Why demand 2.5 FSI when redevelopment can be done in 1 or 1.5?
This question arises after the residents of C-2 type in Vashi demand 2.5 FSI against GDCR
By Shilpa Suryawanshi
NAVI MUMBAI: In 2007, i.e. 4 years back, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, Powai had done structural audit of C-2 type building numbers 1 to 10, in sector.16, Vashi. In its report these buildings were categorized in ‘category: c1’ which means ‘Buildings are in extremely dangerous condition and may collapse any time soon.’
Almost four years back, the C-2 type Apartment Owners Association (AOA) was in possession of IIT report but interestingly it approached Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) only in 2010. It is questionable that if buildings were declared as dilapidated and inhabitable, then why AOA waited for 4 years and not vacated the buildings soon after the report?
The proposal of AOA regarding declaring these buildings dilapidated was submitted to NMMC in 2010.
Soon after having proposal in hand, NMMC Commissioner, Bhaskar Wankhede appointed committee for reviewing the proposal of AOA. Committee agreed with the IIT report and sent letter to AOA stating that buildings are dilapidated.
The Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation’s Government Development Control Rule (GDCR) clearly states that if buildings are declared as unsafe then they should be vacated immediately or within the specific period. In addition to this, it also mentions that if the owner or occupier fails, neglects or refuses to comply with the notice then corporation should remove the danger by demolition or by repair. Now if one goes by that rule then under the directives of Municipal Commissioner, these buildings should have been vacated long back without delay.
Encroachment division head (of NMMC), Subhash Gaikar who was one of the members in Committee said, “Under the directive of Commissioner we have given notification in news paper and have suggested to association that buildings are in dilapidated condition.” He added, “After publishing notification and sending letter to association our responsibility has ceased.” His statement is clearly in non-compliance with GDCR in which it is clearly stated that if owner neglects the notice then corporation must remove the danger by immediate demolition.
Now the Residents dwelling in these buildings are blaming CIDCO for poor construction and instead of reconstructing buildings are demanding 2.5 FSI whereas as a matter of fact these buildings must be built in 1.00 FSI, as the same provision is also mentioned in GDCR, although corporation is inclined to approve 1.5 FSI through change-of-user, but there is a stay on the same.
President of AOA, Subhash Shewale, who is demanding 2.5 FSI said, “In near future we may start reconstruction work with 1.5 FSI (even when there is a stay on change-of-user) but at the same time we will keep provision for 2.5, as we are sure that Naik will get it sanctioned for us.” While vying for 2.5 FSI he has full faith in Thane Guardian Minister Ganesh Naik and MLA Sandeep Naik that they will win additional FSI from state government.
RTI activist, who has unearthed hidden facts said, “When these buildings can simply be redeveloped in 1 FSI, or say, 1.5 FSI, through change-of-user, then on what basis the said association is demanding for 2.5 FSI.” He continued, “These buildings were just built in 80’s besides later the association had also carried out extension and repair work of buildings, then how can they be declared as dilapidated.” He is also doubtful about the IIT report, he said, “How can IIT declare these buildings dilapidated which were repaired and extended just four years back by association. If anyone is truly going to benefit out of redevelopment or reconstruction then it will be no one but builder’s lobby.”
Builders lobby will benefit because if the height of buildings is increased then the value of land will go up too, besides due to additional FSI, residents will get bigger flats.
In the present case, said association ethically cannot blame CIDCO for poor construction since in past, association itself had repaired and extended buildings, besides if reconstruction was no good then how NMMC’s Town Planning department gave Occupancy Certificate to buildings.
If buildings are given additional FSI in Navi Mumbai then it will create a load on municipal services, likewise with increasing population, the city will feel immense pressure in terms of accommodation of vehicles in limited space.
In current scenario when corporation is already finding it difficult to accommodate vehicles, then additional FSI if at all sanctioned, then no wonder it’s bound to play havoc in so called ‘planned city’.
Excellent article from Newsband