Urban Compaction : A Morphological Comparison of Toyko & Leeds by mattriley89

urban compaction A M o rph o logi cal Co m pariso n o f To kyo an d Leeds

by Matthew Riley Inspired by the Urban Age Project by the London School of Economics and Deutsche Bankâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Alfred Herrhausen Society

Masters of Architecture Dissertation Year 5 Leeds School of Architecture

contents introduction Call for Compaction

ESSENCE OF THE STUDY Aims & Methodology

Cities

Understanding the Numbers

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON Macro

Meso

Micro

conclusion Reflections

Bibliography

INDEX

figures ESSENCE OF THE STUDY: CITIES Figure 01 Figure 02

Tokyo: Regional Context Leeds: Regional Context

Matthew Riley, 2012

17 17

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON: MACRO Figure 03 Figure 04 Figure 05 Figure 06 Figure 07 Figure 08 Figure 09 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15

Tokyo & Leeds: City Data Tokyo: Urban Footprint Leeds:Urban Footprint Tokyo: Political Boundaries Leeds: Political Boundaries Tokyo: Infrastructure of Mobility Leeds: Infrastructure of Mobility Tokyo: Residential Urban Density Leeds: Residential Urban Density Tokyo: Connecting Density to Public Transport Leeds: Connecting Density to Public Transport Tokyo:Transport Modal Split Leeds:Transport Modal Split

Matthew Riley, 2012

Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012

19 25 25 27 27 29 29 30 31 32 32 33 33

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON: meso Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28

Nezu, Tokyo: Built Morphology Hyde Park, Leeds: Built Morphologly Nezu, Tokyo: Street Morphology Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Morphology Nezu, Tokyo: Street Walk-ability Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Walk-ability Nezu, Tokyo: Population Density Hyde Park, Leeds: Population Density Nezu, Tokyo: Building Heights Hyde Park, Leeds: Building Heights Nezu, Tokyo: Building Use Hyde Park, Leeds: Building Use Nezu, Tokyo: Land Classification

34 35 36 37 39 39 39 39 41 41 43 43 44

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON: micro Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38

Nezu, Tokyo: Typical ‘Roji’ Hyde Park, Leeds: Typical Street Nezu, Tokyo: “Roji” Character Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Character Nezu, Tokyo: “Roji” Plan Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Plan Nezu, Tokyo: “Roji” Section Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Section Nezu, Tokyo: Plot Ratio Hyde Park, Leeds: Plot Raio

Matthew Riley, 2012

Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012 Matthew Riley, 2012

47 48 46 46 51 51 51 51 50 50

introduction

call for compaction

billion world population in 2012

8.5 billion

world population in 2025

Around 12,000 years ago, 10 million human beings lived upon planet Earth. At the start of the industrial revolution, the global population stood at around 1 billion and today this figure, having experienced a dramatic increase, stands at a huge 7 billion people, this being forecast to further rise to 8.5m billion by 2025. (Rogers, Cities for a small planet, 1997) (Urban Task Force, 1999) (Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia, 2007) It is apparent to state that the previous 12,000 years has been a period of relatively stable climate but since the start of the Industrial Revolution, mankind, through the combustion of fossil fuels and living matter, has brought about the prospect of climate change, a unique threat to human welfare, unknown by previous generations. There is now simultaneous and worldwide expansion of population, depletion of natural resources, degradation of land, accumulation of waste and increased pollution. (Rogers, Cities for a small planet, 1997) (Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia, 2007)

“We have grown in number to the point where our presence is perceptibly disabling the planet like a disease” James Lovelock The Revenge of Gaia, p. xv, 2007 Following such events as the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment, the 1992 and 2002 Earth Summit in Rio and Johannesburg, there has been a strong pursuit of ‘symbiosis’ - the lasting relationship of mutual benefit to the host and the invader, planet Earth and its human inhabitants, respectively, through emphasis upon ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’, by both governments and non-governmental organisations. (Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia, 2007) (Green, 2005) (Jenks, Burton, & Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, 1996) Sustainability is the concept of ‘optimizing our vital human-environmental support systems while providing sustained promise for future generations of all life on earth.’ (Bartuska & Kazimee, 2005) Sustainability relies upon three pillars environmental, social and economic. To achieve sustainable development, there must be environmental, social and economic sustainability, each pillar mutually reinforcing the other. Sustainable development is best defined as it was at the Rio Earth Summit as being ‘development which meets the present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to achieve their needs and aspirations’. (Radovic, 2009) Urbanisation

introduction / call for compaction

2% of earth 's surface is urban

Achieving cities that are sustainable is vital in a rapidly urbanizing world. Following a dramatic rise in the proportion of the world’s urban population, over half of the world’s seven billion inhabitants live in urban environments. This figure, once standing at only 10% in 1990, is estimated to rise to a mighty 75% by 2050. Despite occupying only 2% of the planet’s surface, cities account for 80% of the economic output, 75% of the world’s energy consumption and 75% of the world’s waste production. (Burdett & Sudjic, Living in the Endless City, 2011) Cities have become “parasites on the landscape - huge organisms draining the

world for their sustenance and energy: relentless consumers, relentless polluters.” Richard Rogers, Cities for a small planet, p.27, 1997

53% of world's population live in cities

As cities respond to such dramatic patterns of urbanisation, there is going to be huge economic investment to accommodate mass numbers of new and future urban dwellers. These future waves of urban development are central to the ways in which our cities are ecologically balanced with the planet. Despite cities of the developing world being accountable for the vast majority of the world’s urban growth, it is cities within the developed countries of the world that account for such levels of consumption. It is therefore widely agreed that it is here where the most effective solutions to unsustainable lifestyles can be designed and implemented. (Jenks, Burton, & Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, 1996) (Rogers & Power, Cities for a small country, 2000)

Urban Sprawl

75% of world's co2 emissions produced in cities

At the start of the twentieth century, many European cities experienced a transformation in its urban form. In an attempt to provide improved living conditions, regeneration often directed new economic activity through the development of residential zones in the suburbs. This factor, along with the accommodation of the private motor car influenced outward growth towards the countryside. From urban forms, often compact and densely populated, cities experienced a reduction in population densities and the resulting spatial segregation of activities and people. Sherlock (1996, p.290) describes how many cities became fine civic centres surrounded by inner city slums and an outer ring of leafy suburbs’. This became extremely common within the U.K. Leeds providing a fine example of such. Tokyo, Japan, is an East Asian instance of a city having shown regular levels of compaction and density combined with outward dispersion. (Burdett & Sudjic, Living in the Endless City, 2011)

Suburbanisation: An Unsustainable Trend Patterns of suburbanisation often bring drastic and unsustainable socio-economic and environmental trends. It is common for wealthier families to disperse to more attractive, spacious suburban areas, creating severe social segregation where low-income families become isolated within the city centre. Lower levels of wealth within the inner city zones lead to urban degradation and an imbalance in access to public services, accelerating further, the outward migration of people to the suburbs. Cities expanding at lower densities consume the finite resource of Greenfield land, integral to the regulation of the planet and acting as our urban support system which enables food growth (Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia, 2007) (Lovelock, The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning, 2012) (Rogers, Cities for a small planet, 1997). Suburban developments require an extensive use of land, the duplication of infrastructure, and has resulting weaker links with town centres, civic life, and core services. Suburban dwellers therefore rely heavily upon cars

to reach their basic facilities as they cannot be serviced economically by rail or bus. This therefore leads to amplified levels of traffic congestion, higher fuel consumption and an increase in air pollution. For these reasons, it is argued that urban dispersal is highly inefficient and simply acts as a conspiracy, preventing the transition to sustainable lifestyles. (Hillman, 1996)

The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form In response to the implications brought about by urban sprawl, the Urban Task Force stressed the importance of the compact city. This being a sustainable, future urban form of high density relying upon compact development, which uses existing areas, recycles land and buildings, whilst creating mixed/diverse areas that are well connected (Urban Task Force, 1999) . The compact city is designed to implement sustainable development and counteract the negative social, economic and environmental impact of urban sprawl. The key ideas are to encourage urban forms of high density, intensification and mixed uses, based on systems of public transport and increased walking and cycling. (Williams, Burton, & Jenks, 1996) (Jenks, Burton, & Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, 1996) (Burton, Williams, & Jenks, 1996) With an increasing urban population, providing housing at higher densities is vital if we are to protect our countryside and respond to negative environmental effects of sprawl (Llewelyn-Davies, 1994a). Studies show a positive correlation between living in lower urban densities and having higher fuel consumption and vehicular emissions, therefore concluding that lower density living encourages car use as opposede to public transport (Newman & Kenworthy, 1989a). Compaction combats reliance upon cars making public transport, walking and cycling more viable options, contributing to a decrease in energy consumption and air pollution. This is particularly important as transport is the fastest growing contributor to CO2 emissions (Breheny M. , 1996). Private transportation and car dependence does not only worsen environmental issues but also has an adverse effect upon quality of life. Lower transport expenditure, more community activity and better health, achieved through increased cycling and walking could be achieved with a reduction in car usage (Hillman, 1996) . In addition, research suggests that a reduction in road activity improves the pedestrian environment enhancing social interaction and community spirit (Rogers, Cities for a small planet, 1997). High density housing can also reduce the provision for car parking and therefore discourage from car ownership (Burton, Williams, & Jenks, 1996). The compact city advocates intensification of the built form and intensification of activity. Intensification of the built form usually refers to creating a higher density of buildings whereas intensification of activity can refer to an increased number of people living, working or visiting an area, increased traffic on roads, or an increase in the use of existing land and buildings. Intensification of activity should encourage social interaction as it promotes vitality, mixed uses and tradition. A key attraction to urban living is the diversity and vitality, both delivered by a higher concentration of people and activities within them (Jacobs, 1962) (Sherlock, 1990). Compaction, therefore, is an important approach to urban development as an increasing global population, combined with recent patterns of urbanisation, suggests that cities must become capable of accommodating more people within a restricted area, as they cannot continue to expand outwards, consuming natural land and encouraging wasteful suburban lifestyles.

introduction / call for compaction

essence of the study

aims & methodology Aims The aim of this study is to become familiar with the relationship between morphology and compaction within two selected urban environments in an attempt to gain an in depth understanding into how compact urban forms can successfully accommodate lower carbon lifestyles. Through the analysis of urban morphology and built form at a variety of scales, the essay intends to explore and analyse the ways in which dense urban environments can be created to accommodate more sustainable lifestyles. This study is a response to the theory surrounding the need for city compaction.

essence of the study / aims & methodology

Methodology In an attempt to explore the relationship between morphology, density and compaction, it is appropriate to study two cities of contrasting character. This study is a comparison between the densely populated city of Tokyo, Japan and the relatively low density city of Leeds, UK. Through the analysis of collected data for each city, the study shall attempt to discover relationships between the degrees of urban compaction with the measurements of low carbon lifestyles. In relation to arguments surrounding the Compact City, the study expects to discover a positive correlation between high population densities and common use of public transport with low carbon emissions per capita. If the arguments supporting the Compact city are correct, it is beneficial to become more familiar with the dense environment of Tokyo, as suggestions can be made into ways in which built form can be designed to accommodate higher densities and encourage healthier, less wasteful lifestyles in more sustainable community based environments. Studying the cities of Tokyo and Leeds, a morphological comparison shall be conducted to discover the relationship between urban form and the creation of compact environments. Comparisons and discussions shall be carried out on a range of scale, titled macro, meso and micro. The macro scale analysis shall examine each city within their wider, regional contexts, whilst the meso scale analysis shall examine two neighbourhoods and the micro scale analysis shall examine streetscapes and individual buildings and land plots. The outcome should deliver suggestions as to how urban form relates at a range of scales to influence both the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;compactionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of cities and lifestyles. The research shall be explained and presented through literature, visually supported by data tables, illustrations and photographs. The information used to support the arguments within the essay has been collected from both primary and secondary sources. The study has developed through a natural interest in the subject following the authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience of both Tokyo and Leeds.

cities Tokyo Tokyo is the capital of Japan and forms the centre of the Greater Tokyo Area the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most populous metropolitan area with a population of over 35 million people. Alongside both London and New York, Tokyo is regarded as one of three world economic command centres. As illustrated in Figure 1, Tokyo can often refer to the Greater Tokyo Area, the Tokyo Metropolis, or the former area of Tokyo City, made up of 23 special wards.

Leeds The city of Leeds is one of five metropolitan districts which form the West Yorkshire County in the North of England. It is the UKâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest centre for business, legal and financial services outside of London. Similarly to Tokyo, there is ambiguity surrounding the name and what exactly it refers to. As illustrated in Figure 2, Leeds can refer to either the main urban subdivision, or the entire metropolitan district.

essence of the study / cities

01 Tokyo: Regional Context

02 Leeds: Regional Context

understanding the numbers In an attempt to relate the studied cities of Tokyo and Leeds with the theory surrounding the Compact City, collected data, from a wide range of sources, is presented in Figure 3 When collecting data, it was necessary to determine a strict geographical boundary for each city to ensure calculation accuracy. The majority of data refers to Leeds as the entire metropolitan district, but refers to the 23 city wards of Tokyo, each area illustrated in Figures 1-2. Although statistics cannot fully determine the nature of a city, they enable comparisons to be made which shall provide the foundations to the discussion surrounding the relationship between morphology, urban compaction and sustainable living.

Size, Population and Density Figure 3 shows certain statistical differences, evident between Tokyo and Leeds. Tokyo has a larger geographical size, accommodating a significantly greater population at a far higher density. The 23 wards of Tokyo make up a total area of 621 square kilometres, only a fragment of the massive 2,188 square kilometre metropolis. The main urban subdivision of Leeds however, has a footprint of only 109 square kilometres whilst the City of Leeds metropolitan district, has a total area of 551 square kilometres. Particularly relevant to this study is the substantial difference in urban density. Tokyo metropolis accommodates 6,027 people per average square kilometre, whilst Leeds metropolitan district accommodates a relatively small figure of only 1,448 people per average square kilometre. In the more compact, central areas of the cities, the 23 wards of Tokyo and Leedsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; main urban subdivision, the densities are notably higher, at 14,441 and 4,066 people per square kilometre, respectively.

Transport, Mobilityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and Carbon Emissions Another interesting difference in the data presented, is the preferred methods of transports and the car ownership rates. Of 1000 Leeds residents, there is 546 cars - significantly higher than the 308 cars per 1000 people, in Tokyo. Figure 3 shows contrasting ways in which the majority of people travel. The vast majority, 66.8%, of the population of Leeds travel via private vehicles as opposed to a much smaller proportion, 12%, of the population of Tokyo. Additionally, Tokyo boasts a far higher proportion of people travelling using non-motorized methods such as walking or cycling and boasts a higher proportion of people using public transport. 37% of the Tokyo population either walk or cycle, compared to only 12.8% of the population of Leeds whilst 51% of people in Tokyo travel mainly using public transport, compared to only 20.4% of the population of Leeds. Figure 3 also highlights the difference in carbon emissions between cities. According to the data, the average Tokyo resident produces less CO2 emissions and consumes less electricity than the average Leeds dweller. Furthermore, it indicates that the transport sector contributes a larger proportion of the total 16

essence of the study / understanding the numbers

03 Tokyo & Leeds: City Data

carbon emissions in Leeds than it does so in Tokyo. In the UK, transport contributed 33%, an entire third, towards the national total CO2 emissions in 2009 (Dixon, 2011). Data gives evidence that almost twice as much CO2 is emitted per average resident in Leeds than in Tokyo.

A Need For Urban Compaction? Arguments supporting urban compaction state that dense urban environments can support efficient public transport systems that are economically viable, thus reducing the dependence upon private automobiles (Hillman, 1996). It is also commonly proposed that mixed use neighbourhoods can ensure a variety of services, accessible within walking or cycling distance, reducing the need for motorized transport, thus encouraging a reduction in carbon emissions. If higher densities and more compact urban forms are successful in accommodating low carbon lifestyles, it is appropriate to explore ways in which compact environments are created.

essence of the study / understanding the numbers

03 Tokyo & Leeds: City Data

morphological comparison

macro To compare and understand the compaction of a city, it is important to examine both its morphology and character at a range of scales. The Macro scale examines each city within a 50 x 50km region, analysing its urban footprint, transport infrastructure and population densities.

Urban Growth Over previous centuries, both Tokyo and Leeds have experienced urban growth in the form of an increase in population and a physical expansion of its geographical boundaries. Figures 4-13 illustrate how both cities differ in size, form and density, each resulting from their own cultural response to growth and development. Tokyo, originating from a small traditional fishing village named Edo, experienced rapid growth, becoming one of the world’s largest cities by the 18th century. Unlike cities throughout Europe, horses were not common and transport was often in the form of man and cart. Due to this, the city has remained traditionally compact having been designed and built at a scale restricted by human walking distance (Cadavid, 2012). Throughout the last century, Tokyo has experienced devastation from earthquake, fire and war, leading to the replenishment of its building stock due to intensive industrial and economic post-war development (Architekturforum Zurich, 2012). Figure 4 illustrates the location of Western Tokyo, situated within the vast expanse of urbanised land, interrupted only by the topographical constraints of rivers and contours. It is almost completely urbanised and forms only a segment of the Greater Tokyo Area, one of the largest and most densely populated areas in the world. Western Tokyo is made up of 23 ‘wards’ each defined as its own individual city. Leeds experienced its most prolific period of growth in the latter half of the 19th century as the town industrialised creating a strong local economy. As industry and its subsequent pollution, began to accommodate inner city areas, residential zones were destroyed and redeveloped in suburban areas. An improved quality of housing encouraged the outward migration of the population from the city centre (Fraser, 1982). The negative connotations attached with city living, multiplied with the popularity of both the motor car and the countryside abode, has resulted in Leeds becoming a model of urban sprawl. As illustrated in Figure 5, the urban areas are scattered throughout rural areas. The City of Leeds’ consists of the main urban subdivision of Leeds surrounded by satellite towns. The main urban subdivision, Leeds’ administrative city, has merged with the surrounding towns to form a conurbation known as the West Yorkshire Urban Area.

Urban Footprint There is a strong contrast in the urban footprints illustrated for both Tokyo and Leeds. Leeds consists of smaller settlements of people and buildings, dispersed throughout the countryside, with the exception of the West Yorkshire Conurbation. 22

morphological comparison / macro

04 Tokyo: Urban Footprint

05 Leeds: Urban Foorprint

Tokyo, however, is engulfed within a mass of urbanised land that surrounds only small pockets of remaining rural land. With regards to the sustainability of a city, Figures 4-5 may carry two completely different interpretations. Tokyo’s model may be criticised for having an unhealthy balance of rural to urban land, whilst the Leeds’ model may be criticised for being dispersed and disconnected. On the contrary, Tokyo’s model could draw praise for its collected form over large sprawling distances, whilst the urban formation of Leeds may suggest that villages and satellite towns function locally and independently. There is no one size fits all scenario, and the success and sustainability of a city cannot be determined simply on form or size but rather on the nature in which it accommodates people. To explore the ways in which each urban form functions, at its own degree of compaction, it requires the study of infrastructure for each city, and the ways in which they each accommodate citizens and influence their lifestyles.

Infrastructure of Mobility The infrastructure of transport is critically influential in defining urban form, as it promotes the centralisation of economic functions and the accommodation of citizens along public transport routes (Burdett & Sudjic, Living in the Endless City, 2011). The provision of efficient public transport systems discourages car use whilst both encouraging the intensification of people, buildings and services around important transport nodes. Where there is a lack of public transport provision, citizens rely upon inefficient, private motor vehicles, dependent upon space consuming road networks. Each of which are detrimental to both society and the environment (Girardet, 1999). Figures 8-9 illustrate the modern, extensive intercity metro and rail network of Tokyo compared alongside the regional rail system of Leeds,. Japan has intelligently planned in accordance with their lack of natural resources, developing cities such as Tokyo to become mass urban transport oriented cities (Cadavid, 2012). In a contrasting manner, cities within the UK, in this instance Leeds, developed outwards to accommodate the motor car and respond to the popularity of post-war, suburban living. If urban development is dictated by road networks, cities gradually disperse, creating low density urban environments that are ecologically, economically and socially unsustainable. Alternatively, if urban development is dictated by public transport systems, it becomes possible to intensify areas creating environments of higher densities which are more ecologically, economically and socially sustainable.

Capturing Urban Density Figures 10-11 graphically represent the residential urban densities across Tokyo and Leeds. Each hexagon, representing one square kilometre, is extruded vertically to express the number of people living within that area. Extreme residential densities are represented by tall peaks whilst low residential densities are represented by lower gradients. Naturally, the higher residential densities exist in urban areas. As urban footprint is often heavily influenced by topographical constraints, residential densities are also. The graphs in Figures 10-11 contrast one another in several ways. Firstly, the densities existing in Tokyo are staggeringly high in relation to those existing within and surrounding Leeds. The peak density of Leeds appears to equate to only half that of Tokyo’s. Secondly, the character in which each form expands outwards differs between graphs. The Tokyo model shows a relatively stable density graduating outwards from the city. This depicts the city’s ability to traditionally grow and expand at stable densities of around 7000 - 8000 people per square kilometre, in comparison to Leeds’s outward low density sprawl consisting of disconnected satellite towns. As population figures differ greatly, it is impossible to 24

morphological comparison / macro

06 Tokyo: Political

Boundaries

07 Leeds: Political

Boundaries

expect the Leeds model to show similar population densities existing over large areas, as witnessed with Tokyo. The important difference however, is perhaps the nature in which Tokyoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growth has consistently created additional compact urban environments, which are well connected and sustain a high level of density. Leedsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growth, contrastingly, has resulted in more sporadic accumulations of small urban areas of low residential densities, disconnected from the city. Finally, a more detailed discussion of urban morphology is instigated by the difference in the number of peaks shown between graphs. The Tokyo model includes several peaks each representative of a central zone in a polycentric urban form. Leeds conversely appears as a single form of mono-centricity, expressed by only one peak. Polycentric models enable citizens to live lifestyles at a more local scale, relying less upon travel and relying more upon the provision of services, made accessible within closer proximities. The mono-centric form of Leeds creates lifestyles involving increased dependence upon travel to reach basic amenities, this supportive of the data presented in Figure 3.

Connecting Density to Public Transport As previously highlighted, there is a strong relationship between successfully accommodating people at higher densities with the provision of transport infrastructure, supporting efficient public transport systems. Figures 12-13 indicate, for both Tokyo and Leeds, the relationship present between residential urban densities and public rail and metro networks. In Tokyo, a strong relationship can be examined between the position of intercity metro lines and areas accommodating high populations. Tokyo appears to be a polycentric urban model of highly populated areas situated upon efficient public transport routes. The correlation between good public transport and densely populated areas suggest that each mutually reinforces the other. In well populated areas, public transport systems become viable as they are economically supported by a larger number of users, whilst the existence of public transport nodes encourages the situation of many people within a close proximity. In Leeds, the relationship is less visible as fewer urban areas accommodate at high densities. The formation of low density satellite towns creates a model which cannot viably support efficient public transport, resulting in a society reliant upon cars. Figures 12-13 representing transport infrastructure and population density can explain the transport modal split for residents in each city (Figures 14-15). Tokyo, providing excellent, high speed rail services, accommodates a society which is far less reliant upon private vehicles and more reliant upon public transport and non-motorized transport. Alternatively, Leeds offers a relatively weak and inefficient rail service, unconnected to many suburban areas, thus creating a society that relies heavily upon motorized transport and little upon public transport, walking and cycling.

Reflections Through analysing Tokyo and Leeds as urban forms within their wider, regional context, it is evident that this study deals with cities massively contrasting in size, form and culture. Each city form is a product of its individual, cultural response to growth, combined with local topographical constraints. Both models present two contrasting urban scenarios. Tokyo having experienced incredible growth accommodates a massive population over a vast area of uninterrupted, urbanised land. Leeds, a post industrial town suffering from the consequences of urban sprawl however, has a more modest population, distributed around smaller pockets of towns and villages, separated by areas of rural land. Tokyo encourages urban environments of high population densities in contrast to Leeds, 26

morphological comparison / macro

08 Tokyo: Infrastructure of

Mobility

09 Leeds: Infrastructure of Mobility

10 Tokyo: Residential Urban Density 28

morphological comparison / macro

11 Leeds: Residential Urban Density

Private Vehicle 12%

Walking 23%

Bike 14% Rail 48%

12 Tokyo: Transport Model Split

Bus 3%

(LTA Academy, Singapore, 2011) Bike 1.4%

Walking 11.4%

Bus 18.6%

Private Vehicle 66.8%

Rail 1.8%

13 Leeds: Transport Modal Split (Leeds City Council)

morphological comparison / macro

which over previous decades, has encouraged areas of low population densities. The disparity between cities highlights the effect of urban form and population density upon the provision of public transport systems. Where high population densities exist within collected urban forms, the provision of public transport becomes viable, enabling cities to develop in a polycentric manner. However, where low residential densities exist within a city, more sporadic and uncollected in form, public transport systems are often inefficient, creating cities offering a single centre. The provision of efficient public transport encourages centrality where people can function on a more local scale, relying less upon travel, particularly in the form of private motorized automobiles. Urban compaction encourages higher densities of both people and activities, surrounding many centres, each developed upon efficient public transport systems. At a macro scale, it would suggest that Tokyo provides a suitable model for the study of urban compaction, whilst Leeds demonstrates a model, heavily affected by the conflicting nature of urban sprawl and suburbanisation.

14 Tokyo: Connecting

Density to Public Transport

15 Leeds: Connecting

Density to Public Transport

meso The meso scale focuses upon selected areas of 1 x 1km, examining a single neighbourhood within each city. As the study progresses, focusing upon the urban environments, at a smaller scale, a stronger connection can be made with the way in which people occupy their city and function as a society. Encompassed within the 1 x 1km areas are the neighbourhoods of Nezu and Hyde Park, for Tokyo and Leeds respectively. Each of these neighbourhoods is made comparable by their high population densities, their situation upon public transport routes, and their predominantly residential nature. Despite their similarities, they both express totally dissimilar forms and characters, creating a series of interesting discussions.

16 Nezu, Tokyo:

Built Morphology

morphological comparison / meso

Nezu, Tokyo Nezu is one of approximately twenty neighbourhoods located within Bunkyo, one of the 23 special wards of Tokyo. It is renowned for being a traditionally Japanese, compact neighbourhood accommodating residents at approximately 16,000 people per square kilometre (Bunkyo, Tokyo). Unlike many areas of central Tokyo, Nezu survived the fires and bombs dropped in the Great Tokyo Air Raids of World War II, avoiding the loss of traditional buildings. Nezu is a prime area for studying urban compaction as it still retains many urban plan characteristics still existing from the Edo period ( Keio Universiry Laboratory of Architecture and Urban Design, 2010). Nezu is located along a main road, Route 437, within Tokyo and is situated between two intercity metro stations, Nezu and Sendagi, along the Chiyoda Line.

Hyde Park, Leeds

17 Hyde Park,Leeds: Built Morphology

Hyde Park is an inner city area of Leeds within the City of Leeds District. It provides an appropriate neighbourhood to examine as it has a residential density of approximately 14,000 people per square kilometre, making it the most densely populated area of West Yorkshire and therefore represented as the tallest peak in Figure 11 (Clark, 2007). The area is considered to be the centre of Leedsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; student community for its proximity to both city universities. It is located upon the Burley Park railway station and is bordered by the two main roads of Victoria Road and Cardigan Road. An additional two roads intersect the neighbourhood.

Urban Morphology Despite both Hyde Park, Leeds and Nezu, Toyko having similar residential densities, they have morphologies which contrast massively. Figures 16-17 provide â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;figure groundâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; illustrations of both neighbourhoods to depict building footprints and open space. Hyde Park consists mostly of late Victorian terraced houses in gridded streets off main roads. The built elements appear organised and structured, surrounded by relatively generous quantities of open land, unoccupied with built form. The blank areas shown on the eastern and western edges of the map are public parks. At initial glance, Nezuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s morphology appears to be less organised and more sporadic. Main roads stem throughout a dense accumulation of built form, gradually dispersing as distance from the main road increases. Despite looking spatially disorganised in comparison to Hyde Park, Nezu creates organic patterns in its street and building morphology, which result from intelligent planning developed alongside traditional Japanese lifestyles.

18 Nezu, Tokyo:

Street Morphology

morphological comparison / meso

What makes the street morphology of Nezu impressively organic in comparison to that of Hyde Park, is the presence of hierarchy in both the density of built form and the network of public roads and streets. Figure 17 depicts the way in which a strong physical compaction of buildings exists close to the Route 437 in Nezu. In a hierarchal manner, this compaction gradually deteriorates with distance from the main road. In contrast, there appears to be no hierarchy of built form in Hyde Park, but rather a consistent array of terraced housing.

Figures 18-19 illustrates the networks of roads and streets articulating throughout each neighbourhood. Hyde Park is both bordered and intersected by relatively dominant roads, linked consistently together by streets of horizontal, vertical and diagonal orientation. There appears to be little hierarchy. Nezu, unlike Leeds has a very clear main arterial road, Route 437, running North to South. In a similar nature to its hierarchy of built form, the dominance of roads and streets weakens with distance from this main transport route. The resultant structure resembles a natural pattern, similar to the roots of a plant, or the branches of a tree. As later discussed, there is no significant central core within Hyde Park, whereas Nezu, concentrates around the North to South Road which forms its structural spine and acts as the central, elongated core of the neighbourhood.

19 Hyde Park,Leeds:

Street Morphology

As previously demonstrated, urban morphology carries characteristics which define the way in which people develop their lifestyles. A notable example is the difference in the walk-ability of neighbourhoods, negotiated by the morphology of built form and void. The narrow alleyways and the slim voids existing between buildings in Nezu suggest that the neighbourhood is made easily walk-able. The irregular pattern of individual, stand alone buildings leaves countless voids, maximising the number of routes possible and therefore allowing for more direct movement from place to place. The strict pattern of terraced buildings in Hyde Park reduces pedestrian options, defining a clearer but usually longer and more

inefficient route from place to place. Figures 20-21 demonstrate this in relation to each neighbourhood. This suggests one reason as to why Tokyo residents are more familiar with walking as a means of travel.

20 Nezu, Tokyo:

Street Walk-ability

Another notable factor influencing the way in which people choose to travel is the formation of streets. Hyde Park has a simple, organised network of streets and roads which are generous in width. Nezu, however, has a complex network of streets drastically varying in widths. The generous street widths of Hyde Park are well adapted for the accommodation of motor cars whilst the comparatively narrow streets and alleys of Nezu are not well adapted for car use. Hyde Park’s infrastructural capacity to accommodate cars combined with the incompatible relationship between street morphology and pedestrian movement, explains why residents of Leeds may be heavily reliant upon motorized vehicles and less familiar with walking. On the contrary, the incompatibility between an intricate street morphology and car use suggest good reason as to why residents of Tokyo are less reliant on cars but rather more familiar with walking and the use of bicycles. Resulting from the figure-ground studies of both building and street morphology, there arises several characteristics attached individually to each neighbourhood. These characteristics, as highlighted and demonstrated above, are influential factors that aid the discussions into the degree of urban compaction between the two cities. Through the interpretation of building density of both neighbourhoods, one would expect Nezu to have a residential density distinctly higher than that of Hyde Park. However, this is not true, as Nezu and Hyde Park have urban residential densities of approximately 16,000 and 14,000 people per square kilometre respectively. Although previously stated, these figures may read as a surprise following the previous discussion, reflective of the illustrations shown in Figures 1617. Despite successfully depicting the land occupancy of buildings and expressing the mass to void character of neighbourhoods, figure-ground maps fail to fully explain the character of buildings and the nature in which they are occupied. To explore the reason for the inconsistent correlation between building density and residential density in the case of Nezu and Hyde Park, it is necessary to study the built form in further detail, exploring the nature in which people occupy each urban environment.

Population Density

21 Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Walk-ability

morphological comparison / meso

As explored at a macro scale for both Tokyo and Leeds, the distribution of population at various densities can provide for interesting examination. The study concluded that there was a strong relationship between transport infrastructure and high population densities. Figures 22-23 illustrate the distribution of the local populations at bracketed residential densities within both Nezu and Hyde Park. Public transport routes and stations are indicated in addition to this. Mapped population densities across Nezu express relatively strict lines separating three brackets of residential densities. In correlation with its building density, Nezu’s population density gradually declines, in a hierarchal manner, as distance from Route 437 increases. This main road accommodates efficient bus services whilst the intercity metro line runs beneath with stations located on the Northern and Southern crossroads in the map. As residents within Tokyo are highly reliant upon these public transport services, the metro in particularly, it is sensible to assume that the location of the high population density bracket, responds to its proximity to this metro line and the two highlighted stations. Conversely, Hyde Park appears to show no distinguishable pattern or hierarchy in the distribution and density of its population, despite its location beside the railway line. As Leeds’ railway network is inefficient in comparison to that of Tokyo’s, and data shows that only a minority of citizens rely upon rail as a means of transport, it is unlikely to expect a distinctly higher number of residents surrounding the train

22 Nezu, Tokyo:

Population Density

23 Hyde Park, Leeds:

Population Density

station. This particular area under discussion provides an interesting example of the ways in which urban forms interlink at various scales. If the city can provide an efficient well used public transport system on a large scale, it becomes capable of defining urban centres surrounding public transport nodes on a smaller scale, as exampled by Tokyo and Nezu.

Building Heights To draw relationships between the morphology of an urban environment and its residential densities, it is essential to explore the built form in a greater detail than the two dimensional mapping of building footprints. Figures 24-25 illustrate the number of storeys relative to each building around the examined areas of Nezu and Hyde Park. The buildings in Hyde Park are mostly three store’y high and this remains consistently spread throughout the studied area. There are particular streets which are occupied with only two storey buildings and there is the occasional instance where buildings of one, four or five storey buildings are present. No buildings exceed the height of five storey. As commonly noticed, there seems to be little relationship between the local transport network and the built morphology, in this particular case, building heights. Nezu consists predominantly of 2 storey buildings. Despite its principally low-rise nature, it involves a wide range of heights in comparison with Hyde Park. Where Hyde Park has a maximum of five storeys, Nezu’s highest building is of fifteen storeys, not particularly unusual as it is situated amongst several other high-rise buildings. Another contrasting feature in building heights between the two neighbourhoods is yet again the distribution. Where Hyde Park shows little relationship between building heights and their location, Nezu shows taller buildings to be distributed surrounding Route 437, another morphological feature that is responsive to the street network. Although Hyde Park’s dominant building height is three storey’s, taller in comparison than that of Nezu’s at two storey’s, it still remains unanswered as to why Leeds, with its low building density, achieves a similar residential density as Nezu. Since Nezu includes a reasonable number of tall buildings, situated along Route 437, it is expected that average building heights between both neighbourhoods would somewhat correspond. It could be stated that each neighbourhood is an example of a low-rise, high density environment, each similar to one another in these respects. However, the two studied neighbourhoods could not be regarded as being equally compact, as compaction entails more than simply the densification of people.

Building Use Although the main theme of urban compaction usually consists of the intensification of people to create higher population densities, it also involves the intensification of activity and the provision of a good mixture of services, accessible within a walk-able proximity. The notion being that with an intensification of people, activities and services, there is a concentrated economy, reducing the need to travel, whilst creating an environment of vitality which encourages the interaction of people to create well integrated communities (Jenks, Burton, & Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, 1996) . The accumulative effect, in theory, should create a more ecologically, economically, and socially sustainable environment. The following section of this study explores building use to analyse the mixture of services available within each neighbourhood. Figures 26-27 illustrate the breakdown of building use throughout the neighbourhoods of Hyde Park and Nezu. Similarities can be drawn between the patterns emerging from both illustrations as each neighbourhood appears to be mostly of residential use whilst showing that buildings occupied with a mixture of 38

morphological comparison / meso

24 Nezu, Tokyo:

Building Heights

25 Hyde Park, Leeds: Building Heights

uses tend to be situated along main roads. Differences, however, can also be extracted. Nezu appears to include a greater quantity and a greater proportion of mixed use buildings over the entire neighbourhood, some of which appear well integrated within the residential blocks. The formation created by building uses in Nezu appears to be structured upon the hierarchy of street importance. Along Route 437, there is only the smallest proportion of residential only buildings. The vast majority are either commercial/office alone, or they are a mixture of residential and commercial/office. Along the tributary streets branching from Route 437, there appears to be a healthy proportion of mixed use buildings encompassing a dense residential block. Religious buildings, occupying large open spaces exist beyond these main residential areas. In Hyde Park, there appears to be less structure in place as mapped building use, in addition to the topics previously illustrated and discussed, indicates little evidence of a central core existing within the neighbourhood. This would suggest therefore, that the residents of Hyde Park are less reliant upon local neighbourhood services, but conversely more reliant upon the services available within Leeds city centre. Contrastingly for Nezu, it would suggest that residents are able to function daily, on a more local scale. One particular reason for this would be the provision of local employment, made available by the inclusion of commerce and service within the neighbourhood. After all, commerce creates jobs, thus supporting the notion that the intensification of mixed use developments contributes towards the socio-economic functions of a place.

Planning Polices For neighbourhoods to develop in a particular manner, they are usually dependent upon local planning regulations. Nezu, a typical of many residential areas within Tokyo city, is a compact environment which proves responsive to traditional Japanese lifestyles. Although Nezu’s morphological character appears to be the potential product of an emergent process of self-organized development, it is in fact the result of development, responsive to clever planning regulations. As illustrated in Figure 28 Nezu has been classified into areas, defined by regulations surrounding both land use and building height. In ‘First Type Housing’, restrictions allow only low-rise buildings which must contain residential facilities. In areas of ‘Second Type Housing’, buildings may be completely of commercial use. There is however, emphasis to ensure that the area remains primarily residential. In ‘Commercial’ areas, solely residential buildings are discouraged to provide a good mixture of local services. Additionally, there are fewer restrictions regarding the heights of buildings ( Keio Universiry Laboratory of Architecture and Urban Design, 2010). The implementation of such land use policies explains the hierarchal patterns in the topics discussed above. In comparison, planning guidance for Hyde Park, Leeds appears to be slightly less definite, as the neighbourhood is not divided into strict, classified areas which determine the nature of its form and occupancy. Instead, Hyde Park is defined as an area of mixed housing where development strategies appear to focus more upon regeneration to make aesthetical improvement to the area (Leeds City Council, 2012). This may well be the reason for the lack of hierarchy within the built environment of Hyde Park.

Reflections At this scale, it is possible to observe the difference between a neighbourhood grained within a polycentric city model, that of Tokyo’s, and a neighbourhood grained within a mono-centric city model, that of Leeds. The polycentric nature of Tokyo encourages each neighbourhood to function around its own core, a local centre offering commerce, services and jobs, situated amongst a high density 40

morphological comparison / meso

26 Nezu, Tokyo: Building Use

27 Hyde Park, Leeds: Building Use

28 Nezu, Tokyo:

Land Classification

morphological comparison / meso

of people. The mono-centric nature of Leeds however, creates neighbourhoods which are dependent upon the single city centre for commerce, services and jobs. It would appear evident that the urban form of a city, on a macro level, strongly influences the morphology of neighbourhoods on a smaller, meso scale. Where cities occupy collected urban forms which are densely populated, the viability of efficient public transport systems increases. Where cities occupy less collected forms, low in density, public transport systems are often inefficient. If public transport systems are well used, nodes can become highly significant centres from which a neighbourhood, such as Nezu, can concentrate around. If public transport is not well used however, as demonstrated in Hyde Park, such nodes are less significant and there is less emphasis upon the intensification of people and activities around them. The morphology of Nezu is hierarchal where an elongated core of taller, mixed use buildings, surrounding the metro station and Route 437, gradually decrease in height and become more accustomed to residential use. The morphology of Hyde Park contrasts, showing no sign of hierarchy and no clear location of a central point. Roads and streets are of relatively regular widths whilst building heights and building use differ as blocks or streets in a sporadic manner throughout the neighbourhood. Despite both neighbourhoods being densely populated at a similar scale, they achieve very dissimilar levels of compaction. Where the compaction of people between environments is relatively equal, the compaction of activity is radically different. It is this compaction of activity which creates social and economic sustainability, locally within neighbourhoods.

micro This section of the study aims to explore and analyse the urban morphology at a micro scale, focusing upon typical, individual streets and buildings within the neighbourhoods of Nezu and Hyde Park. As established within the previous chapter, both neighbourhoods express alternative morphologies, each of which creates different levels of compaction. This chapter aims to examine the way in which the morphology of individual streets and buildings can dictate the degree of compaction within an urban environment.

Streetscapes

31 Nezu, Tokyo: ‘Roji’ Character

32 Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Character

Photographs in Figures 29-30 draw attention to the massive visible difference between a typical residential street in Hyde Park, and a typical residential street in Nezu, respectively. Houses along the street in Hyde Park are dominantly three storey’s high. Streets appear generous in size, accommodating pavements for pedestrians and road space for car parking and regular traffic flow. Gardens and front yards, separated by boundary walls, create the division between the public street and the private domains of the house. Nezu entails a more irregular formation of individual houses along a street, or ‘roji’. Houses are predominantly two storey’s high with occasional buildings being single storey’s. The ‘roji’ appears extremely narrow and private outdoor residential space is limited. Figures 31-32 also illustrate the notable elements for comparison between the studied street of Hyde Park and the studied ‘roji’ of Nezu. Figures 33-34 depict the two studied streets at a further degree of detail to illustrate the nature in which each is inhabited. An immediate comparison is made between alternative attitudes towards the utilisation of space. Residents in Hyde Park are relatively space indulgent, relying upon large quantities of space devoted to gardens and the accommodation of bins and cars. In contrast, residents of Nezu make efficient use of space, growing plants and positioning personal possessions, around building perimeters. This leaves only a narrow passage for street movement in the form of walking and cycling.

Intensification The section cuts of Figures 35-36, dissecting each street, show alternative approaches towards urban intensification. The section cut through the residential street of Hyde Park, Leeds, shows how buildings can adapt, through the conversion and refurbishment of attics or basements, increasing its plot ratio and residential capacity. The intensification of people in this manner, is common and reoccurring throughout Hyde Park, explaining its high population density. Alternatively, the section cut through the street in Nezu, Tokyo, illustrates intensification of activity where mixed use buildings exist, creating a greater variety of services accessible within a local proximity. This particular examination explains the distribution of building uses for each neighbourhood. As streets and buildings within Hyde Park 44

morphological comparison / micro

29 Nezu, Tokyo: Typical ‘Roji’

morphological comparison / micro

30 Hyde Park, Leeds: Typical Street

appear to force the intensification of people, there is little creation of mixed use buildings, regularly resulting in streets of residential use only. The street section of however, explains why there is a regular concentration of mixed use buildings integrated within residential areas of Nezu.

Plot Ratio

37 Nezu, Tokyo: Plot Ratio

Both House A, of Nezu and House B, of Hyde Park, highlighted in Figures 33-36, are explored in further detail with regards to plot ratio. Plot ratio is often a measurement of land use and residential density. Figure 37-38 diagrams each studied house to present and compare the calculated plot ratios, typical for houses within each neighbourhood. House B, in Hyde Park has an impressive plot ratio of 2, increased through utilisation of both basement and attic. The house in Nezu has a plot ratio of only 1.4, as it is only two storey’s. However, Nezu has a far higher building density within each residential block, as discussed in the previous chapter. This is because plot sizes in Nezu are significantly smaller in size, allowing a greater number of buildings to exist within equal areas. Each study presents alternative approaches towards creating efficient quantities of habitable floor space within their neighbourhood.

Reflections

38 Hyde Park, Leeds: Plot Ratio

morphological comparison / micro

The morphological comparison conducted upon a micro scale examines a typical street and building within both Hyde Park and Leeds to explore reasons for the contrasting degrees of compaction, determined upon a greater scale. The studied ‘roji’ of Nezu provides a good example of a low rise, predominantly residential street that contributes to the compact nature of its wider neighbourhood context. Building and street morphology encourage both cycling and walking whilst showing complete incompatibility with car use. Additionally, the inclusion of commerce in residential areas ensures the local accessibility of services. On a similar basis, the studied street of Hyde Park reinforces the findings upon a meso scale. The morphology of buildings and streets is heavily determined by the need to accommodate large numbers of people and large number of cars. The result is a form which therefore discourages walking and cycling. Despite achieving high residential densities, the studied street within Hyde Park, fails to create an environment for compact lifestyles as buildings often maximise residential density as opposed to creating mixed use buildings. The result is a lack of local services, previously determined at a meso scale.

33 Nezu, Tokyo: ‘Roji’ Plan

34 Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Plan

35 Nezu, Tokyo: ‘Roji’ Section

36 Hyde Park, Leeds: Street Section

conclusion

reflections â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Urban Compaction: A Morphological Comparison of Tokyo and Leedsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; aimed to increase familiarity in the relationship between city morphology and urban compaction. The study focused upon Tokyo and Leeds, two global cities, expressing massively contrasting urban forms, populations and residential densities. Through the examination of collected data for both Tokyo and Leeds, the study supported claims that the compact city is the solution to creating environments which can successfully accommodate low carbon lifestyles. In comparison with Leeds, residents of Tokyo are more accustomed to the use of public transport within a more densely populated environment and boast lower carbon emissions per capita. Through literature and visual accompaniments, the essay discussed the urban morphologies of each city at a range of scales, with respects to the fundamental characteristics which define urban compaction. Findings suggested that urban morphology is strongly interlinked at each of the examined scales. Discussions conducted upon a macro scale concluded that the creation of urban compaction relied upon a collected, undispersed form, accommodating people at high densities to support public transport systems. Through accommodating people at high densities, public transport systems become economically viable, whilst providing integral nodes which are capable of providing multiple economic city centres. The polycentric model of Tokyo demonstrates this. Leeds, a monocentric urban form, fails to provide efficient public transport systems as its urban environments are disconnected and accommodate people at low residential densities. The findings at a macro scale have a significant relationship with the formation and morphology of neighbourhoods on a meso scale. In neighbourhoods of a polycentric urban model, such as Nezu in Tokyo, there appeared to be a morphological hierarchy in both buildings and street. A central neighbourhood core, concentrated around public transport routes and stations, accommodated buildings, large in scale and mostly mixed use. As distance increased from the determined core, buildings gradually decreased in height and gradually accommodated a greater proportion of residential dwellings. Population densities expressed similar trends as a greater number of people, lived closer to the main transport route. Hyde Park, an example of a neighbourhood within the mono-centric model of Leeds, expressed no indication of an existing central core. Additionally, no hierarchy in built morphology, street morphology or population density was discovered. It concluded that strong urban centres exist where reliance upon public transport is high. Alternatively, where reliance upon public transport is low, no significant centre exists and a lack of local services is accessible. Emphasis was placed upon 52

conclusion / reflections

the need for a mixture of uses within neighbourhoods as Hyde Park achieved net residential densities similar to Nezu, but failed to show a provision of local services. Strong relationships could also be created between the urban morphology at both a meso scale and a micro scale. Examining individual street and building plots in Nezu and Hyde Park showed that each morphology was strongly linked with the transport modal split of their residents. Nezu expressed a morphology of narrow streets and a high number of passageways. Thus proving to be well adapted for walking and cycling but not well adapted for the accommodation of cars. Hyde Park expressed the opposite. Through the analysis of individual buildings, explanation was also given to the high residential densities and contrasting provision of services between neighbourhoods. Studies of a typical house in Hyde Park showed a common emphasis upon the intensification of people as opposed to the creation of mixed use buildings, as expressed in Nezu. Additional studies examined typical plot ratios concluding that Hyde Park made efficient use of internal space, but failed to efficiently utilise external space. The typical house in Nezu had lower plot ratios but was well accustomed to high building densities over larger areas. It can be ultimately concluded that the study has investigated the urban morphology of the compact urban environment of Nezu, Tokyo in comparison to that of Hyde Park, Leeds. The study has developed a better understanding of the relationship between morphology and compaction. This has been conducted to understand how cities can successfully encourage lower carbon lifestyles. Future studies shall explore the relationship between urban morphology and the cultural perception of density and compaction, each relative to Leeds and Tokyo.

index

bibliography Keio Universiry Laboratory of Architecture and Urban Design. (2010). Urbophilia 2009 : No . 01. Urbophilia . Tokyo, Japan: Keio University. Alexander, E. (1993). Density Measures: A Review and Analysis. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research , 181-201. Architekturforum Zurich. (2012, February 2). Learning From Tokyo Press Release. Retrieved 05 31, 2012, from Learning From Tokyo: http://www.em2n.ch/_data/documents/120214_Media_Release_Learning_from_Tokyo.pdf Bartuska, T. J., & Kazimee, B. A. (2005). Sustanabile Cells of Urbanism: Regeneratie Theory and Practice. In M. Jenks, & N. Dempsey, Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities (pp. 221-243). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Breheny, M. (1996). Centrists, Decentrists and Compromisers: Views on the Future of Urban Form. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (pp. 13-35). London: E & FN Spon. Breheny, M. (1997). Local Authorities and Residential Densities - An Attitude Problemn? Town and Country Planning, 63(3) , pp. 84-90. Bunkyo, Tokyo. (n.d.). Retrieved 06 01, 2012, from enotes: http://www.enotes.com/topic/Bunkyo,_Tokyo Burdett, R., & Sudjic, D. (2011). Living in the Endless City. New York: Phaidon Press Ltd. Burdett, R., & Sudjic, D. (2007). The Endless City. New York: Phaidon Press Ltd. Burton, E., Williams, K., & Jenks, M. (1996). The Compact City and Urban Sustainability: Conflicts and Complexities. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form (pp. 231-247). London: E & FN Spon. Cadavid, P. R. (2012, September 7). WEC â&#x20AC;&#x153;Energy for Megacitiesâ&#x20AC;? Study. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from World Energy Council: http://www.worldenergy.org/documents/annex_7_tokyo_1.pdf Clark, A. (2007, December). Connected Lives. Retrieved 06 01, 2012, from Real Life Methods: http://www.reallifemethods. ac.uk/research/connected/connected-lives-fieldsite-overview-v4.pdf

Dixon, T. (2011). Hotting Up? An Analysis of Low Carbon Plans and Strategies for UK Cities. London: RICS. Fraser, D. (1982). The History of Modern Leeds. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Fulford, C. (1996). The Compact City and the Market. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & N. Dempsey, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (pp. 122-133). London: E & FN Spon. Girardet, H. (1999). Creating Sustainable Cities. Totnes: Green Books Ltd.

index / bibliography

Green, R. (2005). Creating a Sustainable City Region. In MikeJnks, & N. Dempsey, Futre Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities (pp. 95-112). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Hanaki, K. (2012, March 4). Toward Low Carbon City, Comparitive Study of Three Cities; Tokyo, Copenhagen and Canberra. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from Integrated Research System for Sustainable Science: http://en.ir3s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/pages/119/ file20100304_10.pdf Hillman, M. (1996). In Favour of the Compact City. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City; A Sustainable Urban Form? (pp. 36-52). London: E & FN Spon. Jacobs, J. (1962). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. London: Cape. Jenks, M., & Dempsey, N. (2005). Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Jenks, M., Burton, E., & Williams, K. (1996). The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? London: E & FN Spon. Jevstar Ltd. (n.d.). The Metropolitan Area of Leeds. Retrieved May 20, 2012, from British Towns and Villages Network: http://www. british-towns.net/en/level_3_display.asp?GetL2=303 Leeds City Council. (n.d.). Census 2001: Leeds: The Big Picture. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from Leeds City Council: http://www. leeds.gov.uk/files/Internet2007/2005/week35/inter__2BCA2EC659245A8C80256E16003FED08_34c3c6bc-c5de-4cf3-8bbc01e49a0f2a3b.pdf Leeds City Council. (2009). Leeds Transport Statistics. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from Leeds City Council: http://www.leeds.gov. uk/files/Internet2007/2010/7/leeds%20transport%20statistics%202009%20final.pdf Leeds City Council. (2012, September). Village and Neighbourhood Design Statements. Retrieved 4 6, 2012, from Leeds City Council: http://www.leeds.gov.uk/files/Internet2007/2010/40/headingley%20nds%20low-res.pdf Llewelyn-Davies. (1994a). Providing More Homes in Urban Areas. York: School for Advanced Urban Studies. Lovelock, J. (2007). The Revenge of Gaia. London: Penguin Books.

Lovelock, J. (2012). The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning. London: Penguin Books. LTA Academy Singapore. (2011, November). Passenger Transport Mode Shares in World Cities. JOURNEYS , 60-70. Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. (1989a). Cities and Automobile Dependence: A Sourcebook. Victoria: Gower, Aldershot and Brookfield. Office for National Statistics. (2011, June 30). Population Estimates Analysis Tool - Mid 2010. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from Office for National Statistics: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-231847 Office for National Statistics. (2011, June 30). Population Estimates for UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, Mid-2010. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from Office for National Statistics: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/populationestimates-for-uk--england-and-wales--scotland-and-northern-ireland/mid-2010-population-estimates/index.html Office for National Statistics. (2010, May 13). Revised Population Estimates 2002-2008. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from http:// www.leeds.gov.uk/files/Internet2007/2010/24/revised%20population%20analysis%20for%202008%20vrf%281%29.pdf Office for National Statistics. (2001). United Kingdom Census 2001. Office for National Statistics. Radovic, D. (2009). Eco-Urbanity: Towards well-mannered built enironments. New York: Routledge. Rogers, R. (1997). Cities for a small planet. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Rogers, R., & Power, A. (2000). Cities for a small country. London: Faber and Faber Limited. Scoffham, E., & Vale, B. (1996). How Comapct is Sustainable - How Sustainable is Compact? In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Fom (pp. 66-73). London: E & FN Spon. Sherlock, H. (1990). Cities Are Good For Us. London: Transport 2000. Shimbun, Y. (2004, March 6). Tokyo Govt May Measure Firmsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; CO2 Levels. Retrieved May 20, 2012, from Global Carbon Project: http://www.globalcarbonproject.org Statistics Bureau. (2011, February 25). Preliminary Counts of the Population and Households . Retrieved May 20, 2012, from Portal Site of Official Statistics of Japan: http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/ListE.do?bid=000001029548&cycode=0 Tokyo Metropolitan Government. (2012). Population of Tokyo. Retrieved May 20, 2012, from Tokyo Metropolitan Government: http://www.metro.tokyo.jp/ENGLISH/PROFILE/overview03.htm United Nations. (2011, November). Human Development Report 2011. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from http://hdr.undp.org/en/ media/HDR_2011_EN_Table1.pdf Urban Task Force. (1999). Towards an Urban Renaissance. DETR.

Welbank, M. (1996). The Search for a Sustainable Urban Form. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (pp. 74-82). London: E & FN Spon. Williams, K., Burton, E., & Jenks, M. (1996). Acheiving the Compact City though Itensification: An Acceptable Option. In M. Jenks, E. Burton, & K. Williams, The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form (pp. 83-96). London: E & FN Spon.

index / bibliography