MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289675985 · doi:10.14288/1.0087427

Life at the water’s edge: an analysis of human behaviour and urban design of public open space at the water’s edge

2009· article· en· W2289675985 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Design and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic spacePublic open spaceSpace (punctuation)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionUrban designArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceSociologyEnvironmental ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringUrban planningCivil engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, North America's urban waterfronts have experienced a renaissance. Urban waterfronts, which once provided the heart and lifeline of many North American cities by acting as a gateway connecting the American interior and the rest of the World, have undergone vast changes and are now the staging areas for numerous uses, to be enjoyed by all of the public, in many different ways. Throughout history, a relationship between man and the water's edge has always existed. The water's edge is where life is most diverse and unique. The water's edge has traditionally been viewed as part of the public realm. A strong commitment to maintaining public access to the shore and waterways of the world has consistently been upheld, starting with the Justinian Law of ancient Rome and continuing through English Common Law as reflected in maritime ordinances. Urban waterfronts have historically been the hub of transportation, trade and commerce. Along many waterfronts, port cities symbolize the history and maritime activities of these traditionally working waterfronts. As many of these waterfront cities first emerged, the waterfront was intimately linked with the city. However, in North America, with the rapid growth of commercial activity, warehouses, railway yards and expressways at the water's edge, cities became disconnected from their waterfronts. Over the past decade, many North American urban waterfronts have undergone yet another transformation. The waterfront has become a valuable amenity, to be shared by all. Urban waterfronts, which were once stigmatized as a worthless industrial wasteland are now respected as a valuable asset for their views, large tracts of underdeveloped land, history, maritime industry and activity, environmental characteristics and their opportunities for recreation opportunities both on land and water. In addition, watercourses have been cleansed due to stricter environmental regulations, and a "back to the city movement" of people seeking places to Uve in the inner cities, have resulted in the redevelopment of many of North America's waterfronts. As waterfronts undergo this transformation, an opportunity is afforded by the public to regain access to the water's edge. At the current time, municipal and provincial (or state) policies are in place which allow the public to require that a portion of land parallel to the water's edge be dedicated for public use, as waterfront lands are redeveloped. These lands are usually used as public open space, in one form or another. In the case of many urban waterfronts, the space is developed with a seawall and a bicycle/pedestrian path. However, all too often little or no attention is paid to including proper lighting, the types of surface materials and landscaping used, seating opportunities, relationship of the space to the street and other nearby spaces, the history and/or maritime character of the area, or public access points to the open space. As a result, the space is not used. To address these concerns, this thesis challenges the popular way of planning and designing waterfront open space by focusing on the specific issue of how urban waterfront open space is designed and how it is used. To accomplish this task, the thesis presents an exploratory study which firstly documents the complexities involved in the process of urban waterfront change from industrial uses to a mix of uses including public open space. It then reviews the literature regarding the design of urban plazas, which share many of the same characteristics as urban waterfront open space, in order to define a list of design elements which could be applied when designing waterfront open space. To test the similarities between the design elements of urban plazas and of urban waterfront open space, case studies examine two waterfront locations in the Vancouver Lower Mainland: Westminster Quay in New Westminster, and; Steveston Landing in Richmond. In these case studies, field observations are used to identify how these waterfront open spaces are designed and how they are used. This information is augmented by survey data collected on site through interviews with the users of the spaces to determine how far and by what means users arrive at the spaces and for what purposes and how frequently do they use the spaces. In addition, interviews held with the designers, planners and managers of the two waterfront open spaces establish what the guiding policies, design approaches and anticipated outcomes were prior-to the construction of the spaces.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it