You are on page 1of 149

A Thesis Report on

REVISITING THE PROVISIONS OF GREEN BELTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A CASE OF JAIPUR.

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Planning (Urban Planning)

By Suvadip Bhowmik (ID NO. 2009 PAU109)

Supervisor Mr. Tarush Chandra Associate Professor

Academic Session 2010-11

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE MALAVIYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAIPUR JUNE 2011

Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur-2011 All rights reserved

List of Abbreviations:

PPG JDA BMR DDA AMC AUDA BMA PPP NCTD NCR MGB STP FSI TDR

Planning Policy Guidance Jaipur Development Authority Bangalore Metropolitan Region Delhi Development Authority Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority Bangalore Metropolitan Area Public Private Partnership National Capital Territory of Delhi National Capital Region Metropolitan Green Belt Sewage Treatment Plant Floor Space Index Transfer of Development Rights

ii

Contents

Page no.

List of Abbreviations.....ii List of Tables.viii List of Figures......ix List of Charts..xii

Chapter 1 : Introduction and Study Brief


1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 Background.1 The origin of the greenbelt concept..3 Understanding green belt.......4 Definition...4 Need of the study......8 Aim.9 Objectives9 Methodology.10 Scope of the study......11 Limitations......11 Study area.........12

Chapter 2 : Literature Study


2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 History of Green belt as a planning tool...14 Important facts to be considered while proposing greenbelt..16 Issues involved..17 Purpose of Green belt....17 Uses of Green belt concept..19 Threat for greenbelts...19 Green belt policies as per PPG (Planning policy Guidance).20

iii

Chapter 3 : Case Study


3.1 London greenbelt, UK...25 3.1.1 History and essence of London Green belt....25 3.1.2 Structure of London Green belt.26 3.1.3 Chronological growth of London..28 3.1.4 Metropolitan Green Belt structure.28 3.1.5 Threats for London green belt land..30 3.2 Seouls greenbelt, South Korea .31 3.2.1 Seouls greenbelt policy...33 3.2.2 Costs and benefits of Seouls greenbelt..35 3.2.3 Greenbelt policy reform...36 3.2.4 Issues involved.38 3.2.5 Seven objectives for the establishment of Seouls greenbelt38 3.2.6 Inferences.38 3.3 Ontario green belt, Canada...40 3.3.1 Vision......42 3.3.2 Purpose of green belt...42 3.3.3 Current land uses...42 3.3.4 Inferences.45 3.4 Paris Green Belt, France.......46 3.4.1 The Green Belt as a Specific Area of the Ile-de-France Region49 3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany.......51 3.5.1 Issues involved52 3.5.2 General awareness..53 3.5.3 Facts & figures.53
iv

3.5.4 Key Features.55 3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada....57 3.6.1 Planning Goals and Objectives.58 3.6.2 Decision Making Framework...59 3.6.3 Uses permitted / Main features......63 3.7 Greenbelt of Beijing, China.64 3.7.1 Three greenbelts of Beijing......64 3.7.2 Issues involved.67 3.8 Vienna greenbelt, Austria....68 3.8.1 Green belt development in Vienna..69 3.8.2 Development phases of Vienna 1870-200070 3.8.3 Categories of green space in Vienna..71 3.8.4 Land use pattern of Vienna71 3.9 Ahmedabad Greenbelt, India...72 3.9.1 Overview of development plans in terms of greenbelt..72 3.9.2 Details of AUDA and AMC...74 3.9.3 Greenbelt land use....74 3.9.4 Inferences.45 3.10 Bangalore green belt, India76 3.10.1 Five concentric belts.78 3.10.2 Growth of Bangalore.79 3.10.3 Green belt statistics80 3.10.4 Inferences.81 3.11 Delhi greenbelt, India.......82 3.11.1 Master plan proposals for Delhi Greenbelt.84

3.12

Inferences........85 3.12.1 Prospects and consequences of greenbelts.....86 3.12.2 Factors assisting the permanence of greenbelt...86 3.12.3 Greenbelt planning principles87

Chapter 4 Survey
4.1 Findings of Survey...88 4.1.1 Purpose of Greenbelt Concept.88 4.1.2 Benefits of Greenbelt with special reference to Jaipur metropolitan region...89 4.1.3 Threat for Greenbelts.89 4.1.4 Viability of green belt to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance of the Jaipur city.89 4.1.5 Other probable options to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance...90 4.2 4.3 Planning option for Jaipur greenbelt- SWOT analysis..90 Survey Inferences...91

Chapter 5 JDA Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area
& Eco-sensitive area 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Master Development Plan 1991..92 Master Development Plan 2011..94 Master Development Plan 2025..97 Comparative analysis of all three Master Plan proposals....100

vi

Chapter 6 Inferences and Recommendations


6.1 6.2 6.3 Influences of city size..101 Parameters responsible for designating Jaipur Greenbelt boundary..102 Development Promotion / Control Regulation103 6.3.1 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (U-2), MDP-2025..104 6.3.2 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (U-3), MDP-2025..105 6.3.3 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (Eco-sensitive area), MDP-2025106 6.3.4 Assessment of Development Promotion / Control Regulations..108 6.4 Recommendations......109 6.4.1 Parameters for Jaipur green belt feasibility study...109 6.4.2 Various schemes for green belt land ownership and pattern of development.111 6.4.3 Suggestive planning principle for Jaipur Green belt.112 6.4.4 Conclusion.113

Works Cited118 Annexure: Annexure A: Comparative analysis of all case studies Annexure B: Opinion survey questionnaire

vii

List of Tables : Table no.


Table 1.1: Table 3.1:

Page no.
Area details of JDA Region.13 The distribution of green belt designated land by region of England as at 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010 22

Table 3.2: Table 3.3: Table 3.4: Table 3.5: Table 3.6: Table 3.7: Table 3.8: Table 4.1: Table 6.1: Table 6.2: Table 6.3: Table 6.4: Table 6.5:

Ontario Green belt details..41 Demographic structure of Paris......46 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany.....51 Frankfurt Green belt details...54 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa57 Land allocation scenario of Green belt land .62 Urban Area, Rural Area & Green Belt In NCTD (1962 -2001)..82 SWOT analysis90 Development controls for Urbanisable Area-2(JDA region)..104 Development controls for Urbanisable Area-3(JDA region)..105 Permitted Use Premises In Eco -Sensitive Area G-2.106 Demographic structure of Sirani & Daulatpura 110 Details of villages under the green belt boundary 116

viii

List of Figures: Figure no.


Figure 1.1: Figure 1.2: Figure 3.1: Figure 3.2: Figure 3.3: Figure 3.4: Figure 3.5: Figure 3.6: Figure 3.7: Figure 3.8: Figure 3.9: Figure 3.10: Figure 3.11: Figure 3.12:

Page no.
Ebenezer Howards Garden City concept..3 Location plan of JDA region......12 Location map of England22 Green belts in England.23 Location map of London in England...25 Green belt around London.26 Settlements inside Greenbelt.27 Phases of Metropolitan Green belt structure.29 The green belt & satellite towns.30 Location plan of Seol....31 Map showing Seoul Greenbelt..32 Changes in Seoul's Administrative Boundary between 1314 & 1963.34 Geographical feature of Seoul.35 The Physical Expansion of the Seoul Metropolitan Region between 1920-1994..37

Figure 3.13: Figure 3.14: Figure 3.15: Figure 3.16: Figure 3.17: Figure 3.18:

Location plan of Ontario.....40 Ontario Green belt43 Existing Land use inside the Green belt...44 The city of Toronto.44 Development around the greenbelt...45 Location map of Paris...46

ix

Figure 3.19: Figure 3.20: Figure 3.21: Figure 3.22: Figure 3.23: Figure 3.24: Figure 3.25: Figure 3.26: Figure 3.27: Figure 3.28: Figure 3.29: Figure 3.30: Figure 3.31: Figure 3.32: Figure 3.33: Figure 3.34: Figure 3.35: Figure 3.36: Figure 3.37: Figure 3.38: Figure 3.39: Figure 3.40: Figure 3.41:

Paris Green belt..47 Urban Area scenario of Paris..48 The perimeter of the greenbelt in the region of Ile de France (Paris)....49 Location of Frankfurt, Germany.51 Green Belt of Frankfurt..52 City boundary and Green belt..53 Pattern of Greenbelt, Frankfurt..55 Pattern of activity inside Greenbelt..56 Location of the City of Ottawa in the Province of Ontario, Canada57 Green belt of Ottawa...58 Land uses in the greenbelt..60 The greenbelt inside the national capital region.61 Pattern of Urban Area around the Green belt..62 Settlement pattern outside the Green belt boundary63 Location of Beijing in China64 The Beijing Green belt..65 The three Green belts of Beijing.66 Location of Vienna in Austria.68 Green belt of Vienna69 Development phases of Vienna70 Land use pattern of Vienna71 Location map of Ahmedabad..72 Boundary of AUDA and AMC.73

Figure 3.42: Figure 3.43: Figure 3.44: Figure 3.45: Figure 3.46: Figure 3.47: Figure 3.48: Figure 3.49: Figure 3.50: Figure 3.51: Figure 5.1: Figure 5.2:

Green belt of Ahmedabad75 Location of Bangalore in Karnataka and India76 Map showing Bangalore Development Authority limit...77 Bangalore Green belt...78 Urban Development Scenario...79 Greater Bangalore in 1973, 1992, 2000, 2006 and 2009.80 Location of Delhi in India.82 Regional setting of Delhi..83 Delhi Master Plan 1962..84 Delhi Master Plan 2021..84 Proposed Land Use plan 1991....92 1991 Master Plan proposal for green belt. The 1991 green belt is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan..93

Figure 5.3: Figure 5.4:

Urbanisable area 2011, indicating ecological area95 2011 Master Plan proposal for ecological area. The 2011 ecological area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan..96

Figure 5.5: Figure 5.6:

Land Utilization Map, indicating Eco-sensitive area98 2025 Master Plan proposal for Eco-sensitive area. The 2025 Eco-sensitive area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan..99

Figure 5.7:

Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area & Eco-sensitive area. These are shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan..100

Figure 6.1: Figure 6.2: Figure 6.3:

Location of Satellite towns around parent city...102 Land Utilization Map, JDA region....103 Location plan of Sirani and Dalautpura inside JDA region.109 xi

Figure 6.4: Figure 6.5: Figure 6.6: Figure 6.7: Figure 6.8:

Sustainable greenbelt model...113 Land Utilization Map, JDA region114 Green belt proposal for JDA region ..115 Development all along the road118 Development only on major junction/nodes..118

List of Charts:
Chart no. Chart 3.1: Chart 3.2: Page no. Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City...56 Permissible land use inside the Green belt.....74

xii

Chapter 1

Introduction and Study Brief

1.1 Background A green belt or greenbelt is a policy and land use designation used in land use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land surrounding or neighboring urban areas. Similar concepts are greenways or green wedges which have a linear character and may run through an urban area instead of around it. In essence, a green belt is an invisible line encircling a certain area, preventing development of the area allowing wildlife to prevail. The general concept of "green belt" evolved to encompass "Green space" and "Green structure", taking into account urban green space, an important aspect of sustainable development in the 21st century. The green belts are considered the lungs of urban centers. Such green belts in a city ensures freshness and improves the ambience of the town, maintain healthier environment by generating oxygen to the living creatures, and also function as an agent of recharging the ground with fresh rain water and controlling the increasing global warm. In fact, green belts increase the longevity of human life. Greenbelt is also an important land use planning technique to limit sprawl (unplanned, uncontrolled together with the spreading of development), which is the tendency for cities to spread out and encroach on rural lands and wildlife habitat. But to designate a Green Belt, a local authority must prove why normal planning and development control policies would not be adequate to protect a town from urban sprawl. The concept of greenbelt was first formally proposed by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee in 1935, "to provide a reserve supply of public open spaces and of recreational areas and to establish a green belt or belt of open spaces".

According to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, United Kingdom, 1955: "An area of land near to and sometimes surrounding a town, which is kept open by permanent and severe restriction on building. The form it takes depends on the purposes it is intended to serve. If it is wanted to prevent two nearby towns from joining up, all that is necessary is a sufficiently wide belt of open land between them, leaving the towns free to expand in other directions. More often, the purpose is to limit the expansion of a town, and a virtually continuous belt all round it will be needed. There are also some groups of towns which are tending to merge into one solid urban mass. In such a case the green belt is partly a series of buffers of open land between the towns and partly a belt around the whole group". In United Kingdom town planning, the green belt is a policy for controlling urban growth. The idea is for a ring of peri-urban area where urbanization will be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail. The fundamental aim of green belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open, and consequently the most important attribute of green belts is their openness. On the whole, greenbelt policies are seen as a useful and often successful means to contain or direct urban expansion. In some cases, development has been switched to areas beyond the green belt which is then sandwiched. Later motives for creating green belts have been the provision of open areas for recreation and the preservation of agricultural land. Some planners advocate the establishment of green wedges which project into the city rather than a green belt. Traditionally in the Master Plan of various Towns, the urban areas have been shown as surrounded by a ring of peripheral control belt or green belt. This green belt was expected to act as lung space around the urban areas. It was also expected to cater to the activities operating in rural areas including agriculture, partly catering to the requirements of the urban uses.

1.2 The origin of the greenbelt concept The origins of the term and its application have been diverse. It was strongly supported in the UK by an active group of preservationists during the pre WW-II period. Preservationists normatively asserted that a town should be clearly a town, and a village a village. They saw the adoption of green belts as a way of imposing an urban-rural polarity on an in-between landscape of urban fringe suburbs and ribbon development. Its origin is often linked to the ideas of Ebenezer Howard in the early 20th Century about developing Garden Cities around London and containing its sprawl.
Figure 1.1. Ebenezer Howards Garden City concept

Source: By Lilian T.Y.C.1, Ho C.S. and Ismail S, Some planning consideration of garden city concept towards achieving sustainable development, 2002, Pp 262.

Howards concept for the garden city was a means of controlling the growth of cities through the building series of new towns physically separated from each other and from the parent city.

1.3 Understanding green belt Green belt is a land-use planning concept. It is basically "Green space, Open space or landscaped buffer zone between developed areas and undeveloped areas. Swathe or continuous and contiguous broad strip of undeveloped land (e.g. agricultural land, forest, waste-land, recreational parks or uncultivated land etc.) around a town or city, protected to prevent it being built on. It is different from Greenways or green wedges (which run through an urban area instead of around it). In essence, a green belt is an invisible line covering a certain area, preventing development of the area allowing wildlife and natural habitat to sustain. Green belt is a planning tool, used to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. It is protected by normal planning controls against "inappropriate development" within its boundaries.
Sources: 1. http://www.answers.com/topic/greenbelt#ixzz1EKU4NMAy as accessed on 15 March, 2011. 2. Greg Lee, Strategic Green Belt Review, Final Report (South West Regional Assembly, February 2006), Page-6.

1.4 Definition Green space: The general term for green space is open space. Although a standard definition of green space keeps broad, there are specific characteristic features that set green space apart from other types of space. Green space in urban areas exists mainly as semi-natural areas and is essential for urban sustainability and the people's quality of life. All land units regarded as green space may be viewed as ecosystems, which are defined as areas containing organisms, a physical environment, and the 4

interactions and exchanges among the organisms and the environment. Green space is an important part of complex urban ecosystems that provides significant ecosystem benefits. The history of green space planning began with the idea of the Garden City advocated by Ebenezer Howard. Greenbelts, greenways, and urban parks are three main types of urban green space, which have significant ecological, social, and recreational functions. They benefit urban communities environmentally, esthetically, recreationally, and economically. Green space provides a large number of ecological, recreational and social benefits to communities. The values and benefits of green space depend on their physical characteristics as well as the interests of those with a stake in their performance. Green space improves air quality and protects natural resources vital to people, plants, and wildlife. They can also preserve the biological diversity of plant and animal species by maintaining the connections between natural communities. Some major ecological benefits of green space are air filtering, micro-climate regulation, noise reduction, and rainwater drainage. The social benefits of green space are to provide health benefits and quality of life to people.
Figure 1.2. Source: Sharon K. Collinge, Spatial arrangement of habitat patches and corridors: clues from ecological field experiments, 1998, Pp 157-168.

Ecological BenefitsGreen space has a host of important ecological benefits and maintains the ecological balance of regions. They protect natural areas and provide habitat for plants and animals. They cool down air and counteract excessive heat buildup in cities through shading and vegetative evaporate transpiration. They also contribute to urban air quality by filtering out particulate matter, especially pollutants emanating from adjacent roadways. Moreover, they supply clean water to aquifers and maintain the quality of

water resource by filtering excess nutrients in ground. The lists of ecological benefits are mentioned below: Air Filtering Noise Reduction Micro-Climate Regulation Rainwater Drainage

Social BenefitsGreen space provides social benefits including recreational, economic, aesthetic, and cultural benefits. It is essential to achieve the quality of life that creates a great city and that makes it possible for people to live a reasonable life within an urban environment. According to the Swedish economist Nils Lundgren, a good urban environment is an important argument for regions when trying to attract a highly qualified workforce. Specific social benefits are discussed below: Recreational and Health Benefits Aesthetic and Cultural Benefits Economic Benefits

Greenbelts: The notion of green space encircling a central city has been translated into the planning instrument of the greenbelt to confine unbridled urban sprawl. A greenbelt is a ring of countryside where urbanization will be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry, and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail. The purposes of greenbelts are to check the unrestricted sprawl of large builtup areas and safeguard the surrounding countryside from further encroachment, to protect the natural environment and improve air quality in 6

urban areas, to ensure that urban dwellers have easy access to the countryside, with consequent recreational opportunities, and to protect the unique character of rural communities, which might otherwise be absorbed by expanding suburbs. In recent years, greenbelts have captured the attention and imaginations of land managers, landscape architects and planners interested in open space conservation. Greenbelts were implemented in different regions of the world, such as Canada and Germany, as well as in Asia. Greenbelt can also be defined as: Swaths of natural or open land surrounding cities or towns. They often contain a mix of public land and privately held land on which development restrictions are placed.
Source: Erickson D, The Relationship of Historic City Form and Contemporary Greenway Implementation: a Comparison of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (USA) and Ottawa, Ontario (Canada) Landscape an d Urban Planning, 2004, 202. pp 199

Greenways: A concept similar to a greenbelt is the greenway which has a linear character and may run through an urban area instead of around it. Greenway is a more general term in the U.S. The purposes of greenways are to link landscape elements to form a linear networks system, usually along terrain features such as natural (e.g. ridgelines or rivers) and artificial (e.g. roads, canals, and railways) features (Smith & Hellmund, 1993, page 126).

1.5 Need of the Study

The term greenbelt refers to any area of undeveloped natural land that has been set aside near urban or developed land to provide open space, offer light recreational opportunities or contain development/curtail urban sprawl. Urban green belts are considered the lungs of the cities as they act as a sink for some of the harmful gases released by vehicles and industries operating in the city area. Whether sprawling over a large area or a small belt, these green belts can be found in few Indian cities and play a very important role. Also, urban areas in India are faced with excessive population along with the pressure of unplanned economic development, industrialization, and vehicular emissions. This has led to considerable rise in urban pollution, affecting air, water, and land. Air pollution has increased rapidly in many cities and metropolises, especially due to vehicular traffic and industrial emissions. Over the years rising population has led to a decrease in open spaces and green belts in the cities. These green belts serve as lungs for cities and towns. They serve as a sink for pollutants, protect rural areas, check the flow of dust and bring down noise pollution level. Green belt provide innumerable environmental benefits, limit city size to an extent and considering the steady increase in air pollution, lack of open spaces in city areas, it has become imperative to increase or plan for the green belts around cities. In most of the cases, the shortage/lack of green spaces in the urban core has caused low quality of life due to their poor location/inaccessibility and ill maintenance. As per the JDA Master Plan 2025, Standard for green spaces is 9 sqmt per person, but provision of only 7.2 sqmt per person have been ascertained in Jaipur city. So there is need for a strategic Green Belt planning concept, which respects the mixture of urban and rural land uses, ecological parameters to encourage an ordered growth. 8

1.6 Aim To study the problems and prospects of green belt as a planning tool.

1.7 Objectives Objective-i: To study the planning issues involved in the provision,

conservation and augmentation of green belts.

Objective-ii:

To document the experience of greenbelts in different

countries around the globe and to identify the lessons applicable for ensuring the benefits of green belts.

Objective-iii:

To study the Masterplan proposals of green belts in the Jaipur

region and their chronological transformations using GIS data/survey sheets.

Objective-iv:

To suggest policy guidelines for the permanence of green

belts and its applicability in planning process.

1.8 Methodology

10

1.9 Scope of the study Curbing and controlling urban growth remains the central and most common objective of greenbelts, and urban development continues to be the biggest pressure and most consistent threat. The constant threat that urban development poses to greenbelt lands underlines the critical importance of effective planning for growth. In this study, only those green belts (around a city/region) which are used as a planning tool to prevent urban sprawl are considered. So, the main focus has always been on such successful greenbelts which are often referred as urban growth boundary. The project also considers the extent of any transformations of the Green Belts in the Jaipur region as per the JDA Master Plan proposals but demarcation of green belt boundary for the JDA region is not the objective of the study.

1.10 Limitations Due to the limitations on information sources, availability of chronological data (GIS Maps and survey sheets) and time, this research does not take into account the issues of development controls for green belts feasibility analysis as far as JDA Master Plan proposals have concerned. The policy guidelines for the Greenbelt proposal in case of JDA region are provided as per the applicable lessons learnt from various case studies only. The proposal/demarcation of physical boundary for the green belt of JDA region is not possible as it required intensive detailed information regarding availability of land, land value, land potential analysis, land ownership scenario, infrastructure provisions, public participation, availability of fund with the authority for land acquisition, etc. But an option for the green belt of JDA region has been worked out according to the implications of various case studies only.

11

1.11 Study Area JDA Region 2025 (area is 2939 Sq. Km.)
Figure 1.3. Location plan of JDA region

Rajasthan

India

Jaipur District JDA Region

Source: Draft master development plan 2025 and www.mapsofindia.com as accessed on 15 May, 2011.

12

The Jaipur Region, according to the JDA Master Development Plan with a horizon year 2025, has been considered as the study area.
Table 1.1: Area details of JDA Region

Source: Draft master development plan 2025, Pp. 14

As per Master Development Plan 2011, the footprint for development covered an area of 326 sq.km and 207 sq.km of the area is actually developed. Due to pressures on land, redirected demand for developments and fast paced conversions, the development area expanded by 215 sq. km. with planned interventions in the form of sector plans to regulate growth. The present urbanisable area within the Region covers an area of 541 sq.km (other than the satellite towns).

13

Chapter 2

Literature Study

Green belt is a popular land-use planning concept. Its origin is often linked to the ideas of Ebenezer Howard in the early 20th Century about developing Garden Cities around London and containing its sprawl. Green belt may also be defined as a narrow strip of parkland more or less encircling part of a built-up metropolitan or large urban area. Similarly, Amati and Yokohari (2006) dened it as a zone of land around the city where building development is severely restricted and suggested that a separation between town and countryside by green belts had been one of the central tenets of post-war British planning. Green belt concept had its impact beyond Britain. Its legacy can still be found in many European cities such as Frankfurt, Berlin, Vienna, Barcelona and Budapest, American cities such as Washington DC, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and Chicago, Asian cities such as Tokyo, Bangkok, Seoul, Taipei and Guangzhou, Sydney and Melbourne in Australia. Green belt planning was sometimes justied as a synonym of good planning that was compatible with international trends of urban and regional planning to protect cities against strong growth pressure. However, such an international diffusion may reect imitation of fashionable British planning practice only in form, but not necessarily in substance.
Source: Bo-sin Tang, Siu-wai Wong and Anton King-wah Lee, Green belt in a compact city: A zone for conservation or transition, March 2007, Pages 358-373.

2.1 History of Green belt as a planning tool The implementation of green belts in many countries can be regarded as one of the most internationally famous attempts to control urban growth. Green belts have ringed major cities to prevent them sprawling. Planners have used them to separate satellite new towns from the urban core, safeguarding land for recreation, agriculture and forestry. Green belts have 14

also provided sites for more utilitarian uses such as salvage yards, incinerators and quarries. In some places, areas of the green belt have suffered through illegal dumping or through neglect. As planners began to grapple with the messy realities of urban growth during the twentieth century, green belts gave them a tool to realize a normative geography that a city has natural limits, that urban and rural areas should be separated and that settlements should be balanced and evenly-spaced. Green belts were used as part of a project to construct a universal planning canon, being employed regardless of the contingencies that affect urban growth in different cities around the world. Planning has changed considerably since the early post-WWII period when practitioners attempted to physically realize the ideas of high modernism. As planners seek to direct the growth of cities towards sustainable patterns of land-use, how likely is it that they will continue to see a green belt policy as a useful tool for managing urban growth? Planners are no longer the allpowerful experts that they once were, nor can they rely on a consensus politics that will support such bold measures. The impact that green belts have on market processes sits uncomfortably with the neo-liberal strategies to deregulate government invoked in many countries during the latter part of the twentieth century. Furthermore, a number of well-known alternatives to a green belt exist allowing planners to opt, for example for a green wedge, a greenway or a greenweb. Despite the importance of the green belt in the UKs planning history, the origins of the term and its application have been diverse. A number of similar schemes, such as parklands, parkways and greenways, flourished during the early twentieth century, spreading internationally via conferences, exhibitions and international lecture tours. Each of these schemes have their individual istories and have shaped the development of different cities at various times.

15

While the green belt was one of several policies that planners in different countries could choose from, it was strongly supported in the UK by an active group of preservationists. The ideas of preservationists were woven into the UKs planning system during the pre-WWII period by a broad array of actors. The green belt was invoked as a universal solution to urban growth. This was a two-way process; while British planners extolled the virtues of the green belt, planners in other countries, inspired by Abercrombies work, implemented the green belt expecting it to be as effective as it had been for London. Overall, therefore, while the concept was deliberately spread by British planners keen to use the green belt as a poster-boy for their nascent discipline, it was also copied wholesale by some cities.

2.2 Important facts to be considered while proposing greenbelt Protecting ecological health should be the overall goal, while emphasizing sustainability and viability. Use the Greenbelt as an environmental sustainability showcase. The Greenbelt should be afforded the highest level of protection and not be considered as open space where development can be negotiated. Quantify the services provided by the Greenbelt to the larger urban area (e.g. ecological, storm water management, views, and recreation). The Greenbelt should not be seen as a means to contain development. An implementation plan that supports Master Plan policies is required. The impacts of Greenbelt planning are felt locally, not nationally; give more consideration to the local community in the Review. Consider green buildings only in the Greenbelt. Investigate whether the belt concept is still viable and appropriate.

16

2.3 Issues involved

The effectiveness of green belts differs depending on location and country.

Development 'jumps' over the green belt area, resulting in the creation of "satellite towns" which, although separated from the city by green belt, function more like suburbs than independent communities. Just because development leap-frogs the green belt, that doesn't mean the green belt cant work. That means that development control beyond the green belt and efforts to encourage regeneration within cities need to be realized.

It even can encourage urban sprawl, by forcing people to build out, rather than clustering construction.

Furthermore, greenbelts have a positive effect on property values.

2.4 Purpose of Green belt In those countries which have them, the stated objectives of green belt policy are to: Protect natural or semi-natural environments, Improve air quality within urban areas, Check the pollution level of adjoining areas / protecting the local environment, 17

Ensure that urban dwellers have access to countryside or open area, with consequent recreational opportunities, Protect the unique character of rural communities that might otherwise be absorbed by expanding suburbs, The retention of land in agricultural, forestry and related uses, The securing of nature conservation interests, Provide burial spaces, STPs and land fill sites, The continuous pattern of green belts further helps to: o Recharge catchment areas o Trunk infrastructure o Control microclimate o Sustenance of ecosystem / Promote natural habitat / Protect biodiversity

The green belt has many benefits for people: Walking, camping, and biking areas close to the cities and towns. Contiguous habitat network for wild plants, animals and wildlife. Cleaner air and water Better land use of areas within the bordering cities.

Sometimes discrete and diminutive green belts in urban areas are also provided in isolation, but they are very different from those green belts which are used as a planning tool to control urban growth. Those are provided along: National Highway / Expressway of the Town River Fronts Railway Tracks Between Industrial and Non Industrial Sector Around Sewerage Treatment plant Around Historical Monuments and Religious Places Around Airport and Ammunition Depot

(But these green belts are not considered as a part of this study). 18

2.5 Uses of Green belt concept To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. To prevent neighboring towns from merging into one another. To assist in safeguarding the urban area from rural areas. To preserve the special character of historic towns. To control urban growth: It provides direction about where, how, and in what form future growth should be accommodated. To limit size of a city: A city has natural limits that urban and rural areas should be separated and that settlements should be balanced and evenly-spaced. To maintain ecological balance. To prevent towns from merging into each other.

Source: Planning Policy Guidance Notes, 1995.

2.6 Threat for greenbelts Increase in the population structure of the city Increasing pressure for housing Highway expansion Aggregate / Mineral extraction Struggle to protect agricultural land The intensification of land use leads to gaps in the habitat system and reduces biodiversity Development proposals for expansion of major projects like airport

Green Belts are a buffer between cities, urban and rural areas. Within their boundaries, damaged and derelict land can be improved and nature conservation can be encouraged. The ever-increasing pressure on land for more roads, housing and airport expansion means that it is vital to protect the Green Belts that we have.

19

2.7 Green belt policies as per PPG (Planning policy Guidance) In the United Kingdom, Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG) are statements of the Government's national policy and principles towards certain aspects of the town planning framework. These guidance notes are applicable for the England only but in recent times they are being adopted in many countries. They are legally binding and may be treated as material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The policies of PPG are: GB.1 Control over Development in the Green Belt GB.2 Engineering Operations and Changes of Use of Land in the Green Belt GB.3 Infill Development in Barrow Nook and Vicarage Lane, Ormskirk GB.4 Design and Location of Acceptable Development in the Green Belt GB.5 Replacement Dwellings in the Green Belt GB.6. Extensions/Outbuildings to Residential Properties in the Green Belt GB.7 Use of Rural Buildings in the Green Belt A number of specific categories which can be summarized as:(a) That necessary for agriculture, forestry and the winning of minerals, or other land use essentially demanding a rural location. (b) Acceptable changes of use of redundant buildings of character. (c) Acceptable re-use or redevelopment of the existing built-up area of redundant institutional complexes. (d) Rebuilding or modest extension of existing dwellings in appropriate locations. (e) Public or institutional uses for which the rural location is justified. Structure Plan policy for the Green Belt is even more restrictive, giving a strong presumption against new development except that related to open recreation and agriculture.

20

Chapter 3

Case Study

This chapter comprises of 11 case studies. Foreign case studies: 1. Londons greenbelt (UK) 2. Seouls greenbelt (South Korea) 3. Ontario greenbelt (Canada) 4. Paris green belt (France) 5. Frankfurt greenbelt (Germany) 6. Ottawa green belt (Canada) 7. Beijing green belt (China) 8. Vienna green belt (Austria) Indian case studies: 1. Ahmedabad greenbelt (Gujarat) 2. Bangalore greenbelt (Karnataka) 3. Delhi greenbelt (Delhi)

21

England's green belt: There are 14 separate green belts in England, varying in size from 486,000 hectares around London to just 700 hectares at Burton. The total area of green belt land in England since 2003 was as follows:
Table 3.1The distribution of green belt designated land by region o f England as at 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010

Year Area (hectares)

2003

2004

2006

2007

2008/09

2009/10

1,671,580

1,678,190

1,631,830

1,635,670

1,639,650

1,639,560

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_belt_(United_Kingdom) as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

Figure 3.1 Location map of England

Europe

Source:mapsof.net/united_kingdom/static-maps/png/europe-locationenglandas accessed on 16 March, 2011.

22

Figure 3.2 Green belts in England

Source: www.buildinglanduk.co.uk/greenbelt -land-uk.htm as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

The beginning of the greenbelt was in 1935 and was established by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee. It was not until 1947, that the Town and Country Planning Act allowed greenbelts to be included in their development plans and it was not until 1955 that the whole idea was beginning to be used throughout the UK. 23

Local councils designated green belts to restrict urban growth for the foreseeable future. Green belts now cover 13% of England (around one-and-ahalf million hectares). The price of land is increasing because more people have the desire to move to the UK. This brings about a chain of events. There is not much land available where homes can be built to ensure that everyone that desires to live in the UK can find affordable housing. This jeopardizes the greenbelts. Investors understand that land is a great tangible investment that can give them a solid investment in their future if they hold on to it until the proper time to sell. If you look around the UK, you will soon learn that the 100 richest people are landowners and property developers. They understand that the need for housing developments is growing like never before and there is no end in site. There are very few plots of land for sale in prime locations around the UK, so they have invested well in land. They know they need to purchase land in the greenbelt areas and then just wait around for the planning permission to allow building and then they can sell this greenbelt land for a huge profit. It has been noted that the Southeastern part of England will need several homes over the next 18 years to keep up with those that wish to move to this area. This means that there will be greenbelt land up for sale and the planning permissions will come in order to accommodate these people.

Source:

Greenbelt

Barriers

to

Urban

Expansion,

in Political

Barriers

to

Housebuilding in Britain: A Critical Case Study Of Protectionism & Its Industrial Commercial Effects, ISR/Google Books, New edition 2002, as accessed on 18 March, 2011.

24

3.1 London greenbelt, UK London Green belt was established during 1935 and this green belt land is protected by planning and development policies.
Figure 3.3 in England Location map of London

Greater London Area: 1572 km Population: 7 7,53,600 London's metropolitan area - 1,706.8 sq. kms

Source: londongreenbeltcouncil.org.uk as accessed on 16 March, 2011

3.1.1 History and essence of London Green belt "Green Belt" is a term that mystifies many people. Some think it is just a countryside where you must not build. Some people think it is a rigid ring of open country round London, several miles deep and in the form of parkland. A few people do realize that it is a restricted area round a town to prevent the outward sprawl of building and provide a breathing space. The idea of a "Green Belt" is not new; it was first proposed by Sir William Petty in the seventeenth century to make a Green Belt two miles from the center of London. The next proposal was made in 1910 by Dame Henrietta Barnett (of Hampstead Garden City fame) for a Green Belt five miles out of London. Both these schemes failed due to lack of support. Later there was the L.C.C. Green Belt Scheme of 1935 and the Green Belt Act of 1938. These were improved by Sir Patrick Abercrombie's Greater London Plan of 1944 and the Green Belt was 25

established by the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 and more firmly by Amendment in 1968. There is no doubt now that public opinion, when properly informed, is seriously alarmed by the many attempts to break the Green Belt Ring, particularly by private speculative builders and some local authorities.

3.1.2 Structure of London Green belt "Green Belt" has been defined as seven to ten miles deep all around the built-up area of Greater London and apart from some limited "rounding off" of existing small towns and villages, no further urban expansion is to be allowed within this belt.
Figure 3.4 Green belt around London

The maps shows, in shading, the Green Belt land around London. Green about times The Belt 1,950 the Metropolitan stretches square of over miles

(5050 km), an area about 3 size Greater London.

Source: londongreenbeltcouncil.org.uk as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

26

Figure 3.5 Settlements inside Greenbelt

Source: Urban green belts in the twenty -first century, Edited by Marco Amati, Macquarie University, Australia .

None of the isolated areas of residential development within the Green Belt has been defined as a 'Rural Settlement' within the terms of Structure Plan Policy RU1 of London. Therefore 'infilling' and 'rounding off' will not be acceptable within any of the residential areas covered by the Green Belt. New dwellings will not be permitted in the Green Belt except in very special circumstances. The extension or rebuilding of existing dwellings in the Green Belt may be acceptable but only subject to certain strict criteria. Any proposal to rebuild or extend an existing dwelling in the Green Belt must have regard to the visual impact on the character of the area. A building or extension which is unduly prominent or which results in the loss of existing landscape features, such as trees or hedgerows, will not be acceptable. 27

3.1.3 Chronological growth of London

3.1.4 Metropolitan Green Belt Structure The MGB was developed in two phases: Phase 1: completed in 1965, Green Belt (GB1) 8-16 km wide, extending to about 40 km from London centre, certain amount of development permitted in specified settlements within the Green Belt. Eight New Towns were established a few miles outside GB1. Phase 2: completed in 1988, GB2 was increased in width by from 8 km. to as much as 32 km. in some places. The reason for this is to push employment development further from London. 28

Figure 3.6 Phases of Metropolitan Green belt structure

Source: www.gardenvisit.com/landscape_architecture/london_landscape_architecture/landscape_pla nning_pos_public_open_space as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

Approximately 10 Sq. Km. of Green Belt land is lost to inappropriate development each year.

29

3.1.5 Threats for London green belt land Short term planning loss by shifting the greenbelt boundaries enabling towns to expand. Housing pressures. People who currently live and work in London and are finding it too expensive and too crowded to live in London which is reducing their quality of life. As a result, they are moving out of London to live in surrounding towns which is increasing the pressures for more houses. It is easier and cheaper to build on green field sites because brown field sites can be expensive for reuse. Inappropriate development which reduces the openness of Green Belt land.

Figure 3.7 The green belt & satellite towns

Uses of green belts: 1) Agricultural activity 2) Lake (for Recreation) 3) Sewage & water treatment plant. 4) Tracking area & picnic area. 5) Natural & Botanical Garden. 6) Habitat of natural wildlife. 7) Growth center.

Source: http://www.chaptersofdublin.com as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

30

3.2 Seouls greenbelt, South Korea: Seoul is the capital of South Korea. Greenbelt was introduced between 1971 and 1973. Seouls greenbelt is very large, consisting of a band averaging about 10 km wide that begins about 15 km from Seouls central business district (fig. 3.9). After being extended four times by 1976, Seouls greenbelt contained 1,566.8 square km, about 13.3 percent of the Seoul Metropolitan Area. The population living within the greenbelt for is only small, Source: climate-zone.com/climate/south1.66 korea as accessed on 20 March, 2011
Seoul South Koria

Figure 3.8 Location plan of Seol

however,

accounting

percent of the Seoul Metropolitan Areas population (Bae and Jun 2003). Most development has been strictly prohibited on greenbelt land and greenbelt landowners have received no compensation for their loss of development rights (Bae 1998, Lee 1999). The economic hardship imposed on land owners has been contentious from the beginning, because nationwide about 80 percent of the land within greenbelts is privately owned (Lee 2000, 2004). The boundaries of Koreas green belts were hastily drawn without public input and without serious consideration of widely accepted criteria for the designation of greenbelts. In one case, a village was divided down the middle by the greenbelt boundary (Choe 2004b). Seouls greenbelt area is 1450 sq.km. or 12.4% of the entire Seoul Metropolitan Area.

31

Figure 3.9 Map showing Seoul Greenbelt

Source: Seouls Greenbelt: An Experiment in Urban Containment, By David N. Bengston and Youn Yeo-Chang, Pp. 29.

Metropolitan area population: 1,89,20 ,000. As of 2009, the citys population was 1,02,08,302. Citys area: 605.25 km2.

32

3.2.1 Seouls greenbelt policy Koreas greenbelt system was introduced in 1971 during the authoritarian government of President Park Chung Hee. The social context for this policy was extremely rapid economic and population growth (Song 2003) and a high rate of rural urban migration. Seoul grew more rapidly than any city in the world from 1950 to 1975, growing at an average annual rate of 7.6 percent (UN Population Division 2002). Seouls population grew from just over a million in 1950 to more than 6.8 million in 1975. By 2000, the population of Seoul was about 10 million, but the population of the entire Capital Region (Gyeonggi Province, including the city of Inchon) had ballooned to more than 21 million. Seouls greenbelt was patterned after the greenbelt of London (Bae 1998) but adapted in the Korean context. Greenbelts, formally referred to as Restricted Development Zones (RDZs) in Korea, were introduced in the City Planning Law of 1971 and shaped by the 1972-1981 National Comprehensive Physical Plan of 1973 (Lee 2000, 2004). Greenbelts were designated around Seoul and 13 other cities between 1971 and 1973. The importance of environmental protection as a rationale for the greenbelt has grown significantly as environmental awareness and economic prosperity in Korea have increased (Lee 2000, 2004). An additional and increasingly important rationale for Seouls greenbelt is the provision of recreational resources to a city short of parks and non-greenbelt open space. Almost threefifths of Seouls greenbelt consists of mountains and forests that are heavily used for recreation (Bae and Jun 2003). Koreas greenbelt policy has enjoyed great support from the general public (Kim and Kim 2000). Lee (1999) cited several surveys conducted in the 1990s that found strong support from citizens, environmentalists, and Korean planners, but opposition from most greenbelt property owners who viewed the policy as seizure of private property. A 1998 survey conducted by the Ministry of 33

Construction and Transportation (MOCT) found that most government officials and academics preferred to retain the greenbelt, but they felt reforms were needed to ensure the achievement of development goals (MOCT 1998). Lee (2004) carried out a multivariate analysis of the data from the 1998 MOCT national survey to account for variation in greenbelt support. He found greater support for the greenbelt policy by individuals with higher incomes and educational attainment, and lower support by individuals residing in regions with strong development pressure and in the Capital Region. Surprisingly, he did not find a statistically significant relationship between opposition to the policy and ownership of land within greenbelt boundaries.
Figure 3.10 Changes in Seoul's Administrative Boundary between 1314 and 1963

Source: Seouls Greenbelt: An Experiment in Urban Containment, By David N. Bengston and Youn Yeo-Chang, Pp. 29.

34

3.2.2 Costs and benefits of Seouls greenbelt Most of the economic studies of Seouls greenbelt have focused on its social costs, especially higher land prices, housing prices, and commuting costs. Several studies have examined the decrease in the price of non-greenbelt land and housing that would result from either a partial relaxation or complete elimination of the greenbelt. These studies found relatively modesteffects of the greenbelt on land and housing prices. For example, Choi (1994) estimated that land prices in the greenbelt in 1987 were about 30 percent below non-greenbelt land values, a much smaller price differential than suggested by anecdotal reports. Chois analysis also indicated that if Seouls greenbelt had been completely eliminated in 1987, greenbelt land prices would have risen by an average of 32.1 percent and non-greenbelt prices would have fallen by 7.5 percent.
Figure 3.11 Geographical feature of Seoul

Source: inakos.org as accessed on 20 March, 2011

35

It is important to recognize that Seouls greenbelt policy is but one of many supply-side restrictions that put upward pressure on land and housing prices. A variety of other government policies may restrict land and housing supply, including multiple layers of urban zoning, agricultural zoning, a virtual public monopoly on urban land development, the system of land and housing taxation, and an inadequate system of housing finance (Choi 1993; Kim 1990, 1993). Hannah et al. (1993) concluded that the governments tendency to under allocate land to urban residential use was responsible for a substantial part of the increase in urban housing prices. Demand-side factors, such as the local and regional amenities provided by greenbelts, also put upward pressure on land and housing prices by shifting the demand curves for land and housing outward.

3.2.3 Greenbelt policy reform From its beginning in 1971, Seouls greenbelt policy remained essentially unchanged for almost 30 years. Public discussion ofproblems associated with the greenbelt was prohibited during the Park regime (Lee and Linneman 1998), which lasted until 1979. Subsequent military governments continued the greenbelt policy. Hence, opposition to the greenbelt was rarely expressed in the early years. But opposition from greenbelt landowners began to be voiced after the current civilian republic was established in 1988. Opposition to the release of land from Seouls greenbelt from environmental groups and many residents of Seoul has continued in recent years as proposals for development have moved forward. Seouls strictly enforced policy has been much more effective at keeping development (other than agricultural use) out of the greenbelt. But Seouls urban containment policy largely failed to keep development from invading the Capital Region beyond the greenbelt.

36

Figure 3.12 The Physical Expansion of the Seoul Metropolitan Region between 19201994.

Source: Urban Containment Policies and the Protection of Natural Areas: The Case of Seoul's Greenbelt David N. Bengston and Yeo-Chang Youn.

37

3.2.4 Issues involved Approximately 80% of the land within the greenbelts is privately owned. The boundaries of greenbelts were drawn without public input, and without serious consideration of the widely accepted criteria for the designation of greenbelts. In one case, a village was divided down the middle by the greenbelt boundary.

3.2.5 Seven objectives for the establishment of Seouls greenbelt National security was originally a dominant objective To eradicate illegal shanty towns on the outskirts of Seoul To control urban sprawl To reduce rapid population growth and industrial concentration To limit land speculation in the metropolitan region To protect agricultural land and promote food security To protect environmental and natural resources

3.2.6 Inferences The greenbelt policy was supported by individuals with higher incomes and educational attainment, and opposed by individuals residing in regions with strong development pressure. The land prices in the greenbelt, in 1987, were about 30% below the land values outside the greenbelt. 38

The price differentials between land, i.e., both inside and outside the greenbelt, and housing should be due only to supply constraints caused by the greenbelt, and not to other factors affecting supply and demand.

It resulted in longer commutes and higher commuting costs. In areas that are to remain greenbelts, landowners should be compensated for their loss of development rights, or offered the option of having their land purchased by the government at a fair price.

However, the greenbelt is responsible for higher housing prices, this suggests the need for progressive housing policies to ensure adequate supplies of affordable housing.

Source: Urban Containment Policies and the Protection of Natural Areas: The Case of Seoul's Greenbelt, By David N. Bengston and Yeo-Chang Youn.

39

3.3 Ontario green belt, Canada

Figure 3.13 Location plan of

Established in 2005, the Ontario Greenbelt is an Ontario area of permanently protected land spanning 1.8 million acres across southern Ontario. The area stretches from Niagara Falls to Tobermory to Peterborough and encompasses green space, farmland, vibrant communities, forests, wetlands and watersheds. It surrounds the provinces Golden Horseshoe region the most Source: quality of life in southern Ontario. The concept of a Greenbelt was first publicly introduced by the premier of the province of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, on November 20, 2003, who had promised during his campaign to establish a permanent greenbelt. The purpose of the Greenbelt was to protect farmland and key environmentally sensitive areas from development. The Greenbelt legislation restricts urban municipalities, located outside the boundaries of the Greenbelt, from expanding urban development into areas within the boundaries of the Greenbelt. Moreover, the Greenbelt effectively eliminates the municipalitys option to re-designate farmland for nonagricultural uses in prime agricultural areas (previously identified by municipalities) and specialty crop areas, which include areas of the Niagara Peninsula and the Holland Marsh. Prior to the Greenbelt legislation, municipalities were able to alter agricultural zoning through zoning by-law amendments so long as these amendments were consistent with an Official Plan an official document that provides a blueprint for future development within a municipality. Additionally, alternative uses of farmland in Rural Areas are now provincially restricted for most nonagricultural uses: e.g., multiple lots for residential dwellings are not permitted. 40
en.wikipedia.org as

populated area in Canada and is vital to the accessed on 25 March, 2011.

Table 3.2 Ontario Green belt details

Source: Ontarios Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 7-8

41

3.3.1 Vision The Golden Horseshoe greenbelt/Ontario Greenbelt will be a permanent and sustainable legacy for current and future generations. The greenbelt enhances urban and rural areas with a continuous and connected system of open spaces that: protects and enhances environmentally sensitive lands and natural heritage systems and contributes to clean air, water and soil; recognizes the regions social, natural and economic needs; sustains and nurtures the regions agricultural sector; conserves, for sustainable use, the regions significant natural and cultural heritage resources; and continues to provide high-quality and compatible recreational and tourism opportunities.

3.3.2 Purpose of green belt Agricultural protection Environmental Protection Culture, recreation and tourism A strong rural economy A sustainable approach to infrastructure and natural resources

3.3.3 Current land uses Agricultural and natural lands

42

Figure 3.14 Ontario Green belt

Source: Ontarios Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 7.

Greater Toronto Area: 7,124.15 km2 Population (2006) - 5,555,912 Greenbelt Area: 7,300 km In addition to its significant natural heritage features, the 1.8 million acre Greenbelt contains932,436 acres of farmland. This farmland covers slightly more than 50% of the total area of protected land within the Greenbelt, and comprises 7% of the total area of farmland in Ontario. 43

Figure 3.15 Existing Land use inside the Green belt

Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011

Figure 3.16 The city of Toronto

Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011

44

3.3.4 Inferences The Greenbelt is one of the largest and most successful greenbelt in the world. It is necessary to establish boundaries (of the green belt) that will last and not to keep land which is unnecessarily open, otherwise there is a risk that encroachment on the Green Belt will have to be allowed to accommodate future development Greenbelt must be larger to make urban sprawl smaller. The city should have some towns to absorb the overspill of the main town. The controlling bodies for the Green Belt should be strong enough to check the development Green belt policies should be revised according to the future requirements.
Figure 3.17 Development around the greenbelt

Source: Ontarios Greenbelt in an International Context Written and researched by the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy, Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin.

45

3.4 Paris Green Belt, France: Paris Green belt was established during 1976.
Figure 3.18 Location map of Paris Table 3.3 Demographic structure of Paris

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 accessed on 5 April, 2011

The Paris green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40%. The area consists of older historical cities like Versailles & Saint-Germain-en-Laye and five new towns (developed in the early 1970s) the regions main airport (opened in 1974), the TGV interconnection stations and the regions main tourist attraction besides Paris (Disneyland, opened in 1992). The green belt area accounts for 13% of the regions farmland. The green belt area is used for thriving fruit, vegetable and even flower farming. Over the last 20 years, the total amount of farmland in the green belt area has decreased by 20% due to urban sprawl and poor public transport servicing of some areas. 46

Figure 3.19 Paris Green belt

Source: National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies, www.insee.fr as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

Throughout history, the orientations of the regional planning in the Ile de France produced the maintenance of a number of agricultural areas arranged in islands within the city that remain managed by the agriculture although they 47

are entirely landlocked by urbanization. If the lack of quantifiable data on the number of sites and farmland concerned, we can nevertheless feel that they are localized to their majority in the perimeter of the greenbelt.
Figure 3.20 Urban Area scenario of Paris

Source: www.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

48

Figure 3.21 The perimeter of the greenbelt in the region of Ile de France (Paris)

Source: www.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

3.4.1 The Green Belt as a Specific Area of the Ile-de-France Region The green belt area is a belt located between 10 and 30 kilometers away from the relatively small (10,500 hectares) city of Paris. It is about 266,000 hectares, which accounts for 22 per cent of the regions total surface area. It is therefore about twice as small as the London metropolitan green belt area, which has long been a strong reference for regional planners in Ile-de-France. Apart from

49

being a belt, the main characteristic of the green belt is not unsurprisingly being green, due to a proportion of woodland and farmland adding up to 60%. A Green Belt features Parks and, most of all, well-preserved woods, form an almost continuous string around the central urban area. Ten of these woods are more than 750 hectares each and are now publicly accessible, such as the Ferrires regional forest in the Seine-et- Marne county or the St-Germain national forest in the Yvelines county. When moving from the most rural and distant parts of Ile-de-France into the green belt area, one will notice that the proportion of built-up area is quadrupled, while the proportion of woodland and parks remains surprisingly the same, at a relatively high level internationally of 28 per cent. With a proportion of farmland reaching 32 per cent, the green belt area accounts for 13 per cent of the regions farmland but, due to a significant presence of intensive market gardening besides large-scale farming, it actually represents more than 20 per cent of the regions farms and 25 per cent of the regions jobs in agriculture. Even though this specific feature is not always well understood, the green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40 per cent. Furthermore, this grey part of the green belt area does not only consist of older historical cities, like Versailles or Saint-Germain-en-Laye. The central urban area in Paris, when compared to London. But they knew even better that because of an early tendency towards urban coalescence between the central built-up area and the neighboring new towns (mostly due to high speculation in the fringes of the long-awaited new towns), they were about to obtain a mixture of both, for which idealized planning scheme was much more difficult to find. Between 1960 and 1976, regional urban planning and green planning in the Paris- Ile-de-France region were both the responsibility of the Central government. After 1976, urban planning remained a prerogative of the Central government, while the Regional council was gradually consolidating its commitment to open spaces, and thus to regional green planning.

Source: Urban green belts in the twenty-first century, Edited by Marco Amati, Macquarie University, Australia. Pp. 226-237.

50

3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany: Frankfurt Green belt was established during 1991. Total Greenbelt area = 80 Sq. Km. (approximately one-third of Frankfurts total area).
Figure 3.22 Location of Frankfurt, Germany

Source: www.gruenguertel.de as accessed on 5 April, 2011

Table 3.4 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany

City Area Population Density Urban Population Metro Population

248.31 km2 6,71,927 (2009) 2,706 /km2 2,295,000 5,600,000 (04/2011)

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

51

Figure 3.23 Green Belt of Frankfurt

Source: www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

3.5.1 Issues involved Frankfurts large international airport is situated near the Green Belt, but is not part of it. A current expansion of the airport does not require the use of Green Belt lands. However, the proximity to the airport does create noise and reduces the quality of the Green Belt for recreation in that area.

52

Figure 3.24 City boundary and Green belt

CITY BOUNDARY

GREENBELT

Source: Ontarios Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 15

3.5.2 General awareness The Green Belt development corporation has established a program for children called Discover, Research and Learn in the Green Belt. It has been successful in introducing the Green Belt to children and their parents, and allowing them to learn about the environment and conservation while having fun.

3.5.3 Facts & figures 52 per cent of Frankfurts surface area is green. 52 per cent of the city area has been set aside for recreation, parks and green spaces, woodland, farmland, orchard grassland, allotments and hobby gardens, cemeteries, roadside grass verges and water bodies. 53

Table 3.5 Frankfurt Green belt details

Source: Ontarios Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 15-16.

54

Figure 3.25 Pattern of Greenbelt, Frankfurt

Source: Castells, M. 2000. The Rise of the Network Society. Second Edition. Volume I.

3.5.4 Key Features The Frankfurt City Forest covers more than half of the Green Belt, and in the remaining area there are other green spaces, parks and playgrounds. There is agriculture in the Green Belt as well. It also hosts a 70 km cycle path and a 63 km hiking path.

55

Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City

Source: Castells, M. 2000. The Rise of the Network Society. Second Edition. Oxford, Volume I.

Figure 3.26 Pattern of activity inside Greenbelt

Source: www.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

56

3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada Ottawa Green belt was proposed in 1950. It provides open space for the future development of farms, natural areas and government campuses. Ottawa had a population of 8,59,704 in 2005.

Figure 3.27 Location of the City of Ottawa in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

Table 3.6 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa.

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

57

Figure 3.28 Green belt of Ottawa

Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan, January - September 2009. Ottawa: NCC.

The Greenbelt, as seen in Figure 3.28, is a crescent-shaped patchwork of farms, fields, forests, and research complexes bordering the City of Ottawa and parts of Nepean and Gloucester. In 1961, the National Capital Commission (NCC) entered into a 50-year forest management agreement with the Government of Ontario, and much of the Greenbelts abandoned and the marginal farmland has since been reforested.

3.6.1 Planning Goals and Objectives In developing the Greenbelt Master Plan it was determined that the Greenbelt must have certain attributes if it was to meet the obligations implicit in the Master Plan and ensure the Greenbelts continued usefulness and health.

58

The goals were that: The Greenbelt must remain a large, rural, open space running in a continuous belt in roughly the present shape and location. The Greenbelt must be relevant to the Capital and to Canadians. The Greenbelt must remain in the public domain. The Greenbelt must maintain a diverse mix of uses and landscapes. Areas with ecological significance or high renewable resource capability must be protected, as well as areas where significant investment has been made. The health and integrity of the Greenbelt must be maintained. The Greenbelt must continue to generate revenue. Partnerships are essential to the maintenance of a healthy Greenbelt.

The specific objectives were to: Make the Greenbelt more publicly accessible, Enhance its role in the regions economy, Enhance the protection of its environment.

3.6.2 Decision Making Framework The Master Plan was built around two zoning mechanisms. The first consists of seven land use designations that locate land uses and guide management decisions throughout the Greenbelt. The second is the Experiences Network, made up of a series of areas with special interest in terms of public programming and landscape character. Greenbelt land uses and activities are organized spatially in the Greenbelt according to seven land designations, and these relate to either natural, rural, or built systems within the Greenbelt.

59

Figure 3.29 Land uses in the greenbelt

Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan, January - September 2009. Ottawa: NCC.

60

Figure 3.30 The greenbelt inside the national capital region

Source: Ottawas Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

The National Capital Region (NCR) spans the Ottawa River, covering a total area of approximately 4,660 square kilometers. The Greenbelt was originally intended to encircle and contain the urban capital. But the Capital grew so fast that by 1970, it had reached the population that was predicted for the year 2000.

61

Figure 3.31 Pattern of Urban Area around the Green belt

Source: Ottawas Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

Table 3.7 Land allocation scenario of Green belt land

Land Allocation Environmental Areas Existing Buildings / Infrastructure Agriculture Rural Total

Area(hectares) 9,726 2,328 5,319 3,427 20,800

Source: Ottawas Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

62

3.6.3 Uses permitted / Main features Forest, wetland, and fields Recreation, conservation, farming and research works Government buildings and the International Airport The Greenbelt is a 203.5 square kilometers (78.6 sq mi). Economic activities occurs in the Greenbelt (e.g. farming, forestry, research, airport) accounting for approximately 11,000 jobs.

Figure 3.32 Settlement pattern outside the Green belt boundary

Source: Ottawas Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 2015 Report, National Capital Commission.

63

3.7 Greenbelt of Beijing, China Beijings greenbelt was first proposed in 1958. The city core area= 62 Sq. Km.
Figure 3.33 Location of Beijing in China

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 20 April, 2011

Area of the Region =16,801.25 Sq. km. Population (2009) = 22,000,000 Density =1,309.4 /Sq.km

3.7.1 Three greenbelts of Beijing The first greenbelt is located between Beijing's third and fourth ringroads. The second greenbelt is located in the suburb area, between the fifth and sixth ringroads. The third greenbelt is developed in the mountain areas.

64

Figure 3.34 The Beijing Green belt

Source: Analysis of the Beijing greenbelts plan using geographic information systems (GIS). By Huifeng Peng.

65

Figure 3.35 The three Green belts of Beijing

First Greenbelt: It covers 240Sq. km. Second Greenbelt: It covers 1,650 Sq. km. Third Greenbelt: It covers 10,418 Sq. km. Total Greenbelt Area: 12,308 Sq. km.

Source: He, Y. (2003). Research on spatial development ecological strategy for Beijing. Beijing City Planning & Construction Review, Pp.33-39.

66

3.7.2 Issues involved The large-scale greenbelt is proposed to both efficiently control urban sprawl and improve urban ecological conditions. In the 1980s, after economic reform, green space development was transformed from government-oriented to a market-oriented policy. The existing greenbelt was fragmented by overwhelming urbanization. The total area of the first greenbelt in the master plan had kept shrinking: In 1958 In 1983 In 1993 314 km 260 km 240 km

Farmlands in the greenbelt area has been occupied by commercial residential buildings and profit-making projects, while the afforesting of greenbelt area and the construction relocated residential buildings for villagers lagged far behind.

Source: Land potential evaluation for large-scale greenbelt development at urban-rural transition zone -a case study of Beijing, China By-Li Wei-feng, OuyangZhi-yun, WangRu-song.

67

3.8 Vienna greenbelt, Austria The Green Belt for Vienna was decided in 1905 to preserve the area of woodland. Green spaces cover 49 % of the city surface in Vienna, compared to 33 % of built-up area and 14 % traffic area. Area (City) = 414.89 Sq. km. Population (2010) = 17,12,903 Density = 4,128.6 / Sq. km.
Figure 3.36 Location of Vienna in Austria

Source: www.planetWare.com as accessed on 20 April, 2011

68

Figure 3.37 Green belt of Vienna

(Greenbelt in gray)
Source: Comprehensive Urban Renewal: More than Building Regeneration: a Case Study in Vienna By Betl Bretschneider.

3.8.1 Green belt development in Vienna Year 1905 1940 1995 2005 2011 Size of the green belt (ha) 4,4005,860 10,700 19,250 21,500 20,267

69

3.8.2 Development phases of Vienna 1870-2000 Green space covers nearly half of the surface area of Vienna, including a broad range of green structures, from small neighborhood parks, green spaces along streets and in courtyards, trees and avenues to large historic parks, and the urban forests at the fringe of the city.

Figure 3.38 Development phases of Vienna

1870

1890

1930

2000

Source: Moving in Vienna intelligence on the move, By Petra Hirschler, Nina Svanda, 2009, Pp. 2-3.

70

3.8.3 Categories of green space in Vienna


LAND USE Forests Farmland Grassland Parks Others TOTAL AREA (Sq. Km.) 74.57 68.4 22.93 10.84 25.93 202.67 (%) 36.8 33.7 11.3 5.4 12.8 100

Source: Vienna and Prague: Political systems and urban development in the postwar period By Elisabeth Lichtenberger

3.8.4 Land use pattern of Vienna


Figure 3.39 Land use pattern of Vienna

(a) 1958

(b) 1997

Source: Vienna and Prague: Political systems and urban development in the postwar period By Elisabeth Lichtenberger

71

3.9 Ahmedabad Greenbelt, India Ahmedabad Green belt was proposed during 1965. Total green belt area= 3.29 Sq. Km. (2011)
Figure 3.40 Location map of Ahmedabad

Source: en.wikipedia.org, as accessed on 20 April, 2011

3.9.1 Overview of development plans in terms of greenbelt 1st Development plan1965: Declaration of green belt as no development zone. 2ndDevelopment plan 1987: Approx 20 % area was encroached. 3rdDevelopment plan 1997: Land was declared as residential zone. Revised Development plan of 2011: Farmers/owners went to Supreme Court.

72

Figure 3.41 Boundary of AUDA and AMC

Source:

AMC

website

(http://www.egovamc.com/A_City/help_line.asp)

as

accessed on 20 April, 2011.

LEGEND AUDA limit Extended AMC limit AMC limit Green Belt 73

3.9.2 Details of AUDA and AMC

AUDA Established: 1978 Area (2001): 1300 sq. km. Population(2001): 45.09lakh Population (2011): Projected, 65.30 lakh

AMC Established: July 1950. Area(2001): 464 sq.km. Population(2001): 35.15 lakh Population (2011): Projected, 41.38 lakh

3.9.3 Greenbelt land use


Chart 3.2 Permissible land use inside the Green belt

agriculture 4% slum party plot 8% 5%

road 9%

residential 12% institutional 14%

commercial 2%

vacant land 46%

Source: AMC website (http://www.egovamc.com/A_City/help_line.asp) as accessed on 20 April, 2011.

74

3.9.4 Inferences The presence greenbelt as per present scenario is negligible due to upcoming developments and encroachments. The Green Belt of Ahmedabad is an interesting case in terms of Gap between a Proposal and implementation of a strategy. As a result it is left with vacant grazing fields, waste land, playgrounds and informal party plots.

Figure 3.42 Green belt of Ahmedabad

Source: Ahmedabad City Development Plan, 2006-2012 Prepared By Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

75

3.10 Bangalore Green belt, India Bangalore Green belt was established in 1961.

Figure 3.43 Location of Bangalore in Karnataka and India

Source: en.wikipedia.org, as accessed on 20 April, 2011

Bangalore Metropolitan Area (BMA) - 1306 sq. kms City area 709.5 sq. kms Green belt and agricultural areas - 455 sq. kms Projected population (for 2015 within BMA) - 8.84 million 76

Figure 3.44 Map showing Bangalore Development Authority limit

Source: City Development Plan of Bangalore

77

3.10.1 Five concentric belts 1st Belt -Administrative Centre and the Central Business District; 2nd Belt - Peri-central area with older planned residential areas surrounding the core area; 3rd Belt - Recent extensions (2003) of the City flanking both sides of the Outer Ring Road, a portion of which lacks services and infrastructure facilities and is termed as a shadow area; 4th Belt - New layouts with some vacant lots and agricultural lands; and 5th Belt - Green belt and agricultural area in the City's outskirts including small villages.
Figure 3.45 Bangalore Green belt

Source: City Development Plan of Bangalore

78

3.10.2 Growth of Bangalore


Figure 3.46 Urban Development Scenario

Source: City Development Plan of Bangalore

79

Figure 3.47 Greater Bangalore in 1973, 1992, 2000, 2006 and 2009.

Source: City Development Plan of Bangalore

3.10.3 Green belt statistics 1984 - 886 sq. km. 1995 - 742 sq. km., (-144 sq. km.) 2011 - 455 sq. km., (-287 sq. km.)

Reason: it had been anticipated that the city's developed area would cover 564 sq km by 2011. But it exceeded 565 sq km in 2003, hence the green belt had to be reworked and scaled down. 80

3.10.4 Inferences Green belt was proposed to give a temporary legal limit to the unrestricted urbanization. Green belt around Bangalore demarcated to keep Bangalore green and clean, and free from pollution. Ban on registration of properties on revenue or non-converted land has come late. Encroachment and illegal construction in the green belt area around the city were responsible for the loss of greenbelt. Bangalore's greenbelt is decreasing by hundreds of acres per year, while the local, state and national governments fail to act to preserve the lands.

81

3.11 Delhi green belt, India Delhi Green belt was established during 1962.
Figure 3.48 Location of Delhi in India

In 1962 (one mile) 1.6 km. width was designated as Green belt. The green belt was utilized for urban expansions both planned and unplanned developments. Hence the urban expansion only beyond existing green belt was not felt feasible. The green belt in between would then attract unauthorized growth. In fact to save the Metropolis from the continued urban agglomeration
Source: en.wikipedia.org, as accessed on 20 and confusion due to developments April, 2011

at

the

periphery,

it

was

recommended to have a green belt all along the Union Territory of Delhi up to a depth of 2 km.

Table 3.8 Urban Area, Rural Area & Green Belt In NCTD (1962-2001)

Area Of NCTD Urban Area Rural Area Green Belt

AS/ MPD-1962 (SQ. KM) 1483 485 870 130

AS/ MPD-2001 (SQ. KM) 1483 891.09 591.01 260

Source: DDAs website http://dda.org.in/ as accessed on 20 April, 2011

82

Figure 3.49 Regional setting of Delhi

Source: http://ncrhomes.com as accessed on 20 April, 2011

The total area of NCR is 33,578 sq. kms. The total area of NCT Delhi is 1483 sq. kms.

83

3.11.1 Master plan proposals for Delhi Greenbelt


Figure 3.50 Delhi Master Plan 1962

Source: DDAs website http://dda.org.in/ as accessed on 20 April, 2011

The Delhi Green belt was proposed during 1962, but due to weak enforcement law and lack of implementation strategy the Green belt as a planning tool was a total failure.
Figure 3.51 Delhi Master Plan 2021

Source: DDAs website http://dda.org.in/ as accessed on 20 April, 2011

According to Master Plan 2021, Green belt as a planning tool has been reestablished and shifted along the state boundary. 84

3.12 Case study inferences: Only a restrictive development was permitted in Greenbelt but unpredicted development pressure is the main reason for the amendment of greenbelt boundaries. The concept was borrowed from the west but lack of implementation strategy is also responsible for its failure. Without any specific policy guidelines for the concept, it has been used/attempted in few Indian cities (Delhi, Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Chandigarh) which overlooked its essence completely. The concept applied in few Indian cities is very different from the original concept (They are basically green wedges, green spaces, parks rather than green belts). Green belt is a strip of planned or protected open space, consisting of recreational parks, farm land, or uncultivated land, often used to define and limit the boundaries of a community and prevent urban sprawl. Green belts have ringed major cities to prevent them from sprawling. Planners have used them to separate satellite new towns from the urban core, safeguarding land for recreation, agriculture and forestry. A city has natural limits, that urban and rural areas should be separated and that settlements should be balanced and evenly-spaced. To control urban growth, green belt as a planning tool can be recommended. For comparative analysis of all case studies, refer Annexure-A.

85

3.12.1 Prospects and consequences of greenbelts For agricultural uses availability of fertile land/soil and water is very necessary. Land ownership may be public/private. Investment opportunities: Agriculture use is a less remunerative so generally it is put to more intensive urban uses for higher returns. Weak enforcement and non-implementation of plan. Lack of political patronage (support, help or privilege may be financially or non-financially). Paucity (lack) of funds with the authority to acquire and maintain the greenbelt. 3.12.2 Factors assisting the permanence of greenbelt Considerable public support. Restriction on landuse conversion. Strategic enforcement law. Restrictive measure and strong political will. Imposition of vacant land tax to discourage land speculation. Proper planning strategy to assist controlled growth of the city vertical development. Provision of limited infrastructure facilities (In most cases through

development comes even before the provisions of infrastructure facilities). Auditing / regular inspection of development. 86

3.12.3 Greenbelt planning principles

Restriction Haphazard Development The Green belt as a land use planning tool has been attempted in few Indian cities, but this concept proved to be more un-realistic and un-feasible as far as the Indian cities have discovered so far. The development restrictions in the green belt region has provoked more and more haphazard pattern of development, which reveals the unsuccessful story of Indian green belt.

THREE APPROACHES

RIGID

SEMI-RIGID

FLEXIBLE

These three different types of approaches can be perceived as the planning strategy for green belt. In the rigid approach, green belt boundary is kept untouched and unmoved throughout the horizon year, but in the semi-rigid or semi flexible approach, green belt boundary is shifted a bit according to the situation, where in the flexible approach, the total green belt region is shifted or moved from its original location/position.

87

Chapter 4

Survey

In this chapter, the findings of opinion survey are included. The survey was conducted among urban planners / town planners, having a strong professional background mainly from JDA and Town Planning Department, Jaipur. Sample size was taken as 25. For details about the survey questionnaire, refer annexure-B.

4.1 Findings of Opinion Survey The findings of this survey are listed below:

4.1.1 Purpose of Greenbelt Concept

Inferences: Greenbelts have been a widely used planning tool for containing the physical expansion of built-up areas. Preserve open spaces for the future generations. Urbanization is an ongoing Process, so to control it is a real challenge.

88

4.1.2 Benefits of Greenbelt with special reference to Jaipur metropolitan region

4.1.3 Threat for Greenbelts

4.1.4 Do you think green belt is a viable option to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance of the Jaipur city?

89

4.1.5 Other probable options to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance

Source: Primary Survey

4.2 Planning option for Jaipur greenbelt- SWOT analysis SWOT analysis has been done to find out the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats for each option. A score of +1 is allotted to every Strength and Opportunity where a score of -1 has been allotted to every Weakness and Threat under each option. (Refer Table 3.9)
Table 4.1 SWOT analysis

S.No.

Planning Option Greenbelt along Urbanisable area U2 and U3.

Strength (+1) -Prevent overspill of population -Retain agriculture -Maintain ecological balance

Weakness (-1) - Lack of fund to acquire land.

Opportunities (+1) -Subject to availability of land. -Open spaces as per norms can be provided.

Threats (-1) -Intensive urban uses for higher returns. -Weak enforcement law

Score

1.

+2

2.

Development controls of U2 and U3.

-Restricted development controls TOTAL

-Extension of urban projects in U2 & U3.

+2

Source: Primary Survey

90

4.3 Survey Inferences Restricting the size of city by the green belt: The high population growth rate in Jaipur, both urban and rural leading to the unplanned sprawl, which may pose a pressure on green belt. The size of the Jaipur city cannot be restricted by a green belt only unless or until we ensure a proper land use planning strategy having a strong political support. The form of the city and green belt: Jaipur has five National Highways converging into the city with a lot of growth potential along them. So, without considering this fact the designation of green belt boundary is impossible. Site selection criteria for green belt: The width of the green belt should be proposed considering factors like topography, land ownership, conservation of natural and built heritage sites etc. Land use policy of bulk acquisition through revolving fund: It should not be preferable to acquire land under green belt which is not remunerative. Suggestive measures against encroachments on green belt land: A number of acts and involvement of various agencies in plan implementation and enforcement to check unplanned growth / encroachments is strictly required. Borrowed western concept: The Indian conditions are very much different from the developed countries in terms of population growth rate, migration to urban areas, uniformity of services in urban and rural areas, availability of funds, awareness, attitude etc. So modification of the concept according to the context is necessary in-spite of using/applying it as it is.

91

Chapter 5

JDA Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area & Eco-sensitive area

In this chapter, all the JDA Master Plan proposals for green belt or similar attempts (Ecological area & Eco-sensitive area) have been included.

5.1 Master Development Plan 1991 In the 1991 Master Plan of Jaipur, the urban areas have been shown as surrounded by a ring of peripheral control belt or green belt. This green belt was expected to act as lung space around the urban areas. It was also expected to cater to the activities operating in rural areas including agriculture, partly catering to the requirements of the urban uses.
Figure 5.1 Proposed Land Use plan 1991

Legend Green belt

Source: Master Development Plan 1991

92

Figure 5.2: 1991 Master Plan proposal for green belt. The 1991 green belt is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan.

The green belt is shown in yellow color. Green belt accounted for 234 Sq. Km., which comprises 60% of the total area.

93

5.2 Master Development Plan 2011

According to the Master Plan 2011, it was mentioned that with the increase of land requirements for urban uses, the urban land parcel keeps expanding and engulfs a large part of the lung space legally delineated as green belt or peripheral control belt in accordance with law. Thus the area shown as green belt in a Master Plan prepared in seventies becomes an urban area for the same city when the revised or a New Master Plan is prepared on expiry of the stipulated date of earlier document. This obviously does not simply indicate that the urban area which required certain green lung spaces around it during the stipulated Master Plan period ceases be so after expiry of the Master Plan Period. Keeping in view all these aspects, besides the Urbanizable Area, Ecological Zone has been delineated in the Region. This zone including the hill ranges, forest covers water bodies, settlements etc. was ideally suited to be maintained as a predominant green zone to be utilized for Agriculture, forestry and allied activities besides compatible activities. The existing settlements and legally established urban and rural functions in this zone were allowed to expand to the extent of natural growth. Functions and activities which were eco-friendly and occupy minimal built area for incidental use like recreational & health resorts, sports complexes, golf courses etc. were allowed to come up in this zone subject to stringent control with respect to environmental and other planning aspects. The Ecological Zone, by all means was to be protected against indiscriminate urbanization and was to be continue to be a predominant green area even beyond the horizon year as stipulated in this document. The area of the Ecological Zone delineated at that stage was approx 481 Sq. Kms.

94

Figure 5.3: Urbanisable area 2011, indicating ecological ar ea

Legend Ecological area

Source: Master Development Plan 2011

95

Figure 5.4: 2011 Master Plan proposal for ecological area . The 2011 ecological area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan.

The

ecological in

area

is

shown for 481

yellow Km.,

color. which

Ecological area accounted Sq. comprises 24.55% of the total Jaipur region (2011) i.e. 1959 Sq. Km.

96

5.3 Master Development Plan 2025

Eco-sensitive area This includes all the bio-diverse and incompatible use areas like Reserved forests, protected forests, flora fauna areas, wetlands, flood prone areas, water recharge areas, water bodies, heritage conservation areas, animal rescue centers, water sheds, habitats of migratory birds, National Parks , sanctuaries, closed areas, significant local areas and other areas, resource areas(like mining, quarrying, etc). In this endeavor the eco-sensitive area is categorized as the Eco sensitive area is categorized as Green zone zone-1 and Green zone 2. Green Zone 1 (G-1): The Green zone G1, is primarily a zone where the principal aim is to conserve the natural features such as hills, river, nalah, water bodies and forests flora fauna, at all cost. The zone is strictly reserved and to be protected from any development. The area need to cater to the respective use. For example, if it is a water channel, it has to be maintained accordingly and no development activity addressed likewise if it is reserve Forest/Protected forest it has to be maintained the same. The uses that can be ventured in to these areas are circulation ventures/public utilities/recreational ventures/heritage protection projects. The other activities and ventures are to be discouraged. Green Zone 2 (G-2): G-2 is primarily the area abutting G-1, this is developed as a buffer to promote a continuum to G-1. All the activities that are permitted in G-3 zone eco-friendly housing biotech parks Motel, resorts are permitted in this use zone. Other than above uses the rest are to be discouraged in the G-2.

97

Figure 5.5 Land Utilization Map, indicating Eco -sensitive area

Source: Master Development Plan 2025

98

Figure 5.6: 2025 Master Plan proposal for Eco -sensitive area. The 2025 Eco sensitive area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan.

The Eco-sensitive area is shown in yellow color. Eco-sensitive area accounted for 642 Sq. Km., which comprises 21.84% of the total Jaipur region (2025) i.e. 2939 Sq. Km.

99

5.4 Comparative analysis of all three Master Plan proposals


Figure 5.7: Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area & Eco -sensitive area. These are shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan.

Master Plan Proposals: 1991-Green Belt: 234 Sq. Km. 2011-Ecological Area: 481 Sq. Km. 2025-Ecosensitive Area: 642 Sq. Km.

100

Chapter 6 Inferences and Recommendations


The findings, inferences and recommendations of various case studies, literature studies are included in this chapter.

6.1 Influences of city size

From the case study analysis, it is very much clear that to designate a green belt; we must define the finite size of a city. Though, it is one of the most difficult challenges in front of any planner as it is dependent on various factors: It is very difficult to define an optimum city size because city development objectives change with time. Three planning tools to influence city size: land use regulations, infrastructure investments and taxation. City sizes are path dependent. The spatial structure of a large city evolves very slowly and can evolve only in a few directions. Also it depends upon average land consumption, distribution of population and pattern of daily trips (the amount of air pollution generated by urban transport depends on the length, speed and number of motorized trips and the type of vehicles). Location of Industries/Job offering centers: Households, whatever their location within the metropolitan area, should be able to reach within a reasonable time (say less than 1 hour) to those locations where jobs are offered. These parameters should be taken care of while defining the proper size of a city realizing the facts that, in a democratic setup like India Demographic force and Economic force are the most strongest forces.

101

6.2 Parameters responsible for designating Jaipur Greenbelt boundary There are certain aspects which are directly responsible for designation of green belt boundary: Those villages may be identified where no future development will be permitted & they may be considered for Greenbelt. Satellite towns beyond the greenbelt can be considered for further growth (see figure 6.1). The rural areas inside the greenbelt can continue to support with viable agricultural holdings and livestock facilities like vegetables, fruits, milk etc for day to day needs.
Figure 6.1 Location of Satellite towns around parent city

Source: Master Development Plan 2025

102

6.3 Development Promotion / Control Regulation as per JDA Master Development Plan 2025

In case Jaipur, to delineate a green belt around the city it is very significant to study the land utilization scenario (see figure 6.2) and development controls of the JDA region.
Figure 6.2 Land Utilization Map, JDA region

Source: Master Development Plan 2025

103

6.3.1 Development Promotion / Control Regulation (U-2), MDP-2025

The development controls of Urbanisable Area-2 as per MDP-2025 are:


Table 6.1: Development controls for Urbanisable Area-2 (JDA region)

S.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Permitted use premises Green Buildings / Eco Friendly Houses / Farm Houses IT Park / Bio-Tech Park SEZ/Film city/ Sports city Integrate Residential Townships Hotel Resort Motel/Holiday Cottage & Resort Amusement Park Hospital (Minim m 300 Beds) Naturopathy / Yoga Centre Educational Institutions (Professionals Colleges,integrated sesidential schools) Public Utilities- Electric Power Plant Petrol Pump with Service Station Convention Centre Religious Buildings Village Abadi Extensions Cottage Industries 104

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

17. 18. 19.

Compost Plants / Solid Waste Disposal Sites Central Govt, Offices/ State Govt. Office Agriculture / Dairy Farming

6.3.2 Development Promotion / Control Regulation (U-3), MDP-2025

The development controls of Urbanisable Area-3 as per MDP-2025 are:


Table 6.2: Development controls of Urbanisable Area-3

S.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Convention Centre Resort / Motel Hotel

Permitted use premises

Sports training Complex Amusement Park Specialized educational Institutions Specialized Medical Institutions Building for assembling units Transportation area (Transport/TruckTerminals, Bus terminals etc.) Public utility

10.

105

6.3.3 Development Promotion / Control Regulation (Eco-sensitive area), MDP-2025

The eco-sensitive area is categorized into green zone-1 and green zone-2. Green zone-1 (G-1): The green zone which is primarily a zone where the aim is to conserve the natural features. This zone is strictly reserved. Circulation, Public Utilities, recreational activities, Heritage protection ventures are promoted. Green zone-2 (G-2): It is the area primarily abutting G-1. Activities permitted in this area shall have very low intensity use with minimum habitation low profile, low density & low rise uses shall only be permitted in this area.

Permitted Use Premises In Eco-Sensitive Area G-2:


Table 6.3: Permitted Use Premises In Eco -Sensitive Area G-2

S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Agriculture Bird sanctuary Botanical garden Cremation and burial ground Fair ground

Activity

Farm house/environment friendly residence Forest Government reserved area

106

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

Historical monument Memorial Orchard & nursery Outdoor stadium Picnic hut/ Camping site Play ground Police post Regional park Religious premises Resort Dhaba Rural settlements Specialised park/ground Sports training institute Swimming pool Vending booth Water bodies Wireless and transmission Yoga/Mediation/Spiritual/Religious discourse centre Social Culture Centre Aquarium

28.

107

6.3.4 Assessment of Development Promotion / Control Regulations

As per MDP-2025, Urbanisable area U-1 is accounted for all kinds of intensive urban activities. Urbanisable area U-2 abutting Urbanisable area U-1and Urbanisable area U-3 along the major highways permits restrictive development controls which are mentioned above (refer table 6.1 and table 6.3). The ecosensitive area (G-1 and G-2) is surrounded by Urbanisable area U-2 and Urbanisable area U-3. The development controls of eco-sensitive area are much suitable and favorable which can be considered for green belt development. So, the pattern of development around eco-sensitive area is responsible for its permanence and feasibility, because of the development pressure of urban activities of U-2 and U-3. To be specific, the industries, SEZs, large commercial complexes and institutions of U-2 and U-3 will act as a magnet for various subsidiary and subordinate urban activities which in turn may act as the threats for the existence of eco-sensitive area.

Development Promotion / Control Regulation for Jaipur Green belt:

All activities of G1 and G2. Limited Residential Development in Villages (the development of lowdensity dwellings, more particularly the farm houses). Limited Affordable Housing for Local Community Needs Extension, Alteration or Replacement of Dwellings Small-Scale Extensions to Existing Business Premises Other Appropriate Forms of Development (mineral extraction, engineering and other operations, sport and recreation). Sewage treatment plant, land fill sites etc.

108

6.4 Recommendations

To plan for a green belt it is very much necessary to: - Study about the parameters responsible for its feasibility - Various schemes for land ownership - Sustainable green belt model

6.4.1 Parameters for Jaipur green belt feasibility study

To demarcate the boundary for Jaipur greenbelt, we should consider the potentials of Eco-sensitive area that can be recognized as green belt as it is. Also, we will have to look for all the available options in rural areas & missing links of Green zone-2 to provide a continuous and contiguous belt. For instance, if we want to select two specific villages or part of villages Sirani and Daulatpura, then the green belt feasibility study is required.

Figure 6.3: Location plan of Sirani and Dalautpura inside JDA region.

109

Table 6.4: Demographic structure of Sirani&Daulatpura

S.NO

VILLAGE NAME

AREA (Hectare) 606

POPULATION

DENSITY, 2011 (Persons/Hec)

1.

Sirani

1681 (2001) 2179 (Projected, 2011)

3.59

2.

Daulatpura

266

561 (2001) 889 (Projected, 2011)

3.34

Source: Census 2001 for 2001 population only

Factors to be considered/studied (to designate these villages as part of green belt): Availability of land. Land use, land value, land potential/characteristics of land. Population structure, workforce population, occupation structure. Socio-economic profile of the villages. Provision of infrastructure facilities. Land ownership scenario. Land acquisition strategy, rate (according to market condition). Strategic enforcement law. Public awareness & public support.

110

6.4.2 Various schemes for green belt land ownership and pattern of development:

There may be various schemes for land ownership strategy and density pattern inside the green belt depending upon the green belt feasibility study. Some of the schemes are mentioned below:

Scheme 1: -60% land to the plot owners with 30% built up. -F.S.I incentive in form of TDR -The remaining 40% -Roads, Public space, etc. with amenities/ facilities/ utility buildings not more than 10% built up area only.

Scheme 2: -75% Plot belong to respective owners but no development zone. -Help generate Revenue / subsidization -10% for roads. -15% for public utility

Scheme 3: -High rise apartment and low density development -Low rise plotted and low density development

111

6.4.3 Suggestive planning principle for Jaipur Green belt:

Semi-flexible or semi-rigid approach towards the planning of Jaipur green belt may be considered. More details regarding such approach are listed below:

Green belt boundaries are generally set for the foreseeable future but are not required to necessarily be permanent always as far as the growth potential of Jaipur city has concerned.

Changes to the boundaries respond to the needs, pressure and particularly the increasing mobility of urban population of Jaipur.

Inner Green Belt boundaries may change where the Governing Authority are convinced that the re-use of neglected land will not be sufficient to meet all the areas needs, in particular the need for housing.

112

6.4.4 Conclusion:

As a conclusion of this project, a sustainable green belt model is developed but it may vary according to the city development objectives, location and its geographical condition.

Figure 6.4: Sustainable greenbelt model

Note: All Distances are in k.m.

113

The case of Jaipur is quite similar to this kind of developmental principles as far as planning has concerned according to JDA Master Plan. The concentric belts or areas (U-1, U-2 and U-3) are associated with developmental controls. All intensive urban development activities are promoted in the core city area whereas more and more development restrictions are placed as we move further from the core city area.
Figure 6.5: Land Utilization Map, JDA region

Note: Concentric circles are drawn with the radii of 10 K.m., 20 k.m. & 30 Km.

114

According to the land utilization map (see figure 6.5), Urbanisable area U-2 is acting as a continuous belt around Urbanisable area U-1. Towards the east U-2 is obstructed by the natural barrier (Aravalli hills) but it is having an average width of 3.5 K.m. where development restrictions are placed. This particular planning phenomena is supportive and suggestive for green belt around U-2.
Figure 6.6: Greenbelt proposal for JDA region

115

Table 6.5: Details of villages under the green belt boundary


PROJECTED POPULATION (2010) 1338 4319 3120 1146 592 1248 222 1616 746 89 1044 551 1143 2367 1273 856 2469 431 783 2479 1537 _ 763 743 1101 776 913 _ 2384 2839 2086 1899 1195 1928 2187 254 3461 2415 5652 1419 2152 1655 3426 AREA (in Hectare) 438 1089 702 327 93 189 43 439 334 35 134 237 370 606 738 266 535 207 357 970 284 20 257 311 224 80 126 550 854 843 202 158 206 343 605 107 503 901 1057 239 535 297 691 POPULATION DENSITY (/Hectare) 3.05 3.97 4.44 3.50 6.37 6.60 5.16 3.68 2.23 2.54 7.79 2.32 3.09 3.91 1.72 3.22 4.61 2.08 2.19 2.56 5.41 _ 2.97 2.39 4.92 9.70 7.25 _ 2.79 3.37 10.33 12.02 5.80 5.62 3.61 2.37 6.88 2.68 5.35 5.94 4.02 5.57 4.96

S.NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

VILLAGE Sundariyawas Bhambori Dhankya Chak Ramsar Keshyawala Kanarpura @ Khanga Barh Fat ehpura Fat ehpura Himmat pura Chak Begas Mansinghpura Lakhawas Ajairajpura Sirani Bhapura Daulat pura Chat arpura Prempura Kishanpura @ Khat ipura Pawaliya Jaisinghpura @ Roopwas Chak Sherwali Dahar Nangal Pooran Raipuriya Khurd Balloopura Dharmpura Sankh Shyopuri Sindoli Ramsinghpura Shri Rampura Dudawala Girdharipura Vijai Mukundpura @ Hir Dyorha Chor Chak Degrawas Boodt hal Anat pura Chonp Bhoorawali Chat arpura Sardarpura Rojda

116

The boundary should be continuous and contiguous to form a green belt. Considering the fact an option is worked out for green belt which connects the Eco-sensitive area (both G1 & G2) together abutting Urban area-2 (see fig 6.6). The total area of green belt is 937.86 Sq. km. which is 31.91% of the total JDA region. The width and the shape of green belt are dependent upon the geographical features and land use potentials. The criteria for the selection of such potential land parcels to form the green belt are as follows: Uplands, hillocks Water channels Ring road Reserved forest areas Proposed woodlands as per the JDA Master Plan-25 Density pattern (low density)

Green belt along Ring Road: The proposed Jaipur Ring Road is about 145 km long, around the city of Jaipur connecting Jaipur- Ajmer Road (NH8), Jaipur-Tonk Road (NH12), Jaipur-Agra Road (NH11), Jaipur-Delhi Road (NH8) and Jaipur-Sikar Road (NH11). A land ribbon 360 m wide is proposed for this development. It will consist of a six-lane access controlled expressway; a three-lane service road on both sides; a 135 m an investors' development corridor on both sides (As per the JDA Master plan25). Instead of proposing ribbon development throughout the ring road we always can opt for investors development in few pockets only on major nodes/junctions, where a high density pattern or relaxation of F.A.R. may be allowed. Other than investors' development pockets/nodes, all the areas should be considered for green corridor or green belt. This kind of development will 117

certainly restrict pilferage, reduce development cost, improve speed limit of vehicles and decrease pressure on roads.
Figure 6.7: Development all along the road. Figure 6.8: Development only on major junction/nodes.

During the past few decades, urban areas have experienced increasing environmental stress, notably in the form of poor air quality, excessive noise and traffic congestion. Road traffic is considered as one of the most important sources of air and noise pollution with adverse effects on human health. So, green belt along ring road will also help to reduce air and noise pollution. Green belt along Water Channels/Nalas: The green belt along water channels (namely Amanisha nala) will restrict encroachment and improve ecosystem in the core city.

118

FOR HOW LONG CAN WE AFFORD OUR CITY TO EXPAND ?

DEFINE CITY SIZE THEN PLAN FOR GREEN BELT!

119

120

Works Cited:

Alan W. Evans and Oliver Marc Hartwich, The best laid plans: How planning prevents economic growth, Policy Exchange, January 2007 See: http://www.rudi.net/node/17560.

Albert Speer& Partner GmbH, Strategic Master Plan for Frankfurt am Main, 2009.

Andreas Faludi, Coalition Building and Planning for Dutch Growth Management: The Role of the Randstad Concept Urban Studies, vol. 31, issue 3, April 1994.

Anne G. Busck et al., Managing rurban landscapes in the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden: Comparing planning systems and instruments in three different contexts, GeografiskTidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 108(2) 2008.

Campaign to Protect Rural England news release, Green Belts shrink despite Prescott pledge, 5 February 2007.

Carolyn Harrison, Spatial Planning England, Green structures and Urban Planning: European Cooperation in the field of Scientific and Technical Research, 2002.

Carolyn Loeb, Planning reunification: the planning history of the fall of the Berlin wall, 21 Planning Perspectives, January 2006, Pg 67.

Christian Curr, Brabant Centre for Sustainable Development, The Story Behind the Story International Examples of Sustainable Area Development, (Lifescape your Landscape, 2008).

121

City

of

Frankfurt

am

Main

website,

Frankfurt

offers

more.

See:

http://www.frankfurt.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=3403879. Countryscape, Centre for Urban and Rural Ecology et al., The Countryside Next Door: Report to the Campaign to Protect Rural England, October 2005. Denmark Ministry of the Environment, Spatial Planning in Denmark, (Copenhagen, 2007). Web- http://www.blst.dk/NR/rdonlyres/80F40F39E60B-401A-B58B-2D25A4FFC54D/49285/ Planning_260907_NY.pdf. Donna L. Erickson, The Relationship of Historic City Form and

Contemporary Greenway Implementation: a Comparison of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (USA) and Ottawa, Ontario (Canada) Landscape and Urban Planning, v. 68 -2004 199. Green Belt Alliance, Golden Lands, Golden Opportunities Preserving vital Bay Area lands for all Californians, 2009. Web: http://www.Green Belt.org/downloads/resources/report_GoldenLands.pdf. Jason Dowling and Kate Lahey, Brumby tackled on urban sprawl, The Age, June 9, 2009. Web: http://www.theage.com.au/national/brumbytackled-on-urban-sprawl-20090608-c0ui.html. London Assembly report to the Planning and Housing Committee of the Greater London Authority, Review of the Role of the Planning System in Supporting and Encouraging Commercial Food Growing in London, Report Number 4, October 13, 2009. Marco Amati, A Study on the Planning Processes and Future Directions of the London Green Belt: An Investigation of Local Level Planning (Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tsukuba, 2005).

122

Martha Works and Thomas Harvey, Can the Way We Eat Change Metropolitan Agriculture? The Portland Example, Terrain.org: A Journal of the Built & Natural Environments, Issue No. 17, Fall/Winter 2005.

Metro

website,

Urban

Growth

Boundary.

See:

http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=277. Natural England and the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Green Belts: a greener future, 2010. See: http://www.cpre.org.uk/campaigns/planning/green-belts/green-beltscampaign-update. Ontario Greenbelt Alliance website, Greenbelt 2.0. See:

http://www.greenbeltalliance. ca/?q=node/32. Alterman, R. (1997), The Challenge of Farmland Preservation: lessons from a six-nation comparison, Journal of the American Planning Association, 63(2), 22044. Beauregard, R.A. (1989), Between modernity and post-modernity: the ambiguous position of U.S. planning, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 7, 38195. http://www.cattlemen.bc.ca/.

123

Annexure-A: Comparative analysis of all case studies


1. Londons greenbelt (UK)

A.1

2. Seouls greenbelt (South Korea)

A.2

3.

Ontario greenbelt (Canada)

A.3

4. Paris greenbelt (France)

A.4

5.

Frankfurt greenbelt (Germany)

A.5

6.

Ottawa greenbelt (Canada)

A.6

7.

Beijing greenbelt (China)

A.7

8.

Vienna greenbelt (Austria)

A.8

9.

Ahmedabad greenbelt (Gujarat)

A.9

10. Bangalore greenbelt (Karnataka)

A.10

11. Delhi greenbelt (Delhi)

A.11

Annexure-B: Opinion survey questionnaire

OPINION SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE


Conducted by: SUVADIP BHOWMIK, M.plan.-II yr, Students of IV Sem. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE MALAVIYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYJAIPUR

1. ACCORDING TO YOU, WHAT ARE THE PROBABLENEEDS FOR GREENBELT CONCEPT: (Rate your preference (level of satisfaction) with each of the following aspect.)

o o o o o o

To control urban growth: It provides direction about where, how, and in what form future growth should be accommodated. To limit size of a city: A city has natural limit, that urban and rural areas should be separated and that settlements should be balanced and evenly-spaced. To maintain ecological balance. To prevent towns from merging into each other. To preserve the characters of historic towns. To protect the urban fringe areas from further encroachment.

2. BENEFITS OF GREEN BELTS: (Rate your preference (level of satisfaction) with each of the following aspect.)

o o o o o o

Provide opportunities for access to the open areas Provide opportunities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation The retention of attractive landscapes and the enhancement of landscapes Improvement of damaged and neglected land around towns The securing of nature conservation interests The retention of land in agricultural, forestry and related uses.

B.1

3. THREAT FOR GREENBELTS: (Rate your preference (level of satisfaction) with each of the following aspect.)

o o o o

Increasing pressure for housing Highway expansion Aggregate extraction Struggle to protect agricultural land

4. AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENTAL POTENTIAL OF JDA REGION HAS CONCERNED, DO YOU THINK GREEN BELT IS A VIABLE OPTION TO CONTROL URBAN GROWTH OR MAINTAIN ECOLOGICAL BALANCE:

o o o

Yes No Other

5. WHAT ARE THE OTHER PROBABLE OPTIONS TO CONTROL URBAN GROWTH OR MAINTAIN ECOLOGICAL BALANCE:

_____________________________________________________________________________. 6. SHOULD WE CONSIDER PROPOSING GREENBELT ON RURAL LANDS FURTHER AWAY FROM THE CITY AS PER DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF JDA REGION?

o o

Yes No If no, are there such lands available for proposing greenbelt inside the city?

PERSONAL INFORMATION: 1. Name:. 2. Age.... 3. Educational qualification 4. Occupation (Secondary....) 5. Place of work:.. B.2

You might also like