if you are contemplating buying an apartment on the city outskirts of Bangalore, it’s better to abandon the plan.
This cautionary advice comes from none other than V Balasubramaniam, additional chief secretary (retired), who in many forums has spoken about the impending water crisis staring Bangalore. And Balasubramaniam has a point.Around 90 residential projects slated to come up on the outskirts are either getting delayed or not taking off for their failure to get the ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB).
The BWSSB has stopped issuing the NOC for major residential projects in BBMP limits, citing builders’ failure to identify a water source to supply water to the apartments.
T Venkataraju, chief engineer, BWSSB, said they were withholding issuing the NOC to builders planning apartments in areas where there was no infrastructure to supply water.
As per norms, without the NOC residential projects will not be granted environmental clearance from the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, without which the builder cannot start the construction work.
According to Balasubramaniam, the BWSSB has provided water connections to only seven lakh houses, while the total number of properties, excluding the apartments that have sprung up recently, in the city is 18 lakh. “Supplying drinking water to thousands of apartments on the outskirts or in the newly added areas of the BBMP will be a daunting task for the BWSSB,’’ Balasubramaniam said.
Advising public not to invest their hard-earned money in apartments on the outskirts, Balasubramaniam said builders will bear no responsibility after handing over the apartments to their customers. “Getting clean water will be a problem. They can’t rely on borewell water since groundwater has been contaminated,’’ he said.-from DNA
Category: Realty
R Jagannathan in an interesting article in FirstPost makes a case that “Mumbai property is a sell rather than a buy”
After making his case, he ends with a disclaimer:
Disclosure: I am currently acting contrary to my views above for personal reasons. I am in the market right now for a small property since I plan to live in it after about a year
Sirjee, if your own actions are contrary to your own views, aren’t you being a hypocrite by telling your readers to act on your views?
But I digress.Let’s look at why R Jagannathan thinks Mumbai realty is a sell:
1.Very few transactions are happening at these price levels
2.Rental yields are absurdly low…investors can get better returns from savings deposits
3.Gap between affordability, investor returns and quoted prices will ultimately have to be closed.Property prices will have to crash by a third to a half to make that happen.
While R Jagannathan has his facts right,his conclusions are incorrect.His own biases makes him such a poor realty investor as written in this earlier piece:
I remember I had bought a home in Thane (a satellite city of Mumbai) in 1997, and for the next few years not only did the price not rise, it actually fell 20 percent. It was only after six to eight years that the price stabilised and started rising consistently. Now, despite what builders tell us, prices are again levelling off. If I had bought my small flat just for appreciation, I would have lost money in the initial years. Even a bank fixed deposit would have doubled my money in those six to eight years.
What R Jagannathan does not get about Mumbai realty is the motivations and incentives of the people who are involved in it.Lets consider each one of the stakeholder involved:
1.Builder:Wants to get the building developed fast.Sells flats in pre-launch phase to financiers/investors to garner funds quickly for building the project.Once 40% of the project is sold, his holding power increases tremendously and he can wait for years to get his price.
2.Financier-Lends money to builder.Takes flats as collateral.Interested in return of capital and quick project completion
3.Investor-Does not lend money.Buys flats in pre-launch phase at a discount.In this phase, many times the approvals are not obtained from the concerned authorities.He sells immediately after project completion.Builders want their relationship with such investors to be good…so the builder always tries to ensure that the investor in pre-launch phase is rewarded in the form of higher prices for his trust/loyalty to the builder.
4.End User-Intends to use the flat for self use or rentals.Time horizon to hold the flat is similar to that of gold.Many plan to live in the flats till alive.Often, wives/children will not allow to sell flat even if a good offer comes.
Also, Indians understand instinctively that real assets will increase with time due to persistent inflation. In all metros,cost of land,approvals,speed money charges,cement,steel,interiors,labour,capital etc have increased exponentially.
It is inconceivable that a project built 5 years from now in any metro can be built at a cost cheaper than current levels.
Now lets look afresh at R Jagannathan’s arguments why Mumbai realty is a sell:
1.Very few transactions are happening at these price levels
The market will find its own equilibrium.Does not mean that a crash is imminent or is inevitable
2.Rental yields are absurdly low…investors can get better returns from savings deposits
Dividend yields for blue chip stocks are around 1% .Does that make them a sell?
3.Gap between affordability, investor returns and quoted prices will ultimately have to be closed.Property prices will have to crash by a third to a half to make that happen.
Has already happened for commercial realty which has different supply-demand dynamics.No chance of such huge corrections for residential realty owing to tremendous latent demand
Now my humble submission to R Jagannathan is this:
If you still had your Thane flat now, it would have given you better returns than fixed deposits and equities.And you wouldn’t be looking for a roof over your head at this age.
An Iranian Shi’ite Muslim businessman now living abroad, who asked to remain anonymous because he still travels to Iran, said he attempted two years ago to sell a piece of land near Tehran that his family had long owned. Local authorities informed him that he needed a “no objection letter” from Setad.
The businessman said he visited Setad’s local office and was required to pay a bribe of several hundred dollars to the clerks to locate his file and expedite the process. He said he then was told he had to pay a fee, because Setad had “protected” his family’s land from squatters for decades. He would be assessed between 2 percent and 2.5 percent of the property’s value for every year.
Setad sent an appraiser to determine the property’s current worth. The appraisal came in at $90,000. The protection fee, he said, totaled $50,000.
The businessman said he balked, arguing there was no evidence Setad had done anything to protect the land. He said the Setad representatives wouldn’t budge on the amount but offered to facilitate the transaction by selling the land itself to recover its fee. He said he hired a lawyer who advised him to pay the fee, which he reluctantly did last year.-from Reuters