Contractor’s ‘crappers’ camouflaged

MICHELLE SAFFER

Was the toilet invisible or just not there? This is a point of disagreement between Clovelly residents who saw members of a work crew relieving themselves in the bushes and the City who claims there was a toilet.

For six days, ending last week on Monday April 18, a crew of people contracted to the City were clearing vegetation between two houses in Clovelly Road. Although the residents were unhappy about the clearing of the vegetation, the City has stated that someone – who was not identified – had complained about the vegetation in the mountainside road reserve. The City said that, following the complaint, its fire department in December last year issued an order that the “overgrown vegetation” be cleared.

So be it. But then if work crew is going to be there for six days, should they not have a toilet? Especially as they were apparently seen defecating in the area.

“The workers claimed to be ‘only peeing’ when questioned why they were heading up into the scrub higher up. They made no secret they were using the area as a toilet,” said resident Mark Prowse.

However, the City was adamant that a toilet had been supplied.

“The City can confirm that there are toilet facilities on the construction site and that arrangements have been made for the use of the facility,” said Johan van der Merwe, the City’s mayoral com-mittee member for energy, environmental and spatial plan- ning.

Oddly, no toilet could be seen by the Echo where the bushes were being cleared or in the vicinity.

Said Mr Van der Merwe: “We have received complaints in the past about workers using the bushes for toilet purposes; upon investigation we’ve found that these complaints have often not reflected the actions of the workers but rather other people in the area.

“The City monitors the contractor throughout the contract to ensure that the conditions of the contract are adhered to, including the use of toilet facilities.”

The Echo again contacted the City, pointing out that this was an area used by the contractors only; that there was a lack of a (visible) toilet; and that there had been a previous complaint directed to the Echo in January in which the crew laying the electricity cables from the Clovelly sub-station to Fish Hoek were reported using the wetlands as a toilet as there was no toilet in the area.

How is this possible?

“Ah, the Phantom Pooper strikes again,” laughed Steve Perrett who lives near the Silvermine wetlands. “I thought that you would have known about the third force crappers who target innocent council projects.

“I’ve also only now found out that contractor’s crappers are artfully camouflaged to blend into the background environment and normally are not visible to the untrained eye except when there’s a sudden (violent?) move- ment.”

Perhaps we have found the explanation. So no need for the council to answer questions such as: do sub-contractors have to supply toilets; who inspects whether there are toilets; are there ways that workers are encouraged not to use the bushes…

It’s all just a dirty plot…