Location, Pattern, and

Structure of Cities

• Ranking Urban Centers: classified by

service offerings (not size)

– Hamlet: few services

– Village: dozens w/ more specialization

– Town: more services & specialization w/ a

hinterland (a.k.a. market area, or

surrounding service area)

– City: more specialization, larger hinterland,

greater centrality, has a CBD (central

business district, “downtown” or core)

– Megalopolis – where large metropolitan

areas have grown together (Bosnywash,

DFW)

• Situation and Site

– Situation: position relative to travel routes,

farmlands, manufacturing complexes,

towns, cities (near & distant surroundings);

subject to change: Chicago, Shenzhen

(favorable), “Rust Belt” (unfavorable)

– Site: physical qualities of a place; valley,

coastal plain, plateau, island,… Paris (first

established on the Seine River), Singapore

(separation from Malaysia)

• Central Places

– All urban centers have a certain economic

reach (range) and centrality

When Hong Kong became a Special Economic

Zone in China, Shenzhen became the fastest

growing city in the world.

• Central Place Theory

– Walter Christaller (1933); wanted to show

how & where urban areas would be

functionally & spatially distributed

– Assumptions: flat area, no barriers, even

soil fertility, even distribution of pop. and

purchasing power, uniform trans. network,

constant range of sale

– Central goods and services = provided only

at a central place, or city (available to

consumers in a surrounding region)

– Threshold – min. market needed to keep a

central place in business

• Range of sale = max. distance

people will travel for good or

service (economic reach)

• Complementary region =

exclusive hinterland w/ a

monopoly

• Hexagons – logically, the

complementary region would be

circular, but problems arise

(unserved or overlapping areas);

hexagons fit perfectly

• Nesting pattern (region-w/in-

region); relates to scale

Christaller’s Hierarchy of

Settlements & Service Areas

• John Borchert (1967): analyzed

urbanization in North America (4 epochs);

based on impact of transportation &

communication

– 1) Sail-Wagon Epoch (1790-1830)

– 2) Iron Horse Epoch (1830-70); steam-

powered locomotive

– 3) Steel-Rail Epoch (1870-1920); full impact

of Ind. Rev., hinterlands expand

– 4) Auto-Air-Amenity Epoch (1920-70); gas-

powered internal combustion engine

– 5) High Technology Epoch? (1970-); service

& information

• Models of Internal City

Structure – based on

competition among land

uses

• Concentric Zone Model

• Ernest Burgess (1920s);

Chicago: 1) CBD, 2) Zone

of transition (res.

deterioration & light ind.),

3) Blue-collar workers, 4)

Middle-class, 5) Suburban

ring

• Dynamic: city grows; inner

rings affect outer ones

Chicago in the 1920s

• Sector Model

• Homer Hoyt (1939);

criticized Burgess Model

as too simple & inaccurate

• Growth creates a pie-

shaped urban structure

• Low-rent areas could

extend from the CBD to

the outer edge (3)

• The same is true w/ high-

rent, transportation, and

industry

• Multiple Nuclei Model

• Chauncy Harris & Edward

Ullman (1945); neither of two

models are accurate

• CBD was losing its dominant

position as the nucleus of

the urban area

• Separate nuclei become

specialized and

differentiated, not located in

relation to any distance

attribute

– Urban Realms Model– Urban realms – parts of

giant conurbations; self-sufficient suburban sectors (focused on their own independent CBD)

– Edge cities (Garreau) –outer realms; third wave: 1) suburbanization after WWII, 2) malling of US (moving marketplace to suburbs in 1960s & 70s), 3) edge cities (moving jobs to suburbs in 1980s & 90s)

– Edge cities have extensive office & retail space, few residential buildings (not cities 30 years ago)

Urban Realms (and Edge Cities) of Los

Angeles

Global Urbanization

Europe is the most urban continent, while Africa is urbanizing most quickly.

• Combines radial sectors & conc. zones, growing rapidly

• CBD – market & high-rise sectors

• Commercial spine –extension of CBD; surrounded by elite res.

• Mall = edge city; suburban node

• Zone of Maturity –middle class

• In Situ Accretion – more modest housing

Griffin-Ford Model

• Outer-ring = poverty; dense pop.

• Periférico – squatter settlements; homes from discarded materials; unskilled & impoverished

• Disamenity sector –tenement apartment housing; also extremely poor; drug lords often “run the show”

• Gentrification zone –rehabilitation of inner-city; historic buildings may be preserved

Cuzco, Peru

La Paz, Bolivia

• SE Asian City; T.G. McGee Model

• Hybrid of sectors & zones, growing rapidly

• Old colonial port zone & commercial district are city’s focus

• No formal CBD; separate clusters: gov’t zone, West. comm. zone (practically a CBD in itself), alien comm. zone (mostly Chinese), and mixed land-use zone (misc. economic activities, including light industry)

• Market gardening zone – along periphery

• New industrial park (estate) – farther out

• Residential areas tend to get poorer away from the port zone (similar to Latin-American city)

Singapore

Shanghai

Bangkok

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Tokyo New

York

Mexico

City

Mumbai Lagos

1975

2000

2015

The World’s Largest Metropolitan Areas

• Megacities – primarily in LDCs; Mumbai, India; Lagos,

Nigeria; Dhaka, Bang.; Karachi, Pak.,… Tokyo, Japan

(MDC; 26)

• Africa is urbanizing the fastest, followed by S. Asia, E.

Asia, then S. and Cent. America

• Many LDCs lack enforceable zoning laws, residents are crowded together into overpopulated tenements & slums

• Cities in the Developing World– Squatter settlements & shantytowns

encircling megacities (e.g. Lagos, Mumbai, Cape Town,…) may appear homogeneous, but have their own ethnic neighborhoods

– City govt’s lack resources for adequate education, housing, police, or medical facilities

– Informal economy – work not taxed or calculated by govt’s (urban immigrants in shantytowns)

– Remittances – part of a person’s income sent back home, becomes a mainstay for those left behind

• Urbanization: Pro & Con

– Pro: 1)fewer people in rural areas – better for forests, soil, wildlife,…,

2)lower family sizes, better education, better health

3) Economies in more urban countries tend to be more developed

– Con:1) Hazards of Site – outlying areas more susceptible to landslides, floods, storms, earthquakes,…

2) Loss of Land – farmland lost (US = 1 million acres/yr.; China = 3x as much)

3) Changed Land Cover – natural landscape becomes cultural (pavement, buildings,…); less rainfall, more pollutants

4) Impact of Pollution – growing volumes of contaminants (in air, water, and soil); Mexico City, Delhi, Bangkok are most smog-ridden

5) Production of Waste – lack of sewer facilities (>3 million w/o in Mexico City); burning garbage heaps

6) Larger Demand for Water – much higher than in rural areas; riverfront cities create pollution as well

7) Changing Consumption Habits – urban dwellers use more energy, change diets (meat), dress, and recreation habits

The ratio of urban to rural dwellers is steadily increasing. By 2015

more than half of the world's population will be urban. The number

of people living in mega-cities—those containing more than 10

million inhabitants—will double to more than 400 million.