MORE BUYERS THAN PLOTS AT MKHOSI TOWNSHIP?

MANZINI – Did the demand for plots exceed the available land at Mkhosi Township?

Victoria Kelly, while presenting before the Zonke Magagula-led Commission of Enquiry on the Mkhosi Township Petition, has claimed that during a briefing held on May 28, 2001, they were informed that available plots were 500 while there were 160. She said prospective property owners were also informed during the meeting that the township had been approved for human settlement while also timeframes of the progress made were shared.

Kelly submitted that her plot was 1 188 metres squared and it retailed at E47 520 at the time. She submitted this was plot number 1857/16. However, this she claimed, altered in a meeting held in July 2010 as she was informed of a new cost price, plot size and number. The hopeful property owner submitted that during this meeting there was a questionnaire which sought to establish from property owners if they were willing to procure a plot with a standard plan house or  plot and house with own plan or plot and build or plot and build later. “I chose plot only and my finances were to be available later than six months,” she claimed.

Subsequent to this meeting, she purported that there was another meeting held on July 27, 2013, where they were informed of the township’s modification and they were informed of the justifications. She supposed that the reason advanced for the price modification was that the cost of the infrastructure had hiked and affected the affordability hence they were reduced to make them affordable. In light of this, Kelly alleged that she was offered a plot measuring 1 007 m2  which she signed for with a comment on the side stating that she was not happy about being moved from the initial site she had chosen (1857/16).

“I was not happy to be moved towards a river, but again one could understand the developments that led to the high costs while also making it available to many people as it is not finite,” she submitted. After a while, she claimed that in 2020 someone informed her that her name was listed as one of the people that had been refunded. In order to verify these allegations, Kelly claimed to have visited the municipality’s offices as the claim that she was refunded meant that she was no longer an aspirant property owner. “I was assisted by Muzomusha Magagula who assured me that I was still part of the prospective owners,” she submitted.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: