Death of reason defines decision of keeping trees out of Delhi's transport planning

By: Parvinder Singh, Source: Toxics Link, Date: May 08, 2007

The campaign to bring city trees back into the discourse of transport and urban planning has grown stronger in the past two months. Citizens and civil society organisations of Delhi have joined forces on the specific issue of felling of hundreds of neighbourhood trees to make way for the High Capacity Bus Corridor (HCBS). The fact that the trees that people have lived around for decades and depended on them for protection in this semi-arid area has outraged them.

The fact that close to 30,000 trees have been axed in the past few years for moderninsing and decongesting transport in the National Capital Region seems too much to be swallowed without any reasoning. The question that has been haunting people, who are faced with these broad daylight murders and mutilations in their neighbourhood, is whether any thought was given to the trees while planning these projects.

Or how difficult is the decision to chop a tree? Is anyone negotiating this life and death situation? Should these plans be treated as the final word and a case of the death of imagination of experts in finding innovative solutions?

Questions like these has got people together, not against any particular project or mega plans, but against the death of reason. The commonsense of the argument and support of promiment citizens moved something, somewhere in the Government. Trees for Delhi, a platform of individuals and organisations, got invited to the Chief Minister's Office following a candle-light vigil on a busy roadside and media uproar.

But in the backdrop of a growing support for the trees, a parallel and much practiced discourse of development versus trees was being whipped-up. Letters were sent out to prominent citizens by the Chief Minister's Office, stating that the trees are being cut by a Government that have green credentials and the damage to the green cover will be compensated by planting sapling in city's outskirts.

But these messages did not even make even a single mention of the neighbourhood trees, which is the core issue. There wasn't even a pretence of addressing issues highlighted through a signed by academics, experts, students and housewives.

On 10th of April 2007, the forum made a joint presentation with a plea to Chief Minister Shiela Dikshit to protect the neighbourhood trees by facilitating a mandatory and dedicate tree lane on the roadside. They also presented a primary tree audit of the first stretch of the HCBS project that showed that the ground situation was a free play against trees. The trees on the ground were fewer than listed in the official count. The ones that were to be saved had been cut. Branches from the old trees were planted in the name of re-plantation and those that were still standing were tarred and chocked.

The Chief Minister gave a patient hearing, but had come prepared to stick to the line of steering clear of the main demand. She said a dedicated tree line will not be granted. The issue of so-called compensatory forestry was the peg. No matter what, the official position was to equate these old native trees with sapling that would some day see the light of the day.

A release was faxed by her media managers, even as the meeting was being wrapped up, stating mostly the same things that she had in response to the petition said. She directed a symbolic body of NGOs and implementing agencies, named as the Tree Monitoring Authority. The members returned to the project site barely 48-hours later and this time had some officials to give then company under the summer sun to assess the status of trees. The findings and the engagement once again convinced them about the apathy towards trees. Follow-up meetings that were promised by the Chief Minister have not happened till date, while the defensive interpretation of Delhi's green cover are being churned out in the media.

Incidentally, despite all the coverage and discussion, the issue of neighbourhood city trees is yet to be engaged with by those implementing the project.

Questions have been raised on the lack of transparency that marks the environmental aspect of the project. There is no Environmental Impact Assessment available on the HCBS project. But when you consider the fact that the agencies and experts involved do not even know the role that neighbourhood trees play in an urban setting like Delhi, it becomes easy to understand why they are talking about saplings as forest and aggregate numbers as opposed to specific micro-environments.

A clichéd response that government resorts to is that the trees that are being felled are absolutely necessary. This is not convincing to those who have been following media reports from the gorenment's side. Let's just take the example of the project at hand, the first phase of the five phased 100-km dedicated bus corridor.

When the issue started gaining support and public interest, an official statement was issued saying that of about 3,000 trees that were to felled in the first stretch only 1,800 will now be axed. This was taken with a pinch of salt, considering that even a botanical paradise that houses this city's tree history, the Sundar Nursery, is being eyed for making a tunnel that will de-congest traffic.

However, this statement, and many such that are being made in recent weeks, is a confession that uncovers the stark apathy towards trees and thus the need to re-look at the whole issue. The planners, in a single stroke of pen, can bring down the number of trees to be cut by almost 50 per cent! This means trees could have been saved in the very first place had they been part of the planning.

The issue of compensatory afforestation has little relevance in the context of neighbourhood trees. By virtue of being in the urban setting, these trees play a more immediate role, like shade, blocking of dust, providing habitat to birds and small animals, keeping water table stable and aesthetic relief. In other words, they allow people who are not in air-conditioned vehicle to walk, cycle and wait for buses. A large number of vendors depend on these for operation. Besides in an era of global warming a large tree is sacred. How do you even compare a promised sapling plantation with diverse native urban trees. Should we then expect all the birds and small animals to wait or keep their lives on hold till plantations can support them.

It is easy to draw from all this that the city trees need an epistemic break so far as our transport plans are concerned. A tree is a negotiable element and will continue to be so till trees are integrated into plans and projects through a legislation. Campaigners have been talking about a 2.5 meters of non-negotiable treeline. Make as many roads and expansions as the agencies feel the city requires, but have a treeline alongside.

At the meeting with the Chief Minister, the representatives made some significant recommendations for addressing the issue of destruction of the neighbourhood trees. The key among these is that of a dedicated corridor for trees. The recommendation reads: "A dedicated row/lane or green belt of 3 metres width should be included in planning and implementation. There should be rows of existing and planted native trees, on both sides of the road. This tree row/lane must be protected and inviolate to all inimical uses, like the dedicated lanes being proposed for cyclists, buses, cars etc. This tree row/lane also ideally serve the needs of all road users (especially pedestrians and cyclists) for shade and climate moderation. Planning the cycle row behind the tree row will additionally provide a natural protection between cyclists/pedestrians and motorized vehicles in the other lanes. This row/lane/belt would also provide a critical buffer between busy traffic and the adjoining homes areas, minimizing pollutants and noise. Hence it will harmonize various critical considerations."

The image of a neighbourhood without trees has spurred reactions in far greater forms and depth than our urban planners would have expected. Two of India top academic institutions, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Delhi University, have witnessed sign-on campaigns by faculty members requesting their Vice Chancellors to address the issue of cutting of trees and loss of green cover. Resident Welfare Associations are thinking of ways to join forces and get their opinions across.

Don’t axe the tree, integrate it with transport

By: Ravi Agarwal, Source: Toxics Link, Date: May 08, 2007

Roadside and neighborhood trees in cities like Delhi have been part of the contemporary urban landscape for over a century. They have more than an aesthetic value. On any summer’s day, the red light or the bus stop automatically ‘shifts’ below the nearest tree for scooterists or for pedestrians. Waiting below them is an obvious choice as temperatures can be several degrees lower here. Besides, on pavements, hawkers and water sellers cluster below their shade for some relief from the scorching heat. Semul, dhak, jasmine or jacaurnada bloom at different times (along with bird nesting), jamuns or imli for fruit, or neem etc. for leafy shelter. Several species of birds - sparrows, pigeons, kites, sunbirds, barbets, even hornbills - all nest in them, and form micro ecologies. All provide a welcome barrier between people’s homes and the road. Yet today they are dispensable in the eyes of the transport planner.

Over the past few years, from available figures, over 50,000 trees have already been axed in Delhi, some over 50 to 100 years old, and probably an additional similar number will go before the Commonwealth Games. The pride of Delhi, the Metro, the upcoming mass transport – High Capacity Bus Service (HCBS – 6 stretches totaling over 100 km) with dedicated corridors, new flyovers, road widening, new roads, none consider trees to be important. The transport planner considers the width between two rows of houses as ‘right of way’ and anything in-between is fair game. Hence for the purposes of ‘transport’ trees are obstructions. It is not realized that trees are an essential part of people’s neighborhoods.

It goes without saying, that transport is important, but it too needs to be sanely planned. The approach must be for integrating concerns, and not to force ‘corridors’ the city, where trees are the first casualties. The proposed road tunnel through the Sunder Nursery is a case in point. Delhi is adding over 900 cars every day to its existing over 30 million on its roads. Each car takes the space of two trees.

On the other hand less than 7,000 buses play in lieu of the needed 9,000. Obviously mass transport need to be increased and cars limited. However road plans are not accounting for this. For example after10 pm any evening, there is comparatively no traffic on Delhi’s roads, and one can drive at over 60 km per hour on many stretches. Yet transport corridors seem to be carved out for a few hours of car traffic intensity. As an engineer will confirm, ‘channel’ capacity must not be optimized for peak loads, and that any city in the world will have traffic slow downs in peak hours.

Projects like the HCBS based on dedicated corridors, need to be fully supported for their ability to transport over 10,000 office goers per hour in buses, both for their transport efficiency as well as carbon saving, but they also need to limit road space for cars, not merely expand the corridor. Roadside trees are equally important to pedestrians and cyclists since no one will use a concrete walkway in the mid-summer heat if it has no shade. Yet transport planners do not currently consider the idea of a dedicated tree line, even if it may seem logical.

These projects will take out many existing trees, and not leave or make space for new plantations. Without any un-tarred land being allotted on the ground, trees cannot be planted. In reality the city is facing simultaneous road widening, new flyovers, new metros, new bus lanes all in one go for the Commonwealth Games. There is a dire need for planning to account for existing topographies rather then impose a new barrenness onto it and integration is the answer.

Any city needs traffic management, as London has shown by taxing car entry, and cannot be open-ended. While mass transport must be brought in, simultaneously car traffic needs to be discouraged. Agencies like the ECPA (Bhure Lal Committee) have been arguing for this, but it seems the ‘car’ lobby is much stronger.

The Delhi Tree Preservation Act mandates, among other things, that for each tree cut compensatory afforestation in a ratio of 1:10 must be carried out. This though does not compensate for the ‘neighborhood tree. Even otherwise, often land is not available for it, or provided at a great distance, wrong species are planted, or survival rates are less than 50%. Inspections carried out by citizen’s groups show crowded plantation which will have to be drastically thinned once the trees become a little mature, defeating the purpose of even the 1:10 ratio. In any case, a new sapling cannot compensate for a 50-year-old tree, or for a neighborhood tree.

Each year the Government works with citizens to plant new trees. In Delhi a Greening Action Plan is prepared annually with targets and goals. Saplings are provided free from nurseries, and students partake in tree planting drives along with NGOs. However when these trees are suddenly and silently axed, they become ‘government property!’ While neighborhoods are transformed, no one is asked, told or consulted even though such transport could take years to plan. A consultative process can in fact reap good results. In cities like Pune, for example, monthly public consultations have managed to save many trees from the unnecessarily axe.

In the larger scheme of things those with powers to protect the trees such as the statutory ‘Tree Officer,’ need more teeth and budgets. In Delhi the Planning Commission has sanctioned over 9000 crores for the Commonwealth Games, half of which is for transport but it is unlikely there any money in it for ‘trees’ As a crisis response, Trees for Delhi, a new coalition of well known NGOs and citizens, says that trees are ‘not dispensable’ in their signature campaign supported by well know people.

Trees must be made a mandatory part of the roadside. Anyone who has watered or seen a tree grow will know that it takes years of sun, water, and caring for it to become what it can be. On the other hand, it takes less than minute to run a power saw through it for it to be felled. Many things can be done to improve the situation. For example old and heritage trees can be protected at the planning stage itself, and trees protected or a place made to plant them again on the edge of the road. New trees can be locally planted alongside new roads, new flyovers, or when new road widening is carried out with a dedicated tree line. Resident Welfare Associations can educate local councilors about the need to protect trees and ensure that they take this up with the Transport and Environment Departments.

In case trees have to be cut, all information of ‘which,’ ‘when’ and ‘where’ should be shared with the residents of locality and put in the public domain. Importantly, laws to restrict the number of cars on the roads, or at least stagger their use of road space is critical. Above all, tree lanes are as important as pedestrian, cycle, car and bus lanes. These need to be made integral to transport planning.