A critical study by IISc warns that the upcoming 2.2-km Hebbal tunnel might only shift congestion to new areas like Veterinary Hospital rather than solving it. The report suggests an underground metro would be a far more efficient solution.
- IISc study indicates the Hebbal tunnel provides only localized relief and shifts congestion to new choke points.
- New bottlenecks are expected near Veterinary Hospital and Esteem Mall.
- An underground metro is projected to significantly reduce traffic pressure compared to the tunnel.
- The tunnel's cost per passenger is estimated to be six times higher than the metro.
The under-construction 2.2-km tunnel between the Hebbal flyover junction and the Veterinary College is facing scrutiny following a rigorous study by the Indian Institute of Science (IISc). The research suggests that while the tunnel aims to ease congestion, it may inadvertently trigger new bottlenecks and long queues at its entry and exit points.
According to Ashish Verma, convener of the IISc Sustainable Transportation Lab (IST Lab), the short tunnel will likely provide only localized relief. The study found that congestion is expected to persist on the roads leading into the tunnel and immediately after vehicles emerge, potentially creating massive queues at Veterinary Hospital and Esteem Mall. These queues could even spill back toward Mekhri Circle and Hebbal Junction.
Why This Matters
BozokMedia analysis shows that infrastructure projects often fail when they focus solely on increasing road capacity without addressing the root cause of demand. The study utilizes the Volume-to-Capacity (V/C) ratio to demonstrate that even with the tunnel, traffic demand at Hebbal Junction towards the airport is projected to reach a staggering 2.42 by 2041, indicating a complete breakdown of service.
While a tunnel increases road capacity over a short stretch, a Metro system reduces the actual number of vehicles on the road by shifting commuters to public transit.
The study presented a comparative analysis between the proposed tunnel and an underground metro alternative. The findings were stark: the Metro option offers a much more drastic reduction in traffic pressure. For instance, with a Metro, the V/C ratio at Hebbal Junction for airport-bound traffic is projected to drop to just 0.05 by 2027, whereas the tunnel scenario keeps it at a much higher 1.06.
Comparison: Tunnel vs. Metro Alternative
| Metric | Hebbal Tunnel | Underground Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Traffic Impact (V/C Ratio) | High (Exceeds Capacity) | Extremely Low (Highly Efficient) |
| Cost Efficiency | 6x higher cost per passenger | Highly cost-effective |
| Primary Benefit | Short-term road capacity increase | Long-term demand reduction |
Furthermore, the researchers questioned the validity of the Detailed Project Report (DPR), which assumes that 50% to 80% of traffic will divert to the tunnel. The study labels these figures as arbitrary, noting a lack of empirical support from commuter preference surveys or comprehensive corridor assessments.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Will the Hebbal tunnel solve Bengaluru's traffic problems?
The IISc study suggests it will only provide temporary, localized relief and may create new congestion points elsewhere.
2. Why is the Metro considered a better option?
The Metro reduces the total number of private vehicles on the road, whereas the tunnel only attempts to move existing vehicles through a different route.
