Are Urban living spaces always a mix of the good the bad and the ugly
Context *Intro *sub question
*geographical relevance *geographical theory *geographical locations *history
This coursework is about the analyzation of urban living spaces. I am investigating how the area has transformed over time and what has caused that change over time and what has caused that change with the focus on gentrification and regeneration. The aim is to explore whether buildings and outdoor spaces within the borough of hackney can be put into certain categories: the good, the bad and the ugly.
What are the spatial differences in urban living spaces?
*within urban living spaces there is a different range of living accommodations ranging from tiny council flats to large detached housing.
What causes there to be verities in urban living spaces?
*I think the variety of living spaces has been caused by gentrification of areas, developers having to meet up with new needs of the public. Also bombing that occurred during world war II meant that lots of people had to have their houses rebuilt.
Do urban areas always have the mixtures of the good the bad and the ugly?
*I believe that every have the mixture of the good the bad and the ugly but... Within some areas the balance will be different.
Urban areas are important to study because they create the most carbon dioxide which creates global warming which is very important to study in geography. By analysing urban areas you can look at the pollution caused by transport, industry and factories and also the massive problem created by dumping or littering. Pollution made by litter those inhabitants the city. Within cities there is a substantial frequency of buildings and each of these need to be heated and supported with electricity, this means that cities burn huge amounts of fossil fuels.
Urban areas are important because they are home to a lot of factories and industrial areas that the country relies on. The urban areas and cities are the main tourist destinations so provide a lot of the tourism profit for the country. The density of the population within urban areas means that it makes a lot of money out of recreational services and also shopping districts. This again puts money into the country but also directly benefits the local population.
The consequences of different quality of urban spaces vary.
The quality of the area will most importantly affect the residents of that area. If the area is much run down, not as many jobs will be available for the local residents and all the jobs on offer won’t be reserved for only local residents. This means that people would either have to leave the area to work or be unemployed. The fumes from the commuting would further increase pollution and dirt within the area and also increase the feeling of desolation. A bad quality of urban land would also discourage tourism lowering the area’s economic status.
the Hoyt and Burgess Model are land use models created by geographers homer Hoyt and Ernest burgess in 1924 in Chicago they show the typical layout of a city these models were chosen to be involved in this coursework because of their representation to the usage of urban living spaces. The aim of this coursework is to investigate and explore the use of urban land and also the standard of it. The models help to explain and show the land use.
The Burgess model:
The base of the idea is that due to the competition to live within the centre of a town or city, the land values are highest there. This means that the closer you are to the central business district the density and height of the buildings will increase.
There are some limitations of the burgess model. The most significant is that every city is…