PANVEL: The revised draft Development Plan (DP) released by the Panvel Municipal Corporation (PMC) last month has ignited a wave of dissent among local residents. Over 1,300 submissions have been filed, predominantly opposing the reservation of areas that already host established homes, especially those categorized as ‘no development zones.’
The DP, unveiled on August 8, initially received a subdued response with only three submissions in the first ten days. Early reactions were somewhat positive, as some villagers saw potential benefits from converting large agricultural tracts in 19 villages into residential zones. The reservation of land for godowns in Nagzari and Chal was perceived as a financial boon for local farmers. However, as the plan underwent closer scrutiny, significant objections emerged.
Residents from Ghot, Taloja, and Karavle, in particular, voiced strong concerns. They fear the loss of agricultural land due to proposed green zones and road developments, which they argue will severely impact their livelihoods. The proposed solid waste management project in Ghot Chal and buffer zones between industries in Taloja have also been contentious issues. Villagers assert that these reservations and projects are detrimental to their communities and economic stability.
In response to these grievances, a large protest was organized on Wednesday involving residents from 17 bastis, koliwadas, and 22 adivasi padas. The demonstrators demanded an extension of the period for submitting suggestions and objections. They also sought a more inclusive planning process, highlighting issues such as discrepancies in population data and the lack of public awareness. The DP documents, which were only available in English, were criticized for being inaccessible to many local residents. A member of the Ghar Haq Sangharsh Samiti criticized the plan for categorizing homes under various reservations like ‘commercial’ and ‘public utilities,’ reflecting what he described as a failure to consider local needs.
Local farmers have expressed deep dissatisfaction with the DP, describing it as “unjust.” They argue that reserving agricultural land for non-agricultural use threatens their livelihoods and future prospects. Despite the widespread opposition, the Assistant Director of Town Planning at PMC has confirmed that the deadline for submissions will not be extended. The next step will involve a hearing conducted by a committee led by the municipal commissioner to review the submissions before the final draft is sent to the state government for approval.
