affordances of cul-de-sac in urban neighborhoods as...
TRANSCRIPT
AFFORDANCES OF CUL-DE-SAC IN URBAN
NEIGHBORHOODS AS PLAY SPACES FOR MIDDLE
CHILDHOOD CHILDREN
SUMAIYAH BINTI OTHMAN
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
AFFORDANCES OF CUL-DE-SAC IN URBAN
NEIGHBORHOODS AS PLAY SPACES FOR MIDDLE
CHILDHOOD CHILDREN
SUMAIYAH BINTI OTHMAN
A dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of
Master of Urban Design
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
APRIL 2010
v
ABSTRACT
Cul-de-sac does not have to be defined as a dead-end or some refer it as a lost
space. Even though it is heavily criticized by urban designers and other experts for
encouraging car transport for even short distances, as more direct connections are cut off
by the dead-end geometry which requires long travel distances even to physically nearby
locations and can caused great difficulty with turning around for bus or in emergency
situation. Sometimes, this informal space can have more utilitarian that often unnoticed
by adults. This study is to investigate and identify the affordances and potential of cul-
de-sac design in urban neighborhoods rather than just a defensible space in housing
layout but as play spaces for middle childhood children in Malaysia. Data of the children
behavioural responses were elicited using research design called observational study
with paired data; comparing the differences of the children’s functioning in two cul-de-
sacs. This study investigates the middle childhood children, on the utilization of cul-de-
sac in their home or neighbouring area. Responses of eighty-two (n=82) children aged 6-
12 were gathered from two sources: children and parents using three methods –semi-
structured interviews, observation and survey questionnaire. The methods were
conducted at cul-de-sac near their home and neighbouring cul-de-sac in two
neighborhood in urban areas. The first area was at housing neighbourhood at Jalan Bakti,
Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor that was characterized by its modern houses and has cul-de-
sac at the end of its streets. Meanwhile the other site was at Taman Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content
analysis. This study suggests that it is not the aesthetic design of the cul-de-sac but
caregiver’s permission and the affordances of sociality that encourage the children to
play in the cul-de-sac. This study implies that children in Taman Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor ventures more to be physically and socially interactive compared to
children in Jalan Bakti, Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor where the monotonous properties in
their cul-de-sacs afforded the children to be less active to play but socially active with
their peers. This study will help to give different view how adults specially professionals
can interpret and not be underestimated the cul-de-sac design in housing layout as
children play spaces.
vi
ABSTRAK
Cul-de-sac tidak sepatutnya ditafsirkan sebagai jalan mati atau ruang yang
hilang. Rekabentuk ini kerap kali dikritik oleh perancang bandar serta pihak
professional bahawa ia menggalakkan kepada penggunaan kenderaan untuk jarak
yang pendek, terlalu banyak jalan pintas yang dipotong oleh rekabentuk geometrinya
yang menyebabkan penambahan kepada jarak perjalanan walaupun secara zahirnya
adalah dekat, malah rekabentuk ini juga menyebabkan kenderaan besar sukar
melakukan pusingan-u terutamanya semasa waktu kecemasan. Namun, kadang-kala
rekabentuk ruang seperti ini mempunyai fungsi yang tersirat selain sebagai fungsi
asalnya. Oleh itu, kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji serta mengenal pasti pemangkin
serta potensi cul-de-sac di perumahan kawasan Bandar yang bukan sahaja sebagai
kawalan rekabentuk jalan di kawasan perumahan tetapi juga boleh dijadikan sebagai
ruang alternative untuk kanak-kanak bermain di Malaysia. Data berkaitan persepsi
kanak-kanak dikumpul menggunakan kaedah pemerhatian secara individual dan
secara berkumpulan. Kajian ini meneliti penggunaan ruang cul-de-sac oleh kanak-
kanak di kawasan perumahan sendiri dan di persekitaran mereka. Maklumat daripada
lapan puluh dua kanak-kanak berusia 6 hingga 12 tahun berjaya dikumpulkan dari
dua sumber: kanak-kanak dan penjaga dengan menggunakan tiga kaedah:
wawancara, pemerhatian dan soalan bancian. Kajian ini dilakukan di dua kawasan
perumahan yang berbeza. Pertama di kawasan perumahan di Jalan Bakti, Taman
Mutiara Rini, Johor yang mempunyai rumah teres moden serta cul-de-sac di setiap
hujung jalan. Kawasan kedua pula di kawasan perumahan di Taman Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor. Data dianalisis menggunakan kaedah statistik deskriptif dan
analisis isi maklumat. Kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa bukan faktor estetika rekaan
sesebuah cul-de-sac yang diutamakan oleh kanak-kanak tetapi izin daripada penjaga
dan faktor pemangkin dari segi pergaulan yang mendorong kanak-kanak untuk
bermain di cul-de-sac. Kajian menunjukkan bahawa kanak-kanak di Taman Lagenda,
Bukit Jelutong, Selangor menjelajah lebih secara fizikal untuk bermain serta bergaul
vii
dengan rakan-rakan walaupun mempunyai rekaan ruang cul-de-sac yang menarik
berbanding di Jalan Bakti, Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor di mana rekaan ruang cul-de-
sac yang terhad menjadikan kanak-kanak di situ kurang aktif untuk bermain tetapi
hanya untuk bergaul dengan rakan-rakan mereka. Kajian ini akan membantu
memberikan pandangan serta persepsi yang berbeza bagaimana orang dewasa
khususnya para profesional dapat dalam menafsirkan serta tidak meremehkan ruang
cul-de-sac dalam rekabentuk serta susun atur dalam perumahan sebagai ruang
tambahan untuk kanak –kanak bermain.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES xv
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.0. Introduction 1
1.1. Aim of Study 5
1.2. Research Objectives 6
1.3. Research Questions 6
1.4. Scope and Limitations 6
1.5. Statement of Problem 7
1.6. Literature Background 9
1.7. Scope of Study and Variables 10
1.7.1. Middle Childhood Children 10
1.7.2 Investigating on Children’s Functioning in
and Housing with Cul-de-sac in Jalan Bakti,
Mutiara Rini, Johor Bahru and Lagenda,
Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
11
1.7.3 Affordances of Cul-de-sac as Play Space 11
ix
1.7.4 Independent and Dependent Variables 11
1.8. Dissertation Outline 12
1.8.1. Literature Review 12
1.8.2. Synthesis of Theories on Affordances of
Children in Outdoor (Cul-de-sac)
14
1.8.3. Methods 14
a. Viewing Man-made Hardscape Elements
and Softscape Available at Cul-de-sac as
Affordances, Stimulator and Interaction’s
Feedbacks
15
b. Experiencing the Outdoor (Cul-de-sac)
through Play Activities
16
1.8.4 Findings and Discussions 16
2 LITERATURE REVIEW: CHILDREN’S BEHAVIOUR
AND THEORIES ON CHILDREN PLAY IN OUTDOOR
ENVIRONMENT
18
2.0. Introduction 18
2.1. Meaning of Terms 18
2.1.1. Affordances 19
2.1.2. Theory of Affordances 19
2.1.3. Taxonomy of Affordances 20
2.1.4. Types of Affordances 22
2.1.5. Levels of Affordances 22
2.1.6. Affordances of Phenomenal Landscape for
Children
24
2.2. Middle Childhood Children 24
2.3. Children’s Behavior in Outdoor Environment 25
2.3.1 Behavior Settings 26
2.4. Definition of Play 27
x
2.1.1. Types of Play 28
2.1.2. Children’s Play Behaviors 30
2.5. Summary of Children’s Play Behavior in Outdoor
Environment
32
2.6. Cul-de-sac in Urban Housing 32
2.6.1. Terrace Housing 33
2.6.2. The Ubiquitous Terrace House 34
2.7. Cul-de-sac 34
2.7.1. Types and Patterns 36
2.7.2. Summary 38
2.8. Conclusion 38
3 METHODOLOGY 40
3.0. Introduction 40
3.1. Study Area 40
3.1.1. Criteria for The Setting of Study 40
3.1.2. Background and Location of The Study
Area
42
a. Study Area 1: Jalan Bakti, Taman
Mutiara Rini, Johor
42
b. Study Area 2: Taman Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor
46
3.2. Research Design 51
3.3. Data Collection 52
3.3.1. Participants 53
3.3.2. Data Collection Methods 54
3.3.2.1. Semi-structured Interview 54
3.3.2.2. On-site Observation 55
3.3.2.3. Instruments 55
3.4. Data Analysis 56
xi
3.4. Descriptive Statistics 56
3.4. Content Analysis 57
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 60
4.0. Introduction 60
4.1. Levels of Participation in Cul-de-sac 60
4.2. Categories of Affordances in Cul-de-sac 67
4.3. Taxonomy of Affordances 67
a. Taxonomy of Affordances of Cul-de-sac for
Jalan Bakti, Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor
68
a. Taxonomy of Affordances of Cul-de-sac for
Taman Lagenda, Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
69
4.4. Levels of Affordances 76
4.5. Conclusion 78
5 CONCLUSION 79
5.0. Introduction 79
5.1. Children’s Cul-de-sac Preference Between Home and
Neighbouring Cul-de-sac
79
5.2. Natural Elements (Vegetations and Animals) as Actual
Affordances
81
5.3. Implication on Neighborhoods Design and Planning of
Cul-de-sacs for Children’s Play Space
82
REFERENCES 84
APPENDIX 88
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
2.1 A functional taxonomy of affordances 21
3.1 Summary of Attributes in Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor and
in Taman Lagenda, Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
51
3.2 Negotiation strategies concept developed by Ismail (2006)
during survey
53
3.3 Analysis of children’s words or phrases in their activities in
outdoor environment
59
4.1 Children participation at culdesac in Taman Mutiara Rini,
Johor and Taman Lagenda, Bukit Jelutong, Selangor (n =
82)
61
4.2 Measurement of Cul-de-sac preference in Taman Lagenda,
Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
62
4.3 Measurement of Cul-de-sac preference in Taman Mutiara
Rini, Johor
65
4.4 The result of taxonomy of affordances for Jalan Bakti,
Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor
68
4.5 The result of taxonomy of affordances for Taman Lagenda,
Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
69
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
1.1 Schematic relationship of children and cul-de-sac 12
1.2 Research Method Flow Chart 13
2.1 An examples of conventional row housing and the linear
approach to planning
33
2.2 An example of cul-de-sac housing scheme in Malaysia 35
2.3 An example of typical cul-de-sac design in Malaysia 37
2.4 An example of cul-de-sac in loop street with and green
island in the middle
37
3.1 Location of Taman Mutiara Rini in Johor Bahru 42
3.2 Masterplan of development in Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor
Bahru
42
3.3 Masterplan of development at Parcel 3 in Taman Mutiara
Rini, Johor Bahru
43
3.4 Site plan of the study area in Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor 44
3.5 View from the green linkage towards one of the cul-de-sac 44
3.6 There is a shelter at the end of the cul-de-sac 45
3.7 There is pergola at the end of the cul-de-sac 45
3.8 Location of Bukit Jelutong, Shah Alam in Selangor 47
3.9 The location of Taman Lagenda, Bukit Jelutong, Selangor 47
3.10 The site of the case study in Taman Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor
48
3.11 The cul-de-sac has mound in the green island 48
3.12 The longest cul-de-sac has a long oval shape green island
in the middle
49
3.13 A shelter is provided in the green island 49
3.14 The smallest cul-de-sac in Taman Lagenda 49
xiv
4.1 Do you like this space (cul-de-sac)? Why? 63
4.2 Who follows you to the cul-de-sac? 64
4.3 Children at Taman Lagenda usually accompanied by their
caregivers hen playing in the cul-de-sac
64
4.4 Do you like this space (cul-de-sac)? Why? 66
4.5 Who follows you to the cul-de-sac? 66
4.6 Children affords to play at the flat, relatively smooth
surface area
70
4.7 Positives and Negatives Affordances at Taman Mutiara
Rini and Taman Lagenda
71
4.8 Affordances of cul-de-sac for middle childhood children at
Jalan Bakti, Taman Mutiara Rini, Johor and cul-de-sac at
Taman Lagenda, Bukit Jelutong, Selangor
74
4.9 Levels of affordances of the children at Taman Mutiara
Rini and at Taman Lagenda
76
4.10 Children’s actual affordances in Taman Mutiara Rini and
Taman Lagenda
77
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX. TITLE PAGE
I Individual and Group Interview Form 88
II Caregivers Interview Form 93
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
In their everyday lives, children largely stay within and relate to three settings
– their homes, schools and recreational institutions. These environments have been
created by adults and designated by them as ‘places for children’. The concept
‘children’s places’ to explain the fact that children relate not only to official places
provided by adults, but also to informal places, often unnoticed by adults.
(Rasmussen, 2004)
It is unfortunate that children cannot design their outdoor play environments.
Research of children’s preferences shows that if children had the design skills to do
so, their creations would be completely different from the areas they called
playground that the adults design for them (Valentine and McKendrick, 1997).
Outdoor spaces designed by children would not only be fully naturalized with plants,
trees, flowers, water, dirt, and, mud, animals and insects, but also would be rich with
a wide variety of play opportunities of every imaginable type. If children could
design their outdoor spaces, they would be rich developmentally appropriate learning
environments where children would stay all day (White, Stoecklin, 1998).
2
The world once offered thousands of delights of free play to children.
Children used to have access to the world at large, whether it was the sidewalks,
streets, alleys, vacant lots and parks of the inner city or the fields, forests, streams
and yards of suburbia and the rural countryside. Children could play, explore and
interact with the natural world with little or no restriction or supervision.
The lives of children today are much more structured and supervised with
few opportunities for free play. Their physical boundaries for independent play have
shrunk. A number of factors have led to this. Parents are afraid for their children's
safety when they leave the house alone; many children are no longer free to roam
their neighborhoods or even their own yards unless accompanied by adults. Some
working families cannot supervise their children after school, giving rise to latchkey
children who stay indoors or attend supervised after-school activities. Furthermore,
children's lives have become structured and scheduled by adults, who hold the
mistaken belief that this sport or that lesson will make their children more successful
as adults.
Children have little time for free play any more. And when children do have
free time, it is often spent inside in front of the television or computers. For some
children, that's because their neighborhood, apartment complex or house has no
outdoor play spaces. With budgets for city and state governments slashed, public
parks and outdoor playgrounds have deteriorated and been abandoned (Valentine and
McKendrick, 1997). Children's opportunities to interact in a naturalized outdoor
setting are greatly diminished today.
Childhood and outdoor play are no longer synonymous. Today, many
children live what one play authority has referred to as a childhood of imprisonment,
child care facility playgrounds are often the only outdoor activities that many young
children experience anymore (White, Stoecklin, 1998).
3
No one knows if this generation of children who lack outdoor play will
develop normally (Rivkin, 2006) but there are suggestions that certain positive
developmental characteristics may be related to outdoor play (Moore, 1990, Moore
and Cosco, 2004).
There is also strong evidence that young children respond more positively to
experiences in the outdoors than adults as they have not yet adapted to unnatural,
man-made, indoor environments. Outdoor environments are also important to
children's development of independence and autonomy. Outdoor space allows
children to gradually experiment with increasing distance from their caretaker. While
the development of greater independence from toddlerhood to middle childhood can
happen within the confines of indoor spaces, safe space outdoors greatly adds to the
ability of children to naturally experiment with independence and separation, and the
adult's willingness to trust the child's competence which is essential for separation to
happen. This is particularly important for children who live in small and crowded
homes.
Children's outdoor play is different from time spent indoors. The sensory
experiences are different, and different standards of play apply. Activities which may
be frowned on indoors can be safely tolerated outdoors. Children have greater
freedom not only to run and shout, but also to interact with and manipulate the
environment. Children are free to do 'messy' activities outdoors that would not be
tolerated indoors.
Systematically, Francis and Lorenzo (2002) introduced a hierarchy of
children play areas with regard to their typology of designed and planned places such
as institutional places, public spaces, privates spaces, found places, found/off limits
places, wilderness, and new and innovative spaces instead of the eight categories of
common immediate places of children’s outdoor activities starting from doorstep
4
play, road and pavements, paved and access areas, gardens, planted areas, wild areas,
grassed areas and unfamiliar places outlined by Littlewood and Sale (1973).
The urban children similarly interact with these elements. However, they are
seen as forced and persuaded to play in playgrounds and engaged with fixed
equipments. In outdoor environment, the urban children engaged with various spaces
as their playscape such as green spaces, open spaces, abandoned spaces, wild spaces
and many more. However, the urban range roaming are seen as restricted due to
parent concern of stranger, criminal, distances, surveillances and parent of sense of
familiarity of spaces (Hallden, 2003; Bjorklid, 1984; 1985).
In most situation, as safety are the main concern by adults on children playing
at outdoor, where the location of open space or playground are usually not located
nearby but yet quite far and the needs to cross the main road is terrified by the adults.
Finding ways to encourage children to play in outdoor area is crucial rather than
discourage by the safety issues. Currently developers are incorporating more
landscape features to encourage a more interesting and pleasant outdoor environment
such as larger green space with lush greenery, more playground rather than just one
centralized playgrounds, wider road curbs and even cul-de-sac at certain properties.
As an alternative for outdoor play area, the street: a cul-de-sac is a potentially
to be a play space because of its near location. It is a good approach to recreate the
best elements of village and small-town life where children can play outside our
homes with friends without fear from crime and traffic, in a community where
people know and talk to each other who are trying to create a more suitable
environment for the “kampong boy of the future” – something better than our
existing terrace houses. These housing types can deliver all the benefits of the cul-de-
sac housing environment (Mazlin Ghazali, 2007).
5
Asabere (1990), the cul-de-sac is essentially a dead-end street with a turn-
around at the end for cars and may be considered a desirable street layout because:
First, it allows for flexibility in the arrangement and orientation of homes, and
provides for creativity in spatial arrangements. A cul-de-sac can be used for odd
corners and subdivision or where topography and natural features make other street
patterns difficult to employ (McKeever, 1968). Second, the cul-de-sac is reported to
facilitate the fear of a criminal, folklore has it that houses at the corners or bocks are
frequently broken into because they offer many escapes route. Third, the cul-de-sac
reduces pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile traffic which decreases the negative
externalities (noise, dirt, fumes etc.) of that activity. Lastly, neighbors around cul-de-
sac may be more socially integrated than those located on traditional gridiron
patterns, since the cul-de-sac neighbourhood is well defined and small.
This study is to investigate whether a cul-de-sac can potentially be an
alternative play space for children. This study is divided into two parts which is the
literature regarding children participation with the outdoor environment in urban
setting. Secondly, it evaluates the levels of affordances, taxonomy of affordances and
types of affordances in the cul-de-sac of the urban setting.
1.1 Aim of Study
The aim of the study is to investigate the affordance cul-de-sac in giving an
alternative play space for children in urban housing area.
.
6
1.2 Research Objectives
The research objectives of the study are:-
i. To examine the level of participation of middle childhood children at cul-de-sac
as an alternative play space; and
ii. To evaluate the significances of cul-de-sac according to its affordances for
middle childhood children to play.
1.3 Research Questions
This study seeks to answer the following questions:
i. What are the cul-de-sac elements that afford interactive activities for urban
children?
ii. How does cul-de-sac help to improve the urban neighborhood?
1.4 Scope and Limitations
The children as user in the outdoor environment are dependent variable.
Thus, the urban settings, soft and hardscape elements are the independent variable.
Both residential layout, linear and clustered, offered different opportunities for
children to play at cul-de-sac. In the context of children playing outside, cul-de-sacs
are viewed as potential spaces for children to play, explore or mobilize and socialize
with peers. However, this different design layout of cul-de-sac offers different
movements and patterns for children utilizing spaces. The properties as materials
offer opportunities for children to demonstrate their skills and abilities in the cul-de-
sac that regulated sensory and motoric actions. Hence, this study evaluates the
7
similarities of the behavioural responses of the urban children in the outdoor relative
to play in cul-de-sac.
The study focuses mainly on the accessibility and utilization of open spaces
(cul-de-sac) that can generate vitality to the area. The study does not deal with
behaviours due to differences of gender, effect of play equipments, ethnic, socio-
economic status, types of terrace house, and cultural background. This is because this
study only covered the following variables (i) urban setting, (ii) cul-de-sac design
layout and (iii) parental concern of allowing children to play in outdoor environment
that may play important roles in children’s functioning.
1.5 Problem Statement
In Malaysia, the housing layout has also become stereotyped since 1990’s. In
the typical estate, the terrace houses are lined up along grid-lines with 40 feet service
roads in front and much narrower back lanes and side lanes. Communal areas for
schools, civic and religious buildings, as well as open areas for children’s
playgrounds and parks, are also provided. Despite the infrastructure provided, it can
be said that the design of many housing estates does not really meet the practical
needs of the average resident. Apart from the aesthetic boredom of rows and rows of
houses, among the drawbacks of the terrace house layout is the lack of public
security and any genuine sense of community. With the rising price of land in urban
areas, many people are resigned to apartments. The terrace house, for all its
drawbacks, has been elevated to the status of a dream-home (Mazlin Ghazali, 2007).
Rasmussen (2004), children largely stay within and relate to three settings –
their homes, schools and recreational institutions in their everyday lives. These
environments have been created by adults and designated by them as ‘places for
children’. The concept ‘children’s places’ to explain the fact that children relate not
8
only to official places provided by adults, but also to informal places, often unnoticed
by adults.
A ‘culture of fear’ has parents afraid or concerns for their children’s safety.
Due to ‘stranger danger’, many children are no longer free to roam their
neighbourhoods or even their own yards unless accompanied by adults (Pyle, 2002;
Herrington and Studtmann, 1998, Moore and Wong, 1997). Children’s lives have
become structured and scheduled by adults, who hold the mistaken belief that this
sport or that lesson will make their children more successful as adults (Moore and
Wong 1997, White and Stoecklin, 2004). The culture of childhood that focuses on
outside played is gone and children’s everyday life has shifted to the indoors (Hart,
1999). One researcher has gone so far as to refer to this sudden shift in children’s
lives and their loss of free play in the outdoors as a ‘childhood of imprisonment’
(Francis, 1998). Childhood and regular play in the natural world are no longer
synonymous. Pyle (1993, pg.5) calls this the ‘extinction of experience’, which breeds
apathy towards environmental concerns.
Then come the cul-de-sac concept in housing scheme which currently be
applied in Malaysia which no holistically research been done so far to shows it
successful. Of course houses in cul-de-sacs are very much sought after in countries
like the US and Australia but cul-de-sac also has always be criticized because its has
some unintentional effects to the residents, but in Malaysia, the ‘horse-shoe layout’
of high-cost detached houses in Subang Jaya has been heralded as an innovative
design that has sadly not been repeated elsewhere. According to Sime Uep Sdn. Bhd.
which is Subang Jaya’s developer, the housing with the cul-de-sac design generated
29 percent price premium of home values over the housing with just grid street
pattern. There is no empirical evidence confirming the view that the neighbourhood
street type has an impact on people’s well being but here we can see that the impact
of street type on well-being can be measured through its indirect effect on property
values.
9
1.6 Literature Background
Children competence in outdoor indicates that they have desires and abilities
for more complex, challenging and exciting play environments than the traditional
playgrounds usually offered them. It means that the physical environment plays a
vital role in the growth and development of young children (Striniste and Moore,
1989). Through the physical environment, children demonstrate their physical and
social skill abilities. Acting in the outdoor environment is namely related to play.
Therefore, play is a reflection of and an influence on all areas of children’s
development—the vehicle by which they communicate, socialize, learn about the
world, understand themselves and other people, deal with their problems, and
practice skills that may be of use to them later in life (Hughes, 1995).
In this research, the importance of play is considered as an essential part of
children’s growth and development. Play influences children’s social, physical and
cognitive development and it is also a medium for children to show their response to
their living environment. It is a tool for them to socialize, to learn and to express
themselves. It permits children to learn about the environment through their own
senses, imagination and experimentation (White and Stoecklin, 1997). Play had
always been an important element in children’s lives and continues to mirror their
overall pattern of social, physical and cognitive development (Fromberg, 2002).
Play activities with peer offer exciting and enjoyable games called social
play. Social play relates to interaction situation with peers, whereby children could
gain reciprocal relationship such as sharing, cooperating, turn taking and the ability
to understand the rules of play. Therefore, activities involve children manipulating
materials as tools in play. In the environment, tools afford affordances for the
children (environment as a set of affordances) which relates to physical activities.
The affordances are the functional meaning of the setting and its content for the
children to play and perceive its benefits and adversities.
10
This study is to study how the urban children interaction and play with the
outdoor elements and the level of participation of the children in urban area based on
the area (cul-de-sac) and the settings available.
1.7 Scope of Study and Variables
The scope of the study comprises of middle childhood children and their
caretaker as the respondents, study on children in double storey residential in urban
settings, children interaction with available spaces at street in front of their house,
and affordances of cul-de-sac as play space.
1.7.1 Middle Childhood Children
The study emphasized on middle childhood children, aged 6-12 years, in
urban setting as its respondent. This age group begun to venture beyond the
immediate vicinity of the home environment and play becomes a reality (Rivkin,
1990; Pyle, 2002). Middle childhood is the most important stage of children
development, whereby their social, cognitive, emotional and motor development gain
a logical and positive perception of becoming adolescences and adults (Moore, 1978;
Matthews, 1987). In urban areas, children who are frequently in contact with man-
made structures are inspired to discover and explore new qualities and quantities of
environment (Kytta, 2004; Heft, 1999).
11
1.7.2 Investigating on Children’s Functioning in and Housing with Cul-de-sac
in Jalan Bakti, Mutiara Rini, Johor Bahru and Lagenda, Bukit
Jelutong, Selangor.
This study examines the three functioning, physical, cognitive and social
skills related to outdoor environment and perception of spaces. The different design
quality of housing areas and the houses was described and predicted children’s
potential and opportunities to play in outdoor space (cul-de-sac) and interact with
properties. This enables to determine children’s properties in the cul-de-sac and
significance of play.
1.7.3 Affordances of Cul-de-sac as Play Space
This study examines the affordances of the cul-de-sac as children’s outdoor
space for children to play. The theory that developed by Kytta (2002; 2003) and Heft
(1999) categorized the affordances into three domains of affordances: levels of
affordances, taxonomy of affordances and types of affordances. These domains were
used to measure children’s potential and opportunities in outdoor environment as
playscape. The affordances were measured through children’s movement and social
activities in the cul-de-sac. Therefore, activities in the cul-de-sac involves with
perceived, utilized and shape the objects. Through the quantity of affordances, the
results showed potential of cul-de-sac which afforded affordances for children.
1.7.4 Independent and Dependent Variables
The independent variables of this study are urban, cul-de-sac at home and
neighbouring cul-de-sac. The dependent variable is the middle childhood children
12
(Figure 1.1). Through interaction in the cul-de-sac and with properties are able to
shift is children functioning, physical and social skills in the outdoor environment.
Figure 1.1: Schematic relationship of children and cul-de-sac
Dependent Variable Middle Childhood
Children
Affect
Functioning
Realms of environment experience
Independent Variables • Urban • home’s cul-de-sac and • neighbouring cul-de-sac
• Physical
• Social
1.8 Dissertation Outline
The dissertation outline is divided into five stages; i) Literature Review –
Cul-de-sac, Theories on Affordances of Children in Outdoor ii) Methods, iii)
Findings and Discussions, and iv) Conclusion (Figure 1.2).
1.8.1 Literature Review
This stage gathered information on concept, theories, models and frameworks
of children assessment on outdoor properties and attributes that influenced the
children behaviour towards the environment, method of behavioural evaluation, and
comparisons of urban and rural children garden perceptions. Theories on children-
environment relationship are studied from several fields including environmental
psychology, children psychology, and research methodology. The subjects of the
study were discussed in the following topics: (i) children behaviour and environment
13
Goal and Objectives
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Midd oole childh dchildren
Properties of Terrace housing
Properties of Cul-de-sac
Children behavior in outdoor
environment
DEFINE CUL-DE-SAC AS APLAY SPACE
Comparison of Case Study
SYNTHESIS AND FINDING
Strategy in Improving thSpaces for Middle
e Potential of Cul-de-sac as Play Childhood Children
Summary
DATA ANALYSIS Photographic map, Photograph, Interview, Observation
Potential and Constraint of Cul-de-sac as Play Spaces for Middle Childhood Children
Summary
Background and Location
Area Physical Design Layout
Physical and Social Interaction
Summary
Stage I Preliminary Study
Stage II Literature Review
Stage III Case Study and Site Survey
Stage IV Data Analysis
Stage V Finding and Recommendation
Define and Design
Synthesis & Conclusion
Prepare, Collect & Analyze
Figure1.2: Research Method Flow Chart
14
(ii) urban children perception on outdoor (cul-de-sac) properties and attributes, (iii)
qualitative research methodology, and (iv) interpretations and findings in outdoor
(cul-de-sac) properties and attributes.
1.8.2 Synthesis of Theories on Affordances of Children in Outdoor (Cul-de-
sac)
The Theory of Affordances is the underpinned of this study that explained
children’s actions or experience in outdoor (cul-de-sac). The children’s actions with
properties were analyzed with through three domains: levels of affordances,
taxonomy of affordances and types of affordances (Kytta, 2002; 2003; Heft, 1999).
Through experience in the outdoor (cul-de-sac) children were able to perceive, utilize
and shape (Kytta, 2004) the environment as playscape. These performances were
lead to children’s potential and opportunities to play in outdoor environment (Kytta,
2004, Chawla, 2006).
1.8.3 Methods
This stage explained the method to gather the data on children activities,
properties and attributes of cul-de-sac as well as their spatial composition. Different
children are observed and interviewed at two types of cul-de-sac. Three measurement
strategies are conducted including: (i) focused interview on children’s feelings,
perceptions towards cul-de-sac properties and attributes, (ii) survey questionnaire
with individual and group of children on their behaviours in the cul-de-sac properties
and attributes with settings, home and neighbouring cul-de-sac, and (iii) children’s
behavioural at the cul-de-sac. The research design employed two methods, interview
and survey questionnaire, and two sources of respondents, middle childhood children
and their caregivers The strategies of the research are to assess the children’s
15
internalizing behaviours such as feeling of satisfaction, children perceptions toward
cul-de-sac properties and social competencies through focused interview because the
children are the best informants (La Greca and Lemanek, 1996).
The research question are formulated that attempts to seek answers cause and
effect suggestion that to questions of “what”, “why” and “what will be” (Greig and
Taylor, 1999). Three causes that are seek for formulated research questions in this
study; viewing the setting of home and neighbouring cul-de-sac, viewing properties
as affordances, stimulator and interaction’s feedbacks and experiencing the cul-de-
sac through play activities.
a. Viewing Man-made Hardscape Elements and Softscape Available at Cul-
de-sac as Affordances, Stimulator and Interaction’s Feedbacks
As discussed in Section 1.5, outdoor elements are viewed as tools in children
activities in outdoor environment-affordances (Moore, 1993; Myer, 2007) that enable
them to demonstrate their skills, abilities and knowledge toward existences of
available elements called stimulator and interaction’s feedback (Katcher, 2002; Kidd
and Kidd, 1990). The demonstrations are transformed by abilities of creativity and
imagination towards pattern of play (Hart, 1994) or actions. Therefore, this tendency
attention involves children’s performances in environment; perceived, utilized, and
shaped (Kytta, 2004). This variables, functions and structures, stimulated children’s
utilization of manipulating the properties into their play tools. Thus, children
perceived the natural elements as affordances. Within this process, the research
question and sub-research questions are:
16
b. Experiencing the Outdoor (cul-de-sac) through Play Activities
According to the review, children activities are influenced by children’s
behavioural, outdoor setting or spaces, the elements that afford particular activities,
and peers influence. However, the children’s attentions in play are influenced by the
contents of the outdoor that regulated the children’s pattern of play and experience of
the spaces. The experiences of spaces are expanded through continuous activities or
play with particular elements or varied elements that offered fascinating and
enjoyable interactions. It suggests that children are able to continue and engage with
those activities or affordances that clearly offered them the significance of elements
in play.
According to the review of children functioning in outdoor environment
(Chapter 2), in the context of play activities create different experiences through
sense of control, physical movement, and social support (Moore, 1986). Plays are
seen in the children’s outdoor interactions involving motoric and sensual activities
with natural and man-made structures (Hartle and Johnson, 1993; Ismail, 2007).
Therefore, the interaction can be alone or with peers or siblings. This suggests
interaction involves with two focused functioning developments which are physical
and social.
1.8.4 Findings and Discussions
The findings and discussion was discussed on two major categories: children
experienced and actions in the outdoor environment. However, the finding and
discussion were explained into four categories: (i) levels of participation in gardens
and (ii) children’s properties and attributes of cul-de-sac for play and (iii) categories
of affordances in cul-de-sac. The results i and ii were involved in children
experienced in the environment and iii was involved with children’s actions in the
17
environment. The impact of cul-de-sac as children affordances in terrace house is
presented in the following format:
i. Children’s outdoor preference of (cul-de-sac) in urban housing.
ii. The level of utilization of space by children’s living near cul-de-sac area.
83
REFERENCES
Bartlett, S. (2002).Building Better Cities with Children and Youth. Environment and
Urbanization 2002; 14; 3
Bjorklid, P. (1994). Children - traffic - environment. Architecture ET Comportement,
10, 399-406.
Biel, A., (1986). Children’s Spatial Knowledge of Their Home Environment, Journal
of Children’s Environments Quarterly, Vol.3, No.4.
Chatterjee, S. (2006). Children’s Friendship With Place: An Exploration of
Environmental Child Friendliness of Children’s Environments in Cities. A PhD
dissertation, North Carolina State University
Chawla, L. and Hart, R. (1995). The Roots of Environmental Concern. The NAMTA
Journal 20(1): 148-157.
Chawla,L. (ed.), (2002). Towards Better Cities for Children and Youth. In Growing
up in an urbanising world, London, Unesco Publishing/Earthscan Publication
Christensen, P. and James, A. (Eds). (2000). Research with children: perspectives
and practices, London, Falmer Press.
Christensen, P. and O‘Brien, M. (EDs.). (2003),Children in the city: Home,
neighbourhood and community, London, Falmer Press.
Christensen, P. and O’Brien, M. (2003). Children in The City: Introducing New
Perspectives In: Christensen, P. and O’Brien, M.: Children in The City: Home,
Neighbourhood and Community: The Future of Childhood Series, Routledge
Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group, London and NY, 1-12.
Clark, C., & Uzzell, D. (2002). The Affordances of the Home, Neighborhood, Town
Cosco N and Moore R (2002). Our neighbourhood is like that! in Chawla, (2002) In
Growing up in an urbanising world, London, Unesco Publishing/Earthscan
Publication.
Cozby, P.C. (2004). Methods in behavioral research. New York, Mc Grow-Hill.
Erickson, A. (1985). Learning and Development through Play In: Playground
Design: Outdoor Environments for Learning and Development, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, NY. pp 1-7.
84
Fjortoft, I., (2004). Landscape as Playscape: The Effects of Natural Environments on
Children’s Play and Motor Development, Telemark University College, Journal
of Children’s Environments Quarterly.14(2):21-44
Francis, M. and Lorenzo, R., (2002). Seven Realms of Children’s Participation,
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22,157-169.
Fraser, S., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M. and Robinson, C. (2004). Doing Research
With Children and Young People
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Greig, A. and Taylor, J. (1999). Doing Research with Children. London: Sage
Publications.
Hallden, G., (2003). Children’s Views of Family, Home and House In: Pia
Christensen and Margaret O’ Brien, (2003). Children in The City: Home,
Neighborhood and Community: The Future of Childhood Series, Routledge
Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York, 29-45.
Hart, R. A. (1997). Children’s Participation: The Theory and Practice of Involving
Young Citizens In Community Development And Environmental Care. London:
UNICEF and Earthscan Publications.
Hart, R., (1979). Children’s Experience of Place, Irvington Publisher, New York.
Hartle, L. and Johnson, J., E., (1993). History and Theory of Outdoor Play:
Historical and Contemporary Influence of Outdoor Play Environments In: Hart,
C. Craig, Children On Playgrounds: Research Perspectives and Applications,
Albany: State University Of New York Press and Motor Development, 14-42.
Horelli, L., (2007). Constructing a Theoretical Framework for Environmental Child-
Friendliness, Journal of Children, Youth and Environments 17,(4).
Ismail Said, (2006). Garden as Restorative Environment for Hospitalized Children.
Phd Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Kellert R. Stephen, (2002). Experiencing Nature: Affective, Cognitive and Evaluative
Development in Children In: Kellert, S. R. and Kahn, P. H., Children and Nature:
Psychological, Sociocultural, and Evolutionary Investigations, The MIT Press
Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England.
Kellett, M., Robinson, C. and Burr, R., (2004). Images of Childhood In:, Sandy
Fraser, Vicky Lewis, Sharon Ding, Mary Kellett and Chirs Robinson, Doing
85
Research with Children and Young People, Sage Publications, and The Open
University, London, 26-41.
Kellett, M. and Ding, S., (2004). Middle Childhood In:, Sandy Fraser, Vicky Lewis,
Sharon Ding, Mary Kellett and Chirs Robinson: Doing Research with Children
and Young People, Sage Publications, and The Open University, London, 161-
190.
Kytta, M. (2002). Affordances of Children’s Environments In: The Context Of
Cities, Small Towns, Suburbs And Rural Villages In Finland And Belarus,
Landscape and Urban Planning 48. Journal of Environmental Psychology 22,
109-123.
Kytta, M. (2003). Children in Outdoor Contexts: Affordances and Independent
Mobility in the Assessment of Environmental Child Friendliness, Helsinki
University of Technology, Centre for Urban and Regional Studies.
Matthews, M. H. (1987). Gender, Home Range and Environmental Cognition.
Transctions of the Institute of British Geographers, 12, 32-56.
Mazlin, G., (2004). Cul-de-sac
http://tesseller.blogspot.com/
McDevitt, Teresa M. and Ormrod, J.E. (2002). Child Development and Education,
Merrill Prentice Hall, pg. 16-17
Mohd Suhaizan Shamsuddin, (2009). Affordances of Home and Neigbouring
Gardens Preferred by Children for Learning and Playing Experiences. Master
Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Moore, R. C. (1986), Childhood’s domain: play and place in child development.
London;
Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1969). The Psychology of the Child. London: Routledge
& Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: Rutledge.
Pyle (2002). Eden in a vacant lot: Special places, species and kids in community of
life. In: Children and Nature: Psychological, Sociocultural and Evolutionary
Investigations. Kahn, P. and Kellert, S. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Rasmussen, K. and Smidt S., (2003). Children in the neighborhood: The
Neighborhood in the Children In: Christensen, P. and O’ Brien, M., (2003),
Children in The City: Home, Neighborhood and Community: The Future of
86
Childhood Series, Routledge Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group, London and New
York, 82-100.
Rivkin, Mary S., (1990). Outdoor play: What happens here? In S. Wortham & J.
Frost (Eds.) Playgrounds for young children: National survey and perspectives,
191-214. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education and
Dance.
Robert, G. David, P. (1970). Neighborhood, City, and Metropolis. An Intergrated
Reader in Urban Sociology: Random House New York Publications.
Valentine, G. and Mckendrick, J. (1997). Children’s Outdoor Play: Exploring
Parental Concerns about Children’s Safety and the Changing Nature of
Childhood. Journal of Geoforum, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 219-235.
White, R. and Stoecklin, V. (2004). Children's Outdoor Play and learning
Environments: Returning to Nature.
www.whitehutchinson.com/children.articles/outdoor.ophillia:
Whyte, H.W., (2000). How to Turn a Place Around. Projects for Public Space Inc.
Zeisel, J (1984). Inquiry by Design: Tools For Environmental- Behaviour Research.
Cambridge University Press.
Can Street be Made Safe?
http://www.spacesyntax.com/housing/housing.html
Children
http://www.nncc.org/Child.Devmid.dev.html
Children Learn Through Play
http://ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/cancer/pedresource/pedres_docs/ChildrenLearnTruPlay.pdf
Cul-de-sac
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cul-de-sac
http://www.answers.com/topic/cul-de-sac
http://www.cyburbia.org
Families Love Cul-de-sacs, Planners Don't,
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2002/06/13/loc_no_outlet_you_cant.html
Honeycomb Cul-de-sac Housing
http://tesseller.blogspot.com/
Middle Childhood Development
87
http://www.childrendevelopmentmedia.com
Play
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Play
Social Influences and Middle Childhood – A Difficult Learning Period
http://www.psychologycampus.com/child-psychology-childhood.html
The Cul-De-Sac: A Suburban Icon
http://learningfrommiltonkeynes.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/lesson-2_2.jpg
What are Children Learning When They Play
http://users.stargate.net/