ENHANCING PHYSICAL PLANNING

USING COMPLIACE LEVELS

LUBANGA NELSON
16/U/385/SLD/GV
SUPERVISOR: Mr. WADEMBERE
ISMAIL
BACKGROUND

 Developments are every one’s desire, however, development in its

own sense can be of a disadvantage if not checked to ensure orderly
and sustainable development. It is estimated that by the year 2025,
there will be 410 cities all over the world with 5 million people or
more. About 65% of these cities will be in the developing countries.
In Africa the level of urbanization has reached 37% (297 million
people) with average growth rate of 3.5%. By 2025, it is estimated
that 54% of Africa’s population will be living in urban areas. In
Uganda it is estimated that the urban population has steadily
increased from 4.4% in 1960 to more than 25% in 2019. World
Population Prospects (2019 Revision).
BACKGROUND CONT’D….
 In most towns in developing countries, physical development does
not necessarily confirm to planned outcomes. As a result, the built
environment in towns in many third world countries are rapidly
deteriorating despite the existence of planning legislation to
monitor and control development. (Ogudele et al, 2009)
 This comes along with various problems such as accidents,
pollution, congestion, fire outbreaks, and other environmental
problems.
 BACKGROUND CONT’D…
 These problems may be attributed to uncoordinated planning, un
coordinated development and sometimes lack of implementation of
the physical planning standards and guidelines, characterised by
non-compliance of the people to these standards and guidelines.
 In a bid to enhance physical planning, in order to achieve
harmonious spatial development, scholars have suggested the use of
projections during planning. Forexample, Xinhao and Rainer (2008)
suggested that planning for the future requires, to some extent,
making projections based on past observations.
BACKGROUND CONT’D…

 However, the projections as suggested by the conducted studies may only

be effective in the design stage but not implementation phase there by
having orderly development only on paper but not on ground, yet
implementation must be ensured if harmony in spatial development is to
be achieved in order to mitigate the problems earlier on mentioned.
The studies ignored considering compliance levels in planning and yet it is
very key if maximum implementation is to achieved. Therefore, it is against
this background that seeks to consider the compliance of the existing
developments to the existing physical planning standards and regulations to
enhance physical planning.
BACKGROUND CONT’D…

This is done with a view of identifying those aspects of

the urban development and planning regulations that
constitute bottlenecks and conflict points, and recommend
more realistic ways to resolve these in order to achieve a
more desirable and sustainable urban development.
PROBLEM STATEMENT

In many developing countries like Uganda, towns are prone to various problems such as accidents,
pollution, congestion, fire outbreaks, and other environmental problems. These problems in most cases
are as a result of uncoordinated planning, un coordinated development and sometimes due to
noncompliance of the people to the existing physical planning standards and regulations.
 In a bid to enhance physical planning in order to mitigate these problems, most scholars suggest the use
of projections to improve physical planning.
By the mere fact the planning authorities in Uganda also consider that Population projections are
essential for planning at the national, regional and district levels in both the private and public sectors,
UBOS (2007), one would expect that orderly development could be a key feature of Uganda’s Urban
areas especially.
PROBLEM STATEMENT CONT’D…
 However, on the contrary, the growth of the towns has been unplanned, with
high rates of spatial expansion (sprawl) and unplanned growth, lack of
integration between sectoral and spatial planning, inadequate provision of basic
services, weak urban management capacity and significant fiscal constraints. As
a consequence, congestion diseconomies are setting in. Chaos prevails with the
landscape dominated by informal housing and slums and a deteriorating urban
environment. Value for money Report AOG (2015).
 This may be attributed to lack of implementation of the physical planning
standards and guidelines, characterised by non-compliance of the people to these
standards and guidelines, however much they will have designed using
projections which may even sometimes be inaccurate. Studies conducted on
enhancement of physical planning have ignored the relevance of understanding
how compliance to the existing physical planning standards and regulations can
be used to enhance physical planning, yet it’s very key if proper implementation
is to be attained in order to achieve sustainable development.
PROBLEM STATEMENT CONT’D…
 Therefore, this study seeks to consider the compliance
of the existing developments to the existing physical
planning standards and regulations to enhance physical
planning.
 OBJECTIVES

 MAIN OBJECTIVE
• To enhance physical planning using compliance levels of developments to the existing physical
planning standards and guidelines

 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
• To establish to current status of the existing developments.
 To evaluate the compliance levels of the existing developments to the existing Physical
Planning Standards and Guidelines
 To identify the major factors that reduce the compliance levels.
 To recommend more realistic ways to resolve those factors that reduce compliance.
METHODOLOGY Data Collection

Primary Data Secondary Data

Detailed Plan
Responses Observations

Photographs Coordinates
Processing
Data Analysis
Compliance Levels
Is the
Compliance No
= 100%?
 

Yes
Is the
No
aspect
Effective?

Yes
Stop
Recommendations
Results and discussion for specific objective one
 Results and Discussion Cont’d
AV MEASURED
ROAD CLASS OF ROAD WIDTH
MAIN STREET Primary Distributor 25.22
SAZA ROAD Secondary Distributor 17.22
BUNYA ROAD Secondary Distributor 12.68
NGOBI ROAD Primary Commercial access road 14.65
BALITA LANE Primary Commercial access road 14.22
BIKADHO ROAD Secondary Commercial access road 11.50
KYEYAGO ROAD Secondary Commercial access road 6.67
KATAMBALA
ROAD Primary Residential access road 6.72
WALUMU CLOSE secondary Residential access road 7.77
GASEMBA ROAD secondary Residential access road 5.00
S1 Service lane 3.35
S2 Service lane 3.83
S3 Service lane 5.99
 Results and discussion for specific objective two
AV
MEASUR
ED STANDARD
ROAD CLASS OF ROAD WIDTH DEVIATION STANDARD WIDTH NON COMPLIANCE (%) COMPLIANCE

JINJA ROAD Primary Distributor 25.22 14.84 40 37 63

SAZA ROAD Secondary Distributor 17.22 12.82 30 43 57

BUNYA ROAD Secondary Distributor 12.68 17.33 30 58 42

Primary Commercial access
NGOBI ROAD road 14.65 5.37 20 27 73
Primary Commercial access
BALITA LANE road 14.22 5.78 20 29 71
BIKADHO Secondary Commercial
ROAD access road 11.50 3.82 15 25 75
Secondary Commercial
KYEYAGO access road 6.67 8.35 15 56 44
KATAMBALA Primary Residential access
ROAD road 6.72 8.34 15 56 44
WALUMU secondary Residential access
CLOSE road 7.77 0.88 8 11 89
GASEMBA secondary Residential access
ROAD road 5.00 3.09 8 39 61
S1 Service lane 3.35 1.68 5 34 66
S2 Service lane 3.83 1.25 5 25 75
 Results and Discussion Cont’d

ROADS ANALYSIS
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
D N
E
A
D
G
O
A
D SE A
D S1 S2 S3
RO RO RO O LA RO A RO LO RO
R EY C
JA ZA Y
A BI TA H
O Y LA U BA
JIN SA N O LI D K
BA
M M
BU N
G
BA K
A M LU SE
BI A A
TA W G
A
K

NON COMPLIANCE (%) COMPLIANCE

 Results and Discussion Cont’d
Petrol Stations

EXISTING MINM EXCESS IN BUILT UP

PETROL STN AREA (m2) AREA (m2) AREA (m2) AREA (m2) Plot Coverage (%)
ELLE 1854.830 1050.000 804.830 404.873 22
DAHABLE 1090.092 1050.000 40.092 248.636 23
KLIN ENERGY 888.829 1050.000 -161.171 283.982 32
HARED 1064.028 1050.000 14.028 539.810 51
TOTAL 1033.966 1050.000 -16.034 376.055 36
SHELL 1077.535 1050.000 27.535 510.589 47
DELTA 1092.767 1050.000 42.767 319.031 29
EAST ZONE 2182.031 1050.000 1132.031 928.283 43
MAWUMO 1737.103 1050.000 687.103 639.062 37
           

Non_Compliance 22       0
Compliace 78       100
Results and Discussion Cont’d

Plot Size Assesment Plot Coverage Assesment

22

78
100

Non Compliance Compliace Non Compliance Compliace

 Distance to Road intersection

MINM DISTANCE = 2000m

DISTANCE TO J1
PETROL STN (m) DISTANCE TO J2 (m) DISTANCE TO J3 (m)
Mawumo 1184.64 960.43 754.01
East zone 1149.51 924.39 716.74
Delta 720.18 488.77 272.49
Shell 510.72 278.29 58.82
Total 257.81 38.31 203.60
Hared 41.98 207.97 430.12
       
C0MPLIANCE (%) 0 0 0
NON_COMPLIANCE
(%) 100 100 100
 Commercial High rise
450     MAXM DEV'T (%) 75
=
PLOT EXISTING PLOT SIZE EXCESS IN PLOT %AGE OF PLOT EXCESS PLOT COVERAGE
NO AREA COVERAGE COVERAGE
1 678.841 228.841 467.886 69 -6
2 500.701 50.701 370.593 74 -1
3 590.082 140.082 429.440 73 -2
4 1058.178 608.178 738.799 70 -5
5 650.145 200.145 396.908 61 -14
6 886.305 436.305 626.504 71 -4
7 584.233 134.233 536.904 92 17
8 503.887 53.887 458.690 91 16
9 531.854 81.854 360.173 68 -7
10 375.239 -74.761 166.915 44 -31
11 595.552 145.552 353.738 59 -16
12 285.421 -164.579 224.428 79 4
13 667.732 217.732 508.701 76 1
           
  NON 15     31
COMPLIANCE
  COMPLIANCE 85     69
Commercial High rise Compliance
Plot Size Assesment PLot Coverage Assesment
15

31

69

85

NON COMPLIANCE %AGE OF PLOT DEV'T NON COMPLIANCE

COMPLIANCE %AGE OF PLOT DEV'T COMPLIANCE
 Heavy Commercial
450     MAXM PLOT COVERAGE = 75
PLOT NUMBER EXISTING PLOT _SIZE DIFF PLOT COVERAGE %AGE OF PLOT COVERAGE EXCESS
11 1102.095 652.095 836.388 76 1
12 549.492 99.492 398.275 72 -3
13 480.717 30.717 356.183 74 -1
14 545.303 95.303 354.891 65 -10
15 527.380 77.380 339.398 64 -11
16 1014.442 564.442 621.142 61 -14
17 515.491 65.491 365.794 71 -4
18 520.151 70.151 385.060 74 -1
19 608.887 158.887 275.725 45 -30
20 575.779 125.779 529.390 92 17
21 539.676 89.676 338.245 63 -12
22 495.313 45.313 391.474 79 4
23 559.392 109.392 379.829 68 -7
24 545.513 95.513 235.712 43 -32
25 553.380 103.380 343.627 62 -13
26 667.160 217.160 349.109 52 -23
27 537.441 87.441 311.419 58 -17
28 460.365 10.365 279.989 61 -14
29 517.821 67.821 327.477 63 -12
           
NON COMPLIANCE 0       16
Heavy Commercial Compliance

Plot Size Assesment Plot Coverage Assesment

16

100

84
NON COMPLIANCE
COMPLIANCE %AGE OF PLOT COVERAGE
COVERAGENON
COMPLIANCE
COMPLIANCE
 Light Commercial

450   MAXM PLOT COVERAGE(%) = 75

PLOT
OBJECTID Existing_Area AREA EXCESS COVERAGE %AGE OF PLOT COVERAGE EXCESS
1 632.495 182.495 201.469 32 -43
2 303.672 -146.328 132.426 44 -31
3 233.316 -216.684 152.393 65 -10
4 866.605 416.605 355.554 41 -34
5 235.768 -214.232 151.664 64 -11
6 243.954 -206.046 151.454 62 -13
7 161.774 -288.226 125.856 78 3
8 1558.812 1108.812 817.848 52 -23
9 490.367 40.367 224.280 46 -29
11 254.970 -195.030 171.479 67 -8
12 236.266 -213.734 118.302 50 -25
13 136.558 -313.442 91.882 67 -8
14 225.081 -224.919 135.326 60 -15
15 1075.466 625.466 749.621 70 -5
16 622.062 172.062 381.928 61 -14
17 945.655 495.655 391.404 41 -34
18 142.796 -307.204 87.390 61 -14
           
  NON COMPLIANCE 59     6
  AREA COMPLIANCE 41     94
 Light Commercial Compliance

Plot Size Assesment Plot Coverage Assesment

6

41

59

94

%AGE OF PLOT COVERAGE NON COMPLIANCE

NON COMPLIANCE AREA COMPLIANCE %AGE OF PLOT COVERAGE COMPLIANCE
 Results for Objective 3
Factors that cause non compliance

FACTOR Frequency %AGE

Informal land ownership
Land tenure 9 11
11% Ignorance of the Planning
20% standards
Ignorance of the Planning
standards 23 29 impracticle Standards
29%

impracticle Standards 13 16 24% Inadquate enforcement

Inadquate enforcement 19 24 16% Urbanisation

Urbanisation 16 20

Total 80 100
 Results for Objective 4

Solution Analysis
SOLUTION No %Age
Compensation 18 23
Review of the Standards 25 31 8%
23%
Compesation

Sensitization 31 39 Review Of the Standards

Sensitisation
Renumeration Of Enforcement
team
39%
Renumeration Of Enforcement
team 6 8 31%

Total 80 100
 Conclusion
• petrol stations are located on main roads other than in any other parts
of the Municipality
• Commercial land use is the dominant land use along the main street
and therefore the CBD of Iganga Municipality, while as one moves
outwards from the CBD there is emergence of mixed developments
• The compliance of the current developments is not that good
especially for roads and Petrol station establishments
• The study has identified five major factors that contribute to
non-compliance of the developments to the standards and
guidelines which include, ignorance of the population in
Iganga Municipality about the planning standards, reluctance
in the enforcement team, urbanization, inapplicable standards,
and Informal land ownership; with Ignorance being the
biggest factor
 Conclusion Cont’d

• The study has also identified the most appropriate ways in which
the compliance level of the developments can be improved
depending on the current compliance level which include;
sensitization, revision of the current standards to suit the
prevailing situation, compensation and improved renumeration of
the enforcement team.
 Recommendation

The study recommends revision of the current standards to suit the prevailing situation.

The study also recommends the immediate sensitization if the public of the existing
physical planning standards and guidelines to improve compliance.

Subsidization of the surveying of the land with in the Municipal to encourage land titling
which will ease the administration of the plots of land within the Municipality to ensure
sustainable development.