URBAN DESIGN PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS REBUILDING KERALA

The warmth and social cohesiveness witnessed during the floods has invigorated the hopes of Keralites when the phrase “Rebuilding Kerala” is professed.

The spirit of egalitarian social warmth shall have to be the bedrock of a Vision amidst the debate of “development vs ecology” that shall soon rage. We cannot take sides here. We need to device our own ways to conduct our lives within this ecological region called Kerala. And to get that going, we need to create a wide consultation process that needs to be first and foremost out-in-the-open, transparent and evolving.

Process creates the Form

So, before we try to define “Rebuilding Kerala”, we need to certainly unravel the process that is producing the Kerala that we still have, with its opportunity to rebuild. We have the privilege of hindsight to seek remedial changes in them, so that we move towards a more satiating Form for Kerala.

A revision is due, to alter the larger political agenda, the governance mechanism and the administrative priorities, and the Rules that govern us. We need to alter the Process that generates the Form!

Tinkering our Governance Mechanism for Land-use:

While it is true that we have Institutions of great merit like the Geological Survey of India (GSI), Centre for Earth Science Studies (CESS) etc; and that they have collated vast tranches of knowledge which have direct bearing on the conduct of lives in Kerala, we still are far away from making practical, functional, real-time application of such available wisdom on the ground. So, areas clearly demarcated as unfit for construction ought not to get a legal building permit. The method that needs to be employed should not be draconian or solely restrictive in a nature. If that is so, the force of demand will learn to subvert the system that denies it.

It is the Local Self Government (LSG) that has the power to prepare the local development plan. It is true that Plans thus prepared and approved by the LSG has the power to over-ride all the other existing building/ development controls/ rules that shape our built form. Then, why does our LSG create plans that permits or does not deny construction in a zone not recommended for such activity?

The history of such places is that there never was any law that abjectly denied permission for construction anywhere. However, neither was there any pressure on land as to attempt to build on such known fragile lands. As development pressures mounted and need to capitalise on the land value of such fragile land also grew, no elected local government had the nerve to announce a restrictive law. As an energetic democracy, let us not assume that any such restrictive law would be passed too soon either; especially so, when the people of the State are emotionally and economically stressed.

There has to be a win-win solution where the person owning the fragile land does not lose out on the opportunity to enjoy its development potential even while he does nothing to alter the nature of the land.

There are two broad case scenarios here; Listing activities that are permissible within the fragile area and complete denial of construction activity. (No Development Zone, NDZ)

If the only land your family owns is in the “non-buildable” ecologically sensitive area by definition, then what is your recourse? If the system cannot effectively compensate you, the State cannot protect its ecology. Then, we are back to square one!

Post rehab stage, the government would need to identify land parcels for re-densification. That is, to allow more housing stock to come up within existing settlements. This is an idea that is very difficult to implement with the available legal tools at the disposal of the government. However, such objective of increasing density within existing urban fabric can be achieved using Acts that already exist in India in some States. This is where Urban Design comes in.

In our urban physical planning; and more precisely, in the administrative service delivery of urban planning by the government, there exists today, a large void- a missing link. Between the very large maps showings broad land-use plans at the city level (Master Plans) and the architectural/ building controls stated within the Kerala Municipal/Panchayat Building Rules (KMBR), we need a bridge that connects these two ideas. That is the role of Urban Design.

This role & task of Urban Design, that would connect the smallest parts of the urban fabric (that is, individual buildings) to the larger networks of public spaces, transportation, urban ecology, services like water supply- sewerage systems- storm water management, pedestrian safety etc, is ill-defined and effectively missing in our cities today.

A small portion of this attempted by the Town Planning Department in the form of Detailed Town Planning Schemes (DTP schemes). However, all Town Planners are aware of how much more valuable a detailed urban Design proposal can be; with its inherent capability for translating built densities into a cohesive and functional urban form that integrates open space network, architectural components and services. Urban Design brings in legibility, character and liveability to the intent of the large Master Plans. Master Plans remain unfulfilled now, due to lack of Urban Design.

THE NEED TO RE-DENSIFY

The availability of well-serviced land has been seriously inadequate due to our poor history of urban planning. The demand for quality usable land is set to spiral in Kerala even without the newly induced pressure from the flood-plain management and the recommendations from noted environmentalists. Hence, further densification of our settlement in a more organised, planned and sensitive manner is an urgent prerogative. Densification should not be needlessly equated with more concrete and squalor. It is potentially a pro-life idea where more accessible green areas are liberated and quality urban life is provided more equitably. Lower energy footprints can be achieved through thoughtful re-densification. 

The degree of re-densification needed in various parts of the State has to be quantified from a deeper study and has to be done in a comprehensive manner accommodating inputs from institutions like GSI, CESS, Social Scientists, Ecologists, Real Estate Industry, Town Planning Department, Urban Designers, Architects, Economists, Agricultural Scientists, elected representatives, and all other stakeholders.

However, the tools needed for the re-densification process to occur needs to be put in place. Many governance tools for re-densification of settlements are in use in various parts of the country and the world. The role of such tools or governance mechanism is to create an administrative environment where the energies in the market operate freely to achieve the built density pattern envisaged by the Detailed Town Planning or Urban Design Scheme (DTS or UDS) over a period of time incrementally.

Tool 1: LAND POOLING ACT:

The current built form of an urban settlement is driven by the Kerala Municipal Building Rules (KMBR) using tools like Floor Area Ratio (FAR), Coverage, setbacks etc which are linked to the assigned permitted land-use on the site. That is, the form or density of built-form is created based on the existing ownership pattern of the land, access width to the land and the permissible land-use. Hence, the built-form or density is not related in any manner to its geographic location.

In other words, no Town Planner is ever aware beforehand, as to where in the city the next high-rise apartment is going to be proposed unless and until an application seeking permission for it lands up on his table. This is a very major lacunae in that, the Town Planner is unable to predict or pre-decide the specific location of high- or low-density development within the Town Planning Scheme and hence is not a position to provide adequate water supply, sewerage or transportation system. This is the single biggest failure of the Town Planning system that we have now.

Another extremely cruel failure that happens as a corollary to the above is the inability of such Town Planning mechanism to create parks or open spaces for the settlement.

This Act is needed to redesign the scenario. The other name for this Act is Land Reconstitution Act. What it does is to first collate information on current ownership pattern as the base record, and then, the land holdings are reworked into a more efficient layout plan with better serviceability/ utility of plots. Plots are assigned specific development densities through a stated maximum permissible built-up area statement. Some have high density while others are medium and a few are earmarked as open spaces as per the Urban Design Scheme.

Ownership patterns are altered marginally mostly and drastically in some cases. A system of reassigning real estate/ values based on the new opportunity is done and the same are redistributed as gains and losses. Such schemes are designed to achieve greater overall density even as they liberate meaningful network of open spaces.

The role of digital technology in the creation, publication, review and execution of this process is tremendous in its capacity for efficiency as well as transparency.

The question of how the person whose land is marked out as no-development zone either for being ecologically fragile like a wet land or as a flood plain or due to CRZ or for a children’s park, can be compensated, still remains and that is where the next tool is relevant and inevitable to the success of the first.

Tool 2: TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR)

This idea has been mooted for some time now. The true purpose of this Act is to compensate a land owner WITHOUT actually acquiring the land from the owner at market rates. Land Pooling Schemes are done within specific Scheme boundaries. TDR shall also be complete binding within their respective Land Pooling Schemes, otherwise, it shall lead to large scale corruption and fraud.

Tool 3: LAND TRIBUNAL

Needless to say, there are bound to be perceived and genuine injustices meted out by such schemes. It is thus mandated that we also constitute a grievance redressal system in the form a Land Tribunal to specifically handle issues that pertain to the implementation of the Act. This would ensure speedier redressal without which the pace and energy of the intended Scheme itself could be jeopardised.

Role of IT:

Digital Revenue data, overlays of GIS maps, 3D modelling on GIS, using such models in real time with TDR database, managing the financial modelling of LP schemes & its TDR support eco-system, locating real-time data sensors for managing services like water supply, storm water management, traffic flow, firefighting, etc are components that can actually reduce administrative costs and turn our governance and the city, more citizen-friendly. Money is already being spent on such digital infrastructure in bits and unconnected parcels, but as and when they attain critical mass, we have the opportunity for carefully integrating them for our collective good.

Kerala is poised at the threshold of a major relook at its self-image; hope has risen in our people for an attitudinal change in resetting our development agenda. The World Bank in their recommendations suggests, “Land use planning allows communities to guide the location, type, density, and timing of development through regulations, public infrastructure investments, market incentives, and conservation of natural resources such that development is safe from flood disaster and in harmony with a sustainable urban water cycle.”

Evolving a new vision for an Urban Settlement Pattern with a carefully choreographed urban re-densification is indeed a positive tool to address our environmental concerns.