INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 05/26/2009 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: AC Basic Project Data Country: India Project ID: P Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Project Task Team Leader: Ke Fang Estimated Appraisal Date: April 16, 2009 Estimated Board Date: July 2, 2009 Managing Unit: SASDT Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: General transportation sector (100%) Theme: Climate change (50%);Municipal governance and institution building (25%);Pollution management and environmental health (25%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): 0.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: Borrower Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) [ ] No [] 2. Project Objectives The Project s development objective is to promote environmentally sustainable transport and to improve the usage of environmentally friendly transport modes in at least four pilot cities by supporting implementation of the capacity building elements and the public- and non-motorized-transport- related aspects of the Recipient#s National Urban Transport Policy. 3. Project Description The project includes the following components (see details in Annex 4 of PAD): - Component 1: Providing technical assistance to the Recipient#s states and cities in order to improve their capacity to implement the National Urban Transport Policy. Such assistance will cover: (i) development of implementation strategies and plans to implement key urban transport reforms envisioned in the National Urban Transport Policy; (ii) piloting model urban transport databases; (iii) assisting cities in the identification and preparation of potential environmentally friendly urban transport investments; and (iv) developing a national research program on sustainable urban transport.

2 - Component 2: City Demonstration Projects. This Component catalyzes high profile demonstration projects in 6 participating cities (in 5 states) that will create models of sustainable transport solutions for other Indian cities to replicate. These projects focus on four themes: (i) Public transport development; (ii) Non-motorized transport development; (iii) Pilot Intelligent Transport System (ITS); and (iv) Integrated land use and transport planning and Transit-Oriented Development. The proposed World Bank loan would finance activities under the Component 2 in four (out of total six) pilot cities (Pune, Pimpri Chinchwad, Indore and Mysore). A GEF grant (being processed under a separate GEF project) will be used to finance Component 1 and some technical assistance activities in all 6 pilot cities. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The interventions under Component 2 will be in 6 cities in 5 states # Pune, Pimpri Chinchwad (in Maharashtra State), Indore (in Madhya Pradesh State), Mysore (in Karnataka State), Jalandhar (in Punjab State), and Naya Raipur (in Chhattisgarh State). Except Naya Raipur which is a green field capital of Chhatisgarh, other cities have typical urban character. Most cities have relatively densely populated city centers. Common roadside features include trees as well as public infrastructure like electric transmission and solid waste management facilities. In a few locations, locally important cultural properties like shrines are also present. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr Gaurav D. Joshi (SASDI) Mr Venkata Rao Bayana (SASDI) Mr Parthapriya Ghosh (SASDI) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) Forests (OP/BP 4.36) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)

3 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: Interventions under Component 2 are focused on improving facilities for public transport, non-motorized transport and pedestrianization of congested areas. Therefore, they are expected to reduce the green house gas (GHG) and local air pollutant emissions. However, some of these can also have small negative impacts, especially during the construction, and operation stages such as local air pollution, increased noise level, safety # workers# as well as traffic/road user. Clearing of roadsides for installation of pedestrian-friendly and/or non-motorized transport infrastructure may also result in removal of trees, or other facilities like solid waste skips, and electric transmission poles. While these may not be large in scale, they may be locally significant and are unavoidable in many cases. In a few cases, some of the encroachers and squatters using public right of way (ROW) for commercial purposes may be adversely impacted. In exceptional cases, there will be instances of private land acquisition. Acquisition of private land and displacement of squatters will have adverse impact on livelihood and income sources. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Over time, the interventions should act as benchmarks for improved urban transport system and should result in wider uptake of similar activities by the cities in the project, as well as other cities in the state. Once the interventions are implemented, they would contribute to reduction in GHG emissions, and presumably also local air pollutants. This should have positive impacts on citizens# health, damage to local heritage buildings etc. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. In all cases, the interventions are likely to improve sustainability of the urban transport system in the cities. In case of major interventions the avoidance/minimization was a focus, such as provision for BRTS in Naya Raipur, where conformance with the development plan for the new city was ensured. Effort has been made to ensure that most of the civil works for the road components are undertaken within the existing legal right of way. In other cases, very few realistic alternatives for the interventions may have existed. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. Since the project interventions have similar limited impacts, an environmental and social management framework (ESMF) has been prepared by the MoUD and endorsed by each participating city for implementation of the project. The ESMF has been developed using information available from the city development plans/comprehensive mobility plans for each city, a review of the applicable policies and regulations # city, state, GoI and WB, visits to cities in the project, and discussions with participating cities# officials. It includes avoidance, mitigation, and management measures for common types of activities

4 as well as ToR for carrying out the EA / SA in cases where major interventions like BRT are planned. In cities included in Phase I of the project, where major negative impacts are envisaged, Environmental Management Plans / Resettlement Action Plans (as in the case of Pimpri) to adapt and include applicable avoidance/mitigation measures from the ESMF with adequate budgetary provisions have been prepared and disclosed during project preparation. It also includes a clear approach to build capacity of the participating cities to implement environmental protection / management and social mitigation measures as part of the institutional development. All participating cities, except Jalandhar, have project implementation units for the JnNURM projects that are being separately funded by the GoI and these would be used to implement the project interventions. Capacity of these PIUs is variable and needs to be systematically raised as outlined in the ESMF. At the national Project Management Unit, an Environmental and a Social Development officer would be appointed to guide the participating cities# Environmental and Social Officers, co-ordinate with line ministries at the GoI level as appropriate, and document the lessons learnt from the implementation of these interventions for use by other cities all over the country. Since this is the first multi-city urban transport project, building capacity of participating cities for environmental and social management is vital for its successful implementation. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. In addition to the participating cities officials, key stakeholders would include line departments like traffic police, transportation, revenue, etc. in the participating cities. State departments of Urban Development for each city, NGOs, especially those with special interests such as those advocating bicycle use in Pune, and potential user of facilities as well as those living in the project influence areas are also very important stakeholders. Each of the participating cities has consulted widely on the ESMF draft following its publication on their websites. Stakeholder meetings have also been held in some of the participating cities to ensure that their views are considered before the ESMF is finalized. The finalized ESMF has been disclosed in the public domain and is available in all the participating cities office as well as website in local language and English. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Date of receipt by the Bank 02/20/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 02/20/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 02/26/2009 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Date of receipt by the Bank 02/20/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 02/20/2009

5 Date of submission to InfoShop 02/26/2009 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank s Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard

6 policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Mr Ke Fang 05/20/2009 Environmental Specialist: Mr Gaurav D. Joshi 05/14/2009 Social Development Specialist Mr Venkata Rao Bayana 05/14/2009 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Mr Parthapriya Ghosh 05/14/2009 Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Mr Frederick Edmund Brusberg 05/22/2009 Comments: cleared. Sector Manager: Mr Michel Audige 05/23/2009 Comments: Cleared.