Sponge City Planning and Information System Development Based on Geographic Information Fuzzy Processing

Table 2

Applicable topographic feature index evaluation and comparison criteria for sponge facilities.

Sponge facility		Location characteristics		Natural terrain conditions
				Soil condition	Groundwater characteristics	Topography	Nature of catchment		Space requirement
		Land use type	Pollution load intensity	Soil type	The highest underground water level is from the bottom of the facility (m)	Confluence gradient (%)	Catchment area (ha)	Impermeability (%)	Area (ha)
Permeable sponge facilities “seepage”	Permeable paving	R/B/G/S	Low	A-B	>0.61	1–3	<1	>0	—
	Sunken green space	R/S/B/G	In	A-B	>0.61	1–5	>4	>0	In
	Biological retention facility	R/S/B/G	In	A-B	>1.22	1–5	<4	>0	In
	Infiltration pond	R/S/B/G	In	A-B	>3	<15	1–4	>0	Big
	Seepage well	R/S/B/G	Low	A-B	>0.61	<10	<1	>0	Small
Adjustment category sponge facilities “stay”	Regulating pond	R/G	Low	A-D	>1	<10	>6	>0	Big
Adjustment category sponge facilities “stay”	Regulation pool	R/S/B/G/M	Low	A-D	>1	—	—	>0	Small
Storage type sponge facilities “fan, use”	Wet pond	R/G	High	A-D	>1.22	<10	>6	0–80	Big
	Rain wetland	R/G	High	B-D	>1.22	4–15	>10	0–80	Big
	Reservoir	R/S/B/G	Low	A-D		—	—	>0	Small
	Rainwater irrigation	R/B	Low	—	—	—	—	—	Small
Purification category sponge facility “clean”	Green roof	R/B/M	In	—	—	<4	—	—	—
	Vegetation buffer zone	R/S/B/G/M	High	A-D	>0.61	2–6	>4	>0	In
	Initial rainwater abandonment facility	R/B/M	High	—	—	—	—	—	Small
	Artificial soil	R/B/M	In	A-D	>0.61	<10	<2	0–50	Small
Transfer type sponge facility “row”	Zhicaogou	R/S/B/G	In	A-D	>0.61	0.5–5	<2	>0	In
	Seepage pipe/drain	R/G	Low	A-B	>1.22	—	<2	>0	In