Imagining Delhi exhibition has moved to laxmi nagar today.
On 3 May, I attended the evening discussion on public participation chaired
by EFN Rebeiro (scheduled to be chaired by PK Pradhan) with KT Ravindran, n
Sridharan and Dunu Roy as speakers. KT Ravindran with two slides, one
showing hawkers at Barapulla told us how master plan is not for the urban
poor and participation is only through 'public objections' and that no
hearing is conducted and final participation is through the elected
representatives in the Parliament and then he suggested how MPC can solve
some of these problems and wondered whether NCRPB can come within the
framework of the MPC. and that DDA Act requires structural change without at
any point of time providing any evidence as to the experince of public
notice process. KT Ravindran, incidently was part of the sub group for draft
MPD 2021. N Sridharan provided a survey of RWAs in DElhi and Dunu Roy wanted
us to imagine ,since he did not have power point presentation, invisible
planning in various slums, unauthorised colonies etc.
Responses from the audience were the most interesting, RWA representative
from Munirka strongly told KT that he disagreed with whatever he said and, I
think he was the one who also told Dunu Roy that for long with talks like
these he and likes of him are sentencing Delhi to death. President of the
RWA from Vasant VIhar told that LAP has not worked and whether we can have
excellence rather than mediocrity and no white haired professionals please!
He also emntioned that technical jargon being used without actually
clarifying legal definition of mixed land use is confusing everybody. Ashok
Kumar from the SPA pointed out that pinning hopes on MPC for increased
public participation is contentious since MPC is only indirectly elected. He
also mentioned that we had come here to hear about how to enhance public
participation rather than hear the panelists raise more questions and that
Dunu Roy's arguement made no sense. IIA president talked of changes
required in the DDA Act because byelaws were part of the Act! question about
the process of panel selection was raised especially who all were part of
the subgroups, had objectioed to the public notice of MPD 2021 or tried to
subvert statutory participation process through protests and use of
political influence thereby grabbing all spaces so that no genuine
participation can happen and thus creating their own discourse through such
exclusionary processes.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/334 - Release Date: 5/8/06
On 3 May, I attended the evening discussion on public participation chaired
by EFN Rebeiro (scheduled to be chaired by PK Pradhan) with KT Ravindran, n
Sridharan and Dunu Roy as speakers. KT Ravindran with two slides, one
showing hawkers at Barapulla told us how master plan is not for the urban
poor and participation is only through 'public objections' and that no
hearing is conducted and final participation is through the elected
representatives in the Parliament and then he suggested how MPC can solve
some of these problems and wondered whether NCRPB can come within the
framework of the MPC. and that DDA Act requires structural change without at
any point of time providing any evidence as to the experince of public
notice process. KT Ravindran, incidently was part of the sub group for draft
MPD 2021. N Sridharan provided a survey of RWAs in DElhi and Dunu Roy wanted
us to imagine ,since he did not have power point presentation, invisible
planning in various slums, unauthorised colonies etc.
Responses from the audience were the most interesting, RWA representative
from Munirka strongly told KT that he disagreed with whatever he said and, I
think he was the one who also told Dunu Roy that for long with talks like
these he and likes of him are sentencing Delhi to death. President of the
RWA from Vasant VIhar told that LAP has not worked and whether we can have
excellence rather than mediocrity and no white haired professionals please!
He also emntioned that technical jargon being used without actually
clarifying legal definition of mixed land use is confusing everybody. Ashok
Kumar from the SPA pointed out that pinning hopes on MPC for increased
public participation is contentious since MPC is only indirectly elected. He
also mentioned that we had come here to hear about how to enhance public
participation rather than hear the panelists raise more questions and that
Dunu Roy's arguement made no sense. IIA president talked of changes
required in the DDA Act because byelaws were part of the Act! question about
the process of panel selection was raised especially who all were part of
the subgroups, had objectioed to the public notice of MPD 2021 or tried to
subvert statutory participation process through protests and use of
political influence thereby grabbing all spaces so that no genuine
participation can happen and thus creating their own discourse through such
exclusionary processes.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/334 - Release Date: 5/8/06