Chapter 11

Urban Systems & Urban Structures

20th century: urbanization process

• 1900: – only 13 cities worldwide > 1,000,000

• 2000: – 411 metropolitan areas > 1,000,000– 19 megacities > 10,000,000

• 2015 projection: – 564 “million cities”

Urban dwellers: proportion increasing

• Differs from continent to continent

• Megacities are increasing

• Mid-size cities are rapidly growing

Conurbations

• Megalopolis – – two large metropolises

merging • Boston to Washington D.C.• Milwaukee/Chicago/Detroit/

Pittsburg• San Diego/Los

Angeles/Santa Barbara

Megalopolis & conurbations

Metropolitan areas of 3 million or more in 2005

Average annual urban population growth rates 1995-2000

Percentage of populationthat is urban or projected to be by 2025

How did urbanization begin?

• First small settlements – villages• 1. temporary markets • 2. permanent markets • 3. development along transport corridor

• Villages transition to urban developments• Trade develops• Not only subsistence existence• Clustering of houses along main road• Become part of system

– ‘system of cities”

Settlement patterns

• Nucleated settlements• Most of world• Village, communal

• Rurally separated, individual

• Only Anglo-American, Northwestern Europe, Australia, New Zealand

Indian rural community

Nepalese summer villageZulu village South Africa

There are many variations of cities

Nature of cities

• Oldest mark of civilization• From 6,000 years, developed around cultural hearths

• Characteristics (functions)• 1. economic base• 2. all part of larger society/economy

– Part of “system of cities”• 3. orderly internal organization of land uses social groups

economic function• 4. experience problems of land use social conflict

environmental concerns

Urban areas provide:

– Retailing – Wholesaling– Manufacturing– Professional services– Government – Personal services

– Entertainment – Political services– Military services – Education – Religion – Transportation

Terms

• Central city – official boundaries of main city surrounded by suburbs

• Urbanized area – continuously built-up landscape

• defined by building & population densities, not political boundaries (physical city)

• Metropolitan area – large scale functional entity

• Urbanized areas operating as integrated economic whole

Terms

• Urban – nucleated, non-agricultural settlements

• Ranging from very small to large

• Town/city – CBD, residential, non-residential uses

• Suburb – subsidiary area, functionally specified

• Not self-sufficient

Defining urbanization

• MSA – metropolitan statistical area– 50,000> major population center/city– 100,000 if no major city

• Two types of counties in the U.S.– metropolitan, non-metropolitan– Over 3,000 counties in the U.S.– 350 + are MSAs

Where are cities located?

• Strategic spots– Ports– River locations– Break-of-bulk points

Function of cities

• Economic Base– Basic sector

• “export” activities, brings in revenue• diversified economy is desirable

– Non-basic sector• Internal functions

Growth & decline in metropolitan areas, 1990-2000

Functional classification

• 1. transportation centers• Sea coasts, rivers, canals, railways

• 2. special function cities• Mining, manufacturing, agglomeration

economies, tourist/recreation

• 3. central places• Rural service, trade functions

Urban hierarchyranking of cities

• First order city – NYC (world city)• Second order cities – Los Angeles,

Chicago• Third order cities – San Francisco,

Houston, Washington D.C.

Top of hierarchy – world citiesNYC London Tokyo

• These cities provide organization & management of global system of finance– Dominate control points:

• 1. international production • 2. international marketing • 3. international finance

• Secondary world cities:– Osaka, Rhine-Ruhr, Chicago, Paris, Frankfurt,

Zurich

Rankings

• Rank-size rule – usually complex economies, urbanized– 1/nth the size of the largest city

• (second largest city = ½ largest city)

• Primate city – often developing countries– more than twice the size of 2nd ranked city– often no obvious “second city”

Bangkok, Thailand

Missouri, USA

Primate city evolution

Central Place TheoryWalter Christaller

• 1. towns of the same size (functional level) will be evenly spread

• 2. larger towns (higher-order places) will be further apart than smaller ones

• “threshold” = • higher farther to travel for product/service/entertainment• lower is much closer

Threshold points

• Range: maximum distance customers will travel– Highest order good: 2 million population– Lowest order: gas stations, grocery, 1 mile or <

• Hierarchical marginal good– Cut off point, next city down doesn’t have– “breaking point”

• Threshold of 500 people– Boom at 1,000 population– Cluster of services

Complementary regions and the pattern of central places

Internal structure of cities

• American cities– First cities:

• Intense land use: compact, high residential & structural density

• Walking cities/later mass transit, but limited range of accessible land

• Sharp demarcation between urban/rural• Transportation lines radiated out, dictating development

High density housing, Brooklyn NY

Land bidding

• Land accessibility, based on economics– Transportation convergence lines – center– Transit junctions– Along transit lines

• Location factors: – Stores: near customers, easily reached– Factories: near workers, materials, resources, supply lines– Residents: connect to jobs, transit lines, stores, schools

Changing landscape: rail lines to freeways

1872 Boston 1994

CBDcentral business district

• Peak-Land value intersection – most costly location of the CBD, most accessible by mass transit

• 1. widest variety of goods/services• 2. highest order of goods• 3. expensive rent

– High value products/services– Small space

• Jewelry• Finance

– Development of office towers = build up

Transition/fringe zone• 1. low income residential

• high density• Immigrants – succession invasion

• 2. whole sale businesses• 3. light industries

• textiles• Bus depots, cargo routes, transients

• Low density residences • Agricultural – intensive farming, dairy

Models of urban land-use

• All models have CBD• A framing core/fringe area• Residential land-use

Concentric Zone Model – 1920s

• CBD• Wholesale, light manufacturing• A zone in transition, deteriorating older

houses– high density, immigrants, low-income slums

• A zone of independent working people – blue collar, second generation Americans

• Single family homes, high-rent apts• Commuter’s zone, low density

• Sector Model– Develops along major transportation lines

• High-rent housing– Low-income housing along manufacturing districts– “filtering down” system

• Multiple-Nuclei Model

– Large cities develop from several nodes– Distinct high-rise development– Independent

Sector Models

Social areas of cities

• In hunter-gather societies identified with tribe/families

• Today we sort ourselves/ find where we fit by several variables

Social status

• 1. income• 2. education (years of schooling)• 3. occupation• 4. house value/rent• 5. home ownership

Family

• 1. gender• 2. marital status• 3. number of children• 4. age• 5 household size (extended family)

• Usually as distance increases from city center, adult residents age gets younger (land is cheaper for families)

Ethnicity

• *sometimes this is a more important determinant than social or family status

• Race > • ethnicity (culture) > • country of origin > • language/dialect > • religion

Social space of American & Canadian cities

Institutional controls

• 1. land-use planning• 2. subdivision control• 3. zoning ordinances• 4. building, health, safety codes

Suburbanization

• Development of the automobile• Acceptance of 40-hour work week• Federal Housing Administration established

• Guaranteed creditors security of mortgage loans• Veterans benefits • “baby boom” – demand for housing exploded 1950-1970

• Interstate Highway system • Late 1950s to 1996• Assembly-line, fordism• By end of 1930s, a national network of paved roads

Resulting patterns

• Metropolitanization (urbanized)

• Suburbanization

• 1970s: developers converted open land @ 200 acres per hour

• End of 1990s: 50 acres and fill in

History of urban sprawl

Suburbanization & landscape

• Unfocused sprawl – no constraints• Mass transit lines defined location, roads = no form• Massive relocation of retail business

• “edge cities” • 5 million sq. ft. of office space/ 500,000 sq. ft. of retail• Built on fringe of central city• Development of self-sufficiency• Basic sector developed: generators of employment/income

• Today’s suburbs: gaining independence from central city residents are self-contained, no ties to central city

Gated communities

Unfocused urban sprawlLas Vegas

Central city change

• Eastern American cities• Confined & central city urban decay

• Western American cities• Huge, expanding urban sprawl, auto-culture

• Redistribution of population• Younger, wealthy, higher-educated – moved to suburbs (more space & cheaper land)• Older, poorer, least-advantaged – remained in central city

• Spatial mis-match• Low-paying, low skill jobs in suburbs, McDonalds, retail, service jobs• Immigrants, unskilled workers in central city ghettos, neighborhoods

• Inner city abandoned• Private investors gone• Loss of tax base to inner city with out-migration of wealthy residents• Housing Act of 1949 – to initiate urban renewal• Massive clearance of slums reduced housing for poor

Public housing

• 1950s & 60s • Concentrated

poverty• Apartments

abandoned– Vandalism– High crime rates 2 miles long development

28 identical 16-story buildings4321 apartmentsAll but 2 demolished in 2004

Chicago

Changing prospect of central cities in 1990s

• Two factors:– Revised economic

opportunity/employment

– Residential for young & trendy, affluent, educated, home seekers - gentrification

Central cities revitalized

• Metropolitan cores provide:• Telecommunication• Investors, • Skilled labor• Research • Education

• Attractive to economic centralizing market• Knowledge base• Finance• Entertainment• Health care• Corporate management

Key factors

• 1. by direct funding from governments• 2. by influx of 15 million new immigrants

(1980-2000) into “gateway” cities – increasing urban labor force

• 3. gentrification – rehabilitation of housing in oldest, deteriorated inner-city

• Gravity & multiplier effect

Trends of cities today

• Western cities:– Problems of unfocused urban sprawl

– No restrictions on growth – No infrastructure $$$ (police & fire depts, schools, water

facilities, sewage)

• Solutions for both Eastern & Western cities– Increasingly restricted physical growth– Diverting some $$$ from highway spending to

mass transit– Resisting expansion of freeways/highways

World cities

• Canadian city (more European style)– More compact (higher

density)– Less suburbanization– More service/ more

dependent on rapid transit

– Higher proportion of foreign born

– Inner city core maintained

Toronto

Western European cities

• Pattern imprints date back to Roman times – Remnants of older

development, just like East Coast U.S. cities

– Irregular systems of narrow streets

– Main streets radiate from city center

– Circumferential “ring roads”

– From Renaissance ideals

Paris

Western European cities

• Not inner core deterioration; Not: “succession/invasion”– outskirts/fringe : immigrants, public housing groups

• Characteristics: – broad throughfares, public parks, plazas, compact (occupy less

land than U.S. cities), most are apt. dwellers, front/side/back yards are rare, developed for pedestrians

• City skylines are low– predates steel frames & elevators (Paris: 3-5 stories)

• Lifestyles: work is close; walking; bicycling– auto is not as important

Eastern European citiesCommunist period 1945-1990

• Ideals:– Limited size for cities– Internal structure of neighborhood equality/self-

sufficiency– Strict land use/segregation

• Characteristics:• compact city, high density, apt. dwelling, dependence

upon public transportation, sharp break between urban/rural land, central cultural district (CCD), large central square, micro districts (assemblages of uniform apt block housing & full neighborhood)

Bucharest, Romania

Poprad, Slovakia

Cities in the developing world• Cities vary tremendously• Commonalities:

• massive in-migration from rural areas

• high rates of natural increase

• ringed by vast squatter settlements

• lack public facilities/services

• populations are greater than formal employment can support

• large group of “informal” sector (street vendors, etc.)

• modern centers of commerce/ like the Western cities

• usually primate city effect

Guanajuato, Mexico

Nairobi, Kenya

Brasilia, Brazil

Mexico City