Evaluating Neighborhoods Developed Open Spaces in Khartoum-Sudan

The research reported in this paper evaluted development of open areas in neighborhoods. The research was performed in the new neighborhoods in Khartoum town (Al Riyadh (1972), Nasr Extension (1972) and Al Mujahedeen (1988), compared to older neighborhoods (Khartoum -2 (1950), Al Diyum (1953), and Alamarat (1958)). The research aimed to study open spaces in these neighborhoods. compared characteristics of the selected neighborhoods, classified developed open spaces and evaluated the performance of each typology. The research promoted measurable development indicators such as availability, accessibility, safety and management. Then applied these indicators to analyse developed open spaces. The results confirmed a lack of a comprehensive development programs. The developed open spaces are 35 with total area of 154,050 m2 which represent only 27. 6 % of the total number of open spaces. The research found that old neighborhoods have higher index of sufficiency value than new neighborhoods e.g. Khartoum (2) (8.9) compared to Al-Mujahdeen (3.9). Also, first class residential areas have higher index value than third class areas e.g. Khartoum -2 (8.9) compared to Al-Diyum (7.7). The successful types of developed open spaces of the surveyed neighborhoods are Recreational open spaces and Community centers. Most of them are managed by community groups (public participation).


Introduction
Urban open spaces promote and enrich the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of communities, commonly called the "four wellbeing's [1]. Some urban open spaces have iconic value -being significant features in their settings and reflect the local culture or history e.g. Central Park in New York Champs-Elysées in Paris or El Tehrer Square in Cairo. In addition to that, they raise real estate values e.g. Central Park and Bryant Park -located in Manhattan, New York City are two examples of urban open space that add economic value to their surroundings [2]. Scholars added a political dimension to the important role of urban open spaces in the 21 st century and described parks as "places where democracy is worked out literally on the ground, and therefore the way such spaces are designed, managed and used demonstrates the realities of political rhetoric " [3]. Public parks conceived as places where strangers can meet, so that there is a great chance of privacy [3]. At the micro level green spaces are important components of the neighborhoods which increase the quality of the urban environment. They offer common grounds for social contact and interaction between neighbors [4]. Open spaces have broad and diverse benefits for neighborhoods residents especially those who are least freely mobile, because of lack of private transport, age or illness like old people [5]. The social impact of access to green spaces in neighborhoods is improvement of social inclusion and community cohesion [6]. Using green space is an expanded indicator for sustainable cities and improve both the health and the well-being of urban residents [7]. There is a strong link between health and the cultural ecosystem services [8]. The social determinants of health and the benefits gained from urban green spaces are listed in table 1. At neighborhood and built environment level they promote sense of place and community satisfaction, reduce crime and incivilities and provide access to healthy food.
The growing amount of people living in urban areasapproaching two thirds of the global population -creates many challenges concerning health hazards and risks. Research on lifestyle impact of green space and quality of life revealed that physical exercise in green spaces is generally positively associated with promoting well-being and recovery from stress [9] , also landscape patterns characteristics influence the mental health of nearby residents [10].Many scholars studied the environmental and ecological impact of green space such as: natural reservation, protection of habitat, preservation of bio-diversity, improvement of urban climate, reduction of air pollution and noise and clearance of contamination [11]. Therefore, the broad and diverse benefits of green networks can be summarized into two main categories, Primary Benefits and Secondary Benefits. Primary Benefits includes: Accessibility, sustainability, high quality, positive image, promotion of economic development and, promotion of social inclusion. Secondary Benefits includes: ecological, environmental and educational benefits [12]. Not understanding or acknowledging the abovementioned benefits of green spaces in urban areas by professionals and active members in industry, have led to the deteriorating condition of urban green spaces in Africa .The reasons of that deterioration are: high rates of urban sprawl and informal settlements e.g. reduction in green vegetation from 21% to 12.9% in Abuja [13] or reduction of forests area , although the existence of natural green space such as a forest may be seen as a substitute for urban green spaces [14]. Regarding the Sudanese context, most of open spaces in Khartoum town are neglected and left undeveloped-brownfields-for a long time. A main problem is that neglected open spaces seem to attract antiurban behavior such as collecting rubbish or unwanted building materials. They produce health hazards especially in times of rains as being a suitable habitat for insects in particular mosquitos. Moreover, the contemporary urban growth of neighborhoods in Khartoum town and the growing demand for residential areas have a considerable impact on change of open space use. The public authority transforms undeveloped open spaces into other uses e.g. social services: mosques, schools or shopping centers. Or even sold them as residential land. This transformation had negative consequences on the quality of neighborhoods and the social life. Some active community organizations and community members start developing open spaces so that public authority could not transform them into other uses.
The main objective of this research is to recognize and evaluate the developed open spaces in the selected neighborhoods.

Open Space Typology
Open spaces can be classified according to functions or characteristics. There is a simple typology that divided urban landscape types into four main categories [15] Another detailed typology focusing on land uses to serve planning purposes [16], where open spaces are divided into:  Green Spaces -parks and gardens: includes urban and country parks, and formal gardens -formal landscape  Amenity green spaces: including: housing green spaces, domestic gardens, village greens and other incidental space-informal recreation spaces in residential areas.  Allotments, community gardens and urban farms.  Natural and semi-natural green space: includes woodland and scrub grassland, heath or moor, wet lands, open and running water and bare rock habitat  Green corridors: includes river and canal banks, road and rail corridors, cycling routes and pedestrian paths within towns and cities and rights of way and permissive paths.
A recent study presented eight categories of urban green spaces [17]:  building greens,  private, commercial, industrial, institutional urban green space and urban green space connected to grey infrastructure  riverbank green,  parks and recreation,  allotments and community gardens,  agricultural land,  natural, semi-natural and feral areas  blue spaces.
From the above-mentioned typologies, it is clear that scholars classified neighborhood open spaces in different ways: it was classified with formal landscape [15], and with the informal recreation spaces-amenity green [16], and finally it was placed in the park and recreation typology and outlined many benefits of them such as: during WW II, neighborhood green was changed into tenant gardens producing food [17].
However, neighborhood open spaces have many uses and perform multiple functions such as: recreation, cycling routes and pedestrian paths and sport fields. It must be seen as "multi-functional area for social interaction, economic exchange and cultural expression among a wide diversity of people and should be designed and managed to ensure human development, building peaceful and democratic societies and promoting cultural diversity" [18]. Therefore, neighborhood open space could be classified in the main formal landscape section with different typologies according to its purpose.

Sustainable Development of Open Spaces
Sustainable development is seen as a process that links environmental protection with economic, social and cultural sound development. Urban development is a major concern in sustainable issues so that cities and human settlements must be inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable [19]. Development of open spaces has to be within the umbrella of the four pillars of sustainability: cultural vibrancy, economic prosperity, environmental responsibility and social justice [20]. Some researchers tried to connect neighborhoods sustainability and open space development, by developing a three-dimensional matrix corelating different typologies of open spaces with sustainability goals and objectives, and sustainability parameters [21].
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) are a collection of 17 global goals set by the United Nations General Assembly in 2015. They were set to guide development, end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity [19]. Goal 11 clearly stated that green and public space development is a major concern in urban sustainability: "by 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, particularly for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities" [19]. The three mentioned indicators in Goal 11 are: safety, inclusion and accessibility. How to measure open space development is a debatable issue and monitoring the progress and application of these goals is not practical [22]. Moreover, World Health Organization identified the most important aspects of development of green environment as: availability, accessibility, quality and security [7]. Therefore, the international indicators to control provision of open space are:

Availability
Provision of open spaces in urban areas can be 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 land should be allocated to open spaces, green spaces and public facilities [18]. The index of sufficiency of open spaces is the fraction of the square meters of open space by the number of the neighborhood inhabitants. The recommended square meters of green space per capita-index of sufficiencyglobally is a minimum of 9 m 2 per person [7], but some European cities applied different monitoring values e.g., Berlin: 6 m 2 per person, Leipzing 10 m 2 per person. The British standard for the natural green aimed to provide 2 hectors of natural green space for urban inhabitants with accessibility of 300 m, while the German standard reduced the amount to 0.5 ha with accessibility of 500 m [17].

Accessibility
Accessibility means the right to approach, enter or use particular open space-without presence of any physical constrain e.g. long distance, roads, railways locked gates or social and cultural constraints e.g. fear of crime or other concerns over safety [12]. In some situations, accessibility is connected with safety. Access to open spaces within a 15-minute walk is regarded as one of the core health indicators of sustainable cities [23]. There are a number of "distance/time" criteria for measuring accessibility for parks and gardens -the British standard proposed the following hierarchy of accessibility [15]:  300 m to the nearest 2 ha green space.  2 km to the nearest 20 ha green space.  5 km to the nearest 100 ha green space.  10 km to the nearest 500 ha green space.
Accessibility is an important planning indicator. Improving technologies enable planners and researchers to use geographical information system (GIS) to analyze availability and accessibility of green spaces within urban areas. They used (GIS) to outline some valuable green spaces in terms of ecological, recreational and aesthetical impact [24] and [25]. Geographical Information System (GIS) helped to create a model for management of existing green spaces and distribution and planning of new green spaces in neighborhoods [26]. Moreover, they used GIS to quantify and measure the access of green space by different ethnic and religious groups [27].

Security
The safety of women, the elderly and children is an important key indicator for the development of open space. The total recorded crime rates in the world  increased by about 30% and it is estimated that about 15% of those crimes have took place in a public space [28]. Security can be guaranteed through provision of lighting and fencing, although fencing enhances the social inclusion dimension.

The Sudanese Context
Open spaces in Khartoum have been classified into four main classes based on parameters of number of population served and zone of service ,see table 2 below. Table 2. Classification of open spaces in Khartoum (source: [29]).

Open space
No. of population Service zone (m 2 ) Neighbourhood court 500-5000 300-500 Residential garden 10,000-20,000 2,000-5,000 Communal garden 20,000-50,000 2,000-5,000 City park 100,000-150,000 Bigger than that The Khartoum Structure Plan [32] proposed increase in green areas by developing the river Nile front embankments in Khartoum, Khartoum North and Omdurman as public parks Residential areas in Khartoum have three distinctive classes:  First class -plot size is ranging from 800 to 500 m 2 and inhabited by high income residents.  Second class-plot size is ranging from 400 to 300 m 2 and inhabited by medium income residents.  Third class-plot size is 200 m 2 and inhabited by low income residents. Location of these neighborhoods is shown in fig 1 below.

Research Methodology
The research has followed qualitative and quantitative methods which included: analysis of documents, photo documentation, observation, and statistical data. The statistical data -concerning area and population of each neighborhood-are collected from Governmental Reports

Comparison between the Selected Neighborhoods
Generally speaking most neighborhoods have acceptable index of sufficiency e.g. Khartoum -2 (8.9) Al-Riyadh (8.7), Al-Diyum (7.7) and Naser Extension (5.7), compared to the international standards of 10 m 2 -6 m 2 (see table 3). More detailed observation revealed that residential class and time of planning are influential factors on index of sufficiency. Old neighborhoods have higher index value than new neighborhoods e.g. Khartoum (2) (8.9) compared to Al-Mujahdeen (5.2) and Al-Diyum (7.7) compared to Naser Extension (5.7) see table 3. Also first class residential areas have higher index value than third class areas e.g. Khartoum -2 (8.9) compared to Al-Diyum (7.

Developed Open Space Typology
User-perception surveys revealed that developed open spaces within the selected neighborhoods differ in functions. Each community has variety of activities that can be performed in open spaces, but the most prevailing activities and occasions occur in outdoor spaces are: children playing, sports, social adults gathering, eating in  Table 4 presented detailed description of each typology. Table 4. Developed open space typologies in the selected neighbourhoods.

Type of Open space
Descriptions Example

1-promenading open space
Green open space whose main function is aesthetical value with environmental and visual benefits. It has cycling routes and pedestrian paths without seating or recreational tools, e.g. spaces that created by splitting of streets.
Developed open space in Khartoum-2. July 2017

2-Gated open space
Green open spaces developed and managed by individuals. It is gated but public are allowed to access, walking through and taking photos, but there are no places for sitting or active recreation.
Developed open space in Al-Amarat. July 2017

3-Recreational Open space
Green garden that contains recreational facilities, lawns with sittings and children's playing areas-provide safe play for children, usually close to home and under informal supervision from nearby houses.
Developed open space in Al-Amarat-July 2017

4-community centers
The open space contains in addition to recreational facilities, commercial activities (restaurant, coffee shop) and educational facilities -providing an "outdoor classrooms" for special interest groups and evening classes for school students. Some of them contain kindergartens Community centre in Al-Diyum-July 2017

5-Sport fields
The whole open space is developed as sport fields e.g. football grounds due to scarcities of sport facilities in Khartoum town. Some of them have green coverage but the majority have grey landscape.
Sport field in Naser Extension-December 2017.

6-Cluster open space
Open space is developed to be a good gathering place for the Cluster residents  Application of the proposed model on the typologies of developed open spaces is presented in table 5. The evaluation is based on strong, moderate or weak impact of each factor. The result revealed that recreational type and community type have strong impacts in all the factors, as they are well developed to serve all the neighborhood residents. The Promenading type and Gated type have strong impact in environmental/ecological and lifestyle factors and moderate impact in social factors and weak impact in equity factors because they do not enable different functions. The Sport field type has weak impact in environmental/ecological factors because most of sport fields have grey landscape. It has weak impact in equity factors because it is used by youth and children only and does not enable different functions. The Cluster type has strong impact in social and equity factors, moderate impacts in lifestyle factors and weak impacts in environmental/ecological factor because most of Cluster open spaces are not well developed with green landscape.

Development Indicators of Open Areas in
Neighborhoods.

Availability
The geospatial analysis of the selected neighborhoods

Conclusions
The absence of a comprehensive development program for open spaces in the selected neighborhoods leads to poor outdoor environments. Well designed and well managed open spaces can be used for play, recreation, and relaxation, they can also encourage neighborhood's residents to involve in out-door activities which enhance social interaction and sense of community. The