Bachelors Thesis

1 Potential for Vijayawada UDA extension area for recreational, institutional & public/semi-public use

Department of Planning

Batch of 2009-13

PROJECT REPORT School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada

Vivek Maddirala

Terminal Project Vivek Maddirala, B.Planning (2009-13) 2090200035


Terminal Project

Bachelors in Planning

Potential of Vijayawada UDA extension area

for regional recreational, institutional and

public/semi-public use.

May 2013

By: Vivek Maddirala Reg. No. 2090200035 2009 - 2013

Main Guide: Mr. M V Sarma

Co-Guide: Mr. Bhaskar Gowd

Department of Planning School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada



(To be on Printed on SPAV Letterhead)

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis titled POTENTIAL OF VIJAYAWADA UDA EXTENSION AREA

FOR REGIONAL RECREATIONAL, INSTITUTIONAL AND PUBLIC/SEMMI-PUBLIC USE, has

been submitted by Mr. Vivek Maddirala (Reg. No. 2090200035, Batch 2009-13) at the

Department of Planning, towards partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of

Bachelors Degree in Planning. This is a bonafide work of the student.

Date:

Seal:

Dr. Ayon K. Tarafdar Head, Department of Planning

.. Main Guide:

Mr. M V Sarma

.. Co-Guide:

Mr. Bhaskar Gowd Assistant Professor

Department of Planning

Thesis Coordinator B.Planning: Mr. Valliappan A. L. Assistant Professor Department of Planning



UNDERTAKING

I, Mr. Vivek Maddirala, the author of the thesis titled Potential of Vijayawada UDA

extensional area for regioan lrecreational, institutional and public/semi-public use.,

hereby declare that this is an independent work of mine, carried out towards partial

fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the Bachelors Degree in Planning at

the Department of Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada. The

work has not been submitted to any other organization / institution for the award of

any Degree/Diploma.

.. Vivek Maddirala

Reg. No. 2090200035 2009-2013

Bachelor of Planning Department of Planning

Date: 31st May, 2013



Disclaimer

The content produced in the thesis report is an original piece of work and takes due

acknowledgement of referred content, wherever applicable. The thoughts expressed

herein remain the responsibility of the undersigned author and have no bearing on

or does not represent those of School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada.

.. Vivek Maddirala

Reg. No. 2090200035 2009-2013

Bachelor of Planning Department of Planning



Abstract Vijayawada-Guntur-Tenali-Mangalgiri Urban Development Authority known as VGTM-UDA

was constituted in December, 1978 under the AP Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975

after the formation of Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) and

Vishakhapatnam Development Authority (VUDA) in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

Vijayawada City is the 3rd largest urban settlement in the state of Andhra Pradesh and

very well linked by Road, Rail and Air to all urban centres in the State due to its strategic

location on the bank of the River Krishna with Head Quarters of South Centre Railway . As

Vijayawada City, Guntur City, Tenali and Mangalgiri Municipalities are located in a triangular

belt having a lot of interactions and well connected by Circular Rail and Road network; this

urban complex has been proposed to be developed by the Urban Development Authority in

a planned manner according to a plan.

In the first instance, the Master Plan for VGTM-UDA region was prepared and approved in

1986 and subsequently the Development Area under the jurisdiction of the VGTM-UDA has

been divided into 27 planning zones and Zonal Development Plans (ZDPs) for 27 zones were

approved by the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh in the year 2006. Subsequently it has been

realised that the Development Area under the jurisdiction of VGTM-UDA needs further

extension to cater the future needs for urbanisation since the existing area under the

jurisdiction of VGTM UDA is covered by rich agricultural lands under Krishna Delta Irrigation

system and the phylosophy behind this thesis is not to disturb the rich agricultural belt while

making proposals for ubanisation with built up environment.

The Development Area under the jurisdiction of the VGTM-UDA has been further extended

by the Government of Andhra pradesh by including Gudivada and Nuziveed Municipal

Towns; Nandigama and Vuyyuru Nagar Panchayats; 423 villages within Krishna District.

Similarly, the jurisdiction has also been extended in Guntur District.

The present study is confined to Development Area which is extended in Krishna District,

spreading over an extent of 2949 Sq.KM. and it forms 84 % of the total area under UDA

limits in Krishna District with a population of 11.22 lakhs as per 2001 census , which is

estimated to be around 15.58 lakhs by 2021 census with a decadal growth rate of 12.54%

The purpose of the study is to identify the potential areas for regional recreational,

institutional, public/semi-public use within UDA Extension Area in Krishna District.

Keeping view of the 74th Constitutional Amendments Act for creation of Metropolitan

Development Committees (MPCs), it has been thought of linking the present study for the

creation of Vijayawada Metropolitan Region within VGTM UDA for the area under

Vijayawada Municipal Corporation and its suburbs, the jurisdiction of which is same as the

present UDA limits falling under Krishna District, spread over an area of 3171 Sq.KM. with

a population of 23.95 lakhs as per 2001 census, which is estimated to be in the tune of

37.30 lakhs by 2021 census. In terms of comparison, the area under the jurisdiction of

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) is 7,100 sq. Kms. and that of

BMRDA is 8005 sq.kms, which is the largest urban development area in India.



The methodology adopted for identification of Potential Areas was by giving weightage to

various parameters such as cultivable waste, forest cover, built-up area, educational

facilities, etc. and concluded in HIGH and LOW potential areas. Resulting in 97 settlements

to be urbanized without disturbing the rich agricultural belt of the Krishna Delta System in

UDA extended area limits.

The various types of institutional and recreational uses proposed are strictly based upon the

norms and standards stated in the Urban Development Plan Formulation and

Implementation (UDPFI) guidelines i.e. 16 to 18 % of total area under recreational use and

12 to 14 % of total area under institutional and public/semi-public use. Accordingly, the

total requriement of area for institutional and recreational uses for the anticipatede

population of 37.30 lakhs (by 2021census) is measuring an extent of 903 sq.kms., which is

28.47 % of the total land under UDA in Krishna Dist.

The land required for the institutional and recreational need to be located within the top

scoring 97 settlements.



List of tables 4.1 Scoring logic break-up..................................................................................29

4.2 Population density distribution......................................................................32

4.3 Distance to nearest urban centres................................................................33

4.4 Standards for land use break up of developed areas......................................34

4.5 Population standards for defining settlement hierarchy...................................34

4.6 Proposed land use under ZDPs 2021..............................................................35

List of figures 2.1 Vijayawada City...........................................................................................14

2.2 Old VGTM UDA boundary..............................................................................15

2.3 New VGTM UDA boundary............................................................................17

3.1 Case area region within extension area..........................................................21

4.1 Map showing population above 5000 persons.................................................27

4.2 Map showing population density distribution..................................................31

4.3 Map showing adjacency of settlements to major roads....................................31

4.4 Map showing proximity to urban centres........................................................32

4.5 Map showing final scores..............................................................................33



Contents CERTIFICATE...................................................................................................................................................................... 3

UNDERTAKING .................................................................................................................................................................. 4

Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

List of tables ........................................................................................................................................................................ 8

List of figures ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8

CHAPTER 1 ........................................................................................................................................................................ 10

1.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 11

1.1.1. Need ............................................................................................................................................................ 11

1.1.2. Objective.................................................................................................................................................... 11

1.1.3. Aim .............................................................................................................................................................. 12

CHAPTER 2 ........................................................................................................................................................................ 13

2.1. Introduction to Vijayawada ........................................................................................................................ 14

2.2. Municipal administration and planning ................................................................................................ 14

CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................................................................................ 18

3.1. Need for a revised delineation ......................................................................................................................... 19

3.1.1. Unauthorised and Accelerated Building Activity ............................................................................ 19

3.1.2. Change in occupational pattern and livelihood characteristics ................................................ 19

3.1.3. Emergence of Economic Activity Nodes .............................................................................................. 20

3.2. Case area region..................................................................................................................................................... 20

3.2.1. Demography ................................................................................................................................................... 21

3.2.2. Geography and land use ............................................................................................................................. 22

3.2.3. Road network ................................................................................................................................................. 22

3.2.4. Economic activity.......................................................................................................................................... 23

CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................................................................................ 24

4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................ 25

4.2 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................... 26

4.2.1. Primary findings ........................................................................................................................................... 26

4.3.1. Scoring of settlements ................................................................................................................................ 28

4.2.3. Major findings ................................................................................................................................................ 30

4.2.5. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 35

References ........................................................................................................................................................................ 36



CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE SUBJECT



1.1. Introduction Cities grow beyond imaginable proportions, particularly in the developing nations. India

is a relatively moderate pace of urbanization compared to other developing countries.

Today, India remains largely agricultural nation; the share of agricultural workers in the

workforce has barely decreased from 73% in 1971 to 70% in 1991. Urban sprawl

promotes the spread of urban land utilization pattern into the rural-urban fringe and

draws a larger number of people into the fringe areas (Bentinck 2000, p 13). This

research is a study of recreational, institutional and public/semi-public land utilizing

features.

The paper focuses on the varying patterns and parameters resulting in major change

and urbanization within Vijayawada and its surrounding areas. Unlike most cities in

India, Vijayawada is urbanizing at a very fast rate. Therefore, it is important to view the

effects of so to say unmonitored development on recreational and institutional spaces

within the municipal boundary(s).

1.1.1. Need Vijayawada can be divided into 2 parts for easier understanding. First is

the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation (VMC) region. Second being the

part of the Vijayawada-Guntur-Tenali-Mangalgiri Urban Development

Authority falling under Krishna district (consisting of 8 planning zones).

The existing land utilization pattern reveals that the Vijayawadas

municipal region has only 2.5% of its total land under public/semi-

public/institutional use. Recreational areas within the same region are

less than 0.25% of the total area, highlighting huge shortage for open

spaces. While its urban agglomeration has only 0.15% of its land under

recreational use and less than 1.5% land under institutional use or

public/semi-public use.

According to the norms of Urban Developments Plans Formulation and

Implementation (UDPFI), a large town such as Vijayawada must have at

least 12% of its total land under institutional/public/semi-public use and

18% of the land under recreational use.

1.1.2. Objective As said earlier, the study is limited to the institutional and recreational

use. The study is directed towards a set rule of parameters. Such as,

demography in terms of size and population, predominant economic

activity in terms of occupation pattern, proximity to major urban centres

and road network or connectivity.

These parameters shall govern the scope of establishing plans in future. In

other words, the focus is on the word potential.

Potential refers to the probability or prospects or the would be situation

of any activity or object.



1.1.3. Aim With an objective to identify areas suitable for development with respect

to recreational and public/semi-public use, such that the future

development plans can further guide the land use and activities within

those areas, the aim is to find the potential for regional recreational,

institutional and public/semi-public use within the region defined as

rural under the Census of India that is currently undergoing speedy

urbanization.

This region is the UDAs extension area falling under Krishna District.



CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO VGTM-UDA AND ITS SURROUNDINGS



2.1. Introduction to Vijayawada The city named after Arjuna as Vijayawada since he was known as Vijaya.

During the British period the town had grown significantly. The most valuable

contribution of English was the construction of Krishna Anicut in 1855 and

Railway Bridge in 1892 across river Krishna. Due to this trade and commerce

flourished in the region and extended up to Madras.

Located on the Northern Bank of the River Krishna at latitude 1631N and

longitude 3037E.

Fig. 2.1 VMC boundary of Vijayawada City (Source; Google images)

The two national highways, namely NH5 and NH9 pass through the city. The city

is the administrative centre of South Central Railway Divisional Headquarters

and several of the State Government Departments like irrigation, revenue,

building, PWD, roads, etc.

The area around Vijayawada city falls in hot humid region of the country and is

situated 72 km away from the sea. At Vijayawada the highest temperature

recorded is 48C. The city receives an average rainfall of 1235mm.

2.2. Municipal administration and planning The Government of Andhra Pradesh constituted the Vijayawada-Guntur-Tenali-

Mangalgiri Urban Development Authority (VGTM-UDA) under Section 3(1) of the

AP Urban Areas Act, 1975 on 17.12.1978.

The region has an area of 1665sq.km. that consists of 7 urban and 165 rural

settlements falling under 8 mandals of Krishna District and 12 mandals of Guntur

District. Among the settlements 4 Municipal Towns are Vijayawada City, Guntur,

Tenali and Mangalgiri and 3 Panchayat Towns Kondapalli, Gnnavaram and

Tadepalli.



Fig. 2.2. VGTM UDA boundary until 2012 (Source; Research output)

Vijayawada Municipality was constituted on 01.04.1988. The status of the

municipality was upgraded to that of a selection grade on 01.07.1960. During

1981, Gunadala, Patamata and Bhavanipuram Village Panchayats were merged

the municipality. Thus, the total jurisdiction of this urban local body (ULB)

extended upto an area of 51.16 sq.km. During the same time the municipality

was upgraded to a Municipal Corporation and was named Vijayawada Municipal

Corporation. During 1985, the villages Payakapuram and Kundavari Kandrika

were merged with the VMC.

Government Order (GO) 34 dated.13.02.2004 states the addition of 34 villages

within Krishna District to the jurisdiction of VGTM-UDA. On June 21st 2012 the

Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department released GO 227

stating the addition of all villages, Nagar Panchayats and Town Municipalities

within Krishna and Guntur District

During 1969 a Master Plan (Outline Development Plan) for Vijayawada was

prepared by the Government of Andhra Pradesh was in force till 2006 where the

Zonal Development Plans (ZDPs) were prepared for the year 2021. All plans

were prepared by VGTM-UDA

The AP Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975 lay down that the Urban

Development Authority should prepare the Master Plans and Zonal Development

Plans of the Development Area under its jurisdiction.

The Regional Master Plan for Vijayawada was prepared in 1969 i.e. before the

constitution of the Authority in 1978. A decade after its birth, the Authority



prepared a new Master Plan 1988 outlining the priorities for the area under its

jurisdiction for the period ending 2001.

The task of preparing the ZDPs for 27 identified clusters villages/towns was

taken up 15years later with a perspective plan ending 2021.

Investment was not envisaged for construction of houses/apartments, altough it

is one of the objectives for setting up the Authority.

Proiority was not accorded for housing schemes/townships in the ZDP budgets.

The major activities proposed during 2006-11 were road network, water supply,

drainage, solid waste management, street lighiting, educational facilities and

medicinal facitilities. A study conducted by the Department Municipal

Administration and Urban Development (MAUD) revealed that:

The Authority projected the investments required sector-wise, identifying the

source for mobilisation of resources. However, it did not coordinate with the

concerned bodies like R&B, NHAI, Railways, Transmission Corporation of Andhra

Pradesh Ltd., AP Tourism Development Corporation, APPGCL, etc. The Master

Plan 1988 proposed development of Sattelite Towns in selected zones of major

towns like Kondapalli, Gannavaram, Tadikonda, Duggirala, Vejendla, Perecherla

and Namburu to decongest residential areas. Of these, first four were proposed

as industrial towns. The proposal of Sattelite towns in 1988 were neither

implemented nor carried on to the ZDPs. Similarly, the projects related to the

establishment of 2 Transport Nagars were never furthered. ZDP Vijayawada

contained proposals for 2 ring roads, 5 flyovers and 8 bridges. However,

construction of only 1 ring road commenced in 2007-08 and is still not

completed.

Although planning was adequate, projects were not implemented effectively as

envisaged in the Master Plans/ZDPs, defeating the purpose of preperation.

The Authority also stated (in 2011) that it could not undertake the development

works in the last 5 years due to fund constraints and that, faliure to shore up its

revenue led to its instability to take up planned development projects.

The Authority has not instituted any Management Information System. It has an

Estate Management Officer, to monitor the progress of various projects and

submit the status to the Board at periodic intervals. While the Board has been

regularly discussing the progress of various projects individually, there is no

evidence of monitoring on its part, of the either follow up action in removing

constraints on account of lack of investment, infrastructure, etc. in individual

projects or in regard to removal of general constraints hamoering its functioning.

Also the absence of a full time Chairman since 2007 till date has been a

contributing factor in the implementation of plans.

The Authority, which was established for planned development of the VGTM area

and to improve the quality of life of its inhabitants, could not achieve its

objectives to a very large extent. Sectoral developments proposed in Master

Plan/Zonal Development Plans were not implemented, as the Authority did not

prioritise its activities and coordinate effectively with the related



departments/agencies (including local bodies) for their successful and timely

completion. While the Authority contended that it had not received adequate

funding for development projects, during the five year period 2006-11 it had

utilised only a fraction of the funds already at its disposal. Consequently, none of

the townships/ projects taken up by the Authority could be completed.

The Authority had not assessed its requirement of land for various infrastructure

facilities and other development related works nor drawn up any specific plan in

this regard. There was no perspective plan with the Authority for acquiring land

for development purposes and no land was acquired by it during the five year

period 2006-11. Approvals for change of land use were given in violation of

Master Plan/ZDPs, vitiating the sanctity of the approved plans. Contract

management in the few projects taken up was ineffective and led to financial loss

to the Authority. The Authority did not also pay adequate attention to provision

of basic amenities in the already established townships. Financial management

was poor and record maintenance was abysmal. Internal controls were

inadequate and lax especially in cash book maintenance, collection of

fees/development charges, disposal of applications for land regularisation and

building penalisation schemes, accountal of demand drafts, etc. (Reference 2a)

The land prices in Vijayawada are sky-high one of the prime reasons for the

extension is to cater and provide for the required amount of land in better

budgeted format. Apart from this, there are other reasons for the extension of

VGTM-UDA boundary.

Fig. 2.3. VGTMUDA boundary after extension, 2012 (Source; Research output)



CHAPTER 3 NEED FOR EXTENSION SELECTION OF CASE AREA



3.1. Need for a revised delineation

3.1.1. Unauthorised and Accelerated Building Activity One of the key menaces in the hinterlands of VGTM-UDA in contemporary times is the rise of unauthorised building activity. Unauthorised development means a colony / development comprising of contiguous area, where no permission of concerned agency has been obtained for approval of Layout Plan, and/ or Building Plan. Unauthorised building activity refers to construction and building of structures that may not adhere to urban standards and bye-laws and may not be having the necessary permissions of the urban local regulatory body. This is a common factor of transformation in many parts of the country as most areas falling beyond or outside the VGTM UDA region are under the purview of the contextual village administration or the village Panchayat. The control over development in such villages is not as stringent as in urban areas and hence builders tend to stand at an advantage in building structures with features that may not be permitted in urban areas. Similarly, large scale building activities are currently happening in the hinterland of VGTMUDA region on which there is no guidance or control. In the eventuality of the urban jurisdiction expanding due to natural growth, such areas get included in the urban limits leading to non-conforming patterns of development. One of the ways of keeping a guiding control over such haphazard building activity is to bring the hinterland under the purview of VGTM-UDA, where building permissions will be sought from VGTM-UDA instead of the Panchayats. Hence, there is a need to a re-assess the existing boundary in view of the building activity happening in its surrounding areas in order to develop a rationale for regulation such activities in a larger societal interest.

3.1.2. Change in occupational pattern and livelihood

characteristics The common trend in most rural-urban fringe areas undergoing transformation is a shift of occupational pattern of the households from agriculture based economic activities to non-agriculture based economic activities. This indicates growing dependence on secondary and tertiary sources income rather than the primary sources of income thereby affecting associated activities in the region. Most of the fringe areas around VGTM-UDA region are having physical and socio-economic characteristics that suggest strong shift of occupational pattern from primary to non-primary activities. Keeping this in view, it is pragmatic to identify those regions where the primary source of income and occupational pattern has already transformed into urban forms and then make necessary arrangements to develop amenities to support such economic and livelihood generation activities rather than continue to consider them as rural villages. Hence, there is a need to assess the change in occupational pattern in the surrounding areas of existing VGTM UDA in order to identify such urbanising areas and contemplate the rationale of including them into the jurisdiction of VGTM UDA region.



3.1.3. Emergence of Economic Activity Nodes The VGTM-UDA region is also witnessing economic activities of particular types beyond its boundaries. Such economic nodes have a variety of functions ranging from the emergence of commercial shopping centres and FMCG warehousing to setting up of small and medium scales manufacturing units and knowledge based institutions. These types of economic and institutional activities are derivatives of agglomeration-of-scale of similar types of investments in the region over a period of time. It also refers to the existence of a structured investment pattern by the private sector over a period of time thereby consolidating economic activities catering to a rising market for urban amenities in these fringe areas. Such activities also depend on the local workforce and infrastructure available. Resultantly, these areas have started developing ancillary and supporting economic activities. Due to the fact that most fringe areas are under the jurisdiction of village administration or village Panchayats, regulations of VGTM-UDA are not applicable. While, the rise of economic activity is a positive indicator for the region, there is a need to assess the pattern of such growth in order to identify corridors or zones of such development and bring it under the jurisdiction of VGTM UDA and embark upon strategies that benefit the economy without adversely harming the environment and built form. (Reference 3a)

3.2. Case area region The total extended area of the VGTM-UDA consists of 631 villages and

spreads over an extent of 5108.90 KM square, falling under Krishna and

Guntur districts.

The area is too large to carry out the study at a MICRO level and therefore, all the

data collected was VILLAGE-WISE. The study has been carried out

correspondingly. Moreover, for an area this large a Perspective Plan or a Regional

Plan is ideal to design in order to guide the settlements towards urbanization.

Hence, the study has been limited to the

2 Town Municipalities

2 Nagar Panchayats

423 Villages

These fall under Krishna District spreading over 2948.57Sq.Km.

The analysis has a scientific approach. The intention is to categorize the study area

into parts in order to frame directions of future development plans. The study has

been carried out at macro-level with village wise data. Bottlenecks within the

existing ZDPs are found; demand as per the projected population and likewise

conclusions have been discussed.



For simpler understanding, in this study, the case area will be referred as

Vijayawada UDA extension area.

The case area, as said before marks trends of speedy urbanization. In this study, we are

going to discuss the different trends, predisposition, style of parameters such as

population size and density, geographic features and land utilization pattern, nearest

urban centres, etc.

Fig. 3.1. Case area within VGTM UDA boundary after extension, 2012 (Source; Research output)

3.2.1. Demography Demography in general refers to the study of population. The entire Vijayawada

UDA extension area i.e. falling under both Krishna district (consisting of 423

villages) has a population size of 11.22 lakh persons and its average population

density is 380 persons per kilometre square (or 3.8 persons per hectare).

In this study, the population size and density have been stressed upon. This will

be explained further in Chapter 4.



3.2.2. Geography and land use It has been realised that the Development Area under the jurisdiction of VGTM-

UDA needs further extension to cater the future needs for urbanisation since the

existing area under the jurisdiction of VGTM UDA and is covered by rich

agricultural lands under Krishna Delta Irrigation system and the philosophy

behind this thesis is not to disturb the rich agricultural belt while making

proposals for urbanisation with built up environment.

In planning, there are 2 distinct types of landuse patterns; rural and urban or

developed area. The urban land use pattern includes

Under urban or developed areas

Residential

Commercial

Industrial

Recreational

Public/semi-public or Institutional

Transport and communication

Agricultural and water bodies

Under rural or agricultural land use

Area under cultivation

Area under forest cover

Land not available (built-up or water body)

Land not under cultivation (cultivable waste, barren land, un-cultivable

land, etc)

The existing land use pattern revels that out of 423 villages 54% area is under

cultivation, 22% of the total area is either un-irrigated (probably under

cultivation) or is not available for development, 1.25% of the total area falls

under forest cover and the remaining 22.75% in not under cultivation.

3.2.3. Road network Similar to land utilization, road network also can be divided into two types of

hierarchy also known as road hierarchy; rural and urban.

Urban hierarchy

Express way

Arterial roads

Sub-arterial roads

Collector street

Local street



Rural hierarchy

National highway

State highway

Major district roads

Other district roads

BT/pakka roads

Kuchcha roads (paved, cart-tracks, un-paved/footpaths)

The case area has two major national highways and one major district road

passing thorugh its region. Namely, NH5 (connecting Kolkata to Chennai), NH65

(old NH-9 connecting Machilipatnam to Mumbai via Hyderabad)

3.2.4. Economic activity There have been reports stating the fast and drastic shift of workers from

primary to non-primary activities. The study has been conducted by using the

data substantiated and justified through various references and source and there

is no significant research output concerning the same.



CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND OUTPUT



After having established a general idea and image of the case area, the methodology

adopted will be easy to understand. Moreover, the reason for opting for such techniques

will also be learnt.

4.1 Methodology The research is directed towards identifying the potential for regional level recreational, public/semi-public and institutional uses. Therefore, study of different types of their uses is necessary. In order to do this, a set rule of parameters will be decided. NOTE; the word "potential" here, is for the ' Most Urnbanizable'. The study area and the different administrative boundaries that it consists will now be referred as settlements. As said earlier, the research will be carried out on a set rule of parameters. These parameters are the population size and density, land utilization pattern, approach to settlement, occupation pattern and order & level of infrastructural facilities available. The parameters drawn will be used to design a scoring logic. There will be 3 major criteria for obtaining scores/points.

1. Demography 2. Land utilization pattern 3. Approach

Each parameter shall carry 5 points. Apart from this, other aspects of urbanization such as infrastructural facilities and occupation pattern will also be incorporated (later in the study). A scoring logic implies that the settlements will be graded / rated. The Census of India defines urban areas as those having population over 5000 persons with a minimum density of 4 persons per hectare with 75% of the male population of the workforce in non-primary activities. Keeping this definition of the Census of India and the limitations of the research in finding the potential, the logic used is to satisfy 2 out of 3 definitions of Census in declaring areas as urban. Say for example, a settlement has a population over 5000, it gets a score x if its population is over 20000, it gets a score y where y is greater than x. The details will be provided in the analysis part with illustrious description. Another logic applied since is that study is limited to the recreational and institutional use preference should be given to the approach road. Therefore, this has also been considered as one of the parameters for scoring on the biases of a settlements adjacency to a major road and its distance from the nearest urban centre. Finally, based on the scoring logic the settlements will be classified into the 2 categories of potential high and low. From the final list, all the villages scoring above 50% of the maximum marks will be considered as settlements highly potential for urbanization. The Census of India defines urban area as area having:

Population over 5000 persons Population density at least 4ppha (or) 1000 Persons/Sq.km. 75% or more men engaged in non-primary activity



Out of all the settlements, the ones satisfying the first two criteria of Census of India will be considered as potential. The population of the existing notified urban areas and the most urbanizable areas will be identified and projected based on scientific analysis. This projected population and its resultant density will provide the bases for the urban standards, norms and regulations that are applicable and that can be implied within the region or settlement. The reason in doing so is that there are no standards to define the provisions for rural areas. The study is of an area undergoing rigorous and fast transitions in the sphere of urbanization. In this study, only UDPFI norms have been followed. The land demand for; recreational / open spaces and institutional/public/semi-public will be calculated and the gap will be identified. Considering the proposals drafted in the Zonal Development Plans 2021, the gap will further be reduced and the remaining demand shall be catered for through the final top scoring settlements.

4.2 Analysis The following analysis provides justification to the above stated methodology.

4.2.1. Primary findings VMC limits:

Vijayawada Municipal Corporation spread over an area of 6188 Ha with

population size 8,45,217 persons and density 136.58 persons/Ha. The existing

land-use pattern reveals that VMC Limits have 61.88 Ha of land under recreational

use and 742.56 Ha of land under institutional use. This means only 0.22 % and

2.37 % of the total extent has been put to recreational and institutional use.

VGTM-UDA limits (within Krishna Dist.):

Vijayawada Urban Development Authority has an extent of 60366.91 Ha. Its total

population is 427650 persons and its density is 7.08 persons/Ha existing land-

use pattern shows, only 85.74 Ha (0.14%) of land is under recreational use and

838.91 Ha (1.38%) of land put to institutional uses.

Clearly, the dire need for recreational and institutional spaces in evident.

The Urban Development Plans Formulation and Implementation (UDPFI) states

that a large town such as Vijayawada should have at least 12% - 18% under

public/semi-public or institutional use and 12% - 14% under recreational

use or as open spaces.

To meet the needs of the urbanizing hour, in 2006 the UDA launched the Zonal

Development Plans 2021. The first development plan to be incorporated after

the 1988 Master Plan by the authority. The region was divided into 9 zones (one

being VMC region). And, the land use proposed was 6793.93 Ha under

recreational 10.20 and 994.61 Ha under institutional 1.49 %



Fig. 4.1. VMC and VGTM UDA boundary within Krishna District (Source; Research output)

As per UDPFI norms and standards, Vijayawada should have at least 11979.88

Ha under recreational use (18% of total area) and 7986.58 Ha under institutional

use (12% of total area). The plans proposed for these zones do not cater for the

existing gap.

VGTM-UDA Extension Area (Limited to Krishna Dist Case Area)

The newly delineated Vijayawada UDA boundary (extension area within Krishna

district) sprawls over 294857.74 Ha. (2948.54 Km.sq.). the entire region consists

of 423 villages. The entire land utilization pattern until now is rural. However the

societys lifestyle graph is speedily tilting towards urbanization.

The population growth rate of the district is 13.19% and the existing population

residing within the 423 villages as per Census of India is 1122156 persons at a

growth rate of 12.45%. To propose a plan that meets the existing gap and the

demand of added of 1122156 persons is neither comprehensive nor practical.

Therefore, the study area will be divided into a hierarchy of its potential to be

urbanized. The criteria set are high potential for urbanization and low potential

for urbanization.

To find highly potential areas, the logic and parameters explained in the

previously, have been implied.

Some of the notable inferences drawn after the primary analysis of the study area are that 22.75% of the total land within the extension area is available for



development. 36 villages have a National Highway passing through them. Other villages have access to Pakka roads. Leaving 89 villages with Kachha roads. The other factor considered for analysis was the distance of the village to its nearest urban centre. There is a high percentage of non-primary sector occupation in the overall scenario of the study area of the UDA region. With more than 80% of the occupation pattern being dedicated to the non-primary sector. Never the less, 214 settlements lack medical facilities and can avail these facilities in a radius of 5km 10km. While on the other hand, the education facilities in the same region project a very different picture. With, only 4 settlements apart from the un-inhabited settlements lack educational facilities.

4.3.1. Scoring of settlements Since the parameters and the reasons for choosing them have now been

understood, the scoring logic can be comprehended and the details of scores and

the relevance of the allotted scores can be discussed.

The objective of a regional plan is to provide direction to small sections of a very

large area such that the local governing bodies of the former are provided the

direction and guidance to focus time energy and investments on. A Perspective

or Regional Plan provides the basis and foundation of the future land use of its

region. This paper is focused on the study of 423 villages and 4 urban

settlements and their requirements for recreational, institutional, public and

semi-public use.

Therefore, to find such potential, designing a scoring logic that highlights the

facts required to identify the reasonable areas for such development is not only

essential but also a mean to achieve the ends at ease with maximum accuracy.

The scoring logic uses the basic parameters used in the Census of India for

defining urban.

Population as a criterion consisted of 2 sub-parameters. One being the absolute

number of people and the other being the ratio of the total number of people within

a settlement to its total area. Each settlement shall score between 1 point to 5

points. The lowest (1) for population below 5000 persons (Census definition) and a

maximum of 5 points for population 30000 persons. Likewise for density, 5 points

relate to those settlements that have density above 30 persons per hectare and 1 for

those with density below 4 persons per hectare (Census of India definition).

Under approach, two prime sub-divisions have been made within the study as it was

found that there are only 2 types of rural roads passing through the area apart from

the black top (BT) roads and kuchcha roads. 5 points was for those settlements with

NH passing through them. 3 points was for MDRs and 1 point for all BT/kuchcha

roads. The study reveals that all villages are well connected with either kuchcha or

pukka roads.



Another major criterion for scoring was the existing land utilization pattern. India is

predominantly an agricultural state and therefore, it shall be the primary concern of

any planning project to protect, conserve and cater for its natural agricultural

richness and not harm the soils potential for cultivation under any circumstances.

Keeping this in view, the land use of the site area must critically and carefully

analyzed and articulated for development. Now, the land utilization pattern of rural

areas can broadly be brought down to 3 components; Area not under cultivation

(suitable for development), area under forest cover (strictly to be conserved) and

area not available for development (areas that are cultivable, irrigated, built-up,

etc.).

The detailed scoring logic break-up for each parameter is given in Table 4.1.

PARAMETER LOGIC SCORE REFERENCE

POPULATION

SIZE

1 UI

2 BELOW 5000

3 5001-15,000

4 15,001-30,000

5 ABOVE 30,000

DENSITY

1 BELOW 5 ppHa

2 5-10 ppHa

3 11-20 ppHa

4 21-30 ppHa

5 above 30 ppHa

LANDUSE

NOT UNDER CULTIVATION

1 0

2 1-25

3 25-50

4 50-75

5 75-100

UNDER FOREST COVER

1 75-100

2 50-75

3 25-50

4 1-25

5 0

BUILT UP

1 0

2 1-25

3 25-50

4 50-75

5 75-100

APPROACH

ADJACENCY TO MAJOR ROADS

1 NONE

2 -

3 MDR

4 -

5 NH

DISTANCE TO NEAREST URBAN CENTRE

1 0-5

2 6-10

3 11-15



4 16-20

5 ABOVE 20

OCCUPATION PATTERN

% NON PRIMARY WORKERS

1 0

2 1-25

3 25-50

4 50-75

5 75-100

As justified and explained in the parameters and the scoring logic, it is evident that only

those parameters have been taken into consideration that mark trends of urbanization and

at the same time provide an insight to the land availability. It must be noted that scoring

logic for occupation pattern has been given. However, due to inaccessibility and

unavailability of data the conclusions were directly derived from the analysis made through

literature study (ZDPs 2021, Research documents from various institutes like SPA

Vijayawada and Ministry of Administration and Urban Development, etc.).

The final scoring logic presents 7 parameters for grading and a maximum of 35 points (7x5)

can be scored by a settlement. Out of all the settlements, the ones scoring above 50% (17.5

pts) will be considered as highly potential for development. This logic of scoring 50% has no

specific grounds/bases. It has been considered on a simple logic of above and below

average and is case and planner specific.

4.2.3. Major findings After arranging all 423 settlements based on the parameters discussed, it was

realized that 76 settlements qualified the population criterion to qualify as urban

under the Census definition. 158 settlements qualify the second criterion i.e.

population density over 4ppHa summing to a whopping 37% of the total

settlements.

22 settlements have a national highway (NH-5 or NH-65) passing through them and

there are 44 settlements with major district roads passing through them (Junction

road).

Occupation pattern as explained before has been shifting at a fast rate. Also, to find the

potential, the criteria have to be close to the definition of urban and not satisfy the

definition of urban areas as per the Census of India. Therefore, this aspect of the study

has not been analysed in depth. Rather, the conclusions of the report drafted by the

School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada Delineation of a new boundary; VGTM

UDA has been taken and directly applied to the case area.



Above; FIG. 4.2. Settlements with population over 5000 persons, Below;Fig. 4.3. Population Density (Source; Research

output)



Fig. 4.4. Map showing adjacency of settlements to major roads (Source; Research output)

Conclusive inferences that can be drawn are that there are 47 settlements that qualify the 2

census criteria required to be deemed potential. Other major inferences have been stated

below in tabular format.

Table 4.2



Table 4.3

Top scores;

Fig. 4.5. Settlements with high potential for development of recreational and institutional use (Source; Research output)

Based on the final scores achieved by each settlement, 97 were found to have scored above

50% of the total scores. The map above shows the 97 settlements.

The study will now be further limited to these 97 settlements. Since the settlements have

high potential for development, UDPFI norms will be implemented and likewise the area

required for recreational, institutional and public/semi-public use will be calculated.



The scope of the study is to identify the shortcomings and bottlenecks existing within the

ZDP notified urban areas and the study area and provide the requirements for recreational

and institutional development. Since the study area spreads over 2947 sq.km. consisting of 423

villages and 4 urban settlements, it is wise to have a regional approach with a perspective plan. Now,

the population in these settlements will be projected and this projection will provide the bases for

establishing the norms and standards applicable. This paper discuses only the UDPFI norms as only

these guidelines have been used throughout the study. The norms followed have been stated below.

UDPFI Standards for % of developed area/region

Land-use Category Medium Towns Large Cities Metro Cities

Residential 40-45 35-40 35-40

Commercial 2-3 4-5 4-5

Industrial 8-10 10-12 12-14

Institutional 10-12 12-14 14-16

Recreational 18-20 18-20 20-25

Transport and Communication 12-14 12-14 15-18

Agro and Water Bodies Balance Balance Balance

Table 4.4, Source; UDPFI

Developed area average population densities (Persons/Ha)

Large Cities 100-150

Metro Cities 125-175

Table 4.5, Source; UDPFI

As shown above, the proposals will be made considering the requirements of large cities. To

put the analysis to an end and arrive at a conclusive inference, the UDPFI norms used will

provide us the land demand or the required amount of land to provide institutional and

recreational facilities. Also, the land demand or the existing gap in the VMC region and the

other 8 zones of the UDA region in Krishna district will be found on the basis of UDPFI

standards. Having done that, the proposals drafted in the ZDPs 2021 will be reduced from

this total demand. The final demand will be compared to the total land available for

development and likewise conclusions shall follow.

The projected population for the year 2021 is 1558041 persons in the case area. 532237 persons in

the 8 zones of UDA region and 1640630 persons in the VMC region. It must be noted that

approximately 30% to 40% of the total area shall fall under residential use. Out of this residential

area, 10 % of it will fall under layout open spaces i.e. 8846Ha, furthering the scope by reducing the

demand. After having reduced all provisions discounting, the final land demand is 80780 Ha of land

for both recreational and institutional use.



4.2.5. Conclusion

Table 4.6, Source; Research analysis

The total institutional and recreational and public/semi-public space required is

67,961 Ha. However, the total land available for development or the total UN-

CULTIVABLE land is 54,157 Ha.

The only inference that can be drawn is that this major shortage of recreational and

institutional land and space cannot be fully met. While the demand for the extension

area can be catered for, 13803.5 Ha is still required to cater for the gap that exists in

the 9 zones (one being VMC) of VGTM-UDA falling under Krishna district.



References Public domains Wikipedia.org , Google search engine, vgtmuda.gov.in

Urban Development Plans Formulation and Implementation (UDPFI) guidelines, norms and

standards.

Krishna District Statistical Handbook and VGTMUDA reports; Zonal Development Plans 2021

Volume I and II, Government Order227, Government Order678, Government Order34

Dr. Sonar G and Patil DM. (2011). Planning for Nashik Metropolitan Region: pp; 21-26

Reference 1a; Bentinck J V. (2000). Unruly urbanization on Delhis fringe changing patterns

of land use and livelihood. Doctoral Thesis Report. Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen Department

Rijuksuniversiteit Gronegen University

Reference 2a: Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development. (2009).

Analysis and auditing of bills, VGTMUDA

Reference 3a: School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada. (2011). Proposed Revised

Delineation of Urban Limits VGTM Urban Area. Project Report for VGTMUDA.

Bachelors Thesis

Documents

Transcript of Bachelors Thesis