Khalilabad in context: Street-network sprawl trends

Khalilabad in context

3.64.55.46.3<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of street additions
3.64.55.46.3<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of entire street network
KhalilabadUttar Pradesh (Region)India (Country)

The chart above shows SNDi trends for new street additions (left panel) and the entire network (right panel), with Khalilabad plotted against Uttar Pradesh and India. The SNDi of new construction in Khalilabad was at its lowest in 1991-2005, compared to Uttar Pradesh which followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase and India which followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase. Most recently, Khalilabad's incremental SNDi rose from 4.97 to 6.1 between 1991-2005 and 2006-2020. In terms of the aggregate network, Khalilabad ranked 260th out of 291 cities in Uttar Pradesh and 1685th out of 1868 in India as of 2020.

New Street Additions (2006–2020)

SNDi value
6.1
Rank in India
1388th of 1868
Rank in Uttar Pradesh
238th of 291

Entire Network (Aggregate)

SNDi value
5.93
Rank in India
1685th of 1868
Rank in Uttar Pradesh
260th of 291

Rankings go from most connected to most disconnected — rank 1 is the most connected.

What about similarly populated cities?

345678<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of street additions
345678<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of entire street network
KhalilabadBonnyCaserta

In new street additions, Khalilabad built increasingly connected streets from 1975 through 1991-2005, then shifted to more disconnected patterns, while Bonny fluctuated in its street-construction patterns and Caserta built increasingly disconnected streets from 1975 through 1976-1990, then improved. For the full network, Khalilabad became more connected from 1975 through 1991-2005, then grew more sprawly from 1991-2005 onwards, while Bonny fluctuated in connectivity and Caserta grew more disconnected from 1975 through 1991-2005, then improved. Notably, Khalilabad had a more sprawly network than Bonny in 1975 but the two have since reversed their relative ranking.