Abstract
The purpose of this article is to simultaneously examine two types of mobility by developing a model of metropolitan organization that emphasizes the axis structure of mobility. The model is based on the realities of daily mobility and long-term residential mobility. Origin−Destination study results validated the axis representation of the metropolitan structure. Furthermore, building on data from a telephone survey, we considered the interactions between the two types of mobility along the Center-North axis of Montréal’s Census Metropolitan Area (CMA). The ensuing discussion on various models of metropolitan structure and their relevance today is framed in terms of the axes of mobility defined as territorial practices that are established within the patterns of daily life and are a significant factor in residential location decisions. The study raises broader issues concerning the relevance of drawing on standard models such as Burgess’s concentric zone model, Hoyt’s sector theory, Adam’s directional bias, or recent findings from the literature to understand urban form dynamics in the CMA.
Highlights
The Chicago School of urban sociology considered daily mobility to be a factor in social disorganization
As for Burgess’s concentric zone model, it has been adapted to take into account the fact that metropolitan areas can include a host of centers and that urban development is shaped by the axes that formed along the sectors (Harris & Ullman, 1961; Hoyt, 1939)
As the concentric zone model considered social areas as ecologically structured, it was assumed that people sharing similar attributes undertook internal migrations within the metropolitan. These migratory movements, spatially directed toward outlying areas, enabled the establishment of new sectors. These territorially based structures were visible through the treelike form that daily mobility took in space, which in turn would bear an influence on residential migrations
Summary
The Chicago School of urban sociology considered daily mobility to be a factor in social disorganization. These migratory movements, spatially directed toward outlying areas, enabled the establishment of new sectors These territorially based structures were visible through the treelike form that daily mobility took in space (planned travel to areas designated for work, services and consumption, and recreational use), which in turn would bear an influence on residential migrations. The tube refers to a position on a surface that is occupied for a given time only and represents a trajectory (daily or life-long) in space (Pred, 1977) While basic forms such as zones and axes are used to represent daily mobility and residential migrations, their interactions have so far not resulted in the emergence of new models of urban spatial organization. They are marked by a concentration of jobs, services, and amenities, which in turn attract new residents and commuters (Filion & Kramer, 2012)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
