BMC's Standing Committee not convinced with Zaveri building's '100% repair'
After the mid-day published a report about the reconstruction of the structure under the name of repairs, a team from the BMC’s committee visited the site on Monday; will table a report in the next meeting
The case of a dilapidated building in south Mumbai, whose residents submitted a proposal for “100 per cent repair” instead of redevelopment, has now come under the BMC standing committee’s scanner. A team from the committee visited the ground-plus-four-storey building in Zaveri Bazaar on Monday for inspection.
mid-day’s report on May 10
The committee, led by chairman Yashodhar Phanse, leader of the house Trushna Vishwasrao, chairman of education committee Vinod Shelar, along with BJP members Manoj Kotak and Dilip Patel, visited the building in Third Agyari Lane. While the BMC administration has reportedly given their nod for the 100 per cent repair, the committee is not convinced yet.
The team is expected to submit their report on the building before the meeting next week, for further discussion. Speaking on the issue, Kotak said, “We are not convinced that a go-ahead should be given to this proposal. We will discuss the issue in the meeting scheduled next week.”
mid-day had reported on May 10, how the building, which was declared dilapidated in June 2012, first sought permission for partial repairs. However, once the work started in March 2013, it was noticed that the building was not repairable and had to be reconstructed.
However, the residents appointed a private architect and submitted a proposal for ‘100 per cent repair’ to the BMC’s building proposal department. An official, on condition of anonymity, said that residents did not want to go for an official redevelopment or reconstruction, as they would have to face a space crunch with regulations asking for open space of 1.5 metres on all sides, when they had 537 sq m of area to begin with.
Yashodhar Phanse, the chairman of the committee, said, “After studying the case, we will table the report before the committee for discussion, and then decide whether the project should be cleared or not.”