REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI
[Document subtitle] MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI
Abstract
This document is a sincere effort by the members of the Planning Committee to address the concerns of the people of Mumbai regarding Draft Development Plan 2034
Submitted by The Planning Committee under Section 28(3) of the M.R. &T.P. Act 1966
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 1
Preface
Public Participation in a city's Development Plan is essential for engaging citizens in the planning and development of the city. The M.R. &T.P. Act 1966 allows people to share their perceptions and suggestions on the plan and its contents. In addition, public participation acts as a tool for accountability and transparency, requiring the Planning Authority i.e. The Municipal Corporation, to seek inputs from the general public. Such public participation allows evaluation of the plan from the citizen’s perspective. This document is an attempt made by the Planning Committee in allaying the general concerns of the citizens of Mumbai towards their city's plan by actively engaging the stakeholders across the spectrum of the city’s population. An attempt is also made to address genuine concerns of the individuals who are affected by the plan and its processes. The Planning Committee, while addressing these concerns, has followed uniform & transparent policies while actively seeking people’s participation towards the revision of the Revised Draft Development Plan 2034.
This document describes the context, methodology and policies adopted by the Planning Committee while framing recommendations, after hearing people’s suggestions/objections and the results achieved through this process.
The Planning Committee comprising three members appointed by the Director of Town Planning, Pune and three members of the Standing Committee appointed by the Planning Authority got constituted on 15th October, 2016. The Planning Committee was briefed about the magnitude of the task by the MCGM Development Plan (DP) team, and then, details were worked out to arrive at standard methodology to conduct the hearing process smoothly. Collective decisions were taken within the Planning Committee to frame common, uniform policies which aided transparent decision making. In this backdrop, the Planning Committee initiated the hearing process.
Marathon sittings, to conduct the hearings, have been held over two months. However, the process has turned out to be very effective and satisfying, where the Planning Committee has been able to achieve outcomes of substance. This continuous working by the Planning Committee brought
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 2
II.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 3
Abbreviations
AH Affordable/Social Housing AR Accommodation Reservation BARC Bhabha Atomic Research Centre BPCL Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. BEST Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport BUA Built-Up Area CS Cadastral Survey CTS Cadastral Traverse Survey CST Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus CEO Chief Executive Officer CEIA Comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment CFO Chief Fire Officer CRZ Coastal Regulation Zone CZMP Coastal Zone Management Plan CC Commencement Certificate CMP Comprehensive Mobility Plan Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Association CREDAI of India DAM Designated Amenity Plot DCR Development Control Regulations DCPR Development Control & Promotion Regulations D. P. Development Plan EDDP Earlier Draft Development Plan EODB Ease of Doing Business ESZ Eco-Sensitive Zone EWS Economically Weaker Section ELU Existing Land Use FSI Floor Space Index GoI Government of India GoM Government of Maharashtra H. T. Line High Tension Line HTL High Tide Line HPCL Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. HDH Housing for Dis-housed IOD Intimation of Disapproval IH Inclusive Housing LIC Life Insurance Corporation of India LIG Low Income Group MCZMA Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 4
Maharashtra Housing and Area Development MHADA Authority MIDC Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation M. R. & T. P. Act Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 MLA Member of Legislative Assembly MP Member of Parliament MIG Middle Income Group MoEFCC Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change MHCC Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee MMRDA Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority MMC Act Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 MbPT Mumbai Port Trust MCGM Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai NARDECO National Real Estate Development Council NA Natural Area NDZ No Development Plan NOC No Objection Certificate NGO Non-Government Organization OS Open Space OA Other Amenities PC Planning Committee POZ Port's Operational Zone PWFDZ Port's Water Front Development Zone Practicing Engineers, Architect, and Town Planners PEATA Association PAP Project Affected Person PLU Proposed Land Use PH Public Housing POS Public Open Space PSC Public Sanitary Convenience RCF Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. RG Recreation Ground ROS Recreational Open Space R&R Rehabilitation and Resettlement RAM Reserved Amenity Plot RDDP Revised Draft Development Plan SRDP Sanctioned Revised Development Plan SRA Slum Rehabilitation Authority SDZ Special development Zone SPA Special Planning Area
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 5
SWD Storm Water Drainage MCHI The Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry TDA Tourism Development Area TPO Town Planning Officer TDR Transfer of Development Right UDD Urban Development Department VIP Very important Person WDZ Waterfront Development Zone
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 6
Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 10 1.1. CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND ...... 10 1.2. PROCESS OF REVISION ...... 11 1.3. FORMATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ...... 12 1.4. APPOINTMENT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ...... 14 2. PRE-HEARING PROCESS ...... 16 2.1. CATEGORISATION OF SUGGESTIONS/OBJECTIONS ...... 16 2.2. ANALYSIS OF SUGGESTIONS/OBJECTIONS ...... 18 2.3. POLICY AID FOR FAIR JUDGEMENT ...... 19 3. HEARING PROCESS ...... 25 3.1. INVITATION TO HEARING ...... 25 3.2. HEARING SCHEDULE ...... 27 3.3. METHODOLOGY DURING HEARING ...... 27 3.4. HEARING TURNOUT ...... 30 4. POST HEARING ...... 32 4.1. PLANNING AREA ...... 32 4.2. DESIGNATIONS ...... 33 4.3. ROADS ...... 35 4.4. AMENITY STANDARDS ...... 38 4.5. PUBLIC OPEN SPACES ...... 38 4.6. AFFORDABLE/SOCIAL HOUSING ...... 40 4.7. EQUITY ...... 42 4.8. GAOTHAN / KOLIWADA / ADIVASIPADA SETTLEMENTS WITHIN MUMBAI LIMIT ...... 42 4.9. RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES ...... 43 4.10. ZONING ...... 44 4.11. LEGENDS ...... 46 4.12. RESERVATIONS ...... 48 4.13. MUMBAI PORT TRUST ...... 49 4.14. AAREY COLONY ...... 51 4.15. OTHER ISSUES ...... 52 4.15.1 Resettlement and Rehabilitation Reservation ...... 52 4.15.2 Disaster Management Plan ...... 53 4.15.3 M Ward ...... 53
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 7
4.15.4 Cafeteria Approach to Slum Redevelopment ...... 54 5. DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL & PROMOTION REGULATIONS (DCPR) ...... 55 5.1. DCPR AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ...... 55 5.2. OBJECTIVES OF DCPRS ...... 55 5.3. DCPR PROVISIONS ...... 56 5.3.1 Part I: Administration ...... 56 5.3.2 Part II: Development Permission ...... 57 5.3.3 Part III: Land Uses and Manner of Development ...... 58 5.3.4 Part IV: Requirement of site and layout ...... 61 5.3.5 Part V: Floor Space Index ...... 62 5.3.6 Part VI: Additional Floor Space Index ...... 64 5.3.7 Part VII: Land use classification and uses permitted ...... 66 5.3.8 Part VIII: General building requirements ...... 69 5.3.9 Part IX: Urban Safety Requirements ...... 70 5.3.10 Part X: Special Provision ...... 70 5.3.11 Part XI: Miscellaneous provisions ...... 71 5.3.12 Part XII: Environmental sustainability ...... 71 6. OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSION ...... 73 6.1. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ...... 73 6.1.1 Natural Area ...... 73 6.1.2 Special Development Zone (SDZ) – previously known as No Development Zone (NDZ) 74 6.1.3 Affordable/Social Housing (AH) ...... 77 6.1.4 Mumbai Port Trust ...... 77 6.1.5 Aarey Colony ...... 78 6.2. AMENITIES ...... 79 6.2.1 Open Spaces ...... 79 6.2.2 Health ...... 80 6.2.3 Education ...... 80 6.2.4 Social Amenities ...... 81 6.2.5 Affordable Housing ...... 81 6.3. CONCLUSION ...... 81
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 8
List of Appendices
1. Appendix – I : Schedule of hearing 2. Appendix –II: An alternative approach to Slum Upgradation and Redevelopment
List of Enclosures
1. Annexure- I : Committee’s recommendations on individual suggestions and objections
List of Tables
Table 1: Split up of Suggestions and Objections Received ...... 19 Table 2: Hearing Schedule as per Category ...... 27 Table 3: Summary of Hearing Turnout ...... 30 Table 4: The apportionment of land excluding layout road ...... 65 Table 5: Revised Natural Areas ...... 74 Table 6: Ward wise allocation of SDZ-I and SDZ-II ...... 75 Table 7: Ward wise allocation of RDDP2034 NDZ Area ...... 76 Table 8: New Reservations proposed in SDZ ...... 76
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 9
1. INTRODUCTION
This section describes briefly, the background of the Earlier Draft Development Plan (EDDP), the process of revision which formed the Revised Draft Development Plan (RDDP) and the stipulations of M.R.& T.P. Act, 1966 for the appointment of the Planning Committee.
1.1. CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND
The preparation of a Development Plan (DP) is a Planning Authority’s statutory obligation. The first Development Plan for Bombay was sanctioned in 1967. The second DP of the city, known as DP 1991 was sanctioned in parts from 1991 to 1994. DP 2034 is the third Development Plan for Greater Mumbai.
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) followed the statutory steps stipulated in the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (M.R. &T.P.)Act 1966 in preparing the Development Plan. The Corporation by its Resolution No. 767 dated 20.10.08 accorded sanction to declare the intention of revision of the Development Plan by following the process as laid down under Section 23 of the MR&TP Act. The preparation of a GIS base map of Greater Mumbai was taken up first. This provided the foundation for the preparation of Existing Land Use Plan (ELU) that was published on 12th of Dec 2012. Subsequent to the ELU, the Proposed Land Use Plan (PLU) was prepared as directed under Sec 22 of the MR&TP Act. The DP was to ‘generally indicate the manner in which the use of Development of land in the area of a Planning Authority shall be regulated, and also indicate the manner in which the development of land therein shall be carried out’. This was preceded by an assessment of the existing status through the use of base map and the ELU 2012. These preparations led to the allocation of space in order to bridge the amenity gaps of the city as far as possible.
After due process, the Earlier Draft DP 2034 was published as provided u/s 26(1) of the MR&TP Act 1966 on 25.02.2015 in the Government Gazette and in local newspapers. Thereafter, Government of Maharashtra (GoM) appointed a Committee under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, GoM to submit a
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 10 report on the published Draft DP 2034. Subsequent to the submission of report by the Committee, GoM by its order of 23 April 2015 u/s 154 of the MR&TP ACT 1966 issued directions to the effect that the published Draft DP 2034 be revised and republished in a period of four months. The order also stated that the revision should undertake correction of errors as well as an examination of planning and legal matters and consequent refurbishment that may be necessary. This period was further extended up to 22 Feb 2016 and thereafter up to 31 May 2016 by when it was revised and republished.
1.2. PROCESS OF REVISION
Sec 38 of Maharashtra Regional &Town Planning Act 1966 empowers the Planning Authority, to ‘revise the Development plan, either wholly, or the parts separately after carrying out, if necessary, fresh survey and preparing an existing land use map of the area within its jurisdiction’. The process of DP revision began with a series of interactions with groups of citizens and officials. This was with a view to get a proper appreciation of the multiple perceptions and concerns with regard to EDDP and the formulation of a strategy to address those perceptions and concerns. The revision process adopted the administrative ward of the city as the primary planning area.
A team of urban planners were brought in to assist the ward staff to provide field support to city level decision makers. As a revision strategy, the SRDP 1991 was adopted as the reference point for a comparative view on several aspects of the revision. To eliminate the errors with regard to Designations in the EDDP, about 10,000 designations were physically verified by the Urban Planners and Ward engineers at the ward level and the rectified list was displayed on the web portal for further public inputs. Final decisions for Designation corrections were based on public observation, site verification and in-house examination. Regarding Roads and Reservations, policies were framed which were followed for a common decision of retaining/deletion/change. Even though the 65,000 suggestions and objections of the EDDP were marked infructuous, once subject to fresh revision and republication, the team took effort to go through them and to correct the genuine mistakes. The RDDP reverted to the norms that were stipulated in SRDP 1991 and attempt was also made to improve the benchmark, wherever
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 11 possible, even though all norms had not been achieved. In the Legends, few were deleted to avoid confusion that crept in due to clubbing of activities under a single legend and also few were added to protect equity provisions.
The Revised Draft Development Plan 2034, after following the orders u/s 154 of the said Act was submitted to the Corporation for its sanction for inviting the suggestions / objections from the public. The Corporation vide its Resolution No. 307 dated 27.05.2016 accorded sanction as required under the provisions of Section 26(1) of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 for inviting suggestions/objections from the general public on the provisions of the Draft Development Plan 2034 for Greater Mumbai along with the draft Development Control Regulations (DCR)
The Suggestions and/or objections were invited from the members of the public in respect of the said Draft Development Plans of Greater Mumbai (2034)& Draft Development Control Regulation (2034) as laid down under Section 26(1) of the said Act till29.7.2016.
1.3. FORMATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE
The MR&TP Act stipulates the procedure to deal with the suggestions/ objections that were received during the statutory period of sixty days. It requires the appointment of the Planning Committee consisting of three members of the Standing Committee and the not more than four members appointed by the State Government having special knowledge or practical experience in the matters related to the town and country planning, for giving hearing.
As per Section 28(3) of the MR&TP Act, 1966, the Planning Committee, shall on receipt of objections and suggestions, make such enquiry as it may consider necessary, and give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to any person including representatives of Government Departments who may have filed any objections or made any suggestions in respect of the Draft Development Plan and after considering the same, the Planning Committee shall submit its report to the Planning Authority not later than two months from the date of its appointment subject to extension as provided in the Act.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 12
The relevant provisions of the said Act are reproduced below: -
28. Objections to draft Development plan:- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, if within the time allowed under sub-section (1) of section 26 any person communicates in writing to the Planning Authority or the said Officer any suggestions or objection relating to the draft Development plan, the Planning Authority or the said officer may, after considering the report of the Planning Committee under sub-section (2) and the suggestions or objections received by it or him, modify or change the plan in such manner as it or he thinks fit.
(2) The Planning Authority or the said Officer shall forward all objections and suggestions received by it to a Planning Committee 1[consisting of three members of the Standing Committee of the Planning Authority and such additional number of persons, not exceeding four, 2[appointed by the Director of Town Planning] having special knowledge or practical experience of matters relating to town and country planning or environment or relating to both] for consideration and report:
Provided that, where a Planning Authority is not a local authority, the Planning Committee shall consist of such members as the Planning Authority 3[* * *] may determine:
4[Provided further that, where the Divisional Joint Director or Deputy Director of the Town Planning and Valuation Department or an Officer nominated by him under sub-section (4) of section 21, as the case may be, exercise the powers and performs the duties of the Planning Authority, then the Planning Committee may consist of such Divisional Joint Director or Deputy Director or, as the case may be, of such officer.]
5[6[Provided also that], where the State Government or any person or persons appointed under section 162, exercise the powers and perform the duties of a Planning Authority or Development Authority, then the Planning Committee may consist of the State Government or the person so appointed:]
1[Provided also that, the Planning Committee contemplated in the preceding provisions shall also consist of such additional number of persons, not exceeding four, appointed by 2[the Director of Town Planning] having special
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 13 knowledge or practical experience of matters relating to town and country planning or environment or relating to both].
(3) The Planning Committee, 3*** shall, on receipt of objections and suggestions, make such inquiry as it 4*** may consider necessary, and give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to any person including representatives of Government departments who may have filed any objections or made any suggestions in respect of the draft Development plan, and after considering the same, the Planning Committee shall submit its report to the Planning Authority or as the case may be, the said Officer 5[ within a period of two months from the date of its appointment or within such extended period as the Planning authority may specify]6 *** .
7[(4) Not later than two months, after the receipt of the report of the Planning Committee, the Planning Authority or the said Officer shall consider the report including the objections and suggestions received by it or him and make a list of such modifications or changes and carry out the same in the draft Development plan, as it or he may consider proper. The Planning authority or the said officer shall publish, in the Official Gazette and in not less than two local newspapers, the list of modifications or changes made in the draft Development plan for information of the public.]
1.4. APPOINTMENT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE
The Director Town Planning, Pune has appointed three members to be included in the Planning Committee in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Section 28(2) of the MR&TP Act, 1966. The names of the three members are
1. Shri. Gautam Chatterjee , Retired Additional Chief Secretary, GoM IAS 2. Shri. Sudhir Y Ghate Retired Chief Engineer, MCGM
3. Shri. Suresh Surve Retired Dy. Director, Town Planning, GoM
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 14
The three names of the Standing Committee members to be included in the Planning Committee were informed by the Corporation on 15.10.2016.
The names of the three Standing Committee members are
1. Shri. Yeshodhar Phanse Chairman, Standing Committee
2. Smt.Trushna Vishwasrao Leader of House and Member, Standing Committee
3. Shri.Manoj Kotak Member, Standing Committee
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 15
2. PRE-HEARING PROCESS
This section briefly describes the groundwork done by the Planning Committee on the suggestions and objections received, in terms of their Analysis and Categorization and the methodology to be followed for hearing them. For a fair judgment by the Planning Committee members during hearing, uniform Policy aids were also framed thus creating a strong foundation on which the hearing could be conducted in a just, fair and transparent manner.
2.1. CATEGORISATION OF SUGGESTIONS/OBJECTIONS
The objections and suggestions from the General Public, Members of Parliament (MPs), Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs), Corporators, Institutions, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) etc. on the Draft Development Plan 2034, Draft Development Control Regulations 2034 and the Draft Development Plan Report 2034 which were received during the statutory period were categorized during the receiving process for ease in handling during the hearing period. They were broadly categorized as under. 1. Suggestions & Objections on Draft DCR 2. Suggestions & objections of General nature 3. Suggestions & objections on Island City PLU 4. Suggestions & objections on Western Suburbs PLU 5. Suggestions & objections on Eastern Suburbs PLU
These were later stored date wise for easy retrieval and review during the hearing process.
MCGM, as part of its technological initiative and digital inclusiveness, initiated an online system for filing suggestions /objections on the Draft Development Plan and the Draft Development Control Regulations. The link to file the suggestions/objections, through the online system was put up on the MCGM web portal during the statutory period. The suggestions and objections were filed online via that link with a registration process linked to a social network login or via a new registration. The suggestions and objections thus filed were retrieved and categorized ward wise along with the attachments. The online application had a built-in map viewer which enabled one to view the
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 16 development plan provisions for the SRDP1991 and RDDP2034 as well. The user could zoom in to plot level or at an area level. The layers of the maps then could be put on or off. This enabled the user to be at the comfort of their homes or offices to log in and submit their say without having to visit the MCGM offices. The MCGM received 3300 suggestions and objections via this online route. Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport (BEST) was one of the major institutions that used this technology in their on-line submission. The suggestions and objections received were mostly from individuals and were on specific plots of which many were repetitions and relating to the same plot. This repetition through both offline and online portals along with multiple offline papers put on same plot, revealed a lot of duplication too.
After taking review of this offline and online process it was decided to segregate the suggestions and objections on PLU of Draft DP ward wise. The DCR and General issues were then separated from the ward. After going through all the submissions that were received, through offline and online channels and within the stipulated time i.e. on or before 29th July 2016 as prescribed in the Gazette Notification dated 27.05.2016, the same were categorized.
It was, thereafter, decided by the Planning Committee that the submissions would require further categorization based on the nature of the applicant, for ease of conducting hearings. Hence, the applications were further categorized as follows: -
1. Suggestions & objections Received from MCGM/MCGM Department on D.P. Plan & DCR were categorized as “MCGM” 2. Suggestions & objections received from Govt./Semi Govt. Department Organizations, Public Sector undertaking and public service provider on D.P. Plan and DCR were categorised as “Institutions” 3. Suggestions & objections received on specific issues directly from MPs/MLAs/Councillors/Ex. M.P.s/Ex. MLAs/Ex. Councillors for D.P., DCR and other VIPs were categorised as “Very Important Persons”(VIPs) It was decided that the letters by MPs/MLAs/Councillors/Ex. M.P.s/Ex. MLAs/Ex. Councillors forwarding suggestions/objections of individuals/groups/societies on Draft D.P., Draft DCR will be included in the individual hearings.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 17
4. Suggestions & objections Received from NGO and Civil Society Groups on DP/DCR were categorised as “NGOs” 5. Suggestions & objections Received from various Institutions/professional bodies such as MCHI/NARDECO/PEATA/Cinema owner’s association/property owner & Developers Associates etc. categorised as “Institutions” 6. Suggestions & objections Received from individuals/co.op. societies/singly or in bulk on D.P. are categorised as “Individuals” 7. Suggestions and objections received on DCR other than Sr.No.1 to 5 above are categorised as ‘DCR’ 8. Suggestions & objections Received from individuals/co.op. societies on general nature of Draft DP 2034 were categorised as ‘General’
This categorization not only helped in extending systematic invitation to the various groups of people such as Government bodies, Institutions, VIPs, NGOs, it also enabled properly organized scheduling of the hearing and avoiding duplication of cases. Multiple cases were brought together and called for hearing in groups because the groundwork process of this categorization was in place.
2.2. ANALYSIS OF SUGGESTIONS/OBJECTIONS
The analysis of the suggestions and objections revealed that around 72482 individuals/organizations/institutions have submitted their say during the statutory period. These included multiple suggestions and objections on the same issue where large groups of individuals/organizations/institutions have given their say. Thus, these kinds of suggestions and objections, around 59,849, which were from groups of people on the same subject, were considered as one single case for ease of hearing. After this categorization, it was found that around 13000 issues regarding PLU, General issues and DCR have been raised. The maximum amount of bulk cases came from the Western Suburbs, namely 36, 688 out of the total 59,849bulk cases. There was a case where on a particular Cadastral Transverse Survey (CTS) number, 3000 suggestions and objections were raised. There were around 1000 suggestions and objections on the Proposed Coastal Road, around 400 from the Koli Community, more than 13,000 from Church groups and bulks of 2000 from
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 18
Slum pockets in ‘S’ ward. These bulk cases, mostly represented by NGOs/Institutions were heard along with the NGO/Institution hearing schedule wherein the concerned NGOs/Institutions were requested that preferably 5 representatives may appear for the hearing before the Planning Committee, for ease of communication and understanding of the case. In some cases much more than 5 representatives attended the hearing, but the Planning Committee did attend to all of them. Table 1: Split up of Suggestions and Objections Received City 1613 Western Suburbs 4612 Eastern Suburbs 2316 General 194 DCR 881 Total Offline 9616 Online 3300 TOTAL Offline + Online 12916 Bulk Cases 283 Total Bulk 59849 GRAND TOTAL 72482 ( 59849-283+12916)
2.3. POLICY AID FOR FAIR JUDGEMENT
The initial categorization of the suggestions and objections, before beginning the process of hearing, helped the Planning Committee in proceeding with the hearing process effectively. The interaction that happened with the people during the process of hearing brought out new dimensions to the nature of suggestions and objections raised by the people. The issues raised were concerning reservations, designations, roads, zones, DCR modifications, slum rehabilitation etc. The pre-hearing aid, firmed up after thorough study of the suggestions and objections, enabled the Planning Committee to formulate standard and uniform policies to deal with the issues raised by the people. Since each submission was unique as it affected the individual/ organization differently, it was a major challenge for the Planning Committee to determine uniform policies to tackle the issues raised, with the help of a standard set of rules.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 19
Some of the issues, raised during the process of hearing, which were not strictly falling in the above standard categorization, were deliberated later in the day, after the hearing got over, and a consensus was arrived at keeping in view equity and also the City’s development requirement over the next 20 years. In very few cases, where a partial deletion or change of reservation was agreed to, it was only when more than 70%, sometimes the entire land, belonging to the applicant/institution had been reserved or in some cases the proposed user was not compatible to the existing use of lands. Like, in some cases, land for Homeless Shelter was proposed within an Educational Complex, prompting the Planning Committee to change the user of the land, compatible to the surrounding use.
The analysis of the suggestions and objections revealed that they could be put in the following broad categories: - 1. Deletion of the reservation 2. Change in the category of the reservation 3. Shifting the reservation 4. Change in the user of the designation 5. Deletion of the designation, as it is no longer in use 6. Change in the alignment of the DP road/ existing road / layout road 7. Deletion of or proposed widening of a road 8. Granting access to a landlocked property 9. Change in the zone 10. Change in Cadastral Survey (CS) /CTS number / CS /CTS boundary, H.T. Lines etc. 11. City level issues viz. designating Aarey as Green Zone, Affordable Housing, Coastal Road, Religious places, Marking boundaries of Gaothan/Koliwada 12. Marking/Indicating the names of religious structures, on DP sheet.
Thus, standard policies were framed to address the suggestions and objections, which are spelt out, category-wise, in the following sections.
2.3.1 Reservation
A maximum number of suggestions and objections were received relating to imposing reservation/s on the plots. A maximum number of individuals who
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 20 filed the say were concerned about the reservation on their lands. Even the Collector of both City and Suburbs raised concerns on reserving their lands. This thought was echoed by several Govt. organizations too viz. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL), Railways, Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) & BEST etc.
The reservation on one’s land is a matter of concern to an individual and even to an institution. So much is the negativity towards the reservations, that it was a major contributor in the bulk of suggestions and objections. The majority of the suggestions and objections on the reservations were for deletion even though the DCR gives more FSI for the lands which are reserved than the lands which are not reserved for any purpose. In order to have a uniform basis for decision making and recommendation, the following policy was formulated.
a. A reservation which was in Sanctioned Revised Development Plan (SRDP) 1991 can be relocated/changed/deleted from the Revised Draft Development Plan (RDDP) 2034 only if, 1. There is an order of Government of Maharashtra for deletion/lapsing/change of the said reservation. 2. There is a court order for deletion/change on the said reservation 3. If an approval for relocation of reservation in SRDP 1991 is granted by competent authority
b. A reservation which was in Sanctioned Revised Development Plan (SRDP) 1991 cannot be deleted from the Revised Draft Development Plan (RDDP) 2034 if, 1. There is an acquisition by the Competent Authority
Otherwise, any reservation which is not part of SRDP 1991 can be deleted only if there is a valid IOD/CC on the said plot. If there is an approved relocation of the reservation, then the reservation proposed in RDDP can be relocated as per the approval of the competent authority. It was also decided that in majority of the cases SRDP 1991 reservations are not to be changed from their original reservation type. Also, if a purchase notice is served and the reservation stands lapsed, no new reservation should be added on that plot. In general, if any new reservations were proposed on vacant lands they would be as per requirement at the ward level.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 21
2.3.2 Designation
As per the DCR the designations are defined as “Designation” means a public amenity provided or aided by an Appropriate Authority on a parcel of land. The analysis of the submissions revealed that the suggestions and objections on the matter of designations were based on the conflict of the site uses and the PLU use, request for not showing their amenities as designations or for deletion of the designation. Hence, in order to have a common basis for decision making and recommendation, the following policy was formulated.
A designation which was included in SRDP 1991 can be relocated/deleted in RDDP 2034 only if,
1. There is a GoM order for deletion/change on the said designation 2. If there is an existing use on site other than what is shown in RDDP 3. If there is change in location of designation, within plot.
2.3.3 DP Roads / Existing Roads / Layout Roads
The objections that were received on the proposals of the Draft DP 2034 were mainly in the following categories.
1. Not to show / change the alignment of the DP road 2. Show layout road /delete layout road 3. Provide access to landlocked properties. 4. Propose widening for the existing roads in the RDDP2034 as the width is not adequate considering future traffic demand / delete widening to the existing roads. 5. Provide new D.P. roads.
The following course of action was finalized, to deal with objections and suggestions relating to roads.
1. A DP road which was there in SRDP 1991 can be deleted/realigned only if, there is a Government of Maharashtra Order for deletion/realignment on the said DP Road or it is realigned/deleted considering the feasibility and its implementation.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 22
2. The layout roads will not be reflected in the DP and if any layout roads shown as existing roads on D.P. sheets, these roads are not subjected to mechanical acquisition as status remains same. 3. To provide new access to landlocked property in RDDP 2034, a provision is made in DCR which will cater to the requirement of the access to the landlocked property. 4. Existing roads on site cannot be removed especially if it is not a layout road or a road which was shown in SRDP 1991. New roads can be proposed as per connectivity requirement. 5. The demand to show widening to the existing roads/ propose new DP road, were accepted in few cases considering the need of the neighbourhood and the fact that the plan is catering to the requirement of next twenty years.
2.3.4 Zones
The suggestions and objections for the zones were mainly in the following categories.
1. Change the zone from Residential/Commercial/Industrial (R/C/I) as per their demand. 2. Change the No Development Zone (NDZ) to R/C 3. Change the Natural area to R/C or the land is not qualified as Natural Area.
It was decided that the Zone shall be changed only if Industrial to Residential / Commercial has been issued but not shown on DP sheet / if the DAM (Designated Amenity Plot) or RAM (Reserved Amenity Plot) is shown on the RDDP construing that the change of user is permitted earlier.
2.3.5 Other Categories
The analysis of the submissions also revealed wrongly shown CTS boundary/ Number, incorrect CS/CTS boundaries, correction in alignment of High Tide Line (HTL), High Tension Line, Buffer to the nalla/river, buffer to Railway, Buffer to Highway etc.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 23
The RDDP 2034 had decided to display property numbers as per revenue record, on the PLU map, in order to help citizens to locate the revenue record of their property with ease. However, over the period of time many of the properties were amalgamated/ subdivided. The amalgamation / subdivision of the property is carried out by the Revenue authorities and the changed status of records, with regard to the boundaries or numbers are not readily available, in their updated form, with the MCGM. Hence, the Planning Committee decided to change the CTS boundary/ Number, CS/CTS boundaries as per the revenue records, which were made available at the time of hearing.
The High Tide line depicted in RDP2034 is as per the Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) approved by Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) in the year 2000. Subsequent to the MoEFCC notification issued in the year 2011 it was explained to the people that the correction in High Tide line will be carried out after its approval by MoEFCC.
Similarly, suggestions and objections were made regarding wrong depiction of the Railway buffer, Highway buffer. It was decided that Highway Buffer will be marked on the DP sheet and the NOC (No Objection Certificate) /Remarks for the plot falling within the highway buffer will be insisted considering the future development and growth of the highway. The decision was taken to correct the buffer for the Railways and it was decided that the modified railway buffer of 30m will be shown from the railway track boundary on all the Draft DP sheets.
As regards nalla, a decision was taken that final remarks from Storm Water Drainage (SWD) department will prevail and a nalla and its buffer alignment will stand modified accordingly. As regards High Tension Power lines, a decision was taken that the remarks of respective power company will prevail.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 24
3. HEARING PROCESS
This section describes briefly about the methodology that was adopted by the Planning Committee to carry out the Hearing process, right from sending invitation, to conducting hearing smoothly. This section also lists out the turnout which the Planning Committee received for hearing.
3.1. INVITATION TO HEARING
The MR&TP Act 1966 provides that the Planning Committee on receipt of suggestions and objections, make such inquiry as it may consider necessary, and give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to any person including representatives of Government departments who may have filed any objections or made any suggestions in respect of the draft Development plan, and after considering the same, the Planning Committee shall submit its report to the Planning Authority Considering the aforesaid provision, a methodology for granting the hearing and its mode of communication was adopted. It was decided that for MCGM, Government, Semi Government Departments/Organizations/Public Sector undertakings and public service providers, M.P, MLA, Corporators, Ex.M.P., Ex. Corporators, Ex. Civil Servant and renowned persons in the field of their excellence, Institutions and NGOs will be informed in writing via emails/courier/telephone.
It was decided that, the individuals/societies/group of persons representing their issues (suggestions/objections) and who wish to be heard in person, may present themselves before the Planning Committee on the scheduled dates of respective ward hearings. After these decisions of hearing format and schedule were finalized, the format for the letters to be issued to various organizations, NGOs, VIPs and the notice to be issued in News Papers and on MCGM web portal for hearing to be issued to the general Public was structured and thereafter the letters and notices were issued under the signature of the Town Planning Officer.
The schedule for hearing and time allocated for each hearing was finalized by considering the number of issues raised by the
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 25 organizations/institutions/VIPs/NGOs etc. The time slot was accordingly allocated for each organizations/institutions/VIPs/NGOs etc.
The MCGM, Government, Semi-Government Departments/Organizations/Public Sector undertakings and public service providers, VIPs, who had already attended the special hearing scheduled for them, were requested not to attend the hearing again on the dates allotted for individual hearing for the respective wards, which were fixed on subsequent days. For the Institutions and NGOs who were also called for separate hearing, it was requested to nominate their representatives not exceeding 5 in numbers to represent their case before the Planning Committee.
For individual hearing, the dates for hearing on suggestions/objections in person (for D.P./DCR/General as categorized) was published twice in around 30 local English, Marathi, Gujarati, Hindi Newspapers and the schedule was uploaded on the website of MCGM. The notice for individual hearing, printed on the flex banner, was displayed at prominent places in MCGM head office entrances and in all 24 Ward offices so as to give wide publicity.
In cases where the bulk suggestions were received on a single issue as discussed in Section 2.2, it was requested to nominate their representatives not exceeding 5 in numbers to represent their case before the Planning Committee. The suggestions/objections from general public on DCR, on general issues, on Island city, Western Suburbs, Eastern Suburbs were heard separately. The issues raised by the general public which were not related/relevant to DP/DCR and not within the ambit of the Planning Committee were forwarded to respective Departments of MCGM. The persons/groups, intending to attend the hearing, were asked to bring along with them, at the time of hearing, copy of suggestions/objections submitted by them, duly acknowledged by MCGM or the receipt generated on online submission.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 26
3.2. HEARING SCHEDULE
Table 2: Hearing Schedule as per Category
Sr.No. Description Period 1 Government From 17.10.2016to 21.10.2016 2 VIPS 25.10.2016, 26.10.2016 & 05.11.2016 3 Institutions 03.11.2016 and 04.11.2016 4 NGOs From 07.11.2016 to 10.11.2016 5 Individual From 11.11.2016 to 15.12.2016 (inclusive of General and DCR) The detailed schedule is as per Annexure -II
3.3. METHODOLOGY DURING HEARING
3.3.1 Logistics
The suggestions and objections received during the stipulated time period as prescribed in the M.R. &T.P. Act 1966 were heard as per the categorization explained in the preceding section of the report. It was decided that the place for the hearing must be convenient to the general public and should be easily accessible by multiple modes of transport. Moreover, it was felt that enormous administrative support mechanism from the MCGM departments would be necessary. The members of the Standing Committee felt that they would also be available for discharging their duties towards the Standing Committee. After prolonged deliberations, it was decided to opt for the Municipal Head Office as a convenient choice for giving hearing to the general public and other stakeholders as the place is known to the general public and convenient to everyone. The Old Building of the Head Office has undergone considerable change; it has been restored to its past glory by the Heritage Conservation Department of MCGM. The ground floor of the building was selected for the hearing considering its accessibility and the suitability for the elderly as well as differently-abled people.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 27
The place for hearing at the ground floor consisted of three small halls and two sufficiently large halls which could occupy around 200 persons. The three small rooms were selected for support staff. All the places were air conditioned with adequate lighting arrangements. Sufficient seating arrangements were also made available for people who had to wait before attending the hearing. The arrangement for individual hearing was separate and very elaborate. Since the public had to travel up to Chhatrapathi Shivaji Maharaj Terminus (CST) from various locations in City and Suburbs a large hall was kept reserved for the public to sit comfortably with arrangements for drinking water and public conveniences. Suitable directional boards were displayed, which served as a convenient guide to the visitors.
3.3.2 Procedure
The procedure followed for the Departments/Institution/VIP/NGO hearing was different from the procedure adopted for individual hearing. In case of the Departments/Institution/VIP/NGO, a time slot was allotted for each Departments/Institution/VIP/NGO depending upon the number of suggestions and objections filed. The hearing for the VIPs viz. MPs, MLAs, Corporators was scheduled with prior intimation to them. Some of the VIPs requested the Planning Committee for allotting different time and slot as they had prior engagements on the scheduled dates. As per the request of these VIPs, a separate time slot, mutually convenient, was allotted.
Similar issues raised by different institutions were grouped together e.g. the suggestions and objections on the Draft Development Control Regulations 2034 raised by institutions viz. Practicing Engineers, Architects and Town Planners Association (PEATA), The Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry – Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Association of India (MCHI – CREDAI), National Real Estate Development (NARDECO) Property Redeveloper’s Association etc. were grouped together and the hearing was slated for one whole day from 10.30 am onwards. This hearing went on up to 8.30 pm, as many common issues were deliberated at length. Similarly, issues raised by the Power Utilities companies were heard at a joint hearing. The issues related to the marking of religious places for the Christian community was discussed with the representative of Archbishop of Bombay along with the several
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 28 representatives of the various churches across Mumbai. The same principle was adopted while dealing with issues related to gender or issues specific to M/East ward, which were heard together with several representatives of the NGOs working for these causes.
The process for the Individual hearing was planned out in detail where the public, after reaching, had to go first to a registration desk and show the acknowledgement copy or the online acknowledgement for easy retrieval of their application submitted. They were allotted a token number on a first come first served basis. After registration, they proceeded towards a waiting hall where the serial number of the gist, which was prepared for the use of the members of the Planning Committee, was written down on their token for ease of identification of their suggestion and objection. As per their token number, the people moved towards the hearing hall where the members of the Planning Committee heard them in person.
The hearing was conducted in a very open and transparent manner. The hearing was conducted with the applicants sitting in front of the Planning Committee members and at the same time those who were waiting for their next slot, were seated in the same room waiting for their turn. Generally, most of the recommendations of the Planning Committee be it acceptance or rejections were conveyed by the Planning Committee to the public at the time of hearing and in front of the people waiting for their turn, if the subject matter fell in the broad category of policy already decided by the Planning Committee. Sometimes, where issues did not clearly fall under a specific category, concerns raised were noted and decisions were taken later after deliberation by the Planning Committee members, after hearing was over. The Planning Committee at various instances asked the Planners to verify the site conditions and site situation along with the applicant. These site visits were then conducted by the Planners of Ward along with the representative of the applicants, as far as possible on the following day, and the report of the site visit was conveyed to the Planning Committee. The Planning Committee thereafter finalized their recommendations. In some cases, recommendation that were conveyed during the hearing required to be revisited by the members, along with fresh facts and documents and after reviewing the cases the recommendations were then firmed up. The hearing was scheduled up to
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 29
5.30 pm with the registration time up to 3.30 pm, however the individuals who came and registered after 3.30pm were also not denied hearing. The individuals who could not attend the ward wise hearing on the scheduled dates, attended hearing on the last date i.e. on 15.12.2016 which was a day when all the general matters raised at city level were heard. Submissions, for which the concerned applicants did not attend hearing on the scheduled dates, were decided on the merits of the cases.
3.4. HEARING TURNOUT
The hearing on the suggestions and objections was conducted in a transparent manner as described in the preceding sections. The public response to the hearing was good and it was seen that the people, sometimes, arrived for registration early in the morning. The systems that were put in place ensured that people didn’t have to wait long for their turn. The hearing was attended in most of the cases by the primary applicant or otherwise by the applicant accompanied by his/her Architect. In some cases, large groups of people attended the hearing on common issues viz. reservation on slums, reservation on cessed building, conversion of NDZ to R/C zone, non-marking of Religious places in PLU.
Table 3: Summary of Hearing Turnout % of Cases No. of Cases No. of People Total no. Appeared Category/ Ward Appeared for Appeared for of Cases for Hearing Hearing Hearing MCGM 26 25 96.15 38 Government 194 184 94.85 169 VIP 373 286 76.68 196 Institution 182 181 99.45 150 NGO 67 65 97.01 166 DCR 1392 110 7.90 109 A ward 84 25 29.76 50 B ward 26 3 11.54 5 C ward 103 32 31.07 89 D ward 269 84 31.23 169 E ward 258 97 37.60 184 F/N ward 263 77 29.28 206
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 30
% of Cases No. of Cases No. of People Total no. Appeared Category/ Ward Appeared for Appeared for of Cases for Hearing Hearing Hearing F/S ward 221 67 30.32 134 G/N ward 186 73 39.25 144 G/S ward 316 119 37.66 301 H/E ward 547 95 17.37 180 H/W ward 432 171 39.58 330 K/E ward 691 238 34.44 545 K/W ward 1021 261 25.56 599 P/N ward 848 286 33.73 576 P/S ward 499 154 30.86 317 R/N ward 497 192 38.63 320 R/C ward 512 158 30.86 331 R/S ward 416 166 39.90 333 L ward 587 175 29.81 377 M/E ward 297 108 36.36 329 M/W ward 491 119 24.24 288 N ward 319 119 37.30 191 S ward 1148 239 20.82 488 T ward 348 135 38.79 284 General Cases 302 140 46.36 289 TOTAL 12915 4184 32.40 7887
Note: - In column ‘cases appeared for’ the individual case/subject were counted, though some cases reflect more than one objection from different persons, these cases were treated as different case. However bulk cases were considered as one objection only.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 31
4. POST HEARING Post hearing, the Planning Committee took out time to analyze the suggestions and objections that were heard during the hearing and major issues that arose from that analysis has been brought out in this section including the decisions that were taken by the Planning Committee.
4.1. PLANNING AREA
The total land of Greater Mumbai identified in Earlier Draft Development Plan 2034 (EDDP) was 458.28 sq km. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), however, was the Planning Authority of a much lesser area since about 9.43% of the cited area fell under the jurisdiction of Special Planning Authorities (SPA). Three such SPAs exist in Greater Mumbai – MMRDA (Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority), SRA (Slum Rehabilitation Authority) and MIDC (Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation). The EDDP therefore, prepared a Development Plan for 415.05 sq. km.
Meanwhile, ELU 2012 located the emergence of an additional area of 14.96 sq. km, full of mangroves, in Thane creek, probably due to siltation. This area is outside the current MCGM limits. It is proposed, however, In the Revised Draft Development Plan 2034 (RDDP) to merge the said area in the MCGM limit and shown as Natural Area (NA)
The Coastal Road approved by GoM proposed to add a further area of 1.80 sq. km through reclamation of the sea. The alignment of this Road is being marked on the PLU (Proposed Land Use). It is also proposed that any changes in the alignment of Coastal Road that would get necessitated during implementation would automatically become part of the DP 2034.
Suggestions and objections were received in respect of the area of Mumbai, disputing the area which is mentioned in the Report on the Draft Development plan 2014-2034. The main argument was about the increase in the area to 474 sq.km. After discussion, it was noticed that the area arrived for MCGM by RDDP2034 is correct and therefore, the Planning Committee decided that there was no need to recalculate or re-determine the area of Mumbai.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 32
The other major suggestions and objections were of non-inclusion of areas under other SPAs into MCGM fold. It is felt that in a Mega City like Mumbai, the Planning and provision of infrastructure should be handled by one single agency like MCGM which will help in having cohesive planning and its proper implementation. But this being out of the purview of the Planning Committee, no recommendation is being made in this regard.
4.2. DESIGNATIONS
The Report on the Draft Development Plan 2034 mentions that, Designations were reservations in the earlier DPs and have since fructified in terms of the provision of specified public amenities. Hence, all reservations of the earlier DPs that already stand developed would continue to be termed as designations in the subsequent DPs. Such designations will continue till such time that they exist, unless altered or rescinded by an order of the Competent Authority. Reservations of the past DPs that have not been developed would continue to be termed as reservations in the subsequent DPs for those specific public amenities, unless altered or rescinded by the Competent Authority. A public amenity privately provided is a designation if it involves specific concession/concessions granted by a public authority, such as land, or monetary grant, or additional Floor Space Index (FSI) for the provision of a distinct public amenity. Public amenities privately provided, of free volition, without DP stipulation and without any concession granted by a public authority for the provision of such public amenities are not designations and will not be marked on PLU as designations. However, since the private party has provided them for public use, they would be taken into consideration in the computation of overall public amenities in the city.
The notion about Designations carried in people’s mind was that once their lands were designated for a particular amenity, they felt that this would be a burden and even if there is no demand for such facility they would have to continue that facility forever. The Planning Committee helped in taking out this fear from the people by adding new clause in DCR which allows for redevelopment of the designated lands and also authorizes Municipal Commissioner to correct the land use of the designated land or change the designation considering the deficiency in the ward.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 33
The MPs, MLAs and Corporators were demanding to depict all existing Schools as designations in the Draft DP 2034. The suggestions and objections received from the general public also requested inclusion of their educational premises in the Draft DP. Their contention was that these schools though constructed contrary to the provisions of SRDP1991 are imparting educations to students and moreover many of these schools are constructed on private unreserved lands after obtaining approval of the Corporation or concerned Competent Authority. Some of these schools were shown in ELU 2012 and in the Earlier Draft DP 2034 published in the year 2015. Some of these schools were excluded from the RDDP2034 as they were not developed on lands which were reserved or designated in SRDP1991. Since these schools were recognized by SSC/CBSE/ICSE boards, the Planning Committee decided to accept the demand and decided to show the existing schools which were part of the Earlier Draft Development Plan 2034. A specific clause in DCPR is included for the verification of authenticity of the structure to determine their status.
The submissions made by the Oil companies towards the PLU were for either inclusion of Fuel Stations which were not part of SRDP1991 and for deletion of Fuel Stations which were not being used for the filling of fuel. Thus, the decision to include or exclude these Fuel Stations was based on GoM order which states that the Fuel stations existing on site after 2008 cannot be deleted from DP or its use cannot be changed. Similarly, the Electric Utility Companies were demanding to show their existing amenities in DP so that they would find permanent place in the DP. It was contended that the electric companies can purchase the lands for setting up their utilities from the open market.
The Cinema Owners Association pleaded that in the era of multiplexes, single screen cinema had lost the charm and fallen out of favour of the cine goers. They further contended that since their use is marked as Cinema designation in the PLU, they cannot exploit the market value of their lands. This matter was deliberated in detail in the Planning Committee and it was decided that the City should not lose the entertainment opportunity but in order to give a level playing field to the Cinema Owners, a method based on DCR would be
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 34 formulated. Thus, the Planning Committee has recommended suitable modifications in the relevant clauses of DCR.
A problem that continued to cause public concern, in spite of clearly stating the same in the report on RDDP 2034, was in regard to plots where part of the use was private and part public where, say a private residential complex on a plot also had a public parking facility. These were marked with the letters ‘pt’ denoting ‘part’. This was meant to clarify that there was something else on the plot that the whole plot was not designated. This matter was further explained and clarified in the course of hearings.
The Planning Committee adopted the following principles with regard to Designation:
Fuel station designation/cinema theatre designation to be shown except where court order is issued to the contrary Designating all Schools which have been shown in EDDP, and also designate the cemeteries which are in records of Executive Health Officer. Power given to Commissioner to suitably modify land use of designations which are not required. Layout RG/Private Gardens have been shown in DP sheet in text only. They do not qualify as designation as they are for exclusive use of residents of layout. Similarly, designated garden under ownership of Educations Institutions/Trust/Museum and in the exclusive possession have been qualified in DCR accordingly. Annexure has captured all existing layout RG/Private Garden so that they are available in the public domain, to obviate any misuse of the same.
4.3. ROADS
The RDDP 2034 report clears the stand taken while depicting the proposed roads and existing roads in the RDDP2034. It states that the EDDP 2034 had shown the following categories of roads on DP sheets:
a. Newly proposed DP roads not in existence earlier b. 1991 DP roads not developed till date and hence shown as proposed DP roads
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 35
c. Widening of existing developed roads d. New Public Streets created u/s 291 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act 1888 e. Sanctioned Regular Line of Existing Streets u/s 297 (1) of the MMC Act 1888
Of the above, (a), (b) and (c) are proposals under the M.R. &T.P. Act 1966 while (d) and (e) are streets done under MMC Act 1888 after following due process under that Act. The RDDP, after a detailed road review has proposed that the roads mentioned at d & e above that were initiated under the MMC Act 1888 and had already reached statutory finality under that Act did not require to be subjected to another round of suggestions and objections and a reopening of their scrutiny under the MR&TP Act 1966. It was therefore, proposed that these roads need not be shown on the DP sheets but a list of such roads be appended to the DP (Appendix 1, RDDP Appendices) on MCGM Web Portal for information and with the clear observation that they are not subject to suggestions and objections since due process of law has been completed under the MMC Act 1888.
The widening of existing roads, the third category of roads, had been entirely abandoned in RDDP 2034, except those shown in SRDP 1991. They did not seem to be backed by any scientific study. Moreover, it was felt that widespread hardships would be caused to occupants of existing structures that would have to be pulled down.
Hence, after consideration, the following roads have been shown on the revised Draft DP sheets:
i. Newly proposed DP roads not in existence earlier, ii. SRDP1991 DP roads not developed till date and hence shown as proposed DP roads iii. SRDP1991 DP roads partly developed and hence shown as existing roads with widening as per SRDP1991 road width, and iv. Road widening to certain roads is proposed which are very important from connectivity point of view. v. New DP roads proposed in NDZ and salt pan lands for better connectivity and integrated development.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 36
The submissions regarding DP roads / Layout roads / Road widening were dealt with accordingly. The MCGM has recently completed Comprehensive Mobility Plan for Greater Mumbai. This plan has recommended inclusion of new roads for better connectivity, widening of the roads for better traffic management and proposals of new bridges/underpass etc. The RDDP2034 had deleted some of the DP roads of EDDP based on their non-feasibility and the site survey. The list of the deleted roads was published on MCGM web portal after receiving comments from the public. It was therefore felt that the proposals of the Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) for the inclusion of new roads in the Draft DP would not be appropriate at this stage as the DP road had gone through previous rounds of scrutiny. Hence, the CMP proposal of inclusion of the new roads was not considered. It was felt that Mumbai city requires widened roads for better movement of traffic and effective utilization of the carriageway.
The need for the widening of the roads was felt and hence it was decided that not all but few road widening on important linkages would be shown on PLU and after hearing the public, some new DP roads were proposed as per the EDDP alignment.
Coastal Road
Some NGOs, Residents Associations and Fishermen Communities had come forward with their objections to the construction of the Coastal Road. Among the many arguments that were raised, the core issue was that the Proposed Coastal Road would destroy the community spaces used by the fishermen community along the coast and the city’s aim to promote tourism, leisure and entertainment would displace the original inhabitants of the city. Another argument was that it would affect the fragile ecological setting of the city by disturbing the coastline features which includes beaches, estuaries, mudflats, mangroves. Objections also arose on not bringing in any toll on the road and creating a taxation free road space on public money for selected few who own cars to use. They were questioning as to why private transport is not made costly by introducing pricing and diverting those revenues towards improving and augmenting public transport. Mumbai’s eagerness to build infrastructure that encourages private transport was discouraged by many applicants in a city where 78% of non-walking trips rely on public transport systems. After patient
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 37 hearing to these objections, the Planning Committee decided to retain the alignment of Coastal Road as it would be an important augmentation in the transport infrastructure of the city. However, out of two proposed alignments proposed in the RDDP, only one alignment which has now been finalized by MCGM is retained and the other alignment is deleted.
4.4. AMENITY STANDARDS
The MR&TP Act, 1966 lists a large number of amenities that could be provided in the DP. They include those for education, health, social welfare, markets, culture, open spaces, sports, nature, transport, communication and public buildings. DP 1991 had adopted differential planning standards for the Island City and the Suburbs, prescribing a specific area or number for a specified population.
The amenities considered by RDDP for provision and the legends and standards adopted for them were not changed. The land demand for amenities has been calculated on the basis of per capita benchmarks and the population projected by draft RP, which is 12.79million.
Due care has been taken for not lowering the amenity standards while considering the recommendations by the Committee. The effect of the recommendations on the area of the amenities has been broadly calculated and separately mentioned in Section 6.2
4.5. PUBLIC OPEN SPACES
The RDDP 2034 had proposed to describe Public Open Spaces (POS) as those open spaces (OS) where there is right to access and any restrictions imposed are universally applicable. Open spaces that are available to all members of a local community, such as residents of a housing society, are local community spaces. So are clubs, gymkhanas and swimming pools that are available on membership or fee basis. However, since a sizeable number of citizens enjoy such spaces, the RDDP has treated them as Public Open Spaces.
The above means that all lands zoned as Natural Areas fall into the realm of Open Spaces. However, if they are not accessible to a sizeable number of people, they are not POS. Additionally, such open spaces that are exclusive to a
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 38 family, as in a private bungalow are private open spaces, and not POS. The RDDP had proposed over a period of time to attempt the meaningful conversion of certain OS into POS so that the citizens of the City have larger accessible areas for enjoyment.
The RDDP 2034 had attempted to list all types of OS and POS. This is with a view to afford a comprehensive idea of the magnitude of open space the City possesses. It also allows a better watch on open spaces and a realistic benchmark for future comparisons. POS play a critical role in a city. They serve the purpose of lungs for the city and impose a much-needed balance between the built and the open environment. They allow a decent quality of life for citizens who could spend time away from home, either for exercise or for recreation, or for interacting with nature. Playgrounds are equally vital, especially for children, for both physical and mental growth or for youthful energy to be channeled in the rightful direction. POS also promotes the growth of human qualities such as friendship, sharing of joy, knowledge, sorrow, because they allow space and opportunities for interaction. They are a great asset for public health as they allow for safe walking by the elderly, safe play by children. They also permit public activities, such as debates, discourses and awareness campaigns.
The analysis of the suggestions and objections revealed that maximum number of suggestions and objections were for deletion or change in the category of the reservation of Open Spaces. The Open Space reservation falling on slum also attracted major share of suggestions and objections from the slum dwellers. The same was the case for the Open Space reservation on the cessed category building of the slum.
The deliberation for finalizing the recommendations on the above category took considerable time and after detailed discussion it was decided to opt the route of accommodation reservation under development control mechanism to garner reserved open spaces. The accommodation reservation mechanism for Open Spaces reservation on slum settlements, thus crystallized, would ensure that the City will benefit with desirable open spaces and the slum dwellers will also benefit with in-situ rehabilitation. The regulation thus formulated will garner 33% land for Open Spaces and 67% land will be made
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 39 available for in-situ Slum Rehabilitation. Thus, the calculation of the total land that will be available as Open Spaces has been worked out by accounting for such deductions upfront by accounting for 33% only.
The DCR for the cessed building provides for dilution of the reservation based on the GoM order which states that the lands under the cessed buildings shall not be subject to any reservations. The DCR provides specific clause for dilution of the reservation if the lands fall under cessed category. This clause was included by considering that it was not possible for Planning Committee to examine each suggestion and objection of cessed building and delete the reservation.
The DCR for allowing development of plot reserved for open spaces/ play grounds etc. also provides the owner to develop 30% land by surrendering about 70% land for development of O.S./ PGs of total OS available.
4.6. AFFORDABLE/SOCIAL HOUSING
The RDDP had proposed the concept of Affordable Housing (AH) to complement the efforts of Government of India (GoI) and GoM in the area of Housing for All. The RDDP’s AH scheme proposed to take the cost of land out of the Affordable Housing equation through the deployment of land instruments. The RDDP recognized current available options and other formulations that are possible for affordable housing. The affordable housing issue has taken such gigantic proportions in Greater Mumbai that every possible scheme and method available for achieving it must be attempted.
The RDDP assumed affordable housing requirement at 1 million tenements when the actual requirement is 6,50,000 tenements for the 1.2 million population. The RDDP assumed that the NDZ lands, MbPT lands and Salt Pan lands would make sizeable contribution to the provision of Affordable Housing. 60 ha out of 721.24 ha of Mumbai Port Zone (MbPT) Lands were been marked for AH. MbPT’s contribution to amenities had been separately marked. Given the significance of AH in the context of the City and the primacy of GoI and GoM attached to AH, it was expected that both private and public agencies would lend unqualified support to the proposal.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 40
The Affordable Housing mechanism, which the RDDP had envisaged received many suggestions and objections from different sections. The major contention was garnering the 4 Ha land for the AH scheme. People requested for much lesser land parcel for the AH scheme. The suggestions and objections also pointed out that the AH must be utilized for different modes of housing viz. Rental Housing, Rehabilitation & Resettlement, Affordable Housing, Low Income Group (LIG)/ Economically Weaker Section (EWS).
After discussion, it was decided that Affordable Housing will include all the forms of social housing viz. Rental Housing and Housing for MIG/LIG/EWS. The detailed provision for Affordable Housing is mentioned in DCPR.
Affordable Housing is now an all-inclusive term which includes social housing in the nature of housing meant for Economically Weaker Section, Lower Income Group, Middle Income Group and rental housing. A megapolis which is having majority of its population staying in slums and also a large no. of people who needs to be rehabilitated because their present habitat is needed for a public project or is in a ecologically sensitive location, such affordable housing is actually needed. Mumbai is constantly getting skilled work force from different parts of India and the World, who are employed in various professions and trades. These people require homes for their period of occupation which may be from one year to five years, thus Rental Housing is also required to cater to the migrant work force. Planning Committee has done a detailed planning exercise and created avenues for creating a sizeable stock of affordable housing for the city’s requirement and keeping with the principle adopted by RDDP 2034, the land cost has been taken out of affordable housing equation through deployment of land instruments. Additional reservation on land for affordable Housing will yield 328.76 ha more area. Yielding to a large number of request during hearing, Erstwhile NDZ lands, those which do not fall in NA, with unauthorized protected occupants have been termed as Special Development Zone I (SDZ I) land where amended provision of 33(10) has been made applicable.
Other NDZ lands, which are vacant and not falling in NA have been termed as SDZ II and a new provision of DCR 33(8) is being made applicable to such lands essentially for creating large stock of Affordable Housing. The amended scheme has taken into account the concerns raised by the various
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 41 stakeholders. It is expected that MCGM will formulate a transparent mechanism to ensure that the Affordable Housing stock reaches the target group. The successful online lottery system of disposal of Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (MHADA) tenements could become the basis for MCGM to formulate its scheme of tenement disposal.
4.7. EQUITY
A city must provide adequately for the needs of special groups in its search for social equity. These comprise women, the informal sector, the differently- abled, the aged, children and those without shelter and their specific needs. The RDDP has travelled quite some distance to recognize these groups as contributors to the city and provide for them in various ways. These include multi-purpose housing for working women, care centers, aadhar Kendra with skill development centre, old age homes, homeless shelters and public conveniences.
The Planning Committee while continuing the stand taken by the RDDP felt the need to increase aspects of social equity. Some of the suggestions from NGOs working on sanitation issue were about the provision of Public Sanitary Convenience (PSC) blocks especially for women, handicapped person and children. This suggestion was accepted and suitable provision has been made in the DCR.
4.8. GAOTHAN / KOLIWADA / ADIVASIPADA SETTLEMENTS WITHIN MUMBAI LIMIT
The local/native inhabitants of Mumbai are traditionally located in the areas commonly recognized as Gaothans/Koliwadas. There are 88 Gaothans/ Koliwadas as certified in one of the Committee reports submitted to GoM and these are marked in the RDDP 2034.The Koliwadas are commonly identified as a densely-populated habitat of the fishermen community residing along the coastal areas. There is no available land record regarding Koliwadas to identify the exact area and extent of Koliwadas. The demarcation of Koliwada area in revenue records is underway.
The Govt. of Maharashtra in Revenue department has constituted a Committee to delineate the Koliwadas boundaries and their extent. On
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 42 finalization of the same, these would be superimposed on the RDDP. The development of Gaothans/ Koliwadas shall be as per the relevant provisions of DCR.
In addition to Gaothans/Koliwadas, there are a number of Adivasi padas/ hamlets within the geographical limit of MCGM. The list of Adivasi padas as received by the Tribal Development Department, Govt. of Maharashtra is appended as Annexure to the report.
The suggestions and objections regarding Gaothans / Koliwadas / Adivasi padas were received from a number of people and NGOs working in this sector. The stand taken in the RDDP was accepted by the Planning Committee and explained accordingly at the time of hearing.
4.9. RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES
In the RDDP 2034 designations are shown in various colours with hatched lines. However, in keeping with the accepted definition of designation, no such markings appear with regard to all religious structures. Only some of the prominent religious structures have been marked on DP sheets by their popular names which are only indicative. Additionally, religious structures marked in SRDP 1991, have been continued in RDDP barring corrections required.
Many objections arose from Christian groups, Hindu Trusts and Muslim Communities for not showing their religious structures. Representatives of various religious groups who appeared for hearing before the Planning Committee were explained in detail the rationale followed in the RDDP 2034 and the need to continue with the same rationale. After long discussion, it was agreed that religious structures shown in SRDP 1991 shall be continued to be shown in the DP sheets. Additionally, religious structures which are part of the heritage list will also be shown in text in the DP sheets.
Objections were raised by the Bombay Catholic Sabha stating that school designations were shown on Religious structure plots and cemeteries. They requested for their clear demarcation. Site visits were carried out and wherever school designation was wrongly shown on a church or a cemetery, necessary correction has been done. Cemeteries within the premises of church
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 43 or school, if certified by Executive Health Officer as an authorized one, have been shown as designated cemetery in the DP Sheets.
4.10. ZONING
The five zones in the RDDP 2034 are Residential Zone (R), Commercial Zone (C), Industrial Zone (I), No Development Zone (NDZ) and Natural Area (NA). The provisions of RDDP recognize the mixed-use nature of Greater Mumbai’s land use. The Report on the Draft Development Plan 2034 mentions that Greater Mumbai area is home to ecologically sensitive areas like mangroves, coastal wetlands, forests, parts of salt pan lands in CRZ I and natural water courses such as lakes, rivers, nallas, streams, ponds, etc. These nurture the city’s ecology and biodiversity. The Sanjay Gandhi National Park and estuarine mangrove patches are standout features of Mumbai’s natural biodiversity. These areas need to be unremittingly protected from the march of the built environment in the long-term interest of the city. The RDDP, therefore, has retained the EDDP categorization of such lands in the Natural Areas. No buildable development on these lands would be permissible, except for essential utilities. The ELU discovery of newly emerged mangroves in Thane Creek spread over 14.96 sq km are included in this Zone.
The maximum number of objections and suggestions were relating to changing the zones from I to R/C or vice versa. These issues were tackled as per the policy aid developed during the pre-hearing process. The demand to change the NDZ to R/C zone was dealt with separately by bringing the concept of Special Development Zone – I and Special Development Zone – II, by making suitable provisions in DCR.
Some of the issues raised by the public related to contesting the demarcation of Natural Area on their lands. The Planning Committee decided to demarcate the areas between High Tide Line and Low Tide Line as Natural Areas barring beaches which will fall in the same zone as the adjoining zone as they are accessible public open spaces.
As per the Report of RDDP 2034, the 1991 plan had demarcated environmentally sensitive lands such as marshy lands along the creek, hilly areas, agricultural lands, high tide areas and barren lands and some lands
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 44 under primary activity as No Development Zone (NDZ). NDZ also included potentially developable lands kept in abeyance for future development.
The RDDP 2034 showed that out of the total area of Mumbai, forests, water bodies, areas under SPAs, unclassified area and area under CRZ I covered majority of the land use totaling 75.52%. Of the balance land, 17.4 % were under Gaothans, Slums and Industries. 12.49%of NDZ lands had been included as designation and reservation of land for public purpose. All lands that are eco-sensitive were shown in Natural Areas. RDDP looked at the balance NDZ lands, comprising 3,734 ha, as a means of assisting the City to bridge its major deficits of affordable Housing, Public Open Spaces and social and institutional Amenities. Planning Committee has termed the developable NDZ land as Special Development Zone (SDZ).
MCGM’s proposal to open up NDZ lands for Affordable Housing was objected to by activists who feared that NDZ lands which largely include ecologically sensitive areas and environment buffers like mangroves, salt pans, inter tidal areas would be opened up and they feared it would affect the city’s ecosystem, would be of no benefit for the urban poor but instead only benefit developers.
Planning Committee tried to ensure that no mangroves, salt pans, Inter tidal areas and such ecologically sensitive areas get included in the developable SDZ zone but instead such lands have been clearly shown in NA zone. Only the balance erstwhile NDZ lands will be opened up for development with encumbered and unencumbered lands being treated differently as SDZ I (Special Development Zone) and SDZ II respectively under newly framed DCR provisions with focus on Public Open Spaces, Social Amenities road infrastructure and Affordable Housing.
The Mumbai port Trust in their suggestions and objections objected to the reservations specifically earmarked on the DP Sheets on the lands owned by MbPT. MbPT stated that a major exercise to re-plan the MbPT area is underway and it will take some time for them to finalize their proposal. They stated that they are working on a proposal to add more waterfront areas to
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 45 the city which will substantially increase open spaces in the city. They asked for creation of two zones of the total lands under their ownership viz. Water front Development Zone and Port Operation Zone. They further requested that instead of specifically marking the proposed amenities on the DP Sheet, the total areas for each of the social amenities to be provided in the Waterfront Development Zone may be indicated and the detailed plan and implementation of those amenities, including Affordable Housing, be left to them. The Planning Committee partly agreed to the request of MbPT. It has been decided to opt for the development control mechanism for allowing development of the MbPT lands as per their future plans. This mechanism is discussed in detail in under relevant section of DCR.
Suggestions were received from NGOs and members of the public for changing the zone of Aarey, by reasoning that Aarey serves as lungs for the city and it also serves as buffer zone for the Sanjay Gandhi National Park and therefore must be kept free from any human intervention. In that perspective, a new Zone has been introduced by the Planning Committee, termed as Green Zone (GZ) which will encompass Aarey Colony. Green Zone would be a large area predominantly with green cover where only a few facilities will be permissible. Those few facilities are a zoo, Rehabilitation of the tribals displaced from Sanjay Gandhi National Park and such other uses which are approved by the Government of Maharashtra with the permission of MoEFCC.
4.11. LEGENDS
Legends are abbreviations depicting designations and reservations on the Proposed Land Use (PLU). Designations are public amenities already developed. Reservations are parcels of land mandated for specific public amenities and yet to be developed. Designations are depicted by a colour with black/hatched lines whereas only colour and no hatched lines depict reservations.
The SRDP 1991 depicted designations/reservations by the use of the name of the public amenity, e.g. Burial Ground, Swimming Pool. Sometimes an individual facility was named in detail, e.g. Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS). This led to a large number of designations, approximately 380.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 46
The EDDP 2034 systematized legend depiction by crafting categories, intermediate categories and detailed categories. These were assigned Codes and Sub-Codes. For instance, Education is a category, School is an intermediate category and Municipal School is a detailed category.
To explain through an example, in the legend DE1.1, D stands for ‘Designation’, E for the Category ‘Education’, 1 for Intermediate Category ‘Municipal’ and .1 for Sub-Category ‘School’. All Educational Designations would have DE as common. This exercise led to a sizable reduction in the number of Designation legends. A similar method was used for Reservations. For instance, in the legend RE1.1, R stands for Reservation, E for Education, 1 for Municipal and .1 for School. The RDDP 2034 has accepted the principles adopted by EDDP 2034 as well as the curtailment of the number of legends with a few modifications.
The addition of legends for designations is primarily for greater clarity. They are designed to disallow future difficulties in redevelopment or blurring of separate kinds of uses on the same plot. The word ‘part’ has been used where a plot combines a designation with a non-designated facility. For instance, let us assume that a public parking lot also has a residential building on the same plot. This would be designated as PPL (Pt), indicating that something else exists on the plot other than a public parking lot which is not designated. Similarly, where accommodation reservation (AR) as per SRDP 1991 has been developed on part land, this would be indicated as (Pt) preceding the respective legend code.
The additions in the sector of reservations are in institutions, gender, social equity and urban livelihoods. The additions in institutions are with a view to strengthen the institutional profile of the city both from the economic angle and the social angle. It was additionally felt that some of the social equity areas were significantly in deficit. Their provisioning, therefore, required that they were not merged in a ‘hold all’ legend and got overlooked in comparison with the other amenities. It was, therefore, necessary to take them out of the general social basket. Similarly, in the legends for open spaces, playgrounds have been separated from gardens and parks.
The Planning Committee, post hearing decided to modify/delete some of the legends since they were either not utilized or they required some change.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 47
1. The reservation RP3.1 (Cattle Pound) did not have any land use assigned in the PLU, hence this code is deleted. 2. The designation code of DPU6.1 (Service Industrial Estate) stand deleted since the reservation has been implemented, the land has been already utilized with certain percentage of service industry galas handed over to the MCGM and the same land could be further utilized for the same purpose or any other purpose. 3. Similarly, the code DPU5.1 (Electric Power Plant) is no more required, hence it is deleted. 4. The code DT4.3 (Railway Tracks/Yards) is changed to Railway Facility including Tracks. 5. During the hearing process it was suggested that the existing VJB udyan be shown as a Botanical garden considering the rich variety of trees and biodiversity it contains and considering the request, a legend for Botanical Garden in Designation Category was introduced as DOS 2.8 which was added to the already designated Garden/Park and Zoo. Also an additional code for Botanical Garden in the reservation category was included as ROS 2.8 6. An additional code for depicting the reservations of Post & Telegraph necessitated due to retaining the reservation of SRDP1991 for that purpose hence a legend for Post & Telegraph RPU4.1 is included. 7. The new symbol for Traffic Island (TI) is added to the list for depicting the land use of Traffic Island.
4.12. RESERVATIONS
The RDDP, while reserving lands, has shown a clear propensity to work towards addressing the deficits of open spaces, affordable housing and social equity issues, as far as possible. This was certainly very challenging, given the limited un-built space available and that these areas had demonstrably gone into deficit in Greater Mumbai. In this endeavour, it has re-instated many of the SRDP 1991 reservations which were deleted in the EDDP 2034. Development Plans of the past were found wanting in putting up an effective implementation mechanism that could convert reservations into public amenities on ground. This was primarily on account of lack of resources as well as the inability to provide a robust tool that would adequately motivate and
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 48 incentivize the land owner whose land had been reserved, to come forward and implement the reservation. The standout feature in this regard is the highly attractive accommodation reservation policy that the RDDP 2034 has proposed.
As mentioned in the preceding part of this section the reservation on one’s land is a matter of concern to an individual and even to an institution. So much was the negativity towards imposition of reservations on one’s land, that it was a common refrain in a large number of suggestions and objections.
During the hearing process, some of the applicants pleaded that substantial part of their land was earlier reserved in SRDP1991, due to which the balance vacant part could not be developed till now and therefore, first EDDP and thereafter RDDP, finding the land vacant have put the whole land under reservation. Thus, entire lands in one's ownership stand reserved for public purposes. The Planning Committee, in such cases, has either recommended partial deletion of the new reservations imposed by EDDP/RDDP or change of SRDP 1991 reservations to compatible users. The Planning Committee has in many cases recommended reserving lands for Affordable Housing, keeping in view the crying need of the City.
There were a large number of demands, mainly from elected representatives and from residents of slums and occupiers of cessed buildings for deletion of open space reservations on old slum settlements and on cessed buildings. The Planning Committee, taking serious note of these demands, decided to tackle the problem via the Development Control Regulatory mechanism. The DCR has thus been suitably modified to address this long standing demand, at the same time not totally giving up the much-needed public amenity reservation for the City. The Planning Committee feels that this solution will translate into in-situ rehabilitation for people residing in slums and in cessed buildings and also will provide social amenities for the City.
4.13. MUMBAI PORT TRUST
Mumbai owes its existence as a global metropolis to its strategic location in a region that included some of the most important colonial sea trade routes on the western cost of India. The presence of an excellent natural harbor along
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 49 the Eastern Waterfront of Mumbai led to massive land reclamation for the Development of port and for port related activities during last three centuries. But during the last two Decades due to a number of interrelated reasons, like the high cost of real estate, the high taxation structure and above all the lack of investments towards modernization of industry, made it difficult for industrial manufacturing to be a sustainable activity within the city of Mumbai. As a result, industrial manufacturing relocated to the fringes of the city. This shift from the secondary sector to the tertiary sector has reflected in the general decline of the various Ports Activities in Mumbai Port.
The RDDP proposals had tried to harness the large tracts of lands under MbPT ownership and suggested many amenity reservations as well as lands earmarked for affordable housing. 60 Ha out of 721.24 ha of MbPT lands had been earmarked for affordable housing.
The Chairman of MbPT personally appeared for the hearing before the Planning Committee. He suggested the following:
Earmark the entire area of the Port as "Port Land Use" comprising two new sub-categories of Land Use zones viz. Port Operation mixed use & Port land mixed use. Port land area to be categorized as Port land mixed use and designation of DT4.3 to be removed. Designation of water transport terminal and jetty DT2.1, DT2.2 to be categorized as "Port operations Mixed Use". MbPT colony which was inadvertently shown as Municipal Quarter to be designated as MbPT colony. Change of zone of port land from NA to Industrial land use as per 1991 to be done.
After duly considering the suggestions made by MbPT, the following has been recommended by the Planning Committee, Two new zones ‘Port Operational Zone’ and ‘Waterfront Development Zone’ are proposed as per the zonal demarcation plan submitted by MbPT. Ballard Estate portion which falls in Heritage precinct is excluded from the development.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 50
These two new zones are incorporated in DCR. The Area of Mazagaon Dock is shown as ‘Port Operational Zone’ and being a sensitive area, the reservations which were proposed in RDDP 2034 are deleted
The RDDP2034 showed number of reservations / designations in the MbPT areas. These amenities were proposed considering the planning requirements and the future population in the area. The MbPT had suggested that these amenities may not be specifically shown in DP Sheets, in order to have flexibility of development of MbPT in future. The Planning Committee after due deliberations decided that these amenities will not be shown on the PLU maps, but will be indicated in the DCR, so that it shall be obligatory on MbPT to make available these amenities while proposing the development of MbPT areas. Accordingly, the amenities are enlisted in the DCRs. The amenities are as follows:
1. Open Spaces 2. Education related 3. Health related 4. Affordable Housing 5. Others
The various reservations, as mentioned above, in Port Operational Zone & in Ports Water Front Development Zone will have to be developed in accordance with the provisions of DCR.
4.14. AAREY COLONY
Aarey Colony which is home to a rich biodiversity, has been proposed to also accommodate a Metro Car Shed, Theme Park, Zoo and R&R of displaced adivasis of Sanjay Gandhi National Park. Environmentalists, Resident Associations and many others have voiced their serious objections to the proposal to allow the above developments in Aarey.
The RDDP had dropped the opening up of Aarey land for institutional use and other developmental uses that were recommended by EDDP in search of new growth centers. The Metro Car shed proposed within Aarey (34.41 Ha) was retained with an alternate site at Royal Palms (89.32 Ha), kept reserved for
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 51
Metro Car Shed. The Resettlement & Rehabilitation (R&R) reservation was meant to rehabilitate the Adivasipadas from Sanjay Gandhi National Park.
Specific suggestions were received from NGOs and members of the public for changing the zone of Aarey from NDZ to NA, by reasoning that Aarey serves as lungs for the city and it also serves as buffer zone for the Sanjay Gandhi National Park and therefore must be kept free from any human intervention. The recent notification from Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), u/no. S.O. 3645(E) dated 5th December 2016 has notified an area to an extent of 100 meters to four kilometers from the boundary of Sanjay Gandhi National Park as the Sanjay Gandhi National Park Eco-Sensitive Zone.
The Planning Committee gave patient hearing to all the concerned citizens and deliberated in detail about the proposed earmarking of land in Aarey. During the course of deliberation, Govt. notification/MoEFCC got issued earmarking lands in Aarey for R&R and metro car shed. The Planning Committee, after due deliberations and after considering the notification from Government of India, decided to change the zone of Aarey from NDZ to Green Zone where further uses, in addition to the proposed reservations, shall be permitted only after approval from the State Government with concurrence from MoEFCC However, it decided to retain the users of Metro Car Shed, Zoo, existing built- up areas within the Aarey and R&R of Adivasis displaced from Sanjay Gandhi National Park. The Metro Car shed was retained considering that the approval for the location is already granted by the State Government. Alternate site is deleted and is included in Green Zone. However, citing eco-sensitivity of Mumbai, public outcry and High Court orders, Shri Yeshodhar Phanse and Smt. Trushna Vishwasrao, expressed their reservation regarding providing land in Aarey colony for “Metro Car Shed”, while approving the other proposed uses
4.15. OTHER ISSUES
4.15.1 Resettlement and Rehabilitation Reservation
The Public Housing (PH)/ Housing for Dis-housed (HDH) reservations of the SRDP 1991 which were located on lands encumbered with slums were continued in RDDP as reservation for Rehabilitation & Resettlement
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 52 considering that these slums would be taken up for redevelopment under SRA and in such a case the reservation will automatically stand deleted in accordance with the relevant provision of DCR 33(10). Such reservations where predominantly observed in the M (East) ward. Major objections were raised by residents of slum settlements regarding reservation of RR 2.1 on their plots where dense but protected slum tenements exist. Their fear was that such a reservation on their plots would mean further densification of their settlements by bringing outsiders, for resettlement on their plot. The Planning Committee members did explain to the people who attended hearing, that the RR 2.1 reservation will not have any adverse impact on any in-situ slum rehabilitation scheme under SRA. However, at the persistent request of the slum dwellers, it was agreed to carry out detailed planning of these areas and delete few of the RR2.1 reservation from the slum settlements of M (East) ward.
4.15.2 Disaster Management Plan
Objections were raised by environmentalists and concerned citizens regarding non-compliance with the recommendations of the Fact Finding Committee 2006 on the Mumbai Floods. They said that the Flood prone areas and detailed contour plans for Mumbai have not been marked in the DP. Moreover, they said, there is no restriction on densities and Carrying Capacity/Infrastructure which have not been indexed while proposing development with high FSI. The Planning Committee is of the opinion that M.C.G.M. should prepare a “Comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment for Greater Mumbai” (CEIA), by appointing consultants working in this field and having adequate experience of preparing “CEIA” of large cities having population more than 30- 35 lakhs considering the overall development in next 20 to 25 years and thereafter see how the Disaster Management Plan, duly updated on the basis of the CEIA, can be dovetailed into the Development Plan.
4.15.3 M Ward
There were quite a few general objections on M/E Ward. M/E Ward has the Atomic Energy Research Centre, HPCL, BPCL, Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd (RCF) refineries, Mumbai’s largest dumping ground and also most of the slum relocation schemes have been implemented in this ward. The strategic
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 53 location of the above mentioned industries makes the ward prone to natural disasters. Also with a large rehabilitated population and very large slum population and inadequate social amenities, the quality of life needs substantial upliftment. Suggestions were made to conduct a risk and pollution study for the ward and also to provide more social amenity and open space reservations for the slum settlements. The Planning Committee has taken help of the MCGM Planners to do a re-planning of M/E Ward with more inclusion of open space and amenity reservations and also recommended for a risk and pollution analysis for the ward to the Municipal Commissioner.
4.15.4 Cafeteria Approach to Slum Redevelopment
During the hearing process, some NGO groups pointed out that though the RDDP report did suggest a need of a 'cafeteria' approach where a banquet of options are available for slum up-gradation and redevelopment, DCR 33(10) is the only option available. The current model is a feasible option only for the private developer involved in the slum redevelopment process and until the developer finds the land value of the slum viable, the slum redevelopment does not take place. The redevelopment of the slum happens only if the property rates are high and there is profit for the developer. As a result, even after more than two decades of SRA scheme implementation, still large number of slums have remained unattended and undeveloped.
Taking into view this ground reality, Planning Committee finds it imperative to look at alternative options for slum redevelopment, one that involves the community and is not totally dependent on the private developer. Urban Design Research Institute (UDRI)’s formulation of an alternative approach for slum up-gradation seems to be a workable alternative provided the slum community agrees to this option. This approach will seek to provide trunk infrastructure and amenities to slum communities and allow for incremental slum up-gradation by the slum dwellers individually or by virtue of plot amalgamation. The detailed Institutional framework and corresponding Regulatory modifications for the same as proposed by UDRI is attached as annexure to this report. If this approach is accepted, a separate set of Development Control and Promotion Regulations for enabling Slum Up- gradation, could then be formulated for implementation by the SRA Special Planning Authority.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 54
5. DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL & PROMOTION REGULATIONS (DCPR)
This section details the various modifications that were brought about in the Development Control Regulations, post hearing, based on the various Suggestions and Objections that were heard and a brief description of why those changes were brought about.
5.1. DCPR AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE
Development Control Regulations are an integral part of the Development Plan (DP) and also an important tool for the effective implementation of the DP. For a city like Mumbai, whose future lies mostly in brown field development, the regulations need to not only regulate but also promote development, thereby creating the required social infrastructure at par with amenities provided in any other developed city of the world. Moreover, for an effective implementation of the DP, citizen’s participation is most essential. This can be achieved by framing Regulations which are user friendly, simple to understand and does not leave any scope for varied interpretation.
Therefore, the Planning Committee has attempted suitable modifications in the regulations with additions/deletions in the already published Draft DCR 2034, with a view to not only to control but also promote development. Thus, the regulations have been re-titled ‘Development Control & Promotion Regulations-2034 (DCPR-2034)’.
5.2. OBJECTIVES OF DCPRS
Keeping in view the objectives of RDDP-2034, it was felt necessary to modify some of the provisions of the Regulations. The following broad criterions form the basis of the said modifications, keeping in mind the city’s aspirations, ground realities & nature of growth.
Clarity and Transparency Ease of Doing Business(EODB) Sustainability of Environment Employment Growth New Zoning,
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 55
Accommodation Reservation Responsiveness to need of society AffordableHousing (AH) Additional necessary controls required to be imposed Rationalization
5.3. DCPR PROVISIONS
Development control& Promotion Regulations are subdivided into twelve part i.e. Part-I to Part-XII. The part wise details of the proposed modifications are described briefly as below:
5.3.1 Part I: Administration
In order to have clarity and transparency in the implementation of the DP, especially during the transitional period, a clause stating that, if the plot is reserved for different public purposes in SRDP 1991 &RDDP 2034, then the reservation as per SRDP 1991 shall prevail till the sanction of RDDP 2034.
To obviate any scope for varied interpretation, certain terms, which were not defined in the Regulations but are often used in practice, have been introduced in the definitions e.g. Atrium, Information technology, Commissioner, Eating House, Energy Efficient Building, Fungible Compensatory Area, Irrevocable consent, Ledge or Tand, Noise Barrier, Solar Energy System, Substation, Tenement etc. Some definitions like Accommodation Reservation which is the most important tool for DP implementation, are suitably modified.
“Affordable Housing” is now an all inclusive term which means social housing in the nature of housing meant for economically weaker section, lower income group, middle income group and which also includes rental housing.
During the course of hearing, it was observed that some of the relocation proposals approved by the Competent Authority have not been incorporated correctly in DP sheets and buildings have come up in original location of reservation. This was creating confusion in the general public. Hence, a clause has been added, stating that “Any discrepancy/error in regard to location/size /use of designations and any relocation of reservation approved by the competent authority along with its development at its relocated position if not
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 56 reflected in this Development Plan and that are brought to the notice of the Development Department of MCGM may, after due enquiry, be corrected with the approval of the special permission of the Municipal Commissioner”.
5.3.2 Part II: Development Permission
As this part deals with development permissions, Ease of Doing Business (EODB) & simplification of procedures has been given utmost importance. EODB will help in avoiding delays, thereby reducing transaction costs. Some of the features are as detailed below:
Ownership- Title Clearance Certificate from Advocate having minimum 10 years of experience is to be submitted, instead of submission of ownership document. Additionally, an Indemnity bond from the owner, indemnifying MCGM from any dispute arising out of ownership in future, will have to be submitted.
Self-certification by owner & professionals etc. is introduced.
The works which are of routine nature are taken out from the ambit of requirements of permissions. E.g. providing fencing, construction of compound wall along CTS/CS boundaries of land under single ownership, installation of Solar Panels by ensuring structural stability.
The policies which are in force and policies which may be formulated in future for bringing in Ease of Doing business &for simplifying procedures, have been made part of the Regulations. On-line approval procedure is made part of the DCPR provisions.
In order to control illegal mining, a provision has been made to submit declaration cum affidavit from the owner/developer/applicant stating that the building material on site for construction shall be obtained from authorized quarry.
In the clause relating to of Deviation during Construction, the term ‘Substantial nature of deviation during construction’ is clearly defined in order to bring clarity in interpretation while dealing with such proposals. Moreover, due to deficiency in workmanship if there is any deviation in outer dimension to the extent of 25 mm, the same shall be tolerated subject to condition that carpet
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 57 area shall remain unchanged. A clause to that extent has been added to specify the allowances during inspection
5.3.3 Part III: Land Uses and Manner of Development
This part of regulation is of significant importance as it deals with development of designation/reservation, requirement of amenities in respect of plot with area more than 4000 sq. m, permission for conversion of Zone from I to R/C Zone and Inclusive Housing. Responsiveness to the need of the society & rationalization of requirement of amenities has been mainly considered while modifying some of the provisions in this part. Developments of buildable & non-buildable reservations, on lands encumbered with slums or cessed structures have been brought under the ambit of Accommodation Reservation. The brief details of the changes/modification/addition/deletion in this part are as follows:
If, designated amenity is no longer required, then the same can be developed for other public purposes considering the deficiency in the administrative ward, so that such lands can be put to effective use as per requirement & need of society. All existing schools as reflected in ELU have been shown on DP with provision of clause in DCPR stating that “if schools which have been developed on unreserved plots and are now designated in RDDP 2034 considering their land use, desire to redevelop in future with the additional benefits of FSI available in DCPR, they shall comply with all other regulations of DCPR/terms and conditions/policy of Govt. regarding schools issued from time to time. By virtue of showing the existing land use as designation in respect of any school, it will not automatically give the status of authorisation unless it is constructed authorisedly as per the then prevailing DCPR/terms & conditions/policy of Govt. “. Traffic island which constitutes part of road, for improvement of traffic can be merged with carriageway. Some of the reservation for public purposes which are of prime importance are shown with (+) sign in DP and a clause has been introduced in DCPR for development of such plot majorly for the intended purpose.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 58
Provision has been made for safeguarding the interest of public body, while shifting or interchanging designation/reservation within single holding. Mumbai has dearth of space for social activity and leisure. In view of the Government policy to allow farmers to sell their agro products directly, provision for Temporary Vending Zone/Bajar-hat/Athawadi Bazaron weekend/holidays etc. is made. The popular concept of “Equal Streets” is now a DCPR provision. A provision for identifying places including roads for ‘Night Bazar’ has been made. As a process of rationalization, a provision has been made which requires handing over amenity on the basis of size of plot & conversion of I zone to R/C Zone in a telescopic manner, like the Income tax slab. There was a demand from a large section of housing societies, to give respite in Regulation of Inclusive Housing (IH), for Co-operative Housing Society/federation of societies/association/condominium/apartment owners association having single/some existing flats of size with carpet area 80 sq. m. or more. Where existing carpet area of some tenement/s is/are more than 80 sq. m, Built up area (BUA) of IH tenement proportionate to BUA of tenements having carpet area more than 80 sq. m with existing BUA, will only be insisted. A clause to that effect has been added. Provision of noise barrier along bridges has been made Accommodation Reservation (AR) is an effective tool for implementation of DP without cost to the public exchequer. The land cost has been taken out of reservation/Affordable Housing equation by deployment of land Instrument. Even in cases where private lands are reserved for public purposes and which are under the purview of Government/Appropriate Authority, the same are also brought under the ambit of AR, with uses permissible in that Zone on remainder plot by which owners so that they are not adversely affected for an in-situ development. In case of development under AR, FSI on gross plot area including the plot to be handed over along with cost of construction of amenity in the form of BUA is made permissible on the remainder plot. Considering the difficulty in consumption of FSI on remainder plot, Regulation has now
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 59
been modified. Now, the built-up amenity along with plot is required to be handed over only if, reserved area is more than 2000 sq. m as against 1000 sq. m. proposed in RDDP 2034 DCR. The cap of 40% on the cost of construction in the BUA, in lieu of cost of construction of built up amenity has been removed. In view of various representations from the Cinema Owners Associations, the development of existing cinema theatre has been brought at par with AR. Multiple Screen theatres/multiplex is allowed with AR, since single screens have become obsolete. A provision has been made in Draft DCR stating that the Owner/Developer may develop the entire designated/ allocated plot for the purpose of entertainment of general public such as Drama Theater/Opera theater/Mini-theater/Multiplex or for Production facilities/studio/s for cinema/ Tele-serial /Dubbing & Recording studio/Preview Theater etc. The reservations such as cemetery, Koli Housing, Police/Govt. Quarters, Police/Govt. Housing, Police Station, Police Chowky, Courts, Govt. Office, Sports Complex with stadium (with minimum area of 50000 sq. m), Fish & Net Drying yards etc. have been brought under ambit of AR. New Reservation of Botanical Garden has been introduced, which can be developed entirely for the intended purpose only by MCGM/Appropriate Authority. In case of development of reservation under AR or otherwise, the owner should clearly know the concerned Appropriate Authority to be approached in the matter. Therefore, the list of Appropriate Authority for each reservation has been prepared and enclosed in Annexure 24. Development of Reservation/DP road in Special Development Zone II will now be treated at par with Residential and Commercial Zone, to avoid disparity. Layout RG has been shown in text on DP. The list of layout/private RGs will now form a part of the annexure and therefore shall be available in public domain. Existing Play Grounds attached to Educational and Medical Institutions/ Museum/Trust and under same ownership, shown as designation in DP, shall not be subjected to acquisition. New Regulation No 17(3) had been introduced which deals with development of plots under Regulation No 33(5), 33(7), 33(9) and 33(10)
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 60
which are affected by reservations. Some of the provisions are as detailed below: o In view of the policy of the Govt., a provision has been made stating that in case of redevelopment of plot/(s) having cessed structure/s and having reservation in the DP, the land component of the said cessed structure as per Zonal (basic) FSI shall be deemed to have no reservation but area beyond the land component of cessed structure/s shall have to be developed entirely for the intended purpose. o In respect of slum redevelopment under Regulation No 33(10) in Industrial Zone (I Zone) and Special Development Zone-I (SDZ I), handing over of built up amenity/plot/POS is being insisted in order to provide amenities to occupiers of developed plot & public at large, as DP does not usually make provisions for amenities/reservations for public purposes in I Zone and SDZ I.
5.3.4 Part IV: Requirement of site and layout
This part deals with the requirement of site, roads, layout roads, recreational open spaces in layout and requirements of Layout etc. The brief details of modification proposed are as follow:
Provision as per the recent Govt. notification directing MCGM, that all the roads below 9 m to be widened to 9 m, has been considered and an enabling provision to widen the road of width less than 9 m to 9 m as per MR &TP Act or MMC Act, for improvement of traffic, has been made in the Regulations. In order to bring more clarity in regulation while DP road/RL is proposed in the approved layout a clause stating that “If DP Road/RL is prescribed in already approved layout, then imbalance of FSI in subdivided plots because of new DP Road/RL shall be allowed. However, if layout is amended subsequently, then the benefit of imbalance of FSI will not be allowed prospectively.”. For clarity regarding public road/municipal road/layout road as most of these roads have been shown in DP, it has been clarified that roads excluding existing public road/Municipal road, reflected in DP shall not be treated as public Road, unless and until declared under appropriate section
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 61
of MMC Act & shall not be subjected to mechanical acquisition. In order to motivate owner/s to give access to land locked plot, FSI benefit for providing access to land locked plots is proposed to be granted, subject to handing over the said access to MCGM. Provision is made clarifying ‘Layout Recreational Open Space (LOS)’ in a private layout shall be for the exclusive use of the residents of such private layout only, and shall not be subjected to acquisition. Similarly, if LOS in private layouts reflected in DP as reservation or designation, the same shall not be subjected to acquisition, but shall have to be maintained by the owner/Co Op Hsg. So/Federation etc. as the case may be. It is specifically shown as layout RG/Private Garden on DP Sheets as far as possible. Provision for planting indigenous trees and preferably native species, having capacity to attract bird for nesting, planting of shrubs with grass in between the indigenous trees, has been made to improve environmental sustainability. Perforated paving has been insisted in area other than LOS for easy percolation of rainwater for ground water recharge.
Responding to the need of the public, an enabling provision is made to modify the list of additional facilities in the Development in Large Holding/layout with the special permission of commissioner, vide Regulation No 29
5.3.5 Part V: Floor Space Index
This part of regulation deals with Floor Space Indices (FSI), computation of FSI/ BUA and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). The changes made in this part are briefly described in this section.
Floor Space Index
As per prevailing land use & development, areas in N ward, where, FSI was restricted to 0.75 has been brought at par with the Zonal (basic)FSI 1 as of adjoining Zone, since most of the surrounding areas being developed under Slum Redevelopment Scheme are having higher FSI up to 3.0. However, the restriction on development in area near Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) with FSI 0.75 is maintained considering the sensitivity & security of the area.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 62
Cities are engines of economic growth. Industrial & commercial development is of utmost importance for a vibrant & progressing city. Due to Industrial location policy, large no of Industries has been closed/shifted during last 20- 25 years. Conversion from Industrial to Commercial/ Residential Zone has created luxury housing without creation of employment. To unlock potential of remaining industrial zoned lands, ‘Additional FSI on payment of premium or TDR has been made applicable in Industrial Zones too (except for use of hazardous Industries). This will be creating large opportunities for skilled based employment for youth and Mumbai will maintain its status of being a commercial hub of the Country.
In order to bring parity &to remove the discrimination in benefits in lieu of the amenities to be handed over under Regulation No 14 & 15, FSI benefit to these amenities have been brought at par with plots reserved for the public purpose.
The redundant clause related to Minimum tenement density has been deleted while maintaining the clause of maximum tenement density. Also from Ease of Doing business point of view, transfer of ownership of amenity/plot in the name of MCGM/Appropriate Authority has been rationalized.
Some features are allowed to be exempted from FSI, such as more parking area, which may help in reducing on street parking etc.
The Fungible Floor Space Index (Fungible FSI) is renamed as Fungible Compensatory Area to distinguish from Regular FSI. In order to promote Commercial and Industrial Development and provide an impetus to employment generation, fungible compensatory area for commercial & Industrial buildings has been brought at par with residential. Fungible compensatory area, in case of redevelopment under Regulation No 33(5), 33(7)(B), 33(9)(B) and redevelopment with TDR/Additional FSI on payment of premium has been considered at par with redevelopment schemes under 33(7),33(9),33(10) and fungible compensatory area for rehab component allowed without charging premium.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
Incentive is proposed for handing over reserved land at the earliest as per Govt. Notification to encourage speedy & effective implementation of DP.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 63
TDR benefit for the DP road/reserved land in SDZ II has been considered at par with other Zones.
5.3.6 Part VI: Additional Floor Space Index
This part deals with the additional FSI for the schemes of redevelopment/development of Institutional/Educational buildings etc.
Additional FSI as per Regulation ’33’ is now linked partially with area of plots. This will help to avoid unnecessary congestion & consumption of FSI with sustainable environment& proper open spaces.
The views of MHADA, SRA and other organizations along with individuals which need consideration have been accepted. One of the suggestion to allow development of MHADA land partially occupied by the protected slums, under Regulation 33(5) with benefit for slum dwellers as per Slum Rehabilitation (SR) scheme has been accepted. This will help in integrated development of MHADA land, with proper planning.
Urban Development Department (UDD) of GOM has issues notification proposing changes to the existing Regulations No 33(5) of DCR 1991 for accelerating development of MHADA lands. Regulations have been accordingly modified in accordance with the notification issued.
UDD of GOM has issued notification inviting Suggestions/Objections for reconstruction or redevelopment of dilapidated/unsafe existing authorized tenant occupied building in Suburbs and extended Suburbs and existing authorized non-cessed tenant occupied buildings in Mumbai city. Due cognizance of said notification has been taken and made part of DCPR as 33(7)(A)
Regulation No. 33(22) of Draft DCR RDDP 2034 was for redevelopment of existing residential housing societies, residential tenanted buildings excluding cessed buildings. In view of the new Regulation no. 33(7)(A) as stated above, the Regulation no. 33(22) has now been made applicable more specifically for co-op hsg societies and renamed as Regulation no. 33(7)(B).
The existing provision 33(8) of development of land for Rehabilitation and Resettlement is deleted & merged with Regulation 33(20) meant for Affordable
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 64
Housing. New provision of development of land falling under Special Development Zone- II is introduced as 33(8). Land of SDZ II is proposed to be developed for the cause of Affordable Housing along with amenities. Affordable Housing includes all forms of Social Housing viz. EWS/LIG/ Middle Income Group (MIG)/Rental housing tenements. The highlight of SDZ provision is as follows,
Scheme is permissible if area of land is more than 1.0 ha. The apportionment of land excluding layout road shall be as mentioned in the table below.
Table 4: The apportionment of land excluding layout road
Afforda Public Open Other Area for ble Spaces (POS) Amenities Owners Plot Area Housin (OA) Developme g (AH) nt
More than1 ha 30% 15 % 16% 39% & up to 2 ha
More than 2 ha 30% 15 % 14% 41% & up to 4 ha
More than 4 ha 30% 15 % 12% 43%
Permissible FSI 1.0 of the gross plot area, on the Owner’s share of land. Development of AH shall be with FSI 2.5& OA shall be with FSI 2 on respective plot, cost of construction in the form of built up area will be given without any cap on it. 15% of admissible FSI on AH plot, exclusively for convenient shops for use of residential occupants. If the plot is affected by the reservation, development of reservation allowed as per AR and FSI to be utilized on remainder of the plot. UDD of GoM has issued notification under section 37(1AA) (c) for Reconstruction or Redevelopment of Cluster(s) of BDD chawls at Naigaon, Worli, N.M.Joshi Marg and Shivdi by implementing Urban Renewal
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 65
Scheme(s) in order to speed up development of BDD chawls. Due cognizance of said notification has been taken by incorporating the same in DCPR as Regulation No. 33(9)(B). The provisions of Regulation No 33(10) are rationalized to avoid additional congestion with objective to improve the living standard in redevelopment scheme. The tenement density of 500 per Net Hectare keeping with FSI 3.0 or rehabilitation area and incentive FSI thereon whichever is more, made permissible in-situ. In case of plots having Tenement Density more than 650, FSI of 4.0 or rehabilitation and incentive FSI thereon whichever is more made permissible in-situ by CEO (SRA). The unconsumed built up area can be made available in the form of TDR. In Regulation No 33(10) (A) which deals with redevelopment of slum areas within Dharavi Notified Area (DNA), Planning Sector has already been defined. Considering the vast area, sectorial development is not getting proper response from the project proponent. Hence from implementation point of view, Implementing Sector has been defined with minimum area not less than 4000 sq. m under development at par with development allowed in SDZ-I for slum, so as to achieve well planned and controlled development within Planning Sector of DRP along with various amenities and facilities to be provided for people at large within the boundaries of such plots/areas.
5.3.7 Part VII: Land use classification and uses permitted
This part of regulation deals with land use zones and uses permitted in various zones & conditions thereof. Three new Zones viz. two zones for the development of port land & Green Zone are introduced and No Development Zone (NDZ) is now termed as Special Development Zone (SDZ). Thus, now eight zones have been created instead of five in RDDP viz.
1. Residential Zone (R) 2. Commercial Zone (C) 3. Industrial Zone (I) 4. Special Development Zone(SDZ) 5. Natural Area (NA) 6. Port’s Operational Zone(POZ)
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 66
7. Port’s Water Front Development Zone(PWFDZ) 8. Green Zone (GZ)
Special Development Zone (SDZ)
In SRDP 1991, large chunk of land, was earmarked as “No Development Zone”, mainly to take care of future development (i. e. in subsequent DP). Only restricted uses were admissible on such NDZ lands with restricted FSI maximum up to 0.20, thereby resulting in certain portion of said lands belonging to Govt., as well as to private owners have been encroached upon by hutments during course of time. The land excluding ecologically sensitive land, which has development potential, was again termed as No Development Zone (NDZ) in RDDP 2034 which has now been termed as Special Development Zone (SDZ).
In order to bring this land under development considering population growth and requirement of city for AffordableHousing, the said Special Development Zone (SDZ) land is further subdivided into two parts
1. Special Development Zone-I (SDZ-I)
2. Special Development Zone-II (SDZ-II)
SDZI I -Zone occupied by protected occupants as defined under Slums Act, 1971. Development of SDZ-I will be governed by the Regulation No 33(10) and 17(3) (C) (c).
SDZ II – Zone which is mostly vacant land, development is proposed predominantly for AffordableHousing (EWS/LIG/MIG/ /Rental housing), POS and Other Amenities. MCGM will formulate a transparent mechanism to ensure that AH stock reaches the target group. Development in SDZ-II for the Affordable Housing shall be governed by Regulation No 33(8) and development other than that for AffordableHousing will be continued as per provisions of RDDP DCR.
Mumbai Port Trust Land (MbPT)
In view of the discussions with MbPT officials from time to time, the MbPT land has been further sub divided into two Zones namely Port’s Operational Zone (POZ) and Port’s Water Front Development Zone (PWFDZ).
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 67
POZ- Zone for development of Port and Port related activities
PWFDZ- Zone with a focus on water front development with mixed land use for certain port related activities, to promote Tourism, Marine tourism, Entertainment, water transport and Affordable Housing. MbPT will be asked to maintain the designations and to provide required amenities as shown in DP.
In order to ensure that existing Designations/proposed reservations get developed in these Zones, it has been clearly stated that “Approval to any development/redevelopment in this Zone shall be granted only after Master Layout Plan incorporating all reservations/designations listed in note below is approved from MCGM”
Green Zone (GZ)
Green Zone is a large area predominantly with green cover where following facilities may be permissible,
Construction of Zoo with FSI of 0.025 Use approved by GoM with permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forest Rehabilitation and Resettlement of the original inhabitants of the forest (adivasis, tribals of Sanjay Gandhi National Park) as per the provisions of Regulation no. 30 with Zonal (basic) FSI
Changes in provisions of other zones
Natural Area (NA) is now redefined as an environmentally sensitive area amenable to buildable development with the approval of the Competent Authority. In NA certain facilities and uses as allowed by MOEFCC will be permissible. Due care has been taken to maintain the eco sensitivity of the area.
Since there is a need to protect the existing authorized structures in Natural Areas and Green Zone, it has been clarified that “Structures constructed in NA/GZ, with due sanction of Competent Authority, before coming into force of these regulations stand protected” Considering the current trend of mixed use, horizon period of 20 years, and on hearing representations from various groups and stake holders, modifications permitting various land-uses and
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 68 occupancies have been done, in order to promote mix uses and the commercial growth of city.
It is to be mentioned here that most of the private mill lands have already been developed as per Regulation no. 58 of DCR of 1991. Only some of the mills of National Textile Corporation (NTC), a Govt of India Undertaking, are yet to be developed. Hence, in order to bring parity for the development of mills of NTC with other private mill lands mostly developed in the past as per the then Regulation no. 58 of DCR 1991, the provisions for development of mill land of Draft DCR of RDDP 2034 have been modified as per Regulation No. 58 of DCR 1991, with some minor changes.
5.3.8 Part VIII: General building requirements
This part deals with general building requirements and changes proposed are detailed in brief below. The sizes of the rooms (Minimum area) have been made flexible considering responsiveness to the society’s need, by maintaining minimum width of the room. Maximum height of room in tenement has been increased from 3.9 to 4.2 m. Minimum width of stairway in a building having height up to 70 m, has been increased from 1.2 m to 1.50 m and in respect of building having height more than 70 m, has been increased from 1.5 m to 2.0 m considering the situation of emergency including fire etc. For industrial building, staircase width of 2 m for building up to height of 70 m is proposed Rationalized open spaces can be allowed by the commissioner than the normal required, on payment of premium from Ease of Doing Business point of view. Premium so collected shall be used for development of infrastructure in such a way that it will mitigate the strain on infrastructure caused due to such relaxation. In order to enhance the aesthetical features of Public building it has been stated that at least 1% of the cost of construction of the building, shall be utilized for enhancing the aesthetical look and aesthetical features of Public buildings.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 69
During hearing, it was represented that provision of additional parking, in case of development proposal of Heritage Listed building, is not possible. A clause has been introduced stating that in case of addition/alteration/reconstruction/redevelopment of Heritage Grade I & II structures where plinth/façade of building is required to be retained, requirement of additional parking as per this Regulation over and above the existing parking shall not be insisted. NOC from railway authority will be insisted if the plot is situated within 30 m from railway track boundary instead of railway land boundary as railway land boundary may include their office buildings, quarters etc. In order to give relief to residents, especially located in the vicinity of airport, railway track and where it is not possible to consume even the Zonal (basic) FSI or Protected BUA due to restriction, provision for granting TDR for unconsumed built up area (BUA) as per Zonal (basic) FSI or protected BUA, in restricted height zones areas, as per Regulation 45(B), (B), (C) has been made. As per Draft DCR, in the redevelopment sites of existing filling and service station of Petrol, Diesel, Compressed Natural Gas or any other Motor Vehicle Fuel, change of use was not permissible. Since, some of the existing petrol pumps are touching the residential buildings, it has now been proposed to allow redevelopment of sites by retaining existing filling and service station of Petrol, Diesel, Compressed Natural Gas or any other Motor Vehicle Fuel, for the uses as permissible under these Regulations subject to No Objection Certificate (NOC) from Controller of Explosive and Chief Fire Officer (CFO).
5.3.9 Part IX: Urban Safety Requirements
No Major Changes have been changed
5.3.10 Part X: Special Provision
Formulations of Constitution of Parking Authority along with its General functions which will act as guiding principle have been introduced. Hence, on receipt of sanction to this DCPR 2034 from GoM, Parking Authority can start functioning including granting permission of Public Parking Lot.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 70
On hearing suggestions/objections from Conservation Architects, NGO, Ex- Chairman of MHCC, and with a view to preserve heritage, particularly Grade I & Grade II, the Regulations related to Heritage has been suitably modified.
Multiple locations are reserved for Metro Car Shed in DP, as per the requirement of MMRDA. Once the location for Metro Car Shed is finally decided, then the reservation at other location shall be automatically de- reserved in order not to cause inconvenience to owner of plot and to do away with the further procedure for deletion of reservation following the relevant section of MR&TP Act. Hence, clause stating that the portion of land reserved/earmarked for the Metro Car Shed in DP, if not required by the Competent Authority subsequently, will fall automatically in the Zone prevailing on land adjoining to land under reservation of Metro Car Shed.
Other Forest Land has been distinguished from land allotted to forest department and clause has been included stating that Development in the forest land which has been designated as Natural Area in DP will be governed by the notifications issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change as amended from time to time.
5.3.11 Part XI: Miscellaneous provisions
On hearing representation from various groups and to avoid inconvenience to the concerned people while seeking permission from MCGM, cultural activities like circus, jatra, etc. has now been included in temporary construction. Structures on construction site like laborer hutments with crèche, sales office/sample or show flat, have been added to the list of Temporary construction.
5.3.12 Part XII: Environmental sustainability
In order to avoid open defecation/urination and as suggested by various NGO’s, in addition to existing provision of RDDP-2034 DCR, a clause stating that, effort shall be made for provision for PSC blocks along highway/major roads at a distance of every 3 km preferably near the bus stop and in public open spaces has been added. Provision for toilet/urinal blocks for differently able persons of both genders will now be insisted.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 71
NA has been marked on DP considering the high tide line as per existing Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) maps. Areas situated on seaward side of the high tide line are marked as NA, independent of ground condition. If the alignment of HTL is modified in future, then the area now shown as NA needs to be modified as per ground reality. Taking this into consideration, a clause has been incorporated, stating that, land shown as Natural Area in DP and situated on the seaward side of High Tide Line, if after modification to High Tide Line falls on the landward side of modified High Tide Line, then in such case, the said land will be deemed to have been situated in the zone of adjoining land unless, said land is forest/salt pan land/occupied by mangroves/mud flats.
Planting of indigenous trees and preferably native species having capacity to attract bird for nesting, planting of shrubs with grass in between the indigenous trees has been made to improve environmental sustainability.
As an incentive for constructing & making Energy Efficient Building additional fungible compensatory area to the extent of 5% over and above than that permissible as per regulation 31(3) has been allowed.
It was felt that keeping in view the existence of a large number of oil, fertilizer and other sensitive industries in the M Ward, it is absolutely necessary that MCGM should carry out detailed risk analysis of the area in a time bound manner. Accordingly, a clause has been added in this Regulation.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 72
6. OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSION
This section covers the major recommendations by the Planning Committee Viz. Waterfront Zone in MbPT, an all inclusive concept of Affordable Housing, addition of a Green Zone for Aarey Colony. The section concludes with the list of deliverables by the Planning Committee.
6.1. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE
The Planning Committee as a part of the hearing process also dwelled upon various City level issues which were raised by the Public Representatives, Institutions, NGOs and Individuals during the process of hearing viz. Aarey Colony, No Development Zone, Natural Area, AffordableHousing, MbPT, Coastal Road, depiction of Religious structures. The number of suggestions and objections on these issues were quite substantial. These issues were deliberated at length by the Planning committee and the recommendations that were finalized are discussed in this section.
6.1.1 Natural Area
The DP has strived for Greater Mumbai to conserve its Natural Areas, augment green cover in the City, preserve its water bodies and take preventive measures to mitigate natural adversities such as floods. An area of 14.96 sq km full of mangroves was found emerged additionally in Thane creek due to siltation outside the municipal limits which was decided to be added to the City’s Natural Area. To conserve all ecologically sensitive areas which include forests, mangroves, water bodies and all areas under CRZ-I, the plan has demarcated these as Natural Areas. No buildable development is permitted in these Natural Areas. The Natural areas as shown in the RDDP forms 12,859 ha which accounts to 29.59% of the planning area.
In addition to the areas already demarcated by RDDP as NA, the Planning Committee has recommended inclusion of all the areas on seaward side of HTL as NA being CRZ -I as per MoEFCC notification except the beaches which will fall in the zone as that of the adjoining zone. This has led to increase in the quantum of Natural Areas. It has also included some wrongly shown NDZ areas as NA. Some of the roads proposed in NA were also deleted as an alternate
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 73 access was available. The deletion of these roads also helped in preserving the NA areas.
However, some of the proposed SDZ areas were found lacking proper access. Hence, to make them accessible some proposed roads have been shown over NA. This, of course, would be subject to NOC from competent authorities.
The Natural Areas are computed in the following table.
Table 5: Revised Natural Areas As per Planning Committee decision Sr. Zones Area in Ha No 1 Natural Area (NA) 1574.24 2 Special Development Zone (I, 2,021.54 II)
6.1.2 Special Development Zone (SDZ) – previously known as No Development Zone (NDZ)
SRDP 1991 had included such lands in the No Development Zone (NDZ) which were reserve areas meant for the growth of population in the future, to be serviced with adequate infrastructure. NDZ lands also included eco sensitive lands viz. Salt Pan Lands, mangroves, water bodies etc. During the preparation of draft DP for the year 2034, it was felt that eco-sensitive lands are required to be protected, in order to preserve the ecology. Thus, a separate category of such lands was decided and designated under Natural Area (NA). Broadly, lands on the seaward side of High Tide Line along with the hill slopes, water bodies, salt-pans and other such eco-sensitive lands were included in NA.
As a part of the revision process of recasting the Draft DP, a decision had been taken to continue with the designation of N.A. land in RDDP. The balance NDZ land, after deducting NA, was to be opened up for development under a special scheme creation of affordable housing.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 74
After considering various policy initiatives at Central and State level, RDDP had brought in the concept of Affordable Housing, without dwelling into the definition or the qualification criteria of Affordable Housing. The concept of AH revolved around an assumption that landowners in the NDZ areas would amalgamate their lands cohesively into units of 4 ha and would participate in the concept of the AH willingly. The clause for the special development, of the NDZ lands, for Affordable Housing, allowed development in minimum land parcels of 4 ha.
The threshold limit of 4 Ha was objected to in the suggestions and objections that were received. People suggested that the threshold limit be brought down to a unit of 1Ha for affordable housing.
The Planning Committee, after detailed deliberations, has now decided to allocate different zoning for the NDZ lands based on the present site situation. The eco-sensitive lands will continue to be shown as NA. The lands with encumbrances of protected slums have been categorized as Special Development Zone -I and the balance NDZ lands categorized as Special Development Zone -II. The existing road pattern present in these areas along with the proposed DP roads of RDDP has been continued and based on the principle of proper connectivity and circulation, new road network has also been proposed. The development of lands under SDZ-I and SDZ-II would be in accordance with the new provisions of DCPR.
Table 6: Ward wise allocation of SDZ-I and SDZ-II Sr.No. Ward Area under SDZ-I ( in Area under SDZ-II ( in Ha ) Ha ) 1 H/W 3.30 1.03 2 K/E - - 3 K/W - 106.00 4 M/E 34.71 56.38 5 M/W - 102.22 6 N 29.25 0.00 7 P/N 102.50 905.89 8 P/S - 0.59 9 R/C 0.16 83.96 10 R/N 14.98 38.66
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 75
11 R/S 8.73 50.55 12 S 49.78 144.30 13 T 4.66 283.88 14 MCGM 248.07 1,773.46
Table 7: Ward wise allocation of RDDP2034 NDZ Area WARD RDDP NDZ Modifi Balanc New SDZ I SDZ II AREA ed NDZ e NDZ NDZ to NA H/W 11.25 - 11.25 6.92 3.30 1.03 K/E 141.08 2.59 138.49 138.49 - - K/W 124.73 0.03 124.71 18.70 - 106.00 M/E 187.30 0.01 187.29 96.19 34.71 56.38 M/W 105.09 - 105.09 2.87 - 102.22 N 30.36 - 30.36 1.11 29.25 0.00 P/N 1,105.99 0.24 1,105.7 97.37 905.89 102.50 5 P/S 962.12 0.01 962.10 961.52 - 0.59 R/C 128.47 0.79 127.68 43.57 0.16 83.96 R/N 124.00 0.01 124.00 70.36 14.98 38.66 R/S 72.84 0.01 72.84 13.55 8.73 50.55 S 256.92 0.05 256.87 62.79 49.78 144.30 T 438.35 0.01 438.34 149.81 4.66 283.88 MCGM 3,688.52 3.74 3,684.7 1,663.2 1,773.46 248.07 7 4 Note: All figures are in Hectars.
Table 8: New Reservations proposed in SDZ Open Educatio Healt Social Affordable Ward Transport space n h Amenity Housing H/W - - - - 0.04 - K/E ------K/W ------M/E 2.26 - - - 1.73 0.48 M/W 2.33 - - 1.17 1.86 - N ------P/N 2.93 1.65 4.15 2.10 11.80 - P/S ------
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 76
R/C 2.06 2.09 - 1.89 3.35 - R/N - - 2.14 - 2.83 - R/S - - - - 0.84 - S 3.63 - - - 2.49 - T 25.80 - - - - - MCG 39.01 3.74 6.30 5.16 24.93 0.48 M Note: All figures are in Hectors.
6.1.3 Affordable/Social Housing (AH)
Planning Committee felt that the nomenclature Affordable Housing as a term and in practice should be more inclusive. Affordable Housing (AH) has therefore been defined to mean low cost, social housing which is meant for economically weaker section, lower income group and middle income group and which also includes rental housing.
To give adequate emphasis to AH, in many cases where reservations were required to be changed for a variety of reasons as explained in the preceding sections, AH reservation has been newly added. Moreover, some of the SDZ areas, where development that has already taken place in the neighborhood, have also been reserved for AH considering the sizes of the said plots.
6.1.4 Mumbai Port Trust
In RDDP, MbPT lands had been proposed for various categories of amenities viz. social, municipal, housing, open spaces etc. These were proposed at various locations including some of the operational areas of the MbPT. MbPT contested the proposed locations of the reservations claiming that these reservations will hamper their future planning. They contended that MbPT authorities are in the process of finalizing the appointment of consultants for preparing a holistic plan of their areas which will include civic amenities, development of waterfront areas, proposals for operational areas and for housing, including slum rehabilitation. Hence, they suggested deleting the reservations as proposed in RDDP and allowing them to locationally plan the amenity areas.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 77
A holistic view of the proposals of MbPT was considered and after detailed discussions with the MbPT authorities, a decision was taken to accept the suggestions of the MbPT as follows:
1. To change the zoning of the MbPT areas into two separate zones viz. Port Operation Zone (POZ) and Waterfront Development Zone (WDZ) 2. Not to show reservations of RDDP in the DP Sheets but mention the proposals of RDDP along with their areas and categories in the separate provisions to be included in the DCPR.. However, to insist upon providing various reservations within their development which should be adequate, as per the planning standards, for the people residing on MbPT owned lands.
These provisions will ensure flexibility of providing civic amenities as per the proposed plan of MbPT, which is under preparation and will also allow the development of MbPT as per the planning proposals under their consideration
6.1.5 Aarey Colony
Discussion on Aarey colony has already featured in the preceding chapter. However, keeping in view the importance of Aarey and that Aarey colony along with Sanjay Gandhi Natural Park has been classified as Eco-sensitive zone in the recent notification issued by GoI, the Planning Committee felt that Aarey Colony be referred in this section too. The essence of the suggestions and objections on the Aarey was to preserve its natural form, continue it as one of the key natural heritage and not to open it up for further development. The Planning Committee gave patient hearing to all the suggestions and took note of the sincere concerns of the people for preserving Aarey.
The challenge to maintaining a delicate balance between desirable developments and preserving the form of Aarey and to protect the flora and fauna within the boundary of Aarey, was a very difficult task for the Committee. The recent notification by the Government of India declaring Aarey as an ESZ helped in determining the cause for Aarey. The RDDP proposal to set aside certain land for the Car shed, Rehabilitation & Resettlement and the inclusion of area for Zoo was also contested by many people. The major task was to retain the land use of Metro Car Shed within Aarey as it was
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 78 finalized by the GoM, for a key infrastructure project. Planning Committee members, Shri. Yeshodhar Phanse and Smt. Trushna Vishwasrao expressed their reservation against the Metro Car Shed proposal within Aarey. Their opinion was to find an alternate land for the Metro Car Shed. However, in view of GoM notification and the suitability of the plot, the Metro Car Shed is continued to be shown as a part of Aarey.
The RDDP had included Aarey in NDZ and part of the areas of Aarey was included in Accessible Open Spaces. People stated that as DCR for NDZ allows certain construction in the lands falling in NDZ, Aarey land may get utilized for construction as a permissible activity. This will spoil the basic characteristics of Aarey. Therefore, Planning Committee has recommended inclusion of Aarey land in the newly created Green zone wherein any use will be permitted only after approval of the State Government in concurrence with the MoEFCC. This, the Planning Committee feels, is a major step towards protecting Sanjay Gandhi National Park(SGNP) which shares its boundary with Aarey and acts as a buffer to SGNP.
6.2. AMENITIES The Draft DP 2034 provided for basic amenities required by the citizens based on the Planning standards, keeping in view the space constraints faced by Mumbai. The amenities were of two kinds viz. Non-buildable which are land intensive and Buildable which are BUA intensive. Non-buildable amenities require precious land which is hard to find. On the other hand, the requirement of buildable amenities can be met through FSI instruments. The status of the different types of amenities is discussed in the following sections.
6.2.1 Open Spaces
The most important of the amenities and the most land intensive amenity is Open Space. This is also crucial for the well-being for the people. Mumbai, due to its restriction on physical size, is not amply served by Public Open Spaces. A very large number of people requested for deletion or for change of Open Spaces reservations including for deletion of open space reservations from existing slum settlements. The Planning Committee explained to the people who attended hearings that draft DCR has provided for development of the Open Spaces by using the principles of Accommodation Reservation.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 79
RDDP 2034 had provided for 4489 Ha of land in the form of designations and reservations for accessible Open Spaces which translates to 3.51 sq.mt pp. Pursuant to decisions taken on the suggestions and objections, the area under the accessible Open Spaces will now work out to 3400.80 Ha of land in the form of designations and reservations. Layout RGs, which are not part of the category of reservations/designations, approximately work out to 979.51 Ha. The Planning Committee has decided to show all layout RGs in text form in the DP Sheets and recommended to put out the details of Layout RG as part of Annexure in public domain in due course , so that the complete information on Layout RG is available to the public. Moreover, development of SDZ -II would yield 39.01 Ha of Open Spaces by way of reservations. Further, Open Spaces from SDZ- II through DCR route would provide 281.09 Ha of land out of which 164.38 Ha is for POS and 116.71 Ha is for Layout RG. The SDZ-I would additionally yield 31.41 Ha of Open Spaces through the DCR route. Therefore, total area of Open Spaces on the basis of Planning Committee recommendations will be 4731.82 Ha which will translate into 3.70 sq.mt pp.
6.2.2 Health
The next important social amenity is Health infrastructure. RDDP 2034 provided for 397.77 Ha of land for setting up health infrastructure in the form of reservations and designations. The recommendations on suggestions and objections yielded 393.33 Ha of land in the form Health amenities. Moreover, the development of SDZ would yield 6.30 Ha of Health amenities by way of reservation. Therefore, total area of Health Infrastructure after these recommendations will be 399.63 Ha. Thus, some additional land for Health infrastructure is being provided, translating into 0.31 sq.mt pp.
6.2.3 Education
Another important social amenity is Education infrastructure. RDDP 2034 provided for 1164.95 Ha of land for setting up educational infrastructure in the form of reservations and designations. The recommendation on the suggestions and objections yielded 1183.04 Ha of land in the form of educational infrastructure. Moreover, development of SDZ would yield 3.74 Ha of educational infrastructure by way of reservation. Therefore, total area of Education infrastructure after these recommendations will be 1186.78 Ha.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 80
Thus, the some additional land for Education infrastructure is being provided, translating into 0.93 sq.mt. pp.
6.2.4 Social Amenities
The next hierarchy constitutes other Social Amenities. RDDP 2034 provided for 1036.20 Ha of land for setting up social amenities in the form of reservations and designations. The recommendation on suggestions and objections yielded 1050.90 Ha of land in the form other social amenities. Moreover, development of SDZ would yield 5.16 Ha of social amenities by way of reservation. The other availability of social amenities from the SDZ, through the DCR route, would be for 153.42 Ha of land. Therefore, total area of Social Amenities after these recommendations is 1209.48 Ha which translate into additional land for Social Amenities accounting for 0.95 sq.mt pp.
6.2.5 Affordable/Social Housing
Affordable Housing is the cornerstone of this DP. RDDP 2034 provided for 707.13 Ha of land for affordable housing in the form of reservations and designations. The recommendation on suggestions and objections yielded 762.35 Ha of land for this purpose. Moreover, development of SDZ would yield 24.93* Ha of affordable housing by way of reservations. Therefore, total area of Affordable Housing will become 787.28 Ha.
6.3. CONCLUSION In accordance with the general overall observations and recommendations with regard to the several suggestions and objections on the Proposed Land Use plan and the Draft DCR, the Planning Committee recommends to the Planning Authority that necessary modifications to the Draft Development Plan 2034 and the Draft DCR be carried out and the same be submitted to the Government for its approval under the provisions of MR&TP Act 1966.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 81
APPENDIX - I
Hearing Schedule for Government Suggestions/Objections: 17th to 24th October 2016
Day 1: 17.10.2016 Monday
Sr. No Government Organization Time 1 AAI 10:30 2 CPWD 11:30 3 PWD 12:00 4 Railway Police Commissioner 12:30 5 HPCL 14:00 6 MbPT 15:00
Day 2: 18.10.2016 Tuesday
Sr. No Government Organization Time 7 RCF 11:00 8 Nehru Police Station 11:20 9 BPCL 11:40 10 Mazgaon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd 12:00 Maharashtra State Police Housing and 11 12:20 Welfare Co-op Ltd 12 Vikram Sarabhai Atomic Energy 12:45 13 Indian Audit and Accountant Dept 13:00 14 MMB 14:00 15 DRP 14:30 16 SRA 15:00
Day 3: 19.10.2016 Wednesday
Sr. No Government Organization Time 17 ITI, Lower Parel 11:00 18 Principal Commissioner of Customs 11:20 19 RBI 11:40 20 Ministry of Health and Family Welfare 12:00 21 Salt Commissioner 12:20 22 Wadala Police Station 12:40 23 Town Planning 13:00
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 82
24 Western Railway 14:00 25 LIC 14:30 26 MMRDA 15:15
Day 4: 20.10.2016 Thursday
Sr. No Government Organization Time 27 Collector & District Magistrate 10:45 28 IOCL 11:00 29 ASI 11:15 30 Mahanand Dairy 11:30 31 Mahanagar Gas 11:45 32 Maharashtra Employees State Insurance 12:00 Maharashtra Film Stage & Cultural 33 12:15 Development Co-op Ltd 34 National Textile Co-op Ltd 12:30 35 MHADA 14:00
Day 5: 21.10.2016 Friday
Sr. No Government Organization Time 36 Collector MSD 10:40 37 MTNL 11:00 38 IOB 11:20 39 ICAR - Fisheries Institute 11:30 40 SBI 11:45 41 MSRDC 12:00 42 MSEDCL 12:15 43 Transport Commissioner, RTO 12:30 44 Forest 14:00 45 MIDC 14:30 46 Commissioner of Police, Police (Estate) 15:00 47 BEST 15:15
Hearing Schedule for VIP Suggestions/Objections: 25th to 26th October 2016
Day 1: 25.10.2016 Tuesday
Sr. No VIPs Time 1 MPs 10:45
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 83
2 MLA/ Ex- MLA 14:00
Day 2: 26.10.2016 Wednesday
Sr. No VIPs Time 3 Councillors –City Wards 10:45 4 Councillors – Suburb Wards 14:00
Day 3: 5.11.2016 Saturday
Sr. No VIPs Time 1 Councillor 10:30-11:00 Hussain Dalwai MP, Chandrakant Handore 2 MLA 11:00-12:00 MLA Manisha Chaudhary MP Atul Bhatkhalkar 3 12:00-13:00 MLA, Yogesh Sagar MLA 4 Councillor - Zone III (H/E, H/W, K/E) 14:00-15:00 5 Councillor - Zone IV (K/W, P/S, P/N) 15:00-16:00 6 Councillor - Zone VII (R/N,R/C,R/S) 16:00-17:00
Hearing Schedule for Institution Suggestions/Objections: 2nd to 4th November 2016
Day 1: 2.11.2016 Wednesday
Sr. No Institution Time 1 PEATA 2 MCHI-CREDAI 3 National Real Estate Development Council 4 Property Redevelopers Association 5 Builder's Association of India 6 Property Owners' Association 11 am – 5 pm Central Mumbai Developers Welfare 7 Association Affordable Housing Welfare Organisation 8 of India 9 Indian Society of Structural Engineers 10 Indian Institute of Architects
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 84
Day 2: 3.11.2016 Thursday
Sr. No Institution Time Maharashtra Rajya Raajatrit Adhikari Maha 11 11:00 Sangh Mumbai Circus & Exhibition Organiser's 12 11:20 Association + Golden Group of Circus Maharashtra Jatra Artist and Merchant 13 11:40 Welfare Association Cinema Owners & Exhibitors Association of 14 12:00 India 15 Hotel and Restaurant Association 12:20 16 Mill Owners's Association 12:40 17 Tata Memorial Centre 14:00 18 Nehru Centre, TISS 14:30 19 Shri. Sharad Kale 15:00 Day 3: 4.11.2016 Friday
Sr. No Institution Time 20 Tata Power 21 Reliance Infrastructure Ltd 10:45 22 Power Supply Utilities/ BEST/ MSEDL Ready Mixed Concrete Manufacturer's 23 12:30 Association 24 Mumbai Cricket Association 13:00 25 Somaiya Trust 14:00 26 Arch Bishop + Churches 14:30
Hearing Schedule for NGO Suggestions/Objections: 7th to 10th November 2016
Day 1: 7.11.2016 Monday
Sr. No NGO Time 1 United People's Front 10:30 2 Vyati Vikas Kendra 11:00 3 Citizens Rights Protection 11:30 4 Shramik Mukti Sangh 12:00 5 Save Versova 12:30 6 Debi Geonka 14:00
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 85
7 Nivara Hakk + Apna Mumbai Abhiyaan 14:30
Day 2: 8.11.2016 Tuesday
Sr. No NGO Time 8 Mobai Gaothan Panchayat 10:30 9 Bandra Bandstand Residents Trust 11:00 10 Sumaira Abdulali 11:30 Watch Dog Foundation + Nicholas Almeida, 11 Godfrey W Pimeta + Bombay Catholic 12:00 Sabha 12 HSMA+ Shweta Wagh+Nandita Shah 14:00 13 Tasneem Mehta 15:00 14 Bombay Environmental Action Group 16:00
Day 3: 9.11.2016 Wednesday
Sr. No NGO Time 15 Bombay East Indian Association 11:00 16 Child Friendly Mumbai Khorat 11:30 17 Lenster Rodrigues 12:00 18 Nagar Advocacy 12:30 UDRI+ Shirin Bharucha, Cyrus Guzder, 19 14:00 Gerson Da Cunha
Day 4: 10.11.2016 Thursday
Sr. No NGO Time 20 IUDI 11:00 21 MESN 11:30 22 Rajeshwari Chandrasekhar 12:00 23 Right to Pee - Supriya Sonar 12:30 24 Machimmar Kruti Samiti 15:00 25 WRI India /M/S.Godrej 16:00 26 Afzalpurkar 17:00
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 86
Hearing Schedule for Individual Suggestions/Objections: 11th November to 15th December 2016
Sr. No INDIVIDUAL – WARD WISE Date 1 DCR 11.11.2016 2 A, B, C, D 15.11.2016 3 E 16.11.2016 4 F/N, F/S 17.11.2016 5 G/N, G/S 18.11.2016 6 H/E 21.11.2016 7 H/W 22.11.2016 8 K/W 23.11.2016 9 K/E 24.11.2016 10 P/N 28.11.2016 11 P/S 29.11.2016 12 R/S 30.11.2016 13 R/C 01.12.2016 14 R/N 02.12.2016 15 L 05.12.2016 16 M/E 07.12.2016 17 M/W 08.12.2016 18 N 09.12.2016 19 S 13.12.2016 20 T 14.12.2016 21 General 15.12.2016
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 87
APPENDIX - II
An Alternative Approach to Slum Upgradation and Redevelopment
Background
Mumbai, although considered as the economic capital of India, has one of the largest populations of slum/ informal settlements in the country, covering an area of 3,422 ha. The slum population or approximately 5.5 million (2011 census), comprises more than 42% of the population residing on 8% of the land area. The fact that Mumbai is surrounded by water, fuels the perception that there is a lack of space for rehabilitation of existing slum areas. Housing is considered as a right to ‘decent life’ under our Constitution, hence, it is the responsibility of every local/ state authority to have a range of mechanisms to allow equitable development. The Government has made several attempts since 1970’s for Redevelopment and Rehabilitation which in its current form is the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) and MHADA. However over 26 years, the SRA has been able to build approximately 160,000 homes as against a need for over 1.5 million homes. At this rate, more than 250 years will be required to provide appropriate housing to all the slum dwellers. The Revised Draft Development Plan 2034 (RDDP 2034) suggests that there is an imminent need for alternatives to the current model for slum rehabilitation, DCR 33(10), which is not working, as it is solely dependent on the private housing market for funds. However, the RDDP 2034 does not actually provide alternative approaches for the redevelopment of slums and instead only mentions the possibility of a ‘cafeteria approach’ to planning, where a banquet of optional methods could be made available for slum rehabilitation. This current note provides an alternative approach to DCR 33(10) and slum upgradation* (*Slum upgradation shall mean conversion of slum pockets from informal settlement to formal housing (pakka houses) through incremental interventions or reconstruction or complete redevelopment, either by slum dwellers/ group of slum dwellers / society/ mandals or with the involvement of a developer.) Need for an alternative to DCR 33(10)
1. The current SRA model and DCR 33(10) make it mandatory for a private developer to be involved in the slum redevelopment process. Hence, the slum dwellers have to wait until such time that a developer will take up the redevelopment of their area / nagar / wadi; 2. The slum dwellers are not asked for their input on how their particular slum pocket should be redeveloped, and instead are subject to the dense living conditions thrust upon them by the developer. 3. Often, these redevelopment projects have led to displacing the slum dwellers from a central location in the city to the suburbs or further afield in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR 4. The sale component, which subsidizes housing for in situ rehabilitation under the DCR 33(10), substantially increases the existing densities in slum neighbourhoods, thereby putting tremendous pressure on the services as well as reducing the rehabilitation footprint to less than 40% of the gross plot area. This results in some cases, with the existing density already high the rehabilitation density sneaks to more than 1800 units/ ha (net) or almost 1 million people per sq km. This extreme marginalization of urban poor is totally unsustainable and unfair.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 88
5. Typically, SRA schemes in areas with high land values have been implemented whereas these have not even commenced in areas with low land value, emphasizing the market-led nature of this existing model. Certain slum pockets in the city might never have the optimum land value to make them viable for redevelopment through the DCR 33(10) option. 6. Slum Rehabilitation Authority through development charges and fee levies for 33 (10) projects has proceeds which needs to be deployed for the core purpose of improving quality of life in slums areas. Therefore, this note attempts to propose an alternative model in which a government agency can facilitate slum upgradation, offering a choice to the slum dwellers to self-upgrade their houses, instead of waiting for housing to be provided by market. Objectives
The overall objectives for the proposed alternative model for slum upgradation are: a) To make it imperative to provide trunk infrastructure and amenities to slum communities through existing delivery mechanisms and local authority responsibilities such as: . Proper means of access/ streets/ footpaths . Adequate water supply . Proper sanitation . Adequate electricity and cooking gas . Waste collection services . Healthcare . Education b) To imminently allow slum upgradation to take place incrementally by slum dwellers, either individually or through an amalgamation of plots; c) To ensure that if at all densities need to increase they are only marginal increase; d) To provide an alternative to private market insecurity for slum rehabilitation process; e) To allow for a cohesive, appropriate, affordable and sustainable slum upgradation by enabling slum dwellers to participate in the planning process at ward level; f) To facilitate justly mass slum upgradation in a relatively short implementation time.
Proposed alternative model
The framework for the proposed alternative model entails: a) that SRA will rightly take on the role as the planning authority for slums areas, and alongwith facilitating SRA schemes will also take on slum upgradation through the preparation of slum upgradation layout plans, special DCRs and execute the same through a two-tiered planned approach. b) facilitate through existing services/utility delivery agencies, state and local authority provision of trunk infrastructure for every slum area; c) that the slum dwellers will be entailed to carry out upgradation of their tenements, as per slum upgradation layout plan approved by SRA, within 3-5 years of preparation of the plan. d) that SRA will be responsible for facilitating tenure of land
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 89
Role of Central, State and Local Government
In the proposed alternative model Central, State and Local Governments play important role in providing:
Tenure of land
Based on the location, ownership and habitable conditions of the land, the Government (Local Authority, State and Centre) will grant the following tenures to the slum dwellers: a) Long-term lease of 30 years for tenable slums; b) For untenable slums, there shall be no eviction until the Government frames a policy for their rehabilitation; c) Transfer tenure to a Co-operative Society for a Community Land Reserve (CLR)*. *Under the CLR scheme, ownership of the land would be transferred to a ‘Society’ formed as a nonprofit company (Section 8) by selected members of the area. Trunk infrastructure
a) On initiating slum upgradation layout plan by SRA, existing utility and services agencies and mechanisms to be activated for providing the basic essential infrastructure and amenities (as described under objectives) for slum pockets conforming to the broader provisions of the plan. b) For untenable land, provision of basic infrastructure for utilities such as water supply and sanitation, electricity will be done until such time that a provision is made for their rehabilitation. Financial assistance
The Central and State Government will facilitate the funds for the slum dwellers through PMAY subsidy / funds, microfinance options, financial institutions and public sector finance options. With grant of fixed tenure of land, these institutions would be more willing to provide a loan to the slum dwellers, as land tenure can act as collateral for loan.
DP Reservation through Accommodation Reservation
In case of slums with DP 2034 Reservations other than residential, proposed accommodation reservation policy in DP 2034 will assist in developing DP reservations along with the upgradation of slums. SRA will play an important role as planning authority to accommodate these DP reservations in the slum upgradation layout plans for slums areas.
The Role of SRA
SRA was formulated in the year 1995 and is the sole ‘Planning authority’ for the redevelopment/upgradation of slums in Mumbai [MR&TP Act 1966 Chapter 1, Definitions, (19) b]. SRA in real sense act as Planning Authority for slums and will need to setup capacity as well as professional teams to conduct surveys, prepare upgradation layout plans, form legal entities of slum dwellers, facilitate land tenure and give approvals for the slum upgradation process. SRA till now through development charges and fee levies for 33 (10) projects has proceeds which needs to be deployed for the core purpose of improving quality of life in slums areas. Therefore
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 90 preparation of the Slum Upgradation Layout plans and furthering the objects of the plan shall be supported by SRA. In this regard, there will be a three-tier planning process undertaken by the SRA: Tier 1 – Formulation of General Slum Upgradation DCR for Mumbai Tier 2 - Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee Tier 3 – Nagar / Wadi / Mandal / Area level Slum Upgradation Layout plan preparation through services of empaneled Architect Urban Planner. Tier 1 Formulation of General Slum Upgradation DCR for Mumbai
SRA will formulate General Slum Upgradation DCR for Mumbai which will be different from the DCR of Greater Mumbai 2034 within a time frame of Six Months. This Slum Upgradation DCR will form basis of all Special Slum Upgradation DCR prepared for specific wadis / nagars / mandals/ society based on their unique characteristic prepared and approved by Ward Level Slum Upgradation Committee.
Tier-2 SRA - Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee
Role of SRA will be extended to each ward level unit which shall be entrusted with the planning and implementation of the Slum Upgradation Layout in individual Nagar / Wadi / Mandal / Area in that administrative ward of Mumbai. The Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee in SRA shall have the below mentioned members and in the spirit of the 74th Amendment to the Constitution of India, local corporators shall be a part of this committee.
The Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee structure
No Member Designation 1 Ward Committee Chairperson Chairperson 2 Executive Engineer /AE SRA Member 3 Two City NGO/Institutions of repute with min 10 years’ Member experience in Urban Planning / Urban Design / Slum Rehabilitation / Social Sciences / Environment Sciences Nominated by SRA 4 Representatives of Concerned Departments of MCGM Special Invitee Members 5 SRA appointed ward level Architect & Urban Planner Convenor with relevant experience This Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee in SRA can co-opt members and shall be funded as well as administratively assisted by SRA with provision of office and qualified staff as well as providing for capital as well as revenue expenditure.
TOR of Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee
The Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee in SRA will be responsible for: a) Delineation of slums into planning units.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 91
Delineating every slum pocket in their ward area and prepare a detailed total station survey enabled base map for the same. The slum buildings will need to be marked as individual planning units. b) Site survey and analysis Authorize and appoint empaneled consultants and fund consultancy services for survey of the existing pockets as follows: i. Existing building and land use survey; ii. Existing population and demographics of the slum area. iii. Existing and proposed access and road infrastructure plan; iv. Survey of existing and proposed utilities and services; v. Survey of existing and proposed community facilities like schools, hospitals, parks, places of worship etc.; vi. Any other social, anthropological, health, education survey as required. c) Special Slum Upgradation DCRs based on General Slum Upgradation DCR Approve and Appoint empaneled consultants, finance consultancy services for preparation of area level Special Slum Upgradation DCR which will include: i. Area specific urban coding / design guidelines for land use, building use, road widths, building heights, building projections, material palette, FSI etc. conforming to upgradation policy guideline. ii. Standards and facilitate provision of amenities such as open spaces, balwadis, healthcare and other such facilities. iii. DCRs based on Special Slum Upgradation DCR guidelines recommended to facilitate the incremental upgradation of the slum tenements, encouraging the construction of structurally safe and environmentally sustainable pakka (permanent) houses with the adoption of basic standards to improve the living conditions in the slums. iv. The fixed tenements sizes of 25 Sq.M under 33(10) do not provide flexibility in planning for slum dwellers’ small scale business operations and hence it will plan/design Special DCRs catering to specific activities and limitations of space in the specific slum areas. v. Laying of trunk infrastructure may lead to displacement of up to 15%-20% of the entire slum pocket. The Special Slum Upgradation DCRs will make provision to ensure that the displaced properties are housed in proximity of the slum area or are appropriately compensated through TDR or by allowing a marginal increase in the net densities of the area, without an increase in number of tenements. vi. General Slum Upgradation DCRs with relaxation of setbacks and provision of appropriate additional free FSI for toilets, balconies and verandahs will encourage the users to upgrade their housing. These will not only allow and facilitate their current floor area sizes but also the current uses. d) Approve and Notify layout planning control, building permissions and provide technical assistance. i Approve and notify through SRA, Nagar / Wadi / Mandal level Slum Upgradation Layout plan prepared through collaborative planning with slum dwellers and services of empaneled Architect Urban Planner. ii Issuing individual / amalgamated building permissions based on the approved Nagar / Wadi / Mandal level Slum Upgradation Layout plan prepared through services of empaneled Architect Urban Planner.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 92
Ii Make available technical assistance to slum dweller by providing services of empaneled architect urban planner, civil engineer, structural consultants, services consultant and chartered accountant for upgradation / reconstruction of individual / amalgamated buildings.
Tier 3: Empanelment of Architect Urban Planners for preparation of Nagar / Wadi / Mandal / Area level Slum Upgradation Layout plan
Team of Architect Urban Planners, Urban Designers, Civil engineers, Structural Consultants, Services Consultants will be empaneled by the SRA which can be appointed by Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee in SRA on recommendation of people of the planning unit / nagar / wadi/ mandal / slum area. The final decision for selection of Local Area Architect Urban Planner will rest with the people of the planning unit / nagar / wadi / mandal / slum area.
The Architect Urban Planner should have a thorough sociological understanding of the area and constitute a team of architects, planners, engineers and urban designers to prepare a successful Slum Area Upgradation Layout Plan in accordance with the needs of the residents.
These empaneled Architect urban planner can also be later assigned to provide technical assistance to slum dwellers for upgrading / reconstruction of their building units.
Criteria for Local Area Architect/Planner empanelment
The Architect/ Urban Planner for the local area selected for empanelment will have a team or consortium consisting of: 1. Registered Architect Urban Planner with accreditation of Council of Architecture with minimum 15 years’ experience. 2. Qualified Planners with minimum 10 years’ experience 3. Registered Structural Engineer with minimum 10 years’ experience 4. Qualified Services Consultants with minimum 10 years’ experience 5. Qualified Social Scientist with minimum 10 years’ experience 6. Adequate technical staff to facilitate public consultation, survey, planning and layout preparation
TOR of local area Architect Urban Planner
Upon analyzing all background information, existing surveys and Special DCR guidelines, the Architect Urban Planner should undertake:
Site Analysis
1. Existing and Proposed road alignments/road widening 2. Existing and Proposed Utilities, Amenities and Services Surveys 3. Existing and Proposed facilities like Schools, Hospitals, Health post, Parks and Playgrounds, etc. 4. Existing and proposed Density: Population density, unit (dwelling) density, street density and FSI 5. Gap analysis for existing SRA survey based on URDPFI/NBC standards or applicability of other standards
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 93
6. Sample household survey for collecting essential data on housing, transport services and state of amenities 7. Implication of Proposed Land Use in Development Plan for the area
Plan Slum Up-gradation Layout
Prepare Plan in order to provide essential trunk infrastructure (services and utilities), access roads and recreational open spaces. Based on the site survey and analysis, a Layout Plan will include: 1. Detailed road network plan – showing means of access and hierarchy of streets. The Authority will ensure that the major roads into these slums will be at least accessible by a two-wheeler. (1.5 M wide Clear) 2. Predominant land use and building use pattern for each slum on basis of the surveyed activities in the area. 3. Detailed listing of incompatible/locally unwanted land / building uses. 4. Comments on continuation/discontinuation of Industrial / incompatible land / building uses. 5. Land rationalisation strategy to provide optimum street widths for major access roads, open spaces and community facilities; 6. Proposals for the upgradation of slums which are prepared in collaboration with slum dwellers. 7. Publication of the upgradation layout plan for suggestions/ objections for a period of one month in English and local languages with every effort to make it participatory and inclusive. 8. Report on consideration of suggestion / objections and making accepted changes in the Slum Upgradation Layout Plan. This plan shall be approved by SRA and notified for implementation.
Role of Slum Dwellers/Residents
Construction and upgradation
Once Slum Upgradation Layout Plan has been notified every building in a slum shall have to conform to the provisions of this plan. Residents will be encouraged to amalgamate plots to bring about rationalisation of land and improve the urban form. Minimum size of plots shall be defined in DCR to apply for building permission. Building permissions approval shall be given in predefined time and slum dwellers/ residents /group of residents on amalgamated plot will be responsible for carrying out the upgradation of their respective homes. Residents will be encouraged to amalgamate plots to bring about rationalisation of land and improve the urban form. Non residential plot users will have to contribute proportionate to their land holding.
Residents will be encouraged to take up upgradation within a period of 3 years through a system of incentives and SRA / Government facilitation. For example, if a slum dweller or a group of slum dwellers upgrade/ reconstruct their homes within a period of 3 years, they would benefit from an additional free FSI (without an increase in density) as well as receive monetary assistance facilitated by SRA / Government. Between period of 3 to 5 years, the slum dwellers would still benefit from the in incentive FSI but may not be able to receive any monetary assistance facilitated by SRA / Government. Beyond a period of 5 years, the SRA /
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 94
Government would take up the upgradation project, and the slum dwellers will not benefit from any additional FSI. The Government will draw out the terms and conditions so that it can recover the cost of construction.
It will be required of slum dwellers/users to give up land for services and infrastructure upgradation. Loss of such land FSI can be consumed on the balance plot / amalgamated plot. In cases where the land requirement for trunk infrastructure is high granting TDR can be considered. In such cases the SRA on recommendation of Ward-level Slum Upgradation Committee will grant TDR.
Implementation phases
Successful upgradation shall be expedited subject to time bound implementation for
a) Delineation of Slums areas as suggested in ELU of Development Plan for Mumbai. These slum boundaries can be subjected to alterations and change by SRA on detailed survey. b) Carrying out surveys of land use, demographic, social and household samples; c) Architect Urban Planners with relevant track record to be empaneled by the SRA; d) Slum dwellers, mandal / society /wadi / nagar to appoint their Architect Urban Planner; e) Appointed Architect Urban Planner to draw up a Slum Upgradation Layout Plan in collaboration with the slum dwellers within a year, to incorporate their needs while conforming to the Special DCR guidelines; f) Laying of Trunk infrastructure through existing utilities and services agencies, local authority and facilitated by government g) Taking up upgradation by Slum Dweller immediately upon receiving approval from the Slum Upgradation Ward-level Committee; h) SRA / Government to step in and carry our upgradation if the slum dweller fails to do so within a stipulated time period of five years with a cost recovery mechanism. Recommended timeframes
Timeline for Implementation of Plan Number of months 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Formation of Ward Level Slum Upgradation Committee 6
Empanelment of Architect Urban Planner 3
Appointment of Architect Urban Planner for preparation of plans 3
Preparation of Upgradation Layout plan for nagar/wadi/mandal 10 Publication of Plan and suggestion/objection. Notification of 6 Plan
Building permission 2
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 95
Transitional Arrangement
SRA Projects, which have taken Letter of Intent (LOI) in the three preceding years (before adoption of proposed model) and have not proceeded with Commencement Certificate for the whole project SRA shall proceed to cancel such LOI and people will have the choice to proceed with their slum upgradation projects.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 96
Annexure – II
Revised Draft Development Plan 2034 Team 1 Shri. More V.R. ….. Dy. Chief Engineer (D.P.) I 2 Shri. Daftardar H.C. ….. Town Planning Officer
D.C.R. Team
1 Shri. Kandalkar C.H. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) D.C.R. 2 Shri. Bhat S.V. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) D.C.R. 3 Shri. Arvikar S.V. ….. Asstt. Engineer (D.P.) D.C.R. 4 Shri. Shah L.K. ….. Asstt. Engineer (D.P.) D.C.R.
Planning Team
1 Shri. Daftardar H.C. ….. Dy. Ch. Planner (A.P.) i/c (Team Leader) 2 Smt. Bhatte A.S. ….. Dy. M.A. 3 Shri. Gandhi V.B. ….. Urban Planner 4 Shri. Khsirsagar A.D. ….. Urban Planner - 5 Smt. Sahare V.S. ….. Urban Planner -
Co-ordinators
1 Shri. Kubal M.S. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) Rev. 2 Shri. Sachdeo H.B. ….. Asstt. Engineer (D.P.) Rev.
Development Plan Department
1 Shri. Mulay M.G. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) W.S. (P&R) 2 Shri. Patil V.E. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) E.S. 3 Shri. Patgaonkar R.G. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) City 4 Shri Dalvi Y.S. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) City 5 Shri Shendge A.N. ….. Executive Engineer (D.P.) W.S. (H&K) 6 Shri. Narkhede ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) A, B, C, D, E 7 Shri. Bhoir N.N. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) E, G/S, G/N, F/S, F/N 8 Shri. Mahajan R.V. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) L & N 9 Shri. Jadhav R. A. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) M/E & M/W 10 Shri. Satav A.M. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) S & T 11 Shri. Nemane S.V. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) H/E, H/W & K/W
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 97
12 Shri. Sachdeo H.B. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) K/E 13 Shri. Chimane A.K. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) P/N & P/S Shri. Khare ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) R/S 14 Shri. Nirmal S.R. ….. Asstt. Eng. (D.P.) R/N & G.I.S. 15 Shri. Shidunkar M.H. ….. Sr. Architect (DP) 16 Smt. Narvekar S.V. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) F/N, G/S 17 Shri. Bari K.D. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) F/N 18 Smt. Suryavanshi S.U. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) A, B & C 19 Shri. Sonavane V.R. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) E 20 Shri. Dhadke U.B. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) F/South 21 Shri. Jagtap P.H ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) L 22 Shri. Sawalkar P.A. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) M/W 23 Shri. Pol S.J. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) M/W & T 24 Shri. Nandekar M.R. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) M/E 25 Shri. Jadhav V.P. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) N 26 Shri. Godbole C.B. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) N 27 Shri. Bapat G.V. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) K/E 28 Smt. Bharate S.M. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) K/E 29 Shri. Kaware P.H. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) K/W 30 Shri. Wadalkar S.U. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) K/W 31 Shri. Dudhbhate S.S. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) H/E 32 Shri. Kamble Danial B. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) H/W 33 Shri. Parab ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) P/N 34 Shri. Zantye J.R. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) P/N 35 Shri. Deshmane A.B. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) P/S 36 Shri. Kabare S.S. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) R/C 37 Shri. Nagare S.D. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) R/S 38 Shri. Salvi P.V. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) R/N 39 Smt .Kolvankar P.P. ….. Sub Engineer (D.P.) R/N
Town Planning Section
1 Shri. Patgaonkar R.G. ….. Executive Engineer (T.P.) 2 Shri. Jadhav R.A. ….. Asstt. Eng. (T.P.) 3 Shri.Godse P.S. ….. Sub Engineer (T.P.)
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 98
Sub Engineers / Architects deputed as Urban Planners for Ground Survey 1 Smt. Merchant Prachi ….. Sr. Urban Planner & Team Leader 2 Smt. Arsiwala Munira ….. A Ward Planner 3 Smt. Rachha Darshana ….. B & C Ward Planner 4 Smt. Bapaye Priti ….. D Ward Planner 5 Shri. Sayan Acharjee ….. E Ward Planner 6 Shri. Keni Niraj ….. D Ward Planner 7 Shri. Badgujar Kiran ….. F/N Ward Planner 8 Shri. Mendhe Sachin ….. G/S Ward Planner 9 Shri. Khaire Hemant ….. G/N Ward Planner 10 Smt. Sarode Deepali ….. H/E Ward Planner 11 Smt. Kaul Himani ….. H/W Ward Planner 12 Smt. Irani Farha ….. K/E Ward Planner 13 Smt. Bodke Anamika ….. K/W Ward Planner 14 Shri. Hardik Sankhe ….. P/S Ward Planner 15 Shri. Doctor Pratik ….. P/N Ward Planner 16 Shri. Vedpathak Mayur ….. R/S Ward Planner 17 Shri. Patil Santosh ….. R/C Ward Planner 18 Shri. Shet Ganesh ….. R/N Ward Planner 19 Shri. Lakras Vishal ….. L Ward Planner 20 Smt. Rohan Salunke ….. M/E Ward Planner 21 Shri. Gawande Dinesh ….. M/W Ward Planner 22 Smt. Valecha Sonal ….. N Ward Planner 23 Shri. Jeurkar Manoj ….. S Ward Planner 24 Smt. Kulkarni Neha ….. T Ward Planner 25 Smt. Ansu Alexander ….. Co-ordinator
G.I.S. Team
1 Dr. Khandke Abhijit ….. All India Institute of Local Self Government 2 Smt. Pragati Singh ….. All India Institute of Local Self Government 3 Shri. Nangare Santosh ….. All India Institute of Local Self Government 4 Shri. Harsule Yogendra ….. All India Institute of Local Self Government
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN – 2034 FOR GREATER MUMBAI 99