IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Origin of Voids at the SiO2/SiO2 and
Review of open space rules and regulations and SiCN/SiCN Bonding Interface Using
Positron Annihilation Spectroscopy and
identification of specificities for plot-level open Electron Spin Resonance
F. Nagano, F. Inoue, A. Phommahaxay et
al.
spaces to facilitate sustainable development: An
- Typologies of Open Space in Quezon
Indian case City’s Lifestyle-Tourism District
J M Dela Cruz and N Navarra

- Afforestation affects rain-on-snow

To cite this article: Sameer Gujar et al 2022 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1084 012073 climatology over Norway
P A Mooney and H Lee

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 106.51.171.249 on 05/05/2023 at 12:15

ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

Review of open space rules and regulations and identification

of specificities for plot-level open spaces to facilitate
sustainable development: An Indian case
Sameer Gujar1, Amit Deshmukh2 and Reshu Gupta,3
1
Research Scholar, Department of Architecture and Planning, Visvesvaraya National Institute
of Technology, South Ambazari Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
2
Department of Architecture and Planning, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology,
South Ambazari Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
3
School of Architecture, CHRIST (Deemed to be) University, Kengeri campus, Kanmanike,
Kumbalgodu, Mysore Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Email- sameergujar.vnit@gmail.com

Abstract
Rapid urbanization and an increase in the alteration of natural resources have led to climate
crises, driving the need to promote sustainable development. Urban open space management
plays a vital role in such scenarios. Research on urban open spaces has been mainly conducted
at regional, municipal, and neighborhood scales. Rarely has the focus been on the plot-level
potentials and management of open spaces. Therefore, the study looks into the Indian
development control rules and regulations and identifies that although these stipulate the
percentage of open space for development on each plot, specificities for open spaces are unclear.
Further, the study analyses quantitative and qualitative aspects of open spaces for selected group
housing schemes in Pune city. The inquiry shows that per capita open space in Pune is
comparatively lower than national standards. The quantitative aspects include FSI, building
ground coverage, built-up area, number of floors, and number of dwelling units, and each relates
to open spaces in one way or another. The qualitative interpretations disclose that a plot-level
open space can significantly impact the regional-level open space network. Hence, the research
advocates a bottom-up approach wherein plot-level open space can become the focus in
formulating new norms and policies for sustainable development.

1. Introduction
The world faces a real challenge of climatic crises. Developing green has become the central theme for
designing the built environment. Nature-based systems are new emerging concepts for providing
sustainable smart cities for the future. In balancing the built and the other, it has been well established
that careful planning of a network of urban open spaces can strategically handle the urban ecology [1–
4].
World Health Organization (WHO) states urban green space as ‘all urban land covered by vegetation
of any kind,’ which may be a subset of open spaces. State University of New York (2010) has defined
green space as any piece of land covered with vegetation. It refers to parks, golf courses, sports fields,
and other open lands within the built-up area, which may or may not be publicly accessible. The
Planning Institute of Australia (2009) has described open spaces as ‘land reserved for formal or informal
sports, recreation, preservation of natural environments, providing green space and managing urban
stormwater.’ Researchers and authorities interchangeably use urban open spaces, urban landscape, urban
green, nature space, urban forest, amenity space, and the urban wilderness, encompassing various
aspects of open spaces.
The landscape of open spaces can range from playing fields to highly maintained environments
to relatively natural landscapes. These include green belts around the city region, green corridors,
boulevards, gardens, paths, spaces between buildings, open space reservations, district parks or local
parks, community spaces, cemeteries, recreational areas, amenity spaces, farmer’s markets, backyards,
and courtyards. It also contains pedestrian malls, plazas, schoolyards, streets, transit malls, town trails,
vacant plots, and waterfronts. Open spaces also comprise agricultural lands, forests, undeveloped

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

shorelines, scenic lands, public parks and preserves, water bodies, wetlands, streams, and floodplains
[5]. It is essential to carefully classify open spaces, their functions, characteristics, and cultural
understandings. Therefore, this study follows Indian rules and regulations, which define open spaces as
open-to-sky spaces, excluding roads, used by the residents for recreation.

1.1. Background
During the colonization period, while developed nations explored new planning concepts of efficient
land management and provided a better standard of living, providing ample open spaces, cities in
developing nations faced densification with deteriorated living standards [6–8]. By the late 19th century,
cities in developing countries independently framed a formal discipline for development. The focus on
open spaces mostly involved planning large parks and public open spaces (POS) at the city level. Plot
sizes were usually smaller during the initial planning stages, having controlled density. Open spaces at
the plot level were provided only for light and ventilation. Besides, the development rules focused on
the health aspects and ignored the recreational needs.
Over time, new concepts such as plot amalgamation and land pooling emerged, leading to larger plot
sizes. New rules drafted for amalgamated plots addressed open space management, considering both
facets of light, ventilation, and recreation [9,10]. With the increasing urbanization, planning notions like
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) or Floor Space Index (FSI) cater to the increased urban population. At present,
these allow high population densities on individual plots. These densities have directly manifested into
vertical growth in the form of multistoried apartments. With ever-increasing densities and the culture of
vertical towers in a plot, assessment for per capita open space has become an urgent need.
Internationally, the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) have set the limits as 30 sq.
m. and 26 sq. m. of per capita green spaces, respectively. On the other hand, the Leadership in Energy
and Environment Design Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) recommends that the green area per
capita be more than 20 sq. m. Also, LEED-ND recommends maintaining a minimum of 1.25 ha of open
space per 1000 residents, i.e., around 12.5 sq. m. per person, and specifies that access to open space is
within 250 m of residential areas in the form of smaller parks. Nevertheless, green space includes all
vegetation of all land types, including recreational POS, vacant lands, forests, and protected areas.
Though the lack of norms internationally, few countries have set standards for their respective cities
(Table 1).
Table 1. Standards for POS sizes in cities of Developed Countries [11].
Cities POS Size Target Population m2/person
1. Greater London 4 hectares 1000 residents 40
2. Edinburgh 2.9 hectares 1000 residents 29
3. Cambridge 4.6 hectares 1000 residents 46
4. Washington 3.8 hectares 1000 residents 38
5. Minneapolis 2 hectares 1000 residents 20
6. Los Angeles 4.85 hectares 1000 residents 48.5
7. Kansas City 3.64 hectares 1000 residents 36.4
8. Bristol 1.0 hectares 1000 residents 10
Table 1 shows that the POS size for various cities is different. However, researchers have argued that
such cities have failed to achieve the set standards. Few studies point out that the measures fail to give
quality of open spaces [12,13]. Research studies have shown that the accessibility standards to such
public open spaces are inadequate and are needed to be scientifically verified. Also, these do not consider
the people’s changing demographic patterns, social behaviors, and physical capabilities [14,15]. Thus,
this indicates the need to address the specificities of per capita open space at the plot level.

2
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

1.2. The Indian Scenario

As per the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2018 report, it is projected that India will
have added 416 million urban dwellers by 2050 [16]. Therefore, for such a large number of city dwellers,
a sustainable urban environment shall become very important in the daily life of the people. One of the
critical aspects is the open spaces. Such spaces impact a place’s social, economic, and environmental
settings. Play areas, active and passive recreational areas, community cultural parks, and centers provide
social opportunities and health benefits. These also influence property values, probable tourism, and
employment prospects and bring extra-economic profits. Nature reserves and botanical gardens are open
spaces providing educational openings and ameliorating urban environments. In addition, open spaces
are habitats for wildlife too.
The growing urbanization has led to a significant decrease in per capita green space in many Indian
cities [17]. The Indian Government has introduced acts, policies, and programs, such as the Jawaharlal
Nehru National Urban and Rural Mission (JnNURM) in 2005 and the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation
and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) in 2015, for the development of infrastructure, green spaces, and
parks in the cities. Furthermore, in 2015 the Government of India implemented the Smart Cities Mission
in the selected cities with targeted sustainability goals, including preserving and developing city-level
open spaces [18]. However, plot-level open spaces catering to the everyday life of people for respective
densities are yet to be recognized. High-density areas do not negate the possibilities of reduced POS,
but studies show that users in such dense areas frequently use such spaces [19,20]. Furthermore, a steady
increase in mass housing development has led to an apartment-based housing culture. This increase has
reduced private recreational spaces and increased the reliability on POS for recreation. Apart from these,
today’s cities have diverse functional needs from open spaces [21,22]. Therefore, a “one size fit all”
would be prone to failure in such high-density areas. Thus, there is a need to review the current status
of the Indian acts and rules concerning per capita open space for prospects in plot-level management.

2. Methodology
The study intends to understand the open space dynamics at the plot level. It conducts a detailed
literature review of planning implementation tools, including the City Development Plan (CDP), which
incorporates the Master Plan and the Development Control Rules (DCR). Firstly, this study involves a
detailed study of the tiered legislative framework, its process, and its hierarchy. Later, the study reviews
how each guideline addresses open spaces concerning their definitions, types, and respective norms.
Based on this initial study, recreational or layout open spaces are studied further. Though local
authorities follow a typical guideline for formulating the DCR, few of them have city-specific
modifications. Cities that come under this list include state capitals such as Tawang, Bhopal,
Chandigarh, Patna, Lucknow, Bangalore, Mumbai, Chennai, Agartala, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and
Bhubaneshwar. Other cities on the list are Thiruvananthapuram, Nashik, Pune, Shimla, and Nagpur;
Union territories such as New Delhi, Pondicherry, Daman, Diu, and Nagar haveli are also on the list.
The researcher conducted a detailed analysis of the DCRs of these Indian cities and union territories for
recreational open spaces.
Moreover, there is a need to understand the impact of the rules and regulations on the ground to
identify specificities related to plot-level open spaces. Therefore, the study undertook a quantitative and
qualitative assessment of open spaces at plot level for seven group housing schemes in Pune city,
developed with the latest rules and regulations. The Indian Census 2011 has stated an average family
size of 4.3 members irrespective of the size of their dwelling unit. Hence, the population density on each
plot differs based on the number of dwelling units provided by the developer. To study this further, case
examples with varied densities were selected.
Under the quantitative analysis, identified examples were examined for density parameters such as
the total number of dwelling units, plot areas, built-up areas, building ground coverage, utilized FSI,
and recreational open space to derive the resultant per capita open space. For all the schemes, all
parameters fitted well within the city’s DCR and building bye-laws.

3
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

The qualitative analysis looked at the aspects of open spaces that contribute to the overall
sustainability of the development. There are three pillars of sustainability: social, economic, and
environmental. The significance of open space at the plot level is more inclined to the residents for social
sustainability. However, the absence of accessible recreational open spaces in immediate surroundings
determines the discrete social values of plot-level open spaces. For economic sustainability, open spaces
distinctly impact property values. However, it highly depends on the size of the plot and the
corresponding size of the open spaces. The plot-level open spaces need to be large enough to impact the
economy significantly. Natural assets like hills, forests, dense vegetation, rivers, lakes, other water
bodies, and open spaces perform best in and around the site for environmental sustainability. The plot-
level open spaces have a high potential to respond to these assets. Therefore, to understand the
qualitative aspects of open spaces at the plot level, the researchers conducted field surveys and studied
the city’s development plan. A limited area of a 500m radius around the plot, corresponding to a person’s
average comfortable walking distance, is studied.

3. Study of Open Space Rules and Regulations in India

3.1 Rules and Regulations

There is a tiered legislative framework for India’s planning and implementation of rules and regulations
for urban planning; at the top is the Central or Union Government, followed by the State government
and the local administrative body. The State Act allows the local executive body to formulate Regional
Plans (RP) and CDPs. The first step taken by the State is to identify respective Regions for the
formulation of RP. Then, the local body formulates the CDP once the State Government approves the
RP. If the city does not have a designated Regional Plan, it can develop its CDP directly. The Union
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) has promulgated the Urban and Regional
Development Plans Formulation & Implementation (URDPFI) guidelines for formulating the RP and
CDP. Later, the local body frames appropriate DCR or Building Bye-laws to facilitate the
implementation of the CDP. Like URDPFI guidelines, the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) formulates
the National Building Code (NBC) to enable the local bodies to draft the DCR. There is constant review
and amendments of the State Acts and the DCRs from time to time. For this, the local body updates the
CDP after every ten years.
As per the respective State Acts, every individual in any local government authority area must follow
the CDP and DCR to construct any structure and obtain prior permissions within the city limits from the
local administration. Though all the local bodies and development authorities within the State follow
the same State Act, they have the freedom to make a few alterations or additions to these rules as per
the city’s geographic, social and climatic requirements.

3.1.1 City Development Plan

The CDP, in unity with the URDPFI guidelines, indicates state-specific details regarding land
management at the city level. It categorizes different Planning Units within the city ranging from sub-
city to cluster or group level. It dictates various norms to implement activities such as Land Zoning and
permissible Built-up Area. The CDP also states the maximum FAR or FSI in various zones depending
on the transit typology. In addition, the CDP needs to consider the local demographics, climatic social
structure, and economic aspects of the city. Thus, the CDP may adopt and add norms that help maintain
local identity and care for local people’s wellbeing.

3.1.2 Development Control Rules

The DCR has to be formulated based on the provisions and norms mentioned in the CDP. It also takes
into consideration NBC. The DCR provides detailed guidelines and rules for built-up development
regarding land utilization. These include open spaces, built-up areas, roads, amenities, and other services

4
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

for various occupancies. It also mentions the detailed utilization of FAR or FSI within the city for those
mentioned in the CDP.

3.1.3 Open Spaces definition

The State Acts mention open spaces as a part of amenity, defined as any useful facility for the city’s
residents. DCR defines open spaces as an area forming an integral part of the plot left open to the sky.
Such open spaces do not include roads, which are open to the sky. The DCR further mentions that the
primary purpose of these open spaces is to provide breathable spaces in the city that can provide enough
light and ventilation into the adjoining built-up spaces.

3.1.4 Rules for Open Spaces

The CDP categorizes the open spaces as,
1) Recreational Space
2) Organized Green Space (OG)
3) Other Open Spaces (such as vacant lands / open spaces including flood plains, forest cover,
etc. in plain areas)
The guidelines mention that a CDP should provide a desirable 10-12 sq. m. per person open space,
which includes all the above categories for the whole city. However, protected and ecologically sensitive
areas in hilly regions are over and above these considerations.
While there is no specific definition for recreation space, the guidelines explain OG further. The
URDPFI guidelines list parks, playfields, specified parks, amusement parks, green gyms, maidan,
multipurpose open spaces, botanical gardens, zoos, and traffic parks as OG. Table 2 indicates norms for
OG in the different zone.
Table 2. Hierarchy and Norms for Organized Greens in Plain Areas [23].
OG space
Sr.
Planning Unit Population Min. Area of
No. Number of OG
Served per OG each OG
1 Housing Cluster 3-4 5000 0.5 ha
2 Neighborhood 3-4 10500 1.0 ha
3 Community 2-3 1 Lakh 5.0 ha
4 District/ Zone 1 5 Lakh 25.0 ha
5 Sub-city center 1 10 Lakh 100.0 ha
The DCR categorizes open spaces as,
1) Mandatory Open Spaces
2) Interior Open Spaces (Chowks)
3) Amenity Open Spaces
4) Layout / Recreational Open Spaces (LOS)
Mandatory Open Spaces are the setbacks from the plot boundary meant to provide adequate light and
ventilation to the structure. As per DCR, there should be a provision of an Interior Open Space
(courtyard, inner chowk) when the whole of one side of one or more habituated rooms, including the
kitchen. These habitable spaces are such that they are not abutting on either the front, rear, or side(s)
open spaces. Amenity Open Spaces are open to sky parking spaces and other amenities. At the same
time, LOS is a larger POS concerned with space for recreational purposes such as public parks. While
the NBC guides provisions for Mandatory Open Spaces, Interior Open Spaces, and Amenity Open
Spaces, the LOS rules shall be congruent with the norms mentioned in the CDP. However, the NBC
suggests a minimum of 3 sq. m. per person open space in built-up areas. DCR state LOS norms in a
certain percentage of the total plot area. These rules state the minimum sizes of these open spaces for
various land use activities to avoid misuse of the net area. However, LOS is only applicable to residential
areas, and hence, the study will focus on LOS norms in detail.

5
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

LOS rules apply for plot areas equal to or more than 0.2 ha (hectares). It assumes the mandatory open
spaces are enough for recreational use in smaller plots. However, as larger plot areas would cater to
more people, there is a need to provide adequate open space for recreation. Thus, LOS norms are laid
specifically for Plot sub-division and Group Housing. The plot sub-division is the division of the
reconstruction of existing plots, which may be an amalgamation of smaller plots or a division of larger
plots. Group Housing deals with mass housing for more than 25 dwelling units and has a minimum plot
size of 3000 sq. m. The norms for LOS are proposed based on plot areas. The percentage of LOS ranges
from 10% to 25% of the total plot area. Few DCR also mentions the minimum area of the LOS. They
also mention the minimum width to length ratio for the LOS to be optimal for the user and not remain a
mere formality on paper.

3.2 Current Scenario of LOS Norms across India

Although DCRs must satisfy the open space norms in CDP, URDPFI, and NBC, many DCRs do not
conform. The study of DCRs of 20 cities in India shows that about 85% have rules for LOS concerning
Plot Division, whereas only 20% of the DCRs have mentioned LOS rules in Group Housing. Further,
only 8 of these DCRs mention detailed norms for LOS in the Plot sub-division, while only 1 DCR
mentions detailed norms for LOS in Group Housing. With time, respective authorities have made
multiple amendments in the individual State Acts and DCRs but rarely have addressed the norms for
open spaces. Few Indian cities tried innovating by providing more personal open spaces in residential
areas. For example, Pune and Pimpri Chinchwad DCR had provisions for open-to-sky alternate terraces
in apartment buildings. However, this provision was taken back in recent amendments, citing privacy
issues and increased housing costs, leading to revenue loss to the builders.
The norms state that designers or builders must calculate the LOS based on the plot area. These LOS
help the designer or builder get necessary clearances and sell properties at premium prices. Also, DCR
makes provisions for the developer to buy additional FSI to increase the occupancy density with the
plot, as permissible in the CDP. Today, owning an individual piece of land or house is becoming scarce
due to increased land prices and changing demography of Indian families [24–26]. In many Indian cities,
residential townships, a form of group housing, have emerged as the new trend in the housing sector to
counter these issues. Nevertheless, the absence or unclear rules related to LOS have led to developers’
pooling land for developing such townships [27,28]. This situation highlights a lack of coordination
between the RP, CDP, and DCR and their implementation on the ground [29,30].
Although, the CDP and DCR dictate the maximum ground coverage for built-up for a developable
plot which ranges from 40% to 75%, with large plots amounting to less ground coverage. However, the
rules for LOS remain the same. Also, the restriction of built-up by controlling the ground coverage ratio
only restricts the horizontal growth. The developer can still pursue vertical growth by buying additional
FSI. Thus, with the additional built-up area, recreational open spaces remain the same, ignoring the
aspect of density residing in such developments. Hence, this reduces the per capita open space, and some
users may lack access to personal recreational open space. Furthermore, many researchers have stressed
the importance of open spaces for disaster management [31,32]. Thus, such a provision may lead to
haphazard development and may fail to accommodate many people during emergencies creating panic
situations.
The CDPs and DCRs reflect a region’s culture and climate; however, the role of open spaces is
limited to natural light and ventilation, seldom acknowledging their role in recreation. Cities such as
Chandigarh and Gandhinagar, planned post-Independence, have consciously planned POS. Chandigarh
is one of the greenest cities in India. However, research indicates that the neighborhood walkability has
been reduced over time [33]. There is a need for a more accessible POS in such a case. Also, in cities
like Bangalore and Delhi, which perform better in per capita open space than other Indian cities, open
spaces declined in the last few years [34–37]. Although the URDPFI guidelines set a target of 10 to 12
sq.m. of open space per person for Indian cities, the open space norms in the DCRs are inadequate to
comply with them. Hence, there is a need for robust plot-level management guidelines in Indian cities
to achieve these targets.

6
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

4. Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Plot-level Open Spaces

4.1 Quantitative Analysis

The study compared seven group housing case studies for their density parameters to understand the
ground reality. Since the literature review revealed that Indian cities have similar DCRs, selecting case
studies from a single city seemed appropriate. Therefore, the study analyses seven group housing
schemes in Pune city. As seen in Figure 2, dwelling units differ on each plot irrespective of their plot
sizes. For example, Case 2 has a smaller plot size and higher FSI than Case 3 or Case 4, but dwelling
units are still lesser than the latter. The population density is comparatively higher on plots with more
dwelling units. Therefore, higher FSI may not necessarily imply high density.
The primary analysis shows that no housing schemes achieve the per capita open spaces standards.
The per capita recreation open spaces varied from 0.8 sq.m. per person to 3 sq.m. per person, whereas
examples with higher population density had lower per capita recreational open spaces (Figure 1). The
only exception is Case 1 because it provided the recreational open space on the podium, reducing the
space utilization for amenities and increasing the same for the recreational open spaces. Similarly, in
Case 2, recreational spaces are provided extensively on the terrace, resulting in higher per capita
recreational open spaces. However, the study also highlights that larger recreation open spaces with plot
sizes do not necessarily mean high per capita recreational open space. For example, as seen in Case 7,
16% of recreational open space, more than the stated 10% (as per Pune city DCR), is provided. However,
the per capita recreational open space amounted to 0.8 sq.m. per person.

Figure 1. Per capita Recreation Open Space in Studied Cases.

7
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

Figure 2. Quantitative Analysis of Identified Group Housing Projects.

Furthermore, the analysis states that amenities and roads do not necessarily affect a housing plot’s
per capita performance (Figure 2). Even though few housing schemes, such as Case 3 and Case 4, may
benefit by reducing the area under roads, it would not change the per capita open space considerably.
Therefore, it is imperative to plan the housing layouts efficiently to increase their per capita recreational
open spaces.

8
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

4.2 Qualitative Analysis

An analysis of the immediate surrounding of each housing scheme shows that the plot level open spaces
have some or other potential to contribute to the social, economic, and environmental sustainability of
the city (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The housing schemes have a medium to high potential concerning social
sustainability. The main reason for high potential in Case 3, Case 4, Case 5, and Case 7 is the
unavailability of accessible recreational open spaces in the vicinity. Whereas, for Case 2, though the
area has many recreational open spaces, almost all of them are private societies and inaccessible to other
people; thus, the potential of plot-level open space increases. In Case 1, there are accessible recreational
spaces; however, the hillock near the site, though it plays a role as a recreational open space, is
inaccessible to people of all ages.
The housing schemes have a low potential for economic potential, except for Case 3 and Case 6.
These exceptions have a large undeveloped residential zone in the vicinity, thus increasing the potential
of plot-level open spaces in increasing the area’s economic value. In other cases, there is high-density
residential development due to which the potential of their plot-level open space to contribute to the
economy of the area reduces considerably.
Around each studied case are environmental assets such as hillocks, nullahs (natural stormwater
drains), dense vegetation areas, and national highways, which have regional impacts. The plot-level
open spaces of the housing schemes have a high to very high potential to contribute to the existing
network of these assets. For Case 1 and Case 2, which have natural assets in their respective vicinities,
the potential of plot-level open spaces is high. Whereas for Case 4, Case 5, and Case 7, which have high-
density built environments and natural assets around each site, the potential of plot-level open spaces is
very high.

Figure 3. Qualitative Analysis of Identified Group Housing Projects in Pune [38].

Though these housing schemes have a good potential to contribute to the city’s sustainability, none
of the plot-level open spaces in these housing schemes respond to their respective sensitivities found in
their immediate surroundings. A brief plot and open space shape analysis show the importance of
building profiles in planning plot-level open spaces. For example, the open spaces provided in Case 5,
Case 6, and Case 3 are highly affected by the site shape and building profiles, impacting the social and
economic vertices. Thus, it also shows how designers and developers prefer built-form shapes over
quality open spaces.

9
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

Figure 4. Impact of Plot-level open spaces on Social, Economic, and Environmental vertices of the
city.

4.3 Discussion
The CDPs state the FSI, while the DCRs state the building ground coverage for specific plot sizes.
Earlier research shows that more FSI leads to higher density scenarios, reducing per capita open space
and compromising quality [39–43]. While planning at the site level, the study shows that density
parameters significantly affect the per capita open space. For any built environment, density parameters
include building ground coverage, FSI, number of floors, and number of dwelling units. As each of these
parameters is interrelated and contributes to quantitative and qualitative aspects of recreational open
spaces, the research advocates building design to consider them warily. Few cases in the current study
demonstrate that more dwelling units decrease per capita open space values. Though FSI does impact
the built-up area, the sizes of individual dwelling units are at the developer’s discretion, resulting in a
varied number of houses on similar plot sizes.
The DCR of Pune specifies 10% recreational open space for plot sizes of 2000 sq.m. and above. In
most cases, the designers or developers prefer to centrally place this 10 % open space, thus restricting
its potential. The DCR also sets building ground coverages for different plot sizes. Lower ground
coverage leads to a better scope of open space development. The building’s ground coverage impacts
the building profiles, affecting the interior and corresponding open spaces. Apart from building ground
coverage, the shape of the plot highly influences the building profile. Irregular plot profiles shall lead
the designer to prioritize building profiles and layouts over the open spaces, which accommodate the
plot’s residual spaces, as seen in a couple of scenarios in this study. Therefore, it is at the designer’s or
the developer’s disposal to design the building and define the relationship between its ground coverage
and its profile.
Decision-makers must understand that plot-level alterations always impact the overall environment.
Similarly, they need to consider the dense natural vegetation, nullahs, streams, and lakes within or
around the site while designing plot-level open spaces. In addition, while managing open spaces at the
plot level, decision-makers must consider the accessibility to existing open spaces and the visual built
density around them, as these have social and economic implications. Furthermore, since plot-level open
spaces can compensate for the environmental losses due to the new development, planning authorities
need to look at hills, forests, and farmlands as a larger extensive network of the plot-level open spaces

10
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

in proposed norms or strategies. The study reiterates the earlier research findings that open spaces at the
plot level need to respond to the various man-made and natural assets in the immediate vicinity of the
plot [2,19,44].

5. Conclusions, Future Research Scope, and Limitations

For Indian cities, as far as the open spaces are concerned, the study shows a stark disconnect between
rules and regulations formulated by various statutory bodies. The provisions made in the DCRs are
inadequate to achieve the targets mentioned in CDP, NBC, and URDPFI guidelines. Therefore, we need
to look into plot-level dynamics for open spaces management. Each community will need to design a
system of open spaces at the plot level to incorporate its various requirements. However, as this system
never works in isolation, it has to structure from plot level to the neighborhood to the regional scales.
Hence, there is a need to formulate guidelines for open spaces that remain interconnected between all
scales and a bottom-up approach to open space management in Indian city planning. As per the study of
the quantitative aspects, the per capita open spaces hint at deriving each plot’s per capita built-up area.
Also, it initiates the discussion of the importance of the contribution of dwelling unit sizes to the plot’s
population density—also the significance of the number of dwelling units over density parameters. The
qualitative aspects of plot-level open spaces define plot-level open spaces’ role in immediate
surroundings. The study substantiates plot-level open spaces’ importance in contributing to the city’s
social, economic, and environmental sustainability.
The study does not consider the surrounding spatial structure, built unbuilt mass, the scheme’s
location, and orientation in its larger context. It may directly guide the open space qualities at the plot
level and thus need further study. Many other parameters may be listed similarly to find a relation
between open spaces at plot level as against its context. Besides these qualitative aspects, the study
acknowledges an interrelationship between quantitative aspects. Amidst new methods and technologies
of incorporating recreational spaces in the plot, there is a need to understand the response of ground-
level and podium-level open spaces to the overall sustainability. Also, can terraces and balconies
contribute to this response in vertical development? Further research can help establish a matrix for
sustainable development goals by identifying these links between various features of quantitative and
qualitative understandings of plot-level open spaces to ensure better practices. Since the study identifies
only a few specificities of plot-level open spaces, researchers may develop a more extensive and
exhaustive data set for many cities to help formulate a robust open space management plan. Such a
database will facilitate a bottom-up approach to achieving the city’s sustainability goals.

References
[1] Andersson E, Borgström S and Mcphearson T 2017 Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change
Adaptation in Urban Areas 51–64
[2] Norton B A, Coutts A M, Livesley S J, Harris R J, Hunter A M and Williams N S G 2015 Planning
for cooler cities: A framework to prioritise green infrastructure to mitigate high temperatures in
urban landscapes Landsc. Urban Plan. 134 127–38
[3] Coutts A M, Tapper N J, Beringer J, Loughnan M and Demuzere M 2013 Watering our cities: The
capacity for Water Sensitive Urban Design to support urban cooling and improve human thermal
comfort in the Australian context Prog. Phys. Geogr. 37 2–28
[4] Shashua-Bar L, Pearlmutter D and Erell E 2011 The influence of trees and grass on outdoor thermal
comfort in a hot-arid environment Int. J. Climatol. 31 1498–506
[5] Rakhshandehroo M and Mohd Yusof M J 2014 Establishing new urban green spaces classification
for Malaysian cities Res. Gate 1–14
[6] Stanley B, Stark B, Johnston K and Smith M 2012 Urban open spaces in historical perspective: A
transdisciplinary typology and analysis Urban Geogr. 33 1089–117
[7] Vyse H 2015 Ideal Homes in Ancient Egypt : the Archaeology of Social Aspiration Oper. Carried

11
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

Pyramids Gizeh 1837 237–41

[8] Vahia M N and Yadav N 2011 Reconstructing the History of Biotas Soc. Evol. Hist. 10 421–34
[9] Marcus C C and Sarkissian W 1988 Housing as if People Mattered: Guidelines for Medium-Density
Family Housing
[10] Macfadyen D 1970 Sir Ebenezer Howard and the Town Planning Movement (Manchester
University Press)
[11] Maryanti M R, Khadijah H, Uzair A M and Ghazali M A R M M 2016 The urban green space
provision using the standards approach: issues and challenges of its implementation in Malaysia
Sustain. Dev. Plan. VIII 1 369–79
[12] Hindley J 2007 A park for the 21st century: Observations on the transformation of mile end park
Capital. Nature, Social. 18 104–24
[13] Wolch J, Wilson J P and Fehrenbach J 2005 Parks and park funding in los angeles: An equity-
mapping analysis Urban Geogr. 26 4–35
[14] Byrne J and Sipe N 2010 Green and open space planning for urban consolidation--A review of
the literature and best practice vol 11
[15] Næss P 2005 Residential location affects travel behavior - But how and why? The case of
Copenhagen metropolitan area Prog. Plann. 63 167–257
[16] Roy J, Tschakert P, Waisman H, Abdul Halim S, Antwi-Agyei P, Dasgupta P, Hayward B,
Kanninen M, Liverman D, Okereke C, Pinho P, Riahi K and Suarez A 2018 Sustainable
Development, Poverty Eradication and Reducing Inequalities Global Warming of 1.5 oC an
IPCC SPECIAL REPORT on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 oC above pre-industrial levels
and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global
response to the threat of climate change pp 445–538
[17] Govindarajulu D 2014 Urban green space planning for climate adaptation in Indian cities Urban
Clim. 10 35–41
[18] Ministry of Urban Development 2015 Smart Cities Mission Statement and Guidelines (India)
[19] Gulati R 2019 Neighborhood spaces in residential environments: Lessons for contemporary
Indian context Front. Archit. Res. 9 20–33
[20] Faragallah R N 2018 The impact of productive open spaces on urban sustainability: The case of
El Mansheya Square – Alexandria Alexandria Eng. J. 57 3969–76
[21] Yang J, Zhang F and Shi B 2019 Analysis of Open Space Types in Urban Centers Based on
Functional Features E3S Web Conf. 79
[22] Ibrahim F I, Omar D and Nik Mohamad N H 2019 Human Interaction In Urban Open Spaces
Environ. Proc. J. 4 188
[23] Town and Country Planning Organisation 2015 Urban and Regional Development Plans
Formulation and Implementation (URDPFI) Guidelines - Volume 1 (Ministry of Urban
Development)
[24] Mahalik M K and Mallick H 2016 Are house prices guided by fundamentals or speculative
factors? An empirical inquiry for India Int. J. Econ. Policy Emerg. Econ. 9 47–64
[25] Nayak D K and Behera R N 2014 Changing household size in India: An inter-state comparison
Trans. Inst. Indian Geogr. 36 1–18
[26] Bandyopadhyay A and Saha A 2011 Distinctive demand and risk characteristics of residential
housing loan market in India J. Econ. Stud. 38 703–24
[27] Ram P and Needham B 2016 The provision of affordable housing in India: Are commercial
developers interested? Habitat Int. 55 100–8
[28] Ahluwalia I and Mohanty P K 2014 Unlocking Land Value for Financing Urban Development
in India Indian Counc. Res. Int. Econ. Relations 1–13

12
ICSEEGT 2022 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1084 (2022) 012073 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1084/1/012073

[29] Kaushik I 2013 Challenges and Issues in Mega City Planning in India Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 1
128–32
[30] Turok I 2014 The Evolution of National Urban Policies - A Global Review (UN-Habitat)
[31] Greeshma P and Kumar K M 2016 Disaster Resilience in Vulnerable cities through
Neighbourhood Development: A case of Chennai Procedia Technol. 24 1827–34
[32] Jayakody R R J C, Amarathunga D and Haigh R 2018 Integration of disaster management
strategies with planning and designing public open spaces Procedia Eng. 212 954–61
[33] Jigyasu N 2014 Re-Planning ‘Planned’ Public Spaces: The Neigbourhood Market of Sector 15
in Chandigarh Creat. Sp. 2 105–25
[34] Ramachandra T V, Bharath H A, Gouri K and Vinay S 2017 Green Spaces in Bengaluru:
Quantification through Geospatial Techniques Indian For. 143 307–20
[35] Shahfahad, Kumari B, Tayyab M, Hang H T, Khan M F and Rahman A 2019 Assessment of
public open spaces (POS) and landscape quality based on per capita POS index in Delhi, India
SN Appl. Sci. 1 1–13
[36] Ramaiah M and Avtar R 2019 Urban Green Spaces and Their Need in Cities of Rapidly
Urbanizing India: A Review Urban Sci. 3 94
[37] Choubey A N 2017 Urban green in Delhi : A temporal analysis ( 1995-2016 ) Int. J. Acad. Res.
Dev. 2 427–31
[38] Google Earth Pro (7.3.4.8248) 2021 Pune City Region, India, 18°31′13″N 73°51′24″E
[39] Dutta S, Bardhan S, Bhaduri S and Koduru S 2020 Understanding the relationship between
density and neighbourhood environmental quality - A framework for assessing Indian cities Int.
J. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 15 1067–79
[40] Dutta S and Bardhan S 2017 Density and Neighbourhood Environmental Quality – A
Comparative Study in the context of Indian Cities Int. J. Emerg. Technol. 8 315–23
[41] Russo A and Cirella G T 2018 Modern compact cities: How much greenery do we need? Int. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 15
[42] Haarhoff E, Beattie L and Dupuis A 2016 Does higher density housing enhance liveability?
Case studies of housing intensification in Auckland Cogent Soc. Sci. 2 1–16
[43] Dave S 2011 Neighbourhood density and social sustainability in cities of developing countries
Sustain. Dev. 19 189–205
[44] Aldous D E 2011 Planning Green Open Spaces for South East Asian Capital Cities Citygreen
01 10

13