Chandrababu's AP capital thru Land Pooling mission impossible

1. The new Andhra Pradesh State Government’s decision and strategy to assemble lands for the New Capital Area through ‘land pooling ‘ would prove to be an albatross around it’s neck. The first mistake that it had made was to locate the New Capital in and around Vijayawada, knowing fully well the limitations of assembling lands for development in the region. As the Americans say’ it’s the land you stupid! And they ain’t manufacturing it anymore! Like Mohd. Bin Tughlak, who wanted to shift the capital from Delhi to Daultabad in interior Maharashtra, but forgot the logistics, the AP State Government is repeating history. The prerequisite for the new capital is land, land ,land and nothing else. All other aspects can be factored in, in case of Andhra Pradesh except land!

And how much land does one need for a Capital ? 100,000 acres of developed land according to the state’s Urban development Minister. For a moment, let us take this as given. To assemble 100,000 acres, how much gross and would be required because of ‘land pooling technique ? Nearly, 3.3 lakh acres! This would mean, taking contiguous lands in about 165 Revenue Villages around Vijayawada, Guntur and Tenali. Translated into distance this would mean about 40 km radius or an area of 5000 sq km. In other words, covering the whole of VGTM UDA Area and much beyond!

2. OK, we have zeroed down on the location and area. The next thing how to go about the ‘land pooling’. ‘Land Pooling’ has become the new mantra for success! These days there are a number of discussions and articles on Land Pooling. Right from the Government (in Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department) to HMDA, everybody has been talking about Land Pooling, but not a single land Pooling has been successfully been undertaken. Government have constituted a Committee for evolving a policy for ‘New Capital development through Land pooling’. HMDA had last year, initiated Land Pooling by calling for Expression of interest from developers for developing the Outer Ring Road Growth Corridor. The new AP Government has held a number of Meetings and also sent officers to Gujarat and Chattisgarh to study similar practices. However, Land Pooling technique is no stranger to Andhra Pradesh. Decades ago, i.e, till the early 1960s, Visakhapatnam Town Planning Trust undertook such developments. So is the case with Guntur, Kakinada, Prodattur, etc. Currently in recent times, Visakhapatnam UDA had undertaken a Land Pooling at Pardesipalem called ‘Ozone valley’ over an extent of 100 acres, in which the land owners who voluntary came forward and parted their lands were given back developed plots at the rate of 1800 sq yards for every one acre, i.e, which is about 37 % of their original holding, while the rest went into the common pool comprising of roads, open spaces amenities and developed lands to VUDA which was to be auctioned. However, it has been reported that there has been a lot of irregularities in the allotments as well as in the use of the VUDA plots and Amenities plots, leading to scams, Vigilance Enquires, etc.

3. Similarly, Vijayawada Municipal Corporation in 2009 had undertaken a similar Land Pooling exercise in Jakkampudi and Gollapudi villages over an extent of about 1000 acres, with a similar percentage of 37% of developed plots given back to owners while the rest of land to be used as roads, open spaces and public use for building houses for weaker sections under the JnNURM. However, it is reported that till date, the owners have not been handed over possessions of developed plots due to numerous reasons basically related to land problems, leading to a mistrust-like situation.

4. Similarly, a third example is that of HMDA’s initiative called ‘Uppal Land Pooling’ wherein more than 800 acres of land was initially notified for land acquisition, which later on was converted to Land Pooling, with the owners demanding 50% share of developed lands/plots. HMDA has not been able to finalise the land pooling with such an tall imposition-after having carved out more than 300 acres out of this Scheme and handing over to HMWSSB and Metro Rail and left with in an ‘Mission Impossible’-like situation.

5. There is yet another example again in HMDA, called ‘Discovery City’ that talked about assembling lands through ‘land pooling’. All these have come to a nought.

6. What went wrong in these land Pooling Schemes ? Why have such Land Pooling initiatives by public authorities been riddled with controversies ? Have the public authorities forgotten the basics or fundamentals of Land pooling ?Before answering the above, one needs to understand Land Pooling and land development dynamics.

7. What is Land Pooling ? Simply put, it is a process wherein a group of land owners (of raw or agricultural land/undeveloped land) come together and pool their land holdings for development after leaving areas for roads, open spaces and amenities. But so is the case with layouts, so how different is it from layout? Not much, but it is the scale of development and the manner of carving out developable plots that makes the difference. Scale implies, both the total extent of such land pooling as well as the final outcome of carving out large developable plots-whereas in layouts, both are small, i.e., the layout extent as well as final plots (200 sq yards on an average). So, what is the benefit of Land Pooling ? Firstly, the extent being large, say average 200 acres, it is ‘area development’ in terms of good major circulation network at large area level, which cannot be achieved in layouts. Layouts are spot developments which at colony level are alright but cannot guide area level development. Secondly, large developable plots means more flexibility, scope and choice in location of activities and building development. Getting large sites of regular shape is a daunting task in cities. Amalgamation of existing plots to achieve large sites for development is rarely possible. Thirdly, due to the aforementioned scale of development, large parks and open space, amenities sites and developable sites for EWS are generated for the Government, which are more effective way of siting and developing public facilities and amenities. Imagine a large park of 5 acres to 10 acres in one piece in an area. Where do we have such amenity in our cities ? Layouts cannot match or cater to this scale or scope of amenities development. Fourthly, the Master Plan can be effectively implemented through Land Pooling. Imagine, the whole of on both sides of the River Krishna (where the new capital is proposed to be sited) having grid roads and amenities and having miles and miles of nice large Complexes -what a difference it can make in the overall quality of development.

8. What is the benefit to the Government ? Government is the ‘sutradhar’, i.e., dons the role of both land developer as well as land manager (i.e., undertakes marketing of the developable plots on behalf of land owners) and thereby gets 100,000 acres of developed lands and also makes profits in the process. In the case of the New capital, the Government is itself be the builder on the developable plots, whereby his scope in such large plots development and benefits increase manifold.

So, as pointed out above, where is the hitch or problem? Why Land Pooling ventures are not taking off-whether in public or in private ? The answers lie in the following:-

(a) VGTMUDA or Government have not issued clear guidelines or rules and procedure for Land Pooling unlike layouts where there are specific rules and procedure.

(b) The private developer/land owners are therefore unaware of this type of development and it’s benefits. They are still used to layout-type of development (which is relatively an inefficient way of land sub-division. It is only recently that is since past two decades that Group Housing has come in vogue, which is another efficient way of land development)

(c) VGTMUDA/Government/Public Authorities are not clear in their role in Land Pooling. Are they supposed to be only regulator or land developer or land manager or a combination of all the above ?It is this confusion that has resulted in unfortunate stalemate as the above past examples of Vijayawada and HMDA’s Uppal Scheme and ‘Discovery City’ Project prove. Land development with facilities, and land management both require a fair degree of expertise and professionalism which is generally lacking in public agencies, resulting in Project overruns, long gestation periods, etc.

(d) Given the above bitter experiences of the ground realities of ‘land pooling’, it would take more than 40 years to assemble the lands alone going by the pace of work of the Revenue department, the dynamism of the farmers and vested interest in lands in and around Vijayawada, Guntur and Tenali. And to begin with, the State Government has not even done it’s homework by way of a Master Plan for the Capital Area, not to speak of the area level layouts. Armed with these then only it should go to the farmers and not the other way around. Then only there would be clarity of the ‘give and take’ policy that ‘land pooling’ strives to bring about. Preparing the layouts after initiating the ‘land assemblage’ is like closing the doors after the horses have bolted!

The mismatch in obtaining the lands through ‘land pooling ‘ especially by Governmental agencies would prove this is not worth the time and effort, making it a ‘Mission Impossible’! More so that building the new capital is the topmost priority for the new state Government, because this is the only thing that would establish it’s identity – a confidence among the people, administration and the economy that there is a physical entity called the capital. Presently, it is in a far-flung rented premises that is cut off from the new State.

So, what should the Government do to build a fatafat new State capital?