CHENNAI: The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority is set to finalise an international consultant to draft a vision document for the city's third master plan. The master plan is likely to have a long-term vision for the desirable urban development of Chennai through a participatory approach while reviewing global experiences in building a city vision. The New Indian Express interacted with former Anna University professor of urban engineering KP Subramanian to find what the focus of the third master plan should be.
How important is a masterplan for a city?
A master plan (MP) is a comprehensive, long-term, statutory, action plan prepared for cities. It proposes a framework for future development. The MP is a borrowed concept from the United Kingdom. Most States in India, still adopt the MPs as the medium for planning, development, and enforcement of regulations though, the UK replaced the concept of MPs with that of the structure plan in 1968 itself. The Second Master Plan (SMP) is currently in force. The prime focus of the SMP is the manner in which the land in the Chennai Metropolitan Area is utilised as residential, commercial, industrial and so on. Further, it generically discusses sector-wise problems and prospects - demography, economy, transportation, housing, infrastructure, environment, and others, assesses the land required for the future and accordingly assigns uses for each and every parcel of land. Any development, thereafter, must be in accordance with the assigned use and other parameters stipulated in the Development Regulations of the SMP failing which such developments are liable for penal action such as locking, sealing and demolition. The SMP expires in 2026 and the CMDA has, in the meantime, initiated the process for the preparation of the TMP.
What should be the focus of the third master plan of Chennai in the context of climate change and Covid-19 pandemic?
Covid-19 and the climate change in Chennai have a few critical lessons on thoughtful city planning and the third master plan (TMP) needs to change its focus to enable the city to show resilience to the pandemic and climate change. A deteriorated environment, poor quality of life, lack of personal hygiene and developments in conflict with nature are prime causes for Covid and climate change. Rapid but unplanned urban development, over-growth and overcrowding, extremely squalid and filthy surroundings as a result of poverty, and neglect may be attributed to the outbreak of the Covid-19. Covid has triggered an unprecedented adverse impact on human lives. It has changed the way people live, work, travel, shop, recreate, interact, migrate, meet and mingle. Therefore, there is an obligation for the CMDA to re-examine the conventional vision and the perception for a resilient future.
Should there be a focus on managing population density?
The TMP may lay greater thrust on optimal residential density combined with mixed land uses, which reduces the carbon footprint, emission of Green House Gases, increases the energy efficiency and counters climate change. Additionally, it provides good accessibility for employment, education, health, shopping and other facilities, boosts productivity, reduces the need to travel, cuts down the land consumption by curbing urban sprawls and enhances the sense of community living. The gross density of the population of the city was 24,700 persons and it's anticipated to increase to 33,000 by 2026 as per the SMP. The impact of the density on the spread of the pandemic was of great concern to the epidemiologists because the worldwide trend of transmission rate initially was very high in larger and denser cities. This was evident from the situation in cities such as New York, Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru and Chennai in the beginning. However, subsequent studies have revealed that density per se is not an issue. But only the unplanned developments with awfully inadequate infrastructure and overcrowding in low-income families, crowded shopping areas, where Covid safety protocol go for a toss matter. Therefore, it's important to effectively manage density rather than containing it and revisit the planning standards for roads, minimum floor area in the housing for the poor and vehicular parking requirements in commercial complexes.
How do you think the third master plan can make the city inclusive for the poor?
About 50% of families in the CMA have a poor socio-economic background. They are engaged in informal economic activities and lead an inhuman way of life in dilapidated, overcrowded squatter settlements without basic amenities and they remain outside the purview of conventional MPs. The TMP may earmark areas for the economic enterprises and housing of the poor and the downtrodden so as to make the city inclusive and the housing affordable for migrants, hawkers, labourers, pavement dwellers and petty shopkeepers.
How to amalgamate climate change into a third master plan?
An indicator of climate change is the rise in mean temperature, which results in erratic rainfall, frequent flooding, cyclones and urban heat islands. Emission from industries, burning of fossil fuels for electricity, transportation, encroachment of natural habitats and water bodies, indiscriminate conversion of agriculture, forest and wetlands for developments, building on flood plains, drainage basins, catchment and inundation areas high dense and high rise-built environment and failure to co-exist with nature as a fall out of rapid but unplanned urban development are key factors contributing to the climate change. The TMP must identify vulnerable areas for flooding and allocate them to use as unbuilt open spaces, parks and playgrounds in the TMP. Such a step would combat climate change and the consequent flooding and also enhance the health infrastructure. The SMP has eleven land use classification, which escalates the travel demand by cars and two-wheelers, increases the trip lengths and trip rates resulting in congestion, pollution and accidents. Therefore, the TMP must consider the minimum number of land use classifications.
How to increase the share of public transport under the third master plan?
The share of public transport was 35% in 2004, as per the SMP. The SMP fixed an ambitious target to double it by 2026. However, the ground reality is disheartening. The share of public transportation declined to 31% and 26 % and walking mode fell from 28 to 25% between 2010 and 2019. The share of bicycles has fallen to a minuscule level of 3% in 2019 from 22% in 1970 and it’s in the process of extinction. Consequently, energy consumption and emissions have increased alarmingly. A lesson for the TMP, in the above context in respect of the transportation sector, is to aggressively increase the accessibility through public transportation interconnected with walking and cycling. This reduces the energy consumption and emissions and helps to combat climate change and helps to improve the immunity of the people. In the light of the above, the TMP needs to make a departure from the conventional approach. Otherwise, it will be business as usual.