Advertisement
In this episode of Prop Personalities, we sit down with Hars...
Luxury real estate is one of the most talked-about segments ...
Welcome to Prop Personalities by Prop News Time - a podcast ...
Airports play a much bigger role than just enabling travel -...
Why does the same hotel brand operate multiple properties in...
Future cities are often envisioned as high-rise clusters, driven by growing populations and limited urban space. Global examples like Manhattan and Tokyo showcase successful high-rise urbanism, while Indian cities are rapidly adopting this model. However, high-rise developments come with challenges, including higher maintenance costs, inefficient resource management, and substantial carbon emissions. Research indicates low-rise, high-density urban models, like Paris, are more sustainable, consuming less energy and generating fewer emissions. India's unique climate and infrastructure necessitate context-sensitive planning, as high-rises may not always optimise land use or ensure liveability. Balancing modern urban needs with environmental goals is imperative.
The cities of the future are often envisioned as clusters of high-rise towers, and for good reason. As populations grow and the demand for urban space increases, it seems, to quote the 1988 pop single, that "the only way is up." Manhattan and Tokyo are frequently cited as examples of successful high-rise urbanism, offering proximity to workplaces, efficient public transport, and even green spaces. Skyscrapers dominate the skylines of Shanghai, Singapore, and Dubai, and India is not far behind. A stroll through any tier I, II, or III city in India reveals 7, 12, 20, or even 40-storey buildings rapidly shaping the skyline, whether as luxury housing, commercial hubs, leisure centres, or government-supported affordable housing. Advertisement
Unsurprisingly, maximising the floor space index (FSI) is a key consideration in most, if not all, planning decisions in India. FSI, known as Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in the US, determines the ratio of land to the built-up area. For example, an FSI of 2 allows construction up to twice the land area after accounting for setbacks. An FSI of 6 permits a 1:6 ratio, and so forth. In central New York, FAR ranges between 12 and 15, although buildings often exceed this ratio. Comparatively, Bengaluru's FSI for residential buildings ranges from 1.75 to 3.35, while Mumbai's is just 1.33 in many areas, though Nariman Point and the Bandra Kurla Complex have FSIs of 3.5 and 5, respectively. It appears that increasing or removing FSI caps could significantly boost housing supply, open up green spaces, and increase density, enabling more efficient service delivery.
Is high-rise urbanism not only inevitable but also optimal for Indian cities? The answer is far from straightforward. While high-rise developments maximise short-term returns on land, they don't necessarily optimise land use, particularly when considering carbon emissions and liveability. In fact, high-rise urbanism comes with hidden costs that are often overlooked. Furthermore, urban models that work well in developed countries with temperate climates may not be suitable for tropical cities with inadequate infrastructure and distinct lifestyles and cultures.
In Indian cities, high-rise developments, particularly luxury ones, promise modern amenities such as enhanced security, gyms, and swimming pools. However, these come with maintenance costs that are 50% higher than those of low- and mid-rise buildings, alongside challenges in water and waste management. High-rise construction requires robust structures to ensure stability, alongside advanced technologies to improve building performance and occupant well-being through better air quality, thermal comfort, and natural lighting. All of these factors impact energy consumption, carbon emissions, and overall sustainability. Research by UCL's Energy Institute in London indicates that buildings of 20 storeys or more consume over twice the energy per square foot compared to those of six storeys or fewer. Similarly, a study by Edinburgh's Napier University using real-world data and computer modelling found that low-rise, dense cities like Paris are about 40% more sustainable in terms of whole life-cycle carbon emissions compared to high-rise, dense cities like New York.
While high-rise buildings are often seen as a solution to urban density challenges in India, they come with significant hidden costs. The benefits of modern amenities and maximised floor space must be balanced against higher maintenance expenses, inefficient resource management, and substantial energy consumption. Furthermore, the sustainability and liveability of these developments within India's unique climate and infrastructure context are debatable. Research suggests that a low-rise, high-density urban model might offer a more sustainable and culturally appropriate alternative, aligning the growth of Indian cities with long-term environmental and social goals. It is crucial for urban planners and policymakers to consider these factors and adopt a balanced approach that optimises land use while minimising environmental impact.
In conclusion, High-rise urbanism in India offers short-term benefits but poses long-term challenges, from maintenance costs to environmental impact. Research supports low-rise, high-density alternatives as more sustainable and culturally fitting for Indian cities. Policymakers must consider these findings and strive for a balanced urban development model that addresses density while promoting sustainability, liveability, and long-term environmental harmony.
(Prof Dhaval Monani, Associate Professor and Director, Affordable Housing, Anant Centre for Sustainability, Anant National University and Dr Nikhilesh Sinha, Professor of Economics and Finance, Hult International Business School, London.)
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
