Minutes of the 10th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee Held on 03/05/07

What the minutes cover

The minutes of the tenth Monitoring Committee meeting record decisions and discussions concerning planning deviations, unauthorised buildings and enforcement in the Chennai Metropolitan Area. They also confirm the minutes of the ninth meeting, subject to two changes that may be relevant when checking approved floor area and facilities in a stilt floor.

Changes to the previous meeting minutes

The Monitoring Committee replaced two entries in the minutes of the ninth meeting:

• The FSI tolerance limit was recorded as 0.03 FSI or 50 square metres of floor area, whichever is higher, over and above the permissible FSI.
• A panel board or electrical room, generator room, pump room and water treatment plant room may be permitted in a stilt floor without being counted as floor, provided parking and the driveway are not affected.

The minutes do not set out an application process for these items.

Enforcement of unauthorised construction

The Monitoring Committee reviewed action connected with the High Court order dated 23 August 2006. CMDA supplied a list of officials who worked in its enforcement unit from January 1998 to March 2007, and the Commissioner of Chennai Corporation agreed to provide a similar list.

The Monitoring Committee asked CMDA to examine files for a few totally unauthorised buildings as case studies. The purpose was to identify officers responsible for enforcement failures, study their roles and degree of responsibility, and place the findings before the Monitoring Committee.

The enforcement presentation recorded that:

• Enforcement powers, including demolition action, had been delegated to the Corporation of Chennai through A.P.Ms.No.2 dated 5 January 1979, and to other local bodies in the Chennai Metropolitan Area through A.P.Ms.No.3 dated 5 January 1979.
• Security deposits for planning permission for multi-storied buildings were described as refundable only when construction follows the approved plan.
• CMDA considered existing enforcement resources and legal provisions inadequate for effectively dealing with unauthorised construction.
• The Monitoring Committee considered that local bodies should have the primary enforcement role and that a more effective system was needed to prevent future deviations.

Demolition and pending court cases

The Commissioner of Police agreed to provide police protection for identified demolitions if informed in advance of the exact demolition date. For affected parties claiming that their buildings were completed in 1999, the Monitoring Committee agreed to examine any evidence they submitted and give its opinion.