Behm, M and Choon Hock, P (2012) Safe design of skyrise greenery in Singapore. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 1(2), pp. 186-205. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Singapore is transforming from a “garden city” to a “city-in-a-garden”. Designing for safety is recognized by researchers and some governments as a best practice in facilitating eventual worker safety within the built environment. The purpose of undertaking this research was to understand and describe the status of safe design for skyrise greenery in Singapore. A total of 41 rooftop and vertical greenery systems were observed with a focus on access, fall from height, and planting considerations. Rooftop greenery systems in Singapore were found to be adhering to safe design principles. Vertical and ledge greenery systems, on the other hand, are newer arrangements and were found to be in need of design for safety guidance. The results add to the body of knowledge in the area of safe design and skyrise greenery and will aid those seeking to understand from a policy and practice perspective.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design; design for safety; safety; Singapore; skyrise greenery |
| Index terms: | built environment, best practice, Singapore, body of knowledge, design for safety, design principle |
| Subjects: | business, design methods, knowledge management, health safety and environment, Geography, infrastructure and transport systems |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Information Management, Geographical Context, Urban Studies, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here