16/09/2025
Dear Mayor of Theewaterskloof Municipality Municipal Manager,
I am writing on behalf of EGRRA Organization, to formally request a follow-up meeting with the relevant stakeholders, including the Mayor, to address the outstanding issues and concerns raised during the previous meeting regarding the Gypsy Queen development.
As promised by the Mayor, this meeting should provide a detailed explanation and comprehensive information on the project.
In the interim, I kindly inquire whether the development will be placed on hold until such a meeting can be convened and all queries are adequately resolved.
During the prior meeting, several key points were raised by community members and EGRRA that were not addressed or responded to by representatives of Theewaterskloof Municipality (TWK).
The meeting concluded prematurely before answers could be provided, and EGRRA was not afforded the opportunity to introduce ourselves or address concerns raised by the community about our organization, despite our requests being denied twice. Furthermore, after requesting additional feedback on our list of concerns, no further response was forthcoming.
To ensure transparency and accountability, I request written feedback on the following unaddressed points:
Ward Committee Involvement:
Why was the ward committee, as a sub-structure of TWK, ignored in the consultation process for this development?
Appeal Fee:
Why is there a R2000 fee required to lodge an appeal? Residents already contribute through TWK rates paymentsโwhy must we pay an additional fee to TWK to exercise our right to appeal?
Alternative Proposal:
I propose upgrading existing informal houses to formal housing and developing the open space using the Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLISP).
Please provide feedback on the feasibility of this approach as an alternative to the current plans.
Project Feedback on Security Cameras:
Please provide an update and feedback on the Give Back Project, specifically regarding the installation of security cameras for the community.
Decision-Making Authority:
Who holds the final authority on the Gypsy Queen developmentโthe Department of Human Settlements or the Mayoral Committee (Mayco)?
Liability for Decisions:
Given that TWK holds the previous Municipal Manager legally and financially liable for decisions made during their tenure, who is the person or entity liable for the decisions made in relation to this development?
Indigent Status Reflection:
The classification of indigent status is an untrue reflection of community needs, as there is no recorded provision for income-earning individuals earning around R3500 who may qualify for support.
Please clarify how these needs are being addressed.
Availability of Land:
The statement that there is "no land" available is false. There are 15 informal settlements that require upgrading, but this involves significant administration, leading to the claim of land scarcity.
Please explain why these settlements are not being prioritized for upgrades.
Sewage Network Claims:
The claim that the sewage network has been checked by professionals and is in order is contradicted by ongoing issues, such as overflows in Rooidakke and Appletiser Park, as well as daily overflows between the BP station and current infrastructure.
Please provide evidence of these professional assessments and details on remedial actions.
Number of Appeals:
More than 500 appeals were lodged with TWK regarding the Gypsy Queen development. However, the Municipal Manager has only responded to organizations and not to individuals. Additionally, a statement was made that only 57 appeals were logged, with just 3 appealed to dateโthis is incorrect, as EGRRA alone submitted more than 50 appeals.
Please confirm the accurate number and provide reasons for the discrepancies and selective responses.
Technical and Surcharge Plans: In the meeting requested by EGRRA, we specifically asked for the technical and surcharge plans but were never provided with them. Why were these not shared?
Insight into New Plans:
Why has EGRRA never been given insight into the new plans? We would like to review the actual plans, including the sizes of the proposed ERFs. The 3D renderings appear impressive, but based on our sense of scale, the houses would be positioned right up against the Spar, which was not indicated on the satellite layer.
Additional concerns include the two entrance roads into Waterworks, which would carry most traffic into Pineview; the minute plot sizes for freestanding houses if fitting two streets with three blocks; the rendering on a flat plain with no indication of infrastructure such as stormwater drainage down the rocky hill; and the marshy ground conditions. Please provide access to these detailed plans for review.
The evidence is overwhelmingโcase studies prove beyond doubt that property values in areas like yours drop when such projects go ahead. and the negative impact on your property values will be permanent
I kindly request that a meeting be scheduled at the earliest convenience, ideally within the next two weeks, and that written responses to the above points be provided in advance to facilitate productive discussion.
Please confirm receipt of this request and provide proposed dates for the meeting.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. I look forward to your prompt response.
our email is :[email protected]
Regards
