Urban spatial order: street network orientation, configuration, and entropy

https://appliednetsci.springeropen.com/articles/10.1007/s41109-019-0189-1

by taubek • 2 years ago

29 7 2 years ago

appliednetsci.springeropen.com

ororroro• 2 years ago

The definition of the extents of a city is completely arbitrary. For example Manhattan is only part of a city, yet the authors don't even blink at treating it alongside cities that are located all around a hilly harbor with extensive sprawl (Sydney) or that constitute an entire country (Singapore).

admaiora• 2 years ago

This paper is more than anything a showcase for the method they created. I think the point of their visualisations is to make them as appealing as possible, and people want to see how Manhattan looks, but they might now want to see how a certain neighbourhood in Singapore looks. And that choice definitely did help create virality for their research a few years back.

Cordiali• 2 years ago

The extent is also culturally specific. In America, Sydney could be regarded as multiple cities. Likewise in Australia, Dallas-Fort Worth would be regarded as a single city.

sarnu• 2 years ago

The author of the paper is also the author of a really useful python package for processing OSM data: https://github.com/gboeing/osmnx

therockspush2• 2 years ago

Weird. I just bumped into this paper when I was trying to learn why Charlotte has such a confusing layout. I've never felt more lost.

euroderf• 2 years ago

A quick look in a mapping app shows pretty much a rectangular grid.

therockspush2• 2 years ago

Charlotte is specifically called out as one of the worst offenders in this article mate.

Urban spatial order: street network orientation, configuration, and entropy

Related Stories