@Dc Account it's not just being surrounded by water but a lot of other factors. Well I'm no expert so I wouldn't know. But mumbai does have a lot of satellite cities maybe that's where the future is.
@Yoo Yoo but mumbai is more dense, US is spreaded and has better hygine or even every aspect. while mumbai is only concentrated on small area like dharavi slum
@@MarginalRevolutionUniversity One additional information to the video: the importance of electric elevators. Before the invention of the electric elevator, buildings were much less taller. The electric elevator made modern urbanization viable.
Govt has a vested interest to keep FSI small. They create artificial scarcity to help their friends(Politicians and builders). Any one buying a property now in Indian cities is either supremely optimistic or extremely stupid.
People have more positive opinion about owning land than a flat in high rise apartment. Independent house and plots are more preferred for long term investments.
Not to mention it's safer and better in every single way. But beggars can't be choosers. For Mumbai it has to be large skyscrapers with good public-transit, for pune it could be a big city with good high speed public transit
@@shrihara a 5 floor apartment is inhertingly safer than a 20 floor apartment. In any case of disaster, a 5 floor apartment can be evacuated far more easily than a skyscraper, by the simple maths that in taller buildings more people will have to pass through a specific unit of area than if the building was shorter. And if your building is wider than is taller (as is in most shorter structures), you can have more methods of evacuation, that is more stairs and elevators per unit of area. Not to mention, a lot of space does indeed gets wasted building taller buildings. It may sound contrardictary to the whole notion, but you can't build 200 meters high on mere 1000 square feet. Infact You need more space to make sure that the building is stable, and your lower floors will have to be wider than the floors above. And this is not even mentioning other things like health care, children health and mental health. It's far easier to get someone medical help if he's not living a 100 metres above ground, unless off course every apparent has its own doctor and hospital. Another problem is societal interaction. The ease of accessing the outside world in shorter building promotes people getting outside regularly and not only on work, but this ease is absent in taller buildings. Infact the act of climbing down(or using the elevators) might serve the opposite. And to add it, In a tall building, you at most know the person on the same floor, and even then, it's highly likely that they remain mere acquaintances. This wouldn't happen in shorter buildings. And before you say that existence of elevators makes up for the inconveniences of living further from the ground, the overuse of elevators will cause even more health problems like obesity. All and all, skycrapers aren't the best way of dealing with housing problems, as it would create new problems instead. The answer is always good city planning, having a sprawling residential area connected to the commercial and market area by good and convenient high speed public transit.
i hate mumbai bcoz of over crowded population, congested roads,huge traffic & sweating warm humid weather which makes me mumbai bad so i reside in Navi Mumbai which is one of the most cleanest and most livable city in India
Can people stop placing the Statue of Liberty in the ny skyline It's actually shorts and to the side, not big and in the middle Source: I've lived in ny my whole life
In terms of living life, Mumbai is a failed city. Although it is the financial capital and it has Bollywood, but it still has multitude of problems for the common man
I've lived in Bombay for 13 years and I love it. IDK what you're implying by "failed" city. It wasn't created keeping urban planning in mind. I have a feeling you're someone who lives in Mulund or Ghatkopar and you're experiencing problems. I grew up and live in Bandra so I love every aspect of our city.
I've lived in mumbai and hyderabad five years at a time in each city I'd say mumbai is just overhyped it failed to meet my expectations but hyderabad was just overwhelming its the best city in india and the cherry on the top it's place for a common man to live
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
This is such a wonderful video! It explains economics concepts as well as a daily life problem in a city like Mumbai. I would request Marginal Revolution University to create more videos, especially on commuting in cities like Mumbai and work issues faced by city-dwellers in corporate offices due to bad economic policy decisions.
Are people really unaware of such concepts? Mumbai really needs to increase FSI from 1 to 20 atleast by this year itself. Another question is, why wouldn't cities around the world keep FSI infinity?
It's not safe.. Consider the example of Chennai.. During heavy floods buildings got destructed because the ground underneath cannot support the weight.. The FSI value should really depend on the soil quality and each building built with a large fsi should ideally be reconstructed after a prescribed time usually around 40-50 years. In india that is pretty much not the case.
@@-Rishikesh so the soil quality in India and in Mumbai is poor? Why is New York City building tall skyscrapers then? Is Mumbai's soil quality poorer than that of New York's?
Good points dilip. There are 30 storey tall buildings greater noida, selling for a price of 3000rs per sqft. Most are well built, have swimming pool, great gardens, etc Mumbai prices are kept artificially high by politicians, builders, etc who already own property and want to see its value 100x
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
bro, the video is absolutely true. Its a nexus of politicians and builders .The careless, ignorant, inefficient and, moreover, corrupt govt won't increase the fsi, so that they can make money under the table.
The other side of building skyscrapers is maintaining them. And believe me, when it comes to maintainanace of anything, we indians are worst. We have corruption in saftey board beurocrats, and many of buildings/apartments in suburbs are already waiting for redevelopment. In some cases, people have died as old buildings have collapsed. Demolition of older buildings/apartment is not a common practice in India unlike Manhattan, Hong Kong, etc. Before thinking of higher FSI in India, we must execute stringent saftey policies for people who would be living/working in such skyscrapers.
I would love to see if the new FSI policy actually takes place in the future, and how it will change Mumbai :) Thank you very much for the video! I am preparing for an exam in Microeconomics now. And when I get tired from calculations, it's nice to watch your videos for inspiration. Well done!
This is starting to change, they got like >115 buildings under construction that are at least 200 meters in height. About 27 of them are 300 or more meters. There's likely to be a bunch more coming after these are completed. Especially if the projected population is 63 million by 2050...
I think it is wise to do so Since India itself is a large country. It doesn't need to construct the city like any other mega city in the world. I, myself, don't like tall building at all. But the problem need to solve for Indian is to increase the width of the road for the future prosperity. Love from China.
Fascinating video, as an architecture student I would love to see more development economics, project finance, and real estate content on this channel. Cheers!
that last point is exactly how so many people in my country think. Is such a backwards mentality that doesn't allow development and better living conditions to strive. High is the way to go.
Stupid Indian government needs to get out of its own way. Remove trade barriers, remove red tapes, increase FSI to 10 or 20, remove rent control and get rid of subsidies.... #FreeMarketForTheWin
One more reason for the higher land cost in Mumbai is the long pending civil litigation with respect to properties resulting in fewer litigation free plots of land to build on. Being a Lawyer I see the long pending civil litigations in the courts every day. According to me almost 70-80% or may be more of the undeveloped plots of land in Mumbai are under some kind of litigation
Nice video! It's really annoying when the other videos on TH-cam say it's all because of capitalism and not enough socialism that India has slums but when you research enough, it's always government control that is at the heart of these things
Do we have more video concerning this FSI problem in Mumbai? I remember that higher FSI introduce ground water and waste water problem. We need deeper discussion to gain more complete insight.
Also, if you allow higher FSI in new area, assuming the rent will be cheaper, of course people will move there! To avoid localised density increase, allowance should be made strategically. I suspect there's something left unsaid in the 2nd interview.
What I sometimes do not understand is, why are only folks migrating to Mumbai ? There are big cities like Pune ,Nashik and Thane in Maharashtra that can be developed as giant commercial hubs..that would definitely reduced part of the population burden so why only head to one place ? .
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
I am not Indian. I do not know the exact situation there. But it does follow that there would be intense pressure from land and housing developers to keep competitors out of their business. The tighter the monopoly they can hold, the more they can charge for the property. As it so often does in many other areas, regulation becomes big business' means of staying big.
Mumbai needs to invest in Public rental housing like Japan's Danchi system. This can create a lot egalitarianism among the residents of Mumbai. For sure training will be required for the initial batch of these paying guests to live in this Form of Public housing, its maintenance & other habits.
its probably an old video because the second interviewee says that FSI is 1.3 which has already been increased to 1.83 and then to further for a proposed 2.5 around 10 Jan, 2018
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
The solution is not simple as increasing FSI. An increased FSI will overburden existing infrastructure around skyscraper. Best example is lower Parel which experiences traffic jam and cramming at train station during office peak hours. What we need is a proper city planning.
Theres definitely more to this than meets the eye. The interviewer only showed one side of the story by systematically editing interviews to suit his narrative and also by not interviewing experts and politicians who are in favour of lower FSI, at all. The western rules are not applicable here in India, because for example, USA has a population of 30 crores wheres as Indian population is 125 crores hence we need bigger cities to urbanise more people. Also, a high FSI will lower down ground water levels. This reporting is totally biased.
Indeed. This video is just a tool for advocating higher FSI without a care about the consequences. Read this:- www.sdmarchitects.com/does-mumbai-need-more-fsi-or-less.html FSI is just a tool. Mumbai needs more tools, only regulating FSI does no good.
Prakash Tiwari It's not biased. U r blind enough to see d problems that persists in our country (not only in Mumbai). U r being biased by not accepting d facts.
Good video but the Maximum fsi in mumbai is 3 not 1.3...1.3 is the fsi that you can build for free...for the additional 1.7 fsi you have to buy it from the government by paying them a fee
i have analysed new york's fsi even in manhattan is not much more than mumbai......by the way manhattan is not 57sq km its under 40sq km which i have verified using google earth where i discovered that nearly all landmasses have been geographically enlarged by around 40-50% [india is the exception where the landmasses are shown smaller than their actual size] which means mumbai is not that much more dense than manhattan within its built up area.........also manhattan's true population is under 500,000 not 1.5 million as reported [from my analysis] and the 5 boroughs add up to around 4 million not 8 million plus......mumbai is actually bigger than the 5 boroughs and has around 10 million plus .....22 million is including all the nearby suburban areas like kalyan,ulhasnagar, virar, navi mumbai etc like the greater new york new jersey metropolitan area
even if I FSI get higher there will be slums....It is nowhere close to the solution of solving slum issues.....It will increase the surrounding land-price much more and how on earth these poor people will get space that will be affordable to them???
Mumbai is same as Chennai in Chennai we have huge population but very few people has capable to buy few things this make failure of sales of luxurious flat or ghost house, office space and commercial building, Luxury car, Luxury Bike, Luxury private flights and helicopter etc in Chennai only udhayanithi friends, Kalanithi workers, Karunanithi family members Binomi and outside elements of Karunanithi business alliance only do have Money those outside elements of Karunanithi, Udhayanidhi friends, Kalanithi workers do not buy none of Luxurious Properties, Luxury Bike, Luxury Car, Luxury lifestyle and Luxury flat etc result failure due to incapable and wrong mobilisation of Money result in Chennai, domestic Car Company, domestic Bike and Local Brand Boom because above listed do buy respective listed domestic product/service under Karunanithi family members businesses tie up or deal include foreign product under Karunanithi family Brand but Foreign Car, Foreign Bike, Foreign Corporate do failure if it not Brand by Karunanithi udhayanithi family it also include various Business Criminology crime and State Craft against Foreign Brand by Karunanithi family members network
1.3 fsi is not their because they think that more people will come to Mumbai to live but it is there to maintain the gap between the demand and supply and by that to keep it more profitable with less work and also to maintain the gap between rich and middle class.but what the backfire is that they have raise the price too high that it even out of reach to the higher middle class now the only hope is to convert their properties into the NPA in bulk so that load have to be beard by the the PSU banks and ultimately by the people of country.
many people who live in slums have houses , they just put them on rent and prefer to live in slums . Since it becomes a good source of money for them .
Higher FSIs in cities with bad public transportation mean more traffic and traffic costs the economy money. In Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo that cost is estimated to be around 30 BILLION dollars per year.
vicky singh He didn't say population should double. He said that if fsi is increasing, then people might feel that population is also increasing and will not understand that it actually creates more space.
Is the fear of more dense areas really the only reason why FSI limits are a thing? Or is there something else that could get cities thinking about them?
Theres definitely more to this than meets the eye. The interviewer only showed one side of the story by systematically editing interviews to suit his narrative and also by not interviewing experts and politicians who are in favour of lower FSI, at all. The western rules are not applicable here in India, because for example, USA has a population of 30 crores wheres as Indian population is 125 crores hence we need bigger cities to urbanise more people. Also, a high FSI will lower down ground water levels. This reporting is totally biased.
That's common man, a cartoon character created by R. K. Laxman. It's a over 70 years old. Created mainly for political satire. Here see more www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/10-common-man-sketches-by-r-k-laxman-you-shouldnt-miss-839025-2016-10-24
But you don't really get much density advantage choosing skyscrapers over traditional 5-6 storey urbanism. You have to leave room for sunlight and ventilation (body heat alone limits you to
But are skyscrapers really necessary to show the development of India. Mumbai has many skyscrapers but their density is low. It's a shame you didn't mention any scientific facts. First of all, the reason why Indian cities have less fsi is because of extreme climatic conditions. Mumbai has an average temperature of 30°C throughout year and pollution levels are high which means all skyscrapers here are consuming massive amount of energy for conditioning and filteration which is bad for a developing nations like ours. The reason why other cities which lie near the equator like Dubai and Singapore can make skyscrapers is because they are rich. Second, some parts of India have water shortage soo it will decrease ground water which is bad for an agriculture backed economy. Third, please don't take example of Mumbai only and then represent rest of Indian cities. Indian cities like Gurgaon, Noida have much taller skyscrapers than London and there are many to come as the nation is getting rich day by day due to Modis policies. Also some parts of India are earthquake prone soo...
^that's not true , it's the costliest in India .Just take Mumbai metro fares for instance . but relative to other big cities of the world it's very cheap
there are 500 cities in india,some have the lowest price,no one has asked poor to live in city which u cant afford...goto a place where prices are appropriate to you...delhi,mumbai are hub of corporated & people earn finest salaries so if you are here living on 10k...u are going to end up in slum,...shift to other growing cities,these migrants are fool they live only in big cities & dont care about the living standards Delhi mumbai kolkata banglore hyderabad are some most expensice cities of world!!
that 20 is due to subsidy...remove the caps & mumbaikers will be on street(well they are already) like beggers..see the response of AC local,it is running empty,but claim to have highest per capita income
Pran Pavi ok you do the unskilled work which pays low, very risky to ones health etc.. Such anti poor attitude will only worsen the situation. Everyone need to develop.
AR98 best talent give me a break...these days engineering graduates are ready to petty jobs for small pay. Not all are born with silver spoon. And every one irrespective of region, religion or cast needs equal chance. Development doesn't include only GDP , it also includes human development index, go read about it. Such archaic mindset only that only people from my community must prosper is a result of divide and rule by the British and you are just following it.
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 2 | 29 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r3lfLNH6Ke4/mqdefault.jpg)
when Delhi fell short in space its just add up lands from neighborhood.
Delhi is in an ideal location for that. I dont think its the best option, despite the location of the river valley and its flat plains for building
But mumbai is a costal city it can't do that.
@Dc Account it's not just being surrounded by water but a lot of other factors. Well I'm no expert so I wouldn't know. But mumbai does have a lot of satellite cities maybe that's where the future is.
Awesome for you guys to shine light on this rather obscure issue.
If this density continues to increase , someday Mumbai will become a black hole.😉
@Yoo Yoo but mumbai is more dense, US is spreaded and has better hygine or even every aspect. while mumbai is only concentrated on small area like dharavi slum
Mumbai is not a dense city at all
This deserves more views. All of your videos do. They’re professional, well thought out, informative and entertaining.
Thank you!
-Roman
@@MarginalRevolutionUniversity One additional information to the video: the importance of electric elevators. Before the invention of the electric elevator, buildings were much less taller. The electric elevator made modern urbanization viable.
A FSI of 25 would make difference compare to FSI of 1.3
25 fsi, fuck.
That way, you could lived in bigger space, and get tons of public spaces like big sidewalk and parks everywhere.
Govt has a vested interest to keep FSI small. They create artificial scarcity to help their friends(Politicians and builders). Any one buying a property now in Indian cities is either supremely optimistic or extremely stupid.
Mumbai doesn't have the underlying infrastructure to support higher fsi
@@arvindk451 wdym
You are
@@greenpeople1775 he means Mumbai needs more basic infrastructure to support higher FSI.
@@arvindk451 yes they do. They have brand new skyscrapers going up. There is money there.
People have more positive opinion about owning land than a flat in high rise apartment. Independent house and plots are more preferred for long term investments.
Not to mention it's safer and better in every single way. But beggars can't be choosers. For Mumbai it has to be large skyscrapers with good public-transit, for pune it could be a big city with good high speed public transit
@@Vajrapani108 which is safer and better?
@@shrihara a 5 floor apartment is inhertingly safer than a 20 floor apartment. In any case of disaster, a 5 floor apartment can be evacuated far more easily than a skyscraper, by the simple maths that in taller buildings more people will have to pass through a specific unit of area than if the building was shorter. And if your building is wider than is taller (as is in most shorter structures), you can have more methods of evacuation, that is more stairs and elevators per unit of area. Not to mention, a lot of space does indeed gets wasted building taller buildings. It may sound contrardictary to the whole notion, but you can't build 200 meters high on mere 1000 square feet. Infact You need more space to make sure that the building is stable, and your lower floors will have to be wider than the floors above. And this is not even mentioning other things like health care, children health and mental health. It's far easier to get someone medical help if he's not living a 100 metres above ground, unless off course every apparent has its own doctor and hospital. Another problem is societal interaction. The ease of accessing the outside world in shorter building promotes people getting outside regularly and not only on work, but this ease is absent in taller buildings. Infact the act of climbing down(or using the elevators) might serve the opposite. And to add it, In a tall building, you at most know the person on the same floor, and even then, it's highly likely that they remain mere acquaintances. This wouldn't happen in shorter buildings. And before you say that existence of elevators makes up for the inconveniences of living further from the ground, the overuse of elevators will cause even more health problems like obesity. All and all, skycrapers aren't the best way of dealing with housing problems, as it would create new problems instead. The answer is always good city planning, having a sprawling residential area connected to the commercial and market area by good and convenient high speed public transit.
I live in Mumbai... trust me it's bad
Khyati Chauhan Delhi stink.. huge pollution.. utter mindset
I am living Mumbai
you badass 😂😂😂
Mumbai is safest city i feel safe here compare to delhi or up bihar
i hate mumbai bcoz of over crowded population, congested roads,huge traffic & sweating warm humid weather which makes me mumbai bad so i reside in Navi Mumbai which is one of the most cleanest and most livable city in India
Can people stop placing the Statue of Liberty in the ny skyline
It's actually shorts and to the side, not big and in the middle
Source: I've lived in ny my whole life
First of all.. Remove that shit background music. I don't know why all videos related to india have this old kind of music,
Rock Jonty exactly
In terms of living life, Mumbai is a failed city. Although it is the financial capital and it has Bollywood, but it still has multitude of problems for the common man
greatidea11 shitiest city ever. I live there & I hate it.
I've lived in Bombay for 13 years and I love it. IDK what you're implying by "failed" city. It wasn't created keeping urban planning in mind. I have a feeling you're someone who lives in Mulund or Ghatkopar and you're experiencing problems. I grew up and live in Bandra so I love every aspect of our city.
Dont worry communist rule is over
In kollata
I've lived in mumbai and hyderabad five years at a time in each city
I'd say mumbai is just overhyped it failed to meet my expectations but hyderabad was just overwhelming its the best city in india and the cherry on the top it's place for a common man to live
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
This is such a wonderful video! It explains economics concepts as well as a daily life problem in a city like Mumbai. I would request Marginal Revolution University to create more videos, especially on commuting in cities like Mumbai and work issues faced by city-dwellers in corporate offices due to bad economic policy decisions.
Are people really unaware of such concepts? Mumbai really needs to increase FSI from 1 to 20 atleast by this year itself. Another question is, why wouldn't cities around the world keep FSI infinity?
It's not safe.. Consider the example of Chennai.. During heavy floods buildings got destructed because the ground underneath cannot support the weight.. The FSI value should really depend on the soil quality and each building built with a large fsi should ideally be reconstructed after a prescribed time usually around 40-50 years. In india that is pretty much not the case.
@@-Rishikesh so the soil quality in India and in Mumbai is poor? Why is New York City building tall skyscrapers then? Is Mumbai's soil quality poorer than that of New York's?
Good points dilip.
There are 30 storey tall buildings greater noida, selling for a price of 3000rs per sqft.
Most are well built, have swimming pool, great gardens, etc
Mumbai prices are kept artificially high by politicians, builders, etc who already own property and want to see its value 100x
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
@@fwefhwe4232 why doesn’t someone raise questions?
this video is crap... he purposely showed sluns whike mumbai has hundreds of skyscrapers.... 300+ buildings taller than 100 mtr.
Smith wtf is sky 'scrapper'
India is surely going to develop very fast god willing.
bro, the video is absolutely true. Its a nexus of politicians and builders .The careless, ignorant, inefficient and, moreover, corrupt govt won't increase the fsi, so that they can make money under the table.
Lmao mumbai doesn't have that high skyscrapers.. it's true.
The other side of building skyscrapers is maintaining them. And believe me, when it comes to maintainanace of anything, we indians are worst. We have corruption in saftey board beurocrats, and many of buildings/apartments in suburbs are already waiting for redevelopment. In some cases, people have died as old buildings have collapsed. Demolition of older buildings/apartment is not a common practice in India unlike Manhattan, Hong Kong, etc.
Before thinking of higher FSI in India, we must execute stringent saftey policies for people who would be living/working in such skyscrapers.
Exactly, It feels bad to.speak about our authorities...Bt sadly, Our system is most corrupted and worst..
I would love to see if the new FSI policy actually takes place in the future, and how it will change Mumbai :)
Thank you very much for the video! I am preparing for an exam in Microeconomics now. And when I get tired from calculations, it's nice to watch your videos for inspiration. Well done!
This is starting to change, they got like >115 buildings under construction that are at least 200 meters in height. About 27 of them are 300 or more meters. There's likely to be a bunch more coming after these are completed. Especially if the projected population is 63 million by 2050...
FSI is dumb, more regulations >:C why can you tell me not to build a 1km tall tower? on MY land.
Share this with all Mumbai people. Let them know the situation. May be then the govt will take action
Sanjibani Choudhury Govt knows this way better bruh
I think it is wise to do so Since India itself is a large country. It doesn't need to construct the city like any other mega city in the world. I, myself, don't like tall building at all. But the problem need to solve for Indian is to increase the width of the road for the future prosperity.
Love from China.
Agreed roads are too narrow for the population
No it consumes more farmland and affects food security in the long run.
Fascinating video, as an architecture student I would love to see more development economics, project finance, and real estate content on this channel. Cheers!
that last point is exactly how so many people in my country think. Is such a backwards mentality that doesn't allow development and better living conditions to strive. High is the way to go.
white man saying mumbai and they are saying bombay wow great
Aniket Bhau what else can we expect from these so called educated people, sod jaudet, Jai Maharashtra
Balon coaching Totally agree dude.
aniket shinde, the white guy should also say Bombay. And Rahul Gandhi should reverse the name change.
samir tirodkar why are you getting triggered?
They prefer the britishers than the indians
Stupid Indian government needs to get out of its own way. Remove trade barriers, remove red tapes, increase FSI to 10 or 20, remove rent control and get rid of subsidies.... #FreeMarketForTheWin
One more reason for the higher land cost in Mumbai is the long pending civil litigation with respect to properties resulting in fewer litigation free plots of land to build on. Being a Lawyer I see the long pending civil litigations in the courts every day. According to me almost 70-80% or may be more of the undeveloped plots of land in Mumbai are under some kind of litigation
Other countries grows up, india grows down.
Trideep nag nee amma
That is not true India is growing faster then any country on the planet
amazing information.
Should be FSI = ∞
Well, eventually physics and material engineering take over. I agree, no limit. It's dumb
well,then transportation time b/w your floor and ground floor will be infinite!!!! lol ,problem is everywhere.
Which is Hyderabad
Nice video! It's really annoying when the other videos on TH-cam say it's all because of capitalism and not enough socialism that India has slums but when you research enough, it's always government control that is at the heart of these things
Okay commie
Is difficult to develop anything in India
India has worest infrastructure and skyscrapers
dhaka bangladesh more congisted and more density than mumbai india , mumbai density becose vary poor slums in the city of mumbai
You make this video in slum area go to maha laxmi,vile parle,and tardeo in mumbai there hundred of skyscraper it is 80+ 90+ 100+ 110+ (floor)
Do we have more video concerning this FSI problem in Mumbai? I remember that higher FSI introduce ground water and waste water problem. We need deeper discussion to gain more complete insight.
Also, if you allow higher FSI in new area, assuming the rent will be cheaper, of course people will move there! To avoid localised density increase, allowance should be made strategically. I suspect there's something left unsaid in the 2nd interview.
There should be investment and development in Mumbai. And all of India.
Why does Mumbai have a lower FSI then Nagpur ? Also, the video should have presented the viewpoints of the Mumbai civic authorities.
What I sometimes do not understand is, why are only folks migrating to Mumbai ? There are big cities like Pune ,Nashik and Thane in Maharashtra that can be developed as giant commercial hubs..that would definitely reduced part of the population burden so why only head to one place ? .
Water
What's up with two story buildings in Palo Alto and Mountain View?
Do research before you speak
Good news for Indians FSI of Mumbai has been increased to 5.
Source ?
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
They need to double that
There are hundreds of Skysrapers being built in Mumbai now with the tallest one being 117 stories high Lodha one world.
They are mad
Jai hind our country is 7th richest country in the
अभय अग्रवाल आपको अंग्रेजी नहीं आती है
माफ करदिजीए
th-cam.com/video/BovSrNdgU7M/w-d-xo.html इस बिङियो को लाइक और subscribe (सबस्क्राइब) करिए मैं आपका अभारी रहूँगा
What is the fsi value of lower parel?
Sameer Hussain all 1.3
@@Dipeshgadiya ye to pure mumbai ka hai
@@niturai7188 it's same everywhere in Mumbai i think. In lower parel the plots sizes are just bigger.
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
Why ain’t government increasing the fsi? Imean now government is taking up development projects
Its easy corruption and ignorance.
amrit prusty because infra is not built accordingly
I am not Indian. I do not know the exact situation there. But it does follow that there would be intense pressure from land and housing developers to keep competitors out of their business. The tighter the monopoly they can hold, the more they can charge for the property. As it so often does in many other areas, regulation becomes big business' means of staying big.
I think regulators are bribed by landlords and in the end this hurts everybody, just because only a few people are shortsighted.
Mumbai needs to invest in Public rental housing like Japan's Danchi system.
This can create a lot egalitarianism among the residents of Mumbai.
For sure training will be required for the initial batch of these paying guests to live in this Form of Public housing, its maintenance & other habits.
its probably an old video because the second interviewee says that FSI is 1.3 which has already been increased to 1.83 and then to further for a proposed 2.5 around 10 Jan, 2018
2.5 is still garbage. With 22 million people we need 10X that. Got it.
What would government have low fsi like how does it benefit them
Hahahahaha Mumbai and Maharashtra deserves this condition for choosing such corrupt and irresponsible govt. Keep suffering guys🤣🤣🤣. Aur chuno chutiya sarkar.
Your content is amazing
The solution is not simple as increasing FSI. An increased FSI will overburden existing infrastructure around skyscraper. Best example is lower Parel which experiences traffic jam and cramming at train station during office peak hours. What we need is a proper city planning.
Maybe amend zoning laws then, to reduce commute? People will choose what's best for themselves given the circumstances available to them.
Theres definitely more to this than meets the eye. The interviewer only showed one side of the story by systematically editing interviews to suit his narrative and also by not interviewing experts and politicians who are in favour of lower FSI, at all. The western rules are not applicable here in India, because for example, USA has a population of 30 crores wheres as Indian population is 125 crores hence we need bigger cities to urbanise more people. Also, a high FSI will lower down ground water levels. This reporting is totally biased.
Indeed. This video is just a tool for advocating higher FSI without a care about the consequences. Read this:-
www.sdmarchitects.com/does-mumbai-need-more-fsi-or-less.html
FSI is just a tool. Mumbai needs more tools, only regulating FSI does no good.
Mumbai doesn't use ground water. Almost all of its water comes from reservoirs.
Prakash Tiwari It's not biased. U r blind enough to see d problems that persists in our country (not only in Mumbai). U r being biased by not accepting d facts.
Promoting Trump towers maybe
Prakash Tiwari thank God someone still likes to think n understand.. great man..
Mumbai skyscraper project
1.palais royale 88 floor
2.world one tower 117 floor (world longest residential building)
3. The imperial 3 116 floor
All on hold
Aa thu
NOTHING COMPARED TO CHINA
indian government should not limit the FSI
Wouldn’t the density increase because of influx
Increasing fsi means more erosion too
How??
You rather prefer people living in slums. You are a genius. I want to know what kind of drugs that you are on. Must be good.
@@dileepchandran392 he means its not safe
@@dv9239 then how cities like Manhattan did?
well explained... and creative too
Good video but the Maximum fsi in mumbai is 3 not 1.3...1.3 is the fsi that you can build for free...for the additional 1.7 fsi you have to buy it from the government by paying them a fee
i have analysed new york's fsi even in manhattan is not much more than mumbai......by the way manhattan is not 57sq km its under 40sq km which i have verified using google earth where i discovered that nearly all landmasses have been geographically enlarged by around 40-50% [india is the exception where the landmasses are shown smaller than their actual size] which means mumbai is not that much more dense than manhattan within its built up area.........also manhattan's true population is under 500,000 not 1.5 million as reported [from my analysis] and the 5 boroughs add up to around 4 million not 8 million plus......mumbai is actually bigger than the 5 boroughs and has around 10 million plus .....22 million is including all the nearby suburban areas like kalyan,ulhasnagar, virar, navi mumbai etc like the greater new york new jersey metropolitan area
even if I FSI get higher there will be slums....It is nowhere close to the solution of solving slum issues.....It will increase the surrounding land-price much more and how on earth these poor people will get space that will be affordable to them???
Mumbai is same as Chennai in Chennai we have huge population but very few people has capable to buy few things this make failure of sales of luxurious flat or ghost house, office space and commercial building, Luxury car, Luxury Bike, Luxury private flights and helicopter etc in Chennai only udhayanithi friends, Kalanithi workers, Karunanithi family members Binomi and outside elements of Karunanithi business alliance only do have Money those outside elements of Karunanithi, Udhayanidhi friends, Kalanithi workers do not buy none of Luxurious Properties, Luxury Bike, Luxury Car, Luxury lifestyle and Luxury flat etc result failure due to incapable and wrong mobilisation of Money result in Chennai, domestic Car Company, domestic Bike and Local Brand Boom because above listed do buy respective listed domestic product/service under Karunanithi family members businesses tie up or deal include foreign product under Karunanithi family Brand but Foreign Car, Foreign Bike, Foreign Corporate do failure if it not Brand by Karunanithi udhayanithi family it also include various Business Criminology crime and State Craft against Foreign Brand by Karunanithi family members network
1.3 fsi is not their because they think that more people will come to Mumbai to live but it is there to maintain the gap between the demand and supply and by that to keep it more profitable with less work and also to maintain the gap between rich and middle class.but what the backfire is that they have raise the price too high that it even out of reach to the higher middle class now the only hope is to convert their properties into the NPA in bulk so that load have to be beard by the the PSU banks and ultimately by the people of country.
many people who live in slums have houses , they just put them on rent and prefer to live in slums . Since it becomes a good source of money for them .
in dhaka per sq km 44,400 piopuls live and in mumbai per sq km 31,700 piopuls live
FSI is small because bombay can not handle too much population. Govt wants to limit it.
In my place we honor this city cause once our men used to sell pearls to all Mumbai Maharajah's...
Yeah ,, do critising ,,we will grow and grow and definitely reach at the top of the word ,,
mumbai has 12th highest number of buildings over 200 m in the world . It's wrong to say that the average height of buildings in the city is LOW
It's 100 not 200 mts
What is the use of making tall buildings
Poor people can't afford them
22 million is population of Mumbai metropolitan region
Building higher is more better than horizontal sprawl.
What is the name of that poster with the organizational chart in the background?
Overporuring of people from small villages and towns are reason for that.
Judiciary wont allow it unless they get a share of it
This is such a good video, it's too bad only $16 worth of views!
I'd invest in this channel's future though.
Good info
Higher FSIs in cities with bad public transportation mean more traffic and traffic costs the economy money. In Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo that cost is estimated to be around 30 BILLION dollars per year.
Yet Sao Paulo looks far better than Mumbai in terms of roads and infrastructure
mumbai was just like shanghai 25years ago 。。。
Please! Make a video on Indian Economic History.
I dont think its nice to compare countries and cities..
I think I've read somewhere that Mumbai was built on delta, not like New York where it's on bed rock. Maybe that's that
New york is also an island city with quite less land
I think they beat the phillippines to the most slum city because the slum of the phillippines is slowy go out
HATAKE KAKASHI nah .Mumbai is also demolishing slums and providing rehabilitation
Y u want the population to double if fsi is 2.6. People will live comfortably with higher space
vicky singh He didn't say population should double.
He said that if fsi is increasing, then people might feel that population is also increasing and will not understand that it actually creates more space.
Problem is in the Roads network.
22 million population. R u smoking weed. It's 18 million as of 2015
Siddharth Kumar
12 million in proper mumbai, 18 in metro mumbai
And u smokimg marijuana? 18M was in 2011. Adding 4M in 7 is no big deal, Bangalore and Hyderabad have done same to themselves.
Is the fear of more dense areas really the only reason why FSI limits are a thing? Or is there something else that could get cities thinking about them?
Theres definitely more to this than meets the eye. The interviewer only showed one side of the story by systematically editing interviews to suit his narrative and also by not interviewing experts and politicians who are in favour of lower FSI, at all. The western rules are not applicable here in India, because for example, USA has a population of 30 crores wheres as Indian population is 125 crores hence we need bigger cities to urbanise more people. Also, a high FSI will lower down ground water levels. This reporting is totally biased.
Designated Shitting Streets.
Good video, I learn new things :)
1:23 There was Master Yoda chilling on a bench!
That's common man, a cartoon character created by R. K. Laxman. It's a over 70 years old. Created mainly for political satire. Here see more www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/10-common-man-sketches-by-r-k-laxman-you-shouldnt-miss-839025-2016-10-24
Good post
Useful information
@3:48...It says it all
Mumbai
Son geniales sus vídeos :)
But you don't really get much density advantage choosing skyscrapers over traditional 5-6 storey urbanism. You have to leave room for sunlight and ventilation (body heat alone limits you to
ડાધો ડાધો
If FSI in mumbai is 1.3 ,then how is Antilla is built?
loganatha K7 jhol & jugaaf
But are skyscrapers really necessary to show the development of India. Mumbai has many skyscrapers but their density is low. It's a shame you didn't mention any scientific facts. First of all, the reason why Indian cities have less fsi is because of extreme climatic conditions. Mumbai has an average temperature of 30°C throughout year and pollution levels are high which means all skyscrapers here are consuming massive amount of energy for conditioning and filteration which is bad for a developing nations like ours. The reason why other cities which lie near the equator like Dubai and Singapore can make skyscrapers is because they are rich. Second, some parts of India have water shortage soo it will decrease ground water which is bad for an agriculture backed economy. Third, please don't take example of Mumbai only and then represent rest of Indian cities. Indian cities like Gurgaon, Noida have much taller skyscrapers than London and there are many to come as the nation is getting rich day by day due to Modis policies. Also some parts of India are earthquake prone soo...
Honestly, before watching the video, I assumed it to be a just another "India-bashing" video. I was wrong. More videos please!
Wow! this was very educational. Thank you for your research and time in making this. As a local of Mumbai, I really appreciate this.
Someone explain to me how the poor can live where the land value is so high? Is there price controls there?
See: marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/04/twisted-tale-rent-control-maximum-city.html
From what it looks like, it's a combination of being grandfathered into rent-controlled units and living in slums instead of formal housing.
^that's not true , it's the costliest in India .Just take Mumbai metro fares for instance . but relative to other big cities of the world it's very cheap
there are 500 cities in india,some have the lowest price,no one has asked poor to live in city which u cant afford...goto a place where prices are appropriate to you...delhi,mumbai are hub of corporated & people earn finest salaries so if you are here living on 10k...u are going to end up in slum,...shift to other growing cities,these migrants are fool they live only in big cities & dont care about the living standards
Delhi mumbai kolkata banglore hyderabad are some most expensice cities of world!!
that 20 is due to subsidy...remove the caps & mumbaikers will be on street(well they are already) like beggers..see the response of AC local,it is running empty,but claim to have highest per capita income
Mumbaikars need to limit unskilled people coming in from other parts of india
Pran Pavi ok you do the unskilled work which pays low, very risky to ones health etc.. Such anti poor attitude will only worsen the situation. Everyone need to develop.
Pran Pavi no Mumbai will be left if people from other places leave, infact it's the same for all cities, your hated will not lead to any solution.
AR98 best talent give me a break...these days engineering graduates are ready to petty jobs for small pay. Not all are born with silver spoon. And every one irrespective of region, religion or cast needs equal chance. Development doesn't include only GDP , it also includes human development index, go read about it. Such archaic mindset only that only people from my community must prosper is a result of divide and rule by the British and you are just following it.