Living on the edge in a bustling city
FPJ published a 46-part series on dilapidated buildings. We showcased these shaky structures that continue to be occupied, posing a challenge for the authorities The endless war Unaffordable and far off temporary accommodation options Tenants challenge
The issue of dangerous and dilapidated buildings has been plaguing the city for decades. Every year before the monsoon, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) publishes a list of highly dilapidated (C1 category) structures in the city and asks residents to vacate them. Yet, scores of residents continue to risk their lives and occupy them. In some cases, many have lost their lives after the structure has collapsed.
As part of its highlyread series ‘Buildings on the Brink’, the Free Press Journal team visited 46 dangerous buildings. The paper also spoke to tenants, landlords and officials who gave a lowdown of the situation at ground zero. According to BMC data, there are 407 dilapidated buildings in the city, including 322 private structures, 59 owned by the BMC and 26 state government buildings. Most of these are either under litigation, pending with the technical advisory committee (TAC) or residents/tenants have refused to move out, despite the BMC disconnecting their water and electricity supply.
The biggest challenge faced by development agencies is the delay in redevelopment. Illegal modifications carried out in these old structures are rampant, which puts the lives of residents at grave risk. While redevelopment takes time, the BMC has been monitoring old and dilapidated structures by listing them under various categories. If a building is listed under the C1 category, it needs to be vacated and demolished immediately. Even the courts have upheld the demolition notices of such buildings.
However, this has just brought the names and numbers of such rickety, old and dilapidated buildings to light and not actually prevented innumerable collapses in the past few years.
The list, however, does not include illegal structures that account for most of the collapses.“They are not included in the figures because they shouldn’t exist,” said BMC’s assistant municipal commissioner (removal of encroachments department) Anant Bhagwatkar. “Slums have more chances of collapsing because they have a lot of unauthorized structures with illegal alterations,” he added.
The BMC classifies dilapidated buildings as C1, C2A, C2B and C3. If a building falls under C1 category, it needs to be vacated immediately and demolished. Under C2A, the dangerous parts of the building need to be demolished and in C2B, the structure only requires structural repairs and a C3 building requires minor repairs. Currently, (2020-21) MCGM has classified 407 buildings as C1 and about 60,000 as C2.
According to BMC rules, residents living in buildings that are over 30 years old have to carry out structural audits. Those falling in the C1 list and can’t be repaired have to be vacated. Elaborating -
on the procedure of listing a building under C1, Bhagwatkar said, “Buildings that are 30 years and older fall under this category. We inspect the general conditions and look for structural weaknesses. The category is applied only after a structural audit, following which a notice under Section 353B of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act for eviction is issued.”
“However, after receiving BMC notices, many residents move court or appeal before the TAC to get the structural audit reports assessed. On many occasions, the BMC also takes an undertaking from residents that they are living in the dilapidated building at their own risk and cost,” said another civic official.
Apart from issuing notices and pamphlets in various wards, officials have prepared a presentation, which includes videos and pictures of past building collapses, to convince residents to move out. In the backdrop of a building collapses in Malwani in June and Ulhasnagar in May, state urban development department minister Eknath Shinde directed municipal corporations within Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) to develop a cluster plan for the redevelopment of dilapidated buildings in the areas. However, the plan should have been implemented years ago, experts say.
Attempts at redevelopment, whether by the government or private entities, have failed because the occupants refuse to leave despite legal notices being served. Even attempts to forcibly evict them have not made progress.
There are instances when buildings are on the verge of collapse and have been officially declared dangerous but tenants refuse to leave arguing and citing examples of how some of the relocated families have been in transit accommodation for a decade, facing uncertainty over possession of a redeveloped house.
Besides, tenants do not find alternative accommodations suitable and demand better options. The landlords are either unable or unwilling to comply. The tenants cannot afford alternative accommodation in the same locality. “We have seen how developers exploit tenants. We know a building nearby that went for redevelopment, they are now waiting for their home for over nine years. What if this happens to us and the builder stops paying rent as well? However, our landlord is very supportive. He has always maintained transparency. He did not sign the agreement until all terms were cleared with the developer. The building is dangerous but if we move out just like that we may never get our homes back,” said T V Shah, one of the tenants of Krishna Bhavan in Vile Parel and former engineer from the BMC’s hydraulic department.
There are several instances where findings of the pre-monsoon survey have been challenged by residents of the structure that has been declared C1. Residents claim that the list of dilapidated buildings prepared by the civic body is faulty as they have got their building checked by private structural engineers who claim the building is suitable to live and does not need to be vacated.
Residents then urge the civic body to change the classification of their building from C1 (highly dangerous) to C2 (which is repairable and no need to be demolished).
One such example is Nobel Chambers (RPI House) in south Mumbai’s Fort area its tenants challenged the audit by the BMC’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and moved the court in 2019, saying the building isn’t dilapidated and just needs repairs.
One of the 38 tenants who moved court insisted that the building does not come under the C1 category, and is structurally strong, with operational lifts. The tenant said, “Most of us are professionals and have been tenants in Nobel chambers for seven to eight decades. Prior to us, our kin held offices here. It withstood cyclones like Nisarg, Tauktae and even heavy rainfall. The building just needs repairs and there is no need to pull it down.”
There are cases where buildings declared dilapidate fall under no development zone or plot surrounded by sensitive areas like defence land/depot. One such example is tenants living in buildings operating ‘pagdi’ system. One such structure is Narayan Nagar building No.1 in Ghatkopar, which was constructed in 1942. Residents are unwilling to vacate the building as they claim there is no scope for redevelopment as the building falls within the restricted radius of 500 meters from the naval depot. They have obtained a stay order from the city civil court as the BMC has been unable to offer any transit accommodation to the affected tenants, a resident said.
Residents say if they move out of the building they will have to keep paying rent from their own pocket as neither the BMC, nor the landlord has offered any alternative accommodation.
Many tenants move court against the landlords. Until the case resolves, tenants continue to live in buildings that are declared highly dilapidated by the BMC. There have been cases wherein development has been stuck due to court cases. There are instances where tenants had alleged that after landlords sell the places to developers, they get the building declared dangerous through the BMC to oust tenants and get the structure vacated. The developers, in turn, earn extra FSI.
Besides, there are other complications like ownership issues. One such example is Jani Niketan building in Mulund that was declared dangerous is 2014. After seven years, the BMC initiated eviction and demolition notices to residents of Jani Niketan building in Mulund. The building was supposed to go for redevelopment, but in vain.
An MoU was also signed in 2006 between nine landowners, of which two died, and M/s Shree Mangesh Constructions. An agreement was signed that stated additional TDR/FSI is essential to make the project financially viable for which they would have to wait for five years from the date of signing the agreement. However, till date, no work has been initiated.
“happens We have seen how developers exploit tenants. We know a building nearby that went into redevelopment; the residents are now waiting for their homes for over nine years. What if this to us and the builder stops paying rent as well? T V SHAH, ONE OF THE TENANTS OF KRISHNA BHAVAN
Issues/hurdles that we stumbled upon