To promote orderly development, physical planning ensures that urban activity is properly guided. Disorderly development has a cost and health implications, and development control is the planning instrument that pre-empts both. Many studies have shown how active the practice of Development control is in the modern areas of third world cities as compared to the traditional areas (Afon, 2007). Instituting action, however, has limitations from two factors. First, it is the generally held belief that development control lacks basis for enforcement in traditional areas as the modernist ideology of urban planning presupposes that development control derives legitimacy from a planning scheme, which in the case of traditional areas is lacking (Santuraki, 2001). Second, is the technical argument that even where the basis for enforcement is found in a planning scheme, modern planning standards are not generally suitable for application in traditional areas, if the overall result was not to be disordered and chaotic, but rather to enhance liveability in all urban settings as expected in the context of wider sustainable urbanism (Abdo and Batzel, 2011).
In Pre-modern times, Development Control in Northern Nigeria was a community responsibility defined at 3 levels. First, each member of the society is a monitor, making reports of contraventions to the representatives of the traditional leadership institutions. Contraventions are held as developments capable of undermining public health, safety, Amenity and convenience. The second is with professional builders, who are not only skilled in construction but are also knowledgeable of the built environment. The third, fourth and fifth enforced by the Mai Anguwa, the emir and during colonial times, the courts. The builder or the head of the guild of builders (Sarkin Magina) is usually first notified of contraventions, and following assessment, appropriate amendments are sought for compliance by the developer. However, mediation by the guild is rarely required as most people are aware of development requirements. Where mediation fails, a report is raised to the community leadership (Mai-Anguwa). An unresolved case is forwarded to the ward or District head (Hakimin Birni da Kauye). The emirate council presided by the emir is usually the final arbiter. Rarely are cases taken to the court, but where it does, the court becomes the final arbiter.
Across the North East, North West and North Central of Nigeria, the emir holds land in trust for the community and leasehold is given to individuals under specified conditions of use. Based on this, haphazard layout and improper developments are rarely common. Town form is defined first by public spaces, and private areas afterwards under strict compliance to cultural norms. That is, individual interests for development usually are bound by common traditions, technology, welfare means, security needs, transportation, and religion (Kaltho 1985). The planning considerations although unwritten, are practised and transmitted across generations through the guild of builders under the authority of the emir. Generally, Development control begins from land acquisition. In the case of purchase, the buyer secures three witnesses. Along with the seller, written agreements are made with the endorsement of the Mai Anguwa (ward head) or at times the District Head (Hakimin Birni da Kewaye), whose main concern at this stage, is the particular use for which the land would be put to. During development, control is about building form and use, as it affects neighbourhood circulation and privacy. Within the house, space use is a private affair of the developer, but the guild of builders generally exercise advisory roles on housing elements and dimensions. Between houses, Development control ensures that buildings do not intrude into adjacent plots and that required setbacks are respected (Kaltho 1985).
At the individual developer’s level, the size of the plot to build on, the number of rooms to be built, and their sizes are influenced by the financial strength of the developer and the functions rooms are intended for. The local authorities have no control over this, except where it invades the privacy of neighbours, as for example when doors or windows are placed opposite the toilet or bathroom of a neighbour (usually unroofed), or erecting high structures that give visual contact to the courtyard of neighbours. For this reason, the construction of storey buildings are rarely permitted. The principle of convenience is promoted at the neighbourhood level relating to circulation, privacy and amenity. Functionality is achieved by ensuring that enough spaces for passages, alleyways and drainages are provided; Privacy is promoted by ensuring that alleys, entrances or parlours do not face one another; and amenity, by ensuring that buildings do not encroach onto roads or alleyways or onto open recreation or public spaces.  Health considerations are expressed in the provision of passages for stormwater and for waste evacuation. 
The promulgation of the 1946 Nigeria Town and Country Planning Ordinance made provision for the planning improvement and development of different parts of the country through the use of planning schemes. The first attempt at organising the administration and development of Land at the grassroots was the enactment of the Local Government Law (1976). The Law made town and country planning a Local Government affair. Thus the state Governments created a Local Planning Authority to control developments and initiate planning schemes at the Local levels. Land use decree No 6 of 1978 was established to curb land speculation, ease the process of Land Acquisition by the government, co-ordinate and formulate land tenure modernization. 
Earlier after the Nigeria Urban and Regional Planning Law Decree, No 88 of 1992 was promulgated, several states in the Southern part of Nigeria especially the Southwest (example Ondo, Lagos etc.) domesticated Urban and Regional Planning. The northern part of the country was still finding it difficult to domesticate the Urban and Regional Planning law owing to several reasons such as cultural believe and practice, lack or inadequate professional planners in the region, poor knowledge of the law among landowners and developers, political and administrative reasons etc.

       North-East Nigeria (formally called Gongola area) has been one of the least developed regions since independent (Abbas, 2002). Generally, both social and economic infrastructure was grossly inadequate or simply lacking while internally, the little available appear to be spatially concentrated in a few locations thereby creating the problems of the regional development process. The burden of physical planning, however, remained on the government (the first level of planning) to plan, implement and monitor development policies and programmes. These beacon for the need to domesticate Urban and Regional Planning in the region. Below are stated in the North East region and their status of Urban and Regional Planning domestication.
Gombe: Gombe state is yet to domesticate Urban and Regional Planning law in the state
Bauchi: Bauchi state is one of the states in Northern Nigeria that has been involved in Urban planning and development. It domesticated Urban and regional planning 2010 when the state passed into law the Bauchi state Urban Planning and development (Amendment) law, 2010/
Yobe: Urban and regional planning is not yet domesticated in Your state of the northeast.
Borno; Borno State Urban Planning and Development Board is considerably active in the state but the state is yet to domesticate planning law for the state.
Adamawa: Though there is a functional planning agency in the state (Adamawa State Urban Planning and Development Board (ASUPDB), the state is yet to domesticate Urban and regional planning.
Taraba: Taraba the state is also among the states in the north, not the domesticate the Urban and regional planning law.
The North West Nigeria accommodates most of the historic towns in the north. Some of the towns were long-established before and during the colonial era. There were recorded traditional planning practice in existence in those areas. However, almost all the state in the region fail to domesticate the Urban and Regional Planning Law. Below are the states in the region and its  status
Jigawa: Jigawa the state is yet to establish the Urban and regional planning law to guide it's planning affairs.
Kano: Kano state, despite it's historical and administrative background has still not pass the Urban and regional planning law
Kastina: Kastina state also is yet to pass the Urban and Regional Planning in her state
Kaduna: Kaduna State Urban Planning and Development Authority was established in 1985 via Edict No. 10 by the then Kaduna State Government. The Edict was repealed and replaced with Kaduna State Urban Planning and Development Agency Law No. 12 of 2015 and subsequently by the Kaduna State Urban and Regional Planning Law No. 31 of 2018. Kaduna state is one of the few states in the north to have domesticate Urban and Regional Planning.
Kebbi: Kebbi state has not domesticated Urban and Regional Planning Law
Zamfara: Urban and Regional Planning Law has not yet been able to domesticate in Zamfara state
Sokoto: The Sokoto State Urban Planning and Development Board has existed before the established in 1976 even before the enacting of the Nigerian Urban  and Regional Planning Law 1992, but the state is yet to domesticate the law for it's used.

The states in the North-central part of Nigeria and their urban and Regional Planning statue are discussed below
Niger: Niger state has a functional development board (Niger State Urban Development Board) but has not yet domesticated the Urban and Regional Planning Law in the state.
Benue: Benue the state is yet to domesticated Urban and Regional Planning Law in the state
Nassarawa: Nassarawa state has domesticated the Urban and Regional Planning Law described as 'Nassarawa State Urban Development Board law, 2009'.
Plateau: Plateau state is yet to enacting its own Urban and Regional Planning Law
Kogi: Kogi State Government has enacted the Urban and Regional Planning Law in 2010
Kwara: The Kwara state government has recently signed into law, Urban and Regional Planning law 2017. This makes the state to be among the few states that have domesticated the law
Abuja: Abuja being the Federal capital territory of Nigeria is operating under the Nigerian Urban and Regional Planning law of 1992.

It is observed that out of the nineteen (19) states in the northern region, only four (4) states (Bauchi, Kaduna, Kogi and Kwara) have domesticated the Urban and Regional Planning law. Among the six states in the North East only Bauchi is operating on her own planning law. Same with Kaduna in the North West out of the seven (7) states in the region, while in the North Central, Kogi and Kwara state have domesticated theirs.
The low percentage of states in the region to have domesticated the planning law could be attributed to lack of manpower     (professional practitioners), terrorism, low rate of development, political issues, administrative bottleneck, and lack or inadequate involvement of planning practitioners in policymaking. To this, I recommend that, the National Institute of Town Planners should strive in it powers to publicize the need for the establishment of the Urban and Regional Planning Law in each state and also encourage state governments on the need to involve planners in their decision making. 

Abbas Bashir, (2003); Regional Planning and Urban Infrastructure development in the Gongola region, North-Eastern Nigeria (1): Global Journal of social science,   vol. 2
Abdo, R. and Batzel, G. M. (2011) ‘Planning the modern Arab city: the case of Abu Dhabi’ in M. Page, and T. Mennel, (Eds.) Reconsidering Jane Jacob, PP. 105–117. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Afon, A. O. (2007) ‘An assessment of solid waste generation in a traditional African city: the example of Ogbomosho, Nigeria’, Environment & Urbanization, 19(2): 527–537.
Kaltho, J. B. (1985) Structure of the Principal laws guiding the practice of Urban and Regional in Nigeria. Course paper CP/02/6/85. Zaria: Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning, Ahmadu Bello University.
Santuraki, A. M. (2003) Analysis of Change for an effective Development Control in Traditional Housing Area: a case study of Yola. Unpublished MSc (URP) thesis, Ahm

Post a Comment