TOI: City skyline set to change as SC okays clusters of towers: September 05, 2008

City skyline set to change as SC okays clusters of towers ……..Dhananjay Mahapatra | TNN
Citing Quality Of Life, Court Upholds Huge FSI For Redevpt Of Old Bldgs

New Delhi: The face of Mumbai will change forever as the Supreme Court on Thursday greenlighted the pulling down of all pre-1940 buildings, including chawls, to make way for highrises.

The highrises that would be constructed by the developers to replace over 16,000 old buildings, which are eligible for being pulled down and redeveloped, would have to accommodate the present tenants of the old buildings.

This means they would move from their dilapidated tenements and occupy flats with a minimum area of 225 sq ft in brand new buildings at no cost. However, in lieu of the free rehabilitation of tenants, the builder can make profits by exploiting a portion of the land to construct a tower which he can sell in the open market.

A bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and P Sathasivam upheld the Development Control Rule 33(7) as amended in 1999 and set aside the limitations on FSI and other restrictions imposed by the Bombay high court. DCR 33(7) will have immediate applicability to 16,502 buildings, which are listed under category A by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) since they were constructed prior to September 1, 1940.

These buildings, irrespective of whether they are dilapidated or not, can now be redeveloped whenever 70% of the tenants/occupants of such buildings came together along with their landlords for redevelopment of their properties. They would also be entitled to extra FSI as an incentive.

The court accepted MHADAs stand that under the DC regulation, houses with an area of minimum 225 sq ft would be provided free of cost to all tenants in these pre-1940 buildings.

While validating DCR 33(7), the bench took into account a survey conducted by the civic corporation in 1980-81 which showed that 30,237 buildings would have crossed their lifespan by 1996. The Kerkar Committee report also recorded that the vast majority of the buildings would have to be reconstructed, the SC noted. It also relied on a report on the Development Plan for Greater Bombay which showed that way back in 1981, 5,82,200 tenements were required to house the natural growth of population.

The SC, clearly relying on facts and figures, also recorded the fact that in 1991, nearly 73% of the population (living in such buildings) occupied one-room tenementsvertical slums; 18% lived in two-room flats. This meant that more than 90% lived in small areas.

HIGHRISE PRESSURE

WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID

It is clear that the (state govts) policy seeks to enhance the quality of lives of those living in very poor conditions The court accepted MHADAs stand that under DCR 33(7), houses with a minimum 225-sq ft area would be provided free to all tenants in pre-1940 buildings. Justifying the rule, it noted that in 1991, nearly 73% of the tenements were one-room and 18% two-room dwellings. Thus, more than 90% lived in small areas

WHAT IS DCR 33/7?

The controversdial Development Control Rule 33(7) was introduced in 1991 to provide for the reconstruction of old, dilapidated cessed buildings in the island city. It was amended in 1999 to give developers unlimited FSI

In 2005-06, the Bombay high court lifted its earlier stay and allowed redevelopment, but only of dilapidated buildings. It capped the overall FSI (floor space index) at 4

WHAT THE BOMBAY HC SAID

Urban environment of Mumbai is perched on a precipice… dividing line between existence and destruction is so tenuous…

The HC observed that if all pre-1940 buildingsa vast majority of which are in good conditionwere given permission for reconstruction with such a huge FSI incentive, it would lead to extra pressure on all civic facilities and infrastructure. It also said that Maharashtra must take a fresh look at a law that impacts not only thousands of old Mumbai tenants, but also the quality of life in the city

TALL STOREYS

There are 19,642 cessed buildings in the island city. 16,400 of them are pre-1940. About 1,000 buildings are redeveloped and about 1,000-1,500 are considered dilapidated

THE IMPACT

Thursdays apex court order comes as a big boon for redevelopers. It gives them almost unlimited FSI, as per the original DCR 33(7). They can now redevelop these buildings (a mere 5 feet apart) for huge profits, as long as they get the consent of at least 70% of the tenants of a building

HC reading not justified

New Delhi: The SC on Thursday upheld unlimited FSI for redevelopment of pre-1940 cessed buildings in the island city. Citing figures, a bench said, Those occupying large areas constitute only 2.7%. Between 1961 and 1991, the number of households increased to 20,88,000, most of which are only of 100 to 120 sq ft.

It is thus clear that the policy is to enhance the quality of lives of those living in such poor conditions, said Justice Pasayat. The HC was not justified in reading additional requirements into DCR 33(7) after holding the same to be valid, the bench said. The public spirited petitioners who had filed the original PIL before the HC in 2004 had been concerned with the problem of congestion of the population of the island city, which covers the area from Colaba in the south to Mahim and Sion in the north.

The infrastructure in the island city, particularly with respect to roads, water supply, sewage system, open areas and gardens, is overstretched and under extreme strain, the PIL had said, adding that the island city has already reached saturation point in terms of population.

According to the Report on the Development Plan of Greater Bombay, 1966, the total acreage of the island city is 17,388.83 acres and the ultimate population, which it can accommodate, is 32.5 lakh. An estimated 33.4 lakh people were already residing in the island city two years ago.

URLhttp://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTS8yMDA4LzA5LzA1I0FyMDAxMDA=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom