An assessment method and typology for the regeneration of vacant land in Quito, Ecuador

Abstract

A proper categorization of vacant lands allows for more appropriate and successful reuse/management strategies. As such, proper definitions and classifications are necessary for the reutilization of vacant sites. Seeking to understand and develop vacant land typologies, this study triangulates data created through an extensive literature review, field experts’ interviews, and an online survey to residents to propose a new typology of vacant lands which can serve as a guide for their regeneration. Also integrating the most relevant vacant land typologies in current literature and available local spatial data, this study identified five vacant land typologies most suitable for the city of Quito, Ecuador including: i) Abandoned Land ii) Undeveloped Land iii) Postindustrial Land iv) Land Held for Speculation, and v) Derelict Land. The research demonstrates that the regeneration of the different typologies of vacant land in Quito has the potential to serve the community and help to address specific urban necessities based on local characteristics. The reutilization of these sites is expected to help with the mitigation of urban sprawl and to control inner-city increasing land vacancies.

Introduction

Many cities are decentralizing due to outward urbanization (Kremer et al., 2013). In cities like Quito, Ecuador, new urban areas have been established outside of the inner-city, resulting in decreased use of inner-city transportation, recreational areas, and basic services (Gu et al., 2019). Simultaneously, residential migrations due to decentralization have created increases in urban abandonment and vacant lands in Quito. However, there is currently a lack of a proper urban regeneration plan to address these issues (Kim et al., 2018). This lack of plan to deal with vacant lands risks creating a sense of abandonment, which may negatively impact citizen’s well-being and stewardship (Kim, 2016). One primary reason for this situation is that vacant land rarely has a well-defined meaning or classification system. Numerous definitions and taxonomies of vacant land exist (Newman et al., 2016, 2018). At the municipal level, these definitions and classifications vary, although with some similarities and overlaps (Gu et al., 2019). Each locality tends to focus on the kinds of vacant lands most problematic to it, to better regulate and develop policies manage vacant lots. The absence of classifications for vacant urban land treats all vacancies the same and the limited use of systematic categorizations for vacant land types makes regeneration difficult. Due to this lack of knowledge, vacant land can be overlooked and undervalued, despite its potential ecological and social values (Kim, 2016).

The term ‘vacant land’ is typcially characterized by negative connotations, sometimes referred to as simply ‘underutilized land (Bowman and Pagano, 2004).’ Vacant land can also be described as “left-over” urban space or “ineffective” urban area (Kim et al., 2018). For example, vacant lands in industrial urban neighborhoods are commonly polluted with hazardous substances, contamination, and waste; these conditions can disturb the sense of community and decrease properties values (EPA, 2017). Although vacant lands can provide opportunities for future development, such spaces are typically associated with negative misconceptions and can be perceived as unsafe lands with high crime, urban wastelands, or properties in need of management or aesthetic upgrades. Vacant land can also be related to the decline of property values in a neighborhood (Goldstein et al., 2011). While many urban area’s land value are oftentimes high-priced, many urban land parcels are also abandoned. The reason can be traced to monetary issues for land supply and demand and changing inclinations of occupants (Mhatre, 2013). Urban decentralization due to land supply and demand unevenness is highly related to the increasing number of vacant lands. The result can be a rapid increase in vacant land and decreases in urban land value and infrastructure.

Inversely, vacant urban land can improve urban ecological ecosystems by providing protection or new habitat for natural systems, if repurposed correctly (Kim et al., 2015). There are numerous past investigations where abandoned land, post-industrial sites, or previous transportation amenities were treated as areas to improve environmental ecosystems through regeneration (Galecka-Drozda, 2018). Spirn et al. (1990) researched that the typology, shape, position, and potential uses of vacant land in West Philadelphia. Kim (2016) identified the public value of urban vacant land in terms of ecological and social value and efforts to identity alternative strategies to optimize the way these spaces are utilized for both short-term and long-term uses to support urban regeneration. Anderson and Minor (2017) discussed an interdisciplinary approach to evaluating vacant lot restoration in terms of ecological, social, and economic benefits.

Since how to deal with vacant land has become a global issue, many scholars have attempted to develop a clear definition for the term. Newman et al. (2016) summarized the definitions of vacant land; Table 1 shows these definitions and describes whether each definition includes land, buildings, and usage of vacant land. Four of the listed definitions include vacant buildings, three studies included underused land, and three studies included the length of vacancy to define vacant land. For example, Accordino and Johnson (2000) defined vacant properties as land or buildings that were vacant for more than two years, following a report from the United States General Accounting Office (1978). Pagano and Bowman (2000) noted that the definition of an abandoned structure depends on each local government. For example, some cities define the threshold of an abandoned structure as a structure has been unoccupied for 60 days or those of 120 days or longer. Németh and Langhorst (2014) cited Pagano and Bowman (2000)’s threshold example, and noted that long-term vacant land is a more suitable candidate for temporary uses, such as urban agriculture and community garden (Kim et al., 2020). Speculation is an inevitable part of a competitive free market, but it can also lead to increased land vacancy and abandonment (Kivell, 1993).

Because of the numerous definitions, examples, and perceptions of vacant land, typology development is necessary. Categorizations allow for different but similar types of vacant lands to be placed into similar envelopes for examination and also allows for different definitions to be developed for each typology. However, classification of the various types of vacant land are rare, depriving understanding of the value of such sites (Kim et al., 2018). Without classifications, the planners and practitioners risk making incorrect of ineffective action plans towards this site (Kim et al., 2018). Only a handful of investigations have created vacant land typologies; each treats such typologies as if they are all equivalent.

This study analyzes the definitions characteristics related to vacant land through a series of interviews, surveys, and reviews of existing literature. We then propose a new set of vacant land typologies which can serve as an assessment methodology to guide the regeneration of these sites. City’s and vacant land parcel’s context yields a multitude of potential uses so the vacant land typology proposed here is not expected to serve as an absolute typological framework for categorizing vacant land. Focusing on the city of Quito, Ecuador, we develop five vacant land typologies and suggest how to regenerate these sites according to the characteristics and urban background associated with each type. The suggested reutilization of vacant sites will help restore the city’s urban landscape and offer Quito’s residents better recreational areas to improve their quality of life.