A few articles have recently highlighted the ways in which road management in Chennai is sub-par. While an arterial road visibly carries the bulk of city’s traffic, collector/ interior roads need further attention. A recent article in The Hindu cautioned that interior roads in the city currently carry traffic volumes far exceeding their carrying capacity. This leads to faster deterioration of the road and causes inconvenience to the residents on these roads.

Another article in the Hindu reports that the authorities are now concentrating on optimising road space on the three arterial roads on which the Chennai Metro Rail will be built. This is good, but there is already no balanced allocation of road space on these roads. In one of my previous blog posts I had highlighted the high rate of accidents on these arterial roads. The width of the roads is disproportionately more than that of the pavements, and pedestrians are forced to walk on the road. Not only does this make them vulnerable to accidents, it also slows vehicles. The authorities tried to mandate traffic lanes on some of the arterial roads, but this has largely failed. This was mainly because of non-availability of dedicated lanes for particular modes of transport like buses. But lanes are still important to decongest roads and to reduce accidents. And investing in more footpaths is also important. Are the authorities in charge of Chennai’s roads – the Corporation, the State transport department, the State Highways Department – taking all of these different factors into consideration?

Meanwhile, a focus on building better roads may not be the most important intervention needed in the city. A more holistic strategy needs to be devised to encourage motorists to switch from their vehicles to a convenient mode of public transport. An integrated, and well planned network of pavements will ensure no conflicts of space between pedestrians and motorists and will help achieve the targets set in the Road Safety policy.

A few weeksago, Transparent Chennai hosted a talk by Mark Gorton,an entrepreneur and advocate of walkable cities, who insisted that the situation in urban India could be improved by:

• Investing and prioritising pedestrian and cycling infrastructure over flyovers and motor- vehicle infrastructure.
• Better public transportation systems as they move larger number of people.
• Suppression of private automobiles by creating disincentives for cars which would force people to switch to public transport.
• Planning smart landuse so that the locations having large number of workingpeople are connected with good public transport, making the use of public transit more feasible. Based on his experience in the West, where urban sprawl is much larger, he feels that planning for buses and pavements could come later, but buildings and land-use policies needed prior attention and planning.

In contrast to the West, our cities in India are much denser and the urban sprawl is also limited. Except for Delhi all other cities have high two-wheeler to car ratios, and a fair portion of trips are made through public transport and walking. This means that moving towards more sustainable, walker friendly cities does not require as much work here as it does in the West. Yet, the authorities here are putting much less thought into this than they are in cities like New York and London. The authorities should take all the above concerns into consideration while upgrading the roads and should insist on participation from the residents to create a workable solution.

Roshan Toshniwal

It is six years since the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission became official on Dec 3, 2005. These were expected to be the six defining years for India’s urban landscape. JNNURM gave rise to a million new hopes and desires. Its ‘one of a kind’ design coaxed people to believe that hopes would somehow be fulfilled in the next seven years when the program was to be rolled out in our rapidly urbanizing Indian cities. We are now entering the seventh year, and questions are being asked -Have hopes been fulfilled? Did JNNURM succeed in delivering its promises? Did the urban sector reforms lead to equitable, efficient, productive and responsive cities, as aimed by the $20 billion programme? Were reforms in accordance with the 74^th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 which seeks to strengthen urban local bodies? Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are not so clear cut, as a talk I attended last week made clear.

Recently, Professor K.C. Sivaramakrishnan, a former IAS officer who served in the Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority and is a member of the Technical Advisory Group of the JNNURM, talked about his new book –Re-visioning Indian Cities: The Urban Renewal Mission, at the Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai. I have to admit that I haven’t read the book yet, but the discussion was intriguing and left the audience thinking about key urban issues and concerns that have plagued the Indian economy for decades.

Sivaramakrishnan started his talk provocatively: “I have lived to see four decades of what one may want to call an urban mess,” he said. He had come to Chennai days after attending the sixth anniversary celebration of the JNNURM held at Vigyan Bhavan in Delhi along with city officials, state ministers and other key urban leaders. He told us that the awards ceremony encapsulated the progress of the JNNURM so far. The JNNURM has had some positive impact: it has prompted people to engage with the urban agenda as never before in Indian history.  Awards were presented at the ceremony to cities whose success stories in providing better services would not have been widely recognized without such a program, like a town in Tripura which successfully implemented 24X7 water. Many more buses are on the roads thanks to the NURM, an objective that was not even part of the original program.

But Sivaramakrishnan cautioned that it was not clear that the program had achieved its ambitious objectives. The program promised to be different, but he argued that the JNNURM was put together like any other centrally sponsored scheme, with all the attendant problems. The concept that ‘better performing cities should get more money’ was shot down by the Planning Commission. Most importantly, he pointed out that the program’s stated commitment to empowering Urban Local Bodies was immediately derailed by treating the para-statals (which are controlled by the state governments) as the same as ULB’s.

According to him, state governments have always undermined and assaulted the capabilities and powers of the municipalities, and that the JNNURM did not change this trend. He argued that “[t]he tendency of the state government to say municipalities are useless has to change. Because of this tendency, parastatals were created. There has been no serious attempt to decentralize in spite of the 73^rd and 74^th Amendment.”

The floor was then opened to the audience for questions. I must confess that I couldn’t contain my excitement at this stage because I anticipated some seriously controversial questions. Mr. SP Ambrose, a retired IAS officer, Managing Editor of our very own Adyar Times, and also a government servant for many years, did not disappoint me. He asked whether the JNNURM had led to better cities or contributed further to the urban mess. He also asked if JNNURM had done very well in some cities, examples which can be highlighted and replicated in other cities.

To this, the professor immediately said:“Some cities have definitely done well in the last decade but I cannot directly link it with JNNURM’s effectiveness. Cities that have done well, like Surat, did well even before the introduction of JNNURM. This is because of a fairly robust arrangement between the local and state political set up.”

Prof. Sivaramakrishnan also highlighted the impact of the bus component of the JNNURM in cities. “When the BRT was introduced in Delhi, 90 per cent of the car owners said that it was a dreadful concept to have bus lines. 90 per cent of the bus owners and users said this was a wonderful concept. So, one can see the intensity of conflict of interest not only between various levels in the bureaucracy, but also between the different socio-economic groups.” In this case, the JNNURM intensified conflict between these classes, but perhaps such conflict will push cities to make decisions about how to more equitably allocate public spaces like roads.

When the audience further prodded him to comment on the effectiveness of the programme, and why his book refuses to give an overall picture of the efficacy of the programme, he highlighted the lack of adequate data on change. He continued: “Let me tell you about the mid-term evaluation of this programme. Assessment of the projects has just been a box-ticking exercise … There has been no determined effort to break away from patterns.”

Prof. Sivaramakrishnan ended by thanking the audience for taking out precious time away from the kachheri season in Chennai. He closed the evening by saying that one book always gives way to another, and that he is confident that he will be back next year talking about his new book.

Verdict: Grab this book if you are interested in learning more about the JNNURM from the perspective of an insider!

Somya Sethuraman

Parking is a menace in every city, and most cities haven’t been able to tackle the problem efficiently. In Chennai, for instance, approximately 1200 vehicles get added to the city’s vehicular population every day, but the authorities have surrendered only 7 per cent of the total land area to accommodate all vehicles.

According to a recent study by CMDA, the demand for parking in central business district[1] (CBD) is more than twice the supply. For example, as of 2007, T. Nagar had the capacity to accommodate 800 cars against the required capacity of 2,151 cars. Similarly, Parry’s Corner had a capacity for 700 cars but needed space for 4,500. “This was the status some four years ago, and now the situation is worse,” official sources said.

The National Urban Transport Policy, a flagship programme of the Ministry of Urban Development devised parking policies in 2006. The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM), the flagship scheme for city development, envisages formulation of parking policies for every city. However, the focus on specific policies to deal with parking woes has been minimal. According to Kamal Nath, the Minister for Urban Development, “”You can go underground or over-ground (with multi-storied parking lots), but I don’t want to have any new construction in the country without parking space”

One cannot build roads, flyovers and bridges without an equal emphasis on creation of adequate parking space, especially when the car population is estimated at 15 million (2010 figures). A question that arises is whether the state should provide public space for an individual’s private property. While parking is not a right, every citizen should be entitled to public space in the country. But how can the state afford to allocate its limited public space to every citizen? The answer to this lies in promoting the use of public transport by the state to restrict the use of private vehicles. Also an easy way to restrict use of private vehicles is by charging high parking fees for use of public space.

Indian cities are ranked lowest by the Global Colliers International Parking Rate Survey 2010. According to the survey, Chennai ($ 0.96-Rs 43.42) is the cheapest city for parking in the world with less than a dollar for parking per day, compared to New York and Hong Kong which have excessively priced parking, topping the list of the most expensive list to park your vehicle at $31.1 (Rs 1407.09) and $ 24.83 (Rs 1,124.20) per day respectively as per the Survey.

A recent Delhi High Court decision[2], while approving the parking policy framed by the Environmental Pollution Control Authority (EPCA) emphasized that “private vehicle owners must pay the cost of the use of public spaces required for parking” and further that “parking policy cannot be based on the increase of parking supply, but on restricting the availability of parking in the city and strict enforcement to ensure against misuse”. This decision paves way for the urban planners to increase parking charges in cities. And that fare so collected can be used in upgrading the public transport so as to promote the same.

Chennai has only 20 tow trucks to monitor the city’s 34 lakh vehicles. Once parking charges generate adequate revenue, it can be used to set up a fund that finances enforcement measures.

In conclusion, a sole policy should be formulated for managing parking facilities in India. This policy should have a long term vision and should be designed after taking into account the various systems devised by urban planners around the globe.

---

[1] According to Volume 3 Chapter 1 Structure of Chennai Developed by CMDA, George Town and its extension southwards into Anna Salai together constitute the central business district of the City

[2] Khan Market Traders Association v. Union of India, 2011

References

http://indiancases.com/display-articles.php?articleid=6
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/cities/chennai/no-end-parking-woes-931
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Chennai/article2570020.ece

Submitted by Iyal Pari, a law student, currently interning with Transparent Chennai

Transparent Chennai was recently invited to participate in the Center for Environment Education’s (CEE) annual coastal carnival for kids, which was held at the Bharat Scouts and Guide’s campus on Marina beach. Our focus? To try and provide an interactive display that in the end would highlight the importance of the beach. How did we do this? Through maps of course!

First we pinned down tiled google images of Chennai’s coastline and we asked students to answer in not more than a couple of sentences either one or all of the following questions:

After students had done this they were asked to pin their blurb on the paper map based on where they wanted it to be.

As the day progressed the display built itself and at the end we were left with a collage of blurbs pinned by the students that visited our stall. This resulted in a rich and varied perception map about the coastline.

Parallel to this, we also had students try to locate where they lived on a big map of Chennai city (using TC’s boundary data no less). What we wanted to know was how far have students traveled to be at this event?

This map also built itself as well as the day went on…

The final map looked something like this. It serves as an important indication to the importance of the coastline with students coming from as far as Thirunindravur to attend CEE’s event.

New layer coming up!

- Siddharth Hande

Member of Legislative Assembly – Constituency Development Scheme (MLA-CDS) is a scheme fully funded by the State Government. In Tamil Nadu, it comes under the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department. The Commissioner of this department is responsible for this scheme.[1] ‘The main objective of the Scheme is to take up works to bridge the critical infrastructural gaps in the Assembly constituencies.  Under this Scheme, each MLA proposes the works that should be executed in his constituency.  The District Collector gives administrative sanction for the works.’[2]

The Scheme was introduced in 1997 when every MLA was allocated Rs.25 lakh for the development of his/her constituency. Over the years the amount allotted to each MLA has increased, from Rs. 35 lakh in 1998, Rs.50 lakh in 1999, Rs.77 lakh in 2000, Rs.82 lakh in 2001, Rs.1 crore in 2005, Rs.1.7 crore in 2009 to the most recent increase Rs.1.75 cr in 2010[3].

There are specific guidelines for the use of the funds under this scheme. The latest guidelines are given in the Government Order G.O.(1D) No.292, RD&PR (SGS1) Dept., dt.  14.06.2010 . In the guidelines, the State government indicates the percentage of funds that are compulsorily tied to be used for priority works. The rest of the funds can be used according to the discretion of the MLA provided that they do not fall under the list of prohibited works. As of now, both the tied and discretionary components are allotted 50% of the funds each. The priority works for the rural and the urban areas are separately listed. For 2010-11, every MLA was asked to spend Rs.20 lakh on Anganwadi buildings and Noon Meal Centres and Sheds. [4]

The Third State Finance Commission (2007-08 to 2011-2012) felt that the works done under MLA-CDS came under the purview of the local bodies. The increased allocation of funds under the MLA-CDS was taking away funds from the local bodies. In the urban areas, the mandatory works carried out were mainly Government sponsored or government oriented assets. If the money had been spent on the lines of the recommendation for rural areas, the CMWSSB (Metrowater) should have received Rs.3.60 cr as opposed to the Rs. 52.71 lakh it received from 2002-2007. In light of this, SFC 3 recommended 30% of MLA-CDS to be ear-marked for core civic services in urban areas. The earmarked portion of the CDS fund should be used for projects prepared by ULBs. For the rural sector, projects shall be prepared by the Gram Sabhas.

Even as efforts are being made to cover all angles and fine-tune the guidelines, discrepancies in the actual spending and utilization of these funds have not been wiped out.

The CAG Audit in 2008 opened a can of worms for the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department. It was found that for the years 2002-2004, money that had not been utilized under the MLA-CDS scheme had been retained by the department instead of being refunded to the State government. Expenditure was being inflated to cover up the unused funds. Rs. 30 cr had been diverted to an unrelated state scheme. Rs.23.8 cr had been spent on prohibited works such as construction of residential/official buildings for government departments. In 2006-07, of the 56,228 that had been taken up only, 25,916 had been completed. In Chennai, none of the 122 works sanctioned had been completed.

A Hindu article in 2008 said that between April 2006 and October 2008, only 43% of the funds allocated under MLA-CDS to the MLAs of Chennai had been used.

In Bihar, Mr. Nitish Kumar’s solution to the rampant corruption in the MLA funds was to do away with the scheme altogether.[5]Are there ways to improve monitoring of this scheme? Do we know how our MLA uses his funds? Do you?

Meryl Mary Sebastian

---

[1] Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, “About us”, <http://www.tnrd.gov.in/aboutus.html>

[2] Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Policy Note: 2009-2010, 5.2 Member of Legislative Assembly Constituency Development Scheme, <http://www.tnrd.gov.in/policynotes/policy_notes_2009_2010_en.pdf>

3 Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu,  Government Orders no. 99(1998), 80 (1999), 138(2000), 221(2001), 30 (2005),90 (2009), 292 (2010), <http://www.tnrd.gov.in/State_Schemes/index2_upto2010.html>

[4] 3 Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu,  G.O.(1D) No.292, 14 Jun, 2010. < http://www.tnrd.gov.in/State_Schemes/linkfiles/go_292_140610.pdf>

[5] The Hindu, “Bihar scraps MLA funds”, Dec 15, 2010. <http://www.hindu.com/2010/12/15/stories/2010121565360900.htm>

After the public meeting on June 4th, we have been in discussion with the Chennai Traffic Police, Cityconnect and a couple of civic activists who have formed a traffic and transportation forum (TTF) to provide suggestive measures to ease traffic congestion at busy junctions in the city. The Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic) Mr. Sanjay Arora has been open to suggestions and has promised to experiment with the working solutions we provide, on a temporary basis.

We have initiated this exercise with the Vijaynagar junction at Velachery which has been identified as a nightmare for pedestrians to cross with vehicles coming from all directions. The Vijaynagar bus stand lies at a crossroad connecting Taramani, the Velachery Bye Pass road or 100 feet road and the Velachery main road. The presence of 3 big eateries (Mc Donald, KFC and Adayar Ananda Bhavan) and offices like Sutherland attracts congestion at this junction. The MRTS station and the DAV school are also in close vicinity to this junction. There is also a multiplex cum shopping mall being built on the main road abutting a 30 feet road which may attract more traffic.

These commercial establishments do not have adequate parking (not even as per norms which is 1 car and 1 two wheeler parking space for every 50 meter sq metres within the corporation area ) which forces people to park on the main roads and bye lanes, which then spills over onto the main road, choking traffic.

Although the road is 200 feet wide, there are only 4 vehicular lanes and the limited footpaths are encroached by shops on both sides of the road. There are open drains in what was to be a service lane and the parts where it is covered is being used for parking vehicles. The road has no mid block crossing/ refuge or a pedestrian grade separator and as the median is a three feet high concrete barricade, the pedestrian risks his life to cross over to the other side.

In the recent past, parts of this road were acquired by the highway department for road widening and apart from Sutherland and some electric poles, these are the only premises that still stand in the way. Apparently there is also a proposal for constructing a flyover in a lane that is opposite Sutherland, to ease pressure from the Vijaynagar junction. Some officials claim that the Sutherland premises have a part of the OSR (Open Space Reservation) land which the company has been reluctant to hand over.

Evolving a solution
So on 29th June the TTF called concerned officials from the Corporation of Chennai (Zone 10), the Electricity Board, both traffic and law and order policemen in-charge of the area, traffic expert Prof. KP Subramanium, officer in-charge of building the flyover at the junction, retired officials, area representative of MTC, an active resident from the area and us.
The representative from the Highway department suggested formulating a traffic and transportation committee at a state or city level which will focus on the traffic congestion and create holistic solutions. The formulation of the committee requires brainstorming sessions from all concerned departments and the civic society on how to deal with the traffic bottleneck and facilitate faster movement.

The junction needs to be redesigned based on the traffic survey and also take the surrounding land-use into account . The corporation will need to work with an iron hand when giving building permissions and ensuring that parking norms are followed. The buses parked opposite the Vijaynagar bus stand will also need to park away from the junction.
Please send us your suggestions so that it can also be incorporated.

- Roshan Toshniwal

When Perungudi was carelessly chosen as a dump site way back in 1987, it was obvious that the government gave scant regard to the ecologically sensitive marshland of Pallikarnai-a hot spot for biodiversity that was situated right next to it. Ever since, the marshland has shrunk in size and the sewage treatment facility that is located nearby only makes matters worse for the flora and fauna of Pallikarnai. Studies that were conducted around Perungudi produced alarming results. The level of dioxins and furans that were found in breast milk samples collected from the vicinity were 25 times higher than WHO’s recommended limit. Dioxins are by-products of industrial process and municipal solid waste and are said to be one of the most harmful chemicals to humans.  Adding to these distressing results is the fact that the effects of such an ‘unengineered’ dump yard stretches for miles around and is not just contained in Perungudi.

The government’s policy towards waste management has the reputation of being knee-jerk reactions, and might have still continued to be so if it wasn’t for the introduction of the ‘Municipal Solid Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules’ in 2000. It took a PIL for the country to realise the disastrous path that it was following and change tracks. The ruling makes source segregation, door to door waste collection, abolition of open storage, daily sweeping of streets, transportation of waste in covered vehicles, waste processing by energy recovery or composting and sanitary landfills mandatory.

With Chennai having the highest per capita waste generation rate in the country (.6kg a day), well-planned, long-term solutions is the need of the hour. Solid waste management in the city is the responsibility of the Corporation of Chennai. The CoC has also been the first in t he country to allow private players into the dirty business. With public-private partnerships gaining popularity, the DMK government ushered in CES Onyx into 3 of the 10 zones in the city in 2000(-a good move considering the following figures, that the total cost for street sweeping, collection and transportation per Metric ton of waste for CoC and Onyx was approximately USD 33 and 25, respectively. Also CoC handled 2000 tonnes per day with a manpower of 10,000 including administrative staff and workers, while Onyx managed 1100 tonnes with a manpower of just 2000). Exnora also forayed into the picture by encouraging CBOs and it easily gained patronage from communities as they appreciated the benefits of environmentally-safe handling of waste.

Dumpyards find themselves at the end of the waste management process and are perennially overflowing with unthinkably enormous proportions of the city’s trash. Should the process really stop there? Will creating n number of dumpyards be a solution to the garbage problem of a country that’s growing at alarming rates? Recent estimates show that approximately 48 million tons of urban solid waste is generated annually in India and is increasing by approximately 1.3% each year.  With all this garbage around, a new approach to waste management is being encouraged by the Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources. The ‘National Programme on Energy Recovery  from Urban Wastes’  was initiated in  1995 to  develop the waste-to energy market. This approach not only results in a substantial reduction in the area that is ear marked for dump sites but it also addresses the acute power shortage that we face. In a report brought out by Frost and Sullivan, it was predicted that the Indian municipal solid waste (MSW) to energy market could be growing at a compound rate of growth of 9.7% by 2013.

Taking all of this into account, a long term solution to real waste management must include steps to reduce garbage generated at the household level through means like recycling and also encourage segregation of garbage and even compost pits for bio-degradable waste at the community level. But private operators like Onyx or presently Neel Metal Fanalca lack the incentive to segregate garbage as they are paid based on the weight of garbage collected, and fines are rarely levied for non-segregation although it is part of their contract. Instead they blame the public for their lack of awareness on the issue.

Ever since Neel Metal Fanalca found its way into the city, Chennai’s residents have only had harsh words to describe its work. The city quite visibly became dirtier with NMF’s arrival and there were even instances where their workers had the audacity to ask for tips to clean streets. It was pretty sad as Chennai was just beginning to see the effects of what a well managed and efficiently run SWM operator could. The citizens of Chennai uniformly agreed that CES Onyx’s performance was far better than the Corporation’s, but much to the city’s dismay, it was shown the door. Why you may ask?-it refused to give in to the new government’s ‘demands’ and this meant that their contract would not be renewed. With the change in government in the State in May, it might be safe to say that we can again expect the incumbent private solid waste management (SWM) company to be kicked out and a new entrant having greased the hands of the new government, mine riches for itself via the city’s overflowing garbage.

References:

Municipal Solid Waste Management in Chennai City, India :S Esakku,A swaminathan, O Parthiba Karthikeyan, J Kurian and K Palanivelu   http://www.swlf.ait.ac.th/UpdData/International/NRIs/MSW%20management%20in%20Chennai.pdf

Public, Private and Voluntary Agencies in Solid Waste Management,A Study in Chennai City by Krithika Srinivasan http://www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/04/27/08/swmepw.pdf

Capacity-to-Act in India’s Solid Waste Management and Waste-to Energy Industries by Perinaz Bhada http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/Bhada_Capacity_to_Act_in_India.pdf

http://www.kleanindustries.com/s/environmental_market_Industry_news.asp?ReportID=452731

http://digitaljourno.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/payment-calculation.pdf

—————————————————-

Maria Terase, student of BA(H) Economics, currently interning at Transparent Chennai

My earlier blog on “Road safety : Who is responsible for it?” expresses the accident trend in the city without holistically analysing the details. This blog is a comparative analysis and insight of the accident in the past five years and represented through graphs and pie charts for better understanding of the reader.

Last year, there were 5133 accidents and 5025 people who got affected. According to the state transport authority 1749 people suffered grievous injuries and 2664 people suffered minor injuries while 621 people died in road accidents in the city last year.

Figure 1: Accident affected parties gender wise between 2006-2010

Source: Data provided by Chennai Traffic Police through RtI: 14.03.2011

In 2006-07 the number of people affected were more than the number of accidents but since 2008 the number of affected people are lot lesser than the number of accidents itself. The reliability of this data could be questioned as suddenly in 2008 the number of accidents increases while the number of affected people reported is much lower.

The number of men affected in the accidents is four times that of the women. This could also be co-related with the lower female work participation ratio in the city and probably women are more careful when they are on the road.

The working age group between 15- 59 are the most affected in the accidents as they account for 84% of all accidents in the city in the past 5 years. It is also alarming that 1 in every 10 people affected in an accident is a senior citizen.

A cumulative record of the past five years indicates that pedestrian and cyclist together form 33% of the total affected people due to road accidents in the city. Two wheelers constitute 30% of people who suffer from road accident.

Figure 2: Accident affected by age between 2006-2010

Source: Data provided by Chennai Traffic Police through RtI: 14.03.2011

The graph below indicates reduction in the number of pedestrian and cyclists suffering from accidents, which cannot be because of any improvement of infrastructure for them . The probability of reduction in their numbers could be attributed to the people’s preference for safer modes of transport.

Figure 3: People affecteddue to road accidents: Mode wise

Source: Data provided by Chennai Traffic Police through RtI: 14.03.2011

The year 2008 saw a huge increase in the number of accidents and the graph above reflects that there was a 407% increase in the affected people travelling in car from 2007. While the list of accident affected parties travelling in the modes shown in the figure 3 had shown considerable increase in 2008, the graph dips for the others (autos, trucks etc) by one third.

The tumultuous conditions of the traffic and accidents in the city are an indication of mismanaged transport network and inadequate enforcement. Last two years data shows a decline in the number of people suffering from road accidents by travelling in all modes except the people travelling in two wheelers probably because they don’t adhere to safety measures.

- Roshan Toshniwal

Date: Saturday, June 4^th,  2011

Time: 11 AM – 1PM

Venue: Parvathy Hall, IFMR, No 24 Kothari Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600034

Transparent Chennai invites you to the Institute for Financial Management and Research (IFMR) on Kothari Road, at 11am on Saturday, June 4th to participate in a public meeting on road safety and pedestrian infrastructure in the city.

Road safety has increasingly become an important concern in Chennai. Roads are essential for the efficient movement of goods and people. But because of a lack of infrastructure and inefficient enforcement of traffic regulations, roads are dangerous places, especially for the most vulnerable users: pedestrians, cyclists, children, and the elderly.

By organizing a public meeting which will involve presentations from traffic experts, representatives from the relevant government agencies, and groups working on the issue of road safety, Transparent Chennai aims to understand how concerned citizens can understand the conditions of road safety in our city and take action to make our roads safer. We hope to develop a more nuanced discussion around the issue of road safety and pedestrian infrastructure, an especially important and urgent task considering the scale of new transport infrastructure projects in Chennai.

List of Speakers

Roshan Toshniwal: Transparent Chennai
Dr.K.P. Subramanium: Professor, Urban Engineering Department, Anna University
Prof. Abdur Razzak: HoD, School of Planning, Anna University
Rajiv Rajan: Co-ordinator at Disability Legislative Unit
Sonal Mishra: IPS, Traffic Police

A recent article on the Hindu announced that the Chennai Rivers Restoration Trust has been ordered to devise a plan for the removal of construction debris from the Cooum River. The Cooum has undergone several such clean-ups and restoration projects over the past four decades. In 2009, Deputy Chief Minister announced an ambitious Cooum restoration project, costing over 200 Crores.  Yet another massive river cleaning initiative was announced in September for 2010 to clean over 800 tonnes of solid waste from the river. Despite all the money spent and plans devised, the Cooum continues to be more polluted than a treated sewer. So where does all the money that is budgeted for these projects go? Is the Corporation doing an efficient job of cleaning the city’s water bodies?

Members of Exnora and environmentalists comment that many of these Cooum restoration projects are counter-productive, as they do not address the source of the problems ailing the river and its associated water bodies. Many believe the major contributing factor to Cooum’s pollution is the slums that are situated on its banks. Much of the focus on restoration revolves around clearing slums and beautifying the banks of the river. However, Exnora’s research shows that a mere 0.14% of the water pollution is caused due to these slums, while the major contributing factor to Cooum’s pollution are the sewage pumping stations and treatment plants that dump gallons of sewage into the river every day. The pollution Chennai’s waterways will worsen unless the government takes the initiative to improve sewer collection and treatment.

Transparent Chennai welcomes this guest post from Mr. Bakthavatsalam Narasimhan. We hope that more regular readers of the Chennai Kaleidoscope will also contribute!