Zoneamento geoambiental do município de Santa Bárbara D’Oeste - SP em escala 1:50.000
Ano de defesa: | 2019 |
---|---|
Autor(a) principal: | |
Orientador(a): | |
Banca de defesa: | |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
Idioma: | por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de São Carlos
Câmpus São Carlos |
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia Urbana - PPGEU
|
Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
País: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Palavras-chave em Português: | |
Palavras-chave em Inglês: | |
Área do conhecimento CNPq: | |
Link de acesso: | https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/20.500.14289/11568 |
Resumo: | Geoenvironmental zoning is a relevant tool to support territorial management and planning, since it allows mapping and analyzing geoenvironmental characteristics and its interaction with anthropogenic interventions, making possible to define homogeneous units with their potentialities and fragilities, in order to guarantee a sustainable and socioeconomic development. It is in this context, if we use information about the physical and environmental characteristics to subsidize the planning and the adequate environmental management of current and future uses of the territory, that this work is inserted. As the general objective, this study provide an elaboration of a Geoenvironmental Zoning of the municipality of Santa Bárbara D'Oeste - SP, which is located in the metropolitan region of Campinas, covering an area of 272.10km² and 191,894 inhabitants. For this, were developed: characterization and analysis of the physical environment (geological formations, soils types, and surface, climate and water resources), biotic (vegetation) and anthropic (land use and cover). These attributes were analyzed in an integrated way, obtaining the Geomorphological map of the region. Likewise, a Potential for Urban Expansion Map was elaborated by crossing the information of the Environmental Fragility (EF) with the Inapt to urbanization areas. The EF was generated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology. All processing was performed in ArcGIS 10.5 software. For the projection system and coordinates were adopted: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) in Zone 23S and reference surface Datum SIRGAS2000. Finally, the Geoenvironmental Zoning was elaborated, through an integrated analysis of mappings and the current legislations issues. The municipality was divided into 8 zones, 4 of which were classified as restrictive to occupancy: Legal environmental restrictions (37.34km² - 13.77%); Geoenvironmental restrictions (51.19km² - 18.82%); Sanitary restrictions (2.62km² - 0.95%) and Consolidated uses (38.80km² - 14.32%) and the others as able for occupation: SOD (90.07km² - 33.08%); Priority Areas for Urbanization (2.79km² - 1.03%); Potential areas for urbanization 1 and 2 (14.62km² - 5.39%) and Potential for agricultural activities (34.67km² - 12.64%). By comparing the territorial occupation guidelines defined in the Master Plan (MP) with the Geoenvironmental Zoning it was possible to verify that some of the directives presented by the municipality were defined in disagreement with the geoenvironmental attributes. This happens because urbanization was planned to take place in fragile areas such as in sandy hills, slopes and fluvial plains, with high slopes and near springs and erosion processes. In addition, the suppression of part of the vegetative remnants in the Areas of Environmental Interest is allowed in the guidelines of the MP. Another issue that requires attention is that the new urban boundary defined in the PD revision (61.66km² of extension), if consolidated, will allow the urban area to expand from 37.21km² to 98.87km² (a growth of 165,70%). On the other hand, it is worth to highlight, in a positive way, the creation of the Water Supply Protection and Recovery Area (APRM) by means of Municipal Law nº. 2.717 / 2002, the delimitation of APPs greater than the mandatory ones defined in Federal Legislation nº 12.651 / 2012, as well as the non-application of the concept of Consolidated Area in APPs in the limit in question. |