<p>The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, which recently received the Governor’s assent, has sparked serious concerns regarding relaxing established setback norms. These mandatory open spaces around a building are based on site dimensions. </p><p>Under the new law, residential buildings can avail up to 50 per cent reduction in setback requirements, and commercial buildings up to 25 per cent. Critics rightly point out that such relaxation could severely compromise the privacy and safety of the neighbouring buildings while stifling ventilation. </p><p>The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) attempts to downplay these concerns, claiming this is merely an ‘enabling provision’ and will remain dormant until the Supreme Court vacates the stay on the Akrama Sakrama Act – a controversial regularisation scheme for unauthorised structures that the court put on hold. </p>.BBMP to be dissolved as Karnataka Governor signs Greater Bengaluru Governance Act.<p>They assert that a similar provision existed in the BBMP Act of 2020 too but was not enforced. However, these assurances ring hollow against the backdrop of BBMP’s surveys indicating widespread violations of existing building plans. Outgoing Chief Commissioner Tushar Girinath’s acknowledgment that the court has stayed the Act, but not explicitly struck down the setback provision offers little comfort; instead, it fuels anxieties about potential future implementation.</p><p>Legal experts have flagged the inherent dangers of including such a clause while the Akrama Sakrama Act remains under judicial scrutiny. This premature inclusion could inadvertently incentivise builders to flout norms, anticipating future regularisation. The extension of the cut-off year for regularisation from 2014 to 2024 further deepens suspicion that this exercise serves less to aid small property owners and more to provide a shield for large-scale violations by influential developers – a recurring issue in Bengaluru. While compounding minor deviations on small plots is understandable, regularising gross violations undermines urban governance and the rule of law.</p><p>At the heart of the crisis is the absence of an updated and relevant Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP). Bengaluru continues to rely on an outdated 2015 plan, resulting in a piecemeal and reactive development trajectory. The long-promised new CDP remains elusive. This shortsighted approach of planning for tomorrow with yesterday’s blueprint starkly contradicts the government’s vision of Bengaluru as a futuristic city. The immediate release of a new CDP is crucial to prevent further deterioration of urban planning and the city itself. More importantly, the government must crack down on violations, not enable them. Bengaluru is already struggling under the weight of unplanned growth and cannot afford policies that favour illegal constructions. Only through stringent enforcement and forward-thinking can Bengaluru hope to navigate its burgeoning population and provide a better quality of life.</p>
<p>The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, which recently received the Governor’s assent, has sparked serious concerns regarding relaxing established setback norms. These mandatory open spaces around a building are based on site dimensions. </p><p>Under the new law, residential buildings can avail up to 50 per cent reduction in setback requirements, and commercial buildings up to 25 per cent. Critics rightly point out that such relaxation could severely compromise the privacy and safety of the neighbouring buildings while stifling ventilation. </p><p>The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) attempts to downplay these concerns, claiming this is merely an ‘enabling provision’ and will remain dormant until the Supreme Court vacates the stay on the Akrama Sakrama Act – a controversial regularisation scheme for unauthorised structures that the court put on hold. </p>.BBMP to be dissolved as Karnataka Governor signs Greater Bengaluru Governance Act.<p>They assert that a similar provision existed in the BBMP Act of 2020 too but was not enforced. However, these assurances ring hollow against the backdrop of BBMP’s surveys indicating widespread violations of existing building plans. Outgoing Chief Commissioner Tushar Girinath’s acknowledgment that the court has stayed the Act, but not explicitly struck down the setback provision offers little comfort; instead, it fuels anxieties about potential future implementation.</p><p>Legal experts have flagged the inherent dangers of including such a clause while the Akrama Sakrama Act remains under judicial scrutiny. This premature inclusion could inadvertently incentivise builders to flout norms, anticipating future regularisation. The extension of the cut-off year for regularisation from 2014 to 2024 further deepens suspicion that this exercise serves less to aid small property owners and more to provide a shield for large-scale violations by influential developers – a recurring issue in Bengaluru. While compounding minor deviations on small plots is understandable, regularising gross violations undermines urban governance and the rule of law.</p><p>At the heart of the crisis is the absence of an updated and relevant Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP). Bengaluru continues to rely on an outdated 2015 plan, resulting in a piecemeal and reactive development trajectory. The long-promised new CDP remains elusive. This shortsighted approach of planning for tomorrow with yesterday’s blueprint starkly contradicts the government’s vision of Bengaluru as a futuristic city. The immediate release of a new CDP is crucial to prevent further deterioration of urban planning and the city itself. More importantly, the government must crack down on violations, not enable them. Bengaluru is already struggling under the weight of unplanned growth and cannot afford policies that favour illegal constructions. Only through stringent enforcement and forward-thinking can Bengaluru hope to navigate its burgeoning population and provide a better quality of life.</p>
