DNA conversation: Redevelopment is resurrection of a dying city

From left: Nishant Agarwal, Sunny Bijlani, Ashok Mohanani, Amin Patel, Boman R Irani and Ramesh Prabhu at the DNA Conversations on redevelopment issues in the city.

DNA

Three years ago the redevelopment of Mumbai was the talk of the town.It seemed then that the state government was finally willing to give this a big boost. After all, cities remain vibrant if people inhabiting them are zestful.But you cannot expect people to exude zest when most buildings in the city are crumbling.

Mumbai's other problem: It's almost an island with very little fresh land for development. Hence existing crumbling buildings must be redeveloped. But for one reason or the other, this has not happened even after the initial euphoria three years ago.

Now, once again, it appears the problem is being addressed with renewed vigour, except for some vexatious issues like buildings on defence lands. These buildings came up legally, but now the defence does not want redevelopment on its lands.So what are the people, who legally bought or built houses there to do? Will the defence buy back their houses at market prices? Or will there be a new policy?

Except for such tricky issues, DNA managed to get some excellent views on the subject from a panel of experts it invited for a Conversation. The panel comprised (in alphabetical order) Nishant Agarwal (managing director, Avighna India), Sunny Bijlani (director Supreme Universal), Boman R Irani (chairman and managing director, Rustomjee), Ashok Mohanani (chairman and managing director, Ekta World), Amin Patel (MLA, Government of Maharashtra) and Ramesh Prabhu (chairman, Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association).

Given below are edited experts of the discussion that was moderated by DNAs RN Bhaskar, with editorial support from Ashutosh Shukla:

DNA: We would like to understand from you the current situation regarding redevelopment in Mumbai. Boman R Irani: There is need for a long-term sustainable redevelopment policy. When I say this, I mean that anything that is decided in terms of what is required for redevelopment should be cast in concrete and not just in hay. What is necessary is to have a policy that will at least stay in place for the next 10 to 15 years, if not more. And the idea is you can incrementally better the policy. But you cannot pull the rug off from under the developers' feet.

Any kind of redevelopment and all my friends out here will agree will take anywhere between one to three years to mature. Unfortunately, by the time you start talking to the members and go around meeting up with them giving proposals nowadays, policies change. The developers reach a stage when they release ads in newspapers, run the process, people begin bidding on that basis, and suddenly the policy changes.

Halfway through or even after a developer has paid a substantial amount of the deposit the government pulls the rug away and says, Well, we had promised you that wed give you 2.5 FSI [floor space index, which is the ratio between the land area and the built-up area of the premises, subject to regulations], but now its got to be on the basis of sharing. It happened in MHADA [Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority] some time back on September 20, 2010. They just decided that no more FSI is to be given against premium.

Visit link:
DNA conversation: Redevelopment is resurrection of a dying city