Hyderabad Master Plan – Whither Telangana?

Introduction:

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) has come out with draft metropolitan development plan (commonly called as master plan) for the extended areas of Hyderabad urban agglomeration and has invited public feedback on the same before finalising it. At the end of feedback period the government will look into the merits/demerits of the suggestions received and will finalise the Plan for final notification. This plan will become binding after final approval and will remain in force until the year 2031. The plan covers an area of roughly 5900 km². To give a better perspective, the area in size almost equals the area occupied by the countries of Palestine or Brunei and is approximately half the size of Qatar. The planning area includes 35 mandals and 850 villages spread across 4 districts. The inner boundary of Outer Ring Road Growth Corridor (ORRGC) towards the core of city is taken as inner boundary of the plan radiating outside. Some parts of this plan already have an approved master plan falling within the limits of erstwhile Hyderabad Airport development Authority (HADA), Cyberabad Development Authority (CDA) and Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA). These planning authorities have been abolished and HMDA has been created as an all encompassing planning authority for Hyderabad city and its surrounding areas.

Hyderabad city is no stranger to planning. The city itself was designed on the model of an Iranian city – Isfahan by Mir Momin during the reign of Muhammad Quli the founder Sultan of Hyderabad. The city progressed over years by careful planning. During the reconstruction phase of city ravaged by floods of 1908, a City Improvement Board (CIB) was established on the recommendations of Sir.M.Vishvesharaiah. The CIB was responsible for planning and execution of the infrastructure required for the plans. Its counterpart in Secunderabad was Town Improvement Trust (TIT), After independence and amalgamation of the princely state of Hyderabad into India, the planning was taken over by municipal corporation. As the city grew bigger and unwieldy, need for better planning was acutely felt in some quarters of the government and A.P. Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975 was enacted to create Urban Development Authorities with a mandate of planning for cities and their peripheral areas. HUDA was established in the same year. The Authority prepared its 1^st master plan, which was finally approved in 1980. Attempts to revise this plan began as early as in 1998 and continued till 2001. In 2003 that draft plan was put up for public consultation. It was shelved indefinitely after some time for no apparent reason. Finally in the year 2007 draft plan of 2003 with some modifications was introduced and approved after few efforts at public consultation. Other master plans were approved subsequently – HADA, CDA etc. Master plan for the core city was approved in 2010. In the year 2008 HUDA was disbanded and HMDA was formed. Apparently the need for this was a recognition of the fact that the city and its range of influence are far wider compared to the initial days of planning and hence the move to plan for larger areas.

The problem with Hyderabad and it's planning is not new. Like many Indian cities in transition from sleepy towns to well connected global and local investment centres, Hyderabad had to deal with haphazard growth and ad hoc decisions thrust upon it by various foci of pressure. These pressures included political, bureaucratic, rural to urban migration, poor regulatory mechanisms and weak enforcement. Proof of it is in the fact that hundreds of Government Orders (G.O.) have been issued after final notification of these plans including conversion of land from uses like conservation or water body to residential or commercial in spite of objections being raised from various activist groups working on issues of environment, urban planning, housing and so on.

HMDA/HUDA have been appealed to quite extensively during the last 2 master plan preparations - in 2007 for HUDA area and in 2010 for MCH area. The appeals were primarily focussed on lack of transparency during the preparation of plan, poor data on existing and porposed plans etc. HMDA is back to its old ways as the proposed plan goes against many norms of planning, violates the law of the land, violates the spirit of the Constitution of India and undermines future of the region.

Gaps in the Current Plan/Process of consultation:

1) The current plan put up for public consultation is a poorly prepared document and is of little value to a person trying to understand the plan in its totality. It extends across 35 mandals in 4 districts. The draft plan is given in English and cannot be understood by majority population living in approximately 850 villages. The maps being displayed by HMDA only in its offices are in English and cannot be understood easily by rural folk. Documents in Telugu were made available only after local elected representatives and civil society groups exerted pressure.

2) Maps available for sale via CDs in HMDA sales counters do not have essential details like survey number etc. which makes it very difficult for people to formulate opinion about the plan – good or bad.

3) Maps have been put up for display only in 5 (five) places making it difficult for people to access them.

4) Consultations have not been organized without which various stakeholders cannot understand the intricacies of provisions in the plan. Without a proper understanding, concerned stakeholders are at a disadvantaged position to give any kind of feedback.

5) The proposed plan should have included the existing land use map as per provisions of AP Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975. This provision has not been followed making the process an illegal one.

6) Section 11.1 of Hyderabad Metropolitan development Authority Act 2008, specifies that the authority shall within 2 years prepare the Metropolitan development plan and a metropolitan investment plan. In the current situation HMDA has prepared only a development plan without any investment plan. This is clearly a case of counting chickens before they hatch and ultravires of the act from which their authority originates.

7) The proposed regional ring road seems to be a very ambitious plan. Outer ring road much closer to the city has not yet been completed, neither have the proposed developments along it happened. If this is the case right now, we suspect the regional ring road will have very little utility value within the time frame proposed. We have also seen in the ORR case that the final alignment was changed many times which affected a lot of people adversely. The current regional ring road plan also might be changed in future leading to large scale corruption as witnessed in the case of Outer Ring Road (ORR).

8) The current plan has mentioned about planning for future needs in terms of basic amenities like drinking water, sanitation, education, electricity and health infrastructure, transportation etc. It is however not clear as to what the sources are or where the infrastructure would come up. Because there is no investment plan, it is not at all clear as to how the proposed infrastructure would be financed and in what stages.

9) No mention of standards or procedure adopted to calculate various land use requirements.

10) Many missing gaps in data on the maps —Zilla Parishat Roads not marked and not shown in the plan —Many places with institutional areas not marked all in the map.

11) Zoning regulations are quite surprising – while the name used is conservation zone one of the activities permitted is – mining!!

Constitutional Spirit of de-centralization ignored:

The Constitution of India recognized the need for decentralization of governance to enable greater participation of people in governance and thus strengthen democracy. Decentralization was formalized by 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments. HMDA encompasses both urban and rural areas covered under these 2 amendments. Article 243 ZE of Indian Constitution mandates that there shall be a Metropolitan planning committee in every metropolitan area. This committee is mandated to look into planning issues and coordinate between municipalities and panchayats on matters of planning and sharing of resources. The government of A.P. has committed to establishing the Metropolitan planning committee for Hyderabad by way of an MOU with union government for accessing funds under JNNURM program. It has shirked this responsibility after garnering funds from the union government. HMDA and its establishment are in direct violation of spirit of the Constitution as HMDA leads to more centralization of planning and governance. Recent inquiries with elected representatives of Panchayats and municipalities in the plan area have revealed that they have not been consulted during the preparation of the draft plan. HMDA till date has not organized any consultation programs with them. This goes on to show the brazenness with which decisions are being forced down the throat of smaller administrative entities. It is nothing but abuse of discretionary powers vested with the state government.

Hyderabad v/s Telangana

What this plan would mean to the future of the region is an interesting question. The plan proposes 13 urban nodes in the periphery of Hyderabad city which are to act as counter magnets to reduce the pressure being imposed on Hyderabad city and might reduce influx of people into the city. To support this idea, a lot of land has been allocated for residential and commercial usage in those 13 nodes. This might lead to a situation where people instead of coming to Hyderabad from various districts would settle down in these nodes, automatically reducing load on the core city. Quality of civic services and quality of life can improve in the areas leading to improved standards of life.

On the surface, this plan looks very rational and seems to be following good principles of planning. The flipside of this plan is the fact that many of these counter magnets will also become counter magnets for their respective district headquarter towns. This would then lead to a situation where these towns, which are within 100 to 150 km radius of Hyderabad, will continue to stagnate in terms of growth and industrialization leading to a further lopsided growth in the region of Telangana. Subsequently, this lopsided growth would further heighten the feeling of inequity and injustice currently widely prevalent in the region.

The population figures from 2011 census probably can be used as an indicator to this phenomenon already at work. Out of 10 districts in Telangana only 3 districts recorded higher population growth rate than that of the state (Ranga Reddy, Medak and Mahboobnagar) growth rate for the period between 2001-2011 while for the period between 1991 and 2001 7 districts in Telangana recorded higher population growth rate than that of the state (Ranga Reddy, Medak and Mahboobnagar) growth rate. The period between 2001 and 2011 also coincides with large-scale reforms/projects/plans facilitating higher growth in Hyderabad. These reforms and projects were centered around Hyderabad – it’s governance and land resources.

Many alternatives exist to this problem. One, which comes immediately to mind and looks more practical is the model advocated by a citizens group called “Citizens for better public transport in Hyderabad”. This group had put forward an idea in which the district centers of Nizamabad, Karimnagar, Medak, Mahboobnagar, Nalgonda and Warangal in the region can all be connected to Hyderabad by high-speed rail network by which the travel time between these district headquarters and Hyderabad is brought down to one to one and half hours making it convenient for people to work in Hyderabad and continue to live in their district headquarters. This idea if implemented properly can lead to a shift in attention from Hyderabad, and lead to more investments, public and private in these towns thus creating local growth engines which can lead to overall development of the surrounding areas too.

The above model it probably the best one to address the vexatious issue of primate city (Hyderabad) devouring resources and opportunities of surrounding areas leading to their impoverishment. The current situation in which a huge people's movement is going on demanding for a separate state of Telangana is the result of the lopsided growth model focusing major developments and investments in and around Hyderabad city which led to drastic decline in employment generation and investments in the hinterland districts. People of the region perceive this model as one being driven by interests of landholders of surrounding areas of Hyderabad who are predominantly from coastal Andhra Pradesh and Rayalseema. The current master plan will further accentuate this feeling if pursued without any modifications.

The plan predicts a population of 1.84 crores by the year 2031. This would mean that the city of Hyderabad and its surroundings will impose a higher demand on the surrounding districts for resources like water, electricity, land for dumping of garbage etc. Situation already exists, where farmers downstream of reservoirs supplying water to Hyderabad are already protesting water allocation to Hyderabad city. The current plan will require more and more transfer of water from distant places by diverting irrigation water. This water can come only by reduction of irrigation water allotment in Telangana region.

Villages and towns downstream of Hyderabad have been suffering the ill effects of untreated sewage water entering and contaminating their water sources. Increased water supply to Hyderabad would only result in further aggravation of the problem, as the current plan does not have any clear ideas on how to tackle the untreated sewage problem. The current plan also ignores the highly problematic part of managing solid waste of the city. If the current situation were any indication, it would mean that all the garbage of Hyderabad would be dumped onto one or more helpless villages in the surrounding area. The city does not even attempt segregation of waste to reduce the amount of garbage that needs to be transported outside and safely disposed in a landfill. The city, which cannot behave responsibly, loses any claim it has to dispose its problem onto others.

Conclusion:

The current draft development plan would irreversibly alter the growth/development contours of Telangana region if pushed without a rethink. It should be shelved immediately and HMDA should initiate an exercise to identify ways and means of integrating growth of city with that of the region so that a win-win situation can be arrived at. The philosophy of creating monolithic mega-cities is outdated and Hyderabad already reeling under the effects of rapid growth should not be pushed down this road of no return. The road leads only to implosion.

Many gaps existing in the data and plan needs to be addressed and the plan is to be revised significantly to make it a sustainable and equitable one.