Tokyo, situated in the central east of Japan, is a fast growing capital that holds a significant role of influence to the rest of the country and the globe. Like any other large cities in the world, with its high population density, Tokyo is constantly confronted with problems such as overcrowding, lack of land, high housing price and long hours of commuting.[1] In response to these problems, different strategies have been adapted which together create the city’s unique urban character. However, it is common for visitors, especially those from western countries who are used to the idea of suburban planning, to find their reading of Tokyo to be rather overwhelming and chaotic.[2] The essay aims at deciphering this kind of impression and identifying some key factors that constitute the urban landscape of Tokyo. The factors that are to be examined are summarised from the author’s first hand observation of the city and are also common points made by western visitors after their initial exploration of the place.[3] They are the polycentric urban structure, the superposition of infrastructure and the use of residual spaces. These factors together may make the urban landscape of Tokyo appear to be without order, but after studying about their origins and reflecting upon experiences with them, one may start to realise their significance to the people and the city. It is then that the true essence of Tokyo can start to unpack.
Polycentric Tokyo
A major contrast between Tokyo and many western cities is its polycentric structure, which is highly evident from the seemingly borderless commercial activities that one may feel when moving across different areas.[4] Precisely speaking, the word ‘Tokyo’ does not refer to only one single city, but can be used in several manners. In 1943, the old Tokyo city was combined with the old Tokyo prefecture containing the western suburbs, the Tama District, and the islands in the Pacific Ocean, to form a greater administrative unit called Tokyo Metropolis (Tokyo-to).[5] The present central city, historically the city of Tokyo, is commonly referred to as ‘the 23 wards’.[6]The centre of the wards is where the historical heart of power sit, presently the Imperial Palace acting as a publicly inaccessible void that is in contrast with many European city centres.[7]
Figure 1. ‘Empty centre’ of the Imperial Palace compound, 3/1995
Source: Botond Bognár, Tokyo, World Cities (Chichester, West Sussex [England]: Academy Editions, 1997), 21.
Since the 1960s, with the aim to decentralise the overly dense commercial districts neighbouring the Imperial Palace and ease the problems of excessive commuting hours, the idea of developing multiple city subcentres started to lead the planning direction of Tokyo, which initiated from Shibuya, Shinjuku and Ikebukuro following by Ueno/Asakusa, Kinshicho/Kameido, Osaki and the artificial land extension in Tokyo Bay.[8] Along with the redevelopment of the initial CBD area, these subcentres have eventually transformed into key commercial, entertainment and transportation nodes respectively serving the needs of different demographic groups and each offering distinctive characters.[9]
Figure 2. A diagram showing the development of Tokyo’s subcentres with individual character
Source: Botond Bognár, Tokyo, World Cities (Chichester, West Sussex [England]: Academy Editions, 1997), 20.
As a result, the polycentric development has given birth to more and more hybrid building types and this kind of urban fabric continues exponentially outside the 23 wards. This eventually erased the border between the suburban areas and the city centre, giving the region high flexibility for future growth and expansion.[10] Due to its contrasting difference from western planning, one may first find this polycentric urban structure hard to comprehend. However, it is necessary and more adaptable for a city of this size, which enables greater spatial varieties and possibilities.
Superposition of Infrastructure
Another factor that plays an important part in Tokyo’s urban landscape that visitors often notice is its superposition of infrastructures. Almost everywhere regardless of the centre or the periphery, one can find multi-layered expressways, pedestrian bridges, elevated and underground railway tracks to an extent of dominating the visual landscape of the city over anything else such as rivers and historical remnants.[11] By sacrificing the quality of living spaces, it has become a formula to use since the population boom in 1960s in terms of increasing the traffic efficiency and functionality.[12] Visitors often find orientation within this multi-layered labyrinth, especially in the main subway stations, quite confusing and chaotic without following signs.[13] Sometimes train would arrive at a completely different platform from one’s previous experience, which leads to an exit on a different level. Here, the idea of “ground floor” has been fully transformed.[14] Consequently, in spite of the disorientation and the sacrifice of living quality that it may cause, it enriches one’s spatial experiences with the city and maximises the spatial potential within a limited area of land.[15]
Figure 3. An axonometric illustration of Shibuya subway station showing its multi-layered complexity
Source: Mapple, Tokyo Metro Navi (Tokyo: Tokyo Metro, 2013), 41-42
Figure 4. View to Sumida River taken from the Tokyo Skytree showing the superimposition and dominance of infrastructure
Source: Vivian Lee, 2013
Figure 5. View to Kandagawa River from Manseibashi in Chiyoda-ku of Tokyo showing the extremely close relationship between buildings and the river as well as the Yamanote railway bridge crossing the river in the background
Source: Vivian Lee, 2013
Figure 6. Shibuya, Meiji Dori, Roppongi Dori and Expressway 3
Source: Wolf-Dieter Gericke, and Juval Portugali, Tokyo (Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2009), 54.
Use of residual spaces
Unlike many countries with vast land spaces, in Japanese cities especially Tokyo, residual spaces such as rooftop areas or under-infrastructure spaces are often revitalised by adding different usages to them. [16] For instance, it is common for visitors to discover shops or restaurants underneath elevated roadways or see a rooftop sports ground from their hotel rooms.[17]
Figure 7. A view to the rooftop soccer ground from Candeo Hotel in the Chiba Prefecture, a neighbouring prefecture to the Tokyo metropolis
Source: Vivian Lee, 2013
Figure 8. Shops built underneath elevated railway bridge in Ameyayokocho, a commercial street at Ueno
Source: Vivian Lee 2013
Figure 9. A shop built underneath infrastructure near Asakusa
Source: Vivian Lee, 2013
Due to Tokyo’s high density and land prices, the use of these spaces is an extreme condition that the city has to adapt to in spite of their unpleasant environmental quality caused by air and visual pollution and noise.[18] However, these minimal spaces may seem unimportant or quite temporary at the first glance, but after fully experiencing the city and the spaces, one may start to realise their inseparable relationship with the lives of the local. Although from a foreign perspective, they may seem to lack any order. However, after all, they have become an integrated part of the city’s character and have significantly contributed to the visual complexity and richness of its urban landscape.
Summary:
Tokyo is a vibrant city with many faces. Some are visually explicit while some would only reveal after an insightful exploration. For many western visitors, the complexity and seemingly ‘chaotic’ scene of the urban landscape may be their direct impression of the place, which can cause instances of disorientation and confusion. However, it is like a puzzle where every piece may seem minimal and insignificant but altogether they form crucial and inseparable parts of the whole. This essay aims at introducing and deciphering the ‘chaotic’ face of Tokyo by examining some of the common observations made by visitors. Different factors that were identified include the polycentric urban structure, superposition of infrastructure as well as the use of residual spaces. In spite of their seemingly negative effects on the qualities of living, they enable high adaptability for future needs as well as allowing innovative architectural possibilities that cannot be realised in places with abundant resources. However, they are just few instances that contribute to the complex urban landscape of the city. Other factors such as organic street patterns and irregular plot widths are also aspects intrinsic to the true essence of the city.[19] In terms of gaining a deeper and more complete understanding of the city, investigation into these aspects and other unmentioned faces is necessary, which provide opportunities and direction for further future research.
[2] Livio Sacchi, Tokyo: City and architecture (Milan: Skira, 2004), 13.
[3] Ibid., 75.
[4] Botond Bognár, Tokyo, World Cities (Chichester, West Sussex [England]: Academy Editions, 1997), 11.
[5] Roman Cybriwsky, Tokyo: The shogun's city at the twenty-first century (Chichester, England: J. Wiley & Sons, 1998), 19-20.
[6] Ibid., 13.
[7] Bognár, Tokyo, 20; Cybriwsky, Tokyo, 57; See note 3 above.
[8] Sacchi, Tokyo, 65-66; Cybriwsky, Tokyo, 93; Roman Cybriwsky, “Tokyo’s Third Rebuilding: New Twists on Old Patterns,” in A Companion to the Anthropology of Japan, ed. Jennifer Robertson, 220 (Blackwell Publishing Online: Blackwell Publishing, 2008), http://www.blackwellreference.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/subscriber/tocnode.html?id=g9780631229551_chunk_g978063122955114.
[9] Cybriwsky, Tokyo, 92.
[10] Sacchi, Tokyo, 91.
[11] Ibid., 96-97.
[12] Bognár, Tokyo, 31.
[13] Sacchi, Tokyo, 90.
[14] See note 13 above.
[15] See note 13 above.
[16] Pedro Hormigo, Takao Morita, and Jean-Sébastien Cluzel, "Promenade into the Gap: Tokyo's Impossible Void," Urban Design International 12, no. 1 (03, 2007): 3-19, http://search.proquest.com/docview/194529396?accountid=14723.
[17] Junzo Kuroda, Momoyo Kaijima, and Yoshiharu Tsukamoto, Made in Tokyo (Tokyo: Kajima Shuppankai, 2001), 30-31.
[18] See note 11 above.
[19] Sacchi, Tokyo, 91-95; Thomas Daniel, After the crash: Architecture in post-bubble japan (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008), 163-169.
