The installation of the Bushwillow Park Estate cellular phone tower has been delayed due to objections by some residents.
This follows an article published by the NEWS on August 12 about a Vodacom tower that was set to be installed at the Bushwillow Park Estate.
The executive head of corporate communications, Mr Richard Boorman, said the building plans were submitted to the City of Johannesburg (CoJ) Department of Planning and Urban Management on July 19, 2013. The plans were approved on November 25, 2014.
Mr Boorman said a public participation process did take place and registered letters were also sent to the adjacent landowners in July 2013.
“The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development confirmed on June 7, 2013, that as the mast is being installed within an urban area and outside areas of conservation importance, no Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was required,” said Mr Boorman.
He said data traffic on the network in South Africa is growing at around 50 percent per year, as a result of the smartphone/tablet revolution.
The NEWS followed up last week after receiving information from residents that the installation of the mast had been put on hold.
Mr Bongo Futuse, a senior specialist in the media relations department of Vodacom, said the installation of the mast has not been put on hold but was delayed due to complaints from residents.
“We have used the time to engage further with the residents, to the point of sending them proof of approvals via e-mail, so as to satisfy them that we followed all the correct processes in installing the mast,” said Mr Futuse.
He said the initial installation was supposed to have taken place in May 2015 and he disputed the claims that Vodacom failed to consult with all the relevant parties.
“We consulted with everyone who needed to be consulted for this project; hence the application was approved by the City Council,” said Mr Futuse.
Some of the residents claimed the process followed regarding the Vodacom mast was not transparent. They said some residents, who live in close proximity to where the mast is to be installed, were never consulted and the objections were not submitted to council when the application was done.
The residents also claim the directors of the estate were not transparent and did not do the necessary consultations regarding the matter.
“The board refused to put the matter to a vote and they did not look at other alternatives to the mast,” said Mr Fabio Dinino, one of the residents opposed to the tower.
Ms Kirsty Hinrichsen, another Bushwillow resident, said Vodacom should have consulted with all the relevant parties.
“We want a fair process and Vodacom should give us the pros and cons because the process followed lacked participation. All options should have been considered,” said Mr Hinrichsen.
Mr Futuse denied these claims and said Vodacom submitted all the information to the council; hence they obtained the necessary approval from the City Council.
“Objections do not come to us, they go directly to City Council,” he said.
Mr Futuse said the tower will improve the life of residents and they can look forward to improved security as access to mobile phone services comes in handy during emergency situations.
“Complexes deploy access control using mobile technology, which the mast will support. Some vehicle tracking companies use cellular technology for tracking; hence this will be beneficial to the residents of Bushwillow Park,” said Mr Futuse.
He said the mast will give residents living in the vicinity of the base station improved voice and data experiences. Vodacom is also planning to roll-out fibre to homes in estates around the country and the mast will be useful for the Bushwillow Estate.
“For small business operators, access to mobile services means better access to relevant and timely information, which can improve productivity and cost efficiency. It can also improve supply chain management,” said Mr Futuse.
Request for comment was sent to Ms Nadia Patermann, HR and communications personnel of Bushwillow Park, but she advised that she was out of the country and could not comment.
Ms Patermann said she had directed our email to the directors for comment, but no comment was received at the time of going to print.
