| File Note: |
It is submitted that the report/ recommendations of RO given in the application were perused and the following discrepancies were noted:
# The project proponent has submitted application for CTE and mentioned its category as Orange in the application form with category code as 2097-Infrastructure development projects not covered under EIA notification. The RO has processed the application based on the same category and calculated the adequacy of fees accordingly. Whereas, as per the revised categorization of industrial and non-industrial sections issued by CPCB, the project may be covered under Orange Category with Cat. Code. 10.1 i.e. Building construction project ≥ 20,000 sq. m. built-up area. Since, based on the total saleable area of all components of the project and calculating the max. achievable FAR of the project, the built-up area is sure to exceed 20,000 sqm. The project proponent is required to update the same.
Reply: The project has applied in the category 2097-Infrastructure development projects not covered under EIA notification. As per new categorization, the category for building projects have been devised. For area development projects, no category has been provided in new categorization. As such, the category 10.1 i.e. Building construction project ≥ 20,000 sq. m. built-up area is resembled for projects where permissible built-up area goes beyond 20,000 sqm. However, the category 10.1 is used in absence of the accurate category for area development projects. As per the observations from ZO, both the previous category and new category falls in Orange Type and as such, no discrepancy of the fee is there. The category 2097-Infrastructure development projects not covered under EIA notification was permitted as it closely resembled to the condition of the project and was still available on the OCMMS.
# It is worth to brought out that the RO has mentioned regarding applicability of EIA notification dated 14.09.2006 to the project, in its agenda note as under:
"The project proponent has submitted a plan of proposed built up area in the project from Senior Town Planner, in which total built up area of the project is below 1,50,000 sqm. As such, the project proponent is not covered under the EIA notification dated 14.09.2006 under category 8(b). Further, it is submitted that as this is a area development project, hence, category 8 (a) is applicable only and project is exempted under the same (being area less than 50 ha or built up area below 1,50,000 sqm)."
However, the RO has not commented on the built-up area of the independent floors proposed in the project, particularly whether these shall be constructed by the promoter itself and whether the cumulative built-up area shall exceed 20,000 sq. m. In case the built-up area exceeds 20,000 sq. m., Category-8(a) of the EIA Notification dated 14.09.2006 shall become applicable.
Reply: As per the plan submitted by the project proponent duly approved by the Senior Town Planner, there are 36 no. of Group Housing Plots of size 150 sq. yard (125.42 sqm) each resulting in total ground area of 4515.12 sqm. As such, as per maximum permissible FAR for group housing i.e. 2.1, the built-up area comes out to be 9,481.752 sqm, which is less than 20,000 sqm. As such, exempted from Category-8(a) of the EIA Notification dated 14.09.2006.
# The RO has reported that the excess treated wastewater shall be disposed of through plantation as per Karnal Technology within 3.5 acres of lease land and 1.83 acres of green area within the project premises, with a loading rate of 103.7 KL/day/acre, which is adequate in principle. However, it needs to be clarified whether the project proponent has submitted an undertaking/affidavit confirming that the green area proposed for parks shall be converted into plantation land for this purpose, and that in the event of any dispute/objection from allottees or plot owners, the project proponent shall arrange alternative land for disposal at its own risk and cost.
Reply: In earlier applications where the refusal was given to the project, the project proponent was proposing 1.83 acres of green area within the premisses for proposal of disposal of treated wastewater as per Karnal Technology. After, the refusal, the project proponent has provided 3.5 acres of lease land for disposal of treated wastewater in addition to the previous 1.83 acres for adequacy of the area. As such, no undertaking has been provided and the consent has been taken as per the feasibility report of the project.
Further, the matter was taken up with the computer section and as per the computer section, no change of category can be done amidst processing of application. As such, there is no increase of category of the project and if approved, consent may be granted to the project in current category with condition that project will be liable to amend the category once closely resembling category is devised by the Board.
|
