Open Access
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 66, 2016
The 4th International Building Control Conference 2016 (IBCC 2016)
Article Number 00006
Number of page(s) 7
Published online 13 July 2016
  1. Bedimo-Rung, A.L., Mowen, A.J., and Cohen, D.A., The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: a conceptual model. American journal of preventive medicine, 2005. 28(2): p. 159–168. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Pakzad, J., The rule of urban design. 2004, Tehran, Iran: University of Tehran. [Google Scholar]
  3. Levinson, D.M., Accessibility and the journey to work. Journal of Transport Geography, 1998. 6(1): p. 11–21. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Giles-Corti, B., et al., Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American journal of preventive medicine, 2005. 28(2): p. 169–176. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Wang, D., Brown, G., and Liu, Y., The physical and non-physical factors that influence perceived access to urban parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015. 133: p. 53–66. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Calthorpe, P., The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. 1993: Princeton Architectural Press. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bertolini, L. and Dijst, M., Mobility environments and network cities. Journal of urban design, 2003. 8(1): p. 27–43. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Truelove, M., Measurement of spatial equity. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 1993. 11(1): p. 19–34. [Google Scholar]
  9. Talen, E., Measuring the public realm: A preliminary assessment of the link between public space and sense of community. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 2000: p. 344–360. [Google Scholar]
  10. F.B. Erkip, The distribution of urban public services: the case of parks and recreational services in Ankara. Cities, 1997. 14(6): p. 353–361. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Heng, C. and V. Chan, The making of successful public space: A case study of people’s park square. Urban Design International, 2000. 5(1): p. 47–55. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jacobs, J., The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Readings in Planning Theory, Fourth Edition, 2015: p. 94–109. [Google Scholar]
  14. Chiesura, A., The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and urban planning, 2004. 68(1): p. 129–138. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Moirongo, B.O., Urban public space patterns: human distribution and the design of sustainable city centres with reference to Nairobi CBD. Urban Design International, 2002. 7(3): p. 205–216. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Scopelliti, M., et al., Staying in touch with nature and well-being in different income groups: The experience of urban parks in Bogotá. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2016. 148: p. 139–148. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Masnavi, M.-R., The new millennium and the new urban paradigm: the compact city in practice. Achieving sustainable urban form, 2000: p. 64–73. [Google Scholar]
  18. Liao, F.H., S. Farber, and R. Ewing, Compact development and preference heterogeneity in residential location choice behaviour: A latent class analysis. Urban Studies, 2014: p. 0042098014527138. [Google Scholar]
  19. Williams, K., M. Jenks, and E. Burton, Achieving sustainable urban form. 2000: Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar]
  20. Rowley, A., Planning mixed use development: issues and practice. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, London, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  21. Newman, O., N.I.o.L. Enforcement, and C. Justice, Architectural design for crime prevention. 1973: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hillier, B., et al., Natural movement: or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B: planning and design, 1993. 20(1): p. 29–66. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gehl, J., Life between Buildings (Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag). 1996. [Google Scholar]
  24. Manning, R.E. and W.A. Freimund, Use of visual research methods to measure standards of quality for parks and outdoor recreation. Journal of leisure research, 2004. 36(4): p. 557. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.