Mumbai’s port land should be redeveloped to benefit, among
others, the dock workers and slum dwellers, says a recently released report by
city based NGOs Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA) and Hamara Shehar
Vikas Niyojan Abhiyaan. Darryl D’Monte analyses the report.
Mumbai’s port land extends over 752 hectares (ha or 1,858
acres), occupying one-eighth of Mumbai’s island city, making the Mumbai Port
Trust (MPT) the city’s largest owner of real estate. The port comprises the
largest of 12 ports owned by the central government. The 14-km-long eastern
waterfront stretches from Colaba at the southern tip to Wadala in the northeast
of the city.
However, with the development of the Jawaharlal Nehru Port
at Nhava-Sheva on the mainland across the creek from the island city, the MPT
is in decline. For two decades, the central and state governments have been
debating what to do with the land now valued at up to Rs 1 lac crore in the
market. MPT earns only Rs 200 crore a year from port revenue and by leasing out
such land to corporates like Taj Hotels, Hindustan and Bharat Petroleum.
The fate of Mumbai’s port land acquires national
significance because it will send a signal when other derelict industrial and
infrastructure land in older cities like Kolkata and Kanpur come up for
redevelopment.
Mumbai port around Darukhana, the site of ship-breaking industry. Pic: Prabirkumar Talukdar |
YUVA & HSM
Mumbai based NGOs Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action
(YUVA) and Hamara Shehar Vikas Niyojan Abhiyaan Mumbai (HSM) recently released
a study report titled People’s Perspective on the port redevelopment in which
they question the corporatisation of ports, recommended by the World Bank in
its India Port Strategy Report in 1995.
The World Bank report suggested large-scale privatisation,
easing of government controls, modernization of infrastructure and making way
for experts to manage port affairs. Last year, an international consultant was
appointed to suggest amendments of the Major Ports Act, 1963.
The NGOs allege that once converted into entities under the
Companies Act, ports will get financial and operational autonomy. This will
enable ports to monetise land, which is their biggest asset, and poor
stakeholders like the workers, slum dwellers and fisherfolk will get a raw deal
in the process.
In a chapter titled “Mumbai in the Dock”, which dealt with
this subject in a book I published in 2002, Ripping the Fabric: The Decline of Mumbai
and its Mills (OUP), I cited how London’s Docklands were privatised by Margaret
Thatcher, virtually doing away with planning. Among other problems, this
neglected the need of local residents, many of of them Bangladeshis, and didn’t
address their housing or employment.
The NGOs have conducted a survey of the encroachments and
informal settlements of the poor on MPT land. This, they say, will establish
the right of these communities and give them a slice of the pie when the land
is up for redevelopment.
They call for abandoning current planning practices which
have vitiated the holistic development of Mumbai and argue for an inclusive,
participatory model which takes all stakeholders into account. It must also
prioritise social goals and people’s concerns.
The NGOs advocate incorporating these concerns into the
draft Development Plan, the earlier version of which was scrapped after public
outcry earlier this year and is now being redrafted. However, this is the
domain of the municipal corporation, whereas the MPT land belongs to the
central government.
The case of the mill land
From the mid-1990s, Mumbaikars lost the opportunity to wrest
162 ha (400 acres) for public housing and open spaces when the land occupied by
the mills, 242 ha (600 acres) was to be redeveloped, according to Mills for
Sale: The Way Ahead (Marg, 2007), edited by me. The mills occupied only a third
that the docks do, and the redevelopment of the latter should avoid the
mistakes committed in the former instance.
In 1991, the Maharashtra government instituted a one-third
formula, whereby mill owners or developers had to surrender a third of the plot
they occupied for low-cost housing, another third to the municipal corporation
for amenities like open space, and sell or develop the remaining third.
However, they received floor-space index or buildable rights in relation to the
size of the plots on the two-thirds they gave up.
In 2001, the state government introduced a new clause, which
required owners to part with two-thirds of only vacant land. Since mills – for
that matter, factories or ports – have a large footprint, Mumbai lost out in
the process. The metropolis has only 1.2 sq metre of open space per inhabitant
today, one of the lowest in the world, specially for a mega city with more than
10 million people.
Rani Jadhav panel report
The two NGOs have analysed the proposal of a committee
headed by the former MPT Chair, Rani Jadhav, which was submitted last year but
has still not been made public. However, repeated leaks have revealed its
findings.
Mumbai port redevelopment plan, Rani Jadhav report. Pic: Urban Design Research Institute |
It ascribes the dereliction of MPT docklands to changes in
the shipping industry, mainly to the switch to container traffic, which Mumbai
can’t accommodate due to its shallow draft. This explains why bigger ships move
to Nhava-Sheva.
The NGOs question the excessive emphasis in Jadhav’s report
on catering to the tourism industry, with a “world-class” cruise terminal for
luxury liners and a giant Ferris wheel on the lines of the London Eye. It also
recommends a floating hotel or “floatel”, food courts and creation of 161 ha (400
acres) of open space. Many such activities may exclude locals not only from
employment but access.
Jadhav’s report begins by pointing out that port cities
worldwide face the global syndrome of the de-industrialisation of city centres.
The relocation of industrial activity due to modernization of manufacturing and
goods handling methods has led to dereliction and redundancy in vast tracts of
inner city harbours.
MPT’s inept handling of changes in cargo and shipping has
resulted in a shift of such activities to new ports, leaving land open for a
variety of entertainment and waterfront activities that, it says, can be
enjoyed by all classes of society.
The report cites how MPT handled 59 million tonnes of cargo
in 2013-14, around a tenth of that handled by major ports. As much as 77
percent of its cargo -- 61 percent of ‘liquid bulk’ like oil products and 16
percent for transshipment to other centres – is handled offshore, which shows
that the port can remain operational despite opening large tracts for redevelopment.
The revenue from liquid cargo makes up for the losses on
general goods. MPT also has to pay large pensions to its retired dockworkers.
The report recommends that future activities should be offshore, for which the
MPT has built a long jetty, enabling larger oil tankers to dock, releasing the
pressure on the waterfront and making it available for public purposes.
As much as 275 ha have been leased to public sector
companies, oil and petroleum industries and the defence authorities. Another
136 ha have been leased to private parties for commercial uses.
After litigation, the MPT was able to retrieve 64 ha from
tenants. According to an incomplete survey by the port estate department in
2002, 7.5 ha have been encroached upon, with 14,365 hutments.
Certain areas on the waterfront have been transformed into
informal small-scale industrial units for ship-breaking – a hazardous and often
banned activity – and ship repairs etc that even supply materials and skills
for the country as a whole. These workers have been classified an informal and
migrant, and the informal economy occupies this 7.5 ha.
A ship-breaking unit in Darukhana, Mumbai port. Pic: Prabirkumar Talukdar |
The Jadhav report envisions opening up 28km of the
waterfront – twice the current length – much of which is occupied by derelict
docks. A 121 ha area will be created into an environment zone and at least 30
percent of the land will be converted into parks, playgrounds, plaza, maidans
and so on.
Its vision is described as Open – for new recreation and
tourism uses; Connected – for seamless local, regional and national
connectivity, through multiple transport modes on land and sea; and Green –
with promenades and open spaces.
A citizens’ initiative called APLI – A Port Land Initiative
– Mumbai took a more people-friendly approach towards redeveloping the area
with mixed-use residential areas which would include “project affected people”,
a heritage corridor centred around the much-neglected Sewri Fort, a watersports
facility to replace the toxic ship-breaking yard and a marina, along with a
cruise ship terminal. It had the backing of the Indian Merchants’ Chamber and
the Graduate School of Architecture of Columbia University.
What the NGOs report
The two NGOs take a different view of what they term a
vibrant informal economy that has been in existence there for decades. They
oppose the proposal to create a centralised planning agency, the MP Land
Development Authority, which will bypass the municipal corporation. The
authority can constitute a Special Planning Authority under the Maharashtra
Regional and Town Planning (MR&TP) Act, negating any role of elected
representatives.
By declaring the port “sick”, exactly like the 54 cotton
mills were, the government is opening up a Pandora’s Box of privatisation, they
fear. Most mills, almost entirely those in private hands but also those in the
public sector, have been transformed into malls, glitzy office complexes and
high-end residential towers.
The rehabilitation of these workers when they are displaced
hasn’t been addressed. There is no consistent housing policy, and those living
in the port communities live a “sub-human” life. There are ten toilet seats for
around 15000 people.
The NGOs estimate there are 30000 slum households – twice
what the 2002 survey assessed -- with 150000 people on this land. Mumbai city
is a stakeholder too, they assert, in sharp contrast to what happened with the
mills.
The two NGOs argue that Section 33 of the MR&TP Act also
gives a local planning authority powers to prepare detailed micro-level plans
for areas requiring “comprehensive development”. This follows the same process
as preparing the 20-year Development Plan, which requires public hearings at
the local level.
Other port redevelopment projects
They have cited international experience to bolster their
case. London, New York, Toronto, Sydney, Singapore and Barcelona are some
cities which have rejuvenated their docklands with varying results, as we have
seen in London’s case. The City in London – with a capital C, the world’s
financial capital – is situated there and there is little local employment or
housing.
The Jadhav committee looked somewhat closer home, at ‘smart
city’ examples of Hong Kong, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and even Australia, where
digital technologies boost port efficiency and reduce the use of resources.
The NGOs specially cite the redeveloped port area of Ciudad
Vieja, in Montevideo, Uruguay, which is home to primarily poor residents in
spite of banks, trading companies and other business enterprises in the
vicinity. There is a special scheme for this area, within the overall
Montevideo plan. The heritage of this historical city centre is preserved and
the decline of its population arrested by projects to resettle inhabitants.
There are moves against urban segregation, while more public space has been
opened to the public, with improved public transport and restrictions on the
entry of cars.
In Singapore, which has the advantage of a deepwater port,
efficiency has ensured the vibrancy of this area. Long term planning, rigid
political control and decisive administration are the key political elements
that have earned the city-state its exemplary status for urban planning.
Darryl D'Monte
25 October 2015
Darryl D'Monte, former Resident Editor of The Times of India
in Mumbai, is Chairperson of the Forum of Environmental Journalists of India
and founder President of the International Federation of Environmental
Journalists.
No comments:
Post a Comment