Learning from Play: Designing an Urban Street Design Game (Part 2)

7th November 2024 by admin

For everyone who thinks managing urban transport is serious business, and not fun and games, we are back to say it can be both!

A few months ago, we wrote a blog on how to design an urban transport game. In the blog, we captured our learnings of gamifying the process of developing long-term plans for Healthy Streets. We did this so others can learn from the process and build on it. Well, this is our way of giving back, having learned from and built upon the expertise and experience of many other organisations in this field.

This is another such attempt to document our journey with a new game – Getting Your Street Design Right. In this blog, we elaborate on how we gamified the process of developing good street designs.

This game was played on 31st May, 2024, with 70 engineers of Greater Chennai Corporation at an inter-departmental workshop. Here’s how it was developed.

*Engineers from the Greater Chennai Corporation playing the game during the Inter-departmental workshop*

Drawing Inspiration from Experts

In our quest to strategise the next game on getting street design right, we came across Global Designing Cities Initiative’s (GDCI) work. In 2023, GDCI hosted an interactive workshop with nearly 40 participants from Renca and Cerrillos (municipalities in Chile). During this workshop, city officials redesigned an intersection using puzzle pieces that represented key street sections such as bus lanes, cycle tracks, curb extensions for play, commerce, and pedestrian crossings. What a great idea! Inspired by their approach and drawing from our own experience, we started out designing our next game.

Crafting a Clear Intent

Having designed multiple games and hands-on exercises in the past, we knew that getting our intent right was key to designing this game. Street design is a vast subject, and with limited time, we had to focus on specific areas and key takeaways for the participants—the city engineers. Here’s what we wanted them to take away from the game:

Grasp the basics of street design – Our participants were city engineers who were familiar with street design. However, they needed guidance on the right principles that would make their projects more impactful and long-lasting. Hence, we decided to focus on the basics, which could then be incorporated even in their ongoing projects for better impact.
Understand the reasoning behind the standards – Simply sharing information was not enough. Without understanding why certain street design standards are recommended, there’s always resistance to change. Hence it was necessary to establish the reasoning through the game, making it easier to grasp.
Foster collaboration across departments – Different departments involved in street design have their own perspectives and processes. It was important to bring them together and get them to collaborate.

In short, we designed the game to simplify street design while making it fun, insightful, and collaborative.

Establishing Gaming Principles

To understand the design of street elements—footpaths, carriageway, landscaping, bus stops, street furniture, utilities, etc.—better, we wanted participants to explore redesigning a street. With this as the base, we structured the game on the following principles:

Allow for mistakes and fixes – We wanted the participants to see how their current approach to street design wasn’t effectively addressing on-ground challenges. Hence, the game was structured in two rounds—one, where they design the street as usual, and two where they rectify their design based on the best practices.
Evaluate the design and learn – To get participants to fix their designs, we needed them to understand the design gaps and why it was considered so. For this, we introduced a design evaluation round for them to understand the reasoning behind the street design standards.
Reward players – It was established up-front that this game would have no winners. But where’s the fun in that? To keep the excitement going and to celebrate the teams for getting some aspects of street design right, we introduced badges! Each badge represented a key element to street design and winning that badge meant they designed that element well. Each team needed to win all six badges to unlock a “Healthy Streets Badge”.

*The different kind of badges awarded to the participants after each round of play*

Detailing the Game

From our past experience, playing the game in groups, especially smaller ones, is most effective to hear different ideas. We decided to play this game in groups of 6-8 participants, creating an interactive approach for participants to learn by doing. Here’s how the game played out:

1. The Playing Board

We started by creating a fictional street, Malgudi Salai (Malgudi Street, in Tamil) and developed a plan view of an 80m stretch of this street, on the playing board. To keep it as realistic as possible, we depicted broken footpaths, varying carriageway widths, parking encroachments, large intersections, etc. on the playing board. Common pedestrian issues were also identified on the board to make it easier for the participants to understand the context and resolve them through design.

2. Context Sheets

To help participants visualise the street , we developed additional information for Malgudi Salai. We included street photographs (of streets with similar character), land-use, and it’s location in the city.

*A sample of the context sheets provided to the participants*

*A sample of the context sheets provided in the form of photos*

3. The Game Pieces

The elements of street design were our game pieces. Since we wanted players to learn from their mistakes, we developed the street elements of varying dimensions, including some that did not meet standards. This way the players had a variety of pieces of the same street element to choose from. We were also curious to know which ones they would pick in an ideal design scenario.

*A list of street-element cutouts handed over to the participants as game pieces*

4. The evaluation matrix and characters

To make the game more engaging, we introduced two fictional pedestrian characters—Thangavel, a person with disability, and Kamala, a caregiver—who frequently used Malgudi Salai. Through their journey, we highlighted specific street issues, such as Thangavel struggling to navigate a broken footpath with his wheelchair. These scenarios helped participants understand the street issues from the characters’ perspectives. We shared an evaluation matrix which helped the teams evaluate their designs, keeping in mind the needs of Thangavel and Kamala. The evaluation matrix was a set of questions to check if a particular street design element was designed correctly.

*The two game characters and a sample of the evaluation sheet*

5. The right process

After the players designed the street and evaluated their designs, it was time to fix it. For this, they needed guidance on best practice of street design. So, before the teams modified their designs, we provided a step-by-step guide on how to redesign their streets. This was followed by another round of evaluation, and then the awarding of the Healthy Streets Badges.

Rolling out the Game

The capacity-building workshop had representatives from departments including the Bus Route Roads, Stormwater Drains, and Special Projects, along with Zonal engineers. We split them into groups of 10, making sure each group had representatives from different departments.

And then, game on! The team dived right into Round 1, working together to come up with a design solution for Malgudi Salai. We witnessed participants engage in healthy debates over minimum standards of the street elements.

After 15 minutes of play, the designs were complete and then came the moment of truth—the evaluation and handing over of badges. All groups got a minimum of two aspects of street design right, qualifying for atleast two badges. However, since they did not incorporate all elements of street design, they did not qualify for the Healthy Streets badge. This quickly made them realise that just fixing one or two aspects of the street doesn’t yield the impact they expect. We eventually informed them that they had an opportunity to win the Healthy Streets badge in Round 2 by following a secret recipe! The energy in the room shifted—they were now pumped to pay attention to the guidance (the secret recipe) we provided on the right street design practices.

As the participants worked on Round 2, following the guidance provided, they even remembered to add access ramps for Thangavel’s wheelchair, without our nudges! They also realised that by making small modifications to their approach, like starting off with identifying the centreline of the street and fixing uniform carriageway widths, they were able to accommodate wider pedestrian infrastructure. They could do all this without compromising on other elements.

As a result, all teams qualified for a Healthy Streets badge by following the not-so-secret-anymore recipe! The players actively referred to the evaluation matrix and the guidance to ensure they got their designs right. This went on to show us that even a simple game like this can be so impactful.

*Glimpses from the game play at the workshop*

Conclusion

Just like our game play in 2023, we once again saw how powerful and transformative games can be. The process of developing the game and especially the positive response of city officials to the game makes us hopeful about the future of streets in our cities. Through such continued engagements, we hope to make Healthy Streets a reality and enable our cities to create impactful transformations on the ground.

We leave you with this – there is hope for the streets in our cities. The game is far from over.

Written by Smritika Srinivasan, Senior Associate – Urban Development

Edited by Donita Jose, Senior Associate – Communications

Compact Cities: Pathways Toward India’s Sustainable Mobility Journey

10th November 2023 by admin

We’re happy to have hosted a roundtable discussion on ‘Compact Cities: Pathways towards India’s Sustainable Mobility Future’ at the 16th Urban Mobility India 2023 Conference, organised by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the Institute of Urban Transport (India).

Moderated by Aswathy Dilip, Managing Director, ITDP India, the roundtable sparked an insightful conversation with key decision-makers and experts who stressed the importance of fostering collaboration between various departments to adopt a comprehensive and interdisciplinary strategy aimed at developing cities that are compact, electrified, and sustainable.

Check out this infographic blog for a detailed overview of the session and the main insights from the speakers:

Conceptualized and Designed by Varsha Jeyapandi
With Inputs from Keshav Suryanarayanan

Healthy Streets Capacity Development Workshop 2 – Chandigarh

27th January 2023 by admin

Conceptualized and Designed by Varsha Jeyapandi
With Inputs from Keshav Suryanarayanan, Aishwarya Soni

ParkItRight

26th October 2022 by admin

An infographic blog

Conceptualized and Designed by Varsha Jeyapandi
Technical Inputs from Parin Visariya, Bala Nagendran

ITDP India Programme: A Decade of Impact

24th February 2020 by admin

Infographic Blog

“All urban residents of Indian cities should have access to jobs, education, and recreation through means of mobility that are safe, affordable, resource-efficient, environment-friendly, and accessible to all.”

Over the last 20 years, the ITDP India Programme has worked with nearly 40 cities across the country to make this vision a reality, impacting the lives of millions.

We celebrate the completion of a glorious decade of work, and welcome a new one with renewed excitement and anticipation of the possibilities ahead.

Designed by Keshav Suryanarayanan

Conceptualised by Aishwarya Soni, Keshav Suryanarayanan

Parking Management in the Pedestrian Plaza

6th December 2019 by admin

An Infographic Blog

Conceptualised and Designed by Kawin Kumaran
Content created by Nashwa Naushad, AV Venugopal
Photographs by TD Achuthan

Priceless Parking: The hidden costs of parking

11th October 2019 by admin

The first two days of September saw two big changes to make India’s streets safer, freer and less congested. The new Motor Vehicles rules came into force on the first of September, attempting the impossible, controlling the behaviour of Indian motorists on the streets. Through heavier penalties, the rules seek to reduce violations. On September 2, the Supreme Court released a judgment on the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019, under the umbrella of the MC Mehta case. This judgment can be seen as a landmark not just for improving parking management in our cities, but also for other steps towards reclaiming spaces for pedestrians.

*Pedestrians walking on the street due to space taken up by parking*

Our cities are known for their chaotic streets. Pedestrians and cyclists competing with other vehicles for space on the streets is a common sight. This is further exacerbated by the ever increasing need for parking space for all these vehicles, mostly on the street or on footpaths, blocking the movement of traffic and pedestrians. The Supreme Court judgment begins with an admonishment of the state for its failure to provide adequate public transport, and mismanaging the consequences of that failure, the increasing number of private vehicles that have taken over our streets.

The judgment has taken some progressive first steps, emphasising some important aspects such as the need for footpaths in all residential areas to be cleared of encroachments to make it usable for pedestrians, and the significance of modern technology in ensuring efficient utilisation of parking spaces. It also raises the possibility of charging people for parking, though leaving that decision to the state.

However, there are some aspects of the judgment that need more scrutiny. The judgment also called on city planners and architects to provide adequate off-street parking at major demand hubs – commercial and institutional areas, transportation hubs, etc – accommodating the potential demand for the next 25 years. The order touches multiple times on creating off street parking spaces to cater to parking demand. This can be effective only post an effective on street demand based priced PM system.

*Underutilised Multi-Level-Car parking structures (Credit:* *The Indian Express*)

Multilevel car parking (MLCP) complexes are one such solution to provide off-street parking. It is a popular myth that high parking demand can be addressed by building MLCP complexes. However, examples from India and around the world clearly indicate that it is a short-sighted attempt. In India, these MLCPs are built at great public cost and remain underutilised and vacant in many cases. Most often, the high demand is an apparent local demand, centred around one or two streets with higher levels of activity (commercial for example), while the other streets in the neighbourhood are relatively free of vehicular parking. This demand could be eased by zone-based on-street parking management, so that parking supply is distributed evenly across different streets in the neighbourhood. Hence, detailed studies are required before proposing new MLCPs.

Another way to provide off-street parking are requirements that already exist in the Development Control Regulations(DCR) set by local development authorities, but are not adhered to in many cases. That might not be such a bad thing.

These requirements are referred to as parking minimums. They are laws that require property developers to include a fixed number of off-street parking spaces according to the size of a building. The reasoning for this is that without enough off-street parking, efficient traffic flow can be compromised due to vehicles cruising for parking or parking on the street. These parking minimums can be extremely problematic in practice.

The hidden costs of parking

*Building regulations should be modified to remove minimum parking requirements, allowing developers to assess parking demand before creating parking (Parking Basics*)

Global experts on parking such as Donald Shoup and Paul Barter point out that providing for parking minimums has a cost. By forcing developers to build huge amounts of parking, these rules increase traffic and harm the environment by encouraging more people to drive. They also lead to inefficient land use. Planners and architects tend to overestimate the demand, providing more off-street parking than necessary, leading to wastage of space. The increased cost of development are then passed on to buyers, even those who may not own vehicles.

At the same time, there is a reluctance to engage with managing on-street parking demand. This leads to a situation where we see the extremes of large, empty parking lots and streets choked with parked vehicles. As a society, we should think about the sense in using up valuable space to prioritise private vehicle parking demand for the next twenty-five years.

Cities around the world have moved away from the concept of parking minimums, realising that they result in a wastage of both public and private land and investments. Mexico City has now converted their parking minimums into a parking maximum. This would change the high levels of mandated parking into the maximum allowed amount of parking, allowing developers to provide lower amounts of parking. Parking maximums are more effective because they ensure that excessive parking is not created based on norms, and developers can choose to provide less parking according to market demand. Any parking above 50 percent of the maximum would be charged and the revenues from this fee would be used to improve public transport and subsidise housing.

Across our cities, free parking is viewed as a right by motorists, leading to a reluctance by city authorities and private developers to charge the full cost of parking onto motorists. It is strange that most people are outraged at having to pay for parking, while showing no surprise on hearing the cost of property in commercial and residential areas. Why should the cost of land for parking not be the same as commercial or residential rental value in a locality? Charging people for parking would discourage personal motor vehicle use, shift to alternative modes and ensure that they pay for the valuable public space they use up for parking.

As the judgment rightly observed, a primary cause for our current situation has been the failure of our governments to provide adequate good quality public transport. While enforcing the new Motor Vehicles act and creating efficient parking management systems are much needed steps, they will fail to achieve their goals without the support of an efficient public transportation system and last mile connectivity.

Moving Forward

The judgment is a great start to a national level discussion on parking. Delhi has notified the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019 which aims to dramatically change parking in Delhi. The policy contains provisions to formulate hundreds of area-specific parking plans which will be developed in an exhaustive exercise over the next four months. Bengaluru and Hyderabad have also attempted to implement parking policies. Cities like Shimla and Gangtok have already created and approved city-wide parking policies. Chennai is also on the way to implementing a parking management system across the city.

Efficient parking management can be an effective way to ensure better streets and cities. Removing parking minimums and charging people for parking are important and necessary steps that can help cities to effectively manage the demand for parking. The judgment is a good starting point and Indian cities have already started taking the first steps towards this future.

Written by Keshav Suryanarayanan

Technical Direction: Vishnu Mohanakumar, AV Venugopal, Aswathy Dilip

Free parking is not a right, but a blight!

24th August 2018 by admin

In the 1970s when Joni Mitchell crooned “Big Yellow Taxi”, not many realised the clairvoyance and the forewarning that the song’s lyrics expressed. Though every bit of the lyric has its own essence and social messaging, the starting couplet is resounding. The verse—“They paved paradise, And put up a parking lot”—held a mirror up to society, and here we are four decades later, perplexed and baffled as to how we got here.

Automobiles are the scourge that drive up emission levels and other environmental issues, yet their numbers continue to rise unabashed. As per a report by the Centre for Science and Environment (Delhi), it took India 60 years (1951-2008) to cross the mark of 105 million registered vehicles. The same number of vehicles were added in a mere six years (2009 – 2015) thereafter!

But when you throw ill-conceived parking systems into this mix, it is like taking gasoline to a firefight. The backlash of this self-inflicted problem is found in every nook and corner of our cities, in all sorts of positions (angular, parallel, perpendicular) and scales (on-street, multi-level, automated).

In India, the conversation surrounding parking management is kindled every now and then, only to be impounded with plans of creating more parking spaces. Or even worse, buried six-foot deep with a parking lot as a symbolical headstone. Irony at its best.

So, why is it that dialogues on parking and its management generate public ire, whereas implausible measures—such as unchecked on-street free parking and multi-level parking—venerated. The answer lies in the psyche of vehicle owners and commuters in general, who lay fodder to a whole bunch of myths regarding parking management.

Now, what are these myths and how do the arguments hold; well, not as solid as the ground their vehicles are parked on.

Let’s deduce this argument with the adage, “Your liberty to swing your fist ends just where my nose begins”. A citizen has the liberty to own a vehicle, but it doesn’t entitle them to occupy a public space of their fancy. Furthermore, no text, context, and subtext of a right allows for the infringement of someone else’s right. Whereas, parking poses as an obstruction for someone to use that common public space from walking or cycling.

Clearly, parking is not a right or an entitlement, but a privilege which needs to be charged and heavily at that. A parking fee must be charged proportional to demand, factoring in criteria such as location, time of day, duration of parking, and category of vehicle (defined by size and type).

Take the case of Ranchi, where a pilot parking management project on the arterial MG Road stretch led to a 12-fold increase in parking revenue. Even the state of Jharkhand, spurred by the revenue spike at Ranchi’s pilot parking management project, invested efforts to regulate parking as a statewide policy. According to reports, Greater Chennai Corporation stands to gain Rs 55 crore per year in revenue from the pricing of about 12,000 ECS (equivalent car spaces) of parking in Chennai: a whopping 110 times increase in revenue from what it presently earns.

Cities can innovatively use parking revenue to encourage sustainable modes of transport. For example, Bicing—the public cycle-sharing program in Barcelona—is financed by its parking revenue. London’s Freedom Pass, which allows elderly (60+) and disabled residents to use public transport for free, is funded by the parking fees collected in many boroughs. You can find more about these cases and other best practices in ITDP’s publication, Europe’s Parking U-Turn: From Accommodation to Regulation.

As per Dalia Research, the average global commute time per workday is 1 hour 9 minutes, India’s commute estimate hovers around 1 hour 31 minutes. That figure helps us to the third spot in the global list, behind only Israel and the UAE. So does the solution of offering more parking space offer a concession on congestion, the answer is and has always been in the negative.

An analogy often used while talking about urban commute is “Travel time was so much lesser when there were lesser vehicle!”. Hence, parking is to private vehicles, what flame is to moths. More parking only begets more private vehicles to hit the road.

An excessive supply of parking will only encourage people to use personal motor vehicles—even when good public transport is available. Cities, therefore, need to limit total parking supply, including off-street and on-street parking. Based on the capacity of the road network, cities must set caps on the total quantum of parking available in each zone.

Most cities invest in developing multi-level car parks to resolve parking woes. But examples, from across the world and India, clearly indicate that it is a myopic attempt. Over time such infrastructures only turn into ‘big white elephants’.

Take the example of Bengaluru’s 11 multi-storeyed parking complexes—Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Company (BMTC) owns nine and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) owns two. According to a Bangalore Mirror report, these “ghost storey” parking lots barely have 20-30% occupancy, reason being parking on roads or pavements is easier, since it is free and the safer.

“Multi-level car parking doesn’t solve parking woes, better on-street management does. Multi-level parking structures remain empty while people continue to park on the streets as long as it remains free and unenforced,” said Shreya Gadepalli, ITDP India Programme Lead. Thus, cities must manage and enforce on-street parking effectively before building any off-street parking facilities, public, or private.

In 2009, Janette Sadik-Khan, the then transportation commissioner of New York City, envisioned Times Square to be a car-free zone. That is, the hub would be less of a conduit for vehicles and an urban space where people could freely walk, sightsee, dine, and take in the magnanimity that is New York. Though there were initial reservations, the results were quite remarkable and by 2010 the changes were made permanent. Citylab reported that “business for merchants in the area was booming, and travel times for cars actually went down”.

There are plenty of such examples be it Hong Kong—where demand for commercial establishments rose post pedestrianisation, Copenhagen—a pilot pedestrian project from 1962 has since reclaimed 100,000 sq.m of motorised transit. Here in India, the Mall Road in Shimla, Temple Street in Madurai, and Heritage Street in Amritsar are examples of how reinventing urban design to focus on pedestrianisation does not affect commercial establishment as feared.

People over parking: regulations allows better streets, better cities, better lives

In conclusion, the need of the hour is to regulate parking, not to take it off the table. Policies which focus on parking management not only help in easing congestion, emissions, and travel time, but also are a feasible revenue generation model for a city. A robust management system clearly defines parking zones, pegs user fee to demand, and uses an IT-based mechanism for information, payment, and enforcement—discussed at length in ITDP’s Parking Basics.

The conversation revolving around parking management has been catching up, with ITDP India Programme offering plausible solutions to cities. Leading the conversation is Pune, which is on the verge of implementing a parking management policy—a demand-based parking system that smoothens traffic movement.

Multiple studies allude that personal cars and two-wheelers occupy most of our street space, yet serve less than a fourth of all trips. They also sit idle for 95 per cent of the time—consuming over a third of street space that could be used more effectively as footpaths, cycle tracks, and bus rapid transit (BRT). The discourse over urban mobility shouldn’t revolve around parking, rather the onus must be on transit-oriented development. Wherein, last-mile connectivity and rapid system of transit ensure movement of people and not just vehicles. As cities evolve, there is an urgent need to step away from an oblivious “man proposes and parking disposes” mentality.

More resources from ITDP on parking management and reforms:

Parking Basics

Park it right

InFocus: Revolutionary Parking Reforms

Parking: Searching for the good life

Sizing Up Parking Space

U.S. Parking Policies: An Overview of Management Strategies

Maharashtra Urban Mobility Policy

31st July 2018 by admin

If life is a theatre, then commuting on Indian urban roads is a Greek tragedy that unfolds daily. Jostling for space, dashing to beat a signal or tip-toeing around oncoming traffic, all these are daily reminders of how desperately the Indian transport system needs an overhaul. According to a Boston Consulting Group survey, a commuter in Mumbai spends 135% more time in road travel than any other Asian city.

Yet, our current vehicle-centric transportation planning only adds more vehicles on roads. And beating congestion by adding more roads is a battle that no city has won. It isn’t just the rapid increase in congestion, traffic snarls or travel time, but also the subsequent rise of pollution and road accidents that hamper quality of life in our cities.

“Every rupee spent by a city on public transport boosts its economy by four rupees!” said Mr Khatua, Director of Mumbai Technical Support Unit, at a workshop on the Maharashtra State Urban Transport Policy. Succinctly put, the senior officer magnifies the need of the hour: sustainable public transport systems.

Closely looking at Maharashtra’s urban population, it is expected to increase by a whopping 30% in the next decade and by another 50% in the years to follow. Going by the present-day scenario of urban commute in the state, the future seems too hazy. To counter these issues, the Urban Development Department of the state has drafted and published the Maharashtra Urban Mobility Policy.

With sustainability at its core, the policy looks to develop transport systems in accordance. So efforts will be concentrated on urban transit systems which reduces burden on resources and most importantly, offers an equal space to every commuter. Hence, facilitating walking, cycling and usage of public transport.

How the policy came about

In 2006, the National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) was laid out as a guidance for transportation planning in Indian cities. It prioritized the movement of people and not vehicles in cities, emphasizing on adequate road space for sustainable transport modes, such as walking, cycling and public transport. However, the NUTP mostly existed as a term of reference on papers.

You may ask, so why bring it up now? Well, Maharashtra is taking strides to plug this gap, making it the first state to define its own transportation policy. This further ensures that its urban transportation projects are consistent with NUTP. In June 2017, the Urban Development Department released a draft of the policy. To ensure transparency and insight on feasibility the process was participatory, taking into consideration comments and suggestions of citizens and officials from various cities.

Consultation with Pune Municipal Corporation

Consultation with Nashik Municipal Corporation

In all of this the ITDP India Programme provided technical guidance to the Urban Development Department, and the department is now in the last stages of finalizing the draft.

What it offers

Applicable to all urban areas of the state, the policy envisions transport modes which are safe, reliable, sustainable and accessible for citizen from all walks of life. Additionally, focusing on women’s safety.

The key objectives that the policy will enforce upon cities are:
· Safety and convenience offered to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users.
· Reducing usage of personal vehicles
· Our transportation infrastructure must be is universally accessible
· Road fatalities should be drastically reduced
· Ambient air quality should meet or exceed Central Pollution Control Board norms

All this is easier said than done, of course. Hence, the policy offers tangible metrics for infrastructure implementation, followed up with support and training provided by the state government.

The policy also helps to detangle the bureaucratic red-tape and ensures a coherent approach is in store. Cities with a population of 10 lakh or more are expected to establish a Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority and an Urban Transport Fund to manage financial resources for all transportation projects. This will ensure that each agency works in coordination and follows an identical vision.

In conclusion, the policy offers a glimmer of hope; and we say glimmer because there are still many a miles to go and stretches to be reclaimed for equal distribution. But this clearly is a step in the right direction which will impact and influence other states to follow suit. In essence, Maharashtra has shown its wherewithal to get with the times and be the trailblazer that leads by example.