The Karnataka High Court had, on 25th Jan this year, issued an interim order staying further construction of commercial buildings in residential zones in Bangalore (check here), pursuant to this PIL filed by CAF, amongst others, in 2008. Even as the city was awaiting the final verdict, on the 8th May, the citizen groups were surprised to see an ad in the newspapers (check here for the text, plus other details, published in BDA website), by the BDA, inviting suggestions (for a period of two months) for its proposal of revision of RMP-2015.
Going into the 'other details' (on the website), it now appears that Indian Institute of Human Settlements, Bangalore (IIHS), was somewhere along roped in by the BDA to do the "proposal for procurement guidelines RFP, RFQ preparation and other connected process of 'selection of consultants' for the preparation of RMP-2035". And, between the two, after following the due process (including notifications through ads in leading newspapers - check this), some nine consultans have now been short-listed, whose names have also been listed (it includes TUSPL - Tandon Urban Solutions Pvt Ltd, the people who are involved in the Maestrikere, Koramangala, DPR preparation).
I recall seeing the ad, in newspapers late last year, and wondering about how the planners chose to broaden their vision by a further decade, as also reading the following comment (amongst others) in the ToI (for the full report, click here):
"Planning is absolutely critical to manage the mega city that Bangalore will be in future. But BDA’s decision to draw up a master plan for 2035 seems like a case of putting the cart before the horse. Its track record in implementing the existing master plan hasn’t been stellar. Also by definition, BDA’s master plan will address only one aspect: infrastructure. City planning ideally has to include other critical governance parameters like delivery of services. A nodal agency which takes a holistic view of what Bangalore requires in another quarter century would be in a better position to postulate a 2035 master plan".
Valid concerns, considering the mess up of the past. The involvement of IIHS brings in some hope. But, 'Janaagraha' was similarly involved last time around, though, eventually, it all ended up in them as well as the citizens being taken for a merry ride. Hope there is no repeat of that this time.
Muralidhar Rao
PS: Meanwhile, the following forms the essence of another judgement issued by the High Court in March this year (for the full text in the ToI, click here):
In a landmark judgment that will have a far-reaching impact on property development in the city, the Karnataka high court has stated that the comprehensive development plan drawn up for the city - Revised Master Plan 2015 - will be the final document, governing land use and zoning regulations in any area. This means the Revised Master Plan 2015, drawn up by BDA, as the local planning authority, overrides all village and gram thana maps.
This in a way seems to contradict the January order - wonder what the implications are.
Forward this Blog entry
Comments
Would Praja qualify for the tender?
Aside from question of 2015 or 2035, was wondering would PRAJA-RAAG would qualify for the 2035 Master plan preparation. :)
Understand the seriousness of the work, efforts it needs and dedicated resources to accomplish the task.
Only wish is, one day, PRAJA should be able such works.
-Syed
revised master plan 2035
ssheragu
it is surprising that the revised master plan 2035 has attracted the attention of only 2 visionaries like Muralidahr Rao and Syed, apart from, some like me, who wanted to comment later;
it is worthwhile to note that this revised masterpan 2035 is a platform that covers many discussions points of Praja; so Praja should utilise this opportunity to contribute in a significant way;
within the time period of 2 months, I do plan to offer my comments and will share the same on Praja;
Syed and Luralidahr Rao are absolutely right; it is high time Praja organised an event for evolving an impeccable revised master plan 2035 for Bangalore and for the rest of our country to implement
Many thanks
Srinath Heragu
This "impeccable" 2035 master
This "impeccable" 2035 master plan is not available online on BDA website, while 2015 has been made available. Why not?
Thats Simple
That is because it has not been prepared as yet. That will be done in maybe two years time by the one consultant shortlisted out of the 9 listed in the intention doc on the BDA website.
How does the public give any input before the plans is prepared that is begging the question.
revised master plan 2035
ssheragu
the nitty gritt & other details, I do not know; but I feel that we can still give suggestions before July (according to the newspaper info) and in all probablity, it may be incorporated in the revised master plan 2035;
it is upto us (we the Praja members) to give useful suggestions of immense civic value
many thanks
Srinath Heragu
it's happening
@ Heragu - The Namma Bengaluru Foundation (NBF), has already organised one meeting of a few RWA representatives to decide on a common approach in the matter. Vijayan Menon and I attended it. We will soon be publishing an approach paper for wider dissemination and discussion, the medium for which could well be PRAJA.
Roads & land use
I will be discussing with some urban planners regarding land use this weekend but here are the 2 broad areas I want to see addresed
Road hierarchy - Currently all existing roads in Bangalore have been classified as just "major roads" this is becuse of the crappy planning that has happened so far. The only categories that exist are Arterial, Sub-arterial, Collector & Local streets (&conservancy). There is no category called major roads. The reason this mapping needs to be strictly adhered to is because each type of street should allow a certain type of development & traffic movement. We have to insist that there be NO classification called major roads & everything be bucketed into the formal categories. Once yu map to the formal categories Citizens will realize how ad-hoc the developent has been so far & how the engineers have let their profession & the city down. Nevertheless all approvals for either transport service or business/housing approval has to be on the basis of this categories. Citizens should be consulted in the clssification for their respective areas.
Classic example is the ribbon development happening around corridor & highways. Businesses are being allowed to have driveways opening out directly to the service road which is ideally a colector street but unfortunately service roads are being made one way and also nto having adequate ramps to the main highway hence being treated like a highway by itself this causes problems to the businesses & to the traffic on the highway. More & more businesses are coming up on corridor roads opening out directly to a high speed traffic which hurts bot the business & the corridor traffic. Two way service road provisioning & entry metering to the corridor is very important in such designs.
Mixed use - This is tied to both land use & the road classification. One of the best practices in Europe is to have mixed use along pubic transport corridors only. Again Public transport will run on certain types of roads & hence the planning of which category of road goes where in a (new) layout has to link to the way the whole ares is planned. You can see these are all linked to usability & land use.
2015 master plan critique
Critique of masterplan 2015 (compiled by Mr Vijayan Menon, and circulated by NBF as a background paper, amongst RWA's, prior to the proposed meeting in the coming week).
There are broadly two big areas under which this topic can be addressed.
a) Macro, process issues
b) At a plan detailed level
This note will discuss the first point, with respect to the defects noted in Masterplan 2015; with a view improve the process in the next masterplan.
As far as point 2 above is concerned, it is hoped that authorities are fully apprised of the criticism at a plan detailed level through many sources but mainly
i) PIL in court, and the stays obtained thus far.
ii) The Ravindra report on residential areas.
iii) BDAs own document to GOK for changes
A) Definition of masterplan
The masterplan 2015 promised to be an overall developmental plan for Bangalore, but quickly degenerated to be just a land use document.
The next masterplan cannot be merely a land use document.
Necessary legislation, administrative rules, and study methods need to be suitably modified as required.
The masterplan amongst other areas need to be able to clearly articulate, concrete plans and action points for
a) 24 by 7 water supply, area wise
b) Electricity supply area wise
c) Transport, parking infrastructure and public transport plans.
d)Urban poor rehabilitation infrastructure.
e) Traffic management
B) Mandated masterplan
Currently there does not seem to be a mandate for all civic agencies/service providers’ (BWSSB, Besom, BMTC etc.) to use the masterplan as the mandated developmental plan for Bangalore.
Currently (masterplan 2015), only calls for opinions from other service providers.
In many cases, this reduces to a cursory examination of the masterplan by other stakeholders since , essentially the masterplan is not mandate for these providers as the principal planning and execution document.
The specific plans and requirements of these other service providers need to be a formal part of the masterplan exercise.
This will lead to a masterplan developed as a true development plan with all stakeholders fully committed to its success.
It will also greatly reduce the incidences of service providers not being able to provide the necessary infrastructure which the BDAs land use plan requires.
C) Visioning
While there could be valid reasons to outsource the detailed masterplan to outside agencies, it is not a conducive exercise to outsource the essential vision document to third party.
This needs to be developed by all stakeholders and in particular, the citizens of Bangalore.
The masterplan exercise needs to be broken up into at least 2 sequential components.
i)The visioning exercise , ending up with an all stakeholder agreement on the vision document.
ii) The detailed plans, with all service providers plans in built as a mandated plan.
(The detailed plan can then be evaluated better against adherence to the vision document.)
D) The Bda masterplan vis a vis regional plan
Logically and also legally the erstwhile BDA masterplan needs to be a subset of the BMRDA Plans for the larger Bangalore region.
This has not happened in the past, and in fact the 2 plans were actually contradictory.
Until an all stakeholders agree to a regional plan, or at least a vision document, the Bangalore masterplan exercise of BDA is irrelevant and a criminal waste of taxpayers money.
E) Who does the masterplan /planning function?
Currently local elected representatives have a minimal or negligible role in development of masterplan. This in turn allows citizens a very minimal role in critique and contribution.
By the 74th amendment, the planning function is a municipal responsibility and oversight.
Also the Bangalore metropolitan governance bill (BMR) has already been conceived and waiting for debate and appropriate legislature.
Under the circumstances, BDA carrying out a masterplan exercise is contrary to both the 74th amendment and the proposed BMR.
Further as mentioned in earlier paras above, for a true developmental masterplan, covering all service providers, it is only an elected body(municipality), which has the jurisdiction and moral authority to enforce a masterplan.