1. Introduction, Limitations & General Background
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 HWC CASE 14082203 DEADP Ref: 16/3/1/F4/15/3015/14 HIA REPORT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE CENTRAL BUSINESS AREA (CBA), PATERNOSTER Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34 St Augustine Road, Paternoster 1. Introduction, Limitations & General Background. FIGURE 01: Location of the application area, Paternoster, West Coast. (Portion of SG 1:50 000 topocadastral series Ref: 3217 DB Vredenburg). 1.1. Introduction. This report comprises a Phase 1 and Phase 2 Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) of proposals for the development of Paternoster’s central business area (CBA) (Figures 01 & 02). The purpose is to provide the town with a stronger urban and business focus, thereby injecting new life into this once sleepy fishing village, now rapidly becoming a premier West Coast holiday destination in the face of a rapidly declining fishing industry. © CS Design CC t/a ARCON Specialist Architectural & Heritage Consultants, May 2015. 1 Heritage Impact Assessment: Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34, Proposed new central business area for Paternoster Village. FINAL REPORT 2 The plan of study for this report is set out in accordance with HWC’s response, dated 10 September 2014, (Annexure 01) to a Notice of Intent to Develop (NID) application dated 27 August 2014. This application was prepared by ARCON and submitted to HWC in August 2014. A HWC professional team meeting has determined that heritage resources would be impacted by the proposals and therefore called for an HIA consisting of an archaeological study, a palaeontological study, a built environment study and a visual impact assessment. FIGURE 02: The site outlined in red viewed in relation to the surrounding topography. St Augustine Road runs through the northern portion of the site from east to west on the original road alignment to the harbour and Cape Columbine. The site is surrounded by residential areas and cut off from the sea by two large dunes occupying its northern portion. North is to the top of this image. (Image: Google Earth). Heritage resources/potential heritage resources identified in this report with regard to Section 3(2) of the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) are: i) Places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance: There are a number of structures older than 60 years within the study area, some of which have historical and architectural significance although they are to be incorporated into the development and will therefore not be physically impacted upon. ii) Historical settlements and townscapes: © CS Design CC t/a ARCON Specialist Architectural & Heritage Consultants, May 2015. 2 Heritage Impact Assessment: Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34, Proposed new central business area for Paternoster Village. FINAL REPORT 3 The historic Paternoster Hotel and surrounding precinct falls within the study area and will therefore be directly affected by the proposals. The broader townscape will be considerably less affected due to the site being largely screened from the rest of the village through the nature of the topography. The relationship of buildings falling within the development area and buildings within the broader village area is indicated in Figure 03. FIGURE 03: The site outlined in light blue showing the existing development in relation to the broader village. North is to the top of this image. Acknowledgements: BCD Town & Regional Planners. iii) Landscapes and Natural Features of Cultural Significance: The development is located within the core of a cultural landscape framed by a low koppie with rocky outcrops above and to the south of the site, known as ‘Hannibal’s Kop’. The cultural landscape has evolved around the fishing industry and, more recently, © CS Design CC t/a ARCON Specialist Architectural & Heritage Consultants, May 2015. 3 Heritage Impact Assessment: Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34, Proposed new central business area for Paternoster Village. FINAL REPORT 4 holidaymakers and tourism. A number of botanically sensitive species are present on parts of the site. iv) Archaeological Resources: The site falls within a broad area of known archaeological potential and includes known middens on two large dunes, parts of which fall within the northern part of the property. The following were not identified as heritage resources in terms of NHRA Section 3(2) and therefore do not form a focus of this report other than some being referred to from time to time: v) Places to which oral traditions are attached: No such places were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the property. vi) Geological resources: There are no known geological resources of scientific or cultural importance on the property. vii) Sites of significance relating to the history of slavery: The site was first developed in the late 19th C and therefore has no direct connections with slavery. 1.2. Assumptions & Limitions of this Study. i) Background material by others: All material by others informing this assessment, including other specialist assessments, historical and planning/land use background information, is assumed to be accurate and a true reflection of the issues governing the property and its proposed redevelopment. ii) Services: This report does not address heritage impacts resulting from the potential laying of pipelines, electrical and other related infrastructure between the site and elsewhere beyond its boundaries. It does, however, address the possibility of archaeological material being uncovered in the course of new services excavations, and the excavation of new foundations. iii) The public engagement process: The public engagement process is being dealt with by Dr Mark Berry Environment Consultant & Biodiversity Specialist in terms of which a comprehensive issues trail covering feedback from interested and affected parties (IAP’s) will be prepared if necessary – i.e. depending on the responses received. This public engagement process addresses heritage issues. © CS Design CC t/a ARCON Specialist Architectural & Heritage Consultants, May 2015. 4 Heritage Impact Assessment: Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34, Proposed new central business area for Paternoster Village. FINAL REPORT 5 iv) Historical Documentation: The historical record of the West Coast within which the site falls, is covered by few secondary sources, while maps of the area are scarce. In the end, the report has relied on personal interviews with John Stephan, grandson of a once prominent local fishing magnate, aerial photographs, diagram and transfer histories and diagrams to understand the historical evolution of the area. The history of the fishing industry has been pivotal to the understanding of the site and consequently that aspect has also been researched. The historical record obtained, together with initial archaeological investigations, botanical investigations and on-site stylistic and spatial analyses are nonetheless deemed sufficient for establishing the heritage significance of the property. iv) Cultural Landscape: The assumption is that the historic landscape of which the site forms a part, is also a landscape with scenic qualities sensitive to new development, and for which the visual impact component of this report is required by HWC. v) Archaeological Sensitivity: An archaeological impact assessment forms part of this report, although a palaeontological report does not at this stage. The reason for this is that the protection of possible palaeontological deposits would more cost-effectively be served by a palaeontological monitoring brief during the construction phase. This approach has been endorsed by palaeontologist Dr John Pether, with whom telephonic discussions have been held concerning the site. Dr Pether has confirmed that it would be feasible for a palaeontological monitoring brief to be undertaken by a trained archaeologist briefed by him, if necessary. Such monitoring would include the examination of possible subsurface calcrete beds. 1.3. Methodology & Study Focus. The focus of this report is essentially determined by the response of Heritage Western Cape (HWC) to the Notice of Intent to Develop application and its requirements, as mentioned in the introduction to this report. This response confirms that visual impacts on the overall scenic landscape as artefact are an important factor to be considered. The methodology upon which this report is based therefore involves the following: i) In-loco inspections: The preparation of this report involved a number of in-loco inspections of the property and discussions with the urban designer involved. Photographs were taken of key characteristics informing heritage significance (including architecture on the site), and site notes were prepared. ii) Sources in determining significance: Site inspections, personal interviews, interpretation of existing development massing and scale characterizing the surrounding area, and graphic spatial analyses have been used extensively to determine cultural/heritage significance, key spatial relationships and potential heritage hot spots. Other sources include scrutiny of transfer diagrams and the historic Surveyor General aerial survey record. © CS Design CC t/a ARCON Specialist Architectural & Heritage Consultants, May 2015. 5 Heritage Impact Assessment: Farm Paternoster A No 34 & Ptn 2 of Farm Paternoster A No 34, Proposed new central business area for Paternoster Village. FINAL REPORT 6 iii) Mapping of heritage resources: Significant elements,