The sponsorship of a R2,4 million boundary wall for the Macassar Sports Grounds made by a private company in 2021 now hangs in the balance following objections from the community. They seem divided on the issue while the City of Cape Town has decided to investigate the matter further and follow due processes.
The sponsorship, meant to drive a Corporate Social Investment initiative, was agreed on in mid-2021 with the then Ward 109 councillor Victor Isaacs, who stated last week that the project was initially supported by the Recreation and Parks Department, but the process was slow and the latest objections have now put the project in jeopardy.
“As far as I understand, there is a lot of support from the community for a boundary wall” said Isaacs. “The current fence has been badly vandalised and has become a safety issue when sports clubs make use of this facility. There is also uncontrolled access to the sports fields which in my view needs to be addressed, and this would be the perfect solution.”
Community activist Christiaan Stewart echoed these sentiments, saying objections were not representative of how the wider community felt about this issue.
“We don’t recall any community participation process where this issue was raised so we feel it just a minority who have objected,” he said. “The sports field fence is almost completely gone and a wall would ensure safety for spectators and players.”
The current Ward 109 councillor, Peter Helfrich, stated objections related to concerns that a non-transparent concrete wall would increase the crime in the area, as no one would be able to see what is happening behind the wall, should a crime be in progress – not only on the field, but also outside the sports grounds.
He said: “On the other hand, the sporting community stated that they do not believe it would increase crime but would rather limit access to the sports field and therefore reduce crime and vandalism on the field. Various other matters were also raised by both of these bodies. It is important to note that both of these bodies met in a very civilised manner and respected one another at all times. It was also clear that they were all willing to work together on finding a solution, together, that would work for everyone. They were also committed to placing our community first.”
Helfrich said accusations that the community was at loggerheads over this issue were untrue and a means of creating division.
“Both the sports and safety communities are aware of this and have given their assurance that they would at all times place our community first and not become involved in political mud-slinging. They have also given their commitment to working together to find a solution to this problem. Both of these bodies will meet soon to further discuss this matter.”
Councillor Patricia van der Ross, Mayoral Committee member for Community Service and Health, confirmed the City’s Recreation and Parks Department received objections against the (private) funding for the construction of the wall.
She said: “Recreation and Parks informed community leaders and local sports clubs of the decision through written correspondence to the MFMC and during a meeting with the local ward councillor. The department is aware of this concern resulting from several incidents of vandalism and will be investigating all viable alternatives to help curb the vandalism and theft.”
According to Henry Baatjies, who serves as chairperson of the Greater Macassar Civic Organisation and also coordinator of various Neighbourhood Watch groups in Macassar, the objections are related to safety concerns in a crime-ridden area.
“We feel that a solid, concrete wall which blocks the view into the stadium will only increase crimes which occur in the community.
The vicinity is a well-known criminal hotspot and there have been assaults on women, many of which go unreported due to fear of gangsters,” Baatjies said.
“Our objection is purely based on whether this would benefit the community in terms of safety, and at this point it would certainly cause more harm.”
