Home > Geospatial Application Papers > Urban Planning > Overview
Overview | Urban Sprawl | Fringe Area Development | Urban Agglomeration | Emerging Technologies | Relevant Links



Challenges in Urban Planning for local bodies in India


The Master plan Approach – Concepts, Objectives and Functions
The master plan, which was perceived to be a process rather than a conclusive statement, provides guidelines for the physical development of the city and guides people in locating their investments in the city. In short, Master Plan is a design for the physical, social, economic and political frame work for the city, which greatly improve the quality of Urban Governance also.

The functions of the Master Plan / Development plan are as follows :
  1. To guide development of a city is an orderly manner so as to improve the quality of life of the people
  2. Organize and coordinate the complex relationships between urban land uses
  3. Chart a course for growth and change, be responsive to change and maintain its validity over time and space, and be subject to continual review
  4. Direct the physical development of the city in relation to its social and economic characteristics based on comprehensive surveys and studies on the present status and the future growth prospects; and
  5. Provide a resource mobilization plan for the proposed development works.
Critique of the Master Plan Approach
There is a widely held view that the Master Planning methods adopted over the last few decades have not produced a satisfactory physical environment. The urban development planning process in the past has been unduly long and has been largely confined to the dealing of land use aspects.

The major criticisms of the Master Plan approach adopted in the country are as follows :
  1. Plan Preparation Techniques: The Master plan details out the urbanized and urbanisable areas under its jurisdiction and suggests land use up to the neighborhood level. The tendency to over-plan the urban environment, with minute detailing, has resulted in lack of flexibility and has hindered individual self-expression.
  2. Plan perspective : The plan projects and ’end state’ scenario for 20-25 years and is not detailed enough for short and medium-terms actions.
  3. Static Plan : The plan is mostly static and not amendable to quick mid-course corrections.
  4. Delays : Inordinate delays in Master Plan preparation and approval and, in addition, difficulty in obtaining possession of land sought to be acquired for the purpose is one of the main handicaps in the speedy and successful implementation of the Master Plan.
  5. Growth of the City : The efficacy of the master Plan is adversely effected by the divergence between the precept and practices concerning the preparation of the Master Plan and its implementation.
  6. Ineffective Public Participation : The mechanism for public participation is ineffective in the process of development planning, in both its preparation and implementation. It is more top-down than a bottom-up approach.
  7. Weak information Base : Master Plan preparation is undertaken with a very weak information base especially on socio-economic parameters, housing and environment.
  8. Impractical Physical standards: The plans prescribe impractical densities and layout high standards in an effort to improve the quality of life in a city. These are generally higher than what the city population, particularly the poor, can afford.
  9. Lack of Financing Plan : Estimates of financial outlay do not match the development works envisaged in the Master Plan. The strategies for raising resources required for plan implementation are never an integral part of the plan.
  10. Spatial Planning vis-ŕ-vis Development Planning : Urban planning in India has been totally over-shadowed by its spatial content instead of realization of social and economic objectives. Town planning exercises have tended to concentrate on physical order and environmental quality of city, and have been isolated from the mainstream of development planning, decision-making and implementation strategies.
  11. Land Policy and Management: The absence of a machinery for systematic and continuous collection of data on the movement of land and tenement prices undermines the implementation of the master Plan.
  12. Private Sector Participation: Through a significant portion of the development is due to the initiative of the private sector, this factor is not recognized in the Plan.
  13. People’s Needs: The Master Plan does not incorporate the exact needs and priorities of the people. Instead of reflecting the aspirations of the community at large, the plan more or less reflects the values of the administrators and planners.
  14. Regulatory mechanism: The regulatory mechanisms in the Master Plan are to enable better management of the city. However, development control mechanisms are observed more in breach than in compliance.
  15. Plan Implementation: The root-cause of the urban maladies has been the divorcing of the plan preparation from plan implementation.
  16. Ineffective plan Monitoring : An Institutional and information system does not, generally, exist for plan monitoring. Since the budgetary system does not explicitly take into account the requirement of plan implementation, problem of resources are not periodically highlighted.
Page 3 of 5
| Previous | Next |