Flats Outdoor Space as a Vital Social Place

Abstract

Minimum dwelling space of low-cost walk-up flats forces life to spill outdoors involving daily mundane activities affecting neighborhood social vitality. In design, this affordance of such ‘marginal’ outdoor space has been neglected. Using data derived from systematic observations in various low cost walk up flats, this paper explores the use of these outdoor near home spaces and found that they support various domestic, social and retreat activities generating liveliness in the otherwise barren low cost environment. Potentials for social encounters and casual surveillance were partially affected by flats configurations.

Full text

FLATS OUTDOOR SPACE AS A VITAL SOCIAL PLACE
Azhan Abdul Aziz1, Abdullah Sani Ahmad2 & Tajul Edrus Nordin3
1 & 2Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai
3Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,
Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak, Bandar Seri Iskandar
azhanaziz@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Minimum dwelling space of low-cost walk-up ats forces life to spill outdoors involving
daily mundane activities affecting neighborhood social vitality. In design, this affordance
of such ‘marginal’ outdoor space has been neglected. Using data derived from systematic
observations in various low cost walk up ats, this paper explores the use of these
outdoor near home spaces and found that they support various domestic, social and
retreat activities generating liveliness in the otherwise barren low cost environment.
Potentials for social encounters and casual surveillance were partially affected by ats
congurations.
© 2011 cE-Bs, FSPU, UiTM. All rights reserved.
Keywords: building layout, near home space, social interaction
Chap 2.indd 13 11/25/2011 11:21:37 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
14
INTRODUCTION
In Malaysia, the provision of urban housing for the low income group has become
increasingly critical as urbanization expands, rural-urban migration escalates, and
cost of living enlarges the proportion of urban poor (Agus, 1990). Development of
low cost housing has been an important social and political agenda in Malaysian
development policies. In the Eighth ve-yearly Malaysia Plan, 200,513 low cost
housing units were built. Another 165,400 units of low cost were targeted to be built
between 2006 and 2010, within the Ninth Malaysia Plan (Government of Malaysia,
2005). Zero squatter policy targeted by some states also contributes to growing
demands. In the urban fringes of major cities, walk-up ats were popular due to
the relatively high density and the lower construction, land and maintenance costs.
Layout variations of such housing have been regulated by economic efciency and
constraints of building standard. Concerns over the livability of ats grow as studies
on residential preference and satisfaction repeatedly point to the importance of such
low cost housing design to be more sensitive to the social implications of physical
planning (Paim & Yahaya, 2004; A. Salleh & Yusof, 2006; A. G. Salleh, 2008).
Emphases have been put on benets of common open space and neighborhood
amenities. However, such emphases overlook the social potentials of outdoors
near home spaces and disregard human-environment transactional processes to
achieve satisfaction.
This paper reports on the eld observations in four of the most common low
cost ats types to explore the use of outdoor near home space as important social
setting for the residents. It aims to nd any association between ats congurations
and the patterns of daily residential uses. By focusing on the behavioral observation,
this study would contribute to the appreciation of human environment transactional
relationships while uncovering the affordances of such basic low cost conguration
for residents’ material and social appropriations.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Growing international literatures point to the concerns over low socialization
among urban residents and suggest rising individualistic and home centeredness
of urban domestic life. Nonetheless, other non-western studies lend only mild
support for such ndings. Reviews of studies on neighboring and residential social
life in Hong Kong and Singapore for example showed that constrains in private
space and limited access to public space alternatively transform outdoor areas in
residential blocks into vibrant social spaces (Forrest, Grange & Ngai-Ming, 2002).
With proper spatial conguration, a sense of social vibrancy, similar to vernacular
living, could be nurtured even in high rise living (Bay, 2004). This is even more
critical in low income housing where local social support is still valued.
Chap 2.indd 14 11/25/2011 11:21:37 AM

flAts outdoor spAcE As A vitAl sociAl plAcE
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
15
Areas around the residential block serve as a suitable unit for analysis
of residential social life. The micro-ecology of such environment involves the
everyday mundane activities generating repeated exposure and encounters at
the block level vital for residents’ social and physical attachment (Taylor, 1997).
Local social contacts in daily routine are still signicant factors of the richness
and vitality of social life despite advancement in information and communications
technology and private transport (Argent, 2008; Holland, Clark, Katz & Peace,
2007). Insufcient dwelling spaces also render the outdoor housing area as important
extension of the homes for other functional and social activities (Abu-Ghazzeh,
1999; Klaufus, 2000; Steemers & Steane, 2004) and as potentials for relationship
opportunities, and investment of care and attachment (Cloutier-Fisher & Harvey,
2008; Mee, 2009). They also inuence how one perceives, uses and engages in
the social environment (Coolen, 2006). Recurring informal meetings, encounters
and the resulting familiarity are also argued to generate collective actions of a
community referred to as social climate (Adriaanse, 2007). It is displayed in the
individual actions in public, residents’ contribution to the ‘curb appeal’, collective
arrangements and participation. The resulting familiarity provides grounds for
collective action and expanding personal contacts as a source of social support,
particularly important in low income communities.
Outdoor near home space in low cost housing is heavily subjected to
appropriations, through which people adapt to and make a space as a place they
could call home (de Haan, 2005; Feldman & Stall, 1994). It is a means to achieve
congruence with the physical and social environment so that satisfaction could be
attained (Kaplan, 1983). Appropriations not only allow residents to realize their
ideal picture of a home but also serve as tools to recreate an image of the nostalgic
living environment or ideal community. Engaging with neighbors and personalizing
the exterior spaces, strengthen the resident’s nostalgic feeling of vernacular living
(Bay, 2004; de Haan, 2005). In housing areas, the house and the exterior spaces are
interconnected physically and socially. Appropriation is also a means of territorial
control. By using the space, people display their territorial domain. In return they
serve others as informal social control fostering a sense of safety and security
(Burcheld, 2009). Thus it is important to pay attention to the near home space to
understand how favorable local social climate develops and is sustained.
The role of physical environment in affording interactions cannot be
undermined in improving residents’ attachments to housing (Brandon, Hirt &
Cameron, 2008; Huang, 2006). A feeling of belonging accumulates around repeated
encounters with physical and social surroundings, and daily shared experiences
(Hargreaves, 2004, 53; Williams, 2005). Even different street layouts afford different
outdoor activities that facilitate attachment to the neighborhood (B. B. Brown
& Werner, 1985; Sauter & Huettenmoser, 2008). Presence of functional spaces
complementing the dwelling units, such as interactional and communal spaces,
and other related social facilities (Huang, 2006; Kang, 2006; Sirgy & Cornwell,
Chap 2.indd 15 11/25/2011 11:21:37 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
16
2002) impacts the residents’ quality of life (Sirgy & Cornwell, 2002; Sugiyama &
Thompson, 2005). Having neighborhood environment of these positive potentials
encourages one to invest time, social and physical resources to generate meaningful
attachment to the community, and local social support (Boyce, 2006; Mee, 2009).
Architectural characteristics of the dwellings (S. Brown, et al., 2009), appropriated
outdoor space enclosures (Al-Homoud & Tassinary, 2004), and outdoor semi-private
spaces (Williams, 2005) also affect social interaction and social support among
neighbors. For children, different congurations ats afford different outdoor space
appropriation and experiences (Azhan Abdul Aziz & Ahmad, 2010; Azhan Abdul
Aziz & Ahmad, 2011). Abu Ghazzeh (1999) found that near home space often
serves as a substitute for large open spaces as they contribute little to resident’s
good neighborhood perception and evaluation. People value opportunities to walk
around and sit in small groups near their homes which more effectively lead to
friendship formation and maintenance. In high rise housing, forecourts become not
only encounter spaces where greeting are exchanged but also space for engaging
more social activities such as social and cultural gatherings (Bay, 2004).
METHODOLOGY
Site selection
Table 1: Summary of selected sites
Flats1 Flats 2 Flats 3 Flats 4
Building conguration
Circulation type Open corridor Double internal Single internal Clustered around
corridor staircase
Year of occupation 1997/8 2002/4 2004 2000
No. of units 480 480 480 476
Site area 6.01 ac. (2.43 ha.) 5.09 ac. (2.06 ha.) 5.87 ac. (2.37 ha.) 5.24 ac. (2.12 ha.)
Density 80 units per acre 94 units per acre 82 units per acre 90.8 units per acre
No. of blocks 6 6 6 6
No. of oors 5 5 5 5
No. of units per oor 16 20 20 4
Ground covered common court No Yes Yes Yes
% of majority ethnic group 86.0% 84.8% 93.7% 76.1%
Racial components
Chap 2.indd 16 11/25/2011 11:21:38 AM

flAts outdoor spAcE As A vitAl sociAl plAcE
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
17
The study was conducted in Johor Bahru, the state capital of Johor located
at the southern tip of Peninsular Malaysia. In 2000, Johor recorded the highest
number of low cost units built (134,775) followed by Selangor (131,330 units).
In the Ninth Malaysia Plan, Johor expects to build the highest number of low cost
housing at 91,500 units after Selangor (Government of Malaysia, 2005). Johor
Bahru district alone has more than 60 sites of low cost ats. Up to the third quarter
of 2009, the district has a sum of 85,396 low cost units constituting 50.8% of all
low cost units in the state. 46% of them (39,276 units) are ats (NAPIC, 2009).
After the third quarter, additional 4,663 units of ats were expected. Flats are thus
important form of housing in urban area of Johor Bahru. Four low cost housing
sites were purposively sampled to control for building height, housing age, racial
heterogeneity and population size (Table 1). They represent four of the most
common walk-up ats congurations (Long, 2007). Flats 1 is a u-shaped single-
loaded open air corridor type forming an open court occupied by parking. Flats 2
has two rows of units facing one another and served by a double internal corridors
with a central vertical air well. In Flats 4, similar conguration is employed except
that the units are served by a single internal corridor. Flats 3, as the most recent ats
type, contain clusters of units organized around staircases and minimal corridor
space. All areas contain six blocks ve-storey ats. However, the ground levels of
Flats 2, 3 and 4 are occupied by covered common courts.
Systematic observation
Systematic behavioral observations were conducted using behavioral
checklist with maps. Age, ethnicity and gender of the residents and their behaviors
were recorded and mapped by two observers following predetermined routes.
Reliability tests show 88.5% agreement on the behavioral constructs observed and
94.9% agreement on the event type. 16 observations were conducted in each site
covering four hours in the morning (9am to 12pm) and another four in the afternoon
(3pm to 6pm) on both weekends and weekdays. The times were sampled based on
the most active times identied in the preceding pilot studies. The average duration
for each observation is 30 minutes and distributed into 8 to 10 minutes for each
block at each hour of observation.
Behaviors observed are categorized as social and non-social activities
(Sullivan, Kuo & Depooter, 2004). Non-social ones are further dened as domestic
and retreat activities. Domestic activity category involves routine household
activities including those related to the functioning of the family (e.g. cloth lining,
looking after the children and putting out rubbish) and care towards the dwelling
exterior space (e.g. watering plants, sweeping and cleaning). Retreat activity
category comprises all outdoor solitude activities people engage in as a means of
fullling personal needs to get away and connotes the feeling of safety and comfort
to be alone outside. The most common ones include sitting, relaxing or having
Chap 2.indd 17 11/25/2011 11:21:38 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
18
nap alone outside, playing alone and watching the surrounding. Social activity
encompasses all group activities including interaction with other fellow residents
prolonged group behaviors such as sitting in groups and having a conversation,
and playing in groups, and brief gestural or verbal greetings.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Who: gender and age
Overall, 3,374 people were observed including children (33.37%), teenagers
(14.29%) and adults (52.34%). Women were active users of outdoor space
registering 30.05% of all people recorded, engaging particularly in domestic
activities and socializing. This is followed by male children (21.83%). Female
dominance around the near home space in all four housing sites suggests a similar
population of housewives in selected sites with working husbands. Their presence
increases the percentage of adult socializing. Social activity observed mostly
involved male children (27.41%) and female adults (23.78%). Domestic activity is
dominated by adult women (42.95%). More than half of all retreat activity is shared
by male children (27.60%) and adult (25.87%). Teenagers use less of the local
outdoor spaces as they tend to be away from their parents and hang out with friends
in distant places (Clark & Uzzell, 2002). Elderly residents were the least observed
which might be attributed to the medium range of housing age selected.
What: domestic, social and retreat
Of all 2,982 events observed, 2,951 events (98.96%) were identied to t the
behavioral categories for analysis. Flats 1 recorded the highest number of activity
events amounting to 31% of all recorded events (Figure 1), followed by Flats 3
(27%), Flats 2 (22%) and Flats 3 (20%). Assuming a comparable population size and
social homogeneity as controlled by the site selection, this suggests possible design
factor in the variation of activity affordances in outdoor near home spaces. Table
2 illustrates the different uses of the near home spaces. Activities in public spaces,
such as lingering, chatting, sitting, watching and playing (Sauter & Huettenmoser,
2008), were found to be as common in low cost residential area. Of the total
observed events, social activity constitutes 41.89% followed by domestic activity
(36.04%) and retreat activity (20.72%). Contrary to other studies (for example
Huang (2006)), the ndings in the present research indicate that housing areas close
to homes are fertile social spaces, at least in the low cost residential environment.
Presence of people outside the units is highly dominated by social activities such
as adults chatting in group (24.67%) and children playing (12.74%). Increase in
social activity, particularly groups playing, also adds events to watch as people
Chap 2.indd 18 11/25/2011 11:21:39 AM

flAts outdoor spAcE As A vitAl sociAl plAcE
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
19
engage in the outdoor when there are things to do and events or view to watch
(Zhang & Lawson, 2009). For example, increase in social events is accompanied
by more retreat activities (Figure 1). In addition, the nature of open corridor with
wide surrounding street view, particularly in Flats 1, might also contribute to the
increase in retreat activity.
Figure 1: Overall activity distribution
Table 2: Outdoor activity components
Chap 2.indd 19 11/25/2011 11:21:40 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
20
More than half of all activities in ats (55.8%) were observed in the blocks
and near the homes, including in the corridors, and the staircases. All three activity
categories observed generally decrease as the oor level rises. However a closer
look at the upper oors indicates pattern of variations across the different housing
congurations. Due to the low number of observed activities in Flats 4, only
observations from Flats 1, Flats 2 and Flats 3 having different types of corridor are
being considered in this analysis. The effect of height on social activity observed
in the upper oors is only signicant in Flats 1 (X2 = 11.324, p < 0.05). As we go
up the levels, the frequency of observed social activity reduces. In the other two
ats, different height does not seem to signicantly affect the differences in social
interaction observed. The internal corridor and narrow air-well congurations
downplay the effects of oor differences. However, while comparing between
oors in each housing, conguration only signicantly affect the frequency of
observed social activity at the rst oor level (X2 = 7.822, p < 0.05). This shows
that providing open corridors could increase the possibility of social activity
observed, but only signicantly at the rst oor. The higher the level of open
corridor housing the less possibility of observed social activity.
Figure 2: Distribution of social activity
Where: level and location
Chap 2.indd 20 11/25/2011 11:21:41 AM

flAts outdoor spAcE As A vitAl sociAl plAcE
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
21
For the internal corridor type, social activity is observed more in the double
corridors (Flats 2) than in the single corridor. The oor level did not show any
signicant difference. As found in social activity, oor height has similar effect
on retreat activity within each housing site. Height only plays signicant role in
affecting frequency of observed retreat activity in Flats 1. However the different
congurations still inuence the activity signicantly up to the second levels (rst
oor: X2 = 11.791, p < 0.005; second oor: X2 = 6.762, p < 0.05). The signicance
gradually decreases as the oor rises (third oor: X2 = 3.561, p = 0.1685; fourth
oor: X2 = 1.999, p = 0.3681). Open corridor ats maintains as an apt place for
retreat, particularly watching the surrounding, because of the street view it offers.
The ndings reveal that the corridor, being the closest space to homes, remains the
most active space for all three activities observed particularly in Flats 1, Flats 2
and Flats 3. This suggests the importance of adjacency of activities to home range.
Parents favor kids to play near the homes while adults prefer to be close to homes
where they are able to control the amount of interactions and encounters.
Statistical examinations reveal that the different flats configurations
signicantly relate to the differences in the amount of the activities observed. In
order to examine the corridor conguration effects on the major social activity
and retreat activity, t-tests were performed between activities at the corridor levels
(Table 3). The results indicate that prolonged social interactions (e.g. people sitting
in groups having conversation) vary signicantly with all different ats layout even
at alpha level of 0.005. Open corridor conguration of Flats 1 signicantly affords
Table 3: Analysis of major social activity
Chap 2.indd 21 11/25/2011 11:21:41 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
22
more potential for occurrences of such events. Larger corridor areas contribute to
higher observed interactions. However, for brief encounters, only comparisons with
Flats 4 indicate signicant differences. Brief encounters seem to be only signicantly
affected by number of units per oor rather than conguration.
CONCLUSION
Outdoor near home spaces of ats are important arenas for social, domestic and
retreat activities. These routines activities, as the sources of attachment and sense
of place, could be important evidence for positive social climate or vitality of a
neighborhood environment. The extent and spatial distribution of such usages
depend partly upon the building congurations as notable variations are found
between the different types as well as the amount and proportion of those observed
activities. A particular type of conguration does differ to another in its affordance
levels and the ability for the residents to appropriate them materially and socially.
Social encounters and ability for people to be outside watching particularly
differentiate the different low cost ats sites. These are signicant activities which
were found to be prerequisite for social engagement and social participation
and the building and reinforcement of social relation. These social potentials of
environmental design for facilitating such effects offer valuable research prospect.
With such knowledge, the potentials for social integration through design are closer
to homes than any planning policy might expect.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study is supported by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (VOT: 78656),
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, and Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak. The authors
wish to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of ofcers in relevant departments of
NAPIC, Majlis Bandaraya Johor Bahru (MBJB), Majlis Perbandaran Johor Bahru
Tengah (MPJBT) and Majlis Perbandaran Pasir Gudang (MPPG).
REFERENCES
Abdul Aziz, A. & Ahmad, A. S. (2010). Flats layouts and children outdoor activities. Paper
presented at the ASIA / Pacic Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies
(AicE-Bs 2010), Kuching.
Abdul Aziz, A. & Ahmad, A. S. (2011). Flat layouts and children outdoor activities. Asian
Journal of Environment-Behaviour Studies, 2(4), 51-62.
Abu-Ghazzeh, T. (1999). Housing layout, social interaction, and the place of contact in
Abu-Nuseir, Jordan. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(1), 41-73.
Chap 2.indd 22 11/25/2011 11:21:41 AM

flAts outdoor spAcE As A vitAl sociAl plAcE
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
23
Adriaanse, C. (2007). The utility of the ‘social climate’ concept in understanding urban
neighbourhood-life: A theoretical approach and initial empirical evidence Delft,
Netherland: OTB Research Institute for Housing and Mobility Studies
Agus, M. (1990). Urbanization and low-income housing in Malaysia: impact on the urban
Malays. Journal of Population and Social Studies, 2(2), 205-221, 242-203.
Al-Homoud, M. & Tassinary, L. G. (2004). Social interactions at the neighborhood-level
as a function of external space enclosure. Journal of Architectural and Planning
Research, 21(1), 10-23.
Argent, N. (2008). Perceived density, social interaction and morale in New South Wales
rural communities. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(3), 245-261.
Bay, J.-H. (2004). Sustainable community and environment in tropical Singapore high-rise
housing: the case of Bedok Court condominium. Environmental Design, 8(3-4).
Boyce, I. (2006). Neighbourliness and Privacy on a Low Income Estate. Sociological
Research Online, 11(3).
Brandon, A., Hirt, J. B. & Cameron, T. (2008). Where You Live Inuences Who You Know:
Differences in Student Interaction Based on Residence Hall Design. [Article]. Journal
of College & University Student Housing, 35, 62-79.
Brown, B. B. & Werner, C. M. (1985). Social Cohesiveness, Territoriality, and Holiday
Decorations: The Influence of Cul-de-Sacs. Environment and Behavior, 17(5),
539-565.
Brown, S., Mason, C., Lombard, J., Martinez, F., Plater-Zyberk, E. & Spokane, A., et al.
(2009). The Relationship of Built Environment to Perceived Social Support and
Psychological Distress in Hispanic Elders: The Role of” Eyes on the Street”. The
Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences.
Burchfield, K. (2009). Attachment as a source of informal social control in urban
neighborhoods. Journal of Criminal Justice.
Clark, C. & Uzzell, D. L. (2002). The affordances of the home, neighbourhood, school
and town centre for adolescents. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1-2),
95-108.
Cloutier-Fisher, D. & Harvey, J. (2008). Home beyond the house: Experiences of place in
an evolving retirement community. Journal of Environmental Psychology, In Press,
Corrected Proof.
Coolen, H. (2006). The meaning of dwellings: an ecological perspective. Housing, Theory
and Society, 23(4), 185-201.
de Haan, H. (2005). Social and Material Appropriation of Neighborhood Space: Collective
Space and Resistance in a Dutch Urban Community. Paper presented at the
‘Doing, thinking, feeling home: the mental geography of residential environments’
International Conference.
Feldman, R. M. & Stall, S. (1994). The politics of space appropriation: a case study of
women’s struggles for homeplace in Chicago public housing. In I. Altman & A.
Churchman (Eds.), Women and the Environment (pp. 167).
Forrest, R., Grange, A. & Ngai-Ming, Y. (2002). Neighbourhood in a high rise, high density
city: some observations on contemporary Hong Kong. The Sociological Review,
50(2), 215-240.
Government of Malaysia (2005). Ninth Malaysia Plan, 2006-2010.
Chap 2.indd 23 11/25/2011 11:21:42 AM

AsiAn JournAl of EnvironmEnt-BEhAviour studiEs, volumE 3, numBEr 7, JAnuAry 2012
ABdul Aziz, A. Et Al.
24
Hargreaves, A. (2004). Building communities of place: Habitual movement around signicant
places. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 19(1), 49-65.
Holland, C., Clark, A., Katz, J. & Peace, S. (2007). Social interactions in urban public
places. Bristol, UK: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Huang, S. (2006). A study of outdoor interactional spaces in high-rise housing. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 78(3), 193-204.
Kang, B. (2006). Effects of open spaces on the interpersonal level of resident social capital:
a comparative case study of urban neighborhoods in Guangzhou, China. Unpublished
PhD, Texas A & M University.
Kaplan, S. (1983). A Model of Person-Environment Compatibility. Environment and
Behavior, 15(3), 311-332.
Klaufus, C. (2000). Dwelling as representation: Values of architecture in an Ecuadorian
squatter settlement. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 15, 341-365.
Long, L. Y. (2007). Sejarah perkembangan perumahan pangsa awam tanpa lif Kuala
Lumpur dari tahun 1957 ke 1988. Unpublished Master, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, Skudai.
Mee, K. (2009). A space to care, a space of care: public housing, belonging, and care in inner
Newcastle, Australia. Environment and Planning A, 41, 842-858.
NAPIC (2009). Residential Property Stock Report Q3 2009. Putrajaya: Pusat Maklumat
Harta Tanah Negara.
Paim, L. & Yahaya, N. (Eds.). (2004). Kesejahteraan Isi Rumah Johor Darul Takzim.
Serdang: Penerbit UPM.
Salleh, A. & Yusof, N. (2006). Residential Satisfaction In Low-Cost Housing In Malaysia.
Pulau Pinang: Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Salleh, A. G. (2008). Neighbourhood Factors in Private Low-cost Housing in Malaysia.
Habitat International, 1(002), 1-9.
Sauter, D. & Huettenmoser, M. (2008). Livable streets and social inclusion. Urban Design
International, 13(2), 67-79.
Sirgy, M. & Cornwell, T. (2002). How Neighborhood Features Affect Quality of Life. Social
Indicators Research, 59(1), 79-114.
Steemers, K. & Steane, M. (2004). Environmental Diversity in Architecture: Spon Press.
Sugiyama, T. & Thompson, C. (2005). Environmental Support for Outdoor Activities and
Older People’s Quality of Life. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 19(3/4), 167.
Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E. & Depooter, S. F. (2004). The Fruit of Urban Nature: Vital
Neighborhood Spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700.
Taylor, R. B. (1997). Social Order and Disorder of Street Blocks and Neighborhoods:
Ecology, Microecology, and the Systemic Model of Social Disorganization. Journal
of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(1), 113-155.
Williams, J. (2005). Designing Neighbourhoods for Social Interaction: The Case of
Cohousing. Journal of Urban Design, 10(2), 195 - 227.
Zhang, W. & Lawson, G. (2009). Meeting and greeting: Activities in public outdoor spaces
outside high-density urban residential communities. Urban Design International,
14(4), 207-214.
Chap 2.indd 24 11/25/2011 11:21:42 AM