HOT TOPICS
SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES
BDA - Multi - Story Housing
Ravi_D - 24 July, 2010 | Bangalore | governance | BDA | BDA Layout | urban development | Media Reports | housing | FSI
Just came back from another week long Singapore trip. Every time you look at those high rise apartments, can't help wonder how Bangalore would benefit if it had its share. It would have been impossible for Singapore to be that green without them.
Finally BDA begins to think about multi-story housing said DH yesterday.
The BDA’s new proposal to construct townships of multi-storeyed apartments have received support from several administrative quarters and the agency plans to try it out in its next project, the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout.
Long overdue. If planned and executed right, these can offer cost effective alternatives and certainly improve living conditions; especially for those would otherwise purchase 20x30 sites and build 1, 2 or even 3 houses within that area. Or purchase homes in unauthorized, unplanned, and sometimes out right dangerous apartment complexes built in 30x40 or 40x60 sites.
We have some examples to look at and improve upon - KHB's Shirke in Kengeri Satellite Town is not the best but a good example to start with. Just go there and see how much open space there is for kids to play, for trees to grow and for people to mingle. And then look at our typical layouts - rows of crowded houses with 20 ft streets filled to the brim w/ cars and bikes. And kids trying to play cricket in between.
COMMENTS
Engagement
Ravi_D - 28 July, 2010 - 06:52
@SB:
From the news report, seems like the bureaucracy is in favor. And they are 'thinking' of high rises. Now w/ change in leadership and Mr. Meena being in charge, time to try talking to BDA again?
going vertical ...
silkboard - 28 July, 2010 - 05:15
Ravi, going vertical is needed,
- saves you land,
- promotes community living better than fenced 30x40 sites,
- promotes mixed-use zones better (what's mixed use in a typical BDA layout when people still have to drive to a BDA complex, or a main road?)
- Makes it easier for utility companies to supply in dense zones
- Makes it easy to plan for public transport, compared to last mile hassles or redundant routes for typical BDA layouts.
Don't know how to even engage with BDA, forget on this subject, but any other subject. Ideas have floated, like that 100 storye building at Majestic, or at the race course land, but these didn't get the quality public discussion they deserve.
30x40 layouts were a fit for 70s, not now. Lost lakes, preference for private transport, weak control on land use (and the akrama sakrama mess) is all partly a result of this layout approach.
Architecting instead of just building
idontspam - 28 July, 2010 - 05:30
Why doesnt BDA ask some architects to help build the layouts? Is including greenery & pedestrian paths along with roads within layouts such a difficult task?
Mixed use has to be sensible, if the layout is not architected properly it is very difficult to retrofit proper PT penetration later. It will definitely involve demolitions.
The new urbanization
Naveen - 28 July, 2010 - 06:05
Well planned BDA layouts were the pride of the city (they still are). It's just that we are caught up in these times with a globalized world that prefers outsourcing of services from cheaper destinations that drives urbanization, casting aside other forms of a more uniform & evenly spread growth.
This is merely confined to Asia - not Europe, not America. Wherever cheaper services with reasonably quality become available, there emerges urbanization centered around large existing metropolises since costs for providing human capital & the related infrastructure are bound to shoot up if the same level of efficiencies have to be maintained in rural setups that have practically no services to speak of - particularly in India & China & also other Asian countries, though the scale is smaller due to smaller country sizes & areas.
BDA will now have to step down on urban spread - creation of mega layouts with 20-50,000 plots is clearly not what is warranted in these times. Rather, they will need to create many zones for multi-storeyed housing within such layouts with much more focus on transport needs & other infrastructure that makes such townships self-contained. In this context, mixed use is a natural corollary that cannot be avoided.
Thats what BDA is saying now
silkboard - 28 July, 2010 - 06:37
So thats what BDA is saying Naveen. Good to see a statement at least on going Vertical. Waiting to hear whats next from Meena, the operative right now is "thinking":
Depending on its success there, the BDA will move ahead with the proposal in its future projects.According to the new BDA commissioner Bharat Lal Meena, the BDA board has been thinking of introducing vertical growth in its proposed layouts. “There is a general perspective over forming these townships in the layouts,” he said.
From http://www.deccanherald.com/content/83253/bda-plans-vertical-housing-projects.html
Vertical growth - why not?
silkboard - 25 August, 2011 - 04:39
read recently in the news that NRN Murthy suggests high FSI. High FSI would reduce corruption in real estate sector, that probably was the argument. Read in either DNA or Times of India, report was about his last day at infosys.
BDA commissioner too was quoted an year ago that he favors vertical growth in new layouts.
On the other hand, FAR / FSI has been raised near Metro routes. Has that lead to any 'densing' in the Metro route areas?
This subject of vertical growth comes to mind every time I go to those sprawling E-City campuses of some software companies. All of E-City could probably have been just 3-4 tall buildings. rest of the land could have been anything else, park, big Bus Stand, a new or preserved Lake, anything.
Wonder what is preventing BBMP/BDA from going Vertical. Is Masterplan-2015 the problem? What laws or bills does one need to amend to start Vertical growth based planning? Don't know much myself.
PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES
Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!