With reference to today's news reports, Ihave sent the
following to DDA Vice Chairman:
Dear Sir,
According to news reports today, as Master Plan
'guidelines' recognise that infrastructure shortages
persist despite investments civic bodies have been
urged to prepare 'perspective plans' for projected
population of 23 million for Delhi Master Plan (DMP)
2021 to "quantify the level of services that would be
required" and "the manner and the time frame within
which these would be provided".
One report has DDA officials saying this is the first
time a separate chapter on infrastructure will
identify sources of infrastructure. For the record,
DMP has a separate chapter on infrastructure since
1962. In DMP-2001 this chapter, with sources of
infrastructure spelt out in tables, is on pp 29-32.
Also, for DMP-1962 and DMP-2001 carrying-capacity
based population decisions were reached by iterative
assessments of possibilities of infrastructure
augmentation and demand optimization via land use
decisions.
What is happening for "first time" is that
infrastructure is being seen as purely supply-side
response to "guidelines" that simplistically accept an
unsustainable population projection.
The proposed ?perspective plans?, like ?guidelines?
they respond to, seem to lack basis in due process of
law for Plan revision. As you are aware, this due
process (consistent with the classical
survey-analyse-plan-implement-monitor basis of
planning) requires planning data from surveys and
mandatory monitoring (for accountability on
implementation), consideration of this data by
sectoral experts (including from civic bodies and
civil society), and synthesis of sectoral inputs into
overall draft for public comment and government
approval. The overall Plan sets post-synthesis targets
for all sectors and mechanisms for their orchestrated
implementation and monitoring.
MPD-2001 infrastructure augmentation targets for
1981-2001 are at pp.88-89 in Monitoring framework and
include, for instance, capacity augmentation for water
by 771 mgd (from 253 to 1024 mgd), for sewage by 782
mgd (from 118 to 900 mgd), for power by 3300 mw (to
4000 mw), etc. Besides targets for new development
(limited by infrastructure targets, ie, carrying
capacity), targets for infrastructure in existing
settlements ? walled city, urban villages, regularised
colonies and resettlement colonies ? are specifically
set out. The infrastructure chapter requires civic
bodies to prepare plans for water, sewerage, power and
drainage "to a reasonable level of details for
implementation ?up to 2001". DMP-2001 also empowers
civic bodies to coordinate through their
representation on high-level committee for policy
guidelines for sanctioning schemes, etc
Now, the "perspective plans" that civic agencies have
been urged to prepare cannot be ones for pre-synthesis
assessments to "quantify the level of services", as
the sub-group on Infrastructure set up for DMP-2021
(besides the World Bank study for 2021 that GoNCTD and
MoE were party to) has already done that exercise. Nor
can they be post-synthesis detailed plans for "the
manner and the time frame" for provision according to
Plan since synthesis of sectoral inputs into overall
Plan has yet to happen.
The point, however, is not what these 'perspective
plans' are. Since the report of the infrastructure
sub-group, on which civic bodies were represented,
provides 2001 capacity figures ? 580 mgd water, 280
mgd sewage, 5543 tpd solid waste, 2162 mw power ? that
clearly show DMP-2001 targets were not met, the point
is what these 'perspective plans' are worth if they
sweep implementation failures on DMP-2001 targets
under the carpet by pretending they are some
news-worthy first-time exercise.
Besides this key issue of accountability, a major
issue on infrastructure relates to Delhi?s changed
legal regime in respect of ground water, metro and
power. Agencies urged to draw up plans to be annexed
to DMP-2021, however, reportedly do not include CGWA,
DMRC and DERC, though issues meriting resolution in
their regard in DMP-2021 have been brought to your
attention time and again.
I think, with city problems becoming intractable,
DMP-2021 is going to be Delhi?s make-or-break Plan and
rigour in Plan revision, guaranteed by law, is an
entitlement whose infringement is unaffordable.
I request you, in view of the above, to make public
the assessment of implementation experiences of
MPD-2001 infrastructure targets and of imperatives
arising from systemic externality changes before
select civic bodies make any stand-alone 'perspective
plans'.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma / Planner
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
following to DDA Vice Chairman:
Dear Sir,
According to news reports today, as Master Plan
'guidelines' recognise that infrastructure shortages
persist despite investments civic bodies have been
urged to prepare 'perspective plans' for projected
population of 23 million for Delhi Master Plan (DMP)
2021 to "quantify the level of services that would be
required" and "the manner and the time frame within
which these would be provided".
One report has DDA officials saying this is the first
time a separate chapter on infrastructure will
identify sources of infrastructure. For the record,
DMP has a separate chapter on infrastructure since
1962. In DMP-2001 this chapter, with sources of
infrastructure spelt out in tables, is on pp 29-32.
Also, for DMP-1962 and DMP-2001 carrying-capacity
based population decisions were reached by iterative
assessments of possibilities of infrastructure
augmentation and demand optimization via land use
decisions.
What is happening for "first time" is that
infrastructure is being seen as purely supply-side
response to "guidelines" that simplistically accept an
unsustainable population projection.
The proposed ?perspective plans?, like ?guidelines?
they respond to, seem to lack basis in due process of
law for Plan revision. As you are aware, this due
process (consistent with the classical
survey-analyse-plan-implement-monitor basis of
planning) requires planning data from surveys and
mandatory monitoring (for accountability on
implementation), consideration of this data by
sectoral experts (including from civic bodies and
civil society), and synthesis of sectoral inputs into
overall draft for public comment and government
approval. The overall Plan sets post-synthesis targets
for all sectors and mechanisms for their orchestrated
implementation and monitoring.
MPD-2001 infrastructure augmentation targets for
1981-2001 are at pp.88-89 in Monitoring framework and
include, for instance, capacity augmentation for water
by 771 mgd (from 253 to 1024 mgd), for sewage by 782
mgd (from 118 to 900 mgd), for power by 3300 mw (to
4000 mw), etc. Besides targets for new development
(limited by infrastructure targets, ie, carrying
capacity), targets for infrastructure in existing
settlements ? walled city, urban villages, regularised
colonies and resettlement colonies ? are specifically
set out. The infrastructure chapter requires civic
bodies to prepare plans for water, sewerage, power and
drainage "to a reasonable level of details for
implementation ?up to 2001". DMP-2001 also empowers
civic bodies to coordinate through their
representation on high-level committee for policy
guidelines for sanctioning schemes, etc
Now, the "perspective plans" that civic agencies have
been urged to prepare cannot be ones for pre-synthesis
assessments to "quantify the level of services", as
the sub-group on Infrastructure set up for DMP-2021
(besides the World Bank study for 2021 that GoNCTD and
MoE were party to) has already done that exercise. Nor
can they be post-synthesis detailed plans for "the
manner and the time frame" for provision according to
Plan since synthesis of sectoral inputs into overall
Plan has yet to happen.
The point, however, is not what these 'perspective
plans' are. Since the report of the infrastructure
sub-group, on which civic bodies were represented,
provides 2001 capacity figures ? 580 mgd water, 280
mgd sewage, 5543 tpd solid waste, 2162 mw power ? that
clearly show DMP-2001 targets were not met, the point
is what these 'perspective plans' are worth if they
sweep implementation failures on DMP-2001 targets
under the carpet by pretending they are some
news-worthy first-time exercise.
Besides this key issue of accountability, a major
issue on infrastructure relates to Delhi?s changed
legal regime in respect of ground water, metro and
power. Agencies urged to draw up plans to be annexed
to DMP-2021, however, reportedly do not include CGWA,
DMRC and DERC, though issues meriting resolution in
their regard in DMP-2021 have been brought to your
attention time and again.
I think, with city problems becoming intractable,
DMP-2021 is going to be Delhi?s make-or-break Plan and
rigour in Plan revision, guaranteed by law, is an
entitlement whose infringement is unaffordable.
I request you, in view of the above, to make public
the assessment of implementation experiences of
MPD-2001 infrastructure targets and of imperatives
arising from systemic externality changes before
select civic bodies make any stand-alone 'perspective
plans'.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma / Planner
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com