By Maj. Gen. (Retd.) S.G. Vombatkere

A 182-m (600 ft.) statue of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was constructed  on an island in Narmada river in Gujarat and declared open to the public on 31.10.2018, as “Statue of Unity.” Government of Gujarat built it along with tourism infrastructure, at a cost of Rs.2,989 crore, using a PPP (Public-Private Partnership)model of funding. Public access to the top of the statue provides a panoramic view of the reservoir of the Sardar Sarovar Dam. In 2018-2019, 2.9 million tourists provided Rs.82 crore ticket revenue.

This possibly fired a copycat proposal in 2018, with Karnataka’s Government proposing a project for a 125 ft statue of “Mother Cauvery” and a smaller statue of Nalwadi Krishnaraja Wadiyar, along with other tourist attractions, near the world-famed Brindavan Gardens of the iconic Krishna Raja Sagar (KRS) Dam in Mandya district (but very near to Mysuru), constructed in 1911. It required 300-400 acres of arable land, was to cost Rs.1,200 crore, be funded by a PPP model and completed in two years.

The project was expected to showcase Karnataka’s culture and heritage, and include a museum complex, two glass towers overlooking the Dam’s reservoir, an indoor stadium, a bandstand and a ‘lane’ showcasing the architectural magnificence of Hampi, Gol Gumbaz, Belur-Halebid, and Somanathapura.

The proposal was opposed by alert members of the public. The dissenting arguments included that money would be better spent on providing good roads and other civic amenities, employing teachers and building schools and colleges in remote areas, and that rejuvenating Cauvery River is better than erecting ‘Mother Cauvery’ statue.

A civil society organisation launched an online signature campaign ‘Karnataka doesn’t need a statue: Say no to Cauvery statue.’ Nearly 5,900 people signed, urging then CM H.D. Kumaraswamy to shelve the project, citing among other reasons, that the ecologically fragile forest and reservoir area of the project would be irreversibly damaged. One person said that the feasibility of the project had not been considered, and the coalition government wanted to make a fortune out of implementing it.

Engineers of The Institution of Engineers (India), Mysore Local Centre, held that the project construction work would call for foundation excavation by blasting subsoil rock, which may lead to weakening of the Dam structure and submitted a technical report to government.

Civil society’s concerted negative reactions, combined with the political turmoil of successive governments in the 2019-2022 years, resulted in the project being put on a backburner.

New avatar

In July 2024, the CM Siddaramaiah Government resurrected the Amusement Park project. It is intended to ramp up the appeal of Brindavan Gardens as a tourist hotspot destination, at a cost of Rs. 2,663 crore on the PPP model, on 198 acres of land, to be completed in 54 months. It is expected to draw an average of 20,000 daily visitors, with 7% annual growth.

The tourism project  — strangely proposed by the Irrigation Department — includes a world-class amusement park, helipad, “grand street”, boating, botanical garden, jungle boat ride, amphitheatre, laser fountain show, doll museum, jungle track, water park, “techno-park”, penguin zoo, roller coaster, sky bridge, river deck view, wax museum and “Cauvery promenade.” 

Deputy CM D.K. Shivakumar has said that the project will be on government land and will not entail land acquisition. But he also stated, “Farmers are also free to surrender the land on their own will, but no one will be evicted or forced to surrender their property,” thus causing confusion. He said that the project is announced in the budget.

This new avatar of a public Amusement Park at Brindavan Gardens has attracted comments similar to those raised earlier in 2018-19 by Mysuru’s civil society. A project involving Rs. 2,663 crore and 198 acres of land surely deserves announcement for public consultation and comments, rather than a declaration of the project having already been budgeted.

Notwithstanding, the Government would do well to consider the following issues:

1. Considering the safety of the Dam structure due to mining and quarry blasting in the area, the Karnataka High Court has banned use of explosives within 20-km radius of the KRS Dam.  Have the engineering safety considerations of the project been examined by the concerned                 Ministry/Department?

2. The KRS Dam and Brindavan Gardens are heritage sites. Have the negative repercussions of “modern” public amusement facilities on Mysuru’s heritage, been considered by Government?

3. Has an economic feasibility study been done? Economic calculations would provide figures of profit to the investor-owner-operator and the net revenue to Government, depending upon ticketing, expected footfall and other factors. Has even an approximate benefit-cost study based upon a DPR been conducted?

4. Have the environmental impacts during construction and after completion due to increased tourist traffic been considered? An Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) of the project may be required by law.

5. Increased tourist traffic will involve substantial increase in demand for electricity and water, along with sewage and garbage/waste handling and disposal. Have sub-projects for these requirements along with their environmental impacts, been considered?

6. Cauvery being an inter-State river, are there legal issues which may arise due  this project?

7. Can the existing infrastructure at Brindavan Gardens and even in Mysuru City, support such growth in road and footfall traffic?

8. In a PPP funding model, Government provides the land and infrastructure and a private investor constructs and operates the facilities. Has a Draft Agreement between the private investor and Government, specifying the period of long-term lease been prepared and scrutinised by Government’s concerned Ministries and Departments?

In view of the issues mentioned above, Government would do well to shelve the Amusement Park Project and addresses issues and expenditures that can benefit ordinary people affected by natural disasters, in preference to tourism development.

email: [email protected]