Watershed Approach and Some

New Concepts in Urban Planning

l
with Water Management
Perspective

Prof. A. K. Sarma
Civil Engineering Department
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
aks@iitg.ernet.in

Watershed is a Hydrological Unit such that

precipitation falling within the boundary of
that unit moves to a single outlet.

Watershed management Aims at:

Optimal utilization and development of
Water
Soil
Vegetation and
Human being

Of th
the Watershed
W t h d
Watershed Management can be regarded as any form of
environmentally sustainable management practice that
facilitates optimal utilization of land, water and
vegetation of the watershed for the benefit of the people
residing in the watershed

ECO SYSTEM
ECO-SYSTEM
Water

Air

Dwellers

Vegetation

All sorts of
living being

Soil

Impact of Urbanization
on Ecosystem
E
Increased
Erosion
Biodiversity

Change in
Population
Dynamics

Deforestation
Urbanization

Increased
Human
Population

nonBiodegradable
Material

Water
Pollution

Denudation of Hills
Increases
Surface erosion
sedimentation
di
t ti in
i
the drains

Reduces
carrying capacity
of the drains

Impact on Drainage System

Increased Flood
Peak
Without Management
Rainfall

With Management
g

Time in Hours

Ecological Disturbance of
G
h i
Guwahati

Impact on Drainage System

Filling up of low lying areas

Impact on Drainage System

Reduction in
carrying capacity
due to sediment
deposition

Blockade of
drainage due to
throwing of
garbage

Impact on Drainage System

Obstruction to flow by the supporting
structures of the cross bridge

 Flood on
8th
October,
October
2007

Impact on Ground Water

GL

G.W.L

Combined W.T

Well Managed and Poorly Managed

Watershed

Development of DEM and

3D View
Vi
of
f Guwahati
G
h i
Brahmaputra

Silsako
bil

Bharalu
A S
Dipar
bil

Bashistha
B hi i
Bahini

M E

G H A

Watershed Delineation

Built-up area=1.23sqKm
Built-up area,1972

Built-up area=11.80sqKm
Built-up area,2002

Hilly and Plain Areas of the Watershed

Effects of Vegetative Cover

on Water
W
Yield
Yi ld
Present
Maximum
outflow at
pilot
watershed
(cumec)

Outflow if
bareland
and open
mix forest
area are
covered
by
vegetation
(cumec)

Outflow if
all the
vegetation
cover is
removed
from the
watershed
(cumec)

6.031

5.27

7.25

Effect of Deforestation
(RUSLE)
Present
annual
sediment
yield in
tons/yr
/y

Annual
sediment
yield in
tons/yr if
bare land
and open
mix forest
area are
completely
p
y
converted
by
vegetation

Annual
sediment
yield in
tons/yr if
vegetation
g
cover is
removed
completely
from the
watershed

20943.88

7903.27

289412.6

Impact of unplanned urbanization in hilly

catchment resulting
g in hazard

What is The Limit

Ecological Foot Print

We Need to Recall Demerits of Pride and Arrogance:

The Lesson taught by Bamana (Vishnu) to MahaBali

Urban Carrying Capacity Concept

Environmental thresholds
We
W give
i pressure tto the
th environment
i
t by
b
Our activities, Population growth
Landuse change, physical development

Environment Reacts in the form of Hazard

We need to develop Indices for measuring Impact
Parameters,, weightage
g g etc.

We can react to maintain a balance if we know the

threshold well ahead
Become aware
Frame legal rule to reduce pressure on Environment
Develop technology to reduce pressure on Environment

Determining urban carrying capacity is thus

important for sustainable urban development

Urban Carrying Capacity Concept

level of human activities, population growth,
land use,
use physical development,
development which can be
sustained by the urban environment without
causing
g serious degradation
g
and irreversible
damage to the ecology.

Factors Effecting Urban Carrying

C
Capacity
i
Environmental and
ecological

Urban facilities

Carrying
Capacity

Public
perception

I tit ti
Institutional
l

Framework for Carrying Capacity

C l l ti f
Calculation
for Hilly
Hill A
Area

Step1: Delineation of hilly area From the Master

Plan
Step2: Demarcation of non developable areas
based on analysis of physical characteristics of
the urban hilly area and provision of different
statute

Waterways
Natural Depression
Rocky land
High Slope Land

Total Developable area of the Watershed

Total Watershed
Area
Non developable
area of the
Watershed

Framework for Carrying Capacity

C l l ti f
Calculation
for Hilly
Hill A
Area
Step3: Determination of area required for different
i f t t
infrastructure
and
d facilities
f iliti like
lik d
drainage
i
network
t
k
provisions, water supply plants, sewerage and waste
treatment plants. This area requirement for infrastructure
will be a function of carrying capacity and will be
calculated iteratively
Step4: From the above calculation net area available for
residential development will be calculated
St
Step5:
5 Determination
D t
i ti off floor
fl
area required
i d ffor each
h
person based on socio-economic status of the
prospective residents of the developable hilly area, habit,
daily water requirement and waste water generation
generation,
amount of daily solid waste generated, market demands,
cultural activities and climate in the area

 Step6: Based on above calculations carrying capacity

of the study area may be calculated as stated below:
CC = (AH (ANDA + AIF(CC))) x FAR/S
Where, AH = Hilly area
ANDA = Non developable area
AIF= Area required for infrastructure and facilities
AIF
FAR = Floor area ratio as prescribed in Master Plan,
Building Bye-law etc.
S = Floor area per person

Step7: Based on the population calculated in step 6

requirement of areas for different infrastructure,
facilities may be calculated using the set space norms
and adequacy of institutional frame work may be
checked Thus,
checked.
Thus considering infrastructure
infrastructure, facilities and
adequacy of institutional framework final carrying
capacity may be decided

Ecological
g
Management
g
Practices

EMPs for Controlling Sediment

and
d Water
W t Yield
Yi ld
EMPs that can be used for controlling
g sediment
and water yield from a hilly residential area
include,
G
Grass land
l d
Forest land
Covering rain impacted areas with pebble, vegetation
or wood chips
Detention drain and Retention pond
Vegetated
V
t t d waterways
t
and
d
Perforated Concrete
Rainwater
a ate Harvesting:
a est g A Major
ajo co
component
po e t o
of G
Green
ee
Building concept

RAIN WATER HARVESTING

FOR URBAN FLOOD PEAK
REDUCTION

Buildings and Drains in Hatigarh

Watershed

Summary of GIS Analysis

Relevant Data of GIS Analysis of Watershed

Particulars

Length (km)

Area (ha)

Total Watershed

280

Plain part

175

Hill part

105

Total Drains

17.6

Total Roof Area

21.3

Roof area as % of plain

area

12.2

Intensity-Duration Relationship
60

Intensity ((mm/h)

50

i = 51.307 e

40
30

0.2179 D

20
10
0
0

Duration (h)

After Sarma and Goswami (2004)

10

Socio--Economic Survey
Socio
Preceding the analysis, a Socio-economic
questionnaire
sti
i ssurvey is
i carried
i d outt tto
understand the current situation in a better way
and
to study the acceptability of the proposed RWH
g the p
people.
p
scheme among

Socio-economic
Socio
economic Study

IN GENERAL
HIGH LAND
LOW LAND

PRESENT SOURCE OF WATER

WELL
WATER SUPPLY & WELL
57%
43%
100%
0%
35%
65%

OCCURRENCE OF FLOODS DURING RAINY PERIOD

Occurs
Does not Occur
IN GENERAL
44%
56%
HIGH LAND
10%
90%
LOW LAND
60%
40%

Socioeconomic Data (Contd

(Contd.))
WATER SCARCITY DURING WINTER
Present
Absent
IN GENERAL
40%
60%
HIGH LAND
40%
60%
LOW LAND
40%
60%

WILLINGNESS TO INVEST IN RAINWATER HARVESTING

Willing
Unwilling
IN GENERAL
52%
48%
HIGH LAND
50%
50%
LOW LAND
55%
45%

Socioeconomic Data (Contd

(Contd.))
PREFERRED TYPE OF INVESTMENT
COMMUNITY& PRIVATE
INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITY BASED
PARTNERSHIP
48%
46%
6%
IN GENERAL
60%
40%
0%
HIGH LAND
36%
55%
9%
LOW LAND

PREFERRED USE OF HARVESTED WATER

IMMEDIATE USE DURING
USE FOR GROUND WATER
USE
DRY PERIOD
RECHARGE
IN GENERAL
27%
32%
41%
HIGH LAND
43%
14%
43%
LOW LAND
20%
40%
40%

DESIGN OF RAIN WATER

HARVESTING (RWH) SYSTEMS
Two options for RWH are proposed and their
Layout and Designs are discussed
Roof Top RWH(RTRWH)
Rain water harvesting from roof top

Flood Well RWH (FWRWH)

Rain water infiltration through flood wells.

Theyy are independent

p
options
p
may be used individually or in combination depending
y
g
needs for Flood Peak Reduction
on the hydrological

Design storm for maximum total volume

Volume = f (Duration)

Volume of runoff
(m3)of a rain of
duration D hr is
given by

Vo
olume of runoff ( m )

160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000

V=

iDA
1000

0
0

10

12

Duration of rainfall (h)

Parameters
Duration of rainfall producing
Maximum Total Volume (h)
Intensity corresponding
maximum Runoff Volume
(mm/h)
Runoff Coefficient of the
Watershed (C)
Discharge Q (m3/s)
Peak Runoff Volume V (m3)

Values
5
17.26
0.212
1.775
1,50,670

Design Summary of Roof Top Rain Water

H
Harvesting
ti S
Systems
t
Sl.
No.

PARAMETERS

FORMULAE
Or
NOTATION

Values

Intensity (mm/h)

17.26

Duration (h)

Runoff Vol Collected from Roof Top Area A (m2)

V = iAD/1000

18,385

Runoff Volume Collected per unit area of Roof

(m3/m2)
Area of tank required for a 1m depth tank

V = iD / 1000

0.086
0.10
10% of
the roof
area

Layout of RTRWH Systems

RTRWH Scheme 1

Table 5.1a Advantages and Disadvantages of RWH Scheme 1

Advantages

Disadvantages

Reduction of peak flow

Free use of water
R d ti in
Reduction
i pumping
i costs
t
Recharge of ground water table

Initial cost is more

Layout of RTRWH Systems

RTRWH Scheme 2

Table 5.1 b Advantages and Disadvantages of RWH Scheme 2

A
Advantages
Reduction of peak flow
Recharge of the ground water table
Partial reduction in pumping costs

Disadvantages
i
Pumping provision must be
present.

Layout of RTRWH Systems

RTRWH Scheme 3

Table 5.1 c Advantages and Disadvantages of RWH Scheme 3

Ad
Advantages
t

Di d
Disadvantages
t

Reduction of peak flow

Recharge of the ground water table
Free use of water without pumping

No inside supply

Layout of RTRWH Systems

RTRWH Scheme 4

Advantages

Disadvantages

Reduction of peak flow

Recharge of ground water
table

No possibility of using rainrain

water

Layout of Flood Well RWH System (Contd.)

20 Flood Wells per ha Scheme with X-Sectional Details

Summary of RWH Analysis (Contd.)

After solution
Before
Parameters
Solution

Only
RTRWH

RTRWH +10

RTRWH +20

FW/ ha

FW/ ha

Water level in drains

(m)

1.78

1.62

1.44

1.29

Sediment in

0.5

0.5

0.18

0.18

Depth of outlet drain (m)

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

Fl ood wi th sedi ment

control(m)

0.78

0.62

0.11

0.00

% Reducti on in
Maxi mum Runoff
Volume

12.2

21.54

30.87

% Peak Discharge
Reduction

12.20

12.70

22.9

% Flood Reducti on in
Drains (without
Sedi ment Control )

20.5

43.6

62.8

% Flood Reducti on in
drains (Wi th Sedi ment
Control, Studyed by
Bracht and S arma)

20.5

85

100

drain (m)

Other Important Measures

Developing Optimal Ecological Management
Practices for hilly urban area with water
management perspective
Adequate hydraulic design of drains with proper
evaluation of gradient and design discharge
Pumping at strategic locations with sluice gate
provision and exploring possibility of developing
underground storage with pumping provision
Development of lake
Restriction in impermeable area
Introduction of perforated slab to cover land
wherever cover is essential
Use of surface water sources in place of ground
water sources
Development of Satellite Township
Flood Forecasting and warning