Subheadline: A former PMC chief engineer’s criticism points to a wider weakness in how the city plans roads, utilities, maintenance and future growth.
Standfirst: Pune’s road debate is usually reduced to potholes, traffic congestion and repeated repairs. At a recent discussion organised by Sajag Nagrik Manch, however, former Pune Municipal Corporation chief engineer Vivek Kharewadkar framed the problem differently: the city needs to treat roads as part of a larger infrastructure network. His comments, along with complaints from citizens, point to a planning gap that goes beyond the quality of asphalt. Roads carry water, power and internet networks, are repeatedly excavated for repairs, and must accommodate a city whose built-up area and travel demand continue to change. This analysis examines what the reported criticism reveals about road management in Pune, what remains unaddressed, and why a digitally mapped, coordinated approach is central to the city’s infrastructure future.
Pune’s road problem is not new, but the recent criticism places several familiar failures in the same frame. Kharewadkar said the municipal corporation has no concrete plan for expanding the city’s traffic network and is largely widening existing roads or repairing the same roads repeatedly. Citizens participating in the discussion complained that municipal engineers do not inspect road works directly, contractors remain difficult to identify or hold accountable, and officials, including the municipal commissioner, are not accessible to them.
The discussion, held as part of the monthly programme of Sajag Nagrik Manch, was focused on the causes and possible remedies for poor road conditions. Its significance lies less in the event itself than in the way it connects road quality with planning, utility coordination, construction supervision and the city’s development plan. A road is not simply a surface on which vehicles move. It is also the corridor through which essential services reach homes, workplaces and public institutions.
That distinction matters because excavation is unavoidable in a growing city. Water lines need repair or expansion. Power and internet networks require maintenance. Drainage systems must be altered or extended. Kharewadkar said roads will therefore continue to be dug up, but argued that the resulting damage cannot be addressed only through repeated resurfacing. The underlying question is whether the city knows what lies beneath each road, which agencies are using the corridor, and what future capacity will be required.
In the reported discussion, he identified several causes of potholes and road deterioration, including waterlogging, the quality of asphalt and oil leaking from vehicles. He also pointed to weaknesses in the original design of roads. These factors suggest that the visible pothole is often the last stage of a longer chain of decisions involving drainage, materials, utility works, construction standards and maintenance responsibility.
A repair-first approach can conceal that chain. Potholes are filled, a surface is relaid and the road is declared usable, but the same corridor may soon be opened again for an underground utility project. If the utility work is not coordinated with the road agency, the newly repaired surface becomes vulnerable once more. The city then spends on both the repair and the subsequent reinstatement, while residents experience the disruption as a continuous failure of road management.
Kharewadkar’s central argument was that roads should be managed through a comprehensive road-management system rather than viewed only through the narrow lenses of potholes or traffic. That approach would require the municipal corporation to connect road design, utility mapping, excavation permissions, reinstatement standards, contractor accountability and maintenance records. The source report does not establish whether such an integrated system currently exists across Pune, but the criticism identifies its absence as a central concern.
The issue is also linked to the amount of road space available in the city. Kharewadkar said Pune should have roads covering at least 15 per cent of its area, while the actual share is not even 9 per cent. The report does not provide the methodology, geographic boundary or official source for these figures, so they require verification before being treated as a definitive measure of Pune’s road deficit. Even so, the comparison illustrates the pressure created when urban growth outpaces the planned road network.
Road coverage alone, however, cannot resolve congestion. More road space may improve movement in some locations, but the performance of a network depends on continuity, junction design, public transport, pedestrian access, drainage and the location of new development. The reported criticism does not present a complete mobility plan, but it does challenge the practice of treating individual road widening projects as a substitute for network planning.
The reference to old development plans is important in this context. Kharewadkar said roads proposed in earlier development plans have not yet been completed and cited the Pashan-Sus road as a project that has remained pending for around two decades. The report does not specify the present status of the road, the reasons for delay, land-acquisition issues or the agencies responsible. Those details would be necessary to assess the project independently. The broader planning issue, nevertheless, is clear: a road shown on a plan has little value for residents until land, funding, design, permissions and construction are aligned.
Long delays also change the conditions under which a road is expected to function. A corridor planned years earlier may now pass through a denser urban area, serve different travel patterns or intersect with new utility requirements. Delayed implementation can therefore make the original design less suitable by the time construction begins. This is one reason infrastructure plans need periodic review rather than simple execution of old proposals.
The discussion also raised questions about the proposed High-Capacity Mass Transit Route, or HCMTR, included in Pune’s 1987 development plan and now being reconsidered, according to the report. Kharewadkar argued that its feasibility should be examined before implementation. In particular, the city would need to clarify whether the route is intended only for vehicles travelling at speeds of 110 kilometres per hour or whether two-wheelers and three-wheelers would also use it.
The question is not merely about speed. It concerns the function of the corridor, the types of vehicles it is designed to carry, the safety implications of mixed traffic and its relationship with the rest of Pune’s transport network. The supplied report does not provide the current design, alignment, traffic projections, cost or institutional plan for the HCMTR. Those elements remain necessary for a complete evaluation. What the discussion establishes is that an older proposal cannot be considered automatically relevant simply because it appears in a historic development plan.
Underground infrastructure is the other major part of the road-management problem. Kharewadkar called for periodic audits of the service lines beneath roads. Such audits would need to examine where utilities have been laid, their length, present capacity, maintenance condition and ability to meet future demand. He also suggested that an updated digital plan showing underground networks should be available.
A reliable digital utility map could change how road works are planned. Before excavation, agencies could identify existing lines and coordinate work. After a project, the location and condition of new infrastructure could be recorded for future maintenance. Contractors and officials could work from the same information instead of relying on incomplete or disconnected records. The report does not indicate whether Pune currently has a citywide digital utility database or what standards would govern its accuracy. That gap itself is significant because a map is useful only when agencies update it after every intervention.
The institutional question is equally important. Roads are used by multiple public agencies and service providers, while responsibility for construction, inspection, reinstatement and maintenance may be divided. When accountability is fragmented, residents may know that a road has been damaged but not which agency authorised the excavation or which contractor must restore it. The citizens’ complaints about site inspection and contractor visibility point to this accountability problem, although the report does not include responses from the PMC, contractors or utility agencies.
The reported criticism therefore points to three linked deficits: incomplete network planning, weak coordination between surface roads and underground utilities, and limited public visibility over construction responsibility. Addressing one without the others would produce only partial improvement. Better asphalt cannot compensate for poor drainage or repeated uncoordinated excavation. A new corridor cannot solve congestion if older planned links remain incomplete. A digital map cannot improve decisions if agencies are not required to use and update it.
The evidence in the report does not establish the scale of each deficit, nor does it allow a judgement on the performance of every PMC road project. It does, however, show why road quality should be assessed as a system rather than as a series of isolated repairs. The next useful evidence would include the PMC’s current road inventory, the verified share of road area, the status of delayed development-plan roads, the design and feasibility documents for the HCMTR, and records of underground utility mapping and excavation permissions.
For Pune, the larger urban question is whether road investment is being organised around individual projects or around the life cycle of the city’s infrastructure. A road has to be planned, built, opened, excavated, repaired, inspected and eventually reconstructed. Each stage affects the next. Without a common record and a clear allocation of responsibility, the city risks repeating the same cycle of construction, damage and patching.
The discussion does not prove that a single reform will eliminate potholes or congestion. It does establish a case for examining the municipal corporation’s planning and coordination systems more closely. What remains to be clarified is how the PMC responds to the allegations, what official data supports the road-coverage figures, and whether proposed projects such as the HCMTR have been reassessed against current transport and utility needs. Those documents and responses will determine whether Pune’s road policy moves beyond repairing existing corridors towards managing the entire urban network.
