A number of shortcomings of space syntax—a well-known technique of urban analysis—were recently discussed in the scientific literature. They are mostly traceable to the reliance in space syntax on the ‘axial map’: a simplified line-of-sight description of the city, which is then analysed based on its topology. This paper explores how another type of urban representations—namely the urban digital elevation model (DEM), a raster map which stores building heights—could prove helpful in providing complementary information to space syntax. Although the use of DEMs is common in the geo-sciences, their application in urban studies is more recent and shows promise. This paper presents several analysis algorithms to derive urban lines of sight, viewsheds, travelling time maps, and simulations based on cellular automata. The relevance of the approach is discussed, suggesting that it could effectively complement traditional space syntax in the coming years.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtzwangerKShäferK, 1999, “Evolutionary approaches to the perception of urban spaces”Evolution and Cognition5(1) 87–92
2.
BattyM, 2001a, “Exploring isovist fields: Space and shape in architectural and urban morphology”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28, 123–150
BattyM, 2004, “A new theory of space syntax”, WP 75, Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London, http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk
5.
BattyMRanaS, 2004, “The automatic definition and generation of axial lines and axial maps”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 615–640
6.
BattyMJiangBThurstain-GoodwinM, 1998, “Local movement: Agent-based models of pedestrian flow”, WP4, Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London, http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk
7.
BenediktM L, 1979, “To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design6, 47–65
8.
CamposB, 1997, “Strategic space: Patterns of use in public squares of the city of London”, in Proceedings of the First International Space Syntax Symposium (University College London)
CouclelisH, 1997, “From cellular automata to urban models: New principles for model development and implementation”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design24, 165–174
11.
DouglasD H, 1994, “Least-cost path in GIS using an accumulated cost surface and slopelines”Cartographica31(3) 37–51
12.
FranklinW RRayC K, 1994, “Higher isn't necessarily better: Visibility algorithms and experiments”, in Advance in GIS Research—Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling SDH'96 (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh) pp 751–770
13.
GaltonF, 1881, “Isochromc passage chart for travellers”Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society3, 168
14.
GibsonJ J, 1966The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA)
15.
HillierB, 1996Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
16.
HillierBPennA, 2004, “Rejoinder to Carlo Ratti”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 501–511
17.
HillierBPennAHansonJGrajewskiTXuJ, 1993, “Natural movement: Or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design20, 29–66
18.
LeeJStuckyD, 1998, “On applying viewshed analysis for determining least-cost paths on digital elevation models”International Journal of Geographical Information Science12, 891–905
19.
LindgrenE S, 1969, “A minimum path problem reconsidered”Harvard Papers in Theoretical Geography, Geography and the Properties of Surface Series28, 1–11
20.
LloberaM, 2000, “Understanding movement: A pilot model towards the sociology of movement”, in Beyond the Map Ed. LockG, (IOS Press, Amsterdam) pp 65–84
21.
NagyG, 1994, “Terrain visibility”Computers and Graphics18, 763–773
22.
OkeT R, 1988, “Street design and urban canopy layer climate”Energy and Buildings11, 103–113
23.
O'RourkeJ, 1987Art Gallery Theorems and Algorithms (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
24.
PeponisJWinemanJRashidMBafnaSKimS H, 1998, “Describing plan configuration according to the covisibility of surfaces”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design25, 693–708
25.
RanaS, 2003, “Visibility analysis”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30, 641–642
26.
RattiC, 2004a, “Space syntax: Some inconsistencies”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 487–499
27.
RattiC, 2004b, “Rejoinder to Hillier and Penn”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 513–516
28.
RattiCRichensP, 2004, “Raster analysis of urban form”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 297–309
29.
SteadmanP, 2004, “Developments in space syntax”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31, 483–486
30.
TakeyamaMCouclelisH, 1997, “Map dynamics: Integrating cellular automata and GIS through geoalgebra”International Journal of Geographical Information Science11(1) 73–91
31.
TomlinC D, 1990Geographic Information Systems and Cartographic Modeling (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
32.
TurnerA, 2003, “Analysing the visual dynamics of spatial morphology”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30, 657–676
33.
Van KreveldM, 1996, “Variations on sweep algorithms: Efficient computation of extended viewsheds and class intervals”, in Advance in GIS Research II—Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling SDH'96 (Delft University of Technology, Delft) II13A15–27
WangJRobinsonG JWhiteK, 1996, “A fast solution to local viewshed computation using grid-based digital elevation models”Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing62, 1157–1164
36.
WarntzW, 1957, “Transportation, social physics, and the law of refraction”The Professional Geographer9, 2–7
