FSI, open space dominate discussions on new DP
By Alka Dhupkar
Town planners say extra FSI will increase built-up space but keep it expensive. Citizens point to misuse of open spaces.
The BMC’s decision invite suggestions and objections from citizens to the city’s third Development Plan (DP) saw thousands of visitors and over 140 responses come in since February 26, and discussions with officials centred mostly around Floor Space Index (FSI) and open spaces.
Those wanting a more in-depth involvement can visit the fifth floor of the main BMC building to go through their area’s DP in detail, and officials say at least 50 people are dropping in every day.
On Wednesday evening, sizeable crowds thronged the conference room where BMC’s associate planner Vishal Lakras and other officials worked with the visitors. The table was covered with maps kept in three compartments -- 62 and 74 of the eastern and western suburbs respectively and 32 of city areas.
“To understand the DP is complicated and lengthy process, so we have allotted 60 days for responses. We are getting tremendous response in every ward and at the headquarters too. Not just the common man, even architects, builders, town planning experts and social workers have been dropping in,” Lakras said.
“I am curious and excited to find out what changes have been proposed in FSI for different areas, and mainly in our area. Everyone is saying that builders will benefit from the revised FSI, but I think extra FSI should be given on merit. We need to check with other agencies like aviation and environment departments and the Navy for NOCs before finalising extra FSI,” Kurla-based Johar Mantri of Mantri Builders said.
The Shiv Sena and Congress have opposing takes on extra FSI, with Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray criticising it. City Congress president Sanjay Nirupam welcomed it saying and end to FSI control would ultimately reduce house prices. He said the Congress has formed a committee to study and submit responses to the DP in the next few days.
Architect and town planner Arvind Unii, who is also convenor of Hamara Shehar Vikas Niyojan Abhiyaan, said in his response, “Presently, there are about 4.79 lakh vacant houses in the city, which means homes are unaffordable despite there being surplus built-up space. The DP falsely assumes that just by producing more built-up space, t disparities will be addressed. Higher FSI may produce more space, but it will hardly produce more affordable space.”
Milind Mhaske, Project Officer, Praja Foundation said, “Currently, Mumbai has 1.24 sq m of open space per person. The proposed open space for Mumbai in the current DP is 2 sq m per person, which is much lower than the 6 sq m per person proposed in the 1991 DP. Urban Development Plans, Formulation & Implementation (UDPFI) guidelines recommend 10-12 sq m of open space per person. We cannot be satisfied with the current level of proposed space.”
According to urban planning consultant at Mumbai Transformation Support Unit (MTSU) Sulakshana Mahajan, “Fear of the changed proposal for open spaces and FSI should be addressed. Reading the entire 500-page report will give a complete picture, and not doing so will lead to the spread of misconceptions. Read, understand and then form your opinion about the DP.”
OBJECTIONS TO 3RD DP
» Rocks near the seashore are shown in open spaces
» National park marked on open space but accessibility issue not considered
» Restricted areas like BARC, Raj Bhavan, Navy Nagar, TIFR marked on open space
» ‘Multiple use of open space’ category has led to objections as sewage treatment plants, rainwater harvesting, electric substations are considered as open spaces
» Walking distance to schools should be calculated as time taken to walk, not the distance in km
» Space allocation should be good for pedestrians
» Land water recharge allocation should be more
» No clear social goals or objectives identified to increase livelihood
» Additional FSI and changes to open spaces may cause environmental harm
» Land use for providing optical fibres not considered for universal access to broadband
Town planners say extra FSI will increase built-up space but keep it expensive. Citizens point to misuse of open spaces.
The BMC’s decision invite suggestions and objections from citizens to the city’s third Development Plan (DP) saw thousands of visitors and over 140 responses come in since February 26, and discussions with officials centred mostly around Floor Space Index (FSI) and open spaces.
As per the civic body’s provision for debate on the DP, residents can send their responses to 27 ward offices and four Building Proposal Department offices in a sealed envelope.
Those wanting a more in-depth involvement can visit the fifth floor of the main BMC building to go through their area’s DP in detail, and officials say at least 50 people are dropping in every day.
On Wednesday evening, sizeable crowds thronged the conference room where BMC’s associate planner Vishal Lakras and other officials worked with the visitors. The table was covered with maps kept in three compartments -- 62 and 74 of the eastern and western suburbs respectively and 32 of city areas.
“To understand the DP is complicated and lengthy process, so we have allotted 60 days for responses. We are getting tremendous response in every ward and at the headquarters too. Not just the common man, even architects, builders, town planning experts and social workers have been dropping in,” Lakras said.
“I am curious and excited to find out what changes have been proposed in FSI for different areas, and mainly in our area. Everyone is saying that builders will benefit from the revised FSI, but I think extra FSI should be given on merit. We need to check with other agencies like aviation and environment departments and the Navy for NOCs before finalising extra FSI,” Kurla-based Johar Mantri of Mantri Builders said.
The Shiv Sena and Congress have opposing takes on extra FSI, with Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray criticising it. City Congress president Sanjay Nirupam welcomed it saying and end to FSI control would ultimately reduce house prices. He said the Congress has formed a committee to study and submit responses to the DP in the next few days.
Architect and town planner Arvind Unii, who is also convenor of Hamara Shehar Vikas Niyojan Abhiyaan, said in his response, “Presently, there are about 4.79 lakh vacant houses in the city, which means homes are unaffordable despite there being surplus built-up space. The DP falsely assumes that just by producing more built-up space, t disparities will be addressed. Higher FSI may produce more space, but it will hardly produce more affordable space.”
Milind Mhaske, Project Officer, Praja Foundation said, “Currently, Mumbai has 1.24 sq m of open space per person. The proposed open space for Mumbai in the current DP is 2 sq m per person, which is much lower than the 6 sq m per person proposed in the 1991 DP. Urban Development Plans, Formulation & Implementation (UDPFI) guidelines recommend 10-12 sq m of open space per person. We cannot be satisfied with the current level of proposed space.”
According to urban planning consultant at Mumbai Transformation Support Unit (MTSU) Sulakshana Mahajan, “Fear of the changed proposal for open spaces and FSI should be addressed. Reading the entire 500-page report will give a complete picture, and not doing so will lead to the spread of misconceptions. Read, understand and then form your opinion about the DP.”
OBJECTIONS TO 3RD DP
» Rocks near the seashore are shown in open spaces
» National park marked on open space but accessibility issue not considered
» Restricted areas like BARC, Raj Bhavan, Navy Nagar, TIFR marked on open space
» ‘Multiple use of open space’ category has led to objections as sewage treatment plants, rainwater harvesting, electric substations are considered as open spaces
» Walking distance to schools should be calculated as time taken to walk, not the distance in km
» Space allocation should be good for pedestrians
» Land water recharge allocation should be more
» No clear social goals or objectives identified to increase livelihood
» Additional FSI and changes to open spaces may cause environmental harm
» Land use for providing optical fibres not considered for universal access to broadband
