An Italian property mogul and her husband are at the center of a dispute with their neighbor in Camps Bay over a construction project that they claim violates building height regulations, blocking their stunning mountain and sea views. Angela Cingolani and her husband, Gary Kallenbach, who purchased their property on Central Drive for its breathtaking vistas, have garnered support from the Camps Bay and Clifton Ratepayers Association (CBCRA) in a public petition against their neighbor’s construction plans.
Cingolani alleges that the property at 18 Central Drive exceeds the permissible height by at least 1.8 meters, claiming that the building’s rear wall contravenes approved planning regulations. She argues that the City of Cape Town’s approval of the plans was a mistake, as lowering the roof would reduce the building’s imposing presence and preserve the view for the neighborhood. “While the owner claims that only the rear is affected, lowering the roof would eliminate the third storey, which would make the building far less imposing,” Cingolani said in the petition. Furthermore, Cingolani pointed out that the City’s official records appear to be missing a “height certificate” that should have accompanied the approval.
In response, the couple has approached the City of Cape Town and sought legal counsel, hoping to rectify what they believe to be an error in the planning process. Deputy Mayor Eddie Andrews confirmed that the City is aware of the issue and has instructed the property owner to address the alleged breach.
However, the accused neighbor, businessman Sajeel Maharaj, vehemently denies the allegations and claims that he is the victim of a smear campaign. Maharaj insists that his building plans were fully approved, allowing him to construct a 10-meter wall as per the rights granted by the Title Deed for his property. He criticized the petition as misleading, asserting that the plans were in compliance with the regulations. “I am being subjected to a campaign of public vilification based on inaccurate information,” Maharaj said. He added that a departure application for the project is underway, giving neighbors the opportunity to express their concerns.
Chris Willemse, of the CBCRA, voiced his concerns over the height of the construction, noting that the building’s rear wall is approximately 1.8 meters higher than the 8-meter limit. Willemse also pointed out that the building plans should not have been approved without a departure application, which he claims was not sought or granted.
For Cingolani, the issue is personal as well as professional. A real estate expert, she encourages international clients to invest in properties in areas like Camps Bay, but the building controversy raises concerns for her about the long-term impact on the area’s appeal. “How can I promise people a view of the ocean when buildings are being constructed that obscure it?” she said.
Despite the ongoing dispute, Maharaj maintains that he is legally entitled to build as he has, emphasizing that the sloping roof and rear wall have no impact on Cingolani’s property. He maintains that there has been no violation of planning laws and asserts that the allegations are simply false.
As the case unfolds, it highlights the tensions between property development and the preservation of scenic views, raising questions about urban planning regulations and the rights of property owners. The trial continues as the City works to resolve the matter and ensure that the correct legal processes are followed.
