Analysis of the planning, functional, and volumetric-spatial organization of temporary settlements

Abstract

This article examines the experience of planning temporary settlements for the affected and displaced persons, evaluating global and domestic approaches. The analysis encompasses urban planning situations, volumetric-spatial, and functional-planning organization of temporary residential structures, defining typological characteristics and categorizing them. The main focus is on the functioning of temporary settlements using open, semi-open, and closed systems within the structure of habitation. The analysis of global practical experience reveals that at the urban planning level, temporary settlements constitute a structural and planning element primarily constrained by the population size and the potential use of existing service infrastructure. These indicators dictate the placement of this element (temporary settlement) within the settlement system and its functional purpose (transit or long-term settlements), consequently influencing the operational period (from a few months to half a year, up to 1 year, over 1 year, or indefinitely). The most common type is a settlement with a population capacity of up to 500 individuals, with the distinction of a residential zone as the main, and in some cases, the only zone (without the development of a public area or a common space core). Less widespread are settlements with a population capacity of over 500 to 1000 individuals, where a public center with facilities for domestic services, recreation, education, and work-related activities begins to form, mainly in the central core of the structure. An uncommon type of settlement is a residential structure with a capacity exceeding 1000 individuals, featuring the development of a comprehensive public center with a hierarchical network of sub-centers for social and domestic services and recreation, serving as nuclei for the formation of residential groups. Such settlements operate as closed self-servicing systems, meaning they are not dependent on functional connections with the community or the city within the settlement system. The planning aspects derived from global and Ukrainian experiences necessitate defining a temporary settlement as a new element in the urban planning system. Additionally, there is a need for further typological grouping of the reviewed examples of temporary settlements based on their interdependent developmental characteristics.