>>1535567When I said chaotic, I wasn't referring to the street layout. Urbanism is more than that, it's defining urban spaces through street layout, natural elements (rivers, hills, etc.) transit, architecture, urban furniture, and so on.
The street layout in Tokyo is good, it's hierarchical: large main streets, small neighbourhood streets. This creates defined areas. However, the spaces within those areas are poorly defined. You don't have open places, and architecture is incoherent.
This isn't a thing of personal preference, urbanism is in a large part based on an objective understanding of how the urban spaces affect us. Erratic architecture leads to badly defined urban spaces and that in turn makes for less pleasant cities. That's why in classic cities you had places like pic related with a coherent, pleasant architecture.
Just the same, not having occasional open spaces makes the city oppressive, stuffy. Most open spaces in Tokyo are dominated by roads and intersections, not by pedestrian spaces or parks which allow a contrast from both the movement of people, and the compact neighbourhood streets.
Old european cities had all these things completely mastered. They designed compact cities with hierarchical street pattern, dotted with occasional open spaces, and a matching architectural style. They're peak urbanism. It's hard to apply those concepts to a large city, and like I said, some things Tokyo does do well. But others it doesn't. Overall it's ok. Not terrible, but not excellent either.
