Urban News

The Hindu 19.09.2009

Multi-storeyed buildings zones in other cities to be studied

Special Correspondent

Photo: S. Siva Saravanan

HIGH-RISE ZONE?: D.B. Road is one of the main roads in the city listed for categorisation as multi-storeyed buildings area. –

Coimbatore: The Coimbatore Corporation will study the system adopted in other cities in the State for declaring multi-storeyed building zones before implementing it in Coimbatore city.

This decision was taken at an all-party meeting held at the Corporation on Thursday.

Among other proposals, the meeting was convened to also discuss the one for declaring areas along more than 60 roads in the city as MSB zones.

This proposal was placed in the Corporation Council on September 11 for its approval.

But, it ran into resistance from a section of the councillors, chiefly those belonging to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and those in the Town Planning Committee.

The members wanted to know why the proposal was placed in the Council directly without routing it through the committee.

Allegation

When they alleged attempts to get approval for the proposal without discussions involving elected representatives, Corporation Commissioner Anshul Mishra explained that it was placed in the Council only to enable all the councillors to take part in the discussion on the proposal.

Mr. Mishra also pointed out that this was not the final list and that the suggestions of the councillors could be considered.

This was why the proposal was placed in the Council, he said.

The Commissioner also said that a survey could be done to identify more places that could be added to the list.

The Commissioner of Town Planning in Chennai had in a letter to the Commissioner said that all areas along 60 ft roads could be declared MSB zones.

This decision was taken following a representation from the Coimbatore Property Developers’ Association.

The Commissioner of Town Planning had asked the Corporation Commissioner to submit a list of such roads. Accordingly, the Corporation identified 64 roads. These included key roads such as Tiruchi Road, Cross-Cut Road, D.B. Road, 100 Feet Road, Thadagam Road, Perur Road, Sivananda Colony Road, Dr. Nanjappa Road, State Bank Road, V.K.K. Menon Road, Raja Street and Pollachi Road.

Move welcomed

The Residents’ Awareness Association of Coimbatore (RAAC) has welcomed the Government decision to permit multi-storeyed buildings zones.

Honorary secretary of RAAC R.R. Balasundaram said that since its inception, RAAC had been requesting the Corporation, Local Planning Authority and the State Government to permit multi-storeyed buildings only along roads that were 40 ft wide and above.

Draft rules

“In this regard, we have prepared a detailed draft building rules and submitted these to the Government. But, till date no steps have been taken on the revised DCR and Master Plan for Coimbatore, which are a need of the hour,” he said.

“We welcome this announcement and request the [Corporation] Commissioner not to permit construction on narrow roads. We also request the Government to publish the new DCR and Master Plan for Coimbatore after getting public opinion,” Mr. Balasundaram said.

The Hindu 19.09.2009

Bench upholds flyover notification

Special Correspondent

Photo: S.R. Raghunathan

Work on the flyover is likely to be expedited. —

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Friday allowed appeals by the Chennai Corporation and the State, challenging a single Judge’s order quashing a notification relating to the construction of a flyover at the junction of Cenotaph Road and Turnbulls Road on the ground that there was no justification for invoking the urgency clause.

In its order, a Bench, comprising Chief Justice H.L. Gokhale and Justice D. Murugesan, said that the acquisition of land was only to an extent of 18,225 sq. feet. Only the compound walls of the buildings belonging to landowners, two pump rooms, a generator room, a ground floor, dining hall of a hotel, a sweet shop, and a ground floor shop constructed without authorisation were to be demolished.

The service lanes were absolutely necessary for the free flow of traffic once the flyover was constructed. These parallel service lanes would be indispensable to the neighbours for access to their premises, and they could not have any grievance over the notification of the urgency clause. In that context, the dispensation of enquiry could not be found fault with.

The Bench said that in its opinion, even if there were certain non-compliance of the guidelines, the court should desist from interfering with the acquisition proceedings initiated for a definite public purpose. Consequently, the Bench said it should necessarily uphold the notification.

The government had issued a notification under the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring land for the flyover. It had invoked the urgency clause. By the same notification, it had also dispensed with the enquiry.

These were challenged. A single Judge, in an order issued in May this year, had quashed the notification on the ground that there was no justification for invoking the urgency clause.