You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    How do we save our cities?

    Travelling between cities like Mumbai and Pune, is a pleasure and a routine for thousands of people. May be, some seven lakh people every day, but train, bus, car and what have you. For business, for pleasure, for personal reasons or whatever.

    But, have we ever calculated the pollution? Yes, we are so much amazed by the billions made by the service sector in Mumbai, through very creative work. For example, the vada pav guys, from whom you can still buy vada pav for Rs.10 apiece, or even less, laughs all the way to the bank, richer by Rs.2000 at the end of the day. (some estimate the earnings even higher).

    But what happens to the human beings and their energy? If a human being travels for at least two hours to work, in the metros and even more in cities like Bangalore, what will happen to their productivity?

    Why are we not re-locating our offices to the suburbs and then systematically developing such suburbs? Why is that the only development ( whatever that means), is always done only by the private sector?

    Take Chennai city for example. It has grown by leaps and bounds. On the southern side, today, there are hundreds of thousands, who travel from distances that are seventy kilometers or more, everyday, for work. The city center, where we have all the offices, has not a centimeter left for development, and all new buildings are those that are done by demolishing the old ones.

    Touch wood, the previous DMK Government saw the need for flyovers and implemented the same, throughout the city. This is exactly why the traffic keeps moving, though there are traffic jams at so many places. Yet, Chennai is one hundred times better than Bangalore, where traffic jams are very huge.

    How do we save our cities? By imposing a ban on fresh construction at some places? For instance, Whitefield in Bangalore, was sought to be developed as a suburb. But today, it resembles a city in itself. What if there is a ban on fresh construction here, and some offices are moved to some place, some fifteen kilometers away?

    Are we justified in eating, thousands of acres of very fertile land, as in the case of Amaravathi? Mr Naidu is a brilliant administrator, but God only knows why he has done this. It has been widely reported that the damage to the natural environment is so huge. Why could he not have developed the city of Vijayawada itself?

    Why not develop alternate cities? For example, Hosur is a hugely developed town, but it has developed only because it is right on the Karnataka border, with superb transport, linking it with Bangalore. Why not more towns like Hosur, so that Chennai stops going out of control?

    Do metro rail services actually lead to lesser traffic jams? Do we have alternate development plans to save our cities? Members who know much more, based on their personal experiences, may attempt answers please.
  • #635666
    Yes Metro rail services have eased out traffic to much extent. Why because those who are bound to travel far off inside the cities are now keeping their vehicle at the boarding station and reaching the destination in time and thus contributing zero pollution from their side. But what I feel that Metro trains are not made available through the densely populated area where the pollution emissions are more. So here we have blame the planners and executors for omitting the high risk areas and taking short cuts and covering tourist places which get them the traffic now and in future. Thus the very concept averting pollution is defeated.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #636319
    What the author opines can work if someone where to build a new city but in real life we have the old cities and town where in place and the civic aminities fall woefully short for the ever increasing population. People across various strata of the soceity find a place to work and live based on their paypackets and affordability. Many would have settled since ages in one place and have deep roots in a locality with school and family life going steadily.

    So, there would be many reasons for us to travel long distances and in the bargain adding to the air pollution. Do we have a choice, Having a tier of second or satellite cities is good but here again, it needs lot of planning and transparency that we lack when planning them. Only when we invest in logical reasoning and science based on the true statistics for a particular city, then we can come up with a decent plan.

    I think, we have had haphazard growth and we will continue until the city radially expands and the suburbs slowly become part of the main city.

  • #636416
    Developing satellite towns and cities around towns and cities is one way to reduce too much population density in cities and creating problems like traffic jams and pollution problems. But the government is not concentrating on this aspect. The people who want to have some livelihood are forced to move towards cities as the employment opportunities in other places are remote. The government should see that the villages will also develop and people will not migrate from these places to cities so that there will be a uniform distribution of people in all the places. For achieving this agriculture-based industries and works should be created in villages so that people there will have their means of earning the food there itself.
    always confident

  • Sign In to post your comments