Urban infrastructure development often comes into conflict with heritage green spaces. Discuss with reference to recent examples, and suggest a balanced policy framework.

Heritage urban gardens are public commons held in trust, yet they are also the last large, litigation-free land parcels in congested cities. Karnataka's move to open a share of statutory park land for infrastructure has revived this development-versus-heritage conflict, which is best resolved not by choosing one side but by disciplining the process of diversion.

Nature of the conflict — recent examples

• The Karnataka Government Parks (Preservation) Act, 1975 was enacted to preserve government gardens such as Lalbagh and Cubbon Park as horticultural spaces [1]; the Amendment Bill, 2026 passed by the State Legislature permits transfer of up to 5% of a park's area to government departments, statutory authorities and local bodies for public utility projects [2].
• The immediate trigger is the Hebbal–Central Silk Board tunnel road, needing Lalbagh land; the High Court has sought clarity on tree felling, and citizen human chains at Lalbagh forced the Chief Minister to signal a re-review [2].
• Mumbai's Aarey metro car shed saw comparable resistance, with the Supreme Court taking cognisance of large-scale felling [3] — showing this is a systemic, not local, tension.

Why it recurs

• Green cover is treated as a free residual, unpriced in project cost-benefit calculations.
• Urban road and tunnel projects often escape the rigour of prior appraisal and public consultation applied to other categories [4].
• Percentage caps invite incremental "salami-slicing" of protected precincts.

A balanced framework

• Apply the public trust doctrine [3]: diversion only after a documented least-invasive-alternative test.
• Make prior public hearing and independent ecological appraisal mandatory for large urban projects [4].
• Enforce no-net-loss: compensatory green cover within the same ward, dovetailed with the Nagar Van Yojana [5].
• Impose a cumulative, non-repeatable cap with legislative review, plus heritage-precinct notification for gardens of historic value.

Infrastructure and ecology are complementary, not rival, claims on the city. Institutionalising alternatives-analysis, consultation and compensatory greening lets States build tunnels without trading away their heritage — the substance of SDG-11's call for inclusive, safe and sustainable cities.