What Does It Take to Make the Compact City Liveable for Wider Groups? Identifying Key Neighbourhood and Dwelling Features

Abstract

Compact cities promote sustainability through several mechanisms, and high-density city development has become a key strategy for policy decision makers to accommodate population growth and mitigate human impacts of the local and global environment. The aim of this study is to identify elements of the built environment and inner-city dwellings considered important for improving compact-city liveability for various groups throughout their life cycles. To attend to the depth and complexity of this issue, this study is based on a qualitative approach, where data are gathered through in-depth interviews with housing market specialists. The expert panel emphasises proximity to green spaces and easy access to local services/facilities and public transportation as key elements of the built environment to improve compact-city liveability. At the same time, some of the respondents strongly argue with facilitating neighbourhoods for private cars. With regard to dwelling characteristics, the experts emphasised the importance of adequate storage space and the availability of a balcony as vital to high-density liveability. Balconies can alleviate some of the negative effects by working as a personal ‘mini garden’. Moreover, a general opinion among experts is that compact living developments should facilitate shared facilities to level out the space disadvantages of small-space dwellings.

Home Building and demands of the population in Ramshar New Town

“…Hence, lands for a single function or special use should not occupy a significant percentage of the city's land when it is necessary. To fulfil this principle, see Kotulla et al that made the city with wider groups in the urban neighborhoods (Kotulla et al, 2019). (v) Allocating some urban land to build homes for the needy and the homeless.…”

Addressing the COVID-19 and climate crises

“…Overall, the cost-effectiveness of these schemes has been questioned (Miller, Wilson and Wood, 2020 [74]) (Van Wee et al, 2011 [75]) (ITF-OECD, 2011 [76]), and in some cases it has been shown that these may have adverse consequences (IEA, 2020 [77]). For instance, in some cases, these schemes have even prompted net increases in CO2 emissions (Klößner and Pfeifer, 2015 [78]) and regressive effects have also been found (Busse et al, 2012 [79]). This should all be taken into account.…”

Pathways to Livable Relocation Settlements Following Disaster

“…With growing recognition that relocation requires more than housing, communal infrastructure (e.g., schools and hospitals) have accompanied recent projects [24]. Additionally, quality of high-density living can be improved by access to local supply, such as markets and stores where residents can purchase everyday needs and avoid burdensome trips for small necessities [25]. In this study, built livability is assessed as a composite of infrastructure, housing, and accessible services.…”