Prestige Park Lane KIADB - Project Overview

This page sets out what is actually established about the project and what is not, because the gap between the two is unusually wide here and it is the single most useful thing a buyer can be told before a site visit. The parcel, its area, its built-up envelope, its cost and its tenure are fixed by the developer's own statutory environmental filing, and those facts are stated here plainly. The building - unit count, tower count, floor count, configurations, sizes, launch date, possession date and price - is not fixed by anything. Every one of those figures reaching the market comes from project information supplied to us in circulation ahead of a launch, and this page attributes them rather than asserting them. Where we have done arithmetic of our own, the arithmetic is shown and the output is labelled an estimate. For buyers already comfortable with the prestige-group name, Prestige Kodagurki adds a local portfolio lens without skipping the practical checks around cost and daily use.

The Project in One Table

The Regulatory and Approvals Position

This is the section that matters most, and it is the section no competing page on this project carries. Nothing about this parcel is approved yet.

Karnataka RERA - not registered, and no application filed

Prestige Park Lane KIADB is not registered with Karnataka RERA, and no application for it has been filed. A full parse of the K-RERA project registry (9,895 rows) returns no registration and no pending application under this name, under "Prestige Holland", under "Prestige Battersea", or under the filing entity Apex Realty Management Private Limited. Under Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 a development of this scale cannot be marketed, reserved or transacted before registration - so no money can be taken, no allotment letter issued and no sale agreement signed until that number exists. The project's environmental application was only submitted on 11 August 2026 and is still under examination, so a RERA registration is realistically a year or more away. Verify the position yourself at rera.karnataka.gov.in.

That last instruction is not a formality. The registry is public, searchable by promoter and by project, and it publishes pending applications as well as granted registrations. A reader can settle the question in two minutes without taking our word or anyone else's.

The environmental application

The proposal is categorised as an EIA item 8(b) Area Development project and sits at Fresh Terms of Reference stage, status Under Examination. Terms of Reference is the first step, not the last: the regulator issues the scope of studies the developer must carry out, the developer then commissions baseline environmental data collection over a defined season, prepares an EIA report, goes through appraisal, and only then can a clearance be granted. No ToR has been granted here, therefore no baseline studies have begun, therefore no environmental clearance exists or can exist for some time. The categorisation is worth noting on its own account - an Area Development filing covering both residential and commercial use is the profile of a scheme larger than a single apartment complex.

Planning approval and the sanctioning authority

No planning approval of any kind is on record. The land is a KIADB allotment inside a notified industrial area, and on KIADB-allotted land plan sanction ordinarily rests with the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board rather than with the Bengaluru International Airport Area Planning Authority (BIAAPA), whose jurisdiction covers the wider airport planning district. Some material in circulation names BIAAPA as the sanctioning authority for this project. We do not assert that, because no sanction exists to attribute to anyone, and the tenure points the other way. This is an open question and buyers should ask the developer, in writing, which authority will sanction the plan.

The Airports Authority of India height NOC

The site is 6.61 km from the Kempegowda International Airport reference point. The Ministry of Civil Aviation's 2015 height restriction rules require an Airports Authority of India No Objection Certificate for any construction within 20 km of an airport reference point, irrespective of proposed height, so an AAI NOC is mandatory here and must precede plan sanction.

The geometry is tighter than the distance alone suggests. The parcel lies 4,637 m beyond the eastern threshold of Runway 09L/27R with a lateral offset of only 521 m from the extended centreline, which puts it inside the approach funnel - the ICAO approach surface at that distance has a half-width of 837 m. Aircraft on a standard three-degree approach to Runway 27R cross this point at roughly 243 m, about 797 feet, above threshold elevation.

Applying the generic ICAO Annex-14 surfaces gives a ceiling in the region of 99.4 m for the approach surface (the first 3,000 m at 2 per cent gives 60.0 m, the remaining 1,577 m at 2.5 per cent gives 39.4 m) and 92.7 m for the take-off climb surface, which is the binding one at 0.02 × 4,637 m. A two-basement, ground-plus-25-floor tower at 3.0 to 3.2 m floor to floor, with lift overrun and parapet, works out at roughly 78 to 85 m. On that arithmetic the massing in circulation fits, with limited headroom. That is our derivation from generic international surfaces, not AAI's number. AAI evaluates each coordinate individually through NOCAS and its determination can differ from a textbook surface. No permitted height for this site has been published, and none is stated here.

Land tenure - an allotment, not a freehold

The ownership document recorded in the developer's own filing is a KIADB allotment letter. That is a materially different tenure from a private freehold parcel bought under a sale deed. KIADB allotments are made for a stated purpose, carry conditions, and are administered by the board rather than transacted in the open market. Buyers should ask to see the allotment letter and the conditions attached to it, and should have a lawyer read the permitted-use clause before any money changes hands.

The zoning question, stated honestly

KIADB's own pre-feasibility report for this industrial area allocates zero acres to residential use. Across the whole 1,210.85-acre layout the land-use table reads Industrial 703.15 acres, KSSIDC-Industrial 25.00, Commercial 26.92, Amenities 28.72, Utility 32.15, Park and Green Buffer 169.08, Parking 60.70, Road 160.95 and NH-207 4.18. There is no residential line item, and the entire commercial allocation is smaller than this single 32.26-acre parcel. The developer has nonetheless filed the scheme as a Residential & Commercial Development.

Precedent for residential use inside the wider park does exist: a 75-acre branded township holds Plots 305 to 309 in the same Phase-2 layout, 1.38 km away. What has no published basis is a residential allocation in the Phase-2 layout table itself. This should not be presented as unambiguously residential-zoned land, and equally it should not be presented as prohibited - Karnataka has raised the floor-area ratio available on KIADB industrial land from 3.25 to 5.2 and relaxed worker-housing norms in the intervening years. It is an open question with real precedent on one side and a silent layout table on the other.

One related point that circulates in a distorted form: a separate 1,777.29-acre extension of this industrial area, across thirteen villages including Haraluru and Muddenahalli, was dropped by the Karnataka cabinet on 15 July 2025 after roughly 1,200 days of farmer protest, and on 6 December 2025 that block was declared a permanent Special Agricultural Zone expressly to stop real-estate use. The already-acquired, allotted and building Phase-2 layout is a different thing and is unaffected. This parcel carries numbered KIADB plots and a road number, which places it in the laid-out tranche. Without survey numbers nobody can state with certainty which side of that boundary every plot sits on, and no page - including this one - should imply otherwise. Ask the developer for survey numbers.

Approvals status at a glance

The Building Envelope and the FAR Arithmetic

Two things follow from that table and both are worth stating clearly.

The envelope is not aggressive. A sanctioned FAR near 2.05 excluding basements, or 2.74 including them, sits well inside the 5.2 now available on KIADB industrial land and inside the 3.25 recorded in the environmental clearance for the adjacent parcel. Whatever else is uncertain here, the developer is not attempting to squeeze an exceptional envelope out of this land.

The density concern in circulation dissolves at the correct acreage. Approximately 1,800 apartments on the 12 acres quoted in some pre-launch material would be 150 units per acre, roughly double the corridor norm and a legitimate cause for concern. The same 1,800 apartments on the filed 32.26 acres is 55.8 - call it 56 - per acre, which is less dense than the 75-acre township 1.38 km away at roughly 96 per acre, and less dense than the corridor generally. The alarm was an artefact of the wrong land area.

Why the apartment figure in circulation is probably a phase figure

The filed envelope carries considerably more than 1,800 homes, and the arithmetic is straightforward.

The assumptions are ours and are named: the 65 per cent saleable-to-built-up ratio is a convention for a project with two basement levels, not a filed figure, and the 30/45/25 mix is our own reading of a 1, 2 and 3 BHK ladder with no 4 BHK. Change either and the unit count moves. The direction of the finding does not.

The reconciliation the evidence favours is that approximately 1,800 apartments describes the phase currently being talked about, and the filed 3.84 million sq ft envelope covers a larger scheme - which is exactly what a filing named "Holland & Battersea" and categorised as an Area Development suggests. Two schemes, one parcel, one clearance.

A second, independent signal points the same way. The filing states an operational permanent employment of 9,914 posts, against only 50 during construction. A purely residential scheme of 1,800 apartments does not generate ten thousand permanent operational jobs - building management, security, housekeeping and facilities for that many homes runs in the low hundreds. A figure near ten thousand is an employment number for offices or commercial space, and it belongs to the commercial half of a filing explicitly titled a Residential & Commercial Development. Two conclusions follow: this parcel carries a substantial commercial or office component alongside the apartments, and the apartment figure in circulation describes only part of what has been filed. Neither the split nor the commercial floor area has been published.

What the filed cost line does and does not tell you

Dividing the filed project cost by the filed built-up area gives ₹8,770,000,000 ÷ 3,843,780 sq ft = roughly ₹2,282 per sq ft of built-up area. That is our arithmetic on two filed numbers. It should not be read as a construction cost or used to infer a margin, because a PARIVESH cost line is not itemised - it may or may not include land, and it certainly does not disclose the developer's own cost structure. It is quoted here only because it is one of the very few project-scale numbers on public record.

Sustainability and the Water Question

Two levels of basement parking, a sewage treatment plant, rainwater harvesting, landscaped open space and common-area power backup all appear in the amenity information in circulation, and all are marked indicative there. No capacity, area or percentage has been published for any of them.

The environmental clearance process itself is the meaningful sustainability check here, and it has not yet started in substance. A ToR grant will specify the studies required - typically air, water, noise, ecology and traffic baselines over a defined season, plus a water balance and a solid-waste plan - and those studies, when published in the EIA report, will be the first independent description of this project's environmental load. That is a document worth waiting for.

The water position is the single hardest fact on the corridor and buyers should not be shielded from it. Devanahalli has no perennial surface water source and no Cauvery supply. It runs on deep borewells and tankers. The region is officially classified over-exploited for groundwater, and Devanahalli specifically has been reported consuming around 169 per cent of its permissible extraction. Cauvery Stage VI - a ₹6,939 crore scheme adding 500 MLD for Devanahalli, Hoskote and Anekal - was approved by the Karnataka cabinet in February 2026 and is at planning stage, with the earliest supply discussed around 2028. And on KIADB industrial land, water supply is KIADB's responsibility, not BWSSB's: a residential tower here inherits an industrial-estate water regime rather than a municipal one. Ask what the sanctioned water allocation for this allotment is, and in what unit it is measured.

The Trade-offs

• Water. No Cauvery supply, an over-exploited aquifer, borewells and tankers, and a KIADB rather than BWSSB supply regime. Cauvery Stage VI is at planning stage with supply discussed around 2028.
• The last mile is a building site. Within 1.5 km of the pin, OpenStreetMap holds 169 road segments - 55 of them tagged under construction and 138 with no surface recorded. Only twelve carry a name, and all twelve are the STRR itself.
• Aircraft overhead. The site is 521 m off the extended centreline of the north runway, under arrivals to 27R at roughly 800 feet and under departures climbing out on 09L.
• No social infrastructure in the pocket. The nearest supermarket is 7.06 km away, the nearest hospital 8.24 km, the nearest international school 22.22 km, and there is no mall within 26 km. There is no tertiary private hospital within 25 km.
• This is not a commuter suburb. ITPL is 35.23 km away, Manyata Tech Park 36.86 km and MG Road 44.66 km - 65 to 99 minutes at peak. The viable working population is the airport belt itself.
• Nothing can be sold yet. No RERA registration, no Terms of Reference grant, no environmental clearance.

What to Verify Before You Commit

1. The Karnataka RERA registration number, at rera.karnataka.gov.in - and the promoter name on it.
2. The KIADB allotment letter and its permitted-use conditions.
3. The survey numbers for every plot in the parcel.
4. The granted Terms of Reference and, later, the environmental clearance with its conditions.
5. The AAI height NOC for these coordinates.
6. The sanctioned plan, with tower heights and carpet areas stated in carpet terms.
7. The sanctioned water source, quantity and supplying authority.

Until those exist, this is a parcel with a filing on it and a good address inside a working industrial estate - which is a real thing, but it is not yet a project a buyer can transact in.

Prestige Park Lane KIADB Overview FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions

Ask your own question