No feasibility study, years of delays hobble Tk881cr Dhaka upgrade project

A Tk880.64 crore project launched in 2019 to
improve living conditions in some of Dhaka's most neglected and densely
populated neighbourhoods has yet to be completed.
According to an Implementation Monitoring and
Evaluation Division (IMED) review, the project was approved without the
mandatory feasibility study, while repeated design revisions, delays in land
handover, court injunctions, administrative complications and uneven progress
across project areas have prevented its completion despite two deadline
extensions.
The Dhaka City Neighbourhood Upgrading
Project was designed to improve roads, drains, footpaths, parks, playgrounds
and community centres in Kamrangirchar,
Lalbagh, Sutrapur-Nawabganj-Gulistan, and Khilgaon-Mugda-Basabo to
enhance urban services and environmental conditions.
According to IMED's evaluation, one of the
project's biggest weaknesses was the absence of the mandatory feasibility study
required for projects costing more than Tk50 crore. The report recommends that
future projects of this nature should be preceded by comprehensive feasibility
studies, including land surveys, soil testing and hydrological assessments.
The project was scheduled between March 2019 and
June 2024. As the work could not be completed on time, the deadline was
extended twice until December 2026. At the same time, the project cost was
reduced by Tk375.88 crore to Tk504.75 crore, comprising Tk38.01 crore in
government funding and Tk466.74 crore from the World Bank.
Although the project's estimated cost has fallen
by 42.68%, its implementation period has increased by nearly 47%. While some
visible progress has been made in road construction, drainage and playground
development, shortcomings in the original planning, repeated design changes,
unequal progress across project areas and weak project management continue to
undermine its objectives.
As of May this year, physical progress
stood at 72%, while financial progress reached 60.8%. Work is ongoing on nine
new community centres, road and drainage rehabilitation, footpath and
playground improvements, pond restoration and the construction of waste
transfer stations. However, IMED noted that financial progress remains
particularly low in several components, including street lighting (5.89%),
traffic signs (7.93%) and tree plantation (around 2%).
The report identified delays in site handover as
the single biggest obstacle to implementation. It took eight months to demolish
old structures through auction and hand over sites to contractors for
constructing new community centres. At the Naolagola Community
Centre, disputes over land forced planners to leave the building's ground floor
open for public access. IMED observed that such practical challenges could have
been identified earlier had proper technical studies been conducted before the
project was approved.
IMED's field inspections also uncovered several
design flaws. Although space was allocated for a library and fish market on the
third floor of the Naolagola Community Centre, no toilet facilities
were included. Contractors also reported that the construction package for the
Metropolitan Theatre did not include electrical works, ceilings,
air-conditioning or sound systems, despite ongoing structural work.
In addition, while the original plan called for
solar-powered street lighting, conventional electric LED lights were installed
instead. The report also found that tree species were selected without
consulting the Forest Department, contrary to project guidelines.
The project has faced 25 audit objections over
six of its nine financial years, with most still unresolved. The amount
involved totals Tk16.3 crore. IMED also identified several management
weaknesses. Only seven of the planned 18 Project Implementation Committee (PIC)
meetings and four of the scheduled 18 Project Steering Committee (PSC) meetings
were held, representing 38.89% and 22.22% of the targets respectively.
Seven of the project's 28 approved posts remain
vacant, including key technical positions such as executive engineer and
assistant engineer.
Urban planner Professor Dr Adil Muhammad Khan
told TBS that the fundamental problem was approving such a large project
without a feasibility study. "Although each neighbourhood had
different needs, no area-specific assessment or community consultation had been
carried out before implementation. As a result, many project components failed
to reflect local priorities."
He added that both the Planning Commission and
the city corporation should be held accountable. "To avoid similar
situations in the future, mandatory feasibility studies, community participation
and stronger institutional reforms must be ensured," he said.
Project
Director Rajib Khadem told TBS that he had been overseeing the
project since 5 August. Although he was not directly involved in its earlier
stages, the project documents indicated that no major project could be approved
without appropriate studies.
He claimed that a pre-feasibility study had been
conducted at the outset and that the project was subsequently approved and
financed based on the required follow-up assessments. "It was incorrect to
suggest that the project had been undertaken without any feasibility
study," Rajib claimed.
However, Rajib Khadem also told
IMED that delays in ministerial approvals, the tender process, consultancy
package approvals, staff shortages, administrative complications and various
World Bank requirements had slowed fund releases and approvals. In particular,
delays in approving several consultancy packages, including the environmental
consultancy, had significantly slowed implementation.
Responding to IMED's query about repeated
changes to the bills of quantities (BOQs) across almost every contract package,
he said the revisions were necessary because of fluctuations in market prices,
design modifications based on practical requirements and changes in the scope
of work. Asked how long it would take to complete the remaining work, he said
additional time would likely be required, while some unfinished components
might ultimately have to be completed under a future project.
IMED's SWOT analysis identified timely fund
availability and technical support from the Bangladesh University of
Engineering and Technology (BUET) as key strengths. However, it cited project
approval without feasibility assessment, repeated design changes
during implementation, unequal allocation of work across the four project
areas, irregular PIC and PSC meetings and the city corporation's lack of its
own laboratory facilities as major weaknesses.
The report also noted that the original
Development Project Proposal (DPP) did not include a clear exit plan. IMED
recommended making comprehensive feasibility studies, well-defined exit
strategies and stronger monitoring mechanisms mandatory for all future
development projects from the outset.
It also recommended preparing a time-bound action
plan to complete the remaining work within the revised
deadline, prioritising delayed components, resolving outstanding
audit objections and ensuring continuity in project management.
















