Transit-oriented development (TOD) projects around metro stations in India have utilized various mechanisms for land consolidation and financing. In Uttar Pradesh, the Noida Metro Rail Corporation model involved grants from central and state governments as well as contributions from local authorities and property development to fund the project. Haryana has defined TOD zones up to 500 meters from metro corridors with higher densities and mixed-used development. Case studies in Delhi show TOD projects being implemented through land pooling, joint development between authorities and private sector partners, and ground leases and sub-leasing of land for development. Challenges remain around operationalizing TOD, but smart, technology-enabled approaches may help optimize land use and attract residents

1. SMART LIFE STYLE &
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
Ar Namrita Kalsi
Dy. Chief Architect, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
connectkaro.org

2. Index
Q.
 What are the Mechanisms or tools for land consolidation and financing of TOD
projects around metro stations?
 How successful have these been thus far, and what changes are foreseen to
improve their success?
 How do you propose to bring in the Private sector as partner in realizing
Transit Oriented Developments (TOD)?
 Does the "Smart City" approach move this forward?
1 MRTS-Financing Trend
2 Financing model- NOIDA -Greater NOIDA Corridor
3 Planning Instruments to optimise land utilisation
4 Transit Oriented Development- Haryana
5 Operationalization of TOD Delhi –Teething issues thro case studies
6 Conclusion
connectkaro.org

3. Introduction
MRTS are high capacity Mass Rapid Transit Systems.
AMENABLE TO
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) &
Densification thro’ additional FAR
 To maximize people & users to live within walking
distance of MRTS stations
 At max. 10 min walking distance
 For sustainability & Reduce travel demand
IN EVITABE TRUTH
T-1 Enhances property prices (sale & rental)
T-2 Government Invests while Private sector benefits
T-3 In the catchment areas of MRTS
 Ensure densification
 Thro’ population density
 Thro ‘ higher FAR &
 En-cash the increased property value
 Part finance the capital cost & OPEX
 Fund other urban transport projects.
connectkaro.org #CK2015
Metro Rail Projects
Public Sector Mode than
BOT/PPP
FINANCING TREND
 Thro’ budgetary support of Central
Govt. & State Govt.
 Loans from multilateral/ financial
institutions.
 The budget resources are limited
 Cannot be concentrated in few cities.
 A need to identify innovative
financing mechanism
 MoUD is urging State Govts.:
 Create dedicated Urban Transport
Funds &
 Finance & implement MRTS Thro’
 Urban Metropolitan Transport
Authorities
Ar Namrita Kalsi

4. FINANCIAL INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN
(FIRR)
• FIRR 8.64 %
• With central taxes only
• With PD income from 50 Ha. of Land
• The FIRR without PD is 3.98.
• The line is viable only with Property
Development
ORGANISATION SETUP
 Special Purpose Vehicle under State Govt.
Control for example :
 Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC)
 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation (BMRC)
connectkaro.org #CK2015
Source of Fund
With Taxes & Duties
Amount
(Rs/Crore)
% Of
contribution
Grant By GOI 741.50 14.28%
Grant By UP Government 741.50 14.28%
SD for CT by UP Government (50%) 297.50 5.73%
SD for CT by GOI (50%) 297.50 5.73%
Grant By Noida Authority 1000.00 19.25%
Contribution from Noida-Greater Noida 2116.00 40.73%
Total 5194.00 100.00%
Land free by Noida/Greater Noida Authority 339.00
Grand Total 5533.00
FUNDING PATTERN UNDER SPV MODEL
(WITH CENTRAL TAXES)
 State Govt. wish list for sole control of NMRC
 Therefore Grant is preferable than equity
 Noida-Greater Noida Authority to reimburse or
exempt Rs.321.00 cr. of State Taxes of
completion cost
 50 Hectare Land free of cost to SPV for getting
FIRR greater than 8%
“Noida Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.”
 An SPV
 Standalone corridor
 Grant enhanced from Rs. 500 cr. to 1000 cr.
 Balance amount by Noida-Greater Noida
Authorities out of own sources (Not Loan)
 GOI & UP Govt. requested to change equity
to grant
Ar Namrita Kalsi
Case Study
Noida & Greater Noida- Metro corridors

5. Case Study
Noida & Greater Noida- Metro corridors
Uttar Pradesh Govt. Approved
(on 27.3.15)
Increase in the floor area ratio (FAR) by 0.5
From existing FAR of 2.75 to 3.25
 Mixed land use in residential and commercial
sectors
 Different slab for sports city & govt. usage
TOD ZONE:
 Within 500m radius of existing Delhi Metro
corridor &
 Upcoming Metro line from Noida to Greater Noida.
 Purchasable FAR on existing formula on 24 m road
 Not permitted on Res. Plotted Development
“ Proceeds to the tune of Rs. 3,500-4000 cr. expected “
connectkaro.org #CK2015 Ar Namrita Kalsi

6. Funding pattern under BOT model with PD
(With central taxes and without land cost)
connectkaro.org #CK2015
Particulars
Amount
(Rs/Crore)
% of
contribution
VGF by GOI 1039.00 20.00%
VGF by GO-UP 2791.00 53.74%
Equity by Concessionaire 455.00 8.76%
Concessionaire’s debt @12% PA 909.00 17.50%
Total 5194.00 100.00%
Land Free by GO-UP 339.00
IDC 32.00
Total including IDC 5565.00
BOT MODEL : Private firm to :
 Finance, design, build, operate & maintenance.
 Govt. of UP contribution limited to cost of land .
 Project eligible for Viability Gap Funding (VGF) upto 20%
from GOI.
 State government to contribute same or more amount.
 Being a social project, private parties are not ready to bid .
 Private operator may demand assured rate of return of 16%
to 18% or
 a comfort of guaranteed ridership.
 The funding pattern assumed under this model for assuring
16% EIRR excluding the cost of land is tabulated above
PPP MODEL
 Variant 1:- Govt. funds the fixed infrastructure
cost such as land and basic civil structures and
private investor funds all the systems such as rolling
stock, signalling, power supply, traction, track, fare
collection system and E&M works including station
architectural design. Example Airport Line
 Govt. investment will be about 40 to 45% of the
total cost and the PPP Operator funds the
remaining cost thro’ viability gap funding . All the
Revenues will accrue to the Operator in all the
concession period till the project is handed over to
the owner.
 Variant 2:- Govt. acquires the required land and
offers to the concessionaire free of cost. The
private partner funds all the rest of the project,
operates and maintains the system taking all the
revenues and risks. His expected losses are made
good through a viability Gap Funding (VGF). At the
end of concession period the system reverts to the
owner. Under the PPP model, Sweeteners are
sometime offered to the operator in the form of
lands for commercial exploitation.
Ar Namrita Kalsi
Other Financial models
BOT or PPP model the total cost of the
project generally gets hiked

7. Mechanisms/tools for
land consolidation &
financing TOD
projects
PLANNIG INTRUMENTS FOR OPTIMISATION OF LAND:
TP Scheme : (Gujarat) There is no land transfer only shrunk by 30% for net
public land transfer to the government. It is likely more immeasurably fairer
(Pandey, 2007).
‘Implicit’ Acquisition in Road Widening (Kerala) the project is viable since
the cost of road is limited to the construction cost while the otherwise
high cost of acquiring the land adjacent to a road for commercial
development is avoided thro land shrinkage(Pandey, 2007).
Use of TDRs (Mumbai) those giving up lands are automatically
compensated, to eliminate value loss in giving up land , through coupons
bought by developers as TDR,
Land sharing projects instead of being evicted, the slum dwellers share the
area with planned commercial properties. (Sandhu, 2004; Shlomo and
Thipparat, 1983).
Land pooling (Punjab, Gujarat, Haryana, UP Delhi DDA)
Efficient, sustainable &equitable land development
Where lands of different owners is pooled together and
After planning is re-distributed in a properly reconstituted plots
Deducting the land for open spaces, social infrastructure, services,
housing for the weaker section and street network.
Compulsorily acquiring land is avoided
Yet a control on the growth and development can be exercised.
Redevelopment of planned & unplanned areas & Conversion
Punjab in 2013 formulated two policies:
Developed Residential Land and Commercial land to land owners
under Land Pooling Scheme and
 Land owners become partners in development
connectkaro.org #CK2015
Land Acquisition or Assembly Methods
In view of new LA legislation &
Real estate regulatory bill ,
call of the day for enabling projects is
Formulation of new or old, innovative,
hybrid formats in refreshed models.
Ar Namrita Kalsi

8. Private sector as partner in TOD &
Role of "Smart City" Innovative Format
Land owner
Developer
Government
End user
&
Technology Provider
All come together to
enable Smart projects
connectkaro.org #CK2015
Stakeholders’ Preferences for Land Assembly: Development with Rural Urban
Synergy, NAMRITA KALSI1 and RAVI KIRAN2
Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85 (4): 00–00, April 2015/Article at
http://epubs.icar.org.in/ejournal/index.php/IJAgS/issue/archive
Ar Namrita Kalsi

9. Haryana-TOD
 Reduce/discourage private vehicle dependency and induce public
transport use through design, policy measures and enforcement.
 Provide easy public transport to max. people within walking
distance through densification and enhanced connectivity.
 Enable city restructuring & optimum utilisation of land along
transport corridors.
connectkaro.org #CK2015
METRO CORRIDORS
HARYANA
Sept 2013
1. Gurgaon- Mehrauli
to Sector -29 City
Centre, Gurgaon.
2. Badarpur ,Delhi to
Ballabgarh, Dist.
Faridabad.
3. Mundka, Delhi to
City Park,
Bahadurgah.
4. Rapid Metro in PPP
mode by HUDA.
In accordance with
Develop. Plan of Gurgaon-
Manesar Urban Complex.
5. Northern Periphery
Road
6. Southern Periphery
Road
DEFINITION OF TRANSIT ORIENTED
DEVELOPMENT(TOD)
macro or micro development
around a transit node that
facilitates ease of access to transit facility
induce people to prefer to walk &
use public transportation over personal transport.
The Primary goals of TOD are to:
TOD Zone:
500 m. wide belt on both boundaries of road ROW of
MRTS corridor is designated as TOD Zone.
Ar Namrita Kalsi

10. Haryana -Permissible Use TOD Zone
connectkaro.org #CK2015
PERMISSIBLE USES
 Multi-storeyed group
housing
 Integrated commercial
complexes
 Integrated Office Spaces
 Integrated Industrial
townships
 Banquet halls/community
buildings/schools
To be designated in the
notified Development Plans
NON-PERMISSIBLE USES
 Car-sales showrooms Automobile-repair/
services/ vehicular servicing shops,
 Bus Depot, LPG godowns, Cremation
ground
 Electric Sub-station above 32KV,
 Trade with obnoxious, hazardous,
inflammable, non-compatible and
polluting substance or process .
 Prohibited outside metro stations:
 Stand-alone Multi Level Parking
 Stand–alone Open parking lot
Option to convert these uses into
permissible uses.
HIGHER FAR OF 3.0 GROUND COV. 40% DENSITY 625 PP/ACRE
In-principle approval to Property development on transport corridors on 17.9. 2013.
Ar Namrita Kalsi

11. NMA Restrictions
Height -
24 m
Basement -
No
connectkaro.org
Operationalization & implementation
Delhi -TOD Case Study-1
8, Jantar Mantar Delhi
 Outside LBZ- Residential
 National Monument
Ar Namrita Kalsi
 DMRC to construct
 Sub-Leased to -DE

12. Operationalization & implementation
Delhi -TOD Case Study-2
MAIN ROHTAK ROAD
EXISTING METRO LINE
M M M
Mundka Rajdhani Park Nangloi
RLY.
RLY.
Mundka
Nangloi
12
Manufacturing
(Light & Service Industry)
MUDKA Delhi,
Industrial Area Zone M
DDA
LAND POOLING
Zone N
Ar Namrita Kalsi
Zone M
Whole/ Part Thro’-DE

13. connectkaro.org #CK2015
Operationalization & implementation
Delhi -TOD Case Study-3
Janakpuri (W) Delhi
Residential Area
Influence Zone layout plan :
 Compulsory for individual developments with TOD norms
 Projects size of < 50 Ha permissible for development/ infill or
redevelopment,
 Compliance with influence zone plan prepared by the
Planning Authority compulsory
Minimum Mixed-Use Criteria ~ Norms At least
 30% -Residential ,
 10% Commercial &
 10% Facility
Ar Namrita Kalsi
50% -predominant land use
FAR - 4:0
Ground Cov. - 40%
ECS - 1.33
EWS - 15%
Density - 2000 PPH
Govt. Lot Size - 1 ha/3000 sqm
 DMRC to construct
 Sub-Leased to -PSU

14. Conclusion
TOD- SMART KARO
 The target population in TOD zones are young working people .
 These are smart people with smart phone centric life's.
 They will take informed decision to live in TOD Zones
 Therefore we requite to SMART UP the proposals:
 Smart Governance -CEO driven
 Hassel free smart Registry & possession
 Universal Accessibility from work to home thro ‘one card
 One bill of all services thro e-payment gateways
 365x24 availability of water, energy , web, services
 At affordable cost so Recycle & Reuse must
 Monitoring Services, O& M through sensors is critical
NOT ONLY CITY BUT SMART LIFESTYLE
connectkaro.org #CK2015 Ar Namrita Kalsi

15. THANK YOU
connectkaro.org