Print

Print
Thank you all.

First of all it is not the whole city but three different districts of the city which are neighbours. I attached the map of the whole city and you can see this urban area in the black rectangle. Also I attached the maps for the three districts separately. I hope this makes the situation clearly.

In regard to Ruben's answer. In the literature the accessibility problem of these neighbourhoods are always associated with lack of permeability into the site and small urban blocks.

In terms of Alans' answer. The deprived area is not the city centre but is indeed an old neighbourhood just in the vicinity of the city centre and at the opposite side of it. And the other two neighbourhoods are rather newer. But it brings one more question. In the literature of the deprived area are associated with spatially segregated which makes brings socio-economic segregation as well. In the case of this research, the map of the whole city almost confirms that and as you can see the areas in the left and right are more integrated globally while the area in the middle is mostly covered by yellow line. Does that confirms the spatially segregation more or less?

Another question is that why in the map of the whole city the area in the middle is all yellow but when I put the three district in one map separately for further analysis the area in the middle turns into red lines while the other two become more green? I would interpret the map in a way that in the two none-deteriorated areas, the left and right rectangle, since the urban blocks are more regular and less complex, the integration is distributed homogeneously and there is no accessibility problem and the map turns into green ( in the spaec syntax attached file). But in the deprived area, in the middle, the small urban blocks makes some lines to have considerable connectivity while the others are not integrated well. That would be why some lines turns into red. I don't know whether what I said is correct or not though !! Is it Correct?

I am looking froward to hearing from you.

Yours Sincerely and Thank your for the help




On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Alan Penn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The same question as Ruben - is this the whole settlement or a cut out area of the full map of a larger city?

If it is the whole, then while the centre is clearly integrated in the whole, this does not necessarily correlate with prosperity of the residents. Often city centres are where the poor live while the rich can afford to isolate themselves. The most expensive residential properties are often in spatially segregated locations.

In this case I would judge from the street layout that the older neighbourhoods are in the centre. The scale of streets and buildings is smaller and I would guess building conditions, room sizes and other aspects of amenity may be lower.  In a growing settlement those with access to capital may build residential buildings in the first 'suburbs', and this then results in a shift of wealth from the centre.

Of course if this is just a partial map of a larger settlement you would need to map the whole thing to make any sense of your question.

Alan


On 25 Oct 2010, at 14:58, Omid Rismanchian wrote:

> Hello everybody
>
> I have a little problem in interpreting the axial line I have made and would be delighted if anybody could help me in this regard. In the attached file you can see the urban area I am working on. The rectangle in the middle is designated as a deteriorated urban area which has accessibility problems in the master plan while the other two are none-deprived neighbourhoods. I was wondering if the deteriorated area has accessibility problem and is suffering from isolation why its streets are shown in Red. Isn’t it true that the more accessible street has more integration value and turns into red? So how should I explain this conflict in this map?
>
> I am looking forward to hearing from you.
> All the Best
>
> <Space Syntax.png>

Alan Penn
Professor of Architectural and Urban Computing
Dean of the Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1H6BT
+44 (0)20 7679 4567
[log in to unmask]



--
Omid Rismanchian
PhD Candidate, Edinburgh College of Art, UK
07549047607

کارشناسی ارشد معماری منظر شهید بهشتی
مدرس دانشگاه شهید رجائی تهران
09123599547