“An approach to explore and outline alternative sustainable urban development pattern for new towns and urban extensions in Saudi Arabia”
Dr. Jayprakash Chadchan Assistant Professor City and Regional Planning Department College of Environmental Design King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, KFUPM Box 1737 Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia E-:
[email protected] and
[email protected]
CONTEXT • Globalization has affected urban land and housing markets of major cities across the globe including MENA region •In MENA region more than US$300 billion is being invested in building urban residential, commercial, tourism, leisure, and entertainment projects. •Rapidly expanding population - Urban share of total population grew from 48% in 1980 to close to 60% in 2000 and is expected to exceed 70% by 2015 (World Bank, 2008). •Cities are in the midst of restructuring space, in terms of both use and form. •Migration of the population from rural hinterlands into urban areas, coupled with large scale immigration of foreign labour. •Poor governance reforms and absence of dynamic private sector. •High cost of land and housing in the formal sector coupled with poor land management.
Map showing MENA region Source : Arab Construction World
•Increase in the ownership of private automobiles and lack of efficient urban public transport systems.
URBAN GROWTH TRENDS IN KSA • Saudi Arabia is one of the most rapidly urbanizing countries in the world in general and MENA region in particular. •Saudi Arabia’s free market economy has undergone remarkable changes in a relatively short period of time. It has evolved from a basic agricultural society into a regional and global economic power with a modern infrastructure. •The current Country’s population is around 29 million and is growing annually at the rate of 2.8 percent. At present, the population residing in urban areas is 82 percent. •As per Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (MMRA) forecast, 88 percent of the Kingdom’s population will be living in urban areas by 2025, exerting severe social, economic and environmental consequences. •The key urban problems witnessed in the major cities of the KSA are: Uncontrolled low density sprawled urban expansion Absence of adequate public urban transport system Poor supply of residential land and shortage of affordable housing units.
Map showing KSA
KEY OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS REFLECTED IN THE NINTH DEVELOPMENT PLAN (2010 -2014) - KSA • Providing
decent and adequate housing for citizens (construction of one million housing units to meet 80% of expected demand for housing).
•Increasing supply of houses and residential lands (Provision of around 266 million square meters of land to establish housing projects expected to be constructed by the public and private sectors). •Providing highly efficient transport services. •Upgrading safety standards in various transport means. •Protecting the environment against emissions of transport means.
•Supporting the process of socio-economic development. •Providing infrastructure and expanding IT applications in both public and private sectors.
URBAN HOUSING SCENARIO IN KSA mismatch between supply and demand has caused a crisis in the Country’s Housing market spurred by rapid population growth, the high cost of land and housing units, increasing urbanization and limited role of private players. •A
•The scarcity of affordable housing is one of the major social problems the country has been facing. •Estimates indicate that, the country needs at least 15000 housing units annually for residential property (AlMunajjed, 2012). On the other hand, there is a serious mismatch between high prices of housing units and lower salaries. •According to Jeddah Municipality estimates, by 2015 the housing shortfall in the Kingdom will be around 2 million.
•Most Saudis live in rented accommodation and it is estimated that only 30 percent of Saudis own their houses. •The most pressing challenges in the provision of affordable housing are inadequate housing finance, socio-cultural factors, access to public transport services and use of “green” building concepts.
URBAN TRANSPORT SCENARIO IN KSA •Despite robust growth of the Saudi economy, developments in the transport sector have not been forthcoming. The poor state of public transport infrastructure is a fall-out of years of neglect. •Easy accessibility to private automobiles and low fuel prices have steadily increased automobile traffic levels leading to rise in congestion and accidents in urban areas. • Statistics indicate that, the average number of accident related fatalities in the Kingdom is about 6,400 cases annually which translates to a daily average of 18 deaths/day. The number of those injured is almost 68,000 annually (Al-Sughair, 2013).
PUBLIC TRANSPORT CHALLENGES IN KSA The deterioration in public transport facilities in Saudi cities can be attributed to various economic, social and regulatory challenges facing the sector. Table below lists key challenges impeding the development of public transport facilities in urban areas. Regulatory Lack of appropriate policies and legislation to regulate services and facilitate shifting demand from private transport modes to public transport.
Economic The low financial attractiveness of the public transport sector deters private investors.
Social Lack of awareness on the benefits of public transport
Differences in priorities of executive and legislative authorities responsible for setting up public transport infrastructure and administering transport services.
Removal of government subsidy to public transport concessionaire.
High preference for privacy (especially for women) in sharing rides makes public transport socially unacceptable.
Absence of special infrastructure provisions for public transport (such as dedicated bus/tram corridors or bus priority at traffic signals), especially in cities with a high density of private vehicles.
Low population densities in the Saudi cities due to horizontal expansion, results in a low load and lower revenue for public transport service.
The social status associated with car ownership.
Failure to incorporate the physical requirements of public transport in Easy accessibility to car ownership in relation to personal initial land-use plans. income, leading to a high ownership rate compared with other countries.
Low fuel prices (fuel is cheaper than bottled water) make operation of private automobiles very affordable.
Source: International Association of Public Transport
KEY FINDINGS : •
Alarming rate of urban population growth.
•
Dispersed and uncontrolled low-density sprawled urban expansion leading to provision of inadequate and costly infrastructure.
•
Alarming rate of loss of scarce productive land for urban expansion.
•
Low density new urban extensions, unviable for public transport.
•
In-efficient public transport has lead to increasing ownership of private motorized vehicles.
•
Increased private motorized vehicles are causing the problems of congestion, traffic safety, and Pollution.
•
Increase in real estate prices.
•
High demand for affordable residential land and housing units.
•
If the present pattern of urban development is allowed to continue with business as usual, is most likely to lead to adverse implications in the near future. In order to reduce, the negative environmental impacts and the depletion of natural resources mainly land and to make available, affordable housing units with efficient public transport accessibility and to make urban environment more livable, it is the need of the hour to explore and adopt an alternative urban development pattern which is sustainable and relevant.
ALTERNATIVE CONTEMPORARY URBAN GROWTH THEORIES AND CONCEPTS :
COMPACT CITY •
Guiding urban development to sustainability.
•
Reduce development costs in providing infrastructure to new development sites as well as transportation costs (Jenks et. al, 1996).
•
Relatively a high-density, mixed-use city, based on an efficient public transport system and dimensions that encourage walking and cycling (Burton, 2000). NEW URBANISM •
Promotes for neighborhoods with open space for civic opportunities, sidewalks and streets based on the grid system, an integrated use of mixed-residential, retail, and office space within walking distance from residential units.
•
Combines elements of the 18th and 19th century American and European towns -- “neighborhood feel where everyone knows your name” with interconnected streets, easy access to transit, and bicycle and pedestrian pathways (Hikichi, 2003).
ALTERNATIVE CONTEMPORARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT THEORIES AND CONCEPTS : SMART GROWTH •
Smart Growth is an alternative to dispersed, automobile dependent development outside existing urban areas, often called sprawl.
•
Smart Growth can provide a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits.
Density Growth pattern Land use mix
Smart Growth Higher-density, clustered activities. Infill (brownfield) development. Mixed land use.
Transport Multi-modal transportation and land use patterns that support walking, cycling and public transit. Street Streets designed to design accommodate a variety of activities. Traffic calming. Planning Planned and process coordinated between jurisdictions and stakeholders. Public Emphasis on the public space realm (streetscapes, pedestrian environment, public parks, public facilities).
Source. Litman (2006), VTPI
Sprawl Lower-density, dispersed activities. Urban periphery (greenf ield) development. Homogeneous singleuse, segregated land uses. Automobile-oriented transportation and land use patterns, poorly suited for walking, cycling and transit. Streets designed to maximize motor vehicle traffic volume and speed. Unplanned, with little coordination between jurisdictions and stakeholders. Emphasis on the private realm (yards, shopping malls, gated communities, private clubs).
Economic
Social
Environmental
Reduced development costs.
Improved transport options and mobility, particularly for non-drivers.
Greenspace & habitat preservation.
Reduced public service costs.
Improved housing options.
Reduced air pollution.
Reduced transportation costs.
Community cohesion.
Increased energy efficiency.
Economies of agglomeration.
Preserves unique cultural resources (Historic sites, traditional neighborhoods, etc.)
Reduced water pollution.
More efficient transportation. Supports industries that depend on high quality environments (Tourism, farming, etc.).
Reduced “heat island” effect.
Increased physical exercise and health.
Source. Burchell, et al, 1998; ICCMA, 1998; Litman, 2006; USEPA, 2004.
MATRIX SHOWING COMPARISON BETWEEN CONTEMPORARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT THEORIES Theories
Smart growth New urbanism Compact city
Attributes / Characteristics Mixed use
√
√
√
Compactness
√
√
√
Pedestrian/ Bicycle friendly environment
√
√
√
Public Transport / Transit oriented
√
√
√
Easy Accessibility / Walkable Neighborhood
√
√
√
Compact Spatial / Building Design
√
√
√
Affordable Housing choices
√
√
Sense of place / community
√
√
High Density Development
√
√
Preserving Farmland
√
√
Reduction in Infrastructure Development
√
√
Development
costs Community / stakeholder collaboration in
√
development decisions Connectivity / Grid Network
√
Conservation of Natural / Built Environment
√
SPREAD DEVELOPMENT Vs COMPACT DEVELOPMENT a. Spread (Sixteen units)
b. Linear, Compact form (Sixteen units)
Accessibility of land uses and infrastructure increases and costs of services reduces with compact development
c. Spread (Twenty Five units)
d. Twenty five units compactly arranged
COMPARISON BETWEEN SPRAWL-TYPE DEVELOPMENT AND COMPACT, TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, RELATED TO URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE ASPECTS Sl. No
INFRASTRUCTURE
COMPONENT ASPECT
SPRAWL-TYPE (as existing)
COMPACT TOD (as proposed)
1
Energy
2
Water Supply
3
Drainage
4
Sewerage
5
Solid Waste Management
6
Communication
7
Transport
8
Social - Educational
Social – Medical
10
Social- Cultural, Recreational &Others
Less More More Low High on long term More More More Low More on long term More More More Low More Same More More Low More Same More More Low More Same More More Low More Less More Limited Low More Accessible Needs transport Needs transport Needs transport Often accessible Needs transport Needs transport Low Accessible Needs transport Often inaccessible Often in accessible needs transport
More Less Less High High on short term Less Less Less High Less on long term Less Less Less High Less Same Less Less High Less Same Less Less High Less Better Less Less High Less More Less Diverse High Less At walking distance Walk/cycling At cycling distance By public transport
9
Building energy needs Street energy needs Transport energy needs Sustainability potential Cost Quantity required Area to be covered Network required Sustainability potential Cost Quantity to be drained Area to be covered Network required Sustainability potential Cost Quantity to be treated Area to be covered Network required Sustainability potential Cost Quantity to be managed Area to be covered Network required Sustainability potential Cost Service quality Area to be covered Network required Sustainability potential Cost Use of public transport Use of private transport Choice of transport Sustainability potential Cost Primary School High School College University Clinic/ Dispensary Specialized medical aid Sustainability potential Neighborhood shopping City level shopping Parks Recreational facilities Cultural/community places
At walking distance Local transport By public transport High Walk able public transport public transport Accessible/public transport
INFERENCES AND APPLICATION POTENTIAL
•
Considering present rapid growth of urban development ,it is need of the hour to rethink about the sustainability of the existing development pattern and equate it with the available scarce natural resources mainly land.
•
Required to understand the complex phenomenon of urban development and its strong linkages with urban sub-sectors mainly housing, transportation and other infrastructure services.
•
Theories are being applied successfully at different scales of planning and development mainly in revitalizing the old congested city areas as well as preserving productive arable land and other resources at regional level, in American and European cities.
•
Theories are not just theoretical utopia, but workable ideas of alternative patterns of urban development which have evolved in response to the increasing need for a resourceconserving, sustainable, and people-centric city ensuring high quality of urban life.
•
Saudi Arabia has the potential to adopt and execute few of the above discussed principles and growth theories in an integrated manner with little modifications to suit to the local context.
CONCLUSION The appropriate and sustainable pattern of urban development for the major cities would include necessarily the following: ( For urban extensions of existing cities and new towns) 1. Compact, high density, sustainable, mixed land use development in terms of walk able, bicycle – oriented and anthropo-centric communities which are safe, secure and universally accessible. 2. Availability of housing choices which are affordable and easily accessible to all sections of the society. 3. High capacity, high speed, multi-modal and multi-level transport corridors connecting the communities. 4. Use of diverse modes of slow and medium speed transport within communities including walking, cycling, and other environment friendly para- transports. 5. Conservation of arable/coastal land by containing urban expansion. 6. Creating and maintaining aesthetically appealing, functionally efficient and healthy environment. ( In case of redevelopment within the metro cities) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Densification along the existing corridor development by way of increasing Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Bringing waste and unused public and private land within the city for re- development. Integration of land use and transport. Encouraging Mixed land use development. Replacing old dilapidated buildings with new-high rise group housing complexes. Developing transport infrastructure facilities above and beneath the ground surface.
REFERENCES 1. AL-Sughair, S. (2013). Expert alarmed at ‘dangerous’ rise in number of traffic accident victims, Arab News, Dec. 11, 2013. 2. AlMunajjed, M. S. (2012). Affordable housing a GCC priority, Arab News, Oct. 6, 2012. 3. Burchell, et al., (1998). The Costs of Sprawl – Revisited, TCRP Report 39, Transportation Research Board, (www.trb.org), Washington, D.C. 4. Burton E. (2000). ‘The Compact City: Just or just compact? A preliminary analysis’ Urban Studies, 37(11): 1969-2007. 5. Hikichi, Lynda (2003). New Urbanism and Transportation, University of Wisconsin. 6. ICCMA (1998). Why Smart Growth: A Primer, International City/County Management Association, Smart Growth Network and USEPA. Available from: www.epa.gov/smartgrowth. 7. Jenks, M., Burton, E. and Williams, K. (1996). “Compact Cities and Sustainability: An Introduction”, in Jenks, M., Burton, E., and Williams, K. (eds.), The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? London: E &FN Spon, pp. 11-12. 8. Litman, T. (2006). Evaluating Transportation Land use Impacts, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (VTPI), Canada. 9. Ninth Development Plan (2010-2014), Ministry of Economy & Planning, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 10. USEPA (2004). Characteristics and Performance of Regional Transportation Systems, Smart Growth Program, US Environmental Protection Agency. Available from www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/performance2004final.pdf. 11. World Bank (2008). Urban Development in Middle East and North Africa Region.
THANK YOU
