HOT TOPICS

SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES

Road Widening Hits Road Block - PIL

508

Written By Naveen - 31 May, 2008

Bangalore CDP BBMP Road Works PIL Road widening Media Reports Transportation Infrastructure Hasiru Usiru

Karnataka High Court admits PIL against Road Widening Projects in Bangalore

 

Issues emergent notices to Respondents

Mr. Chief Justice Cyriac Joseph and Mr. Justice A. N. Venugopal Gowda, constituting the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, today admitted a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Environment Support Group and others against the ongoing irrational road widening projects of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP – Corporation of the City of Greater Bangalore). Appreciating the urgency for considering the need to protect avenue trees from needless felling and safeguarding various rights and priveleges of pedestrians, street vendors, etc., the Hon'ble Judges issued emergent notices to the Respondents while also allowing for serving of hand summons.

The PIL challenges BBMP's ongoing project of widening 91 roads (a number likely to increase) in Bangalore, running into a length of about 400 kms. across the length and breadth of the old city areas. This mega project is predicated on the premise that it would result in improved flow of traffic and reduce congestion. However, no evidence has been presented to prove that the result of widening would actually achieve these objectives. In contrast to the approach adopted by BBMP, experience from densely populated and leading cities from across the world prove that widening of roads is not the solution for easing traffic congestion. Instead intelligent design approaches, responsive (rather than reactionary) traffic management, enhancement of public transport, improvement in pedestrian zones, protection of livelihoods of vendors, and discouraging personalised modes of transport have successfully addressed the most serious traffic congestion problems of mega cities. Such approaches have also enabled the protection of cultural heritage, public spaces and urban greenery, significantly enhancing the environmental quality of urban areas.

 

The PIL makes a strong case against tree felling as the first step to road widening by demonstrating that the work undertaken by BBMP in several roads has proved unsuccessful in reducing traffic congestion. The Petitioners submit that the actions of the Tree Officer in authorising the felling of hundreds of avenue trees violate various provisions of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, and is admittedly an action taken under duress. In most cases where hundreds of really old avenue trees have been felled, the stated object of widening has not been achieved even after years, as various utilities have not shifted out of the proposed right of way, or such spaces have been encroached by places of worship.

 

The PIL relies heavily on the National Policy on Urban Street Vendors, the National Urban Transport Policy and a variety of circulars issued by the Union Urban Development Secretary that argue for a rational and intelligent approach to managing congestion in urban areas. In particular, it makes a case that the object of all travel is to ensure people move across cities in safety and comfort, thus necessitating privileges to pedestrian movement, non-motorised forms of transport and public transport. Contrarily, the BBMP's approach seems to arrogate a right for the private motor car over all other modes of travel, thereby extinguishing many fundamental rights, while also exposing the public at large to great discomfort and even harm.

The PIL presents a variety of evidence to argue that the road widening programme is illegal as it has skirted fundamental public consultation processes required per the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. In addition the draft Comprehensive Development Plan -2005 (CDP) of Bangalore Development Authority, defining land use of the city, did not contain any proposal for widening roads on such a grand scale. Surprisingly, the final CDP – 2007 introduced plans for most inner city roads to be widened without in any manner informing or involving the public, an action that is patently illegal.

The PIL is a result of a long and deliberate series of proactive steps taken by the Petitioners along with Hasiru Usiru, a network of concerned groups and individuals in Bangalore. The Petitioners draw attention to the ruling of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in 2005 (WP No. 14104/2005) in which the Government was directed to involve the public in decisions relating to road widening and tree felling. It is submitted that despite exhaustive efforts on the part of the Petitioners and Hasiru Usiru urging the Government and its agencies to engage with the public in evolving such schemes, the current road widening project has been rushed through disregarding the directions of the Hon'ble Court. In this context, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to strike down the road widening proposals, and the consequent tree felling orders. In addition, it is prayed that the Govenment be directed to evolve rational road development proposals that met with the highest standards of law, policy and urban planning.

 

The petitioners Environment Support Group and CIVIC Bangalore were represented by Advocate Mr. Sunil Dutt Yadav and Mr. Leo F. Saldanha, Coordinator, Environment Support Group, appeared in person. A copy of the PIL is accessible online on ESG website.

COMMENTS

show us you know what you are doing

tsubba - 1 June, 2008 - 01:48

widening the roads without any measurable expectations is irrational, even more so if it entitles sacrifice of trees (which are a unique marker for the city) and displacement of people. what internal codes or even IRC codes have been violated that these road widening projects are being taken up? if it is not based on any code, then it is an entirely subjective decision of some city official. how can governmental decisions be taken on such subjective assessments? meanwhile, even if we are to assume that some codes are being adhered to aksharasa, there are many visible inconsistencies and irrationalities in the existing road network that the city should address first before embarking on road widening. for example, the critical bottlenecks are the intersections and not the midblock width of the road. vehicles donot reside on midblocks. they travel. however, they are forced to dwell at the intersections because of bad engineering. redesigning the intersection by providing turning lanes will increase the capacity of the road more than increasing the road width mid block. even if lane discipline is not followed by road users, the majority of the traffic still flows directionally. turn lanes at the intersections can be designed for directionality by matching the road widths instead of lanes. even at the coarser level of width (as opposed to the finer level of lanes) the roads of the city are badly engineered. it is common to see many of the city's roads mate roads of narrower widths. unless the city can justify the road widening is based on sound engineering judgment these road widening schemes should not be taken up. just saying there are traffic jams on this road is not sufficient. what is the source of the jams? have all other fundamental issues been adequately and objectively addressed. only if such a claim can be made conclusively should a road be allowed to be considered for widening. even then, at this stage when bangalore is at the threshold of implementing plans for public transport and at a stage when the integrated transport authority itself is still getting established, the city should avoid shooting from the hip with road expansion plans and instead invest in rationalizing and optimizing the existing road networks. when there is absolutely no evidence or track record of consistent, sound road and traffic engineering judgment by the city, on what basis is the city going about demolishing its unique cultural and geographic markers? unless the city is absolutely sure that its current roads have been optimally utilized, on what basis is it embarking on broadening the road network? when there is hardly any consistent good road engineering judgment that is visible, how can the city guarantee the optimality of the road network usage and on what basis does it expect its citizens to support its plans? and why should the citizens think of it as anything other than a wider display of hubris and incompetency?

MLAs and Corporators agenda is Road Widening

Vasanth - 1 June, 2008 - 04:01

Corporators and MLAs simply put their agenda as road widening and at the cost of trees and even houses without thinking what is the bottleneck now, what is the root cause and how it can be eliminated.

Root cause is the increase in the number of cars and bad driving habits. Solution needs to be found out for that rather than widened roads which again will be occupied by cars. Width of the traffic will increase and length will decrease.

There are ofcourse very narrow roads in some places, but, oneway and preventing HTV traffic there is the only answer. And few needs to be made pedestrain/cycle only zone such as Avenue road. Goods to be transferred to the shops needs to be transported by cycles as it was done in older days instead of bringing trucks or Goods Auto inside the Avenue road.

Elimination can be done by developing effective public transit and peenalizing for using cars especially wide cars and SUVs.

 

Senseless Road Widening - TS, Vasanth - Perfect

Naveen - 1 June, 2008 - 04:45

 

Absolutely right, & a great assessment, TS.

BBMP's solution so far to tackle congestion has only been widening roads, without care & thought for heritage values & the common folks - provision for movement of private vehicles has all along been taking unduly greater importance whilst ignoring & harming all others.

 

Englighten the administrators, praja activism

Bengloorappa - 1 June, 2008 - 06:03

Well, not surprisingly, our short-sighted administrators should be enlightened as to how important it is for us to retain our trees for future generations and to protect the climate which Bangalore was once renowned for.

May I suggest that we collate all the material that we have been discussing here, viz -
1. Focus on Mass transportation, get more people out of their cars
2. Planning of Bus Stops at proper locations
3. Improve and make BMTC efficient using TTMC model etc
4. Reclaim side lanes abutting footpaths by making them usable
5. Strict enforcement of Lane discipline and other traffic rules, more powers to Traffic police, re-org traffic dept. etc
6. Pedestrian Skywalks can prevent jaywalking and disturbing traffic flow
7. Improving Intersections thru' redesign and signal-free corridors

Then we prepare a draft of the multi-pronged approach and present it to different bodies such as BBMP, BDA, BMTC, Forest Dept., KSPCB etc.

I am sure someone out there in those agencies is thinking about this, but since this is a long tem solution and will take time to show results and maybe even span multiple governments in power, no one wants to implement it.

It is imperative to resist local MLA's, corportators and administrators desires to use funds for mindless road-widening.

Let ESG and Mr. Saldhana use PIL while we could use less confronting ways to convince them about what is right and what is not.

Road Widening - We need to Resist

Naveen - 31 May, 2008 - 18:13

 

Hi All,


I think Praja should engage with Hasiru Usiru & esg & promote better ideas to
tackle congestion with the reformed bus routings that narayan has suggested (TTMC to TTMC or zone to zone), "bus & pedestrians only" in shopping /market areas & BRT concepts, instead of destroying trees, widening roads & worsening the already terrible & chaotic traffic conditions.

The groups taking up the issue against road widening need support & I believe this senseless road widening without a plan for prioritizing public transport will worsen things - praja could provide the inputs on how this can be done.

What are your opinions ?

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!