Unless Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities as well as the Tier 1 cities give priority to infrastructure for walking, cycling and BRTS, the inherent competitive advantage these non-metropolitan cities have to develop will be lost leading to greater migration to tier I cities, causing them also to suffer due to inadequateness of the infrastructure.

The nation is in the process of rapid urbanization. This does not mean and need not mean new urban centres developing. Currently there are 48 cities which are one-million-plus, which will become 58 by 2021.These include 15 cities that are two-million-plus which will become 20 by 2021.

Maharashtra has three two-million-plus cities (Mumbai, Pune and Nagpur), seven one-million-plus cities (Thane, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Nashik, Kalyan-Dombivli, Vasai-Virar, Aurangabad and Navi Mumbai) and eight half-million-plus cities (Solapur, Mira-Bhayandar, Bhiwandi-Nizampur, Amravati, Nanded-Waghala, Ulhasnagar, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad and Akola). There are about four  cities of neighbouring states on the south (Hyderabad, Hubli-Dharwar, Belgavi and Bellary) which lie in reasonably close proximity while seven cities lie in the northern neighbouring states (Ahmedabad, Surat, Indore, Bhopal, Vadodara, Jabalpur and Raipur).

While different kinds of infrastructure are required to facilitate efficient running of the urban areas, it is largely the transportation sector that makes or mars quality of life of city dwellers.

Following the conventional methods of planning, there is great desire to provide infrastructure that would speed up intra-urban travel by motorized transport.

Flyovers and road widening are hallmark of this kind of infrastructure development. The casualty invariably is, chopping down of trees, not providing space for safe pedestrian movements and the non-motorized vehicles and roadside vendors. Since these exist in any city, they begin to take up the ‘widened’ carriageway spaces.

Speeding vehicles in urban areas are the main cause of large number of fatalities seen on Indian roads, in particular the roads in Maharashtra. Therefore, all road infrastructures must be designed with safety of the vulnerable section of road users and traffic calming measures kept in mind.

Considering that road congestions occur due to excessive use of motorcars, which lead to increased air and noise pollution with global warming, climate change and health repercussions, following the National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) of minimizing use of personal motorized vehicles should be looked at with great deal of seriousness. This means providing public transport where it does not exist and improve upon it where it does.

Since practically everyone walks and as many as 15% to 30% use bicycles even in two-million-plus cities, infrastructure must give considerable importance to all of the needs of carbon neutral mode of mobility.

Recently, the committee headed by “Metro Man”, E Sreedharan recommended that private use of motorcars must be discouraged and providing parking space near Metro stations would actually encourage its use. Therefore, he went on to state that such facilities should not be provided.

However he also said that every city with two-million-plus population must plan for providing Metro rail connectivity. There is this misconceived mindset that rail-based mass rapid transit system is most efficient as it has very high capacities. The problem with such systems having very high capacities is that one has to provide a network of road public transport to feed the capacity and also provide space for parking motorcars.

Greater use of personal motorized vehicles option adds to the road congestion. The Metro rail option also requires large sums of money and the investments cannot be recovered by fare box collections. When you have so many Tier 2 Tier 3 cities demanding funds to put up Metro rail, firstly one must understand that money will go where it is likely to get recovered i.e. in mega cities (ten-million-plus) and metro cities (four-million-plus). Trickling in of funds means extended periods of construction and deteriorated quality of life over long period for a city’s citizens. It was wrong on the part of the Sreedharan Committee to recommend this and thus raise aspirations which cannot get fulfilled in all the 15 two-million-plus cities of India (three of Maharashtra) and not provide for growing transportation woes in these Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities.

The right thing to do is to have Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) in place at costs as low as Rs10 crore/km and enhance it with growing demand as against the elevated metro which would cost as high as Rs250 crore/km. BRTS needs to be designed, not just put in place. Frequency of service should be as high as 90 seconds if not higher. The buses need not be the big 52 seaters; even a 10 or 16 seater bus will do exceedingly well to start with. High frequency will make this workable. If the cost of running such system is high from a city’s per capita income level, then this form of public transport can be subsidised, which the government would have done so anyhow to metro rail infrastructure, 20 times of what the BRTS would require.

Even in Mumbai, the decision to go for Metro is wrong because it needs more than Rs60,000 crore; to complete the project it would take nothing less than 25-30 years and provide significantly inadequate capacity which will not ease the overcrowded suburban railway system. In the process of its implementation, besides causing hardship to Mumbai citizens, it will deprive other cities in the state from getting the much-needed infrastructure and thereby deny utilization of the inherent competitive advantages these Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities have currently.

Inter-city public transport needs to be planned; too, to meet growing demand but local needs of rural environment must be kept in mind. Since large number of road accidents take place on these roads, attention to details need to be given in designing these highways of growth. When the Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities have good inter and intra connectivity with public transport, they will begin to provide livelihood to many and the need to migrate to metro and mega cities on this count will diminish.

Utilisation of capital based on local affordability will only create islands of prosperity. If the state or the nation is to have balanced and equitable development, it must adopt large number of projects that are not highly capital intensive.

(Sudhir Badami is a civil engineer and transportation analyst. He is on Government of Maharashtra’s Steering Committee on BRTS for Mumbai and Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority’s Technical Advisory Committee on BRTS for Mumbai. He is also member of Research & MIS Committee of Unified Mumbai Metropolitan Transport Authority. He was member of Bombay High Court appointed erstwhile Road Monitoring Committee (2006-07). While he has been an active campaigner against Noise for more than a decade, he is a strong believer in functioning democracy. He can be contacted on email at sudhirbadami@gmail.com)