top of page

Our Recent Posts

Archive

Tags

The RMP 2015 was revised to frame the proposed RMP 2031 . The revisions proposed were published as Draft RMP 2031 for public suggestions and comments. It is this Draft RMP 2031 which has now been revoked by the government. The main contention is that the Draft RMP 2031 adopts the ToD approach/ principles in selective ways. The approach adopted exacerbates urban sprawl while also not advancing a shift in ridership to public transport. There are other climate change related repercussions of promoting a Plan that increases sprawl and does not support the shift to public transit. I believe it is in this vein that the GoK has asked the BDA to adopt ToD in the new plan.


As part of this effort multiple ToD zones may be delineated in the city.


As I understand there is awareness among the BDA and other departments now that a ‘place’ based approach must be pursued while delineating ToD zones. I presume that the new ToD zones will embrace variety — some forming high density-high intensity development zones, some moderate intensity- moderate density while still others low intensity-low density development. A good method requires that the intensity of development in these zones should be defined by estimating carrying capacity of each place in terms of infrastructure requirements and the feasibility to provide and manage them. But there are debates on the validity of these methods.


ToD preservation zones are inherent to this approach. This would ideally imply that heritage zones, precincts, monuments and buildings are duly recognised and valorised, while they are overlaid with a ToD boundary. An example is the VT/CST Terminal in Mumbai. Preservation of natural areas and ecologically sensitive areas/ networks is intrinsic to the BDA’s revisions as I understand.


I construe that the ToD zoning approach is not mutually exclusive in terms of the cause for heritage. But this depends on BDA’s interpretation of place based ToD - Heritage zones and the eminence it ascribes to history and heritage.


A bigger issue for the city is that the ToD zones which will now be defined will not cover all parts of Bengaluru- at least until more public transport lines are introduced. This is because ToD zones broadly have a radius of about 5 km from the transit station. Unlike Delhi and Mumbai where public transit lines cover almost the entire city in Bangalore bus and metro lines are not yet ubiquitous. So adopting ToD may exacerbate uneven development leaving out some areas from access to public transit and other civic amenities. While para transit arrangements may temporarily fill this gap, the costs of getting around will still be high for these left out areas.


I agree on the question of the MPC’s custodianship of the plan and public costs of preparing the plan again. Regardless, personally, I think revoking the Draft RMP 2031 in its current state with a mandate to support sustainable development will save our city from extended long term damage.


If the new plan goes ahead, I hope the BDA will prepare this plan through public consultation / stakeholder consultation at periodic intervals as opposed to merely displaying the new Draft Plan for public comments. Now is infact a good time to ask the BDA to take up the workshop series with various civil society groups- like they had in 2005, then under the lead of Janaagraha.



About the author , a #HeritageBeku core team member

Champaka Rajagopal is a faculty member at Azim Premji University.

She co-teaches a course on Urban Governance and is Coordinator, Law, Governance and Policy Hub at the School of Public Policy & Governance, Azim Premji University.

She holds a Masters’ Degree in Urban Design from University of California at Berkeley, USA and an undergraduate degree in Architecture from Centre for Environmental Planning & Technology, Ahmedabad, India. She trained at the Haas Business School at UC Berkeley on Leadership Skills for Women Executives in 2015 and is presently pursuing a PhD at University of Amsterdam, in Planning & International Development Studies.

Champaka is Visiting Faculty at Sciences Po, Paris since 2014.

Prior to joining Azim Premji University, she held the position of Head, Urban Development at Egis India Consulting Engineers Pvt. Ltd., During this time she co-led and worked on several large scale public sector projects including the Development Plan for Greater Mumbai 2034, with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and the Revised Master Plan for Bengaluru 2015, with the Bangalore Development Authority. She has worked extensively in India and abroad.


V Ravichandar, Civic Expert and Thinker anchored an Heritage Beku informal discussion on the big RumPumPum on the RMP31. The 2 YouTube Links are below. Moderated by Priya Chetty-Rajagopal, there were several questions and gray areas that really need to be addressed. The on-off-on again discussions have left many of us citizens confused and concerned. First and foremost, who is the right authority to do this? The last time the RMP went into layers of legalese and was finally dismissed by the court, then strangely  resurrected by BDA  and now once again seems to be buried. 


From a statutory point of view,  the two focus area seem to be land-use and the development control regulations or DCR popularly referred to as a Zonal regulations. What is the concern is that it is not binding on any agency only recommendatory and advisory in nature so BMTC, BMRCL or even BWSSB  while nodding in agreement, will do exactly what they want. 

Some of the areas of evaluation metrics is the planned land-use versus the existing land-use or PLU and ELU. The existing land-use use is an important metric because at least there’s a direction in terms of which we are going. We may achieve a portion of it on but it’s a long term approach.


Let us not forget that heritage found a new 40 page mention in the RMP31, a considerable move forward from the three pages of the RMP 2015. There are so many more elements to be considered particularly transportation & BMRCL etc  is a very large player.


Could the change now mean that instead  of an RMP 15, we have an RMP 30 or even an RMP50 ? Reality is that comprehensive planning  for the city have not really worked outz From the comprehensive development plan or CDP 1990, there seems to be three decades of a ground experience to show how little it has impacted. As a very basic metric, look at the fact that open spaces were at 25% of the city in 1995 and are now down to 4% in the current plan – something is clearly not right.


In order for this to work all agencies must participate and must have skin in the game.  Citizens must really participate along with relevant agencies in order to have a user need articulation. Strangely these Master Plan  has not embraced an intangible but critical part of the city ethos which is sustainability and environment or  strategized on the spatial  plan, focus on building blocks, or working on a base GIS map as a common resource across all departments. Of course this map has increased in layers  and better Technology in the last few years. We need to mark off communication, clearly assume assume megaprojects that have to be accounted within the RMP and so Newbie drive excellent inter-departmentality, and integration. 


With the current stand off on the BBMP elections, the authority for the RFP, namely the MPC is even further away, as the BBMP elections have to happen, and then the election or nomination into the MPC has to happen, so we can expect further delays. This is worrying to say the least , as until then a 2015 Plan is in control!


However what is critical is to focus on goals and guiding principles. What do we want to achieve and what is inviolable. These will have to be built-in to the RMP. For example concepts and planning fundamentals on cities being built in -  whether it is metrics for goals on water and air quality, livelihoods, the concept of a 5 km live and work city etc. Without this level of strategic planning, we get too transactional. A Strategic Spatial Plan is what is really needed .


From a heritage perspective, we need to start with the basics. First we need to collectively accept  heritage as important, and therefore heritage as a goal. Given the fact that heritage overlaps on BBMP, BRD and several other institutions, cohesive collaboration is a must. For example the current changes in the Town & Country planning act have certain indications, whereas the BBMP new Act has a slightly different view on city heritage. This has to come together - in this case people participation with subgroups on drafting, consultative approach ensuring that this is kept in mind as a layer across the planning process is critical. 

All the work that has gone into the previous revised master plan should certainly be kept as a foundation to build forward, but this time with more granularity more clear outcomes in a definitely clear path to what needs to be done actively achieve it. The reality and need for Self-funded development is an aspect that we also have to layer in to the RMP


In addition, while we had Heritage Beku should begin to call on the stakeholders namely the chief minister, chief secretary, head of UDD, BDA and the BBMP Commr, it is important to do so with the collective city angle Looking at all spaces rather than just heritage (which of course we specially own). Perhaps this is a good opportunity for us to leverage our small learnings, our passion and heritage focus to look at a better planning frame work for the city that is so beloved to us.




Comments:


on the Notification dated November 17, 2020 on the Draft Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act regarding FAR and Premium FAR


  • It says objections received within specified period will be considered... There is no deadline for receiving objections

  • There is no criteria listed to qualify for the premium FAR.., no mention of whether this is a blanket premium FAR...

  • Usually you get premium FAR by paying a higher amount... here it is 50% less than normal value

  • Charges for premium FAR seems very low (Rs. 1650 per sq, ft) considering this is applicable in premium areas


There is no information on why this premium FAR is being introduced

-Laxmi Nagaraj, Urban Planner, Project Manager & Architect


links: https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/premium-floor-area-ratio-draft-rules-for-karnataka-out-917321.html

Blog: Blog

©2019 by #HeritageBeku.  All Rights Reserved.

bottom of page