1

City Development Plan

Hyderabad

Jaw

ahar

lal

Neh

ru

Nat

iona

l Urb

an R

enew

al M

issi

on

2

Urbanisation

Urban areas contribute 75% of GDP and more than

50% of our population to live in urban areas in few decades.

Role of National and State policies in targeting balanced development- but limitations to the success of such efforts.

Focused approach coupled with heavy investment in urban infrastructure needed.

Cities would be the key drivers to our economy but

Urban areas do not have 100000 problems but 100 problems multiplied 1000 times

3

Presentation Covers 1. City Development Plan (CDP)

2. Salient features of CDP : Hyderabad Current scenario and gaps

Underpinning Challenges

Vision

Strategy

Financing

Action Plan

4

5

Hyderabad in National Scenario- Comparison with Benchmark Cities

Hyderabad lags benchmark Indian cities on economic, infrastructure and social indicators. Hyderabad Bangalore Mumbai Delhi Chennai Kolkata

Gross District Product Per Capita Rs. 23000 Rs. 33000 Rs. 43000 Rs. 39000 Rs. 34,000Rs. 33,000Population below poverty line ( 2001) 23% 33% NA 8% 20% 6%Economic Disparity ( % of low and lower middle Income households, 2002) 37% 42% 27% 18% 42% 32%Literacy Rate( 2001) 79% 87% 87% 83% 80% 81%Drop out rate ( 2001) 66% 70% 42% 52% 46% 42%

Housing% of population living in slums ( 2001) 37% 18% 55% 35% 40% 31%

Health Child Mortality Rate (2001) 6.90% 4.90% NA 2.60% 3.70% 1.60%Piped water supply per day ( Hours)

2 hrs alternate day 2 to 4 NA 2 1 NA

Per capita Availability inlpcd of potable water (Water utility coverage area,2003)

130 80-100 168 180 106 173

SanitationSewerage Connections (UA)

41% 21% NA 55% 55% NAPublic Transport Utilization rate 44% 36% NA 62% 36% NA% area covered by roads 6% 12% 10% 18% 10% 12%Vehicles Density ( passenger car units per KM of road length) 723 695 242 NA 293 NARoad Accident Fatality Rate

( per 100,000 pop.) 2001

1200 1160 730 1430 100 350

Education

Water

Economic

Transport

Strong Weak

Low GDP-

Potential for increasing GDP.

Low literacy level.

Trailing in Water supply, Sanitation, transportation etc.

6

Hyderabad in Inter-National Scenario- Comparison with Benchmark Cities

Hyderabad Hanoi Bangkok Jakarta JohannesburgPer capita income (USD) 511 3,510 15,053 7,2,69 2,900Population below poverty line ( 2001) 23% 1.80% NA NA 25%Unemployment Rate (%) (1998) 22% 10.30% 2.20% 16.80% 26.40%

Education Literacy Rate( 2001) 79% 92% 97% 98% 93%Health Child Mortality Rate 6.90% 4.20% 3.30% 2.40% 5.50%

Household access to water 81% 100% NA 91% 84.50%

Per capita Availability in lpcd of potable water ( Water utility coverage area, 2003)

130 NA NA 77 261Household water connections ( 2001) 64% 70% 99% 50.30% 50%

SanitationSewerage Connections (UA) 41% 50% 100% 64.80% 84%

Economic Outcomes

Water

The comparison is even more harsh with respect to other metropolitan cities in developing countries.

Strong Weak

Low GDP- Potential for increase in GDP.

Low literacy level.

High poverty level.

High child mortality rate.

Trailing in Water supply, Sanitation, transportation etc.

Source: Monitor Group Report

7

Component Area

(sq km)

Population

(lakhs)

Density

(p/sq.km)

1981 1991 2001 2001

MCH 172 21.0 30.5 36.3 21048

Surrounding municipalities

419 3.8 9.9 17 4102

Others 187 2.3 3.2 4 2147

HUA 778 27.1 43.6 57.5 7393

HUDA 1905 29.9 46.7 63.8 3351

Demographics

8

Hyderabad Population has grown rapidly and is amongst the most densely populated cities

People (in 000) per Sq. KM

41.5%

31.8%

29.5%

19.9%

18.5%

51.9%36.2%

30.3%

9.8%

4.1%

20.0%

19.3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Delhi

Bglore.

Hyd.

Mumbai

Kolk.

Chen.

UA

MunicipalCorporation

Decadal Population Growth in Major Urban Agglomeration (1991-2001)

27

24

21

19

16

11

0 10 20 30 40

Mumbai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Blore

Kolkata

Chennai

Population Density of Major Corporations (2001) 000

Source: Census of India (1991 and 2001)

%

Demographics

9

88%

81%

80%

72%

65%

63%

63%

56%

52%

21%

19%

13%

10%

103%

0% 50% 100% 150% 200%

Uppalk. M

Rajen. Ngr M

Qutbul. M

Malkaj. M

L.B.Ngr M

Alwal M

Kapra M

Seriling. M

Kukat. M

Gaddin. M

Sec. Cntt

MCH

Ramach.-CT

Os. Univ

Most of the growth has taken place away from the city core

158%

26%

42%

19%

72%

19%

0%

40%

80%

120%

160%

200%

MCH

10 M

unici

paliti

es

Secb

ad C

ant

1981-1991

1991-2001

Decadal Growth of Population in Various Constituents (1991-2001)

Note: CT refers to Census Town, M refers to Municipality Source: Census of India (1991 and 2001)

Decadal Population Growth Rates in Various Constituents of HUDA (1981-01)

%

%

All

Municipalities

have grown by

more than

50%

compared to

~20% for MCH

and Sec.Cantt

All

Municipalities

have grown by

more than

50%

compared to

~20% for MCH

and Sec.Cantt

Demographics

10

Indu

stria

l

Res

iden

tial

Com

mer

cial

Che

aper

Rea

l Es

tate

Prox

imity

to

Empl

oym

ent

Infr

astr

uctu

re

Uppalk. M 1 1 1Rajen. Ngr M 1 1Qutbul. M 1 1 1Malkaj. M 1 1 1L.B.Ngr M 1 1Alwal M 1 1Kapra M 1 1Seriling. M 1 1Kukat. M 1 1Gaddin. M 1 1MCH 1 1 1 1Ramach.-CT 1 1

Nature of growth Growth DriversIn

crea

sing

Gro

wth

Rat

e

Growth has been residential creating demand for service delivery infrastructure in 10 Municipalities

Proximity to MCH is the key reason for growth Implying large % of traffic flows are towards MCH

Demographics

11

Population Density

Units- Persons/Sq. Km

1218

3706

6753

4156

13691

3273

21046 25293

6976

4142 3129

Pressure on Core is high

12

Demographics (Projections)

Component Area (sq km)

2001 2011 2021 Population (in lakhs)

Density (p/sq.km)

Population (in lakhs)

Density (p/sq.km)

Population (in lakhs)

Density (p/sq.km)

MCH 172 36.3 21048 43.3 25116 51.7 29977

Surrounding municipalities

419 17 4102 28.9 6926 50.9 12151

Others 187 4 2147 5 2692 6.3 3391

HUA 778 57.5 7393 77.2 9923 108.9 13997

HUDA 1905 63.8 3351 90.5 4753 136.4 7162

Growth will be concentrated in HUA area

13

15

Economics

Source: NCAER India Market Demographic Report 2002, State directorates of economics and statistics

39

33

23

43

33

0 20 40 60

Mumbai

Delhi

Kolkata

Bangalore

Hyderabad

Gross District Product Per Capita (2000-01)

Rs. 000

1

Hyderabad does not compare favorably with other metros, in terms of average gross district product per capita or proportion of low income households

16

Growth Corridors

Rail Network

HUA

Shamshabad Airport

FAB City

Apparel Park

Bio-tech Park

Hi-tech city

Hardware Park

Industrial and IT Estates

National highway

State highway

Growth areas Areas of Economic Growth

17

Economics

Knowledge and service sector

IT, Bio-tech, FAB city

Manufacturing

Apparel park

Garments and leather

Tourism

International Airport

18 1 0 1 3 5 10KM

SCALE 1:250000

GROWTH BY 2001GROWTH BY 2011GROWTH BY 2021

UPTO 75 LACUPTO 25 LACUPTO 10 LACUPTO 5 LAC

NODES

1 0 1 3 5 10KM

SCALE 1:250000

QUTBULLAPURRAMCHANDRAPURAM

UPPARPALLY

PATANCHERU

KHARMANGHAT

FALAKNUMA PALACE

SURARAMGUNLA POCHAMPALLY

KUKATPALLY, APHBSECUNDRABAD

CYBERABAD

GUNLA

MEDCHAL

KUSHAIGUDA

GHATKESAR

L.B.NAGAR

HABSHIGUDA

SHAMSABAD

HYDERABAD

To Mumbai N.h.no -9

To Mumbai (Broad Guage)

OSMAN SAGAR

HIMAYAT SAGAR

To Bangalore N.h.no-7

HUSSAIN SAGAR

To Nagpur N.h.-7

To Manmad

To Narsapur

To Kazipet

To Vijaywada N.h.no -9

To Nagarjuna Sagar

To Vikharabad

VASTU SHILPA CO NSULTANTS

"SANGATH" THALTEJ ROAD AHMEDABAD-380054 PHONE 7454537-39 FAX 079-7452006

CYBERABAD ENCLAVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

HUDA : ENVISAGED SPATIAL GRO WTH BY 2021- ALTERNATIVE 1 ( CO NCENTRIC MO DEL)

LEGEND

DEVELOPMENT AREA

ROADS PROPOSED IN 1980 MASTER PLANROADS PROPOSED IN 1980 MASTER PLANNATIONAL HIGHWAYS

BROAD GAUGE RA