Basic Techniques for Typomorphological Urban Analysis

Leo van den Burg

§1: the unavoidable

R = 30 km (approx. 1:1.000.000) R = 10 km (approx. 1:350.000)
In this chapter, we will discuss some of the basic techniques for what is sometimes called a typo-
morphological analysis. But before we can do this, there are a few things we have to make clear. Let’s
first agree that we will make analyses using maps as our basic material. This is not necessarily the case.
We could also analyse photographs, sketches, objects etc., also when making an urban analysis. For the
present purposes though, we will limit ourselves to the map. This is partly a matter of convention. Daily
urbanist practice usually prescribes maps as medium of communication. But maps also provide highly
standardised information which is easily comparable. More than that, maps can ensure that the results
of an analysis can be presented in yet more, but derived maps, resulting in verifiable statements. A last
and obvious advantage of using maps for urban analysis is that larger scales are more easily graspable. A
disadvantage is that essentially, the urbanist does not analyse reality, but only a representation of reality.
The mapmaker has made a lot of decisions about what to show and what to leave out. The quality of
the analysis is therefore to a large extent depending on the quality of the maps. That is why the selection
of a good map is the first step in making an analysis.1 In this selection there are a number of unavoid-
able aspects to consider: we have to choose a map with an appropriate scale, point in time and level of
abstraction.
R = 3 km (approx. 1:100.000 R = 1 km (approx. 1:35.000) Scale
Every map has a scale. Reducing or increasing a scale has a great effect on what we can show in a map.
Fig. 1 shows a number of drawings zooming in on the village of Schipluiden in the vicinity of Delft. The
first drawing has a radius of 30 km. which results in a scale for this book of approximately 1:1.000.000.
Schipluiden itself is hardly visible and one could say it is silly to use a map like this in an analysis of
Schipluiden. Still, the map can clarify the position of Schipluiden as part of a very densely built area
between Dordrecht in the bottom-right corner and the area between Rotterdam and The Hague. This
image of Schipluiden is completely missing in the fourth drawing in the series. Here Schipluiden presents
itself as a little village in an otherwise endless green area. So depending on the scale of the drawing,
Schipluiden can be seen as completely absorbed in an urban tissue or as a pastoral idyll. Similarly, when
we look at the R=300 drawing, there is the clear suggestion that the heart of Schipluiden is a small cluster
of houses on either side of a river. With only the R=100 drawing, this conclusion is much more difficult
to draw. Yet if one wants to know something about the relationship between the houses and the parcel-
lation, even the R=300 drawing is insufficient. Every scale has its “natural” morphological scope. This
means that we first have to have an overview of the location on different scales from which we can then
make a relevant selection for our analysis. Before starting, the urban analyst has to determine on which
R = 300 m (approx. 1:10.000 R = 100 m (approx. 1:3.500) scale(s) he or she wants to work.

1. A second step being of course to verify the information in the map where possible by visiting the site
fig. 1, Scale

- 48 - - 49 -
 Time
Every map represents a point in time. Depending on what you want to find out, this may be the wrong
point in time. The current state of affairs (i.e. what you usually have to study) is often not completely
visible in a map - unless you are very lucky. When this is indeed not the case, your basic map may has to
be updated. On the other hand, in some analyses, a historical map can provide more information than a
recent one. For instance when you search for origins of certain developments. As with scale, it is unavoid-
able that a map includes information about time. Choose carefully. Using the wrong map usually means
that you are wasting your time. Page 56 contains a number of maps which illustrates the development of
Schipluiden. What is very clear is that Schipluiden indeed originated as a small settlement along a river. As
we will see later on, this can explain a lot of peculiarities about the present day structure of Schipluiden.
Of all the possible solutions for this problem, a historical map might provide the urban designer with
arguments to reject some solutions and specifically choose for others. Understanding the history of an
area may enable the designer to make reasonable speculations about future developments as well. Some-
thing which is much more difficult when we only look at the status quo.
aerial photograph basic topographical map 1: 1000
Level of abstraction
As mentioned before, we must realise that every map is a reduction - or simplified representation - of
reality. Even in the most detailed map available, a lot of information and objects we see in reality are
necessarily left out. In itself, this is not a problem. In fact, a map which contains too much information
can be distracting and difficult to use. As always, it depends on what you want to use the map for. When
we return to our example of Schipluiden in fig. 2, we see that the digital map in the top right corner (of
which we would normally be very happy to have a copy) is in fact not very useable if we have to say
something about the town as a whole. Lines blur and we are no longer sure what the lines mean that we
do see. In many cases, a simpler map will suffice. Even a map taken from a route planner can work well.
The example shown here might at first glace appear the most useable map of the six examples. But realise
that it can only be used to show the most elementary information. Even the basic position of Schipluiden
along a river is no longer clear in this drawing. If we want to analyse an urban situation, we will therefore
have to choose carefully which information our map should contain. We should know if the - in itself
unavoidable - level of abstraction is appropriate for our research.

Preparing a basic map

reduced basic topographical map topographical map 1: 25.000 The analyses we will describe in this chapter are based on maps and produce new, derivative maps. We
have seen that choosing a wrong map to work from can lead to the wrong conclusions (or no useable
+E
3

RK P
2)*+

OLD
ER
WE

conclusions at all) and will result in incorrect drawings. Therefore, having good (=appropriate) basic maps
G
!

is fundamental for a good analysis. If we find an appropriate map in an atlas or book or library, that’s
fine. If we do not find it, we will have to make one. We will have to use an inappropriate map and change
%'
47
2!!
334

the scale, add the information we need from other sources or take away the information we do not need.
2)*+

3PORTPARK Preparing a map like this can cost a lot of time, even when we can use digital information. But it is time
3CH

3CHOUW

well spent. A good basic drawing can provide the means to produce your own drawings with relative ease.
OU
3CHOUW

7ESTLAN
D ER +EENENBURG
!AK
!NNA
DE
7ESTLAN
:IJ

0RAAM
KA

VAN2
M
DE

4RA
DE

AESTE

4JALK
R
$O INE

Not having one, usually leads to more work and a less comprehensive analysis.
4JAL

-ARIA N
"O EL
+LE

LTSTRAA
RP :IJ

(OFJE
"OOM

MA
K

"ACH STR
PO KA

"A R K

3TEENSTR
ER

7ILLE BERCH
4JALK

GA
LDE DE

ARD
T

SEL
L
RW

GE

N
MVA

NDER
3CH TRAAT

3IN
EG

LA
7EST
S

'OLFTERREININAANLEG
ILD

N
"EELA

ELLAA
ER

+ASTE
"A TRAAT R

+ASTE
S GE
KK

0AULULAAN
#ROE
*A AAT

ERTS
STR

ER

!GNINKLAAN
ELAAN

S
ES

+AAG
"RU T
STRA

PERS DE
G
A

+EE

3CHI
P "E
+A
"R STEN
/TTO

HOF
0AARARKT

3CHIPLUIDEN
NE N

IEN V
3CHA
"EATR ENLAAN

E 
M

V:

AT STR N
SSTRA
DEN

BURG

G
IXV

$ORP
WEN

DE L (# T
AN

SEKA NGE DE
+E RK T

SSI 0OO
WEG

G
KLA
STRAA

RDIN
G ETIE
R
PLEIN
RST
'AA
6LAA
SIN

R
U SQU
E

ESTER -
RO

Formulating a basic question

7ILGE

"URGEME E L
S#

SING
3T-REGTPLE

S
TIER
NE

ERBE
S QUE
!G

-US
NLAAN

,IJST AT
AART IN

STRA STER AN
'!!'7%'

E
EME ONDLA
3C

ENS

"URG GM
HO
:IJ

VAN%
6A

/TTO
+ORPOEK

OL
KA
N

"URG

PL
7

STR
DE

EIN

GEN
"URG
ERS
IJK


3 ER I N
+EE

SLN
EME
LAA

R
N
,EEU

DE
EME

LAA

L AAN
7ILGENL
N

3CHOERHOF
NEN

YN
ESTE

Many times, an analysis is started halfway between having no idea what to do and knowing exactly what
OORN 2E
WERI

EKST
ESTE

-EIDAT (
BUR
RVAN

U I D E N STRA $R &

G

KPLA EN
RVAN

2EIG
N

GWE
NI
'EN

SO
NT
+

ERPA
'EN

DE

DEN
G
TSING

'OUGEN
'RUTHOF

$R * AAN
D

L
TSING

RE AT &UUT
STRA
EL

TO

LAAN
+IEV
EL

R KOET
-EE
ITHO

US
0RUANAT

you are looking for. Sometimes you wonder where to start your analysis. To avoid that, it is important that
STR
6LAARDINGSEKADE

HOEK
(OLLER

you formulate a basic question to your analysis. Even when you are unsure what to look for, there must
GPAD
'AA

be a reason why you make the analysis, or you wouldn’t be making it. Please make this reason explicit.
6LAARDIN

:/5
4%
6%%

When there is no basic question or hypothesis to start an analysis with, it is impossible to determine scale,
.3%
GSEVAA

7%'

Provincial map 1:50.000 map from a routeplanner abstraction or point in time to look at. Many times, this basic question is provided to you by your client,
teacher or a design problem. When this is not the case (for instance when you are simply given a site and
fig. 2, level of abstraction asked ”to do something” with it), there is always the site itself which can provide a natural scope for

- 50 - - 51 -
 your analysis. With some practice, it is not very difficult to establish the context of your area, what it is
connected to, when it was shaped etc. This will probably give you enough basic information to be able to
formulate a working hypothesis. The themes we have mentioned in this paragraph (scale, point in time,
level of abstraction) can provide a guiding line. Making a statement for all of them will force you to make
your first choices explicit and will serve as a reference for the rest of your analysis.

§2: Morphological Layers (see projects 7,13,15,16,20,22,24,25,28,31,32,34,40)

Having made these preparatory remarks, let’s start now with a description of the basic techniques we
need for a simple typomorphological analysis. This word implies to fields of research: typo(logy) and
morphology. First morphology. This word means the science of form - the visual world. For our pur-
poses, we assume that this science leads to knowledge of urban forms: cities, villages, neighbourhoods,
squares, streets, etc., all in their respective contexts.
When we want to analyse these forms, probably the first technique we have to acquaint ourselves with
basic map main infrastructure

HECTARES

HECTARES

buildings secundary infrastructure

public facilities parcellation

fig. 3, documenting the basic morphological layers fig. 4, first interpretations

- 52 - - 53 -
is that of dissecting a map in its respective parts: to thematically order the elements which shape it in example of an analysis that an urbanist or architect would make in order to understand a given site or
so-called morphological layers. Everybody who has made an urban analysis before, probably knows this region in preparation for design.
technique. A simple one might typically result in a series drawings where all the roads end up in one draw- Structural analyses like these can also be used to explain a design that is already finished. It is daily profes-
ing, all the green in another, all the buildings in yet another and the same for all the water. An example of sional practice to explain your design to other parties. So-called plan analyses are a common tool for this.
this can be seen in fig. 3, where some of these basic morphological layers are drawn for Schipluiden. An excellent example of this is the series of drawings in fig.6. This study by a group of young Dutch
This is a good example of how we take our basic map (top left) and distil it into a number of derivative urbanists shows how their proposal for the western garden cities in Amsterdam is built up. Note how
new maps. We have to note that these basic layers are not the only possible ones to look at. It might be perfectly clear the regularity of the street pattern can be understood in combination with the highway
that for a specific analysis, a few, but very different layers are much more relevant. In principle, there is an system, or the complementary character of small and large green areas. Again the main map would not
almost infinite number of elements that can be considered. The category buildings alone can be sepa- have given us this information so easily. Note that in this way, the designers can also take us by the hand
rated in many sub-categories: public buildings, private buildings, high buildings, low buildings, old build- and show exactly what they want us to see. An analysis can be a powerful rhetorical tool in the hands of
ings, new buildings, big buildings, small buildings, beautiful buildings, run-down buildings etc. etc. The skilled designers. A good analysis avoids that the uninformed reader draws unfavourable conclusions or
same goes for green, water, infrastructure etc. But as we have seen, other categories are also possible like simply doesn’t understand the proposal at all.
density, edges, patterns etc. An important question therefore is how to make a sensible selection from this Another variant can be seen in fig.7. This plan analysis of an IJburg island by Claus, Van Dongen en
infinity. In the next paragraphs, we will give some further suggestions which can help us in this respect. Schaap shows how the general map of the island was developed from a basic grid. Successive drawings
Some believe that drawing morphological layers is all there is to urban analysis. While these drawings are each carve out their own space from the grid until the plan can be understood in full. The advantage is
indeed analytical, our analysis is not finished here. This is only the beginning. We now have to stop and that one will always remember the basic idea of a plan, even though the final result may stand at some
ask ourselves what we can learn from this documentation. distance from that.
Layers show what is there and as such, they cannot explain anything. They show the rough data of
Schipluiden, comparable perhaps to the quantitative data that a statistician collects in a survey or poll. A
necessary further step in our analysis is to look at this material and interpret it.
Fig. 4 shows a first step towards what will eventually enable us to draw relevant conclusions from an
analysis. In the case of Schipluiden, there are some peculiarities our new maps that attract our attention.
For instance the imbalance in size we see between the northern half of the town and the southern half,
the relative regularity of the street pattern, the disturbances of this pattern in some places, the strong
border of the town in the north, the less clearly defined edge in the south, the poor connection between
the buildings in the centre and the rest of the tissue, especially in the north. This second series of draw-
ings is extremely important to make. A pure documentation is never a complete analysis. It cannot convey
our professional opinion of the material.

fig. 6

fig. 5, original and derivative morphological maps of an area north of Milan

Let’s look at some more examples first. Fig.5 shows four drawings from an analysis by Italian urbanist
Stefano Boeri. Buildings (1), Plots (2), Agriculture (3) and Infrastructure (4) are separated from each other
for an area just north of Milan. The maps give us the chance to understand a very complex phenomenon
(for instance patterns in the spread of housing areas) in a short time. One could look at the original map
for ages, but the amount of information in a complete map is usually so big that a clear view of a single
theme is impossible. This analysis was not made to facilitate design, but it could have been. It is a good fig. 7

- 54 - - 55 -
 A last example is fig.9 from an analysis of the Faubourgs of Paris by Jacques Lucan. In a very short series,
the structure of a faubourg block is perfectly illustrated, never to be forgotten. We show it here also to
point at the use of 3d in analyses. These drawings also have a map as their basis, but the author realised
he could not represent everything he wanted in two dimensions. Note that the morphological layers that
these examples use are comparable to our example of Schipluiden, but that they choose their own direc-
tion where necessary.

1857 1900

fig. 9

§3: development (see projects 4,8,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,22,35,37)

Every village or city is a collection of elements which have developed over time. No city or area is built
on a complete tabula rasa. There is always the natural landscape to begin with, and even a town which
is built anew from scratch cannot be built in a day. There is always something which comes first. For
an urbanist, this is extremely valuable information which can explain later developments and which can
1958 1968
become legible when including “time” in the analysis. Up to now, we have assumed that we work with
only one map. We have already seen that any map represents a specific point in time. But this point in
time might not give us all the information we need. The layers we have isolated in our morphological
analysis have no history. They are simply there, and for that reason they are all equally important. We
do not know which came first or whether certain morphological layers are possibly related because they
developed in the same period. Analysing the development of an urban tissue can be a big help to deter-
mine which morphological aspects are relevant and which are not.
In the case of schipluiden, the drawings of the separate layers are all equally important at first sight. We
have no reason to value some structures higher than others. When we look at the development of the
town, we see some aspects that can clarify the morphology of Schipluiden. What is very surprising is that
Schipluiden, small as it is, apparently at some point had a railway station. Both the railway line and the
station have now disappeared. Still, this fact immediately attracts the attention of the attentive urban ana-
lyst for it can explain some peculiar features of Schipluiden. We see that the position of the station at the
south of the town created a naturally cut off area where Schipluiden could expand. During a long time,
growth was directed southward rather than northward. Even when the railway line disappeared, the
development continued in this direction. Reasons for this might have been that the necessary infrastruc-
1974 2003
ture (roads, shops, other public facilities) was already available in the south and lacking in the north. It
was only with the construction of a new road north of the town that a similar pocket was created that
fig. 8, development could be filled up by new developments. A historical analysis has now made clear how the imbalance in

- 56 - - 57 -
 size between the north an south of Schipluiden, which we noted in §2 can be explained. It also shows
why the northern edge of Schipluiden has such a clear boundary and the south does not. We know now
that the south also had such a clear boundary before, but that it was the disassembling of that bound-
ary which allowed further growth of the town. Remnants of this southern boundary are still visible in
the map today in the zone where the direction of the roads is somewhat twisted relative to the rest of
the tissue. All this information is important for the urban designer. Historical developments often cast
a “shadow” over the future. Processes that led to changes in the past, may still have an influence in the
future. This would remain unclear if one only looks at the present.
In our example of Schipluiden, the historical analysis consists of a number of drawings where the city
as a whole is drawn in its different stages of development. This is common, but not the only possible
way. Especially when we have specific ideas about which morphological layers are important, we may
focus our historical analysis on the development of these precise layers. The examples in this book can
give an idea of which direction to choose. There is no fixed procedure for this. Fig.10, from the analysis
by Jacques Lucan for instance, shows the development of an area in Paris that was once agricultural, but
gradually developed into an inner city area. Lucan chose to draw only the parcellation of the area and not
the roads as such or the buildings. Apparently, according to Lucan, the changes in the structure of the
parcels tell us more about the spatial characteristics of this area than the development of the building
blocks. These would only have resulted in a lot of undifferentiated black in the drawing.
Another beautiful example of how a historical analysis can clarify development can be seen in fig.11.
These are some drawings from an analysis of the city of Versailles by Jean Castex et al. Suppose we only
had the last drawing in the series, with the examples of Paris or Rome in mind we would probably have
guessed that the boulevards of Versailles were similarly carved out from an older tissue. But the historical
drawings clearly show that the boulevards were laid out long before the buildings. A situation that lasted
until the early twentieth century.
A special example of a historical analysis is the one in fig.12. where the Dapperbuurt area in Amsterdam
is analysed by Van der Hoeven and Louwe in their study “Amsterdam als Stedelijk Bouwwerk”. This is
not truly a historical analysis. It does not show actual development. Yet it does show how the structure of
Dapperbuurt can be understood as a series of abstract steps, leading from a hypothetical beginning to the
present day situation. In these drawings, the authors clearly indicate that for them, the actual history of
fig. 10 the Dapperbuurt is less relevant than this hypothetical development that never was.

fig. 11 fig. 12

- 58 - - 59 -
 §4: comparison and type (see projects 4,8,9,10,12,14,15,20,24,25,27,30,31,34,38)

In paragraph two, we have separated the words typology and morphology. Now, we will try to find out
how we can also look at typological features through a comparison of our site with other sites. Unfortu-
nately, there is no single definition of the word type current among urbanists and architects. We
understand type as an abstract model which is traceable and describable through an analysis of compa-
rable and concrete objects. We understand typology, parallel to our definition of morphology as the
science of type: in this case leading to knowledge of urban types. How can we determine whether an
urban form can also be called an urban type? For this, we state that we need to compare our situation
with other examples.2
But knowledge of types is not the only possible reason to compare. One of our basic question in para-
graph two was how to determine which morphological aspects are relevant and which are not. In para-
graph three, we saw that the inclusion of historical information can help in this selection. A comparison
of the urban situation with other examples might be a further aid. If we want to know which features of
Schipluiden are unique to the town and which features it has in common with others, this is impossible

HA
HA 


fig. 13, comparison 2. cf. also the remarks on type by Anne Vernez Moudon on p. 18 of this volume.

- 60 - - 61 -
to find out with the material that we have collected so far. A comparison of Schipluiden to other villages
could provide us with this information and give us further reason to value certain morphological aspects
different from others.3
In such a comparison, it would be of little use to consider Schipluiden next to an ideal, star-shaped mili-
tary settlement since these two obviously have very little in common. We know already that Schipluiden
is a little village along a river, with a small core and relatively large extensions, situated in a very regular
polder landscape. A comparison would only make sense if we found other examples which share these
basic characteristics. For the sake of brevity, we will give a short example in which Schipluiden is com-
pared to the town of Balk in Friesland, some two hundred kilometers away from Schipluiden (fig. 13).
As basic drawings, we have chosen topographical maps with a scale of 1:25.000 We will disregard the
wider context of the towns or any historical information. The reader will understand how to expand this
small example into a bigger analysis. Both Balk and Schipluiden have grown around a small core on either
side of a stream. In the case of Schipluiden, this is a winding river, with Balk, it is a straight canal. We
note that Balk is bigger in size than Schipluiden, but at the same time we see that the urban tissue in Balk
seems less compact than in Schipluiden. A short analysis of the building density in both towns tells us
that the number of inhabitants is probably roughly similar (p.60, middle, size in hectares and percentage
of built area).
When we look a bit closer, we see that both towns have grown to many times their original sizes, but
this growth was not the same in all directions. Especially in Balk, we clearly see that the original string
of buildings was expanded only slightly along the water and that most of the growth took place perpen-
dicular to the canal. We did not notice this before with Schipluiden, but when we look at it now, we see a
similarity. We don’t know why this happened, but maybe we have struck something typical in the devel-
opment of small villages along a stream. We can now formulate a hypothesis. Further comparison might
confirm or reject this. fig. 14
Something we already noted before about the morphology of Schipluiden is that the southern edge of
the town is rather weakly defined. When we look at Balk, we see the same phenomenon, but even more
so. Along most of its perimeter, Balk has a very fuzzy edge with many small incidents that look arbitrarily
cut off or waiting for a proper ending. This happens everywhere, except where there is a strong infra-
structural boundary of a higher order: in this case, a big road passing the town on the west. Now, when
we turn back to Schipluiden, we see that our previous remark can be modified. We already observed that
the southern border of Schipluiden is weakly defined and that the northern border is very strong. We
could not know if this development was unique to Schipluiden or not. We could only document it. Now,
having looked at Balk, we may speculate that it is in fact typical of these villages that their borders are fig. 15
unclear - unless they are cut off by roads or other infrastructure. An urban designer might have decided
on the basis of our earlier morphological analysis that the southern border of Schipluiden was not well of the researchers. Here we see two small drawings that show the typical relation between squares and
defined and that new developments should improve this. The present comparison might make us change streets and between squares and churches in these towns. In the study, similar comparisons are drawn
our mind. Since it is characteristic of these villages to have fuzzy edges, new additions should perhaps up to the level of the individual house. In fact, for many typological studies, especially in France and
comply to this principle. In this case, the northern road in Schipluiden could be seen as uncharacteristic Italy, the typology of the single building is often the endpoint of the analysis. A scale level which is not
and therefore unwanted. common in the Dutch practice.
This is only a very small comparison. Looking at more examples might have shown that our conclusions The Dutch example in fig.15 does show building typology, but only in as far as it can illustrate typical
were not correct. Hopefully the reader will understand that performing a comparison in search for the urban patterns: in this case a typical section of the canal zone in Amsterdam compared to a more recent
typical or the unique can provide valuable information to ground an urban- or architectural design on. example at the Java island. As we saw before in the analysis of the faubourgs, the third dimension must
sometimes be included in the analysis to show what is important. This is often the case in analyses that
As is mentioned elsewhere in this book, French and Italian analyses have a strong tradition in typologi- deal with (building)type or typical urban spaces where height, elevation and enclosure are relevant aspects
cal research. Fig.14 shows some illustrations from a famous analysis by François Divorne et al of the of the tissue.
Bastides towns in France. The comparison of Schipluiden to Balk is nothing compared to the incredibly Sometimes, the most characteristic feature of a building or site can be explained by comparing it with
thorough comparison of the Bastides. Obviously, this can result in a much greater validity in the claims something it is not. In fig.16, Colin Rowe explains with two carefully selected examples the fundamental
difference between a modern solitary building and the traditional inner city fabric. This is a very elegant
3. Note that in some cases, it might be the unique that we are looking for, in other cases, it might be the typical. In both way of showing this, because only two illustrations can at once explain two different worlds when put
cases, we need a comparison to see which is which. next to each other.

- 62 - - 63 -
 In fig.17, Richard Wurman shows how comparing a well known example to a lesser known example can
lead to an a-ha erlebnis. The (in Dutch eyes) well known map of Amsterdam can immediately put a map
of ancient babylon in perspective. Showing only the last map would have left most of us clueless about
how big this city really was. One look at Amsterdam at the same scale explains.

fig. 16

fig. 17

§5: drawing your conclusions (see projects 5,13,26,28,31,33,34,35,36,38,39)

Analyses do not only help a designer to structure a design, but they are also commonly used to explain
the characteristics of a site or a design to others: your superior, your client, the municipality etc. All these
parties want to understand what your professional opinion is of a site or they want to be able to judge
whether your proposed intervention is good. In this communication with others, it is important that
you are able to visualise your findings. The documentary part of an analysis - layers, time, comparison
- together form a coherent story, but it can be a rather long story and there may come a point where you
need to show the essence of your analysis as concise as possible.
Let’s summarise the analytical process once more (fig. 18). The first drawing shows the basic map that we
prepared of Schipluiden. This is the one from which all our other maps have been derived. In preparing
this map, we have made decisions about scale, time and abstraction which limit what we can see in the
fig. 18, drawing your conclusions map, but the map itself does not tell us anything yet. Somebody may look at it for hours and not

- 64 - - 65 -
know what we want to illustrate. The second two maps show two of the layers that were part of our first
analytical series. It is the layer with all the buildings in the town and the layer with the water structure.
These drawings document. They do not show what we think about the water structure, they only show
it as it appeared in our basic map. In the fourth drawing we have combined the two layers because we
noted a similarity between them. In the fifth drawing we indicate how the water structure and the building
structure are tot a large extent congruent. We pick up the pencil ourselves and for the first time add to the
map.
This is an important analytical step since this means that this information is no longer visible in reality.
It is our own interpretation of reality. It is a conclusion we could draw only after taking the map apart
and selectively put it back together again. It shows the regularity of the basic structure of Schipluiden
and its congruity with the landscape, but it also clearly shows where this regularity is disturbed. In our fig. 19
previous analysis, we have seen the reasons for this. This drawing shows what we have learned from the
morphology of Schipluiden, but in doing that, much of the information that is still visible in the drawing
is not necessary anymore. Now, the canals and streets are not important anymore as canals and streets
but because they are part of an abstract structure which can be represented also in a more abstract way. A
final step in our analysis is therefore that we forget our basic map completely and only show the essentials
that we have taken from it: our personal selection. If somebody were to ask us: can you show me in five
seconds what you think is the essence of Schipluiden, we could do this with this final drawing, not with
the previous ones. Documentary drawings do not show a personal stamp, but as the drawings become
more interpretative, the drawing techniques can also become more personal. The designer is free to
choose. It can be done with a map, but also with a cartoon, with a diagram, with a single word.
Fig.19 shows some beautiful examples of conclusive drawings by Kevin Lynch from his famous book
“The Image of the City”. These drawings are used to summarise an argument. The argument itself (the
documentation) is not visible here and in a way this is also not necessary anymore. The drawings have the fig. 20
power to explain a complete analysis in a single image.
Another example of this can be seen in fig.20. The person who has made this drawing wants us to believe
that the Dutch town of Heerlen and the German town of Aachen have grown into an urban pattern
which transcends the two separate towns and can be recognised as a new entity. A drawing like this can be
a very powerful pr-tool. We do not know if the information in the drawing is correct, but it looks good
and you only have to see it once to remember it. Please be aware that drawings like these, separated from
the original analysis can easily start a life of their own.
Sometimes, an interpretative drawing is needed to open up the possibility for further research. In fig.21,
the authors represent the highway that connects the cities of the Dutch Randstad as a circle. Of course,
this road is not circular in reality but the whole concept of the Randstad might as well be represented
as such. Suddenly, this one drawing makes a lot of other drawings possible through which many aspects
related to the experience of this highway can be visualised (see p.270). Many times, a departure from
the original map is necessary to come to new insights. A last example of this is the famous drawing of
Van der Hoeven and Louwe of the canal zone in Amsterdam (fig.22). In a small series of drawings, the fig. 21
authors discovered that this area in Amsterdam is very similar to the ideal commercial city as proposed
by Simon Stevin in the seventeenth century. Unrolling the canal zone into a strip makes this connection
clear. As with the Randstad road, a new -personalised- drawing technique was necessary to be able to
visualise what the authors considered the essence of the area.

§6: drawing techniques

Everybody who has seen less successful analyses knows that even slight differences in the orientation of
maps, a change in the use of colour, too much information in a drawing etc. can make an analysis un-nec-
essarily difficult to understand. In most cases, this is not because of methodical faults, but because of a
lack of drawing techniques. Most problems arise from the fact that the drawings in an analysis must be
fig. 22

- 66 - - 67 -
comparable. This leads to obvious rules that within a series of drawings, there is a unity of scale, legend, the way he sees fit. But any analysis dealing with morphology - also the virtuoso freestyle ones - will find
colour, penwidth and orientation. But there are also a few less obvious rules and suggestions that might it almost unavoidable to address the themes we have mentioned above. The fact that a good analysis is
help you in making a comprehensible analysis. also interpretative of a site and therefore subjective makes it very difficult to lay down a fixed method for
1: Show as little information as possible in one drawing. Remember that as a matter of principle, it is typomorphological analyses. Still, there is a general understanding of how to make a basic one. It is a pro-
better to make ten drawings with very little information than one drawing with much information. The cedure which is shaped in practice. One is free to modulate it and expand upon it. The analyses which are
reader or audience must be taken through the analysis bit by bit. If there are more themes or elements shown in part two of this book show how much variation is possible. Hopefully though, the reader will
than necessary in one drawing, the reader will have to search for the right information and will easily lose find that most of the examples in part two use the basic techniques we have introduced in this chapter.
track of the argument.
2: Use common reference points. When you draw morphological layers and follow the first rule, each
drawing contains relatively little information. Especially when the original map is not included in the
drawing anymore, the reader will have problems to compare the different drawings Therefore it is very
important that you use common reference points. In many of the drawings of Schipluiden we drew the
main waterways, even though these waterways were not relevant themselves. In the comparison with Balk,
the original map was visible in the background and all the drawings had the same frame. There are many
ways, but remember that in principle, comparing drawings is impossible when there are no common
reference points.
3: The use of photographs. Many people believe that including photographs in an analysis helps to clarify
the point. This often leads to analyses that look like tourist guides rather than morphological analyses.
Keep as a basic rule that your story must be clear without photographs. Even a photograph which has
zoomed in on a subject will still contain so much information that a reader easily gets lost. He will not
know whether it was the house in the picture that was important or the sidewalk that was in front of it
(This does not mean that photographs cannot be used in a good way. For examples of analyses which use
photographs or other perspective illustrations, see projects 2,6,7,8,11,12, 33,35,36)
4: All the important information must be visible in images. Please keep in mind that in morphologi-
cal analyses, text supports the images, not vice versa. Everything you want to say must be visualised. In
our profession, drawings provide the means to check statements, text cannot. This does not mean that
text must always be reduced to a minimum. In fact, most of the examples in part B of this book come
from books themselves which carried a lot of text. In this volume though, we primarily look at drawing
techniques. An analysis which explains form is impossible without drawings, but keep in mind that other
documents may be added to strengthen your argument.
5: Computer techniques. The purpose of this chapter was to show some basic conventions in making
typo-morphological analyses in the Dutch context. Most of the examples were extremely simple 2d repre-
sentations. This does not mean that the urban analyst may only use simple drawings. Far from it. Over
the last decade, urban designers and architects have been very inventive in the use of drawing techniques.
Progress has been made especially in the use of computer programs. GIS and MAYA techniques link sta-
tistical or quantitative information to a map which enable graphical representations that would have been
almost impossible to make a few years ago. Examples of these techniques can be seen in this book, but
a further explanation is outside the scope of this study. The most important thing is that the methodical
conventions laid down here must remain clear, the graphical techniques are to a large extent up to the
person making the analysis.

§7: is this all?

Is this all there is to analysing? Of course not. It is only the beginning. In this chapter, we have only
looked at formal urban characteristics and showed how these may be compared. We have called this form
of analysis typomorphological. But there are many more sorts of urban analyses. There are analyses
which deal with technical aspects, mental impressions, organisations, time use, functions, connectivity,
density, traffic flows, statistical data, environmental aspects, etc. etc. There can be as many types of analy-
ses as there are urban phenomena. Any designer is free to choose his weapons and to use them in

- 68 - - 69 -