Table 15: Potential for construction

Table 14: Potential for construction

Description vacant lots= assumption average area -900

ward ward 11 ward 8 ward 9 average casastral value number 37 184 18 17 184 18

area 33300 165600 16200 3254 3352 2610 total area 215100

total cadastral value total VALUE

108358200 538862400 54302400 701523000 3261.381 NOTE

Source: Estimates made by the authors based on cadastral data available on smart data cities website. Using Trend analysis, the following study was carried out and prices were predicted.

Financial prefeasibility.

One way of doing the financial prefeasibility analysis of value capture is to evaluate whether it can cover the costs of the intervention. Given that one of the objectives of these case studies is to assess the potential value capture to finance urban interventions, in this way, we will analyse whether the valorization is lower than, equal to or higher than the costs of the intervention

Table 15 shows that a payment of only 0.71% of the total value of the stock of land and buildings (line I) would cover the Program’s total cost. Similarly, valorization generated by the project is considerably superior to the Program’s estimated costs.Total valorization and 2.6% of the valorization expected during the first five years of the Program.

These results demonstrate the viability of financing the Program’s interventions using a value capture instrument that allows cost recovery and could also provide additional revenues to finance other infrastructure projects necessary for the city’s development.

We need to estimate the total value of new construction generated by the Program’s interventions in each of Section within the impact area. The first step is to use cadastral data to estimate the total land area with potential for construction of new buildings in each Section. We assume that all new building construction will be about 900sq stand data about number of vacant lot is obtained from data smart cities website.