Socio-Behavioural at Urban Waterfronts, Case Study: Sugar Beach, Toronto, Canada (REPORT)

ABSTRACT

This assignment focuses on the study of integration between the physical characteristic of the built environment with the human cultural behavioural aspect. The purpose of this assignment is to address author understanding and interpretations of the built environment selection for urban space environment at waterfronts by doing critical analysis. The case study that author select is Sugar Beach in Toronto, Canada and its reflection to the urban space at waterfronts characteristics. The method for the behavioural aspect understanding is by analysing the behavioural contemplating setting picture based on the case study area which is derived from online sources. This research studies on how people use that urban space at waterfront and what are the aspects that influence the use of that space and what physical attributes are the most influential on the human behavioural phenomena connected to the space in Sugar Beach.

Keywords: Human Cultural Behavioural Aspect, Physical Characteristic, Sugar Beach, Urban Waterfront

i

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... i TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS ....................................................................................... 2 1.1 The Physical Characteristics of the Environment ....................................................... 2 1.2 The Cultural / Behavioural Aspects ........................................................................... 7 1.3 Case Study: Sugar Beach, Toronto, Canada .......................................................... 10 1.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 18 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................... 20

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures 1. Hudson River Urban Waterfront, New York, USA ........................................... 2 Figures 2. Cheongyeon Stream, Seoul, South Korea ...................................................... 3 Figures 3. Canal in Amsterdam, Netherland .................................................................... 4 Figures 4. Canal in Venice, Italy...................................................................................... 4 Figures 5. Redevelopment of Sugar Factory into Domino Park, New York, USA.............. 5 Figures 6. Blues Musical Festival in Tom McCall Waterfront Park, Oregon, USA ............. 6 Figures 7. Proximity Relationships Level Diagram ........................................................... 8 Figures 8. Waterfall at Portland Public Open Space Waterfront ....................................... 8 Figures 9. Stagnant Water at Marina Bay Waterfront, Singapore ..................................... 9 Figures 10. Sugar Beach from Bird View Perspective ................................................... 10 Figures 11. Sugar Beach Before Redevelopment (Redpath Sugar Factory Derelict Site)11 Figures 12. Current Sugar Beach Environment Condition ............................................. 11 Figures 13. Disabilities Facility at the Beach Area ........................................................ 11 Figures 14. Beach Atmosphere in the Daylight Time .................................................... 12 Figures 15. Light at the Umbrella in the Night Time ....................................................... 12 Figures 16. Children Play at the Water Fountain in the Daylight ................................... 12 Figures 17. Water Fountain Spectacle of Illuminated Light Choreography .................... 13 Figures 18. Big Granite Rock Outcropping as a Nature Amphitheatre............................ 13 Figures 19. Open-air Public Cinema Session at the Park .............................................. 13 Figures 20. Promenade Area at Sugar Beach .............................................................. 14 Figures 21. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Images at the Beach Area ................... 15 Figures 22. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Sketches at the Beach Area ................ 15 Figures 23. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Images at the Promenade Area............ 16 Figures 24. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Sketches at the Promenade Area ........ 16

iii

Introduction As a human who lives in the world, we cannot be subdivided from the built environment which are created from our actions, needs and thoughts. Each appearance of the built environment is organized to fulfil a human intention every time. In the urban context, there are two types to classify the built environment, i.e. the building environment (e.g. home, workplaces, commercial, etc.) and urban space environment (e.g. residential neighbourhoods, waterfronts, city centre, etc.). The diversity characteristic of the place and space in the environment give an adequate variety of the human cultural and behavioural phenomena or issues. However, the purpose of this assessment is to understand how that issues involved in shaping the built environment.

The built environment that author focus on to discuss, is an urban space environment and waterfront location has been chosen for further explanation. Through this paper, that will be four sections.

First, the author identifying the physical characteristics of the environment. Then, the author determining the relevant cultural or behavioural aspects which related to the environment. Third, the author selecting one case study of a waterfront urban space (i.e. Sugar Beach in Toronto, Canada) and analysing both physical and cultural or behavioural factors involved. In the end of the paper, the author develops a conclusion which present a reflection of understanding the urban space environment as it relates to various cultural and behavioural phenomena.

1

Discussion and Analysis 1.1

The Physical Characteristics of the Environment The built environment that author selected is an urban open space environment which is located

at the waterfront and in this section the physical characteristics of that environment will be discussed.

According to Altman and Chemers (1984) statement, the physical environment disposes an indication with assorted scale. It can be separated into the natural environment and the built environment. Natural environment mentions to places and geographical characteristics (i.e. forest, rivers and valleys) and environmental circumstances (i.e. humidity, rainfall, and temperature). On the other hand, built environment indicates to the people’s adjustment of environments (i.e. cities and communities). In some occasions, the built environment involves an alteration of natural environmental situations.

All urban public open space is established by three fundamental urban attributes (i.e. function, operation and spatial arrangement) and their shared connections. Gehl (2000) said that the function feature is means the public space capability to meet the conditions for necessary, optional, and social activities. The spatial arrangement is the whole urban structure and the operation is interpreted by urban transport and technical infrastructure. Therefore, the quality of an urban public open space is concluded by whether all the three attributes are existed in the location and even if they can accomplish the demands of the inhabitants.

Dong (2004) highlighted that the definition of the waterfront word is got through as the part of a city being next to a harbour, lake, ocean, river, etc. It supports opportunity for interaction between inhabitants, nature, and water. Yasin et al. (2010) also had the same argument that waterfront predominantly indicated as the area of interaction between city development and the water. It is a natural protection place for flooding, erosion with plant cover and become a pollution moderator. Waterfront areas consistently are engaged by port activities and infrastructures such as the harbourfront, riverfront, riverside, and water edge. One of the examples is Hudson River urban waterfront in New York (figure 1).

Moreover, Breen and Rigby (1994) indicated the similar thing between waterfront and urban space waterfront. Accordingly, waterfront recognizes the water’s edge in the cities or urban context of all sizes.

Figure 1. Hudson River Urban Waterfront, New York, USA

2

Based on Wrenn et al. (1983) acknowledgement, urban space at waterfront have been has recognized five classifications to location with water: a. Urban space located on a bay, b. Urban space located on banks of a river, c.

Urban space located on banks of intersecting rivers,

d. Urban space located on peninsula, e. Urban space located on a large body of water.

Explained above the urban space located on a bay and peninsula is the symbolize of coastal cities. However, the other three are the symbolize of inland ones. Nevertheless, the shoreline form is a main influence on how the location of the urban context in reference to the water consequences the citywater links and create the longer form. It can exaggerate the chance of public open spaces around the location and the connection to other hinterland public open spaces.

Urban space at waterfronts have been continuing for a long time in the focus of many architects, urban and landscape designers, who are sensible for their integrities and the capacity of a watercourse carries within the interior of urban context. Watercourse is an interrelating component between the city development, and urban waterfronts are the intermediaries of communication. It is exactly in their area where the city – a human output with various complex conditions of culture background and an inner infrastructure – meets the element of water, which is totally natural element. Furthermore, this natural component influences the process and the image of the city. For instance, one of the great urban waterfronts, Cheongyeon Stream in Seoul, South Korea is giving a history of the culture background through the paintings on the wall infrastructure and sculpture along the river (figure 2).

Figure 2. Cheongyeon Stream, Seoul, South Korea

The presence of water in the structure of urban form is a very basic requirement. For instance, the shape of a river is creating a significance and impact on the public space and the internal relations within the body of the settlement alternate with the size and the width of the flow, character of the waterfront, architectural formation of the riverbanks and its present utilization. This public space refuses the very fundamentals of the waterfront and the city’s inhabitants resemble as unpleasant. In this case,

3

the attractive element of water is incapable toward urban residents to engage together. The quality of the public space is determined by the degree of its utilization by a wider association of inhabitants.

In the context of the urban development, water usually has been decided to restrict the denoting factor of the construction development and watercourses have evolved into a focal point, a reason that gave improvement to other urban open spaces. For instances, rivers involve an important position as a conceptual section of the urban greenery, where they take part in composition of the functionally and spatially related system of greenery. River become an interrelating component which helping to overwhelm the obstruction of the powerfully urbanized environment. The line of watercourses generates development axes which support the precious interrelation between the significant parts of the city and the countryside. Therefore, they meet the comprehensive sense of greenery concept and sustain the internal functioning of an urban organism. It is not only the river itself is achieved but also the adjacent spaces precisely related to the watercourse which is waterfronts.

In the most European cities, the urban structure is predominantly affected by the occupancy of water in the arrangement of a river. River has many shapes than the other watercourse form. The urban structure can exist in their elementary appearance when the river flow as linear city-making component control an imperative position embracing a function of city artery. Watercourses can also take a shape of canals, which are the characteristic of some European cities such as Amsterdam in Netherland (figure 3) and Venice in Italy (figure 4). Canals may configure a complete network intervolving as a result of the urban development, or they can have only a complementary appearance. Furthermore, they mark the streets of the city due to the previous requirement of the expertise to deliver water closer to the buildings that used it.

Figure 3. Canal in Amsterdam, Netherland

Figure 4. Canal in Venice, Italy

4

Wittmann (2008) highlighted that the primary functional uses of urban public open space waterfront areas into the following classifications: a. Transport facilities (e.g. pedestrian, cycling route, road/street, and rail transport), b. Social space (connected with the public facilities), c.

Housing environment and housing itself,

d. Recreational environment, e. Industrial use (figure 5)

Figure 5. Redevelopment of Sugar Factory into Domino Park, New York, USA

All these functions must be respected and cannot elevate one above the other. Many opinions said that urban space at waterfront is demolished by transportation. While this is true, but only because it against all the correct functions and the other evolved alone to an unbearable degree. Correspondingly, the industry continuously mastered an important part of the city and the waterfront is prohibited to flourish other activities. Therefore, that function categories as those which define as inapplicable but the extent to which in the public space obtains the frequency of function. Their compatibility and stability with other public spaces gives improvement to an outline public space waterfront where people can distinguish the industry and transportation as well as recreation.

Yasin et al. (2010) distinguished that the great urban public space waterfront development is accomplished the function on all levels and all the stakeholders get the benefit from it. Moreover, Yassin, Bond, and Mcdonagh (2012) pointed out that all natural and design component recommended to be taken into deliberation to reach the specific purpose of a successful urban public space waterfront. In addition, there are some principles that must be involved while improving design strategies and plans for waterfront environment which are accessibility, integrated, sharing benefits, stakeholder cooperation and construction development.

Currently, a lot of cultural events such as concerts, educative paths, exhibitions, debates, and shows are relocated toward the urban space waterfronts. Good quality architectural and landscape design of these public open spaces can accommodate their full-valued integration into the city life. It is essential to examine for new present opportunities to take advantage of the urban space at the waterfronts. Thus, the purpose is to fulfil the aesthetic, functional, operational, and spacious requirements of the modern era. For instance, there is a musical concert inside the urban waterfront which called Blues

5

Festival in Tom McCall Waterfront Park, Oregon, USA (figure 6). This musical event only happens in a summer season and become a recreational place for the society to satisfy their needs in the city.

Figure 6. Blues Musical Festival in Tom McCall Waterfront Park, Oregon, USA

6

1.2

The Cultural / Behavioural Aspects According to the type of built environment that author selected which is urban space waterfront,

through this part, the author explains about how the cultural/behavioural aspects influencing the environment. Following Altman and Chemers (1984), they believe that the term of culture has certain fundamental elements. It indicates the beliefs and perceptions, behaviours and customs, norms and values of an individual or society. Moreover, culture is a cluster of belief and principles about how to behave or do things. Thus, cognitions, perceptions, ethics, and modes of convenient behaviour establish a set of representatives signified in the concept of culture.

Cultures and physical environments relate to people and distinctive psychological processes, which contain two primary categories (i.e. mental and behavioural activities). Mental activities involve things that obtain in people’s minds such as what they hear, see, smell and their perceptions about the physical environment. Thus, people may discover to produce variant structures as a reaction of their comprehension and sensibility about climate, or they may intensely change the physical environment as an execution of cultural impression about the functions of the environment in the people’s lives. Cultures, environments, and psychological progression accomplish in a synergetic structure.

On the other side, behavioural activities are what people behave and how they achieve in connection to the environment. For instance, the behaviours in the middle of a host and the others at the same places. Its efforts to obtain privacy and to organize and regulate the migrations, territories, and the land use influence how that people behave. Regarding to Altman and Chemers (1984) opinion, many people particularly interested in how people in a heterogeneous cultures behave both similar and different methods with pay attention to the physical environment and in how obvious behaviours are interdependent to attitudes, cognitions, perceptions, and values about the surrounding environment.

Cultural and behavioural aspects that related to the environment can be identified through the achievement of the privacy, personal space, and territoriality. Privacy is the selective control of access to the self and becomes the actual degree of contact that results from interactions with others by any social unit classification (i.e. individuals/ families/ gender). The category and level of privacy are determined by the current sequence of people activities, cultural background, and individual personality and expectations. Personal space is about how people relate socially or psychologically to the physical spaces and it give effect to the proximity relationships level (i.e. intimate, personal, social, and public space) (figure 7). These relationships provide the designer with insight into the nature of human beings and how this relates to people’s satisfaction with the built environment. It helps human determining the comfortable grade and definition of space (i.e. exterior and interior).

7

Figure 7. Proximity Relationships Level Diagram

Territoriality is an area controlled by a person or group which reflected in actual or potential possession. It can be a sign for claiming the ownership of the area to the others and usually also called territorial behaviour. That behaviour becomes the fundamental concept of designing the built environment in a way of people’s correspondence and interactions within the built environment, architectural and urban space. According to Sommer (1969) statement, these behavioural aspects such as implementing privacy, personal space and territoriality cause the fulfilment of people obligations (i.e. identity, motivation, place attachment and satisfaction, security, self-actualization, and self-esteem) from a living place. In addition, Altman and Chemers (1984) also said that the various method of people expressing and presenting these requirements radically different from assorted urban societies. The concept of privacy, personal space and territorial behaviours are approximately related together. Therefore, the building or urban space environment can be judge as a good place if the designer also considered about the cultural and behavioural aspects.

Generally, water is the most substantial design and planning element which is comfort of human physical and psychological aspect (i.e. cultural and behavioural). One of the reasons is natural water source is giving an aesthetic effect and functional whose discovers on human such as audial, psychological, and visual effects. The essentially ability to attracted people on waterfront is visual landscape effects of water on relaxation. In some cases, there are urban public open space at the waterfront designs related to take over motion and serenity factors. For instances, moving water (figure 8) such as waterfall could increase the vibrancy and excitement to a public open space. However, the stagnant water (figure 9) involves the mirror effect in its space as a visual.

Figure 8. Waterfall at Portland Public Open Space Waterfront

8

Figure 9. Stagnant Water at Marina Bay Waterfront, Singapore

9

1.3

Case Study: Sugar Beach , Toronto, Canada

Analysis of the Physical Environment Characteristic The method to understand the physical characteristic in the urban space environment, that the author used are analysing and identifying through the current and past pictures that derives from various online sources. The strategy is to consider the physical environment by focusing on specific aspects such as functional, social, and spatial requirement. The case study that relate to the context that author had been chosen from the previous section, which is an urban waterfront, is Sugar Beach in Toronto, Canada.

Figure 10. Sugar Beach from Bird View Perspective

Sugar Beach is situated at the foot of Lower Jarvis Street close by the Redpath Sugar Factory, Toronto, Canada. The designer name is Claude Cormier and it has an area of 8,500 m 2 .

Sugar Beach is the first public open space which visitors can recognize when they walk along the Queens Quay from the central waterfront. The typology of this public open space is an urban beach which has a view of urban waterfronts and sometimes can be possible approached to the water environment such as river, lake, or sea (figure 10). Urban beaches usually not only accommodate a lot of people’s recreational and sport activities (i.e. jogging and cycling) but also support social activities (i.e. family and community gathering). It is the second urban beach designed for Toronto’s downtown waterfront, and the latest attachment to the amber necklace of Toronto’s beachscape.

Sugar beach can be identified as a new urban expansion in Toronto because it contains the waterfront areas which is reclaimed an old industrial or port areas. In this case, the derelict site of Redpath Sugar Factory (figure 11) which is an industrial area redevelops into a public open space. Responsively, Sugar Beach will increase the quality of landscape, ecological, and social aspect in the urban context and this area is becoming well designed environment than

10

before. Therefore, a lot of people from the diversity of age groups and gender are interested in visiting this public open space.

Figure 11. Sugar Beach Before Redevelopment (Redpath Sugar Factory Derelict Site)

The concept of the design for Sugar Beach illustrates at the time of the industrial heritage in the area and its connection to the adjoining Redpath Sugar factory (figure 12). The aroma of sugar in the air, and the park’s conceptual implication is experienced in both smell and sight. The characteristic of sugar as a concept was used to establish a language or communication for other components throughout this public open space. Moreover, the park has been designed to be fully accessible for people with disabilities through the design of ramp and wood ground at the beach area (figure 13). Therefore, this urban public open space environment which located at the waterfront supports all public accessibility in terms of disability.

Figure 12. Current Sugar Beach Environment Condition

Figure 13. Disabilities Facility at the Beach Area

11

Sugar Beach public open space endeavours a remarkable area which is the beach. The beach allows visitants to enjoy the morning or afternoon time as they play in the sand, relax on the beach chair, or watch boats on the sea and view the sunset panorama. A brightly coloured pink beach umbrellas which is one of the beach elements, giving a characteristic to the area and functional such as providing shade during the day (figure 14) and light up at the night (figure 15).

Another beach element is a dynamic water feature such as water fountain inserted into a granite floor and maple leaf trees next to the beach. That feature can be an alternative for cooling off the environment and giving an attention for adult and children to make fun activities within the space (figure 16). At the night, that interactive water feature transforms into a spectacle of illuminated light choreography and creates a beautiful scenery (figure 17).

Figure 14. Beach Atmosphere in the Daylight Time

Figure 15. Light at the Umbrella in the Night Time

Figure 16. Children Play at the Water Fountain in the Daylight

12

Figure 17. Water Fountain Spectacle of Illuminated Light Choreography

The plaza of the park area offers an active space for social public events. Plaza also become a place for children to play and people to enjoy and relax the atmosphere of the waterfront environment. There is a big granite rock outcropping (figure 18) and three grass mounds in the park area which create a nature amphitheatre as a seat for people to see an outdoor musical concerts on the stage, as well as benefit spot in the spaces between the mounds for smaller events. Through a unique event, such as its open-air public cinema session (include an inflatable big screen mounted on a customised barge) (figure 19). Therefore, Sugar Beach is becoming a dynamic and vibrant public open space and it has not only attained popularity, but cultural and social identity and value.

Figure 18. Big Granite Rock Outcropping as a Nature Amphitheatre

Figure 19. Open-air Public Cinema Session at the Park

13

Another area inside the Sugar Beach that well designed for people attraction is a promenade (figure 20). It is located between the plaza and the beach. Along the promenade which features granite cobblestones in a maple leaf mosaic motive, people usually walk through the park and sit on the bench to enjoy the views of the beach or plaza. Comfortable and sufficient seating and space furniture will rise people physical comfort. The promenade also lined and planted with maple, weeping willows, and white pines trees to provide a shaded route and make it cooler. The large soil volumes (30 m 3 ) in the berms and under the sand of each tree will protect that trees at Sugar Beach will be able to flourish their full potential to increase the environmental comfort encompasses relief from the sun.

Figure 20. Promenade Area at Sugar Beach

Analysis of the Cultural / Behavioural Aspects Generally, based on the author observation and experience, every public urban space environment has a minimum privacy and personal space due to the small or large group people activities happen in the same space. The differences of the ground surface levels and materials usually become the sign of the territorial boundaries of that public space with the surrounding environment. In addition, transformation of the time (i.e. day time and night time), weather (e.g. sunny, windy, and rainy) and season (e.g. summer and winter) in every country will also affect the number of visitors, the diversity of people activities, and also the cultural and behavioural aspects of individual who visit that urban space environment.

The method to recognize and determine the cultural and behavioural aspects in this case study, that the author used are analysing and identifying through the behavioural contemplating setting pictures selection that derived from various online sources. By doing that method, it means that the author select a human behaviour phenomena picture from online sources which relate to the case study context in abstract terms and change it into concrete terms through the author’s interpretation between people and the place that had been chosen. In this section, to clarify that aspects easily, the author divides this Sugar Beach into two specific area (i.e. beach and promenade). Moreover, to extent of knowing the people privacy and personal space in the

14

urban space environment, the physical design at the Sugar Beach including arrangement of boundaries, levels, and configuration of space furniture should support people activities. In other words, the way in which the physical design in the Sugar Beach allows users to personalize the physical environment while offering reasonable territorial actions opportunities in support activities and demand on activities.

Figure 21. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Images at the Beach Area

The first behavioural contemplating setting images is located in the beach area inside the Sugar Beach. It can be seen in the image that the beach area has a spacious space area to accomodate a wide variety of people who visit the park and it happens in the afternoon and summer time where a number of people have gathered to enjoy the sun for a recreational purpose. That picture also reflects a variety of people activities such as lay on the sand for sunbathing and seat on the beach chair for relaxation, however a main focus which has been discussed before is about personal space, privacy and territorial behaviour. It shows the need of people to reach out for maximum of each behaviour aspect available.

Figure 22. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Sketches at the Beach Area

15

Based on the sketches picture, each one pink umbrella occupied by one group whether it is an individual or a group (2 people) seat on the beach chair or even neither. It means that each umbrella can be identified as a personal or group privacy. The distance between one umbrella to the other can control the level of proximity relationships. It looks like more than 1.2 meters and below 3.7 meters. Thus, it indicates on the category of social space. Therefore, the social interaction between people who sit under each umbrella will recognize easily. However, the one that lay on the sand create a personal space and privacy by giving a distance with the person who sit near by. Otherwise, each beach chair inside the umbrella has a little space and it is on the level of intimate and personal space (less than 1.2 meter). On the other hand, the pink umbrella also can be identified as a personal territorial because it shows a place of belongings through the furniture to claim people‘s ownership. The length of the wide opening umbrella is the reason behind the territoriality action responses. Indirectly, that urban furniture controlled to defend against intrusion by others and reflect the occupation portion of individual space.

Figure 23. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Images at the Promenade Area

The second behavioural contemplating setting images located in the promenade area inside the Sugar Beach. It reflects a diversity of behaviours expressed (one man sit on the ground, one man sit on the bench with head bowed focussing on his mobile phone and a couple sit not further from the man on the same bench talking to each other) in the existence of that setting within the urban space environment.

The man who sit on the ground is focusing to see the beach area but those who sit on the bench are not paying attention to their surroundings. As a result, the visual interaction is only made to pedestrians when they walk past them.

Figure 24. Behavioural Contemplating Setting Sketches at the Promenade Area

16

Based on the sketches picture, a couple who sit on the bench is giving a distance to the man who sit alone in the corner. It means they are creating a personal space and privacy (45 centimeters until 1.2 meters) because that couple is already in the intimate space (less than 45 centimeters) and do not want to get disturb by the others. Responsively, that bench is giving a territoriality to the space of surrouding environment and become a signage for people if the bench can be occupied by visitors with a limited number. In other words, the man who sit on the ground is not only has his intimate space but he also creating a space for his privacy and discouraging interaction with the others. Therefore, the social interaction is commonly happen in the public space, especially in this case is on the pedestrian walk in the promenade area because the proximity relationships evel is more extensive and comprehensive.

17

1.4

Conclusion Through this assignment, the author learned a relationship and connection between the physical

characteristics of the built environment such as building or architectural and urban space environment with the human cultural and behavioural aspects. In this case, the author chose the urban space environment because it relates to the author course background which is urban design and the typology that author selected was urban spaces at waterfronts. In addition, there were three phases to achieve the main goal of this assignment. First stage is the author should identify the general knowledge or information about the physical characteristics of the urban space at waterfronts environment. Then, the author should determine the human cultural and behavioural phenomena which happen in that environment in a general way not in the specific case. In the end, the author should choose one example of an urban space at waterfronts as a case study to analyse critically both physical characteristic and human behavioural phenomena, respectively.

First section in this assignment is describing the general knowledge and principle about the physical characteristics of the urban space environment at waterfronts. Generally, urban waterfronts are an integrated element of the development of human inhabitancy in an urban context. Watercourses such as lake, river, and ocean are together with their following edges control a significant role within the structure of the urban environment. Moreover, the urban design element such as parks, streets, and other type of public spaces also engage in establishing a complicated inner structure of the urban organism.

However, urban waterfronts are exclusively become a point where the city land and the landscape meet.

Waterfronts locations responsively create an interrelationship with the surrounding architectural design, spatial requirement, segmentation of public transport and straightforwardly associate with the inner working of the urban environment. In addition, urban space at waterfronts eventually reflect current citizen cultural and social values.

In order to understand the cultural and behavioural aspects in the design of urban space environment especially at waterfronts on the second section, the author should know about the differences people’s physical and psychological comfort level within the built environment. Locals and visitors which also individual or group users are the fundamental connections to that public open space they will be visiting in. On the other hand, if they cannot follow this connec tion, they will easily either move to other place until it reflects if not their convenience, relatively their inconvenience, and in both conditions their attitude of existence. People intrinsically distinguish their interrelationships with others in terms of distances or spaces length. Therefore, a lot of previous research were defining that each personal comfort zone into seve ral factors such as privacy, proximity relationships or personal space, and territoriality.

The purpose of the case study selection in the third section is to give more explanation about the integration between the physical attributes characteristic of the urban space environment (urban waterfronts) which had been identified in the previous part with the human

18

cultural and behavioural aspect. The case study is Sugar Beach in Toronto, Canada. The reason behind the example selection is that urban space waterf ronts is a regeneration city project which transform the Redpath Sugar Factory’s derelict space into well designed public open space.

Sugar Beach has two special main area which is promenade and beach space, and both area is providing many urban furniture (physical attributes) such as benches, trees, lamp lights, pink umbrellas, big outcropping rock (as an amphitheatre and mini stage), and water fountains.

Responsively, all of the physical design elements are influencing the visitor behaviour such as their privacy, personal space and territoriality.

Based on the analysis part of the behavioural aspect by doing the behavioural contemplating setting method, the author selects the beach and promenade area because that space become the important area in Sugar Beach. At the beach area, the presence of the pink umbrellas is contributing a significant potential to evolve the territorial behaviour and become a natural boundary of each person who is standing or sitting on the beach chair under the umbrella. Moreover, the configuration of that beach chair (side to side) is also presenting an intimate space between them. Therefore, the personal space and territoriality behavioural under the umbrella is being identified, respectively.

On the other hand, the promenade area also contributes an adequate capability to the human behavioural factor. In this case, the presence of the benches along the promenade and the differences of the ground level between the wood promenade floor and beach area are providing a variety of visitor activities, proximity relationships and territory instantly. From this area, the author learned that to define that human behavioural phenomena do not always need placing objects for identification and it happens naturally from every individual. Moreover, the sitting position of people is also giving an intention of interacting with the surrounding. If they are sitting closely on the single bench wit hout enough space, it means that they are creating an intimate space and enlarge the range of their territo rial, vice versa. However, all the open space area at Sugar Beach is influenced by the diversity of human behavioural aspects.

As a result, through all the sections in this assignment and the material in the class, the author learned that if the designer or architect want to create a better environments and quality of life for the users, they should involve the participation of people through their b ehaviour or perception with the all the design aspects. The purpose of understanding the human cultural behavioural aspect (i.e. privacy, personal space, and territoriality) in the architectural or urban space environment is to consider the individual inner conditions such as physiological and psychological aspect. Moreover, every human behaviour has a various characteristic, thus as a designer we should respect and consider it in our implication of future architectural or urban space design environment.

19

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Altman, I. and Chemers, M., 1984. Culture and Environment. Monterey Calif.: Books/Cole Publication.

Breen, A. and Rigby, D., 1994. Waterfronts: Cities Reclaim Their Edge. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, p.

256.

Dong, L., 2004. Waterfront Development: A Case Study of Dalian. Master of Applied Environmental Studies in Local Economic Development - Tourism Policy and Planning, University of Waterloo, Canada, p. 159.

Explorewaterfrontoronto.ca. 2020. Canada’s Sugar Beach | Waterfront Toronto. [online] Available at: <http://www.explorewaterfrontoronto.ca/project/canadas-sugar-beach/> [Accessed 10 April 2020].

Gehll, J., 2000. Život mezi budovami: uživani veřejnych prostranstvi. 1st. ed. Brno: Nadace Partnerstvi, p.

202, ISBN 80-858-3479-0.

Trending

City.

2020. Sugar

Beach,

Toronto

—

Trending

City.

[online]

Available

at:

<https://www.trendingcity.org/sugar-beach-toronto-1> [Accessed 10 April 2020].

Sommer, Robert., 1969. Personal Space: The Behavioural Basis of Design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey the American Planning Association, p. 53.

Wittmann, M., 2008. Fenomen vodniho prvku v kontextu rozvoje současnych měst. Shortened habitation thesis. Brno: Vysoke učeni technicke v Brně, p. 31, ISBN 978-80-214-3799-9.

Wrenn, D. M., Casazza, J. A., Smart, J. E., 1983. Urban Waterfront Development, Urban Land Institute, Washington, p. 218.

Yassin, A. B., Bond, S., McDonagh, J., 2012. Principles for Sustainable Riverfront Development for Malaysia. Journal of Techno-Social Vol.4 No.1 ISSN:2229-8940, p. 21-36.

Yassin, A. B., Eves, C. and McDonagh, J., 2010. An Evolution of Waterfront Development in Malaysia.

16th Pacific Rim Real Estate Society Conference Wellington, p. 1-17.

20