Objection to Proposed Cellular Base Station

Objection to Proposed Cellular Base Station on Erf 4 Camps Bay Beachfront by Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association (CBRRA).

SUBMITTED TO THE GOOD HOPE SUBCOUNCIL ON 19 NOVEMBER 2009

Thank you Mr, Chairman for this opportunity to object to your committee in respect of this proposal.

We have perused the highly detailed justification from the applicant and the Council officials as to why the base station should be allowed.

CBRRA is astounded that, although the Council has just proudly and widely announced that the centre portion of Camps Bay beach is now to again become an internationally recognised Blue Flag Beach with all the worthy qualities required for it to become so, it now proposes to place at a very low level a new cellular base station and mast in the very same area !

I would hazard a guess that this must be the first Blue Flag beach in the world with such an added attraction. You can imagine the public outcry when this fact becomes general knowledge.

So attractive is this installation that the financially well-healed applicant has offered to place a public bench and planters nearby which not only looks out at absolutely nothing but is situated within the five metre radius which the Council has stated must be a no-go area !

If there is absolutely no danger, why is there a 5m access restriction by the Council which the above park bench ignores.

Mr Chairman, much is made by your Council Officials and the Applicant that there is “a lack of scientific evidence to suggest that there is a health risk associated with cellular base stations. Both international and local medical and environmental authorities including Council’s Medical Officer of Health, are of this opinion”. This is a nice general spin statement which covers all and is intended to crush all contentions to the contrary.

It is CBRRA’s contention that the onus is NOT on the objectors to prove that the installation is dangerous, but that it is on the Council and the Applicant to produce irreversible proof and test results that such installations are NOT dangerous to humans, animals and plant life in any form or at any distance whatsoever.

If they are not dangerous, why does the Council want to impose a distance restriction and why did it reject the recent application for a similar installation on erf 355 in February 2004 (Application 152379) at Marine Heights Flats in Upper Tree Road Camps Bay ?

I would like to table a photo of the density of people which congregates around this building on occasions and I would like your Council and the Applicant to look me straight in the eye and guarantee unconditionally, without any shadow of a doubt, that not one of these people will ever suffer from the harmful effects of this installation.

Of course you cannot, otherwise why is the Council putting conditions such as ;

Should any further research link electromagnetioc radiation to health issues, this approval may be revised.

There is therefore some niggling doubt in the Council’s mind that something may not be entirely quite right and it is keeping its options open in case things go wrong. In the meantime, the public is at risk, no matter how small and this is not good enough for CBRRA.

I also wish to hand in 14 pages of research which contends that this type of installation IS harmful to humans, gathered from all around the world.

With the greatest respect, Mr. Chairman, I query your Subcouncil’s credentials to be the ultimate judges as to whether there should be a cellular base station in this position or not. It is not your fault that you are not qualified to make this ultimate final or semi-final judgement.

CBRRA accordingly hereby urgently requests that this application becomes the subject of an EIA public procedure process and also the necessary procedures which have to be executed in terms of the new Act / Bylaw which has recently been promulgated which requires an equally rigorous public participation process particularly on buildings which are situated within 100 metres of the sea shoreline.

Aesthetically we are going to be faced with an industrial installation, surrounded by a 2m high fence and razor wire on arguably one of Cape Town’s most picturesque beaches , which will also need maintenance and possibly vehicles travelling over the lawns to and from the area.

The other real problem, as you will readily acknowledge, Mr. Chairman, is that, let Vodacom onto this building, you will immediately get applications from MNnet and Cell C and what justifications will you have to refuse their applications as well ?. This will result in even more unsightly and yet more possibly dangerous installations appearing around the building in the future.

CBRRA fully understands the Applicant’s eagerness to provide an ever-better service (remembering always that this is ultimately always to increase profits and overcome competition) but fails to accept that this site is the only site which will solve its problems. It must therefore investigate other sites which are further away from human habitation or use – especially one as congested as this. Living and health standards cannot be subordinated to aspirations for commercial gain. There are plenty of ither open sites available.

Please therefore, Mr. Chairman, reject this application just as you rejected the previous (and hopefully the next) Upper Tree Road application for a cellular base station.

John Powell
For CBRRA