For a balanced land management
An effective regulatory body must be created to supervise land transactions
By Dr Noman Ahmed
There have been quite a few reports about land scams these days. Procedures of land transactions, development, and transfers are executed. In urban areas, advertisements of land schemes are found everywhere.
Eye-catching images of lush green access ways and an overall up market profile make most of these schemes the ultimate aspiration for the masses. Despite the reality that city and regional planning is seldom applied in real professional sense, no proposed township stops short of claiming the ambience of technological advancement.
Land is not comparable to other commodities because it is finite. Technology or science can create many entities but land remains a non-extendable measure. Intelligent, judicious and sustainable use of land is the underlying principle of most city planning exercises. Livable cities are those where this principle has been respected in a letter and spirit.
London, New York, Sydney, and Los Angeles are all mega cites. They have experienced enormous pressures on their land development priorities. In comparative terms, these cities have been able to grapple with speculative pressures on land in a commendable manner. Ankara, the capital of Turkey, for example, experienced very rapid urbanisation. To deal with the issue of safeguarding its land assets as well as urban environmental quality, a huge plantation drive was undertaken by the Middle East Technical University — a well-known institution in Ankara.
Millions of full-grown trees were added to cityscape in a couple of decades. The effort was so outstanding that it was bestowed the Aga Khan Award for Architecture a few years ago. Approach in all of these and many other attempts is common — to protect the land from misuse and undesirable commercialisation. They offer worthwhile lessons to be learned.
Despite economic slowdown, new real estate ventures are picking up. The investments in the real estate are considered to be safer in comparison to the other options. This aspect automatically creates an attraction, especially for small and medium-scale investors. The capitalists connive with the land owners, land management agencies, influential politicians, and the armed forces authorities to carve out schemes of various kinds. These schemes supposedly serve mutual interest of the stakeholders who collectively steer them to achieve the best of market returns.
Trusts, foundations, and other similar organizations make use of their connections with the powers that be to acquire favours in the land sector. Permissions, approvals, no objection certificates, and concept clearance all fall in their way, apparently without scrutiny or in disregard to standard practices.
There are many problems in some land development schemes. According to some reports, hardly any schemes present correct internal zoning plan to the approving authority. What is normally done is that the submission documents are prepared in total conformity to the available guidelines. The plans are thus granted approval. Thereafter, the management of the schemes changes layouts, plot sizes, density provisions and even price schedules. A few of them announce schemes on incorrect information, interim approvals or other fraudulent means.
For example, many development schemes in our cities have developed along the path of natural storm drains. After occupation, such neighbourhoods are inundated during monsoons. The provision of appropriate infrastructure is another promise advertised without restraint by scheme managements. Scrutiny of the status of various schemes has shown many deficiencies. Some schemes have never even applied to the concerned departments/agencies for obtaining consent for the provision of the said services.
It is true that the existing load on services is beyond the capacity of service providing agencies. Obviously, the schemes are either delayed for decades or become an under-valued slum in case of non-availability of services. The management of such schemes only lure prospective customers through craftily-worded ads. Another way of advertising is about self generation of infrastructural services. From electricity to water, every service is pledged to be provided through self-generation. For electricity, thermal power plants are refered to as the solution. No one, however, explains as to how the colossal capital cost would be met or how its operation and maintenance would be financed.
Desalination plants, which are considered to be the ultimate solution for water supply in coastal belts, are an expensive proposition. Access roads are the next costly element in the set of requirements in any scheme. More often than not, they are left undeveloped even after possession is granted to occupants. Larger promises such as swimming pools, gymnasium, sports and recreational facilities are announced without giving details of design or completion. Either they are left completely unattended or developed much below the announced targets. Disgruntled buyers often end up in lengthy legal proceedings which add more to their financial woes.
Some institutional inputs need to be launched to make things better. An effective regulatory body must be created to look after land transactions. This body must hold dialogue and meetings with the stakeholders. Broad-based need analysis must be carried out to control land supply in relation to the need. Bogus land sales must be discouraged. Regulatory mechanism must ensure the participation and input of infrastructure providers.
Finally, laws and regulations related to safeguarding natural environment, land titles, and investment must be implemented through regulatory framework. The announcement of schemes may be tied up with clearance/approval from the regulatory body. It must be remembered that land is a finite asset. If it is lost to the unbridled ravenousness of a few, the forthcoming generations shall be more impoverished than us.