Indian Urban Planning:
Limits to Economic Growth and Inclusion
Prof. Smita Srinivas, Columbia University Urban Planning
and Technological Change Lab (TCLab)
Champaka Rajagopal, Principal, Planning and Design
Groupe SCE (India)
Roundtable on Inclusive Cities
Jan 7-8 2011
New Delhi
Limits to growth and inclusion
• Urban Economic and Industrial challenges
externalities interfering in way industries advance, lack of worker-work-site amenities, mobility
constraints from home to worksite and of home as worksite, agglomeration challenges for
knowledge and tech investments.
• Industrial employment, land, housing, and mobility challenges
industrial land planned without worker housing/transport/services; land “for growth uses”
conflicts with environmental goals and other uses.
•
Inclusive Industrial growth cannot occur without long-term planning for technological
capabilities, employment, and land issues.
No nodal or other agency oversees the coordination between the goals for strategic economic
urban, regional, and sector plans. Sectors advance neither efficiently nor equitably.
'Inclusion' and 'exclusion' go hand in hand. There are serious industrial, technological,
employment and environmental problems with our current development model.
Recent changes for urban work
•
•
NREGA
JNNURM
•
Supreme court judgments/conflicts
•
NCEUS/Social security for informal workers
•
Affordable housing:
–
–
BSUP under JNNURM has many
complications.
Premium land currently occupied by the
migrant-urban poor in Mumbai, is landlocked
[Phatak et al, 2011].
•
Employment guarantee
•
Urban fiscal devolution, and public infrastructure
•
Right to work vs. right to urban space to work:
No provisions for externalities of activities
related to production/ trade and for expansion
of small and medium units in urbanized areas.
Permissible uses often indicated as
homogenous.
•
•
•
Comprehensive social protections and minima
New counting/census informality statistics
New counting of informal workers
•
Information New land and housing rules, financing,
products, participation
nstitutions and Plans at the three tiers
Master Plan / Comprehensive
Development Plan
CENTRE
State and Planning
74th CAA
JNNURM
CENTRE
CENTRE
Five year Plans –
socio economic in
nature
Five year Plans –
socio economic in
nature
National Steering
Group
Mission Directorate
STATE
Spatial
Plans
STATE
Districts
District
Plans –
non
Spatial
Taluka / Tehsil /
Sub District
Central Sanctioning
& Monitoring
Committee
Spation +
Socio
economic
developm
ent of the
area
DPC
STATE
SLSC
LOCAL
No spatial plans
Responsible only
for implementation
SNA
LOCAL
Spatial Plans by the
Corporations and
the Municipal
Councils.
Superceded
by the State
Wards
Area Sabhas
SLSC
Policy and Vision
Participatory Mapped and environmentally
regulated Development
State Level Steering Committee
SNA
State Nodal Agency
ULB
Consolid
ation
MPC or
DPC
Urban Local Body
District Planning Committee
MPC Metropolitan Planning
Committee
LOCAL
ULBs /
Parastatal
Outsour
ced to
private
sector
Administrative
Section Urban
Local Body
T
A
G
Inclusive Cities
The 11th Five year plan calls for a need to restructure the role of Govt. by suggesting that scarce
public resources best be channelized towards social sectors rather than sectors where private
sectors operating under competitive market can deliver.
Source: An Approach to the 11th Five Year Plan- Towards Faster and More Inclusive Growth, Planning Commission, Govt. of India
 Constitution of DPCs
 Village and Municipal level plans to be outlined
at PRI and ULB level respectively covering the
functions devolved to them
Participatory
 Constitution of Ward Committees
planning
 Constitution of Area Sabhas
Accountability  Use of Right to Information Act (RTI Act, 2005)
& transparency  Use of internet, e-governance
Capacity
 Encouraging partnership between CSOs and
Building
Local Govt. (mainly for rural areas)
Monitoring and  Tracking outcomes instead of outlays and
evaluation
expenditures
Holistic
Planning
Approach
INDUSTRIAL GROWTH and INCLUSION:
All models skirt ULBs and devolution
EXCLUSION OF INDUSTRIAL ZONES FROM THE
DECENTRALIZATION AGENDA
•
•
•
•
GREEN FIELD SITES: The Yamuna Expressway
Region, NCR
BROWN FIELD SITES: Bhiwadi, NCR
REGIONS AND CITIES: Bangalore Metropolitan
Region
HOUSING FOR THE POOR: BSUP Project,
Panaji, Goa
Laws and Norms
Freight Corridors
The Delhi- Mumbai Industrial Corridor: Excluded
from the decentralization agenda and
municipalization has a financial outlay of USD 90
billion, covers a length of length of 1483 KMs , nine
Mega Industrial zones of about 200-250 sq. km., high
speed freight line, three ports, and six air ports; a sixlane intersection-free expressway .
Located amidst agricultural lands and in
environmentally sensitive areas. Example: Gujarat
State and Planning
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Growth and land use versus other uses
Areas designated as ‘industrial’ in master plans
are auctioned/ sold by industrial development
authorities to private builders for residential/
entertainment uses.
YEIDA PLAN
Demographic analyses do not consider detail
sector based employment scenarios for
manufacturing and services.
IT sector and retail ‘success’ seeps into all
neighbourhoods, brings own externalities.
Street vendors displaced. No innovative mixed
use for low-income sellers.
Source: Public display of the Master Plan for YEA Region, YEIDA
Policy and Schemes
Employment, Risk, and the city
Master planning does not
account for housing for migrant
labor.
Sub-standard construction
workers one room tenement,
shared unit, in Bhiwadi, NCR.
Residential area allocated: 21.6%
and industrial areas 29% of the
total land within the jurisdiction.
Development regulations
promote gated multi-storied
apartment units.
State and Planning
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Conflicts: Judicial and Enforcement wings
State’s different efforts segment the city
– Regional and state government
agencies
– Central agencies
– Urban Planning and development
bodies:
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Growth and land use versus other uses
Lands identified as environmentally
sensitive in Structure Plan for the
Bangalore Metropolitan Region
notified for industrial use by
industrial development authorities,
here the KIADB.
Developable
Settlements
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Growth and land use versus other uses
Existing Land Use: 2003
Proposed Land Use: RMP 2015
Peenya Industrial Area and its vicinities: Mixed Land Use
Permissible land uses:
Main land use category: R
Ancillary land use category: C3, I-2,T2 and U4
Ancillary land use is permissible up to 30% of the total built up area
Parking: Buildings with a floor area not exceeding 100sqm are exempted from providing car parking.
However, equivalent parking fee shall be levied as determined by the authority from time to time.
Externalities of mixed use zone, for example increased parking, not incorporated in the zonal regulations.
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Inadequate tools for implementation
T. P. Scheme, Ahmedabad; Source: AUDA
Nation-city dysfunction: No relationship between 5 year Plans, economic
growth projections and actual urban/regional industrial growth.
• Micro-needs of industry and workers
impossible to spatially and physically
embed in cities.
•Indian master plans have no microlevel analog for implementation, and
no mechanisms in town and country
planning acts.
City-neighbourhood dysfunction: Master plans at scales of 1:50,000 and 1:
5000 for analyses as the only tool for planning and implementation does
not capture change on the ground
Institutional dysfunction: Town planning scheme:
The only planning tool for micro-level planning in the town & country
planning acts woefully out of date and inadequate. Implementation of the
TPS requires institutional restructuring in most ULBs, thereby a deterrent.
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Inadequate institutions and tools for implementation
Coordinated
Scheme (CPS)
Planning
Designated on lands
occupied by industries
under decline
- A tool for facilitating urban
renewal and large scale
infrastructure through
coordinated land pooling
- The CPS Scheme was
adapted by the
development authority as a
tool to reserve land for
future acquisition by the
development authority.
Laws and Norms
State and Planning
Inadequate tools for implementation
PEENYA: OLD SUCCESS STORY
But now: absence of a planning
tool/ legal and institutional
framework for coordinated
micro-level planning.
Fragmented development across
industrial and residential at the
micro level.
No strategic view of optimizing
skills, existing SMEs, training
facilities, or expansion of private
firms.
Municipal councils skirt ULBs and
Development Authorities for
subdivision and building permitsIndustrial area
built upon
KIADB and BDA do not
environmentally
coordinate regarding subdivisionsensitive area
regulations creating fragmented
discontinuous urban areas.
No contiguity
between Peenya
industrial layout and
adjoining residential
layouts.
Infrastructure has not been
integrated in the design of the
layout.
Eg: Logistics zone, truck
parking, warehousing
Policy and Schemes
State and Planning
Employment, Risk, and the city
Building on lake beds and
watersheds causes flooding, health
hazards- disease, decline in land
price and neglect towards
infrastructure.
Existing Land Use 2003 and RMP2015,
Electronic City and Bommanahalli, Bangalore
Flooding 2005, Bangalore, Bommanahalli
http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/26/stories/2008102650140100.htm
Bangalore
Laws and Norms
Ground Reality
Partial and selective implementation
Informal industrial zones
State and Planning
Floor Area Ratio: 0.75
60% Ground Coverage
Ground reality
Zonal Regulations and building byelaws do
not address the real demand for work
spaces and mixed use in areas occupied by
informal industrial sites such as Pete,
Yeshwantpur etc, in Bangalore. These areas
become semi-autonomous zones and skirt
regulations through tenuous negotiations
with power groups to meet their
occupational land needs.
Plot size: 36 sqm
Setback: 1m all around
Ground coverage: 60 %
Building height: G+1 or 2
Plot size: 9 sqm
Setback: None
Ground coverage: 100 %
Building height: G+4
Regulation
Laws and Norms
Partial and selective implementation
REGULATIONS
ENFORCEMENT
REQUIRES KEEN
MONITORING
THROUGH A ULB WITH
CAPACITY.
FLEXIBLE MIXED USE
ZONING DOES NOT
ANTICIPATE NEGATIVE
EXTERNALITIES IN
TERMS OF TRAFFIC,
PARKING, POLLUTION,
SOLID WASTE AND
HENCE
NO PROVISIONS HAVE
BEEN MADE IN THE ZR
REGARDLESS OF RIGID
OR FLEXIBLE
REGULATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION IS
SELECTIVE
State and Planning
Policy and Schemes
State and Planning
Migrant workers, BSUP Scheme housing
Migrant workers, Panaji, a city of 80,000
Tin shed houses, 80% of households no
water connections, 93% with no toilet
facilities of their own.
•
BSUP Scheme used for resettlement of
migrant workers
•
Land designated outside Panaji
jurisdiction on low lying flood prone area
for the under-privileged
•
Project approved by the Centre within 5
days of commencement of the task
•
But beneficiary list un-definable due to
vote bank politics, Project shelved, Site
now being converted to affordable sector
housing under PPP with mall as
commercial use.
Mumbai has introduced affordable rental
housing for the migrant laborers. A more
desirable model that accommodates mobility
of labor and spatial allocation
S. Korea
N. Korea
Tokyo:
Urban-centered social investment-led
industrial strategy
• Urban and regional Development
– Neighbourhood-tied industrial investment coordination strategy for externalities
– Social investments in healthcare, education and training, housing and transport
– Social protections integrate corporate welfare and small and micro businesses
under health and welfare programs
– Industrial and environmental strategies brought together under Tokyo Govt.
– Industrial city act, Technopolis Urban rejuvenation program
– Private finance initiative, park projects, Downtown (PFI) program in public
investments
– Revitalisation Act, Minkatsu Act investment projects ((the use of the private
sector for public work)
• Manufacturing production, Development of new technologies, from heavy to
knowledge- linked to environment, medical and incentive and to information
welfare, nanotechnology and information technology
• Public investment, Physical infrastructure for R&D infrastructure, transport
• Source: Fujita (2003)
Tokyo:
Urban-centered social investment-led
industrial strategy
TAMA project:
A model project of Industrial
Cluster Program
• TAMA:
– Technology Advanced
Metropolitan Area
• TAMA Association:
– Intermediary organization
between universities and
firms, and among firms in
TAMA established in 1998
• Geographical location:
– Southwestern part of
Saitama Prefecture,
– Tama district: of Tokyo
Metropolis and
– Central part of Kanagawa
Prefecture.
Capacity building
• Indian labour economists ignore urban and spatial context, physical planners
have little employment and industry focus and national economic plans and
policies have little urban relationship. Sector plans and policies rarely have ULBs
discussed.
• The municipal corporations and parastatals have no trained economic
development planners to embed economic and industrial plans. Engineers
dominate these decisions, and management consulting firms with little urban
industrial experience dominate national priorities with little institutional analysis.
E.g. Bangalore BDA vested with the responsibility to prepare the master plan for
a city of 7 million population had 3 urban planners in its TP division [Mohan and
Rajagopal, 2010] and none qualified to address long-term economic and social
issues.
• In contrast, cities such as Tokyo, Frankfurt, Singapore or New York have far more
integrated industrial and economic growth plans, urban and neighbourhood
institutions for community participation and sector expansion, urban and
regional plans for significant infrastructure and capability building for industries
that helps, not hinders citizens. Urban economic and industrial restructuring is
overseen by agencies with trained staff and significant consulting expertise by
experts. This is over and above basic facilities for citizens such as water and
sanitation, pavements, and safe roads.
Limits to growth and inclusion
• Urban Economic and Industrial challenges
externalities interfering in way industries advance, lack of worker-work-site amenities, mobility
constraints from home to worksite and of home as worksite, agglomeration challenges for
knowledge and tech investments.
• Industrial employment, land, housing, and mobility challenges
industrial land planned without worker housing/transport/services; land “for growth uses”
conflicts with environmental goals and other uses.
•
Inclusive Industrial growth cannot occur without long-term planning for technological
capabilities, employment, and land issues.
No nodal or other agency oversees the coordination between the goals for strategic economic
urban, regional, and sector plans. Sectors advance neither efficiently nor equitably.
'Inclusion' and 'exclusion' go hand in hand. There are serious industrial, technological,
employment and environmental problems with our current development model.
Thank you