Padmanabhpur is a Locality in Durg (durg) with 🟢 good livability livability (Score: 64.38/100, Grade: B). It scores +1.1 above the Durg average.
Strengths: Water Bodies, Earthquake Safety, Air Quality · Needs improvement: Population Density, Nighttime Lights
Best suited for: Investors
Click any metric card to explore detailed parameters
Historical parameter scores over the past 2 data points 02 Nov — 03 Nov 2026
| Parameter | Value | NAAQS Limit | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| AQI Satisfactory | 82 | 0–50 Good | Lower is better |
| Air Quality Index — a single number (0–500) summarizing overall air pollution. Computed from the worst-performing pollutant. AQI ≤50 is "Good"; above 200 is "Very Poor" and dangerous for sensitive groups. | |||
| PM2.5 | 17.87 µg/m³ | ≤40 µg/m³ (24hr) | Lower is better |
| Fine particulate matter (diameter <2.5 µm). These ultra-fine particles penetrate deep into lungs and enter the bloodstream, causing respiratory disease, heart attacks, and reduced life expectancy. Main sources: vehicle exhaust, construction dust, industrial emissions, crop burning. | |||
| PM10 | 33.93 µg/m³ | ≤60 µg/m³ (24hr) | Lower is better |
| Coarse particulate matter (diameter <10 µm). Includes dust, pollen, and mold spores. Causes coughing, aggravates asthma, and irritates eyes/throat. Less dangerous than PM2.5 but still a major concern in dusty cities like Durg. | |||
| NO₂ | 13.89 µg/m³ | ≤40 µg/m³ (annual) | Lower is better |
| Nitrogen Dioxide — reddish-brown gas from vehicle engines and power plants. Irritates airways, worsens asthma, and contributes to smog/acid rain formation. High NO₂ is a strong indicator of traffic-related pollution. | |||
| SO₂ | 3.33 µg/m³ | ≤50 µg/m³ (24hr) | Lower is better |
| Sulfur Dioxide — pungent gas from burning coal, oil, and industrial smelting. Causes burning sensation in nose/throat, breathing difficulty, and contributes to acid rain which damages buildings and vegetation. | |||
| CO | 0.03 mg/m³ | ≤2 mg/m³ (8hr) | Lower is better |
| Carbon Monoxide — colorless, odorless gas from incomplete combustion (vehicles, generators, burning biomass). Reduces blood's ability to carry oxygen, causing headaches, dizziness. High levels indoors can be fatal. Especially dangerous in enclosed/poorly ventilated areas. | |||
| O₃ | 14.84 µg/m³ | ≤100 µg/m³ (8hr) | Lower is better |
| Ground-level Ozone — unlike protective ozone in upper atmosphere, ground-level O₃ is harmful. Formed when sunlight reacts with vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions. Peaks in afternoon heat. Triggers chest pain, coughing, and throat irritation. Especially harmful for children and elderly. | |||
| NH₃ | 15.66 µg/m³ | ≤400 µg/m³ (24hr) | Lower is better |
| Ammonia — a pungent gas from agricultural fertilizers, animal waste, sewage treatment, and some industrial processes. High concentrations irritate eyes, nose, and throat. Contributes to secondary PM2.5 formation through atmospheric reactions. | |||
Acceptable air quality. Minor concern for unusually sensitive individuals.
Outdoor activities are fine. Unusually sensitive people should consider reducing prolonged outdoor exertion.
Minimal cardiovascular impact. Those with severe heart conditions should monitor symptoms.
Continue normal activities. Keep rescue medications accessible.
Generally safe. Elderly with pre-existing lung/heart conditions should be aware.
Outdoor activities are safe. Avoid areas near heavy traffic or construction.
Safe for family activities. Children with asthma should carry inhalers as a precaution.
Outdoor activities are fine. Choose parks away from busy roads for children's play.
Minimal risk. Pregnant women can continue normal routines with awareness.
Normal activities are safe. Prefer green spaces for walks, avoid standing near traffic.
Mild concern for people with severe asthma or COPD. May notice slight airway irritation.
Keep rescue inhaler handy. Avoid areas with visible dust or smoke. Stay hydrated.
Good for sports. Athletes may notice very slight performance reduction during intense exercise.
Outdoor sports are fine. Prefer morning hours (6-8 AM) when pollution is typically lower.
| Parameter | Value | Ideal | Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDS Perfect | 300 ppm | ≤300 ppm | 100 /100 |
|
| Total Dissolved Solids — measures dissolved minerals, salts & metals in water. High TDS makes water taste salty/bitter, can cause scaling in pipes, and may indicate contamination. BIS acceptable limit: 500 ppm. Lower is better | ||||
| pH Level Perfect | 7.3 | 6.5–8.5 | 100 /100 |
|
| Measures acidity (pH<7) or alkalinity (pH>7) of water. Too acidic water corrodes pipes releasing metals; too alkaline causes scale buildup and bitter taste. Neutral pH 7.0 is ideal. BIS range: 6.5–8.5. Closer to 7.0 is better | ||||
| Supply Extreme | 6 hrs/day | 24 hrs | 25 /100 |
|
| Hours of piped water supply per day. 24/7 continuous supply is ideal. Intermittent supply causes negative pressure in pipes, drawing in contaminants from surrounding soil. Also forces storage in tanks which increases bacterial growth. Higher is better | ||||
| Fluoride Perfect | 0.6 mg/L | ≤1.0 mg/L | 100 /100 |
|
| Fluoride concentration in water. Small amounts (0.5–1.0 mg/L) help prevent dental cavities, but excess fluoride (>1.5 mg/L) causes dental fluorosis (staining/pitting of teeth) and skeletal fluorosis (bone deformity). BIS limit: 1.0 mg/L (acceptable), 1.5 mg/L (max permissible). Lower is better | ||||
| Total (sum of 4 params) | 325/400 | |||
| Water Score (Total ÷ 4) Very Good | 75 /100 |
|
||
| Parameter | What It Measures | Better Direction | BIS Standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| TDS | Total Dissolved Solids — dissolved minerals, salts & metals. High TDS causes salty/bitter taste and pipe scaling. | ↓ Lower | ≤500 ppm (acceptable) ≤2000 ppm (max) |
| pH Level | Acidity/alkalinity of water. Too acidic corrodes pipes; too alkaline causes scale buildup. Best at neutral 7.0. | ≈ Closer to 7.0 | 6.5–8.5 |
| Supply Hours | Hours of piped water per day. Intermittent supply draws contaminants into pipes and forces tank storage (bacterial growth). | ← Higher | 24 hrs (ideal) |
| Fluoride | Fluoride concentration. Small amounts prevent cavities; excess causes dental/skeletal fluorosis (bone damage). | ↓ Lower | ≤1.0 mg/L (safe) ≤1.5 mg/L (max) |
| Nitrate | NO₃⁻ from agricultural runoff & sewage. Excess causes "blue baby syndrome" in infants and long-term health risks. | ↓ Lower | ≤45 mg/L (as NO₃⁻) |
| Parameter | Value | Score | Benchmark | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ODF Status | ODF+ | 70 | ODF++ is best | 20% |
| Open Defecation Free certification. ODF means no open defecation. ODF+ adds solid/liquid waste management. ODF++ means all faecal sludge is safely managed and treated. | ||||
| Sewage Treatment Coverage | 55.00% | 55 | 100% ideal | 30% |
| Percentage of households connected to a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) or decentralized treatment system. Higher coverage means less untreated sewage entering water bodies. | ||||
| Drainage Coverage | 60.00% | 60 | 100% ideal | 25% |
| Storm water and waste water drainage network coverage. Proper drainage prevents waterlogging, mosquito breeding, and disease outbreaks during monsoon. | ||||
| Waste Collection | Daily | 80 | Daily (2x) is best | 15% |
| Door-to-door waste collection frequency. Daily (2x) = twice daily collection. Daily = once daily. Alt. Day = alternate days. More frequent collection reduces open dumping and disease vectors. | ||||
| Sewage Disposal Method | STP Connected | 85 | Centralized STP best | 10% |
| How sewage is treated. Centralized STP = large treatment plant serving the sector/city. STP Connected = individual ward connected to STP. Septic Tank = on-site treatment. Open Drain = untreated discharge (worst). | ||||
The sanitation score is a weighted average of 5 parameters:
Score = (ODF × 20%) + (Sewage Coverage × 30%) + (Drainage × 25%) + (Waste Collection × 15%) + (Disposal Method × 10%)
ODF = No open defecation · ODF+ = ODF + solid/liquid waste managed · ODF++ = All faecal sludge safely treated (gold standard under SBM)
Infrastructure quality assessed via 9 satellite datasets — ESA WorldCover, GHSL Built Surface/Height/Volume/SMOD, VIIRS Nighttime Lights, Dynamic World, ALOS DEM, and Sentinel-2 indices. Data analysed at 1000m and 3000m buffer radii around each area's centroid via Google Earth Engine.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Avg Built Surface per Pixel | 0.0 m² |
| Total Built Surface | 0 m² |
| Built Surface Fraction | 2,064.8% |
| Avg Building Height | 5.22 m |
| Max Building Height | 11.8 m |
| Total Built Volume | 20,076,239 m³ |
| Mean Built Volume per Pixel | 16,081.1 m³ |
| Mean Elevation | 290.5 m | Slope (Mean) | 0.10° |
| Min Elevation | 277.5 m | Slope (Max) | 0.10° |
| Max Elevation | 308.5 m | Elevation Range | 31.0 m |
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Built-up (LULC) | 63.5% | 41.8% | 52.6% |
| Avg Bldg Height | 6.25 m | 4.18 m | 5.22 m |
| Night Radiance | 14.85 | 13.47 | 14.16 |
| Urbanization | 98.7 | 71.3 | 85.0 |
| Dynamic World Built | 76.0% | 58.0% | 67.0% |
| NDBI | -0.0299 | -0.0051 | -0.0200 |
| Impervious Surface | 34.9% | 22.1% | 28.5% |
| Mean Slope | 0.10° | 0.10° | 0.10° |
| Infra Score | 77.4 | 61.5 | 70.3 |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Avg Built Surface per Pixel | 2,578.5 m² |
| Total Built Surface | 80,216,494 m² |
| Built Surface Fraction | 2,553.4% |
| Avg Building Height | 6.25 m |
| Max Building Height | 10.2 m |
| Total Built Volume | 6,235,171 m³ |
| Mean Built Volume per Pixel | 20,047.5 m³ |
| Mean Elevation | 291.8 m | Slope (Mean) | 0.10° |
| Min Elevation | 284.0 m | Slope (Max) | 0.10° |
| Max Elevation | 308.0 m | Elevation Range | 24.0 m |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Avg Built Surface per Pixel | 1,591.7 m² |
| Total Built Surface | 445,646,944 m² |
| Built Surface Fraction | 1,576.2% |
| Avg Building Height | 4.18 m |
| Max Building Height | 13.4 m |
| Total Built Volume | 33,917,306 m³ |
| Mean Built Volume per Pixel | 12,114.6 m³ |
| Mean Elevation | 289.1 m | Slope (Mean) | 0.10° |
| Min Elevation | 271.0 m | Slope (Max) | 0.10° |
| Max Elevation | 309.0 m | Elevation Range | 38.0 m |
| Parameter | Risk Level | Score | Benchmark | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| River Flood Risk | Low | 10 | Low (10) = Safest | 50% |
| Risk of flooding from rivers. Areas near rivers, nalas and low-lying ground face highest risk during monsoon. | ||||
| Urban Waterlogging | Low-Medium | 25 | Low (10) = Safest | 50% |
| Risk of urban waterlogging due to inadequate storm-water drainage. RMC data shows 97% incidence of waterlogging in the city with a 52% drainage coverage gap. Dense old-city areas and lake overflow zones are most vulnerable. | ||||
Lower score = safer area. Score is a weighted average of 2 factors:
Score = (River Flood × 50%) + (Waterlogging × 50%)
100 − Risk Score| Parameter | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Soil Type | Lateritic / alluvial plain (Shivnath basin) | Primary differentiator — soft soil amplifies earthquake shaking |
| Seismic Zone | Zone II | BIS IS-1893 classification (Zone II = lowest hazard in India) |
| PGA (475-yr) | 0.0155g | Peak Ground Acceleration for 475-year return period (~10% in 50 yrs) |
| PGA (2475-yr) | 0.0325g | Peak Ground Acceleration for 2475-year return period (~2% in 50 yrs) |
| Liquefaction Risk | None | Soil liquefaction potential during seismic events — saturated soils are most susceptible |
| Raw Risk Score | 1/5 | 1/5 = safest (hard soil), 5/5 = highest risk (soft saturated soil in high zone) |
Standard IS-1893 Zone II construction norms apply.
Lower score = safer area. Score based on soil amplification risk (the only differentiator since all of Durg is BIS Zone II):
Score = Raw Soil Risk (1-5) mapped to 0-100 scale
100 − Risk ScoreLand Surface Temperature measures the radiative temperature of the ground from satellite thermal sensors. Higher LST indicates urban heat island effects — more concrete, less shade, and higher energy use. Data is analysed at two buffer radii (1000m and 3000m) using Landsat 8/9 thermal infrared band at 30m resolution.
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Temp | 27.07°C | 27.54°C | 27.31°C |
| Min Temp | -22.64°C | -6.05°C | -14.35°C |
| Max Temp | 40.89°C | 41.04°C | 40.97°C |
| LST Score | 71.7 | 69.8 | 70.8 |
The Mean Temperature (averaged across 1000m and 3000m buffers) is converted to a 0–100 livability score using a linear scale:
≤20°C → 100 (coolest) | ≥45°C → 0 (hottest) | This score is used in the composite livability calculation.
Open Area score measures the percentage of non-built-up land — open spaces, parks, and room to breathe. Higher score means more open area. Data from ESA WorldCover 2021 at 10m resolution classifies every pixel as built-up or non-built-up.
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Built-up % | 63.5% | 41.8% | 52.6% |
| Open Space % | 36.5% | 58.2% | 47.4% |
| Score | 36.5 | 58.2 | 47.4 |
Nighttime light radiance captured by VIIRS satellite is a reliable proxy for economic activity and infrastructure quality. Brighter areas indicate better street lighting, commercial activity, and power supply reliability. Higher radiance = more developed and safer neighbourhoods.
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg Radiance | 14.312 | 12.960 | 13.636 |
| Score | 28.6 | 25.9 | 27.3 |
Surface water detection from JRC Global Surface Water dataset maps every water body worldwide at 30m resolution. Areas with lakes, ponds, rivers, and reservoirs score higher — water bodies reduce urban heat, support ecosystems, and enhance quality of life.
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Permanent Water % | 12.82% | 70.44% | 41.63% |
| Seasonal Water % | 90.58% | 96.98% | 93.78% |
| Score | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Population density estimates from WorldPop at 100m resolution indicate how crowded a neighbourhood is. Lower density areas tend to have less congestion, better air quality, more green space, and quieter living conditions. Data based on 2020 census integration with satellite imagery.
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population | 16,601 | 112,880 | 64,741 |
| Density (per km²) | 5,284 | 3,992 | 4,638 |
| Score | 73.6 | 80.0 | 76.8 |
Data sourced from TerraClimate (~4.6 km resolution). Analyses soil moisture, precipitation, evapotranspiration, runoff, and drought index (PDSI) to assess groundwater recharge conditions. Recharge = Precipitation − ET − Runoff. Positive recharge and higher soil moisture indicate healthy groundwater replenishment.
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil Moisture Average annual soil moisture (0–200 mm) |
121.1 mm | 30% | 60.5 /100 | |
| GW Recharge P − ET − Runoff (−200 to +400 mm/yr) |
+2.2 mm/yr | 25% | 33.7 /100 | |
| PDSI (Drought Index) −4 (severe drought) to +4 (very wet) |
2.45 | 20% | 80.6 /100 | |
| SM Trend Soil moisture change 2021→2024 (−50 to +50 mm) |
-11.8 mm | 15% | 38.2 /100 | |
| Precipitation Annual rainfall (800–1800 mm/yr) |
1,769 mm/yr | 10% | 96.9 /100 | |
| Groundwater Score | 100% | 58.1/100 | ||
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil Moisture Average annual soil moisture (0–200 mm) |
121.0 mm | 30% | 60.5 /100 | |
| GW Recharge P − ET − Runoff (−200 to +400 mm/yr) |
+1.9 mm/yr | 25% | 33.7 /100 | |
| PDSI (Drought Index) −4 (severe drought) to +4 (very wet) |
2.38 | 20% | 79.8 /100 | |
| SM Trend Soil moisture change 2021→2024 (−50 to +50 mm) |
-11.8 mm | 15% | 38.2 /100 | |
| Precipitation Annual rainfall (800–1800 mm/yr) |
1,766 mm/yr | 10% | 96.6 /100 | |
| Groundwater Score | 100% | 57.9/100 | ||
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil Moisture Average annual soil moisture (0–200 mm) |
121.2 mm | 30% | 60.6 /100 | |
| GW Recharge P − ET − Runoff (−200 to +400 mm/yr) |
+2.6 mm/yr | 25% | 33.8 /100 | |
| PDSI (Drought Index) −4 (severe drought) to +4 (very wet) |
2.51 | 20% | 81.4 /100 | |
| SM Trend Soil moisture change 2021→2024 (−50 to +50 mm) |
-11.8 mm | 15% | 38.2 /100 | |
| Precipitation Annual rainfall (800–1800 mm/yr) |
1,771 mm/yr | 10% | 97.1 /100 | |
| Groundwater Score | 100% | 58.3/100 | ||
Moderate groundwater conditions. Underground water storage is adequate but may show seasonal variation. Monitor trends and consider water conservation practices.
No waterlogging data available for this area yet.
View Waterlogging Map| Category | Score | Level | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental Hazards | 14 |
|
1 |
| Durg Municipal Landfill — Potiya (910m, critical) | |||
| Water & Drainage | 36 |
|
0 |
| Air Pollution Sources | 0 |
|
0 |
| Infrastructure Stress | 0 |
|
0 |
| Land & Zoning Risks | 0 |
|
0 |
| Safety & Social | 0 |
|
0 |
| Future Threats | 0 |
|
0 |
| Health & Nuisance | 0 |
|
0 |
| Accessibility Risks | 0 |
|
0 |
Buffer zones and risk sites detected around the area centroid within 3 km (immediate) and 5 km (extended).
Distances below are straight-line measurements from the area centroid, not road travel distance.
Lower score = safer area. 0 means no risks found in that category.
Overall = Average of 9 category scoresCategory Score = Sum of severity weights (Low=5, Medium=12, High=20, Critical=25) — capped at 100
Scored using OpenStreetMap data: sidewalks, crosswalks, footpaths, cycle paths, traffic signals, street lighting and road quality. This is a special experimental parameter not included in the composite score — a differentiator no competing platform offers for Indian cities.
Poor walkability infrastructure. Minimal pedestrian facilities recorded. This is typical for developing areas — infrastructure data may also be underreported in OpenStreetMap for this locality.
Scored using Google Maps and OpenStreetMap data: police stations, fire stations, hospitals, clinics, pharmacies and overall emergency coverage. This is a special experimental parameter not included in the composite score.
Below average safety infrastructure. Limited emergency services nearby. Nearest police or fire station may be far. Medical facilities may be sparse.
| Category | Count | Max | Score | Progress |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals (3km) | 20 | 10 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Hospitals (3km) — 20 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Schools (3km) | 20 | 5 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Schools (3km) — 20 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Markets (3km) | 20 | 3 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Markets (3km) — 20 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Parks (3km) | 3 | 3 | 99 /100 |
|
|
Parks (3km) — 3 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| BRTS/Bus Stop (3km) | 0 | 2 | 0 /100 |
|
| Pharmacy (3km) | 20 | 5 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Pharmacy (3km) — 20 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Banks (3km) | 1 | 3 | 33 /100 |
|
|
Banks (3km) — 1 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Restaurants (3km) | 17 | 5 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Restaurants (3km) — 17 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Worship (3km) | 20 | 5 | 100 /100 |
|
|
Worship (3km) — 20 places within 3km
View Full Details
|
||||
| Transport Services (3km) | 0 | 3 | 0 /100 |
|
| Total (sum of 11 categories) | 732/1100 | |||
| Amenity Score (Total ÷ 11) | 62.82 /100 |
|
||
Like a library or quiet residential street — very peaceful living environment.
Reasonably quiet — most people can sleep without issues.
The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) sets noise limits for different zone types. Here's how this area performs against the standards:
Distance to key noise sources from this location. Closer sources contribute more to noise levels.
| Source | Count (2 km) | Nearest (m) | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Major Highways
Motorways, trunk & primary roads (high traffic volume) |
3 | 1,084 | Moderate |
| Industrial Zones
Factories, manufacturing & industrial land use areas |
0 | N/A | Low |
| Railway Lines
Rail & light rail tracks (intermittent but high peak noise) |
3 | 666 | Moderate |
| Airport
Swami Vivekananda Airport (flight path noise) |
— | 48.2 km | Low |
The Quiet Score (0–100) measures how quiet and peaceful this area is. A higher score means a quieter, more livable area. The score uses 5 parameters:
| Factor | Weight | Value | Contribution | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Highway Proximity | 40% | 1,084m | 21.7 | Farther from highways = less traffic noise = higher score |
| Industrial Proximity | 25% | N/A | 25.0 | Farther from factories = less industrial hum = higher score |
| Railway Proximity | 15% | 666m | 5.0 | Farther from tracks = less train noise = higher score |
| Highway Density | 10% | 3 roads | 7.0 | Fewer major roads nearby = less cumulative traffic noise |
| Industrial Density | 10% | 0 zones | 10.0 | Fewer industrial zones = quieter residential environment |
| Total Quiet Score | 100% | — | 79.6 | Higher score = quieter and more livable |
The WHO recommends daytime noise below 55 dB and nighttime below 40 dB for healthy living.
NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) is a satellite-based measurement that detects how green and healthy vegetation is from space. This data is analysed at two buffer radii — 1000m and 3000m — around the area centre using Landsat 8/9 OLI satellite imagery at 30m resolution. The final green cover score is the average of both radii, giving a balanced view of your immediate neighbourhood (1km) and wider surroundings (3km).
Moderate greenery — mix of gardens, roadside trees, and scattered vegetation. Typical of well-planned residential areas.
Over half the neighbourhood has meaningful green cover — well above average for an Indian city.
% of area with any meaningful greeneryFew pockets of dense trees. Most vegetation is sparse grass, shrubs, or scattered trees.
% of area with thick tree cover / parksEach parameter is scored 0–100 and combined using weighted averages:
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
NDVI Mean
Average greenness index. Scale: 0 (no plants) → 0.5+ (lush forest). |
0.227 | 40% | 45.4 /100 |
|
|
Vegetation Coverage
% of land with meaningful greenery (grass, shrubs, trees). |
55.5% | 30% | 55.5 /100 |
|
|
Dense Green Cover
% of land with thick, healthy tree cover (parks, gardens, forests). |
6.2% | 20% | 12.4 /100 |
|
|
Parks within 500m
Number of public parks/gardens within walking distance. |
1 | 10% | 33 /100 |
|
| Averaged (1000m + 3000m) Green Score | 40.6 /100 |
|
||
Moderate greenery — mix of gardens, roadside trees, and scattered vegetation. Typical of well-planned residential areas.
Good proportion of green land — gardens, parks, and tree-lined streets contribute significantly.
% of area with any meaningful greeneryFew pockets of dense trees. Most vegetation is sparse grass, shrubs, or scattered trees.
% of area with thick tree cover / parksEach parameter is scored 0–100 and combined using weighted averages:
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
NDVI Mean
Average greenness index. Scale: 0 (no plants) → 0.5+ (lush forest). |
0.217 | 40% | 43.4 /100 |
|
|
Vegetation Coverage
% of land with meaningful greenery (grass, shrubs, trees). |
47.3% | 30% | 47.3 /100 |
|
|
Dense Green Cover
% of land with thick, healthy tree cover (parks, gardens, forests). |
6.6% | 20% | 13.1 /100 |
|
|
Parks within 500m
Number of public parks/gardens within walking distance. |
1 | 10% | 33 /100 |
|
| 1000m Buffer Green Score | 37.5 /100 |
|
||
Moderate greenery — mix of gardens, roadside trees, and scattered vegetation. Typical of well-planned residential areas.
Over half the neighbourhood has meaningful green cover — well above average for an Indian city.
% of area with any meaningful greeneryFew pockets of dense trees. Most vegetation is sparse grass, shrubs, or scattered trees.
% of area with thick tree cover / parksEach parameter is scored 0–100 and combined using weighted averages:
| Parameter | Value | Weight | Sub-Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
NDVI Mean
Average greenness index. Scale: 0 (no plants) → 0.5+ (lush forest). |
0.236 | 40% | 47.2 /100 |
|
|
Vegetation Coverage
% of land with meaningful greenery (grass, shrubs, trees). |
63.7% | 30% | 63.7 /100 |
|
|
Dense Green Cover
% of land with thick, healthy tree cover (parks, gardens, forests). |
5.8% | 20% | 11.6 /100 |
|
|
Parks within 500m
Number of public parks/gardens within walking distance. |
1 | 10% | 33 /100 |
|
| 3000m Buffer Green Score | 43.6 /100 |
|
||
| Parameter | 1000m | 3000m | Average (Final) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NDVI Mean | 0.217 | 0.236 | 0.227 |
| Vegetation % | 47.3% | 63.7% | 55.5% |
| Dense Green % | 6.6% | 5.8% | 6.2% |
| Barren % | 3.4% | 2.5% | 2.9% |
| Tree Canopy % | 4.6% | 4.1% | 4.3% |
| Green Score | 37.5 | 43.6 | 40.6 |
Moderate Green Cover
This area has reasonable vegetation — some parks and tree-lined streets, but also significant built-up zones. The urban heat island effect is partially mitigated. Property values here may benefit from nearby green spaces.
Tip: Check if the green spaces are accessible — a park within walking distance matters more than distant vegetation.
Real opinions from people living in Padmanabhpur
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your experience!
Areas with comparable livability scores
The Amenity Score for Padmanabhpur is calculated by averaging 11 category sub-scores:
Each category scores 0-100 based on how many amenities are found within a specific radius:
| Category | Search Radius | Max Count for 100 | Points per Amenity | Formula |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals (3km) | 3km | 10 | 10 | min(100, count × 10) |
| Schools (3km) | 3km | 5 | 20 | min(100, count × 20) |
| Markets (3km) | 3km | 3 | 33 | min(100, count × 33) |
| Parks (3km) | 3km | 3 | 33 | min(100, count × 33) |
| BRTS/Bus Stop (3km) | 3km | 2 | 50 | min(100, count × 50) |
| Pharmacy (3km) | 3km | 5 | 20 | min(100, count × 20) |
| Banks (3km) | 3km | 3 | 33 | min(100, count × 33) |
| Restaurants (3km) | 3km | 5 | 20 | min(100, count × 20) |
| Worship (3km) | 3km | 5 | 20 | min(100, count × 20) |
| Transport Services (3km) | 3km | 3 | 33 | min(100, count × 33) |
| Category | Found | Raw (count × pts) | Capped at 100 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals (3km) | 20 | 20 × 10 = 200 | 100 (capped) |
| Schools (3km) | 20 | 20 × 20 = 400 | 100 (capped) |
| Markets (3km) | 20 | 20 × 33 = 660 | 100 (capped) |
| Parks (3km) | 3 | 3 × 33 = 99 | 99 |
| BRTS/Bus Stop (3km) | 0 | 0 × 50 = 0 | 0 |
| Pharmacy (3km) | 20 | 20 × 20 = 400 | 100 (capped) |
| Banks (3km) | 1 | 1 × 33 = 33 | 33 |
| Restaurants (3km) | 17 | 17 × 20 = 340 | 100 (capped) |
| Worship (3km) | 20 | 20 × 20 = 400 | 100 (capped) |
| Transport Services (3km) | 0 | 0 × 33 = 0 | 0 |
| Sum of all categories | 2532 | 732 | |
| Final Score = 732 ÷ 11 | 62.82/100 | ||
The Water Quality Score is a composite measure (0–100) derived from key drinking water parameters based on WHO/BIS standards and ground-truth data from the CWC Hot Spots Report 2022 (Central Water Commission).
Water Score = (TDS Score + pH Score + Supply Score + Fluoride Score) ÷ 4
| Parameter | Condition | Score |
|---|---|---|
| TDS (mg/L) | ≤ 300 ppm | 100 |
| 301 – 600 ppm | 75 | |
| 601 – 900 ppm | 50 | |
| > 900 ppm | 25 | |
| pH Level | 6.5 – 8.5 | 100 |
| 6.0 – 6.5 or 8.5 – 9.0 | 70 | |
| < 6.0 or > 9.0 | 30 | |
| Water Supply | 24 hrs/day | 100 |
| Less than 24 hrs | (hours ÷ 24) × 100 | |
| Fluoride | ≤ 1.0 mg/L | 100 |
| 1.1 – 1.5 mg/L | 60 | |
| > 1.5 mg/L | 20 |
| Parameter | Value | Score |
|---|---|---|
| TDS | 300 ppm | 100 |
| pH Level | 7.3 | 100 |
| Supply | 6 hrs/day | 25 |
| Fluoride | 0.6 mg/L | 100 |
Water Score = (100 + 100 + 25 + 100) ÷ 4 = 75/100
The Air Quality Index (AQI) is a standardised indicator (0–500) that communicates how polluted the air currently is. A lower AQI means cleaner air.
The overall AQI equals the highest sub-index among all measured pollutants. Each sub-index is calculated by linear interpolation between CPCB/EPA breakpoints for that pollutant's concentration.
| AQI Range | Category | Health Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 0 – 50 | Good | Minimal impact |
| 51 – 100 | Satisfactory | Minor breathing discomfort to sensitive people |
| 101 – 200 | Moderate | Breathing discomfort to people with lung/heart disease |
| 201 – 300 | Poor | Breathing discomfort on prolonged exposure |
| 301 – 400 | Very Poor | Respiratory illness on prolonged exposure |
| 401 – 500 | Severe | Affects healthy people; serious impact on those with existing diseases |
Each pollutant's sub-index is calculated using linear interpolation:
Ip = ( (IHi − ILo) / (BPHi − BPLo) ) × (Cp − BPLo) + ILo
| AQI | PM2.5 (µg/m³) 24-hr avg |
PM10 (µg/m³) 24-hr avg |
NO₂ (µg/m³) 24-hr avg |
SO₂ (µg/m³) 24-hr avg |
CO (mg/m³) 8-hr avg |
O₃ (µg/m³) 8-hr avg |
NH₃ (µg/m³) 24-hr avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good (0–50) | 0–30 | 0–50 | 0–40 | 0–40 | 0–1.0 | 0–50 | 0–200 |
| Satisfactory (51–100) | 31–60 | 51–100 | 41–80 | 41–80 | 1.1–2.0 | 51–100 | 201–400 |
| Moderate (101–200) | 61–90 | 101–250 | 81–180 | 81–380 | 2.1–10 | 101–168 | 401–800 |
| Poor (201–300) | 91–120 | 251–350 | 181–280 | 381–800 | 10.1–17 | 169–208 | 801–1200 |
| Very Poor (301–400) | 121–250 | 351–430 | 281–400 | 801–1600 | 17.1–34 | 209–748 | 1201–1800 |
| Pollutant | Value | Unit | Category Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 17.87 | µg/m³ | Good |
| PM10 | 33.93 | µg/m³ | Good |
| NO₂ | 13.89 | µg/m³ | Good |
| SO₂ | 3.33 | µg/m³ | Good |
| CO | 0.03 | mg/m³ | Good |
| O₃ | 14.84 | µg/m³ | Good |
| NH₃ | 15.66 | µg/m³ | Good |
Overall AQI = max of all sub-indices = 82 Satisfactory
| AQI Range | Air Quality Score (for Livability) | Method |
|---|---|---|
| 0 – 500 | max(0, 100 − AQI) | Inverted: lower AQI = higher livability |
For Padmanabhpur: Air Score = max(0, 100 − 82) = 18/100
The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) measures vegetation health using satellite imagery:
NIR = Near-Infrared reflectance (Landsat 8/9 Band 5)
Red = Red light reflectance (Landsat 8/9 Band 4)
Range: −1 (water) to +1 (dense vegetation)
| NDVI Range | Category | Description |
|---|---|---|
| < 0.0 | Water | Water bodies, rivers, ponds |
| 0.0 – 0.1 | Barren | Bare soil, rock, sand, built-up areas |
| 0.1 – 0.2 | Sparse | Sparse vegetation, urban green, scattered shrubs |
| 0.2 – 0.4 | Moderate | Grassland, cropland, gardens, roadside trees |
| 0.4 – 0.6 | Dense | Dense parks, plantation, forest patches |
| > 0.6 | Very Dense | Closed canopy forest, dense tropical vegetation |
| Component | Raw Value | Sub-Score | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDVI Mean | 0.227 | 45.4/100 | 40% | 18.16 |
| Vegetation Coverage | 55.5% | 55.5/100 | 30% | 16.65 |
| Dense Green Cover | 6.2% | 12.4/100 | 20% | 2.48 |
| Parks within 500m | 1 | 33/100 | 10% | 3.3 |
| Green Cover Score | 40.6/100 | |||
ee.Image.normalizedDifference(['B5', 'B4']) — per GEE TutorialThe Quiet Score measures how quiet and peaceful an area is, on a scale of 0 to 100. A higher score means a quieter, more livable area — better for living, sleeping, and overall well-being. It blends proximity to noise sources with the estimated day/night dB levels and applies an extra penalty when CPCB limits are exceeded.
| Parameter | Weight | How It's Scored |
|---|---|---|
| Source Score | 65% | Built from highway proximity, industrial proximity, railway proximity, highway density, and industrial density. Farther / fewer sources increase the score. |
| Measured Noise Score | 35% | Estimated daytime and nighttime dB are translated into comfort bands. Night noise carries more weight because sleep disturbance matters more. |
| Day Limit Penalty | Dynamic | Each dB above the CPCB daytime limit reduces the final score. |
| Night Limit Penalty | Dynamic | Each dB above the CPCB nighttime limit reduces the score more aggressively than daytime exceedance. |
Daytime and nighttime noise levels (dB) are estimated using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (simplified). The model calculates noise attenuation based on distance:
| Source | Reference Level | At 100m | At 500m | At 1000m |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major Highway | 78 dB @ 10m | 58 dB | 44 dB | 38 dB |
| Industrial Zone | 70 dB @ 50m | 64 dB | 50 dB | 44 dB |
| Railway (Leq) | 60 dB @ 25m | 48 dB | 34 dB | 28 dB |
| Airport | 75 dB @ 1km | — | 81 dB | 75 dB |
Nighttime noise is estimated to be 5–10 dB lower than daytime (reduced traffic, no industrial operations). Multiple sources are combined using logarithmic addition.
The Central Pollution Control Board classifies areas into 4 noise zones with specific limits:
| Zone | Day Limit | Night Limit | Typical Areas |
|---|---|---|---|
| Industrial | 75 dB | 70 dB | Factory areas, manufacturing hubs (Siltara, Urla) |
| Commercial | 65 dB | 55 dB | Markets, commercial zones (Pandri, Malviya Road) |
| Residential | 55 dB | 45 dB | Housing colonies, wards (Shankar Nagar, Tatibandh) |
| Silence | 50 dB | 40 dB | Near hospitals, schools, courts (within 100m) |
| Score Range | Rating | What It Means |
|---|---|---|
| 80–100 | Excellent | Very quiet, far from all noise sources — ideal for families and health-conscious residents |
| 60–79 | Good | Generally peaceful with minimal noise intrusion — suitable for comfortable living |
| 40–59 | Moderate | Some noise from traffic or industrial areas — consider soundproofing improvements |
| 20–39 | Below Average | Noticeable noise pollution — may affect sleep quality and daily comfort |
| 0–19 | Poor | High noise exposure — health risks from prolonged exposure (stress, hearing, cardiovascular) |
The Sanitation Score measures the quality and coverage of sanitation infrastructure in an area, on a scale of 0 to 100. A higher score means better sewage treatment, drainage, waste collection, and open-defecation-free (ODF) compliance — all critical for public health and livability.
| Parameter | Weight | How It's Scored |
|---|---|---|
| ODF Status | 20% | ODF++ = 100, ODF+ = 70, ODF = 40. Based on SBM Urban certification level. ODF++ means no open defecation plus solid & liquid waste management. |
| Sewage Treatment Coverage | 30% | Direct percentage value (0–100%). Measures the proportion of area connected to sewage treatment plants (STPs). Higher coverage means less untreated sewage discharge. |
| Drainage Coverage | 25% | Direct percentage value (0–100%). Measures the extent of paved/covered storm-water drains. Better drainage prevents waterlogging and disease vectors. |
| Waste Collection | 15% | Daily (2x) = 100, Daily = 80, Alternate Day = 50. Reflects frequency and reliability of door-to-door waste collection by the municipal body. |
| Sewage Disposal Method | 10% | Centralized STP = 100, STP Connected = 80, Septic Tank = 50, Open Drain = 10. Measures how responsibly sewage effluent is handled before discharge. |
The Swachh Bharat Mission Urban uses a three-tier ODF certification framework:
| Level | Criteria | Score |
|---|---|---|
| ODF++ | No open defecation + all sewage/septage safely treated + proper fecal sludge management | 100 |
| ODF+ | No open defecation + no untreated sewage/septage discharged into water bodies/open drains | 70 |
| ODF | No open defecation — all households have access to toilets and use them | 40 |
| Score Range | Rating | What It Means |
|---|---|---|
| 80–100 | Excellent | Comprehensive sanitation coverage — ODF++ certified, high sewage treatment, reliable waste collection |
| 60–79 | Good | Good infrastructure with room for improvement — most areas connected to STPs, daily waste collection |
| 40–59 | Moderate | Basic sanitation in place but gaps in coverage — some open drains, partial sewage treatment |
| 20–39 | Below Average | Significant gaps in sanitation — poor drainage, infrequent waste collection, septic-tank-dependent |
| 0–19 | Poor | Severe sanitation deficits — open defecation areas, untreated sewage discharge, disease risk |
The Flood Risk Score measures an area's vulnerability to river flooding and urban waterlogging. Lower score = safer area.
| Parameter | Weight | Description | Risk → Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| River Flood Risk | 50% | Proximity to rivers (Kharun, Pairy, Seonath) and flood history | Low = 10, Low-Medium = 25, Medium = 40, High = 70, Very High = 85 |
| Urban Waterlogging | 50% | Storm-water drainage adequacy and monsoon waterlogging history | Low = 10, Low-Medium = 25, Medium = 40, High = 70, Very High = 85 |
Risk Score = (River Flood × 50%) + (Waterlogging × 50%)Flood Safety Score = 100 − Risk Score
| Risk Level | Risk Score | Safety Score (shown) |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 Low | 10 | 90 |
| 🟢 Low-Medium | 25 | 75 |
| 🟡 Medium | 40 | 60 |
| 🔴 High | 70 | 30 |
| 🔴 Very High | 85 | 15 |
Livability Flood Score = 100 − Flood Risk ScoreThe Livability Report is a single number (0–100) that represents the overall quality of life in a neighbourhood. It is the simple average of all available sub-scores.
Livability Report = Average of all available sub-scores100 − AQI (lower AQI = better air = higher score)100 − flood_risk_score (lower risk = safer = higher score)100 − earthquake_score (lower risk = safer = higher score)100 − waterlogging score (less waterlogging-prone = higher score)100 − overall risk score (fewer nearby hazards = higher score)
| # | Parameter | Source | Conversion for Composite |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Air Quality | Google AQI / AQICN | 100 − AQI (AQI 41 → 59) |
| 2 | Water Quality | BIS IS-10500 parameters | Direct (0–100) |
| 3 | Sanitation | RMC/NRANVP sanitation data | Direct (0–100) |
| 4 | Amenities | Google Places API | Direct (0–100) |
| 5 | Quiet Score | Noise level analysis | Direct (0–100) |
| 6 | Green Cover | NDVI satellite analysis | Direct (0–100) |
| 7 | Flood Risk | NDMA/ThinkHazard | 100 − score (risk 10 → 90) |
| 8 | Earthquake Risk | BIS IS-1893/NDMA | 100 − score (risk 10 → 90) |
| 9 | Infrastructure | Satellite & OSM infrastructure analysis | Direct (0–100) |
| 10 | Surface Temperature | Landsat land surface temperature | Direct (0–100, cooler = higher) |
| 11 | Open Area | Built-up density (satellite) | Direct (0–100, more open = higher) |
| 12 | Night Lights | VIIRS night-time radiance | Direct (0–100) |
| 13 | Water Bodies | Satellite surface-water mapping | Direct (0–100) |
| 14 | Population Density | WorldPop / satellite population grid | Direct (0–100) |
| 15 | Groundwater | TerraClimate (Earth Engine) | Direct (0–100) |
| 16 | Waterlogging | Terrain & SAR grid analysis (Raipur & Nava Raipur) | 100 − score (score 49 → 51) |
| 17 | Risk Factors | Mapped hazards: water bodies, landfills, airports, field-surveyed risks | 100 − score (risk 72 → 28) |
Only parameters with available data are averaged — NULL values are skipped, not treated as zero. For example, Waterlogging is included only for areas that have waterlogging data, so the number of parameters can differ between areas.
| Grade | Score Range | Meaning | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 80–100 | Excellent livability | Top-tier neighbourhood. Premium pricing justified. Ideal for families. |
| B | 60–79 | Good livability | Well-served area. Good balance of infrastructure and environment. Recommended for most buyers. |
| C | 40–59 | Average livability | Some gaps in amenities or environment. Check specific weak parameters before deciding. |
| D | 20–39 | Below average | Significant gaps. Suitable only if specific advantages (price, location) outweigh livability concerns. |
| F | 0–19 | Poor livability | Major livability issues. Not recommended for residential investment without significant improvement plans. |
The Earthquake Risk Score measures an area's seismic vulnerability based on soil type and amplification potential. Lower score = safer area.
Since all of Durg is uniformly Zone II, the only meaningful differentiator is soil type. Soft, saturated, or filled soils amplify distant earthquake shaking more than hard alluvial or laterite soils. This is called site amplification effect per IS 1893.
Risk Score = Soil-based raw risk (1–5) mapped to 0–100 scaleEarthquake Safety Score = 100 − Risk Score| Raw Score | Risk Score | Safety Score (shown) | Soil Type | Risk Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/5 | 10 | 90 | Hard alluvial / laterite / rock | 🟢 Low |
| 2/5 | 25 | 75 | Soft alluvial / fill / saturated riverine | 🟡 Low-Medium |
| 3/5 | 45 | 55 | Mixed weak soil | 🟠 Medium |
| 4/5 | 65 | 35 | Very soft / liquefiable | 🔴 High |
| 5/5 | 85 | 15 | Extreme soft / reclaimed | 🔴 Very High |
Livability Earthquake Score = 100 − Earthquake Risk ScoreThe Land Surface Temperature (LST) Score measures the thermal comfort of an area from satellite data. Lower surface temperature = higher score (better livability).
LST Score = max(0, min(100, ((45 - mean_temp) / 25) × 100))| Mean LST (°C) | Score | Category |
|---|---|---|
| ≤ 20°C | 100 | ❄️ Cool — Perfect |
| 25°C | 80 | 🌤️ Comfortable |
| 30°C | 60 | 🌤️ Moderate |
| 35°C | 40 | ☀️ Warm |
| 40°C | 20 | 🔥 Hot |
| ≥ 45°C | 0 | 🔥 Extreme Heat |
The Open Area Score measures the percentage of non-built-up land — open spaces, parks, vegetation and room to breathe. Higher open space percentage = higher score.
Open Area Score = 100 - builtup_percentage| Open Space % | Built-up % | Score | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 90-100% | 0-10% | 90-100 | 🌳 Spacious |
| 70-90% | 10-30% | 70-90 | 🏡 Very Open |
| 50-70% | 30-50% | 50-70 | 🏘️ Moderate |
| 30-50% | 50-70% | 30-50 | 🏙️ Limited |
| 10-30% | 70-90% | 10-30 | 🏗️ Very Limited |
| 0-10% | 90-100% | 0-10 | 🏢 Extremely Dense |
The Nighttime Lights (NTL) Score measures urban illumination intensity as a proxy for infrastructure quality and economic activity. Higher radiance = higher score (better infrastructure).
NTL Score = min(100, (avg_radiance / 50) × 100)| Avg Radiance (nW/cm²/sr) | Score | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 0-5 | 0-10 | 🌑 Dark — Minimal infrastructure |
| 5-15 | 10-30 | 🌙 Dim — Rural/developing |
| 15-25 | 30-50 | 🔆 Moderate — Residential |
| 25-35 | 50-70 | 💡 Bright — Active commercial |
| 35-50 | 70-100 | 💡 Very Bright — Major hub |
| ≥ 50 | 100 | 💡 Maximum — City centre |
The Water Bodies Score measures the presence of surface water (lakes, ponds, rivers, reservoirs) in and around an area. More water bodies = higher score (better livability).
Permanent Score = min(100, (permanent_water_pct / 10) × 100)Seasonal Score = min(100, (seasonal_water_pct / 15) × 100)Water Score = (Permanent × 0.7) + (Seasonal × 0.3)| Permanent Water % | Approx Score | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0 | 🏜️ No water bodies |
| 0.1-1% | 7-10 | 💦 Minimal |
| 1-3% | 10-30 | 💧 Some water |
| 3-5% | 30-50 | 💧 Moderate |
| 5-10% | 50-100 | 🌊 Significant water |
| ≥ 10% | 100 | 🌊 Maximum — Lakefront |
The Population Density Score measures how crowded a neighbourhood is based on gridded population estimates. Lower density = higher score (less congestion, more space).
Pop Density Score = max(0, ((20000 - density_per_km²) / 20000) × 100)| Density (people/km²) | Score | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 0-2,000 | 90-100 | 🏡 Low Density — Spacious |
| 2,000-5,000 | 75-90 | 🏡 Moderate-Low |
| 5,000-8,000 | 60-75 | 🏘️ Moderate |
| 8,000-12,000 | 40-60 | 🏙️ Dense |
| 12,000-18,000 | 10-40 | 🏢 Very Dense |
| ≥ 20,000 | 0 | 🏢 Extremely Dense |
The Groundwater Score evaluates underground water balance and recharge conditions using high-resolution satellite-derived climate data. Higher soil moisture, positive recharge, and wetter PDSI = higher score.
| Parameter | Weight | Scoring Range |
|---|---|---|
| Soil Moisture (mm) | 30% | 0 = 0, 200+ = 100 |
| GW Recharge (mm/yr) | 25% | −200 = 0, +400 = 100 |
| PDSI (drought index) | 20% | −4 = 0, +4 = 100 |
| SM Trend (mm change) | 15% | −50 = 0, +50 = 100 |
| Precipitation (mm/yr) | 10% | 800 = 0, 1800 = 100 |
Score = (SM×0.30) + (Recharge×0.25) + (PDSI×0.20) + (Trend×0.15) + (Precip×0.10)
The Risk Factor Score evaluates ground-level risks that affect livability — environmental hazards, drainage issues, pollution sources, infrastructure gaps, zoning problems, safety concerns, and more. Lower score = fewer risks = safer area.
| Category | What's Checked |
|---|---|
| Environmental Hazards | Landfills, open drains, garbage dumps, sewage overflow, industrial waste |
| Water & Drainage | Waterlogging zones, flood-prone areas, contaminated wells, blocked drainage |
| Air Pollution Sources | Industrial zones, brick kilns, heavy traffic corridors, crematoriums, quarries |
| Infrastructure Stress | Power outage zones, poor roads, unlit areas, no sewerage, water supply gaps |
| Land & Zoning Risks | HT power lines, pipelines, unauthorised colonies, disputed land, zoning changes |
| Safety & Social | Crime clusters, abandoned areas, encroachment zones |
| Future Threats | Land acquisition notices, planned industrial corridors, highway widening |
| Health & Nuisance | Slaughterhouses, tanneries, poultry farms, stagnant water, noise sources |
| Accessibility Risks | Far from emergency services, monsoon cutoff zones, no public transit |
Each risk factor has a severity weight:
| Severity | Weight | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Low | 5 | Minor nuisance, far away |
| Medium | 12 | Moderate impact within area |
| High | 20 | Significant hazard nearby |
| Critical | 25 | Severe, immediate proximity |
Category Score = Sum of severity weights for all identified risks (capped at 100)Overall Score = Average of all 9 category scoresThe Infrastructure Score evaluates urban development quality using 9 satellite datasets — assessing built-up density, building heights, nighttime illumination, road surfaces, terrain, greenery, and urbanization level. Higher score = better infrastructure.
| Parameter | Weight | Scoring Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Urbanization Index (SMOD) | 20% | Direct 0–100 scale from GHSL SMOD |
| Built-up Density (ESA) | 15% | Optimal 30–60%; 0%=0, 60%=100, >60% declines |
| Nighttime Light Stability | 15% | Stability index × 100 (proxy for reliable power) |
| Avg Building Height (GHSL) | 10% | 0m=0, 10m=100 (taller = better vertical infra) |
| Impervious Surface % | 10% | Optimal 10–40%; >40% declines (roads/concrete) |
| Nighttime Radiance (VIIRS) | 10% | 0=0, 50 nW/cm²/sr=100 (electrification proxy) |
| Terrain Slope (ALOS DEM) | 10% | Flat=100, steep declines (road-building ease) |
| Green Cover (Tree+Grass) | 10% | 0%=0, 30%=100 (livability greenery balance) |
Score = Weighted average of available parameters (NULL values excluded)
The Walkability Score measures how pedestrian-friendly an area is based on the presence and quality of walking infrastructure, road safety features, street lighting, and road surface quality. Scored on a 0–100 scale (higher = more walkable).
Each sub-score is individually normalised to 0–100 using capped counts, then the weighted sum produces the final score. This is a special experimental parameter not included in the composite livability score.
| Sub-Score | Weight | Components | Normalisation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pedestrian Infrastructure | 30% |
|
min(count / cap × 100, 100) |
| Road Safety | 25% |
|
min(count / cap × 100, 100) |
| Street Lighting | 20% |
|
max(lamp_score, lit_road_score × 0.7) |
| Road Quality | 25% |
|
paved / (paved + unpaved) × 100 |
| Score Range | Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 80 – 100 | Excellent | Highly walkable with complete pedestrian infrastructure |
| 60 – 79 | Good | Good walking conditions with minor gaps |
| 40 – 59 | Moderate | Basic walkability — some infrastructure missing |
| 0 – 39 | Poor | Limited walkability — significant infrastructure gaps |
OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)
All walkability infrastructure data is sourced from OpenStreetMap via the Overpass API. Features like sidewalks, pedestrian zones, crosswalks, traffic signals, street lamps, and road surface tags are queried within each area's geographic boundary.
The Safety Score evaluates the availability and proximity of emergency services — police, fire, hospitals, and pharmacies — within an area. Scored on a 0–100 scale (higher = safer / better covered).
Each sub-score is normalised to 0–100 using count and proximity scoring with distance-based decay. This is a special experimental parameter not included in the composite livability score.
| Sub-Score | Weight | How It's Scored | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| Police Presence | 20% |
|
Binary presence check: scores 100 if any police station exists nearby (OSM or Google data), 0 otherwise. |
| Fire Station Response | 15% |
|
Binary presence check: scores 100 if any fire station exists nearby (OSM or Google Maps data), 0 otherwise. |
| Hospital Access | 35% |
|
Includes hospitals and clinics from Google Maps data. Highest weighted sub-score because healthcare proximity is critical. |
| Pharmacy & First Aid | 15% |
|
Minimum service check capped at 2. Pharmacies provide first-line medical access. |
| Emergency Coverage | 15% |
|
Binary check: does the area have at least one of each emergency service type? Max 100 if all four present. |
| Score Range | Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 80 – 100 | Excellent | Comprehensive emergency coverage with nearby services |
| 60 – 79 | Good | Good emergency access with minor gaps |
| 40 – 59 | Moderate | Partial coverage — some services distant or absent |
| 0 – 39 | Poor | Limited emergency infrastructure — significant gaps |
Google Maps Places API + OpenStreetMap
Emergency services data is sourced from Google Maps Places API (police stations, fire stations, hospitals, clinics, pharmacies) enriched with OpenStreetMap amenity data. Distance calculations use the Haversine formula from each area's centroid to the nearest service locations.
CG-RERA registered projects near Padmanabhpur
| # | Project | RERA No. | Status | Completion | Distance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
YUG HOMES
Durg |
PCGRERA070618000080 | New |
|
0.57 km | View |
| 2 |
BANDHA TALAB
Durg |
PCGRERA280319000953 | New |
|
1.44 km | View |
| 3 |
rishabh vihar
Durg |
PCGRERA310321001216 | New |
|
1.67 km | View |
| 4 |
dwarika niwas
Durg |
PCGRERA010722001464 | New |
|
1.86 km | View |
| 5 |
JAINAM HEIGHTS
Durg |
PCGRERA281118000859 | Ongoing |
|
2.06 km | View |
| 6 |
MAHAVIR BUSINESS PARK
Durg |
PCGRERA050520001108 | New |
|
2.11 km | View |
| 7 |
RISHABH PRIDE
Durg |
PCGRERA020718000434 | Ongoing |
|
2.26 km | View |
| 8 |
RISHABH NAGAR PHASE -III
Durg |
PCGRERA021118000832 | Ongoing |
|
2.26 km | View |
| 9 |
VARDHMAN HEIGHTS
Durg |
PCGRERA140618000177 | Ongoing |
|
2.36 km | View |
| 10 |
navkar residency
Durg |
PCGRERA290722001484 | New |
|
2.59 km | View |
| 11 |
RAJAT BUILDERS
Durg |
PCGRERA300818000744 | Ongoing |
|
2.73 km | View |
| 12 |
RISHABH GREEN CITY PHASE -III
Durg |
PCGRERA250119000904 | Ongoing |
|
3.02 km | View |
| 13 |
nayantara dreams
Durg |
PCGRERA010722001461 | New |
|
3.11 km | View |
| 14 |
SHIVNATH APPRTMENT PHASE -2
Durg |
PCGRERA250419000964 | Ongoing |
|
3.16 km | View |
| 15 |
CONSTRUCTION OF 18 SRHIG, 41 HIG, 96 MIG, 196 LIG, 95 EWS HOUSES (446 HOUSES), 36 UTILITY SHOP, 14 K
Durg |
PCGRERA110923001670 | New |
|
3.28 km | View |
| 16 |
ROYAL PARK
Durg |
PCGRERA030921001252 | New |
|
3.31 km | View |
| 17 |
RISHABH SOUTH CITY
Durg |
PCGRERA250119000903 | Ongoing |
|
3.4 km | View |
| 18 |
PMAY 116 dUS AT POTIYAKALA ,DURG
Durg |
PCGRERA180424001761 | New |
|
3.45 km | View |
| 19 |
durg trade center
Durg |
PCGRERA131221001304 | New |
|
3.53 km | View |
| 20 |
Business park
Durg |
PCGRERA280921001271 | New |
|
3.53 km | View |
| 21 |
ROYAL GREEN PHASE- 1
Durg |
PCGRERA090222001337 | New |
|
3.53 km | View |
| 22 |
royal green
Durg |
PCGRERA200919001047 | New |
|
3.59 km | View |
| 23 |
CHOUHAN BUSINESS CENTRE PHASE-II
Durg |
PCGRERA300824001814 | New |
|
3.6 km | View |
| 24 |
CHOUHAN BUSINESS CENTRE PHASE-I
Durg |
PCGRERA081223001706 | New |
|
3.63 km | View |
| 25 |
mahaveers durg trade centre
Durg |
PCGRERA110122001319 | New |
|
3.65 km | View |
| 26 |
Utopia township project
Durg |
PCGRERA191022001545 | New |
|
3.78 km | View |
| 27 |
BHAAVBHUMI
Durg |
PCGRERA230224001734 | New |
|
3.87 km | View |
| 28 |
NEW PALMWOODS RESIDENCY PHASE -1
Durg |
PCGRERA230219000929 | New |
|
3.93 km | View |
| 29 |
NEW PLAMWOODS RESIDENCY - II
Durg |
PCGRERA070522001419 | New |
|
3.97 km | View |
| 30 |
shriram vatika
Durg |
PCGRERA021121001297 | New |
|
3.99 km | View |
This page shows a preview. Sign in (or create a free account) to unlock the full content, charts, and downloads.
Log in Create account