05 alan cadavos - theories of urban growth and urban land us [compatibility mode]

7/25/2019 05 Alan Cadavos - Theories of Urban Growth and Urban Land Us [Compatibility Mode]

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/05-alan-cadavos-theories-of-urban-growth-and-urban-land-us-compatibility 1/39

Theories ofTheories ofr anr an

and Urbanand Urbanan sean se



Theories of Urban Growth andTheories of Urban Growth andUrban Land UseUrban Land Use

School of Urban Sociology)

Concentric Ring Model (Ernest W.Burgess, US)Concentric Zone Model (Peter Mann, UK)

Hoyt)Multiple Nuclei Model (Edward Ullmanan auncy arr sGalactic City (Peirce F. Lewis)

Inverse Concentric Zone Third WorldCountries)Latin American Model



Ke uestionsKe uestions

ow can we un ers an a c y

Is it a natural evolution? Is it a chaos not guided by any underlying

reason?

How is the urban landscape formed?How is the cit structured b economic andsocial forces?

What are the resultin land uses as a resultof urban structuring?



Urban structure – How is place put

one another?Urban Spatial

i2

Administrative Divisions Urban Form Structure

i1

i4

i6

Land Use

L1

L2

3

L4



Human Ecology (Chicago School ofHuman Ecology (Chicago School of

Six processes at work in the citySix processes at work in the city

Roderick D. McKenzie, Amos H. Hawley, Robert Park, Everett Hughes– applied the principles of evolution and natural history to study socialbehaviorInvasion — traditionally, a process through which a new activity or

Succession — a new use or social group gradually replaces the formeroccupants

Se re ation — the sortin out of o ulation rou s accordin to

conscious preferences for associating with one group or anotherthrough bias and prejudice Assimilation and Accommodation – diverse social groups find a modeof peaceful co-existence

oncen ra on — eren a s r u on o popu a on an econom cactivities in a city, and the manner in which they have focused on thecenter of the city

Decentralization — the location of activity away from the central city--of declineSurvival of the fittest -- Cities evolve through a process of survival bydifferent communities in which the most powerful groups acquire thebest locations and weaker rou s make do with the remainin s ace.Most valuable land goes to those functions which can maximize use of

space and are willing to pay the costs



Concentric Ring TheoryConcentric Ring Theory –– Ernest W. BurgessErnest W. Burgess(1925)(1925)

The theory representing American city firstsuggested by American sociologist Ernest W.Bur ess Human Ecolo based on reflectiveanalysis of the growth of Chicago over a periodof 50 years (1875-1925)

Before the 1870s, cities such as New York hadm xe ne g or oo s w ere merc an s s oresand sweatshop factories were intermingledwith mansions and hovels. Rich and poor,immi rant and native-born rubbed shoulders

in the same neighborhoodsIn Chicago, Burgess’s home town, the greatfire of 1871 leveled the core. The result ofre u ng was a more exp c soc a pa ern ngChicago became a segregated city with aconcentric patternThis was the cit Bur ess used for his modelThe actual map of the residential area does notexactly match his simplified concentric zonesThis is an application of Von Thünen’s theory tour an areas



High-income Residential

Middle-income Residential

Concentric RingTheor Bur ess

Blue-Collar ResidentialModel, 1925)

hypothetical pattern of land use within an

Slums

CBD

ur an area, n w c erent act v t es occurat different distances from the urban center.

The result is a sequence of rings. Towns

so that each zone grows by gradualcolonization into the next outer ring.In addition, the cost of land may decreasew t ncrease stance rom t e c ty centeras demand for it falls. This means thatcommercial agents that can afford high landvalues will be concentrated in the cit center.

Ring TheoryRing Theory

A city extends radially from its center, toform concentric zones and that as distance

from the center increases, there would be are uc on n access y, ren an ens es.A series of 5 concentric rings divide the cityinto five zones



Concentric Ring Theory, 1925Concentric Ring Theory, 1925

Zone 1 The central business district (CBD) Distinct pattern of income levels out to the commuters’ zone Extension of trolley lines had a lot to do with this pattern)

Zone 2 Characterized by mixed pattern of industrial and residential land use Rooming houses, small apartments, and tenements attract the lowest income segment

O ten inc u es s ums an s i rows, many et nic g ettos egan ere Usually called the transition zone

Zone 3 The “workingmen’s quarters”; Solid blue-collar, located close to factories of zones 1 and 2 More stable than the transition zone around the CBD

O ten c aracterize y et nic neig or oo s — oc s o immigrants w o ro e ree rom

the ghettos Spreading outward because of pressure from transition zone and because blue-collar

workers demand better housingZone 4

e c ass area o e er ous ng Established city dwellers, many of whom moved outward with the first streetcar network Commute to work in the CBD

Zone 5 Consists of higher-income families clustered together in older suburbs

oca e e er on e ar es ex ens on o e ro ey or commu er ra roa nes Spacious lots and large houses From here the rich pressed outward to avoid congestion and social heterogeneity caused by

expansion of zone 4



Concentric Ring Theory, 1925Concentric Ring Theory, 1925

Model Chicago, years ‘20

LOOPGhetto

Two Plan

Area

c k B e l t

BungalowSection

Residential District

B l a

IV – working class area

V – residential area

I - Loop (downtown; CBD)

II – industries

VI – suburban areaIII – transition area



Critique of Concentric Ring TheoryCritique of Concentric Ring Theory

ven oug por ons o eac zone ex s ,rarely were they linked to totally surround thecity; Burgess countered there were distinctbarriers, such as old industrial centers, preventingt e comp et on o t e arcCritics felt that Burgess, as a sociologist,

overemphasized residential patterns and did notgive proper credit to other land uses, ignoredphysical features, took little account of industrialand railway use, and disregarded the effect ofradial routes upon land values and usesLand uses within man arts of the urban areaare heterogeneous – shops, offices, factories, andhousing may all be located close to each otheralthough they may have notionally different sitesand locational re uirementsThere maybe many possible locations for differentactivities which do not conform to idealized modelAccessibility is an important consideration forman uses es eciall housin and commercialusesNeglected the possibility of sites being purchasedfor future development with current use being at

-hoarding)



Concentric Zone Model (Peter Mann,Concentric Zone Model (Peter Mann,

Peter Mann took Burgess's

, ,

with his own to typify a

British City in 1965.e ase s mo e on

studies of Sheffield,Nottin ham and

Huddersfield.Urban area should be large

internal differentiation, but

not too large to exhibit thecomplexities of a conurbationMain feature: commuter

up areas



Sector or Radial Model (HomerSector or Radial Model (Homer

Homer Hoyt, an economist, presented his sector model in 1939

Hoyt, 1Hoyt, 1based on 142 American cities. He had the advantage of writinglater than Burgess — in the age of the automobile

relates accessibility (transport), land use and land valuesrecognizes the influence of lines of transportation-communication on land usecities tended to grow in wedge-shaped patterns -- or sectors --emanating from the CBD, growth occurring along majortransport routesHigher levels of access meant higher land values, thus, manycommercial functions would remain in the CBD butmanufacturing functions would develop in a wedge surroundingtransport routes.suggests that various socio-economic groups expand outwardfrom the CBD along railroads, highways, seaports, tramlines,and other transport arteries and that each socio-economic class

creates relatively homogenous use zones that extend outwardsfrom the center.Growth along a particular axis/way follows the dominant landuses already prevailing; their patterns are reinforced bytransportationMoving away from major transport routes, rents go from high to

lowCompatible land uses lay adjacent to each other; incompatibleland uses repel each other.



Sector

2 3

Sector or RadialSector or Radial3

13

o e omero e omerHo t 1939Ho t 1939 4

3

1 CBD2 Wholesale & light manufacturing3 Low-class residential4 Middle-class residential5 High-class residential6 Heavy manufactur ing7 Sub business district8 Residential suburb

n us r a su ur



Sector or Radial Model (Homer Hoyt, 1939)Sector or Radial Model (Homer Hoyt, 1939)Hoyt's model attempts to broadly state principles of urban

Sector

organization. His observations:Wealthy residents choose to live where they could afford to, eg.services etc.Wealthy residents use their cars as transport from home to

2

43

3work and vice versa thereby living farther from industry butclose to main roads.

high-rent districts for the wealthy are instrumental in shapingland-use structure of the city;

3 53

13as wealthy sector tends to locate farthest away from factories,the middle-class would occupy these areas, drawing on theirpast prestige. Middle-rent areas move directly next to high-rentareas.High-rent sector would expand according to four factors along established routes of travel, toward another nucleus of high-

rent buildings toward high ground or along waterfronts, when these areas are not

along the route of fastest transportation toward open space

commercial establishments tend to be along business

thorou hfaresResidential functions would grow in wedge-shaped patternswith a sector of low-income housing borderingmanufacturing/industrial sectors (traffic, noise, and pollutionmakes these areas least desirableLow-rent areas fill in the remaining areas

Low-income households tend to be near railroad lines.



Critique of Sector or Radial ModelCritique of Sector or Radial Model

Used Chicago as a model, an upper classresidential sector evolved outward along the

central business district, while industryextended southward in sectors that followedrailroad lines.Few zones or urban clusters can be said to behomogenous socio-economically.Many transport routes today are surrounded

-

Freeways are today’s major transport routes,yet these did not develop spontaneously butwere im osed on existin urban attern.Freeways were built through low-rent areaswhere land was cheaper and political

opposition was less. ,villages or middle-class subdivisionsproliferate, such that it cannot be claimed thatonl the elite can afford to live far awa fromthe city



Axial Model (Transport Model based on Axial Model (Transport Model based onHomer Hoyt’s Sector Model)Homer Hoyt’s Sector Model)

Travel time rather than

important determinant

of land useTakes into account theeffect of route ways for

Major roads radiatefrom center of town

ommerc adevelopment follows

trans ort routesresulting in Star-shapedpattern of land use



Multiple Nuclei ModelMultiple Nuclei Model

man an arr s,man an arr s,Proposed by Chauncey Harris and EdwardUllman in 1945 Initiall related to UScities where the gridiron road patternsseparated land uses geometrically

A city develops with equal intensityaroun var ous po n sThe CBD was not the sole generator ofchange; urban growth takes place around

A city grows from several independentpoints rather than from one centralbusiness district. Each point acts as agrow cen er or a par cu ar n o anuse, such as industry, retail, or high-quality housing. As these expand, they

The multiple-nuclei is the mostcomplicated of urban land-use models andgives some insight into the growth ofc t es n t e eve op ng wor .



Multi le Nuclei ModelMulti le Nuclei Model(Ullman and Harris, 1945)(Ullman and Harris, 1945)

Certain activities require highly specialized facilities retail district with need for accessibility

port with need for waterfront Factor with need for accessible trans ortationCertain activities cluster because they profit from mutualassociation Profitability of agglomeration (retail districts for concentration of

customers, finance for ease of communication, etc.) Certain activities repe eac ot er an wi not e oun in t e

same area E.g. factories and high class residential, Schools and Red-light district

Certain activities could not make a profit if they paid the highrent o t e most es ra e ocat ons Housing tract with need for large areas of open land

Equal weight must be given to: An old community on city outskirts around which new suburbsc us ere An industrial district that grew from an original waterfront location Low-income area that began because of some social stigma attached

to site



Ullman & Harris ‘multipleUllman & Harris ‘multiple--nuclei’ nuclei’

Sector Nuclei

2 3 3

3

13

2

4 5

3

4

3

36

89

1 CBD2 Wholesale and l ight manufactur ing3 Low-class residential4 Middle-class residential

6 Heavy manufactur ing7 Sub business district8 Residential suburb9 Industrial suburb

5 High-class residential



TheoryTheoryman an arr s,man an arr s,

1945)1945)

--

or Multior Multi--NodalNodal



Galactic City: PGalactic City: Peieirce F.rce F.

ew sew s

leapfrog development

nucleations resemble a galaxyof stars and planets some ofthe nucleations become cities

– Edge cities are analogous CBDs of

newly emerging urban centers

ring that surround older centralcity

Doughnut like, because centeris kept at very low density,w r v y r u

along ring roads.



Hybrid Model by Walter IsardHybrid Model by Walter Isard

(1955)(1955)Combines the stren thsof the Concentric, Sector,and Zonal Models of

This model illustratesthat some urban land

major transport axis(sectors), while others,

commercial, are locatedin nuclei where they

agglomerationeconomies. The urban

overlay of differenttransport effects



Inverse Concentric ModelInverse Concentric Model

It is not true that the rich are moving away from the central city as inBurgess’ Concentric ModelIt is the poor who are moving away from the Central City.Elite keeps its stranglehold of Central City

social status declines with increasing distance from the center



Inverse Concentric ModelInverse Concentric Model ,

concentric pattern where the elite andupperclass reside in central areas. Centeris more desirable than suburbs

center of the city and declines withincreasing distance from the center.

Reversal of concentric zone model of

from central city, it is the poor who aremoving away from central city.Cities where this pattern exist are mostly

primarily administrative and/or religiouscenters (or were at the time of theirfounding)

the elite class

low income families live on the peripheryReasons for this pattern: the lack of an ade uate and de endable

transportation system restricts the eliteto the center of the city so they can be closeto their places of work

the functions of the city (administrative,,

and concentrated in the center of the city



Urban Patterns inUrban Patterns in

by Terry G. McGeeby Terry G. McGee

azaar

CityColoniali

Planned



e ro an ae ro an a



• More complex because

cultures on urban

development into one or twocomprehensive models

• enera ze sc eme

has to be bothsensitive to localcultures and toarticulate pervasive

influence ofinternational forces,both Western and

-



Latin American modelLatin American model



Latin American modelLatin American model “ ”y e s e cu ura norm n a n mer ca. os peop e ve nprimate cities. (11.43d) Most jobs are in downtown. People live in city or in edges and commute

to work. They rely on public transit from the central city , ,

specialized Latin American cities have two parts - modernized CBD and traditional

“market” segment of small, street-oriented business and shops. These

“Spine” - continuation of the features of the city center outward along themain wide boulevard (upper-middle-class housing) - connecting to themall (at the end of the elite commercial spine). Essentially an extensionof the CBD down a ma or boulevard

The relatively affluent population live closest to CBD

Outside the CBD, the dominant component is a commercial spinesurrounded by the elite residential sector Here are the city’s important amenities — parks, theaters, restaurants,

an even go courses Strict zoning and land controls ensure continuation of these activities,

protecting elite from incursions by low-income squatters A ring highway ( periferico) - connect the mall and developing industrial

Three established residential districts arranged in concentric rings aroundthe core.

Opposite of many US cities.



Latin American modelLatin American model-

Less prestigious collection of traditional colonial homesand upgraded self-built homes

Homes occu ied b eo le unable to artici ate in thespine/sector

Area of upward mobilityZone of accretion

verse co ec on o ous ng ypes, s zes, an qua y Transition between zone of maturity and next zone Area of ongoing construction and change Some nei hborhoods have cit - rovided utilities Other blocks must rely on water and butane delivery

trucks for essential services

Barrios and Favelas (slums) - on the outskirts of the city. “ ”times are good.



Zone of peripheral squatter settlements Where most recent migrants are found Fringe contrasts with affluent and comfortable suburbs that ring North

American cities

Houses often built from scavenged materials Surrounded by landscape bare of vegetation that was cut for fuel and

building materials Streets unpaved, open trenches carry wastes, residents carry water

“ ” Residents who work have a long commute

Many are transformed through time into permanent neighborhoods



American cities

opportunities for commerce & services.Second: the sur e of ma uiladoras

(industry) reorganize the urban structureand started competing with commerce &services for location near the bridges.Third: the transition from a monocentric to

y r y.



Synthesis: Forces shaping a CitySynthesis: Forces shaping a City

Centripetal -- Pull forces of the city Clustering of certain functions Maximum accessibility

threshold population Proximity of residence to range of entertainments

Prestige of central address Hu e urban-rural wa e differentials --Ver low ruralincomes versus better paying jobs in cities

Better quality urban services and facilities Possibility of publicly subsidized goods and services Lure of “bright lights

us orces rom rura owar s e c y Wars and civil strife Natural calamities Difficult access to land

Price of agricultural inputs and outputs manipulated

by tradersCentrifugal or Push Forces from the city Congestion Restrictions on city centre developments Lack of space

S f U b G hS f U b G h



Stages of Urban GrowthStages of Urban Growth age o xpor pec a za on: e oca economy s

centered on one principal industry/product/firm.Examples: Natural resource towns, Tourist towns

related products and/or expands to other facets of the

production of this single industry/product/firm.

Stage of Economic Maturation (Local Service SectorPuberty): The local economy replaces imports with local

.

Stage of Regional Metropolis: When the city serves as a nodefor travel, products, etc. from nearby cities, and now exports.

followed by theStage of National/International Metropolis)

Exam les: Atlanta in 1960sStage of Technical/Professional Virtuosity : National eminencein some specialized skill.

Exam les: Detroit Los An eles

h Ci i G ( ’ G )



Why Cities Grow (or Don’t Grow)

• What factors can actto limit urbangrowth?

1) Failure ofMomentum

2) Competition

3) Lack of NaturalAdvantages ac o u va e

Talent/Urban

5) Economic

‘P t‘P t I d t i l Citi ’ i th A fI d t i l Citi ’ i th A f



‘Post ‘Post--Industrial Cities’ in the Age ofIndustrial Cities’ in the Age of--

The phenomenon of ‘de-industrialization’ in historic cities inEurope and North America witnesses the decline of industries,closure of dirty factories and their relocation to remote regionsor to Third World countries – consistent with the internationaldivision of labor (NIEO) conceptualized by neo-liberaleconomics. (Clarification: “Neo-liberal” in USA is called “Neo-

Conservative” in UK) (Population Explosion) combined to create the Post-industrialsociety which is organized around knowledge and innovation.ICTs have implication for spatial organization of all humanactivities; they allow people to work in urban peripheries or atome o ces; ey cause e so-ca e ann a on o space.

Use of computer, internet, and transport technology is changingproduction dramatically.City economies are dominated by tertiary (service), quaternary(finance, information and knowledge), quinary (pleasuretechnologies) sectors that can cater to large markets.emergence of information-processing technologies that requirea highly skilled, intellectual, creative, and imaginative laborforce; preeminence of the professional and technical class.

little benefits for displaced workers in manufacturing sector andthose who are unskilled.Dominant city form is the sprawling extended metropolitanregion without clearly defined urban edges – which tends to New York City’s

. entra ar



‘ ’ ‘ ’

Edge or Fringe Cities are alternate CBDs in urban peripheriesand these are ainin on older central cities. Ca ital andskilled people are moving away from historic central cities.Former functions of historic central cities are now distributed

to multiple urban nodes or Edge Cities , -Parks, technology parks or techno-poles. Most have 5 millionsq ft of office, 600,000 sq ft of retail and more jobs thanbedroomsFinancial Globalization, Firm re-structuring (streamlining,

rationalization, break-ups and mergers), fragmentation ofproduction (business process re-engineering), and neo-

, - , ,de-bureaucratization -- all contribute to deconcentrationaway from historic central cities.

Thus historic central cities become vulnerable to cycles ofinvestment and dis-investment. They have to be deliberatelyre-developed to avoid economic collapse as in the “donutshape model” of Peirce Lewis.

b h ff b ilb i h db h ff b ilb i h d



Urban Ratchet Effect by Wilbur RichardUrban Ratchet Effect by Wilbur Richard

Once cities reach a certain size (250,000), they will not experiencemajor population losses. Areas of the city will age and decline andneighborhoods may suffer, but the urban area will see a shift in thespatial location of population, jobs, etc., not an absolute loss. How

could this be?1. Industrial Diversification: Large cities have an economy that is broad

u r v r r u .2. Political Power : Large cities have enough political power to demand and

receive aid locally, regionally, and nationally.

. .4. Customers Drive Firm Location: In the service economy, firms will not

relocate from large populations. People are now seen as a local naturalresource.

5. Large Areas have More Entrepreneurship: The sheer size of a

population guarantees more opportunities for new products, firms, etc.



..

The concept of “optimum size ofcit ”City must be large enough to takeinvestment decisions of an economic

size to have a common approach toan awareness o s pro emsMust contain at least one growthpole;

industry with necessary laborShould have a homogenouseconomic structure

n mum s ze: , o ,inhabitantsCity should have limit on population

Maximum would be equilibrium pointwhere costs/benefits meetspopulation size.

05 alan cadavos - theories of urban growth and urban land us [compatibility mode]

Documents