Image
edited from a drawing on ESG's
site. Well, the NICE site has no information at all. |
||
BMIC
Phase-I Bottlenecks According to ToI Dec 16,2007 these will be included in NICE’s written reply to the governor. |
||
Peripheral Road
41 km Between NH-7 & NH-4
|
Link Road
9.1 km taking off from SH 17
Kavika, and linking the expressway
|
|
Between 8.00 km and 9.00 km near Bannerghatta Road junction (P2) | At 0 to 0.6 km, linking expressway and Mysore Road near Byatarayanapura and Divitigeramanahally village. | |
Between 15.4 km and 16.0 km near Kanakapura Road junction (P3) | At 1.4 km, BBMP yet to give approval for diversion at ring road and integrating bridge and ramps across Outer Ring Road (ORR). Pending for one-and-a-half years. | |
Between 23.4 km and 24.2 km near Mysore Road junction (P5) | ||
Between 33.6 km and 33.8 km near Magadi Road junction (P6) | Between 2.6 km and 2.9 km near Hosakerehalli. | |
At 5.4 km, where alignment in BWSSB water pipeline has to be shifted, for which NICE paid Rs 77 lakh | ||
Between 7.80 km and 8.30 km needed near Hemmigepura village for link road. | ||
Environmental
Violations
ESG has been pursuing alleged
environmental violations by NICE. Here is an article by Leo Saldhana of
ESG in the May 2007 edition of Indian Architect and Builder: A nice
road goes dangerously off-course. ESG website also hosts a bunch of
maps
on the project.
|
||
Framework Agreement
There are two agreements: 1)
1997 Original Framework Agreement, signed during JH Patel’s term, and
2) 2002 Agreement signed during SM Krishna’s term. HC & SC want the
project to be implemented in letter and in spirit according to the
April 1997 Framework Agreement. You can read about this framework
mess here.
|
||
Meanwhile,
Ring Road ge BYPASS, Kheni ge Pheni!! |
||
BMIC Updates
- Login or register to post comments
- ಈ Story ಅನ್ನು ಸ್ನೇಹಿತರಿಗೆ ಕಳಿಸಿ
ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಗಳು
PS Note: 30,000 crore
BWSSB Vs NICE: Court Order
The Karnataka High Court on Jan 24,2008 directed the BWSSB to shift the water and sewage pipelines in four locations across Bangalore city so that NICE could complete the peripheral road which is part of the BMIC.
The court told the Board to ensure commencement of the said works by completing formalities within three weeks, while directing both the Board and NICE to ensure completion of works taken up, within a week thereafter. The court further directed the BWSSB to issue public notices regarding impending disruption in water suppy during the said works and to ensure emergent water supply wherever required, while telling NICE to cooperate. The judge said the Water Board, if it so wanted, could use men and material of NICE to ensure that the work was completed expeditiously and to ensure that there was minimum inconvenience to the residents of Bangalore.
Works details
The court directed the BWSSB to execute shifting and replacing work of pipelines at two locations by itself, and to permit NICE to execute similar works at two other locations.
The court directed the BWSSB to execute the deviations of 1625-mm dia MS Transmission Line of Uttarahall- Kengeri Road near Channasandra, for which NICE had already deposited Rs 77.1 lakh; further, the BWSSB was directed to execute similar shifting of water pipeline at the starting point of Peripheral Road (Hosur Road) connecting the loop road towards Electronic City for which it had received Rs 30-lakh deposit.
The court asked the BWSSB to issue work orders to NICE to execute by itself the shifting of a 600-mm dia water pipeline parallel to the Ring Road near PES College, and for providing an underground drainage on Avalahalli Road near Pantharapalya village, which come in way of Link Road alignment. For these works, BWSSB was said to have agreed and received ETP charges of Rs 2.17 lakhs.
Pulled up
While opposing the petition, BWSSB had contended that it was impossible to execute or permit the said works citing reasons of inconvenience to public alone and suggested that the very alignment of roads could be altered. The court rejected its contention while pulling up the Board for its inconsistent stand. It observed that the same BWSSB Chief Engineer who had inspected and agreed to take up the said works earlier, was now stating before the court that they were impossible.
The court also rapped the Board for dragging on the issue. It observed that BWSSB officers had taken part in joint inspections of work spots in 2001 itself and the Board need not have waited all these years just to inform the company that it is not possible to shift pipelines.
Dismissing the contentions of the water board, Justice Byrareddy said it could not be permitted to rescind an agreement it had entered into with NICE. While the shifting would cause inconvenience to the residents, the work could be completed expeditiously and the board would have to ensure there is surplus water supply prior to the disruption.