2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103870
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the relationship between urban density and sense of community in the Greater Vancouver Regional District

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 101 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To examine the performance of the options for urban settings of different building densities, the number of residential buildings within the same space in the floodplain area was set to vary from least dense (i.e., a smaller number of houses) to highly dense (i.e., more houses per land area; see the application in Section 3.1). Other parameters, such as the number of people living in the area, building typology, construction types of buildings as well as road networks and public spaces as part of an urban space configuration (e.g., Douglas, 2022; Ellis, 2004) are not included to avoid complexities in the experimental design. This means that the building footprint or changes in land use (e.g., infrastructure, and actual space scaled up due to the building density assumptions) are not considered.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To examine the performance of the options for urban settings of different building densities, the number of residential buildings within the same space in the floodplain area was set to vary from least dense (i.e., a smaller number of houses) to highly dense (i.e., more houses per land area; see the application in Section 3.1). Other parameters, such as the number of people living in the area, building typology, construction types of buildings as well as road networks and public spaces as part of an urban space configuration (e.g., Douglas, 2022; Ellis, 2004) are not included to avoid complexities in the experimental design. This means that the building footprint or changes in land use (e.g., infrastructure, and actual space scaled up due to the building density assumptions) are not considered.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite ongoing scholarly debate, many scholars acknowledge and support the fundamental principle that residential location influences travel behavior (Mokhtarian & Cao, 2008;Handy et al, 2005;Van Acker et al, 2007;Sarzynski et al, 2006;Cervero, 2013;Ewing et al, 2016). Numerous studies have investigated the relationship between residential density and travel behavior, lending credibility to the claims of proponents of new urbanism, who contend that walkable environments, mixed-use residential areas, and density promote the use of sustainable transportation modes, such as walking and public transit, thereby reducing reliance on cars (Andraos et al, 2021;Song, 2022;Douglas, 2022). For several decades, scholars have struggled with the issue of residential self-selection, by which households or individuals may choose their place to live centered upon their travel choices (Cao et al, 2009).…”
Section: Development Of Research Hypotheses and Research Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extensive development of hard surfaces can disrupt natural ecological environments, leading to severe traffic congestion during peak hours. The lack of public activity spaces contributes to decreased community awareness [27], and high-frequency interactions among the population may result in psychological health issues such as anxiety, tension, and irritability [28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%