The Detailed Feasibility Report (DFR) for the ambitious elevated corridor project, which is now in the public domain, seems to have raised more questions than offered answers. The DFR was expected to explain the rationale behind the project and alignment, but with little information on how it can mitigate traffic, it has drawn the ire of citizens groups and urban experts.
While DFR diagnoses the problem of high congestion corridors and proposes the project as a solution before going on to justify its feasibility.
‘Wrong starting point’
The DFR, in its present form, is only an engineering report and debating it will only play into the hands of the government, said N.S. Mukunda, of Citizen Action Forum (CAF).
“It is the wrong starting point for the debate. The government, BBMP or KRDCL, must first release traffic simulation studies, evaluations of various alternate solution sets and how elevated corridors were chosen as the most viable solution. If there is no such study, the government must first do such a study. Till then there is no point discussing the DFR,” said Mr. Mukunda.
Those opposing the project are questioning its genesis, but there are no straight answers.
R.K. Mishra, leading C-Smart, Centre for Smart Cities, made the first presentation on the elevated corridor project early in 2015. The then Mayor N. Shantakumari sought State government grants during consultations on 2015 BBMP budget. At the time, Mr. Mishra was a member of Technical Advisory Cimmittee, BBMP. “The basic idea was to connect North-South and East-West parts of the city with elevated corridors for traffic. The alignment routes were later adjusted based on traffic studies,” he said.
No traffic simulation studies conducted
The project was later shifted to Karnataka Road Development Corporation Ltd. (KRDCL) which proceeded to draw up a DFR.
However, sources in BBMP and a former TAC member said no traffic simulation studies were conducted to decide on elevated corridors as a solution or to decide their alignment. KRDCL later made minor changes to the alignment based on traffic volume studies, but for the most part it remains the same.
“This clearly shows that elevated corridors were decided upon as a solution for the city’s traffic congestion problem on the drawing board, drawing lines on a map and a story later built around to justify it,” said Srinivas Alavilli of Citizens for Bengaluru (CfB), at the forefront of ‘Elevated Corridor Beda’ campaign.
Ideally, following the diagnosis of the traffic congestion problems, all solutions — mainly various modes of public mass transit systems — should have been evaluated vis-a-vis infrastructure for private vehicles, says Ashish Verma, Associate Professor, Transportation Systems Engineering, IISc.
Alternative solutions
For instance, a study by Dr. Verma showed that running metro trains on the proposed corridors instead of private vehicles will move nearly 38 times more people per hour. For a ₹1 crore investment, elevated corridors for private vehicles will move 22 people per hour per direction, where as a metro can move 831 people per hour per direction, the study showed. However, none of the agencies – BBMP, KRDCL or the consultant that prepared the DFR have expanded on the evaluation of alternative solutions.
