European Scientific Journal January 2015 edition vol.11, No.3 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431

CHARACTERIZATION OF BUILT HERITAGES IN A SECOND ORDER CITY IN ,

Viswanadha Kumar Giduthuri, M.Arch., PhD Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Andhra University College of Engineering (A), , , India

Abstract In continuation of the pursuit related to the human endeavor of heritages in second order cities in India, a comprehensive study on heritage resources present in town, Andhra Pradesh, India was taken up next to the earlier attempt at Visakhapatnam city. Vizianagaram town forming a part of the Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region was found to harbour 24 important heritage structures and sites representing reasonable number of architectural styles and typologies and the same are analyzed and discussed in this communication. In the light of re-formulation of Andhra Pradesh state and ambitions to develop mega and smart cities with capital at Vijayawada, the present study assumes greater significance to providing information for the synthesis of the noted heritages with urban landscape to promote historical, cultural and socio-economic merits of the town.

Keywords: Heritage sites, Historic affiliation, Heritage typologies, Architectural styles

Introduction The quality of life, living environment, indigenous techniques and knowledge carried over from the past are considered as cultural heritage. Conservation of these cultural heritages has been a challenge to all levels of government and especially for local governments who are in direct contact with manifestations of these heritages. Moreover, old buildings and older areas of the city should be looked upon as assets rather than liabilities because they represent the history of communities, embodying their tradition, heritage and culture through architecture and the urban form. Majority of these historic city centers are decaying for several reasons. These centers are looked upon as liabilities rather than assets that represent the history of the family, community, its tradition, art, architecture and overall planning. The ignorance about the value of these historic centers and

361 European Scientific Journal January 2015 edition vol.11, No.3 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431

their financial unaffordability to maintain these areas make the situation even worse. To avoid this situation, efforts must be taken to conserve our rich built heritages in a systamatic way to minimise its distruction.

Literature review The identification of built heritages or sites is a means by which official bodies recognise and valorise built heritage deemed to have a special standing. The most famous appellation is perhaps that of UNESCO World Heritage (Leask and Fyall, 2006), but many governments operate listing schemes which are usually accompanied by protective measures.. Heritage policies are not well embedded in certain Asian regions, for example, where there are barriers to enforcement and more urgent calls on scarce resources (ADB, 2006). Wherever the location, arrangements for awarding heritage status may not satisfy everyone with complaints about selection criteria, insufficient funding and inadequate protection. There are likely to be differences in attitudes amongst stakeholders and greater popular participation is often advocated with a view to giving the less powerful a voice in decisions (ICOMOS, 1990). Nevertheless, despite their shortcomings, formal mechanisms do indicate consensus about public sector obligations concerning the guardianship of built heritage. Both tangible and intangible heritages on mother earth were identified as one of the important fields of human endeavor since 1940’s (Larkham, 2010). United Nations General Assembly (1996) in its the Habitat Agenda, directed all the countries must recognize the historical and cultural heritage is an important asset, and strive to maintain the social, cultural and economic viability of historically and culturally important sites and communities. As an upshot, several countries around the world have been marching ahead in the subject to demonstrate the benefits accruing out of these non-renewable proud resources to the present as well as future generations and the need to synthesize these cultural heritages with progressive urban landscape. A number of works of recent origin in the line include inventory and description of several heritage structures from many geographical entities around the world (UNESCO, 2004, 2005a; Buckley, 2007; www.hamilton.ca, 2008; Stewart et al., 2008; HBACW, 2008; ASI, 2008, 2010a, b; Bold and Kovacec, 2009; Mishra, 2009; Rajamani, 2010; Ravindran, 2010; Bailey, 2011; Harun, 2011; Kerr, 2011; DC, 2012) and the same were detailed in the earlier publication (loc.cit.). World over, it is a practice to distinguish archaeological systems from heritage subjects based on age as the basic criterion. The standards for distinguishing the two groups usually differ from country to country and in India, the criterion is set at 100 years. That means all assets with 100 or more years of existence in India fall

362 European Scientific Journal January 2015 edition vol.11, No.3 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431

into archaeological arena while the ones less than 100 years enter the heritage spectrum (GoI, 2011).

Andhra Pradesh State At this juncture, it may be apt to add that the importance of second order cities and towns in Andhra Pradesh, assuming greater significance in the light of recent separation of Telangana region with 10 Districts into a separate state leaving the parent state with 13 Districts. The new Andhra Pradesh State is relegated to eighthplace with 160,205 km2 of area and holds tenth place with a population of 49,386,799 in India (India Census, 2011). However, the state retained the second longest (972 km) coastline of the country and contained 5 international trade gateways. National metropolises, Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bengaluru are still well within the reach of the new state. In the light of re-formulation of Andhra Pradesh state and ambitions to develop mega and smart cities with capital at Vijayawada, the present study assumes greater significance to providing information for the synthesis of the noted heritages with urban landscape to promote historical, cultural and socio-economic merits of the town.

Fig. 1: Major historical agglomerations in Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region

363 European Scientific Journal January 2015 edition vol.11, No.3 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431

Vizianagaram in the context In the process, several first order cities around the world have geared up to meet the requirements right from identification of heritages to their conservation and synthesis with modern landscapes utilizing state-of-the-art technologies. However, second order cities and towns in many nations, especially in developing countries like India did not yet raise to the occasion. Given this scenario, a comprehensive study on heritage structures and sites and their preservation was taken up in Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region (under the jurisdiction of Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, VUDA) lying along the east coast of Andhra Pradesh in India. This Metropolitan Region mainly embraces Visakhapatnam city, Anakapalle, Bheemunipatnam and Vizianagaram towns. In the first step, heritage structures and sites present in Visakhapatnam city of this metropolitan region were described earlier (Giduthuri, 2013) and as a follow up, relevant resources of another town, namely, Vizianagaram in the region are being described and analysed in this communication. Vizianagaram (literally meaning the ‘City of Victory’), an erstwhile princely town (18°12’N and 83°42’E) and District Headquarters of the District by the same name lies