JOIN USHow not to plan flyovers: Lessons from Bengaluru's Sankey project
Kimsuka Iyer lived all her life in the Sadashivanagar area. “There are tamarind trees and a mango tree on the roadside in front of my house. As kids, we used to play under the trees, pluck fruits and eat. Now, to see this big red cross on the trees shocks us all,” she says.
The red crosses were marked by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) two weeks ago as part of a road widening and flyover construction project on Sankey Road, which connects Malleswaram 18th cross to Bhashyam Circle and Cauvery Circle.
Sources say the project may be dropped for now, though there is no official word on this yet. However, the questions about the planning of this project still remain.
Meanwhile, the BBMP has submitted the project to the Directorate of Urban Land Transport (DULT), for the approval of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Land Transport Authority (BMLTA), an agency that is not fully formed yet, and not functional.
BBMP engineer-in-chief B S Prahlad says that the Sankey road widening project dates back to 1984, and it was included in master plans of 1995 and 2015. “There were protests back then too. People went to court in 2009-10 and the high court ruled in favour of the project,” he says. However, the project did not take off.
The question of relevance is important when considering a project that was first proposed over 25 years ago, feels traffic expert M N Sreehari, who is also the advisor to the Government of Karnataka on traffic, transportation and infrastructure. “If someone floated the idea in 1995, why should it be carried out today?” he asks.
Prahlad explains that there is increased traffic congestion in residential areas like Sadashivanagar and Vyalikaval, which calls for a solution. “When traffic is more than 10,000 CPU, widening the roads is not enough. It requires a grade separator, which is why we decided to construct a flyover in 2022, based on traffic studies,” he says.
However, the residents of these areas came to know about the project through the media only six weeks ago. “It was a shock because none of us knew about it. There was no public consultation,” says Preeti Sunderajan, a resident of Malleswaram.
Prahlad says that public consultation is only required for policy-making, not for traffic engineering projects. “We did traffic studies to come up with this project. Even the DULT has checked it,” he says.
However, sources from DULT refuted this.
‘Another flyover’
Preeti says the congestion on Sankey Road is not as severe as it is made out to be. “The real bottleneck is near Cauvery theatre, where the road narrows to 1.5 lanes inside the Magic Box. The signal there is making it even worse,” she says. The Magic Box is a 1.5-lane wide, dismantlable underpass that facilitates movement from Sankey Road towards the city centre.
Prahlad is aware of this. “Vehicles queues at Sadashivanagar and Vyalikaval will reduce, it will shift towards the Magic Box. There needs to be a flyover there as well, and we will do it,” he says advocating one more flyover.
If that is the case, why not plan all of them together? Prahlad explains that the projects are taken up one by one over time to cover expenses. “The CNR Rao underpass was completed eight years ago, the Yeshwanthpur flyover was completed six years ago, and now we are working on the Sankey Tank Road. The BBMP has other priorities as well, so we take up projects one by one,” he says.
Obscure process
Though the project is happening in the BBMP’s West Zone, the zonal officials have no clue about it. “Selected road infrastructure works are undertaken by BBMP head office, the new BBMP Act has no bearing on it, so zonal officers are not in the loop regarding the project,” says a senior official from BBMP West Zone.
A simulated video of the grade separator and road widening project shared by the BBMP shows a four-lane flyover with two-lane roads at grade on both sides. The overall design appears to be eight lanes wide in some areas.
The tender does not show the land acquisition cost. An environment impact assessment done by Harini Nagendra and Vijay Nishanth shows that 55 trees of 23 species and 14 families will be cut in the 600-m stretch to facilitate the project.
Additionally, 400 saplings and trees growing on the tank bund which are not accounted for in the Detailed Project Report (DPR) would also be cut, says the report.
“The DPR shows 39 trees, which is incorrect. 55 heritage trees and a large part of the footpath will be gone,” says Preeti, showing huge trees and footpaths on Sadashivanagar marked with red crosses. “Where are people supposed to walk?” she asks.
‘Ignoring ecology’
Satya Arikutharam, a mobility consultant who has studied the DPR, says that it disregards alternatives and is limited to a predetermined solution of building a flyover.
According to him, the traffic analysis has been completely ignored in the planning. “They have simply counted the traffic on one day and concluded that it is the same throughout the year. The entire planning is flawed, incomplete and incoherent. The DPR also fails to take into account environmental issues,” he says.
The markings on trees inside the Stella Mary’s School compound indicate the extent of land that would be needed for road widening. The compound is known to flood during rains and water seeps from the side of the Sankey tank. In addition to government land, residents say a few private properties and two temples may need to be acquired if the project becomes a reality.
“A tank bund is not meant for traffic operations but they have constructed a road on it. Constructing another road above it will be a blunder. The soil will be weak as it may be holding water,” says Sreehari.
Arikutharam emphasises that changing land use indiscriminately will only lead to increased traffic. “Land use is intrinsically linked to traffic. The absence of land use controls and the lack of capacity in transport planning, traffic management and engineering within the BBMP make them jump into concrete and steel solutions,” he says.
People demand alternatives
“The DPR has projected the traffic as growing at 5% but in reality, it will be a lot more. Give us buses and metro feeder connectivity to reduce private vehicles, that is the way it should be planned. Think of alternatives—diversions, one-ways, signal optimisation and use AI for traffic automation,” says Preeti.
Bhashyam Circle had a traffic roundabout with no signals, which allowed vehicles to move freely. "It was closed when vehicles did not follow rules,” says Vittal Murthy, a resident of Vyalikaval. He says changing it back to the circle is not difficult, and requires less land.
“All the bypass roads are dead in this area. Opening them up will help control traffic,” says Sharath B R, another resident of Vyalikaval.
“A simple solution is to coordinate signals to get a green corridor. There should be a single coordination platform to discuss and remove all bottlenecks,” says Sreehari.
“Traffic control at Bhashyam Circle can be managed better. In the mornings they can have one-way traffic towards Bhashyam Circle and in the evening towards Malleswaram, instead of making more lanes,” he adds.
“In areas like Sankey Road, we should not be thinking about Flyovers at all. C V Raman Road which has been properly developed takes in a lot more traffic than Sankey Road,” says Arikutharam.
Malleshwaram MLA C N Ashwath Narayan, who is also the minister for skill development, was unavailable for comments.