<p>Campaigners against the controversial steel flyover project finally had something to cheer about. The Bangalore Development Authority’s (BDA) undertaking to the High Court of Karnataka that it has put the project on hold would mean curtains for the flyover, opined many who took to Facebook and Twitter to post their views.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Urban mobility analyst, Ashwin Mahesh noted in his Facebook post that on ‘process’ questions, the BDA has always been on weak ground. “Without an overall plan, without meaningful consultation, without consideration of alternatives as mandated in environment impact assessments, there are simply too many points of failure for the agency to be able to go ahead.”<br /><br />Mahesh said the BDA had tried to deflect the questions. “But that works in the media and in TV debates. In court, it is more important to be able to provide answers. And the plain truth is - the answers will surely speak against the project.”<br /><br />In his response, Vision Group member, Ravichandar Venkataraman said: “Today there is interim relief in the Courts, but these as you mention can be ephemeral and tactical retreats. The court of public opinion is critical. Eternal vigilance beckons!”<br /><br />He said the flyover tender had to be cancelled. “It's a poorly conceived, unsustainable engineering project masquerading as a solution for traffic congestion. “This is an inflection point for Bengaluru and a chance to consider the basics of mobility planning around pedestrians and public transport. Car centric 'grab bag' of ad hoc projects is just not on,” said Ravichandar. <br /><br />Using the hashtag #SteelFlyoverBeda, seasoned campaigner for sustainable transport options, Sathya Sankaran sounded positive on the court direction. <br /><br />“That’s how you win the city back and keep winning it back from useless projects,” he said.<br />Citizens’ collective, Whitefield Rising posted this in its Facebook page: “So the citizens of Bengaluru have forced this government with the help of courts - to explain and scrutinize the need for environmental impact study by NGT and issue of citizen involvement and transparency by the High Court. It puts paid to this government and Chief Minister’s attempt to dump this project on our City without scrutiny or consultation!”<br /><br />Separately, Citizens for Bengaluru's (CfB's) member Srinivas Avalilli said, “This proves CfB’s consistent argument that the BDA had never observed due diligence or due process on the ill-conceived project but was hurrying through it even though it wasn’t ready with design and feasibility studies. Even the detailed project report was made available only last month after the citizens’ movement gathered momentum.” <br /><br />V Balasubramanian, former additional chief secretary to the state government and the petitioner before the NGT said that the case in the high court was a fallout of the NGT orders and the BDA has to abide by it. <br /><br />Rajya Sabha member and chairman of Namma Bengaluru Foundation (petitioner in the high court) Rajeev Chandrasekhar said it is a big day for people of Bengaluru as both, the NGT and the high court have heard the voices of people. <br /><br />Notwithstanding the BDA’s undertaking to the high court, the CfB has decided to go ahead with the scheduled day-long satyagraha and fast at Freedom Park on November 6, demanding scrapping of the project. <br /><br /><br /></p>
<p>Campaigners against the controversial steel flyover project finally had something to cheer about. The Bangalore Development Authority’s (BDA) undertaking to the High Court of Karnataka that it has put the project on hold would mean curtains for the flyover, opined many who took to Facebook and Twitter to post their views.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Urban mobility analyst, Ashwin Mahesh noted in his Facebook post that on ‘process’ questions, the BDA has always been on weak ground. “Without an overall plan, without meaningful consultation, without consideration of alternatives as mandated in environment impact assessments, there are simply too many points of failure for the agency to be able to go ahead.”<br /><br />Mahesh said the BDA had tried to deflect the questions. “But that works in the media and in TV debates. In court, it is more important to be able to provide answers. And the plain truth is - the answers will surely speak against the project.”<br /><br />In his response, Vision Group member, Ravichandar Venkataraman said: “Today there is interim relief in the Courts, but these as you mention can be ephemeral and tactical retreats. The court of public opinion is critical. Eternal vigilance beckons!”<br /><br />He said the flyover tender had to be cancelled. “It's a poorly conceived, unsustainable engineering project masquerading as a solution for traffic congestion. “This is an inflection point for Bengaluru and a chance to consider the basics of mobility planning around pedestrians and public transport. Car centric 'grab bag' of ad hoc projects is just not on,” said Ravichandar. <br /><br />Using the hashtag #SteelFlyoverBeda, seasoned campaigner for sustainable transport options, Sathya Sankaran sounded positive on the court direction. <br /><br />“That’s how you win the city back and keep winning it back from useless projects,” he said.<br />Citizens’ collective, Whitefield Rising posted this in its Facebook page: “So the citizens of Bengaluru have forced this government with the help of courts - to explain and scrutinize the need for environmental impact study by NGT and issue of citizen involvement and transparency by the High Court. It puts paid to this government and Chief Minister’s attempt to dump this project on our City without scrutiny or consultation!”<br /><br />Separately, Citizens for Bengaluru's (CfB's) member Srinivas Avalilli said, “This proves CfB’s consistent argument that the BDA had never observed due diligence or due process on the ill-conceived project but was hurrying through it even though it wasn’t ready with design and feasibility studies. Even the detailed project report was made available only last month after the citizens’ movement gathered momentum.” <br /><br />V Balasubramanian, former additional chief secretary to the state government and the petitioner before the NGT said that the case in the high court was a fallout of the NGT orders and the BDA has to abide by it. <br /><br />Rajya Sabha member and chairman of Namma Bengaluru Foundation (petitioner in the high court) Rajeev Chandrasekhar said it is a big day for people of Bengaluru as both, the NGT and the high court have heard the voices of people. <br /><br />Notwithstanding the BDA’s undertaking to the high court, the CfB has decided to go ahead with the scheduled day-long satyagraha and fast at Freedom Park on November 6, demanding scrapping of the project. <br /><br /><br /></p>
