What 43,761 filings say about parking, and the 79 percent that say nothing

MahaRERA collects a parking block on every project: how many two wheeler spaces, how many four wheeler, how many for visitors, and where they sit. Read across 43,761 published filings, it answers one question well and refuses another entirely.

The finding that has to come first#

Of the 46,654 published projects outside Mumbai, 43,761 carry parking detail rows. That looks like excellent coverage, and it is not.

Seventy nine percent of projects file the block and leave it empty. The rows exist, the structure is there, and every number in it is zero.

Where a number is filed, it tracks the code#

The median is 0.54 car spaces per flat, with a quarter of projects below 0.30 and a quarter above 0.99. The tenth percentile is 0.14 and the ninetieth is 1.47.

That median is the interesting number, because Table 8-B asks for one car space for every two tenements in the 40 to 80 sq m carpet area band, which is 0.5 per flat before any city factor. The middle of the market is filing almost exactly the code's figure for the band most Maharashtra flats fall into.

The geography follows the factor table#

Pune files nearly three times the provision per flat that Palghar does. The ordering broadly matches Table 8-C, where Pune and Thane Municipal Corporations carry a factor of 1.00, Nashik 0.9, and the other MMR corporations and CIDCO 0.8.

The correspondence is not exact, and the reasons are worth naming rather than smoothing over. A district is not an authority: Pune district contains PMC and PCMC at 1.00 alongside Regional Plan land at 0.40, and Thane district spans Thane MC at 1.00, other MMR corporations at 0.8 and Regional Plan areas. Flat sizes differ between districts too, and Table 8-B keys on those. What the chart shows is that filed provision varies across the state in the same direction the code intends, by roughly the magnitude the factor table implies.

Two wheelers outnumber cars#

Across the filing cohort the totals are 689,610 car spaces and 721,084 two wheeler spaces, so filed two wheeler provision slightly exceeds filed car provision.

That is what Table 8-B would produce. In the 40 to 80 sq m band it asks for one car and two scooters per two tenements, and below 30 sq m it asks for two scooters and no car at all. A register in which two wheeler spaces outnumber car spaces is a register describing a market of small and mid sized flats.

Bus parking is filed by very few projects, at 3,018 spaces in total, which is consistent with Regulation 8.1.1(vi) requiring a bus bay only for special buildings and for housing schemes above 500 flats.

Visitor parking is the weakest field#

Table 8-B adds 5 percent visitor parking to every residential row. The register records 22,968 visitor spaces against 689,610 car spaces, about 3.3 percent, and only 1,016 projects file any visitor parking at all.

Where the parking sits, mostly unstated#

The block also records a location for each row, and this is where the register is thinnest of all. About 88 percent of projects file an open space row and a closed or covered row, and then the specific structures are rare: 2.1 percent name a basement, 0.9 percent a podium, 4.6 percent a stilt or ground floor, and 69 projects a garage.

That gap has a direct regulatory consequence. Regulation 6.8(ii) excludes a stilt, podium or basement from FSI only while it is used exclusively for parking, so where the cars are is what decides whether the structure holding them is free. The filing usually does not say.

What this means for a buyer#

1. Do not read a zero in this field as an absence of parking. In four cases out of five it means the field was not filled in.
2. Ask for the sanctioned parking plan, which Regulation 8.1 requires to be submitted as part of the building plan and which is the document that actually answers the question.
3. Check what is allotted to your flat in writing, separately from the project total, since the two are different numbers and only one of them is yours.
4. Ask about visitor parking specifically, because it is the least recorded field here and the first to disappear in practice.
5. Establish the authority, since the factor table means a project on the far side of a boundary was lawfully required to provide less than half as much.

Where the filings come in#

The parking block is a good example of what this register does and does not do. It records structure reliably and quantities poorly, so it tells you a project exists and what it declared, and leaves the checkable detail in the sanctioned plans.

What it does record well is history: ReraGenie's project analysis, Rs 2,999 for one project, reads a project's full MahaRERA filing, including the filed parking provision where it exists, 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 project's filing is free to read at reragenie.com/projects, and the requirements this data is measured against are in the parking rules.

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.