Members of the Public Action Committee (PAC) have voiced strong opposition to the draft of the Punjab Unified Building Rules, 2025. On Thursday, they submitted a detailed memorandum to the director of town and country planning, urging a rethink of the proposed regulations.

The state’s housing and urban development department had earlier invited objections and suggestions from the public on the draft rules. However, PAC members said the policy was being rushed through without enough public awareness or consultation.

Activists Jaskirat Singh, Kapil Arora, Kuldeep Singh Khaira representing PAC Mattewara, said the proposed rules could cause more harm than good. “These rules are even worse than the (now withdrawn) land pooling scheme. If implemented, they will worsen traffic congestion, damage the environment and reduce the quality of life in urban areas,” they said.

Their first demand is to extend the deadline for public objections by at least 30 days and to provide an official email address for sending feedback. They said most citizens are unaware of the policy and have not been given a fair chance to respond.

Raising concerns about specific provisions, the PAC team said the rules allow for unlimited floor-area ratio (FAR) and no cap on building height, which could lead to overcrowded and unsafe cities. “There must be a limit to how much can be built. Infrastructure like roads, water, and sewerage cannot handle this kind of pressure,” said the activists. They urged that FAR and density limits should be based on detailed studies about the city’s carrying capacity.

The group also opposed allowing basements to be used as living spaces, especially in a flood-prone state like Punjab. “This poses serious safety risks and should not be permitted. Basements should be restricted to parking or utility areas only,” they said.

They further objected to the provision allowing commercial use in up to 50% of residential units, warning that such a move would destroy peace in housing areas. They recommended restricting it to just 10%, and only in designated mixed-use zones.

Another major concern raised was that open space requirements were fixed as 25% of plot area, without adjusting for population density. “This will reduce green cover where buildings are taller. Instead, green space should be calculated per person and increased with higher density,” they said.

PAC members also criticised the idea of granting more construction rights simply based on the width of the approach road. “Emergency vehicle access, traffic movement, and infrastructure support must all be considered—not just road width,” they said, demanding that traffic and infrastructure studies be made compulsory before allowing higher FAR.

They also raised concerns about fire safety, saying that local fire departments are not equipped to handle high-rise buildings. “The draft rules promote super-tall towers, but our fire services are not ready for that,” they said.

Lastly, the group pointed out that the draft does not take into account the capacity of rivers, drains, or groundwater systems to handle increased demand for sewage and water supply.