The building of housing dates back centuries. All types of residential housing in all parts of the world have gone through various degrees of forethought and conscious design changes in their layout and functioning through the ages.

• Physical city is the result of a coordinated action of housing and city planning.

• Housing covers places where people live - places that are called "home" or "abiding place" that may be singly or multi-inhabited.

•The forms of living are too various to permit the investigation of housing to develop a strict science, but certain details, such as the amount of cubic space of air that each room should contain per each individual are rapidly becoming scientifically understood, and formed into guidelines.

• City planning merges with housing at the street, neighborhood recreation and transportation planning levels.

• City planning has effect on the structure of a housing settlement, not on the use or abuse of it after construction, the transportation systems, lot dimensions and heights of buildings are provided or permitted for at the city plan level.

INTRODUCTON

The Evolution of Planned Housing Concepts: 1870-1970

Many of the received models of modern architecture and planning owe their ultimate origin to the building code and public health reform movements of the second half of the 19th century. As such they emerged as attempts first to accommodate and then to control the escalation in urban population that had risen to crisis proportions by the middle of the century.

• The first reaction : To house the migrating rural labor in constricted tenements or back to back row houses, involving the wholesale superimposition of subhuman living conditions.

• The second reaction was to legislate against the brutal aspects of this instant housing and to postulate alternative models for the accommodation of the urban populace; models which would provide higher standards of space, access, light, ventilation, heat and sanitation.

• The third and final reaction, from the point of view of basic model making, was to propose the gradual dis-urbanization of rich and poor alike; to advocate the planned dispersal of urban congestion, at locations and densities which were clearly intended to be rural.- Formulated by Ebenezer Howard in Tomorrow, A Peaceful Path to Real Reform

Disadvantages of these approaches

• In each approach, the proposed models of built form were not neutral in respect to either the physical differentiation of public space or the physical pattern that would necessarily result from their wholesale repetition.

• In each case, particularly after the turn of the century, the full urban consequences of adopting 'open city' or garden city models, be they urban or suburban, were not foreseen.

• With some exceptions, the potential disadvantages of rendering every building as freestanding as possible were largely ignored. Except protestations of Camillo Sihe (in City Planning According to Artistic Principles of 1898)

• Few could foresee the unmitigated waste that would result from the wholesale proliferation of a corrupted garden city model.

• Displayed little awareness for the potential, of this model to degenerate into the ribbon and track house development of the 20th century.

Tenement Development and the Anti-Street Models of the 19th Century City: 1879-1938Prior to 1918, in rapidly expanding urban centers such as New York, Paris and London, theoretical notions about city block planning underwent transformations.

In New York : Attempts were made to achieve an improved standard for low-income housing after the model tenement designed by George Pose and George Dresser in l879. In Paris : Eugene Henard attempted a reworking of the standard Haussmann boulevard in his set back street model of 1903, which he called a boulevard a redans.

In London :Unwin and Parker employed a comparable set back terrace for picturesque effect in their Hampstead Garden Suburb of 1906.

This same tradition was continued by Le Corbusier who, a decade later, projected after Unwin, a system of set back blocks to be compiled out of a free assembly of standard concrete units; ( Maison Domino, 1915)

Disadvantages

• All these set back solutions were endemically anti-street. • Constituted a conscious disruption to enclosing continuity of the traditional street.

In New York a number of architects developed the Post and Dresser model tenement further, particularly Ernest Flagg whose Improved Housing Council tenements of 1896 demonstrated the potential of an internal set back profile to provide adequate light and air to every room in the tenement. (This model dominated New York tenement development for the next forty years, culminating in the Paul Lawrence Dunbar Apartments of 1926 and ultimately in the Harlem River Homes of 1938. )

•Both of these schemes pushed the space-making potential of the internal set back block to its natural limit. • There is an incipient tendency away from maintaining the continuity of the street, particularly in 1930.

Implicit internationalism had begun to turn the attention of architects away from the street, towards the set back block and the row houses of European Rationalism -models which envisioned the total transformation of the city into a continuous park.

The Evolution of the Perimeter Block Model 1895-1923

In Europe, model tenement development took a totally different course; one which was intent on maintaining the ‘street’.

• The Berlin Tenement reform law of 1890, H. P. Berlage's plan for Amsterdam South of 1917.

•Such a multiple-dwelling model had already been demonstrated on a small scale by Frank Lloyd Wright in his Francisco Terrace apartments built in Chicago in l895.

•Designers and theorists in Germany and Holland developed a perimeter residential block that would preserve the continuity of the street , while opening up the resultant courtyard for use as an enclosed semipublic space.

• The model was realized on a much larger scale in the building out of Berlage's Amsterdam South and in J. J. P. Oud's Tusschendyken housing built in Rotterdam after 1918.

• By the mid 20's Berlage's perimeter model enjoyed a brief period of universal acceptance as the standard European building block for low cost urban housing.

H.P. Berlage, South Amsterdam Plan (1914-1917)

Oud Tusschendyken – Rotterdam Housing

• Influenced a number of cities such as Berlin, Vienna and Helsinki.

• Such widespread adoption came at a time when the model itself had already been significantly modified, most particularly in Michiel Brinkman's Spangen housing built in Rotterdam in 1921 (This project enriched the inner space of a typical Berlagian courtyard block through the provision of an elevated deck, giving continuous access at a third floor level to a periphery of duplex units.• The width of this open deck was hypothetically such that it could serve as a surrogate street affording adequate space

not only for access and service but also for children's play and doorstep conversation.

• Brinkman overlooked the fact that such a street is one sided and inadequate for all the uses to which it is theoretically dedicated.

• Nevertheless the importance of Spangen lay in the fact that it introduced ‘the deck’

•Other examples are Alison and Peter Smithson's Golden Lane Housing 1952, Davis Brodie's Riverbend Housing, Harlem.

Michiel Brinkman's Spangen housing 17) Alison and Peter Smithson's

Golden Lane Housing

The Influence of Le Corbusier : 1922-1956

Both Henard's set back block and Berlage's peripheral courtyard model were to find their brilliant if relatively unrealizable synthesis in Le Corbusier's hypothetical city for 3 million inhabitants, 1922. Le Corbusier's Ville Contemporaine • Each courtyard block enclosed a large communal green space, while his set back structures advanced and receded amid a continuous parkscape. • In both Instances the residential units composed two story L-shaped duplex units each enclosing its own garden terrace.• These were fed by wide access decks elevated five to eleven floors above ground. • In many respects this city, projected at a regional scale, constituted a threshold in the development of European housing models.• From now on the general tendency was towards the ultra-rationalist line of the Modern Movement, a line which was to extend from the Krupp housing built in 1970’s to the medium rise open row house model of the Weimar Republic.

Ville Contemporaine, Le Corbusier

•Self Contained, Self sufficient slab – The neighbourhood unit as megastructure.

• The high rise residential tower designed as a density booster for low income housing was to become the received norm of the New York city Authority from 1934 to 1960’s, In the interim both the slab and the tower were to play mutually disjunctive roles in the vogue of so called mixed development i.e. high and low rise mix that dominated English planning in the immediate post war years.

Ville Contemporaine, Le Corbusier

The Evolution of the Open Row Model 1923-1933

The radical change in German residential block planning in the middle twenties is best exemplified in the work of Otto Haesler.

Between his Siedlung Italienischer Garten of 1923 and his Siedlung Georgegarten of 1924, the overall model becomes totally transformed from a block arrangement facing directly onto the street, to that which has open rows of identical length, set endward to the street, and arranged at a standard distance apart.

Consisted of a typical Haesler three story walk-up block that made the Judicious use of elevators.

Gropius points this out in his essay for the CIAM publication, Rationelle Bebauungsweisen published in 1930, wherein he wrote: "In a ten-or twelve story high rise apartment even the ground floor occupant can see the sky. Instead of lawn strips only 20 meters wide, the windows face landscaped areas with trees which are 100 meters wide and help to purify the air as well as providing playgrounds for children."

• Until 1940’s , in Europe, the three to four story walk-up row housing continued to predominate as the received type and served in projects such as Neubuhl Garden City realized outside Zurich in 1932.

• The triumph of one model, namely parallel rows of freestanding blocks or slabs, led almost at once to its counter thesis, i.e.to the projection of carpet-court-yard housing as an overall solution to the problem of housing at relatively high density.

• Adolf Loos in his Heuberg houses of 1923 and then, in the late twenties, Hugo Haring, Hilberselmer and finally Mies van der Rohe projected various versions the courtyard house as a new unit of land settlement.

• In 1933 Dutch architect Leppla designed a two story low rise house that was capable of yielding the remarkable density of 350 persons per acre.

• A few years later Frank Lloyd Wright proposed Suntop Home built at Ardmore, Pennsylvania, as a new unit for dense suburban settlement in the States.

Heuberg District Houses, Adolf Loos Suntop Home, F.L.Wright

Cloverleaf houses, F.L. Wright

The Evolution of Low Rise Housing: 1948-1966

Immediately after the I war, the isolated tower or slab and the open row house had become universally accepted as standard components for the planning of residential areas.

Le Corbusier’s first essay on carpet housing ,1948 along with his project for La Saint Baume served as an essential point of departure for the low rise scheme to be built after the Second World War, namely Siedlung Helen completed outside Berne in the early 60's.

The decade leading up to Halen witnessed the growth of a Brutalist sensibility, which was to reject outright not only the fragmented Garden City approach of the first English New Towns, but also the equally sterile Zeilenbau model as interpreted in the first English high density schemes of consequence to be built after the war.

This sensibility asserted its relevance in an era of mixed development, with its easy acceptance of and ill-differentiated open space and with the inequality of amenity that it afforded to blocks of different height, i.e. if the tenement forced integration, mixed development forced segregation.

Siedlung Helen, le corbusier

By the late 50's, the English, under the influence of Le Corbusier, were already oriented towards the adoption of low rise housing as a general policy. It took some time, however, for this model to become widely accepted.

Since Siedlung Halen was realized 1962, low rise high density development dominated British housing policy , while in Switzerland, 'carpet housing‘ become the standard technique for building on steep slopes which hitherto were regarded as undevelopable.

BUILT OPEN• Built open relationship is a very important aspect for any planning. It is represented by a figure ground.• A figure-ground diagram is a two-dimensional map of an urban space that shows the relationship between

built and unbuilt space. It is used in analysis of urban design and planning.

• As well as "fabrics", a figure ground diagram comprises entities called pochés. These are, in simple terms, groups of structures — or in even simpler terms the black figures on the diagram. A poché helps to define the voids between the buildings, and to emphasize their existence as defined objects in their own rights: spaces that are as much a part of the design as the buildings whose exteriors define them.

• A figure-ground illustrates a mass-to-void relationship, and analysis of it identifies a "fabric" of urban structures.

The physical aspect of urbanism, emphasizing building types, thoroughfares, open space, frontages, and streetscapes but excluding environmental, functional, economic and sociocultural aspects.

FABRIC

The grain of a city describes the type of organization existing in the city or town.

A fine and sharp grained city is the one with clear definition between spaces and functions. These areas are consisting of residences with mixed use. Production is carried out inside the home, along with agriculture related activities. Sale and purchase may be undertaken here too, or along main streets spreading out indiscriminately. All kinds of houses are mixed together, but organization is based on the owner’s position in society. Craftsmen living over their own shops, a separate street for butchers and a separate one for clergy. The focal points are precise, like a castle or a market square. Areas adapt to special use and have a strong emotional association with their activity. Advantages of such areas provide easy accessibility, good social contact and great visual richness.

GRAIN

Coarse grain on the other hand exhibit clear differentiation between spaces and functions. Modern cities exhibit differentiation on a much broader scale. Areas are planned according to functions with services and street sections suiting to each function. The character is not mixed use. Large scale differentiations have their advantages. Residential areas can have quiet local streets with open areas for children and family life. Areas can be disintegrated according to functions and provided appropriate infrastructure accordingly.

STREET PATTERN• The street pattern principles are designed to yield safe, comfortable personal mobility for people of all

ages and abilities. Streets and intersections designed according to this pattern knit together rather than dividing communities. Streets and sidewalks are designed for walking, and often serve as public gathering places in their own right.

• Street systems have a pervasive influence on how a community functions. They tend to shape local land use patterns, the form of the various districts, the level of access that can be provided to destinations, and the design and function of individual places.

• To a large degree, a community’s circulation system also determines the quality of people’s daily experiences while driving, walking, bicycling, or taking the bus or train. Factors such as the width of streets, the condition of sidewalks, the spacing of intersections and the aesthetic character of surrounding areas may work together to create an environment that encourages walking and outdoor activity.

• The design of streets, pavement markings, and signage can help to orient unfamiliar users of all travel modes, leading to safer, more predictable behavior and a more satisfying experience of place.

• Five key principles define mobility-friendly circulation: Connectivity, Multi-use Streets, Legibility, Safety by Design, and Sensitivity to Surroundings.

• Connectivity:Create interconnected street networks with frequently spaced intersections, and interconnected pedestrianpathways and bicycle networks.

The traditional grid-style street layout of older towns provides excellent connectivity. Streets are interlinked at numerous points, intersections are closely spaced, and there are few dead-ends. This not only provides a more direct route to any destination, butalso helps to spread the traffic load over multiple streets and intersections. The presence of a grid pattern and parallel streets allows state and county highways to serve their main purpose—moving vehicles over longer distances—while shorter tripscan take place on local streets.

• Multi-use Streets:Design “complete streets” and intersections that serve pedestrians, persons with disabilities, bicyclists,transit vehicles, and trucks as well as motorists.

Serving all users effectively can be difficult. It requires balancing the needs of each category of users, and

determining who should have priority in different situations. Their design must reflect the need to accommodate high volumes of truck traffic while providing at least minimal accommodation for other users.

Other roads support frequent bus operations, and their characteristics should reflect transit priorities, with bus pull-off areas and signal preemption systems to cut down on transit travel time.

Roads that serve as “Main Streets,” on the other hand, should discourage high speed travel and give priority to pedestrians.

• Critical minimum dimensions for pedestrian and bicycle facilities are summarized in the table below.

Other critical issues to be kept in mind are that of :• Sidewalks - the foundation of a walkable community, and wide sidewalks are the basis for creating lively

public spaces.• Intersection - Mobility-friendly intersections are designed to provide minimum standards of safety and

comfort for all users, even if this results in some additional delay to motorists.• Crosswalks - Two general types of crosswalks need to be considered: those placed at signalized or

stopcontrolled intersections, and those without traffic controls.• Curb ramps and tactile warnings - Curb ramps provide access between the sidewalk and roadway for

people with special mobility needs, including wheelchair users and those pushing carriages or carrying large items.

• Bicycle facilities - Bicycling can be accommodated through the use of shoulders, wide outside travel lanes, signed shared roadways, dedicated bike lanes within the right-of-way, or offstreet bike paths separated from the roadway.

• Legibility:Provide a legible environment that helps users orient themselves, navigate, and understand their surroundings.

People make sense of their environment through the myriad cues it provides. Signs and pavement markings are only one part of a legible street system. The placement and design of buildings, the use of color and texture to demarcate transitions, and the provision of adequate lighting are all factors working to create legibility. The transportation system should be designed to work together with local landmarks and other features to provide these consistent cues.

Legibility is linked to safety: for example, the use of bright white edge lines helps users recognize the edge

of a roadway and drive more consistently. Edge lines are especially important on rural roads with soft shoulders, as well as for senior drivers. Predictable, unambiguous signals and consistency in intersection design treatments are also factors in legibility, and hence, safety.

• Safety by Design: Encourage safe and predictable behavior by all roadusers. Road features should enforce desired speeds,

accommodate safe use by senior drivers and encourage shared use by motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians.

Self-enforcing roads make it more difficult to speed, and more natural to slow down when approaching a town center or other pedestrian environment. Through careful design, the multi-use streets described earlier in this chapter can convey to each user the behavior that is appropriate at that location, encouraging safe, shared use by motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. This concept is also related to the notion of legibility described above.

Safety-oriented design principles can help to reduce both the number of crashes and the severity of those that occur. They provide a sense of security and comfort in using the transportation system, encourage walking and bicycling, and improve mobility and safety for senior citizens, school children, and other residents.

• Sensitivity to Surroundings:Design roads and bridges in context, with respect for the surrounding environment.

The first four principles of the Circulation pattern focused on providing a mobility-friendly transportation system by planning for multiple users, connectivity, legibility, and traffic calming. The final principle, Sensitivity to Surroundings, is related to each of the others, but turns the focus outward to the roadway environment.

Transportation projects in the urban core should be designed to support a secure environment for a

project’s neighbors. Adequate lighting of transit stations and pedestrian environments is critical. In urban areas, boulevard style roadway treatments can be effective in providing traffic capacity while buffering adjacent land uses from traffic impacts through the use of local service lanes and parking areas. Landscaped medians add visual interest and if wide enough, may serve as linear parks.

The sense of space is put in strong terms, with positive effect by people living in a city. A large open space with clear view lines continuing gives an impression of expanse and is inviting. On the other hand, crowdiness has an overwhelming effect on the impression formed of the physical environment. Enclosures are the obverse of space, but has a more pressing and immediate effect. It usually has a negative effect on the memory of a city on a visitor’s mind.

SENSE OF ENCLOSURE

2 nd century BC.: Traditional core of the city is established. Development is restricted to the 3 sacred zones and the Rajghat plateau.

1832 AD: Rapid growth of the city begins toencroach upon the natural drainage pattern. Major water bodies - Mandakini, Matsyadori,Veni and Godavari are drained, filled and reclaimed for parks. 'Pleasure garden enclosures’ are established by the native rich and the British, in areas between the native and colonial settlements. 1862 AD: The first railway link betwee Calcutta and Benares is established. River Ganga is linked by a rail cum road bridge at Rajghat. Water transport system begins to decline.

1916 AD: Benares Hindu University is established south of the Assi river. 1947 AD: India's freedom triggers a rapid process of urbanization. Large number of partition refugees from 'East Pakistan’ accommodated within the city. All the parts of the pre- independence city grow further1950 AD: The first master plan for the city is prepared. The plan proposes a separate industrialzone within the city and a new road link to Ramnagar. It also initiates a strategy for inner city decongestion.

COMPARATIVE SPATIAL ANALYSIS

PRINSEP’S DRAWINGOF THE TRADITIONAL CORE

The form of the traditional core, as it exists today, is characterized by a homogeneous, dense and porous spatial pattern. The structure of the spatial pattern is composed of radiating, near concentric semi-circular street networks superimposed by a near orthogonal network of streets. The street networks define enclosures with an independent identity, yet similar spatial structure.

These enclosures along the banks of the rivers comprise an organization of different, yet functionally related buildings, and are connected to the “river through a series of step structures known as 'ghats.'There are 108 'ghats' in the traditional core of the city,most of them connected to one another. Each 'ghat' has a specific social or religious significance associated with it.Well integrated with the band of enclosures along the banks of the river, are the different residential quarters of the city.The city is divided into a number of sectors known as 'mohallas,' which are defined by the narrow, meandering street networks of the core. Each 'mohalla' accommodates a group of people belonging to a particular caste and a linguistic - geographical area of the Indian sub continent; and represents a distinct architectural style. The 'mohallas’ also serve as a 'unifying harbor' for pilgrims from its region of origin. Together, all the 'mohallas' of the core reflect the social and cultural diversity found in the Indian sub-continent. Each 'mohalla' is further subdivided into different blocks, each accommodating a distinct social sub group.Towards the periphery of the core, are located large plots of land which accommodate the 'pleasure residences' and garden complexes of the rich.

Characteristics of the spatial patterns within thetraditional core

Whole and part relationship within the spatial structure

Whole and part relationship within the block

DEVELOPMENT OF COLONIAL SETTLEMENT

HISTORY

Delhi assumed its modern form when in 1912 the imperial capital of British India was shifted from Calcutta to Delhi. Since then it has undergone 3 distinct phases of City Planning.

PHASE 1: Lutyens Delhi• The building of New Delhi by a team of

British town- planners and architects led by Lutyens (1912-1935)

• The new city planned as a Garden city symbolisation of British imperial power in India.

DEVELOPEMNT OF LUTYENS DELHI•The urban form of Delhi to impose a statement of grandeur, order and authority. •Development of vast low density areas in New Delhi

DENSITY AND FABRIC• THE POPULATION DENSITY PLANNED : 15 persons per acre • DENSITY OF WALLED CITY : 1,500 persons (approximately) per acre.• No attention was paid to the problems of Old Delhi • Due to the creation of New Delhi, Old Delhi experienced a 28% surge in

population from 1916-1926• Spilling over of the population from inside the walled city to the Paharganj area,

whose restructuring was later abandoned by Lutyens due to resource constraints. • No provision of housing was premeditated for the large no. of skilled and

unskilled workers which immigrated in for the construction work of New Delhi. • Negligence of the planners towards Old Delhi resulted in its transformation to a

large slum area through deterioration and dilapidation.

LANDUSE

• TOTAL AREA: 2800 hectares• BUNGALOW ZONE : plots

varying in size from 1 Acre to 4 Acres of land, and having very low Ground Coverage of 6 to 8% with single storied construction.

• RESIDENTIAL AREA: 847.5ha. Out of this, 402.8 ha occupied by government bungalows and 1026 hectares by private bungalows

CIRCULATIONMOVEMENT SYSTEM• The principle parkway, Kingsway, forms the main processional

route which leads from Purana Quila, through the ceremonial gate, towards the forecourt at the base of Raisina Hill.

• All avenues ranged from 18m to 180 m in width. The original design of the road network was capable of accommodating 6000 vehicles, however these avenues, had the potential of increasing their carriageway-the reason why the road layout has survived till today.

• In general the road network consisted of diagonals and radials, at 30 degree/ 60 degree angles to the main axis, forming triangles and hexagons.

PLAN SHOWING ROADS FORMING MAJOR VISTAS IN LUTYENS DELHI

RELATIONSHIP OF HEIGHT AND STREETSECTION SHOWING HIERARCHY

IN ROAD

Five basic social areas were created: 1. gazetted officers, 2. european clerks, 3. indigenous clerks,4. indigenous elite, 5. non-official – peons. In each of these main sectors, accommodation,

varying in size of house and compound, was allocated according to status with the highest-ranking positions, where, possible, nearer to 'Government House'.

Inter-locking racial, social and occupational stratification was created in the city plan.1. Clear racial and social segregation.2. This model created two distinct classes:

‘European’ and ‘native’.3. Size of dwelling and status reflected in

bungalow costs.

SOCIAL PROFILE

Elements Study Area- Lutyens Delhi

Urban PatternCultural dominance of India by British. Spatially well defined. Social distinctions inscribed in the landscape. The urban pattern consisted of nodes. Landmarks, vistas, etc. Style of architecture that fused classical with vernacular features

Commercial Activities

The new commercial center was established mid way between old and new cities. It catered to the growing high status European population in the city. Connaught Place became New Delhi's commercial center, almost as busy as Shahjahanabad's Chandni Chowk, but more sophisticated, a market for imported goods

Street Pattern

The street pattern was based on hexagonal system containing major landmarks at every node. Hierarchy in terms of road widths was maintained. Other important features of the street pattern include formation of vistas, and boulevards.

The Residential Fabric

Social hierarchy was used to establish thematic contrast. Physical elements within were used to convey the status of the residents. The basic bungalow unit was replicated along with main and service roads, paths and service areas, with very low residential densities.

Open Spaces

PublicSince, the design of New Delhi was inspired from Garden City planning; the city consisted of many large open spaces. Many nodes contained parks, and all public or administrative buildings had gardens, or open areas.

PrivateThe houses contained huge open areas. With a ground cover of 25% the overall open space in the whole city increased multiple times. Other private open spaces include courts, verandas, etc.

PHASE 2• The setting up of the Delhi Improvement Trust and the efforts at renovation of Old

Delhi (1936-1950) and then in the post-independence period.

PHASE 3

• The setting up of the Delhi Development Authority and its combined task of developing new areas and improving old ones 1950 onwards.

• immediately overwhelmed by a influx of refugee immigrants from west Pakistan as a result of partition.

• In December 1957 the Delhi Development Authority was constituted through an act of parliament.

• It evolved a draft plan in June 1960 and submitted it to the public for objections and suggestions. With due changes the final master plan was ready in November 1961 and in 1962 it was made law.

• A land-management plan was prepared which took into consideration the increase in Delhi's employment potential in government, trade and industry.

• On that basis it projected an increase in population up to 50 lakhs by 1981 (which has proved to be very low) and set 'urbanisable limits” which were to be enclosed by a 1 km wide 'green belt' to restrict further urbanisation and prevent surrounding urban areas from merging with Delhi.

POST INDEPENDENCE DEVELOPMENTS

EFFECT OF NEW PLANNING POLICY • The plan basically marked out commercial areas,

residential areas, industrial and educational areas, etc. (Zonal Approach).

• Urban renewal rather than mere slum clearance was set as the approach to planning for redevelopment of the existing city. Detailed prototype plans were then prepared for the 'renewal' of different types of areas.

• Many colonies were setup in the south and west like Kailash Colony, Kalkaji, Malaviya Nagar, Moti Nagar and Kirti Nagar to provide for this huge Punjabi population influx.

• After partition Delhi's growth remained unchecked for nearly a decade. Developed land was in short supply and people did not have the means to afford the exorbitant rates quoted by the private developers. This led to the establishment of unauthorized colonies.

• A large part of Delhi continued to grow unplanned, not considering all the safeguards, with lakhs of urban working poor living in illegal squatter colonies in the city. After the establishment of DDA it acquired most of the land in urban Delhi and became solely responsible for the development of land.

POPULATION DESITIES Densities in Delhi increase with distance from the central areaand continue to do so even at the urban fringes. The followingtable shows densities in different parts of urban Delhi in 1991.

EMERGING DENSITY PATTERNS PLANNED LOW RISE IMPERIAL DEVELOPMENTS•The lowest population densities and low intensity residentialdevelopments in Lutyens' New Delhi, Delhi Development Authority areas in southern Delhi, and in Model Town in the eastern parts of Delhi. •The Imperial town planning movement which gave birth to New Delhi, Model Town and Civil Lines advocated low rise orderly development, with large plot sizes and single storey buildings, with a maximum ground coverage of as little as 25% of the entire plot area.

PLANNED HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENTS•Dwarka, Rohini and Narela in the south west and west of Delhihave been planned to accommodate higher gross densities.• Since the late 1970's DDA has felt that Delhi has no more land to accommodate the exploding population, and maintains that densification can resolve the problem of scarcity of developed urban land. •Dwarka is particularly important as it is planned to accommodate one million people on 5,645 hectares of land

ILLEGAL HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENTS• illegal high rise developments on legally allotted plots has recently been observed. Private builders have generated a great demand for residential plots of between 165 and 420sq.mt. •The model for such a development involves an agreement between the owner and the builder to intensify the development on a plot where low rise residential development already exists. •Despite regulations limiting development to three and a half storeys high, or 12.5m, builders usually construct four or more floors

GROSS DENSITIES INURBAN DELHI, 1991

UNPLANNED HIGH RISE URBAN VILLAGES•Delhi has 369 villages, 170 of which have been incorporated intothe urban area.• The total population of all urban villages is 600,000,with an area of 1,500 hectares. •This makes the gross density of population 400 persons per hectare, which is closer to the higherdensities found in Old Delhi, rather than those of New Delhi.

LOW RISE SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS•There are 1,100 squatter settlements in Delhi, which are evenly distributed over the city.• With increasing distance from the central area of the city, the number of squatter clusters declines. •All squatter settlements are characterized by low rise development.•Inspite of the fact that the population has large household sizes, densities are quite low. It was estimated that a total 1,609,609 people lived in squatter settlements in 1997 on an area of 74,800 hectares giving a gross density of 22 persons per hectare.

HIGH RISE SLUMS•In 1989 the Delhi Municipal Corporation recognized 22 notified slums. • They covered an area of 1,966 hectares and had a population of 1,800,000 giving a gross density of 900 persons per hectare, the highest anywhere in the city. •These notified slums accommodated 21 % of Delhi's total population.

Over the years Delhi has grown in terms of both its geographical size and its population. Between 1951 and 1991, Delhi's area increased by more than three and half times while its populationgrew by eight times. As a result densities increased considerably. Urban Delhi's extremely low gross density of 73 persons per hectare in 1951 rose to 124 persons per hectare by 1991. Whilethe city's area increased by more than three times between 1951 and 1991, the average trip length doubled between 1970 and 1993. This shows a direct relationship between the geographicalarea and the average trip length. Also as the geographical area has increased it has led to longer networks of infrastructure.

EMERGING STREET ELEVATIONS

Diagrams showing the increase in density and commercialization over the years.

Diagrams showing expected transformation.

BUILT OPEN RELATIONSHIP

MICRO SCALE URBAN FABRIC

MAP SHOWING COLONIES HAVING SIMILAR FABRIC AND PLANNING

•Rohini, Narela and Dwarka have similar urban fabric. Here Rohini has been taken up for study and analysis.•Rohini East, is part of a planned development by the Delhi Development Authority. • an infill plan in 3-phase development has been proposed in the master plan of 2021.

PROPOSED LANDUSE AND POPULATION DENSITY

LANDUSE PLAN

PROPOSED LANDUSE PLAN BY DDA

3 PHASE DEVELOPEMENT

PRESENT DAY STREET SECTIONS

Built open ration on main streets is 1:3 and that of secondary street varies from 1:1 to 2:1.