|
Master Plan for Delhi (MPD) 2021 was notified in the year 2007. Before this, there were two earlier plans.
The question that comes to mind is: will this plan do us any good, or will it go the way of its predecessors - the ear- lier avatars MPD 62 and Master Plan for Delhi 2001?
The MPD 62 developed by the Ford Foundation had a strong Western urban thought implanted in it and laid down the framework for rigid land-use planning in the most orthodox sense. The foundations for a low-density sprawl were thus laid. The Master Plan for Delhi 2001 came a full decade late (it was supposed to be released in 1981 but was delayed to 1991) and did not make any radical departure from the earlier plan. The same policy of state control on land and its development continued in Delhi and the government body, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) remained the monop- oly developer and provider, apparently under the presumption that the state is a better provider of housing as compared to the private sector.
What then went wrong with these two plans? Why did Delhi get its numerous slums and unauthorised colonies? Why was there extensive commercialisation of residential areas? Clearly every sensible resident of Delhi knows the rea- sons; the DDA has been extremely slow in providing housing. The DDA does not provide for private landown- ers to develop residential lay- outs. The development norms are too rigid. The DDA did precious little for the low-income population, leave alone the urban poor, and the net result is what we have before us; a city of chaos with no semblance of order. People in need of shelter have broken all the rules of the game in order to provide for themselves what the state was supposed to have done in the first place.
This brings us back to the question: will the new Master Plan for Delhi 2001 also take the city the same way or will it be better? At the outset, Master Plan for Delhi 2001 has set for itself a Vision for making Delhi a "global metropolis and a world class city". The key areas which the new plan focuses on are: a) involving the private sec- tor in public private partner- ships, b) redevelopment and densification of existing areas and, c) optimum land utilisa- tion and incentivisation. It makes a specific mention of housing for the urban poor.
The other salient feature of this plan is the liberalised mixed uses in residential areas. The Plan also envis- ages higher densities and better development controls so as to make developments utilise land in a more inten- sive manner. Clearly, these are all departures from the earlier plans and certainly laudable.
On the face of it, the chapter on housing and slums appears to be all right. However, the "devil is in the detail". As per the Plan, there is approximately a requirement of 20 lakh dwelling units by the end of the plan period 2021. This would mean that every year the housing stock addition should be around one lakh houses. Unfortunately, with all the providers getting involved, the chances of reaching this target seem unlikely. The reasons are obvious. First, there is the question of land being made available to the parties con- cerned in a timely manner.
Second, raw land is of no use unless and until it is serviced with roads, public trans- portation, water and power supply. Third, the price at which serviced housing units are going to be made available ultimately have to be affordable to the masses.
Looking at the extremely slow pace of operation of not only the DDA but the entire governmental machinery including the Delhi Jal Board (DJB), the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the power companies, the chances of completing the targets are remote. Let us face it, work on the Dwarka sub-city project started more than 20 years ago and even today, water is a serious issue in this well-planned suburb!
There is no doubt that Master Plan for Delhi 2001 is more innovative than its predecessors in more ways than one and even talks of participative development, night shelters, integrating unauthorised colonies, and so on. However, any plan will be successful only when it is implemented in all serious- ness. The implementation of a master plan is in the hands of our political masters who need to make the funds avail- able, provide approvals to the plans without delay and facil- itate a higher level of coordi- nation, particularly when it comes to water and power.
Clearly, neither the political framework nor the human resource in the organisations concerned are geared up for taking up the monumental task of speedily and seriously implementing a master plan where decisions need to be taken very quickly and fund flows should be smooth. A high level of urban management capacities are needed at all levels of the governments and parastatal agencies. Today, the functioning of these agencies is unfortunately at its lowest ebb.
Added to this is the dichotomy of the growing work responsibilities on the one hand and the depleting staff numbers on the other. In a regime of Right to Information (RTI), most of the staff in these departments is engaged in prepar- ing replies to mounting piles of questions, rather than bothering to implement the master plan -- interesting but true!
However, one must note that Master Plan for Delhi 2001 promises a grand vision in its opening page and follows it up with many strategies. It is now for all of us to own the plan and make it start working for us. Real estate developers and cooperative societies should seriously press the DDA to start moving forward in iden- tifying roles for them to take up projects, be it for redevel- opment or for `green field' projects. The Master Plan is for the residents of the city and it is for all of us to make the plan move forward. Even if part of it is implemented, the housing scenario in Delhi will certainly be much better than it is now. |
