Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master in City Planning
at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
June 1999
© 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
All Rights Reserved
Targeting project areas and defining the objectives are the most
important procedures to plan neighborhood economic development, such as
the Boston Main Street Program. Which shopping district is to be encouraged
and how? However, this has not been an easy task, especially when the neighborhood
is in the inner city, because the inner city is so diversified that planners
can not find clear spatial patterns on which to base their decisions.
This paper attempts to extract patterns of socioeconomic phenomena relevant to economic development and map them. The advancing technology of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has made it easier to apply raster (grid cell or bit pattern) analysis to studying urban spatial patterns. A map that shows socioeconomic phenomena via rasterization and smoothing processing is called "socioeconomic topography" here. Just as conventional topography shows us geographical features, socioeconomic topography illustrates the spatial pattern and clustering of socioeconomic features of a given area.
The following maps are created as socioeconomic topography to support
planning of inner city economic development: (1) land use allocation, (2)
land value, (3) business variation, (4) shopping convenience, and (5) leading
industrial clusters. On each map, spatial patterns stand out clearly from
the chaos of Boston's inner city. Socioeconomic topography offers a new
way of understanding the inner city and illuminates the need of made-to-order
projects for each shopping district.
Thesis in Portable Document Format (pdf) [200 KB]
| Figure | Title |
Page
|
Size (KB)
|
| 2-1-2-1 | Inner Cities in Massachusetts |
25
|
84
|
| 2-1-2-2 | Inner City in Boston |
26
|
41
|
| 2-2-1 | Median Household Income |
30
|
160
|
| 2-2-2 | Ratio of Racial Minorities |
31
|
152
|
| 2-2-3 | Ratio of English is not spoken at home |
32
|
160
|
| 2-2-4 | Ratio of Immigrants |
33
|
160
|
| 2-2-5 | Ratio of Lower Educational Attainment |
34
|
160
|
| 2-3-1 | Income Density |
37
|
66
|
| 2-3-2 | Expenditure pattern of Inner City Household |
38
|
9
|
| 2-3-3 | Strategic Location |
39
|
56
|
| 2-3-4-1 | Density of Job Seekers |
40
|
68
|
| 2-3-4-2 | Ratio of Job Openings to Job Seekers |
40
|
68
|
| 2-4-3 | Coverage of Retail Expenditure |
46
|
232
|
| 3-1-1 | Shopping Strips and Shopping Centers |
57
|
66
|
| 3-1-2 | Categorized land Use |
58
|
1448
|
| 3-1-3 | Commercial Land Allocation |
59
|
1424
|
| 3-2-1-1 | Industrial Land Allocation |
62
|
1400
|
| 3-2-1-2 | Tax Exempt Land Distribution |
63
|
1432
|
| 3-2-2 | Commercial land Allocation with 100m range |
64
|
1440
|
| 3-3-1 | Land Value |
67
|
1456
|
| 3-3-2 | Median Household Income and Land Value |
68
|
112
|
| 3-4-1 | Number of Parcels Used for Commercial Purposes |
71
|
1424
|
| 3-4-2 | Number of Business Firms by SIC Code |
72
|
1424
|
| 3-5-1 | Commercial Land Use Variation by State Land Classification |
75
|
1456
|
| 3-5-2 | Business Variation by SIC Code |
76
|
1416
|
| 4-1-2 | Neighborhood Convenience |
82
|
1384
|
| 4-2-2 | Industrial Clusters |
86
|
1360
|