Chapter 9

Conclusions

Abstract The ninth chapter presents the main conclusion of the book, somehow
bringing together the different synthesis presented in each of the previous chapters,
and reflecting on the produced work as a whole. This chapter includes the identi-
fication of a number of lines for future research within the science of urban form.

Keywords Cities
Urban form
Urban morphology

There is a gap in the literature on the study of urban form. Despite the existence of
many excellent books on many different aspects on the physical form of cities, there
are no manuals on this field of knowledge. This book addresses this gap and
intends to be a manual on urban morphology. Indeed, it offers the reader an
overview on a reduced, but essential, set of issues in this field of knowledge. The
organization of the book contents draws on my personal experience, teaching urban
morphology to students in the last year of an architectural degree, in a discipline
structured in 15 lessons over one semester. As an introductory book, it ‘stands on
the shoulders of giants’. As such, it identifies the fundamental texts the reader
should examine if he, or she, wants to further explore each of the main themes of
the manual. Perhaps the most obvious examples, in the wide set of references
included in the manual, would be the eight classics in urban morphology and urban
studies listed in Chap. 6 or the two notable books on the history of urban form by
AEJ Morris and by Norbert Schoenauer included in Chap. 4.1
The manual is divided in two different parts. While the first part (Chaps. 2–5)
focuses on the physical form of cities, the second part (Chaps. 6–8) is centred on
urban morphologists and practitioners. This distinction between ‘object’ and
‘researcher’ (and, in some cases, ‘practitioner’) is crucial for the presentation of the
book’s contents. In the first part of the book, we have tried to understand what the
main elements that structure the physical dimension of cities are; how these

1
The references listed above are as follows: Muratori (1959), Conzen (1960), Lynch (1960),
Cullen (1961), Jacobs (1961), Rossi (1966), Castex et al. (1977) and Hillier and Hanson (1984) in
Chap. 6; and Morris (1972) and Schoenauer (1981) in Chap. 4.

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 181

V. Oliveira, Urban Morphology, The Urban Book Series,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-32083-0_9
182 9 Conclusions

elements have been created (who designs them and how each idea is effectively
implemented on the ground); and how these different elements have been organized
in each of the different periods that are part of our collective urban history. After
understanding the object, we have focused on the researcher (and on the practi-
tioner). In the second part of the book, we have addressed the main approaches that
urban morphologists have been developing to understand the physical form of
cities; the passage from scientific description and explanation to professional
practice; and the contributions that urban morphology can give to other fields of
knowledge focusing, as we urban morphologists, on the city.
Each of the next paragraphs includes one fundamental idea of the book.
All cities (and all different parts of a city) are constituted by a limited set of
elements of urban form—streets, street blocks, plots and buildings, to name the
most important. While these elements are the same from city to city, what varies is
the way they are combined in different patterns originating different urban tissues. It
is our strong believe that our capacity for effectively analyzing existing urban forms
or designing new urban forms depends on a correct understanding of the charac-
teristics of each of these elements and of how these can be combined. Over the
twentieth century, streets, street blocks and plots have progressively lost their
importance, in the processes of analysis and design, in favour of buildings (in
particular, of exceptional buildings). We argue for a change of focus, addressing the
different elements of urban form in a more balanced way.
The second fundamental idea of the book is that our cities are made of a great
variety of contributions from different agents (with different and, sometimes,
conflictive interests) and through different processes of transformation. Developers,
architects, builders, planning officers and politicians; all interact in different ways in
complex processes of city building. Furthermore, our societies tend to organize in
different ways to balance comprehensive views of the city, usually planned views, and
a number of different contributions, eventually associated with a higher spontaneity.
These complex processes should be considered in our analysis of and action on cities.
The analysis of our urban history reveals a clear permanence in terms of the
elements of urban form that have been used in the different processes of city
building. On the contrary, the characteristics of each of these elements and how
they have been combined over almost six millennia have had moments of rupture
and periods of permanence. If we assume a simplified view, we can say that all city
layouts built up over 6000 years of history could be classified as ‘regular’ or
‘irregular’. On the one hand, we can find regular layouts in Chinese, Greek, Roman
and Renaissance cities, although in the case of Greece and Rome we can also
identify some cases of irregular layouts—Athens and Rome are, perhaps, the most
notable examples. On the other hand, we can find irregular layouts in the Sumerian,
Islamic and Mediaeval cities,2 although in the case of Mediaeval Europe we can
also find examples of regular layouts—such as the French bastides. As we have

2
The diversity of the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries disables the identification of
one single type.
9 Conclusions 183

said, the characteristics of the different elements have changed over time. While in
the early cities of Mesopotamia and China and, although to a lesser extent, in Greek
cities, streets were only the ‘space between buildings’, their importance increased in
the Roman cities, becoming perhaps the most important element of urban form in
Mediaeval cities. One of the most profound changes in the different physical ele-
ments occurred in the mediaeval era where a number of exceptional buildings and
infrastructures have been literally converted into cities. This has been the case of the
amphitheatres of Arles and Nimes, or of the palace of Split. Another major change
in urban form elements has been the disappearance of the courtyard house in
Mediaeval Europe. While this had been the main residential building type from
early cities to Roman cities, it was substituted by a new type of house in mediaeval
times—a house facing the street, with a clearly urban façade, many times with a
commercial use in the ground floor, and with an open space in the back of the plot.
Only in Islamic cities the courtyard house—a residential type with three millennia
of history—continued to be a key element of urban form.
Another important message of this manual is a eulogy of diversity and an alert to
a tendency of homogenization of urban landscapes. In Chap. 5 we have looked at
three rather different cities. I have drawn on my city, Porto, and have then selected
two of the most fascinating and vibrant cities that I have ever visited, Marrakesh
and New York. While these African and European cities have almost one millennia
of urban history, the American city has only a few centuries of life. Yet, contrarily
to Marrakesh and Porto, where the many urban strategies of the different agents
seem to have been prevalent, the urban history of New York has been clearly
influenced by one single planning document, the 1811 plan. While proposals of
urban development developed after the mid-twentieth century (the definition of a
more precise date depends on the geographical context) have introduced ruptures in
the traditional processes of city building in many different parts of the world, and in
our three case studies, in the specific case of Marrakesh these seem to have been
more profound. Indeed, the way of combining streets, plots and buildings outside
the medina is clearly different from the way these elements are organized within the
walls of the city and closer to the way these have been combined in western cities
over the last decades. This is obviously a threat not only to the urbanity but also to
the identity of this African city.
Urban morphology is a science with more than one century of history. Over this
period it has been consolidating a solid theoretical and methodological body and a
wide set of concepts and techniques for understanding the dynamics of urban form.
The current debate is marked by a set of different morphological approaches that are
shared by an increasing number of researchers in different parts of the world. In this
manual we have analyzed four of these approaches—historico-geographical,
process-typological, space syntax and spatial analysis. While the debate on urban
form tends to emphasize the differences between approaches, this books proposes
the opposite, working together, drawing on our common ground—the focus on the
physical form of cities. In this context, it is argued that the topic of comparative
studies of urban form should be part of the morphological agenda for the next years.
184 9 Conclusions

In this book, when analyzing the relationship between theory/research and

practice, we have distinguished two different links: one to planning practice and
another to architectural practice (we have also mentioned that this simplification,
somehow, blurs more complex sets of professional contexts that depend on each
specific country). We have made evident the existence of a more consistent link to
planning, than to architecture, and we have place a more explicit focus on that link.
Yet, we have argued that mainstream planning practice is not informed by urban
morphology. Neither is it influenced by planning theory. In fact, it does lack a
sound theoretical and methodological body to deal with the physical form of cities.
So, how could this relationship, between urban morphological research and
mainstream planning practice, be reinforced? Close to Ivor Samuels, I would argue
for the need to: (i) communicate in a simple and direct way, to planning profes-
sionals, what urban morphology has to offer to practice; (ii) gather an on-going
collection of case studies of how and where urban morphology is being used
successfully; (iii) prepare effective manuals on urban morphology; and, finally,
(iv) (thinking in future planning practitioners) understand what morphological
contents are being taught in higher education institutions, what contents should be
introduced, and what contents that are now being taught should be improved.
It is not obvious to common citizens (neither to most academics) what the
contribution of urban morphology to our daily lives in cities is. And yet, Chap. 8
has identified some essential dimensions where this input might be of fundamental
importance, notably public health, social justice and urban energy. As we have said
before, one major challenge for urban morphology in the next years is to identify
and communicate, in a systematic way, its most important and morphologically
specific contributions to contemporary cities and societies. This will certainly lead
to the establishment of key cross-disciplinary links with the different bodies of
knowledge studying the city, promoting effective integrated research.
This is a book on cities; on their physical form and on how we, urban mor-
phologists and practitioners, describe, explain and act on this physical form. It is
also an introduction to a remarkable body of knowledge with one century of life. As
such, it should be able to lead the reader to many notable books that have been
written since the birth of urban morphology in Central Europe in the turning from
the nineteenth to the twentieth century. It should also encourage the reader to
contribute to make his/hers city a better city and to visit and enjoy other cities in
different parts of the world.

References

Castex J, Depaule JC, Panerai P (1977) Formes urbaines: de l’îlot à la barre. Dunod, Paris
Conzen MRG (1960) Alnwick Northumberland: a study in town-plan analysis, Institute of British
Geographers Publication 27. George Philip, London
Cullen G (1961) Townscape. Architectural Press, London
Hillier B, Hanson J (1984) The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. Random House, New York
References 185

Lynch K (1960) The image of the city. MIT Press, Cambridge

Morris AEJ (1972) History of urban form: before the industrial revolution. George Godwin
Limited, London
Muratori S (1959) Studi per una operante storia urbana di Venezia I. Palladio, pp 3–4
Rossi A (1966) L’architettura della città. Marsilio, Padova
Schoenauer N (1981) 6000 years of housing. WW Norton and Company, New York