School siting in Riverstone
Riverstone has 420,000 people and is growing by 4.5% a year. About 38% of residents live in Nyundo, an informal settlement on the floodplain of the River Kavi. Nyundo has 700 pupils walking to the nearest secondary school, which is already 400 pupils over its 1,600-place capacity. The city must build one new 1,200-place secondary school. Site A is a 1.2 ha brownfield plot near the main bus station; it is served by sewer and water but lies 150 m from a chemical depot and has no playing field. Site B is 3 ha of greenfield land on the edge of the city; it is 35 minutes by bus from Nyundo, has no sewer connection, and would need a new access road costing £900,000. Site C is 1.8 ha next to Nyundo, donated by a church; it is within walking distance of 700 pupils but has poor drainage and is on the floodplain, flooded in 2018 and 2022. The city has £12 million for land and construction. Parents say travel cost is their main concern; teachers say flood risk and overcrowding are theirs.
1. Recommend one site using access, cost and hazard criteria. Show your trade-offs.
Read the worked answer
Site C is the best compromise if flood risk can be engineered. Access: 700 pupils can walk, saving bus fares that parents say are their main concern; A and B require travel, and B is 35 minutes by bus. Cost: C's land is donated, leaving more of the £12m for construction; B adds £900,000 for access and sewer. Hazard: C flooded in 2018 and 2022, so a standard building is unacceptable. Mitigation would include raising the ground floor above the 2022 flood level, improving drainage, and keeping the ground floor as storage/assembly rather than classrooms. If the flood level cannot be reliably estimated, choose B despite higher cost, because a school that closes in floods fails its purpose. A is too small (1.2 ha), has no playing field and is near a chemical depot, so it fails safety and space criteria. Recommend C conditional on a flood-risk assessment and a funded drainage scheme; otherwise B.
2. Explain why relocating Nyundo residents to formal housing on the city edge may not solve the problem.
Read the worked answer
Relocation moves people away from livelihoods, not just housing. Many Nyundo residents work in the central informal economy, and a move to the edge would raise commuting costs and time; the setup already shows 60% of workers commute over 90 minutes, so further peripheral relocation worsens that. Formal housing may also be unaffordable for households that currently pay little or no rent, so some would sell or sublet and return to informal land, recreating the problem. Social networks, schools and clinics would be disrupted, and the new estate might lack transport and jobs, creating a dormitory. For school planning, moving 700 pupils away from Nyundo could reduce pressure on a Nyundo school but increase it elsewhere, and the city still needs 2,400 secondary places against 1,600 existing. A better approach is in-situ upgrading with drainage and tenure, plus school capacity where people already live. Relocation can be part of a package only if it includes affordable housing, transport and livelihood support.
3. Suggest one policy that links school planning with transport and land use.
Read the worked answer
Adopt a 'walkable school catchment' policy: the city prioritises new school sites within 1.5 km of the largest unserved housing areas and requires safe walking/cycling routes, crossings and lighting before opening. For Nyundo, that means Site C or a split-site solution, with a subsidised school bus only for pupils beyond walking distance. Pair it with mixed-use zoning around the school so shops and services locate nearby, reducing the need for long trips. Fund the bus from a congestion levy or developer contributions, and monitor school attendance, travel time and cost. The policy links land use (school location), transport (safe routes and bus) and social equity (access for poor households). It also prevents the common mistake of building a school on cheap edge land that then requires expensive busing. Set targets: 80% of pupils within 20 minutes' walk, and no school requiring a bus journey over 30 minutes.