2007.05: Letter to Editor, National Geographic

I appreciated the article titled “Dharavi: Mumbai’s ShadowCity” in your May issue of National Geographic. SPARC is currently engaged in discussions with the Government specifically on the “people” issues cited in your article.

As it stands today, the people of Dharavi do not know where within the township they will be rehabilitated or the types of structures they will inhabit. Legal provisions have been made to re-house people in 14+ story towers should the “feasibility of development” require such rehabilitation. These people not only live in Dharavi, but also work in the area, as noted in your article. The act of “verticalization” will disrupt the foundation of business in Dharavi. We are opposed to redevelopment that will lead to the destruction of livelihoods.

SPARC is working with two ArchitecturalColleges as well as several citizen groups to promote low-rise high density redevelopment whereby residents of Dharavi may continue income generating activities post rehabilitation.

Our biggest concerns are the lack of publicly available information and the non-collaborative method in which this project has been handled. As noted by your article, the Mehta plan ignores the concept of consent by the slum dwellers. If the redevelopment plan is such a great deal for the residents, why not obtain their consent? Additionally, aside from the bright blue presentations that Mr. Mukesh Mehta makes on a regular basis, we have received no detailed information from him or the Government on the proposed development plan. Missing are:

1.The specific layouts of the rehabilitation buildings,

2.Detailed plans to rehabilitate livelihoods following redevelopment,

3.Locations of the proposed sale buildings that will offset the redevelopment costs,

4.Livability conditions post redevelopment (he is offering only 0.1 meters of open space per person, compared to nearly 1.28 meters being offered in one of our low-rise high density scenarios.

5.The expected increase in traffic and stress on infrastructure.

We are expecting to meet with the Chief Minister in a few days to address these issues and hope that the Government will pause and reconsider who is benefiting from this redevelopment and if the process in which it is progressing is an ideal model for creating a slum free India. We are not opposed to profitability, though we question the final result of the current Mehta model which would generate 33% more space for selling than for rehabilitation. There is a better way and we have the ability to demonstrate it.

Sundar Burra
Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres (SPARC)