A multiscale classification of the urban morphology

Various studies in the field of urban planning and design have given recommendations for "good urban forms," suggesting that specific spatial characteristics inform the quality of an urban landscape and the way people perceive and behave in them. When modeling spatial behavior in the form of location choice models or hedonic prices, we should reflect these spatial characteristics through the integration of quantitative attributes such as model variables, which is currently only done in a very limited way. The increasing availability of disaggregated geodata enlarges the options to characterize urban morphology in the form of such attributes. The question for the researcher is which attributes are most useful to reflect characteristics of urban morphology and how can they be processed from the given data. In this paper, we want to address this issue and give an overview of quantitative descriptions of urban morphology. We base our work on a data model that is simple enough to allow for reproducibility in any study area. These attributes are classified in multiple scales to reflect different perceptions of urban morphology. In a case study on the canton of Zurich, we furthermore prove how these characteristics allow for the definition of urban typologies at different scales.

[1]  Bill Hillier,et al.  Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture , 1996 .

[2]  Brian W. Baetz,et al.  EVALUATING PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY FOR SUBURBAN SUSTAINABILITY , 2001 .

[3]  J. Jacobs.  The Death and Life of Great American Cities , 1962 .

[4]  Florian Heiss,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[5]  Yoko NISHIMURA,et al.  Google Earth , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[6]  Kara M. Kockelman,et al.  URBAN ACCESSIBILITY INDEX: LITERATURE REVIEW , 2000 .

[7]  M. Wachs,et al.  PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY AS A SOCIAL INDICATOR , 1973 .

[8]  Sonit Bafna,et al.  Space Syntax , 2003 .

[9]  Benjamin Dillenburger,et al.  A retrieval-system for building-plots , 2010 .

[10]  D. T. Lee,et al.  Medial Axis Transformation of a Planar Shape , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[11]  John P. Wilson,et al.  Terrain analysis : principles and applications , 2000 .

[12]  J. A. Hartigan,et al.  A k-means clustering algorithm , 1979 .

[13]  Stephen Marshall,et al.  街道与形态 (Streets and patterns) , 2004 .

[14]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[15]  Ulf Wuggenig,et al.  An Urban Space: , 2018, The Woman on the Windowsill.

[16]  Chandra R. Bhat,et al.  Operationalizing the Concept of Neighborhood: Application to Residential Location Choice Analysis , 2007 .

[17]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Modelling the Choice of Residential Location , 1977 .

[18]  Michael Batty,et al.  Planning Support Systems: Progress, Predictions, and Speculations on the Shape of Things to Come , 2007 .

[19]  Michael A.B. van Eggermond,et al.  The role of location in residential location choice models: a review of literature , 2014 .

[20]  Jennifer Dill.  Measuring Network Connectivity for Bicycling and Walking , 2004 .

[21]  W. G. Hansen.  How Accessibility Shapes Land Use , 1959 .

[22]  Yan Song,et al.  New urbanism and housing values: a disaggregate assessment , 2003 .

[23]  Jorge Gil,et al.  On the discovery of urban typologies: data mining the many dimensions of urban form , 2011, Urban Morphology.

[24]  Susan L Handy,et al.  Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability , 2009 .

[25]  Euskadi. Servicio de Cartografía.  Corine Land Cover , 2012 .

[26]  K. Lynch.  Good city form , 1984 .

[27]  B. Hillier,et al.  The social logic of space: The logic of space , 1984 .

[28]  C. Clark.  Urban Population Densities , 1951 .

[29]  Yan Song,et al.  Quantitative analysis of urban form: a multidisciplinary review , 2008 .