Traffic management is a tricky problem for urban planners. Affordable, quality transport provision, especially during peak hours of the day, requires serious deliberations. Responses to this problem have varied across the world. In the west, European cities, which have a more compact and dense structure than North American cities have focused on promoting and providing alternative modes of transportation from private automobiles. They have encouraged more economical and healthier modes of transportation such as public transport buses, bus rapid transit (BRT) and rail-based transit — underground tubes, light rail transit (LRT), mass rail transit (MRT). They have also made cities more cycling and walking-friendly.

The Americans, in contrast, developed an infrastructure that encouraged and facilitated the use of cars. The US built a large number of inner-city flyovers in the 1950s and 1960s. These multi-laned highways called ‘freeways’ in the US also entered into the cities, bypassing the city’s major residential and commercial corridors. The assumed benefits of these freeways were easing traffic congestion, reducing emissions, and saving travel time.

Freeway externalities

It was in the 1970s when it was realised that the freeways did not solve the above-stated problems. In fact in some ways, they only made the situation worse. The free space created by these freeways attracted more cars, meaning more people buying cars, and more people using freeways. This resulted in a zero-sum game, an effect known as “induced traffic”. In addition to this, according to the Institute of Transportation and Development Policy, urban highways around the globe have led to adverse effects on cities such as worsening air pollution, displaced communities, increased congestion, severed neighbourhoods, loss of architectural heritage, increased crime, dead spaces, and staunched economic development.

Interestingly, some of the urban freeways, especially those in the US were strongly believed to have been developed to prevent passing through black communities and other racial groups. The freeways were allegedly developed to provide the ‘white’ community that resided in the peripheries a convenient thoroughfare to the city centre by bypassing the low-income racial community areas in between — a case that may sound familiar to many Karachiites.

Hence, the development of urban highways and freeways is a controversial idea all around the globe. Since 1987, more than 20 such freeways have been removed across the globe. Some of the most iconic transformation cases of freeway-based corridors include the restoration of the Cheonggyecheon River in Seoul, the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco and the Pompidou in Paris. Most of these transformations, naturally, occurred in the USA which was home to most of such urban freeways

Transport planning challenges for developing countries

Developing countries, however, seem to be in a fix concerning this issue. While mass transit systems provide efficient and affordable transportation services, they require significant capital investment to develop, and financial subsidies to sustain operations. Developing countries are often stuck in trying to strike a trade-off between the cost and benefit of the various aspects of transportation planning. Hence cities in developing countries that fail to provide a decent public transport system to their public, seek to divert that demand to private modes of transportation such as cars and motorbikes.

The case of Pakistan in general and Karachi in specific is very similar. The peak hour traffic issue is dealt with by developing signal-free corridors and adding extra lanes. These traffic-free corridors are created by closing intersections and making bridges and underpasses in place.

Commenting on the way bridges have been built in Karachi, senior architect and urban planner Arif Hasan said that in most of these places, mere preferential signalling and parking management could have resolved traffic issues. Referring to the recently developed underpasses at Shaheed-e-Millat, he thought that the intersections were better off without these structures. Senior transport planning consultant Ashar Lodhi too believes that tactics such as creating a green wave of signals could have solved problems at many of the locations of the city.

While these flyovers were a convenient, short-term solution for traffic regulation — especially for those who could afford to own private vehicles — they left a lasting impact on the natural environment and communities around them. Public works are typically — or theoretically should be — approved after weighing the benefit they will provide to the public at large against the cost and threat to the environment, among other factors. This trade-off has been seemingly abused in certain cases in Karachi.

While multiple new flyovers and underpasses have entered Karachi’s landscape in recent decades, its public transport has suffered a sharp decline, both in terms of quality and quantity. Between 2010 and 2015, the number of buses in the city went down from 22,000 to 13,000. However, various sources including the Karachi Transport Ittehad (KTI) claim the number has fallen below 5000. Simultaneously, according to a Dawn report from 2017, 700 motorbikes were entering the roads of Karachi everyday, with a 230 per cent total increase over the decade. In response to the exponentially increasing traffic on the streets of Karachi, authorities once again resorted to their practice of developing more bridges and underpasses to manage the traffic flow.

The case of Gizri Flyover

There are certain very strange flyovers in Karachi that do not fit in the ‘need’ parameters of the city or of the general public at large. The Gizri Flyover (also known as the Gizri Bypass) for instance was developed merely to connect the vehicular traffic of an upper-class residential area to the rest of the city by flying over a low-income or ‘informal settlement’ that falls in between. It was built so that these residents could ‘escape’ the traffic congestion in the Gizri Market area.

The 1.2km flyover, which was built for Rs600 million in 2009, carries a very low volume of traffic, most of which are private vehicles. The bridge has a right of way (ROW) over the low-income settlements below, leaving little access to sunlight and crosswinds to the corridor below. There is very little space for dust and pollutants — particulate matter, carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide (CO) or nitrogen monoxide (NO) etc. — to escape from beneath the bridge. Numerous studies have shown a strong correlation between the toxic emissions from vehicles moving on urban highways and the impact they have on the health of communities that reside and work in close proximity.

Besides the health risks the flyover has posed — and putting aside the fact that the concrete structure ruins the street and landscape of the entire corridor — it has also evidently contracted the economic structure of the market below. Since the majority of the affluent class which holds significant buying power and would previously pass through the market area now bypasses the market, it has caused a decline in footfall to the market. Hasan added that the real estate values around such flyovers stall, which subsequently restricts the upward mobility of the community that lives under and around these structures.

Read more: Moving pursuits: Life under Karachi’s flyovers

Hasan believes that the construction of this flyover was a complete miscalculation on the part of the planning team. They failed to realise that the traffic there was largely linked to the Gizri market. Hence, when the flyover was built, a very low volume of traffic moved over it. And finally, the anticipated solution for escaping the traffic congestion below also seems to have failed miserably because the traffic now forms a long queue at the signal that is situated on the entrance back into the posh area. 12 years on, looking at how this place has functioned, one wonders how such a project even qualified the environment and traffic impact assessment criteria. And more importantly, is there an urban poor bias that is reflected in our planning processes?

The case of Bacha Khan Flyover

The Bacha Khan Flyover in Orangi Town is a 2.5km-long flyover built in 2009 over one of the city’s densest commercial and residential zones. While it is not stated on official records, it is common knowledge among city planners and officials that it was built to prevent ethnic violence among two groups and to protect one from the other. Amid the conflict, Orangi became a major battleground. Both of the ethnic groups involved had a significant presence in the town. However, one ethnic group was settled closer to the entrance area of the town, obstructing access for the other ethnic group.

Instead of resolving the conflict through political means, the more influential of the two ethnic groups at the time pushed for the development of this flyover over the area of the rival ethnic group.

In this case too, the bridge’s ROW covers the majority of the corridor’s ROW leaving little access to sunlight and crosswinds, and very little space for dust and pollutants to escape from underneath. This has posed a major threat to the health of the large community that works and lives in its vicinity.

Ashar Lodi, director of transport and GIS at an engineering consultancy, highlighted another problematic yet lesser understood fact, which is that these flyovers do not allow integration of potential ridership with the public transport and mass transit projects. For instance, the Orange Line BRT that operates over the Bacha Khan bridge could not be connected to the large population living and working around the Banaras area under the bridge; a big loss.

Again, one wonders how such a project qualified for the basic traffic and environmental impact assessment criteria. And more importantly, with both ethnic groups at peace with each other today — largely established through political means — does this show that our planning bureaucracy lacks a basic understanding of the functioning of urban spaces?

The case of Naya Nazimabad Flyover

More than a decade since these structures have been built, regrettably, neither has the lesson been learnt nor has the trend stopped. While the world is realising the negative impacts of these structures and getting rid of them, Karachi has other ideas. A new flyover is being built by a private housing society in the Qalandria area close to North Nazimabad. It is meant to connect North Nazimabad to Naya Nazimabad, ‘preventing congestion in the Qalandri Chowk and residential areas below’.

In other words, the said flyover is being developed to provide a convenient thoroughfare to the residents of an upper-class residential area by flying over the low-income community (Nusrat Bhutto Colony) that falls in between. As was the case with Gizri, this flyover is also believed to provide clearer access to the residents of the high-income neighbourhood which will subsequently increase its real estate value.

Referring to the case of Naya Nazimabad, Mr Lodi believes that there were potentially other effective solutions available to improve access to the new area and that a flyover was not necessarily required. Much of this could have been managed by slightly widening the corridor and improving road structure. A much shorter underpass could have also resolved the issue. He also said that the flyover would create a similar problem as caused by the Bacha Khan flyover. No mass transit service would be able to serve the space effectively.

In January 2023, a section of the under-construction flyover collapsed, drawing strong opposition. Opposition parties ordered an inquiry against the officials who allowed the construction to take place without adequate technical analysis. A bigger question to ask here, with the structure almost nearing its completion is, has this bridge qualified for the traffic and environment impact assessment criteria? Or does it reflect a bias against the urban poor, in favour of real estate developers and a small proportion of high income individuals?

This elite’s urban poor bias reflects not only the way we address our traffic-related issues but also in more or less every aspect of our city planning. Whether it is approving spaces for large shopping malls whilst removing smaller ‘encroaching’ footpath traders, ignoring the needs for low-income housing, or approving land for housing society giants at the expense of indigenous communities, this elite capture of our planning process is becoming stronger over time.

Urban highways, environment and health

Unfortunately, no studies have been conducted to evaluate the impact these structures have had on the environment and, consequently, on the life of the people living and working in their proximity in Pakistan. However, numerous studies from around the globe have revealed that the ambient air quality close to highways and similar corridors tend to have high volumes of toxic substances.

These toxic emissions have a major impact on the health of those who get exposed to them. According to a study conducted in 2007, people living or spending substantial time within 200m of highways are exposed to these pollutants more than people living at a greater distance, even compared to those living on busy urban streets.

Health studies show an elevated risk for the development of asthma and reduced lung function in children who live near major highways. Studies of particulate matter that show associations with cardiac and pulmonary mortality also appear to indicate increasing risk as smaller geographic areas are studied.

According to Dr Sohail Khan, the chief operating officer of National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases (NICVD), traffic emissions are becoming a major cause of cardiac and vascular diseases in cities. He explained that the CO, NO and particulate matters gradually accumulate in lungs and arteries and can cause failure of these organs.

NICVD introduced chest pain units (CPUs) — mobile care units for cardiovascular emergencies — in Karachi and across Sindh in 2017. These units are located near sites which are exposed to high levels of toxic emissions, especially sites with high levels of congestion. Seven of these CPUs in Karachi are located under flyovers, including the Gizri Bypass. He shared that NICVD is increasingly receiving cases of cardiovascular problems in people in their early 30s, which can be strongly associated with the city’s environmental degradation and traffic conditions. He also believes that the situation in Karachi is worse owing to the way this city has shaped up.

Study proposal

The results of these existing studies are driven mainly by evaluating the emissions from vehicular movement on highways and major traffic corridors. In the case of the bridges mentioned above, the wings of the flyover cover almost the entire right of way from beginning to end. This design blocks crosswinds and sunlight from entering the section under the bridge. And, since the traffic volume is also much higher under the bridge as compared to over it, the emission and toxicants are expected to be much more concentrated and higher in volume under the bridge. Hence considering the potential level of threat these bridges pose to the environment and health, it is critical to study the quality of air under these bridges.

I will be conducting a case study on the impact of flyovers in Karachi. The site for the study is the Gizri Flyover. The table below shows the parameters that will be tested to evaluate the ambient air quality.

A comparative method will be adopted for the study. Air quality will be tested on two sites along the same corridor (Khaliq-uz-Zaman Road) where the Gizri Flyover is located. One site shall be under the bridge and the other outside the bridge zone. The purpose of selecting the same corridor is to ensure that the wind, sunlight, and other parameters remain similar across the two sites.

The map above shows the proposed location of the study along the Gizri Flyover corridor. The study will be conducted at the same time of the same day — during peak rush hour — at both sites. The results from the air quality test will then be used to propose studies for analysing the impact of air quality on the health of the people who remain exposed to such an environment.

I do not argue that all highways must be abolished. With this essay I aim to draw light to the implicit class bias in Karachi’s urban planning — or lack of planning. I aim to advocate for a city and mobility that benefits all, or most, rather than a select few.

The process of urban planning seems to have become hostage to the elite’s understanding of our cities. Insensitivity towards the fundamental needs of the impoverished and the lack of understanding about the use of urban spaces for integrating communities reflects not only the way we, as a city, address our traffic-related issues but also in more or less every aspect of city planning. Whether it is the thought behind approving spaces for large shopping malls and removing smaller ‘encroaching’ footpath traders, or approving land for large housing societies and ignoring the needs of low-income housing, this elite capture of our planning process is becoming more intense over time.

Header image: The KPT flyover near Qayyumabad with DHA in the background. — Photo: Fahim Siddiqui/Dawn.com