POLLUTION CONTROL BODY SEEKS BAN ON MIXED LAND USE
http://www.hindu.com/2004/10/26/stories/2004102611760400.htm
someone tell more about this please.
city invented in the industries imbroglio curious
concept of non-conforming-area (as distinct from
non-conforming use, non-conformity established by
proving ? like we are rightly told by court to do for
our allegations of misuse ? violations at all 3
levels, viz, Master Plan, Zonal Plan and detailed /
layout plan), curious concept currently coming in
handy to use powers against misuse without having to
establish misuse. Now it looks like city might be at
start of new game ? to obfuscate non-permissible
commercial misuse of residential premises and
permissible mixed-use premises (ie, residential
premise with wee-bit non-residential use) to make out
case for "regularising" former with proviso of parking
(the only of many nuisances of unregulated mixing that
has currently lucrative solutions).
btw, mixed land use matters are pending disposal of
s.11A Public Notice for liberalizing mlu regulations,
High Court PIL about commercial premises, SLP in
Supreme Court about commercial misuse of residential
premises, etc. High Court PIL has been incredible - it
was admitted (after dismissal of its prayer for
quashing of tender for unrestricted disposal of
commercial space) in October 2002 because the court
desired to see about directions for future,
respondents have repeatedly desired not to reply,
petitioners were asked to file additional affidavit to
show violations at all three levels, respondents have
still not desired to reply, etc? covered in commerce
section of ncmp-dmp minder (suspended following
cognisable-offence hawker-policy moves instead of
reply as ordered), at
http://plan.architexturez.net/site/dmp2021/ncmp/c
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
http://www.hindu.com/2004/10/26/stories/2004102611760400.htm
someone tell more about this please.
city invented in the industries imbroglio curious
concept of non-conforming-area (as distinct from
non-conforming use, non-conformity established by
proving ? like we are rightly told by court to do for
our allegations of misuse ? violations at all 3
levels, viz, Master Plan, Zonal Plan and detailed /
layout plan), curious concept currently coming in
handy to use powers against misuse without having to
establish misuse. Now it looks like city might be at
start of new game ? to obfuscate non-permissible
commercial misuse of residential premises and
permissible mixed-use premises (ie, residential
premise with wee-bit non-residential use) to make out
case for "regularising" former with proviso of parking
(the only of many nuisances of unregulated mixing that
has currently lucrative solutions).
btw, mixed land use matters are pending disposal of
s.11A Public Notice for liberalizing mlu regulations,
High Court PIL about commercial premises, SLP in
Supreme Court about commercial misuse of residential
premises, etc. High Court PIL has been incredible - it
was admitted (after dismissal of its prayer for
quashing of tender for unrestricted disposal of
commercial space) in October 2002 because the court
desired to see about directions for future,
respondents have repeatedly desired not to reply,
petitioners were asked to file additional affidavit to
show violations at all three levels, respondents have
still not desired to reply, etc? covered in commerce
section of ncmp-dmp minder (suspended following
cognisable-offence hawker-policy moves instead of
reply as ordered), at
http://plan.architexturez.net/site/dmp2021/ncmp/c
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail