Urban form and livability: socioeconomic and built environment indicators

Abstract

Spatial relations among urban elements (buildings, streets, etc.) constantly affect the quality of urban spaces, creating more or less livable cities. The study of urban form has been a way of objectively quantifying such relations to understand their dynamics. Urban livability is the ability of urban spaces to fulfill the expectations of its inhabitants for wellbeing and quality of life. Measurable spatial patterns underlie the emergence of livable cities. Still, few researchers have considered if and how these patterns affect socioeconomic conditions across spatial scales. This paper explores the relationships between indicators of socioeconomic livability and cross-scale patterns of demographic and morphological densities within the Metro Vancouver (MV) region (Canada). Indicators of accessibility, social diversity, affordability, and economic vitality were quantified and compared among five population density clusters composed of 3450 census dissemination areas (DAs) in MV. Morphological indicators of intensity, centrality and diversity were aggregated at the DAs using spatial network analysis with five radii from 400 to 4800 m. Socioeconomic indices were regressed on urban form variables to assess the importance of the built environment on predicting livability-related qualities. Overall, indicators of the intensity of urban form were the most significant to predict the socioeconomic metrics. 'Policy relevance' Policies that aim to solve urban issues should consider nonlinear relations among variables. In the case of MV, indicators of accessibility, social diversity and economic vitality are directly correlated with each other and inversely correlated with affordability. Medium to high-density zones presented a fair equilibrium among the different livability qualities analyzed. Attributes aggregated with the 4800 m radius were highly important to predict the livability qualities within a 400 m radius, which potentially means that urban interventions may affect the livability of spaces not immediately close to them. A higher density of buildings with moderate height distributed among parcels with distinct sizes can potentially have a positive impact on economic vitality and housing affordability. The intensity and diversity of the tree canopy was important to predict active accessibility and social diversity. The inclusion of spatial diversity and network centrality measures on urban planning and design practices potentially foster more livable densification processes.

Keywords

• cities
• densification
• livability
• socioeconomic indicators
• spatial network analysis
• urban form
• urban morphology