Show simple item record

dc.contributor.convenorAssociate Professor Paul Maginen_US
dc.contributor.authorSipe, Neilen_US
dc.contributor.authorMayere-Donehue, Severineen_US
dc.contributor.authorDedekorkut, Aysinen_US
dc.contributor.editorAssociate Professor Paul Maginen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:29:08Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:29:08Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.modified2012-08-19T21:15:23Z
dc.identifier.refurihttp://www.wpsc2011.com.au/index.htmlen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/45267
dc.description.abstractAt first glance the built environments of South Florida and South East Queensland appear very similar, particularly along the highly urbanized coast. However this apparent similarity belies some fundamental differences between the two regions in terms of context and the approach to regulating development. This paper describes some of these key differences, but focuses on two research questions: 1) do these differences affect the built environment; and 2) if so, how does the built form differ? There has been considerable research on how to best measure urban form, particularly as it relates to measuring urban sprawl (Schwarz 2010; Clifton et al. 2008). Some of the key questions identified by this research include: what are the best variables to use?; what scale should be used?; and what time period to use? We will assimilate this research in order to develop a methodology for measuring urban form and apply it to both case study regions. There are several potential outcomes from this research -- one is that the built form between the two regions is quite different; and the second is that it is similar. The first outcome is what might be expected given the differences in context and development regulation. However how might the second outcome be explained - major differences in context and development regulation resulting in minor differences in key measures of urban form? One explanation is that differences in the way development is regulated are not as important in determining the built form as are private market forces.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent522950 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWorld Planning Schools Congressen_US
dc.publisher.placePerth, Western Australiaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://anzaps.net/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencename2011 WPSCen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencetitleWorld Planning Schools Congress 2011: Planning in an era of uncertainty and transformationen_US
dc.relation.ispartofdatefrom2011-07-04en_US
dc.relation.ispartofdateto2011-07-08en_US
dc.relation.ispartoflocationPerth, Western Australiaen_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLand Use and Environmental Planningen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode120504en_US
dc.titleMeasuring Urban Form: A Comparative Analysis of South East Queensland and South Floridaen_US
dc.typeConference outputen_US
dc.type.descriptionE1 - Conference Publications (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeE - Conference Publicationsen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2011 ANZAPS. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the conference's website for access to the definitive, published version.en_US
gro.date.issued2011
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Conference outputs
    Contains papers delivered by Griffith authors at national and international conferences.

Show simple item record