Minister DK Shivakumar: Bangalore Tunnel Road Was Gadkari's Idea

Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar has hit back at opposition criticism of the proposed Bengaluru tunnel road project, asserting that the plan received advice and support from Union Minister for Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari.

The statement came as the Bharatiya Janata Party intensified its opposition to the project, branding it a "VIP corridor" that benefits the wealthy whilst ignoring broader public transport needs.

Shivakumar, who also holds the Bengaluru Development portfolio, took to social media platform X to defend the initiative. He wrote that the tunnel road is not his personal project but a public initiative for Bengaluru's future. According to Shivakumar, a meeting with Gadkari resulted in the Union Minister advising and supporting the tunnel project as a solution to the city's chronic traffic problems.

The Deputy Chief Minister specifically called out state BJP leaders for their opposition, suggesting they should listen to their own Union Minister before launching protests. He pointed out what he characterised as hypocrisy: when the Central government builds tunnel roads across the country, it is called development, but when Karnataka plans one for Bengaluru, it becomes controversial. Shivakumar argued that Bengaluru deserves constructive solutions and progress rather than politics.

The pushback came after BJP leaders launched a signature campaign and staged a silent protest at the Lalbagh botanical garden on Sunday. The demonstration, led by Leader of Opposition R Ashoka and Bengaluru South MP Tejasvi Surya, saw participation from several city legislators. Protesters gathered under the slogan "Protect Bengaluru - Stop Tunnel Road," expressing concerns about the project's scope, cost, and priorities.

The BJP's objections centre on several points. Leaders have branded the proposed tunnel as a VIP corridor designed to benefit car-owning elites rather than addressing the transportation needs of ordinary citizens.

They argue that the estimated cost of over Rs 22,000 crore for the 18-kilometre tunnel could be better spent expanding the Metro system, developing suburban rail networks, and improving bus services. These alternatives, critics contend, would move far more people than a tunnel restricted to private vehicles.

Environmental concerns have also been raised, particularly regarding the tunnel's route through or near the Lalbagh botanical garden, a protected heritage site. Opponents fear construction could damage this green space and set a precedent for future projects that prioritise infrastructure over environmental conservation.

Chief Minister Siddaramaiah dismissed these concerns, stating that the government would not be foolish enough to destroy Lalbagh and that the project had been thoroughly studied.

The tunnel road proposal calls for tolls to fund construction and operations. Shivakumar has stated bluntly that without tolls, there would be no tunnel road, indicating that cars using the route would pay for expedited commutes. This pay-to-use model has drawn criticism from those who see it as creating separate infrastructure for those who can afford it, whilst public transport users continue to suffer in traffic.

Shivakumar offered to form a committee under Ashoka to examine alternatives, suggesting openness to dialogue. However, his social media post and statements suggest frustration with what he views as politically motivated opposition rather than genuine concern for solutions. He accused the BJP of politicising an initiative intended for public benefit.

The political dimension is complex given that Gadkari, as Union Minister, reportedly supports the concept whilst state BJP leaders oppose its implementation. This apparent disconnect provides Shivakumar with ammunition to question whether the opposition is based on genuine policy concerns or partisan politics. By invoking Gadkari's support, he attempts to neutralise claims that the project lacks credibility or technical merit.

The tunnel road debate reflects broader tensions over Bengaluru's infrastructure priorities. The city faces severe traffic congestion that costs significant time and productivity. Various solutions have been proposed and debated over the years, often getting mired in political disagreements. The steel flyover project, for instance, faced intense opposition and was eventually shelved after protests. Health Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao referenced this, accusing BJP leaders of being "drama queens" who opposed white-topping of roads during their tenure whilst doing nothing to reduce traffic.

Whether tunnel roads represent an appropriate solution for Bengaluru remains contentious. Proponents argue they can move traffic efficiently through congested areas without requiring land acquisition or disrupting surface-level activity. Opponents counter that they are expensive, benefit only private vehicle owners, and fail to address the fundamental need to shift people from cars to public transport.

International examples provide mixed evidence. Cities like Seoul and Boston have actually removed urban highways and tunnels, finding that improved public transport and urban design can better serve residents. Others, like Oslo and Mumbai, have built new tunnels to manage traffic flow. Context matters significantly, with successful tunnel projects usually being part of comprehensive transport strategies rather than standalone solutions.

For Bengaluru, the tunnel road debate is likely to continue as detailed plans emerge and environmental, financial, and social impact assessments are completed. Shivakumar's invocation of Gadkari's support may provide political cover, but it does not resolve fundamental questions about costs, benefits, and whether this represents the best use of limited public resources for a city desperately needing transport solutions.