A growing dispute between Rylands Cricket Club, the City of Cape Town and Melomed Gatesville Private Hospital has placed one of the area’s most historic sporting grounds at the centre of a broader debate over land use, public space and community infrastructure.
The dispute pits residents of the predominantly Muslim suburb of Rylands Estate against the Muslim-owned Melomed Gatesville Private Hospital. The question now is whether the two sides can reach a compromise.
According to long-standing club member Riyaaz Parker, who will mark 30 years with the club next season, cooperation is needed to resolve the matter.
“If the parties mutually engage, I believe we can reach a compromise or a settlement that is going to be mutually beneficial for all parties,” he told One Nation Media.
At issue is a proposed servitude approved by the City that would allow part of the Rylands Sports Complex, also known as the A.W. Mukudem Oval, to be used for parking linked to the adjacent medical facility. The club says the development would result in an estimated 15.3% reduction of its playing surface.
The decision has sparked strong opposition from club leadership and sections of the surrounding community, who argue that the land remains a vital and heavily used sporting facility in a densely populated area already facing a shortage of playing fields.
Shortage of playing fields
Parker said the grounds are not underutilised land, but an active multi-sport facility used daily by different teams.
“This field is actively used. It’s not a sports facility that is not active,” he said.
According to Parker, Rylands Cricket Club shares the space with football clubs and visiting teams that rely on the facility because of a shortage of sporting infrastructure in surrounding communities.
He said demand far exceeds supply, creating logistical pressure on local sport.
“We are oversubscribed, meaning that we’ve got too many teams. However, we don’t have sufficient playing fields.”
Lack of consultation
At the heart of the disagreement is whether the City properly considered alternative solutions before approving the servitude.
Parker questioned why sporting land was prioritised for redevelopment when, in his view, other options remain available nearby.
“There is a parking lot about 400, 500 metres away, which we believe could also be utilised for parking,” he said.
He argued that the decision reflects a lack of engagement with affected stakeholders and insufficient consideration of less disruptive planning approaches.
“We’ve never received that type of response from the City.”
The club maintains that it was not adequately consulted on why alternative arrangements were not pursued before the approval process advanced.
Safety and community concerns
While the City has indicated that two playing fields will remain, the club believes the reduction of land will have long-term consequences for sports development in the area.
Parker said the issue is not only the immediate loss of space, but also the impact on future growth and safety at the facility.
“We are concerned that balls are going to be hit into the adjacent flats. It’s going to cause potential damage to buildings on that side, windows, cars parked at those flats, people,” he said.
He added that the current facility has been developed and maintained through significant community effort over many years.
“The members of the community spend time from their businesses, from their work. They come, they make sure that that field is properly watered. The sprinklers are put on properly. The field is properly cut.”
The dispute has triggered visible community mobilisation, with local sporting clubs and residents reportedly rallying behind the cricket club’s position.
Parker said the issue has resonated beyond sport, reflecting wider concerns about preserving safe recreational spaces in the area, particularly for young people.
Possible compromise
The matter is currently before the Municipal Planning Tribunal, which has encouraged the parties to engage in discussions aimed at reaching a possible compromise.
While the approval has reportedly been recommended, the process is not yet final, with further legal and appeal mechanisms still available.
The club says it remains open to engagement but is prepared to escalate the matter if necessary.
“We are not anti-development,” Parker said, adding that a negotiated outcome remains possible if all parties engage meaningfully.
“We are prepared to engage with all parties in the matter to try and reach an amenable solution, which is a benefit to all parties.”
In a written statement, Melomed has rejected claims that affected stakeholders were not properly consulted, saying the proposal has been subject to years of public participation and engagement. The hospital said the development would retain most of the sporting facility while introducing upgraded sporting infrastructure, enhanced security measures and additional community amenities alongside new parking facilities.
ONM has also contacted ward councillor Aslam Cassim for comment.