Naina

DRAFT INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR PARTOF NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA (NAINA)

(23 Villages in Panvel Taluka)
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LTD

SPECIAL PLANNING AUTHORITY FOR NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA
(Appointed by Government of Maharashtra under Section (40)(1)(b) of MR&TP Act 1966on 10th January 2013)
August, 2014
CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1
NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA (NAINA) ......................................................................................... 1
NEED FOR INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN (IDP) ............................................................................................................... 2
SELECTION OF IDP AREA..................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.4.1
CRITERIA FOR SELECTION..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.4.2
EXTENT OF COVERAGE IN IDP .............................................................................................................................. 2
PROCEDURE AND CONTENT OF IDP AS PER MR&TP ACT, 1966 ..................................................................................... 5
2.
EXISTING PROFILE OF IDP AREA .................................................................................................... 6
2.1
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1
LOCATION, REGIONAL SETTING AND ENVIRONMENTAREA AND LOCATION .................................................... 6
2.1.2
REGIONAL SETTING ................................................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.3
TOPOGRAPHY.......................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.4
SOIL CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.5
GEOMORPHOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................. 7
2.1.6
CLIMATE ................................................................................................................................................................... 7
DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC PROFILE.............................................................................................................................. 8
2.2.1
POPULATION GROWTH ........................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2
POPULATION STRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2.1 POPULATION DENSITY ........................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2.2 SC & ST POPULATION ............................................................................................................................................. 9
2.2.2.3 LITERACY RATE ..................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3
ECONOMIC BASE ................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3.1 MAJOR ECONOMIC ACTIVITES............................................................................................................................. 10
2.2.3.2 OCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE AND WFPR ............................................................................................................. 10
2.2.3.3 EMPLOYMENT PATTERN ...................................................................................................................................... 11
EXISTING TRANSPORT NETWORK .................................................................................................................................... 11
2.3.1
REGIONAL ROAD NETWORK ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.3.2
REGIONAL SUB-URBAN RAIL NETWORK ............................................................................................................. 12
2.3.3
LOCAL ROAD NETWORK ....................................................................................................................................... 14
2.3.4
BUS SYSTEM.......................................................................................................................................................... 15
2.3.5
LOCAL SUB-URBAN RAILWAY NETWORK ........................................................................................................... 16
2.3.6
TERMINAL FACILITIES ........................................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.7
PARKING FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................................. 16
2.3.8
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................. 16
EXISTING LAND USE ........................................................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.1
SURVEY METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.2
SCOPE OF SURVEY ............................................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.3
DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USE ............................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.4
LAND AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................... 21
2.4.5
CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................................... 21
SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................................................................ 21
2.6.1
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.................................................................................................................................... 21
2.6.2
HEALTH FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................................... 22
2.6.3
COMMERCIAL FACILITIES ..................................................................................................................................... 22
2.6.4
SOCIO-CULTURAL FACILITIES.............................................................................................................................. 23
2.6.5
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................. 23
2.6.6
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................. 23
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................................... 23
2.7.1
WATER SUPPLY ..................................................................................................................................................... 23
2.7.2
SEWERAGE ............................................................................................................................................................ 24
2.7.3
STORM WATER DRAINAGE................................................................................................................................... 25
2.7.4
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 25
2.7.5
POWER SUPPLY .................................................................................................................................................... 25
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.6
2.7
3.
ENVISIONING FUTURE ..................................................................................................................... 26
3.1
3.2
VISION FOR NAINA.............................................................................................................................................................. 26

POPULATION ESTIMATIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 26
3.2.1
METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................................................... 26
3.2.2
DISPOSITION OF CITIES........................................................................................................................................ 27
3.2.3
ESTIMATED POPULATION FOR IDP AREA ........................................................................................................... 28
4.
REQUIREMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSES ........................................................................................ 30
4.1
PLANNING NORMS.............................................................................................................................................................. 30
City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.
Draft Interim Development Plan for 23 villages in Navi Mumbai Airport Influence Notified Area (NAINA), 2014 - 2034
4.2
4.3
ESTIMATED REQUIREMENT............................................................................................................................................... 31
4.2.1
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.................................................................................................................................... 31
4.2.2
HEALTH FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................................... 31
4.2.3
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL FACILITIES .................................................................................................................... 32
4.2.4
PUBLIC UTILITIES .................................................................................................................................................. 32
4.2.5
PARKS AND PLAY GROUNDS ............................................................................................................................... 32
DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................................ 33
5.
PROPOSED TRANSPORT NETWORK PLAN ................................................................................. 34
5.1
PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK...................................................................................................................... 34

5.1.1
CTS RECOMMENDED PROPOSALS IN NAINA AND KNT ..................................................................................... 34
5.1.2
ADDITIONAL URBAN TRANSPORT NETWORK WITHIN THE IDP AREA.............................................................. 35
5.1.3
PROPOSED ROWS FOR TRANSPORT AND ROAD CORRIDORS........................................................................ 36
5.1.4
METRO LINK EXTENSION TO IDP AREA .............................................................................................................. 38
6.
PROPOSED LAND USE .................................................................................................................... 39
6.1
6.4
KEY CONSIDERATIONS OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................................................. 39

6.1.1
PROPOSED ENTRY/EXIT POINTS TO THE IDP AREA.......................................................................................... 39
6.1.2
PROTECTION OF NATURAL AREAS ..................................................................................................................... 39
6.1.3
LEVERAGING EXISTING AND PROPOSED ECONOMIC NODES IN AND AROUND THE IDP AREA ................... 40
6.1.4
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) ........................................................................................................ 40
6.1.5
INTEGRATION OF GAOTHANS & EXPANSION AREAS ........................................................................................ 41
LOCATION OF GROWTH CENTRES ................................................................................................................................... 41
BROAD AND FLEXIBLE ZONING ......................................................................................................................................... 41
6.3.1
FLEXIBLE ZONING ................................................................................................................................................. 41
6.3.2
PROPOSED LAND USE .......................................................................................................................................... 42
SECTORS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 43
7.
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE........................................................................................................ 45
7.1
7.2
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 45
WATER SUPPLY .................................................................................................................................................................. 45
7.2.1
GROSS WATER DEMAND ...................................................................................................................................... 45
7.2.2
SOURCES OF WATER ........................................................................................................................................... 46
7.2.3
PROPOSED SOURCES OF WATER....................................................................................................................... 47
SEWERAGE COLLECTION, TREATMENT AND RECYCLING SYSTEM ............................................................................. 47
7.3.1
ESTIMATION OF SEWAGE GENERATION ............................................................................................................ 47
7.3.2
SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM .......................................................................................................................... 48
7.3.2.1 SEWAGE / WASTE WATER TREATMENT AND TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT ................................................ 48
7.3.2.2 REUSE OF TERTIARY TREATED WATER ............................................................................................................. 48
RIVERS AND ROAD SIDE DRAINAGE................................................................................................................................. 49
7.4.1
ROAD SIDE DRAINAGE .......................................................................................................................................... 50
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................................................ 51
7.5.1
PROJECTED QUANTITY OF SOLID WASTE GENERATION ................................................................................. 51
7.5.2
SOURCES OF SOLID WASTE GENERATION ........................................................................................................ 51
7.4.2
COMPOSITION OF WASTE .................................................................................................................................... 51
7.4.3
STAGES OF WASTE MANAGEMENT..................................................................................................................... 51
7.4.4
WASTE COLLECTION ............................................................................................................................................ 51
7.4.5
SEGREGATION OF WASTE AT SOURCE .............................................................................................................. 52
7.4.6
TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................................................ 52
7.4.7
TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ................................................................................................................................ 53
7.4.8
LAND REQUIRED FOR DISPOSAL SITE ................................................................................................................ 53
7.4.9
BIOMEDICAL WASTE ............................................................................................................................................. 54
7.4.10 HAZAORDOUS WASTE .......................................................................................................................................... 55
POWER SUPPLY REQUIREMENT....................................................................................................................................... 55
7.4.10.1 DEMAND ESTIMATION........................................................................................................................................... 55
6.2
6.3
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.1
8.
LAND DEVELOPMENT MODEL NAINA SCHEME ....................................................................... 57
8.1
8.2
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 57
APPROACHES FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 57
8.2.1
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................. 58
EXISTING REAL ESTATE SCENARIO ................................................................................................................................. 58
PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT MODEL FOR NAINA .................................................................................................. 58
8.3
8.4
ii
8.4.1
8.4.2
8.4.3
8.4.4
8.4.5
PROVISION OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE: ........................................................................................................ 59

LOW INCOME HOUSING ........................................................................................................................................ 60
OPTIONS FOR NON-PARTICIPATING LAND OWNERS ........................................................................................ 60
INTEGRATING EXISTING POLICIES ...................................................................................................................... 60
DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR GROWTH CENTRE LANDS .......................................................................... 60
9.
SALIENT FEATURES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND PROMOTION REGULATIONS ....... 62
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 62
OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................................................................... 62
FEES, CHARGES AND PREMIUMS ..................................................................................................................................... 63
OTHER SALIENT FEATURES .............................................................................................................................................. 63
10.
BLOCK ESTIMATES & FINANCING DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... 64
10.1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 64
10.1.1 COST OF DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 64
REVENUE SOURCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 66
10.2.1 REVENUE FROM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE......................................................................................................... 66
10.2.2 REVENUE FROM OTHER SOURCES .................................................................................................................... 66
10.2.3 SALE OF LAND IN GROWTH CENTRES ................................................................................................................ 66
10.2.4 REVENUE FROM SALE OF SOCIAL PLOT ............................................................................................................ 66
10.2.5 OFFSITE CITY SERVICE DELIVERY CHARGES (OCSDC) ................................................................................... 66
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY........................................................................................................................................... 67
10.3.1 INFRASTRUCTURE BY CIDCO .............................................................................................................................. 67
10.3.2 INFRASTRUCTURE BY OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ................................................................................ 67
DYNAMICS OF REVENUE ................................................................................................................................................... 67
10.2
10.3
10.4
ANNEXURES .........................................................................................................................................69-139
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................................................................ v
iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1-1: LIST OF VILLAGES COVERED WITHIN IDP AREA ........................................................................................................ 3
TABLE 1-2: PROCEDURE FOR PREPARATION OF IDP AS PER MR&TP ACT, 1966 ............................................................................. 5
TABLE 2-1: POPULATION AND ANNUAL AVERAGE GROWTH RATE, 1981 TO 2011 ..................................................................... 8
TABLE 2-2: MAJOR ROAD NETWORK DETAILS IN IDP AREA ....................................................................................................... 11
TABLE 2-3: AREA STATEMENT OF EXISTING LAND USE (IN HA)................................................................................................. 17
TABLE 2-4: SUMMARY OF LAND AVAILABILITY IN IDP AREA ....................................................................................................... 21
TABLE 2-5: NUMBER OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN IDP AREA .......................................................................... 21
TABLE 2-6: NUMBER OF HEALTH FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN IDP AREA, 2014 ............................................................................ 22
TABLE 2-7: DRINKING WATER SOURCE ........................................................................................................................................ 24
TABLE 2-8: DRINKING WATER POTABILITY ................................................................................................................................. 24
TABLE 2-9: ACCESS TO DRINKING WATER - LOCATION .............................................................................................................. 24
TABLE 3-1: ESTIMATED POPULATION OF NAINA & KNT IN LOW GROWTH SCENARIO (IN LAKHS) ......................................... 26
TABLE 3-2: ESTIMATED POPULATION AMONG PHASES (IN LAKHS) .......................................................................................... 28
TABLE 3-3: DISTRIBUTED POPULATION OF CENTRAL NAIN (IN LAKHS) .................................................................................... 28
TABLE 3-4: ESTIMATED POPULATION FOR IDP AREA IN NAINA ................................................................................................. 28
TABLE 4-1: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT FOR SOCIAL FACILITIES ........................................................... 30
TABLE 4-2: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, 2031........................................ 31
TABLE 4-3: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT OF HEALTH FACILITIES, 2034................................................... 31
TABLE 4-4: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT OF SOCIAL AND CULTURAL FACILITIES ................................. 32
TABLE 4-5: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES, 2034 ...................................................... 32
TABLE 4-6: ESTIMATED DEMAND AND AREA REQUIREMENT OF PARKS AND PLAY GROUNDS, 2014 ................................... 32
TABLE 4-7: AMENITIES & UTILITIES SHOWN IN INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN ....................................................................... 33
TABLE 5-1: LENGTH OF PROPOSED ROADS WITH ROW IN IDP AREA ....................................................................................... 36
TABLE 6-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS IN IDP AREA...................................................................... 40
TABLE 6-2: AREA STATEMENT FOR PROPOSED LAND USE ....................................................................................................... 43
TABLE 7-1: WATER DEMAND FOR IDP AREA ................................................................................................................................ 45
TABLE 7-2: DEMAND/AVAILABILITY OF WATER IN CIDCO AREA ................................................................................................. 46
TABLE 7-3: SEWAGE GENERATED, CAPACITY OF STPS & TTPS REQUIRED ............................................................................ 47
TABLE 7-4: ZONE WISE CAPACITY OF PROPOSED STPS AND TTPS IN IDP AREA.................................................................... 48
TABLE 7-5: MAXIMUM HOURLY RAINFALL AT OTHER STATIONS IN MUMBAI (26TH JULY 2005).............................................. 49
TABLE 7-6: SUMMARY OF LAND REQUIRED FOR DISPOSAL SITE.............................................................................................. 54
TABLE 10-1: COST OF DEVELOPMENT (RS IN CRORES) ............................................................................................................. 64
TABLE 10-2: OCSDC CHARGES ...................................................................................................................................................... 67
TABLE 10-2: SUMMARY OF REVENUE AND COST (NET PRESENT VALUE)................................................................................ 67
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1: LOCATION OF NAINA IN MMR ..................................................................................................................................... 1
FIGURE 1-2: VILLAGES COVERED IN IDP AREA.............................................................................................................................. 4
FIGURE 2-1: ANNUAL AVERAGE GROWTH RATE OF POPULATION OF IDP AREA (%) ................................................................ 8
FIGURE 2-2: POPULATION DENSITY PERSONS PER HECTARE ................................................................................................. 9
FIGURE 2-3: WORK FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE (%) ................................................................................................................ 11
FIGURE 2-4: EXISTING ROAD NETWORK WITHIN IDP AREA ....................................................................................................... 12
FIGURE 2-5: EXISTING RAILWAY NETWORK WITHIN IDP AREA .................................................................................................. 13
FIGURE 2-6: EXITING LAND USE DISTRIBUTION IN IDP AREA, 2014 ........................................................................................... 20
FIGURE 3-1: PHASING OF NAINA & KNT AND LOCATION OF IDP ................................................................................................ 27
FIGURE 5-1: PROPOSED HIERARCHICAL ROAD NETWORK IN IDP AREA .................................................................................. 37
FIGURE 5-2: METRO LINK FROM WEST TO EAST TO PANVEL AND MMC IN IDP AREA............................................................. 38
FIGURE 6-1: LOCATION OF ENTRY/ EXIT POINTS TO THE IDP AREA ......................................................................................... 39
FIGURE 6-2: PROPOSED LAND USE DISTRIBUTION IN IDP AREA, 2014 ..................................................................................... 44
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AMC
AKBSNA
CBD
CIDCO
CR
CRZ
CSIA
CTS
DCR
DEA
DFC
DMRC
DP
DPR
ELU
EIA
ES
FOB
FSI
FY
GA
GIS
GoI
GoM
GPS
HA
JNPT
KMCL
KDMC
KHMCL
KNT
MMC
MMCL
MCGM
MIDC
MESZ
MISEZ
MJP
MJPRCL
Mld
MMB
MMR
MMRDA
MoEF
MPC
MR&TP Act
MSEDCo
MSRDC
Ambarnath Municipal Council

Ambarnath, Kulgaon-Badlapur Surrounding Notified Area
Central Business District
City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd
Central Railway
Coastal Regulation Zone
Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport
Comprehensive Transport Study (known as TransForm)
Development Control Regulations
Department of Economic Affairs
Dedicated Freight Corridor
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
Development Plan
Detailed Project Report
Existing Land Use
Environmental Impact Assessment
Environmental Status
Foot Over Bridge
Floor Space Index
Financial Year
Growth Area
Geographical Information Systems
Government of India
Government of Maharashtra
Global Positioning System
Hectare
Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust
Karjat Municipal Council
Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation
Khopoli Municipal Council
Khopta New Town
Multi-Modal Corridor
Matheran Municipal Council
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation
Matheran Eco-Sensitive Zone
Mumbai Integrated Special Economic Zone
Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran
Mumbai-JNPT Port Road Company Limited
Million Litres/day
Maharashtra Maritime Board
Mumbai Metropolitan Region
Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority
Ministry of Environment & Forest
Metropolitan Planning Committee
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd
Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Limited
MSRTC
MTHL
MWSSB
UMTA
MTHL
MUD
MUIP
MUTP
NH
NMIA
NMMC
NMSEZ
NAINA
NSDP
NSSO
NTDA
NUTP
O&M
OD
PLU
PPP
PAMCL
PMCL
PU
R&R
RP
RTS
SEZ
SH
SPA
TMC
TPS
TPD
TRB
TTC
ULB
WFPR
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation

Mumbai Trans Harbour Link
Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board
Unified Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Mumbai Trans Harbor Link
Ministry of Urban Development
Mumbai Urban Infrastructure Project
Mumbai Urban Transport Project
National Highway
Navi Mumbai International Airport
Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation
Navi Mumbai Special Economic Zone
Navi Mumbai Airport Influence Notified Area
Net State Domestic Product
National Sample Survey Organization
New Town Development Authority
National Urban Transport Policy
Operations and Maintenance
Origin Destination
Proposed Land Use
Public Private Partnership
Panvel Municipal Council
Pen Municipal Council
Phase/ Planning Unit
Resettlement & Rehabilitation
Regional Plan
Rapid Transit System
Special Economic Zone
State Highway
Special Planning Authority
Thane Municipal Corporation
Town Planning Scheme
Tonnes per day
Transport Board
Trans Thane Creek
Urban Local Body
Work Force Participation Rate
vi
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
CIDCO has been engaged in developing Navi Mumbai as a
counter-magnet to Mumbai since 1970. The existing airport
at Mumbai, was fast reaching saturation and scope for
further enhancement of passenger and cargo handling
facilities along with aircraft maintenance and city side
facilities appeared very limited.
Therefore a second airport in the Mumbai Metropolitan
Region (MMR) became crucial. The air travel demand
forecasts indicated that demand will grow from 30 million
passengers per annum in the year 2012-13 to over 100
million passengers per annum by 2030-31. The Mumbai
airport alone will be unable to handle such an increase in
demand. It was therefore imperative to build a second
Airport for MMR. To meet the growing demands of air
travel, following the policy of Greenfield airports in PPP
mode, CIDCO initiated studies of locating the airport
within Navi Mumbai and selected a location close to the
mouth of Panvel Creek.
Figure 1-1: Location of NAINA in MMR
1.2 NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA (NAINA)

CIDCO successfully sought approvals for the proposed International Airport in Navi Mumbai from
Government of Maharashtra, Ministry of Civil Aviation and Ministry of Environment & Forest,
Government of India. While granting the Environmental and Coastal Regulations Zone (CRZ) clearances
to the proposed Greenfield airport on 22nd November, 2010, Ministry of Environment & Forest (MoEF),
Government of India, expressed concern about unplanned and haphazard development around Airport
within 20 km of the airport. In pursuance of these concerns, Government of Maharashtra notified the area
around the proposed airport, identified as Navi Mumbai Airport Influence Notified Area (NAINA) and
appointed CIDCO as the Special Planning Authority (SPA) for the same1.
CIDCO was appointed as SPA for NAINA, by GoM under Section 40.1 (b) of MR&TP Act, 1966 through Govt. Notification No.
TPS-1712/475/CR-98/12/UD-12 dated 10th January, 2013. It covers 270 villages (256 from Raigad District and 14 from Thane
District of Maharashtra). The total area of NAINA is about 570 km2.
NAINA comprises 270 revenue villages from Uran, Panvel, Karjat, Khalapur, and Pen Talukas of Raigad
district and Thane Taluka of Thane district of Maharashtra. Out of which, 217 are full revenue villages.
Remaining 54 are part revenue villages. Together, it has an area of approximately 56,172 ha (561sq.km).
1.3 NEED FOR INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN (IDP)

For SPA, it is mandatory to prepare Development Plan (DP) within 3 years from the date of appointment
under Section 21 of MR&TP Act, 1966. Given the extensive area of NAINA and the content and
procedure of preparing Development Plan as laid down in the MR&TP Act, 1966 the preparation of fullfledged Development Plan would require considerable time. It is therefore decided to prepare an Interim
Development Plan (IDP) for a part of NAINA as enabled by MR&TP Act 1966.
Testing of Innovative Land Development Model: An innovative concept that promotes voluntary land
assembly, contributes land for public purposes, finances infrastructure development, has been developed
by CIDCO for NAINA. However, this concept needs to be tested quickly in the real world, with regard to
its applicability and acceptability by the landowners and developers in NAINA.
Development Pressure: At present, development is guided by the MMR Regional Plan (RP), which
permits limited development around Gaothans. However, area near Panvel due to its proximity to Panvel,
emerging major railway station and the proximity to proposed airport is experiencing relatively
accentuated activity. To manage such development pressures, provisions of MMR RP are not adequate
and legal provisions by way of IDP and Development Control Regulations (DCR) are considered to be
necessary. Based on the above two considerations, it is proposed to prepare an (IDP) for part of NAINA
as provided under section 32 of the MR&TP Act, 1966.
1.4 SELECTION OF IDP AREA

1.4.1
CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
The area covered in IDP is based on the following considerations:

a)
Proximity to Navi Mumbai - CIDCO has provided adequate infrastructure facilities in Navi
Mumbai Area. The IDP area was selected in such a way that existing infrastructure network of
Navi Mumbai can be extended to the proposed development. Hence, an area was selected in
congruity to Navi Mumbai.
b)
Availability of Transport Network- The existing and proposed transport network is an

important indicator for assessing the early potential for growth where new model of land
development could be tested. The existing National Highways, State Highways, proposed MultiModal Corridor (MMC), proposed Mumbai-Vadodara Spur, existing suburban rail network and
proposed metro network etc, were considered to delineate the IDP area.
c)
Development Pressure CIDCO as SPA receives proposals for Development Permission in

NAINA. In addition to this, cases of Non-Agriculture (NA) permission are directed by Collector
to CIDCO seeking their remarks. Further, Special Township Projects (STPs) and Rental Housing
Scheme locations are also known to CIDCO which are good indicators of urbanization pressure
for development.
1.4.2
EXTENT OF COVERAGE IN IDP
d)
Based on the criteria explained above, the area for IDP is selected. It comprises 23 villages with
an area of 3683.09 Ha. This comprises two part villages namely Nere and Vihighar. Remaining all are
full revenue villages. The list of villages along with geographical area details are given in Table 1-1 and
Figure 1-2 depicts the location of IDP Area in NAINA. The term Project Area in this document refers
to whole of NAINA & KNT.
Table 1-1: List of Villages covered within IDP Area
Sl.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Taluka
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Panvel
Village Name
Adai
Akurli
Belavali
Bonshet
Borle
Chikhale
Chipale
Derawali
Devad
Kolkhe
Kon
Koproli
Moho
Nere (Part Village)
Palaspe
Pali khurd
Palidevad
Sangade
Shilottar Raichur
Shivkar
Usarli Khurd
Vichumbe
Vihighar (Part Village)3
GIS Area (Ha)2

308.40
167.24
159.31
20.15
100.40
357.17
132.45
90.97
114.55
228.53
168.24
76.25
306.89
291.63
239.13
96.59
40.82
94.53
50.55
262.57
123.05
118.25
135.42
Total
3683.09
Areas calculated in GIS platform
Part of Vihighar & Nere village falling in MESZ, as indicated in NAINA Gazette Notification dated 10th January 2013
Figure 1-2: Villages covered in IDP Area
1.5 PROCEDURE AND CONTENT OF IDP AS PER MR&TP ACT,

1966
Preparation of IDP is enabled by the provisions under section 32 of the MR&TP Act, 1966. The timeline
for IDP is given in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2: Procedure for preparation of IDP as per MR&TP Act, 1966
MR&TP Act,
1966 Clause No.
40 (1) (b)
23 (1)
32/25
32/26(1)
32/28(1)
Description
Appointment of SPA for Notified Area
10-01-13
Date of Declaration of Intention for preparation of DP

Carry out survey and Prepare Existing Land Use (ELU)
Publish a Notice, Prepare & Publish Draft IDP
Consideration of suggestion objection
12-05-14
15-07-14
15-08-14
4 Months
15-09-14
15-09-14
15-09-14
15-11-14
15-12-14
32/28(2)
32/28(3)
32/30(1)
Date/ Due date
Receiving of Suggestion/ Objection

SPA to constitute Planning Committee (PC)
SPA to Forward Suggestion/ Objection to PC

PC to give hearing & prepare Report and submit to SPA
SPA to incorporate PC Report
Submission of Draft IDP along with list of modification to Government
for approval
09-01-15
Source: MR&TP Act, 1966
In terms of the content of IDP, the requirements stated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of section 22 of MR&TP
Act, 1966 are mandatory.
a)
Proposals for allocating the use of land for purposes, such as residential, industrial, commercial,
agricultural, recreational;
b)
Proposals for designation of land for public purpose, such as schools, colleges and other
educational institutions, medical and public health institutions, markets, social welfare and
cultural institutions, theatres and places for public entertainment, or public assembly, museums,
art galleries, religious buildings and government and other public buildings as may from time to
time be approved by the State Government;
c)
Proposals for designation of areas for open spaces, playgrounds, stadia, zoological gardens, green
belts, nature reserves, sanctuaries and dairies.
Other discretionary features covered in IDP are transport and other infrastructure, DCR, estimates of cost
of implementing IDP, estimates of revenue likely to be generated through various fees, charges and
premium.
2. EXISTING PROFILE OF IDP AREA
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The chapter describes the location and regional setting of IDP Area. It also briefly describes the
topography, soil conditions, climate and geomorphology and current demographic characteristics. The
chapter also presents a brief description of existing land use of the IDP area including residential,
commercial, industrial, agricultural, water bodies, forests, hills, vacant lands etc, based on analysis of
existing land use survey and field observation. Further, assessment of social infrastructure facilities is
also described including education, health, socio-cultural facilities to understand the availability of
infrastructure in 23 villages. Besides, status of physical infrastructure such as water supply, sewerage,
storm water drainage, solid waste management and power supply has been assessed.
Furthermore, existing road network with respect to NAINA and MMR has been given to understand the
connectivity to other areas. Navi Mumbai is one of the vibrant sub-regions in MMR in terms of
population and employment growth. MMRDA, CIDCO, MSRDC, etc. have planned number of
transportation projects to provide the regional connectivity to Navi Mumbai sub-region. Some of the
major projects planned through various studies in the past which are relevant for the area have also been
briefly described.
2.1.1
LOCATION, REGIONAL SETTING AND ENVIRONMENTAREA AND LOCATION
As mentioned in Chapter-1, the IDP area comprises 23 villages and accounts for about 6.3% of total
NAINA area (56,172 ha). All these villages are from Panvel Taluka of Raigad District. The IDP area is
located near New Panvel town, ONGC colony and Kalamboli junction. Major landmarks in the IDP area
are Chikhale railway station and Palaspe Junction. The major roads passing through this area are NH-4,
Panvel bypass road and Mumbai-Pune expressway. Geographical location of IDP Area is shown in
Annexure 2-1.
2.1.2
REGIONAL SETTING
In terms of geography, the region extends from Adai, Akurli, Koproli and Nere villages in the North to
Palaspe, Derawali and Kon at the South. The east-west spread is about 5 km from Vichumbe to Moho.
The region is a mix of flat and hilly areas with Kalundre, Kirki and Gadhi rivers passing through and
number of natural water bodies exists within the villages.
The area of IDP is located in the rapidly urbanising zone of NAINA around Panvel. Panvel Railway
Station is the nearest and most efficient transit facility for the area. Majority of the villages are connected
with and dependent on Panvel railway station for regional connectivity. Peripheral villages like Chikale,
Moho, Palikhurd, Bonshet, Vihighar, and Nere are distant from Panvel railway station. Villages such as
Kolkhe, Derawali, Kon, and Palaspe are connected by NH-4 and NH-17.
2.1.3
TOPOGRAPHY
The hill ranges are along Akurli and Adai villages (elevations ranging from 101 to 232 meters from
MSL) while other parts are generally flat lands. Major hills are also between Chikhale, Moho and
Palikhurd villages (elevations ranging from 71m to 89m from MSL). Map showing slope gradient of IDP
area is shown in Annexure 2-2.
2.1.4
SOIL CONDITIONS
Soils in IDP area are formed from the Deccan trap. Depending on the topographical location, various
types of these soils are grouped as khar or salt, coastal alluvial and lateritic soils. The forest soils are not
used for agricultural purposes but yield valuable forest products such as teak-wood, hirda (Myrobalan),
beheda, pepper, etc. However, these soils are heavily eroded due to grazing and cutting of the forest trees.
Major part of the IDP area is covered by the rice field, which are loamy in texture; yellowish or reddish
grey in colour, neutral in reaction and almost devoid of lime. They are formed from the trap rock from
the Sahayadri ranges under heavy rainfall and humid climatic conditions. The sub-soil water level is only
3 to 5 m deep. The salt contents of the well water are higher in the proximity of the sea; but due to
excellent drainage, its use has not produced any deleterious effects. The soils are almost neutral or
slightly on the alkaline side of neutrality.
2.1.5
GEOMORPHOLOGY
Raigad region has predominantly dark volcanic lava flows and laterites. These are spread out in the form
of horizontal sheets or beds and constitute the innumerable spurs, hills and hill ranges; bold, flat topped
ridges; lofty peaks and plateaus with impressive cliffs. These hill ranges and plateaus form a part of the
Western Ghats. In the plains and valleys the lava flows occur below a thin blanket of soil of variable
thickness. Because of their dominantly basaltic composition and the tendency to form flat-topped plateau,
the lava are termed plateau basalts. Since these basaltic lava flows cover an extensive region in the
Deccan and frequently present step-like appearance to the hills and ridges they are commonly termed as
Deccan traps. The traps attain a thickness of nearly 750 to 850 m around Matheran and Raigad
plateaus, respectively.
2.1.6
CLIMATE
The general climatic regime is fairly equitable since seasonal fluctuations of temperature are not
significantly large. The moderating effects of the nearby sea and the fairly high amount of relative
humidity in the atmosphere have restricted the variability.
o
Temperature: The maximum day temperature ranges in between 28C to 32C while the
minimum temperature ranges in between 17C to 27C.
Rainfall: Majority of the rainfall in the region is from the SouthWest monsoon between June
and September. In Raigad district, the average annual rainfall for the district as a whole is
3,028.9 mm (119.25"). The rainfall increases rapidly from the coast towards the Western Ghats
on the eastern border of the district.
2.2 DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC PROFILE

2.2.1
POPULATION GROWTH
The IDP area has a population of 65,063 with an annual average growth rate (AAGR) of 6.7% as per
2011 census. The area has recorded fast growth since 1981, which is evident from Figure 2-1. Among the
23 villages, Devad has recorded the fastest growth (19.7%) followed by Vichumbe (19.3%) and Koproli
the lowest (0.5%). Population of villages located near to Panvel railway station and having good
connectivity and accessibility have larger population.
Annual Average Growth Rate (%)
AAGR
6.7
Year
2001-11
6.6
1991-01
2.5
1981-91
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
Percentage
Figure 2-1: Annual Average Growth Rate of Population of IDP Area (%)
These villages are closely knit together and densely developed due to the provisions of 200m urban
village schemes. The annual average growth rate in IDP area is shown in Table 2-1. Population
distribution within IDP area is given in Annexure 2-3.
Table 2-1: Population and Annual Average Growth Rate, 1981 to 2011
Sl.No
Village
AAGR (%)
Population
1981
Population
1991
Population
2001
Population
2011
1981-91
1991-01
2001-11
1,222
1,396
1,976
3,358
1.4
4.2
7.0
672
532
1,391
3,344
-2.1
16.1
14.0
Adai
Akurli
Belavali
1,063
1,350
1,422
1,660
2.7
0.5
1.7
Bonshet
278
335
421
550
2.1
2.6
3.1
Borle
599
676
777
890
1.3
1.5
1.5
Chikhale
908
1,236
1,937
1,899
3.6
5.7
-0.2
Chipale
563
667
988
1,629
1.8
4.8
6.5
Derawali
461
649
926
1,205
4.1
4.3
3.0
Devad
583
706
1,082
3,210
2.1
5.3
19.7
10
Kolkhe
1,236
1,768
2,964
4,657
4.3
6.8
5.7
11
Kon
960
1,158
1,690
2,187
2.1
4.6
2.9
12
Koproli
270
378
974
1,026
4.0
15.8
0.5
13
Moho
1,031
1,266
1,535
1,822
2.3
2.1
1.9
14
Nere
1,987
2,303
3,221
3,569
1.6
4.0
1.1
15
Palaspe
1772
2,304
3075
5,086
3.0
3.3
6.5
Sl.No
Village
Population
1981
Population
1991
Population
2001
Population
2011
AAGR (%)
1981-91
1991-01
2001-11
16
Pali Kh
319
401
532
531
2.6
3.3
-0.02
17
Palidevad
526
1017
4900
9194
9.3
38.2
8.8
18
576
727
724
871
2.6
0.0
2.0
328
662
2028
5796
10.2
20.6
18.6
20
Sangade
Shilottar
Raichur
Shivkar
1271
1514
1,946
2,464
1.9
2.9
2.7
21
Usarli Kh
477
643
1,114
2,608
3.5
7.3
13.4
22
Vichumbe
832
902
2,163
6,332
0.8
14.0
19.3
19
23
Vihighar
Total
696
731
1,095
1,175
0.5
5.0
0.7
18630
23321
38881
65063
2.5
6.7
6.7
Source: Compiled from Census of India.
2.2.2
POPULATION STRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTION
2.2.2.1 POPULATION DENSITY

The IDP area is closely located near Panvel urban area. Majority of population distributed in Gaothans
and spread sporadically at peripheries of villages. Villages including Palideved, Shilottar Raichur, Devad
and Vichumbe are densely populated and areas within 200m from Gaothans are relatively fast growing
areas in the IDP area. Average population density recorded in IDP area is about 18 persons per hectare.
Palideved and Shilottar Raichur villages are highly dense with of 226 and 116 persons/ha respectively
(Refer Annexure 2-4). Figure 2-2 presents the population density by village in IDP area.
Density - Persons Per Hectare
250
Density
225
150
115
100
54
50
20
10
Borle
11
28
27
Chikhale
Persons Per Hectare
200
12 13
20
13 13
6 12
21
21
9
9
Vihighar
Vichumbe
Shivkar
Usarli Kh
Sangade
Pali Kh
Palidevad
Palaspe
Shilottar Raichur
Villages
Nere
Moho
Kon
Koproli
Devad
Kolkhe
Chipale
Derawali
Bonshet
Belavali
Adai
Akurli
Figure 2-2: Population Density Persons Per Hectare
2.2.2.2 SC & ST POPULATION

The share of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) population account for 9.4% and 3.4%
respectively. Amongst all villages, Palideved has the highest share of SC population (18.7%), followed
by Vichumbe with 16.6%. Amongst STs, Derawali village has the highest share (17.2%) followed by
Palideved with 13.5% (Refer Annexure 2-5 for SC and ST population by village).
2.2.2.3 LITERACY RATE

The IDP area has an average literacy rate of 73.8%, which is relatively high than the State and National
average literacy rates of 72% and 64.8% as per 2011census. Among all villages, Palideved has highest
literacy rate of 81.8% followed by Shilottar Raichur (78.5%), Chipale (78.5%). Refer Annexure 2-6 for
literacy rates by village.
2.2.3
ECONOMIC BASE
In general, economic base of the villages is non-irrigated agriculture and its allied activities. However,
villages located near Panvel area and along NH-17 and NH-4, have some service and manufacturing
industries. This section presents briefly on major economic activities, occupational structure, workforce
participation rate and employment pattern of IDP area as observed in census 2011.
2.2.3.1 MAJOR ECONOMIC ACTIVITES
The major non-agricultural economic activities such as logistic hubs, warehousing, other service
industries are mainly concentrated in Kolkhe, Derawali and Palaspe villages. NH-17, NH-04 and DivaPanvel rail line are the major transportation networks passing through these villages have created
opportunities to develop these non-agricultural economic activities. Restaurants, hotels, banks, brick
kilns have developed along either side of the Panvel-Matheran road at Palideved and Shilottar Raichur
villages.
Devad, Vichumbe and Usarli Khurd are the villages influenced by Panvel given its local level
commercial activities. Agricultural activities, local commercials such as flour mills, iron gills and fence
fabrication units, brick kilns, construction activities are the other non-agricultural activities in rest of
villages.
2.2.3.2 OCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE AND WFPR
The workforce participation rate (WFPR) in the IDP area is nearly 40% with a total of about 25,350
workers. Among the total workers, 87.4% are main workers and remaining are marginal workers.
Bonshet and Chipale villages have the highest percentage of WFPR of 48% and 46% respectively. The
work participation rate in this area reveals the predominance of migrant workers (see Annexure 2-7).
Workforce participation rate is given in Figure 2-3.
Work Force Participation Rate (%)

WFPR
Percentage
50
48
44 44
41
46
36
35
40
45
44
41
43
38
36
35
41 43
40
38
35 35
33 34
29
30
20
10
Vihighar
Vichumbe
Shivkar
Usarli Kh
Sangade
Pali Kh
Palidevad
Nere
Shilottar Raichur
Villages
Palaspe
Moho
Kon
Koproli
Devad
Kolkhe
Chipale
Derawali
Borle
Chikhale
Belavali
Bonshet
Adai
Akurli
10
Figure 2-3: Work Force Participation Rate (%)
2.2.3.3 EMPLOYMENT PATTERN

Of the total workers of 25,350 in the IDP area, 13.4% of workers are engaged in cultivation, 3.8% of
workers are agricultural labourers, 3.8% are household labourers and 79 % are others. Details of nonirrigated agriculture employment are given in Annexure 2-8.
2.3 EXISTING TRANSPORT NETWORK

2.3.1
REGIONAL ROAD NETWORK
The area is well connected mainly by inter-city roads (NHs, SHs, MDRs/ ODRs) with various Municipal
Corporations/Councils and villages located in rest of NAINA and MMR. Existing road network of the
area and connectivity to the rest of NAINA and MMR is given in Annexure 2-9. National Highways,
State Highways and Mumbai-Pune Expressway are the major corridors which provide fast transport
connectivity within the IDP Area.
The area has about 62.2 km of major road network which are inter-city/ sub-regional roads providing
connectivity between IDP area and rest of NAINA and MMR. NH-04 and NH-17 and several State
Highways traverse through this area. In addition, Mumbai-Pune Expressway also traverses through the
area. It is important to mention that the area has good regional connectivity with Greater Mumbai, MMR.
The Mumbai-Pune Expressway, NH-4 and NH-17 are fairly maintained as they are the major regional
roads. The condition of major roads is good as these are well maintained in most cases. The State
Highways in the area, the most important being Panvel Matheran Road (SH-54) is narrow and is
inconsistently maintained.
Of the total road network, National Highways (NH-4 and NH-17) together constitute nearly 8.8 km
(14%) while State Highways make up for about 6.6 km (10.6%) of the total length. Besides National
Highways and State Highways, nearly 6.4 km (10.3%) of the Mumbai-Pune Expressway also passes
through the area. Major District roads constitute for 0.1 km (0.2%) and other roads aggregating to a
length of about 40.3 km (64.8%) also passes through the area. A detailed breakup of the transportation
network is presented in Table 2-2.
Road Category
Expressway
National Highways
State Highways
Major District Roads
Other Roads
Table 2-2: Major Road Network Details in IDP Area

Length in km
6.4
8.8
6.6
0.1
40.3
Percentage
10.3
14.1
10.6
0.2
64.8
Total
62.2
100
Source: Based on the available base map
11
Existing Condition of Mumbai-Pune Expressway
Existing Condition of NH - 04
Figure 2-4: Existing Road Network within IDP Area
2.3.2
REGIONAL SUB-URBAN RAIL NETWORK
There are no existing suburban rail operations within the IDP area. However, Central Railway provides
suburban rail services between Island city and Navi Mumbai through harbour line. The IDP Area is
served by very limited suburban railway network i.e. through CST-Panvel suburban railway line, VashiCity and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.
12
Thane suburban railway line and shuttle services on Diva-Panvel and Diva-Vasai-Virar corridors (see
Figure 2-5). Total length of railway traversing through the area is about 9 km. The existing Panvel-Karjat
line is about 5.3 km and the Panvel-Wadkhal line is about 3.7 km. presently these lines facilitate intercity passenger and freight services. Suburban services are proposed along these lines.
Figure 2-5: Existing Railway Network within IDP Area
Following are the important proposed/ committed areas of development under several past studies
undertaken which would directly impact the IDP area (see Annexure 2-10).
a) Proposed Road Network: IDP Area shall have an enhanced regional road network connecting
several parts of MMR and beyond with the following proposed/ committed road network;
o
Mumbai-Vadodara SPUR: The alignment of Mumbai-Vadodara Spur in MMR is under

implementation by NHAI which starts in Virar and ends in Panvel. This corridor has been
planned for fast movement of port related inter-city traffic (JNPT);
Multi-Modal Corridor (MMC): One of the major recommendations of Comprehensive
Transport Study-MMR was the concept of development of MMC in MMR. MMRDA has
planned MMC from Virar to Alibag (about 140 km) following the existing as well as the
proposed highway corridors to provide a faster connectivity with the ULBs located outside
13
Greater Mumbai and increase the accessibility to inter-city freight traffic. MMRDA initiated
the detailed feasibility study for the MMC corridor and the study is in progress. Part of the
MMC traverses through the area and it provides good regional connectivity to NMIA as well
as rest of NAINA;
In addition to above regional road/ highway connectivity, the IDP Area would include the new arterial/
sub-arterial/ local roads to provide the local travel needs and sub-regional travel needs.
b) Proposed Transit (Suburban and Metro) Network
o Metro Rail: Presently, there is no Metro line operational in the area. Metro lines proposed in
Navi Mumbai will impact the growth and connectivity of the IDP area. CIDCO has
undertaken construction of the first Metro line in Navi Mumbai from Belapur to Pendhar
which is proposed to be extended southwards up to NMIA. Also additional metro corridor
between Mankhurd and Ghatkopar has been proposed which will be extended up to Panvel
via NMIA, thus providing a fast metro connectivity between eastern suburbs of Greater
Mumbai and Panvel. As part of the present study, it is proposed to extend the MankhurdNMIA-Panvel metro line into IDP.
o Suburban Rail Connectivity: Existing Diva-Panvel line and Panvel-Karjat-Khopoli line are
proposed to have regular suburban commuter transit as part of priority projects by MRVC.
Anticipating huge population and employment growth in Navi Mumbai and surrounding
areas and upcoming NMIA, MRVC has carried out detailed techno-economic feasibility for
suburban operations from Vasai to Diva and Diva to Panvel as well as in-house technical
feasibility study for the operation of suburban rail services from Panvel to Karjat as this
corridor would serve the local as well as regional commuter traffic.
c) Proposed MTHL: The proposed Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL), which connects Sewri
(in Island city of Mumbai) to Nhava Sheva (Main land) is planned with the basic objective of (a)
development of Mainland and reducing pressure on Mumbai City; and (b) facilitate decongestion
efforts by Improving connectivity between Island city and main land. MTHL along with Eastern
Freeway (which is recently opened for traffic) on Island city side and existing & planned new
roads (ex. Coastal road) on Main land side would provide fast connectivity to proposed NMIA
and NAINA.
d) Proposed NMIA: Potential catchment of the NMIA is expected to be mainly MMR and areas
neighbouring MMR. The pressure on Mumbai airport is not likely to get reduced in the coming
years and Pune and Nagpur airports have very limited international flights. Thus the inflow of
passengers to the NMIA is expected to be high and as a result the surrounding areas will have the
potential for development.
e) DMICDC: Government of India (GoI) envisages developing dedicated freight corridor (DFC)
between Delhi and Mumbai (originating from JNPT). Under this project, four strategic zones
were identified viz. Zone A: Mumbai Metropolitan Region, Zone B: Potential Development
Region, Zone C: Potential Growth Corridors and Zone D: Spill over Growth Region. The current
NAINA & KNT fall under Zone C and Zone D of the DMICDC region, which adds to
development potential.
2.3.3
LOCAL ROAD NETWORK
The local road network is primarily formed by the dense village roads that connect the existing Gaothan
settlements to each other. These roads are not more than 6 m in width in most cases. The Panvel-
14
Matheran Road (SH 54 and proposed SH 1031) in the north acts as major connector for many Gaothan
settlements such as Shilottar Raichur, Palidevad, Akurli, Chipale, Koproli and Nere. Another road in the
north-south direction passing through Sangade, Belavali, and Pali Khurd and Nere villages connects
Panvel Matheran road (SH 54) to Shedung Junction. The connectivity to existing settlements from
Mumbai-Pune Expressway needs crossing-over. Underpasses and over bridges are present in various
locations to facilitate the same. Within the settlements, vehicular roads are minimal and pedestrian
pathways form the network. Village level road network in shown in Annexure 2-11.
Some village roads in the intensely developed areas near the major regional roads are well-developed and
well-maintained. Village roads that are comparatively in the interior areas away from major regional
roads are mostly narrow kuccha roads. The pedestrian pathways within the settlements are well
maintained and paved in some cases.
Existing Condition of village roads in intensely developed villages
Existing Condition of village roads in the interiors
2.3.4
BUS SYSTEM
The important bus services used are from the New Panvel Bus Depot and N.M.M.T. Bus Stand in New
Panvel to the west of Village Shilottar Raichur and the Bus stand near Shedung Junction. These are
outside the IDP area. Palaspe Phata Bus Station in Kolkhe village is a major location for bus services
within the IDP area. The services from Palaspe Phata Bus Station provide for Kolkhe and Kon villages
along NH-4 and Palaspe along NH-17. The bus services from New Panvel provide services to some
villages along Panvel Matheran Road.
The villages along Panvel Matheran Road that have bus services are Shilottar Raichur, Palidevad,
Koproli and Nere. Shedung Bus Depot provides bus services in the north-south direction up to PanvelMatheran Road (SH 54) in village Nere passing through Sangade and Belavali villages in the IDP area.
Palaspe Bus Stand along the NH-17. The NMMT provides services from Vashi to Khopoli along NH-4
1
Road Development Plan 2001-2021, Raigad District Panvel Taluka (PWD)
15
and from Panvel to Karjat, Khopoli and Rasayani. No known bus services are available in Chikhale,
Moho, Shivkar, Borle, Pali Khurd, Bonshet, Vihighar, Chipale, Adai, Akurli, Devad, Vichumbe, Usarli
Khurd and Derawali villages. In some villages, where areas are well developed private bus services have
been provided as in the case of Mahalaxmi Nagar in Nere village.
2.3.5
LOCAL SUB-URBAN RAILWAY NETWORK
The existing railway lines do not provide suburban rail services. Suburban services are proposed along
Panvel-Karjat and Panvel-Wadkhal lines. An existing railway station is present in Chikhale village.
2.3.6
TERMINAL FACILITIES
Bus Terminal facilities such as Palaspe Phata Bus Station in Kolkhe village are present. Nearby Bus
Terminals are New Panvel Bus Depot and NMMT. Bus Stand in New Panvel to the west of Village
Shilottar Raichur and the Bus Stand near Shedung Junction are present.
2.3.7
PARKING FACILITIES
There are no formal public parking areas in the area. Private vehicles such as cars and two-wheelers are
parked within private plots of the owners. Privately owned/ maintained truck parking facilities available
in Palaspe and Kolkhe villages.
Localised Parking Areas available within villages
2.3.8
SUMMARY
It is expected that, once the Navi Mumbai International Airport is developed, which is going to trigger
the growth of the area, the traffic characteristics are expected to undergo a major change. In addition, the
development within the area would need further development of transport network and enhanced regional
transport connectivity through suburban rail expansion, metro corridors, and highway corridors.
2.4 EXISTING LAND USE

The existing land use forms the basis for preparation of IDP and is mandatory as per MR&TP Act, 1966.
This section on existing land use presents methodology adopted for carrying out survey, analysis of
various land uses etc.
2.4.1
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
CIDCO appointed an agency to carry out existing land use (ELU) survey for the part area of NAINA.
Extent of area covered under the scope of ELU survey is 294 sq.km. This IDP area is part of ongoing
ELU survey area.
2.4.2
SCOPE OF SURVEY
The broad scope of existing land use survey entrusted to a survey agency is as follows;
16
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
2.4.3
Topographical Survey using Laser Scanning (LiDAR) Technology

Collection of Ground Control Points
Carrying out and setting up bench marks & reference pillars / stones
Contouring
Land Use survey
Data Processing: All types of Data collected / generated / procured
During the survey shall be processed with Digital Elevation Model (DEM) ,
Digital Surface Model (DSM) & Processing of Cadastral plans, Satellite Image Processing
Preparation of Survey plans / Base map.
Preparation of Existing Land Use Map
DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USE
The major land use in the IDP area is non-irrigated agriculture. Environmentally sensitive areas such as
forests, hills and water bodies are present. Existing built-up area includes residential, commercial,
industrial, public and semi-public land uses. The development within the IDP area is sparse.
Comparatively, dense development is in Gaothans. Table 2-3 shows a detailed area statement for the IDP
Area.
Table 2-3: Area Statement of Existing Land Use (in Ha)
Sl. No.
Land Use
Area in Ha.
% of Total IDP Area
230.00
6.245%
Water Bodies
86.92
2.360%
Steep Hill Slopes (20% and above)
148.96
4.045%
0.08
0.002%
129.63
3.520%
Non-developable Land
Forest
2
3
4
Quarry
Transport Network*
Sub-Total of non-developable land
595.60
16.17%
Existing Built-up Area (Redevelopable Land)
Residential
411.35
11.170%
Commercial
99.36
2.698%
Industrial
66.53
1.806%
Mixed Use
26.90
0.730%
10
Public and Semi-public Amenities
18.38
0.499%
11
Public Utilities and Facilities

Sub-Total of existing built-up land
1.75
0.048%
624.27
16.95%
Developable Land
12
Non-irrigated Agricultural
2015.12
54.718%
13
Vacant Land
423.87
11.510%
14
Hill Area (below 20% slope)
9.65
0.262%
15
Recreational
Sub-Total of developable land
Total IDP Area (A+B+C)
14.21
0.386%
2462.86
66.88%
3683
100.00%
* Transport Network includes existing roads, railways, under-pass, over bridge, etc.
Source: Based on ELU Survey
17
The land uses are described in brief.

Largely the area is under agricultural use with 54.71%. Especially the land around Gaothans is primarily
agricultural. The agricultural land falls in four categories; cropped land, fallow land, poultry farms and
plantation/ vegetated land.
The dense residential areas are in 23 Gaothans. High-rise apartment buildings have developed around
Gaothans. The residential development away from Gaothans is sparse. The area under residential use is
11.17% of the total IDP area.
The commercial activities are concentrated along the NH-4. Few commercial uses are also observed
along NH-17 and SH-54 (Panvel-Matheran Road). The land under commercial use amounts to 99.36 Ha
(2.7%).
Large industrial areas of logistic activities are observed at Palaspa Junction and Palaspa area. Some
scattered industrial uses are also seen in the area. These areas amount to 66.53 Ha (1.8%) of the total IDP
area. The public and semi-public amenities include the social infrastructure in the IDP area. It includes
educational, health care and socio-cultural facilities in the area. The total land under these uses is 18.38
Ha which is approximately 0.5% of the total IDP area. The public utilities include the water supply
system, sewerage system, storm water drainage, power supply and solid waste management. The utilities
also include necessities such as bus terminus facilities, water treatment plants, overhead water tanks,
electric substations, etc. in the IDP area. The area of public utilities in the IDP area is 1.75 Ha (0.05%)
which is inadequate. The existing land use pattern within the IDP area is shown in Figure 2-6.
The IDP area comprises a few environmentally sensitive areas such as forests, various water bodies and
hills. The details for the same are given below.
a)
Forests:
An area of 230.00 Ha is under forest as per cadastral records. It is 6.2% of the total IDP area.
b) Water bodies:
Total area of water bodies in the IDP area is 86.92 Ha which includes rivers, lakes, ponds and perennial
streams. The important rivers flowing through the IDP area are Kalundre/ Gadhi River and Kirki River.
The area under water bodies is approximately 2.4% of the total IDP area.
c)
Hills:
Total area of hills in the IDP area is 158.62 Ha. The hill slopes are steep in most areas. Area of hills with
slope of 20% and above is 148.96 Ha while the remainder of hills is 9.65 Ha with gradual slopes. Hills are
4.3% of total IDP area.
The IDP area has fairly large parcels of vacant land i.e. where no particular activities take place and are
not under any specific use. The area of such land is 423.87 Ha, which amounts to 11.5% of total IDP
area.
The IDP area also has other land uses such as mixed use, recreational spaces and quarry. The land under
these uses is very less.
a)
Mixed Use:
This category of use includes land where a number of uses take place simultaneously such as residential
and commercial or any other. Land under such uses is 26.90 Ha which is 0.73% of the total IDP area.
b) Recreational Spaces:
The area of land under recreational uses such as playgrounds, parks, gardens, etc is negligible in the IDP
area. It is 14.21 Ha which amounts to only 0.4% of the IDP area.
c)
Quarry:
A small land area is used for quarrying which is 0.08 Ha which amounts to be negligible percentage.
18
The transportation network in the area includes the road network and railway network the details for
which are given below.
a)
Roads:
A number of major roads traverse through the IDP area. The Mumbai-Pune Expressway passes through the
area. National Highways, NH-4 towards Khalapur, NH-4B towards JNPT and NH-17 towards Goa also
pass through the area. The Panvel-Matheran Road (SH-54) passes in the north in the east-west direction.
The local network is formed by the major district roads, other district roads and village roads.
b) Railway:
The existing railway lines in the IDP area are Panvel-Karjat line and Panvel-Pen line of the Konkan
Railway. There is presently no suburban rail network in the IDP area. Chikhale Railway Station is present
in the central part of IDP area.
The total area of transportation in the IDP area is 129.63 Ha, which is 3.5%. The details of transportation
network are explained in subsequent sections. The IDP area also has a number of proposals from the CTS
study and other authorities for roads, railway services and metro services.
Legend used for showing existing land use is shown in Annexure 2-12.
19
Figure 2-6: Existing Land Use Distribution in IDP Area, 2014
20
2.4.4
LAND AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT
The land available for development has been calculated based on the existing land uses mentioned and
detailed in the section above. Environmentally sensitive areas such as water bodies and forests are
excluded. Physically undevelopable areas such hills with steep slope (20% slope and above) are not
included in the developable area. Land under existing transportation network is also not included towards
developable land. Existing built-up areas are excluded from the developable land.
As derived in Table 2-3, the land available for development is 2463 Ha that is 67% of the total IDP area.
2.4.5
CONCLUSION
The IDP area is predominantly non-irrigated agriculture in nature. The western area of the IDP, which is
in contiguity with Panvel area has maximum existing built-up area. The IDP area has no organized
recreational areas.
Table 2-4 shows the comprehensive area statement for the existing land use and land available for
development. All further calculations for proposed land uses are based on this land available for
development i.e. 2463 Ha which is 67% of total IDP area.
Sl. No.
A
B
C
D
Table 2-4: Summary of Land Availability in IDP Area

Description
Area (in Ha)
Total IDP Area
3683.00
Non-developable Land
595.60
Existing built-up area
624.27
Land available for development [A-(B+C)]
% of total IDP Area

100.00
16.17
16.95
2462.86
66.88
Source: Land Use Survey, 2014.
2.6 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE

2.6.1
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Educational facilities such as primary schools, upper primary schools, senior secondary schools, colleges
and universities are assessed. The analysis is based on the statistics collected from District Primary &
Secondary education departments, Raigad district and State Board of Secondary and Higher Education,
Maharashtra. A total of 20 Primary schools and 28 anganwadis are located within 23 villages of IDP area.
3 Degree colleges are located at Devad, Pali Khurd and Vichumbe villages. Village wise number of
educational facilities existing is given in Annexure 2-13. Number of educational facilities available with
in IDP Area is given in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5: Number of Educational facilities available in IDP Area
Category
Numbers
No.of Primary Schools (I to IV)
20
No.of Upper Primary Schools (V to VII)
06
No. of Senior secondary Schools (VIII to X)
08
No.of Anganwadi Centers
28
No.of Colleges
03
Total
65
Source: District Primary & Secondary Edu Depts and State Board of Secondary and Higher Education, Maharashtra.
21
Zilla Parishad Primary and Secondary School in Shivkar

Village
2.6.2
Primary School in Belavali Village
HEALTH FACILITIES
Assessment has been carried out with respect to health facilities such as dispensaries, sub-centres;
primary health centres (PHCs) and rural hospitals. Health facilities have been assessed with an intention
to understand the adequacy of health facilities for 2011 population. The analysis is based on the
information collected from Public Health Department of Maharashtra.
There are 4 sub-centres and 20 PHCs located with minimum infrastructure facilities. Several private
clinics located apart from the government facilities, which are not accounted in statistics. Few villages
such as Vichumbe, Nere, Devad, Adai, and Bonshet have basic health facilities. Panvel area is the nearest
place for all kinds of health emergencies. Village wise number available of health facilities is given in
Annexure 2-14. Number of available health facilities is given in Table 2-6.
Table 2-6: Number of Health facilities available in IDP Area, 2014
Category
Numbers
Sub-Centers
04
PHCs
20
Total
24
Source: Public Health Department of Maharashtra
Private Clinic located at Belavali Village
2.6.3
Private Clinic located at Adai Village
COMMERCIAL FACILITIES
Small scale commercial establishments selling commodities of daily consumption are present in almost
all the 23 villages. Commercial establishments such as grocery shops, medical shops, flour mills,
vegetable shops are observed in villages. Apart from these, the major commercial activities such as
Banks, Hotels and restaurants are located at Palaspe junction and along the Panvel-Matheran Road.
Panvel is the nearest wholesale and retail shopping area.
22
Local Commercial shops located at Adai village
2.6.4
Local Commercial shops located at Vichumbe
SOCIO-CULTURAL FACILITIES
Socio-cultural facilities such as cinema theatres, sports complexes, and clubs are not observed within the
villages of IDP area. However, other socio-cultural facilities such as community halls, school
playgrounds etc. serve the needs. Panvel is the nearest destination for major cultural activities.
Recreational space with open stage in Vichumbe

village
2.6.5
Community Recreational space in front of temple in

Vihighar village
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Recreational areas such neighbourhood parks, city scale parks are not located within this area. However,
the major source of open spaces is school grounds. Some of the Zilla Parishad schools have playgrounds
attached. Some of the residential colonies, societies and housing complexes are maintaining their own
parks and play grounds within their premises.
2.6.6
SUMMARY
The IDP area being semi-rural in nature does not have a well-developed social infrastructure. At present,
facilities seems to be sufficient to 2011 census population and there is the need to be improve
infrastructure in existing social facilities.
2.7 PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

2.7.1
WATER SUPPLY
81% of the population of the IDP area has access to drinking water within habitation and around 2% of
the population has water availability within villages. However, around 17% of the population has to
fetch water from outside of the village from nearby sources. Around 58% of the population has access to
safe water. Around 2% of the population has to source the water from more than one source where at
23
least one source is unsafe. Besides, around 3% of the population is dependent on unsafe source of water.
Tables showing drinking water source, potability and location are given in Tables 2-7, 2-8 and 2-9.
The analysis has been carried out with the following important aspects of water
Source- Ground water, Surface water

Quality- Water is safe or not
Distance within habitation, within village and outside of village
Water Source
Surface Water
Ground Water
Ground Water /
Surface Water
Total
Table 2-7: Drinking Water Source

No. of Villages
Population
16
48,480
3
4,901
Population %
74.51
7.53
11,682
17.95
23
65063
100.00
Source: Web Site (30-4-14)- National Rural Drinking Water Programme - Ministry of Drinking water Sanitation , Govt of India
and Census 2011
Water Quality
Table 2-8: Drinking Water Potability

No. of Villages
Population
Population %
Safe
12
38,731
59.53
Unsafe
1,899
2.92
Not tested
10
24,433
37.55
Total
23
65063
100.00
Source: Web Site (30-4-14) National Rural Drinking Water Programme - Ministry of Drinking water Sanitation, Govt. of India
and Census 2011.
In the IDP area adjoining existing Panvel 20 villages receive water from surface sources. Around 91% of
the population is getting surface water.
Water Availability
Within habitation
Within Village
Outside Village
Total
Table 2-9: Access to Drinking Water - Location

No. of Villages
Population
16
52,224
02
1,557
05
11,282
23
65,063
Population %
80.27
2.39
17.34
100.00
Source: Web Site (30-4-14) National Rural Drinking Water Programme - Ministry of Drinking water Sanitation, Govt. of India
and Census 2011.
The available data indicates that within the IDP area, around 81% of the population has access to water
within habitation and around additional 2% population gets it within village. However, around 17% of
the population gets water for domestic from area outside of their villages. Around 58% of the population
has access to safe quality of water. Around 2% of population has access to more than one water source,
and at least one of the available sources is unsafe. However, around 3% of the population is dependent
on water sources which are not safe for domestic use. Figures showing drinking water source, safe/
unsafe, availability are given in Annexure 2-15.
2.7.2
SEWERAGE
Maharashtra is the first state in the country to launch a state-wide programme for reforming the water
supply and sanitation sector. The implementation of the following reforms is an integral part of the
Jalswarajya project being implemented with assistance from the World Bank in the state since 2003.
24
The IDP area is mainly rural in character. As on date, there is no sewerage system. In 2001, more than
60% of rural population in Raigad district was not having toilets within premises. Census 2011 indicates
that the number has come down and it is varying between 45 to 60 %. However, as there is no sewerage
system, generally, the toilets are connected to individual septic tanks and the effluent is disposed off in
the nearby drains or opens area.
2.7.3
STORM WATER DRAINAGE
The drainage in the IDP area has not been a major issue, due to the peculiar location of the area. It has
hills on one side where the rain fall received is drained with high speed of water flowing through rivulets,
nallas, valleys, and rivers into the sea, falling on the other side of the area.
After development, the area may be susceptible for flooding because the area receives very heavy rain
fall. Chitale committee report (Fact Finding Committee Report on Mumbai Floods) explains that the
annual rainfall of the meteorological sub division of Konkan and Goa (2,980 mm) is heavy. There have
been instances when as much as half of the annual rainfall was recorded in a single a day. It can be
understood that the IDP area will be prone to flooding after development if adequate measures are not
taken in advance. Urban flooding is fundamentally different from rural flooding, as developed
catchments are formed and flooding occurs in a short time. But urban drainage is one of the most
neglected areas.
2.7.4
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
There is no systematic solid waste management system in villages. The waste generated in the rural area
is disposed off/ dumped in the nearby area. Being within carrying capacity of the nature the same is
recycled without having any adverse impact on the habitats. However, with urbanization, the scale of
waste generation is likely to increase and cannot be left unattended.
2.7.5
POWER SUPPLY
The entire IDP area is provided with electricity by the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution
Company (MSEDCo) Ltd. through 22/11KV substations and lines. MSETCL operates a transmission
network of 39,871 Circuit KM of transmission lines and 559 EHV Substations with 89,178 MVA
transformation capacities. This infrastructure constitutes most of the inter-regional as well as intraregional electric power transmission system in the State.
As per available information, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd (MSEDCL) during
the discussion that all the villages have been electrified barring few padas, which were not accessible.
25
3. ENVISIONING FUTURE
3.1 VISION FOR NAINA

NAINA & KNT depend upon the economic base provided by Taloja Industrial Area, NMIA and Panvel
and JNPT. However, all three are outside the NAINA and KNT limits having their own immediate
hinterlands to capture the growth impulses of these economic inputs and the expanding housing market
of Mumbai and Navi Mumbai. NAINA will have to acquire a competitive edge over other areas in MMR.
The vision for NAINA and KNT could therefore be:
A Competitive, Inclusive and Sustainable City within MMR that can offer enriching environment
for living, learning and work
3.2 POPULATION ESTIMATIONS

3.2.1
METHODOLOGY
The conventional methods of trend projection (arithmetic, geometric) etc, are not suitable for NAINA
(and its part areas) as the population growth is likely to occur on the account of new economic inputs like
NMIA, expansion of JNPT, an emerging rail link at Panvel and warehousing activities at Kalamboli,
expanding housing market of Mumbai/ Navi Mumbai aided by infrastructure provision by CIDCO.
Therefore, Shift and Share method has been used to estimate the population of NAINA & KNT for the
horizon year 2034.
Similar method was adopted for MMR Regional Plan 1996-2011 as well. This is essentially a step down
or from whole to part approach. Since NAINA and KNT are integral parts of MMR, the method helps
to estimate its population, considering the likely spill over population from other constituent areas such
Navi Mumbai, Panvel, Thane, Kalyan-Dombivali, Ulhasnagar etc, and likely potential of NAINA and
KNT to absorb the shifts. Three scenarios have been worked out such as Low, Medium and High for
estimating population. Accordingly, the estimated population of NAINA & KNT would range from 22
lakhs to 29 lakhs by the year 2034. The estimated population of NAINA & KNT is presented in Table 31 below.
Table 3-1: Estimated Population of NAINA & KNT in Low Growth Scenario (in Lakhs)
Estimated Population
Estimated Base Year
Jurisdiction
Population 2011
Population (2014)
2021
2031
2034
NAINA
3.5
3.7
5.1
13.2
17.9
KNT
0.6
0.6
1.3
3.4
4.6
Total (NAINA + KNT)
4.1
4.3
6.4
16.6
22.5
26
3.2.2
DISPOSITION OF CITIES
The estimated population is likely to concentrate in the proximity to three major economic inputs viz.
Taloja Industrial Area, NMIA at Panvel, an emerging rail link at Panvel and warehousing activities at
Kalamboli and JNPT. Phasing of these concentrations is shown in Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-1: Phasing of NAINA & KNT and location of IDP

27
These concentrations are considered as cities and their estimated populations are given in Table 3-2
below.
1. Central NAINA Phase I (Part A+B)
2. Northern NAINA Phase I (Part C)
3. Khopta New Town Phase I (Part D)
Phasing
Phase I
Phase II
Phase I +
Phase II
Table 3-2: Estimated Population among Phases (in Lakhs)

Population
Estimated Base Year
Cities
2011
Population (2014)
2021
2031 2034
Central NAINA
1.1
1.2
1.9
7.5
10.7
(adjoining Panvel)
Northern NAINA
0.2
0.2
0.7
2.8
4.0
(adjoining Taloja MIDC)
KNT (adjoining JNPT)
0.6
0.6
1.3
3.4
4.7
(34 Villages)
Sub-Total
1.9
2.0
3.9
13.7
19.4
Rest of NAINA
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.9
3.1
Total
4.1
4.4
6.5
16.6
22.5
Source: Census of India 2011, and Estimated beyond 2011
3.2.3
ESTIMATED POPULATION FOR IDP AREA
The present IDP area is an integral part of one such city namely Central NAINA. Present population of
23 villages is about 0.65 lakh as per 2011 census. The IDP area is expected to be fast growing area in
NAINA as this area is located in Phase-I (Part A) among the other areas. The estimated population of
Central NAINA is 10.7 lakh by the horizon year 2034. Of which, IDP area population is estimated to be
6.2 lakh. Estimated population of Central NAINA is given in Table 3-3.
Phasing
Phase I (Part A) IDP
Area
Phase I (Part B)
Total
Table 3-3: Distributed Population of Central NAIN (in Lakhs)

Estimated Base Year
Population 2011
Population (2014)
2021
2031
2034
0.6
0.7
1.1
4.3
6.2
0.4
1.0
0.4
1.1
0.8
1.9
3.2
7.5
4.5
10.7
Further, estimated population of IDP has been verified against physical availability of land, using several
parameters such as net land available for development, per capita area required for amenities/utilities, per
capita built-up area required for living, and FSI. Estimated population coming up based on these
calculations is more or less similar to what is arrived out of shift and share method. Table 3-4 explains
how population has been verified with the population arrived by Shift and Share method.
Sl.No
A
Table 3-4: Estimated Population for IDP Area in NAINA

Description
Details
Population (2011)
Population of 23 villages
65,063
Net Plot Area (sq.m)
14,489,974
Per Capita area required for Amenities (sq.m)
6.25
Per Capita built-up area requirement (sq.m)
20.0
(2034)
FSI
1.00
Formula for Population Estimation
NP = P' x PCPP + ((P' x
28
Sl.No
Description
Total (A+B)
Estimated Population by 2034

Estimated + Existing Population
Rounded of Population Figure
Details
BUA)/FSI)
551,999
617,062
6.2 Lakhs
Note:
NP
P'
PCPP
BUA
FSI
Net Plot Area

Population
Per Capita Amenity Space Required Per Person (Per capita space required for all amenities, utilities & open spaces
has been calculated based on the CIDCO Norms)
Built-up Area Required Per Person (Dwelling Unit Size assumed for EWS is 40 sq.m, and 90 sq.m for others)
Floor Space Index (Arrived based on the assumption that, 80% of area with 1.2 FSI will be occupied by Land
Assembly Model and 20% with 0.6 FSI by Individual developments)
Further planning has been done based on 6.2 lakhs estimated population.
29
4. REQUIREMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSES
4.1 PLANNING NORMS

Spatial norms for provision of infrastructure have been laid down by Government of Maharashtra 1979, by
UDPFI guidelines in 1996 and draft revision in 2014. In addition, CIDCO has also adopted a set of norms
for planning in Navi Mumbai. A comparative statement of these norms and standards is given in Annexure
4-1. For estimation of social amenities and public utilities, it is proposed to adopt the CIDCOs Navi
Mumbai norms. Where CIDCO norms are not available, other standards have been considered. Requirement
of such facilities by the year 2034 is given in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Estimated demand and area requirement for Social Facilities
Area
Requirement as
Estimated
1 for
Facilities
per adopted
Demand by
Population
Norms
2034
(Ha)
Educational Facilities
Balwadi/ Creche
12,000
0.05
52
Primary & Secondary School (Building area)
10,170
0.40
61
Colleges
125,000
1.00
05
Professional Colleges/Technical College
125,000
2.00
05
Sub-Total
Health Facilities
Clinic
10,000
0.06
62
Dispensary/PHC
25,000
0.15
25
General Hospital
100,000
0.50
07
Super Specialty Hospital
250,000
2.00
03
Sub-Total
Social and Cultural Facilities
Library
10,000
0.05
62
Multipurpose Hall
10,000
0.20
62
Health Club & Gymnasium
10,000
0.10
62
Religious
10,000
0.15
62
Working Women hostel
100,000
0.30
07
Daily Bazaar
10,000
0.10
62
Community center
100,000
0.20
07
Sub-Total
Public Facilities
Police Station
100,000
1.00
07
Fire Brigade and Allied services
200,000
1.00
04
Burial/Cremation Ground
500,000
4.00
02
Sub-Total
Area
Requirement
(Ha)
2.6
24.4
5.0
10.0
42.0
3.7
3.8
3.5
6.0
17.0
3.1
12.4
6.2
9.3
2.1
6.2
1.4
40.7
7.0
4.0
8.0
19.0
30
Parks/ Play Grounds

School Play grounds
Parks & Play Grounds
City Park
Sub-Total
Total (A+B+C+D+E)
10170
10,000
500,000
0.60
3.00
50.00
61
62
02
36.6
186.0
60.0
282.6
401.3
4.2 ESTIMATED REQUIREMENT

This section presents estimated demand for proposed social infrastructure facilities such as educational,
health facilities, open spaces and other amenities. It includes estimated demand and its area requirement for
the facilities required by the horizon year 2034. CIDCO Navi Mumbai norms have been adopted to project
the requirements.
4.2.1
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Demand estimation carried out for educational facilities which include balwadi/ Creche, primary &
secondary schools, colleges and professional institution/ technical colleges. It is estimated that, by the year
2034, about 61 Schools and 52 balwadies would be needed to cater to the basic educational requirement.
Similarly about 05 Colleges and 05 Professional Colleges would be needed by the year 2034. Estimated
demand and area requirement for educational facilities is given Table 4-2.
Table 4-2: Estimated demand and area requirement of Educational Facilities, 2031
Estimated Demand
Area Requirement (in Ha.)
Grouping of Facilities
Facilities
2021
2031
2034
2021
2031
2034
Balwadi/Creche
School
Higher Education
Balwadi/Creche
Primary &
Secondary School
Colleges
Professional
Colleges/Technical
College
Total Area
15
39
52
0.8
2.0
2.6
17
46
61
6.8
18.4
24.4
02
04
05
2.0
4.0
5.0
02
04
05
4.0
8.0
10.0
13.6
32.4
42.0
Note: As per education trend observed in Navi Mumbai, it is suggested to have integrated/ composite schools (from
pre-primary to higher secondary).
4.2.2
HEALTH FACILITIES
As far as the health infrastructure is concerned, 07 general hospitals and 03 super speciality hospitals would
be needed to cater the needs of population by the year 2034. Two general hospitals with an area of 2.5 ha
each has been proposed as against 07 to consolidate the total land. This would facilitate the city level
medical needs at two significant locations. The Estimated demand of health facilities and area requirement is
given in Table 4-3.
Table 4-3: Estimated demand and area requirement of Health Facilities, 2034
Estimated Demand
Grouping of
Facilities
Facilities
2021
2031
2034
2021
2031
2034
Clinics
17
46
62
1.0
2.8
3.7
Dispensary/PHC
07
19
25
1.1
2.9
3.8
Health Facilities
General Hospital
02
05
07
1.0
2.5
3.5
Super Specialty
01
02
03
2.0
4.0
6.0
Hospital
Total
5.1
12.2
17.0
31
4.2.3
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL FACILITIES
The social and cultural facilities, includes religious facilities, community halls, working women hostels,
daily bazaar/Market complexes. As per the adopted norms, 62 daily bazar complexes would be needed.
Requirement of all social and cultural facilities is given in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4: Estimated demand and area requirement of Social and Cultural Facilities
Estimated Demand
Grouping of Facilities
Facilities
2021
2031
2034
2021
2031
2034
Library
17
46
62
0.9
2.3
3.1
Multipurpose
Hall
17
46
62
3.4
9.2
12.4
Facility Center
Health Club &
17
46
62
1.7
4.6
6.2
Gymnasium
Religious
Religious
17
46
62
2.6
6.9
9.3
Hostel
Daily Bazar
Community center
Working Women hostel

Daily Bazar
Community center
02
17
02
05
46
05
07
62
07
Total
0.6
1.7
0.4
1.5
4.6
1.0
2.1
6.2
1.4
11.2
30.1
40.7
Social amenities and public utilities can be distributed among the authority involved in development (Special
Planning Authority) and developments can come up through private developer by way of obtaining
development permissions as explained in Development Control Regulations. Some city level or larger scale
facilities which are mandatorily to be provided have been shown in IDP. Facilities kept for private
development are not shown in IDP.
4.2.4
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Requirement of public utilities has been worked out. The utility includes fire stations/ police stations and
burial grounds. 07 Police Post/Chowky, 04 Fire stations etc would also be needed. Requirement of all
utilities is given in Table 4-5.
Grouping of
Facilities
Police & Fire
Station
Burial/Cremation
Ground
Table 4-5: Estimated demand and area requirement of public utilities, 2034
Estimated Demand
Facilities
2021
2031
2034
2021
2031
2034
Police Station
02
05
07
2.0
5.0
7.0
Fire Brigade and Allied
01
03
04
1.0
3.0
4.0
services
Burial/Cremation Ground
01
Total
4.2.5
01
02
4.0
4.0
8.0
7.0
12.0
19.0
PARKS AND PLAY GROUNDS
Parks and play grounds are essential facilities. It is estimated that, 62 neighbourhood parks and 02 city level
parks will be needed for the area taken up to cater to the requirements of horizon year population. (Refer
Table 4-6).
Table 4-6: Estimated demand and area requirement of parks and play grounds, 2014
Estimated Demand
Grouping of
Facilities
Facilities
2021
2031
2034
2021
2031
2034
School Play
17
46
61
10.2
27.6
36.6
ground
Parks/ Play
Grounds
Parks/ Play
17
46
62
51.0
138.0
186.0
Grounds
32
City level Park
01
01
Total
02
50.0
50.0
60.0
101.0
188.0
246.0
4.3 DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE

It is important to mention that, the distribution of above estimated facilities among the SPA-NAINA,
developments through Layouts/ NAINA scheme etc will have to be differentiated. Following Table 4-7
explains about how the estimated social amenities and public utilities shown in Interim Development Plan. It
is distributed that, some mandatory city level infrastructure such as City Park, crematorium/ burial grounds,
police station, fire station, general hospital etc have to be provided by authority responsible and they have
been shown in IDP. Some facilities such as daily bazar, colleges and schools are envisaged to come through
development permissions where private developers shall be encouraged.
Part percentage of parks and play grounds are mandatory to come up within layouts and NAINA schemes
(further details of NAINA scheme are given chapter 8 of this report). Abbreviations as well as colour code
used while spatially locating required social infrastructure facilities and list of reservations is given in
Annexure 4-2.
Distribution
100%
designated in
IDP
50% designated
in IDP / 50%
by developer
100%
from
Layouts
and
NAINA
Schemes
Table 4-7: Amenities & Utilities shown in Interim Development Plan

Social Amenities
Public Utilities
Parks and Play Grounds
Dispensary/Primary Health
Police station
Parks and play
Centre
grounds
Fire station
City Level Park1
General Hospital
Burial Ground
Community Centre
Daily Bazaar
School play grounds
College
Schools
Balwadi/ Creche
10% of parks within
layouts/ NAINA
Professional Colleges
Scheme
Clinics
Super Specialty Hospital

Religious
Library
Multipurpose Hall
Health Club &
Gymnasium
Working Women Hostel
UDPFI Norm adopted for estimation of City Park Requirement
33
5. PROPOSED TRANSPORT NETWORK

PLAN
5.1 PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

Transportation network for IDP cannot be developed in isolation. A broad transport network is therefore
developed for entire NAINA & KNT as a part of Structure Plan. This has taken into account
recommendations of Comprehensive Transport Study (CTS) for MMR. The transportation network for
the IDP area is further developed in the context of Structure Plan. There are a number of public transport
and road corridors proposed in the CTS, which can provide regional connectivity in NAINA and KNT
with respect to rest of the MMR. Necessary realignments of proposals given in the CTS are
recommended in the light of proposed Structure Plan for NAINA and KNT.
It is imperative to mention that the proposed transportation plan has been developed to guide the future
development of the whole of NAINA & KNT. However, the same shall be amended based on site
condition while preparing the DP. Annexure 5-1 presents the Proposed Transportation Plan for Project
Area (NAINA & KNT together)
The proposed network is described in the following sections.
CTS Proposals for NAINA and KNT;
Additional Urban Transport Network in NAINA and KNT to improve transit and road access in
the light of proposed Structure Plan;
RoWs Treatment of important Public Transport and Road Corridors.
5.1.1
CTS RECOMMENDED PROPOSALS IN NAINA AND KNT
As stated above, recommended public transport and road corridors of the CTS, which pass through the
Project Area (NAINA & KNT together) are important to provide regional connectivity in Project Area
with respect to rest of MMR. Key proposals, which shall influence urban structure of Project Area and
specifically to the IDP area are as follows: MMC: The proposed MMC is an important corridor, which connects various parts of the Project
Area right from north end to south end. The MMC is a multimodal corridor, which will provide
public transport and road based connectivity to important parts of MMR between Vasai Road/
Virar to Uran. As part of the Structure Plan for Project Area, MMC is proposed for realignment
in the northern parts of the Project Area to enable its efficient use with respect to proposed
development. Service roads will be provided along the MMC on both sides to provide local
access for the proposed development. The RoW proposed for the MMC is approximately 100m
to accommodate metro, regional road traffic, and service roads on both sides. Approximately 11
km of length of MMC from the North of Village Akurli up to Village Belavali in the South
passes through the IDP area.
Metro Network: There is an extensive network proposed for metro to connect Navi Mumbai and
other sub-urban towns to main economic centres in Greater Mumbai. The proposed metro
34
network in the adjoining areas of NAINA and KNT is aimed at connecting CBD of Belapur,
Kharghar Township, Taloja MIDC Industrial Area, NMIA, JNPT, Uran, Panvel. Some of these
important proposed metro corridors with respect to the Project Area are as follows:
o Mankhurd-Vashi-Narthengaon (M17)
o Vashi-Belapur-NMIA-Panvel (M18)
o Targhar-Kharkopar-Nhava Sheva-Dronagiri (M19)
o Kharkopar-Dhutum-Pirkone-Shirkhi-Vadkal (M20)
o Dronagiri-Pirkone-Jite (M21)
o Shirki-Washi-Jite (M22)
Location of above metro corridors is shown in Annexure 5-2.
It is important to mention that CTS was carried out prior to notifications of NAINA and KNT by the
Government of Maharashtra, project came into existence hence it is desirable that some of the metro
corridors are extended and coordinated with the proposed Structure Plan for the IDP area.
It is recommended that metro link proposed up to Panvel is extended into the IDP Area near Panvel,
which can culminate with MMC to enable Transit Oriented Development (TOD).
Sub-Urban Rail Network: Following two proposed sub-urban rail corridors passing through the
IDP Area.
o Panvel-Karjat Sub-urban Corridor (S4); and
o Panvel-Rasayani Sub-Urban Corridor along Konkan Railway (Panvel-Jite-Thal: S2).
It is important and desirable to implement on short-term needs, Panvel-Karjat Sub-urban rail
corridor to facilitate development within the IDP Area.
Freeway and Arterial Road Network: A number of freeways and arterial roads linking the IDP
area are already proposed in CTS, which is of regional importance and an important part to
extend quality road connectivity in the Project Area hence needs to be realized on short to
medium term basis.
Other Important Links relevant to the IDP Area: Among the other proposals in CTS and
other studies, the important transport links of the IDP Area are Mumbai Trans Harbour Link
(MTHL), Mumbai-Vadodara Spur, and NMIA. These transport nodes and links will trigger to
advance the development within the IDP area.
5.1.2
ADDITIONAL URBAN TRANSPORT NETWORK WITHIN THE IDP AREA
To further expand public transport and road network in the Project Area with respect to CTS proposals
following strategies and network are adopted.
Redesign the MMC cross-section to suit connectivity needs of the IDP Area. It is proposed to
provide service corridors along the MMC on both sides to adequately meet local traffic demand.
Typical cross-section of the MMC is given in subsequent sections.
A spinal road is proposed to meet Project Areas traffic needs. A RoW is proposed to be reserved
for longterm needs for a spinal road, which will connect MMC and NH-4 to eastern end of the
35
Project Area along Mumbai-Pune Expressway. A RoW of 60 m is proposed for the spinal road.
Its cross section in given in the following section.
Hierarchical Road Network: A hierarchical road network is proposed to provide access into
various parts of the Project Area with road network having RoWs for Sub-Arterials as 60m and
45m, sector roads and local access roads as 35m and 27m and 20m respectively.
It is proposed that for Phase I development existing road network comprising Mumbai-Pune
Expressway, NH-4 and SH-54, be utilized to provide transport access in to the IDP Area.
Necessary modification and entry points are proposed in order to facilitate Phase 1 development.
5.1.3
PROPOSED ROWS FOR TRANSPORT AND ROAD CORRIDORS
A hierarchical road network is proposed to provide access into various parts of the IDP Area with road
network having RoWs for Sub-Arterials as 60 and 45m, sector roads and local access roads as 35 m, 27m
and 20m respectively. Proposed transport network is shown in Figure 5-1. Typical cross sections of all
transport corridors are given in Annexure 5-3.
Table 5-1: Length of Proposed Roads with RoW in IDP Area
MMC + SPUR (126 m RoW)
Newly Proposed
(length in m)
6,089
MMC + Spine (120 m RoW)
4,706
4,706
SPUR (100 m RoW)
1,236
1,236
SH (Proposed 45 m RoW )
Proposed Road 60 m (Spine)
1,473
1,473
Proposed Road 45 m (with Metro)
4,338
4,338
Proposed Road 35 m RoW
6,555
8,053
655
12,201
12,856
2,060
13,603
15,663
10
Proposed Road 15 RoW
9,081
9,081
11
Proposed Road 12 RoW
6,591
6,591
12
Proposed Road 9 RoW
11,624
11,624
13
Proposed Road 7.5 RoW
803
803
14
Proposed Road 6 RoW
10,035
10,035
15
Proposed Road 4.5 RoW
4,358
4,358
92,694
103,465
Sl.No
Category of Road
Total
Existing/ Proposed for

Widening (length in m)
6,558
1,498
10,771
Total
(length in m)
6,089
6,558
36
Figure 5-1: Proposed Hierarchical Road Network in IDP Area
37
5.1.4 METRO LINK EXTENSION TO IDP AREA

A metro link connecting Panvel to IDP (from west to east) area has been proposed to connect proposed
MMC. Proposed metro link is shown in Figure 5-2.
Figure 5-2: Metro Link from West to East to Panvel and MMC in IDP Area
38
6. PROPOSED LAND USE
6.1 KEY CONSIDERATIONS OF THE PLAN

The structure of the proposed land use for IDP Area is
evolved around following considerations.
6.1.1
PROPOSED ENTRY/EXIT POINTS TO

THE IDP AREA
To enhance the better accessibility from the existing

and the proposed road network, the Plan proposes
seven entry/exit locations to the IDP area. They are
very much essential in terms of local and regional
connectivity. Figure 6-1 depicts the locations of entry/
exit points to the IDP Area.
1.
Mumbai-Pune Expressway near Vichumbe

Village;
NH-4B near Karanjade;
NH-4 near ONGC Hospital;
NH-4 near Kon Village;
Gurudwara Road Panvel ;
MMC; and
SH-54.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
6.1.2
PROTECTION OF NATURAL AREAS
Figure 6-1: Location of Entry/ Exit points to the

IDP Area
The IDP Area is partially located in the hilly terrain of Western Ghats, which has sensitive areas of
natural and economic importance. Protecting these natural areas is important to regional ecological
importance of MMR and Western Ghats.
As part of the protection strategy, the IDP proposes following areas to be protected from urban
development. Hills with more than 20% gradient;
Natural drainage Rivers and Nalas with buffers;
Protected Forests; and
Water bodies with buffers.
The above-mentioned areas will be an important ecological layer of the IDP Area and more detailed
studies may be promoted to ensure the well-being of natural and environmental values of these areas.
39
These areas may be used for passive recreational activities. Summary of environmental sensitive areas is
given in Table 6-1. Location of these features is shown in Annexure 6-1.
Table 6-1: Summary of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in IDP Area
Sl.No.
1
2
3
Land Use
Forests
Water bodies
Steep hill slopes (20% and above)
Area (in Ha)

230.00
86.92
148.96
Total
6.1.3
% of total IDP area
465.9
6.2
2.4
4.0
12.65
LEVERAGING EXISTING AND PROPOSED ECONOMIC NODES IN AND AROUND

THE IDP AREA
The IDP Area is located in proximity to important existing and proposed economic nodes. Leveraging
these economic nodes to provide support economic and social infrastructure is important to bring success
to the development of IDP Area. These major economic nodes are as follows:
Upcoming NMIA;
An emerging rail link at Panvel and warehousing activities at Kalamboli;
CBD, Navi Mumbai; and
Taloja Industrial Area.
Provision of efficient transport network particular public transport and high quality infrastructure would
help IDP to capture the growth impulses of these economic opportunities.
6.1.4
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD)
Transit Oriented Development is an integrated approach of transport and land use planning leading to
compact, high density developments located around public transit nodes such as metro stations, railway
stations or multimodal transit hubs. The development has a rich mix of land uses including commercial,
residential, and institutional; designed to maximize the access to transit and non-motorized transport. The
term transit includes variety of modes including Metro rail, suburban rail, light rail, road based public
transport etc. and a mix of all these gives rise to a variety of land use patterns around the transit corridors
and nodes. The proposed growth centres are located along the transit route in the form of TOD.
CTS carved out a vision for MMRs future transportation as a seamless, integrated system for safe and
convenient commuter travel throughout the region with a strong emphasis on public transport. In order to
support the anticipated economic development in MMR and subsequent inter-related transport challenges
given by population and employment growth, Transit First was considered as a guiding principle in
preparation of the transport plan for MMR.
With this vision, the CTS identified major Transport Networks for MMR to serve multiple growth
centres identified within the region. Other important aspects of the Plan are capacity enhancement of
existing suburban and metro corridors, connecting major existing and planned activity centres of the
region providing exclusive bus lanes to reinforce rail-based transit with a higher order road based public
transport systems.
During the CTS Study, NAINA was not envisaged as a region of intensive urban development.
Therefore, in light of delineation of NAINA as a separate region under influence of NMIA and new
urban development strategies being devised for the region, calls for augmenting the transit network
proposed under CTS.
40
Based on Mumbai and Navi Mumbai experience and also other international regional planning practices,
economic growth of the region is maximized by effective public transit connectivity. Given that the
major economic drivers of the IDP area including NMIA, JNPT and Industries (Taloja MIDC,
Kalamboli) actually lie outside the region, it is very critical to integrate these economic and employment
centres with the region through public transport.
Thus, promoting TOD is the key aspect of the transport and land use plan of the Project Area as a whole
and the IDP Area in particular.
6.1.5
INTEGRATION OF GAOTHANS & EXPANSION AREAS
The Gaothans are developed and the expansion areas are developing rapidly. To achieve planned urban
development integration of Gaothans and their expansion area is necessary. Road network and social and
physical infrastructure is provided for the same.
Such a strategy would enable integration of the village settlements to the urban structure of the IDP Area,
hence leading to a healthy planned urban development.
6.2 LOCATION OF GROWTH CENTRES
The 15 % land reserved for growth centre, development charges and OCSDC shall be the main
sources of revenue for funding City & Peripheral level infrastructure.
The FSI permissible on growth centre lands shall be 1.7, at par with the FSI potential of the
participants in 'NAINA scheme'.
The Growth centre shall not be used for EWS/LIG housing or development of Social facilities.
The Growth centre land shall not be allotted for any request of land by Govt./Semi-Govt. Agency
at concessional prices.
In Growth Centre component, no amenity space needs to be provided.
Only internal and layout roads and open spaces will be required to be provided without losing
FSI potential.
6.3 BROAD AND FLEXIBLE ZONING

Though concept of zoning is important, rigid land use zoning concepts are gradually becoming an
obsolete idea in urban planning and in the context of role of private developers in Mumbai. Hence, it is
desirable to promote the concept of zoning with flexibility to promote compatible land uses in various
zones. Idea is to promote flexible zoning, especially when the SPA intends to promote common
infrastructure and urban development in the IDP Area with major role from developers and other real
estate entrepreneurs.
6.3.1
FLEXIBLE ZONING
As suggested in Structure Plan document of NAINA & KNT, the concept of flexible zoning is evolved
for land use plan of the IDP Area. In each zone compatible land uses are defined under preferred,
permitted, and prohibited uses. The concept of flexible zoning is to encourage enabling of flexible
environment for private sector led development and to tap market demand with changing economic
scenario.
41
As a part of overall land use structure of the Project Area (NAINA and KNT), the area is delineated into
nine zones which are N1 to N7, LDZ (Limited Development Zone) and DDZ (Deffered Development
Zone). The developable area of 2463 ha, as indicated in Table 2.3 is divided into following land use
zones.
N1: Predominantly Residential: The zone is aimed at promoting residential townships and
support social infrastructure. Compatible functions to that of residential development would be
permitted in N1.
N2: Growth Centre: The zone is aimed to promote commercial and business activities.
N3: Mixed Use Zone: The zone is aimed to promote mixed use activities, which can be located
along areas of higher accessibility where land uses and activities related to public and economic
importance can be located.
N4: Urban Village: The zone around 200m of existing inhabitated Gaothans.
N5: Recreational Zone: The zone is aimed to promote open spaces and recreational activities.
The permissible use in each zone are classified as permissible, permissible with conditions and
prohibited.
The conditions are as follows:
No.
Details
Should abut road of minimum 18 m width
Independent Building/If mixed use in same building then separate access
Only manufacturing of bricks, earthen pots, country tiles etc.
i) Should not be located within the distance of 90 m. from any junction of roads having min. width
12 m. each from nearest gate of a school, hospital, theatre, place of assembly or stadium.
ii) Restrictions imposed by Ribbon Development Rules, IRC, MoRTH shall apply.
iii) Petrol filling station shall not be sited on the convex side of a road curve. In case the curve is
not very sharp and cars moving out of the station are completely visible to the traffic from a
distance of at least 90 m. and vice versa, a petrol station may be permitted on such a convex curve.
General Conditions for all development
i) In case of plots fronting on National Highway, State Highway and Major District Roads, the
building line shall be as per Ribbon Development Rules shall apply
ii) A stadium shall generally accommodate 400 m. running track.
Existing plantation, orchards shall continue as a use irrespective of surrounding land use zone. The FSI
will be as per the adjoining zone. The FSI can be loaded on the continuous adjoining land.
6.3.2
PROPOSED LAND USE
The gross area of IDP is 3683 Ha, out of which the developable area is 2463 Ha. This developable area
includes 25% reservations towards proposed roads (13 %), parks and playgrounds (8 %), amenities and
utilities (4%). 15% of the developable area is reserved for growth centres. The social facilities and
amenities include burial/cremation grounds, community centre, fire station, police station, college,
42
school, play grounds, daily bazaar, general hospital, and primary health centre. Map showing proposed
land use zoning is given in Figure 6-2.
Open spaces:
The open spaces proposed in the IDP can be categorized as active and passive open spaces.
a) The passive open spaces include forests, river, and water bodies. The passive open spaces
work out to be 9.5 % of the gross IDP area. These open spaces will serve as lungs spaces for
the city and works out to 5.67 sq.m. per person (considering 6.2 lakh estimated population).
b) The active open spaces in IDP comprise two forms, viz., IDP reservations; and open spaces
through layout permissions. The active open spaces reserved in IDP are 5.3% on gross IDP
area (i.e. 8% on developable land area), which works out to be 3.15 sq.m. per person
(considering 6.2 lakh estimated population). As mentioned in the DCRs, each land holding
having area more than 0.4 Ha, shall require providing open spaces @ 10%. It is assumed
that 80% of the land available with land owners (i.e. 60% of developable land) will be
having aggregations more than 0.4 Ha. Thus, 48% of the developable land (80% of 60%)
will be having land area more than 0.4 Ha. Therefore, the open spaces through layout
permissions of these lands will be 3.14%, which works out to be 1.86 sq.m. per person
(considering 6.2 lakh estimated population).
Considering passive and active open spaces, the open space per person of the gross IDP area is about 10
sq.m. per person.
The proposed land use distribution of developable area is given in Table 6-2.
Table 6-2: Area Statement for Proposed Land Use
Sl.No.
Land Zone / Use
Area in Ha
% of Developable
Land
15%
1
2
3
N1 (Predominantly Residential)
N2 Growth Centre
N3 Mixed Use
1268
375
461
4
5
6
7
8
N4 Urban Village
N5 Parks and Playgrounds
Reservations Amenities & Utilities
Reservations Parks / Playgrounds
Proposed Roads
521
32
77
196
325
Total of Developable Land*

2463
N2-Growth Centre, Proposed Roads & Reservations to be contributed to SPANAINA account for 40% of Developable Land
4%
8%
13%
40%
* Developable Land is a sum of 1 to 8 above less existing built-up areas
6.4 SECTORS
The IDP area is divided into ten (10) sectors. The division of sectors is based on the existing and
proposed physical features such as rivers, railway line, proposed and existing roads. The sectors were
divided considering the geographical area and population. The average area of each sector is 350 Ha. The
estimated population of each sector is approximately 60,000. Map showing delineation of sectors is given
in Annexure 6-3.
43
Figure 6-2: Proposed Land Use Distribution in IDP Area, 2014
44
7. PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The physical infrastructure components considered for development of proposed IDP Area have been
presented below:
Water Supply;
Sewerage and recycling;
Drainage, and river training;
Solid Waste Management; and
Power supply.
7.2 WATER SUPPLY

7.2.1
GROSS WATER DEMAND
Based upon the existing and proposed residential, commercial (employment), horticulture and
firefighting demand, the gross water demand for the IDP area has been worked out.
For working out fresh water demand at consumer end, the quantity of recycled water from Tertiary
Treatment Plants (TTPs) after subtracting the losses in the supply system has been deducted from the
total demand. For working out, gross water demand 28 percent losses in distribution and transmission
system has been considered as per norms prescribed by CIDCO for design of water supply system.
Based upon above norms the demand for total IDP area works out as 93 mld, and if the recycling is not
considered the demand of fresh water shall be as high as 178 mld. The detailed calculations are shown
in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1: Water Demand for IDP Area
Particulars of
users
2016
2031
2034
Residential
Employment
90000
22995
460000
91980.4
620000
229951
Rate of
Supply in
lpcd
180
45
Fire fighting
Industries
Urban Greens
100*(P)^0.5
0.95
2.14
2.49
Population / Area in Ha
11.70
116.79
116.96
251.39
52200
Total
Recycled Water to be used for Urban greens, fire-fighting & flushing
Net Fresh Water Demand at consumer end
Water Demand in mld

2016
2031
2034
16.20
1.03
82.80
4.14
111.60
10.35
116.79
0.61
116.79
6.11
15000
13.12
20.55
9.46
11.08
96.94
47.74
49.20
139.31
66.96
72.35
45
Distribution, Treatment & Transmission losses 28%
3.10
13.78
20.26
Total Demand at source with recycling

Demand without recycling
14.19
26.30
62.98
124.08
92.61
178.32
7.2.2
SOURCES OF WATER
It is understood that the CIDCO is presently gets water from Hetawane dam and MJP to meet the water
demand of its New Town Development Authority (NTDA) Area. The availability from these sources is
nearly 265 mld. A project from Balganga dam is under execution, which is likely to be completed by
2016. The availability from this source shall be 350 mld. Besides, a new source from proposed
Kondhane dam is under consideration. CIDCO is expecting to get 250 mld of water from this source by
2026. CIDCO has worked out year wise demand of its developed/ developable area (other than
NAINA) from 2015 to 2030. Based on this data, a statement showing demand, availability and excess
has been prepared and shown in Table 7-2.
Table 7-2: Demand/Availability of Water in CIDCO area
Year
2015
Demand
in mld
251
Source
Present Status of source
Hetawane Dam
MJP
Existing
Existing
Total
Hetawane Dam
MJP
2016
274
Balganga Dam
Hetawane Dam
MJP
2021
487
Balganga Dam
Hetawane Dam
MJP
2026
667
Balganga Dam
Kondhane Dam
2030
780
Hetawane Dam
MJP
Balganga Dam
Kondhane Dam
Existing
Existing
Under Execution
(likely to be completed by 2016)
Total
Existing
Existing
Under Execution
Total
Existing
Existing
Under Execution
Under Consideration
(expecting to get water by 2026)
Total
Existing
Existing
Under Execution
Under Consideration
Total
Available
Water in
mld
150
115
Excess in
mld
14
265
150
115
350
341
615
150
115
350
128
615
150
115
350
198
250
865
150
115
350
85
250
865
It is evident that CIDCO will have excess of water with respect to demand of NTDA Area 2016
onwards (if proposed sources are developed as expected). Ultimately, in the year 2030, CIDCO shall be
having 85 mld of water in excess of NTDA Areas demand. The ultimate demand of IDP Area in the
horizon year 2034 is calculated as 93 mld and the demand in 2031 is only 63 mld as shown in Table 71. Thus, the demand of IDP Area can well be met from excess water available from CIDCO sources till
the year 2033-34. However, for beyond 2034, some other sources will be required to be tapped to meet
46
the demand of 8 mld for IDP area. However, this is subject to maximum utilization of recycled with
right from the beginning.
7.2.3
PROPOSED SOURCES OF WATER
As per proposals of Balganga Water Supply Scheme (350 mld) of CIDCO, the water drawn from the
dam is proposed to be treated at Nidhiwali Water Treatment Plant, from where it shall be pumped to a
Break Pressure Tank, and then shall be transferred to Master Balancing Reservoir (MBR) near VAHAL
through 2500 mm diameter Pipe line. The detailed note on water supply demand is given in Annexure
7-1.
7.3 SEWERAGE COLLECTION, TREATMENT

SYSTEM
7.3.1
AND RECYCLING
ESTIMATION OF SEWAGE GENERATION
The Sewage Collection and recycling system is planned and designed to collect, treat, and recycle all
the domestic sewerage and industrial effluent generated from the IDP Area. There are three possible
options for collection and treatment of Sewage including Tertiary Treatment and recycling. These are
discussed below:
Sewage and Sullage both are treated by developer of the plot at plot level: This has the
disadvantage, that STPs will be located near the residential areas, secondly, it will not be
possible to monitor the quality of treated water as form large number of STPs. On the other
hand Sewage from Gaothans and small plots has to be treated at community level STPs, which
will again involve infrastructure cost. This also have the problem that how the waste effluent
from so many STPs shall be carried to suitable disposal points.
Sullage is treated at developer level and Sewage is carried to Community level STPs: This
will again have the problem of monitoring the quality of treated water being supplied, and
sullage from Gaothans / small plots as stated above.
Sewage and Sullage both are taken to community STPs and treated water recycled: A
comprehensive sewage collection system, along with community STPs / TTPs and recycling
system is developed. Though this will involve some extra infrastructure cost on account of
collection system and distribution of recycled water this is the safest way of treating the total
sewage. In this system the tertiary treated water can precisely be distributed to urban greens /
parks, different industries for washing and for flushing use in residential areas.
As prescribed in CPHEEO manual, it is assumed that 80% of water actually supplied at consumer end
for domestic use and 60% of water supplied to industries be generated as Sewage/ waste water. While
working out sizes of collection system and capacity of Sewage Treatment Plant, provision has been
kept for 20% infiltration through sewer lines. But while calculating the water available for recycling,
the infiltration has not been considered, assuming that during summers and winters the infiltration shall
almost be negligible. Accordingly, the sewage generated capacity of STPs and Tertiary Treatment
Plants (TTPs) required has been worked out and shown in Table 7-3.
Table 7-3: Sewage Generated, Capacity of STPs & TTPs required
Sewage Generation & Treatment Plants Capacity
2016
2031
Sewage Generation in mld
17.23
85.01
Capacity of STPs required
17.00
85.00
Capacity of TTPs Required
12.00
57.00
2034
118.86
119.00
80.00
47
The recycled water shall primarily be used for proposed urban greens as horticulture requirement and
the remaining shall be used in industries mainly for cleaning/washing and in residential areas for
flushing etc.
Considering the topography of the area, pace of development and land use of IDP, the entire IDP area is
divided into 5 Sewerage Zones. The related Tertiary Treatment Plant is also proposed to be installed on
the side of STP. The Capacity of STPs and TTPs proposed zone wise is being given in Table 7-4.
Table 7-4: Zone wise Capacity of proposed STPs and TTPs in IDP Area
Sewerage Zone
Sewerage Zone-1
Sewerage Zone-2
Sewerage Zone-3
Sewerage Zone-4
7.3.2
Capacity of STP
Capacity of TTP
Sewerage Zone-5
36.89
19.04
20.23
16.66
26.18
24.8
12.8
13.6
11.2
17.6
Total Capacity
119.00
80.00
SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM
The Sewage/Effluent collection system is provided to collect the domestic sewage / industrial waste
water from the residential/industrial areas and to convey it to the proposed Sewage Treatment Plant of
that zone. Since industrial waste water is very meagre in quantity, thus common collection system is
provided for sewage and waste water collection. The zoning and collection network is proposed in such
a way that the flow of sewage follows natural slope and conveys the sewage to treatment plant (located
at the lowest elevation) under gravity flow. The location of Sewage Treatment plants along with
Tertiary Treatment Plants is given in Annexure 7-1.
The Sewage Collection system is being proposed at sector level roads only. The internal sewers
including laterals shall be provided by the land developers themselves, which shall further be connected
to trunk sewerage system. The detailed note on sewerage system is given in Annexure 7-1.
7.3.2.1 SEWAGE / WASTE WATER TREATMENT AND TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT
It is proposed to provide conventional Activated Sludge Process type of Sewage / Treatment Plant. The
plant shall comprise Coarse screen chamber, Sewage pumping station, Fine screen chamber, Grit
chamber, Oil and Grease traps, Activated sludge type Aeration Chamber with Fluidized Bed Reactor or
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor, Secondary Sedimentation tank, Air Blowers, Sludge pumps, and Sludge
drying mechanism.
The Tertiary Treatment Plant (TTP) shall comprise pre-chlorination chamber, rapid gravity sand filters
and post chlorination mechanism. The TTPs are designed to receive an inflow of 85% of Sewage
generated assuming 15% losses in STP. The losses in TTP are taken as 5%.
7.3.2.2 REUSE OF TERTIARY TREATED WATER
The Sewage treated in STP and then the secondary water treated in Tertiary Treatment Plant in each
zone shall be collected in individual Clear water reservoir, wherefrom it shall be pumped for
horticulture / industrial use and for flushing in the same zone. The water shall be collected by individual
users in their ground tanks for their use. Provision has been taken for Clear water reservoirs, pumping
machinery and distributaries rising mains DI Pipe class K-9.
48
7.4 RIVERS AND ROAD SIDE DRAINAGE

Two major rivers and a small nalla of about 8 to 15 meters width are passing through IDP area, a
detailed map showing these rivers is given in Annexure 7-1.
In general the drainage of the area is from North East (where high hills are seen) towards South West.
Terrain of the area is plain except to follow the drainage pattern towards rivers. The levels range
between 32 to 24 meters on Eastern boundary of IDP and 5 m to 12-13 meters on Western boundary.
Though in the hilly terrain in North East of IDP, but outside IDP boundary the levels range between
400 to 500 m on hill peaks. The details about these rivers are given below:
Gadhi or Kalundri River: It has two tributaries. On one of the tributaries is Gadheshwar dam
at the foot hills. One of the tributary as well as the main river passes through IDP area. The
river flows from North East to South West direction. The river originates from the hills on the
North East side of IDP area. All drainage from the north east side of IDP area goes to this
river/ its tributaries.
Kolkhewadi River: This River flows from East to west through southern part of IDP area. The
levels range from 30 m to 8 meters except for the hilly terrain. It meets with the Gadhi River
outside IDP area and finally discharges in to the sea.
One small nala of about 8 to 15 meters in width also passes through IDP area. It flows from
East of IDP area to south and finally meets the Kokhewadi River. It is very much meandering
in nature and divides the total IDP area almost in two equal halves.
The rivers flowing in IDP area were checked for flooding at critical intensity of rain fall. It was done as
per empirical formulae suggested by Indian Meteorological Department. It was found that in general no
flood situation is seen in IDP area.
Methodology adopted for checking the rivers for flooding
CIDCO had provided topographic data along these rivers. The survey was reported to be carried out for
study of rivers by CWPRS for the proposed project of new International Airport near Panvel. Based on
these survey levels, "L" Sections and Cross-sections along the rivers were generated and used for
analysing maximum water level at major / critical points during maximum intensity of rain fall.
Analysis for Maximum Intensity of rain fall:

The data for maximum one day rain fall at Santacruz rain gauge station from the year 1950 to 2005 and
at Colaba rain gauge station from the year 1901 to 2005 were made available by CIDCO. The hourly
rain fall data for 26th July 2005 for these stations was also provided. Based on these data, the maximum
intensity of rainfall at 100 years return period was worked out as per norms and procedure
recommended by Indian Meteorological Department.
However, the maximum hourly rain fall at other stations within Mumbai did not record such a high rain
during any hour on the day. The highest rain fall recorded at other stations on 26th July 2005 is as
follows:
Table 7-5: Maximum hourly Rainfall at Other stations in Mumbai (26th July 2005)
Rain gauge station
Time
Hourly rain fall (mm)
Panvel
12 to 13 hrs
76.0
Kharghar
10 to 11 hrs
105.0
Nerul
14 to 15 hrs
72.5
49
Rain gauge station

Vashi
CBD Belapur
Time
07 to 08 hrs
09 to 10 hrs

100.0
105.0
Thus by using the suggested Table (Annexure 7-1) for conversion of 944.2 mm point rainfall in to areal
rainfall for a recorded 16 hours duration and for 125 sq km catchment, the coefficient for maximum one
day areal rainfall for the catchment reads as 93% (By interpolation of 100 and 150 sq km area).
Therefore, the suggested maximum areal rainfall in 24 hours for 100 years return period comes as 878.1
mm.
So, the Critical intensity of rainfall as per IMD recommendations is = 0.16 x 878.1 = 140.49 mm
per hour. Intensity as per analysis of IIT Mumbai:
7.4.1
ROAD SIDE DRAINAGE
The Storm water drainage system is provided to collect the rain water with in the project area and to
cater it to the natural drains / rivers within the project area which in turn are discharging in to the
Arabian Sea on west of NAINA. The area in general is having a slope from North East to South West
direction. Due care has to be taken during design of drainage system, that the drains flow along the
natural slope of ground, to avoid unwanted earth work during construction. The drainage system shall
be proposed on both sides of proposed roads.
As the drains are discharging in to the natural drains with in project area, it is proposed to create few
water harvesting structures at suitable locations. For this, it is proposed to construct low height weirs of
1.5 m, based on the adjoining contours. The rain water collected from the proposed drains shall be
stored in these weirs. This will help in improving general water table in the area, and will also give a
good aesthetic and environmental view in the green buffer surrounded with woods.
Design Criteria and Parameters
The design of storm water drainage system is to be based on IRC - SP: 50 (Guide Lines for Urban
Drainage). This involves:
Calculating the total discharge that the system will be required to drain off.
Fixing the slope and dimensions of the drain to have adequate capacity to carry the discharge
and afford proper maintenance.
The discharge is dependent upon intensity and duration of precipitation characteristics of the area, and
the time required for such flow to reach the drain. The storm water flow for this purpose has been
determined using the rational method, as suggested in IRC SP: 50 for road side drains.
The road side drains are not to be designed for the peak flow of rare occurrence; however it is necessary
to provide sufficient capacity to prevent too frequent a flooding of the drainage area. However it is
recommended that road side drains be designed for 2 years return period, and the natural drains passing
nearby for a 5 year return period. However, CIDCO in its guide lines circulated has recommended that
Sectoral and Nodal drains be designed for 10 years return period, thus drains shall be designed for 10
years return period.
The detailed note on proposed drainage system is given in Annexure 7-1.
50
7.5
7.5.1

PROJECTED QUANTITY OF SOLID WASTE GENERATION
This section deals with the projection of solid waste generation with respect to the projected population
of the IDP area and per capita waste generation. The population projections made in this report and a
per capita waste generation rates (of 600 gm per capita for resident population) are used for estimating
future waste generation trends. The rate of waste generation throughout the horizon year of 2011-2034
is considered uniform i.e. 600 gm per capita per day. The following table shows the projected quantity
of waste generated. As per the projections, the total population in the year 2034 will be 6 lakhs while
the quantity of waste generation will be around 360 tons per day.
Sr. No.
1
2
7.5.2
Particulars/year
Projected population
Solid waste generation tpd
2021
2031
2034
110,000
120
430,000
300
620,000
360
SOURCES OF SOLID WASTE GENERATION
The main sources of solid waste generation will be residential areas, commercial areas, hotels,
institutional areas, markets and other such areas. There are no industries proposed in the IDP hence it is
unlikely that substantial industrial waste will be generated. The other sources of waste generation are
street sweeping, drain de-silting activities, tree cuttings and leaf litter from gardens and opens spaces
and construction wastes/ debris.
7.4.2
COMPOSITION OF WASTE
The area being a green-field development, no data on composition of waste is available. Hence
standards mentioned in the CPHEEO manual are assumed for composition of waste which is further
used for calculating the area required for landfill site.
Sr. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.4.3
Parameter
Total organic content
Paper
Rubber, leather & synthetics
Glass
Metals
Inert Materials
% of waste as per CPHEEO Manual

44.57
2.91
0.78
0.56
0.33
43.59
STAGES OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
The key stages of solid waste management include collection, transportation, transfer station or storage
(if required), treatment and disposal. These are briefly described in the following sections.
7.4.4
WASTE COLLECTION
Door-to-door collection: Door-to-door collection of waste is recommended in all the areas. The waste
collection shall be carried out using compactors, in gaothan areas or those having narrow street widths
small compactors or containerised push carts may be allowed. Each such push cart will have four
HDPE containers of 1m x 0.69m x 0.15m size. The push cart for door to door collection will be
provided with a bell so that the residents will be alerted of the arrival of the cart for emptying their
waste containers into the containers of the cart. The sanitary workers shall collect the waste from
51
domestic, commercial and other areas in such congested zones. Solid waste should be collected within
24 hours of generation.
Litter Bins: In addition to the door to door collection, litter bins are recommended to be provided in
public places such as gardens, bus stops, at regular intervals on streets in commercial and institutional
areas. These may be provided at 50 m interval or as per the land use and density of people. The capacity
may be around 0.02 cu. M. but may vary depending on the waste generation.
Street Sweeping: Street sweepers shall be assigned with fixed individual beats and pinpoint work
according to the density of the area to be swept. The following standards may be considered. The main
roads and high-density areas shall be cleaned every day. The low-density areas can be cleaned on
alternate days. Drain de-silting will be done on need basis.
Sr. No.
Description
Norm (road length/ sweeper)
1
2
High density areas (commercial, institutional etc.)

Low density area
250m 300m
650m 700m
Wherever bulk quantity of bio-degradable waste is generated such as vegetable markets, gardens, leaf
litter etc. facilities for on-site composting should be explored.
7.4.5
SEGREGATION OF WASTE AT SOURCE
At present, the IDP area is rural in character, and there exist a system of solid waste management.
Segregation of waste at source shall be implemented primarily in residential areas, where door to door
collection of waste is proposed. Separate collection and storage of the biodegradable and nonbiodegradable fraction, dry and wet waste of the waste from households, shops and restaurants shall be
carried out by the sanitary workers. For this purpose, the residents would be asked to store the
biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste separately. Also, the push-carts/ compactors would be
provided with two separate compartments in different colours for collection of the bio-degradable and
non-biodegradable waste. Awareness programs should be conducted to train the people about the
segregation of waste at household level. It is mandatory to segregate waste into bio-degradable and
non-biodegradable as per the Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSW) Rules 2000.
7.4.6
TRANSPORTATION
The MSW Rules 2000 stipulate that carrying solid waste in open vehicles is not permissible. Thus
mechanical compactors of adequate capacity will be used. These usually have a capacity of 6 to 8 cu.
m. For congested areas mini-tipper of 1.8 cu. m. capacity can be used.
52
7.4.7
TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
The characteristics and quantity of solid waste generated primarily influence the disposal options. A
review of the solid waste analysis results for most Indian towns and cities indicate that nearly 50% of
the waste generated is organic in nature, as per CPHEEO Manual it is 45%. In terms of the quantity,
this works out to about 162tpd for the terminal year of 2034. The organic component of the waste (45%
of the total waste) shall be composted and the rest of the waste shall be land filled.
The other technology options will not be suitable, due to the following reasons
Incineration: Due to low calorific value and high moisture content, this technology is not suitable for
Indian Solid waste. Also capital, O&M costs will be very high.
Pyrolysis and Gasification: This process involves thermal decomposition at high temperature and
besides recovering energy from the waste will ensure proper destruction of waste is possible. But due to
the composition of the waste and high moisture content the application of this process is only limited.
Pelletisation: Making fuel pellets is another option. Low calorific value wastes will not be suitable
unless ingredients are added to increase calorific value. While a few Pelletisation plants are operating in
India, long periods of project development and establishment are the hindrances in their large scale
replicability at this stage.
Bio-Chemical Conversion: This is based on decomposition of organic matter to produce methane Gas.
Anaerobic digestion in closed container can produce bio-gas to the tune of 50 to 150 m3 per tonne of
waste .Gas can be used for cooking, heating, or generation of electricity. Several schemes of biomethanation plants are being planned in India.
Considering the limited experience of above technologies, the daily quantity of waste generated and
also as the surrounding areas being predominantly rural, it can be safely presumed that the composting
will be suitable and will find a good market within the region.
The proposed disposal strategy for IDP area will be:
Compost the organic fraction of the waste 162 tons/day for the terminal year 2034
Sanitary land filling of inorganic fraction of waste and 20% compost rejects (240 tons/day in
year 2034)
Encouraging local level aerobic composting and
Educating the community on 4R strategy (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Recover)
Sections below discuss the various aspects of implementing the above strategy.
7.4.8
LAND REQUIRED FOR DISPOSAL SITE
Area requirement for the composting and land fill sites is assessed for the terminal year 2034. At 360
tons per day, the (45%) waste for composting works out to be 162 tons per day, and that for the land
filling is 230 tons (including 20% compost rejects) by the design year. The design capacities have
therefore been considered as 162 tons for composting and 230 tons for land-filling.
As summarised in below, the area required for disposal of waste for IDP area works out to a total of 5.5
ha. This comprises 0.5 ha of land for composting and 5 ha for land filling of the inorganic waste. These
area calculations form the basis for identifying the new disposal site or assessing the adequacy of the
proposed composting site. Summary is given in Table 7-6 below.
53
Table 7-6: Summary of land required for disposal site

Sr. No.
Component
A
1
Windrow Composting
Capacity of plant
Type of composting
Area for windrows for 21 days
fermentation period
Spacing of windrows
Sanitary landfill
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Assumptions
Landfill life
Waste Density
Landfill height
Volume of daily cover and
settlement
Volume of liner and cover
Landfill area calculation
Total waste generation
Total Volume of waste
generation
Volume of daily cover
Volume of liner and cover
Volume available due to
settlement
Landfill volume
Landfill area
Specification
Area requirement
162 tons/day = 262 m3

(1 ton = 1.67 m3)
Manual Aerobic
21 nos of 2.0 X 1.5 m
Height, Length of Windrows 88 m
0.6 m
230 tons/day
(198 tons/day inorganic + 32 tons/day
compost reject)
55.8x88 =4910.4 m2
Say 5000
(0.5 ha)
15 years
0.85 t/ m3 (as per CPHEEO)
20 m
0.1 (as per CPHEEO)
0.125(as per CPHEEO)
722700 tons
850235 m3
85024 m3
106279 m3
85024 m3
956514 m3 (b+c+d-e)
47826 m2
47826 m2
(4.78 ha)
Say 5 ha
Note: The above estimates for area requirement are preliminary estimates and are expected to vary
during the DPR stage
A suitable landfill based on above requirements will be identified outside the IDP area while preparing
the Development Plan for entire NAINA area. The MoEF and MPCB guidelines for identifying land fill
sites will be taken into account.
7.4.9
BIOMEDICAL WASTE
Bio medical waste is the waste material generated from the hospitals, dispensaries & pathological
laboratories located within the IDP area. The bio medical waste has to be collected, transported &
disposed off in the manner & methods as suggested under Bio-medical waste (M & H) Rules 1998. It is
clearly mentioned in this rule that the occupier (a person who has control over the concerned
institution / premises) of an institution generating bio-medical waste (e.g., hospital, nursing home,
clinic, dispensary, veterinary institution, animal house, pathological laboratory, blood bank etc.) shall
be responsible for taking necessary steps to ensure that such waste is handled without any adverse
effect to human health and the environment.
In no case bio-medical waste shall be mixed with municipal solid waste. In most existing cities large
hospitals have their own incineration plants and common incineration plants are set up by local
54
authorities. There are designated agencies for collection and transportation of bio-medical waste which
is then brought to the common incinerator/ disposal site. The total bio-medical waste generation is 357
kg/ day for the IDP area as worked out below. This is not a substantial quantity, however a common
incinerator may be provided at the land fill site or if such a facility is set up by one of the super
speciality/ general hospital it can be used by the other on payment. A hazardous waste disposal site is
available at Taloja operated by private agency. The bio-medical was can also be disposed off at the
Taloja site.
Sr. No.
Medical facility
No. of
hospitals
1
2
Area per
hospital
ha
25
0.5
Nursing Home / PHC

General Hospital
6
Super speciality
3
2
2.0
hospital
Total
8
27.5
*As per UDPFI Guidelines, # As per CPHEEO Manual
Total
area
sq.m.
250000
30000
*No. of beds
@ 100
sq. m./bed
250
300
#Biomedical
waste generation
@0.375 kg/bed
94
113
40000
400
150
320000
950
357
7.4.10 HAZAORDOUS WASTE

There are no industries proposed in the IDP area that are likely to generate hazardous waste. Moreover
hazardous waste generated if any from construction sites or any other use, such as spent oil swabs, used
oil barrels etc will be collected by the authorised agency and disposed at the Common Hazardous Waste
Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities (CHWTSDF) at Taloja as per the provisions of the
Hazardous Waste Management and Handling Rules, 2008.
7.1 POWER SUPPLY REQUIREMENT

The following standards have been adopted for the estimation of power requirement for the planning
area.
Domestic Demand
1.5 KW per household for EWS/LIG
3.0 KW per household for MIG
4.0 KW per household for HIG
Commercial and Industrial Demand
1 KW per Shop
10 KW per Service Industrial Unit
Social Facilities and Public Utilities Demand
Social Facilities 50 KW per 7500 persons
Public Utilities 120 KW 7500 persons
7.4.10.1 DEMAND ESTIMATION
Based on the above standards the broad estimate for power supply for IDP Area for the terminal year
2034 is given below. The estimated population for the terminal year 2034 is 0.62 million.
55
Residential Demand
Sr. No.
1
2
3
Household
EWS/LIG
MIG
HIG
Total
Percentage
30
50
20
100
No. of households
41333
68889
27556
137778
Total Power requirement MW

62
207
110
379
Commercial Demand
Sr. No.
1
2
Shops and Service

Industries
Unit per 1000

persons
Estimated units
Shops
Service Industries
Total
20
2
-
12400
1240
-
Power
requirement
per unit in
KW
1
10
-
Total Power
requirement MW
12.4
12.4
24.8
Social Facilities and Public Utilities Demand

Sr. No.
1
2
Facility
Social
Public Utility
Total
KW per 7500 persons

50
120
-
Total Power Requirement MW

4
2
6
The total power supply requirement therefore works out to 410 MW say 400 MW. The power will be
sourced from MSETCL. The total land area required for electric substations has been worked out in the
physical infrastructure demand which is about 3.8 ha.
56
8. LAND DEVELOPMENT MODEL NAINA

SCHEME
8.1 INTRODUCTION
This
section explains the rationale of search for alternative land development models and the
recommends a suitable model for NAINA.
8.2 APPROACHES FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

The key objectives of planned urban land development are:
To obtain land for public purposes physical and social infrastructure

To ensure inclusive growth by providing housing to the poor, and
To raise finances by either capturing land value gains that occur on account of provision of
infrastructure or adopting the principle of growth pays for growth.
The two conventional approaches to planned development have been the Development Plan model and
the Bulk Land Acquisition Model. The DP has been largely used in existing towns and cities such as
Mumbai and Thane etc. whereas Bulk Land Acquisition has been found suitable for Greenfield
development like in Navi Mumbai or capital cities like Chandigarh or Gandhinagar. Each has its merits
and demerits.
The DP designates particular parcels of land for public purposes, which can then be compulsorily
acquired. In this process landowners who lose their land bear the cost and the benefits accrue to the
others. DP typically does not attempt to capture land value gains that accrue on account of such benefits.
Bulk land acquisition on the other hand can potentially ensure that all three objectives of planned urban
land development are achieved. However large scale compulsory land acquisition is increasingly
becoming difficult.
In case of land pooling and land readjustment the burden of providing land for public purposes and
infrastructure is equitably cast on all landowners. The merit of this method the land remains with the
original land owners except that required for public purposes. The traditional Town Planning Schemes
relied on capturing 50% of land value gains to finance implementation of TPS. The Gujarat model of
development plans/ town planning schemes, in addition allow planning authorities to retain land that
could be sold for financing TPS. In the Korean model of land readjustment cost equivalent land was
retained by planning authority. .
Since in case of NAINA effective legal framework is not available, an innovative model based on
voluntary participation incentivised through appropriate DCRs is necessary.
57
8.2.1
SUMMARY
It is necessary to appreciate that each approach will some advantages and some disadvantages. The
models can be grouped into three categories. The salient features of each are explained below based on
land acquisition, land value capture and finances.
1. In conventional development plans planning authorities have to acquire land designated for
public purposes with additional responsibility of rehabilitating the displaced persons. The land
value gains cannot be captured in this model. Hence external funds are necessary.
2. Voluntary land pooling primarily responds to the demands of the market. As the approach is
voluntary there may be holdouts by certain landowners, which may frustrate the development
leading to uncertain outcomes. Incentives for participation in the scheme as well as some
disincentives for not participating are necessary to make the scheme attractive and ensure
maximum participation. Retaining land for subsequent sale by planning agency could raise
resources for financing the development.
3. Development of new towns with 100% acquisition of land is faced with the same problems of
land acquisition and rehabilitation of displaced persons although planned and inclusive
development is possible in this method. The land value gains can also be fully captured.
For NAINA a model belonging to category 2 above has to be developed.
8.3 EXISTING REAL ESTATE SCENARIO

Since the intended model is market dependent an appreciation of current real estate market is desirable.
The land prices in Navi Mumbai and surrounding areas, including that of CIDCO have been increasing
steadily. The announcement of the development of Navi Mumbai International Airport has further fuelled
the increase in real estate prices. The average price for residential flats in the area around Panvel is about
Rs.5400 per sq. ft. As per the ASR the land prices in Vichumbe village were Rs. 27,60,000 per Ha in
2013 and are Rs. 31,74,000 per ha in 2014, which shows an increase of 15%. Substantial development is
happening in the form of Urban Village Schemes, Special Townships, Rental housing schemes.
The existing and proposed transport network such as NH4, NH4B, Mumbai Pune Expressway, proposed
Alibag-Virar Multi Modal Corridor, Panvel Karjat suburban rail, Vasai-Diva- Panvel suburban rail,
doubling of tracks between Panvel and Roha by Konkan Railway are further fuelling the real-estate
prices. Besides this the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, Dedicated Freight Corridor and Mumbai
Bengaluru Industrial Corridor are likely to act as impetus for rise in the real estate and land prices. Thus
it is very likely that with provision of basic infrastructure for planned development in place, land values
may increase rapidly that could be tapped for financing development. .
8.4 PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT MODEL FOR NAINA

After studying various development models adopted across country, including Special Township
schemes and development approaches adopted by CIDCO in the past particularly at Waluj a base model
was proposed. This model underwent rigorous scrutiny based on inputs received from various stakeholders. The model is now coined as 'NAINA Scheme'.
Its key principles are:
a) Incentivize aggregation: Since bulk land acquisition is difficult and time-consuming, SPANAINA will have to incentivize land aggregation by owners. The incentives to be given are
58
additional FSI on aggregation, compared to low FSI for individual plot developments. Discount
in infrastructure development charges, comprehensive Environment Clearance, provision of
supporting infrastructure by SPA-NAINA and deemed N.A. permission. Minimum area of
aggregated land eligible for NAINA Scheme shall be 10Ha.
b) Sharing of Land: The owner/ developer will retain 60% of the land and 40 % land shall be
surrendered to SPA-NAINA free of cost by consent agreement for providing roads, open
spaces, amenities and growth centre. The permissible FSI for the entire plot will be 1.00, which
can be consumed on the 60 % of retained land resulting net FSI of 1.7 for the retained land. If
more than 40% land area is affected by reservations, landowner is to be compensated for loss of
land in excess of 40% by allotting alternative land elsewhere s within same sector. Alternatively
in lieu of land, the options of onsite-TDR or monetary compensation would also available.
c) Raising Finances: The finances required for developing city-level infrastructure will be raised
from development charges, are leviable under the MRTP Act, 1966. The prescribed are proposed
to be enhanced by 5 times. The second source of revenue will be disposal of 15 % land reserved
for growth centre. The outcome of NAINA Scheme being market dependent is intrinsically
uncertain. To overcome the risk and uncertainty of outcome following strategy is proposed:
Land designated for roads, amenities and growth centre as shown on the PLU of IDP
shall be notified for compulsory acquisition
NAINA Schemes can be formulated incorporating roads and amenity reservations. These
will be counted towards 40% of the land to be surrendered to SPA-NAINA
Landowners whose land is notified for acquisition for growth centre if willing to
contribute 40% of the land free of cost, will be compensated for 60% of the land by way
of TDR and alternate land in the ratio of 1/3:2/3.
d) Inclusionary housing: Additional 20% BUA, over & above BUA generated on 60% land, shall
necessarily be constructed for EWS/LIG housing and this additional FSI is being permitted free
of cost. The constructed tenements of EWS/LIG will be handed over to CIDCO at predetermined rates.
8.4.1
PROVISION OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE:
The internal layout of 60% of the land retained by the landowner shall follow the standard layout
regulations in terms of provision of internal roads, infrastructure, recreational open space and local
amenities. FEATURES OF THE PROPOSED MODEL
a)
Area requirement: Considering the existing situation and market scenario promoting townships on
smaller areas than those proposed in Special Township Policy would be feasible. Minimum land
area or land aggregation required for participating in 'NAINA Scheme' is 10 Ha.
b)
Permissible Uses: Uses permissible on owners land are Residential, Commercial, R+C, Hotels,
Offices etc. The whole of retained land can also be used for institutions like residential schools,
hospitals, college with hostel, research and development institutions etc.
c)
Development of Growth Centres: Growth centres will act as catalysts for urban development and
these will be designated in the development plan based on various parameters such as proximity to
transport network, existing urban centres and development potential.
59
d)
FSI and BUA for 'NAINA Scheme':

Particulars
Area of land (Ha.)
Total Area of Scheme
10.00
Land with owner

EWS/LIG (20%)
Land with CIDCO
Growth Centre
Amenities
Roads
Open Spaces
Total Area
6.00
4.00
1.50
0.50
1.00
1.00
10.00
8.4.2
Permissible BUA in Ha
10.00 (Constructed on
the land retained with
the owmer)
10.00
2.002.55
0.5
0.00
0.00
15.05
FSI
1.00
1.70
0.20
1.7
1.0
0.00
0.00
LOW INCOME HOUSING
It will be mandatory for every land owner to construct 20% of the BUA on his land as low income
housing. This 20% BUA will not be counted in the FSI of 1.7 granted to him. The dwelling units for low
income housing shall have carpet area not exceeding 30 sq.m each. Such dwelling units shall never be
allowed to be merged into larger dwelling units. These units will be handed over to SPA-NAINA at a
predetermined rate.
8.4.3
OPTIONS FOR NON-PARTICIPATING LAND OWNERS
For landowners unwilling to participate in NAINA-Scheme, the FSI shall be 0.5 and no additional FSI on
payment of premium or by any other mean shall be granted for such non-participants. But for those
whose layouts are less than 10 ha and are ready to surrender their lands under reservations, instead of
going through acquisition process, additional FSI of 0.2 will be permissible on surrender of the
reservations under acquisition.
All the non-participants have to pay Development charges as per Section 124(B) of the Act and Offsite
City Service Delivery Charges (OCSDC) @ 25% at the time of issuing Commencement Certificate, 25%
at time of granting Occupancy Certificate and 50% on completion of major road infrastructure.
All lands above 4000 sq. m. will attract provisions of low income housing, which will be provided as
detailed in 9.3.3.4.
8.4.4
INTEGRATING EXISTING POLICIES
The study of existing plans and policies has revealed that the MMR Regional Plan 1996-2011 and certain
other policies of the Government of Maharashtra have implications on the development of the region.
These will have to be effectively integrated in the proposed development model to achieve proper
development of the plan area. The key policies that need to be integrated are the Urban Village Schemes,
Special Township Policies in MMR and Rental housing scheme of MMRDA. The details of these have
been explained in Chapter 9.
8.4.5
DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR GROWTH CENTRE LANDS
e)
The FSI permissible on growth centre lands shall be 1.7, at par with the FSI of land retained by the
landowners in 'NAINA scheme'.
f)
No amenity space shall be provided in Growth Centres.
60
g)
Only internal and layout roads and open spaces will be required to be provided without losing FSI
potential.
h)
The Growth centre shall not be used for EWS/LIG housing or development of Social facilities.
i)
The Growth centre land shall not be allotted for any request of land by Govt./Semi-Govt. Agency
at concessional prices.
SPACE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
61
9. SALIENT FEATURES OF
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND
PROMOTION REGULATIONS
9.1
INTRODUCTION
The Development Control and Promotion Regulations are a mechanism to facilitate the implementation
of the Interim Development Plan and carry out planned development. The DCPRs are largely based on
the Standardized Development Control and Promotion Regulations for Regional Plans prepared by the
Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra. These DCPRs have been contextualised
for the IDP.
9.2
OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT
For the purposes of DCPRs, IDP Area has been divided into four categories viz; Gaothan, Urban
Villages, NAINA-Scheme and Non-NAINA Scheme.
Development in Gaothans: Gaothans will be as defined in the MLRC Code Section 122 and as shown
on the IDP. As Gaothans are built areas it is expected that mostly redevelopment proposals will come for
approval. No FSI is proposed; instead built-form will be controlled by footprint and number of storey.
Existing footprint will have to be retained and maximum two storeys are permissible including ground
floor. To facilitate wider access ways buildings abutting such existing access ways less than 4.5 in width
will be setback by 2.25 m from the centreline of the existing access. Most exiting uses will be continued.
Urban Villages: Urban villages are areas of 200 m around existing inhabited gaothans as marked on the
IDP. As per the existing MMR Regional Plan these areas are permitted an FSI of 1 and building height of
13.5 m. This regulation has been retained in order not to deprive the land owners of the existing
development potential. The land holdings in these areas are small and hence they may not be able to
aggregate to 10 ha land to be part of the NAINA-Scheme, though there is no restriction on them forming
part of the Scheme if they manage to aggregate such land partly within 200 m and partly outside 200m .
Furthermore considering the land-holding pattern a smaller land assembly scheme is proposed for urban
villages. If the owners aggregate a minimum of 4 ha land they will retain 60% of the land and contribute
40% of land to SPA-NAINA.W ithin the land retained by the landowners open spaces at 10% of the land
will have to be provided however provision of amenity space will be optional.
NAINA-Scheme: The minimum area required for participating in NAINA scheme shall be 10 ha and
40% land will be surrendered to SPA-NAINA free of cost. Developer will be allowed to use FSI of entire
land on balance 60% of retained land. There will be a two-stage approval process. In first stage an
Outline Development Permission will be granted based on verification of details of ownership, and
62
proposed allocation of land to be surrendered to SPA NAINA. Final Permission will be granted based
on detailed layout plan, building plans, infrastructure availability, project report etc. Depending upon the
size of the scheme and the number of dwelling units proposed a graded range of amenities to be
developed by the developer has been proposed. This will include basic education and health facilities. In
case developer surrenders built amenity to SPA-NAINA, TDR equivalent to construction value based FSI
of developed amenity shall be awarded to developer.
Incentive FSI for larger aggregation of land is proposed in NAINA scheme as given below;
Gross Area of NAINA Scheme (ha)
Gross FSI
FSI land retained by developer
10-25
1.00
1.7
25-40
1.08
1.8
Above 40
1.14
1.9
Individual Plots (Non- NAINA Scheme): The FSI permissible for such developments will be 0.5 and
layout regulations as per Standardized Regulations for DCPR for RP are applicable.
Special Township Scheme: In case of already approved schemes Development Charges payable or paid
as per Chapter VI-A will be payable by the developer. In case of new proposals developer will have to
surrender 15% land as decided by SPA-NAINA. This 15% will be exclusive of IDP reservations if any.
SPA-NAINA will be approving and sanctioning authority after grant of Locational Clearance under Rule
7(a), i.e. for Letter of Intent under Rule 7(b) and Final Approval under Rule 7 (c).
Rental Housing: OCSDC at 2 times the standard rate shall be charged in instalments as decided by the
SPA-NAINA from time to time.
9.3
FEES, CHARGES AND PREMIUMS
Development charge: The development charge is proposed to be increased by 5 times the existing rates
prescribed in MR&TP Act.
Offsite City Service Delivery Charges (OCSDC): These are charges framed by SPA-NAINA, payable
to SPA-NAINA by persons seeking development permission who would be using the city-level physical
and social infrastructure developed by SPA-NAINA without contributing any land to SPA-NAINA. The
IDP area being largely rural and green-field area there is no physical and social infrastructure available
necessary for urban development. In order to generate revenue for SPA-NAINA to provide this
infrastructure it is proposed to levy OCSDC. This OCSDC will be charged in urban villages and
development that are not under NAINA scheme.
9.4
OTHER SALIENT FEATURES

There will be no restrictions on height of the building, except those governed by Civil Aviation and
Fire Safety Act whichever is less
Definition of amenity amended to exclude public utilities
Rules for tree plantation :
Every plot of land shall have at least 1 tree for every 100 sq. m or part thereof
Recreational open spaces shall have at least 5 trees for every 100 sq. m.
Rules for size of hoardings and fees and deposit charged for erecting hoarding
Existing quarry to be permitted as on-going activity, no new quarries will be permitted
63
10. BLOCK ESTIMATES & FINANCING

DEVELOPMENT
10.1 INTRODUCTION
It is necessary to have fair estimate of the expected revenue and the expenditure for the proposals
envisaged in the IDP. Accordingly, the MRTP Act 1966 under section 26(v) specifies that the plan
should contain an approximate estimate of the cost involved in acquisition of lands required by the
Planning Authority for the public purposes, and also cost of works as may be necessary. In case of a
SPA engaged in Greenfield development having no recourse to tax revenues, it is imperative to prepare a
financing plan for implementing the IDP.
10.1.1
COST OF DEVELOPMENT
All the lands shown on the plan as reservations and Growth Centre will be acquired. This area is about
961 Ha. This includes area under roads, public utilities, social facilities, amenities and growth centres.
Presently the highest non NA stamp duty RR rates applicable in IDP is about Rs 400 per m2.
Considering the rate to be double of this, the acquisition cost would be about Rs 800 per m2. Further, it is
expected that only 20% land need to be acquired under LARR 2013 and balance 80% will accrue by way
of land assembly. Accordingly, the approximate cost of land acquisition would be about Rs. 150 Crs.
The demand for amenities was assessed and has been discussed in detail in chapters 4 & 7. The estimates
for the facilities and amenities, which have to be provided by Government Agencies has been worked out
as per SOR of CIDCO wherever possible, issued in the year 2012-13, with suitable price escalation added
to it to bring the cost at 2014-15 level. For other items, the block costs have been used for estimation.
The summary of estimated cost is given in Table 10-1.
Table 10-1: Cost of development (Rs in Crores)
Sl.No
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
Land Acquisition
Land Rate 0.78 Cr / Ha
POWER
220 KV
731
160
Transmission Line
Internal Distribution
90
481
13
CITY
250
13
LEVEL
PERIPHERIAL
Total
150
150
481
731
13
64
Sl.No
DESCRIPTION
for composting
landfill site
AMOUNT
CITY
LEVEL
PERIPHERIAL
Total
848
236
1084
3
10
WATER SUPPLY
Infrastructure (with recycling)
1084
236
Source Development
848
SEWERAGE SYSTEM
Sewage Treatment & Collection
Recycling Cost
303
220
83
303
303
DRAINAGE
Road side drains
others nala diversion
Training of Rivers
194
146
48
0
194
194
ROADS
Various widths of DP roads
MMC
1641
1354
287
287
1354
1641
Metro
2560
2560
2560
Sub Urban Railway
376
376
376
10
Open Space
36
36
36
11
OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE
Crematorium/Burial ground
Fire station
Fire Tenders & equipments
Bus Terminus
Police Station
275
158
15
40
7
55
275
275
TOTAL
ESTABLISHMENT &
ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE
4334
3029
7364
ADDED @10 % ON YEARLY BASIS AFTER
ANALYSING YEARLY EXPENDITURE
12
13
INTEREST @9% PER ANNUM WOULD BE ADDED ON THE LOAN REQUIRED FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTUCTURE
It has been assumed that infrastructure would be provided from 2015 to 2028. In the initial period, basic
infrastructure work (road, water supply, sewerage, drainage, power etc) will be taken up on priority. The
provision for Metro has been considered from the year 2024 onwards. From the analysis it is clear that in
the initial period, the fund requirement for infrastructure would be more than the revenue and hence the
fund would be borrowed from the market. After accounting for items listed at Sr No 11 & 12 the Net
65
Present Value (NPV) of the estimated infrastructure cost is Rs 10441 Cr. For detailed costing, refer
Annexure 10-1
10.2 REVENUE SOURCES

10.2.1
REVENUE FROM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The MRTP act 1966 Chapter VI-A provides for Development Charge to be levied by Planning Authority,
which can be used only for the purpose of providing public amenities, maintenance and improvement of
the area. The development charge is payable by the applicant coming forward for development
permission. It is applied on land coming for development and proposed built up area separately. For land
the rate specified by the Act is 0.5% of the Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner rate for land. Similarly, for
proposed built up area, the rate is 2.0% of the Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner rate for land.
The total area for IDP is about 3683 Ha., of which, undevelopable and already built up area and
developable area account for 630 Ha, 647 Ha and 2,406 Ha respectively. Considering the applicable basic
rate of development charge is Rs 100/- per m2 the potential revenue from Development Charge will be
about Rs 901Cr. The NPV for the same would be about Rs 400/- Cr. The total cost of development of
infrastructure is estimated about Rs 10441 cr. Even if the development charge is increased by several fold
(say 5 times) the anticipated revenue would be only to the order of Rs 4,505 Cr and the NPV of the same
would be about Rs 1,998/- Cr. It is evident that Development Charge alone will not be sufficient to meet
the cost of infrastructure. Due to such huge gap in revenue and expenditure, it is very clear that the Plan
will remain on paper and it cannot be implemented unless additional sources of revenue are tapped.
Accordingly, CIDCO has proposed additional sources for funding of infrastructure namely development
and sale of land is growth centres.
10.2.2
REVENUE FROM OTHER SOURCES
In order to generate additional resources, Growth Centre of 15% of the developable land has been
proposed in the IDP. This land would be developed and disposed of in the market.
10.2.3
SALE OF LAND IN GROWTH CENTRES
The Growth Centres (GC) are shown in the IDP. These Growth Centres account for about 361 Ha (15%
of the area expected to be available for development). Land in GC would be leased by CIDCO for mixed
land use. If the revenue generated is @ 12000/- per m2, the revenue available for funding the
infrastructure would be to the order of Rs 17,603/- Crs. The NPV of the same by discounting @9%
yearly would be about Rs 6,693/- Cr.
10.2.4
REVENUE FROM SALE OF SOCIAL PLOT
The social facility plots are given on concessional rates to other government bodies / trusts to develop the
facility. However, these plots are not provided free of cost. After considering this factor, it is expected
that sale of social facilities would generate about Rs 1,668/- crs. The NPV of the same by discouting
@9% yearly would be about Rs 717/- Cr.
10.2.5
OFFSITE CITY SERVICE DELIVERY CHARGES (OCSDC)
From all the above sources of revenue, the expected fund (NPV) is about Rs 9,408 Crs, whereas the
expenditure (NPV) is expected to be about Rs 10,441/- Cr. The deficit is about Rs 1033 Cr. In view of
this, it is necessary to identify some additional sources of revenue. From the Table 10-2 it is evident that
the expenditure on the facilities to be provided within the city (peripheral infrastructure) can be met with
the above revenue. However, it will not be possible to provide major city level infrastructures like Water
66
Source development (construction of Dam); Trunk distribution lines, Mass Rapid Transit System (Metro)
etc.
In view of above, it is proposed to recover additional revenue from OCSDC. The rate of OCSDC has
been given in the Table 10-2.
Sl.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
Table 10-2: OCSDC Charges

Description (NPV Rs in Crs)
Total cost of Infrastructure
Rs
Revenue from other sources
Rs
Balance required from OCSDC
Rs
Land available for Developable
Land for OCSDC (less than 20% need to pay OCSDC)
20% of developable land = 0.2x 2400= 480 Ha. sa
Required rate to meet expenses
Rs
10,441
9,408
1,033
2,400
450
Crs
Crs
Crs
Ha
Ha
2,295 (say 2,300)
PER M2
This OCSDC would be leviable only on those applicants who do not participate in city development by
way of providing part of their land to the SPA. Such charge is proposed to be levied on development not
conforming to NAINA Scheme. The revenue on account of OCSDC will therefore vary depending upon
public response to NAINA Scheme.
10.3 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

10.3.1
INFRASTRUCTURE BY CIDCO
CIDCO has developed Navi Mumbai and has vast experience in city development. CIDCO will take up
construction and development of infrastructure works i.e. roads, water supply, sewerage, drainage.
10.3.2
INFRASTRUCTURE BY OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
There are few facilities and amenities which are under the domain of other government agencies e.g.
power by MSEDCL & MAHATRANSCO, Police, Indian Railways etc. In such cases, CIDCO will
provide land at concessional rate to these government agencies and request them to take up work related
to their field.
10.4 DYNAMICS OF REVENUE

Although the costs have been estimated at 2014-15 prices the actual costs at current prices will depend
upon the year in which the works are executed. The uncertainty of revenues is of higher degree as they
are dependent upon the movement of land prices in time and corresponding quantum of development.
The financing scheme of implementation of IDP therefore needs to be tested in terms of a cash flow
analysis over 15 year period with reasonable assumptions. For details, see Annexure 10.1.
The summary of the revenue and expenditure is given in Table 10.2:
Sl.No
A
1
2
3
4
Table 10-3: Summary of Revenue and Cost (Net Present Value)

DESCRIPTION
REVENUE FROM ALL SOURCES
REVENUE FROM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (NPV)
REVENUE FROM GROWTH CENTER ( SALE OF LAND- NPV)
REVENUE FROM OCSDC (NPV)
SALE OF SOCIAL FACILITY (NPV)
Rs in Cr
1997.99
6692.84
1882.82
717.65
67
5
B
C
D
NPV OF REVENUE FROM ALL SOURCES

NET PRESENT VALUE OF ALL EXPENSES
NPV (A - B)
A
B
Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
11291.30
10441.37
849.93
17%
From the annexure 10-1, it can be seen that in the initial period (2015 to 2020), the anticipated
expenditure on infrastructure projects would be more than the revenue in the corresponding years. The
revenue starts exceeding the anticipated expenditure on infrastructure from the year 2021 onwards.
However, accounting for the backlog for the period 2015-2020, the year on year (y-o-y) positive opening
balance is expected from the year 2028. With the assumptions cited in the annexure, the NPV of the
project is estimated to be Rs. 849 Crores and the IRR works out to be about 17%. Thus it may be inferred
that the proposed development including its NAINA scheme based financing model is financially viable.
SPACE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
68
ANNEXURES
69
ANNEXURE 2-1: MAP SHOWING IDP AREA LOCATION IN NAINA
70
ANNEXURE 2-2: MAP SHOWING SLOPE GRADIENTS OF TOPOGRAPHY
71
ANNEXURE 2-3: MAP SHOWING POPULATION DISTRIBUTION WITHIN IDP AREA
72
ANNEXURE 2-4: POPULATION DENSITIES IN IDP AREA BY VILLAGE

Sl.No
Village Name
Population 2011
Area (ha.)
Density
Adai
3,358
308.40
11
Akurli
3,344
167.24
20
Belavali
1,660
159.31
10
Bonshet
550
20.15
27
Borle
890
100.40
09
Chikhale
1,899
357.17
05
Chipale
1,629
132.45
12
Derawali
1,205
90.97
13
Devad
3,210
114.55
28
10
Kolkhe
4,657
228.53
20
11
Kon
2,187
168.24
13
12
Koproli
1,026
76.25
14
13
Moho
1,822
306.89
06
14
Nere
3,569
291.63
12
15
Palaspe
5,086
239.13
21
16
Pali Kh
531
96.59
05
17
Palidevad
9,194
40.82
226
18
Sangade
871
94.53
09
19
Shilottar Raichur
5,796
50.55
116
20
Shivkar
2,464
262.57
09
21
Usarli Kh
2,608
123.05
21
22
Vichumbe
6,332
118.25
54
23
Vihighar
1,175
135.42
09
65,063
3683.09
3683.09
Total
Source: Census of India
73
ANNEXURE 2-5: SC, ST POPULATION IN IDP AREA BY VILLAGE

Slno.
Village
Population 2011
SC
ST
Adai
3,358
445
0.7
101
0.2
Akurli
3,344
246
0.4
51
0.1
Belavali
1,660
02
0.0
03
0.0
Bonshet
550
03
0.0
19
0.0
Borle
890
0.0
03
0.0
Chikhale
1,899
35
0.1
19
0.0
Chipale
1,629
04
0.0
36
0.1
Derawali
1,205
96
0.1
380
0.6
Devad
3,210
18
0.0
12
0.0
10
Kolkhe
4,657
464
0.7
168
0.3
11
Kon
2,187
205
0.3
99
0.2
12
Koproli
1,026
44
0.1
61
0.1
13
Moho
1,822
65
0.1
93
0.1
14
Nere
3,569
27
0.0
21
0.0
15
Palaspe
5,086
387
0.6
202
0.3
16
Pali Kh
531
423
0.7
202
0.3
17
Palidevad
9,194
1,142
1.8
297
0.5
18
Sangade
871
24
0.0
0.0
19
Shilottar Raichur
5,796
961
1.5
95
0.1
20
Shivkar
2,464
74
0.1
24
0.0
21
Usarli Kh
2,608
412
0.6
170
0.3
22
Vichumbe
6,332
1,012
1.6
152
0.2
23
Vihighar
1,175
22
0.0
0.0
65,063
6,111
9.4
2,208
3.4
Total
74
ANNEXURE 2-6: LITERACY RATES IN IDP AREA BY VILLAGE

Slno.
Village
Population 2011
Literates
Adai
3,358
2,251
3.5
Akurli
3,344
2,502
3.8
Belavali
1,660
1,220
1.9
Bonshet
550
375
0.6
Borle
890
591
0.9
Chikhale
1,899
1,461
2.2
Chipale
1,629
1,279
2.0
Derawali
1,205
849
1.3
Devad
3,210
2,288
3.5
10
Kolkhe
4,657
3,575
5.5
11
Kon
2,187
1,585
2.4
12
Koproli
1,026
756
1.2
13
Moho
1,822
1,311
2.0
14
Nere
3,569
2,613
4.0
15
Palaspe
5,086
3,964
6.1
16
Pali Kh
531
352
0.5
17
Palidevad
9,194
7,517
11.6
18
Sangade
871
605
0.9
19
Shilottar Raichur
5,796
4,550
7.0
20
Shivkar
2,464
1,719
2.6
21
Usarli Kh
2,608
2,039
3.1
22
Vichumbe
6,332
4,856
7.5
23
Vihighar
1,175
855
1.3
65,063
49,113
75.5
Total
75
ANNEXURE 2-7: WORK FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE IN IDP AREA BY VILLAGE

Sl.No
Village
Population
Total Workers
No.
WFPR
Non Workers
No.
Adai
3,358
1,465
2.3
2.3
1,893
2.9
Akurli
3,344
1,473
2.3
2.3
1,871
2.9
Belavali
1,660
686
1.1
1.1
974
1.5
Bonshet
550
264
0.4
0.4
286
0.4
Borle
890
361
0.6
0.6
529
0.8
Chikhale
1,899
666
1.0
1.0
1,233
1.9
Chipale
1,629
754
1.2
1.2
875
1.3
Derawali
1,205
432
0.7
0.7
773
1.2
Devad
3,210
1,413
2.2
2.2
1,797
2.8
10
Kolkhe
4,657
1,655
2.5
2.5
3,002
4.6
11
Kon
2,187
978
1.5
1.5
1,209
1.9
12
Koproli
1,026
387
0.6
0.6
639
1.0
13
Moho
1,822
780
1.2
1.2
1,042
1.6
14
Nere
3,569
1,239
1.9
1.9
2,330
3.6
15
Palaspe
5,086
1,958
3.0
3.0
3,128
4.8
16
Pali Kh
531
156
0.2
0.2
375
0.6
17
Palidevad
9,194
3,223
5.0
5.0
5,971
9.2
18
Sangade
871
303
0.5
0.5
568
0.9
19
Shilottar Raichur
5,796
2,330
3.6
3.6
3,466
5.3
20
Shivkar
2,464
812
1.2
1.2
1,652
2.5
21
Usarli Kh
2,608
893
1.4
1.4
1,715
2.6
22
Vichumbe
6,332
2,615
4.0
4.0
3,717
5.7
23
Vihighar
Total
1,175
507
0.8
0.8
668
1.0
65,063
25,350
39.0
39.0
39,713
61.0
76
ANNEXURE 2-8: EMPLOYMENT PATTERN BY VILLAGE

Sl.No
Village
Cultivators
Agriculture
Households
Nos.
(%)
Nos.
(%)
Nos.
Others
(%)
Nos.
(%)
Total
Adai
184
5.36
39
3.97
69
7.01
1,173
5.73
1,465
Akurli
224
6.52
22
2.24
106
10.76
1,121
5.48
1,473
Belavali
381
11.09
33
3.36
20
2.03
252
1.23
686
Bonshet
23
0.67
02
0.2
08
0.81
231
1.13
264
Borle
139
4.05
77
7.83
04
0.41
141
0.69
361
Chikhale
136
3.96
83
8.44
43
4.37
404
1.97
666
Chipale
99
2.88
12
1.22
13
1.32
630
3.08
754
Derawali
81
2.36
07
0.71
24
2.44
320
1.56
432
Devad
77
2.24
20
2.03
39
3.96
1,277
6.24
1,413
10
Kolkhe
75
2.18
34
3.46
83
8.43
1,463
7.15
1,655
11
Kon
237
6.9
73
7.43
10
1.02
658
3.22
978
12
Koproli
32
0.93
25
2.54
09
0.91
321
1.57
387
13
Moho
228
6.64
104
10.58
01
0.1
447
2.18
780
14
Nere
214
6.23
74
7.53
57
5.79
894
4.37
1,239
15
Palaspe
146
4.25
35
3.56
58
5.89
1,719
8.4
1,958
16
Pali Kh
91
2.65
53
5.39
12
0.06
156
17
Palidevad
34
0.99
17
1.73
117
11.88
3,055
14.93
3,223
18
Sangade
63
1.83
74
7.53
06
0.61
160
0.78
303
19
Shilottar Raichur
183
5.33
92
9.36
164
16.65
1,891
9.24
2,330
20
Shivkar
235
6.84
16
1.63
18
1.83
543
2.65
812
21
Usarli Kh
84
2.45
31
3.15
16
1.62
762
3.72
893
22
Vichumbe
247
7.19
24
2.44
98
9.95
2,246
10.98
2,615
23
Vihighar
185
5.39
25
2.54
08
0.81
289
1.41
507
100
972
100
971
100
20,009
100
25,350
Total
(%)
3,398
13.4
3.8
3.8
79
100
77
ANNEXURE 2-9: MAP SHOWING EXISTING TRANSPORT NETWORK AT NAINA &

REGIONAL LEVEL
78
ANNEXURE 2-10: PROPOSED/ COMMITTED REGIONAL TRANSPORT NETWORK
79
ANNEXURE 2-11: EXISTING LOCAL ROAD NETWORK
80
ANNEXURE 2-12: LEGEND USED FOR EXISTING LAND USE MAP
81
ANNEXURE 2-13: NUMBER OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES BY VILLAGE

Slno.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Village name
Adai
Akurli
Belavali
Bonshet
Borle
Chikhale
Chipale
Derawali
Devad
Kolkhe
Kon
Koproli
Moho
Nere
Palaspe
Pali Kh
Palidevad
Sangade
Shilottar Raichur
Shivkar
Usarli Kh
Vichumbe
Vihighar
Total
No.of Primary
Schools
01
01
01
01
02
01
01
01
01
01
02
01
01
01
01
02
01
20
No.of Upper Primary

Schools
01
01
01
01
01
01
06
No.of Senior secondary Schools

01
01
02
01
01
01
01
08
No.of Anganwadi
Centers
03
01
02
01
02
01
02
01
01
03
02
04
01
01
02
02
01
28
No.of Colleges
01
01
01
03
82
ANNEXURE 2-14: NUMBER OF HEALTH FACILITIES BY VILLAGE

Slno.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Village name
Adai
Akurli
Balavali
Bonshet
Borle
Chikhale
Chipale
Derawali
Devad
Kolkhe
Kon
Koproli
Moho
Nere
Palaspe
Palidevad
Sangade
Shilottar Raichur
Shivkar
Usarli Kh
Vichumbe
Vihighar
Pali Khurd
Sub-Centers
01
01
01
01
PHCs
05
01
01
01
01
11
-
Total
04
20
83
ANNEXURE 2-15: MAPS SHOWING SOURCE, QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OFF WATER
84
ANNEXURE 4-1: COMPARISON OF VARIOUS SPATIAL PLANNING NORMS AND STANDARDS

Comparison
Sl.No
UDPFI
Facilities
Popn
SocialAmenities
Balwadi/Creche
Facilitycenter
School
Balwadi/Creche
HigherEducation
PCPP
(sqm)
Popn
1979GRNorms
Area(sqm)
PCPP
(sqm)
Popn
Nil
2,500
800
0.32
5,000
200
0.04
PublicHealthCenter/Polyclinic
100,000
2,000
0.02
100,000
2,000
0.02
Library(communityhallandlibrary)
15,000
2,000
0.13
15,000
2,000
0.13
MultipurposeHall
HealthClub&Gymnasium(Meditationor
SpiritualCenter)
Primary&SecondarySchool
Building
Nil
DegreeColleges
Nil
5,000
0.05
100,000
5,000
0.05
Dependingupontheneeds
5,000
2,000
0.40
5,000
2,000
0.40
10,000
2,000
0.40
2,000
0.40
Nil
Nil
10,170
4,000
0.39
500
Nil
12,000
0.05
16,000
6,000
0.50
10,000
0.83
12,000
500
0.04
10,000
600
0.06
10,000
500
0.05
10,000
2,000
0.20
10,000
1,000
0.10
10,170
4,000
0.39
6,000
0.59
50,000
0.50
Nil
125,000
10,000
0.08
12,000
12,500
1.04
125,000
10,000
0.08
0.06
Nil
125,000
20,000
0.16
12,000
12,000
1.00
125,000
20,000
0.16
Dispensary/PublicHealthCenter
15,000
800
0.05
15,000
800
0.05
10,000
25,000
1,500
0.06
12,000
5,000
0.42
25,000
1,500
0.06
250,000
60,000
0.24
500,000
60,000
0.12
Nil
100,000
5,000
0.05
20,000
5,000
0.25
100,000
5,000
0.05
100,000
37,000
0.37
100,000
37,000
0.37
Nil
250,000
20,000
0.08
Nil
2,000
0.05
250,000
20,000
0.08
Nil
1,000
0.00
SocialCulturalcenters
40,000
0.04
10,000
Religious
Nil
1,000,000
Nil
Nil
10,000
Fish/MeatMarket
Nil
Nil
Rationingshops
Nil
Nil
Flourmills
Nil
Nil
Nil
MilkBooths
Postoffice/Headpostofficewithdelivery
office
Nil
5,000
150
0.03
Nil
500,000
1,500
0.00
Nil
100,000
4,000
0.04
Nil
50,000
3,200
0.06
Nil
WeeklyMarkets/Hawker'sMarkets
1,500
0.00
90,000
15,000
0.17
Nil
500
0.25
0.05
Nil
VegetableMarket
500,000
2,500
Nil
2,000
0.17
10,000
0.05
100,000
10,000
0.10
5,000
0.01
500,000
40,000
0.08
ParksandPlayGrounds
5,000
15,000
3.00
1,000
4,000
4.00
5,000
10,000
2.00
1,000
2,000
2.00
10,000
100,000
10.00
1,000,000
1,000,000
1.00
10.00
1000
0.10
Nil
100,000
2,000
0.02
100,000
3,000
0.03
10,000
1,500
0.15
10,000
1,000
0.10
100,000
4,000
0.04
100,000
10,000
0.10
Nil
10,000
SubTotal
Nil
2,000
200,000
10.00
0.15
Nil
500,000
100,000
1,500
12,000
FireBrigadeandAlliedservices
10,000
10,000
Nil
BurialGround/CremationGround
Citylevelopenspcae/Park
Nil
Nil
Cremation
Openspace
38,000
0.17
12
Parks/Neighborhoodparks
0.02
0.03
2,000
Policepost/Chowky
Playfields
mentioned
alongschools
2,000
3,000
12,000
Firestation/Police
station
Playfields/NeighborhoodPlayfields
100,000
100,000
0.2
11
10,000
Nil
0.04
60,000
1,000,000
Parksandopenspaces
Nil
500
100,000
Nil
16
Nil
1,000,000
Nil
0.65
1.25
12,000
0.32
WorkingWomenhostel
WeeklyMarkets/
Hawker'sMarkets
PublicUtilities
6,500
12,500
Nil
Nil
0.04
Hostels
10
1.90
PCPP
(sqm)
40,000
Communityhall
DailyBazaar/Market
Complex
19,000
Area
(sqm)
40,000
0.05
Popn
125,000
HealthFacilities
500
PCPP
(sqm)
CIDCO(NaviMumbai)Norms&
1972GRNorms
Area
PCPP
Popn
(sqm)
(sqm)
1,000,000
ProfessionalColleges/TechnicalCollege
GeneralHospital
SuperSpecialtyHospital/Intermediate
hospital(CategoryA)
CommunityHall
10,000
CIDCO(NaviMumbai)Norms
Area
(sqm)
100,000
PlayGrounds
4
NewURDPFI(2013)
Area
(sqm)
FinallyAdopted
WalujNagarProjectDraft
Developmentplan
Area
PCPP
Popn
(sqm)
(sqm)
12,000
Nil
Nil
12,000
12,000
0.04
500
0.04
500
0.04
Nil
10,000
16.00
500
30,000
6.00
12,000
1,500
0.13
12,000
10,000
0.83
3.00
3.00
200,000
10,000
0.05
500,000
40,000
0.08
10,000
30,000
3.00
500,000
500,000
0.96
1.00
4.00
PerCapitaSpaceRequired
SocialAmenities
2.35
2.26
4.35
1.04
4.56
2.20
PublicUtilities
0.23
0.24
0.00
0.00
0.08
0.23
ParksandPlayGrounds
10.00
16.00
6.00
3.00
5.62
4.00
Total
12.58
18.50
10.35
4.04
4.56
6.43
Note:
PCPP Per Capita Spaced Required Per Person
85
ANNEXURE 4-2: ABBREVIATIONS USED FOR SPATIALLY LOCATING SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES
Category of facilities (Colour Code)
EDUCATIONAL
MEDICAL
MARKETS
COMMUNITY SERVICES
PARKS & PLAY GROUNDS
PUBLICUTILITIES
Facility description
School
College
Primary Health Centre
General Hospital
Daily Bazaar
Fire Station
Police Station
Community Centre
Burial / Cremation Ground
Park/ Play Ground
School Play Ground
City Park
33KV ELECTRIC SUBSTATION
220 KV RECEIVING STATION
CLEAR WATER RESERVOIR
Abbreviation used
S
C
PHC
GH
DB
FS
PS
CC
BG/C
P
PG
CP
ESS
RS
CWR
ELEVATED SERVICE RESERVOIR/

GROUND SERVICE RESERVOIR
ESR/GSR
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
STP
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
The PLU map has been prepared from the base map prepared by superimposition of cadastral maps and physical features depicted from satellite imagery. Reservations
have been proposed on this base map. The area of reservation and location in survey numbers are tentative. The area of the reservation would be finalized after on-site
demarcation.
In case of any discrepancy, the survey map of the reservation under reference by the DSLR showing the reservation, physical feature (if any) and survey number, Hissa
number boundary would be considered final.
There are cases wherein survey number, hissa number are not available on the revenue map used for preparation of base map. In such cases, shall be referred to the DLSR
for incorporating the necessary data.
P Indicates Part Survey Number

86
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
Sector1
1_C
1.240
Adai
131(P),133(P),134(P),6(P)
Sector1
2_CC
0.280
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
Sector1
3_CP
28.740
Adai
59(P),60(P),61(P),62(P),63(P),64(P),65(P),69(P),79(P),
80(P),81(P),82(P),83(P)
Sector1
4_DB
0.080
Akurli
14(P),15(P),16(P),18(P),19(P),20(P)
Sector1
5_DB
0.110
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
Sector1
6_DB
0.110
Adai
118(P),122(P)
Sector1
7_ESR/GSR
0.340
Akurli
228(P),229(P),232(P),236(P),240(P)
Sector1
8_ESS
0.300
Akurli
222(P),232(P),233(P),234(P),235(P),236(P),237(P)
Sector1
9_ESS
0.200
Adai
42(P),47(P),49(P)
10
Sector1
10_ESS
0.220
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
11
Sector1
11_FS
1.040
Adai
40(P),41(P),42(P),50(P)
12
Sector1
12_P
2.140
ShilottarRaichur
45(P),46(P)
13
Sector1
13_P
0.730
Akurli
98(P)
1.230
ShilottarRaichur
12/A(P),22(P),23(P)
14
Sector1
14_PG
1.470
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
15
Sector1
15_PG
0.630
Akurli
4(P),34(P)
16
Sector1
16_PG
0.560
Adai
83(P),90(P),92(P)
17
Sector1
17_PG
0.700
Adai
134(P),5(P),6(P)
18
Sector1
18_PHC
0.160
Akurli
11(P),12(P)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
87
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
19
Sector1
19_PHC
0.170
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
20
Sector1
20_PHC
0.160
ShilottarRaichur
10(P),46(P),49(P)
21
Sector1
21_PHC
0.150
Adai
103(P),104(P),91(P)
22
Sector1
22_PS
0.980
Akurli
80(P),81(P),82(P),89(P),91(P)
23
Sector1
23_S
0.640
Adai
4(P),5(P),6(P)
24
Sector1
24_S
0.400
ShilottarRaichur
45(P)
25
Sector1
25_S
0.410
Akurli
33(P),11(P),34(P)
26
Sector1
26_S
0.460
Adai
103(P),104(P),90(P),91(P),92(P)
27
Sector1
27_STP3
2.010
Akurli
60(P),64(P),65(P),66(P),76(P),80(P)
28
Sector2
28_CC
0.220
Vichumbe
216(P),218(P)
15.160
Shivkar
149(P),150(P),151(P),153(P),168(P),173(P),174(P),
175(P),176(P),177(P),178(P),179(P),180(P),182(P),
183(P),185(P),186(P),188(P),205(P),206(P),207(P),
88(P),89(P)
4.110
UsarliKhurd
63(P),64(P),76(P),77(P)
1.100
Vichumbe
75(P),77(P)
29
Sector2
VillageName
29_CP
SurveyNumbers
30
Sector2
30_DB
0.160
Devad
43(P),44(P),62(P)
31
Sector2
31_DB
0.090
Devad
78(P),8(P),9(P)
32
Sector2
32_DB
0.090
UsarliKhurd
86(P),87(P)
33
Sector2
33_ESR/GSR
0.250
UsarliKhurd
66(P),67(P),68(P),69(P),71(P),76(P)
34
Sector2
34_ESS
0.210
UsarliKhurd
19(P),25(P),45(P),46(P)
88
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
35
Sector2
35_P
3.700
Vichumbe
24(P),27(P),28(P),29(P),54(P),62(P),63(P),64(P),65(P),
66(P),67(P),68(P)
36
Sector2
36_PG
0.640
Devad
10(P),11(P),12(P),13(P),14(P),17(P),9(P)
37
Sector2
37_PG
0.630
UsarliKhurd
75(P),79(P),86(P),87(P)
38
Sector2
38_PG
0.620
UsarliKhurd
137(P),138(P),30(P)
39
Sector2
39_PHC
0.260
Devad
73(P),78(P)
40
Sector2
40_PHC
0.150
UsarliKhurd
68(P),69(P),70(P),71(P)
41
Sector2
41_PHC
0.160
Vichumbe
29(P),54(P)
42
Sector2
42_PS
0.890
UsarliKhurd
77(P),78(P),81(P)
43
Sector2
43_S
0.420
UsarliKhurd
137(P),138(P),30(P)
44
Sector2
44_S
0.430
Devad
10(P),9(P)
45
Sector2
45_S
0.520
UsarliKhurd
75(P),79(P),86(P),87(P)
46
Sector3
46_BG/C
3.900
Devad
75(P),76(P),78(P)
47
Sector3
47_DB
0.110
Devad
65(P),69(P)
48
Sector3
48_DB
0.160
Chipale
40(P),48(P)
49
Sector3
49_ESR/GSR
0.720
Chipale
53(P),55(P),57(P),59(P)
50
Sector3
50_ESS
0.210
Devad
78(P),81(P),83(P)
51
Sector3
51_GH
2.750
Chipale
59(P),62(P),63(P),68(P),69(P)
52
Sector3
52_P
1.510
Shivkar
276(P)
53
Sector3
53_P
2.720
Shivkar
285(P),298(P),299(P),300(P),301(P),302(P),303(P),304
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
89
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
54
Sector3
54_P
55
Sector3
56
Area(Ha)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
0.550
Chipale
60(P)
5.260
Devad
100(P),94(P),95(P),96(P),97(P),98(P)
55_P
2.950
Devad
78(P),79(P),80(P),81(P),82(P),89(P)
Sector3
56_P
1.890
Vichumbe
24(P),64(P),68(P),69(P),70(P),72(P),73(P)
57
Sector3
57_PG
0.670
Chipale
53(P),59(P),61(P)
58
Sector3
58_PG
0.660
Chipale
22(P),23(P),24(P)
59
Sector3
59_PHC
0.240
Moho
14(P)
60
Sector3
60_S
0.390
Chipale
61(P),62(P)
61
Sector3
61_S
0.390
Chipale
22(P),24(P)
62
Sector3
62_STP2
2.000
Devad
69(P),75(P),76(P)
63
Sector4
63_CC
0.270
Chipale
1(P)
64
Sector4
64_DB
0.090
Chipale
3(P)
65
Sector4
65_DB
0.090
Vihighar
42(P),46(P),48(P)
66
Sector4
66_DB
0.120
Bonshet
20(P),21(P),22(P)
67
Sector4
67_DB
0.110
Koproli
1(P)
68
Sector4
68_ESR/GSR
0.010
Koproli
5(P)
0.230
Vihighar
29(P)
69
Sector4
69_ESS
0.250
Koproli
16(P),17(P)
70
Sector4
70_P
0.010
Moho
14(P)
2.580
Vihighar
72(P),74(P),95(P),96(P)
90
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
71
Sector4
71_CP
72
Sector4
72_PG
73
Sector4
73_PG
74
Sector4
74_PG
75
Sector4
76
Area(Ha)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
0.550
Chipale
2(P),3(P)
20.660
Koproli
13(P),14(P),15(P),16(P),17(P),18(P)
0.010
Koproli
4(P),5(P)
0.690
Vihighar
29(P)
0.690
Nere
102(P),103(P),104(P)
0.040
Bonshet
29(P),31(P)
0.620
Vihighar
15(P),4(P),5(P),6(P),7(P),8(P),9(P)
75_PHC
0.170
Vihighar
16(P),2(P)
Sector4
76_PHC
0.200
Koproli
1(P)
78
Sector4
78_PHC
0.160
Chipale
18(P),20(P),23(P)
79
Sector4
79_PS
0.980
Koproli
6(P)
0.0004
Vihighar
29(P)
0.0001
Koproli
4(P)
0.0013
Nere
50(P)
0.400
Vihighar
29(P)
80
Sector4
80_S
81
Sector4
81_S
0.390
Vihighar
15(P),16(P),4(P),5(P),7(P),9(P)
82
Sector4
82_S
0.420
Nere
101(P),102(P),103(P),99(P)
83
Sector5
83_C
1.080
Nere
166(P),167(P),172(P),85(P)
84
Sector5
84_DB
0.120
Nere
1(P),18(P)
85
Sector5
85_DB
0.100
Nere
253(P),254(P),367(P),368(P)
91
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
86
Sector5
86_ESS
0.270
Nere
178(P),182(P),201(P)
87
Sector5
87_P
2.840
Nere
11(P),12(P),13(P),15(P),17(P),21(P),22(P),23(P),24(P),
25(P),30(P),31(P),32(P),54(P),9(P)
88
Sector5
88_PG
0.590
Nere
375(P),378(P)
89
Sector5
89_PG
0.600
Nere
157(P),159(P),168(P),169(P),170(P)
90
Sector5
90_PHC
0.170
Nere
7(P),8(P),9(P)
91
Sector5
91_PHC
0.180
Nere
253(P),367(P),368(P)
92
Sector5
92_S
0.460
Nere
375(P),376(P),378(P)
93
Sector5
93_S
0.470
Nere
157(P),167(P),168(P),169(P),170(P),172(P),*
94
Sector6
94_C
1.060
Moho
136(P),23(P)
95
Sector6
95_CC
0.250
Shivkar
114(P),115(P),128(P)
0.190
Chikhale
140(P),141(P)
0.040
Moho
105(P),63(P)
17.480
Shivkar
15(P),19(P),20(P),21(P),22(P),23(P),24(P),26(P),29(P),
32(P),36(P),37(P),38(P),39(P),40(P),41(P),42(P),43(P),
44(P),45(P),46(P),47(P),48(P),49(P),50(P),51(P),52(P),
53(P),54(P),56(P),57(P),58(P),60(P),61(P),62(P),63(P),
64(P),65(P),66(P),67(P),69(P),70(P),71(P),73(P)
96
Sector6
VillageName
96_CP
SurveyNumbers
97
Sector6
97_DB
0.120
Moho
103(P)
98
Sector6
98_DB
0.110
Shivkar
250(P),252(P)
99
Sector6
99_DB
0.100
Moho
3(P)
92
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
100
Sector6
100_DB
0.130
Shivkar
114(P),121(P),127(P)
101
Sector6
101_ESS
0.220
Shivkar
149(P),183(P)
102
Sector6
102_FS
1.070
Shivkar
211(P),251(P),252(P),255(P),256(P)
104
Sector6
104_P
0.700
Moho
109(P),110(P)
105
Sector6
105_P
0.190
Shivkar
168(P),259(P)
2.230
Vichumbe
63(P),64(P),72(P),73(P),75(P)
106
Sector6
106_PG
0.600
Moho
49(P),50(P),51(P),52(P),57(P)
107
Sector6
107_PG
0.550
Shivkar
129(P),134(P),136(P),137(P),139(P),140.141(P),142(P)
108
Sector6
108_PG
0.610
Moho
136(P),23(P),24(P)
109
Sector6
109_PHC
0.150
Moho
3(P),4(P),6(P),7(P)
110
Sector6
110_PHC
0.160
Shivkar
121(P),122(P)
111
Sector6
111_PS
1.180
Shivkar
210(P),211(P),256(P)
112
Sector6
112_S
0.600
Moho
110(P),103(P)
113
Sector6
113_S
0.400
Moho
50(P),52(P)
114
Sector6
114_S
0.440
Shivkar
134(P),136(P),139(P)
115
Sector6
115_S
0.470
Moho
136(P),23(P),24(P)
116
Sector6
116_STP4
2.660
Shivkar
237(P),238(P),239(P),240(P),241(P),242(P),250(P),
252(P),284(P),310(P)
117
Sector7
117_CC
0.210
Chikhale
8(P)
118
Sector7
118_DB
0.110
Moho
63(P),87(P)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
93
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
119
Sector7
119_DB
0.090
Chikhale
8(P),9(P)
120
Sector7
120_ESR/GSR
0.340
Moho
105(P),63(P)
121
Sector7
121_ESS
0.260
Chikhale
70(P),77(P)
122
Sector7
122_P
0.840
Moho
100(P),63(P),91(P)
8.560
Borle
112(P),117(P),118(P),119(P),12(P),123(P),127(P),
128(P),129(P),134(P),135(P),136(P),137(P),138(P),
139(P),140(P),141(P),142(P),15(P),23(P),24(P),25(P),
26(P),27(P),28(P),29(P),30(P),31(P),32(P),39(P),55(P)
5.180
Sangade
113(P),117(P),119(P),120(P),121(P),122(P),124(P),
126(P),127(P),128(P),129(P),130(P),140(P),141(P),
142(P),143(P),144(P),146(P),147(P),148(P)
123
Sector7
VillageName
123_P
SurveyNumbers
124
Sector7
124_PG
0.660
Chikhale
66(P),67(P),68(P),8(P),9(P)
125
Sector7
125_PG
0.610
Chikhale
1(P),142(P),143(P)
126
Sector7
126_PHC
0.160
Chikhale
8(P)
127
Sector7
127_PHC
0.170
Moho
87(P)
128
Sector7
128_S
0.530
Chikhale
66(P),67(P)
129
Sector7
129_S
0.490
Chikhale
142(P)
130
Sector8
130_BG/C
3.810
Kolkhe
168(P),173(P),174(P),28(P),36(P),37(P),38(P),39(P)
131
Sector8
131_C
1.320
Kon
109(P),110(P),17(P),19(P),20(P)
132
Sector8
132_CC
0.250
Kon
42(P),44(P),45(P)
133
Sector8
133_CP
22.370
Kon
10(P),11(P),110(P),12(P),13(P),14(P),17(P),18(P),
19(P),22(P),23(P),24(P),25(P),26(P),29(P),34(P),
94
Sl.No
134
Sector
Sector8
ReservationNumber
134_CWR
Area(Ha)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
35(P),36(P),37(P),38(P),73(P)
6.880
Chikhale
168(P),174(P),175(P),176(P),181(P),182(P),183(P),
184(P),185(P),186(P),201(P),202(P),203(P),28(P)
0.010
Kolkhe
135
Sector8
135_DB
0.110
Kon
1(P)
136
Sector8
136_DB
0.180
Kon
101(P)
137
Sector8
137_ESS
0.200
Kon
73(P)
138
Sector8
138_ESS
0.260
Kon
19(P),22(P)
139
Sector8
139_FS
1.020
Kon
14(P),15(P),16(P),17(P)
140
Sector8
140_P
0.580
Kon
100(P),101(P)
141
Sector8
141_PG
0.570
Kon
1(P),103(P),104(P),105(P),107(P),3(P)
142
Sector8
142_PG
0.590
Kon
100(P),101(P),97(P),98(P)
143
Sector8
143_PG
0.680
Chikhale
102(P),103(P),104(P)
144
Sector8
144_PHC
0.160
Kon
101(P)
145
Sector8
145_PHC
0.180
Kon
108(P),25(P),26(P),28(P)
146
Sector8
146_PS
1.060
Kon
110(P),15(P),16(P),17(P)
147
Sector8
147_RS
1.910
Chikhale
101(P),102(P)
148
Sector8
148_S
0.400
Kon
1(P),107(P)
149
Sector8
149_S
0.560
Chikhale
102(P),104(P),99(P)
150
Sector8
150_S
0.420
Kon
100(P),101(P),97(P)
95
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
151
Sector8
151_STP5
2.110
Kon
108(P),111(P),19(P),20(P),21(P),22(P),25(P)
152
Sector9
152_CC
0.260
Belavali
53(P),54(P),55(P)
153
Sector9
153_DB
0.140
Belavali
125(P),189(P)
154
Sector9
154_DB
0.180
Belavali
51(P),52(P),53(P)
155
Sector9
155_DB
0.100
PaliKhurd
6(P),8(P)
156
Sector9
156_DB
0.100
Sangade
86(P)
157
Sector9
157_DB
0.110
Belavali
240(P),165(P)
158
Sector9
158_ESS
0.190
Sangade
51(P),68(P),69(P),83(P)
4.760
Borle
157(P),158(P),159(P),160(P),161(P),162(P),163(P),
164(P),166(P),167(P),17(P),18(P),19(P)
1.830
Sangade
109(P),110(P),111(P),94(P),95(P),96(P),97(P)
159
Sector9
159_P
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
160
Sector9
160_P
2.910
PaliKhurd
6(P),8(P),9(P)
161
Sector9
161_P
0.020
Sangade
111(P)
162
Sector9
162_PG
0.560
PaliKhurd
6(P),7(P),8(P)
163
Sector9
163_PG
0.670
Belavali
48(P),49(P),50(P)
164
Sector9
164_PG
0.650
Sangade
49(P),50(P),51(P),52(P),53(P)
165
Sector9
165_PG
0.670
Belavali
239(P),240(P),165(P)
166
Sector9
166_PG
0.200
Sangade
86(P),87(P),88(P),89(P)
167
Sector9
167_PHC
0.160
Belavali
125(P)
168
Sector9
168_PHC
0.150
PaliKhurd
6(P)
96
Sl.No
Sector
ReservationNumber
Area(Ha)
169
Sector9
169_PHC
0.110
Sangade
51(P),86(P)
170
Sector9
170_PHC
0.150
Belavali
249(P),250(P),251(P)
171
Sector9
171_PS
0.930
Belavali
105(P),113(P),114(P),115(P),116(P),117(P),118(P),
(P)
172
Sector9
172_S
0.410
PaliKhurd
6(P),8(P)
173
Sector9
173_S
0.400
Belavali
1(P),2(P),3(P),49(P),50(P)
174
Sector9
174_S
0.420
Belavali
238(P),239(P),240(P)
175
Sector10
175_CC
0.210
Kolkhe
148(P),150(P),151(P),152(P)
176
Sector10
176_DB
0.120
Derawali
45(P),47(P)
177
Sector10
177_DB
0.100
Palaspe
43(P)
178
Sector10
178_DB
0.120
Kolkhe
1(P)
179
Sector10
179_ESR/GSR
0.110
Derawali
103(P),104(P),105(P),112(P)
180
Sector10
180_ESS
0.230
UsarliKhurd
155(P),157(P),158(P)
181
Sector10
181_ESS
0.210
Palaspe
12/13(P)
182
Sector10
182_FS
1.060
Kolkhe
48(P),49(P),50(P),51(P),52(P),57(P),58(P),59(P),
227(P)
183
Sector10
183_GH
2.680
Derawali
20(P),22(P),23(P),24(P),25(P),26(P),33(P),40(P)
1.870
Kolkhe
75(P),77(P),78(P),79(P)
184
Sector10
184_P
0.060
Palaspe
185
Sector10
185_P
3.330
Kolkhe
110(P),119(P),120(P),121(P),123(P)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
97
Sl.No
186
Sector
Sector10
ReservationNumber
186_P
Area(Ha)
VillageName
SurveyNumbers
4.030
Derawali
128(P),130(P),131(P),132(P),133(P),134(P),135(P),
136(P),137(P),138(P),139(P),20(P),21(P),25(P)
0.040
Palaspe
48(P)
187
Sector10
187_P
0.630
UsarliKhurd
105(P),150(P)
188
Sector10
188_PG
0.630
Palaspe
42(P),43(P),51(P)
189
Sector10
189_PG
0.580
UsarliKhurd
112(P),113(P),114(P)
190
Sector10
190_PG
0.620
Derawali
105(P),106(P),124(P),128(P),129(P),130(P),136(P)
191
Sector10
191_PG
0.400
Kolkhe
135(P),137(P),147(P)
192
Sector10
192_PHC
0.150
Derawali
45(P)
193
Sector10
193_PHC
0.150
Palaspe
43(P)
194
Sector10
194_PS
1.070
UsarliKhurd
102(P),103(P),104(P),106(P),107(P),156(P),157(P)
195
Sector10
195_S
0.380
Derawali
105(P),106(P),112(P),114(P),115(P)
196
Sector10
196_S
0.380
UsarliKhurd
113(P)
197
Sector10
197_S
0.530
Palaspe
42(P),43(P)
198
Sector10
198_S
0.400
Kolkhe
135(P),146(P),147(P),148(P),152(P)
199
Sector10
199_STP1
1.920
UsarliKhurd
101(P),107(P),108(P),109(P)
272.870
98
ANNEXURE 5-1: PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR PROJECT AREA (NAINA & KNT TOGETHER)
99
ANNEXURE 5-2: IMPORTANT PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND ROAD CONNECTIVITY IN CTS

WITH RESPECT TO THE IDP
100
ANNEXURE 5-3: TYPICAL ROAD CROSS SECTIONS OF PROPOSED TRANSPORT CORRIDORS
101
102
103
ANNEXURE 6-1: DETAILS AND LOCATION OF PROTECTED/ ENVIRONMENT SENSITIVE

AREAS
104
ANNEXURE 6-2: PROPOSED GROWTH CENTRES ALONG PUBLIC TRANSPORT NODES AND
CORRIDORS
105
ANNEXURE 6-3: SECTOR BOUNDARIES
106
ANNEXURE 7-1: DETAILED NOTE ON WATER SUPPLY, SEWERAGE AND STORM WATER
DRAINAGE
INTRODUCTION
Provision of state of the art physical infrastructure is important for achieving desired quality of life in IDP
Area. The aim is to develop new physical infrastructure for adequately meeting the demand for water
supply, sewerage network, drainage, solid waste management and power distribution and also to mitigate
with the probable flood situation in the area. In principle, it is aimed to provide independent infrastructure
network within the IDP area which can be developed independently by the development authority. This
trunk infrastructure network can be further extended into developable land parcels by the land developers.
The demand assessment for all the major components has been worked out based on the best engineering
practices.
The major trunk infrastructure components considered for development of proposed IDP Area of NAINA
have been presented below:
Water Supply,
Sewerage and recycling,
Drainage, and river training
Solid Waste Management
Power
Water Supply
Availability of sustainable source of water with related infrastructure facilities is prime necessity for any
modern and sustainable development. But prior to exploring for a sustainable source it is utmost necessary
that actual water demand is worked out precisely based on alternate standards, bench marks and acceptable
norms. The piped water supply has to be designed to provide adequately for:
Domestic needs: Including drinking, cooking, bathing, and washing, flushing of toilets, and individual
gardening / air conditioning.
Demand for the employment in various work places: For Institutional needs.
Industrial use: For existing and proposed industries.
Horticulture needs: For public parks and urban greens.
Fire Fighting needs.
Unaccounted for Water: Including distribution losses, treatment losses and transmission losses.
The physical infrastructure for water supply is to be designed based on spot to spot demand. Thus for
arriving at total water demand, the spatial demand with respect to location of residential, commercial,
institutional and industrial complexes has been considered. Thus the proposed land use of complete IDP
area has been identified and based on the land use the demand has been worked out and compiled.
Adopted Norms and Standards
Norms for domestic water demand
The quantity of water required in the houses for drinking, cooking, bathing, washing etc. is termed as
domestic water demand.
The Environmental Hygiene Committee suggested certain optimum service levels for communities based
on different population groups. The code of Basic Requirements of Water Supply, Drainage and Sanitation
107
(BIS: 1172), as well as the National Building Code recommends a minimum of 135 lpcd service level for
communities where the residents are provided with full flushing system for excreta disposal. The Manual
of Water Supply and Treatment, issued by CPHEEO (Central Public Health and Environmental
Engineering Organization), Ministry of Urban Development, and Government of India has recommended
the domestic water demand as shown in below Table.
Table: Norms for domestic water demand as per CPHEEO manual

Classification of Towns
Recommended
Levels
Water
Supply
Towns provided with piped water supply but without sewerage 70 litres per capita per day
system
Cities provided with piped water supply where sewerage system is 135 litres per capita per day
existing/ contemplated
Metropolitan and Mega Cities provided with piped water supply 150 litres per capita per day
where sewerage system is existing/ contemplated
The UDPFI guidelines, issued by Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment, Government of India, have
also prescribed the standards for domestic water supply in urban areas. These are being illustrated in below
Table.
Table: Standards for Domestic Water Supply as per UDPFI Guide lines
Sl. No.
Aspect
Size of Town (based on population)

Small (<50000)
Medium (>50000)
Large & Metro (> 10,00,000)
Absolute Minimum
70 lpcd
70 -100 lpcd
135 lpcd
Desirable
100 lpcd
135150 lpcd
150-200 lpcd
CIDCO has also prescribed the design norms for design of water supply systems, which prescribes a
domestic water demand of 180 lpcd. The design population of IDP of NAINA area for plan horizon year is
nearly 6.20 lakh. Thus based upon above three guide lines and standards prescribed by CIDCO, the
domestic water demand has been worked out taking 180 lpcd service level at consumer end.
Norms for Employment Population
The water requirement for the persons working in different commercial establishments, offices, factories
and educational institutions have also to be considered while working out water demand. The CPHEEO
manual as well as UDPFI guide lines prescribe a service level of 45 lpcd for the employment population.
Thus the same has been considered while working out the total water demand.
Norms for Industrial Water Demand
The Industrial Demand varies upon type of Industries likely to be established in the region, based upon the
market assessment, raw material availability, logistics and other support facilities. The industries
manufacturing leather & leather products, fine quality paper, beverages, tobacco and related products, gas
and steam generation, basic chemicals, textile dying industries etc. are termed as high water intensive
units. While the industries involved in manufacture of cotton textile (spinning / weaving), silk and manmade fibre, jute and other vegetable fibre, printing and publishing, rubber and plastic products, nonmetallic mineral products, basic metal and alloy industries, metal products and parts, electronics etc. are
termed as low water intensive units. While the demand for high water intensive units goes as high as
60,000 to 1,00,000 litres per hectare, the demand for low water intensive units ranges between 10,000 to
30,000 litres per hectare
For assessment of water demand for industries in IDP area, the type of industries in existing area was
surveyed. It was noticed that the existing industries are generally Ware houses and a very few are small dry
108
metal processing units, thus a water demand of 15,000 litres per hectare has been considered for the
existing industries in IDP area.
Horticulture Water Demand
Provision has also been kept for horticulture water demand for green parks and urban greens proposed. The
demand has been worked out at 67000 litres per hectare, for 60% of proposed green area and 30000 litres
per hectare for balance 40% of the green area as per DSIIDC norms.
Fire-Fighting Demand
As per CPHEEO manual the fire-fighting demand is to be taken based on the formula:
Fire-fighting demand in kl/day = 100 x P^0.5 (where P is the population in thousands)
Thus the same has been worked out as per above standards and added to total demand
Recycling and Reuse of Water
To reduce the fresh water demand recycling of domestic and industrial waste water is considered. The
sewage generation has been taken as 80% of the water supplied for domestic use, as suggested in the
Manual of Sewerage and Sewage Treatment, issued by CPHEEO, Ministry of Housing and Development,
Government of India. The waste water from industries is taken as 60% of the water supplied to industries.
The infiltration in conveyance system has been kept as 20% of daily flow as prescribed by CIDCO in their
norms looking to intensive rains in the area. Provision has been kept for losses in STP and Tertiary
Treatment Plants, while working out availability of water for recycling. The recycled water is proposed to
be used to meet the horticulture demand for urban greens, fire fighting and balance water is to be supplied
to industries for washing and for flushing purposes in residential area.
Gross Water Demand
Based upon the existing and proposedresidential, commercial (employment), horticulture and firefighting
demand, the gross water demand for the IDP area has been worked out.
For working out fresh water demand at consumer end, the quantity of recycled water from Tertiary
Treatment Plants after subtracting the losses in the supply system has been deducted from the total
demand. For working out gross water demand 28 percent losses in distribution and transmission system has
been considered as per norms prescribed by CIDCO for design of water supply system.
Based upon above norms the demand for total IDP area works out as 93 mld, and if the recycling is not
considered the demand of fresh water shall be as high as 178 mld. The detailed calculations are shown in
below Table.
Table: Water Demand for IDP Area
2016
2031
2034
Rate of Water Demand in mld

Supply in
2016
2031
2034
lpcd
Residential
90000
460000
620000
180
16.20
82.80
111.60
Employment
22995
91980.4
229951
45
1.03
4.14
10.35
Fire fighting
100*(P)^0.5 0.95
2.14
2.49
Industries
116.79
116.79
116.79
15000
Urban Greens
11.70
0.61
6.11
13.12
Total
20.55
96.94
139.31
Recycled Water to be used for Urban greens, fire-fighting & flushing
9.46
47.74
66.96
Particulars
users
of
Population / Area in Ha
116.96
251.39
52200
109
Net Fresh Water Demand at consumer end
11.08
49.20
72.35
Distribution, Treatment & Transmission losses 28%
3.10
13.78
20.26
Total Demand at source with recycling
14.19
62.98
92.61
Demand without recycling
26.30
124.08
178.32
SOURCE OF WATER
It is understood that the CIDCO is presently gets water from Hetawane dam and MJP. The availability
from these sources is nearly 265 mld. A project from Balganga dam is under execution, which is likely to
be completed by 2016. The availability from this source shall be 350 mld. In addition a new source from
proposed Kondhane dam is under consideration. CIDCO is expecting to get 250 mld of water from this
source by 2026. CIDCO has worked out year wise demand of its developed/ developable area (other than
NAINA) from 2015 to 2030. Based upon this data a statement showing demand, availability and excess
has been prepared and shown in below Table.
Table: Statement showing Demand/Availability of Water in CIDCO area
Year
2015
Demand
in mld
251
Source
Present Status of source
Available
Excess
Water in
mld
mld
Hetawane Dam
Existing
150
MJP
Existing
115
Total
2016
14
265
Hetawane Dam
Existing
150
MJP
Existing
115
274
in
341
Under Execution
Balganga Dam
350
Total
2021
615
Hetawane Dam
Existing
150
MJP
Existing
115
487
128
Under Execution
Balganga Dam
350
Total
615
Hetawane Dam
Existing
150
MJP
Existing
115
Under Execution
Balganga Dam
2026
350
667
198
Under Consideration
Kondhane Dam
250
Total
865
110
2030
Hetawane Dam
Existing
150
MJP
Existing
115
Balganga Dam
Under Execution
350
85
780
Under Consideration
Kondhane Dam
250
Total
865
It is observed from above table, that CIDCO will have excess of water with respect to demand of Navi
Mumbai 2016 onwards (if proposed sources are developed as expected). Ultimately in the year 2030,
CIDCO shall be having 85 mld of water in excess of Navi Mumbai demand. The ultimate demand of IDP
Area NAINA in the horizon year 2034 is calculated as 93 mld and the demand in 2031 is only 63 mld.
Thus the demand of IDP Area can well be met from excess water available from CIDCO sources till the
year 2033-34, but onwards from 2034. Some other source will be required to be tapped to meet the demand
of 8 mld for IDP area. However this is subject to maximum utilization of recycled with right from the
beginning.
PROPOSED sources of water
As per proposals of Balganga Water Supply Scheme (350 mld) of CIDCO, the water drawn from the dam
is proposed to be treated at Nidhiwali Water Treatment Plant, from where it shall be pumped to a Break
Pressure Tank, and then shall be transferred to Master Balancing Reservoir (MBR) near VAHAL through
2500 mm diameter Pipe line. Proposed water sources are depicted in below Figure.
111
Figure: Map showing Balganga WS Project and proposed tapping at VAHAL MBR
It is proposed to draw the demand of IDP Area (92.6 mld) from this MBR. The water from this MBR is
proposed to be collected in a clear water reservoir within IDP Area. The site of clear water reservoir is
proposed near Kolke village. Looking to the available head between proposed MBR at VAHAL and site of
CWR it is proposed to draw water from this MBR under gravity to IDP CWR. The pipe line is proposed to
be laid along JNPT road (NH-4B). Total length of pipe line works out as 14500 meters.
Based upon the difference of levels between MBR and CWR, the size of gravity pipe line required has
been worked out. Accordingly it is proposed to lay 1000 mm diameter Ductile Iron pipe line class-K9/ MS
pipe line with inside cement mortar lining total 14500 meters long. The capacity of CWR has been kept
equivalent to 8 hours storage, based on 22 hours pumping. Accordingly the capacity of CWR is proposed
as 33.70 ml.
The complete IDP area has been subdivided in 6 number distribution zones, looking to the topography of
the area. The capacity of Service Reservoirs has been worked out as per mass demand curve assuming 24
hours water supply and based upon the zone water demand calculated as per zonal land use. Five out of
proposed six service reservoirs are Elevated Service Reservoirs (ESRs) while the Service Reservoir at
112
zone-4 is ground reservoir proposed on hillock. The zonal demand and capacity of service reservoirs
proposed is being given in below Table.
Table: Zonal Demand & Capacity of SRs
Zone Name
Demand in mld
SR Cap in ml
Zone-1 / OHT-1
0.150
13.89
Zone-2 / OHT-2
0.096
8.89
Zone-3 / OHT-3
0.091
8.43
Zone-4 / GLSR-4
0.358
33.15
Zone-5 / OHT-5
0.135
12.50
Zone-6 / OHT-6
0.170
15.74
Total
1.000
92.61
The Water from the CWR is proposed to be pumped to different Service Reservoirs through network of
pumping mains. The size of all pumping main has been derived as per the criterion laid down in CPHEEO
manual for Economical design of pumping mains, taking into consideration the capital investment and the
capitalized investment for power charges. For working out economical size, per meter cost for seven
nearby sizes of pipe has been worked out, considering bare cost of pipe, excavation of trenches, cost of
specials / valves, laying and jointing etc and most economical pipe size worked out from them.
The economical size of pipe lines so worked out are been checked for the surge pressure encountered in the
system. Even though the system has been checked for surge pressure, provision has been kept for zero
velocity valves and air cushion valves for extra safety. Accordingly it is proposed to lay rising mains from
250 mm to 700 mm diameter. The pumping mains are proposed to be laid with Ductile Iron Pipe class K-9.
The size of pipe line so worked out and proposed for laying in different reaches (nodes) is being shown in
below Table.
Table: Proposed sizes of clear water rising mains
Nodes
Type of Pipe
Distance
Demand
Pipe dia
J-3
O-1
DI- Class K-9
1168
14.30
300
J-3
O-2
DI- Class K-9
2096
9.15
250
O-3
J-3
DI- Class K-9
446
23.46
400
O-4
O-3
DI- Class K-9
1859
32.13
450
J-2
O-4
DI- Class K-9
2022
66.27
600
J-2
O-5
DI- Class K-9
736
12.87
300
J-1
J-2
DI- Class K-9
1327
79.14
700
J-1
O-6
DI- Class K-9
3410
16.21
300
The water from CWR shall be pumped to different service reservoir by Centrifugal pumping sets. Initially
the Clear water pumping station shall be installed with pumping sets to meet the demand of the year 2031
only. Thus it is proposed to install 6 number pumping sets capable to discharge 198.8 litres / sec at 120
meters head coupled with 370 kw squirrel cage induction motor, out of which 4 number shall be working
and 2 shall be standby. Later after 2031, the pumping sets are required to be replaced having a capacity of
pumping 292.33 litres per second at 125 meters head coupled with 560 KW electric motor. Provision has
also been kept for necessary electric switch gears, and power connection. The location of CWR and
complete network of pumping mains is shown in below Figure.
113
Figure: Proposed Network of Clear Water Rising Mains

Provision has been kept for HT Power line up to pumping station along with sub-station, electric cabling
and metering etc. Provision has also been kept for trunk distribution system on sector level roads only as
shown in drawing above.
Sewerage Collection, Treatment and Recycling System
Estimation of Sewage Generation
The Sewage Collection and recycling system is planned and designed to collect, treat, and recycle all the
domestic sewerage and industrial effluent generated from the IDP - NAINA Area. There are three possible
options for collection and treatment of Sewage including Tertiary Treatment and recycling. These are
discussed below:
114
Sewage and Sullage both are treated by developer of the plot at plot level: This has the disadvantage, that
STPs will be located near the residential areas, secondly it will not be possible to monitor the quality of
treated water as form large number of STPs. On the other hand Sewage from Gaothans and small plots has
to be treated at community level STPs, which will again involve infrastructure cost. This also have the
problem that how the waste effluent from so many STPs shall be carried to suitable disposal points.
Sullage is treated at developer level and Sewage is carried to Community level STPs: This will again have
the problem of monitoring the quality of treated water being supplied, and sullage from Gaothans / small
plots as stated above.
Sewage and Sullage both are taken to community STPs and treated water recycled: A comprehensive
sewage collection system, along with community STPs / TTPs and recycling system is developed. Though
this will involve some extra infrastructure cost on account of collection system and distribution of recycled
water this is the safest way of treating the total sewage. In this system the tertiary treated water can
precisely be distributed to urban greens / parks, different industries for washing and for flushing use in
residential areas.
As prescribed in CPHEEO manual, it is assumed that 80% of water actually supplied at consumer end for
domestic use and 60% of water supplied to industries be generated as Sewage/ waste water. While working
out sizes of collection system and capacity of Sewage Treatment Plant, provision has been kept for 20%
infiltration through sewer lines. But while calculating the water available for recycling the infiltration has
not been considered, assuming that during summers and winters the infiltration shall almost be negligible.
Accordingly the sewage generated capacity of STPs and Tertiary Treatment Plants required has been
worked out and shown in below Table.
Table: Sewage Generated, Capacity of STPs & TTPs required
Sewage Generation & Treatment Plants Capacity
2016
2031
2034
Sewage Generation in mld
17.23
85.01
118.86
Capacity of STPs required
17.00
85.00
119.00
Capacity of TTPs Required
12.00
57.00
80.00
The recycled water shall primarily be used for proposed urban greens as horticulture requirement and the
remaining shall be used in industries mainly for cleaning/ washing and in residential areas for flushing etc.
Looking to the topography of the area, pace of development and land use of IDP, the entire IDP area is
divided into 5 Sewerage Zones. The related Tertiary Treatment Plant is also proposed to be installed on the
side of STP. The Capacity of Sewage Treatment Plants and Tertiary Treatment Plants proposed zone wise
is being given in below Table.
Table: Zone wise Capacity of proposed STPs and TTPs
Sewerage Zone
Capacity of STP
Capacity of TTP
Sewerage Zone-1
36.89
24.8
Sewerage Zone-2
19.04
12.8
Sewerage Zone-3
20.23
13.6
Sewerage Zone-4
16.66
11.2
Sewerage Zone-5
26.18
17.6
Total Capacity
119.00
80.00
Sewage Collection System

The Sewage / Effluent collection system is provided to collect the domestic sewage / industrial waste water
from the residential / industrial areas and to convey it to the proposed Sewage Treatment Plant of that
115
zone. Since industrial waste water is very meagre in quantity, thus common collection system is provided
for sewage and waste water collection. The zoning and collection network is proposed in such a way that
the flow of sewage follows natural slope and conveys the sewage to treatment plant (located at the lowest
elevation) under gravity flow. The location of Sewage Treatment plants along with Tertiary Treatment
Plants is shown in below Figure.
Figure: Map showing Location of Sewage and Tertiary Treatment Plants
116
The Sewage Collection system is being proposed at sector level roads only. The internal sewers
including laterals shall be provided by the land developers themselves, which shall further be connected
to trunk sewerage system. The sewage collection network is based on following parameters, as per the
recommendations in the manual of Sewerage and Sewage Treatment issued by CPHEEO, Ministry of
Housing Government of India:
Minimum velocity at designed peak flow
Maximum velocity in SW Pipes
: 0.8 meters / sec

: 1.4 meters / sec
Maximum velocity in RCC / HDPE Pipes

Max. depth of flow in sewers at ultimate peak flow
: 2.5 meters / sec

:
Up to 400 mm sewer
: half full
400 to 900 mm sewer
: 2 /3rd full
Above 900 mm sewer
: 3/4th full
Minimum size of sewer
: 160 mm
Maximum spacing of Man holes

Up to 300 mm sewer
: 30 meters
Above 300 mm sewer
: 90 meters
Additional manholes
: At every junction, change of

Alignment/
gradient/ size.
Size of man holes

Up to 1.5 metres depth
: 900 mm dia.
1.5 to 2.5 mtrs depth
: 1000 mm dia
Above 2.5 mtrs depth
: 1200 at bottom & 900

at top
Formula adopted for design
: Mannings Formula
1 / n X R 2/3 X S 1/2
Velocity in meters
Hydraulic mean depth = WA / WP
Hydraulic slope in M / meter
= Mannings coefficient
Here
= 0.012 for SW Pipes

= 0.011 for RCC / PSC pipe
SEWAGE / WASTE WATER TREATMENT AND TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT
It is proposed to provide conventional Activated Sludge Process type of Sewage / Treatment Plant. The
plant shall comprise of Coarse screen chamber, Sewage pumping station, Fine screen chamber, Grit
chamber, Oil and Grease traps, Activated sludge type Aeration Chamber with Fluidized Bed Reactor or
117
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor, Secondary Sedimentation tank, Air Blowers, Sludge pumps, and Sludge
drying mechanism.
The Tertiary Treatment Plant (TTP) shall comprise pre-chlorination chamber, rapid gravity sand filters
and post chlorination mechanism. The TTPs are designed to receive an inflow of 85% of Sewage
generated assuming 15% losses in STP. The losses in TTP are taken as 5%.
Reuse of Tertiary Treated Water
The Sewage treated in STP and then the secondary water treated in Tertiary Treatment Plant in each
zone shall be collected in individual Clear water reservoir, wherefrom it shall be pumped for
horticulture / industrial use and for flushing in the same zone. The water shall be collected by individual
users in their ground tanks for their use. Provision has been taken for Clear water reservoirs, pumping
machinery and distributaries rising mains DI Pipe class K-9.
RIVERS AND ROAD SIDE DRAINAGE
GENERAL topography and Rivers
Two major rivers and a small nalla of about 8 to 15 meters width are passing through IDP-NAINA area,
a detailed map showing these rivers is shown in below Figure.
Figure: Map showing the rivers flowing through IDP Area

In general the drainage of the area is from North East (where high hills are seen) towards South West.
Terrain of the area is plain except to follow the drainage pattern towards rivers. The levels range
118
between 32 to 24 meters on Eastern boundary of IDP and 5 m to 12-13 meters on Western boundary.
Though in the hilly terrain in North East of IDP but outside IDP boundary the levels ranges between
400 to 500 meters on hill peaks. The details about these rivers are being given below:
Gadhi or Kalundri River: It has two tributaries. On one of the tributaries is Gadheshwar dam at the foot
hills. One of the tributary as well as the main river passes through IDP area. The river flows from North
East to South West direction. The river originates from the hills on the North East side of IDP area. All
drainage from the north east side of IDP area goes to this river/ its tributaries.
Kolkhewadi River: This River flows from East to west through southern part of IDP area. The levels
range from 30 m to 8 meters except for the hilly terrain. It meets with the Gadhi River outside IDP area
and finally discharges in to the sea.
One small nala of about 8 to 15 meters in width also passes through IDP area. It flows from East of IDP
area to south and finally meets the Kokhewadi River. It is very much meandering in nature and divides
the total IDP area almost in two equal halves.
The rivers flowing in IDP area were checked for flooding at critical intensity of rain fall. It was done as
per empirical formulae suggested by Indian Meteorological Department. It was found that in general no
flood situation is seen in IDP area.
Methodology adopted for checking the rivers for flooding
CIDCO had provided topographic data along these rivers. The survey was reported to be carried out for
study of rivers by CWPRS for the proposed project of new International Airport near Panvel. Based on
these survey levels, "L" Sections and Cross-sections along the rivers were generated and used for
analysing maximum water level at major / critical points during maximum intensity of rain fall.
Analysis for Maximum Intensity of rain fall:
The data for maximum one day rain fall at Santacruz rain gauge station from the year 1950 to 2005 and
at Colaba rain gauge station from the year 1901 to 2005 were made available by CIDCO. The hourly
rain fall data for 26th July 2005 for these stations was also provided. Based on these data the maximum
intensity of rainfall at 100 years return period was worked out as per norms and procedure
recommended by Indian Meteorological Department.
Table: Maximum one day rainfall at Santacruz and Colaba rain gauge stations
Santacruz
Colaba
Year
Rainfall
Year
(mm)
Rainfall
Year
(mm)
Rainfall
Year
(mm)
Rainfall
Year
(mm)
Rainfall
(mm)
1950
154.9
1985
223.6
1901
144.3
1936
133.9
1971
291.2
1951
129.5
1986
194.5
1902
151.6
1937
93.5
1972
175.6
1952
308.6
1987
125.7
1903
127.8
1938
181.1
1973
171.6
1953
310.6
1989
144.9
1904
86.4
1939
231.6
1974
575.6
1954
256.0
1990
150.2
1905
82.3
1940
163.1
1975
417.2
1955
183.4
1991
399.0
1906
119.1
1941
105.2
1976
123.5
1956
175.8
1992
215.4
1907
254.5
1942
178.6
1977
184.4
1957
161.5
1993
312.4
1908
129.3
1943
203.5
1978
175.7
1958
241.2
1994
157.2
1909
120.1
1944
181.1
1979
206.2
1959
176.0
1995
180.0
1910
304.0
1945
246.4
1980
125.9
119
1960
121.2
1996
171.7
1911
111.3
1946
217.4
1981
241.6
1961
157.8
1997
346.2
1912
164.3
1947
265.4
1982
180.9
1962
212.4
1998
211.5
1913
201.9
1948
172.7
1983
173.4
1963
192.6
1999
134.4
1914
178.1
1949
432.8
1984
544.3
1964
137.8
2000
351.5
1915
248.9
1950
147.8
1985
345.5
1965
372.9
2001
161.0
1916
165.6
1951
138.4
1986
128.7
1966
291.3
2002
186.0
1917
148.6
1952
156.7
1987
153.9
1967
201.1
2003
192.9
1918
135.6
1953
173.7
1989
138.2
1968
173.8
2004
187.4
1919
277.4
1954
249.9
1990
421.2
1969
201.4
2005
944.2
1920
182.4
1955
149.4
1991
477.6
1970
194.0
1921
216.2
1956
222.3
1992
175.9
1971
244.6
1922
215.1
1957
158.2
1993
206.9
1972
203.0
1923
304.8
1958
233.4
1994
148.6
1973
163.2
1924
85.6
1959
134.1
1995
162.8
1974
375.2
1925
116.8
1960
238.3
1996
165.4
1975
223.4
1926
147.1
1961
144.5
1997
244.2
1976
264.7
1927
216.9
1962
199.0
1998
261.9
1977
136.8
1928
250.7
1963
189.1
1999
233.0
1978
156.9
1929
170.9
1964
112.1
2000
243.7
1979
139.1
1930
548.1
1965
249.4
2001
184.9
1980
151.1
1931
242.8
1966
156.5
2002
138.3
1981
318.2
1932
174.0
1967
179.7
2003
147.7
1982
275.6
1933
153.2
1968
58.6
2004
159.6
1983
253.4
1934
118.9
1969
109.6
2005
865.4
1984
240.1
1935
148.3
1970
288.8
Table: Hourly Rainfall Data for 26th July 2005

Powai Rain gauge station
Santacruz rain gauge station
Date
Time
Rain fall (mm)
Date
Time
Rain fall (mm)
26/07
15 hrs
90.0
26/07
15 hrs
100.2
26/07
16 hrs
136.0
26/07
16 hrs
190.3
26/07
17 hrs
91.0
26/07
17 hrs
90.3
26/07
18 hrs
83.0
26/07
18 hrs
100.4
120
26/07
19 hrs
77.0
26/07
19 hrs
95.0
26/07
20 hrs
109.0
26/07
20 hrs
72.2
26/07
21 hrs
120.0
26/07
21 hrs
60.2
26/07
22 hrs
123.0
26/07
22 hrs
22.2
26/07
23 hrs
20.0
26/07
23 hrs
18.4
26/07
24 hrs
44.0
26/07
24 hrs
40.0
27/07
1 hrs
96.0
26/07
1 hrs
42.5
27/07
2 hrs
32.0
26/07
2 hrs
33.7
It shows that the maximum hourly intensity of rain on 26th July 2005 was recorded at 16 hrs, which
was 136 mm at Powai rain gauge and 190.3 mm at Santacruz rain gauge station.
But the maximum hourly rain fall at other stations within Mumbai did not record such a high rain
during any hour on the day. The highest rain fall recorded at other stations on 26th July 2005 is as
follows:
Table: Maximum hourly Rainfall at Other stations in Mumbai ( 26th July 2005)
Rain gauge station
Time
Panvel
12 to 13 hrs
76.0
Kharghar
10 to 11 hrs
105.0
Nerul
14 to 15 hrs
72.5
Vashi
07 to 08 hrs
100.0
CBD Belapur
09 to 10 hrs
105.0
The Indian Metrological Department, in its Flood Estimation guide lines issued vide No. K8M/19/1992
(CWC and IMD) for West Coast Region, Konkan and Malabar, has suggested the procedure for
conversion of one day rainfall at a rain gauge station to Areal rain fall for a given return period. The
maximum rain fall recorded in a day on both Colaba and Santacruz stations can easily be taken as the
maximum rain fall at 100 years or more return period, since no such heavy rainfall is observed in a day
during past 115 years. The storm duration on 26th July 2005 lasted for about 16 hours.
Thus by using the suggested table for conversion of 944.2 mm point rainfall in to areal rainfall for a
recorded 16 hours duration and for 125 sq km catchment, the coefficient for maximum one day areal
rainfall for the catchment reads as 93% (By interpolation of 100 and 150 sq km area). Therefore the
suggested maximum areal rainfall in 24 hours for 100 years return period comes as 878.1 mm.
121
Now the Hourly distribution Co-efficient of areal rainfall as per table suggested by IMD reads 0.16.
So the Critical intensity of rainfall as per IMD recommendations comes as = 0.16 x 878.1 = 140.49 mm
per hour. Intensity as per analysis of IIT Mumbai:
The Indian Institute of Technology, Powai Mumbai, has conducted an study in the year 2012. The
report was prepared after considering the critical flood scenario of 26th July 2005. In this report it is
suggested that following critical intensity of rain fall be adopted for design of major natural drains /
diversion channels in Mumbai.
Table: Return Period and Intensity of Rain (mm/hr)
Return Period
Intensity of rain (mm/ hr)
2 Years
55.2
5 Years
74.9
10 Years
87.9
50 Years
117.0
100 Years
129.0
200 Years
141.0
122
Here it can be seen that the computed value of critical intensity of rain fall as per para-9 is in fairly
good agreement with the computed values of IIT Mumbai as shown in para above.
Intensity as per NATU Committee:
CIDCO had set up a Technical Expert Committee, called Natu Committee for review of Storm Water
Drainage System in Mumbai and to suggest remedial measures to avoid flooding. The committee has
suggested Hydraulic and Hydrological Norms for the design of Storm Water Drains in New Mumbai.
These norms have been circulated by Engineering Design Circle-II of CIDCO. These norms suggest
that a Storm Intensity of 164.8 mm/hour be adopted for design of Diversion channels having a
catchment area of 10 to 15 sq km.
The below Table, the comparison of critical intensity computed as per IMD norms, computed by IIT
Mumbai, and recommended by NATU committee:
Table: Intensity of Rain fall computed by different methods / Agencies
Computed as per IMD Norms
140.49 mm / hour
Computed by IIT Mumbai in 2012
141.00 mm / hour
Recommended by NATU Committee
164.80 mm / hour
From above it can be revealed that the value for critical intensity of rain fall suggested by NATU
Committee and being adopted by CIDCO for design of drains is slightly (about 15%) on higher side
then the computed values as per IMD norms and as computed by IIT Mumbai. But to be on safer side
the norms as circulated by CIDCO are being adopted for the design of Storm Water Drains in NAINA
area.
Thus the design of Storm Water Diversion Channels in NAINA area has been designed taking the
Intensity of Rain fall as 164.8mm / hour.
123
Time of Concentration
The time of concentration is the time required for a drop of water to run from the most remote point in
the catchment to the point for which the runoff is being estimated. The time of concentration is based
upon two catchment characteristics, first the length of catchment (L) and the difference in level from
124
upstream to outlet of catchment (H). This can be derived by three formulas known as Bhatnagar
formula, Kirpich formula and the California formula. The basic formula in all the three is the same,
except the value of constant is different in different formula.
The basic formula for Time of Concentration is Tc = {xL^3/H}^y
Here
Tc = Time of Concentration in hrs

L = Length of catchment in km
H = Difference of level in meters
x and y are the constants, having different value in different formula
The value of x and y in different formula is as follows:

Formula
Value of "x"
Value of "y"
Bhatnagar Formula
2.45
0.343
Kirpich Formula
0.80
0.385
California Formula
1.19
0.385
A comparison of all the three formula has been done taking in to consideration different catchment
characteristics for rivers. It has been revealed that the values with Bhatnagar formula are the highest,
and Kirpich formula is the lowest. The California formula gives the values in between two. CWPRS
and CWC have suggested to use California formula. Thus the Time of Concentration in our calculations
have been worked out as per California formula.
Critical Intensity of Rainfall
The critical intensity for a catchment is that maximum intensity which can occur in a time interval equal
to the time of concentration. This critical intensity multiplied by the catchment area above shall give us
the total runoff at the point of consideration. The critical intensity can be worked out by the formula
Ic = I .{2 / (tc+1)}
Here
Ic
= Critical Intensity of rainfall in cm / hr
= Intensity of rainfall in cm / hr
tc
= Time of concentration
Based upon the Intensity of rainfall 16.48 cm / hour analysed above, the Critical Intensity has been
worked out for different time of concentration, which has been used in the design of runoff.
Runoff Coefficient
The runoff coefficient is the function based on the surface of the catchment. The major criteria need to
be considered are porosity of the soil, area shape and size of catchment, vegetation cover, surface
storage and the initial state of wetness of soil. For different type of catchment surface different values
of runoff coefficient are recommended in relevant BIS. The runoff coefficient for different type of
surface in catchment is given below Table.
Table: Run off coefficient for different type of surface
Type of surface
Runoff Coefficient
Steep / Bare rock surface
0.90
Paved surfaces in city
0.90
Rock and Steep slopes but wooded
0.80
125
Plateaus (Lightly wooded)
0.70
Clayey soils, stiff and bare
0.60
Clayey soils, stiff and lightly covered
0.50
Loamy, lightly cultivated or covered with woods
0.40
Loamy largely cultivated
0.30
Sandy soil, light growth
0.20
Sandy soil, covered with heavy bush
0.10
When we look for the area within the catchment of rivers in project boundaries, it is found that the
rivers do originate from nearby hills which are partially wooded and then flow through project area.
The slopes are also very steep. Thus up to the foot hills a run off coefficient of 0.0.85 shall be
considered. Onwards from the foot hills the soil is partially clayey and loamy. But as per plan the
complete area has to be urbanised. After urbanisation almost 90% of the area shall either be constructed
or paved for paths, roads etc. Only 9 to 10% of the area is likely to be left as urban greens/ woods. Thus
for remaining project area a run off coefficient of 0.90 has to be considered.
But CIDCO in the design parameters circulated by them has suggested to adopt a Run off coefficient of
0.93 for 10-15 sq km catchment. Though it seems to be on higher side, but is being adopted to be on
safer side.
Coefficient of Rugosity
The coefficient of rugosity is the factor which depends upon the surface of stream/ river/ channel. The
BIS recommends following factors to be considered for different surfaces.
Table: Coefficient of Rugosity for different type of channel surface
S No
Channel surface
Coefficient
Rugosity
of
Natural Streams
1
Clean, Straight banks, full stage, no rifts or deep pools
0.025
Same as (1), but some weeds and stones
0.030
Meandering, some pools and shoals, clean
0.035
Same as (3), lower stages, more ineffective slope and sections
0.040
Lined channels
0.020
Channels with rubble pitching
0.030
Looking to the situation of river as seen at site, the rivers are meandering and at several places having
ineffective slopes. Thus the rugocity coefficient of 0.040 is to be adopted. CIDCO has also
recommended to adopt a rugosity coefficient of 0.040 in the design criteria circulated by them. But for
the part where development within IDP-NAINA area is to be undertaken, it is proposed to train the
river including creating a regular slope by dredging and filling, This shall be provided with concrete
floor and masonary lining on side slopes. The sides shall be provided with weep holes so that it does
not affect the ground water environment of the area. This will result in smooth flow and quick transfer
of water from the project area. On the other hand some of the land on sides of river can be reclaimed,
which can be used for construction of roads along river. On the side of these roads urban greens or
woods can be generated to give a pleasant environment in project area.
126
Thus for the part of river within project area, where the river is proposed to be trained a rugocity
coefficient of 0.020 shall be adopted.
Flood Discharge
The flood discharge in a particular section of river shall depend on the Critical intensity of rain fall,
Catchment area intercepted by that section and run off coefficient of the catchment. The formula used
shall be:
Here
Q=
0.028 x P x A x Ic
Q=
Flood discharge in Cum / sec
P=
Run off coefficient of catchment
A=
Area of catchment intercepted in hectares
Ic =
Critical Intensity of rainfall in cm per hour for related time of
concentration
Flood level in a section
After calculating the flood discharge, the flood levels in a particular section shall be worked out based
on the formula of conveyance factor and slope of the stream. For this the velocity of flow in the section
under consideration shall be worked out. The velocity shall be dependent on the slope of stream,
rugocity coefficient, Area of stream and the perimeter.
The Velocity of flow= V=
Here
R=
=
(R^0.667 x S^0.5) / n
Hydraulic mean depth
Area / Wetted Perimeter of the stream at the section
S=
Slope of catchment =
n=
Coefficient of rugocity
Length of catchment/ Fall in m
Based upon the velocity, the area required to accommodate the flood encountered is worked out, which
in turn gives the level in the river at the time of flood in particular section. For this we have applied the
formula:
The Flood discharge
Here
Q=
AxV
A=
Area of stream
V=
Velocity of water in the stream
Based upon above calculations the flood level in the river is worked out and has been checked with the
ground level in surrounding area.
It is found that at critical/ junction points a minimum free board of 300 to 1500 mm is available. Thus
based on the calculations made with above empirical formulae, no flood situation is seen within IDP
Area. However as already suggested CIDCO must go for 1-D and 2-D mathematical model study of
these rivers to rule out the likely possibility of flood situation in the area before going for urban
development.
Thus as suggested in previous paragraphs, the stretch of rivers within the IDP- Area has to be trained
and lined, after river model study.
The detailed calculations for some of the nodes considered critical and analysed for flood have been
shown in the below images.
127
128
129
130
131
Road side drainage

The Storm water drainage system is provided to collect the rain water with in the project area and to
cater it to the natural drains / rivers within the project area which in turn are discharging in to the
Arabian Sea on west of NAINA. The area in general is having a slope from North East to South West
direction. Due care has to be taken during design of drainage system, that the drains flow along the
132
natural slope of ground, to avoid unwanted earth work during construction. The drainage system shall
be proposed on both sides of proposed roads.
As the drains are discharging in to the natural drains with in project area, it is proposed to create few
water harvesting structures at suitable locations. For this it is proposed to construct low height weirs of
1.5 metrs, based on the adjoining contours. The rain water collected from the proposed drains shall be
stored in these weirs. This will help in improving general water table in the area, and will also give a
good aesthetic and environmental view in the green buffer surrounded with woods.
Design Criteria and Parameters

The design of storm water drainage system is to be based on IRC - SP: 50 (Guide Lines for Urban
Drainage). This involves:
Calculating the total discharge that the system will be required to drain off.
Fixing the slope and dimensions of the drain to have adequate capacity to carry the discharge and afford
proper maintenance.
The discharge is dependent upon intensity and duration of precipitation characteristics of the area, and
the time required for such flow to reach the drain. The storm water flow for this purpose has been
determined using the rational method, as suggested in IRC SP: 50 for road side drains.
The road side drains are not to be designed for the peak flow of rare occurrence; however it is necessary
to provide sufficient capacity to prevent too frequent a flooding of the drainage area. However it is
recommended that road side drains be designed for 2 years return period, and the natural drains passing
nearby for a 5 year return period. But CIDCO in its guide lines circulated has recommended that
Sectoral and Nodal drains be designed for 10 years return period, thus drains shall be designed for 10
years return period.
Rain fall intensity
It has been observed that shorter the duration of critical rainfall, the greater would be the expected
average intensity during that period. Say during a 30 minute rainfall, some 5 minute period will have
average rain fall intensity greater than that of the whole storm. The critical duration of rainfall will be
which produces maximum runoff. This duration has been taken equal to the time of concentration.
Thus based upon the rainfall data from Indian Meteorological department, and rational analysis of the
data, Critical Design Intensity of Rain fall for 10 years return period has been worked out, which comes
as 87 mm / hour.
Based on above values, and Empirical formula as per IRC- SP-13, a table of design rainfall intensity for
different values of time of concentrations prepared for adopting in the design of drain.
Time of concentration
The time of concentration shall be taken as the time required for a drop of water to run from the most
remote point of the road surface to the point for which the runoff is being estimated. The time of
concentration shall be worked out based upon the empirical formula in IRC SP 13.
Run off coefficient
The coefficient of runoff is the portion of precipitation that makes its way to the drain. Its value
depends upon, permeability of the surface, type of ground cover, shape and size of catchment area, the
topography and geology. As per recommendation of IRC-SP-50, the following values have to be
adopted for the design of storm water drains in PEMH area:
Residential Area
0.60
Industrial Area
0.55
133
Open / Parks
0.15
Roads
0.90
Rational Formula adopted for estimating Peak Run-off rates

The IRC SP: 50: 1999, recommends, that for the smaller water sheds following rational formula is to
be used for estimating peak run-off rates:
Q = 0.028 PAIc
Here:
Q = Design peak run off rate in cum / sec.

P = Coefficient of run-off for catchment characteristics.
A = Area of catchment in hectares.
Ic = Critical intensity of rainfall in cm per hour for the selected return period and the
duration
134
m/sec
cumecs
kms
m/m
(min)
(min)
(min)
mm/hr
(Cs)
( C)
(Ha)
cumecs
cumecs
OK / Error
(m)
(m)
Chances of flooding Yes / No
Free Board available
(m)
Minimum Ground level
A/P
Drain section & slope adopted is OK or not
P (m)
Capacity of river / channelQ"
A (m2)
Sub-Catch-ment flow "q"
D (m)
Run off
coeff.
Cathment area Intercepted
D (m)
Storage coeff.
Av. Water Depth

d (m)
Intensity of rain fall
(m)
Time of concen-tration "tc"
(m)
Flow time within stretch "td"
B (m)
Over land flow time "to"
(m)
Slope of catch-ment
(m)
Max. length of catch-ment
(m)
End
Capacity "Q"
(m)
Start
Bed Slope
Velocity "V"
End
Bed Fall
Coeff. Of Roughocity
Start
Area / Perimeter
End
Free Board Proposed
Bed Width
Length of stretch
L (m)
Start
HFL
Perimeter
(m)
Existing Bed Proposed Bed

Level
Level
Av. Area of Section
(m)
Chainage at End
Chainage at Start
Details about the stretch
To
From
Node Number
Width at proposed HFL
As per CIDDCO Norms and 164.8 mm/hr Intensity of Rainfall

15-Apr 14-Apr
Natural
9898
9628
270
29.84
26.6
29.84
26.6
20
98
0.5
2.35
32.19
28.95
45.6
98.1
0.46
3.24
0.012
0.04
1.64
74.98
3.8
0.171
592
2.7
594.5
30.24
0.995
0.93
577.7
44.92
75
OK
29.57
0.62
No
14-Apr 13-Apr
Natural
9628
9426
202
26.6
24.77
26.6
24.77
13
135
0.5
2.25
28.85
27.02
41.8
135.1
0.31
1.83
0.009
0.04
1.09
45.56
0.163
639
3.1
642.5
28.17
0.995
0.93
605.8
43.88
45.6
OK
27.56
0.54
No
13-Apr 12-Apr
Natural
9426
9266
160
24.77 21.05 24.77 21.05
28.5
92
0.5
1.21
25.98
22.26
26.8
92
0.29
3.72
0.023
0.04
1.67
44.86
4.16
0.158
678
1.6
680.1
26.72
0.995
0.93
639.9
43.97
44.9
OK
22.78
0.52
No
12-Apr 11-Apr Lined Channel 9266
8947
319
21.05 18.65 21.05 18.65
12
0.5
1.78
22.83
20.43
16
13
1.23
2.4
0.008
0.02
4.99
79.96
4.48
0.146
761
1.1
761.8
24.09
0.995
0.93
672.8
41.67
80
OK
21.04
0.61
No
11-Apr 1-Apr Lined Channel 8947
6859
2088
18.65
7.8
18.65
7.8
12
0.5
20.65
9.8
18
13.2
1.36
10.85
0.005
0.02
4.43
79.74
6.57
0.101
1364
7.9
1372.3
13.81
0.995
0.93
1568.5
55.7
79.7
OK
13.75
3.95
No
1165
195
11.6
10.62
11.6
10.62
13
85
0.5
1.96
13.56
12.58
96
85.1
1.13
0.98
0.005
0.04
1.92
184.5
7.95
0.057
2123
1.69
2124.7
9.05
0.995
0.93
1049.1
24.43
184.5
OK
15.3
2.72
No
Hills
16/10
Natural
1360
16/10
16/2 Lined Channel 1165
50
1115
10.62
8.01
10.62
8.01
10
0.5
2.19
12.81
10.2
16.4
11.6
1.41
2.61
0.002
0.02
3.04
49.97
9.07
0.05
2595
6.1
2601.1
7.43
0.995
0.93
1130.5
21.6
50
OK
13.25
3.05
No
16/1
1677
5086
8.46
3.29
8.46
3.29
20
60
0.5
2.14
10.6
5.43
85.6
60.2
1.42
5.17
0.001
0.02
2.02
172.52
14.15
0.032
5141
42.1
5183.1
3.77
0.995
0.93
4731
45.89
172.5
OK
6.94
1.51
No
14/20
1060
5.2
3.29
5.2
3.29
10
20
0.5
2.14
7.34
5.43
32.1
20.9
1.54
1.91
0.002
0.02
2.83
90.77
6.5
0.023
2379
6.25
2385.4
8.09
0.995
0.93
4152.8
86.37
90.8
OK
6.94
1.51
No
25/12
1450
3.29
1.72
3.29
1.72
30
60
0.5
2.14
5.43
3.86
96.3
60.3
1.6
1.57
0.001
0.02
2.25
216.5
15.6
0.042
5204
10.75
5214.5
3.75
0.995
0.93
8883.9
85.66
216.5
OK
5.89
2.03
No
18/1
18/20
Natural
1110
1110
16.24 12.84 16.24 12.84
25
0.5
1.48
17.72
14.32
23.7
25.2
0.94
3.4
0.003
0.04
1.33
31.4
11.16
0.015
5254
13.95
5268
3.71
0.995
0.93
2770
26.44
31.4
OK
16.18
1.86
No
17/12
17/1
Natural
11028 8500
2528
21.04 12.92 21.04 12.92
20
85
0.5
2.58
23.62
15.5
135.5
85.2
1.59
8.12
0.003
0.04
1.93
261.45
9.5
0.08
2286
21.83
2307.5
8.35
0.995
0.93
7649.3
164.34
261.4
OK
17.86
2.36
No
8500
12.92
1.49
12.92
1.49
30
60
0.5
2.31
15.23
3.8
104
60.4
1.72
11.43
0.001
0.02
2.63
273.91
18
0.042
6105
53.76
6159.1
3.18
0.995
0.93
12423
101.58
273.9
OK
5.4
1.6
No
6000
386
1.49
0.9
1.49
0.9
60
100
0.5
2.9
4.39
3.8
232
100.4
2.31
0.59
0.002
0.04
1.71
396.4
18.39
0.041
6343
3.77
6346.8
3.09
0.995
0.93
12653
100.45
396.4
OK
5.9
2.1
No
Sep-53 2-Sep Lined Channel 8500

1-Sep Sep-00
Natural
6386
135
ANNEXURE 10-1: CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

FINANCIAL VIABILITY ANALYSIS FOR IDP PART OF CENTRAL NAINA
SN
BASIC ASSUMPTION
QUANTITY
UNIT
QUANTITY UNIT
LAND RATE - NON NA

(Highest rate in IDP as per Ready Recknor)
0.39 Rs/ha (crores)
390 Rs/ M2
LAND ACQUISITION RATE - DOUBLE OF NON NA

RATE
0.78 Rs/ha (Cr)
780 Rs/ M2
LAND RATE - NA
(Highest rate in IDP as per Ready Recknor)
SALE PRICE LAND RATE
SF LAND SALE RATE
0.5 of sale price
6000 Rs/ M2
OFF SITE CITY DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
2.3 Rs/ha (crores)
2300 Rs/ M2
INCREASE IN COST
0.09 PER YEAR
1.09 Factor
INCREASE IN LAND SALE RATE UPTO 2020
0.12 PER YEAR
1.12 Factor
INCREASE IN LAND SALE RATE BEYOND 2020
0.15 PER YEAR
1.15 Factor
10
OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT RATE
11
%AGE OPTING NAINA SCHEME
12
BASIC RATE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
13
RATE OF BORROWING - INTEREST RATE
14
SHARE OF CIDCO IN MMC (ROAD AND METRO

COST)
50% BALANCE 50% BY MMRDA
15
FOR SUB URBAN RAILWAY CIDCO WILL SHARE
67%
4 Rs/ha (crores)
4000 Rs/ M2
12 Rs/ha (crores)
12000 Rs/ M2
0.1 Rs/ha (crores)
100 Rs/ M2
80%
500 Rs/ M2
9% PER YEAR
136
Sources of Revenue
A
Sr No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Equivalent
Area
Land
coming up
%age
for
coming for
Development
developme
Developem
Charge
*
ent
Rs/M2
nt
Year
2015
3
85.9
500.0
2016
3
85.9
560.0
2017
5
143.2
627.2
2018
5
143.2
702.5
2019
5
143.2
786.8
2020
7
200.4
881.2
2021
7
200.4
1013.3
2022
7
200.4
1165.3
2023
9
257.7
1340.2
2024
9
257.7
1541.2
2025
9
257.7
1772.3
2026
9
257.7
2038.2
2027
7
200.4
2343.9
2028
7
200.4
2695.5
2029
4
114.5
3099.9
2030
4
114.5
3564.8
100
1
NOTE
REVENUE (Rs Cr)
Revenue from
DC
Rs in Cr
42.9
48.1
89.8
100.6
112.6
176.6
203.1
233.6
345.3
397.2
456.7
525.2
469.8
540.3
355.0
408.3
2863.3
4505.1
%age of
Rate of
land
Land Sale available
Rs/M2
for sale
Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
42.9
44.1
75.6
77.7
79.8
114.8
121.1
127.8
173.3
182.9
192.9
203.5
167.0
176.2
106.2
112.1
1998.0
Equivalent Area Factors --Residential-1, Commercial-2, Industrial-1.5
REVENUE FROM GROWTH CENTER ( SALE OF LAND)
Sr No
Discounting
Factor
NPV
1.0000000000
0.9174311927
0.8416799933
0.7721834801
0.7084252111
0.6499313863
0.5962673269
0.5470342448
0.5018662797
0.4604277795
0.4224108069
0.3875328504
0.3555347251
0.3261786469
0.2992464650
0.2745380413
12000
13440.0
15052.8
16859.1
18882.2
21148.1
24320.3
27968.4
32163.6
36988.2
42536.4
48916.8
56254.4
64692.5
74396.4
85555.9
0
0
0
0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
100.0
REVENUE (Rs Cr)
LAND SALE
Land sale year-wise Estimated
ha
receipts Rs.Cr
Dev.
Dev.
Dev.
Dev.
Period
Period
Period
Period
18.0
18.0
18.0
18.0
36.1
36.1
36.1
36.1
36.1
36.1
36.1
36.1
361.0
0
0
0
0
340.8
381.7
438.9
504.8
1161.0
1335.2
1535.4
1765.8
2030.6
2335.2
2685.5
3088.3
17603.4
Discounting
Factor
1.0000000000
0.9174311927
0.8416799933
0.7721834801
0.7084252111
0.6499313863
0.5962673269
0.5470342448
0.5018662797
0.4604277795
0.4224108069
0.3875328504
0.3555347251
0.3261786469
0.2992464650
0.2745380413
NPV land sale

revenue
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
241.4
248.1
261.7
276.1
582.7
614.8
648.6
684.3
722.0
761.7
803.6
847.9
6692.8
137
C
Sr No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
REVENUE FROM OCSDC

Land
%age
coming for LAND
Developem AREA
ent
(HA)
Year
2015
3
17.3
2016
3
17.3
2017
3
17.3
2018
5
28.8
2019
5
28.8
2020
5
28.8
2021
7
40.3
2022
7
40.3
2023
7
40.3
2024
10
57.5
2025
10
57.5
2026
10
57.5
2027
10
57.5
2028
5
28.8
2029
5
28.8
2030
5
28.8
100
575.4
REVENUE (Rs Cr)
Rate (Rs/m2)
2300.0
2576.0
2885.1
3231.3
3619.1
4053.4
4661.4
5360.6
6164.7
7089.4
8152.8
9375.7
10782.1
12399.4
14259.3
16398.2
TOTAL
39.7
44.5
49.8
93.0
104.1
116.6
187.8
215.9
248.3
408.0
469.1
539.5
620.4
356.8
410.3
471.8
4375.6
REVENUE FROM SALE OF SF P
Discounting
Factor
NPV
1.0000000000
0.9174311927
0.8416799933
0.7721834801
0.7084252111
0.6499313863
0.5962673269
0.5470342448
0.5018662797
0.4604277795
0.4224108069
0.3875328504
0.3555347251
0.3261786469
0.2992464650
0.2745380413
39.7
40.8
41.9
71.8
73.8
75.8
112.0
118.1
124.6
187.8
198.2
209.1
220.6
116.4
122.8
129.5
1882.8
REVENUE (Rs Cr)
SALE OF SOCIAL FACILITY
Sr No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Land
%age
coming for
Developem
ent
3
3
3
5
5
5
7
7
7
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
100
Area
2.5
2.5
2.5
4.2
4.2
4.2
5.9
5.9
5.9
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
4.2
4.2
4.2
84
Rate (50% of Land

rate) Rs/m2
6000
6720.0
7526.4
8429.6
9441.1
10574.1
12160.2
13984.2
16081.8
18494.1
21268.2
24458.4
28127.2
32346.3
37198.2
42777.9
Revenue
Rs Cr
15.1
17.0
19.0
35.4
39.7
44.5
71.6
82.3
94.6
155.5
178.8
205.6
236.5
136.0
156.4
179.8
1667.8
Discounting
Factor
1.0000000000
0.9174311927
0.8416799933
0.7721834801
0.7084252111
0.6499313863
0.5962673269
0.5470342448
0.5018662797
0.4604277795
0.4224108069
0.3875328504
0.3555347251
0.3261786469
0.2992464650
0.2745380413
NPV
15.1
15.6
16.0
27.4
28.1
28.9
42.7
45.0
47.5
71.6
75.5
79.7
84.1
44.4
46.8
49.4
717.7
138
Expenditure Pattern
INFRASTUCTURE HEAD
LAND
COST
(Rs Cr)
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
POWER
150.2
2.0
75.1
81.8
309.1
SWM
WS
731.3
5.0
13.0
5.0
159.4
173.8
189.4
206.5
225.0
2.8
3.1
3.4
3.7
4.0
1690.4
SEWER
35.0
DR
SUB
URBAN
ROAD
1083.9
10.0
108.4
118.1
128.8
140.4
153.0
166.8
181.8
198.1
216.0
235.4
303.0
10.0
30.3
33.0
36.0
39.2
42.8
46.6
50.8
55.4
60.4
65.8
194.0
10.0
19.4
21.1
23.0
25.1
27.4
29.8
32.5
35.5
38.7
42.1
1641.1
10.0
164.1
178.9
195.0
212.5
231.6
252.5
275.2
300.0
327.0
356.4
2740.6
773.3
498.7
4144.3
OPEN
METRO SPACE
376
5
2560.3
5.0
89.4
97.4
106.2
115.7
126.2
36.4
7.0
5.2
5.7
6.2
6.7
7.3
8.0
8.7
1321.3
1440.2
1569.9
1711.2
1865.2
0.0
534.9 10473.0
YEARWISE EXPENDITURE PATTERN

2020
2021
2022
91.2
SUB
INTERE
EST &
TOTAL +
ST
ADM
EST
COST
10% PER
7363.7 YEAR
TOTAL
SUB
TOTAL
OTH
275
5
59.8
65.2
71.1
77.5
84.5
462.3
755.6
734.4
800.5
872.5
858.9
549.1
589.0
642.0
2021.1
1440.2
1569.9
1711.2
1865.2
0.0
0.0
358.2 16358.8
46.2
75.6
73.4
80.0
87.2
85.9
54.9
58.9
64.2
202.1
144.0
157.0
171.1
186.5
0.0
0.0
1487.2
508.5
831.1
807.8
880.5
959.7
944.8
604.0
647.9
706.2
2223.2
1584.3
1726.8
1882.3
2051.7
0.0
0.0
Discounting
Factor
37.0
105.2
173.1
247.4
302.2
349.7
354.4
351.4
280.1
298.8
230.6
133.6
12.8
0.0
0.0
545.5
936.4
980.9
1127.9
1262.0
1294.6
958.4
999.2
986.3
2522.0
1814.9
1860.4
1895.1
2051.7
0.0
0.0
2876.4 19235.2
1.0
0.91743119
0.84167999
0.77218348
0.70842521
0.64993139
0.59626733
0.54703424
0.50186628
0.46042778
0.42241081
0.38753285
0.35553473
0.32617865
0.29924647
0.27453804
Present
value of
cost
( Rs Cr)
545.5
859.0
825.6
870.9
894.0
841.4
571.5
546.6
495.0
1161.2
766.6
721.0
673.8
669.2
0.0
0.0
10441.4
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
COST
REVENU
E
PROFIT/
LOSS
IRR
508.5
831.1
807.8
880.5
959.7
944.8
604.0
647.9
706.2
2223.2
1584.3
1726.8
1882.3
2051.7
0.0
2030
0.0
97.8
109.5
158.6
229.0
597.3
719.4
901.4
1036.6
1849.3
2295.8
2640.1
3036.2
3357.4
3368.2
3607.2
4148.3
-410.8
17.1%
-721.6
-649.2
-651.5
-362.5
-225.4
297.4
388.7
1143.1
72.6
1055.9
1309.3
1475.1
1316.5
3607.2
4148.3
OPENING
BALANCE
-410.8
-1169.33
-1923.78
-2748.44
-3358.29
-3885.98 -3938.31 -3904.04 -3112.26 -3319.79 -2562.70
-1484.04
-142.52 1161.20 4872.89
9459.71
VALUE
WITH
INTEREST
-447.7
-1274.57
-2096.92
-2995.80
-3660.53
-4235.72 -4292.75 -4255.40 -3392.36 -3618.57 -2793.35
-1617.61
-155.35 1265.71 5311.45
10311.08
37.0
37.0
105.2
105.2
173.1
173.1
247.4
247.4
302.2
302.2
INTEREST
349.7
349.7
354.4
354.4
351.4
351.4
280.1
280.1
298.8
298.8
230.6
230.6
133.6
133.6
12.8
12.8
-104.5
0.0
-438.6
0.0
-851.4
0.0
SUMMARY OF FINANCILA ANALYSIS

NPV
Rs Cr
Rs Cr
1882.8 Rs Cr
717.7 Rs Cr
1998.0
REVENUE FROM GROWTH CENTER ( SALE OF LAN
6692.8
REVENUE FROM OCSDC
SALE OF SOCIAL FACILITY
NPV of All Receipt

NPV of All Expenses
NPV
IRR
6
7
8
11291 Rs Cr
10441 Rs Cr
850 Rs Cr
17%
139

Naina

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Naina

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Naina

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DRAFT INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FOR PARTOF NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA (NAINA)

CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LTD

EXISTING PROFILE OF IDP AREA .................................................................................................... 6

ENVISIONING FUTURE ..................................................................................................................... 26

VISION FOR NAINA.............................................................................................................................................................. 26

REQUIREMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSES ........................................................................................ 30

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

PROPOSED TRANSPORT NETWORK PLAN ................................................................................. 34

PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK...................................................................................................................... 34

PROPOSED LAND USE .................................................................................................................... 39

KEY CONSIDERATIONS OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................................................. 39

LAND DEVELOPMENT MODEL NAINA SCHEME ....................................................................... 57

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

PROVISION OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE: ........................................................................................................ 59

SALIENT FEATURES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND PROMOTION REGULATIONS ....... 62

BLOCK ESTIMATES & FINANCING DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... 64

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................... iv

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

Ambarnath Municipal Council

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

Figure 1-1: Location of NAINA in MMR

1.2 NAVI MUMBAI AIRPORT INFLUENCE NOTIFIED AREA (NAINA)

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

1.3 NEED FOR INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PLAN (IDP)

1.4 SELECTION OF IDP AREA

CRITERIA FOR SELECTION

The area covered in IDP is based on the following considerations:

Availability of Transport Network- The existing and proposed transport network is an

Development Pressure CIDCO as SPA receives proposals for Development Permission in

EXTENT OF COVERAGE IN IDP

GIS Area (Ha)2

Areas calculated in GIS platform

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

Figure 1-2: Villages covered in IDP Area

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

1.5 PROCEDURE AND CONTENT OF IDP AS PER MR&TP ACT,

Date of Declaration of Intention for preparation of DP

Date/ Due date

Receiving of Suggestion/ Objection

SPA to Forward Suggestion/ Objection to PC

Source: MR&TP Act, 1966

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

2. EXISTING PROFILE OF IDP AREA

LOCATION, REGIONAL SETTING AND ENVIRONMENTAREA AND LOCATION

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

2.2 DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC PROFILE

City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

Source: Compiled from Census of India.

POPULATION STRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTION

2.2.2.1 POPULATION DENSITY

Persons Per Hectare

Figure 2-2: Population Density Persons Per Hectare

2.2.2.2 SC & ST POPULATION

2.2.2.3 LITERACY RATE