REPORT ON BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATION

UPDATING STUDY FOR ADDIS ABABA

(FINAL)

October -2011

1
About this report

The study on the updating of the building height regulation of Addis Ababa has the following
three reports:

1. Report #1: this report is about the review of literature on international and local
experiences
2. Report #2: this report contains all information collected during the one month field work
undertaken by infrastructure team and urban design and planning team in ten sub-cities
and,
3. Report #3: this is the final design report.

Report #3

This is report #3 that presents how the new building height regulation was prepared. It also
presents the various building height regulations assigned to the different sections of the city
according to their potential.

The report is organized in six major parts. Part I presents the introduction and background. Part
II presents the design program development and part III shows the application of the design
program to the context. Part IV is about the design stage (regulation showing the way from
concept to design). This is followed by part V which is about the outcome of the design
regulation showing different city parts with their corresponding building height and finally part VI
presents guideline for implementing the new height regulation of Addis Ababa and some
recommendations.

2
Contents

I Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 7

1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 7

1.3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 7

II Design program development.......................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Findings from the literature review. ......................................................................................... 9

2.1.1 Common interest.............................................................................................................. 9

2.1.2 The private interest ........................................................................................................ 10

2.2 Findings of the contextual study ............................................................................................. 11

2.2.1 The interests .................................................................................................................. 11

2.3 Design program for the regulation ......................................................................................... 13

2.3 The design context ................................................................................................................. 14

2.4 The design.............................................................................................................................. 14

III Application of the design program to the context .......................................................................... 16

3.1 Conceptual plan development ............................................................................................... 16

3.2 The selection of an appropriate urban structure for Addis Ababa ........................................... 17

IV Design stage: from concept to design ............................................................................................ 19

4.1 Scientific methods .................................................................................................................. 19

4.1.1 Economic height ............................................................................................................. 19

4.1.2 Infrastructure height ...................................................................................................... 20

4.1.3 Climatic height ............................................................................................................... 20

4.1.4 Esthetic height................................................................................................................ 20

IV building height regulations for diferent parts of Addis Ababa......................................................... 25

5.1 Building height Regulation for different locations ................................................................... 26

3
 5.1.1 Central Business District (CBD)........................................................................................ 26

5.1.2 Sub Centers .................................................................................................................... 28

5.1.3 Tertiary Centers.............................................................................................................. 29

5.1.4 Nodes ............................................................................................................................. 30

5.1.5 Development Corridors .................................................................................................. 32

5.1.6 The “Old City Core” ........................................................................................................ 40

5.1.7 The Buffer zone around the “Old Minilik Palace” ............................................................ 42

5.1.8 Development in the “Transition Zone”............................................................................ 43

5.1.9 Development in the “Rest of the City” ........................................................................... 45

5.1.10 The “Ring Road” ............................................................................................................. 46

5.2 From building height to plot size determination ..................................................................... 48

5.2.1 Plot size determination................................................................................................... 48

VI Guideline for implementing the REVISED buildilng Height Regulation of AddIS AbABA-2011....... 51

6.1 implementation guide lines .................................................................................................... 51

6.2 Minimum plot size determination ................................................................................................ 62

6.3 Other conditions .................................................................................................................... 62

Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 65

4
List of tables

Table #0: Differentiation of Urban Areas based on common interest implementation potential
Table #1: building height for the CBD
Table #2: building height regulation for the sub centers
Table #3: building height regulation for the tertiary centers
Table #4: building height regulation for the nodes
Table #5: building height regulation for 1st grade development corridors
Table #6: building height regulation for 2nd grade development corridors
Table #7: building height regulation for 3rd grade development corridors
Table #8: building height regulation for the old city core area
Table #9: building height regulation for the buffer zone around the old Minilik palace
Table #10: building height regulation for the transition zone
Table #11: building height regulation for the rest of the city
Table #12: building height regulation along the ring road
Table #113: building footprint for different building types
Table #114: Formulas to determine setbacks
Table #15: building types and areas to be deducted during FAR calculation
Table #16: new Enclosure, Minimum Building Height and FAR for centers, sub centers, tertiary
centers and nodes
Table #:17 new Enclosure, Minimum Building Height and FAR for corridors, historical areas,
transition zones, ring road and the rest of the city
Table #18-formula to determine building setback
Table #19-building height, minimum building frontage and depth
Table #20- building height and minimum street width
Table #21-, minimum street width and maximum FAR

List of diagrams/figures
Diagram #1: building height relation according to the Golden ration
Diagram #2: building height relation according to Van Der Series
Diagram #3: building height according to enclosure principle
Diagram #4: building height and intimate scale

Acronyms
BAR Built up Area Ratio in relation to the plot size
BHR Building Height Regulation
CBD Central Business District
FAR Floor Area Ratio in relation to the plot size
LDP Local Development Plan
TOR Terms of Reference

5
 Team members that have participated in this study

No Name Profession Qualification

Urban Design-Urban Planning study team
1 Abraham Workneh Architect- Urban Planner MSc
2 Alazar Assefa Architect– Urban designer MSc
3 Betelihem Demissie Architect-Urban Planner MSc
4 Dagim Asfaw Architect– Urban designer MSc
5 Darik Zebenigus Architect– Urban designer MSc
6 Ezana Yoseph Architect– Urban designer MSc
7 Heyaw terefe Architect– Urban designer PhD
8 Nebyou Yonas Architect– Urban designer MSc
9 Tibebu Asefa Architect– Urban designer MSc
10 Tsion Lemma Architect– Urban designer MSc
11 Yeneneh Chaneyalew Architect – Urban designer MSc
Infrastructure study team
12 Dandena Tufa Architect-Urban Planner MSc
13 Dagnachew Adugna Infrastructure expert MSc
3 Wondimu Kassa Civil engineer MSc
Economic study team
14 Eyasu Kumera Economist MSc
15 Sisay Zenebe Economist MSc
Geology study team
16 Atalay Geologist PhD

GIS expert
17 Alemu Nebebe GIS expert MSc

6
I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
This document presents a building height regulation updating study made by the EiABC from
June 2010 to December 2010. The study was made based on memorandum of understanding
signed between the institute and Addis Ababa city administration.

According to the TOR summated by the client, the updating of the existing building height
regulation of the city was necessitated by four major reasons

1 The existing building height regulation was prepared in 2001 for a planning period of ten
years which ends in 2011. This means time for the preparation of a new one is that
responds to the current reality of the city
2 The scope of the existing BHR was limited to central parts of the city and along major
development corridors and as a result it couldn’t serve as an instrument to regulate
development in many areas of the city that have newly emerged to be major
development areas
3 Even though there have been complaints from stakeholders during the early planning
period that the regulation over-specified in some parts of the city, recently complaints
have turned out to be under-specification and finally,
4 The existing BHR was based on the principles of efficient use of land and infrastructure
and the development of good quality urban environment in general. Its main instruments
were BAR, and number of floors. There is the need to examine whether these principles
as well as the instruments were adequate.

1.2 Objectives
Based on the above rationales, the major objectives of the study were:
 To reexamine the principles on which the existing BHR was based on and propose
updated principles during the updating work
 To study the existing BHR instruments and update them and finally,
 To propose a city wide BHR based on the new principles and instruments.

1.3 Methodology
This study was made by employing three major methods
 Literature review
 Contextual study and
 Stakeholder appraisal

An extensive literature review was conducted to find out international BHR practices and the
principles and instruments on which they are based. Four study teams consisting of economists,
infrastructure experts, urban designers and urban planners were actively involved in reviewing
the local and international experience in relation to building height. The task of the economic
study team was to identify the economic rationalists for regulating the height of buildings in the
7
city. The infrastructure group was involved in assessing the relation between infrastructures and
building height. The urban design team’s major task was to identify design principles that dictate
building height in different cities all over the world. The last team was assigned to investigate
the limitations and potentials of the existing building height regulation of the city government of
Addis Ababa. The findings from this study were used to develop a design program /concept for
the new regulation.

In addition an extensive contextual study was undertaken by dividing the city into ten parts/sub-
cities and using physical survey, observation and interview techniques. The findings of this
study at the sub-city level were used to understand the context for which the regulation is
designed and desired local regulation principles. The later was combined with the findings of the
literature review to complete the development of the design program for the new regulation.

The findings of these two studies were presented to the client for appraisal and feed back. Once
the design program was developed and applied to the context, the result, which was a draft
regulation regulation, was once again presented first to the client and latter to other major
stakeholders for appraisal and feed back. Incorporating the comments given in all the three
encounters, the updated BHR was finalized.

8
II DESIGN PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The BHR updating task is viewed as building height regulation design. Any design starts with
the development of a program. As explained in the background part, the program for the current
design is developed by reviewing the literature, by conducting contextual study in all parts of AA
and putting together the findings from the two studies.

2.1 Findings from the literature review.

In the literature, design program is defined as the list of needs or interests that must be satisfied
by a design. The current design that is the BHR is needed by the government, which is a
development regulator, for the purpose of regulating private and other developments.

Government regulates development in order to protect legitimate interests that may be affected
by unregulated developments. On the other hand, private building development occurs only
when legitimate interests of the private developers are assured to be served. These imply that a
BHR must satisfy two major interests: the interest of the regulator (which must be based on the
common interest) and the interest of the developer which can be generally called private
interest.

2.1.1 Common interest

In principle, the function of the government is to safeguard the common interests of society and
private interests that do not conflict with them. Common interests aimed to be protected can be
economic, social, or environmental by type. In addition, in terms of time the interests intended to
be protected can be existing at the preset time or those envisaged in the future. Common
interest can also refer to different categories of stakeholders such as the country’s or regions’
whole population (national/regional interest), its urban population only (often called public
interest), or its urban area population often called community or local interest.

Different countries often have different national and regional interest because of differences in
history, culture, geographic location and socio-economic development. In addition, cities in
different countries have different urban areas. For example while cities like Addis Ababa have
large slum areas, in American and European cities such areas are quite small. On the other
hand, while many cities in the later have see side and river side areas, this is not the case for
Addis Ababa.
Urban and local interests can also be different among countries partly because of the above
factors. However, there are also many interests that are regarded as uniform at these scales.
These include safety and security, efficiency, equity, esthetics and comfort.

Safety and security: buildings and urban areas are developed for people and the things they
do. To feel safe from harm is considered one of the basic needs of people. Major threats on the
safety of users include unsafe location of buildings and neighborhoods, structural problems,

9
motorized traffic, poor lighting and visibility, poor waste management, vulnerability to crime, fire
and seismic hazards, etc.

Efficiency: concerns mainly optimization of the use of resources such as land and
infrastructure. Land is a scarce resource. Infrastructures such as roads are developed with
heavy investments which is also always a scarce resource particular in poor countries like
Ethiopia. Therefore, there is interest to ensure that these resources are used optimally. Optimal
use means preventing both over use of the resources which may entail poor quality life, poor
health, and even disfunctionality. While under use of the resources would entail wastage of the
scarce resources. Of particular importance is optimal use of infrastructure. The capacity of
infrastructure such as road is a determining factor for the volume of development that takes
place in an area (for more detailed information on this issue, see Report #1: infrastructure study)

Equity: is an interest to develop goods, services and resource allocation system that can
provide access to the resources to all socio-economic groups. The market system which is the
dominant system of allocation serves very well the interest of groups with higher social and
economic status. The concern here is, therefore, for those who are on lower social and
economic status. BHR is an instrument of allocation of space for living and working. Unless it is
designed with equity as part of its design program, it can become an impediment to access for
weaker socio economic groups to space for living and working.

Esthetics: is the interest to develop a city with good visual qualities. Concern for visual quality
is regarded as a common concern among all humans. However, good visual quality may not be
a priority of all social groups at all times. Therefore, it is an interest that must be viewed
contextually. A detail analysis on aesthetics is presented in chapter three.

Comfort: it is one other major quality required from buildings and urban areas by its users.
Buildings and spaces are required to meet certain standard of comfort to satisfy users. The
length of time people stay in a public space for example is a function and an indicator of its
comfort. It is a product of satisfaction with a behavior and quality of elements with which users
interact in a space. These elements include air, light, sound, activity, physical elements and
people.

2.1.2 The private interest

Generally, private interest includes the interests of private individuals and entities. Major Private
Stakeholders in building development include land sellers, financers and developers. The
interest of private entities can be social, economic and use by type. Developers may have
interest in building high for the purpose of advancing their social status, for maximizing profit or
for maximizing satisfaction of need in the case of development for own use. Like the common
interest, private interest intended to be served can be currently existing or future ones.

10
In a market system, a city normally has many land sellers, financers and developers. These
entities also have different economic and social interests at different times. Therefore, their
individual interests are too many and varied to be represented in a design program. However,
leaving aside the other interest types, economic feasibility of development can be taken as a
shared interest of the private entities. Financers and developers are unlikely to involve in
building developments that are not economically feasible particularly when the developments
are intended for business. Therefore, their interest to do development business and to finance
development is affected if what regulations allow to build are economically infeasible. In the
same way such regulations also affect the interests of land sellers who intend to benefit from the
sale of development land.

Economic feasibility of development is not only a shared interest of private entities but also a
private interest which does not conflict with the common interest. In fact in a market system
much of the economic component of the common interest depends on economic feasibility of
private developments. The critical factor for economic feasibility is not however building height
even though in practice a construction cost increases with height while rent normally decreases.
It is building floor area or area of rentable space. Developers need to build certain minimum
floor area for their development to be economically feasible. They also need to stop building at a
certain maximum floor area for the investment to continue to be feasible.

Therefore, generally speaking for buildings developed for business, the range of building height
regulation must fall within the range of development profit. If the end of the regulation range
(maximum allowed area) is below the beginning of profit for the developer, economically
feasible development may not take place. Conversely, if the regulation range is above the range
of profit for the developer, the same thing will happen (for more detailed information on this
issue, see Report #1: economic studies)

2.2 Findings of the contextual study

2.2.1 The interests

The findings of the contextual study indicate that consistent with the international practice there
are both common and private interest in building development in Addis Ababa. The common
interests included not only urban and local interests but also national partly due to the capital
status of the city.

The findings indicate that the national interests with regard to building development and building
height in the city were:
 Be conducive to global investment
 Attract international tourism
 Enhance the city’s status of African diplomatic capital and
 Symbolize the country’s historical and cultural identity and its political and
socio-economic transformation.
11
Ethiopia’s national development strategy emphasizes the importance of attracting global
investment and increasing national income by expanding sectors such as tourism. As a capital
city with relatively more advanced infrastructure, Addis Ababa is expected to play major role in
both cases. This expectation can be realized only if the city’s development plans and
implementation strategies such as BHR are geared towards enhancing the capacity of the city
to play these roles.

Nationally, Addis Ababa is viewed as the diplomatic capital of Africa. This view originates from
factors such as Ethiopia’s victory over a colonial power and its impact on African independence
movement, its contribution to the independence struggle of many African countries, its
contribution to establishment of the former Organization of African Unity (OAU) with its
headquarter in Addis Ababa and its involvement in African affairs. The recent struggle to
maintain the African union’s head quarter in the city, the naming of the streets of the city after
the different African nations, the initiatives taken by the country to represent Africa on climate
change conference, etc all serve this interest.

These roles of the country and the city are highly valued by the Ethiopian people. As a result,
maintaining and enhancing this role (status) was one of the visions of the structure plan of Addis
Ababa. This vision must be supported by informing implementation strategies such as BHR with
this interest.

Cities and their buildings are symbols of the image of a country. In history, countries may
encounter hardships such as civil war, famine and poverty which affect their image. In principle,
however, many countries wish that their cities and buildings symbolize their good image.
Accordingly, there is strong national interest in Ethiopia that its cities and their buildings
symbolize the country’s historical and cultural identity and the rapid political and socio-economic
transformation in which it is found today.

Urban and local interest

Efficiency: land and infrastructure use optimization have been two of the major principles in the
preparation of the structure plan and the existing building height regulation. As stated earlier,
while optimization should aim at preventing both underuse and over use, the plans as well as
the regulation were focused mainly on preventing under use of land and infrastructure. As a
result, the existing height regulation is focused on regulating number of floors of buildings which
do not necessarily ensure optimal use of land and infrastructure rather than regulating floor area
of buildings which is an effective instrument. The study indicates that the BAR requirement can
be fulfilled by adjusting a single floor of the building only while the height requirement can be
fulfilled without increasing floor area of the building and increasing land or infrastructure use.

Safety and security: the major concern regarding safety and security has been that of
proposing an appropriate BHR that goes in line with the available means to protect buildings
during natural and artificial catastrophes such as earthquake and fire. At this moment, the fire
brigade department of the city has ladders that reach a maximum of 72 meters which in other
words means 24 stories. The location of the city along or very close to the rife valley’s fault line
12
is another danger that was considered by many as a major threat to the future of building height
in the city. Regarding security, some foreign embassies and the grand Minilik palace had a
strong need to be protected from high rise buildings in their surroundings.

Equity: It is well known that Ethiopia’s development strategy since the 1974 revolution are
dominated by the interest to maximize the access of weaker socio-economic groups to goods,
services and resources. This interest is currently reflected in urban areas through investment in
housing, health, education and infrastructure. This is a positive trend that must be enhanced
and that must inform urban development plan implementation mechanism such as building
height regulation.

Aesthetics: it has been indicated earlier that even though visual quality is a shared concern
among all humans, it is not however a priority concern in all contexts. In low income residential
and working areas, the priority is for basic services and access to space. However, the existing
BHR did not have the mechanisms to regulate visual quality even in central areas and prime
parts of the city where the concern for visual quality is stronger. The situation is similar in the
case of comfort.

Private interest

The study indicate that private developer’s interest in building height in Addis Ababa is not
limited to economic or profit maximization but also includes social interests such as fame,
winning competition among friends, etc. However, economic feasibility remains the more un-
compromisable interest.

We have mentioned previously that the major stakeholders of building development and building
height are assumed to be private land sellers, financers and developers. In the Ethiopian
situation particularly land seller and developer includes government which is also a
development regulator. That implies its role as a regulator is likely to affect its role as land seller
and developer or vice versa. This raises the question: “May the government accept a height
regulation that reduces the price of land it sells?”. The answer is assumed to be generally yes
because it is assumed that both the regulation and the potential reduction of land price are
intended to serve the common interest which must be the major concern of government.

2.3 Design program for the regulation

Based on the above study, design program for the regulation becomes building height that can
contribute to the objectives of developing a city conducive to global investment, international
tourism, enhancing the city’s status of African capital, symbolizing socio-economic and political
transformation of the country and its historical and cultural identity and producing an efficient,
equitable, comfortable, safe working and living environment and that can attend to private
interests that do not conflict with the above interests. This content of the program is similar to
what is normally known in city planning as Vision.

13
2.3 The design context
The study indicates that none of the parts of Addis Ababa have the potential to support building
heights that can serve all the above interests or where all the vision components can be
implemented. Different parts of the city have potentials to support building heights that can
serve only some of the interests. That implies the city can support building heights that can
serve all the interests only by assigning interests to its different areas according to their
potential.

Division of the city into areas according to their potential and interests they can serve is give in
the table below

Table #0: Differentiation of Urban Areas based on common interest implementation potential
Urban area Implementation Potential

LOW HIGH

Main centre Equity and cultural identity Efficiency, transformation, global

investment

New Development Equity and cultural identity Efficiency, transformation, global

corridors investment

Low-income residential Efficiency, comfort, quality, Equity, land use mix

areas transformation

Old areas (if preserved) Efficiency, transformation Global tourism, identity, quality

New Sub centers Equity and cultural identity Efficiency, transformation, global
investment

Ring road Cultural identity, urban Efficiency, transformation

quality,

Special scenery areas Efficiency, equity Tourism, quality, aesthetics

Market areas Efficiency, transformation Global tourism, identity, quality, equity

New residential areas Cultural identity Transformation, efficiency

High security areas Efficiency equity

2.4 The design

Application of the design program according to the above table produces two types of urban
level building height structures as shown in the figures below.

14
 Resultant General Structure
1. New Areas

2. Old Areas

The first structure is similar to building height structure generated by a polycentric development.
Observation also indicates that this structure is consistent with the existing development trend of
the city and with the regulation of the Structure plan of the Addis Ababa

The second structure however is a new regulation. It maintains the city’s history; it increases the
quality of the city, and generates income from tourism. Many cities have old core areas that
maintain their history, etc. and Addis Ababa also needs to enhance its old areas. With this, we
now move to the next chapter which is “the application of the design program to the context”

15
III APPLICATION OF THE DESIGN PROGRAM TO THE CONTEXT
What has been found from the literature and the context review was once again tested against a
variety of design concepts/options out of which the most feasible was taken and further
developed to fit the context.

3.1 Conceptual plan development

Despite the fact that the context revealed/conformed the poly-centric urban structure as a
feasible model for the development of the new building height regulation of Addis, the study
team has however reviewed other development models as well. The regulation of each model
was filtered through a “city’s vision” that was developed by the study team and strong
constraints identified during the data collection stage. These are constraints such as history,
topography, rivers, values, people that need a certain level of protection within a new building
height zone.

The five models that were considered by this study and the rational for selecting one of them
are presented below

1. The mono-centric city structure

2. The poly-centric or multi-nucleated city structure

3. The decentralized city structure

4. A democratic city structure and finally

5. A laissez faire model and finally

 The mono-centric city structure: as we can see in the diagram, this is about a city with
one center which is the CBD. The tallest buildings rise from this center and building
height for the rest of the city will be down slopping from the center. A building height
regulation can be designed in such a way that it reflects the prevailing urban structure.

 The poly-centric or multi-nucleated city structure: this is about a city having a

number of centers playing different roles. One can be the CBD while the other could be
centers of educational facilities, industrial establishments, commercial areas, sub-

16
 centers and nodes serving a peripheral expansion area. A city’s skyline can easily be
reconstructed on the basis of this hierarchical service structure.

 The decentralized city structure: This applies for both mono-centric and poly-centric
cities. The essence of this type of city structure lies on the fact that in addition to existing
city’s center/s, one also finds additional centers serving decentralized satellite
towns/new towns. A city’s sky line can once again be designed in line with such
structure.

 A democratic city structure: this reflects a flat skyline resulting from a planned or
spontaneous environment that has eventually created a city where no building
dominates over the others.

 A laissez faire model: This is a model that is not controlled but left to the market. Once
again, experts argue that what is eventually produced could be similar a mono-centric or
poly-centric structure.

3.2 The selection of an appropriate urban structure for Addis Ababa

For Addis which is a multi-centric city this model, the mono-centric city has lots of limitations to
address its current needs. The democratic model has also its limitations as a democratic view to

17
development is not strongly compatible to the principles of the free market particularly when it
comes to profit making. The laissez faire model was taken to be not applicable for Addis as well.
In a city where the infrastructure capacity is very limited, such an approach if allowed could
result in overstraining development in a few locations. Yet, the city’s future development
requires a strong control.

The most feasible options were considered to be the decentralized and the poly-centric urban
structure models. For the updating the existing building height regulation of Addis, the study
team has then adapted a hybrid of these two models. Such structure was also promoted by the
new structure plan of the city and by the contextual study.

The different components of this polycentric structure in hierarchical order are presented in the
context of Addis Ababa were:

 The CBD: consisting of three different sections (the inner core, special areas such as
Piaza, Mercato and Arat Kilo area, and development corridors connecting the above
areas)

 Sub-centers: Megenagna, Ayer tena, and kaliti

 Tertiary centers: Bisrate Gebriel, Meri Luke, Gotera, Saris, Kotari, Betel, Winget, Tor
Hailoch

 Node/junctions: Tafo, Ayat, Bole yeka, kara alo, ketebe TTC, gergi, bole Michel, 22
mazoria, shiro meda, semen gebeya, 18 mazoria, keraneo medihanealm, alem bank,
repi/kara kore, lafto, jemo, mekanisa, kera/gofa mazoria, akaki/tuludimtu, akaki old
center, and finally

 Development corridors: these are divided into first, second and third grade corridor
according to their character. A detail list of such development corridors is attached at the
annex

18
IV DESIGN STAGE: FROM CONCEPT TO DESIGN
Once the polycentric urban structure model was selected, the next step was to identify what
height corresponds to each of the bumps in the structure. This is about what height to assign to
the CBD, the sub-centers, the corridors, the nodes, the junctions, etc. For this, the study team
has considered the following scientific methods

4.1 Scientific methods

The scientific method that the study team relied on had five different components, a combination
of which gave the final say for the updating of the building height regulation of Addis. These are:

1. Economic height/floor area study

2. Infrastructure height/Floor area study

3. Climatic height studies

4. Esthetic height studies and finally

5. A combination of them

4.1.1 Economic height

The economic height study was about identifying the minimum height or developable area (FA)
that is economically feasible for an investor. Rather than a feasible height, the economic study
group has come up with a feasible developable area (Floor Area) for each location in the urban
structure.

The economic study team has tried three different formulas and eventually found the third which
is known as “the breakeven approach” as the most appropriate for the Addis Ababa’s context.
The technique helps to set the minimum economic building height level based on the
maximum number of stories set by physical/spatial criteria. The equation used for the analysis is
as follows.
BEP = FC/(SP-VC)
Where:

BEP - Breakeven Point

FC - Annual total fixed costs including interest charges

SP - Charging rate per unit output

VC - Variable costs per unit output at full capacity operation

19
Using the above breakeven analysis formula, minimum building heights were set for the
identified 31 different spots in the City. The analysis was done for four different plot areas
(500m2, 1000m2, 1500m2 & 2000m2) for each of the spots. In addition, three average rental
income values per square meter (100, 125 & 150) were used in the analysis based on the
location of the spots. The conducted analysis assumed Birr 3000/m2 lease price, Birr 5000/m2
construction cost and 75% BAR (built-up-area ratio) for each of the considered plots.
The outcome of this analysis for the selected sites was used as a reference for the minimum
economically feasible developable area which was later converted by the design team into the
minimum building height.

4.1.2 Infrastructure height

This study was about identifying the maximum development capacity of an area on the basis of
the bearing capacity of infrastructure mainly the road network. While the economic floor area
study indicated the minimum economically feasible developable area or building height, the
infrastructure height on the other hand indicated the maximum that should be allowed. In
combination, these two studies determine the minimum and the maximum development density
for an area.

After examining different road efficiency related formulas and applying the selected one on 1m
distance along the East- West axis (from Urael to Megenagna), the study team has found the
1:4 FAR (Floor Area Ratio) as the highest permissible development density in the next 10
years.

4.1.3 Climatic height

Wind and sun are strong determinants of building height. What time we want to shade an area,
a pedestrian street or ventilate a building is partly a matter of the height of buildings in respect to
such areas and other buildings. A simple calculation made on the basis of having two hours
shade (11 am-1pm) for the month of June (which is the most critical) on both sides of the East
West axis shows that the minimum and maximum height of buildings should be 3.33xwidth of
the street and 4.55x width of the street respectively. In other words, for a 40m wide street the
respective height will be 133m (44 stories) and 182m (61 stories). Though justifiable from
climate point of view, what was found through this study was not however economically and
esthetically feasible.

4.1.4 Esthetic height

This is about the determination of building height on esthetic principles. What was considered
under this heading for the determination of building height for Addis was the so called “Golden
ratio”. As we can see in the diagram, this is based on esthetic theory that express relation in
terms of the following numbers 1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55, etc. In this theory, the third number is
always the sum total of the first two.
20
The other esthetic height theory that was that of the recent Van Der Series With Plastic Number
& Plastic Number Series, which is a modern proportioning system(1983) using Series: 1, 1 ,1,
2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 16, 21,28,37,49,65… which is Pi= Pi-2 + Pi-3 ; for i>2, given P0,P1 & P2
as a means of proportion, is also an invaluable tool for frontage and height determination. In
any sequence of four terms, the fourth is the sum of the first two.

Diagram #1: building height relation according to the Golden ration

Diagram #2: building height relation according to Van Der Series

Though both theories are applicable, the team has chosen the Golden numbers for their wide
international application and the variety of options they give between two consecutive numbers
particularly in the lower range.
21
The other two esthetical considerations that were considered in our design are:

 Enclosure: is the relationship between the horizontal distance between two buildings and
the vertical height. The most commonly used enclosure relations in many cities are 45
degree (the height of the building being 1 x the width of the street), 27 degree (.51 x the
width of the street), 18 degree (0.32 x the width of the street) and 15 degree (0.26 x the
width of the street). In exceptional cases, such relation could extend to 60 degree which is
1.73 x the width of the street). Applying such proportions to a 40m wide street, the
respective height of a building on this street for each of the four formulas will be 40m (13
story), 20.4m (7 stories), 12.8m (4 stories) and 10.6m (three stories). For the 60 degree,
the height of the respective building will be 69.2m (23 stories). Diagram #3: building height
according to enclosure principle

 Scale: according to Carmona et al (2003: pp 156) scale is the perception of an object

relative to other objects around it, and to our perception of those objects. Scale concerns
first, the building’s dimension and all its parts relative to the dimensions of a human being
(i.e. human scale) and, second is its dimensions relative to those of its setting (i.e. generic
scale). Hence, a building can be understood to be of a human scale or not and, separately,
to be in or out of scale with its surroundings. The human scale is the distance that one can
see the facial expression and feelings of a person. This distance is approximately 15m or
27degree con of vision.

The other type of scale which is also very important in the study of a city’s building height is
the so called “intimate scale”. The intimate scale expresses the relation between street
width, building frontage and building height. If a street has a width of 40m, the width

22
 according to this intimate scale has to be 20m and the height 16.6m. In other words, a
relation of 1:0.5:0.45 between street width, building frontage and building height is found to
be an intimate scale. The use of the intimate scale is in most cases recommended to that
part of the building that comes closer to the street. If a tall building comes to the street, it
becomes offending, but if it has a podium and a tower combination and the podium which is
designed according to the intimate scale principle comes closer to the street, the whole
complex becomes appealing. Another alternative to produce the same effect is the use of
an open space in front of the tower (see both options in the table below)

Diagram #4: building height and intimate scale

Intimate scale buildigs: podium-tower Intimate scale buildings: set-back-tower combination
combination

This building height regulation has the minimum and the maximum building height regulation for
an area. The way the study team determined such limits is based on two design principles. The
first is the Golden ration itself and the other is the combination of the economic and
infrastructure developable floor area. On the basis of this:

 When infra FA (max) = economic FA, we took the golden section principle which gives
both maximum and minimum. Yet, we have made sure that such regulation never
exceeds the maximum carrying capacity of the infrastructure.

 When the infra FA (max) is greater than economic far min, our decision was to propose
a minimum that goes with the economic minimum and a maximum height that respects
the infrastructure maximum.

 When the economic regulation was greater than infrastructure max, we recommend
improving infrastructure. On the assumption that such improvement will be made, we
made our regulation on the basis of the “golden section” rule.

23
This building height was once again subject to other two strong instruments, which are

1. A “city’s vision” which is developed by the study team in light of the grand vision of the
new structure plan (see 2.3) and

2. “Constraints” such as history, topography, equity, social values, etc.

Combining the four design principles, the new vision of the city, constraints, existing and future
trends, the design team has come up with what is believed to be a responsive and
accommodative building height regulation for Addis Ababa. The regulation for the different
sections of the city is presented below

24
IV BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS FOR DIFERENT PARTS OF
ADDIS ABABA

25
5.1 Building height Regulation for different locations
On the basis of the selected poly-centric urban structure, the new building height for the city of Addis encompasses centers, sub
centers and minor centers, nodes, development corridors, the old city part, historical areas, areas along the ring road, etc.

The central business district is the area where the international vision of Addis is going to be reflected. The maximum building height
in this area, which also applies for the whole city, is 52 stories. This figure is determined on the basis of the grand vision of ‘Addis as
the African capital’. Such figure, representing the total number of African countries so far, is already adapted by the ‘new commercial
bank headquarter (design stage)’ in the city’s core area, has a very strong symbolic meaning.

5.1.1 Central Business District (CBD)

Table #1: building height regulation for the CBD
CBD

According to New BH New BAR New max

No Area/location Remark
the old BHR (Stories/floors) (%) FAR
1 Main center/CBD G+7-LDP  The maximum height of buildings in the
area require that such buildings be located
 Inner zone 34-52 or E-52 facing existing open spaces (Meskel
Square, the Stadium, Ghion Hotel, etc)
 Intermediate 21-34 or E-34 80 max 1:5-1:7
 The total area coverage of the inner zone,
ring
13-21 or E-21 intermediate and outer zone is 56.8
 Outer ring hectares, 158 hectares and 517 hectares
respectively.
2 Mercato G+2-LDP 1-5 85 max 1:4  BAR is reduced from the previous 75-
100% to a maximum of 85% to allow for
more open space. Minimum BAR is left
open
 Due to the narrow size of the streets in
Mercato, new buildings should be built
according to the new setback
requirements
 Some road side development in Mercato
26
 is to be governed by a 1:1 enclosure
principle as indicated in the map.
 In order to protect the working and living
places of the poor in Mercato, the inner
zones are to be redeveloped for low rise
(the maximum being a walk up building).
3 Piazza area G+2-LDP Datum and 85 max 1:4  Height in areas in close proximity to the
Municipal and St George church is
1-5 determined on the basis of a datum. The
reference point is the dome of the church
which rises about 8 meters from the
ground level of 2478m above sea level.
The use of the datum is to protect the view
to these two historical buildings. With this
design principle, Piazza falls in the same
category with that of the “ old city core”
which is maximum of five stories (G+4)
 Building height within the ‘historical area’
(as demarcated by the structure plan) will
also be a maximum of five stories.
 Exception is along major streets within
Piazza where the new height is 5-8 stories
(see detail in the regulation for the “old city
core”

27
5.1.2 Sub Centers
Table #2: building height regulation for the sub centers
According
New BH New BAR New max
No Area to the old Remark
(Stories) (%) FAR
BHR

1 Megenagna G+7-20 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7  The major constraint within the Megenagna
sub-center is the view towards the Yeka
2 Ayer Tena G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:4 Mountain. To protect this beautiful land
scale, the design has limited the maximum
3 Kaliti 8-13 80 max 1:4 building height in this area to only 3 stories.
 BAR is new to go to a maximum of 80% with
4 Lebu 5-8 80 max 1:4
the minimum range left open.
 The boundary that is taken to define sub-
center areas is in most cases taken from
the LDPs prepared by the city government

28
5.1.3 Tertiary Centers
Table #3: building height regulation for the tertiary centers
Tertiary centers

According to New BH New BAR New max

No Area/location Remark
the old BHR (Stories) (%) FAR
1 Bisrate Gebriel G+2-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7  The boundary that is taken to define
tertiary centers is in most cases taken
2 Meri Luke G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:5 from the LDPs prepared by the city
government
3 Gotera G+2/4-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7
 The major constraint that is considered
4 Saris ----- 8-13 80 max 1:5
in some tertiary centers is the aviation
5 Kotari G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:5 zone regulations

6 Betel ----- 8-13 80 max 1:5  The 1:5 FAR considered for some
tertiary centers is due to the low traffic
7 Winget G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:4 density in such areas.

8 Edna Mole G+4-12 5-10 80 max 1:4  BAR is a maximum of 80%

9 Tor Hailoch G=4-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:4

29
5.1.4 Nodes
Table #4: building height regulation for the nodes
Nodes

According
New BH New BAR New max
No Area/location to the old Remark
(Stories) (%) FAR
BHR
1 Tafo 3-5 80 max 1:4  The boundary that is taken to define
tertiary centers is in most cases taken
2 Ayat 5-8 80 max 1:4 from the LDPs prepared by the city
government
3 Bole Yeka G+2-LDP 5-8 80 max 1:4
 The major constraint that is considered
4 Kara Alo 5-8 80 max 1:4
in some nodes includes aviation zone
5 Kotebe TTC G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4 regulation, view corridors and security
issues
6 Gergi G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4
 BAR can be lower than what is indicated
7 Bole Michael G+4-12 5-8 80 max 1:4 as minimum in this table

8 22 Mazoria G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

9 Shiro Meda 5-8 80 max 1:4

10 Semen Gebeya G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

11 18 Mazoria G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

12 Keraneo Medhanealm 5-8 80 max 1:4

13 Alem Bank 5-8 80 max 1:4

14 Repi/Kara Kore 5-8 80 max 1:4

30
15 Lafto/Lebu junction G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

16 Jemo G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

17 Mekanissa G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

18 Kera/Gofa Mazoria G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

19 Akaki/Tulu Dimtu 5-8 80 max 1:4

20 Akaki Old Center G+2-7 3-5 80 max 1:4

31
5.1.5 Development Corridors

1st grade development corridors

Table #5: building height regulation for 1st grade development corridors
According
New BH New BAR New max
No Development corridors to the old Remark
(Stories) (%) FAR
BHR
1st grade development corridors  These are main
streets/development
1 Merkato mexico corridors within the
center that connect
 Anwar mosque-Teklehaimanot G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:4
the different elements
21-34 80 max 1:5-1;7 of the CBD.
 Teklehaimanot – Tikur anbesa G+7-20  Building height on
 Tikur anbesa-Areki factory G+7-20 21-34 80 max 1:5-1:7 these streets refers to
development on both
2 Merkato-Piazza sides of these streets
taking the front plot
 Bus terminal-Habte Giorgis bridge G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4 into consideration
Habte Giorgis bridge– Piazza G+2-LDP Partly old 80 max 1:4
city core 8-
13
3 Piazza -Arat kilo It is in the 80 max 1:4
old city core
area
Residential areas Datum/1-5 80 max 1:3

Non residential land uses G+4-12 Datum/1-5 80 max 1:4

4 Piazza-National Theater (Churchill road): this is

a special area/axis within the historical zone)
 Piazza – Theodros square G+7-20 8-13 80 max 1:4

32
  Theodros Square-Post office G+7-20 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Post office-Defense Ministry G+7-LDP 21-34 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Ministry of Defence-East-West Axis G+7-LDP 34-51 80 max 1:5-1:7

5 Arat kolo-Finfine bridge Old city core

area
6 Flamingo- Air port

 Flamingo-Olympia G+7-20 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Olympia-Peacock G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

 Peacock-Airport G+4-12 5-10 80 max 1:4

7 Mexico- Tor Hailoch 80 max 1:4

 Mexico –Dessie Hotel G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Dessie Hotel-Tor Hailoch G+7-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

8 Meskel-Urael G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

G+7-20
9 Meskel-Gotera

 Meskel – Beklo Bet G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

G+7-20
 Beklo bet – Gotera G+7-20 8-13 80 max 1:4
G+4-12

33
 2nd grade development corridors
Table #6: building height regulation for2nd grade development corridors
According
New BH New BAR New max
No Development corridors to the old Remark
(Stories) (%) FAR
BHR
2nd grade development corridors
1 Urael-Lem Hotel  These are the main
streets that radiate
 Urael – Zerihun bdg G+7-20 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7 from the main city
center connecting the
 Zerihun Bdg-Lem Hotel G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4
CBD with the sub-
2 Gotera – Kaliti centers and the rest
of the city.
 Gotera- Saris G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4  Building height on
these streets refers to
 Saris – kaliti 5-8 80 max 1:4 development on both
sides of these streets
 Saris- Tulu Dimtu 3-5 80 max 1:4
taking the front plot
3 Mexico kera into consideration

 Mexico-Bulgaria mazoria G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Bulgaria Mazoria- Kera 8-13 80 max 1:4

4 Cherkos-Gofa Mazoria

 Cherkos – Tele G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Tele – Gofa Mazoria 8-13 80 max 1:4

5 Mexico-Sar Bet G+7-LDP 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

G+4-12

34
6 Lideta-Abnet-Autobus Tera G+2-LDP 8-13 80 max 1:4

7 Autobus Tera-Mesalemia-18 Mazoria 5-8 80 max 1:4

8 Autobus Tera-Paster-Medhanealm

9  Autobus Tera-Paster 3-5 80 max 1:4

 Paster-Medhanealm 8-13 80 max 1:4

G+4-12
Abune Petros-Polis Kebeb-Paster 8-13 80 max 1:4
G+4-12
10 Piazza-Adisu Gebeya

Piazza-Semen Hotel 8-13 80 max 1:4

G+4-12
Semen hotel-Adisu Gebeya 5-8 80 max 1:4
G+4-12
Adisu Gebeya- Exit from the city 3-5 80 max 1:4

11 Piazza-Afencho Ber-Sidest Kilo (future LRT) G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

12 Arat kilo-Sedist Kilo-Teferi Mekonen

 Arat Kilo-Sidist Kilo (historical)

G+4-12
 Sidest Kilo-Teferi Mekonen 8-13 80 max 1:4

13 Arat Kilo-Megenagna

 Arat Kilo – Brithsh Embassy Old city core

G+4-12
 British Embassy – Meganagna G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4
14 Arat Kilo- Aware-Adwa Bridge-Megenagna

 Arat Kilo-Adwa Bridge Old city core

G+4-12
 Adwa Bridge-Megenaga 8-13 80 max 1:4
G+2-7
15 Behariw Bank-Tena Tibeka-Amstegan Police
35
 station-Coca Cola
 Beherawi Bank-Tena Tibeka 21-34 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Tena Tibeka-Amestegna Polic Station- 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

Chefe Meda
 Chefe Meda-Coca Cola 8-13 80 max 1:4
16 Mexico-Hotel De Afrique-Berbere Tera
 Mexico- Araki Factory 21-34 80 max 1:5-1:7

 Araki factory-………… 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

 ……..-Berbere Tera 8-13 80 max 1:4

17 Urael-Tele Bras
 Urael – Tele Medhanealm 8-13 80 max 1:4
 Tele Medhanealm– Bras Hospital (5-10 aviation
regulation)
18 Olympia-Meskel Flower
 Olompia – Hadid 8-13 80 max 1:4

 Hadid – Mekel Flower 5-8 80 max 1:4

19 Merkato – Yohannes Church/Gojam Berenda 3-5 80 max 1:4

20 Dessie Hotel – Bisrate Gebriel

Dessie Hotel-Old Air Port Fence 8-13 80 max 1:4
Old Airport Site (green area)
Old Airport Tele-Bisrate Gebriel 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

36
 3rd grade development corridors
Table #7: building height regulation for 3rd grade development corridors
According
New BH New BAR New max
No Development corridors to the old Remark
(Stories) (%) FAR
BHR
3rd grade

1 Gurd Shoal-CMC Ayat

 Gurd Shoal-CMC G+4-12 (8-13) 80 max 1:4  These are streets that
connect the center
 CMC – Ayat G+4-12 (5-8) 80 max 1:4 and sub-centers to
tertiary centers,
2 Megenagna-Kotebe TTC-Karalo G+4-12 1- 3 nodes and other
3 Lamberet-Karalo 3-5 80 max 1:4 areas of the city
 Building height on
4 Adwa Bridge-Zerihun Building- Atlas- Worbek G+4-12 5-8 80 max 1:4
building these streets refers to
G+4-LDP
development on both
5 Yohannes Church-Gojam Berenda 3-5 80 max 1:4
sides of these streets
6 Wollo Sefer-Gotera (roads radiating from G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4 taking the front plot
nodes) into consideration
7 Kaliti-Akaki 3-5 80 max 1:4

8 Gotera-Sar Bet- Bisrate Gebriel Metatefia G+4-12 8-13 80 max 1:4

9 Sar Bet-Mekanisa-Abo-Ring Road

 Sar Bet-Mekanissa Square G+4-12 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Mekanisa Square-Ring Road Seminarium G+2-7 3-5 80 max 1:4

10 Mekanisa Square/Market-3 Kutir Mazoria G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

37
11 Ayer Tena-Repi 5-8 80 max 1:4

12 Tor Hailoch-Total Ayer Tena G+2-7 Ring road

13 Ayer Tena-Alem Bank 5-8 80 max 1:4

14 Tor Hailoch-Keraneo Medhanealm 5-8 80 max 1:4

15 Mesalemia -18 Mazoria-Kolfe High School G+4-12 5-8 80 max 1:4

16 Medhanealm-Winget-Asko G+4-12 5-8 80 max 1:4

17 Lafto-Lebu- Jemo2 G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

18 Lem Hotel-Anbesa Garage G+2-7 13-21 80 max 1:5-1:7

19 Anbesa Garage-Goro

 Anbesa Garage- jJkros G+2-7 (5-8) 80 max 1:4

 Jakros-Goro (3-5) 80 max 1:4

20 Bole Pastry-Imperial-Gergi-Mebrathaile G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

21 English Embasy-22-Tele Medhanealm- G+2-7 3-5 80 max 1:4

Friendship
22 Getahun Besha-Bole Medhanealm High 3-5 80 max 1:4
School
23 CMC-Kilinto Condo

 CMC –Summit 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Summit- Kilinto Condominium area 3-5 80 max 1:4

24 Gojam Berenda-Islam Mekabir 3-5 80 max 1:4

25 Paster-Paulos Hotel (?) 3-5 80 max 1:4

38
26 Mesalemia-Medhanealm 3-5 80 max 1:4

27 Kera- Gofa Gebriel G+2-7 5-8 80 max 1:4

28 Gofa Gebriel-Mebrat Haile G+2-7 3-5 80 max 1:4

29 Shiro Meda-Intoto 3-5 80 max 1:4

39
5.1.6 The “Old City Core”
The old core is one of the heritage elements of any city. The medina of the Islamic city or the traditional medieval inner core of many
western cities is reserved in view of keeping this historical heritage.

The core area is always the point of attraction as one can see the different layers of a city’s history in this area. The preservation of
such core, due to its prime location, is one of the most challenging tasks for city governments. Yet, those who have managed to
protect it (such as Rome, Athens, and Venice, to mention a few) are reaping huge benefits from tourism and related activities.

The study team for the revision of the building height of Addis Ababa has also the embarked in such exercise of identifying the
historical core of one of the few indigenous cities in Africa: Addis. This city, as a capital of Africa and a major tourist destination in the
future needs to tell its history of how it has become what it is today. With this conviction, the team has decided to keep the height of
buildings in this area to a maximum of five stories. However, where the old pattern is broken to bring modernity mainly through the
construction of wide roads, slightly taller buildings are allowed to exist.

The vision developed for the historic core being “identity and culture”, allowing tall buildings to come to this area will only disrupt the
old morphology (plot size, plot type, street pattern, building scale, density, etc) thereby seriously affecting the historical significance of
the place.

What distinguishes this old core from the ‘Rest of the city’ in terms of building height? The regulation for both areas is 1-5 stories.
Yet, the intensity of development is different. There is a high development pressure in the old core area for more building height as
compared to the rest of the city where such pressure is low. This pressure is to be relieved by allowing more dense development in
the old core reaching a FAR of 1:4 while that of the rest of the city remains at1:3. BAR is also different with higher percentage (up to
80%) given to the old core while the respective rate for the rest of the city is 70%. With this, the need for vertical development in the
old core can be compensated with horizontal development.

40
Table #8: building height regulation for the old city core area
The old city core area

Land use According New BH New BAR New max Remark

to old BHR (Stories) (%) FAR

1 Residential areas 1-5 80 max 1:`4  Those that are within the 1km radius for the
old palace, around Piaza and Arat Kilo area
are already determined on the basis of a
datum
 Residential areas within this zone to have a
maximum of walk up building
2 Non residential areas 1-5 80 max 1:4  These are all other land uses except
residential
3 Along major streets
(streets width of 25m
and above) 5-8 80 max 1:4
 Mixed use

41
5.1.7 The Buffer zone around the “Old Minilik Palace”
Table #9: building height regulation for the buffer zone around the old Minilik palace
Buffer zone around the old Minilik Palace (1km radius)

Land use According New BH New BAR New FAR Remark

to the old (Stories) (%)
BHR

Protected mixed 1-5 & 80 max 1:4 max  This area is a high security zone which needs protection
development area from the surrounding development within a radius of
Datum 1km. The height of buildings is determined, on the basis
of a datum taking the floor level of the old palace
building which stands at 2438m a.s.l. On the basis of
this calculation, the maximum allowed in the area will be
five stories which is similar to that of the “old city core”.

 Exception is the area west of the palace known as Fit

Bet. To protect the view from down town to the palace
and also the view of the city center from this area, the
study team proposes no buildings facing the curving
street. For all buildings in this area, the datum is the
street level which is 2406m. In other words, while the
first row of buildings should be very low rise with roof
level not higher than the new 2406m indicated above,
the ones down the slope could attain more height but
never exceeding the maximum of 5 stories new for the
historic core.
 To protect the old palace (security reason), a 1km radius
of buffer zone is new. .

42
5.1.8 Development in the “Transition Zone”
The transition zone, as we can see in the diagram below, is the interface between the “Rest of the city” and a CBD, a sub center, a
tertiary center, a node or a development corridor. It is part of the ‘rest of the city’ but due to its immediate location to a high rise zone
deserves a special treatment. If one looks at Megenagna sub-center for example, the regulation for the sub-center area is between
13-21 stories. What is called transition zone in this case is the immediate zone/block bordering/adjacent to the edge where the 13
story regulation applies. Theoretically, this transition zone should have been 8-13 yet due to low level of infrastructure development
in such areas, it is difficult to impose such restrictions. What the study team proposes is as follows

For mixed development: as such areas are the interface between an active development area and “the rest of the city”, their
regulation will also be a combination of these two calculated on the bases of the maximum theoretical and a maximum for the rest of
the city. In the case of the above example, the new height will be 5-13. This we believe gives a big room for the transformation of
these areas.

43
Table #10: building height regulation for the transition zone
Building height in the transition zone/the interface

Land use According New BH New BAR New max Remark

to the old (Stories) (%) FAR
BHR

 Residential 1-5 80 max 1:4

 Non As 80 max 1:4 As mentioned above, building height regulation in such areas
residential indicated varies according to the building use. On the basis of this, what the
in the study team proposes is the following.
remark
 For plots immediate to 5-8 BHR zone, such areas will be
1-5 for both residential and mixed development

 For plots immediate to 8-13 BHR zone, they will be 5-8

 For plots immediate to 13-21 BHR zone, they will be 5-13

 As infrastructure in such areas is not well developed, the

FAR for such area has to be 1:4 max.

44
5.1.9 Development in the “Rest of the City”
The rest of the city is the area that is not given special building height treatment. It consists of residential land use, non residential
land use and predominantly mixed use along streets. The building height regulation for this area is presented in the table below

Table #11: building height regulation for the rest of the city
Building height in the rest of the city

Land use According New BH New BAR New max Remark

to the old (Stories) (%) FAR
BHR

Residential areas 1-5 70 max 1:3  All residential area can develop from a normal
ground floor to a maximum of walk up apartment
of five stories. As it is residential, low density
development is also new.
Non residential land uses 1-5 70 max 1:4  What distinguishes non residential development
from the residential area is the intensity of
development. Here the maximum FAR is
increased slightly

Building height along major streets in the rest of the city

Land use New BH (Stories) New BAR New max Remark

(%) FAR

 On 50m RoW 5-11 70 max 1:4  This includes all land uses including
residential that are located along major
streets.
 On 40m RoW 5-9 70 max 1:4
 An enclosure ratio of 1:1 (the relation of new
 On 30m RoW 5-7 70 max 1:4 height of a building to width of the street) is

45
  On 25m RoW 5-6 70 max 1:4 considered to be adequate in order to
maintain an acceptable urban scale
 On 20m RoW 0-5 70 max 1:4

 On 15m RoW 0-5 70 max 1:4

 On 10m RoW 0-5 70 max 1:4

5.1.10 The “Ring Road”

The debate around the city’s ring road was whether it has to be considered as a normal city street or a highway. Its current character
allows it to be partly for mobility and partly for access. Yet, while its mobility character is unexploited due to low car ownership per
inhabitant in the city, its access function is not either strong as the two lanes that allow such functions are in many occasions too
congested, one of them being serving mostly as parking.

The side lane of this ring road is also very narrow in some areas (Imperial Hotel for example) that if a taxi is parked wrongly, the
whole street is blocked. The fact that developable land along the ring road is accessed only from one direction and such
development is exposed to noise and smoke from vehicular traffic passing by particularly during peak hours, are also some of the
limitations of the ring road to use it as an intensive development corridor.

For such limitations, we have new a low intensity development along the ring road. However, for the nodal/junction points along the
ring road, a different regulation is presented.

Table #12: building height regulation along the ring road

The Ring Road

Selected nodes along the ring road See the regulation on development nodes

Other nodes

Land use/area New BH New BAR New max Remark

(Stories) (%) FAR
 Imperial Hotel 5-8 (subject 80 max 1:4
to aviation
46
 regulation)

 Bole Interchange 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Cadisco Metatefia (under

aviation
regulation)
0-5
 Abo Interchange 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Kaliti Interchange 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Hana Mariam 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Mekanissa Seminarium 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Jimma Road Ring Junction 5-8 80 max 1:4

 Alert 5-8 80 max 1:4

3 The rest of the Ring Road

3-5 80 max 1:3

47
5.2 From building height to plot size determination
The economic and infrastructure study groups produced the minimum and maximum FA
(not building height) for each location. Combining the economic minimum and the
infrastructure maximum with aesthetic principles, the design team has determined the
minimum and maximum new building height for the city. Yet, there is one missing
component which is an important instrument to implement the building height of the city
as new in this study: the development of plot sizes for each building type. This is what is
presented next.

5.2.1 Plot size determination

The determination of plot size is dependent on two variables:

1. Building footprint: this is the area which is occupied by a building which is once
again determined on the basis of the type of building and the new height. In the
former case, we have considered two typologies: tower and podium types and
slab block types.

2. Building Setback: this is the distance a building has to keep in relation to

neighboring proprieties and public spaces.

A combination of these two variables will give the minimum width of a plot.

5.2.1.1 Building footprint

This is about the development of minimum acceptable building sizes that will help
determine plot sizes. What is presented in the next table is the minimum foot print of
selected type of buildings for different height citatory.

Table 13: building footprint for different building types

Low rise buildings Foot print for Medium Foot print for High rise
(1-3 stories) rise buildings (4-12 buildings (>/= 13 stories) in
stories) in meters meters

Minimum --- 16x25/20/15/10 18x25/20

Average --- 18x25/20/15/10 24x26

Other --- 14x25/20/15/10 45x45

options

Depending on the size of the plots, other options (smaller or bigger) could also be used

Note: A refined extract from this table is used to develop building frontage and depth in
the last section (implementation guidelines)

48
5.2.1.2 Setbacks
Front Setback Vs Enclosure

Enclosure is defined as the relation between the horizontal distance between two
buildings and the vertical height. In other words, the enclosure principle requires
relating the height of buildings on both sides of a street or standing side by side with
the horizontal distance between the buildings. According to literature (and as explained
in previous chapters), such relation is determined on the basis of a 1:1.73 (600), 1:1
(450) 1:1.5, 1:2 and 1:4 all depending on which part of the city we are focusing. While
the 600 (1:1.73 which is for every 1m horizontal distance a height of 1.73m relation) is
mainly used in the CBD where achieving the maximum height and development
density is the objective, the lower ratios such as 1:2 and 1:4 are used when one goes
to the suburb where development pressure is low. These ratios which are used to
define the position of enclosing buildings are also used to determine the left side, right
side, and rear side setbacks as will be explained later. However, as we will see it in
the same table, due to the specific nature of plots in the city of Addis which are
mainly small and irregular, these ratios are modified to fit the context.

Left, Right and Rear Setbacks

The left, right and rear side setbacks are also determined on the basis of an enclosure
principle. The formula on how to determine these setbacks is indicated in the following
table

Table #14-formula to determine building setback

No Set back type Formula

1 Front side setback If Setback is the horizontal distance a building is

required to keep from the right of way, front
setbacks for the Addis context is decided to be 2x
Enclosure ratio given for the area.

E.g. for an enclosure of 1:1, setback will be 1:2

(horizontal distance: building height in meters) and
for enclosure of 1:1.73, setback will be 1:3.46
(horizontal distance: building height in meters).

2 Rear side setback  Distance from building to building in the rear side
= Height of the building /2 (which is tan 63.5
degree). For our context, this is again modified
(see implementation guide line)

49
3 Left and Right side setback  To determine left and right side setbacks, an
enclosure principle of 4:1 (where 4 is the height
of the building and 1 is the horizontal distance
from another building in the left or right side) is
new. However, for buildings without lateral
openings, such side setbacks are not needed.
Once again, this is also modified for the city’s
context.
Determination of plot size

Based on the above building footprint and setback criteria, the size of a plot will be
determined as follows

 Plot frontage= a+b+c (see the above drawing) where “b is building frontage,
‘”c” is right side setback and”a” is left side setback. Where the building has no
lateral opening, these two setbacks may be reduced or eliminated

 Plot depth= D+E+F where “D” is front setback from the street, ”E” is building
depth and “F” is rear side setback

 The total plot size obtained through this formula has to be compared with the
one that is calculated on the basis of the Maximum FAR. The maximum FAR
can be implemented only if the plot size is at least 25% of the total floor area.

50
VI GUIDELINE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE REVISED
BUILDILNG HEIGHT REGULATION OF ADDIS ABABA-2011

6.1 implementation guide lines

This guide line shows how we can implement the findings of the literature review
thoroughly discussed in previous chapters to the context of Addis Ababa

Definitions and related issues

1. Story/floor height: one story/one floor means the height of a building from one floor
level to the next floor level. In this study, this height is taken to be 3.0-3.5m.
Building height: as indicated with
the arrow in both figures (A), the total
height of a building in our study is the
height of the building from ground
floor finish level to the upper most top (A)
tie beam of the building. Roofs,
parapets and mechanical rooms are
not counted as part of the height of
the building. In other words, a five
story building in this study means a
building with a maximum height of
15m-17.5m excluding roof height,
parapet or the height of mechanical
rooms. However, if the slope of the roof is so steep that the maximum height created
at any point exceeds 2.40m, it is considered as additional room (as written in the
building permit directive).
Building height on steep sites: for buildings
located on steep sites, the total number of
stories for such buildings is to be taken from
the ground floor level facing a main street.
However, if the building runs along the steep
slope (as in the figure) the total height of the (A)
building will be taken from the highest point
where the building touches the street (B). This
is to allow for more development to take place
in such areas. (B)
Buildings with Mezzanine: In case of mezzanine floor (at any level), floor to floor
level can vary but the maximum height of the buildings should fall within the given
range

51
BAR: known as the Built up Area Ratio, BAR expresses the relation between the
area occupied by the building and the total plot. 80% BAR means, the building is
occupying that percent of the total plot area.
Unlike the previous study, what is indicated here is the maximum Built Area Ratio
(BAR) which in most cases is 80%. Leaving the minimum BAR open to the individual
builder will not only enable to build higher and higher but also contribute to the
increase of open space in a compound. Such open spaces are to be used as green
areas and the remaining for circulation of people, vehicles air and other purposes.
Limiting the maximum BAR on the other hand will guarantee a minimum of open
space thereby avoiding the kind of living environment where every plot of land is fully
occupied by buildings. This is particularly the case where land price is the maximum
such as commercial areas and in the city center.
FAR: this is the relation between the total floor area expressed in square meter and
the total plot area. A 1:4 FAR means that the total floor area of the building is four
times the area of the plot.
One of the findings of this study is the identification of FAR as the most important
factor in building height regulation. It is the intensity of development in an area and
not the relation between open and built up space that determines the quality of such
places. Traffic congestion and associated issues such as pollution are also a result
of such intensity. However, what is directly related to the number of people attracted
to a specific building or an area is directly related to the working space provided in
that building or buildings in the area. Taking this into consideration, spaces allocated
for circulation (stairs, lifts, corridors), toilets, stores, janitor rooms, walls, basement
parking, and other rooms that are considered to be not related to the service
rendered should be excluded from the calculation of FAR.
This exclusion must be done by calculating actual area of these spaces. However, in
the event that this is not possible, the following table can be used.

Table #15: building types and areas to be deducted during FAR calculation

No Building type Area to be deducted from the total

built up area of the building
1 Residential building including 25%
apartments, guest houses, etc
2 Office buildings 25%
3 Mixed use buildings 30%
4 Commercial buildings (hotels, shops, 30%
department stores, etc)
5 Public buildings ( hospitals, schools 35%

52
 theatres, halls, cinemas, etc
6 All other buildings 25%

To summarize,
 The maximum BAR for any area in the city is 80% with the exception of
Mercato which has 85% BAR) and the minimum is left open
 The maximum FAR for the city center and some sub-centers is 1:7 which
is seven times the size of the plot while the most common is 1:4
2 Updated building height for the CBD, Sub-Centers, Tertiary Centers
and Nodes
Since the implementation of the new building height regulation, contradiction has
been observed between enclosure and building height regulations in many areas
especially in those for which the building height is set at 13-21, 21-34 and 34-55
stories. For example for a 30 m wide street, a 1: 1.73 enclosure and 21-34 stories
while the enclosure principle permits a 51.9m (i.e. 30x1.73) tall building the building
height regulation prohibits it since even the minimum number of stories (21) cannot
fit in the 51.9m height. The same contradiction can also be observed in areas where
existing street are very narrow (10m, 12m, 15m, 20m, etc) but there is high
development pressure in areas such as the largely residential areas of the CBD,
nodes, sub-centers and tertiary centers.

These contradictions must be resolved by amending the building height regulation to

one that gives the option of applying either Enclosure (E) or the Building Height
Regulation to determine the minimum building height. Therefore, the regulation
which was previously given only in building heights is amended by adding the option
of using Enclosure to determine the minimum building height of an area as presented
in table #2

53
Table #16: new Enclosure, Minimum Building Height and FAR for centers, sub centers, tertiary centers and nodes
The CBD (excluding piazza and Sub Centers Tertiary centers Nodes
Mercato)
The Height Enclosure FAR Sub- Height Enclosure FAR Tertiary Height Enclosu FAR Nodes Height Encl FAR
CBD (max) Cente (max) center re (max) osur (max)
rs e
Inner 34-55 E= 1:1.73 1:5-1:7 Megen 13-21 E= 1:1.73 1:5-1:7 Bisrate MinBH For For All MinBH 1:4 for
zone Or agna or Gebriel, to Bisrate Bisrate nodes to E= all
E-55 E-21 Meri Luke, MaxBH Gebriel Gebriel identifi MaxBH 1:1 nodes
Gotera, as and and ed in as as
Saris, indicate Gotera Gotera it the indicate indicat
Interme 21-34 or E= 1:1.73 1:5-1:7 Ayer 8-13 E= 1:1 1:4
Kotari, in the E= is final in the ed in
diate E-34 Tena or
Betel, final 1:1.73 1:5-1:7 report final the
zone E-13
Winget, report For the report final
Outer 13-21 or E= 1:1.73 1:5-1:7 Kaliti 8-13 E= 1:1 1:4
Edna or rest For the or report
zone E-21 or
Mole, Tor E to E=1:1 rest as E to
E-13
Hailoch MaxBH indicated MaxBH
Lebu 5-8 E= 1:1 1:4 in the
Or final
E-8 report
(1:4 for
some
centers
and 1:5
for
others)
Note: within the CBD Note: within the Sub-Center, Tertiary center and Node
 For streets above 30m width, maximum  For streets of 15m width and above, maximum FAR has to be 1:4
FAR is 1:5-1:7
 For streets of below 15m width FAR maximum has to be 1:3
 For streets of 25m, 20m, and 15m,
maximum FAR has to be 1:4

 For streets of below 15m, maximum

FAR has to be 1:3

Note:
 Enclosure of 45 degree or 1:1 ratio indicates the relation between the width of the street or that of a permanent open space in front (like Meskel Square) and the height of a
building. This principle has been applied for all areas where the maximum height new by the study is less than 14 stories.
 In areas where high rise buildings (13-52 stories) are new, the enclosure principle or the relation between the width of a street or a permanent open space in relation to the
o
height of a building is 60 or 1:1.73 and FAR is 1:5-1:7

54
Table #17: new Enclosure, Minimum Building Height and FAR for corridors, historical areas, transition zones, ring road and the rest of the city
Development corridors Old city core Transition zone Rest of the city Ring road

Areas Height Enclosu Areas Height Enclosu Areas Height Enclo Areas Height Enclo Areas Height Enclosu
under re under re under sure under sure under re
consider consi consider considera considera
ation ation tion
derati tion
on

st nd
All 1 , 2
rd
and 3
grade As All As All areas As All areas As All nodes As
developm indicate areas indicated demarcat indicated demarcate indicated in and areas indicated
ent d in the 1:1 demar in the 1:1 ed under in the 1:1 d under the final 1:1 demarcate in the 1:1
corridors final cated final “transitio final “the rest of report d as part final
as report under report n zone” report the city” of the ring report
indicated “old road
in the city
final core”
report

Note:

New FAR
 Development corridors: For residential areas in Piazza maximum FAR is 1:3 and the rest of the corridors FAR maximum is 1:4.
 Old city core: For the old city area FAR maximum is 1:4. Yet, when the width of the street is below 15m, FAR maximum is 1:3

 Transition zone: For the transition zone FAR maximum is upgraded to 1:4. However, when the width of the street is below 15m, FAR maximum is 1:3
 The rest of the city: For the rest of the city FAR maximum is 1:3 for residential land uses and 1:4 for non residential land uses. But, when the width of the street is below
15m, FAR maximum even for non-residential land use areas has to be 1:3
 The Ring Road: For the ring road, FAR maximum remains at 1:4 for nodes. FAR maximum is 1:3 when the width of the street is below 15m. Maximum FAR is upgraded for
the rest of the ring road to 1:3.
Enclosure of 45 degree or 1:1 ratio indicates the relation between the width of the street or a permanent open space in front (like Meskel Square) and the height of a building. This
principle has been applied for all areas where the maximum height new by the study is less than 14 stories.
o
In areas where high rise buildings (13-52 stories) are new, the enclosure principle is 60 or 1:1.73 and FAR is 1:5-1:7

55
 Application of this Amendment

1. When Enclosure height (E) is< the Minimum Building Height, Enclosure height (E)
becomes Minimum Building Height.

2. When Enclosure height is > Minimum Building Height; the building height regulation
applies.

Example: for a developer whose plot is facing a 10 meter wide street in the outer zone of
the CBD (where Building Height Regulation is 13-21 and the Enclosure ratio is 1:1.73), the
building height allowed by Enclosure will be 17.3m (5 stories with a room height of 3.5m).
This is a case where “E” height (5 stories) is less than the Minimum Building Height which is
13 stories (scenario #1). In this case, the Minimum Building Height will be “E” height. More
height (only up to the maximum building height) can be permitted if Setback requirements
can be met.

On the other hand, for a developer whose plot is facing a 40m wide street in the same area,
the building height allowed by Enclosure will be 69.2m (about 20 stories). This is a case
where “E” height (20 stories) is greater than the Minimum Building Height, 13 stories
(scenario #2). In this case the Building Height Regulation applies.

3 Determination of setbacks
3.1 Updated Setback regulation for the “Rest of the City” and 13-21 building
height zones

 Previous discussions have indicated that due to the small size of most of the plots in
the city, the enclosure given as 1.5:1 (horizontal distance in relation to building
height) for the rest of the city has been facing implementation difficulties. Therefore,
the enclosure ratio for these areas is upgraded to 1:1.

 For the same reason, the 1:1 enclosure recommended for building height zones of
13-21 is also be upgraded to 1: 1.73 and become similar to that of heights above
21 floors.

3.2 Front Setback Vs Enclosure

While it was explicitly expressed in the regulation that the front setback is based on the
Enclosure principle, implementation of the Setback Regulation is observed to be
inconsistent with this principle.

The enclosure principle requires relating the height of buildings on both sides of a street
with the horizontal distance between the buildings. According to the regulation the
enclosure and setback regulation must be implemented by making field visits, measuring
the space (not only the street) and the height of the building in front of and opposite to the
building for which building permit is requested. For example, if the building is facing a
permanent or long term open space like the Meskel square, setback must be calculated
based on the dimension of that space. On the other hand, if the building is facing a shorter
building set back must be calculated based on the height of the shorter building since there
is no enclosure above that height.
56
 The regulation is however being implemented by focusing on street width rather than
distance between buildings across a street. It is also focused only on the height of a
building for which building permit is requested rather than also the height of the building
opposite to it on the other side of the street. These approaches may have been adopted by
the implementing body because of their simplicity since they do not require site visit for
each building permit request. However, they are problematic because they do not lead to
achievement of objectives of the building height regulation.

In addition, it has been reported that, although theoretically sound, implementation of the
enclosure ratios has proved to be problematic due to the fact that most of the plots in the
city are small both in terms of width and depth. For example, for a 10m wide street and
enclosure ratio of 1:1, the permissible building height on the boundary line will be 10m (the
width of the street). However, if the developer desires to add two more stories (say 7m
high), the regulation requires a setback of 7m which is difficult for small plots to meet.

Therefore, the following amendments have been made to the Front Setback Regulation in
order to make it more responsive:

1 Enclosure is separated from Setback. The ratios given as 1:1 and 1: 1.73 must be
read as enclosure ratios (right of way to building height) and used only to determine
enclosure height (the maximum height a building on the right of way can have)

2 Setback is horizontal distance a building is required to keep from the right of way. On
the basis of this, front setback for any building must be 2x Enclosure ratio given
for the area.

E.g. for an enclosure of 1:1, setback will be 1:2 (horizontal distance: building height in
meters) and for enclosure of 1:1.73, setback will be 1:3.46 (horizontal distance:
building height in meters). According to this regulation, the developer mentioned
above would need a setback of 3.5 m only to add two more floors.

3 For buildings facing large permanent or long-term open spaces, a Site Visit Method
described above must be used to calculate enclosure and setback if the building
height specified for the site cannot be achieved using the street width based
approach currently being used.

3.3 Left, Right and Rear Setbacks

The left, right and rear side setbacks are also determined on the basis of an enclosure
principle. The formula on how to determine these setbacks is indicated in the following table

Table #18-formula to determine building setback

57
No Set back type Formula

1 Rear side setback  Distance from building to building in the rear side = =
Height of the building /2 (which is tan 63.5 degree)
 Unless for structural, safety, maintenance and other
reasons, medium and low rise buildings (<12 stories)
that do not have openings on the rear side can be
built on the boundary
2 Left and Right side setback  When buildings have lateral openings on the left or
right side, enclosure principle of 4:1 where 4 is the
height of the building and 1 is the horizontal distance
from another building in the left or right side will be
used. This is equivalent to the height of the building
divided by 4.
 For buildings without lateral openings, unless for
structural and other safety reasons, medium and low
rise buildings (<12 stories) can be built on the
boundary
For more detail, see condition below
3 Set back distance for a  The minimum setback distance for a building facing a
building adjacent to left or main road on the front side and a side street on the
right side street other, its distance from the boundary on such sides is
determined on the basis of the following formula
X= (HB/8)-SW/2 where

X= setback distance from the boundary of the plot on the

right, left side to the building

HB= height of the building

SW= total width of the street (right of way)

8, 2 and 8 are constant numbers

Conditions to be fulfilled

 When the value of X is negative or 0, there is no need

for a setback.
 To maintain the livability of such streets, blind walls
should be forbidden on this street side
 If the side street is a main street (with right of way
greater t 30m), the setback distance should be
determined on the basis of the new enclosure
principle (like in #1 in this table)
4 Set back distance for a  The minimum rear side setback for a building facing a
building adjacent to rear side main road on the front side and a rear street on the
street back, its minimum distance from the boundary on
such direction is determined on the basis of the

58
 following formula
X= (HB/4)-SW/2

Note:

 When the value of X is negative or 0, there is no

need for a setback.

 To maintain the livability of such streets, blind

walls should be forbidden on this side

 If this rear side street is a main street (with right

of way greater than 30m), the setback distance
should be determined on the basis of the new
enclosure principle (like in #1)

Condition for Rear and Side setbacks

1. If two neighboring buildings have the same height, the set back distance will be
based on the height of one of the buildings. Each plot owner has to maintain at
least half such distance from his boundary as open space. In other words, if the
distance to be maintained between two such buildings is 10m, this distance has to
be shared between the owners of the two buildings.
2. If one of the buildings is smaller than the other, the setback distance will be
determined on the basis of the smaller building. But .the smallest buildings height
should be at least in the minimum building height requirement of the regulation
rang Each plot owner has to maintain such distance from his boundary as open
space.
3. If one of the buildings is already built at the boundary, the required setback
distance should be maintained by the other plot owner who is putting a new
building.

4. In the case of left, right or rear side walls with top windows, a minimum of 1.5m
from boundary line must be maintained.

5. If, like in new investment areas, a person want to build in the absence of any
knowledge about what is to happen in his left, right or rear side, he/she can
proceed as long as he/she maintains his share of the side/rear setback which is
HB/8 for left and right side and HB/4 for rear side. “HB” is the height of the
building. However, if the building has blind wall on one of such sides, such
obligation does not apply Note if the neighborhood plot had no building ,or had a
building of less than the minimum new building height regulation rang , the set
back is governed by the new minimum building height regulation rang.

Determination of plot size

Based on the above setback criteria, the size of a plot will be determined as follows

59
  Plot frontage= a+b+c (see the above drawing) where “b is building frontage, ‘”c”
is right side setback and”a” is left side setback. Where the building has no lateral
opening, these two setbacks may be reduced or eliminated

 Plot depth= D+E+F where “D” is front setback from the street, ”E” is building
depth and “F” is rear side setback

 The total plot size obtained through this formula has to be compared with the one
that is calculated on the basis of the Maximum FAR. The maximum FAR can be
implemented only if the plot size is at least 25% of the total floor area.

4 Minimum Street Width, Building Frontage, Building Depth and Plot Size
determination

The regulation has specified minimum street width and plot and building frontage based
mainly on aesthetic principles. However, this regulation has faced problem of implementation
in many parts of the city that have already developed because the building height regulation
is being implemented without altering existing street and plot patterns. Therefore, under the
circumstances, the regulations are amended as follows:

1. The Minimum Building Frontage and Building Depth (see table below) must be
applied with a 20% tolerance. That is to say, for example, for a requirement of 20m
minimum frontage, frontages ranging from 16-20 will be acceptable. The same
applies to building depth

2. building depth

60
 Table #19-building height, minimum building frontage and depth
No Building height in Stories Minimum building frontage Minimum building depth
1 0-5 stories
2 6-8 stories 10 14
3 9-13 stories 15 16
4 14-21 stories 18 20
5 22-34 stories 24 26
6 35-55 stories 45 45
Note: this minimum building frontage and depth does not apply to pocket sites

Minimum street width for different height categories

Table #20- building height and minimum street width

No Building height in Stories Minimum street width

1 35-55 30
2 22-34 25
3 14-21 20
4 9-13 15
5 6-8 10
6 1-5 -----
Note: these minimum street widths do not apply to pocket sites accessed by
independent roads such roads are practically regarded as internal roads for the pocket
sites

Table #21-, minimum street width and maximum FAR

No Minimum New FAR for each New FAR on the New FAR for the rest
street width Street inside the corridors of the city
CBD
1 30 1:5-1:7 1:4 1:4-1:5
2 25 1:5-1:7 1:4 1:4-1:5
3 20 1:4 -1:5 1:4 1:4
4 15 1:4 1:4 1:4
5 10 1:3 1:3 1:3
6 ----- 1:3 1:3 1:3
Note: these minimum street widths do not apply to pocket sites accessed by
independent roads such roads are practically regarded as internal roads for the pocket
sites.

61
6.2 Minimum plot size determination
Minimum plot size can be determined by applying the above enclosure and set-back ratios, building
frontage and building depth, FAR and BAR

6.3 Other conditions

1. Special cases: This building height regulation should not apply to social buildings
that require a walk-up scale such as schools, churches, hospitals. It does not either
apply in areas reserved for industries and warehouses, public buildings such as
cinema halls, meeting halls, conference rooms, etc, and other “special type of
buildings “that do not require height regulation. If a building not mentioned in this list
is believed to be treated under “special condition”, the sub-city can present the case
through the Planning and Information Institute” to the City Manager for final decision.

2. Unforeseen events: if due to international or local pressure, a building height

regulation made for a specific location has to be modified, like for example if a global
corporation request to build a multi-story building that surpasses the maximum new
for the city, depending on its importance such regulation can be reviewed by the city
government and reconsidered. This is also the case for local projects. If regulations
that benefit the public at large (such as the government sponsored high rise
residential development of G+7 or more stories) come to areas where building height
is limited to 1-5 for example, they have to be reviewed by the city government as
“special cases”.

3. Clarity: To make implementation easier, the building permit department or section

has to give clients with specific indication of the permitted building height in their
respective area both in stories and meters. This is like saying 5-8 stories or height
ranging from 15 to 28 meters.

4. Application of this regulation on LDP areas: This building height regulation does
not apply in areas whose LDP is already prepared and approved. However, the
regulation applies to aspects that were not addressed by the LDPs such as FAR and
others. LDP preparation and revisions taking place in future must however be
conducted in light of this building height regulation.

5. Transparency: The formulas used to calculate building setbacks, plot sizes and
other relevant information that are needed in the design process should be clearly
displayed or made available for the public and professional associations

6. Coordination: Professionals working in land development related departments have

to have a clear understanding of this regulation and a good working relation with the
implementing bodies so that the type of plots leased to investors are convenient to
achieve the new heights.

7. Exception in the application of this regulation: All design permits/plan

agreements issues and approved before this regulation came to effect should be
governed by the old regulation unless the owners of such buildings have chosen to
62
 be governed by the new one. This applies for those who have already plan
permits/plan agreements that were valid (not expired) since January 30/2003 This
exceptional provision will be valid only for three months from the day this updated
(latest) building height regulation is put into effect.

8. Pocket sites: Building on narrow plots which do not fulfill the suggested minimum
frontage can be accepted if such plots are pocket sites squeezed between existing
multi-story buildings that do not allow expansion. The new building with maximum
height of G+13 to be built on such sites has to be as close to existing buildings as
possible (or attached if possible having no lateral openings) to create a better urban
image in the area. In such cases, as long as the new developer assume all the risk
and cost associated with attaching the building, the adjacent building owners are
obliged allow the building to be constructed attached to their buildings. On the other
hand if the plot fulfills the minimum requirement, except building line/front side
setback offset requirements/ other component of the regulation will be applicable, the
new building to build on the plot must respect the previous building line.

9. Request for height increase: people who have requested to add one or more
additional stories (without exceeding the maximum new by the new building height
regulation) are allowed to do so as long as:

 They present a guarantee for structural stability of the building

 They have enough parking space for the new additions and

 They satisfy the Setbacks, BAR and FAR requirements of the new regulation

10 Important Note: In addition to the building height regulation, developers and building
designers must be required to harmonize the height and design of their buildings with the
character of the areas in which the buildings are to be realized especially when the area
is in the main corridor of the city and have been substantially (more than 40-% of the
block) developed respecting the old building height regulation and/or the area have
registered heritages. Area specific details should be determined in the LDP or urban
design level. Urban planning and information institute is expected to do the details of
such area as soon as possible. Even when there is no such detail, the suggestion is
found to be very useful since although harmonization with existing context is a very
important urban development goal there has been concern that it cannot be achieved by
regulation of building height alone. However, it was also realized that regulation of this
aspect requires first determination of character for the said areas either by the regulation
or by plans. Owing to difficulties in this regard, it is decided to limit control to advising
designers and developers to harmonize their developments with the context, on the part
of the implementers, and submitting report on their response to such advises on the part
of designers and developers. In areas where the details are not developed and enacted
in regulation or plan, failure of developers and designers to respond to these advices
adequately, in the opinion of the regulators, shall not be the sole reason for rejecting
development regulations.

63
Annex #1minimum plot size requirement for the lowest building height of range

Description Minimum requirements for the lowest building size

Road width in m 0_5 6_8 9_13 14-21 22-34 35-55
50m above road 90 104 184 282 656 2601

40_49 road 90 104 184 282 665 2619

30_39 road 90 104 184 315 760 2799

25_29 road 90 104 184 390 855

Plot size in m2
20_24 road 90 104 201 428

15_19 road 90 104 231

10_14 road 90 116

Below 10 90
NB
 This is the minimum plot size for the lowest scenario, assuming
o the lowest building height of the range
o the marginal building frontage and depth
o a plot encircled with highest road width of the range,
o a building will be with no lateral opening and rear side setback
 so change in any of the assumption/condition will demand an increases on the plot size
 the formula to calculate the minimum plot, given the site and/or building design is
indicated in this guideline page 60

64
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Allan Konya( 1980): Design Primer for Hot Climates. The Architectural Press
Ltd.London
2. Arivind krishina,Nick baker,svSzokolay,simos yannas(ed.), (2001): Climate
responsive architecture. Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi
3. Carmona Matthew, Heath Tim, Oc Taner and Tiesdell Steven, (2003), Public places-
Urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design

4. G.A. Hiraskar,(2002), Fundamentals of Town Planning. Ish Kupur publisher.

5. Gurcharan singh, (1996)Standard hand book of civil engineering, Lomus printing
service, Delhi-6
6. Ernst and Peter Neufert, 2003, 3rd edition, Back Well publishers
7. Panchdhari, A.C, Water Supply and Sanitary Installation(with in buildings) design
Construction and maintenance
8. Shvarts , A. (1976), Town planning in hot climates , MirPublisher.
9. Singh, Gracharan & Gadash (2001)Building planning Designing & Scheduling.
Standard Publishers & distributers.
10. Town planning in hot climates by shvarts , A. 1976, MirPublisher.
11. Yoshinobu Ashihara (1970): Exterior Design In Architecture. D.Van Nostrand
Company (Canada). Ltd.
12. Mogahtn , Urban design: street
13. Yoshinobu Ashihara (1970) :Exterior Design In Architecture. D.Van Nostrnad
Company (Canada). Ltd.
Internet source
14. http://www.PlanningPortal.gov.uk/england/government/ )
15. http://www.PlanningPortal.gov.uk/england/government/ )

65