Ranking Lab ― The Measured Editorial Desk
Editorial Research Ranking

Which Station in Greater Tokyo Is Really Livable
— 25 Stations Scored Without Votes or Rents

TByline: A reader of institutions and terrain (Rail, municipal finance and elevation across the region / ranks disclosed as six-axis numbers)

Neighbourhood rankings come in roughly three kinds. The vote ("where would you like to live?") asks people to write down the name of a place they already know, so the names of giant terminals rise to the top. The resident survey is better, but the answers carry the after-the-fact reassurance that one's own choice was right, and the sample is limited to people who could already afford to live there. The property-media ranking has both its coverage and its revenue tied to the stock of listings. This article uses none of the three. Not a single vote is counted, and rent, land price and sale price are not scoring axes. Rent is excluded not because expensive places are unpleasant, but because the level of rent measures how much other people want to live somewhere, not how livable it is. Using it as evidence of livability makes the argument circular — and that circle happens to suit the seller. What is measured instead is only what you cannot change after you move in: rail redundancy, everyday support, municipal fiscal strength, safety and quiet, the view twenty years out, and terrain. Elevations are measured values from the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan's LiDAR survey; finance comes from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the 2050 population from the national research institute, and recorded offences from the Metropolitan Police Department and three prefectural police forces. First place goes to Nagareyama-Ōtakanomori and second to Chiba New Town Chūō — neither of which ever appears near the top of a popularity vote. Yokohama, a perennial favourite in those votes, finishes 20th, and Tama-Plaza 24th.

How This Ranking Is Built (Methodology)

So that "where in Greater Tokyo is livable" is not settled in a single word, the question is split into six independent axes and recombined with weights (total = Σ(axis score × weight)/100). Rent, land price, sale price, "most desirable neighbourhood" votes, resident surveys, name recognition, brand and sheer speed of access to the centre are not among the axes. The heaviest weight goes to rail redundancy (18) because what governs daily life is not the average commute but how the network behaves on its worst day. Average journey times are visible on a website before you move; "how do I get home when someone has been hit by a train" is not. And the two axes carrying no lens (safety and quiet 17 plus twenty years out 16 = 33) are what decide the overall order. The 0-10 scores on each axis are the writer's assessment, not facts. There is one exception worth stating: the safety and terrain axes alone are scored monotonically against the measured values — the fewer recorded offences per 1,000 residents, and the higher the elevation, the higher the score, without exception. The single departure is Musashi-Kosugi, where one point is deducted for the flooding recorded in Kawasaki City's verification report.

AxisWhat It MeasuresWeight
Rail redundancyHow many routes run towards the centre, whether they belong to different operators and separate tracks, and whether a walk can reach a substitute when one line stops18%
Everyday supportAge limits, income tests and copayments for children's medical subsidies, nursery waiting lists, and whether food and medical care are reachable on foot16%
Municipal fiscal strengthNot the financial capability index alone but the current account ratio (the share of money that can still be moved), the real debt service ratio and the future burden ratio17%
Safety and quietRecorded Penal Code offences per 1,000 residents, scored monotonically against the figure (municipalities with entertainment districts read high)17%
Twenty years outThe rate of population change to 2050 and the share aged 65 and over in 2050, from the national regional population projections16%
Terrain and disasterThe station's measured elevation from the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan's LiDAR survey, scored monotonically against elevation, with only recorded disasters admitted as an exception16%
Normalization Rule
More lines does not mean better. Lines joined end to end by through services are not counted as independent alternatives, because through running raises convenience and imports disruption from far away at the same time. The financial capability index of a Tokyo special ward is never set beside that of a city: the ministry states that the wards' index "is computed by a method different from that used for other bodies," and it excludes them from its own averages. For the five stations inside designated cities (Yokohama, Kawasaki, Musashi-Kosugi, Tama-Plaza and Ōmiya) the fiscal figures are city-wide while population and offences are ward-level, so the grain differs. Elevation is a measurement at a single representative point for the station, not the height of the whole walkable area; where several points are returned the lowest is used, because water gathers at the lowest ground.
Scope / Unit
Twenty-five stations across Tokyo and the three neighbouring prefectures: ten in Tokyo, six in Kanagawa, four in Saitama and five in Chiba. The unit is the station, one station per entry. Greater Tokyo has more than 2,000 stations, so this is an editorial selection rather than a complete survey (stated at the end as the largest limitation of this article). Regulars of the popularity votes (Yokohama, Kichijōji, Ebisu, Ōmiya, Musashi-Kosugi) were deliberately included as subjects of the test, alongside stations that rarely place well in votes but looked structurally strong (Fuchū, Wakōshi, Ebina, Inzai), with the range of network shapes (from four operators and five lines down to a single line) and of terrain (from -0.7 m to 83.1 m) spread across the field. School lunch fee waivers are not used as a scoring basis, because the timing and scope differ so much between municipalities (primary school only, third child onwards, and so on) that no comparable form could be built.
Data Sources
Elevations for all 25 stations were measured through the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan's elevation API (1 m and 5 m mesh LiDAR), and the representative coordinates of each station were likewise obtained from the same agency's address search API, so no coordinate was guessed. The financial capability index, current account ratio, real debt service ratio and future burden ratio come from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Population and ageing ratios to 2050 come from the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research. The denominator for the per-1,000-resident figures is the Basic Resident Register population. Recorded Penal Code offences are the confirmed 2025 figures published by the Metropolitan Police Department and the Kanagawa, Saitama and Chiba prefectural police; for Tokyo alone the town-block data were aggregated to the municipal level by this article. Children's medical subsidies and nursery waiting lists come from national surveys by the Children and Families Agency.
Compiled / Subjectivity
3 August 2026. Rail redundancy and safety are weighted heavily on the editorial judgement that daily life is governed by the worst day rather than the average. There is no exact tie: first-place Nagareyama-Ōtakanomori (7.45) leads Chiba New Town Chūō (7.43) by 0.02, and 14th-place Musashi-Kosugi (6.20), 15th Akabane (6.17) and 16th Shin-Urayasu (6.16) sit close together.
Switch the scoring lens ― changing the weights moves the ranking (recalculated on the same evidence, same scores)

Overall Ranking

★ First Edition

Findings Against Conventional Wisdom

① First place goes to Nagareyama-Ōtakanomori (7.45) — and this station takes first under none of the four lenses. Its two scores of ten sit only in the axes that carry no lens: safety and quiet, and twenty years out. Recorded offences at 4.27 per 1,000 residents are the third lowest of the 25 municipalities, and the projected 20.9 per cent population growth to 2050 is the only double-digit increase among them. It leads not by rising anywhere but by having no hole. Second-place Chiba New Town Chūō (7.43) is a bare 0.02 behind, and neither of the top two is a name that ever comes up in a "where would you like to live" vote.
② The regulars of the popularity votes fall the furthest here. Yokohama 20th, Tama-Plaza 24th, Musashi-Kosugi 14th, Ōmiya 8th, Kichijōji 5th. Above all, Yokohama Station stands at 1.4 metres, exactly the same figure as Kita-Senju (both measured values from the same LiDAR survey). The station served by more railway operators than any other in Japan and the station with four operators and five lines come out level on the height of their ground. The standing of a station and the height of the land it sits on have nothing to do with one another. Yokohama is also the widest swing in the article, moving between second under the rail lens and 24th under terrain.
③ A well-off municipality and a municipality with money it can move turned out to be different things. Kunitachi City's financial capability index is 1.01, above one, and yet its current account ratio is 99.0 — almost everything that comes in is consumed by costs that go out every year without fail. Adachi Ward and Edogawa Ward, by contrast, post a financial capability index of just 0.38 while their current account ratios stand at 79.7 and 73.0 with negative real debt service ratios, meaning the burden of repaying debt is small. And the ministry itself states that the special wards' financial capability index is based on the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's own calculation and computed by a different method, excluding the wards from its averages. Figures the state declines to place on the same scale are routinely lined up side by side in neighbourhood rankings.
④ The age limit on children's medical subsidies is set municipality by municipality rather than by prefecture, and the pattern that emerged is that bigger cities stop sooner. All ten Tokyo municipalities and all five in Chiba run to the end of the school year in which a child turns 18. The three designated cities — Yokohama, Kawasaki and Saitama — all stop at 15. Those same three carry current account ratios of 98.4 to 99.3, the most rigid finances in the article. Within the same Kanagawa Prefecture, Ebina and Fujisawa run to 18. Being a big city does not mean more comes back to the children living in it.
⑤ "Being so now" and "being so in twenty years" turned out to be different as well. Tama-Plaza has the fewest recorded offences of the 25 municipalities, at 3.04 per 1,000 residents, and sits on a hill at 54.0 metres. It finishes 24th, because only the Tōkyū Den-en-toshi Line serves it and Aoba Ward is projected to lose 6.2 per cent of its population by 2050, with 34.2 per cent aged 65 and over. Tokorozawa takes the same shape: second under the terrain lens at 74.6 metres, yet a projected 10.1 per cent population loss and 35.9 per cent aged 65 and over by 2050, both the harshest values among the 25, leaving that axis at a single point. A quiet suburb on high ground today is no guarantee of the same town twenty years from now.

How the Landscape Changes When You Change the Weights (Sub-Views)

LensNo. 1Biggest MoversWhat It Measures
Balance of all six axes (default)Nagareyama-Ōtakanomori 7.450.02 ahead of Chiba New Town Chūō (2nd, 7.43); Kashiwa (3rd, 7.15), Wakōshi (4th, 6.99) and Kichijōji (5th, 6.92) follow; Yokohama 20th and Tama-Plaza 24thLivability across six axes
Weight rail redundancyKita-Senju 8.24Yokohama (2nd, 7.92) and Ōmiya (3rd, 7.88) follow; Musashi-Kosugi climbs from 14th to 4th and Nishi-Funabashi from 19th to 5th; Tama-Plaza falls to last, Nishi-Kasai to 24th, Kawaguchi to 23rdCan another route carry you home
Weight everyday supportKichijōji 8.56Tachikawa (2nd, 7.96) and Ebisu (3rd, 7.96) follow; Kinshichō climbs from 11th to 4th; Kawasaki, capped at 15, falls to 23rd, Tama-Plaza to 24th, Kawaguchi to lastSubsidies, waiting lists, walkable shops
Weight municipal fiscal strengthChiba New Town Chūō 8.28Shin-Urayasu climbs from 16th to 2nd; Kichijōji (3rd), Ebisu (4th) and Fuchū (5th) follow; with current account ratios near 99, Yokohama falls to 23rd, Kawasaki to 24th, Tama-Plaza to lastCapability index, current account, debt
Weight terrain and disasterTachikawa 8.48Tokorozawa (2nd, 8.08), Kichijōji (3rd, 8.04) and Fuchū (4th, 7.88) follow; Tama-Plaza climbs from 24th to 11th; Kita-Senju at 1.4 m falls to 20th, Yokohama at the same 1.4 m to 24th, Nishi-Kasai at -0.7 m to lastMeasured LiDAR elevation at the core

Debate and Limitations

The 0-10 score on each axis is the writer's assessment, not a fact. What could be confirmed runs as far as the measured elevations, the fiscal indicators, the population projections, the recorded offences, the terms of the medical subsidies, the waiting lists and the lines serving each station; everything beyond that — whether a place is livable — is editorial judgement. There is one exception: the safety and terrain axes are scored monotonically against the measured values (fewer offences, and higher ground, always score higher). The single departure is Musashi-Kosugi, where one point is deducted for the flooding recorded in Kawasaki City's verification report. The sources listed at the end are references for facts; there is no source for a score.

This is not a complete survey (the largest limitation of this article): Greater Tokyo has more than 2,000 stations. The 25 here were chosen editorially to spread across the regulars of the popularity votes, stations that looked structurally strong, the range of network shapes and the range of terrain. A station absent from this list may well belong above these.

How to read the safety figures (the point that needs most care here): dividing recorded offences by the night-time population makes the number leap for any municipality that people pour into by day to work, shop and go out. Between Shibuya Ward at 55.51 and Aoba Ward, Yokohama at 3.04 lies a gap of 18 times, and reading that as "residents are 18 times less safe" would be wrong. This article takes the position of folding that inflation in as it stands, reading it as the shortness of the distance from home to the nightlife, but that is one judgement and not the only correct one. Correcting for daytime population would raise Ebisu, Kichijōji, Tachikawa, Ōmiya and Yokohama alike.

The grain is uneven: for the five stations inside designated cities (Yokohama, Kawasaki, Musashi-Kosugi, Tama-Plaza and Ōmiya) the fiscal indicators are city-wide while the population projections and recorded offences are ward-level. Kawasaki and Musashi-Kosugi therefore share the same fiscal score. The financial capability and current account ratios of the special wards are also computed differently from those of municipalities, under the metropolitan finance adjustment system; the ministry states as much, and this article leans on the real debt service and future burden ratios for cross-cutting comparison and otherwise compares wards with wards.

Elevation is a single point at the station, not the height of the whole walkable area. At stations on the edge of a plateau, a few hundred metres of walking can gain a dozen metres or more (Akabane and Ebisu are of this kind). Nor has this article read the hazard maps for all 25 stations. Embankments, drainage and pumping do not show up in elevation, so the terrain score is an assessment based on the height of the ground and on recorded disasters, not on designated inundation zones. The nature of the ground beneath a station built on reclaimed land, as at Shin-Urayasu, cannot be read from elevation either.

The reference dates do not line up: the fiscal figures are from the most recent annual settlement published by the ministry, the population projections are based on the 2020 census, the recorded offences are for 2025, the Basic Resident Register population is as of the start of the following January, the medical subsidies are as of April in the year of the fiscal settlement and the waiting lists as of April the year after. Institutions change every year. School lunch fee waivers are not used as a scoring basis here, because the timing and scope differ so widely between municipalities (primary school only, third child onwards, and so on) that no comparable form could be built. Several municipalities newly waived primary-school fees from April 2026, and this area is still moving.

What is not measured: since rent, land price and sale price are not axes, a high placing here does not mean good value. Nor are the number of medical institutions, the quality of schools, how easy it actually is to get a nursery place (a waiting list counts the children who could not get in, which is not the same thing), the steepness of the hills, noise, sunlight or the price level of the shops. Neither the sea nor the beauty of a streetscape enters (the placings of Fujisawa and Kunitachi are affected by that). Nor, of course, is where you work — for someone whose office is south of Tokyo Station, the stations of north-western Chiba that top this ranking are not on the list at all.

The strongest objection: "livability is decided neither by institutions nor by terrain but by whether you love the place. For someone who wants to live in Yokohama at 1.4 metres, what does it matter that Tachikawa at 83.1 metres tops the terrain lens?" That is a sound objection. The answer this article offers is that it does not fix the yardstick to one. Switch to the rail lens and Kita-Senju and Yokohama rise; switch to everyday support and Kichijōji stands. Not which is right, but knowing in advance which yardstick you are choosing by — that, the article holds, beats borrowing the result of a vote.

Related

🏠 More on housing and property — TokyoEstate.com 🎓 Greater Tokyo University Ranking 🏙 Tokyo Redevelopment Impact Ranking 📊 More rankings — 10i.jp hub

Sources

  1. Nagareyama-Ōtakanomori Station (Nagareyama City, Chiba. Two operators: the Tsukuba Express and the Tobu Noda Line) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B5%81%E5%B1%B1%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8A%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8B%E3%81%AE%E6%A3%AE%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 18.3 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — Geospatial Information Authority of Japan, Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.9255997&lat=35.8718469&outtype=JSON
  2. Chiba New Town Chūō Station (Inzai City, Chiba. Hokusō Railway and Keisei Electric Railway) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%83%E8%91%89%E3%83%8B%E3%83%A5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BF%E3%82%A6%E3%83%B3%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%AE%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 16.8 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=140.1161187&lat=35.7999833&outtype=JSON
  3. Kashiwa Station (Kashiwa City, Chiba. Two operators, three lines: JR Jōban Rapid, JR Jōban Local and the Tobu Noda Line. Japan's first pedestrian deck was built here in 1973) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9F%8F%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 20.6 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.9714264&lat=35.8621466&outtype=JSON
  4. Wakōshi Station (Wakō City, Saitama. The Tobu Tōjō Main Line and the Tokyo Metro Yūrakuchō and Fukutoshin Lines. The only Tokyo Metro station located in Saitama Prefecture) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%92%8C%E5%85%89%E5%B8%82%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 32.1 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.6129562&lat=35.7881668&outtype=JSON
  5. Kichijōji Station (Musashino City, Tokyo. Two operators: the JR Chūō Main Line and the Keiō Inokashira Line) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%89%E7%A5%A5%E5%AF%BA%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 54.9 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned under this name, and the lower is used: 55.3 m / 54.9 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.5803527&lat=35.7022773&outtype=JSON
  6. Tachikawa Station (Tachikawa City, Tokyo. Three lines: the JR Chūō Main Line, Ōme Line and Nambu Line. Connects to the Tama Monorail) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%8B%E5%B7%9D%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 83.1 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. The highest of the 25 stations) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.4142404&lat=35.6976078&outtype=JSON
  7. Ebisu Station (Shibuya Ward, Tokyo. The JR Yamanote, Saikyō and Shōnan-Shinjuku lines plus the Tokyo Metro Hibiya Line) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%81%B5%E6%AF%94%E5%AF%BF%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 15.9 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 20.5 m / 15.9 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.7090389&lat=35.6470487&outtype=JSON
  8. Ōmiya Station (Ōmiya Ward, Saitama City, Saitama. Its 13 serving lines are second only to Tokyo Station nationwide. JR East, Tobu Railway and the Saitama New Urban Transit) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E5%AE%AE%E9%A7%85_(%E5%9F%BC%E7%8E%89%E7%9C%8C) / Elevation 13.2 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 13.4 m / 13.2 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.6241757&lat=35.9078854&outtype=JSON
  9. Fuchū Station (Fuchū City, Tokyo. The Keiō Line. Fuchūhommachi Station on the JR Nambu and Musashino lines is a separate station) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BA%9C%E4%B8%AD%E9%A7%85_(%E6%9D%B1%E4%BA%AC%E9%83%BD) / Elevation 56.1 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.4801921&lat=35.6720458&outtype=JSON
  10. Ebina Station (Ebina City, Kanagawa. Three operators, three lines: the Odakyū Odawara Line, the Sōtetsu Main Line and the JR Sagami Line) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B5%B7%E8%80%81%E5%90%8D%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 21.4 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 21.4 m / 21.9 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.3913708&lat=35.4528465&outtype=JSON
  11. Kinshichō Station (Sumida Ward, Tokyo. Two operators: the JR Sōbu Rapid and Sōbu Local lines plus the Tokyo Metro Hanzōmon Line) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%8C%A6%E7%B3%B8%E7%94%BA%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 5.4 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.8140034&lat=35.6966021&outtype=JSON
  12. Kita-Senju Station (Adachi Ward, Tokyo. Four operators and five lines — JR East, Tokyo Metro, Tobu Railway and the Metropolitan Intercity Railway — with about 1,440,000 boardings and alightings a day in fiscal 2024, sixth in Japan) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8C%97%E5%8D%83%E4%BD%8F%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 1.4 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.8021877&lat=35.7496227&outtype=JSON
  13. Fujisawa Station (Fujisawa City, Kanagawa. Three operators, three lines: the JR Tōkaidō Main Line, the Odakyū Enoshima Line and the Enoshima Electric Railway) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%97%A4%E6%B2%A2%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 11.5 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 11.5 m / 13.0 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.4874991&lat=35.3372432&outtype=JSON
  14. Musashi-Kosugi Station (Nakahara Ward, Kawasaki City, Kanagawa. The JR Nambu Line, Yokosuka Line, Shōnan-Shinjuku Line and Sōtetsu through services, plus the Tōkyū Tōyoko and Meguro lines) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%AD%A6%E8%94%B5%E5%B0%8F%E6%9D%89%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 5.3 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 5.3 m / 8.2 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.6634971&lat=35.5745882&outtype=JSON
  15. Akabane Station (Kita Ward, Tokyo. Served by JR East alone, but the Keihin-Tōhoku Line, the Utsunomiya and Takasaki lines via the Ueno-Tokyo Line, the Shōnan-Shinjuku Line and the Saikyō Line each run on separate tracks) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B5%A4%E7%BE%BD%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 5.6 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.7210307&lat=35.777615&outtype=JSON
  16. Shin-Urayasu Station (Urayasu City, Chiba. The JR Keiyō Line. Trains entering the Musashino Line at Nishi-Funabashi also stop here) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E6%B5%A6%E5%AE%89%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 2.2 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.9125471&lat=35.6494041&outtype=JSON
  17. Tokorozawa Station (Tokorozawa City, Saitama. The Seibu Shinjuku and Ikebukuro lines) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%89%80%E6%B2%A2%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 74.6 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.4712764&lat=35.7865765&outtype=JSON
  18. Kamata Station (Ōta Ward, Tokyo. Three lines under two operators: the JR Keihin-Tōhoku Line and the Tōkyū Ikegami and Tamagawa lines. Keikyū Kamata Station lies roughly 800 metres away and is not a connecting station) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%92%B2%E7%94%B0%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 3.2 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. Two points are returned, and the lower is used: 3.9 m / 3.2 m) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.7145323&lat=35.5617108&outtype=JSON
  19. Nishi-Funabashi Station (Funabashi City, Chiba. Three operators: the JR Sōbu Local, Musashino and Keiyō branch lines, the Tokyo Metro Tōzai Line and the Tōyō Rapid Line. Every Sōbu Rapid train passes through without stopping) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A5%BF%E8%88%B9%E6%A9%8B%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 2.4 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.9601346&lat=35.7074679&outtype=JSON
  20. Yokohama Station (Nishi Ward, Yokohama City, Kanagawa. Six operators — JR East, Tōkyū, Yokohama Minatomirai Railway, Keikyū, Sōtetsu and the Yokohama Municipal Subway — the largest number of railway operators serving any single station in Japan. About 1.98 million boardings and alightings a day in fiscal 2024, fourth in Japan) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%A8%AA%E6%B5%9C%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 1.4 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. The same value as Kita-Senju Station) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.6201197&lat=35.4656458&outtype=JSON
  21. Kunitachi Station (Kunitachi City, Tokyo. The JR Chūō Main Line. The Kunitachi branch of the Musashino Line carries freight and seasonal trains) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%BD%E7%AB%8B%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 75.9 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.4459777&lat=35.70086&outtype=JSON
  22. Kawasaki Station (Kawasaki Ward, Kawasaki City, Kanagawa. The JR Tōkaidō, Keihin-Tōhoku and Nambu lines. Keikyū Kawasaki Station is a separate but adjacent station linked by concourse and underground arcade) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B7%9D%E5%B4%8E%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 2.6 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.6970836&lat=35.531013&outtype=JSON
  23. Nishi-Kasai Station (Edogawa Ward, Tokyo. The Tokyo Metro Tōzai Line, which runs through services onto the Tōyō Rapid Line at Nishi-Funabashi and the JR Chūō-Sōbu Local Line at Nakano) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A5%BF%E8%91%9B%E8%A5%BF%E9%A7%85 / Elevation -0.7 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR. The only one of the 25 stations below sea level) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.8593367&lat=35.6667831&outtype=JSON
  24. Tama-Plaza Station (Aoba Ward, Yokohama City, Kanagawa. The Tōkyū Den-en-toshi Line, which runs through services with the Hanzōmon Line and the Tobu lines) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%BE%E3%83%97%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B6%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 54.0 m (1 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.5585053&lat=35.5773288&outtype=JSON
  25. Kawaguchi Station (Kawaguchi City, Saitama. The JR Keihin-Tōhoku Line. The southernmost station on the Tōhoku Main Line within Saitama Prefecture) — Japanese Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B7%9D%E5%8F%A3%E9%A7%85 / Elevation 2.7 m (5 m mesh, LiDAR) — GSI Elevation API https://cyberjapandata2.gsi.go.jp/general/dem/scripts/getelevation.php?lon=139.7175397&lat=35.8020304&outtype=JSON
  26. Financial capability index, current account ratio, real debt service ratio and future burden ratio (fiscal 2024 settlement. Every value for all 25 municipalities in this article was taken from this single table. A dash in the future burden ratio marks a municipality whose available funding sources exceed its future burden) — Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, principal fiscal indicators for all municipalities https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/001044529.xlsx / index page https://www.soumu.go.jp/iken/shihyo_ichiran.html
  27. Total population and population aged 65 and over from 2020 to 2050 (the rates of change and ageing ratios in this article are computed from this projection; for designated cities the ward-level sheets were used) — National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, Regional Population Projections for Japan https://www.ipss.go.jp/pp-shicyoson/j/shicyoson23/3kekka/Municipalities.asp
  28. Definitions of the indicators (the financial capability index is the three-year average of standard financial revenue divided by standard financial demand; the current account ratio is the share of ordinary general revenue absorbed by personnel, welfare and debt service costs) — Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, explanation of the indicators https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/001044525.pdf
  29. That the fiscal indicators of Tokyo's special wards are computed differently from those of other municipalities (the ministry states that the special wards' financial capability index "is based on the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's own calculation and is computed by a method different from that used for other bodies," that the current account ratio uses "the ordinary grant of the special ward finance adjustment allocation" in place of the ordinary local allocation tax, and that the special wards are excluded from the averages) — Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, how to read the indicators https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/001044526.pdf
  30. The population used as the denominator for the per-1,000-resident figures (Basic Resident Register population by municipality as of 1 January 2026, all residents) — Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000892952.xlsx / index page https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/jichi_gyousei/daityo/jinkou_jinkoudoutai-setaisuu.html
  31. Recorded Penal Code offences for the ten Tokyo municipalities (2025. The published data are by town block, and this article aggregated them to the municipal level) — Metropolitan Police Department https://www.keishicho.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/about_mpd/jokyo_tokei/jokyo/ninchikensu.html / CSV for 2025 https://www.keishicho.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/about_mpd/jokyo_tokei/jokyo/ninchikensu.files/R7.csv
  32. Recorded Penal Code offences for the six Kanagawa municipalities (confirmed figures as of the end of December 2025, from the official table already aggregated by municipality, "total" column) — Kanagawa Prefectural Police https://www.police.pref.kanagawa.jp/assets/entry/c0030_67.pdf / index page https://www.police.pref.kanagawa.jp/tokei/hanzai_tokei/mesc0030.html
  33. Recorded Penal Code offences for the four Saitama municipalities (confirmed figures for 2025, "all Penal Code offences" column) — Saitama Prefectural Police https://www.police.pref.saitama.lg.jp/documents/27624/r7keihoukansityouson.pdf / index page https://www.police.pref.saitama.lg.jp/c0011/keihouhan.html
  34. Recorded Penal Code offences for the five Chiba municipalities (confirmed figures for 2025, "total" column) — Chiba Prefectural Police https://www.police.pref.chiba.jp/content/common/000071144.pdf / index page https://www.police.pref.chiba.jp/keisoka/safe-life_crime_statisticsA-03.html
  35. Age limits, income tests and copayments for children's medical subsidies (as of 1 April 2024. Every value for all 25 municipalities was taken from this single survey. The survey records only whether a copayment exists, not the amount, so this article does not state amounts either) — Children and Families Agency, survey of medical subsidies for children https://www.cfa.go.jp/policies/boshihoken/kodomoiryouhityousa-r6
  36. Numbers of children on nursery waiting lists (as of 1 April 2025) — Children and Families Agency https://www.cfa.go.jp/policies/hoiku/torimatome
  37. Flooding in Kawasaki City during Typhoon Hagibis in 2019 (about 25 hectares were flooded across three areas of the city in river-related damage, including Kamimarukosannō in Nakahara Ward. This is the sole basis on which the terrain score departs from the mechanical elevation banding) — Kawasaki City, report on the verification of the flooding https://www.city.kawasaki.jp/530/page/0000117090.html
  38. Why school lunch fee waivers were not used as a scoring basis (the national survey publishes aggregate statistics only and contains no municipality-by-municipality list, and it was compiled as of 1 September 2023, so municipalities that began later are not reflected) — Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/toukei/chousa05/kyuushoku/mext_02774.html
  39. That school lunch fee waivers differ in scope from municipality to municipality (even prefectural lists show that some cover primary school only, others only third and subsequent children) — Chiba Prefecture, list of municipalities waiving school lunch fees https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/anzen/kyuushoku/gakkoukyuushoku/musyouka.html
LIVE TOKYO Watch Japan live, right now. Street crossings, trains, temples, Mt. Fuji, the Okinawan sea — on air around the clock. Open LiveTokyo →livetokyo.com