The censuses of the past have identified villages as urban agglomerations depending on certain factors. For census purposes, a village is identified as an urban agglomeration depending on certain factors – the size of the population, the percentage of males involved in agriculture being the main. The circular notifying the urban areas admits it is for preparation of the 2021 census, but what has caused people and activists to take note is that there can be planning and development changes effected in the these villages based on this classification.
However, Revenue Department has said that this will affect only the assessment of land revenue and does not change any building or infrastructure guidelines where the Department is concerned.
One of the main aspects that has raised concerns following this circular is the possibility of these areas, especially those on the coast, getting Coastal Regulation Zone II criteria, that will allow development hitherto not permitted under the CRZ laws. For starters, the Town and Country Planning laws, rather than the Regional Plan, could become applicable in these villages, and the 2000 metre No Development Zone (NDZ) could hence become redundant. The NDZ will be applicable up to the nearest structure authorised prior to 1991, and beyond that the TCP laws will be applicable, permitting development that these villages had not seen earlier.
Given the State’s history with movements opposing changes to the delicate balance of the villages, this circular is unlikely to get by without some sort of challenge. Not too many months ago, people from several villages of Tiswadi objected and got their village dropped from the Greater Panjim Planning and Development Authority. Coastal Bardez too had oppposed the plans of the North Goa Planning and Development Authority, and the villagers of Nagoa, Arpora, Parra, Calangute, Candolim and of the surrounding areas had protested peacefully.
There have already been objections raised to the circular. The opposition Congress has condemned ‘the slow urbanisation of Goa’ stating that the villages are the charm and beauty of the State, and are being destroyed. The other objection is that this will aid the real estate lobby as any change to CRZ II will permit construction of increased height in the villages. On the other hand the explanation is that this identification of villages as urban areas has been done for census purposes and at the instance of the Central government. The decadal census is due next year, and the process will start in the coming months.
The lack of a proper planning process – the Regional Plan fiasco is an example – has led to runaway urbanisation, that has given much of Goa a distinct urban-rural character. Today, the State has 14 municipalities and 181 panchayats, but the 2011 census had listed 56 census towns, and it is these that have now been notified as urban areas. At the current pace of development – taking into consideration the under-construction airport at Mopa and the improved road connectivity from North to South – it is not difficult to imagine Goa almost turning into one large city as quickly as three decades from now.
While these fears of the people are appreciable, one cannot overlook the fact that Goa is a State where land is scarce. The best way forward would be to take the people into confidence when there are any far-reaching decisions that are being taken, especially when they are relevant to changes in the land use patterns. All planning must take into account the natural heritage of the State – whether they be the coastal lands or the forested areas. These are fragile eco-systems that must be protected and any development must come alongside this and not at the cost of the existing balance. The rural-urban look that Goa is heading for has to blend with what the State has to offer – its unique natural heritage.
