Abstract
A striking feature of urban formation has been the deployment of mega-blocks, often on the order of sixteen hectares or more. On the other hand, recent urban policies give strong suggestions for smaller and finer-grained neighborhood block and grid arrangements. This paper explores the transformation of urban block structures in high-density cities beyond spatial conditions of big versus small blocks by emphasizing “place” making through the degree of spatial diversity and flexibility. Using spatial indices of urban block arrangements, road network efficiencies and gradients of transit network accessibility, the assessment on urban neighborhood block structure is applied to territories of central core, suburban and peripheral development in Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen at multiple spatial scales. The results show that the overall efficiency and flexibility of urban block structures becomes more a matter of a narrowing of the range of differing block sizes among the three territories and a concomitant higher potential capacity for adaptation to a broader range of development options. Beyond the Chinese context, in high-density cities across the globe, policies on place making should adopt a multi-scale spatial analysis strategy to measure the configuration of the overall urban block structure and guide the transformation of the city.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
17 March 2021
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-021-00077-4
Notes
Beijing is the capital of the People's Republic of China. As one of the most populous cities in the world, it has over 21 million residents within an administrative area of 16,800 km2 (http://tjj.beijing.gov.cn/EnglishSite/).
Shanghai is one of the four direct-administered municipalities of the People's Republic of China. It has a population of 24.3 million as of 2019, and it is the most populous urban area in China with an administrative boundary of 6350 km2 (http://sh.gov.cn/shanghai/node23919/index.html).
Shenzhen is a leading global technology hub, named China's Silicon Valley. Authorities estimate the population at about 20 million, due to large populations of short-term residents. The administrative area is over 2000 km2. (http://english.sz.gov.cn/govt/agencies/s/201811/t20181122_14606204.htm).
References
Al-Kodmany K (2020) Rethinking urban density through the Chicago experience: a socio-ecological practice approach. Socioecol Pract Res 1:131–147
Ameli S, Hamidi S, Garfinkel-Castro A, Ewing R (2015) Do better urban design qualities lead to more walking in Salt Lake City, Utah? J Urban Des 20(3):393–410
Batty M (2015) Competition in the built environment: scaling laws for cities, neighbourhoods and buildings. Nexus Netw J 17(3):831–850
Batty M, Longley P (1994) Fractal cities: a geometry of form and function. Academic Press, London
Batty M, Carvalho R, Hudson-Smith A, Milton R, Smith D, Steadman P (2008) Scaling and allometry in the building geometries of Great London. Eur Phys J B 63(3):303–314
Benfield F, Raimi M, Chen D (1999) Once there were greenfields: how urban sprawl is undermining America’s environment, economy and social fabric. Natural Resources Defense Council, New York
Chen Y (2020) Equivalent relation between normalized spatial entropy and fractal dimension. Phys A. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2020.124627
Chen Y, Wang J (2014) Recursive subdivision of urban space and Zipf’s law. Phys A 395:392–404
Guan C (2019) Spatial distribution of high-rise buildings and its relationship to public transit development in Shanghai. Transp Policy 81:371–380
Guan C, Peiser R (2018) Accessibility, urban form, and property value: a study of Pudong, Shanghai. J Transp Land Use 11(1):1057–1080. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.1318
Guan C, Rowe P (2016) The concept of urban intensity and China’s townization policy: Cases from Zhejiang Province. Cities, 55:22–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.03.012
Guan C, Srinivasan S, Nielsen C (2019) Does neighborhood form influence low-carbon transportation in China? Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 67:406–420
Howard E (1902) Garden cities of to-morrow. Swan Sonnenschein, London
Hu L, Sun T, Wang L (2018) Evolving urban spatial structure and commuting patterns: a case study of Beijing, China. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 59:11–22
Huang L, Zhu X, Ye X, Guo W, Wang J (2016) Characterizing street hierarchies through network analysis and large-scale taxi traffic flow: a case study of Wuhan, China. Environ Plan B Plan Des 43(2):276–296
Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. Random House, New York
Krizek K (2003) Residential relocation and changes in urban travel: Does neighborhood-scale urban form matter? J Am Plan Assoc 69(3):265–281
Lu D (2006) Traveling urban form: the neighborhood unit in China. Plan Perspect 21(4):369–392
Lu J, Rowe P, Zhang J (eds) (2001) Modern urban housing in China: 1840 to 2000. Prestel, New York
Miles R, Song Y (2009) “Good” neighborhoods in Portland, Oregon: focus on both social and physical environments. J Urban Affairs 31(4):491–509
Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (2016) Excerpts from state council issues ‘Key Directives’ to further reinforce the management of urban planning and construction, People’s Republic of China. http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/zxydt/201602/t20160222_226694.html
Ndubisi F (2003) Ecological planning: a historical and comparative synthesis. JHU Press, New York
Nguyen T (2013) Governing through Shequ/community: the Shanghai example. Int J China Stud 4(2):213–231
Pan D (2013) Key transport statistics of world cities. Journeys 10(Sept.):105–112
Perry C (1929) The neighborhood units, reprinted Routledge/Theommes: London, pp 25–44
Rifaat S, Tay R, de Barros A (2012) Urban street pattern and pedestrian traffic safety. J Urban Des 17(3):337–352
Rowe P (2011) Urban residential district making. In: Kirby WC (ed) The People’s Republic of China at 60: an international assessment. Harvard University Asia Center, Cambridge
Rowe P, Guan C (2016) Striking balances between China’s urban communities, blocks, and their layouts. Time Archit 6:29–33
Rowe P, Forsyth A, Kan H (2016) China’s urban communities: concepts, contexts, and wellbeing. Birkhäuser, Basel
Schneider-Sliwa R (2001) Urban geography. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 16008–16015. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/economics-econometrics-and-finance/urban-geography
Sevtsuk A, Kalvo R, Ekmekci O (2016) Pedestrian accessibility in grid layouts: the role of block, plot and street dimensions. Urban Morphol 20(2):89–106
Skinner W (1977) The morphology of walled capitals. The City in the late imperial China. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Song Y, Popkin B, Gordon-Larsen P (2013) A national-level analysis of neighborhood form metrics. Landsc Urban Plan 116:73–85
Southworth M, Owens P (1993) The evolving metropolis: studies of community, neighborhood, and street form at the urban edge. J Am Plan Assoc 59(3):271–287
Stangl P (2014) Block size-based measures of street connectivity: a critical assessment and new approach. Urban Des Int 2014:1–12
Stangl P (2019) Overcoming flaws in permeability measures: modified route directness. J Urban Int Res Place Making Urban Sustain 12(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2017.1381143
Xiang W (2019) Ecopracticology: the study of socio-ecological practice. Socio Ecol Pract Res 1:7–14
Zeng C, Song Y, He Q et al (2020) Spatially explicit assessment on urban vitality: case studies in Chicago and Wuhan. Sustain Cities Soc 40:296–306
Zhang A, Li W, Wu J, Lin J, Chu J, Xia C (2020) How can the urban landscape affect urban vitality at the street block level? A case study of 15 metropolises in China. Environ Plan B Urban Anal City Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320924425
Acknowledgements
We deepest gratitude goes to the journal editor-in-chief Professor Wei-Ning Xiang anonymous reviewers and An Trinh from University of Chicago for providing very constructive comments. All remaining errors are ours.
Funding
This article was sponsored by the Shanghai Pujiang Program, Grant Ref. 2019PJC076; Key Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, Grant No. 7183000103; sponsored by the Open Project Fund of the Shanghai Key Lab for Urban Ecological Processes and Eco-Restoration Grant No. 2020SHUES0A01. The Harvard-China Project on Energy, Economy and Environment from the Harvard Global Institute, under an award on the theme of “China 2030/2050: Energy and Environmental Challenges for the Future,”; the International Urban Innovation Research Center of the Shanghai Yangtze River Delta Business Innovation Research Institute SimSun; and the Zaanheh Project, an interdisciplinary project led by a team at and funded by NYU Shanghai, China.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
The original online version of this article was revised: Due to an unfortunate oversight during the correction process, some mistakes occurred.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guan, C., Rowe, P.G. Beyond big versus small: assessing spatial variation of urban neighborhood block structures in high-density cities. Socio Ecol Pract Res 3, 37–53 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-021-00074-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-021-00074-7