A REVIEW OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING
REGULATIONS IN SELECTED ASIAN CITIES
UNCHS 1992
4. DELHI : INDIA
THE NATIONAL CONTEXT:
4.1The federal republic of India is an Union of 32 states(25). 7 of these states (including Delhi - the federal capital) are called Union Territories, for receiving special assistance from the Centre - unlike the other 25 States which are required to generate sufficient funds on their own. Currently there is a move to convert Delhi into a State. India has the seventh largest land cover in the world (about 3.28 million sq. kms), but the second highest population (846 million in 1991). With land being static, the land : man ratio has dropped rapidly from 0.99 hectares per capita in 1901 to 0.39 in 1991 (0.81 in China). The projection for 2051 is 0.22 hectares per capita (0.66 for China). Of the 20 largest countries in the world (in terms of area), India has the most unfavourable land : man ratio. With at least 10 per cent of this land being topographically unusable, the problem is further compounded. Clearly, land in the Indian context, is a very finite and scarce resource. Despite this, the track record has been poor in its use and management, mainly due to uncoordinated exploitation and abuse.
4.2In 1991 , the human settlements of India comprised of about 4500 urban centres (megacities - 10m+, metropoles - 1m to 10m, cities - 0.1m to 1m, towns - 20,000 to 0.1m and town panchayats - 20,000 and below) and of over 0.58 million inhabited villages grouped into village panchayats.(26) Settlements and their linkages occupied less than 4 per cent of land in 1901 . By 1991 , this increased to a little over 6 per cent (a change from agriculture to urban of about 60,000 sq. kms in 90 years). It is estimated that by 2021 (within 30 years), at the current rate of change a further 60,000 sq. kms would be taken away from agriculture use. If to this is added land which is topographically unusable, only about 82 per cent of land would be available at that time for increase in food production, cash crops, mineral workings, forestation, watersheds and the like to sustain a burgeoning population. Of this, only about a sixth is devoted to food production (13.67 percent against 10 per cent in China) and this just about balances current needs.
4.3Practically all the change from primary sector to settlement expansion would be on the fringe of existing settlements on largely fertile land, despite the fact that large areas within existing settlement boundaries are unused or underutilised. (Refer Box F). Master plans in India invariably propose a generous expansion of the periphery and correspondingly have sketchy implementable prescriptions for lands within existing settlement boundaries. This concomitant change therefore from agriculture to non-agriculture has become the most contentious of all changes on the use of land especially in metropoles and other high land value situations. If inevitable, it would increasingly have to be on the basis of transparent and integrated policies, strategies and developmental actions that recognises land as a dwindling resource and access to new lands resorted to only after seeking to optimise the use of unused or underutilised urban lands. The draft urban development sector (1997) for the ninth 5-year plan (1998-2003) more forcefully than earlier national plans, gives credence to this policy approach and the states of the Union so stand committed.
The Town & Country Planning Organisation (TCPO), Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment (Government of India) in a 1976 study of about 400 Master Plans in the country, found that in cities with a population of more than 0.10 million, about 30 per cent of the land earmarked for development within the existing urban fences, remained unused or were underutilised. This percentage was even larger for urban settlements with population below 0.10 million.
In Delhi (taken as a model for plan making particularly in northern cities of India), a 20 year plan (1961-81) proposed a doubling of population from 2.30 million in 1961 to 4.60 million in 1981 largely through expansion of land at the periphery. By 1981 , it was found that acquisition of new lands was getting expensive and the process more time consuming. At the same time, success stories in private participation in lands on the urban periphery through land pooling/reconstitution as in the States of Gujarat and Maharashtra worked for smaller parcels (rarely above 40 hectares) and that too by sacrificing standards in non-remunerative uses like roads and open spaces. Also, the system and standards did not make allowances for reservations for marginal/marginalised groups. (The scheme as in operation permits upto 70 per cent of the land to be reconstituted into remunerative plots and efforts by the World Bank and other loan agencies to reduce this to a more environment friendly 60 per cent continues being opposed).
In a confused scenario of growth on the urban periphery and which precipitated speculative unplanned development, the extended plan for Delhi 1981-2001 had a part success story through an intrinsic redensification within the existing urban fence and whereby it was found that in terms of transport, physical and social infrastructure, an area which was to hold 4.60 million in 48 sq. kms of land could hold about 9.00 million, beyond which expansion of the periphery was inevitable.
Guided land development concepts surfaced at this time through private participation via land assembly of larger areas of land (upto 1000 hectares) as in the State of Haryana bordering Delhi. Such exercises however for change in land use from agriculture to settlement growth, calls for a finely tuned partnership with government through spatial plans and policies that continue favouring a reduction in the rate of growth of mega cities. In Delhi, it is leading to an integrated equation between counter-magnets, growth centres, satellite towns and inner city restructuring within a long range megacity region plan called the National Capital Region (NCR) Plan - encompassing over 32,000 sq. kms of land in Delhi, the bordering States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh and even Rajasthan.
From the NCR experience, one notices replicable ingredients for strategy (concept) plans and structure plans as the basis for integrated projects. Through such plans, access to land could now be through any, some or all of four experiences - a) guided land development for large areas (called urbanisable blocks in Haryana); b) land pooling for compact areas (institutionalised as a major ingredient of Town Planning Schemes in Gujarat and several other states); c) land reconstitution/redevelopment (for in-situ upgrading in small parcels in core areas) and d) but not the least, acquisition for a public purpose under the Central Land Acquisition Act 1894 or state level variations of it (recent amendments require substantial development within three years of a clear title, failing which land gets re-notified at an enhanced market value and a solatium already increased from 15 to 30 per cent of this value. This amendment has made the land banking or large scale government land acquisition, development and disposal system unaffordable. Therefore, land can no longer be held vacant for long periods of time). A deterrent tax on vacant or underutilised land would further help in lands developed at the right time for housing and other uses.
4.4Conscious that land continues being uneconomically used, the report of the technical group on Urban Planning Systems of the Planning Commission, Govt of India (May, 1996) have reiterated recommendations of earlier national 5-year Plans that the rate of growth of megacities and metropoles be slowed down. In their report as adopted by Government, they have stated that the urban future of India is progressively linked to the creation of a balanced urban hierarchical structure from metropoles to those small towns which are vibrant, economically viable and capable of sustained economic growth. This recommendation and which coalesces accepted strategies in India over the past several years, takes into consideration a rapidly changing urban growth scenario from around 30 million urbanites in 1901 (one in every eleven) in about 2200 urban settlements to over 300 million urbanites (one in every three) in around 4500 urban settlements in 2001 . The report further states that macro economic policies today, pointedly affect the urban economy and the quality of the urban environment and hence the impact of all such economic development policies need to be seen on the performance of the urban sector. At the same time, it has to be underlined that at the turn of the century, human settlements in India would accommodate nearly 700 million people (70 per cent of the total population) in rural areas, in addition to over 300 million people (30 per cent of the total population) in urban settlements. In this equation, though urbanisation is increasing, investments in rural areas are also increasing and the emerging scenario for India would for several decades be one of an URBAN-RURAL CONTINUUM rather than the domination of the rural sector as hitherto or the urban sector as in the developed world. This fact has precipitated the interfacing through the two epoch making 73rd amendment (rural) and the 74th amendment (urban) to the Constitution. These amendments stress on empowerment to the people (urban and rural) through a strong third tier that is required to spearhead and regulate development that visibly affects the environment at grass roots. The 32 states of the Union (including 7 union territories) are now required to work in a framework of organisational integration for planned growth. (Refer Box B, SECTION I). The emphasis is on planned development. More explicitly on a finely tuned interface between spatial and socio-economic development.
4.5This framework recognises that urban and regional planning, housing, urban transport, basic physical and social infrastructure and other local government subjects are in the State legislative and operational list (as in Malaysia) and within which spatial and socio-economic development have to work in tandem. This has to be within an existing but-restructured three layers comprising of:-
- local levels (panchayats and municipal bodies);
- regional levels (districts and metropolitan areas and mega-regions); and
- state level.
For facilitating governance, States are divided into Districts - each under a Collector who is also in charge of total district revenue. The Districts are further sub-divided into sub-districts (Taluks). (Refer Box G.)
An average size of a district is about 7,000 sq. kms for India taken as a whole. Of the 472 districts which comprised the Union of India in 1991 - (the State of Jahmur and Kashmir was not enumerated at that time), as many as 102 were more than 10,000 sq. kms in size. On the other hand, 56 districts were less than 2,000 sq. kms in size. In this respect, the State of Haryana is a good small state model composed as it is of 19 compact districts of which 7 are less than 2000 sq. kms each and only one district exceeds 5,000 sq. kms in area. This compactness facilitates developmental actions with state and local levels working cohesively. Also, with empowerment to people at district and village levels through the 73rd constitutional amendment and at urban levels (town and city) through the 74th constitutional amendment, we can envisage an era of participatory planned development - a down-top process interfacing with a subdued present top-down bureaucratic dispensations. The District Development Plans to be mandatorily prepared by the District Planning Committees and which are to be immediately constituted across the length and breadth of the nation, offers the key as for the first time a Plan is possible where spatial prescriptions and socio economic investments have to be at tandem and be, subject to analysis by all stakeholders from the smallest group of villages upwards. Already states are reducing districts to workable sizes - a doubling from 13 to 26 in Orissa and from 20 to 29 in Karnataka. Several new districts have been created in Uttar Pradesh, and the demand for creating new districts in all large states is increasing. If this trend/demand is being marginally slowed down, it is primarily to ensure that the administration is geared to cater to additional districts.
4.6It has been recommended that whereas at the national level, sectoral policies are spelt out, at the state level, the flexible strategy or perspective plan is to be mandatory as a guide to regional level actions through statutory district or metropolitan spatial strategy or structure plans and which are required to facilitate the appropriate use of land. This is to be achieved through basic long range perspective plans (20 to 25 years); a more detailed medium range development plans with stress on infrastructure (5 years and ideally co-terminus with national 5-year plans) and finely tuned annual action plans - as applicable. The above recommendations have been accepted by the Planning Commission for spelling out national policies and for disbursement of federal plan funds in the ninth 5-year plan (1998-2003) and in collaboration with the concerned central government ministries so as to fulfil a constitutional diktat. The States of the Union are now analysing changes to be brought in place with acceptable variations so as to respect land covers as historically evolved in their respective jurisdiction and then to ensure the optimal use of this static resource within environmentally acceptable parameters. There is thus to be an overhaul of the spatial planning structure of India and which hitherto was based primarily on urban master plans and town planning schemes and a modicum of regional plans.
4.7 Currently urban planning and development administration in India is organised at three levels viz. federal, state and local. At the central level, the Ministry of Urban Development and the Housing and Urban Development Division of the Central Planning Commission are the two authorities dealing with the subject of urban planning and development performing advisory and co-ordination roles apart from providing technical assistance for promoting orderly urbanisation. The type of arrangement, at the national level are mainly in the form of policy planning and allocation of plan funds thereof to the states; monitoring of central sector schemes; providing incentives to achieve an uniform and comparative plan enabling pattern; and dissemination of new and innovative techniques for improving efficacy of urban planning approaches and methodologies. The Ministry is supported in these tasks by the Town and Country Planning Organisation (TCPO), the Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO), the Central Public Health and Environment Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO) and the national Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA). At the state level, urban planning and development is governed by respective town planning acts and other development acts. As on today, Town Planning Departments exist in all the states and most of the union territories of the Union of India. Functions and activities of the department vary from state to state but by and large it includes preparation of Master Plans/Development Plans, Regional Plans, Town Planning Schemes, Development Schemes, Urban Development Projects, Zonal Plans, Action Area Plans, Implementation of Central and State Sector Schemes. State level policy and strategy planning are worked out to ensure formulation of statutory development plans at various levels and implementation of development schemes. At local level, Planning and Development Authorities in large cities and metropolitan areas, municipalities, etc. are the important agencies engaged in preparation of Development Plans/Master Plans, Zonal Plans and Action area level implementation plans. They are also responsible for giving development permission and undertaking development or ensuring conservation in zones declared as development area. The authorities are created either under State Town Planning Acts or under a separate Planning and Development Authority Act. In some cases, power has also been delegated to municipalities for preparing plans and for giving development permissions. Where these authorities do not exist, the State Town Planning Department prepares development plans and gives development permissions. The third tier (municipalities and panchayats) as yet are subservient to the second tier (State) in India.
4.8 However the policy context for planned development as now evolved has necessitated legislative changes in the relevant state list of subjects. This in turn is enabling a gradual transition in state and local government administration to tie up with mandatory third-tier elections for a more effective stakeholders participation. (This process was witnessed as being made progressively non-existent in India's first 50 years of independence). Along with this, has emerged nationally enunciated policies towards globalisation and privatisation and the role of government as a facilitator rather than as a doer. Therefore, in planned development, the three inter-related thrusts which have erupted to the forefront within the last few years and are crucial in the future are :-
- A greater grass root autonomy (inclusive of a minimum one-third representation to women);
- A larger private participation in planned change on land (with government acting as a facilitator); and
- A more effective environment protection and controls (ground, water, air, noise, etc).
4.9 Like China, India has several primate cities, each with hinterlands of their own within the country. The megacity of Bombay (now called Mumbai) on the west coast, the megacity of Calcutta on the East Coast and the megacity of Delhi in the north have distinct regions of influence. In the South Madras (now called Chennai) held this place but latterly, Hyderabad and Bangalore are competitions with each having population in excess of 5.00 million. The World Bank estimates that Hyderabad will be the fourth megacity of India (and not Chennai). In the census of 1991 , Mumbai and Calcutta were shown as megacities and 21 other cities were shown as metropoles. In 2001 , the megacities of India would be 3 (including Delhi) and there would be 37 other metropoles (of which Hyderabad, Chennai and Bangalore would be 5.00 million plus cities). These 40 agglomerations are well distributed over the geographic mosaic of India with linear concentrations only along the west coast (Ahmedabad, Vadodra, Surat, Mumbai and Pune over a 600 km linear stretch) and with Mumbai as the prime magnet). All these agglomerations have Municipal Corporations. In addition, they have State appointed Development Authorities over a wider Metropolitan area comprising of several local government entities. Thus megacities and larger metropoles function in India today as megacity regions. Of India's 300 million urban population expected by 2001 , over 180 million would be in the metropoles and the remainder of around 120 million in the other 4,450 urban settlements at that time. Among these, at least 360 urban settlements would have populations of between 0.10 to 1.00 million accommodating at least another 60 million people between them. Thus urbanisation in India is almost an issue of metropolitanisation and it is here where economic growth and shortages in services exist side by side with megacities offering the most challenges.