Geografie 1963, 68, 218-228
Delimination of Boundaries of the Agglomeration of Ústí n/L.
The author of this paper tries to explain on an example the use of a general coefficient for the delimitation of boundaries of agglomerations. He discussed this theme already previously in two articles which were published last year. In case the optimum number of data are available, the general coefficient may distinguish the following 10 characteristic qualities of individual housing estates: 1. position 2. possibility of connection with other places by some public means of transport 3. economical structure (proportion of non-agricultural population) 4. transportation of working people to the centre of the agglomeration 5. transportation of working people to some other place 6. increase in number of population 7. density of population and the quality of technical equipment of the housing estate 8. horizontal extension of the housing estate 9. number of social facilities (shops, schools, public health centres, etc) 10. the deviation from a typical centripetency As the example the author chose the town of Ústí n/L which is the large at town agglomeration in north-west Bohemia. Map 1 shows three stages in the development of the agglomeration: a) before the growth of industrialisation (1830) b) at the beginning of industrialisation (1854) c) in the period of progressing industrialisation (1900) The author describes in much detail the influence of the terrain upon the direction of growth of the agglomeration. In this case, the most important factor was the canyon of the Elbe. At the present time, another important agent comes into being, i. e. the progressing open coal-mining which will hinder the extension of the agglomeration in the south-west and west, partly also in north-west direction. In last years, the agglomeration kept on growing in this direction (Všebořice) but at the present it started growing to the north. The situation is shown in cartogram 3 (increase in number of population in 1950-61; the line indicates preliminary working boundary). It should serve as example of a more effective representation than the one used up to now (2 indicates economical structure). Map 4 indicates the transport facilities by some public means of transport (the width of the zone marks frequency, its length proportionality between 5 a. m. and 10. p. m.). Fig. 1 shows the growth of the agglomeration since 1830. A further map gives figures of the complex coefficient (consisting of eight parts, with no statistical data available for its forth and fifth part as yet) for 30 suburban districts out of which 15 - according to the opinion of the author - are to be included into the agglomeration. The last map shows a general classification of the housing estates together with the present administrative (dotted) as well as the suggested agglomeration boundary. In the conclusion, the author treats of the prospective development of the agglomeration. Its north-western part will most probably go on extending, meanwhile its eastern part - the largest at the present - will be reduced by two villages (Mojžíš and Veselí situated more to the east, owing to an ever-increasing influence of the neighbouring industrial agglomeration of Povrly.
