File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

Supplementary

Article: TOD, volumetric TOD, Destination, Public Space and Community Cohesion, Urbanie & Urbanus

TitleTOD, volumetric TOD, Destination, Public Space and Community Cohesion, Urbanie & Urbanus
Authors
KeywordsMTR station
Social Cohesion
Community Destination
Public Space
Urban Regeneration
Issue Date2020
PublisherHong Kong Institute of Urban Design. The Journal's web site is located at https://www.hkiud.org/articles/uu/unuindex.php
Citation
Urbanie & Urbanus, 2020, n. 4, p. 33-50 How to Cite?
AbstractThe publication is an extended version of Shanshan Meng’s Research Dissertation part of MUD’s Research Methods and Research Dissertation and Design Thesis courses. https://www.hkiud.org/articles/uu/202011-UU.pdf Abstract Transit Oriented Development (TOD) has become an urban planning and design policy and practice approach to deliver sustainable transport through the world. TOD as infrastructure contributes to urban liveability in determining way of life and well-being of the inhabitants of a city. Urban liveability can be understood as a perceived notion of well-being and social cohesion among residents of an urban area. TOD has been hypothesised to create gentrification. Does gentrification impact negatively on social cohesion in high density TOD-led cities? We address this question by deploying an exploratory difference in differences qualitative analysis of the relationships between measures of involuntary residential displacement and ‘built environment’ indicators. These are proxies for ‘gentrification’ and ‘social cohesion’ respectively. This investigation examines displacement indicators before and after the opening of three new MTR stations in 2014, using a control neighbourhood which has an existing station. It also analyses BE dimensions related to social cohesion such as ‘destinations’ and ‘public space provision’. The displacement indicators have variable trajectories when details are compared. There is limited evidence of systematic displacement, although there are other more prominent and dynamic changes in those destinations. The provision of new public space is associated with the most dynamic changes. From a placemaking point of view, further detailed study to better understand the role of development drivers of gentrification is required.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/304844
ISBN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMeng, S-
dc.contributor.authorMostofa, RA-
dc.contributor.authorZhang, S-
dc.contributor.authorChiaradia, AJF-
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-05T02:36:01Z-
dc.date.available2021-10-05T02:36:01Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationUrbanie & Urbanus, 2020, n. 4, p. 33-50-
dc.identifier.isbn9789887542537-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/304844-
dc.description.abstractThe publication is an extended version of Shanshan Meng’s Research Dissertation part of MUD’s Research Methods and Research Dissertation and Design Thesis courses. https://www.hkiud.org/articles/uu/202011-UU.pdf Abstract Transit Oriented Development (TOD) has become an urban planning and design policy and practice approach to deliver sustainable transport through the world. TOD as infrastructure contributes to urban liveability in determining way of life and well-being of the inhabitants of a city. Urban liveability can be understood as a perceived notion of well-being and social cohesion among residents of an urban area. TOD has been hypothesised to create gentrification. Does gentrification impact negatively on social cohesion in high density TOD-led cities? We address this question by deploying an exploratory difference in differences qualitative analysis of the relationships between measures of involuntary residential displacement and ‘built environment’ indicators. These are proxies for ‘gentrification’ and ‘social cohesion’ respectively. This investigation examines displacement indicators before and after the opening of three new MTR stations in 2014, using a control neighbourhood which has an existing station. It also analyses BE dimensions related to social cohesion such as ‘destinations’ and ‘public space provision’. The displacement indicators have variable trajectories when details are compared. There is limited evidence of systematic displacement, although there are other more prominent and dynamic changes in those destinations. The provision of new public space is associated with the most dynamic changes. From a placemaking point of view, further detailed study to better understand the role of development drivers of gentrification is required.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherHong Kong Institute of Urban Design. The Journal's web site is located at https://www.hkiud.org/articles/uu/unuindex.php-
dc.relation.ispartofUrbanie & Urbanus-
dc.subjectMTR station-
dc.subjectSocial Cohesion-
dc.subjectCommunity Destination-
dc.subjectPublic Space-
dc.subjectUrban Regeneration-
dc.titleTOD, volumetric TOD, Destination, Public Space and Community Cohesion, Urbanie & Urbanus-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailMostofa, RA: rifatam@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChiaradia, AJF: alainjfc@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityChiaradia, AJF=rp02166-
dc.identifier.hkuros325763-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage33-
dc.identifier.epage50-
dc.publisher.placeHong Kong-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats