Said that, it is important to understand that as a more civic city is our objective, we should increase the value of peoples decisions over their lives, and since with all the information that we already offered to people, some of them still believe that the private transportation is the best for them. In this scene, the use of the city streets become a representation of the city’s life, and it is its most public space.

Jane Jacobs wrote at “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” (1961) that streets “serve other purposes besides carryng wheeled traffic in their middles. Streets and their sidewalks, the main public places of a city, are its most vital organs.”

Understanding one important lesson of economy will be useful to understand why the majority of cities in the world will not be totally free of cars in the next years: If someone can choose between two things to consume, they will always consume what in their minds in good for them. So it is not difficult to understand that in some countries where the infrastructure of the city public transport system is bigger and well manteined (western europe countries and japan) people use less cars, and countries in which the private transport receives a big amount of invesments (North America) and countries which the public transport system poorly exist (South America and Eastern Europe), the private way of transport is the major used among the others.

Presenting what is happening in São Paulo (Brazil), this article pretends to show a way of a non planned union between the Private and Public Sector to increase the use of bicycles in this city without any form of pushing the users to do this by punisment and spending almost any public money, just urban planning.

At the beggining of December 2014, the Paris mayor announced plans to ban diesel cars from the French capital by 2020 as part of an anti-pollution drive. Anne Hidalgo also said parts of central Paris would severely curtail private car use by creating semi-pedestrianised zones, beginning with an experiment on weekends which could be “rapidly” extended to include weekdays. Vehicle use inside these zones would be limited to the cars of residents, and emergency and delivery vehicles.
Source: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/07/paris-mayor-hidalgo-plans-ban-diesel-cars-french-capital-2020

São Paulo is the major city in Brazil. In its metropolitan area lives more than 11 million people and the city has the largest economy by GDP in Latin America and Southern Hemisphere. But besides of its wealth, as other mega-cities in emergent economies, the city has a lot of unequal healthy and underdevellopped infrastructure, which causes a very difficult life for the poorest, since they do not have a easy access to public services, and forces the ones who have the economical power, to get those services by the private sector. This situation occurs in the public transportation also. In the last decades of Brazil, the private transportation have been understood as the mainly method of transportation, and also as a way of economical development by the growth of the car industries. Hopefully this idea has started to change since the end of the military dictatorship (primary a right wing government).

The “Elevado Costa e Silva”, built in the 70′s by the military dictatorship, crossing a central residential area in downtown was at the beggining received as a wealth signal and later became a reason for degradation of the area. Their demolishment started to be seriously discussed by the city major at 2006, and again by the current mayor, both from different political parties.
Source: http://wikimapia.org/12916395/pt/Elevado-Presidente-Costa-e-Silva-Minhoc%C3%A3o

During the last three decades, NGO’s started to appear in São Paulo trying to aware the popullation for issues like preservation of the enviroment, public participation on politics of cities, use of bicycles, among others. Those NGO’s ttogetherer with the spread of information from the press about those issues made some segments of the society (usually higher-medium segments) tried to respond in a positive away about those questions. Those people started to consume more ecological and social responsable products. Sooner, companies started to capitalize and became, at least apparentaly, more ecological and social responsable. One of those segments were the banks, who saw an opportunity to gather a more positive and up-to date image among young and rich consumers. Those banks made a system of renting bicycles for a couple of minutes for free, and charge for a little value if the user rides more hours, but you could only use this service if you are a client of those banks. At begining those stations for renting bicycles were instaled in a very few areas and only in rich neighborhods of the city to atract those young rich consummers. Those stations started to function as a unique way of advertisement of the banks, since public advertisement are extremely controlled in São Paulo. Sooner they realized that those stations could function not only as a way of self promotion, but also as a little source of income and due to the good reception, those banks installed those stations in different parts of the city. The idea of a bicycle as a way of transportation achieved a status of ‘possibility’ in the minds of the rich popullation, who were using them during the weekends.

Images of the two stations of the different banks. The first one is from Itaú in, the program started at 2012 and is called Bike Sampa (http://www.bikesampa.com.br/app/), and the other was Bradesco, who started the Ciclo Sampa in 2013 (http://www.ciclosampa.com.br/), both of them with the suport of the cityhall, but made and controlled by the banks.

In 2013 the current mayor of São Paulo started a big program that would deliver 400km of bicycle lanes to the city (http://www.cetsp.com.br/consultas/bicicleta/400km.aspx), which already have built 78km at September 2014. At the beggining the population was extremely against this program, but later gained more than 80% of aproval (http://g1.globo.com/sao-paulo/noticia/2014/09/datafolha-80-aprovam-ciclovias-em-sp-aumenta-popularidade-de-haddad.html). Those lanes were installed and planed by the public sector, and different from the private, started on the downtown area and spread fast to reach more distant regions, mainly by poorer people. Today those lanes are not only used by poor people, but by everyone. The government is still installing the lanes which are used as a way of transportation and as a hobby during the weekend. Also, developed a small station similar to the ones of the banks, but continue working together with the banks to install the first ones.

Map of the current bicycles lanes of the city: 1- in all over the city, 2- in downtown and at 3- a maily rich area.
Source: http://vadebike.org/2014/07/mapa-ciclovias-sao-paulo-ciclofaixas-ciclorrotas/

In conclusion, it is clear that the car is still the major way of transportation among the rich people, since the most rich neighborhoods are the ones with the fewest amount of lanes in the city, and the ones in which the program is the most unpopular. But also, it was because of those rich regions that those banks installed those stations. Both of them functioned in a coexistence way. Both of them could exist without each other, but they become more effective together. The stations were the initial step on this coexistence, their job was to gather public awareness to the transport issue and were done by the private sector and are the most efective way of charging. The lanes in other hand, is an infrastructure in the city, it is very cheap to be installed, but could only be installed by the public agent and since there are no eficiant way of charging people for using it, it is perfect to achieve the poor regions. They represent a balanced existence between two sectors, none of them took the right of the car to share the city, and shows a economic sustainability change in the city, made without a center agent, but with all agents working together: Society, Public Sector and Private Sector.

Introduction:

It is impossible to explain Venice by words: you cannot understand its uniqueness until you see this city with your own eyes. The beauty of its setting, its architecture and its artworks are the reasons why Venice is listed as a World Heritage Site in its entirety.

 Venice is made of 117 little islands separated by canals and linked by bridges. Venice has grown on the water and thanks to it, the city flourished for centuries as a Maritime Republic. However the water has been also the main Venetian enemy (after Napoleon): the city was born on a river mouth (the Brenta’s). During the Middle Ages the Venetians massively intervened on the surrounding ecosystem: the Brenta and other small rivers were deviated and the canals excavated in order to prevent the city’s sinking and permit their navigation.

 Nowadays the water is still a problem for Venice: the high-tide phenomenon is more and more frequent, due to the climatic changes. This photogenic event attracts and seduces millions of tourists every year, but for those who live and work in Venice the high-tide is an economical bother, as well as an impediment to a normal daily life. The municipality has activated several devices in order to inform people of the incoming phenomenon: an SMS is sent to mobiles the day before and, from the bell towers, an acoustic alarm alerts Venetians a couple of hours before (it sounds differently according to the supposed tide level). So people are informed they have to wear boots! But basically the diseases are not cancelled: the public transport is not regular because water-buses cannot pass under the bridges and a lot of fondamente, calli and campielli (the Venice streets) are underwater and not served by gangways. The M.O.S.E., the great engineering project still under construction, maybe one day will solve or, at least, will limit the damages.

 However I am not going to talk about that, because I think the water is not the main city hazard, but the millions of tourists I have mentioned before. The excessive commercial exploitation of the city centre is damaging the fragile Venetian equilibrium and creating serious problems for its population.

Moreover, a bad city management has been producing the gradual death of Venice.

THE VENICE’S PLAGUES

 Mass tourism:

Tourism has been an important sector of Venetian industry since the 18^th century, when it became a necessary step of the Grand Tour because of its beautiful cityscape, uniqueness, and rich musical and artistic cultural heritage. In the 19^th century the city was a fashionable centre for the rich and famous, often staying or dining at luxury establishments such as the Danieli Hotel and the Cafè Florian. It continued being an in vogue city right into the early 20^th century. In the 1980^s, the Carnival of Venice was revived and the city has become a major centre of international conferences and festivals, such as the prestigious Venice Biennale and the Venice Film Festival, which attract visitors from all over the World for their theatrical, cultural, cinematic, artistic, and musical productions.

 Today Venice is the second most visited city in Italy (source: Hotel Price Index) and one of the most desired destination in the World. Euromonitor International estimates that 3’165’000 people visited Venice during the 2013 (the 45^th most visited city in the World).

Nevertheless, according to the cultural association ItaliaNostra, in 2013 at least 30’000’000 of tourists visited Venice (that means 82’000 tourists a day in less than 4 km²) but in the majority they stayed in the city just for one day, booking an hotel in the nearby cities and arriving in Venice thanks to the public transports (so they are not included into the internationals statistics).

 A lot of shops in the area between San Marco and Rialto’s Bridge have been converted in touristic stores and all the public facilities are more and more “in tune” with the guests, while all the activities not strictly related to the tourism are moving to terraferma (inshore).

 The promotion of a policy of investments deeply connected to the mass tourism (considered as the cardinal economical source of the city) has soon created a huge facilities imbalance.

A non-policy of modernization:

The problem of the mass tourism is combined with a policy that does not care about the city modernization. The last intervention dates back to 1810 and was promoted by Napoleon.

 This is unfortunately a typical Italian affliction: preserving the historical/artistic heritage means to keep the status quo. The “experts” think that restoring an historical site could pervert its nature and spirit, as well as keep it less attractive to tourists.

 So Italy has created hundreds of laws “for the preservation”, as well as a lot of authorities for the artistic and cultural heritage management, producing the total paralysis of any initiative of urban redevelopment.

The Campanile di San Marco parable (the Venetian St. Mark’s Bell Tower) is maybe the best example to illustrate this concept. They said: “Com’era, dov’era”, which means “As it was, where it was”. So after the 1902 collapse, the Campanile was re-built in 1912 by copying the first one: exactly as it was, exactly where it was, creating an historical fake.

 Replacing a window with a new one could be a big problem in Venice: you have to question the Municipality Architectural Heritage Office, which needs from three to six months to answer, and usually the answer is a negative one. The main policy could be resumed as following: do not authorise any architectural intervention that can barely modify the buildings aspect.

So the private citizen has only two choices: to restore without authorization, or to let the house perish.

Public facilities:

This preservative mania unfortunately involves the public service too.

For example, the public transportation does not answer to the current needs. The “fashionable” transportation by boats on the water has always been preferred to a better and faster system such as the subway: there is a project of a lagoon subway for 35 years and still under consideration of the committees.

The result is the complete collapse of a system that is not able to match supply with demand. Furthermore the timetable seems to be conceived to satisfy tourists routes and needs rather than the citizens and workers ones.

The currently recession forced the transportation public service to cut down some lines, but it seems the top management preferred to cut the citizens lines than the tourists ones. Tourism is always considered as the main income source, the only strategic asset of the town.

 Also the waste management has great problems.

The ancient method door-to-door is still in force, demanding a great employment of human and economical sources, but not leading to results up to the civilised cities standards. The inability to act in the interest of the city and the lack of a modern system are carrying the actual waste management to the collapse. The public waste baskets are few (to do not ruin the landscape) and always full, so along the streets it is not so difficult to find piles of trash that rude tourists throw down.

The death of Venice:

This blind and one-directional policy is getting to a slow depopulation of the city. The number of young people deciding to move to Mestre (the part of Venice grown up on the lagoon border) or the hinterlands is increasing every year. In the 16^th century Venice had 200’000 inhabitants, today they are less the 55’000 and still decreasing.

Those few “survivors” feel lonely, emarginated by their own institutions and forced to live in those areas not yet invaded by the mass tourism. They are witnessing the transformation of the city in a tourist attraction, the morphing of Venice into “Veniceland” (as Disneyland), as they sadly started to call it.

This dramatic situation is due to the wrong city planning and management, unidirectional and more focused on the economical profit than the social equity and welfare, bringing the city to paralysis as well as to its gradual depopulation.

 Only a new urban and social long run plan conceived by a knowledgeable management could carry Venice to its rebirth as city.

IS A DIFFERENT CITY POSSIBLE?

Intervening in a city as Venice is not so easy.

Therefore each involvement should be discussed and shared with the citizenry and the small available resources should be concentrated on really essential projects.

It could have been avoided colossal and high-priced projects such as the M.O.S.E. or the Constitutional Bridge (Calatrava’s Bridge), preferring social and urban micro-re-qualification projects, able to awake the citizen social identity as well as a series of private initiatives.

 The social participation in the public management is another important topic.

Thanks to the social networks, independent groups of users have been constituted in order to suggest ideas, signal interventions or just promoting social initiatives. However, the city’s managers have always unheeded these free and passionate contributes, considering them useless and inappropriate.

For example, when the Venetian transportation company (A.C.T.V.) in 2013 decided to change the transportation timetable, a Facebook group tried to collaborate with the company to prevent potential problems for the users.

Unfortunately the company did not accept the users’ suggestions and when the timetable changed, those problems the users widely forecasted have been emerged.

Tourism:

No one can deny that tourism is a vital asset for Venice. However, the city cannot live basing its economy only on this sector. New commercial activities must be promoted and a “business bio-diversity” should be subsidized.

 In addition to that, tourism should be regulated in a more rational way, disciplining the touristic flows and the city pathways. For example, it could be interesting to promote alternative ways to discover the city, trying to decongest the main touristic stream and spreading it in a bigger area.

Moreover the visit of alternative sites could be encouraged. For example, the islands faced to the Bacino Marciano (like San Giorgio and the Giudecca) hide little known treasures, and from their banks it is possible to admire Venice from a different perspective.

Buildings:

Defining Venice as a “different” or a “particular” city and consequently banning any kind of energy upgrading intervention is not acceptable. The municipality must change its conservation concept. It should be understood that Venice must adapt itself to the 21^th century needs and adopt any kind of sustainable progress as done in the other cities of the World. Venice cannot consume three time more energy as a normal city.

 From this perspective, the bureaucratic grip should be reduced and case study projects could be promoted, in order to demonstrate the benefits (even economical) of using solar or photovoltaic panels (now prohibited in Venice), insulated glazing windows and thermal insulations.

According to a recent research promoted by the Venetian architect Board, most of the houses in Venice are rated as F in the energy class scale. A series of small intervention such as windows upgrading as well as the development of a minimal insulation layer to the external walls could reduce the entire annual energetic balance up to 40%. Less consumptions means less monthly bills as well as less CO₂ emissions.

So why Venice cannot be a more eco-friendly city?

Another interesting topic could be the real-estate market regulation.

Nowadays a speculator is totally free to buy and rent apartments to tourists; this market fosters a big housing bubble that does not permit to young couples and not very wealthy families to buy a house in Venice.

It could be interesting to create a touristic houses register, establishing an upper limit for the tenement (for tourist purposes), in order to incentivize the real citizen market.

Public facilities:

The public transportation system needs a careful planning and it should consider social participation in order to share ideas and proposals.

New forms of transportation should be discussed (boat sharing), and the system map could be reshaped in order to solve the actual frictions between tourists and citizens.

 As well as the waste management is concern, many alternatives could be developed and debated with the venetians.

On one hand, new generations could be educated, teaching them the importance of recycling. This really easy action has carried several other Italian cities to increase their recycling part in the total amount of waste. Indeed for an adult is easier to change its behaviour if this has been asked by his son: the generational interaction is the most extraordinary sword to a radical change of habits.

 From the other hand the waste collect system should be changed, especially because the actual one is not able to supply the total daily amount of waste. It could be useful studying how other historical cities have solved their waste management problems.

In Perugia, for example, in the historical city centre an automatized system (using robots) has been experimented. For the same purpose the city centre of Barcelona  is served by the automated vacuum waste collection system that ensures a good clearness level, avoiding an excessive waste stock.

CONCLUSIONS:

 A different city is possible.

Even if Venice is actually flogged by problems only at first glance unsolvable, its citizens conditions could be changed and improved. It must be understood that Venice, despite it has 1500 years of history, can be transformed, adapting itself to the current humans lifestyle.

 After all, Venice is still a very liveable human-scale city. The imbalance caused by the excessive touristic exploitation could be fixed only by a good planning that considers the citizens’ needs, and during this process the social participation should be held in high regard.

 In conclusion, I believe that most of the above proposal could be developed with minimum investments and have immediate benefits for the venetians.

Next spring, after years of scandals and corruption, Venetians will elect the new major. We all hope it will be able to take, for the first time, important and radical decisions thinking about the citizens’ welfare and not only aimed by personal or lobbyist interests.

image: courtesy from venessia.com

Derinkuyu underground city in the Derinkuyu district in Nevşehir Province, Turkey

“If you would see how interwoven it is in the warp and woof of civilization… go at night-fall to the top of one of the down-town steel giants and you may see how in the image of material man, at once his glory and his menace, is the thing we call a city. There beneath you is the monster, stretching acre upon acre into the far distance. High over head hangs the stagnant pall of its fetid breath, reddened with light from myriad eyes endlessly, everywhere blinking. Thousands of acres of cellular tissue, the city’s flesh outspreads layer upon layer, enmeshed by an intricate network of veins and arteries radiating into the gloom, and in them, with muffled, persistent roar, circulating as the blood circulates in your veins, is the almost ceaseless beat of the activity to whose necessities it all conforms. The poisonous waste is drawn from the system of this gigantic creature by infinitely ramifying, thread-like ducts, gathering at their sensitive terminals matter destructive of its life, hurrying it to millions of small intestines to be collected in turn by larger, flowing to the great sewers, on to the drainage canal, and finally to the ocean.”

Frank Lloyd Wright, “The Art and Craft of the Machine” in On Architecture: Selected Writings (1894-1940)

We live in urban nets whose central points represent the cities as density attractors. The development of this grid has been evolving since its first appearance following the concentration, conceived to envelop almost all human activities in opened systems that allow people to exchange matter and energy within and between them. Just after the second world war, nets begin to grow in complexity and functionality according to new technologies and cultural visions, and regained his central position in contemporary debates, exactly as the industrial revolution had made in the previous century.

We live in a spatially limited system (Earth) and our population is rocketing. Our main energy resources are scars or economically not desirable because of the actual market. We are used to say we live in a urbanized world only because half of our population lives in cities, that easily disappear near the nature extension. In addition, circulation and transportation facilities, with housing technical equipments, have been overloading cities and people since the first Ford T. From there, we were really near to the real and mature industrialism.

Within the world actual economic and cultural system, money market and labour market assume the main role in leading people interests and desires. As Adam Smith remind us,

 “Labour was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all the wealth was originally purchased;  and its value, to those who possess it, and who want to exchange it for some new productions, is precisely equal to the quantity of labour which it can enable them to purchase or command (The Wealth of nations, 1776).

Robert Minor, The Daily Worker (22nd December, 1924)

With the adoption of the money the labour itself became alienating and, instead of applying your own skills to gain goods and services with values (first of all of survival), you work to obtain something without immediate values with which you are able to get what you need. From a conceptual point of view, what seems to be inappropriate is to insert in this process a third and overcomplicating element. We needed to set a objective rule or method to exchange but this new market has been responsible to transform the way we conceive life and cities. As natural consequence, almost every existing product has a price that rarely corresponds to its real value, the maximum amount of money a specific actor is willing and able to pay.

Christoph Gielen, Nevada aerial

Even if, as L. Mumford said,

 “The city is a fact in nature, like a cave, a run of mackerel or an ant-heap. But is also a conscious work of art, and it holds within its communal framework many simpler and more personal forms art. Mind takes form in the city; and in turn, urban forms condition mind” (The Culture of Cities, 1938),

we know that, at this point, cities shouldn’t be considered like the only source of knowledge and experience. In reverse, cities are becoming a place in which is almost impossible to pander to solitude and calm. For this reason, many people have been moving toward the outer areas, hoping to find better and healthier conditions. But at the level with which this phenomenon appeared, it is clear that this is not going to reveal itself as the right solution, especially thinking that suburbs are the most problematic areas within the cities.

Although we should consider time as a valuable conceptual created by our minds, it is a useful parameter to measure duration. Time, as goods, is scars and everyone has to manage with it, gathering from it all needed activities. This leads us to think about how time is conceived in the city. Without mentioning any examples given that every urban agglomerate has its own rhythms, it is clear that time has become a luxury good according to a always faster and more dynamic world (job, transports, individual growth).

World urban density

After centuries of architectural research and thousands of failed attempts, the human beings recognized that their development, as they conceive it now, it is not the most reliable and fluid growth modality. Seen from outside, our nets are liable to collapse. Looking at the world urban density map it is easy to detect that our spatial occupation is not balanced and widespread all over the planet, according to different parameters like natural conditions and resources, history, cultural development. The most of the population is condensed in Europe, North America, South Asia and beside coasts. The main empty spaces: the inner part of South America (Amazon forest), North Africa (Sahara desert), Australia and central Asia. Human beings always tried to settle in the natural habitats that allowed him to provide materials and energy, accomplishing a constant and continuous concentration mainly towards temperate and flat lands.

Speaking about occupation there are different and contrasting opinions, some of them toward the idea of a dense and compact urbanized habitat and some other toward toward an enlargement of our presence in the natural environment. The first one is about decreasing footprint, reducing pathways and resources use, still maintaining a high rate of consumption. The second one is about occupying the space we have at our disposal dismantling the city and scattering it all over the nature. This concept has strong and little appreciated roots in Frank Lloyd Wright research in relation with north american planning approach. There, urbanization reached its maximum peak despite the huge amount of flat and empty terrain and the critic against urbanization is heart-felt.

What we are speaking about is an intense change both in architectural development and in urban life concept. After having fought with the nature for a long time, now we can occupy all the available space, even in that extreme sites that we are not used to consider. Every occupation act would be different from one to another, since every building would be conceived starting from the natural properties and features of the site. Spontaneous diversity is able to construct a more flexible and reliable world, since there are not any central poles able to fall apart. In a continuous natural inhabited space people would be able to have their own space and to contribute to evolve it, in a more conscious way. Every different location would have its own resources and could exchange them with neighbours. This asset would permit to add cultural multiplicity and more interesting activities in a smaller spatial range, saving time and money from the transportation system. With more space we would have more time since every activities would be present in each cell of this human pattern. Thousands of different dwellings that adapt themselves to the natural elements contributing to create a personal private space for everyone. No more archetype or models. No more passive approach. So that this could be realized the main goal is to change and improve our economical system.

Capitalist production has become our first activity but, as J. M. Keynes said, Capitalism is “the astonishing belief that the nastiest motives of the nastiest men somehow or other work for the best results in the best of all possible worlds”. What mainly appears unusual is that, instead of beginning a consequence of demand, production always control the market. Goods are produced and then sold to people, without counting how many unities the market is asking for. This behavior generates a general misunderstanding about what people really need.

The population of the city is ever growing and the number of people migrating into cities from villages in search of work is increasing day by day. We can’t tell people to stop migrating. Can we? Mumbai attracts immigrants from rural areas seeking employment and a better life. Despite government attempts to discourage the influx of people, the city’s population grew at an annual rate of more than four percent a year. Many newcomers end up in abject poverty, often living in slums or sleeping in the streets. Nor can we stop development, that’s what characterises us as humans. In the list of the top ten urban sprawls since 1990, Mumbai has been on NO 5 and will be on NO 3 in the next 13 years. The projections made in the UN’s recent publication of State of the world cities 2012-2013 state that Delhi’s urban agglomeration will have a population of 28.6 million by 2025, still well behind Tokyo’s 37.1 million. Mumbai meanwhile reached a population of 25.8 million. There’s a 29% jump in the population by 2025.  However, sheer numbers of people and rapid population growth have contributed to some serious social and environmental problems. An estimated 42 percent of the city’s inhabitants live in slum conditions. Some areas of Mumbai city have population densities of around 46,000 per square kilometre—among the highest in the world. The fact that two of our cities are going to be in the top list of urban sprawls is not something to celebrate upon. Quite apart from the question of what kind of pressure it will put on the city amenities, it highlights a serious problem.  It’s neither desirable nor a sustainable way of development.

Mumbai’s response to this fast urbanization is deplorable; squalor, slums, traffic congestion, floods, crime, pollution, deficient infrastructure, shortage of water and power issues are haunting Mumbai. Moreover, environmental infrastructure of cities, including solid waste disposal system, drainage and sewerage is not keeping up with the fast urbanization and posing serious environmental hazards. As a result, a haphazard development is taking place which is even more life threatening. For example a study said that breathing Mumbai’s air is like inhaling 20 cigarettes a day. The region is lagging behind in reaping full economic benefits of urbanization. These problems need to be solved to make the city serve as the engine of growth of national economy.

The primary attributes of environment that are affected by the urban sprawl are air, water, land and energy. Due to this excess development or what we may call as urban sprawl several changes have taken place in the climate and even a small change in the climate almost leads to a catastrophe .Here I would like to mention about the drawbacks in the drainage system and the floods that take place in Mumbai almost every year. About 100 years ago, if Mumbai city were to receive a rainfall, as heavy as the one witnessed in the monsoon of 2005, its outcome would not have been as catastrophic. This is because the population of the city has grown to ten times of what it was a century ago. To accommodate this population, the city has risen vertically, open spaces have shrunken, the arterial roads cannot be widened any further and the drainage systems fails to keep pace with the ever-increasing requirements of the metropolis.  One more factor adding to all of this are the faulty zoning regulations, when the colonies start building beyond the boundary of the city to sprawl over the neighbouring areas it does not fall under any particular zoning regulation due to which the rules in those outskirt areas vary which leads to housing everywhere, even on wetlands and where construction is not supposed to take place, therefore leading to a lot of change in the microclimate. Although global climate change has been observed almost since the 1970’s, their unpleasant effects were not alarming enough for the governments and planning authorities of cities around the world, to sit and take notice of. Thus, Mumbai’s authorities were never prompted to draft new planning policies, considering the new climatic pattern. This has been true in the case of the city authorities of Mumbai. Prior to 26^th July 2005, the city’s existing zoning and building regulations, that were drafted almost three decades ago, were used to scrutinize and regulate the new developments. There regulations failed to consider the factor of the rapidly changing local climate. Mumbai, which is known to receive an annual rainfall of around 240mm, restricted only to the months of June-September, now bears a downpour of almost eight times the average expected rainfall, in addition to the untimely winter showers. However, none of these have been considered to draft new planning policies for the city that can prevent the inundation caused by these rains and the rising sea levels. Most of the new developments permit the construction of basements, underground pedestrian bypasses and habitable space at ground level. Also, numerous old and abandoned buildings are being revitalized and remodelled to be used for a different purpose. However, the change of use of buildings from “ordinary to critical functions is carried out without strengthening the building” and without considering the climatic changes in the region. In the event of the floods, these areas get water –logged, causing destruction of life and property at large. These woes are added to by an antiquated drainage system that has been serving the city since the past century. Moreover, there has also been a blatant ignorance on the government’s and planning authority’s part to promote sustainable building construction.

The storm water drainage system of Mumbai was built largely in the days of the British rule in 1860, when the population of Mumbai was one-tenth of what it is at present. After the initial development, improving the drainage has never been a priority for the government. The system comprises of about 400km of underground drains and laterals, built on the basis of population and weather conditions of the times it was constructed in. This antiquated storm water drainage system is capable of handling rain intensity of 25mm per hour at low tide. If the rain intensity exceeds 25mm per hour and a high tide occurs, there is always a possibility of inundation. The city’s existing drainage system is designed to tackle a rainfall of normal intensity, with that assumption that there are no significant solid deposits in the drains. But the fact is otherwise, most of the city drains have been found to be occupied by a substantial amount of garbage. The resulting decrease in the capacity of the city’s storm water drainage system has been proved by the disastrous effects of the inundation that hit the city of Mumbai on 26^th july 2005. The city was caught unawares and unprepared to deal with the crisis that followed the floods. It was not in the capacity of the city’s drains to let out the excess water.

This Megacity definitely needs a climate change action plan. Mumbai is most vulnerable to climate change in the world due to its population growing in an unsustainable urban development pattern. In Mumbai, low-income groups are incapable of affording high land prices and thus end up living in slums and informal settlements. Around 74% of the total population in greater Mumbai lives in poor housing conditions, which are more vulnerable to floods and health hazards. The city due to this is constantly under the threat of floods as a result of the low lying areas and drainage system. The city due to this is constantly under the threat of floods as a result of the low lying areas and drainage system. In the city a report identified 111 places as flood prone areas. Projections have shown that the city may face water shortages by 2050.

Uncontrolled urban sprawl together with poor sanitation and drainage services seem to be the main cause for the disruption of urban watersheds. Sprawl is not an inevitable consequence of economic growth but rather a result of specific government policies that allow and in some case promote unsustainable development. Mumbai’s population growth is viewed as the root cause of land reclamation along the Mithi River and subsequent expansion of slums, residential complexes and industrial units. A lack of “systematic regional land use planning “ coupled with “ the fragmented local government structure within each metropolitan area” has fuelled suburban sprawl on the periphery of the Indian cities. Consider for example, Dharavi, a 175-hectare tract housing 800,000 people. Until the late 19th century, Dharavi was a swamp. Poor migrants moved in from different parts of India and made the land habitable. It was through their resourcefulness that Dharavi developed a flourishing economy. Today, the clichéd description of Dharavi as “Asia’s largest slum” depicts it as a place of misery and oppression. But on the positive side observe the drive, the enterprise, the spirit of survival amid the incredibly wretched physical conditions, and you cannot fail to be uplifted. Rarely do you see idleness and despair associated with this “slum”. From the establishments manufacturing leather goods for exports and selling knock-offs of designer brands on the main street to artisanal establishments in the congested inner lanes, the picture is one of pulsating energy. Dharavi is an economic success story that owes nothing to any government subsidy or urban planning. What you see here is pure Mumbai, a tribute to its spirit of human survival, ingenuity and collective solidarity. It’s an unintended city within the city.

Most of the development that you see today has been built upon a landscape of overflows. Even the city’s railway lines and national highway have been built upon what was originally a series of wetlands that served as catchment and drainage for monsoon rains. Mumbai’s Mithi River, once a web of creeks that drained excess monsoon water out into Arabian Sea, has shrunk severely as the city has grown. Uncleared rubbish also clogs storm water drains. As a coastal city we should have been in top gear right now, and since this happens every year we should have been ready for this, to adapt to climate impacts. Instead we see planners filling wetlands, planning construction on low lying salt pan lands and otherwise adding to Mumbai’s heat sink effect by removing 10,000 tress.

Image reference -

New Bombay- http://www.worldpropertyjournal.com/asia-pacific-residential-news/mumbai-real-estate-report-india-housing-market-housing-development-and-infrastructure-ltd-hdil-jp-morgan-real-estate-mumbai-real-estate-listings-5670.php

Old Bombay-http://www.airc-deefholts2011.com/Bombay-Old-Photos.html