There are sensible and pragmatic ways to combine smart urban development with the protection of the environment. Mindless decisions must be avoided
The Karnataka Government's decision, announced on March 2, to scrap an unnecessary, monstrous and environmentally disastrous, 6.9-kilometre steel flyover in Bengaluru, is a welcome development. Jubilation over it, however, should not obscure the fact that the State Government not only spawned the project but obdurately insisted on implementing it in the teeth of massive protests — spearheaded by an organisation called Citizens for Bengaluru— that began on October 16, 2016, when over 2,000 people formed a human chain in the city. Then followed a door-to-door signature campaign and it was found on October 23, 2016, that over 41,800 persons had declared themselves against the project. Representations were made to the Karnataka Governor and Government agencies and a complaint was filed before the National Green Tribunal.
The State Government, under the leadership of Chief Minister, Siddaramaiah, paid no heed, ignoring, reportedly, even suggestions from within the party that it should abandon the project which was beginning to severely undermine its popularity. The Minister in charge of Bengaluru's development, KJ George, was equally adamant in his support for the project. What then explains the turnaroundIJ
The decision came on the heels of allegations that money had been paid to the Congress and some of its leaders for getting the project awarded. These gained in credence following the Income Tax department's recovery of a diary during raids in the house of a Congress MlC and reports that an eight-page note by the department, which decoded the names behind the initials mentioned in the diary, implicated top Congress leaders, four Karnataka Ministers and two top aides in a scam involving massive sums of money — Rs65 crore, according to one report, and Rs600 crore, according to the BJP.
On hopes that the Income Tax department's investigations will reveal whether money was paid and, if so, to whom. It is important to get to the truth because the project should never have been sanctioned. The flyover was to be built through the greenest part of the city, and would have required the felling of 812 trees. The impact of this can be easily understood on recalling that the loss of tree cover has made a major contribution to the rise in the level of greenhouse gases in the environment. Besides, as has been pointed out, the flyover would only have diverted traffic from one traffic light to another without solving Bengaluru's traffic woes, which can only be done through a massive improvement in the city's public transportation system. The money that would have been finally sent on the flyover, should be diverted to improving the latter,
The flyover's estimated project cost, initially put at Rs1,130 crore, had risen to Rs1,350 crore when the Bengaluru Development Authority floated the tender. It was computed at Rs1,791 crore when the project was awarded to l&T and Nagarjuna Construction Company. Given that almost every project in India has experienced massive cost escalation during implementation, the amount ultimately spent would certainly have been much higher. A conservative, rule-of-the-thumb guesstimate would put the figure at Rs2,500 crore, the expenditure of which should significantly improve Bengaluru's public transportation system.
Meanwhile, the entire development raises a fundamental question: How does one provide transport and other facilities to India's growing urban population without damaging the environmentIJ The harsh fact is that all development will be in vain if a sharp deterioration in the environment threatens not just public health but the very existence of communities. An example is the fates of people near seashores, who will have to be abandon their homes following submersion caused by rising ocean levels triggered by global warming.
While all cities have some basic features in common, they also have their unique characteristics depending on geographical location, climate and the nature of economic activities pursued. Planning for their development has to address these as well as the common features. The most important common element is the environment, the impact on which should be the first thing to be considered while sanctioning any project.
(The writer is Consultant Editor, The Pioneer, and an author)