Accessibility and Street Layout Exploring spatial equity in

More documents

Recommendations

Info

connectivity and depth of all routes in a network are calculated. Since the sum of these fundamental measures equates to 1 for each route, the sum of their averages definitely equates to 1. So it will permit to plot each network as a single point on a route-gram where other networks can be plotted and be observed comparatively. Het-gram is another diagram where networks are plotted according to three other properties namely complexity, recursivity and regularity. This diagram then helps to identify the degree of heterogeneity and complexity of a network as well as comparing it with other networks. The recently mentioned properties are helpful in discerning the degree of complexity across networks which are shortly defined as follows. Table 5.3. Route structure analysis data of the studied neighbourhoods Total Routes Relative continuity Relative connectivity Relative depth Irregularity Regularity 62 recursivity Complexity Bredäng 60 0.26 0.279 0.457 0.312 0.683 0.083 0.233 Rinkeby 35 0.27 0.312 0.457 0.23 0.77 0.115 0.115 Rågsved 47 0.22 0.298 0.451 0.387 0.612 0.102 0.285 Irregularity indicates the degree of heterogeneity in a network. It is measured by dividing number of distinct route types by the total number of routes. Regularity then is proposed as a complement value to irregularity so as the sum of two measures is equal to one. To precisely capture complexity of a network two other properties have been introduced in route analysis which are called resursivity and complexity. Figure 5.14 shows three types of network helpful to distinguish different levels of complexity. Layout features a ‘comb’ shape which is clearly regular in having a series of identical cantilevers connect to a collector. Layout C shows an irregular structure which is indeed singularly irregular, in that all 11 routes are of a distinct type. How about layout B? It is irregular in the sense of having all routes of a distinct type (since each route is indicated by a different depth). Yet it is also suggest a kind of regularity because of its repetitive, fractal like branching where the same basic topological form is repeated at different depth. To cope with this issue, two measures of complexity and recusivity can help effectively. Recursivity regards those routes which are only distinguished as a different type due to depth value. Accordingly recusivity is calculated by number of depths divided by total number of routes (where the number of depths is simply equivalent to the maximum depth). The other measure termed complexity is
defined as the number of distinct types of route present over and above number of distinct types generated by difference in depth alone- that is the number of distinct types present less the value of maximum depth- all divided by the total number of routes. The properties of the three neighbourhood units are shown in the Table 5.3 What is picked out in the table is that all three cases are rather deep network which as plotted in the net-gram are placed in the upper part of route gram (Figure 5.15). According to Marshal and the examples presented in his book, this part of route gram specifies Figures 5.14. Networks demonstrating three different propoerties (A) Regular, (B) Recursive , (C) Complex tributary networks (Marshall 2005). Three basic properties of each network are almost similar to each other which place them close together in the route-gram but considering complexity and regularity they vary substantially. Rågsved network seems to be more complicated in the sense that both values of irregularity and complexity are rather high. On the other hand Rinkeby stands in contrast to Rågsved by implying high regularity and a low degree of complexity. Bredäng stands somewhere between these two but closer to Rågsved since its properties of irregularity and complexity are relatively high. Figures 5.15. The three studied neighbourhood are plotted in the netgram according to their mean values of connectivity, continuity and depth. 63
Page 1:
Accessibility and Street Layout Exp
Page 5:
Abstract This thesis revolves aroun
Page 8 and 9:
Preface When I arrived in Stockholm
Page 11 and 12: Introduction The present study has
Page 13 and 14: tween dwellings and certain local f
Page 15 and 16: 1. Research Objectives The conceptu
Page 17: other important issue is the relati
Page 20 and 21: - Latent demand can be assessed thr
Page 22 and 23: The third approach measures travel
Page 25 and 26: 3. Methods The purpose of this chap
Page 27 and 28: and interpret those terms that sign
Page 29 and 30: Continuity equates to the number of
Page 31 and 32: identifies objectivity of space ins
Page 33 and 34: affect emergent to and through move
Page 35 and 36: 4. Case Studies This chapter gives
Page 37 and 38: Rinkeby Rinkeby is located in the n
Page 39 and 40: Figures 4.4. Situation of Bredäng
Page 41: Street network in Rågsved is almos
Page 44 and 45: line represents both a space possib
Page 46 and 47: nbyvägen. The remainders of the ro
Page 48 and 49: Place Syntax Analysis of Rinkeby Pl
Page 50 and 51: Bredäng The axial model of Bredän
Page 52 and 53: Figures 5.7. Bredäng route network
Page 54 and 55: tween 248 meters from the communal
Page 56 and 57: most of the lines in blue and green
Page 58 and 59: Place Syntax analysis of Rågsved I
Page 60 and 61: the Table 5.2 a number of basic mea
Page 65 and 66: 6. Discussion So far we have examin
Page 67 and 68: commonly attributed to tributary ne
Page 69 and 70: and vehicular routes do not interse
Page 71 and 72: 7. Proposals This chapter presents
Page 73 and 74: Ribkeby has been made on a smaller
Page 75 and 76: The Figure 7.3, displays the propos
Page 77 and 78: where the new street traverses nort
Page 79 and 80: oaden our view and particularly con
Page 81: Talen E., Anselin L. (1998) ‘Asse
show all

Accessibility and Street Layout Exploring spatial equity in

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?