How viable are the tiny ‘plots for sale’ in the middle of nowhere?

A plot for sale in Utawala. Gated communities should be indeed encouraged in the interest of optimising on the shrinking urban and peri-urban spaces. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • In an attempt to maximise profits, some dealers are even going lower, to one-sixteenth-acre plots.
  • Overall, this challenge amplifies the need for the expedient implementation of our land use policy.
  • The national and county implementation organs need to be put in place urgently.

Some of my most trying moments come when and where least expected; like when someone you know requesting to be shown some plot far out in the middle of some vast undeveloped zone where the costs of relocating the perimeter boundaries would look disproportionately high.

Let me share two such experiences.

In the first one, someone needed to be shown some plot in the heart of Kajiado County, far from any known landmarks.

The other was off Kangundo Road, but so far inside that even the owner could not sufficiently describe or remember the location.

In each of the cases, the investments date back years, certainly not less than 10.

SUB-DIVISION SCHEMES

The plots were derived from sub-division schemes where some investor bought a piece of land and sub-divided it, generating hundreds of small plots.

These were then offered for sale and aggressively marketed through social networks, newspapers and radio stations.

The resultant commoditisation and commercialisation of land has become a vogue business model with some real estate actors.

Sizes of resultant plots have been standardised at 50 by 100 or 100 by 100 feet in width and length.

For the majority who prefer dealing in the imperial system of metrics when handling matters land, this translates to about one eighth or one quarter of an acre respectively.

MAXIMISE PROFITS

But in an attempt to maximise profits, some dealers are even going lower, to one-sixteenth-acre plots.

In the subject sites above, there were no serviceable access roads, power, water or sewer services nearby.

After viewing the plots, the respective owners returned to the city and waited for “development to get nearer”.

Close to two decades later, it has not.

But the owners continue to wait in hope.

The above experience allows us to enter discussion on a public matter that is yet to fully unfold.

Various questions beg. How far shall we go in fragmenting agricultural and pastoral land?

How come the organs entrusted with approval, usually the land control boards and county government planning units, allow this practice to continue unchecked? Is it that they lack the necessary technical capacity or have they become partisan facilitators?

FUTURE

What will be the future of some of these schemes where many tiny unserviced plots stand “in the middle of nowhere” and are hence unsuitable for commercial and residential purposes, yet are singularly inadequate for pastoralist or agricultural activities?

These few questions, among the many pertinent ones that beg, suffice to bring out the dilemma we face.

Looked at from a profit perspective, the schemes make sense.

The scheme drivers make quick cash. But the buyers and county governments lose out. Investment capital, which could perhaps be committed to other faster options, ends up tied for long periods of time.

The county governments also end up with land use planning challenges and unjustifiable pressure for provision of services.

Therefore, much as there is a strong case for investor gains, there is a weak one for the beneficiaries and public interest.

Striking a balance on this will hence be hard fought since a convergence is a recipe for political and executive influence.

INVESTORS

But county governments which wish to stem the practice will need to be prepared to take heavy punches from investors who have mainstreamed this model!

At the same time, landed and built environment professionals who facilitate the planning and implementation of the schemes, yet knowing that they undermine land use and are unviable for the individual buyers, should be bolder and advise otherwise.

While they await the anticipated land use plans, county governments could meanwhile issue interim guidelines to land control boards within their jurisdictions to avoid escalation of the malpractice.

It also behoves us to advise young investors to watch out for some of these rather attractive but unrewarding investment options which ultimately tie up their capital and savings with little hope for returns in the future.

GATED COMMUNITIES

But this caveat must not be misperceived to include investors who have invested in gated communities in strategic locations off highways or peripheries of urban centres.

Most such investors have preceded the developments with the construction of good access roads, the provision of power, water and even fibre optics for internet supply in some cases.

Such investments improve housing for Kenyans, enhance group security, reduce the costs of utility services and alleviate our housing deficit.

No one should expect large plot sizes in such circumstances unless where developers deliberately wish to provide graduated plot size categories at different purchase or rental rates.

Gated communities should be indeed encouraged in the interest of optimising on the shrinking urban and peri-urban spaces.

Overall, this challenge amplifies the need for the expedient implementation of our land use policy.

The national and county implementation organs need to be put in place urgently.

Mr Mwathane is a surveyor. [email protected]