“The Development plan focuses on a housing centric approach rather than an amenity centered one.” The proposed Development Plan of 2034 has raised a few eyebrows and has left the common man in the dark about some of the aspects of its implication. The Development plan focuses on a housing centric approach rather than an amenity centered one. Certain amenities such as swimming pools, Club houses, ground en- france lobbies will be all counted under FSI. The reduction in open spaces would further prove harmful to the city. There are proposed roads running through societies which have brought about, a stand- siil in the redevelopment sector of the construction industry. Also the reservations within the plot have created confusion for the scope of development. Activists and experts have ciiticized the move, saying it may not turn out well for citizens quaiity of life and further increase health risks. The city’s draft development plan (DP) has stung many builders, pri- vate plot owners and housing soci- eties by marking their layouts as public open spaces and amenities like gardens and schools or showing roads slicing through upcoming buildings. it threatens to wreck one of Mumbai's most expensive residen tial enclaves. While the draft development plan of 2034 packs several other features such as Transit ofiented develop- ment (TOD) , Introduction of Zonal FS1, Local area plans, Reservation policy , inclusionary housing, multi ple use of open spaces, special de- velopment area, etc. it is under heavy scrutiny from architects and planners across the city who are caliing into question its ambiguity. We urge Mumbaikat's to check their society plots or private plots affect: ed by any such reservations or set- backs. Please give your suggestion ‘of objections to the municipal com- missioner and help Mumbai have the future it deserves - Mr, Suresh Sahu (Managing Director) Supreme Engicons (India) Pvt LtdAND ITS IMPLICAITONS At the outset, let me congratulate Shri. Suresh Sahu of Supreme Engicons (India) Private Limited for arranging this seminar, which would bring all the stake holders on one common platform to de- liberate the implications of proposed development plan and contribute in fine-tuning its provisions in order to create a city of everybody's dream. J.also take this opportunity to extend my courtesies and congratulate MCGM for formulating and completing the mammon task of preparing the Devel- ‘opment Plan for this mega city. As we all are aware the last development plan sanctioned in the year 1991 had some innovative provisions such as: transfer of development rights (TDR), cluster devel- ‘opment {regulation 33(9)} etc... which did not make expected headway, as was initially anticipated due to the vari- ous factors. ‘Also the provision of Fungible FSI has now been replaced with Premium A ‘and premium 8 FSI, for which a premium based on the prevailing ready recknore needs fo be paid to the Government. The ready recknore rates are increased ‘on an average by 20% every year by the Government and thus itis feored that the concept of monetization would ‘act as a major deterrent for develop ment, more particularly in certain zones where land rate are very high. This infact wil defeat the purpose of creating housing at a affordable rate. In the proposed new Development Control Regulations (proposed DCR) for DP of 2034, the parking requirement has been reduced by aimost 50% over the prevailing one. Though from the plan- nets perspective it would act as an de- terrent in purchasing new cars, we all know this is not practically possiole. This ultimately would lead fo parking on the main streets / roads and add to existing traffic woes. Similarly in the proposed DCR for new DP of 2034, the provision of recreation ground has been dispensed with and in- stead the Plot fo the tune of 10% of gross plot area need to be carved out and handed over fo MCGM which would then develop it for some public pur- pose. This particular provision will de- rive the occupants of secured quality green space within the plot and due to the carved out plot, planning of the pro- posed building would be a challenge more particularly in their re-develop- ment scheme. In addition the re-devel- ‘opment process will also get further af- fected by making applicable the provi- sion of inclusionary housing to the rede- velopment schemes albeit with certain riders. The regulations for development of narrow plot which was available in the earlier regulations has ako been done away with, which would pose a great challenge for development / re- development of such plot of lands in future. Inproposed DCR for new DP of 2034, the special concessions provided earler for development of cessed category struc- tures and for development of MHADA layouts have been deleted, which would discourage the developers from taking-up redevelopment of such prop- erties. ‘Aswe all are aware that the delay in the ‘approval process due to mulfiayered screening / permissions add to the final cost of the project and therefore, we ail were expecting to have a clear policy spelt out in the proposed DCR by re- moving the multilayers and faking the entire approval process towards single window system. However, the some is not seen reflected in the proposed DCR. The authorities need to come-out with clear guidelines in this regards, as the ease of doing business will definitely resuit in reduction in cost and timely de- livery. As can be appreciated, it wil be very difficult for planners fo provide us with a plan that would fuffl the needs and as- pirations of every citizen of this city, but considering the challenges some more pragmatic approach can tum this de- velopment plan into a plan which can be implemented ond which can im Prove the living standards of average citizens of this city. - Mr. Kamal Khetan Sunteck Realty Limited M NATH’S VIEW ON DRAFT DaiakelaviNit PLAN 2034 1.The drat DP-2034' an attempt fo simply the development in the City of Mumbai ~ however it seems that the norms being put in place may end up as one great Dream, ‘which may not be practicably possible: 2.Current system of FSI gives less buldabilty, ‘95 base Fslis ess, but there is floxbilty to get other areas af a premium payable rate: the proposed draft has increased the base FS! however has included all the free-of-F51 ‘reas within the same base FS all other ad- itional buildable areas are possible at High Premium payment ~ which means that de- ‘velopment shall end up being Expensive: aa S.Ihe proposed draft doesn't give enough Clatity on the areas under CRI — while the plan is for the Mumbai City, which has about 40% of areas affected by CRZ, itis ‘apparent that 60% of Mumbai shall benefit from the new DP, while 40% may have to Tollow the old regulations, that means two sets of DCR. This could have been appropi- iely addressed or can yet be incorporai- ‘edn consideration with Environment; 4o build modem and high-tech ~ projects need exciting elevations & roof top fea- fures / pinnacles - the proposed draft ‘doesn't throw light on this S.Most importantly - proposed DP-2034 is planned for high buildabilty however the infrastructure too needs to calchup with the said development; Infrastructure devel- ‘opment in Mumbai is worth approx. RS. 500,000 Cr., while the annual budget of MCGM Is RS. 30,000 Cr. Our of which Rs. 8,000 Cr. I fr infrastructure works, however only approx. 70% is spent and balance car- tied forward - under such crcumstances, It seems, It would lake more than $0 years fo "bridge the gap" for DP-2034:, ~ Ar. Prem Nath M/S. Prem Nath and Associates|, Nayan Dedhia of Rishabra} Tougheons Group welcomes the Development Plan 2034 which has come up with maximum permissible floor space index (FS!) for each plot in Mumbai. It has been assumed that the new DP eliminates various premiums such as fungible FSI, staircase and open space deficiency and will create a lev- e-playing field by eliminating many of the discretionary DP exemption powers of the Muricipal Commissioner ond Urban Devel ‘opment department. We as proud citizens of Mumbal and would like to express our suggestion & objections (on the new B.P 2034 proposed by the gov- ernment. The New DP has not seen the plot condi- tion where its affecting for the road widen ing, as in most of the parts of the suburbs & City. the plots are small and if road widen~ ing is proposed hal the plots is consumed for road widening with no scope of Devel ‘opment faking into account the mandato 1 open space required for constructing the building. The New D.P has not seen the plot condi- tion where it's affecting for the road widen ing, as in most of the parts of the suburbs & city, the plots are small and if road widen- ing is proposed half the plots is consumed for road widening with no scope of Devel ‘opment faking into account the mandato- 1 open space required for constructing the building. The Postives 1) The new DP acknowledges realities of existing developments and densities. and proposes a geographic distbution of FSlin- slead of a uniform FSI The Negatives 1)_Lobbies, siaicase, etc shall be included. in FSI, which cannot be sold, hence it willbe under ambiguity whether these areas should be included in sale crea of the flat or nat. ~ Mr. Nayan Dedhia Rishabrraj Toughcons Group required for constructing the building The new BP has made many unseen reser- vation & mistakenly put reservation on plots where itis logical and not posible. The new DP has incomporated wholesale matket reservation to society building ‘where a sociely building is presen! on site or Cn land Belonging to the sociely. Also the new D.P has put RG/P.G reservation on lands where the prevailing P.G reservation & most on the land where slums are desig- nated. We would Ike fo request the government to please look in fo this aspects and frame & policy accordingly. So that we can make a beautiful & sustainable Mumbai for our chik dren, grand children & our family Lets proudly call our Mumbai as "AAMCHI MUMBA, - Mr. Pradeep Shetty Heritage Lifestyle Along tem development plan of a city ‘as complex as Mumbai is, to say the least, a very challenging task. In departure with the traditional master plan this draft development plan has been conceived as a broad framework that could respond to the future as it un- folds. itis therefore proposed that a two fier planning approach is followed. De- velopment plan will be followed by de- tailed local area plan in more participa tory fashion. The regulatory framework of the plan is designed fo provide an outer envelope within which physical growth could take place to satisfy the spatial demand of growth. The regula- tory framework is designed to minimize negative externalities cnd help inclusive growth without creating scarcity of de- velopment tights and resultant distor- tions. In conclusion, I would urge upon reader {0 see this plan through a lens is not co- louted by the ruling axioms. MCGM. planners could then look forward to cri= fique that is constructive! Mr. Vidyadhar K. Phatok ‘Advisor to MGMViews on Proposed DP BP. 2034, ts quiet a Depressing Plan, itis being framed without considering the ground reatties ofthe sland City. though iThas sought fo increase the Fl rom 1-33 5, however it hos drectly benefited fo the developers and land owners of Vacant Pol, Redevelopment of Cesed Societies ond Tenanled Buidings wil completely come to halt by capping of 5 Fl because Gt present For Cessed Building’ FS of 3 is valoble + 35% Fungibie FS = 405 FS + all common oreas ike stacase, passages, lobby ete if counted in #31 then the con- sumed FSI would be 5.50. So eventually the New DP Fsthas actualy been reduced for Redevelopment Furihermore, Tenants cond Sociely Membess wil be deprived of Fungible Area which s avalable prosontly, Under guise of low cost housing, pice wa ‘actualy be ky rocketing since here wilnot be ony supply save and except stock of Vacant land owners. - Mr Sandesh Jain Vibrant Group The diafl Development Plan (2034) for Greaier Mumbai along with the draft De- velopment Control Regulation have been prepared by MCGM and vide Resolution ho. 1195 dated 23.2.2015 have been ac- corded sanction for inviting suggestions! bijections from the general public. It interesting to note that MCGM has fol lowed the principle of TOD Le. rans Orient Development, which has been implement: fed in various Countries of the world. But MGM in ts endeavor to implement "Good planning principles” have failed to ac- knowledge the fact that Mumbai is a very Complex megapolis with a lot of diversities ‘ond inircacies and a holistic planning op: proach needs to be adopted. TOD would further congest the oready congested ond ‘rossly Inadequate arterial roads of the ily Which according to the various studies of MCGM have average travel time of 12— 15, km por hour, which would be further ro: duced if MCGM implements this DP & DCR. -Mr. Vishal Ratanghayra, Platinum Corp. Group of Companies Positives 1) The new DP 2034 may sound postive with respect lo tha ncraate in FS1& other good- ies being bestowed upon the cily but in hind sight i raises a lof of questions on the vision of the MCGM with respect fo the de- velopment planned or rather unplanned for the cy 2) The city needs more infrastructural devel ‘opment but nol al @ cos! of is one green cover wrich needs to be guarded Negatives 1) No clear mo-trame for implementation has been outined 2} For the Weslem Suburbs, higher FSI may be largely impractical because of the civil ‘vation funnel and road width require. ments Mr. Amit Gupta Greenfield Developers 1) “Amenity space small pockets wil be formed for smaler plots as eg. 2000 sam. Plot willhave fo give 200.00 sq.m. Land crea for amenily and they wil be left with no RG space for their layout. Amenity are left for Public use so in 200.00 sq.m. Neither you ‘con not gat any buildable space nor con maintain such small pockets." 2) “Building just 1.0m away from front ‘open space makes city lock canjusted and ‘cramp up the overall look of cily. 3) “Arcades are old design concept and ‘we should go for modem design develop- ment. Arcades also invites more hawking spaces asin proper Bombay” - Mr. Niray Mehta: Bhoomi Group No clear fime-ttame for implementation hos been outined. For the Western Suburbs, higher FSI may be largely impractical be: cause of the civil aviation funnel and road width requirements. So of 65 ond 8 wallead to futher crowding of akeady traffic-con- gested regions such os Dadar end Andiher 10% of bull-up crea in projects over plots ‘more than 2000 square metersin orecin the fon of small tenements is required to be handed over lo the MCGM. Developers are disincenivized ftom providing amenities such as swimming pools and clubhouses in their projects, as they are part of FSI fo be paid for but do not generate direct reve- = Mr. Ramesh Prabhu (Chairman) MSWA Development Pion - 2034 wil create level playing field by eliminating many discre- fionory power of authority. Project cost may actualy go up as mos! of the addtional sls inked with Ready Reck- However, OP has ignored 40% population that ives in Slum, there should be separate DCR to make Mumbai slum free. = Mr. Dhitraj $ Gada Sejal Realty & Infrastructure Limited Testimonials “This will be a great effort to keep societies informed, understand and interpre! property various provisions of the Development Plan as envisaged by the authorities and its implications, would appreciate if you could extend the iative to various requirements and provisions for redevelopment of societies, in the fight of many societies going for redevelopment." =Mr. KR C Mani Raghuram Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Mulund (West) * Invititation is interestingly exceptionable fo our commetiee Member’. Your Line of action for the current subject in fight time is highly admirable by our society. Thanks fo supreme fo provide us a platform to clear all the confusion of developement plan 2034." ~ MrRangwala Nay Jay Jatin Sangam, ‘Ghatkopar (Eas!) ‘SUPREME ENGICONS (INDIA) PVT.LTD. 401 Si Krishna Tower, Link Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 053. 4$91-22-26782435 / 36 “www supremeengicons.com