GUWAHATI
MAJOR FINDINGS OF GRAPH THEORY
IMMIGRANTS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES 14%
15%
71% NEPAL
BANGLADESH
OTHERS
LANDUSE PATTERN 22%
46% 12%
LAND USE / LAND COVER PLAN
10%
POPULATION DENSITY PLAN
10% BUILT UP FORESTS WATER BODIES
AGRICULTURE LAND WASTELAND
IMMIGRANTS FROM OTHER STATES 14% 10%
42%
10% 11% 13% OTHERS RAJASTHAN
U.P. W. BENGAL
MEGHALAYA BIHAR
FOREST COVER 6%
PHYSIOGRAPHY PLAN
DISTRIBUTION OF WORKERS
40%
54%
VERY DENSE MODERATELY DENSE OPEN FOREST/DEGRADED
41%
59%
Urban Design -1
TRANSPORT NETWORK
The haphazard growth of urbanization trend in Guwahati city may generate numerous social problems like any other populated city. Ecological imbalances, traffic congestion and emergence of slums and squatters have already become major issues of the Guwahati city. The existing urban infrastructure of Guwahati city is not adequate to improve the quality of human life. Flow of migrants to Guwahati city from all the small towns of the study area, irrespective of Class size and their distance is revealed. It may be summarized that demand for labor, availability of land, good economic opportunities act as a pull factor encouraging the flow of migrants. Lack of job opportunities in the towns act as a push factor for the growth of 7 squatter settlements examined in the study.
UD-1
NON-MIGRANTS
Land use change of Guwahati city for the year 1990 and 2004 reveals that highest area is under built up. In 1990 built up area was 34.64 %, which increases to 45.46 % in 2004 at the cost of decrease of agricultural land, forest and wasteland. Agricultural land covered 12.50 percent in 1990 and 9.82 percent in 2004, followed by forests 13.60 percent in 1990 and decreases to 9.04 percent in 2004. Wasteland was 15.52 percent in 1990 and 12.53 percent in 2004. Guwahati city has undergone a tremendous pressure on land use, due to high growth rate of 40.12, as compared to India’s average of 21.15 in 2001 Census, and high density of population of 3774 results in growth of slums and squatters.
TOTAL POPULATION OF GUWAHATI
MIGRANTS
Guwahati and the small towns are classified into 5 categories based on availability of the infrastructure facilities measured in terms of centrality score. Maximum of towns i.e. more than 90 percent falls into 3rd, 4th, 5th order with CS range of 50-150. Only Guwahati city in first order followed by 3 towns namely, Barpeta, Nalbari and Mangaldoi in the 2nd order with centrality score (CS) range of 150-200. This shows a wide gap between the CS of Guwahati city with 1012.99 and the next higher Class size towns with CS of around 200.
Kriti Verma . Ridham Seth . Ritu Thakur. S.Sukhbir Singh Dayal