Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study investigates how micro-scale landscape configuration relates to outdoor comfort and pedestrian–vehicle interaction around the GKB 5 area of Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang. The research combines (i) field observation of landscape and circulation, (ii) a preliminary user mobility survey (n = 89), and (iii) GIS-based spatial overlay analysis. Pedestrian–vehicle interaction exposure was operationalized using proximity thresholds (<2 m, 2–5 m, >5 m) and separation characteristics (continuous physical barriers versus surface-only delineation). The spatial analysis evaluated 12 functional segments and identified interaction-prone locations through buffer and intersection procedures. Results indicate that the GKB 5 outdoor environment is hardscape-dominant along primary pedestrian connectors, while green open spaces function mainly as peripheral buffers, limiting their role in shading and social use. Five out of twelve segments (41.7%) were classified as high interaction exposure, and three overlap nodes were concentrated in entrance-adjacent transition spaces and parking connectors. Survey results show motorcycles as the dominant access mode (48.31%), followed by cars (31.46%) and walking (20.22%), implying strong parking dependence and stream convergence near entrances. The findings suggest that improving hardscape-softscape balance, strengthening continuous pedestrian-oriented delineation, and enhancing transition-space legibility are critical to support safer and more comfortable campus mobility environments. This study contributes a segment-based spatial diagnostic framework that integrates proximity classification and GIS overlay to identify pedestrian–vehicle interaction hotspots in campus environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samad et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: