A Comprehensive View on Urban Spatial Structure: Urban Density Patterns of German City Regions

Abstract

Urban density must be considered a key concept in the description of a city's urban spatial structure. Countless studies have provided evidence of a close relationship between built density and activity densities, on the one hand, and urban environmental conditions or social practices, on the other hand. However, despite the concept's common use in urban research, urban density is a rather fuzzy and highly complex concept that is accompanied by a confusing variety of indicators and measurement approaches. To date, an internationally-accepted standard for the implementation of density indicators that permits a robust comparison of different countries, regions or cities is widely missing. This paper discusses the analytical opportunities that recent remote sensing data offer in regard to an objective and transparent measurement of built density patterns of city regions. It furthermore clarifies the interrelations between built and activity densities. We apply our approach to four German city regions to demonstrate the analytical capacity of spatially-refined density indicators for the purposes of comparative urban research at a regional scale. In so doing, we contribute to a more encompassing and robust understanding of the urban density concept when analyzing regional morphology.

Identifying Urban Structure Based on Transit-Oriented Development

“…Then, the 3 Ds were extended to the 4 Ds, the 5 Ds, and the 6 Ds, where the importance of destination value, the distance to transit, and the demand management were successively proposed [30][31][32]. Generally, density is regarded as the key concept in the description of urban spatial structure [33], and it is also the key factor in forming city centers and subcenters [4]. Diversity represents mixed land use.…”

Regions Set in Stone—Delimiting and Categorizing Regions in Europe by Settlement Patterns Derived from EO-Data

“…The permanency of human settlements makes them a testimony of location-based current and/or historical success. Furthermore, Krehl et al [41] or Taubenböck et al [42], e.g., show that concentration of built-up masses physically reflects to the concentration of economic functions. In consequence, the growth (size) and convergence (density) of settlement patterns is the predominantly visible result of economic development.…”

Origin, spatial pattern, and evolution of urban system: Testing a hypothesis of “urban tree”

“…City spatial structure typically refers to all of the networks constructed within the urban area, including the transportation (Zhou & Hu, 2002), urban economic chain (Sun, Tang, & Tang, 2015), and information networks (Yao, Chen, Zhu, & Chen, 2001). The evolution of urban spatial structure is usually studied by remote sensing techniques or spatial land use change models (Krehl, Siedentop, Taubenb€ ock, & Wurm, 2016;Van de Voorde et al, 2016), the (population or economic indicators) modeling method and graph theory analysis. The generalized equilibrium model (Berliant & Wang, 2008), logical model (Ikeda, Akamatsu, & Kono, 2012) and gravity model (Wang, Deng, Su, & Song, 2014) have been widely applied in this field.…”