Urbanrise Gattahalli Location

The promoter's fresh environmental clearance application, filed with SEIAA, records the site as follows.

That is the whole of the verified address. It is a survey-number address in a revenue village, which is what pre-launch land in this belt normally has, and it is more specific than the locality names that marketing material tends to use.

Gattahalli and Ghattihalli are one village, not two

The two spellings appear on the same record. The government's plot entry pairs the free-text description "Sy. No. 50, Gattahalli Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk" with structured village code 613187, which resolves to GHATTIHALLI, on the identical plot. The client brief raised the possibility that these were two different villages and that the project might be in the wrong one. They are not two villages. It is one place with two transliterations of the same Kannada name, and the filing uses both without contradiction.

We use Gattahalli throughout this site, because that is the spelling on the filing and in the address. If you search land records, khata extracts or encumbrance certificates and find Ghattihalli, that is the same village.

What the filing does not record

The application does not carry a pincode for the site. The postal address printed on the application is the promoter's Bengaluru corporate office, not the project's address, and we do not republish a corporate pincode as if it were the site's. A pincode matters — it is what a bank, a school admission form and a courier will ask for — so the honest position is that this one is not yet established in any document we hold, and a buyer should take it from the khata or the sale deed rather than from any website, ours included.

Nor does the filing record a street address, a project road name, or a ward. Below the taluk level, the only fixed identifier this project currently has is the survey number.

The client brief states that access is direct from Gattahalli Main Road, and describes that road as 9 metres wide. The road name and the width both come from the brief, not from the filing, so treat the width as an unconfirmed marketing figure rather than a specification. We publish it anyway, because it is exactly the kind of detail a buyer needs and it would be easy to leave out.

No source we hold places this site on a named arterial. It does not front Sarjapur Road. It does not front Hosur Road. The Yellow Line metro corridor and the Hosur Road employment spine both lie some kilometres to the west. What the site fronts, on the only description available, is a village main road.

Nine metres is a two-lane village road with no service lane and no formal footpath. For 368 homes on 4.20 acres — the unit count and the land area are both verified on the filing — that single access is the most important physical question about this location, and it is a question a buyer should put directly to the developer:

• Is Gattahalli Main Road proposed for widening, and by whom, and to what width?
• Where will the entry and exit gates sit, and how will they interact with morning traffic on that road?
• What is the internal circulation for a 2BF + GF + 18UF tower stack, and how does basement traffic reach the main road?

None of those have documented answers today. The environmental application is still under verification, and no traffic or road-widening commitment appears in anything we have seen. That is a gap, and we would rather name it than paper over it.

Every figure below is road distance from the routed table, computed from the corrected pin on the OpenStreetMap driving network. We publish kilometres and not minutes; the reason is set out further down.

The site's employment case rests on the Electronic City and Hosur Road corridor to its west, plus the Sarjapur-side tech parks to its north.

Within about 6 km by road

Between about 6 and 10 km by road

The shape of that list is the useful part. There is no single dominant employer at two kilometres. Instead there is a long spread of recognisable workplaces across a band running from about five to ten kilometres, most of them reached along the same westward roads. For a household with two earners working in different parks along that corridor, the spread is an advantage. For a household hoping to walk or cycle to work, it is not a walkable location by any reading of this table.

Schools are the strongest short-distance category in this table — the only category with several credible entries inside three kilometres.

Higher education sits at a similar remove.

Three schools inside 2.6 km by road is a genuine result for a village-edge parcel, and it is the clearest everyday advantage this location offers. Note one trap in the list: Harvest International School is far closer on a map than on the road — the drive is nearly two and a half times the map separation, and 4.23 km is the number that governs a school run.

Organised retail is a drive. The nearest mall in the routed table, M5 ECity Mall, is 6.36 km by road, and the next two are further still.

Everyday retail is harder to characterise honestly. The routed table is built from live OpenStreetMap records, and the nearest generic convenience entry it carries — logged simply as petty shops and a medical store — is 7.42 km away. That does not mean there is no shop near the site. Village retail is chronically under-mapped in OpenStreetMap, so this is a coverage gap in the data, not proven absence on the ground. What it does mean is that we have no documented evidence of organised daily-needs retail close to the parcel, and a buyer should walk the immediate surroundings before assuming a supermarket run is a short one.

Gattahalli Lake at 3.13 km deserves a note of its own. It is close on a map and much further on a road — the drive is 2.71 times the map separation, one of the sharpest divergences in the whole table. It is a name that will appear in marketing material as a nearby amenity. Three kilometres of driving is the real figure.

A location page that only lists what is near is a brochure. Here is the other side.

It is dense for the site area. The filing records 368 residential units on 4.20 acres. That works out to 368 ÷ 4.20 = 87.6 homes per acre — our own arithmetic, and an estimate of density rather than a figure from any document. The filed built-up area of 79,634.39 sq m against a land area of 1.6996 ha, which is 16,996 sq m, is a ratio of about 4.7 to 1 (79,634.39 ÷ 16,996 = 4.69). Read that ratio with care: built-up area on an environmental filing typically counts basements and service areas that a floor-area calculation would exclude. Either way, this is a compact, vertical scheme on a small parcel, not a low-rise one.

Against that, the amenity commitment on the filing is real. The application records a club house at 2BF + GF + 2UF — a dedicated multi-level amenity building. On a 4.20-acre site that is a meaningful allocation of ground, and it is a verified line on a government document rather than a marketing claim. Both facts are true at once: the scheme is dense, and it has committed a substantial structure to shared amenity.

One narrow road serves all of it. The 368 homes, their visitors and their service traffic reach the outside world through the access described in the brief as a nine-metre road. Nothing we hold documents a widening.

The city boundary is close but on the other side. Expect panchayat khata and panchayat property tax. Confirm the classification on Sy. No. 50 before you pay anything.

Nothing here is settled yet. The environmental application was filed on 7 July 2026 and is under verification. No environmental clearance has been granted, and the project is not registered with the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Under Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016, a project in a registrable class cannot lawfully be advertised, marketed, booked or sold before registration is granted. This microsite is an information and enquiry resource for a scheme at the approvals stage — it is not a booking channel, and no one should be taking money against this address today.

What we still do not know about this location. There is no published site plan, so we cannot tell you where the towers sit within the parcel or which way the units face. There is no confirmed pincode. There is no traffic study, no road-widening commitment, no water or sewerage connection detail, and no announced marketing name. Every one of those is a legitimate question to put to the developer, and an answer in writing is worth more than any page on the internet, this one included.