Author Affiliations
1Research Center for Spatial Planning and Human-Environment System Simulation, School of Geography and Information Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China2Hunan Key Laboratory of Land Resources Evaluation and Utilization, Hunan Planning Institute of Land and Resources, Changsha 410007, China3School of Public Administration, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China4School of Geographical Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Images of urban vacant land in the case study area in Guangzhou City, China, 2016Note: The data were produced by the authors using a high-resolution remote sensing image, combining a street view and field survey (1. Wild grassland; 2. Abandoned building land; 3. Wild grass mixed with shrub and tree land; 4. Abandoned building mixed with bare land; 5. Bare land; 6. Abandoned building mixed with wild grassland).
Fig. 2. Comparison of the morphologies of urban vacant land in the case study area in Guangzhou and New York City, 2016Note: The vacant land data pertaining to New York City were obtained from the NYC Department of City Planning (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/data-maps/open-data.page); the vacant land data pertaining to Guangzhou City in southern China were produced by the authors using a high-resolution remote sensing image, combining a street view and field survey.
Fig. 3. Distribution pattern of urban vacant land in typical transects in Guangzhou, 2016Note: The data were produced by the authors using a high- resolution remote sensing image, combining a street view and field survey
Fig. 4. Distribution pattern of urban vacant land in New York City, 2016.Note: The data were obtained from the NYC Department of City Planning (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/data-maps/open-data.page).
Fig. 5. Distribution pattern of urban vacant land in Chicago, 2017Note: The space coordinates of vacant land parcels were from the City of Chicago (https://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en.html).
Fig. 6. Distribution pattern of share of urban vacant land area in Philadelphia, 2010Note: The data were obtained from ATACANGROUP (https://www.centercityrealestate.com/philadelphia-real-estate-blog/philadelphias-vacant-landissuses/).
Fig. 7. Distribution pattern of urban vacant land in Saskatoon, Canada, 2016Note: “Density” denotes the density of urban vacant land parcel; “economic density” denotes the density of commercial and industrial businesses at the neighborhood level. Vacant land data and data of commercial and industrial businesses were taken from the Vacant Lot Inventory and the Annual Report of Businesses Information for the City of Saskatoon, which were released by the city hall (https://www.saskatoon.ca/).
Fig. 8. Distribution pattern of urban vacant housing land in 65 cities, U.S., 2015
| Number of parcels | Area of UVL (ha) | Occurrence probability (%) |
---|
Share of the number of UVL parcels to that of land parcels | Share of the area of UVL to the total land area |
---|
Wild grassland | 831 | 845.88 | 4.03 | 3.66 | Wild grass mixed with shrub and tree land | 319 | 487.68 | 1.55 | 2.11 | Bare land | 341 | 279.35 | 1.65 | 1.21 | Abandoned building mixed with wild grassland | 207 | 201.06 | 1.00 | 0.87 | Abandoned building mixed with bare land | 122 | 131.13 | 0.59 | 0.57 | Abandoned building land | 12 | 10.93 | 0.06 | 0.05 | Sum | 1832 | 1956.02 | 8.88 | 8.46 |
|
Table 1. Types of urban vacant land in the Guangzhou City case study, 2016
| Number of UVL parcels | Area of UVL (ha) | Occurrence probability (%) |
---|
Share of the number of UVL parcels to that of land parcels | Share of the area of UVL to the total land area |
---|
Private ownership | 21108 | 1724.90 | 2.46 | 2.94 | City ownership | 4965 | 949.44 | 0.58 | 1.62 | Public authority, state or federal ownership | 140 | 38.90 | 0.02 | 0.07 | Mixed city and private ownership | 26 | 52.06 | 0.00 | 0.09 | Other ownership which excludesland with the above ownerships | 915 | 212.76 | 0.11 | 0.36 | Sum | 27154 | 2978.06 | 3.17 | 5.08 |
|
Table 2. Types of urban vacant land in New York City, 2016 (Parcel, ha, %)
Districts | New York City | Manhattan | Bronx | Brooklyn | Queens | Staten Island |
---|
Occurrence probability | Share of the number of the vacant parcels to that of the whole city (%) | 3.17 | 2.72 | 4.48 | 2.45 | 2.53 | 5.65 | Share of the area of the vacant parcels to that of the whole city (%) | 5.08 | 2.06 | 2.97 | 2.48 | 2.53 | 14.40 | Mean area of UVL (ha) | 0.11 | 0.075 | 0.060 | 0.048 | 0.073 | 0.247 | Average shape index value of UVL | 1.46 | 1.50 | 1.46 | 1.46 | 1.49 | 1.38 |
|
Table 3. Morphologic characteristics of urban vacant land parcels in New York City, 2016
District | Number of UVL parcels | Area of UVL (ha) | Mean area of UVL parcel (ha) | Occurrence probability (%) | Average shape index value |
---|
Share of the number of the vacant parcels to that of the whole city | Share of the area of the vacant parcels to that of the whole city |
---|
Transect 1 | 83 | 54.17 | 0.65 | 3.75 | 2.49 | 1.45 | Transect 2 | 144 | 176.11 | 1.22 | 3.88 | 4.90 | 1.46 | Transect 3 | 484 | 597.40 | 1.23 | 11.03 | 9.94 | 1.48 | Transect 4 | 456 | 536.47 | 1.18 | 12.09 | 10.84 | 1.37 | Transect 5 | 413 | 361.31 | 0.87 | 10.19 | 9.49 | 1.31 | Transect 6 | 252 | 230.55 | 0.91 | 10.06 | 8.89 | 1.27 | Total | 1832 | 1956.02 | 1.07 | 8.88 | 8.46 | 1.39 |
|
Table 4. Morphologic characteristics of urban vacant land parcels in the typical transect area of Guangzhou City, China, 2016