From navdeep.asija at gmail.com Fri Feb 5 12:05:25 2016 From: navdeep.asija at gmail.com (Asija, Navdeep) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 08:35:25 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Adviser red flags foot over bridges - Punjab Message-ID: Feb 05 2016 : The Times of India (Chandigarh) Vibhor Mohan Chandigarh: ??`Don't Meet Pedestrian Volume' Punjab's traffic adviser has pointed out that foot over bridges (FOBs) have come up in the state at places where pedestrians are not prone to accident or find movement on roads difficult and thus, there is need to put an end to the practice. The findings are based on a survey in Mohali, where four-foot bridges have been put up at a cost of Rs 2 crore spent, but are in no way helping the cause of pedestrians. In fact, these structures don't meet even the pedestrian volume or traffic safety criteria. Traffic adviser Navdeep Asija says in his advisory note, ?Results (of the report) revealed that present foot over bridges are actually facilitating uninterrupted movement of the motor vehicle and not helping the pedestrians.? The report on `Safe Road Pedestrian Infrastructure in Punjab' says that in 2014, 339 pedestrians lost their life in urban areas of Punjab. But the attempt made by many cities to offer a solution with foot over bridges is turning out to be ?unscientific, expensive and ineffective way to solving the problems?. ?Pedestrians need to be facilitated via at-grade facilities by installing traffic-calming devices such as speed tables and traffic islands by reducing the speed of motor vehicles at critical points rather pushing them to use grade separated foot over bridges,? it adds. Quite contrary to the idea of facilitating pedestrians by installing traffic calming de vices such as speed tables and traffic islands to reduce the speed of motor vehicles at critical points, it was found that present foot over bridges is forcing pedestrians to cover 5-10 times longer distance with up and down movement to cross the same stretch of the road.?During the pedestrian traffic volume studies over four days, it was found that utilization of such wrongly planned infrastructures for pedestrians is almost zero,? adds the report. In case of Mohali particularly, the study found that over the last three years, 21 pedestrian deaths were reported at 21 different locations within the municipal limits, but foot over bridges are constructed at place where they were not desirable. In fact, Mohali becomes the first of its kind city in the country , where foot over bridges are constructed at a traffic signal, where it is much easier to cross via zebra crossing, the study says.It notes that another road safety hazard is being created by installing advertisement on the railing of FOB facing motorist near traffic lights. It is also felt that such undesirable infrastructure may add threat to the personal security of women and children, especially during early morning or night hours when there is less traffic on the roads.?Outdoor advertising devices on the face of these foot over bridges are not only distracting drivers but also block visibility of traffic lights at the intersection,? adds the report. Besides, such underutilized over bridges are becoming hubs for anti-social activities, especially before sunrise and after sunset. In the advisory note sent to the technical adviser to CM and chief administrator GMADA, Asija has said, ?It is advised that in future, *kindly avoid such inadequate and expensive infrastructure to the name of pedestrian safety .?* -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 05_02_2016_004_010 Times of India_FOB.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 340520 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20160205/63a5d6eb/05_02_2016_004_010TimesofIndia_FOB-0001.jpg From yanivbin at gmail.com Sun Feb 21 02:24:45 2016 From: yanivbin at gmail.com (Vinay Baindur) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 22:54:45 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Free bus pass in TN for elders takes off Message-ID: http://newstodaynet.com/chennai/free-bus-pass-elders-takes Free bus pass for elders takes off Saturday, 20 February 2016 NT Bureau ------------------------------ Chennai: It took just two days, after Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa announced the free bus rides scheme for senior citizens, for it to take off. The Chief Minister inaugurated the scheme today by issuing tokens to five senior citizens. State Industries and Transport Minister P Thangamani, Chief Secretary K Gnanadesikan, Government Advisor Sheela Balakrishnan, Additional Chief Secretary (in-charge), C V Shankar, and Metropolitan Transport Corporation Managing Director M Balakrishnaswamy were present during the inauguration of the scheme today. Ever since the announcement in the Assembly on Thursday, bus depots in the city have been buzzing with activity. While forms are given out in the depots, they can also be downloaded online. Old people are taking the effort to access technology to download the application forms for bus passes either by themselves or seeking the help of gen-next. The Metro Transport Corporation?s (MTC?s) website www.mtcbus.org failed to load this morning for some time, as many people were trying to access it. For the lucky ones with good Internet speed, the Senior Citizens - Free Buspass option on the left bottom of the MTC site can be made use of to download the form. The details that are required are name, age, gender, address and age proof. The age proof can be any ID like Aadhaar card, voters ID, ration card or school certificate, as per instructions in the form. While this scheme benefits old people at large, some of them expressed their concern over the height of the footboard that makes it difficult for them to climb into buses. ?It will be nice if the steps are lowered. They are a bit high for people like me to use,? said 78-year-old Ramamani (name changed) who suffers from knee pain due to old age. A spokesperson for MTC said, ?The new buses have footboard with relatively less height and come with doors. The old models are in the process of being modifi ed gradually to become low-floor buses. They will be given a makeover and changed.? Keywords : Free bus pass for senior citizens MTC Chennai free bus pass Jayalalithaa free bus pass News Today From shovan1209 at yahoo.com Sat Feb 27 23:06:07 2016 From: shovan1209 at yahoo.com (Syed Saiful Alam) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 14:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [sustran] Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges References: <345711382.209459.1456581967438.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <345711382.209459.1456581967438.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Responsesto World Bank on Footover BridgesTheWorld Bank says that in order to improve air quality and safe mobility inDhaka, one needed measure is more footover (pedestrian) bridges. On a recentvisit, the World Bank explained to us that in addition to building 70 km offootpaths, an initiative for which we congratulate them, they are also buildinga number of footover bridges. When pedestrians cross the street they slow downcars, which makes the cars pollute more, they told us. Also, since there is littleor no enforcement at zebra crossings and intersections, the only safe way toallow people to cross the street is through the use of the bridges. Theyexplained that the project began many years ago when the World Bank had not yetspelled out a policy on universally accessible design, and in any case, withvirtually no other facilities for people with disabilities in Dhaka, why notspend money building new infrastructure that is also inaccessible? They alsomentioned that the directors of one hospital had requested a footover bridgebecause of staff being hurt or killed crossing the street. (Apparently thepatients visiting that hospital are sufficiently strong and healthy to make useof the bridge. Or maybe since they?re already sick, it?s OK if they get runover.) Whenwe pointed out that they seemed to be saying that pedestrians are an obstacleto cars, they explained that pedestrians also slow down other traffic on thestreet, including buses. But they hastened to assure us that they had not said that pedestrians are the reasonthat buses move so slowly. Theyfurther commented on the limited amount of road space in Dhaka, at about 7%whereas they feel that over twice that is the minimum necessary. When wecommented that in a situation of limited road space, one should discourage,rather than encourage, the most space-inefficient means (the private car) theydropped that topic. Throughoutthe conversation, one thing was clear: the World Bank officials only regardmotorized trips as trips. They are trapped in car-based thinking. They considerall non-motorized forms as unimportant and, worse, an obstacle to all thoseimportant trips that are occurring with the use of fuel. Further, sincefuel-burning vehicles pollute, they suggested that non-motorized transportincluding walking causes pollution by slowing down the otherwise smoothlymoving motorized transport. That cars are the main reason that cars and busesare stuck in traffic does not appear to have occurred to them, nor did theyseem aware of the abundant work that has been done in the past few decades onenvironmentally-friendly and people-focused transport policies to replace theold car-based ideas. We can only imagine two possible explanations for theWorld Bank?s refusal to acknowledge a more people-focused andenvironmentally-friendly approach to transport: either they are unbelievablyignorant that such possibilities exist, or their real interest is in sellingcars and car-based infrastructure. TheBank officials also mentioned that they are not in a position to tell thegovernment what to do; rather, they must respond to the government?s request.Which is fine up to a point. But obviously funders have policies about whatthey will and will not fund. Under a Clean Air and Sustainable Environment initiative, theyobviously could agree to fund footpaths and refuse to fund footover bridges.Conversations with officials at the World Health Organization and the AsianDevelopment Bank have also made clear that while they cannot dictate whatgovernments do, they do have significant scope to engage in persuasion to adopt(or not) more enlightened approaches. Finally, the holder of the purse stringsis obviously not without influence on the recipient. TheBank officials also said that they must listen to different perspectives andthat there are different views on this matter. We could not agree more. Thereare people who have worked for years on transport and urban planning issues andwho have done research on successful and failed policies in cities around theworld. There are people who simply approach the issue with blind prejudice thatthe car is the only means of transport. There are people who care about theenvironment, about safety, about access for those with disabilities (specialneeds), and about the poor, and there are people who only care about sellingcars. We personally do not feel that all opinions should be accorded equalvalue.Andnow to have a little fun with what they said... Accordingto the World Bank: Cars pollute. Cars main and kill. Let?s treat cars as thekings of the road! Accordingto the World Bank: There is not enough road space in Dhaka, so let?s prioritizethe most inefficient users, the car, while making life difficult for the moreefficient users, including pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws. Accordingto the World Bank: People in cars are making trips. People on foot are creatingobstacles. Accordingto the World Bank: Enforcement of road rules in Dhaka is poor. It is obviouslyimpossible to improve enforcement, so let?s just reward those causing theproblem and punish the victims. (More simply put: Drivers behave badly, solet?s punish pedestrians.) Accordingto the World Bank: We must listen to different sides and then ensure that thosebeing hurt are kept safe. Let?s say we had a problem with sexual harassment(eve teasing) on the streets. We will invite men and women to discuss theproblem, in order to involve different stakeholders. The women complain thatthey can?t move about the city without being subjected to rude remarks. The mensay that they are just being men. Hmm...it is difficult to make men behave andrespect women. Hmm...ah, I know! Let?s ban women from moving about the city!! Accordingto the World Bank: Simple logic works. For example: cars pollute; pedestriansslow cars; pedestrians pollute. This is akin to saying that tobacco createsjobs; we need jobs; so let?s promote tobacco use. Just because a few statementsseem to lead to a logical conclusion does not mean that those statements are infact logical! Accordingto the World Bank: It is difficult to create universally accessible design inDhaka so let?s start by adding more infrastructure that is obviously notaccessible! Accordingto the World Bank: The long term is far away so let?s forget about it and focuson the short term. Accordingto the World Bank logic: If the thief is breaking your windows, hand him a keyto the door. Accordingto the World Bank: Cars do not stop at intersections. Cars do not have to stopto allow other cars to go. Too many cars in limited road space does not createcongestion. The main obstacle to the smooth movement of cars is pedestrians. Accordingto the World Bank: If you?re only traveling a short distance and doing itwithout the use of fuel, you may as well just stay home and make space for allthose important people moving about while using fuel, e.g. creating pollution,congestion, and danger for everyone else. Accordingto the World Bank: Pedestrians should not be on any road that is arbitrarilylabelled a highway, but it is OK for cars to enter the narrow lanes of Dhakaeven if that causes a long line of rickshaws to become stuck in traffic.Accordingto the World Bank logic: If people surrendered their wallets to thieves, thenthieves wouldn?t need to carry a gun. So victims of crime make thievesdangerous. (While this is possibly true, it is obviously utterly irrelevant!) Accordingto the World Bank logic: If small kids can?t play on the playground because abig bully keeps beating them up, and if you?ve repeatedly asked the bully tostop but he has ignored you, then you should tell the children to stop playingthere...and declare the problem solved. Anda final suggestion: If the real objective of your project is to promote thesmooth movement of cars in Dhaka, then change the name of the project to?Promotion of Cars for a Polluted, Congested, & Unsafe Dhaka (PCPCUD).?After all, if you accept, or worse, promote the idea that facilitating themovement of cars is good for safety and the environment, you are damaging notonly the situation in the present, but for many years to come. This may be newsfor you, but whether on foot, bicycle, rickshaw, or by motorized means, a tripis a trip. The main difference is that some non-motorized modes do not pollute,do not hurt or kill others, are good for the environment, and require littleroad space, in direct contrast to motorized transport and especially to thecar. Treating the car as the king of the road will simply encourage more peopleto drive and thus make all the problems caused by the car worse, not better. Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges From madhav.g.badami at mcgill.ca Sun Feb 28 00:25:58 2016 From: madhav.g.badami at mcgill.ca (Madhav Badami, Prof.) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:25:58 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges In-Reply-To: <345711382.209459.1456581967438.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <345711382.209459.1456581967438.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>, <345711382.209459.1456581967438.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <49232857A143A54AAD6D08E173ED3AB72E6B2BF9@EXMBX2010-6.campus.MCGILL.CA> Dear Syed Saiful Aslam, Many thanks for sharing your responses to the World Bank regarding pedestrian over-bridges; I agree with you 100%. Back in 2009, I wrote an article titled "Urban Transport Policy as if People and the Environment Mattered: Pedestrian Accessibility the First Step", which was published in the Economic and Political Weekly, and which I have attached for your reference. In the article, I argue why pedestrian accessibility has to be the very foundation of urban transport policy and planning, generally, but particularly in contexts such as South Asia's; and toward the end of the article, I offer a critique of conventional urban transport planning (and its analytic underpinnings). On the subject of pedestrian over-bridges (and underpasses), this is what I had to say in the article: "One hopes that these funds, and those forthcoming from international funding agencies, will be used strategically to ensure that infrastructure and facilities for pedestrians and cycling are incorporated in urban transport projects. While these funds hold great potential for promoting pedestrian accessibility, it is not at all certain that they will have the desired outcomes, even if they are deployed to that end. Unfortunately, pedestrian infrastructure is often poorly designed and implemented; besides, there appears to be an increasing tendency, in the name of providing pedestrian infrastructure, to make inappropriate, and needlessly expensive, technological choices, by way of, for example, pedestrian over-bridges and underpasses. There might indeed be situations in which such facilities may be called for, but what is needed is not a few pedestrian over-bridges or underpasses, which is what would be possible given their very high cost, but for pedestrians (and cyclists) to be able to cross roads conveniently and safely, at grade, across the city, and to make it possible for them to do so at low cost. Apart from the unattractiveness and very limited utility ? from the point of view of pedestrians ? of a small number of over-bridges and underpasses, there is a more fundamental issue. Underlying such facilities is the assumption that motor vehicle traffic is primary, and something which pedestrians should not disrupt." BTW, since I see that Sudhir Gota is copied on your message -- he has an absolutely hilarious photo of a totally needless pedestrian over-bridge from Cebu (??), which I would invite him to share with us all ... Very best wishes, Madhav ************************************************************************ "To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." -- George Orwell ?It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.? -- Upton Sinclair Madhav G. Badami School of Urban Planning and McGill School of Environment McGill University Room 403, Macdonald-Harrington Building 815, Sherbrooke Street West Montreal, QC, H3A 0C2, Canada Phone: 514-398-3183; Fax: 514-398-8376; 514-398-1643 URLs: www.mcgill.ca/urbanplanning; www.mcgill.ca/mse e-mail: madhav.badami@mcgill.ca ________________________________________ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+madhav.g.badami=mcgill.ca@list.jca.apc.org [sustran-discuss-bounces+madhav.g.badami=mcgill.ca@list.jca.apc.org] on behalf of Syed Saiful Alam [shovan1209@yahoo.com] Sent: 27 February 2016 09:06 To: sudhir@cai-asia.org; ianenvironmental@googlemail.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; editor@ecoplan.org; Holger Omlor; callforpapers@walk21hk.com; Carfreesonomacounty Info Subject: [sustran] Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges Responsesto World Bank on Footover BridgesTheWorld Bank says that in order to improve air quality and safe mobility inDhaka, one needed measure is more footover (pedestrian) bridges. On a recentvisit, the World Bank explained to us that in addition to building 70 km offootpaths, an initiative for which we congratulate them, they are also buildinga number of footover bridges. When pedestrians cross the street they slow downcars, which makes the cars pollute more, they told us. Also, since there is littleor no enforcement at zebra crossings and intersections, the only safe way toallow people to cross the street is through the use of the bridges. Theyexplained that the project began many years ago when the World Bank had not yetspelled out a policy on universally accessible design, and in any case, withvirtually no other facilities for people with disabilities in Dhaka, why notspend money building new infrastructure that is also inaccessible? They alsomentioned that the directors of one hospital had requested a footover bridgebecause of staff being hurt or killed crossing the street. (Apparently thepatients visiting that hospital are sufficiently strong and healthy to make useof the bridge. Or maybe since they?re already sick, it?s OK if they get runover.) Whenwe pointed out that they seemed to be saying that pedestrians are an obstacleto cars, they explained that pedestrians also slow down other traffic on thestreet, including buses. But they hastened to assure us that they had not said that pedestrians are the reasonthat buses move so slowly. Theyfurther commented on the limited amount of road space in Dhaka, at about 7%whereas they feel that over twice that is the minimum necessary. When wecommented that in a situation of limited road space, one should discourage,rather than encourage, the most space-inefficient means (the private car) theydropped that topic. Throughoutthe conversation, one thing was clear: the World Bank officials only regardmotorized trips as trips. They are trapped in car-based thinking. They considerall non-motorized forms as unimportant and, worse, an obstacle to all thoseimportant trips that are occurring with the use of fuel. Further, sincefuel-burning vehicles pollute, they suggested that non-motorized transportincluding walking causes pollution by slowing down the otherwise smoothlymoving motorized transport. That cars are the main reason that cars and busesare stuck in traffic does not appear to have occurred to them, nor did theyseem aware of the abundant work that has been done in the past few decades onenvironmentally-friendly and people-focused transport policies to replace theold car-based ideas. We can only imagine two possible explanations for theWorld Bank?s refusal to acknowledge a more people-focused andenvironmentally-friendly approach to transport: either they are unbelievablyignorant that such possibilities exist, or their real interest is in sellingcars and car-based infrastructure. TheBank officials also mentioned that they are not in a position to tell thegovernment what to do; rather, they must respond to the government?s request.Which is fine up to a point. But obviously funders have policies about whatthey will and will not fund. Under a Clean Air and Sustainable Environment initiative, theyobviously could agree to fund footpaths and refuse to fund footover bridges.Conversations with officials at the World Health Organization and the AsianDevelopment Bank have also made clear that while they cannot dictate whatgovernments do, they do have significant scope to engage in persuasion to adopt(or not) more enlightened approaches. Finally, the holder of the purse stringsis obviously not without influence on the recipient. TheBank officials also said that they must listen to different perspectives andthat there are different views on this matter. We could not agree more. Thereare people who have worked for years on transport and urban planning issues andwho have done research on successful and failed policies in cities around theworld. There are people who simply approach the issue with blind prejudice thatthe car is the only means of transport. There are people who care about theenvironment, about safety, about access for those with disabilities (specialneeds), and about the poor, and there are people who only care about sellingcars. We personally do not feel that all opinions should be accorded equalvalue.Andnow to have a little fun with what they said... Accordingto the World Bank: Cars pollute. Cars main and kill. Let?s treat cars as thekings of the road! Accordingto the World Bank: There is not enough road space in Dhaka, so let?s prioritizethe most inefficient users, the car, while making life difficult for the moreefficient users, including pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws. Accordingto the World Bank: People in cars are making trips. People on foot are creatingobstacles. Accordingto the World Bank: Enforcement of road rules in Dhaka is poor. It is obviouslyimpossible to improve enforcement, so let?s just reward those causing theproblem and punish the victims. (More simply put: Drivers behave badly, solet?s punish pedestrians.) Accordingto the World Bank: We must listen to different sides and then ensure that thosebeing hurt are kept safe. Let?s say we had a problem with sexual harassment(eve teasing) on the streets. We will invite men and women to discuss theproblem, in order to involve different stakeholders. The women complain thatthey can?t move about the city without being subjected to rude remarks. The mensay that they are just being men. Hmm...it is difficult to make men behave andrespect women. Hmm...ah, I know! Let?s ban women from moving about the city!! Accordingto the World Bank: Simple logic works. For example: cars pollute; pedestriansslow cars; pedestrians pollute. This is akin to saying that tobacco createsjobs; we need jobs; so let?s promote tobacco use. Just because a few statementsseem to lead to a logical conclusion does not mean that those statements are infact logical! Accordingto the World Bank: It is difficult to create universally accessible design inDhaka so let?s start by adding more infrastructure that is obviously notaccessible! Accordingto the World Bank: The long term is far away so let?s forget about it and focuson the short term. Accordingto the World Bank logic: If the thief is breaking your windows, hand him a keyto the door. Accordingto the World Bank: Cars do not stop at intersections. Cars do not have to stopto allow other cars to go. Too many cars in limited road space does not createcongestion. The main obstacle to the smooth movement of cars is pedestrians. Accordingto the World Bank: If you?re only traveling a short distance and doing itwithout the use of fuel, you may as well just stay home and make space for allthose important people moving about while using fuel, e.g. creating pollution,congestion, and danger for everyone else. Accordingto the World Bank: Pedestrians should not be on any road that is arbitrarilylabelled a highway, but it is OK for cars to enter the narrow lanes of Dhakaeven if that causes a long line of rickshaws to become stuck in traffic.Accordingto the World Bank logic: If people surrendered their wallets to thieves, thenthieves wouldn?t need to carry a gun. So victims of crime make thievesdangerous. (While this is possibly true, it is obviously utterly irrelevant!) Accordingto the World Bank logic: If small kids can?t play on the playground because abig bully keeps beating them up, and if you?ve repeatedly asked the bully tostop but he has ignored you, then you should tell the children to stop playingthere...and declare the problem solved. Anda final suggestion: If the real objective of your project is to promote thesmooth movement of cars in Dhaka, then change the name of the project to?Promotion of Cars for a Polluted, Congested, & Unsafe Dhaka (PCPCUD).?After all, if you accept, or worse, promote the idea that facilitating themovement of cars is good for safety and the environment, you are damaging notonly the situation in the present, but for many years to come. This may be newsfor you, but whether on foot, bicycle, rickshaw, or by motorized means, a tripis a trip. The main difference is that some non-motorized modes do not pollute,do not hurt or kill others, are good for the environment, and require littleroad space, in direct contrast to motorized transport and especially to thecar. Treating the car as the king of the road will simply encourage more peopleto drive and thus make all the problems caused by the car worse, not better. Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Badami 2009 -- UT Policy as if People and Environment Mattered.pdf Type: binary/octet-stream Size: 174662 bytes Desc: Badami 2009 -- UT Policy as if People and Environment Mattered.pdf Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20160227/799db9e2/Badami2009--UTPolicyasifPeopleandEnvironmentMattered-0001.bin From yanivbin at gmail.com Sun Feb 28 23:02:44 2016 From: yanivbin at gmail.com (Vinay Baindur) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 19:32:44 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Preliminary report on elevated roads in a month: KJ George Message-ID: isn't this a violation of the NUTP plus a series of toll roads in the city which is a condition of the Malaysian Consortium.. because the governments cannot fund.... and what is the use of the signal free corridors then all the major expenditure on that is being increase 10 times for access controlled roads only for private 4 wheelers.... it seems like infrastructure overkill is such a dangerous addiction..... fly over the whole city ..... and spend more money than Metro ph II while you are at it.... drop the suburban rail and allow cars to rule by ruining .......... http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/Preliminary-report-on-elevated-roads-in-a-month-KJ-George/articleshow/51147057.cms *Preliminary report on elevated roads in a month: KJ George* TNN | Feb 26, 2016, 01.59 AM IST Bengaluru: If one goes by the words of Bengaluru development minister KJ George, the city may get rid of its traffic woes in a couple of years. The preliminary report on the 82.7km elevated road network plan, which promises end-to-end connectivity, will be ready in a month, he said on Thursday. "It will be a network of six elevated corridors running across the length and breadth of the city. Once the ground work begins, we hope to finish the project in two years," George said. The estimated cost of the project, to be taken up under public-private partnership, is Rs 18,000 crore. The detailed project report is expetced to be complete in five months. "The government is keen on elevated roads and the Peripheral Ring Road to ease traffic congestion," the minister said. George made the statement following a meeting with the members of Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), Malaysia, and other private company representatives from the southeast Asian country. "Malaysian companies have expressed keen interest in taking up the elevated road project. We will share more details with them soon. Infrastructure development companies from Japan and UAE (Abu Dhabi) are also interested. Tenders will be floated soon to pick the best bidder. The project cost will be borne by the developer and they will get the returns through toll collection under a built-operate-transfer (BOT) model," he added. The minister said the project will not run into land acquisition hurdles as most of the network is being planned on existing medians. "We need to acquire some land only at the entry and exit points of the corridors," he added. Seamless travel Total length: 82.7 km Total cost: Rs 18,409 crore The locations *North-south corridor connecting NH-7 to NH-7: From Central Silk Board to Hebbal *East-west corridor 1 connecting NH-4 to NH-4. From KR Puram to Goraguntepalya *East-west corridor 2 Connecting SH-17 to SH-35: From Jnanabharathi (SH 17) to Varthur Kodi (SH 35) *Connecting corridor 1; will link north-south corridor and east-west corridor 2: From Agara to Kalasipalyam *Connecting corridor 2; will link east-west corridor 1 to east-west corridor 2. From Richmond Road to Ulsoor *Connecting corridor 3; will link corridor from Kalyan Nagar Junction on Outer Ring Road to St John's Church Road and Wheeler Road Junction