Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 http://www.hrpub.

org
DOI: 10.13189/cea.2018.060601

Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed

Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan
Zuhal Eltayeb Awad

Department of Architecture and Physical Planning, Institute of Building and Road Research, University of Khartoum, Sudan

Copyright©2018 by authors, all rights reserved. Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License

Abstract The research reported in this paper, evaluated addition to that, they raise real estate values e.g. Central
development of open areas in neighborhoods. The research Park and Bryant Park -located in Manhattan, New York
was performed in the new neighborhoods in Khartoum City are two examples of urban open space that add
town (Al Riyadh (1972), Nasr Extension (1972) and Al economic value to their surroundings [2]. Scholars added a
Mujahedeen (1988), compared to older neighborhoods political dimension to the important role of urban open
(Khartoum -2 (1950), Al Diyum (1953), and Alamarat spaces in the 21st century and described parks as “places
(1958)). The research aimed to study open spaces in these where democracy is worked out literally on the ground, and
neighborhoods. Compared with characteristics of the therefore the way such spaces are designed, managed and
selected neighborhoods, classified developed open spaces used demonstrates the realities of political rhetoric “[3].
and evaluated the performance of each typology. The Public parks conceived as places where strangers can meet,
research promoted measurable development indicators so that there is a great chance of privacy [3]. At the micro
such as availability, accessibility, safety and management. level green spaces are important components of the
Then apply these indicators to analyze developed open neighborhoods which increase the quality of the urban
spaces. The results confirmed a lack of a comprehensive environment. They offer common grounds for social
development programs. The developed open spaces are 35 contact and interaction between neighbors [4]. Open spaces
with total area of 154,050 m2 which represent only 27.6 % have broad and diverse benefits for neighborhoods
of the total number of open spaces. The research found that residents especially those who are least freely mobile,
old neighborhoods have higher index of sufficiency value because of lack of private transport, age or illness like old
than new neighborhoods e.g. Khartoum (2) (8.9) compared people [5]. The social impact of access to green spaces in
to Al-Mujahdeen (5.2). Also, first class residential areas neighborhoods is improvement of social inclusion and
have higher index value than third class areas e.g. community cohesion [6]. Using green space is an expanded
Khartoum -2 (8.9) compared to Al-Diyum (7.7). The indicator for sustainable cities and improves both the health
successful types of developed open spaces of the surveyed and the well-being of urban residents [7]. There is a strong
neighborhoods are Recreational open spaces and link between health and the cultural ecosystem services [8].
Community centers. Most of them are managed by The social determinants of health and the benefits gained
community groups (public participation). from urban green spaces are listed in table 1. At
neighborhood and built environment level they promote
Keywords Neighborhoods, Open Spaces, Measurable sense of place and community satisfaction, reduce crime
Indicators, Development and incivilities and provide access to healthy food.
The growing amount of people living in urban areas
-approaching two thirds of the global population -creates
many challenges concerning health hazards and risks.
1. Introduction Research on lifestyle impact of green space and quality of
life revealed that physical exercise in green spaces is
Urban open spaces promote and enrich the social, generally positively associated with promoting well-being
economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of and recovery from stress [9] , also landscape patterns
communities, commonly called the “four wellbeing’s [1]. characteristics influence the mental health of nearby
Some urban open spaces have iconic value - being residents [10].Many scholars studied the environmental
significant features in their settings and reflect the local and ecological impact of green space such as: natural
culture or history e.g. Central Park in New York reservation, protection of habitat, preservation of
Champs-Elysées in Paris or El Tehrer Square in Cairo. In bio-diversity, improvement of urban climate, reduction of
270 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

air pollution and noise and clearance of contamination[11]. uses. The main objective of this research is to recognize
Therefore, the broad and diverse benefits of green and evaluate the developed open spaces in the selected
networks can be summarized into two main categories, neighborhoods.
Primary Benefits and Secondary Benefits. Primary
Benefits includes: Accessibility, sustainability, high
quality, positive image, promotion of economic 2. Open Space Typology
development and, promotion of social inclusion.
Secondary Benefits includes: ecological, environmental Open spaces can be classified according to functions or
and educational benefits [12]. characteristics. There is a simple typology that divided
urban landscape types into four main categories [15]:
Table 1. Connections between social determinants of health and benefits
linked to cultural ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces. • Urban common: includes brownfields, vacant land,
Source: [8] back land and informal open spaces.
Social Determinant of Benefits linked to Cultural • Encapsulated country- side: includes natural
Health Ecosystem Services features-river valleys and woodlands.
Physical Well-Being • Working landscape: includes farms, forestry and
Health and health care
Psychological Well-Being allotments for food production
Sense of Place
• Formal landscape: includes parks, gardens and
institutional grounds for recreation.
Neighborhood and built Community Satisfaction
environment
Another detailed typology focusing on land uses to serve
Reduced Crime and Incivilities
planning purposes [16], where open spaces are divided
Access to Healthy Food into:
Social and community Social Cohesion • Green Spaces -parks and gardens: includes urban and
context Social Capital country parks, and formal gardens - formal landscape
Academic Performance
• Amenity green spaces: including: housing green
Education spaces, domestic gardens, village greens and other
Cognitive Functioning
incidental space- informal recreation spaces in
Property Values residential areas.
Economic Stability
Community Revitalization • Allotments, community gardens and urban farms.
• Natural and semi-natural green space: includes
Not understanding or acknowledging the woodland and scrub grassland, heath or moor, wet
above-mentioned benefits of green spaces in urban areas by lands, open and running water and bare rock habitat
professionals and active members in industry, have led to • Green corridors: includes river and canal banks, road
the deteriorating condition of urban green spaces in and rail corridors, cycling routes and pedestrian paths
Africa .The reasons of that deterioration are: high rates of within towns and cities and rights of way and
urban sprawl and informal settlements e.g. reduction in permissive paths.
green vegetation from 21% to 12.9% in Abuja [13] or A recent study presented eight categories of urban green
reduction of forests area , although the existence of natural spaces [17]:
green space such as a forest may be seen as a substitute for
urban green spaces [14]. Regarding the Sudanese context, • building greens,
most of open spaces in Khartoum town are neglected and • private, commercial, industrial, institutional urban
left undeveloped-brownfields- for a long time. A main green space and urban green space connected to grey
problem is that neglected open spaces seem to attract infrastructure
anti-urban behavior such as collecting rubbish or unwanted • riverbank green,
building materials. They produce health hazards especially • parks and recreation,
in times of rains as being a suitable habitat for insects in • allotments and community gardens,
particular mosquitos. Moreover, the contemporary urban • agricultural land,
growth of neighborhoods in Khartoum town and the • natural, semi-natural and feral areas
growing demand for residential areas have a considerable • blue spaces.
impact on change of open space use. The public authority From the above-mentioned typologies, it is clear that
transforms undeveloped open spaces into other uses e.g. scholars classified neighborhood open spaces in different
social services: mosques, schools or shopping centers, or ways: it was classified with formal landscape [15], and
even sold them as residential land. This transformation had with the informal recreation spaces- amenity green [16],
negative consequences on the quality of neighborhoods and finally it was placed in the park and recreation
and the social life. Some active community organizations typology and outlined many benefits of them such as:
and community members start developing open spaces so during WW II, neighborhood green was changed into
that public authority could not transform them into other tenant gardens producing food [17].
 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 271

However, neighborhood open spaces have many uses spaces is the fraction of the square meters of open space by
and perform multiple functions such as: recreation, cycling the number of the neighborhood inhabitants. The
routes and pedestrian paths and sport fields. It must be seen recommended square meters of green space per capita-
as “multi-functional area for social interaction, economic index of sufficiency- globally is a minimum of 9 m2 per
exchange and cultural expression among a wide diversity person [7], but some European cities applied different
of people and should be designed and managed to ensure monitoring values e.g., Berlin: 6 m2 per person, Leipzing:
human development, building peaceful and democratic 10 m2 per person. The British standard for the natural green
societies and promoting cultural diversity” [18]. Therefore, aimed to provide 2 hectors of natural green space for urban
neighborhood open space could be classified in the main inhabitants with accessibility of 300 m, while the German
formal landscape section with different typologies standard reduced the amount to 0.5 ha with accessibility of
according to its purpose. 500 m [17].

3. Sustainable Development of Open 3.2. Accessibility

Spaces Accessibility means the right to approach, to enter or use
particular open space-without presence of any physical
Sustainable development is seen as a process that links
constrain e.g. long distance, roads, railways locked gates or
environmental protection with economic, social and
social and cultural constraints e.g. fear of crime or other
cultural sound development. Urban development is a major
concerns over safety [12]. In some situations, accessibility
concern in sustainable issues so that cities and human
is connected with safety. Access to open spaces within a
settlements must be inclusive, safe, resilient and
15-minute walk is regarded as one of the core health
sustainable [19]. Development of open spaces has to be
indicators of sustainable cities [23]. There are a number of
within the umbrella of the four pillars of sustainability:
“distance/time” criteria for measuring accessibility for
cultural vibrancy, economic prosperity, environmental
parks and gardens -the British standard proposed the
responsibility and social justice [20]. Some researchers
following hierarchy of accessibility [15]:
tried to connect neighborhoods sustainability and open
space development, by developing a three-dimensional • 300 m to the nearest 2 ha green space.
matrix corelating different typologies of open spaces with • 2 km to the nearest 20 ha green space.
sustainability goals and objectives, and sustainability • 5 km to the nearest 100 ha green space.
parameters [21]. • 10 km to the nearest 500 ha green space.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) are a Accessibility is an important planning indicator.
collection of 17 global goals set by the United Nations Improving technologies enable planners and researchers to
General Assembly in 2015. They were set to guide use geographical information system (GIS) to analyze
development, end poverty, protect the planet and ensure availability and accessibility of green spaces within urban
that all people enjoy peace and prosperity [19]. Goal 11 areas. They used (GIS) to outline some valuable green
clearly stated that green and public space development is a spaces in terms of ecological, recreational and aesthetical
major concern in urban sustainability: “by 2030, provide impact [24] and [25]. Geographical Information System
universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green (GIS) helped to create a model for management of existing
and public spaces, particularly for women and children, green spaces and distribution and planning of new green
older persons and persons with disabilities” [19]. The spaces in neighborhoods [26]. Moreover, they used GIS to
three mentioned indicators in Goal 11 are: safety, inclusion quantify and measure the access of green space by different
and accessibility. How to measure open space development ethnic and religious groups [27].
is a debatable issue and monitoring the progress and
application of these goals is not practical [22]. Moreover, 3.3. Security
World Health Organization identified the most important
aspects of development of green environment as: The safety of women, the elderly and children is an
availability, accessibility, quality and security [7]. important key indicator for the development of open space.
Therefore, the international indicators to control The total recorded crime rates in the world (1980–2000)
provision of open space are: increased by about 30% and it is estimated that about 15%
of those crimes have took place in a public space [28].
3.1. Availability Security can be guaranteed through provision of lighting
and fencing, although fencing enhances the social inclusion
Provision of open spaces in urban areas can be dimension.
monitored by goal/target as - 45% of land in urban areas
with a minimum density of 150 inhabitants per hectare
should be allocated to streets and public space [18]. 15% of 4. The Sudanese Context
land should be allocated to open spaces, green spaces and
public facilities [18]. The index of sufficiency of open Open spaces in Khartoum have been classified into four
272 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

main classes based on parameters of number of population classes (first, second and third) and different time of
served and zone of service ,see table 2 below. planning (old neighborhoods and new ones). They are also
differing in size, some are large and others are small. The
Table 2. Classification of open spaces in Khartoum (source: [29]).
selected neighborhoods are:
Open space No. of population Service zone (m2)
• First class residential areas: Khartoum -2 (1950), and
Neighbourhood court 500-5000 300-500 Al Mujahedeen (1988).
Residential garden 10,000-20,000 2,000-5,000 • First class + second class residential area Al Riyadh
Communal garden 20,000-50,000 2,000-5,000 (1972).
• Second class residential area: Al-Amarat (1958)
City park 100,000-150,000 Bigger than that
• Third-class residential areas: Al Diyum (1953) and
The Sudanese standards for open spaces aimed to Nasr Extension (1972).
provide 4 open spaces in a small neighborhood -2000 Location of these neighborhoods is shown in fig 1
people, each one is 0.16 hector in area [30]. The below.
recommended square meters of green space per capita
locally is 1.5-0.40 m2 for open space in small
neighborhoods and 1.7-0.80 m2 for open space in large 6. Research Methodology
neighborhoods with additional 1.2-0.70 m2 for out-door
sport fields [31]. The proposed standards for accessibility The research has followed qualitative and quantitative
are [31]: methods which included: analysis of documents, photo
• 300-200 m to the nearest cluster open space. documentation, observation, and statistical data. The
• 500-300 m to the nearest neighborhood open space. statistical data -concerning area and population of each
• 500-300 m to the nearest sport field. neighborhood- are collected from Governmental Reports
[35].
Khartoum Structure Plan [32] proposed increase in The field survey was performed in July-December 2017.
green areas by developing the river Nile front The research has three levels of analysis:
embankments in Khartoum, Khartoum North and
1- A comparison between the characteristics of the
Omdurman as public parks
selected neighborhoods (geospatial data) to outline
Residential areas in Khartoum have three distinctive
developed open spaces, index of sufficiency and the
classes:
planning pattern of open spaces.
• First class -plot size is ranging from 800 to 500 m2 2- Classification of developed open spaces in the
and inhabited by high income residents. selected neighborhoods and evaluation of the
• Second class-plot size is ranging from 400 to 300 m2 performance of each typology.
and inhabited by medium income residents. 3- Analysis of developed open spaces using the
• Third class-plot size is 200 m2 and inhabited by low international indicators of development of open
income residents. spaces. These indicators represent the most important
aspects needed to develop open spaces [7] and [21].
The indicators are: Availability, Accessibility and
5. Selected Case Studies Security.
Sudan is located in North-Eastern Africa. Its area is The research added Management as a fourth indicator.
roughly 1,765,048 Km2. The population was estimated in Each indicator is expanded into components e.g.:
2018 as 41,511,526 and 35.3 % of the population is urban. • Availability includes area of open space, the
The density is 24 persons per sq.km [33]. Khartoum city percentage of green coverage and the type of
-the capital is located in the center of Sudan at the landscape whether green landscape or grey landscape.
confluence of the White Nile and the Blue Nile. Khartoum • Accessibility includes distance to the nearest open
city is also the capital for Khartoum State, one of 18 space and percentage of street frontage of the open
Sudanese states. Khartoum State area is 22.142,000 km2 space.
and its population has grown to 7,687,547 [34]. • Security includes provision of lighting and fence.
The research selected six neighborhoods in Khartoum • Management includes the developer of the open space
city as case-studies. They represent different residential and the manager.
 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 273

Key
1- Khartoum -2
2- Nasr Extension
3- Al Riyadh
4- Al-Amarat,
5- Al Diyum
6- Al Mujahedeen
Figure 1. Location plan of the selected neighborhoods (Source: [32])

7. Discussion 154,050 m2 which represent only 27.6 % of the total

number of open spaces - 187 with total area of 558,699 m 2,
7.1. Comparison between the Selected Neighborhoods as shown in table 3. The percentage of developed open
spaces is higher in first and second-class residential
Generally speaking most neighborhoods have acceptable neighborhoods e. g. Khartoum 2 (65%) and Al-Amarat
index of sufficiency e.g. Khartoum -2 (8.9) Al-Riyadh (8.7), (57.6%) than third class residential neighborhoods e.g.
Al-Diyum (7.7) and Naser Extension (5.7), compared to Naser Extension (27 %) and Al-Diyum (21. 4%). The
the international standards of 10 m2-6 m2 (see table 3). inhabitants of these neighborhoods are affluent and can
More detailed observation revealed that residential class afford spending some money to develop their open spaces.
and time of planning are influential factors on index of When comparing the index of sufficiency of open spaces
sufficiency. Old neighborhoods have higher index value with the index of sufficiency of developed open spaces, the
than new neighborhoods e.g. Khartoum (2) (8.9) compared actual index of sufficiency of developed open space
to Al-Mujahdeen (5.2) and Al-Diyum (7.7) compared to reduced dramatically e.g. Khartoum -2 from 8.9 to 5.8 and
Naser Extension (5.7) see table 3. Also first class Al-Diyum from 7.7 to 1. 6.
residential areas have higher index value than third class It indicates a severe shortage in provision of developed
areas e.g. Khartoum -2 (8.9) compared to Al-Diyum (7.7). open spaces (see figure 2).
The developed open spaces are 35 with total area of Regarding the distribution of open spaces in the selected
274 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

neighborhoods, some open spaces have hierarchy semi-communal open space (see fig 3). While new
according to the housing cluster. They range from neighborhoods have non-hierarchical open spaces e.g.
semi-communal open spaces within plots of houses up to Al-Mujahdeen (see fig 4). However, the hierarchy
communal open spaces which serve larger group of houses. provision of open spaces is not appropriate to children’s
The hierarchy exists in old neighborhoods e.g. Al-Diyum, play and sports facilities.
each plot of houses should have direct access to the

Key
index of sufficiency of open space
index of sufficiency of developed open space
Figure 2. The index of sufficiency of open spaces in the selected neighborhoods. Source: The researcher

(Source: Google Map 2016)

Figure 3. hierarchy of open spaces in Al-Diyum Neighborhood
 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 275

(Source: Google Map 2016)

Figure 4. non-hierarchical open spaces in Al-Mujahdeen Neighborhood

Table 3. Characteristics of developed open space in the selected neighborhoods.

index of
index of Develop-ed sufficiency
open Develop-ed
Residential Area Inhabitants sufficiency open of
Neighbour-hood spaces + open
class (m2) (person) of open spaces + developed
area (m2) spaces %
space Area (m2) open
space
13 6
Khartoum (2) First 1,457,870 4,871 8.9 65.7 5.8
41,850 27,490
18 4
Al-Mujahdeen First 900,000 5552 5.2 34.0 1,1
28,800 6400
First+ 31 3
Al-Riyadh 2,774,538 12,797 8.7 14.8 1.2
second 107,000 15,800
31 8
Al-Amarat second 2,050,160 8,184 4.7 57.6 2,7
38,120 21960
65 8
Al-Diyum third 2,562,896 29,616 7.7 21.4 1.6
226,609 48400
35 6
Naser Extension third 2,214,515 22205 5.7 27.0 1.5
126,320 34000
Source: The field survey- July-December 2017

7.2. Developed Open Space Typology Ramadan and even wedding parties and mourning the dead.
However, developed open spaces in the selected
User-perception surveys revealed that developed open neighborhoods can be classified upon their use into six
spaces within the selected neighborhoods differ in groups: Promenading open space, Gated open space,
functions. Each community has variety of activities that Recreational Open space, Community centers, Sport fields
can be performed in open spaces, but the most prevailing and Cluster open space. Table 4 presented detailed
activities and occasions occur in outdoor spaces are: description of each typology.
children playing, sports, social adults gathering, eating in
276 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

Table 4. Developed open space typologies in the selected neighbourhoods.

Type of Open space Descriptions Example

Developed open space in Khartoum-2. July 2017

Green open space whose main function is

aesthetical value with environmental and
1-Promenading open visual benefits. It has cycling routes and
space pedestrian paths without seating or recreational
tools, e.g. spaces that created by splitting of
streets.

Developed open space in Al-Amarat. July 2017

Green open spaces developed and managed by

individuals. It is gated but public are allowed to
2-Gated open space access, walking through and taking photos, but
there are no places for sitting or active
recreation.

Developed open space in Al-Amarat-July 2017

Green garden that contains recreational

facilities, lawns with sittings and children’s
3-Recreational Open
playing areas- provide safe play for children,
space
usually close to home and under informal
supervision from nearby houses.

Community centre in Al-Diyum- July 2017

The open space contains in addition to

recreational facilities, commercial activities
(restaurant, coffee shop) and educational
4-Community
facilities – providing an “outdoor classrooms”
centers
for special interest groups and evening classes
for school students. Some of them contain
kindergartens
 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 277

Sport field in Naser Extension-December 2017.

The whole open space is developed as sport

fields e.g. football grounds due to scarcities of
5-Sport fields sport facilities in Khartoum town. Some of
them have green coverage but the majority
have grey landscape.

Developed open space in Al-Mujahdeen-October 2017

Open space is developed to be a good gathering

place for the Cluster residents especially in
occasions such as having breakfast in Ramadan
6-Cluster open space
and also supervising children playing or
cycling-with small efforts in landscaping and
provision of facilities

Source: The field survey July-December 2017

The research grouped the broad and diverse benefits of open spaces in neighborhoods presented in the introduction
section, into four main impacts: Environmental/Ecological Impact, Life style Impact, Social Impact and Equity Impact.
They are the most effective impacts of open spaces. Then formulated a model to evaluate the performance of the six
typologies of open spaces found in the selected neighborhoods are as follows:
• Environmental/Ecological Impact and related suggested factors are: improve air quality and reduce risk of flooding,
support water management, support contact with nature and enhance biodiversity.
• Life style Impact and related suggested factors are: increase physical activity level, enable active transport by foot or
bike, Increase the time people spend out-door and support healthy lifestyle and active recreation.
• Social Impact and related suggested factors are: support social cohesion and promote social interaction.
• Equity Impact and related suggested factors are: encourage all groups to use open space and enable different
functions.
278 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

Table 5. Evaluation of developed open spaces performance.

Impacts Promenading Gated Recreational Community Sport field Cluster

Improve air quality and reduce risk of flooding. strong strong strong strong weak weak

Environmental Support water management strong strong strong strong moderate strong
/Ecological Support contact with nature strong strong strong strong weak weak

Enhance biodiversity strong strong strong strong weak weak

Increase physical activity level strong strong strong strong strong moderate

Enable active transport by foot or bike strong strong strong strong strong moderate
Life style
Increase the time people spend out-door strong strong strong strong strong strong

Support healthy lifestyle and active recreation strong strong strong strong strong strong

Support social cohesion moderate moderate strong strong moderate strong

Social
Promote social interaction moderate moderate strong strong moderate strong

encourage all groups to use open space moderate moderate strong strong weak strong
Equity
Enable different functions weak weak strong strong weak strong

Source: The researcher

 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 279

Application of the proposed model on the typologies of open spaces are surrounded by streets at all direction
developed open spaces is presented in table 5. The except four open spaces.
evaluation is based on strong, moderate or weak impact of
each factor. The result revealed that Recreational type and 7.3.3. Safety
Community type have strong impacts in all the factors, as Most of developed open spaces-85.8% - have lighting
they are well developed to serve all the neighborhood which to some extent guarantee the safety of women,
residents. The Promenading type and Gated type have elderly and children walking by or using these areas. 74.3%
strong impact in environmental/ecological and lifestyle of the developed open spaces are fenced. That indicates a
factors and moderate impact in social factors and weak growing tendency of green space being locked behind
impact in equity factors because they do not enable walls and prevents the public from using them. Thus,
different functions. The Sport field type has weak impact in enhances the social inclusion dimension. Developed open
environmental/ecological factors because most of sport spaces that have lighting and a fence represent 68.5% of the
fields have grey landscape. It has weak impact in equity total developed open spaces, while only two developed
factors because it is used by youth and children only and open spaces have no lighting or a fence.
does not enable different functions. The Cluster type has
strong impact in social and equity factors, moderate 7.3.4. Management
impacts in lifestyle factors and weak impacts in Generally, neighborhood open spaces in Khartoum town
environmental/ecological factor because most of Cluster are owned by local government authority, in some cases
open spaces are not well developed with green landscape. they are privately owned. The privately-owned open spaces
are usually developed and managed privately by
7.3. Development Indicators of Open Spaces in landowners. In the selected neighborhoods, most
Neighborhoods. developed open spaces are managed by public participation
7.3.1. Availability - 65% of them by community groups and 12% of them by
individuals (see figure 5) at their own expense, and
The geospatial analysis of the selected neighborhoods sometimes have assistance from the town local authorities.
revealed that developed open spaces take several shapes Some open spaces have commercial activities such as cafes
and sizes. Each neighborhood has different sizes of open to meet user needs and to add to attractiveness to the open
spaces except Al-Mujahdeen neighborhood. As the newest space and thus the neighborhood.
neighborhood, Al-Mujahdeen has open spaces of the same The field survey revealed that factors ontribute to well
size-1600 m2. Sizes of developed open spaces range from management of open spaces are:
1200 m2 to 12500 m2. Small open spaces (1200 m2-3000
m2) represents 60% of the total open spaces. Medium open • A well organized and active community participation.
spaces (3200 m2-6000 m2) represent 14.3% of the total • A local person who acts as a leader of the local
open spaces. Large open spaces (6200 m2-12500 m2) community who can gain legal support.
represent 25.7% of the total open spaces. The size of open • Clear security for the space, usually in the form of fencing
space can vary considerably with the actual design of and lighting.
houses and the inner gardens; so that, it is much less • Use of the space by different age groups of the
important in first class residential areas where houses have community.
large gardens than in third class residential areas where
houses are small with less possibilities of gardens. 65.7%
of developed open spaces have green land scape with green
coverage more than 50% of the total area as shown in table
5.
7.3.2. Accessibility
The accessibility of developed open spaces is related to
the number of these spaces and their distribution within
neighborhoods. Developed open spaces are obviously
randomly distributed within the neighborhoods so that only
15 developed open spaces- which represent 42.8% - have
good accessibility ranging from 122m – 300 m compared Key
to the international standard of 300 m. They are located in Public participation
first and second-class residential areas e.g. Khartoum (2), Private sector
Al-Amarat and Al-Mujahdeen. The remaining 20 open local authorities
spaces have bad accessibility ranging from 344 m -1075 m, Source: Field survey July-December 2017
they are located in - third class residential areas e.g. Figure 5. Management of developed open spaces in the selected
Al-Diyum and Naser Extension. Almost all developed neighborhoods.
280 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

Table 6. Development Indicators of open spaces

Availability Security Accessibility Management

Open space

Fron-tage %
Distance (m)
cover-age %

land-scape

Manag-er
lighting
Type of
+

Owner
Green

Street
fence
Area
(m2)
Typology

1.1 Sport 6,000 50 Grey available available 290 100 Public Public
1.2 Gated 9,000 60 Green - available 122 100 Private Private
Khartoum-2

1.3 Sport 6,000 10 Grey - - 500 100 Public Public

1.4 Prominade 1200 90 Green available available 200 33 Public Public
1,5 Prominade 1200 70 Green available available 130 100 Public Public
1.6 Recreation 5600 85 Green - available 134 100 Public Public
2.1 Gated 3,960 80 Green available available 344 100 Private Private
2.2 Recreation 2,500 50 Grey available available 198 100 Public Public
2.3 Gated 2,200 100 Green available available 434 100 Private Private
Al-Amarat

2.4 Recreation 5,200 70 Green available available 241 100 authority Public
2.5 Recreation 2,200 90 Green - available 418 100 Public Public
2.6 Sport 1,800 95 Green available available 425 100 Public Public
2.7 Sport 2,900 40 Grey available available 375 100 authority Public
2.8 cluster 1,200 50 Grey - - 588 100 authority Public
3.1 Community 9,000 90 Green available available 344 100 authority authority
3.2 Community 9,600 20 Grey available available 565 100 authority authority
3.3 Recreation 1200 95 Green available available 125 100 organization organization
Al-Diyum

3.4 Sport 12,500 50 Grey available available 600 70 authority authority

3.5 Sport 12,500 10 Grey available available 850 50 authority authority
3.6 Cluster 1200 90 Green available available 145 74 Public Public
3.7 Cluster 1200 80 Green available available 150 100 Public Public
3.8 Cluster 1200 30 Grey available - 154 100 Public Public
4.1 Recreation 1,600 88.5 Green available available 245 100 authority authority
Naser extension

4.2 Gated 1,900 98 Green available available 371 100 authority Public
4.3 Recreation 2,800 70 Green available available 458 100 Public Public
4.4 Sport 7.700 25 Grey available available 582 100 Private Private
4.5 Sport 10.000 90 Green - available 187 100 Public Public
4.6 Sport 10,000 5 Grey available available 447 100 authority authority
5.1 Recreation 2,400 74 Green available available 300 100 Public Public
Al-Riyad

5.2 Sport 3,000 80 Green available available 830 100 authority Public
5.3 Community 10,400 40 Grey available available 1075 100 authority Public
6.1 Cluster 1600 90 Green - available 385 100 private Public
Al-Mujahdeen

6.2 Sport 1,600 40 Grey - available 350 100 Public Public

6.3 Cluster 1600 50 Grey available - 300 100 Public Public
6,4 Cluster 1600 50 Grey - - 478 100 Public Public
Source: field survey July-December 2017
 Civil Engineering and Architecture 6(6): 269-282, 2018 281

8. Conclusions REFERENCES
The absence of a comprehensive development program [1] Regional Public Health: Healthy Open Spaces: A summary
for open spaces in the selected neighborhoods leads to poor of the impact of open spaces on health and wellbeing,
Regional Public Health Information Paper March 2010
outdoor environments. Well designed and well managed
open spaces can be used for play, recreation, and relaxation, [2] Kozloff,H. Understanding the Value of Urban Open Space.
they can also encourage neighborhood’s residents to Urban Land Institute.2015.
involve in out-door activities which enhance social [3] Thompson, C.W. Urban open space in the 21st century.
interaction and sense of community. Landscape and urban Planning. Volume 60. Pp 59-72. 2002.
The research added a quantitative perspective on
previous researchers’ more qualitative studies on open [4] Rapoport A. The role of neighborhood in the success of
cities Ekistics, 69(412-414); pp 145-151. 2002.
spaces within neighborhoods. The developed open spaces
in the selected neighborhoods are 35 with total area of [5] Swanwick C. Society’s attitudes to and preferences for land
154,050 m2 which represent only 27.6 % of the total and landscape. Land Use Policy. Volume 26, Supplement 1,
number of open spaces. The comparison between the Pages S62-S75. 2009.
selected neighborhoods revealed that old neighborhoods [6] Kazmierezak,A.E and James,P. The role of urban green
have hierarchical open spaces while new neighborhoods spaces in improving social inclusion. pp354-365. 2007.
have non-hierarchal open spaces.
[7] World Health Organization. Health Indicators of Sustainable
The field survey also disclosed a strong influence of a set Cities- Initial findings from a WHO Expert Consultation:
of factors such as residential class and time of planning on 17-18 May 2012.
the development of open spaces in each neighborhood. The
[8] Jennings,V, Larson,L, and Yun,J. Advancing Sustainability
comparison between high income - first class
through Urban Green Space: Cultural Ecosystem Services,
neighborhoods e.g. Khartoum 2 (65%) and low income Equity, and Social Determinants of Health. International
-third class neighborhoods (e.g. Al Diyum (21.4%)) Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2016
revealed that first class neighborhoods have more
[9] Bell S, Hamilton V, Montarzino A, Rothnie H, Travlou Pand
developed open space than third class areas,
Alves S. Green space Scotland: research report. 2008
The research classified developed open spaces in the
selected neighborhoods upon their use into six groups: [10] Tsai W.l., McHale M.R., Jennings V, Marquet O., Aaron
Promenading open space, Gated open space, Recreational Hipp J. Leung Y.F. and Floyd M.F.Relationships between
Open space, community centers, Sport fields and Cluster Characteristics of Urban Green Land Cover and Mental
Health in U.S. Metropolitan Areas. International journal of
open space. Also, the research formulated a model to environmental research and public health. 2018.
evaluate the performance of the six typologies of open
spaces in the selected neighborhoods based on [11] Rakhshamdehroo M and Johari M. The environmental
environmental/ecological, lifestyle, social and equity benefits of urban green spaces. Alam Cpita. Volume 10 (1).
pp10-16.2017.
impacts. The successful examples of developed open
spaces of the surveyed neighborhoods are Recreational [12] Campbell, K. Rethinking Open Space, Open space Provision
open spaces and Community centers. and Management: A Way Forward, Report presented by
The research promoted a set of indicators to evaluate Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, Edinburgh,
Scotland, UK. 200
development of open spaces in neighborhoods such as:
availability, accessibility, security and management and it [13] Mensah,C.A.and Roji A. Urban green spaces in Africa.
was clear that small open spaces (1200 m2-3000 m2) Insights from selected African cities. Landscape
represents 60% of the total open spaces. 65.7% of Ecology.No.62 2014
developed open spaces have green land scape with green [14] Baycan T. Nijkamp,P .Critical success factors in planning
coverage more than 50% of the total area. Accessibility of and management of urban green spaces in Europe.
developed open spaces in first and second-class International Journal of Sustainable Society. 2007.
neighborhoods is better than third class neighborhoods. [15] Shirley, P. The Urban Park, In M. Cliff (ed.), Urban Design:
68.5% of the total developed open spaces, while only two Green Dimensions, Elsevier, Architectural Press, Oxford,
developed open spaces have no lighting or a UK, pp. 77-92. 2005
fence .Developed open space of the surveyed
[16] Urban Green Spaces Task Force. Green Spaces, Better
neighborhoods managed by community groups (public Places–Final report of the Urban Green Spaces Task Force.
participation) are estimated to be greater than that which is DTLR, London. 2002.
managed by the local authority and most of them have
lighting and fences. [17] Green Surge Project. A typology of urban green
spaces,ecosystem services provisioning services and
demands.Vol.10. 2015 .
282 Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

[18] UN Habitat, Habitat III issue papers 11 – Public Space, New

York.2015.
[19] United Nations. (n.d.). Sustainable Development Goals
SDGs. Retrieved October 2016, from Sustainable
Development: www.sustainabledevelopment.un.org.
[20] UNDP. Melbourne Principles for Sustainable Cities. United
Nations Environment Programme Division of Technology,
Industry and Economics. 2002.
[21] Al-Hagja K. Towards a sustainable neighborhood’s role of
open spaces. International journal of architectural research.
volume 2-Issue 2- pp162-177. July 2008.
[22] You,N. Toward a global action plan for public
space-Bridging the urban SDG with Habitat III. Citiscope.
2015
[23] WHO Regional Office for Europe. Urban green space a brief
for action. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.
2017.
[24] Mahon.J.R and.Miller R.W.Identifing high-value green
space prior to land development .J.Architecture.20 (1) .pp
25-33. 2003.
[25] Herbits H and Herbits V. The development of an evaluation
method using a geographic information system to determine
the importance of wasteland sites in urban wildlife are as
landscape urban plan .77. pp 176-195. 2006.
[26] Randall T. A, Churchill C.J. and Baetz B.W. 2003.A GIS-
based decision support system for neighborhood greening.
Environ Plan-SAGE journals.30 (4). pp541-563.
[27] Comber A, Brunsdon C, Green E.1 Using a GIS-based
network analysis to determine urban greenspace
accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups.
Landscape and Urban Planning. Volume 86, pp 103–114.
2008.
[28] UN Habitat, Enhancing Urban Safety and Security .Global
Report on Human Settlements . 2007.
[29] Alhuseen,. “Sufficiency of Open Public and Green Spaces in
Khartoum State-Sudan”, International Journal of Social
Relevance & Concern (IJSRC) ISSN-2347-9698, Volume 3,
Issue 5. 2015.
[30] Ministry of physical planning. Sudan Report for Habitat II,
1996.
[31] Committee for physical planning. The Planning Directory
for Social Services. Khartoum State. 2016.
[32] Khartoum State: Ministry of planning and physical planning.
Khartoum Structure Plan. Volume 1. Khartoum State. 2009.
[33] http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/sudan-pop
ulation/ accessed 14/11/2018
[34] https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Khartoum_%28state%29#Ref
erences. accessed 14/11/2018.
[35] Khartoum State. Governmental Reports-Khartoum .
Khartoum State.2015.