Dr. Kayvan Karimi, Ed Parham An evidence informed approach to developing an adaptable regeneration programme for declining informal settlements The 8 th

Dr. Kayvan Karimi, Ed Parham

An evidence informed approach to developing an adaptable regeneration programme for declining informal settlements

The 8th Space Syntax SymposiumSantiago de Chile January 2012

Dr. Kayvan Karimi Senior Lecturer - Bartlett, UCL ; Director - Space Syntax LimitedEd Parham Associate Director - Space Syntax Limited


• According to UN-Habitat’s ground breaking report, The Challenge of Slums, in 2003, 924 million people, or 31.6 per cent of the world’s urban population, lived in slums or squatter settlements.

• The majority of these settlements were in the developing regions, accounting for 43 per cent of the urban population (UN-HABITAT, 2003).”

• These figures are unfortunately in continuous rise according to internationally verified statistics (UN-HABITAT, 2006).

• Due to complexities of defining a slum area, these figures don’t necessarily include the ‘slum-like’ conditions of many other deteriorated urban areas, such as historic centres, which would not automatically qualify as a slum.

Deteriorated unplanned settlements/Slums a disturbing reality


Cities in transition Forces of change


First modern slums Victorian UK


Unplanned/informal settlements and slums

Not always is an informal settlement a slum, or is a slum created in unplanned areas, but it is fair to say that in most cases slums happen to be informal or unplanned areas that are suffering from multiple physical or socio-economic problems.


In many developing countries, the governments that don’t have the resources, or are highly influenced by economic, social and political agendas, resort to a variety of harsh solutions to transform the slums.

“urban segregation is not a frozen status quo, but rather a ceaseless social war in which the state intervenes regularly in the name of ‘progress’, ‘beautification’, and even ‘social justice for the poor’ to redraw spatial boundaries .. (Mike Davis, Planet of Slums).” .In other words, the whole effort is sometimes about eliminating the question through removing human encumberments, urban evictions, city beautification, slums de-criminalisation, and so on, rather than finding a solution to create a condition that informal settlements could self-correct themselves.

Regenerating urban slums a huge challenge


Imag

e: S

au P

aolo

- Lu

iz A

rthu

r Lei

rão

Viei

ra (T

uca

Viei

ra)

Physical segregation and social segregation


Physical segregation and social segregation


Forces of change:Rapid growth, urbanisation,

changing economies, migration, poverty …

Socio-economic conditions:Deprivation, Impoverishment, low income, …

Spatial conditions:Segregation, Degradation,

Encroachment, densification, …

Urban Slums the vicious circle of depravation


Physical transformation Force of demolition


The need for change physical transformation


Slum Clearance The UK case

Much of this effort was associated with slum clearance, as encouraged by the 1930 Act, which made the local authorities responsible for slum clearance and providing alternative accommodation.


At the other end of the regeneration spectrum, it is argued that the slums have to be fixed by themselves. By helping people to help themselves, the life conditions will improve and the slums will be saved.

Being much less costly, interruptive, and authority-dependent, this approach is favoured by institutions such as the World Bank, international aid agencies, NGOs and philanthropists.

On the face of it, it looks like a good approach, but when it comes to the realities of the vast slums and deteriorated areas, the solutions do not seem to work.

Mike Davis goes as far as calling it the ‘illusion of self-help’ and scholars such as Jeremy Seabrook, call it a misrepresentation: “it would be foolish to pass from the distortion – that the slums are places of crime, disease and despair – to the opposite; that they can be safely left to look after themselves (Seabrook, 1996, p. 197).”

So, what should be done?

The social approach illusion of ‘self help’


Patrick Geddes (1854-1932).

Conservative surgery Geddesian approach

Dr. Kayvan Karimi, Ed ParhamThe Indian Town of Barlampur (1917)

Physical transformation Conservative Surgery


Forces of change:Intervention, Regeneration, Investment, Redevelopment, …

Spatial conditions:Access, Integration

infrastructure, development, …

Socio-economic conditions:Improvement, cohesionviability, investment, …

Urban Slums the virtuous circle of regeneration


Complex issues need complex approaches The case of Santiago


Jeddah Unplanned Settlements

How did the Growth of Jeddah lead to the formation of unplanned settlements and what conditions exist within them today?


Jeddah Saudi Arabia

Saudi ArabiaBiggest port on Red Sea Gateway to the holy cities of Makkah and Madinah - 2.5m pilgrims in 2009

2010 Population 3.4 million2030 Population 5.6 million


2000

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0200 bc

400 bc

646 Jeddah main port for holy cities

Jeddah established as fishing village by Q

uda’a tribe

1947 City wall rem

oved1964 - 71 O

il boom1980s – Present day

1500s City walls built

Urban growth

60 km


The city of Jeddah historical background


History Phases of growth


Proposed Masterplan for Jeddah, Dr. Abdul Rahman Makhloof (1963 AD),Source: Historical Area: yesterday, today and tomorrow, King Abdul Aziz Project for Protection and Development Jeddah Historical Area

Proposed Masterplan for Jeddah, Sirt Jackson and Saudi Consultants (1978 AD)Source: Historical Area: yesterday, today and tomorrow, King Abdul Aziz Project for Protection and Development Jeddah Historical Area

Planning History Modern masterplans


“Planned” areas

1.5 km


2.7 km

Unplanned areas


1.8 km

Unplanned areas


1.6 km

Unplanned areas


1.0 km

Unplanned areas


Unplanned settlementsOver 50 unplanned settlements across Jeddah

Settlement populations range from 3,000 to 120,000

Current estimation of 1m unplanned settlement inhabitants in total

Worked with Municipality of Jeddah and public private partnership since 2006 to address Unplanned Settlements


Current conditions


Current conditions


Current conditions

Conditions across settlements vary but all of them combine at least 3 of the 5 characteristics the UN uses to define a slum:

• Inadequate access to safe water• Inadequate access to sanitation and other infrastructure• Poor structural quality of housing• Overcrowding• Residential status


Spatial Accessibility

Unplanned settlements

High

Low

Jeddah

Spatial accessibility

Spatial analysis Local scale




High

Low

Jeddah


Spatial analysis City wide scale




High

Low

Agra


Spatial analysis Local scale




High

Low

Agra


Spatial analysis City wide scale


Current conditionsProblems

• Isolated communities• Poor physical quality• Inadequate access to utilities• Under provision of social infrastructure• High proportion of illegal immigrants• High (perceived) levels of crime

Benefits

• Cheap accommodation• Established family/social networks• Established local economies• Contribution to wider city economy• Least reliance on cars


Reversing the cycle of decline

How can an intervention be developed to address the fundamental spatial problems at the heart of the unplanned settlement condition, and which can respond to potential changes in the economic, social and political conditions?


Transformability index

27.5 to 4025 to 27.522.5 to 2520 to 22.515 to 2010 to 15

5 to 100 to 5

Vacant land

Access to public realm components

3 to 42 to 31 to 20 to 1

Number of utilities

3 to 42 to 31 to 20 to 1

Public Realm index Utilities Realm index

Settlement profile Analytic indices


Fulfils three roles:

Provides settlement-specific profile which can be used to categorise areas

Identifies areas to target improvements in each settlement

Provides design tool for later in process

Settlement profileAccess and Public Realm (sq m)

Access Road Widening 5,420

Parking *

Public Realm Road Surfacing 106,304

Street Lighting 60

Pavements *

Utilities and Services (%)

Utilities Sewers 5%

Surface Drainage 100%

Water Supply 5%

Electricity Supply 5%

Services Regular Refuse Collection 100%

Police Patrol 100%

Socio-Economic and Social Infrastructure (no.)

Social Infrastructure Health Facilities 0

Hygiene Facilities 0

Primary School 8

Secondary School 1

Community Centre 1

Socio-Economic Micro-CreditMarket Places 1

Services Remove Abandonned Cars 106,304

Public realm Façade maintenance 141,092

Public Space 4,126


Attractiveness to developersHigh

Low

Ranking formed the basis for the JDURC classification of settlements:

1. Settlements attractive to developers

2. Settlements partially attractive to developers

3. Areas with potential for self improvement

4. Settlements in need of immediate partial intervention

Settlement classification


Approach Spatial intervention

If the heart of the unplanned settlement condition is spatial, how can changes be made to spatial structure which minimise disruption to existing residents and stakeholders?

If each of these approaches has its own strengths which are suited to a particular set of economic, social and political conditions, what can be done to combine the benefits of all of them and switch between them?


Principles of design Adapt existing spatial network to reverse cycle


0 250 500

metres

Principles of design Adapt existing spatial network to reverse cycle


Principles of design Distribution of functional components

Higher FARsPredominantly Commercial

Lower FARsPredominantly Residential and Social infrastructure

Land use/FARExposure to movement

Distribute land use and density in mixed use areas according to route hierarchy and exposure to movement (accessibility)

Primary blocks

Special blocks

Secondary blocks

Block type

Primary routes

Secondary routes

Route hierarchy

Tertiary routes


Principles of design Distribution of functional components


Private lead Superblock-based redevelopment(Scenario A)

Maximum interventionMaximum investmentMaximum rehousingMinimum program

Private-lead Route-based regeneration(Scenario B)

Private lead landRoute-basedplot assembly (Scenario C)

Public-leadCommunity assistedimprovement(Scenario E)

Minimum interventionMinimum investmentMinimal rehousingMaximum time for transformation

Public-leadRoute based road widening(Scenario D)

Design Scenarios Flexibility









Scenario A

Private sector, super–block based redevelopment










Scenario B

Private sector, route-based regeneration










Scenario C

Public/Private, route-based regeneration










Scenario D

Public lead, route-based road widening and self-organising regeneration



Projects need to optimise public investment. To make sure designs offer a viable option for private development cost models were developed.

Functional components Cost model


Design guidelines: Sherafiyah

PrimaryPlot Area 81,477FAR 4.5Built Area 366,647Maximum plot coverage (ground) 100%Minimum plot coverage (ground) 80%Available plot area 81,477Maximum plot coverage (upper) 60%Minimum plot coverage (upper) 50%Available plot area 48,886

Land use Land use split Built Area Plot Area Min. no. of floors Max. no. of floors Average plot coverage Max ground floor area Max upper level area Min ground floor area Min upper level areaCommercial Retail 15% 54,997 12,222 6 7 12,222 42,775 9,777 45,220Commercial Office 15% 54,997 12,222 6 7 12,222 42,775 9,777 45,220Residential private 45% 164,991 36,665 6 7 36,665 128,326 29,332 135,659Residential social 20% 73,329 16,295 6 7 16,295 57,034 13,036 60,293Social infrastructure 5% 18,332 4,074 6 7 4,074 14,258 3,259 15,073

100% 366,647 81,477 6 7 69% 81,477 285,170 65,182 301,465

SecondaryPlot Area 40,428FAR 3.0Built Area 121,284Maximum plot coverage (ground) 80%Minimum plot coverage (ground) 70%Available plot area 32,342Maximum plot coverage (upper) 60%Minimum plot coverage (upper) 50%Available plot area 24,257

Land use Land use split Built Area Plot Area Min. no. of floors Max no. of floors Average plot coverage Max ground floor area Max upper level area Min ground floor area Min upper level areaCommercial Retail 5% 6,064 2,021 4 5 1,617 4,447 1,415 4,649Commercial Office 5% 6,064 2,021 4 5 1,617 4,447 1,415 4,649Residential private 55% 66,706 22,235 4 5 17,788 48,918 15,565 51,141Residential social 20% 24,257 8,086 4 5 6,468 17,788 5,660 18,597Social infrastructure 15% 18,193 6,064 4 5 4,851 13,341 4,245 13,948

100% 121,284 40,428 4 5 74% 32,342 88,942 28,300 92,984

SummaryFinancial model headlines Guidelines

Area of plots 121,905 121,905Proposal built area 487,620 487,931Average settlement FAR (financial model) 4.0 4.0Average plot coverage (financial model) 85.0% 71.3%Commercial Retail 65,057 61,061 13%Commercial Office 65,057 61,061 13%Residential private 227,639 231,697 47%Residential social 97,400 97,586 20%Social infrastructure 32,467 36,525 7%

Sherafiyah

Primary investment Land Buildings CompensationLand value sq m 1,000 Cost per sq m 1,000 Compensation per household 0No. of plots 799 Built area 324,563 No. of households 529Area of plots sq m 133,785

Government grant 0 Government grant 0 Government grant 0Total 133,785,000 Total 324,563,000 Total 0

Secondary investment Resettlement Demolition Road buildingCost per household 0 Cost per sq m 210 Cost per sq m 500No. of households 529 Area for demolition 324,563 Area for required 23,884

Government grant 0 Government grant 0 Government grant 0Total 0 Total 68,158,230 Total 11,942,000

Further investment Vacant land costs Serviced land costs Urbanised land costs Developed land costsCost of utilities per plot 0 Cost of utilities per plot 0 Cost of utilities per plot 0Plots requiring utilities sq m 0 Plots requiring utilities sq m 0 Plots requiring utilities sq m 121,905Cost 0 Cost 0 Cost 0

Government grant 0 Cost of public realm sq m 0 Cost of public realm sq m 0Total 0 Area of roads, public space 0 Area of roads, public space 23,884

Cost 0 Cost 0

Government grant 0 Cost of building sq m 2,425Total 0 Area of built space 414,477

Cost 1,005,106,725

Government grant 0Total 1,005,106,725

Revenue Revenue 1: Vacant 0% Revenue 2: Serviced 0% Revenue 3: Urbanised 0% Revenue 4: Developed 100%Value of land sq m 0 Value of land sq m 0 Value of urbanised land sq m 0 Value of built space sq m 3,775Area of land sq m 0 Area of land sq m 0 Area of land sq m 0 Area of land sq m 121,905

FAR 4.0Plot coverage 85%Area of built space 414,477

Total value 0 Total Value 0 Total Value 0 Total Value 1,564,645,874

Primary investment 0 Primary investment 0 Primary investment 0 Primary investment 458,348,000

Secondary investment 0 Secondary investment 0 Secondary investment 0 Secondary investment 80,100,230

Further investment 0 Further investment 0 Further investment 0 Further investment 1,005,106,725

Total cost 0 Total cost 0 Total cost 0 Total cost 1,543,554,955

Profit (value - cost) 0 Profit (value - cost) 0 Profit (value - cost) 0 Profit (value - cost) 21,090,919return 0% return 0% return 0% return 1%

Assumptions - existing values/costs Assumptions - potential values Total Cost 1,543,554,955

Existing land value sq m 1,000 vacant land sale value sr/sq m 2,000 Total Profit 21,090,919

Existing building value per sq m 1,000 vacant land rental value sr/sq m 2,000 Overall return 1.37%Compensation per household 0Cost of resettlement per household 0 serviced land sale value sr/sq m 3,000Cost of demolition per sq m 210 serviced land rental value sr/sq m 3,000Cost of road building per sq m 500

urbanised land sale value sr/sq m 4,000cost of electricty sr/sq m 0 urbanised land rental value sr/sq m 4,000cost of water sr/sq m 0cost of sewers sr/sq m 0 retail sale value sr/sq m 6,000cost of telecoms sr/sq m 0 retail rental value sr/sq m 6,000

office sale value sr/sq m 5,000cost of road surfacing sr/sq m 0 office rental value sr/sq m 5,000cost of pavement sr/sq m 0 private residential sale value sr/sq m 3,500cost of street lighting sr/sq m 0 private residential rental value sr/sq m 3,500cost of land scaping sr/sq m 0 social residential sale value sr/sq m 2,500

social residential rental value sr/sq m 2,500retail building cost 2,000 social infrastructure sale value sr/sq m 0office building cost 3,000 social infrastructure rental value sr/sq m 0private residential building cost sr/sq m 2,500social residential building cost sr/sq m 2,000social infrastructure building cost 2,500

Once we have an outline of the amount of development required, and the land use mix, it is easy to develop a set of design guidelines for massing

Functional components Cost model


Secondary

5% Commercial retail5% Commercial office75% Residential15% Social infrastructure

3.0

70 – 80%

50 – 60%

4 – 5

Secondary


2.0

70 – 80%

50 – 60%

2 - 3

Primary


4.5

80 – 100%

50 – 75%

6 – 7

Primary


5.0

80 – 100%

50 – 75%

7 - 8

Guideline example one (preferred)

Land use distribution

Floor Area Ratio (FAR)

Plot Coverage (ground floor)

Plot Coverage (upper floors)

Building heights

Guideline example two

Land use distribution

Floor Area Ratio (FAR)

Plot Coverage (ground floor)

Plot Coverage (upper floors)

Building heights

Impact

Impact

There are a huge number of potential guideline combinations that satisfy the requirements of the population and financial model but what is the physical impact?

Design guidelines Option testing


Detailed design guidelines developed to create consistent, high quality, safe, and inhabited public realm

Design guidelines Public realm character


At all stages of project, consultation carried out with Residents, Local Municipalities, Omdahs, Developers, JDURC and Municipality

Consultation


Slowing the cycle of decline

If the wider context to the project does not support the levels of investment required to implement changes to reverse the cycle of decline, what can be done to slow it, improve living conditions, and start to create the forces of change?









Design Scenarios









Scenario E

Public lead, community assisted improvement

Design Scenarios


Current problems

What improvements need to be made to improve existing living conditions?

Poor access for vehicles (Cars, Security, Refuse)No Street lightingPoor access to Education facilitiesPerception of crimeNo PavementNo Road SurfaceNo connections to SewersStreets blocked by cars and rubbish (no Parking)Inadequate access to servicesNo access to Water mainsNo Storm Water DrainageNo connections to ElectricityPoor condition and lack of maintenance of buildingsPoor access to Health facilitiesUncollected rubbishPoor quality Public SpacesDifficult to establish local Economic Activity


Analysis and strategic design Principles of design

How can improvements be implemented?

Improvements cannot be implemented across the whole settlement uniformly so a framework for improvement is required.

Route-based improvement of Access, Utilities, Public Realm and Face Lifting

Settlement-wide improvement of access to services and Social Infrastructure

Self-organising regeneration through guidelines and access to micro credit


Define a spatial structure which can be used to analyse existing conditions and implement improvements

Route-based improvements

Access and Public Realm

Access Road WideningParking

Public Realm Road SurfacingStreet LightingPavements

Utilities and Services

Utilities Sewers

Surface DrainageWater Supply

Electricity Supply

Services Regular Refuse CollectionPolice Patrol

Socio-Economic and Social Infrastructure

Social Infrastructure Health Facilities

Hygiene Facilities

Education Facilities

Community Centre

Socio-Economic Micro-CreditMarket Places

Facelifting

Services Remove Abandonned Cars

Public realm Façade maintenancePublic Space


Framework for improvements to Access, Public Realm and Utilities

Route-Based Improvements Access, Utilities and Public Realm


8.0m Section allows access for vehicles, parking, utilities and pedestriansWhere more space is available additional parking or pedestrian space can be added

4.0 - 5.0m traffic

0.75 - 1m pedestrian

0.75 – 1m pedestrian

Upper levelsResidential usesPrivacy provided through screening

Ground floorCommercial uses

First floorResidential usesPrivacy provided through screening

2.0m Tolerance/parking

Route-Based Improvements Access, Utilities and Public Realm


Route-Based Improvements Face Lifting (Valparaiso)


Favela Painting, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Route-Based Improvements Face Lifting


In the immediate term “Face Lifting” can be carried out to improve conditions quickly and cheaply.

This could involve re-painting facades, removing all abandoned vehicles and cleaning up Public Spaces.

Route-Based Improvements Face Lifting


Use existing vacant plots to provide range of public spaces and other facilities based on plot size

Settlement-Wide Improvements Social Infrastructure

1,000 sq m +- Sports ground / public park- School- Community centre- Weekly market

250 – 1,000 sq m- Neighbourhood park- Clinic- Car parking

Less than 250 sq m.:- Local public space- Car parking- Hygiene facilities- Water taps

Identify existing vacant plots and provide social infrastructure


Settlement-Wide Improvements Development allowances

Plot size (sq m) FAR Max Commercial land use Max height

Primary route Plot size < 300 0.0 N/A 1.0301 < Plot size < 625 1.0 100% 3.0625 < Plot size < 900 2.0 50% 4.0901 < Plot size < 2,000 2.5 40% 5.0

2,000 < Plot size < 3,000 3.0 33% 5.03,001 < Plot size < 5,000 2.5 40% 5.05,001 < Plot size 0.5 Case by case assessment 1.0

Secondary route Plot size < 300 0.0 N/A 1.0301 < Plot size < 625 1.0 50% 3.0625 < Plot size < 900 2.0 25% 4.0901 < Plot size < 2,000 2.0 25% 4.0

2,001 < Plot size < 3,000 1.5 33% 3.03,001 < Plot size < 5,000 1.0 50% 3.05,001 < Plot size 0.5 Case by case assessment 1.0

Tertiary route Plot size < 300 0.0 0% additional to existing 1.0301 < Plot size < 625 1.0 0% additional to existing 3.0625 < Plot size < 900 1.3 0% additional to existing 3.0901 < Plot size < 2,000 1.5 0% additional to existing 3.0

2,001 < Plot size < 3,000 1.5 0% additional to existing 3.03,001 < Plot size < 5,000 1.3 0% additional to existing 3.05,001 < Plot size 0.5 0% additional to existing 1.0

Plots do not have to be vacant or affected by access improvements to be redeveloped.

Owners may redevelop plots according to a set of Self-Organising Guidelines based on location and plot size


Route-based improvements to access, utilities, public realm and face lifting

Settlement-wide improvements to social infrastructure

Self-organising regeneration of existing built fabric

Minimum Intervention Improvement Framework


Implementation Flexible programme of Improvements

Some elements of the framework are flexible enough to be delivered early if the budget is availableIf additional budget is available, some items can move forwardIf less budget is available, key improvements can be chosen and the rest shifted back

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Settlement Wide Design Guidelines/Self Organsinig Regeneration

Social Infrastructure



Route Based Project 1

Project 2

Project 3

Project 4

Project 5

Project 6

Project 7

Project 8

Project 9

Project 10

Project 11

Project 12

Project 5

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Settlement Wide Design Guidelines/Self Organsinig Regeneration




Route Based Project 1

Project 2

Project 3

Project 4

Project 5

Project 6

Project 7

Project 8

Project 9

Project 10

Project 11

Project 12

Project 5

Project Access and Public realm Facelifting Grand Total

Land Building Demolition Public Realm Lighting Total Façade Public Space Total

Phase 1

1 8,623 0 0 852,796 104 861,523 80,955 22,502 103,457 964,980

2 176,818 40,395 52,595 646,977 878 917,664 10,320 23,187 33,507 951,171

3 531,575 40,662 52,944 419,800 0 1,044,981 7,645 0 7,645 1,052,626

4 564,341 80,986 105,446 474,462 102 1,225,336 8,700 18,644 27,344 1,252,681

5 1,347,335 505,762 658,516 535,227 0 3,046,839 8,925 2,062 10,987 3,057,826

Phase 2

6 1,912,098 255,333 332,451 387,950 0 2,887,832 7,620 0 7,620 2,895,452

7 1,437,692 200,808 261,458 447,250 282 2,347,490 8,175 0 8,175 2,355,665

8 1,082,239 139,167 181,200 575,365 86 1,978,058 13,305 9,468 22,773 2,000,831

Phase 3

9 1,958,167 152,550 198,624 284,440 157 2,593,937 10,070 655 10,725 2,604,662

10 520,408 61,295 79,808 185,895 444 847,849 6,010 19,978 25,988 873,837

11 0 0 0 149,764 0 149,764 3,115 6,643 9,758 159,522

12 0 0 0 96,000 0 96,000 2,005 0 2,005 98,005

13 0 0 0 53,000 29 53,029 2,040 0 2,040 55,069

All Projects 9,539,295 1,476,959 1,923,042 5,108,925 2,084 18,050,304 168,885 103,138 272,023 18,322,327


Public/PrivateRoute-basedregeneration (Scenario C)







Flexibility of implementation

Scenario hybrid


Thank You!

The 8th Space Syntax SymposiumSantiago de Chile January 2012

Dr. Kayvan Karimi Senior Lecturer - Bartlett, UCL ; Director - Space Syntax LimitedEd Parham Associate Director - Space Syntax Limited

Documents

Dr. Kayvan Karimi, Ed Parham An evidence informed approach to developing an adaptable regeneration programme for declining informal settlements The 8 th