Yamuna: views of E. Shridharan

As published in TOI on 20th May 2009
Restrict Yamuna with walls and develop low-lying areas
Dr E Sreedharan, MD of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, says a handful of environmentalists are coming in the way of saving the river and calls for setting up of an SPV to do the job
When the members of the British parliament sat in the House of Commons on a day in the late 1850s, they could not transact any business on account of the foul stench emanating from the Thames. That was the day the government decided to clean up the river and limit its width by building high retaining walls along both banks. By so confining the river, a new hydrological regime was achieved which resulted in self-cleansing during high and low tides. Sewage and industrial effluents flowing into the Thames were intercepted and taken elsewhere for treatment. The large tract of low-lying areas behind the retaining walls were given for real estate development. And that is how London is today — clean, with majestic and monumental buildings lining the banks of the Thames. The same story appears to have been repeated for all great cities located on river banks whether it is Paris, Budapest, Moscow, New York or Seoul. In all these cities, the river is ‘trained’ (cause to grow in a particular direction or shape) with retaining walls and the banks on either side are beautified with parks, promenades and landmark buildings. Why cannot Delhi also learn lessons from the experience of these cities? The Yamuna river has to be trained and confined to a width that is defined between abutments of the existing bridges by constructing appropriate guide bunds or retaining walls, and the large sprawling tracts of low-lying areas behind these walls utilized for high-end developments which can make the city rich, beautiful and prosperous. A handful of self-styled environmentalists is stalling this idea. The result is rampant encroachments on the riverbed by jhuggis which catch fire at regular intervals every summer, often burning alive a few people. Sewage and untreated industrial waste are let into the river without treatment and nobody owns up responsibility for the same. The so-called environmentalists are vociferous against clean development schemes which are vital for the city, such as Commonwealth Games Village, Metro constructions, Akshardham Temple, etc. If the Yamuna is to be saved, there is only one way. Control the width of the river, not allowing flood waters to inundate the lowlying areas of the city and allow the river to reach its own natural regime in the constricted width. Model studies in the Central Water and Power Research Institute (CWPRI), Khadakvasala, can validate the philosophy of this argument. Two large longitudinal sewers should be built behind the rampart walls to intercept all the sewage falling into the river, take the sewage to a far-off place, and after proper treatment, let the effluents flow into the river. Industries should treat their effluents before they are let into the river. The lowlying areas behind the masonary embankments should be released for high-end development. A Special Purpose Vehicle (Yamuna Development Authority) should be set up under an Act of Parliament, fully empowered to train the river and to manage the developments on the released lowlying areas. The resources needed for all these can be easily raised by exploiting the released riverbeds. In the development plan, a corridor of 300 metres should be reserved adjacent to the river bank for gardens, promenades and recreation centres. Initially the stretch between Wazirabad barrage and Kalindi Kunj could be taken up for river training, and the project can be extended downstream and upstream in due course. The government has already spent more than Rs 1200 crore for cleaning the river. Where has all this money gone? If development as suggested above can be undertaken, the river can be saved, Yamuna can be made clean and the river-fronts can be made the pride of the city. It is time the government and the judiciary listen to the voice of professionals and not to the vague fears of a few so-called environmentalists. In all great cities located on riverbanks, whether it’s Paris, Budapest, Moscow, New York or Seoul, the river is ‘trained’ with retaining walls and the banks beautified with parks, promenades and landmark buildings Two large longitudinal sewers should be built behind the rampart walls to intercept all the sewage falling into the river, then take it to a far-off place and release the sewage into the river after proper treatment These so-called environmentalists are vociferous against clean development schemes vital for the city, such as the Games Village, Metro, Akshardham Temple. It’s time the govt and judiciary listen to the voice of professionals

High Court verdict: YAMUNA MORE IMPORTANT THAN GAMES

High Court verdict: YAMUNA MORE IMPORTANT THAN GAMES
New Delhi, November 03Indian Express
“It is fear and anxiety that makes me pen these lines,” begins Justice Rekha Sharma in a crisp four-page verdict that says the river is “gasping for breath”.Supplementing a formal 45-page judgment from Justice A K Sikri, is the four page judgment from his “sister Justice Rekha Sharma”, who says the entire project of building on the Yamuna riverbed is a “sad story of men fiddling with major issues and resultantly playing havoc”. “This judgment,” she observes, “relates to a river which once flowed majestically but is now gasping for breath. If this continues, time is not far off when this gift of Gods will die an unnatural death buried under layers of silt.”She pits the oft-mooted contention of “development” with the environmentalists’ cry of “save the river”, and concludes that Yamuna is more important of the two. “The significance and importance of the Commonwealth Games is not lost on anyone (but) the impact of building on the Yamuna, its environment, ecology and the long-term damage is, as the petitioners (environmentalists) say, pregnant with disaster,” the judge notes. “If no urgent measures are taken, the Yamuna may exist only in books.” Justice Sharma also notes: “No doubt is left that the site in question is on the river bed.”In his separate judgment, Justice Sikri considers the issue a “disputed question” that needs to be looked into by an expert committee.But Justice Sharma goes a step further to add that even if the construction is not on the riverbed, “urbanisation and colossal construction underway may yet adversely affect the environment, the river and the ecology”. She also lashes out at the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute for unexpectedly changing its stand to favour urbanization. Justice Sharma concludes with a parting shot that neither the government, DDA or the NEERI have been “fair” to the river.