Indian cities should discourage cars completely, not just restrict them!

CHOKING CITIES

Delhi's odd-even experiment will be messy, contested and incremental, but restrictions on using cars are here to stay.

The odd-even rationing of roads in Delhi has got everyone talking about air pollution, public transport, carpooling and parking charges. It’s amusing that issues that until recently were confined to policy and academic circles have suddenly entered the public discourse. While this reaffirms the belief that an issue’s proximity to Delhi is directly proportionate to its media coverage, it doesn’t change the reality that the air pollution levels in the capital and other cities are indicative of a public health crisis. And it’s a crisis that has been created by placing our relentless appetite for private automobiles above human interest.

Automobiles dominate our cities and our minds. “Traffic congestion” is part of everyday lexicon and building of flyovers is widely used to claim development in cities. Like the mythological demon that kept gobbling, the demands for uninterrupted traffic flow, wider roads and more flyovers remain unsatisfied.

Private automobiles have become dominant thanks to cheaper loans, lenient taxation, demand for free parking spaces and the absence of effective road-pricing mechanisms. “Car seva” remains the unofficial motto of our urban policies, putting a dent in the city’s budget while officials get criticised for not supplying enough essential “infrastructure” for smooth and fast traffic movement. The large number of litigations against the odd-even car use restrictions in Delhi and the bitter criticism of the capital’s Bus Rapid Transit System illustrate how the incumbent automobile regime resists any form of usage restrictions or re-prioritisation.

Here, there and everywhere

The space occupied by automobiles – moving or parked – is viewed as inevitable and legitimate over other urban activities such as play areas for children or street trading. A car or a motorbike are not only “utility vehicles” but are fast becoming personalised objects of cultural consumption. Popular media and automobile advertisements continue to portray automobiles as symbols of greater freedom and higher social status.

Ownership of an automobile brings a sense of entitlement for consuming increasingly more road space. We have fallaciously linked automobiles and the upgrade from a motorbike to a car as the only possible curve of social and economic progress. Similarly, a spurt in the private automobile sector is viewed as a pathway for economic growth. The automobile regime encompasses political, economic, social and cultural vested interests developed around the relentless consumption of automobile use.

The dominance of automobiles also affects other transport modes and access to public spaces. As automobiles appropriate more and more space, the use and quality of public transport and the share of walking and cycling in commuting declines. Even so, walking and cycling constitute 40% share in urban travel, according to the latest census.

Pedestrians and cyclists scavenge for road space. Jaywalking is not pleasant in most cities. Automobile-free areas, where one can walk freely, children can play carelessly or where the elderly can relax, are rare, gated, exclusive, and at times expensive.

Housing colonies, institutions, streets are infested with parked automobiles, each of them giving up on other activities to accommodate the vehicles. Soon, Gurgaon-like suburbs proliferating in cities around India will lock their residents into an automobile-centric culture, just like the residents of the low-density sprawling suburbs of the North American cities.

We live in cities made for automobiles, honking is an inevitable part of our urban soundscapes, and breathing the foul air emanating from automobiles completes our urban lives. While private automobiles are not solely responsible for air pollution, the dominance of the automobile regime severely affects the quality of urban life.

Long-term projections show that by 2050, the majority of urban travellers in India will depend on public transport of various forms including the para-transits, walking and cycling, carpools or car share if they become popular.

Future course

Despite high vehicle ownership, cities in industrialised countries have reversed their public policies and have started restricting the use of automobiles in one way or the other.

So how will the restrictions on automobile consumption become a political priority in India? Do we have political constituencies around promoting public transport today? Do people demand better buses – GPS-enabled, smart card-operated, etc. – instead of cheaper fuel for their private vehicles? Shouldn’t we have a Pradhan Mantri Rashtriya Shahari Footpath Yojana? Will cycling to work be incentivised in the Smart Cities Mission?

There is a silver lining. The problem of automobile dominance in the city affects the elite class, and that’s why there is such a hue and cry at the moment. Delhi’s odd-even car use restrictions have initiated politics of differential mobility on a large scale – a little niche to discuss alternative ways of moving around the city, a first step to dismantling the idea that car ownership gives you god-given rights to the road space.

The policy may not be completely rational and the government might not have the wherewithal to fully implement it initially. But let’s remember that public interventions in India are messy, contested and incremental.

The odd-even formula from Delhi will slowly get more people on board to understand that restrictions on the use of cars are here to stay. It will grow into two-wheeler restrictions, carpooling and, hopefully, better public transport integration.

As long as the Delhi government is keen to stay the course, these restrictions will become a reality in the capital and hopefully in many other Indian cities as well.

Published on 4th January, 2016. URL: http://scroll.in/article/801229/indian-cities-should-discourage-cars-completely-not-jut-restrict-them 

Why free parking is entitlement but street vending is encroachment?

You must have seen people who push their way through the queues at the airport, people who honk indiscriminately at the moving vehicles in front, people who throw garbage out of moving cars, people who feel proud of making noise at the restaurants. These people have a great sense of entitlements and they have assumed that they deserve everything they can grab. They feel deeply threatened when their sense of entitlement is challenged. These are the people, who fight for parking spots and believe that it is the obligation of the city to provide space for their car wherever they need.

Parking spots are weirdly linked with the vehicle owner’s ego and the size of the ego is directly proportional to the size of the vehicle they drive. Many vehicles owners think, it is their birth right to get free parking every where. Free parking is usually haphazard parking, which not only obstructs the pedestrian movement but the moving vehicles on the streets. Most of the roads in our cities operate on half their capacity andparked vehicles occupy the other half. We keep making multi-storied parking buildings, which remain empty, but the parking on the streets is chaos.

Every large city in Gujarat and elsewhere requires a policy of paid parking on all their major roads. The international experience shows that the paid parking policies have magical effect of removing unnecessary parking from the streets. This goes a long way in opening up the pedestrian paths and smoothening the traffic flow. But to convert the free parking lots in all major roads into the paid parking lots is a very unpopular move. Because many car owners think that free parking is their entitlement that the government is supposed to provide. The government officials who move around in official vehicles also feel that it is too harsh to charge for parking. This mindset needs to change.

Vehicular parking is similar to street vending as both occupy public spaces like roads for private activities. Arguably, both are economic generating activities and add to the vibrancy of the city. Yet both are treated entirely differently in popular perceptions and thus, by the city government. When word ‘encroachments’ is used generally for the street vendors and not for the freely parked vehicles. The municipal raids to clear ‘encroachments’ do not touch the parked vehicles. Vendors are often under threats by the police and they are pushed around at different occasions. But vehicles can be parked freely anywhere and everywhere. Even the traffic police is selective about the kind of vehicles they catch to fine.

I am optimistic about paid parking policy to become a reality soon. The ever-increasing vehicles on the roads are going to force us to think of new ways of dealing with the ‘parking problem’. In a welcome move, the Ahmedabad’s Municipal Corporation and the Traffic Police have decided to have the paid parking lots around the Sarkhej-Gandhinagar highway. The CG road has had paid parking lots for two decades now but there is lot of unpaid parking in the side lanes. If our cities want to save their streets from being converted into permanent parking lots then the paid parking needs to be extended to its all major roads.

(17th August, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=70207&boxid=1215&ed_date=2015-08-17&ed_code=1310009&ed_page=5

You are not stuck in traffic, you are ‘the traffic’ that you resent so much!

A bus full of people reduces about 50-80 vehicles from roads. A train coach will reduce about 100 vehicles if it reaches where the need is. 

"A developed country is not where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation."

You are not stuck in traffic, you ARE the traffic!’ – Originally a slogan from Copenhagen to promote sustainable means of transport has become a timely reminder for many city planners and administrators in the 21st Century. It is quite self-sympathising and self-deluding to believe that ‘I am stuck in traffic’ – as if there is a larger conspiracy to do so. Smart motorists realise that they are also contributor to the problem of traffic and they cannot get away by putting the blame on others for driving just like them. Recently I have been guilty of adding one more car in the city by buying one. The more I drive the car, the more I realise how I am contributing to the problem.

When you are a car driver, you would like wider roads and less traffic coming your way. Wider roads, free parking and smoother functioning of traffic coupled with lack of efficient public transport compel a lot of people to take up driving. Yet we have a very low car ownership in the country compared to many industrialised countries. For example, the US have about 750 cars per thousand people and we have not even reached about 100 motor vehicles per thousand people. In short, motor vehicles will be growing at unprecedented rates and we will have to learn to deal with this problem like other countries.

Cities around the world are realising that unlimited supply of wider roads and flyovers is not possible. These conventional solutions of keep building ‘roads over roads’ are not economically or environmentally sustainable. By building a maze of flyovers and by allowing relentless traffic, Delhi has attracted the worst air pollution, unsafe roads and never-ending traffic. Besides, who likes to live in a city, which has a jumble of flyovers on every junction but hardly any sight of greens! Even car drivers are not happy with these solutions because they neither get wide roads nor smoothly operated traffic. As new owners add more and more vehicles, the once-upon-a-time nice roads to drive on get congested.

Many cities have realised that they need to make ‘life-style changes’ to solve the problem of their clogged arteries and some by-passes here and they will not help in the long run. As Petro Gustavo - the mayor of Bogota famously said, “A developed country is not where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” Promoting public transport and making it so efficient and affordable that a majority uses it is a challenge worth taking up.

A bus full of people reduces about 50-80 vehicles from the roads. A metro train coach will reduce about 100 vehicles provided it reaches where the need is. Many vehicle drivers will not mind walking short distances or taking public transport provided there are better facilities. Cities in Gujarat have surely made a good beginning in these directions compared to many other Indian cities but they will need to do much more. Over the last few years, the awareness amongst the citizens about the benefits of public transport is growing. This needs to be now backed up with the adequate investments, long-term plans and efficient implementation. Good governance gives us possibilities of being a solution to the problem and not only the contributors. Hope, we get our due!

(15th June, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

big cars, bigger egos and culture of rule-breaking kills people on the roads!

We are curiously watching the case of Salman Khan’s drunken driving and roadside killing. As of now, Salman Khan, balancing between public sympathy and hatred, is delaying the process of justice with a hope that he might evade it completely. As a reputed judge and author Tom Bingham said, the rule of law unfortunately is ‘hooray for my side’ for most of the people. This partisanship is often used to put pressure on the judiciary. Besides the larger issue of the prevalence of the rule of law, Salman Khan is surely a bad role model for the young motor vehicle drivers. 

Salman Khan is not the only bad role model in young people’s life. Youngsters learn most of their behaviour traits from their parents. How about parents (on motorbikes and cars) dropping kids to school by driving on the wrong side of the road? Lot of people believe that we should teach the kids traffic discipline from their childhood - catch them young! Kids learn more looking at the conduct of their parents then what they learn in the children's traffic parks. How do we expect the kids to follow traffic rules when there is a prevailing culture of casual rule breaking for the sake of little convenience? Unfortunately, this culture of casual rule breaking is considered social smartness in most cases and is further encouraged.

  

The wrongful behaviour on part of the motor vehicle drivers also emerge from their imagination of seeing themselves as 'victims' - 'what do I do when there is no provision for me!' or ‘give me more space, I am more important than others!’ When someone buys an expensive, big vehicle the feeling of victimhood doubles up - as if buying an expensive vehicle is a license to ask for more road space, free parking space and honking unnecessarily. More powerful people with their more powerful vehicles have a great sense of entitlement. When this self-assumed entitlement for unlimited road space is denied, they see themselves as victim of relentless traffic and not as equal participants in adding to the chaos. The combination of the culture of casual rule breaking and notion of ‘victimhood’ results in road rage and wrongful traffic behaviour. 

  

The statistics from the National Crime Records Bureau shows us that the bigger vehicles are responsible for larger number of road fatalities. Trucks or SUVs going at a high speed will kill more people than an auto rickshaw. With bigger vehicle comes bigger responsibility of saving other people’s life. 1.25 lakh Indians die in road traffic related crashes every year. If we are serious about reducing the road fatalities then we will not only have to make the physical infrastructure of our streets safer but also target some of these social issues - bad role models, sense of entitlement/victimhood amongst the privileged drivers and the culture of casual rule breaking. 

(11th May, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)