Abel Hayat - Condominiums Open Space

UNITY UNIVERSITY
College of Engineering, Technology and Computational Science

Department of Architecture and Urban Planning
B.Sc. Thesis Arch 6271
CONDOMINIUM’S OPEN SPACES

The spatial assesment of condominium public open spaces.
The case of Arat kilo (Basha Wolde Chilot) condominium, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
In Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Bachelor Degree of Science in Architecture

and Urban Planning in Unity University
Abel Hayat, UU68720R
Advisor: Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik
March 2022 G.C.

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Declaration
I declare that, this thesis prepared for the partial fulfillment of all the requirements for the degree of Bachelor
of Science in Architecture and Urban Planning entitled “CONDOMINIUM’S OPEN SPACES” is My original
research work prepared in an effort with the close advice and guidance of my adviser. I also declare that
this thesis has not been presented in any university and all sources that I have used or quoted have been
indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references.
Abel Hayat Signature Date

UU 68720R ___________________ March 2022
Certification
Here with I state that Abel Hayat has carried out this research work on the topic entitled “CONDOMINIUM’S
OPEN SPACES” under my supervision and it is sufficient for the partial fulfillment for the award of BSc degree
in Architecture and Urban Planning.
Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik

Signature: _____________________
Date: _________________________
Approved by board of examiners
Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik _________________ _______________

Dean/ Internal Examiner Signature Date
Mr.________________ _________________ _______________

Advisor/ Internal Examiner Signature Date
i
Acknowledgement
First and foremost, praise and thanks to God for His constant blessings throughout my Architectural and
Urban Planning studies, for completing the requirements for the Bachelor of Science in Architecture and
Urban Planning at Unity University, for assisting me in the preparation of this research paper, and for the
knowledge and strength he has provided me throughout my life.
I'd like to express my gratitude to Unity University, particularly the Department of Architecture and Urban
Planning, for providing me with the opportunity to complete my BSc degree in Architecture and Urban
Planning, as well as everyone involved, and for providing me with the opportunity to gain more experience
and knowledge about the theatrical as well as practical work of Architecture and the construction sector.
I'd like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik, the Dean of Unity University's Architecture
and Urban Planning Department, as well as our dearest instructor and advisor, for providing us with a source
of knowledge, support, and guidance, as well as giving us the opportunity and space to be expressive and
confident architects with his mentor.
I am grateful to everyone with whom I have had the privilege of working and studying along my road to
become a professional architect. Each member of the Architectural department, as well as my fellow friends,
colleagues, and acquaintances, has provided me with significant personal and professional assistance and
has taught me a lot about both designs and the life element of Architectural in the corporate world and in
general.
Finally, I want to express my gratitude to all of my friends and colleagues who have helped me finish the
Internship program, whether directly or indirectly.
I'd want to express my gratitude to my mentors, professors, fellow students, co-workers, and everyone else
who helped me finish my thesis paper and obtain my Architectural and Urban Planning degree.
Abel Hayat
March 2022
ii
Abstract
In the current planning business, communities are becoming fundamental planning units, and there
is a strong desire and propensity in the planning process to make them lively, safe, and beautiful places to
live. The design and maintenance of public open spaces in neighbourhoods is given a higher priority in this
achievement. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia's capital and Africa's diplomatic centre, is constructing new
neighbourhoods primarily through the city's grand housing initiative. In the context of the city's present open
space crisis, these new neighbourhoods are a noteworthy achievement. However, in the development arena,
it must be reviewed and evaluated in terms of physical sustainability.
The study's overall goal is to evaluate and appraise the long-term viability of open spaces in Addis Ababa's
new condominium neighbourhoods. The research is primarily concerned with their physical sustainability,
which is one of three dimensions of sustainable human settlement development: environmental/physical,
social, and economic. Thus, using the Arat Kilo (Basha Wolde Chilot) Condominium which is one of the
projects in Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP) in Addis Ababa as a case study site, the study
assesses and examines the sustainability of open spaces in these condominium communities in Addis Ababa,
with an emphasis on their spatial dimension.
This research paper aims to investigate how residents use communal open spaces by investigating the
activities that are taking place and the level of their involvement in terms of using these spaces, as well as
investigating and analysing the cause-and-effect relationship between the activities and the physical
characteristics of existing open spaces, and identifying the challenges that residents face in their day-to-day
activities as a result of the current communal open spaces.
Qualitative analysis is used to examine the usage of existing communal open spaces, to understand the
relationship between the physical setting of open spaces and the activities, and to investigate communal
open space-related challenges on the day-to-day activities of the residents, using data collected through
interviews, questionnaires, and long-term observations of the physical setting and daily activities conducted
in the study area.
The findings show that, despite the availability of communal open spaces, residents' attitudes and motivations
to use and improve the space through physical changes and maintenance were negatively affected when
physical attributes of the area were investigated, such as adequacy of spaces, type of enclosure, location,
accessibility, and overall physical quality (attractiveness), were unsatisfactory, affecting social and user-
environment interaction. Apart from the physical characteristics of the open space, the current varied
activities are also significant variables that influence inhabitants' use of the area. The current community
open space-related difficulties, on the other hand, are shown to be the outcome of the combined influence
of physical qualities and existing activities. Finally, the study suggests that, based on its results, organizations
involved in the development of communally owned residential neighbourhoods conduct in-depth
observations to address the need for and spatial aspect of communal open space during the design and
implementation stages. The research also suggests post-occupancy resolutions to enhance the state of the
study area's community open spaces.
Keywords: Condominiums, open spaces, activities, communal, sustainability
iii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................................................ ii
Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................. iii
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................. iv
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................... vii
Chapter One .................................................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction and R esearch Design .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Backgrounds and Context Review................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Objectives......................................................................................................................... 3
1.3.1 General Objective .................................................................................................................... 3
1.3.2 Specific Objective ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Research Question ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Scope of the Study ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.5.1 Thematic Scope.............................................................................................................................. 3
1.5.2 Spatial Scope.................................................................................................................................. 3
1.5.3 Temporal Scope ............................................................................................................................. 3
1.6 Significant of the Study ................................................................................................................... 3
1.7 Organization of the Paper and research design........................................................................ 4
1.8 Research Methodology .................................................................................................................... 5
1.8.1 Research method choice ......................................................................................................... 5
1.8.2 Research approach .................................................................................................................. 5
1.8.3 Selection of Case Study area ................................................................................................. 6
1.8.4 Source of data and collection methods ............................................................................... 6
1.8.5 Method of Data Analysis......................................................................................................... 7
Chapter Tw o ................................................................................................................................................ 8
2. R EVIEW OF R ELATED LITER ATUR E .................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Open Space: A Basic Definition .................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Types of open spaces ...................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Open Space Development in Communal Residential Areas ................................................... 9
2.3.1 Benefits of Open Space in Residential Area ................................................................................ 9
2.3.2 The spatial challenges of Open Spaces ...................................................................................... 11
2.4 Sustainable development ............................................................................................................. 11
iv
2.5 Spatial Sustainability ..................................................................................................................... 11
2.5.1 Space.......................................................................................................................................... 12
2.5.2 Place .......................................................................................................................................... 12
2.6 Activities on Open Space and the Role of the Physical Environment .................................. 13
2.7 Key Characteristics of Successful Open Spaces ....................................................................... 16
2.7.1. Area of Open Space ................................................................................................................. 17
2.7.2. Open Space Accessibility ......................................................................................................... 17
2.7.3. Open Space Location ............................................................................................................... 17
2.7.4. Open Space user’s safety ......................................................................................................... 17
2.7.5. Open Space Appeal ................................................................................................................. 17
2.7.6. Open Spaces’ Functionality...................................................................................................... 17
2.7.7. Open Space Enclosure ............................................................................................................. 17
2.8 Community Open Spaces Performance Assessment .............................................................. 18
2.9 Designing Neighbourhood Open Space ................................................................................... 19
2.9.1 Open space and Density .......................................................................................................... 19
2.9.2 Open space and Standards ..................................................................................................... 20
2.10 International Case Study .......................................................................................................... 22
2.11 The Literature Review's Summary ........................................................................................... 29
Chapter Three ............................................................................................................................................... 30
3 CASE STUDY ........................................................................................................................................... 30
3.1 Contextual Background................................................................................................................. 30
3.2 Housing development policy in Ethiopia ................................................................................... 31
3.2.1 Housing condition in Addis Ababa .......................................................................................... 32
3.2.2 Actors involved on condominium Housing Development ....................................................... 33
3.2.3 Neighbourhood Open Space Provision Standards ................................................................. 33
3.2.4 Provision of Open Space and Density ..................................................................................... 35
3.2.5 Framework for Institutions......................................................................................................... 36
3.3 Case study (Arat Kilo) .................................................................................................................... 37
3.3.1 General Description about Basha Wolde Chilot Condominium Neighbourhood .... 38
3.3.2 The study Area – General Description ............................................................................... 38
3.3.3 Communal Open Spaces Management and Administration ........................................ 40
3.3.4 Uses of Communal Open Spaces in the study area ....................................................... 41
3.3.5 Activities in Communal Open Spaces Interfere ............................................................... 50
3.3.6 The Physical Environment and Activities ............................................................................ 51
Chapter Four ................................................................................................................................................. 57
v
4 Findings and Discussion .................................................................................................................... 57
4.1 Summary findings of the case study ........................................................................................... 57
4.2 Communal Open Spaces' Challenges ....................................................................................... 59
Chapter Fiv e .................................................................................................................................................. 61
5 R ecommendation ................................................................................................................................ 61
5.1 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................... 61
5.1.1 Planning & Implementation in the Pre-Occupancy Stage ......................................................... 61
5.1.2 Usage & Management System in the Post-Occupancy Stage ................................................... 63
References......................................................................................................................................................... 64
Appendix ........................................................................................................................................................ 66
Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 66
Appendix 2 .................................................................................................................................................. 66
Appendix 3 .................................................................................................................................................. 66
vi
List of Figures
FIGURE 1 RESEARCH DESIGN STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................................ 4
FIGURE 2 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................................................ 5
FIGURE 3 METHOD OF DATA TRIANGULATION .................................................................................................................................. 7
FIGURE 4 CONSTRUCTION OF A PLACE (MONTGOMERY 1998) ......................................................................................................... 13
FIGURE 5 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ACTIVITIES AND QUALITY OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT (GEHL J. 1987) ........................................... 14
FIGURE 6 HYPOTHESISED MODEL, QUALITY NEIGHBOURHOOD PARK ................................................................................................... 15
FIGURE 7 AN EXPANDED THEORIZED MODEL FOR IDENTIFYING HIGH-QUALITY GREEN SPACE IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD; ABDUL MALEK (2009) . 15
FIGURE 8 FOUR KEY QUALITIES OF PUBLIC SPACE (PPS) (2016) ...................................................................................................... 16
FIGURE 9 S*PARK PROJECT.................................................................................................................................................... 22
FIGURE 10 S*PARK PROJECT GREENHOUSE .............................................................................................................................. 23
FIGURE 11 XS*PARK PROJECT PLANS ..................................................................................................................................... 24
FIGURE 12 S*PARK PROJECT PARKING ..................................................................................................................................... 25
FIGURE 13 S*PARK PROJECT STORM WATER APPLICATION ........................................................................................................... 26
FIGURE 14 S*PARK PROJECT STORM WATER SYSTEM .................................................................................................................. 27
FIGURE 15S*PARK PROJECT AESTHETIC APPROACH ................................................................................................................... 28
FIGURE 16 ARA KILO - AERIAL GOOGLE IMAGE ............................................................................................................................. 37
FIGURE 17 BASHA WOLDE CHILOT CONDOMINIUM - ARAT KILO, ADDIS ABABA................................................................................... 37
FIGURE 18 ALLOCATION MAP - BASHA WOLDE CHILOT CONDOMINIUM - ARAT KILO, ADDIS ABABA ........................................................ 38
FIGURE 19 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE STUDY AREA ..................................................................................................................... 39
FIGURE 20 STUDY AREA OPEN SPACES ALLOCATION ........................................................................................................................ 39
FIGURE 21 SELECTED INTERVIEWS FROM FEW BLOCKS OF THE STUDY AREA .......................................................................................... 41
FIGURE 22 SURROUNDING AREA OF ATO, TEFERA GETACHEW OPEN SPACES - DUMPED SOILS UNPLANNED LANDSCAPE ................................ 43
FIGURE 23 ACTIVITIES AND OPEN SPACE CONDITION ....................................................................................................................... 43
FIGURE 24 PRESERVED AREA FOR GREENERY ONLY - ACTIVITIES CONDUCTING ON THE CIRCULATION AREA .................................................. 43
FIGURE 25 PARKING ON PAVEMENT -UNUTILIZED LANDSCAPE ........................................................................................................... 44
FIGURE 27 DIFFICULT ACCESS UNPROPER DESIGN ........................................................................................................................... 45
FIGURE 28 NEGATIVE SPACES LEFT AND UTILIZED AND UNMAINTAINED - HIGH STAIRS ............................................................................ 47
FIGURE 29 INTERFERENCE OF DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES IN ONE PLACE. .................................................................................................... 47
FIGURE 31 INTERFERENCE OF ACTIVITIES/ POOR LANDSCAPING - UNITIZED SPACES ................................................................................ 49
FIGURE 32 ACTIVITIES NEAR THE BLOCK - NEGATIVE SPACE LEFT TO DETERIORATE .................................................................................. 49
FIGURE 34 INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES IN OPEN SPACES .................................................................................................................... 51
FIGURE 35 ENCLOSED OPEN SPACES ............................................................................................................................................ 53
FIGURE 36 PARTIALLY ENCLOSED OPEN SPACES .............................................................................................................................. 54
FIGURE 37 OPEN SPACE ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ............................................................................................................................... 55
List of Tables
TABLE 1 COMPONENTS OF SENSE OF PLACE ................................................................................................................................... 14
TABLE 2 SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE PROJECT (FOUNDATION, 2013) ...................................................... 18
TABLE 3 PRACTICE FEATURES OF OPEN SPACE ................................................................................................................................. 21
TABLE 4 PLANNED CONDOMINIUM HOUSING UNITS CONSTRUCTION, 2006-2010 - DOLICHO, E. (2006) CITED IN UN-HABITAT (2010)... 32
TABLE 5 NEIGHBOURHOOD OPEN SPACE STANDARD - ADDIS ABABA NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL, (2006) ................. 35
TABLE 6 PROPOSED POPULATION DENSITY OF ADDIS ABABA - ORAAMP, (2002) ............................................................................... 36
TABLE 7 AREA PER HOUSEHOLD STANDARDS IN CORE, INTERMEDIATE AND EXPANSION AREAS ................................................................. 36
TABLE 8 INTERFERENCE OF ACTIVITIES AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS ................................................................................................... 50
TABLE 9 THE INFLUENCE OF ACTIVITIES ON GREEN AREAS.................................................................................................................. 51
TABLE 10 ACTIVITIES ON ENCLOSED OPEN SPACE ............................................................................................................................ 53
TABLE 11 ACTIVITIES ON PARTIALLY-ENCLOSED OPEN SPACE ............................................................................................................. 54
TABLE 12 THE EFFECT OF CHARACTERISTICS AND QUALITY OF THE OPEN SPACE ..................................................................................... 56
vii
Chapter One
1. Introduction and R esearch Design

1.1 Backgrounds and Context Review
Inadequacy of land is a widespread concern in today's cities all around the world. Because cities are
the most desirable location for commercial and business operations, competition for property within cities is
increasing. Even for middle-income families, a piece of residential plot land had become costly. As a result,
high-rise flats and condominiums (UN-HABITAT, 2010) become a superior alternative for housing a big
number of people on a limited piece of land. (Doebele, 1987)
Addis Ababa, which is considered one of the country's fastest-growing cities, is having the same problem.
Since its founding more than 130 years ago, the city has witnessed significant urbanization. Land scarcity
has become a common problem in the city as a result of rapid urbanization, causing a dramatic increase
in the price of land per square meter, putting significant pressure on the local government to provide land
for industrial development and infrastructure, as well as housing for the growing urban population.
In response to the housing shortage in the city of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, new condominiums have been
created on a large scale, and the government is developing many more under the Integrated Housing
Development Program (IHDP). In addition to providing housing, the development concept also includes
social amenities such as communal open spaces and community structures. Although the focus of the
program is on providing a large number of housing units for residents, community facilities such as shared
open spaces and community structures are also important components of the development.
Since the program’s launch in 2005, it targeted low-income people until a 40/60 program for middle-
income people was created in mid-2013. The condominiums were built at the lowest possible cost to make
them affordable for the target group. One method of reducing costs is to reduce the area of each type to
the smallest minimum practicable standard. As a result, residents are expected to use the outdoor areas for
a variety of activities, which makes public open spaces an essential part of the development program, as
communal open spaces are the only way for residents to exercise outdoors.
Open spaces are an important concern in the overall viability framework that must be addressed. Open
spaces play a variety of roles in developing the sustainability of a community. They help mitigate climate
change, improve local air quality, promote biodiversity, spur economic development (primarily through site
enhancement), promote urban regeneration, strengthen social inclusion, serve as a platform for
environmental education, promote individual and community health, provide a place for relaxation and for
children to play, and so on. (Cemil, 2012)
The community benefits from a wide range of services provided by open spaces. It provides air and water
purification, wind and noise filtering, and microclimate stabilization as an environmental service. It
encourages inhabitants to use outside space in the social service dimension, which enhances social cohesion
among neighbors. In terms of economic benefit, open space decreases the cost of pollution control by
serving as a natural air cleaner, promotes cities as tourist destinations, and raises the value of a real estate
in a given region. (Gedikil, 2004)
Open spaces are, in general, the most important components in the development of city quality of life. They
are also crucial in the process of long-term urban development. Every city's physical planning should try to
create high-quality, possibly sustainable open spaces, sometimes using unconventional methods.
1
When seen in the context of the city's physical state, the open spaces given in Addis Ababa's new
condominium neighborhoods might be considered a noteworthy achievement. However, in order for them
to be considered part of the city's long-term development, they must be evaluated from a long-term
perspective. Therefore, assessing the current condition of community open spaces in established
condominium neighborhoods is an important first step in improving current circumstances and creating
livable environments in future projects.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
As a consequence of the government's vast production of houses, particularly in the city's outskirt
districts, the number of people living in condominium neighbourhoods is expanding from time to time. So
far, the residences have mostly been occupied by lottery winners who have registered for the scheme.
However, as part of the inner city's infrastructure building, land-use modification, and
redevelopment program, many people residing on private plots of land and government houses (Kebele
houses) are being transferred to newly created condominium communities.
Many open and green areas are utilized for festivals, children's playgrounds, and other social events at the
local or small neighbourhood level. These aren't yet designed or planned locations. Some are unmanaged
spaces between residential housing units, while others are designated as urban open spaces.
In many of the condominium neighbourhoods constructed under IHDP, open spaces are included into the
neighbourhood design with the goal of serving as common open spaces where residents may engage in
any outdoor activity. The proportion of available open space relative to built-up area, on the other hand,
varies depending on the location of the neighbourhood.
As we know, Addis Ababa residents are a diverse group of people from all parts of the country, each with
their own culture and traditions that require a proper living environment, both indoors and out. Residents of
newly constructed condominiums are therefore undergoing a significant transformation: They no longer live
close to the ground, but in a multi-story building where every outdoor space is used by the local community.
However, the built environment of already constructed condominium complexes is poorly adapted to the
changing lifestyles and needs of residents.
The shared open space is the sole place where residents of the condominium neighbourhood can engage
in any outside activities. As a consequence, different activities occur on the available open space as a result
of the requirements of the people, independent of the friendliness or inhospitality of the physical qualities of
the existing open spaces or the other activities occurring in the area. As a result, they may find living in
condominium complexes, where every outdoor space is shared and communally owned, to be a difficult or
unpleasant experience. As a result, examining the present experience with community open space, which
has a considerable impact on the day-to-day activities of condominium neighbourhood residents, is critical
for understanding the current situation and determining how to improve the living environment in the future.
To generalize, a fundamental component of the residential environment, communal open spaces in

condominiums play an important role in influencing residents' outdoor activities. However, these open
spaces are neither built nor planned. Some are omitted areas between housing units, while those designated
as urban open spaces are poorly maintained. Therefore, examining the current spatial experience of
community open spaces, which have a significant impact on the daily activities of residents in a
neighbourhood, is critical to understanding the current situation and deciding how to improve and sustain
the living environment in the future.
2
1.3 Research Objectives
1.3.1 General Objective
The main objective of the study is to gain a better knowledge of how condominium’s community open
spaces work and the interplay between the environment's physical attributes and the activities; as well as to
look at the long-term viability of open spaces, with an emphasis on their spatial dimension.
1.3.2 Specific Objective

The specific objectives of the study are:
o To determine how tenants in condominium houses use shared open areas.

o To look into the relationship between the physical aspects of the open space and the activities that
take place there.
o To identify the inhabitants' current communal open space-related problems.
o To look at viable solutions for communal open space-related issues at various stages of house
development and post-occupancy.
1.4 Research Question

This research paper will try to answer these questions:
o What are the functions of community open areas in a condominium neighborhood?

o What are the spatial issues associated with community open space that impact the activities of
residents?
o What are suitable and sustainable approaches to overcome the existing spatial challenges of
condominium's communal open spaces?
1.5 Scope of the Study

1.5.1 Thematic Scope
The research's thematic scope is to investigate communal open spaces concerning the activities taking place,
as well as the impact of physical characteristics of the open spaces on the adequacy of the area for residents'
needs, accessibility for multiple activities, location, enclosure type, and physical quality of the space in terms
of user preference. In addition, the study evaluates if there are any connected problems for residents in
utilizing accessible common open spaces, as well as viable ways to improve the community's current
environment.
1.5.2 Spatial Scope

The research is confined to Addis Ababa's geographic bounds and focuses on open spaces in condominium
neighborhoods. For the spatial scope of the case study, the 4-kilo condominium neighborhood open spaces
are drawn with this aim. The 4kilo site one of the prototype projects of the Addis Ababa municipal
administration that kicks off the city's Grand Housing initiative.
1.5.3 Temporal Scope

The Research Temporal scope is set is set to be accomplished within 3 months; from November
20221 up to February 2022.
1.6 Significant of the Study

According to the Addis Ababa neighborhood planning and design manual, providing communal open
spaces is also a part of Integrated Housing Development Programs (IHDP), which aims to encourage the
previous living qualities at a certain level, such as common green spaces for children's play areas and other
activities such as meetings, Iddir6, and holiday celebrations for people of all ages. However, the current
state of previously constructed places indicates that common open spaces require additional renovation. As
3
a result, this research will focus on the most important concerns in comprehending current conditions and
communal open space-related challenges in condominium communities.
Because the quality of the surrounding environment is a good predictor of the quality of life in residential
areas, creating a livable open space implies raising the community's living standards. As a result, the
research will play an important role in determining the performance of community open space in the
examined region, which is important for all IHDP shareholders. Furthermore, the study will be used as a
resource by the entity in charge of preparing condominium neighborhood plans in terms of providing usable
open space. In addition, the research will provide some ideas for local citizens and administration on how
to improve the current situation and create a more accepting atmosphere.
1.7 Organization of the Paper and research design

The research paper is divided into five chapters. The first chapter deals with background of the study,
statement of the problem, objectives, significances, and research methodology used in conducting this
research. The second chapter is about the background study of open spaces and reviewing related literature;
the third chapter deals with case studies conducted in the city of Addis Ababa specifically in Arat kilo
condominium. The fourth chapter in this research paper shed lights on the data and findings interpretation
and discussion; finally, in the fifth chapter has organized by the findings, focused on Conclusion and
Recommendation to then finally draw out a design proposal.
The design structure of the study focusses on answering the research question that initiated the study in the
first place, and providing a solution or responds to the findings and objective of the research.
Research
Question and
Objective
Related Literature
Case Study
Review
Answers
Findings, Analysis
and
interpretation
Recommendation
and
Implementation
Design proposal
Figure 1 Research design structure
4
1.8 Research Methodology
1.8.1 Research method choice
The purpose of this study is to comprehend and characterize the events that occur in the open areas
of Addis Ababa condominium housing developments. Furthermore, these occurrences differ depending on
their situation. Understanding the local context is critical for the study conclusion to be legitimate. As a result,
the case study technique is the best choice for gaining a better knowledge of what is happening in a specific
local context, which has its own distinct character and individuals who live in the region.
This research is as mentioned earlier is based on investigating various cases involving communal open
spaces, such as usage of communal open spaces; the cause-and-effect relationship between physical
characteristics and the activities taking place; the outcome of this relationship (challenges or advantages);
and the implications of the outcome. As a result, the case study research technique is the best fit for studying
all of the aforementioned real-life occurrences. Depending on the nature of the research topics, qualitative
analytic methodology is applied.
The qualitative technique is used to investigate how communal open spaces are used in connection to
residents' experiences, as well as the link between the open space's physical environment and the activities
taking place. It is also used to study the nature of community open space-related obstacles that people have
faced, which will aid in the development of feasible solutions depending on the nature of the issues.
1.8.2 Research approach

This study primarily focused on defining and analysing the open spaces present in condominium sites,
with a focus on the quality of open spaces and their contribution to the neighbourhood’s long-term viability.
The fact that open spaces in the urban setting can range in scale from public urban open space to private
residential open space, neighbourhood open space is located in the middle, between the two extremes of
urban and private residential open space. In this sense, the extent of neighbourhood open space is best
connected to the majority of Addis Ababa's condominium site open spaces.
Thus, overall goal of this research was to investigate and analyse how shared open spaces between chosen
condominium complexes are now operating. The study sought to better understand individuals' relationships
with their surroundings, as well as the governing relationship between these outdoor areas and the residents.
As a result, the research is focused on the activities that take place in common open spaces as well as the
physical aspects of the study area.
Communal open
spaces
Users Non-users
Activity performed
HOW The participants in WHY (Reasons)
activities
The relation between

the Physical
FACTORS
Environment and the
Activities Figure 2 Research Framework
Activity related
5
CHALLENGES
Physical space related
1.8.3 Selection of Case Study area
The author prioritized the neighbourhood locations where he has been residing and persons in these
areas whom he may approach in order to obtain relevant primary data and for the simplicity of the survey.
Another case study area selection parameter studied was the temporal dimension, which might demonstrate
the consequences of the phenomena through time by assuming a somewhat historical location. Furthermore,
a condominium site (4kilo) is chosen from Addis Ababa’s inner city to demonstrate the intensity of habitation
and activity.
1.8.4 Source of data and collection methods

The study makes use of both primary and secondary data sources. Primary data is gathered by first-
hand observation and photographing the location, as well as interviews and discussions with locals, the
neighbourhood representation group, and government authorities. Manuals, past research, a master
(development) plan, a satellite picture (Google map), and related literature are used to gather secondary
data.
Various data gathering approaches are employed for this study depending on the nature of the research
method used. The following strategies were used to obtain primary data from residents and the
surrounding environment of the research area:
o Interview
Interviews were employed to acquire information that complemented the physical observation in this
study. The interview aids in determining people's attitudes, views, and motivation toward open spaces.
In general, there are two types of questions that were asked during the interview:
- The use of the space (For what purpose they use the open spaces).
- Attitudes, attitudes, and issues pertaining to the spaces
The interviews were performed utilizing semi-structured interview questions. Respondents were chosen
from various parts of the neighborhood and floors.
o Direct Observation and On-Site Measurement
Conducting site visits to the locations and seeing what is really going on there, i.e. the linkages between
activities and spaces When you examine a location, you discover how it is actually utilized, not how you
imagine it to be used. As a result, one of the key methods of data collecting for this study is a field
observation of the selected case study region. As a result, all open places in the neighborhood were
repeatedly observed, and photographs of each open space were taken. On-site measurement is also
performed to gather measurements of a few places in order to update the existing map, which deviates
from the intended neighborhood design.
o Photography
Photographs are taken in various parts of the study area to document the activities that take place in the
existing common open spaces and to depict the physical setting of the environment. Which is used to
connect the responses of the respondents to the current situation.
o Mapping
During interviews with residents, mapping the activities is done to determine the locations where the
activities are taking place and to define the area territory of their activity for subsequent spatial analysis.
During the observational research of the study area, drawing was also employed to document some of
the physical aspects and elements on the open space.
6
1.8.5 Method of Data Analysis
Different forms of data acquired from residents, observations and surveys of the physical environment,
and data from various documents are analyzed to answer the major study issues. As a result, by linking the
research questions with the data acquired, the data is analyzed to generate essential results.
The qualitative analysis technique is used to investigate spatial phenomena by mapping respondents'
activities on community open spaces in their different locations and comparing planned and existing open
space conditions. In addition, qualitative analysis is carried out to examine the data and determine the
impact of each activity on common open spaces and other activities taking place over some time.
Data triangulation is used to assess the quality and validity of obtained data once it has been collected from
several sources as indicated above. The respondents' responses are double-checked by seeing the open
space and researching the activities that are taking place, as well as looking at the physical setting of the
open space. In addition, the associated data is assessed by comparing the information to the neighborhood
design plan.
It was vital to keep returning to the objectives throughout the review process in order to avoid becoming
distracted from them and to uncover themes that were out of context. Returning to and re-evaluating the
research's fundamental purpose and the resulting themes on a regular basis resulted in stronger and more
focused aims and analyses.
Intervewing
the
inhabitants
Valid Data
for Analysis
Literature
review of
Observation
related
topics
Figure 3 Method of data triangulation
7
Chapter Tw o
2. R EVIEW OF R ELATED LITER ATUR E

2.1 Open Space: A Basic Definition
"Open space" may indicate a multitude of things depending on the context of the debate and the
persons participating, therefore defining it is a difficult task. "For others, "open space" may simply mean
"land that isn't occupied by people," in which case urban parks, marshes, farms, golf courses, baseball fields,
and a variety of other land uses would be considered open space." Others may describe "open space" as
less developed land uses as woods, forests, wildlife refuges, or nature preserves." (Anderson, 2006)
Generally, an open space is thought of as an undeveloped region where outdoor activities take place. As a
result, (Gedikli, 2009) defines open space as undeveloped territory within a city that offers communities with
environmental, social, and economic advantages. It can be a green space, such as parks and gardens, play
spaces, sports facilities, and green corridors, or a civic space, such as pedestrian streets, sports facilities,
and promenades.
The term "open space," on the other hand, refers to conservation land, wooded land, recreation land,
agricultural land, corridor parks and amenities such as small parks, green buffers along motorways, or any
open area managed by a conservation agency or group. However, the phrase can also apply to
undeveloped area that is particularly valuable for conservation or enjoyment. Vacant parcels and
brownfields that can be turned into recreation zones fall under this category. Some open space is utilized
for passive activities like strolling, hiking, and nature research, while others are used for more energetic
sports like soccer, tennis, or baseball. (Cryan, 2008)
The importance of open space in residential construction cannot be overstated. There are private gardens,
community grounds, and drying areas. These areas are utilized for entertaining, recreation, and leisure, as
well as providing private spaces for residents and communal areas for neighbors in multi-unit projects. The
addition of shade trees and other vegetation to open spaces increases residential amenity and makes the
space more pleasant, beautiful, and usable. However, while open space is a simple idea in and of itself, the
forces that influence it and are influenced by it are complicated.
2.2 Types of open spaces

Different criteria can be used to characterize open space. Nonetheless, identifying open spaces
according to their purpose is a regularly used method. (Gibbons, 1998), categorized open space into the
following functional categories:
1.1.1 Animal and vegetative habitat, stream belt corridors, and trap rock ridges are all included in
Natural Resource Protection Areas.
o Minimal-intervention zones, which include existing natural characteristics such as individual
trees, woods, watercourses, hilly or undevelopable ground, and are managed for
biodiversity and landscape value.
o New planting areas, maybe with additional elements such as ponds, that are maintained for
quick screening and structure while also increasing biodiversity value.
1.2.1 Outdoor Recreation
o Active - These are play places that have been specifically created and placed to meet the
needs of youngsters. They include both unequipped casual play areas and formal play areas
with equipment. At the high end of the spectrum, and subject to local conditions. Parks,
playgrounds, beaches, and trails, for example.
8
o Passive - Publicly accessible grassed or landscaped spaces that serve an aesthetic and leisure
purpose. Plazas, sitting places, and arboretums are examples.
Amenity Areas are a type of passive recreation. The utilization of open space to give aesthetic
benefits to new residential developments was formerly commonplace. Amenity open space is a term
used to describe this sort of open space. This can include structural planting, highway verges, and
landscaped spaces in order to make projects more inviting and pleasant to live in and visit.
1.3.1 Resource Management - forests, fisheries, farmland.

1.4.1 Protection of Public Health and Safety
Floodplains, wetlands, unbuildable or development-restricted locations, such as steep slopes, high water
tables, and shallow depths to bedrock.
1.5.1 Areas that Influence the Character or Design of a Community

Buffer strips, front, rear, and side yards, urban plazas, greenways, and development-related open space
dedications.
1.6.1 Historic or Archaeological Sites

Battlefield, historic structures and grounds, historic districts, and the town green.
Communal open spaces fall under the category of outdoor recreational space, which may be used for active
or passive enjoyment by the community. Individual and group recreational and social activities take place
in communal open areas in residential neighborhoods.
2.3 Open Space Development in Communal Residential

Areas
Condominium apartments, real estate, and private residences were created by associations in Ethiopian
urban centers, and condominium apartments have been growing in most urban centers of the nation under
the Government's policy to solve housing difficulties over the last 13-14 years. (MUDH, 2016)
There are several characteristics that all of these sorts of residential neighborhoods have in common. One
aspect that all of these housing facilities have in common is that each unit does not have its own green area.
Another quality that they all have in common is that they all fit a large number of people into relatively tiny
places. It is critical to offer green areas at conveniently accessible locations in such community living
complexes so that residents may engage in informal leisure. (MUDH, 2016)
Strips of land left between adjacent blocks of buildings that should be used for driveways, walking paths,
small open spaces left surrounding blocks of buildings, and relatively larger open spaces meant to serve as
communal green areas left at median locations in the vicinity of several condominium apartment blocks are
the most common forms of open green spaces observed in communal housing areas. These are the green
open areas that must be cultivated to reap the many benefits that come with green spaces.
2.3.1 Benefits of Open Space in Residential Area

Recreational activities, seclusion, a barrier to nearby development, good vistas, wildlife habitat, and
conservation of natural regions and native plants are among possible benefits of open spaces. Aside from
open space for outdoor activities, a living environment must have other elements. It has several cultural,
social, economic, and environmental advantages, as well as a good impact on physical and mental health
and overall quality of life.
9
As stated by (Anderson, 2006) "Open space, whether for amenity or enjoyment, contributes significantly to
the quality of residential neighborhoods in a variety of ways. Open space in the form of landscape areas
will serve to improve the visual setting of a neighborhood from outside its bounds and will contribute to the
creation of a desirable living environment. Recreational spaces will provide vital open space for children to
play and other inhabitants to enjoy near to their houses."
From an environmental standpoint, residential complexes' green space might have a considerable influence
on producing a sense of freshness and vitality, as well as increasing levels of contentment. Individual
productivity rises as degree of satisfaction rises, resulting in a benefit to the country's economy and
inhabitants' living standards.
"Air and water purification, wind and noise filtering, and microclimate stability are all environmental services
provided by open spaces." In terms of its health-related functions, studies show that it relieves tension and
promotes tranquility. There is a link between using parks and having excellent mental and physical health.
Encouragement of the utilization of outdoor areas, as well as increased social integration among neighbors,
are two of its social functions. Finally, its economic services include tree-based air filtration, which lowers
pollution-prevention costs, as well as increased property values and tax income." (Gedikli, 2009)
(Gedikli, 2009) talked about two types of advantages from open space: those that give use value and those
that provide non-use value. The existing usage of the resource, such as recreation, beautiful vistas, privacy,
or as a barrier to neighboring development, determines its use value. The non-use value is calculated by
taking into account the area's potential future usage.
Communally maintained open space can also provide social advantages by encouraging inhabitants to
engage. Open space may improve a community's overall quality of life, enhance property values, and
develop a sense of responsibility for and connection to local natural resources. When local communities
manage open spaces, they boost their value for sustainability by achieving greater benefits. Some of the
most important benefits of community-managed open space, according to (Foundation., 2003), include:
o Enhancement of the aesthetic

o Community cohesiveness
o Environmental advantages
o Gardening instruction for participants
o Recreational opportunities
o Income production
o Increased community organizing ability
o Positive activity for kids
o Ripple effect to additional open spaces
o Improved communal nutrition
o Asset to individual/group
o Knowledge and experience transfer
As stated above, showing the many positive impacts a well-designed open space can bring to the community
as well as to the Environment; open green spaces may also have a positive impact on local economic
regeneration, particularly in terms of job creation, company start-up, improved land values, and inbound
investment. In the Ethiopian context, condominium apartment buildings have areas that may be utilized for
small enterprises that provide leisure activities, such as cafés, kiosks, and small restaurants. Thus, greening
the accessible land surrounding such service places improves business potential significantly.
10
2.3.2 The spatial challenges of Open Spaces
Due to a lack of policy direction, the government and the urban population have paid little attention
to the development of open green spaces until the formulation of a national urban development policy, out
of which the urban greenery and beautification strategy was formed. As a result, open green areas have
been neglected and are facing a variety of issues. In certain regions, for example, they were and still are
utilized as rubbish dumping grounds. The other more significant and prevalent threat to the availability and
sustainability of open green spaces in Ethiopian cities is the conversion of a portion or the entire plot to
other land uses, such as residential or commercial building. (MUDH, 2016)
In the specific case of condominium housing, communal open spaces have spatial as well as managerial
issues in sustaining the open spaces to serve the inhabitance. Some of these issues can be managerial
(Community participation is not viable, communication issues among community members, follow up and
maintenance is not supported, etc.) and some spatial issues can be seen concerning the inhabitance daily
activities and how convenient it is serving the community in regards to its area, functional-ability, safety and
security, and accessibility.
2.4 Sustainable development

Sustainable development is a multifaceted topic that includes efficiency and equality in intra and
intergenerational relationships based on economic, social, and environmental factors. Its development is
centered on the integration of the three components as a system, rather than on the individual performance
of the three components. (Ciegis, 2009) Hundreds of definitions of sustainable development concept
descriptions may be found in various books and research, but none of them can cover all parts of the idea
and offer a complete comprehension of it.
Economic, social, and environmental development paradigms are the three key areas in which sustainable
development may be applied. It is described in economics as securing a higher per capita income for future
generations. The social component describes it as the transmission of people's values, practices, and culture
to future generations. In the field of the environment, the definitions stand for the preservation of biological
species biodiversity, important ecosystems, and ecological processes. (Ciegis, 2009)
The idea of sustainable development establishes a framework for integrating environmental regulations and
development initiatives, however it only serves as a constraint. The constraint is not an absolute one, but
one imposed on environmental resources by current technology and societal structure. It also demonstrates
the biosphere's ability to absorb the repercussions of human activities. This clearly demonstrates that
environmental preservation is fundamental in the notion of sustainable development, leading to the
conclusion that sustainable development must endeavor to ensure that economies' long-term growth
remains firmly connected to their ecological origins. As a result, sustainable development is a changing
process rather than a static state of harmony that may be established once and maintained in the future. It
is a transformation in which resource exploitation, investment direction, technology development orientation,
and institutional change are all aligned with future as well as current needs. Sustainable development, in its
broadest meaning, is the ability to preserve peace among humans and between humankind and
environment.
2.5 Spatial Sustainability

Space and society are inextricably interwoven, and no discussion of society and how people interact
can be complete without a discussion of the space in which they may do so. Making spaces suitable for
individuals to perceive their community or environment is therefore spatial sustainability (Pomeroy, 2012).
11
The ability of urban habitats to develop a strong feeling of community and hence convert space into place
is dependent on spatial sustainability.
According to Peter Nijkamp and colleagues (1996), spatial sustainability refers to a geographical system's
environmentally suitable spatial and socio-economic development. It's all about establishing quality of life
in the spatial system, they go on to say. It indicates that a single development in a given area should not
compromise the interests of other land users in the present or future.
Based on a knowledge of a planning or design issue and the activities required to overcome it, a spatial
notion can be conveyed in words and images. The link between land use, ecosystems, and biotopes is the
spatial component of sustainability in the field of open spaces. The optimal allocation of diverse functions
in a restricted space is referred to as land use planning. Its fundamental goal is to assign land uses to satisfy
people's economic and social demands while also protecting future resources. An ecosystem is a functional
unit made up of plants, animals, and microorganisms that interact. The term "biotope" refers to a biological
community and is sometimes used interchangeably with the term "habitat." (Leito, 2002) To simply define
the concept of Spatial Sustainability in relevance to this research is about making places ideal for people to
perceive their community or environment, and therefore turning space into place, is what spatial
sustainability is all about.
To value and convey spatial sustainability, several terminology and explanations are used. The phrases
"space" and "location" are the most commonly used.
2.5.1 Space
Space, according to (Dursun, 2009), is more than just a volume. He argued that space has a physical
form that can be simply characterized by length, width, scale, geometry, texture, color, light, and other
abstract and complicated properties such as length, breadth, scale, geometry, texture, color, light, and so
on. Codes, rules, and abstract pieces are the abstract and complicated features that shape meaningful
objects. Working on the man-space interaction is a critical factor for understanding and identifying spatial
qualities, he added.
(Tuan, 2001) sees space as an abstract concept. It has the sensations of openness, freedom, and treatment.
It's also where we reside. Space generates environments in which our lives, activities, and relationships may
be organized (Lawson, 2005). They are important features of how communities and cultures are built in the
real world. Space is a social commodity, according to (Lefebvre, 1998). The civilization creates, modifies,
and improves it.
Architecture is based on the concept of space (Dursun, 2009). When there is a space, architecture exists.
To design, you must first think about and imagine the place by decoding its features and identifying messages
hidden inside its architectural form. Space is a laboratory that necessitates advanced brain processes for
handling numerous types of data. Space is a characteristic of the natural world that may be experienced in
broad terms.
The quantity of open space, the presence or absence of walls, the brightness of lighting, the existence of
windows, entrances, and other physical aspects that make a space all contribute to the physical structure of
the space. The organization of physical space can have an impact on human behavior. Physical structures
may have an impact on a person's mood and impressions of their environment. Physical structure may
impact a person's behavior through altering their mood and perceptions.
2.5.2 Place
Place, according to (Tuan, 2001), is a unique and lived location. It is known for its security and stability. He
goes on to say that location is a steady entity that attracts our attention. It's a meaningfully arranged universe.
It's essentially a one-dimensional idea. On the other hand, according to Dorren Massey (Cresswell, 2009),
12
thinking of place static is a conventional approach. He argued that locations are generated via linkages to
the rest of the world and are thus more about pathways than roots since they are not clearly defined,
anchored in place, or tied to single homogenous identities.
A meaningful site is one that combines location, locality, and a sense of place (Cresswell, 2009). The place
signifies the material environment for social connections, the locale denotes the feeling and emotion a place
evokes, and the sense of place expresses the feeling and emotion a place evokes. These three aspects are
effectively discussed in Montgomery's place formation and Punter's sense of place development. The place
is represented by shape, the activity symbolizes the locality, and the image is the consequence of feeling of
place in Montgomery's place creation diagram. Punter, like Montgomery, utilizes the activity as the setting,
the place as the physical setting, and the feeling of place as the meaning (Montgomery, 1998). Place is
depicted as a significant location in both designs. Furthermore, it is obvious in both pictures that locations
include the three pillars of sustainability. The environmental dimension is represented by shape and physical
setting, the economic dimension is mostly represented by activity, and the social dimension is primarily
represented by image and meaning. (Refer figure 4)
The place in which individuals form economic, social, psychological, and environmental relationships to
sustain their everyday lives is referred to as place.
2.6 Activities on Open Space and the Role of the Physical

Environment
Open space, which is created and given for the use of the general public or a specific community, is
anticipated to accommodate a wide range of activities, depending on the demands of the users. However,
a range of physical and non-physical environmental variables influence the amount of open space use.
However, the individual's perception of a particular open space has a big impact in the area's use in terms
of drawing or discouraging the person to interact. Space is more than just physical three-dimensional space.
Various "kinds" of space are encountered at different times and in different circumstances, and their
compatibility is a significant design consideration. Even if one ignores a broad variety of spatial
interpretations that may be referred to as ethological space (home range, core region, territory, and so on),
it is simple to come up with a long list of interpretations for the word."
The cumulative influence of its physical surroundings, activities occurring on it, and individuals' conceptions
of the place are characterized by a modern theory on place formation or construction. Place-making is at
the heart of urban planning, with places including not just a physical space8, but also all of the actions and
events that made it possible. (Montgomery, 1998)
Physical
Activities
Characteristics
Place
Conceptions
Figure 4 Construction of a place

(Montgomery 1998)
13
Sense of place is a theory that dives into emotions of belonging to an area and security inside it (Clemons,
2006). They refer to the personal and emotional attachment people have to a location when they say "sense
of place." As a result, anybody may realize that, in addition to the physical surroundings and the activities
taking place, one's perception determines his attractiveness to and engagement in public spaces activities.
As a result, while defining a space, the activities, the physical environment, and the meaning or notion of
the user about that particular area are the most important factors to consider. Thus, these three components
can be analogously expressed in studying open spaces, where the activity refers to residents' existing
activities, the physical setting refers to the built environment's physical characteristics, and the meaning
corresponds to residents' feelings and experiences on open spaces around their living area, which determines
their involvement on the open space.
Elements of Sense of place Expression of open spaces

Activity Residents' current activities on the available open
area
Physical characteristics The setting and the quality of the built environments
Conception or meaning Residents' perceptions and experiences with existing
open spaces
Table 1 Components of sense of place
Active community engagement, a clear redesign program based on people's needs, and suitable
management programs to combine attractive events and activities in the public space with active public uses
in the surrounding region are all required for the creation of good public spaces.
(Gehl, 2010), said that theoretical considerations have revealed that obligatory, voluntary, and social
activities can take place in public areas. The idea, choice activities are far less common in low-quality places,
but required tasks are much more common. The required activities, on the other hand, are balanced in both
a bad and a good physical environment. As a result, it is obvious that the physical environment has a
significant impact on the activities that take place in public areas. The relationship between the activities and
the quality of the physical environment;
Figure 5 Relationship between activities and quality of the physical environment (Gehl J. 1987)
14
Because open and recreational areas are an important part of a residential zone, their layout, equipment,
and upkeep have an impact on the quality of the home. The proper layout and management of open and
recreational areas, as well as environmental comfort and accessibility, all contribute to the aesthetic
transformation of the functional-spatial unity of the housing environment to which they belong.
It appears that the quantity and quality of green spaces will have an impact on residents' activity patterns,
frequency of daily recreation, opportunities to relax from daily stress, and how they learn about the
environment (Abdul Malek, 2009). Thus, an increase in the quantity of outdoor exercise might be aided by
improvements in the quality of and access to community green areas.
From the preceding comments, it is evident that open space is an important aspect of the living environment
that provides several advantages, and the quality of open space is a crucial influencing factor in obtaining
all of these benefits. But, more importantly, how can we assess the quality of open space?
There are already a slew of planning and design factors to consider when creating a high-quality
neighborhood open space. In reality, depending on the situation, the concept of a "quality neighborhood
open space" varies. However, (Abdul Malek, 2009) argue that learning more about the preferences, use
patterns, and demands of users' leisure activities is critical.
Figure 6 Hypothesised model, quality neighbourhood park
Figure 7 An expanded theorized model for identifying high-quality green space in the neighbourhood; Abdul
Malek (2009)
15
(Herzele, 2003) proposed certain value criteria for assessing the quality of open spaces based on space,
nature, culture and history, silence, and facilities. On the other hand, (Bradley, 1986) argued that when it
comes to providing quality open space, the focus should be on recognizing the critical need for diversity in
both natural settings and social facilities within local areas, as well as emphasizing the potential of urban
green space to improve the quality of life for all citizens.
In general, open spaces include physical and functional characteristics that impact social interaction,
comfort, and security, all of which draw people to the location. Physical and functional qualities of open
spaces are related to physical amenities, activities, accessibility conditions, location characteristics, and
surrounding land-uses that support or do not support the activities developed in plazas and have an impact
on their capacity to promote social interaction, livability, and comfort (Herzele, 2003). As a result, it is
possible to conclude that open space quality is not exclusively determined by techniques and processes, but
also by the people who utilize them.
2.7 Key Characteristics of Successful Open Spaces

In order to get a better understanding of the quality of neighborhood open spaces, a detailed study
of successful green open spaces was conducted, as well as findings from previous research in urban open
spaces in many disciplines. According to (Abdul Malek, 2009), the factors that contribute to the
understanding of what is referred to as a successful green open space can be divided into four main sub-
categories: natural surrounding factors, spaces and design factors, cultural and social motivation factors,
and finally external factors.
According to research of project for public space (2016), excellent settings for people have four crucial
characteristics:
1. Uses and Activities

2. Sociability
3. Comfort and Image
4. Access and Linkage.
Access, in particular, refers to

the ability of a location to be
visible from afar in the context
and to be easily accessible. As
a result, circulation is simple,
and the physical features of
the space are both useful and
safe for humans. Public areas
should allow people to sit or
walk and project a positive
image of communal life.
Figure 8 Four Key Qualities of Public Space (PPS)
16
2.7.1. Area of Open Space
The fundamental phase in the neighborhood design process is to achieve the area standard when providing
open space, especially for an open space that is supposed to fulfill various roles. The percentage of open
space that should be preserved in a development's overall area varies by location. Meeting the requirements
of the target community, on the other hand, should take precedence. "A system of all parks and recreation
places, developed to fulfill the demands of a certain neighborhood, should be given, occupying around
10% of the entire are” (MWUD, 2008). When the available open space is insufficient for a certain function,
it is unlikely to be used for the intended purpose since the user's comfort is compromised.
2.7.2. Open Space Accessibility

Accessibility is the most basic criterion for determining whether or not an open area is successful. Open
spaces that are easily accessible and well connected to their surroundings can help to improve the urban
environment by fostering community development and social ties. Access to high-quality public places for
everybody is thus a cornerstone of democracy and social fairness, as well as a key problem in making a
space responsive.
2.7.3. Open Space Location

One of the most important factors in the provision of open space is its location. Neighborhood open space
is a site where a variety of requirements may be addressed without having to go a great distance, while also
offering basic recreational amenities to all users. It is frequently found in the heart of a development. Open
space should be positioned in the most accessible portion of the neighborhood, away from major highways,
to minimize any possible conflicts. To facilitate safe access, they should be connected to local routes and
have well-placed entrance points. When numerous sections of open space are planned as part of a new
development, they should be fairly dispersed around the land. (Service, 2008)
2.7.4. Open Space user’s safety

There's no denying that open space must be secure for its intended purpose. This can be accomplished by
placing the spaces in regions that are overlooked by homes, allowing for natural monitoring, and by
ensuring that developments do not overlook portions of public open space. Safety can also be achieved by
making sure that open areas are well lit and that there are no hidden areas where people may feel more
vulnerable.
2.7.5. Open Space Appeal

The appeal of an open area is another important aspect in its success. To encourage people to use open
areas, they should be friendly. This may be accomplished by ensuring that the places are well-marked, have
some soft landscaping features, have high-quality amenities, and have attractively maintained boundaries.
2.7.6. Open Spaces’ Functionality

The purpose that an open space area is designed to enable, as well as the area's capacity to perform that
function, will determine its quality. Even if it is desirable to use a single open space for different purposes
due to its numerous benefits, it is necessary to first prepare the area to accommodate those activities,
otherwise it will not operate correctly. As a result, in order for any open space to work well, a suitable
atmosphere must be provided for that purpose in terms of supplying facilities and equipment, meeting the
area need, and covering the ground with comfortable surface material, among other things.
2.7.7. Open Space Enclosure

Choosing the right sort of enclosure for an open space design is very important since it affects both the
practical and aesthetic aspects of the space. Outdoor space, according to (Samuel, 2014), may be divided
into positive and negative areas depending on the degree of enclosure. Positive, confined space has a
defined and recognizable shape, whereas the latter is shapeless and unimaginable. The ratio of the breadth
17
of space to the height of the enclosing wall influences the quantity of enclosure and the degree of
confinement that results. When buildings are arranged in a row, the poorest concept of space occurs. In this
case, the buildings are separate, unconnected pieces that are not contained. The siting of buildings at right
angles to one another, with the corners of the space open, generating a street intersection or a gap between
buildings where space seeps out via the corner openings, is one method of attaining compositional order.
2.8 Community Open Spaces Performance Assessment

Several factors influence the performance of space in architecture, whether it is indoor or outdoor. In
the case of the outdoors, supporting features such as trees, sculpture, ponds, and seats might be included.
Individual senses should be able to perceive all of these factors accurately. Human perception in relation to
space performance is investigated to see how far a combination of variables may produce favorable
sensations in humans. (Syafriny, 2010)
Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) for outdoor facilities and other built settings might be beneficial in the
future to promote a more humane physical environment and to improve urban environment quality of life.
POE is a systematic method for evaluating built environments from the point of view of users. It is used to
find solutions to enhance environmental quality, increase user comfort and productivity, and lower design
and maintenance costs. The following are the phases of POE for evaluating spatial performance; according
to (Syafriny, 2010):
1. Observations of the environment in order to determine who, where, when, and possibly how users
spend their time;
2. Survey design and distribution to users of the site for quantitative (statistical) environmental
measurement; (questionnaires)
3. User interviews on their experiences with the location; this helps to categorize where and how
individuals spend their time in some areas or corners and not others.
4. Preferences and Behavior Mapping the region, maybe at multiple sizes, to identify the places that
get the greatest and least use, as well as quantifying and qualifying the causes for that use.
5. Photographic study of how people utilize the area, as well as critical measures that show whether
individuals are connected to the environment or not.
The degree of satisfaction among residents was used to assess the quality of a successful neighborhood
open space. The level of participation of residents, however, is also critical to the success of any open space
project. The distinction between a successful and a failed community open space initiative as described by
(Foundation, 2013) is a follow:
Successful Projects Failed/Unsuccessful project

Idea generated by the community externally imposed concept
Accepted as part of the community Only a few individuals use it.
Community generates people power. People's power comes from without.
Many doers, some planners Too few doers, too many dreamers
The community takes the lead. The community waits for help.
Progresses through stages and seasons, it evolves. The first stage is complete; however, it does not
evolve.
Shares knowledge with others No interaction with others
Improved horticulture abilities Unwilling to learn the necessary skills
Receives official recognition Nobody notices or cares.
Table 2 Successful and unsuccessful community open space project (Foundation, 2013)
18
2.9 Designing Neighbourhood Open Space
When it came to open space in new residential neighborhoods, much of the focus in the past was on
reaching the required quantity of open space. To determine these criteria, a variety of approaches have
been used, including open space based on the number of people living in a new development or open
space based on the number of units within a new development. Since a result, unpleasant sections of open
space with no obvious use have emerged, as providing open space within new residential areas has
frequently become an issue of merely fulfilling the needed numbers. (Service, 2008)
Designing open space should be based on a genuine understanding of how people utilize the area, not on
abstract study or thought from behind the drawing board. Outdoor activity may be impacted by the physical
design, but the design itself may be influenced by the number of people and events predicted, the duration
of the activity, and the types of activities that are available. As a result, not only should all types of possible
activities be studied in design research, but also the interconnections between them (Gehl, 2010). Meaning,
to incorporate the concept of using an open-ended design approach to incorporate the end- users.
"In the case of cities, the sorts of criteria produced by man-environment study are particularly relevant since
they are utilized by a wide variety of people, have a big time and space scale, and there is a significant
separation of designer and user." Some of these issues may be addressed through open-ended design or
user participation, but norms are still required because there are many things that users cannot do at the
urban scale, designers must deal with the joints between areas and organize the overall structure, and
designers must also know the relative importance of elements to various groups." (Gehl, 2010)
The user perception method, which states that designers should consider not only the resident's demands
but also their perceptions in order to create a more harmonious residential environment that maximizes
comfort with the resources available.
Because social activities are intertwined with other activities, neighborhood open space should be planned
to be appealing and pleasant for both social and personal activities. People meeting each other, according
to (Gehl, 2010). Social contact is not influenced by the physical surroundings in any way. Designers, on the
other hand, have the ability to change social interaction situations. Above all, open space should be included
into the overall design of new residential complexes and should be one of the major elements in developing
a design solution for new sites from the beginning. Theorists propose that when population density rises, we
should increase the quantity of green space in a neighborhood to compensate for the loss of private
backyards. The 'compensation hypothesis' states that inhabitants would compensate for lack of access to
private green space by accessing public green spaces such as parks.
2.9.1 Open space and Density

The idea of building a sustainable and compact city is being promoted around the world because it has
social, economic, and environmental benefits, such as encouraging positive interaction and diversity,
improving the viability of and access to community services, enhancing the economic viability of
development and infrastructure, supporting public transportation, and increasing energy and resource
utilization efficiency (Aquino, 2014). Compact development, on the other hand, will be achieved through a
high-density settlement style that favors more shared open spaces.
As a result, residential density, which is simply the number of units in a given area, is one of the most
important considerations in housing development when it comes to providing neighborhood open space,
particularly in high-density areas where the outdoor environment is shared and utilized by a large number
of people. There has been a long-running dispute concerning the effects of growing urbanization on urban
green space usage. (Samaratunga, 2013) They believe, however, that simply because individuals live in
densely populated areas with limited access to private green space, they will use neighborhood public parks
and other green spaces more regularly. Indeed, one paradox of urbanization is that it may actually
19
encourage leisure travel, as city inhabitants desire to escape to the countryside or other locations for leisure
and recreational experiences. Existing parks and other green spaces in higher-density regions may be
overcrowded or attract a clientele of "undesirable users," making urban consolidation - without more green
space - highly inequitable. (Byrne, 2010)
One of the issues with the naive concept that more parks are necessary as population density rises is that it
ignores the characteristics of individuals who live in higher-density areas. The concept presupposes a uniform
population of residents living in townhouses and apartments who require access to a generic park.
Furthermore, there is a prevalent misunderstanding that tiny families live in small homes. When we look at
who lives in townhouses, midrise, and high-rises, we see that income, age, sex, household composition,
and other factors differentiate the populations. Some observers have suggested that many inner-city
locations have an excess of park capacity as a result of this. However, a closer examination of the
interrelationships between green space users and green space attributes reveals that green space design in
urban consolidation efforts should be approached with caution. (Byrne, 2010)
Children in higher-density housing have a larger demand for public green spaces for play, mental health,
and social and physical development than children in lower-density housing. Parents who live in flats may
not use open areas for their personal advantage on a regular basis, but they frequently seek out safe open
spaces where their children may play and release excess energy. Children who live in apartments may face
distinct challenges since they lack the private play places that their low-density counterparts have. As a result,
children require a safe place to play away from traffic, where their parents can keep an eye on them, and
where their activities will not bother other apartment residents. Planners should consider the following three
criteria when constructing neighborhood open spaces, according to (Byrne, 2010):
1. Various sorts of individuals with different demands for green space will live in increasing density
developed areas.
2. Planners must consider how to incorporate existing green areas into denser urban environments since
consolidation always involves existing built environments – Many parks, for example, will have been
created for a different audience than the inhabitants who would be displaced as a result of the
consolidation
3. It has been proven that the nature of built environments influences how people utilize urban green
spaces; urban planning must guarantee that green areas are accessible, safe, and of good
environmental quality. As a result, the design of greater density development must take into account
future people' green space demands as well as the built environment's ability to accommodate those
needs.
Because of these factors, open space and green space near high-density housing must cater to a wide range
of individuals — seniors, children, adolescents, parents, the affluent, and the poor – who have different
expectations about the roles that green space should serve. For greater density locations, a "one size fits all"
approach to green space planning is doomed to fail.
2.9.2 Open space and Standards

The World Health Organization considers the availability, accessibility, quality, and security of green spaces
in residential environments to be a health indicator. The World Health Organization recommends 10 square
meters per person as an international guideline. To meet the WHO criterion, a minimum of one hectare
(10,000 sq. m) per thousand persons is necessary. According to (Suter, 2012) describe research assigning
25-50 percent of developing land to open space as one of the elements of best practice in Germany,
Somerset, and Australia. The following table summarizes the key best practice elements in terms of open
space supply.
20
Features Approach
Open Space Provision 25-50% of land allocated to open space
(including communal and public realm
such as plaza areas)
Diversity A hierarchy of provision, a variety of
open space typologies such as green
space, linear linkages, plazas, natural
areas, and play and leisure places are
included.
Landscape Verges Wide verges (5m – 12m)
Private Open Space Internal courtyards, private balconies
that may be used, and rooftop common
areas that meet occupants' urgent needs
Open Space Features Long linear public square and Central
square that provides a meeting, play
and picnic focus
Road Widths and Shared Use Wide roads (5m - 7m) Central Road
verge (4m) Shared streets
Path Widths Wide pathways (most are 3m)
Building Offsets Wide building offsets (8m – 50m) Wide
link widths between buildings (9m-12m)
Communal Open Space Large courtyards (0.2 ha)
Community Involvement Widespread community involvement in
planning and development
Planning Considerations Reflection of the area's heritage, culture,
and geographical aspects, as well as
appropriate health planning goals
Renewable Energy Solar roof panels provide large-scale
renewable energy sources.
Table 3 practice features of open space
The establishment of Principles and Guidelines to govern the provision, placement, development, design,
and management of open space in higher density developments was a fundamental consequence of the
Best Practice on provision of open space in higher density development initiative. generated principles for
best practice directions in open space provision, open space design, and open space management from
research of best practices in many nations. (Suter, 2012)
21
2.10 International Case Study
S*Park (previously Sustainability Park) is a Denver-based eco-agrihood community development that
spans a whole city block. It serves as a hub for sustainable living, maximizing the utilization of sunshine and
green spaces while lowering energy costs. The master plan for the S*Park project emphasized optimizing the
use of natural light, generating density and variety in living areas, de-emphasizing the vehicle, and opening
the land up for public green spaces. The property, which is located at 26th and Lawrence, is in a transition
zone between commercial and residential streetscapes. The density and mixed-use nature of the project
reflects this transformation.
Figure 9 S*PARK PROJECT
The overall idea of the communal open space/Park was to get rid of the vehicle and make room for urban
farming, a shared community park, and a planted storm water retention system amid the residential
structures. The removal of the lane and the automobile on site resulted in the creation of a considerable
quantity of greenspace for the S*Park neighborhood - around 40,000 square feet. The typical block to the
southeast of the property, on the other hand, contains about 2,322.576 square meters of greenspace
dispersed among the single-family dwellings.
The idea was to develop an outdoor place that could be used for both social and ecological purposes.
Sunlight was a major factor in the S*Park site's master planning. The interplay of the sun with the site
prompted the idea to open the south end of the block to urban farming and a year-round outdoor green
area. The southeastern corner is occupied by a ground-level urban garden, which is close to a 650 square-
meter greenhouse, bringing the original Sustainability Park's spirit back to the site.
The southwestern corner's second-story greenhouse gets enough natural light to grow microgreens without
using artificial grow lights. The greenhouse was lifted off the ground thanks to the utilization of hydroponic
growth towers, allowing for longer hours of sunlight and room for commercial programming at ground
22
level. With automated ventilation and thermal blankets that spread over the inside on cooler evenings, the
greenhouse uses passive heating and cooling tactics. This low-energy, high-tech glass structure commands
a significant presence at the site's corner.
Figure 10 S*PARK PROJECT Greenhouse
23
Figure 11 xS*PARK PROJECT PLANS
24
The site plan's basic concept was to store all automobiles underground and use the space for people and
plants instead of cars. Previously, the land was home to a number of low-income housing buildings that
were dismantled, leaving polluted and disturbed soil behind. This necessitated site remediation, which
necessitated the removal of 6 to 8 feet of dirt and buried detritus throughout the site, allowing for the
excavation of a few feet deeper for an underground parking facility. The presence of the automobile on the
site was reduced as a result of this strategy. By parking beneath the property, the car's footprint is reduced
to around 280-meter square, as opposed to 1400-meter square for the block to the southeast.
Figure 12 S*PARK PROJECT Parking
25
Everything in S*Park is powered by electricity, with the exception of the communal outdoor barbecues, in
anticipation of Colorado's transition to renewable solar and wind energy sources. The site's energy
consumption is offset by a 200-kwh rooftop solar array. Inside and out, the project makes use of high-
efficiency LED lighting, high-performing Low-E windows, and advanced insulation levels of R-38 for roofs
and R-20 for walls. Finally, the shared walls of multi-family living areas result in a smaller building envelope,
which means less cooling and heating loss. Specifically:
o For electricity and natural gas, a typical S*Park unit (subject unit is 120 square meter) has an annual
operational energy cost of $336.
o According to the US energy consumption study, the cost of electricity and natural gas for a similar
size new multifamily condo in the southern mountain area is on average $1040 per year.
When compared to a comparable unit in a modern multi-family apartment complex, a S*Park unit uses
around 1/3 of the energy to run.
The communal park serves as a gathering spot as well as a storm water catchment and filtering system.
Storm water from each roof is channeled down to the park via galvanized steel downspouts and specially
angled channels, which water the plants and percolate back into the ground, decreasing the burden on the
local sewer system and the need to irrigate the landscaping.
Figure 13 S*PARK PROJECT storm water application
26
Figure 14 S*PARK PROJECT Storm water system
27
Much of the brick at S*Park comes from Mendoza Brickyard, a Denver-based demolition firm that salvages
materials from buildings being demolished all across town. Brick is used in a variety of designs and
applications to add interest and texture while also serving certain purposes. At balconies and outdoor
staircases, strategically removed bricks allow light to enter through while also providing a look out. Greenery
climbs up the ground level façade thanks to turned bricks. The Japanese restaurant's southern façade is
wrapped in a brick and glass brick wall system. Inside and outside the area, the wall system provides
seclusion and aesthetic appeal, while allowing sunlight to play geometric games through the glass bricks.
Figure 15S*PARK PROJECT Aesthetic Approach
Thus, this Case study shows how an open space left between residential housing units can bring about
different economic, social, and spatial benefits for the inhabitance. By integrating a simple design
approach to every aspect of the open space to eventually provide a valuable revenue to its community
and even bring an impact in urban level.
28
2.11 The Literature Review's Summary
The different aspects of open spaces have been discussed in this section, beginning with the definition
of open space and progressing to different types of open spaces, including residential neighborhood open
space and its extents. As a result, the following key aspects of neighborhood open space are summarized
based on the study's objective in order to connect existing theories about the subject matter with the study's
focus. From the theoretical discussions, it is clear that neighborhood open spaces provide numerous benefits
to residents. As a result, residents' activities and their degree of contentment with existing open spaces might
be investigated from a human perspective. The question of sustainability, which has been debated by
scholars for a century, the three pillars of sustainability, and the role of open space in building a sustainable
neighborhood have also been examined. Moreover, the paper also reviewed an international case study of
a well-designed open space as means of viewing the impact of residential communal space on its
inhabitance when it response to their needs and their context.
Residents' needs for open space, however, vary according on their custom, culture, ethnicity, and historical
background, among other factors. As a result, an in-depth study of the target community should inform the
process of developing and supplying neighborhood open space. Meanwhile, a detailed observation of the
area should be conducted to determine the types and features of activities that are taking place in the
neighborhood open space. Furthermore, because the physical environment of the open space is a crucial
influencing element in the use of neighborhood open spaces, it should be thoroughly examined alongside
the sort of activity taking place.
As a result, several characteristics affecting the usage of neighborhood open spaces are generated from the
theoretical debate for the aim of this study to be utilized to analyses the current state on the study area. The
primary goal of this study is to look at the link between the physical qualities of an open space and the
activities of its users, as well as the issues that residents face as a result of the current state of community
open spaces. Physical environment-related factors such as area, location, accessibility, design (primarily the
type of enclosure), physical quality (attractiveness), and availability of facilities on open spaces are filtered
parameters to be studied in order to assess the performance and quality of the study area, according to the
literature.
29
Chapter Three
3 CASE STUDY
3.1 Contextual Background
Ethiopia's capital, Addis Ababa, was founded in 1886 by Menelik II. Only 136 years have passed
since the city was founded. The introduction of eucalyptus (a fast-growing tree that provides a lot of wood
for energy and cooking), the proclamation for legalizing private ownership of urban land in 1907, and the
completion, mainly by the French, of the Addis Ababa – Djibouti railway in 1917 were the three main factors
that caused the city to remain as Ethiopia's capital city (since many cities have been capital cities throughout
Ethiopia's history). Addis Ababa emerged with a defense-friendly configuration but no systematic city
planning. A number of "master plans" to "modernize" it were created in the years after its formative years.
The plans, on the other hand, have had little or no impact. True to the spirit of its early formative years, the
city has continued to evolve on its own terms. Inevitably, rejection of the master plans' implementation was
not without repercussions. It has made a significant contribution to the city's current multi-faceted difficulties
(Yitbarek, 2008). Following its formative years (mid-1880s-1930), the city has had three separate
government systems: capitalism (1930-1974), Marxist (1975-1991), and "free market" (since 1991). (1991-
to date). There was little effort made during the two previous regimes to significantly improve the socio-
economic and physical conditions of non-planned settlements. Long after the two regimes had passed away,
little was done. Years of indifference have contributed to the current massive backlog. Currently, it is
estimated that 80 percent of Addis Ababa's population lives in "slums" (Yitbarek, 2008). According to
UNHABITAT (2008), slums make up the vast bulk of Addis Ababa's housing. From the preceding
paragraphs, it is clear that Addis Ababa's current image is derived from its history, namely from the country's
housing and land policies under prior regimes.
In the 1960s, several emerging countries implemented urban regeneration, urban upgrading, and slum
removal programs (Doebele, 1987). Slums were largely subjected to destruction, upgrading, and
regeneration during the 1960s, according to studies, since they were considered sources of crime and
repeated violence. Since the early 2000s, Ethiopia has been involved in the process. This might be because
Ethiopia has experienced a series of confrontations with its neighbors and has been preoccupied with
resolving them. Furthermore, the government faced a lack of well-articulated policies and plans for slum
regeneration, slum upgrading, and slum removal that were executed on the ground.
Similarly, (Yitbarek, 2008) emphasizes that Addis Ababa has been waking up from its dormancy during the
2000s. Meanwhile, Addis Ababa's municipal government was disbanded, and the city's administration was
reformed through decentralization [during the post-1991 period]. The city has also begun to take significant
steps to decrease slums and substandard housing, notably in the most deteriorated government-owned
kebele dwellings. Urban renewal, urban upgrading, slum eradication, and other initiatives are among them.
Currently, Addis Ababa is home to the African Union's (AU) headquarters, the United Nations
Economic Commission for Africa (UN-ECA), and multilateral financial institutions such as the World Bank,
the European Commission, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and others. In addition, the
city is home to over 103 embassies and diplomatic mission heads, as well as many international, regional,
and sub-regional organizations and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Aside from the
fact that Addis Ababa is a metropolis made up of people from all across the country, it is also a location
where people of all ethnicities and cultural backgrounds coexist. The city is undergoing significant changes
in various sectors, including infrastructure provision, including the construction of roads and railways to
30
address the city's transportation problem, mass production of houses in various parts of the city to alleviate
the city's housing problem, increasing the volume of pure water supply for the city, increasing electric power
supply for the city, and the emergence of many high-rise buildings owned by various entities. However, much
more effort is needed to make the city a pleasant place to live and work for the majority of its residents.
3.2 Housing development policy in Ethiopia

Until March 2005, Ethiopia has never had a comprehensive national housing strategy. However, it
was not until 2004 that a definite policy direction was established, which was then converted into an official
government policy statement and a comprehensive program (MWUD, 2008). Prior to 2005, what was
known as "urban policy" was mostly limited to expressions of purpose found in different national economic
development policy papers, including several historic proclamations and laws concerning urban regions
(UN-HABITAT, 2007).
Following the many urban reform projects that have been tried in Addis Ababa and across the nation since
2000, the Council of Ministers of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia created and adopted a
consolidated Urban Development Policy in 2005 (MWUD, 2008). Ethiopia's cities are to be examples of
participatory democracy, providing efficient and effective public services to inhabitants, complementing and
facilitating rural development, and building rapid economic possibilities that produce jobs, according to the
policy.
In addition, the policy's goal is supported by eight guiding principles that serve as the foundation for an
urban development plan and supporting measures. One of these guiding concepts envisions cities providing
inhabitants with enough housing. The Urban Development Policy, based on these guiding principles,
specifies five essential intervention areas to promote the overall goals of faster and equitable growth.
Housing Development, Micro and Small Enterprise Expansion, Land and Infrastructure Provisions, Social
Service Delivery, Governance, and Urban Planning and Environmental Conservation are among the
important interventions (MWUD, 2008).
As a result, following the formulation of the policy, the implementation process began with the goal of
addressing current housing issues. In 2006, the government created the Integrated Housing Development
Program (IHDP), which is now being implemented in 59 cities across the country. IHDP was initially
implemented in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia's Federal Capital, in 2004. The national program was developed in
2006 using the experiences of the Addis Ababa City Government, which introduced and implemented new
and creative means of providing cheap housing to urban people between 2003 and 2005. The Program
has been scaled-up to encompass 36 cities in 2007 and 59 cities in 2008, based on its success in Addis
Ababa, the outcomes realized, and the lessons gained (MWUD, 2008).
The Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP) attempts to achieve the following goals:
i. Increase the provision of affordable homes for low-income people.

ii. Recognize current urban slum zones and take steps to prevent further spread.
iii. Increase work chances for micro and small businesses, as well as unskilled laborers, so that their
families may afford their own homes.
iv. Increase the nation's wealth production and distribution.
The government's initial goal for the IHDP for 2006-2010 was to:
i. 400,000 dwelling units will be built.

ii. To create 200,000 jobs, making a substantial contribution to the national goal of halving urban
unemployment.
iii. To support the long-term growth of 10,000 small businesses in the construction industry.
iv. Provide 6,000 hectares of serviced land for houses and other projects each year.
31
v. To improve and expand the capability of contractors, consultants, engineers, foremen, and
construction material suppliers.
vi. To assist the private sector in producing 125,000 housing units each year by providing land,
infrastructure, and a favorable legal and legislative environment.
The government intends to satisfy approximately half of the housing demands while assisting the private
sector with the other share. The aim was 360,000 residential condominium units across a variety of housing
typologies and 9,000 commercial units (see table 4) when the scheme was further developed (UN-HABITAT,
2010)
Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom

Addis Ababa 36,750 71,750 52,500 14,000 175,000
Other regional 38,850 75,850 55,500 14,800 185,000
states
Total 75,600 147,600 108,000 28,800 360,000
% Distribution 21% 41% 30% 8% 100%
Table 4 Planned Condominium Housing Units Construction, 2006-2010 - Dolicho, E. (2006) cited in UN-
HABITAT (2010)
3.2.1 Housing condition in Addis Ababa

Because of the city's fast-growing population and the bad state of the bulk of existing dwellings, there is a
significant backlog in providing appropriate housing for its residents. Housing shortages are one of the
most prominent manifestations of poverty in Addis Ababa, and they may be interpreted in both qualitative
and quantitative terms. "It is believed that 80 percent of Addis Ababa's population lives in slums."
(Yitbarek, 2008).
Since 2004, the government has been implementing large-scale housing construction to address the city's
housing shortage, primarily through the Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP). The initiative
aims to increase the government's engagement in the housing industry, which was only 8.4% in 2003 (see
Table 5), and to develop and distribute low-cost condominium homes for the city's low-income citizens.
However, the number of housing units built and provided thus far is significantly fewer than the projected
and actual need.
Housing supplier No. of houses Percentage share
Public 7,409 8.4
Cooperatives 24,820 28.2
Individuals (formal) 22,225 25.3
Real estate developers 3,520 4.0
Informal sector 30,000 34.1
Total 87,976 100
32
Over the last 10 years, the municipal government has been able to develop and transfer9 more than
136,000 condominium homes, with another 130,000 now under construction in various regions of the city
(Ethiopian News Agency, 2016). Previously, the focus category was low-income residents, but beginning in
2013, the municipal government began implementing various home development initiatives for middle-
income residents under the 40/60 program. The Agency re-registered previously registered candidates as
well as new applicants in the 10/90, 20/80, and 40/60 programs in August 2013. These programs differ
from the previous in that registered applicants are expected to save 10, 20, or 40% of the total cost of the
house in each program to be included in the delivery process, which is based on a lottery system, and the
remaining balance will be paid to the bank after the house is delivered. However, in the previous scheme,
pre-saving was not needed to be included in the delivery process; instead, those who received a house were
expected to pay a 20% down payment up front and then pay the remaining balance to the bank every month
for the next 20 years.
3.2.2 Actors involved on condominium Housing Development

So far, the government has dominated the condominium housing development program in Addis
Ababa in terms of policy formulation, land supply, plan and design preparation, financing, and delivery of
basic services, with offices such as the City Council, Works and Urban Development Bureau, Addis Ababa
Development Housing Agency, Addis Ababa Road Authority, Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority,
Federal Utility Agencies, and Addis Ababa Leas implementing the program. Private consultants, construction
firms, and Micro and Small Businesses, on the other hand, are actively participating in the building process.
Until now, the condominium project has been carried out with the participation of many entities under the
guidance and control of the government, namely HDPO. The total process of developing each new
condominium house, according to UN-HABITAT (2010), is as follows.
i. Addis Ababa City Administration selects and surveys potential site

ii. Request for approval put forward to the Land Board
iii. Apply for Government bonds from CBE
iv. HDPO competition released for site master plan
v. Shortlisted entrants develop design
vi. Presentation of designs to stakeholders with a winner selected
vii. Design amendments made by HDPO
viii. Construction contractor vacancies released
ix. HDPO hires contractors and sub-contractors
x. Condominium construction commences (first construction of houses, then infrastructure)
xi. When construction is 80 per cent complete, lottery registration opens
xii. Lottery draw and results dissemination
xiii. Winners have one month to claim condo/ complete Form 03.
xiv. They then pay down payment to CBE and sign General Agreement with HDPO
xv. General Agreement sent to CBE and Land Authority
xvi. Construction completes
xvii. Keys given to beneficiaries.
3.2.3 Neighbourhood Open Space Provision Standards

According to the Addis Ababa Neighborhood Planning and Design Manual (AANPDM) (2006), while the
concept of condominium housing is new, the neighborhood design must encourage previous living qualities
at a certain level, such as common green spaces for children's play areas and other activities such as
meetings, Iddir, and holiday celebrations to appeal to people of all ages. It is vital to govern the quality and
amount of open space in the neighborhood design to achieve this.
33
The guidebook emphasizes neighborhood planning and design ideas for providing neighborhood open
spaces for regeneration of inner-city regions and new settlement areas such as expansion and infill areas.
These guidelines can be stated as follows:
o Create a livable, energetic atmosphere that blends in with the current settlement.
o Consider how conventional communal spaces are organized and how the specific project area,
whether in the front or back yard, is used.
o Create architectural forms and settings that encourage ethnic variety and social interaction.
 Creating enclosed areas between construction blocks, designing spaces for fostering
communal sport activities, and establishing gathering places inside each community,
 Creating pedestrian zones with employment, services, and recreational
opportunities.
 Creating a better living environment for children and meeting areas for adults by
designing terraced houses with a modest elevation.
 Buildings and neighborhoods should provide ramps for handicapped people.
o Avoid wasting negative spaces and unsuitable areas, such as excessively sharp triangular spaces, as
much as feasible.
o Create environmentally sustainable and economically sound communities such as:
 Create communal recycling facilities, community bins, and biogas digesters in
backyards.
 Create a space for community members to promote small organic farming
operations.
 gardens and roof top gardens for improving social interactions and creating a
pleasant climate.
 Provide trees (especially along pedestrian routes) and green areas, which are
essential elements of a community.
 Reduce hard surfaces (asphalt, concrete pavements...) as much as possible and
maximize green fields to create a favorable microclimate.
o Emphasis should be placed on encouraging and promoting pedestrian and non-motorized
transportation, particularly on local and access roads such as:
 The creation of a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle paths,
 Ramps for disabled people are available.
 Winding the streets, erecting bumpers, and other measures can be used to
discourage fast moving vehicles from using local and access roads.
o While planning and designing, consider specific important site features (both natural and man-
made), such as a river, landmark and historical buildings, trees, and so on.
o Improve crime prevention mechanisms through physical planning (to support informal neighborhood
social control mechanisms) by designing a favorable internal layout of pedestrian routes, roads, and
buildings to avoid unsafe spaces where rape and other assaults are likely to occur (such as entrances
to the houses should be open and built in such a way that people living around could observe who
are entering into the house and pedestrian routes to follow roads and facing the front yard of houses
than leading through backyard and wooded areas)
o Promote social cohesiveness, social mixing, and integration of diverse communities by creating an
open society.
o Develop and establish a hierarchy of neighborhood spaces, including public (streets), semi-public
(courtyards for block clusters for community activities), and private space (within the housing unit)
The supply of open space at residential clusters based on the number of inhabitants or households is as
follows, according to the manual:
34
Level of open Space requirement Catchment’s area Served population Location
space
Play lot (at 0.1-0.2 ha 120 m radius 1,250- 1,750 inh. Centre of
residential cluster) (250-350 catchments area,
Household) Not adjacent to
collector street
Play lot (at 0.3 - 0.4 ha 400 m radius 5,000 – Within the
residential cluster) 10,000inh. catchments area
(1,000 –2,000
Household)
Table 5 Neighbourhood open space standard - Addis Ababa neighbourhood planning and design manual,
(2006)
ORAAMP developed norms and regulations in 2002 for the green area coverage of open spaces in
residential neighborhoods, with the goal of improving environmental quality and increasing green area
coverage in residential contexts. The following are the criteria for a neighborhood green space. (ORAAMP,
2002)
o For plots up to 150 m sq., one tree is planted, and for plots larger than 150 m sq., one tree is
planted.
o Unsealing 12 to 25% of a plot's surface area is recommended (for greenery and natural open space
so that rainwater should percolate to the ground, decrease water discharge and reduce runoff).
o Green areas of various levels (neighborhood-city level) should be supplied and developed in
accordance with the Social Facilities component's norms and requirements.
o In any case, green areas should be allocated an average of 0.5-1m sq./person.
However, as compared to the WHO's suggested standard of 10 sq. m/person, the norm for Addis Ababa is
significantly lower (see section 3.7.2). Furthermore, in high-density development, the percentage approach
to providing open space is criticized for being inequitable. When compared to low-density development,
this will result in less open space per person. As a result, the researcher suggests allocating open spaces
based on the number of people rather than a proportion of the overall developed area.
3.2.4 Provision of Open Space and Density

The density range for a certain region can be stated in terms of reference based on the specific city
norm and standard in a neighborhood development program. The density of an area can varies not just
from one region to the next, but also within a city, depending on economic opportunities, resident interest,
development trends, land value, and other factors (MWUD, 2008). Density proposals are provided for the
different zones on the structural plan in Addis Ababa. Dense growth is predicted in key locations where land
value is high, with enhanced service and infrastructure supply, job opportunities, and transportation, to
maximize effective resource usage. As a result, the planned population density levels in various Addis Ababa
zones, as well as the catchment radius area, are as follows:
Density Zone Proposed Density Proposed Catchment radius

HH/he. population density
HH/he.
Core Area 125- 380 650 – 2000 Areas within 5 Km
radius: Merkato,
Teklehaimanot,
Piazza, Lagaar,
Mexico, Kazainchis
etc.
35
Intermediate zone 80- 125 400- 650 Areas between core and
infill
80- 125 400- 650 Infill areas
Periphery and 54-80 280-400 Existing non-and partly
Expansion areas built-up areas.
Table 6 Proposed population density of Addis Ababa - ORAAMP, (2002)
In order to achieve the stated density, (ORAAMP, 2002) developed the following criterion as an average
land area per household for various Addis Ababa zones.
Average land area per Household (m. sq./HH)

Areas For pure residential or housing units and For housing units,
use supporting physical supporting physical
and social and social
infrastructure services infrastructure and
higher-level uses
Core 40 – 80 80 – 100 100 – 120
Intermediate 80 -130 130 – 140 140 – 150
Expansion Area 125 185 215
Table 7 Area per Household standards in core, intermediate and expansion areas
In Addis Ababa, the building permit regulation BAR for condominium homes ranges from 75 to 85 percent,
including parking space. This standard is only applicable in densely populated sections of the city. In the
middle area, a large neighborhood normally emerges. In this situation, the built-up area is determined by
the available development area as well as the minimum area need for open space provision at the
neighborhood level. According to Elias Yitbarek (Yitbarek, 2008) performance evaluation research, "the
total area covered by new housing developments over the planning period is assessed to be 2,977 hectares
of land." When compared to the projected area, just 30 percent was covered with dwellings. The remaining
70% of land might be unoccupied or has already been converted to various land uses to varying degrees.'
This data suggests that the actual development is more compact than the projected one, which might have
a substantial impact on the available open areas.
3.2.5 Framework for Institutions

The Beautification, Parks and Cemetery Development and Administration Agency of Addis Ababa
(BPCDAA), which was established in 2004 based on proclamation number 35/2004 by the city government
and was previously categorized under sanitation and beautification administration, is currently the authorized
institution for administering open spaces in residential neighbourhoods (Anteneh, 2014). The agency was
founded to address the city's current sanitation problems, with the goal of making Addis Ababa one of the
African towns that residents and visitors choose in terms of attractiveness and green growth. The agency has
the authority to manage, oversee, and develop public recreational parks and green areas in residential
neighbourhoods.
The organization now concentrates on greening public parks and greeneries along the street, but its
engagement in creating and preserving existing open space around condominium communities is
insufficient. As a result, residents and residents' associations in condominium communities focus largely on
the creation and management of existing open spaces in their communities. However, a concerted effort
from all stakeholders is likely to provide a remarkable result in terms of creating liveable living environments
in condominium communities.
36
3.3 Case study (Arat Kilo)
Arat Kilo is an older, socially mixed slum colony with both formal and informal constructions. There
are a variety of housing typologies available, ranging from single detached houses to cluster housing to
substandard dwellings. Furthermore, the buildings' age, construction quality, and infrastructure provisions
vary, but most of the residential building materials are inadequate. In the centre of Addis Ababa, it is one
of the city's oldest neighbourhoods. Waves of evictions removed Arat Kilo and nearby districts in Arada sub-
city between 2009 and 2015 to make way for private projects and governmental residential projects. Over
8,000 families were displaced from their houses, with many relocating to the suburbs.
The study area in Arat Kilo is known locally as Basha Wolde Chilot/Bekele Tera (previously before the
redevelopment). It is located in Adwa Street from the West side of Arat kilo roundabout. As stated earlier,
the properties, which are located at a prominent location in the city, have historical significance and are
administratively significant. Thus, different governmental and administrative office are located in that are,
as well as different amenities and services for recreational, educational, religious and medical facilities can
be found in and around the neighbourhood.
Figure 17 Basha Wolde Chilot condominium - Arat Kilo, Addis Ababa
Figure 16 Ara Kilo - Aerial Google Image
37
To Piassa To 5 Kilo
Basha Wolde Chilot

Condominium To Megenagna
Arat Kilo
R oundabout
To Stadium – National Palace

Figure 18 Allocation map - Basha Wolde Chilot condominium - Arat Kilo, Addis
3.3.1 General Description about Basha Wolde Chilot Condominium
Neighbourhood
The government has planned to build 400,000 condominium units under the Integrated Housing
Development Program (IHDP) from 2005, Part of the Integrated Housing Development Initiative is the Basha
Wolde Chilot relocation program. “Bashar Wolde-Chilot” condominium is located at 9° 1'59.51"N,
38°45'32.54"E and spread on 62,985.67 m2 of land. This condominium site is found in Arada Sub City in
Woreda 09.
The overall size of the community, according to the neighbourhood design of Basha Wolde condominium
acquired from Addis Ababa Housing Development Project Office, is roughly 6.3 hectares. From north west
to south west, a river runs on the borders of the neighbourhood. The prominent natural landscape feature
is the down slope from the north to the south of the neighbourhood.
3.3.2 The study Area – General Description

A specific study area from the neighbourhood is chosen to be investigated in depth as an exemplary
parcel. Following that, a broad overview of the research region is offered, as well as data obtained from
residents concerning the current state of community open spaces in the study area, which is then analysed.
The entire area of the research site is 13,800 m2, with a built-up area of 3,200 m2, a road network and
circulation area of 3,476 m2, and a total amount of open space of 7,124 m2.
There are 9 condominium blocks and one communal open space between the blocks within the study area.
The total number of residential flats are 324. If we assume a population of 5 people per household
(according to the Central Statistics Agency, 2007), the residential area's density will be 1,620 inh/he, which
is higher than the Addis Ababa Housing Development Project Office's standard of 600-950 inhabitants per
38
hectare (assuming five people per household) or 120-190 households per hectare for the intermediate
density zone.
This condominium was very recently added to the community, and residents have only been living there for
around two years. As a result, their experience and community participation are still in the early stages, and
the majority of the community relationships are still being formed.
Figure 19 Aerial photograph of the study area
Figure 20 Study area open spaces allocation
39
3.3.3 Communal Open Spaces Management and Administration
Currently, the residents' organization, through allocated representatives from each block, is in
charge of the creation and administration of existing common open spaces. The management structure of
community open space in the study region may be explored by categorizing it into two levels: neighbourhood
and parcel. The Basha Wolde Chilot Condominium House Owners Association Office had a local regulatory
standard covering members' rights and obligations in using shared open spaces, as well as how they should
utilize these places, at the neighbourhood level. Unfortunately, the involvement of the respective government
agency and community representative in developing and managing the existing open spaces in the study
area is missing. Yet, there are rules and laws stated by the Association’s to regulate the communal open
spaces.
o Section 15.2.5. Inhabitants have equal right to use the parking spaces and other related spaces
however inhabitants are not allowed to perform activities, which are restricted to be performed on
communal open spaces.
o Section 16.3. Ceremonies like diges, lekso, wedding and other social events should be held on
space, which is dedicated for this purpose.
o Section 16.4. Except on spaces, which is dedicated, to be used communally by inhabitants, it is not
allowed to construct a tent on the road and building entrances.
o Section 17.1. Any slaughtering activity is not allowed except on the space dedicated for this purpose.
o Section 17.2. It is forbidden to dispose waste from household activities like cloth washing cleaning
houses on the ground.
o Section 17.4. It is forbidden to dispose a burned fuel from cars on the ground
o Section 17.5. Without having permission from the association car washing activity on open space is
not allowed
o Section 17.7. It is not allowed to put an advertising board on the open space.
o Section 17.8. It is a shared responsibility of inhabitants to maintain and protect the green areas,
destroying and cutting the plants is forbidden.
o Section 17.9. Constructing a plastic shelter on residential flats or on the side of the roads for doing
commercial or any other activity is prohibited.
o Section 17.10. Inhabitants should collect the trash from their household activities and handover to
the trash collectors. Disposing garbage on the roads or on corridors is forbidden.
o Section 17.11. Excreting/urinating on the road is forbidden.
o Section 17.14. It is not allowed to dispose waste material from cleaning the house plastics, soft etc.
in the neighbourhood except on the area dedicated for trash and residual collection purpose.
o Section 18.1 Playing football within the neighbourhood main roads and circulation areas is
forbidden.
o Section 18.2 Vehicle owner inhabitants and guests should obey the traffic sighs inside the
neighbourhood
o Section 18.3 Driving inside communal space with generating high noise is forbidden.
o Section 18.4. Except in case of emergency using clacks and siren in communal spaces is forbidden.
o Section 18.5. Maintaining cars and leaving broken vehicle parts on communal spaces is not
allowed.
o Section 18.6. Without having permission from the Association, inhabitants are not allowed to park
big trucks on communal spaces and inside the neighbourhood.
o Section 18.7. Parking on circulation area and pedestrian way is forbidden.
o Section 18.8. Without permission, practicing motor bikes or bicycle around the blocks is forbidden.
40
o Section 18.9. The Association will work together with the owner to relocate abandoned old vehicles
on communal space. If not, the association will have relocated the vehicles at the cost of the owner.
o Section 18.10. Parking outside the dedicated parking lot is forbidden and there will be a fee for
parking service.
On a parcel or the study area level, however, there is a tendency of permitting and forbidding activities on
various parts of the investigated parcel, which is established by informal agreement of residents, in addition
to the Association's laws and regulations. Within the analysed study area, the following issues can be seen
practice openly by the inhabitants.
As it was observed in the study area, the open space between the blocks so reserved for only plantation and
green infrastructure and no community or other activities are allowed to be conducted on it. Thus, forcing
the inhabitants to utilize the circulation area for those purposes. Those rules were implemented by the
committee of the condominiums putting the presence of the green infrastructures ahead of the people’s daily
needs and lifestyle activities as was discussed with the inhabitants.
3.3.4 Uses of Communal Open Spaces in the study area

The interview is conducted with residents of the study area to collect information and experience and
engagement with local open spaces and how it serves their community, as mentioned in the preceding part
of the research process. This kind of data collection has aided in the comprehension of the physical element
of open spaces as well as the inhabitants' everyday activities and lives. Interviews are done at random in the
study regions from each block. The following are a few of the interviews that were conducted.
3.3.4.1 Selected Interviews
Figure 21 Selected interviews from few blocks of the study area
41
Interview 1
Name: Ato Tefera Getachew
Sex: Male
Age: 42
Floor: 1st floor- 2bed room
Family number: 4 Child-1
Occupation period: 2
Work: Driver
Use open space: Yes
Use: main use for washing and drying clothes.

Sometimes to dry herbs and traditional spice preparation.
General information: Ato Tefera Getachew is one of the pioneer occupants of newly developed Arat Kilo
condominium who lived in the neighbourhood for almost 2 years now; meaning since the end of the
construction. He got relocated to Arat kilo (Basha Wolde Chilot) neighbourhood from his previous location
‘Lideta’ to a different condominium now he is settling in Arat kilo because of the redevelopment program of
the area. Currently he is living in two-bedroom flat with his family. During the interview, Ato Tefera Getachew
is a representative of the block he is living in concerning different issues regarding the living environment
including the usage of communal open space around her block. He is also a member of the condominium
committee.
Usage of communal open space: He added that the majority of his and his family's open space usage is for
fabric washing and drying, but that there is a rule that the open areas cannot be used for anything other
than a plantation. As a result, the only places left out are the circulation area and the negative spaces
between the buildings, which are finally not usable because they do not receive enough sunshine. "As you
can see, the open space accessible near our block is inconvenient for any social or recreational activity
since the area is too tiny and the space is too narrow for such activity, and the garden space retains a large
amount of space that we cannot employ," he explained. "Even though I haven't had any 'diges'/ceremonies
since I moved to this neighbourhood, I've seen other people use the corridor area for 'diges' and other
ceremonies," he said, "this is because the current open areas aren't convenient for such activities."
Challenges: The lack of space and the physical condition of accessible open space were cited as the key
reasons for his not using it for recreational purposes or allowing his kid to play on it. "As you can see, the
area and physical quality of this place are not suitable for our kids to play on, plus the rule proposed on not
using the green space for any other activities other than plantation, so living in the condominium for residents
with children is a major issue." Even for cloth drying, there isn't enough room because most households
wash their clothes the same day when water is only provided once a week or on the weekends thus, forcing
them to use the walkways as a place for drying and washing" he also explained, adding, " "Even at night,
the entire condominium is dark as there are no outdoor lights and proper enclosure or boundaries of the
neighbourhood jeopardizing the safety and the security of the residents." Ato Tefera Getachew, also stated
the issue of scarcity in the parking space forcing vehicle owners to park in the walkways and undesignated
areas, making the communal area unsafe and uncomfortable for the general movement of the inheritance.
He ended his statement with "The location is suitable for living except for minor concerns like water scarcity,
proper landscaping and green space allocation that paves away for an ample and pleasant outside space
for children playing and other social activities," he ends his assessment of the neighbourhood by stating that
42
since he is a member of the neighbourhood committee, he tries to raise these issues and shed lights on the
daily challenges the residents are facing.
Figure 22 surrounding area of Ato, Tefera Getachew open spaces - dumped soils unplanned landscape
Figure 24 preserved area for greenery only - Activities conducting on the circulation area
Figure 23 Activities and open space condition
Soil dumbed on the side of the walkways

Vegetation and plantation on the other side of the walkways
Noise and unsafe area due to car movements
43
Interview 2
Name: W/ro Mesert Seyfu
Sex: Female
Age: 35
Floor: 1st floor- 2 bed room
Family number: 6 / Child-2
Occupation period: 1 year
Work: Housewife
Use open space: Yes
Use: main use for washing and drying clothes. Sometimes

to dry herbs and traditional spice preparation. Mostly on
Sunday’s. Kids play.
General information: A year ago, W/ro Mesert Seyfu relocated to the Arat kilo condominium
neighbourhood. She is now residing with her spouse and two children.
Usage of communal open space: W/ro Mesert Seyfu and her family use the communal open space, which
is located to the side of their block for some personal uses primarily and daily activities. “We use the open
space for food and spice preparation for household consumption and for cloth washing and drying activities
predominantly, in addition to this we also occasionally use the hardscape cobblestone for children to play”
Challenges: W/ro Mesert Seyfu “for me the biggest challenge is the location of the only useable open space
as you can see, it is adjacent to the asphalt road in which cars passes at high speed that makes me worried
to let my children play on since the greenery area is strictly for plantation and we cannot conduct our daily
activities on it. Besides this, the open space which is found adjacent to the road and at the rear side of the
block is used as a parking sport for the residents’ vehicles.” She also mentioned the difficulty to use the open
space because of interferences of multiple activities as stated earlier parking on the pathways and hanging
clothes on walkways. “We don’t have a separate space for cloth drying purposes so is it difficult to hang a
washed cloth because most of the time when I use the wire on open space to dry clothes the children will
drag it to the ground or hit it with a ball while they are playing consequently or people pass by it, I have to
clean it again.” W/ro Mesert also added “ There is difficulty in accessing the open spaces due to unplanned
and improper stair raises that makes it hard to access especially for older peoples, Plus the absence of night
lights and boundaries or enclosure makes it even worse and exposes us all to dangers and thefts” Another
thing that was challenging for W/ro and her family is the absence of communal building in the newly
constructed condominium for slaughtering and ceremonial or social gatherings making the open space
usage even harder to properly utilize for our daily activities and our lifestyle.
Figure 25 Parking on pavement -unutilized landscape
44
Figure 27 Difficult access unproper design

45
Interview 3
Name: W/ro Alem Gebru
Sex: Female
Age: 33
Floor: 3st floor- 2 bed room
Family number: 5 / Child-2
Occupation period: 1 year
Work: Housewife
Use open space: Sometimes

Sometimes to dry herbs and traditional spice
preparation. Mostly on Sunday’s. Kids play.
General information: W/ro Alem Gebru has also moved to Arat Kilo around now year and a half years ago.
She is a housewife and she spent most of her time in the neighbourhood taking care of her two daughters.
Currently, she is living in a two-bedroom flat with her family, during the interview.
Usage of communal open space: W/ro Alem Gebru mentioned that living on the upper floors is
discouraging to use the open space however; they use it for necessary activities. “Living on the upper floor
by itself is not comfortable to do our activity on the ground despite this I and my family occasionally use the
open space available in front of our block for important activities like children wanting to play, for cloth
washing and drying, and spices preparation but mostly we use it for car parking and children from around
play on it on weekends and after school, even though there is no designated place for children playground
and no place to conduct ceremonial preparation, when necessary.”
Challenges: W/ro Alem Gebru stated the issues she and her family face whenever they use the communal
open spaces are inadequacy of area and the spatial quality of available open space as there is no proper
designated area for our daily activities that has caused a huge social barrier among the inhabitants in my
block as there is no proper gathering area for celebration, ceremonial preparation, and mourning, in
addition, limiting our daily usage due to lack of proper and safe area for kids to play and residents to enjoy.
Even there is not enough space for doing anything and we have to use public walkways as the place for
parking our vehicles and drying our clothes. Moreover, the general aesthetic of the open area is not well
thought of and the area left for greenery is not well planned and the plantation arrangement and types area
discouraging for safety and providing shades and lovely atmosphere. She also added the same issue of
security and accessibility the other inhabitant mentioned especially at night time She concludes her insight
about the neighbourhood by saying “the neighbourhood is a good place to live in terms of general
accessibility to the rest of the city and work-wise, but when it comes to the social relationship among us all
inhabitant of this new condominium is being hindered by the inadequacy of the open space and the planning
strategy the committee is following, it is not serving us or our lifestyle”
46
Figure 29 Interference of different activities in one place.
Figure 28 negative spaces left and utilized and unmaintained - high stairs
47
Interview 4
Name: W/ro Zewdnsh Wendemagegnehu
Sex: female
Age: 83
Floor: 2nd floor-1 bed room
Family number: 4
Occupation period: 2 years
Work: Unemployed
Use open space: Yes, but not that much

Sometimes to dry herbs and traditional spice
preparation. Mostly on Sunday’s.
General information: W/ro Zewdnsh Wendemagegnehu has lived in Arat Kilo condominium neighbourhood
for 2 years now. She and her family relocated from Cherkos neighbourhood because of the redevelopment
program. Currently W/ro Zewdnsh is living with her daughter and two grandchildren in one bedroom flat.
Currently, she is not working because of her age and spent most her time at home however she has a
financial support from her daughter.
Usage of communal open space: W/ro Zewdnsh’s activity on communal open space is limited to planting
simple herbs at a very small scale in summer and look out for her grandkids whenever they want to play
outside. “I am old I spent much of my time inside my home however in the previous years I have planted a
herbs and simple plants on the open space adjacent to the stair case and I used them for home
consumptions. I also have a plan to do it this year too but they will always get destructed by other tenants
especially one lving on the ground floor that uses these spaces for their daily activities. Other than that, we
use the cobblestone paved area in front of our block for kids to play and sometimes sit on the edge of the
paved walkways to have a change of air while watching my grandkids play.”
Challenges: W/ro Zewdnsh mentioned the area of available open space as a major challenge as it is
inadequate for any recreational activity for her and her grandchildren, no sitting places no kids playgrounds.
“The green space we have is only left for plantation and greenery and we can use it for recreational or other
activities, for an old person like me it will be very good if we have enough accessible and useable green
space. Also, there are no children playing area so my grandchildren are playing on the cobblestone paved
area and the adjacent asphalt road. This makes me and their mother worried every day thinking about if
they might be hit by a car or fell on the ground. Even if it is not safe for them there is no other option.” W/ro
Zewdnsh also mentioned the lack of social interaction and social life she used to have in her previous
residences such as iddir, ceremonial celebration, or even social participation in holidays. All due to there is
in place give for them to conduct these activities properly.
48
Figure 32 activities near the block - negative space left to deteriorate
Figure 31 Interference of activities/ poor landscaping - unitized spaces

49
3.3.5 Activities in Communal Open Spaces Interfere
The physical environment is not the only thing that influences one's activity in open places, but it also
influences the actions of others. Interference of activities is expected since the common open areas are used
for different purposes. However, this phenomenon is occurring in the study area in such a way that one
activity is interfering with the other. Residents cited some of the current activities as a barrier for them when
using the area, according to data obtained from residents to analyse how other residents' behaviour affects
their activity on common open spaces. When many activities are taking place in the same location at the
same time, it usually impacts the population.
Interfering activities Associated challenges
Gardening and satellite dish mounting Conflict between neighbours as a result of destroying
the vegetation and dirtying the area during satellite
dish mounting,
Gardening and food preparation Destroying the vegetation and mucking up the area
Gardening and children playing Destroying the vegetation
Cloth drying and food preparation Not comfortable while using the space for both
activities and conflict as a result of competition for
space,
Gardening and cloth drying Destruction of vegetation while hanging clothes
Cloth drying and children playing Difficulty for cloth drying
Car parking and children playing Difficulty for car parking during children are playing
Walkway and cloth drying People passing under other people’s hang clothed
Table 8 Interference of activities and associated problems
The actions carried out by the locals have an impact on the existing physical environment. As a result of
the residents' responses and observations, the activities and their effects on existing open spaces are
presented in the following table in the form of a summary, indicating their impact in terms of functional
disruption for other activities, contribution to environmental quality, and user conflict.
Activity Cause Effect on the open space
Functional Env ironmental Functional Env ironmental Conflict

Disturbance Quality Disturbance Quality
Satellite dish - Using separate Narrowing the Reduce Scenic Interfering with
mounting satellite dish space for View gardening and
individually gardening and social spaces
social activities
- No dedicated
space for this
function
Dumping dry waste - No maintenance Reduce the quality Changing in to Unwillingness for
- Irresponsible of the space for dumping area cleaning
behaviour other activity
Food and spice - The need for Interfering with Reduce Scenic Interfering with
preparation direct sun light gardening and View because of open space
social activity the waste from the
- Separate space is
process
not allocated
50
Cloth washing and - requires sun light Interfering with Reduce free Interfering with
drying and fresh air public access and movement and access and visual
movement visual connection connection.
- separate space is
from different
not allocated
points
Car parking - requires space to - interfering with - minimizes public Minimize

park and move. safety and access safety pedestrian access
when parking on
- some of the open
walkways
space area was
turned into a
parking lot
Table 9 the influence of activities on green areas
3.3.6 The Physical Environment and Activities

Because there are so many components to discuss, the physical environment is a big idea to go through in
depth. "Any state of influence beyond the organism, group, or whatever system is being researched," defined
Rapoport (1977). The physical environment is made up of several components that characterize the urban
environment; "the physical environment, which includes all natural aspects of topography, climate, and
artificial features that constrain and enable behaviour and the environment's resources"
Figure 34 Interference Activities in Open spaces
51
So that it is clear that while analysing the physical environment, it is necessary to limit the parameters. The
role of physical characteristics and quality of existing communal open space in relation to residents' activities
is investigated in this study using some of the parameters discussed in the literature, such as area, enclosure,
accessibility, location, and physical quality (attractiveness based on availability of facilities and visual
desirability).
AREA
The size of an open space is important because it may promote or discourage certain activities. As a result
of being a multi-functional space, the sorts of activities that take place in the study area's existing community
open spaces vary in nature and character, as does the amount of space they demand. The overall size of
the study site is 13,800 m2, containing 3,200 m2 of built-up space, 3,476 m2 of road network and
circulation space, and 7,124 m2 of open space.
According to the response from the resident the challenges, which are related to the area adequacy of
existing open spaces, are mostly related to the improper utilization of the open spaces, limiting people's
access to the greenery and not being able to do their daily activities freely without interfering with public
spaces. No communal building or facilities for the resident to conduct their ceremonial or food preparation,
nor a slaughter place. Moreover, due to the improper planning and maintenance of the landscape around
the blocks, most of the area is being used as a dry dumb area of soils and stones, satellite mounting, and
trash accumulation. The inadequacy of the area forced most of the residents to park their vehicles on the
pedestrian walkways.
Because the accessible green spaces are divided by access roads, residents are having difficulty finding
enough open space for events involving large groups of people, such as wedding ceremonies, Mahiber,
and Iddir, within walking distance of their apartment. Residents are presently using parking lots for such
activities as a result of this situation. However, this phenomenon makes it difficult for others to find a parking
place.
Enclosure
The activities and enclosure type of the open space are investigated to determine the relationship between
the enclosure type and the activities taking place on it, which will aid in determining which type of open
space is most commonly used by residents and understanding its impact on open space usage. The research
area's enclosure type is divided into two categories for analysis: Based on the features of the existing open
space, enclosed open space and partially-enclosed open space was created.
Enclosed Open Space
An open space established as a consequence of condominium buildings encircling the area. This form of
open space differs from partially-enclosed spaces in that it is more defined and has semi-private qualities.
52
List of activities happening Type of Open Space
Children playing Inside some of green area and on paved ground
Gathering On paved ground
Food & spice preparation Inside the green area, and on unpaved ground
Cooking for ceremonies On paved ground adjacent to the block
Cloth drying Inside the green areas and on paved ground

adjacent to the block
Car parking On paved ground
Gardening Inside the green area
Table 10 Activities on enclosed open space
Figure 35 Enclosed open spaces
Partially Enclosed Space
Open spaces, such as corridor spaces between blocks and spaces adjacent to condominium blocks on one
side and the road on the other, that are partially bounded by condominium blocks, such as corridor spaces
between blocks and spaces adjacent to condominium blocks on one side and the road on the other side.
53
List of activities happening Location
Children playing Inside the green area and on unpaved ground
Food & spice preparation Inside the green area, and on unpaved ground
Cooking for ceremonies On paved ground adjacent to the block
Cloth drying Inside the green areas and on paved ground

adjacent to the block
Car parking On paved walkways and grounds
Satellite dish mounting Inside the green areas,
Dry waste dump On the side of the walkways
Table 11 Activities on partially-enclosed open space
According to the tenants, the layout of the blocks impacts their privacy and comfort when using the open
areas. The following are some of the issues raised by people and observed in the study region in regard to
Figure 36 Partially enclosed open spaces
the enclosing of existing municipal open spaces:
o Partially-enclosed spaces attract more parking activity and causes noise disturbance as a result of
car parking activity too close to the building. Some even park on the pathways
o Security problem the general enclosed open space of the condominium.
o Partially-enclosed open space is exposed for trash damping activity by outsiders and construction
left over
o Partially-enclosed open space is difficult for management and maintain
Accessibility of Green Areas

The accessibility of a green area is assessed based on the physical barriers to accessing the open space as
well as the activities that are permitted and prohibited by the local regulatory structure. In fact, there are no
54
major natural landscape features in the studied area that limit access to open spaces, but manmade features
such as fences, cloth hanging wires, mounted satellite dishes, dumped dry wastes, and other manmade
features play a significant role in the inaccessibility of communal green spaces. Each green area is given an
area code and is linked to the activities for the purposes of analysis.
The bulk of the green spaces are walled and closed to allow for recreational, social, or extended household
activities. This circumstance reduces the open spaces' multi-functionality, limiting the purpose of the existing
green space to boosting the scenic beauty of the area. Due to the inaccessibility of green places, local
children were forced to play on dangerous surfaces such as asphalt roads and cobblestone paved areas.
Residents also utilize the corridors and circulation spaces for fabric drying in regions where hanging cleaned
clothing inside the green space is forbidden, which has an impact on circulation.
Figure 37 Open space accessibility issues
Location of open space and activities

The proximity of the open space to the residential blocks, according to inhabitants, has an impact on their
activity in terms of its comfort to use and noise from activities. The following are the issues that respondents
identified when explaining how the locations of existing open space impact their day-to-day activities in the
neighbourhood.
The open spaces on the backside of condominium buildings are hard to utilize.
55
Open spaces around the condominium complex, which are utilized for parking and children's play areas,
are the sources of noise. The responders also emphasized the high level of disruption from open space
towards the back side of the block, where the bedrooms are located.
The open area at the back of the condominium blocks has received less attention for maintenance and has
become an abandoned open space and place to dump wastes and leftover construction materials and soil
build-ups.
Outsiders have turned some of the open spaces on the back side of the blocks into garbage dumping areas,
due to lack of proper enclosure or boundary fences resulting in a foul odour, unsanitary and unsafe
atmosphere.
Residents replied differently based on their experiences to the issue of how the physical qualities of existing
open space, namely in terms of its Area, Enclosure type, Accessibility, Location, and Quality of space, impact
their activities. Some of them stated that all of the above factors have an impact on their activities, while
others stated that the size and physical quality of the space is the most important influencing element. This
is because each household's demand and need for open space differs; yet, the collected data demonstrates
that the physical aspects of the open space have an impact on the occupants, as shown in the table below.
Effect of the characteristics and quality of the space on activ ities

Enclosure The blocks are very close to each other the open space is narrow for activity
The existing type of enclosure is inconvenient, and endangers the community
The enclosure is not convenient in terms of security for cloth drying, and theft
Area The available open area is too small for recreational activity
The green area is not enough for tent construction in case of social events
The area of the green area is too small for children playing, no designated space for
different activities
Location The location of available open space for daily usage and proper recreational area is not
provided due to restriction done on the greenery areas by the committee.
The location of existing open space is close enough yet inadequate for our activity
Car parking area is too close to our block which generates a high noise.
Accessibility Green areas are not accessible for children playing and recreational purposes.
Green areas are restricted for plantation only
Adequate open spaces are not provided; thus, interference of activities hinders
movement
Parking cars on the pathways and pavements
Quality of There is no recreational facility on communal open space for us to use
Spaces Some areas are not clean and properly designed for children and elderly people
Available spaces are not attractive for recreational purpose
Table 12 The effect of characteristics and quality of the open space
56
Chapter Four
4 Findings and Discussion

4.1 Summary findings of the case study
Residents are often utilising the existing community open areas for a variety of activities, depending on their
requirements. Recreational, social, and household activities, as well as other activities such as automobile
parking, gardening, urban agriculture, and satellite dish mounting, may all be divided into four categories.
A crucial stage in developing a liveable environment is to make neighbourhoods suitable for leisure activities.
As a result, common open spaces are the sole outdoor places in condominium communities, and they are
typically used for personal and group leisure activities. However, the extent to which community open spaces
are used for recreational activities in the investigated region is confined to children playing. Because of the
poor quality of the built environment and the present usage and management trend, the necessity for
exploiting existing open space for other recreational purposes is restricted. The physical condition of existing
open spaces is insufficient for recreational activities such as resting, playing, socializing, or leisure time
activities such as reading.
Furthermore, limiting inhabitants access to green places is another factor that prevents them from
participating in leisure activities on accessible green spaces.
The following primary reasons explain why community open spaces are not utilised to their full potential.
o Inaccessibility of green spaces for recreational activities: the majority of current green spaces do not
allow children to play inside or participate in other recreational activities.
o Unavailability of amenities: essential amenities such as sitting furniture, playing equipment, and
natural or manmade shads, which will entice users to spend time inside green spaces, are not
accessible.
o Unattractiveness: The accessible open areas have lost their aesthetic appeal as a result of
inadequate plant coverage and poor management. Furthermore, a large amount of open space
that may be exploited for recreational purposes has been abandoned (unused and unmaintained).
o Area: In certain situations, the available green space is relatively little as a result of access roads
fragmenting it, making it insufficient and uncomfortable for recreational activities.
Within the examined region, the amount of residents' involvement on community open spaces for social
activities is substantially greater for burial ceremonies and gatherings for Iddir-related topics. On the other
hand, the use of open space for other social events such as weddings, birthday celebrations, and holiday
ceremonies is restricted. Residents, on the other hand, utilize their homes and the building's corridor spaces
for such activities mostly due to the inadequacy of accessible open space in terms of area and its proximity
to the residents' apartment.
Furthermore, it is discovered that the amount of social interaction amongst residents in the examined region
is lower. The main cause of this predicament is the large number of tenant residents residing in the region,
the majority of whom do not participate in social events and have no social relationships with their
neighbours.
On community open space, the most common activity are household activities. The majority of the activities
in this category are driven by the inhabitants' own requirements. Even in the face of municipal regulations,
activities such as washing and drying clothing, cooking meals for social occasions, preparing food
components and spices for family consumption, and slaughtering take happen on common open areas. As
57
a result of the mismanaged nature of most of these activities, they have had a significant impact on the
quality of the physical environment.
Because there are no specific venues dedicated to these activities, the majority of inhabitants use green
spaces for domestic activities. Unmanaged use of open space for home activities, on the other hand, led in
interference of activities, which occurs when many activities are taking place at the same time in the same
location.
Car parking, gardening, urban agriculture, and satellite dish mounting are some of the other activities now
taking place in the study area, in addition to recreational, domestic, and social activities. Gardening and
urban agricultural activities are carried out on a very modest scale, with only two individuals participating.
However, in the examined region, automobile parking and satellite dish mounting are regular activities.
The physical environment, in terms of its various characteristics, such as the physical quality of the space, its
relative location from the user, the degree of accessibility, the adequacy of the area, and so on, is a key
influencing factor in attracting the user to engage in any activity on open space. The information gathered
from the study region allowed researchers to look at how current physical attributes influence activities in
community open spaces and what role existing activities play in the surrounding open space. As a result,
within the study area, the features of the outdoor built environment and people' activities on community
open spaces are linked in such a way that one influences the other.
Physical Quality: The existing physical quality of the open spaces in the investigated region is not up to par,
attracting residents to utilize the space for recreational purposes, which is an optional activity that depends
on the user's desire and satisfaction. The absence of recreational activity on existing community open spaces
is mostly due to a lack of visual appeal and the lack of amenities for various recreational activities and
spending quality time within green space. Another issue that discourages recreational activities on shared
open spaces is the area's lack of available open spaces. On the other hand, residents' activities, primarily
extended household activities that occur on communal open spaces and the waste generated from these
activities, lack of regular maintenance, construction of sub-standard fences around green areas, wires for
cloth drying purposes, installation of satellite dishes at random locations, and dumping dry waste on open
spaces, are the major factors that contribute to the current unfavourable environment.
Accessibility: Another key aspect that limits residents' use of shared open space and reduces the open space's
multi-functional purpose is accessibility. Accessibility issues are mostly connected to the local regulatory
system, which prohibits the majority of green areas from being used for children's play and home activities
in order to maintain the vegetation and keep the area clean from waste from domestic activities. However,
as a result of this circumstance, children have been forced to play on dangerous surfaces such as asphalt
roads, hard surfaces, and unsanitary areas. Furthermore, the lack of open space contributes to residents
being forced to use the condominium blocks' existing short access roads and circulation corridors for
household activities.
Area: the geographical area One of the impacting elements of the physical environment indicated by the
respondents is the appropriateness problem of existing open spaces. Residents struggle to locate adequate
area for tents to be built for social events such as weddings, funerals, and memorial services, or any other
social event involving a large number of people. As a result, residents now use the hallway space and, in
some circumstances, the flats of their neighbours to accommodate visitors. Furthermore, some homeowners
are obliged to utilize the access road and parking spots for tent building during social gatherings, causing
traffic congestion and making automobile parking difficult.
Location: The influence of the position of communal open space on inhabitants' preferences for using the
open space is investigated in terms of the open space's relative location from the residents' block. According
to the data, the bulk of activities take place on open space near to the front side of the blocks, indicating
58
that front side open spaces are the most heavily used open space. Furthermore, in terms of open space
management, front-facing open spaces are consistently maintained and are judged to be of higher physical
quality. On the contrary, the bulk of the open areas at the back of the buildings have been abandoned.
Interference of activities occurs when many activities take place at the same time in the examined region.
Furthermore, the proximity of noise-generating activities such as automobile parking and children playing
from residential blocks affects those who live in the neighbourhood.
Enclosure: The physical environment for inhabitants is affected by the differences in enclosure features of
community open spaces. The impact of enclosure features on the investigated area is linked to privacy and
security concerns, as well as people' comfort in using open space. The influence of enclosure features is
apparent in the examined region in the way that inhabitants prefer enclosed open areas over partially-
enclosed open spaces. Furthermore, homeowners dislike current partially-enclosed forms of open areas
because of security concerns when fabric drying and because they attract more traffic and automobile
parking activity, resulting in noise pollution for residents due to parking activities too near to the building.
4.2 Communal Open Spaces' Challenges

The activities and physical qualities of the open space are analysed in connection to communal open space
challenges. Existing issues are discovered to be the consequence of a cause-and-effect link between
residents' activities and the space's features and quality. The key issues with shared open space that were
filtered out of the analysis are mentioned below.
Loss of Scenic Quality: The study area's outdoor living environment is deteriorating due to the poor physical
state of existing community open spaces. The open spaces around the residential blocks are not utilised or
maintained in a way that improves the neighbourhood’s physical character. The sorts of activities that take
place in the region, as well as the lack of regular upkeep, contribute to the common open areas' picturesque
quality deteriorating. The following are some of the primary factors that lead to the loss of scenic quality in
the accessible community open spaces:
o Maintenance issue: a substantial number of green areas are not consistently maintained by cleaning
the area, growing and maintaining vegetation such as grasses, trees, and flowers, and repairing
protective fences.
o Using a separate satellite dish for each residence led in the mounting of too many of them in a
haphazard way on any accessible adjacent open area, creating an unappealing visual landscape.
o Low-quality fencing: fences made of eucalyptus wood and plastic material that surround green
spaces provide an unappealing aesthetic environment.
o Dumping dry waste: wastes from many sources, such as garbage thrown from upper levels, residual
wastes from the food and spice preparation process, and waste from house maintenance and
modification processes, make certain open places ugly and hazardous.
o Wires for hanging washed clothes on different regions of the public open space: an unappealing
method of putting wires for hanging washed clothing on different areas of the communal open space
using wood posts and fibre.
Inaccessibility: The majority of green spaces are inaccessible due to the following key factors:
o To safeguard the environment, green spaces are enclosed to prevent children from playing in them
and other inhabitants from using them for domestic chores.
o To maintain the spaces free of the garbage left behind from various domestic operations.
o A portion of the open space is surrounded by a private garden, which is walled to prevent
unauthorized entrance.
Unsuitability: As mentioned in the analysis section, some residents have difficulty finding enough open area
to build a tent for social gatherings and an acceptable playground for children to play in. This is due to the
59
fact that access roads have split previous open areas into small plots of land, and a major portion of the
open space has been paved for parking.
Interference of activities: It occurs when many hostile activities coexist in a same open place. Cloth drying
and children playing; gardening and satellite dish mounting; children playing and food preparation;
gardening and cloth drying are just a few examples of activities that might cause conflict when they occur
concurrently on existing open areas.
Conflict: While conflicts over community open space are not widespread in the study area, some residents
have stated that conflict with other residents or neighbours can emerge for a variety of reasons, including:
o Unwillingness to help with upkeep

o Interference with someone's private garden
o Conflict resulting from activity interference
Uncomfortable Smell: Due to a lack of regular maintenance and garbage dumping activities in some
sections of the open space, the environment has deteriorated, resulting in a foul odour in residential areas,
causing health problems and creating an unpleasant living environment.
Residents living near parking spaces and children's play areas are subjected to noise pollution from activities
on open spaces, particularly when children are playing on nearby open space and cars are parked too close
to the building.
60
Chapter Fiv e
5 R ecommendation
5.1 Recommendation
Existing community spaces within the study area, as indicated in the preceding sections, are an important
aspect of the inhabitants' living environment, since they are used for social, home, and recreational activities.
However, due to the current issues, many residents are unable to use them. The issue develops as a result
of a number of interrelated physical qualities and current activities on accessible open spaces. The problem's
interrelated nature, on the other hand, might be a benefit for the essential measures being taken to improve
the area's liveability, because fixing one problem would inevitably lead to the solution of the other.
Some recommendations for improving the quality of existing communal open spaces and building useful
neighbourhood open spaces are mentioned below. Following the development process of a new
condominium neighbourhood, the recommendations are divided into two categories: pre-occupancy and
post-occupancy stages.
5.1.1 Planning & Implementation in the Pre-Occupancy Stage

Addis Ababa has already seen the construction of a considerable number of new condominium housing
units, with the government planning to build much more. Those developments are concentrated in the city's
core as well as its outskirts. Nonetheless, there are critical concerns to address throughout the design and
building stages of providing those residences for residents. One of the primary concerns that should be
thoroughly examined during the condominium house construction process is the quality of shared open
space.
5.1.1.1 From the standpoint of policy and planning

Open space design should be based on real-world knowledge of how people utilize the space, not on
theoretical study or considerations from behind the drawing board (Gehl, 1987). As a result, the most
essential component of planning community open spaces is analysing the demand for space for a certain
function and taking into account the physical and functional features of open space in relation to how
activities are taking place. The policy on providing neighbourhood open space, as described in the
research's background study, strongly supports providing a quality open space that can retain past living
values by offering common open spaces to build a liveable environment for residents. However, in order to
provide the best operating open space and create a liveable environment for residents, a detailed
investigation of the features of the activities on community open spaces is required throughout the design
phase. As a result, the following concerns should be explicitly stated at the policy level and thoroughly
evaluated as part of the neighbourhood design process.
It is possible to meet the demands of the end user and increase their happiness by inviting them to participate
in the planning process. So far, IHDP's neighbourhood design has emphasized the inclusion of community
green spaces for amenity purposes. However, residents' demands go beyond having a green space unless
it is believed that they would use the amenity area for all of their needs, such as recreational, home chores,
and social activities. As a result, offering distinct open areas for the following activities will eliminate the
problem of activity interference.
o For recreational purposes, there is a children's play area, as well as room for relaxing and hanging
out.
o For home tasks such as drying clothes, preparing food and spices, and so on.
61
o Space for tent building in case of social events such as funerals, memorials, weddings, holidays, or
other religious or customary activities.
5.1.1.2 From the standpoint of spatial attributes

Enclosure: The lack of a hierarchy between private, semi-private, and public outdoor space is clearly
recognized as a result of the enclosing features of the analysed region. The bulk of activities are
accommodated in an open space with enclosed kind of layout rather than partially enclosed type, as
evidenced by the study area. Because it increases safety and answers the question of privacy, creating a
correct hierarchy of space with appropriate organization is a key tool in encouraging inhabitants to
appropriately utilize the outside environment. However, the question of the amount of space required for
each activity should be taken into account.
Location: The amount of common open space use is obviously impacted by its placement in relation to
condominium buildings and the distance from their apartment, as stated in the finding section. It is
preferable to reduce the area of open space next to either side of the block, but especially the rear side
facing space, and maximize the front facing space in order to enhance performance and improve the
possibility of maintenance.
Furthermore, if separate places are offered for various activities, they should be located such that activities
do not interfere with one another and are at a reasonable distance from the apartments. To combat noise
pollution, places that are given for activities that generate noise, such as playgrounds and automobile
parking areas, should be situated at an acceptable distance from residential complexes.
Area: The area-related problem arises as a result of access roads fragmenting open areas and a major
portion of open space being used for parking. This means that while the availability of open space may
not solve the area problem, taking into account the area requirements of each activity on shared open
spaces will aid in the provision of appropriate open spaces for each resident's activity.
Internal circulation and parking areas will be reduced, allowing more green space to be created. The area
utilized for access road and circulation might be reduced by constructing a larger open space rather than
fragmenting the land into smaller areas, as the research shows. It will also assist in reducing the amount of
parking activity that is attracted.
Function: In the case of the examined location, residents have seen and described interference between
activities as a difficulty. It is critical to consider the sorts of activities that take place on public open spaces
when creating a better operating communal open space, and to designate different areas to minimize
interference with one another. This can be accomplished by identifying all expected activities on
communal open space and analysing the characteristics of each activity so that it is easier to allocate
open space based on the area requirement, activity compatibility with other activities, and other user
preferences that meet their needs and requirements.
5.1.1.3 Aspects of Implementation

Without effective execution of the design during the building process, designing a liveable community via
satisfying all aspects of design criteria for neighbourhood design would be incomplete. The challenge of
correctly executing the plan is noted in the investigated area as a consequence of the construction of extra
blocks on the area that was intended and designated for community green space. Furthermore, a portion
of the intended neighbourhood design's vehicle parking space has been converted to an abandoned green
area due to its inaccessibility for car parking due to a brick wall created near to the asphalt road.
As a result, during the building phase, special attention should be paid to ensuring that the open spaces
designated in the neighbourhood plan are provided and constructed appropriately so that they may be used
for the purpose for which they were intended.
62
5.1.2 Usage & Management System in the Post-Occupancy Stage
As this research paper shows, community open space difficulties are caused not just by architectural
concerns, but also by how residents use and manage the existing public open space. As a result, by working
together, residents and the appropriate administrative body may overcome these problems and enhance the
current state of communal open spaces.
Create a strategy to enhance tenant participation: involving more tenants will result in considerable
improvements in the physical quality of shared open spaces. Because tenants outnumber owners in terms of
population, it is critical to establish a management structure that allows tenants to participate in improving
the quality of shared open spaces.
Introduce income-generating activities on green areas: as the study shows, agricultural activity by residents,
such as planting vegetables and certain spice plants, has a good impact on common open space
maintenance. As a result, establishing revenue-generating activities on abandoned open spaces would assist
to enhance the physical condition of the environment while also providing residents with additional cash.
However, those income-generating activities, such as urban agriculture, should be beneficial to the living
environment: veggies or other plants to grow
Assign numerous responsible bodies from the residents: while there is a tendency of managing blocks by
appointing one person from each block, this does not appear to be a successful method for producing high-
quality outdoor areas. Instead, forming a committee of different citizens to be accountable for green space
conservation and upkeep will be more beneficial in terms of increasing the number of responsible bodies
and creating a stronger check and balance mechanism.
Use a multi-nodal satellite dish system: placing a satellite dish on an open area separately is a big factor in
the loss of appeal and restriction of the open space's useful area. The introduction of a multi-nodal satellite
system will assist in resolving the problem of mounting satellite dishes on green areas individually, which is
a solution for increasing usable area, improving the attractiveness of the living environment, and avoiding
conflicts caused by interference on green areas while mounting satellite dishes.
Provide space flexibility by permitting friendly activities on restricted green spaces to increase functional
flexibility.
Use plants as a green area fence: this will assist to produce a more appealing green area with simple access
to the space while avoiding the use of woods and plastic robs materials, which will create an aesthetically
unappealing environment.
Maintain green spaces on a regular basis: within the investigated region, the amount of regularly maintained
green space accounts for a lower portion of the overall green area coverage. As a result, inhabitants should
be committed to preserving the green areas on a regular basis in order to enjoy a nice living environment.
Provide amenities for sitting, shading, and playing activities to encourage recreational or leisure activities
such as playing games, reading, and socializing with friends and neighbours. It will also assist in allocating
a specific space for a certain function, avoiding the unwanted effect of activity interference as a result of
numerous activities occurring on the same area. Furthermore, because they profited from the open space,
it will increase the number of responsible persons who participate in the maintenance process by building a
sense of belonging.
63
References
A. A. ILEMOBADE, O. O., 2012. Greywater reuse for toilet flushing. durban: water research commission of
south africa., South Afric: s.n.
AAHCPO, 2015. Report on condominium housing., Addis Ababa: s.n.
AAWSA, 2019. budget year Addis Ababa water supply and distribution report, Addis Ababa: s.n.
Abdul Malek, N., 2009. The Making of a Quality Neighborhood Park: A Path Model Approach., s.l.: s.n.
Anderson, S. T. &. W., 2006. Open Space, Residential Property Values, and Spatial Context., s.l.: University of
Michigan: Michigan..
Anteneh, G., 2014. Sustainability and Open Space: the Spatial Sustainability of Open Space in New
Condominium Neighbourhood of Addis Ababa. Addis Ababa: (Pre-publication). Issue EiABC, AAU..
Aquino, F. &. G. X., 2014. Understanding Density in an Uneven City, Santiago de Chile: Implications for Social
and Environmental Sustainability, s.l.: s.n.
Bradley, C. &. M. ,. A., 1986. Successful Green Space- do we know it when we see it?, s.l.: s.n.
Byrne, J. &. S. N., 2010. Green and Open Space Planning for Urban Consolidation – A review of the
Literatureand and Best Practice, s.l.: s.n.
Cemil, B. G. E., 2012. Urban Green Space System Planning ;Landscape Planning,, s.l.: s.n.
Ciegis, R. e. a., 2009. The Concept of Sustainable Development and Its Use for Sustainable Scenarios.. s.l.:s.n.
Clemons, S. A. B. J. H. &. M. D. A., 2006. The Importance of Sense of Place and Sense of Self in Residence Hall
Room Design., s.l.: s.n.
Cresswell, T., 2009. Place. s.l.:s.n.
Cryan, M. &. C. J., 2008. Open Space and Recreation Planner’s Workbook., s.l.: s.n.
Doebele, W., 1987. he Evolution of Concepts of Land Tenuer in Developing Countries. Habitat Intl, s.l.: s.n.
Dursun, P., 2009. Architects are Talking About Space.. s.l.:s.n.
Foundation., P. &. P., 2003. Neighbourhood Open Space Management: Community Greening Survey and
Landtrust Strategies for Baltimore City, s.l.: s.n.
Foundation, P. &. P., 2013. Neighbourhood Open Space Management: Community Greening Survey and
Landtrust Strategies for Baltimore City, s.l.: s.n.
Gedikil, B., 2004. The Open Space Contributing to Neighbourhood Sustainability Through Public Events: A
Case From Ankara, Turkey, s.l.: s.n.
Gedikli, B., 2009. The Open Space Contributing to Neighbourhood Sustainability through Public Events: A
Case from Ankara, Turkey, Ankara: s.n.
Gehl, J., 2010. Cities for People, s.l.: s.n.
Gibbons, J., 1998. Open Space Planning., s.l.: s.n.
Herzele, V. A. &. W. T., 2003. Monitoring Tool for the Provision of Accessible and Attractive Urban Green
Spaces., s.l.: s.n.
64
Lawson, B., 2005. The Language of Space, Architectural Press,. s.l.:s.n.
Lefebvre, H., 1998. The Production of Space. s.l.:s.n.
Leito, A. a. A. J., 2002. Applying Landscape Ecological Concepts and Metrics in Sustainable Landscape
Planning. s.l.:s.n.
Montgomery, J., 1998. Making a City: Urbanity, Vitality and Urban Design, s.l.: s.n.
MUDH, 2016. Development of Amenity Green Space in Residential Areas. Manual No.15/2016. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia: s.n.
MWUD, 2008. Integrated Housing Development Program of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia., s.l.:
Ministry of Works and Urban Development.
ORAAMP, 2002. Norms and Standards of Addis Ababa Structure Plan Components. Addis Ababa..
Program, N. W. C. R. N. W. S., 2008. Urban greywater design and installation Handbook, Australia: Ramit
University.
Roesner, L. Q. Y. C. M. S. M. &. K., 2009. Long Term Effects of Landscape Irrigation Using Household
Graywater, s.l.: The Water Environment Research Foundation.
Samaratunga, T., 2013. High-Density High-Rise Low-Income Housing: An Appropriate City Planning Solution,
s.l.: s.n.
Samuel, A. L. W. &. L. Z., 2014. Addis Ababa Neighbourhood Planning and Design Manual. Addis Ababa:, s.l.:
s.n.
Service, S. A. P., 2008. Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Open Space and Designing New Residential
Developments’., s.l.: s.n.
Suter, S. &. M. E., 2012. Summery Report: Best Practice Open Space in Higher Density Developments Project.,
s.l.: s.n.
Syafriny, R. &. S. T., 2010. Evaluation of Public Open Space Performance through the Environmental
Perception and Behavior Setting in Manado., s.l.: s.n.
Tuan, Y.-F., 2001. Space and Place, Royal Holloway. London: s.n.
UN-HABITAT, 2010. The Ethiopia Case of Condominium Housing: The Integrated Housing Development
Programme. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme., s.l.: s.n.
UN-Habitat, 2021. work towards universal access to water and sanitation, s.l.: s.n.
Yitbarek, E., 2008. Revisiting «Slums». Revealing Responses; Urban upgrading in tenant-dominated inner-city
settlements, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology..
65
Appendix
Appendix 1
Semi structured interview questions
Functional usage
 For what purpose they use the open spaces

 What extra activities they observe in the open spaces
Previous open space experience
 How they were raised in their childhood concerning open spaces
Aspiration on/about the open spaces
 How they feel about the open space presence in their neighbourhood
 Over all feelings on open spaces and relationship
Comments and suggestions on the open space services
 Their opinion on the different open space services of the neighbourhood

 What functions are missing in the open spaces?
 What extra objects (landscaping elements) are vital to the open spaces?
Opinion on the size of the open spaces
 Activity and size relationship

 Overall aspiration about the size
Appendix 2
Interviewed inhabitant’s info
NO. NAME GENDER MARITAL CHILDREN FLOOR OWNERSHIP USAGE

STATUS
1. Ato Tefera Getachew Male Married 1 1st Floor Owner Yes
2. W/ro Mesert Seyfu Female Married 2 1st Floor Owner Yes
3. W/ro Alem Gebru Female Married 2 3rd Floor Rent Sometime
4. W/ro Zewdnsh Female Widowed 1 2nd Floor Owner Sometime
Wendemagegnehu
Appendix 3
Questioner
66
This questioner is prepared by a student of Unity University Department of Architecture and
urban planning for the purpose of collecting information for conducting educational research
on Communal Open Spaces in 4 kilo condominium neighbourhood. I would like to ‘Thank you’
in advance for your cooperation.
Name:_________________________Sex:___ Age_____Block No.:______Floor:_______ House Type: Studio
One Bedroom Two Bedroom Three Bedroom
Marital Status: ______________Family Size:_______No. of children_______
Ownership Status: Owner Tenant
Employment Status: __________________ Occupation Period: __________________
Note: Communal open space refers to available unbuilt space within your parcel which is provided to be
used by the inhabitants within your parcel it includes the green area, circulation and parking area, and any
available paved and unpaved area.
1. Do you or your family members use the communal open space? Yes No
2. If you and your family don’t use the communal open space, what is the reason?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
3. If yes, for what activity do you or your family uses the communal open space?
Note: For the “where” question answer the question with respect to the type of space by saying “inside the
green area”, “on unpaved area” or “on paved area” and the location of the place with respect to your block.
4. When you or your family member use communal open spaces within your parcel for the activities you
mentioned on question No-3, how the physical characteristics and quality of the open space affect your
activity?
a. In relation to the enclosure of the open space?
67
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
b. In relation to the area and shape of the open space?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
c. In relation to its relative location from you block?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
d. In relation to its accessibility?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
e. In relation to attractiveness
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
f. In relation to availability of facilities

_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
5. What challenge do you or your family experience because of the physical characteristics and
quality of the open spaces mentioned on question 4 above when you use available communal open
space within your parcel?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
6. What challenges do you or your family experience by other inhabitants’ activity on communal
open spaces?
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
68

Abel Hayat - Condominiums Open Space

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abel Hayat - Condominiums Open Space

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abel Hayat - Condominiums Open Space

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNITY UNIVERSITY

College of Engineering, Technology and Computational Science

B.Sc. Thesis Arch 6271

CONDOMINIUM’S OPEN SPACES

In Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Bachelor Degree of Science in Architecture

Abel Hayat, UU68720R

Advisor: Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik

March 2022 G.C.

Abel Hayat Signature Date

Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik

Approved by board of examiners

Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik _________________ _______________

Mr.________________ _________________ _______________

Keywords: Condominiums, open spaces, activities, communal, sustainability

1. Introduction and R esearch Design

1.2 Statement of the Problem

To generalize, a fundamental component of the residential environment, communal open spaces in

1.3.2 Specific Objective

o To determine how tenants in condominium houses use shared open areas.

1.4 Research Question

o What are the functions of community open areas in a condominium neighborhood?

1.5 Scope of the Study

1.5.2 Spatial Scope

1.5.3 Temporal Scope

1.6 Significant of the Study

1.7 Organization of the Paper and research design

Figure 1 Research design structure

1.8.2 Research approach

The relation between

1.8.4 Source of data and collection methods

o Direct Observation and On-Site Measurement

Figure 3 Method of data triangulation

2. R EVIEW OF R ELATED LITER ATUR E

2.2 Types of open spaces

1.3.1 Resource Management - forests, fisheries, farmland.

1.5.1 Areas that Influence the Character or Design of a Community

1.6.1 Historic or Archaeological Sites

2.3 Open Space Development in Communal Residential

2.3.1 Benefits of Open Space in Residential Area

o Enhancement of the aesthetic

2.4 Sustainable development

2.5 Spatial Sustainability

2.6 Activities on Open Space and the Role of the Physical

Figure 4 Construction of a place

Elements of Sense of place Expression of open spaces

Figure 6 Hypothesised model, quality neighbourhood park

2.7 Key Characteristics of Successful Open Spaces

1. Uses and Activities

Access, in particular, refers to

Figure 8 Four Key Qualities of Public Space (PPS)

2.7.2. Open Space Accessibility

2.7.3. Open Space Location

2.7.4. Open Space user’s safety

2.7.5. Open Space Appeal

2.7.6. Open Spaces’ Functionality

2.7.7. Open Space Enclosure

2.8 Community Open Spaces Performance Assessment

Successful Projects Failed/Unsuccessful project

Mr. Tewedros G/Tsadik ___ _

Mr.________ _ _______