Parameterisation of Urban Sprawl Amon Boontore. S p r a w l P l a n i m e t e r Slpanimeter + Optional Title.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
What is the capital of the UK? London What is the capital of France? Paris.
Advertisements

SCATTER WORKSHOP, Brussels, November 9th 2004 KARI LAUTSO / LT CONSULTANTS SCATTER SPRAWLING CITIES AND TRANSPORT: FROM EVALUATION TO RECOMMENDATIONS Lic.
SCATTER WORKSHOP Virpi Pastinen/LT Consultants SCATTER SPRAWLING CITIES AND TRANSPORT: FROM EVALUATION TO RECOMMENDATIONS SCATTER WORKSHOP MILAN.
Spatial analysis tools for biodiversity indicators on habitats and ecosystems Expert meeting on multi-scales mapping and integrated analysis of landscape.
Study Project The Countries and Capitals of the European Union.
George Büttner et al.: Institute of Geodesy, Cartography and Remote Sensing (FÖMI) Remote Sensing Centre Budapest, Hungary Construction.
SELMA – results SCATTER workshop 8 June Brussels 2004 Annet Bogaerts.
Industry in Europe, 1870 (Pg. 367) 1.Label these countries: Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Serbia, Austria-Hungary, Switzerland, Germany,
GILBERTO GALLONI “Best practices in Europe:
MEGALOPOLIS (CHAPTER 4: PART 1). Your Mental Image?
EPRU, CPSV, UPC Barcelona, Spain The Use of Remote Sensing to Describe Residential Densities Structures in Urban Land Use Remote Sensing application of.
Western and Southern Europe The world’s leading destination regions.
SCATTER-SELMA joint workshop, Brussels, 8 June 2004 Testing potential solutions to control urban sprawl The Brussels case city.
14 – day tour of Europe FROM UKRAINE TO … SEE 14 COUNTRIES OF EUROPE IN 14 DAYS! LONDON AND …
Virpi PastinenSCATTER WORKSHOP SCATTER SPRAWLING CITIES AND TRANSPORT: FROM EVALUATION TO RECOMMENDATIONS SCATTER WORKSHOP MILAN OCTOBER 24.
SCATTER WORKSHOP, Brussels, June 8th PAAVO MOILANEN / STRAFICA LTD SCATTER Helsinki Model sprawl analysis Paavo Moilanen.
Why Do Suburbs Have Distinctive Problems?
Scan in Rank-Size graph Mature urban systems – like US – nearly linear relationship Primate cities/urban primacy Examples – UK, Mexico City Need graphs.
Multiple Dimensions of Sprawl: How Does LA Stand Up? George Galster, Wayne State University Royce Hanson, U. Maryland-Baltimore Co. Hal Wolman, George.
Presented by Runlin Cai, CAUPD Affiliate. Issue: What determines travel mode choice Transit mode share in LA county was 3% in (Source: SCAG Year.
1 Best practice of integrating Mobility Management in Land Use Planning in the field of off street parking policy European Conference on Mobility Management.
EMTA Strategy & Working program Lyon meeting October2006.
A comparison using the EMTA Barometer 2004 data This work has been realized on the basis of EMTA Barometer 2004 data recently published. Its objectives.
Proposed EEA approach to establish an environmental- compatible wind energy potential in Europe Hans Eerens MNP Netherlands Copenhagen 9 November 2006.
Remote Sensing Classification Systems
Marta Pérez-Soba Janneke Roos Sander Mücher Han Naeff Alterra, The Netherlands Brussels, 14th June 2001 Localisation of livestock systems.
© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 13: Urban Patterns The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography.
Corine land cover, Land accounts and scenario development An introduction Jean-Louis Weber & Ferràn Paramo 26 February 2003.
Why do inner suburbs have distinctive problems?
Mobility energy use for different residential urban patterns in India Anil Kashyap, Jim Berry, Stanley McGreal, School of the Built Environment.
Urban Structure Three models of urban structure –Concentric zone model –Sector model –Multiple nuclei model –Geographic applications Use of the models.
Analysis and flood models for Ljubljana Urban Region Elco Koks & Hans de Moel.
EEA 2006 Accounts Update Tables. PART 1 Table 1.1: Classifying land cover and land cover change for land accounting.
JRC-AL – Bonn on Disaggregation of CAPRI results Renate Köble Adrian Leip.
Urbanization Key Issue #4: Why do suburbs have distinctive problems?
Roger Sayre, PhD Senior Scientist for Ecosystems Land Change Science Program U.S. Geological Survey and GEO Task Lead GI-14 Commonalities in Global Land.
CORINE land cover 1990 European Topic Centre on Terrestrial Environment (ETC-TE) Backdating CORINE land cover 1990 to 1950’ies 30x30km windows centred.
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Mr. Resnick’s 8 th Grade Geography Class The Geography of Western Europe.
Fiscal Impact of Sprawl on Suburban Households in Southeast Michigan Hui-Chun Huang.
Regional Policy Towards indicators of proximity to services in Europe's major cities Enhancing the analytical use of the GMES Urban Atlas in combination.
Urban Climate Analysis Assignment CLIM-CAP Training Pilot Module 2: Analysis techniques for urban climate - Assignment - "With the support of the Lifelong.
Kobe Boussauw – 15/12/2011 – Spatial Planning in Flanders: political challenges and social opportunities – Leuven Spatial proximity and distance travelled:
How does the environment impact humans?
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Countries and Capitals of Western Europe
Ivan Novković, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Geography
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
The Burbs.
Urban Audit Think Tank 06 March 2007
The Urban Audit project
The Urban Audit follow-up
Selected maps of land cover change in Europe produced from land accounts based on Corine land cover Vol.1: Trends in agriculture and urban.
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
How does the environment impact humans?
Land Cover and Land Use Statistics
Other urban data collections
WP05: Turkey Land Use Change Model
WEST EUROPE MAP REVIEW.
How does the environment impact humans?
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Land Use Modelling Group, Sustainability Assessment Unit (DG JRC)
Testing potential solutions to control urban sprawl
A New Large-Scale Sentinel-2 Benchmark Archive to Drive Deep Learning Studies in Remote Sensing Gencer Sumbul1, Marcela Charfuelan3, Begüm Demir1, Volker.
II. The EU: a Diverse Territory
Focus Collection and use of data in support of urban transport policy:
Chapter 13: Urban Patterns
Presentation transcript:

Parameterisation of Urban Sprawl Amon Boontore

S p r a w l P l a n i m e t e r Slpanimeter + Optional Title

Outline 1)Main Objective 2) Operational Indicators of Urban Sprawl 3) Pilot Study 4) Future Works

Main Objective Geographical Distribution of Land-uses Geographical Separation Travel Urban Sprawl Distance Travelled Measurement is a key initial step in scientific understanding (De Cola & Lam 1993). Definitions Characteristics Indicators

Earle Draper Perhaps diffusion is too kind of word...in bursting its bounds, the city actually sprawled and made the countryside ugly...uneconomic [in terms] of services and doubtful social value. First Used

Sprawl is a pattern of land use in an urbanised area that exhibits low levels of some combination of eight distinct dimensions: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, nuclearity, mixed uses, and proximity (Galster et al 2001). The term is used variously to mean the gluttonous use of land, uninterrupted monotonous development and inefficient use of land (Peiser 2001). Sprawl is the spread-out, skipped over development that characterises the non- central city metropolitan areas and non- metropolitan areas … (Ewing 1997). …low-density development beyond the edge of service and development, which separates where people live from where they shop, work, recreate, and educate- thus requiring cars to move between zones (Seirra Club 1998). 1. Low residential density 2. Unlimited outward extension of new development 3. Spatial segregation of different types of land uses through zoning regulations 4. Leapfrog development 5. No centralised ownership of land or planning of development 6. All transportation dominated by privately owned motor vehicles 7. Fragmentation of governance authority over land uses between many local governments 8. Great variances in the fiscal capacity of local governments 9. Widespread commercial strip development along major roadways 10. Major reliance upon the filtering or “trickle-down” process to provide housing for low-income households (Transportation Research Board 1998). Definitions of Urban Sprawl

Characteristics of Urban Sprawl Subjective Research Approach Time & Data Limitation Subjective Prejudgement Subjective 1)Form 2) Density 3) Land-use Pattern 4) Urban Process 5) Impacts 6) Dependent Variable 7) Aesthetic 8) Example 1) Low Density 2) Spatial Seclusion 3) Single Functional Use

1) Low Density 2) Spatial Seclusion 3) Single Functional Use 2.1) Evenness 2.4) Centralisation 2.2) Complexity 2.3) Clustering Index of Dissimilarity Gini Entropy Atkinson Thiel’s Index Fractal Dimension PAR Geary’s Coefficient Moran’s I Centralisation Index ACI 3.1) Concentration 3.2) Exposure Duncan’s Delta ICO Relative Concentration Index ISO Interaction Index CT G ETA IJI Residential Density Urban Density Residential Land-use Density Density Gradients 1.1) Density Sprawl Conceptual Variables & Indicators

i, j, k = number of tract = Total developable land area = Area of developable land in tract i = Total residential land area = Area of residential land in tract i = Total non-residential land area = Area of non-residential land in tract I = Total developed land area = Area of developed land in tract i = Total residential proportion = Residential Proportion in tract i City A City tract A 1 = 100 City tract A 2 = 100

Index of Dissimilarity: 2.1) Evenness Sprawl Conceptual Variables & Indicators

3.1) Concentration Relative Concentration Index: Sprawl Conceptual Variables & Indicators

3.2) Exposure Interaction Index: Sprawl Conceptual Variables & Indicators

Pilot Study: Data & Methodology Land cover maps 250 metres resolution Year 2000 CORINE (Coordination of Information on the Environment) European Environment Agency Maps Distance Travelled Data Transportation Data International Association of Public Transport (UITP) Year 1995 Case Studies 30 Austria: Graz, Vienna; Belgium: Brussels; Denmark: Copenhagen; Finland: Helsinki; Paris: Lyon, Marseille, Nantes, Paris; Germany: Berlin, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Dusseldorf, Munich, Stuttgart; Greece: Athens; Italy: Milan, Bologna, Rome; Netherlands: Amsterdam; Spain: Barcelona, Madrid; Sweden: Stockholm; UK:Glasgow, London, Manchester, Newcastle

Overall average trip distance (km/trip) Car Public modes Mechanised modes Private modes Motorised modes Overall Mobility (daily trips/cap) – Foot Mechanised modes Public modes Private modes Pilot Study: Data & Methodology Daily Km/cap Mechanised Private Public Motorised All

Mineral extraction sites Undevelopable land Inland marches Beaches, dunes, sands Bare rocks Burnt Areas Glaciers and perpetual snow Peat bogs Dump sites Salt marshes Salines Intertidal flats Water courses Water bodies Coastal lagoons Estuaries Sea and ocean Road and rail networks and associated land R N Construction sites Non-irrigated arable land Permanently irrigated land Rice fields Vineyards Fruit trees and berry plantations Olive groves Pastures Annual crops Complex cultivation patterns Natural vegetation Agro-forestry areas Broad-leaved forest Coniferous forest Mixed forest Natural grasslands Moors and heathland Sclerophyllous vegetation Woodland-schrub Sparsely vegetated areas Developable land Continuous urban fabric Discontinuous urban fabric Residential land Industrial and commercial units Port areasAirports Green urban areas Sport and leisure facilities Non-residential land Pilot Study: Data & Methodology

n Pilot Study: Data & Methodology

Data Sourcing Evenness: IOD Concentration: RCO Exposure: INT Pilot Study: Data & Methodology

Pilot Study: Results R 2 =.176 Sig. =.003

Pilot Study: Results Grouping of Case Studies Range (million m 2 )n XS XL L M SM S Total

Pilot Study: Results R 2 =.883 Sig. =.002 SM-M

Pilot Study: Results R 2 =.549 Sig. =.006 XS-S

Pilot Study: Results R 2 =.415 Sig. =.033 XS-S-SM

Pilot Study: Results XS XL L M SM S RCO-Private (12,.549,.006) IOD-Public (13,.342,.036) RCO-Private (13,.414,.018) IOD-Public (15,.305,.033) INT-Public (11,.415,.033) IOD-Mechanised (9,.714,.004) IOD-Mechanised (8,.683,.011) IOD-Mechanised (10,.733,.002) IOD-Mechanised (9,.705,.005) IOD-Mechanised (8,.833,.002) RCO-Motorised (20,.237,.03) RCO-Private (14,.374,.02) RCO-Motorised (15,.294,.037) RCO-Motorised (27,.176,.03) (5) (9) (1)(10)(4)(1)

Future Works 5x5 Km grid sq n Workable Grid Size Reduction of Indicators ?

Future Works: Sensitivity Plot IOD

Future Works: Sensitivity Plot IOD

RCO Future Works: Sensitivity Plot

INT Future Works: Sensitivity Plot

1) Low Density 2) Spatial Seclusion 3) Single Functional Use 2.1) Evenness 2.4) Centralisation 2.2) Complexity 2.3) Clustering Index of Dissimilarity Gini Entropy Atkinson Thiel’s Index Fractal Dimension PAR Geary’s Coefficient Moran’s I Centralisation Index ACI 3.1) Concentration 3.2) Exposure Duncan’s Delta ICO Relative Concentration Index ISO Interaction Index CT G ETA IJI Residential Density Urban Density Residential Land-use Density Density Gradients 1.1) Density Future Works: Correlations

Thank you