Resultados y evaluación

Provision of the Abuja Master Plan as it relates to Transit Infrastructure and Development along its Corridor

The Abuja master plan was prepared in 1979 by IPA with a follow up Transportation Plan by Sofretu Amana Osot of France prepared in 1981. The provisions for transit infrastructure included LRT network running through the spine of the city. This included planned residential and employment areas especially in the transit hubs in the city, sectors and some district centres as illustrated in figures 1 and 2.

Source: Adapted from The Abuja Master Plan, p. 70, FCDA, 1979.

Figure 1: The Abuja Mater Plan showing the pathway of the Transit way

Source: FCDA/Sofretu, Amana, Osot, 1981.

Figure 2: Abuja Transportation Master Plan showing Transit Network within the Core-City (FCC)

been commissioned and to-date (2014) progress of work is about 30% to completion. Within this period (1979 – to date), development along these proposed transit corridors have been characterised by low density residential developments which is unlikely to support the optimal operation of the LRT when completed.

The Sequence of Transit Infrastructure and Developments along its Corridor

As described above, with the LRT infrastructure remaining largely unimplemented, and with the housing developments along these corridors being predominantly low density, the sequence of transit infrastructure development proposed by the Master Plan has been altered. In comparison, this situation is consistent with the findings in the studies by Calthorpe (1993), Cervero and Murakami (2008 p. 23) and Cervero (1998) which argue for the development of transit ahead of other landuse (residential) developments, the challenges of inappropriate sequencing in Abuja is therefore evident.

Physical Observation of the character of existing Development along the Transit Corridor

In line with the proposition of the LRT network proposed by the Abuja Metropolitan Concept Plan (See Figure 3), the LRT network and the stations located along its corridors form the basis for the selection of the station used as the case study.

Source: FCDA/Albert Speers and Partners, 2008. Figure 3: FCT-Abuja Metropolitan Public Transport Concept

Figure 3 shows the network of the LRT system and the 12 stations proposed along its corridor. Figure 4 shows the satellite imageries of the spatial character of developments within the half- mile sphere of influence of the LRT station in Garki II District. The physical character of existing housing developments along the corridor of the LRT was captured during a physical survey and presented in Figures 5 and 6.

Source: Google Earth, 2014.

Figure 4: Satellite Imagery of Garki II District, Abuja

Source: Authors’ Field Survey, 2014.Source: Authors’ Field Survey, 2014.

Figure 5 and 6: An example of the character of development within the sphere of influence of the LRT station within Garki II District, Abuja

Figure 5 and 6 shows the predominance of single dwelling units along these corridors with some dotted multiple dwelling units. This therefore, depicts the character of housing-density along the transit corridor.

Spatial Analysis of the Comparison of existing Density and prescribed Density of Development along the Transit Corridor (Especially LRT)

The comparative analysis of existing and proposed development density along the transit corridor is made in this section. This is based on the spatial analysis of the satellite imageries for one of the selected proposed LRT station located in Garki II District and the physical

Source: Authors’ Analysis (2014).

Figure 7: Satellite imagery of the LRT station showing its sphere of influence and the spatial character of development around it.

Analysis of these imageries and physical observation shows the predominance of single dwelling units along these corridors with some dotted multiple dwelling units. The density analysis shows an average of 17.77 dwelling units per hectare. The density specification along an LRT station according to the studies of Pushkarev and Zopan (1977), Dittmar and Ohland (2007), Guerra and Cervero (2011) is put at 36.08 dwelling units per hectare. The comparison of these density levels is reported in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Comparison between existing and prescribed density levels around transit stations

Size in radius (m) Land Area (Ha) Existing density around transit station Prescribed density

within TOD _Savings

realizable from each zone (Dwellings) Savings realizable from each zonec (Land Area in Ha) Prescription on Densitiesa (Dwellings Per Ha) Number of Dwellings realizable from each zone Prescriptions on Densitiesb (Dwellings Per Ha) Number of Dwellings realizable from each zone 400m 50.272 17.77 893 36.08 1814 921 51.83

Source: Authors’ Analysis, (2014). Notes:

a _{Sourced from the Abuja Development Control Manual and Physical Observation}

b _{Sourced from Synthesis of TOD Standards (Pushkarev and Zopan, 1977, Ditmmar and Ohland, 2007)}

c _{This is obtained by dividing the value of the savings realizable from each zone (dwellings) in column number 8 by}

the corresponding value of prescription on densities (dwelling per hectare) in the exiting situation as stated in column number 3.

Findings from Table 1 above show that within the 400m radius (quarter of a mile) of the intense zone of the sphere of influence of an LRT station, there exists a gap between the existing and

prescribed density levels. The gap represents the deficit in the existing level of density and indicates a shortfall in the level of density required around a transit station. In percentage terms, the existing density level would need to be leveraged by 103.51% to achieve the required prescribed density levels.

Interview Data from Relevant Practitioners

In order to provide corroborative evidences to the identified challenges of sequencing that appear to inhibit optimal outcomes from the implementation of the Abuja Master Plan and the need for reforms, relevant practitioners were interviewed in order to gain insight into their opinions on this matter.

Some of the questions asked included; whether the practitioners agree that the sequencing of the development of transit infrastructure and housing development along the transit corridors is uncoordinated; and whether they can attribute the situation to the adoption of the Master Plan approach for Abuja. An additional question was what areas of reforms are required to overcome the challenge? The findings are discussed in the following section.

5.5.1. Uncoordinated Sequencing of the Development of transit infrastructure

Analyses of the opinion of the respondents from the interview sessions indicated consensus (86%) of opinion on the uncoordinated sequencing of the development of transit infrastructure along the corridors of the LRT in Abuja. The narratives in terms of the challenges of sequencing of development resulting from the interviews with practitioners were polarized along two lines. On the one hand, practitioners in the government establishments appear defensive of the Master Plan approach, and opined that the plan and its approach was flawless; and that the challenge of the plan is only attributed to the shortage of finance and political interference in the implementation of the Master Plan. On the other hand, practitioners in the private consulting firms and the academia opined that the application of the Master Plan approach has long outlived its usefulness in the face of the complex dynamics that face global south cities which include rapid urban population growth and the related impacts of increasing demand for mobility and housing. They opined that challenges implicit to the Master Plan approach are far beyond the challenges of sequencing of infrastructure development but also ramify wider implications of its static and rigid features.

Further, the disposition of the practitioners in the government establishments charged with the task of shaping cities indicate that these practitioners appear stuck with the Master Plan approach and do not see the need for a shift in the current approach. This finding is consistent with the studies by UNHSP (2009) which posits that notwithstanding the complexity and dynamics of the challenges facing global south cities, majority of these cities have remained stuck to, and continue to be guided by the vestiges of the Modernist Planning Paradigm and its Master Plan approach. It may therefore be safe to posit that reforms are required in order to shift these global south cities from the 20th _{century urban planning approach, towards a pathway}

that recognizes the complexities and dynamics of 21st _{century challenges and able to yield}

optimal urban planning outcomes.

relevant practitioners on how and what is required to achieve the required reforms is illustrated in the tree map below in figure 9.

Source: Authors’ Analysis (2014).

Figure 9: Factors needed to achieve Reforms to the existing Master Plan approach

Evidently, the themes on the required solutions and reforms emerging from the opinions of the practitioners include need for a new strategic urban planning approach, enabling legislations, sectoral integration, stakeholder engagements, Political will, capacity building, and stakeholder engagement. While it is important to learn from global experiences on best practices to reforming the urban planning system, it may be appropriate to recognize these themes emerging from the opinions of the practitioners as important component of the reform, as these will make the resulting urban planning approach to be context-specific and home-grown to recognize the peculiarities of the city in question and produce optimal outcomes.