Most city chapters in UDCPR take something away. Nashik's does something rarer: it takes a strip of private land for a public path and writes the compensation into the same regulation.
Key takeaways
- Regulation 10.0 applies city specific rules notwithstanding anything else in UDCPR, so inside Nashik Municipal Corporation limits Chapter 10 is read before the general chapters.
- Regulation 10.5.2 requires 6.0 m of marginal distance from the edge of a listed minor water course, and reserves 3.0 m of that as a public cycle track.
- The owner keeps in-situ FSI of the strip and, on handing it to the Corporation, receives TDR or in-situ FSI equal to 35 percent of the strip's area.
- Where a stretch is already developed and the track cannot be fitted, the Municipal Commissioner may disapply the regulation and normal margins resume.
- Nashik builds low. On ReraGenie's registry copy captured 11 August 2026, 59 percent of Nashik district projects filing floor counts top out at 7 floors or fewer, and the 90th percentile is 11 floors.
The chapter is short, and that is the point
Chapter 10, Regulation 10.0, UDCPR as updated 30 January 2025 makes city specific regulations apply notwithstanding anything else in UDCPR. Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5, Nashik Municipal Corporation* then uses that power sparingly: three sub-regulations, against Pune's four and Thane's fifteen.
What Nashik does with them is unusual. Two of the three are about specific pieces of ground, one road and one network of water courses, rather than about the city as a whole.
The cycle track, and who pays for it
Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5.2, UDCPR as updated 30 January 2025 is the provision worth understanding properly, because it is a land acquisition dressed as a margin rule.
Banded by distance from the edge of the water course
- 0 to 3.0 mPublic cycle track strip. Handed over to the Municipal Corporation. The compound wall is built excluding this strip.
- 3.0 to 6.0 mRemainder of the marginal distance. No building construction within the full 6.0 m.
- beyond 6.0 mOrdinary development, subject to the general chapters
Source: Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5.2, UDCPR as updated 30 January 2025
The compensation has two limbs and they are easy to conflate.
The owner is entitled to FSI of the strip, in situ. The land does not stop counting towards development potential merely because a path runs over it.
On handing the strip over, the owner is additionally entitled to TDR or in-situ FSI equivalent to 35 percent of the area of that 3.0 m strip. That is a premium on top of the retained FSI, not a substitute for it.
Read those two limbs together before valuing a riverside or nallah-side parcel in Nashik. A 3.0 m strip along a 100 m frontage is 300 sq m: the owner keeps the FSI on that 300 sq m and receives TDR or in-situ FSI on a further 105 sq m equivalent. The strip is a cost in usable ground and a credit in buildable area, and the two do not net to zero in either direction.
The regulation applies to the nallahs specified in Plan A annexed to UDCPR, not to every water course in the city, and Chapter 3, Regulation 3.13.1, For Nashik Municipal Corporation carries the companion provision in the general chapters. Where development has already happened and the 3.0 m track cannot be provided, the Municipal Commissioner is empowered to disapply the regulation for that stretch, and normal marginal distances resume.
One road with its own rules
Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5.3 sets setbacks and marginal distances for a single road, notwithstanding Chapter 6, Regulation 6.2.1*: the 36 m wide Development Plan road running from Gangapur Survey No.12 to Ambad Survey No.199.
| Requirement | Value on that road |
|---|---|
| Minimum plot size | 300 sq m |
| Minimum plot width | 12 m |
| Minimum setback from road side | 3.00 m, including for commercial use |
| Minimum side margins | 2.00 m |
| Minimum rear margins | 2.00 m |
| Applies to | Buildings of G+2 or stilt+3 |
| Above that height | Permissible subject to the marginal distances in Regulation 6.2.3 |
The remark in the regulation matters as much as the numbers: these margins are for G+2 or stilt+3 structures, and greater height remains permissible but reverts to Chapter 6, Regulation 6.2.3, Marginal Distances for Buildings of Higher Heights* for its marginal distances. It is a relaxation for low rise on one corridor, not a general licence.
Nashik builds low, which is why that matters
Source: ReraGenie analysis of the MahaRERA project registry, 4,088 of 4,138 published Nashik district projects filing building floor counts, captured 11 August 2026
Fifty nine percent of Nashik projects that file floor counts top out at 7 floors or fewer, and only 3.4 percent reach 17 or more. The 90th percentile is 11 floors, against 31 in Thane. A G+2 or stilt+3 relaxation on one corridor is a meaningful concession in a market shaped like this; the same clause in Thane would be close to irrelevant.
The district-to-city gap that limits the Pune and Thane charts is much smaller here. Of 4,138 Nashik district projects, 3,866 are in Nashik taluka, about 93 percent, against 12 percent for Pune City taluka within Pune district. The district figures are a closer proxy for the Corporation area, though still not the same thing: 10.5 governs the Nashik Municipal Corporation area, and MahaRERA records taluka rather than planning authority.
The provision that survives from an older scheme
Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5.1 is one line and easy to miss: the special Regulations framed by the Arbitrator for some final plots in Town Planning Scheme No.1 (First Varied) remain in force.
Two consequences. A final plot in that scheme can carry rules that appear nowhere in UDCPR itself, which means the code in front of you is not the whole answer for that land. And it is another instance of the general rule this series keeps meeting: what governs a parcel is a stack, and the newest document on the stack does not always sit on top.
What to check for a Nashik parcel
- Confirm the authority. 10.5 governs the Nashik Municipal Corporation area, and who signs your development permission sets out the six cases.
- Check the parcel against Plan A if any nallah or river runs near it, and price the 6.0 m margin and the 3.0 m strip into the layout rather than discovering them at sanction.
- Value the compensation separately from the land loss, per Chapter 10, Regulation 10.5.2.
- If the plot is a final plot in T.P. Scheme No.1, obtain the Arbitrator's special regulations.
- Then read the general chapters for everything Chapter 10 leaves alone, beginning with the UDCPR FSI rulebook.
Where the filings come in
The regulation says what may be built beside a nallah. The register says what has been built, and by whom. ReraGenie's project analysis, Rs 2,999 for one project, reads a Nashik project's full MahaRERA filing: the promoter's extension history with their stated reasons, the slip between original and current completion dates against the median for the same pincode, construction progress against the eleven activity checklist building by building, and complaints and litigation with case numbers. The area consolidated report covers a whole micro-market at Rs 2,999 for the first project and Rs 1,999 per additional one.
Every Nashik project's filing is free to read at reragenie.com/areas/nashik-maharashtra, and the question that comes before all of this is which rulebook governs your plot.
Source: Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations for Maharashtra, UDCPR as updated 30 January 2025. Sanctioned under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.
Evaluating a micro-market or a land parcel?
The ReraGenie project analysis reads every filing in your competitive set: supply, absorption, pricing and promoter records. Rs 2,999 per project, area consolidated reports from Rs 2,999.
See the project analysis