No!!!
The infrastructure does not cater for expansion;
The costs for additional security will further burden the community already contributing to the enclosure;
The cost for implementation cannot be borne by residents already I. The enclosure;
No guarantees in place which will exempt residents currently within the enclosure from additional costs;
Additional vehicles and people adds further risks to security of the enclosure.
L
Lance Carr
5 years ago
8 San Raphael, Glyndwyr Avenu
M
ML MOGOSHI
5 years ago
My vote is No, the traffic through the boom gate is a lot already.
B
Bradley Marks
5 years ago
No
B
Bruce Beyers
5 years ago
It’s a security risk and ware and tear on the roads will be severe. They are not contributing enough to the security of the enclosure. Getting in and out of the boom will become a traffic jam!
S
Sonia van Schalkwyk
5 years ago
21 A River Road: Petition signed NO.
R
Romaan Rasheed
5 years ago
No From 22 shelly street
L
Louw Otto
5 years ago
#7 Riversands, 24 River Road
A
Anthony Gouveia
5 years ago
NO (i.e. I reject the RRC extension) from 7, 13th Avenue Rivonia.
F
Felix de Kleijn
5 years ago
I vote NO
F
Francisco Khoza
5 years ago
It’s No from 28a River Road.
F
Frank Rovelli
5 years ago
No.
V
Viv Rovelli
5 years ago
It’s a NO from me - Our guards at the boom are already perpetually opening and closing the boom with enough volume of traffic for 1 guard to manage; the maintenance of the boom - the motors, the swipe button, the roads, the palisade gate and other costs will increase; traffic will increase (it would not be of any benefit to the residents of the closure who enjoy walking, running, biking, teaching their children to ride their bikes etc if our Closure had more traffic); opening the gate at Morris may also lead to increased crime - a permanent closure definitely reduces crime. We’re happy to welcome them as neighbours but not included in our closure. Our Closure works well as it is - it is just the right, manageable size from an admin point of view as well as for our 24 hour patrol vehicle. Over 95% of our Residents completed the relevant forms and signed for the Closure as it is, when we re-applied at the Council 2 years ago.
L
Leon Jacobs
5 years ago
38 River Rd
P
P M B Green 4Dwyfor
5 years ago
Featured
Vote not to include
Beside the reasons stated :
Once you start changing the status quo the Municipality could impose further restrictions. The developer just wants to sell.
The development corner 12 and wessel has guard’s
If we do accept won’t it be difficult to object to 20 story developments within our closure ?
NO
No. Reject. 8 Orchard Lane.
NO from 28A River Road
No!!! The infrastructure does not cater for expansion; The costs for additional security will further burden the community already contributing to the enclosure; The cost for implementation cannot be borne by residents already I. The enclosure; No guarantees in place which will exempt residents currently within the enclosure from additional costs; Additional vehicles and people adds further risks to security of the enclosure.
8 San Raphael, Glyndwyr Avenu
My vote is No, the traffic through the boom gate is a lot already.
No
It’s a security risk and ware and tear on the roads will be severe. They are not contributing enough to the security of the enclosure. Getting in and out of the boom will become a traffic jam!
21 A River Road: Petition signed NO.
No From 22 shelly street
#7 Riversands, 24 River Road
NO (i.e. I reject the RRC extension) from 7, 13th Avenue Rivonia.
I vote NO
It’s No from 28a River Road.
No.
It’s a NO from me - Our guards at the boom are already perpetually opening and closing the boom with enough volume of traffic for 1 guard to manage; the maintenance of the boom - the motors, the swipe button, the roads, the palisade gate and other costs will increase; traffic will increase (it would not be of any benefit to the residents of the closure who enjoy walking, running, biking, teaching their children to ride their bikes etc if our Closure had more traffic); opening the gate at Morris may also lead to increased crime - a permanent closure definitely reduces crime. We’re happy to welcome them as neighbours but not included in our closure. Our Closure works well as it is - it is just the right, manageable size from an admin point of view as well as for our 24 hour patrol vehicle. Over 95% of our Residents completed the relevant forms and signed for the Closure as it is, when we re-applied at the Council 2 years ago.
38 River Rd
Vote not to include Beside the reasons stated : Once you start changing the status quo the Municipality could impose further restrictions. The developer just wants to sell. The development corner 12 and wessel has guard’s If we do accept won’t it be difficult to object to 20 story developments within our closure ?
Our vote is No for the gate extension.
No from 41 river road and 22 shelly street