Compact City

Sustainability Concepts

Group Members:
Rhujuta. S. Jadhav (111214009)
Pratyusha. P. Kiran (111214017)
Rhea. H. Motwani (111214025)
Structure of Presentation:
 Origin of compact city
 Definition of compact city
 Compact model
 Characteristics of compact city
 compact city in developed and developing countries
 Urban sprawl
 Eco-compact city
 Eco-compact city more efficient than sprawl city
 Indicators of compact city
 Positive impact of compact city
 Negative impact of compact city
 Sustainability
 Cities participating in compact city model
 Main arguments regarding compact city
 Recommendations for compact city policy
ORIGIN of compact city:
 The term Compact City was first coined in 1973 by George
Dantzig and Thomas L. Saaty, two mathematicians whose
utopian vision was largely driven by a desire to see more efficient
use of resources.

 Compact cities were created by the idea of SUSTAINABLE

URBAN PLANNING in European countries in the late 1990’s.

 The concept of COMPACT CITY is based on the

SUSTAINABILITY , a term used by THE CLUB OF ROME
in 1972.

 Characteristics of SUSTAINABLE CITY can be seen in Urban

justice , Urban beauty , Creativity , Ecology , Essay to move and
access , Compact and Polycentric Diversity .
 THE TERM : COMPACT CITY

 The Compact City or city of short distances is an urban planning and

urban design concept, which promotes relatively high residential density
with mixed land uses.

 It is based on an efficient public transport system and has an urban

layout which – according to its advocates – encourages walking and
cycling, low energy consumption and reduced pollution.

 It is also arguably a more sustainable urban settlement type than urban

sprawl because it is less dependent on the car, requiring less (and
cheaper per capita) infrastructure provision.

 A large resident population provides opportunities for social interaction

as well as feeling of safety in numbers and “ Eye On The Streets.”
Compact city model
Characteristics of Compact City
 FORM OF SPACE:

 High dense settlements.

 Less dependence of auto-
mobile.
 Clear boundary form
 Surrounding area.

Compact city model: Compact city model: Compact city model:

DISTRICT TOWNS CITIES
 Characteristics Of Compact City
 SPACE
CHARACTERISTICS:

-- Mixed land use.

-- Less complex land use.

-- Clear identity.
 FUNCTIONS:
-- Social fairness (less number of high dense
settlements).

-- Independence of governance.

-- Self sufficiency of daily life.

-- Efficient transport system.

Other compact city characteristics
 Urban Infrastructure, especially sewerage and water mains.

 Multi nodal transportation.

 High degree of accessibility; local/regional.

 High degrees of street connectivity (internal / external) including

sidewalks and bicycle lanes.

 Low open space ratio.

 Unitary control of planning of land development or closely co-

ordinated control.

 Sufficient government fiscal capacity to finance urban facilities

and infrastructure.
 Over lapping

 More convenient land use pattern reduces the car journeys.

 Reduces the energy for transportation.

 Lesser congestion due to fewer cars and better air quality.

 Encouragement of cycling and walking rather than driving.

Compact city Variations
DEVELOPED DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES COUNTRIES
 Urban population ratio:  Urban population ratio:
POPULATION GROWTH 69.8% : 84%. 26.7% : 57.1%.
 Urban population:  Urban population:
730 million 1 billion. 2 billion 4 billion

• Increasing amount of • Increase infrastructure

land area , per capita , supply , to catch up with
decrease in population rapid population growth
density. , to keep close urban-
• Increase in energy use , rural linkages.
CONDITIONS average travel distance • Poverty deteriorating
, electrification of life. urban environment.
• Increase of waste and • Promoting equality in
pollution. economic , social ,
• Increasing security political interferes.
status of urban
infrastructure. (compact
urban form)
 DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES

 Social service and poverty

GOALS  Advance in quality of life. alleviation.

 More considerations on  There is less vacant land in urban

placing a strong areas due to high population
emphasis on mix land density and little spare capacity for
use. population growth.

 Wise use of resources-  Undeveloped land that does exists

MIXED conservation is of high valued for urban
USES management of urban agriculture purposes and losing this
ecosystem. land would affect the poor urban
dweller.
 Control of physical
expansion ; Developing  Not much visibility of wise use of
various guidelines for the resources as it has more pressure
sustainable development on resource utility due to immense
of towns & cities. population.
 DEVELOPED DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES COUNTRIES

 The urban poor and  The poorest people tend to live

those on low income in center , at very high densities.
HOUSING tend to live in center , The clusters of poor people on
and the rich and middle periphery are low or medium
class on the periphery , density squatter settlements or
in suburbs. illegal sub divisions.
Urban Sprawl Characteristics
1.Low residential density

2.Unlimited outward extension of urban development

3.Spatial segregation of different types of land uses through zoning

4.Leapfrog development

5.No centralized ownership of land or planning of land development

6.All transportation dominated by privately owned motor vehicles

7.Fragmentation of governance authority of land uses among many local governments

8.Great variances in the fiscal capacity of local governments

9.Widespread commercial strip development along major roadways

10.Major reliance on a filtering process to provide housing for low income households

Source: Burchell et al. 1998 (as quoted in Neuman, M2005)

 Eco-compact city
• The eco-city is an umbrella metaphor that encompasses a
wide range of urban-ecological proposals that aim to achieve
urban sustainability.

• These approaches propose a wide range

of environmental, social, and institutional policies that are
directed to managing urban spaces to achieve sustainability.

• This type promotes the ecological agenda and emphasizes

environmental management through a set of institutional
and policy tools.

• The distinctive concepts of the eco-city are greening and

passive solar design.
 Eco-compact city
 It is remarkable that the core of many approaches is the
management of the city, rather than the suggesting of any specific
urban form; it is believed that not the physical shape of
the city and its built environment that is important; it is how
the urban society is organized and managed that counts
most.

 Therefore, the city is managed to achieve sustainability

through different land use, environmental, institutional,
social, and economic policies

 In practice, many local governments, planning consultants,

landscape architects, and so on are grappling much
more specifically with aspects of ecological, pedestrian oriented,
or otherwise sustainable urban form.
Eco-compact City vs Sprawl City:
Efficiency

 It consumes less territory.

 It allows the correct density.

 It allows small retail to be on street and on square.

 It maximizes the investment.

 It allows the creation of efficient network of public

utilities.

 It allows creation of an efficient public transit system.

Indicators of Compact Citiy Model
INDICATORS (GENERAL)
•Population
•Regional GDP
•Regional employment growth
•Regional employment
•Regional productivity by sectors
•Built-up areas
•Density in built-up areas
•Density of new residential
development
•Sprawl
•GHG emissions
•Energy consumption
•Share of public transportation
use
•Vehicle ownership
•Length of public transportation
lines per capita
INDICATORS (GOAL SPECIFIC )
•Average trip distance and time
•Per capita vehicle miles travelled
•Transport energy consumption by
transport mode
•Proximity to public transport
•Operational costs of public services
(per capita)
•Vacancy rates of housing and
offices in built-up areas
•Residential energy use per capita
•Area of land for urban development
•Concentration of urban facilities in
core areas
•Diversity in land use in urban
centers
•Green areas
•Air pollution levels
Positive Impact Of Compact Cities

GOALS ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY

1. Shortening • less energy •Lower travel cost, less

commuting consumption congestion,
distance •less GHG (Green thus higher mobility and
Houses Gases) emissions higher
productivity

2. Maximizing •Preservation of land for •More cost effective public

densification agriculture, water service
and resources, etc. provision (e.g. road,
intensification •Efficient use of energy water)
•Lower electricity demand •Maximized impacts of
public
investment
Positive Impact Of Compact Cities
GOALS ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY

3. Enhancing •Improvement of •More frequent exchange of

attractiveness neighborhood level ideas,
and quality of living environment (green, thus increased knowledge,
life in urban clean air, etc.) innovation
centers and wealth creation
•More cultural diversity, higher
quality of life, thus more talented,
high-skilled labour force and more
private investment

4. Improving metropolitan governance

Negative Impact Of Compact Cities

 Less domestic living space.

 Lack of affordable housing.

 Poor access to green space.

 Increased crime level.

 Higher death rate due to respiratory diseases.

Sustainable city
Cities depicting Compact City Model

1. Melbourne (AUSTRALIA)
 MAIN AREA STUDY/ POPULATION:
31municipalities,
4 million population

 MAJOR POLICY TOOLS:

• Melbourne 2030 (Spatial development strategy published

by the State of Victoria in 2002; revised in 2007).

• MSS (City of Melbourne’s spatial master plan).

• Deregulation policies on land use (for mixed use

development) and conversions (from office buildings to
residential) in downtown Melbourne in mid 90’s.
Cities depicting Compact City Model

2. Toyama (JAPAN)
 MAIN AREA STUDY/ POPULATION:
City of Toyama,
0.4 million

 MAJOR POLICY TOOLS:

• Compact city policies in a depopulating society

• Incentives to concentrate residential development along

the transportation corridors

• PPPs in public transport

 Cities depicting Compact City Model

3.Vancouver(Canada)

 MAIN AREA STUDY/ POPULATION:

Metro Vancouver,
2.2Million

 MAJOR POLICY TOOLS:

• Densification policy in residential neighborhoods (e.g.,

Laneway House Guidelines of 2009)

• Regional governance in managing growth

• GHG emission reduction and compact city

Source: OECD
Arguments for the compact city:
1. Higher level of control over urban processes, reuse of previously
developed facilities and derelict land, bigger urban vitality, rational
city form and preserved outskirts of the towns.

2. Effectiveness of public transport and decreased fuel

consumption, lower pollution per person.

3. Possibility of mixed use development due to higher population

density.

4. Savings of energy in heating and other facilities as the result of dense

urban fabric.

5. Possibility of social mix when different tenure and comfort level

tenements are close together.
Five recommendations for
compact city policy strategies

1. Set explicit compact city goals

Establish a national urban policy framework

Encourage metropolitan-wide strategic planning

2. Encourage dense and contiguous development at urban

fringes

Increase effectiveness of regulatory tools

Target compact urban development in green-field areas
Set minimum density requirements for new development
Strengthen urban-rural linkage
3. Retrofit existing built-up areas

Promote brown-field development

Harmonize industrial policies with compact city policies
Regenerate existing residential areas
Promote transit-oriented development in built-up areas
Encourage “intensification” of existing urban assets

4. Enhance diversity and quality of life in urban centers

Promote mixed land use

Attract residents and local services to urban centers
Promote focused investment in public space and foster a “sense of place”
Promote a walking and cycling environment

5. Minimize adverse negative effects

Counteract traffic congestion

Encourage the provision of affordable housing
Promote high-quality urban design
Encourage greening of built-up areas Thank u..

Source : OECD Study : COMPACT CITY POLICES : A Comparative Assessment