Abstract:Christopher Alexander, a British-American scholar, famously differentiated an old (natural) city from a new (planned) one in structure. The former resembles a “semilattice”, or a complex system encompassing many interconnected sub-systems. The latter is shaped in a graph-theoretical “tree”, which lacks the structural complexity as its sub-systems are compartmentalized into a single hierarchy. This structural distinction can explain, or perhaps determine “the patina of life” in old urban districts and the lack of such in new ones. Alexander's idea, although widely influential, remains contested for its lack of empirical support. Subsequent literature failed to distinguish the structural differences between the old and new cities in systematic ways, nor is his asserted structure-life relationship verified with rigor. This study aims to test Alexander’s urban structural theory under a comprehensive research framework. We translated his constructs and premises into a mathematically testable form. The structural qualities of an urban street network, conceived as “semilattice”, “complex network” and “living structure”, were measured using graph-topological indicators. Urban life was captured using a combination of Twitter activities, Point-Of-Interests, and walking trips, aggregated at the district level. The structure-life relationship was tested statistically, after controlling for urban form and socio-demographic confounders, including land use, density, block size, parks, income, age, and demographics. This research design was implemented in London, New York, Hong Kong, and Gdansk. Our results support Alexander's early works that an old urban district contains more “semilattice” than new ones. This quality can be captured by Meshedness Coefficient, a graph-network indicator for a semilattice-shaped street network and a strong predictor for urban life. The same cannot be observed for “complex network” with consistency, and we found no independent associations between “living structure” and life, contrary to existing literature. The study shed light on the hidden relationships between urban spatial structure and behaviors, in both the virtual and physical world. We uncovered the British-American predilection of Alexander’s theory, which is well-supported by observations in London and New York yet less so in Hong Kong or Gdansk, suggesting the need for a locally-sensitive approach. The analytical tools developed can be of value for planning research and practice.

A review of the structure of street networks

Measuring the Structure of Road Networks

Methods and Measures for Analyzing Complex Street Networks and Urban Form

Planarity and Street Network Representation in Urban Form Analysis

Structural properties of planar graphs of urban street patterns

Topological Structure of Urban Street Networks from the Perspective of Degree Correlations

Resilience of Self-Organised and Top-Down Planned Cities--A Case Study on London and Beijing Street Networks

Urban Spatial Order: Street Network Orientation, Configuration, and Entropy

A multi-city study on structural characteristics of bicycle networks

Off the Grid... and Back Again? The Recent Evolution of American Street Network Planning and Design

A topological pattern of urban street networks: Universality and peculiarity

A city is not a tree: a multi-city study on street network and urban life

A multi-scale analysis of 27,000 urban street networks: Every US city, town, urbanized area, and Zillow neighborhood

Street Network Models and Indicators for Every Urban Area in the World

Random planar graphs and the London street network

The spatial structure of networks

Topological Patterns of Spatial Urban Street Networks

Using Ensemble Analysis to study the effects of Network Topology on Performance in Urban Road Networks

Different Ways of Thinking about Street Networks and Spatial Analysis

Resilient by design: Simulating street network disruptions across every urban area in the world