AREA

DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING STUDIO
WARD 29, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. STUDY AREA
2.1. City Appraisal
2.2. Site Area-Ward Appraisal
3. VISION & OBJECTIVE
4. OVERVIEW OF WORKFLOW
4.1. FRAMEWORK- METHODOLOGY
4.2. Problem Prioritization
4.3. SURVEY DATA collection & METHOD
4.4. LIMITATIONS
5. ANALYSIS
5.1. Demographic- Population Projection
5.2. Raster Analysis
5.2.1. Watershed
5.2.2. LULC Image Processing & Classification Outputs
5.2.3. LULC Classification- Change Detection
5.2.4. LULC Classification- Accuracy Assessment
5.2.5. Land Surface Temperature
5.2.6. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
5.3. Infrastructure Analysis
5.3.1. Water Supply Infrastructure
5.3.2. Sewerage Infrastructure
5.3.3. Solid waste management
5.3.4. Electricity
5.3.5. Stormwater
5.3.6. Social Infrastructure
5.3.7. Green and Open spaces
5.3.8. Transportation
5.3.9. Housing
5.4. SWOT analysis
6. PROPOSALS-RECOMMENDATIONS

1
 6.1. Urban Sprawl Modelling- LULC Prediction 2031
6.2. TRANSPORTATION
6.2.1. Roads connectivity
6.2.2. Junction Design
6.3. INFRASTRUCTURE
6.3.1. Water Supply & Sewerage Network
6.3.1.1. Scenario 1: Retaining Existing network (2021)
6.3.1.2. Scenario 2: Expansion of Network (2031)
6.3.2. Solid Waste Management
6.3.2.1. Scenario 1: Retaining Existing Road network
6.3.2.2. Scenario 2: Based on the new Road network
6.4. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (intro)
6.4.1. Development Control Regulations
6.4.2. Plot Amalgamation
6.4.3. Passive Design- Green Building
6.4.4. Green and Open spaces
6.5. WETLANDS & LAKES CONSERVATION
6.5.1. Literature Study of wetlands Conservation
6.5.2. Action Plan for wetlands and lakes conservation
6.5.3. Buffer and Community Participation in conserving
6.5.4. Fencing & Cost estimation
6.5.5. Waterfront Development
6.5.6. Housing Rehabilitation
6.6. Proposed Land use
7. PHASING & COST ESTIMATION
8. SUMMARY
9. REFERENCES

2
3. VISION & OBJECTIVE
VISION STATEMENT-
“As a gateway to Amaravati, the ward is envisioned to undergo inclusive development by
reinstating the natural balance between rapid growth & environment through enhancement
of green & blue amenities, improvement in physical infrastructure incorporating a mix of
uses in support of transit-oriented development.”
The following are the guiding principles to the area development plan:
1. Drafting Micro-Level Ward Area Development Plan- Transition of the site area
in the urban periphery- into a compact, & vibrant region that responds to market
conditions and the timing of TOD concept implementation. Ensuring an
interesting environment for creating transit-supportive neighbourhoods.
2. Pursue to opt for Transit-Oriented Development along a major corridor- The
proposal includes regulating areas under TOD for efficient functioning and
creates opportunities by improving the BRTS section for various users and by
imposing proper building regulations and bye-laws.
3. Improve the public realm & focus on enhanced placemaking- Foster a
distinct sense of place & create diverse community open spaces to support
human connection and well being
4. Pursue and develop local roads to improve connectivity about the ward- in-
depth understanding of the urban sprawl growth and contextually sensitive road
layout with appropriate transitions creating a human-scaled environment.
5. Conceptualization & design of Basic infrastructure facilities- Develop
Existing Infrastructure to cater to forecasted population upgraded utility networks-
solid waste management, water supply and sewerage discharge.
6. Pursue environmentally responsive conservatory plan- Focus on ensuring
the conservation of natural ecosystems that are vulnerable to rapid urbanization
such as wetlands and lakes.
Focusing on large greenfield developments in peri-urban areas to respond to the
demand of expansion in the rapidly growing urban centres, & development mechanisms
to explore the ideas of future living. Integrate multidisciplinary aspects to result in a
high-quality environment. Develop & evolve new approaches for TOD and infrastructural
development models in line with regional regulations for a more equitable distribution of
costs and benefits.

3
OBJECTIVES: The design of the ADP will involve preparing a FIVE-dimensional
plan
1. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
2. INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS
3. ROAD NETWORK & TRANSPORT JUNCTION DESIGN
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
5. GREEN & OPEN SPACES
KEY MOVES INCLUDE
● The greatest density of development is concentrated around transit corridors
creating hubs of activity
● Developing an understanding of the degree of urban sprawl through spatial
analysis tools.
● Environmentally sensitive areas to be provisionally protected from
encroachments
● Preliminary analysis of the existing utility network in order to cater to the
forecasted needs

5. ANALYSIS
5.1. DEMOGRAPHIC- POPULATION PROJECTION

5.2. RASTER ANALYSIS

5.2.1 WATERSHED

4
5.2.2 LULC Image Processing & Classification Outputs
a) METHODOLOGY

b) FALSE-COLOUR COMPOSITES
False-colour composite- year 2011
● The bright red colour indicates healthy vegetation.
● Freshwater Lake-
ground spaces- dark green
● Cyan blue represents the built-up area in the site
False-colour composite- year 2015
● There is substantial growth with respect to built-up
● Due to an increase in peri-urban expansion and
● Increased developmental projects.
● Agricultural land converted- barren/uncultivable land.

False-colour composite- year 2021

● Over 2
on hydrology
● The growth observed at a high density about the
● transit corridor and expected to grow outwards

5
5.2.3 LULC Classification- Change Detection
a) Land use Land Cover- 2011

Relatively higher green cover- predominantly sparse vegetation Peri-Urban region initial
developmental stage Minimal Developed High density- built-up cover
b) Land use Land Cover- 2015

Increased proportion of Barren Land and high-

density development. Significant reduction in
vegetation cover and loss of biodiversity-
Builtup encroachments
c) Landuse Land Cover- 2021

6
 Fast-paced development increased rate of built-up expansion with medium
density development- conversion of agricultural land & loss of dense
vegetation cover.
d) The overall change in the land use landcover
(i) Between years 2011-2015

(ii) Between years 2015-2021

Observation—-

5.3. INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS

5.3.1 WATER SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE

7
(i) The entire city population is being supplied with potable water. But the distribution
network is available for only 61 % of the ward area. The sources of water supply are
majorly through the municipal water connection (91.1%) alongside handpump(5.4%) and

Fig. Existing water supply network Fig. Location of water treatment plant
distribution layout (2021)
others also include tankers (3.6%). The
distribution network is not covered in the LIG areas and has poor network connectivity
in the low-lying areas.
The overall framework to assess and better understand the site area water supply
infrastructure was first carried out through compiling the secondary data- census data &
the information collected via primary survey online questionnaire. After which, the
municipal water supply network system was digitized for the ward alongside validated
with the ward secretariate and local pump operator units. Through which, it had enabled
the further prioritization of infrastructural provisions & bridging the gaps through
estimating the forecasted demand.
(ii) Upon comparing the service level benchmarks the following are the results with
respect to the current status of water supply infrastructure:-
SLB Benchmark Ward 29
Coverage of water supply connections 100% 67%
Per capita supply of water 135 lpcd 96 lpcd
The extent of metering of water connections 100% 13%
Continuity of water supply 24 3

8
Table 1: Service Level Benchmarking comparison with ward 29-site area
(iii) The water supply flow diagram and water sources are as follows-
a) Water sources: Guntur Channel Drawal at Takkellapadu-raw water pump house
Distance 4 km from the city; Max drawal capacity- 45.50 MLD
b) Water Treatment Plant: Treatment Treatment plant location-Takkellapadu
Capacity-45.50 MLD & Condition- Good
c) Pumping Station: Pumping Station Location- Saradha Colony; Pumping system
efficiency- overall 65% & Condition- Good
d) Overhead Tank: Total water overhead tanks connected- 3 Nos- Twin Tanks
Locations- Sowbhagaya Nagar, Kavitha Nagar & Reddy Palem lake

Fig. Secondary data- Urban Local Body

(iv) WATER DEMAND MODELLING- FRAMEWORK

9
Firstly, the workflow involves digitizing the water supply network distribution system with
respect to the junction nodes (Head) and the subsequent links. The data collected via
secondary sources include the diameter of the pipelines within the water supply network
which is then spatially linked to represent the final network layout alongside the junction
nodes containing the elevation data obtained through the dem raster sourced from the
USGS repository. Then the calculator of the current water demand (with 96 lpcd) and
comparison with respect to CPHEEO standards (135 lpcd) was carried out to further
understand the gap in water demand. Besides, the forecasted demand was also
estimated as follows:-
a) DEMAND FROM EXISTING SUPPLY OF WATER (2021)

Table- Water demand calculation with respect to land use ( existing GMC water supply)

Total Water Demand= Domestic + Comm.+ Institutional + Industrial

Total Water Demand= 2572800+1660+242 Lpcd

10
 (Litres per Capita/Day) = 25,74,702 Lpcd= 2.57 MLD
b) DEMAND FROM SUPPLY OF WATER AS PER CPHEEO (2021)

Table- Water demand calculation with respect to land use ( Recommended water supply as per CPHEEO)

Total Water Demand= Domestic + Comm.+ Institutional + Industrial

Total Water Demand= 3618000+2490+242 Lpcd
(Litres per Capita/Day) = 36,20,732 Lpcd= 3.62 MLD
c) EXISTING WATER SUPPLY GAP CALCULATION
GAP Calculation= Demand of water (CPHEEO) - Supply of water
GAP Calculation= 36,20,732 Lpcd - 25,74,702 Lpcd
= 10,46,030 Lpcd = 1.046030 MLD
d) ESTIMATING FORCASTED WATER DEMAND FOR 2031
Domestic per capita demand (in lpcd) as per standards CPHEEO= 135lpcd
Population (2031)= 71,385
Water demand Calculation= Per capita supply x Population
Water demand (Lpcd)= 96,36.975 Lpcd
Water demand (MLD)= 9.36 MLD

WATER PEAK DEMAND MODELLING-

Water demand-driven modelling was done by employing the QWATER- EPANET
software plugin in QGIS which require input data with respect to the junction nodes (with
elevation) and water supply pipeline links that contain data with respect to pipeline
length & diameter. Alongside the user would have to manually enter preliminary data
such as the population, Water supply in LPCD, peak hourly flow factor (1.5), Peak daily
flow factor(1.8) & minimum diameter. Then the model is run to fill the demand with
respect to the connective nodes and respective links. Through the generated output it
would be used to determine areas with substandard demand flow at the nodes which
can then be replaced with an improved systematic water supply network layout.

11
Fig. Existing Junction Demand Flow at 96 lpcd water supply Fig. Junction Demand Flow at 135 lpcd water supply(CPHEEO)
It is rather evident from the junction demand modelling that there are specific areas
especially low lying wherein there is increased length of the pipes (when compared to
the compact areas by the core area near Amaravati highway) with inadequate provision
of junction/pumping utilities has caused a relative decrease in demand lower than
recommended demand flow rate (which is below 0.05 m3/sec). Thus the areas can be
similarly traced and improved provision of the pipeline can be the suggestive solution to
improve the overall supply of water in the site area.

6. Proposals & Recommendations

6.1. URBAN SPRAWL MODELLING- LULC PREDICTION 2031

INPUT RASTER LAYERS INCLUDE-

12
 Fig. Input Layer- Distance from CBD Fig. Input Layer- Roads Proximity

Fig. Input Layer- Restricted Areas Fig. Input Layer- Slope

Transition Potential- ANN-Neural Network Learning Curve

13
 While there are numerous
ways for creating a
transitional potential map,
this module includes
computational intelligence
aspects such as artificial
neural networks (ANN).
LULC data is used as an
input in every approach for

Fig. Neural Network Learning curve with Kappa value depicting accuracy
calibrating and modelling
LULC change. The Neural
Network Learning curve graph depicts the overall accuracy in calibrating or estimating
the transition potential to predict the growth for the given set of years (ie, 2031). The
red portion depicts the ability for the trained model to predict based on the input layers
and the set of LULC provided which is in green. The more the red portion overlaps with
the green dataset the more accurate results can be obtained.

Predicted LULC 2031 Results-

Application of urban sprawl modelling

include-Spatial understanding of urban
growth with the ward rapidly urbanizing-
the analysis shows increased high intensity
built up in the year 2031. This model
depicts the “Business as usual” scenario
wherein no steps were taken to conserve
high-density vegetation near wetlands.
Through the analysis one of the input
factors ie roads is also utilized as baseline
criteria to further propose a highly
Fig. LULC Predicted year 2031 connective and complete site coverage
road network pattern.
LIMITATIONS INCLUDE-
It restricts to only the set of parameters
defined that is the input layers- more input

14
 layer -higher accuracy. The growth is
Table. LULC Classification area distribution(%)
calibrated off of one set of decadal growth
rates/ 2 sets of temporal LULC- 2011 to 2021. Most influential factor- Landuse pattern
from decadal growth as opposed to the input parameters.

6.3. INFRASTRUCTURE PROPOSALS

6.3.1 WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE NETWORK

6.3.1.1. Scenario 1: Retaining Existing network (2021)
a) Water supply network (Existing Network 2021)
The newly proposed
pipelines replace the
older lines with wider
diameter pipelines
between 225 to 250 mm.
The replacement of
pipelines would improve
the overall equitable
water distribution and
maintain a residential
average demand
between 0.2 to 0.3
Fig. Water supply network (Existing Network 2021) m3/sec. Through this
network (especially in the
low lying areas- as the model is peak flow demand- slope based driven model
at junctions) would essentially ensure the network is capable of capacitating
increased demand flows from 96 lpcd to 135 Lpcd.

i) cost estimation for provision of metered connection

15
 Table- Provision of Water meter costing

ii) cost estimation for provision of pipeline

Table- Provision of water supply pipeline

ii) cost estimation for provision of pipeline

Total cost incurred= Water meter + Pipeline provision
Total cost incurred= 2,38,52,242.52 Rs

b) Sewerage network (Existing Network 2021)

16
6.3.1.1. Scenario 2: Expansion of Network (2031)
a) Water supply network (Expansion of Network 2031)
The provision of the new layout
ensures full coverage i.e, 100%
coverage of the water supply
network in the ward area
following the new local roads
pattern. The system maintains
the ideal minimum- 0.05 m3/sec
and maximum demand flow- 0.4
m3/sec; This is achieved through
assigning appropriate diameter
in the system & going by the
diameter range from the existing
system, we are able to maintain
continuity and practicality in
terms of layout project implementation. The baseline scenario goes by wherever
there is an increased radius of pipe it is ensured to provide junction to thereby
decrease the requirement of the length of pipelines and thereby improving the
demand flow. The proposed water distribution system maintains demand upto 0.40
m/sec (76.4 PSI). Water pressure throughout the distribution system should be no
less than- 0.03 m/sec (17 PSI). Ideally, minimum demand maintained- 0.05 m/sec
(20PSI); Residential areas distribution lines maintains demand- 0.28 to 0.33 m/sec
(normal pressure between 50 & 60 PSI) at junctions.
COST ESTIMATION

Table- Cost estimation for provision of pipeline Diameter- Table- Cost estimation for provision of pipeline Diameter-
225 to 250 mm 100 to 150 mm

b) Sewerage network (Expansion of Network 2031)

Table- Cost estimation- Total Cost incurred

17
6.4.TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

<TOD JUSTIFICATION, RATIONALE, INTRO, TOD ZONE DELINEATION & FINAL TOD
ZONE PLAN/MAP>
6.4.1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL REGULATIONS
(I) ZONE 1
(a) PERMISSIBLE FSI
MIXED-USE ZONE 1
PERMISSIBLE BASE FSI 2.5
MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE FSI 4
NO FRONT SETBACKS REAR SETBACK-3
MANDATORY ALONG BRTS CORRIDOR
Non permissible uses- Industrial 2,3 & 4 and Agriculture- 1,2,3 &4
(20% rebate FSI- Purchasable FSI) for commercial development and redevelopment within 2 years along
with TOD to intensity mixed-use development

(b) BUILDING HEIGHTS REGULATION

MIXED-USE ZONE 1
BASE FSI- 2.5 building ht MAX FSI- 4 Building ht
G+6 21m G+ 9 30m
Stilt+7 24m Stilt +10 33m

Fig. DCR Mixed-use TOD Zone 1 Fig. Zone 1 Specific Plot Development

(II) ZONE 2
(a) PERMISSIBLE FSI

18
 MIXED-USE ZONE 2
PERMISSIBLE BASE FSI 1.8
MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE FSI 2.2
FRONT SETBACKS 3 REAR SETBACK 3
MANDATORY ALONG BRTS CORRIDOR
Non permissible uses- Industrial 2,3 & 4 and Agriculture- 1,2,3 &4
(20% rebate FSI- Purchasable FSI) for commercial development and redevelopment within 2 years along
TOD to intensity mixed-use development

(b) BUILDING HEIGHTS REGULATION

MIXED-USE ZONE 2
BASE FSI- 1.8 building ht MAX FSI- 2.2 building ht
G+4 15m G+7 24m
Stilt+5 18m Stilt+8 27m

Fig. DCR Mixed-use

TOD Zone 2 Fig. Zone 2 Specific Plot Development

(III) PURCHASEABLE FSI

For every 1 sq.m of additional floor area constructed availing Premium FSI
MIXED-USE ZONE 1
PERMISSIBLE BASE FSI EXCESS FSI AREA
BASE FSI-2.5 0.4 sq.m.
MAX FSI- 4 0.25 sq.m
MIXED-USE ZONE 2
PERMISSIBLE BASE FSI EXCESS FSI AREA

19
BASE FSI-1.8 0.55 sq.m.
MAX FSI- 2.2 0.45 sq.m
Premium FSI Charges = (Additional Floor Area/Allowable FSI as per DR) x Guide Line
Value
The following is the example scenario wherein the Premium FSI regulations would play
a major role in dictating the additional charges that come with increasing the floor
height-

6.4.2 PLOT AMALGAMATION

6.4.3 PASSIVE DESIGN- GREEN BUILDING

20
6.4.4 GREEN AND OPEN SPACES
(a) Norms for Organised Green for Plain Areas as per URDPFI guidelines
TYPE OF ORGANIZED GREEN
SPACES Population served per unit Area Requirement (Ha)
Housing Area Park 5000 0.5
Neighbourhood Park 15000 1
Community Park 1 lakh 5
District Park 5 lakh 25
Sub-city Park 10 lakh 100

(b) EXISTING CONDITION- GAP ESTIMATION

Category AREA (ha) Population served per unit
Housing Area Park 0.5 5000
EXISTING SUPPLY Total Parks Existing 2 nos
Housing Area Park-1 0.75 7500
Housing Area Park-2 0.71 7100
Total 1.46 ha 14600
GAP ESTIMATION Existing Population 26800
Total Population served 14600
GAP UNDERSERVED 12200

(c) CRITERION BASED- CONCEPTUAL PLANNING

● Ward with peri-urban character & moderate density- Open spaces
prioritization about the Compact TOD corridor/zones.
● Optimum usage of available open areas- conserve into parks before
complete urbanized phase
● Neighbourhood level park provision at the vicinity of LIG and
underdeveloped low lying areas
● Combat Urban Heat waves and improve the regional climatic conditions
(especially near compact density TOD Zones)

21
Fig. EXISTING & PROPOSED ORGANISED URBAN GREEN SPACES

(d) ORGANISED URBAN GREEN- THE YEAR 2031

(i) Hierarchy of Park considered with respect to Site development scale
PROPOSED Location Category
6 Housing area park (excluding 2
TOD Zones existing)
1 Neighbourhood park
LIG area 1 Neighbourhood park
EXISTING SITE AREA 2 Housing area park
(ii) Proposed Parks- Population Served per unit Capita
Area Requirement
Category Population served per unit (Ha)
6 Housing area park (excluding 2 existing) 30,000 3
1 Neighbourhood park 15,000 1
1 Neighbourhood park 15,000 1
2 Housing area park (existing) 14,600 -
TOTAL 74,600 5

22
Fig. Proposed Housing Area Parks Fig. Proposed Neighbourhood Parks

23
RFP & Project Timelines

The Request for Proposal timeline is as follows:

Request for Proposal Issuance 06/07/20XX

24
 Selection of Top Bidders / 06/08/20XX
Notification to Unsuccessful Bidders

Start of Negotiation 06/09/20XX

Contract Award / 06/10/20XX

Notification to Unsuccessful Bidders

The need-date for project completion is [DATE]. Bidders may propose a date earlier or
later, and will be evaluated accordingly.

Budget

[COMPANY NAME]’s budget for the project is [DOLLAR AMOUNT].

Evaluation Factors

[COMPANY NAME] will rate proposals based on the following factors, with cost being
the most important factor:

1. Responsiveness to the requirements set forth in this Request for Proposal

2. Relevant past performance/experience
3. Samples of work
4. Cost, including an assessment of total cost of ownership.
5. Technical expertise/experience of bidder and bidder’s staff

25
[COMPANY NAME] reserves the right to award to the bidder that presents the best
value to [COMPANY NAME] as determined solely by [COMPANY NAME] in its absolute
discretion.

26