A redevelopment architect who works for the society
In most redevelopments the architect is appointed by the developer. That is not improper and it is not always a problem — but it does mean that when the numbers are being set, nobody in the room is paid to represent the members.
That is the gap we fill. Engaged by the society, we tell you what your plot can actually yield, what a fair offer looks like, and where a proposal in front of you is quietly light.
What the plot permits under the applicable DCR/DCPR provisions — permissible FSI, TDR, fungible area — and what that translates to in buildable area. Before you talk to a single developer.
What each member should expect, in writing, calculated rather than asserted.
Reading offers side by side on the terms that actually matter: carpet area increase, corpus, rent during construction, timeline, penalty clauses, and what happens if the developer stalls. Most committees compare the headline number and miss the rest.
Where the society appoints us for the scheme itself — layout, unit planning, amenities, and the drawings for approval.
Attending general body meetings and explaining the technical position in language members can act on. This matters more than anything else here: redevelopments fail on member consensus far more often than on numbers.
That is the right sequence. A society that knows its own numbers negotiates from a completely different position.
Send the plot details and any proposal you have received. I'll tell you what I see in it.