patterns of contemporary suburbanizationcase studies

patterns of contemporary suburbanization
methods of analysis
kiril stanilov
CASA June 2009

Urban form
contrasts

kiril stanilov
CASA June 2009

land uses 1960

Managing suburban growth in Seattle

commercial
industrial
multi family
multi-family

Question
How have land use patterns changed as a result of new growth
management policies enacted in 1990?
Sub-questionsbi• What happened prior to 1990?
• What is predicted to happen after 1990?
• What is actually happening?
Data sources•Documented patterns of land cover changes from 1960-1990•Current zoning maps
•Residential building permits 1995-1998

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

land uses 1970

land uses 1980

commercial

commercial

industrial

industrial

multi family
multi-family

multi family
multi-family

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

land uses 1990

accessibility and commercial uses
1970-1990

commercial
industrial
multi family
multi-family

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

planned land uses 2020

land uses 1990

commercial

commercial

industrial

industrial

multi family
multi-family

multi family
multi-family

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

land uses 2020

residential permits
1991-2000

commercialindustrial
multi family
multi-family• Consolidation andconcentration of
growth in large
suburban centers• Introduction of a
new category of mixeduses• Drastic increase in
the amount of land
zoned for multi family
useskiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

multi-family permits

conclusions

1991-2000

1991-2000

Where
hgrowthh management succeeds:d• concentrating most of the growthwithin the growth boundaries• concentrating higher density
residential development within andaround large suburban centers
Where growth management fails:• allowing too much single family
development outside of growthboundaries• mixed use zones slow to appear• concentratingt tit
too muchh ddevelopmentlt
in large suburban centers ofquestionable scale• ignoring development in medium andsmall suburban centerskiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

tri-county shopping center

tri-county shopping centercincinnati ohiocincinnati ohio

And you may ask yourself
Whathiis thathb
beautiful
if l hhouse?
And you may ask yourself
Where does that highway go?
And you may ask yourself
Am I right?...Am I wrong?
And you may tell yourself
MY GOD!...WHAT HAVE I DONE?

retail space (m2) per 1,000 residents
share of national retail sales(Talking Heads “Once in a Lifetime”)

Mall of America attracts more visitors than
Disneyland and Grand Canyon combined

Europe100
12%USA
1,80050%

Tri-county regional shopping center - 4 million
square feet of retail space

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1960

zoning 1960

buildings 1956

buildings 1962

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1967

zoning 1967

buildings 1962

buildings 1973

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1975

zoning 1975

buildings 1973

buildings 1980

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1984

zoning 1984buildings 1980

buildings 1990

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1991

zoning 1991

buildings 1990buildings 1997

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

zoning 1998

moscow

praguesofia

ljubljanabuildings 1997

kiril stanilov
CASA november 2008

kiril stanilov
CASA november 2008

residential growth patterns

suburbanization in eastern europe

praguemoscow

Estonia Latvia
Estonia,Latvia, Croatia
Croatia, Slovakia
Slovakia, Poland
Poland,Hungary, and Bulgaria are amongst
the most sprawling urban areas in Europeof the last two decades

sofiakiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

drivers of residential suburbanization

drivers of residential suburbanization
prague dense built-up urban cores disinvestment in inner citycommunities need for closer association withhabitat

demand for larger dwellings
Western Europe
PragueBucharest
Sofia

36 sq m18 sq m17 sq m15 sq mmoscowtallinnkiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

shopping center retail space (m2) per 1,000 residents

commercial suburbanization

decentralization of offices

suburbanization

moscow

praguekiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

environmentalit l ddegradationd tiWest London 1875
Bulgaria
Slovakia
Slovenia
PolandHungary2004

Lithuania

1990

LatviaEstonia
Czech Republic
0100

200

300

400500kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

West London 1895

West London 1915

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA november 2008

CASA november 2008

West London 1935

West London 1960

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

West London 1985

West London 2005

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

1875

1875

1895

1960

kmhaRoad network
Developed land

4000
3500
3000
25002000
1500
1000
50001915

1985

1875-95 1985-15 1915-35 1935-60 1960-85 1985-05

2005

kiril stanilov
CASA november 2008

class 1class 2class 01875

187
1875
51935

400
350
300
250
200
150
1005001875-95 1895-15 1915-35 1935-60 1960-85 1985-05

189
1895

191
1915

193
1935

555196
1960

198
1985

200
2005

055

industrial 1875

industrial 1895

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009industrial 1915

industrial 1935

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

industrial 1960

industrial 1985

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009industrial 2005

multi-family 1975

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

multi-family 1915

multi-family 1935

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

multi-family 1960

multi-family 1985

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA June 2009

multi-family 2005

why cellular automata?
CA/CS models are: particularly adept at dealing with spatial phenomena
 able to capture fine-scale dynamic adaptations
 able to capture complex behavior• decentralized self-organization• emergence• abruptbchangeh highly adaptable for a variety of contexts
 open to outside influences (constraints)
 highly visual environments

kiril stanilov

kiril stanilov

CASA June 2009

CASA november 2008

key issues
emphasis on application in urban planning strongerg
integration
gof ppublic p
policies and pplanningg stronger integration of transportation and infrastructure
networks
 from cell-based to object-based modeling integration with agent-based modelingkiril stanilov
CASA november 2008