Aspects of urban form

Karl Kropf
Urban Morphology Research Group, University of Birmingham and
Roger Evans Associates Ltd

Revised version -23 March 2009

The main intend of this article is to understand the urban morphology with different
phenomena and to coordinate different approaches and bring them together for
better understanding. In this article different approaches are taken into the
consideration for urban morphology keeping in mind the social, economic and
environmental factor. Further there is disparity that, are cities results of human efforts
or it’s an exhibit characteristics of self-organization. To justify the theories of evolution
it is a lengthy, progressive efforts and it could have changed over a period of time
while in case of human settlements it can be acknowledge by complexity, diversity
and ambiguity of objects.
Basic intent is to justify and compare the analysis of different text. Effective
comparison can only be made when there are basic criterion in consistency,
specificity, generality, comprehension, coherence. Taking the example of small
market towns, and linear settlements, the works of slater (1982), markets towns and
rural settlements, markets of suburban settlements etc. Are to understand the
outward form of an organism and to define the internal parts and relativity of others.
It also take the example of morphology in plants and animals is also an evidence
that leads to theory of evolution. While in urban morphology it take the reference of
“pattern of land use” with in a town, it also compare between economically
developed and undeveloped cities.
In this article it also take the pragmatic insights of Kevin lynch definition of urban
form in six distinct aspects, physical form, movements, control, perception, continuity
,flow of materials all this aspects mostly covers the discipline of urban morphology.
Further the different approaches of urban morphology are explain in four different
ways of spatial analytical, configurational, process typological and historical
geographical. In spatial analytical with example of batt it states that the models are
not intended to provide accurate description but to strip the process of city growth.
In configurational approach it try to understand the spatial structure of settlements
through the range of analytical methods. In process of typological approach to
urban morphology it try analysis the component subdivision that form hierarchy in
elements, structure of elements, system of structures and organisms of systems while
in historico- geographical approach to urban morphology it explain the
geographical approach and character of towns through systematic analysis.
Thus intent of this analysis and synthesis is not to compile the information but to
compare various component. It tries to compare different components and their
relationships, different stages and their development, growth and development. All
the analysis which emerges from process are the views that are conceptually more
integrated and articulated as whole rather of single perspective. This article has
sought to apply this method of urban form itself by undertaking a deductive and
comparative analysis of urban morphology.

SILVI PATEL IU1543000024