By Qamar ZJ

The other day, prominent civic actists debated over a newspaper report about BBMP’s new proposal to allow local provision stores, milk booths, and bakeries to come up on residential roads. While some don’t agree with the idea altogether, others mentioned that such stores already exist in many parts of Bangalore, and this move will only regularise them. Others debated that the BBMP’s move to expand its tax base by regularising an illegality was tantamount to awarding the guilty rather than penalising them. A few others felt that the BBMP proposes many things, but implements nothing on ground, so what use is another proposal anyway? One person summed it up well by saying, it’s another ‘akrama sakrama all over again’. Akrama Sakrama was a move by the state government several years ago to regularise building violations across the state. But the proposal could not be enforced as the residents went to court against the move as it favoured big builders more than the small land and house owners. In addition, it would lead to more haphazard development of the city, which has already gone from bad to worse.

Ancillary services

In the existing 2015 masterplan that is in use today, there is already a provision for ‘ancillary use’ for provision stores and such small entities on roads above 40 feet width. “They are permitted for up to 50 sq. metres,” says Nitin Seshadri. But now, the BBMP wants to allow them on roads that are 40 ft. and less. “This has already happened on ground, so why the formal statement now?” asks Pushpa S. Another resident activist disagrees with the BBMP’s move by saying, “The logic is ridiculous. Something illegal exists, the BBMP is losing revenue, therefore they want to make it legal! It emphasises the point that the law-abiding citizen is a fool to be so. Break any rule, wait long enough and it will be regularised with a paltry penalty.”

Realistic requirements, anyone?

If you ask any average resident who has no clue about the law, they will get back to you and say, but we need these shops, as they are close to where we stay. Agrees Vijayan Menon: “From a holistic point of view, residents need the kiranas… maybe not the eateries. Most of them don’t have trade licence, so there are two options: regularise and take the trade licence fees for kiranas which came up before January 2012. The commercial tax licence can be used to find the dates. the second option is to work the masterplan to designate areas and roads for local markets, like the commercial axis concept.” Meera K agrees to this by saying, “Kirana stores are important; many apartments have small shops too.”

However, Pramod Kapur disagrees by saying that there is a reason why the current law holds its value. “Not having any commercial activity on roads of 40-feet and less has some logic,” he says. “Congestion resulting from two-wheelers and possibly the odd four-wheelers belonging to owners and more customers will create huge problems. People must be encouraged to walk a bit longer if necessary. Convenience to some can become a nuisance for everyone in the future.”

New proposal or law, BBMP should not be taken seriously, say some residents. “The problem is that we have no faith that the BBMP will implement whatever they say,” said one resident. “Agreeing to anything is pointless.” Kapur agrees: “The only solution is to maintain the status quo. No exceptions because then, one gets into debates. One simple single rule and that’s it.”

However, what about shops that don’t have a trade licence even though they came up before 2012? “If we close them, it will hit the functioning of a residential layout,” says Menon. Swarna V says, “Small shops had designated spaces even before 2012 in BDA layouts under shop sites. They didn’t adhere to that then and now that’s what has become this colossal cancerous monster.” Indira adds to this, by saying, “Not to mention, the umpteen eateries that have come up creating havoc and much garbage.”

The problem is also about how these initial small shops grew into larger entities. “Any shop starts small, but they aim to grow big,” says Mina Prabhu. “And as they grow bigger, they just expand the space they are in, because they believe it is lucky for them. They rarely want to move out.”

Agrees Neeraja Shetty: “Nowadays, everyone wants to expand beyond capacity. So a kirana shop starts selling bakery items, sets up a chips counter with a stove on the footpath, and so on. These kind of adhoc food services are really causing major issues.”

The argument continues. To amend or not to amend the zoning regulations is the question. However, Seshadri has an important fact to share about the importance of a sustainable master plan for the city. “The majority in this city couldn’t care less about commercialisation,” he says. “They don’t want to stop at a traffic light. It’s okay for them to go the wrong way on a one-way street. It’s the minority, people like us, who are paying all the taxes and running the country anyway. The majority only matters during elections. We need to focus on sensible policies and not check what the majority feels about each issue. The government is supposed to look at implementing progressive policies that help the long-term growth of the country in every way. What the majority feels about each issue is totally irrelevant.”

However, the implementation will “touch’ the majority, says Mina Prabhu. “And in a situation of elections every year, no party wants to risk implementing any policy that can damage their potential votes.” Menon had the last word on this issue: “It’s a bunkum proposal anyway. It is proposed by people who have no jurisdiction on the matter, not even UDD (Urban Development Department). They can only do this with the next Master Plan… which is also out of their hands.”

What do you think, dear reader? Let us know by WhatsApp at: +919880585748.