Conclusion

The study has demonstrated that urbanization and its spatiotemporal form, pattern and structure can be quantified and compared across cities using spatial metrices. With the urban growth in India increasing, the need to understand the type of growth is important to plan the cities efficiently. Urban growth in India may take various spatial forms, depending upon the type of development, however, many parameters in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Hyderabad showed similar results. Especially Delhi and Mumbai have shown very similar growth type corresponding to the spatiotemporal urbanization and built-up density gradients. The entropy value for Hyderabad has increased showing randomness in the growth pattern, while for other cities, the randomness is minimum. The patch density has increased in Kolkata for the time period indicating dispersed patches of urban growth in outskirts of the city as well as in the city centers in a ring-shaped manner. PAFRAC for Hyderabad is differing from the other cities with decreasing values indicating that, with re-densification the urban patches are becoming more regular in its shape. Clumpiness index for Kolkata are decreased showing increasingly disaggregated patches. Kolkata and Hyderabad, is undergoing changes in the urban form.

Due to different urban topographic conditions in combination with socio-economic and political impacts Indian cities do not show a standard form. But nevertheless aspects of spatial urban growth proceeded very similar. The time series landscape metrics is important for describing, understanding and monitoring the spatial configuration of urban growth. Measuring the development stages of the Indian cities, help us decide the planning of the growth of the cities.