NHB Conference Plan Sanctions for Affordable Housing PPP Projects Ramesh Ramanathan Chairman...
Transcript of NHB Conference Plan Sanctions for Affordable Housing PPP Projects Ramesh Ramanathan Chairman...
NHB Conference
Plan Sanctions
for
Affordable Housing PPP Projects
Ramesh RamanathanChairman
Janaadhar Constructions
About Janaadhar Constructions (P) Ltd.
Janaadhar Constructions Pvt. Ltd. is a for-profit affordable housing development company, focused on bringing well-designed, quality homes for the urban under-served LIG population.
The majority stake in Janaadhar is held in a Section 25 not-for-profit company Janalakshmi Social Services (see below)
About Janalakshmi
Janalakshmi (literal translation, ‘People’s Wealth’), is a ‘social business’. It embraces market principles while pursuing a social objective. To accomplish this, Janalakshmi has been designed
in a 2-tier structure: for-profit operating companies for investors; and a (Section 25) not-for-profit holding company called Janalakshmi Social Services - in which promoter stakes are held.
Funds in Janalakshmi Social Services can only be used to address social issues. This 2-tier structure addresses one of the key criticisms about the social business sector that has arisen in India - about promoters generating wealth from the success of their initiatives. In Janalakshmi’s case, while investors can get the returns that they deserve for putting up capital, all promoter
stakes are held in the Section 25 company, thereby ensuring that there is no personal enrichment for promoters.
Contents
• Background and Context
• RAY and its implications
• Bangalore Case Study
• Challenges in Plan Sanctions for Affordable Housing
• Streamlining Plan Sanctions for Affordable Housing PPP
• What it can look like
• Benefits of Affordable Housing Plan Sanction Process
• Suggested next steps
Bangalore Case Study – Agencies and Statutes
Level Agency
National level MoEF
State level KSPCB
BIAAPA
Fire Department
Para-statals BMRDA, BDA
BESCOM
BWSSB
City Level BBMP
Relevant Statutes
National Building Code of India 2005
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961
Karnataka Municipal Corporations’ Act
BDA Act
Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority Act 1985
Environment (Protection) Act 1986
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981
Karnataka Fire Department Statutes
Agencies involved in plan sanction stages
BMRDA Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development AuthorityMoEF Ministry of Environment and ForestsKSPCB Karnataka State Pollution Control BoardBESCOM Bangalore Electricity CompanyBWSSB Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage BoardBIAAPA Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority
AH Developer [scheme preparation &plan submission]
MoEF and KSPCB: [plan evaluation and approval]
BMRDA /MoEF/KSPCB
Bangalore Case Study – Timeline of sanction events
Apr ’09 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan ‘10 Feb
Plan Version: A B C DE F G A B C
Plan Version: A B C
95 days 94 days 120 days
Note: These steps begin AFTER land acquisition has taken place – an independent process that takes anywhere between 12 – 24 months
Bangalore Case Study – Details of activities
Submittal Date RemarksMeeting between client/architect on project brief
09-Apr-09
Final Scheme Presentation to Client 30-Apr-09 40 days required for preparing sanction drawings
Development Plans Submitted to BMRDA: Version-A
08-Jun-09Phase-01,02 - S+G+3 and Phase 3-B+G+8 Commercial Block (Area of 50,000 Sft) Facing Road
Version-B 07-Aug-09S+G+3 floors only, Outline of Commercial revised (area reduced 50,000 Sft T0 15,000 Sft = 3%). Unclear Guidelines.
Version-C 13-Aug-09S+G+3, Distribution of Commercial space in 2 location, demarcation of visitors car parking. Arbitrary Decision
Version-D 15-Sep-09S+G+3 floors, Area Calculation format revised for CA, Open spaces etc. No Standard Format Available.
Version-E 25-Sep-09S+G+3 floors, Area Calculation format revised for CA, Open spaces etc.,
Version-F 05-Oct-09Nala profile as per tippany. Refer back to village records. Civic amenities, green open spaces relinquished to BMRDA on October 3rd 2009. 25% of site?
Version-G 23-Nov-09 Revision of Visitors car park location. Arbitrary Decision
Version-H (Submitted with commercial space separation)
25-Nov-09Commercial space separated from Residential and earmarked as landscape area. BMRDA denied accepting this earlier.
Signed copy development plan received from client
22-Dec-09
Submittal of Detailed Floor plans to BMRDA
Version-A 31-Dec-09 Floor plan revised as per approved Development Plan
Version-B 28-Jan-10 Area statement revision. No Standard Format Available.
Version-C 15-Feb-10Demarcation of 2 wheeler parking in Stilt floor, Section/Elevations for all Blocks. Not required as per by-law
Signed copy of floor plans received from client 02-Mar-10 Plan sanctioned only for G+ 3 floors
Challenges in Affordable Housing Plan Sanction• Complexity of rules
Faulty urban planning and by-laws, restricting FAR and building height
• Ambiguity in interpretation Ill-defined zoning laws, resulting in fragmented
design/approval process and sub-optimal outcomes
• Time delays Multiple agencies/iterations/ambiguity causes enormous
delays
• Uncertainty Overall uncertainty in the process has two consequences
– Reduced risk-appetite from Developers to enter this space– Increased desired returns to offset uncertainties
Making PPP in Affordable Housing a reality
• Improve access to clear land for developers Crucial element to address
Not discussed in this presentation
• Streamline the Plan Sanction Process Strategic Issues
Tactical Issues
Operational Issues
• Simplify access to subsidies JNNURM/RAY subsidies on capital/interest not easily
available to private developers
Not discussed in this presentation
Streamlining Plan Sanctions – Affordable Housing Development Plan (AHDP) Sanctions• Strategic Issues
Densification– Community perspective– Min/Max persons/hectare standards based on location/
context/climate– Diversity of unit types– Allow for incremental growth– Open / Built space ratio based spatial / temporal standards
Integrated Use– Land use should permit Live/Work/Play/School/Leisure
automatically– Community needs oriented mixed use models– Create participative communities
Sustainable Development– Low or zero carbon developments– Passive & Active climate oriented design to optimize energy
consumption– Reduce, Reuse, Recycle philosophy in the design– Meet Griha standards
Streamlining Plan Sanctions – Affordable Housing Development Plan (AHDP) Sanctions
• Tactical Issues
Single Window Approvals for Plan Submissions
Simplified access to subsidies and other benefits (e.g. Carbon credits etc)
Examine self-certification
• Operational Issues
Rationalise building regulations like set-backs/parking/road-width etc to reflect EWS/LIG requirements
Establish SLAs for turnaround times for sanction processes
What it can look like – Total Cycle time of 18 months
• 2-Step AHDP Sanction Process
Step 1: Qualifying criteria for AHDP window– Project details/Financials/Construction details etc
Step 2: AHDP Sanction window– Layout Plan with unit sizes etc.– Plan for Civic Services
Month1 Month2 Month3 Month4 Month5 Month6…………… Month 15 – 18
AHDP* Plan Sanctions completed
Land Acquisition completed
Construction Phase
Delivery completed
• Benefits of the proposed AHDP Sanction process
Removes Uncertainty
Reduced Timelines
Improves Economics and Market Functioning
WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN
– For Affordable Housing Clients
– For the AH PPP Developer
– For Union/State/Local governments
What it can look like – Total Cycle time of 18 months
Thank You!
Background and Context –Rajiv Awas Yojana
• Support provided by MoHUPA under RAY
Financial support
– Existing slum-based support
– Surveys/maps/slum-free city plans/training
– Part 2 State plans for preventing new slums
Capacity building/tools
• Admissible components
Integrated development of existing slums
Development/improvement/maintenance of services
Convergence with other schemes and connectivity infrastructure
Creation of affordable housing stock, including rental housing
Bangalore Case Study – Environmental Clearances
Submittal of plans & documents to MOEF Date Remarks
Version-A06-Jun-
09 Phase -01, 2 G+3 floors Phase -03 B+G+8
Version-B09-Sep-
09load calculation, Design brief, UG Sump, OHT, Water balancing
Version-C12-Dec-
09Central Ground Water Board-Water Availability, NOC from Deputy Commissioner
Final acceptance copy received from MOEF/KSPCB Mar '10
Environmental Clearance from MoEF required if
1.Project involves developing more than 20,000 sq. metres2.Project serves 1,000 persons or above 3.Discharges sewage of 50,000 litres per day or above4.With an investment of Rs. 50 crores or above
Bangalore Case Study – Timeline of sanction events
Step Statute(s) Agency Time
Scheme Presentation to Client by Architect
- AH Developer
1 Month (April 2009)
Submittal of Plans to Airport Authority
BMRDA Norms, BIAAPA Norms
BIAAPA May – June 2009(1.5 months)
Submittal of Plans to Fire Department
Fire Department Rules, NBC Rules
Fire Dept.
June – August 2009(3 months)
Submittal of Plans to KSPCB, MoEF for Env. Clearance
Environment (Protection) Act 1986)
KSPCB, MoEF
June– March 2010(8 Months)
Submittal of Plans to BESCOM, BSNL
BESCOM, BSNL
August- September 2009 (1 month)
Submittal of Plans to BWSSB BWSSB
Submittal of Plans to BMRDA for Sanction
BMRDA Act 1985, National Building Code of India 2005
BMRDA June 2009 – March 2010