research paper: relationship of physical environment and activities in leftover spaces

Relationship Of Physical Environment And Activities In Leftover Spaces | Syahirah Binti Mohammad Sultan SB

v

Research Paper

Syahirah Binti Mohammad Sultan Sikandar Batcha

B.Sc Architecture 08 (2009132445)

Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying

Universiti Teknologi MARA

RELATIONSHIP OF PHYSICAL

ENVIRONMENT AND ACTIVITIES IN LEFTOVER

SPACES

Semester March – July 2013

Supervisor: Pn.Nurulhusna Qamaruz-‐Zaman

Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying

Universiti Teknologi MARA


vi

TABLE OF CONTENT

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem 4

1.3 Research Question 5

1.4 Purpose Of Study 6

1.5 Aim of Research 6

1.6 Objectives of Research 7

1.7 Scope of Study 7

1.8 Limitations 8

1.9 Methodology 8

1.9.1 Methodology Adaptation based 8

on Literature

1.9.2 Research Methodology for this Study 10

1.10 Research Framework 11

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 12 2.2 Physical Environment 13

2.3 Human Behavior 14

2.4 Physical Activity 16

2.5 Relationship between physical environment 17

and physical activity/human behavior


vii

CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY

3.1 Methodology 18 3.1.1 Introduction 18

3.2 On-Site Observation 19

3.3 Location Study 21

3.4 Procedure 23

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1 ‘Visual Examination’ Findings

4.1.1 Case Study 24

4.1.1.1 Café and Food Stalls 25

4.1.1.2 Business and Services 27

4.1.1.3 Sports and Recreation 28

4.1.1.4 Culture 29

4.1.1.6 Activities and Physical Environment 30

4.1.2 Case Study 35

4.1.2.1 Food Stalls 36

4.1.1.2 Gazebo 36

4.1.1.4 Activities and Physical Environment 38

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 40

References 41


viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.9.1.2 Berlin Case Study 9

Figure 1.9.1.3 Berlin Case Study 9

Figure1.10.1 Research Framework 11

Figure 3.3.1 Google map: Macro: Penchala Link. 21

Figure 3.3.2 Google map: Micro: Penchala Link. 21

Figure 3.3.3 Google map: Macro: Open Space. 22

Figure 3.3.4 Google map: Micro: Open Space 22

Figure 4.1.1.1 Cafes 24

Figure 4.1.1.2 Business and Services 25

Figure 4.1.1.3 Sports And Recreation 27

Figure 4.1.1.4 Culture 28

Figure 4.1.1.5 Diagram 29

Figure 4.1.2.1 Food Stall 35

Figure 4.1.2.2 Gazebo 36

LIST OF TABLE

Table 4.1.1.6 Activities and Physical Environment: 30

Under Flyover

Table 4.1.2.4 Activities and Physical Environment: 38

Open Space


1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Leftover spaces are increasing in number as development is at a

rapid pace and also being quite prominent in the city nowadays.

Buildings over building, road, bridges, and parks are increasing in

number by the day thus creating leftover spaces, usually

unintentionally.

Activities and public involvement are necessities that occur

within the urban realms, influenced by the attraction of the urban space

(Gehl, 1980). In leftover spaces, activities that occur are most likely

influenced by the public users either negatively or positively.

Since leftovers are usually unintentional, they can happen just

about anywhere. Leftover spaces could happen near developments or

even highways and abandoned buildings (S. Qamaruz-Zaman NH,

Zalina, Nik Azhari, Nik Farhana, 2012) .


2

Leftover spaces can either be utilized to its fullest potential or

neglected fully depending on how it fits within the urban fabric. Leftover

space can also be categorized as a “lost space” as mentioned by

(Trancik, 1986) where the term “lost space” can be defined as ‘the

inadequate use of space’ that mostly happens in urban spaces.

(Mossop, 2006) suggested that leftover spaces are a process of

infrastructure building with a purposed function creating a leftover

space and resulted in inconsiderate human experience

.

Factors that influence the utilization of leftover spaces may

include geographical location, form and design and accessibility. Some

leftover spaces are created over time from being a busy space to an

empty space. Some on the other hand changes its function greatly. This

usually occurs in abandoned premises where the intentioned function

does no longer apply and the space is left untreated. Buildings that

slowly lost in function develop into dilapidated that when occur “such

buildings become leftover, forgotten spaces that go unseen by the bulk

of society; they are left to minor, often illicit alternate uses” (Fein, 2011)


3

In terms of how leftover spaces are defined and key termed,

(Karen, 2006) believes that leftover spaces are usually situated beside

spaces with fixed and delimited functions. Leftover spaces are “publicly

owned without any assigned function” and the examples of leftover

spaces “include the spaces under bridges and next to highways and

railroad tracks” (Karen, 2006).

These leftover spaces exist above the boundaries of a planned

communal space and “having no intended use and often lacking

conventionally appealing features” (Karen, 2006). “Waterfronts, empty

lots, piers, abandoned buildings and tunnels – spaces that once had

assigned functions but no longer do – posses similar qualities” (Karen,

2006) .

Due to the loose ownership of a leftover space, physical

activities will build on their own by the community that slowly integrates

the leftover space with what their surrounding lacks in necessities. This

research is conducted because of my curiosity of activities that occur in

leftover spaces mainly under flyovers and open spaces. I would like to

further investigate how those activities come about and how far are they

being influenced by the physical environment.


4

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In leftover spaces, any sort of activity can occur because it can

be entitled a “no man’s land” or “free-zone” (Eric, 2005). If properly

conducted, leftover spaces can be spaces that provide to the

community. If left abandoned, the surrounding community will treat it as

part of their own and create a space that has potential to be something

more towards fulfilling the none existence or lack of necessities that the

area acquires or vice versa being an abandon space occupied by the

marginal people.

There a few case studies on the matter all around the world on

how leftover spaces are being treated. For example, in Tyneside,

England, an abandoned mine now is a place for watching birds,

parachuting and clay pigeon shooting (Lonsdale, 2001) Another

example where an unofficial “museum of graffiti” has been created out

of an abandoned railroad maintenance building in Denver (Ferrel, 2001)

.

There are a few more leftover spaces mentioned on a Timeout

Hong Kong website ("Under the bridge: a Space Conundrum," 2013)

mentioning a mass of leftover spaces treated into different amazing

spaces. The few mentioned are leftover spaces Under the Freeway


5

Flea Market, Wallace, Idaho, USA where a three-day flea market event

has been going on for eight years. In Zilina, Slovakia, an auditorium and

a theatre was built under the flyover ("Under the bridge: a Space

Conundrum," 2013).

So these studies clearly show that the physical activities in

leftover spaces are utilised depending on how the physical environment

is. It also is influenced by other factors such as its previous

functionality, form and design and natural environment.. Community

involvement is definitely part of it as well as they also are able to decide

and manipulate how the leftover space is treated.

1.3 Research Question

a) What is the relationship of physical environment and activities in left

over spaces and what are the factors that influence the types of

activities in leftover spaces?

b) What are the common activities that usually occur in leftover spaces

depending on who manipulates the leftover space?


6

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship of

the physical environment and the activities in leftover spaces.

Besides that, it is also to experiment on whether the relationship

between the two boasts any potential harm to the surrounding

community as leftover spaces are exposed to all sorts of

unpredictable activities to occur. The focus of this study is mainly

on leftover spaces under flyovers and exposed open spaces.

Finally, the purpose of the study is to further explore the

questions raised in the research question

1.5 Aim of research

The aim of the study is quite similar to the purpose of the study

where it is to understand the relationship of the physical environment

and activities in leftover spaces. It is also to understand the factors and

influences that attribute to the connection between the physical

environment and physical activities with the leftover space. Last but not

least, it is to further explore the questions raised in the research

question.


7

1.6 Objectives of research

a) To investigate what is the relationship of physical environment and

activities in leftover spaces and what are the factors that influence the

types of activities in leftover spaces?

b) To determine what are the common activities that usually occur in

leftover spaces depending on who manipulates the leftover space?

1.7 Scope of Study

The scope of study is to explore the factors and influences

that lead to the activities happening in leftover spaces of the physical

environment. The study will be conducted at wide variations of leftover

spaces such as under flyover, abandoned buildings, abandoned car

parks and even exposed open spaces. The location of the study to be

conducted will be scattered within the Petaling Jaya district.


8

1.8 Limitations

The limitation I faced during conducting the study include,

access limitation to certain leftover spaces. This usually involves

leftover spaces that psychologically feel s unsafe. Other limitations

include space occupancy where I can only conduct certain investigation

only when there is an activity going on and there is presence of

community involvement.

1.9 Methodology

1.9.1 Methodology Adaptation based on Literature

This research is based on the study done by (Cupers, 2002) and

a few others. In his study, he did “a photographic essay on the life of

leftover spaces in Berlin” and another method which is “documenting

activities” (Cupers, 2002) which includes “leisure”, “temporary living”

and “social encounters” (Cupers, 2002)


9

Figure 1.9.1.2 and Figure 1.9.1.3 Images from his study in Berlin (source: (Cupers,

2002)

Based on (Cupers, 2002) overall method, this research adopt

only a few that suits the study such as the ‘photographic essay on the

life of the leftover spaces’ and the “documentation of activities” both by

(Cupers, 2002). Few steps from (Briffett, 1995) will also be adopted to

further studying my subject through “recording methods which may

comprise of written, graphical, photographic, audio and even video

techniques”.

I believe his techniques can help me identify and document my

studies even better for analyzing later on in the research.


10

1.9.2 Research Methodology for this Study

Based on these references, recording of photos and videos

where necessary are done. Along the process, useful information that

can be used for the research will be noted. Background checks on

certain leftover spaces that may have historical significance to what the

space has become now were also done.

As mentioned earlier, the research includes observation towards

these leftover spaces. Graphical aids such as photographs and video

recording snapshots will be included as aids to the study and reference.

Notes will also be included to verify any information and clarification to

the research. Proper background studies such as site analysis if

necessary to the leftover space will be included. All the relevant data

collected will later be further expanded based on the research methods.


11

1.10 Research Framework


12

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The literature review is focusing on the study of the relationship

of the physical environment and activity in leftover spaces. This study is

done to investigate and identify how the two elements connect with

leftover spaces. The focus on the types of leftover spaces that will be

investigated are, under flyovers and exposed open spaces.

This study is done to investigate and identify the possible

fabrication of the relationship of the physical environment and the

activity in leftover spaces that includes topics such as physical

environment, human behavior and activities, physical activities and

finally the relationship of the physical environment and human behavior

or physical activities.

The literature review will help my readers understand the topic

better as it will further explore the content of the discussed subject and

more importantly answer the questions raised in the research question.


13

2.2 Physical Environment

Physical environment is a vast term. It differs in meaning

depending on the subject it’s fitted into. The word ‘environment’ alone

explains half of what physical environment is. Environment is a term on

its own and has its own structures. “The environment is a series of

relationships among elements and people and their relationship are

orderly” (Krupart, 1985) adopted by (Qamaruz-Zaman NH, 2005).

Continuing the defining of environment, (Rapoport, 1986)

categorized environment in two ways – “organizing in space, time,

meaning and communication” and “ settings or cultural landscape made

up of fixed, semi-fixed and none-fixed features”. According to

Bronfenbrenner, it is proper before anything else to the study the

interactions between people, people with settings and vice versa. A

research should not be focused on only just the one environment but

expand to the study of “people-people”, “people-environment” and

“environment-environment” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979)

The term physical environment comprises of more key terms as

it expands in definition compared to the short but complex


14

‘environment’. The long definition of physical environment includes

“natural environment”, “built environment”, “infrastructure” “public

facilities” , ” urban design” , “urban environment” and “perception”

(Klaus, 2007).

As mentioned by (Klaus, 2007) physical environment includes

the term “perception”. The term “perception” or the Latin word “

percipere” means to take hold of and to comprehend according to

(Bashri, 1990) as adopted by (Qamaruz-Zaman NH, 2005). Physical

environment, being one of the factors that influences the activities in

various ways (Gehl, 1980). So It is clear that based on the key terms

and definitions, the physical environment has high influences on the

human behaviour as the people interaction itself is part of the mix.

2.3 Human Behavior

Human behavior is a unique understanding of the human

temperament. It is unique because each person has their own unique

trademark. Human behavior is basically an exploration of the different

characteristics of an individual.


15

Behavior can be defined by any action that a human does

including thinking, feeling and seeing (Ziesel, 1984). “Groups of people

ranging from couples to families to communities to nations also exhibit

human behavior” (Charles H. Zastrow, 2012). Behavior can be

associated with the surroundings or the environment. Behavior usually

is in response with the environment where man and the environment

have a two way response to each other (Bashri, 1990)

Studying and observing the human behavior allows possibilities

to attain information how the human character and the environment

manipulate each other and the relationship sustains them, on how

individuals integrate themselves into spaces either predictable or not

and how the environment presents opportunities for the behavior

(Zeisel, 1981 )

It is clear behavior is not a fixed subject and it will change

according to different spaces and environment, where if there is a

modified environment, there will be unpredictable behavior because of

the incongruity of the existing environment or it is not as conducive as

hoped (Qamaruz-Zaman NH, 2005)


16

2.4 Physical Activity

Physical activity is a step up from human behavior. It is studying

of the activities done by the people concerning the environment

surrounding it. Like physical environment, physical activity also has its

own key terms. They include – “physical activity”, “walking”, “cycling”,

“exercising”, “transportation”, “active transport”, “physical inactivity”, and

“sedentariness” (Klaus, 2007)

Activities happen only if the environment is conducive to allow it.

(Gehl, 1980). To ensure an activity to occur naturally, an urban space

has to be “loose”, created by activities that can generate social

encounter usually through leisure and entertainment. (Karen, 2006).

Activities that take place are when the exterior conditions are inviting

with good weather. The relationship of the activities and the physical

planning are important and they usually depend on the exterior

physicality (Gehl, 1980)


17

2.5 The Relationship Of Physical Environment and

Physical Activity/Human Behavior

The physical environment has different effects on behavior that

certain behavior is a result that comes from the possibilities indirectly

from the environment (Rapoport, 1977) It is always the case where if

the behavior changes the environment changes or vice versa. This is

because the physical environment and activity are always connected to

each other.

Any outcome of behavior will bring life to the environment where

the environment will change according to the behavior. (Bashri, 1990)

adopted from (Qamaruz-Zaman NH, 2005). Each of these elements are

capable of manipulating each other. The environment can constrain the

physical activity by the way that it is structured by either giving the

people more or fewer opportunities to attempt physical activity.

(National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Physical Activity,

2005)


18

CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY

3.1 Methodology

This part of the chapter will be examining and justifying about the

strategy used for the data collection for the research. A case study

strategy was chosen as the research instrument. This case study is to

determine the relationship of physical environment and physical

activities in leftover spaces.

3.1.1 Introduction

For the case study, Two locations were chosen to carry out my

research. First being under a flyover near the Taman Tun Dr. Ismail

Federal Territory Of Kuala. The flyover is underneath the Sprint

Highway or The Penchala Link. The new link connects the Lebuh Raya

Damansara-Puchong (LDP) in the west to Jalan Bukit Kiara at Mont

Kiara in the east (SPRINT, 2013).

The second site location is an exposed open space near

Persiaran Mahogani, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya. The surrounding


19

of the site is yet to be develop however opposite of the site is one of the

busiest commercial area in Kota Damansara which is Sunway Giza

Mall.

Both sites were chosen for this case study because I believe

they relate well to the topic and the focus of study which are under

flyovers and exposed open spaces. Both the sites are leftover spaces

that are utilized by the activities of the community on a daily basis.

3.2 On site Observation

The on site observation was done based on the study by

(Cupers, 2002). In his study, he did “a photographic essay on the life of

leftover spaces in Berlin” and “documenting activities” (Cupers, 2002).

The documenting will includes “leisure”, “temporary living” and “social

encounters” (Cupers, 2002)

So for both sites, under the flyover and the exposed open space,

I applied the method done by Cupers and by implementing it according

to my focus of study and site analysis, Most of the observation is

documented using still photographs and video screenshots. For both

sites, the observation included the form and design of the leftover


20

space, the types of activities happening at the space, the group of

people utilizing the leftover space and overall geographical location on

the map to its surrounding. Sketches is included to further explain the

situation of the leftover spaces.


21

3.3 Location Study

The location study of the two sites mentioned earlier which are

leftover space under the flyover and leftover space at an exposed open

space. The location of the leftover space under flyover is near Taman

Tun Dr. Ismail Federal Territory Of Kuala Lumpur. The location is

roughly at the intersection of Sprint Highway and Jalan Sungai

Penchala in between Exit 22 and Exit 23. The closest landmark is the

Muhibah Seafood Restaurant which is a 1 minute drive from the site.

Figure 3.3.1 and Figure 3.3.2 (source: map/google.com.my)


22

The second site location is an exposed open space near

Persiaran Mahogani, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya. The site is

opposite Sunway Giza Mall at Jalan PJU 5/17 which is also a landmark

closest to the site. The location of the site is in between the D’Shire

Vlllage residential area on the west, Tune Hotel right up north and a

commercial area on the east.

Figure 3.3.3 and Figure 3.3.4 (source: map/google.com.m)


23

3.4 Procedure

For the first case study which is under the flyover at intersection

of the Sprint Highway and Jalan Penchala Link, Findings were

documented through photographs and sketches including notes of the

site. Since the site is under a flyover, I approached it from a macro

scale to micro scale in terms of photographing it.

Photos from a distant angle far and close are captured. Photos

captured include the overall form and design of the flyover. This is to

understand how it influences the activity happening under it. Photos of

all the activities happening under the flyover either active to non-active

were also captured. The group range of people involve with the activity

were also noted.

I also sketched details from the activities on the leftover space

that can’t be captured through photograph. Besides that, I also

sketched out theories on how the form and design may influence the

activity at the leftover spaces.


24

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1 Visual Examination Findings

4.1.1 Case Study 1: Under Penchala Link Flyover

4.1.1.1 Café and Food Stalls

Figure a&c) Warung Cherry, Figure b) Apek Corner


25

Under the flyover, there are total of 3 warung. Warung Cherry

having two restaurants, and Apek Corner. All three cafes are located

directly underneath the flyover on both sides of the road. Warung

Cherry has a longer operational hour compared to Apek Corner.

Warung Cherry operates from 12 noon till 2 am. The food offered

ranging from mix-rice to fried food. Apek Corner on the hand operates

from morning till late evening. Food stalls are located in front of both

cafes along the road. The food stalls offers food such as the Malay

“kuih” and tidbits.

4.1.1.2 Business and Services

Figure a) and Figure b) up-close of the services offered such as car wash and work

repairing.


26

Figure c) and Figure d) Car wash service main entrance, view of back of Apek

Corner from the service area.

Next to Apek Corner, a car wash service is available with

repairing work such as air-cond repairing. The service’s main entrance

is next to the Apek Corner restaurant and goes all the way down the

slop as seen in figure d).


27

4.1.1.3 Sports and recreational activities

Figure a) Paintball area opposite the Apek Corner Restaurant

Opposite the Apek Corner restaurant, there is a paintball area

which operates during weekends. Even though not connected to the

café and Isolated, it is still a huge space on its own.


28

4.1.1.4 Cultural Activities

The cultural activities are held in the “Warung Cherry” café itself where

there is a readily built stage with a great view to the

audience/customers to sit and enjoy the performance. The show

however is not on every day and usually on Friday nights.

The cultural activities involve Malay traditional instruments and other

traditional influences.

(Source: ccfoodtravel.com)


29

4.1.1.5 Diagram: Under Flyover on map and sectional view

Figure a) is the types of activities categorized by case studies under the flyover

indicated on the map and figure b) is types of activities under the flyover from

sectional view.


30

Location Case Study

Activities Physical Environment Description

Under Penchala Link Flyover

A Cultural Activities - Cultural performance involving singing and music.

The cultural activities happen within the café of “Warung Cherry Tom Yam Seafood”. Located slightly inwards of the café, at first glance it is not very visible to the passerby as seen in the image below.

Performances are held on a built stage that is surrounded by a comfortable sitting area. The area is quite spacious considering the stage is right at the end of the flyover. However due to the fairly immense height, it gives the space a spacious feel. No matter how or where the space is, if the space is contributing enough, activities can happen as mentioned by (Gehl, 1980) that activities happen only if the environment is conducive to allow it..


31

B

And

F

Café A - 2 cafes of the same name. One being “ Warung Cherry” and next to it “ Warung Cherry Tom Yam Seafood”

Café B - Apek Corner

Café A are strategically adjacent to the road that goes under the flyover. However they are not of the same level. It slops upwards gradually from the road right towards the end of the café/flyover as seen in the images below. Even though there is a slope, the cafes still exist because it was manipulated well to suit the environment. The height gives an advantage as well to the activity. The environment doesn’t present itself as an obstacle but rather as an opportunity and the community manipulated it well. As mentioned by (Zeisel, 1981 ) it is how individuals integrate themselves into spaces either predictable or not and how the environment presents opportunities for the behavior. As for Café “Apek Corner” it is the on the same level as the road. At the end of the café where its starts to slope but doesn’t affect the café in any way.

Road Level

Café Level


32

C

and

D

Food Stall A and B - Stalls selling various Malay “kuih” and tidbits (keropok and snacks.)

Food Stall A is located right in front of “Warung Cherry” café while Food Stall B is located in front of “Apek Corner” Cafe, Both of the food stalls are on the same level as the road. The pathway between the café and the road is quite a gap so the community took the opportunity to open up stalls along the road as seen in the image below. The stalls however are not too close to the road so safety is secured. So it is clear even with that little gap, it can provide an opportunity for an activity. To keep in mind the space is under a flyover but that doesn’t limit any opportunity for the activity to occur. As mentioned by the (National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Physical Activity, 2005), the environment can constrain the physical activity by the way that it is structured by either giving the people more or fewer opportunities to attempt physical activity.


33

F

Business And Services - Car wash service and repair work.

The car wash service is located next to the “Apek Corner” café. It is an unused ample space but with a minimal height because of the flyover structural support. Leftover spaces are “publicly owned without any assigned function” (Karen, 2006). So with the given non-conducive space, the community took the opportunity and manipulated it with a very useful activity. No space was left to waste.

G

Sports And Recreational - Paintball activity during the weekend.

The paintball activity area is isolated from the café area but directly opposite from the “Apek Corner Café”. It is a wide stretched of space with excellent height. It is a suitable choice for the community to manipulate the environment for that activity. One side of the flyover starts to slop downwards slightly while the other maintains a great height for a few meters distance.

Limited height


34

According to (Karen, 2006), to ensure an activity to occur naturally, an urban space has to be “loose”, created by activities that can generate social encounter usually through leisure and entertainment. Judging by the space, it is loose and fitting for a paintball activity. Not only it generates a good social encounter, it makes use of the space beneficially without it being turned into an anti-social and dangerous space.

Table 4.1.1.6 Activities and Physical Environment: Under Flyover


35

4.1.2 Case Study 2: Exposed Open Space

4.1.2.1 Food Stalls

Figure a) Durian food stall

The stall is open during weekdays and weekends. The stall

sells fresh durian and also “cendol”. Usually there is a crowd who will

either buy or take it home or sometimes they will eat at the stall itself or

the open space opposite it. Sometimes people will also eat the durians

or “cendol” at the near gazebo towards the exit of the site.


36

Figure b) Gazebo located near the exit of the site

The gazebo is stand alone and is situated towards the exit of

the site going out to Persiaran Mahogani. The function of the gazebo is

mostly for the visitors to sit and eat the food bought at the stall nearby.

If the stall is closed, the Gazebo is not used.


37

Figure 4.1.2.3 Diagram: Exposed Open Space on map and sectional

view

Figure a) is the types of activities categorized by case studies at the

exposed open space indicated on the map and figure b) is types of

activities at the exposed space from sectional view.


38

Location Case Study

Activities Physical Environment Description

Exposed

Open

Space

Opposite

Sunway

Giza Mall

A

Food Stall - Selling Durian and “Cendol”

The location of the stall is a bit odd because it is on a supposedly parking space to an open space. The road is going in from Persiaran Mahogani and out again. There are no actual developments around it except being an open space. The only development is the Sunway Giza mall on the opposite road, east and a residential area opposite, west. This leftover space very much is a clear example of how (Karen, 2006) describe how a leftover space can be - leftover spaces exist above the boundaries of a planned communal space and “having no intended use and often lacking conventionally appealing features”


39

B

Gazebo

The gazebo is the only proper sitting area provided for the whole open space area. Considering it to be a place where people might relax and enjoy the greenery and the food stall, the authority decided the gazebo would be handful. However the position is not to suitable as it is quite close to the exit of the leftover space and further from the greenery of the open space.

Table 4.1.2.4 Activities and Physical Environment: Open Space


40

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION

Leftover spaces are actually unique spaces that can be another

alternative to creating a new space with a function. It can be just about

anywhere from under flyovers, to open spaces, in-between buildings,

railroad tracks and abandoned buildings.

However to have a well-round leftover space, there has to be a

good connection between the relation of the physical environment and

physical activity. From the study it is clear the form and design,

community involvement and location is a contributing factor to the

outcome of how the leftover space will turn out to be.

The human nature or behavior is also part of how the leftover

space develops. The environment and activity work hand in hand at the

same time manipulates each other. When one changes, the other

changes as well. All in all, if being handled by the right group of people

or community, a leftover space is a great gift from the result of

development.


41

REFERENCE

Bashri, S. (1990). Urban Spaces in Tropical Climate. 1(1).

Briffett, C. (1995). Building Maintenance Technology in Tropical Climate.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design.

Charles H. Zastrow, K. K. K.-A. (2012). Understanding Human Behavior in the Social Environment (9 ed.): Cengage Learning.

Cupers, K. (2002). Space of Uncertainty: Verlag Müller and Busmann.

Eric, C. J., Groth. (2005). Reclaiming Urbanity: Indeterminate Spaces, Informal Actors and Urban Agenda Setting.

Fein, Z. E. (2011). The Aesthetic of Decay: Space, Time, and Perception.

Ferrel, J. (2001). Tearing Down The Streets: Adventures in Urban Anarchy, New York: Palgrave.

Gehl, J. (1980). Life Between Buildings New York.

Karen, F. Q., Stevens. (2006). Loose Space: Possibility and Diversity in Urban Life: Routledge.


42

Klaus, G. M., Adrian E. Bauman, PhD, Mark Petticrew, PhD. (2007). The Physical Environment and Physical Activity: A Critical Appraisal of Review Articles. 32(5), 361 - 369.

Krupart, E. (1985). People in Cities.

Lonsdale, J. (2001). Tyneside (Inertia).

Mossop, E. (2006). Landscapes of Infrastructure In The Landscape Urbanism Reader.

National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Physical Activity, H., Transportation, and Land Use, National Research Council (É.-U.). Transportation Research Board, Institute of Medicine (U.S.). (2005). Does the Built Environment Influence Physical Activity?: Examining The Evidence, Issue 282: Transportation Research Board.

Qamaruz-Zaman NH. (2005). Behavior Characteristics Of Public Open Space In Town And CIty - A Case Study Of KLCC Urban Park. 93.

Qamaruz-Zaman NH, S., Zalina, Nik Azhari, Nik Farhana. (2012). Opportunity in Leftover Spaces: Activities under the flyovers of Kuala Lumpur.

Rapoport, A. (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form.

Rapoport, A. (1986). The Use and Design of Open Space In Urban Neighborhoods.

SPRINT. (2013). Completed Enhancements. from http://www.sprint.com.my/enhancement_completed.php


43

Trancik, R. (1986). Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design.

Under the bridge: a Space Conundrum. (2013). from http://www.timeout.com.hk/big-smog/features/57756/under-the-bridge-a-space-conundrum.html

Zeisel, J. (1981 ). Inquiry by design: Tools for environment-behavior research: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co. (Monterey, Calif.)

Ziesel, J. (1984). Inquiry by Design: Tools for Environment-behaviour Research (Illustrated,reprint ed.): CUP Archive, 1984.

research paper: relationship of physical environment and activities in leftover spaces

Documents

introduction leftover

leftover spaces semester

research methodology

berlin case study

list of figures figure

location study

purpose of study

scope of study