Fighting climate change without developmental blind-spots

Deep thinking and concern for the future is what past generations have demonstrated in how they have constructed urban spaces

For three years, the congregation of All Saints’ Church has been struggling to change Namma Metro’s decision to build a concrete station box within its verdant sacred grove, a stunningly beautiful and serene garden in the middle of heavily concretised Bengaluru. Trees in this garden are gorgeously old, older than the 150-year-old charming and fragile church they embrace, a church with distinctive architecture designed by Robert Fellowes Chisholm, one of the pioneers of the so-called Indo-Saracenic style.

To the European Investment Bank (EIB), which lent €500 million to Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (BMRCL), Governments of India and Karnataka promised Namma Metro would be built to European Union’s Environmental and Social standards, which require protecting cultural and religious heritage and biodiversity rich spaces. The guidelines require projects financed by EIB not to destroy carbon sinks, especially in heavily built metropolises.

BMRCL argues that the price paid by the loss of this verdant sacred grove is the balance demanded by weighing environmental considerations with developmental priorities. It is also a popular sentiment, quite often employed to justify just about any mega project. Almost always, the judiciary agrees with this sentiment.