Urban News

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Urban Planning

SWD project: civic body receives last payment from Centre

Print PDF

The Hindu                 07.06.2013

SWD project: civic body receives last payment from Centre

Staff Reporter

The Coimbatore Corporation received Rs. 26 crore from the Government of India – the last instalment of funds it had to release to the urban local body for implementing the storm water drain (SWD) project.

The Corporation is implementing the SWD and a few other projects with funds from the Government under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission scheme. According to sources, the Government released the funds in New Delhi after conducting a meeting to review the progress of works. For release of funds, the urban local body ought to have utilised 75 per cent of the fund released in the earlier instalment. The Government, however, contributes only 50 per cent of the total project cost of Rs. 180 crore. The State Government contributes 20 per cent and the Coimbatore Corporation 30 per cent. The State Government would release its share of the remaining fund along with the Central Government’s, the sources said and added that the State Government would release Rs. 9.85 crore. The Corporation had divided the SWD project into seven packages to implement the scheme in the old Corporation area of 60 wards. Of the seven packages it had completed the fifth package, which was executed by SEW Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad. The project involved constructing drain for 83.59 km and 340 culverts at a cost of Rs. 19.06 crore.

The civic body’s objective is to collect the run off water from roads and take it through the drain to the nearest natural drain – Sanganoor Pallam, Karupparayan Odai, etc. The water will finally reach River Noyyal. The Corporation started the SWD work in September-October 2010 with a mandate to the contract-companies to complete the work between 12 and 20 months depending upon the drain length. In executing the project, the Corporation had to face opposition from residents who did not want trees to be felled. The civic body agreed with the residents’ views and bypassed the tree trunks. The Corporation would complete the work by July 2013, the sources added.

 

‘Rs.490 cr. needed for second phase of UG drainage scheme’

Print PDF

The Hindu               28.05.2013

‘Rs.490 cr. needed for second phase of UG drainage scheme’

Special Correspondent

The Corporation may require an additional amount of Rs. 490 crore to complete the second phase of the underground drainage project, after having spent around Rs. 52 crore for the first phase a few years ago, an estimate prepared by a Bangalore-based consultant firm has said.

The first phase of the underground drainage programme was executed by the Corporation under the National River Water Conservation Programme, after it was found that the Tamirabharani was being increasingly polluted with drainage from houses and commercial establishments everyday.

However, only 20,403 houses and business establishments of the 1, 36, 647 entities in the civic body were covered in the first phase. Four drainage pumping stations and one sewage treatment plant were set up and pipes were laid for about 187 km out of the 963.54 km of road that comes under the Corporation. In other words, only 10 of the 55 wards were fully covered while another 22 wards were partially covered under the plan.

To bring the remaining areas under the underground drainage system, the Corporation planned to start the second phase of the work and roped in Bangalore-based Infra En Consulting Private Limited, to prepare the project report. “As per the report, the Corporation requires Rs. 490 crore to complete the second phase by laying pipelines for about 776.54 km to carry the drainage to Ramaiyanpatti in a scientific manner,” a senior official said.

Since the amount required for implementing the second phase of the programme is huge, the Corporation has decided to approach the Central and the State Governments for funding this infrastructure development scheme, which will help conserve the Tamirabharani from further pollution.

“Moreover, we’ve planned to approach the Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Town (UIDSSMT) so that the scheme can be completed within the stipulated period without any hitches,” the official added.

 

Remove seal on retail outlet: HC

Print PDF

The Hindu                 24.05.2013

Remove seal on retail outlet: HC

Staff Reporter

: The Madras High Court bench here has directed the Madurai Local Planning Authority (LPA) to remove the seal on a private retail outlet in Madurai.

The LPA had sealed the multi-storied Big Bazaar outlet here for not having obtained approval to construct the building. N.K. Ashok, the deputy manager of Future Value Retail Limited, filed the writ petition at the court stating the building that was sealed was owned by Jeyam Velmurugan Associates. They had obtained approval for the building plan from the Madurai City Municipal Corporation in 2008, the petitioner claimed.

Based on the directions of the court, Collector Anshul Mishra filed a counter-affidavit in which he said that the commissioner of the Madurai City Municipal Corporation had granted permission to construct buildings between 2006 and 2010 ‘beyond the powers delegated to him’.

The commissioner had also signed on behalf of the member-secretary of Madurai Local Planning Authority without any authorisation, he said.

“As per the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 there is a parameter to approve multi-storeyed buildings. As per the Act, there are major violations in this building”, the Collector said justifying the act of sealing the retail outlet.

“The petitioner had not responded to the notices served on them. Therefore, the plan approval was rejected and the petitioner directed to obtain a fresh plan approval”, he further said.

A division bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and R. Mala, on Wednesday, directed the LPA to remove the seal and allow the petitioner to use the building. However, the judges directed the petitioner not to put up additional construction in the building.

However, judges directed the petitioner not to put up additional construction.

 


Page 18 of 101