Some good ideas have been mentioned in this article, I am sure many lahore Guppies could comment better?
RE-INVENTING LAHORE: Lahore’s development paradigm must change
Dr Abdus Samad
The regulators must recognise that sleepy country estates are for the countryside and should be pushed further out into the country and suburbia. City fathers should take pride in their urban structures
We were dining in Cairo at a lovely restaurant in the 33 floors Le Meridien overlooking the Nile. The skyline with its tall well-finished buildings comprising numerous hotels, office blocks and beautiful apartment complexes inspired me to remark, “Why can’t we have tall buildings and hotels in Lahore?” My friend Ghazala from Lahore spontaneously responded, “I like Lahore the way it is! We have lovely gardens at a convenient distance from our haunts, the Punjab Club and Liberty. Let us preserve it!”
Ghazala had quite succinctly encapsulated the development paradigm for Lahore that our bureaucrats/city planners have held close to their hearts for the last 50 years. They believe that, “the city is for the convenience of the kothiwallahs.” The residential convenience of the kothiwallahs and their clubs and social haunts is all what the planners cater for. It is not surprising that what has been allowed to develop with rapidity in our fair city is golf courses and highways for the kothis.
GOR in Lahore typifies it all. It boasts of two social clubs — the Punjab Club and the Officers Club — in its midst. Yet efforts by some owners to plan a hotel or a school in a large four-acre estate in the heart of GOR were blocked on the grounds that it could not be allowed in a residential area. At the same time, GOR boasts of a four-acre mansion for the high court chief justice that has been vacant for most of our history. It is maintained at the taxpayer’s expense so the occasional wedding can be held there. Yet nowhere in GOR or on the Mall is there any room for commercial development.
Lahore has been developed on the basis of housing schemes typified by the DOHA. The idea is to build little rectangular plots with very poor quality commercial construction based on small marla plots. No wonder, all commercial construction has the look of small provincial colonial towns. But the rich do not want large hotels and shopping malls. For that they can go to the West or even to Dubai. All they want is little convenience stores for grocery and perhaps tailoring shops.
Office space is available on a very limited basis in Lahore. You have to rent a house and convert the bedrooms to offices. The same goes for schools and other commercial enterprises. Even then you live with the fear that the regulator may at any time force you out for they only reluctantly allow such property to be used on a commercial basis. It impinges on kothi life.
On the other hand, land is available for clubs. It is interesting that the Punjab Club and the Sindh Club that at partition allowed only white members were not designated evacuee properties but were gifted to the elite who promptly became members. The land that has been transferred to them at hugely subsidised rates constitutes a transfer from the poor taxpayers of Pakistan to the kothiwallah elite.
Similarly, the Gymkhana Golf Course continues to be leased out at a nominal annual rent in the heart of the city when there is no room for street hawkers or a market where the poor can run shops. Land for clubs is available more easily than land for commercial development that will generate jobs or even land for schools.
These clubs are commercial ventures and should be treated as such. Their land should be properly priced and they should be taxed at market rates so that the rich pay a fair price for their entertainment.
The poor have had to struggle for space. Canal Park, Jail Road and in many other streets, they have fought for small kiosks. It is a constant struggle. Carpenters, weavers, tailors, and all manner of artisans set up informal shops to earn a living. For years they live under threat of expulsion. Every now and again the regulators push them out and they set up a stall elsewhere. If they are lucky, as in Canal Park, regulators will bless these businesses and they will be allowed to set up a diminutive unappealing set of shops. The very architecture and ambience of these places dooms these businesses to a bleak future.
This mindset has to change if Lahore is to be a premiere Asian city. Cities have been proud of their commerce and their urbanisation. Florence, London, Paris, Amsterdam and Venice long ago established separate markets for gold, stocks, calico, flowers crafts etc. To make room for thriving commerce, estates gave way to consolidated mixed-use urban space. And with the advance of technology, they built taller buildings.
The regulators must recognise that sleepy country estates are for the countryside and should be pushed further out into the country and suburbia. City fathers should take pride in their urban structures (shopping malls, office and apartment blocks, hotels, entertainment centres etc) and not just a collection of kothis. It should be recognised that commercial construction is pro-poor since such construction creates a vast number of jobs during and after the construction. Our development paradigm must therefore shift from its current emphasis on “kothis for the rich” to “commercial development for the poor.”
Dr Abdus Samad is a leading economist
RE-INVENTING LAHORE: Lahore’s development paradigm must change
Dr Abdus Samad
The regulators must recognise that sleepy country estates are for the countryside and should be pushed further out into the country and suburbia. City fathers should take pride in their urban structures
We were dining in Cairo at a lovely restaurant in the 33 floors Le Meridien overlooking the Nile. The skyline with its tall well-finished buildings comprising numerous hotels, office blocks and beautiful apartment complexes inspired me to remark, “Why can’t we have tall buildings and hotels in Lahore?” My friend Ghazala from Lahore spontaneously responded, “I like Lahore the way it is! We have lovely gardens at a convenient distance from our haunts, the Punjab Club and Liberty. Let us preserve it!”
Ghazala had quite succinctly encapsulated the development paradigm for Lahore that our bureaucrats/city planners have held close to their hearts for the last 50 years. They believe that, “the city is for the convenience of the kothiwallahs.” The residential convenience of the kothiwallahs and their clubs and social haunts is all what the planners cater for. It is not surprising that what has been allowed to develop with rapidity in our fair city is golf courses and highways for the kothis.
GOR in Lahore typifies it all. It boasts of two social clubs — the Punjab Club and the Officers Club — in its midst. Yet efforts by some owners to plan a hotel or a school in a large four-acre estate in the heart of GOR were blocked on the grounds that it could not be allowed in a residential area. At the same time, GOR boasts of a four-acre mansion for the high court chief justice that has been vacant for most of our history. It is maintained at the taxpayer’s expense so the occasional wedding can be held there. Yet nowhere in GOR or on the Mall is there any room for commercial development.
Lahore has been developed on the basis of housing schemes typified by the DOHA. The idea is to build little rectangular plots with very poor quality commercial construction based on small marla plots. No wonder, all commercial construction has the look of small provincial colonial towns. But the rich do not want large hotels and shopping malls. For that they can go to the West or even to Dubai. All they want is little convenience stores for grocery and perhaps tailoring shops.
Office space is available on a very limited basis in Lahore. You have to rent a house and convert the bedrooms to offices. The same goes for schools and other commercial enterprises. Even then you live with the fear that the regulator may at any time force you out for they only reluctantly allow such property to be used on a commercial basis. It impinges on kothi life.
On the other hand, land is available for clubs. It is interesting that the Punjab Club and the Sindh Club that at partition allowed only white members were not designated evacuee properties but were gifted to the elite who promptly became members. The land that has been transferred to them at hugely subsidised rates constitutes a transfer from the poor taxpayers of Pakistan to the kothiwallah elite.
Similarly, the Gymkhana Golf Course continues to be leased out at a nominal annual rent in the heart of the city when there is no room for street hawkers or a market where the poor can run shops. Land for clubs is available more easily than land for commercial development that will generate jobs or even land for schools.
These clubs are commercial ventures and should be treated as such. Their land should be properly priced and they should be taxed at market rates so that the rich pay a fair price for their entertainment.
The poor have had to struggle for space. Canal Park, Jail Road and in many other streets, they have fought for small kiosks. It is a constant struggle. Carpenters, weavers, tailors, and all manner of artisans set up informal shops to earn a living. For years they live under threat of expulsion. Every now and again the regulators push them out and they set up a stall elsewhere. If they are lucky, as in Canal Park, regulators will bless these businesses and they will be allowed to set up a diminutive unappealing set of shops. The very architecture and ambience of these places dooms these businesses to a bleak future.
This mindset has to change if Lahore is to be a premiere Asian city. Cities have been proud of their commerce and their urbanisation. Florence, London, Paris, Amsterdam and Venice long ago established separate markets for gold, stocks, calico, flowers crafts etc. To make room for thriving commerce, estates gave way to consolidated mixed-use urban space. And with the advance of technology, they built taller buildings.
The regulators must recognise that sleepy country estates are for the countryside and should be pushed further out into the country and suburbia. City fathers should take pride in their urban structures (shopping malls, office and apartment blocks, hotels, entertainment centres etc) and not just a collection of kothis. It should be recognised that commercial construction is pro-poor since such construction creates a vast number of jobs during and after the construction. Our development paradigm must therefore shift from its current emphasis on “kothis for the rich” to “commercial development for the poor.”
Dr Abdus Samad is a leading economist
Comment