Conclusion
Conclusion The proposed methodology is not perfect for the common man, yet helps suggest that the common man needs to talk often, and help through the process of the city evolution of what he thinks of as a better picture. But, there are a certain aspects that only the people in the eld of design or construction can see, and not the layman. Such aspects may not strike the understanding. So, cross validating the site of report with on ground visit and documentation can help.
In general, the residents of Nandanvan that are in the area for over the years evidently nd their area to be safe as they are accustomed to the environment and habituated to various things. Such section many not seek for a change until given to them which will only ease their lifestyle. Multiple street crimes, each to have speci c type of setting is not the common man’s look out, he is concerned for his travel distance and purpose of using that street. The criminal is concerned with the vulnerable ends, that help ease his intent of terror. With the idea of people talking about their city to making analytical maps and statistically understanding various suggestions of the common masses; there is an immense scope of scaling and validating. As this pilot project was being implemented, it was noted that safety and security wasn’t only the only issue that the people wanted to talk about. They started conversing on road tra cs safety, street and accessibility, tree plantations, water and sewage; and various other social and physical aspects of the city. Having said that, when all of such aspects put into a map in layers, can evidently point out the patterns, and with clear understanding of the subject — probable solutions can be proposed to what the concerned authorities can quickly act upon. From a generalised opinionated data, such creative ways can bring about factual information on to the fore-front. A city level study of all the social and physical aspects can instantaneously be an eye-opener of a task.
fi
fi
fi
ffi
27
