Starwood park residents ask court to stop Phoenix housing development

Tags

---

13-11-2026
Read : 13 times
IOL
Source

Residents are seeking an interim interdict to halt construction on a Phoenix property they say has operated as a community park for decades.

The developers dispute the application and say substantial money has already been spent on the project.

The Starwood Estate Residents Association (Sera), represented by attorney Tashya Giyapersad, is seeking an interim interdict to halt further development on the property pending the determination of disputes surrounding its allocation, zoning, sale and development approvals.

Sera maintains that the land has been used as a public recreational space for more than 40 years and that its loss would deprive the community of an important shared facility.

The respondents are the eThekwini Municipality, its city manager and head of human settlements, the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), Madupha’s Business Enterprise CC (Madupha) and Praveen Choonilall Construction (PCC) Pty Ltd.

In his founding affidavit, resident and Sera’s chairperson, Brian Singh, said that developments on the park raised concerns about the municipality’s handling of land allocated under its Municipal Human Settlements Infill Housing Programme (MHSIHP), as well as the lack of public participation and questions about planning approvals.

He said around the year 2000, the municipality resolved to use vacant sites in Phoenix to facilitate affordable housing for first-time homebuyers from lower- and middle-income groups.

Under the programme, serviced vacant sites were to be sold to developers appointed through a procurement process and the conditions required the sites to be developed for affordable housing and allocated to approved beneficiaries within specified income bands.

According to Singh, the municipality advertised a tender in 2002 inviting private developers to develop 130 sites. Seventeen submissions were received, and three developers were appointed in November that year. All three later ceased to be service providers to the programme.

He alleged that further developers were subsequently appointed without a fresh or lawful procurement process.

“I am advised that from about 2012, the fifth respondent (Madupha) entered the programme as a subcontractor without any tender. The fifth respondent subsequently claimed to have concluded a joint venture with the sixth respondent (PCC),” Singh said in the affidavit.

Singh said a complaint in 2019 led to an SIU investigation, which reportedly found that developer appointments had breached section 217 of the Constitution, the municipality’s Supply Chain Management Policy, and the Municipal Finance Management Act.

The SIU subsequently approached the Special Tribunal to review and set aside developer appointments, including Madupha, and to recover allegedly unlawfully derived profits.

Singh said the tribunal later granted an order setting aside the appointments and agreements in question.

He believed the park had been treated by the respondents as land falling under the housing programme.

A Deeds Registry search, according to Singh, confirmed that the property remained registered in the municipality’s name.

“I respectfully submit that any purported alienation, transfer or sale of the property to a private person or entity absent a lawful procurement process and public participation would be unlawful.” 

Singh said that the property was not, and had never been, vacant, derelict or neglected land. 

“It has existed as a public park for more than forty years and has been continuously maintained by the surrounding community for more than 30 years. It was from time to time also maintained by the first respondent (eThekwini Municipality).”

Singh said the park served as a central communal facility utilised for the association’s annual general meetings, gatherings of senior citizens, and recreational activities by children for soccer, skateboarding and basketball among others. 

He said a non-governmental organisation, known as Needy Feedy,  conducted feeding schemes from this location, and that the community had made efforts over several years to preserve the land for communal use.

“About two years ago, the association formally approached the municipality with a proposal to purchase the property and retain it as a community facility, including the proposed establishment of an educare centre. The first respondent did not respond.”

He said more recently, an association member, who lived next to the park, offered R2 million to purchase the property through lawful municipal processes, with the intention of preserving it for community use.

“That offer too was spurned,” said Singh.

The association alleges that a few months ago, the park was subsequently offered for private sale.

Singh said three residents independently reported that a man had approached them with an offer to sell the property for R2 million. 

“I am aware that (the man) is closely aligned with, and acts in the interests of, certain of the developers operating in the area.”

Singh added that committee members of the association had a meeting with the man at a shopping mall. 

“In the course of the meeting he asserted that he was directly involved in the development project together with the developers; that the committee did not understand who it was dealing with and that he was ‘untouchable’; that the committee was ‘playing with the wrong people’; and that he and the developers possessed sufficient financial resources to engage attorneys and senior counsel.”

Singh said the man also referred to an individual whom he knew to be associated with Madupha, and another well-known businessman, and indicated that a “deal” could be reached provided that nothing was reduced to writing.

“The committee rejected any such proposal and informed him that the matter was non-negotiable and that the land was to be left undisturbed.” 

Singh said that in May, upon attending the site, he observed that labourers had begun digging trenches. 

“The site development board erected at the property reflected Madupha Enterprises as the developer and P.C. Construction as the contractor. This caused immediate concern, given that the appointment of the fifth respondent had been reviewed and set aside, and given that the fifth respondent was then recorded as blacklisted on the first respondent's database.”

Singh said the association’s committee thereafter addressed correspondence to the relevant municipal authorities raising their concerns. 

Among the concerns were non-compliance with signage by-laws; excavation activities undertaken without adequate safety measures; unrestricted public access to hazardous areas; potential breaches of occupational health and safety requirements; the absence of approved building plans on site; possible zoning and land-use contraventions; and the absence of lawful planning and environmental approvals. 

He said the pace of the alleged unlawful development had recently escalated. 

These include fencing being erected, digging of a trench for a single dwelling, and concreting works. 

Singh said approximately four to five courses of brickwork have been laid. 

“The works are presently confined to approximately one-quarter of the property, where I am informed two duplex units are being erected. The remainder of the property presently remains intact and undeveloped.” 

Singh said the association had established a prima facie right to the relief sought, arising from the decision of the SIU, the setting aside of the impugned appointments, and their interest in the lawful administration of the MHSIHP. 

However, in his answering affidavit, Praveen Choonilall, director of PCC, disputed the association's entitlement to stop the development, saying the company had invested approximately R1.8 million in the project.

Choonilall said PCC began construction in March 2026, with work stopping on June 26 after the company received a blacklisting letter from the municipality. 

He said construction resumed after a high court decision on August 18.

Choonilall said that by September 1, brickwork had reached almost window height and construction had since progressed to the point where a roof had been installed.

He said one dwelling was physically complete, while the foundation for a second had been prepared. 

He said the expenditure included surveying, architectural and engineering costs, geotechnical inspections, construction materials and labour.

Choonilall said PCC's involvement was governed by a joint venture with Madupha, with it contributing development expertise and PCC providing funding and undertaking construction.

However, he said that PCC did not claim ownership of the property merely because it had funded or undertaken construction work.

Choonilall said in his affidavit that stopping work on the nearly completed dwelling would expose the company to further financial losses, security expenses and additional costs.

Madupha's sole member, Lindiwe Beauty Ntobela, in her affidavit, denied knowledge of several allegations made by Sera.

Ntobela said she managed the company's day-to-day affairs before its provisional liquidation.

She disputed having knowledge of the park's alleged 40-year history and the community's efforts to maintain it.

She said she visited the property after its allocation on March 4, 2025, and found it at the time to be “neglected and overgrown, with dilapidated playground equipment and vegetation encroaching on the basketball court and its fencing”.

Ntobela also denied knowledge of alleged discussions about a private sale, saying she had not authorised anyone to negotiate or sell the land on Madupha's behalf.

She said the man worked for Madupha as a site manager from 2015 until June 2026, and that she did not give him any authority to sell the land. 

Ntobela said she also did not attend any meetings and did not authorise anyone to participate in discussions attributed to her. 

“What others said there is outside my knowledge and is not admitted.”

The eThekwini Municipality said: “Given that the matter is currently before the court, the city is not in a position to comment on the merits.”