From: Teuns Kok
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 1:24 PM
To: Morne De Wet
Cc: Cllr Joan Woodman (DA) ; Rushdi Brown ; Alesia Valda Bosman; Cllr Elton Enrique Jansen (DA)
Subject: RE: Letters to residents - Lanes in Colorado Park
Dear Morne and others,
Please note that road closures in the City is subject to the City’s approved Road Closure Policy (attached). Due to the procedural requirements it is anticipated that the process will be +-2 years.
In terms of the Road Closure Policy, the purpose of road closure is to improve road safety though intersection improvements and neighbourhood traffic management.
As you have indicated below, the availability of alternative routes for pedestrians must be considered in the assessment.
From: Morne De Wet
Sent: Wednesday, 09 June 2021 12:37
To: Cllr Elton Enrique Jansen (DA; Teuns Kok
Cc: Cllr Joan Woodman (DA); Rushdi Brown ; Alesia Valda Bosman
Subject: RE: Letters to residents - Lanes in Colorado Park
Councillor Jansen
Herewith feedback on the request for the closure of Idaho, Vermont, Washington and Arizona street together with the already closed off Casino street.
The closure of roads / streets and construction of any kind within the road reserve without a formal consultation and approval process being followed and subsequent approval being obtained is a contravention of the City’s by laws relating to Roads and Stormwater and our planning by-laws.
Casino streetThis road has already been closed off by the residents. I can understand the sentiment for the residents closing this street as it borders Portion 787 which is under developed. Currently there are some developments being undertaken but this is more towards Tambotie street. There is also a development currently in the process at Vrede street, erf 3137.
A notice was drafted, see attached, that will have to be served on residents as per list provided by SC offices. The notice stipulate the contravention but also a way forward. In short, the Roads department will not enforce the removal as stipulated within the notice baring the stipulation regarding development.
All 17 notices as per list will be forwarded to the SC office by Friday
Vermont, Arizona, Washington and Idaho streets The Roads department is
not in favour of closing these streets.
We as department have a ruling not to enclose roads and this is supported by management.
We do not have funds to maintain these sort of road closures and to erect fences.
A list with residents was forwarded to this office.
Vermont 6 residents linked to erf 1210 access to New Eisleben road
Arizona 9 residents, linked to erf 1210 access to New Eisleben road
Washington 8 residents linked to erf 1210 access to New Eisleben road
Idaho 4 residents. linked to erf 1210 access to Highlands Drive
The closing of these mentioned 4 streets will not be beneficial towards the greater area of Colorado. As per regulation, the public has the right to make use of roads and footways and have free access. Closing these streets will severely impact the pedestrian movement in or out of Colorado park. By merely looking at the aerial photograph the “paths” taken is clearly visible pedestrians make use of. By closing these streets pedestrian flow will be restricted to certain streets leading into Colorado park and pedestrian travel time will increase as flow will be around the area and not as such through the area. The shortest route will be closed / restricted.
As an illustrated example. A resident living in Alabama street want to take a bus or taxi in New Eisleben road. His / her shortest route was along Washington drive then over erf 1210 and he / she is on New Eisleben road. Closing Washington drive will now force the pedestrian to walk all the way around. Drastically increasing their travel time.
The structure will have to be of permanent nature with no gate as per residents request. If gate is proposed, this has other issues pertaining to the matter as who will lock and unlock each morning and night and who will take ownership of this process. The maintenance will also again come into consideration and need to be addressed.
If I may suggest that if meetings is held it is not only with the residents from the mentioned streets (27 no) as per lists provided, but the greater area of Colorado.
I trust this provide you the necessary feedback.
We are more than willing to discuss way forward after your meeting with residents the 19
th.
Teuns, do you perhaps have any comments/ inputs from a Transport planning perspective?