Revealing Urban Public Space Patterns through Quantitative Comparison between the Old City of Nanjing and Zurich

Abstract

Urban public space is indispensable in a metropolitan environment. In recent years, green space, as an important part of that public space, has been studied in terms of its pattern and equity of accessibility. However, the pattern of urban public space, including streets, has not yet been studied, nor has it been studied among different countries. To resolve this gap in information, this study conducted a quantitative comparison on the general pattern, type pattern, and scale pattern of urban public space between Zurich in Switzerland and the old city of Nanjing in China. This study also explored using the location quotient method to quantify the pattern of urban public space and its physical structure characteristics. The results show the difference between urban public space in China and Europe exists not only in quantity, scale or type, but also in the pattern of the urban public space system, including the choice of location, distribution status, and service level of that public space. The maximum location quotient of Zurich’s public space is 9.5 for the areas located in the urban core area. Meanwhile, it is 8.5 for Nanjing for areas located in the periphery of the old city. Areas with a location quotient of greater than one cover 63.3% of the urban construction land in Zurich, while only 30.8% of the corresponding urban construction land is covered in Nanjing. The area and quantity of streets are quite different as well. The street areas of Zurich account for 51.5% of the total area of public space and the number of streets account for 51.2% of the total number of public space sites, while those numbers are only 22.6% and 17.5% for Nanjing, respectively. In addition, the scale gradient of public space is polarized. Both the area ratio and quantity ratio of medium, medium-large, and large public space in Zurich exceed 92%, while the area ratio and quantity ratio of Nanjing are less than 77% and 68%, respectively. This study provides important insights for revealing urban public space patterns to facilitate the sustainability development of urban public space.