What is the objective of a theme park at racecourse? The concept is unclear.

When an artificial lake is created in a park birds visit, which changes its ambience. London’s Hyde Park has an artificial lake – it’s a theme park and not an amusement park.

A theme park typically has thick bushes in one or two acres in one corner, with a slight contouring of the land on the other side. Chandigarh’s Rose Park or Rose Garden is one such. Some places in Mahalaxmi Racecourse will have thick plantation like an urban forest while some areas will be reserved for a garden for children.

It will cater to all kinds of people and be properly utilised.

The idea of a theme park was mooted so that the racecourse can be accessed by all – but the public already access it.

I do not go for morning walks at the racecourse because of a mental block as I perceive that it is only meant for club members. Imagine the inhibition a slum dweller will have? Once it becomes a public garden, that mental block will go away, and people can access it freely.

Why wasn’t RWITC allowed to maintain the racecourse? They could have roped in corporates for funds, instead of BMC spending such huge amounts.

It again comes down to the divide between the rich and poor. The poor wouldn’t feel comfortable unless a BMC guard is standing at the gate and allowing everyone to enter. Also, the entire area is not well developed. Except for the racetrack and the inner garden, the rest of the area isn’t maintained well so that people can take a walk. BMC will spend money to maintain those unkempt areas.

If the theme is to keep it green, why could RWITC not do it?

There’s an issue with resource – the private club does not have the funds that BMC does.

The RWITC members want the stables to remain untouched. They do not want BMC to demolish them and spend ₹97 crore on rebuilding.

The issue of stables will be mutually discussed, and we will come to an amicable solution.

Do you refuse to acknowledge the rights of the Amateur Rider’s Club (ARC)?

I had addressed this issue in the open house meeting on January 19. I had said we will stick to the legality of the agreement.

So, what about stables for their (ARCs) horses? Where do they fit into the 120 acres?

Don’t worry. We will take care of that.

There’s an allegation that renewal of lease is an excuse and a bribe to allow free memberships for chief minister and yourself in RWITC?

I told them categorically during the open house that I won’t become a member if they don’t allow. But around 20 members stood up in support and said they wanted me as a member, which is on record.

It is also alleged that the conditional lease is an arm-twisting tactic used by the state government and BMC to renew the lease?

Who are “they”? 76% of members have voted in favour of our proposal – that says it all; it isn’t a small majority. This is good news because we will all now be beneficiaries of a huge garden.

What future do you envisage for the racecourse with this consent from the majority of the members?

The minutes of the meeting is pretty detailed on the way forward. Following the go-ahead given by RWITC members, an MoU is expected to be signed between the BMC, state government and the turf club.