Stakeholders Raise Concerns Over BMC’s Iconic Structures Policy, Call For Heritage Safeguards And Clear Guidelines

Mumbai: Around 15 stakeholders—including architects, urban planners, civic groups, developers, and citizens—voiced concerns over BMC’s proposed policy on developing ‘iconic structures’ to enhance Mumbai’s skyline and boost tourism. At a public meeting held on Thursday at the BMC headquarters, participants criticised the vague definition of ‘iconic,’ questioned the selection committee’s scope, and raised concerns about the potential impact of such projects on the character of surrounding neighbourhoods.

The BMC has proposed adding Regulation 33(27) to the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR), 2034 to govern ‘iconic’ structures, with objections and suggestions to be sent to the state urban development department.

Public Consultations, Heritage Assessments Urged for Mumbai’s Iconic Structures

Anish Gawande, spokesperson for the Nationalist Congress Party (SP), said, "Our existing iconic buildings need care, and this policy should include them too. It must also ensure that the character of heritage precincts is not distorted." He submitted a letter signed by over 2,000 architects, designers, and urban planners, highlighting concerns about the policy’s impact on existing heritage precincts. Gawande also called for a stricter scrutiny committee, similar to the heritage conservation panel, to ensure only up to five truly deserving projects are approved annually. He urged cost controls to keep the 40% public-access requirement affordable.

Shirish Sukhatme, an architect and representative of the Practicing Engineers Architects and Town Planners Association (PEATA) called for a broader definition to include cultural and educational buildings. He recommended increasing minimum access width from 18 to 27 metres, selecting projects via a national design competition, removing the 1 million sq ft builder eligibility criterion, and demanding justification for the additional premium FSI granted to developers. His view was supported by Fort Heritage Conservation Association, Urban Design Research Institute (UDRI), and NGO NAGAR, who stressed that such structures should be defined by urban contribution, cultural context, sustainability, and public value—not just form or scale.

Public Consultation Needed for Mumbai’s Iconic Structures

Some participants at the meeting stressed the need for precise guidelines on built-to-unbuilt area ratios and green/open spaces, along with social and heritage impact assessments and mandatory public consultations. Sunil Rathod, chief engineer of the development plan department, clarified that iconic buildings will remain subject to heritage regulations and the existing 32-metre height restriction. Consequently, despite the additional FSI incentives offered by the policy, opportunities for development in these areas will be limited due to space and height constraints.