WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA

LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE

WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
AUTHORS
LAN WANG
MARIA CHIARA TOSI
MIRNA ZORDAN
CATERINA VILLANI
SILVIA MAROSO
ALEX PELLIZER
ALDO AYMONINO LAN WANG, MARIA CHIARA TOSI, MIRNA ZORDAN,
GIANNI TALAMINI
CATERINA VILLANI, SILVIA MAROSO, ALEX PELLIZER,
ALDO AYMONINO, GIANNI TALAMINI
COPYRIGHT © 2017 TONGJI UNIVERSITY PRESS
WALKABLE
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF THIS BOOK MAY
BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM BY ANY ELECTRONIC
OR MECHANICAL MEANS (INCLUDING PHOTOCOPYING,
RECORDING, OR INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL)
WITHOUT PERMISSION IN WRITING FROM THE PUBLISHER.
THIS BOOK WAS POSSIBLE THANKS TO THE SUPPORT OF
CITIES
COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING (CAUP)
IN TONGJI UNIVERSITY, UNIVERSITÀ IUAV DI VENEZIA AND
URBES, URBAN RURAL BUILT ENVIRONMENT SUSTAINABILITY
RESEARCH LAB.
EXECUTIVE EDITOR
IN HIGH
CRISIE YUAN
EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS
RYAN ZERINGUE, JESSIE SUN, OWL XU
GRAPHIC DESIGN
ANTONELLA LIGIOS
COVER IMAGE
CATERINA VILLANI, SILVIA MAROSO
DENSITY
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CHINA CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION
DATA. A CATALOGUE RECORD FOR THIS BOOK IS AVAILABLE
FROM THE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CHINA
ISBN 978-7-5608-7215-5
TONGJI UNIVERSITY PRESS BOOKS MAY BE PURCHASED AT
CHINA
SPECIAL QUANTITY DISCOUNTS FOR BUSINESS OR SALES
PROMOTIONAL USE. FOR INFORMATION, PLEASE EMAIL
UKSALES@ACCPUBLISHINGGROUP.COM
PRINTED AND BOUND IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.
Livable Healthy and Sustainable
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This book is published as a result of a joint collaboration between
College of Architecture and Urban Planning (CAUP) in Tongji University,
Università IUAV di Venezia with the support of URBES, Urban Rural
Built Environment Sustainability research lab. We would like to express
our very great appreciation to Prof. Zhenyu Li, Dean of CAUP in Tongji
University. We are particularly grateful for the assistance given by
Prof. Weiqiang Wang with the case study of Caoyang, Shanghai. Our
special thanks are extended to Prof. Alberto Ferlenga (Dean of IUAV
University), Prof. Margherita Turvani and Prof. Zhenwei Peng for their
collaboration in the establishment of the URBES research lab. We are
also very grateful to: Crisie Yuan and the publisher of Tongji University
Press, for their continuing support during the publication of this book;
to Antonella Ligios, for developing the graphic design of this book.
CONTENTS
PREFACE
01 INTRODUCTION: 11
WALKABILITY AND THE RIGHT
TO THE CITY
Maria Chiara Tosi
02 INTERMEDIATE SCALE 27
VERSUS EXTREMENESS
Aldo Aymonino
03 GROUND CHINA:
STARTING FROM VILLAGES 41
Mirna Zordan
CASE STUDY | URBAN VILLAGE
3.1 Gangxia Rules - 51
3.2 Slow mobility network - 65
3.3 Ground motion - 71
04 CBD: A NEW POROSITY 81
Caterina Villani
CASE STUDY | CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
4.1 Lujiazui morphology - 91
4.2 Pedestrian multilevel networks - 103
4.3 Multilevel Porosity - 111
05 SHARING PATHS 115 08 CONCLUSION: 211
Silvia Maroso
WALKING TOWARD A
CASE STUDY | CAOYANG VILLAGE
5.1 Caoyang morphology - 125 HEALTY CITY
5.2 Shared spaces - 139 Lan Wang
5.3 Permeable Caoyang - 145
BIBLIOGRAPHY
CONTRIBUTORS
06 SYNTHETIC CITY 149
Alex Pellizer
CASE STUDY | CAOYANG VILLAGE
6.1 Urban porosity in Caoyang Village - 153
6.2 Connect to regenerate - 167
6.3 “Walk-in-progress” scenario - 175
07 WHERE BUILDINGS AND 191
ACTIONS INTERPENETRATE
Gianni Talamini
7.1 Walter Benjamin, Deng Xiaoping and Portofino - 192
7.2 The notion of porosity - 194
7.3 Porosity in Shenzhen - 197
7.4 Visualizing porosity - 201
7.5 The tabula rasa and turnkey city - 203
7.6 Sensible-forms of Portofino - 205
7.7 New perspectives - 207
PREFACE
As a preamble to this book let us say few words about what preceded the
making of this book.
It is about a story of an academic encounter and friendship between two
Institutions, University IUAV of Venice (IUAV) and Tongji University,
College of Architecture and Urban Planning (CAUP) and two cities, Venice
and Shanghai. Rejuvenating a tradition of cultural exchange that goes
back to the Ancient Silk Road, connecting China and Venice.
2017 is the anniversary of Tongji University (110 years) and of the CAUP
(60 years) and IUAV University (90 years). This May the two institutions
signed an agreement to set up a Joint Research Lab that we named URBES
to clearly identify our joint interest in researching, studying, designing,
and creating policies for CITIES. Based on the principles of mutual benefit
and respect for each other’s independence, the two institutions will
foster and organize parallel and joint research activities focusing on
issues of cities and contemporary urbanization challenges, applicable to
cities and rural areas, including local development, redevelopment, and
conservation.
The book is the first outcome of the Joint Research Lab and of course
is about cities. It is the result of a variety of joint initiatives and
experiences; joint workshops and exhibitions, student exchanges, professor
collaborations in Venice, Shanghai, and Shenzhen that took place during
the last 3 years.
We are especially proud that our students are the main initiators for
this book, as they were the living force acting to nurture the growing
cooperation between IUAV and CAUP and they spearheaded the push to
study sustainability for changing our cities.
The name of the joint research lab, URBES, stands for CITIES (in Latin)
but it also stands for Urban and Rural Built Environment Sustainability
and this book is about how to make our city more livable, healthier, and
friendlier, by making them walkable and overall more sustainable.
Within the framework of a worldwide debate on big metropolises urban
regeneration this book focus on a specific theme: the walkability of cities.
It does so because walkability stands between urban sustainability and
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
10 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
city rights, calling for a reinterpretation of major metropolitan cities urban
spaces. This leads to the need to improve the accessibility to services and
collective spaces, in order to make citizens daily practices easier in the city
and their lifestyles healthier.
Walkability is also about streets and their role in public life, it is about
sidewalks as Jane Jacobs explains:
“It is possible to be on excellent sidewalk terms with people who are very
different from oneself and even, as time passes, on familiar public term
with them. Such relationship can, and do, endure for many years, for
decades…The tolerance, the room for great differences among neighbors –
differences that often go far deeper than difference in color-… are possible
and normal only when the streets of great cities have built in equipment
allowing strangers to dwell in peace together…Lowly, unpurposeful and
random as they may appear, sidewalk contacts are the small change from
which a city’s wealth of public life may grow” ( Jane Jacobs, The Death
and Life of Great American Cities, First Edition, Random House, New York,
1961 ).
Jacobs’ writing on sidewalks reminds us of the importance of chance
encounters and shared experiences and their impact on the quality of
life and ability to create a better and just society, against fragmentation,
niches and homogeneity, and for surprising us with the diversity and the
novelty to be able to envisage and build our future.
Let’s build more ‘street corners’, not just in our cities, but in our everyday
life, to give space to new encounters and more communication.
Margherita E. Turvani Zhenwei Peng
Professor of Political Economy Professor of Urban Planning
University Iuav of Venice Tongji University
Executive director of URBES Joint Research Lab Director of URBES Joint Research Lab
Director of National Planning Accreditation Board
Venice Shanghai
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 11
01
INTROD-
UCTION:
WALKA-
BILITY AND
THE RIGHT
TO THE CITY
Maria Chiara Tosi
INTRODUCTION
WALKABILITY AND THE RIGHT TO THE CITY
1. Daily living practices: walking.
Living in the city is often tiring; extended stretches of urban fabric
exhibit a profound hostility towards all inhabitants and not only
towards the young, oldest, or disabled. Observing the city from
this point of view requires mobilizing an observation strategy
capable of discovering daily living practices (Certeau, 1980),
questioning ourselves as to the reasons and causes of this fatigue
and hostility. Recognizing that while sometimes this is due to the
lack of services, facilities, and spaces, it often seems rather that
the fatigue and hostility are attributable to faulty organization,
incorrect operating methods, discontinuity and inaccessibility, and
a lack of walkability. These tend to cause inconvenience, discomfort,
insecurity and sometimes danger: the excessively far-away school,
the discontinuity of the sidewalk or bike path, the fragmentation
of green spaces and the difficulty in reaching them, so far the
inefficiency of rainwater catchment system along the roads and
sidewalks which become impassable.
Starting from these issues, by observing and
specifying the set of elements responsible
for the trouble of inhabiting the city, perhaps
we can now go back to specify what “urban
infrastructure” is (or should be).That apparatus
that does not produce individual wealth directly,
but contributes to the wellbeing of a community.
We do this by asking ourselves what specifically should this
“infrastructural” dimension be composed of, what should make up
the “support” of the contemporary city, reflecting on its materials,
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 15
 how it should be laid out, what should its connections and the rules
of its organization be.
In dealing with these issues, one is driven to question what
constitutes the common good today, and how to again build up the
social capital assets that have been used and consumed in recent
decades. How it is possible to reconstruct a network of common
goods understood at the same time as both the product and
precondition of any true, deep urban policy.
Addressing walkability urges one thus to observe the current intense
consumption of the existing capital assets, bringing one to ask with
a degree of urgency: what are the common goods, the “collective
happiness”, the “spatial justice” (Soja, 2010) that new policies of
walkability should build or regenerate?
In the belief that a more precise attention to the issue of accessibility
to services and facilities is necessary, as well as the upgrading of the
pedestrian spaces, and more generally a richer and more varied offer
of public spaces, and and a different landscape policy could be the
basis for a new policy aimed at defining an urban space that is more
welcoming, livable and walkable, less tiring and hostile, where it is
possible to achieve wellbeing collectively and not just individually.
2. Accessibility, walkability and the right to the city
In discussions about the goals of citizens’ rights, the prevalence of a
socially oriented attitude has resulted quite frequently in first asking
about the entities or individuals in the pursuit of or fighting for the
assertion of such rights. These are mainly minorities (the homeless, NEIGHBORHOOD MARKETS ARE URBAN PLACES WHERE
PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT AGES, DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES,
feminists, environmentalists, young people, immigrants, etc.) who AND DIFFERENT CULTURES CAN EASILY PERCEIVE AND
preside over the social scenes that have tended to pursue a plurality MIX EACH OTHER.
of rights.
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
16 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 17
 Towards the end of the 1960s, there began to develop a line of
thought and practices that placed emphasis on claiming “the right to
space”, to public space and to the city:
“In difficult conditions, in the heart of this society
that cannot fully oppose them and yet bars their
way, rights are making headway that define
civilization [...] Among these nascent rights is
the right to the city (not to the ancient city, but
to urban life, to renewed centrality, to places of
encounter and exchange, to rhythms of life and
uses of time that allow a full and entire use of
these times and places, etc.)” (Lefebvre 1968, 159).
Following this seemingly slight movement, which in reality has
proven to be quick-footed and disruptive, “the long-accepted
treatment of space (or territory) as fixed, unproblematic and
inconsequential” (Bromberg 2007, 2) falters, bringing attention to
where and how rights are asserted, pushing researchers to ask: what
is the space where the rights to the city, the rights to citizenship,
are formed? (Harvey 1973, Lefebvre 1974, Soja 1989). Within these
development processes, the search for justice seeks to understand
and investigate not only the dialectical relationship between the
social and economic conditions of the various groups, but also the
geography of injustice. That is, how the social production of space
impacts social groups and their opportunities for development.
Territorial justice (Davies 1968), spatial justice (Reynaud 1981) or
socio-spatial justice (Pirie 1983), are the terms with which scholars
have tried to emphasize this change. Although, “there are tendencies
among geographers and planners to avoid the explicit use of the
adjective ‘spatial’ in describing the search for justice and democracy
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
18 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
in contemporary societies” (Soja 2009).
If space can no longer be considered as a mere inert support for social
practices, it then becomes the ground where old and new citizenship
rights can be affirmed. The instrument and context for reflection
on developing well-being and social rights. These are precisely the
matters we feel the need to highlight: the influence that the form of
the city and the spatial organization of the set of services and facilities
has on the quality of daily life environments, on the possibilities
of coexistence among peoples and thereby on the assertion of the
rights of citizenship. Recalling that the freedom to make and remake
our cities, by producing and reproducing spaces, is “one of the most
precious yet most neglected of our human rights” (Harvey 2008).
Some recent urban planning documents, expressed in very different
forms, such as plans, visions, studies, social forums, exhibitions,
etc., have made the center of their focus the physical city’s capacity.
Following the idea that if properly treated by the project it can
produce improvements in daily life, in the form of greater well-being,
safety, health and justice. While simultaneously moving from very
different perspectives and approaches and obtaining more or less
appreciable and shareable results (Fainstein 2009, 2010). Some recent
experiences developed in New York, Los Angeles, Amsterdam, London
and Copenhagen have recognized the urgency of transforming the city
by creating new collective spaces. With the belief that the differing
materials comprising the latter reality (parks, gardens, sidewalks,
green areas, river or marine docks) must necessarily be construed as
“places where the rules of public life and
citizenship are tested and formed. In this sense,
they are not just about improving the physical
health and well-being of people as they go
about their daily lives, but about creating more
reciprocal forms of social life as well. There is
no sustainable future without them” (Ward
Thompson, Travlou 2007, 20).
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 19
 In this sense, the production of collective space has been taken
as the way through which it is possible not only to improve the
well-being of the population (VV. AA. 2008), but also to form and
strengthen their rights. In these documents, the procedures through
which an attempt was made to give shape to new collective spaces
are varied. We are interested here in dwelling only on one of these:
the construction of “networks” consisting of services, equipment,
open spaces, etc., which must be easily accessible, so much so that
the practice establishes that the place of residence or place of work
must be reachable within a 10-15 minute walk.
“We have developed three main approaches to ensure that nearly
every New Yorker lives within a 10-minute walk of a park by
2030. First, we will upgrade land already designated as play space
or parkland and make it available to new audiences. Second, we
will expand usable hours at our current, high-quality sites. And
third, we propose re-conceptualizing our streets and sidewalks as
public spaces that can foster the connections that create vibrant
communities” (The City of New York 2008, 31).
We know that busy city dwellers do not have much spare time in
their daily lives. Today, every Copenhagener spends on average one
hour in a park every other day. Today 60% of Copenhageners live
within 15 minutes’ walk of green or blue areas. This is good but it
can be improved. The initiative will cover the creation of new parks,
beaches and sea swimming pools as well as good and safe green
connections throughout town so it will be easier to reach the blue
and green areas. We are not necessarily talking about large areas.
Even small parks of about 2,000 square meters, about a fifth the
size of a football pitch, are large enough for many activities and
experiences [...] The goal for 2015 is that 90% of Copenhageners
must be able to walk to a park, a beach or a sea swimming-pool in
less than 15 minutes” (Municipality of Copenhagen 2007).
“London’s open spaces include green spaces, such as parks,
allotments, commons, woodlands, natural habitats, recreation
grounds, playing fields, agricultural land, burial grounds, amenity
space, children’s play areas, including hard-surfaced playgrounds,
and accessible countryside in the urban fringe. Civic spaces, such
as squares, piazzas and market squares also form part of the open
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
20 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
space network. The variety and richness of London’s open spaces
largely contribute to its distinctive and relatively open character.
Open spaces provide a valuable resource and focus for local
communities, can have a positive effect on the image and vitality of
areas and can encourage investment. They provide a respite from the
built environment or an opportunity for recreation. They promote
health, wellbeing and quality of life. They are also vital facilities
for developing children’s play, exercise and social skills” (Major of
London 2004, 142).
In many respects quite different from each other,
these three instruments agree that “accessible,
good-quality, well maintained green spaces
and playgrounds, modern transport system and
safe, walkable neighbourhoods that encourage
physical activity and social interactions are key
constituents of urban quality of life”
(VV. AA. 2009, 13).
Pedestrian accessibility to services and facilities is used in these
experiences as a tool, a set of devices that measure the level of
“spatial democracy” and “fairness” of the city, its inclusivity and
acceptance of diversity (Loukaitou-Sideris 2009).
Like the three examples previously mentioned, in Los Angeles the
reflection on the themes of accessibility to services and facilities is
enhanced by incorporating the organization of public transport.
“Transportation access is a critical human rights issue. If someone
doesn’t have access to public transit, the system is in essence
denying them basic human rights: access to education and healthy
food; access to jobs; access to healthcare; and the pursuit of goals
beyond mere survival. In a city like Los Angeles, with its many social
and economic extremes, transportation denial further en-trenches
neighbourhood and racial segregation” (Clarke 2009).
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 21
 3. In China
In China it is only in the twentieth century, and most likely in the
last half of it, that cities have started to face the rising demand for
public and collective spaces. For walkable spaces to be used for a
wide range of spontaneous activities, like leisure, recreation, market,
informal sport and dance, performance, etc.
The rise of a new “cultural public space” in China, that has been
described as “a space intermediate between state and society in
which both participated” (Huang 1993: 224) offered the opportunity
to look at the social context for the physical development and
design of public spaces, a context in which the public sphere can be
experienced and performed by citizens.
More recently in Chinese cities the market economic reform has
SLOW MOBILITY EXAMPLES ON STREETS IN CHINA
created tangible impact on society. Through the infusion of the
private realm to the universal public realm, which is typical of the
planned economic era, at all dimensions of space production. These
new processes transformed public spaces but they did not produce
an improvement of space and in several cases the transformation
resulted in a deterioration of public space (Miao 2011).
Chinese citizens today are looking for an easier and less tiring way
to move in the city. Instead of vehicular traffic, people want to reach
public facilities by pedestrian and cycling paths, involving direct
daily contact with other people, demanding a city which is more
accessible and comfortable.
Recent studies have compared the connectivity
and accessibility of Chinese cities with other
European and extra-EU cities. The dimension of
urban blocks in newly planned expansion zones
of Chinese cities (Shanghai as well as Shenzhen
are outstanding examples in some areas) typically
range from 400 to over 800 meters a side.
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
22 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 23
 This size seems huge if compared with blocks in Tokyo that average
50 meters a side, or blocks in Paris and London that average 120
meters a side. These superblocks are usually not divided into smaller
plots, and this implies a small range of connectivity, a small number
of intersections, and an environment that is not pedestrian friendly.
Superblocks create a strong discontinuity, lack of complexity,
and the differentiation of urban public places: fewersmall plazas,
pedestrian or cycle path, and places for citizens’ interactions.
Sometimes in Chinese cities the superblocks
together with the high-speed arterial roads act as
impassable barriers within the city, reducing the
connectivity between neighborhoods, as people
are forced to walk more 500–700 meters to
cross an 80 meter wide road (World Bank 2014).
Consistently, they stop walking.
Against this backdrop, planning and policies aiming to improve city
welfare and citizens wellbeing should work to forge and to revitalize
public spaces and consider that streets, roads, paths, passes are the
nexus of much of the multi-functionality in cities. Around them
the various nested interests which correlate with the various city
functions offer support to create consensus amongst the disparate
interests. Whichhelps in creating a space where mobility is also
balanced with place making and local commerce with active living of
people.
The most appropriate actions for producing more and more free
open spaces are the enhancement of the connectivity and the
porosity of the cities, an increase of the number of intersections,
and the presence of narrow streets and paths that run from block
to block, with walking and cycling paths. These lead to more and
more free open spaces, which available for social interaction, and
sometimes also for informal and ephemeral activities (dance, open
air gym, Thai chi, ground calligraphy are emerging activities looking
for such kind of public spaces).
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
24 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
THE VITALITY OF SOCIAL ACTIVITIES INSIDE CHINESE PUBLIC PARKS
In response to these issues this book addresses the role of walkable
space in improving people’s welfare and wellbeing in cities. In
improving the right to the city. It discusses the relationship between
design, actions, and policies aimed to achieve this goal. With a focus
on Chinese cities and an eye to Shanghai and to Shenzhen.
The works presented here show how the enhancement of the
quality of accessibility and walkability can be feasible. By working
at a micro scale, by detailed design interventions, pursuing higher
connectivity and the porosity of the urban fabric. These sometimes
easy and cheap interventions give rise to an easier accessibility for
all categories of citizens. Allowing them to get to the services they
need, to invent new ways of living in the space within their reach,
thus improving their wellbeing. Our research design not only tries to
increase the wellbeing of the neighborhood studied, but also improve
the base to create a new attractiveness for new dwellers, for new
middle class families with children. While preserving social variety
and opening to new economic businesses, thus avoiding the fall of
the neighborhoods in a process of gentrification.
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 25
 References
Bromberg, A., Morrow, G. and Pfeiffer, D. (2007). Why Spatial Justice?.
Critical planning, (14).
Certeau, M. (2010). L’Invention du Quotidien. Paris: Union générale
d’éditions, Tome 1: Arts de faire.
Clark, J. (2009). Bus Rider Rights. Urban Habitat, B. Jesse Clarke’s in-
depth interview of Manuel Criollo.
Davies, B. (1968). Social Needs and Resources in Local Services. London:
Joseph Rowntree.
Fainstein, S. (2009). Spatial Justice and Planning. Justice spatiale/
Spatial Justice,(1).
Fainstein, S. (2010). The Just City. New York: Cornell University Press.
Harvey, D. (1973). Social Justice and the City. Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press.
Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, (53).
Huang, P. (1993). “Public Sphere”/”Civil Society” in China: the third
realm between state and society. Modern China, 19(2), pp.216-240.
Lefebvre, H. (1968). Le Droit à la Ville. Paris: Editions Anthropos.
Lefebvre, H. (1974). La Production de l’Espace. Paris: Editions
Anthropos.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., Ehrenfeucht, R. (2009). Sidewalks. Conflict and
Negotiation over Public Space. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Major of London (2004). The London Plan. Spatial Development Strategy
for Greater London. GLA, February.
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
26 LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE
Miao, P. (2011). Brave New City: three problems in chinese urban public space
since the 1980s. Journal of Urban Design, 16(2), pp.179-207.
Municipality of Copenhagen (2007). Eco-Metropole. Our vision for
Copenhagen 2015.
Pirie, G. (1983). On Spatial Justice. Environment and Planning A, (15).
Reynaud, A. (1981). Société, Espace et Justice: inégaitès regionales et justice
socio-spatiale. Paris: Presse de l’Universitè de France.
Soja, E. (1989). Postmodern Geographies: the reassertion of space in critical
social theory. London: Verso Press.
Soja, E. (2009). The City and Spatial Justice. Justice Spatiale/Spatial Justice,
(1).
Soja, E. (2010). Seeking Spatial Justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
VV. AA. (2008). Paisage i Salut. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya.
VV. AA. (2009). Ensuring Quality of Life in Europe’s Cities and Towns. EEA
Report, (5).
The City of New York (2008). PlaNYC: a greener, greater New York.
Ward Thompson, C., Travlou, P. (2007). Open Space: people space.
London: Taylor & Francis.
World Bank, Development Research Center of the State Council, the P.R.C.
(2014). Urban China: toward efficient, inclusive, and sustainable urbanization.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
WALKABLE CITIES IN HIGH DENSITY CHINA
LIVABLE HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE 27