E-421
VOL.4
in associaton with
IIIE
Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Project Co-ordinating Consultancy Services (PCC)
for the Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project
IBRD Loan/Credit No. LN-4114
~~ aidar
Belga
KarwarE          { 
aa~~~durga
Mangalorgalore
Prepared for:
Govt of Kanataka
Public Works Dept.
(Natonal Highways)
December 2000






in assoaion wfl
IIIE
Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Project Co-ordinating Consultancy Services (PCC)
for the Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project
IBRD Loan/Credit No. LN-4114
sXi~~~dar
Belga
Karwa
durga
Mangalor                    ______ _
Prepaed for.
Govt of Kamataka
Public Works Dept.
(National Highways)
December 2000






Karnataka State Hizhwavs                                             Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                            Table of Contents
VOLUME-Il: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.   INTRODUCTION ................................................................................                  1-1
1.1.   PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................. 1-1
1.2.   METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 1-2
1.3.   STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ................................................................................. -4
2.   POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ........................................................... 2-1
2.1.   HIGHLIGHTS OF THE INDIAN SYSTEM & MAJOR ORGANISATIONS .                    ........................................................ 2-1
2.2.   RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PROJECT PROMOTER & INTERFACES WITH OTHER AGENCIES                         ... 2-1
2.2.1.  Interface wvithr the Ministry of Environment & Ftests .2-1
2.2.2.    Interface with the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board .2-2
2.2.3.    Interface wvith the Department of Land & Land Revenue of the GoK .2-2
2.2.4.    Interface with thle Offices of the District Magist-ate & City Municipalities .2-4
2.2.5.  Interface wvitlh tile Department of Forests of the GoK .2-4
2.2.6.  Interface w1 itht thie Department of Mines of the GoK .2-5
2.3.   STRENGTH OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF GoK FOR INTERFACE MANAGEMENT                            ... 2-5
2.4.   STATUTES RELATED TO ENVIRONMENT ..............................................................................  2-6
2.4.1.    Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (with subsequent amendments) .................    ....................I................. 2-7
2.4.2.    Tilze Indian Forest Act, 1927 ...........................................................................  2-7
2.4.3.    Tlze Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act, 1958 and thle Karnataka
Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act. 1961 .             ....................................................... 2-7
2.4.4.  Thze Karnutaka Foorest Act. 1963                  ..2-7
2.4.5.    Thte Mvsore Highways Act, /964 .....................................                     ......... .. 2-8
2.4.6.    The Wildlife +'Protection) Act, 1972 .............................................2..........-.......... .. -8
2.4.7.    Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act. 1974 ...............................................................2 -8
2.4.8.  The KarnataAa Preservation of Trees Act, /976                  ..2-8
2.4.9.    The Fory- -second Amendment of the Constitution. 1976 ......................................................... 2-8
2.4.10.   Town and Countrv Planning Act. 1976 .......................... ...................... . ........... _  9
2.4.11.   Forest Conservation Act. 1980 ........................................... . ...................... 2-9
2.4.12.   The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act. 1981             ..2-9
2.4.13. Environment (Protection) Act, 1986                                     ..2-9
2.4.14.   Motor I lhicles Rules, 1989 .............................................. 2-10
2.4.15.   Tlze Hazardous WIastes (Mfanagement And Handling) Rules. 1989 ............................................2 -10
2.4.16.   Coastal Regulation Zone Notification. 1991 .....        .......................................................... 2-10
2.4.17.   Pubfic Liability Insutrance Act, 1991 .....................................2.......................................... ......... 2-10
2.44.18.   Sevenn -t-loarth, 4 mendment of the Constitutior. 1992 ................................................................. 2-10
2.4.19.   Vational Environment Tribunial Act, 1995                ..                  ................................... 2-11
2.4.20.   VatronalEnr iron menttAppellateAulitlhorint  Act, 1997 ...............................................-................. -11
2.4.21.   Putblic Interest Lttigation against Government ...................................2.................................... . 2-11
2.5.  GUIDELINES FOR EIA OF HIGHWAY PROJECTS, IRC: 104-1988 .. .                                                2-11
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .                                                                                            3-1
3.1. PROJECT LOC ATION .                                                                                          3-1
3.2. SCOPE OF \\WORKS .                                                                                           3-1
3.3. TRAFFIC DETAILS PER ROUTE .                                                                                  3-3
ToC-I                            Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                                                       Envirownental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                      Table of Contents
3.4.   DESIGN OPTIONS CONSIDERED ......................................................_-3
3.5.   OPTIONS ON CONSTRUCTION METHODS..................................................3-4
3.5.1.                 em n           O e Pavement....................................verlay........................                                                                 S-
3.5.2.                   C ntrc New.....................Construction.....................................                                                                            6 -
3.5.3.           Treatment Alternatives..........................................................3-6
3.6.   OPTIONS ON ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS.............................o..............3-6
3.6.1.                 k    ...............................Rocks......................................                                                                      7..    -
33.6.2.alG avl............Natural.....................Gravel...................3......                                                                                               8 -
3.6.3.                 d..................................Sand.........................3-8............    -
3.6.4.                   s    ..........................Fly................Ash.................3-8.........    -
3.6.5              m    an m ntFl...........Embankment...........................Fill.....................                                                                           8-
3.6             A phl.6.........................Asphalt................................3-8.........    -
3.7.   OPTIONS ON CROss DRAINAGE STRUCTURES.............................................3-10
3.8.   OPTIONS ON INTERSECTIONS ON ROADS FOR UPGRADATION.................................3-10
3.9.           P IO SONB               PA SSOPTIONS................ON.......BYPASSES...................3............                                                                   11
4.  ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................4-I
4.1.          N R D CTO                  ..........INTRODUCTION......................................................                                                                   1-
4.2.           oP OJC                PTO    ....N.........PROJECT....................OPTION..................4.......                                                                   1-
4.3.   STRATEGIC OPTION STUDY............................................................4-1
4.4.   INITIAL PACKAGE OF THE KSHIP ......................................................4-1
4.5.   ALTERNATIVES SUGGESTED By KPCC...................................................4-1
4.6.   IMPACT OF WORLD BANK'S CRITERIA...................................................4-1
4.7.           E IN          L ER A IV S.DESIGN...............ALTERNATI......................ES..........                                                                 4......        2-
4.7.1.                 teA ten tie   ......Route..............Alternatives...............................                                                                          -2..   -
4.7.2.    Alignment Alternatives .........................................................4-2
4.7.3.    Bypass Alternatives ......_..................................................._ 4-3
4.7.4.    Cross-section Alternatives .......................................................4-3
4.8.   ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION.........................................4-3
4.9.              NC U JN  .............CONCLUSION.......................................4............                                                                            3.    -
5.  BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL SET UP ................................................5-1
5.1.          N R D CTO                 .........INTRODUCTION.......................................................                                                                     I-
5.2.           H SCA             ES U CE .PHYSICAL....................RESOURCES..............   ....................                                                                     1-
5.2.1.                 sog a k   ..............P...........................................................    I
55.2             Ge lg..........................Geolo..............................................    -
5.2.3.                m    t   ...........................................ate.................5-4..........    -
55.2.4.raue................Te..........pe.....rature.................................                                                                                                4 -
5.2.            Ra5.ll.......................R............ ...... ....... ............... ..... ......                                                                        4.    -
5.2.6.                ecin   fWi Directio................................of........Wi.......d.............                                                                           4-
5.2. 7.    Ambient Air QuialityI...I.......... ...........................................5-4
5.2.8.    AmbientNoise Level ...........................................................-14
5 .2.9.    Drainage Sy'stemi.............................. ...............................5-16
5.2.10.         Soil            ......................................5........................-2...........52
5.3.   EcOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................5-20
5.3.1.             lr Flora          .......................................................................                                                                 1.52
5.3.2.           Fauna              .......................................................5-24..............52
5.4.           U     A         U EVA U S........U......AN........SE...... .ALUES.............................                                                                 2...       52
5.4.1.                 d Land        ..................................... .use.......................-.......                                                                    5~52
5.5.   SoCIAL ENVIRONMENT ........... ..................................................5-26
5.5.1.          Demographic  Feat                             .....ures----------.5-26-------  ----  -  -- -..................... 52
5.5.2.    Occutpational Pattern .........................................................5-28
ToC-2                                                Scott Wilson I CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                     Table of Contents
5.5.3.     Economic Profile of the Region .......................................................                       5-31
5.5.4.     Regional and Local Utilities along the Project Routes .......................................................  5-32
5.5.5.     Religious and other sensitive structures along thle Project Routes ............................................. 5-32
5.6.    PUBLIC HEALTH ............................................ .                               ..................... 5-32
5.7.    ACCIDENT HAZARDS AND SAFETY .........................................................                             5-32
5.8.    AESTHETICS ......................................................... 5-33
5.9.    SITES OF TOURIST AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTEREST ......................................................... 5-33
6.   IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION  MEASURES .......................                                  ......................... 6-1
6.1.    INTRODUCTION ...........................    .......................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2.    IMPACTS FROM LOCATION ............................................................. 6-1
6.2.1.     Impacts of Gravity Flow Irrigation Systems .........................................                         6-1
6.2.2.     Large Reservoirs behind Dams ......................................... 6-2
6.2.3.     Consequences of Extensive deforestation .........................................                            6-2
6.2.4.     Improper Road Drainage System .........................                                                       6-3
6.2.5.   Effects of Growing Mining Economy .......................... 6-3
6.3.    IMPACTS FROM ROAD DESIGNS ................................... - . - .                .-        -       ... 6-3
6.3.1.     Impacts from  Altered Design ......................................... 6-4
6.3.2.     Impacts from  Diversion from  Current Use of Land .........................................                  6-4
6.3.3.     Impact on people due to land acquisition and displacement .........................................          6-5
6.3.4.     Impacts on Regional Utilities .........................................                                      6-6
6.3.5.     Impacts on Local Utilities ......................................... 6-6
6.3.6.    Impacts on Local Religious Structures ......................................... 6-7
6.3.7.     Impacts on Other Community Assets .........................................                                  6-7
6.3.8.     Impacts on Avenue Trees .........................................                                            6-8
6.3.9.     Impactsfrom  the Choice of Construction Materials ............                  ............................. 6-10
6.3.10.   Accidents and Road Safety .........................................  6-10
6.4.    IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION                                 ... ............................... 6-11
6.4.1.    Impacr on Land Resources ......................................... 6-11
6.4.2.    Impacr on soil qtialit6 ... ........................................... 6-12
6.4.3.     Impacr on  vater resources .........................................                                        6-12
6.4.4.     Impact on wvater qualit ...............6.............................................................................................. 6-12
6.4.5.     Impact on Air Quality .......................................6 2.......... .....                       ... 6-12
6.4.6.     Impact on Noise Level .............................. 6-13
6.4.7.     Impact on Biological Etnvironment .............................. 6-13
6.4.8.     Impactsffrom Sanitation and Waste disposal ............................... 6-13
6.4.9.   Other impacts .............................. 6-14
6.5. IMPACTS DU RING OPERATION PHASE ..                                                         .                         6-14
6.5.1.  Impacr on Land Use ...................... 6-15
6.5.2.  Impact on Air -Quality ............................                                                            6-15
6.5.3.  Imp4c                  l on Noise le el...............                                                    ....... 6-16
6.5.4.  /mpac, on Ecological Resources ...................... 6-17
6.5.5. Acciient Hazards and Safet.                                      ...................... 6-17
6.5.6. Aestihctrcs .....                                                               :                               6-18
6.6. CONCLUDING OBSERVATION .                                                  . .6-18
7. PUBLIC CONSULTATION ..                                                                                                     7-1
7.1.    INTRODUCT. ION ........................................................ 7-1
7.2.    CONSULTATION DURING ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING ........................................................               7-1
7.3.    CONSULTA-ION DURING MONITORING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY & NoISE LEVEL ...............                         .................. 7-2
7.4.    JOINT PUBL:C CONSULTATIONS WITH SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSTS ........................................................ 7-3
7.5. THE STAKEHOLDERS MEETING ....  7-4
ToC-3                               Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                        Table of Contents
7.6.  PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF EIA REPORT ............................. 7-5
7.7.  CONCLUSION ............................. 7-5
EXHIBITS
APPENDIX 6.1
APPENDIX 6.2
APPENDIX 6.3
APPENDIX 6.4
APPENDIX 6.5
APPENDIX 7.1
ToC-4                     Scott Wilson CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                      List of Tables and Figures
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLE 1-1: ROADS SELECTED FOR UPGRADATION IN PHASE-I    .................................................................... 1-1
TABLE 1-2: ROADS SELECTED FOR MAJOR MAINTENANCE IN PHASE-I ................................................................. 1-1
TABLE 3-1: DISTRICTS AND TALUKS TRAVERSED BY THE PROJECT ROADS ...................................e....3-1
TABLE 3-2: PROPOSED CONTRACTS PACKAGES ....................................................................  3-1
TABLE 3-3: PRESENT & PROJECTED TRAFFIC BY VEHICLE TYPES ALONG THE PROJECT ROADS .......................... 3-3
TABLE 34: GUIDING PARAMETERS FOR ROAD UPGRADATION IN RURAL AREAS ................................................. 34
TABLE 3-5: GUIDING PARAMETERS FOR ROAD UPGRADATION IN SEMI-URBAN & URBAN AREAS ...................... 34
TABLE 3-6: SOURCES OF COMMON ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ............................................................... 3-6
TABLE 3-7: NUMBER OF NEW IMPROVED CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ......................................................... 3-10
TABLE 3-8: LIST OF INTERSECTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT .........................................3.... . . .. 3-10
TABLE 3-9: URBAN CONGESTION AND PROPOSED BYPASS ........................................        3-12
TABLE 5-1: TOPOGRAPHY ALONG THE ROUTES ........................................                   5-I
TABLE 5-2: GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA ........................................                     5-1
TABLE 5-3: TEMPERATURE RANGE (IN CENTIGRADE) ........................................            54
TABLE 5-4: RAINFALL PAT TERN IN TH     E STUDY  AREA ........................................     5-4
TABLE 5-5: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NATIONAL)..          .0. ..............................5-10
TABLE 5-6: LOCATION OF AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS ............................5-10
TABLE 5-7: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING RESULTS ...........................................................  5-13
TABLE 5-8: NOISE LEVEL (AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS) .................................................  5-14
TABLE 5-9: AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS MEASUREMENT STATIONS ........................................................................ 5-I5
TABLE 5-10: AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL .................................................5 -15
TABLE 5-1 1: DRINKING WATER- SPECIFICATION- IS 10500: 1991 .5-16
TABLE 5-12: AMBIENT QUALITY OF SURFACE WATER.                                                   5-17
TABLE 5-13: SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA .5-20
TABLE 5-14: SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .5-20
TABLE 5-15: SPECIES OF TREES IN THE STUDY AREA .5-21
TABLE 5-16: SOCIAL FORESTRY PLANTATION ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTE .                                5-24
TABLE 5-17: COMMON WILD FAUNA IN THE STUDY AREA .                                               5-24
TABLE 5-18: LAND USE IN THE STUDY AREA .                                                        5-25
TABLE 5-19: DEMOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE STUDY AREA .                                            5-26
TABLE 5-20: DEMOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE TOWNS OF THE STUDY AREA .                                5-27
TABLE 5-21: LITERACY STATUS- RURAL POPULATION IN THE STUDY CORRIDORS .                           5-28
TABLE 5-22: WORKFORCE IN RURAL AREA .                                                            5-28
TABLE 5-23: WORKFORCE IN URBAN TRACTS .                                                          5-29
TABLE 5-24: OCCUPATION PATTERN OF MAIN WORKERS IN RURAL TRACTS .                                 5-29
TABLE 5-25: OCCUPATION PATTERN OF MAIN WORKERS IN URBAN TRACTS .                                 5-30
TABLE 5-26: MAJOR FUNCTIONS OF THE TOWNS .                                                       5-31
TABLE 5-27: ARRIVAL OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN MARKETS .                                        5-31
TABLE 6-1: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS FROM ALTERED DESIGN .                                             6-4
TABLE 6-2: EXTENT OF LAND ACQUISITION .                                                           6-4
TABLE 6-3: PAFS AND PAPS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                                               6-5
TABLE 6-4: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS ON REGIONAL UTILITIES .                                           6-6
TABLE 6-5: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS ON LOCAL UTILITIES .                                              6-6
TABLE 6-6: LOCAL RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES FALLING IN THE CORRIDOR OF IMPACT .                         6-7
TABLE 6-7: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS UPON OTHER COMMUNITY ASSETS .                                     6-8
TABLE 6-8: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS FROM FELLING OF AVENUE TREES .                                    6-8
TABLE 6-9: SPECIES WISE NUMBER OF TREES IN THE PROPOSED CORRIDOR OF IMPACT .                      6-9
TABLE 6-10: PROPOSED Bus BAN, LOCATIONS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                               6-11
TABLE 6-11: EMISSION FACTORS OF DIFFERENT-VEHICLES (G/KM) .                                      6-15
TABLE 6-12: POLLUTION LOAD OF POLLUTANTS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                              6-16
TABLE 6-13: PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS (L) .                                                         6-17
LoT- I                      Scott WVilson, CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                                                        Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                        List of Tables and Figures
TABLE 6-14: No PROJECT AND UPGRADATION SCENARIO ASSESSMENT ............................................................ 6-19
TABLE 7-1: DETAILS OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ................................................................................                                                                 74
FIGURE  1-1: PROJECT  ROADS  - PHASE  I ................................................................................. 1-5
FIGURE  2-1: ENVIRONMENTAL  CLEARANCE  PROCEDURE .................................................................................   24
FIGURE 2-2: FORESTRY CLEARANCE PROCEDURE UNDER FOREST CONSERVATION ACT, 1980 ............................ 2-6
FIGURE 3-1: PROJECT ROuTES .................................................................................. 3-2
FIGURE 3-2: URBAN CROSS SECTION OF THE ROAD .................................................................................                                                              3-5
FIGURE  3-3: RURAL  CROSS  SECTION  OF THE ROAD  ..........................................                                                 ....................................... 3-5
FIGURE  3-4: SOIL  GRAVELLINESS  IN  THE  STUDY  AREA  .................................................................................                                                   3-9
FIGURE  5-1: PHYSIOGRAPHY  OF THE  STUDY  AREA  ..................................                                                 ............................................... 5-2
FIGURE 5-2: GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA .................................................................................                                                                   5-3
FIGURE  5-3: 24  HOURS  RAINFALL  ................................................................................. 5-5
FIGURE 5-4: WIND ROSE DIAGRAM - RAICHUR IMD STATION ............................................................................. 5-6
FIGURE  5-5: WIND  ROSE  DIAGRAM   - GULBARGA  IMD   STATION  . ........................................................................ 5-7
FIGURE  5-6: WIND  ROSE  DIAGRAM   - BIDAR  IMD   STATION  ................................................................................. 5-8
FIGuRE  5-7: WIND  RoSE  DIAGRAM   - BIJAPUR  IMD   STATION  ..............................................................................   5-9
FIGURE  5-8: AIR, NOISE, WATER  AND  SOIL  MONITORING  LOCATIONS  .........................                                                         ..................................... 5-11
FIGURE  5-9: DRAINAGE  BASINS  OF THE  STUDY  AREA  .................................................................................                                                   5-19
FIGURE  5-10: SOIL  TYPE  OF STUDY  AREA  .....................                                               ............................................................ 5-22
FIGURE  5-11: FOREST  AREA  BY  TYPES  ALONG  THE PROJECT  ROUTES ............................                                                       .................................... 5-23
LoT-2                                                Scott Wilson / CES / IIIF



Chapter 1
Introduction






Karnataka State Highways                                                       Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                          Chapter I
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................                                                  1-1
1.1.   PROJECT BACKQROUND ................................................ 1-1
1.2.   METHODOLOGY ................................................                                            1-2
1.3.   STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ................................................ 1-4
TABLE I -1: ROADS SELECTED FOR UPGRADATION IN PHASE-I .[................................................. I-
TABLE 1-2: ROADS SELECTED FOR MAJOR MAINTENANCE IN PHASE-Ii ................................................ I-I
FIGURE 1 - 1: PROJECT ROADS - PHASE I ................................................. 1-5
ToC-I                                 Scott Wilson I CES / IIIE






Karnataka State Highways                                  En% ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Proiect                                                              Chapter I
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.   Project Background
The Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project (KSHIP) is an initiative by the Public Works
Department (PWD) of the Government of Karnataka (GOK), under the proposed World Bank loan, to
undertake improvement of 2490 km of roads consisting of State Highways and major District Roads.
These roads were selected on the basis of a Strategic Option Study (SOS) carried out in 1996, the
objective of which was to formulate a policy for developing an effective network of regional network
of regional roads. The road improvement program of the GOK entailed upgradation of some 900 km
of roads and to carry out major maintenance of the rest based on Feasibility Study.
To facilitate this job the Government of Kamataka has appointed M/s Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick UK
and Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick India in association with Consulting Engineering Services (I) Ltd., New
Delhi and India International Infrastructure Engineers Ltd. as the Project Coordinating Consultants
(PCC) to carry out the Feasibility study for the road upgradation and major maintenance. To assess the
enviromnental aspects environmental screening of the 2490 km of the roads was undertaken and the
environmental issues were assessed to eliminate roads not satisfying the environmental criteria. This
was followed by the Sectoral Environmental Assessment of the roads selected for upgradation and
major maintenance as per the operational policy OP 4.01 of the World Bank. Based on the Feasibility
study, the GOK selected 940 Km of roads for upgradation work and 1277 km of roads for major
maintenance. The project has been divided into two phases. In Phase-I 394 km of road length will be
upgraded and 848 km of road lengths would be taken up for major maintenance. In Phase-lI, some 546
km of road length would be upgraded and some 429 Km of road length would be taken up for major
maintenance.
The entire Phase-I Project has been divided into five Contract Packages of upgradation and nineteen
Contracts packages of major maintenance.
Table 1-1: Roads selected for upgradation in Phase-I
Contract      Route       State Highway    Location   of  Upgradation    Length
Package                     Number        Section                          (Km)
Ul            l            SH-23        Kalmala- Sindhnur               76.673
2A           SH-23         Sindhnur-Gangawati             50.577
U2           2B            SH-23        Gangawati-Budugumpa cross       26.960
3A           SH- 19       Hattigudur-Shahpur              11.982
3B           SH-19        Shahpur-Jevargi                 37.931
U3           3C            SH-19        Jevargi-Gulbarga                37.347
3D           SH- 19       Gulbarga-Homnabad               55.757
.3E           SH-19        Homnabad-Naubad. Bidar          45.417
U4            4            SH- 12       Biiapur-Tikota                  20.149
5A           SH- 13       Andhra   Pradesh   border-    19.331
U5             _                        Raichur
_____________    X 5B            SH-20        Raichur-Kalmala junction        11.807
Total Length in Km                               393.931
Table 1-2: Roads selected for Major Maintenance in Phase-I
Contract     Link       State      Location of Major Maintenance    Length
Package    Number  Highwav                    Section                (Km)
Number
-I lScott Wilson i CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Hiihvwavs                                 Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                             Chapter I
Ml           IE        SH-20      Mudgal - Hungund                  39.670
M2           2Ba       SH-12      Tikota- Badachi                   43.000
M3         l 2Bb       SH-12      Badachi-Shedba]                   49.510
2C        SH-12      Shedbal - Chikodi                 34.170
M4           2D        SH-12      Chikodi - Sankeshwar              21.320
M5           6Aa       SH-19      Srirangapatna - Chinya            32.000
M6          6Ab        SH- 19     Chinya- Nelligere                 30.960
M7          6B         SH- 19     Nelligere- Kibbanahalli           47.010
M8          6C         SH-19      Kibbanahalli - Huliyar            36.460
M9          6D         SH- 19     Huliyar - Hiriyur                 48.720
M1o         6Ha        SH-19      Bellary - Devinagar               41.000
Ml l        6Hb        SH-19      Devinagar - Sindhnur              42.897
M12         6J         SH-19      Sindhnur - Lingsugur              52.160
M13         6K         SH- 19     Lingsugur - Hattigudur            68.380
M14         9A         SH-25      Mariammanahalli - Ittigi          41.110
9B        SH-25      Ittigi - Harpanahalli             23.270
M15         9C         SH-25      Harpanahalli - Harihar            42.516
M16         9C         SH-25      Harihar - Honnali                 34.545
M17         9E         SH-25      Honnali- Shimoga                  39.041
M18          H IA      SH-57      Belur- Chikmagalur                23.910
M19           IIB      SH-57      Chikmagalur- Tarikere             56.570
Total Length in Km                         848.2119
It is useful to mention here that the SEA Report has comprehensively dealt with the major
maintenance components and has also addressed the issues concemed therewith requiring attention in
the EMP. Requisite conditions have also been included in the contract clauses for the protection of the
environment.
The scope of the feasibility study included preparation of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Report on the roads selected for upgradation in Phase-I as per the Guidelines of the Ministry of
Environment and Forests (MOEF) of the Government of India (GOI) and to meet the requirements of
the World Bank as per its operational policy OP 4.01. The EIA Report presented below addresses
those stipulations fully and comprehensibly for upgradation of 394 km of roads in Phase-I, which
hereinafter is referred to as the project.
Each upgradation contract package has been defined as Routes. Keeping in mind the length of routes
2, 3 and 5, for easy analysis and understanding of the various attributes, these have been broken into
smaller links. The location of the upgradation road lengths in each route and their respective links has
been listed in Table 1-1. The major maintenance road lengths have been listed in Table 1-2. Figure 1-1
shows the project roads of Phase I.
1.2.   Methodology.
The environmental impact assessment study was preceded by an Environmental screening of all the
corridors selected during the SOS study amounting to 2490 km. The feasibility Report identified the
routes to be taken up for improvements after incorporating economic, environmnental and social criteria
in the evaluation. The GOK selected 960 km of roads for upgradation and 1100 km of roads for major
maintenance in two phases.
A sectoral environmental assessment was camred out for all the roads selected under upgradation and
major maintenance programmes. This sectoral environmental assessment helped in identifying the
possible environmental and social impact due to the project implementation in the various corridors
and also in identifying the data gaps and additional information required for carrying out a detailed
environmental assessment of the upgradation sections.
1-2                        Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kaamataka State Hi2hx%avs                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protect                                                                 Chapter I
The results of the environmental screening and the Sectoral Environmental Assessment have been
useful in identifying the key environmental parameters getting affected due to the proposed project.
The Environmental Screening and the sectoral environmental assessment identified the key parameters
that may get impacted due to the project and helped in scoping the tasks related to detailed
environmental impact assessment of phase I upgradation routes. These assessments also provided
valuable inputs in identifying the significant impacts and devising appropriate mitigation measures.
The environmental impact assessment study started with a detailed reconnaissance survey for the
purpose of recording the environmental features along the roadside and in the adjoining area. Areas
impacted due to anthropogenic activities and natural processes were also recorded. Areas of tourist and
archaeological importance were identified and recorded. In addition, the locations with encroachments
on the right of way and congestion due to varied causes were noted. Sensitive areas like schools,
hospitals, religious structures like Temples, mosques and sepulchres by the roadside and encroaching
upon the ROW were also noted.
The above survey was followed by collation of data pertaining to the physical attributes of the region
in general and road in particular on a 14 km wide swath for every route. Detailed information on the
following features were recorded and analysed.
*  Physical Resources: Geology, Topography, Tectonics, Climate, Soil and Drainage system,
*  Biological Resources: Ecology, Vegetation, Flora and Fauna
* Human Resources: Demography, Land Use, Occupation pattern
*  Quality of life values: Educational institutions, Medical facilities, basic amenities like water
supply, electricity and communication and transport
.  Aesthetics
*  Cultural heritage and Tourism
The reconnaissance survey enabled the consultants to identify the various critical locations where
primary data on Air, Noise, Water and Soil quality were to be generated for impact assessment and
prediction. These data were generated.
In addition to the above surveys, informal and formal discussions and consultation were held with the
local populace with reference to the pertinent projects and their views and suggestions were sought on
issues of road widening, land acquisition. environmental pollution and degradation, sanitary facilities
and safety. The environment team alongwith the social team participated in the more formally
organised public consultation and discussed issues related to road development and related problems.
Alongwith the above, laws related to environmental management and pollution control in India have
been reviewed and their bearing upon the project has been elucidated. The legal promulgation for
carrying out this study is the January 27, 1994 notification and subsequent amendments dated 4th May
1994 and I olh April. 1997 under the Environmental Protection Act. 1986. Of particular importance in
this regard are the legal procedures on land acquisition, tree felling, compensatory afforestation and
preparation of rehabilita'tion and resettlement plan.
The pavement conditions of the existing roads indicate that these are damaged. Altered hydrological
regimes are the substantive causes of deterioration of roads. Social actions taken over different parts of
Kamataka subsequent to the time of initial construction, poor maintenance and environmental factors
have resulted in the current deteriorated state of the roads.
To identify and assess the probable environmental impacts during design phase, construction and
operation phase, close interaction was established with the design engineers and feasible engineering
solutions were arrived at. In addition alignment shifts were considered in sensitive areas involving
community, religious structure, drainage constraints and stretches were social forestry plantations were
encountered. The corridor of impact varies between 10-26 m depending upon the terrain and
1-3                         Scott Wilson / CES / FIlE



Kamataka State Highways                                    Env ironmental Impact Assessment Repon
Improvement Project                                                               Chapter I
geographical location of these roads. The social section separately covers the impacts due to land
acquisition, displacement and rehabilitation. The impact analysis and mitigation measures arrived at.
help in forrnulating the Environment Management Plan (EMP). The ENIP looks into the environmental
impacts and mitigation measures, identifying the implementing organisation for environmental
management, the current composition of the PIU, level of expertise of the personnel, extemal
consultants required for monitoring and implementation and the training needs of the personnel were
taken into consideration for formulating the EMP and the budgetary requirements. The EMP covers
the procedure to be followed for implementation of the mitigation measures, monitoring of the various
activities and the responsibilities of the project proponent, supervisory consultant and the contractors.
The EMP Document also gives a broad coverage to the major maintenance section.
1.3.   Structure of the Report
Keeping in mind the physical features of the various routes and the related impacts the report has been
divided into three sections under the following Chapter headings. Each Chapter deals with the
situations related to each of the 5 Routes.
Volume - I
Environmental Assessment Summary Report
Volume - II: Environmental Impact Assessment
Chapter 1- Introduction
Chapter 2- Policy, legal and Administrative Framework
Chapter 3- Project Description
Chapter 4- Analysis of Alternatives
Chapter 5- Baseline Environmental Setup
Chapter 6- Impact Assessment and Mitigation Measures
Chapter 7- Public Consultation
Volume - III
Environment Management Plan
1-4                        Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                           Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                          Chapter I
Figure 1-1: Project Roads - Phase I
UpGradation
2
I w         3                                               H          W     ar
4
Major Maintenanoe
Gulbarga
,_J   <-   ijapur  -*
Shed~bal FJ(  
-v\-v  .Jamkhand    *                orpu 
l *Chikodi                       t-J       *        *     AP. Border
1Huk. L-  *Mudhol              *        -
L *Bagalkot  <    aLingsugur' ">  wR ichur
*Belgaujn      *   -$  j                      zn-h
* KhanTLW"-f n   }Nru;A           */}-S                ppa
*Waliyal                      u g    
*Kumbha~wad                    -                     el
|  gg         *~~~Yellapu  *      -^                    >
p *         (-,  *Harpanahali /
I  e        '>   Ft  *ha   e
-_*   .*HonnNi 
--.    *          e*Shimoag*HShimogr
i   Y   1 *  '   *Tarikeri-  ,
>0           *C3*i 9)u   Chiknayakanha5i   -*
} \ * -   -   ( < *Belur      *Turuvekefe
\  -A e,   *Hassan    --       0 * ,                   '
V  \/-   )   J-  ) *   zuy  .N~aSbahgaia L
*                     <t?  \ - ) *  *Melukote,% *Channa
1-5                    ~~~~~~~Scott Wilson /CES /IIIE






Chapter 2
Policy, Legal and Administrative
Framework






Kamataka State Highways                                           Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                        Chapter 2
CHAPTER 2: POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.  POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ...........................................................-2-1
2.1.  HIGHLIGHTS OF THE INDIAN SYSTEM & MAJOR ORGANISATIONS          .     .     .2-1
2.2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PROJECT PROMOTER & INTERFACES WITH OTHER AGENCIES...            2-1
2.2.1.   Interface with the Ministry of Environment & Forests .2-1
2.2.2.   Interface with the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board .2-2
2.2.3.   Interface with the Department ofLand & Land Revenue of the GoK .2-3
2.2.4.   Interface with the Offices of the District Magistrate & City Municipalities .2-4
2.2.5.   Interface with the Department of Forests of the GoK .2-4
2.2.6.   Interface with the Department of Mines of the GoK .2-5
2.3.   STRENGTH OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF GoK FOR INTERFACE MANAGEMENT ...           2-5
2.4.  STATUTES RELATED TO ENVIRONMENT ................................................. .   2-6
2.4.1.   Land Acquisition Act. 1894 (with subsequent amendments) .2-7
2.4.2.   The Indian Forest Act, 1927 ................................................     2-7
2.4.3.   The Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act. 1958 and the Karnataka
Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act, 1961   .     .    .2-7
2.4.4. The Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 .2-7
2.4.5. The Mysore Highways Act, 1964 .2-8
2.4.6.  The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 .2-8
2.4.7.   Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 .2-8
2.4.8.   The Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act. 1976 .2-8
2.4.9.   The Fortv-second Amendment of the Constitution, 1976 .2-8
2.4.10. Town and Country Planning Act, 19 76.2-9
2.4.11. Forest Conservation Act, 1980 .2-9
2.4.12.  The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 .2-9
2.4.13. Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 .2-9
2.4.14. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 .2-10
2.4.15.  The Hazardous Wastes (Management And Handling) Rules, 1989 .2-10
2.4.16.  Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 199 .2-10
2.4.17.  Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 .............................. 2-10
2.4.18.  Seventy-fourth Amendment of the Constitution. 1992 .2-10
2.4.19.  National Environnment Tribunal Act, 1995 .2-11
2.4.20.  National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997 . .................................... .  2-11
2.4.21.  Public Interest Litigation against Government .2-11
2.5.  GUIDELINES FOR EIA OF HIGHWAY PROJECTS, IRC: 104-1988       .       .2-11
FIGUREp2-1: ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE PROCEDURE. ..........................2-4
FIGURE 2-2: FORESTRY CLEARANCE PROCEDURE UNDER FOREST CONSERVATION ACT. 1980 .2-6
ToC-I                           Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Karnataka State Htghvavs                                  Ens ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Chapter 2
2.   Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework
2.1.   Highlights of the Indian Svstem & Major Organisations
Development of environmental protection and enhancement measures in India has been determined to
a considerable extent by the central legislation. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), set
up in 1980, is the controlling institution in this regard. The MOEF has two wings as Environment and
Forests. Clearance of new developmental projects is necessary from both the wings.
Every state in India has now their respective Departments of Environment & Forest. In Kamataka, this
department is known as the Department of Forests, Ecology and Environment. This Department was
established in March 1981 to have an integrated approach to deal with, prevention and control of air
and water pollution, preservation and development of forest wealth and other natural resources in the
state. This department co-ordinates and controls the activities of the Union Ministry of Environment in
the State. It also co-ordinates and controls the activities of the State Pollution Control Board.
The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is another technical wing of the MOEF entrusted with
the responsibilities for detection and abatement of pollution. Every state of India has their respective
pollution control boards, which act in unison with the policies of the CPCB. The State Pollution
Control Boards (SPCB), in tum, are the empowered institution to issue licenses to the industries. These
licenses are issued on the condition of total compliance with the standards of permissible pollution as
prescribed from time to time by the CPCB or as modified (usually in more stringent terms) norms
depending on local conditions. Every licensed industry is required to carry out environmental auditing
and submit such reports to the license issuing authority. The State Pollution Control Boards can repeal
such licenses on the observed violation of the norms.
The functions of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board include advising the State Government
on water pollution issues, enforcement and monitoring as per the Air Act, coordinating the activities of
the regional offices of the pollution control board. It also issues "No Objection" Certificates (NOC) for
establishment of new projects, environmental clearance of projects and conducting public hearing with
respect to developmental projects. It also issues consent letters and NOC for projects involving
expansion. The KSHIP would come under its purview.
The Kamataka State Pollution Control Board is the nodal body involved in monitoring the various
industries and infrastructure related development projects from the angle of pollution control. It also
formulates and stipulates the various standards for the various emissions, discharge of effluents, by-
products and pollutants into the environment.
2.2.   Responsibilities of the Project Promoter & Interfaces with Other Agencies
The responsibility of initiating actions leading to issuance of environmental clearance of a proposed
project vests with the project promoter. In the present instance, the Public Works Department (PWD)
of the GoK would be carrying the legal responsibilities of the project promoter.
The basic responsibility of the project promoter is to prepare, submit a comprehensive document,
complete in all respect. It shall be obliged to provide clarification, with or without additional
documentation, when intimated by the designated authority. It must carry the commitment that no
deviation from designed project would be made during implementation without prior and explicit
permission of the designated authority to do so.
2.2.1.      Interface with the Ministry of Environment & Forests
The basic document required for obtaining environmental clearance is the Environmental Assessment
(EA) report presented in the prescribed format and supported by detailed and accurate description of
the project. The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report when prepared and where necessary,
2-1                        Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Hiwhwavs                                      Enx ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Impro emeni Prolect                                                                 Chapter '
would follow the format prescribed bv the MOEF in this regard. In addition to the EIA report. the
project proponent are to furnish information on the rehabilitation of the displaced people if more than
1000 people are likely to be displaccd. In case it is less than 1000 persons a summary plan would be
adequate.
It is also useful to be aware of a recent circular of the Standingz Committee of Indian Board for
Wildlife under the Ministry of Environment and Forests where in it is stated that the Members were of
the opinion that "Widening and black topping of the roads within National Parks and Sanctuaries
increase the vehicular traffic and also the speed of the vehicles. There were instances of accidental
death of wildlife by the fast moving vehicles in the protected areas. Considering the negative impacts
of widening and black topping, it was decided that roads that have already been tarred should continue
to be maintained and repaired properly. However, no roads inside the National Parks and Sanctuaries
should be widened or upgraded.
While following the prescribed format of the EA report, it would be seen that the project promoter has
to establish and utilise strong interfaces with several other Departments of the State Government and
other State Agencies. It is useful to understand the contexts of this need.
The PIU has already approached the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of
India and informed it about the Project and is in the process of getting the approval from the
MOEF.
2.2.2.      Interface with the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board
The Amendment dated 4th May, 1994 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 requires every
promoter of major infrastructure projects, including road development, to prepare and submit
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report for clearance before the project can be implemented.
However, the Ministry declared through a notification dated April 10, 1997 that projects conceming
upgradation of existing roads which involve marginal land acquisition would be exempted from the
prescribed clearance procedure except where sensitive areas like sanctuaries, national park, reserved
forests etc, are involved.
In schedule IV of the above referred notification, the MOEF has prescribed that the Environmental
Assessment report on road up-gradation project should be disclosed for public hearing through a
notified meeting to be headed by the nominee of the State Pollution Control Board and the District
Collector of the concerned district. The report of this meeting with observations would be sent by the
SPCB to the MOEF. This report would contain a copy of the No Objection Certificate (NOC), if
issued to the concerned project promoter.
Following the amendment dated April 10, 1997, the Ministrv of Environment and Forests,
Govemment of India issued a circular on 15h October, 1999 (No.21012/26-99-IA-Ill) where it
clarified that "Marginal Land acquisition means land acquisition not exceeding a total width of 20
metres on either side of the existing alignment put together. Further it is also clarified that bypasses
would be treated as stand alone projects and would require environmental clearance only if the cost of
the projects exceed Rs.50 Crores each."
2-2                         Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Hieh% a\s                                   Entvironmcntal Impact Assessment Report
Improvrement Protect                                                                Chapter 2
Fiszure 2-1 shows the procedure for obtaining Environmental Clearance from the SPCB. State
Department of Environment and MOEF.
It is pertinent to mention here that the Phase -I component of the Project has been already
granted clearance and consent for establishment by the Karnataka State Pollution Control
Board under the W\ater (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board has also opined
that the Project is exempted from obtaining clearance from the MIOEF, GOI.
2.2.3.      Interface with the Department of Land & Land Revenue of the GoK
However marginal may be the amount of land required, for its acquisition the project promoter has to
proceed by following the laid procedures in this regard. The District Land Acquisition officer of the
Department of Revenue is the designated authority to conduct the business of land acquisition within
his jurisdiction. The Collector of the District in the Controlling Officer and would receive requisitions
for land acquisition required in public interest. All costs in this regard are to be bome by the project
promoter. The given Office of the District Collector would carry out disbursement of the amounts of
compensation, adjudicated in conformity with the declared state policy on entitlement.
Time required for the completion of the above noted process of land acquisition can be very long
indeed for the complexities of the procedures. The delay is caused by complexities in the
determination of both titular and usurfuctuary rights over the given property. The process can be
expedited through some pro-action from the project promoter. These are as follows
* Identify the location of the land to be acquired by the plot number shown on the authoritative
village map of the given Taluk,
* Ascertain and state the name of the title-holder from the latest Record of Rights as prepared by the
Department of Land Records,
-  Determine through exact measurement the amount of land of a given title-holder to be acquired
with a statement on the recorded status of the land,
* State the legal basis of the computed amount of compensation in conformity with the State's
entitlement policy and show the calculations used, and
* Submit these along with the application for land acquisition before the concerned District
Collector.
To attend to the above elements of pro-action, an effective interface with the District and Block level
Offices of the Land & Revenue Department is necessary. With the authentication by this Office of the
information compiled by the project promoter, the District Collector can expedite the process.
2-3                         Scott Wilson ! CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Hijhx\ass                                             Env,ronmental Impacl Assessment Repon
Improxernent Project                                                                           Chapter 2
Figure 2-1: Environmental Clearance Procedure
| pph     \1OEF F  prescib,d
;Sub,,.,zs  ojeauQawnnnnm t.o Con-po.4 SPCB              Subm  sssofoithtp lo MOEF l
l   1                                      | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~alo.g o,h aIi nekso,iDocosrn,n 
erus?cB        h,i6i1I   5y by MOEF Sr ff
Rtwew ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~R by SPCB          fM nnu             sf rny
completing lan  acusto  proes enin  with payen ofE copnsto  an/o  rehabilitatsion.cprbl
i    Cw issou  be critl.ed  at t              thmn aforrn.n
DitIc  wol  tak  allt acin   ncerneo  hs.Rehbliain  fte   dipae  peson                        ol
needthe assistanceof both the District Magistrate and the CityMunicipality.ThesEAC  ofcers d ouldb s e
I  l  l                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1, th.rr . pubEcoDei onr
approacedwhil muainth  Resettlem ntl &  Rehabilitatn Plan  Observ
wu ,l pojea iAunder tShedul-  Pe                 n                      reor. H         r i
a  r f EIA Nod reha          bii              Humed
2.2.5.     In f10DPAPs  w       iththeDeartment    CofForeAsmt  y ofthelooko
Whenroadevelopmen  projcts r icepabk c        spsiffrstldad andby     i lvef
CoEnsment l of thne Foes Deatmn  of th  Stt as welalhto  h    iisr   fteGeto
Persistence of public grievance in such matters complicates the schedule of implementation of the
project on ground. Therefore. it is recormmended that no construction work should start before
completing land acquisition process ending with payrnent of compensation and/or rehabilitation.
2.2.4.        Interface ngith the Offices of the District Magistrate & City Municipalities
This would be critical at the time of removal of encroachrnent and congestion. The Magistrate of the
District would take all actions on clearance of these. Rehabilitation of the displaced persons would
need the assistance of both the District Magistrate and the City Municipality. These of fices should be
approached while fo8rmulating the Resettlement & Rehabilitation Plan. Obserations on this issue
wound come in  the  R&R Planst  which would be presented, in a separate report. However, in the
context of environmrental management. no construction work should start before the displaced persons
are resettled and rehabilitated.
2.2.5.        Interface wvith the Department of Forests of the GoK
When road development projects require acquisition of forestland and/or involve felling of trees.
Consent of the Forest Department of the State as well as that of the Ministry of the Government of
India is then required. Although the designated authority to permit felling of trees is the District
Collector, decisions are inviolably taken with the consent of the State Forest Department. The
following steps taken by the project promoter quickens the process of decision making
* Prepare a strip-plan showing the locations of trees to be felled,
* Classify and count these trees by species and girth at 1.5-m from the ground level through a sur-vey
conducted jointly by the of the authonised representative of the State Forest Departrnent and the
project promoter.
24                              Scott Wilson / CES, IIIE



Kamaraka Stare Hiehka,ss                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Impro%ement Proect                                                                    Chapter'
*  Obtain certificate from the State Forest Department stating that no endangered species of tree is
proposed to be felled and that the wildlife value of the tract would not be reduced in consequence.
*  Determine the value of the trees to be felled jointly with the State Forest Department.
*  Measure the area of anv designated forest to be diverted to such non-forest use.
*  Arrange for acquisition with the help of the Collector of the District of new land acceptable to the
State Forest Department for its quality and manageability for raising twice the number ot trees to
be felled as means to preserve the biotic wealth of the tract.
*  Determine the cost of land acquisition and of raising new trees jointly with the State Forest
Department,
*  Submit all these documents to the District Collector while requesting for permission to fell trees
along with the money agreed upon for transfer of acquired land and to cover the cost of raising
new forests.
On receipt of the permission to fell trees, the State Forest Department has to arrange to obtain
concurrence of the Forest Wing of the MOEF of the GOI to the plan. The Ministry, before concurring,
may wish to verify the facts through their own agencies. If no diversion of land from the designated
forest areas is involved, then the Ministry may accept the proposal without ground verification. Under
that circumstance. the project promoter is not required to transfer acquired land to the State Forest
Department to carrv out compensatory afforestation. This can happen when felling is limited only to
the avenue trees planted earlier on the unused part of the right of way belonging to the project
promoter. However. raising of new trees twice the number of felled trees on the unused part of the
right of way persists as a condition for obtaining clearance of the project by the appropriate authority.
Assistance of the State Forest Department for meeting this task facilitates preparation of compliance
reports. Figure 2-2 shows the procedure to be followed for obtaining forestry clearance.
The Department of Forest, Environment and Ecology, Government of Karnataka has also
granted clearance to the Phase I component of KSHIP. The Department has also clarified that
following the amendments to the 4(h Mav 1994 EIA notification, the KSUIP Phase I is exempted
from obtaining clearance from the MOEF, GOI.
2.2.6.       Interface with the Department of Mines of the GoK
It is generally expected that the project promoter would obtain supplies of stone aggregates from the
existing licensed quarries. If for any reason new quarries are to be opened up. Then the permission of
the State Department of Mines would be required. Such new quarries of sizes more than 5-hectares
would require environmental clearance based on EA reports.
2.3.   Strength of the Public Works Department of GoK for Interface Management
Till the recent past the Public Works Department had no wing dealing specifically with environment
management of road projects. land acquisition, compensatory afforestation or for administering the
resettlement & rehabilitation plan for involuntarily shifted communities arising from road
development. If expertise in these fields were developed within the Department, then, as a project
promoter, this Deparntrent would gain advantage in the matter of project preparation as well as in
steering through the process of obtaining environmental clearance thereof. Discharge of
responsibilities for compliance and reporting thereon during project construction phase and
subsequently could also be made in acceptable forms. The formation of the Project Implementation
Unit (PIU) constituting a multidisciplinary team is the requirement of the day and the PWD has rightly
initiated this for the project under consideration and should think of deploying such multifaceted units
which can adopt a holistic approach for the future road projects.
2-5                          Scott Wilson/ CES  IIIE



Karnataka State HiwhwaN s                                                Env ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                  Chapter 2
Figure 2-2: Forestrv Clearance Procedure tinder Forest Conservation Act. 1980
Application of User Agency to DFO
Scrutiny of Application, Preparation           Identification of Forest land
of Formal Proposaln n
4
Scrutiny,Recommendation
|Scrutiny, Remark, Recommendation|
l            of PCCF               l
4
Scrutiny, Remark, Recommendabon
;             g                         ~~~~~~~~RCCF
Proposals upto      Proposals above 20            m                  Site inspecion for
20 hectares-RCCF       hectares-MOEF                                 posals above 40Ha
Examination and final decision for
cases upto 5 Ha forest land except
those of mining and encroachment.,
Examinabon and putting before           Recommendabons of Advisory
State Advisory Group proposals                   committee
other than those menboned above
me-   ---I                     ,I Finaldecision, issueof
Meeting recommendations                          first stage approval
Issue of orders by State                         State Govt Compliance
l   Gov'      }                                 n report
| Monitoring    l
_                       Approval~~~~~~Order
2.4.    Statutes Related to Environment
The various laws and policies of the Central and the Kamataka State Govemment having a bearing on
the Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project are discussed below.
Environment is a subject specified in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution as the exclusive
privilege of the Union Government. This domain is included in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian
Constitution under the powers of the Union Govemment. The constituted States formning this Union
cannot violate any law or regulation issued by the Union Govemment. However, the States are
2-6                               Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamaraka State Hnghxxavs                                    En%ironmental Impact Assessment Repon
lmprosement Proiect                                                                 Chapter 2
permitted to stipulate more stringent norms w ith the concurrence of the Union Government. The GoK
has been honourinu these in all respect.
In India, there were several laws before independence. which had direct or indirect reference to
preservation of environment. The Indian Penal Code made the acts of causing public nuisance a
cognisable offence. The Smoke Nuisance ;\ct. the Factories Act, the Mlotor \ehicles Act. etc.. are
some of the more important statutes in India in this regard. Laws on Municipal Government have
many provisions appertain to environment protection. Laws govermnng occupational health also fall
within this category. However, it was after the Stockholm Conference in 1972 that India recognised
the need for formulating more comprehensive laws for protection of environment. To permit
participation of the States with a view to sharing a common concern in this regard, the Union
Government initially drafted many new Statutes for adoption by the respective States. Keeping this
element of history of environment management in view, the laws as those emerged in time sequence
are discussed below.
2.4.1.      Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (with subsequent amendments)
This statute would apply on KSHIP as and when land is to be acquired in the case of changes in
alignment, bye-passes and widening where there is not enough Right of Way (ROW) with the State
Government.
The Land Acquisition Act under Section 4(1) is enforced to acquire land in public interest. The
maximum time allowed, from the date of notification for the acquisition is two years, after which the
notification lapses. For the project land acquisition will be required The compensation for land is fixed
under section 23 (2), where the amount to be paid is the market value + 30% solatium (compulsory). If
this amount is paid within one year then an additional interest of 9% is paid to the beneficiary; if it
exceeds one year then an additional interest of 15% is paid.
2.4.2.      The Indian Forest Act, 1927
This statute provides power to the Government to declare and classify forestland. It is useful to be
aware of it.
This Act consolidates all the Statutes passed since 1865 relating to forests, the transit of Forest
Produce and the duty leviable on timber and other forest-produce. This Act also confers power to the
State Government to declare a forest land or a waste land which is the property of the Government or
over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest-produce of
which the Govemment is entitled as reserved forest.
2.4.3.      The Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains Act, 1958
and the Karnataka Ancient monuments and Archaeological sites and
Remains Act, 1961
These Acts are applicable in case any development activity is undertaken in close vicinity of any
archaeological site or any are discovered during the construction stage. The Act requires prior
authorisation of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for development within 300 m of a
Protected Property.
2.4.4.      The Karnataka Forest Act, 1963
This statute provides power to the Government to declare and classify forestland. It is useful to be
aware of it.
This Act was enacted with the purpose of consolidating the law related to forest and forest produce in
the State of Karnataka. It confers the powers to the state to constitute land over which it has
proprietary rights as reserved forest, village forests and district forests, taxation and on matters related
to forest produce etc. This Act was amended in 1984 abridging all forest leases to industries to only 5
years, and the supply of raw material was made subject to availability instead of assured quantity
2-7                         Scotl Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Hiehv~avs                                      En,ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                   Chapter 2
commitment. All concessions to wood based industries were terminated in 1989 and a moratorium on
green tree felling was imposed in 1990 which continues till today. Fot-est Officcvs have been
authorised to evict encroachers from forestlands and confiscate vehicles engaged in forest offence
cases.
2.4.5.      The Mvsore Highwavs Act, 1964
The Mysore Highways Act. 1964 and the Mvsore Highwavs Rules. 1965 are in force in the State of
Kamataka. These enactments provide, among other things, for the restriction of ribbon development
and removal of encroachments. They are applicable to highways of the State, but not to the National
Highways. These have also provisions for enforcing restrictions on building activity along highways
and control of access to their land.
2.4.6.       The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
This Act provides for the protection of wild animals, birds and plants and for matters connected
therewith or ancillary or incidental to. It appoints the wildlife wardens and constitution of the wildlife
advisory board, etc.
2.4.7.      Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
This statute would apply on KSHIP as and when the project during implementation adversely affects
the quality of ambient water.
The basic objective of this Act is to maintain and restore the wholesomeness of the country's aquatic
resources by prevention and control of pollution. Water is a state subject under the constitution.
Consequently, the Water Act, a Central law, was enacted under Article 252(1) of the Constitution,
which empowers the Union Government to legislate in a field reserved for the States. All the States
have approved implementation of the water Act.
2.4.8.       The Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976
This statute would apply on KSHIP.
This act provides for the preservation of trees in the State by regulating the felling of the trees and for
the planting of adequate number of trees to restore ecological balance and for matters connected
therewith. This act confers the State Government to constitute a Tree Authority for urban and rural
areas. The Act provides for appointment of Tree Officers in the urban and rural areas.
The Act also describes the statutory powers and duties of the Tree Authority and the Tree Officer. The
duties of the Tree Authority also include as described in Section 7(e) "planting and transplanting of
trees necessitated by construction of new roads or widening of existing roads or replacement of trees.
which have failed to come up or for safeguarding danger to life and property".
The Act also elaborates the restriction on felling of trees and liability for preservation of trees Section
8(2) of the Act specifies that "Any person desiring to fell a tree, shall apply in writing to the concerned
Tree Officer for permission in that behalf. The application shall be accompanied by a site plan or
survey sketch specifying clearly the site or survey number, the number, kind and girth of tree sought to
be cut and the reasons therefore along with the consent of the owner or occupant".
2.4.9.       The Fortv-second Amendment of the Constitution, 1976
This statute empowvers the GoK.
This amendment was made in 1976 wherein Article 48A defined some Directive Principles for the
States. One of these principles provided that "the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country". Under Clause (g) of Article 51 A
it was prescribed that "it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural
environment including forests, lakes. rivers and wildlife."
2-8                          Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Hi,hxh avs                                  Env ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improrement Proicct                                                                 Chapter 2
2.4.10.     Town and Countrv Planning Act, 1976
This statute can be gainfully used by the KSHIP to obtain land use control along the road corridors.
Like the act on prevention of water pollution. the original structure of this act was drafted in the Union
Government and later adopted by the constituent States. Under this the States wvere to set up Boards to
plan land use for both towns and country. Anv promoter of project has to obtain a certificate from this
Board stating whether the proposed land use is compatible wvith the laid plan. (It should be mentioned
here that The State of Kamataka had its own Town and Country Planning Act since 1961 which has
undergone several Amendments and presently is known as The Kamataka Town and Country Plannmng
(Amendment) Act. 1993).
2.4.11.     Forest Conservation Act, 1980
This statute would apply on KSHIP as and when the project intends to divert forestland for non-forest
purposes.
This Act provides for the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or
incidental to. This Act restricts the de-reservation of forests or use of forestland for non-forestry
purposes without the prior approval of the Union Government.
The Rules and Guidelines under this Act as amended on October 25.1992 have elaborately outlined
and defined the application of the Act, procedure to be followed for acquisition of forestland for non-
forest purposes. submission of proposals, compensatory afforestation and certain clarifications about
the procedural requirements.
Section 2.2 (iii) of these rules clearly states that the projects for roads and railway line construction
will be processed in their entirety. Therefore proposals in piecemeal should not be submitted. A note
on the present and future requirement of forestland is to be submitted along with the proposal.
Section 2.5 states that whenever diversion of protected or reserve forest land is required for realigning
of road/raillcanal, permission would be granted subject to the condition that non-forest land saved on
account of such realignment would be declared as protected forest. The proposal from the State /Union
Territory Govemment will have to be comprehensive indicating clearly the land asked for and saved
on account of the proposed realignment of the road/rail/canal.
Under section 3.2(vi) (e) land for compensatory afforestation requires that "for diversion of linear or
strip plantation declared as protected forest along the road sides for widening or expansion of road,
compensatory afforestation may be raised over degraded forest land twice in extent of the forest area
being diverted 'de-reserved in respect of the above proposal.
2.4.12.    . The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
This statute wvould apply on KSHIP as and when the project during implementation adversely affects
the quality of ambient air.
The Union Government under Article 253 of the Constitution passed this Statute. This Act provides
for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution and confers powers to the Central and State
Pollution Control Board with a view to carry out the aforesaid purposes.
2.4.13.     Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
This statute would applv on KSHIP for implementing the project.
The Union Government under Article 253 of the Constitution passed this Statute. The Environment
(Protection) Act. 1986 seeks to achieve the objective of protection and improvement of environment
and for matters connected therewith. This legislation enables the co-ordination of activities of the
2-9                         Scott Wilson / CES / IllE



Kamataka State Hieh%%avs                                     Environmental Impact Assessment Report
impro\ement Project                                                                 Chapter 2
various regulatory agencies. setting up of an authoritv or authorities with advocate powers for
environmental protection etc.
2.4.14.     Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989
This statute would apply on KSHIP as and when the project during implementation adversely affects
the quality of ambient air and impairs safety.
In 1989, the Central Motor Vehicles Rules introduced nation wide emission levels for both petrol and
diesel driven vehicles. Rule 115(1) requires that every motor vehicle be manufactured and maintained
so that smoke, visible vapours, grits, sparks, ashes, cinders are not emitted when the vehicle is driven.
Emission standards for petrol and diesel vehicles have been specified by the motor vehicles rules.
2.4.15.     The Hazardous Wastes (Management And Handling) Rules, 1989
This statute would apply on KSHIP as and when handling (including storing) and transhipment of
hazardous materials during construction of the project roads.
The Central Government formulated these rules under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Under
section 7 of these rules it is required that the operator or occupier of a facility dealing with hazardous
waste ensures that the hazardous waste is packaged in a suitable manner for storage and transport and
the labelling and packaging shall be easily visible and be able to withstand physical conditions and
climatic factors. Packaging, labelling and transport of hazardous wastes shall be in accordance with the
provision s of the rules issued by the Central Government under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and
other guidelines issued from time to time. Section 9 of these Rules also requires that in case of an
accident during transportation of hazardous wastes, the operator or occupier of a facility shall
immediately report to the State Pollution Control Board in the prescribed form.
2.4.16.     Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 1991
This statute would not apply on the KSHIP since none of the project roads are located in the coastal
area.
This notification was issued on 19th February, 1991 under section 3(1) and section 3(2)(v) of the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and rule 5(3) (d) of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986
declaring Coastal Stretches as Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) and Regulating Activities in the CRZ.
In order to prevent deterioration of the oceans from unregulated land use in the coastal areas, this
statute has been adopted. All states having oceanfront are required to prepare maps showing the
locations of 4 Coastal Regulation Zones (CRZ) and to mark their boundaries on ground. Within the
CRZ-I, which extends at the most 500-m from the high tide line, no developmental action would be
permitted. Within CRZ-II, urban land use is permitted. CRZ-III includes the land under rural land use.
The CRZ-IV refers to the islands.
2.4.17.     Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
This statute would apply on the implementers of KSHIP.
This Act provides for public liability insurance for the purpose of providing immediate relief to the
persons affected by accident occurring while handling any hazardous substance and for matters
connected therewith or incidental thereto. The transportation of hazardous substances by vehicle use is
also included.
2.4.18.     Seventy-fourth Amendment of the Constitution, 1992
This statute empowers the GoK.
The subject matter of the protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspects was
included as an item in the Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution by the Constitution (Seventy-fourth
Amendment) Act, 1992.. This Amendment enables the Legislature of the State to endow the
2-10                         Scon Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highv%avs                                    En ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 2
Municipalities with powers and authority as may be necessarv to function as institutions of self-
Government. Schemes are to be prepared by the State Government and devolution may be made with
respect to the perfomiance of functions and implementation of schemes as may be entrusted to the
Municipalities including those in relation to protection of environment and promotion of ecological
aspects. No State in India has, however, endowed the Mlunictpalttes with such powers under this
Amendment including Kamataka.
2.4.19.     National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995
This statute would apply on the implementers of KSHIP.
This Act provides for strict liability for damages arising out of any accident occurring while handling
any hazardous substance and for the establishment of a National Environment Tribunal for effective
and expeditious disposal of cases arising from such accident, with a review to giving relief and
compensation for damages to persons, property and the environment and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto.
2.4.20.     National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997
This statute would apply on the implementers of KSHIP.
An Act to provide for the establishment of a National Environment Appellate Authority to hear
appeals with respect to restriction of areas in which any industries, operations or processes or class of
industries, operations and processes shall not be carried out subject to certain safeguards under the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
2.4.21.     Public Interest Litigation against Government
This statute empowers the society at large to restrain any person or organisation from degrading
environment.
Writ petition can be filed by any citizen of India with the Supreme Court soliciting judicial
intervention on situations of environment degradation arising from inadequate or inappropriate
executive actions of the Govermment. These appeals are generally described as Public Interest
Litigation (PIL). In such contexts, the petitioner is not obliged to establish his locus standi. This means
that the petitioner need not be a directly affected party. In order to expedite settlement of disputes,
"Green Courts" have been established in every High Court of the country to hear complaints
concerning environment management.
The above list of Statutes together with the Rules & Regulations define the legal instruments available
for protection of Environment in India. The designated authorities are empowered to prescribe norms
and procedures to be followed to comply with the respective Statutes.
2.5.   Guidelines for EIA of Highway Projects, IRC: 104-1988
The Indian Roads Congess published the guidelines for EIA of road projects in 1988. It outlines the
procedure for carrying out the EIA and the requirements to be met under it. It also lists the various
environmental components to be examined in relation to road projects. It also recommends that the
project authorities have close interaction with the Department of Environment and Forests. It is
pertinent to mention that the Guidelines of the Ministry of Environment and Forests for EIA are much
exhaustive than that outlined in the IRC guidelines.
2-1 i                        Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Chapter 3
Project Description






Kamataka State Highways                                                         Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                            Chapter 3
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .                       ......................                                               3-1
3.1.   PROJECT LOCATION......................................................................................... 3-1
3.2. SCOPE OF WORKS ...........................                    .3-1
3.3.  TRAFFIC DETAILS PER ROUTE ............................                                                     3-3
3.4.  DESIGN OPTIONS CONSIDERED ............................                                                     3-3
3.5.   OPTIONS ON CONSTRUCTION METHODS ............................                                              3-4
3.5.I. Pavement Overlay .3-5
3.5.2.    New Construction ....................................... .................. 3-6
3..3. Treatment Alternatives .3-6
3.6. OPTIONS ON ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS                          ..3-6
3.6.1. Rocks ........... 3-7
3.6.2. Natural Gravel ............ 3-8
3.6.3. Sand ............3-8
3. 6. 4. Fly Ash ........... 3-8
3.6.5. Epmbankment Fi ...........                                                                             3-8
3.6.6. Asphalt ... . . .3-8
3.7.   OPTIONS ON CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ..................................................................  3-10
3.8.   OPTIONS ON INTERSECTIONS ON ROADS FOR UPGRADATION ........................................             . 3-10
3.9.   OPTIONS ON BYPASSES ...................................................................                  3-11
TABLE 3-1: DISTRICTS AND TALUKS TRAVERSED BY THE PROJECT ROADS ......................................................... 3-1
TABLE 3-2: PROPOSED CONTRACTS PACKAGES. .......................................................3-1
TABLE 3-3: PRESENT & PRO3ECTED TRAFFIC BY VEHICLE TYPES ALONG THE PROJECT ROADS .......................... 3-3
TABLE 3-4: GUIDING PARAMETERS FOR ROAD UPGRADATION IN RURAL AREAS .... ........................................... 3-4
TABLE 3-5: GUIDING PARAMETERS FOR ROAD UPGRADATION IN SEMI-URBAN & URBAN AREAS ............ ......... 3-4
TABLE 3-6: SOURCES OF COMMON ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS .............................................................. 3-6
TABLE 3-7: NUMBER OF NEW IMPROVED CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES. .......................................3-10
TABLE 3-8: LIST OF INTERSECTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT ....................................................................  3-10
TABLE 3-9: URBAN CONGESTION AND PROPOSED BYPASS ..............................................................3-12
FIGURE 3-1: PROJECT ROUTES ..................................................................... 3-2
FIGURE 3-2: URBAN CROSS SECTION OF THE ROAD ...........              ..................................-...................... 3-5
FIGuRE 3-3: RURAL CROSS SECTION OF THE ROAD .................................................................... 3-5
FIGURE 3-4: SOIL GRAVELLINESS IN THE STUDY AREA ....................................................................  3-9
ToC-I                                  Scont Wilson / CES X IIIE






Kamataka State Highva'.s                                     Enx ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Proiect                                                                 Chapter 3
3.   Project Description
3.1.   Project Location
The Project Roads, div-ided between 5 routes, are distributed in North Western. Northem and Eastem
Karnataka. Prior to devising the contract packages the project corridors followed a different
nomenclature during the Feasibility study. Table 3-1 showvs the link numbers used in the Feasibility
Study composing each route as also the various districts and taluks through which these routes pass.
Figure 3-1 shows the geographical location of the project roads.
Table 3-1: Districts and Taluks Traversed by the Project Roads
Route          Location      Link Numbers   Districts           Taluks
in Feasibility
Study
1       Kalmala junction to     5A        Raichur    Raichur, Manvi, Sindhnur
Sindhnur
2A       Sindhnur to             SB        Raichur    Sindhanur. Gangawati
Gangawati                         Koppal
2B       Gangawati to            5C        Koppal    Gangawati
Budugumpa cross
3A       Hattigudur to           6L        Gulbarga   Shahpur
Shahpur
3B       Shahpur to Jevargi      6M        Gulbarga   Shahpur. Jevargi
3C       Jevargi to Gulbarga     6N        Gulbarga  Jevarei and Gulbarga
3D       Gulbarga to             60        Gulbarga   Gulbarga,
Hominabad                        Bidar
3E       Homnabad to             6P        Bidar      Homnabad, Bidar
Naubad. Bidar
4       Biapur to Tikota        2A        Bijapur    Bijapur
5A       A. P. border to         1A        Raichur    Raichur
Raichur
5B       Raichur to Kalmala      lB        Raichur    Raichur
I_junction
3.2.   Scope of Works
The PWD, GOK reviewed the various routes selected for upgradation and decided to award the work
based on five contract packages. four under International Competitive Bidding (ICB) and one under
National Competitive Bidding (NCB). The final grouping is indicated in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2: Proposed Contracts Packages
Contract  Contract Value    Contract          Contract      Route    Length
No.      Rs (in crores)      Type           Period                  (Km)
Ul            100            ICB              24            1         76.656
U2           94.5            ICB              24           2         77.537
U3           239.4           ICB              48           3         191.361
U4           25.2            NCB              10            4        20.149
U5           42.8            ICB              18           5         31.138
3-1                         Scott Wilson / CES IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                             Environmental Impact Assessment Reporl
Improvement Project                                                                             Chapter 3
Figure 3-1: Project Routes
UpGradation
2
Major Maintenance
Gulbarga
L~~~~~
A iijapun                           ,
-   *Jamkhand
hikodi                           0x4UgsuuA-P.~  Border
l L ~~~*Mudhol *f-  
s  *HukFi              * .Bagalkot      alingsugurK         R
*Belgaurn                         * ] 
_ ~ ~ ~~~- *       -\ -         -) .fi                 rr
!Kha       'r-i S NargunO rt<          uppa
j    S   S       W;~*Hliyal                 u        P     t i
*Kumbhaiwad                             *           oBel
: <Sr  *Yellapuf    *
>|           .   *Harpanahalli
t   <    M          <  T  w-                 eC~~~halie¢    8
i  rs,    .              HOnni,,   .               z~~~~*i U
| ~     ~       ~~ *e       '                               rv 
'.-v    *    *     Shimoga
\   ,   *  t  E *Talker ,'
I   I     *           9)  *Chiknayakanha9i   +,          *
r        \   ,  '             ~~~~~~*C+iIagatur   **                       '       *
* , .fdelur         *Turuveker 
'- J    *Hassan   ---.      *
06~~~~~~~~~
-2                              Scott WS  /  CES gas l  S    lE
>   )--~* -       4, *  -Uelukateo' -Chann               
'                 l        *   ':: *   l ~~oKm
,~~~~~~~~~~~~-                                                           Sct Wilso CE \     E



Karnataka State Hch"avs                                      En% ronmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                  Chapter 3
3.3.   Traffic Details per Route
The volume of vehicular traffic as of year 2000 is presented in Table 3-3 along Xvith the projection for
year 2008. The rate of growth of the different types of vehicles between the years as given in the First
Interim Report (Appendix F) has been used. The reason for not preparing any projection beyond year
2008 is that any EIA report is not considered valid by the MOEF beyond five years without further
review.
Table 3-3: Present & Projected Traffic by Vehicle Types along the Project Roads
Route       Year       TWO       THREE       CAR        BUS-       LCV-   TRUCKS
WHEELER WVHEELER TOTAL  TOTAL  TOTAL
2000       1038       61         411        281        135        463
2008       2664       156        1055       505        279        1113
2A          2000       2660       103        535        296        201        552
2008       6826       263        1371       532        415        1329
2B          2000       2804       583        546        256        366        613
2008       7193       1495       1400       460        756        1475
3A          2000       243        9          442        248        138        417
2008       624        23         1134       445        286        1002
3B          2000       857        179        564        413        209        344
2008       2199       460        1448       742        433        828
3C          2000       1545       572        654        392        226        512
2008       3965       1467       1677       704        468        1231
3D          2000       858        321        606        369        162        533
2008       2201       824        1555       662        335        1282
3E          2000       2356       1523       2033       634        662         1170
2008       6045       3907       5217       1140       1368       2816
4           2000       1450       368        648        578        396        348
2008       3721       944        1661       1038       819        838
5A          2000       2103       168        845        384        232        722
2008       5396       431        2167       691        480        1737
5sB         2000       1896       158        844        520        210         809
2008       4864       406        2165       935        433        1947
Source: First Interim Report, Appendix F
3.4.   Design Options Considered
The design options considered in the First Interim Report are:
*  The adopted Pavement Design standards are according to the current Indian Roads Congress
guidelines and Road Note-31 of the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), UK.
*  For all improvemerLt options and altematives, a design life of 20 years has been considered.
*  Upgradation options have been prepared with the aim to improve both the structural and functional
performance of the existing road.
*  Paved shoulders are also proposed for the upgradation options as per the IRC guidelines.
*  Similarly, widening of the formation to 12m as per IRC 73:1980 guidelines is also proposed only
for the upgradation options.
Upgradation Options were considered in three (3) forms, namely
*  Widening to either 6-m or 7-m,
*  Strengthening of the existing pavement to its current width, or
* Widening and strengthening of the pavement.
3-3                          Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                             Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                           Chapter 3
Subsequently, the design parameters for cross sections of roads for upgradation have been further
refined. These are being used for designing the roads as guidelines. Table 3-4 shows these guidina
parameters for roads in rural areas. Similarly Table 3-5 indicates these guiding parameters for roads in
the urban and semi-urban areas. The urban and rural cross sections are given in Figure 3-2 and Figure
3-3.
Table 3-4: Guiding Parameters for Road UTpgradation in Rural Areas
(All Figures are in Metres)
Road Type -            URLD    URHD                URLI           URHI
Parameters 4-
Formation Width             12           12            11              11
Carriageway Width           7             7             6              6
Paved Shoulders             2             2             2              2
Earthen Shoulders           3             3             3              3
Footpath                   Nil           Nil           Nil            Nil
Embankment
Height                       I            I 1           1
Widthof                     2             2             2              2
Embankment Slope                    l
Drain Width
Minimum              4|_4_ 4
Desirable             |    5              2             5              2
Desirable Plantation I      6             6             6              6
Right of Way
Minimum               |    19       l    18      l     18       I      17
Desirable                   26           20            25              25
Remarks: U = Upgradation; R = Rural; L= Low Embankment; H = High Embankment;
D = Double Lane, I = Intermediate Lane
Table 3-5: Guiding Parameters for Road Upgradation in Semi-Urban & Urban Areas
(All Figures are in Meters)
Road Tvpe -        i   UVDI            UVI          UTD          UTF
Parameters ;
Formation Width             10            9             13           18
Carriageway Width           7             6              7           15
Paved Shoulders             3             3             2             -
Earthen Shoulders            1             I             1            -
Footpath                     -                           3            3
Drain Width
Minimum                    3.6            3              -
Desirabl&                  3.6             3
Right of Way
Minimum                    13.6           12            12           18
Desirable                 13.6+          12+           12+    I    18+
Remarks: U = Upgradation: V = Semi-urban; T = Urban: D = Double Lane; I = Intermediate Lane; F = 4-lane.
For UVD, a minimum of I--m verge is required. Wherever width is limited, the area between the carriageway to the drain will
be paved. The outer edge of drain will match with the ROW line. For lVI, the outer edge of drain will match with the ROW
line. For UTD & UTF, an extra width of minimum 2.5-m is required wherever parking is recommended. Outer edge of
footpath will match with the ROW line.
3.5.    Options on Construction Methods
Subsequent to submission of the First Interim Report and the Second Interim Report, options on
construction methods have been examined and the suitable ones were selected. These are important
3-4                            Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State High%Navs                                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
lmproN ement Project                                                                                    Chapter '
Figure 3-2: Urban Cross Section of tle Ioa(I
8'>m       VARi7S                           .                           VARIES.!
i   DRAIN         VERGcE                                                       VERG       I  DRA:N
PARKING AREA                    GARRIAGEWAY                   PARKING AREA
/BUS BAYS/BUS BAYS
z
1   3%      3%                  2.5%t       2.55%                3%       37 
COVERED DRAIN                                                      -
URBAN CROSS SECTION
Figure 3-3: Rural Cross Section of the Road
1 .5m 1 1m              7m                   1,   1 5m-
UNPAVED               CARR AGEWAY
SHOULDER PAVED         ARAWA
SHOULDER
3%   3%      2.5%     2 5%          3X   3%
0.5m  1 1  X  0                                    1   1 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.5m
0  ~ 5         SUBGRADE BOTTOM                                          1.    ;       5<
RURAL CROSS SECTION
2iDZn5     R VARIES       5,          7m                I S      VARI    2 QSm
E VERGE                                                I  VERGE
BUS BAYS   PAVED           CARRIAGEWAY           PAVED   BUS BAYS
/PARKING    SHOULDER                          SHOULDER   /PARKING
AREA                                                    AREA
3    %                  2.5%     2.5%           %    3%
VILLAGE CROSS SECTION
features of the proposed project and are potential determninants of environmental impacts from road
design. While the details will be found in the Final Project Report. some of the critically important
issues are highlighted below.
3.5.1.          Pavement Overlav
Overlay thickness design has been based on the characteristic deflection determined for each relevant
section of the project road links.
3-5                                Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State H,ehxa\s                                          En\ ronmenral Impact Assessment Report
Impro%ement ProJcct                                                                         Chaptcr
3.5.2.        New Construction
In the Second Inlte-inm Report. after reviewine several methods. it wvas decided to adopt IRC 37-1984
(extrapolated curves) and cross check the design thickness with AASHITO0 methlod.
3.5.3.        Treatment Alternatives
The main elements of the construction processes are given below.
Upgradation: WN idening & Strengtheninig (includinlg r aising ol einbaiikrneit): The elements are:
* Remove high shoulders & grub out bushes (some trees may get removed);
* Remove existing pavement:
*   Widen road formation to 12-m width;
*  Construct new wider pavement with paved shoulder, including surfacing and providing
ditches and drains, wherever necessary; and
*  Construct shoulder filling.
Raising of Embankment & New Pavemetit: The elements are:
*  Remove high shoulders & grub out bushes (some trees may get removed);
*  Remove existing pavement and widening;
*   Widen roadway to 12-m and construct side ditch, if required:
X  Raise embankment;
* Construct newv wider pavement and paved shoulder, including surfacing and pavement
edge drain; and
*   Construct shoulder filling.
TIhe sections identifiedfor raisinig wvere selected on the basis ofa ntumnber of criteria includinzg
*   Relative height of the existing road fornation level (top of subgrade) to the surrounding
ground and likely maximum water table conditions;
-  Possibility of seepage across the road line;
*  Presence or likelihood of field irrigation close to the road:
-  Nature of local soil: and
*   Possibility or otherwvise of improving drainage by means of side drains.
3.6.   Options on Road Construction MNlaterials
Information about existing quarry and other sources of potential road construction materials was
collected by the PCC from the local offices of the Public Works Department throughout the project
area. Information from other sources and from field observations was also collected. These are
presented in Table 3-6. The distance and direction of these sites is given with respect to the starting
point of each link. Suitability of these materials has been tested. It is important to note the importance
of tested bearing strengths in determining the required thickness of the different parts of the road
formation. In the Second Interim Report. the desired parameters of the different components of the
road formation with reference to their thickness have been recommended on the assumption that the
available construction materials will have CBR value of 10.
Table 3-6: Sources of Common Road Construction Materials
Route               Rock             I           Gravel                         Sand
I         Granite: Neermanvi: 1.5 km left  Moorum: Sanjeevarayagudda; 4.2  Nandihal quarry at RG road at
of km 27.6                   km left of km 35               km 41.3
Granite: Sanjeevarayanagudda:5  Ntoorum: Byagwat; 9.2 km left of  Potnal sand quarry at km 5 5.5
km left of km 35             Km 47
Granite; Bvagwat quarr\ 9.2 km   Moorum; Amareshwara: 1.5 km
right of Km 47               left of km 50.51
Moorum: Kapagal quarry: I km
_ left of km 23.2
2A
3-6                            Scott Wilson CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Hi, hs%avs                                                 Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improv ement Project                                                                                  Chapter I
Route                 Rock                             Gravel                            Santd
Granite: Ambamath;  12.S  knm   l Moorum: Anibamath : I2km  loft  Sindhnur Nalla at km 2.'1
left ofkni 12.365               of klm 12.305
Granite: Halekota: 37.6 km  left  Moorum:  Amareshwara  quarry:  Potnal Nalla at km 55.66
of km 13.2 of SB road           2km left of km 50.129
Granite: Bvagwvat quarrv: 9.2 knm   Moorum: Hasamkal quarrv: 12'.35   Quarrv at km 23.708
right of km 47                  km of km 76.52G6
Granite Nlaski: 12.35 km  left of  Mioorum: 6.5  km  rigtht of kmii
Km 76.52 of route I road        24.511
Granite: 1.5 km left of km 16.868   Moorum: Basapattanaat km 16.S6S   Koppal: 15 km off km 26.933
2B          Granite: 2 km left of km 26.979  Moorum on roadside: 22.38-26.341   Budugumpa coarse sand at km
26.933
3A          Granite: Mahanteswara Gudda at  Moorum: Ajibair 4-km  right of  Sand quarry: 12-km  right of
11.5 km right of km 11.788      11.788                            km 11.788
Granite: Sharablingeshwara 1-km   Moorum: Vibutipura next to road at  Sand quarry: at km 22.927
left of Km 3.834                km 6.807
3B          Granite: Mahanteswara Gudda at  Moorum: Ajibair 4-km  right of  Sand quarry: at km 22.927
11.5 km right of km 11.788      11.788 of segment I
Balbatti trap metal: 21 km left of  Moorum: Vibutipura next to road at  Saidapur sand quarry I km left
km 20.912                       km 6.807 of segment I             and 11.842 right
Kellur trap metal: 6km left of km   Moorum: 8 km left of km 20.406
30.995
Trap metal: 8 km  left of km   Moorum: balabhatti village 20 km
37.017                          left of km 20.406
Moorum: 3 km left of km 26.957
Moorum: Kellur 6 km left of km
30.463
3C          Marthur trap metal quarry I lkm   Private moorum quarry 6 km right  Malked sand quarry 38 km
left of km 23.116               of km 0.008                       right of km 42.008
Revanur trap metal quarry 6 km   Moorum: private quarry 6 km left
left of km 0.008                of km 23.116
Pala village trap metal quarry 15   Moorum: Private quarry at km
km right of 42.008               11.195
Moorum: Private quarry at km
37.244
3D          Trap metal; Mustapur 2km  left  Moorum; Laterite quarry at Km   White   sand   quarry   at
and right of km 51.924          53.924                             Sadasivpet (A.P) 125 km right
of km 60.105
Murguthi cross private Moorum
quarry at km 37.244
3E          Trap metal: Janwada 12 km left  Private Moorum quarry 5 km left of  Coarse Sand quarry 25 km right
of km 46.315                    km 46.315                          of km 46.315 on SH_ 15.
White   sand    quarry   at
Sadasivpet (A.P) 48.8 km right
of km 60.105
Trap metal: darga quarry  3 km   Moorum: 3 km right of km 20       Tamba: 30 km right of km 0.0
right of km 0.0
4           Trap metal: 14 km right of km   Moorum: Alapur Quarry: 4.25 km   Don river sand quarry:24 km
20                              left of km 5.749                   right of Km 20
Moorum: Darga Quarry: 3km right
of km 0.0
5B      Granite: Sultanpur quarry:       Moorum: Assapur quarry:            Jambaldinni Nala:
17.8 -km right of km 11.82      5-km left of kml .2               25-km left of km 1.2
Granite: Assapur quarry:
5-km off
3.6.1.         Rocks
In most of the links, sources of rocks are available. Granite, gneiss. basalt. quartzite and sandstone are
the common rocks. Amongst these. granite, gneiss and massive basalt are suitable for all purposes.
Quartzite and sandstone are more variable in nature and may be used for some specific purposes.
3-7                               Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Hiohkkavs                                         Fn% ironmenral impact Assessment Report
ImproN ement Proiect                                                                      Chapter 3
3.6.2.       Natural Gravel
Moorum and residual uravel are useful for applicationi for sub-basc. suberade anid shoulder material.
Figure 3-4 shows the regional distributioni of -ravel soils in Karnataka. The bearing strengths of the
available matenals have been tested.
3.6.3.       Santd
Most rivers in Kamataka. especially those  vitlh dry beds during the greater part of the year have
spreads of sand. which are collected for making concrete and lime plaster. These sands get replenished
each monsoon and there is little shortage in their availability.
3.6.4.       Fly Ash
The thermal power plant at Raichur is a major source of fly ash. It is relatively strong when
compacted. It has compaction characteristics similar to natural sand. It compacts well when dry and
does not have a pronounced optimum moisture content and a maximum dry density. The fly ash can be
easily utilised in Route I and Route 5. Its utilisation will be limited to these two project routes, as the
lead distances and transportation cost involved with respect to other project routes will be very high.
3.6.5.       Embankment Fill
Appropriate materials will be drawn from the nearest available location to the construction site.
However, highly plastic black cotton soil will not be used.
3.6.6.       Asphalt
Asphalt for the project routes are to be brought from Mumbai.
3-8 nScott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                               Environmental Impact Assessment Repori
lmprosement Project                                                                               Chapter 1
Figure 3-4: Soil Gravelliness in the Stucky Area
Project Routes
2I
4
I5
Major Maintenance
KARNATAKA                                 4 *,
SOIL GRAVELLINESS;'
3
3
teaend                             '/oTGA
> .2           '        3   ; ' > >Nonqravelly or shght(< 5'/   60 13
Moderately gravelly ( 1s.3&4) 5.59
y                  5S  Strong CqrveflIy ,25-niO, 3) 1*
~~~~~~~ ~~~~~Rockland                                     2.56
-                                  m    ~~~~~~~~~~~~Settlementr,
EWater bud ies
(P
w r
2 ,,,  . +z;e_h8.'\,',.,,,<,_   j * 'Tamil Nadu
Kmn 25   0      ,n c'v
--Dist bo:.rtda-
-Roan
NBSS&LUP. R C. 2ngarira-
3-9                              Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State HiLh\\avs                                                 En% ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                  Chapter '
3.7.    Options on Cross Drainage Structures
Manv cross-drainage structures. like culverts and bridges. are on the project roads. The number of
culverts and bridges proposed to be improved at old locations or to be created anew is noted in Table
3-7. All improved bridoes would be located very close to the existing ones.
Table 3-7: Number of New Improved Cross Drainage Structures
Route          Culverts                Causewavs                   Bridges
Existing  Improvement Existing Improvement Existing Improvement
proposed                proposed                 Proposed
1          102             76         3               3        25             20
2A           70             60         5              5         17             14
2B          44              39         1               1         4              3
3A           16             121                                  3              2
3B           51             32         1               1        15              9
3C           28             24          -                       13             t0
3D           85             69          -                       19             14
3E           41             34          -                       13              6
4           15             13-                                  8              8
5A           18             18                                   8              6
5B           16             16                                   4              2
3.8.    Options on Intersections on Roads for Upgradation
All intersections on the roads selected for upgradation in Phase-I were studied. Amongst these, 15
intersections will require improvement. The list is shown in Table 3-8. Improvement would entail
establishment of smooth gradient into the feeder road from the given main road and widening the
paved surface to allow easy tum for vehicles.
Table 3-8: List of Intersections for Improvement
Route No.      Location        Chainage         Intersection with      Intersection Type      Remarks
SH   MDR   Other Road
Kalmala                0        20              SH 20         Y-intersection
Manvi                35.091                    Internal       T-intersection
12 km before         23.462          MDR                      Y-intersection    Mantralava road
Manvi
Sindhnur             76.256     19              SH-19         T-intersection    Start of Route 2
Sindhnur              8.318     19              SH- 19        T-intersection    -
2     Karatagi '                            MDR                     4- arm crossing   Kanakagiri road
Gancawati            50.532     SH                            4- arm crossing   Lingsugur road
Hatfigudur   *       69.329          MDR                      Y-intersection    Yadgir road
Bheemaravanagudi    4.713       16                            Y-intersection    Bijapur road
Jevargi              37.784      12                           Y-intersection    B ijapur road
Gulbarga             37448                      Intemal       Y-intersection
3     Gulbarga               3.865                    Ring road      4- arm crossing
Mahagaon cross       23.052          MDR                      4- arm crossing   Basavakalyan-
Chincholi road
Before Homnabad         9       NH-13(0od                     4-arm crossing
Road).
Bidar                46.313      4                            Y-intersection    Bhalki road
4     Tikota                 19.98     =    MDR                      4- arm crossing   Jamkhandi-jath rd.
Note:  SH-State Highway
MDR- Major District Road
3-10                               Scott Wilson i CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Heh%%ass                                         Enx Ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Impro%ement Project                                                                     Chapter 3
3.9.   Options on Bypasses
The Environment Consultants. throughl field verificationi, ascertained the need for bypasses in the
congested urban centres along the project routes.
The environmental pollution aspects were also looked into but the pollution was related to high levels
of Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM) and Respirable Particulate Matter (RPNI). This high level of
SPM and RPM can be attnrbuted to the climatic factors and the poor condition of the roads especially
the degraded shoulders and unregulated parking on the roadside. Another point to be noted here is that
in almost in all the urban areas. semi urban areas and rural areas with certain degree of urban influence
there is a total lack of solid waste management system. Unauthorised dumping of refuse and garbage
by the roadside and in the adjoining drains is a common feature in all the urban areas, this also
contributes to the high level of SPM. These shortcomings of the town municipalities and public health
department do not merit for considering a bypass in the urban areas. Improvement of the existing road
and regular maintenance and proper solid waste management and disposal of the waste with penal
provisions for unauthorised dumping on the roadside by the residents and establishments is the only
solution. The PWD will take pro actions in this regard to inform the concerned authorities and get the
required measures implemented in order to improve the overall environment.
Noise levels were on the higher side during the night-time because of the varied land use and lack of
regulation in building activities. The traffic related noise is marginal, the point to note. is that the
ambient noise level in the urban areas as such is high because of the commercial and economic
activities. High noise levels are a result of the honking of homs, playing of loudspeakers, public
advertising and use of power generators. In addition to this even poor town planning and inadequate
traffic management and planning have contributed in a big way for unwanted noise and related
nuisance. Stnct enforcement of traffic rules and noise pollution control laws by the town
administrations can effectively curb this problem.
The congestion seen in the urban area was of varied types. Encroachment by mobile vendors, petty
shop owners, motor mechanics, vegetable vendors, private vehicle owners, commercial establishment
and residential houses, religious structures and platforms and in some cases by the telephone boxes
and utility lines like water pipeline, water taps and hand pumps are leading to congestion in the urban
areas. Lack of parking space and proper taxi stands have also led to encroachment on the shoulders,
road intersections and sometimes on the existing carriageway itself leading to congestion. Most of the
urban areas are major agricultural markets and the pedestrian traffic is considerably high and it often
spills over to the road therebv slowing down the traffic movement and leading to localised pollution.
Encroachment on the footpaths, covered drains force the road users and pedestnans to resort to parking
on the carriageway and walk on the roads.
In many of the road junctions lack of traffic control leads to congestion and resultant bottlenecks. The
encroachment and lack of traffic control have cascading effect and in the process the entire road length
gets affected. Junction improvements and traffic control can mitigate this problem and also ensure
smooth flow of the traffic.
Keeping the above-mentioned scenario in mind, the consultants classified the degree of observed
congestion on a 5-point scale. These observations along with information on Xwhere bypasses exist or
have been proposed by the given town administration are placed in Table 3-9.
According to the scale used by the Environment Consultants, the degrees of observed congestion are
as follows:
I = No congestion
2 = Solution through simple traffic control
3 = Solution entails traffic diversion like one-way roads
4 = Solution entails traffic management along with traffic diversion
5 = Requires bypass.
3-11                          Scott Wilson / CES i IIIE



Karnataka State Hizhx avs                                         En. ironmental Impact Assessment Repon
Irnpro' ement Project                                                                      Chapter 3
It mav be noted that no bypass for anx of the towns along the roads needs to be considered in the given
Project. It is important to note that the need for bypass was observed only for Gulbarga towvn.
However. this town is now in the process of executint  an approved bypass. The PIUL has requested the
PCC to explore the feasibility of Bypasses in Bijapur and Gulbarga in Phase-ll of KSHIP so as to offer
better connectivity to the project routcs and other State and Natlonal Highwaays.
Table 3-9: Urban Congestion and Proposed Bypass
I Route    NIame of Town       Order of    If Bn Pass    Status of          Remarks
Congestion    Proposed    Proposal
I     Manvi                   I            No       Nil          No bypass required
Sindhnur               2            No       Nil          No bypass required
2                                                                No  bypass  required.
Gangawati              2            No       Nil          Route- 2 within town
has divided carriagewav
Shahpur                I            No           Nil      No bypass required.
Route 3 follows a new
bypass with divided
carrmagewav
Gulbarga               5            Yes         Under    8-km is completed; 4-
3                                                   construction  km   is  brought  to
by PWD    formation  level;  for
remaining 4-km of ring
road. land acquisition
notice issued, but the
acquisition process is
not yet complete. This
ring road would act as a
by-pass.
Homnabad               I            No                    No bypass required.
Route 3 follows a new
bypass
4     Bijapur                 2            No       Nil          No  bypass  required.
Widening of ROW
needed
5     Raichur                 I            No       Nil          No bypass required
3-12                           Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Chapter 4
Analysis of Alternatives






Karnataka State Highways                                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                     Chapter 4
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.  ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................. 4-1
4.1.   INTRODUCTION .........................................                                             4-1
4.2.   No PROJECT OPTION ........................................                                         4-l
4.3.   STRATEGIC OPTION STUDY ......................................... 4-1
4.4.   INITIAL PACKAGE OF THE KSHIP ........................................ .                            4-
4.5.   ALTERNATIVES SUGGESTED BY KPCC                     ..                      ...................................... 4-1
4.6.   IMPACTOF WORLD BANK'S CRITERIA .........................................                          4-1
4.7.   DESIGN ALTERNATIVES .........................................                                     4-2
4.7.1.    Route Alternatives .......................................... 4-2
4.7.2.   Alignment A lternatives .... ...................................... 4-2
4.7.3.    Bypass Alternatives .................................                                  ......... 4-3
4.7.4.    Cross-section Alternatives .......................................... 4-3
4.8.   ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION                    ........................................ 4-3
4.9.   CONCLUSION .........................................                                              4-3
ToC-I                               Scont Wilson, CES  IIIE






Kamataka State Hthxva\s                                       Enm ronmental Impdct Assessment Report
Impro\ement Prolccl                                                                   Cltapte 4
4.   Analylsis of Alternatives
4.1.   Introduction
The constituent road-links of the KSHIP wvere selected after considering various options as the wvork of
project formulation progressed. The objectixe of this Chapter is to highlight some of the salient issues
considered for exercising options.
4.2.   No Project Option
To examine this option appeared unacceptable. Several reasons were upper most to the GoK. In the
first instance, the State has little resource to maintain the roads, not to mention upgrading these.
Secondly, persistent deterioration of the road conditions made maintenance of regional network of
transport difficult to sustain, notwithstanding the injury caused to the transporter. Hence the need for
this project.
The history of regional economic development in Karnataka reveal that the gains over the past few
decades remained largely confined along the National Highway corridors. At the same time,
investments for newer means for resource use were taking place over wider areas. The State Highways
and some of the Major District Roads, by acting as feeders to the centers of growth located on the
National Highways, were found to be assisting these processes. Hence. the need for establishing
proper feeder roads to the National Highways appeared a reasonable programme.
Under the circumstances, options for searching altogether new alignments to serve as regional feeder
road was not considered. Option was restricted to improve the geometric designs of the existing roads.
4.3.   Strategic Option Studv
In order to formulate a policy for developing an effective network of regional roads, a Strategic Option
Study (SOS) was carried out. The findings from this study forrned the basis for initiating the KSHIP.
4.4.   Initial Package of the KSMIP
Of the roads identified in the SOS Report that would deserve improvement. the GoK chose to examine
the feasibility of 54 road links. their lengths totalling 2490 odd kilometres. The work of ascertaining
feasibility was assigned to the KPCC.
4.5.   Alternatives Suggested by KPCC
KPCC completed the analysis of alternatives through distinct processes. The Environmental Screening
Report identified tvo corridors (no. 10 & 13) in which a stretch of 30 Km were passing through
National Parks in both the corridors. In addition, the Economic Internal Rates of Retum (EIRR)
analysis indicated tiat these two corridors and 3 road-links of Corridor-8 did not justify investments
even for major maintenance. Following a revision of the EIRR in November 2000, the previously
unviable links were considered for major maintenance in Phase II including Corridor 10 and 13. the
stretches passing thrcfigh the national parks have been excluded from the improvement options. The
Sectoral Environmental Assessment was also carried out for the roads selected under upgradation and
major maintenance. The Sectoral Environmental Assessment also considered tw o additional road links
originally listed under Major maintenance for upgradation as a buffer in order to minimise risks on
grounds of environmental constraints.
The KPCC also identified the road links justifying investment for Upgradation as distinct from Major
Maintenance.
4.6.   Impact of *World Bank's Criteria
As a part of the negotiation for loan with the World Bank, it was decided that about 940-km length of
road should be considered for Upgradation and the remaining links for Major Maintenance.
4-1                          Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highx%a%s                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Repon
lmpro%cnmcni Project                                                               Chapter 4
Accordingly, the GoK acted. In the First Phase. 394-km  of road was chosen by the GoK for
Upgradatton and 848-km of road for Major Maintenance. In the Second Phase, the GoK would like to
upgrade 546-km for Upgradation and 429-km for MIajor Maintenance. Henice the total road lengtlh for
Upgradation comes to 940-km and 1277-km for Major Maintenance.
Incidentallv, it may be mentioned that the EIRR analysis done by the KPCC showed that more than
940-km of roads could admit investment for Upgrading. These are given in the First Interim Report.
4.7.   Design Alternatives
The PCC explored a wide range of design options available for both Upgradation and Major
Maintenance. The recommended designs are based on the assumption that the available road
construction materials would have a bearing strength of 10. Otherwise, the thickness of the different
components of the road formation would be made to vary. These are given in the Second Interim
Report.
Arising from the findings of the Environmental Screening Report, the KPCC thought it advisable to
modify the proposed road design in order to minimise felling of avenue trees. In addition, the need for
reducing the designed speed of traffic was accepted in order to minimise the size of land acquisition in
avoidable locations.
It is necessary to mention at this stage that new road projects offer a lot of scope to explore various
altematives in terms of new routes between two destinations, more than one option for the road
alignments keeping in mind various constraints in the proposed alignments. The alternatives also
include possibility of by passes for congested and heavily populated areas or in environmentally
sensitive areas. It is also pertinent to mention here that the magnitude of environmental impacts is very
large in case of new road construction in comparison to upgradation of existing roads.
The project design considered for this project follows the existing alignment of the roads to minimise
land acquisition and social impacts. The deviations from the existing alignment have been necessitated
in certain sections because of the poor road geometry and safety considerations.
Keeping in mind the above constraints the various design altematives explored are described below:
4.7.1. Route Alternatives
Prior to selection for upgradation, the initial set of roads comprising of 2490 kmn were subjected to
detailed economic, environmental and social evaluation and the combined outcome of these studies
were taken into account for selecting the roads for upgradation and major maintenance. The selected
routes for upgradation and major maintenance were also evaluated in the sectoral environmental
assessment and it wvas found that the impacts could be mitigated.
The route altemative issue does not arise in any of the selected corridors as these corridors pose the
minimum of environmental problems and also available Right of Way is more than the other corridors
under consideration forimprovement. The economic activities in these corridors are also very much
developed as the roads pass through the rice bowl of Kamataka.
4.7.2. Alignment Alternativ es
Since the improvements are envisaged in the existing alignments only there are no major alignment
changes in the project. The alignment shifts are very marginal and have been necessitated as already
mentioned in section 4.7 due to poor road geometry and safety considerations. The related land
acquisition for the new desisgn is very marginal. Only 4.67 hectares of private land is being acquired
for the entire project. In stretches where social problems were anticipated, the designs have been
modified accordingly.
4-2                         Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State HtehAavs                                      Enx ronnmental Impact Assessment Report
lmpros cment Project                                                                Chapter 4
The trees that are located in the Corridor of Impact are the only ones that are to be felled. Changing the
alignment due to the roadside trees is a constraint because most of the trees that are coming in the COI
are at a distance of around 3.5m- 5.5m from the centreline. The stretches wxhere there is off centric
COI from the existing centreline. a few more trees on the edQe of the ROW\ are getting affected. The
felling of these trees is inevitable.
No cost effective engineering solution other than embankment raisine- and additional cross drainage
structures could be envisaged as this option has been suggested in lowv lving area that are often prone
to inundation during monsoons and due to uncontrolled discharge of irrigation waters. Moreover, the
roads pass through irrigated areas and additional land acquisition will be an expensive option.
Therefore in areas where embanknent construction is proposed, tree felling is involved.
It is worth mentioning here that on average only 14 trees are being felled per km in the entire project.
The project has a comprehensive tree plantation programme that envisages tree plantation of around
200 trees per kn. On completion of the construction phase, the tree plantation will begin and add to
the aesthetic beauty of the roads.
4.7.3. Bypass Alternatives
As already indicated in Chapter- 3, Section 3.9, the bypass requirement is only for Gulbarga town and
the construction is already in progress. The pollution levels in any of the other town does not warrant
any by passes because only the SPM and RPM component are higher than the prescribed limits and
this is due to the local climate and the poor conditions of the shoulders and debris by the roadside.
Proper road maintenance and traffic management with the active participation of the town
municipality is the solution. High noise levels are a result of the honking of horns, playing of
loudspeakers and generators. In none of the urban and semi urban areas bypasses are required because
of traffic induced pollution. The pollution data on ambient air quality and noise level given in Chapter-
5, Section-5.2.7 is self-indicative of the nature of pollution experienced in the urban areas.
4:7.4. Cross-section Alternatives
The Cross sections considered for the road improvement have been shown in Figure 3.2 and 3.3 of
Chapter -3. These cross sections were designed keeping in mind the minimum road width required as
per IRC standards and also the constraints related to environmental aspects, land acquisition and social
impacts. The carriageway and the shoulder are 12m wide in rural areas and 10 m wide in villages. In
addition to the carriageway, The drains have been proposed of average width of 1.125 m on both sides
of the carriageway in the rural areas and 2.05m width in the villages.
The carriageway is 7 m wide in urban area. The shoulders will be utilised as parking areas. Covered
drains of 1.85m width are proposed on both sides of the road.
The existing alignm,ent necessitated modification in the proposed design in Route 4 because of the
continuous row of avenue plantation on both sides of the road. The cross section was reduced in Route
4 from Chainage Km 15.100 to Km 20.148 because of the avenue plantation. The unpaved shoulder is
excluded from the modffied cross section in order to avoid felling of the roadside trees.
4.8.   Alternative Methods of Road Construction
In the Second Interim Report, alternative modes for road construction have been described. In
Chapter-6, section 6.2 and 6.3 of the Sectoral Environment Assessment Report, some other options
have been discussed.
4.9.   Conclusion
The pointed reference to the diverse criteria used for discovering the alternatives summarises the
processes under consideration.
4-3                         Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Chapter 5
Baseline Environmental Setup






Kamataka State Highwavs                                                                              Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                        Chapter 5
CHAPTER 5: BASELINE ENVIRONNIENTAL SET UP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
5. BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL SET UP .................................. 5-1
5.1. INTRODUCTION ................................... 5-1
5.2.  PHYSICAL RESOURCES .....................................                                                                                5-1
5.2.1.   Phtysiography.5-1
5.2.2.  Geology.5-
S.2.3.  Climare.S-4
S.2.4.  Temerature.r5-4
5.2.5.  Rainfall.S-4
5.2.6.  Direction of Wind.                                                                                                                5-4
5.2. 7.    Ambient Alir Quality.5-4
5.2.8.   AmbientrNoiseLLevel5-14
5.2.9.    Drainage System.5-16
5.2.10. Soil.5-20
5.3 .  ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................                                                         5-20
5.23.1.      Flora  .....................-21 -..............................                                                     .......... 5-21
5.3.2. Fauna .......... 5-24
5.4. HUMAN USE VALUES .....................                                                                                                  5-25
5.24.16      L        ond use.2 ....................                                                                                        5-4
5.5. SOCIALENVIRONMENT                                        ...................... 5-26
5.5.1.   Demographic Fearures.5-26
5.5.2.   Occupational Pattern.5-28
5.5.3. Economic Profile of the Region.                                                                                                   5-31
5.5.4.   Regional and Local Utilities along the Project Routes.5-32
5 .5. 5.     Religious and othler sensinive struturres along the Project Routes.5-32
5.6    . PUBLIC HEALTH .. ........................................................ 5-32
5.7.             A       CCIDENT HAZARD S AND SAFETY .........................................................                              5-32
5.8. AESTHETICS .........................................................      .                                                            5-33
5.9 . SITES OF TOURIST AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTEREST ......................................................... 5-33
TABLES -I : TOPOGRAPHY ALONG THE ROUTES.......................................................... 5-25
TAB  LE 5-2:  GEOLOGY  OF THE STUDY AREA.                               ..........................................................              5-
T         ABLE 5-3: TEMPERATURE RANGE (INENIR E     .........................................................CENTIG.                            5-4
TABLE 5-4: RAIN FALL PATTERN  IN THE STUDYE .........................................................AR.                                         5-4
TABLE 5-5: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NATIONAL) .                                   ......................................................... 5-10
TABLE 5-6: LOCATION  OF  AMBIENT AIReQUALITY  MONITORING STATIONS.........................................................  5-10
TABLE 5-7: AM1BIENT  AIR  QUALITY  MONITORING  RESULTS                                 ......................................................... 5-13
TABLE 5-8: NOISE LEN EL (AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY STANDARDS) .the5-14jc..Rutes........................................ 5-32
TABLE 5-9: AMUBIENT .NOISE LENVELS MEASUREMENT STATIONS.                                 ......................................................... 5-15
TABLE 5- 10:  AMBIENT  NOISE LEVEL                    ......................................................... 5-35
TABLE 5-  T: DRINKING             .ATER- SPECIFICATION- IS  10500: 1991 .                  ......................................................... 5-16
TABLE 5-12: AM1BIENT QUALITY OF SURFACE WATER                                 E   7......................................................... 5-
TABLE 5-13: SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA .......................................................... 5-20
TABLE 5-14: SOIL  SAM PLING  LOC ATION  ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES.......................................................... 5-20
TABLE 5-15: SPECIES OF TRE               ES   IN THE STUDY  AREA .........................................................                       5-21
TABLE 5-416: SOCIAL FORESTRY  PLANTATION ALONG THE PROJECT ROLTE..........................................................  5-24
TABLE 5-17: COMMON WA ILD FAUNA IN THE STUDY AREA  ...............................4.......................... 5-2
TABLE 5-18: LAND USE IN THE STUDY AREA . MONITORING STATIONS ..                                          ................................. 5-25
TABLE 5-19: DENMOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE STUDY LTS .........................................................A.                                  5-26
TABLE 5-20: DEMOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE TOWNS OF THE STUDY .AREA......................................................... 5-27
TABLE 5-21: LITERAC             E STATUS- RURAL POPULATION  IN THE STUDY CORRIDORS.......................................................... 5-28
TABLE 5-22: WORA EFORCE IN RURAL AREA                           ......................................................... 5-28
TABLE 5-23: WORKHRCE RISTIN                          OFAN    TRACTS. ................................................................           5-29
TABLE 5-24: OCCUPSATNI N PATTERN OF MAIN  WORKERS IN RURAL TRECTS ......................................................... 5-29
TABLE 5-25: OCCUPATIOREATRNPOFNMAIN ALWORKERS IN URBAN TR ACETS    .5-30
ToC-I                                            Scott Wilson ,'CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                                                                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                                      Chapter 5
TABLE 5-26: MAJOR FUNCTIONS OF THE TOwNS ............................................................ 5-'1
TABLE  5-27: ARRIVAL  OF AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS  IN  MARKETS ...........................................................                                                       5-31
FIGURE 5-1: PHYSIOGRAPHY OF THE STUDY AREA ...........................................................                                                                          5-2
FIGURE 5-2: GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA ...........................................................                                                                               5-3
FIGURE  5-3: 24  HOURS RAINFALL ........................................................................................................................  5-
FIGURE 5-4: WIND RoSE DIAGRAM  - RAICHUR IMD STATION ......................                                                         ..................................... 5-6
FIGURE 5-5: WIND ROSE DIAGRAM - GULBARGA IMD STATION ...........................                                                           ................................ 5-7
FIGURE 5-6: WIND ROSE DIAGRAM - BIDAR IMD STATION ...........................................................                                                                   5-8
FIGURE 5-7: WIND ROSE DIAGRAM - BIJAPUR IMD STATION ...........................................................                                                                 5-9
FIGURE  5-8: AIR, NOISE, WATER  AND  SOIL MONITORING  LOCATIONS ...........................................................  5-11
FIGURE 5-9: DRAINAGE BASINS OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................................                                                                   5-19
FIGURE 5-10: SOIL TYPE OFSTUDY AREA ........................................................... 5-22
FIGURE 5-1 1: FOREST AREA BY TYPES ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES ...........................................................   5-23
ToC-2                                                       Scott Wilson / CES,' IIIE



Kamataka State HiLghxxas                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 5
5. BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL SET UP
5.1.   Introduction
The study area considered for the project covers a 7-km wide swath on either side of the project routes
following the existing alignment. Information on physical. biological, social environment, human
resources, economic environment, cultural heritage and aesthetics was collated and analysed. Primary
and secondary data were collected on the above aspects. The reconnaissance survey enabled the
consultants to identify the various critical locations where pnrmary data on Air, Noise. Water and Soil
quality were to be generated for impact assessment and prediction. At these locations monitoring of
the ambient conditions were done. All these information together provide appreciation of the baseline
environmental set up.
5.2.   Physical Resources
Physical resources refer to Physiography, geology, climate. drainage system and soil. In the following
sub-sections, an attempt has been made to describe the attributes of the five routes in this regard.
5.2.1.      Physiography
The routes selected for upgradation pass through the Central and Northem Kamataka Plateau. The
topography traversed bv the different routes is noted in Table 5-1 in summary form. The distribution
of physiographic features has been shown in Figure 5-1.
Table 5-1: Topography along the Routes
Route  Location                      Topography
1    Kalmala- Sindhnur             Gently undulating terrain
2    Sindhnur- Budugumpa           Gently undulating terrain with residual hills
3    Hattigudur-Naubad  junction, Mixture of flat and undulating terrain
Bidar
4    Bijapur-Tikota                Near flat rolling terrain
5   I A.P. Border- Kalmala junction  Gently undulating terrain
5.2.2.      Geology       4
The geological formations in Kamataka are of many types and the project routes pass through varied
rock types. The major types of lithology are the Gneiss complex consisting of granitic and
granodioritic composition. Kolarian schist formation consisting of gold beanrng belts. the Bhima
formation consisting of fossil free sandstone, limestone and shale and the Deccan Trap consisting of
Augite-basalt. The geological formations along the routes have been listed in Table 5-2. In Figure 5-2.
the distribution of geological formations has been shown.
Table 5-2: Geology of the Studv Area
Route          Location          Geological Formation          Rock Type
I    IKaiala- Sindhnur       Gneissic  complex  and  Granite. schist-quartzite
__________             Gold Bearing Schist
2      Sindlnur- Budugumpa  Granitic             and  Granite
Granodioritic Rocks of
Gneiss complex
3      Hatntzudur-Naubad      Bhima  formation  and  Limestone. Sandstone and
junction. Bidar       Deccan Trap             Basalt
4      Bijapunr-Tikota        Deccan Trap             Basalt
r     1 A.P.Border- i,almala   Gneissic  complex  and  Granite. Schist-quartzite
l________  _______________ Gold  Bearing  Schist
5-1                         Scott Wilson, CES 1IIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                         Chapter 5
Figure 5-1: Physiography of the Study Area
Packages for UpGradation-Phase I
-4
-52
Major Maintenance
Physiographic Regions
j I  Coastal i>(1 
ElC Malnad                      Irf                                      _     
El Northem Maidan
1I Souther Maidan
5-2                                  Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnaraka State Hsghwavs                                                             Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                  Chapter 5
Figure 5-2: Geology of the Study Area
Project Routes
-1
- 4                                    1
5
Major Maintenance
KARNATAKA
GEOLOGY                                                                N
3                            17
Andhra
Pradesh
,, -q      m       -.---'              _               :  3.,INDEX
.Tertiar to Ouate,mry
2   12            * N~~~Dccan Tr o 
~~~;*  t_Crait 
*Grsuaiite, 
Dh&r", ~  ~        ~      ~       '            *,,sri
\     COarse SchiSt Dot
C   ~     ~        ~        ~       ~        ~       COii~~~~~~tre&.v Group)
(Ba_ hilran Group)
s-.        _       Chars..b Schist Sl'i 
;DUIItB                                                            Gold-Searing iStat Sats
V ~     ~      ~       eVnar                                     =tKolor Type)
Older Graiu comptx
I  -  S 'S C _ &0FCl*ll~~~~~~~~~~~~ne                               t   Srurrskabh 
Sw .    ,I  ,g  Yv.  .a;          .
0               ~~~~~~~"Q irQ
' a.rgslove
2      _  , F  r Maf e.,Nd. . 
2>   tR INDIA                                                              ITmil Nadu
Scott Wilson  CES 7 IIIE



Kamataka State Hi2hw%avs                                  En,ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Chapter 5
5.2.3.      Climate
The climatic zone known as the North Interior Kamataka zone covers Bidar. Bijapur, Gulbarga and
Raichur districts. This zone experiences semi-arid tropical steppe type of climate. Here rainfall
declines from east to west. This region is hot with temperature ranging between 45°C in the summers
and a low of around 100 C in the winters. The meteoroloeical parameters influencing the climate and
having a bearing on the road environment are discussed in the following sections:
5.2.4.      Temperature
In Table 5-3 annual variation in temperature has been shown.
Table 5-3: Temperature Range (in centigrade)
Route         Location            Mean          Mean           IMD Station
Maximum       Minimum
I    Kalmala- Sindhnur          42.2           14.8            Raichur
2     Sindhnur- Budugumpa       42.2           14.8            Raichur
3     Hattigudur-Naubad          42.8          11.7       Gulbarga and Bidar
junction. Bidar
4   I' Biiapur-Tikota           41.9           12.2            Bijapur
5    A.P.Border- Kalmala        42.2           14.8            Raichur
5.2.5.      Rainfall
The principal part of annual rainfall is experienced during the Southwest Monsoon, covering the
period between June and September. Some amount of rainfall is also available during the Northeast
monsoon. In Table 5-4. the rainfall pattern and the expected maximum rainfall in 24-hours along the
routes has been showvn. Regional variation of maximum rainfall in 24-hours is presented in Figure 5-3.
Table 54: Rainfall Pattern in the Studv Area
Route    Annual Normal Rainfall   24-Hour Maximum Rainfall
l     640 mm                    280-320 mm
2      523-582 mm               280-320 mm
3      697-941 mm               280-360 mm
4     1565 mm                   280 mm
5      688 mm                   320-360 mm
5.2.6.      Direction of Wind
Kamataka is generallv wvindy. Wind velocity increases during the penod of Southwvest Monsoon. often
reaching 60 km per hour. The dominant trend over the year is however from Southwest to Northeast.
In most of the places the wind direction changes to some extent in the course of the day. Annual Wind
roses for Raichur. Gulbarga. Bidar and Bijapur IMD station are shown in Figure 5-4 to Figure 5-7.
5.2.7.      Ambient Air Qualitv
Care was taken to monitor the ambient air quality alone the routes in the month of February 2000. The
procedure used and the findings from monitoring are narrated below.
Ambient Air Oiialitr Sta,idards: The Central Pollution Control Board has specified the Parameters to
be monitored and their permissible limits in the ambient air depending upon the location of the
proposed project. The various parameters considered for ambient air quality monitoring are Suspended
Particulate Matter (SPM). Respirable Particulate Matter (RPM). Oxides of Nitrogen (NO), Sulphur
Dioxide (SO.). Carbon Monoxide (CO), Hydrocarbon (HC) and Lead in air (Pb). Table 5-5 lists the
standards prescribed tor Ambient Air Quality. Limits have not been prescribed for hydrocarbons in the
ambient atmosphere. These have been used as datum for ascertaining the quality of ambient air in the
project area.
Scott Wilson, CES. IIIE



Kamataka State Hlih\xavs                                                  Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                    Chapter 5
Figure 5-3: 24 Hours Rainfall
Project Routes
1-4                                t
5
-         i   Major Maintenance
ISOHYETS iN mm                                                                                     C   I tIlE
;  _                            ,                                  r~~~~~~~~~~~
t)t '~~q               ALTW>'
. ,
.Ab L
5-r5                               Scott Wilson /CES /IIIE



Kamataka State Highwavs
Improvement Project                                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Chapter 5
co E
E  n
CDO
0
LU~ ~~~~~~u
w                                                          w
z                                                          co
0
a   uCo /o a/    -
ctn                                 NN  
U~~~~~zU
Figure 5-4: Wind Rose Chart Raichur
5-6                                Scott Wilson/CES/IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                Chapter 5
N  't
E(I
E   m
co L)
coo
C,)
L.
0 co
00 v
w
zC,
o~~~                                                 o O
o                   /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ic
= U 
(N      ° 04s 
z                                                                                   0~~z 
Figure 5-5  Wind Rose Chart Gulbarga
5-7                                Scott Wilson/CES/IIIE



Kamrnataka State Highways                                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Pro-ject                                                                                       Chapter 5
I o
[L                                                  LL~~~~~~~~~L
in
Ic
Z                                                               Co
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
'U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L
Figure 5-6: Wind Rose Chart Bidar
5-8                                   Scott Wilson/CES/111E



Kamataka State Highwavs                                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                      Chapter 5
0E-
X
Co
w   c
76
Z.,                                                            UJ
0                                                0
(U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L
0
3      Lo     o       uz                    C)\
0  i
Figure 5-7: Wind Rose Chart Bijapur
5-9                                   Scott Wilson/CES/IIIE



Karnataka State Hieh''a\s                                                    En\ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Proiec                                                                                        Chapter S
Table 5-5: Ambient Air Quality Standards (National)
Pollutants            Time-W\eighted                Concentration in ambient air
Average         Industrial   Residential, Rural &      Sensitive
Area           other Areas            Area
Sulphur Dioxide(SO-            Annual Avg.         So(ugz'm3     6042/m3                 ISuizrm3
24 Hours'*         Il'0jagm3    S0pglm3                   30lagim3
Oxides of NitrooentNO(j       Annual*             S0pgm3        60upgm3                I5 pg/m3
24 Hours**          120pizim3    SOpg/m3                  304tg/m3
SPM                           Annual               3604i,/m3     140gg/m3                70jg/m3
24 Hours**          500pg/m3    2003Lg/m3                 I 00pg/m3
RPM(Size<0IjOm)               Annual               120pg:,m3    60pg/m3                 504tg/m3
24 Hours*"          150iag/m3    I00jtg/m3               75.ig/m3
Lead(Pb)                      Annual               lpg'm3       0.75pg/m3               0_5 pgm3
24 Hours*"          1.5juagm3     Iug/m3                  0.754g/m3
Carbon MonoxidelCOl           8 Hours**            5mg/m3       2mgim3                   I mg/m3
I Hour             IOmgrnm3     4mgim3                  2mg/m3
Source: Standards for liquid effluents, gaseous emissions. automobile exhaust, noise and Ambient Air Qualitv.
Central Pollution Control Board.PCL/4/1995-96
* Annual Arithmetic Mean of minimum 104 measurements in a vear taken twice a week 24 hourly at uniform
interval
** 24 hourlyiS hourly values should be met 98% of the time in a vear. However, 2% of the time, it may exceed
but not on two consecutive davs.
Location: The sampling stations were selected after considering the spatial relationship of the various
land uses with the existing alignment of the highway in accordance with IS Guidelines (BIS: 5182.
1985). Due consideration was given to the traffic density in the area and the commercial activity in the
region. Suitability of fixing the High Volume and Respirable Dust Sampler at the chosen location in
relation  to  the meteorological parameters was also  examined. Every  location  is on  doovn-wind
direction. The Sampling Stations were selected to cover the densely populated urban, semi urban and
rural areas. The locations of Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations with the criteria used for their
selection are shosxn in Table 5-6. The locations of monitoring stations have been sho'vn in Figure 5-S
and Appendix 5-1.
Table 5-6: Location of Ambient Air Quality N1onitoring Stations
Route  .Nlonitoring   Location by    Distance from        Height from          Description of Location
Station      Chainage         Centreline       Ground level
(K(m)     1      (m)                (m)
2A         AQ- I      Sindhnur              15                 6 6        On RHS Commercial area. sloxx
2.(654                                              traffic  mox ement:  unauthorised
______________ __ __ _parking and pedestrian movement.
2A         AQ-2       Ganeas%atir           I S                           On LHS. Junction point of road
Sii7S5                                              towards Sindhnur and Linizsuour.
* .                                                       Congested    area   w ith   dust
cntrainment  and  slo\w  trat'fic
I         I_________   _____________________________   _________________   ______________ _ n m o v em ent.
313   | A()Q-    * Je\ are                  20        T       6           On  RHS.  residential  structure.
0.20S                                               Semi-urban  area  with  mediuLim:
Ivehicular moxvcment.
SE        AQ-4       Homnabad               20       i        5           On LHS. Rcsidential structure. Lot
unction      .                                     of commercial actiity and hca\N
(1o2                            f                   traffic in the arca.
4    1   AQ-5        BiapLIu                IS                (          On  RHS.  residential  structurc.
2.2   ,            l                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~Semi-urban   area    w ith  hcj% ! 
Iehicular no\mcenti.
A\Q-04     Shaktinaar.           I 1                           On LHS. commercial structurc: bar I
RTPS          I                 [                   and rcstaurant. Industrial area x\ ith
4.S 1S9                                             heavy  traf'fic  movement.  Arca
!(cncral Iy \ er% x indv
Note: RHS = rinht 11a1d .  LHS  Lft-ci hand side RTIPS: Ralcilulr Themilial Powser Station
5-jII                                Scott Wilson  CES  IIIE



Kamatakla State Highways                                                   Environmental Impact Assessment Rcport
Improvement Project                                                                                     Chapter 5
OAir          Figurc s I j: Air, Noise, Water and Soil Monitoring Locations
*Soil
AWater
Legend For Phase-I
Upgradabon                                                  f
Major Maintenance
40~~~~~~~~
*; S                            S
5-11                                Scot  ilson / CES/IIIE



Kamaiak-a State Hleh%va\s                                      EnN lronmcnal2 JInp3ct Assessmcnt Repon
Improv ement Proiect                                                                   Chapter 5
Sampling and Testing Methods: The measurement techniques emploved for carrying out the ambient
air quality measurements are outlined belowr in brief.
Suspended Particulate matter (SPM) and Respirable Particulate Matter (RPM) were measured
using High Volume sampler and Respirable Dust Sampler respectivelv by collectina 8 hourly samples
for 72 hours. The RPM was collected on EPM 2000 Filter paper.
Sulphur Dioxide was measured by employing the method prescribed in IS: 5182 Part II. Method II
(Improved West and Gaeke method) and 8 Hourly samples were collected for 72 hours. SO, is
absorbed in Sodium tetrachloromercurate. The absorbed SO2 is estimated by colour produced when
pararosaniline-HCL is added to the solution. Absorption is measured in a spectrophotometer and
compared with calibration curve.
Oxides of Nitrogen were measured by employing the method prescribed in IS: 5182 Part IV (Jacob
and Hochheiser modified method) and 8 hourly samples were collected for 72 hours. Ambient air is
bubbled through NaOH solution to form stable Sodium nitrite. Nitrite produced is determined
colorimetricallv with phosphoric acid. sulphanilamide and NEDA reagent.
Carbon Monoxide was measured as per IS: 5182 Part X. Ambient air sample was collected in a
sealed rubber bladder fitted with an air valve. Subsequent analysis is done at laboratory using Gas
Chromatography technique.
Hvdrocarbon was analysed as per IS: 5182 Part XVII. Ambient air sample was collected in a sealed
rubber bladder fitted with an air valve. Subsequent analysis is done at laboratory using Gas
Chromatographv technique.
Lead in air was analysed by collecting the sample in EPM 2000 Filter paper. The filter paper
containing particulate is leached in nitric acid and filtered. The solution is made to a known volume
and aspirated in to the air/acetylene flame. The standard solution is prepared in a similar manner and
readings are taken at 217 nm.
Ambient Air Qualitv M1onitoring Results: The ambient air quality monitoring results are presented
in Table 5-7. The maximum, minimum and average values otf each parameter for each of the
monitoring locations are presented in the table. The major findings are brietly noted as follows.
Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM): The data shows that the SPM level are wvithin the prescribed
limits of 200 ptg m3 for residential areas in AQ-3. AQ-4 and AQ-5. The SPM  level in AQ-6 is well
within the limits specified for industrial area i.e. 500 p/img-' and in fact is comparable with that otf the
residential areas. The SPM level in AQ-1 and AQ-2 is very high and beyond the prescribed limits of
200 pjigm3. This mav be attributed to the fact that both these monitorint stations are located in the
business hub of the town. In addition to the slow movement of traffic and pedestrian traffic dust
entrainment due to the damaged condition of the carriageway and broken and degraded earthen
shoulders also contribute to high SPM concentration. Localised wind pattern and velocity and drifting
nature of the soil also contribute to the high levels of SPM in the area.
Respirable Particulate Matter (RPM): The data shows that the level is within the prescribed limits of
100 ptg/m3 for residential areas in AQ-3. AQ-4 and AQ-5. The RPM level in AQ-6 is well within the
limits specified for industrial area i.e. 150 p g/m3. The RPM level in AQ-1 and AQ-2 is very hieih. this
may be attributed to the fact that both these monitoring stations are located in the business hub of the
town. In addition to the slow movement of traftfic and pedestrian traffic dust entrainment due to the
damaued condition of the carriageway and broken and degraded earthen shoulders also contribute to
5-12 I'Scott Wkilson CES III E



Kmdi iLii .St tcIC hvlmaNs                                                                                                          Environmceltal Impact Asscssmicni Rcpol
111p1i m\ cillment Pl o..ct                                                                                                                                     (Ilhapter S
Tab)lc 5-7: Ambieint Air Quality NMonitorinig Results
AL              SPNI                  I __ SMt   .            NOx                    SO)2                   Ph                    CO                   HC
___      Max   Min   Avg    Max   Min    Avg    Max    Min    Avg__ Max   Min   Avg    Max    Min    Avg   Max   Mi    Avg    Max   Min    Av
AQ-1    649    251    467    163    88    1367    17.4   15.2                             11.03   0.055   0.031   0.044  3.43   1.14   2.03   _1 51  0.5   1 02
AO-2    2068   302   1087    694    69    329.6   22.2   14-- 18.17   14.3   8.4  11.36   0.058   0.030  0.042   4.5   1.14   2.29    19    0.                56
AQ-3    155  _ 76   108.3   49  -19    3345    23               111    15.79   14.3   7.1   9.12    0.047   0.029  0.037   3.4   1.14    2.03    1    04   065
AQ-4    170   75   129.4  _64         30'   45.7   23.2   134    1748    14.3   7.3   9.95                                3.43   1.14    2.16    14    0.8   1.08
201    09   1492    68       36    4567    162    95    1291    12.5   5.7   8.01   0.043   0.025 _0.035   343   1.14    2.4    22            1    1 6
AO-6    296    155   2449    110    62_  9122  _19    13.4   1658    16.2   8.8   12.1   0.051   0.027  0.040   4.58   1.14    2.29    1.2   0.8    1 04
Notc: All *alucs In pig/il' exCct (CO in mg/rin  and I lydrocarbon in ppm.
5-Il                                                                  Scott Wilso o  (1I.S / 111k



Kamataka State Hiehsxa\s                                        Envtronnrnial Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protect                                                                     Chapter §
high RPM concentration. Localised wxind pattern and velocity also contribute to the high levels of
RPM in the area.
Oxides of Nitrogen (NO\): The data shows that the level is well within the prescribed limits of 80
Pg/m3 for residential areas in all the monitoring stations. The NO, level in AQ-6 is well -ithin the
limits specified for industrial area i.e. 120 pt-gm3 and in fact is even less than the limits prescribed for
residential areas.
Sulphur Dioxide (SO): The data shows that the level is well within the prescribed limits of 80 p.g/m-
for residential areas in all the monitonrng stations. The SO, level in AQ-6 is well within the limits
specified for industrial area i.e. 120 Pg/m3 and in fact is even less than the limits prescribed limits for
residential areas.
Lead in air (Pb): The lead level in ambient air is well below the prescribed limits of 1.0 pairnm and 1.5
pjg/m3 for residential and industrial areas in all the monitoring stations.
Carbon Monoxide (CO): The CO level on all the monitoring stations are well vithin the prescribed
limits of 4 mg/m3 for residential areas except at AQ-2. The CO level in AQ-6 is vell within the limits
specified for industrial area i.e. 10 mg/r3.
Hvdrocarbons (HC): The HC level ranged between 0.4 -2.2 ppm across the monitoring stations.
5.2.8.       Ambient Noise Level
To deternine the existing Ambient Noise level in the study area extensive noise level measurement
were carried out as per the guidelines of the CPCB and the requirements of the MOEF. The
methodology adopted for the sampling and monitoring and various other parameters in selection of the
monitoring stations are discussed in the subsequent sections. The discussion begins with an
introduction to the prescribed standards of the CPCB with respect to Ambient Noise level
measurement.
Ambient Noise level Stanlards: The measurements should yield hourlv averages during day-time
(0600 to 2100 hrs.) and night-time (2100 to 0600 hrs.) over 24-hours on two days interspersed by a
two-day interval In a given week. These are shown in Table 5-8. These were used as datum to
ascertain the quality of ambient noise in the project area.
Table 5-8: Noise Level (Ambient Air Qualitv Standards)
Area        Category of               Limits in dB(A) Leq
Code           Area               Dav Time        1   Night Time
A          Industrial area              75           _       _70
B      .   Commercial area             65                    --
C'         Residential area             55           __5
D          Silencearea                 50           -40
Note: (1) Davtime is reckoned in between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.: (2) Night time is reckoned in between 9
p.m. and 6 a.m.: (3) Silence zone is defined as area upto 100m around such premises as hospitals.
educational institutions and law--courts. The silence zones are to be declared bv the competent
Authority. Use of vehicular horns, loud speaker and bursting of crackers shail be banned in these
zones. (4) Mixed categories of areas should be declared as one of the four above-melltioned categories
by the competent authority and the corresponding standards shall applv.
Locatioui of nionitoring stations: The Noise level measurements were carried out at select locations in
the routes in the month of Februarn 2000.The sampling stations were selected considering the location
of sensitive areas and receptors like Residential areas. Hospitals educational institutions and
government institutilons like courts and Rest lloLIses. DIue consideration was given to the trailic density
o-14                             Scott \\dlson CES IIIE



Kamataka State Htehwavs                                                 Enx ironmental impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protect                                                                                Chapter 5
in the area and the commercial activity in the region. The average distance of the momltonng location
was about 10-15 m from  the centre line of the carriaaewav. The Sampling Stations wvere selected to
cover the densely populated urban. semi urban and rural areas. The Noise level measurements
locations with their selection criteria are shown in Table 5-9. Figure 5-8 shows the Noise Monitoring
Locations.
Measuremenit Techniqute: Portable sound level meters with a built in capacitance microphone were
utilised for measuring the ambient noise level in the location. The measurements were recorded every
5 minute interval and the equivalent sound pressure level were calculated for 8 hour cycles for 72
hours. The eivht-hour cycles were devised based upon the day and night time duration and the
movement of traffic during the course of the day. The three cycles considered are from 0600-1400
Hours. 1400-2200 Hours and 2200-0600 Hours. The results are shown in dB (A) Leq i.e. indicating the
continuous equivalent sound pressure level in the area.
Table 5-9: Ambient Noise levels MNteasurement Stations
Route/          Noise level       Location      Chainage        Distance      Description of Location
measurement Station                    (Km)            from
Centreline
(m
On   LHS,  Government
Hospital       Sindhnur,
2A          NL-I          -       Sindhnur      2.654            15            Commercial  area,  slow
traffic       movement,
coniiestion   due    to
unauthorised  parking  and
pedestrian movement
On    RHS.   Veterinary
Hospital. Junction point of
2A          NL-2                  Gangawati   50.785             15            road towards Sindhnur and
Linesuour. Congested area
with dust entrainment and
slow traffic movement.
Don Nvind direction
On LHS. in front of High
3C          NL-3                  Jevarzi       0).20S                         School  Semi-urban  area
%%ith medium vehicular
_____________________                             ~~~~~movement
1                                                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~On  RHS. Opposite  the
SE          NL-4                  Homnabad    0.02              15             PWD  Hcst house
junction
On LHS. in the compound
4           NL-5                   Bijapur       1.650           15             of Government Hospital.
l______________  ______________  heav  \  chicular movement
On   LHS.   commercial
iA          NL-6                   Shaktinagar.  4.819           15             structure.  Industrial  arca
i               RTPS                                         with    hea\\    traffic
-   __ ___ ____ _   _ ____ ___ ____ -   _ ____ ___ ___ m o \   cmient
RHS: Right Hand Side. LHS: Lett Hand Side. RTPS: Raichur Thermal Powver Station
Noise level Monitoring Resultts: In Table 5-10, the ambient noise level monitorine results are shovn.
All the values are expressed in dB (A) Leq.
Table 5-10: Ambient Noise level
Noise level    _                             Duration
Mlonitoring      0600-1400 Hours         1400-2200 Hours         2200-0600 Hours
Station                            I                       I
NL-1                             60.04 1                   59. 1                 57.9 
NL-2                              59.9 .                 61.16 1                53.65
NL-'                             59.47                   60.48                    8.15
NL-4                             59.61                   59.47 1                57.61
,N\L-5                            59.5                   59.18                  57.36
Ž- 5 >AScott Nilson CES  IIIE



Kamataka State Hi ehw avs                                       Ervironmental Impact Assessment Report
rnprovement Project                                                                      Chapter 5
Noise level                             Duration
Monitoring     0600-1400 Hours      1400-2200 Hours   i 2200-0600 Hours
Station                                              I
NL-6                         59.93                 59.04                5 56.27
The noise levels ranged bet-ween 57.9 - 61.16 dB (A) Leq. Higher noise levels were recorded during
the daytime and evening hours. Dunng daytime the noise level was below the prescribed limit of 65dB
(A) Leq for commercial areas. The noise level at NL-6 at RTPS Shaktinagar was well below the
prescribed limits of 75dB (A) for industrial area. The noise level was slightly higher than the
prescribed limits during the night-time at NL-1, NL-3, NL-4 and NL-5. The ambient noise level in
these urban centres is high due to the commercial activity going around in the town. The main
contributors to the noise are the roadside shops playing their music systems. the v ehicles blaring their
horns. Lack of landuse control and poor town planning and lax implementation of noise nuisance
control laws by the enforcing agencies have also resulted in congestion. encroachment and unwanted
noise nuisance in sensitive areas like schools and hospital zones.
5.2.9.       Drainage Svstem
The State of Kamataka has two major drainage basins of the Krishna and the Cauvery. The Project
Routes are all located within the Krishna basin. In Figure 5-9, the locations of the major basin and
their tributary basin are shown.
Water Resources along the Project Routes: The project routes cross manv small seasonal and
perennial streams. A very good network of canals criss-crosses routes land 2 which pass through the
rice bowl of Karnataka. The Tungabhadra reservoir caters to the irrigation requirement in this region.
Route 3 passes through the Bhima basin. Besides River Bhima. Karanja and Kagna are the important
rivers in this region. River Karanja supports irrigation in the area. River Krishna caters area west of
Route 4 and it supports imgation. Route 5 starts from the North bank of River Krishna and the river
water is utilised by the Raichur Thermal Power Station at Shaktinagar. Water for construction purpose
can be easily sourced from the rivers and streams that flow through the corridors. The Tungabhadra.
Karanja reservoirs and Bhima and Krishna can ensure adequate vater for construction.
Inundation of roads during monsoons and uncontrolled flow of irrigation water is seen in Route I and
2A. this is mainly in areas where the submersible bridges have been constructed and the existinc
culverts are clogged with weeds and debris. Many culverts lack the adequate vent size to accommodate
increased volume of water because of the run off of the irrigation water from the agricultural fields.
In the irrigated areas seepage of water has led to the collapse of road formations and in the process the
shoulders have become higher than the carriacewav. During rains the Nvater flows on the roads and the
road functions like a drain. Inadequate maintenance of the roads and lack of roadside drains result in
the inundation of roads during heavv rains.
NN ater Quality: Water samplin- was carried out at three locations along the selected routes to assess
the ambient water quality. The three locations chosen for sampling are Potnal halla near Potnal village
in Route 1. River Kauna and River Karania in Route 3. Secondary data on water qualitv of River
Bhima near Ferozabad village was obtained from the CPCB records. Route 3 crosses River Bhima
near Ferozabad. Figure 5-8 shows the water sampling locations.
W\ater quality standard: The drinkinu water standards for potable water are prescribed under IS-
10500: 1991. The parameters and their limits thereof are presented in Table 5-1. These have been
used as datum to assess the quality of water in the project area.
Table 5-1 1: Drinking WN ater- Specification- IS 10500: 1991
Si No     SUBSTANCE/    I   DESIRABLE           PERMIISSIBLE                 REMARKS
i CHARACTERISTIC            LIMIT            LINIIT
i  COEOt R.    H-\ZE    5                25               Extended  ro 2 It To'ic Substance  Arc
'-16                          Scott\ dlson CES IIIE



Kaamaraka Stare Hehs~avs                                                     En% tronmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                       Chapter 5
SI No       SUBSTANCE/               DESIRABLE    I PERMISSIBLE                            REMARKS
I __  j CHARACTERISTIC                   -LI'MIT               Lli\IIT        __j
UNITS .MAX                                                          Not Suspected  In  Absence Of Altemnate
iO D O U R                     |__      _   _    _   _   _   _   _    Sources
2     ODOUR                     Unobtectionable                           aflest cold and %\hen heated
,______  ___________________  ___________________   b)Test  at  seseral    dilution
3     TASTE                     Acreeable                                 Test to be conducted only after safety has
been established
4     TURBIDITY  N  T  U.  5                         10
Max
5     pH value                  6.5 to S.5           No relaxation
6     TOTAL    HARDNESS   600                        600
(as Ca C03 me/lit)
7     IRON (as Fe mg/lit. Max   0.3                  1.0
8     CHLORIDES(as         Cl  250                   1000
m2/lit Max
9     RESIDUAL         FREE   0.2                                         To  be  applicable  only  when  water  is
CHLORINE, mg/lit Max                                               chlorinated. Treated at consumer end. When
protection against viral infection is required.
it should be Min 0.5 mo/lit
10    DISSOLVED   SOLIDS   500                       2000
mo/I. Max
II    CALCIUM  (as Ca ) mg/l  75                      200
,Max
12    COPPER (as Cu ) mg/I  0.05                      1.5
| Max
13    MANGANESE(Mn    i  0.1                         0.3
mo!/I Max
14    SULPHATE (As So4 ).  201)                      400                  May be extended up to 400 provided (as Mg
Max                                                                )does not exceed 30
15    NITRATE (as No3  mg/I  45                       100
I  Max
16    FLUORIDE (as F) me/I.  1.)                      1.5
Max
17    PHENOLIC                  (1                    0.1)002
COMPOUNDS           (as
C6H60H) mo/I Max \
I S    ARSENIC(as As ( .mj'l   0.)                    No relaxation       To be tested whcn pollution is suspectcd
19    LEAD(as Pb) mgl           1)05                 No relaxation
21)    ANIONIC                  0 2                   1.0
DETERGENTS          (as
MBAS )mig/l               _                    _
21    CHROMIUM(as    Cr) |1.0s                        1.10                 To be tested w%hen pollution is suspected
i ______  m!                                                                i
2'2  IM INERAL OIL m2 1          .I 1                 0.03
23    ALKALINITY mu I            211$)                600)                _
Surface Water Quality Results: The results of the water qualitv analysis ol the three stations and that
of Bhima River are presented in Table 5-12. The sampling was carried out in the month of February
2000.
Table 5-12: Ambient quality of Surface Water
Parameters            Units                          Monitoring Station
Route I       Route 3B       Route 3D       Route 3E
l             l              | ~~~~~~~~~~~Potnal Hialla | Bhima    |    lagn2    |   aran ja |
Ph sical Parameters     j
Pona   ala         Bhm            Kan             aaj
Teimperature                   C              26            -27      j      2              29
pH                                     I     S4        I     S       I      S        I     S.   .
Turbidit,                    NTI              2              (i      1        2 
TSS                          mgI    |          ' I  
TDS                     |    m  I    I        )31           l()2                           2431
5-17                               Scoit \Wilson  CES, IIIE



Karnataka State Hichv;avs                                                   En ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                      Chapter 5
Parameters            Units                          Nlonitoring Station
Route I       Route 3B       Route 3D       Route 3E
Potnal Halla      Bhima          Kagna         Karanja
TFDS                         me i           S55             657            320            131
Organic Parameters
DO                           mel             6.6            7.1            6.S            6. 5
BOD                          me/l            8              4.9             9              7
COD                          me/l            i 8            24             20             22
Nitrites+ Nitrates           mg/I            42             43             23             18
TKN,                         meil            1.4           0.92            1.4            0.8
Ammoniacal Nitrogen          mgli          absent         absent         absent         absent
Chemical Parameters
Conductivity             micromho/cm        1590            172            780           378
Total Alkalinitv             mgl           304            300             299            177
Sulphates                    mg2I            42            306             IS             10
Chlorides                    mgvl           162             151            52             16
Sodium                       mgzl            62             85             32             15
Phosphate                    mgil       less than 0.1      0.81       less than 0.1   less than 0.1
Boron                        mg/I       less than 0.1      NA          less than 0.1   less than 0.1
Calcium as CaCO3             me/I           ISO             61             48             96
Magnesium as CaCO3           mg/I           120             86             15Q            48
Total hardness as CaCO,      mg/l           300             147            19S            144
Bacteriological
Parameters
Faccal Coliform          MPN/100 ml         2.3            1.74            2.3           2.3
Total Coliforrn          MPN, 100 ml        1.09           2.585           1.3            7.9
The concentration of all the parameters are well within the prescribed limits of the drinking water
standards. It is an indicator that the stream and river water is still unpolluted and whatever variation is
observed is due to natural causes and seasonal changes due to ingress of imation water. People in the
vicinity use the water for drinking purpose and other household chores.
5-IS                                Scolt Wilson  CES  IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                  Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                   Chapter 5
Figure 5-9: Drainage Basins of the Study Area
Project Routes
DRAINAGE & RIVER BASINS                                          I in4
5
Major Maintenance
MAHARASHTRA
X _ _ XHP~ 
J
ANDHRA PRADESH
LEGEND
PW4hno
~ 19                       Scott Wilson /WCES / tilE



Karmatakla State Hizhw axs                                      En\ ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improv ement Project                                                                     Chapter 5
5.2.10.      Soil
The State of Kamataka has five major types of soil. These are Coastal Alluvium. Latentic Soil, Dark
Brown Clay Soil. Red Soil and Black Soil. Amongst these. the Project Routes do not traverse Coastal
Alluvium and Dark Brown Clay Soil. Within each major group of soils. the relative incidence of
argillaceous and clastic materials varies. The distribution of the major groups of soil along the project
roads is shown in Figure 5-10. The basic features of soil along the routes are given in Table 5-13.
Borrow area material will have to be sourced from approved quarries by the contractors during
construction and in the event that it is sourced from private land then the area has to be restored to its
original status. Necessary conditions xvill be incorporated in the contracts for ensuring the restoration
of borrow pits in a suitable manner.
Table 5-13: Soil Characteristics of the Studv Area
Route           Soil Type                          Description
1, 2 & 5          Deep Black Soil  Deep, moderately well drained. calcareous cracking
clay  to  silty  clay  soils. moderately  to  severely
susceptible to erosion
3                 Medium Black    Moderately  deep, moderately  well drained, non-
(Southem Part)                      calcareous cracking clay to silty clay soils, moderately
to severely susceptible to erosion
3 (Middle Part)  Shallow   Black  Shallow. well drained clay loam. severely susceptible
and 4            1 Soil             to erosion
3 (Northem Part)  Lateritic         Deep, well drained to excessively drained, sandy clay
Gravelly Soil    loam to sandy clay and clay surface soils and sandy
clay to clay sub surface soils. moderately to severely
i__________________________________ Isusceptible to erosion
Presence of Lead in Soil: Soil samples were collected near urban centres and analysed for lead
concentration. The lead concentration in all the stations were below 0.001 mg/gm. The stations where
the samples were collected are shown in Table 5-14.
Table 5-14: Soil Sampling Location along the Project Routes
Route         Chainage                             Location
(Kin)
2A             2.35             Sindhnur. near main circle. opposite Agriculture Dept.   |
3C            0-° 200           Jevargi, near Govemment College
.E             S.)0             Homnabad junction
F5A             4.6               RTPS. Shaktinagar
5.3.   Ecological Refources
The ecological resources reter to flora and fauna and social impacts upon these. The project routes
pass through the eastern and northern region of Kamataka. which are characterised by low rainfall and
prone to droughts. These areas experience and climate. Dry deciduous vegetation and xerophytes
-epresent the tlora in such regions. The rainfall determines the vegetation, open forest canopy that is
verdant during the monsoon turns leafless to avoid loss of water due to transpiration. Over the past fewv
decades these forests are subject to heavy pressure from  firewvood extraction. grazing and fauna.
Introduction of' imration In these tracts has also altered the ecologv of this region and large areas
previously uncultivated and tinder tfrests has bome the brunt of extensive felling and conversion into
agricultural lands. The flora and fauna found in the study area are described below. Figure 5-11 shows
the Forest Area by types along the project routes.
-2 O                         Scott Wilson CES IIIE



Kiamataka State Hlchx\avs                                    Env ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement ProJect                                                                 Chapter 5
5.3.1.      Flora
The area traversed by these roads is poorly vegetated. As a result of the expansion of agnculture and
its allied activities. the natural vegetation in the plains has been greatly reduced. The common species
seen by the roadside are Azadirachia indica (Bevu or Neem), Tainarindids inidlica (Hunsemara or
Tamarind), Acacia niilotica. Acacia ferruiginea. Dalbergia sissoo, Tei-inialia chiebula, Albizia lebek,
Albi:ia amnara, Ficuis benghalenisis. Ficus religiosa and Prosopis juliflora. The forest department
under the social forestry programme has undertaken Acacia autricutlifortits and Eucalyptus plantation.
Table 5-15 lists the various tree species found in the study area.
Table 5-15: Species of Trees in the Studv Area
Scientific Name            Familv             Kannada Name
Acacia auriculifornzis   Mimosaceae            Bangalijali
Acacia ferrugintea       Mimosaceae            Bannimara
Acacia leucophloeae      Mimosaceae            Bilijaladamara
Acacia nilotica          Mimosaceae            Karijali
A cacia latronwon        Mimosaceae            Gonaj ali
Aegle mnarmelos          Rutaceae              Bilipatra
A gave sisalana          Agavaceae             Kattale
Albizia amara             Mimosaceae           Tuzale
Albizia lebek             Mimosaceae           Bage
Albizia odoratissimna    Mimosaceae            Bilwara
Arrocarplus heterophvllus   Moraceae           Halasu
A:adirachta indica       Meliaceae             Bevu (Neem)
Baiibtsa anzndinacea     Gramineae             Bidru
Baiuhiinia racemnosa     Simaroubaceae         Basavanapada
Bombax ceiba             Caesalpiniaceae       Burugadamara
Borassus flabellifer     Palmae                Talemara
Buttea inonospertna      Papilionaceae         Muttugadamara
Borassuts flabellifer    Palmae                Talemara
Calor opis giganteai     Ascelpiadaceae        Besharam
Cassia fistula           Caesalpiniaceae       Kakemara
Cassia siamnea           Caesalpiniaceae       Seementangadi
Cocos imticifer-a        Palmae                Tenau (Coconut)
Dalbergia sissoo         Ebenaceae             White Beete
Delo nix regia           Caesalpiniaceae       Gulmohar
Eutcalyptu s tereticornis  Myrtaceae           Nilgiri
Ficris benghalensis      Moraceae              Aladamara
Ficius i-eligiosa        Moraceae              Ashwatha
Gliricidia sepi lwn      Papilionaceae         Gobaradice
Leautcenia leucoceplhlai  Mimosaceae           Subabul
tlidhiflca               Sapotaceae            Hippe
loi1 gifolia(A J .irdica)
Alan ifera intdica       Anacardiaceae         Mavu
Man ilk-are zapota        Sapotaceae           Chikku
Mich1elia chamnpaka      Magnoliaceae          Sampige
PhY'llanthus e,nblica     Euphorbiaceae        Nelli
Pongainia pinlerata      Papilionaceae         Honge
Ptre-ocat-pts mnarsulpini ll   t Papilionaceae  Honne
____________l_l_ __li_i  _   Mvrtaceae         Nerale (Jamun)
Tanmarindits indica      Caesalpiniaceae       Hunsemara
Tem-minalia chebilda     Combretaceae          Allallemara
Zipi iius nmau-iriana    Rhamnaceae            Elachimara (Ber)
Zziph/ls I-u gosca      L Rhamnaceae           Chotemara
5-'1                         Scott Wilson CES IJJE



Kamataka State Highways                                                          Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                             Chaptcr 5
Figure 5-10: Soil Type of Study Area
Project Routes            I
_2                           i
5 
Major Maintenance           I
KARNATAKA
t                    ~~~~ ~ ~~~~SOILS                              tg t Itstt"lyw8n 
_2A#td anegravelly ioam *o wl
'Traditional nomenclature                                                         -  c  _  3        cly   t
iw.11   non-gravo,11y clav y
5I.L*e,oic gravelly so'h.
?j'~   Alievic.colluvial so.I
_ ."8 P black So)l&
m9.M.dase deep bLack sohlS
_      tC.SiuU,e black Iqa4
11I.Allavio.colluvial.seJa.4o"
t2.MAt=   non.grate"Ey sclay
13. ed gnavelly cnlay soik
t  -_  _    14. otest brto, Sols    I
Is.Rlte grvIHIy cay soils
'  - si  s6- 1tted nt.gvelly cayv so6i
_ i?t.d qiavellsy jom 1o1s
<w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 =WStat ltrn Ia~
-12.coatima asiavui so.lt
20.Rack aflo
1-11 Soils of South Deccan Plate
12-14 Soils of Western Ghats    I
15-17 Soils of Eastern Ghats
18.19 Soils of Coastal Plains
i ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5-x. 
e  > NliF _                              Ta~~~~mil Nadu
6  _                           t                 ! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~km 25  0   50 km
I  z9  ;---  Dtst,bourndary
- 9                  F                  1~~~~~~--  RObJ
NBS5&LUP. R C .  31
5-22                                  Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                              Environmcntal Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                             Chapter 5
Figure 5-11: Forest Area by Types along the Project Routes
Project Routes
FOREST AREA BY TYPES   -2
-4
5
-  S    Major Maintenance
¢              <            ]       Zf                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Moist Deciduous
O        .  soh3                                                               578 (15.0%)
Dry                              Scot Wo CU
; t ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1151(0%)
I t Hm i -RM
E FCttESl _FORM
SD6EW FCXET >^UIE 
0      OS DECIOUOUS FORM_                 w_      t
0    M D ECIDL>US EST
5-23                             Scott Wi lson C CES I I11 E



Karnataka State Highwavs                                         Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                       Chapter 5
There are roadside social forestry plantations on both sides along Route 3 in Link D and E. The
plantation consists mostly of eucalvptus trees for commercial exploitation.
Table 5-16: Social Forestrv Plantation along the Project Route
Route         Tree Species under           Chainaoe
Social Forestry       From       To
Plantation                            I
3D             DeloniLx regia             24.S    24.89
_  Eitcalvptus tereticornis  25.5    26.4
IEulcalyptuls tereticorn7is  27.7    27.2
Eucalyptts tereticorn1is   28.8    31.00
3E             Eucalyptus tereticorntis   3.70    6.50
Eucalyptus tereticornis    19.20   21.40
Eucalyptuts tereticornis   26.4   i27.1
Eucalvptus tereticornis    28.0   l 28.15
5.3.2.       Fauna
The fauna is poorly represented in all the routes. Extension of agriculture has resulted in conversion of
forested/wooded areas into agncultural land and in the process fauna is restricted to common species
like Bonnet Macaques, Langurs, Mongooses. Foxes and Civets etc. Parakeets, Partridges, Pigeons.
House Sparrows, Kites and Crows represent the avian fauna. Cattle egrets, Herons and Lapwings are
seen near the streams. rivers and the agricultural fields. The reptilian fauna is limited to a few snake
species of Cobra, Rat Snake and Land Monitors near agricultural fields and water bodies. The tree
dwelling species will be the one that will be affected, as the tree fellinge will force the fauna to look for
new nesting sites and habitat. But the number of trees affected will be less than the actual trees in the
existing Right of way and adequate design considerations have been taken to ensure that the tree
felling is kept at minimum. All these species are highly tolerant to disturbance and frequently live in
proximity to humans and have well adjusted to anthropogenic interference. Table 5-17 lists the various
wild fauna in the study area.
Table 5-17: Common Wild Fauna in the Studv Area
Common name                  Scientiric name
Bonnet Macague             Macaca radiatza
Common Langur              Preshitis eutelli/s
Small Indian Civet         Viverricula indica
Common Palm Civet          Paradoxutruts hiermnoplhoroditts
Wolf                       Canis Iipus
Golden Jackal              Can is aureuts
Common Monuoose            Herpestus edwhardsii
Indian Fox                 Vulpes hen galenisis
WVild Pij                  Slis scor-ofa
Black naped Hare           Lepots iingricolis
Indian Porcupine           Hvstrix indica
Flyvin  Fox                Pieroputs giganrteus
Pan,o lin                  Manis crassicaudaza
Indian Cobra               Na/a spp.
Rat Snake                  Plvas unicosus
Indian Mlonitor            Varanitis Iengallensis
5-24                          Scott \Vilson CES IIIE



Karnataka State Hieh%wavs                                              Env'ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                Chapter 5
5.4.    Human Use AValues
As per MOEF Guideline. this section deals with land use of the studv area. The land use data of 1999
census has been used for determining the land use in the study area.
5.4.1.         Land use
The principal land use along the corridor is agncultural in all the routes. Irrigation is more pronounced
in Route 1, parts of Route 2. and parts of Bidar district in Route 3 and in Route 5. In certain pockets
depend on ground water for irrigation. Ground water is extracted by using bore wells and wells. Most
of the irrigated tracts are restricted to Route I and 2 about 33.5% and 35% of the land are under
imgation in this region. The land use data indicates that there is not much land to be brought under
cultivation. As the data indicates only about a maximum of 6.84% of land is under culturable
wasteland in Route 3 and Link E offers some chance of cultivation. Land not available for cultivation
ranges between 2-1 1 %No indicating that either the land is barren and rocky or not suitable for cultivation.
The Prosopis juilif/ora growing by the roadside and planted by the forest department is heavily
coppiced and sometimes totally pulled from the ground by the villagers for fodder and firewood.
Localised mining of shale and limestone is observed in Route 3 especially between Shahpur and
Gulbarga. The land use pattern in the study area considered for the vanous routes that covered all
revenue villages falling in a 14 km wide swath is presented in Table 5-18.
Table 5-18: Land use in the Studv Area
(All Area in Hectares)
Route    Total   Forest Area   Irrigated area   Unirrigated area Culturable Waste    Land Not
Area                                                         Land         Available for
Cultivation
Area I In %    Area  | In %    Area    I In %    Area   I In %   Area  In %
Route 1
I 19841   1550   i.29  40205.48  33.55 1684305   5710 12951.75   [.46  6302.85 15.26
Total   119841   1550   1.29  40205.48  33.55 68430.5 _57.10  2951.75  [2.46  6302.85 15.26
Route 2
Link A   103246  11084   i.05  44833.69  43.42 143601.46  42.23  12814.94  1273  7229.4  7.00
Link B  33565    1007S  30.03 2923.48   8.71  9724.24   28.97  1302.31    3.88  64693.9  113.98
Total   136812   11162  8.16  47757.17  34.91 153325.7   38.98  4117.25   3.01   11923.3 18.72
Route 3
Link A   21527    2227   10.34 105.98    049   16421.88  76.29   1135.22   5.27  1636.93 17.60
Link B   50981    1091   2.14  194.73    0.38  45140.53  88.54  1999.68   3.92  2554.8  5.01
Link C   55045    477.9  0.87  750360    1.36  50081.75   90.98   1472.33    2.67  2265.93 4.12
Link D   87521    4197   4.80  3444.69   3.94  67376.96  76.98  6895.86   7.88  5607.07 6.41
Link E   56901    5076   S.92  5285.15    9.29  34792.9   61.15  7113.37    12.50 4303.72 7.56
Total   271975   13068 .14.81  19780.91  13.60 1213814   178.62  18616.46  16.84  16368.5 6.02
Route 4
}34490)               1545.64   1158 131591 0S  19 59  110273    12)8  11326   1384
Total  134490   ]-             545.64   [1.58  31591.08  191.59  11027.3   12.98  11326   13.84
Route5
Link A  128266   1436-4  1 .54  1689]96   12.44 J21995.65  177JS2  11494.9   Is 79 1E54 .3j II61
Link B  120702   11.16  10.73  15154.6   124.90 113213.41  16383  1787.43    13.90 119499 10674
Total  j48968   1588   1 L20  15844.56   11.942135209.06   1         8      |      4959-79 10.13
Source: Village and Town Directory, Census of India. 1991
Substantive point to note in this regard is the progressive reduction of the earlier contrasts noticeable
between the rural and urban habitats. The dynamics of such change needs appreciation in the context
of designing road improvement strategy. In the first instance. irrigation based agricultural growth has
attracted processing industries in the heretofore rural areas. contributing to the formation of nascent
urban settlements. Rice processing mills, cotton ginniniz factories. oilseed expellers. etc., are the
25,5                              Scot \Vilson, CES  IIIE



Kamataka State HiwhN\a\s                                            Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                           Chanter 5
commonest manifestation in this regard. Best examples of this trend are the towns of Sindhnur and
Gangawati in Route 1 and 2 respectivelv. Similarly, urban industrial formations have stimulated the
neighbourhood aencultural economy to shift towards commercial cropping. This is wvidely noticed in
Route 4 in and around Bijapur. Expansion of, fruit orchards. commercial plantations etc.. are the
commonest manifestation in this regard. Each one of these commercial crops is attracting processing
industries.
The consequential need to obtain increasing access to the regional and national markets and demands
for it have been the central consideration of the Govemment of Kamataka for promoting the road
improvement programme. Increased traffic is progressively damaging the structurally weak roads,
rendering them unusable in manv tracts. Hence the need for upgrading these. The road improvement
programme is certainly going to further stimulate the growth of regional economy. One major
consideration in this reg,ard should be to avoid causing environmental degradation. Another matter of
concem is the ribbon development occurring along the roadsides in the urban. semi urban and large
rural settlements. Almost all the roads suffer from encroachment and congestion due to lax application
of land use control laws and poor ROW management by the PWD.
5.5.    Social Environment
Many of the major changes in the environmental set up have been induced by society. Some of these
have arrested deterioration in the ecological systems. Some made the system increasingly vulnerable.
All impulses in this regard originated from within the emerging social systems. This has been true as
much in Kamataka as in all other places of the world.
Propensities in this regard have. however. been different between the societies, govemed as these are
by their respective demography. literacy economic occupations and basic amenities, including the rates
of urban-industrial growth. All these features of the social environment along every route have been
recordcd in the following sections.
5.5.1.        Demographic Features
In Tables-5.18. 5.19 and 5.20. the basic features of demography along the study corridors have been
indicated. Due to the absence of better data, the figures as of 1991 Census of Population have been
used.
In Table-5.18. care has been taken to depict the average situation obtaining within the Study Area.
Table 5-19: Demographic Features of the Studv Area
Location   I   Total     Total male  Total female    Densit! of  Sex Ratio Literac%    SC    ST
Population   Population   Population    Population                     '/,
Karnataka      44977-2011  22951917     22025284         .235       96(    56.4~  16.381       4.26
State                             I
Route I          1706291      857671        844031         1591    9841   21.861   18.82|    14.60
Route 2
Link A           21579o     I11126         113849          305      972    29.82    19.461     6.55
Link B            456-S       23117         22566          1211    976    20.74    15.79       12.90
Total            261468      140238        136415          241      973    28.23    18.821      7.66
Route 3
Link A            246(-       1 25 16       12181          147      973    19.02    24.74       7.67
Link B            729S-       36(I48        34133          13S      926    28.73    20.01       3.5S
Link C            7245S       36S83         35260          120      956    29.45    21.96       3.64
Link D            136330)     oQ968         65132          165      931    32.48    30.23      6.31
5-26                            Scott WVilson CES IIIE



Karnataka State Highvwavs                                           Environmental impact Assessment Report
improvement Project                                                                            Chapter 5
Location       Total     Total male  Total female    Density of  Sex Ratio Literacy    SC      ST
Population   Population    Population    Population                     %         %
Link E            148384       76029         71411          229      939    31.49    20.S6       11.06)
Total      [      454865      232244        218117          1641    939    30.341   23.92        7.07
Route 4    [      337051       174731        162321         1201    9291   35.771   22.021       1.79
Route 5
Link A            27498        13943         12971          101      930    25.69    25.56       0.08
Link B             1249S       6353          6145            76      967    23.69    27.37      2.51
Total             39996       20296          19116           92      942    25.06    26.13      0.84
Source: Primarv Census Abstract, Census of India, 1991
In Table 5-20, care has been taken to depict the situation obtaining with the urban places. Here UA
refers to the urban area, which is larger than the town limits (TL). The data shows that there is a
general tendency towards formation of urban sprawls. Beyond the town limits. ]and use control is less
strict.
Table 5-20: Demographic Features of the Towns of the Study Area
Name of    Route                Population              Density  Sex  Literacy  SC       ST
Town               Total pop      male       Female   Persons Ratio   rate       %      %
Total po  male  Fe        /Sq.km          ___
Manvi            1          28080        14214       13866   11461    976    34.91  11.83   12.18
Sindhnur        1, 2        44375       22846        21529    1432    942    41.22  7.27    6.51
Bijapur-UA       4         193131      100474        92657   2563    922    62.64 11.74    0.66
Bijapur-TL       4         186939       97202        89737   4175    923    63.24 11.35    0.68
Raichur-UA       5         170577       87806        82771    2267    943    50.68  17.44    1.43
Raichur-TL       5         157551       81213        76338   5542    940    51.29 16.04    1.51
Shaktinagar      5          12561        6685         5876    987    879    53.87 14.51    1.95
Gangawati-UA    2           81156       41477        39679   2706    957    40.57  12.61    5.48
Gangawati-TL    2           64843       33161        31682   17200    955    42.19  13.60    4.38
Gulbarga-UA      3         310920       163516      147404   7204    901    57.71  15.69    1.08
Gulbarga-TL      3   1    304099       159881       144218   9462    902    57.87  15.44    1.09
Shahpur          3          24740        12458       12282   6633    986    44.26  9.44    0.65
Homnabad         3          25581        13245       12336  18015    9311   52.16  14.46    5.68
Bidar-UA         3         132408       70200        62208   2814    886    60.69 12.22    1.72
Bidar-TL         3         108016       57241        50775   9670    887,   64.53  11.28    1.58
Source: Primary Census Abstract. Census of India. 1991.
TL: Town Limits. UA: Urban Agglomerate
Table 5-21 would indicate the status of literacy in the rural areas.
5-27                            Scott \Vilson CES, IIIE



Karnataka State Highwsays                                       Enmironmental Impact Assessment Repon
Improvement Project                                                                       Chapter 5
Table 5-21: Literacv Status- Rural Population in the Studv Corridors
Route               Literate Population              % of Female
Literates to Total
Male       female          Total           Literates
1               26909        10391            37300              27.86
Route 2
2A              43092        21247j           64339              33.02
2B               7159         23161            9475              24.44
Total           50251        23563|           73814              31.92
Route 3
3A               3551         1146             4697             24.40
3B               14771        6197            20968             29.55
3C              15073         6268            21341             29.37
3D              31857        12428            44285             28.06
3E              32000        14720            46720             31.51
Total           97252        40759           138011             29.53
Route 4   [      8250         3805[           12055             31.56
Route 5
5A       |       5103         1960             7063             27.75
5B       F       2234          727             2961             24.55
Total            7337         2687            10024             26.81
Source: Primarv Census Abstract, Census of India, 1991
5.5.2.       Occupational Pattern
In Tables-5.21, 5.22 and 5.23, attempt has been made to show the features of the workforce in the
study area as well as their relative incidence between the occupational categories that the Indian
Census Organisation uses. It may be noted that the relative incidence of main workers in all the route-
corridors is higher than that of the State of Kamataka. This indicates that economic functions in these
corridors are more intense than the state.
Table 5-22: Workforce in Rural Area
Route   Percentage of worker categorv to Total Population
Main       Marginal        Non-worker
worker      Worker
Karnataka       38.45         22.73                 38.01
Route I         48.19          2.01                 49.80
Route 2
-A              50.25          2.16                 47.59
2B              48.16          2.36                 49.48
Total           49.89          2.20                 47.92
Route '
44.56          1.95                 53.49
SB113           40.84          3. '5                55.81
S'C             42.59           1.90                55.51
5-2S                          Scott WVilson CES,, IIIE



Karnataka Statc Hlzh\\avs                                            Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                             Chapter 5
Route   Percentage of wvorker category to Total Population
Main   1Marginal             Non-worker
worker  J Worker
3D               39.29            3.25                  57.45
3E               3808             2.30                  59.62
Total            39.961           2.67                  57.37
Route 4          42.531           2.31                  55.16
Route 5
5A               44.66            3.16                  52.18
5B               47.84            1.26                  50.90
Total            45.67            2.56                  51.78
Source: Primary Census Abstract. Census of India, 1991
It may be noted in Table 5-23 that in all the urban tracts within the route corridors the incidence of
main workers is less than the average for the whole state of Kamataka.
Table 5-23: Workforce in Urban Tracts
Name of   Status of         % Main    % Marginal          % Non-
Towns        The Town    Worker          Worker           Worker
Gulbarga           UA             24.07              0.14          75.80
Gulbarea           TMC              2.42             0.14          32.06
Hornnabad         TMC             25.32              0.16          74.52
Bidar              UA             23.86              0.13          76.01
Bidar              CMC            22.40              0.04          77.56
Raichur            UA              27.87             0.48          71.64
Raichur            CMC            27.18              0.40          72.42
Shaktinagar       NMCT            32.00              4.03          67.88
Bijapur            UA             24.85              0.49          74.69
Biiapur            CMC            24.72              0.49          74.79
Gancawati           UA             35.29             0.53          64.18
Ganeawati          TMC             34.55             0.50          64.95
Sindhnur           TMC             34.42             0.12          65.46
Manvi        I    TMC             36.29              0.87          62.83
Source: Primary Census Abstract, Census of India. 1991, UA: Urban Agglomeration. TMC:
Towvn Municipal Corporation. CMC: City Municipal Corporation. NMCT: Non Municipal
Census Town
From Table 5-24. it can be seen that agriculture has the largest share of the main wvorkers in the rural
tracts of all the route corridors. Especially in Route 1. Route 2 and Route 5 the percentage of
cultivators and Agricultural labourers accounts for around 90 % of the total main vorkers.
Table 5-24: Occupation Pattern of Main Workers in Rural Tracts
(In percentage of Total Main Workers)
Location                                          Categories ol IMlain Vorkers
Cultivators Agricultural   Livestock.    Mining and  Household  Other than Construction Trade Transport.  Other
labourers   Forestry,    Quarrying   industrv   Household            and  Storage and Services
Fishing. Hunting                     industrn            Comme communica
and plantation.                                           rce      tion
orchards and
allied activities
Karnataka      34.21       2892           3.57       067         1.86     841         2.48  .t98       2.063   8.84
Route 1        31.201      0244           0.641      (.05;      (154      0.30        J 16    I 53      (39   3.251
~~ -29  ~~~~~Scott Wilson, CES IIIE



Kamataka State Hizh~xavs                                                          Environmental Impact Assessment Reporn
Improvement Proiect                                                                                               Chapter 5
Location                                                   Categories of Mlain NNorkers
Cultivators | Agricultural    Liv estock.  Mining and   Household  Other than Construction  Trade  Transport.   Other
labourers      Forestry.      Quarrying     industrv   Household                  and   Storage and  Services
Fishing. Hunting                             industry                Comme communica
and plantation.                                                       ree       tion
orchards and
allied activities
Route 2
2 A                32.68        5> . '            0.51         0.03          0.67        1.40         0.33    3.07        0.47       3.33
2B                 32.25        57.42             1.24         0.38          1.56       0.83          0.39    3.09        0.38      2.92
Total              32.61        57.70             0.64         0.09          0.82        1.31         0.34    3.07        0.46      3.26
Route 3
3A                46.38         41.27             3.36         0.46          1.71       0.83         0.82     2.36        0.65      2.16
3B                27.72         50.92             2.23         0.38          2.48       1.77          1.60    5.08        1 67      6 14
3C                 28.97        53.82             1.26         0.47          1.19       1.90          1.26    4.60        1.23      5.31
3D                 32.17        4938              1 38         0.32          1.64       1.45          1.38    3.72        2.11      6.47
3E                22.41         I5 .1             1.30         1.03          1.56       4.15         1.11    4.83         2.24      6.63
Total             28.72         51.67             1.60         0.58          1.68       2.38         1.28    4.35         1.84      6.01
Route 4           38.35        47.67             2.64          0.04         0.94        1.16         1.50    2.54         0.96      4.20
Route 5
5A                27.5S         52.64             1.26         0.06         0.91        0.87         0.67    2.80         0.60     12.62
5B                27.S8         t l.62           0.74          1.05         0.22        0.25         0.17     1.59        0.23      6.76
Total             27.51         55.62             1.08         0.39         0.68        0.67         0.50    2.39         0.48     10.67
Source: Primary Census Abstract, Census of India, 1991
From Table 5-25. it can be seen that except for Raichur trade and commerce has the largest share of
the main workers in the urban tracts. Manvi, Gangawati and Sindhnur being the major rice export
centres the percentage of agHcultural labourers is higher than all other occupations.
Table 5-25: Occupation Pattern of Main Workers in Urban Tracts
(In percentage of Total Main Workers)
Town-      Route  (Cultivaiors Agricultural  Livestock.   Mining  House-hold  Other  Constru   Trade and  Transport.   Other
Civic Status                       labourers    Forestry.      and      industry    than     ction    Commerce   Storage   Services
Fishing.   Quarrying              House-                            and
Hunting and                          hold                          conimunic
plantation.                       industry                           ation
orchards and
allied
___________         a~~~CtiVitieS          _ _ _ _ _
Manvi-TMC   I         11 90      42.65         0.76         1.13       2.23       4.32      2.14      15.65        3.02       16.21
Sindhnir-    1.2      II 38      33.40         0.71         0.01       1.nl       6.27      2.68     21.88         ;.0(       17.06
TMC                   ____
Gangaw%at-   2        5.67       33.S4         0.80         0.30       2.20       10.65    267       21.28         5.S7       1 3.72
I JA                                                                    _ _ _  _
Ganga" ati-   2       S.57       S0.5 *        0.75         0.31       2.45       9.94      2.92     24.22         5.'2       14.39
TMCII
Shahpur-     3        I1 08       19.27        2.10         0.11       4.2)9       991      4.63     23.09         5.55       19.91
TMCII
Gulbarga-lJA  3       2S          2.28         2.10         0.22       1.3*0       14 24    8.9(     25.25         11.48     31.45
Guibarga-    3        11.08       19.27        2.16         0.11       4.2')      9.91      4.63     23.09          .55       19.91
onabad-   3           - )         14.21        1.07     .   0 11       I.()5      8.23      4.83     24.46         16.43     2 2.43
TMC                                                                     ___
Bidar-UA     3       4 .68       5.0')         1.41         0.50       1.41       9.45      4.27     21.74         9.95       39.50
Bidar-CMC   3          15       3. 8          11.22        0.12       0.70       S.82      4.1)2    25.50         11 09     42 51)
Bijapur-tIA   4       - 4        4.*3          I o7         0.36       113n)       12.'3    S.54     2(.67         11.29     26.27
5-30                                   Scott Wilson  CES  IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                        Chapter 5
To%vn-    Route  Cultivators Agricultural  Livestock.   Mlining  llouse-hold  Other  Constru   Trade Innd  Transport.   Other
C(ic Status                      labourers    Forestr.     and      industrv   than    ction    Commerce   Storage   Serices
Fishing,  Quarrning             House-                          and
Hunting and                        hold                        communic
plantation.                     industr%                         ation
orchards and
allied
actis ities                              _
Bijapur-CAIC 4      4.6        3.9-4         o6           .         4 44      13 10)    7 u4    27.'4       1 1.51"   266t6
Raichur-UA   5      4.54       7 45         2.00        0.4         I7       5 20     4 1 2    IS.92        6 40      49,44
Raichur-CMC 5       3.98       2.44         2.14       0().50      1.0       5.63     4.4t     20.60        6.91      51.82
Shakitmagar- 5      0 67       1.12         0.20         0.27     0u20        1.17    4.40     3.96         047       87.53
IN MC        _ _ _    _  _ _  _ _ _  _ _  _ _ _  _ _ _ _  _ _  _ __             _ _ _  _  _ _
Source: Primary Census Abstract. Census of India. 1991
5.5.3.         Economic Profile of the Region
Urban outgrowths are occurring as linear extensions of existing towns along the routes. The people are
transforming themselves by using the urban facilities and by participating in the urbanising social
process. The towns play a major role in the development of the adjoining region. They act as
collection point of diverse commodities raised in different parts of the surrounding tracts and the
district. Processing of the same materials take place in these towns and the finished goods are exported
to different centres of consumption. The point to note is that the functions of these towns are
intimately related to, but not exclusively determined by the economy of the immediate neighbourhood.
Table 5-26 lists the major functions of the towns in the routes.
Table 5-26: Major Functions of the Towns
Route       Town                                  Indicative Major Function
As Importer               As Processor             As Exporter
I     Manvi          Paddy, Groundnut and  Raw   Paddv,  Groundnut  Rice, Groundnut oil and
cotton                          and cotton lint      cotton lint
I & 2    Sindhnur      Grocenes,   medicines   and   Cotton   lint  and   Rice,  Cotton  lint  and
clothes                         Groundnut oil        Ground nut oil.
2      Ganyavati    Clothes , Petrol and Diesel      Rice.  Cotton  lint  Paddy, Groundnut oil and
and Ground nut oil.   cotton lint
3      Shahpur       Cloth,  Groceries  and  food  Ginning, RCC poles  Cotton.  Groundnut  and
_____________   grains                        and pipes             Jowar
3      Gulbarua      Groundnut, Sunflower and Rice   Tur dal, Suntlower  Til and Moong dal (Lentils)
oil and  Groundnut
oil                                             l
3      Homnabad    Non-edible oils, food grains and   Soap,  cut  sized   Timber. Soap. Edible and
cloth                           Timber and Edible  n3rn-edible Oil products
oil                  _ _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _  _ _ _
3      Bidar         Food grains. Pulses, Sugarcane    Bidri ware, Edible  Jaegerv, Coriander. Bidri
lIl                              oil. Pulses           ware
4      Bijapur       Jowar, oil seeds and cotton     Edible  oil. Cotton   Cotton  varn. cotton  lint.
lint and cut sized   Edibie oil and Non-edible
l____________________________ _ ltim ber              O il
5      Railhur       Grains, Cotton and Groundnut    Cotton lint. Ground   Rice, Ground nut oil and
l_________________ l_______________________   _________________________________________ nut oil And _vashin-  Cotton  lint  J
I ________   I ___________  _____________________________   soap                                         l
Source: Village and Towvn Directory. Census of India. 1991
Agriculture being the major occupation in most of the roads. it is useful to know  about the crop
arrivals in these towns. Table 5-27 lists the various crop arrivals in the towns falling in the routes. This
is indicative of the economy of the service area of the tovns.
Table 5-27: Arrival of Agricultural Products in Markets
(Amount in Quintals)
Crops        Mlanvi    Sindhnur  | Gangauvati  | Gulbarga                   Bidar    Bijapur I Raichur
| Paddv           604726          5839281          3549248 |                      -           -         1390720  
Rice          l           l               l                       32S970        63883              -     45550
Ž-.' I                              Scott Wilson  CES  IIIE



Karnataka State Hiizhw avs                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement ProTect                                                                      Chaptcr 5
Crops      Manvi   Sindhnur    Gangawati   Gulbarga    Bidar  l Bijapur  Raichur j
Maize                 I            l              l             l         l  33293 lJ
Jowar                 l            I             -       44268      43732     63652      24942
Wheat               - l           -1876           l           - l        -              23009
Tur                 -             -               1     140549    133117           -    83523
Groundnut I                                                  -               100654   292615
Sunflower           -l            - l                    32602            l         l
Cotton              -       159678          19155             -         -   439706   615798
Onions     j        -             -              -       10610          -    17215       15969
Jaggery    j        -                            -            - l  31016           -    24800
Source: Village and Town Directory, Census of India. 1991
5.5.4.       Regional and Local Utilities along the Project Routes
A variety of regional utilities like Telephone poles. Optical Fibre Cables, and Electric Poles,
Telephone boxes transformers etc fall within the ROW. Local utilities like lamp posts, water lines.
hand pumps, and dug wells and bore wells also fall within the ROW. Road widening will involve
removal and relocation of these utilities. The total number of such utilities falling within the Project
Corridor of Impact (COI) is listed in section 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 of chapter 6 of this report.
5.5.5.       Religious and other sensitive structures along the Project Routes
Development of the towns and growth of the rural settlements has seen the coming up of
encroachments within the ROW  in the forms of temples, shrines and mosques. The other forns of
encroachment within the ROW  and public land are sepulchres, mazaar and aralikatte (Platforms
constructed around Ficris religiosa and Acaciaferr7ugin7ea trees). The total number of such structures
getting affected is covered in section 6.3.6 of chapter 6 of this report.
5.6.   Public Health
No major diseases in the form of pulmonary and respiratory trouble due to vehicular pollution and
traffic movement have been observed. The common diseases seen in the area are cases of common
cold, influenza. diar-rhoea, typhoid. dysentery and other gastro-intestinal disorders. Nutrition related
problems and ailments due to old age and infirmity are also observed in the study area. Brain fever had
afflicted the populace in Gulbarga. Raichur and Bellary district. Pigs are the carriers of this disease
and poor community and personal hygiene and sanitary facilities in the urban area result in the spread
of this disease. It should be emphasised that sanitary facility is near totally absent in the entire rural
area.
5.7.   Accident Hazards and Safetv
In most of the stretches the existing road is only a single lane and moreover encroachments and
congestion have resulted in reducing the carriageway width in urban areas and in stretches passing
through rural settlement. Here mention should be made of Route I and 2 where the encroachment by
the casual and migrant agricultural labourers in the form of makeshift hutment and squatters occupy a
good portion of the ROW  and spill over to the carriageway. Such unauthorised occupations pose a
major traffic hazard to the road users as well as to the roadside community. Acute-angle intersections.
lack of proper road siunage and dumping of leftover construction material are common sights on the
roads. Improper storage of construction material also poses a major threat to the road users and cause
accidents. Lack of proper bus-bays and parking facilities also pose a major obstacle to the smooth flow
of traffic in urban and rural areas. The existing bus stops are also not properly constructed at proper
locations keeping in mind the terrain and curve of the road.
One of the constraints in identit'ying the accident-prone locations is the lack of authentic database and
statistics on the traffic accidents that have occurred in the corridors. The consultant conducted specific
junction surveys and visual observations along with discussions with the local populace for identifying
the location oftbus bays. parking facilities and other requisite road fuumiture.
5-32                          Scott Wilson/ CES, 1iIE



Kaamataka State Hichvavs                                           Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Prolect                                                                          Chapter 5
5.8.   Aesthetics
Route 2 passes through the undulating terrain of the Tungabhadra valley and the granite rocks and
boulder formation are the major attractions of othervise a very stark landscape. Monoliths of various
shapes and sizes are strewn across the adjoining land especially between Gangawati and Budugumpa.
Route 3 passes through the North Kamataka Plateau and traverses the hill fomnations of the Deccan
traps between Gulbarga and Naubad and crosses many small streams and two major rivers namely
Karanja and Kagna. The vanety of landscapes adds to the aesthetic wealth of the routes.
Avenue plantations consisting of various trees like Terniinalia cihebila, Dalbergia sissoo. Cassia
species, Azadiraclhta indica, Tarariaidtus indica and many vaneties of Acacia species are the elements
of the aesthetic wvealth of the routes.
5.9.    Sites of Tourist and Archaeological Interest
There are no major sites of tourist or archaeological interest in the project routes except in Route 3E
and 4. A Shiva temple belonging to Chalukyan era in Jalasangi village is a famous tounst and
archaeological site in route 3E. This road on improvement will provide better connectivity to this
important tourist spot. This temple is at a distance of around 8-km from Homnabad towards Bidar.
This temple is at a distance of about 4 Km left of the project road.
Route 4 starts from Bijapur town. The world famous Gol Gumbaz, Ibrahim Rauza and Baraah Kamaan
are the major tourist spots in Bijapur. These monuments are at a distance of about 2-km from the
project route. The only important tourist and archaeological site near the road is the famous
Navaraspur Sangeet Maha] near Torvi village in Route 4. It is at a distance of around 200- m from the
roadside. Ever' vear a State level music festival is held in the precincts of this monument.
On the whole developing these roads will greatly benefit the tourist circuits in Kamataka. as all these
roads will functions as connectors to important tourist spots and places of cultural and historical
interest.
Table 5-28:Places of Tourist Interest in the Corridors
Route      Places of Tourist & Archaeological  Distance   Nearest Town
Interest                from
I_____________________  __________________________  Route
I  Raichur Fort                          10 km         Raichur
2B  Hampi                                 42 km          Hospet
IC  Gulbarpa fort. Hafth Gumbaz           6 km          Gulbarga
3E  Jaisanet Shiv a Temple                 4 km         Homnabad
4  Navaraspur Mahal. Torvi               200m           Bijapur
4  Goleumba.. Ibrahim Rauza               2 km          BijaDur
5  Raichur Fort                           2 km          Raichur
Scott Wilson CES IIIE






Chapter 6
Impact Assessment and Mitigation
Measures






Kamataka State Highways                                            Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                          Chapter 6
CHAPTER 6: IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
6.  IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................................   6-1
6.1.  INTRODUCTION .....                                       .................. .....       . 6-1
6.2.  IMPACTS FROM LOCATION .......................... ....... 6-1
6.2.1.   Impacts of Gravit-i Flowv Irrigation Systems.                                      6-1
6.2.2.   Large Reservoirs behind Dams ............................              :           6-2
6.2.3.  Consequences of Extensive deforestation .6-2
6.2.4. Improper Road Drainage Svstem .6-3
6.2.5. Effects of Growaing Mining Economy .6-3
6.3.  IMPACTS FROM ROAD DESIGNS ........................................... 6-3
6.3.1.   Impacts from Altered Design ..........................................6............................... 6-4
6.3.2.   Impacts from Diversion from Current Use of Land .6-4
6.3.3.   Impact on people due to land acquisition and displacement .6-5
6.3.4. Impacts on Regional Utilities .6-6
6.3.5. Inpacts on Local Utilities .6-6
6.3.6.  Impacts on Local Religious Stuctures. .6-7
6.3.7. Impacts on Other Community Assets .6-7
6.3.8. Impacts on Avenue Trees .6-8
6.3.9.   Impactsffrom the Clhoice of Construction Materials..................   .................. 6-10
6.3.10.  Accidents and Road Safety ....................................                    6-10
6.4.  IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION .....................................................     . 6-11
6.4.1.   Impact on Land Resouirces ..............................                          6-Il
6.4.2.   Impact on soil qualin .............................. 6-12
6.4.3.   Impact on water resources .............................. 6-12
6.4.4.   Impact on water qualih' .............................. 6-12
6.4.5.   Impact on Air Qualin .............................. 6-12
6.4.6.  Impact on  Noise Leve l ..............................                             6-13
6.4.7.   Impact on Biological Environment .............................. 6-13
6.4.8.   Impacts fromn Sanzitation and Waste disposal .............................. 6-13
6.4.9.   Othter impacts ..............................                                     6-14
6.5. IMPACTS DURING OPERATION PHASE ..                                   .                   6-14
6.5.1.   Impact on Land Use ...................... 6-15
6.5.2.   Impact on Air Qalit ...................... 6-15
6.5.3.   Impact on Noise leel .. ......................                                    6-16
6.5.4.   Imnpact on Ecological Resources ...................... 6-17
6.5.5.   Accident Hazards anid Safet ...................... 6-17
6.5.6.  Aesthetics ......................                                                  6-18
6.6. CONCLUDING OBSERVAION .. .                                                              6-18
TABLE 6- 1: MAGNITUDE OF INIPACTS FROM ALTERED DESIGN .                                          6-4
TABLE 6-2: EXTENT OF LAND ACQtUISITION .                                                         6-4
TABLE 6-3: PAFS AND PAPS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                                             6-5
TABLE 6-4: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS ON REGIONAL UTILITIES .                                         6-6
TABLE 6-5: MAGNITUDE OF INIPACTS ON LOCAL UTILITIES .                                            6-6
TABLE 6-6: LOCAL RELIGIOUS STRICTURES FALLING IN THE CORRIDOR OF IMPACT .                       6-7
TABLE 6-7: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS UPON OTHER COMMUNITY ASSETS .                                    6-8
TABLE 6-8: MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS FROM FELLING OF AVENUE TREES .                                   6-8
TABLE 6-9: SPECIES WISE NUMBER OF TREES IN THE PROPOSED CORRIDOR OF IMPACT .                     6-9
TABLE 6-10: PROPOSED BUS BAY LOCATIONS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                              6-1l
TABLE 6-1 1: EMISSION FACTORS O [ DIFFERENT VEHICLES (G/KM) .                                  6-15
TABLE 6-12: POLLUTION LOAD OF POLLUTANTS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTES .                            6-16
TABLE 6-13: PREDICTED NOISE LEYIELS (L) .                                                      6- 17
TABLE 6-14: No PROJECT AND UPURADATION SCENARIO ASSESSMENT .                                   6-19
ToC-I                            Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Kamnataka State Hwhxwavs                                        En% ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                      Chapter 6
6.   Impact Assessment and Mitigation Measures
6.1.   Introduction
Roads may cause negative impacts upon environment in manv different wvavs. The objective of this
chapter is to discern those negative impacts that are contextuallv possible in the project under
consideration and to suggest the required mitigation measures. Care has been taken also to identify the
prospects of positive impacts and of the measures that are likely to enhance the quality of the given
environment.
Road development projects generally cause impacts in four specific situations. These are
*  Impacts from Location.
*  Impacts from Project Design.
*  Impacts during Construction. and
*  Impacts when the Road becomes Operational.
6.2.   Impacts from Location
It has been mentioned earlier that the objective the KSHIIP is to improve many different road links.
which are distributed across the State of Kamataka. Whatever impacts these roads might have had
caused initially upon environment now appear as more or less adjusted. However, fresh impacts upon
the environment can happen when these roads are redesigned for reconstruction. The nature of these
impacts shall vary over tracts notwithstanding the similarities in the construction-designs, since the
environmental settings vary between these road links.,
The pavement conditions of the existing roads indicate that these are damaged. Altered hydrological
regimes are the substantive causes of deterioration of roads. In addition. use of over loaded vehicles
together with lack of regular maintenance has contributed towards deterioration of pavements. Social
actions taken over different parts of Kamataka subsequent to the time of initial construction of these
roads are the reasons behind the observed alterations in the hydrology. The major features of social
action causing alterations in the hydrological regimes appear to suggest four specific processes. These
are
*  Improper practices in the command areas of gravity flow irrigation,
*  Formation of large reservoirs large dams for moderating the seasonal variation in rainfall,
*  Extensive deforestation,
* Improper road drainage systems, and growing mining economy.
The products of the above noted social processes should be appreciated in order to identify the
appropriate mitigation measures.
6.2.1.       Impacts of Gravitv Flow Irrigation Svstems
All major command areas of Kamataka. as in many other places of India. function through
uncontrolled delivery of wvater without laying proper drainage facilities. This leads to the rise of
ground water table above the level that was assumed in the original road design for the sub-grades. In
some extreme cases, the excess water from the nearby agricultural fields overflows across the roads.
Both these situations cause damage to the road-pavements on account of damaged sub-grades.
Decidedly, the road engineers have not created the problem. Nevertheless, they carry a responsibility
to appraise the appropriate quarters of the GoK and to assist the relevant department(s) to install
proper drainage facilities to safeguard their assets and to reduce frequently recurring costs of repairing
the roads.
While this is the necessarv step to secure permanent solution of the problem. the results of such
counselling may not be forth coming. It will take time to yield dividend. The available mitigation
6.-i                          Scott Wilson/ CES, IIIE



Karnaraka State Hichwavs                                        Enwironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protecr                                                                      Chapter 6
measure. therefore. is to raise the height of the so affected roads to save the sub-grade from being
contaminated bv groundwater.
The tracts suffenrng from such problems are found in Routes 1. 2 and 3 as also to limited extent in
Route 5. The magnitude of requirement of embankment raising in these Routes has been indicated in
Table 6- 1.
6.2.2.       Large Reservoirs behind Dams
Kamataka is studded with reservoirs created by damming rivers. These reservoirs are critically
important for obtaining agricultural development based on irigation. and for sustaining cities,
industries and mines. In hard rock terrain. ground water stock is poor and cannot sustain these
economic functions. The reservoirs have also become useful to moderate floods. These are necessary
for the region.
These reservoirs have set in changes in hydrological regimes in many tracts. Seasonal rhythm of
rainfall and run off from the respective catchment areas is reflected in the fluctuations of the water-
spread areas of these reservoirs. Several consequential effects of this are discemible within the
neighbourhood drainage systems. Smaller tributaries entering the reservoir have to face seasonal
variations in their respective hydraulic gradients. Increase in the water spread area of a given reservoir
cause backward rising flood hydrographs in these tributary channels. If there happens to be a road
passing through so affected area, the structure gets damaged. especially the cross-drainage facilities,
often leading to their collapse.
None of the Project Routes considered in this EIA Report, however, suffers from this problem.
6.2.3.       Consequences of Extensive deforestation
A significant part of the spread area of the forests in Kamataka has been converted into other uses, like
agriculture, irrigation infrastructure, mining, etc. Along with it the age-old practices of felling of trees
have continued to meet the rural energy demands. This has caused faster run off. rapid denudation of
soil cover, changes in the channel shapes due to deposition of larger quantities of transported
materials. deepening of channel bottoms. etc. In several places. the foundations of the cross-drainage
structures have been exposed by the deepened channels or are eroding the nearby banks due to changes
in stream course consequent upon sedimentation on their beds. None are welcome signs for
maintenance of roads. Rehabilitating the forest cover in the catchment area and armnouring the channel
beds at the sites of the cross-drainage structures appear to be the required mitigation measure.
This problem is manifested along all the routes. The Departments of the GOK other than the PWD can
effectively execute the mitigation actions suggested above.
In addition the PWD has envisaged a comprehensive tree plantation programme along the road and has
also made budgetarv allocationl for taking up afforestation programme in the degraded forestland in the
vicinity of the project corridor in due consultation and participation of the State Forest Department.
The present tree plantation programme involves planting 200 trees per krn. 100 trees are to be planted
per km on either side of the road with a spacing of 10 m between each tree. The tree species include
local and indigenous species like Aiadirachlta indica, Tamna,i,i,dues indica. Mlailgifera indica, Acacia
niilolica, Acacia auriciliformiis. Albi_ia lebek. Ficuts spp., etc. Fast growing species like Gliricidia
sepiwdnl. Dalbergia sissoo etc are also being considered in the plantation programme. Adequate tree
guards in the form of a brush Nxood fence and branches of Prosopisfjiflor7a wvill be made.
The afforestation programme can be taken up in Route 2B, 3A. 3B and 3E. The adjoining forest land
in the vicinity of these roads is shown in the Table---.
A second tier plantation consisting of Prosopis juli0floa/Euphol-ia tiniricalli will be planted adjacent to
the tree line. This shrub belt w ill function as a dust and noise barrier. Adequate budgetary allocation
has been made tor the plantation and subsequent maintenance of the plantations.
6-2                           Scott Wilson / CES  tIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                        En% ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                    Chapter 6
Plantations in the rotary of major intersections will also be undertaken for increasing the aesthetics of
the surrounding area.
6.2.4.       Improper Road Drainage Svstem
The carriageways in most of the project roads appear to act as drains. This has happened because the
shoulders have become higher than the carriageway levels. It is important to note that nearly all parts
of Karnataka are windy and suffer from aeolian erosion. especially during dry weather months. On the
earthen shoulders, many types of shrubs grow. These arrest the moving dust and in time raise the
shoulder height.
Regular grubbing and dressing of earthen shoulders to establish a gentle slope away from the
carriageway can be an effective mitigation measure. This has been taken care of in the proposed road
designs.
Altematively, paved/hard shoulders should replace the earthen shoulders.
6.2.5.       Effects of Growing Mining Economy
Kamataka is rich in mineral resources and building stones. These deposits are mostly associated with
the Dharwarian petrology, which covers a major part of Kamataka. This increases the load of
suspended particulate matter in and around the mines. In addition, road-transport is used for
transhipments of the extracted materials to the consuming areas.
The truckers have the habit of driving over loaded carriages. This is reflected in the axle-load survey
findings placed in the First Interim Report. The over loaded trucks damage the road formations,
leading to increased-maintenance costs.
The trucks carrying limestone traverse Route 3. especially in routes 3B, 3C and 3D. Some parts of all
other routes are not totally free from this problem as these link the source with consumer-locations.
Route I and 5A act as connectors to the consumer- locations, especially Granite that is mined in and
around Mudgal Town which is around 40 km from the project routes utilise the project comdor for
transportation of the stone blocks to Raichur and adjoining areas of Sindhnur and Gangavati towvns.
The GoK is taking various measures to control pollution from mining operations. One could also
consider providing higher than the prescribed loads for two axle carriages in the reconstructed road
formations. This is a risk covenng measure arising from less than effective policing on over-loaded
trucks. Specific mitigation measures in terms of road fumiture have also been proposed in the
engineering design. The PWD wvill interact with the Police department and initiate random checks
during the operation phase to prevent over loaded vehicles from plying on the road.
6.3.   Impacts from Road Designs
The design criteria for roads under upgradation have been noted in Chapter-3 of this report. Diverse
types of impacts can arise on account of implementing the proposed design. These are as follows:
*  Impacts from Altered Design
*  Impacts from Diversion from Current Use of Land
*  Impact on people due to land acquisition and displacement
*  Impacts on Regional Utilities
*  Impacts on Local Utilities
•  Impacts on Religious Structures
*  Impacts on Other Community Assets
*  Impacts on Avenue Trees
*  Impacts from Choice of Quality of Materials
*  Impacts on Road Safetv from Improved Road Design
6-3                          Scott Wilson! CES. IJIIE



Karnataka State Hizhwavs                                       Enwironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                    Chapter 6
6.3.1.       Impacts from Altered Design
Vanous types of alterations of the road designs as proposed in Chapter -1 and improvements upon
many components of the existing road have been suggested in the Final Design ot' the project routes.
The magnitude of such alterations has been shown in Table 6-1. These are as follovs:
* Reduction of Shoulder Width
*  Rectifying or Shifting Horizontal Alihnment
*  Placement of Improved Cross-drainage (CD) Structures
*  Reconstruction of Bndge or Causeway
* Raising of Embankment
*  Rail Over Bridge (ROB)
Reduction of shoulder width has been made in Route 4 in order to save a reserved species of trees
called Terninalia chebuila (Allalemara) in the avenue plantation. Many bad horizontal alignments in
the existing roads were corrected to retain as much as possible the designed traffic speed. Inadequate
number of culverts as well as damaged culverts had to be amended. Embankmnent height has been
raised to protect the sub-grades from altered hydrological conditions. In addition to the raising for the
protection of the pavement, under pavement drains below the sub-grade has been included in the
design. While improved CD structures and bridges would be constructed at the same site, any
significant negative impact on local hydrology is not expected. However, care should be taken during
construction phase to reduce turbidity in the rivers. especially where diversion-structures are to be laid.
No Rail Over Bridge (ROB) is required in any of the routes. The detailed information on the location
of each of these alterations and their starting and ending chainages have been shoNvn in Appendix-6.1.
The required mitigation measure is to implement the design carefully during construction phase.
Table 6-1: Magnitude of Impacts from Altered Design
(Nlagnitude Indicated by Length in meters or by numbers)
Route                                    Parameters
Reduction of   Rectifying   Improvement  Improvement   Raising of   ROB
Shoulder    or Shifting   of culverts    of Bridge or   Embankment
Width      Horizontal                   Causewav
Alignment
N. il      1020 m                76       23           3450 m      Nil
2A         Nil          Nil                 60        19          5300 m      Nil
2B         Nil        3950 m                39        4           2400m       Nil
3A         Nil         1950 m               12        2           8000 m      Nil
3B         Nil          Nil                 32        10          2400 m      Nil
3C         Nil         1200 m               24        10          6000 m      Nil
3D         Nil        2350 m                69        14          5000 m       Nil
3E         Nil          Nil                 34        6           3300 m      Nil
4       5005 ni   I   200m                 13        8             Nil        Nil
5A         Nil          Nil                 18        6            900 m      Nil
5B         Nil          Nil                 16        2             Nil       Nil
6.3.2.       Impacts from Diversion from Current Use of Land
In order to implement the altered road design. some land is to be acquired. This wvill cause diversion ot
land from current use. The required mitigation measure is to follow the land acquisition procedure
detailed out in Chapter 2 and to impiement the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) according to the
State's policy on entitlement. Table 6.4 shows the magnitude of land acquisition. The details on both
these issues have been presented in a separate report on Social Impacts. This would require transfer of
land from the concerned govemnment agency to the PWD.
Table 6-2: Extent of Land Acquisition
,Magnitude indicated in Sq.m/Hectares)
6-4                          Scotn Wilson CES IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                         Enm ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Projcct                                                                      Chapter 6
Route    Land in existing ROWA'   Total additional Land  Percentage       of
In Sq.m( Hectares)      requirement              Acquisition    to
In Sq.m( Hectares)      existing RON4V
l        22.99.500(229,95)       9628.681(0.96)          l              0.41
2A        11.61.1)0 (116.11)      20649.938(2.06)                       1.78
2B        8.18.600 (81.86)        26330.825(2.6)         l1.
3A        6.90.000 (69.00)        64.177(.0064)                        0.009
3B        I 1 .56.000 (115.60)    2157.633(0.02)                        0.18
3C        6.60,930 (66.09)        4717.458(0.047)                       0.71
3D        21.88.000 (218.80)      14953.303(1.49)                       0.68
3E        13.79.200 (137.92)     5660.746(0.5)                          0.41
4         4.15.056 (41.50)        8217.44(0.82)                         1.97
5A        7.20.000 (72.00)       239.442(0.02)           [            0.033
SB       321000 (32.10)           138.875(0.013)                       0.04
6.3.3.       Impact on people due to land acquisition and displacement
The existing ROW is not sufficient for the considered design. For widening of the roads private land in
the form of agricultural land, commercial structures, residential structures are getting affected and will
be acquired as per the Land Acquisition Act. 1894. A comprehensive Resettlement and Rehabilitation
(R & R) policy has been formulated detailing the benefits to be extended to the Project Affected
Persons under this project. Since many people are dependent on the road users and the road for their
livelihood, the shifting from the current place will affect their sustenance. In addition to it many
encroachers and squatters have occupied the ROW and pursue their commercial activities from there.
In certain stretches residential encroachers and squatters are also observed. Based on the R & R policy
a detailed Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) is being prepared as per the World Bank Guidelines
described in their Operational Directive - OD 4.30. The RAP addresses the issues pertaining to
displacement of Project affected persons (PAPs) and their rehabilitation and resettlement. The total
number of Project Affected persons (PAPs) is 4543 and the total number of Project Affected Families
(PAFs) is 753. The route and link wise PAPs and PAFs are shown in Table 6-3.
Table 6-3: PAFs and PAPs along the Project Routes
Route        Projected Affected       Projected Affected
Families (PAFs)         Persons (PAPs)
l                           205                   1313
2A                           167                    900
2B                            88                    591
3A                            21                     111
3B      j                     60                    336
3C      j                      14                     85
3D      j                     63                    367
3E                             9                      56
4       l                    92                     567
5A                            18                     103
SB                            16                     114
Grand Total                       753                   4543
The land acquisition involved is vern marginal. The additional land required for the project is only
9.38 hectares. Out of this 9.38 hectares. 4.71 hectares is tgoverrment land and involves inter
departmental transfer of land. 4.67 hectares of land are to be acquired from private owners. The details
of the land acquisition. ownership and landuse are covered in the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)
report.
6-5                           Scott Wilson CES IIIE



Kamataka State Hi2hwavs                                           Env ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                         Chapter 6
6.3.4.        Impacts on Regional Utilities
A variety of utilities serving the regional needs are currently placed within the ROW. The details of
these that are falling in the corridor of Impact are presented in Table 6-4. The categories of such
utilities are as follows:
*   Optical Fibre Cable Posts
*  Telephone Box
*  Telephone Poles
*  Power Lines
*  Power Transformers
*   Electric Poles
The required mitigation measure would be to ask in advance the relevant owners of these utilities to
shift those before construction starts to avoid disruption of regional services. It is the PWD's
responsibility to make the land available to the contractor free of all encumbrances before construction
begins.
Table 6-4: Magnitude of Impacts on Regional Utilities
(Magnitude indicated in Numbers)
Route      Optical      Telephone    Telephone          Power        Electric
Fibre Cable      Box           Poles       Transformers      Poles
Posts
l             27               -           121                7         300
2A             163             2            268               22         560
2B                -            2             94               11         211
3A              65                           30                6          98
3B             210              -           104                I         330
3C             159X             1            41                3         170
3D   l234                       1           104                6         242
3E   |13                       2            74                7         101
4              9;              1            46                1          45
5A               l5             -            40                4          84
5B              79              -            63                8         146
Total           1428              9           985               76 1      2287
6.3.5.       Impacts on Local Utilities
Many types of utilities serving local needs are now placed within the ROW. The details of these are
presented in Table 6-5. The categories of such utilities are as follows:
*  Lamp Posts
*   Water Lines
*  Hand Pumps
*  Water Taps
*  Dug Wells
*  Bore Wells
The required mitigation measure would be to ask in advance the relevant owners of these utilities to
shift those before construction starts to avoid disruption of local services. It would be judicious for the
PWD of the GOK to assist such owners. be they local institution. communities or individuals, to gyet
land for new locations.
Table 6-5: Magnitude of Impacts on Local tUtilities
(Magnitude indicated in Numbers)
Route ! Lamp         Water        Hand   |  Water    Bore Wells
Posis      Lines       Punips       Taps s
6-6                            Scott \Vilson / CES IIIE



Karnataka State Hwghways                                          Ens ironmenral Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Projcct                                                                         Chapter 0
Route    Lamp        Water        Hand         Water    Bore Wells
IPosts     Lines       Pumps         Taps
1             629 5!                                             23
2A            33             -           5           1>7         13
2B              8; l                     l            5l          4
3A             16 l                      1            2
3B             1 3          -            3            -
3C              -         108            4                       33
3D              -             I          51           1
3E              6                       _2           4            5
4              6                         2           4            5
5A    ~ ~ -       -                  -           4            3
5B            35I                                                 I
Total        178 i        108           23          38           89
6.3.6.       Impacts on Local Religious Structures
There are many types of religious structures located within the ROW. These will need new locations.
The required mitigation measure would be to assist the owners. be they local institution, communities
or individuals, to get land for new locations. Table 6-6 lists the various types of religious and sensitive
structures getting affected. The PWD will ensure that the idols/artefacts are relocated in the new
structures before demolishing the structures falling in the corridor of impact. The PWD will construct
these new structures at a site identified by the project authorities in consultation with the local
communities.
Table 6-6: Local Religious Structures falling in the Corridor of Impact
._________                 (Magnitude indicated in Numbers)
Route       Temple       Shrine     Samaadhi/  Gravevard*   Aralikatte
Mazaar
_________   ~2           1 0---
2A           2           11                                     3
2B           5            3                        -            -
3A           I            -
3B                        -
3C           I           4
3D           4      f     3           1-
3E           -            I                                     1
4           33
5B           1            3                   _  _ _ _ _ _ _  _ _  _ _
Total        20           36           l            1           7
Note: Aralikatte - Platforms constructed around Ficus religiosa and .caciafjerruginea trees.
*- Boundary Wall of the graveyard is getting affected
6.3.7.        Impacts on Other Community Assets
The road upgradation project would have impact upon other communitv assets like. parts of land of
Colleges and Schools and also of the Bus Stands. Their magnitudes are shown in Table 6-7. The
required mitigation measure for land acquisition should be followed. Bus Stands should be relocated
with the assistance of the PWD of the GoK .on roadside. The Bus Bays has been provided for in the
Final Design.
It is pertinent to mention that only the boundary wall of the Al-Ameen Medical College is getting
affected in Route 4. The College .-\dministrative Building is the nearest to the roadside at a distance of
6-7                            Scott W\ilson CES, IIIE



Kamataka State Hiehwa%s                                         Ensironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                      Chapter h
around 150m from the boundary wall and moreover it is located on a higher level than the road.
Alreadv the college authority has initiated plantation in the open areas. In route 3B near Jevargi the
school playground is bv the roadside and the school building is around 120m away from the roadside.
The PWD will develop the avenue plantation alone the road length and also involve the School
Authorities in explornn the possibility of establishing another row of trees and shrubs in the school
ground. The total number of educational institutions and medical centres near the project routes are
listed in Appendix 6.2.
Table 6-7: Magnitude of Impacts upon Other Community Assets
(Magnitude indicated in Numbers)
Route                         Parameters
Colleges           Schools            Bus Stand
2A           --3
'E.                              -                  4
14  I        __
3B  jr-                          1                  5
3C                                                  6
Total         11                                    37
6.3.8.       Impacts on Avenue Trees
On account of widening the roads as also for rectifying the horizontal alignments some trees would
unavoidably be felled. The magnitude of such impacts is discernible from Table 6-8. It appears that 14
trees on the average per km are to be felled. This appears to be reasonable. The major contributory
factor behind number of trees requiring felling in routes or links is the location of the trees at a
distance of 3.5-5.5 m from the existing centreline and the need to raise embankment height.
The trees that are located in the Corridor of Impact (COI) are the only ones that are to be felled.
Changing the alignment due to the roadside trees is a constraint as already mentioned that the trees
coming in the COI are at a distance of around 3.5m- 5.5m from the centreline. The stretches where
there is off centric COI from the existing centreline, a few more trees on the edge of the ROW are
getting affected. The felling of these trees is inevitable.
No cost effective engineering solution other than embankment raising and additional cross drainage
structures could be envisaaed as this option has been suggested in low lying area that are often prone
to inundation during monsoons and due to uncontrolled discharge of irrigation waters. Moreover. the
roads pass through irrigated areas and additional land acquisition will be an expensive option.
Therefore in areas wvhere embankment construction is proposed. tree felling is involved. Appendix 6.3
lists the details of trees on either side of the project routes.
Table 6-8: Magnitude of Impacts from Felling of Avenue Trees
(Magnitude indicated in Numbers)
Route                                        Girth
<30cm    >30cm&    >60cm&<   >90cm&:<180  >180cm             Total     No.per
<60cm        90 cm          cm                                km
398  I   632          484            Nil          Nil       1514       20
'A   |  361        1-4         467            Nil          Nil   |    02 I20
2B      ]O    r   S-1          237            Nil          Nil       429        16
3A       Nil       i1           13            1 7          16        56
3B       627       cc          125            144          Nil       393
6-8                           Scott Wilson iCES IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                             Ens ronmental Impact Assessment Report
Improv,ement Project                                                                           Chapter 6
3C       Nil         47           71             104           144        366         10
3D        90         140         201             179           Nil   1   610          10
3E       Nil        101          214             60            47         422         9
4         0         27           181     1      Nil           Nil   I   21S
SA       50          20           122            Nil           Nil        192        10    I
5B       3a          is           138            Nil           Nil        191        16
Total     I 14       1315         2253            504          207        5393         14
of allI
Routes |
In Table 6-9, the number of trees to be felled has been classified in terms of different species for all the
five routes. None of the species are endangered.
Table 6-9: Species wise Number of Trees in the Proposed Corridor of Impact
Tree Species        Route I    Route 2    Route 3    Route 4    Route 5     Total
Acici aiurwcliformi7s                                 23  _                            23
Acacia ferrtiginea                                                3                     3
Acacia lan-onum                                       72                        j      72
Acacia nilorica                760 |      130        180 _       _                   1070
Albi:iaainara                     -        15          -           -         13        28
Albi:ia lebek                     -        31        100           -          -       131
Azadirachta indica             380        603        270         50         148      1451
Dalbergia sissoo                50         54        250         45           -       399
Delonix- regia                 190        232         60         30                   512
Eucalipfus teretcornis            -        38        195           -          -       233
Ficus Ben ghalensis              9          -         80          2           -        91
Ficus rehlriosa                   -        39          -          2-                   41
Gliricilia sepiLtn              14        108        172          -           -       294
Mantgifera indica                 -          -       150                      -       150
Pongainia pinnata                16          -         -           -          -        16
Tanariilhus indica              30         77        120         86        142        455
Telintialia chlehutla          65        104        175          -         80        424
Total                         1514       1431       1847        218        383       5393
The required mitigation measures are many indeed. In the first instance. a survey has to be conducted
in collaboration with the Department of Forest of the GOK. Then permnission to fell trees would have
to be obtained from the designated authority. Then nurseries will have to be established with the help
of the Department of Forest. Simultaneously appropriate institutions will have to be entrusted with the
job of replanting of avenue trees as per the rules of the MOEF and for their subsequent maintenance.
The procedure has been stated in Chapter 2. The views expressed by the local people during Public
Consultation (see Chapter 7) should be noted in this regard. The involvement of the village populace
and the village panchayats in the plantation programme will be an added advantage. The public
consultations have revealed in quite a many places the wvillingrness of the public in getting involved in
the environmental enhancement measures.
As recommended by the MOEF, the most effective species to absorb the various elements of traffic
related pollutants are. A:7adirachta itidica (Bevu or Neem). Taniarindus indica (Hunsemara or
Tamarind). Ficits benighlalensis (Aladamara or Banyan), Terninaillia clhebutla (Hallalemara or Arjun)
and Dalbergia sissoo (White Beete or Shisham). All these species were found to be the major
constituents of the existing avenue plantations. These are also the preferred species in the avenue-
plantations by the Kamataka Forest Department. The Forest Department is also planting Acacia
attriculijormalis, Albi_ia lehek. Albi:ia amara aniid klangifwra ind(licar along the roadsides.
The most effective sound barrier has been Prosopis juliflor-a (Bellaryjali). This has been widely used
in the existing roadside plantations. This species grows on all tvpes of soils and responds by profuse
shoot formation after repeated pruning. The wood is very suitable as fuel. It sells as such at a rate of
0-9                             Scott Wilson, CES IIIE



Kamataka State Hlgkh%a\s                                        En,ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                      Chapter 6
more than 80 paise per kilo. The thoms prevent penetration of animals through the bushes. The leaves
provide good mulching materials for soil improvement. Healthv plants produce two harvests of pods.
which are very nutritious animal feed. Mature and rtpe seeds are edible and nutritious for human
beings. because of high protein content. This species should be planted as second row of the avenue
plantations. The P\VD is also considering planting Eu,plhor-hial tiruicalli as the second tier.
As alreadv discussed in section 6.2.3. the plantation programme will be taken up immediately after the
Construction phase with the participation of the State Forest Department.
6.3.9.       Impacts from the Choice of Construction Materials
The suggested specifications for the different formations of the roads under upgrading appear
reasonable. Nevertheless. the thickness of the different components of the road-formation would under
go modifications in tune with the bearing strengths of the available matenrals. Since the nature of
available materials would vary between regions, the total thickness of the fornations is likely to vary
between the locations of the project roads. However, careful supervision is warranted while using the
diverse materials. In this regard, three observations noted belowv may appear pertinent. All related to
the choice of materials.
Gravel & Borrow Pit
In the first instance, one should note that soil with gravel (moorum) occur extensively over nearly all
parts of Kamataka, but is generally associated with rather high clay fractions. Proper homogenisation
with sand would add to the stability of the road embankments. Connected to this situation is the
location of borrow-materials. Borrow pits are generally located along the road corridors. Water
accumulates in these pits during the rainy season, which in tum can act as disease vectors. Proper
dressing of the pits would be environmentally desirable.
Use of Alternative iMaterials
Secondly, apart from moorum, options exist on the use other materials for embankment construction.
These altemative sources are fly ash from thermal power stations and re-use of the materials excavated
form the damaged roads. Transhipment of fly ash requires very careful handling to avoid adding to the
load of suspended particulate matter along the routes. Use of slurry in covered trucks is the required
mitigation measure. But the travel distance would be a limiting factor on the use of fly ash. Raichur
thermal power station is the major source of fly ash. Only the nearby road-links can take advantage of
this source. The use of excavated materials from the damaged roads is a good idea. But it would not be
possible to re-use the bitumen-contaminated matenrals from excavation. Bitumen is known to release
phenol. Dumping of such material anywhere and every where is not permissible under the CPCB
Rules. Hence their disposal should be made in clay-lined pits of abandoned stone quarries.
Mines
All the mines and quarries to be used for obtaining construction materials for the project roads are
licensed units. Due to increased production, some negative impacts can be apprehended. However, it
would be appropriate to inform the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) about the
specific mines used for obtaining construction materials. since these are in their purview. Decision
should also be taken in consultation with the KSPCB on the proposed location of stone crushers. If the
stone crushers get located near the construction site. then adequate measures must be taken to control
dust pollution and noise level. The contractors should also purchase the construction materials from
licensed quarries only. In case new mines are to be utilised bv the contractor proper clearance and
licenses should be obtained from the state pollution control board and the Department of Mines and
Geology respectively.
6.3.10.      Accidents and Road Safety
The traffic studies have identii'ied areas with heavy traffic intensity and acute-angle intersections.
which require junction improvements and widening of roads in congested stretches. The locations of
these intersections have been noted in Chapter 4. The Strip Maps show the locations of congested
(-10                          Scott \Vilson / CES, IIIE



Kamataka State Hiih\% avs                                    Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                  Charter 6
places. The road improvement plan has suggested improvement of junction points and improvements
in the vertical profile and straightening of the road in stretches with acute curves. Appropriate road
signage and svmbols have been suggested to forewarn the road users. Tabie 6-10 shows the total
number of the proposed Bus bays in the project routes. Appendix 6.4 lists the locations of these bus
bays and their chainages.
Table 6-10: Proposed Bus Bav Locations along the Project Routes
Route       Proposed Bus Bavs
. I               16
2A                 18
2B                 10
3A                 5
3B                 10
3C                 II
3D                 14
3E                12
4                 4
5A                 7
SB                 3
6.4.   Impacts during Construction
Several types of negative impacts upon environment do happen during construction of roads, primarily
due to negligent practices. Responsible supervision is needed to avoid and to mitigate such adversities.
The contexts of such impacts are noted below.
* Impact on Land Resources
* Impact on Soil Quality
* Impact on Water Resources
* Impact on Water Quality
* Impact on Air Quality
* Impact on Noise Level
* Impact on Biological Environment
- Impacts from Sanitation and Waste disposal
* Other impacts
Each of these requires specific mitigation measures.
6.4.1.      Impact on Land Resources
Some land will be needed to establish site office and construction-labour camp. Both will require land
acquisition, although for a short period. Temporary leasing of private land can be seen as alternative to
land acquisition. Reinstatement of original quality of land is an essential.
A substantial amount of land would also be required for borrow pits. Here. use of the instruments of
land acquisition wvould be unavoidable. Complete reinstatement of the original condition after removal
of borrow materials will not be possible. However, dressing the sides of the borrow pit to create a
slope consistent w ith the level of the adjoining land would be better than leaving the hollow altogether
unattended. The ground water level being high in most of the project routes the utilisation of these pits
for water harvesting and ground water recharge is verv much limited. As a supplementary action. the
local villagers may be encouraged. through public consultation, to use these pits for compost making.
6v-i IScott \Vilson CES IIIE



Karnataka State Hiuhwavs                                        Environmental Impact Asscssment Repon
Improvement Proiect                                                                      Chapter 6
6.4.2.       Impact on soil qualitv
Soils of eastern Kamataka are prone to erosion due to their characteristics. Scounng of soil is expected
along the roadside earthen drains leading to siltation. Penodic maintenance of the drains is the required
mitigation measure.
Construction areas near culverts and bridges are likely to be prone to erosion. particularly during
monsoon season. Hence. construction activities for culverts and bnidges should be limited to dry
seasons.
The embankment slopes will be vegetated with native seed mix to prevent soil erosion.
6.4.3.       Impact on water resources
There are many bridges and culverts in the given network of the roads selected for improvement.
Some of these will require replacement. Care should be taken to place the bridges and culverts
approximatelv at the locations of the original structures. This would cause minimum of long term
adverse impacts on the given watercourses. During reconstruction of such structures. diversions are
required to avoid impairing the traffic. Care should taken to prevent erosion of these diversion
structures. Aquatic ecological systems are precious. Hence care should be taken to avoid impairing
these.
Roads can act as dams. impeding free run off along the sloping terrain. It would be necessary to place
adequate number of culverts with carefully designed capacities to avoid adverse impacts on water
resources. It is also necessary to note that accumulation water on one side of the road damages the
road structures. Establishing roadside drains lead to natural drainage channels. Hence all cross
drainage structures and roadside drains should have adequate capacity to discharge the run off from
probable highest rainfall in 24 hours as per the IMD Data-book. The map showing regional variations
of such rainfall has been placed in Chapter 5.
6.4.4.       Impact on water quality
No permanent impact is anticipated on water quality due to the project. Construction activities may
temporarily deteriorate surface wvater quality near the alignment through increase in turbidity as well as
in oil and grease. Some of the important mitigation measures are as follows:
* All water and other liquid wastes arising from construction activities will be properly disposed off
and will not be let into any water body. This can be realised by acting as noted below:
* Littering or unauthorised discharge will not be permitted;
* Permission of the engineer and the concerned regulatory authorities will be obtained for disposal
of the wastes at the designated disposal point.
* The stream courses and drains wvill be kept free from any dumping of solid wastes and earth
material.
* All the natural and artificial water bodies will be protected from possible modes of pollution like
runoff of the earth material to the water course. blockage of drains and culverts due to spillage of
materials and other drain off which contribute to siltation.
* Details of temporary drainage system (Including all surface channels, sediment traps. wvashing
basins and discharge pits) will be submitted for approval prior to commencing of construction
works.
6.4.5.       Impact on Air Quality
Moderate air quality impacts during the construction phase of the project can be anticipated due to the
uses of construction machinery and fugitive dust generation in and around the construction site due to
vehicular movement and handling of materials. It has been noted in Chapter 3 and 5 that the SPM and
RPM levels are generally high in Kamataka and xvell beyond the prescribed limits in urban areas like
Sindhnur and Gangavati. Regulation of traffic and pedestrian movement is of particular concern in the
urban areas during construction. as the regular traffic will have to be diverted to other temporary roads
for the period of constrmction. The required mitigation measures are
Scott Wilson CES, IIIE



Kamataka State HiLhx\avs                                        Env ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protect                                                                      Chapter 6
*  Asphalt and hot mix plants should be located at least 500-metres away from inhabited urban and
rural settlements.
*  Trucks carrying earth. sand or stone should be covered with tarpaulin or canvas sheets to avoid
spilling.
*  Fugitive dust should be controlled by sprinkling wvater. and
*  Regular maintenance of machinery and equipment should be camed out.
The thermal power plant at Raichur is a major source of fly ash. It is relatively strong when
compacted. It has compaction characteristics similar to natural sand. The fly ash can be easily utilised
in Route 1, 2A. 5A and 5B. Its utilisation will be limited to these stretches as the lead distances and
transportation cost involved with respect to other project routes will be very high. Transhipment of fly
ash requires very careful handling to avoid adding to the load of suspended particulate matter along the
routes. Use of slurry in covered trucks is the required mitigation measure.
6.4.6.       Impact on Noise Level
Temporary impacts in the immediate vicinity of the project may occur due to construction. The
magnitude of impact will depend upon the specific types of equipment used and on the construction
methods employed. Care should be taken to reduce such impacts.
Based upon previous studies and measurements. the construction equipment appears as a point source
of such negative impacts. With source strength of 95 dB(A) at a reference distance of 2m. the noise
produced should not exceed 45 dB(A) beyond a distance of 250m, the drop off rate being 6 dB(A) for
doubling the receptor distance from a point source. In view of this, the construction equipment will be
located at least 250m away from inhabited areas. This would be the essential mitigation measure.
In addition. one should note that the workers near construction equipment are likely to be exposed to
an equivalent noise level of 80-95 dB(A) in an 8-hour shift. The generated noise may affect workers.
They would require protection devices like earplugs.
Other ancillary mitigation measures are source-control and scheduling of construction activities.
Source-control means that all equipment will be maintained in good condition, properly designed
engine enclosures and intake silencers will be employed. Scheduling of project activities means that all
operations will be scheduled to coincide with periods when people would be least affected.
Construction activities will be strictly prohibited between 10 P.M and 6 A.M. in the residential areas.
Especially in sensitive areas like in the vicinity of Schools, Hospitals and Health centres due care
would be taken not to establish the construction equipment and machinery near these.
6.4.7.       Impact on Biological Environment
No impacts to threatened or endangered plant species are anticipated. Nevertheless. actions specified
under Sub-section 6.2.3 and 6.3.8 above must be strictly followed.
6.4.8.       Impacts from Sanitation and Waste disposal
Sewage and domestic solid waste generated at the construction workers colon,v shall be properlv
disposed off. Improper management of these solid wastes may lead to health and hygiene related
problems. The applicable PWD specifications for labour camp development for type A construction
will ensure that adequate sanitation at the workers' colony is maintained. The basic mitigation
measures are:
*  The contractor shall install adequate lavatories at the construction camp to cater to the
requirements of the workers.
*  The contractor at the campsites shall build Septic Tanks.
*  Proper collection system for domestic refuse and its segregation and disposal *vill be ensured.
*  Periodic health check-ups of construction workers will be undertaken.
6-1                          Scott WVilson CES IIIE



Kamataka State Highwayas                                     Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Impro%ement Project                                                                  Chapter 6
6.4.9.      Other impacts
Some short-term impacts mav happen during the construction phase. The locations and contexts of
such impacts are
* Site Office
* Equipment Storage and machinery maintenance
* Traffic Diversion and Safety aspects
• Employment Opportunities
Site Office
Temporary impacts may occur due to the construction of site offices and labour camps. The following
impacts are envisaged:
* Land acquisition.
* Destruction of vegetation. and
* Poaching and illegal timber cutting.
These impacts are likely to be of marginal severity and can be mitigated by following good
construction camp practices.
Equipment Storage and machinerv maintenance
The site area should have a proper maintenance shed for the regular maintenance of the construction
vehicles and the waste emanating from the maintenance shed should not be allowed into any water
body. The oil and Grease change of the equipment and vehicles should be carried out in the service
area designed for the vehicles and the wastes should be collected in containers and bins before selling
them off. Proper sand beds should be developed to prevent the flow of oily wastes. The tar-coated
drums should be properly stored in the site area and can be used for demarcating the diversions during
construction phase with proper fluorescent markers. The drums can be used for storing water for
construction purposes. Under no circumstances uncleaned drums should be used for storing drinking
water.
Traffic Diversion and Safetv aspects
Short term impact associated with this project. will be traffic diversion and management during the
construction phase. Suitable traffic management system will be devised and finalised with the
concurrence of the Police Department. Assistance of the Police Department would be necessary to
regulate traffic. A comprehensive Traffic Management Plan during construction phase has already
been formulated and included in Chapter 3: Detailed Road Design. Section 3.13 of the Detailed
Engineering Design Report.
Employment Opportunities
The construction activity can provide opportunities to the residents of the neighbouring area to earn.
They may come to provide labour or to service the construction camps. It is necessary to ensure that
the persons after completion of construction works return back to their homes and not set up squatter
colonies.
6.5.   Impacts during Operation Phase
The operation phase impacts mainly arise due to vehicular movements. These can be grouped as
follows
* Impact on Land Ltse.
•  Impact on Air Qualit.
* Impact on Noise level.
* Impact on Biological Resources.
* Accident Hazards and SatIetv. and
* Aesthetics
6-14                         Scott \Vilson; CES /I IIIE



Ka-nataka State Hiihwavs                                        Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                      Chapter 6
6.5.1.       Impact on Land Use
The land use pattern mav experience some changes on the roadside like the coming of commercial
establishments and other road induced developments. The local statutory bodies will strictlv enforce
land use control measures to regulate development of commercial. residential and industnal
infrastructure. development of squatter settlements on the slopes of the embankrnents and on vacant
areas of the existing and acquired ROW will be prevented and monitored.
6.5.2.       Impact on Air Qualitv
Increase in vehicular traffic is assumed in the very design for road upgrading. Consequent nrse in the
level of vehicular emission as well as of noise is only to be expected on all road segments in future.
Creating a vegetation screen along the roadside having a two-tier arrangement will absorb pollutants
and arrest dust entrainment. The details of Avenue Plantations have been presented in Sub-section
6.3.8 above. At the operation phase maintenance of avenue plantation would be necessary.
Other measures on reducing impacts on air quality would be
*  Phasing out of old vehicles,
*  Promote increasing use of fuel-efficient engines,
*  Promote use of catalytic converters for petrol vehicles, and
*  Promote use of smoke traps for diesel vehicles.
It may be noted that increased traffic speed will reduce localised concentration of pollutants and result
in faster dispersion of the pollutants.
It is difficult to predict the pollution level from vehicles. since it is not known how the adoption of new
technology vehicles would proceed. It is. however, possible to assess the future pollution load on the
assumption that the old technology vehicle would persist. The unit load of pollutants from different
types of vehicles have been estimated under the same assumption by the Indian Institute of Petroleum,
which is presented in Table 6-11.
Table 6-11: Emission factors of different vehicles (g/Km)
Tvpes of Vehicle         CO       HC         NOx        SOx         Pb       TSP
Two Wheeler                     8.3      5.16           -     0.013      0.004
Cars                         24.03       3.57       1.57      0.053    0.0117
Three Wheelers               12.25       7.77          -      0.029      0.009
Buses-Urban                  4.381      1.327      8.281       1.441         -   0.275
Trucks                       3.425      1.327      6.475       1.127               0.45
Light Commercial Vehicles       1.3       0.5        2.5         0.4     O_ .I
Note: TSP: Total Suspended Particulate. Source: Indian Institute Of Petroleum. 1985
Based on these factors, the current loads of vehicular pollution as well as those expected in 2008 have
been estimated in Table 6-12. Though there is an observable increase in the pollution load in 2008
when compared to 2000 figures yet it is very low.
6-I1                           Scott Wilson , CES 1IIE



Kamataka State Hich%vavs                                       En%ironmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Protect                                                                    Chapter 6
Table 6-12: Pollution Load of Pollutants along the project Routes
(In Tons/Km/day)
l                     ~~~~~~~Parameters
Route, Year 1TSP           SOx      NOx        Pb        HC       CO
l    I  2000   0.0003    0.0010    0.006   9.51E-06    0.008    0.02
2008    0.051     0.168     1.05     0.016      0.02     3.63
2A   ' 2000   0.0004    0.0012    0.007   1.78E-05    0.018     0.04
2008    0.040     0.131     0.82     0.036      0.05     3.99
2B     2000   0.0004    0.0013    0.008   2.28E-05    0.022     0.05
2008    0.023     0.076     0.47     0.051      0.06     2.62
3A     2000   0.0003    0.0009    0.006   6.22E-06    0.004     0.02
2008    0.007     0.023     0.15     0.010      0.01     0.44
3B     2000   0.0003    0.0011    0.007   1.16E-05    0.009     0.03
2008    0.023     0.087     0.56     0.019      0.03     2.21
3C     2000   0.0004    0.0013    0.008   1.90E-05    0.016     0.04
2008    0.034     0.120     0.76     0.039      0.04     3.74
3D     2000   0.0004    0.0013    0.008   1.34E-05    0.010     0.03
2008    0.047     0.157     1.01     0.027      0.03     3.92
3E    2000   0.0008    0.0027    0.018   4.69E-05    0.034      0.09
2008    0.080     0.270     1.82     0.207      0.09     10.23
4     2000   0.0004    0.0015    0.009   1.67E-05    0.014     0.04
2008    0.015     0.059     0.37     0.032      0.04     1.58
5A     2000   0.0005    0.0016    0.010   1.98E-05    0.017     0.04
2008    0.020     0.065     0.42     0.052      0.05     1.84
SB     2000   0.0005    0.0018    0.011   1.89E-05    0.016     0.04
1 2008    0.014    0.046     0.29     0.057      0.05      1.11
Note: TSP: Total Suspendcd Particulate
6.5.3.       Impact on Noise level
Increase in noise level is anticipated due to increase in traffic movement. The impacted areas are
basically the towns and the other places having a semi-urban profile and which function as major
market centres and where inter-modal transfer of commodities is involved. Proper traffic management
and legal measures can easily control the unwanted increase in the noise level.
Avenue plantations would dampen traffic-related noise. Intermix of vegetation consisting of local
shrubs and trees will be planted along sensitive receptors like hospital. schools and administrative
offices.
Noise levels near urban stretches have been predicted by using the following relationship.
L = 10 Log1oq - 10 Loglod + 20 Log1ou + 20, where.
L is mean noise level at receiver located at distance d (in Metres) from the source in dB (A)
d is distance betwveen receiver and pseudolane at the centre of the traffic lanes
q is traffic volume. v ehicles per hour
u is mean speed of traffic. miles per hour
The above relationship assumes that there is no obstruction such as high building or high wall between
the roadway and the point at which the noise level is being predicted. The traffic details are as per the
existing traffic. Table 6-13 shows the estimated noise levels.
(-16                          Scott Wilson iCES' lIIE



Kaamataka State Highwavs                                        En\ ronmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                      Chapter 6
Table 6-13: Predicted Noise Levels (L)
(In dB (A))
Route       q          d          U          L
I     100        I        34.027     58.87
2A     181        15        34.027     61.45
2B     215       15         34.027     62.19
3A     63        15         31.946     56. 32
3B     107        15        31.946     58.62
3C     119        15        31.946     59.08
3D     163        15        31.946     60.44
3E     350        15        31.946     63.76
4     158        15        33.19      60.64
5A     186      1i5         32.733     61.23
5B     184       15         32.733     61.18
The maximum  predicted noise level of 63.76 dB (A) is well within the limits prescribed for
Commercial areas. Previous field measurements and observations have shown that a vegetative screen
attenuates noise level by 7 -10 dB (A). This implies that the noise level in the area will be within the
limits prescribed for residential areas i.e. 55 dB (A). The point to be noted here is that when compared
to night -time ambient sound level in the urban areas, it is high but when the road is widened and with
smooth traffic flow the noise level will come down appreciably. A few hospital and school buildings
are located around 50 m from the centreline. Previous studies have established a drop off rate of 6 dB
(A) on doubling of the receptor distance. Providing a high wall and vegetation will dampen the noise
level by a large extent in such sensitive locations. It also indicates that proper land use control should
be exercised in designated sensitive areas by the appropriate govemment agency.
6.5.4.       Impact on Ecological Resources
The roadside plantation. once undertaken, will greatly enhance the aesthetics of the road and also
function as a pollution arrester and prevent surface runoff in stretches prone to soil erosion. It needs
mention that no negative impact is anticipated on forest vegetation and the fauna during operation
phase.
The villagers can be involved in maintaining the Prosopisjuliiflora shrubs that has been suggested as
the second tier plantation and in turn they can source their fuel wood from these plantations by pruning
the branches of the shrubs. The only precaution that has to be exercised is that the shrubs are not
uprooted to meet the fuel wood needs. This is one wvay of preventing the villagers from indiscriminate
felling of the trees and other vegetation for fuel.
6.5.5.       Accident Hazards and Safetv
During the operation phase, accident hazards will be greatly reduced and the widened road will ensure
smooth and fast flow of traffic. The event that could pose significant environmental risk is the accident
of vehicles carrying hazardous cargo. Spillage of hazardous chemicals and subsequent run off into a
water body may have significant adverse environmental impact.
To handle such problems, the area of spillage should be immediatelv cordoned off and be made off
limits to the public. At all costs run off of the chemical into any water body should be prevented. Side
drainage channels and collection sumps at the landfall points need to be provided for collection and
safe removal of hazardous materials. Emergency response mechanism should be evolved to tackle
accidents and spillage of hazardous nature.
(-17                          Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                      Env ironmental Impact Assessment ReponT
Improvement Project                                                                  Chapter 6
6.5.6.       Aesthetics
The roadside plantation, in addition to functioning as pollution screens. will add to the aesthetics of the
road. Road fumiture. if properly desianed. can also contribute towards attractiveness of the road to the
users.
6.6.   Concluding Observation
An attempt has been made to assess and compare the quality of environment in the Studv Area under
three assumed scenarios as
*  No Project
*  Project without Mitigation Measures Implementation
*  Project with Mitigation Measures Implementation
Granting that subjectivity would always be there in such assessments, the advantage of comparison
between the three scenarios would still be possible because the subjective weightage have been kept
constant between them. A matrix has been developed taking into account twelve impact areas. The
twelve impact areas have been taken into account keeping in view the main resources that will get
affected due to road development. In this context, a weighted scheme approach has been adopted. This
approach is based on the desire to assess quantitatively the impact and weight of that value by its
significance or importance. The idea is to require environmental impact analyses to define two aspects
of each action that may have an impact on the environment. The first aspect is "magnitude" (M) of the
impact upon specific environmental factors. The term magnitude is used in the sense of extensiveness
or scale. The second is the weighting of the degree of "importance" (W) i.e. significance of the
particular action on the environmental factor in the specific instance under analysis. A scale of 1-5 has
been used for the magnitude and importance. A "+" in front of the magnitude number indicates the
impact is beneficial and "-" indicates an adverse impact.
The product of the magnitude "AI" and importance "W" value gives the net impact of the action on
the environmental resource i.e. the impact magnitude. The total impact score of a project altemative
can be obtained by the sum of the impact magnitudes on the environmental resource in a given
scenario. Based on this approach the maximum impact score that can be achieved is +300 i.e. a
maximum impact magnitude of +25 for each parameter and summation for 12 environmental
parameters gives a maximum impact score of +300 indicating positive and beneficial impact. Similarly
the minimum score that can be achieved is -300 indicating negative and adverse impact. To
distinguish between the three scenarios and to give it a qualitative aspect. the following classification
has been adopted.
Positive and beneficial impact    +200 to +300
Positive and moderate impact   +100 to +199
No appreciable impact          0 to + 99
Negative and moderate impact    - I to -100
Negative and significant impact:  -101 to -199
Negative and adverse impact:    -200 to -300
The impact scores obtained for the three scenarios considered for the project route links are presented
in Table 6-14. The details of the analysis are presented in Appendix 6.5.
6-18                         Scott Wilson i CES' IIIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                            Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                          Chapter 6
Table 6-14: No Project and Upgradation Scenario Assessment
Route    ENo Project Scenario   Upgradition without   UTpgradation *rith
Mitigation Measures         iMitigation
Measures
1___________ 1                   -63                     -124                  -1 19
2A            !                  -85                     - 136                 -131
2B                               -89                     -152                  -147
3A                               -48                     -112                  -110
3B                               -32                      -96                  -110
3C                               -32                      -97                  +100
3D                               -43                     -120                   +99
3E                               -37                      -96                 +101
4                                -32                     -120                  +109
5A                               -31                     -101                 +108
5B                               -28 |                    -99 |               +108
It is very clear from the scores obtained from the no project scenanro and project without mitigation
measures scenario that both situations will certainly have a negative impact upon the environment. It is
evident from the tables that implementation of the mitigation measures will not only enhance the
existing environment but also have a positive impact upon the environment and also lead to optimal
use of the natural resources.
6-19                            Scott Wilson ! CES, IIIE






Chapter 7
Public Consultation






Kamataka State Highways                                        Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                    Chapter 7
CHAPTER 7: PUBLIC CONSULTATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7.  PUBLIC CONSULTATION ................................ 7-1
7.1. INTRODUCTION .7-1
7.2.  CONSULTATION DURING ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING .7-1
7.3.  CONSULTATION DURING MONITORING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY & NOISE LEVEL.                 7-2
7.4.  JOINT PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS WITH SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSTS .7-3
7.5. THE STAKEHOLDERS' MEETING .7-4
7.6. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF EIA REPORT .7-5
7.7. CONCLUSION .7-5
TABLE 7-1: DETAILS OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ................................. 7-4
ToC-I                         Scott Wilson v CES / IIIE






Kamataka State Highways                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 7
7.   Public Consultation
7.1.   Introduction
Even when a project cames environmental clearance and is not apprehended to infringe the
stipulations of any Statute during implementation, keeping the concerned people informed is useful.
Structured or unstructured consultation with the local stakeholders is the best means to keep the public
informed about a project.
Public consultation process helps in eliminating any apprehensions regarding the project and gives
new insights to the problems faced by the lay public and also provides cost-effective solutions by
participation of the affected populace in the implementation stage.
Organising public consultation to disclose infortnation that is relevant to the publics, who are listening
from their respective stakes in the society, needs careful planning. A successfully implemented
consultation process will help ensure public support for the project. Once the territorial specificity of
the project is determined it paves way for more cohesive and transparent discussion with the lay public
of the affected area and the stakeholders.
Hence the objective of this chapter is to record the various procedures adopted for public consultations
as the specificity in the KSHIP was progressively attained. The review of this may assist the
implementers of the given project. The procedures as outlined in the Operational Policy OP 4.01 on
Public Consultation were referred to while conducting the public consultation. The procedures adopted
during this process are:
* Consultation during Environment Screening & Monitoring of Air, Noise, Water and Soil;
* Consultation in tandem with those conducted by the Consultants concerned with Social Impacts;
and
- Consultation with the Stakeholders.
7.2.   Consultation during Environmental Screening
During field reconnaissance for Environmental Screening, care was taken to meet the people in the
roadside teashops or near markets and to solicit their opinion on
* The need for improving the given road; and
* Their willingness to preserve the roadside avenue plantations.
Some of the findings from Public Consultations carried out by the PCC during Environmental
Screening are worth noting. These are as follows:
a)     Their general response was that regular repairing of any road is certainly desirable. But their
counter question was: 'Would that create employment for the local people?" This is not a
simple enquiry about their job prospects in the works. Probing their mind revealed that their
general experience has been that the contractors bring in people from elsewhere and leave
them near the site when the project is over. In consequence, social tensions emerge. The so
abandoned involuntary immigrants ask for lower than the prevailing wage and, thereby, reduce
employment opportunities for the local people. Unless the contractors are forced to take their
labourers back, the problem cannot be solved.
The above findings should be taken as an object lesson and the PWD as the project promoter
should require the Labour Contractors to take back their labourers after the project is complete
and to create job opportunities to the extent possible for the local labour.
b)     On the social responsibility for preserving the roadside plantations, their responses were less
precise. They felt that a more compelling need is to insure supply of firewood. Amongst the
7-1                         Scott Wilson / CES, IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 7
bushes. they find Prosopis jlulifora was good as these provide good quality of firewood
continually. They harvest it wherever required, but without killing the plants all together.
About the roadside trees, the usefulness of Tainaarindzs inzdica was appreciated by many. Apart
from this species. their general preference was for shade-bearing trees.
The above finding should be taken as an object lesson while planning for avenue plantation.
(c)    An unsolicited response provided an interesting exposition of the problem faced by the local
people with increasing traffic of trucks. During rains, the trucks do not dare to drive on the
earthen shoulders as the wheels sink into the mud. During this time, these trucks occupy a
good part of the road and obstruct traffic coming even from opposite direction. As a result,
traffic bottlenecks get created. These hurt them by delaying the arrival of public buses at the
appointed stoppages. They had no concrete solution to offer. but felt that widening of the road
would probably solve the problem. On the utility of the paved shoulders. they felt that the
animal drawn carts should find that useful and would probably use those if punitive measures
were there for disobedience.
It may be noted that designed project provides for both paved and earthen shoulders. Nevertheless,
informing the local people that slow moving non-motonsed vehicles should use the paved shoulders
would be useful.
7.3.   Consultation during Monitoring Ambient Air Qualitv & Noise Level
Monitoring of ambient air quality was started after the GoK selected the road-links for upgrading as
well as for major maintenance. The programme of monitoring involved supervision by the Consultants
and staying at the chosen station for a stretch of 72 hours. This gave a good opportunity to interact
with the neighbourhood communities. The findings from this phase of Public Consultations are as
follows:
- No formal approach was made by the Consultants to initiate any discussion. But during more easy
hours of the dav many of them came out of curiosity to know what the Consultants were doing.
They had not seen before any of the machines those were in use to monitor ambient air quality and
noise level. The utilitv of these machines was explained. This prompted many of them to ask for
the purpose of measuring these at that given location. This opened up for the Consultants an
appropriate opportunity to describe the basic contents of the KSHIP. They were told that some
roads would be upgraded to a wider carriageway with paved shoulders and earthen shoulders as
well. The discussion shifted away from the purpose of air quality monitoring.
The object lesson of the above finding is that the organisers of Public Consultation should arouse
curiosity of the local communities without assuming an ostentatious posture. They should explain
in simple terms about the utility of the work that they are carrying out in understandable language.
This would prompt the respondents to disclose their problems that require mitigation.
* Nearly all the people' present expressed happiness about the project. Some of them took upon
themselves a newv role to convince the others about the usefulness of the project. The incredulous.
however, wanted to know whether all roads in the locality would be so upgraded. The Consultants
explained that however much the govemment wishes to do so. there is the problem of shortage of
funds. This stimulated some in some places to state that they wish the given road had not been
selected for upgrading. They said that the traffic volume has already become unbearable for the
dust and smoke these generate. The problem is aggravating everyday with increasing volume of
traffic so as to make crossing the road unsafe for the children and the aged. Such a situation
offered the Consultants an opportunity to explain the objective of monitoring air quality and noise
level. If the levels of noise and pollution were found unacceptable, then that road might not be
retained in the list for upgrading. A smile of disbelief was visible on them. The more polite
amongst them stated that are happy to see the 'contractors" doing their work paid for with care.
7-2                         Scott Wilson i CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                  Chapter 7
They have seen manv contractors taking little care of the quality of the work given to them. The
GoK should maintain strict supervision and apply puntive measures on the defaulters.
The above finding is important on two counts. In the first instance. it suggests that the local
people desire to put in their suggestions about the probable contents of the project and wish to
do so from the initial stages of project formulation. Secondly, it is necessary to inform the
local people that the official project designers equally share their concern and explain how
they are trying to meet such concerns.
* These inter-actions were never structured beforehand. It was kept free floating to proceed in tune
with the mood of the listeners. These moods reveal their basic concerns in life. Therefore, when
asked to give their suggestions on the manner of conserving the roadside plantations. the
immediate answer was that more important a task is to ensure supplies of fuel-wood. Fire wood
plantations should be raised. The village Panchavats should be assigned with the responsibility to
conserve these and meet the cost with the proceeds of sale. Until then, the roadside plantations
would continue to be plundered, not necessarily by philanders, but by the honest villagers in
response to their concem for converting grains into food.
The above finding should be an object lesson for maintaining any asset created through public funding.
In the context of the avenue plantations, the suggestion of the local people to involve the village
panichayats for maintenance is important and could be accommodated within environment
management plan.
7.4.   Joint Public Consultations with Social Impact Analysts
More formal public consultations were organised after the horizontal geometry of the road links
selected for upgrading started getting prepared one by one. These drawings indicated the places where
fresh acquisition of land would be necessary and also those where encroachment have to be cleared.
These two issues were the purview of the Social Impact Analysts. This team immediately initiated
socio-economic census in the so designated tracts and, on completion, called for public meetings.
Team on Environment joined the Social Team in these participatory Public Consultations. The
Consultants on Social Impact Analysis will present in a separate report the details on their findings
from these meetings.
The Consultants on Environment Impact Analysis. however, did not get any new insight on the public
awareness of environmental issues than what were gathered from the earlier interactions. The
participants had obviously set their priorities on issues conceming land acquisition and resettlement-
packages and were disinterested to talk on environment. Their report on such meetings is placed in
Appendix-7.1.The conclusion to be drawn is that the issues concerning environment should be
unstructured and informally organised.
Attempts were made to identify Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) who had previous
experience in the implementation of the environmental measures, but most of them were involved in
watershed development and social development projects only.
One very interesting issue came out from these structured Public Consultations. In nearly all the
meetings. the participants expressed their concern for Public Health in the neighbourhood. Thev felt
that the problems ansing from lack of safe drinking water and toilets in the villages should be
mitigated as early as possible.
It may be interesting to recall that in Chapter 6 of this report, care has been taken to prescnbe
mitigation measures to sustain the water sources those are falling on the corridor of impacts. This is
the minimum that the PWD can do meet the needs of the v illagers. However, much more is needed to
be done the mitigate the problems of safe drinking water and the PWD should consider taking some
initiative in this regard by wvav of impressing upon the other relevant departments of the GOK to
attend to the problems encountered. That this concern is also relevant for the PWD can be appreciated
7,3                         Scott Wilson CES IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                     Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 7
from what has been noted in Chapter 6 of this report, on the habit of the villagers defecating on the
road embankment. which leads to reduction of safety to traffic. Table 7-1 lists the places where the
public consultations were held and the topics discussed there in and the total number of participants.
Table 7-1: Details of Public Consultation
Route          Date             Venue                     Issues                Number of      Women
Participants  Participants
5thJune. 2000     Kallur village, Land  acquisition.  Encroachment, 49             7
Taluk Manvi    Resettlement.        Employment.
Environmental  aspects,  Sanitary
facilities, Safetv
2A         5t June, 2000      Gorebal         Land  acquisition. Encroachment,  69            5
village, Taluk  Resettlement.       Employment.
Sindhnur       Environmental  aspects.  Sanitary
facilities, Safety
2B         4 June,2000        Chikkebenekal  Land  acquisition,  Encroachment, 31              8
village, Taluk  Resettlement,       Employment,
Gangawati       Environmental  aspects,  Sanitary
.__________                        facilities. Safety
3D          15"h April, 2000    Hallikhed-K,    Land  acquisition.  Encroachment, 38           l
Taluk           Resettlements       Employment,
Homnabad        Environmental  aspects,  Sanitary
facilities, Safety
4          18"'March, 2000    Torvi,  Taluk  Land  acquisition. Encroachment, 40              7
B ij apur      Resettlement,        Employment,
Environmental  aspects.  Sanitary
facilities, Safety
SA         6th June, 2000     Yermaras,       Land  acquisition.  Encroachment, 6             2
Taluk Raichur   Environmental  aspects,  Sanitary
facilities, Safety
7.5.   The Stakeholders' Meeting
The KPCC requested the PIU to convene a meeting of the stakeholders as a part of the public
Consultation process. The PIU thought that the stakeholders shall represent the local agencies like, the
State Pollution Control Board, District Administration, the NGOs. Project Affected People and the
population at large. This meeting was held, but with an accent on Rehabilitation Action Plan that the
Consultants on Social Impacts are carrying out. None of the issues concerning Environment
Management Plan wvere raised in this meeting.
The PIU had organised a formal Environmental Public Consultation at all the District Headquarters of
the Project roads between 16th and 25th October 2000. The interesting part of these formal public
consultations was the participation of many Non Govemmental Organisations (NGOs) and the positive
interactions between the government agencies, the NGOs and the public including the PAPs and the
local populace. The issues that came up for discussion were mainly to do with good construction
practices, air pollution during construction. stage, safety aspects. community participation in the
plantation programme, water supply and sanitation, co-ordination between various government
agencies and compensation to Project affected Persons and active involvement of NGOs in the R&R
programme
7.4                         Scoti Wilson i CES , 1IIE



Kamataka State Highwavs                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Proect                                                                 Chapter 7
Based on the above observations the PIU-PWD has taken a pro-active approach to address the issues
of public concern in rural settlements and areas with bad road geometry. In villages and semi urban
settlement where alignment changes cannot be undertaken. the design speed has been reduced and
adequate road signs will be installed to forewam the road users. The PWD has also adopted a pro-
active approach for coordinating with other government agzencies in providing sanitary and drainage
facilities in the roadside villages. A consolidated amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs has also been included in the
EMP Implementation budget in villages where sanitarv and water supply facilities can be established
and maintained with the participation of the local communitv and the panchayats
7.6.   Public Disclosure of EIA Report
It is of particular importance to note that the Rules formulated under the Environment (Protection) of
1986 stipulate that Public Disclosure of the EIA Report would be required under the aegis of the State
Pollution Control Board. The listed stakeholders in the given Rule should be drawn form the Project
Affected Area. This Rule is given in Schedule 4 of the Gazettes Notification, dated 10'h April 1997.
The MOEF stipulates that such disclosures should be made in terms of only the Executive Summary of
the EIA Report.
The PWD has already made available the EIA Report and the executive summary in Kannada and
English to the public at all the Deputy Commissioners Offices and in the Taluk offices of the project
roads. The PWD is also planning to circulate the executive summary in the District Public Libraries.
7.7.   Conclusion
The public consultations offered an opportunity to understand the concerns of the local populace and
social issues related to road development. Based on the above observations the PWD has taken a pro-
active approach to address the issues of public concerm in rural settlements and areas with bad road
geometry. In villages, and semi urban settlement where alignment changes cannot be undertaken, the
design speed has been reduced and adequate road signs will be installed to forewarn the road users.
The PWD has decided to approach the Public Health Engineering Department and the Rural Water
Supply Departments to make necessary arrangements to provide sanitary facilities at the roadside
villages and hand pumps and water lines for drinking water. The consultations have revealed that in
most of the cases the general perception is that it is the responsibility of the administration to provide
the sanitary facilities and maintain the same. One cannot expect the local community's participation in
maintenance of the public lavatories and drainage, as there are social and cultural differences in the
village community. As far as plantations are considered, maintaining them is not considered a problem
if it is in vicinity to their residential quarters. In some of the villages the participants agreed to
maintain the plantations provided the funds are available. Keeping in mind the divergent viewpoints of
the public. the PWVD has decided to go ahead with the Tree Plantation programme along with the State
Forest Department.
The PWD is planning to develop a second tier of shrub plantation consisting of Prosopis juliflora and
Eutphorbia tiruicalli (Kalli) along the road. This is a fast growing species that requires minimum
maintenance. This species grows on all types of soils and responds by profuse shoot formation after
repeated pruning. The wood is very suitable as fuel. It sells as such at a rate of more than 80 paise per
kilo. The thorns prevent penetration of animals through the bushes. The leaves provide good mulching
materials for soil improvement. Healthy plants produce two harvests of pods. which are very nutritious
animal feed. Mature and ripe seeds are edible and nutritious for human beings, because of high protein
content.
The villagers can be involved in maintaining these shrubs and in turn they can source their fuel wood
from these plantations by pruning the branches of the shrubs. The only precaution that has to be
exercised is that the shrubs are not uprooted to meet the fuel wood needs. This is one way of
preventing the villagers from indiscriminate felling of the trees and other vegetation for fuel.
7-i                         Scott Wilson CES  IIIE



Karnataka State Highwavs                                     Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                 Chapter 7
The PWD has realised that for effective road management. the active participation and co-operation of
the various department like Telecom. Town Planning, Electricity Boards, Town municipality, Police
Department, Pollution Control Board. Water Supply and Sewerage Board. Department of Public
Health, Revenue Department and Police etc. are required. For instance in towns like Ganaawati.
Sindhnur and Bijapur, the poor condition of the road and resultant ambient pollution is not only due to
inadequate maintenance. Many other activities like indiscriminate dumping of garbage and debns by
the roadside, unauthonsed parking and laying of utility lines, poor town planning and total lack of land
use control have also led to deterioration of the roads.
The PWD has already informed the various govemment agencies about the issues to be taken up for
discussion and initiating remedial measures and possible relocation of the various utilities currently
installed in PWD's Right of Way. The PWD has also adopted a pro- active approach for coordinating
with other govemment agencies in providing sanitary and drainage facilities in the roadside villages. A
consolidated amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs has also been included in the EMP Implementation budget for
establishing sanitary and water supply facilities in roadside villages that could be maintained with the
participation of the local community and the panchayats
7-6                         Scott Wilson CES, IIIE



Exhibits






Kamataka State Highways                                            Environmental Impact Assessment Report
linprovement Project                                                                          Exhibits
l l.
Squatters on the edge of Carriageway near Sindhnur - Route 1
Causeway over Potnal Halia- Route 1
Scott WiLson CES IOIE



Karnataka State lighwavs                                              Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                               Exhibits
Submersible Bridge over Hire Halla - Route 2A
_. ~  ~    ~ ~ C 's            , --   ., s -  -    *- -
Temple on the Edge of the Carriageway- Route 2B
Scott Wilson CES IE



Kamataka State Highways                                          Enviroinental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                        Exhibits
Edge Failure.of.theRo ad - Route .2
* 'S s~~~~~-    ' - ' F-
Edge Failure of the Road -Route 2B
. t
J-
Sharp Curve on Rolling Terrain with Poor Sight Distance - Route 3D
Scott Wilson t CES I IE



Karnataka State Highways                                              Enviromnental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                               Exhibits
Public Consultation at Torvi Village, Bijapur Taluk - Route 4
Scott Wilson ICES I IDE



Appendices






Appendix 6.1






Kamataka State Highwavs                              Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                         Appendix 6.1
Appendix 6.1: Design Alterations Considered in Project Routes
I.     Rectifving or Shifting of Horizontal Alignment
Route      Chainage (km)
From       To
1        3+900      4+200
2B
1+300      1+600
1+800      2+100
33+600     3+800
4+500      5±000
11+600     11+900
14+700     14+900
21+900     22+900
24+300     25+200
26+550     26+800
3A       6+100      7+150
3C       1+500       1+800
14       [6+200      6+400
II.    Reduction of Shoulders in Project Routes
Route          Chainage (Kmn)
From            To
4         15+100       20+148.67
III.   Raising of Embankment Considered in Project Routes
Route    Chainage (km)        Magnitude
From       To
I    6+610       7+210    600mm
29+880     31+390   600mm
141+310    42+720   550mm
45+1130    46+730   550mm
47+730     49+730   550mm
66+740     67+230   600mmrr
2A
0+000      4+865    600 mm
7-192      8+205    300mm
8-205      11+451   600 mm
I I -t451    117+819   500 mm
= 19+010   20+957  1300 mm
Scott Wilson / CES IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Appendix 6.1
Route     Chainage (km)         Magnitude
From      |To
23-+-708    25+515   1300 mm
25-515      26-720   ]300 rnm
26+-920     27+520   1200 mm
28+730      29+730   1200 mm
30+540      30+740    200 mm
33+460      35+380    200 mm
135+580     36+290    200 mm
38+000      38+810    200 mm
39+210      39+610    200 mm
40+000      41+300    200 mm
42+190      43+580    200 mm
44+570      45+370    200 mm
46+160      47+360   1200 mm
48+150     48-+-350    200 mm
2B    0+000       0+253     600mm
1+428      1+826      200mm
9+180       9+721     200mm
12+067      13+532    200mm
14+341     15+149    300mm
18+182     20+782    300mm
21+381      22+380    300mm
24+379      25+179    300mm
3A    0+000       8+000     Minimum depth of
_____ ____ _  400 mm raised
3B    3020        4085      600mm
6860        8620      600mm
9020        12840     600mm
15130       15930     600nmm
3C    3+840       5+130     500mm
5+130       5+940     300mm
6+647       7+752     300mm
9+151       9+651     300mm
9--651      10+150    600mm
10+150     11+654    300mm
12+655      13+055    300mm
14-r154     15+356    300mm
16+-156     16+755    300mm
16+755      18+155    300mm
118+755    19+356    500mm
19+356     20+655    300mm
Scon Wilson 'CES " IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                 Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Appendix 6.1
Route     Chainage (km)          Magnitude
From        To
20+655      22+634    300mm
24+635      25+335    300mm
27+61S      29+112    300mm
30+917      32+120    300mm
34+732      35+335    300mm
3D    24+610      25+210    700mm
25+210      26+010    500mm
34+210      35+420    600mm
36+020      37+040    600nmm
37+450      37+850    600mm
44+500      44+900    1000lmm
49+920      50+120    1000mmn
3E
1+140      2+237      300mm
3+536       4+ 135    300mm
11+122      11+819    800mm
21+883      22+281    800mm
23+584      25+305    300mm
39+594      40+588    500mm
43+474      43+872    500mm
5A
1619       2619       600mm
14358       14857     300mm
Scott WVilson i CES / ITIE






Appendix 6.2






Karnataka State Highways                              Environmental Impact Assessment Project
Improvement Project                                                           Appendix 6.2
Appendix 6.2: Educational Institutions and Hospitals near the Project Routes
School          I        College          ! HospitalHealth Centre
Route   LHS       RHS   Total   LHS    RHS   Total    LHS             RHS    Total
2A      j      3       1        4       -       11                          --
2B      l1                      2 l    =                  - l               - |
3A             -       -        -       Ii      1         2 |
3B        ~ ~3     1        4                         I~11                   
_3C    |       2                2         .~  l             |      2                 2
3D             3       1        4    =       =-           -        i       -         I
3E             -       1        1I                                           
4              -      2         2       1                 I-               --
SA             1                l 1          = -          - _
Total         14      8        22       2      3         5         4       1         5
Scott Wilson CES i IIIE






Appendix 6.3






Karnataka State Hizhways                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                            Appendix 6.3
Appendix 6.3: Girthwise Classification of trees with in the Corridor of Impact
Route _        Parameters          Chainage (km)    Numbers   Total
From      To       LHS R-RHS No. of
I_                                                       Trees
IA    I Girth < 30 cm          0+000 76+655.974   136  262       398
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  0+000 76+655.974   305  327    632
iii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000 76+655.974   270  214  484
_____________________        Route  Total               1514
2A    I Girth < 30 cm          0+000 50+577.366   168  193       361
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  0+000 50+577.366   85   89     174
iii Girth => 60          0+000 50+577.366   230  237       467
_                          =_= =_1002
2B    I Girth < 30 cm         0+000 26+960.361   66   41         108
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm   0+000 26+960.361   42   42     84
iii Girth => 60          0+000 26+960.361  126  101        237
_____________________                                    429
Route Total               1431
3A    I Girth<30cm                                                 0
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm                    6    4        10
iii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm    =              7    6        13
iv Girth => 90 and < 180 cm                   13    4       17
v Girth => 180 cm                            14    2        16
_             _             56
3B    I Girth < 30 cm          0+000 37+931.309   36   26         62
L ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm   0+000 37+931.309   29   33     62
_  iii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000 37+931.309   61   64     125
iv Girth => 90 and < 180 cm  0+000 37+931.309   74   70    144
|  0   | }              _                                393
3C    i Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  0+000  37+330.7    25   22       47
ii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000  37+330.7   45   26      71
_iii Girth => 90 and < 180 cm  0+000  37+330.7    63   5 1  104
iv Girth=> 180cm         0+000  37+330.7    79   65        144
_______                    =                  =    = _____  366
3D    I Girth < 30 cm          3+091  58+848.170   54   36        90
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  3+091  58+848.170   73   67    140
iii Girth >60 and <  cm  3+091  58+848.170   93   108      201
iv Girth => 90 and < 180 cm  3+091  58+848.170   93   86   179
_610
3E    I Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  0+000 45+416.773   41   60      101
ii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm  0+000 45+416.773   103  111    214
iii Girth => 90 and < 180 cm  0+000 45+416.773   31   29    60
iv Girth => 180 cm       0+000 45+416.773   22   25         47
_                                                        422
_                      _____Route Total                 1847
4    I Girth < 30 cm          0+000 20+148.678    7    3          10
.. ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm  10+000 20+148.678   16   11     27
Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                 Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Appendix 6.3
Route           Parameters          Chainage (km)    Numbers   Total
From       To       LHS |RHS  No. of
Trees
. iiGirth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000 20+148.678   83   98     181
Route Total       l         218
5A    I Girth < 30 cm           0+000  19+330.584   15   35         50
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm   0+000  19+330.584    8    12     20
iii Girth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000  19+330.584   41   81    122
__ __                               _ _ _  _ __192
5B    I Girth < 30 cm           0+000  11+807.245   20   15         35
ii Girth => 30 and < 60 cm   0+000  11+807.245    6    12     18
=-G iiiGirth => 60 and < 90 cm   0+000  11+807.245   76   62         138
_ _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _19 1
_  = 7Route Total                  383
_______                Grand Total                          5393
Scott Wilson i CES / IIIE



Appendix 6.4






Karnataka State Highways                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                           Appendix 6.4
Appendix 6.4: Schedule of Bus bavs
Route 1: Kalmala Junction to Sindhnur
Location                                      Remarks
Left Carriage Way                  Right Carriage Wav
Start      Centre       End        Start        Centre      End
5.048    5.100          5.153       5.173    5.225          5.278 Kasbe Camp
9.548    9.600          9.653       9.673    9.725          9.778 Kallur
13.548   13.600         13.653      13.673   13.725         13.778 Before Distributory
_                         Canal
19.108   19.160         19.213      19.233   19.285         19.338 Bommanahal Road
Cross
23.123   23.175         23.228      23.248   23.300         23.353 Mantralaya Road Cross
24.298   24.350        24.403       24.423   24.475         24.528 Bettadore
27.578   27.630         27.683      28.348   28.400         28.453 Neermanvi
34.940   35.000        35.060       35.090   35.150         35.210 Manvi Town
49.798   49.850         49.903      49.923   49.975         50.028 Amareswara Camp
54.690   54.750         54.810      54.840i  54.900         54.960 Pothanal Town
62.248   62.300         62.353      62.373   62.425         62.478 Mankeshari Camp
65.908   65.960         66.013      66.033   66.085         66.138 Jawalgiri Village
68.248   68.300         68.353      68.373   68.425         68.478
69.948   70.000         70.053      70.728   70.780         70.833 Algiriramara Camp
72.148   72.200         72.253      72.528   72.580         72.633 Machalaya Camp
76.365   76.425         76.485      76.515   76.575         76.635 Before Sindanur
Route 2A: Sindhnur to Gangavati
Location                                      Remarks
Left Carriage Way                   Right Carriage Way
Start      Centre       End         Start       Centre       End
2.370       2.430       2.490       2.520        2.580       2.640       Kustagi Road
___________   __________      ___________  __________Cross,Sindanur
5.963       6.015       6.068       6.088        6.140       6.193    Hosahalli Village
8.340       8.400   .   8.460       8.340        8.400       8.460     Siruguppa Road
Cross,Sripuram
9.808       9.860       9.913       9.933        9.985      10.038             Village
11.323      11.375      11.428      11.448       11.500      11.553     Gorebal Village
15.448      15.500      15.553      15.748       15.800      15.853    Hanchanala Camp
19.248      19.300      19.353      19.248       19.300      19.353    Kadigere Village
22.740      22.800      22.860      22.890       22.950      23.010   Karatagi Town (1)
24.265      24.325      24.385      24.415       24.475      24.535   Karatagi Town (2)
26.048      26.100      26.153      26.173       26.225      26.278    Jhuratagi Village
27.548      27.600      27.653      27.848       27.900      27.953  Marlanahalli Village
31.068      31.120      31.173      30.648       30.700      30.753    Ravinagar Camp
32.998      33.050      33.103      33.123       33.17'      33.228          Siddapura
37.848      37.900      37.953      38.248       38.300      38.353       Sriramanagar
Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                             Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                         Appendix 6.4
42.748     42.800      42.853       43.048      43.100     43.1531      Mardi Village
45.473     45.525      45.578       45.898      45.950     46.003  Jangamara Kalgudi
47.548     47.600      47.653      47.798       47.850     47.903         Vidyanagar
49.420     49.480      49.540      49.740       49.800     49.860 Gangavathi Town(l)
Route 2B: Gangavati to Budugumpa cross
Location                                     Remarks
Left Carriage Wav                    Right Carriage Way
Start        Centre      End          Start        Centre      End
2.248       2.300        2.353       2.373        2.425        2.478 Vaddarahatti
Village
3.348       3.400        3.453       3.748        3.800        3.853 Guddada Camp
4.723       4.775       4.828        5.048        5.100        5.153 Basapattana
Village
6.028       6.080        6.133       6.548        6.600        6.653 Dasnal Village
10.248      10.300       10.353      10.473       10.525       10.578 Chikkabenakal
I__________               ___________              Road  Cross
12.448      12.500       12.553      12.648       12.700       12.753 H.G. Ramulu
Nagar
15.348      15.400       15.453      15.668       15.720       15.773 Mukkumpa
Village
18.348      18.400       18.453      18.573       18.625       18.678 abal gudda
I__ _ _ _  _   _   _   _   _  _    _   __.         V illage
20.348      20.400       20.453      20.573       20.625       20.678 Indrigi Road
I__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _   C ross
26.165      26.225       26.285      26.290       26.350       26.4 10 Budagumpa
ViIIage
Route 3A: Hattigudur to Shahpur
Location                                 Remarks
Left Lane                          Right Lane
Start     Centre    End       Start     Centre    End
0.148     0.200     0.253     0.308     0.360      0.413 Hattigudur
4.290     4.350     4.410     4.465     4.525      4.585 Rasthapur Cross
5.538     5.590     5.643     5.968     6.020      6.073
6.883     6.935     6.9SS     7.013     7.065      7.118 Vibuthihalli Village
10.573    10.625    10.67S    10.448    10.500    10.553 Before Shahpur
Scott Wilson / CES IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                          Appendix 6.4
Route 3B: Shahpur to Jevargi
Location                                    Remarks
Left Carriage Wav                  Right Carriage Wav
Start       Centre       End         Start        Centre   End
1.940       2.000       2.060        2.090    2.150  2.2 10 College Stop
4.440       4.500       4.560         4.790    4.850  4.910 Bheemarayanagudi (I)
6.090       6.150       6.210        6.240    6.300  6.360 Bheemarayanagudi (2)
13.698      13.750      13.803       13.873   13.925  13.978 Madrali Cross
16.098      16.150      16.203       16.223   16.275  16.328 Existing Bus Shelter
20.323      20.375      20.428       20.473   20.525 20.578 Mudwala Cross
22.423      22.475      22.528       22.623   22.675 22.728 Mudabala (B)
26.123      26.175      26.228       26.323   26.375 26.428 Chigralli Cross
31.165      31.225      31.285       31.040   31.100 31.160Kallur
33.348      33.400      33.453       33.523   33.575 33.628 Aurad
Route 3C: Jevargi to Gulbarga
Location                                    Remarks
Left Carriage Way                 Right Carriage Way
Start       Centre       End        Start       Centre    End
0.840       0.900       0.960       0.990     1.050  1.1 10 Jevargi Town (1)
2.240       2.300       2.360       2.490     2.550  2.610 Jevargi Town (2)
10.248      10.300      10.353      10.373    10.425  10.478 Cross Road
12.448      12.500      12.553      12.648    12.700  12.753 Ferozabad Road Cross
20.068      20.120      20.173      20.193    20.245  20.298 Existing Bus Shelter
23.123      23.175      23.228      23.248    23.300 23.353 Farhatabad
28.948      29.000      29.053      29.148    29.200 29.253 Cross Road
30.448      30.500      30.553      30.573    30.625 30.678 Anaguva Road Cross
32.040      32.100      32.160      32.190    32.250 32.310 Central Jail, Gulbarga
34.790      34.850      34.910      34.940    35.000 35.060 All India Radio Station
36.065      36.125      36.1 S5     36.215    36.275  36.335 Ramamandir, Gulbarga
Scott Wilson / CES ,' IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                              Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                         Appendix 6.4
Route 3D: Gulbarga to Homnabad
Location                                    Remarks
Left Carriage Way                Right Carriage Wav
Start     |Centre      End        1Start       Centre   End
3.915      3.975       4.035       4.065     4.125  4.185 Doordarshankendra,
l __________  ___________   ____________   _________   ______  G ulbarga
6.840      6.900       6.960       7.090     7.150  7.210 Industrial Area. Gulbarga
10.698     10.750      10.803      10.823    10.875 10.928 Tavaregere Cross Road
13.748     13.800      13.853      14.073    14.125 14.178 Awarad Road Cross
17.698     17.750      17.803      18.048    18.100 18.153 Kagganamadi Road Cross
19.198     19.250      19.303      19.448    19.500 19.553 Balbad Road Cross
21.098     21.150      21.203      21.298    21.350 21.403 Karikotta Village
22.840     22.900      22.960      23.090    23.150 23.2 10 Mahagaon Cross
25.998     26.050      26.103      26.123    26.175 26.228 Rasthapur Road Cross
32.265     32.325      32.385      32.790    32.850 32.910 Kamalapur
41.273     41.325      41.378      41.398    41.450 41.503 Doguram Road Cross
45.123     45.175      45.228      45.478    45.530 45.583 Kimnie
46.565     46.625      46.685      46.740    46.800 46.860 Hallikhed (B)
49.898     49.950      50.003      50.023    50.075 50.128 Hallikhed (K)
Route 3E: Homnabad to Naubad junction, Bidar
Location                                   Remarks
Left Carriage Way                Right Carriage Way
Start       Centre      End         Start       Centre End
2.808       2.860       2.913       2.933  2.985  3.038 Dhurnasura Village
5.573       5.625       5.678       5.798  5.850  5.903 Existing Bus Shelter
8.648       8.700       8.753       8.773  8.825  8.878 Jalsingh Road Cross
18.548      18.600      18.653      18.748 18.800  18.853 Hallikhed (I)
21.448      21.500      21.553      21.748 21.800 21.853 Sugar Factory
27.728      27.780      27.833      27.998 28.050 28.103 Byalahalli Village
32.248      32.300      32.353      32.508 32.560 32.613 Nirmanahalli Thanda
35.398      35.450      35.503      35.608 35.660 35.713 Existing Bus Shelter
37.123      37.175      37.228      37.278 37.330 37.383 Anadura
38.998      39.050      39.103      39.178 39.230 39.283 Kollur Cross
40.148      40.200      40.253      40.348 40.400 40.453 Bakachowd Road Cross
44.390      44.450      44.510      44.540 44.6001 44.660 Colony Cross. Naubad
Scon Wilson! CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                            Appendix 6.4
Route 4: Bijapur to Tikota
Location                                     Remarks
Left Carriage Wa!                   Right Carriage Wav
Start       Centre      End         Start        Centre      End
0.590      0.650       0.710        0.740       0.800       0.860 Water Tank. Bijapur
1.540       1.600      1.660        1.690       1.750       1.810 Govt. Hospital,
.__________                                       Bijapur
4.440      4.500       4.560        4.590       4.650       4.710 Medical College,
_________I                          Bijapur
5.798      5.850       5.903        5.998       6.050       6.103 Veterinary Hospital
Route 5A: A.P. Border to Raichur
Location                                     Remarks
Left Carriage Wav             Right Carriage Way
Start     Centre    End        Start      Centre    End
1.578     1.630      1.683     1.715      1.767     1.820 Check Post
3.390     3.450      3.510     3.255      3.315     3.375 Shakti Nagar Entrance
3.848     3.900      3.953     4.048     4.100      4.153 Raichur T.P.Station
7.298     7.350      7.403     7.433      7.485     7.538 Hegasanahalli Village
8.958     9.010      9.063     9.113      9.165     9.218 Chikkasugur Cross
14.048    14.100     14.153    14.215     14.267    14.320 Yermaras Village
16.183    16.235     16.288    16.048    16.100     16.153 Yermaras Cross Road
Route 5B: Raichur to Kalmala junction
Location                                    Remarks
Left Lane             _         Right Lane
Start      Centre   End         Start     Centre    End
2.390     2.450      2.510     2.540      2.600     2.660 After R.O.B
3.298     3.350      3.403     3.423      3.475     3.528 Agricultural College
4.448     4.500      4.553     4.573      4.625     4.678 Agsal village
Scott Wilson / CES ! IIIE






Appendix 6.5






Karnataka State Highways                                                                                                                  EnvirotinentaI Impact Assessmnlt Rlcpolt
Impro% mjient Project                                                                                                                                                    Appeniix 6.5
Route-1. Location- Kalmala junction to Sindhnur
Impact Criteria                     Maximum                   N  Pro ect        Upgra ation Without Mitigatlonn Measure          Upgradat n with miti ?tlon measure
Magnitudetm}    Importance(w)   m    w   m w          m          w                 m-w                   m            w             m
Location                                                 _______
Gravity low irrigation                    5                5         =    =    =
Reservoirs behind dams                    5                5          _    _    _
Deforestation                             5                5
Road drainage                            5                 5          3   3    -9        -4          4                  -16                  4            4              16
Road Design                              5                 5          .3   3     S        .3         4                  -12                  4            5              20
Land Resources                           5                 5          1    1    I         -3         4                  -12                  -3           3               -9
Sol Quality                              5                 5          1    2    2         -2         3                  -6                   1            3               3
Water Resources                           5                5          -1   3    -3       -2          3                  4                    3             3              9
Water uality                              5                5          1    1    1         -3         3                  -9                   -1            4              -4
Air Quality                               5                5          -2   4    4         -3         4                  -12                  4             4              16
Nose Level                               5                 5          -2   4    4         -1         2                  -2                   2             4              8
Biotic Environrnent                       5                5          -1   3    .3       .5          5                  -25                  4             5             20
Sanitation and waste disposal             5                5          -3   4    112       -4         4                   1ti                 3             5              15
Emiloyment o  ortunitles                 5                 5          1    1    1         2          2                   4                    3            3              9
Safety                                   5                 5           4   4    1         -3         4                  -12                  4             4              16
__________________________   _____________  43  ________  -124                                      119
Magnitude: Deflned In a scale of 1 to 5 (   Indlcates beneficlal Impact and - Indicates adverse Impactl
Importance: Defined In a scale of 1 to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criteriatfactor)
Positive and beneficial impact:                         200-300
Positive and moderate impact:                            100-19S
No appreciable Impact:                                    0-99
NegatIve and moderate impact:                           1 to -100
Negattve and significant impact:                      -101 to .200
Negative and adverse Impact:                          .200 to -300



Kam~ataka State Hlighwvays                                .Environmental Impact Assessmellt Repor-
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                             Appen(lix 6.5
Route.2, Link A, Locatlon. Slndhnur to Gangawati
Impact Criteria                   Maxinum                 N  Pro ect         Upgradatlon wIthout Mi igation Measure      Upgradat in with mitt atlon measure
Magnitude(m)  Importance(w)  m    w    mw             m            w            mw                m           w            m w
Location                              5(Max)         5(Max)            _            _
Gravity flow Irrigation                 5               5         -4    3    -12         -3           4             -12              4           4             16
Reservoirs bohind dams                  5               5
Deforestation                           5               5                                                                                         _
Road drainage                           5               5         -3    3    -9         -4            4             -16              4           4             16
Road Design                             5               5         -4         -16         -3           4             -12              4           5             20
Land Resources                          5               5         1    1      1          -3           4             -12             -3           3             -9
Soil Quality                            5               5         1    2      2          -3           3              -9              1           3             3
Water Resources                         5               5         -2    3     4          -2           3              4               3           3             9
Water qualilty                          5               5         1    1      1          -3           3              .9              -2          4             48
Air Quality                             5               5         -2    4    4          -3            3              -9              4           4             10
Nolse Level                             5               S         -2    4     -8        -1            2              -2              2           4             8
Biotic Environment                      5               5         -1   3      -3        -5            5             -25              4           5             20
Sanitation and waste disposal           5               5         -3    4    -12         -4           4             -15              3           5             15
Employment opportunities                5               5         1 1       1            2            2              4               3           3             9
Safety                                  5               5         -4 4       -16         3            4                              A12  4      4             16
___ __ __ __45                        __ _ _ _ _ _   _    _   __       -136ei_ __ _              __ _ _          131
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5 ( "+ Indicates beneficial Impact and "." Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criteria/factor)
Positive and beneficial Impact:                      200-300
Positive and moderate Impact:                        100.199
No appreciable Impact:                                 0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                       -1 to -100
Negative and signincant Impact:                    .101 to .200
Negative and adverse Impact:                       -200 to -300
5contt Vii 1i,5,, / (ot. I, li P  



Karnataka State Hlighways                                                                                                           Environmental Impact Assessmeint Report
Inprovement Project                                                                                                                                               Appendix 6.5
Route-2, Link B, Location- Gangawati to Budugumpa
impact Criteria                     Maximum                  No Pro ect           Upgradation With aut Mitigation Measure   Upgradatlc.n with mitigaton measure
Magnitude(m)   Importance(w)   m    w   m-w                m                 w         m-w         m        w            m w
Location                               5(Max)           5(Max)                                                                              _
Gravity flow Irrigation                   5                5         -4    3   -12             -3                 4         -12         4                      16
Reservoirs behind dams                    5                5
Deforestation                             5                5          -3   3    .9             -4                 4         -16         4        4             16
Road drainage                             5                5         -3   3    .9              -4                 4         -16         4        4            16
Road Design                               5                5          -4   4    -16             -3                4         -12         4        5            20
Land Resources                            5                5          1    1    1               -3                4         -12        .3        3             -9
Soil Quality                              5                5          1   2    2                .3                3          -9         1        3             3
Water Resources                           5                5          -2   3    -4             -2                 3          --         3        3             9
Water uality                              5                5          1    1    1               -3                3          .9        -2        4             -6
Air Quality                               5                5          -2   4   4                -3                3          .9         4        4             16
Noise Level                               5                5          -2   4    4               -1                2          -2         2        4             8
Biotic Environment                        5                5          1    2    2               -5                5         -25         4        5             20
Sanitation and waste disposal             5                5          -3   4    -12             4                 4         -16         3        5             15
Employment opportunities                  5                5          1    1    1               2                 2          4          3        39
Safety                                    5                5          -4   4    -16             -3                          -12         4                      16
- _89 I*_152                                                            =         -_ 147
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5  I "' Indicates beneflclal Impact and "-" Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particul2r action on the environmental criteriaffactor)
Positive and beneicial Impact:                          200-300
Positive and moderate impact:                           eO0-199
No appreciable Impact:                                    0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                          *1 to -100
Negative and siginicant Impact:                        -101 to .200
Negative and adverse Impact:                           -200 to -300



Karnataka State Hlighways                                                                                                       Environmenital Inmpact Assessmlent Repolt
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                          Appendix 6.5
Route-3, Link A, Location- Hattigudur to Shahpur
_____________________________  ~ Maximum               No Pro ect      Upgradat Wi hout Mltig tion Measure         Upgradation with mitigation measure
Impact Criteria         Magnitude(m)  Importance(w)  m    w   mw               m              w          m-w             m          w           m-w
Location_ _
Gravity flow Irrlgation                 S               5                
Reservoirs behind dams                  5               5              =
Deforestation                           5              5 _3   3              9           -4             4          -16             4         4             16
Road drainage                           5                         - 3   3    -9          -4             4           -64-                     4             16
Road Design                             5               5         -4   4 -16             .3             4           -12            4          5            20
Land Resources                          5              5          1    1    1            -3             4           -12            3          3             9
Soil Quality                            5               5         1   2    2             -3             3           .9             1          3            3
Water Resources                         5               5         1    3    3            -2             3           -6             2          2            4
Water quality                           5               5         T    1    1            -3             3           -9            -2          4            -8
Air Quallty                             5              5          -2   3    -6           -3             4           -12            3          4            12
Noise Level                             5              5          1    2    2            -1             2           -2             2          4            8
Biotic Environment                      5               5         -1   2    -2           -3             3           -9             4          5            20
Sanitation and waste disposal           5               5         -3   4   -12           -4             4           -16            3          5            15
Employment opportunities                5              5          1       1  1           2              2            4             3          3    _
Safety                                 5               5         -2   2    -4            2              1            3             2          2            4
_________________________ _  _ ___________  __                           __I _45-112                                                              110
Magnitudw De:ened In a scale of i to 5 J "" Indlcates beneficial Impact and "-" Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5 ( Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criterialfactor)
Positive and beneficial Impact:                      200-300
Positive and moderate Impact:                        100-199
No appreciable Impact:                                0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                       -1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:                   -191 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                       -200 to -300



Karnataka State Hlighways                                                                                                       Environmental Impact Assessmcnt Rc,,
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                          Appendix 6.5
Route-3, Link B. Location. Shahpur to Jevargi
Maximium                No Prc ect      Uppracation W  hout Mitigan Measure        Ugoradatie  with ritigatlon measure
Impact Criteria           Magnitude(m)   Importance(w)   m    w   m w            m              w          m-w            m         w           m w
Location                                 5(Max)          5(Max)     ___         _
Gravity flow Irrigation                    5               5
Reservoirs behind dams                     5               5         _    _
Deforestation                              5               5
Road drainage                              5               5          -3   3    .9          -4             4           -16            4         4            16
Road Design                                5               5          -3   3    -9          -3             4           -12            4         5            20
Land Resources                             5               5          1   1    1            -3             4           -12            -3        3            -9
Soil Quality                               5                5         1   2    2            -3             3            -9            1         3            3
Water Resources                            5               5          1   3    3            -2             3            4             2         2            4
Water qualtY                              5               5          I   1    1            -3             3            .9            1         4            4
Air Quality                                5               5          -2   3    4           -3             4           -12            4         4            16
Noise Level                                5               5          1   2    2            -1             2            -2            2         4            8
Blotic Environment                         5               5          -1   2    -2          -3             3            -9            4         5            20
Sanitatlon and waste disposal              5               5          -3   4   -12          -4             4            -16           3         5            15
Employment opportunities                   5               5          1   1    1             2             2            4             3         3            9
Safety                                     5               5          -2   2    -4           2              1           3             2         2            4
I                    I_  _   32                           _          96                                  110
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5 ( "  indlcates beneficial impact and " Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular actlon on the environmental criterda/factor)
Positive and beneficial impact:                          200-300
Positive and moderate impact:                            100-199
No appreciable Impact:                                    0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                           -1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:                       -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                            200 to -300



Karnataka State Higlhways                                                                                                Environnmental Inmpact Assessment Report
Improvemnent Project                                                                                                                                 Appendix 6.5
Route-3, Link C. Location- Jevargi to Gulbarga
Maximum                    No Project        Upgradatio'i without mitigation    Up ciradation with mitiqatlon measure
Impact Criteria           Magnitude(m)  I_mporbance(w)    m         w     m-w        m        w        m-w          m        w               m-W
Location                               5(Max)           5(Max)                  _    =                  =
Gravity flow irrigation                                 ___
Reservoirs behind dams                  - -_____=___=
Deforestation
Road drainage                                   _                     -3      3    -           -4        4        -16         4         416
Road Design                               5                5          -3      3      -9        -3        4        -12         4         5               20
Land Resources                            5                5           1      1       1        -4        4        -16         -3        4               -12
SoilQuality                               5                5           1      2      2         .3        3         -9          1        3                3
Water Resources                           5                5                  3      3         -2        3         -6         2         2                4
Water quality                             5                5           1      1       1        -3        3         .9          1        4                4
AirQuality                                5                5          -2      3       6        -3        4        -12         3         4                12
Noise Level                               5               5            1      2      2         -1        2         -2         2         4                8
Biotic Environment                        5                5          -1      2      -2        -2        3         -6         4         5                20
Sanitation and waste disposal             5                5          -3      4      -12       -4        4        -1-          3        4                12
Employment opportunities                  5               5            1      1      1         2         2         4          3         3                9
Safet                                     5                           -2      2       4        2         1         3          2         2
Y________________________________________  __________              __           -32  ___  =_____             -97    --    __ ________               100
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (+  Indicates beneficial Impact and - indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of 1 to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criteria/factor)
Positive and beneficial impact:                         200-300
Positive and moderate impact:                           100-199
No appreciable Impact:                                   0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                           1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:                      -101 to -200
Negative and adverse impact:                          -200 to -300



Karnataka State liighways                                                                                                                Environmental Impact Assessmenit Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                                      Appendix 6.5
Route-3. Link D0 LocatIon- Gulbarga to Homnabad
Maximum               No Pro ect       Upgradation without ltigation measure          Upg adation with miti ation measure
mpLacCritbrIa             nitude(T  Importance(W) m   w   m w           m            w               m w              m            w                m w
Location                                                       ___
drji!y !!9A irrigat!n      _           5             5     __      _
Reservoirs behind dams                5              5         _   _
Deforestation                          5             5         _   _
Road drainage                          5             5         -3   3    -9      -4           4                -16              4            4                 16
Road Design                            5             5         -3   3    -9       -5          4                -20              3            5                 15
Land Resources                        5              5         I   I    1         -4          4                -16              -2           4                 -t
Soil Quality                          5              5    -         2    2        -3          3                 -9               1           3                 3
Water Resources                        5             5         1   3    3         -2           3                4                2            2                4
water quality                          5             5         1   1    1         -3           3                .9               1            4                4
Air Quality                           5              5         -2   3   -         -3          4                -12              3             4                12
Noise Level                           5              5         1   2    2         -1          2                 -2               2            4    _
Biotic Environment                    5              5         -1   2    -2       -2           3                4                4            5                20
Sanitation and waste disposal         5              5         -3   4   -12       -4           5                .20              3            4                12
Employment opportunities              5              5         1   1    1         2            2                4                3            3                 9
Safety                                5              5         -3   5   -15       -2           4                4                2            2                 4
Total                                                          =   =    -43                                    -120                                            99
Magnitude: Defined in a scale of I to S (l" Indicates benefieial Impact and "-' Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of 1 to 5 ( Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criteria/factor)
Positive and beneficial Impact:                    200-300
Positive and moderate Impact:                      100-199
No appreciable Impact:                              0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                     -1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:                 -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                     .200 to -300



Karnataka State Flighnways                                                                                               Environmiental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                  Appelidii  6.5
Route-3, Link E, Location- Homnabad to Naubad, Bidar
Maximum              No Pro ect    Upgrad tion without mitigation measure          Upgradat on with mitigation measure
Impact Criteria          Magnitude(m) Importance(w)  m    w    m-w        m          w              m-w                m                w              m-w
Location                                                         _
Gravity flow Irrigation                    5             5             =
Reservolrs behind dams                     5             5
Deforestation                              55                                      ______                     _______
rJorad drainage                            5             5        -3   3    -9        4          4              *16                4               4                16
Road Design                               5              5        -1    3    -3      *3          5               15                3               5                15
Land Resources                             5             5        1    1     1       -3          3               -9               -2               4                -8
Soil Quality                               5             5        1    2     2       -3          3               -9                1                3               3
Water Resources                            5             5        1    3     3       -2          3               -6                2                2               4
Water quality                              5            5         1    1      1      -3          3               -9                1                4               4
Alr Quality                               5             5         -2   3    -6       -3          4              -12                3               4                12
Noise Level                               5             5         1    2     2       -1          2               -2                2               4                8
Biotic Environment                        5             5         -1    2     2      -2          3               -6                4                5               20
Sanitation and waste disposal             5             5         -3   4    -12      -2          4               -8                3                4               12
Employment opportunities                  5             5         1    1     1        2          2               4                 3                3               9
Safety                                    5             5         -3   5    -15      -2          4               48                3                2               6
Total                                _                                       -37                                -96                                                101
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (    I Indicates beneficlal Impact and - Indicates adverse impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criteria/factor)
Positive and beneficlal Impact:                      200-300
Positive and moderate Impact:                         100-199
No appreciable impact:                                 0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                       -1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:                    -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                        -200 to .300



Karnataka State Highways                                                                                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                       Appendix 6.5
Route4, Locatlon- Bijapur to Tikota
Maxlmum                No Pro ect       Uogaatlon With ut Mitigation Measure         Upgradati n with mitigation measure
Impact Criteria       Magnitude(m)  lmportance(w)   m    w   m w         m          w               m w                 m         w            m w
Location                        5(Max) )_                        _                           _ _
Gravity flow irrigation           5               5         _   _    _                                           _                                 _-
Reservoirs behind dams            5               5
Deforestation                     5               5
Road drainage                     5               5          3    3    9        4          4               .16                 4         4             16
Road Design                       5               5         .3   3    -9        -3         4               .12                 4         5             20
Land Resources                    5               5          1    1    1        -3        4                .12                -3         3             -9
Soil Quality                      5               5          1   2    2         -2         3                -6                 1         3             3
Water Resources                   5                5         1   2    2         -3         3                -9                 1         3              3
Water quality                     5               5          I    1    1        -3         3                -9                -1         4             -4
Air Quality                       5               5         -2   4    -8        -3         4               -12                 3         4             12
Nolse Level                       5               5         .2   4    -8        -1         2                -2                 2         4             8
Blotic Environment                5               5         -1   3    -3        -5         5               -25                 5         5             25
Sanitation and waste dispos       5               5         -1   4    -4        -3         4               -12                 2         5             10
Employment opportunities          5               5          1    1    1        2          2                4                  3         3              9
Safety                            5               5         -4   4   -16        -3         3                -9                 4         4             1 6
____ ___ ____ ___ ____ ___ ____ _ _ _  __ _  -32   _             -120                                        109
Magnitude: Defined in a scale of I to 5 ( "+ Indlcates beneficlal Impact and "-" Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined in a scale of 1 to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criterlalfactor)
Positive and beneficial impact:                 200-300
Positive and moderate Impact:                   100-199
No appreciable Impact:                           0-99
Negative and moderate Impact:                   1 to -100
Negative and significant Impact:              -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                  -200 to -300



Karnataka State Hlighways                                                                                                      Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                          Appendix 6.5
Route-5 Link A Locatton- A.P. Border To Ralchur
Maximum                  No Pro act        .Upgradat In without Mitigation Measures         Jpgradati n with Mitigation Measure
Impact Criteria        Magnitude(m)    importance(w)   m    w    m-w           m            w              m-w                 m         w            mw
Location                          5(Maxl           5(Max)
Gravity flow Irrigation             5                5
Reservoirs behind dams              5                5         _
Deforestation                       5                5                _     _                        .
Road drainage                       5                5           3    3     9          -4          4               *16                 4         4             18
Road Design                         5                5          .3   3    -t          -3           4               -12                 5         5             25
Land Resources                      5                 5          1    1     1          -3          4               -12                 -3        3             .9
Sol Quality                         5                5           1    2     2          -2          3                4                  1         3              3
Water Resources                      5                5          1    2     2          -3          3                .9                 I         3
Water qualty                         5                5          1   11                -3          3                *9                -1         4            -4
Air Quality                         5                5          -2   4    -8          -3           3                .9                 4         4             18
Noise Level                         5                5          -2   4    4            -2          2                -4                 2         4              8
Biotic Environment                  5                5          -2    3    .6         -2           5               -10                 3         5             15
Sanitation and waste disposal       5                5          -1    4    -4         -3           4               -12                 2         5             10
Employment opportunities            5                5           1    1     1          2           2                4                  3         3              9
Safety                              5                5          -3   4    -12         -2                          -11                  4         4             16
______ _____ ______ _____ ___   __ _____ ______ _____ ______ _____-31  _ _ _ _ _ _ _            -101           __ _ _o___                    0
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5  I "  indicates beneficial Impact and - Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Defined In a scale of I to 5( Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criterla/factor)
Positive and beneficlal Impact:                  200 to 300
Positive and moderate Impact:                     100 to199
No appreciable Impact:                             0 to 99
Negative and moderate Impact:                     -1 to -100
Negative and signlficant Impact:                 -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                    -200 to -300



Kamataka State Highways                                                                                                                  Environmental Impact Assessrnint Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                                                     Appendix 6.5
Route-5, Link B, Location- Ralchur to Kalmaia junction
Maxirmum                No Prolect        Upgradatf n without Mltigation Measure         Uoigradation with mItigation measure
Impact Criteria            Magnitude(m)   Weightage(w)   m    w   m w            m          w              m w                m           w               m w
Location                                                          T_       _ 
Gravity flow irrigation                    5                5         _    _                           _
Reservoirs behind dams                     5                5      _       _                           _
Deforestation                              5                5         _    _                           _
Road drainage                              5                5          3    3               -4          4              -16                4          4                16
Road Design                                5                5         -3    3    -9        -3           4              -12                5          5                25
Land Resources                             5                5          1    1    1          -3          4              -12               -3           3               -9
Soil Quality                               5                5          1    2    2         -2           3              -6                 1           3               3
Water Resources                            5                5          1    2    2          -3          3              .9                 I           3               3
Water quality                              5                5          1    1    1          -3          3               -9               -1           4               -4
Air Quality                                5                5         -2    4    -8        -3           4              -12                4           4               16
Noise Level                                5                5          2   4    -8         -1           2               -2                2           4               8
Biotic Environment                         5                5         -1    3    .3        -2           5              -10                3           5               15
Sanitation and waste disposal              5                5         -1    4    -4        -3           4              .12                2           5               10
Employment opportunities                   5                5          1    1    1          2           2               4                 3           3               9
Safety                                     5                5         -3    4    -12        -l          3               -3                4           4               16
tY_____________________________  =____________    =____________              -28   ___________   _______           -99          ___________  _8_____             108
Magnitude: Defined In a scale of I to 5 ( +" Indicates beneficial Impact and -"  Indicates adverse Impact)
Importance: Denned In a scale of I to 5 (Importance means the significance of the particular action on the environmental criterila/factor)
Positive and beneficial Impact:                         200 to 300
Positive and moderate impact:                           100 to 199
No appreciable Impact:                                   0 to 99
Negative and moderate Impact:                           -1 to .100
Negative and significant Impact:                       -101 to -200
Negative and adverse Impact:                           -200 to -300






Appendix 7.1






Karnataka State Highways                                                                                     Frnvirontmiental Impact Asscssmi,. .ol l
Improvemenit Project                                                                                                                   Appendix 7.1
Public Consultation at Routel: Kallur Village, Taluk Manvi, District- Raichur- 5"' June,2000
SI.No      Issucs                            Public Perception                                     Consultants' Recommendation                       Nlitigation Nicasure
I       I.and         Compensation has to be on par with the prevalent market rates for the  The respondents' awareness level is very high.    Resettleineiet Actionl Plan
acquisition    land.  Besides,  the  PAP's  unequivocally  expressed  that  the  The land acquisition and compensation dispersal will  adequately addresses the benefits
compensation should be paid before the land is acquired and the civil  have to be transparent and efficient so as to avoid any  to be extended to the Project
works start.                                                      problems in future.                                   affected Persons and has an
inbuilt clause that compensation
disbursement and benefits are to
be disbuIsed to the PAPs before
commenicemenit of civil works
2       Encroachme   While the PAPs do agree that there have been illegal occupancy and  The PWD should strictly maintain its Legal ROW.       The project envisages under its
nt/           encroachment of the govt. land, and that they cannot get any  Roadside vendors and shopkeepers must be prevented         R&R policy to extend Shiftinig
Encroachers  compensation for the land occupied, they nevertheless feel that  from spilling over to the ROW irrespective of the days or   Allowance, housinig facility
government should extend some amount of assistance. Since the  activities. Shifting allowance can be extended to the     ulider EWS schemes to the
sources of livelihood for most of the likely PAP's/PAFs is dependent  encroachers.                                      encroachers losing their
upon agriculture, they expressed concern over their displacement as it                                                   livelihood depending upoIl the
would result in moving away from their workplace i.e. the agricultural                                                   poverty line status. The details
fields. Proximity to the fields ensures them a regular job as casual                                                    are given in the RAP.
labourers or farm hands in the agriculture fields.
For encroachers it was suggested that though they are not legally
entitled for compensation, they could however be linked to the ongoing
government housing schemes like the Ashraya Housing Scheme or the
government could acquire land, convert them into plots and allow the
displaced families to build houses there.
Nevertheless, some of the squatters felt that they should be provided
with land and monetary assistance to construct the lost structure.
3       Resettlement  Those likely to lose commercial structures felt that the best option is to  The Local Municipal authorities must be involved in  'I'here is a provision in tle RAP
allow them to continue in the existing locales by shifting a little beyond  exploring the possibility of providing alternate site for  for makinig available 250sq.ft of'
the COI. Ilowever, they also consented on the option of commercial  commercial complex or make provisions for a market   shop area in a complex to the
complexes let out on rent basis with vicinity to the road.        place on municipal or panchayats land, preferably near  Below Poverty l.ine Squatters at
the road alignment.                                   a cost to be decided by the (GOK.
Shifting allowance can be extended to the encroachers
and squatters.
A7-1                                                    Scott Wilson / ('ES / lIIE



Karnataka State Hlighways                                                                                    Environmental Impact Assessimient Report
Improvemenit Project                                                                                                                   Appendix 7.1
Sl.No      Issues                             Public Perception                                    Consultants' Recommendation                       Mitigatio.ii Mcasuire
4        Fauploylienit  A Fiew squattei-s insisted oni gettinig eitlier a governmenit job or at least   It is evident the people are muchi inclined towards a  'Ihere is a pr(visioll in the R&R
and          some monetary assistance from the authorities. The populace in general  govemment job as it offers good pay and security. Project policy that the Contractor while
economic      could not relate to the economic benefits of a road development   related employment opportunities did not evince any   execution has to give prefereilce
benefits      project.                                                          interest.                                            to the PAPs in jobs. No
governmenit jobs are to be
extended to the PAI's.
5       Enviroimcint  The respondents were interested in planting fruit bearing trees as  The awareness about environment is very much evident    The plantation programme will
al aspects    avenue plantation, Neem and Tamarind trees.                       here. Proximity to Manvi and Raichur also ensures     take care of the roadside avenie
appreciable social, environimental and political awareness  plantation.
of the respondents.
Community   The public opined that such assets which belong to the entire village  The project involves re -establishment of the assets  Necessary  re-locations  already
assets       like handpumps and shrines, etc., and those likely to be affected due to  alongwith  the  participation  of the  other  various  covered in engineerinig designs
the project would have to be relocated and that it would extend its  departments.                                       and RAP. Cost of the relocation
support and help in locating a suitable site for the same and in                                                         also iicltided in the RAP
reconstructing the lost assets.
6       Sanitary      The people enquired about any assistance being extended to the     The PIIED should explore the possibility of immediately   The project in the first phase
facilities    development of sanitary facilities and water supply in the village, as  providing public lavatories and drains in the village. The   does not envisage providing
the community hygiene and sewerage conditions are very poor. Water   prevailing condition is a major health hazard.     these facilities. The PWD will
pools and puddles are a major eyesore and breeding conditions for                                                        interact with the PHiED and
mosquitoes.                                                                                                             request the PIIED to take the
necessary action in the affected
stretches
7       Safety        School Children are a vulnerable lot in this stretch as there is a high  Proper road signage and improvement of the pavement  Engineering Designs have taken
Aspects      school in the village and many students use the road to reach the  will greatly reduce the incidence of any mishap especially  into account adequate safety
school. People opined that Proper Safety measures and road signs were  in areas like Karatgi etc.                        considerations and road firniture.
needed.                                                                                                                  Design spee(ds have been reduice(i
in settlements.
A7-2                                                    Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                            Appendix 7.1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1. Phollamma
2. Maktumbi
3. Abdullka Ajid
4. Sabira Hussain
5. Naseer Hussain Mulla
6. Shantappa Pujar
7. I.Veera Reddy
8. Narasanna Slo Ramayya
9. Adullah Nabi
10. Yaduraj
11. P.Amaranna
12. Shetty Gandeppa Sarkar
13. Ramakka
14. J.Seetarama Reddy
15. K.Suryakant Venkatesh
16. Nabisab Khaja Hussain
17. Sanna Ramanna S/o Kallurayya
18. Madeva Hottara
19. Narasappa
20. Rajanna S/o Eswaramma
21. Ibrahim
22. J.Shamsundar
23. Satyanarayan Reddy
24. A.Narayan
25. Nooruddin Sab
26. Sirab Sultan
27. Shalam Khan
28. Tulekha Begum
29. Amaresh
30. Mohammad S/o Mohammad Esmial
31. Padmavathi W/o Narasappa
32. Shelam Sab Davalsab
33. Gokarnappa. R
34. K. Thimauua
35. Hassamsab Sab B/o Rehman Sab
36. Veeresha
37. Parashuram
38. Hanumantappa S/o Tippayya
39. Lalsab
40. Sheshappa Pujari
41. Vittal Rao
42. Kishan Rao
43. Amaresha
44. Naddar Kullar
45. Sharadamma
46. Ragavendra S/o T.I. Shetty
47. Khairunnisa Begum
48. Saraswati
49. Rangamma
A7-3                         Scott Wilson / CES IIIE






Karilataka State Ilighways                                                                                    Environmiental Impact Assessmienl Report
hinprovcnicnt l'roject                                                                                                                   Appenidix 7.1
Public Consultation at Route 2 A- Gorebal Village, Taluk- Sindhnur, Raichur District- 5th June, 2000
SI.No       Issues                           Public Perception                               Consultants' Recommendation                       Nlitigation M1easures
I       L.and           Compensation has to be on par with the prevalent market rates for   The respondents' awareness level is very high.  Resettlement Action Plan aclequately
acquisition     the land. Besides, the PAP's unequivocally expressed that the  The land acquisition and compensation        addresses the benefits to be extendled to the
compenisationi should be paid before the land is acquired and the  dispersal will have to be transparent and  Project affected Persons an(d has an inbuilt
civil works start. Most of the villagers present               efficient so as to avoid any problems in future.  clause thiat compenisatioin dlisbursemilenit and
benefits are to he dlisburtsed to thie P'Als before
commencemileiit of civil xvoiks
2       Encroachiment/  While both the categories agreed that there has been encroachment  The PWD should strictly maintain its Legal  The project envisages under its R&R policy to
Flucroachei s   of' ROW, uLn(ler existinig circumstances, thcy expressed their  ROW. Roadside vendors and shopkeepers       extend Shifting Allowance, housing facility
apprelhensioI about shiitilng l'rom their present abode. liowever,  must be prevented from spilling over to the  undeIL EWS schieimes to the eiicioachiers losinig
givenl shifting assistance, thiey are ready to vacate the encroached  ROW irrespective of the days or activities.  their livelihood diependinig UpoIl the poverty
lan(l. As far as squatters are concerined, they expect shifting  Shifting allowance can be extended to the  liie status. In the ease ol'squiatters shiftiign
allowance.  .                                                  encroachers.                                 allowance to be extendced only to Squatters
._______BPL.__ _____________The____________details_________________________are____________given___________________in__BPLL.TThetdetailseareggiveniinAthe PRAP
3       Resettlement    As far as commercial structures are concemed, people felt that the  The Local Municipal authorities must be  There is a provision in the RAP for making
best option is to allow them to continue in the existing locales by  involved in exploring the possibility of  available 250sq.ft of sliop area in a complex to
shiftinig a little beyond the COI. However, they also consented on  providing altemate site for commercial  the Below Poverty Line Squatters at a cost to
the option of commercial complexes let out on rent basis with  complex or make provisions for a market      be decided by the GOK.
vicinity to the road.                                          place on municipal or panchayats land,
As for the encroachers and squatters whose residential structures  preferably near the road alignment.
are likely to be affected, the respondents felt that Resettlement
sites with amenities would be a feasible option.               Shifting allowance can be extended to the
_______________ .______________________________________________________________   encroachers and squatters.
5       Environmenital  The respondents agreed that environmental enhancement in the  The awareness about environment is very       'I'he plantation programilme will take care of
aspects         form of avenue plantations is required and showed willingness to  much evident here. Proximity to Siidlinur also the roadside avenie plantationi.
maintain the plantations. They are of the opinion that this must be  ensures appreciable social, environmental and
entrusted to the panchayat. The panchayat and town municipalities  political awareness of the respondents.
are already involved in the maintenance of the village drains. The
villagers see no problem in implementing this if the funds are
made available.                                                                                                            _____
Coimmtinity     The public opined that assets like wells, hand pumps etc. should  The project involves re -establishment of the  Necessary  re-locations already  covered  in
assets          be relocated and that they would extend their support and help in  assets alongwith the participation of the other  engineering designs and RAP. Cost of the
locating a suitable site for the same and in relocating the lost  various departments.                      relocation also incltided in the RAP
________  _ __________ _  assets.
6       Sanitary        Sanitary facilities are lacking in the area and are more evident as    Toilets and sanitation facilities are a mnust in    The project in the first pliase (hoes not
A7-4                                                     Scoti Viglson / ('ES / 1111.



Kainataka State 1-Highiways                                                                                  Environimiental Impact Assessinelt Rcpoit
Improvement Project                                                                                                                    Appendix 7. 1
SI.No      Issues                            Public Perception                              Consultants' Recommendation                      Mitigation Measures
facilities     one nears rural settlements and otitskirts of the urban areas. The  this area. The PHED should be asked to look    envisage providing these facilities. The PWD
participants did not have any views to offer regarding the   into this aspect.                            will interact with the PHED and reqtuest the
establishment of public lavatories.                                                                       PHED to take the necessary action in the
affected stretches
7       Safety Aspects  Safety aspects evinced interest in the public but any new insight    Proper road signage and improvement of the    Engineering Designs have taken into account
was not offered by them                                       pavement will greatly reduce the incidence of   adequate safety considerations and road
any mishap especially in areas like Karatgi  furniture. Design speeds have been reduced in
A7-5etc.                                       settlements.
A7-5                                                    Scott Wilson f/( [-- / II-P



Karnataka State Hiehwavs                               Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                           Appendix 7.1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1. Ramakrishna S/o Narsappa
2. Anjanavya SwNamy
3. K.Shivraj. S/o Ambanna
4. Mahesh S/o Amalayya
5. Siddalingayya S/o Amalayya
6. Hanamanagouda S/o Amalayya
7. Basavaraj S/o Shankarappa
8. Bhimappa S/o Malleshappa Chanalli Cross
9. Shantabai Pratapsingh
10. Gangamma Hugul
11. Chinappa S/o Venkatappa
12. Palayya S/o Venkatesh
13. Abdul Gayum
14. Mohammad Rafiq S/o Shiekh Shawul
15. Palakshayya Sio Rachayya
16. Basappa S/o Durgappa
17. Nabisab S/o Karimsab
18. Shankaramma W/o Malappa
19. Hanumantha Reddy
20. Motelpal Subbanna
21. Amalappa S/o Basanna
22. Ambanna S/o Bhimanna
23. Rngamma W/o Hulgappa
24. Md.Sab S/o Shamid Sab (Munnibegam)
25. Mallappa S/o Satyappa
26. Rachamma W/o Mahadevappa
27. Holemma W/o Siddaramappa
28. Basamma W/o Hanumantappa
29. Mallappa S/o Amalappa
30. Shekangouda
31. Amaramma W/o Veeresh
32. Dodda Basappa Siddappa (Lakshmamma W/o Doddabasappa)
33. Niranjan Rao
34. Amalappa S/o Shivanna
35. J.Surya Narayan
36. Lakshmi Devi
37. K. Ryomti D/o Ramanjaneyulu
38. K.Ramanjanevulu
39. Siddappa Slo Gangappa
40. Y.P. Subbaravadu
41. A.V. Pramila
42. Amaresh (Kamal Kirani Stores)
43. Durgappa S/o Parappa
44. Veerayya S.o Sharanavya
45. Umapathi S/o Shekarayya
46. Bhimachar S/o Venkobachar (Kirana shop)
47. G. Sanna Sharanegouda
48. Bettadayya Swami S/o Gadayya Swamy
49. Renukayya Shetty.J.M (Hotel)
A7-0                         Scott \Wilson / CES IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                          Appendix 7.1
50. Veeranna Moolimani
51. Lakshman Singh
52. Hasalappa S/o Savarappa
53. H.Veeresh (Barber shop)
54. Chandrappa S/o Sunkappa
55. Venkatesh S/o Nagappa
56. Nagappa S/o Hanamamma
57. Durgappa S/o Thippanna
58. Hanumantappa S/o Haralappa Chaluadi
59. Sanjeevapp Chaluvadi
60. Hulagappa Chaluvadi
61. Basappa Harijan
62. Baleppa S/o Hanumantappa
63. Basappa S/o Hanumantappa
64. Ulavappa S/o Hanumantappa
65. Lakshmappa S/o Yamanappa
66. Muddappa S/o Ulavuppa
67. Gangappa S/o Ulavuppa
68. Sannasalappa S/o Ulavuppa
69. Hanumanth S/o Bulappa
A7-7                        Scott Wilson/ CES / IIIE



Karoataka State Highways                                                                                        Environmental Impact Assessmicnt Report
Imiprovemient Project                                                                                                                      Appendix 7.1
Public Consultation at Route 2 B - Chikkebenekal Village, Taluk-Gangawati, District Kopp 1l, 04 June 2000
Sl.No    _ Issues                             Public Perception                                Consultants' Recommendation                        Mitigation Measures
I.and           Compensation for land acquisition has to be on par with the  The respondents' awareness level is very high.  Resettlement Action Plan adequately
acquisition     prevalent market rates for the land. It was also suggested that  The land acquisition and compensation       addresses the benefits to be exten(led to the
compeinsationi is provided for the standing crops at the time of  dispersal will have to be transparent and  Project affected Persons aid lias an ilbuilt
implementation and value of land for the stretch is based on  efficient so as to avoid any problems in future.  clause that comipenisationi dlishursciictit aii(n
iiariket value or the registration valie, whichi ever is highier. It was                                     benefits are to be disbur-sed to the PAI's betbic
also opmied that wherever tilc loss is less thani 2 acres (tile landl to                                     commiieiemcnit oi civil works
be acquired would not be more than 3-4 Mts. for each plot), then
cash for land is a better option. Allis was so opined because the
populace 1'elt that even in such a loss if' lanid lost is compensated
by land, this would not be economically viable for the land loser
as that portion of the land would not be given at the same place
where he has his remaining part of land. However, if a person
were likely to lose more than 2 acres, then land for land would be
an ideal option.
2       Encroachment/  While the people agree that there has been encroachment of ROW,  The PWD should strictly maintain its Legal    The project envisages under its R&R policy to
Encroachers     under existing circumstances, they expressed their inconvenience  ROW. Roadside vendors and shopkeepers      extend Shifting Allowanice, housinig tacility
to shift from  their present abode. However, given  shifting  must be prevented from spilling over to the    unider EWS schemles to the encroachiers losing
assistance, they are ready to vacate the encroached land.      ROW irrespective of the days or activities.   their livelihood (lepending upoin the poverty
Shifting allowance can be extended to the    line status. In the case ol' squatters shi'tiig
encroachers.                                 allowance to be extended onily to Squatters
_.________________________________________  BPL. The details are given in the RAI).
3       Resettlement    As far as commercial structures are concerned, people felt that the  The Local Municipal authorities must be  There is a provision in the RAP for making
best option is to allow them to continue in the existing locales by  involved in exploring the possibility of  available 250sq.ft of shop area in a complex to
shifting a little beyond the COI. Ilowever, they also consented on  providing alternate site for commercial  the Below Poverty Line Squatters at a cost to
the option of commercial complexes let out on rent basis with  complex or make provisions for a market       be decided by the GOK.
vicinity to the road.                                           place on municipal or panchayat land,
preferably near the road alignment.
4       Employment    For those losing commercial structure, the villagers suggested that  It is evident the people are much inclined  Benefits to be extended as per R&R policy
and economic   they be provided with cash compensation for the structure, land  towards a government job as it offers good   and RAP content. No gover-nilimenit jobs will be
benefits        for the land and a government job.                              pay and security                             provided.
5       Environmenital  The respondents agreed that environmental enhancement in the  The awareness about environment is very         The plantation programilie will take care of
aspects         form of avenue plantations is required and showed williigness to  much evident here. Proximity to Gangawati   the roadside avenie plantation. TI'he PWD will
maintain the plantations. They are of the opinion that this must be  town has also resulted in appreciable social,   inter act with the PIIE;) for niaintairiinig arid
A7-8                                                   Scott Wilson / Cl'S i IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                                                                                      Einvironimiental Impact Asscssnieiit Report
limprovement Plroject                                                                                                                    Appendlix 7.1
SI.No       Issues                            Public Perception                              Consultants' Recommendation                       Miligation Measures
entrmsted to the panchayat. The panchayat are already involved in  environmental and political awareness of the   improivement of drains within the village
the maintenance of the village drains. The villagers see no  respondents.
problem in implementing this if the funds are made available.
6       Community       The public opined that assets like wells, hand pumps etc. should  The project involves re -establishment of the  Necessary  re-locations already  covered  in
assets          be relocated and that they would extend their support and help in  assets alongwith the participation of the other  engineering designs and RAP. Cost of the
locating a suitable site for the same and in relocating the lost  various departments.                     relocation also include(d in thc RAP
assets.
7       Saniitary       Sanitary facilities are lacking in the area and are more evident as    Toilets and sanitation facilities are a must in    The project in the first phase does not
I:acilities     one nears rural settlements and outskirts of the urban areas. The  this area. The PHIED should be asked to look    envisage providing thesc facilities. TIhe l PW)
participants wanted a public lavatory near the school to cater to the  into this aspect.                   will interact with the PIIED and reqluest the
school children as the school children defecate by the roadside.                                           PHED to take the necessary action in the
affected stretches
8       Safety Aspects  Safety aspects evinced interest in the public but any new insight    Proper road signage and improvement of the    Engineering Designs have taken into account
was not offered by them                                       pavement will greatly reduce the incidence of   adequate safety considerations and road
any mishap especially in areas like         fumiture. Design speeds have been reduced in
Waddarahatti.                               settlements.
A7-9                                                 Scott Wilson / (ES / ilIE



Karnataka State Highways                                 Environrnental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                              Appendix 7.1
LIST OF PARTICIP.ANTS
I . Martab Sab Vaddarhatt.
2. Sugappa.
3. Nagappa.
4. Hoshnisaab
5. Gundappa.
6. Eramma
7. Yamunamma
8. Mariamma
9. Hanumamma
10. Nagamma
11. Parvathamma
12. Lingappa
13. Sarasamma
14. Indramma
15. Lingappa
16. Balanagowda
17. Varashappa
18. Gangappa
19. Hulagappa
20. Shameed Saab
21. Shami Saab
22. Yallusa
23. Ibrahim Saab
24. Manappa Kambara
25. Hanumantappa
26. Lakshmana
27. Lakkappa.H
28. S.F.Koppal
29. Basappa
30. C. B. Patil
31. B.Earappa
A7-l1                         Scott Wilson / CES IIIE






Karnataka State Highways                                                                                        Environmental Impact Assessieiiit R epolt
Improvement Project                                                                                                                       Appeindix 7.1
Public Consultation at Route 3 D at Hallikhed-K, Homnabad T'aluk, Bidar District 15"' April 2000
SI.No       Issues                            Public Perception                               Consultants' Recommendation                        Mitigationi Mleasures
I       Land            Compensation has to be on par with the prevalent market rates for   Following the discussion, it was evident that    Resettlement Action Plan adequately
acquisition     the land. The choice seemed to be more towards cash for land as    changing the alignment will not be feasible, as  addresses the benefits to be extended to the
land of similar quality is scarce given the terrain of the region. In    many stnictures both residential and  Project affected Persons and has an ihbtuilt
case of the by-pass too, the villagers suggested that the land loser   commercial will be affected. So the   clause that compenisationi disbursement and(
be given cash for land lost. Ilowever, in case of loss of residential   apprehensionis of the respondents is well  benefits are to be disbursed to the P'APs befor-e
structure land for lanid as an optioin was not ruled out.      justified.                                    commilencemilent of civil works
2       Encroachment/  Encroachment related issues were limited to temporary            The PWD should strictly maintain its Legal    The project envisages under its R&R policy to
Encroachers    encroachments by roadside vendors and shopkeepers on the         ROW. Roadside vendors and shopkeepers        extend Shifting Allowance, housing facility
market day i.e. Saturdays.                                     must be prevented from spilling over to the   under EWS schemes to the encroachers losing
ROW irrespective of the days or activities.  their livelihood dependinig upon the poverty
line status. In the case of squatters shifting
allowance to be extended only to Squatters
.______ ______________                                            __________________________________________   BPL. The details ale given in the RAP.
3       Resettlement    Resettlement sites and group housing were welcomed in case more  The concems of the respondents are well      Thiere is a provision in the RAP for making
than 20 to 25 families are losing residential structures. As far as  taken. It is suggested that the existing  available 250sq.ft of shop area in a complex to
commercial structures are concemed, people are worried and     alignment be adhered to.                      the Below Poverty l.ine Squatters at a cost to
apprehensive about being relocated away from the village as this                                             be decided by the (GOK.
would severe their business. They fear that even at a 2-km
distance or within this distance too, the same business prospects
are difficult to find. Due to this, most suggest that a bypass is a
better option than displacing people and disturbing their business
activities. However, they seemed to appreciate the option of
business complexes
4       Employment    For those losing commercial structure, the villagers suggested that  It is evident the people are much inclined  Benefits to be extended as per R&R policy
and economic   they be provided with cash compensation for the structure, land  towards a govemment job as it offers good    and RAP content. No govenmenit jobs will be
benefits        for the land and a govemment job. The last point about providing    pay and security. They do not anticipate any   provided.
a govemment job was being repeatedly stressed. This village    employment opportunities during the
being a major commercial centre, the villagers fear that their  construction stage as it is for a temporary
respective livelihoods may suffer serious setbacks if land is to be    period and moreover the contractors employ
acquired for widening. In such a situation, they expect that along    labourers from other places.
with the compensation that they would get, a Govt. job be
provided to one member of each such affected family that is losing
._____   ____________ its shop or such other commercial establishment,
5      I'invironmental  The respondents agreed that environmental enhancement in the  The awareness about environimlent is very       Thantation pogramUe will take care of
A7-1 I                                                    Scott Wilson / CES / tIIE



Karnataka State llighlways                                                                                    Envirotnmeintal Impact Assessmient Repot-t
Improvenmenit Project                                                                                                                   Appendix 7.1
Sl.No       Issues                            Public Perception                              Consultants' Recommendation                       Mitigation Mcasures
aspects         form of avenue plantations and showed willingness to maintain the  much evident here. The general indifference   the roadside avenue plantation. The PWI) will
plantations and are of tihe opinion that this must be entrusted to the  as noticed elsewhere was not observed.  inter act with tihe PlIED for maintaining and
panchayat. The panchayat are already involved in the maintenance                                          improvement of drains within the village
of the village drains. The villagers see no problem in
_  implementing this if the fonds are made available.
6)     .Sanitary        Sanitary facilities as sucih are lacking in the village. Public  Toilets and sanitation facilities are a must in    The project in the first phase does not
Iaciiiies     lavatories are not there in the village. The villagers did not have  this area. The PIIED should be asked to look    envisage provi(dinig these facilities. '[he I'WD)
any suggestions on the constniction or provision of stici facilities.  into this aspect.                   will interact witil the PlIEI) and irequest the
PIIED to take the necessary action in the
affected stretchies
7       Safety Aspects  The people do acknowledge the-fact that safety aspects are not  Safety measures are of a major importance in   Engineering Designs have taken into account
uppcrmost in their mnid. Any measure taken by the PWD is      this stretch as the road passes througlh a rolling  adequate safety considerations and road
welcome. Maintenance of th1e measures did not evince any cogent   terrain and the settlement is in a curve. Proper  furniture. Design speeds have beeni reduced in
response.                                                     road signage and improveinent of the         settlements.
pavement will greatly reduce the incidence of
any mistap.                                                      l     E                  _
A7-12                                                    Scott Wilson / C-FS/ IIIE



Karnataka State Highways                              Envirornmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                          Appendix 7.1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
I. Subhashchandra S. Somanna.
2. Narayan Appa Rao C. Patil.
3. Rajesh Bhimsha Mantalker.
4. K.M. Pateel.
5. Kuppanna Bundi.
6. Annappa Batkal.
7. Kashappa. A. Honnali.
8. Baburao Cheelshettv.
9. Basavaraj Lakka.
10. Subhash Waar.
11. Kalyanrao
12. Vadiraj Chikkapatil
13. Sharanappa Bapun
14. Niranjappa Bhandi
15. Chandrashekara
16. Siddaram Indi
17. Tukaram Chiwadi
18. RajappaMooli
19. Sangappa
20. Gundappa
21. Kamilappa
22. Nigappa Bhimanna Sadlapur
23. Sharanappa Siddappa Halbanga
24. Tippanna Gundappa Uppar
25. Gundappa Shankrappa Chillashetty
26. Nagaashetty Apparao Chikkapatalagi
27. Omanna Revanasiddappa Chikkapatalgi
28. Punappa Shankrappa Chinnashetty
29. Manikyappa Shankrappa Chinnashetty
30. Eranna Kallappa Varad
31. Nagaraj Sajjanna Shetty
32. Rajabai Annappa Chikkappa
33. Niranjanappa Shavanappa Bhadi
34. Kalyanappa Shamrao Chickpatil
35. Shamrao Nagappa Patil
36. Annappa M. Ratkal
37. Vijayakumar Kashappa Chilshetty.
38. Dasarath Shrnappa
A7-13                        Scott Wilson CES / IIIE






Karnataka State llighways                                                                                          Environimilental Impact Assessment Rcport
Improvement Project                                                                                                                            Appendix 7.1
Public Consultation at Route 4: Toravi Village, Bijapir Taluk, Bijapur District - 18th March 2000
SI.No           Issues         |                       Public Pcrception                                  Consultants' Recommendation                      _Mitigation Measurc
I       Land acquisition        The general view regarding land acquisition was to be             The public is very clear about the compensation   Resettlement Action Plan adequately
compensated as per the prevailing market rate and on the event of   issue and is conversant with the prevailing market  addresses the benefits to be extended to
displacement, the affected people to be rehabilitated in the village   rates. People know about the compensation and  the Plroject affected Persons and( has an
itsclF                                                           other benefits extended to the affected personis in   inbuilt cliiuse that compenisationi
the UKP project.                                  disbursenient and benefits are to be
disbursed to the PAPs before
commencement of civil works
2       Encroachment/           The community accepts the fact that there has been encroachment   The participants in general tried to evade the    The project envisages under its R&R
Encroachers             on the ROW but at the sante time insist that given the situation  issue of encroachment and agreed to the fact that   policy to extend Shifting Allowance,
that they are asked to vacate tihe land. Alternate site in addition to   encroachiers will have to shift to some other place   houising fiacility Luld(er EWS schcmes to
shifting allowanice shotild be provided as it is a matter of     but within the village limits                      the encroachers losing their livelihood
livelihood and their sustenance is entirely dependent on the road-                                                  depending upon the poverty line status.
users.                                                                                                              In the case of squatters shifting
allowanice to be extended only to
Squatters BPL. 'I'he details are given in
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ th e   R A P .
3       Resettlement            The villagers are firmly against the idea of being rehabilitated at a   Apprehension about R&R is well appreciated, as    Resettlement sites are not under
different area and are apprehensive about the basic amenities and    benefits from the previous projects like UKP,  considerationi in the first phase of
infrastructure facility being extended to the resettlement site. The   reportedly, have not reached the affected persons.   KSIIIP. Adequate compenisationi and
argument extended is severance from kith and kin and a sense of    Most of the respondents insist on a Government    benefits have been described in tIhe
insecurity about the new place. The villagers are averse to the idea  job.                                          RAP.
of being shifted to othier areas as their economic and business
interests will be severely affected.
4       Employment and          There is perceptible indifference in the people regarding the     Many self interest groups are involved as the      The RAP addresses the issue of makinig
economic benefits       employment opportunities as a result of road development. The     demands vary from group to group.                 available shops to the squatters below
roadside shopkeepers and dwellers from whom land may be                                                             poverty line at a cost decide(d by the
acquired and persons running petty shops i.e. the encroachers                                                      .GOK.
demanid that they should be allowed to run their business by the
_ ___________________  roadside beyond the land under PWD possession.                                                                                  __
5       Environmental aspects   The populace in general is indifferent to the environmental issues.  Most of the respondents are unaware of          Plantationi drive taken up by the Pill I and
At least to expect community participation in this village does not  environmental issues and disinterest in such   Forest departimienit will try to involve the
arise. The general perception is that the issue of plantation,  issues is clearly visible.                          local populace during the programme.
maintenance of roadside public amenities is that of the respective
government agencies. Respondents are not forthcoming in their
_______ ____ _________________opinion on public participation in such activities.
A7-14                                                       Scott Wilson / cES /I IIIE



Karnataka State llighways                                                                                         Environmenital Impact Asscssiient Report
Improvement Project                                                                                                                          Appendix 7.1
SI.No           Issues                                Public Perception                                  Consultants' Recommendation                        Mitigation Mleasure
6       Sanitary facilities     The village lacks proper sanitation and people defecate in the   Toilets and sanitation facilities are a must in this    The PWD will discuss the issues with
fields and by the roadside. This is a major traffic hazard especially  area. Issues related to traffic accidents and  the P1lED and ask themil to provide
in the early morning hours and in the evenings From health and  general safety did not evince any interest        necessary facilities to the village
hygiene aspect also this is not acceptable.
7       Safety Aspects          The people were disinterested in discussing the safety aspect. Any   Safety measures are of major importance in this    Detailed designs have incorporated all
measure taken by the govermment in this aspect is welcomed.     stretch as the road passes through rolling terrain    the necessary road furnituire and safety
Maintenance of the measures did not evince any cogent response.   and the setlement is in a curve. Proper road    signage.
signage and improvement of the pavement will
greatly reduce any mnishap.                                          _l
A7-15                                                      Scott WNilson / CES / IIIE



Kamataka State Highways                                Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                           Appendix 7.1
List of Participants (2A)
I. Gangadhar S Haldimani
2. Ramkrishna S Jayadal
3. Yamanappa Y Parsi - Haldimani
4. Shibadri A Ganji
5. Tamanna L Ganji
6. Suresh S Babaleshwar
7. Sadashiv k Ganji
8. Raju G Hadimani
9. Laxman M Gudimani
10. Hanamanth M Gudimani
11. Basappa M Karigar
12. Sabawa V Ganchinamani
13. Samappa L Hadimani
14. Bojappa L Hadimani
15. Girappa L Hadimani
16. Ravatappa Maleppa Hosamani
17. Lakkappa Lakshmana Goni
18. Lakkappa Ravutapa Ganjinavara
19. Narayan M. Kulkami
20. Arjun Ganji
21. D.K. Biradar
22. Basavaraj. A. Patri
23. K.V. Kulkami
24. Basavaraj. K. Biradar
25. Shivananda. M. Mangali
26. Mallappa N. Huttimani
27. Yallappa G. Gangenawar
28. Hanumant. R. Ganjenwar
29. M.M. Athani
30. S.G. Chalawedi (Village Accountant
31. N.L. Swadgi
32. Siddhartha Ganjanur
33. N.B. Nyamgond
34. K.B. Biradar
35. Vilas. S. Bagali (Patil)
36. B.B. Biradar
37. Vilas S. Bagali
38. K.B. Biradar
39. N.L. Saralagi
40. P.S. Biradar
A7-16                        Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Karnataka State Highiways                                                                                    Environmental Impact Assessimienit lReport
Improvement Project                                                                                                                    Appendix 7.1
Public Consultation at Route 5 A, Yermaras village, Raichur Taluk, District Raichur- 6'h June 2000
SI.No       Issues                           Public Perception                              Consultants' Recommendation                      Nlitigation Measures
I      Land            Compensation has to be on par with the prevalent market rates and  The respondents' awareness level is very high.  The R&R policy and the RAP adequately
acquiisition    per square feet because the area comes under municipal limits.  The land acqtuisition and compensation    address the compenisation benefits and other
Instead of distirbinig the structure, it was suggested that the  dispersal will have to be transparent and  allowances and( the disbursal proceduie also.
alignment could be shifted to the left side where there is vacant  efficient so as to avoid any problems in future.
land. Some of them also suggested that the COI could be reduced
such that there is minimum acquisition and affect on the structure.
It was opined that if the remaining structure becomes unviable, the
compensation shotild be paid for the whole structire and if the
Govt. was not making use of the remaining piece of land, the same
should be given to concerned family.
2       Encroachment/  Encroachment related issues were limited to temporary          The PWD should strictly maintain its ILegal  Shifting allowance to be provided to the
Encroachers .  encroachments by roadside vendors and shopkeepers on the       ROW. Roadside vendors and shopkeepers       encroachers and squatter-s as per the RAP.
market day i.e. Saturdays.                                    must be prevented from spilling over to the
ROW irrespective of the days or activities.
5       Environmental  The environmental aspects did not figure that high in the  The disinterest in environment issues was very  The project EMP has adequate measures for
aspects         discussion. Avenue plantation maintenance and other related  much evident.                                environmental enhancement.
issues did not evince much interest.
6       Safety Aspects  The safety aspects were of concern to the respondents as the road    Proper road signage and improvement of the    Detailed designs have incorporated all the
abuts through the village. They insisted on proper traffic signs and   pavement will greatly reduce the incidence of   necessary road furnitire and safety signage.
safety measures.                                              any mishap.                                     _
A7-17                                                   Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE






Karmataka State Highways                                     Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Improvement Project                                                                   Appendix 7.1
List of Participants
1. Prakash
2. Lakshman
3. Sakubai
4. Siddaramappa
5. Rajendra
6. Sharadammna
A7-18                           Scott Wilson / CES / IIIE