E505 Government of Vol. 1 Public Works Department Lucknow,

Public Disclosure Authorized ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (PHASE I)

September2001

ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services u (LoanNo, 41144N) Public Disclosure Authorized

Consultancy Services for Uttar M nitH,jNalhp Pradesh State Roads Project Public Disclosure Authorized

Jhv :X Public Disclosure Authorized DHV ConsultantsBV FundingAgency: in associationwith TheWorld Bank Halcrowand Partners Operations ResearchGroup DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. F CO PY MDPConsultants (Pvt.) Ltd. EnvironmentAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants Services for the Uttar PradeshState Roads Project, under IBRD Loan No. 4114-IN

ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT (PHASE 1) EXECUTIVESUMMARY

1 TIHEUTTAR PRADESH STATE ROADS II environmental sensitivity of each road vis-a-vis ;PRX ;0-.MOJET -0; proposedroad improvementwas assessed.Based on favourable economic assessmentof highway, The Uttar Pradesh State Roads-l1 Project is project costs,social and environmentparameters, financed under the World Bank loan number four routes were prioritised for taking up 4114-IN. The Uttar Pradesh Public Works subsequentdetailed designwork in the first phase Department, as the executing agency, as under: representedthe Government of India in terms of Route4 Katra- Bilhaur:...... 148.435 km liaison and co-ordination with t,le World Bank. Route7 Bahraich- Faizabad:...... 109.35 km The Project is performed by a consortium of Route14 Boghnipur- Chaudagara consultantsconsisting of DHV ConsultantsBV as Mode:.. 82.296 km lead consultant, Halcrow and Partners, Route18 Jaunpur- Mohammadpur:33.872 km Operations Research Group, Development ConsultantsLtd., and MDP ConsultantsPvt. Ltd. Total Phase1 ...... 373.95 km The FeasibilityStudy project followed on earlier Figure 1 gives an overview of roads selected in work done under the Uttar PradeshState Roads Phase1 upgradationworks and Table 1 gives the Strategic Option Study (SOS), where a list of list of roads,and proposedworks. 2,655 km candidate roads for upgrading was generated.This list included a few more routes Location plans for the four routes are given as on suggestionof UPPWD. This study was based follows: on regional approach to road planning contexts Figure 2: Bhognipur-Chaudagara to support regional socio-economicdevelopment Figure 3: Katra-Bilhaur policies. Under the feasibility study Figure4: Bahraich-Faizabad environmental screening of 18 finally selected Figure 5: Jaunpur-Mohammadpur project roads was carried out and the Table 1: Projectroad andlinks

Link Description ProposedDstit LinkNo. i From To Length i) Works ,~~~~~~~~~~~------,, ------...... - 14.1 Bhognipur SH 46 389 W3 14.2 , {hatampur; . ; Jahanabad. . ------~~~------...... ! SH------46 ! 19.1 W3 14.3 Bakear SSHJahanabad 46 _L 26 I W3 rural and Fatehpur 14.4 Bakewar ChaudagraMode ODR MDR 6 12.05 W3 .. . -----~~~~~~~~------I------~-~~...... - ...... Sub-total Blhognipur ChaudagraMode 82.03 4A I i Katra Jalalabad , MDR W5 35.00 Wo ------...... _... ____...... _- 4A.2 Jalalabad Allahganj I SH29 j 19.60 W3 4A.3 Blgram MAilahgan;MDR 26C | 61.50 W I Shahjahanpur, Hardoi, 4A.4 Mallawarl Bangarmau SH 38 14.00 W3 Unnao and Kanpur Rural 4B.1 Bilhaur Bangarrnau SH 40 1 17.20 W3i Sub-total Katra slhaur 148.44 7A. Bahraich Gonda SH 30 6480 W3 7A.2 Gonda Nawabganj SH 30 135 30 W3 Bahraich,Shravasti and 7A3i Nawabs.nj Faizabad SH 30 5 75 W3 'Gonda Sub-total Bahraich Faizabad |- 109135 18.1 launpir In Mohammadpur MDR 69 13387 W3 launpur and Azamgarh Sub-total laulnptir mohamn,adpur 33.87 Sub-total Sultanpur Pratapgarh 36 80 ...... ,,...... _ _ . _ _.,I Total[ ' 373.9521

Government of lnar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environment Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Table 2: Project roads for maintenanceroutes

SCorridor enth Remarks No. 1km) Remrk 1 Bilgram-Madhogan; 23.000 !Part of Katra-Bilhauar road 2 Faizabad-Azamgarh 138.000 Bahraich-Faizabadis -being up upgraded 3 Jaunpur (NH)-56 to 5.500 1Jaunpur-Mohammedpur MDR-69) __ ruaded 4 Mohammadpur- 55-400 jaunpur-Mohammedpur DOohrighat !is being upgraded 5 Varanasi- 69.600 Mohammadpur . 6 Ghazipur- 53.800 Azamgarh 7 - 52.625 Sahranpur 8 -Naziabad 118.000 9 .Barreilley-Badaun 45.000 10 Kairana-Zansath 86.236 (SH 47) i i Lakhimpur-Sitapur 45.000 - Kachhlabridge to be reconstructed 12 Bachhrawan- 72.000 Fatehpur 13 Kashipur- 43.572 Moradabad TOTAL 807.733

Covernmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India Project Cu-oidlndtintgCoISUltarits (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project A LEGEND N o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~DistrictHeadquarters * Sattlement ~Phase 1 routes Major district roads LMal K;l State highway f National highway

;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Lk

eerneout 7tsenrue\h

PublicWorks Deparitment 0 J/W FigureNo: 1I Governmentof UttarPradesh UttarPradesh State Roads Project In assOCiratioflwith ~ Phase1 routes Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halorowand Partners ______Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114 - IN) CperationsConsularts Group SCL N LEGEND | DistrictH.Q. 79°30' 80°000 80'30' * SaKtlement | "~Route 14 Majordist. road ____ xana~State highway 27'00' >1 Nationalhighway ~-Rail River $;ur [ Districtboundary

Govermentof UKarPradsh

t<~~~~~~~im

Govmmet of Uta : Praes laLaca0\ a

Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Inassoctatiort with BgiutCadga(otU ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Bogniur twCaandgra(Roue 14 Services.(World Bank Loan No.4114 -IN) OperationsResearch Group DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. SCALE MOPConsultanWtsPvt.) Ltd 025 50 Kilometers

Rie reference:oAnaveen'Voutes\r14 LA LEGEND

2 District boundary ( District Headquarter " Project road «k>NationalHwy z State Hwy Major distt. road X Rail River

Government of ar Pade U

- a nj Q~~~~~~~Sad

ProjctC-rnt utagam Pa o 4 ( l

S t ~~~~Bilhaur \ Aig o

PublicWorks Department Figure No: 3 Govemmentof UttarPradesh . Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Inassociation with Route 4A (Katra - Bangarmau - Bilhaur ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowand Partrers Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114 - IN) OperationrsResearch Group DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. SCALE MDPConsultantstPvtfLtd. 0 10 20 30 Klometers

Filereference, c:\naveen\routes\pack1 A LEGEND District Headquarter A Settlement \ &Route 7 Majordist. road \ NZState Hwy \ NationalHwy Rail River \ Districtboundary 28000

27°J30

GovernmentPradesh f Ia'

Services.4114-IN) (WorldOpera.ios BankReearGrop2700' Loan No. Utarael taeRas rjc 'Xasocatint RueN. 7

51°30' 82°00,

PublicWorks Department 8 7Figure No: 4 Govemment of Uttar Pradesh UttarPradesh State RoadsProject Inassociation vnth RueN Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) katcrowand PartnersRotN.7 Services.(World Bank LoanN o. 4114- IN) OperatiorisResearch GroupSCL DevelopnmentConsultants Ltd. SCALE MDPConsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 20 40 Kilometers

PFlereference c:\naveenlrouttes\r-7 L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~LEGEND N ( Distrct headquarter * Settlement "Route 18 National hwy , State hwy Major dist. road Rail . River 2 District boundary

\_/ _ , , Bad~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~purr

PublicWorks Department FigureNo: 5 Government of Uttar Pradesh __ Uttar PradeshState Roads Project In associatonwith Route 18 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowand Partrers Services.(World BankLoan No. 4114- IN) OperationsResearch Group SCALE DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. MDPCcnsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 25 50 Kilometers

Filereference: c:AnaveenVrowles\r18 EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

8.1 hectaresof agricultural land for ROW of 2 PROIECTDESCRIPTION 45 m. The key featuresof the project roadsare given Route 14 Bhognipur-Chaudagra Mode: The asfollows: project road connects with National Highway No. 25, National Highway No. 86, and furtherto . The entire area is flat and hence drainage is National Highway No. 2. Feasibility report slow. Besidesroute Nos. 14 and 4 suffer from identified this route in priority works due to high major river floods of river Ganga, internal rate of return at 15.32% with low and Kalyani. environmental and socio-economic costs. The total length of the route is 82.296 km. . Project roads are in seismic zones IV and IiI with high to moderateintensity. Project road Route4 Katra-Bilhaur-Bangarmau:This road runs structuresare designedto withstand this level south of Bareilly and connects with SH22. The of seismic activity. road connecting Kanpur crossing rivers Kalyani and Ganga meeting NH2 at Bilhaur. The road is . The roads traverse several irrigation canals, passing through districts of Shahjahanpur, livers and local drains (nallas). The notable Hardoi, Unnao and Kanpur rural. The road is an rivers are Sangur, Kalyani, Garra, Sendha, orbital link reducing distance between Barielly Rasheda,Lialmai Ganaga, Terhi, Aora, Bhesi and Kanpur. This route is prioritised due to high and Gangi. Being an extensively irrigated IRR at 38.1%. The total length of the route is area,the canal network is also extensive. 148.435 km with five links. A bypassis proposed at Bangarmau. . There are a number of ponds along the route which are used by the nearby villages. Route 7 Bahraichto Faizabad:This route links Drinking water sources, however are by the important towns of Faizabadand Bahraich handpumpsonly which are also severalalong and passesmainly through rural areas.This link the routes. has a heavy traffic and with improvements,the IRR at 40% is most attractive amongstall routes . Project roads have a large number of cultural in PhaseI. The total length of the road is properties like mazars, mosques, ruins, 109.35 km. temples,burial grounds

Route 18 Jaunpur-Mohammadpur:This route is . Archaeologicalfeatures in the vicinity of some an important link in the strategicroad network of project roads is very rich and of ancient State Highways. This road was a part of World origin. There are a few historical structures Bank assistedprolect which has been taken up to and ruins along the project roads.The chance complete the link. The IRR is 16.6%. The total archaeological finds during road works are length of the road is 33.872 km. quite possible.

By passes:There are two by passes: * Roadsidetrees are within the Right of Way affecteddue to widening of the roads. Gaura Badshapur in route 18 of 6.342 km length which requires acquision of 12.00 . Along the project roads there are several hectaresof agricultural land for ROW of 45m. settlementsboth urban and rural. Theseplaces Part of bypass alignment utilities existing have weekly and daily markets and attract service road of canal, large slow moving traffic causing congestion, delaysand accidents. aiangarinauby passin route 4A with a length of 1.851 km requires acquisition of Table No. 3 below gives key features for each route.

Goverrn,ientor UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India viii t'(UJVCi CO-u[d lildtilIg CUnSUltdllbt (PCCI SelViCCStur Uttdl PradeSil Stdte Rudds PluiUct EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHIVConsultants dV September2001

Table3: Keyfeatures of PhaseI projectroads Village Historic I Settlement Roadside Routei Bridges Vlae Cultural ' Bypass Ponds/ p ArchaeologBrick Kilns' ... No. (Riv4er) Poete Trees Lakes Prpris ical Urban Rural (30m row) 8 (ruins), 14 - 3 35 31 2 43 11,847 (monume l : . j ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~nts)l-i 4 1 6 6 64 25 2 45 51,719

7 - - 23 67 19 3 52 21,713 18 1 3 15 25 2 28 8,210 Total for 2 13. 47 191i 10l 77 7 1 168 93,489 Phase I

Upgradationwork India environmental legislation and guidelines Various options that have been worked out for which form basisof this reportare: the upgradation works as part of Phase- I are ForestConservation Act, 1981 presentedin Table 4 below: . NationalForest Policy, 1988 Table4: Cross-sectionoptions for the . Wild Life ProtectionAct, 1972 upgradationworks in UPSRP-11 _arriageShoulder width Median * Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 carriageiShoulder width .Mda omt Optionri way Hard Soft Width Width * Air and Water (Pollution Control) Acts, 1981 Width Shoulder Shoulder _ and 1977 WI 6.0r0 1. mnnitm - n1 W (23m) _ m __- r _ . Control of Noise Under Environment IW2 - 2.5 m - 12 m Protectioni Act, 1986, Schedule Ill.

7l-m 1 . - 12 m The Environmental Impact Notification, (2x3.5m) 15 2m m Varies ~~~~~MOEF,1994 W4 2mx 15 m varies Varies L _.25m . The Environmental Guidelines, Procedures and updat^s on Environmental Assessment The Right of Way (RoW along the project routes and Resettlementvide OP 4.01 and OP 4.30 varies from 8 mn in the most constricted of the and 4.20 section to 30m somestretches. Sincethe design . Public Liabilitiesand InsuranceAct, 1991 adopted (W3 option) requires at least 13m clean * Vehicle RegistrationAct, 1998 at formation level and even more at toe depending on the height cf formation, it is felt . Indian Motor Vehicles Act (for control of air that enough clear space is available in RoW at and noise pollution) most of the places. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) * Ancient Monuments,Archaeological Sites and per project route varies from 2097 PCU RemainsAct, 1958 (Bangarmau-Bilhaur) to 12046 PCUS on Jalalabad-Allahganj link, Except for the . LandAcquisition Act, 1984 and 1989 settlements where flooding occurs frequently, pavementsalong all the routes are flexible. At Institutional settingsIn the environment context locations where regular flooding occurs brick i Indiaare: paved roads havebeeni planned. . Ministry of Environmentand Forests,(MoEF), . New Delhi. 3 POLICIES, LEGALAND . Regional office of MoEF, Lucknow ADMINISTRASTIVE FRAMEWORK * CentralPollution Control Board * Departmentof Environmentand Forests, The project being financed by the World Bank, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh follows OP 4.01 Operational Guidelines,January The Indian Constitution makes ernvironmental 1999 and the various state and Governmentof protection an explicit duty for everycitizen.

Government of Uitar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India ix ProjectCo-ordinating ConsLltants (PCC) Services for UnarPradesh Stale Roads Project EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

The No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Table5: Detailsof treesin 30 m row Uttar PradeshPollution Control Board has been obtained. The nrocedure for the permission to Route length TotaliTrees Density/Km No. (Kmn) 1; (Nos) (Nos) cut the treesalong the routesis in an advanced - (Km)___' _ l_--*---)-140 stage. The independent review exercise is 14 i 82 296 11,847 140 completed and findings of review have been -_-- _---_- (low) _ incorporated. 4 4 51,719. 348 *(medium) * 253 The report takes into account all the above Acts 7 10935. 27,713 and Guidelines. (_edium) ______18 333(Medium) 872 8,21Q 242 4 METHODOLOGYOF ENVIRONMENTAL. 250 ASSESSMENT TOTAL 373.90 93,4899 di)

Methodology adopted for completion of the study CulturalProperties are: is as follows: Table6: Culturalproperties within 30m RoW Scoping of Workshop organisation with______variousstake holders; Route Majors/ Ruin * Reconnaissancesurvey to collect No. s iTmrsaMgrounds information in devisedformats; /Dargahs Analysisof assemblydata; 14 31 41 8 * Documentationof baselineconditions; 4 53 11 * Analysisand assessmentof various 7 50 16 1 alternatives; 18 19 5 1 * Assessmentof potential impacts; TOTAL 153 i 36 2 8 * Formulationof mitigation, avoidanceand

enhancementmeasures; * Other features are village ponds, rivers, * Integrationof environmental impactsin wells, hand pumps, rivers and streams and design process"Mainstreaming the environmentalcomponent"; numerousirrigation canals; * Community consultations; * Preparationof standaloneenvironmental D Landuseconsists of agriCUlturalfields, brick managementplans (EMPs)for all kilns, urban and rural settlements but no upgradationroutes; and res, urest areas. * Environmentaland social managementplan reservedforest areas. (ESMP)for maintenancecorridors. AmbientAir Qualityand Noise

5 ExisTINGENVIRONMENTAL SCENARIO Samplesfor air, noise, water and soil were taken based on locations representative of EnvironmentalConditions environmentalcharacteristics for all routesas per MOEFprocedures and analysedagainst the CPCB Baseline studies involved kilometre-wise standards.The following key observations are assessmentof possible removal of roadsidetrees, made basedon the baselineconditions areas of flooding and erosion, fauna and flora, . SPM levels exceed permissible limits at all landuse, urban and rural settlements,impacts on cultural propertiesand historic structuresand on locationsalong all routes ambientair, noise anidwater quality. . Noise levels exceed for residential and Details of roadsidetrees in 30 m corridor and the commercial areas and for sensitive receptors tree densitiesare as per Table No. 5 during day time for all routes. . Noise levels exceed for residential areas at night time for route 14 (ChaudagraMode)

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India x ProjectCo-ordiniatinig Corisultants (Pcc) Services for Uttar Pradesih State Roads Project EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Water pollution levels exceed permissible 6 PUBLICCONSULTATIONS AND standards for drinking water in all routes due INFORMATION DISCLOSURE to insanitary conditions Road projects affect roadside communities Village ponds along route 4A and Sedariver residing along the road directly and indirectly. at Route 14 have pollution levels unfit for any rtanc of public c ltan hadibeen use. importance of public consultation has been recognised and detailed methodology has been It can be observed that 'without the project" stated. Public consultations have taken place at pollution levels are considerable on account of local, district, State and institutional levels. SPMIRSPM, Noise levels and (non-road induced) water pollution. At local level discussions with affected persons and their leaders were held. At district level Proximity of Project Roads to Environmentally concerned departments, NGOs and opinion Sensitive Targets leaders were invited to give reactions to presentations by the PWD and PCC Consultar.ts. None of the upgradation route passes through At State levels suggestions and views were any ecologically sensitive areas such as Wild Life obtained from NGO's, various departments of Sanctuaries, National Parks, Biosphere reserves, GOUP and Central government and concerned Bird Sanctuary and Zoological Parks notified by citizens. Inputs from Social Impact Assessment the State Government. However, Route No.7 were taken into consideration alongwith traffic (Bahraich-Faizabad) forms a boundary to Parvati- induced health impacts. Finally inputs for project Aranga bird Sanctuary. design and actions were evolved, as given in Table 7: One maintenance route Meerut-Naiibabad, passesthrough a Hastinapur Wild-Life Sanctuary.

Table 7: Routewise Representationsof Public Concerns and Hearings and their Incorporation in Project Design

RouteNumber PublicConcerns/Hearings IncorporationinDesign Route4 NeedCentral widening to minimizenumber of PAPs BBypass planned. Habitantsalong project route expressed desire during FocusGroup Discussion. Needfor Bangarmaubypass due to alignmentpassing ; Suggestionaccepted and incorporatedin design throughcongested and accident prc e commercial area.This issue came up in focusgroup discussion in ; Allahgani ----'----'------...--- '------'-'------. . ______...... ,,_ Buildingup ofsafetyaspects in upgradedroads. issue All majorintersections to be developedas per MOST raisedin districtlevel construction at Shahjahanpur i specifications.The improved intersections are planned at Khairpur,Madanpur, Yakubpur, Jalalabad, Hoolpur, i______Swagipurand Gani Moradabad intersections. Propersignages at identifiedaccident hot spots such as 1)alalabaddeveloped area, Katrisili Village, Sukh Sukhi Village,Eknaura Village etc. Whetlierproject design takes care of waterlogging? An water loggedareas identified and drainage issueraised at Bareillyin districtlevel construction. 'improvementincluded in engineeringdesign. Routewiselocations where drainage improvement will takeplace are detailed in a Chapteron Mitigation,in EnvironmentalAssessment Report. DistrictMagistrate desired railway over bridge near Thesuggestion could not be incorporated,as the Bareilly- Issueraised during public consultation at proposedlocation does not fall on any of theproject Bareilly. route under Phase-l,Phase 11 or maintenance …programme. Noise level in post project scenarioand measuresto Noise predictions done in EnvironmentalAssessment reduce these. Issueraised in level for future scenario. Noise barriers planned at noise consLUltation. sensitivereceptors leducational and health institutes) along the project route. No horn zones identified in design and proper sign marking on road.

GCovcrii,,nmtof Ultdt Pradesli,Publc Works Department, Lucknow, India xi Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Route Number Public ConcemslHearings _ Incorporation in Design One governmentofficial enquired about sanitation Properconstruction colony planned in the project for facilities at construction workers' camp. Further,he construction workers. The colony to have proper suggestedthat cooking fuel to be madeavailable by i drinking water and sanitation facilities. Necessary contractor to avoid tree cutting. Query raisedat Hardoi. clausein contract document will be kept to ensure availability of keroseneat camp No suggestioncame at Unnao. ______---._ .. ._ -- ___-- ______------I - - ' ------" -' -''- '------Route 7 ' Necessaryoccupational and safety measuresbe t A clausewill be made in contract document so that provided to construction workers. Suggestioncame at contractor will provide earplugs,safety helmets etc. to level consultation. all workers working in high noisezone areasand near i lifting machinery. District Magistratedemanded bypassfor Bahraich. Issue Suggestioncould not incorporated due to pre findings raisedduring district level consultation. of SOS study,feasibility study and cost considerations. SDM Gonda suggestedfor proper measuresin design Water pollution will be abatedby provisions of proper for reduction for air, water and noise pollution in post I drainagenetwork at human habitations.Drainage project period. Issueraised during district level improvementtaken up in design. cor.sultation at Gonda- Noise barriersplanned at sensitivereceptors. CDO Gonda suggestedthat upgradation design should ! Design takesinto account improved intersectiondesign, have better measuresfor safety. Issueraised during sharpcurve design and proper signages. district level consultation at Gonda. Route 8 District level public consultations were not held for this Pratapgarhbypass planned. However, it will be route as this has been declared a National Highway. l implemented in Phase-Il. However focus group discussionswere held before declaration. In the focus group discussionat Chilebila crossingpeople suggestedfor Pratapgarhbypass to save | travel time to Allahabadtown. Route 14 Type of speciesfor tree plantation, sourceof saplings Type of species recommendedin Environmental and plantation strategy details soughtby a NCO ! assessmentare thosegrown locally. Project envisages participant at Kanpur (Rural).Issue raisedduring district i participation of NGO for tree plantation under guidance level consultatior at Kanpur (Rural). _of StateForest Department.

Villagers of Shahjahanpurand Puhur handedover a i Suggestionincorporated. Roadwidening will be done memorandum through District Magistratefor Central (in both sidesconsidering old road centreline. Widening taking original road centre line becausemoad hasbeen widened recently by 5 feet on one side. Issue raisedduring district level consultationat Fatehpur. Villagers residing in Puhur village also handedover j Suggestionaccepted and incorporated in design. memorandum similar to Shahjahanpurvillage for Central Widening. Issue raisedduring district level consultation at Fatehpur. Participantfrom Shahjahanpurvillage suggestedthat ESuggestion accepted. Village pond at Shahiahanpur village pond be included in list of village pondschosen (included in ponds to be enhancedalong the project for enhancementon the project route. Issueraised route. Itduring district level consultation at Fatehpur. District Magistratedemanded railway over bridge near Suggestioncould not be incorporated due to cost ChaudagarhCrossing. Issue raisedduring district level i considerations. consultation at Fatehpur. T :------.------__._ .___ Block Development Officer BindkiTehsil suggested Suggestionnoted and passedto StateForest road treesspecies for plantation. Issueraised during Department.The speciesrecommended included in EA district level consultation at Fatehpur. Report. Route 18 ; Participation from iocal village aiong prolect route Design takesinto account improvement in cross raised the issueof water logging. Issueraised during l drainagealong project route district level consultant at launpur. Propercompaction and strengthat Gaura Badshahpur i Design takes into account the suggestion. bypassdue to high hydrostatic pressureat canal. i Suggestioncame at Jaunpurdistrict level consultation. Shopkeepersof Gaura Badshahpur marketraised the Suggestioncould not acceptedon account of two concern that their businesswill be affectedhence reasons:(a) at the time of FocusGroup discussion bypassshould not be constructed. Issuecame during i bypasswas demandedby the locals and (b) enough district level consultation at Jaunpur. ROW is not available for required widening at Gaura j Badshahpur. i Further consultant feels a need for bypasstaking into | considerationsthe future traffic scenario.

-~ --.----. ------.---- …--… STATELEVEL CONSULTATION - LUCKNOW

MouF participants enquired status of Environmental I EnvironmentalAssessment completed and Assessment. Environmental Managementand Action Plan prepared.

Governmirent of Uttar Pradesh,PLublic Works Department,L[icknow, India xii Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants 8V September2001

RouteNumber 1 PublicConcerns/Hearings Incorporationin Design Lesserusages of stoneaggregates in upgradation, as it I Suggestioncould not be acceptedas alternate to stone will haveadverse impact on ecologyof hill regions. | aggregatesis bricks; it hasmore adverse impact on ______. agriculture field. lanhitManav Seva Sansthan an NGObased at Bahraich Projecthas considerable role of NGOsin isuggested-that PAPsand NGOs should be involved for implementationphase. smoothand timely completion of project. i

7 ANALYSISOF ALTERNATIVES not taken for stabilisation. Soil contamination has been identified as an impact due to solid waste The analysis of alternatives has been carried out contamination from the labourer camp, stock and concentric widening has come out as the yard, hot mix plants, etc. During operation stage most acceptable choice from environmental and soil pollution has been identified as an impact social considerations. For the upgradation W3 due to accidental vehicle spill. Impact on natural option has been chosen. In this option the road resources will be limited to construction period. formation width will be 7 m with provisions of The impact would be on depletion of resources 1.5 m hard shouldersand 1 m the soft shoulder such as quarries, borrow pits, stone aggregates, on either the side. bitumen, etc.

8 ASSESSMENTOFIMPACTS Road projects have significant impacts on surroundings. During construction phase noise generation will take place from construction Impact due to project has been assessedon equipment to be used for clearing, excavation meteorology, environment, ground and surface and earth moving, grading and compacting, water resources, flooding, soils, topography, paving, landscaping and clean-up, etc. In the natural resources, ambient noise levels, flora, operational phase increasednoise levels will be fauna, human usevalues (land acquisition,loss of felt due to increase in traffic and increased private properties, highway amenities and operativespeed. Impact on flora will be limited facilities), land speculation,cropping pattem and due to felling of treeswithin the RoW and will be productivity, exploitation of resources and subsided once compensatory trees planted are archaeological/protectedmonuments. grown up in 8-10 years period. Routewisetrees to be cut aregiven below in Table 8: During planning and design stage the impacts will mainly comprised of financial hardships faced due to delay in construction or inadequate Table8: Treesto be cut on upgradationroutes compensation.These have been coveredin detail Route Route Name Treesto be in Rehabilitation and Resettlementreport under No. oe - cut separate cover. 4 Katra-Bangarmau-Bilhaur 5,640 7 1ahraich-Faizabad 128 14 tSonprCadgrMde i286 Impact on meteorology will be temporary in _____ognipur. h r M .2.. nature due to felling of trees, which could cause 18 rnmadur73 day temperature rise, but will be reversible in The most significant location where fauna is nature due to compensatory plantation. Impact important is Parvati-Aranga bird sanctuary on air environment during construction phase would due to construction machinery, movement adjacent to Route7 (Bahraich-Faizabad).The of vehicles carrying machinery, hot mix plants possibleimpacts identified are encroachmentinto etc. Impacts on water environment during sanctuary area, disturbance to visiting birds construction period have been identified as (October to February), illegal poaching, increase of sediment load on surface water collection of eggs/youngones, if any, etc. There bodies, abstraction for construction causing are no other wild life havensalong any routes. groundwater table decrease, etc. During Impacton fauna will be due to cutting of trees. A operation phase increased surface run-off has positive impact has been identified in operation been identified as permanentimpact. No impact phasedue to compensatoryplantation. on topography has been identified as all p,oject routes are in plain terrains. Impact on soil Impacts on human values have also been environment has been identified due to need of a e the hum an e valueswhchmaeniky borrow material. Soil erosion has been identified to be impactedare private properties,community at high embankment stretches if proper care is buildings, police stations,safety, etc. The impact

Goveriimeo1tof Uttar Prdcesli, Public works Department,Lucknon', India xiii ProjectCo-ordinating Consuiltants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environment Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001 of upgradation on private properties has been summarisedin Table 9 below: . Bangarmauon Route4A . Gaura Badshahpuron Route18 Table9: Impacton privateproperties along The impactsof threebypasses are: upgradationroutes Route i * pass through agricultural areas and require Impactcategory ,- - Total... m 4 i 7 14 18 acquisition of farm land causing loss of land otalresidence 37 36 10 11 94 and livelihood Houseand homestead 0 0 0 2 2 * do not effectany sensitive ecosystem House and part of homestead 9 3 6 0 18 . will create new barrier (severance)for free Total homestead 2 0 1 I 4 movement Partial homestead 5 2 10 23 i40 * will create air and noise pollution in a quiet Only part of residence 38 30 22 110 200 ruralarea Totalcommercial structure 134 105 107 6 1352 * will createobstruction to local This --1~ -. ------o illcrate o structontolocaldrainage. T i Panof commercial structure 21 8 8 24. 61 will require effectivecross drainage Totalhouserand partof .5 0 4 3 12 * may attract induced developments unless

Totalcommercial 'structure 12- 1 '' 7 42 carefully controlled. and part of house 12 18 5 7 i4 Both house and conmnmercial 1 X 10 1 23 The area to be acquired for the respective structure in total; y Part of agriculture land 0 0 I 641 65 alignmentas follows: Irrigation units 0 0 1 41 Route I Areato be Treesin privatepropertyTrees i 0 0 1101 0 1 No. | BypassI LengthL i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IiBpasLntacquired Onlysource of income 3 0 9 14 26 4 Bangarmua 1.85 8l 138 i GauraBadshahpur'- 6.432' 12.0* A number of facilities important for residentsof 1 ' . 12 roaoside settlements exist along the edge of Restof the landwill betransferred from the existing road. Of thesefollowing public buildings irrigationcanal are likely to be affected: Tabk 10: Publicbuildings likely to be affected Impacton Air, Noise,Water andSoil Quality

Amenity/Facility lTotal * Air pollution impacts especially on account l4 i7 14 118: olto _ --- - - 4----- of SPWRSPMlevels are high and with the Communitybuilding T, 3 01 0. °T 0 l 3 projectedtraffic they will increasefurther Policestation 0o I - 0

Safety has been identified as a concern. Project . Noise levelsare high along all routeswhich has identified 'black spots where accidentsare will also increase further due to projected most likely and adequatemeasures are provided traffic increase in design to reduce risk. . All water sourcesare polluted and require No archaeological or protected monument ts treatmentat the location. This will have to be likelytobeimpactedduetoprojectroutes. Some taken up by state pollution control boards cultural properties are likely to be affected to with concernedlocal authorities widening. The summary of cultural propertiesto be impacted is given below: . Soil quality is within limits Table 11: Summaryof cultural properties impacted in PhaseI Impactson air, noise,water and soilquality due Route to projectedtraffic increaseupto 2010 are: Description ' ------Total Temples/shrines 3 10 21 2 i17 Air quality predictionshave been carried out, Graveyard i 0 0 1i i using CALINE -3 model and finally predicted valueshave been comparedwith existing Impactof bypasses: Ambient Air quality standardsThe results show Two bypasses are proposed in Phase-I that the valuesof gaseouspollutant (CO & NOX) upgradation on route- 4 and 18. The names of will not exceed the specified standardsupto the year 2015. thosebypasses are:

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India Xiv Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for UttarPradesh State RoadsProject Environment Assessment(Phase II DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

No.. pat Avoidancre/mitigationmeasures The noise level predictions have been carried out No-slpe s Ainceitian mar for post project scenario, using FHWA model l 5. Stoneslopespitching genitfer fortan emfbank- I and it has been concludedthat noise levelswill i I ment slopessteeper than 1:2 exceedthe standardsbecause of high background 3 Quarries -1. Contractortoprocuremateial levels. Necessarynoise protective measureshave from UPPWD approve been recommended for sensitive receptors 2 quarriesidentified (education and health institutes) along project 2. Alltrucks carrying materials to (education ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~becoveredwith tarpaulin routes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~4Contamination 1 ulsoaeadrfeln of soilfrom fuel . Fuel storage and refuelin Background levels of SPM and RSPM exceed the andlubricant drainagesd iamagechannels kel awaywfreand walet limits at present. In the post project scenariothe bodies levels because of traffic will decrease due to 2. Oil inter captorsto be installed improvec operativespeeds. a was areas The lead levels in ambient air and soil will 5 Contamination 1. Cut and fill areashave been decreasein future yearsdue to availability of lead of soii from designedto be balanced construction 2. Constructionwastes to be free gasoline. wastesand dumped in selectedpits devel I quarrymaterials opedon unfertileland Impacts due to Maintenance Road i 3. dNonbituminous waste to be dumpedin bor-rowpits and thoseare to be coveredwith The impactsdue to maintenanceroad will be topsoil during construction phase only as there is no .4. preserved. land acquisition and tree cutting involved in 6i Waterresources d. The ponds close to project routes have been selectedfor maintenance.The constructedrelated impacts enhancement. will be managed.The mitigation measures 12- Contractor will obtain suggested in generic environmental and wathdrawalpomriverslground.nec management plan (ESMP) will minimise 3. All the road run off shall be adverseimpacts throughoil and gjrease ~~~~~~~~~~~~~passedtrap to avoid contamination. 7 Drainage i t All crossdrainage structures designedto handlea 50 years 9 MITIGATION, AVOIDANCE AND I back floodlevel. 2.Road side covereddrains ENHANCEMENTMEASURES plannedfor water logged areasin habilations 3. Additionalculverts planned on eachroute to improvecross The development of mitigation as well as drainage. avoidance of adverseimpacts of proposed road 4. Routewiseprovisions for new drainsis as givenbelow: development has been an iterative process.There 1. Route-422.5sKm has been continued interaction between the 2. Route-7-38. 868 Km design and environment teams to arrive at | 3. Route18-47 64km measuresacceptable to both sides. . . Route-na8r-a47.564 km 5-Sill fencingarrangemnent plannedin proximity of water The avoidance and mitigation measures have bodies. beensummarised in the following table: 8 s qualityquality .. 1.Provision of setilingponds degradation andinstallation of oil Table12Mtiatonmesuesfo e interceptor toprevent Table 12: Mitigation measuresfor identified S contaminationof waterbody impacts (ponds rivers,wefls, etc.) 2. All wastefrom construction Impact Avoidancemitigationmeasurs site willbe disposedas per No.IS pat .Aodnemtgto esrsSPCB norm. 1 Meteorological compensatoryafforestation, 3. Vehicles andequipment will parameters landscapinig,etc. be properly maintained.

2 i Soil 1. Avoidance of borrow areas ir 9 Air quality 1 All vehicles, equipment and agriculturelproductive lands machinery used for 2. Utilisation of topsoil for filling construction will be regularly of tree pits maintained to ensure pollution level conform to UP PCB 3. Soil erosion in slopes will be norms. prevented by turfing them with 2 Pollution control equipment grass and shrubs ' (Cyclone scrubber) will be 4. Bick pitchingfor embankment installed at the slack of hot

Government of Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India xv Project Co-ordinating Consultants IPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

S. Avoidance/mitigationrneasures RouteRmpact7: Bahraich - Faizabad No. m _o _et-o4 Roadside Pond on Leftside 48.58 mix plant. 5 Roadside Pond on Leftside 52.16 3. Regularspray of waterat 6 Roadside Pond on Rightside 39.67 earthworks.tempofary 7 Roadside Pond on Rig_side 56 00 haulage and detour toads. ...-- .---- ~sd ____ 4. All vehiclescnrrying 8 Roadside Pond on Rightside 80.93 construction material to be __ __.- __ _- _ __-__ _-_ __ _.--- - coveredwvithtarpaulin. _ 9 Roadside Pond on Rightside 82.9 5. In thepost constructionperiod 10 Roadside Pond on Rightside 85.35 regularmonitoring of vehicle Route14: Bhognipur - Chaud_graMode emissionsplanned. 1I Roadside Pond on Leftside 69.5 Noiselevel 1. Plantand equipmentused for 12 Roadside Pond on Leftside 70.5 constructionwill strictly 13 Road_sidePond on Rightside 75.5 conformto CPCB noise __.i _d 75_ standards. 14 Roadside Pond on Rightside 73.5 2. Workersto be providedwith 15 _Pond nearVillageShahjanpur - ear plugs Route18: jaunpur -Moammhadpur 3. Construction activity should 16 Roadside Pond on Left side 6 0 be restrictedbetween 6.0 AM 17 !Road sidePond on Leftside 6.9 4.Monitoring-9. 0 PM nearhnear habitations.------tioeness.f 18 .Roadside Pond on Rightside 6,3 1 ~~~~~~~~4.Monitoring of effecUvenessof . .- _4 ___ __ ------pollutionattenuating 191 Roadside Pond on Rightside 8.0 measureswill be takenthrice 20 Roadside Pond on Rightside 9.4 in operationpointed. 21 Roadside Pond on Rightside 10.0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... __. _...... ______...... I R._ Flora 1. Loss of treesis being 22 Roadside Pond on Leftside 16.0 compensatedin accordance 23 I Roadside Pond on Leftside i 17.9 to theprinciples laid out in 24 , Roadside Pond on Rightside 16.5 i (conservation) Act, ...... ______~~~~~~~~~forestforest9(conse8vation0.Act, 25 Road side Pondon Left side _ 27.4 1980. .,-..--.------.--- Fauna------26 LRoad side Pond on Rightside . 38.4 1. I. Theconstruction in the .-. ------stretchnear Parvati-Aranga 27 i Roadside Pond on Leftside 39.6 bird sanctuaryin route-7will be allowedonly after Februaryand before October The proposed enhancement measures Include in anyyear to prevent dafetyfisturbancgema ~~~~~~~~~~~ i.~ * provision for structures which increase SaCeh 1. Trafficmanagemern plan ill the utility of ponds such as platforms for routespwirebeidenfiedato washing clothes and utensils, bathing diverttraffic from construction location. ghats etc. 2. All sign boards giving cautions * Provision for seating and landscaping to barricadesfor diverting traffic attract the roads user to enjoy the

specibcations. surroundings.- Proper parking facilities 3. Safetymeasures planned at and accessto avoid congestionon road id.'ntiried accident hot spots. itself will also be created. Themeasures include development of intersections, reducesspeed signs at habitations,smootheningo f Some of the temples and shrines will also be meandersand zigzag enhanced.The enhancement measures include: sections,improved sight * provision of seating around trees; distance,turning radii storage space(at sharpcorners), etc. * paving using bricks will also be provided; Enhancementof Common Property Resources * If structure opens directly on to the road, Road-side pond is a common feature of all railing will be provided to preventdirect project routes. The ponds have been selected accesson the road; after receiving and considering feed back from * appropriateplantation will be carried out local residents during formal and informal wherefree spaceis available,and consultations. Routewise selected ponds are * drainage in the vicinity of structure will given in Table 13: be improved by providing drains where needed. Table 13: Ponds selected for enhancement S. Typeof WaterBody Chainage LandscapeStrategy No. Y _ _ (kin) Landscape strategy has been developed to Route4 Katra-Bilhaur enhance the visual quality of the road. In the 1 Roadside Pond on Leftside 125-. lanidscapingthee will be additional plantation of 2 Roadside Pond on Rightside L 121.4 3 Roadside Pondon Leftside 43.8 trees at the rate of 200 trees per km in available space within road.

CGovnrnmentfot mtr Pr.sdPshPiibliriWnrks Departmnntn,hisknnw, Indiq xvi ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environment Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Standalone Environmental management and Table 14: Environmentalmanagement Cost Action Plan(EMAPs) >.c

Standalone environmental management plans ' l C.u I ° , *C u have been prepared for three stagesviz. Design _ 0 co (pre-construction), construction and operational Katra-siihaur 2f_ 7i5mJJ -749%pX4-- 24,Xt" stage. Those environmental managementplan sahraich i I contain mitigation, avoidance, enhancement Faizabad measuresas discussedin previoussections. The shognip individual environmental managementplan will Chaudagrae72XD 455%XU n,1ctXn become part of tender document. Besidesthe JaMonpder-r iT mitigation, enhancement and avoidance Mohammad-1 ,977W1 asM 455m 4,41M measures the EMAPs have also identified pur _- . I responsible organisation for implementation. TOTAL. 3AApt 47f Reportingsystem formats have been provided in EMPs for monitoring and evaluation during 1 -M ; T RRANEMENT implementation. 10 IMPLEMENTATIONARRANGEMENTS

Environmental and Social ManagementPlan for The implementation arrangement institutional Maintenance Corridors strengthening, training needs and roles and A separategeneric standaloneenvironmental and responsibilities of those to be involved in social managementplan has been preparedfor all implementationhave been studied. The project maintenance corridors on the lines of shall be implementedby Project Implementation upgradationroutes EMAPs. Unit (PIU) formed at UPPWD Head Quarters. The PIU will be assisted by Supervision Environmental Monitoring and Implementation Consultant, Non Governmental Organisations Plans (NGOs), Technical Auditors and contractors. In Environmental monitoring plans have been the implementation of maintenance corridors prepared to monitor the implementation and Technical Auditors will be appointed in place of performance of mnitigancymeasures, monitoring supervision ronsultants. The existing frequenciesand parametershave been suggested organisationalstructure of PIU has been studied separatelyfor construction and operation period. and following organisational set up has been Activity wise implementation schedules have recommendedfor PIU. been prepared. Training needs have been identified for various recipients which include PWD staff, NGOs, EnvironmentalManagement Cost Supervision Consultants, Contractor to be An indicative estimate of the cost component associated with the implementation. The involved in mitigation of impacts, corridor technical aspects to be covered for each enhancements(through landscaping or specific identified recipient and mode of training and enhancement measures for cultural properties agency(ies) who will conduct training have been and typical enhancements) monitoring and identified. evaluation of various components in pre- construction, construction and operation period as well as institutional strengtheningof UPPWD has been worked out. Route-wisebudget for EMPSis given in the following Table 14

Governmcnt of ULttarPradeish, Public Wor!.s Dxpartr.rt, uckov., Xvii Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Stagewise environmental reporting system and Terms of Reference (TOR) for Supervision Consultants Environmental Specialist have also beengiven.

ProjectDirector (SE- UPPWD),

ExecutiveEngineer

AssistantEngineers AssistantEngineers (2)(R&,R) , 2W (Envirnet

NGO (to be , heists (2) (to be deputed procured) f rom PWD Central f . ~~Laboratory)

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Ltwknoxv. India xviii ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project OJ39fd pIspoXJaJeiS qsappjd JeiinfJOJ sO!J&S (DDd) slut!lilsuI D StfUl'Ll pfAod ekIPUI MoUlDpll 'VlliWL;-Cdo ' C 9lld '.iqsa ,: U

0£. 0,6 L 'JV' (UOIWPAJ5suOD)ISsJOJ 0tLh lT£

67...... p.. IOJ}UOD UOolnlOd LIS0Pejdd winllf C 67. qspeJd Jellf JO IUOWU4wAOD 'SIs5,1 JO lUaW,jeLdO bV7 £ 67..pJUO IoJ uOD LIOIlflhIOd We.OLIOD [1FT 6c-. Mou)Dnl 'J3OW aul Jo ODIJiOaO JeLOIOSa 1 6. -... - - .. . SISaJO] pUe lUaWULIOJIALI] O AJIsIU!W 11CC 66 -. -- - --...... -..---. ....-.....-...-.-.. IXLOD jljLaUld .IOiALi] aL0 U)! L]IIJOS 1PLIO0J1LJ41iU 17£

-.. . Iun UooleiuatidwL io3A°jd ([T£ -. _ (CoMddn) iuawiwPdaG sAoM Ylqnl qsDPPJd P1l1 P,IT£ -...... - .aql ojd joj U!lIaS jeuoiIllllLII £c ez.. OM.WVNI 3AIMVYlSINIWOV (NY 1VV31 'ADllOd

g-----...-....--..-.--..-..--.-..----..-.-..----..-.---.. , uauodwoD UUUasuLII2V.]OfIA 97 ... - .paf- Dafojd aq, jo sPedw! aqI Jo Ma!AaAO £ 57Z SZ ...... J..nnjjS pue suo!ldo luaw0APd Z 5 c ISPz -.. SD-sp!Jg 1'5' ...... -- - .z s Jl,...jalo pasocloJ. '...... d. ...97 tc--7--.--- - PsodoJ.d1U0LUU'ijVl p c bc- 'sUO!PDafOJd 3JuJPi £7z

£c- sa!!3Paes AltunuuLioD 9c77 £7.AioluaAuj pPoX 677 EZ ...... I...... ------s-p e AeAlo unwwo 97 Z

9 L ------JAeJl l - c-

9 .. - SJoM Uolepej2dA L77z

bl.M SuLuaaId 777au!A3I

tb L ...... suPld luawaSeueyq pue luawussassy i:)edwi jI2'uaWUoJlAu3 E'Vb OL-9--. 0 b.L. *U.WSS.SSV----.e.UOiJlAU3 VMM uoolepeJSdnSSJOIDS Z£77LLgL7

6 ...... -----...... sSem4g HIDO(oj aql jo juawiaAOjdwi pasodoAd Z-z

6 ...... (dllSdn) lD31011d SUVOll 31'V1S HSI(]Vld -dvln 3H1L 1

9.NOIid SIDN31NODO JO 11

(I 3SVHd) lN3"SSISSV lVlN3WNOSIANI

N1-. L It 'ON uLol Oagl aPun 'PaP d spe asSpddwPS 4saPeJd n3n joc sa.iw&uaS sluellDsuosR JuWleuUPJU I SPa!'d

I (Oo j)qvwajdaS A6 sluellnsuoDAHUJ aseqd)luO wssasso el uawuo!AuI ID,4!DJdspPO'd r)IPIS qspP"Jd eJLIn JOJsO:)!AJS (DDdl swnjlnsuo:D '''(ll IIPi °-D 1:i)-8!Jd 29.S~flIPA r!F1:I " 'wlen,1.1fo(l llqlld lts4)PId imiriw O winiIIIlmDAnD

19...... - ...... snlAD11Ji lt ...... s n I A D 1 JO l l l b t 5 t9 - ...... sJa...Jd d eJIT....L£ hT D......

09 .. -. - -- . lIA ILW!-'O1aqDJV 40 S0!aJOdojdpuLI Sjuownuo 1 aNPa101ocd LT£S og...... sailjadoJd leJnlInD) pue SluUwl)Ll0N P033l0Od/leD2j3)jA ! I

0 .S- - san eA aSfl vIIPLJllH LY2 6 S ...... -.---...... s- e -SC 1-112-1----11H J5 95 ...... 11-1 N 97S bb7pLIOl F7z .. - .b eueg(l pue ASOIOJPAH:JDeW,' Z s Lb '-.-JI\ L?2S Lb7. -. -UaWUOJIAU3 IeJDsAqdoi8 pue le0neN 2 5

.bPUIM £ LS Ob ".aineieaduJaj g Otb -. - - aleu-iD L I's 07..- au!laseqletoiolojoa)VV I'S ot ".'. "...... ''' ...... '' .... .SOI.VN.. 1V1N3NOMIANl 9NllSIX3 S

.£- - - -- uelId Xu)uL.IePUPA Ie!OS pUP llUamWUOIIAU3,)Haa2 pue SutLd lUawUAeue jPlJlJWUO!AIU3 auOV PLIOelS b'E'b 8£ ...... - ...... sainseaVN jUaU-a.ouequ3 pue uo!lhjl!W £ £ b .£ -. -ufliapoW pue juawssass'V 4Je(l(l Z£bJf 8£~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... - - - uijaseq aql upjadLLlO) I£ ,S ...... I...... - VCsaseuwu17UISUSe!

8E ...... sueld luaLwaSeuLV lelua wUOJ!AU3 aqI Jo uo!leJedaAd Ol Z b .. .£ U!l.lnsuoD qIUlUnwuOD 6Ztb . -..£ . sainseawu uawaoue4u] pue Uoiue2I?p! pa!4Iluapi 8'Z17 L.... - - .. ,IuauodwoD CeUOWUOJ!AU3 aqli Bu! ewe su!ev/, :ssaJojd u2!sa( aql U! slpedwl ejULUUOJI!AU] JO UOIiLUjajUl 'Z'1 '...... '.'....'...... --'''-''''''''''''--...... - slpedwi le!2u1-od JO luawssassV 9'Z't z £...... "I',""-,, '' ''''''' S0AIlEUJaIIVJO )uaWSSaSSV 5Z't ...... a. sU.!1.pUO.. U!lseI."S,- J° Uo Wuan0o T't'b : -. .£ eleU Jo s!sAIeuv pue Alqwassv £'7b . . - - sAaAJnS aJuess!euuoDaM Z2b'7 9...... - - -.-.-.-.-.-.- .SuioD5 1'Zb 9f .- . - ...... S lUaW luOJIAL3 o '

9 c.Apnis Al!l!q!seal a1 ui pawejodJoDui&uoileJap!SuoD el0Ua4UoJ!A1U]

-'' ''''''' ''''''' ''''' '' .£' ' '''' '' saDoeieaiDjL snel luaJJfD b5'£ *----...... sluawajinbaj ulueo PIJoA. ES£ .... ' ' '' ' saDuejeali leuo!leN Z S5 ...... -- --- .1 ...... ---'siuawauinba-j aJuelJeaj alels dn L's fE '.... '.... '''.. '.. '-'.. ''''.. '.. '-.. ''''..''''..'..''''''''''-'-'.'''' ''''' ' IDwIoJdaqi Jo siuawawimnbajaDueIelID S'

b£ ...... I. sV juo pue Uolelsial aal alelS b £ ' ''''''''''''''''''''' 8961.7 'V suIeLua- pue sal!S lu:!oloaeqDJv pue sluawnuo IUaIJDUVaiI 9SITT

.. . spv (uoalnIlOd JO IOJIUOD pue UO10UaAaJd) JOV pue Jleh oq I b'TE ...... E Z6L 'IDV (UO!palOJd) a.!lpI!M 0L_L £VC Z. ''-''''''''''' '' ' I''''' -' ... "I '''''' '''' ''''''.''''''''-''.'''''''''.b66 tUOIIeD!J!lON' juawssassV pedwi le)UawUOIAU3 aU pue 96 L 'PV (uO!QaaLOJd)iUawUoJlAU3 a4q zT1

LooZ JaqwuldwaS Ag SlulnlnsuO > AHO (I ase7,d)IUa1LSSaSSV IVPLIaJIU0i!ALI] Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

5.4.1 Private land ...... 62 5.4.2 RoadsideProperties ...... 62 5.5 Resettlementissues ...... 62

6 PUBLICCONSULTATIONS AND INFORMATIONDISCLOSURES ...... 64 6.1 Introduction...... 64 6.2 Object:ves...... 64 6.3 Methodology adoptedfor Public Consultations ...... 64 6.3.1 Stagesand Levelsof Consultation...... 64 6.3.2 Tools for Consultation...... 65 6.4 Issuesraised and community perception...... 67 6.5 Addressalof Issues...... 68 6.6 Continued Participation...... 80 6.6.1 Informationdisclosure ...... 80 6.6.2 Community Participation ...... 81

7 ANALYSISOF ALTERNATIVESIN UPSRP...... 87 7.1 "With" and 'Without project scenario...... 87 7.2 RouteFinalisation ...... 88 7.3 Widening Options...... 89 7.4 RoadCross-sections ...... 90 7.5 BypassAlternatives ...... 90 7.6 PhasingConstruction Activities ...... 91

8 ASSESSMENTOF IMPACTS...... 92 8.1 Background...... 92 8.2 MeteorologicalParameters ...... 92 8.3 Naturaland BiophysicalEnvironment ...... 2 8.3.1 Air ...... 92 8.3.2 Water Resources...... 103 8.3.3 Land ...... 105 8.3.4 Consumptionof NaturalResources ...... 107 8.3.5 Noise .. 1...... 09 8.3.6 Flora ...... 117 8.3.7 Fauna...... 118 8.3.8 Human Use Values ...... 118, 8.4 Archaeological/ProtectedMonuments And Other Cultural Properties ...... 120 8.4.1 Archaeological/ProtectedMonumnents ...... 120 8.4.2 Other Cultural Properties...... 120 8.5 Socil impacts ...... 122 8.5.1 Project Displacedpopulation ...... 122 8.6 iniducedImpacts ...... 123

9 MITIGATION, AVOIDANCEAND ENHANCEMENTMEASURES ...... 124 9.1 Approachto Mitigation Measures...... 124 9.2 Avoidanceand Mitigation Measures...... 125 9.2.1 Meteorological Parameters...... 125

Government of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 3 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV Septemnber2001

9.2.2 Soil...... , 125 9.2.3 Water Resources .129 9.2.4 Air Quality ...... 133 9.2.5 NoiseLevels 1434 9.2.6 Flora...... 135 9.2.7 Fauna.136 9.2.8 Accidentsinvolving hazardousmaterials ...... 136 9.2.9 Safetymeasures.1 37 9.2.10 Cultural Properties .138 9.3 EnvironmentalEnhancements .. 139 9.3.1 Enhancementof Common PropertyResources . 139 9.3.2 LandscapeStrategy . 141 9.4 EnvironmentalManagement Plans .. 141 9.4.1 Monitoring Plans. 141 9.4.2 ReportingSystem . 142 9.4.3 EnvironmentalBudget . 142 9.4A Environmentaland Social ManagementPlan . 143

10 IMPLEMENTATIONARRANGEMENTS . 144 10.1 Mandateof the UPPWD. 144 10.2 ExistingInstitutional Arrangements . . .144 10.2.1 The Project ImplementationUnit (PIU)...... 144 10.2.2 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants .145 10.2.3 SupervisionConsultants .145 10.2.4 Non-GovernmentalOrganisations .145 10.2.5 Technical Auditors.145 10.2.6 Contractors.145 10.3 Need for furtherStrengthening .146 10.3.1 Need for additional capacity.146 10.3.2 Lanid/PropertyAcquisition ...... 146 10.4 ProposedSet-up...14 10.4.1 ProjectImplementation Unit .146 10.4.2 ConstructionSupervision Consultants CS).147 10.4.3 Contractors.148 10.4.4 Technical Auditors.148 10.4.5 Other Agencies.148 10.4,6 Facilitiesfor the EnvironmentalCell .149 10.5 EnvironimientalReporting System .149 10.6 InterinalizinigEnvironmental Expertise in the UPPWD .150 10.7 Operationalisation.150 10.7.1 Identification and Appointment of Staff.151 10.7.2 Procurementof NGOs and other Agencies .151 10.8 Training 1151

REFERENCES

Government of Utt.dr Priddesh, PLIblic Works Department. LLcknow. India 4 Proiect Co-ordiriatig C(oinsuitants(PCC) Services for Uttar Prcdebih State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase Ij DHV Consultants BV September2001

LISTOF TABLES

Table 1-1 Corridors included in PhaseI Upgradationprogramme ...... 1...... 0...... 10 Table 1-2 Corridors included in phaseI Major Maintenanceprogramme ...... 11...... 1 Table 2-1 Cross-sectionoptions for the upgradationworks in UPSRP...... 16 Table 2-2 Traffic in baseyear (2000)along the routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 17 Table2-3 PavementRoughness along Routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 23 Table 2-4 Inventory of crossingsalong routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 23 Table 2-5 Community facilities along the phaseI upgradationroutes in UPSRP...... 24 Table 2-6 Projectedtraffic along various routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 24 Table 2-7: RouteAlignment Detailsfor routesincluded in PhaseI of UPSRP...... 25 Table 4-1 EnvironmentalConsiderations in prioritisingthe routesfor phaseI of UPSRP...... 36 Table 5-1 Rainfall alongproject routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 41 Table 5-2 National AmbientAir Quality Standards(CPCB, 1997) ...... 41 Table 5-3 Air Quality at selected locationsalong routesselected in phaseI of UPSRP...... 42 Table5-4 Drainagein routesselected in PhaseI upgradationin UPSRP...... 43 Table 5-5 Summaryof Surface water bodiesalong phaseI upgradationroutes in UPSRP...... 43 Table5-6 Areasprone to flooding ...... 43 Table 5-7 Drinking water resourceswithin likely areaof direct influence of routes...... 43 Table 5-8 Water Quality Data on UP PCC Phase-1Routes ...... 44 Table 5-9 Seismicityof areasin vicinity of routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... _...... 45 Table 5-10 LeadContent of Soils in vicinity of project routesin upgradationin UPSRP...... 45 Table 5-1 1 QLiarriesidentified for phaseI construction...... 50 Table 5-12 Borrow Pit locationsalong project routesin phaseI of UPSRP...... 52 Table 5-13 GeotechnicalProperties of Fly ashfrom PTPS...... 56 Table 5-14 National ambientnoise level standards...... 57 Table 5-15 Noise levelsalong upgradationroutes selected for phaseI of UPSRP...... 57 Table 5-16 Girth wise distribution of treesalong routesselected in phase I of UPSRP...... 58 Table 5-17 Settlementsalong routesselected in phaseI of UPSRP...... 60 Table 5-18 Marketsalong the road in phaseI routesof UJPSRP...... 60 Table 5-19 Brick Kilns adjacentto road in phaseI routes...... 60 Table 5-20 Cultural Propertiesalong UPSRPupgradation phase I routes...... 61 Table 5-21 Summaryof urbanand semi-urbansettlements and villagesalong project route...... 61 Table 5-22 Propertieswithin 30 m wide route along phaseI upgradationroutes in UPSRP...... 62 Table 6-1 Locationof GDs Category...... 65 Table 6-2 District Level Public ConsultationSchedules ...... : 66 Table 6-3 Addressalof General Issuesand Concerns under the project...... 68 Table 6-4 RoutewiseRepresentations of Public Concernsat Local Level and their mitigation efforts..69 Table 6-5 RoutewiseRepresentations of Public Concernsand Hearngsat District andState Level and their Incorporation in Project Design...... 79 Table 7-1 Su minnaryof results from environmentalscreening of routesselected for Feasibility. 88 Table 7-2 SummaryInformation for routesselected for upgradasionin phaseI of UPSRP.88 Table 7-3 Cross-sectionoptions for the upgradationworks in UPRP .90 Table 7-4 Summaryof bypassalternatives to be implementedin phase11 along routesin phaseI . 90 Table 8-1 SpeedCorrected Emission Factors (in gm/km/ vehicle).94 Table 8-2 Operative Speedsalong Various Routes.95 Table8-3 PredictedPollutant Levelsalong up-gradationroutes in UPSRP. 96 Table 8-4 Impactson water resourcesdue to constructionactivities .103 Table 8-5 IncreasedRun-off along ProjectPackages due to UPRP.104 Table 8-6 Grourndwater resources...... 1...... 105 Table 8-7 Materials requirementfor various routesselected for up-gradationin Phase-I.107 Table 8-8 Typical noise levelsof principal constructionequipment .110 Table 8-9 Speed-noiserelationships for variousmotor vehicles.111 Table 8-10 PredictedNoise levelsduring design life of UPSRP.111 Table 8-11 SuLlmmaryof treesto be cut for the up-gradationworks in Phase-Iof UPSRP.11 7 Table 8-12 Impacton Privateproperties along up-gradationroutes in Phase-Iof UPSRP.119 Table 8-13 Amenritiesand facilities affectedalong Phase-Iroutes. 119 Table 8-14 Summ11aryof cultural propertiesimpacted in Phase-Iupgradation routes. 121

Govern,mentof Uttir Pradesh,Publfc Works Department, Lucknow, India 5 Prolet Co-ordiniamgCoIsultdnts tPCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV Septeinber 2001

Table 8-15 ProjectDisplaced population ...... 122 Table 8-16 Categorywise displaced Population...... 122 Table 8-17 Impacton vulnerable population ...... 122 Table 8-18 Community propertiesimpacted along upgradationroutes in phaseI of UPSRP...... 123 Table 9-1: Locationswhere slope protection neeosto be provided...... 127 Table 9-2 Waterbodies identified for providing oil cum sedimenttraps along Phase-Iroutes ...... 130 Table9-3 Additional culvertsproposed as part of UPSRPphase I upgradation...... 131 Table9-4 Provisionfor new drains in phaseI of UPSRP...... 132 Table 9-5 Comparisonof plantation in UPSRP...... 134 Table 9-6 SensitiveReceptors along Phase-Iroutes to be shielded from high noise levels...... 134 Table 9-7 SafetyProvisions incorporatedin Designfor PhaseI upgradationroutes...... 1 37 Table 9-8 Pondsselected for enhancementalong phaseI upgradationcorridors in UPSRP...... 140 Table 9-9 Tree speciessuggested for roadsidelandscaping ...... 141 Table 9-10 SummaryBudget for Environmentalcomponent of upgradationroutes in phaseI of UPSRP 142 Table 10-1 Stage-wiseReporting system of UPSRP...... 150 Table 10-2 TrainingComponents for UPSRP...... 151

Government of uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 6 'rolutt Co-oidilloliwiioCoIibultantob (PiCC Services lor Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmenitalAssessnent (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

LISTOF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 PhaseI Maintenanceand UpgradationRoutes ...... 12 Figure2.1 PrioritisedUpgradation Routes in PhdseI...... 18 Figure2.2 Locationplans: Bhognipur-ChaudaghraMode (Route14) ...... 19 Figure2.3 LocationPlans: Katra-Bilhaur (Route 4A) ...... 20 Figure 2.4 LocationPlans: Bahraich-Faizabad (Route 7A) ...... 21 Figure 2.5 LocationPlans: Jeunpur-Mohammadpur (Route 18) ...... 22 Figure2.6 Typical CrossSection for W3 Option...... 26 FigLire3.1 Flowchartshowing various steps involved in examinationof casesreceived under Forest ConservationAct and ClearanceAct . 31 Figure3.2 Flow chart for obtaining EnvironmentalClearance ...... 33 Figure5.1 Water, air, noise and soil sampling locations(Route 14) ...... 46 Figure5.2 Water, air, noise and soil sampling locations(Route 4A) ...... 47 Figure 5.3 Water, air, noise and soil samplinglocations (Route 7) ...... 48 Figure 5.4 Water, air, noise and soil sampling locations(Route 18) ...... 49 Figui 5.5 Locationsof quarries...... 51 Figure 5.6 Borrow arealocations for Route14 ...... 52 Figure5.7 Borrow arealocations for Route4A ...... 53 Figure 5.8 Borrow arealocations for Route7 ...... 54 Figure5.9 Borrow arealocations for Route18 ...... 55 Figure 8.1 Variation of PeakOne-hourly Concentration of CO with distanceat Katra-Bilhaur...... 97 Figure 8.2 Variation of Fight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Katra-Bilhaur...... 97 Figure 8.3 Variation of One-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Bhognipur-Bakewar...... 98 Figure 8.4 Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Bhognipur-Bakewar...... 98 Figure8.5 Variation of PeakOne-hourly Concentrationof CO with distanceat Gonda-Bahraich...... 99 Figure 8.6 Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Gonda-Bahraich...... 99 Figure 8.7 Variation of One-hourly Concentrationof CO with distanceat Jaunpur-Mohammadpur..100 Figure 8.8 Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Jaunpur-Mohammadpur.100 Figure 8.9 Variation of 24 Hourly Concentrationof NO, with distanceat Katra-Bilhaur...... 101 Figure 8.10 Variationof 24 Hourly Concentrationof NO, with distanceat Bhognipur-Bakewar.... 101 Figure 8.11 Variation of 24 Hourly Concentrationof NO, with distanceat Gond'a-Bahraich...... 102 Figure 8.12 Variation of 24 Hourly Concentrationof NO, with distanceat Jaunpur-Mohammadpur 102 Figure 8.13 Noise level, Leq (Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Katra-Bilhaur),Year 2005 ...... 113 Figure 8.14 Noise level, Leq(Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Katra-Bilhaur),Year 2010 ...... 113 Figure 8.15 Noise level, Leq (Day), Leq(Night) Variation (Gonda-Bahraich),Year 2005 ...... 1 14 Figure 8.16 Noise level, Leq(Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Gonda-Bahraich!,Year 2010 ...... 114 Figure 8.17 Noise level, Leq (Day), Leq (Night) Variation (launpur-Mohammadpur),Year 2005. 115 Figure 8.18 Noise level, Leq (Day), Leq (Night) Variation Jaunpur-Mohamniadpur),Year 2010 . 115 Figure 8.19 Noise level, Leq(Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Bhognipur-Bakewar),Year 2005 ...... 116 Figure 8.20 Noise level, Leq (Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Bhognipur-Bakewar),Year 2010 ...... 116 Figure 9.1 Brick pitching for embankmentslopes greater gentler than 1:2...... 126 Figure 9.2 Stonepitching for embankmentslopes steeper than 1:2...... 126 Figure 9.3 Combinedsedimentation and oil/greaseseparator ...... 129 Figure 9.4 Designof silt fencing arrangement...... 132

Government (tf Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 7 ProW(ctC(-O)rdImIating Consultants wPCC) Services ior Uitar PrddeshState Roads Proiect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

LISTOF BOXES

Box 1.1 Scopeof Work of EnvironmentalAnalysis, Design and ManagementAction Plan...... 13 Box 3.1 ApplicaWt'o',y of the Forest(Conservation) Act, 1980 ...... 30 Box 3.2 StatePollution Control BoardRequirements ...... 32 Box 10.1 Draft Termsof Referencefor SupervisionConsultants' Environmental Specialist ...... 147

ANNEXES

Annex1 Cazettenotification of Ministryof Environmentaland Forests Annex 2 Baseline surveyGn air, noise, water and soil quality Annex 3 Useof fly ash as alternative to bricks - MoEF Notification Annex4 Specieswise andgirth wise list of treesin Rightof Way Annex5 Publicconsultation and information disclosure Annex 6 Proposedlocations of drains on project routes Annex 7 Pilot study on road safety Annex 8 List of hot spots

PHOTO PLATES

PhotoPlate 1 Baselinedata collection at site Photo Plate2 Local level consultation Photo Plate 3 District level workshop Photo Plate4 State level workshop

Goveriiinent of UstarPradesh, PLiblic Works Department, Lucknow,India 8 Proec-t Co-)rrfin,ttinq ConRlitanrc fPCC)ServicP, far Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants Services ForUttar Pradesh State Roads Project, under IBRD Loan No. 4114-IN

ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT (PHASE I) September2001

1 THEUTTAR PRADESH STATE ROADS PROJECT (UPSRP)

This chapterdescribes the project backgroundand the need for the project. Afterdescribing in brief the various studies that have led to the identification, prioritisation and selection of the project corridors for improvement, this chapter presentsthe various improvementoptions proposed.The setting in terms of the preparation of EA for the project and the EA processadopted has been discussed.The lastsection presentsthe outline of the variouschapters of this report.

1.1 UPSRP

The Uttar PradeshState Roads Project is being preparedand is to be implemented by the Public Works Department, Uttar Pradeshwith financial assistanceunder the World Bank Loan number 4114-IN. The UPPWD is carrying out the project preparation through 'Project Co-ordinating Consultants' (PCC)appointed' for the project. The project preparation activities commenced in September1999.

The PCC's mandatewas to conduct a detailed feasibility study2 of 2655 km (which included 3 corridors identified subsequently after the SOS) using principles that not only took into considerationthe economic impact of the improvementof the road network, but also the impact due to rehabilitation of the roadson the environmental and social settings. This study was carried out to establisha road investmentprogramme for a subsetof theseroads that are to be upgraded.A regional approach to road network planning was adopted in order to place road improvement projectsin the contextof regionaldevelopment policies.

Based on the outputs of the economic, engineering, environmental and social analysis of the network, the UPSRPproposes to carry out upgradationof 1000 km and major maintenanceof 2500 km of StateRoads. The project has beendivided into two phasesfor easeof implementation.Phase I includes374 km roads for upgradationto 7m wide pavementwith hard and soft shoulders and 807 km of roads for major maintenancewhere treatmentwill depend upon the existing pavement conditions and land availability.

The second phase will consist of 594.95 km of upgradation roads, 11.68 km of bypassesand 1711.0 km of roadsfor major maintenance.The corridors included in the phase 11programme also have high economic internal rates of return, as establishedduring the feasibility stage, but have substantialbottlenecks, in terms of either major works like bridges or have scored 'high' on the socialand/or environmentalscreening carried out during the feasibilitystudy.

1.2 ProposedImprovement of the Project Highways

As discussedin the previoussection, the UPSRPhas two major components, v Upgradation Programme; and * Major MaintenanceProgramme.

The Project Co-ordinatingConsultancy assignment has been awarded to a consortium which inclides DHV Consultants, BV of the Netherlands, in associationwith Halcrowand Partnersfrom United Kingdom, ORG, DCL and MDP from India. 2 The Feasibility study fOr the project follows the earlier work done under the Uttar PradeshState RoadsStrategic Options Study (SOS),undertaken in 1996, wherein an evaluation of the state road network of UP was carried out and 2,551 km were selectedfor detailed evaluation.

Government of Uttar Pradesh.Public works Department. Lucknow, India 9 Project Co-ordinating Consultants IPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Prolect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

The following sections discuss the proposed improvements that are being planned as part of the project.

1.2.1 UPGRADATION WORKS

As per design of upgradation works, the major engineering activities proposed along the project roads are:

* widening of the existing road (carriage way width varying from 3.75m to 7.0m including shoulder width) to 7.0 m with 1 .5m hard shoulders and 1.0 m soft shoulder on either side; * providing profile of corrective course, Asphaltic Concrete Bituminous(AC) wearing course and Bituminous Macadam (BM) on paved shoulder; * providing embankment slopes at 1:2 and storm water pits 0.5m deep and 0.5 m wide with 1:1 side slopes in rural areas; • constructing pucca side drains in built-up areas; * wideningand reconstructionof thedamaged drainage structures; * improvingsight lines and radiusof curvatureat sharpbends; and * pavementimprovements like profile correction,strengthening and providing adequatecamber.

The project routesselected for upgradationincluded in phaseI of the project is given in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1 Corridors included in PhaseI Upgradationprogramme' i Lengthfor S.No. CORRIDOR LUpgradation (km) 1 Katra-Bilhaur 148.440

Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode. 82.300 3 Bahraich-Faizabad 109.350 4 Jaunpur-Mohammadpur 33.870 Total 373.96

1.212 MAJORMAINTENANCE WORKS

The major maintenance works will be carried out within the available clear width and do not envisageany earthwork.The salientfeatures of the major maintenanceprogramme are:

e Potholesfilling through patchwork; * Repairto structuresalong the road (parapetof culvertsand bridges,km stones,etc.); • Profile correction with proper camber; * Crack sealing; * Overlay of B.M. (40-70mm); * New wearing course(25 mm); * Provision of 1.5 m wide hard shoulderswhere the pavementwidth is between 3.5 and 4.0 m, 0.6 m wide shoulder of concrete interlocking blocks for pavementwidths between 4.0 and 6.0 m and 2.5 m wide soft shouldersfor pavementwidths between6.0 and 7.0 m; and * Temporarydiversions to facilitatemaintenance.

Table 1.2 presentsthe project routesthat have been identified as candidatesfor major maintenance works as part of PhaseI of the project.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, PublicrWorks Department, Lucknow, India 10 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table1-2 Corridorsincluded in phaseI MajorMaintenance programme S. Nio ' Corridor len=h (km)

i. Bilgran-Madhoganj 231000 2 Faizabad-Azamgarh 138.000 3 Jaunpur(NH-56) to MDR-69 5.500 4 Mohammadpur-Dohrighat . 55.400 5 Varanasi-Mohammadpur 69.600 6 Ghazipur-Azamgarh 53.800 ...... 7 Muzaffarnagar-Sahranpur 52.625 8 Meerut-Naziabad 118.000 9 Barreilley-Badaun 45.000 10 ,lKairana-Zansath(SH47) 86.236 11 Lakhimpur-Sitapur 45.000 12 Bachhrawan-Fatehpur 72.000

13 t Kashipur-Moradabad _ _43.572 Total 807.733

Figure 1.1 showsPhase-I maintenance and upgradationroutes.

Goverinent of Utrar.Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 11 Project Co-ordillating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase II DHVConsultants BV September2001

Figure1.1 PhaseI Maintenance and Upgradation Routes

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 12 Project Co-ordiniting Culbsuitalits(PCC) Sefvices for Uttdr PiddeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment MPhase 1i DHVConsultants BV September2001

1.3 EnvironmentalAssessment in the Project

The Scope of Environmental Assessmentas envisaged in the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the project are detailed in the Box 1.1 below.

Box 1.1 Scopeof Work of EnvironmentalAnalysis, Design and Management Action Plan

...The main objective of Environmental Analysis and Design is to improve decision makin and to ensure that the highway improvement options under consideration are environmentall sound, sustainable and cgfntribute to the development ofenvironmental assets. "...The scope of work comprises the following three'mairttasks: ...Environmental Analysis. Carry out a preliminary environmental screening of the :highway to determine the magnitude o actual and potential impact and ensure that environmental considerations are given adequate weight in the selection and design of the proposed highway improvements. '-Collect information on existing environme .talbaseline conditions and vndertake preliminary evaluation of the highway se1-ted-for imptovement in order to define the focus of the environmental assessment design and.management studies; Identify positive and-negative impiacts of upgrading the highway and propose cost-effectiv measuresto enhance positive impacts an-to avoid and/or mitigate negative impacts; Complete the relevant Environmental-Assessment documentation for the respective State level, Go and WorW Bank environmental'reviews and clearances; and Carry out public consultation with iffected groups-and NGOs.' l...Environmental Design From EA, identify adverse impacts which-can be prevented through judicious desig changes, identify adverse impacts such as soil erosion, flooding, loss of tree cover, etc. which could be mitigated through appropriate mitigation measuressuch as ground cove planting installation of proper drainage% etc.' Prepare cost-effective proposals t implement appropriate mitigation and remedial measures to upgrade and enhance th environmentalquality alonrg with the highwayin a sustainablemanner; and Selectstretches along with the highway,which provideopportunities for environmenta enhancementand the development of post-effectivesustainable environmental assets.' '...EnvironmentalManagement Action Plan Producean implementationschedule and supervisionprogram with associatedcosts an contactingprocedures for theerecution of environmentalmitigation and design works; Develop a programfor monitoringenvironmental impacts during constructionan operation; Specify requirementsfor institutional strengtherting and training; and Recommend any further studies of environmental issues which should be undertaken durin project implementation.'

Source:PWD

Governmentof uttarPradesh, Public Works Depaftment. tucknow, India 13 Project Co-ord4ating Cowsultdirts(PCC) Services for Utl,r PradeJtStte RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase II DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

1.4 EAprocess adopted

Incorporationof Environmentalconsiderations into the projectplanning and designhave been takenup asan integralpart of the projectpreparation. The major steps in the EAprocess that have beenadopted for the projectare presented in thefollowing sub-sections.

1A.1 ENVIRONMENTALSCREENING

The feasibilitystudy incorporateda social and environmentalscreening following which the corridorswere classifiedas 'low', 'medium'or 'high' in ascendingorder of environmentaland/or social sensitivity.The parametersand componentsconsidered to arrive at this classification included:forest area, flood zones,trees,- quarr.es and borrow areas,brick kilns, structureswith historicaland/or culturalsignificance, industrial estates, traffic mix and conflicts,bus-stops and shelters,steep slopes and erosionproneness, etc. Corridor specific environmental hotspots were alsoidentified.

1.4.2 SECTORALENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

A SectoralEnvironmental Assessment has been carried out wheresector wise environmentalissues of concernsuch as the presenceof sensitivereceptors along alignments, the pollutiondue traffic and removalof roadsideproperties have been identified as the majorissues to be addressedduring the moredetailed environmental assessment for the individualphases of the projectThe corridors with moreserious environmental concerns were put intophase 11. The implicitassumption was that the insightand knowledgegathered in the implementationof phaseI will allow a betteraddressal of environmentalissues in phase11.

1.43 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACr ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENTPLANS

The detaileddesigns of roads includedin phaseI have been closely co-ordinatedwith the preparationof the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment(EIA). The EIA preparationled to the identificationof potentialenvironmental hotspots and their feasibleremedial measures (including avoidance,mitigation and enhancement)which were made a part of the Environmental ManagementPlan (EMP). Separate EMPs have been prepared for eachof the selectedupgradation corridorsand a genericEnvironmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) has been prepared for all the majormaintenance stretches together.

1.5 Structure of the EIA Report

Thereport is organised into 10chapters as follows:

Chapter 2 entitled Project Descriptiondescribes the UPSRP.The project corridors are described from an environmental perspectivealong with the salient featuressuch as RoW, qross sections, Communityfacilities, etc. The traffic projectionsare presentedfor the selectedcorridors. An overview of impactsof the entire project,mainly benefits,is given in the lastsection.

Chapter3 discussesthe Policy,Legal and AdministrativeFramework within which the projectis set. The major stakeholderdepartments of the Stateand CentralGovernments with their specific roles are described hereand the applicable Acts and Lawsare described.The chapter ends with a sectionon the clearancerequirements at variouslevels and their current status.

Chapter 4 details out the Methodologyadopted for the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment. Descriptions are provided for survey procedures, modelling methods and environmental designs.

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 14 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Chapter5 describesthe ExistingEnvironmental Scenario in detail.The sections on Meteorological baseline,components of the biophysicaland naturalenvironments, cultural properties along the corridor and qualityof life add up to give a comnprehensivepicture of the existingenvironment alongthe projectcorridor and its areaof influence.

Chapter6 gives an overviewof the CommunityConsultation carried out during the project preparationstage. It alsoprovides an insightinto the processesinvolved, its importanceto project designand methodsadopted to document the entire exercise.

Chapter7 analysesthe Alternativesconsidered during the projectdesign. The minimisationof environmentalimpacts by consideringdesign alternatives determines the extentof mainstreaming of the environmentalcomponent.

Chapter8 on the Assessmentof Impactsdetermines the extentof the impactsof the projectactivity on the existingenvironmert. The focus of the this sectionis on the adverseimpacts since the beneficialimpacts on the environmentdue to the project.The impactshave been detailed in the samesequence as described in Chapter5 for easeof understanding.

Chapter9 entitledMitigation, Avoidance and EnhancementMeasures forms the basisof the generationof coherent,comprehensive and conciseEnvironmental Management Plans for the projectcorridors. In additionto the avoidanceand mitigationmeasures for the biophysicaland naturalenvironmental components, this chapterdiscusses various environmental enhancements suggestedby the projectincluding the enhancementof commonproperty resources as community waterbodies and cultural resources along the project.

Chapter10 reviewsthe existingImplementation Arrangemnents and suggestsfurther institutional strengtheningfor easeof implementationof the environmentalcomponent of the project.It goeson to describethe set-uprequired, a reportingsystem and training needsto ensurethat the environmentalexpertise required for the effectiveimplementation of EAprovisions is internalisedat the UPPWD.The implementationarrangements are basedon the mechanismsworked out for the projectin the SEA.

Reportends with referencesand annexes. An ExecutiveSummary is alsoprepared.

Government of Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department. Lucknow, India 15 Project Co-ordiinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

2 PROJECTDESCRIPTION

Thischapter on projectdescription focusses on the descriptionof the salientfeatures of the PhaseI upgradationroutes, in termsof traffic,existing highway conditions, levels of safetyetc. The chapter then discussesthe proposedimprovements suggested considering the projectionsthat have been workedout. Finally,a discussionon the overallbenefits / impactsperceived due to the projectis presentedin the lastsection.

2.1 UPSRP

The UPSRP,being implementedwith World Bank assistance,has two major components: upgradationand major maintenance.While the former will involvesubstantial earthworks to incorporatethe widenedpavement and shoulders,the latterwill essentiallybe restrictedto the existingformation. The UPSRPproposes to upgrade1000 km of roadsand carryingout major maintenanceof 2000km of roadsspread all over UP.The first phaseincludes upgradation of 374 km of roadsalong with major maintenanceof just over 800 km. The roadspass mainly through plain areas,most throughthe Indo-Gangeticplain which coversabout 70% of the state.They consistof StateHighways, Major DistrictRoads and Otherdistrict roads.The proposedtreatment will createState Highways with 7 m blacktopirrespective of the presentcondition of the road. Figure2.1 illustratesproject route prioritised under Phase I for upgradation.

2.1.1 UPGRADATIONWORKS

As per designof upgradationworks, the major engineeringactivities proposed along the project roadsis the wideningof the existingroad (carriageway width varying from 3.75m to 7.Om includingshoulder width) to 7.0 m with 1.5mhard shouldersand 1.0m softshoulder on either side.

Thevarious cross-section options that havebeen worked out for the upgradationworks as part of PhaseI are presented in the tablebelow.

Table2-1 Cross-sectionoptions for the upgradationworks in UPSRP ShWidthWWddth Option CarriagewayWidth SWideidhMdiah Widmtho I ~~~~~~~~HardShole otShoulder W1 406.Om(2x3m); - 1_5m Inm - =1m W2 7.. (2x3sm) I_. - i 2.sm 12 nn W3 7.Cm12i35rnm 1 1 5 m 1 m - 12m W4 :2m x 7.25m 1.5 m 1 m Varies Varies

2.2 Salient features

The following subsectionsdescribe the important road related characteristicsof the upgradation routescovered in phaseI of the project.

2.2.1 TRAFFIC

The traffic, existing and projected, provides the basis for decision on whether or not to improve identified routes. It also is the single most important criterion of determination of the level of improvementto be carried out. The traffic along the routesselected in phase I is characterizedby a mix of slow and fast moving traffic. The proportion of slow moving to fast moving traffic is given In Table 2-2 below:

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 16 Project Co-ordinating consultaits (PCcQServices for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Table2-2 Trafficin baseyear (2000) along the routesin phaseI of UPSRP

Route Link IO (l) ADT Total Route ~~~~~~~~LengthADT~~0m)(all) Katra-r'lhal3r Bilgram- IKatra-Jalalabad 35.0 3665 1538 6133 Madhoganjjispart of I lalabad-Allahganj 19 7671 3941 1206_ maintenance) Allahganj-Bilgram, 61.5 3919 2740 8461 Madhogani-Bnprmau 23.8 . 4040 1378 4007 _ angariMa-Bihaur 17.2 1436 899 2097 sahraich-Faizabad Bahraich-Gonda 64v8 3759 2335 5573 Gonda-Wawabgani 35.3 4642 2945 7204 Nawabgan,-Faizabad 5 75 4642 2945 7204 shognipur-chaudagra.hognipur.Ghatampur 38.9 4374 2847 7428 Mode _Ghatampur-jahanabad 191 3650 2563 6428 lahanabad-Bakewar 126 __3650 2563 6428 XBakewar-NH2 12.1 2555 1794 4500 launpur-MohammadpurIlaunpur-Mohammadpur 33.87 3394 1908- 4432

The location plans for above .outeswith their district jurisdiction areas,rivers, National Highways and other roadsand railwaysare given as foilows: Figure 2.2 LocationPlans: Bhognipur-Chaudagara Mode (Route14) Figure 2.3 LocationPlans: Katra-Bilhaur (Route 4A) Figure2.4 LocationPlans: Bahraich-Faizabad (Route 7A) Figure2.5 . LocationPlans: Jaunpur-Mohammadpur (Route 18)

2.22 RIGHT OFWAY

The Right of Way (RoW) along the project routesvaries-from 8 m in the most constrictedsections upto 30 m in rural stretches.In settlements,very heavy encroachmentis seen along the existing routeswith businessspill-over dominatingthe towns while extensionsof residencesdominating the encroachmentin rural areas.Since the designsadopted (W3 section in most cases)require at least 13 m clear at formation level and even more at the toe dependingon the height of the formation, it is imperative that enough clear spaceis availablewithin the RoW. It is estimatedthat at least 18 m clear zone will be required within the RoW if the averageheight of the formation is consideredas 1m and the side slopesare IV to 2H. SufficientRoW is available in all stretchesof phase I routes except for GauraBadshahpur where a bypassis alreadydesigned as part of the project3.

For the major maintenancecomponent, the improvementswill occur within the existing formation only. There is no earthwork involved by way of creation of embankment.Though the UPPWD may have an adequateRoW, the proposedworks shall take place only within the clear spaceavailable and there will be no felling of treesor removalof properties.

2.2.3 CROSSSECTION

The road width variesfrom 3.75 m to 7 m along variousstretches. The narrower stretches(3.75 m) have brick edging to prevent the dislocation of the pavement.Earthen shouldersexist for rural stretchesof all routes. Along certainstretches, the width of the pavement is increasedto 5.5 m by widening on only one side of the original 3.75 m wide pavement.

The proposed treatment for all the routes selected for upgradation is section W3. This section envisagesa 7m pavementwith 1.5 m wide hard shouldersand lm wide soft shoulderson either side. Puccadrains will be provided in built up areas.In rural areas,embankment slope of IV to 2H is provided along with storm water pits 0.5 m wide and 0.5 m deep with 1:1 side slopes.For the bypasses too, a rural section as described above has been adopted. As part of the major maintenance,the formation of the road will essentiallyremain the same.However, there will be an addition of shouldersof reducedcrust or interlockingconcrete blocks.

- Thebypasses proposed around settlements areto betaken up for implementation in the Phase Ifof theproject.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 1 7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants iPCC) Services for UttarPradeshi State Roads Project LEGEND N * District Headquarters I Sattlement "Phase 1 routes Major district roads Xz1- State highway Utt.,< <>*National / highway

DI%-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \d , Rubida}~\

|RouteE~~~~~~~~Rot 7~W

Public WorksDepartment I J/W Figure No: 2.1 Governmentof Uttar Pradesh Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Inassociatonwth Phase1 routes ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowand Pnartneres ______Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114- IN) OperationsRNesearct Group DevelopmentConsultants Ltd.SAL MDPCorsultsants(Pvt.)Ltd, 0 50 100 150 Kilometers

File reference: cAnaveenb-outes\phl LEGEND ( DistrictH.Q. 79'30' 80,000 80'30 S Sattlement "Route 14 Majordist. road _ State highway 27000 Knna Nati-abonal highway Rail River J )tX itur 2 District boundary

Puli Wok Deatmn __ Figure No 2.2n Governmetof Utanpr Pradesh

_dere?erence =c:\naveen'~out45°30'

79'30' 80,00' 80'30' 8I1/D0 _~~~~~~~~~~~~OHoststtf t. 0 250 Kioees.

PublicWorks Department Figure No: 2.2 Govemment of Uttar Pradesh 4oYl/ Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Jn association with ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) l-alcrow and Partners Bognipur to Chaudagra ( Route 14 ) Services.(World BankLoan No.4114 - IN) OperatiorrsResearch Group - Development ConsultanitsLtd. SCALE MDP Consultants(Fvt) Ltd. 0 25 50 Kilometers

File reference: c knaveenNroutesVr14 N LEGEND

z District boundary (3 District Headquarter " Project road ,, National Hwy , State Hwy Major distt. road ~'Rail River

.Oratdions /esearhG Proutaprra

PubliWok Deatmn FiueNo .

X ~~~~~Bilhaur

PublicWorks Department Figure No. 2.3 Govemment of Uttar Pradesh UttarPradesh State Roads Project In associationith ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowanld Partners Route 4A (Katra - Bangarrnau - Bilhaur) Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114 - IN) OperationsReuearchts L SCALE MDPConsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 10 20 30 KIilometers

Fle reterence.c-\naveen\routes\packl i Q LEGEND N ® DistrictHeadquarter I Settlement #*\ Route 7 Majordist. road z\ z StateHwy < NationalHwy ~yRail River I Districtboundary

(~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'

FitixoX-~77#/ FkueNo .

PublicWorks Department Govenment of UttarPradesh Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Inassociation with RouiteNo. 7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Hacrrowand Pr-v Services,(World Bank LoanNo. 4114- IN) '. rationsResearch G-oup DevelopmentConsultants Ltd SCALE MDPConsuWtartssPvt Ltdre0D 20 40 Klometers

Filereference: cAnaveenVoutes\r-7 LEGEND

®Districtheadquarter * Settlement " Route 18 Z,- Nationalhwy , Statehwy Majordist. road , Rail - River z Districtboundary

26'30'

/ / \t 2/ | ) /< J Mohammdpur~~~~pu

82.30'800 8303

PublicWorks Department ~~1 \~~~~~~~~~d Figure No: 2.5I Governmentof UttarPradesh Uttar PradeshState Roads Project In associationwith RouteNo.18 (Jaunpur-Mohammadpur) ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcroward Partners ______Serlices. (WorldBankLoanNo.4114-INOperatios DesearGroupALEtment Fig utes DevelopmnentConsultants Ltd. MIDPCcnsultaints(FMt. Ltd. 0 20 40 Kilometers

Fle reterenceo:\naveen\routes\r18 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

2.2A PAVEMENT

The pavementover the existingroads is usuallyblack-topped. However, there are certain stretches where brick-soling has been done to allow the traffic to ply even during monsoon when the road gets inundated. The average pavement roughness along the various links is given below in Table 2-3

Table 2-3 Pavement Roughness along Routes in phase I of UPSRP

Route Link Lemt IRI Katra-Bilhaur(Bilgram- Katra-Jalalabad 35-0 6.42 Madhoganhiis part of Ialalabad-Allahgan _ 196. 6.97 maintenance) Allahgn-Bilpram 61.5 7_15 Madhoganj-Bai1garmau 23.8 6.74 I .angarmau-Bithaur _ 17.2 6. 72 Bahraich-Faizabad Bahraich-Gonda 64.8 6.10 Gonda-Naabgnj _ . _ 3 53L 6.31 Nawa nl-Faizabad 5.75_ 7.47 Bhognipjur-Chaudagra Bognipuri-Ghatampur 389 656 Mode Ghatampur-lahanabad 19.1 5.73 jahanabad-Bakewar 12 6 = Bakewar-NH2 12.11 Jaunpur-Mohammadpur Jaunpur-Moharnnmadpur 33.87 8.0

For the major maintenance routes, a profile correction course will be provided to integrate the newly created shoulders with the already existing pavement to ensure a smooth riding surface.

2.2.5 ROAD INVENTORY

The roads included in the Phase I cross over a number of rivers, canals, ponds, etc. The structures allow the road to traverse over low lying areas where drainage might be a special concern since the saturation of the formation will weaken it. The bridges and culverts are also important from the environmental point of view since they will allow flow of water which would otherwise stagnate and may lead to diseases, especially around settlements. Inventory of crossings has been given in Table 2.4 below.

Table 2-4 Inventory of crossings along routes in phase I of UPSRP

Route . ink Length Culverts Katra-Bilhaur 500Katra-alalabad L 39 4 Jalalabad.Allahganl = 196 29 . 0 _ Allahganj-Bilgram 61 5 104 5 2 Madhoganj-Bangarmau.__ 23.8, 25 2 0 Eangarmau-Bilhaur E 17 21 18 0 1 Bahraich-Faizabad Sahraich-Gonda 64.8 95 6 0 f Gonda-Nawabganj i 3. 25 3 0 NawabganjFaizabad 5775 3 1 0 Bhognipur-Chaudagra Bhognipur-Ghatampur 389 _ 32 .3 Mode (NI-121i Ghatampur-Jahanabad 1 25 2i 2 6 Jahanabad-Bakewar 12 6 19 1 1 .akewar-NH 2 12.1 16 1 0 jaunpur-Mohammadpur: Jaunpur-Mohammadpur 3387 69 10 0 Total 499 43 4

2.2.6 COMMUNITY FACILITIES

All routes in phase I are dotted with small and large settlements, which has meant that a lot of facilities considered important by the people are located adjacent to the road. These include community resources like ponds, handpumps and wells, cultural properties like shrines, religious

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 23 Project Co-ordinating Consultants wPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

structuresand trees. Other amenitieswhich are also located on the road side are health centers, hospitalsand schools.Table 2.5 inventoriesthe communityfacilities along the projectroutes.

Table2-5 Communityfacilities along the phaseI upgradationroutes in UPSRP

Route Link Length(km). Cltural CommunityAmenities _____ ~~~~~~Proerties: Rtesources Katra-Bilhaur(Bilgrans-rKatra-Jalalabrd 35.0 16 Madhoganjis partof Jalalabad-Allahgani 19.6, 7 maintenance) AllahganpBilgram 61.5 = 13 201 8 Madhoganj-Bangarrnau 23.8 28 ,,,,.,,,,, Bangamiau-Bilhaur__ 17.2 7 Bahraich-Faizabad Bahraich-Conda 64.8 26 Gonda-Nawabgani 35.3 283 4 Nawabganj-Faizabad 5.75 4 Bhognipur-Chaudagra Bhognipur-Ghatampur 38.9 30 Mode Ghatampr-lahaabad 19.1 13. 102 Jahanabad-Bakewar 12.6 0 Bakewar-NH2 12.1 0 jaun_pur-MohammadpurJauilpur-Mohammadpur 33.87 24 177 0

2.3 Traffic Projections

Thetraffic projections in UPSRPused three alternative growth scenarios. The study has also taken into account the elasticity of growth in traffic as a function of total state income. A further conservativeassumption in the analysis is that the elasticity of vehicle registrationsrelative to economic activity will decreasein later years. Two separaterates of growth have been calculated for the periods 2000-2009 and 2010-2019. The Table 2-6 below givesthe projectedtraffic along routesof PhaseI.

Table 2-6 Projectedtraffic along various routes in phaseI of UPSRP TrafficVolumes From t To -. TwoWheelers ThreeWheelers Cars B ehicles

.2001 200s; 2010 2001' 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010 Katra Jalalabad 432 840i 1680 72 96, 144 360 984 1080 1104 1680 2568 lalalabad Allahgan; 76 2352 4656 240 336i 456 984 16B0 2952 2736 4296 6888 Allahgan jBiiran 600 1176 2328 24 24 48 792 1392 2424 2088 3240, 5088 Bilgram Bilhaur 360 1320. 1392 120. 96 240 504 744 1536 1344: 2328 3216 ------n-----r------l------r------:------r------:------,------Bahraich Gonda 624 1248 2496 120 I68. 240 816 1416 2304 1104 1704i 2664 Gonda jFaizabad 64a. 1296; 256s! 48 72 961 11521 2016 3312 1728j 26641 4104 ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .....-.- -_ -_-...... -_ -...-- _ . ._------

Bhognipur Ghatampur 5281 1056 2088 360 504 720 480. 840j 1488 2400. 3624i 5592 Ghatampur NH-2 672 1320: 2640 96 t20, 196 672 1t52 2040 2076: 3048 4632 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .... .~~...... ''.- ~~~~------r------.- .-___ launpur Mohamadpur 768 1512 3000r 24 24 241 696. 12550: 2112 936. 1392- 2136

2.4 Alignment Proposal

Most of the alignment of the phase I routes are along existing SH/MDR/ODR'. The proposalsfor upgradation and maintenancerecommend concentric treatment. The provisions for upgradation include the creation of a 7 m wide pavementwith hard and soft or only soft shoulders.There is a smallstretch for 4-laning in Ghatampuralong the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode route where there is a major intersectionwith NH-86, which connectsHamirpur and Kanpur. Any minor correctionsto the alignment will occur within existing RoW and there will be no land acquisition in PhaseI

Only a coupleof bypassesare planned for thesettlements of Bangarmaualong the Katra-BilhaLir route and for thesettlement of Gaura-Badshahpuralong the Mohammapur-Jaunpur route. Their combined length is Icssthan 8 km.

Covernmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 24 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase l) DHV Consultants BV September2001

except for the bypasses.The following Table 2-7 givesthe details of the existingstretches in terms of their classification,lengths, proposed works and districtsthese routes traverse.

Table2-7: RouteAlignment Detaiisior routesincluded in PhaseI of UPSRP

ihk LinkDescrio O_ Length Proposed ! No. From To i RoadNo. (ki) Works i 4A - Katra alalabad I MDR Ws 35 00 W3 Kanptir Rural and 4A.2 Jalalabad ' Allahganj .SH 29 _ 19.60 W3 Fatehpur 4A.3 _ Allahganj Bilgram _ MDR 26C 61.50 W3 4A.4 Mallawan i Bangannau SH 38 14o00 W3 4A.5 Bangarmau Z Bihaur _ SH 40 ,- 17.20 W3D KATRA-BILHAuR 148.440 ...... q ._ .__,______j.___...... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... 7A. Bahraich ; Gonda : SH 30 64.80 W3 Bahraich Shravasti 7A. 2 Gonda _ Nawabn _ SH 30 1__ 35 30i W3 and Gonda 7A.3 -Naawbsani I Faizabad SH 0 _3 5 75 W3 BAHRAICH-CONDA ______r_109.350 ._. 14.1 _hognipur _ hatampur SH 46 380 W3 Shahahanpur, 14.2 iGhatannpur _ ,Jahanabad ;SH46_ 1_9.10 W3 l-Hardoi,Unnao 14.3 jahanabad !sakewar SH 46 1260 W3 and Kanpur Rural 14.4 Bakewar ChudagaMode MDfVODRR12 6 05 W3 BHOGNIPUR-HAUDAGRA MODE 82 300 181 jaunpurJn _ InMoharnmadpur_ MOR 69 . 33.870 W3 . jaunpur& JANUPUR-MOHAMMADPUR . 33 870 W3 Azamgarh TOTAL -_T…743.63 |

Typical cross-sectionfor W3 option hasbeen shownin figure 2.6.

2.5 Other proposed features

In addition to the upgradationworks like widening the pavement,a number of other featuresare also planned as part of the project. The specialfeatures to be implementedare highlighted in the following sub-sections.

2.5.1 BRIDGES

There are several major and minor bridges in the routes selectedfor phase I routes. Most of the bridges are in good condition and will not require any special works. As per bridge inspection report all major bridges along PhaseI upgradation routes are in good condition. No new major bridgesare to be constructedas part of the phaseI of UPSRP.

2.5.2 PAVEMENTOPTIONS AND STRUCTURE

Exceptfor the settlementswhere flooding occurs frequently,the pavementsalong all the routesare flexible. At locations where regularflooding occurs,brick-paved roads have been constructed.The design for widened pavement also considers a flexible pavement for all the routes. To ensure service during flooding, rigid cement concrete pavement has been suggestedin 'place of brick- paved roads. In the maintenanceroutes too, the provisions of pavement are based on flexible pavement design.0.6 m wide concrete blocks are suggestedto effect widening in stretcheswhere the pavement width is between 4m and 6m. The design life of the pavement is 10 years with overlaysin the 6"' year. However,the baseand sub-baseare designed for a design life of 15 years.

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 25 Projuct Co-ordinitinrg Consultants (PCC)Services for Unar PradeshState Roads Project ErivironnentalAssessment (Phase I) September2001 DHV ConsultantsBV

Figure2.6 Typicalcross section (Option W3)

i~~~~~~~~~i

a-

WH _ i H,

CL.

CL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C,

0

CL.. )

Cl-~~~~I~E.

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India Proact Co-rdinating Consultants 26 (PCC Servicesfor UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

2.53 OVERVIEWOF THEIMPACTS OF THEPROJECT

The project will provide much neededconnectivity to the vast rural areas of Uttar Pradesh.The improved connectivity will undoubtedlybring prosperityto these economically under-developed regions.

The direct and measurablebenefits of the project rise from the Vehicle OperatingCosts and Travel time costs. The other direct benefitsinclude the improvedaccess, the local produce will have to regional markets& industrial productsto the vast untappedrural markets,better accessto health and education facilities. Construction related jobs would be created during the implementation stageof the project. There will be an increasein the safetyand comfortof the road users- whether pedestrianor vehicle-user.Ir fact, poverty alleviationhas been one of the main objectivesof the project,which hasled to selectionof severalroads in easternUttar Pradesh for upgradation.

Indirect benefits of the project include the better business opportunities and increased competitivenesswithin the area. Increased mobility of the population will mean far more integrationof the region in economic,social andpolitical termsas one entity.

There will also be adverse impacts of the project relating to the strife in the local population, increasedstrain on environmentallysensitive receptors, consumption of (non-renewable)resources, increasedpollution loads during construction period, etc. Indirect adverseimpact would include the increased ribbon development of settlements,risk of accidents of increased severity, unregulatedaccess to previously secluded areas,etc. Theseadverse impacts are the focus of the subsequentchapters, since project justification would have highlighted in considerabledetail the benefitsof the project.

2.6 Major Maintenance Component

The major maintenancecomponent of the UPSRPhas been examinedas part of the Sector EnvironmentalAssessment already prepared.The assessmentconcluded that since the major maintenancecomponent does not causesignificant adverse impacts, these routes can be easily omittedthe detailedenvironmental impact assessment required for the upgradationroutes. To managethe environmentaland social issuesthat may ariseduring the implementationof these works,a separateenvironmental and socialmanagement plan hasbeen preparedfor all major maintenanceroutes together.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 2 7 Procct Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

3 POLICY,LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVEFRAMEWORK

This chapterpresents a reviewof the existinginstitutions and legislationrelevant to this projectat the Nationaland Stateleve's. Regulations concerning procedures and requirementsthat may directly concernthe project, the capacityof the concernedinstitutions and their ability to successfullyimplement the EnvironmentalManagement Measures have beenaddressed in this chapter. Also, this chapter presentsthe various issuesrelated with the framework in place for environmental clearance of highway projects with referenceto the central government, state governmentof UP and requirementsof the World Bank.

3.1 Institutionalsetting for the project

An understanding of the institutional setting of the UPSRP will help ensure its smooth implementation.The identificationof the major stakeholders,their respectiveroles and analysisof the policy and legislationthat govern their functioning are necessaryto understandand appreciate their contribution to the successfulcompletion of the project.

The Uttar PradeshPublic Works Department(UPPWD), the project proponent of the UPSRP,is responsiblefor the overall project, including the project preparationand implementation.Though the primary responsibility is vested with the PWD, there are several institutional players with varyingdegrees of responsibilities,which is presentedin the following sections.

3.1.1 UTTARPRADESH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (UPPWD)

The Uttar PradeshPublic Works Departmentis a massiveorganisation having about 1500 engineers on its payroll and staff strength of around 65,000. The Engineer-in-Chiefis the head of the organisation,which has 23 chief engineersand a chief architectto assisthim carry out the works for 180,000 km of roads in the state. One Chief Engineeris exclusively in-charge of externally funded projects.A superintendingengineer works as the Project Director for this and such other projectsunder the Chief Engineer.

3.1.2 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION UNIT

A Project Implementation Unit assists the Project Director (PD) to ensure the smooth implementationof the project The PIU consistsof an ExecutiveEngineer and 2 AssistantEngineers. Of the two assistantengineers assigned to the PIU, one looks after the Environmentalaspects and the other looksafter the issuesrelated with Resettlementand Rehabilitation.They constitutethe key officials of the environmentalcell and are responsiblefor monitoring the activities of the various contractors,PCC, SC, etc. hired by the UPPWDto assistin the implementationof the project.

Details of the modus operandi of the PIU and the environmental cell' are detailed in the Chapter10 entitled ImplementationArrangements

The institutional arrangementsand the capacity building of the PWD with respect to the Environmental and Social Aspects have been assessedas part of the SEA,carried out during the feasibility study for the project. The setup and the implementation mechanismshave been detailed out in this report basedon the framework that hasbeen worked out for the project in the SEA

Goverisiise,itof uttarPrddesh, PLiblic Works Department, LLucknow,India 28 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Unar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

3.2 InstitutionalSetting in the EnvironmentalContext

3.2.1 MINISTRYOF ENVIRONMENTAND FORESTS

A separateMinistry of Environmentand Forestsfunctions with a cabinetminister and ministerof statealong with severalsecretaries, each assigned to a specificdepartment within the ministry.The primaryresponsibility for administrationand implementatiorof the Governmentof India'spolicy with respectto environmentalmanagement, conservation, ecologically sustainable development and pollution control restswith the Ministry.The MoEFis supportedby the CentralPollution ControlBoard (for industrialpollution control), Wildlife Board of India(for conservationof wildlife) andother such autonomous bodies.

3.2.2 REGIONALOFFICE OF THE MOEF, LUCKNOW

The MoEF has severalregional offices around the country for carrying out its mandatelocally. For this project, the RegionalOffice in Lucknow.

3.2.3 CENTRALPOLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

The Central Pollution Control Board is mostly as an advisor to the Central Government and the State Pollution Control Boards. Its responsibilitiesrelevant to this project include inter alia the following:

* Planand implementwater and air pollution programs; * Advisethe CentralGovernment on waterand air pollution programs; a Setair and waterquality standards;and a Co-ordinatethe StatePollution Control Boards.

3.2A DEPARTMENTOF FORESTS,GOVERNMENT OF UTTARPRADESH

The department of Forests,GoUP is responsiblefor the managementand administrationof the forest resourcesin the state. Realisingthe importanceto increasethe forest cover in the state,the GoUP has carried out various afforestationschemes. Also, the roadsideplantations along the entire state have been designatedas protectedforests. The StateForest Department is also in-chargeof the maintenance of roadside plantation. Its Social Forestry section will be responsible for the implementationof the compensatoryafforestation programme in lieu of treescut duringthe project.

3.25 UTTARPRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

The Uttar PradeshPollution Control Board (UPPCB)will be the governmentagency responsible for ensuring the compliance with the relevant standardsrelated to discharges into the environment. The following activitiesof the UPPCBwill be relevantto the project:

* Plannirngand executingstate-level air and water quality initiatives; * Advisingstate govern-menits on air, water and industry issues; * Establishingstandlards based on NationalMinimum Standards; * Enforcinigand monitoring of all activities withinl the Stateunder the Air Act, the Water act and the CessAct, etc.; * Issuing No-objection Certificates(NOC) for industrialdevelopment, defined in such a way as to include roadprojects like UPSRP.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Department,ticknow, India 29 Project Com-odumdrimng Consulianis lPCC) Servicesfor uttar PradeshSi.lte RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessnment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV Sertember2001

3.3 Legal framework

The IndianCoitsii[iuon makesenvironmental protection an explicit duty for everycitizen by the inclusionof thefollowing passage:

'It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the environment,including forests, lakes,rivers, wildlife and to have compassionfor living creatures.In addition, Government of India has laid out various policy guidelines;acts and regulationspertaining to the sustenanceof environmentand thesehave beenexplained in the following sub-sections.

3.3.1 THEFOREST (CONSERVATION) AC, 1980

The Forest(Conservation) Act, 1980pertains to the casesof diversionof forestarea and fellingof roadsideplantation. Dependingon the size of the tract to be cleared, clearanceare applied for at the followinglevels of govemment:

* If the area of foreststo be cleared or diverted exceeds20ha (or, loha in hilly'area) then prior permissionof CentralGovernment is required; * If the areaof forestto becleared or divertedis between5 to 20ha,the RegionalOffice of Chief Conservatorof Forestsis empowered to approve; * If the areaof forestto be clearedor divertedis belowor equalto 5ha,the StateGovernment can give permission;and * If the areato be clear-felledhas a forest density of more than 40%, permissionto undertakeany work is neededfrom the CentralGovernment, irrespective of the areato be cleared.

The aboveclearance procedure has beenshown in the form of flow chart in Figure3.1.

Box 3.1 Applicability of the Forest(Conservation) Act, 1980

RoadsideStrip Plantation In 1986,when MoEFenacted the Environment-ProtectionAct, the entirelinear stretches o roadsideplantations along the highwayswere declaredas protectedforest in certainStates Uttar Pradeshbeing one of these.Although the land is under the control of the highway department,due to its protectedstatus, clearance is requiredto cut roadsidetrees. Applicabilit of the provisionsof the Forest(Conservation) Act, 1980to the linear {roador canal side plantationswas modifiedby a notificationfrom the Gol, MoEF,dated 18 February1998. The new notification recognizesthat the spirit behind the. Forest (Conservation)Act wa conservationof naturalforests, and not strip plantations.In the caseof the notified to b protectedroadside plantations, the clearancenow may be given by the concemedRegiona Officesof the MoEF,irrespective of the areaof plantationlost. While issuingthe approval, place of normalprovision for compensatoryafforestation, the RegionalOffices will stipulate conditionthat for everytree cut at leasttwo treesshould be planted.If the concernedRegiona Office does not accord the decisionwithin 30 days of the receipt of fully complete application,the proponentagency may proceed with the widening/expansionunder intimatio to the StateForest Department, and MoEF.

ForestLand Restrictionsand clearanceprocedure proposedin the Forest(Conservation) Act applies wholl to the natural forest areas,even in casethe protected/designatedforest area does not have an vegetationcover.

Govprninpnt of trtar Pradesh.Public Works Depariment. tlrcknow. India 30 Project Co-ordinating Consult.nts (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessmnent(Phase O) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Figure3.1 Flowchartshowing various steps involved in examinationof casesreceived under Forest ConservationAct andClearance Act

APPLICATIONOF USERAGENCY TO D F0

COLLECTOR SCRUTINYOF APPLICATION IDENTIFICATIONOF NON-FOREST PREPARATIONOF FORMALPROPOSALI LAND

CONSERVATOROF FOREST

SCRUTINY,RECOMMENDATION I

+ NODAL OFFICER

SCRUTINY,REMARK, RECOMMENDATION OF PRINCIPLECCF

- STATEGOVERNMENT IFOREST DEPARTMENT)

SCRUTINY,REMARKS, RECOMMENDATION l

RCCF(PROPOSAL UPT MEF(PROPOSAL ABOVE R 20 HECTARES) 20 HECTARES) C SITEINSPECTION FOR e r *PROPOSALSC ABOVE40 Ha OF ~EXAMINATION < F FORESTLAND

EXAMINATIONAND FINAL DECISIONFOR CASESUPTO S Ha FORESTLANf ADVISORY EXCEPTTHOSE OF MINING AND ENCROACHMENT COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATIONOF EXAMINATIONAND PUTTING BEFORESTATE ADVISORY GROUP FOR ADVISORYCOMMITTEE PROPOSALSOTHER THAN THOSEMENTIONED ABOVE

STATEADVISORY GROUP 4 MEF MEF FINAEDECISION ISSUE OF FIRSTSTAG l MEETINGRECOMMENDATIONS | APPROVAL

ISSUEOF ORDERSBY STATE STATEGOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT [MORING|

STATEGOVERNMENT's R COMPLIANCEREPORT

F~~~~~~~E STATEGOVERNMENT ,FMEF | >|FORMAL APPROVALORDER |4

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 31 Project Co-ordinating ConsultantsIPCCI Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

3.3.2 THEENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT, 1986 AND THE ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT ASSESSMENTNOTIFICATION, 1994

The Environmental(P,otection) Act, 1986 is the umbrella legislationproviding for the protectionof environment in the country. This Act provided for the Environment(Protection) Rules, which were formulated in 1986, The EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Notitication, 1994 and the Amendment thereto (April 1997). As per the Amendment,no formal environmentalclearance from the ministry is required for highway widening, strengtheningprojects if they do not cut acrossor passthrough environmentally sensitiveareas as reservedforests, wildlife sanctuaries,biosphere reservesetc. Also, the bypassesare to be treatedas separateprojects and require an EIAonly if each one costs more than INR 500 million (Annexl). Under 'The Environment (Protection)Act', 1986, the developmental project require clearancesfrom the StatePollution Control Board and Ministry of Environmentand Forests,New Delhi. The procedure for obtaining environmentalclearance has beendepicted in Figure3.2.

3.3.3 THE WILDLIFE(PROTECTION) ACT, 1972

The Wildlife ProtectionAct has allowed the governmentto establisha number of National Parks and Sanctuariesover the past25 years,to protect andconserve the flora andfauna of the state.

33.4 THE WATERAND AIR(PREVENTION AND CONTROLOF POLLUTION)ACTS

The Water (Preventionand Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 resulted in the establishmentof the Central and State level Pollution Control Boards whose responsibilitiesinclude managingwater qudlity and effluent standards,as well as monitoring water quality, prosecutingoffenders and issuinglicenses for constructionand operation of certain facilities.The SPCBis empoweredto set air quality standardsand monitor and prosecuteoffenders under The Air (Preventionand Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

Box3.2 StatePollution Control Board Requirements

l The project requiresthe obtaining of tclearancefrom the StatePollution Control Boardof Utta Pradeshpursuant to the Water (Preventionand Controlof Pollution) Act of 1974, the Cess Ac of 1977 and Air (Preventionand Control of Pollution) Act of 1981. The UPPCBestablishes review panel and circulatesthe application for public review and comment in each-affecte district. The State Pollution Control Board issues a No-objection Certificate (NOC) afte acceptingthe applicationfor the project.

3.3.5 THE MOTORVEHICLES ACT, 1988

In 1988, the Indian Motor VehiclesAct empoweredthe StateTransport Authority (usuallythe Road TransportOffice) to enforcestandards for vehicular pollution and preventioncontrol.'The authority also checks emission standardsof registeredvehicles, collects road taxes,and issueslicenses. In August 1997, the Pollution Under Control Certificate (PUC) programmewas launched in an attemptto crackdown on the vehicularemissions in the States.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanment,Lucknow, India 32 Project Cu-ordinating Cuntsultacmts(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Figure3.2 Flowchart for obtaining Environmental Clearance

INVESTOr INVESTOR 3.3.6 ,

SUBMITSPROJECT7 QUESTIONNAIRETO SUBMISSIONOF THE CONCERNEDSPCB PROJECTTOTHE MIN. OF ENV.& FORESTSALONG WITH ALL DOCUMENTS rLSTED AT PARTI OF THE REVIEYBY 5KB HAND BOOK

YES ES ISTHE ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL SCRUTINYBY MANAGEMENTPLAN STAfF OF MIN. Of ENV. SATISFACTORY & FORESTS

+ NO I CAN ISSUES BE NOREVIEWN BY RESOLVED REJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IS H _ ~~~~~~~~~APPRAISALCOMMITTEEPROlIrECSITE

F ORESTS G STIUAIN NO

rPROVIDE MDQAEBNERTK|

* YES E n|SITVSTE |SPCB ISSUE NOC APPLYALSO TO ClCF yE Governen|ot Prsh bli WorksNDepCASnFORESTL I | LANDIS INVOLVED.| R ProjIST + | } + | t ~~~~~~~~~ACCEPTABL |DOES THE PROJECT||NO | FALLUNDER YES ll l l§N |SCHEDULE- I OF i . .I EIANOTIFICATION l COiMPREHAENSIVE EFMNVIRONMENTALCLA ANCEPISUEDBYLEN | NO | SPECIFICSTNUDY ||AVSDT + + | | |I SUGGESTEDBY||LOKR IAPPLY TO STATE I I | THECOMMffTEE||ALENTVI |DEPARTMENTOF | |APPLY TO UNION | ll l'l 5T |ENVIRONMENT MIN. oF ENV.&

ENVIRONMENTAL PRESCRIBED CLEARANCE | |QUESTIONNAIRE_

NO |CNISEBE|( ISHPRIC |Y,RECOMMENDED BY|

, s , RESOLED EAC

REJECT I |ENVIRONMENTALCLEARANCE ISSUED IBY MIN. |OF ENV.& FORESTSALONGWITH STIPUAIN

Governmnentof Ulttr Pradesh,Ptiblic Works Department, LLICLknOsV,India 33 ProjectConrrlinaring Co)ngtilrants (PCC) Services fR Urtil !ade' SimlreRods Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

THEANCIENT MONUMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICALSITES AND REMAINSACT, 1958

Accordingto this Act, areawithin the radii of 100mand 300mfrom the 'protectnd property'are designatedas 'protected area' and 'controlled area' respectively.No developmentactivity (including building, mining, excavating,blasting) is permitted in the 'protected area' and developmentactivities likely to damagethe protectedproperty are not permittedin the 'controlled area" without prior permissionof the ArchaeologicalSurvey of India (ASI)if the sitelremains/ monumentsare protected by ASIor the StateDirecotrate of Archaeology,if these are protected by the State.The Mata Mukteshwari Temple complex along the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode route is a site protectedby the UP Directorateof Archaeologyand is locatedat a distanceof 500mfrom the road.

3.4 State LevelLegislation and OtherActs

No specific state-levellegislation relevant to the environmentalclearance requirements, other than thosementioned above are requiredfor UPSRP.

The ForestProtection (Conservation) Act 1980 has been amendedto include RoadsidePlantations as protected forest. Under this, the PWD has to obtain clearancefrom the Forest Departmentfor cutting the trees.

However, clearancewill be required for setting up hot-mix plants, batching plants, etc., under the Air (Preventionand Control of Pollution) Act of 1981 and the Water (Preventionand Control of Pollution) Act of 1974. Clearancefrom the StateDepartment of Mining is required for establishing quarries.Clearance from the StateGround Water Boards/Authoritiesis requiredfor establishmentof new tube-wells/bore-holes,etc.

In addition, with respectto hygiene and health,during the construction period, the provisions as laid down in the FactoriesAct, 1948 and the Building and Other ConstructionWorkers (Regulation of Employmentand Conditionsof Service)Act, 1996would apply.

With limited possibility, the provisions of the Hazardous Wastes (Managementand Handling) Rules, 1989 and the Chemical Accidents(Emergency Planning, Preparednessand Response)Rules, 1996 would also apply during the constructionand the operationperiods.

3.5 Clearancerequirements of the project

3.5.1 UP STATECLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS

The project will require a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the UPPCB.In addition, clearance will also be required from the Forests Department for the felling of trees along upgradation corridors. The requirement of Public Hearings for development projects has been waived for Highway Projectsvide notification of 3d January2001.

But, individual contractorsmay apply for the consentsfrom the UPPCBto establishHot-mix plants and labour camps underAir, Water and Environment(Protection) Acts, described above.

3.5.2 NATIONALCLEARANCES

The phaseI routesdo not passthrough any environmentallysignificant areas, nor does involve any land acquisition. Therefore, the project does not require an environmental clearance from the MoEF. However, to ensurethat the project has met all the requisiteGot clearances,a NoC from the MoEF statingthat the project does not trigger any clearancesfrom the ministry and the Ministry has no-objectionwith regardsto the implementationof the project needsto be obtained.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 34 Project Co-ordiniatingConisultafits (PCC) Services for Uttar PradesihState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

3.53 WORLD BANK REQUIREMENTS

The entire project has been classified by the Wcld Bank as a 'category A' project. Therefore conformiancewith the requirementsof the EAprocess as defined in the Bank OperationalPolicy on EnvironmentalAssessment (OP 4.01) and the variousSafeguard Policies must be obtained from an independentreviewer.

3.5A CURRENT STATUSOF CLEARANCES

The NOC from the Uttar PradeshPollution Control Boardhas been obtained.The procedure for the permissionto cut the treesalong the routes is in an advancedstage with the figuresfor treesto be cut being verified along the routesin co-ordinationwith the.Forest Department officials.

The NOC from the MoEFhas been obtained.

Governmenetof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, lidia 35 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for unar PradeshStdte Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

4 METHODOLOGY

The environmental assessmentin this project employed an iterative approach in which potential environmental issueshave been examinedin successivelevels of detail and specificityat each step in the process.This chapter presentsthe methodology adopted for the EIA preparationfor the UPSRP. This also describes, as a natural corollary, the mainstreamingof the environmental considerationsin this project.

4.1 Environmentalconsiderations incorporated in the feasibilitystudy

The environmental assessmentin the EAfor UPSRPbegan with the adoption of an environmental and social screeningprocedure during the feasibility stage(as part of the SectoralEnvironmental Assessmentcarried out for the project). The purposeof the screeningwas to identify at the outset, corridors involving eco-sensitivereceptors and/or locations requiring substantialR&R activities. This information could then be used to phase the corridors to be taken up for upgradation or maintenance so that the more sensitive corridors could be taken up later to allow beginning of the project on schedule. The screening classified the corridors as having 'low', 'medium' or 'high' sensitivity'. The prioritisation was effected so that the phase I routes scored either 'low' or 'medium' 7 on the environmental screening and had economic internal rate of retum . Details of the environmental sensitivity and economic rates of return are provided in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Environmental Considerations in prioritising the routes for phase I of UPSRP

Ro _tie fescription - - Length Proposed Environmental IRR Costs |RNo. : Frona .- To , (kin) Section ClassificationI I%) (INRmillion) No.------'- - - -I 4A Katra _ ilhaur 148.44 W3 'Medium 38.1 2,839.70 7A Bahraich Faizabad 109351 W3 ' High 40.9, _,265.50 14 Bhognipur .ChaudagraMode 82.03 W3 iLow 15.3 1,349.20 18 - jaunpur i Mohammadpur 3387, W3 Medium , 16.6 i 417.00

4.2 Environmental assessment

The environmental impact assessment procedure proceeded simultaneously with detailed design of routes selected for phase i. The important findings of the assessment gave important feedback to the design team, especially in terms of the sensitive receptors located along the selected routes. It helped modify the designs at locations where impacts had to be avoided and incorporate mitigation measures wherever the impacts were unavoidable due to other constraints. The stepwise methodology adopted for the EA is as follows:

4.2.1 SCOPING

The scope of the assessment for this study was determined by the Terms of Reference of the Consultants, the statutory requirements for the area of influence required by the Ministry of Environment & Forests and consultations with experts. In addition, a scoping workshop was organised at the beginning of the study where various stakeholders were invited to use their

These information on the environmnentaland social sensitivityof the various project routes provided critical inputs to the Feasibility analysis, where the project routes were evaluated in terms of engineering, economic, environmental and social concems. These analysesenabled the identification and prioritisation of promisingroutes as candidates for selection in the up gradation programme to be carried oLIt under the various project phases.

7 The only exception to this guiding rule was the Bahraich-Faizabadcorridor. The exceptionally high internal rate of return caused the revisit of the criteria used in selecting corridors. It wasfound that the route received a 'high' classification becauseof the large nuimber of senlements and properties likely to be affected. However, it was revealed that the bulk of the properties along the roadside were along the stretch beyond Katra (Faizabad)towards Azamgarh and Phephna. Hence, this route was selected for upgradation in PhaseI.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanrment,Lucknow, India 36 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCCi Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

intimate knowledgeof the study area so that the focus would be on valued ecosystemcomponents (VECs)they consideredimportant.

4.2.2 RECONNAISSANCESURVEYS

The study team visited all the corridors and data was collected in formats which were prepared following the scoping workshop. The formats were designed to collect information for every kilometre of each route in respectof the VECs.Detailed strip mapping being carried out as part of the detailed design data collection also provided valuable information regardingarea adjacentto the pavement.

4.2.3 ASSEMBLYAND ANALYSISOF DATA

The data from surveyswas fed to customisedspreadsheets for ease of analysis.Supplementary information was collected from Survey of India toposheets, census handbooks and other governmentpublications as well as reportsprepared for other projects in Uttar Pradesh.Standard statistical techniques were used for analysis of the socio-economic data, the tree count, etc. Qualitativeanalysis was done for more descriptivedata.

4.2A DOCUMENTATIONOF BASELINECONDITIONS

The documentationof the baseline conditions was completed for a 7 km wide strip on all sidesof the project route-ProjectInfluence Area (PIA) as per the MoEFguidelines. Primary surveyswere carried out for determination of ambient air quality, water quality in sources along the various routesand noise levels.A detailedtree countwas alsoconducted.

4.25 ASSESSMENTOF ALTERNATIVES

Alternativeswere continuously assessedthroughout the process.A more formal assessmentwas also undertakenas a part of the environmentalassessment process, including the assessmentof the 'No Action' Alternative as is customarily included as a part of the formal assessment methodologies to ensure that it has been given proper consideration. Other sources, such as satelliteimagery, were usedto identify and analysealternatives like bypassalignments.

4.2.6 ASSESSMENTOF POTENTIALIMPACTS

Potential significant impactswere identified on the basis of analytical review of baseline data; review of land usesand environmentalfactors; analytical review of the socio-economicconditions within the PIA; and review of assessmentof potential impactsas identified by previous highway projects.

4.2.7 INTEGRATIONOF ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS IN THE DESIGNPROCESS: "MAINSTREAMING THE ENVIRONMENTALCOMPONENT"

The design and decision-makingprocess integrated environrnental, resettlement and rehabilitation issuesand prompted the early identification of appropriate actions. Such actions included, for example, shifts in alignments based on awarenessof the locations of cultural resources,and biological resourcessuch as significant areasof roadsidetrees and "green tunnels' and the early identificationof severalshort bypasses to reduce local impacts.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,tucknow, India 3 7 Project Co-ord!nating consultants IPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Rcods Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

4.2.8 IDENTIFIEDMITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENTMEASURES

Positiveactions to not only avoid adverseimpacts, but to capitalize on opportunitiesto correct environmentaldegradation or improveenvironmental conditions were determined.

4.2.9 COMMUNITYCONSULTATIONS

Extensiveconsultations were held at variousstages of the project. A separatevolume detailsout the methods,approaches and outcomesof the consultationsheld. The issuesraised by the communities and the various stakeholderswere incorporatedin the design and construction/operationplan of the project highway. Since the requirement of public hearings has been waived for highway projects,the consultationsheld are more in line with World Bank requirements.

4.2.10 PREPARATIONOF THEENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLANS

Environmental managementplans have been prepared for each route separatelyas part of the EnvironmentalAssessment. Responsibilities have been assignedfor the various actions identifiedto limit the adverse impacts of the project and budget allocations have been made for the funds required for mitigation as well as enhancementmeasures. A generic environmental management plan hasalso beenprepared for the maintenancecorridors.

4.3 Finalisingthe environmentalassessment

After addressingthe comments by the World Bank and the Independent Review Consultants8 appointed for the project, the finalisation of the environmentalassessment has been carried out in continuous interaction with the IndependentReview Consultants.In addition, the field visits - a part of the review exercise,provided valuable inputs into the completion of the EA. The baseline environmental setting, the potential impacts and the plausible mitigation measureshave been supplementedbased on the field visitsand observationscarried during the IndependentReview.

4.3.1 COMPLETINGTHE BASELINE

The baselinewas updated by visiting all the upgradationcorridors and a selectivesample of routes included in the major maintenanceprogramme. The information was evaluated using the same VECswhich were identifiedduring the preparationof the draft EAreport. It is anticipated that since major maintenance will be a much less intrusive activity, the impacts will be limited to the constructionperiod and that too within the confined areaadjacent to the RoW only.

4.3.2 IMPACTASSESSMENT AND MODELLING

Impact assessmentwas carried out for the baseline environmental quality, which has been establishedalong the project routes.Certain impactswhich were not consideredduring previous stageswere also included. In addition, the updatedbaseline and other information collected about sensitive receptorsduring the subsequentsite visits provided the basis of making more concrete assessmentof impacts.

4.3.3 MITIGATIONAND ENHANCEMENTMEASURES

In view of the presenceof sensitivereceptors on project routes, appropriate mitigation measures were chalked out for individual routeswhere adverseimpacts could not be avoided. Enhancement

TheT WB and the UPPWD have appointed M/S.LeaAssociates South Asia, New Delhi to be the Independent Review Consultantsfor the Environmental and SocialAssessments carried out for the project.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 38 Project Co-ordinating Consuitants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

measuresincluding generic landscapeplans for individual routes, enhancementplans for cultural propertiesidentified along the routeshave been prepared.

4.3A STANDALONE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLANS AND GENERICENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIALMANAGEMENT PLAN

Since the EMPsare to become a part of the contract documents, they must contain all the information that may be required for the successfulimplementation of the mitigation and/or enhancementmeasures envisaged as part of the assessment.The summaryEMPs for each corridor has been updated and additional mitigation and enhancementmeasures have been incorporated along with a clear demarcationof responsibilitiesof the various institutionsresponsible. Monitoring systemshave been establishedto ensureease of follow-up activities.In addition, the genericESMP for the major maintenancecomponent has been beefedup with inclusion of provisionsrelated with R&R activitiesand other impactsidentified.

4.3.5 ENVIRONMENTALBUDGET

The budgetaryprovisions for implementingvarious environmentalmeasures have beenrationalised for all the routes. The unit costshave beenexamined and appropriatelymodified to incorporatethe changes.

Covernment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 39 Project Co-erdinating Consultants(PCC) Services for unarPradesh State RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

5 EXISTINGENVIRONMENTAL SCENARIO

This chapterassesses the nature,type and dimensionsof the studyarea and describesthe relevant physical and biological environmentalcomponents along the project routes selectedfor upgradation.The conditions along major maintenanceroad have been discussedwhere appropriate.The database on the environmentalcomponents relevant to decisionsabout project location,design and operation have been assembled from various secondary sources and primary surveysand havebeen supplemented by the fieldvisits carried out duringthe independentreview.

5.1 Meteorologicalbaseline

Thestudy of meteorologicaland micro meteorological parameters is significantin a roadproject as theseparameters regulate transport and diffusion of pollutantsreleased, into the atmosphere.

5.1.1

The climate of Uttar Pradesh is mainly sub-tropicalwith the hilly region of Terai having more temperate characteristics.The routestaken up in phaseI of UPSRPare located in the humid sub- tropical region with markedmonsoon effects. The summersare generally hot and dry, while cold weather prevailsin winters. Due to large variations in temperatureand rainfall, the climate has a characteristicseasonality. The climate is distinguishedby three distinctseasons:

- Hot Summer(from April to June), * Warm humid Rainyseason (from Julyto September),and X Cold Winter (from Novemberto February).

October and March constitute the transitional months between rainy, winter and summer seasons respectively.

5.1.2 TEMPERATURE

The temperaturein the region varies from extremehigh temperaturesupto 47°C around Kanpur in summer to as low as 4°C in winter. The annual averagetemperature is around 271C for all the routesincluded in phaseI upgradationprogrammes.

5.1.3 WIND

The routes selectedfor upgradationin PhaseI lie in the plains of Uttar Pradesh,which have light to moderatewinds. Hot winds locally called 'loo', blow from the west during the summer.However, the average wind speedsare quite low though there is the occasional storm. The averagewind speed is in the regionof 4-5 km/h.

5.1.4 RAINFALL

The rainfall in the region is almost exclusivelydue to the northeastmonsoon. The rainfall increases from west to eastbut decreasesnorth to south. The following table givesthe averagevalues for rainfall for each route as recordedat the nearestrain gaugestation.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 40 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table5-1 Rainfallalong project routes in phaseI of UPSRP

Route Average Rainfall k I...... __ ...... ------(rnm)_ Katra-Bilhaur 1050 Bahraich-Faizabad1 1300 Bhognipur-Caudh a Mode 825 Jaunpur-Mohammadpur 1100

5.2 Naturaland BiophysicalEnvironment

Accurate determination of baseline conditions of natural and biophysical environmental componentsalong project routes is vital for robust impact assessment.The componentsof the environment for which the information has been collected are described in the following subsections.

5.2.1 AIR

Degradationof ambient air quality is the most commonly identified adverseimpact on the natural and bio-physicalenvironment along roads which are improved.

National AmbientAir QualityStandards (NAAQS)

The permissibleair quality standardsfor particulateand gaseouspollutants are presentedin Table 5-2 as laid down by the CPCB.

Table 5-2 NationalAmbient Air QualityStandards (CPCB, 1997)

TimeWe,ghted Concentrationin Ambientair (Wm/3 ) Pollutant T Wrightred Ruraland Residential Seitv Sulphur Dioxide (SO.) Annual Average 80. 60 --1 - 1----5--- _24 hr* 120 80 30 Oxides of Nitrogen (as NO. AnnualAverage 80 60 24 hr- 120 i 80 30 Suspendedparticulate Mater , Annual Average 360 140 70 (SPM) .24hr-* 500 200 100 Respirableparticulate nmatter , Annual Averame 120 60 so (< 10 m) (RPM) i24 hr 150 100 75 Lead j Annual Average 1.0 075 0.50 24 hr* * 1.00 0.75 -Carbon monoxide mg/mr 8 hr 5.0 2.0 1.0 | ______ilhr 10.0 4t0 2.0

* Annual Arithmetic mean of minimum 104 measurementin a year taken for a week 24 hourly at uniform interval. * 24 hourly/8 hourly values should meet 98 percent of the time in a year Socirce:Central Pollution Control Board(1997) National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Series,NAQMSla/i996-97.

No standardshave been promulgatedfor HC yet.

Ambient Air Qualityalong project routes

High volume ambient air samplersin conjunction with Mylar bags/bladderswere used to collect samplesof ambient air at a number of locations.The selectionof the receptorswas basedon the following considerations:

* Coveringall project routesindividually; and * Coveringland usecharacteristics and socio-economic conditions observed along all routes.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 41 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase D) DHVConsultants BV Septeinber2001

Composite samples were prepared using three 8-hr samplescollected at each location. The sampleswere analysedfor pollutantsof interest(CO, NO3 , SO2, Pb, HC, SPMand RPM)using the appropriate method prescribedby Bureauof Indian Standards.Air quality samplinglocations and resultsobtained at each aregiven in the table below:

Table 5-3 Air Quality at selectedlocations along routes selected in phaseI of UPSRP

Air Quality Parameters Reading SPM RPM s5o NOX 'O HC 3 3 2 3 3 3 (pg/rn) (pg/rm) (pg/Fn) (pg/M ) _(pg/M ) (pg/n) Pb(pg/mr) Bilgrar, CongestedUrban Area on Route4 l1 239 72 8.9 14.2 1145 1 1.0 0.02 2 _ 242__ 82 9.1 13.1_ 2290 _ 1.1 _0.02 3 _221. 61 7.7 12.9 1145 1.2 0.02 jalalabad, LargeUrban Centreon Route4 4 231 89 9.7 17.3 __3435 1.3 0.03 5 _ 239, 92 _ 89, 16.8 _ 2290 1.41 0.03 6 209, 63 10.1 ! 17.1 2290. 18. 0.04 Katr Junion wth NH on Route4 7 ___ 253. 86- 8.7 15.77 3435 1.4 0.04 8 248 I 90' 7.3; 12.8~ 2290 1.1 i 0.03 9 237 91 8.4 14.8. 34351 1.3 0.04 Gonda,Major Urban Centreon Route 7...... _ 4 2 2 10 212 83 1 6.9 1 1 . 1 1145, 1. 0_03 lahanabad,Major Urban Centreon Route 14 l l 233 69 13.11 19.3. 2901 12 005 12 ; 10i 61 10i31 15.9- 2290. 2.1 0.03 13 ! . ... _ 62 ___89 123 17.2__ 1145 _ 2.2 0.04 Gaura BadshahpurMajor UrbanCentre on Route 16 4 . 2051 681 114 5 m 1 3 0.04 15 ! 202 89 10.2 15.4 2290 1.8 0.04 16 192i 58 12-3- 16 2290 18 003

Source: Consul(ant'sSurvey 3 Above CPCB limits

As can be seenfrom the table above,the only parameterexceeding CPCB limits is SPM.The traffic along the project routes is light at present.The high levelsof SPMcan possibly be attributed to the soil, which is alluvial and therefore has a propensity to get suspendedin air. In addition, in settlements, other anthropogenic activities too may generate a lot of suspended particulates, which results in high concentrations recorded during the survey.

5.2.2 WATER:HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE

Water is relatively abundant in the study area, mainly due to the presence of the snow-fed perennial rivers-tributaries of the Ganga. However, the concern with water is as much about quality as it is about quantity available. Road projects can significantly alter the hydrological setting of the project area by acting as an impediment to the natural drainage system of the region. They can also alter ground water recharge pattems by creating impervious surfaces as part of the pavement as well as by diverting flow away from or towards groundwater recharge areas.

Surface Water

The project routes in phase I are all located in water-rich areas. The only exception is the first 20- odd kilometres of the Bhognipur-Chaudagra Mode route which passes over ravines. Here there is real scarcity of water and even trees are few and far in between. The general drainage along the project routes is in the direction of the Ganga so that the rivers north of Ganga flow towards south and east while those south of the Ganga flow north and east. There are a number of cross drainage structures located under the existing pavements which facilitate movement of water. The details of the cross drainage structures are presented in table below:

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4 2 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Table5-4 Drainagein routes selectedin PhaseI upgradationin UPSRP

Noof No. No. of Route Major i Mior I culverts Major Rivers .____ , Bridgresi 8rdges i------Katra-Bilhaur _ _ . _,__ 3 16 215, Rahseda,Ganga. Sendha,Lilmai, Garra, Kalyani Bahraich-Fabiza-bad 0 10 123iTerhi 1h ode 7 ! =_ 92 i Sangur.Dugva, Non, Rind Mohammadpur-jaunpurX o l iorTGangi, Aora,heso

In addition severalcanals criss-cross the study area.A number of minor bridgesare locatedon these canals. A number of ponds lie adjacentto the project routes.Water from most ponds is used for purposeslike bathing, washing, irrigation,etc. However, someponds are used for drinking water too. The following Table5-5 givesthe summaryof water bodies locatedalong the project routes.

Table5-5 Summaryof Surfacewater bodies along phase I upgradationroutes in UPSRP

Route | RiversI MajorRivers

Katra-silhaur __6 61986 Rahseda_Gan5a,Sendha Lilmai Garra Kalyani BahraichFaizabad 1 12451 23| 1 Terhi Bhognipur-Chaudagra_Mode,I 86 3. 4 _Sangur, DuSva, Non, Rind Mohaminadpur.Jaunpur M7 15S 3 Gangi,Aora, Bheso

Flooding is a seriousproblem- for the road and for the villagesalong side.The major causesof this water loggingare blockageof alreadyexisting culverts in built up areas,under capacityof the cross drainage structures provided and absenceof side drains-especiallyin villages: The areas,which were identified during surveysas beingprone to flooding, are tabulatedbelow.

Table5-6 Areasprone to flooding Route Locationof floodingarea Katra-Bjihaur I . Km 31.50and near Barsoiya Nala

Bahraich-raizabad I NearCulvert 92t2 oI Chaudagra.1gnipurModel'1 None auinpur-Mohammadpur TNone

Groundwater

There are a number of wells and handpumps in use along the routes. The dependence on groundwater, however, may be limited becausea number of perennialrivers flow in the area. The number of undergroundwater sources-handpumpsand wells locatedwithin a 30 m of the existing centrelineare listedbelow:

Table5-7 Drinkingwater resourceswithin likely area of directinfluence of routes

|. i Numberof Route handpumps _ nd wells Katra-Bilhaur j -64 Bahraich-Faizabad 483 Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode 80 Mohamninadpur-Jaunpur 174 Total - 901

It is obvious that the perennial rivers do have a significant role drinking water supply in the study area. Though the Katra-Bilhaurroute is longer than Bahraich-Faizabadby as much as 40 km, there are far less groundwater supply sources, indicating that the big rivers (Ganga, Kalyani) supply drinking water in settlementsclose to the route.

Government of tittar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 43 Prjiect Co-ordinlatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase n DHV Consultants BV September2001

Water Quality

Water quality is a concern for the numerous surfssrp water sources and the groundwater sources. A number of samples have been collected from surface as well as groundwater sources to ascertain the baseline conditions of water quality. The water quality and applicable standards are summarized in the Table 5-8.

From the table it can be concluded that the quality of water in borewells is by-and-large acceptable but for dissolved solids and hardness. One borewell in Route 14, near Badshahpur village has higher concentrations of Fe, BOD, and Suspended Solid than specified.

For surface water bodies, presence of coliforms and relatively high Oil and Grease concentrations make the water unsuitable for drinking purposes. However, in the larger rivers like Kalyani, Rind, etc., these are within the limits specified by the CPCB. Among the surface water bodies, low dissolved oxygen -levels indicate possible presence of oxygen-consuming algae and consequent potential for eutrophication or just lack of surface renewal due to little throughput leading to lower DO concentrations.

None of the heavy metals of interest are in unacceptably high concentrations. The water quality monitoring carried out at various locations along the Phase I upgradation routes are presented in Table 5-8.

Table 5-8 Water Quality Data on UP PCC Phase-1 Routes

r~~~~~

Si. CE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ o. SSParameter a, r 3 =

No. 'n.- .2 .L _ . CO

.01 pH vatlue ___ _ i 8.2 1 _ 7.4 7 1 7.3 - 78 | 6.9 - 7.8 0 7.4 /i 02TDSmtl, _ 389 187 926 1471 225 78 308 355 03 Oils andGrease, mp/t <1 4.4 1 2 <1.0 < 10 52 <10 1 < 1.0 04 BOD 27C,3DAYS) m 06 50 274 3 1 i 6 I 34 2.8 05 : CODo,rn 1.5 179 10 11 4 199 i 11 13 "06 iChlondcasCle mg/l __ 26.S65 8 143 321 8 4 17 14 j07 SulphateasSO4,m,tg . 13,8 25 87 224 26 3 _,i27 ! 12 08 Salinity I 47.9 14.5 * 258 580 14.5 7.2 31 25.3 09; ; DlssolvedOxygen, mgf E 4.6 5.8 3.9 4.7 51 4 4'8 4.6 10 tron as Fe mgI 0.05 1.34 0.24 008 013 058 219 10.05 I11 Copperas <001 <0.01 <0.01 <001 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 12 Zinc asZn, mg_ _ 0-04 005 004 01 o0.08 0.03 0.03 |004 t3 iead as b,mAii <0.01 <001 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 i <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 14 Chromitim as Cr, mg/l , I <001 <0_01 <0S01 <0'01 <001 l <001 <0.01 0.01 15 Cadmium asCd,m l -- T <0.01 <00.1 <0.01 <001 <0.01 <001 <001 <0.01 16 MPN Coliformn Nil 32 Nil Nil Nil 221 Nil Nil 1 7 .E-ColI .! AbSent Present ent Absent Absent Present Absent Absent 18 Total Hardness asCaCO3,mgl 262 135 i438 818 182 55 210 i313 19 Total SuspendedSolids, ml 1.00 54 18 2 36 22 117 4.4

Souirce: Consultant's Survey AboveCPCB limits

5.2.3 LAND

All the routesselected for upgradationin phase I passthrough plain terrain. Only a short stretchof the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode route traversesover ravines of tributaries of the Yamuna. The ground is generally flat with slopes < 1I%.The generalaltitude along the routesvaries from 120 m to 250 m. Since northern UP is mountainous,higher altitudes are encounterednear Bahraichand Katra,while the altitudefalls to about 120 m in Bhognipurin the south.

Governinent of UttarPradesh, Public Works Department,tL.cknow, India 44 Project Co-ordin.tiing Consultants IPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Geology and Seismicity

The entire areaof toutes selectedtinder UPSRPis characterizedby alluvial sedimentstransported by the Gangaand its tributaries.The entire area close to routes selectedin phaseI of UPSRPis characterizedby alluvial sedimentstransported by the Ganga and its tributaries.The soil cover is 400-1500 mm deep. The Gangetic plain is distinguished between the older and the newer alluvium. The older is usuallycomposed of argillaceousbeds, where kanker,an impure carbonate of lime and pislitic ferruginousconcretions are disseminated.

The underlying geology is a significant factor in determiningthe susceptibilityto earthquakesof structuresstanding above ground. The routesselected in phaseI lie either in ZonesIlI or 1W9. Table 5-9 below detailsout thedetails of seismiczones encountered along the routes.

Table 5-9 Seismicityof areasin vicinity of routesin phaseI of UPSRP

Route Horizontal 1 acceleration0 . _ Katra-Bilhaur . -j0.04 III Bahraich Faizabad 0.02-0.04 _ 114V Bhognipur{haudagira Mode 1 0.02 il Launpur-Mohammadpur 0.02 . 1

Soils

The soils makingup the project routesare mainly alluvial. Theyare transportedby the river Ganga and its tributaries as they flow down from the Himalayasand sluggishlydeposit their loads in the plains.

The soils associationsnamely, Orchepts, Orchepts{;ullied land, Ochrepts-Orthents,Ochrepts- Psamments, Ochrepts-Orthents-Udlafs are spread all over the state. These soils are extending over level to gently sloping areas occupying the inter-fluvial, old flood plains of the river Yamuna, Ganga, (all nearRoutes 4, 14 and 18), Sardaand Ghagra.They are coarseloamy to fine loamy. Thesoils are veryfertile and supporta variety of cropsof which wheat is the major cereal.

The districts of Bahraichand Gonda along route 7 have terai soils. Thesesoils are rich in humus with clay, silt and fine sand.They are saturatedwith groundwaterand supportwater intensivecrops like sugarcaneand rice.

Lead in,soil is a causeof concern. The ingestionby kids playing nearthe highway is a likely event in roadsidesettlements. The other pathway is through uptakeby vegetationwhich may becomea part of the food-chain.The leadcontent of soil wastherefore analysed for all the project routes.The resultsare reportedbelow in Table 5-10.

Table 5-10 LeadContent of Soils in vicinityof projectroutes in upgradationin UPSRP LeadContent S. No. Route ka cmntent i Katra-Bllhaur_E L Bahraich-Faizabad 3.2 3 . BhognipurChaudagra Mode 3.1 4 launpur-Mohammadpur 4.0

As can be seen from the above table, concentrationsof lead are quite low along all the routes.This can be due to the relativelylow traffic volumes.

asper theIndia Meteorological Department's five-tiered classification in which I representsthe lowestrisk from earthquakewhile V representsthe highest.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4 5 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project LEGEND ® Districtheadquarter N J \XX -\ * Settlement "-\ Route 18 < < \Nationalhwy yy \State hwy Majordist. road <-- /.Rail x River 2 Districtboundary ( Water samplingstation

. Air samplingstation 1 Noise samplingstation * Soil samplingstation

\(a

\h \

\T - < A~~~~~,gficulturefield Ghatam,p / < \ ------ew

Public Works Department 7 Figure No. 5.1 Govemmentof UttarPradesh __ Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project In assnciation vAth Route 14 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halerow and Partnenrs Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114- IN) OperationsResearchGroup Developnent Consultants Ltd SCALE MDP Cansultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 10 20 Kilonmeters

File reference c:tnaveenVrouteskri4sampling A | LEGEND N > i) DistrictHeadquarter * Sattlement ~Route 4A Majordistt. road ,-z -- Statehwy / National- hwy

-'Rail y W y s z ~~~~~~~~~~~~Rilver E] Districtboundary C. welR Watersamplingstation Wah Air samplingstation . Noisesampling station * Soilsampling station

\ Jali'abadFj a<

Governmentof UttPrdeshopmen¢ \

-npentCnsant00 oeeArears

.X

Uttarrades Stat Roads Projc nasc ationWit Rot N.4

Project,<;,Cooriatn Cosutat (P0 z[ ac adPrnr

S \ Z~~~~evlpietCnutaOLt SCL g~~~~~~~DCoslaf(v.Lt. 03060Kiomtes- J 1, X~~~~~~~~~~~

UftarPradesh InassoFlerenerncethRoute State Roads Project N\.Ac PublicDepartmMPentrsltats(vt' Works Lt. igure____No. ___5 __2

UttarRoads PradeshProject State InasssciationwitFil Rernc:Anve\outesNo4 A LEGEND N (D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~District Headquarter * Settlement "Route 7 Major dist. road ,--State Hwy National Hwy z'yRail River mDistrictboundary Water sampling station +Airsampling station Noise sampling station *Soilsampling station

PublicDepartment Works ~ FigureNontre

GovernmentPradeshofUttar ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o nea

PublicDepartmerit Works FigueelopmntrCesuNoats5U3

MDP'ConsAtMants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 20 40 Kilometers

Filereference o:\naveen'iroutes\r-7saMnpie LEGEND N (3® Districtheadquarter * Settlement " Route 18 National hwy Z State hwy Major dist. road - Rail - River I District boundary [ Water sampling station * Air sampling station t Noise sampling station * Soil sampling station

Public Works Department 4jw Fultre No. 5.4

Public Works Department > Figure No. 5.4 Govemment of Uttar Pradesh x _Y Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project In associationwith Route No. 18 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halrow and Partners Services.(World Bank Loan No.4114- IN) OperatiorrsResearchGro.p SCALE Development Consultants Ltd MDP Consuwtants(Pvt.)Ltd. 0 20 40 Kilometers

File reference: c:\naveenVrautes\r1-sampling EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Figures5.1 to 5.4 indicateroutewise sampling locations for air, water, noise and soil. The detailed methodologyof collection, analyticalmethods used and samplingprocedures followed are given in Annex 2.

Quarries & Crushers

The UPPWD has approved several quarries for obtaining sand aggregatesfor their construction works. Existingquarries that are already in operation with the required environmentalclearances have been recommendedfor this project, and no new quarrieshave been proposed.The following quarries (Table5-11) will be used for phaseI constructionworks. The location of thesequarries has been shown in Figure5.5.

Table 5-11 Quarriesidentified for phaseI construction

S. No. Nare OfQuarr_ Material 1 BadshahiBag qdarry Aggregate 2 _Handwarquarry ag__egates.rStone 3 Ldlkuan quarry Stoneaggegates 4 Beharigarh quarry _ Stoneagregtes 5 Tanakpurquarry ____ Stoneaggregates 6 FatehpurSikri quarry Sand-stoneaggregates 7 Ihansiquarry _ Granitearegat s __ 8 Bandaquarry _ Sand 9 Karbraiquarry Stoneaggregates 10 Shaukargarhquarry - Sand-stoneaggregates 11 Hamirpur quarry Sand 12 Chunar quary e aggregates 13 Dalla quarry I Lime-stoneagreates | 14 Chopanquary __ Sand - .15 Birohi quarry Stoneaggregates

Borrow Pits

The soils to be used,as sub-grade,select sub-gradeand shoulder materialsneed to be hauled from designatedborrow areas. Similar to the identificationof suitablequarries, suitable borrow areasfor supply of soil to the new road formation were also identified. Basedon the total requirementand availability of each soil type, estimatesof soil quantity to be obtained from each of the borrow areas were worked out in accordancewith the Naticnal Standards,recommended by the Indian Roads Congress(IRC)'".

In the selectionof the borrow areas,care wastaken to ensurethat:

* sufficientquantity of suitablesoil is availablefrom the borrow pit; * the borrow areasare as closeto the project roadas possible; * the lossof productiveand fertile agriculturalsoil is minimum; and * there is minimum lossof vegetation.

In order to keep the lead manageable,a maximum distanceof 100 m was assumedfor all routes. Details of borrow pits identified along the variousroutes are given in Table 5-12. The design team has estimatedthat the material availablefrom thesepits will be enoughfor the constructionworks envisaged.

'° IRC(1 989i. RecominendedPractice for BorrowPits for RoadEmbankments constructed by ManualOperation.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Puiblic Works Department, tucknow, India 50 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for uttarPradesh State Roads Project Public Works Department Government of Uttar Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) 27j 1t 0 Cham< Services. (World Bank Loan No. 4114 - IN) ra un i Rudra Uri~~~n Alagesm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~inassociationwith~ ar ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Halcrowand Partners OperationsResearch Group mpavath DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. MDPConsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 9P+ / ~>Wdha ng h Nagar nanakpur quarry (Quartzite & Granite aggregate)

hi & Ber

FigureNo: 5.5

LEGEND

Ma e _i v,Dnegar . District Headquarters ANodes project roadsphase -I N ~~~~~~~~~~~~z-xMajor districtroads '.yState highway Nationalhighway *Quarrieslocation

Jhansistoneequaryre i (Graniteaggregate

OdaI(Sandstone aggregate)

sf5 n ~~(gr-aniteaggregate)Shnagrsoeury G V (Sandstoneaggregate) IDaliastone quarry (Limestoneaggregate)

SCALE o 50 100 150 Kilometers

Filereference: c:\naveen\prc 1\quarries-ph1 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~______Environmental Assessment(Phase 1, DHV Consultants BV September2001

Table5-12 BorrowPit locationsalong project routes in phaseI of UPSRP Chainageof BorrowArea Location (Distance in m fromRoW) S. No. -- -gi__ur __M_hamnadur Katra-BilhaurBahraich-Faizabad Bhognipur- Mohamrtdpur- .*. -...... , ChaudagraMode jaunpur 9.5 410)t 4.5 (100) °510 53(75) 2 - 16.5(<100] 15.(55) i 18.5(50 26.1(100) 3 86.3(<100] 25.4(75) 34.5(55) 4 98.5 (<100] --- 356 (7) I 61.5 (75] T 5 . 46.6(75) 69.575] ______6 . 55.8(65) ._ ._ _ 7 _ _67.7(45)___ 8 _ _78 4(75)1 __ 9 84.5(55) 109 955 (4) 11 105.0i65)

The locationsof the abovementioned borrow pits havebeen shown in figures5.6 to 5.9.

Fly Ash as Fill Material

The proposed UPSRPupgradation will requiresubstantial amount of earthwork and largequantities of fill material. The normal practice hitherto has been to usesuitable soil from nearby locationsas fill material. Over the past decade, it has been gradually realised in India that fly ash is accumulatingat all thermal plantsacross the country at a rate of 80 million tonnesannually. Only 5 to 10% of this material is being utilised at present. There are active efforts on to explore the possibility of using fly ash in routes selectedfor upgradation near Kanpur. Fly ash from Panki Thermal Power Station (PTPS)has been proposed to be used along the Route 4: Katra-Bilhaur- Bangarmaudue to its proximityto the PTPS.

To give an impetus to the presentuse of fly ash as well as find new uses,the Governmentof India has establishedFly ash Mission in 199512(Annex 3). One of the large-scaleuses identified for fly ash is its utilisation as filling materialin road embankments.Different forms of fly ash,such as pond ash, bottom ash, etc have been found applicable as construction material in roads, either as compactedmaterial or as stablisedmaterial, the most common stabilising additivesbeing lime and cement. Globally, vast of axperienceis available concerningthe successfuluse of fly ash in road and embankmentconstruction, besides other applications.

As far as the Indian scenariois concerned,records are available of use of fly ash since 1970s,as a component of lime-fly ash stabilisedsoil, lime-fly ash concrete,lime fly ash water bound macadam, etc. All theseprojects have been monitored and the use of fly ash has been found to improve the performanceof the structureconcerned.

In thecontext of theuse of fly ash forhighway fills, the Ministryof Environmentand Forests notification of 14 September1999 has to be keptin view. Theessential aspects are: * Thermalplants shall make fly ashavailable without any paymentfor a periodof tenyears from Sept 1999,for use in highwav embankmnents,and other applications. * Publicworks departments, NHAI and such other construction agencies shall prescribe the riseof ash anidash based prodsicts in their scheduleof specificationsand constrLcItion applications. Coincidingwith the beginninigof fly ashmission, highly successfulexamples of bulk Useof fly ash in emilbankmentconstructioni werecompleted in 1995.1996 and 1998,these being Okhla fly over, HanuimanSetu fly over and tle 2"' NiZamLiddiniBridge (eastern approach),respectively. All the projectsare on heavytraffic roads in DelhiUrban area on NH2, RingRoad and NH24 respectively.The 2'" NizamulddinBridge (eastern approach) embankment rin for nearlyis 1.86km acrossthe flood plainof River YarIu1aand the totalheight is up in 10 In. It is noteworthythat the performancesof all thesesribanikrsients hdve been excellent. with io settleisientsor othersign1s of distress.Pavements on theseembank,nents have also shown better perforimiance thani those on compactedby soil fillings. Thiscan be attributedto thehigher shear strength and deformaation modulos of compactedfly ash, compiaredto that of comiipdctedsoil.

Govemmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 52 ProjectCo-ordirnating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Proicrt A LEGEND DDistrict boundary ® DistrictHeadquarter Op Projectroad NationalHwy - State Hwy Z Major distt. road Rail .x River BorrowArea (distance from projectroad)

Kanpur

PublicWorks Department w,7 # Route 14 (Bhognipur-Ghatampur Govemmentof UttarPradesh -Chaudagra) UttarPradesh State RoadsProject In associationwth Locationof BorrowArea ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) HalcrowandPartdes Figure No. 5.6 Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114- IN) OperaticnsResearch Group S Development Consultants Ltd. SCALE MDPConsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 10 20 30 Kilometers

File reference - c \naveen\routesVpac4 N | LEGEND

. District boundary ( District Headquarter "Project road ~ NationalHwy - State Hwy , Major distt. road ~-Rail zzRiver Borrow Area (distance from project road)

XaS!<~~~~

_XXBilhaur ggBilhau

Public Works Department _ Route 4A (Katra - Bangarmau- Bilhaur) Govemment of Uttar Pradesh Locationof BorrowArea Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project InassociationMth Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowand Par ets Figure No. 5.7 Services. (World Bank Loan No. 4114 - IN) OperationsResearchGanup SCALE DevelopmentConsultants Utd. MDPConsultants(Pvt.) Ltd. 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers

Filereference: c:\naveen\routes\pack1 A LEGEND

2 Districtboundary * DistrictHeadquarter ,' Projectroad , National Hwy z StateHwy x Majordistt. road .- ,' River BorrowArea (distance from projectroad)

: < ~~~~~~~~~~Akbarpu^r

~~> iK C ~~~~~AzamG;t

Public WorksDepartment Route 18 Governmentof UttarPradesh I t UttarPradesh State Roads Project In associationflth Locationof BorrowArea ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Halcrowand Partners Services.(World Bank LoanNo. 4114 - IN) Operations Research Group Figum No. 5.8 Development consultants Ltd, MOP Corisultants(Pvt.) Ltd. SCALE 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers A LEGEND

2 District boundary ( District Headquarter " Project road ,,National Hwy z State Hwy z Major distt. road

BorrowArea (distance from project road)

Projecto-orntingCosultant \) /~ endPartners FigureNo35.6.75 .

qS X~~~~ 0 5b~Km. 84Xm UttaPrades State Road Prjc Inascato

t~~~~~~~~eeomn Cosutat L SAL

Pe od i o l sCMOPCjant Pa 10e20 3m)Fglometers Services.(Works Departmenk LoanNo.4114-IN)peratii rene 7 (ahaichtoa DeveloprnentConsultants Ud.SCL MDPConssultants(PAt) Ltd. 0 10 20 30 Kilometers FilereFerence : c:AnaveenVrouteslpac2 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Propertiesof FlyAsh from PankiThermal Power Station (PTPS), Kanpur

Fly ash from PTPSwas tested by lIT Kanpuras well as CRRI,New Delhi. The resultsof thesetests are comparedwith propertiesof fly ashesused in Okhla flyover, HanumanSetu flyover and 2Od Nizamuddin Bridge(Eastern Approach) below in Table 5.13.

Table 5-13 GeotechnicalProperties of Fly ash from PTPS

Flyashfrom PTPS Okhla Flyover H Set Nizamuddin Property ...... Bridge Eastern (Astested by (Astested by lITIy Bottom Ah Ah Flyover Approach CRRI) Kanpur) I sp ravity.. .:...... 1.1. 9 !....5 2.09__. 2.05 ...... ,___._.4.____.__1.90._....-- . -..-.-.- .-.-.------1.90 I Grain size 75% silt Sandysilt Sand 86/0 Sand 22% Sand25% / Sand 25% l distribution 25% fine sand -Silt 14% Silt 78% Silt 75% 1Silt 75% l Compaction... OMC 29/0 132% 37°5 j30°h35% MDD(gm/cc) 1.15 1.165 1.03 _ 1.06 1.13 1.14 Shearstrength . 0 - 34" properties 0 - 36' ! (Postpeak !31" j3" 35 I(Directshear) .frictionangle ...... _ . _from tests)__ ... _ermeability Notgiven 6x 10 I x IOi 1 x 10i (cm/si lKh - 6-9x 010 ______Source:Study on Useof Flyash for NH2,October 2000, LASA

Fly ash and bottom ash used in the Okhla flyover were taken from the BadarpurThermal Power Station (BTPS)and the fly ash used in Hanuman Setu and Nizamuddin Bridge projects were sourcedfrom IndraprasthaPower Station(IPS). On the basisof generalcomparison, it is seenthat properties of fly ash from the three thermal stations, viz, BTPS,IPS and PTPSare.in a close and comparablerange. It would thus be reasonableto draw upon the experiencegained in usingof fly ash from BTPSand IPS in highwayfills and extrapolatethe experienceto fly ash from PTPSto the extent applicable.

At Okhla fly over and HanumanSetu fly over locations,fly ash was used as backfill for reinforced earth walls, with geogridsas reinforcingmaterial. The height of embankmentat Okhla fly over was 9.7 m (max.)and at Hanumansetu 4.0 m (max.). The maximum height of embankmentwas 1Oin in the caseof Nizamuddin easternapproach embankmentof nearly 1.86 km length. The average height wasof the order of 5m. Much of the embankmentis across-theflood plain of River Yamuna. The sidesare subject to prolonged inundation during the monsoonseason. The embankmentwas constructedwith side slopesof 1h to 2v. The fly ash formedcore of the embankment,encased in a cohesivesoil cover on the sides. Further, layersof local soil of 2040 cm thicknesswere provided afterevery 1.50 to 2.00 m of fly ashfilling. The embankmenthas experienced two flood seasons.

At all the three sites,the performanceof fly ash as fill and embankmentwas found to be excellent, both from stability and settlementconsiderations. The fills are stableand settlementsnegligible.

From the test results,it is reasonableto conclude for design purposes,that in geotechnicalterms fly ash from PTPSis cohesion-lessmaterial, with grain size in the.range of fine sand,and silt. The OMC is around 30% and MDD 1.15 gm/cc. The low MDD is due to the low specificgravity of the fly ash particles. The shear strengthof the material is highly satisfactorywith friction value of 34°. The materialhas beenfound to havepermeability in the rangeof 6 x 10' cm/sec.

Comparisonof test resultsprovided in the reports of CRRI and IIT Kanpurshows the values to be closeto each other,CRRI report recommendsthe useof fly ashfrom PTPSas fill material.

5.2.4 NOISE

Noise attributed to roads dependson factors such as traffic intensity, the type and condition of the vehicles plying on the road, acceleration/deceleration/gearchanges by the vehicles depending on

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 56 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DHVConsultants BV September2001

the level of congestionand smoothnessof road surface(IRC: 104-1988). Excessivelyhigh noise levelsare a concernfor sensitivereceptors, i.e., hospitals,educational institutions, wildlife, etc.

National NoiseStandards

The Central Pollution Control Board has specified ambient noise levelsfor different land usesfor day and night times. Importancewas given to the timing of exposureand areas designatedas sensitive. Table 5-14gives the noisestandards set.

Table 5-14 National ambient noiselevel standards

Area category Limits in Decibels (do A) Code j DayTime Night-Time A Industrial 75 70 B coinmerciai__ 6s5 . s C Residential 55 45 D Silence Zones _50i 40

Note: i1) Daytime: 6 AM io 9 P.M., Night-time 9 PM to 6 AM; (2) Silence zone is an area up to l oo m around premisesas hospitals,educational insritutions and courts. Source;Central Pollution Control Board, New Delhi

Selectionof SamplingLocations

Locationsfor noise monitoring along the route are identifiedbased on the criteria same as those usedfor air monitoring but the relativeimportance of eachcriteria carries a weightagein arriving at the final set of locations.In case of noise monitoring locations,sensitive landuse such as schools, hospitalsand religious placesgains more importancedue to ill effectsof noise.In all, 13 locations were selected for monitoring of noise levelsto cover all types of sensitivereceptors and all the possibleroutes.

Results& Analysisof NoiseMonitoring

The night time noise levels were lower than the correspondingdaytime measures. A variation of more than 30 dB (A) to 19 dB (A) was observedat the monitoring locationsbetween the day and night time noise levels. Table 5-15 givesthe valuesobserved at various locationsalong the project routes.

Table5-15 Noiselevels along upgradation routes selected for phaseI of UPSRP

, Leqday Leqnight NSo Survey Station (SS) I(15 hourly) I(9 hourly) dB (A) dB (A) 1 Bsldr.inl,Congested Urban Area on Route-4 64.1 39.9 2 AIlah,anj, LargeRural Developmenton_Route-4 = 6.8 400. 3 1ilalabad, Large Urban Centre on Route-4 71 2 49.0 4 katra, jaUnctionwith NH on Route-A 71.9 52.9 s Bahraich,Major urban Centre on Route-7 = - - 73.3 45.2 6 1Gonda Major UrbanCentre on Route-Z 70-7- 45.2 7 Faizabad,Major Urban Centre on Route-7 75.4 47.8 8 Blognipur,junction with NH on Route-14 75. 44.5 9 Chatamipur,Petrol PuImpon Route-14 70.7 41.2 10 Ghat. l pur,Government Hospital on Route-14 475 432 11 jah aibad, Major Urban Centre on Route-14 75.9 49.3 12 Chat Inpur, MarketPlaceonRoute-i4 73.6; 47.8 13 GauraBadshalipur, Major Urban Centre on Route-l 8 69.5 42.0

The day tmne noise levels in all settlementsis far in excessof the 55 dB (A) maximum value specified by CPCB. However, in most settlements,the night time valuesare close to the 45 dB (A) level. Marked effect of traffic noise can be seen in all settlements.The detailed methodology of baseline data collection (air, water, soil, noise, etc.) and sampling proceduresfollowed has been given in Annex 2.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 57 Project Co-ordindting Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

5.25 FLORA

The flora along the road is characterizedby large treesat the edgeof the soft shoulder or baseof the embankment.All roadsideplantation in UP is designatedas ProtectedForests. Shrubs and grass form relativelydense undergrowthin certain routes.The most common flora recorded in the route aredescribed below.

Trees

The most common road side tree speciesare shishum(Dilbergia sissoo),jamun (Egeniajambolina), neem (Azadirachtaindica), Aam (Mangiferaindica), pipal (Ficus religiosa),and Mahuva (Madhuca indica). Other species recorded include Arjun (Terminalia arjuna), Imli (Tamarindus indica), Gulmohar (Delonix regia), Pakar(Ficus retura),Amaltas (Cassia fistula), etc. The newer plantation include Eucalyptus(Euclayptus globules) and Poplar.Most of the trees are quite mature and girth sizesof as much as 5 m are also recorded.Annex 4 givesthe details of the tree surveycarried out as part of the study Table5-16 givesthe distributionof treesalong all routesby girth size.

Table 5-16 Girth wise distributionof treesalong routes selected in phaseI of UPSRP

| _...... Route Girth Sze (cm) From To <10 *1020 T2-30 30-40 40-60 >60 Total Katra Bilhaur , 6007 5,400, 13,1241 22,718 1,684_ 2;786. 51,719 Bahraich Faizabad 2,469 2,115 3 729 4462 4347' 4,591 r 21,713 BhognipLur 1ChaudagraMode, 1,514 7 1,550 2,801 2,805 _2423 81,47 )aunpur.'Mohmammadpur 839 516 1195 4,062 787 _811 8210 TOTAL 10,839 8,775 19,588 34,033 9,603 10,671 93489

Shrubs

The common shrubs observedalong the roadside are Babul (Acacia arabica) and Kikar (Acacia nilotica). In addition Ber(Zizhypus jujuba) and Katira(Streculia urens) are also recorded.

Grasses

Sometall grasseslike munj (saccahrummunja) are observedgrowing along the road especiallynear natural streamsand water bodies.The other grassesare sarpatand kans.Bamboo clumpswere also saenlining the outermostline of trees.

Herbs

Some of the herbs observed growing along the road are dhatura (dhatura metal), kalmegh (peristrope bicalyculata), croton (croton bonplandianum), duddhi (euphorbia hista), latzeera (achyranthesaspera), lantana (lantana indica), polygnonum pledium, justicia simplex, euphorbia microphylla, evolvulus alsinoides, sida cardifolia, sida equisetifolia, ipomca palmata, Lubchak (ipomea cornea), mamoli (solanumxanthocarpum), chaulii (amaranthusvivdes), madar (calotropis procera,etc.

Hydrophyles

Most of the ponds, not in regular use have luxuriant growth of eichhornia, trapa, wolfia, vallisveria, nyiTphea, scirpus, azolla, salvinia, lemma, nelumbo, hydrilla, cyperus, etc. These aquatic planits provide habitatfor insectsand small fish and maintainithe balanceof the ecosystem.

5.2.6 FAUNA

None of- the project routes in phase I upgradationpass through designatedwildlife havens. The closest a selected route comes to a sanctuaryis in Bahraich-Faizabad(Route 7), where the road forms one of the boundariesof the Parvati-ArangaBird sanctuary.The other sanctuarylying within

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 58 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCJ Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV Septeiiiber2001

the 7 km wide area of indirect influence (as suggestedby the MoEF) is the which is 4 km from SandiIntersection in Route4 (Katra-Bilhaur).

Parvati-ArangaBird Sanctuary

The Parvati-Arangabird sanctuaryis a combination of two lakes Parvatiand Arga near Wazirganj village in . A part of Parvatilake is actually cut by the road formation (culvert 92/1) in km 92. However,the border of the sanctuaryis the edge of RoW and the road brushespast its administrative/legal'boundaries.

The Parvati-Arangalakes were declared a bird sanctuaryin 1990. They cover a total areaof 11 km2 of which Parvatiis the largerlake. The sanctuaryis a stopoverfor migratorybirds that crossthe sub- continent in their flight to avoid the cold winters north of the . Between Diwali (October/November)and Holi (February/March),a number of foreign bird species-waterfowl, varietiesof geese,egrets and herunsfrequent the sanctuary.A number of nativespecies also inhabit the lakes-Sarascranes, storks and water hens being the most common. During the visit a couple of red-headedgeese were sighted.

The vegetation in the waterbody consists of hydrophyles already described in the preceding subsectiondealing with flora. The common treesin the areaare Arjun andJamun.

SandiBird Sanctuary

The Sandi Bird Sanctuaryis located4 km from the Sandi Intersection(Katra-Bilhaur Route 4) along the road that goes to Hardoi. It is a lake with a continuous walking trail along almost its entire embankment.Its total areais 3.08 km2.

Sandi too is a stopover for migratory birds. The species recorded in the sanctuaryare the red headed duck, varieties of pelican, demosiellecrane, red headed pochard, etc. The sanctuaryis being developed as a tourist resort. Constructionof watchtowers to facilitate the view are being constructednow. Thereare plans to constructrest houses for visiting tourists. The residentspecies include the Sarascrane, jacanas,water hens, lapwings, etc. Cattle was seen grazing in the lake during the visit.The vegetation observed within the receding waterbody included water lilies, lotusesand hydrophyles.

Exceptthese two, there are no other legally protected areasin the vicinity of the routesselected for upgradation in phase 1. One waterbody was observedon the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode route with luxuriantvegetation and couple of storkswere also observedfeeding in the pond.

There have been recordsof jackals,foxes, etc. The bird species include woodpeckers, peacocks, and quails, in addition to the common birds like crows, sparrows and pigeons.The fish found in the rivers include Katla,Rohu, Hilsa, etc.

5.2.7 HU-MAN USE VALUES

The land adjacentto the existing alignmentis primarily used for agriculture. Three crops are taken annually: Rabi, Kharif and Zaid. The major cereal grown in vicinity of the routes in phase I is Wheat. in addition, a number of other crops: oilseeds-Mustard,cash crops-Tobaccoand Sugarcane are cultivated. A remarkablefeature of the study area is the existenceof a large number of brick kilns adjacentto the roads.

Settlements

There are a number of small and large settlementsadjacent to all project routes. Most of the settlementsare hamlets or villages. Most of the larger settlementsare also like villages that have grown out of proportions rather than cities. Widespread encroachments into the RoW within settlements,is the common featureof all routes.Table 5-17-details the settlementsin all routes.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 59 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UtnarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table 5-17 Settlementsalong routes selected in phaseI of UPSRP

Route Urban/Semi viiiages Urban areas Katra-BilhaL,r i 2 45 Bahraich-Faizabad i 3 52 Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode j 2 43 jaunpur-Mohammadpur - 28

Markets

There are permanent markets in major settlements.These trade in food grains in wholesale quantities and other items of daily needs of thesesettlements as well as villages nearby. Roadside temporary marketsare also quite common in entire UP. The accessthat road providesand the ease with which materialto be tradedcan be transported,make road side the chosenplace for markets. Most of tiese marketsassemble once or twice a week. The commonly traded items arevegetables, cattle and groceries.Details of marketsalong upgradation routes in phase I routes are given in Table 5.18 below.

Table5-18 Marketsalong the roadin phaseI routesof UPSRP

| Major Small markets/ i 'temporary Route Markets _. ShopslKiosks Markets_ Katra-Bilhaur 4 2 . 4 Bahraich-Faizabad 2 3 _ , 21 = haudagraModeo 4 3 ia'unpur-Mohammacdpur -

Brick Kilns

A notable feature of the routes included in phase I upgradation programme is the presenceof numerous brick kilns adjacentto the road along all the project routes.The only exception to the ever presentchimneys were the first few kilometersof the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode route which passes through ravines and the Jaunpur-Mohammadpurroad, the shortest of all routes. The presenceof brick kilns meantthe removal of topsoil which would take yearsto regenerateand in vicinity of settlements,the depressionswould causewater-logging. The following table 5.19 gives the number of brick kilns locatedadjacent to the road alongeach route.

Table5-19 BrickKilns adjacent to roadin phaseI routes

Route Numberof Approximate Kilns I NoJkm Katrd-Bilhdur . 25 0.17 kahraich-Faizabad- x 19. 0.18 Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode 1 31 0.39 laLmipLir-Molianimadpur j 2 0.05

5.3 Archaeological/ProtectedMonuments and Cultural Properties

There exist numerousstructures of archaeological/historical/culturalimportance located along the roads, some of which are quite old alignments.

5.3.1 PROTECTEDMONUMENTS AND PROPERTIESOF ARCHAEOLOGICALVALUE

Amonig all the routes selected for upgradation in phase 1, the Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode (Route14) is the most interestingfrom cultural environment point of view. It is an old alignment and is also known as 'Mughal Road'.There are a number of old monumentslocated alongthe road. The most importanitof these is the Mata MukteshwariTemple Complex. It consistsof a number of small templesthat have cropped up around the central temple dedicatedto Shiva'sconsort- Parvati,

Governn.pnt of Uttar Pradesh,PLublic Works Department,Lucknow, India 60 ProjectCo-ordinatinq Consuiltants iPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

who is also known as Mukteshwari.Located at nearly 500 m from the highway in km 17, this property recognizedby the Uttar PradeshDirectorate of Archaeologyand declared as protected area. It housesidols of deitiesdating back from the medievalto the Jainperiod.

The other notable monument along the same route is a mansion built by the erstwhile ruler of Datia, a kingdom in present day Madhya Pradeshstate. This is a magnificent building whose approach is directly from the road to be upgradedin km 57. The building is almost completely preservedand even has a well, which is in use, and a distant viewing gallery. The building is presently occupied by an old man who has converted the erstwhile bedroom into a temple dedicatedto Hanumanji.

There is a fort on the banks of the river Sangur in km 14 which datesback to the Mughal period. The fort is located at 20 m from the edge of the carriagewayand its walls are in tact. A whole settlement,called ChhaparGhata, is still thriving insidethe confinesof this old fortification.

5.3.2 CULTURALPROPERTIES

All the roads in phaseI of UPSRPare dotted with temples,shrines, mosques and idgahs.There are other propertieslike mazars,graveyards and dargahsdedicated to saints.In addition, there are old Isarais' or resthouses,which though in ruins, have wells which are still in use. In severallocations, there are trees-mainly pipal, which are worshipped by the local population. Most of these propertiesare located well beyond the edgeof the pavement,but within the RoW. The Table 5-20 below summarizesthe cultural propertiesthat are locatedclose to the carriageway.

Table5-20 CulturalProperties along UPSRP upgradation phase I routes Descriptionof CulturalProperties Rout Temples ~~~~~~~~~Majhar/Run oqeGrave- Large Medium| Small i Ver Dargph yards

Katra-Bilhaur ______l______1 _ __I 52 Small _ _ __ 6 _ _ Bahraich-Faizabad 50i -_ 8 _- . 8 1 ,,Bh gnipur-Chaudagra_ Mae, 3_ 31_- -i_ , 3e-- -- _ jaunpur-Mohanmmadpur 5 1 141 41 1

5.4 Quality of Life Values

The routesselected in phase I for upgradationpass through 10 districts of Uttar Pradesh.They cover 19 blocks and traverseland of 168villages. Details of the settlementsin the route are given in table 5.21.

Table5-21 Summaryof urbanand semi-urban settlements and villages along project route Numbersof Numbersof RouteNos. and Links Urbanand Semi- 1 vllaeS urbanSettlements RouteNo. 14 Bhognipur - Chatampur - lahanabad - Bakewar- Clhaudaglhra 2 43 Routes No. 4 (4A & 4B1) Katra - lalalabad- Allahgani- Bilgrai - Malldwan - 2 45 BangarmiaoL-Bilhaur Route No. 7 52 Bahraichi- Gonda- Nawabganj- Faizabad 2 Route No. 18 launpLr - Mohaininadpur 28

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,tucknow. India 61 Project Co-ordina.tingConsultants (PCCIServices (or UutarPradeslh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

5.4.1 PRIVATE LAND

Since the project does not envisage any land acquisition for the proposed upgradation in Phase I, there is no direct impact on the host communities. The only land that will be acquired will be for the bypasses. However, both bypasses will be taken up during Phase II. Therefore, there will be no direct loss of land impact during the implementation of Phase I. Therefore details of landholding are not presented.

5.4.2 ROADSIDE PROPERTIES

A number of properties exist on roadside which have built within the RoW of the road. Most of these are commercial structures with kiosks dominating the distribution. However, there are some residential properties too built on the land earmarked for the road. The distribution of the total properties within 15 m of the existing centerline on either side has been determined and details are given in Table 5-22.

Table 5-22 Properties within 30 m wide route along phase I upgradation routes in UPSRP Type of Property j Route4 Route 7 Route14 Route 18 Total ...... -- i -- I-- - Rsidential 10161; 13241 961 30211, 6322 ResidentiComrnercial _1730I 2106 2303 1671i 781

Agriculture ! 546 0 30. 356 932

Irngationitrees/Source of Income -- 33 216 . 373 622

5.5 Resettlement issues

The details pertaining to impacted properties, household, persons, families, commercial and residential structures etc. have been covered in Chapter 7 on Assessment of Impacts.

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 62 Prolect Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV Consultants DV September2001

PhotoPlate 1 Baselinedata collection

(1) Ambientair qualitymonitoring in progress (2) Noiselevel monitoring& recording

(3) Soilsample collection (4) Watersample collection with lnsitu, testing for PH, temperature& dissolved oxygen (D. 0.)

Goverment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow,India 63 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Pradeshattar State RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

6 PUBLICCONSULTATIONS AND INFORMATIONDISCLOSURES

6.1 Introduction

The project is likely to affectthe communitiesresiding along the road and their activities.Moreover successfulimplementation of the project requires coordinated efforts of various stakeholdersat different levels. Hence, consultationat different levelswas used as a tool to inform and educate stakeholdersabout the proposed action both before and after the development decisions were made. Public consultation was useful for gathering environmental data, understandinglikely impacts and communities'needs and preferences.The various alternativescould be evolved and sustainable mitigation measures could be formulated through consultations. It assisted in identification of the problemsassociated with the project as well as the needs of the population likely to be impacted.This participatoryprocess helped in reducing the public resistanceto change and enabled the participationof the local people in the decisionmaking process.The involvement of the various stakeholdersensured that the affected population and other stakeholdersare informed, consulted and are allowed to participate at various stages of project preparation.A separatechapter on PublicConsultations is also provided in ResettlementAction Plan(RAP).

6.2 Objectives

The main objective of the consultationprocess was to minimise negativeimpact of the project and to mnaximisethe benefits of the project. Other objectives of the consultation process was the following:

* To promote public awarenessabout the proposed project especially amongstthe potentially impactedcommunities/individuals; . to educate the potentially impacted communities/individualsabout the proposed course of action andthe projectalternatives; * to solicit the views of affectedcommunities/individuals on environmentaland socialproblems; * to gather inputs from the affected communities/individuals in crucial decisions regarding - mitigation of the identifiedenvironmental and socialissues; - to stimulatecommunity selfevaluation and analysis; - to inform Project Affected Persons(PAPs) about the entitlement framework and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP),and to settle their problems with mutual consent and to assistthem during relocationand resettlement;and * to ensure lesseningof public resistanceto change by providing them a platform in the decision makingprocess.

6.3 Methodology adopted for Public Consultations

6.3.1 STAGESAND LEVELSOF CONSULTATION

Public consultation was conducted both at screening stageas well as project preparation stage. Consultation made at screeningstage played an important role in scopingthe level and extent of consultationto be takenin the project preparationstage.

Public consultationshave been held at four levelsas follows:

Community levelinvolving roadsideinhabitants and their representatives;

District level consultationsinvolving NGOs, BDOs, District Magistrate,revenue department and divisional PWD officials;

Govemi-ent of Uttar Pradesh,Ptiblic Works Depanrment,Lucknow, India 64 ProjecrCo-ordinating Consultants(PCCj Services for Uttar PradesshSt.ate Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

institutional level consultationswith StateForestry Department, State Pollution Control Boardand the Ministry of Environmentand Forestof the Governmentof India;and

State level workshopwhere discussionson socialand environmentalissues were disclosed.

6.3.2 TOOLSFOR CONSULTATION

Public Consultationwas done using various tools including, interviews with governmentofficials, questionnaire based information with stakeholders,formal presentation of project proposalsat organiseddistrict level seminarsand workshops;briefly discussed as under:

(i) Informal discussion: A reconnaissancesurvey at the time of screeningwas carried out informally drawing people into dialogueto obtain a overview of likely impactsand concerns of the community.Consultation was held along severalproject roads within 30 meterson a random basis covering areaswhere public activity was intense and spilled over the roads, speciallycovering:

ownersand visitors of roadsideshops and markets; ownersand visitorsof weekly marketsincluding cattle markets; people usingbus/rail facilities along the project roadcorridor; usersof non-motorisedvehicles frequentingmarkets; and encroachers/squatterswith temporarystructures.

A checklist of questionswas kept ready and responseswere elicited from people and guidelines were issuedto field assistantsfor the purpose.The questions were kept simple for people to comprehend.The questionnaireand guidelines used in the local level consultationis given in Annex-5.Notes were madefor the responsesand viewpointspresented by the people.

(ii) FocusGroup Discussions:Group Discussions(GDs) were held along selectedpoints in each of the Phase 1 project roads. During the GD, interaction/discussionwere held with the encroachers/squattersand generalpublic residingalong the project roadswithin the existing corridor/ROW.Table 6-1presents the locationof GDs.

Table 6-1 Location of GDs Category

S ProjectRoad Rue GDsLocation/Category No. No (a) Bhognipur - junction of NH 1. Ohognipur - ChaudagraMode 14 (bcGhatampur - Commercial area (c) Jahanabad- Commercial area (di jahanabad- Residentialarea (a)Jalalabad 2. Katra - Bilhaur 4A (b) Katralunction of NH

(a) Bahraichliurban area 3. Bahrfaich,, ,,,__,,__ -Faizaibad ____ ,, _,- ,,------7A --- )G---dallrar-Ib) Gonda uirbanarear------

4. JaUnpUr- Mohammadpur 18 (b) laimur rural area (cl jaunpur urban area (dl Moham-madpuir

(iii) Presentationsand seminars were conducted at District level meetings at Shahjahanpur, Bareilly, launpur, Azamgarh, Kanpur (Dehat), Fatehpur, Unnao, Hardoi, Gonda and Bahraich.The datesof theseconsultations are given in Table 6.2 and were held under the chairmanshipof respectiveDistrict Magistratesand were attendedby a considerablenumber of participants at each district. The participantswere from NGO, District administration, P.W.D regional officers public living along project roads and project affected persons. Invitation to generalpublic was given by publishing advertisementsin two local newspapers (one in and one in English).At the meeting, the Project Director gave outline of proposed road improvements.The social expert explained resettlementand rehabilitation

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Departmcot, Lucknon, India 65 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PcC) Services for Uttar PradeshiState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessmnent (Phase l) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

issues and the environmental expert outlined environmental issues, mitigation and enhancementmeasures.

Table 6-2 DistrictLevel Public Cons-ultation Schedules

si. . . . . Consultation Venueof No. Dstrict Date Chairman Consultation 1. Shahiahanpur 10108/2000 Distrct Magistrate VikasBhawan 2 Bareilly 10/08/2000 DistrictMagistrate VikasBhawan 3 Jaunpur 13/03/20011 Chief Development Officer VVikas Bhawan 4. Azarmgarh 13/0312001 ChiefDevelopment Officer Vikasshawan 5 I Kanpur(Dehat)__16/03/2001 ChiefDevelopment Officer I VikasBhawan 6 Unnao 19/03/2001 DistrictMagistrate VikasBhawan 7 IHardo19/03/2001 'Chief DevelopmentOfficer .VikasBhawan 8 Gonda 20/03/2001 ChiefDevelopmentOfficer'Vikas hawan 9i Bahraich 2/03/200t 4DistrictMagistrate _ LVikasBhawan 10. tatehpur 21/03/2001 DistrictMagistrate VikasBhawan

At the seminars,the peoplevoiced their concernsabout compensationissues, compensation to encroachers,increased level of pollutants,road safety,water logging, supplementarytree plantation,etc. and the needfor official proceduresto be amenableto people'srequirements and fairness.

(iv) A State level workshop was conducted with a view to know public opinion and suggestions,at Hotel Taj in Lucknow on 23.03.2001. The advertisementwas given in two widely circulatednewspapers in Englishand Hindi languages,in the State.In addition to this invitations were also sent to NGOs, Central Governmentand Government organisations, which may concernor are linked directly/indirectly for clearancesof PhaseI project roads. The workshop -was held on the social and environmental issues.The workshop was inauguratedby Engineerin Chief U.P. PWD and was attendedby about 60 participants.The participants were from NGOs, State Central Governmentdepartments and project-affected persons.In order to familiarisethe participantsthe deliberationswere given by the following:

ProjectDirector Outline of Project ||PCC-Consultant HMhwy Design_5peulist Selectionmethodology ofrect roa s for considerationin PhaeI Environmentalissues of projectroads, mitigatory measures to PCC-ConsultantEnvironmental Specialist minimiseadverse environmental impacts and environmental enlhancement measures. PCostnSocialExpert Socialissues of proiectroad, rehabilitation action plan, eligibility Ccriteria of proiet roads Vote of Thank--s Chief Engileer (World Bank Projects)UP PWD

The photographsof the consultationsheld at local, District and Statelevel are is given in -PhotoPlates 2, 3 & 4.

PublicHearing, Schedule IV, underEIA notification of MOEFdated April 10, 1997

Public hearing has been included in EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Notification issued in 1997, under EnvironmentProtection Act for all developmentprojects under EnvironmentProtection Act' 1987. This is also a statutoryprocedure to involve the public in the project and to disseminatethe information. The public hearing is to be organisedby StatePollution Control Board. In the present casethis will not be applicable for PhaseI ProjectRoads, as UP StatePollution Control Board has already intimated to PWD that clearanceis not requiredas per provisions made in the Gazette of India Notification datedJanuary 03, 2001.

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 66 Project Co-ordinating Consultants KPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase ti DHVConsultants BV September2001

6.4 Issuesraised and community perception

Some of the generalissues raised during the different consultationsessions can be summedup as follows.

Water loggingand Drainage

Water loggingand poor drainageproblem in the habitationsalong the project roads was reported especiallynear market areas even during dry season.The water logging in theseareas are leading to road damagealso suchas nawabganj, Wazirgang and Bangarmau.

Lossof livelihood

Particularly squatters/encroacherswere concerned about lossof livelihood. Most of the likely PAPs reported that their businessdepends more on the settlementsthan the highway users. Hence, in case of displacementshould be relocated within the village. People also suggestedthat shops should not be removedaltogether, rather can be shiftedlittle back.

Roadsafety

Safetyissues were paramountin ail the consultationsessions. Regarding safety issues, rumble strips or speed breakerswas demanded at every major habitationand especially before a school or a hospital. At certain placesfootpaths were also desiredfor the safety.of the pedestrians.Haphazard parking of Buses,jeeps for passengerswere also reportedto be causeof accidents.

Extentof acquisitionand compensation

People were concernedabout the land requirementof the project and impact on their properties. People suggestedfor concentric widening. PAPswere also of the view that community should be consulted before the road designsare finalised. Cash compensationwas preferred more by the PAPsand at market rate. Encroachersand squattersalso expect compensationunder the project. Resettlementsites should be closeto the currentsettlement.

Lossof roadsideidols/shrines

Participantsshowed resistance for shifting of burial groundsand other religious structuresat certain locations,whereas, at.others community agreedto relocationof shrineson account of proper rituals and further consultationwith the locals.

Lossof treesdue to upgradation

Respondentswere of the opinion that trees cutting should be avoided or else minimised. For trees to be cut compensatoryafforestation should be done. Somevillagers expected additional plantation to be done. Recommendedtree speciesfor plantation were Seesham,Mango, Neem, Babool and other local varietiesof fruit bearingtrees. Socialforestry with involvement of local people was also suggested.

Impacts on health

Separateconsultation sessions were organisedto identify issuespertaining to health due to highway improvemenltspecifically for sexuallytransmitted diseases (STDs). Settlements along highways were reportedto be gettingexposed to suchdiseases both due to lonigdistance highway usersand labour camps. Health problems due to water pollution and generally poor living conditions were also reported. Few villagers expected that provisions should be made under the project for health facilities.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 67 Project Co-ordinating ConsLltants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshSidle RouadsProject Environinental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Increasedlevel of pollutantsdue to increasein traffic

Peoplewere concernedabout rising pollution levelsand depleting tree/greencover. Plantationwas recommendedas a solution. At certain locationsair pollution was not felt very high but high noise levelswere felt in the night. Effectivemeasures were expectedin the projectto arrestrising trend of pollution.

Proposalsfor bypassesfor decongestion

Bypasseswere suggestedin many urban stretchesto reduce congestionwithin the settlementviz., GauraBadshahpur, Bangarmau, Ghatampur, Katra and jalalabad.

Perceptionsand expectationsof the community recordedduring the consultationsessions can be broadly listedas:

* The public andthe PAPsappreciate the projectdevelopment; * PAPs understood/appreciatethe overall benefits to the community resulting from project developmnent; * People realise the illegal statusas encroacher/squatter,but non expectationfor assistanceor compensationwas found in somecases only; * Vulnerablegroups are hopeful of somekind of assistancein relocation in form of having kiosks donatedfrom Govemmentand employmentopportunities in the project; * Aware of the increasedaccess, less travel time in commutingafter project development; * Expressloss of belongingnessto the corridor but seem/appearto understandthe situation due to perceivedbenefits of projectdevelopment; * Expect to have proper designatedbus stands after project development due to additional corridor / roadwidth; • Expect better managementof traffic and necessarynoise barriers at educational and health facilities;and ' Expresssatisfaction on environmentalenhancement measures such as pond beautification, tree densification,protection for cultural heritages,etc.

6.5 Addressal of Issues

The projecthas tried its best to addressall the issuesraised 'during consuitations under the constraints of land availability and suitability from engineering point of view. Some of the provisionsmade under the project to addressthe issuesand concernsof the community are given in Table 6-3

Table 6-3 Addressalof GeneralIssues and Concerns under the project

Issue/Concern Addressal underthe project WaterLogging and Drainage Covered drains with proper outfalls have been planned as part of projectdesign in urban sections.Raised carriageway planned in clear space. Rigid pavement has been provided in certaincases as a solution. Lossof i velihood Squattersand encroachers loosing their livelihood due to theproject woLid be provided assistanceunder the RAP. RoadSafety Upgradationof road tO internationaistandards initself would reduce accidents. Funhert , safetyfeatures provided such as RedLIced speed signages, speed breakers improved intersectiondesign, bus bays etc. Acquisitionand No landwould be acquiredunder the Phase I of theproject. Proposed designs are well Compensation withinthe RoW. However, few squatters and encroachers woUld be affected due to the protect.Concentric widening has been adopted to minimisethe impact on properties. All thoseimpacted would be comiipenisated/assisted Lnderthe R&R policy of UPSRP. Lossof roadside idols/shrines Tifons havebeen madein design to avoid the impact on roadside retigiouIsstructures to the maximumextent possible, ror thoseto beimpacted , relocation would be donie under the protectcost only afterconsLitations with thecommunlity. Provisions have been made in the .NGOst IoR to consultthe commnunity in identificationof newrelocation sites. Lossof trees Compensatoryafforestation would be done atthe ratio of two treesfor eachtree to be CLit. Additionalplantation would be doneto achievethe density of notless than 200trees per I km. Landscapeplan has been prepared and local species of treeshave been selected for plantation. .

Governmentof UttarPradesh Public Works Department. Lucknow, India 68 ProjectCo-ordiiidiiiog ConIsultdilts (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project Environinental Assessment(Phase 11 DHV Consultants BV September2001

Issue/Concern Addressalunder the project Impact on health Furtherstudy hasbeen suggee studyto the impac of highwayson roadside community's health. Resultsof testing for ambient air and water quality showed that the pollution levels are well within the prescribed limits of pollution control board. Although plantation has been proposed to screenemissions from the traffic reaching the settlementareas. Increasedpollution levels Pollution levels are not crossingthe prescribedlimits of CPCB. Noise barriers planned at _sensitive receptors._ . _ _. Bypasses Bypasseshave beeniovided actGaura Badshahpurand Bangarmau Bypasseshave not l been provided at Jalalbadand Katra becauseof its financial non feasibility. Widening within available space hasbeen proposed.Four laning has been proposedat Ghatampurto relive the congestion. The construction of bypasseswill be carried out as partof Phase11 of .... ------. _ _theproject...... Assistanceto vulnerable Special provisions have been made in the entitlementframework for assistingvulnerable -

UtitI esand basic iAllthe utilitiestobe impactedwi be relocated underthe projectcost. infrastructure The construction colony built-up by the contractor with all necessaryamenities will become property of the district administrationafter the completion of construction work and will be handed over for educational and health facilities in the settlements. Enhancementof community Typical designshave been preparedto enhancethe community resourcessuch as ponds,. resources water bodies, temples etc... Budgetaryprovisions are also made under the project.

The specific location wise issues raised and their incorporation in the design has been explained in Tables 6.4 and 6.5.

Table 6-4 RoutewiseRepresentations of PublicConcerns at LocalLevel and theirmitigation efforts

Name of the IssuesRaised Suggetionsof PAPs Mitigat Design Y.l.-i age ______- - - . - h Route 4: Katra - la'alabad - Madhoganj - Bilgram- BilhaurRoad

Katra * Encroachment * PAPsare aware that th:eyare * Concentric Widening Relocation of business encroachersand arewilling to Provision of footpaths over drain establishment move out. But would take * Safetyrailings and signageto be * Heavy traffic movement compensation for structure provided in habitations * Safety preferablyin cash. * Commercial spaceto be * Widening options Widening should take place on provided as per R&R policy * Land Acquisition and mode of both sides * Compensationwill be given at compensation Would like to havenew shops replacementvalue asspecified * Requirementof a bypass constructed by govemment in R&R policy Income restorationoptions (readprojecti. * Bypassis not possible as there is Safety was paramountdue to no space beyond the market heavy traffic. This place is area. intersection of national and state highways. Cash compensationat market val ue Bypasswill help in reducing accidents ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.__.__.__.__._. Khairpur . Encroachment j * Widening should take place on * Concentric widening Safety both the sides j * Footpathsand railings for safety. Widening options * What safetymeasures will be * Road width restricted to 12m * Mode of compensation taken for children? Awamness * As per the policy, contractors * Employment during construction among the villagers towards will give preferenceto able traffic rules is important bodied PAPs Project should provide * Compensationwvill be given at employment to affected persons. replacementvarlue as specified * Cashcompensation at market in R&R policy value is preferable Site for resettlementwill be Resettlementsites should be decided in consultation with close to the current settlement. displaced families by the NGO

Government of Uttar Prade3h,PLiblic Works Department, Licknow, India 69 Project Co-ordinating Conisultaits (PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Nameof the IssuesIRaised I SuggestionsofPAPs MitigationMeasures I Design

lMadanapur* Encroachmenton eitherside of I * Cashcompensation is more I * Concentricwidening and raised theroad preferredthan any other mode carriageway Relocationoi business . Concentricwidening * Wideninghas been restricted to establishment * Showedconcem about safety of availableclear space * Heavytraffic movement childrenand others due to fast | * Compensationwill be givenat * Safety, movingvehicles on new replacementvalue as specified lWidening e * options i highway.Speed breakers was in R&Rpolicy .* Mode- of compensation i demanded * Commercialspace to be * Publicutility services * Shopsshould not be removed providedas per R&Rpolicy i* Shrinesgettingaffected ! altogether.They can be shifted * Labourcamps and little back. administrativeoffices of Electricityand drinking water contractorswill be build close facilitiesdemanded by PAPs to habitationsso that facilities I * Schoolsand health facility in canbe usedby villagersas well resettlementcolony.

Kaudiya * Encroachment i * Concentricwidening and two . Concentricwidening and raised Relocationof business I laningis possible carriageway establishment ' Cashcompensation * Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement . Awarenessamong the villagers availableclear space Safety can reducethe accidents | * NGOcontracted will carryout * Wideningoptions i Resettlementshould be as per awarenesscampaigns among * Modeof compensation i thewishes of PAPs PAPsand has been suggested in * Incomerestoration options i* Businessestablishments should I RAP E*mployment during construction be relocatedalong the road l * As perthe policy, contractors At leastone person from each i will givepreference to able affectedfamily should be bodiedPAPs providedjob by theproject * Commerciatspace to be providedas perR&R policy l...... _...___....._ .____.___,.__...... _...... _

Khaikhera Relocationof business * Concentricwidening Concentricwidening and raised establishment AdequateCash compensation icarriage way * Heavytraffic movement . Relocationshould be within the . Compensationwill be givenat * Safety - village replacementvalue as specified * Wideningoptions Speedbreakers can reduceroad !in R&Rpolicy * Modeof compensation accidents Wideninghas been restricted to i Incomerestoration options * Businessestablishments can be availableclear space relocatedalong the road * Commercialspace to be i Peoplelosing business providedas per R&R policy establishmentsshould be * Safetyrailings and signage to be providedwith governmentloan. Iprovided in habitations

lalalabad * Encroachment * Wideningof roadis not * Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business possible.Bypass from west(if carriageway establishment comingfrom Katra)of villageis * Wideninghas been restricted to - Heavytraffic movement possible. availableclear space * Safety Templecan be savedif bypassis I * Templehas been saved. * Wideningoptions given.If notthen it shouldbe . Safetyrailings and signage to be * LandAcquisition and mode of relocatedas per the consensus providedin habitations compensation of villagers * Comoensationwill be givenat * Requirementof a bypass * Safetyis a majorconcern, replacementvalue as specified . Incomerestoration options however,if bypassis allowed, in R&Rpolicy * Shrinesgetting affected safetyissue can be handled. Economicrehabilitation has * Employmentduring construction * Cashcompensation is never - beenconsidered in RAP adequate.Moreover we arenot document encroachers.Road came after we settledhere. Wideningof roadwill affectlot of peopleand therefore economicrehabilitation is not possible.Becaulse of bypass,w will loseland but that can be comnpensatedthrough adequate compensationand irrigation facilityin residualland.

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh, PuibliC Works Department. LUcknow, India 70 ProjectCo-ordiniating Consultants IPCCl Services for UttarPradesh Staite Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 11 DHVConsultants BV September2001

Name of te Issu Raised Suggestionsof APs MitigationMeasures I Design Vill_ge ______.______pproach___ Yakubpur Encoachment * Concentricwidening i Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business * Cashcompensation at market carriageway establishment value * Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement * Awarenessregarding traffic rules availableclear space * Safety amongthe villagers can reduce '* Compensationwill be givenat l Wideningoptions accidents 1 replacementvalue as specified .Mode of compensation * Resettlementsites will be in R&Rpolicy i Incomerestoration options finalisedby thePAPs * Awarenessamong PAPs for * Demolitionof shops | Beforedemolishing the existing i trafficrules will be carriedout shops,new shopsat appropriateI by NGO However,design I locationshould be provided providesfor safetyrailings and signagein habitations. , No structurewill be demolished i beforealternative is providedas perthe R&Rpolicy.

lBhasinagla* Encroachment i* Concentricwidening . Concentricwidening and raised I Relocationof business * Cashcompensation at market carriageway establishment value Wideninghas been restricted to . Heavytraffic movement * Relocationwithin the affected availableclear space * Safety villageand along the road is * Compensationat replacement Wideningoptions preferred valueas indicated in R&Rpolicy * Modeof compensation i* Speedbreakers at boththe end * Safetyrailings at all habitations l* Incomerestoration options i of thevillage' alongwith signage l Shrinesgetting affected ! GramPanchayat will decideon * All religiousstructures will be relocationof religiousstructures relocatedin consultationwith * At leastone member from each . villageelders , affectedfamily be providedjob * As perthe policy, contractors by theproject authority . will givepreference to able bodiedPAPs

Sandi * Encroachment * Concentricwidening * Concentricwidening and raised . Relocationof business i* Our incomedepends lot on the carriageway establishment i roadtraffic, hence we canmove i * Wideninghas been restricted to littleback so thatroad can be availableclear space widenedbut will notshift to i Consumerbase will be otherlocation i paramountwhile providing - ! . commercialspace. This issue hasbeen considered while prpparingRAP document

Bilgram * Encroahment * Concentricwidening . Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business * Cashcompensation before carriageway establishment reiocation i* Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement i* Relocationsites should be In availableclear space l* Safetyi . thisvillage and along the road * soththe religiousstructures, a * Wideningoptions 1 Religiousstructures be relocated majarand one temple have * Modeof compensation with theconsensus of the beensaved by realignment l Shrinesgetting affected , villagers * Safetyrailings and signagewill l Speedbreakers at both endof be providedat all habitations thevillages * Compensationswill be provided beforephysical relocation as specifiedin R&Rpolicy. * Relocationsites will be&decided in consultationvith thePAPs |

Bangarmau. Encroachment Wideningwill affectnumerous * Bypassproposed to be Safety : shopslocated on eitherside of constructedas partof Phase11 * Modeof compensation - the road * Relocationof business * Bypasssuggested establishment * Cashcompensation at market value | Businessestablishment be relocatedalong the widened road.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 71 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase i) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Nillamegofe IssuesRaised tSugtionsofPAPsigationMeasures Design Village Suggestions______of __PAPaspoac

Maflabwan* Encroachment j Concentncwidening i* Roadalready 7m wide only Relocationof business Cashcompensation at market I hardshoulder will be added establishment valueand should be given withinthe available clear space Heavytraffic movement beforerelocation | and thereforethere is no social Safety ! Relocationsites will be impact Wideningoptions identifiedby thePAPs . Modeof compensation i * Awarenessamong the villagers * Incomerestoration options will helpin reducingroad . accidents l At leastone person from every affectedfamily should be given job by theproject authority Business-establishmentsbe relocatedalong the road

~~~~~~~~~~...... _. .. _...... , ...... ,______...... Route7: Baharaich- Gonda- Faizabad

Khiurhasa * Encroachinent * Cashcompensation at market * Concentricwidening .and raised Relocationof business value. carriageway establishment . Alternativeshops should be . Compensationas indicatedin Heavytraffic movement providedbefore physical R&Rpolicy. Safety displacement- Relocationsites in consultation * Wideningoptions * Relocationsites will be withPAPs * Modeof compensation identifiedand finalised by PAPs . Roadwidth restrictedto 12m * Socialimpact can be minimisedj affecting12 temporary if roadwidth is restrictedto structures. I 1Om. Concentric widening is - Safetyruling and signages at all notpossible in thisvillage. habitations * Speedbreakers at theentrance I of thevillage are necessary.

Pure Tiwvari E*ncroachment i* Compensationshould beat i Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business marketvalueand relocation site carriageway establishment shouldbe asper PAPs | Compensationat replacement *Heavy trafficmovement consensus. valueas indicatedin R&R * Safety I* Cashcompensation should be l policy. * Wideningoptions paidbefore relocation * Safetyrailings and signages * Modeof compensation i* Roadshould be widenedon j Dovetailing with poverty * Incomerestoration options bothsides - alleviationschemes of Govt.of * Employmentduring construction * Accidentsare quite common, Indiaas Indicated in RAP hencespeed breakers at the'- document. entryof villageis must * Incomerestoration schemes for affectedpopulation would be . moreuseful than temporary employmentduring construction * phase...... _ ------.--- r--.---.------..~~~-- -- Thadwadia * Encroachment * Roadis prettywide, so very few i* Concentricwidening and raised .* Relocationof business structureswill be affected, carriageway establishment Henceroad can be widenedon t * Wideninghas been restricted to * Wideningoptions j eitherside. availableclear space LandAcquisition and mode of At leastone member of the Permanentemployment not compensation . affectedfamilies should be i possiblebutcontracted to give Shrinesgetting affected providedpermanent preferenceto able-bodiedPAPs employment. i anddove tailing of poverty Templeshould be shiftedinside alleviationof schemesof Govt. the villagewith the consensus of i of India. thevillagers Templeto be shiftedin * Compensationshould be at consultationwith people. marketvalue and relocation of * Compensationat replacemient businessestablishment should valueas perR&R policy. be on roadsideonly.

Governmentof UnarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow India 72 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Nameof the lssuesRaised Suggestionsof PAPs MitigationMeasures / Design ...l age ______. . _ _....__app r ach Mundermafi * Encroachment * Relocationof business . Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business establishmentswill affectthe carriageway establishment ! economyof thearea * Wideninghas been restricted to * Wideningoptions Compensationshould be paidin availableclear space * Modeof compensation j cashat marketvalue and !. Compensationat replacement * Requirementof a bypass j beforehand valueas per R&Rpolicy. I*ncome restoration options j Templeand shrine can be * Templeto be shiftedin * Drainagefacility relocatedas per consensus of consultationwith people. *-Shrinesgetting affected villagers. . No physicalrelocation before * Employmentduring construction Relocationof business alternativesare at placeas per establishmentsshould be done R&Rto policy. beforedemolishing of old ,NGO to hold meetingswith I structures. PAPs. | - Apartfrom employment during 1 Drainageorovided in Road constructionphase, small design. committeesof PAPsbe formed for maintenanceof roads. i Drainageis big problemin the roadsidesettlements, hence drainagebe provided.

Kheora * Encroachment * Shrinecan be shiftedto some . -Concentricwidening and raised Mohan Relocationof business otherplace as perconsensus of carriageway establishment 7 thevillagers * Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement * Roadcan be widenedon both availableclear space * Safety thesides i . Shrineto be shiftedin i Wideningoptions j * Speedbreakers be provided consultantwith villagers. Modeof compensation | Cashcompensation at market -. Safetyrailings and signages * Incomerestoration options valuebefore physical -Compensationat replacement D*rainage facility I displacementbe givento the valueas per R&Rpolicy * Shrinesgetting affected PAPs * Drainageprovided in road * Drainagefacility be provided design. Governmentrun poverty j Dovetailing of poverty alleviationschemes be alleviationschemes as given in implementedin thevillage. RAP.

..--- _____....-.--.- _- _ __ __-. -- Rauzasharif1* Encroachment l Compensationshould be paidin H Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business cashat marketvalue before i carriageway establishment 7 PAPsare relocated. i * Wideninghas been restricted to * Modeof compensation HRelocation should be alongthe availableclear space .i Incomerestoration options roadonly. Compensationat replacement * Shrinesgetting affected * Affectedshrine should not be valueas perR&R policy * Employmentduring construction i touched.Road should be * Relocationsites to be finalised realignedto savethe shrine. in consultaiionwith people. * Insteadof employmentduring j *Shrineneeds to be shiftedin construction,project should i consultationwith people. . providetraining to educated Povertyalleviation schemes of ' youthsfor self-employmnent. GOI to be dovetailed and NGO I ! ' to providetraining for self- i E a employment.

Nawabgan; * Encroachment Neitherthere is any placefor | Roadwidth reducedto I Relocationof business bypassnor for wideningof road. minimumpossible and drainage establishment Theonly option is proper facilityprovided. - Heavytraffic movement maintenanceof road. i Raisedcarriageway to avoid * Safety i However,there is enoLughspace i flooding. * Wideningoptions i towardsleft (Faizabad)for i * Relocationto be cjrried out in - Mode of compensation wideningof road l consultantionwith PaPs. .* Requirementof a bypass ! Removalof people both Safetyrailings/signages * Income restorationoptions residential and commercial will * Compensationat replacement * Drainagefacility affecttheir economy, as there is valueas perR&R policy. hardly any place for relocation * NGO to help in identification of of housesand btisiness relocationon site. establishments. Accidents are qujite conmmonin this area, therefore apart frnm I speedbreakers, awareness campaignabout traffic safety rules is important.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 73 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Rodds Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

NamerNameof the ~~IssuesRaised I Suggestionsof PAPsAPMitigation 'aeoci MeasuresI Design .iae. ,_ _,_I,,._. ____Iapproach

.. E*engood compensation is I uselessas there is hardlyany . sp-cein Nawabganjfor a family to settledown. * Drainageis veryimportant as wateroverflows even in normal times. ~~~~~~~...... _._.._._ TelianPurwa * Encroachment i Roadshould be widenedon * Concentricwidening and raised Relocationof business i eitherside, carriageway establishment , Cashcompensation at market . Wideninghas been restricted to * Safety valuebefore physical availableclear space * Wideningoptions displacementshould be given * Compensationat replacement Modeof compensation ,* Speedbreakers at theentry of valueas per R&Rpolicy. Requirementof a bypass i villageis important All community Iincome restoration options . Communityfacilities should be structures/facilitiesto be * Publicutility services replacedas per villagers relocatedin consultationwith -*Employmentdufing construction, iconsensus!cnsessthe tepolpeople. * Employmentduring construction Thereare very few faciliiiesin Labourcamp and administration thevillage Projectshould officesto be locatedclose to the providebasis amenities such as villageso that villagers can use | schools,medical facility, etc to thefacilities. ithevillage. i AltemativeIR schemesto I Apartfrom employmentduring workedout by NGOtraining for constructionphase, permanent self-employmentin dovetailing I employmentshould be provided of povertyalleviation schemes. by the projectto PAPslosing incomeopportunities.

Baria * Encroachment | No communityand religious * Concentricwidening and raised (khalilpur) * Relocationofbusiness structureshould be touched. carriageway establishment Alignmentshould be changedto i Wideninghas been restricted to Heavytraffic movement avoiddemolishing such availableclear space Safety I structures. Religiousstructure, if at all , Wideningoptions Speedbreakers and proper i affectedwill be relocatedin - * LandAcquisition and modeof managementof trafficcanr , consultationwith PAts. compensation i controlaccidents. Safetyrulings/signages * Incomerestoration options t * Employmentduring construction . Trainingfor self-employment Communitystructures and shouldbe givento localPAPs anddove tailing of poverty Shrinesgetting affected andeven maintenance of the alleviationschemes of GOI. * Brickkilns affected stretchshould be givento us. Relocationof structuresin Basicamenities in resettlement,Business establishmentsshould consultationwith PAPs colonies be relocatedalong the road or i BusBay have been provided elsebusiness will be affected.- Busstop be providedin the village,as that will bring in morecustomers. Roadshould be widenedon eitherside. Noneof the brickkiln geting affectedwhich absorbs most of the villagersduring non- agricultureseason.

11 ...... _. _._..__ __... _._..______... ______..

Katra Encroachment SHmeets NH here.Hence . Concentrcwidening and raised Relocationof business commerciallythis place is very carriageway establishment i important Removalof Wideninghas beeni restricted to * Heavytraffic movement commercialestablishments will availableclear space and * Safety affect their economy badly. No . thereforevery few temporary * Wideningoptions alternativelyland as.good as this commercialstructures will be * Land Acquisition and mode of is available in close vicinity. rejected. compensation New community facilities and * A per R&R policy no physicalI ! * ReqLiirenientof a bypass shriniesshould be providedeven relocationunless alternatives are * Incomerestoration options beforethe old onesare getplace. * Drainagefacilioy o demilolished. i Finsliationof relocationon sites * Type of shops/housesfor PAPsshoLild be relocated within in consultation with PAPs. relocation the village and selection of area * Safetyrailings/signages at entry *le Demolitioni of houses/shops , shouldbe as perthe andexit point of village. * Public uitility services requirement of the PAPs * Community buildings and * Speedbreakers are necessaryat Shrinesgetting affected the entrance of the village

11------i...... _...... - ...... _ ------_ ------...... I

Government of Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow. India 74 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCCQ Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

*Name.Namie}of the,the' IssuessusRieRaised Suggestionsueto offPP PAPs T MitigationfrocMeasures IDesign Employmentduring construction l a . Brickkilns affected i Bassicamenities in resettlementl colonies

Route14: Bhognipur - Ghatampur- ChaudgraMode

Shahiahanpur* Encroachment * Villageis quiteold whenwe . Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business settledroad was not here, so we carriageway establishment arenot encroachers. ; Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement | Speedbreakers at theentrance availableclear space * Safety of thevillage Safetyrailings and signages at * Wideningoptions , . Concentricwidening entryand exit of thevillage. * LandAcquisition and modeof 1 Cashcompensation at market Compensationof replacement compensation valuebefore displacement valueas per R&Rpolicy. . Requiremento a bypass PRelocation should be within the .* Finalisationof realisationsites in * Incomerestoration options village consultationwith PAPs. * Drainagefacility * Registrationwith govemment t Dovetailing of poverty * Typeof shopsVhousesfor bodiesfor employmentwill be 1 alleviationschemes as detailed relocation - moreuseful - outin IRchapter. * Demolitionof houses/shops * Publicutility services * Shrinesgetting affected * Employmentdui;ing construction * Brickkilns affected i * basicamenities in resettlement colonies

Chaudagra . Encroachment * Concentricwidening is possible * Roadwidth reducedto 12m. * Relocationof business providedwidth of roadis t. ROBnot possibledue to low establishment reduced. . rail traffic. * Heavytraffic movement i ROBover railway crossing. ! Shineis notgetting affected. , Safety * Shrinesshould not be affected. * Compensationat replacement Wideningoptions Shrinescannot be shifted. i valueas per R&R policy. .Mode of compensation I Ratherroad should be so * Safetyrailings/signages. * Shrinesgetting affected designedthat it doesnot affect !Employmentduring construction ! theshrines. ! Adequatecash compensation in i onesingle installment. * Speedbreakers at boththe end of thevillage to avoidaccidents l . Encroachmet Iin thevillage.

lahanabad Encroachment j* Concentricwidening is not' * Concentricwidening and raised Relocationof business possible,as the marketwill be carriageway establishment affected. * Wideninghas been restricted to l Heavytraffic movement Mostof usare encroachers. As availableclear space Safety roadwas made pucca most of us * Mosqueis not gettingaffected. * Wideningoptions - movedcloser to roaddue to !*Compensation at replacement Modeof compensation betterbusiness prospects. valueas per R&Rpolicy * Shrinesgetting affected * Wideningshould not affect the i .Signagesindicating habitation E*mployment during construction mosque.Road should be so i aheadto reducespeed limit. alignedthat mosque is not * Finalisationof relocationsites in affected consultationwith PAPs. l Cashcompensation at market valueshould be givenbefore we areshifted out. * Vehiclesshould have low speed limit in settlementsto avoid accidents. * Businessestablishments should be relocatedalong the road.

Kora * Encroachment * Villageis prettybig and five * Concentricwidening and raised - Heavytraffic movement hundredyear old. Wideningwill . carriageway * Safety affectlarge number of people. Wideninghas been restricted to * Wideningoptions Hencebypass will be better. availableclear space * Modeof compensation If at all roadis widened,cash Compensationat replacement *Requirementof a bypass compensationat marketvalue is valueas per R&Rpolicy .Income restorationoptions preferred.

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 75 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 11 DHVConsultants BV September2001

NameoVilgf the IssuesRis Sugsfftiorwsof PAr I, MitigationMeasures / Design Namef -th; -Isues_aise ~ Suggestionsof PAPs aprac . Shrinesgetting affected .[ Religiousstructures should be , Religionsstructures to be shiftedsafely inside the village E relocatedin consultationwith beforethe road is widened. PAPs. * Separatelane for pedestrians . Signagesindication of low andslow movingvehicles can speedlimit. reduceaccidents. i Dovetailing of poverty * PAPsbe registeredwith various alleviationschemes as detailed govemment'spoverty alleviation out in RAPdocument. programmesfor income generationactivities.

Bakewar * Encroachment 1 Concentricwidening is possible Roadwidth reducedto 12 m. * Relocationof business providedroad width is reduced. /concentricwidening. establishment Cashcompensation market Compensationat replacement * Heavytraffic movement valueshould be givenbefore valueas per R&Rpolicy. * Safety displacement. Shrinenot getting affected i Wideningoptions * Shrinescannot be shifted.Road i * Footpathsover drains * Modeof compensation shouldbe so designedthat * No physicalrelocation before * Shrinesgetting affected shrinesare not affected. compensationis paid. Footpathsfor pedestrianswill reduceaccident rate.

Paras * Encroachment l- Concentrcwidening * Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business i*60% of theaffected families are 1 carriageway establishment i into businesshence they should i Wideninghas been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement I be relocatedalong the road availableclear space - Safety 1- Religiousstructures can be * Finalisationof relocationsites in * Wideningoptions | relocatedinside the village with i consultaionwith PAPs - Modeof compensation i theconsensus ofthe villagers * Shrinesto be relocatedin Incomerestoration options . Speedbreakers can reduce the consultationwith PAPs. Shrinesgetting affected accidents Safetyrailings/signages Employmentduring construction Employmentshould be provided Contractorto givepreference to to affectedPAPs by theproject. I PAPs/dovetailing of poverty alleviationschemes/training for self-employmentby NGO/professional/maser training.

. . . , . . . . __._._.______sl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~......

Ghatampur * Encroachment ' Wideningof roadwill affectlot * Tobe takenup in Phase11 , Relocationof business of peoplehence bypass is establishment preferable.However, if road - Heavytraffic movement I width is restrictedto 1Om * Safety I nothingwvill get affected. Wideningoptions . Religiousstructures cannot be * Modeof compensation I shifted.Widening of road - Requirementof a bypass shouldnot affect the structure - Shrinesgetting affected * Cashcompensation at market value

Bhogntpur * Encroachment Wideningis notpossible, as this j * Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business I will affectlot of people.Bypass I carriageway establishment is suggested. * Wideninghas been restricted to Heavytraffic movement If bypassis notpossible, road availableclear space. Safety shouldnot be furtherwidened. Newbuildings for templeat Wideningoptions i.. A newand better religious i locationfinalised my PAPs. Modeof compensation structureshall be provided * Compensation.atreplacement Requirementof a bypass j within thevillage before valueas per R&Rpolicy. * Shrinesgetting affected dismantlingthe old structure. * Safetyrailings/signages. Cashcompensation at market value i * Separatelane for pedestrianscan reducerate of accidents

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 76 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UnarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Nameof the Raised MitigationMeasures I Design Issues Raised ~Suggestionsof PAPs Village _ _ppfoach

Musanagar* Encroachment Concentricwidening * Concentricwidening and raised * Relocationof business I * Cashcompensation at m arket 1 carriageway establishment value | Wideninghas-been restricted to * Heavytraffic movement - Speedbreakers and awareness availableclear space * Safety ! generationamong villagers - * Compensationat replacement * Wideningoptions towardstraffic rules to avoid valueas per R&R policy. l Modeof compensation accidents. i * Safetyrailings/signages/ *ncomerestoration options 1 Relocationof houseswithin the i awarenesscampaign by NGO. villageas per the PAPs choice. I* Relocationsites as per PAPs - Registrationof PAPswith choice. Govemmentpoverty alleviation * Dovetailing of poverty programmes. alleviationschemes as detailed out in RAPdocument. Route18: launpur- Mohammadpur

CGanbhiirpur * Encroachment , * Cashcompensation at RoadR width reducedto save * Relocationof business replacementvalue templeand other permanent establishment Speedbreakers forsafety residentialstructures. . Heavytraffic movement Templeshould be re-established* Safetyrailings/signages SSafety withinthe village * Compensationat replacement Wideningoptions * New resettlementsites should valueas per R&Rpolicy. Modeof compensation be alongthe road and with the * Dovetailing of poverty Incomerestoration options i consensusof all thePAPs. alleviationschemes/training for * Shrinesgetting affected , Employmentduring construction self-employment. - Employmentduring construction is nota long-termsolution. Permanentemployment sources shouldbe creatednot only for PAPsbut also for entire village.

Thekma - Encroachment , Roadwill improvecommercial . Roadwidth reduced to save . Relocationof business valueof thevillage. Amount of templeand other permanent establishment compensationshould be good residentialstructures. * Safety enoughand we should be i* Compensationat replacement * Wideningoptions resettlealong the roads so that valueas per R&R policy Incomerestoration options our businessis nothampered. Trainingfor self * Demolitionof houses/shops i * Temple,shouldbe re-established employment/dovetailing of * Shrinesgetting affected in thevillage before povertyalleviation * Employmentduring constriuction i constructionstarts. schemes/employmentwith * Speedbreaker in thevillage is contractor mustfor thepurpose of safety. * Relocationsites to be finalised Twolaning is importantfor by PAPs. smoothmovement of traffic. * Footpathsover drains safety Employment during construction railings andproper compensation will helpus to getback to our economy. . . _ . -- -______..~~..*~...*.*..~....-.--- *. --.------.. .-- _ _----- Bhira * Encroachment * PAPsare willing to moveout in Widthof theroad reduced to X Relocationof houses casecompensation is at savetemple from getting Heavytraffic movement i replacementvalue. affectedand avoid displacement S*afety Compensationshould be paid of puccastructures. -Widening options beforethey are moved out. . AffectedTemple I * Footpathfor pedestriansand *Income restorationoptions I speedbreakers at theentry of - Drainagefacility thevillage. *Shrinesgetting affected I*emple can he shiftedbut with ! -Employment duringconstruction i theconsensus of villagers. * Inconmeopportunities are required for entire village, thoLughPAPs are special case. PAPsand other villagers should be preterredfor employmenit dLurinlgconstruiction. F*or relocation of houses choice ot area woLld be of PAPs.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 77 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmerntalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Name of the IssuesRaised MitigationMeasures I Design | l~~~~~~y~~~~!~ ~ . . .e....Isus aiedSuggestions of PAPs ~ - apoach__prai

|Gaura * Encroachment * Over two fifth of the villagers Bypassproposed to be .BadshalipurI Relocationof business depends on trade and business constructedas pab of Phase11. establishment for livelihood and Road through | To avoid land acquisition to the Safety the village would effect extent possible,major portion of Widening options significant number of families. the bypasswill run on the dike Land Acquisition and mode of * Bypassis ideal, of the existing major irrigation compensation * For loss of land for bypass,land i canal. l*Requirement of a bypass for land is mostpreferred, bu lIncome restorationoptions cash compensationat market I IDemolition of houses! shops value is well accepted. lEmployment during construction * Training for educated youths for -Temple/Graveyards self-employment tbrough project is preferred. . Roadeven if widened, will pose safety hazardsas housesare too close to the road. I Temples/graveyardscannot be shifted. To save such structures, bypasscan be laid.

| iibali * Encroachment Good compensationshould be . Road width reduced to avoid Relocationof business paid before PAPsare askedto i demolishingof permanent establishment move out. residential structures. Safety . * Footpathfor pedestriansand t Compensationat replacement Mode of compensation speedbreakers at the entry of value asper R&R policy * Income restorationoptions the village. * Training for self employment * Employment during construction I income opportunities are very i dove tailing of poverty few in the village. Therefore, alleviation-schemes/ j apart from employment with employmentwith contractor I contractors, project should start . Relocationsites to be finalised some sustainableincome I by PAPs. restorationschemes. I Footpathsover drains/safety For relocation of houses,choice railings. I of area would be of PAPs Businessestablishments should be relocated on roadside otherwise they will lose customers.

Barda Encroachment * PAPswill moveout provided * Road with reducedto avoid * Relocationof business compensationamount is as per demolition of residentialand establishment replacementvalue commercial structures,which * Safety Footpathfor pedestriansand are permanent in nature. Widening options speedbreakers at the entry of * Footpathsover drain/safety Mode of compensation the village. railings * Requirementof a bypass * Road should be widened,on i Concentric widening Income restorationoptions both the sides. * Contractor to give preferenceto Employment during construction * Bypasswil I reduceour income PAPs/trainingfor self- baseas most of the vehicles, employment/dovetailing of which stops here (mostly poverty alleviation schemes. passengervehicles), will not . Relocationsites to be finalised even come to this place. by PAPs. * Employmentduring construction will be of labour activities, which most the PAPswill not go for. Other income restoration schemeswith training should be provided by the project. Housescan be relocated inside the village but affected business establishmentshould be relocated on the road.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Luicknow,India 78 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV _`eptember 2001

Table63 RnutewiseRepresentations of Public Concerns and Hearings at Districtand State Leveland their Incorporationin ProjectDesign Route oumber PublicConcerns/Hearings Incorporationin Design

Route4 NeedCentralwidening to minimizenumber fPPs Cenral widening opted Habitantsalong project route expresseddesire during i Bypassplanned at Bangarmauproposed to be FocusGroup Discussion. constructedin PhaseII. Needfor Bangarmaubypass due to alignmentpassing .Suggestionaccepted and incorporated in designto be throughcongested and accident prone commercial constructedin Phase11 area. This issuecame up in focus group discussion in Allahganj ______Buildingup of safetyaspects in upgradedroads. Issue All majorintersections to be developedas per MOST raisedin districtlevel construction at Shahjahanpur. specifications.The improved intersections are planned at Khairpur,Madanpur, Yakubpur, Jalalabad, Hoolpur, Swagipurand GanjMoradabad intersections_ Propersignages at identifiedaccident hot spots such a Jalalabaddeveloped area, Katrisili Village, Sukh Sukhi .Village,Eknaura Village etc. Whetherproject design takes care of waterlogging? An Waterlogged areas identified and drainage issueraised at Bareillyin districtlevel consultation. improvementincluded in engineeringdesign. I Routewiselocations where drainage improvement will i takeplace are detailed in a Chapteron Mitigation,in EnvironmentalAssessment Report. DistrictMagistrate desired railway over bridge near i Thesuggestion could not be incorporated,as the Bareilly.Issue raised during public consultation at proposedlocation does not fall on anyof theproject Bareilly. routeunder Phase-I, Phase 11 or maintenance I programme. Noiselevel in pcst projectscenario and measures to Noisepredictions done in EnvironmentalAssessment reducethese. Issue raised in Hardoidistrict level j forfuture scenario. Noise barriers planned at noise consultation. sensitivereceptors (educational and healthinstitutes) along-theproject route. No hornzones identified in designand propersign marking on road. Onegovernment official enquiredabouit sanitation Properconstruction colony planned in theproject for facilitiesat constructionworkers' camp. Eurther, he j constructionworkers. The colony to haveproper suggestedthat cooking fuel to be madeavailable by drinkingwater and sanitation facilities. Necessary contractorto avoidtree cutting. Query raised at clausein contractdocument will be keptto ensure Hardoi. j availabilityof keroseneat camp No suggestioncame at Unnao. Route7 Necessaryoccupational and safety measures be A clausewill be madein contractdocument so that providedto constructionworkers. Suggestion came at s contractorwill provideearplugs, safety helmets etc. to Bahraichdistrict level consultation. 'all workersworking in highnoise zone areas and near , lifting machinery. DistrictMagistrate demanded bypass for Bahraich. I Suggestioncould not incorporated due to pre findings Issueraised during district level consultation. of SOSstudy, feasibility study and cost considerations. SDM,Gonda suggested for proper measuresin design :Waterpollution will be abatedby provisionsof proper for reductionfor air,water and noise pollution in post drainagenetwork at humanhabitations. Drainage projectperiod. Issue raised during district level improvementtaken up in design. consultationat Gonda. Noisebarriers planned at sensitivereceptors. CDO,Gonda suggested that upgradation design t Designtakes into accountimproved intersection shouldhave better measures for safety.Issue raised i design,sharp curve design and propertsignages. duringdistrict level consultation at Gonda. Route14 Typeof speciesfor treeplantation, source of saplings Typeof speciesrecommended in Environmental andplantation strategy details sought by a NGO assessmentare those grown locally. Project envisages participantat Kanpur(Ruralh. Issue raised during participationof NGOfor treeplantation under

l districtlevel consultation at KalnpLur(Rural). guidanceof StateForest Department. Villagersof Shahiahanpurand Puhur handed over a Suggestionincorporated. Road widening will be dorie memorandumthrough District Magistrate for Central in both sidesconsidering old roadcentreline. *Widening taking original road centre line becauseroad hasbeen widened recently by 5feet on one side.IssuLe raisedduring district level consultation at Fatehpur.i

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 79 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services (or UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessnment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

R_oute Number PublicConcerns/Hearings incorporation in Design 'Villagersresiding in Puhurvillage also handed over Suggestionaccepted and incorporated in design. memilorandumsimiilar to Shahiahanpurvillage for CentralWidening. Issue raised during district level consultationat Fatehpur. Participantfrom Shahjahanpur village suggested that ; Suggestionaccepted. Village pond at Shahjahanpur villagepond be includedin list of villageponds includedin pondsto be enhancedalong the project chosenfor enhancementon theproject route. Issue route. raisedduring district level consultation at Fatehpur. DistrictMagistrate demanded railway over bridge near Suggestioncould notbe incorporateddue to cost ChaudagarhCrossing. Issue raised during district level considerations. consultationat Fatehpur. BlockDevelopment Officer Bindki Tehsil suggested j Suggestionnoted and passed to StateForest roadtrees species for plantation.Issue raised during I Department.The species recommended included in districtlevel consultation at Fatehpur. , EAReport. Route18 Participationfrom localvillage along project route Designtakes into accountimprovement in cross raisedthe issue of waterlogging. Issue raised during ; drainagealong project route districtlevel consultant at Jaunpu.r. Propercompaction and strength at GauraBadshahpur JDesign takes into accountthe suggestion. bypassdue to highhydrostatic pressure at canal. Suggestioncame at Jaunpurdistrict level consultation. Shopkeepersof GauraBadshahpur market raised the Suggestioncould not accepted on accountof two concernthat their business will be affectedhence ! reasons;(a) at thetime of FocusGroup discussion bypassshould not beconstructed. Issue came during bypasswas demanded by the localsand (b)enough districtlevel consultation at launpur. I ROWis not availablefor requiredwidening at Gaura BadshahpuLr. Furtherconsuitant feels a needfor bypasstaking into considerationsthe future traffic scenario. STATELEVEL CONSULTATION - LUCKNOW MoEFparticipants enquired status of Environmental EnvironmentalAssessment completed and Assessment. I-EnvironmentalManagement and ActionPlan prepared. Lesserusages of stoneaggregates in upgradation,as it I Suggestioncould not be acceptedas alternate to stone will haveadverse impact on ecologyof hill regions, aggregatesis bricks; it hasmore adverse impact on 1 agriculturefield. lanhitManav Seva Sansthan an NGObased at Projecthas considerable role of NGOsin Bahraichsuggested that PAPs and NGOs should be implementationphase. involvedfor smooth and timely completionofproject.

6.6 Continued PartiCipation

The following plan for the continued participation of the various stakeholders,especially the project affected has been worked out to ensure time bound and effective achievements of the implementation of the various EA measures proposed.

6.6.1 INFORMATIONDISCLOSURE

The EA / EMP will be disclosed at several locations, for the benefit of the interested community, and the stakeholders.These are the following componentsof disclosureof project information.

Public Disclosureof the summary EAReport

The EAwill be disclosedand kept for public referenceat the following locations,

P Public Librariesof the districts P Office of Chief DevelopmentOfficer, and > Librariesof selectedcolleges in the district. P PWD officesin project districts

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 80 ProjectCo-ordiniating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

> Schoolsof the villagesaffected, and > Any other public placealong the highway

The report will also be available at World Bank Infoshop Washington DC as per World Bank disclosurepolicy.

A copy will also be placed at the office of Project Director, UPSRP,Lucknow and respective PWD circlesand divisions.

Public Information Sharingand transparency

PWD offices located along the four Project Corridors will provide actual information on and policies and environmental/ resettlementissues to the people, in a continuousmanner.

6.6.2 COMMUNITYPARTICIPATION

To implement the EMP in a proper way, it is essentialto provide scope of involving communities and affected personsin the process.Stakeholders' participation throughout the stagesof project implementationand early operation(or the defectsliability period)will be integratedin the project.

In all the four project corridors, it has been fully realized that, to redressthe environmental issues likely to surfaceduring constructionand operational phases,a constantcommunication needs to be establishedwith the affected communitiesand the road users.This has been ensured by regular progress monitoring of the construction and with co-operation of the NGOs. Meetings will be organized with the project affectedand the variousstakeholders at regular intervalsat the potential hotspot/sensitivelocations before and during the constructionperiod. During the preparationstage, consultationswere held at local, district and statelevel as documented above. Severaladditional rounds of PAPand Host community consultationswith regardto formation of self help groups in managementof community assetsand roadside plantation willIform part of the future consultation exercises.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Licknow, India 81 ProiectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Photo Plate 2 Local LevelConsultation

(1) Publicviewpoint on effect of road widening c2)Opinilon oftree fellingdue to roadconstruction

(3) ProjectTeam exiplains apoint over impact of road (4) Projectteam & public discuss opportunities of upgradation people'sparticipation in environmental

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 82 ProjectCovordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

PhotoPlate 3 District Level Consultation

Jaunpur:Social Impact Specialist explaining alignment Jaunpur:Discussion with PAPs of Route18

Azamga,h:CDD OAzamgarh makinga point duringdiscussion. ShahJahanpur

Unnao: EnvironmentalExpert welcoming CDO of Unnao Unnao:Project Directorinforming the gatheringabout the beforethe start of the workshop project

Hardoi:PWD representative from Hardoimaking a point Hardol:Environmental Expert welcoming the DMHardoi. duringthe discussion

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow,India 83 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Servicesfor Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

DistrictLevel Consultation

Gonda:Distrct level consultationin progress. Gonda:Venue of District LevelWorkshop in Gonda.

Baharalch:District levelconsult at on in progress. Baharaich,:NG0representative discussing an issue with DM Bahareich.

Fatohpuw:Environmental Expert welcomning DM Fatehpuor. Fafthpur:Social Impact Specialist welcoming DM Fatehpour.

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 84 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for U.ttarPradesh State Roads Project EnyironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

PhotoPlate 4 StateLevel Workshop - Lucknow, 23 March2001

t-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

Lightingof oil lamp: Statelevel workshopbeing inaugurated by Dr Pandey- an eminentsocial worker

Piaject Director welcomningthe delegatesl participantsin State LevelWorkshop. lb in

1PAPRAD EIRJC (.- 90EwoR'D BAC F )t.1

;? D m 8 t DIW ,_ rnrojectDjrector ~welcomingthe ~ ~ ~ ~ ttoute selectedstbWr Phase IN

-s~ '':"2 _.W

EnvironmentalExpert explaning the enronmental issues MrIlngham D explainingthe projectand routesselcted for Phase I

WTTARPRADE MERM PROETJ II-~~~~~~~k- P; Vt ; atx~~~~~~~:WORLUs

PCCConsuJtants and other participants SocialSpecialist explaining the socialissues.

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Departmnent, Lucknow, India 85 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh, State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

StateLevel Workshop - Lucknow,23 March2001

Representativesfrom PWD,Revenue and otherline departments.

_~~~~~~~

PAPsfrom projectroutes among the 3~~~~ participants. i

NGOrepresentatives from Baharaich and Gonda among th e participants.

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 86 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Proj ect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

7 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVESIN UPSRP

This chapterdiscusses the analysisof alternativesthat havebeen consideredfor the PhaseI upgradationroutes, It also includesa discussionon the with and without projectscenario. The methodologythat has been adopted for the evaluationof the alternateroutes for improvementand the selectionbased on engineering,economic, environmental and socialcorcerns have been highlighted.The minimisationof environmentalimpacts by consideringdesign alternatives determinesthe extentof mainstreamingof the environmentalcomponent. An evaluationof the variousalignment options has been evaluated for arrivingat the mostpromising bypass alignment. This chapterlooks at the decisionsmade during the projectwhen alternativeswere available and describesthe rationalebehind each decision.

7.1 'With' and 'Without' project scenario

Uttar Pradeshhas not beenable to developthe roadinfrastructure at a pacethat would allow it to competewith otherstates to becomea favouritedestination for industrywhich would have enabled rapiddevelopment of India'smost populous, yet one of the leastdeveloped states. The ' with' and 'without' projectscenarios are analysedwith this backdropof requirementof reliablequality infrastructurefor sustainedgrowth of state'seconomy and consequent well-being of its citizens.

The UPSRPis beingimplemented with World Bankassistance to upgrade1000 km of roadsand carryingout majormaintenance of 2500km of roadsspread all over UP.The first phase includes upgradationof 373.96km-of roadsalong with majormaintenance of just over800 km. Theroads passmainly through plain areas, most through the Indo-Gangeticplain which covers about 70% of the state.They consistof StateHighways, Major District Roadsand Otherdistrict roads.The proposed treatment will create State Highways with 7 m blacktop irrespectiveof the present conditionof the road.The design life of the projectis 20 yearswith periodicoverlays to ensurethe riding quality for the road-users.The major maintenanceenvisages various treatmentsto achievea 7 m wide pavementwith hard shouldersor concrete blocks,as applicable to.allow smooth flow of traffic simultaneouslyin both directions.

Providing better connectivitywill ensurethat goods and peoplefrom areascovered by the road can move in and out of the areas quicker and save time. Increasedtrade and commerceactivity are expected.Accounting just for the savingsin the Vehicle OperatingCosts makes the project viable. However, there would be an increasein the vehicular pollution-air and noise, in the vicinity of the road. Some agricultural land will have to be diverted for road use to construct bypassesin two locations: Gaura-Badshahpurand Bangarmau.In other settlements,some people will lose their propertiesclose to the roadto accommodatethe proposedwidening.

If the project is not implemented,there is likelihood that the project roads will deterioratefurther. Though the UPPWDenvisages a 5-6 year maintenancecycle for StateHighways and 10-yearcycle for Major District Roads,the actual work carried out is usuallyon an ad hoc basis.Therefore, only certain roads may be maintained regularly. There is likelihood of deterioration of the existing pavements. In the absenceof the project, the department will also find it extremely difficult to generatefunds for such a massiveimprovement of the road infrastructurefrom its own resources. Increasedair pollution, due to slow moving traffic and congestion,will follow. Noise levelswill rise due to deterioration of the pavementas well as increasedhonking. Without the bypasses,the traffic would continue passingthrough the two settlementsand continue to posea safety risk for the residentsin thesealready congested towns.

Therefore, the 'with' project scenario,with its minor adverseimpacts is more acceptablethan the Iwithout" project scenario which would mean an aggravationof the existing problems. The potential benefitsof the proposedroad improvementsare substantialand far-reachingboth in terms of the geographicalspread and time. Hence, it is clear that the implementationof the project will

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Ptiblic Works Dep,riniierirtLucknow. india 87 Project Co-ordinattrig ConsoIliaoig(IICCI Servi:es for Uttar PradeshSt.ite RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

be a definite advantageto UP in order to achieve all-round developmentof its economy and progressfor its people.

7.2 Route Finalisation

The project envisagesthe upgradationof existing roads and thereforethe routeswere more or less finalisedafter the SOSstudy carried out in 1996.A feasibilitystudy prioritised 1000 km of roadsfor upgradation from 2655 km (2561 km from the SOS and two more corridors identified by the UPPWD and approvedby the World Bank).The study used the concept of homogeneouslinks to the corridors (18 corridors divided into 74 links). Thesewere then prioritised using the HDM 3 software developed by the World Bank. Simultaneously,based on environmental and social screening,the corridors were classifiedinto low, medium and high impact corridors based on the following environmental attributes: Roadside trees, Rainfall, Topography. Flood zones, waterbodies, water logging, surfaceerosion, forests,Wildlife Park and Sanctuaries,presence of endangeredspecies, archaeological/historical monuments, religious structures,graveyards/Mazaars, etc. The resultantenvironmental categories for each of the road screenedduring feasibilityand the internal ratesof return obtainedare given below in Table 7.1.

Table 7-1 Summary of resultsfrom environmental screening of routes selected for Feasibility RouteSection Route EnvironmentaH RouteNo. From To Length EIRR ______1kmLngth)Categoryr

Route 1 SikandraRao j Bareilly _ __ 133.20 Medium 8.1% Route 3 Pilibhit i Khutar 72401 _igh 24.9°b Route 4A _ 'Katra ___i___Me_i_urn______u t'Katra A 1Bangarmau 153.10 Medium 37.4% Route[ 413 'Bilhaur _ __ iLucknow 88.001 Medium 209% RouteI S Sitapur _ i Madhogan; __ ; 74.00 Low 1722% Route 6 Sitapur TiRahraicti 101 70i High ;_8.2 Route 7A . Bahraich Akbarpur 159.25 High 35.5% Route 7B Akbarpur _ Phepna(Ballia) 18430 High 37_5% Route8 Sultanpur AllahabadBridge 97.80' Low 155.5/% Route iOA Gorakhpur i Shahean; 10655 Medium 53.9% Route 1OC launpur AllahabadRoad 87.00X Medium 26.9/ IRoute 11 Moradabad Nainital 106 95 High 15.4% Route 12 Allahabad *Mirzapur 87.00 Medium 13.0% Route 13 Barei_ly talkua _ 78_8.50 t-Medium 13.9% Route 14 * Bhognipur NH2 (Bakewar) i 8265 Low 15.3% Route 15 Lucknow lJunctionSH091SH38 188.80 Mediuim 11 3% Route 16 Deoria ! Ballia 109.60j Medium 27.2% Route 17 Varanasi Dohrighat . 134 50 Mediumn 17.6% Route 18 jaunpur tMohammadpur 45.20 Medium 14.6% All ProjectRoutes 2,090.50 27.6%

The finally selectedcorridors and their proposed treatment-aretabulated in table 7.2. The widening options stated in it are discussed in detail in a subsequent section (see section 7.4), where their environmental implications are detailed out.

Table 7-2 Summary Information for routes selected for upgradation in phase I of UPSRP r - ~~~~~~~INR ~ ~ ~~~~~~~Cost Routedescription Prpsd CsqN Routedescription Length . Proposed (INR million) Environmental IRR | Route x (km) works (at 2000 Category j %) Noe. From To prices) i 4A Katra Bilhaur 147.30 W3 2 839.70 Medium 38.i 7A Bahraich Faizabad 105.85- W3 2 265.50: High 40.9 14 Bhognipur ChaudhagraMode 82.65 W3 1 349.20 Low i 15.3 18 launpur Mohainmadpur 39.70- W3 417.00. Medium 16.6

There has been a conscious effort to take up corridors with high internal rates of return, but substantial environmental hotspots and R&R issues, to phase 11of the project. This would allow the

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow. India -88 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmenral Agsessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

internalisationof expertiseand experiencesfrom phase I into the PlU's environmentalcell. This wiould ensure that the implementationof the first phase would begin in right earnestand the secondphase would also benefitfrom it. Three of the four corridors in phaseI areclassified in the 'low' or 'medium' impactcategory from an environmentalperspective.

The only route which has been taken up for upgradationin phase I though ciassifiedas 'high' in terms of environmentalsensitivity is the Route7: Bahraich-Faizabad.This corridor has beentaken up becauseupon closerscrutiny it wasrevealed that the reasonfor classificationwas the potentially high social impact of the proposedworks within 30 m RoW at the feasibility stage.The site visits confirmed that most of the impacts were restrictedto the stretch beyond Faizabad.The only sensitivereceptor along the route in phaseI is the ParvatiAranga bird sanctuarywhich is situatedat the edgeof the RoW in km 92. Therefore,this route wastaken up in phaseI for upgradation.

7.3 WideningOptions

The final proposed section for all roadsselected for upgradation in phase I consistsof 7 m wide pavement with a provision of 1.5 m hard shouldersand 1 m soft shoulderson either side. The options for widening are either concentric or eccentric widening. The choice is governed by a number of factors: availability of land, presenceof sensitive receptors,earthwork requirement, number of treesto be cut, embankmentstability, etc. in addition to the local people'sperception of bias towardsresidents on one side.

While the revenue recordshows RoW of between8 and 33 m for all roads included in the project, with an averageof around 20 m, in practice,the spaceavailable is much less, especiallywithin settlements.The settlementswhere the RoW is lessthan the requisite12 m have beenexamined as bypass candidates have not been feasible, designs have been modified. Along route 18, in Gambhirpur & Thekma,designs have been modifiedto accommodatethe entire section in the clear availablespace of 9 m. In thesesmall stretches,the 7 m wide pavementis available,with trade-off involving the spacerequired for hard shouldersand drains. Moreover, in caseof formations,the centrelinesof the existing pavementscoincide with thoseof the RoW in almostall cases.Therefore, the embankments have stabilised for the 12 m formation available at most locations. The perceptionof the common people is that it is fair that residentson both sides of the road should be treated at par and no favouritism should be shown. Eccentricwidening would mean that either shoulderson one side arestronger than the other or that pavementwill have to be dug up for other side too. Thesearguments would favourconcentric widening along the existingcentreline.

Concentric widening would mean that there would be hindrance to traffic during construction. There would be loss of green tunnel effect from first row of trees, if any. Moreover, eccentric widening would also allow avoiding demolition of any structureof significanceif found quite close to the pavement.These arguments would work in favour of eccentricwidening.

The choice of concentric widening is governed in part by the apparent fairness of affecting propertieson both sidesequally. This is further reinforcedby the strongdesire of local residentsto ensureequity among the roadsidedwellers. It is further noted that the treesalong the.highway are generally located 13 to 15 m apart (random measuremnent).Thus, concentricwidening is preferred in order to minimise tree loss. Further,it is noted that along some corridors, in phase 11,the roads being upgradedlmaintainedalready have been constructedon raisedembankments beside the old alignment. In such cases,widening on one side (the old road side) should be consideredso that more trees can be saved. However, this has to be balanced againstthe cost of creating a new embankment,its stability, and effect of -change in centreline over relatively short (few kilometres) distances.

Thus,for the project as a whole, concentricwidening has beenthe preferredoption. However,it is not a blanket solution and wherever feasible,eccentric widening has been explored before the decisionhas beenmade.

Government of Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 89 Project Co-erdinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsUV September2001

7.4 Road Cross-sections

Four different road cross-sectionswere generatedfor the proposed upgradation based on the standardsspecified by IRC, AASHTO, TRLand SATCC.The following Table 7.3 givesthe detailsfor each of the proposedsection.

Table 7-3 Cross-section options for the upgradation works in UPSRP

Widh oulderS_ Width _ , Median Formation Option Carriageway Width Hard Soft Width Width ...... _ _. _ 1 Shoulder i Shoulder WI 6.0m (2x3m) _ 15 m I IrnI m W2 7.0m (2x3.5m) 2.mr m W3 L7m(2x3.5m) 1.5 - m 12 m wW4 2m x 7.25m 1.5 n ,n I Varies varies

IRC specifies a minimum width of 3.5 m for a two-lane two-way road. Therefore, Wl section cannot be adopted, W2 and W3 require equal width at the top of the formation. However, using W3 would be advantageous since the carrying capacity increases even though the space utilised is the same as W2. W2 may be adopted where the traffic volumes are low or where just 7 m wide space is available for the pavement. The soft shoulder can also be used where non-motorised vehicles ply the road in large numbers. It can also be used advantageously in situations where giant trees are located near the pavement. The soft shoulder will allow the retention of the trees. However, the project would preferably construct the W3 section wherever space is available.

Within urban stretches, W4 section may be adopted. In this case, the hard shoulder can' be increased to 3 rn on either side with appropriate drainage facilities to prevent inundation during monsoons.

The sections adopted for individual routes have already been stated in Table 7-2.

7.5 BypassAlternatives

Excessive encroachment,'-especially within settlements, has meant that even the 12 m width required for the upgradation is not available without resorting to extensive R&R activities. Travelling through congested settlements entails longer journeys and increased risk of accidents. To avoid these potential negative impacts, two bypasses have been proposed to be constructed as part of the phase 11 of the UPSRP. These are for bypassing the' settlements of Gaura Badshahpur in Mohammadpur-jaunpur (Route 18) and Bangarmau in the Katra-Bilhaur (Route 4). Table 7-4 summarises the comparison of the alignments evaluated.

Table 7-4 Summary of bypass alternatives to be implemented in phase iI aiong routes in phase I

I_____ BanagarnmauBypass Gaura Badshahpur Bypass Criteria Upgrade Shortest Slight detour i Upgrade Northern i Southern existing iconnection at the existing bypass bypass alignment beginning align ent ...... MinimniseR&R activitv Poor Fair Good Poor Excellent Fair Redcetree cuttin Excellent Good Eairxcellent ood Good Redutceloss of arable Excellent Fair Fair Excellent Fair Poor land l land _ __ i _ _~~~~~~~~.._...._ ------i------Minimise Vehicle Fair Cood Cood Fair Good Fair Operating Costs and travel time Reduceconflicts Poor Excellent Excellent Poor Excellent Fair between through traffic and local act... ty...... Chosen Option . _ _ j

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Ltucknow,India 90 Project Co-ordinating Consultaitis(PCC) Services for Uttar PradesliStaite Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV Consultants BV September2001

7.6 PhasingConstruction Activities

Therewill be an overlapbetween the implementationof phaseI and phaseII. The phasingof constructionbecomes vital becauseof the presenceof sensitivereceptors within settlements proposedto be bypassed.If the projectroutes were improvedon eitherside of thesesettlements, the problemssuch as vehicular pollution, pedestrian safety, etc. would be furtheraccentuated until bypassesbecome functional. Therefore, improvements along the road closeto the settlements, wherebypasses have been proposed, should be donetowards the end of phase1. It is suggested that 500 m stretcheson eitherend of the bypassend locationsbe improvedtowards the end of phase1. As far as possible,the bypassconstruction should be taken up in the firstquarter of phase11 so that enough overlap is availableto producea homogenoussection. To this end, timely completionof land acquisition,disbursement of entitlementsand other R&Rrelated activities becomesvital.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,LUcknow, India 9 1 Proiect Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase i} DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

8 ASSESSMENTOF IMPACTS

8.1 Background

Thischapter assesses the nature,type and magnitudeof the potentialimpacts likely on the various relevantphysical, biological and culturalenvironmental components along the projectroutes3. The descriptionof the impactson the individualcomponents has beenstructured as per the discussionin Chapter5: ExistingEnvironmental Scenario of thisreport.

UPSRPenvisages the provisionof a 7 m widecarriageway with 1.5 m widehard shoulders and 1 m soft shouldersfor the routesselected for up-gradation.The 374 km long projectroutes have sufficientRoW along moststretches to accommodatethe improvedsection. Hence, most impacts will be confinedwithin the RoW.Wherever sufficient RoW is not available-inBangarmau and Gaura-Badshahpur,bypasses have been proposed 4.'Sincethe alignmentis alongexisting roads, few indirectimpacts normally associated with new alignmentsare likely. The impactsof the activitiesproposed as partof theproject can occur during:

* Planningand Design Stage * ConstructionStage * OperationStage

8.2 Meteorological Parameters

The routesselected for up-gradationin Phase-Iare locatedin a sub-tropicalregion with marked monsooneffects. Though no changein the macro-climaticsetting (precipitation, temperature and wind) is envisageddue to the project,the microclimate,islikely to be temporarilymodified by vegetationremoval and the additionof increasedpavement su'Tihce. There will be an increasein daytimetemperature on the roadsurface and soil due to lossof shadetrees, which in turn might lead to formationof heat islandsespecially along the inhabitedsections. 'In addition,at green tunnellocations, the removalof treeswill increasethe amountof directsunlight resulting in higher temperaturesalong the highway.

Thisincrease in the daytimetemperature assumes significance especially to the'slow movingtraffic, the pedestriansand the firstrow of residences/ receptors along the corridor,as the entireproject stretchexperiences temperatures as highas 470 C duringsummers. The impact will befelt moreby the slowmoving traffic and pedestriansalong the projectroad. Althoughthe impactis significant and long-termand reversiblein natureand shallbe compensatedfor by additionalplantation of trees. it mustbe notedthat the impactis unavoidable.However, it maybe pointedout that the projecthas taken care to minimisetree felling in the RoWby ,ealigningtheroad to savetrees.

8.3 Natural and Biophysical Environment

8.3.1 AIR

Air qualityalong the projectcorridor will be adverselyimpacted both duringthe constructionand operationstages. Construction stage impacts will beof shortterm and haveadverse impacts on the constrLuctionworkers as well as the settlementsadjacent to the road, especially those in the downwind direction.Operation stage impacts will not be as severeas the constructionstage impactsand will beconfined generally to a bandof width rangingfrom 50to 75mfrom the edgeof

| For the assessmenttof impacts,the baselineinformation has been utilised information obtained from the field visits carried out as part of the independent review.

Bothi bypasseswill be impleiietited in Phase-11

Government of Unar Pradesh.Public Works Department, Ltucknow,India 92 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

the pavement.However, they will continue for the entire life of the project (15 yearsin the caseof UPSRP).The following sectionspresent the impactsof the projectactivities on this component.

Generation of Dust

Pre Construction& ConstructionStages

Generationof dustis the most likely impactduring thesestages due to:

* Site clearanceand useof heavyvehicles and machineryetc.; and * Procurementand transport of raw materialsand quarriesto construction sites;the impactswill mostly be concentratedin the RoW. It is likely that impacts due to dust generationare felt downwind of the siterather than on the site itself.

As the entire project corridor has a soil type with high silt content and the constructionactivities to be carried out during the dry seasonwhen the moisturecontent would be less, dust generation, particularly due to earthworkswill be significant. Dust is also likely to be generateddue to the various constructionactivities including:

* Stonecrushing operations in the crushers; * Handlingand storageof aggregatesin the asphaltplants; * Concretebatching plants; and • Asphaltmix plantsdue to mixing of aggregateswith bitumen.

Generation of dust is a critical issueand is likely to have adverseimpact on health of workers in quarries, borrow areasand stone crushing units. This is a direct adverseimpact, which will last almost throughoutthe constructionperiod.

Operation Stage

No dust generationis envisagedduring the operation stageas the all road shouldersshall be paved (for all the routes in Phase-I,the section adopted is W3, which envisages 1.5 m wide paved shoulders,except for a 2 km stretchin Ghatampur in route 14, where 4 laning is proposed)and all slopes& embankmentsshall be turfed as per bestengineering practices.

Generation of ExhaustGases

Pre Construction& ConstructionStages

Generationof exhaustgases is likely during the pre-constructionstage due to movementof heavy machinery for clearanceof the RoW for construction. This impact is envisagedto be insignificant during the pre-constructionstage

High levelsof SO2, HC and NO, are likely from hot mix plant operations. Toxic gasesare released through the heating processduring bitumen production. Although the impact is very localised, it can spread down wind depending on the wind speeds. The EnvironmentalManagement Plan needs to ensure that adequatemeasures are taken especially for health and safetyof workers such as providing them with pollution masksduring working hours. Also, the contractor should ensure that hot mix plants, stockyards,etc are away from residentialareas and residentialquarters of all workers. Ii adequate measures are taken, impacts from generated gases can be considered negligible.

Operation Stage

The major impact on air quality will be due to plying of vehicles. Increasein air pollution is also the identified by the public as one of the most undesirable impacts of any road improvement project. The impacts on air quality will, at any given time depend upon traffic volume/rateof vehicularemission within a given stretchand prevailingmeteorological conditions. Excess

Governmerit of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 93 Proiect Co ordinating ConsLultantsdCCQ Services for Uilar Prade5hStale RoddsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

discharge of exhaust gases can occur due to (i) inadequate vehicle maintenance; (ii) use of adulterated fuel in vehicles and/or (iii) poor road conditions. To predict air quality in the vicinity of roads air pollution modelling has been carried out to quantify the impacts incorporating all these variables.

Modeliing of Vehicular Emissions

The modelling for this project has been carried out. using CALINE-3 t5 , a model developed by the California Transport Department. However, it has been adapted for UPSRP conditions by using emission factors prevalent in India and traffic volumes as predicted for the project. Though it can predict concentrations up to 500 m from the centreline of the road, here the worst-case scenario is presented at 25 m from the centreline. It is clear from the baseline, that even with low traffic volumes, there is a lot of particulate matter in the ambient air. Since the SPM levels are already above the statutory limits, any increase will only be reflected beyond specified standards. Therefore, the particulates have not been modelled.

Composite Emission factors

Composite Emission factors have been calculated for the various types of vehicles likely to ply on the project routes. The basic information on the emission factors has been derived from Indian Institute of Petroleum's publication: 'Vehicle Emissions and Control Perspective in India". These have since been adopted by the CPCB as emission norms for vehicles from 2000 A.D. onwards. The following information obtained from various secondary sources has provided important inputs in calculations of the emission factors:

(i) A combined standard for HC and NO, is prescribed for all petrol driven vehicles in CPCB standards. In order to facilitate comparison with ambient air quality standards, NO, levels are required to be predicted separately. Based on data available in the report 'Vehicle Emissions and Control Perspective in India' prepared by IIP, a HC- NO, split of 97-3% and 6040% has been considered for 2/3 wheelers and passenger cars respectively. For petrol driven vehicles, it is assumed that they are fitted with catalytic converters.

(ii) In order to account for variation in emission factor with speed, the guidelines presented by WHO in their 1993 publication on Assessment of Source of Air, Water and Land Pollution was used. For vehicles fitted with catalytic converter, the emissions are constant and independent of speed and are presented in Table 8.1.

(iii) For diesel vehicles, the standards for trucks are given as a function of the engine capacity. Accordingly, these are converted to mass per unit km by assuming typical engine capacity of 112 HP.

(iv) For other category diesel vehicles of gross weight below 3.5 tonnes i.e. LCVs and MAVs, the proposed emission are taken to be 50% and 200% respectively (considering half and twice the engine capacity for light commercial and muitiple axle vehicles respectively).

(v) The vehicles speed vary in the range of 10-80 kmph for diesel vehicles, the speed corrected emissions factors based on their engine capacity for trucks are presented in the table below:

Table 8-1 Speed Corrected Emission Factors (in gmAkml vehicle) DieselVehicle Trucks ~~~~~~~~...... -.--...... _§peed(kmph) _.__.. __.___._____. ._...... Pollutanlt - 10 i 20 30 40 50 60 70 L 80 CO 37.80 18.80 12.53i 9.40 7.52 6.27 5.37 4.70 NO, 66.83 33.42 22.28 16.71 13.37 11.14 9.55 8.36 is.. a...... a..Lgorithm.._...._..,.__.._._._.for incrementa_increasedfPetrol Vehicles (independent of speed)...... ue r...... p ... Pollutant Cars Two Wheelers Three Wheelers co 2.72 2.0 4.0 ...... - - ......

'5 CALINE-3 is an extension of the Gaussianplume model. However, it treats the road as a line sourceof pollutaits. The programme is a FORTRAN:basedalgorithin for incrementalincrease due to a given volumneof traffic Linder specific atinospheric conditions.

Governmetntof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Luicknow,India 94 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeslhState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase D) DHVConsultants BV September2001

. NO . 0J.58 0.05 0.05 l

The vehicle speedsassumed for various corridors are given in Table 8.2 for each of the up- gradationroutes in Phase1.

Table 8-2 OperativeSpeeds along Various Routes S. RouteName OperativeSpeed (kmph) No. 2001 2005 2010 1 Katra-Bilhaur 40 80 60 2 Bahraich-Faizabad 40 80 60 3 ! Bhognipur-ChaudagarhMode _ 40 80 60 4 launpur-Mohammadpur 40 80 60

MeteorologicalConditions

The data regardingthe conditions prevailing on the site such as wind speed, direction, mixing height, stabilityclass, etc. were obtainedfrom the India MeteorologicalDepartment. For calculating the emissions,worst-case scenario is assumedand concentrationsare obtainedfor worst wind direction, an option in-built into the programmeitself. The worst wind direction obtained is with respect to the assumed north. A stability class of D for day-time and F for night-time with a minimum wind-speedof 1m/s wasused for all runsof the model.

Traffic Volumes

Traffic volumes used for the model were same as those from the feasibility report. However, the traffic was suitably reclassifiedso that the emission factorscalculated above could be used in the model directly. Thesevalues have already been presentedin Table 2-6 in the project description.

Receptors

The receptors for the model were assumedto be located at 25 m from the centreline of the pavement.Since the traffic volumesare not too large,it was felt that the selection of just one row of receptorswould suffice.If the pollutant levelsexceeded the ambient air quality standardsin any of the routes,another row of receptors,further away could also be simulated.

PredictedPollutant Levels

The predictedconcentrations of NO, and CO are presentedin the table 8.3 below. The predictions have been carried out for the 2005 and 2010. The concentrationsof pollutants as a function of distanceare presentedin Figures8.1 to 8.12.

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh, PLiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 95 ProiectCo-ordinating Consultants iPCC) Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table8-3 PredictedPollutant Levels along up-gradation routes in UPSRP

Background Predicted Incrementall Predicted AAQ 3 Location Concentration Lunicentration (g/m ) Concentration (m) Standard ___ __,_, (g!mW) 2005 2010 2005 2010 (g/m') 4 BilgramCongestedArea - CO 2290__' 41 821 2331 j 2372 4000 Conged A_e NOA14.2 10.52 24.2 24.72 _ 38.4 a80 Allahganj LargeRural CO 2290. 33 i 67.6 2 23 2358 , 4000 Development__ _ NO,13.1 9.03i 20.84 22.13 33.94 80 4 JalalabadLarge Urban Centre CO 3435 41182.7 3517i 4000 ______. NO, 17.3 11052 24.2! 27.82 41.5! 80 4 i Katraunction CO 3435 33 676 3468 _3502 4000 ! uI_ NOX15.7 9.03 20.84 24.72 36.54 80 7 BahraichMajor UrbanCentre _C.20._,,5.1._04 23S~2994~~~ ,ahrach Ma_o Urban__NO, Centr 19.2 8.38 19 27 58 382 80 7 Gonda Major Urban Centre C0 2290 - 55 31 109.4 2345 2399.4 4000 NO 148 84 1 23-2 3381 80 CO3435 4056 82.34 3476 3512 4000 7 FaizabadMajor Urban Centre N 7 4 19 23 39 8

C02290 60.22 129. 23501 2419 4000 14GhatampurMarket Place N 8 22 2 0T 41 . _ ____ , ~~~~~~~~NOXl1B.9 12.12j 28, 30.21 __46.1 __ 808 14 Bhognipurjunction___14 -,BhognipurJunctin CO 3435 55 116. 3490 3551 4000 ______NO_ 16.3 1132 23.35 26_62 39651 80 18 Gaura BadshahpurMajor Urban CO 2290 41 82.3 2331 2372 4000 Centre NO 154 .7 13.3 21.1 28.7 80

The concentrationsof both NOXand CO do not exceedthe specified levels of 4000 pg/m3 and 80 Vg/m3 at any of the sensitivereceptors even at 25 m from the centreline of the road. This is in line with the relatively low traffic volumesprojected for the routes.

It should also be pointed out that the values predictedhere are based on the current normsof the CPCB.As the requirement for more stringent norms is passedon to the manufacturers,like the adoption of EURO11 norms, the emissionrates will continuouslydrop. Therefore,even thesevalues may not be actually exceededin the yearspredicted, if emissionrates are reducedfurther.

Government of Uttar Pradesli,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 96 Project Co-ordinating Consuftants(PCCi Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Figure 8.1: Variation of PeakOne-hourly Concentrationof CO with distanceat Katra-Bilhaur

VARIATION OF PEAKONE HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF CO WITH DISTANCEAT KATRA-BILHAUR

200

180 -

160 ; 140

120 .2001

100 - -.- 2005

80 - -'--2010 60

40- 200

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.2: Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distance at Katra-FBilhaur

VARIATION OF EIGHT HOURLY CONCENTRATION OF CO WITH DISTANCEAT KATRA-BILHAUR

180-

160

140 i 120

100 2 . 2001 -.-*2005 i 80 w 2010 60

401

20 ,

- 0 100 2060 0 0 00

Figure 8.3: Variation of one-hourly Concentration of CO with distance at Bhognipur-Bakewar

Government of Utt.r Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 97 PsujectCo-urdilating Consultants(PCC0 Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

VARIATIONOF ONE HOURLY CONCENTRATION OF CO WITH DISTANCEAT BHOGNIPUR-BAKEWAR

300

250

200 2

i~~~~~~~~~~~ _2001 150 . -2005 l2010! 100

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.4: Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Bhognipur-Bakewar

VARIATIONOF EIGHT HOURLY CONCENTRATION OF CO WITH DISTANCEAT BHOGNIPUR-BAKEWAR

250

, 200

150 +200t

\_2005

100- it 2010

50 -

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure8.5: Variation of PeakOne-hourly Concentration of CO with distance at Gonda-Bahraich

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 98 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assescment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2 001

VARIATION OF PEAK ONE HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF CO WITH DISTANCE AT GONDA-BAHRAICH

200

180

160 - 140

120 20 1002 .I20 °° -X 2010

80 GK_< 602 *40

202

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure8.6: Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat Gonda-Bahraich

VARIATION OF EiGHr HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF CO WiTH DISTANCEAT GONDA-BAHRAICH

160

140

120

100 - i 2001

80 s \ ' +20051

60 2 V 9+2010

40 202

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.7: Variation of One-hourly Concentrationof CO with distanceat Jaunpur-Mohammadpur

Government of Urtar Pradesh,Public Works Department, LLicknow,India 99 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

VARIATION OF ONE HOURLY CONCENTRATION OF CO WITH DISTANCE AT JAUNPUR-MOHOMMODPUR

160-

140

120

100

80 - .... 2005 60 . 20101

402 20J

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.8: Variation of Eight-hourlyConcentration of CO with distanceat launpur- Mohammadpur

- ~~ --- ______-. ~------_ ___ - - ~----- VARIATION OF BGHT HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF CO WITH DISTANCEAT JAUNPUR-MOHOMMOOPUR

120

100

80- .30 \ , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2001 j

60 2005 I '20101 40 ___

20 .

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Governmii^'n'of Utidr Pradesh,Public Works Departmiient,LLicknow, India 10 Project Co-wrdinatinigConsLltants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Figure 8.9: Variationof 24 Hourly Concentrationof NO, with distanceat Katra-Bilhaur

VARIATIONOF 24 HOURLYCONCENTRATION OF NOx WITH DISTANCEAT KATRA-BILHAUR

180 I 160 t 140 120 100 \ 20011 80 - -in--2005 601,E _~~~~~~~~~~~~~20101li 60 --_ - 40!

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.10: Variationof 24 Hourly Concentration of NO, with distanceat Bhognipur- Bakewar

VARIATIONOF 24 HOURLYCONCENTRATION OF NOx WITH DISTANCEAT BHOGMPUR-BAKEWA

180 160 140

120 - 100201!

80 80 \ 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~2010'

60 - 40 20

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh, Ptiblic-Works Department, Lucknow, India 1t 1 ProjectCo-ordinatieg Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Figure 8.11: Variation of 24 Hourly Concentration of NO, with distance at Gonda-Bahraich

VARIATION OF 24 HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF NOx WITH DISTANCE AT GONDA-BAHRIACH

140

120

100 I

80 2001

60 2010

40

20

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Figure 8.12: Variation of 24 Hourly Concentration of NO, with distance at jaunpur- Mohainmadpur

VARIATION OF 24 HOURLY CONCENTRATIONOF NOx WITH DISTANCE AT JAUNPUR-MOHOMMODPUR

90 - 80v , 70 7a60 o so r 50 ... 2004 40

5'30- o 20-

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Oistance (ir.)

Governmentof UttarPradesh, PLiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India Project Co-oldi;;1ihrg Consull.rlui (PCC)Seivices for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants BV September2001

8.3.2 WATERRESOURCES

The proiect corridors traverse across major river basins of the Ganga, the Yamuna and their tributaries-allpart of the Himalayan Drainage system,most of which are northwestand southeast flowing perennial rivers, causingfrequent flooding. To facilitatethe cross-drainageat thesewater crossings,543 cross-drainagestructures are being proposedincluding improvementsin the existing structures. The surfacewater flow in the project area is predominantlyfrom the north to the south. In addition, there are 47 stagnantwater resourcesincluding ponds locatedalong the variousproject routes.. Most of them are located in or alongside the RoW and are being used by the local community for washing/bathingpurposes. Thesesurface water bodies can be subject to adverse impacts due to the various construction activities as well as during the operation stageof the project.

Water table along the project road is quite high due to its proximity to large perennial rivers and the topographybeing plain. All along the highway, a total of 901 tube wells /hand pumpsand wells were reported within and just abuttingthe RoW. Due to the high water table along the corridor, wells and tube wells arerf.ostly the sourcesof potable and irrigation water. The typical impactson water resourcesduring the constructionof a roadare summarised in Table8.4.

Table 8-4 Impacts on water resourcesdue to constructionactivities ImpactsDue To Construction Indicators Lossof waterbodies Areaof waterbodies affected L|ossof other;watersupply sources Numberof wellsaffected Alterationof drainage,run off, flooding ___ No.of crossdrainage clhannets Depletion of Ground Water recharge _ Area renderedImpervious Useof WaterSupply for Construction Quantumofwater used Cotaminationfrom fuel and lubricants Natureand quantum of contaminators Contanminationfromimproper sanitation and Waste Areaof camp / disposal site and proximity to water Disposalin ConstructionCamps bodies/ channels

Alterationof Drainage

Impactsof road construction,which lead to alterationof drainage,are generallydue to widening at culvertsor at bridge locations. This requiresriver and or gully training for the periodduring which the bridge is to be constructed. Alteration of drainagecan lead to soil erosion of adjacent areas, disturb local vegetation.If the period of alteration is long, here are chancesof local ecologybeing impaired. However,as mostlybridge works are done in summerswhen the water levelsare low in the rivers, the impacts due to alteration of drainagecan be minimized effectivelywith adequate mitigation measuresand pre planned construction schedules.As part of Phase-Iup-gradation, no 6 new major bridgesare to be constructed". -

Pre ConstructionStage No drainage modification of surface flow of rivers/streamsis envisaged-duringpre-construction period.

ConstructionStage Though construction along the watercoursesis to be carried out in the lean flow periods, as the major rivers are-perennial, the construction activities will necessitatediversion of the waterways. Four major bridges(spanning more than 60 m) lie along routesselected for up-gradationin Phase-I. Their rehabilitation will involve some diversion of waterway. This diversion of flow can significantly harm the aquatic habitat, if any. The waterway will be constricted,increasing velocity downstreamof the bridge. This will mean increasedsediment load with the flow, therebyallowing lesssunlight to penetrateinto the water and can reducegrowth of micro flora. The impact shall be -direct but shortterm in natureand shall lastas long as constructioncontinues. Design proposesthe raisingof the embankmentsby a minimum of I.Om from the existing levelsto ensurethat the finished pavementis above the High flood level so as to preventany impactsdue to

1 Theconstructioll oi maiorbridges as part of theproject has been shifted to Phase11.

Governmentof UtrarPradesh, PuLblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 103 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DHVConsultants BV Septeimber2001

any water seepagein the pavement.No significant impacts in the drainage pattern due to the raising of the road profile are likely, as the road design itself takes care of the cross-pavement drainage.

Operation Stage One of the unavoidable aftermathsof road construction is the increasedsurface run off. The addition of hard pavedshoulders, which essentiallyincrease paved impervious surface,will cause increasedsurface runoff along the roadsides.An averageincrease of width of 5 m of blacktop has been assumedsince the pavementwidth variesfrom 3.75 m to 7 m and the hard shouldersare 1.5 m wide on either side. Increasein surfacerun-off is due to the creationof impervious surfacesthat prevent the flow of water into the ground. The increasedrunoff from the project has been worked out as follows:

Increasein runoff (cu.rn) = increasein runoffco-efficient due to construction* annual rainfall in the area(m) areaof the newly constructedsurface.

.The entire corridor traversesover alluvium with runoff coefficient of 0.35 and the black top has a run-off coefficient 0.90. The increasein the runoff co-efficient has been worked out as 0.55, i.e, the difference between the runoff co-efficient of black top surface and alluvial soil has been adopted as increasedrun-off co-efficient due to the projectin Table 8.5.

Table8-5 IncreasedRun-off along Project Packages due to UPSRP

increased I iTotal Length Increased Increased Corridor (km) width (m) Rainfall (m) Co-efficient ' width (m) run-of(i) of ruin-off ~~~~~~~I Katra-Bilhaur- 148.440= 5 1 05= 0.55 _428620.5 |ahraich-Faizabad _ 82.300 5 1.3 0.55i 339487.5 |Bshognipur-ChaudagraMode I 109.350_ 5 0.825 0.55 248087.8 |Jlaunpujr-moammedpur I 33.870 5 1 1 0.S5 I 102456.7

Impactsdue to surface runoff include increasedsoil erosion and local flooding or water logging. However,as the proposedup-gradation has been designedwith ditches on both sidesto take care of runoff, and surface runoff shall be drained to the nearest cross drainage structure. The engineeringdesign includesdesign of crossdrainage structures, which shall take care of the extra flow.

IncreasedSediment and Degradation of Water Quality

Pre-constructionand ConstructionStage The degradationof waterquality can occur during constructionstage from increasedsediment load into watercoursesnear the construction site. This may be aggravatedby removal of trees and consequent increase in soil erosion. As soil in the study area is alluvial type with a high silt composition, the impactsdue to the increasedsediment load will be significantand need to be addressedfor all water bodies along all the routes. Numerous irrigation canalsthat criss-crossthe study areaare unlikely to be subjectedto such run-off dischargesbecause they have properly raised bermson their banks.

The impactsof run-off laden with sedimentmay be felt in villages that depend on the fish living in the water-body. Increased load of fine sediment will make the water more turbid. If the concentrationsare exceptionallyhigh (> 185 mg/I), smaller fish can be harmed. Heavier sediment may smotherthe algaegrowing in the lower strataand would completely alter the substratumof the watercourse. Excessivesediment loads mayalso meandisruption to areaswhere fish lay their eggs.

Degradationof water quality is also possibledue to accidental dischargesinto watercoursesfrom drainage of workers' camps and from spillage in vehicle parking and/or fuel and lubricant storage areas.

Since the soil is alluvial and contains a large proportion of silt, percolation to underlying aquifer will be very fast. Therefore,any pollutant discharge may qLiickly percolate into the depths of the

Government of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Deparnment,L.icknow. India 104 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeslhState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

earth. Remediatingsuch a situation may be technically possible but may have financially prohibitive implications.

Operation Phase During the operation phase,there is little chance of degradation of water quality during normal operations. The implications of accidentai dischargeare potentially disastrous.But, it must be emphasisedthat the probability of such an accident is quite low, indeedone of the objectivesof the design is the enhancementof roadsafety.

Lossof Water bodiesI Groundwatersources

Projectroutes traverse areas, which are plentiful in water resources.A number of ponds lie adjacent to the existing alignmentand will be affectedby the proposed widening works as part of the up- gradation. The existing road also cuts acrcssseveral ponds. Water bodies,which need to be filled up to accommodatethe widened formation upwill have a reduced storagecapacity. There are a total of 5 suchponds directly impacteddue to the project.

A number of groundwater sources-wellsand hand pumps are located within the Col of the proposed up-gradation.The lossof these supplies of relatively pristine water (see comparison of water quality in section 5.2.3) would be a direct negativeimpact. However, the project envisages replacementof each sourceof water supply before removing a single one. It is also envisagedthat the affected population will provide its inputs on where to locate the new source. Therefore,the eventual impact of the proposedwidening may only be marginal.The number of hand pumpsand wells aregiven in Table 8.6.

Table 8-6 Groundwater resources

Route No. of . No. of

Katra-Biihaurr11 . C Bahraich-Faizabad 0 1 EhognipLr-Chau a Mode 2 O jaunpur-Mohammedpur 3 0 Total 16 1

FloodHazard

The routes selectedfor up-gradationin Phase-Iof the UPSRPpass through the plains of the Ganga and its tributaries. Flooding is a frequent occurrence at several locations. The river Sangur in corridor 14 overtopsthe bridge in km 14 (nearChhapar Ghata village) due to the backflow from the Yamuna.Flooding also occurs in settlementswhere the residentshave raisedthe plinth of roadside houses,converting the road into a drain. The extent of impact varies from some localiseddamage to the pavementto washing away of sections of the road. While raising the level of the road, usually 1 m above the HFL, care should be taken to ensure that the raising of the road does not causeflooding in the settlements.Adequately sized drains to accommodatethe increaseddischarge will be a part of good engineeringpractice. Provision for additional culverts and drains will be beneficial to the road side residents.It is expected that overall the project will help improve the situation of exposureto flood hazards.

8.3.3 LAND

Physiography

The impact of roadconstruction on physiography is a function of the terrain of the area.It is most drastically altered in case of hilly terrain or where extensivecut-and-fill operations are involved. Since all the routesin Phase-Ipass through plain areasand no substantialcut-and-fill operationsare planned,the overall'impact on the physiographyof the areawould be limited.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Puiblic Works Depatnment,LUickI(W, India 105 Project Co-ordinaiing Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar Prcit'sEhSitte RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 0) DHV ConsultantsBV September 2001

Seismiicity

All routes in Phase-Iof the UPSRP are located in zone Ill or IV. Theseare relatively stableareas. Road construction in this area will have little impact on its overall earthquakepotential since no major blastingis ensisaged at the constructionsite.

Lossof productive soil

Pre-constructionstage Loss of productive soil, albeit during the construction stage only, is envisaged at locations of workers' camps,stockyards, storage godowns etc are located on fertile areas.The EMPcan ensure that no productive areasare usedfor these purposesand avoid adverseimpact. In any case,though it would be a direct impact,it would be reversible.

Construction stage The soils along almostall routes,except for the ravinesin route 14, are of alluvial type, capableof producing high yields, largely due tc the rich soil nutrients depositedby the Gangaand Yamuna and their tributaries.Soils both within and outsidethe RoW may be negativelyimpacted due to the proposed project. The loss of productive topsoil due to road constructionis a direct adverselong- term impact. Suchloss would be further significantas the routesare locatedin the someof the best agricultural areasof India. However, no land acquisition is envisagedfor the Phiase-Iof UPSRP. Therefore, the impact on productive soil, if any, would be temporary-restrictedto the time for which the land is acquiredfor diversions,labour camps,etc.

Soil Erosion

The soil in the study areavaries from sandyloam to silty clay. Thereforethe potential for erosion is low. Erosionwill be exacerbatedif the vegetationis removedfrom the sidessince roots are known to hold soil together.This will howeverbe for the duration until the compensatoryafforestation and roadside turfing have matured. In stietches where raised carr;agewayhas been planned, slope protection measuresare a must.

It may not be possibleto improve a road without removing trees and therefore erosion may be unavoidable. However, to preventthe eroded materialfrom entering the watercourse,silt fencing can be provided at the end of ditches or cascadearrangements can be provided at the end of ditches as they enter the watercourse. While the former requiresfrequent cleaning to preventbuilt- up, the voids in the cascadewill be filled up by eroded materialand eventually vegetationwill be establishedthere.

No soil erosion is envisagedwhen the road is in operation as all the slopesand embankmentsof the project road shall be stabilized through sound engineeringtechniques. The issuehas been addressedat the design stageitself and all slopeshave been 1V: 2H, which shall ensurestability of the embankment.

Compaction of soil

Pre-ConstructionStage Compaction of Soil will occur in the pre-constructionstage (particularly during site clearancestage) due to movementof heavy machineryand vehicles.Similarly, compaction will take place during setting LIp of construction camps and stockyards. However, this is a short duration impact. Appropriate mneasLiresneed to be specified in the Environmentalmanagement plan to minimize the areaof soil compactioin.

ConstructionStage Compaction occurs beyond the carriageway and within the vegetated area of the RoW by the movementof vehicles and heavy machinery. Movementof vehicles during road constructionis the major caLuseof soil compaction. This impact is direct and will be maximum in the RoW. It is

Governmenitof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Departnent, Lucknow, India 106 Piujeu Co-vdiit,,,im,gCQstLlta,t tt'CC) Servicesior uttar t-radesh Stilte RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase i) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

necessary to ensure that there is no adverse impact of soil compaction in areas other than the RoW, where vegetationcan grow and rain infiltrationwill take place.

OperationStage During the operationperiod compactionwill be restrictedto the carriageway. Compactioncannot be said to be an impact of the operation stageas the pavementitself is a function of compacted baseand sub base.

Contaminationof Soil

Pre-ConstructionStage Contaminationof soil in the pre-constructionstage may be considered as a short4erm residual negative impact. Soil contaminationmay take place due to solid waste contamination from the labour camp set up during pre-constructionstage. This impact is significant at locations of constructioncamps; stockyards, hot mix plantsetc. will come up in this stage.

ConstructionStage Contamination of soil during construction stage is primarily due to construction and allied activities. The sites where construction vehicles are parked and serviced are likely to be contaminatedbecause of leakageor spillageof fuel and lubricants. Pollution of soil can also occur in hot-mix plants from leakageor spillage of asphaltor bitumen. Refuseand solid waste from labour camps can also contaminatethe soil. Contaminationof soil during construction might be a major long-termresidual negativeimpact. Unwarranted disposalof construction spoil and debris will add to soil contamination. This contaminationis likely to be carried over to water bodies in caseof dumping beingdone nearwater body locations.

OperationStage During the operation stage, soil pollution due to accidental vehicle spills or leaks is a low probability but potentially disastrousto the receiving environment, should they occur. These impacts can be long term and irreversibledepending upon the extent of spill. The contamination due to deposition of heavy metals such as Lead is a cause for concern. However, since the proportion of petrol-drivenvehicles is not large and since phasing out of Lead from petrol has become a priority. Lead from vehicular emissionsis expected to grow at a reduced rate and eventually taper off. However,monitoring of soil quality may be continued during construction& operation to ensurethat this is indeedoccurring.

83A CONSUMPTIONOF NATURALRESOURCES

The proposed up-gradationworks envisagethe use of massivequantities of the earth,stone and grit and sand alongwith bitumen.The table8.7 indicatesthe quantitiesrequired for eachstage

Table8-7 Materialsrequirement for variousroutes selected for up-gradationin Phase-

Route Approximatequantities of major itemsof work Route ~~~~~~~~~~GranularSub-ba'se Bitu,m,in ou s No. From To Earthworks Sub-base . and ase Work (Cu m) ( urn) ~course(Cu m) (Cum) 4 Katra Bilhaur 1,856,000 191,000 233,000 227,000 7 .Bahraich ,Faizabad '1,279,000, 128,000, 161,000): 153,000 14 BhognipCir ChaudagraMode 813,300 67,000 70,000 101,000 18 JauinpLr Mohammedpujr 760,000 59.000 63,000 63,000 l Total 4,708,300 443,000- 527,000 544,000J

Quarries

The excavationof quarriesand borrow pits used for obtaining rocks, soil and aggregatematerials for road construction can causedirect and indirect long-termadverse impacts on the environment. Although the cut operationsshall generateample rock and soil material it is likely that material

Governrent of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lticknow, India 107 Project Co-ordinating Consaltants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

from quarry and borrow areascould be neededdepending on the appropriatenessof the material quality. The impacts of Quarrying operations could be significant at various stagesof road construction. Quarrying and crushingcould have a critical impact especially on the air quality of the area especially the area downwind to the quarry. The stagewise impactsare as described below.

Pre Construction Stage Existing quarries that are already identified by the UPPWD have been recommendedfor this project, and no new quarries have been proposed. The bulk of the materialsneeded for the construction of the embankmentswill be procured from the existingquarries. As thesequarries are already in operation with the requisite environmental clearancesand redevelopmentplans, no major impacts,which arisein makingnew quarriesoperational, are likely.

Construction Stage A major source of dust ouring the constructionstage is from stone crushing operationsfrom the crusher and the vibrating screen. The dust, in addition to being an eyesore, reducesvisibility thereby increasingsafety concerns. Dust is generateddue to procurementand transport of raw materialsfrom quarriesand borrows sitesto the road constructionarea. Theseimpacts will persist till the activity ceases. The regions especiallydownwind to the quarries/borrowareas are more vulnerable to air pollution.

As no new Quarry needs to be openedfor this project (majority of the material being generated from cut operationswithin the site itself), therefore, no new impactsare likely to arise due to quarrying operations.

Though the quarry materialsare to be transportedover long distances,except for route 14 where the material will come from nearby Hamirpur, to the construction sites, almost all the quarries identified have proper accessroads, therefore, no major impactsduring the haulageof materialsis envisaged. The issueof dust generationetc along the haul roads needsto be addressedthrough proper enforcementof dust suppressionmeasures.

Borrow Pits

The total quantity of earthworksfor PhaseI up-gradationroutes is !The FormulaNot In Tablecu.m. No major earthworksare envisagedalong major maintenance routes. Severalborrow pits have been identified along all the up-gradationroutes. It has been estimatedthat the volume of earth available is sufficientfor the earthworks.

Pre ConstructionStage A huge quantity of sand would be required for the cement concrete rigid pavementand for the cross-drainagestructures proposed. As the project corridor is in the vicinity of the major rivers of Ganga and Yamuna,sand required for the construction w.ll mostly he procured from thesebanks. None of these sites would require any preventiveenvironmental measures. However, the long leadsmean that care would haveto be takento preventspillage of materialand damageto the haul roads during transportation. No additional adverseenvironmental impact, except those resulting from spillageduring transportation,is expectedto occur.

As the borrowing is to be carried out in accordanceto the guidelines laid out in IRC-10-1961,no major adverseimpacts are anticipated. Also, productive agriculturalareas have been avoided for borrowing. However,the borrow area pits, if not treated properly afterthe borrowing is complete, can form stagnantpools and pose health hazardsto preventwhich redevelopmentof borrow areas need to be worked out. Additionally, they can also act as breeding ground for vectors like mosquitoesjust aftermonsoon.

ConsttuctionStage Cartageof the borrow materialsto the cotistructionsites is of significance,as almost all such areas are accessiblethrough dirt tracks only and therefore, spillage and compaction of soil along these

Governmnet of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 108 Project co-ordinalingConisultants (PcCI Services (or Uriar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September 2001

tracks will be a significant impact. Proper protection measuresneed to be worked out for the minimising of such impactsduring the haulageof borrow materials.

Rehabilitationof borrow areasfrom which earth has been excavated,is a potential problem which needsto be addressed.In addition to visualblight. safetyissues shall also be considered.

Use of Fly Ash as fill material

The use of fly ash from PankiThermal Power Station was considered for route 4. Sincethe fly ash is an excellent fill material, it could be used in high formation to reduce quality of soil used.The other potential use could be provisionof slope protection by fly ashbricks. However,during phase I of UPSRP,no new high embankmentsare planned. Therefore,it cannot be used as fill material since the existing formation is sufficient for the proposed improvementwithin the stretch falling within 50 km of Panki.

However, no supplyof fly-ashbricks for free is available within the area. Therefore,fly ash will not be usedduring phaseI of UPSRP.

8.35 NOISE

Though the level of discomfort caused by noise is subjective, there is a definite increasein discomfort with an increasein noise levels. Road noise dependson factors suchas traffic intensity, the type and condition of the vehicles plying on the road, acceleration/deceleration/gearchanges by the vehicles dependingon the level of congestionand smoothnessof road surface (IRC: 104- 1988).

The baseline noise levels monitored at various locations along the project routes indicate the baseline levelsexceed the permissiblelimits for residentialand rural areasduring day-timewhereas at nights the values are quite close to the limit specified by the CPCBfor residentialareas. Thus, noise is a major areaof concern, especial!ysince a number of sensitivereceptors (schools, colleges and hospitals)have been identifiedto be quite closeto the roadalong all routes.

The impactson noise due to the project will be of significancein both the construction as well as the operationstages.

Pre-Constructionstage Noise levels during the pre constructionstage are mostly expectedto be indicative of prevalenit baseline levelsapart from localisednoise levelsat locations where pre constructionstage activities are taking place such as establishmentof workers camps,stockyards. Theseincreased noise levels will prevail only for -ashort durationduring the pre constructionstage. Moreover, asthese activities are not likely to be placed near settlementlocations the increasednoise impact is bound to be negligible.

ConstructionStage Due to the various constructionactivities, there will be temporary noise impactsin the immediate vicinity of the project corridor. The construction activities will include the excavation for foundations and grading of the site and the construction of structures and facilities. Crushing plants, asphalt production plants, movement of heavy vehicles, loading, transportation and unloading of construction materials produce significant noise dLiring construction stage. The typical noise levels associatedwith the various construction activities and the various construction equipmentsare presentedin Table8.8.

Government of UrnarPradesh, Public works Department,Lucknow. India 109 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for UnarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Table 8-8 Typical noise levelsof principal construction equipment (Noise Level in dB (A) at 50 Feet) CLEARING STRUCTURECONSTRUCTION ___ Bulldozer 80 Crane >77 Frontenid loader 72-84 Weldinggenerator 71-82 lack hanmmer _ 81-98 Concretemixer 74-88 Cradiewvith bdll 75-87 iCorncrete pump 814 j l Concretevibrator 76 EXCAVATION& EARTH MOVING Air compressor 74-87 uIldoezer 80 Pneumatictools 81-98 Backhoe _ __ 72-93 Bull1dozer 80 Iront end loader 72-84 Cementand durnp trucks 83-94 Duinp truLck 83-94 Frontend loader 72-84 Jack hanmmer 81-98 Dump truck - 83-94 Scraper 80-93 Paver 86-88 lGRD!NANDCOMPACTING = LANDSCAPINGAND CLEAN-UP l.. .._Grader - . _ ., . ._ - -_ _.__. -- ---80-93 ------. Bulldozer 80 I Roller 73-75 I Backhoe 72-93 l Truck 83-94 PAV'Il NG _ Front__ .end _ _ loader. . 72-84 PFaver 86-88= Dump_truck 83-94 l.TTruck . 83-94 Paver 86-88. __.__.:_._..__.____..__ Tamper 74-77 Dump truck 83-94

Source: U.S EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Noise From Construction Eqtuipmentand Operations. BEiildingEquipmenit and Home Appliances. NfD. 300.1. December31. 1971

Though the noise levels presented for the various construction activities far exceed the permissible standards, it is important to note that the construction noise is generally intermittent and depends on the type of operation, location and function of the equipment. Proper mitigation measures as to regulate the timings of construction, employing noise protection measures etc. need to be,worked out.

Operation Stage To assess the noise levels at the various sensitive receptor locations along the corridor, the prediction of noise levels"7 has been made for the years 2005 and 2010, using the FHWA Transport Noise Model.

The Highway Noise Model presented below is based upon calculating the hourly L, for all category-wise vehicles-separately and then adding these logarithmically to obtain the overall hourly

L,5 as follows:

10 L, (hi) = Loei + "log Ml + log 15 '( -13 + os SiT D Where, Leq(hi) Equivalentnoise level at the hour (hi) for vehicle type (i) L_, Reference mean energy level for (ith) vehicle type Ni Number of vehicles of (ith) classpassing in time (T) one Hour (1 hour3 Si AverageSpeed of vehicles of (ith) class(kmphl T Time duration corresponding to Ni, one hour D Perpendiculardistance in (m) from centrelineof the traffic laneto observer o Factor relatitig to absorption characteristicsof the ground cover between roadway and observer (to be conservative,this is taken as 0 in actual modelling, but consideredqualitatively in the final analysis)

'-Operationalnoise for thehighway are predicted through the model developed by FederalHighway AdiTnistration, Department of Transportationof the U.S.Likely noise levels at various receptor locations predicted through FHWA noise model in presentstidy. Thevarious assumlptions predictiig-the noise levels along the corridor throIgh ithe FHWA inodel were: * No significantchange in thevehicle characteristics is anticipated during the projectedperiod; . Thereare no majorgrade differerices in theproject area as it is geiierally a plainterrain and genile slopes of 10/ to 3%.,anid no significant effect of grade on the noise levels is anticipated; . Thetraffic along thte proposed section is assumedto flOwsimLltaneoLIsly in both the lanes and in both directions; * Noisefroimi other sources apart from the highway is notbeing accounted for in themiiodelling; and * Thereceptor is consideredto be independentof thenoise emitted from theadjacent stretches.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Deoartment, Lucknow, India 110 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase i) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Ss: Shieldingfactor for barrier(to beconservative, this is takenas 0 in actualmodelling, but considered qualitatively in the final analysis)

Thecombined effect of all the vehiclecategories can bedetermined at the receptorby addingthe individual valuesusing the followingequation.

= log10 lbLN11v00 h=i

ReferenceNoise Levels

The vehicular noise emission levelssignificantly vary with vehicle speed.It is thereforenecessary that speeddependency of noise emissionsfor various categoriesof vehicles is taken into account while using the model for noise prediction due to the roadway. In this work the speed-noise relationspresented by National EnvironmentalEngineering Research Institute (NEERI) in their report on Environmental and Social AssessmentDelhi - NOIDA Bridge Project have been adopted (Table8.9).

Table8-9 Speed-noiserelationships for variousmotor vehicles

Cars i Trucks & Buses 213Wheelers Speed(kmph) (dB(A)) (do (A)) (dB (A))

30 - 56 0 J 73.0 L 58.0 40 59.0 _ 760 _ 61.0 S0_ _630 =,1 800 66.0 60 68.0 81.0 _ 68.0 70 _ _680 = 815 7=0. 80 _ 700 _ 82.0 72.0 90. . !._ ___.o _ , 83702_0A 74.0 100 . 74.0 _' 83 5 76.0

TrafficVolumes and Speed

To arrive at the hourly distribution of the category-wisetraffic over a.day for the horizon yearsthe ratio of category-wisehourly traffic to the daily traffic basedon the 1999 survey data of various sectionswas used.

Diiferent operative speedshave been nsed for different years in the design life to get a realistic picture of the noise levels. Thesespeeds have already been presentedin table 8.2. Provisionof glazing in schools is consideredto reduce noise levels. The details have been covered in EMP. Predictednoise level at sensitivereceptors are given in Table8.10.

Table8-10 PredictedNoise levels during design life of UPSRP

- i s . = .... =. | .Predictednoise Predicted noise Typesof Sensitive Chainage StandarddB(A) S. No. Receptors (kn leveldMA) 2005 leveldBtA) 2010 Sadr BA ______Day Night Day Night | Day I Night Route 4 Katra-Bjlhaur = =~ -=~- -- ~-~~= 1 Educational Institute 58 030 67.5 66 5 702 692 55 45 2 Health Facility 101.009 67.5 665 702 69.2 55 . 45 3 : EducationalInstitute 760 67.5 66 5 70 2 69 55 45 4 Educationalinstitute 104.770 67.5 66 5 70 2 69.2 55 45 5 Educational Institute 109.190 67.5 66.5 70.2 69.2 55 45 6 EducationalInstitute 109.196 67.5 665 702 69.2 55 45 7 EducationalInstitLite t 9.743 67.5 66 5 70 2 69.2 55 45 8 Education.alInstitute 30.893 67 5 66 S 70.2 69.2 55 45 Rotite 7 Bahraich-Faizabad 1- ...... -Educational------Institute ------93.196 --- -- 66.3 64 9 69 67.6-.-- ...-.--...... _...... 5 - 45 2 EducationalInstitute 64.309 66.3 64 9 69 67.6 55 45 3 EduLcationalInstitLite 70.464 66 i 64.9 69 t 67.6 55 45 4 Educational Institute 73.086 66.3 64.9 69 67.6 55 45 Route 14 Bhognipur-ChaudagraMode 1 EdUCationalInstitUte- - 37.674 68-6 65.4 71 68 55 45 Educational Institute 38.283 68.6 65.4 | 71 68 55 45

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Deartlment. Ltucknow,India 111 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants [PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental AssessmetAt(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001 I

Predicted noise Predicted noise .No Typesof Sensitive Chainage lee dBAi05 lvld()21 Standard dB(A) Receptors (krn) -- - - __ ___iDayNight Day Night Day Night 3 EducationalInstitute 48.474 68.6 65.4 71 68 55 45 4 iEdiucationalInstitute 53 571 686 65.4 71 68 55 45 5 EducationalInstitute ___ 71.600 68.6 65 4 71 68 55 45 6 EducationalInstitute 71 7621 68.6 65.4 71 68 I 55 45 7 EducationalInstitute j__ 75.700 68.6 654 71 68 55 45 Route18j Jaunpur Mohammedpur _ L==_ NO SENSITIVERECEPTORS

As can be seenfrom the above table, the noise levelsalong routesin Phase-Iare well beyond the limits for residentialareas. The effectsof the increasenoise levels on young studentsand patients being treated in the health facilitiesadjacent to the project roads have not been evaluatedin any detail. However, a comparisonwith the base line indicates that the increasein the values is not uniform with respectto the observedconcentration. However, there is a continuous increasein the noise levels,which needsto be addressedas part of the proposed mitigation measures.The noise levels as a function of distancefrom road centrelineare presentedin figures8.13 to 8.20 for the horizon years2005 and 2010.

Goverinmentof Uttar Pradtsh, Public Works Department. Lucknowv,India 112 Project Co-ordialiting Consultants (PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Figure 8.13 Noise level, Leq (Day),Leq (Night)Variation (Katra-Bilhaur),Year 2005

Lei. L.-Ws. L.q 10 n L.|Iitt l Vio

iO; - < 1-1-

70

__ _ S'. ______

304 ______

230 - --

101 ___.______- _.-__I

0 100 200 300 4CC 600 r00 700 503

______~~~~~~~~~F.__...... Ii

Figure 8.14 Noise level, Leq (Day),Leq (Night)Variation (Katra-Bilhaur),Year 2010

Nc. L.-i.. L.q (05.y) .nd Lq (6 5ig0V0i i (55r iSih...Y. -20105

6C______--~ _--- ______

70 _ ___

60s_ _

40 2050 - _ - _ . ______. _ , -

2s,0 ______._ _ . _ _ _ _ .. _ _ +

, 0 _-* ---- _ '- _ _------_------. ------2

0 100 200 31X 400 500 6W 700 No0

Fig- ,12

Government of Unir Pradesh,PUblIC Works Department, Luicknow,India 113 Proecrt Cn-ordinating Convsiltants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessnent (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV Septemrber2001

Figure 8. 15: Noiselevel, Leq(Day), Leq(Night) Variation (Gonda-Bahraich),Year 2005

40 Y.r 00402

30 ______,_- _ \.-- ______.____- . .. _1

50 00 _0 __0 40 _0 0

< I

1000 _ .- _ _ ___ .___.

40 _ ,-_ _ _ _ _ ~ ______

e 70o ______, 0 ¶0 00 3 000 00 400 000 000o 5000

_ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . __ _. 4,0

Figure 8.16:level, NoiseLeq (Day), Leq (Night) Variation (Gonda-Bahraicwh), Year 201044*~*

Fguvrem8.16: a Noadse,PLevel,c [eqk (Day),t[eqnight)knoVarniato (odaahac)Yer21

Governmentlittar Pradesh,of Public Works Department, Lucknow,,1. India,_ q (i3 7 114q Projet CoordieeingConsltansIPCI Sevice for ttarPradsh Satsel-Road Project Environmentalseptember2001 Assessment(Phase 1)

Figure8.17: Noiselevel, Leq(Day), Leq figure 8.1Noise (Night) 7 level, Variation LeqO. 0Jaunpur_Mobammadpur), Year2005 .4 L I4(D4V.d40f

60C

10~ . 5t__ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~nu-oaradj) ot0 _ _ _ _ _- LC er21 Ch~~~4. Figure8.18 Noiselevel, Leq (Day),Leq (Night) Variation Ojaupr hamdr)Yer20

t I 70 ---.3I 40 ------

4 --

20

covernhit of uttar Prades ic Works F'roCCt~o.rdit~gCoeis De_ rt_e . t (CC, _ __ _ . _ida services frUtrpaehSaeRasPcC _.. Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Figure8.19 Noiselevel, Leq (Day),Leq (Night) Variation(Bhognipur-Bakewar), Year 2005

N.I.. L-1 ar.fl.t.k .fld.qZ(NOght)OS,W- YifFnrffwi-tYtt20fS)

F0--- _ ____1j

70 .- 0

4 0 - ______i|.3

70oo------_ _ -

20 I

10'-

O 00 200 3X lC 500 00 7X00 0r

Di OtencO CO.)

Fig-T 2 FIgo, 2

Figure 8.20 Noise level, Leq (Day),Leq (Night) Variation (Bhognipur-Bakewar),Year 2010

N.h. tr1th.. tLq (Dw) .ft L. q (ightt V0t..

ro ____ -!-- - - -

.00 10~~~~~~~~~~05 0 *TO8k.

50 ______

40._-_ ___-- --- …---- - _ __ f +L_F

owl..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0 TO 200 300 400 50 00 70

Governnent(if UttaTrPradesh., Pibl ic Works Department,LLucknow, India 11 6 Project Co-ordinanngConisultanits IPCC) Services for Utiar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

8.3.6 FLORA

RoadsidePlantations and Protected ForestAreas

The forest cover in UP has been reduced to a meagre 4.46% since the carving out of Uttaranchal in 2000 against a desirable level of 33%. Since the roadside plantation in UP is designated protected forests, saving it becomes extremely important. The principal impact on flora involves the removal of trees for the creation of a clear zone within the Corridor of Impact. Reason for clearing trees is threefold:

* To prevent single-vehicle collision with the roadside trees, trees very close to the road need to be cleared. Roadside trees are safety hazards, particularly those trees with strong and rigid stems. Some trees are safety hazards because they preclude clear sight distances. Some trees (such as Tamarindusindica) have a propensity to overturn when old and are potential safety hazards depending upon age and decay condition. All trees that are safety hazards need to be cleared. * To ease construction of the embankment for the widened road formation and, to permit construction of adequate roadside drainage structure, trees located within the clear zone need to be removed. * Trees need to be cleared to facilitate construction of traffic detours.

The stage wise impact on roadside trees and plantation has been described in the following sections.

Pre-ConstructionStage

The project has a significant, direct and long-term impact on Roadside trees in the Pre-construction stage. The cutting of trees shall have manifold impact. Most visible impact is the loss of shade. Also, there is a possibility of the local people being deprived of tree products, such as wood, fruits, leaves etc. Removal of roadside tress will reduce comfort levels for slow moving traffic and pedestrianis.

This negative implication needs to be taken into consideration by compensating with new plantation along the RoW of the project highway, including predominant species and girth sizes has been discussed in the chapter 5. Table 8.11 summarises the tree cutting required during up- gradation of each of the routes in Phase I.

Table 8-11 Summary of -trees to be cut for the up-gradation works in Phase-I of UPSRP r DSize wise number of trees RouteNo. and LinkDetails = Girt size_incm) = 30-60 60-90 90_180 > 180 ROUTE14- Elisogaipur-Gliataimpur 155 90. 19 3 267 Gh.ri.r-,pu,-Idiil,jabad 69 51 16 157 Ilalhalabad-Bakewar 117i 97! 42 3 259 Bake a,-Chouidagra 181 237 138 47 ,603 Total (Route 14) 5221 4751 235 54 1286 T*t . .URO-~ ------Katra-iaiala-bd _ 40 69 49 . 1 159 laiaiabad-.Alialtgani 168, 272 188 30 658 AIiahgani-BiiSram 1 2891 1 610, 1.065 E 77 4041l MaiIao'al-8ioga-rnal .... ?215 _ 125 100 19 459 rauiwaLl-B,Ilhaur 112 116 s0 15 321 Tolal (Route D) 1,824 2,192 1,482 142 5,640 ROUTE7 Bahralwrllr,-G.Wa s5 io'0 1z 47 = 84 Gonda-Na,abganl.1 13 4 4 63 Nasasbgalln-Faizabad 1 2 2 2 7 Total (Route 7) 19 36 18 55- 128

iaulipor-MohslAmadpur 60 137 I15) 354-- 736l Total (Roule 18) 60 1 137 31i5 354 736 I... ~...... - - ..-I. ... . _ _. -. ------GRAND TOTAL (All4 Routes) 2,425 2,840 2,050 605 7,790

Government of Utmir Pradesh,Publfc Works Deptjinm1ent,Lucknow, India 1 17 Project Co-ordinating Consuiltanis wICC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironnientalAssessinent (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

The micro-ecosystemssupported by the roadsidetrees are also a point of environmentalconcern. The removal of road side trees will not only lead to erosion,and depletion of the ground water table, but alsoto the lossof the micro-ecosystemsdeveloped on the roadside.

Construction Stage

Accidental cutting of roadsidetrees may occur during the construction stage.It can also occur due to negligencefrom the constructioncrew. Therefore,it is essentialthat all treesthat are to be felled be clearly marked. No other trees should be cut on site. Cutting of trees for fuel by workers, especially near their camps is also a concern, thereforeadequate training of the workers, and availability of fuel are to be ensuredby contractualobligations.

Operation Stage

The impactson flora during the operation stagecan occur due to accidental collision of vehicles. Though improved safetyon the highway is an objective of the project, the increasedspeed will mean that collisions will be more damagingto the flora than before.Moreover, increasedpollutant concentrationson roadsides(see section 8.3.1 for details) will mean harsher conditions for the newly planted roadsidetrees. Improved accessdesignated forests, as in some maintenanceroutes, can also makethem vulnerableto illegal logging.

8.3.7 FAUNA

The most significant location where fauna is important is the Parvati Aranga Bird Sanctuary, adjacent to route 7. Migratory birds, visit the sanctuaryduring the winter months (October to February). The possible impacts due to the project that can disturb the natural balance in the sanctuaryprecincts are: encroachmentinto the sanctuaryarea, disturbanceto visiting birds due to increasedtraffic on the road, illegal poaching, illegal collection of eggs/youngones, if any, etc. However, it must be stressedthat the existing alignment is older than the sanctuary,which was declaredonly in 1990.

There are no other recognizedwildlife havensin the vicinity of any of the project routes.However, several wetlands,adjacent to the road which were seen to supportvariety of flora and particularly avian-faunamay be disturbedduring construction.

No other locations of special interestfrom point of view of protecting fauna have been recorded along any of the routesselected for up-gradation.

8.3.8 HUMAN UJSEVALUES

LandAcquisition

No land acquisitionis envisagedduring Phase-Iof the entire UPSRP.

Lossof Private Properties

In the project widening is to be done only within the RoW, therefore,the only propertiesthat need to be acquired belong to squatters/encroachersthat have come up on PWD land. Most of the structuresare safety risks-for the road usersas well as residentsin case of accidents.It is to be noted that the entire RoW is not being cleared to limit the extent of impact of the project. The structures being removed are only within the Col. The owners of these properties will face uncertaintiesand possibly hardshipsuntil the compensation,as specified in the RAP, is paid to them. Table 8.13 givesimpact of upgradationon privateproperties.

Gnvernment f lJttar Pradesh,Publir Work; Department,iukriow, India 118 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCCJServices for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table 8-12 Impacton Privateproperties along up-radation routesin Phase-Iof UPSRP

. . mpatca.e.ry_ Route4 Route7 Routel4 Route18 Total Total residence 37 36 10 1 94 House and homestead 00 00 00 i 02 2 House and part ofhomestead 09 _ 03 06 00 18 Total homestead T 02 00 01 01 4 Partialhomestead 05 02 10o 23 40 POlypart of residence 38 30 22 110 200 Total commercial structure 134 105i 107- 06 352 Partof commercial structure 21 08 08 24 61 Total houseand part of comm. Structure 05 00 04 03 12 Totalcomm. Structureand partof house 12 18- 05S_1 07 42 Both houseand commercial structurein totaity It 0 0 1 01 23 Part of agriculture land 0 0 o1a 646 65 Irrigatno units 00 00 01 04 5 Trees in private property 00 00 01 00 I Onlysource oFincome 03 00 09 14. 26

HighwayAmenity and facilities

A number of facilitiesimportant for the residentsof roadsidesettlements exist along the edge of the existing road. Of these,the public buildingslikely to be affectedare given in Table 8.14.

Table8-13 Amenitiesand facilities affected alongPhase-I routes

AmenitylFacility Route-14 Route-4 Route-7 Route-18 Total Community Buildi_, - 03. - - 03 Police station - . - - 0

Changein landuse

The development due to the Project will induce a changesin the land use along the corridor. Change in land use will be sparkedoff as a resultof land speculation. The road, which is flanked by agricultural fields, is vulnerableto land-usesuccession. Industrialisation of fringe areasof cities is also a possibleimpact of a road developmentscheme. The availability of cheap labour and easy access to markets in the urban areas will make roadside areas quite an incentive for the industrialist.

Reducedtransportation costs and availability of high-speedtransportation facilities for raw maternals and products will be the most important advantageof the improved road. The mushroomingof industrial areason roadsidewill mean that the use of whatever infrastructurefacilities that may be available will preferentiallygo to the 'deep pockets' of the industry. This will further strainthese almost non-existentservices. In addition, in case of polluting industries, the environment will directly suffer if control measuresare not in place.

Though not directly falling within the project's remit, the feedbackfrom the proponents(UPPWD) to the civil authorities(Municipal Corporations, etc.) to implementappropriate planning restrictions so that the road does not becomethe only magnet in the area can be a great help to avoid the pitfalls like congestion,over-use of the road and under-developmentof the areas,which are further away from the road itself. In case, it is envisagedthat ribbon developmentwill occur in certain areas,provision can be-made for providing access/serviceroads to ensure that properties in the interior too can benefit from the betteraccess available through the improvedhighway.

LandSpeculation

Betterconnectivity will also mean that the value of roadsideproperties will rise almost overnight. The encroachmentonto the RoW for the road to cash in on this opportunity is an almost universal occurrence,to varying degrees. The lure of businessfrom road usersis usually the main magnet. Encroachment will mean that the future expansion/widening of the road scheme will be

Covernment of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Uepartmienti,Lucknowv, India 119 Project Co-ordisiatinigConsultants (PCCi Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessrrent iPhase Il DHVConsultants BV September2001

problematic and the issuesrelated with easementand eviction will becomea real challengefor the UPPWD that is alreadystretched to the limit.

Strict planning laws in conjunction with continuous unbiasedmonitoring of the development are the only proven strategiesagainst such illegal activities.However, this is beyond the jurisdiction of the UPPWD and thereforewill requireco-ordination with relevantauthorities on a regularbasis.

Cropping Patternand Crop Productivity

The proposed project is likely to bring in its wake, industrialisationand change in land use. This translatesinto change of land currently under agricultureto more commercial use. It is envisaged that due to this proposed change, the crop productivity in the agricultural belt immediately adjoining the RoW shall decrease.This impact is envisagedonly to be valid for the agriculturalland immediateto the RoW. Although the spatial impact is likely to be insignificant,the impact will be irreversiblein nature.

Exploitationof Resourcebase

Development of a road in areas previously not easily accessiblecan work like a double-edged sword for the environmentalresources in the area. While the road would unlock potentialvalue in the area, stimulate growth and make the environment hospitable, at the same time, the rapid depletion of natural resourcesis also possible.

Development of such vital infrastructure will lead to over exploitation of the environmental resources(e.g. too much groundwaterpumping, indiscriminatewastewater disposal, etc.). While the medium term impactsmay not be large enough to be noticed, the long-term implications of such depletion are potentiallydisastrous. The severedepletion of ground water resourcesin certain areas are likely if the expanded urban areascontinue to use bore wells for their domestic water supply.

Safety

The concernifor safetystems from the proposalsfor fastervehicular movementalong the highways. Though speedytravel is one of the objectivesof the project, it also increasesthe intensityof loss in case of an accident. The project has identified 'black spots' where accidentsare most likely and adequatemeasures are provided in designto reducethe risks.

8.4 Archaeological/ProtectedMonuments And Other CulturalProperties

There are a number of old monumentslocated along the routesselected for up-gradationin UPSRP. Most of these are located well away from the existing pavement,though quite close to and sometitneseven adjacent to the RoW.

8A.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAUPROTECTEDMONUMENTS

The only protected monument,the Mukteshwaritemple complex, is located 500 m from route 14 in km 17-18 and is not directly impacted by the proposedimprovements. The other old structures like the mansionof the king of Datia and the fort at ChhaparGhata may be partially impactedalong the samecorridor at km 57 and km 13 respectively.However, they can be indirectly affecteddue to increased pollution and traffic on the routes.

8.4.2 OTHERCULTURAL PROPERTIES

There are a number of other shrines/temples/mosques/structures,which are important in a local perspective. For the local populations, these are focal points of a number of activities of their

Government of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Deparimenl, LLcknow. India 120 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshSt.ite RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

daily/normal life. The table below 8.15 lists various such structures being impacted along the Phase-Iup-gradation routes.

Table 8-14 Summaryof culturalproperties impacted in Phase-Iupgradation routes

Description Roule-14 Route-4 Route-7 Route-18 Total Temnples/Shrines _2 03 133 , 18 G raveyard 01 -- 01

Relocationof CulturalAssets

Pre ConstructionStage Cultural properties lying in the high impact zone are most susceptibleto impactsdue to pre construction and constructionactivities. Clearingof the site during movementof road construction machinery will require a belt of about 4-5m from the edge of the carriageway,which is likely to impact cultural propertiesespecially lying in the high impact zone. Pre-Constructioncould also involve cutting down of sacredtrees if they are locatedin the Col.

Shrines and SacredStructures will be subjectedto varying degreeof impact dependingupon their placement in the RoW. Structures,which are close to the proposed carriageway,shall need relocation .

ConstructionStage Construction Stage,which involves not only the actual road construction process,but also allied activities such as movementof heavy road machinery, haul vehicles etc as well. These heavy vehicles need a belt of about 5m on the roadsidefor movement. Also, mixing etc activities need spacealong the road edge. All similar activities are likely to damage religiousstructures located in the RoW, especiallyshrines which arenot always in the line of sight.

Operation Stage Traffic Volumes and vehicles speedsare bound to increaseafter the proposed widening. As the widening could mean curtailing of the of accessway of religious properties,shrines and other religious structures in the RoW I Col are likely to be exposedto collision risk especially during night. One of the adverseimpacts of the road rehabilitationproject on the cultural property located along the roadedge is increasedrisk of damageto the propertydue to likely vehicularcollision.

Loss/Disruption of Access

Pre Construction One of the impactsof road construction,which is also a subsetof the above impacts,is interrupted accessto the cultural property. There are chancesthat usersof the cultural property may face difficulty in accessingthe property during the period of pre- construction. Increasedfrequency of movementof haul vehicles may obstructaccess to the cultural propertieslocated in the RoW. This impact is howevershort term.

ConstructionStage Loss of Access is likely to be severe during the construction period, due to movement of construction machinery,construction and labour campsor settingup of borrow areas,setting up of servicestations etc.

Operation Stage Loss/Disruptioni of Accessis envisagedin casesof land acquisition or severanceof land. In caseof the proposed road widening, the road widening may take tip part or whole of the approach to the property thusmaking it vulnerablein termsof its safetyor accessingit.

Goveriiinent of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Department,Lucknow, Inidia 1 21 ProjectCo-ordintiing Consultants (PCC) Services for UltarPradesli Stile RoadsProject Environmental Assessmenlt(Phsase 1) DHV Consultants BV September2001

8.5 Social impacts

8.5.1 PROJECTDISPLACED POPULATION

The encroachersand squattersthat shall have to be displacedfrom the Col due to the project are given in Table 8.16.

Table 8-15 Project Displacedpopulation

-Route Na. of PDPs No. of PDF 4 ~~~979l 325j 81i 252 Toa42 0 1 8 ~370 121 Total2897 938

The displaced families and displaced populatior. in each land use category of residential and commercial is given in Table 8.16 while Table 8-17 detailsout the impactson the groups identified asvulnerable as partof the UPSRP.

Table 8-16 Categorywise displacedPopulation

Routes Route 4 7 14 1 PAFsPDFs ~PAFsPDFs PAts PDFs PAFs PDFs Residential ~~~~ ~~~~83 ___137i ~~144 95. 1061 68. 88 61 Cominercial 33 19 211 19 28 6 2 5 RVes'idnilal+ C meia53 53 12! 8 tO 9 111 6 Irrigation LinirrTree4/Soturce of income 1, 1 141

Table 8-17 Impact on vulnerablepopulation

Route Status Residential Commercial Residentiall + Commercial Ohr oa WHH 24 4 SC . 10 23 4 ST 3 6 BPL 58 140 21 SLubtotal 95 169 25 286 iWHH 15 8 SC 18 27 1

BPL 56 84 4 SLubtotal 89 119 5 213 WHH 8 91 1 4 ...... SC 14 30 ST 5 BPL 45 120 SLubtotal 72 159 7 238 WHH- 5 2 1 SC 6 5 1 18 ...- ...... ------...... ST 21 BPL 31 35 4 SLubtotal 44 43 6 5 99

LTotal 300 . ~~~~ ~~~43 ~. ~~4906 839

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, LLucknow,India 1 22 Project Co-ordinating ConsultantsIPCC) Services for Uttar PradesltState Roads Prolect Environmental Assessment(Phase t) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Impacton CommunityResources The impactsof the pruposed upgradationiwill not just be on private properties.Some properties used by the entire severalroadside residents in the areaare also likely to be impacted.Though the extent of impactmay vary,the local communitiesmay feelquite ur happy about the loss.

Table8-18 Communityproperties impacted along upgradation routes in phaseI of UPSRP

Property , , _ Routes(figurnes i num,ber) 4 7 14 itt Shrines--- 3 10 . 2 ...... ___...... _...... _____,_.._,___.___Graveyard/Crematoriuml - - 1 : WandeUlilps_Wells-.. _-....----- ______--- __ .2.------I _H!ndPnIMPS 26 2 3 Total 3 36 6 5

8.6 Induced Impacts

The impactsof the proposed project will not be limited to the direct impacts discussedabove. There are severalareas where the project will provide improvedaccess following the up-gradation and widening. In ecologicallysensitive areas, this may proveto be a major stickingpoint.

A casein point is the up-gradationof the Bahraich-Faizabadroute in Phase-i.This will induce more far-reachingimpacts than just the construction period increase in vulnerability due to pollution from machinesand poaching by labourersfor the Parvati-ArangaBird Sanctuary.Improved access will facilitate tourist traffic to the sanctuary.This could create more pressureon an ecosystem where fishing within the two lakes (that constitutethe sanctuary)has been banned to protect the habitat for migratorybirds though it causeshardship to the local residents.With proper regulation by wildlife authorities,this sametourist flow can become a very important factor in ensuringthat the sanctuaryis sustainable-from the revenuethat can be generatedfrom tourism while increasing acceptability for the local population by reducing the economic hardshipsince they can generate work by providing servicesfor the tourists.

Another instance of occurrence of induced impacts would be more widespread, if not as spectacular.The cutting of trees on the edge of the pavementscan increasethe rate of erosion, which though not of immediateconcern in the vicinity of the road itself, can become critical in case of the increasedsediment load is discharged into a watercourse.If the increasedsediment finds its way to a river where fisheriesare important, or where water is abstractedfor domesticuse, the increasedsediment load would be quite a big problem.

Governmentof Unar Pradesh, Public Works Departnient, Lucknow. India 123 Projecrco-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsutEtntsBV September2001

9 MITIGATION, AVOIDANCE AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES

The chapter.detailsout the measuresincorporated during the project preparationstage to avoid and mitigate adverseimpacts on the various environmentalcomponents. The enhancementmeasures envisagedto increasethe acceptanceof the project by the host populationsare also described.The final section describes the managementplans for the implementation of the environmental provisionsduring andafter construction.

9.1 Approach to Mitigation Measures

People have long inhabited land that is now known as Uttar Pradeshover the millennia owing to the proximity to perennial rivers-theGanga, the Yamunaand their tributaries.Therefore, it is only logical that the roads being improvedhave a number of important componentsvalued by people living near the road as well as away from it. As has already been discussedat length in previous chapters, the development of roads in the area will have certain negative impacts on these components, during pre-construction,construction and operation stages of the project. Though conscious efforts have been made to minimise the impacts of environmental and social components,certain adverse impacts have been inevitable.

The development of mitigation as well as avoidanceof adverse impacts of the proposed road development has been an iterative process.There has been continued interaction between the design and environmentalteams to arrive at measuresacceptable to both sides.The avoidanceand mitigation of negative impacts involve reduction in magnitude of the adverseimpacts during various stagesof the projectthrough:

* Alterationsduring design,site clearance,construction and operation stagesof the road project to avoid adverseimpacts, and v Additional mitigation measures for unavoidable negative impacts on the environmental components.

These measureswere incorporated into the various stages of the project. Based on their applicability, both generaland casespecific measures were incorporatedas follows:

Standard: The 'Standard designs' of various road sections, were arrived at after detailed deliberationsbetween the Highway Designand the Environmentteams.

General measures:To avoid or mitigate impactson environmentalcomponents, general mitigation measureswere identifiedbased on the characteristicfeatures.

Generic: For varioustypologies, enhancement designs were preparedat a generic level so that they could be applied to locations selected by the Engineer in consultation with the PIU for implementation.

The selection of the alignment and the designingof the project corridor were seenas a two-way processbetween the design and the environmentteams. In-depth investigationson the site have been carried out so that encroachmentsonto the environmental resourcesare effectivelyavoided, and the alignmentselected is the environinentally best-fitalignment aiternative.The approach to arrive at variousmitigation measuresis an interactiveexercise and interdisciplinaryinvolving expert advice from all the fields of highwaydesign. This wasdone by closelv interactingwith the highway design teamand appraisingthem of environmentalrepercussions of the alignmentin later stagesof the project.

The avoidanceof adverseimpacts on roadsidesensitive receptors has been the first preferenceof the environmental team. The environmentalteam was in constanttouch with the designteam and measuresincorporated in the design includinig avoidanceof structures by their inclusion in soft

Governmentol Uttar Pradesh. Public Works Depantmet,it Lurkiovs, India 124 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase o DHV Consultants BV September2001

shoulders.Examples can be on route 14 where the stepsof a well adjacentto a dilapidated 'sarai' (rest house)in km 60 and on route 18 where the wall of the mosquein has beensaved by careful design.

The following sub sectionsdetail the mitigation measuresadopted in the PhaseI to minimize the adverseimpacts envisaged due to the project.

9.2 Avoidanceand MitigationMeasures

The avoidanceand mitigation measuresare discussedin the sameorder as impacts identified in Chapter 7 where impactshave been assessed for each of the environmentalcomponents.

9.2.1 METEOROLOGICALPARAMETERS

Avoidance measures,as the minimisingof the number of treesto be cut etc, have been worked out as part of the design finalisation.However, there will be a significanttree felling due to the project. Though no change in the macro-climaticsetting (precipitation, temperature and wind) is envisaged due to the project, the microclimateis likely to be temporarily modifiedby vegetationremoval, loss of roadsideplantations and the addition of increasedpavement surface.

Compensatoryafforestation, planting along the median and landscapingproposed shall help in restoringthe greencover along the corridor. This will be co-ordinatedwith the forest Department, whichi is already in the middle of promoting increasein green cover of Uttar Pradeshthrough 'Operation Green'.

9.2.2 SOIL

Conservationof ProductiveLands

DesignStage The alignment has beenselected to minimise acquisition of productive agriculturalland, as a major length of the corridor falls within the fertile plains. In the selectionof borrow areasfor the project, productive agricultural areashave been avoided for borrowing of materials (Seesub-section on borrow areas).in fact, for the phaseI routes,no permanentland acquisitionis envisaged.

Traffic detours, temporarydiversions required during constructionhave been chosenso as to avoid or minimise temporaryacquisition of productiveagricultural lands.

ConstructionStage Wherever unavoidableand in areaswhere acquisition of productive land occurs, along bypasses, traffic detours, construction camps,all areas of cutting, borrow areas in productive lands and all areas to be permanentlycovered, the top soil will be strippedto a specified depth of 150 mm and stored in stockpilesof height not exceeding2m. The stockpilingwill be done in slopesof 2:1, to reducesurface runoff and enhancepercolation through the massof storedsoil.

The stored topsoil will be spreadback to maitntainthe physico-chemicaland biological activity of the soil. The storedtopsoil will be utilizedfor:

* Coveringall disturbedareas including for the redevelopmentof borrow areas; * Top dressingof the roadembankments and fill slopes; * Filling up of tree pits, proposedas part of compensatoryafforestation; and * To prevent any compaction of soil in the adjoininig productive lands, the movement of constrLIctionvehicles, machinery and equipmentwill he restrictedto Col.

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Departineiit. tucknvw lndi&i 125 ProjectCo-ordinatinr Consultants (PCC) Services forUttar Pradesht Sl,ife Ro,ds Proteci EnvironmentalAssessment iPhase l) DHVConsultants BV September2001

6 peration Stage The improved accessA, S result of UPSRPhas the potentialto induce land use changesalong the corridor and can result in the conversionof the existingagricultural lands to other landusessuch as industrialor commerciai.

To avoid the successivelanduses along highway, landuseregulation controls have to be adopted. This calls for inter-agency co-ordinationwith local authoritiesfor ;mplementationof development controls.

Soil Erosion

The problem of soil eresion is likely to be more pronouncedduring the constructionstage along bridge-endfills, over steepbanks and embankmentslopes. Soil erosion results in the loss of soil cover, slope stability and addition of sediment loading to drainagechannels. Major bridges have been included in phase11 and there are no new major bridgesin phase1.

DesignStage The slope of the road embankmenthas been fixed at 1:2 to 1:3, which is fairly stableand reduces the possibilitiesof slope failures.To check soil erosionon critical road embankmentslopes turfing with -grassesand shrubs will be carried out, in accordancewith the recommendedpractice for treatmentof embankmentslopes for erosioncontrol, IRC:56-1974.

Figure9.1 Brickpitching for embankmentslopes greater gentler than 1:2

For slopes gentler than 1:2, in urban sections, brick pitching will be adopted.The bricks will be laid in such a fashion that they will form open -A--- 1--3 C::A. s:, pockets in between them (Figure 9.1). The advantageof- this arrangementis that it allows the growth of vegetation in the empty spaces ::-:- X ; createdg. on the faceof the slope,while providing N . better\,? !V: retention.\ .. ... Second-classbricks laid flat will .,_IV;--, . be used without any mortar in between. The - -. >N pockets will support any kind of vegetation growing on the slopes. At locations where the embankmentabuts water body, a kerbstoneand gabion box arrangementwill be provided at the I bottorn. If-the slope is steeperthan 1:2, stone pitching will be carried out. Stoneswill be fixed on slopesby gentle hammering.A P.C.C.anchor will be provided at the base,which will prevent sliding of stoneson slope. The gaps betweeniadjacent stones allow grassto grow which will- hold the soil firmly together(See Figure 9.2).

Figure9.2 Stonepitching for embankmentslopes steeper than 1:2 To check the slope stabilisation of the borrow . pits adjacent to the embankment, the depth of ; s* the pit will be so regulatedthat the bottom edge . R of pit shall not intersect the imaginary line of .-;->- slope 1:4 drawn fromnthe top edgeof the nearest embankment. To avoid embankment slippage * ~ and erosion, borrow pits shall not be dug -...... continuously.,. 2 Locations where stone pitching/brick- pitching will be there are suminarisedin table 9.1.

Governmientof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Departinent, Lucknow, India 126 ProjectCo-ordiniatin, ConsultantsI(PCC) Services for Uttar Pradeslh Stiite Roads Project Environmental Assessmrent(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table 9-1: Locationswhere slope protection needsto be provided

Route Locations where slopes protection is proposed (Design 4.2...... , Chainages) 2,5,29,32,500,503,505,514,516 7 4, 71, 16, 26, 33, 46, 68, 92,0,104 14 12.94, 23.98. 30.57, 41.25, 53.73, 58.94, 61.12 18 '14.02. 15.837, 17.309, 22.302, 23.235, 27.85, 28.816

Construction Stage Impacts perceived in the construction stage due to soil erosion are mainly at the construction sites of bridges/high embankments and a:ong the edges of the diversion channels.

Severeerosion of earth slopesis usuallycaused by a concentrationof storm water flowing from the roadwaysection or from the area at the top of cut slopesdown unprotectedembankments or other slopes. Preventingconcentration of water in these critical areas is essential.Channels, ditches, berms, or shoulder dikes for diverting water to satisfactoryoutfalls should be constructed at appropriate locations early in the constructicn of the project. Rainfall on cut and fill slopes will causeerosion to varying degrees,depending on the intensityof rainfall, the type of soil, the degree of slope, the length of the exposedsurface, the climatic exposure, and the effectivenessof the vegetative or other protective cover. Benchesor terraces, enclosed drainage systems,or the mulching or coveringof the soil with various materialsmay be required to reduce slope erosion- especiallywhile constructinghigh embankments.

Borrowingof Earth

DesignStage For borrowing of earth for the project, several borrow area locations have been identified and recommended.

Certainprecautions have to be takento restrictunauthorised borrowing by the contractor.

No borrow areashall be opened without permissionof the Engineer.The borrowing shall not be carried out in cultivable lands,unless and until, it shall be agreedupon by the Engineerthat there is no suitable uncultivableland in the vicinity for borrowing, or there are private land ownerswilling to allow borrowing on their fields. It,will be ensuredby the contractorthat, there will be no lossof productivesoil and the requisiteenvironmental considerations are metwith.

Location of source of supply of material for embankmentor sub-gradeand the procedure for excavationor transportof materialshall be in compliance with the environmental requirementsof the MoEF,MoST and as specifiedin IRC: 10-1961.

Re-developmentof the identified borrow areas, worked out as part of thc project, will be implementedto mitigatethe impacts.

ConstructionStage To avoid any embankmentslippages, the borrow areas will not be dug continuously. In case borrow areasother than specifiedare selected,the sizeand shapeof borrow pits will be decided by the SupervisionConsultant. Borrowing of earth shall be carried out at locations recommendedas per IRC: 10-1961whose salient features are described below:

Non-CuLtivablelands: Borrowing of earth will be carried out upto a depth of 1.0 m from the existing ground level. Borrowing of earth shall not be done continuously. Ridgesof not lessthan 8m width shall be left at intervals not exceeding 300 m. Small drains shall be cut through the ridges,if necessary,to facilitatedrainage. Borrow pits shall have slopesnot steeperthan 1 vertical in 4 horizontal.

Publicor Privateagricultural lands: Borrowing of earth shall not be carried out on productive lands. However, in the event of borrowing from productive lands, topsoil shall be preservedin

Coverlrnneni of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Departiiment,LLLcknow, Itidia 127 Proiect Co-ordinating ConsultanitsiPCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshStale RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) ' DHVConsultants BV September20D1

stockpiles. A 150mm layer of the top soil shall be stripped off from the area designatedfor borrowing and it shall be storedin stockpiles in a designatedarea for height not exceeding2m and side slopesnot steeperthan 1:2.At such locations,the depth of borrow pits shall not exceed45 cm and it maybe dugout to a depthof not more than 30 cm afterstripping the 15 cm top soil aside.

Borrow pits on the riverside: The borrow pit should be locatednot lessthan 15m from the toe of the bank,distance depending on the magnitudeand duration of flood to be withstood.

Precautionarymeasures like the coveringof vehicleswill be takento avoid spillageduring transport of borrow materials.To ensurethat the spills likely to resultfrom the transportof borrow and quarry materialsdo not impact the settlements,it will be ensuredthat the excavationand carryingof earth will be done during day time only. The unpavedsurfaces used for the haulageof borrow materials will be maintainedproperly.

The contractor shall evolve site-specificredevelopment plans for each borrow arealocation, which shall be iniplementedafter the approvalof the SupervisionConsultant.

Quarries

DesignStage As part of the project preparationprocess, an evaluationof all existing quarriesalong the corridor has been carried out and the statusin terms of the suitability of the quarry materialand their legal statusassessed. A recommendedlist of such operationalised,licensed quarries have been provided in the baselinedescription.

Construction Stage If the contractorsdecide to usequarries not in the recommendedlist, they would requireobtaining materialsfrom licensedquarries only. To offsetany possibilityof spillage of quarry materialsdue to transport of quarry materials,proper precautionarymeasures as the-covering of vehicles carrying materialsshall be carriedout.

Operation Stage The UPPWD in associationwith the StatePCBs shall carry out the monitoring of,the redevelopment of the quarries so asto ensurethat the redevelopmentplan has beencarried out as laid down in the EMPfor each quarry.

Contaminationof soil from fuel andlubricants

With an increasein the traffic volume, the contaminationof the soil adjacentto the highway is likely, even though the effectdue to this will be very localised.

Construction Stage At the various construction sites,the vehicles and equipment will be maintained and refuelled in such a fashionthat oil/dieselspillage does not contaminatethe soil. It will be ensuredihat the fuel. storageand refuelling sites are kept away from drainage channelsand important water bodies. At the wash down and refuelling areas,'oil interceptors' as shown in Fig 9.3 shall be provided. All spills and petroleum products shall be disposedoff in accordanceto the SPCBGuidelines. Fuel storageand fuelling areas will be located at least 300m from all cross drainagestructures and significantwater bodies.

In all fuel storageand refuelling areaslocated on agricultuLraillands or productive lands,the topsoil preservationshall be carriedout.

OperationStage Probability of contaminationof soil being only from the road runoff, which is directed into nearest water bodies through well-designeddrains and oil/greaseseparators, no impact on the soil during operation stageexcept in caseof accidents,is anticipated.Since there is very little the project itself can do to prevent deposition of Lead along the roadside,monitoring of soil quality should be

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Puiblic Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 128 ProiectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

carried out as envisagedin individual EMPs. If the values increasedramatically, local health authoritiesshould be'advised of the sameand all assistanceshould be provided to them to reduce threatto the roadsidedevellers.

Contaminationof soil from Constructionwastes and quarrymnaterials

Design Stage Cut and fill areashave beendesigned to be balanced. Therefore,the generationof spoil materials hasbeen minimized.

Construction Stage It will be required that the cut and fill works are carried out strictly in accordanceto the design drawings. Earth, if required, will be dumped in selected area approved by the Supervision Consultant.The spoilscan be usedto reclaim borrow pits and quarries,low-lying areasin barren lands and in settlementsalong the project corridors. All spoilswill be disposedoff and the site will be fully cleaned before handing over. The construction wasteswill be dumped in selected pits, developed on infertile land. Non-bituminouswastes from constructionactivities will be dumped in borrow pits and coveredwith a layer of the conservedtopsoil. Bituminouswastes will be disposed off in a dLumpingsite approved by the SupervisionConsultant.

9.2.3 WATERRESOURCES

Surfacewater bodiesand other water resources

DesignStage The impacts on ponds and other surface water bodies have been avoided by suitable design modifications.At locationswhere the encroachmentonto the pondsand surfacewater bodies was necessitateddue to other engineeringand social concerns,the loss due to the project has been compensatedfor. The typical enhancementdesigns have been contemplatedfor various pond locationsthat offer scopefor mitigation aswell as environmentalenhancements.

ConstructionStage The mitigation measuresprovided could be discussedin relation with the extent of impart on a water body. The excavationfor replacementof water bodies that are entirely lost due to the project will be carried out at the closest possiblelocation with respectto the original water body. Part filling of existing water bodies, shall be compensatedfor by the excavationof an equal volume of earth from elsewhereof the water body. When the excavation,Jisundertaken in the wet areaof the water body, the banks will be protected,such that the slopesare not steeperthat I vertical to 2 horizontal. There are ponds whose storagecapacity .,. - . - .. is not being impacted but the embankmentis being cut across.In such cases, reconstruction of earthen embankment with turfing/pitching or construction of retaining wall will be taken up.

'9s'-...4 -...-. The contractor shall carry out enhancement of the various surface water bodies in accordance to ' the drawings specified in the individual EMPs. Enhancementdetails of selected

. pondsare explained in the next section.

q___.___.,___'.____',___3___.:___.',____ n______-Figure9.3 Combined sedimentationand oil/greaseseparator

Government.-ofUttar Pradesh, Ptiblic works Department,Lucknow, India 129 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for unar Pradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase O) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Operation Stage Future developmentthat may involve the filling up of water bodies,or adverselyimpact the water quality of these resourcesshall be discouraged.As part of the monitoring plan, water quality monitoring of various surface water bodies have been proposed at several locations along the highway. All the road runoff shall be passedthrough oil and greasetraps to avoid contaminationof water bodies.

The technique for the separationof oil and water is gravity separation.Figure 9.3 givesdesign of an arrangementfor combined sedimentand greaseseparator. Enough detention time is provided for run-off to allow silt to settle and oil/greaseto float on to the surface.Other techniquessuch as emulsification, acid cracking and biodegradationof oil have beenconsidered but rejectedbecause they are suitablefor high concentrationsof oil and require much greatercontrol / supervisionover the process.Water bodies identifiedfor providing oil receptorsin phaseI are summarisedin table 9.2.

Table 9-2 Waterbodies identified for providing oil cum sedimenttraps along PhaseI routes S. No. Typeof WaterBody Osaine Route4 Katra Bilhaur I Roadside Pond on Leftside 125.4 2 Roadside Pond on Rightside 121.4 3 Roadside Pond on Leftside 43.8

Route..... 7...... Bahraich... .. ___ _ - Faizabad 4 _ Roadside Pondon Leftside 4B 58 5 Roadside Pond on Leftside i 52.16 6 Roadside Pond on Rightside 39 67 7 Roadside Pond on Rightside 56.00 8 _ i Roadside Pond on Rightside 80.93 9 Roadside Pond on Rightside 82 9 9O1 Roadside Pond on Rightside 8535 gnhogipurChaudagra Mode 11 Roadside Pond on Leftside 69.5 12 Roadside Pond on Leftside 705 13 Roadside Pond on Rightside _ 75.5 14 : Roadside Pond on Rightside - 73.5 15 rPondnnaiTe tliae Shahianpur ! Roule18: launpur- Mohimmadpur 16 j Roadside Pond onl Left side 6.0 17 Roadside Pond on Left side 6.9 18 Roadside Pond on. Right side i 6.3 19 Roadside Pond on Rightside 8.0 2 RoadsidePond on Rightside 94 21 Roadside Pond on Rightside 10.0 22 Roadside Pond on Leftside 16.0 23 Roadside Pond on Leftside 179 24 ERoad side Pond on Rightside 16.5 S5 Roadside Pond on Leftside 27.4 26 ; Roadside Pond ois Rightside 38.4 2i7 Roadside Pond on Leftside 39.6 Rivets and streanis l Rou.te4 (Katra Biihaairt 31.500 1 Barsoiyariver i ...... _ M DR-26)_ Route4 (Katra- Bilhaurl 2 Pi NiagarKapo-nd 1.700 3 Guriaiver 14.20 4 j Nilriai River i 19.900-l 5l ~~Rinirgairga Behgul 499/200 6 SendhaRiver 26.40 i 7 SeiidhaRiver 54.500 87.500 8 RiverKalyani iSH-40) 9 RiserGairga i Y98.400 l Route7A (Batraidch-azabad) 10 Cross-igsvaliip 4t/909 1.t.ll Nili t100.700 12 N ilj 10.1.900 Rsoute14 (Birognipur-Csiaudhiagra imode 13l .[ah.erpsir-S-iiakia irrigaironbridge 0B200 l 14 Ser1tar River 1 .100 15l NOnRiser 31 050 16 RiiodRiver - - 61 9o0 l Route18 (launpur Mohanireadpur). i7l RiserCsrromati 158 400 1 9 'ea Riv: iC, 800ei

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department. Lucknow. India 130 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradesisStilte RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Relocation of other water supply sources

Design Stage Conservation/Avoidance of water supply sources as tube wells, ponds, wells etc. have been worked out in the design of the alignment. However, at several locations, the impacting of these community resources has been unavoidable. Any source of community water (potable or otherwise), such as wells, ponds, tube-wells, and bore wells accidentally lost will be replaced immediately.

Pre-construction Stage The relocation of these water supply sources, both private and community sources, shall be completed prior to the commencement of the construction by the contractor, in accordance to the utility and community assets relocation plan prepared for the project. To prevent any stress on the local water sources due to the relocation, the process of dismantling shall commence only after the provision of the water supply source at the relocation site is agreed upon by the community.

Drainage

Design Stage To ensure efficient cross-drainage and to prevent water logging along the sides, adequate size and number of cross-drainage structures have been provided. All cross-drainage structures have been designed to handle a 50-year peak flood level. Road level of the proposed section shall be raised by 0.6m from the high flood level to avoid future inundation in the inundated stretches along the corridor such as in Jalalabad along route 4. Along the settlements, as part of the engineering design, provision has been made-for drainage along the sides of road. The following Table 9.1 details out the locations where additional culverts have been proposed as part of the project. Input from consultations at the local level, both formal during meetings and informal during surveys; have been incorporated into the project design to mitigate any potential adverse impacts.

Table 9-3 Additional culverts proposed as part of UPSRP phase I upgradation Size/Span S. No. Chainage , Type Route4: Katra- Bitthaur 1 21.575 1x5.0 RCCStab l2 87.431 1 x5.5 RCCSlab 3 . 888D40 .1lx5.5 RCCSlab 4 89800 1x5 5 RCCSlab 5. 92013 I x3. RCCSlab 6 . 93-069 _ lx5.5 RCC Slab 7 93.655 1x3 5 RCCSlab I8 96.916 . lxS.S - RCCSlab I9 . 97.910 ltx3.5S RCCSlab 10 98.600 1 x35 RCCSiab i 1 86.306 SX1o Bridge Route 7: Babraich - Faizabad I 88.323 lx0.6 Huine Pipe 2 91.543 1lx0 6 Hums Pipe Route 14: Bhognipur - ChaudagraMode I . 1 80.800 1x2.0 RCCSlab lRoute 18: launpur Mohammadpur 1 1.830 . 1x0.6 HUrnePipe 2 27.840 1x2 0 RCC Slab

Construction Stage The contractor will remove obstructions tinat may cause any temporary flooding of local drainage channelsduring construction.No spoil or construction materialwill be storedoutside the proposed RoW or at placesobstructing the natural drainiagesystem. During field investigation,the out-fallsof proposed drain were also located by the team comprising of environmental expert, social expert and drainage engineer in consultatiornwith the local people. Generally, it is preferred to dispose the proposeddrain into a naturalstream or nalla flowing through the culvert or bridges.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, LUcknow, tndiir 131 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for utiirarPradesih Stite RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September.2001

Based upon the findings of field investigationssupplemented with road inventory and cross drainagestructures inventory, it has been decided that coveredlined drain will be provided in the built-up areas.These drains are proposedto be constructedat the edgeof the shoulder.In order to prevent the ingressof water into the soft shoulder, the areabetween the pavementedge and drain edge wiil be coveredby a hard shoulder.The covereddrain maybe utilized for vehicle parking in built up area,resulting in unobstructedvehicular movementon the main carriageway.Above all, covered drains ale more hygienic. Table 9.2 below givesthe route-wise length of drains to be provided as part of the project. Particularchainages at which drains are provided can be found in Annex 6.

Table9-4 Provisionfor newdrains in phaseI of UPSRP

[ S. gRoute DrainLength (km) No. Left Right Total X Katra-Bilhaur _ i 0o__ 2 Bahraich- Faizabad - o o 3 Bhognipur-Chaudagra Mode 20.04 20.04 _ 40.08 4 launpur- Mohammedpur 23.604 23.960 47.564 Total 43.644 44 37.644

In sectionsalong watercourses,and locationsclose to cross-drainagechannels, the contractorwill ensure that earth; stoneor any other construction materialshall be disposedoff immediatelyat the designatedlandfill site so as to avoid blocking the flow of water along those channels.Silt fencing shall be providedat constructionsites in proximity of waterbodies.

The silt fencing consistsof geotextile(MIRAFI 140N or equal)with extremelysmall size supported by a wire-mesh mounted on a panel made up of angle frame. Modules of 625 mm each are designed to allow ease of handling and construction (Fig. 9.4). It is expectedthat a single person will be ableto drive the angles300 mm into the groundby pressingfrom the top. The framewill be installed at the edgeof the water body along which constructionis in progress.Silt fencing shall be provided wheneverconstruction is in progress.The wire-meshwill provide structuralstability and the 25x25x3 mm angle sectionwill act as posts for the silt fencing. The number of such unitsto be installed can be decided dependingupon the length of the water body along the side of the road construction.

Figure9.4 Designof silt fencingarrangement

..... SLOT. IMOMC>f All necessary precautions will be

SUPPORTINGMESH t(' . _.X ANGLE PRAME taken to construct temporary or permanent devices to prevent inundation. Temporary drains for collection and disposal of runoff GROTESTILEkiIRAP )F 1410NOrExTI,R51L < . tiR- into natural drainagesystem will be APPRG\TD NiAKE _: ...... §g4 ..Fhe_constructed. contractor will take

@ t allt;.5tt5t0dx' the necessary measures to . N ,s,,;,...... ,preventtemporary or permanent

+;£-X'-EFg!,,,O,z*,

Operation Stage To maintain an efficient storm water flow, the roadside ditches will be cleaned regularly,especially prior to the monsoons.It is envisagedthat the NGO employed by the UPPWDfor R&R work will mobilise the local populationsto createlocal maintenance/policinggroups for maintainingthe drains too.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, LUcknow,India 132 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (Pcci Servicesfor uttarPradesh StIte RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 11 DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Preventionof WaterQuality Degradation

ConstructionStage To avoid contaminationof the varioussurface water bodies and drainagechannels in the vicinity of the construction site, constructionwork closeto the streamsor other waterbodies will be avoided, especially during monsoonperiod. All necessaryprecautions will be taken to constructtemporary or permanentdevices to preventwater pollution due to increasedsiltation and turbidity. All wastes arising from the project will be disposedoff, as per SPCBnorms, so as not to block the flow of water in the channels.The wasteswill be collected,stored and takento the approveddisposal sites.

The vehicles and equipment will be properly maintained and refuelled, so as to avoid contamination of the water bodies and drainagechannels from fuel and lubricants.The slopes of embankmentleading to water bodies will be modified.and re-channelisedso that contaminantsdo not enter the water body. Oil and greasetraps will be provided at fuelling locations, to prevent contaminaiion of water.

The sewagesystem fur constructioncamps will be properly designed and built so that no water pollution takesplace to any water body or watercourse.

OperationStage Propermaintenance of the protection measuresas the settling ponds and oil interceptorsprovided along the highway along the stretchesclose to the watersources would be ensuredby the UPPWD through the effortsof the NGO as describedin the previoussubsection.

9.2A AIRQUALITY

DesignStage At critical sectionsespecially along the congestedsections of the existing highway, removal of bottlenecks and relieving congestion in built-up stretcheswere incorporatedthrough improved design and improving roadgeometry and widenir.gof roadto smoothentraffic flow.

Basedon the baselineambient air quality at the variouslocations along the highway, prediction of the pollutant concentrationsfor the projected traffic due to the project was carried out using CALINE-3.The resultsindicate that the ambientair quality will not deterioratebelow the standards now applicable,even in 2010.

ConstructionStage The asphalt plants, crushersand the batching plants will be sited at least 1 km in the downwind direction from the nearesthuman settlement.

All precautionsto reduce the level of dust emissionsfrom the hot mix plants, crushersand batching plants and other transportationof materials will be taken up which includes vehicles delivering loose and fine materialslike sand and fine aggregatesshall be coveredto reduce spills on existing roads. Water will be sprayedon earthworks,temporary haulage and detour roads on a regular basis. During and after compactionof the sub-grade,water will be sprayed at regular intervalsto prevent dust generation. The hot mix plant will be fitted with dust extraction units. It shall be ensured that the dust emissionsfrom the crusher and vibrating screenat the stonequarries do not exceedthe emissionstandards set by CentralPollution Control Board.

To ensure the control of exhaust gas emissionsfrom the various construction activities, the contractor shall takeup the following mitigation measures: * An adequatecyclone/scrubber to control emissionsfrom the stackof hot mix plants will need to be provided in the event of the emissionsexceeding the SPCBnorms. Other potential measures inclide plantationiaround peripheryof the hot-mix plants. * To ensure the efficacy of the mitigation measuressuggested, air quality monitoring shall be carried out at leastonce a monthduring the periodthe plant is in operation.

Government of Utrar Pradesh,Ptiblic Works Department, LLucknow,India 133 ProjectCo-ordinating Consiltants iPCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

All vehicles, equipment and machinery used for constructionwill be regularly maintainedto ensure that the pollution emissionlevels conform to the SPCBnorms. A vehicle maintenance scheduleprepared by the contractorand approvedby the Engineershall be adheredto.

Operation Stage During nperation stageof the project, vehicular emissionsof critical pollutants(SPM, RSPM, CO, SO2, NO, and Pb) will be monitored. Roadsidetree plantationwill be maintained.Tree plantation for attenuatingpollution levelsshall be as per the proposedroad landscapeplans, which includes specieswith thick foliage. Monitoring of the effectivenessof the pollution attenuatingvegetative barriers will be takenup after 5 yearsfrom the plantingof roadsidetrees, The numberof treesto be planted as part of UPSRPare governed by the UP forestry DevelopmentCorporation's road plantation strategy.According to this strategyno treeswill be planted for 9 m on either side of the centreline. Therefore,the roadside plantation is limitedto the availablespace given in table below:

Table9-5 Comparisonof plantation in UPSRP

Compensatory Additional Ratio Route TreesCut (Forest through Cutting: Department) Project Plantation"8 Route4 i 5640 _ 11280, 4473 2.59 Route7 128. 256 5137 42.13 Route 14 1286 2572j 5967 6.64 Route18 736i _ 1472 2181 4.96 TOTAL 7790 5580 17758 4.28

9.2.5 NOISE LEVELS

DesignStage Removalof bottlenecksand relieving congestionin built-up stretchesthrough improveddesign will help in reducingthe noise levels.

A prediction of the future noise levelsdue to the projectfor 2005 and 2010 have been carriedout using FHWA Model. Critical locationshave been identifiedwith respectto the noise standardsand mitigation measuresproposed.

As the structuresidentified are isolatedand are smallerin size, provision of a noise screenmay not be feasible. Therefore,such sensitivereceptors are to be provided,with sound insulationthrough double-glazing of doors and windows. This shall be done on a cost-sharingbasis between the UPPWD and the usersof the facility. The split will be decided after consultationwith the groups likely to be affected.The locationswhere noise predictionsmeasures will be provided have been identified in table 9.5.

Table9-6 SensitiveReceptors along Phase-I routes to be shieldedfrom high noiselevels

IS No ! Typesof Sensitive Chainage Receptors (kin) Route4 KatraBilhaur 1 EducationalInstitute 58.030 2 HealthFacilit 1t1.009 3 EdLIcationalInstitute 7.650 4 Educationalinstitute 104.770 5 Eduicationalinstituite 109.190 6 EducationalInstitute 109196 7 EdLicationalInstitute 19.743

Althoughthe average rate of plantation per irce cul is more tha,i 4 for each trce cut, no significant reduction inSPM, other air pollutantsor noiseis expected. Studies suggest the plantation widthi of asmuch as :;0 m to achieveany significant reduction in pollution.Such planitation is n,otpossible along project ro,tes (due to tie limitedkoV). Theproicct does the best it can

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Puiblic Works Department L[cknow. India 134 ProjectCo-ordinating Consiiltants (PCC) Services forUtar-Pradesh Snne Roadb Proiect Environmental Assessimient(Phase n DHV Consultants BV Septenmber2001

S. No . Typesof Sensitive Chainage S . N... : Receptors (kin) 8 EducationalInstitute 30.893 Route 7 Bahraich-Faizabad 1 EducationalInstitute 93.196 2 EducationalInstitute 64.309 3 EducationalInstitute 70.464 4 EducationalInstitute 73.086 Route 14 Rhognipur-ChaudagraMode 1 EducationalInstitute 37 674 2 EducationalInstitute 38.283 3 EducationalInstitute 48.474 4 EducationalInstitute 53 571 5 EducationalInstitute 71.6;)0 6 EducationalInstitute 7X.762 7 EducationatInstitute 75.700

ConstructionStage The plants and equipment used for constructioniwill strictly conform to CPCB noise standards. Vehicles and equipments used shall be fitted with exhaust silencers. During routine servicing operations,the effectivenessof exhaustsilencers shall be checkedand if found to be defectiveshall be replaced.The noise level from any item of plants(measured at one metrefrom the edge of the equipment in free field) such as compactors, rollers, front loaders, concrete mixers, cranes, vibrators and sawsshall not exceed75 dB (A), as specifiedin the EnvironmentalProtection Rules, 1986.

In construction sites within 150m of the nearest habitation, noisy construction work such as crushing, concrete mixing, batching will be stoppedduring the nighttime between9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. No noisyconstruction activities will be permittedaround the silencezones, a distanceof 100m from the sensitivereceptors as hospitals,educational institutions etc. Blastingwill be carried out as per the Indian ExplosivesAct. Prior intimation of the operationalhours of the blastingwill be given to the people living nearsuch blasting sites. Blasting will not be undertakenin night.hours.

To protect constructionworkers from severenoise impacts,noise standardsof industrialenterprises will be strictly enforced,and workersshall be provided with PersonalProtective Equipment (PPE).

Operation Stage Monitoring of the effectivenessof the pollution attenuatingbarriers will be taken up thrice in the operation period. Basedon the results,recommendation for any changesin the mitigation measures or suggestionof additional measuresshall be made.

Monitoring shall be taken up along other sensitivelocations, where sound insulationhas not been provided, so as to ascertain any requirementfor the provision of additional measuresfor the mitigation of ill effectsdue to increasednoise resulting from the operation of the project.

9.2.6 FLORA

DesignStage To minimize the loss of trees and vegetation,clearance of only those trees within the proposed Corridor of impact hasbeen proposed. The loss of trees is being compensatedat the rate of two saplingsfor each tree felled in accordance to the principles laid out in the Forest(Conservationl Act, 1980. Thesetrees can be accommodated in the spaceavailable within the RoW afterthe -upgradation is completed.Typical landscapeplans have been preparedfor all project routesbased on geographic,climatic and soil conditions. Trees earmarkedfor felling will be removedonly with prior approvalof the District ForestOfficer. The

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public WorksDepartment, Lucknow, India 135 Pruiect Ct.,ofdindting Consuitaits (PCC)Services for Uttar.PrddeshiState RoAds Project EnvironmentalAssessrnent (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

tree plantation cleared will be replaced and compensatedprior to the commencementof cdnstruction.

Construction Stage Apart from trees earmarked for felling, no additional tree clearing within the RoW will be carried out. No tree will be removed in the zone of construction (apart from those trees earmarkedfor felling) without the . prior approval of the Department of Forests, through the Supervision Consultant. Construction vehicles, machinery and equipment will nmoveor be stationed in the designated area only (RoW or Col, as applicable), to prevent compaction of vegetation. While operating on temporarily acquired land for traffic detours, storage,material handling or any other construction relatedor incidental activities,it will be ensuredthat the trampling of soil and damage to naturallyoccurring herbs and grasseswill be avoided.

Plantationof shrubsand ground cover in the median shall be undertakento preventthe glareof the vehicles coming in the oppositedirection. The choiceof species,planting types for the mediansare presentedin the landscapepians preparedfor the project.

9.2.7 FAUNA

Construction Stage All construction activities will be carried out in such a fashionthat the damageand disruption to fauna will be minimum. The constructionworkers shall be given instructionsto conserve/ protect natural resourcesand fauna,including wild animalsand aquatic life.

The construction in the 10-km stretch(5km on either side of culvert 92/1) near Parvati-ArangaBird Sanctuaryin Route7 will be allowed only after Februaryand before Octoberin any year to prevent disturbanceto the migratorybirds arriving to spend the winter. No constructioncamp shall be sited within lkm on either side of the culvert 92/1. No hot-mix plant, batching plant or crusherwill be allowed within 1 km on either side of this culvert. The temporary land acquisition for the rehabilitation of this culvert will be only on the western side of the existing road. The workers deployed along the stietch will be given special instructionson how to handle any wildlife found by chance. The monitoring of constructionactivity in vicinity of the sanctuarywill include Forest departmentofficials, especially during surprisechecks to ensure that all the measuressuggested are being implemented.

Operation Stage Although no impactson fauna in operation stageare anticipateddirectly due to the project, certain measuresshall be taken. Co-ordinationwith the Sanctuaryauthorities will be continued to ensure that better accessdoes not encouragepoachers/hunters into the area.

Informatory signs wiil be put up on either side where the border of the sanctuary is near the existing route to alert the road usersto the possibility of sightingof protectedarid/or rare birds and animals.

9.2.8 ACCIDENTSINVOLVING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Operation Stage Accidents involving hazardouschemicals will generallybe catastrophicto the environment,though the probability of occurrence is low. Preventiotnof an accident involving hazardousmaterial is a better way of minimising the impacts. The provisions mandated by 'The Hazardous Wastes (Managementand Handling) rules, 1989' undet-the Enviroinmental(Protection) Act, 1986 will be complied with. Vehiclesdelivering hazardoussubstances will be printed with appropriate warning signs.

In case of spillage, the report to relevantdepartments will be made and instructions followed in taking up the contingencymeasures immediately.

Governinentof Utitar Pradesh,Public Works Departmiient, Lucknow, india 136 Project Co-oidinaiing Consuitants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project -EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants BV September 2001

9.2.9 SAFETYMEASURES

DesignStage Safetyor pedestriansas well as of the vehicles plying on the road are given highestimportance and adequatemeasures have been incorporatedin the design of the alignment.In order to find causes of accident and to provide remedial measuresin design,a pilot study on road safetyenvironment was undertaken.The detailedfindings of this studyare given in Annex 7.

ConstructionStage Constructionactivities causehindrance to traffic movementand are also hazardousfor the traffic. Traffic managementplans shall be preparedand temporarydiversion routeswill be identified to divert traffic from construction locations.Signboards indicating constructionsites on the road and flags shall be erected.All the signboardsgiving caution, barricadesfor divertingthe traffic shall be as per MoSTspecifications.

Operation Stage Unrestrictedaccess to the highway and other extraneousactivities on the road is a safetyhazard.- Certainprecautionary measures as restrictionof unauthorisedaccess on to the highway, banning of extraneousactivities on the highway, segregationof local and through traffic in urban areasand stickingto the traffic managementplans will reducethe risk of accidentson the highway.

The following safetymeasures have been proposed in the design itself to ensure that the risks of accidentsare reduced:

Table 9-7 Safety Provisionsincorporated in Designfor PhaseI upgradationroutes

S. No. AccidentalHot Spot Safety Provision Route 4 ilKatra-ihaur I Khairpur four arm intersection IntersectionDevelopment as per the MOST ...... __. specif_cationn __ __..__ _ 2 Madanpur Developed Area Reduced speed sign_ _ ___ 3 Yakubpurthree arm intersection intersectionDevelopment as per MOST specification 4 lalalabadDeveloped Area Reducedspeed sign s HoolpurFour Arm Intersection IntersecionDevelopment asper MOST specification. 6 KatrisiliVillage Reducedspeed sign 7 SughiSukhi Village Reduced speed sign. 8 Mode(zig-zag section between Jalabad and Smootheningofzig-zag section to keepthe design Al lahganj) spe _ ____I 9 HarpalpurDeveloped Area Reducedspeed sign 10 Eknauravi.ge Reducedspeed sign -_ _ _11_ __Swagipur . _ .__three ...... arm_ ._ . intersection. _ ...... _. _ ._. .... _._ __ _ _ ...... Intersection Developmet as per. . MOST specification.

.... 12...... -...... Mallawan- --q__ - --- ...... Developed...... _....._ __.___ Area Reducedspeed sign -'_ 13 GaniMoradabad intersection _IntersectionDevelopment asper MOST specification 14 BangarmauDeveloped Area Reducedspeed sign I Route7 8ahraich-Faizabad Bahraich (Krn 0 to 31 . Provisionof road sign and markings Developmentof all intersectionin between as per MOSTspecification. Smootheningof meandersand zigzag section._I 2 Gonda IKm 61 to 67) Provision of roadsign and markings Developmentof all intersectionin-between as per MOSTspecification. Smootheningof meanderand zigzag section. 3 Nawabganj Market Area Reducespeed sign. 4.Sharp Cuirves Project sight distance turning radii and storagespace. I MallapUr Reducedspeed signi, ininimum, set back of residentiIlcoimmlllercial from edge of road 4 m. 6 DkiinAriaDeeh Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of residential/commercialfrom edgeof road 4 m. 7 Achalpur . Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of residential/commercialfrom dge of road 4 m 8 Wazeer Gani Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of residential/commercialfrom edge of road 4 m. 9 Railway level crossingat Chainage (Km 58. 5) Coarsetextuired overlays 10 Sharp curves at Chainage 58.5 lImprovedsight distanceturning radii, storagespace.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, I,urknow, India 13 7 PronectCo-rdin.vting Constiltants IPCC)Services for Uttar PradeshSt.ite RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase l) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

S. No. AccidentalHot Spot SafetyProvision X 11 i Railway level crossingat Km 61.9 Coarsetextured overlays 12 junctions at Km 62.10 and Km 63.4 Developmentas per MOSTspecifications 13 Railway level crossingat Km 103.0 'Coarse texturedoverlays ____ 14 Sharpcurves at approachesat Km 103.0 Developmentas per MOST specifications 15 Junctionwith National Highway nearFaizabad Developmentasper MOSTspecifications Route 14 Bhognipur-ChaudaghraMode 1 Majle Gaon Reducedspeed. 2 JahanabadDeveloped Area Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of residentiatlcommercialfrom edge road to 4 m 3 i BendaVillage andBridge Reducedspeed sign. ___ 4 MusanagarDeveloped Area - Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of . __ . __ ...... _ residential/commercialproperty 4 m. _ Ghaghuapur - Reducedspeed sign Route 18 Jaunpur-Moham_adpur 1 Bardha Reduicedspeed sign 2 Chawki Reduicedspeed sign 3 ThekmaMarket Area with sharp curveat km. 25 ReduLcedspeed, m niinum set back of commercial/residentialproperties 4 m Sharpcurve imiprovementas per MOST specification.

. ._...... _. ._._...... ____._.____ _ 4 - Gambhirpur MarketArea Reducedspeed, minimum set back of commercial/ __ .... __------residential properties4 mr 5 . Mohammadpur Reducedspeed sign, minimum set back of commercial/ residentialarea 4 m

9.2.10 CULTURAL PROPERTIES

Design Stage Alignment has been worked out to minimise impacts on cultural/religious properties along the corridor. At locations where this was unavoidable, and where the community was willing to relocate the religious property, relocation has been proposed. Detailed discussions with the community and various stakeholders have been conducted for relocation or shifting of cultural properties. The details of the cultural properties which are being relocated are given in the RAP. The edge of fort along route 14, is being incorporated within the hard shoolder. While for the mansion in km 57, only entry to the property is being affected. There is no effect on the main building itself.

Construction Stage All necessary and adequate care will be taken to minimize impacts on cultural properties which includes cultural sites and remains, places of worship including temples, mosques, churches and shrines,etc., graveyards,monuments and any other importantstructures as identified during design and all properties/sites/remainsnotified underthe AncientSites and RemainsAct.

The contractorshall ensurethat no constructionactivities will spillover to these property'spremises and precincts. All conservationand protection measureswill be taken up.as per desigti. Accessto such properties from the road shall be maintained clear and clean. Typical enhancement designs for some important structuresalong the highwayhave been detailed out in the following section.

If any valuable or invaluable arficles such as fabrics, coins, artefacts, structures, or other archaeological relics are discovered, the excavation will be stopped and the Uttar Pradesh ArchaeologyDirectorate will be intimated.

At these chance find locations, the contractor shall take reasonableprecaution to prevent his workmen or any other personsfrom removingand damagingany such article or thing and shall, immediately upon discoverythereof and before removal acquaintthe SupervisionConsultant (SC) of such discovery and carry out the SC instructionisfor dealing with the same,awaiting which all work shall be stoppedlOOm all directiotisfrom the siteof discovery.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,LLicknow, India 138 Project Co-ordiriating Consultants (PCC)Services for Utiar PradesshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

The SC shall seekdirection from the Directorateof Archaeology,Uttar Pradesh,before instructing the Contractorto recommencework on the site. Archaeologistswill supervisethe excavationto avoid any damageto the relics.

9.3 EnvironmentalEnhancements

In accordance to the World Bank Operational Policies 4.01, additional positive actions are encouragedto be taken up as part of the EA processapart from the remedial /mitigationmeasures that are being proposedto addressthe negativeimpacts due to the project. Thesepositive actions are in addition to severalother enhancementsthat occur inherently becauseof the very nature of the project such as improved drainage, pedestrian facilities, prevention of existing erosion, overtopping and flooding etc. as these improvementsare in-built in the Highway design,as part of good engineeringpractices.

EnvironmentalEnhancements specifically refer to thesepositive actions to be taken up during the implementationof the project for the benefit of the road usersand the communitiesliving along the project road. Theenhancements have beencarried out with the following objectives:

* To enhancethe appealand environmentalquality of the project corridorsto their users; * To enhancevisual quality alongthe highway;and * To generategoodwill amongstthe local communitytowards the project, by the enhancementof common propertyresources.

9.3.1 ENHANCEMENTOFCOMMON PROPERTYRESOURCES

The positive actions identified are directed towards meaningful use of the social elementsof the environment and improvedaesthetics and sustainableuse of the natural environment.Accordingly the typologies of sites have been identified and detaileddesigns prepared for each case.These are discussedbelow. The Engineerwill have the discretionto decide which design shall form the base for a specific location. Genericdesigns for typical situationsas well as the details for the elements used in theseare also given in the drawingsannexed to EMPfor each route.

CommonElements Typical designshave been worked out for the individual elements such as railing, paving and seating. There has been a consciousattempt to integratethe original character of the road within the design to reflect the primacy of the local heritage. The,project also aims at maintaining a continuum all over the project routes, though they are spread across the entire state.This is reflectedin the selectionof uniformdesigns for the enhancementsfor all the routes

Pondon roadside The roadsidepond is a common featureof all routesof PhaseI in UPSRP.Several village ponds line the roads. The proposed upgradationof the road will be an opportunity to make the pond more attractive to the local population as well as road user.For the former, additional facilitiesthat make the pond more usefulwhile the beautificationwould appealthe road-userwho might want to take a break from driving/travelling.The possible locations for enhancementshave been decided after receiving and considering the feedback obtained from the local residents during formal and informal consultations.The following table 9.4 lists out the ponds selected for enhancementin each corridor.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Deparnment, Lucknow, India 139 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Service, foi Uitdr PrideshSl;te Roicds Project Environmental Assessment(FPase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September 2001

Table 9-8 Ponds selected.fbr enhancement along phase I upgradation corridors in UPSRP

S. No. Typeof water Body inag Route4: Katra- Bilhaur I1 Road side Pondon Leftside -_215.4 2 Roadside Pond on Rightside 121.4 3 Roadside Pond on Leftside 43.8 Route7: Bahraich- Faizabad 4 Roadside Pondon Leftside 48.58 2 I Roadside Pondon Left side 5 16 6 Road side Pondon Right side 3967 ..7 Road side Pond on Right s_deside ____8093...... 56.00.-I-.. 8 Road side Pond on Right side 80.93 I...... __...______-...... __ 19 Road ~~sidePond onRgtse_82.9 l 1 0 Road side Pond on Right side 85.35 I...... _.. -__-_ -_.._-_ - -- -__---. Route 14: shognipur - ChaudagraMade _-___ _ -_-_-l 11 Road side Pond on Leftside 69.5 1 2 Road side Pond on Left side 70.5 13 ; Roadside Pond on Rightside 75.5 14 Roadside Pond on Rightside 73.5 15 Pondnear Village Shahjanpur Route18 Jaunpur- Mohammadpur

. .. 16 ... . Road_.._.__. side Pond on Leftside ...... 6.0- -- ...- 17 Roadside Pond on Leftside 6.9 18 Roadside Pond on Rightside 6 3 19 Roadside Pond on Rightside 8.0 20 Road dsiePond on Rightside 9.4 21 Roadside Pond on Rightside 10.0 22 I Roadside Pond on Leftside 16.0 23 Roadside Pond on Leftside 17 9 24 I Roadside Pond on Rightside 16.5 25 Roadside Pond on Leftside 27.4 26 Roadside Pond on Rightside 38 4 2 7 koadside Pond on Leftside 396

The proposal for the enhancement of ponds in the vicinity of settlements envisages a two -pronged approach to enhancement:

* Provision for structures which increase the utility of the-ponds such as platforms for washing clothes and utensils, bathing ghats etc. These will increase the acceptance of the proposed scheme by the local population. % * Provision for seating and landscaping to attract the road-user to enjoy the surroundings. Proper parking facilities and access to avoid congestion on the road itself will also be created.

Temple/Shrines

The beautification of temples along the roadside is an important part of the enhancement scheme. Since there are a number of small as well as big temples and shrines abutting the highway, there are significant opportunities for the project to become more attractive to the host population. It underlines the importance the project attaches to the sentiments and values of the host population and thus tries to build trust and ownership for the project.

The proposed schemewill retain the existing sirLictureof the templescompletely. In addition, the followinig measuresare incorporated in the proposed design appended to each Environmental ManagementPlan:

* Provisionof seatingaround existingtrees; * Paving usingbricks will alsobe provided; * If the structureopens directly on to the road, railing will be provided to restrict direct accessto the road; * Appropriate planitationwill be carriedoLut where free spaceis available;and * Drainage in the vicinity of the structure will be im-nprovedby providing drains where needed.

Governmentof UnrarPradesh, PLiblic Works Deparnineit, Ltucktnwv,lndiii 140 Project Co-ordinatinigConsultants IPCC)Services mir ULtir PradrshSl.ite Roads Proiect Environmental Assessment(Phase l) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

9.3.2 LANDSCAPE STRATEGY

The Engineer will decid- the best applicable design based on typical sketches attached to individual EMPs and site conditions. The landscape strategy developed for UPSRP reflects the underlying assumption of the landscape designers that local species are the best. The environment along the proposed corridor shall be enhanced using various techniques of soft landscapes, principally through plantation of various types of shade and ornamental trees along with shrubs. Landscape strategy has been developed to enhance the visual quality cf the road. Tree plantations have manifold benefits. They may help in reducing the air pollution levels, especially SPM in the surrounding area. A marginal decrease of 3 to 4 dB (A) in noise levels may also be expected due to the plantation used for landscaping. Consultations with officials of the UP Forests department, which is actually in-charge of the roadside plantationi in the state, indicated that a tree density of 200 per km is achievable along all the corridors. This landscaping strategy allows for the incorporation of this target, subject to the availability of space. However, in case of deviation from the Roadside Plantation Policy of the UP Forest Development Corporation, provisions of the Policy will be final and ruling.

Since the RoW availability varies between just enough to accommodate the proposed section (W3) to more than even 30 m, the landscaping scheme allows for flexibility of the decision at the discretion of the Engineer. The stretches shown here are representative of most situations likely to be encountered on the ground-no space available to space available for as many as 3 rows of trees. It is envisaged at this stage that along most routes,. the space available will be enough to accommodate 2 rows. The species selected for each corridor, take into account the local availability, the conditions of the roadside, existing plantation that will be saved after the project construction is over and the care required after plantation. Since the RAP envisages the maintenance of the trees by the local population, the generation of valuable products (fruits, leaves, or even timber) is also a consideration. The following Table 9.5 gives the species suggested for plantation along each of the project routes: The detailed drawings with proposed plantation scheme are made a part of the EMP being prepared as a standalone document.

Table 9-9 Tree speciessuggested for roadside landscaping

S.No r Route Speciesselected ___l -atra -jlhaurMadhuca indica, Mangiferaindica, Dalbergia sissoo,Azadirachta indica, 1 tatra-BIlhaurLargestomiaflosreginea, Cassiafistila dMadhucaindica, Mangiferaindica, Terminalia arjuna. Dalbergia sissoo,Albezzia 2 'fBahraich-Faizabad lb . ______I~~~ebbeck 3 8hor nipur{haudagra Mode Azadirachta indica, TainanndLlsindica, Terninalia ariuna, Dalbergia sissoo, Albezzia lebbeck 4 Mohammedpur IaunpurMadhiica indica, Maigifera indica, Azadirachta indica, Delonix regia, Dalbergia 4 launpur-Mohammedpur ; L I ', ~~~~~~~sissoo,

9.4 EnvironmentalManagement Plans

Standalone Environmental Management Plans have been prepared for each project route and are intended to become a part of the contract documents so that implementation of all the environmental measures can be ensured. A brief introduction to the project and its context with a summary description of the project corridor along with anticipated impacts has been added to each plan. The implementation actions, responsibilities and timeframes have been specified for each component and adverse impact anticipated. Separate sections detail out the monitoring plan, a comprehensive monitoring system and budgetary estimates for each corridor.

9.4.1 MONITORING PLANS

The purpose of the monitoring programme is to ensure that the envisaged purpose of the project are achieved and result in desired benefits to the target population. To ensure the effective implementation of the EMP, it is essential that an effective monitoring programme be designed and carried out. The broad objectives are:

CGveriinent nf UntarPradesh, Public Works Departrneiit. Lucknow, Irndi.a 141 Project Co-ordinaiing Consultanis(PCC) Services for U1tarPradesh St,iie Roads Projert EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

. To evaluatethe performanceof mitigationmeasures proposed in the EMP; * To evaluatethe adequacyof EnvironmentalImpact Assessment; To suggestimprovements in managementplan, if required; To enhanceenvironmental quality; and * To satisfythe legaland communityobligations.

Various physical, biological and social components identified as of particular significance in -affectingthe environment at critical locations in variousstages of the project have been suggested as PerfornanceIndicators (Pls) listed below shallbe the focusfor monitoring:

* Air quality w.r.t SPM,RSPM and CO; * Waterquality w.r.t DO,BOD andColiforrn count; . Noiselevels around sensitive locations; and * Repiactationsuccess/ survival rate.

The monitoring plansduring constructionand operationstages have beendescribed in detail in the respective EMP documents for each of the project routes. For each of the environmental components,the monitoring plan specifiesthe parametersto be monitored; locationof monitoring sites; frequency and duration of monitoring. The monitoring plan also specifiesthe applicable standards,imnplementation and supervisingresponsibilities.

9.4.2 REPORTINGSYSTENM.

The Monitoring and Evaluationof the managementmeasures envisaged are critical activities in implementationof the Project. The rationale for a reporting system is based on accountability to ensure that the measuresproposed as part of the EnvironmentalManagement Plan get implemented in the project. The reporting systemenvisaged as part of the UPSRPis dealt with in detail in Chapter 10.

9.4.3 ENVIRONMENTALBUDGET

An indicative estimate of the cost component involved in mitigation of impacts, corridor enhancements(through landscapingor specificenhancement measures for cultural propertiesand typical enhancements)monitoring and evaluation of various components in pre-construction, construction and operation period as well as institutional strengtheningof the UPPWD has been worked out. A total of INR 54,200,000 has been allocatedfor the environmentalmanagement for phaseI upgradationroutes in UPSRP.This is approximately0.20% of total costsof the upgradation component or approximately 1.05% of cost of civil works for upgradation routes in phase I. A summary of the budget for all project upgradationroutes under different headsis presentedin Table 9.6. Detailedbudget for each route is presentedin the individual EMPs.

Table 9-10 SummaryBudget for Environmentalcomponent of upgradation routes in phaseI of UPSRP

i Mitigation/Mitigatlonl, Trainingand ~~~~~~TotalTtlBdeeBudgeted Roule Route ,' EnhancemCentsEnhancement ~~Monitorngn Cost Mobilisationrang an Costsoth5s

Costs ,,.. contingenicy) Katra-8ilh.ur 20,619;300 784,000 469,000 23,000,000 Bahracbh-Faiza bad 8,690,300 739,000 485,000. tO,S00,000 Bhrognipill-ChlaocdagraMode 11,382,900 704,000i 465;000! 13,200,000 Jaunpur-Mohamniadpur 55,925,300; 693,000 431,000. 7,500,000 Total 46,617,800 2,920,000 1,850,000- 54,200,000

Governmentof UttarPradesh. Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 142 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

9AA ENVIRONMENTALAND SOCIALMANAGEMENT PLAN

As discussedpreviously, the environmentaland soctal issuesare likely to be of lower intensityand extent in the corridors selected for major maintenance.Since no corridor specific significant impactsare expected,a separatestandalone pian has been preparedfor all the maintenanceroutes together.It coversthe social and envii-onmentalcomponents together and describesmneasures to be takenin caseof specificsituations likely to be encounteredduring major maintenance.

Coverrnient of Uttar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Departmenti,Lucknow, lqdi.d 143 Project Co-ordiniatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Utiar Prdesh Slata Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

10 IMPLEMENTATIONARRANGEMENTS

This chapterreviews the existingImplementation Arrangements and discussesthe roles and responsibilitiesof the variousinstitutional players involved in the implementationof the project. Basedon the analysisof the existingsetting, further institutionalstrengthening for ease of implementationof the environmentalcomponents of the projecthave been suggested. It goes on to describethe set-uprequired, a reportingsystem and training needs to ensurethat the environmental expertiseis internalisedat the UPPWD.

10.1 Mandateof the UPPWD

The UPPWDis responsiblefor the road networkin Uttar Pradesh.It is chargedwith the upgradationand maintenanceof just over 184,000km of roadsin total.These consist of National Highwaysnot vestedin the NHAI, StateHighways, Major District Roadsand other roads.At present,of the 112803villages in UP, only 58565are connectedby metalledroads. Therefore, there is a need for connectingthe remainingvillages too the road network too. In addition, the new road policy adopted in 1998 envisagesthe renewal of 1/3 length of National Highways, 1/5 length of State Highways, 1/6 length of Major District Roadsand 1/8 length of Other District roads and Village Roadsto be renewedevery year.

The UPPWD has extensive experiencein building and maintaining roads over the years. The UPSRPconsisting of nearly 1000 km of upgradationand 2500 km of major maintenanceof roads with assistancefrom the World Bank will require commitmentof dedicated staff and resourcesto ensure smooth implementation of this category 'A' project. The organisational set-up of the UPPWD and modifications required in order to meet these new challengesare discussedin the following sections.

10.2 ExistingInstitutional Arrangements

The presentUPPWD set-upconsists of an Engineer-in-Chiefwho heads 23 chief engineers,a chief architect and staff officers at the headquarters.One of the chief engineersis responsiblefor World Bank assistedprojects. It is under her/his office that the Project ImplementationUnit headedby a SuperintendingEngineer has been set up for the Uttar PradeshStateRoads Project 11.

10.2.1 THE PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION UNIT (PIU)

The SuperintendingEngineer is the Project Director responsiblefor the successfulimplementation of the project. He heads a team comprising an ExecutiveEngineer and two AssistantEngineers dedicated to the PIU for the duration of the project. One of the assistantengineers looks after the environmental aspectswhile the other looks after the social aspectsof the project. Their role is mainly into co-ordinating with other government departments and supervision of the project preparation by the Project Co-ordinating Consultants during the initial stages and Supervision Consultantsduritig the implementationstage, which will commencesoon.

PROIECTDIRECTOR- UPSRP

EXECUTIVEENGINEER

ASSISTANTENGINEER (1) ASSISTANTENGINEER III it/C ENVIRONMENTI (I/C R&RI

Government of Utiar Pradesh.Public Works Departiitnrit. LLurknow.India 144 Project Co-ordinatingCo-nsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roadsc Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 11 DHV Consultants BV September2001

1022 PROJECTCO-ORDINATING CONSULTANTS

The Project Co-ordinating Consultantshave been appointed to ascistthe PIU during project preparation. The Environmental and Social experts of the PCC have been responsible for the preparationof EA as per the ToR approvedby the World Bank.The major inputs of the PCC will end with project appraisal.However, their specialisttechnical inputs will continue for the project duration on a limited scale.

10.23 SUPERVISIONCONSULTANTS

The project envisagesthe use of SupervisionConsultants for the implementationstage to assistthe PIU during construction stage. The SC will assumethe role of the Engineerand will have the powers and responsibility for the approval of bills, etc. normally vested with the client. These consultantswill be selectedthrough InternationalCompetitive Bidding (ICB)and it is expectedthat they will have substantial capability to supervise the implementation of the environmental component of the project as part of their assignment.Implicitly, the construction supervision consultantsare expected to have specialiststo advice on and co-ordinateimplementation of the measuresdeveloped as part of the EnvironmentalManagement Plans for individual routes.

10.2.4NON-GOVERNMENTALORGANISATIONS

The provisionsenvisaged in the RAP shall be implementedby Non-GovernmehtalOrganisations contractedfor the purpose by the PIU. Their brief is to monitor the progressand implementationof the proposed measures.A representativeof the NGO will also be a part of the District Level Committee,which will decide the replacementvalue of land and propertiesto be acquired. One representativeof the NGO will also be a part of the Grievance RedressalCommittee for each district. The environmental responsibilitiesof the NGO's include the facilitation of formation of self-help groups in villages, which will supervise the cleaning of drains and maintenance of roadsideplantations.

10.25 TECHNICALAUDITORS

For the major maintenancecomponent, the PIU will be assistedby technical auditors. Since the environmentalconcerns along maintenancecorridors are few, the environmentalexpertise required for these will be limited. However, it is expected that the Technical Auditors, who are to be procured under National Competitive Bidding, will have sufficient staff, albeit part-time to ensure that the provisions of the Environmentaland Social ManagementPlan (ESMP)are implementedin letteras well as spirit alongall the routesunder major maintenance.

10.2.6CONTRACTORS

The execution of the works will be responsibility of the contractor. It is expected that the environmental measuL-eswill also be implementedby the samecontractor who executesthe road works. This w,ill ensurethat the constructioniof the road and mitigation/enhancementdesigns will progresssmoothly and efficiently. It follows that the contractorhas enough environmental/social expertise to incorporateenvironmentally-senisitised construction practices. As executionersof the EMPsand ESMP,the contractorsare expectedto follow the letter and spirit of the specifications. Though each contractorwill have a set-upfor executing works specified in the EMP,it is expected that a certain portion of its staff will have enough environmental awarenessnecessary for the successfulcompletion of the works entrusted.

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Pubiec Works Departnmei, Lucknov. India 145 Project Co-ordinaling Co1SL1itdntsiPCCi Services for U.ttr PreideshStlte RoadsProjec Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV Consultants BV September2001

10.3 Needfor furtherStrengthening

Themani-power requirement for the implementationof the projectwithin the UPPWDcan be easily satisfiedfrom its existingstaff. The recentInstitutional Development Study carried out for the UPPWDbecomes the guidingfactor while suggestingthe man-powerdeployment for the project. The requirementsfrom otherplayers will haveto be ensuredfor the smoothimplementation of UPSRP.

103.1 NEEDFOR ADDITIONAL CAPACITY

During the implementationstage, construction will proceed simultaneouslyon the 4 separate corridors simultaneously.Since the corridors are spread.allover UP, the presentresources of the PWD will be stretchedto the limit. It is anticipatedthat the phase11 roads will also be implemented within this setup only andthere might be someoverlap of constructionperiods of the two phases.

10.3.2LAND0/PROPERTY ACQUISITION

It is expectedthat there will be no land acquisitionduring phaseI of the project. During this phase, the only propertiesthat will be taken belongto encroachers/squatters.However, in phase11 of the project, at least 3 bypassesare to be taken up and will involve taking up large areas of land. Moreover, land and/or propertieswill also need to be acquired along the congestedstretches in routes in phase 11as well as for major intersectionswith the National Highwaysalong routes in Phase I and 11.These activities will need to begin early since the entire processis quite long and requiressix monthsor more to complete.Therefore, this is an areaon which the UPPWD will have to concentrateright from the preparationstage of phase11 the project. Stepsare alreadybeing taken at the PIU level with the employment of a former land record official to collect information regardingRoW availabilityfor phaseI and 11upgradation routes.

10.4 ProposedSet-up

The proposedset up for project envisagesstrengthening the environmentalcomponent of the PIU and also ensuresthat sufficientstaff is deployed from the other actorstoo, in order to implementthe provisionsof the EnvironmentalManagement Plan on the groundas envisagedin this project.

10A.1 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION UNIT

The PIU has one assistantengineer already in-charge of environmentalissues for the project. With the envisagedsimultaneous implementation of the two phases,at leastin part, there is a need for another helping hand. For the purposesof the project, UP is divided into two zones: Eastand West with Lucknow being the dividing point. The other assistantengineer to be inducted into the PIU, will handle one region, while the presentassistant engineer will look afterone region.

In addition, the issueof land acquisitionwill be a considerablechallenge for the engineerin-charge of R&R activities. In addition to another engineer, on the lines of the environmentalengineer mentioned above to add up to 2 engineerin-charge of R&R activities-oneeach for the eastand west divisions. In addition, the servicesof the land recordsofficial since land acquisition is going to be sLibstantialin phase11. Availing of their servicesfrom now will facilitatethe project preparationfor phase il and also ensurethat stageis set for the smooth implementationafter all the formalitiesare complete. The advantageof using former revenue officials is their familiarity with the procedures and recordsas well as the rapportthat they mighthave built with their ex-colleagues.

The environmental managementplan envisageson-site monitoring of construction activities and analysisof the samplescollected. For this purposetwo chemistswould be required.While they will

Governimeit of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, LLucknow,India 146 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pridesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 11 DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

be based in Lucknow, the collection of samples will involve traveling to the sites where construction is in progress,as well as where specifiedin the monitoring programme.Other support staffwill be procuredfrom the UPPWD'sown manpoweras required.

Thus an induction of 4 more people is envisagedinto the PIU. The engineersand chemistsare available from the UPPWD staff itself.While the formerare expectedto be from the filed staff,the latter will be deputed from the ResearchLaboratory of the PWD which is a designatedTest House, as notified in the Gazette.The final structureof the EnvironmentalCell of the PIU for the UPSRP will be as below:

PROJECTDIRECTOR iSE-UPPVWDi UPSRP

EXECUTIVEENGINEER

ASSISTANTENGINEERS (2) ASSISTANTENGINEERS (2)(R&R) (ENVIRONMENT)

NGO fO BsE - CHEMISTS(2)(TO BE DEPUTED FROM PROCURED) PWDCENTRAL LABORATORY)

10A.2 CONSTRUCTIONSUPERVISION CONSULTANTS (CS)

The supervision consultants will assumethe powers and responsibilitiesof the Engineerfor the UPSRPand assistthe PIU in implementation.It is expectedthat the supervisionconsultants will have the necessarycapability to supervise the implementationof the environmental measures proposed in the EMP. The CS to be selected through ICB are expected to have the in-house capacity to adviseon and supervisethe implementationoi the EMP.including makingthe decisions regarding applicability of enhancement design options and, any modifications, if needed, the appropriate landscapesection to be applied etc. For this purpose, it is expectedthat the CS will employ a full time Environmentalspecialist. The draft terms of referencefor such a specialistare given below in Box 10.1.

Box10.1 Draft Termsof Referencefor SupervisionConsultants' Environmental Specialist

The Uttar Pradesh State;'RoadsProject (UPSRP),financed by the World Bank, integrate1 environmental and social issuesin the planning and design of the Highway. An Environmenta ManagementPlan (EMP)has been preparedand is integratedin the technical specificationan contract documents. The prime duty of the EnvironmentalSpecialist is to supervise th implementationof the EMP by the Contractorsand to ensurethat the day-to-dayconstructio activities are carried out in-an environmentallysound and sustainablebasis. The scope include development of environmentalprocedures and good construction practices,development an delivery of training programmesetc. Qualificationsand Experience . A civil engineerpreferably with postgraduatespecialization in environmentalengineering. . 15 yearsof working experiencerelated to the integrationof environmentaland social issue in the design, construction and operation of transportprojects. Experiencein constructio manageinentand operationalmaintenance of highwaysis preferred. Continued on next pag

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Luckno%v, India 147 Project Cu-oldinalinag Consuldains(PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshSt.ne RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants sV September2001

- Continued PrincipalDuties . Supervisethe implementationof the EMPby the Contractors. . Hold regularconsultation meetings with the AssistantEngineers of the EnvironmentalCell i the PIU, UPPWD. . Review the Contractors'Environmental Implementation Plans to ensure compliance wit the EnvironmentalManagement Plan (EMP). . Organiseperiodic environmentaltraining programmesand workshopsfor the staff of th Contractors,Construction SupervisionConsultants and the Project Implementation Unit (PIU). . Develop good practicesconstruction guidelines to assistthe contractors in implemnentin the EMP. Monitor tree plantation prograrnmesand the periodic environmentalmonitoring (air, noise water, etc.) programmesto ensurecompliance with the Staterequirements and the EMP. . Prepareand submit.regular environmental monitoring and implementationprogress reports.

10A.3 CONTRACTORS

The Contractorstoo will have to employ EnvironmentalEngineer/s. Depending upon the number of contractsawarded to each successfulbidder, the numberwill vary. The bestsituation would be the use of Civil Engineerswith electivesin environmentalengineering during the final year to supervise the environmentalaspects. Their duty will include the proper constructionand maintenanceof the facilities for the labour camps,the measuremenitand verification of quantitiesfor environmental enhancement,ensuring that proper environmentalsafeguards are being maintainedat borrow sites and quarries from which the contractor procuresmaterial for construction.They will also have to preparethe bills of quantitiesfor the work carried out for enhancement.In addition, they will have to ensurethat proper facilitiesare availablefor the monitoring of ambientair quality and collection of water and soil samplesas provided for in the environmentalmonitoring plan. iOAA TECHNICALAUDITORS

The technical auditors will perform similar functions as the CS for major maintenancepackages. However, since the environmental impacts of the proposed works are limited compared to upgradation, the involvement of environmental specialist(s)will be much less. However, it is expected that the Technical Auditor will have one environmental specialistto take care of any unforeseenadverse environmental impact for all corridorswithin their purview at leastin the initial stagesof construction.

10A.5OTHER AGENCIES

The other agenciesinvolved in project activities include the NGO procured for the implementation of the RAP.The sameNGO will be given the responsibilityof creating self-helpgroups envisaged here for the maintenanceof the drainisand plantation (in close co-ordination with the Forests department). It follows that the NGO will require some professional assistance,especially for explaining to the local people the importance of the proposed activities to ensure that they are willing to participate in thesecommunity baser) initiatives.Occasional surprise monitoring by-the local UPPCB officials may also be of advantageat hot-mix plait locations to ensure that they comply with the relevantdischarge normiis. Thriugh not requiredto a largedegree in the phase1, .the project would benefit immensely if liaison with the local land record and revenue officials beginsas soon as possible.

Governmentof Urtar Pradesh, Public Works Depanmentr. Lucknou. Inidia -148 ProjectCo-ordinating consultants (PCC) Services (or UttiarPradesh St,re Ruadv Pro;ect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase Ot DHVConsultants BV September2001

10A.6 FACILITIESFOR THE ENVIRONMENTALCELL

The Environmentalcell will require certain basic resourcesfor its effective functioning. These include, in addition to the manpower already described, adequatespace for staff and testing laboratory. Some equipment will also be required to be procured, for collection and analysisof samples from site. Adequate transport facilities, to accommodateboth monitoring staff and equipment, jeeps with large storagespace, will have to be dedicatedto the environmentalcell, at leastduring the constructionperiod. Since all the staffwill be basedin Lucknow, it is advisableto have two sets of all equipmentwhile they sharethe office space-with one being dedicatedto the easternand other to the westernregion.

10.5 EnvironmentalReporting System

Monitoring and Evaluationare critical activities in implementation of all projects. Monitoring involves periodic checking to ascertain whether activities are going according to the plans. It provides the necessaryfeedback for project managementto keep the program on schedule. By contrastevaluation is essentiallya summing up, the end of the projectsassessment of whetherthose activities actuallyachieved their intendedends.

The reporting system will operate linearly with the contractor who is at the lowest rung of the implementationsystem reporting to the SupervisionConsultant, who in turn shall report to the PIU. All reporting by the contractorand SupervisionConsultant shall be on a quarterly basis.The PIU shall be responsiblefor preparingtargets for each of the identified EMP activities.All subsequent reporting by the contractor shall be monitored as per. these targets set-by the PIU before the contractorsmove on to the site.

The compliance monitoring and the progress reports on environmental components may be clubbed together and submitted to the UPPWD (through the PIU) quarterly during the implementation period. The operation stage monitoring reports may be annual or biennial, provided the Project Environmental Completion Report shows that the implementation was satisfactory.Otherwise, the operation stagemonitoring reportswill have to be preparedz specified in the said ProjectEnvironmental Completion Report.

During the implementationperiod, a compliance report may include description of the Items of EMP,which were not complied with by any of the responsibleagencies. It would also repoft the managementand field actions taken to enforce compliance.It may however, be noted that certain itemsof the EMPmight not be possibly complied with in the field due to a variety of reasons.The intention of the compliancereport is not to suppressthese issues but to bring out the circumstances and reasonsfor which compliance was not possible(such as jurisdictional issnes).This would help in rationalizing the implementationof the EMP during the remaining duration of implementation. Solutions for further effectiveimplementation should also come out as a result of the compliance monitoring reports.

Responsibilitiesfor overseeingwill rest with the SupervisionConsultant's staff reporting to the PIU EnvironmentalUnit. Capacityto quantitativelymonitor relevantecological parameterswould be an advantagebut monitoringwill primarily involve ensuring that actions takenare in accordancewith contractand specificationclauses, and specifiedmitigation measuresas per the EMP.

Photographicrecords will also be establishedto provide useful environmentalmonitoring tools. A full record will be kept as part of normal contract Imonitoring.Reporting and Monitoring Systems for various stagesof constructionand ielated activities have been proposed to ensure timely and effectiveimplementation of the EMAP.

The reporting systemhas been prepared for each of the stageof roadconstrtuction namely: * Preconstruction stage * ConstructionStage * Operation Stage

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Wofks Departmeni, Lucknuw, India 149 ProjectCo-ordin.ititig Consultaints (PCCi Services for UttdiPradesio Stite Roads Piojeui Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

This reportingshall be donethrough: * Reportingby the Contractorto the SC * Reportingby SCto PIU * Reportingby the PIU to UPPWD(HQ)

The stage-wisereporting systemis detailedout in the following Table 10.1.

Table 10-1 Stage-wiseReporting systemof UPSRP

. t Contractor Supervision. . Consultant (SC) ~~~~~~~~ProjectP ImplementationUni WorldBank Ip(PIU) t Wo(WB) a FtNo.mForm Item Implementati Oversee/ at No.i on and Reportingto Field Reportto Desired Reportingto Supervision PIU Compliance WB Supervision SC ... .~~~~~~~~~...... _ .... ------..-_-_ ...... __.. ..._ .. . Monitoring . .. _...... CONSTRUCTIONPHASE Monitoring of Ci constructionsite Beforestart Quarterly Quarterly Halfyearly andconstruction of work camp Targetsheet for C2 Pollution As required tr Aferyearly Monitoring Monitoring Hatyrl i, Momtorlng , ...... _.~--- --.------i------~~~~~~Monitoring - -.-..-.... Targetsheet for C3 roadside Monthly QLiarterly Quanerly Half yearly Yearly plantation ...... P._.__, ... _.. _...... i... Targetsheet for C4 nionitonngof Monthly Quarterly iHalffyearly Yearly cleaning water ~~~~~Monthly Q bodies- OPERATIONPHASE Targetsheet for As per After , Twice during 01 Pollution imonitoring monito operation Monitoring plan ring phase Targetsheet for Once after.3

02 survival reporting Quarterl After - yearsof end of roadside monitorngr of plantation I construction Targetsheet for

0 3 cleaningonitoring water of Q a t r y monitoringA fter operationT i e d r n bodies phase

The formatsfor the reporting of the various environmentalissues.through the various stagesof the project implementationare annexedto the individual EMPs.

10.6 InternalizingEnvironmental Expertise in the UPPWD

Moreover, as a long chain of projects is envisagedover the next decade or so in the highways sector in India, the acquired capacity needsto be fully internalized.Two things becomeimportant in this respect.Firstly, there should be substantialenvironmental capacity beyond the staffdirectly responsiblefor implementing the EMP in different projects.This may be achievedthrough training and disseminationof information. Secondly, the possibility of the EnvironmentalCell developing beyond the project, like the UP StateBridge Corporation, should be explored. It could continue to function beyond the UPSRPconducting EAs for other project proponents-both government departments/undertakingsas well as privatedevelopers.

10.7 Operationalisation

Operationalisation of the environmenital setup for this project would involve three distinct elements.These are:

* Identificationand appointmentof Staff

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 150 Project Co-ordicatiingConisultanit, (IPCC) Services for Uilir Pradeslt SIlie RoadsProie(t EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

* Procurementof NGOs andother agenciesresponsible for implementation

Eachof theseis-described below.

10.7.1IDENTIFICATION AND APPOINTMENTOF STAFF

At the project level, the PIU has already been functional. Two assistantengineers are already working for the project's environmental and social components. Two other engineers will be inducted when implementationbegins. It would be advantageousif thesetwo engineershave post- graduate qualifications in Environmental Engineeringor previous experience of R&R related activities. The chemists to be inducted are already part of the UPPWD's central laboratory in Lucknow and can be draftedin at shortnotice.

10.7.2 PROCUREMENTOF NGOS AND OTHER AGENCIES

UPPWD is already finalising the NGO's to implement the RAP provisions.UPPWD will procure the servicesof any other agency,such as educationalinstitutions for surprisemonitoring, if found necessary,during the implementationstage.

10.8 Training

The training under UPSRPhas beendevised with the objective of mainstreamingthe environmental concerns into the day-to-dayfunctioning of the organisation.Though there will be more intensive training for member of the staff directly involved in the project, the training intends that the environmentalawareness will percolatethrough to other sectionsof the PWD too. The emphasisof the training for the staff directly involved will be on environmental monitoring and sampling techniques and their day-to-daywork, while for the other staff it will be more about overview of environmental legislation and policy, impacts of road construction etc. The detailed training programmefor the project is given belowvin Table 10.2

table 10-2 Training Componentsfor UPSRP

TrainingS. ainins RecipientsReciient . Modeode off TainigTraining : EnvironmentalcoreirinnmdueAnc Aspects to be Training Conducting No. __ <_ ___ _ coveredtraining mDdule - -ec- I---- 1 . Environmentalstaffof i. LectureSystem * Environmentaloverview Externalagency 'Environmental Cell i . Workshops * Environmental Regulationsand I AssociatedNGOs in j Group Discussion - Acts implementationand I . Shortterm training i. Environmental managementPlan PIUstaff associated course I Environmentalpolliution associated withconstruction ! withroad protects supervision * RoadProjects and Environmental I issues - Environmentallysound constructionlmanagement ' Planning for environmiiental sustainableoperation of roads Longtern environmentalissues in road managemnent

2 * All PIU staff . Seminar *. Environmentaloverviewv ExternalAgency construction . Workshop ! EnvironmentalImpact Assessment stupervision * Lecturers * EnvironmentalM.magenirent Plan conultantand Implementation coniractors Etnvironimental Regulations and Acts * Environmentalpollution associated withroad pmroects * Environmentally sound construction management RoadProjects and Environmental Issues 3 . All PIUstaff and * Shorttern training * Environnientaloverview i ExternalAgency

Government of UttarPradesh, Pu,blic Works Departmenit. Locknow India 151 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCcI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Protect Environmental Assessfnent(Phase 1I DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

S r. igRciins Md o riig EnvironmientalAspects to be TrainingConducting .No. Trinn Reciiens Mdeo- raiin. coveredtraining module Agnc ExecutiveEngineers courses *Environmental RegLulationsand and above PWD Visit to case studies Acts officials associated *Seminar *Environmnental Pollution with the protect *Road projectsanid environmental routes ~~~~~~~~~~~issues EMPfor road projects

4 *Collaborating * Multimiedia *Environmental Overview ExternalAgencies and Govemmen presentations, .Important Environmental PCCConsultant Agenciessuch as InformationTraining Regulationsand Acts from road Pollution Control transport perspective Board, Traffic and *Pollution due to road projects Transport Departments,State Forest Depanm-ent etc. and all staff of PWD

-5 * All1s-taff of P-iUJ-- 'Sho-rt ter-m-training *Theoretical COuirseto Externalagency. entrustedwith course ienvironmental impact assessment enivironnmentalrelated arildprocedures. matters EnvironmentalRegulations, Acts and Clearanceprocedures. *Environmentaldlata acquisition and mionitoringanalysis. *Hands on training onicomnpliance monitoring and operation stage monitoring.

6 1*AllI PIU, PWD)staff .Short term-Course *Refresher traininigcourse on Environmentalcell of associatedwith monitoring aridcompliances of PIU and PCC supervisionof .llitigation meCasures. Consultants. construction and *Environmental mianagementplan supervision consultant .

The total estimatedcosts for the training programmeare INR 1,200,000 which have been equally apportioned to all the four upgradationcorridors in Phase1.

Governnmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Departmenti,LUCknow. India 1 52 Project Co-,ordiisauingConsultants IPCCIServices for Uttar PrasdeshSta,te Roatds 'ro 1 sst EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

REFERENCES

1 World BankOperational Directives and other guidelines,The World Bank 1999. 2 Ministry of Environmentand ForestGuidelines for roadprojects, MOEF, New Delhi. 3 EnvironmentalImpact Notification, MOEF, 1994. 4 Guidelinesfor EnvirotimentalAssessmenit of Highway Projects,The Indian RoadsCongress, 1989 5 EngineeringProject Management,(Chapter-4 Project appraisal & EnvironmentalImpact) Edited by N.l.Smith,Blackwell Science, University of Leed,U.K. 6 EnvironmentalImpacts of Roads& Traffic,L.H.Watkins 7 EnvironmentalImpact Assessment, S.R. Sharma, Encology, Vol. 4, No.,June, 1989 8 EnvironmentalImpact Assessment, EIA project phase-l1workshop sponsored by UNDP/MOEF& co- ordinated by CESE,lIT Bombay. 9 Traffic Noise,Greater London Council, February1966. 10 EnvironmentProtection Act, 1986. 11 The Water(Prevention & Controlof pollution) Act, 1974. 12 The Air (Prevention& Controlof pollution) Act, 1981. 13 ForestConservation Act, 1980. 14 Wild LifeConservation Act, 1972. 15 PlanningAtlas of U.P.,Government of India, 1987. 16 Ninth five YearPlan, 1997-2002,1998. GOUP. 17 U.P. ForestryStatistics, GOUP, 1996-97. 18 Tourism Promotionmeasures in U.P.centrally sponsoredschemes, GOUP-1 998. 19 Centrally protectedArchaeological Monuinents in U.P., Govt. of India 1997. 20 Tourismstatistica[ Book of U.P, GOUP, 1997. 21 Reportof CentralGround WaterBoard, U.P., Central Water Commission, 1997-98. 22 U.P. StateRoad Transport Department, Annual Report,GOUP, 1998-99. 23 Developmentof Tourism Infrastructure,Buddhist circuits Phase-Il,GOUP, 98-99. 24 Soil salinity Map of U.P., GOUP, 1998-99. 25 Map of Hydrologicalzones of U.P.,Ground WaterResources, GOUP, 1998. 26 U.P. StateRoad Project,Strategic Options Study, CES, Delhi, 1996. 27 Landscapingof Roads,Indian RoadCongress. 28 Public Works Department,Government of Rajasthan-State highways Project, PCC FeasibilityStudy, Louis BergerInt. U.S.A.1997. (Chapter on EnvironmentalFeasibility Assessment) 29 U.P. Annual Report,1997-98, Govt. of U.P. 30 Terms of referencefor PCCservices for Uttar PradeshRoads, UPPWD, 1998 31 Workshop on U.P. StateRoads Project, Lucknow 21s' February2000. Organisedby PWD & PCC Consultants. 32 Inception Report,U.P. StateRoads Project, PCC Consultants, Lucknow, U.P., October 1999. 33 Terms of Referencefor EnvironmentalAssessment, U.P. StateRoads Project, PCC Consultants, Lucknow,U.P., December1999. 34 Indian Highways.Monthly Magazinepublished by IRC,New Delhi. 35 Man in the Environment,Tata McGraw - Hill PublishingComtpaniy. New Delhi, 1975. 36 Environment by D.M.Kalapeshi,Leslie Sawhny programme of training for Democracy, Orient House,Manglore Street, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-38 37 Pollution tolerant plant speciesfor roads and industrial environments, BharatiyaAgro Industries Foundations,Pune, 1993-94 38 Landscapeof Roads,Sylvia Crowe, Macmillan, London, 1980. 39 Pollution from Roadvehicles, National Society for clean air, Brighton,England. 40 Health Hazardsof human Environment,WHO, 1972. 41 Stateof India's Environment-1982,A citizen's Report,C.S.E., Delhi. 42 EnvironmentalLaw, 2"" Edition,by Hughes,D. (1992), Butterworth,London. 43 Environmental Economics-an elementary Introductioll by Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead,England. 44 Environmental Impact Assessment-Theory& Practise edited by Wathern, P., Routledge Publications. 45 Valuesfor the Environment-A Guideto EconomicAppraisal, HMSO (1-991). 46 EnvironmentalImpact Assessment 2nd edition, edited by R.E.Muon, JohnWiley & Sons,1979.

Govemnmentof Unar Pradesh, PLiblic Works Deparnnient. LrLIk,now, Inldia 153 ProjectCo-ordinatinig ConsLIltants (Pcc) Servicesfor Utt.ir PradeshState Roads Protect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants BV September2001

47 Course material for workshop on Eco-Restoration,Environmental Conservation and management fdr PWD engineers,U.P.P.W.D., 1989. 48 Roadsand the Environment,A handbook,edited by Koii Tsnokawa& ChristopherHoban, World Bank Technical PaperNo. 376, November1997. 49 Feasibility study Final Report, 2000 by DHV ConsultantsBV Volume I & il- ConsultancyServices for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project 50 Hydrology & Drainage Report for Phase- I project Roads-Consultancyservices for Uttar Pradesh Stateroads project. DHV ConsultantsBV, 200 51 Bridges inspectionReports for Phase- I Roads,Uttar PradeshState Roads Project. DHV Consultants BV, 2000 52 Parivesh Newsletter, June'99 volume 6(1), Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environmentand Forests. 53 National Highways Authority of India NH-2 Four laning and strengthening by SNC-Lavalin International Inc, 1999. 54 Preliminary Environmentaland social screeningReport, Four laning and strengtheningof MDR from Trichy by passto Madurai via Melur, N.D. Leainternational, Canada, May 1999.

RELEVANTIRC PUBLICATIONSREFERRED IN PREPARATIONOF THIS REPORT

No. Title

43 IRC:46-1972 A Policyon roadsideadvertisement 49 IRC:52-1981 Recommendationsabout alignment survey and geometric design of Hill Roads (FirstRevision) 50 IRC:53-1982 Roadaccident forms A-1&4 (FirstRevision) 51 IRC:54-1974 Lateraland vertical clearancesat Underpassfor vehiculartraffic 53 . IRC:56-1974 Recommendedpractice for treatmentof embankmentslopes for erosion control 59 IRC:62-1976 Guidelinesfor control of accesson highways 61 IRC:64-1990 Guidelinesfor capacityof roadsin rural areas(First Revision) 62 IRC:65- 1976 Recommendedpractice for'traffic rotaries 63 IRC:66-1976 Recommendedpractice for sightdistances on rural highways 64 IRC:67-1977 Code of practicefor roadsigns 66 IRC:69-1977 Spacestandards for roadsin Urban areas 67 IRC: 70-1977 Guidelineson regulationand controlof mixedtraffic in urbanareas 70 IRC:73-1980 Geometricdesign standards for rural highways 76 IRC:79-1981 Recommendedpractice for road delineators 77 IRC:80-1981 Typedesign for pickup bus-stopson rural (i.e.non-urban) highways 84 IRC:86-1983 GeometricDesign standards for Urban Roadsin Plains 87 IRC:89-1997 Guidelines for design and constructionof river training and control works for road bridges(First Revision) 90 IRC:92-1985 Guidelinesfor the design of interchangesin Urban Areas 91 IRC:93-1985 Guidelinesoni Design & Installationof RoadTraffic signals 96 IRC:98-1997 Guidelines on -accommodationof undergroundutility servicesalong and across roads in urban areas 97 IRC:99-1988 Tentative Guidelines on the provision of speed breakers for control of vehicle speedon minor roads 100 IRC:102-1988 Trafficstudies for planningby passesaroulid towns 101 IRC:103-1988 Guidelines for pedestrianfacilities 102 IRC:104-1988 Guidelinesfor EnvironmentalImpact Assessment of highway projects 104 IRC:106-1990 Guidelinesfor capacityof urban roadsin plain areas 106 IRC:108-1996 Guideiinies for traffic prediction on rural highways

Specialpublications:

110 IRC:SP:12-1973 Tentativerecommendations on the provisionof parkingspaces for urbanareas 113 IRC:SP:15-1996 Ribbon developmentalong highwaysand its prevention 127 IRC:SP:31-1992New traffic signis

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,PUblic Works Deparrment,Luicknow, India 154 Pw-jcci Co-u,didmtm,,gCunbukaht.s WCC) Services iot tjii.,l Il ldesh Stale RoadsP'ronva Environmental Assessment(Phase 4 DHV Consultants BV September2001

137 IRC:SP:41-1994Guidelines on designof At-gradeIntersections in rural and urbanareas 138 IRC:SP:42-1994 Guidelines on road drainage 140 IRC:SP:44-1994 Highway safety coipi 144 IRC:SP:48-1998 Hill road manual

Manual on1landscape of roads,1979

Environmentalconsiderations in planningand designof highwaysin India, Indian roadscongress,1979

Governmiienitof Ultar Pradesh,Puiblic Works Department, Locknow, Irdia 1 55 Projeci C-oiIdinating Consultants IPCC)Services for Uirar PradeshState Roads P-oje(t Government of Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department Lucknow, India

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (PHASE 1) ANNEXURES

September2001

Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services (LoanNo, 4114-IN) gUtfikashi,>

Consultancy Services for Uffar XlXn2 959#94 Nain PradeshState RoadsProject

.,h3d-~~~~~~~~~~Fudn Agency

DHV Consultants BV FundingAgency: in associationwith The World Bank Halcrow and Partners OperationsResearch Group DevelopmentConsultants Ltd. MDP Consultants (Pvt.)Ltd. Annex 1 Environmental Assessiment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ANNEX 1 GAZETTE NOTIFICATION OF MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST

2heXQ ®alette of 2u1uia d

rXTRAORWNR

Xt

wo.,t~ ~ -WEWUit WIS11A.SQ} flJf I A%AtLI§

KTq oq su VoN, ) tc(q*' w4*W

.4~::z e ti A gtt'ts

, TBfClrt;tq3;T* Kltrm '(iN

' -VVtI vo -V , v < vxr Va:t7 s2e. ''

Governmientof UntarPradesh, Puiblic works Department, LLucknow.Inidia 1- Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Unar Pradesi StateRoads Project Envimnmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

2 TH- GA i& j0F1DMA -2ECTsAQRDi4AKY IPwT lI-Sme 31si)

pyml 'i- kt t "

M .t= VL- ; , VAi.M 60t*i), 2Jt tt W 194 tM VfM* 'n 1- 4A W3IM VV' -tR.Mlt.Vt. 3 4 ll) 4 994, S 3P lt10Mtt tO In 197, rt t 7 27U .

MINISThY OF ENVLR?NTA")FORFS1S NOTIFICATION NkwVdW. k, Ta3d lanaay.200 S.O. E3-WMiccrasby wttifcationufthr GDsm oiAdtundia in ttc Minisftryit Envtrourcnttn>td Forsts No. SO. 6VE,dtcd thi Z1thJanutary. t994 (hcrcnalc r.crndt&acsaf ntiort)i ucd zub'acto) atud camev) n sob-i L(2)ofo ncti 3o ftiscnEMM M t(ran)Act. 155 (9 of I )t4d wih bst id) of sslb-rsk ) of nrtd S of he B rosnnt 1 i a 196 at Ccata Gvutnn ssl iUs5td 4 envlnr rcbtrsttisons assdprohibktions ort ft xpasiott and mnmisatinonyfai acWy. iDCMe C4dckirtaoflany p2Do$c.m±nkss ctsvirsantst* dcarnrc hmtbeen erngtd by the vrimnit- ArFwcre the3l 4alrificaunt aw_sw n scqw* vtdc S.. 154(E) datd tse lst tliy. 15994.&O. I ME) sdatldthe 10th April. It'l7. S.O. 73(L) dated (ho 27th Januauy2000 and S.O. It 19V) diLed t3te 33thiDmtsuItr,

And v4nrcas i bs,bsbesl fowX#%haSn3ii S jss&uazli 1 tUs.MSMiningPsssps wsh .tase uVP towzt lf hoctercs, wi4Caing and suLngtsicnrg of LIsiIwxa)t, and oawutoon or cxt3jing 1rrigabon Pmojczucaitsc msimnJAWt lrstpacts,bosh ott Ihectssvirosuncai at d peope tCvintgintl,vAtnit ft Ad ikts C ctv2 Xsd3ctp SlS1;ttl B inoionsprwlod( p3ctiute ptropac to thifsMiut1ysOut sithou aP*UC hauisg

NoW,. ftrcfort, (h feoos rnotswsCa on Liwb(cb u Ce an covcamst propoe to msanrsa= of poweics C=Wredby pUFti(l)rud2Icstai imn dhetf Er t(lretP tion) As.1I-Kvi 129 0r11926) is hc=-&Yp1dbisbe as rrxwzm1unsick Snb.ndCte)ofm;nk ot thit0nwxonment (Prnacion) Rs&lcs,1916 rit tUsei sVrmmtiovnof all pC(5e0sslii bi:tto Cititalledd t.nby. and IsottUeis lie, fy given tlsit th taliddaft nsotficaiusn tol . be laken ilSocCz5id ln Sa.fQ tpaep4 of dof ltyq daystrom ft dalt o: wtskb saosnof dtc eN"ca it eontnioins '.1 zctsjitln aic nru3e eC-aAlc w 1s y ki, Any lxs:wa desirous of nuking any otj4cijort or RU7ssg on ilk respet of the stid draft nr,tifir,3aornusay tonstwi IlbC cnin asi .rf fr, c t .' t: r cIou ^e,-tamie walsirth z:pcrad s spe 5irto se 5 i r, Mtiristrv o li. zrs3rrnaar .ci .1, Par 1aurt B2_iVLCtrCGO. Cm=plest,L bibo, dNewDelhi - I3O i LILAJr PROPMSAL lt, Uta1:t~i risifiitzU5i301,it patgrzph >, instu *npapth! in itemt4 a) foltowng sgailtib iaserted aJtsw etd,

-c! cv-er, 4asblcheca ting ts not resquiredItItepc of Snalil SCaleInd"stisal Units ISr (1%f;ncdin the lalusugril Mait ftsin ti mnto tinec),widlcningrand sutreaei3ng ofir irways, oiniiii pccmseg (m*wr*nratslv. sis -_ r orea4i. hpeel\rts.cs1 an ;-trtssu etcautig *XirrrrMirsXs,~

DI. V -RAJAGOPAL&N, Jt, Sc,y.

Foot Nou.-Thk PNincipal Notific4tci %ts pibisted vide usumcbt S 0. 6OE) dated tsIr 2"th au.ry, 1994aA4 ribs VcnttyamatndcdvidenttstobrS.O. 356(E)dssted lthe th Mtty,1S9Y4, Sb. 3 81S()dated the fOrtI Attil. 199.,S.O. fl(E:) dnJs:udt1 Thi Swstay. 2tSYen .O.11 !9(Edatc tht.13th DscrrŽher. 2t#C '

' ^l.4CiD:- YWs ftc,, . k!rtlf^lft}r-' N-if

Governmenito; Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 1-2 Project Co-orcidiuatinrgCornsultants (PCC) Services for Uttdr PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessnent (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

(I: L 1)IV I S ItON;

Ocobe415, ig99.

~21Ih~ pU\i'~tOi uf th~ LA ~ s of'Q 1" OA alld,

t\5 1' [ll1 M' jecV1 rliatilg to. illprO 'uc filit Nvorl I n U ldl,lV!;l,

t*whst!L V rk s. icwa rlics, d atoerI a t sSiaiita. ala.aaa, I *:2dil- gIL>:1'I yXVIdT'j th1ey d uot) j\t')ass II\ wI)t3'let'Žcs3$t1,,owl ctI' SsNS;;cf'B -vuc

tt'tS*\'9II.ife5 5Ls.tht 111as-'iJ1;: la|¢130:3 . 1t]usiti7;1-:l*'t7J,;stlloltlllnilZLmjM1 suchl l ,5u3.;;rt w,idt i'. i IetSari(s 6iFdct l .'.. I t. eN lq I ~(c b\'Sl Zo 5'aji31;icjJ s CfPrd s~3 II r.p I's .ii'a ltss I-,%'ko .IIUIr Clarifie.d .Iq)vl14 II.hc c * ~jtJ< 3tc 4'ir , Ie .'id -.. an.iiid \w ould1.qui(rt. LII oi ltilt I'l ClAci, l i)C-. k(ldl ii, IhII

- .I~~~~~~~uillfSectr(i it ft) l lv 5.a ,'Lvc infln ( of In i

. . ~~~~~~~~~~~~.

Guveri,il )oi Pr.rdcrh, P'LIl cCW.torks Depattment, 1iraknnw,India 1-3 Project Co-ordinating ConsulItants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Annex 2 Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsuLitantsBV September2001

ANNEX 2 BASELINESURVEY ON AIR, NOISE,WATER AND SOILQUALITY

Methodology followed for collection of data

The various parameters to be studied under each environmental features i.e. air, noise, water and soil had been finalised based on CPCB procedures and MOEF clearance requirements acceptable to the World Bank. Also within the framework, consideration had been given to those parameters, which might have roads induced impad.

. The numbers and locations of survey stations to record data on each environmental feature had been chosen so as to cover comprehensively various locations characteristics namely, rural, semi-urban and urban land uses under each project route. The sample survey points are thus representative of environmental conditions of the entire project routes.

* The apparatus used to record data were as per guidelines of the relevant IS codes of standards.

The Table Annex 2.1 below illustrates the entire method of approach adopted i.e. locations of survey stations, parameters recorded, frequency and duration of records, apparatus used and standard followed etc. for each environmental features.

wiwieLof Jiz;;aPi.iclesh, Public Works Dcpanrrnerc,tLick nox, Ilidjc 2 -1 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table Annex 2.1 Survey Locations and Environmental Parameters

Environmental I I & ~~~~~~~~~Duration Remarks |reoantumre LocationFeaturoscf"'ey stations(Route) jParameters Recorded ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~frequencyApparatusused 1. Ambier.nairi . Katrajunctio.., junction of NH (4) i a) Suspended I 3 days @ 8 High volume i SPMwas estimated quality ialalabad, large urban centre (4) Particulate hours samplesMylar as per 195182 * Allahganj, large rural ,MatterlSPM) 9-13 hrs. and bags/Bladder : (PartVI) - 1975, developrTient(4) b) Respirable 17-21 hrs Bilgram, congestedurban area (4) particulate s, was estimatedas * Bahraich,major urban centre (7t matter(RPM) .per IS-5182)Part - It G*onda, major urban centre (7) cI Sulphur dioxide 1969 * Faizabad,major urban centre (7) (502) * Chatampur, market place(4) ,1d) Oxides of nitrogen N°x estimatedas per ; Jalanabad major urban centre , (No,) IS-5182(Part VI)- (1tl4) !te) CarbonMonoxide 1975. Leadestimated * BhognipLsr,junction of NH (14) { (Co' as per IS 12074. fiHydro crbons(HC) ...... _ , , , ,, ______, g?)Lead (Pb) ...... 2. Noise Chatamptir Petrol Pump (14) a) Max Noise Level(L One day at Noise level The following criteria * Bhognipur (14) mnax) each site meter adoptedfor ChatampurGovt. hospital (14) bbMin noise level . measuringnoise * Chatampur Market Place (14) (Lmin) it level: * Jahanabad,major urban centre c) Maximum hourly - * Measurementof (14) Leq ! .'weighted' * KaLra,junction of NH (4) d) Minmum hourly sound level Bilgram, congestedurban amea(41 Leq continuously using * Allahganj, large rural e) Leq value 15 noise level meter developrnent14) ,t hourly (6 am-9pm) at 5 minutes at 5 minutes interval for one i* alalabad,large urban centre(4) terval day in eachsurvey * Condarai,(major urban centre(1 fi Leq value 9 hourly' locations as per Gonda, (7) major urban centre ( ..- m tteCC Faizabad,major urban centre (7) 5 minutes interval procedures gl Lie * The noise levels h) Lo were measured i) Lgo adjacent to the road at a distance of 1 5 metre from - L of project road. 3. Water * Kalyani River (4) a) pH value IOne'time Relevant Fromeach water * Sedariver (4) b) Total dissolved i apparatusused samplingstation 3 * WelIlhandpump at Jalalabad I solid (TDS) Oils as per codes litres of * Borewell at Katra (4) jand grease . representativewater P*Pond(ch.17.0) (7) ic) 3OD (27"C,3 sample wascollected . Borewell neardry irrigation j days) and transportedto canal(7) d) COD laboratoryfor *.Sangur river (14) e) Chloride as Cl physico-chemical o Rind river (14) 0fl Sulphate as SO , analysis, - Borewell neardry irrigation canal g) Salinity 'ch.587.5) (14) hDisleOxgnParameters like pH,, -ColnIti river (18) (IDO) temperatureand i) Iron Idissolved oxygen j) Copper were measuredin- k) Zinc situ_ I1) Lead i m) Chromitim n) MPN coliform o) E-coli j p) Total ardnessas CaCO3 q) Total suspended solids .. _... 4. Soil * One sample survey location for Lead (Pb) One time Analysisdone Sampleswere each project route near in Atomnic collected from 30- agricultural field along ROW Absorption 45cm depth Spectrophoto- meter(AAS)

Source: Cornsftaut

Government of (Jitar Pradeshi,Puiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 2-2 Project Co-oirdinatingConsultants )PCC(Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

BaselineStatus of *Air,Noise, Water and Soil Quality in the ProjectRoutes

AmbientAir Quality(AAQ): The results on the AAQ show that except the SuspendedParticulate Matter (SPM),all other air quality parametersare within the permissiblelimits as prescribedby the Central Pollution Control Board(CPCB). SPM level has beenfound above the permissiblelimit in 5 out of 11 SurveyStations (SS). However, since neither of the SS is falling under the category of either SensitiveArea or Industrial Area, the resultshave been comparedwith thatof the limit prescribedfor Residential,Rural and other Areaas per the CPCB.

The RespirableParticulate Matter (RPM) level has beenfound within the permissiblelimit at almostall the SS.

The three days reading of other parametersnamely, Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOJl, Carbon-mono-Oxide (CO) and Lead (Pb) are found well within the respective permissible limits. Hydrocarbon(HC) is not prescribedin permissiblelimits. ReferTable Annex 4.2 for detailed results.

It may be concluded that the SPM level along all the Four project routes are critical and immediate implementationof the suitablemitigation measuresare requiredto contain its growth.

AmbientNoise Level: For assessingthe ambientnoise level, the 15-hourly (6 a.m. to 9 p.m.) Leq value and 9-hourly (9 p.m. to 6 a.m.) Leq value has been comparedwith the correspondingpermissible limits. It is found that 15-hourly Leq valuesrecorded at all the four project routesare higher than the permissiblelimits. The SScovered all types of road side land uses i.e., residential,commercial and sensitiveareas (hospital) coming under the project routes. The SS near Ghatampur Government Hospital on Bhoghnipur-ChoudagraMode road (Route14), a SensitiveArea, recorded both day time and night time ambient noise levels above the permissible limits. The night time noise level recorded at SS at Ramganj, a rural residentialarea on Route8, and at SSat Katra,at junction point with NH, are above the permissiblelimit. Refertable no. 3 for detailedresults.

From the foregoing discussions,it may be concluded that the Receptorson the Four project routesare rectiving noise levels higherthan the prescribedlimit and hence, standgreater risk of experiencingfurther noise pollution when the road up-gradationworks take place.Thus, appropriateset of mitigation plan and set of measuresare imperativenot only to protect the receptorsfrom the increasednoise pollution but also to stopfurther proliferationof negativeimpact of noise on the receptors.

Water Quality: The sourcesfrom which the sampleswere collected include both surface and ground water i.e., river, hand pump and bore wells near irrigation fields. The samples were then tested against nineteen parametersto assesswater quality. A detailed descriptionof the parametersand the resultsare presented in the Table Annex 2.4 anddiscussed below.

The amouLntof Total DissolvedSolid (TDS)exceeds the permissiblelimit in the samplescollected from the borewells at jalalabadand Katra both locatedon the Katra-Bangarmau-Bilhaurroad (Route4).

Maximum concentrationof Oil and Grease was found in the sample collected from pond located at chainage1 7 km on Bahraich-Faizabadroad (Route7) at 5.2 mg/l.

In casesof water samplesdrawn from borewells locatedat jalalabad, Katraon Route4, and Badshapuron RoLite18 the BOD (27°C, 3-days)values of sampleswere foulid abovethe permissiblelimit.

The levels of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) are foulid below the permissible limits in the water samples collected from bore well near dry irrigation canal at chainagekm 59.50 on Route14, bore wells locatedat Jalalabad,Katra on Route4, bore well near dry irrigation canal on Route7, and bore wells at Badshapur on Route18.

The total hardniesslevel (as CaCO,) were found above the permissiblelimit in two casesof water samples fronmJalalabad and Katraon Route4.

Governiicnt of UttarPradesh, Public Works Dcpartment, Lucknow, India 2 - 3 ProjectCo-ordinatinig Consultdnts (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase i) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Soil Quality: The soil samplescollected from each of the Four project routeswere testedto assessthe concentrationof Lead (Pb). However, all the sampleswere found having negligible concentrationof Lead. ReferTable Annex 2.5 for detailedresults.

Table Annex 2.2 AmbientAir Quality Dataalong UP PCCPhase-I Routes

Readino Air Quality Parameter SPM(pm') RPMWm') n SO,(p NO, (pm') CO(urn) C (pm') Pb (pm'l Survey Station (SS):Ghatampur, Market Place on Route 14- 01. . isi 58 i_ 10.8 1 .17.9 , 2290 1.5 0.05 02 - 132 . 49 i 9 172 1145 1 1.0 0.04 03 141 _ 46. 0.3 181 2290 1.9 0.04 SurveyStation (SS)! Bhognipur, function with NH on Route14 01 161 57 11.1 16.3 _ 3435 2.2 _ 0.03 02 130 __ 971743 142 2290 _ 50 003 03 148 56 10 i 15.7 2290 1.3 0.03 -SurveyStation (SS): lahanabad Major UrbanCentre on Route14 I 01233 ...... 69 _ 13.1 19.3 2290 1.2 0.05 --- 0-2------2-101- - -61 103t 159 2290 2-1 0.03 02~ ~ 62 8 12.3 12 142 00 022j9=23_..7...... ------0 ..04 _ 'SurveyStation (SS): Bilgram, Congested Urban Area on Route4 01 239 72 8.9 i 14.2, 1145 1.0. 0.02 02 242 J 82 9.1 13.1 2290 i 1.1 0.02 03 _; . _2211 61 fi77j .129 1145 i 1.2 . 0.02 SurveyStation (SS): Allahganj, Large Rural Development on Route4 01 149 43 6.7 131 2290 _1.1j. 0.02 02 - 154 68 i 801 13.1 2290 1.9 003. 03 183I34 54 j _4_ 12 3 -1145 1 1.4 0.02 SurveyStation (SS) lalalabaad,Large Urban Centre on Route4 01 231jr 89. 971 17.3 3435 i 1.3 0.03 4 _ 02 239 92 8_9 16.8~~~~~~~4 2290 1 1.4 0.03 03 j-209-_ 63 11 171 | 2290 18 0.04 SurveyStation (SS): Katra, junction with NH on Route4 01 25_ 863____ 76_1 158.7 3435,_ 1.4 0.04 02 1 . _ 248 90 1 7.3 1 12.8 2290 ! 1.1 0.03 03 237 -134391 13 Survey Station (SS) Bahraich, Major Urban Centre on Route 7 01 161 51 j 6.1 17-3 11' - 1.1 0.02 -- _02- '193 51 69 -192 1 2290 -. 1 0.02 03 178 ' 54 i 7,3 ! 16,9 2290 11 3.03 SurveyStation (SS)! Gonda Major UrbanCentre on Route7 01 187 . 54 6.9 148 2290 1.2 0.03 02 212 83 6.9 14.2 1145 1.2 0.03 03 191 63 71 13.8 i 2290 1 1-4 0.04 SurveyStation (SS): Faizabad, Major Urban Centre on Route7 01 131 56 1 83 17_9 335 19 0.04 02 145 62 7.3 150 2290 1 6 0.03 03 139 54 6.9 16.7 i 2290 . 0.04 Source:Consultant's Survey =11 AboveCPCB limits

Table Annex 2.3 Ambient NoiseLevels along UP PCCPhase I Routes

__ _ -- , ' ! i : . :

- SurveyStation (SS) ,2

-~~~~~ . w, ..~~~~~v CC*cc o. ' ° ; ~~ i~~o ~ ~ i J .4 0 iogn:pur,linctionwithNHon815; 40.2 76.8 41.3 75.7i 44-5 796 73.5 61.2 Routel 4 02 pr, tro Pumpon 75.9 384 71.7. 40.2. 70.7 41.2 74.6 67 3 55.9 Rouite1 4 03 Glvtuellpur,Govt. Hospital on j 78 8 39.2 74 7, 42-4 74.5 43-2 78.9- 74.4 52.2 ROtLte14 ,; I, . .I jahanab.td, Major Urban Centre 04 onao.l4 84.5 42.6 75.9 45.8 75.9' 49.3 78.9 68.4 55;3 onRotLte. 14 i

Goveritierit of UnarPradesb, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 2-4 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCQ Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessmnent(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

OZ~~~~~~~~~~~C o Survey Station (SS)

05 Gaapu,MrtPleon 76-3 41.3 1 74.5 44.6 ;73-6 4 78 I 74.3 62.2 45.3 Rouite14 *Bilgram, CongestedUrban Area 58 34 536 63 4 39 54 17 6. on Route4 07 AI`ahg;anj,Large Rural 07 eopetnRue 78.0 35.1 68.6 37.4 6568 40-0 65.6 61~6 56.6

08 aaaadLagUraCete. 82 6 43.4 73.5 44.5 71,2 49.0 76.3 58.4 44.1 -on R-out-e-4 09 katra,IunctionwithNt-Ion 45.8 72,8 48.4; 529; 74.9 70.6 64~5 RoLute4 ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~6.5~7119 Barih aorUbnCnr 76.1 41.3 73.4 43.9 ~ ~33 45.2 I 759 72.6. 55.0 on Route 7

Gonazad, Major Urban Centre6

13 DevelopedCommercial Area on ~~~~ ~~~~3538 ~~742571 3 3693 i-704 1 403 2 178 61.3 58.3 Rouite6

12 Goaizaadhpr,Major UJbtiCnrba 76i 9 33 4 9 20 7 24 4. CeteonRoute 18 SoreChnsltant'ad Curoseng DensoeelCylit Tab3Aneveoe 2.4rWaerQualt Dataon U4P 35C3 71ase 369 0Routes721 1. 3

Source:Survy Consltant's Aove CPCBlocatiosofSreStiosSS

C o t. a~~~C Parameters > i >o o ,

~~~o o ,~~~~~~oC0o no ------...... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5. 1 vHaluie 8.-0 8.2' 8.1 7.4 7.8 711I 7.3 7.8 6.9 7.6 2 TDS,rmg/I 314 3891 2051 187i 251 i 926! 1471i 2251 78i 434 3.OiIsandGrease,rng/l 2.3 <1 2~2 4.4 4.4 1.21 <1.04 r 0~ 52 3.6

; BOD(27C,3DAYSI, 11 0' 1 0 8 2 0 1

5;COD,rng1l 2.9; 1.5 4.4 179i 20' 10 1I1I 4 199i 25 6'Chloride as Cl, nig/I 22.4 26.5 7 8 14 143 321 a8 4 22 7-Sul-pha-t-eas5.04, mg/I 7.3. 138' 78 25! 9 87i 224 26 ~ 3: 26, 8 Salinity 40.5. 47.9 1 2.6 14.5; 25.3; 258' 580. 114.5 7.2 40 DissolvedOxygen, 4 ~ . . 9 4 1 4J.* s

to0 ron as Fe,mig/l 1.0 0.05 1.4' 1.341 0.1 7' 024' 0.08' 0.13' 0.58 01 5 t 1Copper as Cu, iiigll <0.01 (0.01 (0~011 (001 <0,01 <0.01 (0.01 <001 <0.01 <0.01 12Zinicas Zn; mig/I 0.02 0.041 0.02i 005 0.02 0.04' 01 0.08~ 003 0.26 13 'Lead as Pb, mJl (0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <001 (0.01 <0.01; <0.01 <0.01 (0.01 <0.01 1~4 ChroniumIas Cr, ng/I (0.01 (0.01 <0 01 <0.01' <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 .<0.01 <0 01 (0.01 15Caidmiium asCrl, mgll <0.01 (0.01 <0.01 i<0,01 (0.01 <0.01 <001 "<001 <0011 (0.01 t 6.MPN Coliform 278 nil 20. 32. 39 nil nil' nil; 221 32

17 E-oiabsent absent' present1 present' present, absentl absentiabsent~ present! present Toa1 Hrnesa 156, 262i 1181 135, 1150- 4381 818 182. 55~ 329

19 Toa Ssedd11.21 1.0 29.2 54 10 18 2 36 22i 29i Solids,milg/I

Goveri,inieistof Utiar Pradesli,Public Works Depdrtiilenit Luckno,rivInidia 2- 5 Project Co-ordinating ConsuiltantsIPCC) Services for unar PradeshState Roa ds Project Environmental Asses:sment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBv September2001

Above CPCB limitmr=- Source:Consultant's Survey

TableAnnex 2.5 SoilQuality Data on UP PCCPhase I Routes

SI. tead(Pb)1 No., Route Details Route No in mgk

1 B,shognipur-ChoudagraMode 14 3.1 2 Katra- Bangarmau- Bilhaur 4 2.6 3 BSahraich- Faizabad 7 3.2 4 jaunpur- Mohammadpur 18 i 4.0

Source:Consultant's Survey

Coverner)t of Uttar Pradesh,PUbliC Works Department, Lucknowv,India 2 -6 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar Pradesh-StateRoads Project Annex 3 Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

ANNEX 3 USEOF FLYASH AS ALTERNATIVETO BRICKS- MOEFNOTIFICATION

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA: EXTRAORDINARY [PART 11- SEC. 3(ii)] MINISTRYOF ENVIRONMENTAND FORESTS NOTIFICATION New Delhi the 141hSeptember, 1999

S.O. 763(E).- Whereasa drafts notification containing certain directions was published,as required by sub-rule (3) of rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 under the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Environmentand Forestsnumber S.O. 453(E)dated 22nd May, 1998 inviting objectionsand suggestionsfrom all personslikely to be affectedthereby, before the expiry of the period of sixty daysfrom the date on which the copies of the Gazetteof India containingthe said notificationare madeavailable to the public;

And, whereas,copies of the saidGazette were madeavailable to the public on the samedate;

And, whereas, the objections and suggestionsreceived from the public in respect of the said draft notification havebeen duly consideredby the CentralGovemment;

Whereas it is necessaryto protect the environment, conserve top soil and prevent the dumping and disposalof fly ashdischarged from coal or lignite basedthermal power plantson land;

And, whereas, there is a need for restrictingthe excavationof top soil for manufactureof bricks and promoting the utilisation of fly ash in the manufactureof building materialsand in constructionactivity within.a specifiedradius of fifty kilometersfrom coal or lignite basedthermal power plants;

And, whereas,the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature,Delhi vide its order dated 25'h August, 1999 in CWP No. 2145/99 Centre for Public Interest Litigation, Delhi v/s Union of India directed that the Central Governmentto publish the final notificationin respectof fly ashon or before 26ih October, 1999;

Now, therefore, in-exerciseof the powersconferred by sub-section(1),.read with clause(v) of sub-section (2) of section 3 and section5 of the Environment(Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986); and in pursuanceof the orders of the Hon'ble High Court, Delhi stated above, the Central Government hereby issuesthe following directions which shall come into force on the date of the publication of this notification, namely: -

1. Use of fly ash, bottom ash or pond ash in the manufactureof bricksand other construction activities: -

(1) No personshall within a radius of fifty kilometersfrom coal or lignite basedthermal power plants, manufactureclay bricks or tiles or blocks for use in construction activities without mixing at least25 per cent of ash (fly ash, bottom ash or pond ash) with soil on weight to .weightbasis.

(2) The authority for ensuringthe use of specified quantity of ash as per para (1) above shall be -ane-corcerned-RegiornalOfficer of the StatePollution Control Board or the Pollution Control Committee as the casemay be. In caseof non-compliance,the said authority,in addition to cancellation of consent order issued to establish the brick kiln, shall move the district administrationfor cancellation of mining lease.The cancellation of.mining lease shall be decided after due hearing. To enable the said authority to verify the actual use of ash, the thermal power plant shall maintain month-wiserecords of ash made availableto each brick kiln.

Govenment of Utiar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 3 -1 Project Co-ordinating Consultanits(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project. Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

13) In caseof non-availabilityof ash from thermalpower plant in sufficient quantitiesas certified by the said power plant, the stipulation under para (1) shall be suitably modified (waived/relaxed)by the concernedState/ Government.

(4) Each coal or lignite based thermal power plant shall constitute a dispute settlement committee which shall include the General Manager of the thermal power plant and a representativeof All India Brick and Tile Manufacture's Federation(AIBTMF). Such a committee shall ensure unhindered loadingand transportof ash without any undue loss of time. Any unresolveddispute shall be dealt with by a State/UnionTerritory level committee to be set up by State/UnionTerritory Governmentcomprising Member Secretaryof the State Pollution Control Board/PollutionControl Committee, representativesof Ministry of Power in the Sate/UnionTerritory Government and a representativeof AIBTMF.

2. Utilisation of ash by ThermalPower Plants: -

All coal or lignite basedthermal power plantsshall utilise the ash generatedin the power plantsas fol Iows: -

(1) Every coal or lignite based thermal power plant shall make available ash, for at least ten years from the date of publication of this notification without any payment or any other consideration, for the purpose of manufacturing ash-basedproducts such as cement, concrete blocks, bricks, panels or any other material or for construction of roads, embankments,dams, dykes or for any otherconstruction activity.

(2) Every coal or lignite based thermal power plant commissioned subject to environmental clearanceconditions stipulating the submissionof an action plan for full utilisation of fly ash shall, within a period of nine yearsfrom the publication of this notification, phaseout the dumping and disposalof fly ash on land in accordancewith the plan. Such an action plan shall provide for thirty per cent of the fly ash utilisation, within three years from the publication of this notification with further increase in utilisation by atleast ten per cent points everyyear progressivelyfor the next six yearsto enable utilisation of the entire fly ash generatedin the power plant atleastby the end of ninth year. Progressin this regardshall be reviewedafter five years.

(3) Everycoal or lignite basedthermal power plant not coveredby para (2) above shall, within a period of fifteen years from the date of publication of this notification, phase out the utilisation of fly ash in accordancewith an action plan to be drawn up by the power plants. Suchiaction plan shall provide for twenty per cent of fly ash utilisation within three years from the date of publicationof this notification,with further increasein utilisation every year progressivelyfor the next twelve yearsto enable utilisation of the entire fly ash generatedin the power plant.

(4) All action plans preparedby coal or lignite basedthermal power plants in accordancewith sub-para(2) and (3) of Para2 of this notification, shall be submittedto the Central Pollution Control Board,concerned State Pollution Control Board/Committeeand concernedregional office of the Ministry of environment and Forestswithin a periodof six months from the date of publicationof this notification.

(5) The Central and State Government Agencies, the State Electricity Boards, the National ThermlalPower Corporation and the managementof the thermalpower plantsshall facilitate in making available land, electricity and water for manufacturingactivities and provide accessto the ash lifting area for promoting and setting up of ash-basedproduction units in the proximity of the areawhere ash is getieratedby the power plant.

(6) Annual implementationreport providing information about the compliance of provisions in this notificationshall be submittedby the 30'i'day of April every year to the Central Pollution Control Board, concerned State Pollution Control Board/Committeeand the concerned

Guveritient of UttaiPiadesh, PuLblic Works Department, LLucknowv, India 3-2 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV Septemnber2001

RegionalOffice of the Ministryof Environmentand Forestsby the coal or lignite based thermalpower plants.

3. Specificationsfor use of ash-basedproducts: -

(1j Manufactureof ash-basedproducts such as cement,concrete blocks, bricks, panels or any othermaterial or the useof ashin constructionactivity such as in roadlaying, embankments or useas landfill to reclaimlow lying areasincluding back filling in abandonedmines or pitheadsor for any other useshall be carriedout in accordancewith specificationsand guidelineslaid down by the Bureauof IndianStandards, Indian Bureauof Mines,Indian Road Congress,Central Building ResearchInstitute, Roorkee,Central Road Research Institute,New Delhi, BuildingMaterials and TechnologyPromotion Council, New Delhi, CentralPublic Works Department, State Public Works Departments and other Centraland StateGovernment agencies,

(2) The Central Public Works Department,Public Works Departmentsin the State/Union Territory Governments,Development Authorities, Housing Boards,National Highway Authorityof Indiaand other constructionagencies including those in the privatesector shall also prescribethe use of ash and ash-basedproducts in their respectiveschedules of specificationsand constructionapplications, including appropriate standards and codesof practice,within a periodof fourmonths from the publicationof this notification.

(3) All localauthorities shall specify in their respectivebuilding bye-laws and regulations the use of ash and ash-basedproducts and constructiontechniques in buildingmaterials, roads, embankmentsor for any other use within a period of four months from the date of publicationof this notification.

4. Applicability of Gazetteto PresentProject and Strategy for its use

The use of fly ash is desirableas per the above Gazetteof India Notification. In order to comply with this, U.P. PWD is contemplatingto make use of fly ash for Bangarmaubypass. This bypass location is within 50 km from Panki Thermal Power Plant of Uttar PradeshPower Corporation Limited (UPPCL).The UPPCLtransports fly ash free within a distance of 50 km. Due to this, fly ash is plannedto be usedat Bangarmaubypass.

Governmnenmof Uttar Pradesh,PLIblic Works Department, tucknow, India 3 -3 Project Co-ordinating consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProjert Annex 4 ELnvronmentaiAssessment 'Phase 1) D:iV Consultan 3/S Seprember.2001

ANNEX4 SPECIES-WISEAND GIRTH-WISELIST OF TREESIN RIGHT OF WAY (ROW)

The treeshaving a particularvalue to the community have beenhighlighted. The asurnpticns macieIn highlighting are:

* All fruit trees viz M4fango,Jamun, Aroo , Anwala, Imli, Kaitha, etc. * Treeswhere worships are performednamely Peepal and Banyan. * Treesproviding timber i.e. Seesharn(girthsize >40 cm), Teak(all sizes). * Treesproviding shadeand medicinalvalues such as Neem with girthsizemore than40 cm.

Annex 4.1 Route14 Bhognipurto ChaudaghraMode ...... 4...... 4- Annex 4.2 Route4 Bilhaurto Katra...... 4-22 Annex 4.3 Route7 Bahraichto Faizabad...... 4-70 Annex 4.4 Route18 launpurto Muhammadpur...... ----.-.--.--.-.-- . 4-91

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public WorksDepartment, Lucknow, India 4-1 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants iPCo Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAs'essment APhase 1) DI-IVConsultants BV September2001

ANNEX4.1 SPECIES-WISEAND GIRTH-WISELIST OF TREESIN RIGHTOF WAY (ROW) ROUTE14 - BHOGNIPURTO CHAUDAGHRAMODE

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10 cm,T 10-20 20-30 30-40 i 40}60 > 60 L i L R L L L[RR L R L

0-1 Sisam 9______If 1 ____ Neem ._l_1 - Jamun 1 Peepai __--i1

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 47 Other 1-2 Sisam 3 3 5 -i3 39 35 Neem I 10 1 2 1 3 14 larnun ===== . Arroo _ _ __1 | 1 1 | 1

Babool 1 _____3 - Mix 2 2 - I = 2 = 1 = 1 = ] = = = 49 50

- - TOTAL NO. OF TREES 99 2-3 Sisam 3 1 220 10 Neem 1 4 2 1 1 | , 9 6 Jamun 1 3 Arroo 1 Babool Imli Peepal 1 1 2 Sirsa - 1 Mix 6 3 6 3 69l 41 I_____ - TOTALNO. OF TREES _ 110 34 Sisam 1 1 222 Mango Neem 1 | 4i. 2 Jamun | 4_9__ Arroo || 4

Sirsa __4___6_ Paker 1 1 | I _____ |Arioon 3 3 |

| Banyan _ Babool 1 1

Peepal - ___ 1 | 3 l fl g 8 i j | | § } | 1^' l 1'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~461371 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 83

4-5 Sisam - | | i 4 16

Mango _ _ .14-.1 7 '14 | - i: * 16| Neem . I 2 ;u:j 5 ) 3 | |Arroo | 1 |2 1 z l l |-.X Babool - - 1 | | |Arjoon ___Ill ll|K3i|l 4 | _ __ 7 _ __ Sirsa [ _ _ j _ I _ _

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-2 Project CroordinazingConsultan-ts iPCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessmenst (Phase l) DIIV Consultants13V September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wiseDistribution (cm)Toa Km Tree < 10cm 1-0 20-30 30-40 41-6O >60 __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LR ______t R I R L R ~~~~~~~~~L_L R L R{ R Eucalyptus 3 4 -~- 7

______35 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~52 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 87 5-6 Sisam S 3 2 1yA 7 'V 14)1j4L 61 4

B__abrool 11 9 12 25 10 613 40

___Mix 58 6 t 6 153 88 TOTAL NO. OF'TREES 241 6-7 Sisam 4 33 34

_ _ Neem 1 __1 -

Babool I 7 17 4 5 12 22

_ _ Mix 5 6 5 6,

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5968 ______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 127 7-8 Sisam 3 1 1 5et~-41 6 N~eem 2 2 44 5 ___Arroo I I Babool 15 1 5 2

_____Sirsa 1 3 1 3

____Bahera 3 3 4 3 7 6

Eucalyptus ___11 -

____Banyan1 - 1

_ __ _ Peepal _ _v i 2

____Mix 4 4 48 4

_ - - ~~~~~~~~~OTAO FTES -_ - 92 8-9 Sisam {1 4 2 { 4T 51

S___rsa __ _I I8 61 Imli 1I4 46 Babool 2 3 8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 }610 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 109

9-10 SisamI __ 8 __11 2T 67 7I l 19 12

Neem __ i{ i i__ 2

Baboot __ 2 ___1 5 2 7 3

--Imli -- [- __ 6 6 15 16 18 10 39 32

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 116

10-11 Ssm11 8 8 9 8_ ___ _22 19

___Babool j33 I 41 1 114 61 ___ 3_ 11

Other .. . 1______1 __ _ _ Eucalypts j_ _ L L . i _ _ 11 J ______2

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Depariment, Luckniow, India 4-3 Project Co-ordirnatingConsultarits (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHiVConsultanits BV September2001

ROUTE14 - BIHOGNIPURTO CHAUDAGHRAMODE

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tre <001O20 -20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 L r------i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

______~~ R L R L R R __ L_ R I _ Chi)___Bil 11 2

TOTALNO. OF TREES 121

11-12 Sisam ___ 3__ 1 _9 Neem 12 2___ i7 9 8 3 17 2 Imli 2 1 2~, 4T 3 7 1 ___Babool 64 8 2 - - {80 2 Other 12 .3 __ 3 12

______1 __ . 1 ______I __ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~10642 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 148 12-13 Sisam 1 213 10 Neem1 1 Imli 510 3 Babool 134 18 9 3 13 3 8158 30 ChilBil I 2 Kaitha1

____Mix 62 ____ 62

______- - G~~~~OTALNO. OF TREES - -291 13-14 Sisam 7 1 2 3 3i':4F 26T 2 49 23

Babool 3 ___ 2 2 4 2 9

Eucalyptus___3 - 3 Chi[Bi( jamun1- 1

Arjoon 1 3 . 2 - 6 I L ~~~~~~~~~~~~51 43 _____ - ~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES… …… …… 94 14-15 Sisam 1 1 1 30 115 7JI-, >41 .2 33 44

Neem __ _ i _2, 2 1 Sirsa I1 2 4 27 22 29 27_

Babool - 1___ 1 5 21 2 __1 5 24 Eucalyptus I_ il 2 1 i 2 2

Chil B3it .... I______I ____ -. ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8199 TOTALNO. OF TREES 180 15-16 Sisam 2_ 6 18I10 10 .2x-J .320' 31 Neem ii 4- . 15 I 6

Mahua ___7 1 26 3 1 12 8 Babool 2 2 2 102

Chil Bil ______1 1

Other 7 I - 10 17 Peepal 1_ A rjoon 11 -

______J ___ - ______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6856 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 124 1&-17 Sisam 121 I 131 13 31 101 < 5 61 30 Mahua ~~~~ 1 ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~111 2

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Wor* Department,Lucknow, India44 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services (or Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAFsessment (Phase 1) DVCnuinsH September2001 DVCnuinsB

ROUTIE14 - BHOGNIPUR10 CHAUDAGH-RA MODE

i ~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 i40-60 >60 ____ ~~ ~~~~~~LR ___ L R I~ ~~~R IL ~~R ~L RTL R L R __

Imli 3 1 5 __ 1 20

____Babool 1 2 2 4 I 3 7

____Eucalyptus 5 ______1 5- -

__ __ ther 6 5 2 __ _ _ _9 I 1

_ _ Neem I 1 - 2

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 1___ 185 17-18 Sisam I ii 2 4 9 4 6'.~K ij i 17 N~eem 112 - Arroo 1 U9 4 1 4 Biabool- 1 2 4 1 4 41 Ashok 1 1 1 1

Bahera 1 2 -

Peepal 2 ___ 1 __ _ 3 Madina 33 Banyan______Paker22 Kadam

____Jamun - . ______~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~43 4 TOTALNO. OF TREES 78 18-19 Sisam Neem Babool

____Kadam……

Mix…_ _-I I - -

TOTALNO. OF TREES_

19-20 Sisam 2 2 __ 6 16 4 111 25 2 7

Mango j_ ___- .71 7-

Mahua ___ .1: 5[0[ 1 21

jmun I.._ _ _1 7 - Baboof 3 1~~~~~~~~~~~___ 3_ 2

Arrool _ _ _ _ 3 -

_ __ A rjoon ______I______1 Sirsa 2 4 8 1 _ _ __ Kanjii______

Chil Bil _ ____

Banyan __ 1

TOTAL NO. OF TREES j162

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department,Lucknow, India45 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Serv'ices for UniarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsuiuants BV Septe'mber2001

ROUTE14 - BHOGNIPURTO CHAUDAGHRAMODE

Girth wise Distribution(cm) I Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 j >60

20-21 Sisam { 19 6 f 35 2~ 23

Mango - 1

Neem 12 14 - Mahua 2. 1 2 1 jamun 6 4 10 - Babool I___ 5 3 1 4 12 12 Arjoon I 1

_____Sirsa 3 6 2 6 5

___Imli - .4 7__'~6 9 20 Paker I 1 -

- Mix 2 - 2

______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 124

21-22 Sisam -3 : 54 48

Mango __7 - jamun 1 -

Peepal __ _ _ _ - _ _ _- I Babool 11 - 2 Chil Bil 1- 1

__ _Mix 9 _- 9

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6261 TOTALNO. OF TREES 123

22-23 Sisam 23 _ 81 53

___Mango I_ 2 Neem 1 -

____Mahua 5 - Sirsa 2 3 3 3 5

Banyan __ 1

____Babool 4- 4

______- __ - __ - ______~~~ ~~~~9264 TOTALNO. OF TREES ___ 156

23-24 Sisam 6 __ll11 6.'- 16 7 26 32

____Mango _ _12 3' 12 3 Neem -I1 Mahua 22 - jamun 1 2 1 2

Babool ___ __1 1 Arjoon 11 2 2 2

Sirsa ______- ____ _ 12 14 6 14 10

______t - ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5958 TOTALNO. OF TREES 117 24-2.5 Sisam 1 1 4 .2 18 6 6. 381 28

____Babool ___ 2 1 _ 3 1 __3 5

___ Chil Bil 1 11 1 Imli - 1

___Mango ___6 3; 6 3

_ _ Neem I l - 2

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department.Lucknow. India 4-6 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2061

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CH-AUDAGH-RAMODE

Kim Tree <10cm 1200 1! t 20;0 3itih~Wi 40-60 >60Tta II~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ RI

___Mahua _ 4_1 Arjoon 3 2t

_ __ _ Peepal _ ___ _ Kaitha f_ 4______Mix 1 3 3 I ______3 3 ______- ______[ ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~65 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 128 25-26 Sisam 1 1 '9 10 3 20 13 Mango ~ ~ 6__ Neem I 2 1

Mahua ____ 3 - Jamun - 1 1I 1 B3abaoo 5 5 ____ 4 1 9 6 Arjoon 9 5 12 13 0 5 1 23 ____Peepal I

____Madina 1I Lasoda1- 1 Sirsa 5 - 5

____Eucalyptus 2 - 2 Mix ] 9 10 _ _ _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~83 62 ______~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 145 26-27 Sisam [4 39 4

Babool -- 13 ___ - 2 - __ _2 13 A___rjoon ___1 2 .7 14 3. 6 11 22 tKanji __Ii _ _ _ 1 ___I______xx xx r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5378 TOTAL NO. OF TREES__ __ 131

27-28 Sisam 11 4 ~j 4~ 44

____-jamun . l_

___ Babool 3 _ - 1 ~ 3

Sirsa 14 1 14 1

Arroo . - A- -. ChulBit 3

____Kaitha -

___ _ _ Bale ______

_____Mahua

_ _ _ Peepal - -- Mix 2 8 it 2_ ___ 2

TOTAL NO. OF TREES ___I153 281-29 Sisam 131 61 41 2 72.Q7A2-. 4 43 3

____Arjoon 2 2 2 3 25 ___ Baboot 616 3 3 i i .311 1

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project E:ivironmTntalAssessment (Phase II Dl1VConsultants BV Septembe,r2001

ROUTE14 - BHOGNIPURTO CHAUDAGHRAMODE

Girth wise Disiribution (cm) Total ; , . Km Tree c10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 > 60 . i L R L L R RIL R L R L R Arroo 2 1 5 10 8 . mli -;1 Madina 1 1 Other 2 1 3 Kaiha - 1 Mahua ======1

_ _ Neem -. 4__- 3 Neem_ ] _ : ¢ 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6769

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 136 29-30 Sisam = = = = 3 = , 4X0 Io3 48 47 Babool 2 7 2 2 1 4 10 Peepal j ji 1 Mix 1 = = = = =

___ 1 _ __ _ _ 6457, TOTALNO. OF TREES 121 30-31 Sisam - 11 7 Neem 1 1 2 - Arjoon 1 1 - Babool 1 3 | | 1 1 4 Sirsa 1 6 19 9 20 15

Kanjii __| 3 1 1 4 1

Chil Bil 1 2 _ 1 - 4 -- -__ _ I_1Mix22 22 -

______1 l l l l l l l | | 61 31 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 92

31-32 Sisam - - - - i1! _ 2 23;2.' Y.i7:ii3j i.3: 34 32 Babool 2 7 1 4 1 4 11 Sirsa 1 4 4 1 | Kanji 1 1 Chil Bil I Mahua - 22. Mix 4 4 - ,'1 451 471 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 92 32-33 Sisam 1 5 5 7*-j- K5f -44 38 36 |Mango | 1 || .2- 2:i 1 __ Arjoon 1 1 18 2 5 141 23 _ Gular II_1 L1I_ 1 - _ Babool 3 3 _ ___ - 6

___JNeem 1

______IMix 5 I I I 5

___ j 5___ ------.---- |------1 60 67.

. ___ '_ TOTAt NO. OFTREES 127 33-34 | Sisam | 6 39*27 1 -9 63 54 Babool | __ 3 _ |_ - | 5 .Neem _ ILl__1± 1 - 1-I J Mix | 3 | | ~2 l l l l l 3 | 2|

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-8 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UtnarPradesh State Roads Project Envi-onment4fAssessment (Phase 1) DHV Consul;anisf3V September2PC 1

ROUTE14 - BHOGNIPURTO CH-AUDAGH-RAMODE

1 T ~~~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree < 1Ocm 10-20 -20-30 30-40 :40-60 >60

12I~~~ILF~R LIIL' L RI LRi _

______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 128 34-35 Sisam 1 4 l.:2$31 16 4 . 42

___Mango1 1

____Arjoon 1 3 4 '28 18 291 25 ____Babool j3 1 3 .7 26

______~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 148 35-36 Babool T 1 1 21 J 3~ I Mango ____ 81 4

____Sisam {1 2 2 16 2 9 :7. 481 57 Neem1 _ 1 _1 1 _ _ ___ I _ I 1 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 63 ______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 122

36-37 Sisam - -1 4 39 _ 5- 43

____Mango ___21 21 - Arjoon 2 13 13 7 1 16 16 36

Eucalyptus___4 .26 30 -

_ __ Babool _ __1 - 1

_ _ _ Gular1- 1

____Neem 2 - 2

__ _ Peepal .1 I_ 110 49 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 159 37-38 Ssm I3 2 3 2 5 1 3 40 Babool } Chil Bd 1

___ _ _ m li i _ _ _ _ 1

Mango 1 1. 7_ 4 2 Neem ~~~~~~~ - 1 ~~~__ ~~~~~48 Peepal __1 .% 2 2 Eucalyptus…1-- I

___ __ Kadam I __ _, I- Other 112

TOTAL NO- OF TREES 108 38-39 Sisam 32 2f 2 2 1 27 11 2

Neem 1 3 tl __ -__ 3 5

___ __ Sirsa 1 _____ Arroo 1 1 j3 2 4_ Chit Bit I_

Peepal _ _ 2__1i:1

Paker ___I3 ___ 3 - Kadam 1112 1

Banvan ______I EucalyptusFI I 2211 1 1_

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India49 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BH-OGNIPUR TO CH-AUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) ______f Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 20-30130-401 060 >60r

__~~~~ LR L RLR L R LR IL R¶ R J_JAshok1- 1

Arjoon __

______---. I - * - * -.---- ~~~ ~~~3542 ______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 77 39-40 Sisam ~1 3 4 6 .36 v1- 12 13 56 30 _____Sirsa 1 3 1 3

Mahua :,.3.3 -

_ _ Babool_ __ _11 Chil Bil 2 5 6 7 8 12

____Eucalyptus ___8 3 1 1 11

Mango - 3

___ Mi~x 9* 9 -

______~~~ ~59 ~~~~~79 ______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 138 40-41 Sisam .5 5 1 6 1 59

Babool . 1 19 1 19 2

____Chil Bil 2 1 1 2 2

_____ Sirsa 2 1 - 3

Eucalyptus__13- 13

Mango . - 3

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~2282

- TOTALNO. OF TREES .104 41-42 Sisam 1 3 3 ~ 19 23

____Babool 8 1 6 24 2 1 j3210

_ _Eucalyptus 8_ 1- 8 __Mix 5 5 ~ 15 5

TOTALNO. OF TREES -132 42-43 Sisam 1 1 2 -13 ~ x 17 12

Mango ~:66 - Neem 3 1j .5 - Arjoon 1 3 2 4 10 3 13 10

______Sirsa 1 1 1 1

_ __ _ Arroo - ~ :1 2

____jamun 5

____Babool 1 1 2 2 2 Imuli7~i 14

_ _ __ Peepal __

____Eucalyptus ___3 8 2 - 1.3

____Mix111 - 63 54

_____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 117 43-44 Sisam ] ]__ 1 8 3 2 19 11 3'38 40 _ _ MahuaJ j1 {j ]1f I ____jArjoon j _ __2 7] 3] 3 5 I 0*

Govemmentof UtnarfPradesh, PublicWorks Depanment. Lucknow, India 4-10 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants iPCC-) Services for UntarPradesh State Roads Project ErWvironrnentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 14 --BHOGNIPUR TO CH-AUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 140-60 >60 L R L R L R L R L R L R L R Sirsa 12 2 7 8 2 11 11 Babool 1. 3 1 3 2

Imli1 - Chil 811 1-

Eucalyptus 3 2 - 5 Peepal I 61 69 TOTALNO. OFTREES 130 44-45 Sisam 3 3 1 3 46 43 Mango 2 2 Arjoon 5 5 7 8 12 13 Sirsa 1 2 1 1 24 3 Babool 1 3 23 3 Kanjii11

Peucalypu

Neeom 15 3 2

69 92 TOTALNO. OF'TREES 161 45-47 Sisam 12212 34 20

-Neern 1I 1 3

Arjoon 2~ 0 35 30

Gubool 1 13 28 Madhua 2I

Mango i -~~~~~~~~~1 -6 12

TOTALNO. OF TREES 161 447-4 Sisam 1 1 1 34 10

Goeneneom~a Pae ubi ok Deatmn, uknw Inda4 413 PSjct i-rsiat,5 Cnutns(C)Srie o ta SttIrds Rod Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DlHVConsultants eV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

______.Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total_I Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30o 3040 40-60 1 >60 L RI . L | R L | R L | R | LR I|~~ RL ~~ I L R RL

I___ I___I__ I R 381 61 TOTALNO. OF TREES 99 48-49 Sisam 4 3 3 1 5 32 34 Mango 11 10 -

Neem 1 _ _ : 1 2 Arioon 2 6 12 1 4 9 16 Mahua … 1 3 Babool 3 - 3 Kanji 1 1 Madina 1 Mix _ 5 53 65 TOTALNO. OF TREES 118 49-50 Sisam 2 1 13 29 25 Mango .|6 Neem 2 9 4

|_ _ |Nm12Arjoon 6 1 8 | 1 Jamun 11 |_____ |Peepal I

____Paker 22 !__| Other. 1 | 1 Sirsa |_____ |Eucalyptus 4 - 4 Babool 5 3 1 1 - 9

|_____ |Gular - | 2

___ Mahua = =-_ 2

__ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7.59 TOTALNO. OF TREES 116 50-51 Sisam 2 1 4 5 1 1j 36 36 Chil Bil 2 1 - 3 Babool 4 1 26

Neem 2 _ | | 3 1 2 5 I____ IArjoon I I 10 41 4 15 14

Mango | _4| Mahua1 Banyan 1|

|_|_E;helwar | l l l l 5 1 1 1 l l l l 61 64 TOTALNO. OF TREES 125 51-52 Sisam || 4 3 70 47

Mango .'7 6 Babool | 4 9 1 1 13 Chil Bi l 2 1 1 1 2 3 Madina 2 2 - Sirsa I

Eucalyptus |__|5 _| 2 2 5

|___ |_Neem 6| 8 - 15

Govemrnmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-12 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCQ Servicesfor Uttar PradeshSlate Roads Project EnWironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wise Distribution (cm) I Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 1 40-60 > 60 L

. ___ L R L R L R L R L R L R Mahua _.__. 2 Peepal _ 1 84 93 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 177

52-53 Sisam = - - 2 1 1 _ Ri j . 10 30 22 Mango 18 13 Jamun i 3

___Neem 15 _14_ 1 Arjoon 2 1 8 5 4 1 14 7 Sirsa I I Arroo I - Mahua 7 3 Babool 5 2 1 . 3 5 Peepal 1 2 = = 1 3 Eucalyptus 1 2 3 Mix 4____4_ 4 = | ======~~~~~77-78 .____ TOTAL NO. OF TREES 155 53-54 Sisam 2 7 9 |10 =M 41 30 _ Babool 9 21 9 5 2 1 I 1 36 | Eucalyptus 1 - 1

_ Sirsa - I ______Paker 3 - 3 _ | |Mango6 4 4 Neem64'2 2 Mahua 3 3

jamun - 2 Arjoon 1 2 3 2 Other 2 -____1_2_1__32

__ mli ……… ……I - PPeepal 2 4

| Lasoda 2 ___| 2 Other 3 3 Mix 5 3 5 3 89 99 TOTALNO. OF TREES 188 54-55 Sisam 10 - 1 1 5 1 15 2 |__| Mango 1 - Arioon 6 9 4 8 1 2 | 11 19 |___ |_ Babool 4 71 90 39 3 90 117 Chil Bil 1- 1 Neem | 1

Peepal - - - - - 1 _ _ _ _- - - 1

_ __ M ix 22 ______- 22

______……~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~117163 TOTALNO. OF TREES 280

Govemrnmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, india 4-13 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 140-60 >60L' L R L R L R L R L R L R 55-56 Sisam 1 1 4 2 3 3 30 Neem 1 2 7 Arjoon 1 1 1 1 Babool 19. 58 91 37 91 114 ChilBil 4 5 1 3 3 2 8 10

Sirsa 2 5 15 15 8 , 20 25 Eucalyptus 7 26 27 26 34 Madina 1 I - J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~152221 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 373 56-S7 Sisam 1 1.2 2 2 5 14 12 Arjoon 5 5 3 8 13 8 Babool 46 28 70 175 90 76 2 206 281 ChilBil 4 2 5 2 8 5 Sirsa 3 1 5 6 1 12 6 Eucalyptus 39 137 38 137 77 Lasoda 2 2

jamun - 1 392 390 TOTAL NO.OF TREES 782 57-58 Sisam 1 1 2 2 -3 5 17 Neem 1 1 2 5 3 6 Arjoon 1 1 Babool 7 12 18 50 *6 69 24

ChHlBil 1 1 2 - Sirsa 1 11 1 Eucalyptus 3 8 128 15 Ashok 11

Madina3 2 3 23

Eucalyptusm 1 1 14 1

aNeemn 3 6 -

Sirsal I -1

Maix a 2 8 2 2

37 40 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 7

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 41 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants OV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wiseDistribution (cm)Toa Km Tree <10cm 10-20 ~120-30 30-40 40-60 >60

____ ~ ~LR LR L R L- R L R 59-60 Sisam 2 4 4 ____Eucalyptus___1 2

____Chi! Bil 3 2 2 5 2

__ _ S'irsa _ _2 __ __ -2]

___Ashok 1 _ _- 1

Imli ___ K~adam 1-

___ eem I 2 4 1 1 1 3 7 6

_____ adina 3 - 3

Mahua 2 ___ 2 - Babool 3 2 4 9 -

_ __ Peepal ___1 -

____Mix 12__ 12 21

____ 1 z._-_- ___ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4143 ______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 84 60-61 Neem 1 1 14 6 15

jamun ___ 11 - Chil Bil 1 4 6 1 1 2 9 a

Eucalyptus 1 -

Peepal ___;.§.1 -

Sisam 23 ___1 - 24

____Babool ___3 2 - 5

Arjoon ___2 - 2

___Madina ______J 2 - 2

Mix 36 _ __36 - 54 561 TOTALNO. OF TREES 110 61-62 Babool 7_ 1 Oj 5 1 22

___ _ _ Sirsa1- 1

____Neem 5 9 2 Madina I

jamun11 -

_ _ M ix 6 _ _- _29

62-63 Sisam NO4O TEE 3 __ __ 10 1 ____Neem 1 S 5 3T

__ jamun X l Z Z 7 1 -1 - Babool 3 8 2 5 16 2

_ _ Chi]lBil 3 42.":4-7 6

Kaitha __[______[__ 2 ___ .3

____Peepal 1_ _ 2 __ 1 2 3- 3

____Gular -1 -

_ _ __ Sirsa

_ _ __IEucalyptus ______

[mu __ _i

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Pubtic Works Department, Lucknow. tndia 4-15 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) OFHYConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 14- BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 1 >6 _ ____ - ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~LR LR L RL K L {RL IR L K _ _ Mango___-

____Arjoon j 1__ - Madina 1 I 2 TOTAL I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~46j 33 TTLNO. OF TREES 179_ 63-64 Sisam 7 9 9 .5 7 1 1 5I 24 Babool 1 3 4 3 5

_____ Sirsa I I

Kaitha -; .14 1

Mango - 4

Neem … ……1 - 2 Peepal - 4 jamun .F- I Madina1- 1 Mahua1 24 44 TOTALNO. OF TREES 68 64-65 Sisam 2 2 .5 33 1 :4: 37 42

____Mango 3 1 3 Neem 1 1 3

Jamun .- ~.1 - Arjoon 3 A 1 1 4 2 ____Si rsa 1 '2 2 1 Babool 15 1 6 1

____ChilBil II -

____Peepal - -- -. -

Madina -- 2 - 2

______- L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 5 TOTALNO. OF TREES 108 65-66 Sisam 11 1 18 16 38 14 ~. 5 75 36

Sirsa -I 1 2 3 - 3 4 Chil Bil 5 1 7 3 9 2 6 8 3 27 17 Mango .1 2 -- 3

Neem __2 __ .1 >.1: 4 2 Mahua ,.- 1

___Babool 3_ 14 _

TOTALNO. OF TREES__176 66-7 Sisam 2 2[2 4 27 16 ji8 14T 39 38

____Arjoon ~ Sirsa ~ ~ 1 ~~~~~22 3 2 B__abool 2 j 1 1 2 ~3 3

____ChilIBil' 1 3 14 3 - 15 6 Neem…1

____Peepa -

_ _mix 10 31 _1

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India4-6 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVCorisultain;s b\' September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGHRA MODE

Girthwise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <1cm 10-20 I20-30 30-40 40-60 > 60 L

______~~~~~~~ RL iR IL I RL L R

______~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES ______1251

67-68 Sisam ______4 4f 2120] 141_ _12 31 _ 273~2

BabooChl ______4i 2__ 9 2 23]32 4 7- 26

Mhil Bi 1 3 - 1

_____ ~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 167 68-69 Sisam 8 1 16116 7_ 8 -1 Il 0 10.1 6 46

Mango - -~1 1 - Neem I.4 1 Babool 4 3 9 16 2 23 31

Chil Bil1 1 -

Sirsa -1 - 2 Mahua Peepal Arjoon Mix 89 80 ______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 169

69-70 Sisam 2 4 4 3 1 __ 4 4, 6 16 17

Mango __ 4~4 1 _1 ____2 ___jamun ---*1.'__ i~2 3

Arjoon __ 4 3 _ 8 4 1 j__ 16 4

_____Babool 2 1 t 2__ 2 _ 3 E-cal-yp-tus 5 81 - _ 13 - Paker1 2 ______t ______2 - CUhilIRui 3 _ _TI __ __ - 3

GularT__ I__ - 1

_____ Peepal11 _ - 1 Mix 24 L 24

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 117 70-71 Si-sam 6 61 6 9r L 6 5 2 26 20

Mango 1 _ _ 1 1 2 Neem I2[ 1 2 1 2 1 6 3

jamun 2 _ __2 .2 4 2 Babool 5 4 6 11 7 22 22

Kaitha___1 -

Chil Bil 2 1 5 15. 2 ______1 7 9--

Eucalyptus 2 12 9 ____14 9

…aker I I

Sirsa _ _ . . .2 . . _ __ _1______H2 _ _ _

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-1.7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCO) Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CHAUDAGH-RA MODE

T ~~~~~~~~~~GirthwiseDistribution (cm) i Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 404 j >60

L R L R L R LI _ __L_ R1______Kanji ______

Gular ___

Banyan __

____Mahua 1 _____Arjoon 3 14

Madina 3 4_____ Mix 14 ___ 14

_ _ _ _ TOZO.O7_ _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~148 TOTANO OFTREES19 71-72 Sisam 23 111 1

Mango - _5 2

jamun 2 1 ___10 1

Neem 4 3 13 -~24 25 Mahua I1 - Babool 10 26 20 5 3 34 30 Sirsa 2 2 f - Eucalyptus__42 38 7 26 2 8 9 114 ChliBil 2 1 3 -

__ __ Peepal . .2 -

_____Madina 2 __ 2 - ____Arjoon 12 6 - 1

____mix 14 14 -

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 321 72-73 Sisam -1 2 1 5 A.7 7. 1 18 _____Mango1 2 2

____Neem 2 4 3 13 1 3 25

Mahua __ __22 jamun ii111 1 Babool 1 10 16 20 2 3 22 30

_____ Lisoda 11 - Plum11 ____Eucalyptus 42 38 9 26 7 8 16 114

____Peepal I1 -

Madina 113 - Arjoon 26- 18 ______- ______- j______- - ~~~ ~~~~~77208 TOTAL NO. OF TREES28 73-74 Sisam 1.-•y1 A 2 2 ___Mango *.- - ~9,..-13 *:*j4Q;~-' 4 25 Neem __11 5 -i,2 3 5 Arjoon 17 8 - Babool 6 3 1 10 ____Banyan >-1: Eucalyptus 8-

_ _ _ eepal1_ _ _ _ - - _ -- 1

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depantment;.Lucknow, India 41 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHiVConsultants BiV September2001

ROUTE 14 - BHOGNIPUR TO CI-AUDAGHRA MODE

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 140-60 >60 ____ LL R RI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I ______L_R_ _ R_ L__ RTLl L RL

lamun _ _ _-. 6

Madina __21 4I

TOTALNO. OF TREES 77 74-75 Sisam 2 2 `4 6 9 13 15 21

___Neem 2 il :- 5 3 4

___Jamun .22 71 4

____Arioon 3 3 2 15 2 4 22 7

____Babool ___2 7 13 1 2 1 8 18

Peepal -'4 _ _ _ Gular 1 2 1 2 Eucalyptus 1- 1

Mango______1 Mahua - 7

_____ Mix ~~15753 __ 157 -5- 219 129- TOTAL NO. OF TREES 348 75-76 Sisam 1 1 7 ~4~4 12

Mango _2 9 Neem 1I 1' 7 2 Mahua ………… 7 i 3 1

____Babool ___2 8 9 1 8 12

Jamun 1 -

Peepal ___~- 2

___ Mix 40 29…40{ 29

______…~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~65J6 7

TOTALNO. OF TREES- -132

76-77 Sisam - Ž7ri3 8 -: , 13 14 Mango ~ i 8

Babool 3 ___1 2 2 1 1 4 6 Jamun -;I1 2 *1

___Peepal __ - . 2 2

Eucalyptus- 6 - 9 1 - 16

Paker11 -

Banyan _____2 Neem 6 Madina 2 - 2 Mix 182 77 182 77

____ - - .J ~~~~~~~~~~~-- E 205 I136 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 341

77-78 Sisam 12 ___1 3 2 5[i 20

Nee___ 14 3 8 3 Bnyan 14 5 63 8 2 3

Babool 11 __ Eucalyptus __ 2 _ _- 2 2 2 _____Mango - -- ___iC : _____JPeepal

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Oepartment, Lucknow, India 4-19 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for VttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 14- BHOGNIPURTO CH-AUDAGHRAMODE

Girlh wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 > 60

____ LRLR~~~~~ R LR L ~ ~~~LRI L IV R Mix 5 K z zi _ 4

TOTALNO. OF TREES 127 78-79 Sisam 1I:

Babool 8 3 3 3 3 11 Peepal 1.J 2 1

Paker 11 -

____Madina1 11 1

____Banyan1

Gular1 -

Mango1 - 1

Neem - 3 Jamun-

____Mix 13 13 - 22 20 TOTALNO. OF TREES 42 79-80 Mango . .. I 3__

Neem11 - Mahua 1 1 Babool 3 12 1 1 6

jamun 1 -

___ Mango 4 2 - 5

______Mx 25 25 -

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3212 TOTALNO. OF TREES 44 80-81 Sisam ……I...... '1 1 Mango I -12 l 2 Neem 1 12 51 -- 7~2.5 9 14 Peepal 3___3

____Paker11 4 Babool 1I Sirsa 2

Madina _ I_

Mix 12 __ _ 12 - 30 24 ______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 54 81-82 Sisam 426 9T 7 5 27 21 Neem 1 1__ .1 -` 5, 7 10

____Babool 113 1 4~

_ __ _ Sirsa 3 2- _ 2 3

Bate 1

Gular11 -

Madina11 -

__ __ Banyan1: _ _1 1

____Mangoj 1

____Peepal 131

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-20 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l) DI1V ConsultintsBV September2001

ROUTE14 - BHOGNIPURTO CHAUDAGHRAMODE

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 i 30-40 40-60 >60

____ 4Mix :zz.. R L [L R L R 1 [.jL L R L

I ______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~4246 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 88

82-82.20 Sisam l -- 2 .__ ; 3 2 3 Babool 1 1 1 1 Paker = = = == 1 =

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 16

Governmentof Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-21 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment (Phase 1 DHV Consultants BV September 2001

ANNEX 4.2 SPECIES-WISEAND GIRTH-WISE LIST OF TREESIN RIGHT OF WAY (ROW) ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree < 10 cm 1 -20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60

L R L R L R L R L R L _ I R 0-1 Sisam 3 2 72 4 6 1 81 7 Babool 1 2 1 1 3 2 Arroo 1 1 - Arioon 5 2 1 1 1 8 Mix 3 2 _3 - 3 22_

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 108 1-2 Sisam 5 17 21 32 40 1 1 66 60 ____Neem 1 1 1 1 2

Sirsa 2 2 -

Babool - - 2 3 7 9 1 2 1 _ 1 14 Arjoon 5 18 20 12 30 12 17 80 Eucalyptus 6 6 I___| Chil Bil - 9 7 7 17 26 14 !_____- Jamun = 1 Mix 26 16 26 16 155 187 - ~ TOTAL NO. OF TREES . 342 2-3 Sisam . 2 8 28 18 57 1 5 - X t; 87 47 Neem 2 2 1 Babool 2 6 1 5 1 1 1 4 13

Arroo - - 5 1 Arjoon 1 6 1 6 5 - - - 2 17 |_____ |Eucalyptus 158 64' | 9 158 73 ChilBil 1 12 4 2 181 61 3 1 1 27 21 Mango |'-2 18 - - 20 Mahua |4 . 4 ______Jamun 1; 1 Mix 3 12 1 12

TOTALNO. OF TREES 498 3-4 Sisam 1 7 5 14 65 18 | ' -';z ' 71 41

Mango - - - 10 5

jamun ;. -4 - -3i5 _

Neem 1 5 5 _ | - 5 7 Sirsa 3 1 | _ __ | 3| 1

Arjoon 7 8 9 | 14| 16 21 | _ __|_ | 32 43 Eucalyptus - 27 296 193 42 1 296 263 ChilBii 1 20 6 19 11 2 5 1 42| 23 Babool 1 1 - 2 Madina 1I 1 Mix 3 3 S M: : i 464 393 TOTALNO. OF TREES 857 45 |Sisam I | 1|10| 7151 231 16- 61 | 37 Neem 2 2 3 2 1 5

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-22 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DfiV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) r Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 i 4060 >60 …+-- -~~ R ~~~~~~~~ R- L R L R L R L R L R L RR Babool 4 4 == 4 5S

Eucalyptus 7 204 52 18 _ 204 77 Chil Bil 4 8 9 1 7 13 16 Sirsa = = = 5 - 10 Arroo 1 -1 1 Mango 1 1 1

Arjoon 3 - 3 Mix 12 7 12] 7 .____ 296] 162 TOTALNO. OFTREES 458 5-6 Sisam 5 21 21 28 59 13 86Q6 64

Mango 3 2 1| 3 | _ 8] | 3 Jamun = =| I I | Neem 4 31 5 3.j Sirsa 5 5 - |_____ |Babool 2 1 1 2 2

______Arjoon 4 4 Eucalyptus 20 17 4 20 21 j__ |_Chil Bil 3 3 | 6 4 3 13

| ____ _ |Paker 1 1 | |______Arroo _ 1 |_____ [Mix 32 11 32 11

___=__ = = _ 165 124 TOTALNO. OF TREES 289 6-7 Sisam I 1 3 3 -

|___ Neem 2 31 _ -- 5 -

I_ i Babool l l 3 2 5 - I 0 _ |___|_ Arroo 3 3| Arjoon 4 | 4

|_____ |Peepal 1 2 ____ 2 1 Chil Bil 3 3 , |

Gular 3 3 - Banyan i 1 Eucalyptus 1 |

I I - - _ __34 2 TOTALNO. OF TREES 36

7-8 Neem 2 | _ _ ___ 2] _ - |Babool | | { | 4 33 74 22 19 | | 4 26| 130

Chil Bil || 7 6 | - 13 - |Sisam| l 1 l 1 l - l 2

| __Mix | 30 12 | 30 12 71 44 |__ TOTAL NO. OF TREES 215 8-9 ISisam 8 3j| 3 1 5 1 -| 17 5

___ Mango______2 j 1 2 2

|___ ].Chil Bil 15 3] 7 3 _ - _ 25 3 | Babool j___|_| 7| 19 31 38 j 5 j 31 69

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-23 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCQ Services for UntarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DIIV Consultants5(V September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree '<10 cm f 110-20 20-30 3(i-40 40-60 > 60

____ IL R R L R L Ri L R L R I _

____ Peepal i -

___Mix 69 14 __69] __4

____ ~~~~~1459 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 238 9-10 Sisam j8 1 9_____ Neem j3 2 3 1 13 7 Babool 15 4 24 10 29 1 1F 27 57

___Chil Bil 4 3 _ 14 4

____ Sirsa 3 - 3

Gular 1 3 2 - 6

____Mix 3 142 332 142

TOTAL NO. OF TREES -59436] 2 10-11 Sisam1 2 10 1 3 2 ~~~~~~~~15 13

___Arroo ___ M.10 - 37

____Babool 3 __2 __4__ 5 7

_____ Chil Bil 7 ______4 11 11 Sirsa 2- 2 -Neern…………- 4 Mix 603 210 603 210

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~644284 TOTALNO. OF TREES 928

11-12 Sisam 26 8 3 1 ___29 9 Babool 4 5 30 6 30 15

Chil Bil __ 7 11 2 4 2 3 __ 1 11 19 Eucalyptus 47 64 18 47 82

____Arroo '.' Ti•...;:3 -Ii 2- 9

_ _ _ Kaitha 1_ _

Mango - 1

Neem~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3

Peepal*1_ _

Mix 560 112 * 560 112 677 252

TOTAL NO. OF TREES __ __929

12-13 Eucalyptus 69 245 89 __ 19 245 177

Banyan . 11._2 1 2 4

Paker 3 1 - 4

Mango ______4A Neem 4 1 5 11 7 16 12 Sisam .4 4 -

Babool __4 5.9 -

Mix 66 -

TOTAL NO. OF TREES .1_ _ 483

13-14 Sisam ___ 7 2 6 5 ___ F4V Vi22I -2 24~ 15

___Mango 2 '.1l"_I 7

GoenetofUttar Pradesh,. Public Works Department, Lucknow, India -- 4 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCO Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DIHVConsultarnts 8V September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILH-AURTO KATRA

1 ~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm). i Total Km T.ree <10cm 10-20 i20-30 1 340 40-60 >60 L R

______ii~ ~~R L R L R L R L R L Rj_

Jamun __13 3 i Chil Bil 1 .9 9 1

____Eucalyptus ___150 317 195 1 7 -31 7 362 Peepal .

Madina 4 1 7 - 1 I1

Bantyan ------V1 Babool - ~3 4 Ashok 1 1- 2

_ _ _ Paker1 - 1 Mahua 3Y.T ~ 7

Mix 25 _ 25 - 395 420 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 815 14-15 Lasoda 2 2 - Sisam 34 19 3

____Mango fr-4 - Jarmun A:~

__ _ Neem 2 __5 3 t~~F 1 8

___ Sirsa.1_ -1 -

Mahua __ __2 2

Eucalyptus __19 3 - - __ 19 3

_ _ _ Paiker- 1-- -

____Banyan __

____Peepal .

___ jamun .- - -~-2 -- 52 19 TOTALNO. OF TREES 71 15-16 Sisam 2_____- 1 5 2 2 2 Babool ___5 15 19 171 15 32 ChilBa1 14l

Eucalyptus - - - - 32 101 69 [ 1101 112 ______Mango .1 - Mahua I 2 - 3

Arjoon ______3 _ _I _ __- 3

Mix 8 - -8 - …~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 137 158

TOTAL NO. OF TREES ______295

16-17 Sisam [ 2- T 1 ___ 2 2 3

__ __ jamun 5 ___ _ _

Babool 15 30 35 -. 8 - - 30 58

_ __ Chil Bil …… - - - _ 2__ Eucalyptus 21 75 49 8 __ 75 78_

Peepal …… _ _

_ _ __ Sirsa1- 1

__ _ _ Arroo- - - 114 143 TOTAL NO. OFTREES 257

Governmentof UttlarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, tndia 4-25 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) ______Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30T 30-40 40-60 >60 i

L R L R L R L RL R L RI _ 17-18 Neem 3 6 3 i4K 10 5

_____Babool 1 7 22 3 1 32

Sirsa I 1 - Chil Bil 3 1 1 4 1

____Eucalyptus ___6 18 ___6 18

_____Gular 3 3 - ______~~~ ~56 ~~~~~~25

TOTALNO. OF TREES .81

18-19 Mango__1 - Neem 3 5 1

ChilBil - -11

Peepal 2 - Paker 1I

Eucalyptus 15 15 -

____Banyan1 -

____Mix 3 3 -

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~293 ______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 32 19-20 Sisam 2

Neem 2 1 2 1 - 1 3 11 Ashok I I - Paker 1 2 1 1 3 6 5 9 Gular 2 22 2

____Madina 2 ., 1 3 -

Banyan '1I -

ChilBil 1 2 1 - 4

Imli1 - Kaitha A..

Peepal1 - 1 17 29

______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 46

20-2.1 Sisam 6 5 27 26 . .. t~4 ~ . 27 54 Neemn 1 2 1 2 9 12 Babool 4 3 1 1 4 5 ChilBil 1 6 4 14 1 2 1 5 24

____Eucalyptus ___1 1 4 2 2 ___ 3 7 Imli :4- 1

Sirsa .3 - 3 Semar.1-

Mango - 1

____jamun . - __ 4 - 7 ______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~48115. TOTALNO. OF TREES 163

21-22 Sisam 18 16118 40 591371 9___ 6' : ___ 4 l

_ __ Mango__ __ [_ _ _ Neem 2 322

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-2.6- ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCQ Services for UttarPradesh Stale Roads Project ~FnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBVy September 2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) 1 Total Km Tree <10cm1 I 2 0 20-30 30-40 40 600>L60 L R L R LI R L R L R L R

Jamun -- - 2 - Babool 4 1 9 3 2 4 11 22 ii Chil Bil 15 12 22 5 58 31 2 3 1 7 98 109

____Eucalyptus 8! 93 92 IC__ 93 110

Paker I __1 - 1

Mix 1 7 3 ____ _ 17 3 329 350 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 679 22-23 Sisam 8 3 10 14 19 1 9 ~ I39 47

___-Mango ___~1 2

Neem I - 1 3'T 8 2- Jamun 3 3 Babool 1 2 10 35 12 8. 5 3 1 47 30 ChilBil 51 70 32 74 110 45 3 10 5 3 201 202

____Eucalyptus 1 7 10 7 11

Lasoda 1 -- 1 - Bale 2 2

Plum 1 1 - Gular 11

Imli11 -

____Mahua 2 12 - 14

____Mix 35 44 3.5 44

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~347355

TOTALNO. OF TREES - -702

23-24 Sisam 4 10 8 1 39 ' ~~' 34 69

Mango .. 1 . -Y--: 3 3 Neem 2 55 .2

jamun - - - - . . 7 1 Babool 3 13 61 37 10 6 ij 71 60 ChitBil 60 68 55 1111201 90 3 5 316 277

_ __ _ Sirsa __ _6 6 , -_

___ Eucalyptus 1 8 8 _ 8 9

___Mix __ 302 __-} 302

______I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~450J723 TOTAL NO. OF TREES___1,173 24-25 Sisam 17 69 8 7 70 51 1 6 195

Mango ___3: 3 Neem 1 6j1 3 2 9 jamun I

____Chil Bil 16 31 8 41125 10.1 150 45 BabooI 1 7 3 513 14 Sirsa 1 1 161 44 23 9 45 4

Eucalyptus - 5 7 77 -_ 57 9 Arioon 2

__ __ Arroo 8 _ _ Gular r E II

Govemment of Uttar Pradesh,Public WorksDepartment, Lucknow, India 4-27 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmenialAssessment (Phase I) DHiVConsulIanis BV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-s0 20-30 30-40 40-60 I >60 ______L R L R L R L R L R_ _ R I _ _

__ _ _ M ix 46 ______1 46 ______I. ___ _ _ 1 ~~~~~~j ~466 ~~ ~~~361

TOTALNO. OF TREES __827 25-26 Sisam 66 45 13 .3 45 82 ____Chil Bil 15 3 2 5 10 2 {27 10 Babool 10 3 12 12 36 11 ___ 2 __58 28

____Sirsa 1 7 13 3 I1 4 10

____Eucalyptus .44 224 216 16 ___224 276

____Arroo CC1 t4 *"r- 3 Neem…2 - 2

_____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO.OF TREES 417768 ChilBil 34 2 6 3; 5 Babool 3 1 2 5 Sirsa 1 Eucalyptus 13 31 5 31 9

_ __ Banyan…- _ __I

______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 143 27-28 Sisam 1 4 10 6 24 16

___Neem ~*&w.

_ _ ChdlBil 1 1 2 1. Paker 1 22 1

____Babool 2 ,1 - 3

____Teak xl

___Madina 2 2

__ __ Mix 10 _ _ _ _ _ 0

TOTALNO. OF TREES 71 28-29 Sisam 17 2 3 7 66 7 120 16 ____Mange ... I ~. 3 1 4

____Babool 5 21 7 8 24 8

__ __ Arjoon 2 _ 3______1

Imli. 1 f 1 -

__ _ _ ChilBal 2 - 2

___Banyan - 1

Gular11 - Neem__11 161 41 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 202 29-30 Sisam 25 45 26 21 -!2;<.5 7 35

___Mango -. Z1iI 2_ 4 3 5

___ jamun _ * I__ 1 1 2 Chil Bil 3 6 22 4] 10 29

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public WorksDepartment, Lucknow, India 4-20 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase l), DHV Consultants1V September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 1 10-20 1 20-30 3040 40460 >6

___~~~~~ LR L R L R L R L R L R _ Babool 10 15 2!3 20 151 45 38 Sirsa 5 31 51 31 10 Arloon 4 6 2 23 81 3 33 13

____Kaithta -2 - 2

____Peepal ____- I

_ _ Mix 12- 12 - ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12051 35 TOTALNO. OF TREES 340 30-31 Sisam 1 1 4 2 l 63 9 17

Mango 3 -

___Neem

____jamun 4 11I

___Chil Bil 2 6 2 _ 2 10 2

____Babool 14 5 1 14 6

____Mahua 77J.*.2. -T-1 2 2

_ _ _ Gular1 -

Paker1- 1 Mix 40 40 93 39 TOTALNO. OF TREES 132

31-32 Sisam [18 -. - 19 1 13 : .8 13 41*

Mango 12 - Neem111 1

____Babool 2 6 22 12 181 42

jamun ……… 2 _

____Chil Bil 81 22 35 23 12 104 69

Mahua ______-

Arjoon 2 _____ 2 __

Gular -… __

IMix 256 ______- 256

-…I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~18411I

___ - ~TOTALNO. OF TREES -559_ __ 32-33 Sisam 12 24 20] 31 .1I 1 8- 13 64] 501

____Mango -. 4><4 9: 12 131 131 Neem~ ~ ~ ~ __ 3 1 _ 5_{: I__

____Babool 10 15 42 40 22 29 7 4"

_ __ jamun . I__-

Chil Bil __ 1 4_ 3 6 3 1 l Arjoon 1 1 r - Eucalyptus 11 Sirsa 1 5 7 2 7

Mix 70 104 70_ 04

______3___ j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~2462701 TOTALNO. OF TREES -1 56

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works D'epartment, Lucknow, India 4-29 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project ErivironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsullantsBV Septermber2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution_(cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 120-30 f30-40406 6 L R L R L R L R L R L Rj_

33-34 Sisam - 15 13 25 31 19 12 ~6 IQ'i7 72 5

___Mango __ 4! 21 20

____Neem 33 1 F i* 6 4

Babool __ - 13 1 12 37 48 7173 4 Jamun *3 'I 3 1

-___ChdlBil 28 10 4 15 121 5 - - 44 30 Mahua ___ -- 21 2 1

____Arjoon 3 2 8 2 11

___Sirsa 7 2 7 3 4 1 18 6

_ _ Gular…-_ _

___Mix 63 40 - - - 63 4 304 225 TOTAL NO. OF TREES52 34-35 Sisam 30 18 54 23 20 6 Mg,, 10.Io6 49

Babool __20 19 30 41 20 29 __ 70 89

Chil Bil - 12 2 3 1 1__ -1 6

_ _Sirsa 4 2 - 6 __ _Banyan- 1 Mango 7R4-23 27

_____ Peepal _ _ Jamun 2 1 Arjoonl __ * 9 41 9

- _ Neem - - - -- 11- 21 -

__Kadamb 1 _ 23 -

___Mix 12 4012 40 ______………~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~236 229

TOTAL NO. OF TREES46 35-36 Sisam 8 15 29 2 29 25 Mango ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~22 Neem 1 4 1 1 6 Babool 2 6 4 2 4 10 Chil Bil 33 -

Peepal -* 2

Kaitha 1I - Imli ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,t:4 1 4

Banyan -1- -- 1 Paker…-_

Kadamb - - -3 - 3

Gular- - - -1 1

___Mix 1 6-6 7 44 61

______- - ~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 105 36-37 Sisam 2 T-- 311- _ _ Chil Bil __ _z 3 j llI _3_ L 4 ___Banyan L m j 2 2 1 ; i1

GDcvemmentof UttarPradesh, PLublic works Depanment. Lvcknow-India----3 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services (or Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DI-IVCorisultants ISV Sepiember2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

F_ ~~~~~~~~~GirthwiseDistribution_(cm) ______oa Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 140-60 > 60 L R

- _____ ~~~~~LR L. R L R LI L R L R~i 2 P___uakr I 1 2j 2

Mango _ 7135 2:A.; 24t 5 Neem 2 4 <1' A-1 4 3 7T 8

Peepal 1. { 2 jamun 1 1 Kaitha 1 2

__ _ _ Madina - .1 7 ___ Mix 12 19 12 1

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~606 1 TOTALNO. OF TREES 121 37-38 Neem 2____ 10 2 Jamun ~I~ 2 1 Paker 2 1 3 1 3 1 8 3

Ashok .4 4 - Kaitha -11 7 1 -

Madina 2 4 1 ___ 3 4 Sisam 2 2 - 4 Babool 1 - I

____Banyan ___ 1.

Gular ___1- 1

lackFruit - 3

___Mango ~A .

TOTAL NO. OF TREES…76 38-39 Sisam 1 6 17 -1J Babool __ __ 1 16 12 1 3_ 1 191 15

____Paker 1

Jack Fruit I -1 Mango 2 . % : .18- 7 >2 Neem 6 11 ~ $8 13

____Mahua 1

___Peepal- 1

_____Jamun 1it

____Arjoon __18 4 -1 22 - ChilB1 30 5 3

____Mix 4 - 4

______……~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~99~60 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 159 39-40 Sisam 52 54 55 156 25 2117 3 0 13: 144 247

Mango ______3 3 3

Arjoon 39 42 1.9 52 1334

___Chil Bil 114 141 11 _ _ 14 16_ -Babool 75 4 l25 70 ___ 131 261 12 1 23 2

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India -4-31 ProiectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVCorisuIltaris BIV Seplember2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <1OcmlO-20 0-30 30-40 40-60 >60

__ I~~~ R L R L R L jR L R L:R I_

- Sirsa __ _1 _ _

Peepal ___ 2

mix 1135 - -135

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~669~447 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 1,116 441 Sisam 13 11 44 5 2 3 5 5 20 68 Mango -2 2 5 2

- ~ Neem -1 2 4.1 2 12

jamun __ 1 5i1C 6 1

-- Arjoon - _ 5 - 3 4 _ 51 7

ChilBil - 1 4 1 1 2 1 _ 4 6 Babool 10 5 10 14 16 14 2 38 33 Kaitha 2 2

____Mahua

Eucalyptus__1 2 i j 12 1

Imli ~ ~2 - 3 - Peepal - - .:~ - 2 _ _ _ Mix 53] _ _ 3 -

TOTALNO. OF TREES 283

4142 Sisam -19 49 30 49 50

___Mango i Neem11f__ 48 6 ChilBil ~~~~13 16 9 19]7 K

Mix 4 I - 4

TOTALNO. OF TREES 170

4243 Sisam 21 421 45 ___4.164 Mango .1 -~-~T

___ Neem 4 2 5 - _ _ _6 1. Jamun .Z4 2 15 2

- ~ Babool 2 5 6 _5 8

- ~ Peepal ___--11

- ~ Paker ……… __3 Ii 3

Imli 1 ___24.. :6 __2~ 7

- ~ Kadamb…iI I

TOTAL.NO.OF TREES - __ 160

43-44 Sisam - -n 2 - -G i 3 46 1 9

-~Mango 1 - A-- 13

Neem -- - _ 2 3 7

Babool 1 1 6 2 4 Paker f I I F 3 I___Banyan I ______IT 1 i~~

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow -India 4-32 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (P'CC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) Dt-IVConsufta')t5 IJV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

- ~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 R

___ ~~~~ R ~~LL R L. R L R LLR R

-__Mahua - .*- 2

___Peepal 2 21 : 1 3 - ______- --~~~~~~~~- - I _ _ _ t _ ~~~~~~~~79_ 52 TOTALNO. OF TREES 131 44-45 Sisam 3 15 74 38 374 59

Neem 1 1 - 131 -

___ Babool _ 20 __ 20 27 48 .. 88 27.

___Sirsa 1 - 4 2 ___ 5 2

___ Chil Bil - 14 __ __ - -- 1 14 1

___Mango __ '24 ~ -',- 7

___Mix 30 30 - 214 96

TOTALNO. O TREES -310

45-46 Sisam 2 __ _ 4 49 18~ 53 26 __ Mango I_ 3 1 * Neem 2 3 4 7 Babool 6 24 6 24 12

____Chil Bil 5 3 3 2 14 3 3 2 24 11

Shammer11 -

Sirsa _ _ 1_

Semar - 2 - 2 Arjoon 1- I

____Mix 281 28 -

-______- ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 199 -46-47 Sisam22j 17 4

Mango - - _ _ 8 9 Neem 9 7 3 5 3 2 15] 14 -Jamun -5 ___ .'a- .3 ____

Chil Bil 6 4 5 ii 8 5 3 7 29 2 Arroo I1: Peepal1 1 1 1 Paker 1 2- 1 3, Babool 1- 1

Gular…1 -

Mahua ... 2 - 9

Mix 12 - -______12 -

TOTAL NO. oFrTREES 194

47-48 Sisam -- 6 19 22 2 2- >1 1 227 3 1

Mango ____2 3: .7 * 6 9 9 Neem 11

- jamun - - _*1 4-.5 1 6

-___Babool - 14 2 29 4 48 6-

Sirsa _ _ 3~ _ ____Chil Bil __ 381 28] 18 4] 9 30 3 131 11 I 9f7

_ _ Kaitha [ _ J 2__ ~ _ _ 1 1178

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public-Works-Department, Lucknow, India 4-33 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCCQ Sea-vices for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvirionmenialAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsuliantsOV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm). Tot___ Km Tree <10cm 1022 -30 30-40 40-60 >60

Gular L R L R L R L R L R L R 2_

____Shammer - i 7 - _ __ Teak 1- 1 ____Mix 194 f 1941

______~ ~ ~ TTA N. FTREES 532 48-49 Sisam 7 20 24 1 1 21 32 Babool 38 12 34 6 36 4 1 108 23 ____Sirsa 20 16 3 9 23 2 Chil ail 1 2 15 3 1 20

_ _ Kanjii11_ _

___Kaitha - 14 7 Shammer 2 2 -

Eucalyptus ___5 - 5

Semar 1 2 - 3

jamun - 2 Arjoon 2 ______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~170119

______~TOTALNO. OF TREES 289 49.50 Sisam 6 6 171 5 ~ 23 13 Mango __t ~ ~2 1 Neem 6 10 16 11 jamun 2 ' 2 21 3 3 Babool 20 5 30 9 0 8 110, 22 Sirsa 1 6 9 4 5 21 15 Ar-joon I I4 I1 2

Eucalyptus___ 4__ 12 _ _2 2 88B

Gular 1 - Shammer 3 5 -1 Other______~~~~~ I1 57 281 57 39

-___ Teak ______~i 7

_ _ hilBiI 1 i _ 21 _ I_ 1 2 ___Semar j 2 9 2 - 13

______I { ____ 1____ ~~~~ ~~257211 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 468

.50-51 SZsam __16 41~ 34} 1 4 42 54 Mango]___I___i *.> 1 1 Neem 1 3 Jamun J 1 ~{ Babool ~ 10 20 9140 71 1 70 17 Sirsa 4_3_ 2:

Mjoon 2~~~ 2 1

O th e r ~~ ~~~~~13 13-

Shammer7 __ iuiL~I 2i1 J_ 2 5j__19_

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 43 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Ut-tarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DI V ConisultaintsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) _____Total Km Tree c10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-0 >60I

L JR L R- L R IL R I L R L R -

Sernar -15____ Gular jJ__31 _ ~ 3_

______I ____ ~~~~ ~~~1911 32 TOTALNO. OF TREES 1__ 323 .51-52 Sisam 26 T 371

Manrgoj4 1] -

CEhilBil 012 6 1 5 2 16 2 3.93 1

____Babool 4 10 I11 1 10 16 Sirsa I 1 1 3 1 3 4

Eucalyptus ___1 9 1 9 2

Teak ___1 -

____Other 1 - I

_____Peepal ___A1 ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12477

TOTAL NO.OF TREES -__ 201 52-53 Sisam 7 6 10 58 15 2'473 2

Mango 1 ___ 12 1 2.

_ _ Neem 111 1 ChilBil 3 1 6 15 i6 5 2 124 1

___ bTool 3] 3 I Sirsa 2 3 1 1 10 3

Shammer 1 112 -

Kaitha ____.:1 61

_ __ Arroo .1 _ _ _ _ Eucalyptus 2 16 9 4 1 3 ~23j 12 Paker 1I -

l__arnun

Arjoon - .]- _ _ _ _ Madina 1{ - 1

______j - - ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~14467

TOTAL NO. OF TREES __ __ 211 i

53-54 Sisam I______4 70 150 381 _ __ 216_ NeemI 6

ChilBil __j 3' 6 41 2 5 4__T 12 12~

____Babool 3__1 ij 2 5~ 9 4

Arioon __ __ 13 1 1 I 16 4 _ _ _ 4715 Kaitha 13 ~ ~ 4 2j__ F 141 6 Eucalyptus - 1__ _ 108 61 2 2 12 18 ___ 1481 73

Mango 1r.6_ __ ~ ji

Madina -1 _1

______M _ i ______t 4 5 14 2 .46 1

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, Ind ia 4-35 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvtironmentalAssessment (Phase !JI DHV ConsultantsU3V September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Tree <10cm1 0-30 3~~~040 0-0601 KmTree < 10 cm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0-0 20 __30____30_4__40 _60 __>_60

____ ~~L R L R I L I RIL'LR___ TOTALNO. OF TREES 2__{ 6 700

54 Ssa _5 20 9 31_4 27_76 ___

Mango ___1 -0.:. Neem 4 1 1 J__ 2 Jamun 1 2 1ji 3

____Chil Bil 131 a 1 2 231 1 Babool 15 7 10 45 42 15 __ 1671 67 ___Sirsa 2 20 8 ___I 20 10

Peepal ………… __ iT 1 - __ __ Paker 1I 1-

Eucalyptus 2 6 22 ___ 2 6 26

Gular 3 3 - Madina 2 - 2

____Mix 23 ___23 -

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~229170

TOTALNO. OF TREES. .399 55-56 Sisam 5 5 14 47 48 31 ,-. 8 85

Mango - - 4 11 Neem 1 1 13 2 Jamun 11 2 - ChilBil 13 2 11 1 26 1

____Babool 19 16 37 80 38 2 115 77

____Sirsa 6 4 5 6 5 16 10

Paker 1------

_____ Bale 1-

____Eucalyptus 2 5 1 3] 5

_____ ular 1 3 1j

_____ ther~ 2- 2

____Arioon ______2 ______2__

____Mix 13

______~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~26 196 TOTALNO. OF TREES 452

56-57 Sisam 3 4 26 20 7 ______27 33 ChilBil 1 I 1 2 1

Babool 5 4 2 19 36 14 ___ _4 3 37 Sirsa 1 1 3 :1 4

_____Eucalyptus 1 1 5 1 1 7 Gular 1 1 -

Mix 32 ______I_3_2 I II I II I 107 ~~~~~~~~~~~~82 ______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 189 57-58 Sisam 5 {13 68 52 7 1- 73 7 ____Chil Bil -2 11 2 1 _1 5

____Babool I__0 2 101 77 63 30 1 83 110

___Eucalyptus __2 6-19

TOTAL NO. OF TREES __354______

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depantment,Lucknow, India 4-36

ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services forUttar Pradesh Stare Roads Project - Environmental Assessment (Phase I) DIIV Conisultalits UV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 3040 I 40-60 >60 __L RR L Rn L R|L R L 1 R L R 58-59 Sisam - 13 7 5 6 14 I | :1 __ 33 14 _____ Mango ___ -1 Neem 3 10 5 5 3 18 _____ Jamun = - 12= 1. __ 3

_____ Babool 3 47 148 21 2 148 73 ___ Chil Bil 21 2 10 6 5 1 __ 36 9!

______Sirsa 1 26 26 1

______Eucalyptus 84 84 -

FM___mu 2 2 -

______Paker 3 1 1 3 2 Gular 3 2 1 4 2 Banyan 1I 1

_ _ Bale1_

Kaitha - - 2 ______Semar 2 1 . 3 ____Arjoon1- 1 Mix 23 23 Mix_ 23______- 385 116

______TOTALNO. OF TREES _ _ 501 _59-60 Baboo 152 12 22 13 66 25 3 _ __ f 202 91 Mix - 63 ______= =__ =__ =__ = = = =202 154 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 356 6-661 - -- isam | ! 41 l } _ 71

|Neem | l l l Il l | - ,21 .| __ 2 2 Babool 53 4 2 12 6

P~eepal __*l

___ |_Paker 2 2 -! L____Gular - i ___ 2 1 22- t___| Jamun _ _ _ _| 1 | -.|. 1 __ 1 ___ __ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~9016 TOTAL NO. OF TREES | 106 61-62 Sisam 1 1313 23 2 3316 Babool 3 30 5 6 20 8 282_|4 44 ______|Bhelwar _ 1 3_ 3__ 3_ 26 t1 _ _53 - Paker I1. I

L__ I Banyan ______! 1 l ___ '1 1 -

______| Arjoon __ l II __ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~117611 t__ | |. _ __ I 1 1 | 6 1 TOTAL NO. OF TREES | 1781

62-63 Baboo l 27 491 7 16 4 _ 12j 7238 70

L____ Sisam --41 5 _ 11 !

L___ Eucalyptus |_ __ __ -:I 1Z | ] t l Banyan _ _ J 1

_Peepal _ _ | ____ t_ _ __ | l z|1

Governmentof UnarPradesh, Public Works Department. Lucknow, India 4-3 7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UnarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

JROUTE4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree 60 |

1 63-64 t L R |L TOTAL|RJ|L NO. OF |RjLTREES |R |i R| |R L 155 63-64 Sisam __ - 1 41 12~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 9 10 9 Neem = = = |2 = = = 2 = Babool 49| 16 12 4 1 12 70 Bhelwar _ i 1 _ _ Peepal = 1 1 1 2 1

Eucalyptus _ 1 _ 1 Banyan = I =- 27 ZIL- - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2782 TOTAL NO. OF TREES _ _ 109 64-65 Sisam 4 63 16 7 1 16 74 Jamun 2 - Babool 7 _ 5 39 28 16 40 55

I ___ =__ ======~ 58 129 TOTAL-NO. OF TREES 187 65-66| Sisam 71 18 30 8 37 27

Neem j||1 K P 2 _5 4 Babool 4 1 7 42 20 1 3 3 31 59

| Sirsa t t 1 ___ 1 - Lasoda 2 1 1 1 1 4 Peepal 1 *''f< 1::]J? 2 ;

_____ Other __

| Arjoon t1 I 1 ______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7697 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 173 66-67 Sisam T_1T114 17 15 | 81 66 34 95 132

| Babool | | 69 29 27 40 94 7 _ 190 76

_ Sirsa 199 1 1 21 27 47 30

______I TOTAL |332 1 ______238 ______TOTAL NO. OF TREES 570 167-68- Sisam 14 9 10 | 27 10 8 34 44 I___ Babool 106| 78 87 142 130 14 | 323 234 Sirsa 9 2 7 1 10 9

__--___- _------_ 1 t | | | | | | | 1 367 287 68-69 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 654 |_6869_ | Sisamr 5 91 4 16 1 ] 1 2 |___ |_Babool |__ 35 88 26 212 |159 32 3 | 220 j 35

I_ _ I_ I I I i I T I I -I IJ_ _1 230 360 |______TOTAL NO. OF TREES _ 590 69-70 Sisam 6 8 S 7 12 | 31 54 20

____ |_Babool 24 561 30 126 j 98 38 2 152 222

*____| Arjoon _ 8 2 101 1 2 | __ 11 12 |__ | Sirsa 1 1 | 218 254 TOTALNO. OF TREES 472 1 70-711 Sisar t | | !11 I 61 41 2 1 .1 |Neem j j | | i | | 1 |- [ ll

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department.Lucknow, India 4-38 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Unar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConSultantsBV September2001

ROUTE4 - B3ILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(crti) - Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 20-301 30-40 40-60 >60 L. R L R L R L R L R L R

____Babool 64 56 28 ___ 2 56 94-

____Paker 2 1 1 13 2

Arjoon 3; __- 31

______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 174 - 71-72 Sisam 2 16 7 1 1 17 10

Mango 3.<1 i4.!4 __3 5 Sirsa 1 4 2.1 5 3 Paker 2 1 3 1 1 1 6 3

Lasoda 2 2 -

Gular 11 - Babool 1- 1

Bhelwar 5 ___ 2 __ Semar- Neem 11 1- 3

______~ ~ ~~~~~~~F34 3 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 67 72-73 Sisam 5 85 33 38 1 6 I.123.1 44 Mango ~~ I 0 11

_ _ Neem 1 1 2 3 1 4 4 jamun .-5 . .-1 -5 1 Babool 12 36 5 36 17

ChilBil 5 2 7 -

____Sirsa 7 21 3 ___2 10 Shammer 2 2

Other - - 6 1 3 __6 _

____Eucalyptus 12~ __ _ 12!

___Kadamb 11__ __21 Bhelwar 11_____ I__

Semaf~11 __ __ 2

Gular _ _ i______I_

Peepal .i~ __ I

Mix 41 41~~~~~~~~~~~Il

Mix 41 1______~~~~~~~~~236!10 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 346 73-74 Sisam 1 .;=.>j 36. io 38 21~

Mango ____ 2_ _ 7__I -

Neem __I

Jamun ____11 1

Bhelwar ______1I

Babool I_ 10 24 41 91 __ 2 34

______3 5 Bare __ _ _ 4_t______Kaitha i-

__ _ _ _ Gi lar _ _ _ _I ______2_ __ _ _

__ __ ChilBil . _ _ 2 2__ 1 Paker______] __ _ _ _ 1 J J _ _ 1-

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Luczknow, India 43 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (FCC) Servicesfor UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) OHV CornsuttanrsBV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

______Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <:10cm f 10-20 20-30 1 30-40 40-60 1 >6b 1

______~~~LR L R LIR L R Li R L R LR

__ _ _ Madina 331J______

______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO, OF TREES 173 74-75 Sisam 17 2 1[ 121 29

___Mango __1 3 f4 Neem 1 9 1 1 1 i 10 4 jarnun11

____Babool 4 1 4 j. 6 1

_____SirsaI 1 2 2 1 33

___ Peepal- - - -- 1 -

____Paker 1 2 2 1 4 Chil Bil 5 5 Bate1- 1 JackFruit- 1

Gular ------2 - 2 __ Mix 7 6z z _7 6 ______~~~~ 47 ~56 TOTALNO. OF TREES 103

75-76 Sisam . 6 4 40 23 1 33 41

_____Mango .- 1

ChiIBiI 4 1 2 2 10 16 3

Sirsa .2- 2 - Eucalyptus 1 3 3 3__ 4 Paker 1 2 1 I 1 3 Kaitha……2 - Peepal 12i 1

__ __ - - ___ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~6058

TOTALNO. OF TREES J __ 118 76-77..Sisam 6 110 11 55 11 2~1 __I 71 23~ Mango 1 1:7 *.. ' '17 .2 1 3 3 Babool 52 14 j 19 2 Chil Bil 6 ……… jT 6 1 Sirsa 121 14 7 1 14 19

____Eucalyptus 33_ 16____ 6__ 7 j 6 56

____Neem 3 3

Mix 20 28 ___ _ 281 20

______1 ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~148112 7

- - ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 275

77-78 Sisam 2 0 8 4 0 1241 110 351 170 16

Mango _____ 1 ______

SirsaT 1 __ 1 -

_ _ _ Paker__ __ ~1]_ _- 1 -Mix_ _ _- -i _ _ I I 28 ______I _ 1_ _ I_ _ _ Z_ _ f_ E~~~~~~~~I I ______J~~~~~~ 200 168

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India .4-40 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm). Total Km Tree 10-20 20-30 I 30-40 40-60 > 60

______~L IL R I L R I R FL RL RI _ _

______~TOTALNO. OF TREES 368I

78-79 Sisam 25 1 10 65 50 26 __ _ 86 92J

Neem 5 2 3 ______2~ _8

____Babool 18 2 53 15 12 17 83

-__Chi IB il 3 2 3 2 ___ _8 21

____ ucalyptus 19 __ 19 Kaitha ~~~~~~~~~~~~44

_____Badhar __

____Mix 38 1~- __38 -

- - I. ______- L______~~~~174187 ______~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 361 79.80 S7isam 30 18 116 82 70 43 216 144

____ Mngo -- ~__ 2 4 Balbool 4 3 10 2 5 19 5

Ch-ilBil 5 12 11 12 1 2 _ 26 17

Sirsa 7 1 1 1 ___2 8

Arjoon 1 2 ___3 - Eucalyptus 1 7 26 5 7 32 Kaitha 1___5 4 Neem 1- 2

Jamun ___t-.1

____ 1 ~~~~~~~~280217 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 497

80-81 Sisam - - Hi2 28 10 :I.1 471 44

Babool 681 23 125 1129 75 38 __ __268 190

ChitBit - ~~23 4~ 201 15 10 3 __ 53, 22 Sirsa T~ ~~~~~~3 5 4 1~ 1 __ _ 8,

Arjoon- - ~ ~ ~2 ~ ~5- ~ ~ 11 ___ 7_

Shammer .

380 272 ______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 652

81-82 Sisam 2 39 60 18 ___57 ____Mango J 213 101__ _ i± 1

Neem 2___ 2 __

Sirao - I _ 25_2 16 25

____Paker - 4 ~'2j ___ 4_ 12 '2 1 ______Ashok ____ 311 3-______Gular ______...... 1____ Peepal ______1 Jamun 2 2

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 295]

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-41 ProjectCo-ordinrating Consultants IPCCIServices forUrtar Pradesh State Roads Project, EnvironmentalAssessment (phase D.) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribuition(cm) Total KM Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 i30-40 40-6 >6

____ ~~L R L R L R LI R L R L R 82-83 Sisam 7- 16-1 5 166f 14 Babool 7 13 13 2 6 221 19- Mango 1 2 2 1 Neem 1 2 Paker 2-- 2 - Sirsa 1-

Mix 5 . 5

______~~~~~~~~~481 3 TOTALNO. OF TREES 85

83-84 Sisam 10 34 4 - 48

Mango,~. . _ 2 60J

___ Neem __ 1112 - 1

,Jamun K1' __ 1 32

Babool ___34 19 __ 60,__ 79 34 Chil Bil- - 2 2 6 .2 8 Paker 2 2 -

Eucalyptus - 1

_ _ Mix 3 4. 4

______~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES…279 84-85 Sisam 36 14 75 109 125 442' 37 167

Babool __14. 30 1. 40 1 84

____Chil Bil 60 11 20 5 15 3 95 19

_ _ _ Arjoon34,3_ _ _ _

____Eucalyptus ____ 1 35 34_3 35 37

Neem .- I__1

__ _ _ Mix 3 3

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3721308 TOTALNO. OFTREES 680

85-86 Sisam 4 1 4 - -1 8

jamun I 21 . _1 2. Chil Bil 1 I -

____Eucalyptus 18 581 220 4 581 242

Paker 1 2 __ _ 1 2 Babool 4 1 - 5 Gular 1- 1 Mango) 13'_ 4 ___ NeemPeepal 3 -E3[ 6 E I 12 585 277- TOTAL NO. OF TREES 862

86-87 Neem __4 7 1 6 5 5[ _ _ _ 12 25

____Jamun ;2 2 2

____Baboot __ 12 16 22 222 28

___ __ Eucalyptus ______94 2__ _ _ 2__ 1__ 94 4 ____Kaitha 12 .2 - Sisam___ __ 1_ _ 2 6 sf ______1

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department. Lucknow, India .4-42 ProjectCo.arclinating Consultants (PCC) Services (or UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHiVConsultants L3V September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <10cm i 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 L R

___Banyan _ II _ __ Paker I1- 1 _Mi~ ~~~x __9___9_ -

TOTALNO. OF TREES 401 87-88 Sisam 1 722 i[ 1 27 2_ Mango I _

____Chil Bil 112 Babool 52 21 35 3 1 90 22 Eucalyptus 16 138 109 6 138 131

____Peepal 1 -

Paker [11 -

Neemun…2_ - 2 …-munO260 161

TOTALTREES -~ NO. OF ~ ~ ~ 26 416 88-89 Sisam 12~~~~~~TTATRES41267O23O1 88 a89oSi37 11 70 20 97 320 310 B_uabolypu 407362 1297 320 317

Eiusaly4us36212 6 - 148

___Chil Bil 2 2 4 - Other 8 8 -

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~578325

TOTAL NO. OF TREES______903 89-90 Sisam - _ -F67 89 41 1 8 1 08 ____Mango '1

Chil Bil - -1 1-i

____Babool 3 4 2 ___4 _5_ Eucalyptus 67 444 254 6 i444 327

___Sirsa 1 __ 9 2 _ - _ _ - 12

_ _ Neem -- 1 _ _ _ _1_

Arjoon __ _ 10 _ 21___ - _ I 29]6

TOTALNO. OF TREES -1,006

90-91 Sisam 6 9 15 163 157 ______~178 112 Neem 1 1 7 Arioon 2___2

Chil Bil __22 22j 6 _ _ 22 28 Babool I 5~ 15 18 2 I24 17 Sirsa 20 5 39 12 63 10 1 122 27

Eucalyptus 60 394 271 17 __ __ 394 348

____Kaitha :.43'.~YC2 . 33'-i Y3 J1 ~7 5

Paker __1 2 1 4 1 2 7 4

Gular -2 __ j1 __ - 2 1~ 4 3

_ _ Other __I 25 2 5 Banyan j _ _ _ _ _ t1______

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depariment.Lucknow, Inidia 4-43 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshSlate Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) 0HV ConistiltantsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

______~Girthwise Distribution (cmn)Toa Km Tree <10cm 120 1 20-30 r30-40 40-60 >60 _ _ _ 7~~~~~L R~ LR L_ 1 R L7 RL R Mix 118 ~ ' ~]_ 18~

______I I. ____ L...... i~~~~~~~~9-76] 553 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 1,529

91-92 Sisam 10 20 3 1 19 5 _ _ _ _ 1 49 361 Neem 2 2 I 21 21

Arjoon 1 7 28 66 57 45 1021III~

Chil Bil 6 28 7 7 1 35 1

Babool 24 2 28 84 821 9 .1341 95 Bhelwar 8 1 61 1169

Eucalyptus ___ 67 67 j.

Other 3 ____1 _ _ 4 - Sirsa 1T Gular 112 Madina1- 1

______15 33 Mix 15 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~41033 *TOTAL NO. OF TREES 741

92-93 Chil Bil 150 25 141 28 11 10 __ __213 25

____Babool 78 9] 22 105 __183 31 Eucalyptus 5 28. 5 28

Sisam 1 3 - 4 Sirsa1- 1

Paker1 - 1

Mango - - - -- 5

Jamun - ~-~- 2 Mix 46 _ 3-J 46 ------____ - I ~~~~ ~~~~~~~401143

TOTAL NO. OF TREES -- __ - -544 93-94 Sisam 26 70 1 21 1117~ 1

_ __ Mango _ _ . .*1 1 Neem 11 2 1 3 1 jamun Y2. ~ 4 ;3 1

Arjoon I11 12 1 10 ___33 1 Babool 3 12 44 Z ~44 15. Sirsa 1 2 1 4

Mahua - T 2 _ __1__ 2 - Eucalyptus 1 240]I 2~ 4__2

Paker -2 I1 2 I

Other -6 17] 6_ _

___ TOTAL NO. OF TREES ___299

.9-5 Sisam __J14[ 18 25 3II II2___ 1 21 41

__ _Neemo _ _ 6 _ I 9 10 1 5!I j16 15

__ _ _ Arjoon _ _ 51 - _ _ 6______Babool __ __ 01 7 _ 6 40 15 ._ _ _ __1 70 99

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,,Public WorksDepartment. Lucknow, India 44 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHv ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

i ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) I otal ,Krn Tree < 10 cm 10-20 i 201-30 30-40 |40-60 > 60 L R L R L R L R |L R L jR iL R Sirsa ~~~~~24 2 19 1 4 _25 25S -BaI = = =e = = Eucalyptus 1 6 _7 =Peepal _ __='1 __ 3 9

TOTAL NO. OF TRrEES 331 95-96 Sia = = = 30 8 7 = 9 37 . Neem 1 3 : :;.4 1 Jamun======-! 1 1 Arjoon _4 1 4 1 Babool 13 3 33 53 5 __66 41 Chil Bil _ 4 24 7 18 20 31 42

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 2401 96-97 |Sisam | | 1 | 5 114 | 14 8 19 | 231 Neem | | 1 | 31 2 1J4 3| Arjoon | 3 | |.| 3 | |Babool | | | 9 | 4 4 1 17 | 71 51 201 261 |Chil Bil | | | | | 2 | 2 | . | ~~Banyan| l l l | | 1 - |Mango 3- - 3 |Gular | 1 - | 1| L 1 49 56-] TOTAL NO. OF TREES '105| 97-98 [Sisam 201 41 87; 681 311 921 118 Neem| | | | | | !~~~~~~~~'61 51 | | 17| 61 Arjoon 1S5 25 1 19 83 24 1 1 23 43! |Sirsa | 2 1 | 3 | 2| 32| 3 4471 5| |Chi] Bil | 25 | 50| 1 T 5 1 80 |Lasoda I | 25 i |30 |27 1 1 82 | |Paker | | 1 | | | * 1| | |Gular | 2| 2 - Eucalyptus| 5 3 3 78 |Mix |16| 8| I 16 | 18| |Babool 4 1 111| | 2| -| 271 |Mango l 3| l l | l1 30 |Madina l l l l l ! l l l l l l-

TO-VAL NO). OF TRE>ES 74631 98-99 |Sisam I | | 1 |146 | 6 |40 | 1 | 186 | 8 |Ma'ngo | | | - |jamun l l l l l:. IBabool I I I1 4 10 I 1 141 - | ~~ChilBil | | 4 | | 1 | - |Lasoda 1 | 1 |

Governmentof Uttar Pradeshi,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 445 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (PIhase ti DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) f____otal Km Tree <10cm 10D-20 20-30 j30-40 40-60 1 >60 L RRL R L R L R L R L

Sirsa -11 14 4 - 19

Eucalyptus 54 ___ 1 - 55 Mix 56 j- 56

______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES34

99-100 Sisam -. 36 3 10 4 1_ 46J7

____Babool 35 29 52 1387[42

____Sirsa 2 3 2 ______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~13552

______~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 187 100-101 Sisam 34 38 22 7 56 45

____Babool 86 24 18 24 104 ____Sirsa I___11 18 - 29 __ eem 2 j7 - 9 1 ~~~ ~~~~~~80187 TOTALNO. OF TREES 267 101-102 Sisam 71 22- 93

Babool __17 13 - 30 ___Ashok __ ~2

Peepal - 4 -

Paker __2 1 2 2 1.11 1 7 4 Sirsa I

_ _ Neem 111- 3

____Mix 10 - I10 13 141 TOTALNO. OF TREES 154 102-103 Sisam 18 6 24 1of 1 -~K1. 36J 25 ___Neem 1 1 4 314 2 71 8 Paker 2 1 - 3

__ _Gular - - 1 5 1 1 2 1 9 2

_____Madina I 1 1 Babool 4 1 - 5

_____Eucalyptus ___1 1 - 2

__ __ Chil Bil 3 1 - 4 Banyani - 1

____Peepal 1- 1

Arjoon 4 10 - 14

liii- -. ~~~~~~53166 ______- - ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 119 103-104 Sisam 6 32 696_ 3 10 34~i -12: 14: 25 125

Mango _____1 Neem 2 22 33' 6

__ _Ja'mun __- ~I I- -

Eucalyptus __ 1871 ____ 187 __

____Babool 3___2 - 6

_ _ _ Sirsa ]__

__ __ Peepal ______

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow. India 44 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCO) Services for UllarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DOHVConsultants E3V September2001

ROUTE4 - BILH-AURTO KATRA

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 304 40-60 >60 I R

____ ~L R L R L R L R L. R LiR __ _

Arjoon 12 18 __ __ 301 217 16] ______~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 386

104-105 Sisam - 1 6 22 1 91 4f 7 141131 26[ s1I ____Mango 2 1 1 2__ -_ Neem 7 1 7 31 9__ 10

____Babool 28 5 2 30______

Imli i1 -

____Eucalyptus 234 ____ 234 -

Jamun- -…______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~27792

______~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 369 105-106 Sisam 1 3 10 4 ____Neem __2 2 ____Babool 4 77 7 71 I_____ 11 84

Eucalyptus __ ~ __15 - __ _1 5 -

_ __ Sirsa 10 4 _ _ _ _ F- 14 1 ______38 104 TOTALNO. OF TREES 142

106-107 5isam 14 11 - 1 . -~2 3 Neem 1 1 3 81 1 5 5 14

Babool 26 44 194 96 67 I1661 261 ChilBil 4 J 3 17 14

Sirsa I _ j

Mahua 1 ____ -

_ _ _ jamun ______1-

_____- -______1______~~~~~~ ~~~~205[9

TOTAL NO. OF TREES _ ____ 496~

107-108Sisam I26 12 1 ____ 7 3 __25 Mango 7.112 1K Neem 2 2 141 6 14 1

Babool 6 9 9 2__ __ 15

___Sirsa ………… I61 -

____Eucalyptus 4 1 4 ____ Paker 3 1 3 Chil Bil ~~~~13 1 _31 1 __ __ am un 1 ______- ______~~~~74 56 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 130

108-109 Sisam ____ 9 __ __ 16

Mango 1 31 _ _ _Neem 2___ _ 6-

__ _Mahua 27I62 _

Sirsa _ _ _ _ - - 3 1 1 _

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-47 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UtitarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase i) DHVConsuiian;s ilv September2001

ROUTE4 -BILHAUR TO KATRA

-~~~~~~ C~~~~irlbwise Distribulion (cm) Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 3040 40-60 >60

______~ R L R' LI R LZIIR LIL R i9

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES - __ 164

109-110 Sisam -6 25 27 3 :2';.1 6 5~ 9 6

__ _Mango 7 _

Neem 1 1 7 8j 8 9

Mahua 2 2_ _

___ Babool - 7 15 7 18 10 40 171 Kanji I. 1 2 Sirsa 16 3 - 10

Eucalyptus 9 - 9 Paker 11 - 2 Mix 8 3 a__j 3,

______I ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9988 TOTALNO. OF TREES 4187] 110-111Sisam S 4 16 s 221

Babool ___ 20 20 20 33 10 25 50 781 Sirsa1- 1

Mango __. I_ 2

_ _ Neem 1 1 Arjoont 2 10 2 10

__ __ Mix 3 _ _ _ 3- 61 114

_____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES ~ . - -- 175 111-112 Babool 40 18 1 2 58 3 Sisam 111- 3

ChilBil -- 1 __- 1

Mix 19 - -19 -

______*---t-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7--_7

TOTAL NO. OF TREES -84_ __ - _____

112-113 Sisam - - [ 3 3 2 4__ 5__ Neem - 1'-i-- - ___Babool 20 22 21 1 22 421

Eucalyptus ___3 37 1 3 38 jamun 1:2- 3

…………… ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~31881

TOTAL NO. OF TREES -11-9__ __

113-114 Miamg - 2 1 ___1113_ 25_ Mano_ __ _ > ! . :5 11 71

Babool 7 7______

Shammer -2- -_34____37

Arjoon __ 2 21 ____Chil B3il 3 3-iI41

___Eucalyptus I - I3 __ aker -2 _.-

___ _ Gular I_ _ 1 1

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-48 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1} DliIVCullsullInis B3V September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

I ______Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 i 20-30 3040 40-60 > 60

____ ~~L R L IL L IL LR Jamun

Madina .i 2 z12 -_ _

-OA NO OF TREES ~ - -1571

114-115 Sisam - 12 1 2 __ 6 Mango _ [ i

Jamun _ __ __ 5 _ _ _ - Neem K13 < 5 '25 1 25

Paker ------Babool1

_ Eucalyptus -

_ __ _ Sirsa - 2

_ __ _ Kanji I ____Arjoon 2-} 2_

TOTALNO. OF TREES 67 115-116 Sisam 1 -4j - 1'6 2

Neem ~ ~ ~~~~32 ~ 2' 4 '~6 4 13 Babool 1 ~~2 11 3

Paker11

Chil Bil 2 - 2

Madina ____ I______- - 1

TOTAL NO. OF TREES______42

116-117jamun -I 1 Neem 22111___ 2 3

Mahu1 2 _ 2 - Eu-calyptus 67~] 107 I 6 107

__ _ _ Peepal _: 3____ 3) 1

Paker______

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 227 117-118 Sisam I42) 130 11 1 1 44 142

___Mango …_ 4. 4- 7

______2)Mahuia22 2

____Peepal V 1 I~ 2 Paker ) - -F I13 3.

B~abool _ 4

Government of Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 44 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Utiar PradeshiState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssess-nernt (Ph?se 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILH-AURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) ____ Tta Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 f >60 L LR I R I _L _ L_ R

__ _Neem __ I 5 16

_____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 216 118-119Sisam 47 39 3 11 7 ~-,J ~~ . 2 52

____Neem 1I~L 1 3 2

___ _ Sirsa1-_ _

ImliT1 - 1

___Kanjii _

____Peepal -4 - 2

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5559 TOTAL NO. OF TREES .114

119-120Sisam 37 21 40 5 _ -- 78 26 Jamun ……{___2 - Babool ji 1 1 1 Mahua I -

____Kanji _____1 2 14 1 2 16

Sirsa 2 2 -

Peepal ___ 1 1, ____Chit Bit 3~ - 3 Teak- 1 Semar1- 1

IArjoon 36 - 3 Mix 2 2

1 ____ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8787 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 174

12D-121 Sisam I 1 6 2 20 ____ 3 37 Mango 2 2

____Babool 11 - Sirsa 2 2 2 2

ChilBil _ 8 14 1 14 9

Peepal P2 -

Kanji 19 3 - 13 Mahua 2-! - 1 24 64

______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES - _ -- 88

121-122Sisam - I 100 21T 61 27 _ 163 53 Mango j 77: 2 8 Baboot 7 7 -

Arjoon 23 23 -

Eucatyptus 3 1 1 5 -

Peepal .. 4

_ __ _ Paker 2 - 21

_ _ Kanjii _ _ 4~ _ _ 4 - 8 ____Neem r2 - 2

j__amun__- _

Madina j j ___[ J__21 I I I - 2

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-50 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessmentt (phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

G,irth wise-Distribution (cm) Tota'l Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 j 40-60 >60

______L -R L R LLIR R L IRI _ __ Mix 13 _ _ 11.. 1 . 1

______~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 291

122-123 Sisam 35 26 12 12 __ 7222 2 49~ 42

Jamun - ______-- __ _ __ 3 3

Babool ___2 8 13 150 5 i5 163

Arjoon 5 5 - Sirsa 9 2 3 2 12

Eucalyptus ___ 55 3 1 59 -

Peepal _____ 2 1 2

Paker __ 2 2 2 1 2 5

___nya71I -

Mix 25 24 _ 25. 24 162 248 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 410

123-124Sisam 1 4 1 - : ~ ~ 1 5 5 Neem ___ 2 9 6

Jamun11 -

__ __ Mahua _ _1 -

Eucalyptus ___24 2 11 1 3 35 Chil Bil Peepal i~ 2 Paker 3 1 3 6 8 1 4 6 3 1 21 15 teak I~F - Madina 1 4 1 4 Imli <1 Mix 2 37 2 37

_ _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4910 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 153 124-125 Sisam 1

_____Paker 2 5 2 6 3 5 2 3 3 5 12 24

Babool _ __3 ___ 5 ___8 Imli -51- - -

Neem 2 .3 - 5 Peepal .1- 1

_____Mix 48 40 48 40 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ - I60. 80

_ _ _ _ - - ~~~~~~~~TOTAL,N&.OFTREES -~140

125-126Sisam __ 13 21 16 30 59 ~7771 81

Neem 1 1 - Babool 6 8 6 8

___ __ Arloo _ __ 38 15 3353 33

_____Eucalyptus ___94 1 79j__ 23 __ 94 202

__ _Paker 1 1 ~ 11 1 3 2

____Shammer ………… 1

Other 7 __ _ 7 -

___ Chil Bil 6 4__ fl

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-51 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase It OHV Consultant5BV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILH-AURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm)Toa Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 3040 1 44 >60~

_____ Gular I~ ~R L R L R L R II R - _

___Peepalj 1 -__

TOTALNO. OF TREES - -576 126-127 Shamnmer 2 1 3

____Sisam 2 21 13 19 18 4 ___40 37

____Mango ___ 2 4 2 4 Neem. 3 5 8 -

_ __ _ Mahua _ _ _ _ _ I_ -

____Babool 11 7 4 7 15 Arjoon 43 38 60 32 103 70

____Sirsa 3 7 1 2 1 5 9 Eucalyptus 87 118 22 87 140

____Peepal __

Banyan CU1 -

Gular11 - Semar1- 1

Paker1 - 1

____Madina 3 5 - 8 Mix 12 12 -

______j. ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~276295 - - ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 571 1-27-128 Sisam 7 26 1 20 46 8

Mango ____* <5 1 5 Jamun 7 1 7

Mahua ___-8 7 8 7

Babool 2 9 12 5 ___ 2 14 16

_ _ Sirsa 1 2 . 3 Eucalyptus 131 31 181 19 31 _331 ChilBil 51 1 79 1 51 181 2 Paker 1I1 1 . Kanji I- 4 Neem 1 2 -:29~0. 379 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 669

128-129 Sisam 24 20 ]44 - Mango .1 11 6 12 Neem 2 2 -

jamun -4..11 5 11 Mahua .9 .10 9 10

CItilBil 43 20 __ 60 __1 23 -

____Babool 9 3 I 3 0

____Eucalypu .81 92 38 - - 92 119

___Paker 3 3ij 1 3 2 Banyan * Ii.

Govemnmentof'Unar Pradesh, Public Works Department,Lucknow, India -- 4-52 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (FCC)Segvices forUttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) HCnslnttV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

______~Girthwi se Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-0 20-30j -30-401 40-601 >60 ______- -i ~~ ~~~~~~~~Lj R ______~~~LR L R L R IL RL R~ t A

_____ Peepal 1.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~288 167 TOTALNO. OF TREES 455

129-130 Mang -. L31 13 23 13 Jamu U1 7 10 7 11

ChilBil __11 -

_____Eucalyptus ___22 80 58 80 80 Shammer11

Peepal ___-l1

Paker I3 - 2 __ - 1 5 Sisam 3 4- 8

____Banyan- 1

NWeem $1 - 2

____Madina - 1

______Mix ~~48135 48 135

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~162256 ______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 418 130-131 Sam32 3 7 17 1 1 40 21 Mango ~:;j.;~: ~'.-'M0: 11 11 ____lamun K 5 2 Sirsa 3 11 3

___Chil Bil __ 9 29 25 12 21 54

____Babool 12 2 1 3 ___12 5 Eucalyptus 3 46 11 46 4 Shammer I Semar 1I - :2

Paker 2 - 2 Mahua- Peepal

_ __ Madina ______J 1 _ _ I__ Mix 48 1401 48 140

______1______~~~~1851247

______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 432 131-132 Sisam 3 3 4 7 15 2 11 Mango ___ 1 1129 2

___Neem _ 21

__ _jamun _ _ _ 9 -2 9 2 Paker 2 1 Eucalyptus -- 1 7 7~

_____Chil Bil 20 18 5 - 43

_ __ Mix 13 __ _13 - * 1 ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~5377 ______- - ~~TOTAL,NO. OF TREES 130

132-133 Sisam ___7-__ 12

____Mango ___12 12 12 12

_ __ Neem _ _3JL h l2_ _ 3_ __ __ jamun _ __ 2j22 1

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Publ'ic Works Department, Lucknow, India 45 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services tor Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHIVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILH-AURTO KATRA Z

i ~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) ~Total Km Tree < cm 10-20 20-3{) 30-40 40-60 >60 L R L R L R L R R L R Mahua3 Shammer Peepal~~~~~~~~ Paker

Other.1 -

Babool I 4 _ ____

M__Mx 1 123- -__ _ 123 - 13 2 1 -I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~563 TOTALNO. OF TREES - - [- 56 3 133-134 Sisam 6 1 23 ~ z2vE[ 3 32 Mang-o- -3 3

Neem 3 3 ___~. 6 14 ___Chil Bil-1- 1 ____Babool .30 2 3 4 133 7 Jamun . 2 4

Mahua 1 - Lasoda1- 1 Semar1 1 48 63

TOTALNO. OF TREES - 1 134-135 Sisam 1 4 3 4 5 6 Mango j_1 - Neem 3 7 13 7 16

____Chil Bil 25 2 10 12 18 BareI

_ _ Paker I2 15 __ 8 -

___ Babool 2 __ 1- 3

_____Eucalyptus) - 1

__ _Semar1

_ _Mix 123 _ __23 - * - - - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 45 TOTALNO. OF TREES 9 135-136 Sisam ___ .1U 0 11

Neem __-- - 2 7 2 7

jarnun __2 __ _ ~K '

Babool ___ Z 2 2 ___I2 5 Arjoon ___7 8 12 128 -

Peepal __ __ _11 4 2 5

Paker - 4 2 1 _3

__ _ Mango _ __ _~_ _ .

TOTA-L NO. OF TREES 98

136-137 Sisam 111 6 1 .. 2 L1 81 4 Mango __ 8 27 28J 27

_ _Neem 12 3 7______Mahua jj2 4] 2

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanrtment,Lucknow, India ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCO Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsLiv September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30- 30-40 40R0 >60 L L R L R LR L R L R L R Babool 2 2 3 10 3 12 8

Shammer 4 4 - Chil Bil 23 18 22 73 13 24 58 115 Sirsa 2 - 2

____jamun1 Mi . _ ___ _ I Mimx 13 _ -_1 13

______1231 175 TOTALNO. OFTREES 298 137-138 Sisam 1 2: 2 3

Mango ' 2 15 43 15 Neem 1 7 1 7 Mahua = 10I | 9 Babool 5 6 9 | 1 6 1 5 Chil Bil 12 1 2 6 1 18 4 Peepal | - - 1

___ mli1 -

Paker 1 - 10

| |Jamun_Mix 13 _ 13 I -1 D1 1 4 I 1 =:t= = < ~~~~~~~~82|77 TOTALNO. OF TREES 159 138-139 Sisam - 3 1 8 4 10| 1 , 22| 8 |_____ Mango ½4?;:|J4 2' 421 42 Neem 1 1 1 1 Mahua 10 8 Babool | 5 6 18 6 23

|___ |_Chil _ Bil 161 B8 18 4 ! _ 18 28 Peepal … … ……………… I - {

_Sirsa _ 1 5 - 6

Semar | 1 - _ - I 1011 117.i TOTAL NO. OF TREES 218 139-140 Sisam 34 5 31 | | 12 | 9 80

Mango _ j5:. 17 15 17 Neem 2 1 13 16 16 16 Mahua _ 53 5 7

Babool 3 1 2 4 1 - 1 - 5 6 Shammer 3 | | 1 4 -

Sirsa - -2 2 1 _ - 2 3

Paker 2 4 _ 3 1 1 3 6 8 Cular 42 6 - ____Eucalyptus ___34 34 - r___|_ Chil Bil 4 | 4 |Peepal | | l l l I | l l l l l | 2 - 2

| PJepamun l LL ] | | > L_-_ z il| tl l _ 102 144|

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UntarPradesh Staie Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHIVConsuirants BV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILH-AUhRTO KATRA

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution(cm) i Total Kml Tree < 0c 0-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60

j _____ ~~~~L.JR L~R L R L RL R TOTALNO. OF TREES 246 140-141 Sisam 3 I 5 Mango f5 457

____Neem I1

Mahua ______3 3 - Jamun 3 5 3 5

Babool __ 6 14 11 6 25

____Chil Bil 9 1 22 3 41 72 4

Eucalyptus__2 18 - 20

Sirsa 1 6 - 7

Mix 13 - 13

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~130124

__ TOTAL NO. OF TREES 254 141-142 Sisam :T 3 2 ChilBil 38~- 36 - 74 Banyan 1 1 Paker 2 1 - 3

Mango __ .4 7 24 Neem 1 3

Mahua _____2

___Jamun…--2 -

Eucalyptus __ __ 1 .15 -

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~41107 TOTALNO. OF TREES 148 142-143 Sisam 7 17!g 2

Mango __ 9: 24 __9 24j Neem 1 2 33 3 Mahua 1 S.irsa 12 2

Eucalyptus__ - 23 23 - Paker 2 1 .1 1 2 3

Arjoon ___2 2 -

Chil Bil 38 36 74 -

Banyan -V1 -

____ ~~~134 3 2 ~~~TOTALNOOF TREES__16 143-144 Sisam 41 * .~:3~-a4 8 6

Mango ____ '22. -. 18 22 18 jamun .. V I1

Sirsa I - Babool 11

Eucalyptus ___10 37 _____37_

P'eepal __

Paker__1 _ ___ 1 __ _ _j Gular1

I MiK I10: 3j[ I I __L j] I o D 3

Govemmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, tndia -4-56 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Servi ces for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) OHV ConsultantsB3V September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 _____ iFLIRV1TTTiNL;R1~~~~~~~~~~~______L R'

144-143Sisam R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5666 TOTALNO. OF TREES 122 144-145 Sisam~~11 17 8 E*Y 2 4 2

___Mango…- i** - 5 J 6 ___ Neem 1- 2 2 4I 2 lamun 13 I1 141 ___Mahua 2 1 3 1 5,

____Babool 12 *. 12 - ____Arjoon 42 150 132 42 282 79 322 _____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 401 145-146 Sisam 3 2 4 4 7

Mango ___ $ 7 20

Babool- - 1I

Peepal - - -~-2 2T2

Paker 1 _ 3 4 3 5

___Arjoon I 3 . - - - 4 Neem 4 - 4 Mahua . 3 - I Mix 3 3

TOTALNO. OF TREES -74 146-147 Sisam 115 3 .2 161 5

Mango J _ - :3 3~5: 231 35

Mahua __ . __ Sirsa f3 1 3 7 3 1 6

Eucalyptus __ ___ 14 43_ 9____ 1______2_ 221_3 ChilBil ………2 113 NeemT-

jamun - 4

Arjoon 5 - 5 _ _ Mix 2 I- 2 ______I __ _ _ _ ~~~5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~6113-

TOTAL NO. OF TREES __ __ 178

147-148Sisam __ -- [- 21 7 1 -2 1 41___ M____an go 2__I_33_30_35 3 Eucalyptus…4 19 ~4 19 A____rjoon 1026 36__

__ _ _ Mahua…_ _ _ _ 5

______-. ~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 141 148-149 SisamJ 1

_____ ango 28_ 34_28_34 Mahua I- 1___ Babool __ 15 2 7 1 : 9

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Work'sDepartment, Lucknow, India 45 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Urtar PradeshState R~oads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 -,BIIHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wise Distribution(cm) ___ Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 1 30-40 I40-60 j >60 L R ___ I~~~ R ~~L R L L R L R LIR _ _

___Peepal __TI 1 Eucalyptus __41 * S

____Sirsa 1 _ ~2 Paker 1 I

_ _ _ Mix 5 1 i - 5 ______1 ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4656

- ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES10

149-150 Sisam 29 9 4 - 1- 9 34

____Eucalyptus ___24 2 - 26 ____Mango ___ 3Q ~33. 30 33

Neem 5 5 -

___jamun - __ 4,:~ 3 7

Chil Bil - 2 2 1 4 - -4 4

Peepal __ - - - - 1 - Shammer1 1 1

Arjoon __9 11 18 1_ 38 Sirsa !- 1

Mahua-17

TOTALNO. OF TREES 198

1150-151 Sisam -2 7 5 _ 9 12

____Mango - 1O I 1 12 Neem 1 4.3 3 3 Mahua . 1 1

Sirsa11 - Chil Bil 32 3 17' 3 49

_ _ _ Eucalyptus…_ __ __ Shammer1 ___ - ____Babool 1__

___Gular izz-I 27 TOTALNO. OF TREES 108 25-15Sisam - T5 22 20 _____..4 22 28

____Mango '.f 7 10 17 Neem 2 2Zi 6 6 8 Chi( Bil I 1 3 1 4

____Peepal___11

_____Paker 1 2 2 1 ___Shamnmer {1 Babool -_131 4

____Mahua1- _____ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3163_

______~~TOTACNO. OF TREES -106

152-153 Sisam - _ 121 24T21 24 37 ____Mango ___ 13 2 13 22

{Neem__] 22. * 4 2 LJamun 1 82 8 20

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-58 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsuttantsUV September2001

ROUTE4 - BILHAURTO KATRA

______~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total 1 Km Tree < 10 cm 10-0 203 30.401 40-60 > 0 L L R L R L R L RL R

Sirsa j12 1 _ i 3__

Shammer 2 _0 13

Semar 2 2 - Gular- 1

Arjoon - 10

TOTALNO. OF TREES __175

153-154 Sisam 11 16 30 _ 17 45 Mango i3______20:

____Neem3 2

Jamun - - -t ~-M 3 1 ChilBil 24 24 -

____Peepal :,) A2 1 Paker 33 1 Mahua- 3

____Arjoon __6 - 6 Mix 3 94 3. 94

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 238

154-155 Sisam B 6 25 . 2 . 8 41

____Mango . 24 .14 8 40 18

_ _ Neem - - _ - -2 __ 12 3 2

l___amun -' -. * 13 4 5 4 Mahua ~ -ChiI B-i

Peepal ______*2: 2 -

____Arjoon I 224 15 51

Gular 2 13 -

Madina __ 1I -I

Banyan __ 2i

___Badhal - - _ Other 2 4 9-- -. v - Sirsa 2.t- 2

_ 1_ ~~~~~~~~~L~~~~_L~~~~J~~~L4 67 ______~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 210

155-156Sisam __ 325 35 1 1 6 25 .:,A 1 66 41

____Mango ___18 12 18 12~

Neem __2 1 2 ii

Sirsa I15 15 -

Arjoon 43 43 - Paker 311- 2

Mahua __ I

TOTAL NO. OF TREES20

156-1571Sisam I 1 9 18 10 21 .. 3 9 43]

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department.Lucknow, India 45 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultanls IPCO Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 4 - BILHAUR TO KATRA

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) 1 To;al Km Tree <10cm 1020 20-30 30-40 40-60 > 60 L R L R L I R L R L R L R

Mango 3 _ _ == 1 1 6

Neem 1 - 1 3 1 4 Jamun _ 4 .Mahua _ _ 29 9 ____ Sirsa 6 .. 22 1 28 1 Paker 1 2 4 1 1 3 1 6 7 Shammer 1 = = Babool . 10 1 11 Chil Bil 3 3 Imli = =: =- = ,= - 1 Peepal _____ - 1 79 77 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 156

Govemmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanment,tucknow, India 4-60 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Unar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DH\VConsultants BV September2001

ANNEX4.3 SPECIES-WISEAND GIRTH-WISELIST OF TREESIN RIGHTOF WAY (ROW) ROUTE7- BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (cm) | Total Km Tree <10 CtTt 10-20 20-30 -30-40 40-60 >60 L R L R L R L[| R I | R L R 0-1 Neem … … … … … … 2 4 Imli 2! 3 Pakar .1 1 - Peepal ___ 1 1 1| 1 Ashok 7 7 Madina 1 _ _ 1 Sisam 2 2 i.* Kaitha 2 1 larmun- 1 16 11 TOTAL NO. OF TREES . 27 1-2 Sisam 1 4 3 lmli______---i' w^ 1 1 |__ |_Neem 2 1 2 1

|_____ |Jamun 1I==-= - Pakar 1 1 2 - Kanji 1 2 1 2 Kaitha ==._ 2 Madina 1 1 1 1

Other - 4 … ………4 - Mix 4 = = = 4 Sirsha 3 - 3

Ashok - - - 1 2_2 ____ Peepal __ _ 1

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 36

2-3 Sisam 3 4 -Y ' , -4 i 5 | 8 Babool 2 5 1 3 6

|_ | Imli |…- . t-. 3 -

| _ |Neem - - 1 1 2 5 2 2 5 8

|__ |_Mango _ _ :1 1 . -. 4 2. 5 3

Shemmar - 1 - - I - Jamun - - - - s-": 2 1 1

Teak ______4 6

Kaitha -__ __

Badhal - 2 - _ 2 ___ Mix 77

Sirsha _ 1 _ ____1 l_____ iBanyan

| _____ Peepal - - - ___-

___ Mahua . -j

TOTALNO. OF TREES 84

Govemmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Depariment, Lucknow, India 4-61 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradeshi State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 31-40 1 40-60 >60

____ I~ R L R L R L RIL R L R 3-4 Sisam 8 12~ 19 22

Babool - - -- 2 1 - ~ 3 -

Euclpu - 5 3 3 2 2 5 10

__ _Nee 2 ?;. ,:4' 1 4 5 Pakar 2 2 4 -

_____ amun ~' 11 1

Kithta - 12

Sirsha 1 3 1 3

____Madina 1 1 1 1 2 Imli -

____Teak - I Peepal… - I 42 46 TOTALNO. OF TREES 88 4-5 Sisam 6 4 26 24 18 27 65 69

____Babool >1 3 1 ___3 2 Eucalyptus I 1I

____Sirsha 5 5 3 1 10 4 Neem 1 2 4

Pakar - _-4 4 4 4

___Mango .6' t;~ 7 11

____Mahua -

____Banyan1 -

___Chil Bil 2 3 _____5 -

____Mix 3 2 3 2 jGular 1- 1

____Peepal- 1 I 1K- 102 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~99

5-6 Sisam 1__ 3 6 12 13 6 16 8 ~2 30 37

___{Babool __ __ 24 14 25 21 3 31 38

____Sirsha 3 5 4 5 7 Neem 3 2 1 1 4 3

____Mango __ _, 10 17 ShemmerI

___Chil Bil 4__43 7.-

____Bale -1 2

Pakar1 - 1

____jamun ___1 - 2

j ______j _ __ - 89 107

______~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 196 6-7 ~Sisam 1 1 5 2 4 1 i2 -1__12 3'2 107 77

]Babool__3_ _3 25 3 > 1. 25 16 ____3Eucalyptus J _ ____1 12 2 ___1_ 12 3

Goverinentof UttarPradesh, Public Worics Department, Lucknow, India 4-62 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCI Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConisultants BV September2001

ROUTE 7- BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (crm) | Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 | 20-30 30-40 40-60 > 60 1| L R L R L R L R L R L R 1 R Sirsha 2 1 3 3 5 2 5 10 Peepai = 2 Neem _ 311 3 1 Mango `:2!- `. 2 '- 1-. i~ ,T P 4 23 25j -Shammer 1 Jamun 3 Kaitha .I--1 _ 3:3_ .2. 21 4 Chil Bil 2 2 -

Other __ 8 Mix 16 3 16 3 Badhal 3 _ 1 1 Pakar __ _ .l 1 Lasoda = = = =___ 1 = - 2 Forestneem 1 9 10 10 225 156 TOTALNO. OF TREES 381 7-8 Sisam 8 9 24 1 19 14 7 581 41 Babool - 1 25 3 4 25 8 Eucalyptus 1 1 - Sirsha _ - 6 32 69 18 9 69 65 Peepal I - Neem 3 1 1 1 4 Pakar 1 1 1 1

Mango S| I 'R , ;X 3 26

Jamun | | - 2)1? 3 ?0*|< __ 7 6-t6

Arjun 4 6 10 -

Chil Bil 3 2 5 _ _ _ 5| 5 Shammer 1 2 1] 2

Other 3 _ 13 __ - - 16, -

Mix 60 _ 8_ _ . 601 8

Forestneem 1 4 _ S

Teak | | | | - . -

Mahua _ _ i41n_ _ - --- _____i______. 1 - t ] - 288 173 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 461 8-9 Sisam 10 |3| 14T 5 5 3101 '3 34 24

| Babool 6| 12! 9 | 5 | _ 12 20 Eucalyptus I 10 | 10 | I Sirsha 4 3 19 24 16 28 38

_ Peepail _ - . 10 _ - - |||.2.-.1 7--7..6.'7.-- 'Ms.14.;'ang 15I 20 Shammer 2 2 - Mahua 171 -31 | Kaitha 1 -

i anmun 2 3 5 _ Chil Bil | lI - | LasodaL [ i - | _ l | | | 1 | j j _j _| I

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depanment.Lucknow, India 4-63 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConisultantsU3V September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 20-30 d 3G-40 40-60' >60 I R L R L R LT R L R L R L R Mix ~~ ~~82 8 21

Fore5tneem 3 - 3 Neem 11- 2 Madina I 121 117 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 238 9-10 Sisarn 18 5 15 15 26 9 j? :;3 4. 64 44

Etucalyptus 6 6 - Sirsha 25 7 7 60 20 92 27

OtArju 10 9 3 1 217 42 Neem 3. 1 3 3 Mangoo 7 17 14

ChLasod2a 2 3 Maihua 6

Shammer~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 21 16

O0-1hSea 11 5 71 10 67 4 3

Babool 11 1 -

Foecaptsine 2 7 Arin 3B20 2 35 8 538 6 maihua 1I 23A

215 1615 TOTAL.NO. OF TREES 316 11-12 Sisam 23 9 153 11 67 Z' 38 53 34 Babool 3110 5510 3

Sirsha 13 201 18 129 3 35 72

Arjun 3 18 5 36 10 1 18 5

Kaitha I *..-I2 7 4

Goeneto taruPr2s,Pbi ok eatet uko,Ida46 Prjc mC-rixrtnCoslat PC evcsfrUtards tt od rjc EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) 01IV ConsultantsRV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total 7 <10cm 1 T 20-30 1 30-40 400 Km Tree <14c00-0 _ 60__

LI R L L R~ L R L RI_ - _ ___Other 3~__

____Peepal ~__

Mix _I_

__ ucalyptus -31 2 I

Pakar __21 2 aroo- 1 Bhelwar 8 178 206 TOTALNO. OFTREES 384 12-13 Sisam 20 16 2 2 6 4 '7 58 21

____Babool74 4 1 2 Mango ~ ~ I 9 19 Sirsha 1 6 664 2 30

___Jamun -5 7_ Peepal Pakar 22

Arjun 10 27 25 38 10 3 6 __ _ I 45 74 Imli 11 I

____Bhelwar 4 4 Neem 9 9 - 18

______~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i183 198 ______- - ~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 381

13-14 Sisam -If 2 1 4 :1' 35 22

Babool - _ - 2 6 7.-6 9

Mango 1~ . 11 _ _ . 2--, 12 22

- Sirsha -- 2 1 5 7 Pakar2 Arjun 2 3 11 Mix 22 2

BhelwarI

Imli ……- __ -- 1 jamun .. TOTALNO. OF TREES 148 14-15 Sisam ___ 1 2 7T13 &16:___ 7.'.6 43 36 Mango s_ 10 ', i~ I 1 20

Sirsha I _ _ 3 1 _ _ _ _ 3 2 jamun V-..p~:A. .2__I__. 21 5 Arjun I1 3 151

Imli- - ---.- 2s_ - _2

Kaitha 2Ž____} ] - Shemmar 1i

Neem______1__

Peepal __ _17.3 __

Babool ______2 -

______]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~68- -69 TOTALNO. OF TREES 137

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-65 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UtlarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants 1V September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Totdii Km Tree < 10cmn 10-20 i20-30 30-40 40-0 >60 R

____ I~~ R L R L R L R L R Lul I _ IS-16 Sisam -6 2 1 . 49 402 Babool [2 1 [ 2 ij Mango _I1 4 18

____Sirsha11 -

_ _ _ Pakar11 -

Arjun ___3 __ _ 3 -

____Other 2 2

_ __ Jamun ,3 ___- 3 . ______72 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~62

TOTALNO. OFTREES ___134 16-17 Sisam 2 3 3 ir 45 34

Mango __18 29 Sirsha I 1 2 1 1 4

_ _ Neem 3 ( _3 2 Peepal 2_2

Pakar I - ChilBil 121L

Badhal 11 - _____ Arjun I

Mix 2 - 2

__ __ Teak------

lamnun - 2

___ Babool - - - - - 1- --- * 74 77 TOTAL NO. OF TREES. 151 17-18 Sisam 1 112 15[ -25 18 2.20 *49 44 ___Mango - 12 2 5 Sirsha I7 5 3 2 101 7 20 Neem 2 !-A41 3 21 lamuni -4 1 ~ _I

___ Arjun ]22

____Babool __2 _ 4 ~ __ 1is 6 __jTeak ii~i__- ______84 77 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 161 18-19 Sisam 12 218 9 8 2 202 16 771 68 ___Babool 110 14 3 5~_ 14 9__ Mango - t .I--A'..9- 1 4 7__

_ _ Sirsha 11 _ 16 8 6 __

____Jamun

Pakar 5 2 5 2_ ___Chil Bil 4 2 17

Mix 2 7 ___- __2 7

Peepal __ _ _I______I Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-66 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phas'e I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girih wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm I0-0 20-30 30-40 4"O6 >60 L R L R L R L R L R L R Teak1 110 130 TOTALNO. OF TREES 240

CBatBl 1 2 12 1 23

Mixg 54 - Peecalypu 4 12

Pakamr 2331 - 4

Jamun 2 2

125 152 TOTAL.NO. OF TREES 277 21-22 Sisam 2 1 2 7 1' 10 31

Mango 36 372 Peepal 14 8 Pakar 271 8 15 9 Jamun 5. 6 Siahua 1387 32

N eem 13- 4

Sirshun2 7 3324 4411 56 Mix 5 5 -

Shammer 3 4 4

935 133 TOTALNO. OF TREES 2267 21-22 Sisam 2 1 3 2 7 3'-I 4 34 Mango 36 42 Pe-epal 1 6

Goe Pmnaktar ors3ep met,Luknw Idi 2rdeh,Pulc 96 JwetC-riamungCos2at P]Srie o ttrPaehSat od rjc EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) , DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 R L R L R L R L R L R L R Pakar 4 1 14 10 18 11 Jamun 2 2 Imli = 1 Neempa 1 1 2 3 Arjun 23 4 5 12 12 63 tSirsha 3 8 _ 2 7 _ 0 4 17

TOTALNO. OF TREES 285 23-24 Sisam I 2 L 5 2 32 57325 Mango _= 24 49 Peepal P W 1 Imli C ( S o U ras S R P Neem 1 1 4 | 1 2 S Arjun 39 30 58 18 14 4 . 52 111 Pakar = = =I = = - lamun _@2 - 3 Sirsha_1 947 117 Chil Bil = = = t 1 2

'TOTALNO. OF TREES 340 24-25 |Sisairr .|| 1 |1| 1 727 70 |Mango || 20 34 Peepal .11 |Jamun 6 6 Neem | 61 1 5 51 2 1 131 7 | Ariun l X 203 i 12X03 - [ Other T T 1 3 1 I 4 ! - I 0 I T0:1::0:0100=X:01X101 T I I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~941117 | ~~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES . 211 |25-26 |Sisarnml 1 | |5 2 |7 121| 39 | |Mango l ! i a s 7 1 30 | |Neem r 7 61 1 3 7 1 9_ Tamrun am IM 4 II 5

Pakar 1 1

| Babool | | 1 | | 2 | 3|

| |Sirsha | | 1 | | 2 - 3 | ~~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 1231 |2f-27 Sisam | | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 70 39 42|

Nee 3 1 6 5 _ 87 1 132| | |Jamun R I 1| I Sirsha | | 13 5 1 13 | 10| 22| 6 1 12| 48 33 | |Arjun | 21 38 3 1 21 | 8 5 98 | |Babool I 12 6 8

Govemrnentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-68 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarFradesth State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBv September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribuiion (cm) Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 L L R L R L R L R L R L R Shemmer 1 = 1 Mix 2 - 2 Pakar _ 2 1

TOTALNO. OF TREES 340 27-28 Sisam 7 _1 4 1 i 33 | 33 Mango ======7 3 Neem 6 20 2 S 2 2 7 30 Jamun = = _ = = = = ;, :.- = 4 1 Shemmer 1 1 Mix 7 2 7 2 Sirsha 5 52 5 - 62 Arjun 5 - 5 Eucalyptus 3 12 5 i 20 She=mer = = 1 1 =- 59 2 156 TOTALNO. OF TREES 215 28-29 |Sisam 7 39 110 13 3 2 60 239 EuMango l5 .5

|pl| 1 3 1 3 2 . | ~~Pakar | | | | | T T 2 2 - ShemmerNemaIua 1 23 9- Arjun |70 i39 |110 |163 | |28 |l | l l 180|230 Sirshae 3 4 5 18 3 10 2 18 35 |Eucalyptus| | 5 - 5

|Chil l| 1 I 2 274 328 TOTALNO. OF TREES 602, 29-30 |Sisam | 3 | |4 | 2 .11 -MAJ 28 | 39 Mango l w21 | 21 Mahua - 2 | amun | t2 | 5 Pakar P l W Departme1t PSirsha l P S f Pe31 S Roads1P 3 Shemnier I 6 6 - |Neem 1 2 | 4

Mahu ] l l i , 2

. I { l { { { | ; { { t { t S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~979 - I ~~~~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 138

NL-em + 4 4 | |Jamun [Xi fl 7 2 r |Peepal | 1| 1.

Govemmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-69 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCQ) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalASSessment (Phase I) IDlIV CoiisultantsBv September2001

ROUTE7.- BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wi,e Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 31-40 40-60 I >60 L L R I R L R L R L R L R_ Aejun 46 76 8120 76 147 Kaitha I 137 224

TOTAL NO. OF TREES36

Pakar 1 1

Teak 5~.

Mix 0 46 -0 46

Arjun 21 4 - 15 Jamun -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~352

Go BabetofUhrPaehl Pbi ok eprmn,2cno,Ida4 Projec(PC) Co-odinatng Sevices orCosuI~ats Utar Prdesh tate2oads5ro3ec EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE7- BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 3040 | 40-60 | >60 L R L R L R I R R I R L R TOTALNO. OF TREES 92 35-36 Sisam 2 2 3 5 ;7 35 39 Mango = = = = = 3 24 Neem 1 1 4 5 Jamun __' -1 1 1 Peepal _ _ 1 Shemmer 1 1 Mix 3 2 3 2 Sirsha 2 4 4 4 14

48 86 TOTALNO. OF TREES 134

Teaka 1 Neem 2 3 Jamun A 4===2 4 37-38 Sisarn 6 48-~ 38 PeepalMango _ 2I1 105 _ ======t | ~~~~~~~~~~~191 5 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 71 37-38 Sisam 2 I | . 41 38

Mango l l l . . . 122 10

Neem 1 6 Peepal | 1 5 Sirsha l l l l l l l l 1 471 601 jamun TOTAL NO. OF'TREES 5YS 2,~ 107 1 38-39 |Sisam j 1 l l l l |2 1-4ll,.3,n;85 46T1 42 TeMakgo l t i|u } |iq 4;' J ?2c|2£++$si3S?1 11 10 Neem 2 1 S 1 3 6

Jamunt ...... 1 7 IPeepalMangao~ IIILIII11n 2" |Pakar | | 1| 1|1| 1| lrtti , I *I- ..

|Babool 1| | l F T 1 |Arjun { ^ | | 51 6j

|Kaitha | | -i 86 7 86 76 TOTAt NO. OF TREES 162 3940 Sisam 6 1 1 ' ,;-I1 44 53 Mango 6 4 Neem 2 1 3 1 | | Mix | 22 '3 22 3

Govemmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, tucknow, India 4-71 ProjectCo-ordinaing Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV Consultants1V September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) - Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 T 40-60 >60 L R L R L R L R L R L | R Imli22

Peepal ______I

___Jamun -au _ _- _ _-______- 2 I Sirsha_ 1 _ -_ 1 Babool 1 Arjun 5 6 Chit Bil 7 7 ======~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7580 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 155 40-41 Sisam 2 6 2 - 21 47 Mango 1 = i R 14 14 Neem 1 1 1 1 2 Peepal = 1 2 Pakar 1 1 - Sirsha 1 1 |

Banyan = = 1 - Babool 9 9 - Mix 13 - 13

__ __ jamun.. 1 =_|amun______--______l l l 49 80 TOTALNO. OF TREES -…129

41-42 Sisam - 1 2 4 4:i. 2'' 23 38 46 | Mango 13 11

Peepal | t 5 | Pakar 1 1 2 1 3

Neem 2 0~-

_ Jam u n - - 2

______- - - - - ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5765 TOTAL NO. OF TREES .. 122 42-43 Sisam 2 1 1 '| 1E 2 23 35 32 Mango j 7

Neem - . 1 8 3 11 | Peepal |..--...t 3 3 ` 6 10 10 | Pakar 1 1 - Babool 1 1 |

___Mix . .19 ~1 9

Gular ______1 | | 1

Eucalyptus| - . 1 11

TOTALNO. OF TREES 136 1 43-44 Sisam | 1 4 - s ir c-, l 4 | Mango 5- j 1 221 llamun { g { I"t A' -': 2l 3_ 7

| ____ _ |Peepal 3 4 3_j Sirsha 3 I1 3_|_|_1_| r1

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Departnent, Lucknow, India 4-72 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for. Utar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase j) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60

L R[L R L R LR [ R [L R

____Eucalyptus - - -30 90165 89 8 12 19 1 203]

____Babool 8 1 3 9 13 _____11 23 Mix 6 6

Neem 2 - 2

Mahuna 11__ 1 1

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2462661 TOTALNO. OF TREES 512 44-45 Sisam 2 1 1 1 2 j -' 'I YA4 9 12 Mango : ~ ; - ¶ ~ ~ ~ t ~24 29

Peepal _____2 1

____Sirsha 2 2 2 2

Eucalyptus _____8 36 52 _ 4 36 64

Babool ___16 12 16 12

Mahua __ -5_---

Other 2 2 - Mix 20 - 20 Pakar1- 1 -____Banyan- 1

_ _ Neem1- 1

Jamun -~____ - 2

______- ______-- ~~~~~~~~96145 ______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 241 45-46 Sisam 7 4547-4 38 26

Mango _____-g 16 13

Neem __ 3 3

Peepal ] ~-. .i~ 4 9 6

Sirsha__ i______-

Eucalyptus 3 - 7 49 1 39 __ 6 49 5

Madina1- 1 116 106 TOTAL NOJ.OF TREES 222

46-47 Sisam - 5 9 17 z.29 1i 46 52

Mango 1 j *4 5 __ Neem 2 1 4~1__6 2

lamun __1 2 Pakar 1I -

Eucalyptus _92 38 92_45

Imli i __ _ _ _ Madina ___2 2 2 ___4 2

_ _ _ Sikrha- -.- - _ - 1 156 103

TOTALNO. OF TREES -259

47-48 ISisam I 71 21 2f 7 1Iz.~~t~ F 67 74 Mango 1 1 '-I*. 2 5

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Wodks Cepartment, Lucknow, India 47 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants tPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV Septenmber2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cn) Total Km Tree < 10cm 1020 i 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 R ___ . ___ L R L R L R L R L R L R Peepal = = = 1 Eucalyptus ____18 153 54 8 153 80

___Neem Other 2 2 Mix 138 57 138 57 Jamun 1 Mahua 1 1 ======~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~364218 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 582 48-49 Sisam 2 2 6 3 |O° W 44 33

_ _ _ Mango , - _ _9.~ ____ Neem 6 7 4 6 1_1 Peepal = = 3 5 Pakar I1 Eucalyptus ___3 6 6 3 Mix 51 26 51 26 Sirsha I Mahua 1

* Arjun - 1 _ _ l l l l ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1209 2 |______TOTAL NO. OF TREES 212 49-50 Sisam - 1 | | 2 |.- 1s 20 21 Mango L t 23 25 Neem 1 1 l 4 9 1 13 6 Mahua - jamun1 1 Peepal : j 2 2 |_____| Pakar 2 2 Babool 1 2 2 1

___ |_Madina 1 1 2 - Sirsha 1 1 1 1

|_____ |Arjun 2 3 - - - - | - 5 | |_____ |Mix 36 | 36 _ __ _ Teak ______- 2 Im li | | | i } I | | } I } } ' 72 96 TOTALNO. OF TREES 168 50.51 Sisam 3 1 9 7 5 | 28 32 ______]Mango 1 1'26 -|--| -- 1 ' 21 33 Neemr 3 3 2 5 * l jamun . I Peepal | |. 2 1 2 3 |_____|_ Pakar 1 3 1 3 | |6Babool 1 1 - ____ |_Sirsha 2 12 4 2 1 | 5 14 12 | | Arjun & 7 69 14 58 481 21 175 Mix 25 2 25 20

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-74 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAsses5ment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants 1W September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAH-RAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) - Ttal- Km Tree <10cm 10-20 120-30130-40 406 >60 1

______L 1 L 1 I 1 i L 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~J117 284 TOTALNO. OF TREES 401 51-52 Sisam…9 5 " 131 32 Mango W31 48 '26 62 3

____Neem __ _ __12., 1 2 4 5

I amu n___j _____1 1

___Arjun -61 69 4' 58 48 1O 175

____Mix 20 __ _ __ - 2

____ Sirsha 2 4 1 5 - 1

____Pakar 3____

_ ___Peepal ______Babool1- 1 TOTALNO. OFTREES 375 52-53 Sisam 2_2___25_

____Mango ___~~' ~ ~ ~ ~ i 53 46 Peepal

Babool ____ Arjun2 3 2 228 8 Mix 5 4 4 ____Banyan 7 Neemn 2- Teak

TOTALNO. OFTREES17 53-54 Sisam 1 3 1

Mango __ .t ~~" 4 311 29

___Neem j1_ _ 12

jamun __ 5 4

___Peepal ~ ~71 81 Pakar3

Mix 3 3

Babool 14 __ __ Kaitha22

Mahua __ Ii

Madina ______I

Sirsha 2 - 2

Arjun ____ 74 79-

TOTAL NO. OF TREES ____ 153

54-55 Sisam __4 6 -- 1I 13' 25 27 ___Mango ______>* 1 1;'3 21 6

I __~~~~~~~~~~ Neem 2 1

_ _ _ jamun *4I ______Peepal ______> -i3) _ _

Government-ofUntar Pradesh, Public Works Department.Lucknow, India 47 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1I DHV Consultanis BV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 3040 40-60 >60 ._Sirsha L R L R L R L R LR L R

Sirsha …i

Teak =-2 2 ____Arjun _ . 1 ======~~~~~~~~~~~~6171 TOTALNO. OF TREES 132

55-56 Sisam 3 2 - - 2 - ." 4 7 15 10

Mango =. = - - -= - = = ->5 4 '-17 |:-32 31 46

Neem _ _ _ 3

Jamun 1 _ _ ' 2 1

Peepal - - - - = ; 26 15

Arjun _7 7 4 4 8 231 - Imli 2 4 1 7 6 8 Sirsha 2 21 Mix 11 - 11

=___= = t i = = l ,107 94 TOTALNO. OF TREES 201 56-57 Sisam | | 14 6 Mango 29 31

I_ |Neem ..- , 7 3|. |Jarun. | | M.4 161 9 Sirsha 2 1 1 2

Arjun __3 3 _ - ______Mix 3 4 _ 3 4 xrali - - } | 3

Peepal | ___| _

______Babool j 1 1 ______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~7657 |_____ TOTAL NO. OF TREES 133 57-58 Sisam 1 | 2 1 8

|__ |_Mango 3 |t _ _2TI 9. 42 47 Neem 1 1 | 4 4

__.__ Jamun 5 5 Peepal 1 1 1 (Imli .t:- ,. 1 2 |_____ |Arjun 1 1 | - 2.2

______- _ _ _ _ - ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~54[69 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 123 58-59 Sisam 1 2 2 'Pl 10 14 Mango | -:*2.1,: ; .2 30 333 3_ Neem 10| 1 1 1| 2 Mahua | | | |' 4 8

Jamun _ l 3 . 8 1 Peepal | 1

Pakar 1 1 -

|Imli . _ ] _ t [ I | i i 1 1 1 1 | _ |Other _ _ J_ . |_ _ 1 -

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-76 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UntarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironimentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultaiits BV September2001

ROUTE~7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZAB3AD

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total I Km Tree 1 <10cm I0-20 20-30* 30-40 40-60 >6

_____ ~L R L R L R L R L IR L I R '_

M ix _ _ 3 ______j 3 Gular 1I__-

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~57 j63

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 120

59-60 Sisam ] _ '~2 2 3T 3 Mango j 24: 10 '12 21 18 31 jamun ~f -;. 1 1 5

____Badhal 2 2 - Mix' 6 6 -

Imli - 4

____Neem '1- 2 Arjun 1I

Teak - 2 ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3048

______- ~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 78 60-61 Mango 1 ~ . 35 42

Jamun - -~3 4

____ Nee&m 1 1

____Banyan I- 2m

____Peepal I

____Shemmer 2 2 - Other 9 9

____Sisam 1 2 3 - 6 Mix 7 - 7

___ Imli .4

____Kaitha .1__1

______1 ___ T ______I____ 53 62

TOTAL NO. OF TREES - __- - -115 61-62 Sisam 3 2 6 6 Mango 7.T~~~4~J ~~ 24 31 jamun .1 5 Neem 1 2 2

Mahua1 -

Teak 1 -

____Other 3 3 - Mix 2 - 2 Eucalyptus 1 1

- -- I__~~~~~~~~~~~~434 TOTALNO. OF TREES 84

62-63 Sisam 2 42 5 ~ 1~ *~~' 8 6

____Mango __ __2 2--i 8 4

_____jamun ___ .4:~K1 ;~

____N6em -- 1 I 2 3 __ 1< .;~6 6

Bale 2 -

___Kaitha 3 -1 1 _ __1 4.

Shemmer __I__1 __ _ 1

Mix .5 141 ______5 4.1

Govemmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India ProjectCGaordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConisuliants BV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree< 10 m 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 Km Tree <10cm1O-20~~~~~~~~~~~~~~20-30~~~~L R L L R. LRItR L R L R L R1_

Teak ___ Babool___

__ _ _ Arjun1 ~~ - ____Madina t__~ ~__ 31 2

TOTALNO. OF TREES 61

63--64 Mango ____3 1 .1> :1 2 5 6

Peepal1 -

___ __ Banyan __ _- -- 2 ' ~ .2 6

Neem __ 2 2 -

Other 2 2 - Madina 2 2 2 2

_ _Mix 5 __- 5

Ashok ___2 1__ _ - 3 14 22

_ ~ ~~TOTALO.OFTREES 36

64-65 Mango __ 4

Neem __ __252L4 __5 7

___ Pakar - I 2 - - - - 2 -

Kaitha ______I

Other 4 4 - Mix 6 2 6 2 Gular I - Eucalyptus 1 I__

___ isam 2 __2

Madina 2 - 2 30 15

TOTALNO. OF TREES .45

65-66 Sisam …… __ 11 Mango >,61 + Neem1- 1

Chil Bil _ 2 2 - Sirsha 11- 2 Kaitha .

____Madina 11- 2 I10 5

TOTALNO. OF TREES .15. 66-67 Sisam 1 3 2 12 15 7 jamun .1

_ _ Neem 3 1 4 1 1' 5 5

____Peepal1

Chil Bil _ 5 5 1 1_ La'soda 1 Imli1 1

____Madina ___2 2

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-78 ProjectCo-rdinating Consultants (PCQ Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) ] Total Km Tree < 10 cm I0-0 20-30 30-401 40-60 > 60

___ _ _ Kaitha L______PakarI Sirsha1

___Mango…j 2'. __

Babool __ - __ __ 1____31 2

TOTALNO. OF TREES 59 67-68 Sisam 1 71 7 §2 .:73.1 . . 2 10 17 Mango…2i *I< ~-st. 0 2 Jamun 1I - Neem 14 3 3

____Peepal 3 - Imli 2 1

Arjun 11 -

____Eucalyptus 3 1 - 4

Sirsha…1- -- 1 Madina 3 - 3

Teak __ - 13

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~3044 TOTALNO. OF TREES 74 68-9 Sisam 1 2 3 27 18

__ _Neem __ 4 1 3

____Peepal 2 - Sirsha 1 11 1

_ _ _ Imli - 1 Eucalyptus 3 1I 4 Mango 31- 2 Madina 3 ~~ ~~~~~~~3-

Teak- _I_ 1

______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 64 69-70 Sisam 6 14T 17 5 61 19 30 Mango <.3J;1:V.-.-I 2 51 7 Neem 2 7 1 1 31 1 MahuaT1

__Imfi--_ __ 11 -

Arjun 4 2 32 7

Sirsha____ _1 116 1 -1 7

_ __ _ Kaitha T.; ______- 2

Madina j2__ __ - 2

Babool 2 - 2 ___Eucalyptus 5 [ _ __31 6

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 97 70-71 Isisam TIII I 5 1 81 117-J.'15Y -1I .2 23 16 Mango 1 2 *:1> 03 19 44

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depariment, Lucknow, India 47 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCCO Services for UnarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultanits 13V September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) Total 1 Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 :60 R L R L R L R_ L RIL R L R

Sirsha 6 2 5 6 7 -Jamun f:I 1 1

Mix 2 - 2

Eucalyptus 1 Arjun 1- 1

Peepal 1. -

Madina1 4

TOTALNO. OF TREES 192 72-73 Sisam 2 2 4 301:~: 169

Pakar 3 443

Madina 4 4

TOTALNO. OFTREES 70 73-74 Sisann1 8 6 3.0:1~20 236

Neem 22 2 6 ~ ~ 8 3,

Makiar4 1 1 4 - Sirsha 2 12 1

Takjn 1 3 Babool 2 5 4 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~494

TOTALNO. OF TREES 113 74-75 Sisam 4 1 6 13 48 4V0.3 232 Mango ~ 6 26 Neem 1 26" 7 3

Pakar 1 2 1 2

Sirsha 1 1 2 -

GvrMetoUtarinPrd2,PulcWrs eatet2Lcn Inda -8 PrjctCArdjuin onutn ts(C)SricsfrUtr3rdstt Rod Proec EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICH-TO FAIZABAD

______Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 20-30 J30-40 i40-60 >60

___~~~~~~ R L L R L-R. R1R

___Arjun 12 1

Eucalyptus __

____Shemmer11 - Mix 6 61

jamun-- ] 2

_ _ 7~~~~~~~~~~~~_4]71j TOTALNO. OF TREES 145 75-76 Sisam 10 19 6 46 46__

Mango -_ 7 __1

Mahua I

Peepal ______2 - CmliI jamun3

Teak__ -- - _…_

_ __ Arjun_ 4_____a __ 3__ 4_2

____Babool

____ Mix 15 4 f__

____PakarI

_____ Sirsha 2____

____Madina

_____ ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 191 76-77 Sisam2 2 2 429 3

Mango __. 17 14

____Neem4 2 Peepal I__ Cmli__

_ __ jamun ……_ -4 Ž~ Pakar~

____Madina1

Mix 44 5 4

TOTALNO. OF TREES 245 77-78 Sisam 144 2 3 31 10-~7 "~~5. 1 33

Mango ___6 8

__ _ _ Neem 1 - 8 17 8

Peepal _____2 -

Jamun :7 2 . 6- *'- 1 9 13

Shernmer1 _ -

Arjun - ~ 4 3 7 -

____Other -13 8 21

___Mix 60 4 6

Babool __ _ _ i

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Depariment, Lucknow, India 48 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services (or UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 7- BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 J 20-30 30-40 ! 40-60 | >60 ____ I I RILR R I~~~~~~~~~~~~L L R L R L R L R L R R Kaitha 1

_ Chii BiiI 69 =_======_=_==_= = 142 69 TOTALNO. OF TREES 211 78-79 Sisam =T1 | | 4 10 16 : 10: 1 30 37 Mango _ -2 .,6 16 9

Neem 2 -- : j 3 4

____jamun 2 2

____ < t-Pakar 1 -

____Peepal 11 1 Babool 11

_ __ _ Arjun 11 -

____Mix 12 _ 12

Imli -- 3 ______Other 3_3 _ 3 67 59

- - TOTALNO. OF TREES 126 79-80 Sisam 2 | 3 | 3 44.i .6. 22 32 | Mango 5 6 | Neem |6 8 Jamun 2

i______Sirsha 1 Peepal |__ | :1 ':.2 1 2

Arjun 7| 3 |I I 17

Mix 17 17 - Mahua

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 127 80-81 Sisam 5 3 11 8 U m 3 28 241

___ |_Mango l | .2' 13 | 15 Neem 2 1 6 2

Jamun - jy .~5 2 Imli LIE3 3 -

Peepal _ __

Madina 11 12 ______Shemmer |2 60 44|]

TOTALNO. OF TREES - -0 81-82 Sisam | 12 8 3 11 Jt O 37 30 Mango - j - 6 1. Neem 2 | |3 4 8 Jarmun !I _ 1 - Pakar 2 2 - | | Peepal | |- ||pal3 ' j 2 4

___Ashok 11 -

___ |_Other - - 1|

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-82 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DH-VCounsultants UV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (CM) ___ Total-

Km Tree <10cm I 0-2 20-30 _ 4 ~0 >60 L

______~L R L I R L R L2 4 R L RLLR

____Mix 16 6 Sirsha R LL R L I2 -

TOTALNO. OFTREES 125

82-83 Sisam 6 21 1 210' T2j1 ' 32 30

Mango __ t 1 2 ~ "A 10 7 Neem 2 I10 11 Jamun 2 4 Sirsha 1I 2 1 Peepal 1 -

Mix 14 10 ___ _ 14 10

Chill Bil __1 _ _ _- 1

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7164 TOTALNO. OF TREES 135

83-84 Sisam 3 11 12 8~ . 52] 49

___Mango V - M 7 6

____Neem 1 _ W 3M 1WI1 7 Sirsha 1 37 5 Mix 37 12 3

Eucalyptus ___1 3 - 4

Mahua -…… - 2 Peepal I.

____jamun .:~2

Chil Bil 2 _ - 2 114 90 TOTALNO. OF TREES 204

84-85 Sisam 61 1 5 5J 3 10 K2 ____ 0 41 _ - - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----1-_ --_- .- I _ _ Mango ______3__ _ _

_ _ Neem 12 _ 1 2 Mahua .1I Sirsha 1- , Other 112 - Mix 49 40 49 40

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~16187. TOTALNO. OF TREES 248

85-86 Sisam 24 4 __ 5 2 5 AS~ 41 44

Mango __1~~ 1 9 Neem .... Si'-1 9 121 14

Jamun __ __- i1 Pakar11 Mix 46 28 46 28 Babool1- 1 Madina1- 1 98 97 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 195 86-87 ISisam f I 21 6~ 4<4 1 1 15 8

Mango 4. , I 5

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Departmnent, Lucknow, India - 4-83 ProjectCo-rdinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH-TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-O >6

L R L R L Rh L _R RIL R _ _ _ Neem 1 12 4 __ 72 -

jamun… __ __2 1 Irnli .- Y-- 2 5 ____Sirsha 3 __ 1 3 -

____Pakar11 -

____Peepal 11 -

____Mix 4 3 _ 4 3 Eucalyptus.___1- 1

Ashok ___1- 1

____Madina -1__

______~~~~~~~~~~~~136 35 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ 676~~~~~fTOALNOO TE_ 71 87488 Sisam 2 3 3 7 9 1 3 4 Mango 7__ Neem ………… 5 ~5 Sirsha 1 1 Babool 228 6 jamun 2 2 2

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7665 TOTALNO. OF TREES 141 88-89 Sisam 2__ 14 16

Mango __ 8 2 Neem 222 5 8

Babool1 -

Pakar …… _[11

Mix 44 Eucalyptus__ Jamun . 1 2

Madina __ __ 2-__

TOTALNO. OF TREES 65 89-90 Sisam If1 j L 8j1

___Neem _4__3__7 3___2_ 58 1

____Sirsha 1 __ ___ 19126

TOTAL~NO. OF TREES 45 90-91 Sisam 45 3 35 .14 21 8 254$ .- 5 -3 1311 43

___Neem -4 1 -4..~ 4 ____ imli 11 3 3 Sirsha 15 3 18 24 11 6 __ _ 44

Babool . 18 5 1 28 -5__rI I

Peepal______

____Arjun ___3 ___ 24 4 9 1 4 36_

____Other 12 4, _ 16 Mix 21 2

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, lndia 4-84 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DH-VConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 340 40-60 >60 L R

______L R I R~~~~~~~L LR L R M ango ____1______[ 1 273 [124 TOTALNO. OfTREES 397 91-92 Sisam 4 1 6 16 3 -2~3 22 23 Mango __

Chil bil 8 8 -

Shernmar 2 2 -

____Mix 16 __16 - Imli 3 - 3

Peepal -44;I2

jamun 2 - 2 Madina ~~~~~~~3 3I5

______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES __ __363 92-93 Sisam 28 4 5 1 0 2

____Mango - -__

___Neem 2 1 5 5

_____ Sirsha __6_6 2_3_42___6_56_4___

____Babool _____ 29 18 __ 9- 16.____ _56______65

__ __ Pakar __ _ 3______

____Arjun 1 4 1 4 1 113 01 jamun 2 1

Other 2_3______Chil bil 25 5 15 4 4 Mahua- __ 1__

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OFTREES 463 93-94 Sisam - 12 6 8 8 5 2 32 23

Mango - '27__ __ ?'4:fiJ 6 710 30 23 ____Neem ____2 3

____Sirsha 17 I __ 17 - Babool 121 1 15 -3 1 10 I38 14

Pakar __ - _ 4 5 7 5

Arjun 35 45 21 119 9 60 4 69 224

___lamun -

__ _ Gular 2_4__ _ _

_ __ Chil bil 118 __ _ 12 _ _ __ _ 3 _ _Other f 4 3 __ __ 4_7 ~mmar__-She _ _ H__- - 1

Govemmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Djepartment, Lucknow, India 48 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHiVConisultints iSV September2001

ROUTE 7 - BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Km Tree <10 cm 1~~~~~~20Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total - Tree<10cm 10-20 20-30l 30-40 40-60 >~

______~ R L LR R L R _ _ 1111111112481_L321 TOTALNO. OF TREES 560 94-95 Sisam 61 3 1 2 4 ~x3 13 101

____ Mngo J7..L.;U.' -. < 2:.2W.6 ' 7 10 ::2 4

__ Neem .11 2 2 2 3

____Babool -61 1 14 5 -24 6

_ _ Pakar II1 __ 3 4 Arjun 18 21 4 48 5 4 2 7 73 Gular 2 1 11 3

Banyan1 - Chil bil 15 1 8 1 1 23 3 Mix 20 20 - Sirsha 4 4 9- 17

______125 139 TOTALNO. OFTREES 264 95-96 Sisam 3 4 37 5 7 3-1 40 Mango'1 ~-- 1 7 11 13

___Neem 72,45h~ 7 6

____Sirsha 15 8 3 8 18 Babool 7 3 10

Arjun 6 39 '18 2 3 __8 60

____Madina 1I -

____Eucalyptus 1 1 -

____Mix 30 18 ___30 18

jamun '* - 1 - 2

___Chil bl1,- 1 Z1Za~~~~~~Z[Z__- ~~~~~~~107115 TOTALNO. OF TREES 265 96-97 Sisam 61. ii 3 ~~ ~~4 ~~~~56 2 17 12. -.20 47 49

____Mango .I I. :- y. 1 5 Neem 1 5 1 *:A~ 3..4 ,.6 9 14

____ Sirsha __6_3 6 8

____Babool 84 __ 12 25 4 2 9 100 44

Mix 36 - 36

Chlbil -- 10 -- _

______~~~~~~~~~~188~172_ - ~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES - -- 3601

97-98 Sisam 1 3 44O -192 14-1113 47 40

Mango __ ~~Z t B A 0 1

___Neem __~ ,~ ~0 8 13

Babool 4 t8 i3 3 3 1 III'~ __122

Mahua .- - - _

___Mix __ 4______41

Governmentof Urtar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 48 ProjectCo-ordinatinig Consultants (PCO Services for UtiarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) Dl[tV C.onsujtaiits LW September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD Girth wise Distribution(cm) Toal

Km Tree <10 cm 1 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 1 > 60~'

__ ___ L_ RILIRiLRILIRILiR!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L

_ __ Pakar _ _1 5 _ 5

Chil bil 6_ _ _ _ _1 6 Arjun 4._____ 4

______~~~~~~~~~~ _ _ _95 105 TOTALNO. OF TREES r __ 200 98-99 Sisam 9 i 10 6 4 17 17 8 45 40

____Mango - 01 6 151]

__ _Neem 2I1 5.3 7' 4

_ j_amur n I 4 2~ 3 Peepal 22 Pakar I

Sirsha 3 ___3 -

____Babool 12 1 4 9 10 3 9 _ _ 26 22 Arjun 1 2 2 1

'Imli - -1 2

__ Mix 7 _- 7

____Shemmar1 - 1

__ _ Mahud__w _

____ bilChil ~~~~~~3j12]- 6

_- _ _~~~~~~~~~~~ _ _06 103 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 209 99-100Sisam jI 20 8 8 415 "4. 1 30 33

Mango .. , ~2' 5 4 6 6 Peepal_____1

_ _ _ Pakar . . -I 1 Neem ijI13 51 Sirsha I2 1 2j ! 22 3 M ix _ __3 ______3

TOTLO.OFTREES 5 9443

100-101Sisam __ ~ ---- 6i 2J 6. 6 14 Mango - - - r I. 4 4 1 6 ___Neem__I 36 -6 116 10 12

Jamun I ~ __ ~ 11 2

Peepal _____2 lj 1 1 3

Pakar __ _ - ____ 4 3 4± 3

Babool - I 2 1 _ 2~ 10 Eucalyptus I-I7 10 7__ 10_ Shemmar I I1 Chilbil I 33

Banyan __ I 2_ _ 2I _ _

Sirsha -2 ______- 3__

Asho-k__ 4 _ 2 _ I

____…__ --- A ______~~~~~~~~~~~4

Govemrnmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 4-8-7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHiVConsultants fiV September2001

ROUTE7 - BAHRAICHTO FAIZABAD

I ~~~~~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 [ ______I~ ~R ~~~~~~~~I ______R ~~~~~LIR L IR L R L IR L iRj TOTALNO. OF TREES 9 101-102 Sisam 3 6 2 10 8 ~~w-~si>~~~~ ~4 2j __I Mango . 5 Neem -. :.3~ .5 4

____Jamun 2 1 21 1 Peepal 1 1 i

_ __ Pakar 4

Eucalyptus 5 10 2

Sirsha 11 1 4 1 15 Arjun 4 3 7 -

Kaitha ……- 4

TOTALNO. OF TREES__125 102-103Sisam 10' 7 3 5 3 301 6

*Mango 2 __ 34k 6 3

Neem __18 8 lamun 1 2

Peepal _ Pakar 3 1 6 5 .7 8 Babool 12 2 11 8 14 22 25

Eucalyptus 1 4 14 1.6 2 .. 1 14 24

Ariun 1 7 2 4 9 ___ 11 12 Banyan- i 3. - 1

___ArooI- 1,- i

Sirsha…2 2__ Teak 2H

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 203_ 103-104Sisam 7 4 121 23 41 3 *i6 1 058 4 Mango 4 2 6 * 10 1

Neem . 4 5 7~11 14 lamun 11 7' 1 8 Pakar 1 1 2 1 2 1 5 2 Eucalyptus 17 2 8 1 2 26

Banyan I*~1 __ Mix 5 1- 5

Sirsha ___8 5. 13

Aroo…__ 7TT 1 W __ P6epal 1 Arjun ~~~___ ~~18 [__ __ - 18 F___ 9~~~~1150.

TOTAL NO.OF TREES - I241 104-1051Sisam I 1 21 12 11 1810 8 9l'8 -5.'.43 1 2

GovernmentofUttar Pradesh, Public Works Department. Lucknow, India. 4-881 Project Co-ordinating Consuttants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Proiect EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsuV September2001

ROUTE 7- BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girthwise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 3G-40 40-60 1 0 L L R L R L R L R L R L |R Mango ___ i _ _A-4- 19 .Neem = 7 ==w*29@4 Paeekapral l 2 2 3 2 3 .Pakar 25 2 5 Eucalyptus - 7 5 5 7 10 Sirsha 4 3 4 5 1 2 12 7

Imli . . ___ 1 1 Gular 1 = 1

jamun - 3 Teak _ 4 : __ 5 =______= =____=__ = = 99 68 TOTALNO. OFTREES 167 105-106 Sisam 6 3 | 13 14 24 27 | Mango 1 8 11

______Neem ! = 1 = _ _ 212 1= | ____ |_Jamun ___1| 1 Imli ' * , Ai 2 5

Peepal - 6 - * Pakar 2 2 - Eucalyptus 2 3 2 3 Arjun 3___ 3 *GularI Sirsha 3 3 3| 3| Mix 16 5 16 5

____Mahua - 1 | ___ L_Banyan | j - I _ _ _ _ 1 |___ |Teak J _1 .__ - 1 1-___ 1______1__ I__ . = _I = 891 831 TOTALNO. OF TREES 172 106-107 Sisam i51 I | 31 8 5 -43 20 12 Mango |. |_ 2 3

Neem _ 7' -2 d.?i8 ::18 25 28 Jamun 4 3 Babool - F 1---i |_ Irnli |__2 __| 2 Peepal 1 | 2 31 Pakar _ I _ -I 2 2 2

Gular __

Mix 3 2 _ ___

Babool __I 21 1 __~3~

Sirsha _ F 1| 2 | 331- _ _ | ______I _ _ _ j______L ... 1I _ _ _ _ _ 65 62 . ______.__ - TOTAt NO. OF TREES 127

07-107.2 Neem J_ [ I] 1 1 2 | .- 31- - 2 .2; 7 2

|__ | Peepal i _ | | :- 1 i _ | ____ _ |Ashok _ |[ |___i _ T | ____ _ |Other _ _ |2 |_|| 4

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-89 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 7- BAHRAICH TO FAIZABAD

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total

Km Tree < 10 cm j 10-20 20-30 30-40* 4060 _>_60_ > ! . _ . I I ~~~~~~~~~~~L1 R i L R LIR L R L R L R L R Pakar 2 2 Jamun = 1

Madina - 1

Madina _ - TOTALNO. OF TREES_ _ _ _ _ 1 19

Govemmentof Unar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4A0 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DIAVConsultants IV September2001

ANNEX 4.4 SPECIES-WISEAND GIRTH-WISELIST OF TREESIN RIGHT OF WAY (ROW) ROUTE 18 -JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution(cm) Total Km Tree < 10cm T 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-60 T >0 - RILRLR~~~~~~~~~~ ___ ~~~~~LRLI R LRLRL R LR 0-1 Sirsa1-

___Neem __1 __ __ 12 2

Babool 3 3 34 6___3 ____Kadam 6 3 6 1 13 3

___Madina 16 16 3 1 _ 19 17

____Eucalyptus ___2 3 7 3___9

____Jamun ~ I

Mix 6 7 __6 7 Sisam I___ 2 2

______1______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~5244 ______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 96

1-2 Babool __ f______3 ____Neem 24

____Chil Bil 35[4 8 55 12 59 55

__ _ Peepal 4

____ Paker 1 -

____Banyan ~ ____ 1*i ___ Madina 1 1 1 2 3

___ _ ular __ _3 - 3

___ Kaitha -.- 3

_ _Mix 7 - 7

TOTAL NO. OF TREES ______146

2-3 Babool 1 1 [5 2 I __7 21 Neer - 1___ 1 j2 - ____Sirsa 2 44 3 44_ SI

Eucalyptus j3 _3 ] Chil Bil 43 7

Paker 1 - Sisam 3 -

____Gular I -

______- __ __ i. L __ __ ~~~~ 12 ~~~~~~64

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 76 3-4 Babool 3 5 7 7

_ __ _ M ango ______. .1 _ _ 1-

_ _ Sirsa - -

_ _ Kadam 2 3 2 3_

____Eucalyptus ______Madina~ ~ ~ Ii2 1 2 Mix 3 9 __ _13 9

_ _ _ Banyan __ __ _ -:1 _ _ TOTALNO. OF TREES 56

Govemmentof UJttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India .4-91 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV Conisultzints8V September.2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girthwise Distribution (cm) I lo:al Km Tree <10cm 10-20 T 20-30 30-0 40-60 >*__60,

L R L R L R L R L RIL IRI __ 4-5 Sisam 1 4 4 12 1 I10 1 1 1 28

IBabool 2 1 3 I1~ 5. Paker 11

____Sirsa 9 9 _ -i 18 Neem 1 3 51 3_ 5 9 _ 11~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peepal - __2 Madina i__ I- 1 Mango__[__

_ Mix 9 -~L ' ____ ~~~~~~~~~~~16174

TOTALNO. OF TREES ___ 90 5-6 Sisam ]3 5 17 3 73

Babool ____ 2 22_ 7__ 7__ _ 91 29 Neem 2_3_ 31 4 Jamun 21 1 Mahua I__J 0 Sirsa 3 141 4 26

Eucalyptus __ 1 -

___Chil Bil 4 6 1 4{ 7 Peepal ii. 1 Gular'-1i

Banyan __2 - 2

___Mango . - R - 6

___Madina. __ - _

______~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ 7 1 1 9 7 TOTAL NO. OF TREES -168

6-7 Sisam 5 _ 1 6 1 30 1~~~ I421 16

___Babool I__ 1 141 10 __ 2 1141 1 3 Mango [ ~41 7

Neem 2 4[ 161 7

Sirsa~ 1 3 4 8 1 -T

Chil Bil- iI__1

Peepal - _ - "1 _ _ _

Gular __2 _ _ 2_ ___

Semarj______i i ______

Arjoon _ _ i___ _ _ 2__

Ashok 1 _ _ _ I______1 ______I ______I i _ _ _ [ _ _ _ . . ~~80 6 8 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 148 7-8 ISisarn I i i 7J 61 l1 I 19 Babool 4 21 2 7 2 32

Government of UJttarPradesh, Public WofrksDepariment, Lucknow, India 4-92 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV Consultan'tsBV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total I Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 1 30A40 40-60 >60 R L R R I L R I RILIRI~~~~~~LIR__ R_

_ _ Mango *.1;~ ~ _ _ 9 __4

Neem _ 1 2 Mahua j 1 1 Sirsa I _ _1 ______1] 2 j

jamun 3 __ 1 3_

Paker 4 I ___ 11

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~875 TOTALNO. OF TREES16

8-9 Sisam 1 2 - 5 9 32 __ I.g0 52 Babool 59 10 17310 3

Mango - ~.8 4

Neem 201 2 -

Mahua - -1 - Arjoon 6 16 Eucalyptus 1

Kaitha

Shemmer11 -

Lasoda------1

____Paker 1_ ____ viiT V ___Mix ±16 1_6j~

TTLN.OF TREES - __183

9-10 ISisam __ 2 1 3 5 _-4 '5 __[__ I 0Y 1

Babool _ __ 1 6 3 49 6 9 10 6 4

Mango -______Neem1

Paker 1 __ __

Eucalyptus _ _I[ 2 - 7 _ 2______

____Sirsa____

Mix ______- 1

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 129

Babool______h 57 11 10 __ _11177 I_

-Neem ___ I 1 1 4 8 - 10 5

___Mahua ~ _ 2.>7 ____ 118 2

____Arjoon 2 j __ I111 3 __ I 3 14

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 49 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants IPCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) D)HVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 18 - IAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wiseDistribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree <10cm]. 0-20 20-30 30-40A0 40O60 >60 L R RL 1[R L R L R 1 G RIR L I~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sirsa 5 61 5 ChilBiI I__I____

____jamun WI__ MO_. R 2 4 Paker 2 311 2 21 5 6 Lasoda1 11 Madina I Peepal

Mix111 - 83 152

______~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 235

11_12 Sisam _1_2 12_………1 61

____Babool 2 1 17 23

____Mango 19 34 Neem 4 4 -

Mahua ____3 Arjoon 2 22 2 Eucalyptus2 jamun 1I

_____Paker

___Lasoda 1 1 1 2

Madina 4 ~~~~~~~~~4-

_ __ _ Kaitha ……- 1

Bale .- 1

____ Bacher -- 1

____Chil Bil 1

_____ Sirsa 2 3

____Mix 42 15 42 15 95 148 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 243

12-13.Sisam - - - 171 4 4 634 121

___Babool 3 35 12 32 12 70

Mango Jr47~~~;<~__X _ 2 2

Arjoon 1 __ _ 6 2 7_ 2 Sirsa 1C 6 8 16 19

Eucalyptus 2 __ __ 2 -

____Chil Bil 13 311 44 Paker I I

Lasoda - 2 __ 2

____Madina 2 12 1

Mix - 69 3 ______69] 3

Mahua - j 3

______- - -- I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~181~245

TOTAL NO. OF TREES__426 13-14 Neem i] 2J 9 3

- Eucalyptus -i7 1 _ 7 1

jamun 51I _

Govemmernof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 49 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC).Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE18 - JAUNPURTO MOHAMMADPUR

______~Girthwise Distribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree < 10cm 10-20 :120-30 30-40 40-60 i >60

___ ~~~~~LR L R I. RL RLI RL R R _ Paker ~~1 2.i1i2 1 3 3

Madina ___2 - 2

____Lasoda 1I

___Sisam 111- 3 B___abool 2 2 1_17 3 1- 25

___Sirsa Ii 2 - 3 Gular 1 j__ J ~~~~2242 ______~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 64 14-15 Neem 4 5

__ ___ Sirsa 11 _ _

____Eucalyptus 1I Peepal 1 1

____Paker, I 1 1 2 2 5

Ashok 1 1 1 3 ______1 5 2

____Madina .2 2 ___2 2

___ mli - I 17 11

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES' 28 15-16 Sisam3 3 Neem 6__47 3_1 - 8 14

____ Sirsa 2 2 -

____Eucalyptus 2 2 -

___Peepal .~1 - Paker 2 9 12 1 Madina 23 - Babool 3- 3 Kaitha … … … … - 13 Mix 8. 1 8

______I _I_3 1 42 1 ______~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES _ 73~ 16-17 Sisam i i1 18 F15 Z 3 4 ~ ~ ! 212l Neem 111 __ _ 3

___Babool 10 46 50f 16 1 50 73

Mahua - 1 -

Sirsa 31 ___31 -

____Eucalyptus 15 26 ij 151 27

Chil Bil 2 __ 2 __

__ _ Paker…_ _- IJ

_ __ M ix 3_ __I_ 3__ _ _ 127 121 TOTALNO. OF TREES 248 17-18 Sisam 7 5 19 7 ~ j12 4 25

____Babool 2 1j__ 51 144 2 1 ___ 9 j 146 82

_ _ _ Sirsa IJ I-

__ _ _ Eucalyptus .4. ____

GovemnmentotUttar Pradesh, Pup(ic Works Department, Lucknow, India 9 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services forUttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) OHVConsultants 8V Septemnber2001

ROUTE 18-- JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution(cm)To Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 1 40-60 '>60 L R L L R …IR4 L- - R

____mango Wm_ 5

____Neem 16

______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1901123 TOTALNO. OF TREES 313 18-19 Sisam 3 3 16 3 742~ 1 f6 44 31 Babool 10 6 6 52 62 28 2 1 781 88

____Eucalyptus 1 7 1127 1

__ _Jamun - -. 2 2

____PeepalI

____Lasoda 11 -

____Mango __- 5 Neem1- 1

____Mahua- 1 Mix 42 - 42

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~133184

- TOTALNO. OF TREES 317 19-20 Sisam2 5 4

____Babool 2_ __61_3_ 66 12

____Eucalyptus 4__ 6 28_ 4_ 6 36

____Mahua 1 -

____Neem 3 3 24 5 Sirsa 23 - Chil BiIl lamun I Ashok 2 1 2 1 Paker 4 - 4

Mango ______- 3 Madina I

__ __ Mix 1 3 __ _ _ 1 3_ 108 116

__ _ - ~~~~~~~~TOTALNO.OFTREES--224 20-21 Sisam 3 4 3 171 3 ____Eucalyptus __ 4 3 1 1 { 3 1 19 Neem 2 1 7 3 ___ { j8 5-

Sirsa 2 1 1 1 .[ 12 3 Chil Bil11

Paker 1 4 1 __2 4

Mango _

TOTALNO. OF TREES -72_ 3 21-22 Sisam 21 10 ~ 1 19 Babool 3 3 - Eucalyptus 2 6 16 44 3. 16 55

_ __ Bahera __ _ 11

____Arjoon 3 4 ~ 2 - 9

Govemmentof Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-96 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I( DHVConsultants BV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOH-AMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution(cm) ______Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 120-30 30-40 40-60 >0 a~

______I~ ~R L R_ L R L R L R L R Peepal 1

Mix 3 2 __ ___ 3 2

______- - _ _ _ _ -~~~~~~~~~ 54 8 6 TOTALNO. OF TREES 140 22-23 Sisam 12 4 3 41 9 26~i3 51 53 Eucalyptus 4 26 32 6 26 42

_ _Neem- 11

Peepal ___-W1

Bahera ___5 _ _ _ 5 - Arjoon 9 2 - 1

Babool it 3 6 110 -

Mahua - I__- 841 117 ______~TOTALNO. OF TREES 201 23-24 Sisam 1 7 4

___Arjoon 3_ _ _ *Babool ……………62 9

Eucalyptus 30 __7__ 1 1

Mahua 2___ Neem, 1 1

_ __ Sirsa 2 ___2

__ _ _ Peepal ___ 1 2 * Paker

____Mango3

* Mix 10 - 1

______~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 295 24-25 Sisam I 13 10 13 15 ~§-1.~5>9 59 65

____Mango 1 -

____ Babool _ _1 12 Eucalyptus 7 34 4 7 3 Mahua 1 '

___Neem 13 5

Peepal * 2

____Paker2

____Banyan 1 -. Madina 44 Arjoon 2 - 2 Ashok I 1 Lasoda ~~~~~1 1 ______Lasoda…………~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 113. TOTALNO. OFTREES 195

25-26 Si-sam 1 26 10 ;' ~?~ 591 36. Mango_____I 4 9

____Babool - 7 143 - __ 7 17 ____Eucalyptus ____16 _ 5 16 Neem______- __ 77______1- i1 2 ::2j

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public works Department, Lucknow, India ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants'(PCQ Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConlsultatnts BV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

______~Girthwise Distribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree <10cm 10G-20 20-30 30-40 40-0 >60 L R L R L R L R L- R L R Peepal

Imli__L_ Sirsa L TOTALNO. OF TREES 161 26-27 Sisam 16 2 24 .5 43 46 Babool 2 . 2 14

Mango __ ., 2 1 Eucalyptus 3____ a Sirsa 931 2 Neem 25 Mahua 2

Jamun -2 3 Mix 23 23 47 114

- ~~~OTLN.OFTES161 27-28 Sisam16 3 3 8 2 51 64 Babool 17 18 181 18 35 Eucalyptus 20 86 95 12 86 127 ArJoan 33

Mahua 1 - 159 226

TOTALNO. OF TREES - 385

28-29 Sisam __4_2 28___ Babool 2 ~4 17 Neem 1 Eucalyptus 3 3

Mahua _ ____ I______Arjoon1 1 Peepal ……… 3 1 Sirsa 77 Mix 14

* TOTALNO. OF TREES 112 29-30 Sisam 115 61 12 18 2 47 53 Eucalyptus 2_____ 3I 2

Arjoon ______2 1 - 3 Babool 11 11 13 2 2 16 Neem 111 2 2 3__ Mahtua I

jamun - -j *2;____ - 2

_ _ _ Peepal…_ __ _ _ 3 Sirsa11

____Paker. 33

TOTALNO. OF TREES16

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 49 ProjectCo-ordinAting Consultants (PCO) Services for UrrarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree < 10 cm 10-20 1 20-30 30-40 40-60 >60 L R L L RR L RIL R L R L R L_ 30-31 Sisam 4 6 1 29 5 Babool 12 11 12 11 Neem I 1 6 9 8 1 1 16 10 Mango 1 -

Eucalyptus - 15 1 15 1 Peepal _ _ 1 -

Sirsa - = j 1I 1 1 2 1

Paker 3- - 3 lamun - ==_ I

Lasoda 3 - 3 Mix 9 3 _ _ 899 3

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~8934 TOTAL NO. OF TREES 123 31-32 Sisam I 7f 2 19 8 28 Neem 1 3 = 7 0 9 28 22 Sirsa 3 2 3 2 Paker _ 2 1 4

jamun - 2

Ashok 1 _ i 1I Madina 2 2 _ _ 4 Eucalyptus i 1___ 1 Mango . - 3 Peepal _ 6 =__ Mix 5 _ _

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 97 32-33 Sisam 7 Babool 2 j 81 22 30 3 22 43 Neem 2 ! 21 7 9 4 Sirsa 4 Paker 2 1 1 2 4

Peepal _2 | - 2

Chil Bil | || I _ - 1 |

Arjoon - 3|_ 3 |

Mango _ __| | -j .f- J |-i 92

Mahua _ I _1_ 1 1 Ashok _ | _ _ i 1 | 1 |_ j 1 1

Madina i 6 1 _ 61 Eucalyptus _ __ I l V 12 1 2 | Mix _ -| 8 _ _ |- _ | | | 691 7

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 142

33-34 Sisam 1 41 3 | 2 20 22 ______. ___ A: 26 13

Babool |_ 121| 1 5 1 1|12 |2 19 _31 |__| Neem 1 41 | 1 1 2 | 11 1 | 7 I Sirsa . | i 1| 51

| |Peepal | ¢g--t;s T'l'F;t ll 11 4

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department,Lucknow, India 4-99 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCO Servicesfor UttarPradesh Slate Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 30-40 4G60 > . L R L R L R L R L R L R L Arjoon 1 Mango ~ Mahua Jamun Paker… Mix 2 2

======< -5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5272 TOTALNO. OF TREES 124 34-35 Sisam = 16 10 22 7 z8' 8 . 2 34 37 Babool 6 14 20 25 27 6 31 67 Eucalyptus ____2 14 14 4 14 20

___Neem 4 4 - Paker 2. 2 | =______lamun I -

Peepal __ Arjoon 3 3 Mahua ===_ 1 1 Madina _ I -

_ _ _ Mix 3 - 3

TOTAL NO. OF TREES 220 35-36 Sisam 6 6 6 7 | 1 __¶. j : 32 27 Eucalyptus 1 7 21 7 22

Neem 112 -

| Paker | _____ 1 | 1 Mahua 4 i 1

Babool __1_ 2 - 3 | Mix 8

___ I | |ii -- __ I i } 6 _ - 43 61 TOTALNO. OF TREES 104

36-37 Sisam . 2 8 9 371 .35

Eucalyptus 9 a 9 _

Arjoon _ 3 40 3 | 3 43

Chil Bil | 1 _ | 11 Neem 1 | 1

Jamun | ---- '- 1 - Mix 62 156 t 162 |156 ______|{ - - OFTRES* i. 1---1 112 2451 TOTALNO. OF TREES |357 37-38 Sisam 1 1 . - 19

._|_Babool - 2 6 2 81 __ | 2 16 Eucalyptus . F 4 i 33 __i 2 _ | 4 351 Sirsa I 1 I 1 | |- _ - Paker 1 | | 2 -

Peepal _ |1 2 1 3 11

______l Imli _ _ I I _

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Depanment, Lucknow, India 4-100 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV,Consuliants H3V September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHAMMADPUR

______~~~Girthwise Distribution (cm) ______Total Km Tree <10cm i10-20[J20-30 30,40 [40-60 >60 I J LL RR ~ LI R L R L LRRLLR R L

Kaitha ______1 2

Madina __1 RI 1 ___

______~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES 108 38-39 Sisam ] 2 1- 2 4 4.1J.10 A. 14 12

____Eucalyptus 13 59 13 59

____Aroon 10 5 - 15 Chil Bil 8 1 - 9

Babool 1 __ 2 3 3 3

__ ___ ango _ ____1 2

Feepal ___1 1 jamun 14 8 Paker 2 2 -

Banyan -3 -

Mix 12 12 -

______~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~63109 _____ ~~~~~~~~~TOTALNO. OF TREES - - - - -172 39-40 Sisam… 2 6 i 9 14

____Baboof 2 a Neem22 6 Peepai 1 6

____ Paker 2___3 _3_

Madina ___2 5 2 Eucalyptus 12_2__1 Banyan

Arjoon 3 __ 3_____ Sirsa I Chil Bil 77 Mix 12 27 12 27_

Mahua __ _ 1 I_

TOTAL NO. OF TREES __ 131___

40-41 Sisam ___13 23 -

Babool ____ 30 _3 7__ __ 30 53

Eucalyptus __6 434__64_

___Mango ___ ";i. 6 Neem 1 ChilB3il 22 Peepal2

_ _ __ Paker _ _ __

Banyan ___

____Arjoon Kaitha Mix 25 2

TOTALNO. OF TREES 235

Governmentof UttarPradesh,-Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-101 Project Co-ordirnatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) OHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPUR TO MOHIAMMADPUR

Girthwise Distribution(cm) j Total Km Tree <10 cm 10-20 20-30 30-40] 40-60 1 >60 L

______I~~~ R L R RL R L R LI R 41-42 Sisam 2) 1 2 22 1 7 $'7, 38 16

* Babool __j 18 8 10 8 28

____Eucalyptus - __ - f1 108 57 1 108 59

___Mango __ I,2:a A½ 2 _ jamun ' 3' -12 5 12

* Neem I 2 3 -

___ Arjoon 2 3 3 3 5 Paker 3 3 - Sirsa 5 2 15 3

____Banyan -

Mahua .__ - 1

____Peepal -- 5

_ _ Mix 2 - 2

______~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~175132 TOTALNO. OF TREES 307 42-43 Sisam 1 1 14 8 6~ 5 40 it

Babool 1 21 5 18 _ 6 39

Eucalyptus 22 3 ___ 5 -22 42

Arjoon 1 14 - 6 Sirsa 1 4 1 4

____Semar1 11 Neem 1 1 *1 i i t2 6

___ Peepal ______i 2 2

Madina11 Mix 10 11 10 11 86 12 TOTAL NO.OF TREES………- 20

43-44 Sisam - . 1 3 2 8 5 4 *7734: 40 20.

___Babool j2 7 21 93 2 21 - 23 1411 Neem11 1

____Eucalyptus J2 14 9 , 14 1

____Sirsa 2 1 0 1 7 6 6 1 ' 8 34_ _Mango I 1: 2 -~

Paker _ l I -~

Chil Bil -3_____ 2 4 4 Peepal .27 2

Ar)oon 2__B_ __ __

Semar -2 1 14

Kanji - 3

Bale ~ .*>t ";z.' __ 7Z3'4

Mix 35 I___- 35

______I....~~~~~~~~~] ___ I.~~~~___ ~~95 272 TOTAL NO.,OF TREES .367 444. Sisam I K~i223 6 20 a Baboo 12 4 10 5 12

Governmentof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Depariment,Luckniow, India* 4-0 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultanis (PCC) Servces for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase li OHV ConsultantsU3V September2001

ROUTE 18 - JAUNPURTO MOHAMMADPUR

Girth wise Distribution (cm) Total Km Tree <10cm 10-20 20-30 1 30-40 4060 >60 R L R L R L R L R L L R L Neem 2 2 2 6 10 10j 12

Eucalyptus - 3 15 - 3| 15

_ _ Sirsa…5 __ _5 1 -

Mango - = I= 1 Paker 1I Chil Bil 2 3 3 2 Peepal = = =: 4 3 Shemmer 1 1

Jamun -6 9 Madina 6 6 Kaitha - 4 Mix 50 9 50 9 =_ ======115 75 TOTALNO. OF TREES 190 45-46 Sisam ______[=4 6 jPeepal ____ .

S___ale______1

____jNeem 1[

TOTALNO. OF TREES 9

Governmentof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 4-103 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Unar Pradesh State Roads Project LO

X: Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September 2001

ANNEX5 PUBLICCONSULTATIONS AND INFORMATIONDISCLOSURE

Questionnaireand Guidelinesfor PublicConsultation

Q I Do haveany problem due to the existingroad? Q2 Haveyou heardof the project?If yes,what do you know about it? Q3 If, roadhas to beexpanded, which side should the expansion take place and why? Q4 Whetherbypass, via duct roads-,which is betteralternative. Why? (Explain the meaningof eachto thegroup) Q5 WIhynot theother two choices?Give reasons. Q6 Whichoption likely to causeminimum risk of accidentsto the humanbeings? Q7 If bypass,which side? Q8 If the wideningof the roadnecessitates dislocation, where would you like to be relocated (Area)? Q9 Whatform of compensationwould you prefer?(Order of priority)if it is cashhow much approximately? Q1O Whatkinds of problemsdo you foreseein the processof relocation? 1. 2. 3. Ql1 Whatare the possiblesolutions? Solution1. Solution 2. Solution3. Q12 What would be the suitable location for the constructionof lay-bye?What kind of services should be provided at theselay-byes? (Explain the conceptof lay-bye) Q13 What arethe possibilitiesof shiftingthe temple(s)?And whereto relocate? Q14 Any other issueyou would like to discuss? Q15 Whatare the accidentalhotspots? Q16 Do you knowthat trafficwill increasein futureyears and pollution levelsalso? Whatmeasures in your views should be takento reducepollution? Q17 Do you know that tree cutting will take place in COI? Q18 To compensatetree plantationwhich speciesyou recommend? Q19 Do you know environmentalenhancement measures are part of the project? Theseenvironmental enhancement measures include pond beautification, barriers for nolse protectionat educationalinstitutes/health facilities, construction of bus-bays,etc. Q20 Which arewater-logged areas in your surroundingsalong the road? Q2 1 Do you feel excessivenoise at night time due to traffic? Q22 What measuresdo you suggestfor reductionof noisepollution? Q23 Which portion of routesare proneto flooding andsoil erosion? Q24 Do you know that by-passwill provide a big relief from ppllution? Q25 Do you feel congestionon road, if yes, at which locations?

Governnicm of Uttir Pradesh,Public Works Deparrmen-,Luckno%v, India 5-1 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHVConsultants BV September2001

Guidelinesfollowed for conductinglocal level consultation

(After you reachthe targetedvillage, try and meet village leadersor opinion leaders.Inform them about your purposeof visit and in short explain them the project. Requestthem to give sometime to the team from their busy schedule.Do not promiseany thing to the potential PAPseven if you are provoked. If persisted,just inform them that you are here to assessthe impact and discussion with them will guide your minimise the impacts.Given below are certain guidelines,which will help you in discussion.Do not try to stick to this alone. In case somethingnew comes up while discussingwith the PAPs,discuss at length.This is a mereguideline and not a questionnaire.)

(A) GeneralInformation

1. Nameof the Routeand Link 2. Nameof the Village/Block/District 3. Landmarkfor identificationof village 4. Historyof the village 5. Total populationof the village,caste and religionwise distribution 6. Populationof the villagewithin ROW,caste wise and religionwise distribution 7. Major occupationfollowed by affectedpopulation 8. Major developmentalactivities carried out in the village sinceinception 9. Age of the habitationalong the roadside 10. How roadside habitationdeveloped.

[While you collect this information, preparethe groundwork for Social and ResourceMap and with the help of anothergroup requestthem to helpyou in preparationof the maps.]

(B) Awarenessabout the project Si. - No. 5Issues Action Points 1 Awarenessregarding the project If theyare not aware,tell themin detailwhat project is all about. 2 Viewsof thePAPs with referenceto the 1. Tryand find out,whether people are in favourof impactsof theroads bypassor theyare willing to give up their houses. 2. PAPsconcern with regardto shrines,burial grounds, trees,etc. 3. Concernregarding the compensation. 4. Concernof PAPsregarding roadside accidents (Safety Issues). 3 Effectiveplanning and implementation 1. WhetherPAPs are willing to participatein the process of identifyingalternate site for relocation/bypass,etc. 2. whetherPAPts should be consultedbefore drawings of the roadsare finalised. 3. Processof Replacementof affected community properties. 4 MigratingTribal Groups I FDGwith thegroups if encounteredon the projectroute.

(C) Toolsto be Used

Tools of consultationincluded Social Maps, ResourceMaps and Group Discussions.Group Leaderwill ensure that during theseexercises, consultation team will only facilitate and in no way would interfere or try to influence the views of PAPs.While conducting group discussion,while one person will ask questions,other person in the group will take notes. Sizeof the groupshould be not more than 15.

Rememberto thank thePAPs after you finish your discussion.

Governmentof UttarPradesh, PLiblic Works Department, LIcknow, India 5-2 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Note-OnConsultation With PollutionControl Board And Conservator Of Forests,U.P. 913/2000.

Along with Ms Sonia Kapoor of the World Bank and Mr Yadav. (PWD), visits were made to the Departmentof Pollution Control Board & conservatorof forests, U.P. The points discussedare briefly statedas under:

1. Member secretary, U.P. State Pollution Control Board mentioned that in case of the national highways,a number of studieswere made mandatorydue to wider impact pollution (disturbanceto natural drainage, air pollution, noise etc.) and also land acquisition / resettlement.In case of improvementsto StateHighways, this may not be necessarysince the negativeimpacts will be considerablyless, though he sharedthe concern with us, they needto be instructedfrom the above in writing in absenceof which they continue to insist upon sampling, data presentationand mitigation measuresas per normal procedures.They agreedto presenttheir views at the scoping workshop when the U.P. StateRoad ProjectTeam would be in a position to presenttheir outline. Time andvenue will be intimatedto them in duecourse.

2. The chief conservatorof Forests,U.P., and his Dy. On World Projectsdiscussed the forestryissues threadbaremaking specific points related to forestryclearances:

Within Right of Way any improvementsdo not involve acquisitionof forest land. Henceforest land issuesare not involved;

Where acquisition of land in forest areas is involved, a detailed study covering land area, soil conditions, floral characteristicsand the type of bio-diversityincluding rare / endangeredspecies is required. A detailed questionnaire is to be filled up and measures for replacementplanting including suitable land acquisition,plantation scheme,nursery raising, implementation,aftercare, budgeting provision with timetable for actions and undertaking to do so are required to be submitted.A valuationof specieslost is also requiredto be submitted;

Actual clearanceof forest is done only by the forestrydepartment through their own procedures laid down for the purpose;

Roadsideplantations are now declaredforestry areas and their clearancerequires approval from the department;

40 % canopy cover, 5 hectarein hilly area and 20 hectarein plain areas comes under forestry purview. A booklet in Hindi giving the forestryconservation Act, 1980 (revisedtill October 1992) was given to the project road team. The Conservatorof forests,also, mentionedthat they would be pleased to attend the Scopingworkshop and presenttheir views/offertheir comments,advice on matters relating to forestry clearance.The Project Team members mentioned that prior study of guidelines and rules can influence the study and help to identify stretches/routeswith minimum forestryproblems.

Governinieiitui Uttdr Pradesib,Public Works Departmi1enit,Lucknow, India 5-3 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCCi Servicesfor Unar PradeshState Roads Project Annex 6 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase tI DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ANNEX 6 PROPOSEDLOCATION OF DRAINSON PROJECTROUTES

Left Drains ___Right Drains___ SI. No Sat'End Length It Str End Length

Chainage __Ch_nage_ (in kin) IChainage Chainage (in kin) -Katra-jalalabad-AllahganjBangarmau-Bilgram (4A) 1 0.00~~~~~~~~10.320 1 0.320 000.00 0.320: 0.320 2 33.040 32.700 0.340 I 1 7.450 170700 0-250 3 33.460: 33.040: 0.420 33.460; 33.040: 0.420 4 33.460 34.460 1.000! 33.460 34.460 1.000 5 54.760 55.126 0.4001 54.760: 55.160; 0.400 6 66.600; 66.900 0.300 66.600' 66.900 0.300 7 75.500 76.560 1.060 75.500 76.560 1.060 8 102.800 102.400 0.400 104.290: 104.520 0.230 9 104.290 104.520; 0.230I104.8301 104.520 0.310 10 104.830 104.520: 0.310 114.100 I113.450 0.650 11 114.100' 113.450 0.650 1172601 116.700i 0.560 12 117.260 I116.700 0.560'i 4.440 4.860 0.420 13 4.440: 4.860 0.420 7.770 7.450.I 0.320 14 7.770 7.450 0.3201 7.770: 8.100 I 0.330 15 7.770 8.100 0.330 19.680 19.420: 0.260 16 19.680 19.420t 0.260It 19.680; 19.01 .2 1 7 19680 19.900: 0.220,

Baric-onaKatra (FaizabadRoad) (7) ____ 1 I 2.900 3 9 00000lOOi 2.900 I 3.900 1.000 2 140121.480 00801 21-400 -- 21.480 0.080 3 21.700[1 21.4901 0.2101 21.700, 21 490 0 210 4 30.700 i30.920 0.2201 30.750! 30.920 0.170 5 31 110i 30.930, 0.180 31.150 30-930; 0.220 6 37.700 3750 0,050 37.700 37.750, 0.050 7 37900 37-750 0.1501 37.900 37.750 0.150 8. 47-900, 48300 0400k 47.9001 48.3001 0.400 9 51.700 52000 0.3001 51.700! 52.000' 0.300 10 55.000 55~250 0.250' 55.000. 55.250: 0.250 11 64-550' 64~650~ 0.100 i65.080;I 64.650 I 0.430 12 65.080 64.650 0.430' 65.080. 65.410 0.330 13 65.080 65.410'1 0.330 I65.670 65.410 0.260 14 65.670 65.410 0.260 65.670: 66.500 0.830 ...... _- - - ~ . 15 i 65.670 66.500, 0.830 66.660 66.5004 0.160 16 1 66.660' 66,500 0.160 66.660 67.260 0.600 1 7 66.660: 67.260 0.600; 67 620 67.260 0.360 18 67.620; 67.260__ 0.360, 67-620 67.850, 0.230 19 67.620 I67,7201 0100 68.430 67.850 0,580 20 68.430 67,850: 0.580 i68-430 68.5101 0.080 21 68.4301 68.510 0.0801 68.5101 69.4801 0.970 22 68.510 69.480; 0.970 74.120, 73 820 0.300 23 74.120 73.820 I 0.300 74.120 74,620 0.500 24 74.120 74-620 0.500 74.720 74.620 0.100 25 74~720 74~620 0.1001 74.950 74.720 0.230 26 74.950 74.720 0.230 74.9501 75,820 0.330 27 74.950 75.280 0.330; 82.050 82.320 0.270 28 82.050 82.320 0.270 82.400 82.320'i 0.080 29 82.400 82.320 0.080i 91.000 91,560 0.560 30 91.000 91.560 0.560' 92.230 91.560'I 0.670 31 92.230 91.560 0.670 102.300! 102.4001 010 32 102300 102.400: 0.100'i 102.520~ 102.400 012

GOVUrnmentof Uttar Pradesh,PLublic Works Department, Ltucknow,India 6-1 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

.LeftDrains ______Right Drains SI. No Start ; End Length Start End ILength Chainiage Chainiage (in kmn) Chainage Chainage (in kin)

33 __102.520 102.400; 0.120' 102.520: 102.9001 0.380 34 102.520. 102.900 0.380 1102.980j103.220 0.240 35 102.980 103.220 0.240: 109.354; 108.450j 0.904 36 109.354 108.450. 0.904' Jaunpur-Muhammadpur(18) 1I 2.430 2.180, 0.250 2.510 2.180 0.330 2 4.230 4.370 0. 140 4.230 4.370 0.140 3 4.790 4.3 70 0.420. 4.790 4.370 0.420 4 15.150 14.640' 0.510; 15.090 14.750; 0.340 5 15.650 15.350 0.300 15.090 15.350 0.260 6 19.340 19.200; 0.140: 15.650 15.350; 0.300 7 19.340 !9.600' 0.260. i19080 19.150 0.070 8 20.080 20.290. 0.210 19.340 19.150 0.190 9 25.880. 27.360 1.480 19.340 19.600f 0.260 10 27.3 60j 27.650; 0.2901 19.680~ 19.600 0.080 11 34.450: 35.390. 0.940 20.080 20.290 0.210 12 37.310 37.530 0.220 25.880 27.360 1.480 13 39.770: 40.050. 0.280 27.360 27.650 0.290 14 40.214: 40.050 0.164 34.450 35.390 0.940 15 37.310 37.5301 0.220

16 ______~~~~~~~~39.770 40050 0.280 17 40.2001 40.050 0.150

Bhogniipur-Ghatampur-ChaudaghraMode (14) ___ -______1 0.000 0.170 0.170 0.000' 0.170 0.170 2 16.600. 16,970 0.3701 16.600~ 16.9701 0.370 3 17.370 16.970, 0.4001 17.370 16.9701 0.400 4 17370 17.810 1 0.4401 17.370 17.790] 0420 5 45.600 45,7501 o.iso 45.600 455] 0.150 6 46.000 45.750; 0.250; 46.000 45.750 0.250 7 57.000 57.320 0.3201 57.000 57.320 0.320 8 57.540 57.320 0.220: 57.540 57.320. 0.220 9 57.540 57.770 0.2301 57.540 57.770 0.230 10 58.050 57.7 70; 0.2801 57.950 57.770 0.180 11 58.100 58.350 0.250f 57.950 58.370 0.420 12 58.680 58.360; 0.320i 58.680 58.380 0.300 13 58.680 58.780 0.100 58.680 58.780~ 0.100 14 I 58.940 58.780~ 0.1601 58.940 58.780 0.160 15 58.940 59.7601 0.8201__58.940 59.7601 0.820 ...... -- - . j ______16 70.350 70,600. 0.250~ 70.350 70.600 0.250 17 70.900 70.600I 0.300170.900 70.600 I 0.300 18a 77.760 78.280. 0.5201 77.760 78.280 0.520 19 78.700 78.840, 0.140 1 78.950 78.8401 0.110 2 0 82.250 81.9001 0.350 I82.250 81.900 0.350

Government of Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 6-2 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsP roject Annex 7 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase o) DHVConsultants BV September 2001

ANNEX7 PILOTSTUDY ON ROADSAFETY ENVIRONMENT

1 INTRODUCTION

Studiescarried out in India suggestthat with increasein traffic volume coupled with increased development in roadside activities,the accidentexposure rate generally increaseif improvement measuresare not taken in time. The road environmentis an importantfactor alongwith road user behaviour and vehicle factor in determiningthe inherent risk associatedwith any sectionof a road. Road passing through settlement areas face serious safety problems. In absenceof accurate identificationand prioritisation of criteria there has been little attemptto pinpoint black spots and application of appropriatecounter measures,especially on the state highways and major district roads.

The objective of this pilot study on road safetyenvironment is to provide a baselineassessment of the collision occurrenceon selectedsample roads,which will help in identifying potential safety hazardlocations and suggestingappropriate measures to enhancesafety along the road.

Following discussionswith the representativesof he UPPWD and the World Bank; it was decided that the pilot study would cover the following road sections selected for upgradation and maintenance:

* Bhognipurto ChaudraghraMode (SH46) - upgradation; * Katrato Bangarmau(MDR 5W, SH 29, MDR 26C,SH 38)- upgradation; * Pratapgarhto Allahabad(SH 9) - maintenance;-- * Lakhimpurto Sitapur(SH 21) - maintenance.

The road alignment drawings were examined prior to detailed site investigationsto assessthe designer's compliance with the relevant standardsand guidelines and identify any area or spot requiring close attention. Along with the site investigationsthe accident occurrence records for various stretches were collected from respectivepolice stations. In all the police stations a discussionwas also held with officials regardingtraffic behaviour and hazardouslocations. The characteristicsof various routes and the occurrence of accidents, route-wise,are discussed as under:

2 KATRATO BANGARMAU(MDR 5W/SH 29/MDR26C/SH 38)

Roadcharacteristics and accidents

This 153.1km route has five sub-sections (links) with carriageway width varying from single lane to double lane with very poor stateof the earthenshoulders. The averagedaily traffic along the route rangesfrom 3,665 to 7,671 vehicles with significantchange in composition. The traffic volume is maximum alongJalalabad-Allahganj section. The surfacecondition of the entire route is quite bad, hovering around an IRI figure of 6.8. The salient featuresof the route is shown in the following table:

Governmentol Uttar Pradesh,Public WorksDepartment, LLcknu(jw,India 7-1 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCc) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Table Annex8.1 Generalprofile of the roadsections

Se Ition Len~h Gcm) wCarridgh Ruhes AverageDaily Traffic (ADr)

(intion ,,Index S()w IRI No of ----.-.-- --.-'.'------. ------ehcl , P U F s Katra- Jalalabad 35.0 4.08 642 I 3,665 6,133 ! 41.96 Jalalabad-Allahganj 19.6 417 r 6.97 7,671 12;046 51.38 L -- - - - . ._.___.______I___,__.. Allahgani - Bilgram 61.5 I 3.85 7.15 3,919 . 8,461 69.92 Bilgram - Madhoganj I 13.2 - 7.00 6.64 3,919, 8,461 69.92 | Madhoganj - Bangarmau 23.8 . t.O, 6.74 4,040 4,007 1 3411

3 ACCIDENTOCCURRENCE

The route falls within the jurisdiction of 12 police stationsfrom where accident recordsfor the last three years were collected and analysed (Table4.11). During the year 1999 there were 52 accidentsrecorded on this route,though the actualnumber accordingto the police officials may be much higher. A major portion of theseaccidents is not reportedand goeswithout lodgingan FIR through mutual settlementsby involved parties.Out of 52 accidentsthe involvementof pedestrian has been observedin 36 cases.The severityof the accidentscan be gaugedfrom the fact that there were 30 deathsand 29 injuries,which work out to be 0.2 per km in each case.

Table Annex8.2 Detailsof accidentsrecorded in 1997, 1998and 1999

Involvement Severity

Police .8IProbable Station Year Oate Location c - reason

Katra . 1997 , Data not available ___j___ 1998 No accidentrecorded 1999 Apr6 Nagaria jDay5rT,:.. 'Tuk . Narrowroad, ------_1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.bad shoulder, Jul25 'tNagaria iDay IJeep j j poor junction ...... 23. airp....Day .. e..ca.... geometrics, Aug23!Khaipur Day !jeep - rash driving Madnapur. 1997 Feb4 Kudaiya Day Truck 'i Narrow road, ---- bad shioulder, ,Mar3iMad-napur ' Day Jeep -:b' Jun 2 Kesopur 'Day Tracktor Cycle = abudeing ...... ------~~~~~~~~~~~~developinens liU 29 Barkhera iDay Jeep V I pedestrian .Sep11 Haidalpur Day rruck - t spill-over, rash 1998 May31 Madnapur Day Bus lun 20 iB'arkhera Day Jeep Aug28 Haidalpur Day M.cycle i 1999 Feb12 Madnapur 'Day 'Scooter ,

JlIl 12 Barkhera Day Truck _ ' I / lalalabad 1997 Mdar18lalalabad Day ,Truck Roadside May 2 Yakubpur -Day .Jeep i i commercial dand residenitial Dec 19. Barkhera Day Truck=developme''s, 1998 Feb 16 Dolapur ,Day Track6or . V pedestrian May 7 Yakubpur :Day .Truck j i ' i spillover,on- .Aug8 Atibara Day M.cycle streetparking. Dec 23 Kolamode ;Day .Truck Bus j Vhih lef poor 1999 Apr 9 lalabad Day jeep .roadc May8 Bars;ari Day jeep i geometrics Jun19 Jalalabad , Day Tractor 'BUL Jul 2 Jaialabad :Day Truck H Carl -Oct 19 Sainiina IDay Jeep

Gover1nmenttoiUttar Pi,desli, Publi 'vVurksDepaituneiiit Luck6iowv,india 7-2 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) 01-V ConsultantsBV September2001-

IInvolvement Severity Polic e Probalble Stton Year Date Location '. I~~ rm reason

> >_ __

A llahgjanj 199 May 18' Katuir Day iTrtc - Narrow road !Jun 14 [ Hoolapu Da usi with.bad 'il ,hoiulder,poor JunEmalia 16 '~~~DayiTractor I __ intersection Jul 1 Goaoe'a u cce i geometrics, Oct 29 Hoolapur IN ight Tractor Imeandering Dec 23' Katuli Da rc IIIsction with ______-- -- ~poorgeometic 1998 Jan21 Hoolapur Day !Truck Ifeatures !FebI1 1 Shugsuki Da'Je MyleI absenceo Ap Ho-olapiur Day 'Bus M.cycle iIaeiaera V____- signs and Jun2 C.KiCrd NighjTractor ve . akig Oct 15 IEmalia DayTTruck M.cycle "abutting Oct 29 Shugsuki__Day iTruck I/dvlpet

Dec 31 Thengri Day !Truck I ' wihpoe ______~~~~~~~set-back,rash 1999 JaniS Hoolapur Day ITracto I i driving etc, Jan 23 Hoolapur Day :Tractor I

!Feb 16 Sh:ugsuki Dpay 'Truck Jeep ___

Mar 19, Katuli 'Night 'Bus 'Cycle ___ / ;Apr 8 Katuli 'Day TruckT Jul 22 Allahgan_NihTep .Jul26 Goramode Day Truck CylV_ ALug10 Eali Day iBus Aug161 ShugsukJjoy ruk iCycle I Aug 3 0 iThegi ay !Bus iTempoT i Pai 19918 !Jul23 Kanhari Day !Bus i I Narrowroad, 1999 lFeb-15iKhamaria Day Bous II Ipoilreto

Juli28 I Kanhari Day Bus Jeep .r, goerc a Nov 191Gourkhera Day 'Truck huderivnrtsh Harpalpur 1997 J,an8 Harpaipur Day M.y IV I Narrow moad,

i Oct 13 Harpalpu IbyJe I interseto Dec 2 Eknoura iDay Myi___geetcs IF199 Apr 29 Eknoura ,Night.,Tractor ;Cycle i- ''ad shoulder, May 5 Eknoura iDay iTempo I rash dnving, iMay 101Harpalpuir 'Day Tatrodsd ------~ - ---- ~ ~ ~ ____ development Jiul5 Kakara DyJe ihu ijul 26 Ekrioura 1Day ~Bus adequateset- 1999 Jun 29 Eknoura 'Day M.cycle nc t 'Nov 29' Halpalpur Day iBus ;CycleI Bllgram 1997 Fb21 Naipurwa 'Day 'Trwacor V Narrow road, May t0ONaipurwa Day ITrolley po Jul 4 iNaiDurwa 1Day iBus I oat itreto ------...... ------~ ~~~-. geometcs, Aug 12' Pashner !Day Jeep ___ibad shoulder, 19-98 Jan17. .Durgagani'Day iCycl-e- 'C'y-cIe- rash driving, Mar 18 IS.Khera 'a'Tempo Day ~~~~~~~~~~~~developmentrodsd Se-p- -1 0-1 Du r-g a-g a ijDay Jleepwihu Dec 23 Durgaganj 'Day Jruck Ido adequateset- 1999 Feb 1S Hirapur iDay 'Tempo bait 'Feb 15 Poshanpir; Day Tempo

Feb 16 .Roshanpur Day Jeep Mar 4 Sadarpuir tDay Jieep :Mar 15 SadarpLur Day Truck Ap23 RoshanpUriNight'Van Nov I RoshanpLurDay ijeep

GovernmTentof Uttar Pradesh,Ptubi ic Works DeparTment,tic-know, India73 Project Coi-crdirnatingConsultants (PCC)Services (or Uttar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase II DHV Consultants,RV September2001

involvement Severity I

Statioe Year Date Location r E roal U reason

Madhoani 1997 Jan23 SekhwapurDay Truck VPoor 4 1998 :May 24 Madhogant ihtrc V v in[erseciO Jun 27 j Rudamau 'Day 'Tractor Scooter Iemtit ______~~~~~~~~~roadside Aug 28, Madhognj iDay 'Truck ~~ 1 deelpmnt Mar9 Rsulapur NightlTruck deehpet Mar2 1 Madhaoganj!Day Truk 'badeuc est Ma1;SkwpurD :yTruck /bc M~allawan 519-97 F-ebT8i& BhikharipurjNight]Tractor "iNrrow roadj Apr 7 Mallanwa iDay M.Cyclewt a shoulder, poor May 7 5 Rewari Night:Bus Tractor ___intersection May 28, Mallanwa Day Jep geometrics, Jun 4 mallanwa 'Day Tractor road side

'Jun 23 iMallanwa 'Day :jeep ___ivopents 1998 Jan20 Barhauna !Night Jeep withouate :Feb 10 mallanwa Day Scooter __-sebck, rash fey 18 M allanwa D6ayTm rvn t may 3 Mallanwa IDay 'Bus May 26~Mallanwa Day Tractor IV

Aug 151 Mallanwa Day ;Truck " Sep21 Mallanwa IDay Temip / Oct- 1 Mallanwa Day Tuk ~Oct13 Kalipur Night I ruck 'Dec 12, Gauri IDay Van I/- 1999 ~Jan31 i Bajiganj IDay Tempo I i I :Feb 24!Mallanwa ;Day :Van ------Mar9 5SGanga I Day !Tractor Apir 3 Mallanwa INight Bus 'Truck !May9 Khemipur Day 'Tempo Jun 17 Mallanwa Day Van V Jul22 Mallanwa Day Bus Truck Ag5lSutanurDay Temp Nov 23, Mallanwa 'Day Tractor DecIO10Gangapur Day Jeepi Dec 161 Pulia ;Day Truck Bangareiiau1997 jlan 30 BangarTmau'Day Truck ~MCycle Poor 'Mar 24 BangarmauDay jeep itreto

Jun 13 BangarmiauiDay Tractor ,.-- emtis Jun 17 Bangarmau!Day Truck parking, Jun 28 Bangarmtau'Day Truck commercial A 2g29Bangartnau 'Day Truck deloriei along road, I1998 Apr IS Bangarmau;Day Tiractor~Cycle -i pedestrian * May 9 MuradabadIDay Temipo- spill over, rash may 161Bangamiau :Day Jeepdrvnet May 27 B3angarmau!DayBus, * Jun 10 Muradabad Day Tractor jeep * ii 28 MuracdahadlDay Tempo Auig10. BangarmaL_Day BuLS ALugII 1angarmiaB :Day Truick Scooter

,Oct 29 BangarmauDay Truck M.Cycle " Dec 15 BangarmLI Day Trictor V- 1999 Mar-113Nasirptir Day M.Cycle Scooter Sep30,Duihapur Day TrLuCk-lep -Oct 20: Banganrsau' Day jeep Cycle

- Oct21 1anarmau Da TrLuck Cycle -Nov t Muradabad Day 8 LS

-Nov 22i Muradlabad D iy Tractor

Government of Uttar PradeuhiPublic Work

4 ACCIDENTSPOTS

Major accident-pronelocations along the routehave been identified as,

* Khairpurfour-arm intersection; * Madnapururban area; * Yakubpurthree-arm intersection; alalabadurban area; * Hoolapurfour-arm intersection; * Katuli village; * SughsukhiMode (zigzagsection between Jalalabad and Allahaganj); * Harpalpurdeveloped area; • Eknauravillage; * Sawaijpurthree-arm intersection; * Roshanpurvillage; * Madhoganjthree-arm intersection; • Mallawan urbanarea; * Ganj Muradabadintersection; * Bangarmauurban area including Mohan Rd.and BilhaurRd. intersections.

It may be observedfrom the list that mostof the major settlementsand junctions are quite accident- prone though the accident records for last three years--identifysome of them as accident 'black spots'. The crime recordsat the police stationsdo not presentthe nature of collision for most of the cases.The discussionswith the concernedofficials revealedthat the nature of collision for majority of casesis;

* Rearend collision * Rightangled collision X Brush/Sideswipe

At certain locationsdue to inadequatesight distanceand poor geometricfeatures the collision type is 'head-on'.

Deficiencies

In generalmajor deficiencies observed in the routeare:

* Mostly single lane road with poor shoulder condition increasingthe risk of smaller road users (by cyclesand pedestrians). * Badroad surface * Poorgeometrics for intersectionsand accessroads with inadequatesight distance * Absenceof proper roadsigns and markings * Meanderingsection between Jalalabad and Allahaganjwith poorgeometric features * Absenceof footpathat developedareas forcing pedestrianto spill over on the road * No adequatesetback for residentialand commercialactivities from roadedge.

Recommendations

The entire route has been proposed to be widened to two-lane carriagewaywith hard and soft shoulders.Taking into considerationthe land acquisition problems and related rehabitation and resettlementissues, the genericsolutions for minimisingthe accidentrisk can be listedas follows:

* Development of major intersectionsas per MOST specificationsand improvementof minor ones through provisionsof adequatesight distance;turning radii (minimum 20 m.) and storage space (minimum 20 m.).

Government of Utar Pradesh,PLiblic Works Department, LLuCknow,India 7 -5 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

. Smootheningout the horizontal profile of hazardouszigzag section with respectto the design speed. Provisionof adequateroad signs and markings. In major settlementswithin the developed areadivided carriagewayof at least5.5 m. wide in each directionis to be providedwith 2 m. wide footpathon eachside Provisionof rumblestrips at major settlements. In small settlementsthe setback from the roadedge is to be made at least5 m. Trafficmanagement measures should be consideredin urbanareas.

Refugeisland for pedestriansin urban areas

SettlementArea Pedestriancrossing

2 m Footpath 2 .5 m hard standing ;- --

.7I--: sefugeisland (minimum 1.2 m) 16 r

30 m 2 .5 n hard standing

.2rn _ __ _ K Footpath__ < > -_-_---_--. I.

SettlementArea Source:IRC SP 43

5 CONCLUSION

Based on findings of the study, routewise improvementsin development of intersections,as per MOST specifications,smoothening of zig-zag sections,railway level crossings,refuse islands for pedestrians,setback from road edge, etc. have been incorporatedin design. Identified accidental hot spotshave been provided with mitigation measures.

Governmentof.Uttar Pradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 7-6 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project Annex 8 EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I)r DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

ANNEX8 LIST OF HOT SPOTS

LINK 4: KATRA-BILHAUR

Health EducationIReligious Commnnity !Arcelgical Chainage - __-____ Cmuiy Water rhol L R L!R L R LR L R L R 111671 111741 158211 1 73891 1 74491 1 76331 1 76921 180741 182791 187411 191681 195151 203 541 212011 21617 1

26062 .1

26068. .11 27816 1

287491-. 318991

32 7401 328791 329561

32998 ___

33089 . 33140 1 332401

-33287 - 3332 11 3334 71 333421 3343 7 33486 - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----1--- 33513

335311 335401

33546 .1

- 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------336951 33963

33966 . 1 339801

C7n\w~nmentof Uittar [Pradesh,Puiblic Works Depsrnment.LLucknow. India 8-1 Project Co-ordiniatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Health Education Religious Communioy Drnkng Archeologia Chiairiage IWater ca 1 L R L R L R LIRIR L R 33995 340711 340871T 340921 341821 34216__1 34224 j 1 3431 71

34333 __ 3443211 348671 1 1 34872 4-

35249 ___ 35569 386141 388841 426991 *42 705 1 427111 427311 -43023 I__

547111 1 1 1

54920 1 1 5498911 55029 .L______55035 2 550051 550981 551461 551891 552421 558451 566531 56846 F 57798--1 58030 I 618331 620631 62351 1 633661 636381 649621 1 662001 664501 664551

66591 66663

Governmientof UttarPradesh, PLublic Works Department, LLucknow,India 8-2 Project Co-ordintrig C0onSUtntS (PCCIServices for Utiar PradeshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessinent (Phase 1) DHVConsultants BV Septeml~er2001

t Drinking ChainageHealth Education Religious Community Archeological L iZ L R L R L RR

66666 _1 6669211 667221 1 667551

66807 __1 1 668211 668701 670301 1

67681 - 680931 696331 706951 716871 71710 718061 718901

743781 744201 749001 751921

75204 - -I1 752971 755131 75614 1.I 757741 75813 I

75860 .- 1 758641 75927 I 760571 76425 1 816751 821231 831221 831851 832881 832991 858911 85963 1 85999 1 860541 86078 913651 100326 1 100773 1

101009 1 1021521 1026531

Coverti~iioeisof Uttxr P1.1CI&-;!k, Puiblic \'Works Departinent, Lucknow, India 8-3 ProjectCo-ordinitin-, Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Drinking Health Education Religious CommunityI 'rcheological Chainage -- ______Water L R LiR: R L RjL : 1026531 1027641 1027791 1027821 1028271 1028361 1031431 103380 1033811 1039391 1043561 1046291

1055011 1066831 1072721 109194 1 1096511 109659 1 109966 1__ 1099021 1102241 1126841 I1127821

112849 __1 11 3972 1 1139931 114000 1142041 1147531 1166921 1169901 1169931 1170091 11 71911 11 71771 L.State Higohway 771 46621 48421 48971 50141 59091 65811 6662 1 68791 753 71 76501 78631

G0Ve II II I Ie.IIt U Ut t I PI ddes I Pubi ic WorcksDepa rtmie nt, L ucknow, I ndia 8-4 Project Co-ordinaitingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshiState Roads Project Environmental Assessmnent(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Helh Education Religious Communityi Drni rcheological Chainage~~~L R L R L R IL R L R L R

1 7059 1 72041 1 7314 191471 1980 193141 19329 196231 197431 19768 197741 20501

2850- 308931 33026 1 1 11 4 2 6 12 172 20 75 89 0

LINK 7: BAHRAICH - FAIZABAD

Health Education Religious Community'Drinking Water Archeological ChainageRl-- L R L R L R L R 1 L L tR

1 3 6 4 - .. - - .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------1481 14861 15421 16241 1625------1741 1804 1829 2049 2066 21211

23 68

24601 2500 2730 I 2 770

.2800 3010

3040 3070 3080

3810 38706 4020

L 5800

Government of UJlurP'radesh, Puiblic.Works Department, LLcknowv Indiat 8-5 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project 98V Lpu'~ moul)nJl~'1uawlid.3a sliOM D!I1ild 'ys)pL'jd IL'IIfl JOjUouWUJ~aO9

000F~ ......

- ~~~~L 09:09~ 066sI

006S~

o016t'1 ------~~0601'

091 6 : I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iOlLZL

0606?:

L .OtLL?:

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ot"~?

L 00WE?

L 0960?:

L ~~~~~~~~09661

--0t799Z

* I . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... ~ 9

L OOZEZ~~~L02f I 096ZI

0966 L I . . . . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... ------. t ~~~~~I0?96

I _____~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... 09?6:2

I ___ O6L L CE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ZIL

2ui~~uuaI 1snoISip~Almunwwo) UOI~E3fl~3 0II99

ASSIU~~~~1II1SUOJ AI-IG (I ~~~~~~~~I~~~~Id)~~~a~VI~~~)LI~~WU-OJ-I---- Environmental Assessment(Plhase 1) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Chain~~~~ge~ Health Education Religious CommunityDrnnking Water: Archeological L. R RLI R L R L R L R

3631801 1 36450 1 365001 3651011

36730... 1 368101 3 706. 3 7070

3758-01

.38000 .1

38670 ____ 38710 111 39250 39740 1 40670 40680 406201 4 75- 0----- 1 40760 1

41100 41120

42440 1

42500 ___1

42600 .1__ 4i280 43790 _ _ _

438701 449401

449801 44990 I_____ 45070 1

45820 ____ 45850 46030 460501

46130 _____ 46220 1 46260 1 46360

416630 46810 48820

491401 491 701 491901

499501

CoverinniintofUrttar Pradesh, PLiblic Works Department,I[ucknow, India 8- 7 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnviroinmentalAssessmnent (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Health Education Religious Wte_Arhe_gia Chainage TrnknCo-u-t-D-k-g------cholgia L:R L R L 1 R LI 1 R L I- R 50000 ------~~~~~~ i _-----

502040 I.I 1 51300.1 530501

533401

54210. 1 542901 54300 54370 ...... -1- 552901

5 78501 57870.11 5791011 579301 579501 579701 1 57990

59640 __1

59670 __1 597001 600301

610901

61260 -

60 1 2 9 ------. ------1--- 615001 61101 61730

62020 ___ 62060 62100 -21 7 01------6228701 62290 62365 62384I

62645 626647 7 .------... 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~.... 62761I 62929 629731 630211 630791 631001 631 15 1

631708

6314 11

.632291 63242 632481 632671 6333 - 1

Governmnentof Uttar Pradesh,Puiblic Works Deoartment, Lucknow, India 8-8 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC Servicesfor Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentalAssessmnent (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Health Education Religious Community DrinkingWaterl Archeological iChainage L R L jR L R Li 'R L R L I R 633971 63425100__ 63429

63560 ____

63 579 ____ 63580 636041 636151

636791 638601 640611 64-30-9 64361

645961 646011 _ 646561 1 64693 647256

64814 -- 64836 1 64869 * ~~64893

* ~~~650417 65521 656601 65750 658701 65920

66511

66684 - 6672111 667271 -- 66871 66874 -----.----.. 1. 67275 .1 673001

67403 .

67587 .-

68411

664551 68498 . 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... 68784 ~6903 689211

69072-1

697381 -----i6i1 7064 1

Goveromiieni.. f Uttar PraIdesh1,PLiblic Works Departineni,LOCk1110W, li dia 8-9 Project Co-ordinatinigConsLultants (PCCI Servicesfor Uttar PraideshState Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Chain~~~~ge~ Health Education Rigos Community jDrinkingWater' Archeological L R L R L R L R 1 R L R

-70482 70418 1 705931 -7680 I 70811

70997. 1 1 71070 -- 1--- ... . . 71086

712141 71i233______71247 712541 71421--- 716281

71659 __1 716661

717181 178 1.....1. 717551 717851 719341 719521 71954___ 719761 1 720181 72019 720471 jii 72`1571

72237 ___ 724671 1 725561

72608 __ 72652 - -- -- 1 72663

72749 1___

72817 ___ 728951

729641 73D061 731381 31731 732771 733521 734702 73508 737471 73754I 737721 7383

74250 74755 74B769

Government of Urtar Pradesh,Puiblic Works Department, Lucknow, India 8- 10 Project Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC)Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnivironmentalAssessinent (Phase ) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Health Education Religious Community ~DrinkingWater! Archeological g RL ii ~~~ ~L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RLR I R L R 749151

74960 1 __ 74980 752391

75366 753801 753971 754331 75485 755261

772891 773531

786731

78677 .. 1 _ __ 79451 1

79570 1 795941 79668 ------1~~~~~~~~~~---- 79770 -- - .79844 79974 1

80020

80093 __ 800951 800

. . . 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... 805382

80594 1I 80804 81173

81 725I

81 762 81 792 82446I 494I ~ .. 82909 83013 1 83055

83221 832541

83668- - 1 -. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------

877 - 1.I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- -- -

846340

Goiverinmentof Uttsr Pradesh,Puiblic Works Departmefnt,Luic

Health Education Religious Community|Drinking Water, Archeological Chaihage ~ II__ L R L R LI R L R I R L R

84719 . , - I i i1 84723 _ J - - __ 84724 j j _;I 1

84755 84756 1 : _ _ 84858 1 85049 -1 , I 85371 1

85545 . 85553185553 , _ ...... ------...... --- .- _ _ _ _ - -_ a 1 _ ------85572 1 _85578_ _ _ j,. ___ _ _I_ , l l 1- I 85597 1 85680 - -r 1 85936 _86009 __1 1 __, 86076 =86140_ j ; ' j ______j 1_ _ _ 86176 1 86194 ! __ 1 i i 86234 , 1 86239 ;

86296 i ...... ,,,,,, =,,-_---_j ..,.,,.__ . __, _ 8-63-27------1------'-!------8-6371----'---'--'- ~Ii-~-~|-= 1 -- = i--- 86414 1 8643451 86435 j L L -_I 8653386493 ------.--i.---.-...-.i------~- l _ _ --- i -- 86542 i 1. . t T t 1j. 1 r~ 86589 '_ i+_'_ 1 ' 86609 I _ 1 86628 1 i 86635 1 866721 '------8-6-6-72-'-'-----'-''------' l- - t- '------'------1 86699 j ... ~ ~~~ ~'--j''1_l.__f ~~'' ~ 86731 i i86791 i___ j____ j1tj------j------i -- r 1 -F----,--i------868126 1 86864 . .. 1. 86B68 1 86938 , __=___j ______L_1 t, 86949_ 1 _ 87224 i __ i 1 1 _ I_ 8758i 1 B7897 - ' ' 88-092- - ' ------1-- 88270 1 882761...... - - 1 . .-----...... l , ..."'.'.. -''.'. ---. --'.-.T ------; ~~~~~- 88508 i 885621.86...... , , ,.,, ...... - i ._...... -- - -- I B8574 F I I 88584 ' ' :- 88584 ! i i1 ; . 1l ; 88599 1 88602 1

88700 = 1 88722 i 88736 l --~~ 887-3-6~~~~~~~ >~~ ~~~'~~~j j~~ -~~~' -- ~~~i=--l-- --- '''>-'-- - - - ~~------~~~~~~~~~~~~~' 88747 . 1 .--...... '8 -i6--'; ~ .... ------''"'- ~~ ...... '' ~ ...... ------~ ~ ~~ '- '~ ~~~t~-''~ 88776 ______

Governmeritof UttarPradesh, Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 8-1 2 ProjectCo-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradesh State Roads Project EnvironnientalAssessmient (Phase 1) IJHV ConsultantsBV Septemiber20011

Chain~g Health Education Religious Commnunity DrinkingWater: Archeological 1 L R L 'R L R L R L

_88803 1 RI 1 ~ 889771 __ 89086 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----- 89164

89349 . . ~ 894531 17 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----- 895301 895671 6974 5 _ 1 89766 1

898831 900131 90054 I 900691 901371 901401 90204 1 90208

903232

90967

914181 91432 1 915t93 - -I------

925041 92565------926121 926471

92699 ___------_-----

993161 71 .99672

999841

99988 1----- 1001951 100227~~~~~------100263 1 .029 100304 6oYt½~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------100324

100357 1 -

100447 1 1005201 1006071 100618 100658 8 -~ ~ ~ ~~------1 00871 101000 10 10 1

10104i2 .I

1101059

Governmpnt of UtitarPradesh, Ptublir Works Departmpnt,Lucknow, India 8- 1 3 Project Co-ordinating Consultants~(PCC) Servicesfor UttarPradesh State Roads Project EnvironMentalAssessmient (Phase 1) DH-VConsultants BV September2001

Health Educationj Religious CommunityDrinking Water! Archeological Chainage .--- - -*------,.------L R L R L 1 R L RI L'R L R

1010901 1011491 1013411 101440 101454 101604 1016351

101638 . 1

1018791

10i913 __ 1 01946 1021 56 1

102694 - 1033031

103971 I__ 1043587 104412 1 104435 --- ...... 1 1044481 104462 1048571 105251 . 1 1052881

1.058710 1058 1 0 5 8 2 ...... _ 105850

105867 I 0 0 3 1 50 84 0 0 216 27 0 0

LINK 14: BHOGNIPUR -CH-UADAGRAHA MODE

Chairiage ~~~~HealthEducation iReligious PCommunity brinkingWater~ Archeological I R . I R L R R I R L R

191 2141 1092

1..... 73. . 1------

23 77 24271 2599 40321 42671 5 763

75151 75371 7546

Governmienitof Uttar Pradesh,Public Works Department, Lucknow, India 8-1 4 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Servicesfor UttarPradesh State RoadsProtect Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV' September2001

Health Education Religious Community'Drinkinig Water' Archeological Chainage .~-- --- . I L R L R iL R L R LI R L R 7550 7605 8368 9905 12444 1 2648 1 2940 13225 1 7054 17195I 1 7297 1751 9 17599 1 7932 18105 18136

181968

18594 1 9542 1961 5I 19627 19740 20577 20766 20773 20830 20872 25906. 25982 28239 28390 31843 1It- 31930 32024.I 32297 36010 36914

3 7833 3 7846I 38044 38283 38310 38359 38384I 38420 38619 38973

GovernmientofULtid Piade;h, Pubic WVorksDepartment, Lucknow, India 8- 1 5 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC) Servicesfor Uttar PradeshStateRoads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV Consultants BV September2001

Chainage I. ~~elt Euctin elgiu Sornu±iiv lDrinkingWater! Archeological L R LI R L IR t i VV R . R 39741t 40048 433231 430691 43701 43833 43842--- 43840 43840

4403 7 44201 46187 4621 7 46395 46486 46554 1 466721 467251

48296 48386 I 48401I

48445 1 __ 484741 48523 I 51334 5348011

153486 53505 53571 55488 56585 56854 57193 57320 1 1 573421 58050 581031 596531 59677 59931 600091 60321

606021 60669 606731 606821 62830 62849 70694

Governtmentof UJttarPradlesh, Puiblic Works Department, Ltcknow, India 8- 1 6 Project Co-ordinating Consultants,(PCC.) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase 0 OHV Consultants BVy September 2001

Health Education Religious Community 'DrinkingWater' Archeological Chainage .------.. L R LI L R Li R L R L R 716001 71 7621 ODR ------921 1151 1671F 5141 5631 693- I 9061 18681 22761 2487I 28131j 2824 29151 4220 42291 7007 73981 75701 77421 77801 108001 109381 1,2088 1 12166 0 1 3 51i12123 4 18137 43 0 2

[INK 18: JAUNPUR-MOHHAMiADPUR

Health Education Religious Community'Drinking Water Archeological Chaihage- L R L R L R L R L R L Rt 3841 3861 7971 84211

1037 -1 11391 12431 1632 16501 17641 17761 17821 20051 2005 2104 1 2107 1 2426. 2432 I

Goveininewlof UliI)r P,scieh,t Public W,orks Department, Lucknos%,India 8-1 7 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject EnvironmentafAssessment (Phase 1) 09-V ConsultantsBV September 2001

Ching Health IEducationReligious CommunityDrinking Water'! Ar6chological L RL R L~~~~~~~~~~~~R 1 ~~~LI R I' 2539 25491 3131 3177 3423 3453 44~561 4486 4572. 1 4605 4612 46141 46511 46651 4686 47281 4792 1 110781 12159 1 121621

12273 I 1 126511 128061 120131 128221 12846 12920 129,211 15080 I 15126 15164 151771 15195 152211 15243 1------15441

15459 - 15465 155341 15575 1 16960 1 180481 191261 19231 19275 193121 19329 19386. 19476 19480 I

19521 . -

Governmientof Uttar Pradesh,Plubl ic Works Department, Lucknow, lIndia 8-1 8 fProject Co-ordinatingConsultants (PCC) Services for Uttar Pradeshi Stdte Roads Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Health IEducation Rteligious CommunitylDrinking Water! Archeological Chainage ~ -- I------I. IR L' T ____~~~~~~~~i R L R I ~R L R 19542 1 19546 195551

20320 ___1 204081 208181 20921 210991 21131 1 21224 21335 213681 21386 21456 21504 1 228011 22809 I- 235791 23626 23701 I 27351 23747 1

23761 .1 239381 24305 243441 245791 24605 246441 24671 247081

24723. . 1 249261 251101 25149 1 25207 25567 -256001 256321 '256601 258221 2583fl 2S836 27111 1 27201 217230 2 7264 27294 2 7318 217359

27407 .

Governmepntof UttarPradesh) Public Works Departmient,Luckflow, India 8- 19 Project Co-ordiniatingConsultants (PCCQServices for Uttar PradeshState RoadsProject Environmental Assessment(Phase 1) DHV ConsultantsBV September20C01

clang Health Education Religious Community lDrinking Water'!Archeological L R L R L R L R L R L R 27593 27792I 28090 281221 283301 28345. 284531 28485 I 287591 28872 28959 290091 297921 298071 29831r1 ...... -. ------30018 1 30051 300751 301131 30150 1 31456I 32413 325971 326301 32663 1 32818 I 32876.1-

32948 . l 331381 33518 I 338331 34188 ..... 1.... 34188 1

343651 343741 34384 1 34551 1 34642 1 346591 34677 .... -.. -- - ...... 34728 34770 34794 348151 35081 1 350931 352091 352101

.5...... 3 ...... -- - 1- 354915

Governmiientof Uttdr Pradesh,Putblic Works Department,Lucknow, India -8- 20 Project Co-ordinating Consultants(PCC) Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase II DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

Chainage Health Education Religious Community 'Drinking Water Archeological L---! R ~~LIR I R I R L R 35561 356081 362721 366031 369841 373921 374731 374761

37477 . . 375121 376231 379861 386561 386721

38851 . 1 389231 389331 391891 393961 396381 39696 1 397191 39792. 397971 398301 399021 399421 399471 40101 1 0 0 0 0 14 10 3 0 97 77 0

Government of Uttar Pradesh,PLublic Works Department, Lucknow, India 8- 2 1 Project Co-ordinsatingConsultants IPCCIServices for Uttar PradeslhState Roads Project Environmental Assessment(Phase I) DHV ConsultantsBV September2001

LISTOf SETTLEMENTSALONG THE PROJECTROADS

ROUTE-14 ROUTE-4 ROUTE-7 R~J.3If iB VILLAGES VILLAGES VILLAGES VILLAGES

Chaudagrahi Fatehpur DunakkaTiraha K~eshavpuir Harsinghpur Khajuri Nagiraha Allapur Gopalpur

PahoLr G.hatosha Nalgraur Harupur

lalala Rawatpur Beria Kamnmuriddinpur ShahijahanPLur Sarsai Chilberia Bithar Nama mau Saidapur Bhadauli Chorsand

Akbarabad Rupapur Kahala Gaura 8acdshahpur Harda-SpLr Gadlaria Khutaina Jeweli

Rasullpur Marikhra B3ehlimpur Bardha Bakewar Birpur Ruknapur Chawki

Gopalpur Kanhari Pyagpur 1 hira Bazar AlaimpLr iNagara Indrapur RajepurPasika

Bhelgaon Khamaria Shiv Singh ka Purwa Sarai Mohan Sarai Langar Gaur Khera Vishwe5hNvarganj Bijaul,

Shakurabud I Sawaizpur Udharna Mirzapur Tejnagar ;iKuakhera Sajanwa Thekma

Kora Sahdulipur Guichupur Kiiratmnalpur

Ghanshiyamnpur Sawrang Sisaimaphi Bhagwanpur Kuiwankhera Saijana PathanJoht Bela'Tiraha

Kaitha Jilgaon Arya Nagar Bauwapura Chandapeir Sekhpura Bhonipur Sadapatti Bhadwara Barsoya mallapur Sujatpur NaUraniga iRoushan purwa i hat purwa Sigra

f8teh)PLIT 1Harpalpur Pipra bazar Kunauli

-Pars Kakra Thad baria Gamnbhirpur

As'odhyapur Eknaura Munder Maphi Ranipur-Rajinia Bencla Lainkani Munder kalan Nagaralahanpur Naberi Bakharia Khorora mohani Mohammadpur

MuLiYal Laxanpura PandariShankar

Srinagar MvaninmaL Bijmore URBANAREAS

Gtrgluwa Ghatkana jhanihari Khiria JalpipLur Bankat%wa BLOCKS

Shaikhiajaniewa Barault Peri Pokhar Dhararnpur

tvtLIan&tgar H-LuShepLur MannrapLur Tliekmna HiliaL ClhaLdhairyapur Parsapur Mohaimmadpur

Chpalr Ghata Sandi Ti r,ha Pr i~r

Akbarabad NkHtmuKhurtiasa DISTRICTS Pahalwainba

S4irai MatsoodpLur Dargikuan launpur

Narhuvwapur Sakhiera Banghusra .Azaniigarhi

GuvtmmiIeiit uLUiar FhddeSfi,PLibliC W\orks Departmnent,Lucknow, India 8-2 2 Project Co-ordinating Consultants (PCC(Services for Uttar PradeshState Roads Projec >

c ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c

41~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'

C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C

U

z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z , 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z- - .... q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------E ; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;' r - ' E~~~~~ Ii I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iP1C > u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ l >(D I r CX _ V - a. _~~~~~~~~~~~~~Cr.- I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

tD L 0Uwn

E ° erS XQ m nc E ' , t n E