城市社区日常服务设施可步行性评价——以开封市为例
|
摘要
社区可步行性是衡量城市可持续发展的重要指标之一,社区日常服务设施可步行性评价有助于科学评估城市基础设施的合理配置程度。本研究借鉴国际通用的在线可步行性评价平台walk score的算法,构建适合中国城市日常服务设施可步行性评价的步行指数,以开封市4147栋建筑为基本研究对象,以453个社区为研究单元,分析开封市社区总体可步行性以及各项日常服务设施的可步行性。研究发现:开封市社区日常设施可步行水平整体较高,但空间分布不均衡。社区破碎度高、土地利用混合度高的老城区可步行性水平较高。城中村以及居住和工业交错分布的社区可步行性较差。各项日常设施可步行性空间分布模式差异较大,均匀分布、圈层分布、梯度分布等模式并存。各项日常设施可步行性呈现组团分异,不同的功能导向一定程度上塑造了社区日常服务设施的可步行性空间格局。城中村、回迁社区、居住-工业混合利用的社区以及城东南组团是日常服务设施亟待优化调整的重点。
The neighborhood walkability has become increasingly applied in studies of urban sustainability. The neighborhood walkability assessment of daily service facilities has the potential to evaluate the rational configuration of urban infrastructure. The article constructed a walk score to assess the neighborhood walkability of Kaifeng, including 4,147 dwelling districts and 453 communities. The results show that the neighborhood walkability is high in Kaifeng and distributes unevenly in various dwelling districts. And the more fragile and mixed community tend to have higher walkability. The "urban village" and the dwelling districts located in residential and industrial mixed communities have low neighborhood walkability. The dining, daily lives and personal care facilities demonstrate uniform spatial distribution; the educational, medical shopping and recreational facilities have a gradient spatial pattern; and the communal facilities is multi-core distribution. The neighborhood walkability of daily service facilities are clustered, and the different functions of land use to some extend shape the spatial pattern of the neighborhood walkability. Urban managers should pay attention to the "urban villages", the residential and industrial mixed communities and the southwest cluster of Kaifeng.
The neighborhood walkability has become increasingly applied in studies of urban sustainability. The neighborhood walkability assessment of daily service facilities has the potential to evaluate the rational configuration of urban infrastructure. The article constructed a walk score to assess the neighborhood walkability of Kaifeng, including 4,147 dwelling districts and 453 communities. The results show that the neighborhood walkability is high in Kaifeng and distributes unevenly in various dwelling districts. And the more fragile and mixed community tend to have higher walkability. The "urban village" and the dwelling districts located in residential and industrial mixed communities have low neighborhood walkability. The dining, daily lives and personal care facilities demonstrate uniform spatial distribution; the educational, medical shopping and recreational facilities have a gradient spatial pattern; and the communal facilities is multi-core distribution. The neighborhood walkability of daily service facilities are clustered, and the different functions of land use to some extend shape the spatial pattern of the neighborhood walkability. Urban managers should pay attention to the "urban villages", the residential and industrial mixed communities and the southwest cluster of Kaifeng.
引文
[1]Hall C.M,Ram Y.Walk score?and its potential contribution to the study of active transport and walkability:A critical and systematic review[J].Transportation Research Part D,2018,1-15.
[2]Talen E,Koschinsky J.The Walkable Neighborhood:A Literature Review[J].International Journal of Sustainable Land Use and Urban Planning,2013(1):42-63.
[3]Forsyth A.What is a walkable place?The walkability debate in urban design[J].Urban Design International,2015,20(4):274-292.
[4]Duncan D T,Aldstadt J,Whalen J,et al.Validation of Walk Score?for estimating neighborhood walkability:an analysis of four US metropolitan areas[J].International Journal of Environmental Research&Public Health,2011,8(11),4160-4179.
[5]Leyden K M.Social capital and the built environment:the importance of walkable neighborhoods[J].American Journal of Public Health,2003.93(9),1546-1551.
[6]Leinberger C B,Alfonzo,M.Walk this way:The economic promise of walkable places in metropolitan Washington,D.C.The Brookings Institution,Washington,D.C.2012.
[7]Trowbridge,M J,Pickell S G,Pyke C R,et al.Building healthy communities:Establishing health and wellness metrics for use within the real estate industry[J].Health Affairs.2014.33(11),1923-1929.
[8]Brownson R C,Hoehner C M,Day K,et al.Measuring the built environment for physical activity:state of the science.[J].American Journal of Preventive Medicine,2009,36(4):S99-S123.e12.
[9]Walk Score 2017.Walk Score.https://www.walkscore.com.
[10]Carr L J,Dunsiger S I,Marcus B H.Validation of Walk Score for estimating access to walkable amenities[J].British Journal of Sports Medicine,2011,45(14):1144-1148.
[11]吴健生,秦维,彭建,等.基于步行指数的城市日常生活设施配置合理性评估——以深圳市福田区为例[J].城市发展研究,2014,21(10):49-56.
[12]吴健生,沈楠.基于步行指数的深圳市福田区公园绿地社会服务功能研究.生态学报,2017,37(22):7483-7492.
[13]卢银桃.基于日常服务设施步行者使用特征的社区可步行性评价研究——以上海市江浦路街道为例[J].城市规划学刊,2013,(5):113-118.
[14]王德,卢银桃,朱玮,等.社区日常服务设施可步行性评价系统开发与应用[J].同济大学学报(自然科学版),2015,43(12):1815-1822.
[15]黄建中,胡刚钰,李敏.老年视角下社区服务设施布局适宜性研究——基于步行指数的方法[J].城市规划学刊,2016(6).
[16]黄萌,刘光,陶迎春.北京太平桥街道POI数据的步行指数计算方法[J].北京测绘,2017,(4):117-120.
[17]董世永,龙晨吟.基于模糊综合评价的住区可步行性测度方法及发展策略研究——以重庆典型住区为例[J].西部人居环境学刊,2015(1):106-112.
[18]周垠,龙瀛.街道步行指数的大规模评价——方法改进及其成都应用[J].上海城市规划,2017(1):88-93.
[19]卢银桃,王德.美国步行性测度研究进展及其启示[J].国际城市规划,2012,27(1):10-15.
(1)公交站为高使用频率服务设施,但根据分类该类设施为公共服务设施,综合考虑其他设施特性,将其归并为低使用频率服务设施。
[2]Talen E,Koschinsky J.The Walkable Neighborhood:A Literature Review[J].International Journal of Sustainable Land Use and Urban Planning,2013(1):42-63.
[3]Forsyth A.What is a walkable place?The walkability debate in urban design[J].Urban Design International,2015,20(4):274-292.
[4]Duncan D T,Aldstadt J,Whalen J,et al.Validation of Walk Score?for estimating neighborhood walkability:an analysis of four US metropolitan areas[J].International Journal of Environmental Research&Public Health,2011,8(11),4160-4179.
[5]Leyden K M.Social capital and the built environment:the importance of walkable neighborhoods[J].American Journal of Public Health,2003.93(9),1546-1551.
[6]Leinberger C B,Alfonzo,M.Walk this way:The economic promise of walkable places in metropolitan Washington,D.C.The Brookings Institution,Washington,D.C.2012.
[7]Trowbridge,M J,Pickell S G,Pyke C R,et al.Building healthy communities:Establishing health and wellness metrics for use within the real estate industry[J].Health Affairs.2014.33(11),1923-1929.
[8]Brownson R C,Hoehner C M,Day K,et al.Measuring the built environment for physical activity:state of the science.[J].American Journal of Preventive Medicine,2009,36(4):S99-S123.e12.
[9]Walk Score 2017.Walk Score.https://www.walkscore.com.
[10]Carr L J,Dunsiger S I,Marcus B H.Validation of Walk Score for estimating access to walkable amenities[J].British Journal of Sports Medicine,2011,45(14):1144-1148.
[11]吴健生,秦维,彭建,等.基于步行指数的城市日常生活设施配置合理性评估——以深圳市福田区为例[J].城市发展研究,2014,21(10):49-56.
[12]吴健生,沈楠.基于步行指数的深圳市福田区公园绿地社会服务功能研究.生态学报,2017,37(22):7483-7492.
[13]卢银桃.基于日常服务设施步行者使用特征的社区可步行性评价研究——以上海市江浦路街道为例[J].城市规划学刊,2013,(5):113-118.
[14]王德,卢银桃,朱玮,等.社区日常服务设施可步行性评价系统开发与应用[J].同济大学学报(自然科学版),2015,43(12):1815-1822.
[15]黄建中,胡刚钰,李敏.老年视角下社区服务设施布局适宜性研究——基于步行指数的方法[J].城市规划学刊,2016(6).
[16]黄萌,刘光,陶迎春.北京太平桥街道POI数据的步行指数计算方法[J].北京测绘,2017,(4):117-120.
[17]董世永,龙晨吟.基于模糊综合评价的住区可步行性测度方法及发展策略研究——以重庆典型住区为例[J].西部人居环境学刊,2015(1):106-112.
[18]周垠,龙瀛.街道步行指数的大规模评价——方法改进及其成都应用[J].上海城市规划,2017(1):88-93.
[19]卢银桃,王德.美国步行性测度研究进展及其启示[J].国际城市规划,2012,27(1):10-15.
(1)公交站为高使用频率服务设施,但根据分类该类设施为公共服务设施,综合考虑其他设施特性,将其归并为低使用频率服务设施。