In the crumbling spaces and congested streets of Mumbai lies both its vulnerability and its unmatched resilience. Tasked with one of the most formidable missions in India’s urban history — delivering over 8 Lakh affordable homes — SANJEEV JAISWAL, CEO of MHADA, stands at the centre of this transformative challenge. In an exclusive conversation for Homes & Buildings Magazine’s Vision 2030 series, TITTO EAPEN explores Jaiswal’s sweeping vision for a future where Mumbai doesn’t just grow — it evolves. From redefining affordability to championing rental housing, recalibrating urban densities, and confronting systemic inefficiencies, Jaiswal lays bare the complexities of remaking one of the world’s most pressured cities.
MHADA has been entrusted with an extraordinary mission to help deliver over 8 lakh housing units in Maharashtra. That’s a Herculean task. What’s the real strategy? How do you envision achieving this target?
You’re absolutely right, the scale of the Vision 2030 programme is unprecedented. Under the broader growth framework guided by the Government of India and coordinated by NITI Aayog, Mumbai has been selected as one of the key hubs for strategic expansion. Affordable housing forms a cornerstone of this vision. Specifically, within the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), the goal is to create nearly three million homes by 2030. Out of this, about 2.2 million homes are intended for the redevelopment and rehabilitation of existing slums, while the remaining 8 Lakh units fall under the affordable housing category. MHADA has taken upon itself the responsibility of delivering this share — either through direct construction or by facilitating projects across Mumbai and its satellite cities. Our roadmap has three principal pillars. First, the redevelopment of old and dilapidated buildings, particularly in South Mumbai, through Section 33(7) schemes and larger cluster models under Section 33(9). Second, is the regeneration of MHADA’s own 114 layouts across the city, many of which are now poised for comprehensive redevelopment under Section 33(5). And third, wherever feasible, we are adopting a cluster-based approach to increase density, enable better planning, and unlock free-sale stock for the market. Several projects are already well underway. Motilal Nagar, for instance, became the first redevelopment awarded under the CND (Cluster-based New Development) model. Abhyudaya Nagar has crossed important milestones after overcoming initial area-related disputes. GTB Nagar is progressing under similar frameworks. Beyond that, projects like Bandra Reclamation and Adarsh Nagar have secured Cabinet approval, while Aram Nagar is nearing its final clearance stage. Kamathipura, governed under Section 33(7), is set to become an iconic redevelopment case study in itself.
With the combination of sanctioned projects, pending tenders, and fresh MHADA-led initiatives across the region, we are confident of contributing significantly to this target. Delivering 8 Lakh affordable homes is not just an aspirational goal for us — it’s an institutional commitment aligned with Mumbai’s future as a world-class, inclusive metropolis.
That’s an incredibly structured and layered approach. But let’s address the heart of the issue — affordability. On the ground, “affordable housing” in Mumbai often seems out of reach. Nationally, it’s defined as units below ₹45 lakh, but in Mumbai, even a ₹90 lakh home feels like a miracle. How do you define affordable housing in the real Mumbai context for 2030?
That’s a significant observation, and you’re absolutely right to highlight it. The ₹45 lakh benchmark for affordable housing was crafted with national averages in mind. Unfortunately, it does not reflect the economic realities of a global megacity like Mumbai, where land prices, construction costs, and demand dynamics are fundamentally different. We have actively raised this concern at multiple policy forums and requested a recalibration of the affordability definition for Mumbai and similar urban centres. It’s not the built-up area that’s problematic — sizes for EWS (Economically Weaker Section) and LIG (Low-Income Group) units are still relevant. The real mismatch lies in the financial ceiling.
At present, Mumbai’s affordability index stands at over 51%, much higher than the recommended threshold of 25%–30%. This means that for a typical family, over half their income would go towards housing, making ownership increasingly unrealistic. To correct this, two fundamental shifts are needed: First, we must reduce the embedded costs of development — by rationalising development premiums, metro cess, infrastructure charges, and other regulatory costs. Second, we must push for a revision of GST and stamp duties, especially for EWS and LIG homes, to make sustainable affordability viable.
We have already proposed these reforms in Maharashtra’s upcoming draft Housing Policy. MHADA, through its own housing lotteries, has demonstrated that demand for genuine affordable stock is massive — with application rates that far exceed available inventory. The message is clear: if we can structurally reduce input costs, we can revive affordability in a meaningful way. But to truly succeed, both government and private stakeholders must embrace a larger systemic change — affordability must be seen as a public good, not just a commercial product.
You’ve rightly stressed the affordability challenge, but a major contributor to the soaring cost is the high premiums and approval charges in Mumbai — which accounts for 30–35% of a project’s total cost. What has MHADA recommended to the government regarding this issue, especially for redevelopment projects under the upcoming housing policy?
Yes, the burden of premiums and approval costs is undeniably one of the most critical issues impacting affordability today. It’s a reality that developers — especially those engaged in affordable and rehabilitation projects — have been struggling with.
To put it in perspective, the premiums developers pay — development charges, fungible FSI premiums, infrastructure cess, metro cess, and various other levies — collectively make up a very large portion of the project outlay. While these collections are vital, as they fund crucial urban infrastructure projects such as the Mumbai Coastal Road, the Atal Setu bridge, and the vast metro network currently under construction, there is a need to recalibrate when it comes to housing for the lower-income segments.
In our draft housing policy, we have proposed that for EWS (Economically Weaker Sections) and LIG (Low-Income Group) housing projects, the government should offer rational concessions. In my personal capacity, I strongly advocate for a rational premium ecosystem for this segment with at least a 40–50% reduction on all premiums and related charges.
Such a measure would have a direct impact on the final pricing, potentially reducing the cost of these homes by up to 30%, thereby making them significantly more affordable and accessible to genuine beneficiaries. However, it’s equally important to clarify: We are not advocating a blanket reduction across the board. For MIG (Middle-Income Group) and HIG (High-Income Group) housing, we believe current premium structures are justified and sustainable. These market segments have greater purchasing power and do not require subsidisation of development costs.
Another major reform we have proposed relates to rental housing. Here, we’ve recommended offering free additional FSI to developers constructing rental units for specific vulnerable groups — working women, students, senior citizens, and industrial workers. Rental housing inherently generates deferred and staggered returns compared to outright sale, so making these projects more viable through incentives is crucial. If Mumbai is serious about delivering affordable, sustainable housing by 2030, this rebalancing of development economics is not optional but necessary.
You’ve touched on rental housing, which has historically been a neglected component of India’s urban strategy. Could you elaborate on how MHADA plans to mainstream rental housing within Mumbai’s affordable housing framework?
Absolutely — and I must say, rental housing is one of the most exciting and transformative aspects of the new housing policy. For decades, urban planning in India, particularly in Mumbai, has been ownership-centric. The idea was always: buy a home, own an asset. But the reality of modern urban life is changing. Mumbai is a magnet for migrants — students, young professionals, contract workers — many of whom do not wish to, or cannot immediately, invest in ownership. Their needs are different. They require quality rental options that are secure, affordable, and flexible.
Recognising this, MHADA’s new 2024 housing policy explicitly integrates rental housing under the affordable housing strategy. We have expanded the definition of affordable rental housing to include:
-
Working women’s hostels
-
Industrial workers’ dormitories
-
Senior citizens’ assisted living facilities
-
Student hostels
-
Studio apartments for urban migrants
To promote the supply side, we are proposing several enabling mechanisms:
-
Free additional FSI specifically for developers creating rental housing stock
-
Creation of a dedicated online platform where property owners can list rental accommodations transparently, and tenants can search, apply, and complete agreements without middlemen exploitation
-
Buyback models, inspired by global agencies or housing boards, could purchase rental projects after a stipulated period, providing developers a secure exit strategy and steady supply pipelines
If implemented well, these measures could unlock thousands of rental units across Mumbai, particularly near industrial hubs, educational zones, and new transit corridors.
Rental housing is not just about shelter. It’s about creating a dynamic, inclusive, and mobile city, where opportunities are not restricted to those who can afford to buy. It’s about ensuring that Mumbai remains India’s economic powerhouse by providing flexible housing models for its evolving demographic. And if Mumbai gets rental housing right — it could set a precedent for urban India at large.
You’ve outlined MHADA’s roadmap for affordable housing. But when it comes to planning Mumbai’s future, how do you view cluster development? Specifically, how do you balance residential and commercial priorities within these new growth strategies?
That’s a crucial dimension to the city’s future — and I’m glad you asked it. Our vision for cluster redevelopment is very clear: we must move beyond the outdated, narrow focus of merely rebuilding residential blocks. Mumbai’s future depends on creating integrated, mixed-use ecosystems — places where people can live, work, and thrive without commuting for hours each day.
When we talk about cluster development, especially in areas like NM Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, and the BDD chawls, we aren’t just building new homes. We are imagining new neighbourhoods. That’s why we insist on a mixed-use model — integrating affordable residential units alongside commercial spaces, retail opportunities, and even small workspaces. Mumbai’s historic imbalance has been its lopsided growth: immense residential densification without matching commercial infrastructure. This mismatch has created daily migration stress, congestion, and poor quality of life.
Even after the pandemic normalised remote work to some extent, there remains a strong need for physical office spaces, co-working hubs, and retail ecosystems close to residential areas. Cluster redevelopment, with its flexibility in planning, gives us the opportunity to utilise FSI judiciously, allocate space for affordable commercial units, and encourage micro-enterprises to flourish alongside housing. This approach not only enriches the local economy but also makes urban living more sustainable — cutting travel time, reducing pollution, and fostering real community life.
At MHADA, our mandate is not just housing for housing’s sake. It is to facilitate liveable, balanced urban ecosystems — particularly for the middle class, the working population, and the small entrepreneurs who form the city’s backbone. If Mumbai has to retain its stature as India’s financial nerve centre, we must simultaneously create affordable living spaces and affordable working spaces. That is the future we are working toward.
That’s a powerful urban vision. But Mumbai’s governance today involves multiple authorities — BMC, MMRDA, MHADA, SRA, among others. Many experts argue that the lack of seamless coordination slows down transformative projects. Would you advocate for a more centralised planning approach?
It’s a very important — and sensitive — question. Let me answer it carefully. Firstly, I would not say that there is zero coordination today. All agencies — whether it’s BMC, MMRDA, SRA, or MHADA — do engage with one another. And each has a clear statutory mandate that must be respected.
However, I must agree that the silos in decision-making and execution sometimes delay holistic outcomes. Mumbai’s challenges are multidimensional — you cannot upgrade housing without simultaneously upgrading transport, drainage, green spaces, and utilities. This interdependence demands a far tighter, cross-agency alignment than what often exists. The Government of Maharashtra has recognised this. Platforms like the Honourable Chief Minister’s Project War Room have been critical in breaking bureaucratic logjams.
Largescale cluster projects, metro projects, and other strategic initiatives are now being tracked and troubleshot at the highest levels to ensure smoother inter-agency cooperation. Having said that, I personally believe Mumbai still needs a stronger institutionalised coordination mechanism — something akin to a “Greater Mumbai Urban Commission” that can synchronise all urban development plans across departments. I am not advocating for a super-bureaucracy or a single monolithic authority. That risks its own inefficiencies. Instead, what we need is a cohesive, empowered, cross-functional urban governance framework, with clear roles, faster dispute resolution, shared data systems, and unified project pipelines.
Ultimately, every agency wants Mumbai to succeed. What’s needed is better orchestration — a common rhythm to our collective efforts. With over 29 years in public service, my belief is that great cities are not built by isolated departments — they are built by collaborating minds aligned to a shared vision. And Mumbai, with its energy and resilience, deserves no less.
Mumbai’s growth has often been compared with cities like Hyderabad, NCR, or Bangalore, which seem to have developed at a faster pace. What, in your view, are the key structural challenges that have historically constrained Mumbai from matching that acceleration?
Comparisons are inevitable, but Mumbai’s urban story is fundamentally different. Unlike Hyderabad or NCR, which had vast expanses to grow outward, Mumbai has always been confined — locked between the Arabian Sea on one side and hilly terrains on the other. Space here is a finite, contested resource, making density management one of our greatest challenges. The city’s infrastructure, originally laid out in the British era, was never designed for the scale and pace of growth we’ve witnessed post-Independence.
Every year, Mumbai absorbs thousands of new migrants — students, workers, entrepreneurs — adding to the already colossal demand on housing, transport, water, and waste systems. This constant pressure has often stretched infrastructure to its limits. Another major issue has been legacy congestion. For decades, public transport systems like suburban railways bore the city’s lifeblood burden almost single-handedly, while road networks remained stressed and fragmented. Private vehicle ownership exploded, but corresponding upgrades in public mobility lagged behind. The cumulative effect of these gaps over the years created severe urban stress.
However, today, Mumbai is witnessing an infrastructure renaissance. The coastal road, Mumbai Metro projects, and the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link are transformative projects that will fundamentally change how the city breathes, moves, and connects. Another overlooked factor has been the slower development of affordable commercial spaces within the core city. In contrast to residential real estate growth, the commercial sector has struggled to expand at the same scale, leading to economic activity concentrating in pockets and worsening commute patterns.
All these historical constraints meant that Mumbai’s pace of evolution appeared slower when compared to newer, master-planned urban centres. But Mumbai’s complexity — its density, diversity, and dynamism — also makes its success uniquely impressive. Going forward, the focus must remain on balancing expansion with upgradation — building new, but also regenerating and reimagining existing spaces sustainably.
You’ve articulated Mumbai’s challenges very clearly. Given the massivevinfrastructure push underway, what is your personal vision for Mumbai by the year 2030?
Mumbai’s greatest strength has always been its resilience and optimism. Despite all odds — whether it’s space constraints, natural disasters, or economic shocks — the city reinvents itself with unmatched energy. By 2030, I envision a Mumbai that is truly inclusive, efficient, and globally competitive. I see a city where affordable housing is not a lottery win but a structured right — where lower and middle-income citizens can aspire to dignified, well-designed homes without lifelong debt burdens. Where rental housing is professional, transparent, and available, empowering mobility and economic participation without binding people into ownership compulsions.
I see a seamless public transport network — metro lines, suburban trains, buses, and coastal corridors — interconnected in such a way that the daily commute becomes faster, safer, and more humane. A Mumbai where the east-west divide shrinks and peripheral suburbs are as attractive and liveable as the traditional core city. I envision a greener Mumbai — with restored open spaces, urban forests, stormwater resilience, and air-quality-conscious planning. Where urban development is not at odds with environmental stewardship, but is fundamentally aligned with it.
Importantly, I imagine Mumbai as a hub of innovation and entrepreneurship — a magnet for startups, creative industries, technology firms, and sustainable enterprises — where opportunity is abundant not just for the privileged few but for the ambitious many. But this vision will only be possible if we stay focused on inclusive urbanism — not letting gentrification push out the heart of the city, but ensuring that taxi drivers, teachers, artists, office clerks, and business owners alike have a place and a future here.
Mumbai’s destiny is not just to be India’s commercial capital. It is to be a model global city — one that balances growth with compassion, speed with sustainability, ambition with accessibility. And if we stay the course — with political will, coordinated planning, and citizen participation — I am confident that by 2030, Mumbai’s best chapter will have just begun.
