Pune Metro pillars are intensifying traffic bottlenecks and pedestrian-safety problems along parts of the Shivajinagar–Khadki corridor, according to a ground report by Civic Mirror. The issue is most visible near Khadki, Bopodi and Shivajinagar, where metro structures, existing roads, railway infrastructure, buses, autorickshaws, cars, two-wheelers and pedestrians are competing for limited space.
The problem is not simply that a pillar occupies a portion of a road. It is that the road corridor appears to have been treated as a series of individual engineering decisions rather than as one continuous movement system. At several locations, the available carriageway narrows suddenly around metro pillars, railway underpasses, junctions and station approaches. Vehicles are then required to merge, turn and overtake within compressed spaces, creating conflicts that become more severe during peak hours.
Civic Mirror’s inspection found vehicles moving through narrow lanes around metro structures in Khadki and Shivajinagar. Cars, buses, autorickshaws and two-wheelers were described as competing for the available road space, particularly near junctions and routes leading to metro and railway stations. The report also identified Khadki as a critical interchange area because its railway station, bus services and metro station are located close to one another.
That proximity should ordinarily make Khadki a strong public-transport node. Instead, the design of the surrounding streets appears to make transfers difficult. The road narrows at some points, while pedestrians and vehicles converge around station access routes. A metro pillar near a crossing or footpath can force pedestrians to change direction or move closer to vehicle lanes. Sustainable transport expert Pranjali Deshpande said pedestrian crossings should not lead directly towards a pillar and that citizens should not be expected to find their own routes around such obstructions.
Her observation points to an important distinction between road engineering and street design. A road can be technically built and still function poorly as a public street. Road engineering may account for curves, turning radii, medians and gradients. Street design must also consider the entire space between property boundaries, including walking routes, crossings, bus movement, informal stopping, drainage and the interaction between different modes.
The evidence described in the report suggests that lane continuity is a central weakness. Deshpande noted that some stretches expand from two lanes to three and then return to two lanes before widening again. Such changes create uneven capacity along the same corridor. The widest section cannot compensate for a short, constricted segment because traffic flow is ultimately limited by the narrowest point. During peak periods, even a small obstruction at that point can produce queues that extend backwards into adjoining junctions.
The conflict is particularly acute for two-wheeler riders. When riders pass through the narrow space between metro pillars and larger vehicles, they must later merge back into the main traffic stream. This produces a conflict point rather than a continuous movement path. Deshpande argued that each pillar should have a clearly defined buffer zone and that the space between consecutive pillars should be managed consistently. Without such continuity, the space may appear available to two-wheelers even though it is not safe for movement or merging.
The report also highlights the effect on pedestrians. At station areas, passengers must move between trains, buses, metro services, autorickshaws and private vehicles. If a pillar interrupts a crossing or narrows a footpath, the burden of solving the design problem shifts to the pedestrian. In practice, that can mean crossing at an undesignated point, walking through a traffic lane or taking a longer route around a junction. The supplied report does not provide a formal pedestrian-injury dataset, but it records repeated concerns about the safety and continuity of walking routes.
The institutional challenge is that these corridors are not controlled by one agency or used for one purpose. Pune Municipal Corporation is responsible for important aspects of city roads and streets. MahaMetro is responsible for the metro infrastructure. Pune Police manages traffic regulation and enforcement, while railway infrastructure and station access add another layer of operational responsibility. District-level administration and public-transport operators also influence how passengers reach and leave the stations.
This division of responsibility can make it difficult to resolve problems that occur between systems. A metro pillar may be structurally complete, but the surrounding carriageway, footpath, crossing, drainage and traffic-management arrangements may remain fragmented. Each agency may address its own asset without a single authority being accountable for the performance of the complete corridor.
The response from Pune Police illustrates the type of operational measure now being considered. Manoj Patil, additional commissioner of police for the western Pune and traffic divisions, said a proposal was being prepared to make the Khadki railway underpass and the Poultry underpass one-way. The Poultry underpass is also known locally as the Range Hills railway underpass or Poultry Chowk underpass. The proposal is intended to reduce congestion and vehicle conflict in already narrow sections.
A one-way arrangement could change how vehicles move through the underpasses, but the report indicates that it remains a proposal rather than an implemented decision. Its feasibility would depend on a detailed traffic study, including diversion routes, emergency access, pedestrian movement and the effects on adjoining junctions. The source material does not establish whether such a study has been completed or whether a final implementation schedule exists.
The Khadki case also shows why multimodal integration cannot be reduced to placing multiple transport systems in the same neighbourhood. Deshpande said the area needs integration across infrastructure, passenger information and fare systems so that people can move safely and easily from one mode to another. The physical connection between a railway station, bus stop and metro station matters as much as the existence of the services themselves. If the interchange requires passengers to negotiate congested road space, the network remains connected on a map but difficult to use at street level.
Commuter accounts in the report add a ground-level measure of the problem. Mukesh Chaudhary, who travels near Khadki Metro station, said the combination of the railway underpass, continuously flowing rainwater and metro pillars adds to delays, with an additional 30 to 45 minutes spent on working days during morning and evening peaks. Other commuters described worsening conditions when cars, autorickshaws and two-wheelers converge near junctions. These accounts are individual observations, not a representative travel-time survey, but they show how infrastructure design is experienced by daily users.
The concern extends beyond existing locations. Deshpande said upcoming extensions, including the Pimpri–Nigdi and Vanaz–Chandni Chowk corridors, should be planned together with their street design. Her argument is that the location of pillars, crossings, junctions and connections to other modes must be settled before construction, not treated as a corrective exercise after the structures are built.
That sequencing issue is the larger lesson from Pune’s metro corridors. Once pillars, stations and road edges are constructed, changing the arrangement becomes expensive and administratively difficult. Traffic restrictions, redesigned crossings or one-way systems may reduce conflicts, but they cannot always restore the space that was lost during initial planning. The cost of incomplete coordination is then transferred to commuters through longer journeys, difficult transfers and greater exposure to moving traffic.
The evidence currently establishes a recurring street-level conflict around metro infrastructure in parts of Pune, supported by a media inspection, named expert comments, a police statement and commuter accounts. It does not establish the total number of accidents, the precise responsibility for each location or the effectiveness of any proposed traffic change. Those questions require formal traffic, safety and design assessments. What is clear is that the success of a metro corridor depends not only on trains and stations, but also on whether the streets around them remain continuous, legible and safe for every user.
