The Revised Master Plan 2031, the much-awaited blueprint for the city's growth should have the stamp of the people upon it. Still, we know enough about the BDA to expect malpractice and they have not failed to disappoint! Chandrashekar G. and Aknisree Karthik speak to five experts about a Master Plan that has been prepared (unlawfully) by a private agency and is shrouded in secrecy.
Plan not worth the paper it is printed on: V. Ravichandar
Master Plan 2031 has followed a seriously flawed process. Its been shrouded in secrecy and the base plan drawn up without public consultation. The fear is it will be a repeat of the land use plans of the past decades , which have made Bengaluru the mess it is today. What the authorities needed to do was present the Existing Land Use map to citizens for their feedback and follow this up with vision – scenario building and a strategies report , leading to the next plan.
All civic agencies should have been involved in the plan evolution and mandated to follow its final version Without this, the plan is not worth the paper it is printed on. Wards should be the Planning District Boundary and ward priorities should be reflected in the aggregated master plan. We should strive for environment- friendly solutions, increased public spaces, more public transportation and sidewalks and the like to make the city liveable. Ideally the master plan should have clear guiding principles and scope for dynamic adjustments to new realities.
The writer is a civic evangelist
By 2030, bengaluru can be an amalgam of 20 micro cities: Harish Bijoor
Bengaluru’s population is booming. By 2031, we are going to be a complex city with complex problems. Considering its growth, it makes better sense, in my view, for it to be an amalgam of 20 micro cities. And instead of having just one central business district (CBD) drawing people for entertainment, education, work and so on, each of these micro cities should have all these facilities and be self-contained.
Also, Bengaluru should not be macro but micro managed, and this should apply to everything, from its power supply to garbage disposal. Micro-cities should retain their original flavour in all aspects.
The vision document has intelligently put together several amenities for the city in 2031. But the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) has to take it to the masses as without their involvement no big plan can work. Road shows must be held in each ward on the document and open gate meetings held with Resident Welfare Associations and citizen forums to get their feedback on it. People should participate in large numbers and give their views so the planners can get a deeper understanding of their needs and what should be done to meet them.
The writer is a brand expert
State focussing only on high end infrastructure: Kathyayini Chamaraj
The Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) must plan for Bengaluru going by the 74th Constitutional Amendment, which neither the MLAs nor BBMP councillors have cared to implement although they take an oath to preserve the Constitution. Under MPC rules, the Bengaluru Development Authority( BDA) is only its secretariat.
But things are topsy-turvy today as the BDA is presenting a vision document for Bengaluru prepared by a consultant and not the MPC, in a bottom-up process beginning with the area sabhas and ward committees.
And unfortunately, the authority has not been making comprehensive development plans for the city’s “ economic development and social justice” as required by the 74th Constitutional amendment. Ideally the plan should encompass poverty alleviation, slum development, and the rest of the 18 functions delegated to urban local bodies in the 12th Schedule attached to the 74th CA.
But instead of the MPC, the state government is making all the plans for Bengaluru, concentrating on high-end infrastructure. The result is the city is on the verge of dying with its air, water and land all polluted and the divide between its rich and urban poor is growing even wider. The question then is, why is the MPC not asserting its rights and setting right the priorities and planning for a sustainable and inclusive Bengaluru?
—The writer is Executive Trustee, CIVIC
Why is the plan such a secret, Mr George? asks Sridhar Pabbisetty
Over the past few years Bengaluru has seen very haphazard growth. What it needs now is proper statutory long-term planning. But there is not enough transparency in the way the BDA functions.
The contractor engaged for the preparation of Master Plan 2031 has already submitted his vision document to the BDA for consideration. And although Bengaluru Development Minister K.J. George had promised to make it public, its contents have still not been revealed. Why so?
Also the Bengaluru Metropolitan Planning Committee (BMPC) has not been involved in the finalisation of the vision document. The committee formed by the BDA to review the document and the Master Plan 2031 does not have even one member of the BMPC on board.
Decisions, especially relating to infrastructure and mobility projects that are not a part of the current Master Plan 2015, are also being implemented without any discussion with the BMPC.
While a meeting was called last week to discuss the vision document for the Revised Master Plan 2031, BMPC members were given a notice of just 20 hours to attend it, reflecting the utter lack of responsibility in the BDA. We demand that the vision document be made public, that a public consultation be held and the document tabled before the BMPC for discussion.
— The writer is CEO, Namma Bengaluru Foundation
Masterplan needs widespread public involvement: NS Mukunda
People should have been involved from the very beginning in preparing the vision document of the Revised Master Plan 2031 for Bengaluru. After all, how do we build our dream home? All the family members sit together and discuss what they need, how many rooms are required, what they should contain and how big or small they should be, what kind of facilities the kitchen must have and so on. Based on the feedback received from the family members, the architect prepares the plan and the dream house is built.
If this is the level of care we take with our homes, shouldn't the same rule apply to the cities we live in? Before planning for a city, people should be asked for their opinion on the right public and private transport mix, what they want to see in prime locations , how the need for water and other basic amenities can be met and what should be the parking policy.
So rightly speaking, people should have been consulted on what they wanted for their city in 2031 before the job of drawing up the plan was given to experts. But the reverse has happened. The job of preparing the vision document has been given to a private consultancy without the public being any wiser about its possible contents.
We demand wide public consultation on the Revised Master Plan 2031 and if it is not held, we may have to knock on the doors of the courts to make sure that the government holds it .
