Multi-temporal transect analysis of peri-urban developments in Faridabad, India

Figures & data

Figure 1. Expansion of Controlled Area and Development Plan from DP-2011 to DP-2031. Source: GoH-DTCP (1991a, 2014a), USGS.

Table 1. Categories for the contextual land-use classification.

Villages Existing villages have been identified in the map. In India, the area of rural villages contains residential and agricultural land. The residential area is known as village abadi and, in the process of urbanization land uses within the village abadi generally remain under the full control of the panchayat (village assembly), while the agricultural land is rezoned based on development plans. Due to their extraordinary governance structure, the village abadi areas are therefore not directly affected by state-led development plans. Generally, the village abadi area is densely built-up and – except for further densification and increased vertical developments – did not show major changes. The village boundaries formulate a distinct border between densely built-up areas and mainly agricultural use. In most cases, existing villages were easy to identify based on satellite imagery. For these reasons, we treat the villages as a separate land-use category in the map and decided against further identifying individual buildings in these areas. The reference point for the village boundaries is 2008 and in the 2016 classification these boundaries are kept constant. It is, thus, important to note that the identified village boundaries must not be equated with the officially recognized village abadi and their extensions in the DPs.

Societies The most prominent feature of the peri-urban development is the construction of so-called societies within the DP-2011 area. In various interviews, the terminology society was attributed to high-rise estates on large plots of land. The construction of societies is a direct outcome of the public–private partnership between real-estate developers and HUDA. During fieldwork, we identified 10 more or less consolidated areas where societies have been constructed or were close to completion. The mid- to high-income residential areas are characterized by their strictly planned design of high-rise apartment complexes, security measures like gates and watchmen, and integrated, private green spaces and playgrounds. Planned, low-income housing is non-existent. On the satellite imagery, societies are also clearly distinguishable based on the regular, large-scale building formations and the clear boundaries of walls and fences. Colonies Colonies aggregate built-up structures that are mainly residential. They are identified by small plots and sub-standard housing structures. Their boundaries are fuzzy and their identification was most challenging. In particular, as often only a few houses along a street were built and neighboring plots were still unoccupied, they were hard to distinguish from land under development or even barren land. Based on reference data from fieldwork, we have identified only major scattered developments (developed between 2008 and 2016) as colonies in the map and interpret them as the two types of the afore-mentioned unauthorized colonies either within or beyond the developmental area of the DP-2011. According to interviews with residents, especially low-income families buy these plots of land (either from farmers or middlemen) and build their houses in these colonies, while knowingly or unknowingly accepting the risk of conflicts with the official development agenda.

Under development Plots being under development or prepared for development exist all along the transect. Developers level the sites and build walls to demarcate the plots. The fieldwork showed that some plots are or have just recently been prepared to be sold or built-up, while other plots seem to be abandoned, mainly indicated by the state of vegetation (e.g. scrub) and no indicators of any development activities. In the field as well as in the satellite imagery, areas under development are characterized by a homogeneous coverage of barren or bushy land and indicators of demarcation and access roads in mainly rectangular patterns. During the fieldwork, some plots were further identified by billboards advertising the proposed projects. Further, the size and shape of the subdivision of land and the demarcations of single plots (e.g. boundary walls) are indicators for the designated use. Many of the areas classified as under development beyond the DP-2011 area will develop into dense residential areas – mainly unauthorized colonies.

Agriculture Arable land (and a few pastures) dominates along the transect. Farmers mostly cultivate staple crops (rice and other cereals) and vegetables. While the areas close to the Yamuna are almost entirely used for agriculture, farm land is increasingly perforated by non-agricultural uses with increasing proximity to Faridabad’s urban areas. Rectangular plot patterns and characteristic crop formations made identification of agricultural land easy and reliable. In cases of uncertainty, the multi-temporal images (Google Earth timeline) were checked for seasonal variations based on crop patterns.

Brick kiln Brick kilns are typical land uses for alluvial lands in Northern India. Utilizing the clay soil for brick burning usually prohibits any agricultural use afterwards. Land owners lease out or sell their land to brick kiln operators. Based on the DP-2011 regulations, brick kilns are generally allowed in agricultural zonings (GoH-DTCP, 1991b, 2014b). Their individual legal status is based on obtaining a license, which requires a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the DTCP and other state authorities. Brick kilns are easy to identify based on the chimneys, the stockpiling of bricks, and the red-coloured soil.

Barren land The category of barren land is the vaguest in the map and must be understood as a residual category. It consists of land between built-up spaces, along roads as well as abandoned agricultural land. We have distinguished these barren lands from land under development, due to the fact that on these no actual development activity could be detected both during fieldwork and from multi-temporal satellite imagery. Typically, this implies almost unchanged barren or bushy land cover for 2008–2016. The transition between barren land and land under development is fluid and should be interpreted as a rather loose distinction.

Figure 2. Typical land-use changes of the development pathways. Source: Authors.

GoH-DTCP. (1991a). Development plan 2011 A.D. Map. Retrieved from https://tcpharyana.gov.in/Development_Plan/Faridabad/Faridabad/FDP_2011/FDP_2011_FBC_Map.pdf

 Google Scholar

GoH-DTCP. (2014a). Draft development plan 2031 A.D. Map. Retrieved from https://tcpharyana.gov.in/Development_Plan/Faridabad/Faridabad/DDP_2031/DDP_2031_FBC_Exp_Note.pdf

 Google Scholar

GoH-DTCP. (1991b). Development plan 2011 A.D. Notification, 13/29/9I-3CII. Retrieved from https://tcpharyana.gov.in/Development_Plan/Faridabad/Faridabad/FDP_2011/FBC_2011_Exp_Note.pdf

 Google Scholar

GoH-DTCP. (2014b). Draft development Plan 2031 A.D. Notification, 14th July, 2014. No. CCP(NCR)/FBC(DDP-31)/2014/1312. Retrieved from https://tcpharyana.gov.in/Development_Plan/Faridabad/Faridabad/DDP_2031/DDP_2031_FBC_Exp_Note.pdf

 Google Scholar