How limited is the gleaming vision of infra in Mumbai

Urban infra meant services like waste management, water supply, etc. Urbanists have expanded its scope to include digital services too

In the now fully functional underground metro, Aqua Line, you are forced to go through a digital detox for the length of your commute. Most mobile services are not accessible there. In fact, they have not been for the past many months, even when the line was operational for about half its 33.5 km distance. Complaints have fallen on deaf ears, posts tagging the relevant authorities on social media have gone unnoticed, and periodic reminders to the staff at the metro stations have been received with nonchalant shrugs.

It is, of course, possible to live without access to a mobile service for half an hour to an hour. But why should anyone have to in this day and age when connectivity is everything? This non-availability of mobile services, or the last-mile connectivity to and from metro stations, was not mentioned two days back when the Aqua Line was made fully operable till Cuffe Parade from its hitherto last stop at Acharya Atre Chowk, or Worli Naka. This, according to the powers that be, is not infrastructure in the strictest sense of the term.

Why, though, is a mystery because the ‘Mumbai One’ common app for all public transport ticketing is considered a part of the city’s new infrastructure. As is Mumbai’s, to be precise Navi Mumbai’s, spanking new international airport, which, along with other projects, was inaugurated earlier this week. In the exuberant self-congratulations going around since the multiple inaugurations, evidenced also in a panel discussion on a mainstream television channel that I was invited to, the true and complete meaning of urban infrastructure seems to have been lost. Or wilfully forgotten.

In the climate of urbanisation that India has been in during the past decade or two, urban infrastructure has been rather unfortunately reduced to mega, multi-million or multi-billion-rupee, big-ticket physical projects that can be presented or displayed. An exhibition of such projects has become synonymous with urban development, growth of cities, and some sort of urban progress. Even in this limited vision, the emphasis has been on transport projects and, within this narrow band, on roads and bridges that considerably ease commutes of a certain select class of Mumbaikars.

This is not to suggest, by any measure, that the new international airport or the underground metro or the entire metro network was not needed in Mumbai. If they fit into the comprehensive vision for the city and for the entire Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), and study reports showed a need for them, then it follows that they should have been designed and constructed. Even so, this is only half the story, or perhaps less, given that climate change concerns barely affected the indiscriminate flattening of hills or turning of river flows for the airport.

The concept of urban infrastructure goes well beyond physical projects of transportation; it was always meant to include the entire framework of physical structures and social services to facilitate or push economic growth and improve quality of life for the largest number of people. So, urban infrastructure meant services like water supply, waste management, hospitals, schools, markets, community or common areas, open spaces, emergency response systems, and so on. Urbanists have expanded its scope in the hyper-connected world to include digital services and facilities too and, of course, incorporated sustainability issues.

When was the last time that Mumbai’s water supply or public school system or public health network was treated like a big-ticket project with massive investments in a short time, like in the metro network or coastal road? When was the last time that the city’s waste management became worthy of national attention and, consequently, the state government and civic body’s priority?

Even if limited to transportation, why does Mumbai get physical projects that ease the movement of private vehicles when the maximum number of commuters use public transport? The intentional bleeding of Mumbai’s BEST bus services has been well documented. The service on which 3.5m Mumbaikars, some of the most marginalised, still depend does not get beyond Rs 900-1,000 cr a year in the BMC’s budget. If the Rs 37,700 cr Aqua Line metro, with a projected 1.3 million commuters a day, is infrastructure worth investing in, why is BEST, with three times the commuters, not?

The story of the suburban railways is even curiouser, with a highly impressive figure of Rs 52,000 crore investment earmarked, but timelines are unclear. The MMRDA is spending nearly Rs 6500 crore this year but, again, on specific new roads. The fundamental question: why does the vision of Mumbai’s infrastructure and world-class facilities never include basic walking infrastructure across the city even when it has been recorded that 54 per cent of the fatalities on roads are of pedestrians? The self-congratulationists would do well to find two kilometres of uninterrupted walkable pavements in the city other than, of course, Marine Drive and the tonier segments of south Mumbai.

The approach to Mumbai’s infrastructure has been project-defined, selective to a certain class, and rather narrow in its vision. This singular focus on a few physical projects has, in fact, deprived the city from realising its full potential as a vibrant economy with an aspirational quality of life. The first half of the equation, vibrant economy, might still hold, but no common Mumbaikar would argue that she/he enjoys a good quality of life, let alone great. Why, right outside the Bandra Kurla Complex station of the Aqua Line metro lies the much-abused and stinky, black Mithi River; it was covered up during the inauguration spree. 

The rejuvenation of the Mithi should have been a part of the great infrastructure push, if only its true meaning was understood by those in power.