Amid the recent row over entry fee hikes for morning walkers at Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP) in Mumbai, Nayana Kathpalia, Trustee of NAGAR and OVAL Trust, speaks to Omkar Gokhale about the city’s shrinking open and green spaces, poor walkability, policy failures, and the need for people-centric urban planning. Excerpts from the interview:

Q. Recently, an attempt was made to increase annual ticket rates for morning walkers at SGNP, later rolled back after outrage. What should be the charges to access public open spaces?

Nayana Kathpalia: Ideally, public open spaces should not be ticketed, considering the economic disparity in our country. This holds true for Mumbai too, especially considering its civic body, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), is the richest municipal corporation in India. Hence, all public open spaces must be maintained by it without charging an entry fee. All citizens must have equal access, which will not happen if there is an entry fee, however small. The open space policy permits charging a fee to private entities maintaining a public space.

Q. Do you think Mumbai has enough open and green spaces, and why do they matter?

Kathpalia: No. Mumbai’s open spaces are abysmally low for its population. The Development Plan (DP)-2034 states that Mumbai’s per capita ratio of accessible existing open space is 1.28 square metres. Whereas the central guidelines of Urban and Regional Development Plans Formulation and Implementation (URDPFI) state that they should be 10-12 square metres per capita, including all kinds of open spaces. Open spaces are important for the physical, social, and mental health of its citizens as well as for environmental reasons, air pollution, prevention of flooding.

Q. Why are such spaces shrinking, and how does it affect citizens?

Kathpalia: The government does not consider having public open spaces of much value. For them, the value of the land is only in construction. They also include clubhouses and sports facilities in public spaces. Its priorities are all wrong and driven by monetary considerations. Public recreation and health are something they don’t really care about.

Q. Do you think we have an effective regulatory mechanism amid infrastructure and residential development in the city?

Kathpalia: On paper, there are some good policies and regulations, but not enough. The problem lies in the implementation of policies, which is very poor and mainly dictated by monetary considerations. The authorities just look the other way when encroachments begin, as eventually they know this will allow high rises to come up as per the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) policy. The haphazard implementation of the SRA policy speaks of the lack of political and administrative will. The same fate is that of redevelopment projects. The new gated developments are private and do not allow public access. However, the green space created for the residents is good for the environment. Proper, people-centric urban planning remains a distant dream in Mumbai.

Q. Tell us about initiatives for Oval and Cross Maidans in south Mumbai.

Kathpalia: The restoration of the 22-acre Oval Maidan was done by the OVAL Trust 25 years ago, and it is continuously maintained by it till date, and the same is true for the Cross Maidan garden. Our focus was clear, with no vested interest, to create two public spaces for the citizens of Mumbai. No entry fees are charged for either.

Q. What about access to footpaths, and how do they fare in terms of walkability?

Kathpalia: Footpaths in Mumbai are a disaster. While parts of south Mumbai have wide footpaths, most areas have narrow ones, and parts of the suburbs have none. So walkability is a complete no-no! The encroachments on the footpaths are both legal (bus stops, substations, Aarey stalls, etc) and illegal (hawkers and squatters). Hence, road space management is a nightmare. The public has to walk on the road at their peril, vehicles slow down, leading to traffic jams, and thereby increasing pollution.