUSE Concept Sketch 27th July 2017

FIGURE 19. CANAL DISTRICT TRANSIT PLAZA

FIGURE 20. SILO DISTRICT PHOTOGRAPH 5. ROGGEBAAI CANAL

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 17 6. CURRENT CHARACTER AND QUALITIES OF PRECINCT

6.1. Character and History of Gateway Precinct (Canal District)

The Gateway/ Canal District has never been a harbour character precinct, nor does it have a harbour interface. The Canal was introduced as a device to recall the old coast line and offers a water’s edge experience as well as pedestrian connections between the CTICC, Roggebaai Canal and the heart of the V&A Waterfront. The landscaping upgrades currently underway are improving the pedestrian connectivity of these routes with new linkages, better connections under bridges and so on.

6.2. Existing Grain and Massing

rn ong n orgon on ndond n Waterfront and the Central City. Its built form is characterised by: Large footprints, course grained shed structures; Low coverage 35% (comparison - between existing precinct coverage and more urban - compare with CBD / other global waterfront); Low rise buildings in relation to the Scale and Width of Dock Road/ Dock Circle; rg n o undnd on o r udng rod no nour or dnon n onr n grnd n rron r nd urroundng nd Waterkant.

FIGURE 22. THE EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINTS OF THE FIGURE 21. THE CANAL DISTRICT WITHIN ITS CONTEXT CANAL DISTRICT

18 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report Photograph 10. EXISTING QUALITY OF THE BATTERY PARK Photograph 11. WATERWAY HOUSE

Photograph 8. CALTEX BUILDING Photograph 9. NEGATIVE EDGE OF THE AUDI BUILDING

Photograph 7. THE EXISTING CAR PARKING OVER THE OLD Photograph 6. ELECTRICITY SUBSTATION - NEGATIVE AND BATTERY WITH THE FILM STUDIO’S IN THE BACKGROUND IMPOSING

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 19 6.3. State of Precinct Heritage Resources

The Canal District includes a number of heritage resources including the Theatre School Building, Queens Hotel, the Amsterdam Battery, Synchrolift and historical costal edge. As previously stated the precinct has been neglected over time including these heritage resources. The Amsterdam Battery was used as a car park and sports facility while the remaining walls were left to crumble (Photograph 12 - Photograph 15). The aim of the proposed precinct plan for the Canal District is to create positive environments around these important resources, to celebrate, enhance and protect them.

FIGURE 23. HERITAGE RESOURCES WITHIN THE CANAL DISTRICT

20 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report AMSTERDAM BATTERY Analysis of remaining fabric, photographic survey and recommended reconstruction November 2012

PHOTOGRAPH 12. HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPH OF THE AMSTERDAM PHOTOGRAPH 13. REMNANTS OF THE BATTERY WALL BATTERY

by

Tim Hart

urban design & landscape architecture

AMSTERDAM BATTERY, OCTOBER 2012 1

PHOTOGRAPH 14. THE EXISTING CAR PARK LOCATED ON THE SITE PHOTOGRAPH 15. SOCCER FIELDS LOCATED ON THE SITE OF THE OF THE HISTORIC BATTERY HISTORIC BATTERY

PHOTOGRAPH 16. THE THEATRE SCHOOL BUILDING PHOTOGRAPH 17. QUEENS HOTEL

PHOTOGRAPH 18. THE SYNCHRO LIFT IN THE FOREGROUND WITH PHOTOGRAPH 19. IMAGE SHOWING A BOAT BEING REPAIRED AT A VIEW OF LION’S HEAD THE SYNCHRO LIFT Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 21 6.4. Streets and Public Realm

The existing streets and public domain of the Canal District are car dominated and unfriendly to pedestrians. The facades of buildings are blank and negative with large underutilised and undnd on oogr nd oogr ) r r o public spaces and access to the canal side is limited (Photograph 26). Private hotels and residences along the canal further limit access to this public amenity.

FIGURE 24. EXISTING PUBLIC REALM FIGURE 25. BUILT FORM - EDGE CONDITIONS AND HEIGHT

PHOTOGRAPH 20. CANAL INTERFACE PHOTOGRAPH 21. WALKWAY ALONG THE CANAL EDGE

22 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report Photograph 26. PRIVATISED CANAL EDGE IN FRONT OF THE CITY Photograph 22. VIEW FROM THE OLD BATTERY TOWARDS THE CITY LODGE

Photograph 23. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENT ALONG PORT ROAD Photograph 27. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENT ALONG PORT ROAD

Photograph 24. DOCK ROAD AND DOCK ROAD CIRCLE Photograph 28. VIEW ACROSS ERF 9588 TOWARDS BUITENGRACHT STREET

Photograph 25. VIEW TOWARDS THE DOCK ROAD / Photograph 29. DOCK ROAD CIRCLE BUITENGRACHT STREET INTERSECTION Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 23 7. HERITAGE INDICATORS & PRECINCT PLAN RESPONSES

SILO

The heritage informants that 1. The Amsterdam Battery have been taken into account in remnants and axis. the urban design framework are 2. Views of Signal Hill from the illustrated in Figure 26. Battery Park 3. The original coastline 4. View of the Silo Elevator building and Synchro-lift from Dock Road & plaza 5. Views of the harbour from Signal Hill over the Canal SYNCHRO-LIFT District 6. The historic Queens Hotel and Dock Road remnants 7. The Waterfront Theatre School 8. Visual indication of the Battery from Dock Road & the canal 9. Historic view down Buitengraght Street 4

5 HARBOUR

4

1

2 8

3 7 6

9

FIGURE 26. HERITAGE INFORMANTS 24 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 7.1. The Amsterdam Battery remnants and axis

Heritage Indicator 1 The remnant of the remaining fragment of the Amsterdam Battery must be retained and an appropriate means developed for its incorporation and interpretation in any new development. The Central Battery Axis must be retained. Precinct Plan response: The Battery remnants are being save guarded and restored in the new Battery Park; The precinct plan has been amend to better remember the original extent of the battery by creating a generous battery park. Development parcels are set back from the Battery extent; Development is set back from the Battery axis. Development height at parcel M in line with the Battery axis has been reduced to 10m to respect the axis and maintain the corridor. HARBOUR

FIGURE 28. YACHT CLUB BUILDING OBSTRUCTING VISUAL FIGURE 27. THE AMSTERDAM BATTERY REMNANTS AND AXIS AXIS FROM BATTERY PARK

FIGURE 29. PROPOSED BATTERY PARK (DHK AND PLANNING PARTNERS) Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 25 7.2. Views of Signal Hill from Battery Park and Battery remnants

Heritage Indicator 2 The view to signal hill from the Battery Park, over the Battery remnants is of historical significance and must be safeguarded. Precinct plan response: • Development not allowed along Battery Park Access; • Development of Parcel I and H is set back 5m to a height of 10m to increase the view to Signal Hill from the park; • The view to signal Hill is not negatively effected by the proposed Canal District development.

Figure 30. VIEW AXIS FROM SIGNAL HILL Figure 32. SIGNAL HILL FROM DOCK ROAD AND TROUGH WATERWAY HOUSE

Figure 31. MASSING STEPPED TO RETAIN VIEW TO SIGNAL HILL FROM BATTERY PARK 26 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 7.3. The Original Coastline

Heritage Indicator 3 The original coast line runs roughly along Dock Road. This should be linked to the Battery to form part of a public open space system with a clear linkage to the canal which marks the original coastline. Precinct plan response: n r orgn coastline; Old Dock Road restored and enhanced as pedestrian route and part of landscape upgrades to forecourt space on Erf 9588.

FIGURE 33. THE ORIGINAL COASTLINE FIGURE 35. CANAL PEDESTRIAN UPGRADES (OVP)

FIGURE 36. CANAL PEDESTRIAN UPGRADES (OVP)

FIGURE 37. CANAL PEDESTRIAN FIGURE 34. LANDSCAPE UPGRADES ERF 9588 (OVP) UPGRADES (OVP) Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 27 7.4. View of the Synchro-lift and Silo Elevator Building from Dock Road and Transit Plaza

Heritage Indicator 4 The heritage indicators stressed the need to retain views from the canal district and along Dock Road. Important views to be retained include the view of the Grain Elevator and Silos and the Syncro-lift. Precinct plan response: The view to the Silo and Grain Elevator and the Syncro-lift is not impacted upon by development along Dock Road; The proposed transit plaza showcases important heritage views .

FIGURE 38. VIEW OF THE SYNCHRO-LIFT AND SILO ELEVATOR BUILDING FROM FIGURE 39. CURRENT VIEW OF THE SYNCHRO-LIFT AND SILO DOCK ROAD AND TRANSIT PLAZA ELEVATOR BUILDING FROM DOCK ROAD

FIGURE 40. VIEW OF SYNCHRO-LIFT AND SILO FROM THE TRANSIT PLAZA 28 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 7.5. Views of the harbour from Signal Hill over the Canal District

Heritage Indicator 5 The visual corridor between the Battery, the sea and to the noon day gun site on signal hill must be protected. Precinct Plan response: The Canal District does not negatively impact the view of the harbour from Signal Hill; Development height is responsive to the typography of the in order to protect views.

FIGURE 41. VIEW OF THE HARBOUR FROM SIGNAL HILL OVER THE CANAL DISTRICT

FIGURE 42. SECTION ILLUSTRATING VISUAL CONNECTION FROM SIGNAL HILL TO THE HARBOUR MAINTAINED

FIGURE 43. VIEW OVER THE CANAL DISTRICT FROM SIGNAL HILL Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 29 7.6. The historic Queens Hotel and Dock Road remnants Heritage Indicator 6 un o udng gnn historical, contextual, architectural and o gnn udng nd immediate context of Dock Road has Grade IIIB status. (HWC’s Short Guide to Grading) Precinct Plan response: The existing form of the Queens Hotel is respected by stepping development Back at parcel K to allow for a forecourt and active edges; The existing Height of the Queens Hotel is respected by including a minimum setback of 5m to the height of the Queens Hotel; Approved development on erf 9588 has been revised to comprise a landscaped parking space to protect and enhance views to the Hotel from Dock Road.

FIGURE 44. THE HISTORIC QUEENS HOTEL AND DOCK ROAD REMNANTS FIGURE 46. SECTION THROUGH ALFRED STREET

FIGURE 45. QUEENS HOTEL RESTORATION AND RE-PURPOSING FIGURE 47. VIEW ACROSS LANDSCAPED SPACE TO QUEENS HOTEL AND OLD DOCK ROAD 30 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 7.7. The Waterfront Theatre School

Heritage Indicator 7 The Waterfront Theatre School has considerable historical, social, architectural, aesthetic and contextual gnn nd u rnd Precinct plan response: Development setbacks around the waterfront theater school are introduced; There is a shared forecourt between the Theatre School and development parcel I.

FIGURE 49. THE WATERFRONT THEATRE SCHOOL PRECINCT FIGURE 48. THE WATERFRONT THEATRE SCHOOL PLAN RESPONSE

FIGURE 50. VIEW OF THE NEW SHARED FORECOURT BETWEEN THE THEATRE AND DEVELOPMENT PARCEL I

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 31 7.8. Visual indication of the battery from Dock Road & the Canal

Heritage Indicator 8 The Visual indication of Battery from Dock Road is of historical importance and should be integrated into the public open space system which links to canal. Precinct plan response: • Set Back Development parcel K to maintain visual link to the battery park from the canal and Buitengracht Street and create a connected open space system .

Figure 51. VIEW OF THE BATTERY REMNANTS FROM DOCK ROAD & THE Figure 53. VIEW ACROSS LANDSCAPED SPACE TO QUEENS CANAL HOTEL AND OLD DOCK ROAD

Figure 52. VIEW ACROSS LANDSCAPED SPACE TO QUEENS HOTEL AND OLD DOCK ROAD

32 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report 7.9. Harbour Views Down Buitengracht Street Heritage Indicator 9 The view along Buitengracht Street is gnn ruurng orrdor Sight lines from the Buitengracht pedestrian bridge to the harbour must be maintained Design response: Omit development on Erf 9588 to maintain view corridor; Pull taller buildings back within the precinct to mitigate impacts on views.

FIGURE 55. EXISTING VIEW FROM WATERKANT STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

FIGURE 54. HARBOUR VIEWS DOWN BUITENGRACHT STREET FIGURE 56. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR ERF 9588 AS PER 2016 R.O.D. FROM H.W.C. PARCEL ‘L’ YACHT CLUB

FIGURE 57. VIEW CORRIDOR MAINTAINED - CANAL DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT FROM BUITENGRACHT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 33 8. VIA RECOMMENDATIONS The draft VIA was undertaken by David Gibbs in July 2017 provided a positive recommendation in response to the earlier version of the Precinct Plan. These recommendations were made in relation to an earlier scheme where the height of parcel ‘L’ was higher. After comments from the CIFA the current Precinct Plan proposed a lower and more distributed height than the massing model assessed in the July 2017 Draft VIA.

The following comments are extracted from the VIA: The Canal District precinct plan proposal has evolved in direct response to heritage / visual indicators: by virtue of its position within the precinct, the tall building (L1) will not impact negatively upon the Buitengracht shaft of space nor the heritage structures. Moreover, the n o nud rn n o uur nd gnn ngron o an urban park as an interpretive setting for the historical remains of the Amsterdam Battery, thereby revealing and curating an important heritage resource; Considered holistically, the Visual Impact of the development will cause little material effect upon the heritage resources, environment or on human well-being; and with mitigation provided by the implementation of the Battery Park, will be well-within heritage and environmental quality standards, targets, and legal requirements; roo oud ondrd n don onnuon o n helping to reduce the massive scale of the surrounding road infrastructure, and providing a better connection to the city by creating a more positive and pedestrian- orientated interface; As a new intervention and contemporary overlay upon, into and congruent with the urban cultural landscape; serving to reveal and interpret earlier layers of history; to provide better pedestrian connections between the city, foreshore and waterfront; to facilitate positive visual impacts on heritage resources; the updated V&A W Canal District precinct plan (July 2017) by GAPP Planners and Urban Designers may be approved, subject to the implementation of the urban park as mitigation and heritage interpretation.

The views overleaf are extracted from the draft VIA (Figure 58 - Figure 60) for reference.

34 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report FIGURE 58. VIEW OF THE PRECINCT WITH TABLE MOUNTAIN IN THE BACKGROUND

FIGURE 59. VIEW ALONG BUITENGRACHT STREET TOWARDS THE PRECINCT AND THE HARBOUR

FIGURE 60. VIEW OF THE PRECINCT FROM SIGNAL HILL Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 35 9. CONCLUSIONS All heritage indicators have been addressed and in the formulation of the precinct plan response u rood drd ro ondrd nd oroug ron o rg r urban design and contextual informants (i.e. it was not an imposed target) rn n or gnn rod dgn ron o rd Battery and Queens hotel as compared with the currently approved 1992 precinct plan. It also dr rod grr nour nd dnon o or n u o precinct; the Battery Park, Canal Transit Plaza and Canal Gateway Square (at the point where the canal runs beneath Dock Road adjacent to Parcel L. the expanses of relatively large open spaces such as the Battery Park and Plaza warrant udng ng rod n o dnon oron o Square, Thibault Square and illustrates how these smaller spaces are dnd udng r n o rood n n r The heights proposed for parcels K and L do not compromise any of the adopted heritage indicators . It should be noted that these have already applied in recent approvals for Waterway house, Queens Hotel and Battery Park.

FIGURE 61. ENHANCED PUBLIC REALM IN THE CITY AND WATERFRONT : BATTERY PARK AND CANAL, PLAZA & WALKWAYS

36 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report Figure 62. CANAL DISTRICT PRECINCT PLAN (NOVEMBER 2017)

Prepared by GAPP Architects & Urban Designers | November 2017 37 November 2017

38 V&A WATERFRONT CANAL DISTRICT |Supplementary Information to Heritage Indicator’s Report