Written By Photoyogi - 18 November, 2008

Bangalore BBMP Road Works Citizen Reports Transportation Infrastructure Pedestrian Infrastructure Mobilicity

I live in Kumarapark (BBMP Ward No 77) and i was initially pleased to see the footpaths getting a face lift. Yes Serpentine road is having spanking new machine finished granite slabs to cover the drain and make for the footpath.

We are talking 5' X 2', 3'' thick slabs! Wow, isn't that sort of expensive? bout 100 Rs per sq foot. (i was told so by the contractor) 
So why this report? I am sad to tell you that these footpaths are now 2 ft narrower and the way its being constructed looks like its not going to be usable.

Check out some pictures:

New Footpath narrower than the old one

Check The height of the kerb in the next picture, and to accommodate for the entrances to the houses, we have a step of 1.5 ft to 1 foot every 20 feet, this makes the new footpath unusable.

This picture tells you that the kerb height is almost knee height! Cars parked close to the footpath, the door may not open which means people will have to park towards the center of the road making the road appear narrower too.

Neighbors asking the contractor why this is such a bad job - while he smokes the problem away (next pic)

Existing Footpath being removed - opposite side of the road - this footpath is about 8-9 ft. I only hope this too is not going to be reduced to 5 ft.

When I contacted the President of the Kumarapark resident welfare association, Mr Ramakanth he gave me the reason that we residents park our cars on the footpath which is why this high kerbs are being put up. Though there may be some truth in that, I find that terribly lame.

I was asked to contact concerned BBMP engineer No 9880580712 (Asst Engineer Ibrahim) , how ever when i called this number there was no response.  More so this solution not only makes the cars not use the footpath now the cars are going to be parked away from the footpath making the road too unusable.

I hope the concerned authorities look into this before more damage is done.

I also request other members who are more knowledgeable in this matter to throw some light on the specification for kerb sizes in residential areas if any thing like that exists.

I am happy that my locality is getting this face lift, on the other hand It also occured to me why not take up footpath works in dense pedistrian areas such as Gandhinagar or mejestic etc where the footpaths are in worse conditions.

For more pictures visit http://flickr.com/photos/photoyogi

--
Praveen Sundaram
Aka
PhotoYogi

Footpaths Too High !

Naveen - 18 November, 2008 - 16:47

Photoyogi Yavare,

Nice pictures. I'm not sure if there are heights specified anywhere, but I think if the kerbside sidewalk is 8" higher than street level , it should be enough to discourage vehicles from trying to mount their wheels over the footpath, whilst at the same time, enable old people & children to step on to it.

One other thing is that this height must be maintained evenly across, even in way of entries /exits to gates. The rise from street level & also to gate could be made gradual /slanted. This will not interrupt the pedestrian walkway, & at the same time, permit a vehicle to rise on to the sidewalk height & then descend to the gate.

However, such designing (as is common overseas) can be misused as cars will use the gate approaches to "mount" their cars, one side up on to the footpaths.

• thumb_up 56 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Footpath height IRC guidelines

srkulhalli - 18 November, 2008 - 17:13

No dimensions given but I reproduce verbatim Footpath (Side-walks) 4.1 : In order to be effective, side-walks should be provided on both sides of the road and above the level of the carriageway seperated by non-mountable kerbs. Height of the kerb at the edge should, however, not exceed the height of non-mountable kerbs, as this might otherwise detract pedestrians from getting on to the side-walks In a totally different doc, there were 3 kerb examples, of heights 325, 275 & 200, I beleve the dimensions are mm. If you figure this out, let me know. It does appear there is no mandated height.

Suhas

• thumb_up 50 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Down right sick

asj - 18 November, 2008 - 17:15

Day after day I keep seeing more bad news. Why on earth narrow the width?
And when you start talking of IRC norms, they treat these documents with the same attitude that one has to a paper napkin when blowing noses (worse still - they would rather use these as toilet tissue).

ASJ

• thumb_up 53 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

IRC norms

asj - 18 November, 2008 - 17:22

I did point out the deficits of the IRC norms. They are long overdue for an update. But it should not become an excuse for providing a platform for doing step aerobics. 200mm is ~ 8 inches. Plus there is no mention of dipped curbs and gradients
ASJ

• thumb_up 44 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

@Photoyogi I'm very

fcsoares - 25 November, 2013 - 01:12

@Photoyogi I'm very interested in knowing from you if you succeed in trying to revert the footpaths height (and width as well) back to what is documented and approved. I tried finding out on your blog but I ain't find anything related to it.

Thanks!

• thumb_up 54 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES

Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!