GHMC Replaces Seven Flyovers, Seven Underpasses With Single KBR Corridor

Telangana government faces citizens’ ire over KBR flyover fiasco

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation has approved a single continuous elevated corridor from Jubilee Hills Checkpost to NFCL Junction, replacing the earlier plan for seven flyovers and seven underpasses around Kasu Brahmananda Reddy National Park.

The reversal has triggered severe criticism from citizens and raised questions over the government’s handling of the infrastructure project near the park in central Hyderabad.

Earlier plan replaced by unified corridor

The original proposal involved constructing seven flyovers and seven underpasses in the vicinity of the KBR National Park. The GHMC has now changed the design to one continuous unified elevated corridor running from Jubilee Hills Checkpost to NFCL Junction.

The revised construction plan has been divided into two packages. The first package will cover the stretch from Jubilee Hills Check Post to Banjara Hills Road No.2. The second will run from there to Muffakhkam Jah College and will include a dedicated connecting ramp to Banjara Hills Road No.1.

Despite the change in design, the GHMC will not call new tenders. Senior GHMC officials said the previous contractor had already completed 50% of the work under the earlier design.

The sanctioned cost of the project will also remain unchanged at ₹1,090 crore. According to official claims, however, the revised design has led to savings of ₹1,200 crore.

Officials attributed ₹800 crore of the claimed savings to a sharp reduction in the need to acquire high-value private land, while another ₹400 crore was attributed to lower construction costs.

GHMC cites one-way traffic experiment

GHMC Commissioner R.V.Karnan said the design was changed after officials saw that one-way traffic flow had reduced congestion on the stretch. He made the statement while speaking to the media after inspecting the site on Monday.

The approval by the GHMC Standing Committee brought the revised plan into focus and prompted a strong reaction on social media. Citizens criticised what they described as a casual approach by the government towards a project that had already involved the use of resources.

One question raised online was how an infrastructure proposal could change so radically from ring flyovers to a straight corridor “in a month”. “How can an infra proposal change so radically from ring flyovers to a straight one? That too in a month?” city-based architect Shankar Narayan asked on ‘X’.

Narayan also questioned whether traffic studies had been conducted or whether the revised project was a compensatory project for the contractor after the original proposal was shelved.

Citizens question studies and project cost

Prashanth Bachu, a strong advocate for sustainable transport, questioned whether the required assessment had been carried out before the infrastructure proposal was changed. “I wish there was some shame left in these bureaucrats and engineers. Investing in major infra requires a study; an assessment of alternatives, examination of consequences, a design, and a chance for the public to examine. Was any of it done?” he said.

Bachu also questioned how the project price had been determined. “And how did you arrive at the price?” he asked.

Uday Krishna from Vata Foundation sought details of the money already spent on the earlier KBR project and questioned why those details had not been disclosed. “And... how much did you say was already spent on the KBR blunder? Oh... you didnt say anything about that. Why no details on that wastage? Since it’s a new design... are tenderes being refloated?” he questioned.

Tree felling and excavation under scrutiny

The Save KBR citizens’ group, which had opposed the construction of the flyovers through protests on and off the roads, questioned why there was no Detailed Project Report for the new project.

The group also drew attention to the damage caused by the felling of age-old trees. Green activist Natasha Ramarathnam asked why the earlier project had been abandoned if the H-CITI project had been designed after extensive traffic studies.

“If, like the govt claims, H-CITI project was designed after extensive traffic studies, why has the project been abandoned and a new one proposed? Who will be held accountable for money already spent on excavation?” Ramarathnam posted.

She also questioned who would take responsibility for the trees that were cut down and the rocks that were destroyed. “Who takes responsibility for trees cut down and rocks destroyed?” she posted.

GHMC officials blamed traffic police for the delay in conducting the one-way experiment, saying it was reportedly delayed by at least six months. The traffic police agreed to the experiment only after it was made clear that the works would not proceed if one-way traffic was not put in place.

“The delay cost us a lot. Our hands are tied now, because if we scrap the contract, it will result in legal problems,” a GHMC official said.

Source: The Hindu