Chapter Four Conclusions, recommendation, Proposals & Strategies 4.0 Conclusions, recommendations, proposals and strategies;

4.1 Conclusions and Recommendations;

The previous chapters have been devoted to survey and analysis of recreation facilities, specially of parks and play grounds serving Kegalle City. The recommendations and proposals to be made will be discussed with the last section of this chapter, and they are based on the following summary of the study conclusions.

eational facilities are disproportionately distributed. As seen The existing recr recreational facilities. (2.5he of total area an 0.097he. the standard of the existing both 10% of total area of an urban settlement per 1000 population) is lower than recommended minimum standards of on the UDA planning and the to be allocated for public outdoor recreation 1.4he.(3.5acres) per 1000 population Development Authority. for urban areas recommended by the Urban

the policies, be improved using facilities are to Outdoor recreational , and also improvement will be of the UDA provision concept, and methodology required to support them. needed in the administrative structure

54 The land identified as needed for PORS could be either government or private lands. The plans for any of these should follow the procedures applied by the zoning plan control institutions for recreation. The lands identified for recreation need to come under other urban projects implemented in the area. To allow both to be processed to be seen to have been competently proposed

Authority has been competent to prepare the PORS plans & implemented accordingly to the Urban Development Authority act, 41 act of 1978 and by the amended by che act No.4 1982 although above acts have been processed urban

Development Authority, the implementing stages were handed over to Local

Government institutions. Due to the administration of local government under political leadership, difficulties may arise. Hence it is required to maintain PORS as a high priority and add it to the legal system, (eg. Like street lamps, changes done with modernization)

By this process, public outdoor recreation space can be protected. Public awareness should be increased as to the importance of developing public outdoor recreation spaces. In order to gain the attention & support of the public obtain private sector support for addressing the public It is also required to assistantance is not enough to process outdoor recreation as government recreation spaces.

lung in the City of is fully used for '' the Green , school holiday seasons, during similar recreation activities in weekends, evenings December 31st' for the dawning filled with people on to ' face green' which is outdoor spaces for in flats, always wish to use of the New Year. People living in recreation, and to have contact with the out door

4.2 General Recommendations; should include both urban area facilities in any given Outdoor recreation , outdoor facilities should be . Where possible active and passive outdoor recreation

55 associated with indoor recreation facilities, e.g. indoor sports centres, centres for leisure, art, music, drama and hobbies, community centres, libraries and other buildings providing such facilities.

Natural and cultural amenities such as landscape view points special landscape features, landscape sites, e.g. beaches, water ways, water bodies, marsh land, hills, vegetation of significance, architectural, archaeological or histoircfal value, should be evaluated and integrated into the public outdoor recreation space system as far as possible.

There should be a hierarchy of parks" emphasizing walking distance criteria as well as space requirement criteria to rationalize locations, sizes and service area of different orders/levels of parks and this concept should be combined with the

'nesting' concept in spatial planning. The sen/ice area of a higher order park should include the service areas of a number of lower order parks, all orders/levels being needed because of the different range of facilities they provide at varying distances from the users. This spatial concept is vital because it is the best way to ensure that all persons have suitable degrees of access to urban parks of the various levels/orders corresponding to their needs, keeping in mind that the shapes of

service areas of parks need not be regular and can be modified according to the actual shapes of the parks themselves as long as the walking distance criterion is met.

of linear parks and shaded foot Links between nodal parks, in the form Paths street side walks should be established, forming, as far as poss, e a p ^ open space net work. The relative importance of road and oo pa with larger services areas vary according to the type of park, e.g. larger Pa'ks ^ ^ routes and squiring vehicular access should be in locabons w ^ ^ ^ ^ ottKrs it bus stands. In some cases this factor wi roads and foot paths or the widening of existing will stimulate development of new ones.

56 PORS standards per 1000 population must be determined for area based on a national guideline, but sach urban allowing flexibility for modification according to locational differences in natural and social environment and for future growth of the town.

4.3 Proposals for future recreation needs;

In Kegalle city 2.5he. of land, is allocated for PORS. This amount is quite low compared to the total population in the area. The land required by 2020 to serve increased population will be nearly 35.3he. figure 4.1 shows the PORS plans processed according to the standard method of 1.4he. (3.5acres) for 1000 population. It explains the PORS requirements allocated for existing population and estimated increased population by 2020. At the moment only 2.5he. of land exists.

As Kegalle town is located in a valley, The PORS plan developed for Kegalle city with the help of UDA PORS methodology will, include mini parks, local parks community parks paddy fields and home gardens areas. All of them based on convenient walking distances.

"Kurulu Kele" The forest located in Kegalle city will also be included in the

PORS plans. Water bodies, conservation areas and road conservation areas are also included in a linear park. Therefore, the PORS methodology concepts and

Principals used by UDA can be applied to Kegalle city as well.

The parks proposed for PORS protect green coverage/colour in Kegalle rsity of Kegalle. (See appendix No.7,8) Plants which leads to protect the bio dive physical and mental well from all the foregoing PORS will help to enhance the nd contribute to a cleaner tang and it will also help to increase the bio diversity, a

9reener Kegalle city)

57 _1 5

Scale: 1:20000 Fig:4.1 Source : Landscape

58 4.4 Strategies for implem entation;

It is proposed that land reservation for Parks should be immediate effect followed as early as gazetted with possible by compulsory acquisition of land and development as parks, including certain i income- earning facilities such as restaurants, sports clubs and advertisements within the parks or associated with them.

"While it was intended to involve relevant public and private sector institutions with regard to establishing policies as well as funding and implementation, me need for an intensive public relations programme organized together wiim t! i... urban local authority and local political representatives in order to ensure full understanding and support for these proposals by the people, was recognized."1

The success of this PORS planning are the next twelve years will greatly depend on the people of kegalle being persuaded that it is in their best long term interests a permanent exhibition of the proposals in kegalle perhaps with a model nicer be a good mean of commucating with the public.

1 Basnayake Hester, Methodology for public outdoor rec 59 References :

01. Van Doren, Caltons, Priddle, George B. !!nd leisure c°ncepts and methods in outdoor recreaS

02. Allan J. £re^7°r“rS'i"lan'land 03. Diana R. Dunn Recreation, open space and social organization. (1979) 04. Hagget, Peter, Cliff Andrew and Frey Allan Hierarchies in part one moderns of locational structure in locational analysis in human Geography. (1977) 05. Commission of Baltimore city planning The design of Neighborhood parks. (1992)

06. Doell, E, Charls Elements of parks and recreation administration. (1963)

07. John Hulftsman, Richard L, Catteerrell, Wendy- Recreation, open space and Zalas Hultsman social organization. (1979)

08. Somadisstra Macbdar As peots of social and recreational development and skill training. (1978) 09. Don, C.S.V. Priddle, G.B. and Lewis J.E Land and Leisure. (1979)

10. Austin RJ. Designing the Natural Landscape. (1984) 11- Colvin Brenda Land and Landscape. (1973)

12. Grove, A.B and Cresswell, R.W. City Landscape (1983)

Architectural and Landscape 13. Kittiu Peferse Policies. (1982)

Outdoor recreation and open 14- Maryland Dept, of state planning, mary land - space plan. (1978)

Landscape Architecture. (1998) 15. The trust for public land Public Outdoor recreation 16. Basnayake Hester space methods policies and concept unpublished report.

60 17. Benty F., Alcook a Murvin P. Responsive environments, A manual for designers architectural press, London. (1985) 18. Ching, Francis, D.K. J[?itej*u,e form/ space and orde, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. (1979) 19. Cullen Gorden The concise townscape, the architectural press, London. (1975) 20. Garnham, Launch Maintaining the spirit of the Place. A process for preservation of town character (1985) 21. Krier, Ros, Urban space, Academic edition fired impression. (1984)

22. Albert. J. Rutledge, Asia Anatomy of a park. The essential of recreation area planning and design. (1971)

23. Colin Price Landscape economics. (1978)

24. Chauson marion and kentche Economics of outdoor recreation. (1966)

25. Doren Vans, Carlton, priddle B, George and Land and leisure concepts, and G.John methods in outdoor recreation. (1979) 26. Lavery Patrick Recreational Geography. (1974)

An introduction to landscape 22. Laurie Michael architecture pitman edition published. (1976)

Hand Book of urban landscape. 28. Tandy c.v. The Architectural press, London.(1978)

The garden city E and FN spon 29. Ward Stephen, V. ' An imprint of chapment of hall, London. (. )

61 Unpublished;

Oi. Balasooriya, S.I Visual patterns and the andscape of wet zone Sri- Lanka, dissertation of MSc landscape design. (1986) 02. Silva Radha de. Outdoor recreational needs in the Colombo municipal councial area MSc university of Moratuwa.(1995) 03. Chandrawansa W.P.K. Public outdoor recreation space planning for city of Galle.

04. The regional workshop on urban landscape i improvement of squatter settlements, final report, Indonesia, February 1992.

05. Urban Development Authority, Research and Training unit, proceeding of

the seminar on landscape aspects of urban development plans. 1992

Web ;i. Delaware township open space preservation and recreation master plan -

http//www/historyweb.com/pbmm/pbmm/98 opensp.htm.1998. ii. http//www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/199807/0717121.htm

park and open space, iii. http//qs.ucdaris.edu/classes/poll95/Charlie/space.html.

iv. Greeneries program - open space and recreation. Plan, http//www.state.nj.us.dep/greenares/osrp.htm

62 < ^■PPejodt t‘‘*~ Ua \ @

A Hierarchy of Parks for Urban Areas in Sri r' Lanka Based on our knowledge of human soci ciety and the human body as well a requirements for s space organized sports/games and informal recreation, certain logical decisions can be made as to contents, sizes and shapes of various orders/levels of parks and also as to maximum service areas of such parks.

space has to be a, leas. 0.82±a in

measuring 72m by 114 m (its long side being orientated as dose as possible to the North-South direction). If minimal spectator standing room is sufficient, an additional 4 m should be left all round making the area 80m by 122 m i.e. 0.976 ha. or aDBmximately 1 ha. Knowing what types of sports and other forms of

. outdoor recreation are needed for different age groups in , we can make similar space allowances for them.

The average healthy adult and the older child can walk briskly at roughly 8 km

per hour, relaxedly at 6 km per hour and slowly at 4 km per hour. Considering older (healthy) adults and younger children we could adopt 5 km per hour as an i ■ average walking speed, which means that it takes 5 minutes to walk 0.4km or 1/4 mile - this can be used as a basic criterion for determining service radii of

•. different orders/levels of parks. It is also logical to assume that while the vast

*>

* II majority of Sri Lanka's city-dwellers "eed ,0 have types of outdoor recreational facilities within' public, and in some cases. priJl^'^I *

The two basic categories of public outdoon Lecreitionjacmties for an urban area could then be defined in accordance with location:

(i) Localized Facilities i.e • public parks and playgrounds of various sizessi and categories (orders/leveis) distributed throughout the urban area in question according to population distribution and type as well as maximum walking distance criteria.

' Oi) Centralized Facilities covering the full range of active and passive recreation, including those more specialized (e.g. beaches, zoos, nature

parks) and sophisticated (e.g international/national standard stadia).

There could be one large unit or a group of smaller units according to the

shape, extent, character and context (e.g. boundaries, adjoining areas) of

the particular urban area.

The different levels or orders of parks can be defined in detail as follows (subject

to modification according to the urban area under consideration).

Localized Facilities:

Level (1) Pocket Parks - Less than_0J_ha. (0.5 acre) in very high play spaces/rest areas/garden patches, Scattered without proper private gardens am) also m density residential areas i/vded commercial and industrial areas. certain crow

Mini Parks - 0.2__tojLQJm Level (2) hundred population; e.g. a With woodland children's 12 park/rest garden/limited combination of such

the needs of fhe local population. areas, depending on

Service Area Radius: Upto 2 „2 mi minutes walking distance, i km (1/8 mile) i.e. 0.2

Level (3) Local Parks lJL0j^0ha.(2.5to7^a cres) With a wider range of facilities 0 n ■ .... ’ e,9' a junior or senior football Ditch

~.-taxation rspace;some or a large informal,or ^ grassed ** -— area where football and cricket could be played combined with a children's play area, a email woodland park and an informal running practice area.

Service Area Radius: Upto 5 minutes walking distance, i.e. 0.4 km (1/4 mile).

Level (4) Community Parks » 3 to 6 ha (7.5 to 15 acres)

With a wide range of active and passive recreation facilities; for

example a park with combined pitches and other facilities:

2 ha. Football (cum hockey) plus practice Running Track and athletics,

1.0 to 1.5 ha. Small Cricket Pitch. 0.25 to 0.5 ha. Netball and/or Basketball and/or Volley ball,

etc, 0.25 ha. Children's special play area,

0.25 ha. Ornamental Garden, . Naturalistic area for relaxation and study. 0.5 ha

10 minutes walking distance,8. i.e. 0.8 km Service Area Radius: upto

(1/2 mile). / ' '03

13 Centralized Facilities:

Level (5) lownParks - 6 to r l§Jo_20jcres With a still greater range of active and passive including certain recreation facilities, specialized facilities, and having separate games pitches and courts. (Size will va ry according to the population of the area).

Service Area Radius: 12 t° 1-6 km (3/4 to 1 mile). Such parks would not be accessible to younger children on their own unless- they live in the immediate vicinity, but they would be accessible to

all by vehicle. They could be the highest order of park for small

towns and some medium sized towns.

Level (6) Central Urban Park /City Park or Central Recreation Area - Over 8

ha. (20 acres)

With all facilities, including international standard sports grounds,

stadia, competition standard swimming pools, nature parks, small

zoos, etc. Size according to overall population - could be upto 40

ha. (100 acres).

This would preferably consist of one large unitor grouping but if this is not possible, there could be a number of units more or less in a

. Viliara Maha Devi Park, Galle Face Green, central location, e.g and various stadia in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

ic vehicular transport is level/order of PORS, private/public For this essential for most of the population.

ReoieniiPafearOutlCMSSIffltiorLCeritrll: Level (7) facilities plus specialized full range of These could be with the nature parks, ecialized nature (e.g

activities or could be of a sp 14

certain small wildlife

sanctuaries). There are no firm standards for size - they could occupy hundreds of acres or hectares and could even comprise a group.

They may be located within, or partly within, or just adjoining, an urban area or areas, usually dependant on relevant natural resource availability. Their extents could be omitted or perhaps partially or wholly taken into account when calculating the PORS

provision for a particular urban area, depending on the usefulness

of the park to that urban area compared with its usefulness to the

region as a whole.

In many urban areas in Sri Lanka the suitable range might be levels (1) to (5) or levels (2) to (6) rather than (1) to (7), while in some there may be a situation where certain parks fall outside the hierarchy and therefore outside the calculation of PORS provision for the population according to the decided 9 standard for the particular urban area.

of small towns with low density population distribution, levels (3) to In the case

(5) alone might suffice.

PORS Hierarchy could Public Outdoor Recreation Spaces outside the Urban

include: or the entire island, e.g. the 8 ha. (a) Specialized parks serving large regions -Mt. Lavinia. Zoological Garden in Dehiwala National Parks, etc. (b) Wildlife Sanctuaries, Nature Reserves 17

Figure 2

•The service eree of a higher order park shoCS^*""

Of a number of lower order parks". service areas

t- i /• \

/ i /• T i

\ / vMA

ft V r ft

KEY

COMMUNITY PARK AND BOUNDARY OF SERVICE AREA URBAN AREA >*

MINIPARK AND $ TOWN PARK o SERVICE AREA CENTRAL URBAN PARK LOCAL PARK AND SERVICE AREA GREEN links (footpaths / Linear Parfcs) CENTRAL URBAN park *30oco6es)

TOWN PARK ■AtoGO<5o

COMM UN ITY PARK o

LOCAL PARK

©e>«a C5o£^° es*ao^& <300 © o

Min ( otgd&sd gs&see® PARK 8§a s6%a *aey£D

j^eyssso SY OF PARKS FOR A HIERARCHY |M VARIOUS ADAPTATION URBAM AREAS. i. "* N

* NO ; 0

^ STANDARDS BASED ON MINIMUM PROPOSED BY 19 83 •U DA WORKSHOP OM SPATIAL AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT. :

1.4- Lo \ O- G>4 ha. PER IGOO PERSONS CEMTlRAUS ED

0-56 N LOCALISED faci Lines

■^ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM STANDARDS:

O • 6 Pi a CBMTP.ALIS ED Ol lOQ FACILITIES PER > I ooo PERSONS, 0*4 ho. LOCALI SBb V FACILITIES

i

attempts TO POSTULATE STAN PARES TOR EXTENT OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION space IN URBAN AREAS 4

recreation facilities ^official/unofficial^ determine orders/levels and service areas, adapt/modify hierarchy and categories of parks to suit the particular / circumstances. Evaluate existing and proposed school playgrounds and club sports pitches also.

2) Make an inventory of "natural amenity precipitants11 such as viewpoints, special landscape features, etc* for example existing and proposed waterways and water bodies, interesting marsh land, etc.

3) Prepare to a suitable scale, a map showing residential population d e n s 5. t y distribution, projected to a suitable year in the future, highlighting high-density

housing areas /schemes.

Prepare a separate plan or a transparent overlay show- ing existing parks and playgrounds , vacant crown/local natural amenity council/private owned land, and precipitants•

(4) above, finalize the categorisation 5) Using (3^ & Of existing parks and playgrounds, study in relation other land use to suggested (but not finalised) out proposal for new parks• proposals, and work of existing parks and play- Indicate the service a-reas

grounds on (4)

transparent overlay showing Prepare a separate plan or S) delineation of service areas all proposals including 2,3,4 and 5 or only 2,3 and, 4, for parks of levels as the case may be. Append* No. 03

PREPARATION OF URBAN LANDSCAPE MASTERPLANS

N i UK. VL AMD CULTURAL HIERARCHY OF PARKS, MINIMUM PORS POPULATION DENSITY, At :‘\N>': V P R EC'.IPITANTS NESTING CONCEPT, STANDARDS "GREEN LINKS" ' DISTRIBUTION & TYPE

N.-. !R L PUBLIC OUTDOOR j (40%) GREEN LUNG PEDESTRIANWAYS. MACROSCALE & nr .Re :mental , RECREATION SPACE ! REQUIREMENT STREETSCAPE, URBAN IA 701 ECOLOGICAL PLANNING MICROSCALE n- IA> PER SQUARES, RAIL ROUTES, VISUAL ANALYSIS CYCLE WAYS, PARKING AREAS, WATERWAYS (& RELEVANT SPACE STANDARDS)

▼ PUBLIC OPEN SPACE NETWORK & TOWNSCAPE PROPOSALS.

URBAN LANDSCAPE MASTERPLANS INTEGRATED WITH URBAN DEVELOPMENT PLANS & INCLUDING ACTION PROJECTS. Appendjc No. 04

Public outdoor Recreation Space Plan (PORS)

ENVIRONMENTAL PLRWIN9 METHODOLOBV . EOR AN URBAN Qf?PQ

II ‘ IF ^valuation of Nature; Bflvironnental Factors Public Outdoor Recreation Spaces , fipecially Natural Resources s Planning in accordance with UDfl ------policies & concepts , based on Base,leading to general 1Land--Use Itfltability. A Develoouent population and other socio- Potential economic factors ,Nat ura1 / reconoendations. Cultural aaenity precipitants < Standard: 1 to 1.5 ha per 1000 population )

\ l-nfrz .vIvm ciil re /f^'- SS m e rft ^Evaluation of Environcental v Problens, 1ssues. /

\ \

X7

a 2 Id Evaluation regarding other \ Visual Analysis - Macro-scaie public open space* such a* N^ i Micro-scale including squares,street*, rail routes, Recosaendations. parking areas,pedestrian ways, cycle ways, water ways, etc.

relevant SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONS ITERATIONS

GENERAL LAND-USE 4 CONSERVATION BUIDELINEB , OPEN SPACES PLAN , ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT 4 T0UN8CAPE RECOMMENDATIONS, ACTION PROJECTS. 1 Appendix No. 05

gMllgSSrgHTRl, PURINA BfTHnnm^v gPR AN URBAN Preo

ia IF

fjViluafcion of Natural Public Outdoor Recreation Spaces Jjfi.VlPOnnental Factors , Planning in accordance with UDfl fipoclally Natural Resources ------policies & concepts , based on LfMtleading to general Land-Use population and other soci.o- ffiitibilitv & Development econoaic factors , Natural / filfhtial recoaaendations. Cultural aaenity precipitants ( Standard: l to 1.5 ha per lCi©0 population )

LB Infra strwck re /(t'-'SS Tiertt 3tEvaluation of Environcental Problems, Issues. /

p V i S Xd Evaluation regarding other \ Visual Analysis - Macro-scale public Open space* such as \ & Micro-scale including square*,streets, rail routes, Recoceendations. parking areas, pedestrian ways, cycle ways, water ways, etc..

V relevant socio-economic CONSIDERATIONS

BENERflL LAND-U8E ( CONSERVATION 0UIDELINEB , OPEN BPACE8 PLAN , ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT t T0WN8CAPE RECOMMENDATIONS, ACTION PROJECTB. 1 1 Appendix No. 06

Description of PORS Plan in selected towns

No Area Existing Proposed

PopulationLand Extent PORS % Population Land extent % (hectare) (hectare) PORS 01 Colombo me 635,500 3,733 75.90 2.03 66,000 278 7.44 02 Dmmc 209,781 2,106 20.00 0.94 263,153 126 5.98 03 Gampaha me 56,063 2,924 4.12 0.14 63,166 i 63.60 2.17 04 Rathnapura me 47,811 2,218 27.20 1.22 57,073 81.20 3.66 05 Kegalle uc 19,111 779 2.50 0.3224,634 34.40 4.41 06 Panadura uc 32,532 592 6.60 i.ii 43,366 61.00 10.30 07 Kaduwela ps 177,190 8,772 157.70 1.79 558,935 664.90 7.51 08 Ruwanweila ps > 12,122 1,680 2.25 0.1320,877 30.30 1.80 09 Mawanella ps 23,501 403 1.20 0.2940,356 58.80 14.60 10 Matale me 38.000 860 14.70 0.01 45,000 77.70 9.03 11 Kantale ps 21.000 2,600 12.50 0.48 45,000 63.00 2.47 12 Ehaliyagoda ps 22,623 1,638 0.80 0.04 32,548 45.00 2.74 13 Kahawatta ps _ 13,189 840 0.75 0.0816,059 32.48 3.86 14- Monaragala p^ 7,221 780 3.00 0.88 11,595 16.00 2.05 i 15 Bandarawela uc 7,829 246 2.50 1.01 9,947 9.95 4.06 16 Kurunegala me - 28,337 1,051 5.00 0.47 42,968 49.00 4.66 17 Moratuwa me 177,190 2,294 41.00 1.78 297,683 274.00 11.94 18 Kottikawatta Mulleriyawa ps 109,381 2,134 1.50 0.07 179,891 130.00 6.09 .■j« • Mo: (S?)

Aaricultural/Forestry Crops for Sri Lanka’s urban public open spaces, with focus on streets, squares and parks Hester Basnayake, Landscape Architect & Director, Environment & Landscape, UDA, Associate member of the Landscape Institute, U.K.

BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR PLANT SPECIES FOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACES IN URBAN AREAS (IN CONTEXT OF OUR EQUATORIAL CLIMATE AND OUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT NEEDS & CONCEPTS)

• Maximum possible contribution to Green Lung of the city/town.

• Facilitation of provision of outdoor recreational needs of the urban population.

• Amelioration of heat, exposure to excessive sunlight, wind, glare & dust.

• Mitigation of water pollution, Use in Sustainable Drainage Systems.

• Stabilisation of slopes and beaches, prevention of erosion.

^^T%isual enhancement/improvement of the public realm, contributing to distinct character, including, in general, planting in scale with the public urban environment.

. Generally, requiring little or no maintenance, unless there are realistic arrangements for high maintenance.

infrastructure, foundations or roofs, or resulting m unacceptable ^ISMlfiguration/distortion of the plants themselves.

How and Where could agricultural/forestry crops fit In?

■*>>

WHAT SPECIES? and (preferably) needing little or no Crops affording permanent green cover (PostbTeeTcepfon: certain urban flood detention areas). /.V <■+ ws. :

PUBLIC URBAN STREETS & URBAN SQUARES:

Generally, fruit trees with large, heavy fruits should be avoided, e.g.Cocos nuclfera (Pol). Other fruit tree species are suitable only If haphazard fruit fall, haphazard fruit plucking by the public (especially throwing stones, etc.) and excessive feeding by birds/bats (causing problems such as excessive bird droppings) is prevented by a foolproof management regime successfully addressing timely harvesting: this may be more applicable in housing schemes. The species chosen should satisfy the other urban requirements, especially shade provision, unless the location is in the cold part of the hill country of Sri Lanka. Examples: Tamarindus indicus (Siyambala), Borassus flabellifer (Thai), Mangifera indica (Amba) - the latter only if cars are not going to be parked under them, considering the possible staining caused by falling flowers.

HARVESTING OF TREE BRANCHES. LEAVES. BARK. FLOWERS. ETC. IS NOT ACCEPTABLE UNLESS THE VISUAL IMPACT IS INSIGNIFICANT. Softwood trees and trees with brittle branches should be avoided especially adjoining vehicle routes/parks as they are hazardous to vehicles especially during storms and high winds. Buttress rooted trees should not be used unless there is sufficient space; otherwise, paving, kerbs, edgestrips, etc. may be damaged by root spread. Adjoining roads, small-leaved species are preferable to large-leaved ones, as fallen large leaves mean more regular maintenance on road cleaning, particularly to avoid clogging of drains. Drooping large leaves are more hazardous as they could cause excessive dampness from dripping water, creating skid prone road surfaces.

Immediate gathering of fallen leaves, etc. for composting is definitely desirable, making it possible to use certain large-leaved trees along busy streets' even species such as Terminalia cattappa (Kottamba) may be acceptable if. their fallen leaves are collected quickly and if there is sufficient space for the surface spreading buttress roots.

However, prunlngs of trees and shrubs could be used as cuttings for . Hibiscus varieties (Vadhamal), Bougainvillea vegetative propagation, e.g even anaeorobic digestion for blo-gas spp., or for composting or production. “Nurse” or “Temporary" trees may be carefully harvested for various uses

Examples. Fast grow ng ... Dermanent species along streets, may

a suitable size. Macaranga peltata (Kenda) Inter-planted URBAN WATERBODIES / WATERWAYS / WETLANDS'

Harvesting of invasive water plants as composting material etc., e.g. Eichornia crassipes (Water Hyacinth) & Salvinia.

Careful harvesting, without spoiling visual effect, of excessively spreading (0 flowering water plants such as Nelumbium nuciferum (Lotus), . Nymphaea spp, (Water Lily), water’s edge plants such as Habarala, Kankun, reeds & rushes (Pang), while ensuring that bank erosion Is not caused.

Harvesting of reeds, rushes, etc., on condition that the natural wetland appearance is not spoiled.

Growing of wetland crops such as Paddy & keera-kola in selected flood detention areas, where a strictly natural marsh character is not essential.

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY * GENERALLY NOT RECOMMENDED FOR URBAN PUBLIC OPEN SPACES, except Tor very limited demonstration purposes.

N.B. In URBAN SEMI-PUBLIC co^atibility^with agricultural uses are the overall vision for the city. . For example, in upper water ehed , tourlsrri & oriented cities like Nuwara Eliya, regular cultivation is, unsuitable on slopes where a permanent green cover » need« chararfpr or to forestall erosion and silting (although It is S In "mltad flat valley areas), but grazing and growing of permanent crops would be suitable.

URBAN AGRICULTURE • i'w —S

' <

Annual pollarding of trees under service lines or tree surgery when needed may provide a harvest of poles or firewood.

Erosion-control grasses/other erosion control vegetation such as Wedella trilobata creepers on slopes adjoining roads in hilly areas may provide harvests of cuttings for various purposes.

PUBLIC PARKS & PLAYGROUNDS: /

(a) Informal grassed sports pitches & other grassed expanses:

Grazing, provided the animals are managed In a disciplined manner and the droppings are collected before they pose a nuisance to the public. / Harvesting of mowings for fodder or for planting elsewhere.

(b) Areas with trees &/or shrubs a/or herbaceous perennials a/or climbers:

Fruit trees provided there Is a foolproof management regime for harvesting and to prevent haphazard fall of potentially injurious fruits such as Pol and-Jak.

Fruit bearing shrubs and climbers from which the public or the relevant park authority may gather fruits, provided there is no nuisance caused to anyone.

Gathering of fallen leaves, etc. as mentioned above.

& loppings of trees and shrubs as mentioned above, Harvesting of prunings and twigs for use as fuelwood, fences and the Gathering of fallen branches like. ” trees ae mentioned above. Harveating of “Nurse" or “Temporary

, when “thinning <> forest patches or groves, for Harvesting of excess trees various uses elsewhere. for medicinal uses may be of urban forest patches Careful management suitable in some cases. Appendix No. 8 Plant List

Common Name Botanical Name Family Name

01. BADULLA Semecarpus species ANACARDIACEAE s.Badulla

02. BERALIYA Shorea Worthingtoni DIPTEROCARPACEAE s. Beralliya

03. BETEL NUT Areca Catechu PALMAE Puwak

04. BUKENDA Mallotus tetracoccus EUPHORBIACEAE

05. CALAMANDER Diospyros quaestia EBENACEAE Kalumediriya

06. HAVARI NUGA Alsttonia macrophylla APOCYNACEAE Havari nuga CLUSJACEAE 07. KEENA Calophyllum walked EUPHORBIACEAE 08. KENDA IVJacorange

SONNERATIACEAE 09. KIRALA Sonneratia caseolaris

Adenanthera pavonina LEGUMINOSAE 10. MADATIYA

Cycas circinalis CYCADACEAE 11. MADU Swietenia mahogone MELIACEAE 12. MAHOGANY Myristica dactylo ides MYRISTICACEAE 13. MALABODA Lagerstroemia speciosa LYTHRACEAE 14. MURUTHA CLUSIACEAE Mesya ferrea 15. NA VERBENACEAE Viteu negundo 16. NIKA MYRISTICACEAE Myristica fragrans 17. NUTMEG V Rhododendron arhoreum ERIACEAE 18. PHODODENDRON PROTEACEAE Grevillea robusta 19. SABUKKU LEGUMINOSAE/ Albizia saman MIMOSACEAE 20. RAIN TREE 21. PIHIMBIYA Fillicium decipiens SAPINDACEAE

22. YELLOW FLAME Peitophorum pterocarpum LEGUMINOSAE/ FABACEAE

23. KOTTAMBA Terminalis catappa COMBRETACEAE

24. PLAMBOYANI Delonixregia LEGUMINOSAE

25. BARRINGTONIA Barringtoniaasiatica LECYTHIDACEAE mudilla

^BATU^l o* A.A r Co 0 5 SEP 2012 !; a- cc & lli 1*vN».-