The reopening of the lower security gate in Dahlia Street, Lenasia South, has brought relief following concerns over restricted access for an elderly resident. However, a fresh response from the Johannesburg Roads Agency (JRA) has exposed a much broader issue: despite years of efforts to regularise security boom gates across the area, not a single gate has received formal approval from the City of Johannesburg.
Responding to enquiries by GLOBE POST, the JRA’s Deputy Director Transport Systems Management, JRA’s Nobuntu Duze, confirmed that four applications have been submitted since last year but remain undecided.
“There have been since 4 applications that have applied to the City since last year. These are pending decisions. No gates have been approved yet for the entire area,” Duze told GLOBE POST.
The confirmation raises significant questions about the status of existing security structures, the progress made towards compliance and the responsibilities of those operating access restrictions on public roads.
Earlier this month, GLOBE POST reported on the plight of 78-year-old Ayesha, a Dahlia Street resident who relies on a walker and had struggled to access her street through a locked lower security gate.
The closure forced her to use another entrance some distance away, turning an ordinary journey into a physically demanding challenge.
Following the concerns raised, the lower Dahlia Street gate has now been opened and manned.
While the development addresses the immediate access problem reported, it also highlights a wider challenge: how can communities protect themselves against crime without restricting the movement and rights of vulnerable residents?
The matter is particularly relevant to elderly people, residents living with disabilities, emergency services and municipal service providers who may need unrestricted or appropriately managed access.
Importantly, the reopening of the Dahlia Street gate does not constitute formal approval of the security installation. The JRA’s latest confirmation indicates that no gates have yet been approved in the area.
The latest response also raises questions about the progress of an initiative that appeared to be gaining momentum in 2025.
In September 2023, GLOBE POST reported that only one incomplete application for security access restrictions had been received from Lenasia South.
At the time, City of Johannesburg Deputy Director of Transport Systems Management Nobuntu Duze emphasised that boom gates and similar restrictions were subject to the City’s Security Access Restrictions Policy, adopted in 2018.
Residents were required to follow the prescribed approval process before restricting access to public streets.
By November 2024, a Ward 120 Boom-Security Gate Committee had been established to assist communities with legalising their structures.
The committee, led by Jason Reddy, worked alongside Ward Councillor Puseletso Nzimande and Ward Committee representative for Safety and Security Ridwaan Minty.
On 24 April 2025, representatives met City transport officials to discuss the regularisation process. Subsequent inspections took place on 23 May 2025.
In July 2025, GLOBE POST reported that nine gated communities were represented on the committee, with efforts underway to prepare and submit their applications.
The City had granted a temporary reprieve until 31 August 2025, allowing existing structures to remain in place while communities completed the required documentation.
Residents were warned that structures without formal approval remained unlawful and could face removal.
More than a year after that deadline, the JRA now confirms that only four applications have been submitted since last year and are awaiting decisions.
This leaves an important question unanswered: what happened to the other communities that were previously part of the regularisation initiative?
It is not yet clear whether additional applications were never submitted, remained incomplete or failed to progress through the administrative process.
The introduction of boom gates across parts of Lenasia South was driven largely by residents’ concerns over crime and the need to improve neighbourhood security.
Community representatives have previously argued that restricting access has helped deter criminal activity and provided residents with greater peace of mind.
The City itself acknowledged the perceived crime-deterrent benefits of security structures in correspondence reported by GLOBE POST in May 2025.
However, security concerns do not remove the requirement to comply with municipal regulations.
Public roads remain subject to the City’s legal framework, and the installation or operation of access restrictions must be authorised.
The requirements also raise practical questions about access for ambulances, fire engines, municipal maintenance teams, pedestrians and people with limited mobility.
Ayesha’s experience demonstrates how the operation of a security gate can have consequences beyond crime prevention.
For residents who depend on walking aids or have mobility difficulties, an inaccessible entrance can substantially affect their independence and ability to move around their neighbourhood.
The challenge for communities and authorities is therefore not simply whether gates should exist, but how safety measures can be introduced lawfully, fairly and without placing unreasonable barriers in the way of residents.
The JRA’s confirmation that no gates have been approved brings renewed attention to the responsibilities of applicants, community security committees and the City.
Questions remain over the locations covered by the four applications, when they were submitted, whether they meet the prescribed requirements and what is preventing final decisions.
There is also uncertainty over the status of the temporary reprieve granted in 2025 and whether any further arrangements have been made for existing structures.
While the absence of formal approval raises compliance concerns, it does not, on its own, establish what enforcement action the City has taken or intends to take against individual gates.
For residents contributing financially towards security installations, clarity is equally important. Communities need to understand whether their structures comply with municipal requirements and what obligations apply to those responsible for managing access.
The contrast between nine communities previously involved in the regularisation process and four applications currently awaiting decisions also warrants an explanation.
With no approvals granted, residents are entitled to clear information about the next steps and the implications for existing security arrangements.
The reopening of the Dahlia Street gate represents an important development for a resident whose daily movement had been affected.
But it does not settle the wider debate over security restrictions across Lenasia South.
Three years after GLOBE POST first highlighted the lack of compliance with the City’s approval process, the community remains without a single formally approved security gate, according to the JRA’s latest response.
The challenge is now to establish why the regularisation process has not produced approvals, how existing structures should operate in the meantime, and what practical measures can safeguard both neighbourhood security and public accessibility.
For Ward 120, the issue is no longer simply about installing gates to keep criminals out. It is also about ensuring that security measures do not shut residents out, and that those responsible for the process are held accountable for delivering a lawful, workable solution.
GLOBE POST will continue seeking clarity from the City, the Ward 120 Boom-Security Gate Committee and affected communities on the outstanding applications and the future of existing security restrictions.
Leave a Reply