New DP for PUNE

The new development plan for Pune (old PMC area) is about to be approved and released for suggestions and objections from citizens. Although it is not released as yet, from news paper releases lot of things are being discussed.

It is projected as sustainable development plan. What is sustainable about it and where it will lead us to still remains to be seen. From the news paper reports we can see that the plan aims at development of business for particular section of businessmen and society.  Grant the additional floor space to all interested parties is the theme of this plan. Granting of additional FSI is at some places illogical and at other places indiscriminate in nature. Such additional FSI and resultant higher occupancy will add to crowding on roads and put further strain on the roads thus leading to slowing down of traffic and resultant pollution. How can we call this development plan to be sustainable?

The affordable housing development will get higher FSI. Who will monitor the construction and final occupancy whether the houses are actually occupied by the section of society it is meant for? In north-eastern part of Pune we can see the houses that are built for lower income group under urban land Ceiling Act scheme are actually occupied by cream of cream of the society. Fate of affordable housing, if not implemented and regulated properly, will not be any different.

There is scheme to grant additional FSI for rental housing. PMC is to control and monitor to whom these houses will be allotted. They are basically small houses meant for urban poor and low income group. I sincerely hope that enough such houses will get built and will be allotted to ‘right’ people without asking for any favours.

There is a scheme for additional FSI for hostels built in 500 meters periphery of educational institute if you have tie up with the institute. What happens if such tie up or agreement is terminated after certain period and the building is then sold as apartments or converted to hotel? Also, there are many charitable trusts running hostels in Pune. E.g. Vidyarthi Sahayyak Samiti, Lahoti Vidyarthi Bhavan, Prof. J. P. Trivedi memorial Trust Hostel, Firodiya Hostel, Baramati Hostel, Sharada Niketan, hostel for daughters of ex-servicemen, etc. Students staying in such hostel are not from any specific institute but from some specific community or background or place. Why these hostels are deprived of benefit of additional FSI?

There is a scheme for granting additional FSI to hospitals. Hospitals attract lot of traffic and crowding in the vicinity of relatives and visitors. They put immense load on the roads around the place and also add to crowding. e.g. areas around – Sasoon Hospital, Ruby Hall, Apollo Hospital, Poona Hospital, Deenanath Hospital, Sahyadri Hospital, etc. are always crowded and clogged of traffic. Granting additional FSI of 4 will only add to this crowding and at points will also delay emergency vehicles reaching the hospitals in time. We need to prevent such clogging of roads by some means if additional FSI is to be granted. We have to formulate new set of guidelines for ground coverage and minimum size of plot for such hospitals to avoid crowding and congestion in the surrounding vicinity. We must ensure that there is enough space to accommodate all the relatives, visitors, parking of vehicles of all the doctors, employees, and visitors and also the support services like medicine shops, canteens, ATM, etc. within the premises of the hospital.

There are plenty of suggestions (उपसूचना) which have been suggested by elected representatives with or without help of professionals and /or property related businessmen. While some of the suggestions are really innovative, worth considering and incorporating into final DP, many others are very much oriented to get some personal benefit or political mileage. I hope the general body will wisely pick up and incorporate only those which are benefitting larger part of city and majority citizen.

आमच्याही काही उपसूचना.

१.      रस्त्यावर होणाऱ्या पार्किंग बाबत – रस्त्यावर होणाऱ्या अनिर्बंध पार्किंगला वेसन घालायची असेल व जास्तीत जास्त नागरिकांनी सार्वजनिक वाहतूक व्यवस्थेचा वापर करण्यासाठी त्यांना उद्युक्त करायचे असेल तर रस्त्यावरील सर्वप्रकारच्या वाहनांच्या पार्किंगसाठी शुल्क लावून त्याचे संपूर्ण व्यवस्थापन पीएमपीएमएल कडे सोपवावे.

सदर शुल्काची आकारणी पुढील प्रमाणे असावी – पहिला अर्धा तास मोफत. अर्धा ते एक तास कालावधीसाठी दुचाकी १ रु. चारचाकी ५ रु. त्यानंतरच्या २ तासांपर्यंत संपूर्ण कालावधीसाठी दुचाकी ५ रु. चारचाकी २० रु. प्रती तास. तदनंतरच्या ४ तासांपर्यंत संपूर्ण कालावधीसाठी दुचाकी १५ रु. चारचाकी ५० रु. प्रती तास. त्यानंतरच्या ४ तासांपर्यंत प्रत्येक तासासाठी दुचाकी ३० रु. चारचाकी १०० रु. आठ तासांसाठी दैनिक पास – दुचाकी १०० रु. चारचाकी ३०० रु. बस, मालवाहू वाहने, स्टेन्ड व्यतिरिक्त उभ्या असलेल्या रिक्षा, यांना सुद्धा पार्किंग शुल्क असावे. असे करण्याने पार्किंग आपापल्या जागेमध्ये करण्याचे प्रमाण वाढेल व रस्त्यावरील पार्किंग कमी होईल. तसेच पीएमपीएमएलला त्यांची सेवा सुधारण्यासाठी पुरेसा निधी उपलब्ध होईल. सुरुवातीच्या काळात सदर पार्किंग शुल्क माणसे नेमून जमा करता येतील व ही पद्धत रुळल्यावर ठिकठिकाणी पार्किंग मीटर लावून ही पद्धत राबवता येईल.

२.      विजेचा वापर कमी करण्यासाठी जास्तीत जास्त इमारती कमी उंचीच्या बनविल्यास त्यामध्ये उद्वाहकाची आवश्यकता भासणार नाही व विजेची चांगलीच बचत होईल. त्यासाठी १२ मीटरपेक्षा कमी उंचीच्या व उद्वाह्काची सोय नसलेल्या रहिवाशी इमारतींना मालमत्ता करांमध्ये तसेच विकसन शुल्कामध्ये सूट मिळावी.

३.      नव्याने विकसित होणाऱ्या भागात अंतर्गत रस्त्यांची रुंदी पुढील प्रकारे असावी.

·         प्रभागातील प्रत्येक प्लॉटचे क्षेत्रफळ २५० चौ. मीटर पेक्षा कमी असल्यास ७५ मीटर लांबी पर्यंत ९ मीटर, ७५ ते १५० मी. पर्यंत १५ मीटर, १५० ते ३०० मी. पर्यंत १८ मीटर, ३०० मीटर पेक्षा जास्त २४ मीटर.

·         प्रभागातील प्रत्येक प्लॉटचे क्षेत्रफळ २५० चौ. मीटर पेक्षा जास्त पण १००० चौ. मीटर पेक्षा कमी असल्यास ७५ मीटर लांबी पर्यंत १५ मीटर, ७५ ते १५० मी. पर्यंत १८ मीटर, १५० ते ३०० मी. पर्यंत २४ मीटर, ३०० मीटर पेक्षा जास्त ३० मीटर.

·         प्रभागातील प्रत्येक प्लॉटचे क्षेत्रफळ १००० चौ. मीटर पेक्षा जास्त असल्यास ७५ मीटर लांबी पर्यंत १५ मीटर, ७५ ते १५० मी. पर्यंत २४ मीटर, १५० ते ३०० मी. पर्यंत ३० मीटर, ३०० मीटर पेक्षा जास्त ३६ मीटर.

·         कोणताही अंतर्गत रस्ता ९ मीटरपेक्षा कमी रुंदीचा नसावा. १५ व १८ मीटर रुंद रस्त्याच्या दोन्ही बाजूस कमीतकमी ३ मी. रुंदीचा फुटपाथ असावा. २४ मी. रुंदीच्या रस्त्यावर दोन्ही बाजूस कमीतकमी ४.५ मी. रुंदीचा फुटपाथ असावा. तसेच ३० मी. किंवा त्याहून जास्त रुंदीच्या रस्त्यांचे दोहो बाजूस कमीत कमी ६ मी. रुंदीचा फुटपाथ असावा.

४.      १५ मीटरपेक्षा कमी रुंद रस्त्यांचे लगतच्या प्लॉटवर टीडीआरचा वापर करता येवू नये.

५.      नव्याने तयार झालेला टीडीआर त्या जागेपासून २ कि.मी. परिघात वापरला जावा. अथवा विरळ वस्ती विभागाचे (सेक्टर II ते VI) ४ ते ६ प्रभाग करून तयार झालेला टीडीआर त्याच प्रभागात वापरला जावा.

६.      प्रीमियम चटई क्षेत्र हा नियम न होता फक्त अपवादात्मक परिस्थितीच असे चटई क्षेत्र दिले जावे.

संपूर्ण आराखडा हाती आल्यावर त्याचा अभ्यास करून आणखी लिहीनच. आज एव्हढेच पुरे...

Response to Mah tech education perspective plan

Directorate of technical Education Maharashtra state has prepared a perspective plan for technical Education in Maharashtra ( visit  http://fileserver.mkcl.org/approvedinstitues/OasisModules_Files/Files/69.pdf?did=186 )

Responses were invited on this perspective plan. Here is my response:

Vision 2020

It is essential to see that the technical education in Maharashtra is developed to respond to societal needs and aspirations.

Expansion

As on date ratio of admissions for engineering, pharmacy and management education to higher education is adequate but not regionally well balanced.

For Architecture ratio is still not very adequate and also is regionally imbalanced.

Demand pattern does not reflect Architecture related jobs. Growth of Architecture related jobs have direct relation to social well being and economic accomplishment of society in general.   This is different from engineering as the job growth in engineering is mainly dependent on industrial growth and promotion.

District wise augmentation

Data as shown regarding Architecture admissions is incorrect. In 2011-12, with few exceptions, all the seats at undergraduate courses in Architecture all over Maharahstra were full. (e.g. Your data shows 60 intake for Aurangabad district and 0 admitted. Reality for 2011-12 was intake was 80 and all seats were filled) Please correct the data. Please contact Maharashtra Association of Schools of Architecture for correct data.

Issues and recommendations in expansion

Community college is good idea. However, they should be expressly linked with premier institutions to get good standing and value. e.g. COEP running couple of community colleges in rural areas makes more sense than a private engineering college with little or no standing running the same.

At the same time we must encourage cross discipline education where credits could be transferred across discipline. A science student should be encouraged to acquire some credits from engineering or performing arts or management or architecture and vice versa. Such education will surely add value to overall education system.

All the old colleges with good standing should be actively supported and encouraged to become autonomous. Particularly government and government aided colleges should be immediately made autonomous. Actually, educational standards in old, reputed institutes are declining because of clubbing them with new institutions under the same university and faculty. All colleges say more than 20 years old, should be allowed to set their own curriculum and scheme of examinations that is only supervised by the university without active intervention.

Equity/ inclusiveness.

In Architecture education, particularly in government and government aided colleges gender ratio is much different than other disciplines like engineering, etc. Often there are more than 70% girls and less than 30% boys. May be in other professional streams – medicine, accountancy and law the situation is not very different. This has definite reflection in profession as the percentage of girls actually pursuing profession is very low. As such, availability of trained personnel in profession is declining and shortage of availability is already visible.  It must be reviewed and decided whether 30% reservation for girls is necessary for such courses.

Affordability is another very important reason for low enrollment. In reality, technical education is out of reach financially for many who wish to take it up and have right aptitude to do so.  Reserving certain number of seats in all institutions for deserving candidates who pay same amount fees as in government institutions is essential to overcome this problem. Whether this is to be done with cross subsidy within institute or through scholarships extended to such students by the government needs to be decided.

As a parallel exercise, in certain rural areas and small towns, where private institutions are reluctant to establish an institution for higher learning, government should take initiative and establish such institutes. Existing renowned government and government aided institutions may be asked to take up this task. However, it is also essential to control and see that the students admitted to such institutes are from its defined catchment area only so that seats are not filled up by students from urban areas.

Government and all its arms like local bodies, etc. should get its entire consultancy and research requirements fulfilled through academic institutions. This can a) save taxpayers’ money b) Keep the institutions updated of happenings in the field and eventually these institutions will be capable of offering such consultancy to private sector and generate good amount of endowment to support its own research and also subsidize education of needy and deserving students.

Excellence.

 Student: faculty ratio is marred by many factors such as recruitment rules, reservations, etc.  US/UK Universities mentioned in the report do not have any policy for reservations in jobs by virtue of caste/ religion/ language, etc. Educational and teaching merit is the only criteria. Many teaching positions are vacant as colleges are not able to get teachers of required reservation category and also of good academic standing. Often, academic merit criteria is diluted or overlooked to fill up a position that is reserved and undeserving candidates are recruited in such position. This compromises the education quality also.

Similarly, being good teacher and being knowledgeable person and two different things. A knowledgeable person with Ph.D. and number of papers to his credit may not be very good teacher. On the other hand a person with very basic qualification can also be an excellent teacher. Having aptitude to teach and ability to generate interest in students to learn does not have direct relationship with academic accomplishments of a person. This is a difficult area to deal with but the consensus could be evolved and system of identifying good and academically sound teachers could be devised. Good teacher, not very highly qualified can be recruited and encouraged to upgrade his academic qualification during his tenure.

The system today is very much examination oriented and therefore classroom based. This has its roots in school education. School education has adapted this method due to shortage of higher education opportunities of good quality; leading to extreme competition.

We must change the orientation from exam to knowledge. For this the established system of evaluation need complete review and overhaul. Once the importance is given to actual knowledge and capability of application of acquired knowledge rather than passing examination, the focus will automatically move from classroom based to practical.

To help teachers upgrade themselves and keep them updated, their teaching load needs to be reduced a little and they must also be free of many non teaching and administrative tasks that they are expected to do. (e.g. assisting and managing tasks like census, elections, other clerical duties and preparing of non academic reports, etc.) In reality, many teachers get very little time to read, carry out research and upgrade themselves. Keeping teachers busy with learning and research only is the requirement of the day.

Improving quality

I fully agree with most of the recommendations for improving quality. How to bring these recommendations into reality remains challenge.

For improving faculty, establishment of academic staff colleges is necessity. Rather than calling them academic staff colleges they should be called and function as resource centers.  They should be independent centers for each discipline as each discipline has its own specific requirements not shared with other disciplines. Such resource centers will help teachers upgrade their skills and knowledge through Short term courses, Ph. D. programs, research programs, etc. These centers should also serve as publication houses that can help teachers publish their research, thoughts and books. Further, these centers should also help universities and institution in preparing curriculums, design evaluation systems, etc. It should also create repository of knowledge and learning resources for teachers. National Institute of Advanced Studies in Architecture, Pune, (NIASA) established by the Council of Architecture is one of the good efforts in this direction.

Infrastructure development needs fresh thought. Normally, grants are available for establishing infrastructure but no grants are available for maintenance and up gradation. While sanctioning the grants for infrastructure there should be three distinct components – one time grant for establishing infrastructure, annual maintenance grant paid every year, upgradation grant paid after few years.

When one moves from terminal/ annual and university based exams to continuous college based evaluation, the responsibility of teacher and college increases. Many teachers and colleges are reluctant to assume this responsibility. Teachers at times do not have courage to tell non-performing students of their failure to meet the criteria of evaluation. Teachers therefore try to pass the buck to the university and the external examiners. Occasionally, they are also pressurized by the higher ups to pass un-deserving students for sake of displaying better overall performance of the institutes and also for financial compulsions. How many colleges and teachers are ready to accept autonomy in this area remains to be seen. In absence of transparent system there also exists possibility of victimization due to inter-personal relationships.

Research

Facilities to pursue Ph.D. should be widely available to everyone, particularly to teachers. In professional education, in lieu of Ph. D. the teachers should be encouraged to practice since every assignment in practice is a mini research opportunity in itself and such assignment brings in rich practical knowledge. Further, it also brings in a possibility to involve students who can learn as well as earn. However, teacher must document the entire assignment for benefit of others. Government and industry also must create opportunities for basic as well as applied research and provide sponsorships for the same.

Similarly, the resource institutions should themselves undertake research in technical education field and use certain colleges as testing beds for the research in technical education as well as education technology.

Residential campuses where teachers and students live on the same campus as the institute always provides better environment for research. Good examples are IITs, IISERs and IIMs. Such kind of residential campuses should be highly encouraged.

Monitoring and evaluation of framework

Certain confusions must be cleared. For example, accreditation of engineering education is globally covered under ‘Washington Accord’ but Architecture education is not covered under this accord. Accreditation of Architecture education is covered globally under ‘Canberra Accord’. This must be understood and architecture colleges should therefore be provided with independent program for accreditation that is complies with the ‘Canberra Accord’.  Most of the developed nations are already signatories of Canberra Accord and by virtue of being commonwealth country India is included under Commonwealth association of Architects (CAA) that is signatory for the Canberra Accord. The accreditation criteria for architecture courses should be based ion CAA program.

Globally, since ages, Architecture education is not clubbed with the engineering/ technical education but is recognized as independent faculty that is highly inter-disciplinary in nature. It’s high time we recognize this and grant independent faculty status to Architecture education.