‘Wider roads, fly-overs won’t solve traffic woes’

When he was the mayor of Bogota, Enrique Penalosa was almost impeached. Not due to any great scandal, but for getting parked cars off the sidewalks so pedestrians could walk on them.

On a recent visit to the city, the economist and administrator spoke to Taran N Khan about buses, bicycles and how Mumbai can pull a Bogota.

How would you decongest Mumbai’s traffic?
The first thing to understand is that decongesting roads is an idea that never happens, since the more flyovers and roads you build, the more cars you attract. It’s like trying to put out a fire with gasoline. Not a single city has reduced traffic by making bigger roads.

In the 20th century, we built cities more for cars than for people. If you offer the brightest Indian graduates work in New York or London, they would be happy to go. But they would not have cars there. So maybe it is not such a terrible life to be without cars? If Mumbai wants to be one of the great cities of the world, it must plan for people, not cars.
 
What does that mean, in practical terms?
In Bogota, 20 per cent of the people who use the public transport system are car owners, but they leave them at home because the bus is quicker and easier. There are two arguments in favour of using cars intelligently. One is the quality of life argument — a city friendlier to people than cars is more pleasant, children are safer and so on.  The other is the mathematical argument — that we simply cannot move everyone by car. The city will collapse.
 
How effective are measures like the Bandra-Worli sea link?
I have not seen it but can imagine it. It is essential for such a bridge to have from the very first day an exclusive lane for buses, as well as good spaces for bicycles and pedestrians.

These must exist from the beginning because later it is too difficult to get space for them. And at some point in the future — it may be next year or ten years later — the bridge will be jammed.

So what are the solutions for us?
What Mumbai must do is very simple. One, implement a great bus system, which will move much faster than cars. It will have to be well designed, with pre-paid stations, the capacity to pick up and drop off large masses of people in seconds, be well integrated with other systems like local trains, metros, etc. Two, create spaces for bicycles and pedestrians, with wide footpaths, parking and ramps that give equal dignity to cyclists and walkers as to motorists. These public pedestrian spaces should be aesthetic, with facades and windows at ground level. Mumbai has so many giant buildings coming up, which is fine, but they cannot be self-contained fortresses as if they were built in the middle of Mars. The builder and owners have a responsibility to contribute to the city and develop pleasant spaces around them.
 
In a city where basic needs are a challenge, aren’t public spaces something of an elite concern?
I think they are quite the opposite.  It is during leisure time that income differences are most keenly felt. At the end of the day, the high-income person goes to a large house, or drives to a country club where he has access to greenery. A poor person goes to a very small house, where the only alternative to TV is public pedestrian spaces. This is the least a democratic country should provide its citizens. It is not a frivolous need. Public spaces are as necessary as hospitals and schools, since man needs to walk to be happy, just like fish need to swim and birds need to fly. In the great cities of the world, the rich and the poor meet as equals in its public spaces. These spaces should be so beautiful that even the rich cannot stop going there, like the millionaires of New York who go jogging in Central Park.
 
What are the challenges in making this happen?
The big challenge is that the upper middle class which has all the political power will prevail in their demands. All they want are bigger and better roads, and maybe subways for other people to use. The challenge for the government is to see beyond these immediate pressures. Great cities have one foot in tomorrow and one 100 years ahead. The other is to educate the public about the real solutions. To the person sitting in a traffic jam, it seems that the solution is to make bigger roads, but the logic is actually counter-intuitive.