See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357677359

Mainstreaming Risk Reduction in Planning Practices for Vulnerable Hill

Settlements: A Case of Uttarakhand

Conference Paper · November 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 78

1 author:

Shraddha Bahukhandi
Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur
5 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Shraddha Bahukhandi on 31 March 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Mainstreaming Risk Reduction in Planning Practices for Vulnerable Hill
Settlement: A Case of Uttarakhand

SHRADDHA BAHUKHANDI1 and ANJALI SARASWAT2,

1
DIT University, Dehradun
2
Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur
sbahukhandi3@gmail.com +91-9760921735

Theme: (HARNESSING TECHNOLOGY FOR DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT)

Sub Theme: 9 - (Remote Sensing, GIS and Drones for Disaster Risk Management)

Abstract
The Indian Himalayan state of Uttarakhand acclaimed for its pilgrimage sites and touristic destinations;
has also been distinguished as a climate-sensitive and multi-hazard prone region. The proliferating
development in such fragile locations has intensified the vulnerability to disasters. In 2020, the state
government announced “Gairsain” as its summer capital; a hill town that lies in Chamoli district.
Acknowledging the high-risk profile of the district that encountered frequent disasters like the earthquake
in 1999, Kedarnath cloudburst in 2013, Rishiganga avalanche outburst in 2021; it becomes a formidable
task to plan a new settlement or greenfield development in the hilly region. Hence, assessment of the
anticipated intensity and vulnerability of development in Gairsain needs to be predetermined.

Architects, urban planners & policymakers play a vital role in shaping the community, and based on the
impending challenges, the responsibility escalates to plan a built environment on hilly terrain that
comprehends the vulnerability and risk reduction aspects. At present, the lack of a sustained approach to
incorporate DM in the planning process and the absence of Master plan documents for most of the towns
in Uttarakhand has led to a distressing state of affairs. Therefore, development tools like risk-based land-
use planning, zoning regulations, GIS imagery, remote sensing, and hazard mapping can assist in
fabricating resilience in a susceptible greenfield settlement. The paper aims at analyzing the multi-
dimensional aspects of urban planning in reducing the risks of disasters in Gairsain town. The research
grants an opportunity to envisage and emend the resilient planning, infrastructure priorities, capacity
building, challenges of local government, and policymaking for managing urban risks. The paper
concludes that lacunae in planning practices can only be filled by appropriate initiatives and preventive
strategies that can ameliorate the present condition and concede with the suitable traditional approaches
used in past.

Keywords: Urban Planning; Hill Settlements; GIS; Disasters; Resilience; Risk-sensitive land- use
1. Introduction: Uttarakhand

The hill state of Uttarakhand is Fig. 1: Uttarakhand seismic zone map

situated on the southern slope of the
Himalayas. These mountains are one
of the youngest alpine systems that
are seismically active and immensely
eco-sensitive. With a geographical
area of 53,483 sq. km, where 86 %
lies on hilly terrain; the state is
bestowed with rivers, glaciers, and
dense forests. Uttarakhand consists
of 13 districts with varied terrain, out
of which 10 districts lie in hilly
regions amid unique ecological
diversity. The region is prone to
severe disasters like earthquakes,
cloud bursts, landslides, storms,
forest fires, flash-floods, avalanches,
etc. The susceptibility to these
catastrophes is the fragile terrain,
high relief, ongoing tectonics, high
seasonal precipitation, and the state’s
location in high-risk seismic zone
IV and V (Fig. 1). The state has Source: IS 1893
encountered disasters like Uttarkashi
earthquake-1991, Malpa landslide-1998, Chamoli earthquake-1999, Kedarnath cloud burst-2013, and
forest fire-2020 and glacier burst-2021. In a matter of seconds; a calamity nullifies all the efforts and
induces loss of life, property, livelihood, resources, and environment. The history of the state’s
vulnerability reveals that the recent disasters are occurring more frequently and causing destruction on a
magnified scale. Factors aggravating the vulnerability are expeditious urbanization, unregulated
development, lack of awareness, lack of urban- regional or rural planning, nonexistence or noncompliance
of policies and regulations. The state has been acclaimed for its pilgrimage sites and tourist destinations
hence the influx of travelers every year lays an anthropogenic burden on the environment and puts them
at risk as well. However the inadequate facilities, insufficient health infrastructure, ineffective
government initiatives, and poor accessibility cripple the state during the calamity. Ever since the
bifurcation from the erstwhile state of Uttar Pradesh; Uttarakhand has witnessed expeditious development
on the fragile land without adequate care for the environment or sustainability. There are 45 Hydro
Electric projects in the state of varying capacities (NIDM). These projects along with mining have been
carried out disregard to the environment, biodiversity, geographical, geological, and ecological
dimensions (NIDM). The construction on flood plain zones, landslide-prone areas, earthquake fault lines,
and other geologically unsuitable areas poses a great threat. Despite many acts and policies the
construction of projects on non-developable land is a matter of prime concern. The push and pull factor of
this hill state has displayed the adverse effects of development coupled with deforestation that triggered
environmental degradation. With the growing population and demand for urbanization, the vulnerability
to multi-hazards intensifies (Uttarakhand State Disaster Management Action Plan). Therefore, the
necessity of making hill settlements resilient in nature needs to be acknowledged. Identification of risks
and integration of policy framework with development plans has become a need of the hour. The
mitigation and management strategies need to ensure the incorporation of social, economical, cultural,
environmental, and political factors.
2. Study Area Profile & Risk Potential

Uttarakhand endured a skewed development towards the districts that lie in plains whilst the districts in
the hills continued to languish. The region witnessed intra-state migration, from the remote areas in hill
districts to urban centers in the plains. This migration induced unplanned urbanization and economic
concentration in districts like – Dehradun, Haridwar, and Udham Singh Nagar. To resolve the hurdle of
unbalanced growth, in 2020 the state government announced Gairsain town as its “Summer Capital”.
Gairsain being a hill town located in Chamoli district (Fig. 2) evokes many challenges concerning disaster
management. Acknowledging the high-risk profile of the district that encountered frequent disasters like
the earthquake in 1999, Kedarnath cloudburst in 2013, Rishiganga avalanche outburst in 2021; it becomes
a formidable task to plan a new settlement or greenfield development in the hilly region. The high-risk
profile of Gairsain in Chamoli is conditioned by remoteness, difficult accessibility, and lack of awareness
on disaster risk reduction. Besides limited carrying capacity; the socio-economic, cultural, environmental
aspects also make the area vulnerable to hazards.

Fig. 2: Location map of Gairsain town in Uttarakhand

Chamoli District in Uttarakhand State Gairsain Tehsils in Chamoli District

Planning Area Gairsain Planning Area in Gairsain Tehsil

Source: Authors
Gairsain is situated at the geographical center of the state of Uttarakhand. The region comes under
seismic zone V and is hence exposed to various hazards. With an area of 21.7 sq. km and a population of
11,480 (Census, 2011) the town connects Garhwal and Kumaon region via NH 87. The new summer
capital is located approximately 250 kms away from the current capital Dehradun. The town lies at a
height of 1650m above the mean sea level and has a moderate topography in contrast to the nearby areas.
The highest point of the town is at 2220m above mean sea level, where the new legislative assembly
building is stationed; while the lowest point is at 1400m. Fig. 3 illustrates the base map and the existing
land use map of Gairsain planning area which has most of the area under agriculture and forest cover.

Fig. 3: (a) Base map & (b) existing land use map of Gairsain planning area

Analysis by authors, Source: Town and Country Planning Dep., Garhwal division

Due to the difficult topographical features, the town is devoid of any airport or rail connectivity. The lack
of a multi-mode transport system intensifies the susceptibility and risk at the time of disaster. However,
there are two helipads within the town. And the nearest airport is in Gauchar town which lies at a distance
of approximately 54 kilometers. The new project of the “Chota Char dam” railway network from
Rishikesh to Karnaprayag will further improve the connectivity of the Chamoli district. Other than
climatic and connectivity concerns the Gairsain hill town has landslide-prone areas, areas with a slope
more than 45 degrees, river drainage channels, and dense forest patches. The climatic condition of the
district along with the human interventions may cause severe damages and imbalance in the ecology of
this new site. In the past, other than natural causes various manmade activities have multiplied the effects
of hazards in Chamoli district (SDMA). Therefore, assessment of the anticipated intensity and
vulnerability of development in Gairsain needs to be predetermined. The amalgamation of engineering
and socio-economic aspects is required for vulnerability assessment.
3. Mainstreaming Risk Reduction in Planning: Need & Nature

The greenfield town lies in the Alpine- Himalayan belt and thereupon any rampant, unregulated, or
inorganic development may lead to calamitous effects in a hilly region. The approach of resilient urban
planning can structure the capacity of a town to mitigate & adapt when exposed to any hazard. With the
integration of disaster risk reduction in planning practices and governance; the causal factors can be
managed while minimizing the vulnerabilities (UNISDR, 2011). Mainstreaming the urban resilience in
the Master plan covers dimensions like socio-economical, ecological, infrastructural, and financial
aspects. These plans not only prepare measures for structural features i.e. buildings & infrastructure; but
also the non-structural features like policies on land use, resource management, watersheds etc (Safari et
al., 2016). The resilient plan follows a circular process involving aspects like – impact and vulnerability
assessment against hazards, low impact development based on the carrying capacity of the town,
resilience strategies and action plans, execution, and evaluation (Fig. 4). The need for awareness and
involvement of locals and multi-stakeholders in the planning and implementation process is a major
concern (Chmutina et al., 2014). The resilient plan can dispense guidelines, policies, and best practices
for the vulnerable hill settlement from the initial stage of development. Urban planners, architects,
policymakers along with the disaster management department can strengthen the city by reducing social,
assets & environmental losses in the Chamoli region.
Fig. 4: Aspects of resilient urban planning approach

Source: Authors
4. Challenges in resilient planning

In addition to the natural causes, numerous manmade activities multiply the susceptibility. Modeling hill
settlements resilient and sustainable requires a holistic approach in assimilating the aspects of disaster risk
reduction and urban planning (Joshi, 2021). In Uttarakhand, various plans and agencies that work to
address climate change including Disaster Mitigation and Management Centre, Uttarakhand Science and
Education Research Centre, Uttarakhand Centre on Climate Change, and many more. However, there is a
growing need to integrate the risk reduction concept with development plans at the city level. Following
are the barriers that restrict the mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction in development planning:

4.1 Topographical and environmental constraints

Building resilient hill settlements is a strenuous task, as they lie in ecologically sensitive zones having
lower carrying capacities. The topographical, climatic, and seismic constraints are the major factors
governing the development plans. The limited developable land that excludes steep slopes, forest covers,
landslide areas, etc. defines the direction of growth and hence poses a great challenge in resilient
development. The mountainous concern of mobility, connectivity, accessibility, and the pressure on
roads; fabricates the fragility of risk reduction planning. As Gairsain lies in Chamoli district the
accessibility during emergencies in or around the new capital creates yet another major challenge. Hence,
for a hill town mainstreaming risk reduction in development plans would require to shed light upon the
topographical and environmental impediments.

4.2 Complex institutional arrangements & coordination

In India, there have been uncoordinated efforts and interventions in addressing urban resilience. The
involvement of various government departments and private bodies in risk reduction planning generates
chaos. Building consensus among these stakeholders, ministries, and jurisdictions for long-term planning
is a dominant concern. The absence of concurrence is further magnified with the involvement of
construction stakeholders (Nguyen et al., 2018). Climate-sensitive planning requires the involvement of
multi-sectoral linkages like planning departments, SDMA, development authorities, local bodies, private
& government research centers, etc. Lack of proper coordination between these institutes/ agencies
hampers emergency response and results in ineffective use of resources (Bhattarai, 2013). There is a need
to clarify the complicated and lengthy process of role ambiguity, stipulate responsibilities, and duplication
of actions.

4.3 Absence of consolidated approach in the planning process

The lack of a sustained approach to incorporate Disaster management in the planning process and the
absence of a Master plan document for most of the towns in Uttarakhand; is a major barrier in
mainstreaming risk reduction in development plans. The planning departments, local jurisdictions,
housing, and development authorities don’t incorporate or collaborate with the State Disaster
Management authorities to work on the risk-based planning or Mater Plan document. The need to
assimilate a chapter on climate resilience and hazard vulnerability within the Master plan has now been
recognized for hill settlements. The climate change considerations are required to be included as
mandatory criteria for the approval of development plans. The adoption and integration of hazard risks
into the planning process is a major challenge that surfaces up due to a lack of coordination and consensus
by various stakeholders (Bhattarai, 2013). The additional framework, tasks, and economic demands due
to the unified approach make the collaborators lack the commitment (Phiri et al., 2019). With the rapid
urbanization of hill towns and lack of community involvement in planning; a consolidated dimension of
development is lacking.

4.4 Institutional Incompetence - Lack of capacity

The foundation of integrating the DRR with urban planning lies in the comprehensive and updated
information that is still lacking in the vulnerable hill settlements. The data on vulnerabilities,
infrastructure, transportation, services, health facilities, housing, etc are scattered within various
departments in India. The lack of technical proficiency, data, mapping, and proper allocation of budget
limits the enactment of urban resilience planning (Asian development bank, 2016). As climate
adaptability is a fresh concept in India; the lack of hazard data, obsolete land use maps, Khasra maps,
policies, and ignorant staff at local and state levels are aggravating the issue of urban-rural planning in the
mountainous landscape. Building institutional capacity is a crucial aspect. It is important to collect,
update and spatially translate the data for risk-sensitive planning and policymaking. The disaster, climate,
and planning assessment by the local bodies can strengthen the aforementioned challenge (Bhattarai,
2013).

4.5 Lack of awareness

In Uttarakhand, there is a meagerness of knowledge, engagement and awareness among the vulnerable
communities and local institutes about the risks. To deal constructively with the impacts of climate
change requires collaboration between the public, experts, and governments. Acquiring knowledge about
the available alternatives for effective response and empowering the public and local bodies can
predominantly help in building climate resilience. The lack of policy enforcement is largely provoked by
the inadequate understanding of the general public (Nguyen et al., 2018). Raising awareness assists in
preparedness and building capacity; hence should be incorporated in school education and health
institutes. Public engagement actively plays a crucial role in mainstreaming DRR in planning practices.
Public participation refers to activities that are used to incorporate people’s interests, concerns, needs, and
values into decision-making for safer settlements (Khatibi et. al, 2021).

4.6 Lack of guidance for compliance and implementation

The implementation of disaster risk governance and compliance with resilient policies is still lacking in
most of the towns. The implementation of mitigation strategies is also affected by political aspects, as the
funds required for building resilience are currently unavailable at the city and state levels. The financial
mechanism creates complexity and resistance for various stakeholders and private developers (Asian
development bank, 2016). The non-regulatory frameworks on disaster alleviation, building codes, bye-
laws, planning mandates, and other development controls in vulnerable hill areas are intensifying the
issue of risk reduction urban planning. The compliance and enforcement of the policies, development
plans, and regulations can only reinforce the growth in the disaster-prone state. The implementation and
monitoring via State disaster management action plan and other instruments need to curtail the gaps in the
legal framework (Nguyen et al., 2018).
5. Strategies for mainstreaming risk reduction in planning

Urban planning is one of the most essential tools of development that not only achieve economic growth,
designs the physical form, or focuses on social impact; but also ensures the safety and security of
settlements from the hazard’s susceptibility. With the increasing complexity of hazards especially on
vulnerable hill settlements; risk-sensitive planning grabs attention. Asian Development Bank (2016)
highlights the significance of resilient planning explicitly for greenfield development. Initiating
development from the scratch offers flexibility in choosing sites for various land uses and infrastructure
based on the hazard zonation. The clean slate presents the opportunities of risk-based development, new
policies, building codes, and cost-effective strategies that can be involved. By mainstreaming DRR into
urban planning, the local governments are empowered to formulate and implement action plans and
policies to mitigate the risks. These plans administer the desired economic & physical growth of the town
while regulating objectionable construction on the fragile terrain of the Himalayas. Strategies for
integrating disaster risks into planning considerations are as follows:

5.1 Vulnerability Assessment & GIS mapping

The documentation about vulnerabilities is crucial for building a resilient new township. The data from
risk assessment in context to climate change and disasters can be used for hazard zonation mapping and
for prioritizing the type of development in the master plan document. The assessment covers aspects of
topography, population dynamics, existing or future vulnerabilities, informal sector, land use pattern,
carrying capacity, etc (Asian Development Bank, 2016). The analysis will be established on climatic
projections, existing policies, discussions with suitable agencies, and secondary data for adaption in the
planning process. The assessment identifies the natural and human-induced hazards to determine the level
of exposure, addresses the issue of informal settlement, builds resilient infrastructure, and develops
guidelines before commencing any development. The analysis along with carrying capacity calculation
and Environment Impact Assessment can assist in healthy and inclusive planning. The risk analysis
extends a flexible approach to strengthen planning practices and consensus for numerous urban
dimensions (Phiri et al., 2019).
The vulnerability mapping with the help of Geographic Information System (GIS) can play a critical role
in analyzing the data required for disaster resilient planning. For hill towns it is very crucial to consider
all physical aspects such as geology, hydrology, landslide zones etc. while planning which is mostly
missing from a planning perspective. Much of the information on these aspects can be obtained through
geospatial technologies. By creating and overlaying the layers of exiting built-up, drainage channels,
forest cover, steep slopes, landslide-prone areas, earthquake fault lines, existing infrastructure, building
data, etc; inferences about the buildable and non-buildable zones can be easily marked and recognized for
further planning proposals. GIS gives proper evaluation for facilitating decision-making and coordination
among various agencies/ stakeholders (Uttarakhand State Disaster Management Action Plan). The
integrated map based on the risk assessment is being used for land development, policy formulation, risk-
sensitive land use map, determining density distribution, etc. For the vulnerable hill settlement of
Gairsain; the ecological map (Fig.6) is generated using GIS that marks the developable and
undevelopable areas based on various factors like- areas with a slope of more than 45 degrees, reserved
forest cover (dense & medium dense), landslides-prone zones, areas near major drainage channels and
rivers (dry river + perennial river + river scrub + river sand) shown in Fig. 5. Therefore, the first step of
mainstreaming resilience in development plans should be the risk assessment & hazard zonation.
Fig. 5 GIS mapping of (a) Forest data (b) Slope data of less than 45 deg. (c) Drainage channel data of Gairsain

Fig. 6 Generated Ecological map Analysis by authors, Source: TCPD, Garhwal

division
presenting undevelopable zones 5.2 Risk-sensitive Land use planning & Management

The risk-based planning uses hazard information and location to

guide the greenfield development in the master plan. This is an
instrument that promotes "Resilience Oriented Urban Planning" by
keeping areas free from any future development. Based on the
vulnerability analysis, it identifies the locations which should be
declared as undevelopable or no construction zones due to high
vulnerability and hazard exposure (Fig. 7). Apart from keeping
certain areas free of development, spatial planning also determines
the acceptable land-use types according to the intensity and
frequency of the existing hazards. This is generally referred to as
risk-based land-use planning; as it incorporates risk assessment to
identify the locations, type of land use, design, intensity, and timing
of development. A holistic land-use planning can be adopted by

Analysis by authors, Source: TCPD including EIA and disaster risk assessment. This land-use model
enables the local authorities to demarcate hazard-prone areas,
regulate land use, demarcate safe land for infrastructure for future expansion, set development regulations
(specific rules about location, bulk, height, shape, and use of structures in each zone), and set building
codes (design, constructions specifications) to withstand risks. One of the challenges Indian towns are
facing is the lack of integration of DRR in development plans, therefore with the proposal of risk-based
land-use planning the strategies can be proposed in action plans, site plans, master plan documents, zonal
and regional plans. As a greenfield location attracts countless investors and developers; it becomes crucial
to offer information on potential threats, allowable intensity, and density, changes in hazard patterns in
and around the site (Asian Development Bank, 2016). It is important to amalgamate urban planning and
land use management with disaster resilience by land zoning of urban growth and well-informed planning
of new built-up for the sensitive zone of Chamoli district. The risk-based planning also requires
incorporating the regional development approach as no hazard is bounded within a jurisdiction. Urban
planning caters to the dimensions of comprehensive planning that includes sanitation, water supply, solid
waste management, health and education infrastructure, mobility plans, housing especially for the
informal sector, environmental plan, economic plan, capacity building plan, etc. Urban planning
manifests as an effective instrument for climate adaption & DRR planning. The greenfield project of
Gairsain presents the opportunities to allocate the site for the informal sector away from the ecological
and disaster-prone zones. Planning for this sector is extremely critical as new capital town would steer the
attention of all economical classes and the fragility of the town poses more insecurity. By encouraging
such development on safer zones and providing affordable housing; the risk can be reduced (Phiri et al.,
2019). Covering all the salient aspects of development in the Master plan document would assist the risk
reduction practices.

Fig. 7 Risk-sensitive strategies for development on hilly terrain

Source: Authors

5.3 Strengthening Urban governance and community-based disaster preparedness

Resilient planning being a comprehensive approach; raises the concern of institutional arrangements,
competence, and awareness. Coordination among various authorities, agencies, and stakeholders over a
defined province is significant for risk reduction planning practices. The lack of awareness, information
gaps, and poor correspondence among competing authorities magnifies the severity of hazards (Moraci et
al., 2018). The alliance of researchers, scientists, urban planners, engineers, politicians, communities at
risk, government departments, NGOs, and investors; is required to identify the hazards and threats
imposed by the urbanization of vulnerable settlements. As suggested by the Ministry of Urban
Development, the participation and commitments by the aforementioned stakeholders play a pivotal role
in the development plan formulation and implementation exercise. The town’s development vision,
infrastructure priorities, policies, and investments can be concluded from the mutual consensus. By
compelling the staff of various departments involved at the state, district, and town level to participate in
training modules and workshops; the urban governance can be built well equipped both administratively
and financially. The State Disaster Management Action Plan of Uttarakhand recommends raising
awareness among the locals via school curriculum, rallies, exhibitions, broadcasting on T.V through ads,
short films or regional movies, articles in local newspapers, banners, Do’s and Don’ts posters, mock
drills, roadshows, etc. Awareness in the vulnerable towns of this multi hazard prone district is the key
initiative of mainstreaming resilient planning. Until and unless the local community, government
authorities, and all the involved stakeholders don’t understand, accept, or get included in the planning
process; the proposal and execution of the best practices can never be obtained. For the new development
in the Gairsain planning area; raising awareness from the early stage can improve the overall quality and
value of investments (Asian Development Bank, 2016). The compliance to the town planning zoning
regulations, building codes, and other policies can only be enforced effectively by strengthening the
governance and community-based preparedness.

5.4 Recommend building regulations & development policies

The concern of climate change and disaster vulnerability has been addressed numerous times by the
national, state, and district authorities via acts, action plans, policies, etc. Yet, without integrating these
climate parameters or safety codes in the master planning process; the comprehensive approach is still not
adopted. The building codes, bylaws, development controls, zoning regulations, and policies assist with
the controlled development of environmentally sensitive areas. This is another indispensable strategy that
incorporates DRR in development plans. The compliance with building regulations and planning norms
can be reinforced by incentivizing the land-owners or developers. These recommendations should apply
to the local context of Gairsain and should be monitored regularly. Hazard risk is largely determined by
the exposure and vulnerability of the community. Hence, building codes for the new hill town should
incorporate specifications for relevant threats. Strict regulations aim to protect public health, safety,
infrastructure, resources, and the environment (Kumar and Pushplata, 2015). The regulations and policies
should holistically cover aspects like building heights, FAR, ground coverage, setbacks, density
distribution, land-use policies, wetlands preservation, deforestation laws, flood plains, fault lines, and
landslide norms, etc. Based on the past trends of constructing built-form that is non- engineered in most
of the hill towns; the susceptibility intensifies in Gairsain. Therefore the State, district and local
governments should be obligated to strictly adhere to the prevalent practices and update these strategies
regularly (Uttarakhand State Disaster Management Action Plan). Amendments should also be made in the
Town and Country Planning Act to mainstream the resilient practices.

5.5 Implementation and monitoring

The enforcement and evaluation of proposed guidelines in the urban framework dictate the success of
resilient urban planning. There are several plans like state climate change action plan, disaster
management plan, risk assessment plan, and other emergency plans that are prepared by authorities.
However, the lack of enforcement dissolves its intention. The effective implementation of DRR in
planning is built upon a combination of components involving vigorous cooperation of all the
stakeholders, the flexibility of plans, political willingness, community acceptability, financial liability,
and capacity. With the proposition of flexible policies, a balance is created between strict stipulations and
cost-effective growth. A Master Plan document is imposed for 20-25 years to accommodate multiple
urban variables and hence the flexibility offers modifications as per the growing needs. Similarly, when
DRR is integrated into planning practices it should be designed in a way that, other than the mandatory
specifications the flexibility is still maintained. The policies should be enforced as per the government’s
instructions. There shouldn’t any be discrepancies. This helps in restricting any construction over the
forest areas, wetlands, steep slopes, or earthquake fault lines. A culture of adherence should be created
and promoted among the vulnerable community and stakeholders using incentivization. The influence of
building regulations and planning norms should be closely reviewed/ analyzed by the district disaster
management authority and local governing bodies to subject the changes in the subsequent plans.
5.6 Traditional practices of Uttarakhand

Despite the fact that Uttarakhand is a multi hazard prone state, the traditional practices and vernacular
architecture of the region stand out for its strength and exclusiveness. The “Koti Banal” style of
construction technique (Fig. 8) is a reflection of the historic reality that has successfully withstood several
earthquakes over the decades (Rautela and Joshi, 2009). The vernacular practice of the state makes
ample and judicious use of local knowledge and locally available building materials (timber and stone) to
create multi-storied structures. These practices demonstrate indigenous understanding, sensibility, and
community involvement (Saraswat and Mayuresh, 2017). There are similar styles of vernacular approach
embraced by other Himalayan states of India including Kath Kuni, Koti Banal, and Dhajji construction.
The traditional architecture not only provided climate adaptability but also strength to the buildings
located in seismically vulnerable regions (Kumar and Pushplata, 2013). However with time, due to the
need for inexpensive and rapid construction; the traditional building techniques started to disappear. The
architectural heritage that survived centuries was replaced by rapid urbanization and resulted in poor
quality non-engineered structures in hilly areas.
The resilient planning for the new town in Chamoli district needs to revisit the indigenous practices and
fabricate a city that amalgamates both traditional and modern methods for comprehensive development.
These structures are the manifestation of safe multi-storied construction on fragile terrain. The
mainstreaming risk reduction in planning practices consults elements like housing, urban poor, building
regulations, etc; here the vernacular guidance can be employed. The acknowledgment of local traditions,
construction culture, and community involvement creates a comprehensive understanding of resilience,
architecture, and urban planning. These ecological solutions for a resilient built environment can respond
to the community needs of the hill settlements (Gautam et al., 2016).

Fig. 8 Traditional multi-storied structures in Koti Banal style

Source: Rautela & Joshi, 2009

6. Conclusion

Uttarakhand has witnessed an expeditious development on the fragile land without adequate care for the
environment, biodiversity, geographical, geological, and ecological dimensions. The climatic condition of
Chamoli district along with the human interventions on the new capital site may cause severe damages
and imbalance in ecology. Even though natural disasters are inevitable and their occurrence cannot be
prevented; preparedness may largely lessen the losses and damages. Identification of risks and integration
of disaster management with development plans has become a need of the hour. The mitigation and
management strategies need to ensure the incorporation of social, economical, cultural, environmental,
and political factors. The resilient plan can dispense guidelines, policies, and best practices for the
vulnerable hill settlement from the initial stage of development. Although there are several challenges in
mainstreaming DRR into planning for the vulnerable hill town due to topographical, institutional
constraints, lack of awareness and compliance, etc. But the urban planners, architects, policymakers along
with the disaster management department can strengthen the city by reducing social, assets &
environmental losses in the Chamoli region. Tools & strategies like GIS-based mapping, risk-sensitive
land-use planning, traditional vernacular practices and many more can help in mitigating the risks. For
hill towns it is very crucial to consider all physical aspects such as geology, hydrology, landslide zones,
etc. while planning, which is mostly missing from a development perspective. Much of the information
on these aspects can be obtained through geospatial technologies. Hence, an appropriate mechanism
should be adopted for the preparation and revisions of these maps. Urban resilience can be built by
strengthening the local government and community participation. For a multi-hazard prone state like
Uttarakhand, it is essential to ensure that DRRM consolidates the strategies by including urban planners
and not just engineers and disaster management professionals.

7. Acknowledgement
The authors, while assuming the whole responsibility for the contents of the document, sincerely extend
their gratitude to Dr. Kshama Gupta, scientist at Urban and Regional Studies Department - Indian
Institute of Remote Sensing-Dehradun (IIRS-ISRO), whose guidance is ineffable.

8. References
 Asian Development Bank. (2016). Reducing Disaster Risk by Managing Urban Land Use: Guidance
Notes for Planners. © Asian Development Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/11540/6674. License: CC BY
3.0 IGO.
 Bhattarai, N. (2013). Opportunities and Challenges of Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in
Development Planning at Local Level: A case study of Dailekh District, Nepal.
10.13140/RG.2.1.1739.1204. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239526579
 Chmutina, K., Ganor, T., & Bosher, L. (2014). Role of urban design and planning in disaster risk
reduction. Proceedings of the ICE - Urban Design and Planning, 167(3): 125-135.
 Census of India, 2011. https://censusindia.gov.in/.
 Gautam, D., Prajapati, J., Paterno, K.V. et al. (2016). Disaster resilient vernacular housing technology
in Nepal. Geoenviron Disasters 3, 1 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-016-0036-y
  Joshi, N., (2021). Adopting a governance lens to address urban risks in the Uttarakhand Himalayas:
The case of Almora, India. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 54, 102044,
ISSN 2212-4209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102044.
 Khatibi, F.S., Dedekorkut-Howes, A., Howes, M. et al. (2021). Can public awareness, knowledge and
engagement improve climate change adaptation policies?. Discover Sustainability 2, 18
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-021-00024-z
 Kumar, A., & Pushplata. (2013). Vernacular practices: as a basis for formulating building regulations
for hilly areas. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 2(2): 183–192.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.01.001
 Kumar, A., & Pushplata. (2015). Building regulations for hill towns of India,HBRC Journal,Volume
11, Issue 2: 275-284,ISSN 1687-4048, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.006
 Moraci, F., Errigo, M., Fazia, C. et al. (2018). Making Less Vulnerable Cities: Resilience as a New
Paradigm of Smart Planning. Sustainability, 10(3), 755. doi:10.3390/su10030755
 Nguyen, V.N., Ginige, K., & Greenwood, D. (2018). Challenges in integrating disaster risk reduction
into the built environment – The Vietnam context. Procedia Engineering, Volume 212: 316-323,
ISSN 1877-7058, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.041.
 Phiri, Y., Aydin, K., Mkandawire, A., & Parham, H. (2019). Urban Planning and Urban Disaster
Resilience: Effects of Poor Urban Planning and Development in the Cities of Malawi. IV.
International Congress on Urban Studies. Issue: 1, Volume: 4: 137-168
 Rautela, P., & Joshi, G. C. (2009). "Earthquake safety elements in traditional Koti Banal architecture
of Uttarakhand, India", Disaster Prevention and Management, Volume 18 No. 3: 299-316.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560910965655
 Safari, N., Mehr, A.M., & Heidari, R. (2016). The role of urban planning in reducing the harmful
consequences of natural disasters (Case Study: Abbar). International Journal Of Humanities And
Cultural Studies Issn 2356-5926. http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index
 Saraswat S., Mayuresh G. (2017). Koti Banal Architecture of Uttarakhand: Indigenous Realities
and Community Involvement. In: Chakrabarti A., Chakrabarti D. (eds) Research into Design for
Communities, Volume 2. ICoRD 2017. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, Volume
66. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3521-0_14
 UNISDR (2011). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Revealing Risk, Redefining
Development. http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2011/en/home/download.html

View publication stats