NCR Planning Board dilutes environmental safeguards to promote towns, industries
Plan that isnÃ”Ã‡Ã–t
On November 28, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the National Capital Region Planning Board (NCRPB) acting on a public interest petition. The petition accused the board of allowing unsustainable and haphazard development in the region by violating the Regional Plan 2021. The court has also sought replies from the Union Urban Development Ministry and the governments of Delhi and adjoining states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan.
While the case will be heard in January, environmentalists and town planners point out that NCRPB is quietly making changes in the Regional Plan 2021 to regularise the violations. During a mid-course revision of the plan, it diluted several environmental safeguards, which would allow urbanisation and industrialisation of eco-sensitive areas. If implemented, analysts say, the revised plan would sound the death knell for the region’s ecosystem, already on the brink.
Small wonder that since July when NCRPB put the revised draft of the Regional Plan 2021 on its website for public comments, it has attracted more than 400 objections from the general public, environmentalists, city planners and those who were part of the consultative process to revise the plan.
An analysis of the objections shows that NCRPB has omitted an entire paragraph—17.4.1—on creating green cover from the earlier plan. The section recommended creating green belts of the width of a revenue village wherever possible along the National Capital Territory, green buffer along the highways and railway lines, and marking eco-sensitive zones along the Yamuna.
While revising, planners at NCRPB have also removed the word “forest” from the section on land use and replaced it with “green cover”.
By doing so, NCRPB does not need to seek permission under the Forest Conservation Act for diverting forestland for non-forest purposes, and it can change the land use at will in future, says Chetan Agarwal, a Gurgaon-based environmentalist who was part of the consultative process for revision of the plan.
NCRPB is already changing the land use at will, especially from green areas to commercial and residential areas, according to Pradeep Kharbanda, a town planner from School of Planning and Architecture in Delhi. He has filed 14 objections against the revised draft. “This is against the NCRPB Act. But NCRPB is doing so to facilitate greedy builders,” Kharbanda alleges.
NCRPB’s own data shows between 1999 and 2012, built-up areas and landfills across NCR have increased by 34.6 per cent and that under stone quarrying and crushing by 160 per cent. This is when the extent of forests and green cover and that of water bodies have reduced by 22.5 and 5.9 per cent respectively (see ‘Change in land use...’).
To facilitate infrastructure developers, NCRPB has also omitted a crucial guideline that restricts construction in the Natural Conservation Zone (NCZ)—eco-sensitive areas such as forests, biodiversity hotspots and cultural heritage sites. It allowed 0.5 floor-area-ratio (FAR is the ratio of building’s total floor area to the size of the plot) in NCZ.
The restriction was introduced in the original plan after satellite images showed rampant construction activities in eco-fragile areas such as the Yamuna riverbed, wetlands, the Aravalli mountain range, ridge areas and forests.
Agarwal says the removal of 0.5 FAR cap will jeopardise NCZ. Any further construction will mean high population density. And this will mean more roads, boundary walls, tube wells, electric poles and more diesel gensets that cause noise and air pollution. This will irrevocably fragment the eco-sensitive area and disturb the wildlife habitats and corridors. This will also violate the National Forest Policy of 1988 that calls for keeping one-third of the country under forests, Agarwal says. Only 6.2 per cent of NCR is under forest cover against the national average of 22 per cent. Agarwal points out another loophole in the plan: NCRPB is yet to demarcate NCZs.
Sarvdaman Oberoi of the non-profit, Mission Gurgaon Development, points out omission of another sentence that restricts change in land use. Master plans for towns in NCR should incorporate an analysis of land suitable for settlement, agriculture, forestry and industry. The earlier plan stated further growth should be channelised in areas, suitable for settlement growth. But the revised draft says land suitability analysis is required only for new master plans. This will exclude existing master plans and expansion of towns that form the bulk of the development activity in NCR, Oberoi says.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.