You are on page 1of 149

A Thesis Report on

REVISITING THE PROVISIONS OF GREEN BELTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A CASE OF JAIPUR.

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Planning (Urban Planning)

By

Suvadip Bhowmik

(ID NO. 2009 PAU109)

Supervisor

Mr. Tarush Chandra

Associate Professor

A Thesis Report on REVISITING THE PROVISIONS OF GREEN BELTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A CASE OF

Academic Session

2010-11

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE

MALAVIYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAIPUR JUNE 2011

© Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur-2011 All rights reserved

List of Abbreviations:

PPG

JDA

Jaipur Development Authority

BMR

Bangalore Metropolitan Region

DDA

Delhi Development Authority

AMC

AUDA

BMA

Bangalore Metropolitan Area

PPP

Public Private Partnership

NCTD

National Capital Territory of Delhi

NCR

National Capital Region

MGB

Metropolitan Green Belt

STP

Sewage Treatment Plant

FSI

Floor Space Index

TDR

Transfer of Development Rights

ii

Contents

Page no.

List of Abbreviations…….………………………………………………………………....ii

List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………….viii

List of Figures…………………………………………………………….………….….… ...ix

List of Charts………………………………………………………………………….…….xii

Chapter 1 : Introduction and Study Brief

  • 1.1 Background……………………………………………………………….………1

  • 1.2 The origin of the ‘greenbelt’ concept……………………………………… ..3

  • 1.3 Understanding green belt………………………………………………… .......4

  • 1.4 Definition……………………………………………………………………….… ..4

  • 1.5 Need of the study……………………………………………………… … ....8

..

  • 1.6 Aim………………………………………………………………………………….9

  • 1.7 Objectives…………………………………………………………………………9

  • 1.8 Methodology……………………………………………………….……………10

  • 1.9 Scope of the study………………………………………………………… ......11

    • 1.10 Limitations………………………………………………………...……………...11

    • 1.11 Study area………………………………………………………………… .........12

Chapter 2 : Literature Study

  • 2.1 History of Green belt as a planning tool……………………………… ….14 ..

  • 2.2 Important facts to be considered while proposing greenbelt…….….16

  • 2.3 Issues involved…………………………………………………………….…….17

  • 2.4 Purpose of Green belt…………………………………………………….… 17 ...

  • 2.5 Uses of Green belt concept…………………………………………….…….19

  • 2.6 Threat for greenbelts………………………………………………………… 19 ...

  • 2.7 Green belt policies as per PPG (Planning policy Guidance)………….20

iii

Chapter 3 : Case Study

  • 3.1 London greenbelt, UK…………………………………………………………

...

25

  • 3.1.1 History and essence of London Green belt………………………

25

  • 3.1.2 Structure of London Green belt……………………………………….26

  • 3.1.3 Chronological growth of London…………………………………… 28 ..

  • 3.1.4 Metropolitan Green Belt structure…………………………………….28

  • 3.1.5 Threats for London green belt land………………………………… 30 ..

  • 3.2 Seoul’s greenbelt, South Korea ….……………………………………………31

    • 3.2.1 Seoul’s greenbelt policy……………………………………………… 33 ...

    • 3.2.2 Costs and benefits of Seoul’s greenbelt…………………………… 35 ..

    • 3.2.3 Greenbelt policy reform……………………………………………… 36 ...

    • 3.2.4 Issues involved…………………………………………………………….38

    • 3.2.5 Seven objectives for the establishment of Seoul’s greenbelt……38

    • 3.2.6 Inferences………………………………………………………………….38

  • 3.3 Ontario green belt, Canada…………………………………………………

  • ...

    40

    • 3.3.1 Vision………………………………………………………………….… 42 .....

    • 3.3.2 Purpose of green belt……………………………………………….… 42 ..

    • 3.3.3 Current land uses……………………………………………………… 42 ...

    • 3.3.4 Inferences………………………………………………………………….45

    • 3.4 Paris Green Belt, France………… ....…………………………………………...46

      • 3.4.1 The Green Belt as a Specific Area of the Ile-de-France Region………………………………………………………………………49

    • 3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany……………………………………………

    .......

    51

    • 3.5.1 Issues involved……………………………………………………………52

    • 3.5.2 General awareness…………………………………………………… 53 ..

    • 3.5.3 Facts & figures…………………………………………………………….53

    iv

    3.5.4

    Key Features……………………………………………………………….55

    • 3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada………………………………………………

    ...

    ….57

    • 3.6.1 Planning Goals and Objectives……………………………………….58

    • 3.6.2 Decision Making Framework……………………………………….… 59

    ..

    • 3.6.3 Uses permitted / Main features……………………………………

    ......

    63

    • 3.7 Greenbelt of Beijing, China…………………………………………………….64

      • 3.7.1 Three greenbelts of Beijing…………………………………………

    ......

    64

    • 3.7.2 Issues involved…………………………………………………………….67

    • 3.8 Vienna greenbelt, Austria……………………………………………………

    ....

    68

    • 3.8.1 Green belt development in Vienna……………………………… …69

    ..

    • 3.8.2 Development phases of Vienna 1870-2000…………………………70

    • 3.8.3 Categories of green space in Vienna……………………………… 71

    ..

    • 3.8.4 Land use pattern of Vienna……………………………………………71

    • 3.9 Ahmedabad Greenbelt, India………………………………………………

    ...

    72

    • 3.9.1 Overview of development plans in terms of greenbelt………… 72

    ..

    • 3.9.2 Details of AUDA and AMC……………………………………….…… 74

    ..

    • 3.9.3 Greenbelt land use……………………………………………………

    ....

    74

    • 3.9.4 Inferences………………………………………………………………….45

    • 3.10 Bangalore green belt, India……………………………………………………76

      • 3.10.1 Five concentric belts…………………………………………………….78

      • 3.10.2 Growth of Bangalore……………………………………….……………79

      • 3.10.3 Green belt statistics………………………………………………………80

      • 3.10.4 Inferences………………………………………………………………….81

  • 3.11 Delhi greenbelt, India………………………………………………………

  • .......

    82

    • 3.11.1 Master plan proposals for Delhi Greenbelt………………………….84

    v

    3.12 Inferences…………… ..………………………………………………………......85

    • 3.12.1 Prospects and consequences of greenbelts……………………

    .....

    86

    • 3.12.2 Factors assisting the permanence of greenbelt……………… …86 ...

    • 3.12.3 Greenbelt planning principles…………………………………………87

    Chapter 4 Survey

    • 4.1 Findings of Survey……………………………………………………….……… 88

    ..

    • 4.1.1 Purpose of Greenbelt Concept……………………………………….88

    • 4.1.2 Benefits of Greenbelt with special reference to Jaipur metropolitan region……………………………………………………

    ...

    89

    • 4.1.3 Threat for Greenbelts…………………………………………………….89

    • 4.1.4 Viability of green belt to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance of the Jaipur city……………………………….89

    • 4.1.5 Other probable options to control urban growth or maintain ecological balance……………………………………………………

    ...

    90

    • 4.2 Planning option for Jaipur greenbelt- SWOT analysis…………………… 90

    ..

    • 4.3 Survey Inferences………………………………………………………………

    ...

    91

    Chapter 5 JDA Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area

    & Eco-sensitive area

    • 5.1 Master Development Plan 1991…………………………………………… 92

    ..

    • 5.2 Master Development Plan 2011…………………………………………… 94

    ..

    • 5.3 Master Development Plan 2025…………………………………………… 97

    ..

    • 5.4 Comparative analysis of all three Master Plan proposals……………

    ....

    100

    vi

    Chapter 6 Inferences and Recommendations

    • 6.1 Influences of city size………………………………………………………… 101 ..

    • 6.2 Parameters responsible for designating Jaipur Greenbelt boundary..102

    • 6.3 Development Promotion / Control Regulation……………………………103

      • 6.3.1 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (U-2), MDP-2025..104

      • 6.3.2 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (U-3), MDP-2025..105

      • 6.3.3 Development Promotion/Control Regulation (Eco-sensitive area), MDP-2025…………………………………………………………………106

      • 6.3.4 Assessment of Development Promotion / Control Regulations..108

  • 6.4 Recommendations………………………………………………………… 109 ......

    • 6.4.1 Parameters for Jaipur green belt feasibility study………………

  • ...

    109

    • 6.4.2 Various schemes for green belt land ownership and pattern of development…………………………………………………………….111

    • 6.4.3 Suggestive planning principle for Jaipur Green belt…………….112

    • 6.4.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………….113

    Works Cited………………………………………………………………………………118

    Annexure:

    Annexure A: Comparative analysis of all case studies

    Annexure B: Opinion survey questionnaire

    vii

    List of Tables :

     

    Table no.

    Page no.

    Table 1.1:

    Area details of JDA Region…………………………………………….13

    Table 3.1:

    The distribution of green belt designated land by region of

    England as

    at 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010……………22

    Table

    3.2:

    Ontario Green belt details…………………………………………… ..41

    Table 3.3:

    Demographic

    structure

    of

    Paris………………………………

    … 46 ..

    Table

    3.4:

    Demographic

    structure

    of

    Frankfurt, Germany………… ..……...51

    Table 3.5:

    Frankfurt Green belt details…………………………………….……

    ..

    54

    Table 3.6:

    Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa……………………………57

    Table 3.7:

    Land allocation scenario of Green belt land…………………….62

    Table 3.8:

    Table 4.1:

    Urban Area, Rural Area & Green Belt In NCTD (1962-2001)

    82

    .. SWOT analysis………………………………………………………………90

    Table 6.1:

    Development controls for Urbanisable Area-2(JDA region) ..104

    Table 6.2:

    Development controls for Urbanisable Area-3(JDA region) ..105

    Table 6.3:

    Permitted Use Premises In Eco-Sensitive Area G-2…………….106

    Table 6.4:

    Demographic structure of Sirani & Daulatpura…………………110

    Table 6.5:

    Details of villages under the green belt boundary……………116

    viii

    List of Figures:

    Figure no.

    Page no.

    Figure 1.1:

    Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City concept………………………………… 3

    ..

    Figure 1.2:

    Location plan of JDA region………

    ...

    ……………………………… ..……….12

    Figure 3.1:

    Location map of England………………………………………………………22

    Figure 3.2:

    Green belts in England……………………………………………………….…23

    Figure 3.3:

    Location map of London in England………………………………………

    ...

    25

    Figure 3.4:

    Green belt around London…………………………………………………….26

    Figure 3.5:

    Settlements inside Greenbelt……………………………………………….…27

    Figure 3.6:

    Phases of Metropolitan Green belt structure…………………….…………29

    Figure 3.7:

    The green belt & satellite towns……………………………………….………30

    Figure 3.8:

    Location plan of Seol………………………………………………………

    ...

    ….31

    Figure 3.9:

    Map showing Seoul Greenbelt……………………………………………… 32

    ..

    Figure 3.10:

    Changes in Seoul's Administrative Boundary between 1314 & 1963….34

    Figure 3.11:

    Geographical feature of Seoul……………………………………………….35

    Figure 3.12:

    The Physical Expansion of the Seoul Metropolitan Region between

    1920-1994……………………………………………………………………….….37

    Figure 3.13:

    Location plan of Ontario……………………………………………………

    .....

    40

    Figure 3.14:

    Ontario Green belt………………………………………………………………43

    Figure 3.15:

    Existing Land use inside the Green belt………………………….………… 44

    ..

    Figure 3.16:

    The city of Toronto……………………………………………………………….44

    Figure 3.17:

    Development around the greenbelt………………………………………

    ...

    45

    Figure 3.18:

    Location map of Paris…………………………………………………………

    ...

    46

    ix

    Figure 3.19:

    Paris Green belt………………………………………………………………… 47

    ..

    Figure 3.20:

    Urban Area scenario of Paris………………………………………………… 48

    ..

    Figure 3.21:

    The perimeter of the greenbelt in the region of Ile de France (Paris)....49

    Figure 3.22:

    Location of Frankfurt, Germany……………………………………………….51

    Figure 3.23:

    Green Belt of Frankfurt………………………………………………………… 52

    ..

    Figure 3.24:

    City boundary and Green belt……………………………………………… 53

    ..

    Figure 3.25:

    Pattern of Greenbelt, Frankfurt……………………………………………… 55

    ..

    Figure 3.26:

    Pattern of activity inside Greenbelt………………………………………… 56

    ..

    Figure 3.27:

    Location of the City of Ottawa in the Province of Ontario, Canada…57

    Figure 3.28:

    Green belt of Ottawa…………………………………………………………

    ...

    58

    Figure 3.29:

    Land uses in the greenbelt…………………………………………………… 60

    ..

    Figure 3.30:

    The greenbelt inside the national capital region………………………….61

    Figure 3.31:

    Pattern of Urban Area around the Green belt…………………………… 62

    ..

    Figure 3.32:

    Settlement pattern outside the Green belt boundary……………………63

    Figure 3.33:

    Location of Beijing in China……………………………………………………64

    Figure 3.34:

    The Beijing Green belt………………………………………………………… 65

    ..

    Figure 3.35:

    The three Green belts of Beijing……………………………………………….66

    Figure 3.36:

    Location of Vienna in Austria………………………………………………….68

    Figure 3.37:

    Green belt of Vienna……………………………………………………………69

    Figure 3.38:

    Development phases of Vienna………………………………………………70

    Figure 3.39:

    Land use pattern of Vienna……………………………………………………71

    Figure 3.40:

    Location map of Ahmedabad…… ..…………………………………………72

    Figure 3.41:

    Boundary of AUDA and AMC………………………………………………….73

    x

    Figure 3.42:

    Green belt of Ahmedabad……………………………………………………75

    Figure 3.43:

    Location of Bangalore in Karnataka and India……………………………76

    Figure 3.44:

    Map showing Bangalore Development Authority limit…………………

    ...

    77

    Figure 3.45:

    Bangalore Green belt…………………………………………………………

    ...

    78

    Figure 3.46:

    Urban Development Scenario………………………………………………

    ...

    79

    Figure 3.47:

    Greater Bangalore in 1973, 1992, 2000, 2006 and 2009………………….80

    Figure 3.48:

    Location of Delhi in India……………………………………………………….82

    Figure 3.49:

    Regional setting of Delhi……………………………………………………… 83

    ..

    Figure 3.50:

    Delhi Master Plan 1962………………………………………………….……….84

    Figure 3.51:

    Delhi Master Plan 2021…………………………………………………….…….84

    Figure 5.1:

    Proposed Land Use plan 1991………………………………………….……

    ...

    92

    Figure 5.2:

    1991 Master Plan proposal for green belt. The 1991 green belt is shown

    inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan……………….……….93

    Figure 5.3:

    Urbanisable area 2011, indicating ecological area………………………95

    Figure 5.4:

    2011 Master Plan proposal for ecological area. The 2011 ecological

    area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan…… 96

    ..

    Figure 5.5:

    Land Utilization Map, indicating Eco-sensitive area………………………98

    Figure 5.6:

    2025 Master Plan proposal for Eco-sensitive area. The 2025 Eco-sensitive

    area is shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master Plan…… 99

    ..

    Figure 5.7:

    Master Plan proposals for Green belt, Ecological area & Eco-sensitive

    area. These are shown inside the JDA region as per the 2025 Master

    Plan…………………………………………………………………………….….100

    Figure 6.1:

    Location of Satellite towns around parent city…………………………

    ...

    102

    Figure 6.2:

    Land Utilization Map, JDA region…………………………………………

    ....

    103

    Figure 6.3:

    Location plan of Sirani and Dalautpura inside JDA region…………….109

    xi

    Figure 6.4:

    Sustainable greenbelt model…………………………………………… ….113

    ..

    Figure 6.5:

    Land Utilization Map, JDA region……………………………………………114

    Figure 6.6:

    Green belt proposal for JDA region ……………… ..………………………115

    Figure 6.7:

    Development all along the road……………………………………………118

    Figure 6.8:

    Development only on major junction/nodes…………………………… 118

    ..

    List of Charts:

    Chart no.

    Page no.

    Chart 3.1:

    Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City………………

    ...

    56

    Chart 3.2:

    Permissible land use inside the Green belt…………………… ...…………..74

    xii

    Chapter 1

    Introduction and Study Brief

    1.1 Background

    A green belt or greenbelt is a policy and land use designation used in land

    use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land

    surrounding or neighboring urban areas. Similar concepts are greenways or

    green wedges which have a linear character and may run through an urban

    area instead of around it. In essence, a green belt is an invisible line encircling

    a certain area, preventing development of the area allowing wildlife to

    prevail.

    The general concept of "green belt" evolved to encompass "Green space"

    and "Green structure", taking into account urban green space, an important

    aspect of sustainable development in the 21st century. The green belts are

    considered the lungs of urban centers. Such green belts in a city ensures

    freshness and improves the ambience of the town, maintain healthier

    environment by generating oxygen to the living creatures, and also function

    as an agent of recharging the ground with fresh rain water and controlling

    the increasing global warm. In fact, green belts increase the longevity of

    human life.

    Greenbelt is also an important land use planning technique to limit sprawl

    (unplanned, uncontrolled together with the spreading of development),

    which is the tendency for cities to spread out and encroach on rural lands

    and wildlife habitat. But to designate a Green Belt, a local authority must

    prove why normal planning and development control policies would not be

    adequate to protect a town from urban sprawl.

    The concept of greenbelt was first formally proposed by the Greater London

    Regional Planning Committee in 1935, "to provide a reserve supply of public

    open spaces and of recreational areas and to establish a green belt or belt

    of open spaces".

    According to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, United

    Kingdom, 1955: "An area of land near to and sometimes surrounding a town,

    which is kept open by permanent and severe restriction on building. The form

    it takes depends on the purposes it is intended to serve. If it is wanted to

    prevent two nearby towns from joining up, all that is necessary is a sufficiently

    wide belt of open land between them, leaving the towns free to expand in

    other directions. More often, the purpose is to limit the expansion of a town,

    and a virtually continuous belt all round it will be needed. There are also

    some groups of towns which are tending to merge into one solid urban mass.

    In such a case the green belt is partly a series of buffers of open land

    between the towns and partly a belt around the whole group".

    In United Kingdom town planning, the green belt is a policy for controlling

    urban growth. The idea is for a ring of peri-urban area where urbanization will

    be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture,

    forestry and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail. The fundamental

    aim of green belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land

    permanently open, and consequently the most important attribute of green

    belts is their openness. On the whole, greenbelt policies are seen as a useful

    and often successful means to contain or direct urban expansion.

    In some cases, development has been switched to areas beyond the green

    belt which is then sandwiched. Later motives for creating green belts have

    been the provision of open areas for recreation and the preservation of

    agricultural land. Some planners advocate the establishment of green

    „wedges‟ which project into the city rather than a green belt.

    Traditionally in the Master Plan of various Towns, the urban areas have been

    shown as surrounded by a ring of peripheral control belt or green belt. This

    green belt was expected to act as lung space around the urban areas. It

    was also expected to cater to the activities operating in rural areas including

    agriculture, partly catering to the requirements of the urban uses.

    1.2 The origin of the „greenbelt‟ concept

    The origins of the term and its application have been diverse. It was strongly

    supported in the UK by an active group of „preservationists‟ during the pre

    WW-II period. Preservationists normatively asserted that a town should be

    clearly a town, and a village a village. They saw the adoption of green belts

    as a way of imposing an urban-rural polarity on an in-between landscape of

    urban fringe suburbs and ribbon development.

    Its origin is often linked to the ideas of Ebenezer Howard in the early 20th

    Century about developing “Garden Cities” around London and containing its

    sprawl.

    Figure 1.1.

    Ebenezer Howard‟s Garden City concept

    1.2 The origin of the „greenbelt‟ concept The origins of the term and its application have

    Source: By Lilian T.Y.C.1, Ho C.S. and Ismail S, Some planning consideration of garden city concept towards achieving sustainable development, 2002, Pp 262.

    Howard‟s concept for the garden city was a means of controlling the growth

    of cities through the building series of new towns physically separated from

    each other and from the parent city.

    1.3

    Understanding green belt

    Green belt is a land-use planning concept. It is basically "Green space“,

    “Open space” or “landscaped buffer zone” between developed areas and

    undeveloped areas.

    Swathe or continuous and contiguous broad strip of undeveloped land (e.g.

    agricultural land, forest, waste-land, recreational parks or uncultivated land

    etc.) around a town or city, protected to prevent it being built on.

    It is different from Greenways or green wedges (which run through an urban

    area instead of around it). In essence, a green belt is an invisible line covering

    a certain area, preventing development of the area allowing wildlife and

    natural habitat to sustain.

    Green belt is a planning tool, used to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land

    permanently open. It is protected by normal planning controls against

    "inappropriate development" within its boundaries.

    Sources:

    15 March, 2011.

    • 2. Greg Lee, Strategic Green Belt Review, Final Report (South West Regional

    Assembly, February 2006), Page-6.

    • 1.4 Definition

    Green space:

    The general term for green space is open space. Although a “standard”

    definition of green space keeps broad, there are specific characteristic

    features that set green space apart from other types of space. Green space

    in urban areas exists mainly as semi-natural areas and is essential for urban

    sustainability and the people's quality of life.

    All land units regarded as green space may be viewed as ecosystems, which

    are defined as areas containing organisms, a physical environment, and the

    interactions and exchanges among the organisms and the environment.

    Green space is an important part of complex urban ecosystems that provides

    significant ecosystem benefits. The history of green space planning began

    with the idea of the Garden City advocated by Ebenezer Howard.

    Greenbelts, greenways, and urban parks are three main types of urban

    green space, which have significant ecological, social, and recreational

    functions. They benefit urban communities environmentally, esthetically,

    recreationally, and economically.

    Green space provides a large number of ecological, recreational and social

    benefits to communities. The values and benefits of green space depend on

    their physical characteristics as well as the interests of those with a stake in

    their performance. Green space improves air quality and protects natural

    resources vital to people, plants, and wildlife. They can also preserve the

    biological diversity of plant and animal species by maintaining the

    connections between natural communities. Some major ecological benefits

    of green space are air filtering, micro-climate regulation, noise reduction,

    and rainwater drainage. The social benefits of green space are to provide

    health benefits and quality of life to people.

    Figure 1.2. Source: Sharon K. Collinge, Spatial arrangement of habitat patches and corridors: clues from ecological field experiments, 1998, Pp 157-168.

    Ecological Benefits-

    Green space has a host of important ecological benefits and maintains

    the ecological balance of regions. They protect natural areas and provide

    habitat for plants and animals. They cool down air and counteract excessive

    heat buildup in cities through shading and vegetative evaporate

    transpiration. They also contribute to urban air quality by filtering out

    particulate matter, especially pollutants emanating from adjacent roadways.

    Moreover, they supply clean water to aquifers and maintain the quality of

    water resource by filtering excess nutrients in ground. The lists of ecological

    benefits are mentioned below:

    Air Filtering

    Noise Reduction

    Micro-Climate Regulation

    Rainwater Drainage

    Social Benefits-

    Green space provides social benefits including recreational, economic,

    aesthetic, and cultural benefits. It is essential to achieve the quality of life that

    creates a great city and that makes it possible for people to live a

    reasonable life within an urban environment. According to the Swedish

    economist Nils Lundgren, a good urban environment is an important

    argument for regions when trying to attract a highly qualified workforce.

    Specific social benefits are discussed below:

    Recreational and Health Benefits

    Aesthetic and Cultural Benefits

    Economic Benefits

    Greenbelts:

    The notion of green space encircling a central city has been translated

    into the planning instrument of the greenbelt to confine unbridled urban

    sprawl. A greenbelt is a ring of countryside where urbanization will be resisted

    for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry,

    and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail.

    The purposes of greenbelts are to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-

    up areas and safeguard the surrounding countryside from further

    encroachment, to protect the natural environment and improve air quality in

    urban areas, to ensure that urban dwellers have easy access to the

    countryside, with consequent recreational opportunities, and to protect the

    unique character of rural communities, which might otherwise be absorbed

    by expanding suburbs.

    In recent years, greenbelts have captured the attention and imaginations of

    land managers, landscape architects and planners interested in open space

    conservation. Greenbelts were implemented in different regions of the world,

    such as Canada and Germany, as well as in Asia.

    Greenbelt can also be defined as:

    Swaths of natural or open land surrounding cities or towns. They often contain

    a mix of public land and privately held land on which development

    restrictions are placed.

    Source: Erickson D, “The Relationship of Historic City Form and Contemporary Greenway Implementation: a Comparison of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (USA) and

    Ottawa, Ontario (Canada)” Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004,

    202.

    pp 199

    Greenways:

    A concept similar to a greenbelt is the greenway which has

    a linear

    character and may run through an urban area instead of around it.

    „Greenway‟ is a more general term in the U.S. The purposes of greenways are

    to link landscape elements to form a linear networks system, usually along

    terrain features such as natural (e.g. ridgelines or rivers) and artificial (e.g.

    roads, canals, and railways) features (Smith & Hellmund, 1993, page 126).

    1.5 Need of the Study

    The term “greenbelt” refers to any area of undeveloped natural land that has

    been set aside near urban or developed land to provide open space, offer

    light recreational opportunities or contain development/curtail urban sprawl.

    Urban green belts are considered the lungs of the cities as they act as a sink

    for some of the harmful gases released by vehicles and industries operating in

    the city area. Whether sprawling over a large area or a small belt, these

    green belts can be found in few Indian cities and play a very important role.

    Also, urban areas in India are faced with excessive population along with the

    pressure of unplanned economic development, industrialization, and

    vehicular emissions. This has led to considerable rise in urban pollution,

    affecting air, water, and land. Air pollution has increased rapidly in many

    cities and metropolises, especially due to vehicular traffic and industrial

    emissions. Over the years rising population has led to a decrease in open

    spaces and green belts in the cities. These green belts serve as lungs for cities

    and towns. They serve as a sink for pollutants, protect rural areas, check the

    flow of dust and bring down noise pollution level. Green belt provide

    innumerable environmental benefits, limit city size to an extent and

    considering the steady increase in air pollution, lack of open spaces in city

    areas, it has become imperative to increase or plan for the green belts

    around cities.

    In most of the cases, the shortage/lack of green spaces in the urban core has

    caused low quality of life due to their poor location/inaccessibility and ill

    maintenance. As per the JDA Master Plan 2025, Standard for green spaces is

    9 sqmt per person, but provision of only 7.2 sqmt per person have been

    ascertained in Jaipur city.

    So there is need for a strategic Green Belt planning concept, which respects

    the mixture of urban and rural land uses, ecological parameters to

    encourage an ordered growth.

    1.6

    Aim

    To study the problems and prospects of green belt as a planning tool.

    • 1.7 Objectives

    Objective-i:

    To

    study

    the

    planning

    issues

    involved

    in

    the

    provision,

    conservation and augmentation of green belts.

    Objective-ii: To document the experience of greenbelts in different

    countries around the globe and to identify the lessons applicable for ensuring

    the benefits of green belts.

    Objective-iii: To study the Masterplan proposals of green belts in the Jaipur

    region and their chronological transformations using GIS data/survey sheets.

    Objective-iv: To suggest policy guidelines for the permanence of green

    belts and its applicability in planning process.

    1.8 Methodology

    1.8 Methodology 10

    1.9 Scope of the study

    Curbing and controlling urban growth remains the central and most common

    objective of greenbelts, and urban development continues to be the biggest

    pressure and most consistent threat. The constant threat that urban

    development poses to greenbelt lands underlines the critical importance of

    effective planning for growth.

    In this study, only those green belts (around a city/region) which are used as

    a planning tool to prevent urban sprawl are considered. So, the main focus

    has always been on such successful greenbelts which are often referred as

    „urban growth boundary‟.

    The project also considers the extent of any transformations of the Green Belts

    in the Jaipur region as per the JDA Master Plan proposals but demarcation of

    green belt boundary for the JDA region is not the objective of the study.

    1.10 Limitations

    Due to the limitations on information sources, availability of chronological

    data (GIS Maps and survey sheets) and time, this research does not take into

    account the issues of development controls for green belts feasibility analysis

    as far as JDA Master Plan proposals have concerned.

    The policy guidelines for the Greenbelt proposal in case of JDA region are

    provided as per the applicable lessons learnt from various case studies only.

    The proposal/demarcation of physical boundary for the green belt of JDA

    region is not possible as it required intensive detailed information regarding

    availability of land, land value, land potential analysis, land ownership

    scenario, infrastructure provisions, public participation, availability of fund

    with the authority for land acquisition, etc. But an option for the green belt of

    JDA region has been worked out according to the implications of various

    case studies only.

    1.11 Study Area

    JDA Region 2025 (area is 2939 Sq. Km.)

    Figure 1.3.

    Location plan of JDA region

    Rajasthan India Jaipur District
    Rajasthan
    India
    Jaipur District
    JDA Region
    JDA Region

    Source: Draft master development

    plan 2025

    and

    www.mapsofindia.com as accessed on 15 May, 2011.

    The Jaipur Region, according to the JDA Master Development Plan with a

    horizon year 2025, has been considered as the study area.

    Table 1.1: Area details of JDA Region

    The Jaipur Region, according to the JDA Master Development Plan with a horizon year 2025, has

    Source: Draft master development plan 2025, Pp. 14

    As per Master Development Plan 2011, the footprint for development

    covered an area of 326 sq.km and 207 sq.km of the area is actually

    developed. Due to pressures on land, redirected demand for developments

    and fast paced conversions, the development area expanded by 215 sq.

    km. with planned interventions in the form of sector plans to regulate growth.

    The present urbanisable area within the Region covers an area of 541 sq.km

    (other than the satellite towns).

    Chapter 2

    Literature Study

    Green belt is a popular land-use planning concept. Its origin is often linked to

    the ideas of Ebenezer Howard in the early 20th Century about developing

    “Garden Cities” around London and containing its sprawl. Green belt may

    also be defined as “a narrow strip of parkland more or less encircling part of a

    built-up metropolitan or large urban area”. Similarly, Amati and Yokohari

    (2006) defined it as “a zone of land around the city where building

    development is severely restricted” and suggested that a separation

    between town and countryside by green belts had been one of the central

    tenets of post-war British planning.

    Green belt concept had its impact beyond Britain. Its legacy can still be

    found in many European cities such as Frankfurt, Berlin, Vienna, Barcelona

    and Budapest, American cities such as Washington DC, Cincinnati,

    Milwaukee and Chicago, Asian cities such as Tokyo, Bangkok, Seoul, Taipei

    and Guangzhou, Sydney and Melbourne in Australia. Green belt planning

    was sometimes justified as a “synonym of good planning” that was

    compatible with “international trends of urban and regional planning” to

    protect cities against strong growth pressure. However, such an international

    diffusion may reflect imitation of fashionable British planning practice only in

    form, but not necessarily in substance.

    Source: Bo-sin Tang, Siu-wai Wong and Anton King-wah Lee, Green belt in a compact city:

    A zone for conservation or transition, March 2007, Pages 358-373.

    • 2.1 History of Green belt as a planning tool

    The implementation of green belts in many countries can be regarded as

    one of the most internationally famous attempts to control urban growth.

    Green belts have ringed major cities to prevent them sprawling. Planners

    have used them to separate satellite „new towns‟ from the urban core,

    safeguarding land for recreation, agriculture and forestry. Green belts have

    also provided sites for more utilitarian uses such as salvage yards, incinerators

    and quarries. In some places, areas of the green belt have suffered through

    illegal dumping or through neglect.

    As planners began to grapple with the messy realities of urban growth during

    the twentieth century, green belts gave them a tool to realize a normative

    geography that a city has natural limits, that urban and rural areas should be

    separated and that settlements should be balanced and evenly-spaced.

    Green belts were used as part of a project to construct a universal planning

    canon, being employed regardless of the contingencies that affect urban

    growth in different cities around the world.

    Planning has changed considerably since the early post-WWII period when

    practitioners attempted to physically realize the ideas of high modernism. As

    planners seek to direct the growth of cities towards sustainable patterns of

    land-use, how likely is it that they will continue to see a green belt policy as a

    useful tool for managing urban growth? Planners are no longer the all-

    powerful experts that they once were, nor can they rely on a consensus

    politics that will support such bold measures. The impact that green belts

    have on market processes sits uncomfortably with the neo-liberal strategies to

    deregulate government invoked in many countries during the latter part of

    the twentieth century.

    Furthermore, a number of well-known alternatives to a green belt exist

    allowing planners to opt, for example for a green wedge, a greenway or a

    greenweb.

    Despite the importance of the green belt in the UK‟s planning history, the

    origins of the term and its application have been diverse. A number of similar

    schemes, such as parklands, parkways and greenways, flourished during the

    early twentieth century, spreading internationally via conferences, exhibitions

    and international lecture tours. Each of these schemes have their individual

    istories and have shaped the development of different cities at various times.

    While the green belt was one of several policies that planners in different

    countries could choose from, it was strongly supported in the UK by an active

    group of „preservationists‟. The ideas of preservationists were woven into the

    UK‟s planning system during the pre-WWII period by a broad array of actors.

    The green belt was invoked as a universal solution to urban growth. This was a

    two-way process; while British planners extolled the virtues of the green belt,

    planners in other countries, inspired by Abercrombie‟s work, implemented the

    green belt expecting it to be as effective as it had been for London. Overall,

    therefore, while the concept was deliberately spread by British planners keen

    to use the green belt as a „poster-boy‟ for their nascent discipline, it was also

    copied wholesale by some cities.

    • 2.2 Important facts to be considered while proposing greenbelt

    • Protecting ecological health should be the overall goal, while emphasizing

    sustainability and viability. Use the Greenbelt as an environmental

    sustainability showcase.

    • The Greenbelt should be afforded the highest level of protection and not

    be considered as open space where development can be negotiated.

    Quantify the services provided by the Greenbelt to the larger urban area

    (e.g. ecological, storm water management, views, and recreation).

    • The Greenbelt should not be seen as a means to contain development.

    • An implementation plan that supports Master Plan policies is required.

    • The impacts of Greenbelt planning are felt locally, not nationally; give more

    consideration to the local community in the Review.

    • Consider green buildings only in the Greenbelt.

    • Investigate whether the “belt” concept is still viable and appropriate.

    2.3

    Issues involved

    2.3 Issues involved  The effectiveness of green belts differs depending on location and country. 

    The effectiveness of green belts differs depending on location and

    country.

    Development 'jumps' over the green belt area, resulting in the creation

    of "satellite towns" which, although separated from the city by green

    belt, function more like suburbs than independent communities. Just

    because development leap-frogs the green belt, that doesn't mean

    the green belt can‟t work. That means that development control

    beyond the green belt and efforts to encourage regeneration within

    cities need to be realized.

    It even can encourage urban sprawl, by forcing people to build out,

    rather than clustering construction.

    Furthermore, greenbelts have a positive effect on property values.

    • 2.4 Purpose of Green belt

    In those countries which have them, the stated objectives of green belt

    policy are to:

    Protect natural or semi-natural environments,

    Improve air quality within urban areas,

    Check the pollution level of adjoining areas / protecting the local

    environment,

    Ensure that urban dwellers have access to countryside or open area,

    with consequent recreational opportunities,

    Protect the unique character of rural communities that might otherwise

    be absorbed by expanding suburbs,

    The retention of land in agricultural, forestry and related uses,

    The securing of nature conservation interests,

    Provide burial spaces, STPs and land fill sites,

    The continuous pattern of green belts further helps to:

    o

    Recharge catchment areas

    o

    Trunk infrastructure

    o

    Control microclimate

    o Sustenance of ecosystem / Promote natural habitat /

    Protect biodiversity

    The green belt has many benefits for people:

    Walking, camping, and biking areas close to the cities and towns.

    Contiguous habitat network for wild plants, animals and wildlife.

    Cleaner air and water

    Better land use of areas within the bordering cities.

    Sometimes discrete and diminutive green belts in urban areas are also

    provided in isolation, but they are very different from those green belts which

    are used as a planning tool to control urban growth. Those are provided

    along:

    National Highway / Expressway of the Town

    River Fronts

    Railway Tracks

    Between Industrial and Non Industrial Sector

    Around Sewerage Treatment plant

    Around Historical Monuments and Religious Places

    Around Airport and Ammunition Depot

    (But these green belts are not considered as a part of this study).

    2.5

    Uses of Green belt concept

    To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas.

    To prevent neighboring towns from merging into one another.

    To assist in safeguarding the urban area from rural areas.

    To preserve the special character of historic towns.

    To control urban growth: It provides direction about where, how, and in

    what form future growth should be accommodated.

    To limit size of a city: A city has natural limits that urban and rural areas

    should be separated and that settlements should be balanced and

    evenly-spaced.

    To maintain ecological balance.

    To prevent towns from merging into each other.

    Source:

    Planning Policy Guidance Notes, 1995.

    • 2.6 Threat for greenbelts

    Increase in the population structure of the city

    Increasing pressure for housing

    Highway expansion

    Aggregate / Mineral extraction

    Struggle to protect agricultural land

    The intensification of land use leads to gaps in the habitat system and

    reduces biodiversity

    Development proposals for expansion of major projects like airport

    Green Belts are a buffer between cities, urban and rural areas. Within their

    boundaries, damaged and derelict land can be improved and nature

    conservation can be encouraged. The ever-increasing pressure on land for

    more roads, housing and airport expansion means that it is vital to protect the

    Green Belts that we have.

    2.7 Green belt policies as per PPG (Planning policy Guidance)

    In the United Kingdom, Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG) are statements

    of the Government's national policy and principles towards certain aspects of

    the town planning framework. These guidance notes are applicable for the

    England only but in recent times they are being adopted in many countries.

    They are legally binding and may be treated as material considerations in the

    determination of planning applications.

    The policies of PPG are:

    GB.1 Control over Development in the Green Belt

    GB.2 Engineering Operations and Changes of Use of Land in the Green

    Belt

    GB.3 Infill Development in Barrow Nook and Vicarage Lane, Ormskirk

    GB.4 Design and Location of Acceptable Development in the Green Belt

    GB.5 Replacement Dwellings in the Green Belt

    GB.6. Extensions/Outbuildings to Residential Properties in the Green Belt

    GB.7 Use of Rural Buildings in the Green Belt

    A number of specific categories which can be summarized as:-

    (a) That necessary for agriculture, forestry and the winning of minerals, or

    other land use essentially demanding a rural location.

    (b) Acceptable changes of use of redundant buildings of character.

    (c) Acceptable re-use or redevelopment of the existing built-up area of

    redundant institutional complexes.

    (d) Rebuilding or modest extension of existing dwellings in appropriate

    locations.

    (e) Public or institutional uses for which the rural location is justified.

    Structure Plan policy for the Green Belt is even more restrictive, giving a strong

    presumption against new development except that related to open

    recreation and agriculture.

    Chapter 3

    Case Study

    This chapter comprises of 11 case studies.

    Foreign case studies:

    • 1. London’s greenbelt (UK)

    • 2. Seoul’s greenbelt (South Korea)

    • 3. Ontario greenbelt (Canada)

    • 4. Paris green belt (France)

    • 5. Frankfurt greenbelt (Germany)

    • 6. Ottawa green belt (Canada)

    • 7. Beijing green belt (China)

    • 8. Vienna green belt (Austria)

    Indian case studies:

    • 1. Ahmedabad greenbelt (Gujarat)

    • 2. Bangalore greenbelt (Karnataka)

    • 3. Delhi greenbelt (Delhi)

    England's green belt:

    There are 14 separate green belts in England, varying in size from 486,000

    hectares around London to just 700 hectares at Burton.

    The total area of green belt land in England since 2003 was as follows:

    Table 3.1The distribution of green belt designated land by region of England as at 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010

    Year

    2003

    2004

    2006

    2007

    2008/09

    2009/10

    Area

               

    (hectares)

    1,671,580

    1,678,190

    1,631,830

    1,635,670

    1,639,650

    1,639,560

    Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_belt_(United_Kingdom) as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

    Figure 3.1 Location map of England

    Europe
    Europe

    englandas accessed on 16 March, 2011.

    Figure 3.2

    Green belts in England

    Source: www.buildinglanduk.co.uk/greenbelt -land-uk.htm as accessed on 16 March, 2011.
    Source:
    www.buildinglanduk.co.uk/greenbelt -land-uk.htm
    as
    accessed
    on
    16
    March, 2011.

    The beginning of the greenbelt was in 1935 and was established by the Greater

    London Regional Planning Committee. It was not until 1947, that the Town and

    Country Planning Act allowed greenbelts to be included in their development

    plans and it was not until 1955 that the whole idea was beginning to be used

    throughout the UK.

    Local councils designated green belts to restrict urban growth for the

    foreseeable future. Green belts now cover 13% of England (around one-and-a-

    half million hectares).

    The price of land is increasing because more people have the desire to move to

    the UK. This brings about a chain of events. There is not much land available

    where homes can be built to ensure that everyone that desires to live in the UK

    can find affordable housing. This jeopardizes the greenbelts.

    Investors understand that land is a great tangible investment that can give them

    a solid investment in their future if they hold on to it until the proper time to sell. If

    you look around the UK, you will soon learn that the 100 richest people are

    landowners and property developers.

    They understand that the need for housing developments is growing like never

    before and there is no end in site. There are very few plots of land for sale in

    prime locations around the UK, so they have invested well in land. They know

    they need to purchase land in the greenbelt areas and then just wait around for

    the planning permission to allow building and then they can sell this greenbelt

    land for a huge profit.

    It has been noted that the Southeastern part of England will need several homes

    over the next 18 years to keep up with those that wish to move to this area. This

    means that there will be greenbelt land up for sale and the planning permissions

    will come in order to accommodate these people.

    Source:

    “Greenbelt

    Barriers

    to

    Urban

    Expansion”,

    in Political

    Barriers

    to

    Housebuilding in Britain: A Critical Case Study Of Protectionism & Its Industrial -

    Commercial Effects, ISR/Google Books, New edition 2002, as accessed on 18 March, 2011.

    3.1 London greenbelt, UK

    London Green belt was established during 1935 and this green belt land is

    protected by planning and development policies.

    Figure 3.3 Location map of London in England Greater London Area: 1572 km² Population: 7 7,53,600
    Figure 3.3
    Location map of London
    in England
    Greater London Area: 1572 km²
    Population: 7 7,53,600
    London's metropolitan area - 1,706.8 sq. kms

    Source: londongreenbeltcouncil.org.uk as accessed on 16 March, 2011

    3.1.1 History and essence of London Green belt

    "Green Belt" is a term that mystifies many people. Some

    think

    it

    is

    just

    a

    countryside where you must not build. Some people think it is a rigid ring of open

    country round London, several miles deep and in the form of parkland. A few

    people do realize that it is a restricted area round a town to prevent the

    outward sprawl of building and provide a breathing space.

    The idea of a "Green Belt" is not new; it was first proposed by Sir William Petty in

    the seventeenth century to make a Green Belt two miles from the center of

    London. The next proposal was made in 1910 by Dame Henrietta Barnett (of

    Hampstead Garden City fame) for a Green Belt five miles out of London. Both

    these schemes failed due to lack of support. Later there was the L.C.C. Green

    Belt Scheme of 1935 and the Green Belt Act of 1938. These were improved by Sir

    Patrick Abercrombie's Greater London Plan of 1944 and the Green Belt was

    established by the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 and more firmly by

    Amendment in 1968.

    There is no doubt now that public opinion, when properly informed, is seriously

    alarmed by the many attempts to break the Green Belt Ring, particularly by

    private speculative builders and some local authorities.

    3.1.2 Structure of London Green belt

    "Green Belt" has been defined as seven to ten miles deep all around the built-up

    area of Greater London and apart from some limited "rounding off" of existing

    small towns and villages, no further urban expansion is to be allowed within this

    belt.

    Figure 3.4

    Green belt around London

    established by the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 and more firmly by Amendment inlondongreenbeltcouncil.org.uk as accessed on 16 March, 2011. 26 " id="pdf-obj-38-26" src="pdf-obj-38-26.jpg">

    The maps shows, in shading,

    the

    Green Belt

    land around

    London.

    The

    Metropolitan

    Green

    Belt

    stretches

    over

    about

    1,950

    square

    miles

    (5050

    km²), an

    area about 3

    times

    the

    size

    of

    Greater

    London.

    Source: londongreenbeltcouncil.org.uk as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

    Figure 3.5 Settlements inside Greenbelt

    Figure 3.5 Settlements inside Greenbelt Source: Urban green belts in the twenty-first century, Edited by Marco

    Source: Urban green belts in the twenty-first century, Edited by Marco Amati, Macquarie University, Australia.

    None of the isolated areas of residential development within the Green Belt has

    been defined as a 'Rural Settlement' within the terms of Structure Plan Policy RU1

    of London. Therefore 'infilling' and 'rounding off' will not be acceptable within

    any of the residential areas covered by the Green Belt. New dwellings will not

    be permitted in the Green Belt except in very special circumstances. The

    extension or rebuilding of existing dwellings in the Green Belt may be

    acceptable but only subject to certain strict criteria. Any proposal to rebuild or

    extend an existing dwelling in the Green Belt must have regard to the visual

    impact on the character of the area. A building or extension which is unduly

    prominent or which results in the loss of existing landscape features, such as trees

    or hedgerows, will not be acceptable.

    3.1.3

    Chronological growth of London

    3.1.3 Chronological growth of London 3.1.4 Metropolitan Green Belt Structure The MGB was developed in two
    • 3.1.4 Metropolitan Green Belt Structure

    The MGB was developed in two phases:

    Phase 1: completed in 1965, Green Belt (GB1) 8-16 km wide, extending to about

    40 km from London centre, certain amount of development permitted in

    specified settlements within the Green Belt. Eight New Towns were established a

    few miles outside GB1.

    Phase 2: completed in 1988, GB2 was increased in width by from 8 km. to as

    much as 32 km. in some places. The reason for this is to push employment

    development further from London.

    Figure 3.6

    Phases of Metropolitan Green belt structure

    Figure 3.6 Phases of Metropolitan Green belt structure Source: <a href=www.gardenvisit.com/landscape_architecture/london_landscape_architecture/landscape_pla nning_pos_public_open_space as accessed on 16 March, 2011. Approximately 10 Sq. Km. of Green Belt development each year. land is lost to inappropriate 29 " id="pdf-obj-41-6" src="pdf-obj-41-6.jpg">

    Source:

    Approximately 10 Sq. Km. of Green Belt

    development each year.

    land

    is

    lost

    to

    inappropriate

    3.1.5

    Threats for London green belt land

    Short term planning loss by shifting the greenbelt boundaries enabling

    towns to expand.

    Housing pressures. People who currently live and work in London and are

    finding it too expensive and too crowded to live in London which is

    reducing their quality of life. As a result, they are moving out of London to

    live in surrounding towns which is increasing the pressures for more houses.

    It is easier and cheaper to build on green field sites because brown field

    sites can be expensive for reuse.

    Inappropriate development which reduces the openness of Green Belt

    land.

    Figure 3.7 The green belt & satellite towns

    3.1.5 Threats for London green belt land  Short term planning loss by shifting the greenbelthttp://www.chaptersofdublin.com as accessed on 16 March, 2011. 30 " id="pdf-obj-42-50" src="pdf-obj-42-50.jpg">

    Uses of green belts:

    1) Agricultural activity

    2) Lake (for Recreation)

    3) Sewage & water treatment

    plant.

    4) Tracking area & picnic area.

    5) Natural & Botanical Garden.

    6) Habitat of natural wildlife.

    7) Growth center.

    Source: http://www.chaptersofdublin.com as accessed on 16 March, 2011.

    3.2 Seoul’s greenbelt, South Korea:

    Seoul is the capital of South Korea.

    Greenbelt was introduced between 1971

    and 1973.

    Seoul’s greenbelt is very large, consisting

    of a band averaging about 10 km wide

    that begins about 15 km from Seoul’s

    central business district (fig. 3.9). After

    being extended four times by 1976,

    Seoul’s greenbelt contained 1,566.8

    square km, about 13.3 percent of the

    Seoul Metropolitan Area. The population

    living within the greenbelt is small,

    however, accounting for only 1.66

    Figure 3.8 Location plan of Seol Seoul South Koria
    Figure 3.8
    Location plan of Seol
    Seoul
    South Koria

    Source: climate-zone.com/climate/south- korea as accessed on 20 March, 2011

    percent of the Seoul Metropolitan Area’s

    population (Bae and Jun 2003). Most development has been strictly prohibited

    on greenbelt land and greenbelt landowners have received no compensation

    for their loss of development rights (Bae 1998, Lee 1999). The economic hardship

    imposed on land owners has been contentious from the beginning, because

    nationwide about 80 percent of the land within greenbelts is privately owned

    (Lee 2000, 2004). The boundaries of Korea’s green belts were hastily drawn

    without public input and without serious consideration of widely accepted

    criteria for the designation of greenbelts. In one case, a village was divided

    down the middle by the greenbelt boundary (Choe 2004b).

    Seoul’s greenbelt area is 1450 sq.km. or 12.4% of the entire Seoul Metropolitan

    Area.

    Figure 3.9

    Map showing Seoul Greenbelt

    Figure 3.9 Map showing Seoul Greenbelt Source: Seoul’s Greenbelt: An Experiment in Urban C ontainment, By

    Source: Seoul’s Greenbelt: An Experiment in Urban Containment, By David N. Bengston and Youn Yeo-Chang, Pp. 29.

    Metropolitan area population: 1,89,20 ,000.

    As of 2009, the city’s population was 1,02,08,302.

    City’s area: 605.25 km 2 .

    3.2.1 Seoul’s greenbelt policy

    Korea’s greenbelt system was introduced in 1971 during the authoritarian

    government of President Park Chung Hee. The social context for this policy was

    extremely rapid economic and population growth (Song 2003) and a high rate

    of rural urban migration. Seoul grew more rapidly than any city in the world from

    • 1950 to 1975, growing at an average annual rate of 7.6 percent (UN Population

    Division 2002). Seoul’s population grew from just over a million in 1950 to more

    than 6.8 million in 1975. By 2000, the population of Seoul was about 10 million,

    but the population of the entire Capital Region (Gyeonggi Province, including

    the city of Inchon) had ballooned to more than 21 million.

    Seoul’s greenbelt was patterned after the greenbelt of London (Bae 1998) but

    adapted in the Korean context. Greenbelts, formally referred to as Restricted

    Development Zones (RDZs) in Korea, were introduced in the City Planning Law of

    • 1971 and shaped by the 1972-1981 National Comprehensive Physical Plan of

    • 1973 (Lee 2000, 2004). Greenbelts were designated around Seoul and 13 other

    cities between 1971 and 1973.

    The importance of environmental protection as a rationale for the greenbelt has

    grown significantly as environmental awareness and economic prosperity in

    Korea have increased (Lee 2000, 2004). An additional and increasingly

    important rationale for Seoul’s greenbelt is the provision of recreational

    resources to a city short of parks and non-greenbelt open space. Almost three-

    fifths of Seoul’s greenbelt consists of mountains and forests that are heavily used

    for recreation (Bae and Jun 2003).

    Korea’s greenbelt policy has enjoyed great support from the general public (Kim

    and Kim 2000). Lee (1999) cited several surveys conducted in the 1990s that

    found strong support from citizens, environmentalists, and Korean planners, but

    opposition from most greenbelt property owners who viewed the policy as

    seizure of private property. A 1998 survey conducted by the Ministry of

    Construction and Transportation (MOCT) found that most government officials

    and academics preferred to retain the greenbelt, but they felt reforms were

    needed to ensure the achievement of development goals (MOCT 1998). Lee

    (2004) carried out a multivariate analysis of the data from the 1998 MOCT

    national survey to account for variation in greenbelt support. He found greater

    support for the greenbelt policy by individuals with higher incomes and

    educational attainment, and lower support by individuals residing in regions with

    strong development pressure and in the Capital Region. Surprisingly, he did not

    find a statistically significant relationship between opposition to the policy and

    ownership of land within greenbelt boundaries.

    Figure 3.10 Changes in Seoul's Administrative Boundary between 1314 and 1963

    Construction and Transportation (MOCT) found that most government officials and academics preferred to retain the greenbelt,

    Source: Seoul’s Greenbelt: An Experiment in Urban Containment, By David N. Bengston and

    Youn Yeo-Chang, Pp. 29.

    3.2.2 Costs and benefits of Seoul’s greenbelt

    Most of the economic studies of Seoul’s greenbelt have focused on its social

    costs, especially higher land prices, housing prices, and commuting costs.

    Several studies have examined the decrease in the price of non-greenbelt land

    and housing that would result from either a partial relaxation or complete

    elimination of the greenbelt. These studies found relatively modesteffects of the

    greenbelt on land and housing prices. For example, Choi (1994) estimated that

    land prices in the greenbelt in 1987 were about 30 percent below non-greenbelt

    land values, a much smaller price differential than suggested by anecdotal

    reports. Choi’s analysis also indicated that if Seoul’s greenbelt had been

    completely eliminated in 1987, greenbelt land prices would have risen by an

    average of 32.1 percent and non-greenbelt prices would have fallen by 7.5

    percent.

    Figure 3.11

    Geographical feature of Seoul

    3.2.2 Costs and benefits of Seoul’s greenbelt Most of the econom ic studies of Seoul’s greenbeltinakos.org as accessed on 20 March, 2011 35 " id="pdf-obj-47-35" src="pdf-obj-47-35.jpg">

    Source: inakos.org as accessed on 20 March, 2011

    It is important to recognize that Seoul’s greenbelt policy is but one of many

    supply-side restrictions that put upward pressure on land and housing prices. A

    variety of other government policies may restrict land and housing supply,

    including multiple layers of urban zoning, agricultural zoning, a virtual public

    monopoly on urban land development, the system of land and housing

    taxation, and an inadequate system of housing finance (Choi 1993; Kim 1990,

    1993). Hannah et al. (1993) concluded that the government’s tendency to

    under allocate land to urban residential use was responsible for a substantial

    part of the increase in urban housing prices. Demand-side factors, such as the

    local and regional amenities provided by greenbelts, also put upward pressure

    on land and housing prices by shifting the demand curves for land and housing

    outward.

    3.2.3 Greenbelt policy reform

    From its beginning in 1971, Seoul’s greenbelt policy remained essentially

    unchanged for almost 30 years. Public discussion ofproblems associated with

    the greenbelt was prohibited during the Park regime (Lee and Linneman 1998),

    which lasted until 1979. Subsequent military governments continued the

    greenbelt policy. Hence, opposition to the greenbelt was rarely expressed in the

    early years. But opposition from greenbelt landowners began to be voiced after

    the current civilian republic was established in 1988.

    Opposition to the release of land from Seoul’s greenbelt from environmental

    groups and many residents of Seoul has continued in recent years as proposals

    for development have moved forward. Seoul’s strictly enforced policy has been

    much more effective at keeping development (other than agricultural use) out

    of the greenbelt. But Seoul’s urban containment policy largely failed to keep

    development from invading the Capital Region beyond the greenbelt.

    Figure 3.12 The Physical Expansion of the Seoul Metropolitan Region between 1920-

    1994.

    Figure 3.12 The Physical Expansion of the Seoul Metropolitan Region between 1920- 1994. Source: Urban Containment

    Source: Urban Containment Policies and the Protection of Natural Areas: The Case of Seoul's Greenbelt David N. Bengston and Yeo-Chang Youn.

    • 3.2.4 Issues involved

    Approximately 80% of the land within the greenbelts is privately owned.

    The boundaries of greenbelts were drawn without public input, and

    without serious consideration of the widely accepted criteria for the

    designation of greenbelts. In one case, a village was divided down the

    middle by the greenbelt boundary.

    • 3.2.5 Seven objectives for the establishment of Seoul’s greenbelt

    National security was originally a dominant objective

    To eradicate illegal shanty towns on the outskirts of Seoul

    To control urban sprawl

    To reduce rapid population growth and industrial concentration

    To limit land speculation in the metropolitan region

    To protect agricultural land and promote food security

    To protect environmental and natural resources

    • 3.2.6 Inferences

    The greenbelt policy was supported by individuals with higher incomes

    and educational attainment, and opposed by individuals residing in

    regions with strong development pressure.

    The land prices in the greenbelt, in 1987, were about 30% below the land

    values outside the greenbelt.

    The price differentials between land, i.e., both inside and outside the

    greenbelt, and housing should be due only to supply constraints caused

    by the greenbelt, and not to other factors affecting supply and demand.

    It resulted in longer commutes and higher commuting costs.

    In areas that are to remain greenbelts, landowners should be

    compensated for their loss of development rights, or offered the option of

    having their land purchased by the government at a fair price.

    However, the greenbelt is responsible for higher housing prices, this

    suggests the need for progressive housing policies to ensure adequate

    supplies of affordable housing.

    Source: Urban Containment Policies and the Protection of Natural Areas: The Case of Seoul's Greenbelt, By David N. Bengston and Yeo-Chang Youn.

    3.3 Ontario green belt, Canada

    Established in 2005, the Ontario Greenbelt is an

    area of permanently protected land spanning

    1.8 million acres across southern Ontario. The

    area stretches from Niagara Falls to Tobermory

    to Peterborough and encompasses green

    space, farmland, vibrant communities, forests,

    wetlands and watersheds. It surrounds the

    province’s Golden Horseshoe region – the most

    populated area in Canada and is vital to the

    Figure 3.13 Location plan of Ontario

    3.3 Ontario green belt, Canada Established in 2005, the Ontario Greenbelt is an area of permanentlyen.wikipedia.org as accessed on 25 March, 2011. quality of life in southern Ontario. The concept of a Greenbelt was first publicly introduced by the premier of the province of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, on November 20, 2003, who had promised during his campaign to establish a permanent greenbelt. The purpose of the Greenbelt was to protect farmland and key environmentally sensitive areas from development. The Greenbelt legislation restricts urban municipalities, located outside the boundaries of the Greenbelt, from expanding urban development into areas within the boundaries of the Greenbelt. Moreover, the Greenbelt effectivel y eliminates the municipality’s option to re-designate farmland for nonagricultural use s in ―prime agricultural areas‖ (previously identified by municipalities) and ―specialty crop areas,‖ which include areas of the Niagara Peninsula and the Holland Marsh. Prior to the Greenbelt legislation, municipalities were able to alter agricultural zoning through zoning by-law amendments so long as these amendments were consistent with an Official Plan — an official document that provides a blueprint for future development within a municipality. Additionally, alternative uses of farmland in ―Rural Areas‖ are now provincially restricted for most nonagricultural uses: e.g., multiple lots for residential dwellings are not permitted. 40 " id="pdf-obj-52-28" src="pdf-obj-52-28.jpg">

    Source: en.wikipedia.org as accessed on 25 March, 2011.

    quality of life in southern Ontario.

    The concept of a Greenbelt was first publicly introduced by the premier of the

    province of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, on November 20, 2003, who had

    promised during his campaign to establish a permanent greenbelt. The purpose

    of the Greenbelt was to protect farmland and key environmentally sensitive

    areas from development. The Greenbelt legislation restricts urban municipalities,

    located outside the boundaries of the Greenbelt, from expanding urban

    development into areas within the boundaries of the Greenbelt. Moreover, the

    Greenbelt effectively eliminates the municipality’s option to re-designate

    farmland for nonagricultural uses in ―prime agricultural areas‖ (previously

    identified by municipalities) and ―specialty crop areas,‖ which include areas of

    the Niagara Peninsula and the Holland Marsh. Prior to the Greenbelt legislation,

    municipalities were able to alter agricultural zoning through zoning by-law

    amendments so long as these amendments were consistent with an Official

    Planan official document that provides a blueprint for future development

    within a municipality. Additionally, alternative uses of farmland in ―Rural Areas‖

    are now provincially restricted for most nonagricultural uses: e.g., multiple lots for

    residential dwellings are not permitted.

    Table 3.2

    Ontario Green belt details

    Table 3.2 Ontario Green belt details Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney

    Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 7-8

    3.3.1 Vision

    The Golden Horseshoe greenbelt/Ontario Greenbelt will be a permanent and

    sustainable legacy for current and future generations. The greenbelt enhances

    urban and rural areas with a continuous and connected system of open spaces

    that:

    protects and enhances environmentally sensitive lands and natural

    heritage systems and contributes to clean air, water and soil;

    recognizes the region’s social, natural and economic needs;

    sustains and nurtures the region’s agricultural sector;

    conserves, for sustainable use, the region’s significant natural and cultural

    heritage resources; and

    continues to provide high-quality and compatible recreational and

    tourism opportunities.

    • 3.3.2 Purpose of green belt

    Agricultural protection

    Environmental Protection

    Culture, recreation and tourism

    A strong rural economy

    A sustainable approach to infrastructure and natural resources

    • 3.3.3 Current land uses

    Agricultural and natural lands

    Figure 3.14 Ontario Green belt

    Figure 3.14 Ontario Green belt Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter -Whitney

    Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 7.

    Greater Toronto Area: 7,124.15 km2

    Population (2006) - 5,555,912

    Greenbelt Area: 7,300 km²

    In addition to its significant natural heritage features, the 1.8 million acre

    Greenbelt contains932,436 acres of farmland. This farmland covers slightly more

    than 50% of the total area of protected land within the Greenbelt, and

    comprises 7% of the total area of farmland in Ontario.

    Figure 3.15 Existing Land use inside the Green belt

    Figure 3.15 Existing Land use inside the Green belt Source: <a href=www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011 Figure 3.16 The city of Toronto Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011 44 " id="pdf-obj-56-4" src="pdf-obj-56-4.jpg">

    Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011

    Figure 3.16 The city of Toronto

    Figure 3.15 Existing Land use inside the Green belt Source: <a href=www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011 Figure 3.16 The city of Toronto Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011 44 " id="pdf-obj-56-12" src="pdf-obj-56-12.jpg">

    Source: www.greenbelt.ca as accessed on 02 April, 2011

    3.3.4 Inferences

    The Greenbelt is one of the largest and most successful greenbelt in the

    world.

    It is necessary to establish boundaries (of the green belt) that will last and

    not to keep land which is unnecessarily open, otherwise there is a risk that

    encroachment on the Green Belt will have to be allowed to

    accommodate future development

     

    Greenbelt must be larger to make urban sprawl smaller.

     

    The city should have some towns to absorb the overspill of the main town.

    The controlling

    bodies for the Green Belt should be strong enough to

    check the development

     

    Green

    belt

    policies

    should

    be

    revised

    according

    to

    the

    future

    requirements.

     

    Figure 3.17 Development around the greenbelt

    3.3.4 Inferences  The Greenbelt is one of the largest and most successful greenbelt in the

    Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context Written and researched by the Canadian

    Institute for Environmental Law and Policy, Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin.

    3.4 Paris Green Belt, France:

    Paris Green belt was established during 1976.

    Figure 3.18 Location map of Paris

    3.4 Paris Green Belt, France: Paris Green belt was established during 1976. Figure 3.18 Location maphttp://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.3 Demographic structure of Paris Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 The Paris green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40%. The area consists of older historical cities like Versailles & Saint-Germain-en-Laye and five new towns (developed in the early 1970s) the region‟s main airport (opened in 1974), the TGV interconnection stations and the region‟s main touri st attraction besides Paris (Disneyland, opened in 1992).  The green belt area accounts for 13% of the region‟s farmland.  The green belt area is used for thriving fruit, vegetable and even flower farming.  Over the last 20 years, the total amount of farmland in the green belt area has decreased by 20% due to urban sprawl and poor public transport servicing of some areas. 46 " id="pdf-obj-58-8" src="pdf-obj-58-8.jpg">

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    Table 3.3 Demographic structure of Paris

    3.4 Paris Green Belt, France: Paris Green belt was established during 1976. Figure 3.18 Location maphttp://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.3 Demographic structure of Paris Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 The Paris green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40%. The area consists of older historical cities like Versailles & Saint-Germain-en-Laye and five new towns (developed in the early 1970s) the region‟s main airport (opened in 1974), the TGV interconnection stations and the region‟s main touri st attraction besides Paris (Disneyland, opened in 1992).  The green belt area accounts for 13% of the region‟s farmland.  The green belt area is used for thriving fruit, vegetable and even flower farming.  Over the last 20 years, the total amount of farmland in the green belt area has decreased by 20% due to urban sprawl and poor public transport servicing of some areas. 46 " id="pdf-obj-58-16" src="pdf-obj-58-16.jpg">

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    The Paris green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40%.

    The area consists of older historical cities like Versailles & Saint-Germain-en-Laye

    and five new towns (developed in the early 1970s) the region‟s main airport

    (opened in 1974), the TGV interconnection stations and the region‟s main tourist

    attraction besides Paris (Disneyland, opened in 1992).

    The green belt area accounts for 13% of the region‟s farmland.

    The green belt area is used for thriving fruit, vegetable and even flower

    farming.

    Over the last 20 years, the total amount of farmland in the green belt area

    has decreased by 20% due to urban sprawl and poor public transport

    servicing of some areas.

    Figure 3.19 Paris Green belt

    Figure 3.19 Paris Green belt Source: National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies, <a href=www. insee .fr as accessed on 5 April, 2011. Throughout history, the orientations of the regional planning in the Ile de France produced the maintenance of a number of agricultural areas arranged in islands within the city that remain managed by the agriculture although they 47 " id="pdf-obj-59-4" src="pdf-obj-59-4.jpg">

    Source: National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies, www.insee.fr as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

    Throughout history, the orientations of the regional planning in the Ile de France

    produced the maintenance of a number of agricultural areas arranged in

    islands within the city that remain managed by the agriculture although they

    are entirely landlocked by urbanization. If the lack of quantifiable data on the

    number of sites and farmland concerned, we can nevertheless feel that they

    are localized to their majority in the perimeter of the greenbelt.

    Figure 3.20 Urban Area scenario of Paris

    are entirely landlocked by urbanization. If the lack of quantifiable data on the number of siteswww.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 48 " id="pdf-obj-60-10" src="pdf-obj-60-10.jpg">

    Source: www.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

    Figure 3.21 The perimeter of the greenbelt in the region of Ile de France (Paris)

    Figure 3.21 The perimeter of the greenbelt in the region of Ile de France (Paris) Source:www.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 3.4.1 The Green Belt as a Specific Area of the Ile-de-France Region The green belt area is a belt located between 10 and 30 kilometers away from the relatively small (10,500 hectares) city of Paris. It is about 266,000 hectares, which accounts for 22 per cent of the region‟s total surface area. It is therefore about twice as small as the London metropolitan green belt area, which has long been a strong reference for regional planners in Ile-de-France. Apart from 49 " id="pdf-obj-61-4" src="pdf-obj-61-4.jpg">

    Source: www.purple-eu.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

    3.4.1 The Green Belt as a Specific Area of the Ile-de-France Region

    The green belt area is a belt located between 10 and 30 kilometers away from

    the relatively small (10,500 hectares) city of Paris. It is about 266,000 hectares,

    which accounts for 22 per cent of the region‟s total surface area. It is therefore

    about twice as small as the London metropolitan green belt area, which has

    long been a strong reference for regional planners in Ile-de-France. Apart from

    being a belt, the main characteristic of the green belt is not unsurprisingly

    being green, due to a proportion of woodland and farmland adding up to 60%.

    A Green Belt features

    Parks and, most of all, well-preserved woods, form an almost continuous string

    around the central urban area. Ten of these woods are more than 750 hectares

    each and are now publicly accessible, such as the Ferrières regional forest in the

    Seine-et- Marne county or the St-Germain national forest in the Yvelines county.

    When moving from the most rural and distant parts of Ile-de-France into the

    green belt area, one will notice that the proportion of built-up area is

    quadrupled, while the proportion of woodland and parks remains surprisingly the

    same, at a relatively high level internationally of 28 per cent.

    With a proportion of farmland reaching 32 per cent, the green belt area

    accounts for 13 per cent of the region‟s farmland but, due to a significant

    presence of intensive market gardening besides large-scale farming, it actually

    represents more than 20 per cent of the region‟s farms and 25 per cent of the

    region‟s jobs in agriculture. Even though this specific feature is not always well

    understood, the green belt area has a proportion of built-up area of about 40

    per cent. Furthermore, this „grey‟ part of the green belt area does not only

    consist of older historical cities, like Versailles or Saint-Germain-en-Laye.

    The central urban area in Paris, when compared to London. But they knew even

    better that because of an early tendency towards urban coalescence between

    the central built-up area and the neighboring new towns (mostly due to high

    speculation in the fringes of the long-awaited new towns), they were about to

    obtain a mixture of both, for which idealized planning scheme was much more

    difficult to find.

    Between 1960 and 1976, regional urban planning and „green planning‟ in the

    Paris- Ile-de-France region were both the responsibility of the Central

    government. After 1976, „urban planning‟ remained a prerogative of the Central

    government, while the Regional council was gradually consolidating its

    commitment to open spaces, and thus to regional „green planning‟.

    Source: Urban green belts in the twenty-first century, Edited by Marco Amati, Macquarie University, Australia. Pp. 226-237.

    3.5

    Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany:

    Frankfurt Green belt was established during 1991.

    Total Greenbelt area = 80 Sq. Km. (approximately one-third of Frankfurt‟s total

    area).

    Figure 3.22 Location of Frankfurt, Germany

    3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany: Frankfurt Green belt was established during 1991. Total Greenbelt area = 80www.gruenguertel.de as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.4 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany City Area 248.31 km Population 6,71,927 (2009) Density 2,706 /km Urban Population 2,295,000 Metro Population 5,600,000 (04/2011) Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 51 " id="pdf-obj-63-16" src="pdf-obj-63-16.jpg">
    3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany: Frankfurt Green belt was established during 1991. Total Greenbelt area = 80www.gruenguertel.de as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.4 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany City Area 248.31 km Population 6,71,927 (2009) Density 2,706 /km Urban Population 2,295,000 Metro Population 5,600,000 (04/2011) Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 51 " id="pdf-obj-63-18" src="pdf-obj-63-18.jpg">
    3.5 Frankfurt greenbelt, Germany: Frankfurt Green belt was established during 1991. Total Greenbelt area = 80www.gruenguertel.de as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.4 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany City Area 248.31 km Population 6,71,927 (2009) Density 2,706 /km Urban Population 2,295,000 Metro Population 5,600,000 (04/2011) Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 51 " id="pdf-obj-63-20" src="pdf-obj-63-20.jpg">

    Source: www.gruenguertel.de as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    Table 3.4 Demographic structure of Frankfurt, Germany

    City Area

    248.31 km 2

    Population

    6,71,927 (2009)

    Density

    2,706 /km 2

    Urban Population

    2,295,000

    Metro Population

    5,600,000 (04/2011)

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    Figure 3.23 Green Belt of Frankfurt

    Figure 3.23 Green Belt of Frankfurt Source: <a href=www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 3.5.1 Issues involved Frankfurt‟s large international airport is situated near the Green Belt, but is not part of it. A current expansion of the airport does not require the use of Green Belt lands. However, the proximity to the airport does create noise and reduces the quality of the Green Belt for recreation in that area. 52 " id="pdf-obj-64-4" src="pdf-obj-64-4.jpg">

    Source: www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    3.5.1 Issues involved

    Frankfurt‟s large international airport is situated near the Green Belt, but is not

    part of it. A current expansion of the airport does not require the use of Green

    Belt lands. However, the proximity to the airport does create noise and reduces

    the quality of the Green Belt for recreation in that area.

    Figure 3.24 City boundary and Green belt

    CITY BOUNDARY

    GREENBELT

    Figure 3.24 City boundary and Green belt CITY BOUNDARY GREENBELT Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International

    Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C. Esakin, Pp. 15

    3.5.2 General awareness

    The Green Belt development corporation has established a program for children

    called Discover, Research and Learn in the Green Belt. It has been successful in

    introducing the Green Belt to children and their parents, and allowing them to

    learn about the environment and conservation while having fun.

    3.5.3 Facts & figures

    52 per cent of Frankfurt‟s surface area is “green”.

    52 per cent of the city area has been set aside for recreation, parks and

    green spaces, woodland, farmland, orchard grassland, allotments and

    hobby gardens, cemeteries, roadside grass verges and water bodies.

    Table 3.5 Frankfurt Green belt details

    Table 3.5 Frankfurt Green belt details Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter

    Source: Ontario’s Greenbelt in an International Context By Maureen Carter-Whitney & Thomas C.

    Esakin, Pp. 15-16.

    54

    Figure 3.25 Pattern of Greenbelt, Frankfurt

    Figure 3.25 Pattern of Greenbelt, Frankfurt Source: Castells, M. 2000. The Rise of the Network Society

    Source: Castells, M. 2000. The Rise of the Network Society. Second Edition. Volume I.

    3.5.4 Key Features

    The Frankfurt City Forest covers more than half of the Green Belt, and in the

    remaining area there are other green spaces, parks and playgrounds.

    There is agriculture in the Green Belt as well.

    It also hosts a 70 km cycle path and a 63 km hiking path.

    Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City

    Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City Source: Castells, M. 2000. Thewww.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 56 " id="pdf-obj-68-4" src="pdf-obj-68-4.jpg">

    Source: Castells, M. 2000. The Rise of the Network Society. Second Edition. Oxford, Volume I.

    Figure 3.26 Pattern of activity inside Greenbelt

    Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City Source: Castells, M. 2000. Thewww.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 56 " id="pdf-obj-68-12" src="pdf-obj-68-12.jpg">
    Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City Source: Castells, M. 2000. Thewww.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 56 " id="pdf-obj-68-14" src="pdf-obj-68-14.jpg">

    Source: www.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011.

    Chart 3.1 Details of Green and Open spaces inside Frankfurt City Source: Castells, M. 2000. Thewww.frankfurt.de. as accessed on 5 April, 2011. 56 " id="pdf-obj-68-20" src="pdf-obj-68-20.jpg">

    3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada

    Ottawa Green belt was proposed in 1950.

    It provides open space for the future development of farms, natural areas and

    government campuses.

    Ottawa had a population of 8,59,704 in 2005.

    Figure 3.27 Location of the City of Ottawa in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

    3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada Ottawa Green belt was proposed in 1950. It provides open space forhttp://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.6 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa. Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 57 " id="pdf-obj-69-14" src="pdf-obj-69-14.jpg">

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    Table 3.6 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa.

    3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada Ottawa Green belt was proposed in 1950. It provides open space forhttp://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.6 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa. Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 57 " id="pdf-obj-69-22" src="pdf-obj-69-22.jpg">

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011

    3.6 Ottawa Greenbelt, Canada Ottawa Green belt was proposed in 1950. It provides open space forhttp://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 Table 3.6 Details of Area and Popilation, Ottawa. Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 5 April, 2011 57 " id="pdf-obj-69-28" src="pdf-obj-69-28.jpg">

    Figure 3.28 Green belt of Ottawa

    Figure 3.28 Green belt of Ottawa Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to the

    Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan, January - September 2009. Ottawa: NCC.

    The Greenbelt, as seen in Figure 3.28, is a crescent-shaped patchwork of farms,

    fields, forests, and research complexes bordering the City of Ottawa and parts

    of Nepean and Gloucester. In 1961, the National Capital Commission (NCC)

    entered into a 50-year forest management agreement with the Government of

    Ontario, and much of the Greenbelt‟s abandoned and the marginal farmland

    has since been reforested.

    3.6.1 Planning Goals and Objectives

    In developing the Greenbelt Master Plan it was determined that the Greenbelt

    must have certain attributes if it was to meet the obligations implicit in the

    Master Plan and ensure the Greenbelt‟s continued usefulness and health.

    The goals were that:

    The Greenbelt must remain a large, rural, open space running in a

    continuous belt in roughly the present shape and location.

    The Greenbelt must be relevant to the Capital and to Canadians.

    The Greenbelt must remain in the public domain.

    The Greenbelt must maintain a diverse mix of uses and landscapes.

    Areas with ecological significance or high renewable resource capability

    must be protected, as well as areas where significant investment has

    been made.

    The health and integrity of the Greenbelt must be maintained.

    The Greenbelt must continue to generate revenue.

    Partnerships are essential to the maintenance of a healthy Greenbelt.

    The specific objectives were to:

    Make the Greenbelt more publicly accessible,

    Enhance its role in the region‟s economy,

    Enhance the protection of its environment.

    3.6.2 Decision Making Framework

    The Master Plan was built around two zoning mechanisms. The first consists of

    seven land use designations that locate land uses and guide management

    decisions throughout the Greenbelt. The second is the Experiences Network,

    made up of a series of areas with special interest in terms of public programming

    and landscape character. Greenbelt land uses and activities are organized

    spatially in the Greenbelt according to seven land designations, and these

    relate to either natural, rural, or built systems within the Greenbelt.

    Figure 3.29 Land uses in the greenbelt

    Figure 3.29 Land uses in the greenbelt Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to
    Figure 3.29 Land uses in the greenbelt Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to

    Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan, January - September 2009. Ottawa: NCC.

    Figure 3.29 Land uses in the greenbelt Source: Background Report on Public and Agency Response to

    Figure 3.30 The greenbelt inside the national capital region

    Figure 3.30 The greenbelt inside the national capital region Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 –

    Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 – 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

    The National Capital Region (NCR) spans the Ottawa River, covering a total

    area of approximately 4,660 square kilometers.

    The Greenbelt was originally intended to encircle and contain the urban

    capital. But the Capital grew so fast that by 1970, it had reached the population

    that was predicted for the year 2000.

    Figure 3.31 Pattern of Urban Area around the Green belt

    Figure 3.31 Pattern of Urban Area around the Green belt Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995

    Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 – 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

    Table 3.7

    Land allocation scenario of Green belt land

    Land Allocation

    Area(hectares)

    Environmental Areas

    9,726

    Existing Buildings / Infrastructure

    2,328

    Agriculture

    5,319

    Rural

    3,427

    Total

    20,800

    Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 – 2015 Report, National Capital Commission

    3.6.3 Uses permitted / Main features

    Forest, wetland, and fields

    Recreation, conservation, farming and research works

    Government buildings and the International Airport

    The Greenbelt is a 203.5 square kilometers (78.6 sq mi).

    Economic activities occurs in the Greenbelt (e.g. farming, forestry,

    research, airport) accounting for approximately 11,000 jobs.

    Figure 3.32 Settlement pattern outside the Green belt boundary

    Source: Ottawa’s Greenbelt Master Plan 1995 – 2015 Report, National Capital Commission.
    Source:
    Ottawa’s
    Greenbelt
    Master
    Plan
    1995
    2015
    Report,
    National
    Capital
    Commission.

    3.7 Greenbelt of Beijing, China

    Beijing‟s greenbelt was first proposed in 1958.

    The city core area= 62 Sq. Km.

    Figure 3.33 Location of Beijing in China

    3.7 Greenbelt of Beijing, China Beijing‟s greenbelt was first proposed in 1958. The city core area=http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 20 April, 2011 Area of the Region =16,801.25 Sq. km. Population (2009) = 22,000,000 Density =1,309.4 /Sq.km 3.7.1 Three greenbelts of Beijing  The first greenbelt is located between Beijing's third and fourth ringroads.  The second greenbelt is located in the suburb area, between the fifth and sixth ringroads.  The third greenbelt is developed in the mountain areas. 64 " id="pdf-obj-76-10" src="pdf-obj-76-10.jpg">

    Source: http://www.wikipedia.org as accessed on 20 April, 2011

    Area of the Region =16,801.25 Sq. km.

    Population (2009) = 22,000,000

    Density =1,309.4 /Sq.km

    3.7.1 Three greenbelts of Beijing

    The first greenbelt is located between Beijing's third and fourth ringroads.

    The second greenbelt is located in the suburb area, between the fifth and

    sixth ringroads.

    The third greenbelt is developed in the mountain areas.

    Figure 3.34 The Beijing Green belt

    Figure 3.34 The Beijing Green belt Source: Analysis of the Beijing greenbelts plan using geographic information

    Source: Analysis of the Beijing greenbelts plan using geographic information systems (GIS). By Huifeng Peng.

    Figure 3.35 The three Green belts of Beijing

    Figure 3.35 The three Green belts of Beijing First Greenbelt: It covers 240Sq. km. Second Greenbelt:
    Figure 3.35 The three Green belts of Beijing First Greenbelt: It covers 240Sq. km. Second Greenbelt:
    First Greenbelt: It covers 240Sq. km. Second Greenbelt: It covers 1,650 Sq. km. Third Greenbelt: It
    First Greenbelt: It covers 240Sq. km.
    Second Greenbelt: It covers 1,650
    Sq. km.
    Third Greenbelt: It covers 10,418
    Sq. km.
    Total Greenbelt Area: 12,308 Sq.
    km.

    Source: He, Y. (2003). Research on spatial development ecological strategy for Beijing. Beijing City Planning & Construction Review, Pp.33-39.

    3.7.2 Issues involved

    The large-scale greenbelt is proposed to both efficiently control urban

    sprawl and improve urban ecological conditions.

    In the 1980s, after economic reform, green space development was

    transformed from government-oriented to a market-oriented policy. The

    existing greenbelt was fragmented by overwhelming urbanization. The

    total area of the first greenbelt in the master plan had kept shrinking:

     
    • In 1958

    314 km²

    • In 1983

    260 km²

    • In 1993

    240 km²

    Farmlands in the greenbelt area has been occupied by commercial

    residential buildings and profit-making projects, while the afforesting of

    greenbelt area and the construction relocated residential buildings for

    villagers lagged far behind.

    Source: Land potential evaluation for large-scale greenbelt development at urban-rural transition zone -a case study of Beijing, China By-Li Wei-feng, OuyangZhi-yun, WangRu-song.

    3.8 Vienna greenbelt, Austria

    The “Green Belt for Vienna” was decided in 1905 to preserve the area of

    woodland. Green spaces cover 49 % of the city surface in Vienna, compared to

    33 % of built-up area and 14 % traffic area.

    Area (City) = 414.89 Sq. km. Population (2010) = 17,12,903 Density = 4,128.6 / Sq. km.
    Area (City) = 414.89 Sq. km.
    Population (2010) = 17,12,903
    Density = 4,128.6 / Sq. km.
    Figure 3.36 Location of Vienna in Austria

    Source: www.planetWare.com as accessed on 20 April, 2011

    Figure 3.37 Green belt of Vienna

    (Greenbelt in gray)
    (Greenbelt in gray)

    Source: Comprehensive Urban Renewal: More than Building Regeneration: a Case Study in Vienna By Betül Bretschneider.

    3.8.1 Green belt development in Vienna

    Year

    Size of the green belt (ha)

    • 1905 4,4005,860

    • 1940 10,700

    • 1995 19,250

    • 2005 21,500

    • 2011 20,267

    3.8.2 Development phases of Vienna 1870-2000

    Green space covers nearly half of the surface area of Vienna, including a

    broad range of green structures, from small neighborhood parks, green spaces

    along streets and in courtyards, trees and avenues to large historic parks, and

    the urban forests at the fringe of the city.

    Figure 3.38 Development phases of Vienna

    1870
    1870
    1890
    1890
    1930
    1930
    2000
    2000

    Source: Moving in Vienna – intelligence “on the move”, By Petra Hirschler, Nina Svanda, 2009, Pp. 2-3.

    3.8.3

    Categories of green space in Vienna

    LAND USE

    AREA (Sq.

    (%)

    Km.)

    Forests

    74.57

    36.8

    Farmland

    68.4

    33.7

    Grassland

    22.93

    11.3

    Parks

    10.84

    5.4

    Others

    25.93

    12.8

    TOTAL

    202.67

    100

    Source: Vienna and Prague: Political systems and urban development in the postwar period By Elisabeth Lichtenberger

    • 3.8.4 Land use pattern of Vienna

    Figure 3.39 Land use pattern of Vienna (a) 1958 (b) 1997
    Figure 3.39 Land use pattern of Vienna
    (a) 1958
    (b) 1997
    3.8.3 Categories of green space in Vienna LAND USE AREA (Sq. (%) Km.) Forests 74.57 36.8

    Source: Vienna and Prague: Political systems and urban development in the postwar period By Elisabeth Lichtenberger

    3.9 Ahmedabad Greenbelt, India

    Ahmedabad Green belt was proposed during 1965.

    Total green belt area= 3.29 Sq. Km. (2011)

    Figure 3.40 Location map of Ahmedabad

    3.9 Ahmedabad Greenbelt, India Ahmedabad Green belt was proposed during 1965. Total green belt area= 3.29en.wikipedia.org , as accessed on 20 April, 2011 3.9.1 Overview of development plans in terms of greenbelt  1 st Development plan1965: Declaration of green belt as no development zone.  2 nd Development plan 1987: Approx 20 % area was encroached.  3 rd Development plan 1997: Land was declared as residential zone.  Revised Development plan of 2011: Farmers/owners went to Supreme Court. 72 " id="pdf-obj-84-10" src="pdf-obj-84-10.jpg">

    Source: en.wikipedia.org, as accessed on 20 April, 2011

    3.9.1 Overview of development plans in terms of greenbelt

    1 st Development plan1965: Declaration of green belt as no development

    zone.

    2 nd Development plan 1987: Approx 20 % area was encroached.

    3 rd Development plan 1997: Land was declared as residential zone.

    Revised Development plan of 2011: Farmers/owners went to Supreme

    Court.

    Figure 3.41 Boundary of AUDA and AMC

    Figure 3.41 Boundary of AUDA and AMC Source: AMC website <a href=( http://www.egovamc.com/A_City/help_line.asp ) as accessed on 20 April, 2011. LEGEND AUDA limit Extended AMC limit AMC limit Green Belt 73 " id="pdf-obj-85-4" src="pdf-obj-85-4.jpg">

    Source: AMC website (http://www.egovamc.com/A_City/help_line.asp) as accessed on 20 April, 2011.

    LEGEND

    AUDA limit

    Extended AMC limit

    • AMC limit