BMC’s Delay on Matunga Parking Tower Raises Concerns
The 23-storeyed robotic parking tower project in Matunga, a ₹126 crore initiative, has faced growing public resistance as the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) grapples with increasing scrutiny over its lack of transparency and timely responses. The proposed parking tower, situated near the bustling Matunga Central Railway Station, has become the focal point of criticism, with citizen activists raising serious concerns about the decision-making process and procedural delays.
Activists, led by Chetan Trivedi, who have filed Right to Information (RTI) requests regarding the project, are still awaiting crucial information from the BMC. These RTIs seek details such as the number of existing parking spaces near the station, along with a copy of the No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Mumbai Fire Brigade. The deadline for BMC’s response has long passed, yet activists report continued delays. Trivedi, in his interactions with the BMC’s Building Proposal Department and the fire brigade, has encountered shifting responsibility and a lack of concrete answers.
Despite multiple meetings with BMC officials, including a recent invitation from Girish Nikam, Chief Engineer for Roads and Traffic, activists allege that the corporation has failed to provide any documents or substantive answers to the public. Compounding their frustrations, the fire brigade has been unable to provide the NOC, citing the absence of a city survey number for the project site, which raises further questions about the project’s legitimacy. Adding to the growing discontent is the method by which the contract was awarded. While the project’s total cost is pegged at ₹126 crore, concerns have been raised about the offline awarding of the contract in 2023, before all required NOCs, including from the railways, had been secured. Furthermore, the absence of a city survey number on the plot in question has led to doubts about the project’s adherence to planning regulations.
The Petition Group, a prominent local advocacy group, has been vocal in its opposition to the parking tower, calling it a safety hazard. Trustee GR Vora has expressed dismay at the BMC’s lack of public consultation, further compounded by the silence from local political representatives, including some government officials. Despite their assurances, Vora and his team are still awaiting official responses to their letters submitted in November. As the deadline for the project approaches, the city finds itself grappling with the dual challenge of managing its ever-growing transport needs while maintaining transparency and accountability in urban planning. Activists continue to push for a rethinking of the project’s location and safety concerns, while the BMC faces pressure to address these mounting criticisms.
