Community divided over Herzlia field access as City reviews 850 submissions
Access to Herzlia field’s hangs in the balance after 850 public submissions, as the City weighs competing demands over access, safety and use.
Image: Murray Swart/ Cape Argus
The future of the Herzlia sports ground in Vredehoek now hangs in the balance after the City of Cape Town received about 850 public submissions on proposed lease amendments, highlighting differing views over how the space should be used.
The public participation process, which closed on Friday, drew significant engagement from residents, sports groups and other stakeholders, placing pressure on the City to balance competing interests around access, safety and sustainability.
“The City has received approximately 850 comments on the proposed amendments to date,” said Mayoral Committee Member for Community Services and Health, Councillor Francine Higham.
“While this level of public engagement is welcomed, it is important to note that decisions are not based on the number of comments for or against a proposal. Rather, each submission is carefully considered on its merits.”
At the centre of the dispute is a proposal to amend the lease agreement for the city-owned sports field at 12 Capel Road, which could remove clauses allowing unrestricted public access and guaranteed third-party use.
Residents have argued that the field has long functioned as a shared public space in a high-density area, and that restricting access would reduce already limited green space.
Community representative Brent Moore welcomed the level of public participation, saying it reflected strong community interest in the outcome.
“The scale of the response is remarkable. It’s encouraging to see the community taking the opportunity and time to participate and have their voices heard,” Moore said.
He said the core issue remains access to a public space.
“As I understand, the issue is about the public continuing to have access to what is currently designated as a public open space. Removing this access is infringing residents’ rights to what is supposed to be a shared community space.”
Moore said the process had also raised concerns about how the matter was handled, particularly after a notice indicating the field would close to the public from March 1 was later withdrawn after residents raised concerns.
“CoCT tabled a motion at Subcouncil 16 in November last year to amend the lease to restrict public access to the field. The motion was not approved and a public participation process recommended.
“Despite this minuted resolution, a notice was put up saying the field would be closed to the public on March 1. The community lodged complaints and the notice was withdrawn, and the field remains open,” he said.
Moore added that the public participation process had generated widespread engagement, although some residents had raised concerns about not receiving acknowledgement of their submissions.
Grass Boots FC, a long-standing City Bowl football club, has also voiced concern that the proposed amendments could affect its ability to train and host matches at the field.
“GBFC continues to try and search for a workable solution in line with how other fields across the city run and operate,” Grass Boots FC said.
“There are so many cases of positive shared fields across the city with clubs and schools working collectively together.”
On the other hand, United Herzlia Schools has said the request to amend the lease is driven by operational realities linked to managing a high-use facility.
Executive director Andries van Renssen said the school’s focus was on ensuring the fields remain safe, well-maintained and sustainable for all users.
“As with any high-use public sports facility, factors such as maintenance standards, scheduling and appropriate use need to be clearly defined to ensure the space remains viable and safe,” he said.
He added that the facility is used by school pupils, organised sports groups and members of the public, and that these competing demands need to be balanced.
The City has also pointed to the adjacent Van Riebeeck Park as an alternative space for informal recreation, including dog walking, although some residents argue the sports field serves a different purpose.
With the comment period now closed, the City said a report will be compiled and submitted to Subcouncil 16 for consideration. A final decision will follow internal processes, including review by the Property Transactions Department, although no timeline has been confirmed.
As the City weighs hundreds of submissions and differing views, the outcome will determine not only access to a single sports field, but how shared urban spaces are managed in an increasingly dense city.
With 850 voices now on record, the question is no longer whether the community cares, but how the City will decide who gets to use the space, and on what terms.