Relative spatial variability in building heights and its spatial association: Application for the spatial clustering of harmonious and inharmonious building heights in Tokyo
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2024
Relative spatial variability in building heights and its spatial association: Application for the spatial clustering of harmonious and inharmonious building heights in Tokyo
Whether or not a streetscape skeleton – the 3D spaces of streets defined by the arrangement of surrounding buildings – is vertically harmonious depends to a large extent on the degree of difference between the heights of buildings adjacent to one another, known as the relative spatial variability in building heights. Surprisingly, this subject has been overlooked in previous studies examining the harmony of streetscapes. Data on precise building heights are indispensable for evaluating the relative spatial variability in building heights and its spatial association. The recent relaxation of data limitations on precise building heights in Tokyo enabled us to identify the relative spatial variability in building heights and quantify its spatial association. Therefore, in this paper we aim to answer the following question: where are harmonious or inharmonious building heights locally clustered? To this end, we computed the spatial association of the relative spatial variability in building heights as a set of edges whose indices enabled us to evaluate the local indicator of spatial association (LISA). Subsequently, we statistically demarcated locally harmonious and inharmonious building heights without having to set predetermined basic spatial units. In this respect, our methods and findings are novel and can contribute to establishing a new method for measuring the variability in vertical streetscape skeletons, which is important for developing urban design policies.
AnselinL (1995) Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geographical Analysis27(2): 93–115.
2.
AnselinLReySJ (2010) Perspectives on spatial data analysis. In: Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer, 1–20.
3.
AraldiAFuscoG (2019) From the street to the metropolitan region: pedestrian perspective in urban fabric analysis. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science46(7): 1243–1263.
4.
BabaY (2011) Machizukuri and urban codes in historical and contemporary Kyoto. In: MarshallS (ed), Urban Coding and Planning. London: Routledge, 120–136.
5.
BarnettJ (2011) How codes shaped development in the United States, and why they should be changed. In: MarshallS (ed), Urban Coding and Planning. London: Routledge, 201–226.
6.
BattyMCarvalhoRHudson-SmithA, et al. (2008) Scaling and allometry in the building geometries of Greater London. The European Physical Journal B63(3): 303–314.
7.
BertaudABruecknerJK (2005) Analyzing building-height restrictions: predicted impacts and welfare costs. Regional Science and Urban Economics35(2): 109–125.
8.
BextonWHHeronWScottRH (1954) Effects of decreased variation in the sensory environment. Canadian Journal of Psychology8(2): 70–76.
9.
BiljeckiFLedouxHStoterJ (2017) Generating 3D city models without elevation data. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems64: 1–18.
10.
BlackWRThomasI (1998) Accidents on Belgium’s motorways: a network autocorrelation analysis. Journal of Transport Geography6(1): 23–31.
11.
BoeingG (2018) Measuring the complexity of urban form and design. Urban Design International23(4): 281–292.
12.
CarusoGHilalMThomasI (2017) Measuring urban forms from inter-building distances: combining MST graphs with a local index of spatial association. Landscape and Urban Planning163: 80–89.
13.
ChauKWWongSKYauY, et al. (2007) Determining optimal building height. Urban Studies44(3): 591–607.
14.
DoverVMassengaleJ (2013) Street Design: The Secret to Great Cities and Towns. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
15.
ElshestawayY (1997) Urban complexity: toward the measurement of the physical complexity of streetscapes. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research14: 301–316.
16.
EwingRHandyS (2009) Measuring the unmeasurable: urban design qualities related to walkability. Journal of Urban Design14(1): 65–84.
17.
FleischmannMFeliciottiARomiceO, et al. (2020) Morphological tessellation as a way of partitioning space: improving consistency in urban morphology at the plot scale. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems80: 101441.
18.
GoetzMZipfA (2012) OpenStreetMap in 3D – detailed insights on the current situation in Germany. Proceedings of the AGILE 2012 International Conference on Geographic Information Science. Avignon, France, 288–292.
19.
GuneyCAkdag GirginkayaSCagdasG, et al. (2012) Tailoring a geomodel for analyzing an urban skyline. Landscape and Urban Planning105(1–2): 160–173.
20.
HarveyCAultman-HallL (2016) Measuring urban streetscapes for livability: a review of approaches. The Professional Geographer68(1): 149–158.
21.
HarveyCAultman-HallLTroyA, et al. (2017) Streetscape skeleton measurement and classification. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science44(4): 668–692.
22.
HerzogTRKaplanSKaplanR (1976) The prediction of preference for familiar urban places. Environment and Behavior8(4): 627–645.
23.
JacobsAB (1993) Great Streets. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
24.
JedwabRBarrJBruecknerJK (2022) Cities without skylines: worldwide building-height gaps and their possible determinants and implications. Journal of Urban Economics132: 103507.
25.
KawamuraS (2010) A study about the changes of the building form with the height regulations: a case of Shinjuku ward, Tokyo. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan45.1(1): 8–13.
26.
LiMKoksETaubenböckH, et al. (2020) Continental-scale mapping and analysis of 3D building structure. Remote Sensing of Environment245: 111859.
27.
MarshallS (2005) Street and Patterns. London: Spon Press.
Milojevic-DupontNWagnerFNachtigallF, et al. (2023) EUBUCCO v0.1: European building stock characteristics in a common and open database for 200+ million individual buildings. Scientific Data10(1): 147.
30.
MonteroGCarusoGHilalM, et al. (2023) A partition-free spatial clustering that preserves topology: application to built-up density. Journal of Geographical Systems25(1): 5–35.
31.
NicholJWongMS (2005) Modeling urban environmental quality in a tropical city. Landscape and Urban Planning73(1): 49–58.
32.
OkabeABootsBSugiharaK, et al. (2000) Spatial Tessellations: Concepts and Applications of Voronoi Diagrams. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
33.
PerezDKämpfJHScartezziniJL (2013) Urban area energy flow microsimulation for planning support: a calibration and verification study. International Journal of Agile Systems and Management6(3–4): 260–271.
34.
PesaresiMCorbaneCRenC, et al. (2021) Generalized vertical components of built-up areas from global digital elevation models by multi-scale linear regression modelling. PLoS One16(2): e0244478.
35.
RattiCRichensP (2004) Raster analysis of urban form. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31(2): 297–309.
36.
RoyEPronkMAgugiaroG, et al. (2022) Inferring the number of floors for residential buildings. International Journal of Geographical Information Science37: 938–962.
37.
SchläpferMLeeJBettencourtL (2015) Urban skylines: building heights and shapes as measures of city size. arXiv: 1512.00946.
38.
StampsAE (2002) Fractals, skylines, nature and beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning60(3): 163–184.
39.
StampsAE (2005) Enclosure and safety in urbanscapes. Environment and Behavior37(1): 102–133.
40.
TaraALawsonGRenataA (2021) Measuring magnitude of change by high-rise buildings in visual amenity conflicts in Brisbane. Landscape and Urban Planning205: 103930.
41.
UsuiH (2018) Statistical distribution of building lot frontage: application for Tokyo downtown districts. Journal of Geographical Systems20(3): 295–316.
42.
UsuiH (2019) Statistical distribution of building lot depth: theoretical and empirical investigation of downtown districts in Tokyo. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science46(8): 1499–1516.
43.
UsuiH (2021) Building height distribution under zoning regulations: theoretical derivation based on allometric scaling analysis and application to harmonise building heights. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science48(9): 2520–2535.
44.
UsuiH (2023a) Automatic measurement of building setbacks and streetscape widths and their spatial variability along streets and in plots: integration of streetscape skeletons and plot geometry. International Journal of Geographical Information Science37(4): 810–838.
45.
UsuiH (2023b) Comparison of precise and approximated building height: estimation from number of building storeys and spatial variations in the Tokyo metropolitan region. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science50(2): 487–499.
46.
UsuiHAsamiY (2013) Estimation of mean lot depth and its accuracy. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan48(3): 357–362.
47.
UsuiHAsamiY (2020) Size distribution of building lots and density of buildings and road networks: theoretical derivation based on Gibrat’s law and empirical study of downtown districts in Tokyo. International Regional Science Review43(3): 229–253.
48.
UsuiHTerakiAOkunukiK, et al. (2020) A comparison of neighbourhood relations based on ordinary Delaunay diagrams and area Delaunay diagrams: an application to define the neighbourhood relations of buildings. International Journal of Geographical Information Science34(11): 2177–2203.
49.
VermeulenTKnopf-LenoirCVillonP, et al. (2015) Urban layout optimization framework to maximize direct solar irradiation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems51: 1–12.
50.
WatanabeHHonmaYHonmaK, et al. (2017) Effects of height restriction and relaxation by sky factor focusing on digestion floor area ratio and building height. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan52(3): 682–688.
51.
YamadaIThillJC (2010) Local indicators of network-constrained clusters in spatial patterns represented by a link attribute. Annals of the Association of American Geographers100(2): 269–285.
52.
YuSMHanSSChaiCH (2007) Modeling the value of view in high-rise apartments: a 3D GIS approach. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design34(1): 139–153.
53.
ZachariasJ (1999) Preferences for view corridors through the urban environment. Landscape and Urban Planning43(4): 217–225.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
