Compact City Development A Comparative Assessment

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Compact City Development A Comparative Assessment

Vikas Verma

Department of Urban Planning

School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi Delhi, India

Ruchir Kumar

Department of Housing

School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi Delhi, India

Abstract The compact city idea is received in a city by arrangements of many created nations for the accompanying advantages: effective utilization of land while shortening sprawl, diminishment in the transport system and dependence on mass transport, a socially intuitive condition with dynamic quality of exercises, monetary reasonability, and so forth. Be that as it may, it is still wrangled about whether the urban areas in creating nations like India, which are already highly dense, will truly profit by the compact city shape. Measuring urban shape and minimization of these urban areas turns out to be more critical for understanding the spatial urban structure to intercede as needed for practical urban improvement. This paper investigates different parameters and measurements of estimation of compactness.

KeywordsCompact city, urban sprawl, sustainable development, compact development.

  1. INTRODUCTION

    Different urban structures advanced through current urban arranging hones, yet regularly the worry for their negative effects is seen as absent. This casualness is evident in the created world in "Sprawl" as a prime urban shape. As the importance of "sustainability" is globally acclaimed, recently yet intentionally the sprawl is being denounced for its negative ecological, social and financial effects. The focal start of this investigation is that the type of a city can influence its manageability. A few examinations have endeavored to demonstrate that manageability of a city may rely upon its shape, size, density, and land utilize circulation. The Urban shape has a positive or negative effect on openness to offices, travel traits (separation and time), vitality utilized, social value, and productive utilization of land, monetary advantages, and a decrease in Carbon dioxide outflows, energy. Be that as it may, the civil argument on the most reasonable urban frame to accomplish maintainability is as yet uncertain. To advance urban manageability, the connections between the urban frame and the different components of a city should be caught on.

    This research is an endeavor to gauge the current urban structure of a city and to survey its capability to further create it towards more feasible presence. Conceivable outcomes to rebuild the city to form itself into a compact city are researched upon.

    1. Theoretical Background

      Before continuing towards the discourse on compactness and sprawl, it is important to glance at a few ideas which are examined beneath:

      1. Sprawl – Urban sprawl or rural sprawl portrays the extension of human populaces far from focal urban ranges into

        low-densities, mono practical and for the most part auto subordinate groups, in a procedure called sub- urbanization.

        The term urban sprawl is exceptionally politicized, and quite often has negative implications. It is reprimanded for causing ecological debasement, heightening isolation and undermining existing urban regions.

      2. Urban Structure – Three sorts of metropolitan urban structures are mono driven, polycentric and decentralized structures among which first and the last are for the most part perceived as reduced advancement and indiscriminate development (or sprawl) separately, however there is little accord on whether polycentric metropolitan frame speaks to compactness or sprawl. In a more extensive sense, quantitative factors to recognize appropriately between three model structures are as yet missing to portray quantitatively metropolitan frame when all is said is done and to recognize minimization from sprawl specifically.

      3. Compactness – Compactness does not have an acknowledged definition. Anderson et al (1996) characterized both mono driven and polycentric shapes as being compact. Ewing's definition (1977) was some convergence of work and lodging and additionally some blend of land employments. Bertaud and Malpezzi (1999) built up a compactness record; the ration between normal separation from home to focal business locale (CBD), and its partner in estimated round and hollow city with measure up to appropriation of advancement. Regardless of different definitions, one normal topic is the obscure idea that compactness includes the grouping of improvement.

      4. Sustainable Development – The most normally utilized meaning of supportable improvement, the proposal of both the WCED report and the Earth Summit, is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987:43). This definition joins the need to remember the necessities of future age likewise while addressing current needs.

    2. Sustainable Urban Development

      The significant issues in numerous urban communities are identified with long travel separations, clog and fuel outflows, corrupting condition, social imbalance, ecological debasement, well-being, loss of encompassing area (with agrarian and normal assets). A significant number of these issues are seen as an effect of physical urban shape. It is generally acknowledged that urban areas must be at center in the maintainable improvement plan as urban areas through

      their structures influence general natural execution and administration. In this manner, practical urban frame can be characterized as the shape which empowers the city to work inside its regular and man-made conveying limits is easy to use for its tenants and advances social equity through comprehensive basic leadership forms.

    3. Urban Form

      Urban form is a spatial organization of components that rehash, and if in light of certain supportable ideas, can prompt the manageability of urban areas. Different methodologies are investigated for accomplishing supportable urban advancement through a city's frame.

      The seven ideas or standards of maintainable urban areas are:

      • Compactness

      • Sustainable Transport

      • Density

      • Mixed Land employment

      • Diversity

      • Greening.

      These go for diminishing travel separations, sparing vitality, increment personal satisfaction, proficient utilization of land, spare framework costs, and so on adding to maintainable urban advancement. Each of these urban structures contribute distinctively in making urban communities practical, however theoretically compact city is by all accounts more persuading than other urban structures. The varieties depicted generally manage the type of a reduced city. Smaller urban shape advancement ends up plainly one of the methodologies that appear to be possibly an essential part in planning feasible urban areas.

    4. Urbanization in India

      The most recent couple of decades have encountered extraordinary urban development in the creating scene, especially in Asia and Africa, where three times increment in the developed urban territory (up to 0.6 million square km of urban areas with million or more populaces) from year 2000 to 2030 is anticipated.

      Creating nations consider it to be an open door for advancement and acknowledge it as ideal. Urbanization is seen as the consequence of degree of human civic establishments with demonstrated advantages of financial development and improvement.

      Creating nations require urban communities to draw in human apital for fundamental monetary sustenance. Indian urban communities possess 10% of the world's aggregate urban range and house more than one tenth of the world urban populace. The present pace and size of urbanization in India will right away outcome in the greater part of its populace living in urban ranges, which may undermine its supportable.

      The personal satisfaction in officially stressed urban communities is probably going to corrupt further, and the huge rate of urbanization will have a noteworthy natural effect. The advancement of self-capacity is a test, while the open door is in making development which is socially comprehensive and naturally amicable. The urbanization in India will affect worldwide maintainability as India's offer in worldwide biological impression will increment in not so distant future (allude Table 1). Consequently, building

      maintainable urban communities will be a key to hold India's development in future.

      Table 1: Status of Urban India in relation to the World

      Continent/ Country

      Average (Persons per Hectare)

      % of World s Urban Area

      % of Worlds Urban Population

      World

      43

      100

      100

      Africa

      70

      11.2

      10.3

      North America

      16

      13.4

      13.5

      South America

      57

      7.7

      8.5

      Australia

      14

      0.7

      0.7

      Europe

      28

      9.3

      7.4

      Russia

      32

      4.2

      2.6

      Asia

      70

      51.3

      56.0

      India

      120

      10.1

      10.6

    5. Compact City Concept

      The beginning of Compact City lies in the supportable goals of asset preservation and waste-minimization as exemplified in the Brundtland Commission report and the UNCED Agenda 21 proposition distributed in the late eighties and the mid-nineties. Ewing's contended thought is high densities induced less space per capita with more land for farming and open spaces; transport and rail serve better in dense settlements with lesser dependence on autos; and higher densities decrease society's ecological impression and moderate the utilization of non-renewable assets.

      A compact city shape can encourage for mass transport and diminishment in travel separations, accentuation on person on foot movement, productive utilization of land through high populace densities, social union and social advancement, and the economy in per capita cost of framework arrangement and minor organizations by making a steady limit populace accessible, embedding more energy in urban areas. The advantages of minimal urban areas are seen more through high density and open travel. Along these lines, a conceivable arrangement offered for accomplishing practical urban frame is that of Compact City Model Development. Basically, the compact city show characterized as a high density, blended utilize improvement, inside a prohibitive land territory with upgraded open transport and framework offices. Be that as it may, there are wrangles about the benefits of a reduced urban frame.

      The overabundance increment in building and populace density may bring about congestion in neighborhoods as is seen from the cases of Hong Kong. Arrangement of abundant measure of per capita open space is essential to keep up personal satisfaction, which ends up plainly troublesome in compact urban communities. Independent of the kind of urban form, management of the city is more essential to accomplish manageability, and it is more perplexing in minimal urban structures. The contained urban land in compact settlements which is shared by more individuals with high density may have higher land costs not reasonable to disadvantageous gatherings.

      The vision of the compact city has been commanded by the model of the densely created center of numerous notable European urban communities. They are viewed as perfect spots to live and encounter the essentials and assortment of

      urban life. Notwithstanding, the arrangements proposed have been based more in principle than training.

      Inquiries are raised about the frame and adequacy of the compact city idea in accomplishing supportable, and whether it implies fixation and centralization, or decentralization with some level of self- governance. Contentions likewise address the issue of worthiness, the wants of people, and the more extensive duties of the resident and general society interest.

      Speculations have by and large not been approved by inquire about, and what has been done is basically audits; it is contended that a superior coordination and mix of research is required. With ideas and hypotheses that are clashing, the need is that information drawn from research and practice ought to have the capacity to give a clearer comprehension of complex reality.

      1. Meaning of Compact City What is implied by Compact? The inquiries are being asked like, does it imply that structures, and with them the elements of urban life, ought to be near one another; nearer together than is currently normal? Does it mean an expansion in density, so more individuals and, one may expect more urban capacities are situated inside a given region? The inquiries sharpers the qualification among density and power or advancement, as they are not a similar thing. Density is a quantitative measure of number inside an endorsed zone, while power mirrors a more subjective measure of developed or urbanity. Density, in itself is of little significance unless it is identified with manufactured frame. Compact is negligible unless it is identified with a few statistical data points.

      2. Compact City Theory The connection between urban frame and sustainability is at present a standout among the most fervently issues on the global natural motivation. The way that urban areas ought to be created later on, and the impact that their shape can have on asset exhaustion and social and financial manageability, are integral to this verbal confrontation.

        At one outrageous of the level headed discussion, there are the individuals who trust that conservative urban areas are critical of the feasible future. This is likewise obvious that urban inhabitants could appreciate bringing down transport use, less contamination and lower warming expenses from this.

        Breheny, advocates a position which bolsters both the benefits of centralization, for instance, urban regulation and urban recovery, and the advantages of the 'unavoidable decentralization' to towns and rural areas which offer a scope of open offices.

        At last, at the other outrageous there are the individuals who contend against the procedure of compaction, in light of the fact that is unsustainable and prohibited to urban and sub urban occupants, for the straightforward reason that the guaranteed benefits are exceeded by misfortunes to the social, monetary and regular habitat. Supporters contended that there is excessively to be lost from urban solidification, and that arrangements lie in changing transport frameworks, as opposed to re-organizing urban communities.

        While the image for the most proper urban form has a long history, as a look for feasible shape the test is genuinely new. The examinations likewise demonstrate that this pursuit still

        can't seem to discover definitively either for, or against, the conservative city. What is clear, be that as it may, is the main by thorough examination and kept addressing and testing of suppositions, with the ramifications of maintainability for our towns andurban communities are caught on.

      3. In Favour of the Compact City – The rise in car ownership and use, firm decline in walking and cycling, and poorer open transport administrations have prompted an intensifying of the circumstance in regard to a large portion of the financial social and natural measures that could be utilized to screen advance in personal satisfaction. These aggressive impacts show themselves in essential ranges influencing the personal satisfaction in urban areas.

        • The trouble that individuals without an auto (most of the populace particularly in the creating nations go under this class) have in addressing day by day needs which are reliant on non-mechanized and open types of transport.

        • Congestion spreading to more streets, and for longer time of the day, with resultant misuse of travel time and assets.

        • The fear and tension created by the developing volume and speed of activity, owning to the apparent danger of death and damage in the car crashes; at that point requiring the activity of ever more prominent cautiousness by people on foot, and cyclists

        • The threatening and severance impacts of movement on group life, constraining the previous scope of elements of the road to just that of going about as a channel for engine vehicles.

        • The dispersal of an expanding extent of movement past the limits of the nearby neighborhood.

        • The spread of noise shapes all movement sources- street, rail and air

        • Exposure to air contamination, assurance to good well- being, particularly respiratory infections.

      4. Criticisms of the Compact city In spite of the fact that contentions for the Compact City are expanding yet there are evaluates too. Right off the bat, through activity releases might be diminished by the smaller city; there is the potential for more individuals to encounter remaining discharges in light of higher populace densities. Furthermore, exact confirmation from an collection of studies recommends that while blended utilize advancement which is pivotal part of the minimized city, lessens vehicle trip rates however this can be in generally changing degrees as expanded walk-trips in blended utilize neighborhoods frequently supplement, as opposed to supplant, auto trips. It is likewise uncertain whether mixed utilize improvement has more effect on shopping or non-work trips, contrast with driving.

        A current report via Carruthers and Ulfrasson (2003:506) crosswise over 283 metropolitan regions in the US 'proposes that per capita spending on foundation decays at more noteworthy densities and increments with the spatial degree of urbanized land region.

      5. Possible outcome of compactness Few possible outcomes after the study are as follows:

    • A sensible city development, spatially and subjectively,

    • Preventing the loss of farming area (more genuine in Indian setting, as the greater part of the populace is subject to horticulture.) and open spaces,

    • More selection of open transport and non- mechanized from of modes, which isn't just more ecological neighborly yet additionally more moderate alternative,

    • Better use of existing assets and administration of the city,

    • Benefiting the city economy by utilizing F.A.R. for various land sorts and areas,

      Along these lines, looking above discourse clearly Sprawl isn't a practical option for the future and studies are still in starting stage to state firmly in the help of the Compact City. Regardless, whatever has been done till date toward this way has shown Compactness as a more sensible option? The need is to achieve more genuine examinations to make the thought clearer. In spite of the fact that contentions for the Compact City are expanding yet there are evaluates also.

      Initially, through activity emanations might be lessened by the minimal city, there is the potential for more individuals to encounter remaining outflows in light of higher populace densities. Furthermore, experimental proof from an collection of studies proposes that while blended utilize improvement which is urgent part of the minimal city, diminishes vehicle trip rates however this can be in generally changing degrees as expanded walk-trips in mixed – use neighborhoods regularly supplement, instead of replace, auto trips.

  2. FORMULATION OF RESEARCH

    The aim of the paper is to look for a comprehensive definition of compactness and the factors responsible along with ways to measure. In the process, the objective is:

    • To measure the urban form and study the growth patterns in some selected cities on the basis of their visual/physical analysis.

    • Analyzing the comparative scenarios and factors for the same in the chosen cities and the resultant conditions therein.

      As per the earlier discussion, despite efforts there still exists uncertainty regarding adoption of this model as a sustainable urban form, because besides lack of a precise definition, there are very few methodological scales to put cities on a scale ranging between compact and sprawl, so the study is intending to take the research to the following questions

    • What is a compact city?

    • How can we measure compactness?

    • What are the possible forms of compactness/sprawl? What is the network pattern?

    • What is the degree of scale between compactness and sprawl?

    1. Methodology

      Calculation indexes for compactness and sprawl in general (have taken 20 million plus cities for experimentation to arrange cities on a range of scale between compactness and sprawl).

      Parameters for selection of these cities are because of their factors that make population migrate resulting in overcrowded and eventually resource crunch and abnormal growth.

      Almost 40% of the Indian population reside in these cities.

    2. Limitation

      The limitation of this research includes shortage of time and unavailable data for research.

    3. Scope

      The scope is to study the growth and density patterns in the selected cities and to explore for the presence of compactness and its specific forms.

    4. Outcome

    The research is aiming to bring out a accurate meaning of compactness and sprawl, their different forms, differences between them, indexes to classify cities into different urban forms.

    These results, to my opinion will try to give an answer to the questions related to sustainable urban forms and their uses. A better understanding of the forms will help in acceptance of proper policy and planning tools to deal with many of the problems cities are facing today allowing them to grow in preferred direction.

  3. COMPACTNESS AND SPRAWL

There have been very few efforts to measure compactness and sprawl.

For compactness index, a circle of equal area to that of the contiguous built-up is drawn and the part that comes under is calculated and then proportion of that total area is calculated.

Regarding Sprawl Index, a simple formula of the ratio of the total area (sprawl and contiguous Built-up) to that of the contiguous Built-up.

Road Density is the Total Road Length Divided by Total Area (both sprawl and contiguous Built-up). This is done to see the network pattern in different cities as said in the literature that more the city is compact; more will be the road density.

A. Increase in Urban Sprawl (1992 to 2011)

Figure 1: Mumbai

Figure 2: Delhi

Figure 3: Kolkata

Figure 4: Chennai

Figure 5: Bangalore

Figure 6: Hyderabad

Figure 7: Ahmedabad

Figure 8: Pune

Figure 9: Surat

Figure 10: Jaipur

Figure 11: Agra

Figure 12: Chandigarh

The above figures (Source: H. S. Sudhira (2011), IIHS) show how with time the urban sprawl and city boundaries have increased in various or a specific direcion due to the driving force acting there.

The reasons for expansion vary from city to city but finally, they all suffer due to unplanned growth.

The table (allude table 2) shows the areas and population of the selected 20 cities:

Table 2: City Wise Area and Population

City Name

Contiguous area

(sq. Km)

Sprawl Area (sq. km)

Total Area (sq. km)

Total Population (In Millions)

Mumbai

438

697

1135

18.41

Delhi

940

545

1485

18.98

Kolkata

715

845

1560

4.49

Chennai

483

158

641

7.088

Hyderabad

387

929

1316

6.81

Bangalore

433

428

861

8.42

Ahmedabad

215

217

432

5.57

Pune

225

293

518

3.11

Surat

104

207

311

4.46

Kanpur

140

111

251

2.92

Jaipur

195

171

366

3.07

Lucknow

183

249

432

2.81

Nagpur

144

50

194

2.40

Patna

106

42

148

2.04

Indore

99

194

293

1.99

Bhopal

100.5

113

213.5

1.79

Ludhiana

163

255

418

1.61

Vadodara

90

99

228

4.16

Kochi

143

85

228

0.60

Coimbatore

160

137

297

1.60

The table above depicts that Kolkata, Hyderabad, Mumbai and Bangalore ranks high while Patna and Vadodara are at the bottom in terms of total area. If we look at the contiguous area then Kolkata, Delhi, Chennai, Mumbai, Bangalore and

Hyderabad top the list. Whereas, Vadodara and Indore comes at the bottom.

In terms of sprawl area Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai comes at the top and Patna, Nagpur, Kochi and Vadodara occupy the lower rung.

Figure 13: Areas of Indian Cities

Figure 15: Sprawl Index

As per the above graph, Hyderabad, Surat, Indore, Delhi, Lucknow, Ludhiana and Pune are the most sprawled while Chennai, Nagpur, Patna, Bangalore are at the bottom meaning in a more compact form.

C. Road Pattern

B. Compactness and Sprawl Index

Table 3: Compactness and Sprawl Index

Cities

Ranks

Compactness Index

Cities

Ranks

Sprawl Index

Indore

1

0.84

Hyderabad

1

3.4

Ludhiana

2

0.83

Surat

2

2.99

Ahmadabad

3

0.81

Indore

3

2.95

Vadodara

4

0.75

Delhi

4

2.75

Jaipur

5

0.74

Lucknow

5

2.36

Nagpur

6

0.72

Ludhiana

6

2.32

Hyderabad

7

0.72

Pune

7

2.3

Kanpur

8

0.72

Mumbai

8

2.24

Bangalore

9

0.71

Kolkata

9

2.18

Lucknow

10

0.71

Bhopal

10

2.13

Bhopal

11

0.71

Vadodara

11

2.1

Coimbatore

12

0.68

Ahmadabad

12

2.01

Chennai

13

0.64

Jaipur

13

1.87

Kochi

14

0.63

Coimbatore

14

1.85

Pune

15

0.62

Kanpur

15

1.79

Surat

16

0.59

Kochi

16

1.59

Patna

17

0.57

Bangalore

17

1.49

Kolkata

18

0.48

Patna

18

1.39

Delhi

19

0.48

Nagpur

19

1.34

Mumbai

20

0.46

Chennai

20

1.32

Figure 14: Compactness Index

As can be seen from the graph and table, Indore, Ludhiana, Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Jaipur and Nagpur are the most compact cities while Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Patna and Pune are the most sprawled.

Table 4: Road Pattern

Cities

Road Pattern

Indore

Radial-Block

Ludhiana

Radial Block

Ahmedabad

Ring Radial

Vadodara

Ring-Radial and Grid

Jaipur

Radial-Block

Nagpur

Grid and Circular

Hyderabad

Radial-Grid and Ring Radial

Kanpur

Grid-Iron

Bangalore

Radial-Grid and Ring Radial

Lucknow

Ring Radial and Grid

Bhopal

Linear and Semi Ring Radial

Coimbatore

Radial Block

Chennai

Radial Block

Kochi

Grid

Pune

Grid/Block

Surat

Ring Radial and Grid

Patna

Linear

Kolkata

Grid/Rectangular

Delhi

Ring-Radial

Mumbai

Block/Grid while outwards amorphos

The analysis of street patterns is vital as it is vital for a city's future development patterns and foundation. It influences the life of city and nationals. Individuals tend to take shorter however more secure courses and need to inhabit places with better availability. In the study area the urban areas which are smaller have a tendency to have ring-radial and radial block. These examples keep the downtown area and outskirts in a decent entire while keeping regarding the need of various modes.

  1. Road Density

    Road density is the ratio of the length of the total road network to the land area. The road network includes all roads in the city/state or country: motorways, highways, main or national roads, secondary or regional roads, and other urban and rural roads.

    Figure 16: Road Density

    The graph is more clearly written in the following table where cities are arranged as per their ranks.

    Table 5: Road Density

    Cities

    Ranks

    Road Density

    Kanpur

    1

    1.95

    Delhi

    2

    1.92

    Nagpur

    3

    1.76

    Bangalore

    4

    1.71

    Kochi

    5

    1.71

    Kolkata

    6

    1.71

    Patna

    7

    1.46

    Coimbatore

    8

    1.39

    Vadodara

    9

    1.35

    Jaipur

    10

    1.3

    Ahmedabad

    11

    1.21

    Mumbai

    12

    1.18

    Pune

    13

    1.17

    Bhopal

    14

    1.16

    Chennai

    15

    1.14

    Ludhiana

    16

    1.11

    Indore

    17

    1.11

    Surat

    18

    1.02

    Lucknow

    19

    1.01

    Hyderabad

    20

    0.52

    The table shows that Kanpur, Delhi, Nagpur, Kolkata, Bangalore, Kochi and Patna have more density while Hyderabad, Lucknow and Surat have the least.

    Other important characteristic of Compactness is that it is related with high population density. So, from density point of view the chart below depicts the population of urban agglomeration for the years 2000 and 2011.

    Figure 17: Densities of Cities in 2000 and 2011

    Table 6: Density City wise

    Cities

    Density in 2000 (per sq. km)

    Density in 2011 (per sq. km)

    Mumbai

    10553.65

    12334.80

    Delhi

    10223.21

    12563.20

    Kolkata

    8609.31

    11057.69

    Chennai

    10984.40

    13839.31

    Hyderabad

    4848.02

    6876.90

    Bangalore

    6603.81

    9091.75

    Ahmedabad

    12540.22

    15984.90

    Pune

    5212.36

    10415.74

    Surat

    9937.90

    13906.75

    Kanpur

    10719.07

    12709.16

    Jaipur

    7322.40

    9726.78

    Lucknow

    5197.94

    7467.59

    Nagpur

    10577.32

    13413.65

    Patna

    11466.22

    15202.70

    Indore

    5593.86

    8648.46

    Bhopal

    6711.93

    9934.43

    Ludhiana

    3337.32

    4942.58

    Vadodara

    6910.05

    9280.42

    Kochi

    4993.04

    5491.32

    Coimbatore

    3134.28

    3675.96

    As can be seen in the chart and the table above in 2000 Ahmedabad had the highest density which has maintained the trend in 2011, next comes Patna, Chennai, Kanpur, Mumbai and Nagpur which have maintained higher densities over the years. Coimbatore, Hyderabad, Pune, Lucknow and Indore have shown lower density in both the years.

  2. Energy Consumption

    Though energy consumption widely varies from city to city due to several factors that reflect the character of the city. A city with high rate of industrialization or commercial sector involvement will surely show high usage of energy. Still considering energy consumption as a parameter will show whether the size of the city has an impact on the energy consumption or not.

    Cities

    Population (In Millions)

    Energy Consumption (Kwh)

    Kochi

    0.601

    565

    Coimbatore

    1.6

    2100

    Ludhiana

    1.619

    4728

    Bhopal

    1.798

    5396

    Indore

    1.994

    5292

    Patna

    2.047

    3381

    Nagpur

    2.405

    4820

    Lucknow

    2.816

    9074

    Kanpur

    2.93

    5131

    Jaipur

    3.073

    10683

    Pune

    3.115

    21111

    Vadodara

    4.166

    13627

    Surat

    4.497

    15225

    Calcutta

    4.462

    25588

    Ahmedabad

    5.571

    16097

    Hyderabad

    6.81

    29730

    Chennai

    7.088

    26236

    Bengaluru

    8.0426

    21219

    Mumbai

    18.31

    43039

    Delhi

    18.98

    52343

    Cities

    Population (In Millions)

    Energy Consumption (Kwh)

    Kochi

    0.601

    565

    Coimbatore

    1.6

    2100

    Ludhiana

    1.619

    4728

    Bhopal

    1.798

    5396

    Indore

    1.994

    5292

    Patna

    2.047

    3381

    Nagpur

    2.405

    4820

    Lucknow

    2.816

    9074

    Kanpur

    2.93

    5131

    Jaipur

    3.073

    10683

    Pune

    3.115

    21111

    Vadodara

    4.166

    13627

    Surat

    4.497

    15225

    Calcutta

    4.462

    25588

    Ahmedabad

    5.571

    16097

    Hyderabad

    6.81

    29730

    Chennai

    7.088

    26236

    Bengaluru

    8.0426

    21219

    Mumbai

    18.31

    43039

    Delhi

    18.98

    52343

    Table 7: Energy Consumption

    Figure 18: Energy Consumption per Capita (Watt/Hour)

  3. Waste Generated

    Waste generation is another aspect that reflects the scale of city. Due to large urban sprawl reflecting the urban agglomeration to be so huge, the amount of waste is unimaginably large which cannot be handled and worked on in a sustainable manner.

    This eventually results in land fill sites to grow up exponentially increasing wastage of resources.

    Figure 19: Waste Produced

  4. Aspects of Transportation

    1. Road Densities Road Network Density assesses penetration of transport arteries into the urban built up areas and their accessibility. This indicator also evaluates the road capacity and permeability of urban land. Higher value of road network density indicates sustainable urban form with respect to transportation parameters.

      Figure 20: Road Density

      Above graphs shows the highest road density in Delhi and lowest in Hyderabad. Though this parameter cannot be totally relied on to state the compactness of city as Delhi being the largest agglomeration has to have the intensive road network for connectivity.

    2. Congestion Index Higher congestion reduces mobility, increases travel time due to less travel speed which in turn reduces road efficiency. The congestion index is formulated as follows:

      Congestion index = 1 – (A/M)

      Where M is Desirable Average journey speed on major road networks of a city during peak hour, which is assumed as 30 Km per hour, and A is Average journey speed observed on major corridors of city during peak hours.

      Figure 21: Congestion Index

      The graph here by shows how congested are mega cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Bangalore along with Calcutta. Showing clearly lack of mobility, high travel time and low travel speeds.

    3. Accessibility Accessibility or proximity of a service, place, or intended activity may be described as how efficiently with less time and travel distance a person can reach there. It can be measured as the distance to the nearest place or activity, number of places or activities within a given distance, etc. Often, it is dependent on the accessibility of travel facilities and the land use planning. This is a different approach to study the efficiency of transport network from the conventional one where transportation is perceived only as motor vehicle traffic, per capita vehicle ownership, vehicle- kilometers, average traffic speed, roadway, level of service, etc.

      Two types of Accessibility indices are developed as part of the study by Wilber Smith Associates, they are:

      • Public Transport Accessibility Index

      • Service Accessibility Index.

        1. Public Transport Accessibilty Index It is formulated as the inverse of the average distance (in km) required to be travelled to reach the nearest bus-stop/railway station (suburban/metro) by residents. Higher the index means

          better public transport accessibility. For Nagpur the index value is 1.05. i.e., same as the average value for various Indian cities.

        2. Service Accessibilty Index This index is based on the percentage of work trips completed within 15 min time and 30 min time for each city. Higher index indicates better service accessibility. In Nagpur, almost 35% of total work trips are made within 15 min and almost 78% of work trips are accessible within 30 min time. For Nagpur, index value is 0.78, which is above the average index value of 0.68 reflecting that the city has good service accessibility. This could be a result of moderate trip lengths due to medium city size.

  5. Overall Ranking

    Comparing all the parameters that are listed above overall ranking is stated below:

    Table 8: Overall Ranking

    CITY NAME

    OVERALL RANKING

    Kochi

    1

    Pune

    2

    Bhopal

    3

    Nagpur

    4

    Coimbatore

    5

    Patna

    6

    Vadodara

    7

    Lucknow

    8

    Indore

    9

    Ahmedabad

    10

    Jaipur

    11

    Surat

    12

    Kanpur

    13

    Calcutta

    14

    Chennai

    15

    Hyderabad

    16

    Ludhiana

    17

    Bengaluru

    18

    Mumbai

    19

    Delhi

    20

    Kochi tops the list followed up with Pune and Bhopal. All the metro cities: Chennai, Hyderabad, Bengaluru, Mumbai and Delhi come in bottom. Surprisingly Ludhiana also comes in the bottom of the chart.

    The above chart clearly states the size of city, the amount of population it should have and also it will reflect the energy consumed, waste produced and other infrastructural parameters.

    A city to be sustainable needs to follow up the above parameters to fall under the category of Compact City.

  6. Conclusion

The study done is aimed at defining and measuring a Compact City. Finding, regarding documents is that there have been attempts to define Compactness, still no universal comprehensive definition exists. Reason is that there is no precise characteristic that has been established globally and authors define it as per their own criteria. It starts with the time of medieval city with clearly defined limits to the present notion of high density and mixed used city. Though all agree at one common theme that the concept has to do with the concentration of development, using less space and consequently high density but no fixed amber and framework has been put forward to let the concept fit in.

Regarding measuring party, there have been some attempts to measure compactness and sprawl and present

study has reviewed some methods to see their effectiveness in measuring. The observation is that all attempts have positive and negative points and the methods range from quantitative analysis to visualization, remote sensing and GIS. In applying all methods, the biggest constraint is the data which creates a great hindrance in the study.

The study concluded that the measures of urban form characteristics (related to density distribution and shape performance) discussed in this paper show that Kochi, Pune, Bhopal, Nagpur and Coimbatore have almost all components of a compact city. These cities are presently compact but gradually dispersing.

On the basis of the analysis done in this study, it may be concluded that Kochi, Pune, Bhopal, Nagpur and Coimbatore are presently standing on the threshold between compactness and dispersion. The compact urban form characteristics of the cities, which were present for decades, facilitated shorter travel distances, prevalence of mix land use, higher densities with compact urban fabric in core and intermediate areas, hgh share of non-motorized travel modes, etc. Timely intervention to restructure the urban form may retain its comparatively compact urban form in future.

There is a high possibility that deterrents to achieve sustainable urban development will be at work. Lack of proper regulations and required institutional framework for fulfilling the high demand for compact and high density built areas can lead to overcrowding and environmental degradation. In addition, the city will suffer from pollution, noise, lack of privacy, isolation, breakdown of identity, etc. The component of informal development in the cities of developing country is high, which is a deterrent to the success of compact city policies. High densities and more built area may accentuate heat island effect and vulnerability to disasters.

The compact city model can be recommended as the appropriate model to achieve sustainable urban development in context of above listed cities, but with a word of caution. This paper suggests that such analysis can be very informative and useful for understanding the existing spatial structure and evolution of a city over time and accordingly intervention in the process of planning can be made.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First of all, I am grateful to The Almighty God for establishing me to complete this research on Compact City Development A Comparative Assessment. I would like to express gratefulness to all the respected faculty members of SPA-New Delhi for their endless efforts in guiding me towards achieving my goal and for the consistent encouragement to maintain my progress on track. Mere acknowledgment may not redeem the debt I owe to my parents for their direct/indirect support during the entire course of this paper. I am also thankful to my friends who helped me a lot in the completion of this paper.

REFERENCES

  1. Jenks, M.; Williams, K.; Burton, E. The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? Chapman and Hall: London, UK, 1996.

  2. Johnson, A. Monitoring Settlement Sustainability-A Review of Practice. In Proceedings of the Conference on Politics of Planning, New Zealand Planning Institute Conference, Palmerston North, New Zealand, 2730 March 2007.

  3. Williams, K.; Burton, E.; Jenks, M. Achieving Sustainable Urban Form; E & FN Spon: London, UK, 2000.

  4. Barrow, C.J. Sustainable Development: Concept, Value and Practice. Third World Plan. Rev. 1995, 17, 369386.

  5. Jabareen, Y.R. Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models and Concepts. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2006, 26, 3852.

  6. Frey, H. Designing the City: Towards A More Sustainable Urban Form; Spon Press: London, UK and New York, NY, USA, 1999.

  7. United Nations Population Fund. State of World Population; UNFPA: New York, NY, USA, 2007.

  8. Suzuki, H.; Dastur, A.; Moffat, S.; Yabuki, N.; Maruyama, H. Ecological Cities as Economic Cities. In Eco2 Cities: Ecological Cities As Economic Cities; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; pp. 1328.

  9. Dermographia World Urban Areas (Built-up Urban Areas or World Agglomerations) 10th Annual Edition: March 2014. Available online: http://demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2014).

  10. Booz & Co, CISCO. Intelligent Urbanization-Roadmap for India; Confederation of Indian Industries: New Delhi, India, 2010.

  11. Burgess, R. The Compact City Debate: A Global Perspective. In Compact Cities: Sustainable Urban Forms for Developing Countries; Burgess, R., Jenks, M., Eds.; Spon Press: London, UK, 2000; pp. 9 24.

  12. Ewing, R.H. Characteristics, Causes, and Effects of Sprawl: A Literature Review. In Urban Ecology; Marzluff, J.M., Shulenberger, E., Endlicher, W., Alberti, M., Bradley, G., Ryan, C., Simon, U., ZumBrunnen, C., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 519 535.

  13. Marcotullio, P.J. The Compact City, Environmental Transition Theory and Asia-Pacific Urban Sustainable Development. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on New Approaches to Land Management for Sustainable Urban Regions, Department of Urban Engineering, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, 2931 October 2001.

  14. Bertaud, A. Metropolis: A Measure of the Spatial Organization of 7 Large Cities. Available online: http://alain-

    bertaud.com/images/AB_Metropolis_Spatial_Organization.pdf. (accessed on 9 June 2013).

  15. Bertaud, A. The Spatial Structure of Cities: International Examples of The Interaction of Government, Topography and Markets. Available online: http://alain-bertaud.com/AB_Files/ AB_Transcript_3_Spatial_organization.pdf (accessed on 9 June 2013).

  16. Knaap, G.J.; Song, Y.; Ewing, R.; Clifton, K. Seeing The Elephant: Multi-Disciplinary Measures of Urban Sprawl. Available online: http://smartgrowth.umd.edu/assets/documents/research/ knaapsongewingetal_2005.pdf (accessed on 7 July 2013).

  17. Bertaud, A.; Malpezzi, S. The Spatial Distribution of Population in 48 World Cities: Implications for Economies in Transition. alain- bertaud.com. 2003. Available online: http://alainbertaud.com/ wp- content/uploads/2013/06/Spatia_-Distribution_of_Pop_-50_-Cities.pdf (accessed on 7 July 2013).

  18. Glaster, G.; Hanson, R.; Ratcliffe, M.R.; Wolman, H.; Coleman, S.; Freihage, J. Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and measuring an elusive. Hous. Policy Debate 2001, 12, 681717.

  19. Ewing, R.; Pendall, R.; Chen, D. Smart Growth America. Available online: http://www.

    smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/MeasuringSprawl.pdf (accessed on 16 September 2013).

  20. Song, Y.; Knaap, G. Measuring Urban Sprawl: Is Portland Winning the War on Sprawl? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2004, 70, 210225.

  21. Krizek, K.J. Operationalizing Neighborhood Accessibility for Land Use-Travel Behavior Research and Regional Modeling. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2003, 22, 270287.

  22. Hess, P.M.; Moudon, A.V.; Snyder, M.C.; Stanilov, K. Site Design and Pedestrian Travel. Transp. Res. Record 1999, 1674, 919.

  23. Burton, E. Potential of the Compact City for Promoting Social Equity. In Achieving Sustainable Urban Form; Williams, K., Jenks, M., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2000; pp. 1929.

  24. H. S. Sudhira (2011). Urban land Cover and Land Cover Change Dataset of India Cities. IIHS Working Paper, Mimeo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *