1
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS FOR SITE SELECTION OF
LOW INCOME SETTLEMENT PROJECTS
by
Harold A. Ruck
B.
Arch.,
University of Tennessee
1975
M.Arch.A.S., Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1980
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
of the Degree of
MASTER OF CITY PLANNING
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
January 1983
©
Harold A. Ruck
The Author hereby grants to M..I.T. permission to reproduce
and to distribute copies of this thesis document in whole
or in part.
Signature of Author
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
January 1983
Certified by
Lisa'R. Peattie
Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by
Chairman, Department Graduate Committee
Rotch
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE
OF TECHNOLOGY
JUL 21 1983
cImARIES
2
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS FOR SITE SELECTION OF
LOW INCOME SETTLEMENT PROJECTS
by
Harold A. Ruck
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning
on January 1983
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Master of City Planning
ABSTRACT
Of the issues involved in the development of low income
settlement projects, important consideration must be given
to the selection of the site.
This is because it affects
the affordability of the development for the targeted
income group along with the ability to satisfy their needs.
This work aims to address the criteria that planners should
use and the current "state of the art" for site selection,
by investigating its key elements of concern, existing
methods and tools for evaluation; and the current involvement within institutions. These aspects are then brought
together in a case study illustrating the points indicated
above, and that 1) it is necessary to determine priorities
of importance that many times involve trade-offs of criteria; 2) there is a process involved in selection of sites;
and 3) other political concerns are just as, or more, influencial in site selection than existing technical criteria.
Thesis Supervisor:
Dr. Lisa R. Peattie
Title:
Professor of Urban Studies and
Planning, M.I.T.
3
PREFACE
This
study
criteria,
low
intends
to
describe
explain
planning
methodologies and process of site selection
income
settlement
projects.
professionals
people,
development
of
developing
countries
localities
and
housing
It
is
or
otherwise,
for
the
but
it
poor
is
for
applicable
with
concerned
particularly
appropriate
to
to
in
other
as well.
The specific elements, methodologies, discussions, and data
for the
study
research
and
are
derived
from
The
with
case
persons
study
knowledgeable
of
Cairo,
features;
on
Egypt,
because of the availability of studies on 1)
urban
individual
of information documented in relevant literature,
conversations
subject.
principally
the
was chosen
the
existing
2) proposed growth patterns and policies;
and 3) site selection for
this
knowledgeable
dynamics of its land market, and
about
the
urban
area;
and
persons
capabilities of its political and institutional frameworks.
The attitudes and points of reference for
reflected
in
this
study
are
the background and experience of the author.
This includes four years, from 1974 to 1978, connected with
the Vice Ministry of Urban Planning in Managua,
(Central
America),
where
Architect/Planner during the
Also
influencial
was
the
I
era
was
of
author's
Nicaragua,
employed
General
A.
as
an
Somoza.
participation in the
Urban Settlement Design Program (U.S.D.P.) at M.I.T.,
from
4
19'8
to
1980.
This program emphasized the evaluation of
existing urban dwelling
public
and
alternative
private,
solutions,
environments,
and
the
i.e.,
traditional,
and
evaluation of
design
particularly
site
and
sevice
projects.
The author gratefully acknowledges the
and
advice
support,
of Professor Lisa Peattie, whose direction has
been invaluable in the preparation of this work.
indebted to Reinhard Goethert
assistance,
guidance,
and
Tunney
Lee
I am also
for
their
constructive criticism and suggestions; and to
Mauricio Silva for
sharing
his
insite
of
institutional
involvement and concerns in site selection with the author.
Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Maria,
her
constant
--who
with
interest and support, was instrumental in my
finishing this work--
and my children,
Brian, for their patience and their love.
Carlos,
Alan
and
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE . .
Page
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-
.
LIST OF FIGURES . . .
CHAPTER I:
A:
B.
CHAPTER II:
-
5
-
- - - - -.. - - -
- - -
-
6
- - -
- - -
- -
7
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
1.
2.
Size
Shape
3.
4.
Soil Conditions
Topography
-
-
-
-
10
- .
- - -
-
Physical Characteristics
11
Social Criteria
.
.
13
13
15
- -
-
.
- - -
--
-
Accessibility
Nuisances/Hazards
.
.
.
.
- .a
- . . .
Land Cost
Development Costs
Planning Policies .
35
.
.
.
.
Project Criteria
Development Controls
3.
Institutional
.
.
.
.a
. . .
.
Structure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
38
38
47
59
EXISTING METHODOLOGIES FOR SITE SELECTION EVALUATION
.
27
29
30
1.
2.
.
20
20
Economic Criteria . 1.
2.
D.
3
PLANNING CRITERIA FOR SITE SELECTION-
1.
2.
C.
-.
-
.
- - - - - - - -
- -
INTRODUCTION
.
- - -
- - -
- - - -
- - -.
-
. .
65
-
. - . -
65
A.
Matrix
B.
C.
- - - -a
.
- -. .
Bertaud Model . . . . .
Existing Organizational Participation - - -
70
- - - -
- - -
86
- - - -
- - -
- 107
.
..
CHAPTER III. CASE EXAMPLE:
CHAPTER IV. CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- - - - - -
- - - - - - -
FOOTNOTES . . .
.
.
.
.
EGYPT -
CAIRO,
.
- .
- - -.
.
.
.
- - - - .
.
- -
- .
-.
.
.
-
.
- 112
.
.
80
.
114
6
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1:
Ranges of Modes of Travel
.
- 25
FIGURE 2:
Preferred Distances of Activities/Facilities
. 26
FIGURE 3:
Major Cost Components in
-
-
-
.
.
a
a
Sites & Service
-
-
FIGURE 4:
A Site Evaluation Chart
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 66
FIGURE 5:
The Evaluation Matrix.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 67
FIGURE 6:
Rating Site Development Potential (Example).
FIGURE 7:
Bertaud Model:
FIGURE 8:
Bertaud Model: Program 1 - Variables for
Precise Values for Circulation Space and
Projects
-
.
-
- 31
Program 1 - Affordability
On-Site Infrastructure Costs
.
.
.
.
FIGURE 9:
Cairo Metropolitan Area (CMA)-Urbanization.
FIGURE 10:
C.M.A.
FIGURE 11:
Districts of Cairo.
FIGURE 12:
Greater Cairo Region (GCR)-Existing Road
- Major Parcels of Vacant Land
Network
FIGURE 13:
FIGURE 14:
G.C.R.
Scheme
.
-
FIGURE 16:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 76
. 87
. 88
. 91
. a
.
- 73
.
. 94
.
. 97
.
* 99
Long Range Urban Development
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Preliminary Analysis of Property No. 0
El Khanka .
FIGURE 15:
.
.
.
. 69
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
Preliminary Analysis of Property No. 16
-
El Owraniah West
.
.
.100
Weighted Development Potential Scores
.
.103
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
INTRODUCTION
poor
of
migration
In developing countries, the continued
rural families to the urban centers in search of employment
creates problems in the availability of low income housing.
A
particularly acute problem
high land and development
of
result
the
of
features
urban
governments
centers in
central
and
formulation
low
alternative
income
government
the
however,
implementation
per
terms
city
deal with this problem
development
numerous
consider
order to be
For these projects to be acceptable
to the low income,
and affordable
financial
developing
projects.
settlement
must
now
are
To
services.
and
a
becoming
are
close to employment sources and benefit from
infrastructure
part
As a result,
costs.
low income squatters or illegal developments
permanent
in
a question of housing standards,
this is
part,
In
that of affordability.
is
in-
issues
project
acceptable
including
funding, project
household, project
design; cost recovery, site selection, etc.
Of the issues involved in the
settlement
low
of
income
projects, important consideration must be given
to the selection of the site.
the
development
affordability
of
the
it
This is because
development
affects
the targeted
for
income group along with the ability to satisfy their needs.
Presently,
possible
has been to
the tendency
land
which
well out of town due to
is
utilize
cheapest
the
often of poor quality and located
the
fact
that
there
is
little
8
land available for low cost settlement
developable
easily
projects in the urban center.
That which is,
is
generally
and/or politically suited for other land uses
economically
which although cheaper to develop is too costly to purchase
and
be
to
affordable
locations
peripheral
urban
the
However,
poor.
poor physical standards (soil,
with
of
costs
topography, etc.) can increase development
preparation
the
another concern is that these sites may not
affordability,
the
for
provide
instance,
it
long
Experience
site
is
major
employment
shown
and
that
opportunity.
expansion
and
families will not stay if
the
not acceptable to the people served.
These concerns and others influence the
site
sources,
economic
infrastructure, and be capable of
and
development
has
For
involved.
people
necessary that the site be accessible to
services
term
the
of
needs
is
transportation,
community
from
Apart
population.
poor
urban
desired
with
may still jeopardize the affordability for
cost
land
land
infrastructure installation (depending on
and
costs of off-site infrastructure) which when combined
raw
the
selection
of
the
for low income housing projects and have an effect on
This thesis aims to address the criteria that
its success.
planners should use for the selection of
sites
that
will
allow the project to be affordable while also providing for
the
needs
of
the
targeted
low
income
group.
investigate the key elements of concern in site
i.e.,
It will
selection,
physical, social, economical, and political, and will
9
also
look
at
the
selection for low
particularly
current
income
review
"state
settlement
existing
its advantages and disadvantages;
In
art" of site
projects.
of
Bertaud
It
will
evaluation;
Model,
a
relating
and lastly, the existing
in site selection of appropriate institutions.
To support this, it will also
Cairo,
the
methods
current tool being utilized, the
involvement
of
utilize
case
studies
from
Egypt, in which alternative sites will be compared.
this
way,
evaluation
of
the
site
selection
locational
criteria
process
will
and
a
real
be illustrated.
Based on this discussion and case studies, observations and
conclusions will be made in relation to the key element
of
concern in site selection.
In closing, this work focuses on the physical and technical
aspects of site selection
as
Though
influencial
potentially
more
opposed
to
the
political.
(to the extent that
unreasonable sites do get developed) political aspects
difficult
to
generalize,
locality, and from government
they
would
context.
be
better
changing
to
from
government.
locality
are
to
Therefore,
discussed only within a particular
10
CHAPTER I.
PLANNING CRITERIA FOR SITE SELECTION
Site selection is a complex process and underestimating its
To assure
importance risks the success of a project.
the
for
sites
that
urban settlement projects will be adequate
basic
groups,
for the targeted low income
considerations
for selection must be analyzed in regard to the site itself
and
These
the area where the settlement is to be located.
key elements
physical
can be classified under headings of
relating
socio-economic criteria
residents
site;
the
of
characteristics
which
govern the project.
evaluated in order to produce a
satisfies
of
the
which may be enhanced by the site location area;
economic realities of the site location
policies
necessary
needs
the
to
pertinent
the
needs
of
and
the
planning
These factors must be
livable
environment
that
residents, is affordable to
the
them, while still respecting the
character
of
the
land.
Common cases of site selection include a) given an intended
use,
find
suitable
sites,
or b) given a site, determine
options for its use/development.
ll
A.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The physical characteristics which influence its
selection
for urban settlements are its size, shape, soil conditions,
and
topography
of
a
given
site.
acceptability/suitability of the site
determining
the
They
for
reflect
development
the
by
constraints of physical planning, and the
economic and practical feasilibity of development.
1.
Size
The size of the site is its physical magnitude
the
total
area
in
hectares
pertains
development.
instance,
to
Given
it
is
its
a
impact
site
with
possible
by
or square meters within its
boundaries and the unusable areas.
location
defined
to
Its influence
to
site
on the suitability for
a
known
determine
,
for
options
for
size
populations, areas for land utilization and number of units
to
see
if
criteria,
the
i.e.,
site
can
support
established
project
population, densities, number of dwelling
units, etc. and be a settlement of sufficient scale that is
worthwhile to justify administration and start up costs and
cost recovery.
It should be large enough to lessen illegal
invasion of land (squatter, slums) and reduce pressure
increasing
land
values from scarcity and speculation.
the other hand, if given a proposed population,
sizes
of
sites
can
be
for
On
acceptable
determined by finding options of
densities, number of units, and areas for land utilization.
12
These size requirements can then be compared to alternative
site
locations.
In addition, the size of a
site
influences
the
type
of
community or urbanization which will develop along with the
future
expansion
potential
of
the
initial
site.
For
instance, generally, projects with sizes of 12 hectares
or
less can be considered small and are not able to or need to
include
all
community elements.
can and must.
are
Those with greater sizes
Those with sizes greater
schools,
large
playgrounds,
this, for a small site,
develop
hectares
as
a
a
sites,
since,
in
or
community
more
likely
of
expansion.
to
They are
Larger
subcommunities
or
neighborhoods
general, they have a larger variety of services
compositions,
in
terms
education,
ambitions, etc.
located
determinant
is
(1) Because of
can produce a single self-contained large
numerous
population
expansion
etc.
secondary
part of an adjacent urbanization.
however,
community
activities;
parks,
generally infill sites not capable
those
30
large projects and begin to include other elements not
related to basic community life and
and
than
as
of
These
in
the
demand
of
income,
skills,
large
urban
periphery
increases.
ages,
cultures,
sites
and
household
aspirations,
are
maybe
generally
capable
Another
of
important
project size is that is should be within a
range conditioned by the local characteristics of
income, topography, climate, etc.
culture,
13
In addition, a multitude of small sites will be more costly
to develop and administer than a few larger sites.
2.
Shape
configuration
The shape of the site is its surface form or
defined
Its impact is reflected in the
by its boundaries.
suitability or usability for development of a site in terms
compact
more efficient development, because
allow
shapes
they provide more
uniform
land
irregular,
circulation;
and
for
conditions
symetric
subdivision
utilization,
Generally,
layout.
street
and
of land utilization, lot
dispersed shapes, however, result in unusable areas
and/or
inefficient layouts.(2)
3.
Soil Conditions
An analysis of soil conditions assists in making
decisions
about alternatives for settlement locations as well as land
utilization
This is through its data
project.
a
within
streams
which identifies: 1) the location of
for
valleys
and
drainage purposes; 2) excessive slopes where soils are
susceptible to
plains;
(3)
infrastructure
foundations,
and
the
5)
and
sewage
areas;
impervious
3)
erosion;
systems,
flood
and type of veget.ation,
nature
i.e.,
types,
building
4)
that
roadways,
can be sustained, (4)
while also assisting in guiding sound
subdivision
layouts
survey
ranging
and designs.
The soil conditions are
from
simple
analyzed
examinations
of
through
surface
soils to elaborate
14
subsurface boring.
The data is recorded on soil
maps
and
reports which show the location of the different soil types
and capabilities of the soils for various purposes.
Soil survey data is particularly influencial in
potential
problems
that
Unfavorable soils, for
resulting
in,
1)
maybe
encountered
instance,
may
predicting
at
cause
a
site.
difficulties
the structural instability of buildings
from soils with shallow depth
of
bedrocks,
poor
bearing
capacity, or high shrink-swell potential; 2) the failure of
roads
and
highways
in
terms
of
settling or heaving from poor bearing
the
corrosion
(because
of
of pipes;
soils
with
cracking,
capacity
potholing,
soils;
3)
4) the failure of septic systems
poor
effluent
absorption);
pollution from rubbish being buried in unstable soils;
5)
and
6) flooding because of soils that have high water tables or
allow excessive surface
soil
conditions
will
runoff, etc. (5)
cause
Oversite of poor
extra
development
and
maintenance costs.
Structurally, soils consist of particles of
differing
in
size,
adhesiveness to one another.
that
and
soils
This gives
types
degree
of
properties
distinguish one from another and makes differences in
the soils potentials and
soils
stability,
shape,
various
with
particles
limitations.
ranging
from
Generally,
2mm
and
diameter are the most desirable for development.
followed
by
gravel
greater in
This
is
sand soils with particles ranging from 2mm to
15
0.06mm in diameter, silt soils with particles ranging
0.06mm
soils,
0.002mm in
to
diameter.(6)
from
A last type is organic
composed mostly of plant materials,
which
is
very
poor to unsuitable for development.
of
Because of these characteristics, the kinds
their
locations
potential
and
do
a
difference
costs
incurred.
the
development
and
conditions
make
An
soils
for
development
awareness
problem
of
soil
they create can
prevent these extra development and maintenance costs
arising
by
from
either assisting in identifying special design
precautions
problems
and
necessary
of
the
to
deal
with
the
specific
or indicating the necessity
site
alternative site if soil conditions cannot be
improvements are not economically feasible.
soil
for an
improved
or
Generally, the
soils must have acceptable characteristics for the sub-base
of
of buildings, sewage disposal as
foundations
streets,
well as drainage.
4.
Topography
Topography
including
man-made
selection
is
the
the
configuration
relief
features.
is
and
Its
of
position
primary
judging
the
the
of
land
its
natural and
importance
economic
surface
to
feasibility
site
and
development potentials and limitations of the site.
The most important
economic
elements
feasibility
of
of
a
reference
site
are
to
the
judge
aspects
terracing, especially the amounts of cut and fill
of
the
of
land
16
and
retaining
walls
necessary
areas,
public and semipublic
services
of infrastructure.
greater the amounts of cut
and
to
provide
the
basic
This is significant since the
and
fill
(earthmovement)
and
This
the greater the development costs.
walls,
retaining
to develop lots, streets,
earthmovement is reflected in the topography (slope) of the
site since the smaller the percentage of
the
cut
fill and necessary retaining walls.
and
verified also in the
lots
general,
the
slope,
design
whose
long
of
layouts
sides
are
the
less
This is
sites.
In
to
the
parallel
contours, minimize earthmovement and are utilized for
gentile
of
slopes
configuration
less
restricts
than
3%.
more
However, because this
utilization
of
for
patios
playgrounds and other social activities, lots perpendicular
to
the
slope are utilized for steeper slopes greater than
3%.
Because of the small amounts the urban
housing,
poor
can
pay
for
low income settlements are particularly concerned
with minimizing costs,
minimized.
planning and
For
therefore,
earthmovement
must
be
this target group topography is a primary
design
consideration.
Topographies
differ
from site to site and selection of locations for low income
settlements
must
reflect
this difference that identifies
sites that minimize earthmovement to a point that costs are
economically feasible for the low income residents.
17
must
Site selection
potential
of
consider
also
the
site.
development
physical
Topography,
identifies the potential and limitations
for
of
instance,
the
site
in
regard
to the physical aspects of the project layout, ie.,
sewage
and
storm
drainage,
vehicular
circulation,
buildings,
and surface
topography
ground in
in
is
the
landuse,
land
subdivision,
development and maintenance,
projection.
slope
land
or
The main
indicator
angle of inclination'of
relation to a horizontal plane which is
terms
of degrees.
the
development of these physical
5% can create
problems
drainage
also
and
requiring
monotony
developing
land
development
small lot
and
this
case,
natural terrain,
special
and
special
whether
small
lot
for
sewage and storm drainage,
subdivisions.
maintenance
treatment is
Since
general
for
streets,
costs
to
prohibitive
needed to preserve the
vegetation and other features.
it
is
subdivision of walk-ups
settlements.
Less than
attention
The topography also influences the decision of
types,
feasible
aspects.
infrastructure, and lot terracing are high
in
measured
from a lack of visual relief.
Slopes over 10% have problems in
and in
the
Generally, those sites whose slopes
are between 5% and 10% are the most suitable
for
of
development
small lot subdivision or large lot
and
high
rises
for
low
income
Although low income groups are more suited to
subdivision, the decision of small versus large
lot subdivision for a site must be made in conjunction with
that
which
minimizes
the
costs
per
family
of
land,
18
development and maintenance for low income groups.
While the location aids
topography
is
important
maintenance costs.
than
20$
in
slopes
determining
in
determining
layout
costs,
are
feasible
and
other
most
less
for small lot development
physical
aspects
of
the
site improvements can be made.
However, sites with slopes ranging between 5%
the
the
development and
Generally, sites of predominantly
since adequate placement of the
project
land
to
10%
are
economical to develop for small lot subdivisions
as opposed to flat or steeper
slopes
since
they
further
minimize costs by more easily facilitating storm and sewage
drainage.
If slopes are predominantly greater than 20%, the
not
adequate
for
small
maintenance costs will
there
lots
increase
development
sharply.
For
is
and
instance,
will be retaining wall and foundation complications,
drainage
and
restrictions
erosion
which
concerns,
require
also
increase.
family requires
achievable
only
plus
The
Therefore,
greater
street
layout
roads parallel or diagonal to
the contours to reduce its slope.
will
since
site
to
population
through
walk-ups
cost
of
utilities
reduce the cost per
densities
and/or
which
high
are
rise
development.
Because of
subdivision
topography
of
a
site,
small
or
large
lot
is determined by tradeoffs between preferences
and acceptable development costs.
If the preference is not
19
flexible it may be necessary to locate an alternative
site
with a more suitable location and topography if development
costs
are
too
great.
In regard to site selection, this
implies two alternatives for low income settlement
locations:
a)
given
a
desired
project
subdivision preference,
locate a suitable site, and; 2) given a site determine
suitable subdivision alternative.
the
20
B.
SOCIAL CRITERIA
1.
Accessibility -
The location of low income settlement projects have
influences
since
opportunities
educational
social
location determines access to employment
(jobs),
community
facilities),
and
drainage, etc.).
facilities
(health,
infrastructure
(water,
Since these are critical needs of the low
income residents the provision of access is
vital
to
the
look
at
the
poor and their needs.
For
success of the projects.
To understand this fact it is
characteristics
of
the
necessary
urban
instance, the poverty of the low income
from
a
lack
residents
of
service.
results
of education, skills, political power.
results in limited access and- mobility
because
to
a
lack
of
to
satisfy
This
needs
money and adequate transportation
The low income sector predominantly
uses
public
transport, with owners shifting the worst conditioned units
to
the
poorer
localities.
streets can cause transport
service
altogether.
In
vehicles
work.
location.
to
poorly
reduce
paved
or
deny
Because of this, time, distance, and
monetary costs are important to
housing
addition,
Their
poor
primary
persons
need,
and
affect
however, is for
They desire housing at locations where they can
employment
opportunites
at
reduced
find
transportation cost;
along with the provision of minimal utilities and community
services,
rather than the provision of dwellings.
This
is
21
because,
to
low
income
housing, in addition to
people,
providing shelter for families, serves
their
total
environment
social-economic
that
resources,
and
as
the
maintains
is
a
symbol
center
of
access
to
of
their
achievements.
Locating housing for the poor depends on trade-offs between
project costs of land and
costs
development
transportation
to satisfy their needs that together must fit within
their family income.
fixed
locations,
Activities
urban
centers,
poor,
costs.
Therefore,
projects
located
For
the
long
run
more
the
services
are a part of the cost of living at a given location.
costly travel to work utilizes a high percentage
income
which is
are
especially
costs
This
to multi-earner families. Long
important
particularly
poor,
expensive than identically prices
units with better access because travel or transport
is
for
for instance, in the periphery,
far from employment opportunities and social
in
have
where they live is of greater importance
than the conditions under which they live.
cheaper
however,
and the movement of persons and goods to
and from their locations involves
the
and
of
their
damaging to the family economy.
This poor access may mean exclusion for the urban poor from
economic
periphery
opportunities
areas
where
in
the
employment and cheap shopping
the
city
center
or
other
large percentage of low skill
opportunities
are
located.
Poor families are aware of the value of locations that have
convenient
access
to
jobs and social services and try to
22
obtain it in the best possible way.
Consequently, accessibility is a
location
of
vital
for
criteria
housing for low income families that involves
searching and finding employment and other incomes
opportunities,
community
However, access to the
urban
the
activities,
facilities,
urban
and infrastructure.
centers,
friends
and
earning
other
centers
relatives
are
of
also
influencial.
A benefit of taking into account the spatial
sites,
that
promotes
accessibility
provides for their needs,
housing
for
is
that
location
for
it
for
residents, and
leads
to
cheaper
the urban poor, by indirectly adding to their
income by reducing commuting costs.
Improved access to the needs of the urban poor can best
be
achieved by emphasizing either the proximity of the project
location
and
linking
the
social
economic sources to each other or by
locations
and
sources
by
improved
transportation facilities including both modes of transport
and
roads.
In
the
first
instance,
proximity
achieved by locating the site, 1) close to
utilities,
can
existing
be
urban
2) near employment concentrations and community
services (within walking or bicycling distance) by locating
activities near or within low income housing
to
have
direct
transportation.
access
to
some
form
This will effectively reduce
projects,
of
travel
3)
public
time
and costs for the residents and also may eliminate the need
23
for
a
number
of
trips.
This
is crucial for those who
cannot afford public transport or even a bicycle
but
must
walk.
The
poor
by
services.
improving
improved
existing
Transportation
consideration in the
projects
in
facilitate
developing
By
can
access
expand
the
people,
goods
a
of
mass
transportation
particularly
low
income
important
settlement
countries, since it is a means to
providing
are created among
and
is
location
satisfying
residents.
people
to
opportunities through emphasizing the mobility of
location
the
alternative
second
can
needs
of
the
low
income
access and communication, links
places
travel
and
things
such
that
from one place to another.
These links are facilitated by a circulation
system
(i.e.
streets, paths, waterways, railways) and different modes of
transport
private
whether
(i.e.
bicycling,
public
(i.e. bus, subway, taxi, etc.),
etc.),
jitney,
auto,
or
walking,
or
and are measured in terms of distance, time and
monetary costs.
However,
service,
that the poor can afford and the inability
etc.,
autos,
to obtain private
of
systems
Collective
because
personal
taxis,
income
buses
are
sector.
liberalized
and
well
the
intermediate,
transport
minibuses
cooperatives), jitneys, etc.,
than
of
should
(by
level
of
bus
less
centralized
be
stimulated.
individuals
or
that can maintain lower costs
suited to meet the needs of the low
Licensing
taxation
procedures
should
should
also
be
be reduced to make them
24
more attractive as ways of earning income and
making
them
cheaper for use.(7)
To complement this action, street paving
residential
locations,
programs
between
and sources of social services and
economic opportunities outside and within the neighborhoods
themselves, could increase penetration for buses and
access
for
fire
engines,
garbage collection, etc.
could
be
enhanced
public
Bicycle
utility
and
allow
maintenance,
pedestrian
traffic
as well by the installation of bicycle
paths, sidewalks, footpaths,
pedestrian
overpasses,
etc.
(8).
The impact of access to the location of settlement projects
1
is further exemplified in "Figure
ranges
of
modes
distance,
of
along
travel
and
illustrating
211
in terms of speed, time, and
preferred
with
distances
of
activities/facilities in terms of travel and distance.
An
aspect
additional
for
consideration
is
of the low income sector.
A main reason for this
transport
for
costs
account
factory and retail prices of
a
instance,
building
the
the
is
i.e..,
costs
of
Affecting this cost is the
order and the distance from the source.
transportation
that
large difference between
materials,
sana, gravel, stone brick, etc.
of
the
of materials can influence housing location
transportation
size
how
of
small
quantities
For
of
materials is one of the difficult problems of the
low income sector housing.
Single
small
deliveries
are
25
FIGURE 1
RANGES OF MODES OF TRAVEL
Modes
Walking
Bicycling
Motorized
Water
4
16
30
20
Maximum Walking Distance:
Maximum Bicycling Distance:
SOURCE:
Time
Speed (km/hr)
(Min.)
Distance (M)
6
400
14
1,000
28
2,000
15
4,000
30
8,000
30
15,000
60
30,000
30
10,000
60
20,000
2,000 m.
8,000 m.
Caminos, H., URBANIZATION PRIMER, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA 1978, Figure 1, p. 61.
26
FIGURE 2
PREFERRED DISTANCES OF ACTIVITIES/FACILITIES
Activities/Facilities
Frequency of Travel
Distance (m)
Education
.Kindergarten;playground
Daily
400
.Primary; playground
Daily
1,000
.Secondary; playground
Daily
8,000
.Community
Daily, Weekly
1,000
Daily, Weekly
Daily, Weekly
Daily, Weekly
400
1,000
400
Recreation
.Local:
(Social)
Children
Adolescent
Adults
Occasionally
.Regional
(over)30,000
Shopping
.Local
Daily, Weekly
400
. Regional
Daily, Weekly
15,000
.Low Income Groups
Daily(Walking)
(Bicycling)
(Motorized)
2,000
8,000
15,000
.Other Incz-me Groups
Daily
30,000
Employment
SOURCE:
Caminos, H., URBANIZATION PRIMER, MIT PRESS,
Cambridge, MA., 1978, Figure 1, p. 61.
27
difficult
to
since
arrange,
very
expensive,
and time consuming,
customers must wait until a truck lines up
a
series
of deliveries in the same direction.
Another problem of transportation of materials is that even
though the demand for materials grows steadily, predictably
because of the continuous stages of housing
the
supply
sector
can
but
to
construction
fluctuate,
the
not
public
creates
according to the popular
sector.
shortages
consolidation,
Intensive
public
for the low income sector
ana causes inflated prices.(9)
Remedies for this transport problem of materials pertain to
housing
locations
distributors
small
and
conveyance
maintenance
costs,
in
the
that
close
proximity
utilization
are
and
do
to
material
of transport modes for
economical
on
fuel
and
not require high quality road
surfaces.
2.
Proximity to Off-site -
Nuisances/Hazards
Additional social criteria that influences site
potential,
are the offsite visual, auditory (sound), olfactory (smell)
nuisances, and safety hazards that may affect the site when
in
proximity
elements
can
billboards,
to
it.
consist
For
of
instance,
power
lines,
air
visual
water
towers,
industrial complexes, highways, garbage dumps,
while possible auditory elements can
rail,
disruptive
and pedestrian traffic.
include
heavy
auto,
Olfactory elements may
28
originate from odors from dumps and other chemical
Safety
hazards that may impact the site result from a lack
of joining roads in areas
sudden
changes
in
of
heavy
one
or
more
traffic;
sewer
and
land, i.e. cliffs, vibrations, floods,
dust/dirt, fumes, fire/explosion
If
wastes.
of
hazards,
air
pollution.
these problems is uncontrollable, an
alternative site may have to be chosen.(10)
29
C.
ECONOMIC CRITERIA
Acceptability
projects
of
locations
for
low
income
settlements
are influenced by the economic costs that will be
incurred in providing for the needs of the
advantages
and
disadvantages
settlers.
of site locations influence
the economic costs of acquiring housing at that
location.
income,
Since
these
location
costs
and/or
The
must
be
availability
particular
compatible
impacts
with
on
the
affordability of housing.
Though economic costs may not present a problem for
to
high
income
middle
they have a tremendous impact on
groups,
acceptable and affordable locations for housing of the
income groups.
the
best
low
Generally, housing locations, which provide
access to employment needs will have the highest
direct front-end economic costs because of high land price.
However, since distance has costs over time to
who
are
commuting,
thereafter
because
deteriorates,
at
of
economic
improved
front-end costs
commuting costs.
beginning
their
access.
are minimized
As
locations
and
pay
later in
Since the poor,
who pay 15-20 percent of
income
housing,
minimal
have
places a burden on them by reducing
ability
to
afford
access
you generally pay at
locations.
on
people
decrease with an increase in
In other words,
better
costs
the
the
poorer
their
economic resources, it
or
prohibiting
housing at the better locations.
can have an effect on their upward mobility since they
their
This
can
30
only
afford
locations
require increased
provide
with
reduced
transportation
housing
locations
accessibility which
and
which
travel
satisfies
requires methods to reduce the economic
for
the
low
income
to
costs.
their
costs
of
To
needs
housing
the point where housing is truly
affordable.
The major cost components of low income settlement projects
are land, site preparation, on-site infrastructure and plot
development.
by
the
Based on site and service projects
World Bank, the mean percent distribution of costs
of these components are shown in Figure 3.
in
sponsored
economic costs, therefore,
Any
reduction
will have to be made in one
or more of these cost components.
Site selection
components
of
infrastructure.
Costs"
The
is
influenced
land,
site
These are also
by
the
first
preparation,
known
as
three
and
the
cost
on
site
Real
Land
that the poor must pay to acquire land for shelter.
importance
therefore,
of
site
location
on
housing
costs,
becomes apparent when it is realized that these
components account for 67% of the total costs.
1.
Land Costs
Raw land cost is one major
real
land
cost
at
a
component
given
location.
market value differs as a result of
most
valuable
in
determining
the
Principally, its
varying
demand.
The
or high priced land is primarily that which
is near to the city centers (the central business district)
31
FIGURE 3
MAJOR COST COMPONENTS IN SITES & SERVICE PROJECTS
Cost Item
Unweighted
Mean (%)
.Land Acquisition
21
.Site Preparation
13
Earthmovement/Survey Work
.On-site Infrastructure
33
Water/Sewage/Drainage
Roads/Lighting/Electricity
.Plot Development
33
Core Housing/Material loans for Construction
100%
TOTAL
SOURCE:
Popko, E., Ph.D. Thesis, p. 56 from World Bank, "Housing
Sector Policy Paper", (Washington, D.C. , World Bank, May
1975), pp. 40, 72.
32
along with economic activities in other locations.
This is
because these areas maintain a high proportion of the total
employment, commercial and social services, and other urban
facilities
of
facilities
attract people and the low income groups desire
the
city.
Since
these
activities
to live within easy access to these areas, the
land
in
or
reflected
in close proximity increases.
in
demand
higher land prices.
only
not
for
This demand is
In addition, land in or near the city centers
by
and
uses,
residential
industrial,
institutional,
recreational
uses,
transport systems.
etc.,
but
is
also
commercial,
rinancial,
governmental,
as
well
demanded
as infrastructure and
These alternative uses,
on
one
hand,
affect availability of land and make it difficult to locate
any
land
residential use at all, particularly in the
for
most desirable areas of the city centers which are
allocated
to
commercial.
the
This
most
profitable
competition
and
uses,
demand
usually
generally
for
scarce
resources leads to even higher land prices.
For this reason, maximum land
centers
with
also
occur
in
the
city
the price declining as the distance from the
city centers increase.
periphery
values
Land is generally cheapest
in
the
because the provision of infrastructure is
often poor, and inadequate urban transport make
access
employment
consuming.
and urban
facilities costly and time
As a result, land available for housing in the
centers
to
is
33
generally
too
costly
and
rents
are
residential locations, particularly
too high to permit
for
the
urban
poor.
However, in the periphery, locational demands are less such
that
land
costs may be low enough to permit affordability
of a small parcel of
project.
land
in
a
low
density
settlement
In intermediate zones, with improved access and
higher land prices, it may also be possible to develop land
by utilizing high density units
capita.
This
buildings
would
to
dictate
characteristic
of
row
reduce
the
cost
per
housing or multi story
large
lot
subdivisions
of
walkup and high rise construction.
Variation to this pattern of land prices will
the
demands
for
areas
that
provide
secondary employment centers within the
result
from
the best access to
metropolitan
area
and other amenities such as schools, parks, markets, health
facilities,
and transport facilities which raise the price
of land in proximity to them.
demand,
which
affects
Because of this
pattern
of
land prices, slums develop in many
cases in or near the city center as
the
only
alternative
for access to employment opportunities and services for the
lowest
income
groups.
Though
they
cannot
compete for
long-term tenure in such locations, they can occupy,
short-term
rental
basis,
at
relatively
high
density, land which is "not yet" redeveloped for
profitable use.
on
a
levels of
its
most
34
Additional factors that affect land
sites
are
the
speculation.
require
for
settlement
land tenure or ownership patterns and land
For instance, publicly owned
land
does
absorbed
In this case, the values or costs of land
are
entirely or partially by the government by either
donating public land for
and
projects
or
purchasing
private
then donating or selling it to the beneficiaries
on a subsidy basis. This can reduce the real land costs
settlement
projects
to low income groups.
minimizes costs to government since land
transferred
to
land,
of
Such land also
is
acquired
and
projects at prices that reasonably reflect
market conditions at the
owned
not
the same land acquisition costs as privately owned
land would.
land
costs
however,
land speculation.
particular
is
locality.
Privately
susceptible to the phenomena of
The holding of land
and
imposing
high
selling prices jeopardizes the prospects for a project at a
specific locality by increasing
real land costs to a point
that it may not be
affordable for low income groups.
is
there
possible
when
is a fixed quantity of land in a
given location; when demand is greater
there
than
supply;
when
is uncertainty as to where and when land development
will take place.(11)
consequent
increases
Means to control this
in
land
through direct interventions
needed
This
of
values
land
phenomena
and
for public use are
banking
to
acquire
land for development ahead of time and the indirect
methods of zoning and planning restrictions;
rent controls;
and taxation such.as site value tax and capital gains tax.
35
2.
Development Costs
The site preparation and on site infrastructure costs, also
known
as
the
components
"development
in
costs"
determining
the
real
residents would pay for housing in
Site
preparation
costs-
make
up
the
other
land costs that the
a
settlement
pertain
to
land
project.
leveling,
earthmovement, surveying, etc., while infrastructure
reflect
the
installation
of
services in terms of roads,
water, sewage, drainage, and
other
they
land
turn
raw
Principally,
topography
land
into
development
and
other
costs
costs
natural
utilities.
suitable
vary
as
Together,
for
a
features.
housing.
result
The
worse the
conditions, the more expensive the development costs.
instance,
steep
slopes,
seismic
develop.
risk
are
For
unfavorable soil conditions (See
Section on Physical Characteristics) or
to
of
relatively
sites
susceptible
difficult and costly to
Lowest development costs
will
occur
on
nearly
flat land.
Along with this, development costs
services
land.
can
also
be
high
must be carried long distances to less accessible
By locating low income settlement projects close
adjacent
higher
or
to existing facilities, or more appropriately, to
income
facilities,
provided
if
at
these
development
costs
relatively
projects
can be reduced.
low
costs
by
with
existing
Services can be
paying
only
additional costs of supplying both projects together.
arrangement
also
provides
the
additional
benefits
the
This
of
36
facilitating urban expansion and desired heterogenity among
income groups.
To reduce the economic costs that low
pay
for
costs.
housing,
the
site
must
income
residents
will
minimize the real land
This means that after determining
prospective
groups
the
amount
the
can pay for housing, a site must be
chosen that minimizes either the
raw
land
costs
or
the
development costs, or both enough to be affordable to them.
Generally, governments pick locations a great distance from
the
city
in
center
the periphery on public land.
Their
criteria is to use the cheapest land possible even if it is
unsuitable in terms of
location
(transport
and
opportunities), topography and soil conditions.
economic
This, over
time, can be more expensive to the low income groups, since
transport costs are a cost of living at a given location as
opposed
to
higher
(location).
priced
land
More times than not
with
this
better
criteria
access
leads
to
continued development and expansion of squatter and illegal
settlements
A
better
in
and near the city centers.
strategy
affordability
of
for
the
government
to
influence
housing for low income, would be to work
within a system of tradeoffs or substitutions that
reflect
the general trend in decreasing land prices as the distance
from
the
income
housing,
city
level
a
center
with
site
the
increases.
For instance, given an
particular
location
could
ability
be
to
pay
for
based on trade offs
37
between socially accessible land
(Refer
to
Section
development
adequate
of
on
Social
services.
access
it
may
with
higher
land
costs
Criteria) and the costs of
If
periphery
locations
be better to reduce standards of
development to maintain access at the more expensive
Reduced
high
standards
cost
could
materials
traditional
building
minimal levels through
lack
be
for
site.
achieved through 1) changing
indigenous
materials
and
methods, and 2) reducing services to
communal
facilities.(12)
Cheaper
land is capable of more services.
Another substitutional
dwelling
type
prospect
options
and
pertains
variations
to
in
considering
densities.
Generally, the higher densities reduce real land costs
dwelling
unit
provided, of course, that high density does
not require more expensive construction systems.
case,
For
per
In
this
costs may actually go way up with increasing density.
example,
where
raw
land
costs
are
low
as in the
periphery low density small lot subdivisions are
possible.
As land prices increase, however, large lot subdivisions of
walkups
and
high
rise construction with higher densities
may become economic to reduce settlement costs per dwelling
unit.
This allows the poor some options of improved access
without compromizing construction and service standards.
38
D.
PLANNING POLICIES
The previous physical, social, and
economic
factors
that
influence site selection for low income settlement projects
are
given
external
constraints
that
consider and has little control over.
a
government must
As such,
they
must
be viewed as they presently exist and evaluated in terms of
additional
costs. and
necessary
trade offs.
If they are
unacceptable, a different site location might be necessary.
However, there are additional aspects
"Planning
over
to
consider
called
Policies" which the government does have control
that
influence
affordability
of
the
feasibility,
and
a project location to the low income and
promotes desired urban growth patterns.
be classified
acceptance,
according to project
These policies can
criteria,
urban
land
development policies, and institutional structures.
1.
Project Criteria
For the development of a settlement project, the government
must make initial policy decisions that
on
the
selection
of sites.
have
These policies are primarily
concerned with, 1) the limits of population,
number
of
dwelling
units
implications
of
the
density,
projects;
determining who is the target income group of the
These
factors
requirements
preferences.
of
influence
size,
the
location,
site
and
selection
dwelling
and
and
2)
project.
through
types
39
For
the
government,
important
to
adequate
provide
for
population
the
continuing
population, particularly the low income
urban
areas
from
natural
slums
and
illegal invasions.
a
sufficient
groups,
into
enough
to
the
This
relieve
This reflects the criteria of size, and
project
sizes
growth of the
lessen the prospect for additional
location requirements of the site.
dictates
are
growth and in migration.
means the project site should be large
overcrowded
ranges
For instance, if policy
population,
can
alternative
sites
of
be determined by finding acceptable
options of population densities,
number of dwelling
and
Also, population standards
areas of land utilization.
reflect size and location of site
required
community
facilities,
through
i.e.,
schools, police and fire protection,
smaller
populations
smaller site sizes.
require
less
the
levels
clinics,
etc.
units,
of
markets,
Projects
with
facilities which allow
Furthermore, they are more
likely
to
develop as part of an adjacent urbanization in infill areas
to
are
make use of adjacent facilities.
not
generally
capable
projects
with
larger
support,
need
more
sufficient.
generally
of
Because of this, they
urban
expansion.
Those
projected populations, however, can
facilities,
and
are
more
self
Thus, they require larger size sites which are
located
in
the periphery and may be capable of
expansion as demand increases.
Additional
relevant
policies
to
site
on
population
selection.
For
densities
are
also
a given population, a
4o
lower density project requires a larger site than if it had
a higher density.
Lower densities also
result
in
higher
costs per capita in land and infrastructure, while too high
densities
and
show negative impacts of excessive service loads
social
evaluated
conditions.
by
Horacio
Based
on
Caminos
and
existing
Reinhard Goethert and
documented in their UBANIZATION PRIMER the most
net
density
ranges
from
200
projects
reasonable
persons/hectare in initial
phases to 600 persons/hectare in the saturated phase.
Limits in
the number of dwelling units,
important
policy
project.
needed
considerations
or lots,
for
number
reason
units
sites
are
becoming
mechanisms.
larger
particularly in site and service projects,
located
of
justify administration, start-up costs and make
it worthwhile to implement cost recovery
this
also
site selection of a
Generally, there is a minimal
to
are
in
the periphery.
and
and
For
larger,
are
being
This, however, raises problems
for employment accessibility.
Though these policy
number
of
limits
of
population,
density,
and
dwelling units are significant because of their
own individual impacts on site selection it is important to
be aware of their interrelationships.
of
affordability
and
For instance,
the
costs
services required for a population,
each policy element influences
others.
Based on
or
is
influenced
by
the
for a given site, population can be
estimated by options of density and/or numbers of
dwelling
41
units
(with
knowledge
of number of persons/family).
same is true for densities and number
of
dwelling
The
units.
Density can be reflected by population estimates and number
of
dwelling
units; while the number of dwelling units can
be reflected by population estimates and densities.
An apparent conclusion from this interrelationship is
it
may
be
possible for a government to make decisions on
only one of the limiting factors, the one with the
priority,
site.
and
calculate
within
highest
the other two limits for a given
However, the impacts of all three
considered
that
their
optimal
factors
must
be
ranges and reflected in
site selection.
A second project criteria that impacts
concerns
the
analysis
of
those
intended.
Making decisions on the
initially
is
a
most
important
impact and implication on
project.
It
the
particularly
on
targeted
criteria
total
indicates
levels
of
on
these
accessibility
constraints
to
these
income
group
because of its
development
of
the
the social economic
the project must resolve to be successful.
impacts
selection
for whom the project is
needs and the level of cost affordable to
site
site
the
group
that
Location of the
by providing desired
needs
at
affordable
prices.
Though it is understandable that the needs
affordability
of
and
levels
of
different income groups will vary, i.e.,
high to middle to low
incomes,
for the
success
of
a
low
42
income
settlement
project target income groups means more
than just general
imperative
to
low
income
understand
groups
standards.
low
income
is
that there are different levels
and type of needs and interest priorities even
same
It
group.
within
the
The settlement location must be
responsive to each of the specific needs of each case.
Settlement projects,
variations
in
relevant
therefore,
must be responsive
the low income group.
and
necessary
about
beneficiary group and how they
interact to realize
project
For instance,
can be
patterns
of,
an
1)
understanding
"consumption"
sanitation, power, fuel, etc.,
education,
skills,
credit, etc.,
3)
income,
5)
and
rights,
well
variables
being
aspirations
as
of
of
This
the
income
food,
water,
2) capital assets of health,
and access
to
urban
land
and
employment/ occupation characteristics, 4)
territorial
"externally oriented",
These
optimal
economic, social and geographic mobility.
realized through
group
the
what are their
present conditions and future expectations and
concerning
the
This means identifying
characteristics
location and design.
to
are
well
"in
orientation
transit"
indicators
as
a
or
whether
it
be
"consolidation".
of present and potential
committment
to
particular
localities in which projects might be undertaken. (13)
Different low income groups are
the
territorial
best
exemplified
orientation that is particularly
through
important
in determining site location which reflect income and
time
43
within an urban area.
consolidate
as conditions improve.
the "externally
locating
These can be considered as stages to
in
oriented
areas
types"
The initial stages are
who
are
family
and
relatives
transit
groups
are
a
locating
temporarily to gain a "foot hold"
who
These
live
elsewhere.
first
in
locations
two
stages
by types of people who are
groups and who 1) have no interest in
an urban area
when
they
are
typically
the poorest
dwellings.
are
income
investing permanently
in the particular area, 2)are more concerned with
than
In
second stage and are interested in
to move later to more permanent
characterized
in
only for the purpose of sending income
back to
capable.
interested
location
For these reasons, these people probably
desire rental units in the central
or
intermediate
zones
achieved through high density development.
The
third
"consolidating"
type,
however,
desires
to
establish permanent residence in their present locality and
intend to invest and improve their conditions there.
types
are
characterized
as
people in
stratum of the low income group,
amenities
in
because
primary
the middle to high
and are interested in
and capable of living further from
intermediate
of its
focus
and
periphery
ability for cost
of
most
low
These
zones.
work
This
places,
last type,
recovery potential,
income
more
is
the
settlement projects,
particularly site and service projects.(14)
44
In addition to territorial orientation and
the
characteristic,
low income groups have similar preferences that differ
from higher income group that impact on dwelling types
Consideration must be given to this for
project locations.
it affects access at affordable costs.
as
selection
site
economic
These preferences are apparent through the social
and
of
tendencies
cultural
group.
the
on the family structure that may
of larger families, i.e.,
their
of:
characteristics
lead
influences
little
a)
instance,
mobility,
can
to a tendency
children, extended families,
This
survival.
The predominant
for
economic characteristic of low income,
impact
and
social
their
b)
for
for
need
community facilities, i.e., schools, parks, clinics, c)need
for larger family dwelling areas, d) the desire to be close
to
possibilities.
groups
because of a lack of transport
employment
of
sources
This is in contrast to
the
income
higher
who generally maintain smaller families with social
characteristics of, a) higher mobility, b) smaller dwelling
requirements (though preference is for large plots,
cases) and c)
need
less
to
be
close
in
in many
proximity
to
employment sources.
Based on these characteristics, low income groups are
suited
to
small
lot
subdivision
rather
subdivision of walk ups and high rise
more
than large lot
developments.
With
small lots each family can at least maintain ownership of a
piece
of
land
and
with
the use of lot clusters greater
community involvement can be promoted.
In
addition,
this
45
allows
for
animal breeding, home industry and incremental
construction of housing.
low
income
families
neighborhood.
locational
These are important
for
This
the
type
development
of
because
criteria
elements
it
of
a
subdivision
results in
viable
influences
a lower density
which requires large sites with less expensive land
For
this
reason
these
type
of
to
costs.
settlement projects are
generally in the periphery.
For higher income,
acceptable
large
including
lot
subdivisions
the
restricted.
preferences
locations
location
For
for
but
be
more
not only walk ups and high rises but
in many cases, large individual plots.
advantages,
may
of
instance,
large
central
plots
and
Because of economic
these
sites
required
may
are
land
result
intermediate
less
sizes
in
and
periphery
zones
are also
possible.
For the low income,
indicate
a
however,
their
final subdivision type.
preferences
may
not
The decision of small
lot subdivision versus large lot subdivision for sites must
also be made in conjunction with affordability of costs per
unit family of land, development and maintenance.
For
income
As costs
groups
these costs must be at a minimum.
increase, densities must rise to reduce
such
that
costs
per
low
capita
walk ups and high rise developments become more
appealing.
To
preferences
versus
arrive
at
a
solution,
costs may be required.
trade
offs
of
If they cannot
46
be made,
site
it may be
location.
income
necessary to evaluate other
alternative
In general, walk ups and high rises for low
groups
are
solutions dictated
by costs and do not
provide desired social benefits.
An alternative policy concerning project
target
criteria
of
the
income group is to utilize a mixed income approach
which mixes higher and lower income groups into
still
homogeneous
groups
not
individual
small
plots.
alternative can, 1) allow greater ranges in
site
to
and
more
accessible
and
costly
but
land
This
location
2)
allow
affordability to a greater percentage of the poorest of the
low
income
groups.
affordability
This
while
would
maintaining
higher income groups pay higher
which
could
cross
Optimistically,
heterogenity
local
this
by
the
opportunities
It
services
also
services,
ghetto slums.
approach
prices
improving
recovery by having
for
their
lowest
alternative
acquiring
income group.
utilities,
cost
by
plots
income groups.
allows
for
more
that avoids class segretation and can promote
employment
groups
subsidize
be
turns
and
promotes
in
the
poorest
income
jobs from the higher
improved
transportation
However,
out
for
practice
qualities
of
and the avoidance of
this
mixed
income
to be somewhat limited because of the
difficulty of having a sufficient variation in
allow cross subsidization to work.
incomes
to
47
2.
Urban Land Development Controls
Site selection
impacted
by
for
the
low
income
availabity
housing
of land.
is
particularly
For governments to
insure an adequate supply of land for housing, requires not
only anticipating housing needs and economic situations but
maintaining appropriate legal
acquire
sufficient
land
policies
and
or
influence
mechanisms
to
development
at
acceptable locations and at reasonable costs,
scarce
resource
limitations
on
the
governments and low income groups.
known
as urban land development
that
These
controls.
use these controls in influencing
projects
part
view
of
both
the
mechanisms
are
Governments
can
of
settlement
influence positive urban growth pattern by:
or
costs
on
areas;
and raising revenue for public use
government
of
of
location
directing urban expansions; stabilizing
portion
in
by
betterment
reducing
land
controlling speculation in ideal
values
in
by
acquiring
a
private land associated
with the provision of urban infrastructure and services.
Policies to achieve these objectives can
by
direct
and indirect controls.
to influence private
development
public
direct
development,
controls
which
distinguished
While both are designed
and
raise
revenue
for
controls are also designed to
substitute public for private
direct
be
sector
require
development.
adequate
These
legislation,
appropriate political support, and administrative capacity,
allow for
public
acquisition
of
land
and
public
land
48
development
schemes;
while
indirect
controls
use legal
measures such as land use controls and fiscal incentives to
influence
limit
behavior.
and
These
regulate
the
governmental
use of land.
actions
guide,
It is important to
consider that both direct and indirect measure
are
highly
interdependent, and for the greatest probability of success
in
providing
adequate
land
at acceptable and
affordable
locations, they should be utilized simultaneously.
from the benefits from these development
controls,
still only legal policies or mechanisms.
confronted
with
issues
of
minority
power.
with
they are
As such, they are
political feasibility.
that stand to lose the most from
small
Appart
these
controls
Those
are
the
the most land, wealth, and political
Therefore, implementation
of
these
policies
can
become very difficult.
Direct
Controls:
- Public
Land Acquisition
The most direct and effective means of supplying
specific
purposes,
directly
participate
becoming
involved
i.e.
in
in
housing,
the
public
direct purchases of land.
land
land
for
is for governments to
market.
This
means
acquisition of land through
This purchase of raw land can be
either for immediate development or to form publicly
owned
land reserves through advance acquisition.
For advance acquisition, land values are generally
since
costs are at current use values as
cheaper
opposed to future
49
use
or
speculated
development.
values
if
land
is
for
immediate
Land reserves are used as land banks and are
particularly advantageous to
governments
in
ensuring
adequate supply of land for the future (10-30 yrs.)
the
to meet
needs of development projects or also withholding land
from development for environmental
advance
acquisition
of
reasons.
In
addition,
land provides a control over land
resources that has benefits or reducing land speculation
keeping
prices down through
increases
in
land
increasing
supply;
values to go to the governments,i.e..,
governmental
over
orderly,
land
development
to
provide
services,
resources
for
potential
of
impact
the
housing,
land.
government
of
This
selections
and
extensions
and maintenance of natural
realization
the
control
timely
rational urban expansion that include efficient
public
by
allowing
public sector; and providing greater
of
an
the
socio-economic
approach particularly can
of
sites
for
settlement
projects at acceptable and affordable locations.
Apart from these benefits, however, there
with
large scale advanced land acquisition.
governments may not
because
be
able
to
acquire
be
concern
For instance,
very
much
land
there can be considerable costs, administratively,
financially,
and
politically,
project implementation.
which
can
strains
that land
land
holdings
until
It can tie up large sums of money,
budgets, and can increase demand to a point
prices
dissatisfaction
on
still
and
increase.
alienate
all
It
the
can
also
create
classes of people
50
through
unfulfilled expectations,
raising
pressure
against
Finally, governments may
reserves
because
of
impacts,
etc.,
large advance land acquisition.
be
the
follow on the most prime
negative
unable
wide
to
hold
large
land
spread squatting that may
land
with
the
most
accessible
locations.
Apart from
purchasing
techniques
are
land
available
public acquisition and
mechanisms
of
on
the
free
market,
to the government to facilitate
control
eminent
of
domain
land.
and
These
legislation
mechanisms
depends
include
expropriation;
emption, and purchase of development rights.
success of these
other
on
the
pre
The degree of
appropriate
giving the government power to use and enforce
them.
Eminent Domain and Expropriation
over
of
private
land
and
allow
are
the
governmental
take
least costly of the
available techniques.
However, the government
that
in the public interest and allow the
owner
acquisition
to
defend
compensation.
is
his
Powers
of only land scheduled
nearby
land.
land reserves
It
also
right
to
of eminent
for
a
the
land
must
and
prove
demand
domain allow acquisition
specific
development,
does not allow for acquisition
for future unspecified
uses.
not
of
Expropriation
is an alternative technique which has the same use but also
allows for excess acquisition of surrounding areas or other
areas
for land banking purposes.
These techniques do have
difficulties since neighbors
adjacent
land
at
are
speculated
free
to
values
keep
or
sell
on the free market.
Because of this it may be necessary to freeze
land
prices
in an area to reduce speculation selling.
Pre-emption is
private
first
to
a
means
public
by
of
transferring
ownership
from
giving the government the right of
priority to acquire land in instances where the
owner
is interested in selling.
land
If they are interested in
buying the land, a price is negotiated such that both sides
are able to reject each others
this
mechanism
expropriation.
must
also
offer.
be
For
supported
If the government is
not
this
reason,
by the power of
interested,
the
owner can then sell the land on the free market.
This mechanism allows the government
changes
and
land
to
market prices, etc.,
1)
control
land
to some degree, 2)
create land reserves without being forced to purchase large
areas
in
a
development,
short
period
of
simultaneously
time
and
3)
influence
in more than one geographical
location.
The Purchase of Development Rights allows the government to
acquire
the
transferring
development
land
rights
titles.
For
to
this
property
reason
regulatory and less restrictive than the other
techniques.
without
it is more
acquisition
The owner still maintains land titles but can
be restricted in how he
uses
it,
i.e.,
right
of
ways,
52
scenic
or
environmental
purposes, etc.
This technique is
particularly advantageous in providing the government
control over
reducing
An
the rate and type of development planned while
the cost of full land purchase.
Land Development Schemes
alternative
development.
of
with
to
direct
acquisition
is
public
land
this strategy is concerned with the provision
infrastructure,
i.e..,
roads,
facilities, public utilities,
sewage
etc.,
for
systems, water
efficient
urban
expansion along with the construction of housing, secondary
centers
and
even
new
towns.
effective method, short of
governments
to
supply
It
actual
land
for
is
the
land
low
single
most
acquisition,
for
income housing and
guiding growth with respect to desired urban patterns.
New
development,
i.e..,
the
availability
of
will not occur.
prohibited
housing,
generally
public services.
depends
on
Without it, development
For that reason infrastructure
should
be
from being extended to questionable areas which
will curtail
locating
development of new settlement
services
in
favorable
projects
areas,
while
promoting
development.
One method the government has to direct infrastructure
housing
is
through
readjustment".
the
land development scheme of "land
This is a mixed public and
with temporary public ownership.
together
by
public
and
authorities
private
scheme
It involves the "pooling"
of
numerous
small land
53
parcels, without paying monetary compensation,
large
site
in which all
parties, public
an interest.
The land is then subdivided
master
with the government
plan
services.
owners
and
creating
private, have
according
respect
to the value
to
a
retaining land for public
Most of the building plots are returned
in
a
to
the
of land contributed.
The
remainder is sold by the public authority to recover costs.
Though
similar
advantageous
necessary
to
public
since
which
no
acquisition,
governmental
minimizes
this
purchase
governmental
scheme
is
of land is
financing
of
services and development costs.
Indirect Controls:
-
Land Use Controls
Land use controls are legal
can
use
to
physical
influence
growth
development.
restrictions
regulations
settlement
according
This
is
and minimum standards
governments
locations
to
done
that
desired
by
by
patterns
placing
The most
influencial
controls
planning,
zoning,
regulations,
Master
of
these
subdivision
is
a
planning
process
that
sets
the
location, and limits for desired long term land
use development.
income.
locational
and building regulations.
Planning
direction,
master
of
on the specific types of
land uses and activities.
are,
guiding
One of these land uses is housing for low
This can be done on national, regional
and
urban
54
scales.
However, this type of planning has many problems.
These plans
are
sophisticated,
characterized
and
costly;
as
time
being
too
consuming
elaborate,
and
static.
Because of the continual changes that must be made
future,
in
the
these plans cannot reflect future reality of needs
and become obsolete very fast and too inflexible to legally
enforce.
Because of this,
an
"strategic planning" is gaining
favor
as
alternative planning process for making decisions about
the ,physical environment that can respond to changes.
alternative
focuses
on
critical
issues
and
This
areas
of
development, i.e..,
housing; and establishes priorities for
investment,
infrastructure.
i.e..,
flexible and dynamic approach
to
It proves to be a more
influence
urban
growth
patterns, and encourage efficiencies in resources, time and
space.
Zoning is another valuable technique of urban
that
governments
of urban areas.
can use to indirectly
urban
"zones"
This is by placing locational restrictions
by
educational,
which
For
instance,
areas are divided into an array of districts or
prominent
land
uses
religious,
Regulations are then
affect
etc.)
residential,
including
industrial, commercial, institutional (i.e..,
etc.
policy
control the growth
and regulations on specific land use types.
the
land
governmental,
recreational, undeveloped,
established
within
each
zone
heights, shapes and bulk of buildings,
floor
55
area ratios, set backs, population
densities,
etc.
This
technique is particularly useful for insuing proper amounts
of
land for all activities in the most efficient manner at
optimal locations.
A particular zoning
housing
regulation
settlements
that
affects
is population density.
the number of developed families and
can
be
low
developed
per
hectare.
densities that are too low may
income
It influences
dwelling
units
that
For instance, permitted
effectively prevent the
use
of site and service projects at a particular location.
The
real
land costs per capita will be unaffordable to the low
income.
Zoning
excluding
can
project
commercial, or
earning
high
also
influence
areas
that
income
zones
opportunities.
The
site
are
Zoning should allow industrial
near
which
opposite
and
location
by
industrial,,
provide
should
commercial
income
be
true.
activities
adjacent to chosen project areas.
This phenomena has led to an alternative zoning concept
planned
unit
development
in which a large parcel of land
can be developed in a number of
various
forms
activities
may
configuration.
of
housing,
be
the
of
Within
one
area,
social services, and economic
introduced
emphasis
socio-economical development.
ways.
without
is
on
regard
total
to
lot
physical,
56
Subdivision Regulations provide
land
use
control
for designated
governments
with
over the proper development
purposes.
This
is
through
another
of raw land
establishing
restrictions on the exact way land is to be subdivided, the
provision of public facilities and the infrastructure.
low
income
settlement
projects it is particularly useful
for its influence over location and timing
to
ensure
preserve
proper
land
housing
requiring
unaffordable.
example,
growth
On the
numerous
eliminating
high
other
It
establishes
design, construction
to
it
that
can
cost
promote,
located
spot
income
make
for
one
in
development
instrument of Building Codes is
use control concerned with
etc.,
hand,
low
area
which
greatly to high costs of human settlements.
The regulatory
built.
development
For instance, it can
standards
and
of
or prevent
subdivisions
piece-meal
contributes
patterns.
from being developed,
by
For
protect
how
minimum
techniques,
life
a
a final land
development
controls
materials,
is
over
to
be
building
maintenance,
and health of residents.
For low
income people, h.owever, if these controls are too stringent
and
uniform
settlement
costs
of
over
the
entire
projects
will
materials
and
alternatives
urban
area,
low
income
be unaffordable because of high
labor.
It
will
allow
only
of squatting, and illegal settlements that do
not have enforced standards.
57
An alternative for governments is
standards
that
relate
to maintain variation
to probabilities of vulnerability.
The highest standard would be in the most
while
minimum
areas.
The
utilized
to
codes would
settlement
controls
concept
be
in
the
to
hazardous
standards
poor
could
be
In this way, building
affordability
the
areas
the less hazardous
performance
costs further.
influence
projects
would
of
reduce
of
at
of
low
income
locations of least
hazardous risks.
- Fiscal Incentives
Fiscal
incentives
influences
urban
are
another
settlement
affecting the behavior of land
that
control
locations.
owners
This
through
which
is
by
incentives
can stabilize land prices, raise revenue, and promote
development
patterns.
are
indirect
that
Two
through
corresponds
principal
subsidies
to
desired
urban
growth
approaches to fiscal incentives
and
land
taxation.
Subsidies
encourage development with financial assistance in the form
of
capital
grants and low interest loans for the purchase
of materials and building at
settlement
appropriate
locations.
For
projects the recipients would be the low income
land owners who comply with urban and land use regulations.
Land taxation measures, on the other
owners
in
with desired
desired
hand,
penalize
land
a monetary sense for uses that are inconsistent
urban
locations
land
patterns.
This
can
influence
for projects while importantly allowing
58
the
benefit
instance,
high
which
raising
desired
land
problems
of
prices
could
is
be
designed
productive
use,
addressed
to
excess
favorable
encourage
(2)
a
values
at
for
low
other
if
uses.
gains
tax
as
a
which
for
would
into
for
which
discourages
being made on a site
well.
In
addition,
particular location could be
This measure
has
income settlement locations.
developed
This
put
withholding
tax
from
use of a differential tax rate,
favorably
These
from land sales which reduces
encourage through a property tax.
potential
being
capital
improvements
development
land
discouraging
profits
land
speculation.
by (1) a tax on vacant land
and (3) a betterment
increases
For
from
discourages
which
city.
resulting
and
land
the
locations have problems with
purposes;
undesirable
for
settlement
speculation
speculation;
revenues
land
low
can
be
great
With the
taxed
more
income housing than for
discourage
land
owners
from
measures
that
developing alternative uses for the same land.
Together,
these subsidies and land taxation
reduce speculation,
in
land
prices,
development,
raise revenues by benefiting from rises
and
influence
the type and location of
contributing to the land supply for low income
settlement sites at
desired
expenditures for urban growth.
locations,
and
payments
of
59
3.
Institutional Structure
Site
selection
affected
by
for
the
acquiring
and
countries
this
low
governments
developing
market system,
income
is
settlement
ability
land.
projects
and
In
is
capacity
most
for
developing
determined both by the influences of a
and
most
importantly,
the
institutional
structure or framework under which the government operates.
As elaborated in the section on
market
system,
economic
criteria,
values of urban land reflect a
limited supply of the scarce resource, land.
areas
in
greatest
demand
are
those
economically productive and profitable
areas
attract
people
profitable activities
desire
to
in
who
demand for
Usually,
the
land
to
uses.
place
These
similar
locations
and
who
live within easy access to such activity areas.
This increases demand which is
prices.
same
a
that have the most
compete
these
in
Land
values
reflected
decrease
as
in
higher
locational
land
demand
diminishes.
This market system is further
motivation
called
speculation
characterized
by
to
go
even
higher.
profit
on the part of the private
sector who withhold favorable land from sale.
prices
a
This
forces
As a result of this system,
governmental
acquisition
and
development
residential
settlements
are
either
of
poorly
land
located
for
in
relation to access to activities, or acquired and developed
at high costs in better locations.
6o
In many cases this
weak
situation is
institutional
and
market
intervention.
centralization
results
and
condition
the role of
with little
authority
rather
instances,
for
inhibits
and
by
a
strong
development.
This
control
of
Under this
more administrative
urban
development.
Under
the political system can operate under a
that promotes urban development.
However,
this
of development generally promotes economic profit
other personal gains at the expense and or neglect
low
the
resources.
authoritative
than
does not
instance,
the city becomes
consideration
framework
type
cities
existing
and
characterized
in a preoccupation with
regions
other
of
traits
For
governmental structure can be
over
an
political framework that
permit overcoming these free
governmental
reinforced by
of
or
the
income groups.
There are also problems within the bureaucratic
which
departmental
municipal,
confusion
state
as
to
jurisdiction
and
national
who
is
within
and
governments
responsible
system
in
between
creats
for what.(15)
a
For
instance, there are overlaps in governmental authority such
that
in any one level of government different
departments
are responsible for aspects of housing, land, public works,
etc.,
with
no real coordinating or controlling mechanism.
Even a planning unit
other
is
usually
without
authority
over
departments and often cannot control compliance with
a Master Plan.
Therefore, housing
built
unit
by
one
can
be
considered
or
of government and be denied services,
61
i.e..,
schools,
public
the responsibility of other departments.
which are
of these institutional
of
transport, permits for water,
of activities and responsibilities,
adequate governmental response to acquiring and
of
for
the
low income housing is
land
institutional
market
close
impeded.
situation
and
developing
The consequences
the
politican
and
framework is the erection of slum, squatter,
and illegal settlements.
within
Because
characteristics, resulting in a lack
policy, scattering
land
etc.,
proximity
These
to
poor quality with inadequate
the
settlements
are
city
generally
standards
and are
of
located
services;
of
they
are considered a disgrace to the community.
Political solutions for governments to alleviate the
conditions
resulting
from
these
settlements
urban
range from
upgrading to establishing new settlement projects utilizing
site and service schemes.
The advantages of upgrading
that
not
the
residents
opportunities
security
of
but
are
maintain
relocated
low
cost
from
employment
housing,
However,
these
upgrading
schemes
not add to the housing stock and many have difficult
is
satisfy
stock
do
sites.
for governments to develop new settlement
projects such as site
housing
acquire
tenure and gain improved access to facilities
and activity areas.
An alternative
are
and
service
schemes
which
expand
at minimal cost and adequate locations that
the residents
needs.
62
Since governments
at
locations, an alternative institutional structure
adequate
is
are generally responsible for housing
necessary
implement
with
appropriate
powers
and
capacity
to
policy and deal with the problems created by the
land market, speculation and
squatting,
rapid
and
development
illegal
urban
growth,
urban
i.e..,
An
sprawl.
alternative could be the establishment of a separate public
Acquisition
"Land
assist
low
income needs.
mandated
Agency"
Development
and
This type of agency would
independent, autonomous entity established for the
be
to
an
purpose
of guiding and controlling land use development in general,
and
promoting affordable urban residential development for
the
controlling
(2)
location,
for
providing
for
necessary
be
scale
timing,
and
type
of
To accomplish these goals the agency would be
development.
responsible
could
ensuring available land for development while
by
achieved
purpose
This
low income groups in particular.
the functions of (1) long range planning;
land
assembly
immediate
banking according
to
acquisition
through
residential
established
if
development or land
housing
policies;
(3)
developing land or arranging sales to developing companies;
(4)
monitoring
implementation
and (5) funding/financing
income
assistance
materials,
costs.
and
for
for
schedules and regulations;
infrastructure,
credit,
administrative,
lot
planning
sales,
and
land,
low
building
management
63
To be successful this
functions
effectively.
will
This
devices
utilize adequate
sources
agency
implies
perform
and
measures
direct
including
public intervention in the land
of
land
market, and indirect measures of legal
and
controls
use
of Land Development
section
(See
incentives
fiscal
maintain
These intervention devices
would pertain to urban land development controls
both
Adequate funding sources would include national
Controls).
bond
governments, loans from local and foreign banks, land
issues,
earnings
It should also
from projects, etc. (16)
everyone;
be operated under a political system that serves
not
its
that it be able to
intervention
for
adequate funding.
for
to
have
or
corrupt
that
serves
implies the possibility of a
only the ruling class.
This
for
this
monitoring
system
purpose.
of
In closing, this alternative institutional structure
Land
Acquisition
and
Agency
addresses
two
developing
countries
for
Development
in
principal problems apparent
governments to adequately supply and develop land.
its
intervention
and
available
stabilizing
in
the
affordable
land
coordination
authority
among
facilitate governments to
by
Finally, through its impact on
development of land for low income
better
groups
income
low
for
prices.
and
Through
market, land becomes more
land
the institutional framework of the country,
responsibility
a
for
housing,
sites
and
acquisition
departments.
supply
jurisdictional
and
it
This
provides
should
develop
low
64
income housing according to desired growth patterns.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
From the previous discussion there are numerous aspects for
of
mentioned
under
the
categories
of
Those
projects.
settlement
income
low
selection
site
for
consider
to
organizations
government or other
social,
physical,
economical, and policy criteria are basic minimum qualities
to
be considered to increase
the probability of success of
the project.
However, these criteria are not
reasons.
political
or
environmental
criteria for site selection and
to
need
may
revised,
to
Therefore,
administrative
reflect
financial,
its
concern
the
structures
unique
own
For instance, some physical aspects may not
qualities.
of
be
own
its
has
cultural,
of
because
characteristics
country
or
location
geographical
Every
encompassing.
all
be
while others such as social aspects may change
allowing differences in accessibility requirements in terms
of distance and facilities
aspects,
well.
previously
not
For
example,
characteristic,
to be considered.
required.
In
mentioned,
may
depending
elevation
on
the
addition,
some
be important as
region,
seismic
advantages, etc., may also need
65
CHAPTER II.
EXISTING METHODOLOGIES
A.
FOR SITE SELECTION EVALUATIONS
Matrix
factor
Apparent from the discussion is that any one single
of
a site for low income
be
must
This
accordingly.
At
complexity.
in any evaluation
reflected
This can be done in various
procedure.
detail
of
levels
simplest level, criteria can be
the
established for site selection and each "weighted
One
made
They are all interrelated and decisions are
housing.
and
acceptability
determine
cannot
evenly".
method for this, is to use a matrix and check off each
criteria to insure that the site has
An
qualities.
least
at
site's
equal
potential
potential
slight differences and/or lie in different areas.
improve on this, another type of matrix can
an
designates
"initial
for instance, from 0 to
the
better
development
site and compared.
numerical
be
used
4.
The
higher
the
score,
cannot
be
making
To
that
the
potential for the given criteria.
totaled
for
each
An example of this is seen in Figure 5.
system of indicating a degree of potential
for each criteria gives more information and confidence
decision
with
score" for each criteria ranging,
The scores for each quality can then be
This
This
in relation to another, but lacks detail and accuracy
especially among sites with roughly
only
basic
example of this is seen in Figure 4.
method gives a visual sense of where one
lies
the
especially
easily evaluated.
among
in
sites whose potentials
66
FIGURE 4
A SITE EVALUATION CHART
SITES
CRITERIA
A
5C
Convenient Shape
Absence of Steep Slopes
Adequate Soils
4-
Absence of Flooding
-4
a)
B
C
Suitable Environment Conditions
>
r.
-o
U
Less than 500M from existing
transport route
Less than 3 km. from major
employment centers
Less than 3 km. from existing
market or shops
Less than 5 km. from existing
secondary school
Local Water Supply
:
Existing Sewers
.earby.
4-h
Existing Electricity nearby
Existing Access (roads)
Acquisition
Cn
Low
Moderate
High
rn
Development
Low
Moderate
0
High
4..
*
Actual distances should be adjusted to specific region.
SOURCE:
Alan Turner, THE CITIES OF THE POOR, St. Martin's Press,
New York, 1980, Figure 9.7, pp. 270.
ETC.
67
FIGURE 5
THE EVALUATION MATRIX
(expansion potential)
Site I
Site II
3
4
A.
Size
B.
Accessibility to Employment
4
2
C.
Accessibility to Utilities
2
2
D.
Accessibility to Services
2
3
E.
Public Transportation
4
3
F.
Topography
4
3
G.
Soil Quality
3
4
4
4
H. Absence of Flooding
I.
Site Cost
2
4
J.
Site Ownership
3
4
K.
Site Availability
3
3
L.
Plan Designations
3
3
M.
Mixed Use/Density Potential
2
3
N.
Acceptability to Users
3
4
42
46
Site III
Site IV
TOTAL SCORE
SOURCE:
M. L.
Rivkin,
"Techniques of Site Selection"
Shelter Workshop, 1979-80, p.35, p--10.
for USAID,
68
A more sophisticated matrix attaches
quality.
each
In
way it
this
scores"
"weighted
acknowledges that certain
than
criteria are more important or have a higher priority
Depending on the region, for instance, topography
others.
may be
values
to
proximity
supply.
electrical
existing
in
employment
proximity to
location
Therefore,
must
involve
accounted
for
reality
This can be
criteria.
a
roads may be more important than
or
decisions
than
important
more
sources,
an
to
offs
trade
by
giving
among
weighted
(percentages) to each assumed criteria relating its
importance or priority to others.
with
combined
developmental
assigned
the
These values can then be
potential
or
"initial score" of each criteria, and summed to arrive at a
"total
weighed
score".
Figure 6) This score can be
(See
computed for each alternative site and
and/or
related
to
acceptable
an
ranked
minimal
accordingly
value
or
standard.(17)
An important factor in this type of analysis is
region,
and
country, city, etc.,
combination
acceptable
of
distances
each
represents a unique situation
influences.
or
that
To
account
for
this,
basis for arriving at an initial
score for developmental potential of each criteria, as well
as, priority, weighting (%)
of
accordingly to account for this.
each
criteria
will
vary
69
FIGURE 6
RATING SITE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
(Example:
CRITERIA
Al Berka #5)
Criteria
Weight
%
Initial
Score
(0-4)
Weighted
Score
Topographic Conditions
15
3
45
Environmental Hazards
10
4
40
Accessibility to Water System
12
4
48
Accessibility to Sewerage System
8
4
32
Accessibility to Electricity System
8
4
32
Accessibility to Primary Road Network
10
4
40
Accessibility to Major Work Places
10
1
10
5
3
15
Ownership
12
4
48
Land Price
10
2
20
33
330
Proximity to Central Business District
TOTALS
Source:
Dames & Moore, Center for International Development and
Technology (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND USE/
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STUDY, FINAL REPORT. USAID
Contract No. AID/OTR-1-1853, September 1981, Table 3-3,
pp. 3-16
70
B.
The Bertaud Model
Because
of the number, complexity and interrelationships of
is
tool
Model".
"Bertaud
the
polic.y
administrators,
staff,
settlement projects in developing areas to
accelerate
in
decisions
formulation, implementation, and
dealing
financing questions,
settlement
for
income
and
project
of
is
This
appraisal.
formulating
by
project
and
design
physical
important
feasible
The Bertaud Model also uses computer
projects.
that
programs
project
with
specifically
and
facilitate
phases
various
technical
low
for
such
groups
user
makers,
responsible
agencies
international
tool aids
This
being
One
processes.
developed to assist in its planning
income
are
and
been
have
tools
projects,
settlement
low
of
development
the variables involved in the
Therefore,
components.
relationships
mathematical
establish
to
consequences of changing
components can be easily and quickly identified.
These
of
specific features of the model reflect a
recognition
for
responsible
the
importance
of
"affordability"
institutions and households, (regardless of
social
acceptability),
beneficiaries.
growth
of
the
as
well
This recognition
based
both
on
the
rapid
poor in urban areas which increases demand
for housing solutions compounded by the
of
and
participation of the
as
is
political
governmets,
institutions,
limited
and
resources
the urban poor.
This phenomena necessitates. responsible agencies to finance
71
majority
Through
recovered from the beneficiary.
the
beneficiary,
can
afford,
be
participation
by
an understanding of what the income group
upper
their
limits,
along
components (sizes of plots, and levels of
can
their
with
priorities, trade-offs can be made, among
and
preferences
must
etc.,
costs,
land
i.e..,
costs,
of
the
while
infrastructure,
i.e..,
services,
only public
that
services),
reduce costs.
In considering affordability, the Bertaud Model assists
in
answering questions important for making decisions that are
to
particularly
concern
recovery,
settlement
feasible
a
significant
design,
project
financial
funding,
and site selection.
These are
variables
analyzes
1
settlement
a
in
When
approximate to a grid.
variables,
the
relationships
project
changes
which
are
made
Program
circulation
space
2
and
more complex layouts.
analyzes
cost
variables
which
allow
some
for
affect
It identifies, for example,
project
lower income groups to participate.
Program 4 helps analyze the impacts of a graduated
loan
in
consequences
what cross subsidies are possible that still cover
and
layouts
of on-site infrastructure in
Program 3 analyzes the
differential land pricing.
costs
For
basic
among
have
up
consequences and changes are identified in
the others.
of
make
Each covers a significant aspect.
Bertaud Model.
instance, program
cost
terms,
reflected in the five programs or submodels, that
the
These
project.
monthly
payment which reflect expected increases in household
72
implied
Program
Finally,
incomes.
by
alternative
5
helps
settlement
options together with
their institutional cash flow
options
computer
of
program
consisting
subsidies
identify
(18).
an
is
Each
equation
set of
or
equations that represent relationships that help
a
establish
realistic priorities among project variables.
Of the five programs, Program 1 is the most appropriate for
including
formulation,
assisting in decisions for project
This is
site selection, as well as early stages of design.
because
the
the
analyzing
by
program,
financial
consequences of change in the major variables of a project,
can identify whether
the
basic
location,
are
likely
including
a
of
features
project,
to be cost effective
and
workable, or close enough to be made so by detailed design,
differential land pricing, graduated monthly payments,
needed.
Only
data
typical
data is not
In addition, precise
acceptable low subsidies.
or
reliable
experience are necessary for localities and
and
estimates from
general
types
of layouts.
The twenty major variables of the Bertaud Model are
in
Figure
7.
likelyhood
of
stipulated for
Variables
They are used to calculate the most useful
for
determinants
listed
a
project
feasible project.
all
category
the
other
calculates
When values have been
variables,
the
highest
has
that
formulation
the
capital
affordable per household for housing (k),
Financial
investment
while the
Design
73
FIGURE 7
PROGRAM 1 - AFFORDABILITY
The Principal Trade-Offs Between Project Variables
SYMBOLS
PROJECT VARIABLES
FINANCIAL VARIABLES
I.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
f
I
N
h
k
DESIGN STANDARDS AND UNIT COSTS
II.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
III.
Capital affordable per household*
Land cost per m2
On-site infrastructure cost per m 2 of project area
Off-site infrastructure cost per m 2 of project area
Construction cost per m2 of floor area
Connection cost per plot
Special feature cost
Community facilities cost
2
Core house size (m )
Number of households sharing community facilities
Persons per plot
Gross residential density(persons per hectare)*
k
e
cl
c2
al
a2
a3
a4
b
y
d
PROJECT LAYOUT VARIABLES
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
*
Monthly payment
Yearly interest rate (%)
Recovery period (yrs.)
Downpayment (%)
Capital affordable per household*
Gross residential density*
Circulation space (%)
Parks and open space (%)
Community facilities space (m2
Plot size (m2)
d
p
m
per person)
Linking variables
SOURCE:
PADCO, THE BERTAUD MODEL, prepared for the World Bank,
December 1981, p. 9.
m2
74
and
Standards
Cost category allocates (k) among the
Unit
other various cost items which make up the
the
total
cost
of
project and calculates an affordable gross residential
Finally, the Project Layout variables use (d)
density (d).
and calculates an affordable plot size (j).
variables,
the
Of
three
(d) is a key parameter since it is the
density
means or link that equalizes
the
capital
affordable
per
household with project costs.
in
In general, any of the variables included
can
be
given.
However,
model
the
program
as values for the other are
long
as
for
solved
the
is
programed
to
calculate
outputs for affordable capital available (k), gross density
(d),
and
plot size (j) in that order of priority since it
seems practical
to
affordability.
Therefore,
base
design
the
standards
program
with (k) and calculates (d) and (j).
on
household
generally begins
This can be reversed,
however, to begin with (j) and calculate for (d) and (k).
In addition to these outputs, if the
other
variables
are
stipulated, the program can also calculate the variables of
affordable core house costs a1 , a 2 , a 3 ), affordable on-site
infrastructure
This
last
selection
costs
variable
(c),
is
and affordable land costs (e).
especially
important
for
site
purposes, since it is a principal cost component
of a settlement project.
Sometimes typical data or estimates are
more
accuracy is
not
available
or
needed for the major variable of specific
75
circulation space and
the
cases
on
site
can make use of
model
In
infrastructure.
variable
nine additional
(21-29) that can calculate more precise values as
the
long
as
type layout is known and values for detailed
specific
layout
design
width,
block
variables
are
street
i.e..,
stipulated,
width, plot ratios, and contractor costs for
infrastructure and circulation.
is
Program 1,
generally
in
formulation
project
such
(See Figure 8)
characterized
by a trial
and
as a way of assisting
It
process.
error
makes trade offs and adjusts project variables in the model
weighted importance
to
according
arrive at the most acceptable mix
can reduce other
costs,
or
standards,
that
compromise
land
infrastructure,
i.e..,
is
if (k) is fixed, it
For instance,
feasible.
financially
and costs to
priorities,
to increase plot size to an acceptable level,
etc.,
standards.
or reduce plot sizes to maintain higher service
This trial and error process is characteristic of the other
four submodels of the Bertaud Model as well.
Bertaud
The usefulness of Program 1 of the
in
illustrated
determine
a
variables
of
numerous
range
of
monthly
ways.
payments (f),
size (j) and indicates the effect one
For
instance,
and vise
dependent
versa.
on
ad (d) increases,
The
amount
of
be
is that its outputs
One
feasibility
can
Model
among
the
principal
density (d),
on
has
the
and plot
other.
(f) and (j) will decrease
change
in
(f)
will
be
the changes made in the financial variables,
76
FIGURE
8
Variables Used in Program 1 in the Calculation
of More Precise Values for Circulation Space
and On-Site Infrastructure Cost
SYMBOLS
VARIABLES
20.
Plot size (m 2 )
21.
Width of primary streets (m)
u
22.
Width of secondary streets (m)
v
23.
Block length
(m)
w
24.
Plot ratio
25.
CIRCULATION SPACE (percentage)
p
26.
Network length per m2
t
27.
Net work cost per linear
(length:
front)
2
m
m
28.
Circulation cost per
29.
ON-SITE INFRASTRUCTURE COST PER m2
SOURCE:
x
c3
c4
PADCO, THE BERTAUD MODEL, prepared for the World Bank,
December 1981, p. 23.
77
variables, while
and the design standard and unit cost
of change in (j)
amount
the changes made in
depend on
will
the
the project layout variables.
the
program
demonstrating
the
consequences
or
feasible
the
beyond
of
level
housing
they
that
imply
affordability for the
of
Generally, it
specific low income group?
in
beneficial
present
costs
the
Are
development standards.
also
is
addition,
In
the
illustrates
need for a more affordable mix of standards whether smaller
reduced service standards.
acceptable plot sizes and/or
program
is
selection
by
For the purposes of this thesis, however, this
particularly
useful
assisting in
the
affordable
land
designated
for
a
of
This
determine whether the
income
its
instance,
For
prices.
low
feasible,
through
is
site
for
tool
location
sites.
project
as
housing
is
location
can
affordable
and
calculation
existing
of
sites
be evaluated to
feasible
for
shelter
possibilities given the constraint on land price.
solution
Can trade offs be made among major variables that can still
maintain affordability, i.e'..,
Related
standards?
new
locating
must
housing
preferred
types
locations
and
on
the
this,
sites as well.
assuming minimum
terms,
to
reduce plot sizes or service
can
aid
in
For instance, to what extent
costs
higher
plot sizes,
program
be
reduced
priced
service
to
land.
standards,
achieve
Also,
if
financial
the program can assist in locating feasible project
78
than
less
are
sites with affordable land prices that
or
to the maximum price identified in the program.
equal
Though the Bertaud Model is useful to identify the range of
and
individual
exploratory
it
is
still only a tool for
Because
of
this,
households,
purposes.
institutions
involved
for
financially feasible solutions
not
only
its
need to be understood but is limitations as well.
benefits
For instance, it deals only with physical features and some
It
financial aspects of low income settlements.
does
not
take into account all the constraints, desires, needs, land
forms
etc.,
mathematical
formulas.
Therefore,
for
of
transportation,
impacts
on
decrease of
i.e..,
For the selection
the
land
opportunities,
the
are
the
etc;
markets,
areas including the increase or
adjacent
and
values;
transportation,
the
systems,
surrounding
infrastructure,
in a given location;
particular
of
to social services,
accesses
acceptable
job
excluded
instance,
For
etc.,
in
nearby
areas; sufficient information about residential demand
housing
are
low income settlement projects this leaves many
concerns unanswered.
relationship
solutions
economically, and even
politically acceptable or desirable.
sites
its
of
socially,
physically,
in
the Bertaud Model cannot
determine whether the consequences
culturally,
represented
be
all
cannot
they
since
area
to
the
for
the image of the project in a
community;
the
institutional
and
the
political attitudes and preferences about the site for
the
feasibility
of
acquiring
necessary
permits;
79
decision
Analysis and
their
support
the
important
are
close
require
to
or not.
location
site
and others,
implications of these points
trade-offs
project and
among
to
makers
the
of the
success
and
coordination
with
cooperation
relevant institutions and close participation of the
people affected.
An understanding of these limitations of the Bertaud
and
implications imply that caution should be taken
their
political,
to introduce
relevant
constraints,
initially,
for
and
design
makers
and
the
beneficiaries.
acceptable and desirable sites, the model can be
utilized imputting
payments,
locational
that are derived from analysis of
the attitudes of decision
Then
Model
and
minimum
affordable
plot
land
sizes,
maximum
monthly
prices that will indicate
whether the site is affordable or requires subsidies and/or
reductions
standards
in
costs
of
components
through
reducing
or plot sizes; or an alternative site with lower
land costs if necessary.
80
low
of
selection
settlement
income
are
projects
and
important
for
methodologies
for
their
understanding
the
difficult problem of finding acceptable
it
However,
locations.
evaluations
site
for
criteria
theoretical
about
Generalizations
Site Selection
in
Participation
C. Existing Organizational
are
what organizations or institutions
and
problem
to have an idea of
also valuable
is
From examples, it becomes apparent that
how.
the realities of site selection by these
be
considered a
rational planning criteria
for those
site
can
to acquire the best
affected.
involved
Institutions
institutions
or constrained from what would be
different,
similar,
this
in
involved
selection
in
considered
be
can
through their participation, on a direct or indirect level.
The
most
direct
important are those that consider selection on a
and
responsible
countries,
generally
executing
agencies
the
of
responsibility
particular
and
is
the
of the individual country and
only
is
This
because
level can political,
housing
institutional,
local
the
of
consist
including both private organizations
agencies.
local
They
level.
public
primary
on
the
socio-economical,
and cultural land issues can be resolved.
One example of an institution
selection
is
of
El
Salvador
involved
in
site
"Fundacion
Salvadore'a de Desarrollo y
in the small
but highly populated country
the
Vivienda Minima",
directly
in
Central
America.
This
private
81
organization
is
noted
as
one
of
the
most
successful
developers of low income housing and is used as a reference
model for other organizations to
Mauricio Silva, was able
and
criteria
of
director
former
the
experience,
emulate.
to
set
general
him, the critical issues for site
selection
in
of
For
continually surfaced.
that
priorities
a
his
Fundacion, Mr.
the
identify
on
Based
order
of
Availability of land; 2) Institutional
priority, were:
1)
constraints; 3)
Location; 4)
He noted that in San
Costs.
Salvador, the land market was extremely tight such that the
land became the major limitation for site
of
availability
Secondly,
selection.
the
constraints
of
appropriate permits such as for the extension of
acquiring
water line to the site, was
Without
institutional
this,
a
significant
proposed site alternative.
Following these two restricting
criterias, locational acceptability was evaluated.
this
Fundacion,
opportunities
pertained
and
problem.
not be worthwhile to consider the
wold
it
also
to
access
to
For the
socio-economic
other activity centers from the site as
well as the advantages or disadvantages of proximity to the
primate city of San Salvador
For
the
or
other
secondary
cities.
Funda-cion, costs were the last criteria and least
restrictive.
For instance, innovative design could provide
a flexibility that reduced costs of development.
Though
general
these
elements
priorities
are
relatively
are not automatic.
order of priority and based
on
their
constant,
their
They can change in
interrelationships,
82
trade-offs
benefit
can
best
be made that provide an acceptable site to
those
affected,
both
institutionally
and
individually.
Appart from the major criteria related to, other
though
not
directly
are
identified,
concerns,
considered.
For
instance, soil conditions were not critical factors to
Fundacion
in
site
selection.
This
is
because
conditions in their region are generally grid
pose
major
problems.
development costs.
consider
must
"responsible"
times
these
conflicts.
close
to
the
needs
institution,
these
and
the
locational
issues
of
beneficiaries
may
differ
and
For instance, the Fundacion
and
the
the
present
possible
developed
a
site
an illegal settlement away from the city center.
was not an
the
government
policies
elimination of illegal settlements, it
acceptable
alternative
to
the
beneficiaries
created problems for the Fundacion in the short run.
The costs of the plots and
than
not
It is important to be aware that many
concerns
promoted
which
do
constraints
Though the site was beneficial to the
that
soil
Any, of this kind, are included in
In addition,
government policies.
and
the
the
illegal
priority.
Thus,
insufficient
groups.
However,
They
in
services
settlement.
the
were
Legal
demand
for
more
tenure
the
expensive
was
project
not a
was
to recover costs and reach the desired income
continued
the
long
to
run,
go
to
illegal
settlements.
if the illegal settlement is
removed by the government, the benefits to the
institution
83
would increase as the demand for the project would increase
by
eliminating
director,
the
alternative.
According to the former
these issues were the major determinants
of
site
location for the Fundacion.
Differing
public
from
the
agencies
local
such
private
For
land
development
domain,
instance,
controls,
expropriation,
rational
site
can
play
such
and/or
an
as
acquisition.
important part.
Many
profits
selection.
monetary
be
Strategic
gains
land owners by
reaping
may
times
a
on
land
this
payments
worst
for
in
sites
for
sites
locations.
motive
in
can
site
provide
for the most powerful individuals or major
increasing
benefits
from
the
value
being
in
of
their
close
project
governments
these
expense.
agencies in order to be
a
addition,
results
determining
locations
In
infrastructure lines constructed to
require
eminent
For example, some
disastrously located on poor land.at the
Also,
of
powers
preemption, to direct site
governments have a maximum ceiling
site
selection
in many cases they lack the
selection and keep land costs to a minimum.
politics
local
as housing and planning ministries,
may be more restrictive in their
determinants.
organizations,
Because
of
effective
in
land
by
proximity
to
site
at
the
factors, public
housing
the
poor,
the successful implementation of land controls and
caution
that
public
interests
selection, not private individuals.
are
central
to
site
84
Other institutions get involved on a limited basis
selection
site
are
These
process.
who
international organizations
give
in
the
primarily
the
assistance
to
local agencies in developing settlement projects.
the
The most
exempliary of these, is probably the World Bank; also known
as
the
International
Bank
Development (IBRD), that
gives
technical
aid
for
important part
of
urban
this,
However,
projects.
knowledgeable
personnel
influence
site
on
for
financial
and
is
regional
for
based
from
Reconstruction
low
on
in
assistance
and
development.
income
this
with
institution,
selection is limited.
An
settlement
conversations
they do not finance land acquisition but
costs.
and
their
This is because
only
development
In addition, project officers are placed typically,
the
role
of
appraisers
country for financing.
and
chosen
the
of
a project submitted by a
At this point, the site is
evaluation
entire project package.
is based on the merits of the
Therefore, generally, their impact
in site selection lies in the acceptance
funding
for
already
a submitted project.
or
rejection
of
For instance, if a site
is considered unacceptable for reasons
such
as
excessive
development costs incurred, it does not generally assist in
site
selection
of a new site, but would require the local
and
government to comply with recommendations
revised
project
package
for
approval.
procedure, direct participation in site
exception
rather
than
the
rule. .
submit
the
Because of this
selection
They
only
is
assit
the
if
85
by
requested
local
the
or
government
responsible
institution.
Because the World Bank is
site
it
selection,
only
not
does
have
a
well
documented
It
locational criteria and methodology of selection.
however,
have
development
personnel
including
settlement projects.
through
standard
experience
set
established.
It
on
knowledgeable
selection
site
is
generally
retaine'
criteria,
for
hoc"
guidelines,
does,
aspects
low
learned
or. an "adi
with
involved
indirectly
of
income
intuitively
basis with
or
no
checklist
In this way, it is dealt with case by case by
involved personnel.
Other public and private international
as
the
Agency
for
International
institutions,
Development
Foundation for Cooperative Housing (FCH),
and
Development
and the
(AID); the
Planning
Collaborative Inter. (PADCO), assist with
the site selection in a similar fashion (or even to a
extent)
such
as the World Bank.
less
86
CAIRO, EGYPT
CASE EXAMPLE:
CHAPTER III.
A process
for
site
projects
can
be
of
selection
illustrated
low
more
clearly
adaptation of a real setting or case example.
study
of
the
locality
settlement
income
through
For this,
an
a
of the Cairo Metropolitan area in
Egypt will be utilized.
In a locality such
begins
by
as
this
the
site
selection
process
an inventory of potentially suitable
obtaining
sites within the study
This means gathering
or urban area.
information that identifies existing developed or urbanized
areas, land which is undevelopable because of topography or
soil conditions, land constrained from development
of
ownership
status.
From
this
information, along with
minimum size requirements, (for the
than
hectares
10
or
25
Cairo
be
study,
greater
vacant
land
and
determined.
For
the
feddens),
potentially available sites can
because
Cairo Metropolitan area, this type of information inventory
identified
potentially
twenty-five
suitable
sites
as
illustrated in Figures 9 and 10.
Following this, it is now important to
information
from
which
potential.
This
includes
settlement
features.
section
project
(if
project
additional
to assess these sites development
it
Relevant project
on
acquire
data
is
data
criteria)
about
the
proposed
known) and critical urban
(as
elaborated
pertains
in
the
to limits on its
population and/or densities, the proposed number
of
lots,
87
FIGURE 9:
CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA-URBANIZATION
... . e . e.. e . . .. . o... . o... .e...e.....e.
\ t ::::::QALYMBlYAH S
~ ~ ~. 0 ~0e. ~ ~ ~ . G . . .e o -
e
e0
. .e.
.
.
e..
eoe
~* .
*e
.
..
.
o ..
e
e
e
0
e
o
..
e
e
e
.
-
o
e
.
e
e
.
~ ~~~ a
e~
e
e
0
-
.
0
e
e
o0..
e
e0000090
e e e e .e
e~~~~~~~~~
e~
e
e
o
e
e
o e ee
oe
e
ee eeo.e
ee
eeo
,
e
e
oe
eeo
e
eo
e
ee oee
e
eo
0
0
..
..
e
e
.
.
e
e
eoe ee
o
.
.
.
.
e
ee
e
eee
oee
ee
X
e
ee
eo
ee ee
o
.
eeeeeeo
0
e0
..
-
SOURE:
s
ee e
o
e e
o eoe
e
Figure
ee
LE ED-
e
e
2-2,
e eeeo ee
ee
.
eee.
ee
oe
ee
0
ee
oeoeeoee.
*0
.00
eeDE0E.
e
pg.e
ee..
eo e
Z
..
e~
.e........
.
e
e
eeeeeeo
oee
0ee 0
e0*0
~~~~~~~~0
.
en
e
.
0 0
o
o,0060ei
DEER
e
LAN
eeeoeeee
Dam eeee e s
an
Figur e ee 2-2
o
00
ee
0
. ..
es
.e
eeoe
e e
.
.o.
.
oea
e
e
eo
ee
ee
ee
..
.
eI
ee
s e
en ese
s
.e
s
e
ee
0
e
e
Ue
E/
epemer
LAND
pg
(C
a a 0e e
- -
-
T
,
2-4.eee eee
-
-.LAND
- .1
- - -
CAR
-
LAN
- -
-
-
.ees
ee
oe
e
.
s
1981
LANDT
Mooe,
.
ees
M 00.***00e.e
e
e
e
e
DEER
.
2-4
~~~~~-AGRICULTURE.
SOUCE
s
e
eeeeoe
eee
.O
.
..
ee
e900e
.
.STUDY.
e
.
eee
ee e e e e .e e ee e
~ 0e 0e es 0*000*
e e
0e
0ee 6eeoe ee
s0se
~~ eeeeeee~ eeeee
~ee se ~eeseeeee~eo eoe ~
ee e ee
.e.e
eo ee e e e e
e ee
.e
e eo
e
0
seesRess
a
seese000000e000e0*0ee
Des
and
Moe,
a
(CDAT),
CAIRO
.
0
a
EELOPME
..
e o
. . e
. e
. . . e INFRASTRUCTUReE
VACA.
.
OR
essesseesseeeesseeesee
e~~~~~~~~~~~
.
.eeeo
s
0
e0
ee
.
.
..
eee
eee
e
....
..
.
006000e
ee
0
0
e
9
o
e
.~X.
ee ee
e~~~~~~
ee
0
e
ees
0e
ee
e ee ee ee
0
..
...
~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~,,,,
e
e
e
4
e
e
0
e
e e e e
.e...e
-09,040
e
.
' e 0 a 0 0 , e* * * * *
. e e e 0 e e e e* 0 0 e. * . . o. e e
.. . . ..............
0
.
-
USE/
-
..
...
0
...
.
..
.
. .
.
. .
.
88
FIGURE 10:
CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA-MAJOR PARCELS OF
VACANT LAND
/
SQALhfU4'AH-R
\ NcGovmoIa
():y
10uena
U
c4m
GOVEQ20AT
GIZAOV&DJJODT~
AMBfe8I
1N ,
/
25
SCALE 1:250,000
SOURCE:
Dames and Moore, CAIRO LAND USE/INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT STUDY, September 1981, Figure 2-8.
N
N
89
the
subdivision
target
income
existing
type,
groups;
and
utility
and
while
proposed
the
water
road
urban
and
standards,
features
sewage
and
include
systems,
areas
served by public transportation, location of industrial and
commercial activities, major roads and land and development
costs. This inventory of the urban features is particularly
important in understanding the urban
infrastructure potential of the
growth
patterns
and
available sites from which
to access their development potential.
Tools for
acquiring
this
inventory
of
information
for
identifying available sites and their development potential
include:
maps,
aerial
location
master
photography, land use maps, land vacancy
inventories
of
utilities
and
services,
plans for land uses and utility systems, reviews of
development controls currently in
analysis
(i.e.,
capacity,
environmental
topography,
data,
land cost data.
This
type
significant
of
place,
soil
hazards,
land
capability
conditions,
etc.),
land
bearing
ownership
(19)
information
inventory
process
identifies
characteristics about the greater Cairo region
and their influences on the available sites
necessary
assessing
For
their
development
located at the mouth
capital
of
of
the
potential.
Nile
River,
instance,
Cairo
is
the
Egypt, and is an international center of major
importance in Africa and the Middle East
and
for
economically.
It
is
also
both
becoming
politically
a
prominent
90
financial center.
The greater Cairo
region
(G.C.R.)
is
comprized
of
the
entire Governorate or cities of Cairo, and portions of Giza
on
the
almost
west
and
Qaliubiah
on
continuous
urbanized
area
separated by the Nile River.
the north.
with
They form an
Giza
and
Cairo
(In the United States this is
similar to Boston, Cambridge, and Newton in Massachusetts).
In
addition,
the
population
of
estimated by the National Urban
approximately
6.8
million
the
Policy
Cairo
region,
Study,
1982,
was
in 1976 and 8 million in 1981.
By the year 2000,
this should increase to 16.5 million,
increase
since 1976.
of 141%
Relevant
an
Because of this there is and
will continue to be a tremendous need for
region.
as
housing
in
the
project data for low income settlements
in Cairo consist of land available in small plots with 4 to
5 persons per dwelling; and minimum
roads,
water,
and
electricity.
utilities,
i.e.
main
Improvement will be made
progressively.
The urban features identify the
of
the
Cairo
urban
land'scape.
within Cairo are, first of
centers
with
all,
following
The
similar
characteristics
economic locations
to
other
development districts and important economic
activity clustered on or along major transportation
(see
Figure
11
for
reference to locations).
locations are principally located in the
District
urban
(C.B.D.)
along
Central
routes
Industrial
Business
the river front and at two other
tij
0
F-3
I0
-KC)
t3.j
c-4 -
0d
81-3
(10
zI-4
I-H
0
H
C)
I-I
Uz)
H
0
ci
tj
C:
~C
1zj
wl
0
H
92
in the north, and
Commercial and trade activites
Helwan/Tebbin on the south.
that
are also heavily concentrated within the C.B.D.,
is,
by Ramses, Tahrir, and Alaba
formed
triangle
the
within
and
Mostorod,
Kheima,
to Abu Zaabal
up
Canal
Ismailia
along
Al
in Shubra
areas or poles
major
Squares for modern trade, and the corridors connecting them
and the adjoining Mouski
In
on
Giza,
addition,
the
significant
and private
factories,
Finally, the main markets are located in Rod
services.
Bab el
Ataba,
Faraq,
a
has
west,
employment base with consumer goods,
trade.
traditional
District, for
el
Luk and Tewfikiya in the city center;
the periphery with a fish
market
on
Important to development potential is the accessibility
to
in
Giza and Embaba in
Port Said Road
(20).
predominantly to sewage,
administered by a
over
part
separate
the
in
System
sewage system is over
the
combined
needs, secondly,
authority.
serving
the
all,
are
South.
loaded,
is
extending
of the territory of all three governorates.
It
the Cairo System in the
the
in
central and east, the Giza System
times
of
authority
regional
pertains
transportation
first
sanitation,
is served by thee sewage networks:
Helwan
and
road
water,
Cairo,
In
networks.
This
utilities.
public
and
infrastructure
In
west,
and
the Cairo region this
more
disposing
than
capacity of the three systems.
administered
the
by
a
regional
five
Water
water
It is responsible for five water supply systems
Cairo region:
the Cairo-Heliopolis system in
93
the central and eastern areas; the
the
areas;
central
south
Giza-Embaba system in the
the
the
west; the Helwan system in the south; and
Shoubra
Al
the capacity
As with sewage,
in the north.
System
Kheima
in
system
Cairo-Maadi
demands.
of the system is being strained by the population
Thirdly, the road capacity of Cairo presently is thought to
be
are
There
inadequate.
limited number of high volume
separation
between
through
local
and
roads and
little
traffic.
There is a substancial need for additional modes
extending
of transportation, widening of some streets, and
transit
rapid
to
the
The existing road
periphery (21).
system of Cairo is illustrated in Figure 12.
Of particular importance to site selection is the
land
means looking at the difference in
the
urban fringe vary between 50 L.E./m
2
and
when far from
(more than 100 meters) to 100 L.E./m
the road
land
agricultural
For instance, land costs on agricultural land
desert land.
on
of
For Cairo, this
development construction costs.
and
cost
2
up
and
in
locations with good access and close to existing utilities..
With
a
floors)
per
flow
area ratio of 3.5 (lot coverage of 85%, four
the cost per dwelling is
dwelling
for
Utility costs, however,
quality
and
main
areas
floor
are
streets
roads
750 and
50
between
and
minimized
though
free.
These
are
estimated at L.E. 100/dwelling.
and
between L.E.
For desert
3000
100 m 2 .
poor
with
costs
land,
are
utility
are the important cost components since land in
desert areas is free.
Using 1980
prices,
utility
costs,
94
FIGURE 12:
To
Shibin
El-Kom
GREATER CAIRO REGION-EXISTING ROAD NETWORK
To Alexendria
To laellie
To
To
)
/
/
Helwan
To
Faty urn
To
Upper Egypt
SOURCE:
General Organization for Physical Planning
(G.O.P.P.), PLANNING OF THE ENTRANCES TO THE
CAIRO URBAN AREA, April 1976, Figure 11-5,
pg. 11-14.
To
Gulf of
Suez
95
roads,
water, sewage, electricity, telecommunication,
i.e.
3750
are estimated at L.E. 750 per capita, or L.E. 3000 to
This
dwelling.
per
is
land which
agricultural
to the total costs for
compared
vary
between
850 and L.E.
L.E.
3100
(22).
development growth
true
particularly
the
of
spread
predominantly
has
income sector with higher
low
A reason for this is
incomes locating on free desert land.
land
that the total cost of a dwelling on agricultural
desert
on
aquafiers
from
supplied
income,
agricultural
existing continuity
to
close
major
land is
employment
Also,
costs.
available in
Finally,
areas.
for
small plots,
and
urbanizations,
existing
with
be
areas, i.e. Nile and Delta
intake
distant
must
water
Therefore,
land.
aquafrier, which increases development
in
is
than on desert land since there are no underground
cheaper
low
is
This
land.
agricultural
on
north-northeast,
Up to the
patterns of the Cairo region.
development
present,
proposed
and
existing
the
are
Of particular importance
the
law
prohibiting the changing of agricultural land to other uses
is not enforced, making this land flexible in
Because
out.
of this,
precious agricultural
To counter this trend,
slow down and stop urban
land.
desert
land is
the government
growth
in
the
is
its
supply.
being wiped
proposing to
northern
arable
This is
by producing strong development poles in the
areas.
One mean for this is by proposing a highway
system based on an outer ring road circling Cairo to
limit
96
an
development;
future
road
ring
inner
to
serve the
heavily urbanized area; a southern ring road on the eastern
and
side of the Nile extending south between Maadi
This is supported by a concept
radials and other highways.
proposes
stages
satellite
cities
of
15th
1) three
of
and
May,
of
It
13).
Figure
(see
consisting
development
of Al Obour,
of
6th
act as anchorage points for new settlements;
that
October
corridors
and
settlement
of new
a system of
finally,
and
Cairo,
to
back
circling
and
Helwan
2) four new towns of 10th of Ramaden, Al Bade, Al Amal, and
and
Sadat City to give direction to development corridors;
3)
the agricultural areas, i.e. Delta, being a green space.
This
last
of the outer ring road,
section
which crosses
section
only
the
eastern
and canceling
the
western
completing
involved
stage
agricultural
land.
All these stages
will be supported by land use controls that establish zones
that
under
urbanizations
prevents
development
that
another
urbanizations,
accept
conditions
certain
accepts
and another that
(23).
A final influence on site selection in the Cairo case is an
the
implementation constraint highlighted by the fact that
range
of
available
Each
jurisdiction.
within
development
numerous agencies
competing
efficiency
for
in
span more than one governorate
sites
has
governorate
its
within
control
over
land
own boundaries and there are also
each
locations
development
implementation
governorate
it
is
involved
and
necessary to
uses.
achieve
and
For
a
97
LONG RANGE URBAN DEVELOPMENT SCHEME
FIGURE 13:
ALEXANDRIA
SUEZ
6
th OCTOBRE
4
AL AMAL.
AIN SUKHNA
NILE
A
Towns
New
Main
Development
Major
Corridor
Highway
Airport
SOURCE:
General Organization for Physical Planning
(G.O.P.P.), GREATER CAIRO REGION, STRATEGY PLAN,
April 1982, Figure 5.1, pg. 5.2.
98
level
of
coordination
among
the
jurisdiction and involved agencies.
vesting responsibility
single
agency
for
This
entire
governorates
could mean
system
either
within
a
or establishing a coordinating body to make
collective decisions.
would
the
three
Also,
facilitating
implementation
be the effective use of existing development control
mechanisms.
For Cairo this pertains particularly to
legal powers
of expropriation when necessary,
betterment
taxes
Based on
such
analysis
of
to control
an
the
These
and enforcing
land prices.
information
inventory,
a
preliminary
available sites can be made according
their relationships to the
Cairo.
their
(as
"existing"
elaborated
urban
features
to
of
in the chapter on Planning
Criteria) include physical characteristics, accessbility to
employment, infrastructure
development
sites,
costs.
Number
Ownraniah
West",
This
0,
"El
and
transportation,
urban
and
kind of analysis for two of the
Khanka",
and
Number
16,
"El
is summarized in Figures 14 and 15.
For
instance, El Khanka, located in the southern limit
Giza
land
of
the
area, presently has good physical features, is
readily accessible to employment in Giza and central Cairo,
infrastructure, and transportation
route
to
price
with
Ownraniah,
the pyramids).
relatively
located in
(in
proximity
to
main
Consequently, it has a high land
low
development
costs.
El
the eastern portion of the Qalyubiyah
Governorate,
has good physical features also, but presently
does
have
not
convenient
access
to
infrastructure,
99
FIGURE 14
Property No. 0 -
El Khanka
Location:
The property is located at the western side of El
Khanka neighborhood, in the eastern part of
Qalyubiyah Governorate.
Area:
180 feddans.
Designation:
Nonagricultural land suitable for development.
Ownership:
Private ownership.
Topographic
Conditions:
The land is flat and considered very suitable for
development.
Sewerage:
The property is not covered by the Cairo sewerage
system, but could be served by a local system.
Water:
The property is not serviced by the Cairo water
supply system.
Major Roads and
Transportation
System:
The subject property is not covered, nor it is
scheduled to be covered, by any major road network.
However, it is presently serviced by the auxiliary
roads which service the El Khanka neighborhood.
Business
Activities, SocialServices, and
Accessibility to
Major Workplaces:
Because the property is close to El Khanka neighborhood, it will benefit from the existing business
activities and social services . Any housing development will also have access to several workplaces in
the neighborhood.
Environmental
Hazards:
The property does not have any known environmental
constraints which would affect its development for
housing.
Development Costs
Category (not
including land
acquisition):
Relatively high cost per feddan (LE64,000) because of
infrastructure gaps. Sum for 180 feddans = LE 12 million, infrastructure, earthwork, and engineering.
SOURCE:
Dames & Moore (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND USE/
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STUDY - Final Report, for USAID,
September 1981, Appendix E.
100
FIGURE 15
Property No. 16 -
El Owraniah West
Location:
Close to the southern limit of the Giza urban limit.
Area:
240 feddans.
Designation:
Agricultural land.
Ownership:
Mixed public/private.
Topographic
Conditions:
Flat.
Sewerage:
The property is already served by the existing
system.
Water:
The property is already served by the existing
system.
Major Roads and
Transportation
System:
The property is close to existing road networks
and is adjacent to the Pyramids Road.
Business
Activities, Social
Services, and
Accessibility to
Major Workplaces: The Cairo and Giza business districts are nearby.
Environmental
Hazards:
Development Cost
Category (not
including land
acquisition):
SOURCE:
No environmental hazards.
Medium low cost per feddan (LE 42,000). Sum for
240 feddans = LE 10 million, engineering, earthwork,
and infrastructure.
Dames & Moore (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND USE/
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STUDY - Final Report, for USAID,
September 1981, Appendix E.
101
transportation and only limited employment opportunities in
the vecinity.
Therefore, it has a low
land
price
and
a
relatively high development cost because of the distance to
existing infrastructure sources.
An evaluation of these
be
characteristics
view of the sites development
preliminary
can
site
achieved
either
graphically
can
give
potential.
through
two
methods,
allowing each
basis
of
the
matrix
site to be
format
(in
criteria
given
can
be
the
compared with
established
particular region
has
criteria
this
the
case,
same
This
maps
overlays, or more scientifically, through a matrix.
and
Of the
advantage
the
other
appropriate
Cairo,
a
of
on
the
for
the
Egypt).
Each
relative importance or
weight and either checked off as in Figure 4 or scored on a
range of 4-0 as in
identifies
Figure 5.
In
the
first
instance,
it
which of the criteria are favorably represented
by the site while the latter gives a range of favorability,
i.e.,
4:excellent,
exclusion.
(The
3:good,
2:fair,
1:poor,
scale can be reversed).
O:site
The results are
then summed for a total score and either be compared to
acceptable
range or sites numerically ranked.
criteria can also be weighted
more
i.e.,
access
land
costs,
and
for
heavily
to
6.
If desired,
than
others,
employment, etc.
reflecting instituional, geographical, social
priorities, and scored accordingly as
an
or
economic
illustrated in Figure
102
In the Cairo example
utilized
in
this
this
weighted
priority
preliminary evaluation.
method
was
The results of
the matrix for the two sites are illustrated in Figure
At
level,
this
these two sites are extremes in
16.
desireable
and least desireable potential for the study area.
This type of preliminary evaluation that relates
sites
to
existing conditions, though informative and with.a purpose,
in
many
cases is not enough.
It will give only a partial
idea of the development potential of
the
many times arrive at unrealistic results.
of Cairo.
Cairo,
sites
For evaluating development potential of sites in
it
is
market
necessary
to
also consider the additional
policies,
projects.
In the case of El Ownraniah
West, these concerns present restrictions which
preliminary
positive
development
compromise
potential.
instance, the site is on private agricultural land.
development
the
factors, and the ability of the government to
develop settlement
its
can
Such is the case
factors of future urban growth patterns and
land
that
policies
of
Cairo
prohibit
For
Future
(or
looks
unfavorable upon) development on this type of land use.
addition,
if
alternative
uses are permitted, this highly
accessible land will quickly go
economically
profitable
prices considerably.
In
uses
to
than
competitive
and
more
housing, raising land
Therefore, the only solution for
the
government to develop this land for housing would be for it
to
act quickly if not immediately, to purchase and develop
land.
This is unrealistic in the case of Cairo!
It
would
FIGURE
16
WEIGHTED DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL SCORES
CRITERIA
Weight
%
Initial Score (0-4)/Weighted Score
(16) "El Omraniah West"
(0) "El Khanka"
Topography
15
4/60
4/60
Environmental
10
4/40
4/40
Water
12
4/48
2/24
Sewage
8
4/32
1/ 8
Electricity
8
3/24
1/ 8
Roads
10
4/40
2/20
Workplace
10
4/40
3/30
5
4/20
4/20
Ownership
12
2/24
2/24
Land Price
10
1/10
2/20
34/338
25/254
C.B.D.
TOTALS
H0
SOURCE:
Dames & Moore (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND USE/INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
STUDY, Final Report, for USAID, September 1981, Appendix F.
104
also
units
walk-up
necessitate
opposed to sites and
as
services since in Cairo they can
be
developed
much
more
quickly at reduced costs per capita.
In the case of
potential
El
is
mitigated
consideration.
For
poor
by
other
though
instance,
factors
located
in
of
the
the
elaborated in
the
means
that
new
strategic
town
"El
of
planning
Obour"
concept.
opportunities will be extended
and
as
This
reducing
site will have
into
development
this
costs.
development
tremendous
employment
and
transportation,
infrastructure,
area
improving
Therefore,
potential
in
this
the
To take advantage of this, the most opportunistic
future.
strategy would be to acquire
future
the
development
it will in the future, be in close proximity to
proposed
access
preliminary
sector some distance from the urban center of
northeastern
Cairo,
Khanka,
the
land
in
the
immediate
before land prices and demand for land increase and
develop it when infrastructure networks are established for
With the time elerient and the
the new town.
and
prices
development
that
are
reduced
a small lot
possible,
subdivision project of sites and services is
land
feasible
for
this site.
The significance of these additional concerns is
development
and the
growth
of
the
settlement projects take time to complete,
political
concepts
that
and
will
market
impact
situations
and/or
and
constraint
proposed
project
105
and,
feasibility
existing
therefore,
urban
features
its
success.
indicate a degree of short range
potential, future long range potential
In
evaluation.
realistic
sites
two
is important
case
the
of
the
additional factors in fact, reverse
the
the
Though
for
a
these
Cairo,
desireability
of
development derived from the existing
for
conditions.
evaluation for development potential
Although this
to
sites
the
the
desireable
useful
particularly
estimates of land and
i.e.,
affected,
available
consideration
institution
of
and
The
sites.
is
a
Using realistic
tool for doing this.
it
costs,
development
Model
Bertaud
assists
in
costs can be minimized within the reach of
if
determining
final
the
needs to be evaluated in more detail for
still
most
a
settlers,
affordability for those
residents,
of
the desireability
about
some conclusions
reaches
the settlers ability to pay.
In
Cairo
the
example,
the
maximum affordable payments by the targed low income groups
is
L.E.
30/year
for land for housing (24).
for desert land to be feasible,
affordable
as
will
it
agricultural land.
supplied
minimize total
With
(at
least
to
be
as
and road networks
the
first
stage)
to
average costs per dwelling.
this type of process, as
case example,
in
have
This means that for the
desert settlements only minimal utilities
should be
Furthermore,
exemplified through the Cairo
sites can be identified,
analyzed,
determined
106
development
and evaluated for their
is
This
constraints.
potential
important
possibility of a successful project.
implies
increasing
The format,
the
however,
that locational needs are of greater priority than
issues of affordability.
locational
If the
site
is
affordable
but
needs are not met, the likelyhood of success of
the project is
group
for
design
and
because
income
reduced, particularly for the lowest
of
the
added costs overtime in transport,
etc.
This type of format should be performed by either
the
personnel
of
or
both
the responsible local agency and/or the
international consultants in considering sites for projects
of this type.
107
CHAPTER
IV.
CONCLUSION
Site selection is an
important
development
for
process
phase, or
aspect
of
the
income settlement projects.
low
Though all phases have their importance, site selection
one
concern
the
project.
This
is
because
location
ability
to
acquire
their
affordability
acceptable
has particular impact on the success of
that
residents'
of
to
is
the
the
project.
If
affects
needs
the
and
site
the
their
is
not
settlers, they will not live there, at
least for very long.
Therefore, site selection
should
be
with seriousness within a structured framework of
regarded
analysis.
In the selection process it is important
of
range
a
evaluate
to
consider
Generally,
criteria.
it
is
and
not
uncommon, particularly by public organizations, to consider
land costs as the principal factor.
the
more acceptable.
increased
costs
inappropriate
choices,
other
site
because
of
of living at a location with poor access,
physical features, and/or environmental hazards.
reason
the
However, utilizing this factor alone
to
has generally led
The cheaper
criteria
as
elaborated
in
For
this
the thesis are
necessary.
In
the
evaluation
process
it
is
also
important
to
understand that sites are not perfect and that there are no
two
sites
similar
in
advantages
and
disadvantages.
108
for
Generally,
instance,
the
better
with
sites
good
physical featues and/or access, have higher land ccsts.
In
addition, one site may have poor physical features but good
access while another mray have the opposite.
means
that
"trade-offs"
This situation
are necessary among key planning
elements for a selection that best provides for
of the settlers but which
an
importance
on
the
is also affordable.
priorities
based
needs
This places
on cultural, social,
economic, and political characteristcs of the region and of
the beneficiaries
of the project.
To facilitate the site selection process, methods and tools
are available.
is convenient
readable,
and
For instance, a matrix method of evaluation
and
and
to
-alternative
models
valuable tools.
understand
such
However,
their
Model
deals
Other
important
be
sites,
sites.
precaution
limitations.
In
visually
In
addition,
must
be
taken
to
isolation, it can not
For instance, the
information
such
Bertaud
as
the
extent
of
and other locational characteristics, cannot
into
the
model
assessment of alternative sites.
project.
is
with affordability and utilizes limited data.
incorporated
selection
it
as the "Eertaud Model" are also
guarantee a successful project.
accessibility
because
sites evaluations can be readily summarized
compared
mathematical
advantageous
"process"
to
make
a
realistic
This limitation implies a
for greater prospects of a successful
Selection should first consider identification of
analysis
and
evaluation
based
on
locational
109
qualities
and
then,
with
ranges
models, evaluate
of
the assistance of mathematical
most
the
for
affordability
desireable sites.
In addition, though it is desireable to select a
low
best prospects of success, the realities
of developing countries do not dictate
happen.
This
is
or
allow
because
of speculation.
institutions
land
are,
for
control
example,
they also have conflicting responsibilities
it.
The
Sometimes,
which
creates
competition and power struggles not condusive to
planning
process.
This
framework
is
reinforced
decision makers who take advantage of the land
select
prices
excessively
bureaucratic which makes them slow to respond.
confusion,
to
This is reinforced by an existing
political framework and its response to
public
this
because of an existing free land market
which, when uncontrolled, tends toward higher
sites
beneficiaries.
market
by
and
based on their own personal monetary motives
regardless of the needs
in
for
income settlement projects from a creditable plannning
process to ensure
a
site
and
desires
of
the
low
income
These political conditions create problems
implementing land controls
necessary to acquire land
at
desireable and affordable locations.
An option to alleviate this situation is
of
a
"Land
the
Acquisition and Development Agency" concerned
for the needs of the low income sector.
could
establishment
facilitate
land
acquisition
This
and
institution
development
of
110
through
sites
suitable
However,
process.
government
to
it
use
the
would
implement
of
viable
a
the support of the
require
appropriate
land
controls and adequate funding to accomplish
In
closing,
selection
appart
for
from
the
settlement
technical
projects
satisfy the needs of the low income
elaborated
in
this
makers.
the
development
its
objectives.
issues
of
site
that are necessary
at
affordable
to
prices
work, there is another factor that is
potentially more influencial
mentioning:
planning
in
political
site
selection
objectives
of
and
the
Housing for the poor is a tremendous
needs
decision
problem
for
the government particularly in developing countries and can
be
politically
sometimes,
in
explosive.
order
to
Therefore,
survive
governments
politically,
must
demonstrate that they are doing something about this issue.
They
consequently,
political impact.
considerations.
pick a highly visible site for maximum
This is
at
the
expense
of
technical
These sites are generally poor sites with
high development costs and/or high costs because of reduced
accessibility.
developed
and
In the long run, these sites may never
get
if they do, they may be unsuccessful.
As a
result, new sites will be needed later when
the
political
impacts wear off and realities set in.
This situation implies that just as
among
there
are
trade-offs
the technical factors there is a need for trade-offs
between the political and technical factors as well.
When
111
there
are
political
objectives
involved,
weighed and evaluated against the technical
site
which
may,
political impact,
in
the
long
run
have
they should be
aspects of
more
than it would have otherwise.
the
positive
112
NOTES
1.
Horacio Caminos and Reinhard Goethert, URBANIZATION
PRIMER, (Cambridge, Ma, 1978), pp. 105-106.
2.
Caminos, pp. 65,
3.
American Society of Planning Officials (ASPO), SOILS AND
LAND USE PLANNING, (Chicago, Ill., 1966), p. 12.
4.
Caminos, p.
5.
Donald A. Davidson, SOILS AND LAND USE PLANNING,
York, 1980), p. 60.
6.
W. H. Ransom, SOIL STABILIZATION, A PREVIEW OF PRINCIPLES
AND PRACTICE, Tropical Building Studies No. 5, Department
of Scientific and Industrial Research, Building Research
Station, (London, 1963), p. 5.
7.
Tomas Sudra, LOW INCOME HOUSING SYSTEM IN MEXICO CITY,
Ph.D., Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, 1976, p. 407.
8.
Johannes F. Linn, "Policies for Efficient and Equitable
Growth of Cities in Developing Countries", World Bank
Staff Working Paper No. 342, July 1979, pp. 186-187.
9.
Sudra, pp. 335-336.
10.
Harvey M. Rubenstein, A GUIDE TO SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PLANNING, (New York, 1969, first edition, 1980, second
edition), pp. 26-1, 33-2.
11. Caminos, p.
105.
68.
(New
76.
12. Orville Grimes, HOUSING FOR LOW-INCOME URBAN FAMILIES,
(Baltimore, 1976),
pp. 71-72.
13. Planning and Development Collaborative International,
Inc. (PADCO), GUIDELINES FOR FORMULATING PROJECTS TO
BENEFIT THE URBAN POOR IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, Vol. 1,
prepared for AID, (Washington, D.C., April 1976), pp.
18-19.
26.
14.
PADCO, GUIDELINES, p.
15.
United States Agency for International
Development (USAID),
PERCEPTIONS, PROBLEMS,
FOCUS ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT:
APPROACHES, AND NEEDS, (Washington, D.C., October 1972),
pp. 73-83.
113
16.
Dames and Moore (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND
USE/INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STUDY (FINAL REPORT),
(for USAID, September 1981), pp. 4:8-17.
17.
For more complete discussion of this alternative, see
Dames and Moore document, Section 3.3.
18.
PADCO, "The Bertaud Model", Technical Paper No. 2,
World Bank, (December 1981), p. 4.
for
19. Malcolm D. Rivkin, Techniques for Site Selection, prepared for USAID Shelter Workshop, 1979-1980, pp.35. p2-5.
20.
Ministry of Transport, GREATER CAIRO TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING STUDY, Vol. A., May 1973, pp. 2-20,-24.
21. Dames and Moore, pp.
22.
Appendix G.
General Organization for Physical Planning (G.O.P.P.)et
al, GREATER CAIRO REGION, STRATEGY PLAN, April 1982, pp.
6.1-3.
23.
General Organization for Physical Planning
al, pp. 5.3-5.
24.
Dames and Moore, pp. Appendix J-l.
(G.O.P.P.)et
114
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrams, C., MAN'S STRUGGLE FOR SHELTER IN AN URBANIZING
WORLD, the MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1964.
American Society of Planning Officials (ASPO), SOILS AND
LAND USE PLANNING, Soil Science Society of America, Chicago,
Illinois, 1966.
Bartelli, L.J., Klingebiel, A.A., Baird, J.V., and Heddleson,
M.R., SOILS SURVEYS AND LAND USE PLANNING, published by the
Soil Science Society of America and American Society of
Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, 1966.
Caminos, H. and Goethert, R.,
Cambridge, MA, 1978.
URBANIZATION PRIMER, MIT Press,
Chana, Tara S., SITE AND SERVICES HOUSING PROJECTS IN KENYA,
Thesis M.C.P., MIT, 1975.
Dames and Moore (CIDAT), CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA LAND USE/
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STUDY (FINAL REPORT), for USAID,
September 1981.
Davidson, Donald A.,
Group Limited, Inc.,
SOILS AND LAND USE PLANNING, Longman
New York, N.Y., 1980.
De Chiara J. and Koppelman, L., MANUAL OF HOUSING/PLANNING
AND DESIGN CRITERIA, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood.Cliffs,
N.J., 1975.
Doebele, William A., "The Chartwell Notebooks:
Two
Cautionary Tales on Public Land in Developing Countries",
In Dalton Kehoe and Others (eds.), PUBLIC LAND OWNERSHIP:
FRAMEWORKS FOR EVALUATION, Lexington, MA, D.C. Helath, 1976.
Dunkerley, Harold, et al, "Urban Land Policy Issues and
Opportunities - Vol. 7, Staff Working Paper No. 283", World
Bank, Washington, D.C., May 1978.
Flores-Rangel, Maria G., LAND OWNERSHIP PATTERNS AS
DETERMINANT OF THE AVAILABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY OF URBAN
LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.
CASE STUDY OF MERIDA, VENEZUELA,
Thesis, MCP, MIT, January 1981.
Gakenheimer, R., "The Urban Transportation Plan:
Case Study", 1978.
A Composite
General Organization for Physical Planning (G.O.P.P.), et
al, EL-OBOUR MASTER PLAN STUDY, PHASE A/B, AREA ANALYSIS,
Prepared for the Ministry of Reconstruction and State for
Housing and Land Reclamation, Cairo, Egypt, 1980.
115
General Organization for Physical Planning (C.O.P.P.), et
al, GREATER CAIRO REGION, LONG RANGE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
SCHEME, STRATEGY PLAN, prepared for the Ministry of Development, State Ministry for Housing and Land Reclamation,
Cairo, Egypt, April 1982.
General Organization for Physical Planning (G.O.P.P.), et
al, PLANNING OF THE ENTRANCES TO THE CAIRO URBAN AREA,
SUMMARY REPORT, prepared for the Ministry of Housing and
Reconstruction of the Arab Republic of Egypt, Advisory Committee for Reconstruction, April 1976.
Grimes, 0., HOUSING FOR LOW-INCOME URBAN FAMILIES, John
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1976.
Grindley, William and Merrill, Robert, SITES AND SERVICES:
THE EXPERIENCE AND POTENTIAL, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), International Development
Association, Washington, D.C., May 1973.
Herbert, John D., URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN THE THIRD WORLD,
POLICY GUIDELINES, Praeger Publishers, New York.
IBRD, "Housing", Sector Policy Paper, World Bank, May 1975.
Linn, Johannes, F., "Policies for Efficient and Equitable
Growth of Cities in Developing Countries", World Bank Staff
Working Paper No. 342, July 1979.
Masaya-Marotta, Fernando, POPULAR URBAN SETTLEMENTS IN
GUATEMALA:
GUIDELINES FOR PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT, Thesis,
M.Arch.A.S., MIT, June 1980.
Ministry of Transport, Arab Republic of Egypt, GREATER CAIRO
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING STUDY, VOL. A., May 1973.
Nez, George,
1973.
"Low Cost Housing Potential Locations", USAID,
Oh, Byungho, URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN.LOW INCOME
AREAS, Ph.D., Thesis, MIT, January 1980.
Parker Jr., George R., PHYSICAL GUIDELINES FOR POPULAR URBAN
SETTLEMENTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, Thesis, M.Arch., MIT,
June 1970.
Planning and Development Collaborative International, Inc.
(PADCO), GUIDELINES FOR FORMULATING PROJECTS TO BENEFIT THE
URBAN POOR IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, VOL. l,
BACKGROUND
GOALS, AND PROJECT OPPORTUNITIES, prepared for Agency for
International Development, Office of Urban Development
Bureau for Technical Assistance, Washington, D.C., April,
1976.
116
PADCO, "The Bertaud Model, A Model for the Analysis of
Alternatives for Low-Income Shelter in the Developing World",
prepared for Urban Development Department, Technical Paper
No. 2, World Bank, December 1981.
Popko, Edward, SITES AND SERVICES POLICIES FOR LOW INCOME
HOUSING IN COLOMBIA, Thesis, Ph.D., Urban Studies, MIT,1980.
Ransom, W.H., SOIL STABILIZATION, A PREVIEW OF PRINCIPLES
AND PRACTICE, Tropical Building Studies No. 5, Department
of Scientific and Industrial Research, Building Research
Station, Her Majesty's Stationary Office, London, 1963.
Rivkin, Makolm D., "Techniques of Site Selection", prepared
for USAID, Shelter Workshop, 1979-80.
Rubenstein, Harvey M., A GUIDE TO SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PLANNING, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1969 (1st.
1980 (2nd. ed.).
ed.),
Ruck, Harold A., IMPACT OF TOPOGRAPHY ON LOW INCOME SETTLEMENT PROJECTS, A MODEL APPROACH, Thesis, M.Arch.A.S., MIT,
June 1980.
Stone, P.A., THE STRUCTURE, SIZE AND COSTS OF URBAN SETTLEMENTS, the University Press, Cambridge, Great Britain, 1973.
Sudra, Tomas, LOW INCOME HOUSING SYSTEM IN MEXICO CITY,
Thesis, Ph.D., Urban Studies, MIT, Vol. I., and II, 1976.
THE URBAN EDGE, "Site Selection", published by the Council
for International Urban Liason, 3/2, Washington, D.C.,
February, 1979.
Turner, Alan, THE CITIES OF THE POOR, St. Martin's Press,
New York, 1980.
United Nations, DISASTER PREVENTION AND MITIGATION, LAND
USE ASPECTS, VOL. V., Office of the United Nations Disaster
Relief Organization, Geneva and New York, 1978.
United Nations, IMPROVEMENTS OF SLUMS AND UNCONTROLLED
SETTLEMENTS, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
ST/TAO/SER.C/124, New York, 1971.
United Nations, LAND FOR HUMAN SETTLEMENTS, Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, ST/ESA/69, New York, 1977.
United States Agency for International Development (USAID),
PERCEPTIONS, PROBLEMS,
FOCUS ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT:
Bureau for Technical Assistance,
APPROACHES, AND NEEDS,
Urban Development Staff, Washington, D.C., October 1972.
117
USAID, PROPOSED MINIMUM STANDARDS, IDEAS AND METHODS,
Exchange No. 64, 602.2, Housing Codes and Standards, Dept.
of Housing and Urban Development, Office of International
Affairs, Washington, D. C., May 1966, June 1970 (Reprint).
Van Huyck, Alfred, PLANNING FOR SITES AND SERVICE PROGRAMS,
Agency for International Development, Office of International Affairs, Washington, D. C., July 1971.
Way, D.S., TERRAIN ANALYSIS:
A GUIDE TO SITE SELECTION
USING AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY INTERPRETATION, Dowden, Hutchinson
and Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, Pa.,
(Community Development
1973.
Series),
World Bank, "Sites and Serivces Projects",
Paper, April 1974.
a World Bank
World Bank, "Urbanization", Sector Working Paper, June 1972.
World Bank, "Urban Transport",
Sector Policy Paper, May 1975.