Study on Relationship between Roles of Public Open Spaces and Pedestrians Inside Campus: Case Studies from Universities in Thailand and Hungary

Chompoonut Kongphunphin; Pál Hegyi; Csaba Koren

doi:10.14513/actatechjaur.v13.n1.537

Authors

Chompoonut Kongphunphin Thammasat University, Faculty of Architecture and planning, Klong luang, 12120 Pathum thani, Thailand
Pál Hegyi Széchenyi István University, Department of Transport Infrastructure and Water Resources Engineering, Egyetem tér 1, 9026 Győr, Hungary
Csaba Koren Széchenyi István University, Department of Transport Infrastructure and Water Resources Engineering, Egyetem tér 1, 9026 Győr, Hungary

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14513/actatechjaur.v13.n1.537

Keywords:

public open space, pedestrian facilities, campus

Abstract

Public open spaces in campuses are social places for students and staffs. Convenient accessibility both physical and visual is the main factor that attracts people to use these spaces. This article analyses the physical layout of public open spaces through their relationship with the surrounding. The purpose of this study is to compare the relationship between public open spaces and pedestrians in the campuses. The case study conducted in four campuses located in Thailand and Hungary. In order to get the required data, spatial analysis from Geographic Information System and observation survey was employed as qualitative techniques. The study revealed that pedestrian facilities are the most important accessibility types in public open spaces in each campus. The different lengths of pedestrian facilities are related with three factors of campuses’ layout. They are the size, surrounding and design elements of the campuses and their public open spaces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Csaba Koren, Széchenyi István University, Department of Transport Infrastructure and Water Resources Engineering, Egyetem tér 1, 9026 Győr, Hungary

Professor

Department of Transport Infrastructure

References

H. Arendt, The Public and the Private Realm, in: The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1998, pp. 182-230.

A. Madanipour, Whose Public Space? Routledge. New York, 2010.

J. Walljasper, Big Plans on Campus (2009) [cited 2020-01-27]. URL https://www.pps.org/reference/campusbulletin/

P.K. Baran, W.R. Smith et al. Park use among youth and adults: examination of individual, social, and urban form factors. Environment and Behavior 46 (6) (2013) pp. 768–800. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512470134

A.T. Kaczynski, K.A. Henderson. Parks and recreation settings and active living: a review of associations with physical activity function and intensity, Journal of Physical Activity and Health 5 (4) (2008) pp. 619–632. doi: https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.5.4.619

C. Holland, A. Clark et al.: Social interactions in urban public places. The Open University, Policy Press, Bristol, 2007. [cited 2020-01-27]. URLhttps://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/2017-interactions-public-places.pdf

M.J. Koohsari, S. Mavoa et al. Public open space, physical activity, urban design and public health: Concepts, methods and research agenda. Health & Place 33 (2015) 75–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.02.009

Project for Public Spaces and Metropolitan Planning Council. A Guide to Neighborhood Placemaking in Chicago, Project for Public Spaces, New York, 2008. [cited 2020-01-27]. URL http://www.placemakingchicago.com/cmsfiles/placemaking_guide.pdf

Gehl Graphic Library. Public Space & Pedestrian Realm. A. Connectivity – The Public Space Network, 2011. [cited 2020-01-27]. URL http://www.bettermarketstreetsf.org/docs/BMS_P2-1_BestPractices_12072011.pdf

J. Schipperijn, U.K. Stigsdotter et al. Influences on the use of urban green space—A case study in Odense, Denmark, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 9 (1) (2010) pp. 25–32. doi https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.09.002

T. Sugiyama, J. Francis et al. Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces. American Journal of Public Health, 100 (9) (2010) pp. 1752-1757. doi https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.182006

T. Morar, L. Bertolini, Planning for Pedestrians: A Way Out of Traffic Congestion, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 81 (2013) pp. 600-608. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.483

J. Walker, Human Transit. basics: walking distance to transit (2011) [cited 2020-01-27]. URL http://humantransit.org/2011/04/basics-walking-distance-to-transit.html

W.H. Whyte, Streets as Places: How Transportation Can Create a Sense of Community, Project for Public Spaces (2014) [cited 2020-01-27]. URL www.pps.org/reference/streets-as-places-how-transportation-can-create-a-sense-of-community

Z. Asadi-Shekari, M. Moeinaddini, M. Zaly Shah, A pedestrian level of service method for evaluating and promoting walking facilities on campus streets, Land Use Policy 38 (2014) pp. 175–193. doi https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.11.007

R. Panitat, The appropriate walkway towards sustainable transportation in the university community: A case study of Kasetsart University, 16th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference, Bangkhen Campus, Hong Kong, China, 30 May – 1 June 2010.

K. Lynch, The Image of the City, The M.I.T. press, Cambridge, 1990.