Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Visual intrusions resulting from the presence of motor vehicles in urban residential areas Park, Donald F. 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A6_7 P37_5.pdf [ 13.81MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093690.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093690-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093690-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093690-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093690-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093690-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093690-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093690-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093690.ris

Full Text

VISUAL INTRUSIONS RESULTING FROM THE PRESENCE OF MOTOR VEHICLES IN URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS by DONALD F. PARK B.B.A., University of Ottawa, 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Regional and Community Planning University of Bri t i s h Columbia We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Apr i l 1976 © Donald F. Park In p re sent ing t h i s t he s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make v i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference and study. I f u r t h e r agree t ha t permiss ion fo r ex ten s i ve copying o f t h i s t he s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r ep re sen ta t i ve s . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t he s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed without my w r i t t e n permi s s ion . Depa rtment of ScApQ 1 pf l e v w n Jf\i j ^ CuAg{ /\e^ ' O f \&J f^&Wi A< The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date Z<7 ~ 4- ~ =T& i i ABSTRACT Visual intrusions are a consequence of the presence of motor vehicles in urban residential areas. Measuring the community's level of annoyance to the negative images of vehicles, determining the capacity of the visual environment to accommodate vehicles, and introducing standards of visual quality for the appearance of a neighbourhood are tasks in which urban planners should become involved. In the study of visual vehicular disturbances, literature was reviewed and a case study was undertaken. A questionnaire was organized and administered in three Vancouver residential areas so as to obtain attitudinal and factual information. Attitudlnal responses were elicited in regard to the resident's actual environment and to certain standard environments portrayed in photographs. A data analysis involved correlations between variables which were hypothesized to be associated. The main conclusions from the research were, f i r s t that residents, when asked directly, do appear to be annoyed by the unattract!veness of vehicles in the residential environment. However, residents do not appear to be sensitive to the importance of visual intrusions as a problem when compared to other adverse vehicular effects. Second, the correlation coefficients were either not statistically significant or not high enough to be conclusive in support of the hypothesized associations between levels of annoyance and (l.) socio-economic status, (2) motor vehicle activity, and (3) effectiveness of visual screening.structures. Third, and finally, the visual-capacity of the residential environment to accommodate motor vehicles was perceived to be higher by communities of lower socio-economic status. i i i Because of the uncertain future use of motor vehicles, particularly in l i g h t of fuel shortages and r i s i n g insurance costs f o r vehicles, and the high public expenditures required f o r physical alterations to reorganize vehicular movements and parking f a c i l i t i e s , "short-term", "wait and see", "bandaid" type approaches are recommended to mitigate the problem of visual intrusions. A planning alternative whereby access-i b i l i t y i s maintained while measures are -taken to enhance the visual quality leads to an implementing proposal such as visual screening structures. TABLE OF CONTENTS iv CHAPTER Page I INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT 1 1.1.1 Introduction 1.1.2 Problem Statement 1.1.3 Hypothesis 1.1.4 Objectives of the Study 1.1.5 Assumptions 1.1.6 Scope and Limitations 1.1.7 Organization of Thesis II LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1 MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ... 10 2.1.1 Defining the Problem 2.1.2 An Orderly Presentation of Basic Factors Which Affect Accessibility and Environmental Quality 2.2 VISUAL INTRUSIONS DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF MOTOR VEHICLES 16 2.2.1 Visual Intrusions 2.2.2 Visual Perception and Sensory Cognition 2.2.2.1 Cognition and Cognitive Structure 2.2.2.2 Visual Perception 2.2.2.3 The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception 2.2.3 Community Values and Attitudes Concerning the Visual Environment 2.2.3.1 Aesthetic Values 2.2.3.2 Value Measurement 2.3 VISUAL BALANCE IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT 37 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS.. 41 III CASE STUDY 45 3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PRESENTATION OF DATA COLLECTED 45 3.1.1 Research Methodology 3.1.1.1 Selection of Study Areas 3.1.1.2 Questionnaire Format 3.1.1.3 Questionnaire Distribution 3.1.1.4 Field Observations 3.1.1.5 Field Measurements and Other Data 3.1.2 Presentation of Data Collected 3.1.2.1 General Description of Study Areas 3.1.2.2 Motor Vehicle Activity in the Study Areas V CHAPTER Page 3.1.2.3 Visual Screening i n the Study Areas 3.1.2.4 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Sample Households 3.1.2.5 Personal Socio-Economic Characteris-t i c s of the Sample Households 3.1.2.6 Attitudinal Responses 3.2 DATA ANALYSIS 89 3.2.1 S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures Employed 3.2.2 Case Study - Data Analysis and Findings 3.2.2.1 Annoyance and Visual Intrusions 3.2.2.2 Testing the Research Hypothesis 3.2.2.3 The Perceived Capacity of the Visual Environment to Accommodate Motor Vehicle Activity 3.2.2.4 Visual Screening 3.3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS • 105 3.3.I Case Study Conclusions 3*3.2 Discussion of Conclusions 3.3.3 Recommendations APPENDIX A Survey Questionnaire 12? B Letter of Introduction 136 C Components of the Urban Planning Process 137 D Visual Intrusions and Planning 138 E - l Adverse Vehicular Effects 139 E-2 Environmental Selection 140 E-3 Visual Screening Structures.... 141 BIBLIOGRAPHY 142 v i LIST OF TABLES TABLE Page 1 B r i t i s h Columbia Motor Vehicle Registrations, 1958-1966 3 2 Traffic Counter Tapes, 1974 59 3 Parked Vehicle Counts 60 4 Parked Vehicle Activity 6 l 5 Moving Vehicle Activity 65 6 Total Effectiveness of Visual Screening 6? 7 Average Period of Residence 67 8 Home Ownership........ • 76 9 Average Number of Cars per Household 76 10 Number of Vehicles per Household 77 11 Total Household Income 77 12 Households with Children ?8 13 Number of Children per Household 78 14 Ages of Sample Respondents 79 15 Sex of Sample Respondents... 79 16 Marital Status of Sample Respondents 81 17 Education Level of Sample Respondents... 81 18 Social Status of Occupation of Sample Respondents 82 19 Environmental Selection 82 20 Undesirable Effects of Motor Vehicle Activity 84 21 Extent of Annoyance - A. Parked Vehicles B. Moving Vehicles 85 22 Perceived Effectiveness of Screening Structures 86 23 Unattractiveness of Motor Vehicle Activity 86 v i i TABLE Page 24 Environmental Adaptation 88 25 Maximum Visual Tolerance - Parked Vehicles.. 88 26 Maximum Visual Tolerance - Moving Vehicles 90 2? Maximum Visual Tolerance - Parked and Moving Vehicles 90 28 Variable Indicies - Actual Environment 96 29 Nonparametric Correlations 97 30 Variable Indicies - Standard Environments 100 31 Maximum Tolerable Vehicular Activity - Standard Environments. 102 32 Visual Appearance of the Surroundings 104 v i i i LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ILLUSTRATION Page 1 Elements of A c c e s s i b i l i t y - Environmental Quality System 14 2 A Guidance Framework* Incorporating Aspects of V i s u a l Balance and T r a f f i c Intrusion. 38 3 Location of Study Areas 48 4 Study Area 1 49 5 Study Area 2. 50 6 Study Area 3 51 7 V i s u a l Screening Structures A. Study Area 1 70 B. Study Area 2 71 G. Study Area 3 73 8 E f f e c t i v e V i s u a l Screening Structures 116 9 V i s u a l Screening Structures - Inside and Outside Appearances 119 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT 1 1.1.1 Introduction Each year the world's net population increases "by close to 50 million persons. In the past century and a half, urban areas have been created faster than i n any previous time period i n world history.^" At this rate, according to J.O. Firestone, more than 35 million Canadians w i l l be located 2 i n our urban environment by the end of the century. An increased demand for land immediately surrounding urban areas for residential, work, and travel space has created a disconcerning side effect; 3 described by E. Higbee as "environmental leukemia". Urban decay, suburban sprawl, r i s i n g taxes, clogged streets, and disappearing recreational space are some of the impacts of this urbanization. The whole geographic scale of c i t i e s i s changing today, and at the base of the change i s the pressure from urban growth as well as man's desire 4 continually to "improve and intensify the quality of l i f e . " There i s l i t t l e place for a built-up city to grow but on the periphery, and with the motor vehicle giving greater freedom of location to the householder and greater a b i l i t y of commercial and public Interests to serve those households, patterns of new growth have been generally irregular and dispersed."' Despite the wide range of f a c i l i t i e s and services available, many central areas are dying and decaying, victims of ugliness, inconvenience, and obsolescence.^ Certain major factors have been held responsible for the evolution of c i t i e s . They aret (1) The Geographic Sprawl of the Cities. The City of Vancouver i s a 2 typical example. "The growth of the metropolitan area has been similar to most North American citiesj the central city remains relatively static while the surrounding municipalities continue to grow rapidly."'' (2) The Growth in the Number of Automobiles. Of particular interest is the Buchanan Report, 1963* which referred to the British situation. ... the assessment of the future number of vehicles can proceed only by the projection of past trends and considerations of the recent experiences of the United States ... so what is involved is a doubling of numbers within ten years, and nearly a trebling within twenty years." The Buchanan Report further qualifies the preceding forecast* ... the United States and Canada are about a generation farther into the Motor Age than we are. The stage that we have reached now. they reached some thirty or thirty-five years ago.9 In the years 1953-1964 Toronto, Canada, experienced a 100 percent increase in registered vehicles, compared to a population growth of only 50 percent for the same period.^"0 The following table shows that the increase in vehicle registrations in British Columbia from 1958-1966 was 60; percent. The population growth in British Columbia from 1956-1966 was 34 percent, (see Table l) Adaptation to the motor vehicle has been imminent in terms of journey to work, journey to home, and journey to shopping. The greater opportunity for mobility offered by this personalized form of transport has contributed to the geographic sprawl of cities by providing some people with the necessary means of easily relocating outside the city and yet being able to maintain contact with the city. This relocation has resulted in congestion and overloading street systems which in turn has raised the cost of automobile operation while undermining the urban residential environment.*^ (3) Increased Standard of Living. With the existence of an affluent 3 TABLE 1 British Columbia Motor Vehicle Registrations 1958 - 1966 British Columbia Population 1956 - 1966 YEAS 1956 1958 1959 1969 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 POPULATION 1,398,464 34$ increase 1,873,674 ) REGISTRATIONS 511,203 541,363 560,271 584,041 616,037 657,174 705,380 767,669 818,112 increase Source: Annual Reports of the Motor Vehicle Branch B.C. from 1958. and Statistics Canada, Canada Year Book 1974, (Ottawat Information Canada, 1974) p. 161. society', quite in contrast to the past generation, there has evolved in Canada and the United States a new way of l i f e in which people are experiencing an unprecedented period of wealth and opportunities. "The ordinary individual has access to such amenities as foods, entertainment, personal transportation, 12 and plumbing - in which not even the rich rejoiced a century ago." The tremendous growth in middle income groups, together with shorter working hours, and more leisure time, has resulted ln an increasing demand for goods, services, and facil i t i e s , and an increasing frequency of use of the motor vehicle. With this has come a new style of l i f e which can be linked to the flight to suburbia. Thus, urbanization has brought an image totally unflattering to the senses. It i s what has been called "Subtopia, the annihilation of the site, the steam rollering of a l l individuality of place to one uniform and mediocre pattern," J and leads others to state " ... most American cities are ugly ..." 1.1.2 Problem Statement The proliferation of motor vehicles i s a factor in the changing visual character of the city. Accommodating increasing numbers of vehicles demanding access to urban areas has singularly been thought of as the transportation problem. Most of the resulting, problems have been a i r and noise pollution, vibrations, visual intrusions, traffic congestion, and so on. In the past the transportation problem was treated by engineers either as one of accessibility or as one of circulation. This concentra-tion on efficient flows, parking capacity, and street hardware, however, has been at the expense of a 'second dimension* ***-* of the transportation problem} that i s , the effects that the presence of motor vehicles have 5 on the environment. Urban transportation is instead, therefore, a dual problem consisting of both motor vehicle accessibility and urban environ-mental quality. One specific adverse effect of this redefined transportation problem i s the creation of visual intrusions which deteriorate the appearance of the urban environment. If visual screening is not present, negative physical images can be perceived by urban residents as visual annoyance. The level of this annoyance will depend upon various aspects of the visual and cultural environments. If the central concern of urban planning is the urban environment and the quality of l i f e therein, then with respect to visual quality, the transportation planner faces three difficult taskst (1) The f i r s t task is to measure effectively the extent of visual deterioration and/or level of annoyance. The central problem for the planning profession will always remain - to reach a satisfactory interpre-tation of the public Interest in relation to land use. (2) The second task is to determine the capacity of the visual environ-ment to accommodate vehicles and then to develop a standard of visual environmental quality. Environmental quality cannot be effectively measured as acceptable or unacceptable unless a predetermined standard exists against 16 which present conditions can be compared. (3) The third task is to create a planning process through which alternative policies and implementing programs can be presented, thus leading towards the resolution or mitigation of accessibility-environmental quality conflicts. The visual balance of motor vehicle images with other components of the appearance of an urban residential environment presents a challenge for planning. 6 1.1.3 Hypothesis The hypothesis deals only with the f i r s t transportation planning task suggested in the Problem Statement. To interpret community needs and desires, from which policy objectives are formulated, requires that transportation planners be familiar with the relationship between attitudes and various conditions of the environment. Annoyance, with respect to certain visual images of motor vehicles as represented in attitudes, is a function of various characteristics of the physical and cultural environments. More specifically then, and for the purpose of the thesis, i t is hypothesized that j The visually undesirable aspects of motor vehicle activity are perceived by the individuals while on their own property at certain annoyance levels depending on (a) the individual's socio-economic status, (b) the physical charac-teristics of the motor vehicle activity, and (c) the total effectiveness of any type of visual screening presently existing on an individual's property. 1.1.4 Objectives of the Study The broad objective of the study is to investigate the problem of adverse visual effects of the presence of motor vehicles on the appearance of the urban environment, as they are perceived by the community inhabitants. By delving into the physical (appearance, aesthetics, and so on), the perceptual (cognition, perception, attitudes, and so on), and the planning implications of visual intrusions, It is hoped to gain better insight concerning the means by which conflicting community objectives can be dealt with. In Chapter III a case study examines the relationship between community attitudes and specific aspects of the physical and cultural environments. An attempt is made to determine the extent and direction of 7 influence of such physical variables as the presence of motor vehicles and visual screening, and such cultural variables as socio-economic characteristics, on the individual's level of annoyance. The intention is to measure the attitudes of the inhabitants of a community affected by visual intrusions so that more effective transportation planning can proceed on that community's behalf. 1.1*5 Assumptions For the purpose of this study i t is assumed that: It is desirable for a community to seek and demand a visual environment which will contri-bute toward its well-being. It is desirable and possible to achieve an< acceptable balance between motor vehicle accessibility and urban environ-mental quality• 1.1.6 Scope and Limitations This research investigation is intended to discuss and outline the process whereby visual environmental stimuli are perceived by individuals and are expressed through attitudes. Attitudes can be interpreted by urban planners who can suggest alternative changes which will lead to a better urban environment. The scope of the study extends only to an examination of visual characteristics. In particular, the state of vehicular activity (stopped or moving) and the number of vehicles (parking density or traffic volumes) affect the appearance of an environment. The appearance of vehicles i s perceived by the residents whose attitudes to the visually disturbing aspects are associated with other variables such as - income, education, and occupation. 8 No attempt is made to itemize or to investigate the f u l l range of problems in visual intrusions and environmental quality; nor is there any attempt to present a comprehensive l i s t of relevant alternative policy recommendations. Visual environmental traffic standards are discussed and visual screening is considered briefly, and only as a short-term or "bandaid" type recommendation. The method of investigation imposes a limitation to the study, as do the particular questions asked in the survey questionnaire, the availability of literature for review, and the specific problems of the various urban residential areas. 1.1.7 Organization of Thesis The thesis is comprised of three Chapters. Chapter I - INTRODUCTION, establishes through a documentation of the literature, the problems evolving from urban growth and their effect on the urban environment. An introduction to the problem of visual deterioration within neighbourhoods in the city is intended to arouse an interest for planning the appearance of the urban environment. Chapter II - LITERATURE REVIEW, i s divided into four sections, The fir s t section investigates the dimensions of the accessibility-environmental quality phenomenon. Terminology that is referred to throughout the study, is defined, and a framework to conceptualize the phenomenon (later to be termed a system) is presented. The second section looks further into one specific adverse effect as a consequence of vehicular accessibility, that is, visual intrusion. The process whereby visual images are determined as annoying in urban residential aareas is reviewed in discussions of visual perception, cognitive attitude formulation, and attitude measurement. 9 The third section reviews literature with respect to visual balance between vehicular images and the appearance of residential environments. The visual capacity of an environment i s discussed i n preparation for an examination, i n the fourth and f i n a l section, of visual environmental standards. Chapter III - CASE STUDY, the f i n a l component of the body of the thesis, represents a portion of a research project undertaken i n the summer of 1975 i n three Vancouver residential areas. It i s divided into three sections. The f i r s t section provides a description of the research methodology and a profile of the areas studied. The second analyzes the data collected and outlines the findings. A third, and f i n a l section then summarizes the case study and considers visual screening as a recommendation to reduce visual intrusions. REFERENCES - CHAPTER I \ . Davis, "The Urbanization of the Human Population," Scientific  American, Vol. 213, No. 3, (September, 1965) p. 41. The Vancouver Sun, March 15, 1968, p. 13. ?E. Higbee, The Squeeze: Cities Without Space, (New York: Morrow and Co., i960). I. Nairn, The American Landscape, (New Yorkt Random House Inc., 1965). e -'Vancouver Planning Department, "Vancouver's Changing Population", The City of Vancouver, June, 1964, p. 1. **J.W. Rouse, "Mill Downtown Pace up to its Future?", Urban Land, Vol. 16. No. 2, (Washington1 Urban Land Institute, 1957) P« 1* 7 'Vancouver Planning Department, op. ci t . , p. 1. Q Ministry of Transport, Traffic in Towns (The Buchanan Report), (London: HMSO, I963) p. 2?. Q 'Tbid., preface, p. 11. ^Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, Metropolitan Toronto, (Toronto1 Thorn Press, 1965). Mumford, "The Highway and the City", The Environmental Handbook, Garrett de Bell (ed.), (New York: Ballantine Books Inc., 19?0) pp. 182-196. 12 J.K. Galbraith, "The Dependence Effect and Social Balance", Private  Wants and Public Needs, E.S. Phelps (ed.), (New York: W.W. Morton and Co., 1962) p. 22. ~ ^ 1 . Nairn, "Outrage", Architectural Review, (Westminster: S.W.I. Architectural Press, June 1965) P« 371» 14 Heyerson, Martin, and E.C. Banfield, Boston: The Job Ahead, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I 9 6 6 ) . ^J.C. Barford, Environmental Traffic Standards, Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 1968, p. 2. l 6Ibid., p. 4. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW The adverse effects of motor vehicles on the quality of community l i f e have "become a matter of serious concern to planners.! It i s i n regard to such a statement as the above that this literature review i s undertaken. The particular adverse; effect to be examined i s the visual intrusions resulting from the presence of motor vehicles. The appearance of the urban residential environment i s the focal area of attention. The structure of this literature review i s comprised of four sections. The content of these sections arises from literature concerning f i r s t , the association between motor vehicle accessibility and the environmental quality of the urban neighbourhood; second, the problem of visual Intrusions and the appearance of the neighbourhood; third, the theories of visual environ-mental capacity and visual balance; and fourth, the concept of visual environmental standards. 2.1 MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 2.1.1 Defining the Problem It has been rightly said that i n our eagerness to go places we 2 are i n danger of destroying places worth going to. The insistence on using vehicles to penetrate a l l areas at a l l times i s having a deteriorating effect on the urban surroundings. This i s expressed physically by the massive intrusion of vehicles which destroy the visual balance and compact layout of c i t i e s ... 3 When motor vehicles are admitted to a residential area, environmental conditions are altered. The penetration of vehicles throughout urban areas brings the penalties of accidents, anxiety, intimidation by large 11 or fast vehicles that are out of scale with the surroundings, noise, fumes, vibrations, and visual intrusions on a vase scale. The Buchanan Report, Traffic in Towns, pointed out in 1963 the two major problems of urban transportation. There is f i r s t the difficulty of providing accessibility for motor vehicles, and second the adverse effects of traffic on the quality of the urban environment. V.S. Pendakur and G.R. Brown^ further point out that the efficiency and f lexibi l i ty of the automobile have produced a conflict in which the high level of potential accessibility deemed desirable by urban residents tends to contradict the social objectives of a safe, attractive, urban environment. It is recognized, however, that a limited level of motor vehicle activity is perhaps necessary 7 and even compatible with urban street l i f e . Thus, i t is evident that motor vehicle activity and urban environmental quality are not two separate nor unrelated items but rather two facets of the same problem. The present contradiction between accessibility and environmental quality is a conflict betweenltwo elements of the same movement 8 9 system. ' Residential urban areas contribute to the generation of traffic and provide destinations to which i t can go. Two factors which compound the conflicts between vehicular accessi-bi l i ty and environmental quality are: (1) The increase in total vehicular activity in many urban residential areas .as a result of (a) an increase in the total number of motor vehicles present and, (b) the changing attitudes and demands for personalized mobility, leading to a greater frequency of use of each vehicle. 1 0 (2) Management and engineering schemes which purport to improve the accessibility for motor vehicle users. This often exceeds the environmental 12 capacity and thereby reduces the environmental quality of the urban area.""" In fact, vehicular activity has often been permitted and encouraged to expand i n urban areas at the expense of good l i v i n g conditions. J. Antoniou states that. ... t r a f f i c improvements which seriously affect the physical environment are seen as a disagreeable necessity in order that c i t i e s can continue to function. Many Improvements for vehicle activity have rapidly exceeded their designed capacity and/or have become obsolete.^ Antoniou observes further that there appears to be a conflict i n objectives and attitudes between planners and engineers concerning the conflicting requirements of t r a f f i c and neighbourhood amenities. The engineer, who i n the past has been •.given- the responsibility of resolving the problems of vehicular accessibility and design of urban vehicle routes, and who by education and training has acquired a quantitative approach to t r a f f i c and i t s effects, has tended to use c r i t e r i a based predominantly on engineering and economic factors. L i t t l e attention has been paid to the environmental implication of t r a f f i c . The technical standards adopted by the engineer have been considered by implication to be acceptable levels of quality. On the other hand, Antoniou suggests that the planner, by education, has a much wider range of interests and i s consequently involved i n a wider spectrum of a c t i v i t i e s ; including f o r example, socio-economic planning, physical restructuring, as well as planning f o r better accessibility. By their very nature these requirements are often conflicting and the planner must therefore be engaged i n the Intricate task of balancing and absorbing contradictions. But to achieve these conflicting aims, the planner has not as yet developed a clear-cut way of expressing the value of the various 13 attributes of the urban fabric to the same extent that the engineer has 13 developed his quantitative standards. From the evidence of emerging physical results of past transportation policies, i t is evident that traffic technology has continued to increase 14 in its application while traffic planning has lagged behind. Engineers have tended to emphasize the movement of vehicles while planners to a lesser extent have tended to emphasize the movement of people and goods. This philosophical difference in approach has encouraged traffic schemes to achieve the urban objectives for accessibility generally at the expense of the objectives for environmental quality. In conclusion, there is a wide range of adverse effects from the presence of vehicles in the urban environment. Since there are often substantial difficulties in visualizing and assessing the impacts of effects, i t i s helpful to conceptualize the elements of the movement system in an orderly framework. Subsection 2.1.2 presents a model which, although >, designed in regard to conflicts and balance between vehicles and pedestrians in a suburban shopping district, can equally be applied to those conflicts and balance between vehicles and householders in an urban residential district. 2.1.2 An Orderly Presentation of Basic Factors Which Affect  Accessibility and Environmental Quality As suggested previously, motor vehicle activity functions as a part of an interacting system which incorporates both the needs of the urban residential areas and the vehicles themselves. V.S. Fendakur and G.R. Brown* extending the Initial research of the Buchanan Report, have presented a framework of the basic factors which affect accessibility and environmental o ILLUSTRATION 1 ELEMENTS OF ACCESSIBILITY - ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SYSTEM: (A) SUPPORTING ELEMENTS; (B) CONFLICTING ELEMENTS SUPPORTING E L E M E N T S Street Width Vehicular Speed -Vehicular Volume _ Pedestrian Crosswalks + Controlled Intersections + Message Communication + Exposure Points -Pathway Directness Parking Proximity Linkage Severance Noise -Vibration -Fumes -On-street Truck Density — Parking facility Size -Existence of oostreet Parkin; -Moving Vehicle Density -No. Traffic Control Devices -Design of Control Devices + Parking Spaces + Parking Proximity + Parking Facility Access + Off-street Service Areas + Access to Service Areas + Clarity of Control Devices + Roadside Visual Interest + Clarity of Road Layout BACKGROUND 1-ACTORS Potential By-Pass Routes Socio-economic Conditions Vehicle Design Cultural Conditioning Driver Skill +/_ direction of change to meet planning cojectives ^ — supporting elements - — conflicting elements CONFL ICT ING E L E M E N T S i Street Width -Vehicular Speed -Vehicular Volume Pedestrian Crosswalks Controlled Intersections + Message Communication + Exposure Points -Pathway Directness Parking Proximity L inkage Severance On-street Truck Density Parking Facility Size Noise -Vibration -Fumes -E xistence of oostreet Parkinrj Moving Vehicle Density No. Traffic Control Devices Design of Control Devices Turning Movements _ Pedestrian Crosswalks - Controlled Intersections + Parking Facility Pedestrian Flows + Travel Sfwcd Potential - Fxistcnee ot oostreet pnrknc + Lane Width •! + Street Width - Controlled Intersections • i - Traffic Flow Interruptions •• • '• i v • + Parking Spaces + Parking Proximity + Parking Facility Access + Off-street Service Areas + Access to Service Areas + Clarity of Control Devices + Roadside Visual Interest • Clarity of Road Layout BACKGROUND P A Y O R S Potential By-Pass Routes Socio-economic Conditions Vehicle Design Cultural Conditioning Driver Skill  +/_ direction of change to ' meet planning objectives — supporting elements . — conflicting elements Source: Pendakur and Brown, op. c i t . , pp. 48-49. 15 quality, and which provides a means of conceptualizing a l l elements of the accessibility-environmental quality system (see Illustration 1). The development of a system framework arose from the authors' recognition that the planning task requires a framework which will rationalize the accessi-bi l i t y and environmental objectives in terms of the relationships between the elements of the system. According to the authors then, the system consists of two concepts. That of 'Environmental Quality* Includes the parameters - pedestrian safety, pedestrian convenience, comfort, and appearance, and that of 'Accessibility' consists of - driver and vehicle safety, convenience, penetration, and visual harmony. Since many of these terms have broad meanings, some explanation is ln order. Environmental quality refers only to the resulting quality of those aspects of the physical environment which are affected by motor vehicles. Appearance is the mosaic of visual images which result from motor vehicles, signs, and various street and traffic hardware. Visual intrusions are the negative images produced, by these elements. Accessibility is used in the broad sense of the Buchanan Report, that is,the degree of freedom for vehicles to circulate and to penetrate to individual destinations and to stop on arrival. Quantitatively i t is the relative measure between the capacity of an area to accommodate vehicles and the number of vehicles seeking to enter and stop within,^ Accessibility refers to the complete system of movementj safety* convenience, driver comfort, visual harmony with roadway elements, and penetration for parking. The parameters of accessibility and environmental quality can be sub-divided into their constituent elements. For example, the concept of appearance is denoted by measurements of moving vehicle density, existence 16 of on-street parking, and so on. The interaction of the constituent elements of the system i l l u s -trate three possible relationships. F i r s t , there are elements that support one another. For example, to meet planning objectives for the appearance of an urban area and f o r motor vehicle accessibility a reduction i n on-street parking w i l l benefit both the residents and the vehicle operator. Second, there are independent elements that have no effect on the other. For instance, the reduction of visual intrusions by implementing various types of screening does not affect accessibility. Third, there are certain elements that conflict. If, for example, vehicle speeds are reduced to enhance safety in the neighbourhood, accessibility w i l l be decreased since delay i n reaching a destination w i l l be increased. In summary, the system framework of Pendakur and Brown i s an orderly presentation of the basic factors which affect accessibility and environ-mental quality within urban areas. It portrays the tradeoffs between a high quality and the need for vehicle accessibility. Attention i n Section 2.2 i s devoted to a discussion of conflicting elements of the system; specifically the visual intrusions from vehicle activity which have negative impacts on the appearance of the urban residential environment. 2.2 VISUAL INTRUSIONS DUE TQ THE PRESENCE OF MOTOR  VEHICLES This section sets out to discuss the problem of visual disturbances due to the presence of motor vehicles i n the urban residential neighbourhood. The concepts of visual perception and sensory cognition are examined and the process of value measurement i s discussed. 1? 2.2.1 Visual Intrusions The whole setting of the urban street has been affected by the motor vehicle; the consequence has been visual disamenlty.^ This visual degradation has evolved over time. After the introduction of the motor vehicle as a personalized mode of transportation, there was a short-lived organic type relationship between buildings, streets, the surrounding trees, and the atmosphere created by the activity of vehicles and pedestrians. The result was a unified, visual entity. But today this important quality is lacking* Visual intrusion is now a serious matter to 17 which society will be bound to pay serious heed. 18 The intrusion into the environment is of two kinds. The f i r s t i s the intrusion of the motor vehicle itself, both moving and at rest, into almost every corner so that wherever one looks one i s confronted with a continual mass of vehicles of every shape and hue. The second kind of visual intrusion i s the' clutter of signs, signals, bollards, railings, and the rest of the paraphernalia which are deemed necessary to satisfy 19 the demands of the motor vehicle. The effects of the intrusion can be the blocking out or interference with the view of existing visual Amenities or the degradation or enhancement of the surrounding appearance. The motor vehicle transcends the intimacy of human scale demanded for pedestrian activity to that latter's ultimate 20 destruction. Larger vehicles such as trucks or buses can Impair the whole visual scale and sever the resident's view. The f i l l i n g station and the parking:lot are two of the most unstimulating forms in the urban environment which tend to destroy any sense of scale with their openess. The negative images from high densities of parked vehicles on narrow streets can portray an awkward, congested, unsightly appearance. Where traffic is on the move, visual intrusion is expressed predominatly from the sheer flow of vehicles involved. Continuous streams of traffic can debase the visual character of any adjacent surroundings. The effects that were originally created or intended by architectural expression can be broken or 21 destroyed. Prior to the proliferation of vehicles in urban areas various less attractive aspects of the visual environment could often be absorbed. However, when certain streets were widened to accommodate greater vehicle flows and on-street parking, pedestrian boulevards and trees were replaced by waste paper baskets and gigantic concrete lamp stands. The result has been that unnecessary attention is drawn to the rather unsophisticated architecture which previously would have blended into the local atmosphere.' The most damaging visual Impacts have occurred in those residential areas built before the impact of motor vehicle traffic, parking, or street fixtures and hardware. Certain visual aspects of vehicles can enhance environmental appearance. The visual and psychological impressions promoted by the individual vehicle have been thoroughly explored as a means of promoting sales. Often i t i s not so much the performance or the safety factors that are exploited, but rather the slick style of the vehicle, as a way of projecting a particular image in the public mind. The visual problem of endless rows< of parked vehicles often has l i t t l e relevance to the image 23 projected by the individual vehicle. At this point one might ask how serious is the problem of negative visual effects resulting from motor vehicle activity? Actually, of a l l 19 the adverse e f fec t s , the question of v i s ua l intrus ions i s the most debatable. However, the motor age has contributed towards many phys ica l changes i n the urban scene. Indeed the whole se t t ing of the s t reet has been af fected by the motor veh ic les . The conglomeration of vehic les mars 24 the general appearance of many areas. The v i s ua l consequences of the intrus ions by motor vehic les as reported i n the Buchanan Report a r e : ^ The crowding ,;out of every ava i lab le square yard of urban space with vehic les e i t he r moving or stat ionary, so that the bui ld ings seem to r i s e from a p l inth of cars; the destruct ion of a r ch i t ec tu ra l and h i s t o r i c a l scenes; the in t ru s ion in to parks and squares; the garaging, se rv ic ing , and maintenance of vehic les i n r e s i den t i a l s t reets which creates more than jus t the impression of hazards f o r ch i ld ren , trapping garbage and l i t t e r , and great ly hindering snow clearance; and the i n d i r e c t e f fec t s of o i l s ta ins which render dark black the only colour f o r surfaces. Indifference to v i s ua l i n t rus ion leads eventually to a slovenly ?6 disregard f o r the qua l i t y of the surroundings. Peoples ' senses can become dul led to the v i s ua l d isorder around them, encouraging r i g i d i t y of perception 27 of v i s ua l communication. I f , f o r example, permanent parking a t the curbside becomes accepted, then maintenance, garbage, o i l s ta ins , grease, and l i t t e r are accepted f o r they cannot be swept away. There i s nothing i s the experience of the United States to suggest that frank acceptance of v i s ua l impact of motor vehicle a c t i v i t y i s leading to the emergence of any new kind of b r i l l i a n t , l i v e l y urban townscape. On the contrary i t i s producing unrelieved ugl iness on a great s c a l e . ^ Vehicular intrus ions reducing the qua l i t y of the v i s ua l scene i s a dangerously subjective form of po l l u t i on . This i s not only a re su l t from the d i f f i c u l t y of quantify ing v i s u a l qua l i t y and awareness, but a l so because 39 of the continuously changing s o c i a l a t t i tudes towards the motor veh ic le . Measures of the extent or importance of v i s ua l po l l u t i on vary with the different attitudes of the urban residents, which in turn vary according to the individual's value system. The following subsection deals with visual perception and value measurement. 2.2.2 Visual Perception and Sensory Cognition Visual communication between the urban resident and motor vehicle activity in the environment is dependent upon four components! (1) the image and the source of visual stimulus, (2) the medium and the process through which the stimulus is transmitted, (3) the reception of the visual stimulus and the physiological process of seeing and, (4) the decoding and the interpretation of the visual stimulus by perceptual and cognitive processes, resulting in'attitudinal and/or behavioral r e s p o n s e s . ^ It is the fourth component of the visual communication process that is expanded upon in this subsection. 2*2.2.1 Cognition and Cognitive Structure Cognitive theory is a term used to refer to the general theoretical orientation that emphasizes central processes (for example, attitudes, ideas, 32 expectancies) in the explanation of behavior. The terms cognition and cognitive structure are basic to cognitive theory. M. Scheerer refers to cognition as a centrally mediated process representing internal and external events. "It takes the form of phenomenal organization which is centrally 33 Imposed between the source of stimulation and the behavioral adjustment."-^ L. Festinger identifies "cognitive elements" as cognitions, which he defines as the things a person knows about himself, his behavior, and his surroundings. V. Neisser states that cognition refers to processes by which any sensory input is transformed, reduced, elaborated, stored, ..recovered, and used. J J Thus cognition seems to be that which is known or knowledge acquired through personal experience. Cognitive structure i s defined as an organized subset of the attributes an individual uses to identify and discriminate a particular 36 object or event. W.A. Scott uses the term cognitive structure to mean those structures whose elements consist of ideas consciously held by the person or as the set of ideas maintained by a person and readily available to conscious awareness. The content of experience i s believed to be organized into more complex structural assemblies, and i t i s these structures that give meaning to specific elements (for example, particular beliefs, knowledges, values, expectancies). These cognitive structures play a significant role in learning, perception, and similar psychological 37 processes. 2.2.2.2 Visual Perception Basic to a l l visual communication is visual perception. Our perception of the quality of the urban visual environment involves the complicated interaction of many processes and is subject to influences from many sources, thus making i t difficult to define, except in the most elemental 38 way. In the simplest psychological sense, perception i s the way an 39 organism relates to its environment. This definition encompasses a l l of the senses and cognitive processes and stresses the concept of organism-environment interaction. Perception is a psychological process which clearly reveals the cognitive orientation. M. Scheerer defines perception as the phenomenal representation of distal objects (physical objects) 22 resulting from the organization of distal stimuli, the medium, and the proximal stimuli (for example, the pattern of stimulation on the retina of the eye). Thus, individuals must rely upon the proximal stimulation for perception, but this pattern i s not the object we perceive. Although the proximal stimuli are mutually independent, the perception i s an organized whole. A person sees a table, for example, and not merely the pattern of light waves reflected by the object (table). The organization of independent local stimuli is induced by the relations among them. The meaning of whatever is perceived derives from the class of precepts with which i t is grouped. Meaning is thus a consequence of a categorization process that is 42 basic to perception. According to E.B. Hunt a person learns a number of large information processing units. J These units are specifically designed for the manipula-tion of an internally represented environment. This environment i s , of course, symbolically coded. Using these learned information processing units, the individual is able to construct an internal model of the environ-ment. This environment can then be used to predict external events. 44 D.E. Berlyne identifies several aspects of perception. (1) The perceived properties of a stimulus vary according to the pattern of which i t is a part. (2) Perceptions are variable from person to person and from time to time. (3) Perception varies with the direction (focus) of the sense organs. (4) Perceptions tend to develop in a particular direction, and are largely irreversible. Por Instance, once a concealed object is discovered i t cannot be ignored. Perception is determined by two major sets of factors or variables! 45 structural variables and functional variables. J The structural variables are those inherent in the physical stimuli and the neural events they produce in the human nervous system. Functional factors are those that reside in the perceiver, for example, needs, moods, past experiences of the perceiver, and other Individual characteristics. Although the concern here is with perceptions which are generated hy visual stimuli, i t is difficult to separate perceptual responses which 46 are solely the; property of one sense. For example, an urban resident's favourable reaction to a certain level or type of motor vehicle activity may be conditioned not only by the visual stimuli, but also by the odour of the vehicles or other sources of air pollution, the sun glaring in his eyes, the roaring and honking of traffic, dust blown up on his face -and on and on one could go, listing environmental variables that could condition the negative perception of the visual images before him. Thus perception of a visual display involves a complex interaction of cultural, historical, maturatlonal, situational, and environmental variables - and the combinations and effects of these variables vary with each individual 47 in society. Donald Appleyard, in his urban research, has suggested that three types of visual perception appear to be dominant! operational, responsive 48 kQ and inferential. ' ^ Many elements in the urban residential environment are visually perceived because of their operational roles. People use their urban environments to perform various tasks. The street, for example, may be seen as a component of the urban transportation system. Visual perception directed by activities i s similar. For example, the urban resident who uses the car himself for daily shopping trips, may perceive other traffic as functional in regard to that a c t i v i t y . ^ 24 Visual perception implies cognition, /but physiological-and physical factors are Important conditioners.^1 Visual perception is responsive therefore to the nature of the physical environment. Bright, singular, isolated, and distinctive characteristics of vehicular activity can catch the eye and cause visual intrusion for the urban resident. There are certain principles of vision as well which influence perception. For example, i t is known that the visual perception system i s kept at a high level of arousal under conditions of highly intense background illumination. Similar i n -creases in perceptual responsiveness can be attributed to various configura-tions, colour combinations, shapes, textures, sizes, and so on of the physical environment. For example, high densities of parked vehicles and/or congested vehicular traffic can cause the urban resident's perception to be much more responsive. Negative reactions are frequently directed toward 53 the most overt manifestations of visual communication. ^ Since motor vehicles are so prominent in many urban areas they have become an easily selected,target for visual pollution charges. Distinctive type elements of the physical environment are analagous to those "imageable" elements which 54 Kevin LyncJr has described. Finally, perception is inferential and probabilistic in nature. As people grow up, they develop a generalized system of environmental categories, concepts, and relationships which form their coding system for the urban 55 environment. ^ A new urban resident will draw certain inferences about the motor vehicle activity according to what he learned to expect from vehicular activity at his previous place of residence. Perception in this sense can be seen more as a cognitive decision process fitting categories,^ predicting probabilities, forming and testing hypotheses. Those items of the environment which occur more frequently will he more accessible in a person's reference system and will stand.a good chance of being identified. Motor vehicle activity is likely highly accessible in most resident's reference systems. For opposite reasons, more related to curiosity, the unfamiliar or unusual aspects of vehicular activity will also be noticed. The tensions between environmentally dominant responsive perception and the urban resident's dominant operational and inferential perception appear to be fundamental to a person's environmental experience. The visual communication with the environment, which is in any case a sporadic one, is continually shifting between subjective and objective, personal and environmental poles, according to our familiarity, experience, mood, the task at hand, and the nature of the environment."^ While these perceptual dispositions do shift from moment to moment, i t is also fairly certain that individuals emphasize one or the other, according to their value system , as an enduring disposition. The individual has a value scale that he can distinguish visual sensations as agreeable or unpleasant (this will be discussed further in subsection 2.2.3. Moreover, the individual has a 59 memory and can compare time segments of experience. Much of the visual communication is absorbed by the urban resident and represented in his memory as actions or images without transformation as enactive or iconic images, while others are labelled, categorized, or interpreted for some particular purpose or through habit or experience.^ The resident's representation of the immediate environment is the product of two information systems, the substance of direct experience and the indirect language of communicating that experience. People perceive information directly from the environment and indirectly from friends, 26' books, the news media, and several other sources. The human brain trans-lates and combines these sources into a coherent network of urban environmental knowledge. 2.2.2.3 The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception As stated previously, perceptions of the visual environment are conditioned by cultural experiences. Culture includes the accumulated behavior patterns of a society, and each individual's habits with that culture are as a result of his experiences.^ Early studies have dealt largely with cultural world views and indicate that people tend to classify, name, and interpret similar experiences according to pre-existing patterns that are traditional within their culture. There i s also evidence to Indicate that an individual becomes selectively sensitized to some stimuli rather than others as a function of his membership in a particular cultural 62 group. The planner may discover, for example, that individuals of a higher socio-economic group perceive a high density of parked vehicles on the street to be more visually annoying than a lower socio-economic group would perceive i t to be. Studies, such as these, indicate culturally based differences in the processes which intervene between presentation of a stimulus to a receptor organ and perception of that stimulus. In other words, culturally shaped experiences predispose people to perceiveoeasily some features of the environment while they find i t difficult to detect others. Visual perception is influenced by a person's inference system which has been established through habit. As with other culturally affected phenomena, i t is therefore a very human tendency to judge a visual display of say,, vehicular traffic, from one's own point of view. This ethnocentric interpretation by an Individual is based then on his environmental background - cultural and natural. Historically, a controversy over the nature of visual perception has evolved among experimental psychologists. The primary area of conflict i s known as the nativist-empirical controversy. The empiricist interpretation of perception relates visual response to cultural and ecological facts in the visual environment. This position postulates that the pattern of visual experiences to which a person is subjected in his lifetime modifies his perception of objects in space and thus the world is perceived according to learned expectations. The nativist argument, on the other hand, maintains that certain perceptual tendencies are part of the human biological endowment, irrespective of culture and that certain basic aspects of the learning process occur in a l l humans. 63 The popular position today tends to support the hypothesis that visual perception varies from person to person as a result of culturally mediated differences in experience (which are built up as unconscious assumptions about, for example, the urban environment), rather than 64 biological differences in visual perception. For example, W. Hudson, studying depth perception in cultural groups, found that South African students who are not as familiar with photographs (that is, black and white two-dimensional representations of objects in three-dimensional space), 6*5 encountered failure to perceive the object displayed in the photograph. D Similar support to the hypothesis has been provided in regard to content 66 67 68 perception, colour perception, ' and the perception of form. One final point is that the perception of the visual fi e l d (that i s , the pictoral mode of visual perception) is dependent upon conditions of attitude more than on conditions of stimulation. This may be of importance to the planner who uses photographs in an attitudinal survey. J.J. Gibson 28 states, " *.* the visual f i e l d i s a product of the chronic habit of civilized 69 men of seeing the world as a picture." 2.2.3 Community Values and Attitudes Concerning the Visual Environment Planning agencies are continuously discovering or being confronted with problems and/or opportunities in the urban environment. Assuming sufficient resources are available, the planning process commences with an i n i t i a l data collection so as to permit the identification of alternative 70 policies in regard to the urban problem or opportunity.' (see Appendix C) The two major steps of a data collection are, (1) to identify the demands or issues within the particular urban area, and (2) to identify the inherent capabilities of the urban environment to serve various community objectives. This second step is considered ln section 2.3» If. for example;then, the planner i s presented with the problem of visual intrusions resulting from the presence of motor vehicles, i t is essential i n i t i a l l y to collect an inventory of data on the demands regarding the issues. The articulation of demands may be in the form of attitudes expressed as complaints from annoyed householders or unexpressed as the general desire of the community for a high quality visual environment. The urban planner has the responsibility of developing policy alternatives that take community values into consider-ation, and then of evaluating alternatives according to the community's values 71 framework, so as to arrive at a set of relevant alternatives. The values of a community help to determine the value of an alternative course of action. 2.2.3.1 Aesthetic Values An immediate distinction should be made between the terms>value and values. The term value refers to the relative worth, merit, or importance of a thing. A residential view or scene, for example, may be deemed important or of value. The term values, on the other hand, as defined by 72 D.J. Bern,' refers tot ... primitive preferences for, or positive attitudes toward, certain end-states (like freedom) .. or certain broad modes of conduct (like honesty) ... 73 I.K. Fox ^  defines values as: ... ideals, customs, institutions of a society toward which its people have an effective regard. 74 D. Loeks defines the basis of a community's evaluation of a thing. ... that quality of a thing which individuals or society feels is worth acquiring, protecting, and conserving. It is the process and criterion with which that 'quality* is evaluated by the community that is of particular concern of planners and psychologists. 75 G. Santayana'-' discusses the concept of values with respect to criterion of preference. He says that the 'good' is that which is preferred and that there are two classes of good. The f i r s t contains things aesthetic that are good for their own sake. They require no justification; they are good because they are preferred; they are preferred because they give pleasure, which is an end in itself. The second class of good contains things moral, that are good because they serve a preferred purpose. They are not valued for their own sake but because they are the keys to other desired things. This frequently involves an opportunity cost or sacrifice, which means that an opportunity for pleasure is foregone in order to obtain a more preferred opportunity. I.K. Fox states that community values (ideals, customs) influence the means and extent to which a community values (measures the worth;of) a 30 condition of the environment. The community's value framework i s the term given to the residents' basis for measuring or verifying the relative importance or value. Combined, the two concepts - values and value 76 framework, make up the community's value system. This is a dynamic system. External circumstances can alter l i f e conditions in a community and consequently change inhabitants' values and/or the basis for evaluation 77 of altered l i f e conditions. Although i t is often difficult for the planner to Obtain a consistent, operational set of values that represent the consensus of the community affected' by, for example, vehicular intrusions, there exists however a broad and commonly recognized set of basic values which underly representative democratic government. The three higher values are (1) social well-being which includes a high quality visual environment, (2) the 79 conservation ethic, and (3) equity. Things of beauty or of visual quality generally are highly regarded by individuals in a community. The criterion for their preference, as explained previously, is that they are preferred for their own sakes and 80 therefore determined good* But how do we acquire tastes in urban residential views or scenesj. appraising one as beautiful and another as visual pollution? One answer is that we are so taught; and our teachers are ultimately the great artists J who have accustomed our eyes to see environments in certain 81 ways. Therefore, like other values discussed in subsection 3«3«li aesthetic values, including concepts of spatial harmony, are culturally influenced) are subject to change* and are things we acquire in the process of maturation and learning. Evaluation of a residential view is compounded of many elements of which visual appeal - the beauty of surface forms - is one. The beautiful view, like any aesthetic object, has the power to express through purely visual means - qualities of line, volume, mass and colour - the forms of go our feeling. The use of biological terminology. such as "vital", "necessary", "living", "dynamic", and "inviolable", in appraising the visual images, suggests that even from the perspective of pure aesthetics, beauty is closely related to man's deepest sense of organic well-being. Beauty is not identical with charm and sense appealj i t is expressive (or significant) form; i t is 'pleasure objectified'.^ As visible form beauty clarifies and shapes our aesthetic values, emotions, 84 and sensibility. Few people, however, are endowed with (or have taken the trouble to develop) a high degree of aesthetic sensibility. The visual attitude toward art, as described by Tuan^ is, ... 'I may not know anything about i t , but I know what I like'. And when we are confronted by a painting we want to know what i t says, .. and we can rarely focus on its aesthetic merits alone; ... If this is true of peoples* attitude toward works of art, i t is doubly true of their attitude toward residential scenes which, after a l l , are not made primarily as objects for aesthetic contemplation. Most people require that their environments be functional and thus, the appeal of the visual environment is superficial - a gloss on function. Aesthetic values are, more often than not, influenced by other values. People in a community prefer certain visual environments on purely aesthetic grounds, such as, "visual delight" which is a rewarding environmental experience or "visual seriousness" which is an aesthetic 86 quality of natural environments. However, most peoples' visual judgment of their environment goes beyond an evaluation of the surface appearance 32 to the social or economic forces that have brought the images into being, or to an ecological ideal that a scene exemplifies. For example, by visual pollution i t is meant that judgment of the health of the community is on the grounds of visual evidence in the residential environment. Householders visualize congested traffic volumes and densities, of parked cars and take them as evidence that society is desperately i l l . They see commercial vehicles rumble past and conclude that society is drunk with business ethos and blind to other values. Other householders who perceive commercial traffic as economic well-being or progress may visualize the vehicular activity as beautiful. In other words, the argument as to what makes for quality in an environment is pursued at the level of social and moral philosophy and of ecological principles, and not at the level of pure 87 88 aesthetics. Visual pollution, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and is difficult therefore to delimit. ... Just as no scene is so impecable that i t will not offend some observers, there is no scene so blighted that i t will not find admirers ...89 90 Aesthetic quality is a matter of subjective judgment. Aesthetic judgments then, vary widely in community evaluation of the visual quality of the 91 residential environment. Each critic may dislike what he sees not because the object or view itself is visual pollution but because i t provokes some displeasing reaction; excitement, anxiety or perhaps shock for 92 example. Furthermore, i t is not just the motor vehicle presence or activity but the presence or activity in the view from the homes. Habitation 93 conditions aesthetic judgment. J Repeated views of a site or the simple lapse of time will dull the impact of what f i r s t appeared beautifulj or i t may have the opposite effect, enabling the observer to find virtue in a scene that initally was repelling. To deal further with aesthetic judgment would require delving into such elusive topics as - a sense of place, meaning of landscape, environ-mental influence, the concept of home, feeling, moods, and the emotional reaction to the particular character of particular places. However, i t should suffice, here, to recognize that a high quality of visual environment 94 9*5 (defined by Buchanan' as stimulating and interesting, and by Peterson7-' as a function of sound physical quality, harmony with nature, and variety of richness of appearance) i s determined by aesthetic judgment and i s based upon common aesthetic values of those persons observing the appearance of the environment. 2.2.3.2. Value Measurement Assuming that individuals do have a value system associated with their visual environment, then in order to provide information for decision making i t is necessary to measure the value systems. In urban planning elected officials often make unfounded assumptions about the kind of urban 96 environment the public wants. Gaining citizen acceptance of a policy depends on the extent to which citizen values are reflected in the policy. There is l i t t l e agreement about the nature of a community's values or how 97 to measure them; } however, a group's value structure relative to an environment should be a major factor in making decisions which will alter 98 the environment. . Of the various procedures used to identify community values, the attitude survey is one of the most frequently u t i l i z e d . ^ ' 1 0 0 ' 1 0 i » 1 0 2 The real advantage of these types of surveys seems to be that they give an overall guidance and direction to the planning effort. They give an Indication of what the community is thinking c and the issues which i t feels are of greatest importance. In a general way, surveys form a logical 103 basis for the development of planning objectives. v 104 M.T. Shaffer suggests that a problem of surveys is that in practice, opinions are often measured instead of attitudes. Opinions, she says, are simple views, judgments,oor beliefs having to do with specific situations. By their nature they are inherently unstable and are open to influence and change by social pressure. The use of opinions as a tool, therefore, has l i t t l e predictive value. Attitudes, however, are considered more basic and complex than opinions; they relate to rather abstract elements such as time, convenience, aesthetics, and education. An attitude i s a learned predisposition to behave in a consistent manner in a given situation; 1 0^ and as such attitudes are more enduring than opinions. According to L.W. Doob,"^ An attitude is an implicit response ... which is evoked by a variety of stimulus patterns as a result of previous learning or of gradients of generalization and discrimination ... Doob notes that i t must be an immediate response and i t may be conscious or "unconscious" and verbal or propioceptive. The overt response that is an expression of the underlying (implicit) attitude is the result of the attitude state and other tendencies within the individual (drive, habit). The stimuli which e l i c i t attitudes are various, they may be external or internal. According to Doob, the arousal or evocation of an attitude results from two broad psychological processest perception and learning. Perception promotes responses of paying attention to a given stimulus pattern because of some previous familiarity with the pattern. Learning, on the other hand, defines the factors in the past history of the individual that led to this familiarity (for example, a bond between the stimuli and attitude). Thus the individual perceives a given object (or state within himself), and this perceptual event leads to the evocation of one's habitual orientation toward that object. Two people holding similar attitudes toward a given object or class of objects (for example, motor vehicles in the visual environment) might overtly respond differently because of differences in Internal stimuli, such as drive level, at the moment of response. Doob suggests three reasons why attitudes are evoked. The f i r s t is the previous learning of the individual. Thus, some stimuli may become elicitors of attitudes through the process of conditioning. For example, i f motor vehicle noise is negatively reinforcing to the individual, the image of motor vehicles in the appearance of the surroundings may in time come to serve as a negative reinforcer. The second reason why attitudes are evoked is the process of generalization. Attitudes toward a given object may be formed on the basis of this object's similarity to another object for which an attitude already exists. Where the similarity is physical i t can be conceptualized over physical gradients of colour, size, shape, intensity, and other physical attributes. Where the similarity is based on meaning, the process of mediated generalization occurs over a semantic gradient to fix an individual's attitudes to a whole class of objects. Lastly, attitudes may be evoked through the process; of discrimina-tion. This process is operative when one's attitude is directed toward a specific object rather than a class of objects (for example, trucks rather 36 than general class of motor vehicles). A variety of techniques exist within the social sciences for 107 103 attitude assessment. Several of these projective techniques can he adapted for use in predicting behavior of those affected by adverse effects of motor vehicle activity. Through the use of surveys '-}-. attitudes toward basic values can be determined. The reaction -then,' of the community to the present environmental conditions or to the projected impacts of proposed policy alternatives can be predicted by knowing the relative importance of attitudinal factors. In order to measure an individual's aesthetic value system there must be some standard environment of measurement which enables the 109 researcher to adjust information from one environment to another. Such a standard environment can be represented in a photograph. Since many variables of urban environment which enter the observance of actual behavior cannot be removed from any real or simulated decision problem i t is necessary to hold a l l variables constant except those wished to be measured. S. Vander Ryn further suggests that the standard environment should be independent of a particular location within a city. It should be independent of the appearance and functional aspects of the home, property, or view someone would prefer to occupy. The procedure for measurement is to explain the standard environment to the respondent of the attitude survey and to ask him to imagine himself as being in that environment. The researcher then varies only the visual aspects of the environment (for example, the number of vehicles) and asks the respondent certain questions designed to e l i c i t the extent to which he/she values various aspects of the visual environment and the appearance of the visual surroundings as a whole. 37 2.3 VISUAL BALANCE IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT Depending on the particular character of an area, i t s architectural and historic significance, and so on, the number of vehicles that can be visually accepted v a r i e s . 1 1 0 J. Antoniou suggests that what i s required i s f i r s t to decide on the qualities which give a street or area i t s particular character and then to assess to what extent t r a f f i c can be absorbed without destroying the visual balance. (see Illustration 2) The qualities of an area may be attributed to a variety of factors including natural setting, manner of layout, and the intensity of a c t i v i t i e s . But an equally important aspect of an area's quality i s the visual display presented to the pedestrian or resident and to the vehicle operator or passenger. The idea that within an environmental area the t r a f f i c (using the term to include stationary vehicles as well as moving vehicles) should be subordinated to the environment carries with i t the important implication that 111 any environmental area must have a maximum acceptable level of t r a f f i c . It must in other words have a maximum capacity. (By environmental area the Buchanan Report refers to an area in which considerations of the environment predominate over the use of vehicles.) This may be seen by considering the case of an area of terraced houses i n conventional streets with narrow pavements. The amount of t r a f f i c within such an area would obviously have to be curtailed i f reasonable standards of environment were to be secured. Antoniou states that the capacity of a particular street may be governed not only by physical factors, but also by visual and environmental considerations. For example, the capacity of a physical 'bottleneck* may be easily assessed and accurately defined. But the capacity of a particular 33 ILLUSTRATION 2 A GUIDANCE FRAMEWORK» INCORPORATING ASPECTS OF VISUAL BALANCE AND TRAFFIC INTRUSION TRAFFIC FACTORS /K / VISUAL CAPACITY / ASSETS (1) STATIONARY VEHICLES* parking; loading/unloading, etc. (2) MOVING VEHICLES: Volumei composition of t r a f f i c . (3) ROAD FURNITURE: carriage way; markings; signs; t r a f f i c objects. (4) STRUCTURES: garages; servic-ing; fueling stations. (5) POLLUTION: Noise; fumes; vibrations| d i r t ; etc. (1) SYMBOLIC SIGNIFICANCE: archeology; history; architecture. (2) NATURAL SETTING: climate; topography; land characteristics. (3) FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS: U \ \ concentration of ac t i v i t i e s , r — 7 / (4) VISUAL DISPLAY: panaorama; | < / skyline; vista; frame; space; serits; detail. (5) PERCEPTION ELEMENTS: temperature; touch; smell; sound. VEHICULAR SATURATION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Source: Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. ?1 route (although physically adequate) can he limited by what may be called an "amenity valve". Thus, although the crude capacity of a street can be accurately defined in terms of so many vehicles per hour, the Intrinsic value of the environmental qualities may necessitate narrowing down 112 considerably the capacity of the route. Every street must have two capacities for traffic, according to the 113 Buchanan Report ^ - a crude capacity related only to the movement and parking of vehicles, and an environmental capacity in which account is taken of the need to restrain the volume of traffic in-order to maintain environ-mental standards. The environmental capacity of an area to accept vehicles depends largely on the way the buildings, properties,, and access ways are arranged. The example has already been given of a residential area with narrow conventional streets, which would have a low capacity. In order to ensure that the visually acceptable amount of traffic i s not exceeded i t might be sufficient merely to exclude a l l extraneous vehicles. The Buchanan Report points out, however, that even then the area's own traffic might increase beyond the limit as a result, say, of the conversion of houses to apartments. In this event there would either have to be a regrettable lowering of the environmental standard or a curtailment of the accessibility. But there would also be the possibility of making, at a price, physical alterations to the area, for example, by providing garages for vehicles which would otherwise be left on the street, or perhaps by introducing visual screening structures to separate pedestrians or residents from the negative visual effects. It i s possible then to rearrange an area (provided enough capital is available) in ways that would enable more vehicles access yet give an equally good or perhaps better visual environment.11'* 40 The idea then that any urban area, as i t stands, has a definable traffic capacity i f the quality of the environment is to be securred, is very important. The acceptable amount of traffic should in theory be calculable. The Buchanan Report presents a crude method to try to quantify 11*5 these matters. J They attempt to estimate environmental capacity by looking at pedestrian delays in crossing a street. The estimation is refined by including a variable for safety* that i s , the vulnerability of those individuals crossing the street. The capacity of the street is expressed in terms of a single number which i s independent of the composition of vehicles. The passenger-car unit (p.c.u.) allows for the different effect of various types of vehicles by considering them in terms of the equivalent number of passenger cars. An important point is that the estimation of environmental capacity provides an immediate pointer to the policy to be adopted for the street. 1 1^ If the policy recommendation is physical alteration then the aesthetic design of streets and related street furniture is an important visual consideration. It i s important to ensure that the designs take account of the manner in which structures are viewed. The requirements of the "driver's eye view" 117 and the "pedestrian's eye view" are quite different. In conclusion, the Buchanan Report states that although the street as a form of layout is basically unsuited for motor traffic, i t is nevertheless.bound to form the backbone of towns for a long period ahead, and therefore, the estimation of environmental capacity must be very 118 important in planning the future function of many streets. ... the time is fast approaching when hundreds of streets in hundreds of towns and cities will have to be classified for their primary function, and i f i t is an environmental function (presidential) 41 then the yardstick for a l l planning and improvement works must be the environmental capacity.H9 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS Until very recently, aesthetic standards within the society were determined by tradition or widely accepted norms, and respect for this tradition served as a collective control. However, tradition has ceased to function efficiently as a regulator and can no longer be relied upon to maintain the quality of our visual environment. In an environment in which no standard of beauty can be universally agreed upon, conflicts are inevitable.l^O With respect to the motor vehicle situation, D. Appleyard and M. Lintell insist that environmental conditions on residential streets will not be improved unless means of determining acceptable and unacceptable 121 conditions are^available. They go on to say that present planning thought is running against the formulation of standards, as planners have come to realize the variability of population needs and ^ situations and the difficulties of scaling environmental conditons. Yet without standards or specific guidelines, planning controls will remain amorphous and ineffectual. There is an urgent need at the very least to articulate unacceptable environmental conditions for particular groups. These conditions might be couched in the form of environmental performance standards. An environmental standard, according to the Buchanan Report, is a state of affairs defined as acceptable in relation to any or a l l of the 122 direct or indirect effects of motor traffic on the environment. The pedestrian or resident who says, "The conditions in this street would be quite acceptable i f there were not so much traffic," is in fact expressing a view on the environmental capacity and seeking the application of an environmental standard.123 Since the ubiquitous presence of the vehicular 42 urban street is likely to continue for some time, environmental standards must be concerned with the conditions under which the street can continue 124 to play an effective role. As indicated previously, however, not a l l planners are in favour of environmental standards. J. Antoniou maintains that whereas i t is a relatively easy task to locate the intrusive elements descriptively, i t is a far more difficult problem to assess the precise line of acceptability, 125 in relation to environmental quality, with any degree of accuracy. This is particularly true, he says, of urban areas where the assessment of the visual elements can be more complex on account of their interactions so that there is an inherent difficulty in reducing a l l factors to cold numerical standards. In conclusion Antoniou suggests that the Interactions between visual balance and traffic intrusion are too complex to provide a straight forward measuring standard of, for example, so many vehicles per hour. In the absence of appropriate "yardsticks" for environmental assess-ment, i t may be pertinent, Antoniou says, to examine the situation in a more positive but subjective way, and to take into consideration the factors involved. In this way, vehicular intrusion may be more appropriately "weighted" according to the effect on the visual balance. The Buchanan Report disagrees with Antoniou and advocates environmental standards, ... the attitude we take to visual intrusion, or, to put i t another way, the standards we choose with regard to i t , i s in many ways of crucial importance. ... If we decide that intrusion does not matter then we must be prepared to see an even greater loosening of the urban structure ... our assumption is that society, perhaps only after some bitter experience, will decide that visual intrusion is as deserving of the fixing of standards as are the more tangible aspects of danger, noise, fumes, and vibration. 126 4-3 even though, i t recognizes that the standards for visual intrusion are 127 more difficult, "because i t i s so much a matter of personal opinion." Visual environmental standards arise from a determination of the visual environmental capacity of an area. The Buchanan Report sees environmental standards, the level of vehicular accessibility , and the costs that can be incurred on physical alterations in an urban area as three variables related in rough and ready "law". ... within any urban area as It stands the establishment of environmental standards automatically determines the accessibility, but the latter can be increased according to the amount of money that can be spent on physical alterations.128 In plain words this means that i f , i t is indeed desiret to have a great deal of traffic in urban areas In "decent" conditions^ i t i s likely to cost a great deal of money to make the necessary alterations. Finally, J.G. Barford, extending the work done in the Buchanan Report, hypothesizes that environmental traffic standards can be defined and applied to a particular environment to determine whether the quality of that 129 environment i s above or below that suggested by the standards. ' Barford warns that "only when there are rationally defined standards can present environments and future proposals for development and redevelopment be tested with any meaningfulness, and the quality of those environments be 130 improved and enhanced.*,' J Such environmental standards, he says, should f u l f i l two major requirements. First, they should have a scientific and objective basis. Second, they should recognize the inherent differences between, and the various needs of, different types of environments. Barford recognizes as well that the visual environment s t i l l remains essentially subjective or "individual" in nature. "Each person experiences 44 'his' environment in a different way, and to a different extent, dependent upon such factors as social status, education level, and immediate state 131 of mind," v hut to avoid the problem of visual intrusion "will probably 132 result in the destruction of many urban values." v Barford only, however, suggests one standard (and only in regard to commercial areas). He suggests, " ... unilateral-parking only to reduce visual intrusion of motor vehicles and to ensure maximum intervisibility between driver and pedestrian.""*"^ He concludes that what is particularly needed is a set of overall visual criteria that can apply to the urban physical environment. It should be noted in conclusion that although there has been l i t t l e success or effort in regard to traffic standards for visual intrusion, there has been an increased interest in aesthetic control generally in residential areas. This interest has lead to legislation usually in the form of 134 135 municipal zoning by-laws, design standards, and aesthetic regulations. J J REFERENCES - CHAPTER II """V. Setty Pendakur and G.R. Brown, "Accessibility and Environmental Quality", Journal of Urban Planning and Development Division, proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 95, No. UPI, Proc. Paper 6518, April 1969, pp. 43-59. "Ti. Blumenfeld, "Criteria for Judging the Quality of the Urban Environment", Occasional Paper No. 14, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, 1974, p. 6. ^J. Antoniou, Environmental Managementt Planning for Traffic, (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1971). P- 7« ^Ministry of Transport, Traffic in Towns, (The Buchanan Report), (London: H.M.S.O., 1963), P« 39. 5Ibid. ^Pendakur and Brown, op. cit., p. 43. 'Antoniou, op. cit., p. 70. Q M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., comments of the Steering Group. ^Pendakur and Brown, op. cit., p. 44. ""*°M.0.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 7-18. nAntoniou, op. cit., 34-35* 1 2Ibid., p. 7. 1^Ibld., pp. 19-21. ^Ibld., p. 13. M^.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., pp. 216-222. ^Antoniou, op. cit., pp. 67-70. M^.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 23« J.C. Barford, Environmental Traffic Standards, unpublished M.A. Thesis, 1968, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, p. 43. "^ M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 22. 20 Barford, op. cit., p. 43. 21 ^Antoniou, op. cit., p. 70. ^Ibid., p. 70. 23 Ibid., p. 68. 44b REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued) 2**Ibld., p. 58. M^.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 22. 2 6Ibid., p. 23. ^R.J. Claus and K.E. Claus, Visual Environment, (Toronto. Collier-MacMillan, 1971), p. 61. M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 23. 2^Antoniou, op. cit., p. 67. 3°J. Wild, Introduction to Realistic Philosophy, (New York. Harper and Row, 1948), p. STJ. 3"h?. Heider, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. (New York. John Wiley, 1958). •E. Shaw and P.R. Costanzo, Theories of Social Psychology. (Toronto. McGraw-Hill, 1970), p. ?1. 33M. Scheerer, "Cognitive Theory", Handbook of Social Psychology. G. Lindsey (ed.), Vol. 1, (Reading Mass.. Addison-Wesley, 1954), p. 99« 3^L. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. (Stanford. Stanford University Press, 1957). 3^v. Neisser, Cognitive Psychology. (New York. Appleton-Century -Crofts, 1967). 3^ R.B. Zajonc, "The Process of Cognitive Tuning in Communication", Journal of Abnormal Psychology, i960, No. 61, pp. 159-169. 3^ Shaw and Costanzo, op. cit., p. 173• 3^ciaus and Claus, op. cit., p. 3« 3 9 l b i d . , p. 3. ^Shaw and Costanzo, op. cit., p. 176. 41 M. Scheerer, op. cit. J.S. Brumer, "Our Perceptual Readiness", Psychology Review, No. 64, 1957, PP. 123-152. *3E .B. Hunt, Concept Learning. An Information Processing Problem. (New York. John Wiley, 1962). REFERENCES - CHAPTER II 4 4 C (continued) 44 D.E. Berlyne, "Recent Developments in Plagets Work", British  Journal of Educational Psychology, No. 27, 1957, PP« 1-12. 45 D. Krech and R.S. Crutchfield, Theories and Problems of Social Psychology, (New York. McGraw-Hill, 19487^  46 G.W. Whelsh, "The Perception of Gur Urban Environment", Perception and Environment. Foundations of Urban design, R.E. Stripe (ed.), -(Institute of Government, University of North Carolina at Chapel H i l l , 1966), Pp. 3-9. 47 Claus and Claus, op. cit., p. 3* 48 D. Appleyard, "City Designers and the Pluralistic City", Regional  Planning for Development, ed. L. Rodwin et. al. , (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1969), Chapter 23, pp. 422-452. 49 D^. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge'-', Proceed-ing of the Environmental Desgin Research Association ed. by J. Archea and C. Eastman, 1970, pp. 97-101. r "^ Shaw and Costanzo, op. cit., p. 184. -'"'"Heider, op. cit. 52 ^ I. Samuels, "Reticular Mechanisms and Behavior", Psychological  Bulletin, 1959, No. 56, pp. 1-25. 53 ^Claus and Claus, op. cit., p. 14. Lynch, The Image of the City. (Cambridge: MIT Press, i960), Chapter 1. 55 ^D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. cit., p. 97. 56 J Bruner, op. cit., pp. 123-152. 57 •"Bruner, op. cit., pp. 123-152. •"^D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. cit., p. 98. -^I.D.J. Bross, "Nature of Decision", Design for Decision, (New York: The Free Press, 1953). P« 30. 60 D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. cit., p. 98. 6l Claus and Claus, op. cit., p. 5* REFERENCES - CHAPTER II 4 4 d (continued) 62 A.I. Hallowell, "Cultural Factors i n the Structurallzatlon of Perception", Social Psychology at the Crossroads, J.H. Roher and M. Sherif (eds.), (New Yorki Harper, 1951). p. 168. Hllgard, "The Role of Learning in Perception", Perception. An Approach to Personality, R.R. Blake and G.V. Ramsey (eds.), (New York» Renald Press, 1951). 64 F.H. Allport, Theories of Perception and the Concept of Structure, (New York. John Wiley, 1955)t PP« 278-279. 65 W^. Hudson, "Pictoral Depth Perception in.-,Sub Cultural Groups in Africa", Journal of Social Psychology, I960, No. 52, pp. 183-208. ^ J . Bagby, "A Cross-Cultural Study of Perceptual Predominance ln Binocular Rivalry", Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1949, No. 38, pp. 445-44?. ^B.L. Whorf, "Science and Linguistics", Technology Review, 1940, No. 54, pp. 229-231. Reprinted i n Readings i n Social Psychology, 3rd ed., E.E. Maccoby, T.M. Newcomb and E.L. Hartley (eds.), (New York1 Holt, 1958), pp. 1-9. 68 M.H. Segall, D.T. Campbell and M.J. Herkovits, The Influence of  Culture on Visual Perception, (Indianapolis1 Bobbs-Merrill Co. Inc., 1966). 69 7J.J.CGibson, "The Visual Field and the Visual World: A Reply to Professor Boring", Psychological Review, 1952, No. 59, pp. 149-151. ^J.K. Fox, Lecture Notes 26-9-75. course PL 521, School of Community and Regional Planning, U.B.C, Vancouver. 7*11.8. Bureau of Public Roads Instruction Memorandum, 50-2-63 cited in "Attitudes, Community Values, and Highway Planning," M.T. Shaffer, Highway Research Record, No. 187, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1970), p. 56. Bern, Beliefs, Attitudes and Human Affairs, (Belmont, California: Brooks-Cole Publishing Co., 1970), p. 4. ^I.K. fox, op. c i t . , Lecture notes 26-9-75» 74 CD. Loeks, "Community Values, Goals and Objectives in the Transportation Planning Process", Paper presented to AASHO Urban Trans-portation Planning Committee, (New York* 1965). as cited i n M.T. Shaffer, op. c i t . , p. 56. ^G. Santayana, The Sense of Beauty, (New York: Dover, 1955). 76 I.K. Fox, op. c i t . , Lecture notes, F a l l , 1975* 44e REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued) 77 "W. Goldschmidt, Man's Way: A Preface to the Understanding of  Human Society, (Torontot Holt, Rinehart Winston, 1959), P« 78. no M. Manheim, "The Impact of Highways on Environmental Values", Highway Research Record, No. 305, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1970), p. 26. W^. Morton and I.K. fox (eds.), Regional Natural Resources Planning, unpublished manual, Westwater Research Centre, I.B.C., Vancouver, 1975, pp. 12-26. 80 J.H. Randall and J. Buchler, Philosophy: An Introduction, (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1942), Chapter 12. Q - l Y. Tuan, "Visual Blight: Exercises in Interpretation", Visual  Blight in America, Commission on College Geography, Resource Paper No. 23, (Washington, B.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1973), P« 24. 8 2Ibld., p. 27« 8^Santayana, op. cit. 84 Tuan, op. cit., pp. 27-28. 8 5Ibld., p. 27. 8 6Ibid., p. 26. 8 ?Ibid., p. 26. O Q D. Lowenthal, "The Offended Eye: Towards and Excresential Geography", Visual Blight in America, op. cit., p. 30. 8 9Ibid., p. 29. 90 C. Buchanan, "The Urban Environment", Journal of the Town Planning Institute, Vol. 50, No. 7, (July/August, 1964), p. 269. 91 Glaus and Claus, op. cit., p. 58. 92 J.B. Jackson, "Commentary: Visual Blight - Civic Neglect", Visual Blight in America, op. cit., p. 47. 93 -'Lowenthal, op. cit., p. 29« ^Buchanan, op. cit., p. 269» ^G.L. Peterson, "Complete Value Analysis: Highway Beautification and Environmental Quality",- Highway Research Record, No. 182, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1967), p. 15* REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued) 9 * \ j . Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, (New York. Random House, 1961). 09 M.T. Shaffer, op. cit., p. 55. 98 S. Van der Ryn, "Value Measurement and Visual Factors in the Urban Environment", paper presented to the College of Environmental Design, University of California, 1963, p. 1. "v.S. Pendakur and G.R. Brown, op. cit., pp. 43-49. 1 0 0Peterson, op. cit., pp. 9-1?. "^ "San der Ryn, op. cit., pp. 1-1?. in? G.A. Wlnkel, R. Malek, and P. Thlel, "Community Response to the Design Features of Roadsj A Technique for Measurement", Highway Research Record, No. 305, (Washington, D.C.j Highway Research Board, 1970), pp. 133-145. 103c.F. Barnes, "Living Patterns and Attitude Survey", Highway  Research Record, No. I87, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1967), p. 46. 104 Shaffer, op. cit., p. 55• 10^H.H. Hyman, Survey Design and Analysis; Principle Cases and  Procedures, (New York: Free Press, 1957)• 10^L.N. Doob, "The Behavior of Attitudes", Psychology Review, No. 47, 1947, p. 136. 1 0 ? I b i d . , pp. 14-15. 1 0 8Shaffer, op. ci t . , pp. 58-59* 1 0 9Van der Ryn, op. cit., p. 3. "^Antoniou, op. cit., p. 71 • mM.0.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., pp. 45-46. 112 "^Antoniou, op. cit., p. 71 • "^ M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 50, p. 203-n \ b i d . , p. 46. 1 1 5 I b i d . , pp. 203-206. REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued) ^^IJbid., p. 51 • 1 1 7 I b l d . , p. 197. u 8 r b i d . , p. 203. 1 1 9 I b l d . , p. 50. 120 Claus and Claus, op. cit., p. 55* Appleyard and M. Lintell, "The Environmental Quality of Slty Streetst The Resident's Viewpoint", A.I.P., March 1972, Vol. 38, No. 2, p. 99. 122 M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 220. 1 2 3 I b l d . , p. 51. 1 2^Ibid., p. 49. 12*5 •'Antoniou, op. ci t . , p. 71. 126 M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 50. 1 2 7 I b l d . , p. 49. 1 2 8 I b l d . , p. 45. 1 2 9Barford, op. ci t . , p. 5. 13°Ibid., p. 4. 1 3 1 I b l d . , p. 4. 1 3 2 I b i d . , p. 59. 1 3 3 I b l d . , p. 60. 134 D. Vanin, Legislating for Urban Aestheticst A Case Study of  the Civic Design Panel, Vancouver, B.C., unpublished M.A. Thesis, School of Community and Regional Planning, Vancouver, B.C., 1972, pp. 49-61. "^Claus and Claus, op. cit., p. 58. CHAPTER III CASE STUDY In previous research such as that of D. Appleyard et a l . 1 and 2 G.H. Winkel et a l . , the focus of attention was on the appearance of the environment from the perspective of the motor vehicle operator or passenger. This Case Study in contrast, and like the research of D. Appleyard and 3 4 M. Lintell , and S. Van der Ryn , is directed at the appearance of the urban street from the perspective of the residents, and as i t is influenced by the presence of motor vehicles. The investigation reported in this thesis identifies and measures the attitudes of persons living on residential streets in the City of Vancouver concerning the vehicular visual intrusion problem. It is a study using observations, measurements, and questionnaire techniques, and does not pretend to statistical significance. The results, however, are suggestive. The Case Study begins with a description, f i r s t , of the study design and second, of the street environments. This includes a presentation of the data collected. The descriptions are followed by an outline of the findings of the data analyzed. The study is terminated in a discussion of the use of visual screening as an alternative mechanism to reduce visual intrusions. 3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PRESENTATION OF DATA COLLECTED 3.1.1 Research Methodology In order to test the hypothesis and to examine further the visual intrusion problem, a field, study is presented in which questionnaires were 46' administered and observations and measurements, were carried out in three different Vancouver residential areas. The selection of these areas was based mainly on the features of appearance, vehicular activity, visual screening structures, and socio-economic characteristics. In addition to the review of literature, four sources of information were used in this research. A detailed questionnaire (see Appendix A) was organized to obtain, f i r s t attitudinal data reflecting the levels of annoyance to both the immediate visual environment and various standard environments portrayed in photographs, (as both types of environment are affected by vehicular intrusions)^ and second, factual data pertaining to the socio-economic characteristics of the sample households and respondents. The field observations provided data in regard to visual screening types and effectiveness. Field measurements were made of parked vehicle densities in each of the three areas, and finally other data regarding traffic volume counts was obtained from The City of Vancouver, Traffic Engineering Department. The computer was chosen to process and compile the various informa-tion collected from the study areas. Nonparametric statistical procedures were selected to analyze the data and thereby to test the hypothesis. Statistical procedures were used to determine the possible relationship between levels of annoyance and visual and cultural environmental characteristics. 3.1.1.1 Selection of Study Areas Except for the exclusion of commercial activity in two of the three areas, the research areas reported upon here were intended to serve 47 as typical Vancouver residential environments. Each area contrasted the attitudes of residents to the visual effects of motor vehicle activity. The areas were chosen as a result of their similarity in regard to the types of motor vehicle activity and the type of residential area; and as a result of their dissimilarity in regard to socio-economic status of households, and the abundancy and effectiveness of the types of visual screening against motor vehicle activity. The three areas chosen were defined as followss Area 1 Granville Street - 49th Avenue - Adera Street - 47th Avenue Area 2 Dunbar Street - 33rd Avenue 0 Blenheim Street - 34th Avenue Area 3 Fraser Street - 55th Avenue - Prince Albert Street - 57th Avenue The areas are displayed in Illustrations 3» 4, 5 6. 3.1.1.2 Questionnaire Format A survey questionnaire was organized to obtain both attitudinal and factual information (see Appendix A). Questions to procure attitudes were structured in a number of ways. Questions 1, 2 and 5 required that the respondent compare various items to one another and then to rank them according to, for example, their importance or effectiveness. Question 3 asked the respondent to place a check in the appropriate space as he/she perceived a present environmental condition. A simple "yes" or "no" response check was required for Question 6 which inquired of the respondent's past behavior. Questions 7(a) to 7(i) measured attitudes according to the Likert Scaling approach"* in which the householder had a range of five possible responses, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". Finally, Questions 4 and 8 presented the respondent with photograph(s) of certain simulated and standard visual environments. Question 4 required the house-holder to look at, then respond to various physical characteristics ILLUSTRATION 3 LOCATION OF STUDY AREAS ILLUSTRATION 4 Study Area 1 4-1-TH AVENUE. h ii UL Ot Hi < Hi Q < IG 15 5 IA 13 3 12 2 ( 1 i S 1 IO ti vi J 5: H 0 24 25 32 34 23 33 31 21 30 20 2^  za R 16 26 2^  Is UJ 0 N #-9T/W AVENUE. so ILLUSTRATION 5 Study Area 2 h LU UJ tf In < OQ Z 3 D 16 i s 3 3 A V E N U E . 14 4 5 6 8 i O l J i Z 13 15 2DZ! ZZ Z3Z4 25Z6 21-Z62? 3 0 3/ Q 32 44 33 3 4 35 3 6 3^- 3 3 3<3 4D 4/ 4 - 5 4^. 4 ? 4 a 49 5 0 .51 52J53 30-TH AVH.Nl/E 4 ^ 54 5.5 ti uJ uJ z iii CD U V o FR AS EL R N N N Lv 0 Ul 0s Oi > Cn 0) U l m z m c ID 0 LA Ch N O (5s -£ o U\ LA 0 Ch u - i X > < m z m N 1 8 Utl LA L> 4i OD 4* 0> O LA) LH 0^ 41 CP -0 0 PRINCE. A L B E R T .52 illustrated in a blow-up picture. A check in the appropriate space for each characteristic visualized could range fron "not noticeable" to "very annoying". Question 8, on the other hand, contained three rows of six pictures in each, in which motor vehicle activity was the variable factor in the standard environment. The householder was asked to respond by choosing the picture, in each row, which portrayed the maximum level of visual annoyance that could be tolerated. Questions 9 to 17, which were designed to acquire factual informa-tion, were structured similarly. Question 17(b) - Occupation, which required the respondent to specify, in writing, the position or type of work, was the only deviant question. A l l others required only a check in the appropriate square. The respondent's occupations were categorized according to a modification of the Blishen Scale,^ which measured the social status of occupations. The five categories Were (in order of descending social status): professional, managerial, sales - clerical - housewives, skilled, and unskilled. 3.1.1.3 Questionnaire Distribution Due to the nature of the questionnaire and specifically since photographs were to be shown, i t was determined that household visitations would be the most appropriate means of surveying. Copies of a letter were circulated in each of the three areas, prior to the survey, ln order to introduce the interviewers and briefly to describe the nature of the survey, (see Appendix B) Questionnaires were administered both in the daytime and in the evening, so as to ensure that the sample from each area contained the the views of both males and females. When possible, both.husband and wife were encouraged.to f i l l out separate attitudinal portions of the questionnaire. Pre-teenage persons were not encouraged to participate. Each questionnaire administered required a time of approximately half an hour. The total number of questionnaires completed for a l l areas was 119. In Area 1, 23 homes (68 percent) were surveyed. In Area 2, 48 homes (87 percent), and;, in Area 3» 40 homes (61 percent) participated in the survey. This was not a very large sample but since i t represented greater than 50 percent of the homes in each area, the attitudes were probably representative of those areas. 3.1.1.4 Field Observations Various structures were determined which could reduce or eliminate the visually undesirable aspects of motor vehicle activity. In particular, fences, hedges, window drapes, trees, walls, and landscaping were effective-and perceived preferable by residents to varying degrees. The term effective bad to be distinguished from the term efficient. A certain type of screening structure could have the inherent physical capability to screen out undesirable visual intrusions, in which case the structure would be considered efficient. However, i f that screening type was not located in an appropriate place on the resident's lot then its actual effectiveness, to perform the screening function desired, was minimized. The effectiveness of each screening type observed was assessed as "effective" or "not effective". Closing the window drapes was considered an immediate or short-term remedy to blocking out visual disturbances. However, i t was felt that this reaction failed to mitigate the condition in the long term. Most people like their drapes left open during the daytime and, as well, drapes provide screening only while the residents are actually i n the house. Drapes were not considered, therefore, i n the subjective assessment of the total effectiveness of a l l types of screening present. The t o t a l effectiveness of visual screening referred to both the physical efficiency and location of screening structures. I t included each, a l l , or any combination of screening structures (except drapes), and included as well City owned structures, such as trees on the boulevards. The t o t a l effectiveness ratings were based on the situation i n which the resident would be looking out from the front of his house, (not necessarily from inside the house). The exception was those homes on corner lots, i n which two sides of the residence had to be included i n the rating of t o t a l effectiveness. The ratings - high, medium, low, and zero - had the following meanings: high - blocks out almost a l l / t o a l l visual disturbances medium - blocks out some/to almost a l l visual disturbances low - blocks out zero/to some visual disturbances zero - blocks out zero visual disturbances 3.I.I.5 Fiel d Measurements and Other Data The extent of motor vehicle a c t i v i t y i s dependent upon a combination of the following factors: 'l) the state of movement ,2) the direction of movement (3) the frequency of movement ( t r a f f i c flow) (4) the spatial orientation (congestion) (5) the number of vehicles present (6) the design or condition The visual impacts of motor vehicles depend, partially, on the extent of motor vehicle activity. The Influence of the visual effects on the residential neighbourhood depends, as well, on a variety of other physical image creating factors, such as street fixtures, visual screening .55 structures, and so on. Field measurements were made fi r s t , in regard to the state of movement of vehicles, (in particular simply whether a vehicle was parked or moving) andj second, the number of vehicles present. A visual count was made of parked vehicles, on both sides of the street, and within the immediate view of the respondent's property. From these objective measurement, a rating was made as to the level of parked vehicle activity. The ratings - high, medium, and low - had the following meanings; P A T T „ r TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES i l J ^ (4 OBSERVATIONS) high 14 medium 8-14 low 0-7 With respect to moving vehicle activity, traffic counts were obtained from the Traffic Division of the Engineering Department of the City of Vancouver. From these objective measurements, a rating was made as to the level of moving vehicle activity. The ratings - very high, high, moderately high, medium, moderately low, low, very low - had the following meanings., VEHICLES PER 24 HOUR MID RATIO PERIOD POINTS SCALE very high 15,000 to 17.500 16,250 13 high 12,500 to 15,000 13,750 11 moderately high 10,000 to 12,500 11,250 9 medium 7,500 to 10,000 8,750 7 moderately low 5,000 to 7.500 6,250 5 low 2,500 to 5,000 3.750 3 very low 0 to 2,500 1,250 1 .56 3-1.2 Presentation of Data Collected The presentation of data collected can he classified as factual or attitudinal. The factual information is outlined in terms of description of the residential environments surveyed. This description includes such aspects as- general, description, motor vehicle activity, visual screening characteristics of each area, and socio-economic characteristics of the sample households and sample respondents. Attitudinal information from the sample respondents i s presented in terms of responses to particular questions..chosen from the survey questionnaire. 3.1.2.1 General Description of Study Areas A l l three study areas were classified a; .single family residential. Only Area 3 contained any commercial activity. In Area 2, and especially Area 3» the lot sizes were much smaller and the houses were generally closer together and closer to the street. The houses in Area 1 were generally larger and fewer houses were located on each block. There was a greater percentage of homes, in Area 1, with garages attached to the side of the house. The majority of houses in Area 3 were finished in wood while most houses in,Areas 1 and 2 were finished in stucco, stone, brick or aluminum siding. The architectural styles of houses in Areas 1 and 2 were more sophisticated than those of Area 3' The houses and grounds in Area 3 were not as well maintained as those in the other two areas. The streets in Area 3 were, likewise, not as well maintained, although the street surfaces in a l l three areas were hard-topped with asphalt. The streets in Areas 1 and 3 were fairly level with respect to gradient. In Area 2 the avenues gradually sloped down to the west and and the streets sloped down to the south. A l l areas had service lanes except for the Collingwood Street - 33rd Avenue - Blenheim Street - 34th Avenue block in Area 2 and the Granville Street - 49th Avenue - Churchill Street - 47th Avenue block in Area 1. Area 3 cLid. not have cement curbs on 56th Avenue, 57th. Avenue, nor Prince Albert Street. The boulevards in Area 1 and 2 were better defined and aesthetically more pleasing. In both Areas 1 and 2 the existence and mix of trees, hedges, and other vegetation were substantially more predominant than in Area 3' City maintained trees, located on the boulevards of Adera Street and Churchill Street were of sufficient age to provide a partial arbour in Area 1. 3.1.2.2 Motor Vehicle Activity in the Study Areas The major.: similarity between the study areas was in regard to the types of vehicular activity. A l l streets within or bordering each area could accommodate two-way traffic. Legal speed limits on a l l streets were 30 m.p.h.j • however, actual driving speeds on arterial routes -Granville, Dunbar and Fraser Streets - appeared to exceed the legal limit, and on the side streets actual driving speeds appeared to be slower, especially when cars were parked on both sides of the street. On-street parking was permitted on a l l streets with, however, certain restrictions. In Area 1 bus stops on both sides of Granville Street and on both sides of 49th Avenue limited parking. Parking restric-tions between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. existed on the east (or north bound lane) side of Granville Street,. Ori 49th Avenue parking was restricted between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m., and 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. In Area 2, Dunbar Street had bus stops on both sides. Likewise, Fraser Street, in Area 3, had bus 58 stops on both sides of the street. In a l l three study areas motor vehicle parking was regulated by the Street and Traffic By-Law No. 2849/ City of Vancouver."'' General parking and stopping prohibitions existed for both commerical and private vehicles. The important restrictions for residential areas are generally as followss (1) No commercial vehicle shall park for over 3 hours unless the property abutting the street belongs to the vehicle owner. (2) No commercial vehicle shall be parked on any street between 1 a.m.. and 6 a.m. (3) No private vehicle shall be parked on any paved street for more than 2 hours between 1 a.m. and 6 a.m. (4) No type of vehicle shall be parked for more than 3 hours between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on any street unless the property abutting the street belongs to the vehicle owner. (5) No vehicle shall park within 15 feet of a fire hydrant. The nature and extent of the vehicular activity in each area varied slightly. In general, a l l three areas were bordered on two sides by heavier vehicular movements. As would be expected, vehicular movements were higher on the arterial routes in a l l areas and lighter on the side streets, (see Table 2) Compared to Area 1, on-street parking was much heavier in Areas 2 and 3. (see Table 3) Of the sample surveyed in the questionnaire, a greater proportion of households in Area 1 were subjected to lower parked vehicle activity than in Area 2. In Area 2 a slightly higher proportion of households were subjected to lower parked vehicle activity than in Area 3' (see Table 4)... In regard to moving vehicle activity, the proportion of households surveyed from Area 1 that were confronted with higher activity was greater than in either Areas 2 or 3? both of which were quite low. (see Table 5) Table 2 TRAFFIC COUNTER TAPES, 1974 NUMBER OF MOVING VEHICLES AREA STREET DATE 24 HOUR TOTAL 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. TOTAL 1 G r a n v i l l e S t r e e t - North of 45th S t r e e t 3 - 9 - 7 4 30,156 18,688 49th Avenue - West of Angus S t r e e t 2 8 - 2 - 7 4 12,384 6,264 2 Blenheim S t r e e t - North of 41st Avenue 1 9 - 2 - 7 4 3,453 1,580 Dunbar S t r e e t - North of 36th Avenue 2 1 - 2 - 7 4 (northbound) 2 6 - 8 - 7 4 (southbound) 10,224 4,389 33rd Avenue - West of Collingwood S t r e e t 2 6 - 8 - 7 4 2,096 1,097 3 Fraser S t r e e t - North of 61st Avenue 1 2 - 7 - 7 4 10,928 5,325 57th Avenue - West of Ross S t r e e t 1 1 - 7 - 7 4 5,734 2,594 .60 Table 3 PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 1 Observation 1 2 3 4 House Lo c a t i o n Date 4-8-75 6-8-75 7-8-75 8-8-75 TOTAL Number Time 6:00 am 10:00 am. 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 03 0 0 1 1 02 04 0 1 1 1 03 05 0 1 0 1 02 06 0 1 0 0 01 08 0 0 1 0 01 09 0 0 1 0 01 10 0 0 0 0 00 12 0 0 1 1 02 13 0 1 1 1 03 14 0 1 0 1 02 17 0 0 0 1 01 18 0 0 0 0 00 19 0 0 1 1 02 20 0 0 1 1 02 21 0 1 1 1 03 25 0 0 0 0 00 26 0 0 0 0 00 27 0 0 0 0 00 28 0 0 0 0 00 29 0 0 0 0 00 32 0 1 1 0 02 33 0 0 0 0 00 34 0 1 1 0 02 PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2 Observation 1 2 3 . 4 House L o c a t i o n Date 12-8-75 14-8-75 15-8-75 18-8-75 TOTAL Number Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 02 0 0 0 0 00 Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2 House Location Number Observation 1 2 3 4 TOTAL Date 12-8-75 14-8-75 15^8-75 18-8-75 Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 03 0 0 0 0 00 04 6 2 3 7 18 05 6 1 2 6 15 06 5 2 2 7 16 07 5 1 3 8 17 08 4 0 3 9 16 09 5 1 1 7 14 10 3 0 0 4 07 11 2 0 1 3 06 12 1 0 0 1 02 14 0 0 0 0 00 15 0 0 0 1 01 17 0 0 0 1 01 18 0 0 0 1 01 19 2 1 1 2 06 20 4 3 3 4 14 21 6 4 5 7 22 25 4 2 2 5 15 26 4 2 2 4 12 27 3 1 3 4 11 28 3 1 2 3 09 29 1 0 0 1 02 30 1 0 0 1 02 31 0 0 0 I 01 32 2 0 0 1 03 33 1 0 1 1 03 34 1 0 0 1 02 35 2 0 1 1 04 36 2 0 1 1 04 37 1 1 1 2 05 M Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2 Observation 1 2 3 4 House Location Date 12-8-75 14-8-75 15-8-75 18-8-75 TOTAL Number Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 38 1 1 1 2 05 39 0 0 0 1 01 40 0 0 0 0 00 • - 41 • 0 0 0 0 00 42 0 0 0 0 00 43 1 1 0 1 03 44 3 1 1 4 09 45 2 1 1 2 06 46 1 0 0 2 03 47 0 0 0 1 01 48 1 0 1 2 04 49 1 0 0 1 02 50 2 0 1 1 04 51 1 1 1 2 05 52 0 1 0 1 02 54 1 0 0 1 02 55 0 0 0 0 00 PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 Observation 1 2 3 4 . House Location Date 20-8-75 21-8-75 26-8-75 28-8-75 TOTAL Number Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2;00 pm 6:00 pm 02 0 0 0 1 01 03 0 0 0 0 00 04 0 o: 0 0 00 06 1 1 1 1 04 11 4 2 2 4 12 12 4 3 2 4 13 63 Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 House Location Number Observation 1 2 3 4 TOTAL Date 20-8-75 21-8-75 26-8-75 28-8-75 Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 13 6 2 3 7 18 15 5 2 2 4 13 16 7 2 3 6 18 17 9 3 3 7 22 19 5 2 1 4 13 20 3 1 2 2 08 23 0 0 1 0 01 24 0 0 1 0 01 25 0 0 1 2 03 27 1 o : 0 2 03 30 3 l 2 5 11 33 5 3 3 9 20 35 7 1 2 8 18 37 5 1 3 5 14 40 2 0 1 4 07 43 3 1 2 5 11 44 4 3 3 6 16 45 5 2 2 8 17 46 6 1 2 9 18 47 8 2 1 10 21 48 7 2 3 8 20 49 6 1 2 5 14 50 5 1 3 5 14 51 5 1 3 5 14 54 4 2 2 3 12 57 1 1 1 1 04 58 3 2 1 3 09 59 4 2 2 3 11 60 4 2 3 4 13 61 3 1 4 4 12 64: Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 House Location Number Observation 1 2 3 4 TOTAL Date 20-8-75 21-8-75 26-8-75 28-8-75 Time 6:00 am 10:00 am 2:00 pm 6:00 pm 62 5 3 2 6 16 64 6 3 3 6 18 65 5 2 2 6 15 66 5 2 1 6 14 65 Table 4 PARKED VEHICLE ACTIVITY Extent of Parked V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y Percentage of Sample Households Confronted w i t h Parked V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y (%') AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 high 14.6 42.5 medium 16.7 35.0 low 100 68.8 22.5 Table 5 MOVING VEHICLE ACTIVITY Extent of Moving V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y Percentage of Sample Households Confronted w i t h Moving V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 very h i g h 21.7 high 26.1 moderately high 10.4 7.5 medium moderately low 25.0 low 8.3 very low 52.2 81.3 67.5 66 3.1.2.3 Visual Screening i n the Study Areas In comparison with Area 2, the total effectiveness of visual screening was substantially greater i n Area 1. (see Table 6) Likewise, Area 2 has a total effectiveness of screening greater than Area 3' These characteristics were generally common to most properties i n each area and not just particular to thoseohouseholds surveyed i n each area. In regard to the existence and effectiveness of various screening types, a high proportion of households sampled in a l l three study areas had highly effective window drapes that could be used to block out vehicular visual intrusions, (see Illustration 7) Very few effective walls, fences, or. landscaping were present i n any of the three areas. The proportion of properties with effective hedges were moderately low in Area 1, and very low i n Areas 2 and 3* Finally, with respect to trees, Areas 1 and 2 both had a medium proportion of properties with effective trees; whereas Area 3 had very few lots with effective type trees for visual screening. 3.1.2.4 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Sample Households As mentioned previously, the three study areas were chosen deliberately as a result of their differences i n regard to socio-economic status. Socio-economic characteristics attributed to the households of each area are outlined i n the following paragraph. Personal socio-economic characteristics of the respondents sampled from each area are outlined i n sub-section 1.2.5. The average length of residence was similar for households in a l l three study areas, (see Table 7) In regard to home ownership, however, l i t t l e similarity existed.' More householders of Areas'.! and 2 owned their 67 Table 6 TOTAL EFFECTIVENESS OF VISUAL SCREENING T o t a l E f f e c t i v e n e s s of V i s u a l Screening Percentage of Sample Households (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 high 30.4 6.3 medium 13.0 12.5 low 34.8 54.2 37.5 zero 21.7 27.1 62.5 Table 7 AVERAGE PERIOD OF RESIDENCE Area Mean Number of Years 1 14.4 2 12.8 3 13.0 ILLUSTRATION 7 V i s u a l Screening Structures 69 LEGEND Not E f f e c t i v e E f f e c t i v e Fence 1 1 Hedge 2 2 Drapes 3 3 Tree 5 5 Wall 6 6 Landscaping 6 6 TOTAL SCREENING EFFECTIVENESS High Medium Low Zero A B C D - Commercial SL - SL Service Lane 70 ILLUSTRATION 7 A. Study Area 1 4-TTH A V E N U E J if) -© ©©©© i@@©© © © A r B © l D 1 c © -2. 1 © D C © © r-m c fe J J © 0 I © c c c © X | 0 © © © -© © A -© © 4 B 4 © 5L. - J 5 L © © A C © 4 ± © 4 @©@© A © ©©©© A © © <3> -©+© ©1 © © © 6 © © 3 C © 3 D © ©' 3A<f> ® © ® i 4 3 T H A V E N U E ILLUSTRATION 7 B. Study Area 2 3 3 K . D A V E - N U & of < 7 z> Q 3 D 3 D 4 4 1* r 4 4 (D C . S L -3 C ® C 4- 4 3 c -=z-44-zt C 4 4 D 4 4 C 4-4 D t © 4-©©© 0 o 0 D H ®(DB 4 © (D D uv r c 4-4 4 +-2--D c c c D 1 4 4-' 4 C cD 2 4 -© A © i ©i ©<2)©1 3 4 - T H l>£_ ILLUSTRATION 7 B. Continued - Study Area 2 3 3 /^D A \ / £ N U £_ 5 uJ q 0 0 N5 0 0 © 4 C 4 (D C 4 4 4 D ^ 4 © © C © © © c -©-© © c 4 4 — 5—* | © © @ © © f © I © # > ! A ©I © © r H 5 © © c 4 N A 3 C D ® © I © © C © c © c 3 Ui © 4 4-© 4 rf © © © t B © 1 © 5 3 4 - T H /W/aNUE. -v3 ILLUSTRATION 7 C. Study Area 3 5 5 T H A\/&/\! UE-o © D ® D 3 D N D C © D (a D 4 ® C i i I 11 © D © D C 38 > r m - i © 12. © C 4 D © D © C © D 3 i t i I I I D 3 D 3 CA fn H 5 o T H A l / £ N f . ILLUSTRATION 7 C. Continued - Study Area 3 © D @ D K M © C 4- 4-© D © D D © 4 © D © 4 4 © 4 © © c © D 3 D © © 3 © D © C ] + © 4 ^ © 4 4-4M-4 "0 I o > H ON tn © D • VI 5 T T H AVBrsJU 75 homes, as opposed to renting them, (see Table 8) The average number of cars owned per household was highest in Area 1. (see Table 9) The average number of total vehicles per household, (including cars, trucks, and motorcycles) was again highest in Area 1; but the percentage differences between the three areas were less, (see Table 10) The total household income in Area 1 was higher than in Area 2, which was in turn higher than in Area J. (see Table 11) Generally more households in Areas 1 and 2 had children, (see Table 12) and Area 1 had the highest average-number of children per household, (see Table 13) There was a great diversity of ethnic origins in a l l three areas, which is perhaps typical of many areas in the City of Vancouver. In summary then, the socio-economic status of households in Area 1 were classfied as "high", Area 2 were classified as "medium" and, Area 3 were classified as "low". 3.1.2.5 Personal Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Sample Respondents With respect to age, (see Table 14) the relative frequency of respondents, age 26-60, was highest in Area 2. Area 1 had the highest frequency of respondents age 41-60 and Area 3 had the highest frequency of respondents age 16-25• 1° general, the ages of respondents in Area 3 were much more spread out over the age categories, while Area 1 respondents were closely grouped in the upper age categories. With respect to the sex of sample respondents, (see Table 15) there was a progression of an increasing proportion of males surveyed and a decreasing proportion of females surveyed, from Area 1 to Area 2 to Area 3' 76 Table 8 HOME OWNERSHIP Occupancy Arrangement Percentage of Sample Households (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 own 95.7 95.8 75.0 rent 4.3 4.2 25.0 Table 9 AVERAGE NUMBER OF CARS PER HOUSEHOLD Number of Cars Percentage of Sample Households (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 0 4.4 10.4 12.5 1 21.7 27.1 52.5 2 52.2 50.0 25.0 3 21.7 8.3 10.0 4 0.0 4.2 0.0 Mean Number 1.87 1.69 1.34 77 Table 10 NUMBER OF VEHICLES PER HOUSEHOLD Number of V e h i c l e s Percentage of Sample Households (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 0 4.4 8.3 10.0 1 21.7 25.0 40.0 2 52.2 50.0 32.5 3 21.7 12.5 10.0 4 0.0 4.2 2.5 5 0.0 0.0 5.0 Table 11 TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Percentage of Sample Households T o t a l Household Income $ W AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 0-6,000 0.0 2.0 20.0 6,001-12,000 8.7 16.7 22.5 12,001-18,000 4.4 16.7 27.5 18,001-24,000 8.7 14.6 15.0 24,001 pl u s 52.2 35.4 7.5 M i s s i n g Values 26.0 14.6 7.5 78 Table 12 HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN C h i l d r e n Percentage of Sample Households (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 Have C h i l d r e n Have No C h i l d r e n 65.2 34.8 56.3 43.7 32.5 67.5 Table 13 NUMBER OF CHILDREN PER HOUSEHOLD Percentage of Sample Households Number of C h i l d r e n AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 0 34.8 43.7 67.5 1 8.7 18.8 7.5 2 30.4 14.6 5.0 3 17.4 8.3 5.0 4 8.7 8.3 10.0 5 0.0 6.3 2.5 6 0.0 0.0 2.5 Mean Number 1.56 1.38 1.00 79 Table 14 AGES OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS Age of Respondent (years) Percentage of Sample (%) Respondents AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 0 - 1 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 - 25 0.0 5.8 26.2 26 - 40 24.0 40.4 21.4 41 - 60 48.0 38.5 28.6 over 60 28.0 15.4 23.8 Table 15 SEX OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS Percentage of Sample Respondents Sex of Respondent AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA.3 female 76.0 61.5 47.6 male 24.0 36.5 52.4 M i s s i n g Values 2.0 80 The percentage of sample respondents married was highest i n Area 1. The percentage of singles and widows/widowers was highest i n Area 3« (see Table 16) In Area 1, 100 percent of those respondents surveyed had a completed high school education or better. This i s compared to 90 percent i n Area 2 and 64.3 percent i n Area 3' Both Areas 1 and 2 had similar proportions of respondents with university graduation - 36 percent and 34.6 percent respectively. Area 3 bad a significantly lower proportion, that was 9«5 percent, (see Table 17) With respect to the occupational status of sample respondents, both Areas 1 and 2, had relatively similar proportions of respondents with medium-high and high status jobs - 28 percent and 34.6 percent respectively. Area 3i on the other hand, had a small proportion of respondents i n these high status categories, that was 7«2 percent, (see Table 18) The percentage of respondents with medium status jobs decreased from Area 1 to Area 3* This was l i k e l y due in part to the increasing percentage of femalsrespondents from Area 1 to Area 3« In summary, the personal socio-economic characteristics of respondents i n Areas 1 and 2 did not d i f f e r to the extent that they differed between respondents of Areas 2 and 3« 3.1.2.6. Attitudinal Responses The presentation of attitudinal data i s restricted to those questions from the survey questionnaire which were used f o r the analysis i n Chapter III, Section 3 .2 . 81 Table 16 MARITAL STATUS OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS Percentage of Sample Respondents M a r i t a l Status of Respondent AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 s i n g l e 0.0 5.8 14.3 married 92.0 78.8 73.8 widow/widower 4.0 7.7 9.5 other 4.0 5.8 2.4 M i s s i n g Values 1.9 Table 17 EDUCATION LEVEL OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS Education L e v e l Percentage of Sample Respondents AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 elementary school 16.7 some high school 7.7 19.0 high school graduation 28.0 28.8 38.1 some u n i v e r s i t y 36.0 26.9 16.7 u n i v e r s i t y graduation 36.0 34.6 9.5 M i s s i n g Values 1.9 82 Table 18 SOCIAL STATUS OF OCCUPATION OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS Percentage of Sample Respondents S o c i a l Status of Occupation W AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 high 20.0 25.0 2.4 moderately high 8.0 9.6 4.8 medium 60.0 50.0 42.9 moderately low 0.0 1.9 16.7 low 4.0 3.8 7.1 M i s s i n g Values ( i n c l u d i n g r e t i r e d ) 8.0 9.6 26.2 Table 19 ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION I n f l u e n c i n g Factor Rank of Importance AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 l o c a t i o n 1 1 1 v i s u a l appearance 2 3 4 character of neighbourhood 3 2 3 advice of r e a l t o r 6 4 2 p r i c e 5 6 6 r e s a l e value 4 5 5 83 The sample responses to Question 1 indicated that, of the factors influencing people in their selection of an environment i n which to l i v e , locational advantage was the most important factor l i s t e d , (see Table 19) Areas 1 and 2 ranked visual appearance as second and third respectively and ranked character of nieghbourhood as third and second respectively. Area 3« however, ranked price as second, character of neighbourhood third, and visual appearance fourth. Areas 1 and 2 considered price less important and therefore ranked i t sixth and fourth respectively. Areas 2 and 3 both regarded resale value and the advice of a realtor least important and thus ranked them f i f t h and sixth respectively. Area 1 apparently f e l t that resale value was slightly more important and ranked i t fourth. Question 2 attempted to determine how respondents ranked the visual disturbances from motor vehicle activity i n comparison to various other undesirable effects of vehicular activity. In a l l three study areas respondents expressed most concern f o r motor vehicle noise, (see Table 20) In Areas 2 and 3 respondents f e l t that a reduction i n pedestrian safety was the second most important vehicular problem. Area 1 respondents, i n contrast, considered a i r pollution ahead of safety as a problem. Areas 2 and 3 ranked the problem of visual intrusions as third most important while Area 1 respondents ranked i t fourth. Respondents from a l l three areas regarded vibrations and reductions to property value as the least important of vehicular problems i n residential environments. Question 4 from the questionnaire asked the sample respondents to indicate the level of their annoyance to certain physical characteristics of vehicular activity as portrayed i n a standard environment i n an eight inch by ten inch photograph. With respect to Question 4(c) and 4(d), 84 Table 20 UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACTIVITY Undesirable E f f e c t Rank of Importance AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 noise 1 1 1 a i r p o l l u t i o n 2 4 4 v i s u a l disturbances 4 3 3 v i b r a t i o n s 5 6 5 re d u c t i o n of ped e s t r i a n s a f e t y 3 2 2 re d u c t i o n of property s a f e t y 6 5 6 TABLE 21 EXTENT OF ANNOYANCE A. PARKED VEHICLES B. MOVING VEHICLES Percentage of Sample Respondents Extent of Annoyance A. PARKED VEHICLES B. MOVING VEHICLES AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 very annoyed 56.0 26.9 31.0 20.0 23.1 9.5 moderately annoyed 20.0 28.8 23.8 36.0 19.2 28.6 m i l d l y annoyed 12.0 30.8 16.7 20.0 25.0 23.8 n o t i c e a b l e but not annoying 12.0 11.5 28.6 20.0 28.8 28.6 not n o t i c e a b l e 0.0 1.9 0.0 4,0 1.9 9.5 Mi s s i n g Values 1.9 85 88 percent of respondents sampled from Area 1 were mildly to very annoyed by the number of parked vehicles i n the photograph and ?6 percent were mildly to very annoyed at the number of moving vehicles, (see Table 21) In comparison, 86.5 percent and 71.5 percent respectively, of respondents of Areas 2 and 3» were mildly to very annoyed by parked vehicles; and 67.3 percent and 6I.9 percent respectively were mildly to very annoyed by moving vehicles in the photograph. With respect to high levels of annoyance to parked vehicles, 56 percent of respondents from Area 1 were very annoyed with the situation portrayed i n the photograph. A smaller proportion of the samples from Areas 2 and 3 were very annoyed - 26.9 percent and 9«5 percent respectively. Likewise, with respect to high levels of annoyance to moving vehicles, a larger proportion of respondents of Areas 1 and 2 were annoyed by moving vehicles i n the standard environment - 20 percent and 23*1 percent respectively. A much smaller proportion of respondents in Area 3 were very annoyed^ that was 9>5 percent. Question 5 i n the survey questionnaire asked the respondents to rank certain types of visual screening structures as they perceived them to be most effective for reducing visual disturbances of t r a f f i c in a residential neighbourhood. The relative frequency of ranks by respondents of a l l three areas was remarkably similar, (see Table 22) A l l areas ranked hedges as the most effective, trees second most effective, landscaping third, fences fourth, walls f i f t h , and window drapes as sixth most effective. Questions ?(a) and 7(d) asked the respondents to indicate the extent of their agreement or disagreement with respect to a particular 86 Table 22 PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF SCREENING Type of Screening S t r u c t u r e Rank of E f f e c t i v e n e s s AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 fence 4 4 4 hedge 1 1 1 drapes 6 6 6 tree s 2 2 2 w a l l 5 5 5 landscaping 3 3 3 Table 23 UNATTRACTIVENESS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACTIVITY Extent of Agreement Percentage of Sample (%) Respondents AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 s t r o n g l y agree 24.0 19.2 21.4 m i l d l y agree 32.0 46.2 33.3 n e i t h e r agree nor disagree 16.0 13.5 21.4 m i l d l y disagree 28.0 19.2 11.9 s t r o n g l y disagree 0.0 1.9 11.9 87 statement. A major proportion of the respondents from each area sampled considered the unattractiveness of vehicular activity in their neighbour-hood to be annoying. In Areas 1, 2, and 3i 56.0 percent, 65-4 percent, and 5^.7 percent respectively, mildly to strongly .agreed with statement 7(a). (see Table 23) Wo respondents of Area 1 strongly disagreed with the statement. Only a small proportion of those sampled i n Areas 2 and 3 strongly disagreed - 1.9 percent and 11.9 percent respectively. A moderate proportion of respondents i n each area were noncommital. Question 7(d) was intended to inquire as to the extent of adaptation of respondents to certain environmental conditons. In particular, residents were asked i f visual disturbance from motor vehicles were less annoying than they were at a previous time. In Area 1, 48 percent of the sample either mildly or strongly disagreed with the statement, (see Table 24) In Area 2, 51«9 percent disagreed to, some extent with the statement. Area 3 respondents were equally disturbed - 38.1; percent of the sample disagreed to some extent and 38.1 percent agreed to some extent. Approximately one f i f t h of the respondents of each area were noncommital i n regard to statement 7(d). The f i n a l attitudinal question, presented as data, deals again with photographs and a standard environment. Question 8 was designed to determine the respondent's maximum level of tolerance to visual intrusions from motor vehicles. Residents were asked to examine three standard environments. In one, only the number of parked vehicles wasvto be considered and in another, only the number of moving vehicles. In a third, consideration was given to both the number of parked and moving vehicles. 88 Table 24 ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATION Percentage of Sample Respondents Extent of Agreement W AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 s t r o n g l y agree 8.0 3.8 7.1 m i l d l y agree 20.0 21.2 31.0 n e i t h e r agree nor disagree 24.0 23.1 21.4 m i l d l y disagree 20.0 25.0 11.9 s t r o n g l y disagree 28.0 26.9 26.2 M i s s i n g Values 2.4 Table 25 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE - PARKED VEHICLES Photograph Representing Maximum Tolerance Percentage of Sample Respondents (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 l e s s than 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 1.9 2.4 2 20.0 5.8 4.8 3 24.0 15.4 19.0 4 32.0 34.6 26.2 5 16.0 19.2 4.8 6 8.0 9.6 16.7 greater than 6 0.0 13.5 26.2 89 Responses to Question 8, Row 1, resulted i n approximately one third of the sample of each area choosing picture number 1. (see Table 25) Area 1 responses covered a smaller range, that i s , a l l respondents chose vehicular situations between photograph; 2 and photograph 6. In Area 1 only 8 percent of the respondents chose picture number 6 or greater, whereas, in Areas 2 and 3 a larger proportion -" 23«1 percent and 42.9 percent respectively chose parked densities as portrayed i n picture number 6 or greater parked densities. With respect tb the number of moving vehicles, the range of responses to Question 8, Row 2, was greater than for Row 1. (see Table 26) The distribution of responses from each area was also greater. In Area 1, 72 percent of the respondents chose pictures 2, 3» or 4 and i n Areas 2 and 3 the proportions were 84.6 percent and 73«8 percent respectively. A greater proportion of respondents of Area 3 chose picture number 6 or greater. When parked and moving vehicles became part of the same standard environment, in Question 8, Row 3» 84 percent of respondents of Area 1 could tolerate vehicle levels up to the number portrayed i n photograph number 2. (see Table 27) The related proportions for Areas 2 and 3 were 78.8 percent and 52.3 percent respectively. Compared to Areas 1 and 2, a significantly higher proportion of respondents of Area 3 could tolerate vehicular activity beyond that il l u s t r a t e d i n photograph number 5« 3.2 DATA ANALYSIS This section sets out f i r s t , to describe briefly the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures employed and second, to describe the case study data analyses 90 Table 26 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE - MOVING VEHICLES Photograph Representing Maximum Tolerance Percentage of Sample Respondents (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 l e s s than 1 8.0 3.8 2.4 1 8.0 7.7 0.0 2 20.0 23.1 21.4 3 24.0 34.6 9.5 4 28.0 26.9 42.9 5 8.0 1.9 16.7 6 4.0 0.0 4.8 greater than 6 0.0 1.9 2.4 Table 27 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE - PARKED AND MOVING VEHICLES Photograph Representing Maximum Tolerance Percentage of Sample Respondents (%) AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 l e s s than 1 40.0 25.0 9.5 1 20.0 17.3 19.0 2 24.0 36.5 23.8 3 8.0 15.4 21.4 4 4.0 3.8 0.0 5 4.0 1.9 16.7 6 0.0 0.0 4.8 greater than 6 0.0 0.0 2.4 M i s s i n g Values 2.4 91 and findings. The data analyses for the case study involve both the examination of particular data and the comparison of certain variables to provide descriptions and relationships respectively. 3.2.1 Statistical Procedures Employed Computers are extremely useful for the routine processing of large quantities of data and for the statistical manipulation of that data. The 8 Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) is an integrated system of computer programs containing many of the most' common statistical procedures employed by social scientists and, therefore, was used in this thesis to condense information into a form which could be easily comprehended and interpreted. The class of statistical procedures chosen was the nonparametric procedures which required few assumptions about the distribution or level of measurement of the variables and could be applied to nominal or ordinal, data which did not have well established metrics. One of the SPSS statistical procedures employed was referred to, functionally, as "Descriptive Statistics and One-Way Frequency Distributions". The sub-program MARGINALS computed and presented tables containing (1) simple ram frequencies, (2) relative frequencies, and (3) cumulative relative frequencies for classificatory or grouped variables. When investigating variables which were classificatory (that i s , were measured in terms of a limited number of discrete categories or values) i t was determined desirable to examine the number or frequency of cases which f e l l into each category of the variable. MARGINALS was thus utilized to provide a display of one-way frequency distribution (or marginals) of variables. 92 A second SPSS procedure employed was referred to functionally as "Bivariate Correlation Analysis". The correlation analysis provided a technique for measuring the linear relationship between two variables and produced a single summary s t a t i s t i c describing the strength of the association. This s t a t i s t i c was known as the correlation coefficient. Nonparametric Correlation . (NONPAR CORR) enabled the computation of either Spearman or Kendall rank-order correlation coefficients or both. The output from NONPAR CORR provided the correlation coefficient, the number of observations upon which the correlation was based, and the level of s t a t i s t i c a l significance of the coefficient. 3.2.2 Case Study - Data Analysis and Findings F i r s t , the data received i n regard to Question 7(a) of the survey questionnaire was analyzed to determine i f , i n fact, the sample respondents were annoyed by th^ visual disturbances of motor vehicle activity. In conjunction this was followed by an analysis of Question 2; that i s , how the sample respondents ranked the importance of those visual disturbances i n comparison to other undesirable effects of motor vehicle activity. Second, the research hypothesis was tested with respect to the actual and standard environments. Correlation between the responses to particular questions was used to describe the relationship between variables. Third, Question 8 was analyzed to investigate the sample respondents' perceptions of the tolerable visual capacity of the standard environment to accommodate vehicular activity. At the same time responses to Questions 1 and 7(d) were examined so as to permit a brief description of two factors (that i s , environmental selection and environmental adaptation respectively) which 93 would likely influence the respondents* determination of his/her maximum tolerable number of vehicles. The fourth and final analysis was to determine, from responses to Question 5» which visual screening structures were regarded as most effective for utilization in urban residential areas. 3.2.2.1 Annoyance and Visual Intrusions Do urban residents consider-the unattract!veness of motor vehicle activity in their neighbourhood to be annoying? According to Question 7(a) sample responses from the three, study areas, the answer apparently was, yes. As mentioned previously (Chapter III, Sub-Section 3.1.2.6), in Areas 1, 2, and 3 over 50 percent of the respondents of each area agreed to statement 7(a) while only 28.0 percent, 22.1 percent, and 23'8 percent respectively disagreed. Of the area respondents, 24.0 percent, 19.2 percent, and 21.4 percent respectively, strongly agreed while only 0.0 percent, 1.9 percent, and 11.9 percent respectively strongly disagreed. When the responses of the three areas were combined, 71 residents or 60 percent indicated that they were mildly or strongly annoyed with the unattractiveness of vehicles. If urban residents do in fact, then consider the unattractiveness of motor vehicle activity to be annoying, how do they rank i t s importance in comparison to other undesirable motor vehicle effects? According to the sample responses to Question 2, only the problems of noise, vibrations, safety, and property value showed sufficient discrepancies between the actual responses and the expected responses thereby suggesting that residents were not sensitive in their importance ranking of air pollution or visual intrusions, (see Appendix E-l) 94 3.2.2.2 Testing the Research Hypothesis To test the hypothesis that the visually undesirable^ aspects of vehicular activity are perceived by individuals while on their own property at certain annoyance levels depending on (a) the individual's socio-economic status, (b) the physical characteristics of the motor vehicle activity, and (c) the total effectiveness of any types of visual screening presently existing on an individual's property, i t was decided that a correlation of assigned indlcies of the sample respondent's, level of annoyance to visual intrusions in his/her actual environment with, indlcies of socio-economic status, motor vehicle activity, and total visual screening effectiveness of the actual environment would be appropriate. As well i t was decided that a correlation between the levels of annoyance with respect to standard environments (in; photographs) and socio-economic statuses would also be appropriate. Question ?(a), the responses of which were scaled from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'} were translated into a scale of annoyance. For example, i t was assumed that strong disagreement with statement ?(a) would mean that the respondent was either not annoyed at a l l or had a very low level of annoyance to visual disturbances of vehicles. At the other end of the scale a strong agreement to statement 7(a) was assumed to indicate that the respondent had a high level of annoyance with the unattractiveness of vehicular activity. Thus, a range of annoyance levels was established and given numerical values from 1 (very low level or no annoyance) to 5 (high annoyance). Similarly, an index of socio-economic status was formulated. The attributes of income, education, and occupation received equal weighting as 95 the basic variables of the index. Each variable was scaled numerically and the sum: of the three variables, which would extend from 3 (low status) to 15 (high status), provided an index of respondents' socio-economic status. The level of annoyance was then correlated with socio-economic status. The total, effectiveness of screening structures in the actual environment, as previously stated i n Chapter III, sub-:section J.l.l,kt was scaled - high, medium, low, or zero. A numerical index was applied to this scale to create an index of total effectiveness - 1 represented zero total effectiveness and 4 represented high total effectiveness. The level of annoyance was then correlated with t o t a l effectiveness of visual screening structures. With respect to the presence of motor vehicles, parked vehicles and moving vehicles were examined separately as to their possible influence on levels of annoyance. The total number of parked vehicles from four observations was correlated with the level of annoyance. The ratio scale of moving vehicles (see sub-section J.l.l) provided an index of moving vehicle activity. Moving vehicle activity was then correlated with the level of annoyance. A presentation of variable indicies i s displayed i n Table 28. The results of the three correlations are displayed in Table 29-o Theoretically, the Spearman Correlation Coefficient (r) varies from -1.0 to +1.0. A coefficient of 0 always indicates that no linear relationship exists; a +1.0 coefficient implies a 'perfect' positive relationship (that i s , an increase i n one variable i s always associated with a concommitant increase i n the other variable); and a coefficient Table 28 V a r i a b l e I n d i c i e s - A c t u a l Environment Numerical Index Moderately Moderately V a r i a b l e Very High High High Medium Low Low Very Low-Annoyance = Q 7 (a) Socio-economic s t a t u s = Income + Education + Occupation T o t a l E f f e c t i v e n e s s of V i s u a l Screening Str u c t u r e s Number of Barked V e h i c l e s R a t i o of Moving V e h i c l e s 13 12-15 4 >14 11 7-11 3-6 3 2 1 8-14 0-7 7 5 3 1 ON 97 Table 29 Nonparametric C o r r e l a t i o n s C o r r e l a t i o n V a r i a b l e s Spearman C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t (r) S i g n i f i c a n c e ACTUAL ENVIRONMENT Annoyance w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s Annoyance w i t h t o t a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s Annoyance w i t h parked v e h i c l e s Annoyance w i t h moving v e h i c l e s STANDARD ENVIRONMENT Question 4 Annoyance parked v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s Annoyance moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s Annoyance parked v e h i c l e s w i t h annoyance moving v e h i c l e s Question 8 Annoyance parked v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s Annoyance moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s Annoyance parked and moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic status Annoyance parked v e h i c l e s w i t h annoyance moving v e h i c l e s 0.1862 0.0263 -0.0058 0.1679 0.1057 0.2746 0.2036 0.1266 -0.1695 -0.1933 0.4202 * 0.021 0.388 0.475 * 0.034 0.126 * 0.001 * 0.013 0.085 * 0.033 * 0.018 * 0.001 * S t a t i s t i c a l l y significant 98 of -1.0 ind icates a ' p e r f e c t ' negative re la t ionsh ip (that i s , one i n which an increase i n one var iable i s always associated with a decrease i n the other va r iab le ) . The s ign i f icance s t a t i s t i c ind icates the p robab i l i t y of committing a Type 1 Error} that i s , of erroneously re jec t ing a hypothesis which i s r e a l l y true. The l e v e l of s i gn i f i cance, that i s , the p robab i l i t y of obtaining a f a i r l y strong (pos i t ive or negative) co r re la t i on coe f f i c i en t purely by chance was set a t 5 percent ( «= 0.05)« To tes t the n u l l hypothesis of no co r re la t i on (namely, the hypothesis that there i s no l i n e a r re la t ionsh ip between two given var iables) the s ign i f icance value obtained was compared to the l e v e l of s ign i f icance set. I f the s ign i f icance value obtained was greater than 0.05 then there was no s i gn i f i c an t co r re la t ion and the value of r was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c an t . The resu l t s of the cor re la t ion between the l e v e l of annoyance and socio-economic status, and between the l e v e l of annoyance and moving vehic le a c t i v i t y , suggested a weak d i r e c t re la t ionsh ip . The corre lat ions between the l e v e l of annoyance and the t o t a l effect iveness of screening, and between the l e v e l of annoyance and parked vehic le a c t i v i t y , on the Other hand, were chance corre lat ions and hence the coe f f i c i en t s were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c an t . F i n a l l y , the associat ion between the l e v e l of annoyance, with respect to standard v i s ua l environments, and socio-economic status was examined. Like the previous corre lat ions i t was necessary to formulate an index f o r the l e v e l of annoyance. Questions 4(c) and 4(d), which were scaled from 'not not iceable ' (low annoyance) to 'very annoying', were given numerical values from 1 (low annoyance) to 5 (high annoyance). 99 Question 8, which also involved photographs, was translated into annoyance levels. It was assumed that the choice of, for example, photograph number 1, which indicated a low tolerance level to visual disturbances, would in turn, therefore, indicate a high level of annoyance to visual vehicular intrusions. Each row of photographs was scaled and numerical values were applied such that 1 represented lowest annoyance and 8 represented highest annoyance. The indicies of annoyance and of socio-economic status are displayed in Table 30. The results of correlations with respect to standard visual environ-ments are displayed in Table 29• The correlation between the level of annoyance to moving vehicles and the level of socio-economic status for both Questions 4 and 8 resulted in statistically significant coefficients. However, the direction of the suggested relationship between the variables was not the same. The associations between the level of annoyance to parked vehicles and the level of socio-economic status, on the other hand, were not statistically significant. Finally, the correlation between the level of annoyance to parked vehicles and the level of annoyance to moving vehicles, for both Questions 4 and 8, resulted ln coefficients indicating weak positive relationships. 3.2.2.3 The Perceived Capacity of the Visual Environment to Accommodate Motor Vehicle Activity What is an urban resident's maximum level of tolerance or cut-off point with respect to visual disturbances of vehicular activity? When an equal proportion of responses to Question 8 was considered from each area (which was Row 1 - ?6 percent, Row 2-88 percent, and Row 3-84 percent) the following findings became evident, (see Tables 25, 26, and 27) The Table 30 VARIABLE INDICIES - STANDARD ENVIRONMENTS Numerical Index V a r i a b l e Very High High Moderately High Medium Question 4 (c) L e v e l of annoyance parked v e h i c l e s (d) L e v e l of annoyance moving v e h i c l e s 3 4 3 3 Moderately Very Low Low Low 2 2 1 1 Question 8 Row 1 - L e v e l of annoyance parked v e h i c l e s Row 2 - L e v e l of annoyance moving v e h i c l e s Row 3 - L e v e l of annoyance parked and moving v e h i c l e s 6 6 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 Socio-economic status = Income + Education + Occupation 12-15 7-11 3-6 101 residents of Area 1 sampled could tolerate 4 vehicles and less in Row 1 -parked vehicles only, standard, visual, side-street environment. Area 1 respondents' maximum level of tolerance to moving vehicles was k and less in Row 2 - moving vehicles only, standard, visual, arterial street environ-ment. When parked and moving vehicles - Row 3 - were portrayed together in a standard, visual, arterial street,environment, Area 1 respondents could tolerate 3 parked and 3 moving vehicles and less. The cut-off point for Area 2 respondents, on the other hand, was slightly higher with respect to parked vehicles only. When the responses of Row 1 were examined, Area 2 respondents considered 5 parked vehicles and less as the maximum tolerable. With respect to Row.2, Area 2 respondents could tolerate a maximum of 4 moving vehicles. When Area 2 respondents considered Row 3 photographs, their maximum tolerable number of vehicles was 3 parked and 5 moving. Finally, when responses were analyzed with respect to Area 3, the residents considered their cut-off points as 6 parked vehicles; 5 moving vehlcles : and; 4 parked and 5 moving vehicles respectively, in regard to the three rows of photographs. The overall results from the three areas are displayed in Table 31-Environmental selection and adaptation were two factors assumed to influence an urban resident's determination of his/her maximum tolerable level of vehicular activity In the neighbourhood. Question 1 of the survey questionnaire was designed to determine specifically how important a resident considered the' visual appearance of the surroundings, in comparison with other influencing factors in his/her selection of an urban environment in which to reside. According to the total responses 102 Table 31 MAXIMUM TOLERABLE VEHICULAR ACTIVITY - STANDARD ENVIRONMENTS MAXIMUM TOLERABLE NUMBER OF VEHICLES Q 8 - ROW 1 Q 8 - ROW 2 Q 8 - ROW 3 AREA PARKED MOVING PARKED AND MOVING (76 percent of (88 percent of (84 percent of respondents) respondents) respondents) 1 4 4 3-3 2 5 4 3-5 3 6 5 4-5 103 from the three areas, the discrepancies between the observed and expected were large enough to suggest that residents were in fact sensitive to ranking the importance of the visual surroundings, (see Appendix E-2) The attitudes of the sample respondents from Area- 2, (as indicated in Table 32) showed that 92.7 percent considered the visual appearance of the neighbourhood as the f i r s t , second, or third most important reason for selecting that environment. Areas 1 and 3» °n the otherl.hand, were somewhat different} that i s , only 58 percent and 47.6 percent of the respondents respectively considered visual appearances in the top three reasons for selecting the environment. In Chapter III, subjection 3.1.2.6, i t was indicated that Question 7(d) was intended to inquire as to whether the sample respondent had adapted to the visual environmental conditions resulting from motor vehicle activity in the neighbourhood. According to the responses compiled in Table 24, 48 percent of Area 1 respondents, 51.9 percent of Area 2 respondents. and 38.1 percent of Area 3 respondents indicated that, to some extent, they had not adapted to visual disturbances resulting from vehicular activity, whereas, 28 percent, 25 percent, and 38 percent of Area 1, 2, and 3 respondents respectively indicated that they had adapted to visual intrusions. 3.2.2.4 Visual Screening Visual screening i s one alternative to reduce visual intrusions. Which types of visual screening structures do urban residents perceive to be the most effective ln reducing the visual disturbances of motor vehicle activity? The aggregated responses from the three study areas to Question 5 indicated that respondents were sensitive in ranking the 104 Table 32 VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE SURROUNDINGS % of Sample Respondents RANK AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 1 16.0 26.9 7.1 2 32.0 30.8 16.7 3 20.0 25.0 23.8 4 20.0 11.5 26.2 5 8.0 1.9 11.9 6 1.9 2.4 MV 4.0 1.9 11.9 105 effectiveness of screening structures, (see Appendix E-3) As already mentioned in sub-section 3*1«2.6, the ranking given to various screening structures was virtually identical for a l l three study areas, (see Table 22) It should be mentioned that the word 'effective' was generally misinter-preted and thus the question was ranked more towards a 'preference' of various screening structures. Hedges were the most favoured structure followed by trees, landscaping, fences, walls, and window drapes (in order of descending effectiveness or preference.) 3*3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Various conclusions have emerged from the data analyzed i n section 3>2« These conclusions are presented and discussed respectively, in the following sub-sections. This section i s terminated with a discussion of visual screening structures as a recommendation to reduce visual disturbances from motor vehicles. 3.3.I Case Study Conclusion It can be concluded from the case study that residents sampled from three areas surveyed, when asked directly, appeared to be annoyed by visual intrusions of motor vehicles in their residential neighbourhoods. In fact, according to the community attitudes collected, i t was shown that visual disturbances were considered as the third or fourth most undesirable effect of vehicular activity in the neighbourhood. However, when asked to rank the Importance of visual intrusions in regard to other adverse vehicular effects, residents appeared to be insensitive to the problem. 1 0 6 Although the results of the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures i n section 3.2 are inconclusive to verify the following statements, i t i s speculated that in regard to the presence of motor vehicles (l) the higher the socio-economic status of a resident, the higher i s his/her level of annoyance, and (2) the greater the number of parked and/or moving vehicles, the higher i s the level of his/her annoyance. On the other hand, (3) as the to t a l effectiveness of visual screening structures present on a resident's property increases, the resident's level of annoyance decreases. As well a resident's level of annoyance to parked vehicles increased as his/her level of annoyance to moving vehicles increases. The maximum tolerable level of vehicular activity;.In the standard visual environment, assessed by sample respondents, appeared to be higher in Area 2 than i n Area 1 and highest i n Area 3» Therefore, the visual capacity of the residential environment to accommodate motor vehicles i s perceived to be higher by communities of lower .socio-economic status. In addition, of the three study areas, Area 2 residents appeared to be more concerned with the visual surroundings i n their selection of an urban environment i n which to reside. In the process of environmental selection the appearance of the visual surroundings i s more important to higher socio-economic groups. It i s concluded as well that the majority of sample respondents of Areas 1 and 2 and a Large proportion of respondents of Area 3 apparently had not adapted to visual disturbances of vehicular activity i n the neighbourhood. However, the impression following the questionnaire administration was that environmental adaptation was a factor i n modifying the respondent's annoyance. 10? 3-3'2 Discussion of Conclusions If a Large proportion of residents i n an urban area indicate that they are annoyed by vehicular visual intrusions and i f the level of annoyance i s measured and i s determined to be substantial, the urban planner, on the basis of this i n i t i a l problem definition and verification, can begin to collect an inventory of data to permit him/her to identify various alternative courses of action so as to mitigate the problem, (see Appendices C and D) Such was the situation i n the case> study. The annoyance indicated by residents was measured and the level was determined to be "moderate". The ensuing data collection and analysis lead to the findings and conclusions presented in previous sub-sections. From this information base the following discussions arise. The dependence of annoyance levels on the socio-economic statuses of the residents of the urban community was perhaps f i r s t due to the fact that a higher income might have permitted more leisure time which in turn might have lead to a greater frequency of contact with the visual environment. Second, higher education levels might have led'to a greater awareness and understanding of the problem of visual intrusions. The dependence of annoyance levels on the physical characteristics of motor vehicle activity was l i k e l y influenced by a variety of factors. Even though the survey questionnaire attempted to s p l i t out only the number of vehicles as a variable, i t was li k e l y that other variables such as the design, or the condition of the vehicles, .the speed of movement, the noise, the resident's mood, and so on, influenced the response regarding his/her level of annoyance. As well, the assumed association between annoyance and vehicles was unlikely to be a directly proportional 108 relationship. An increase i n the presence of vehicles i n areas presently low i n vehicle activity, l i k e l y arouses proportionately more annoyance than i f a similar absolute increase occurs in an area presently high i n vehicle activity. The association i n which a resident's level of annoyance to parked vehicles increases as his/her level of annoyance to moving vehicles increases indicates that residents probably f a i l to differentiate completely the adverse aspects of parked vehicles from the adverse aspects of moving vehicles. The photograph which represented a respondent's maximum tolerance to visual intrusions was, at least i n part, an indication of what the respondent perceived the maximum capacity of the standard visual environment to be i n regard to motor vehicle activity. The average maximum tolerance indicated from the residents of a particular area was considered to represent the community attitude concerning the visual environmental capacity. This attitude could help lead to the establishment of a standard for the visual capacity of the environment to accommodate vehicles. Attitudes of residents to photographs of t r a f f i c activity can be used to predict the residents' attitudes concerning t r a f f i c i n the actual environment. Objective obervations of environmental quality, by means of t r a f f i c counter tapes and parked vehicle counts showed that environmental conditions on the busier streets were particularly severe. However, the levels of annoyance from persons l i v i n g on or close to higher levels of vehicular activity and subsequently greater visual intrusions were not so high as might reasonably be suspected. One major reason appeared to be that the errosion of the visual environmental quality had been subtle and had occurred over a number of years. During that time the workings of visual 109 environmental selection and visual environmental adaptation had l i k e l y been operating. These are important phenomena to consider i n measurements of attitudinal responses to environmental quality. The workings of visual environmental selection may be stated as follows: A visual environment tends to be selected by those groups who find i t most amenable, and to be rejected by those who f i n d i t least amenable. The principle does not work perfectly however. Appleyard and L i n t e l l go on. to suggest that those who are unable to select their preferred visual environment through lack of financial, informational, or psychological resources become "locked i n " to certain visual environments and are therefore l i k e l y to suffer the most from increasing visual disturbances of vehicles. Householders may select a less than ideal visual environment f o r reasons other than lack of resources. Many make a compromise, sacrificing visual amenity f o r the benefits of, f o r example, locational advantage, quickly available accommodation, and so on. Other people selecting an environment may make errors of judgment. Visually 49th Avenue in Area 1, for example, i s a well maintained, high quality, yet increasingly busy street. A potential resident who assesses the appearance of this street environment at a period of lower t r a f f i c activity (say on a Sunday morning) might be deceived. Another kind of error i s the in a b i l i t y to predict future visual deterioration of an area. By visual environmental adaptation i t i s meant that those who remain i n one visual environment f o r a length of time become adapted or resigned to i t whether or not i t i s visually pleasant* , especially i f they see no future change in s i t e . ^ Those with low expectations or aspirations may be content with any visual environment. Visual adaptation may be 110 apparent as a result of-residents not wishing to complain i n order to keep up their social image and the sales value of their property or through reluctance to admit that they have limited resources or have made an error of judgment i n their selection of an attractive place to reside. 3.3.3 Recommendations In l i g h t of the case study conclusions and the literature reviewed, the following sub-section concerning recommendations i s presented. Subsequent to a problem definition and an i n i t i a l data collection, the urban planner's next task i s to present relevant alternative courses of action reflecting community objectives, (see Appendix C) In the literature various means to resolve the conflict between motor vehicle accessibility and visual environmental quality have been proposed. In the past, proposals were directed toward improving motor vehicle accessibility at the expense of the visual quality of the urban residential neighbourhood. However, i n the; advent of serious fuel shortages and environmental deterioration the emphasis has to be taken away from vehicular accessibility improvements and instead given to improving environmental quality while at the same time creating new ways to permit the access of people and to reduce or eliminate vehicular problems. As J. Antoniou suggested then, the concentration of urban transportation planning should be predominantly 12 on the movement of people and goods and not on the movement of vehicles. Transportation should be effective as well as efficient in terms of community objectives. Today then, i n the midst of a growing environmental consciousness, present transportation proposals have to be directed more towards the I l l maintenance or enhancement of environmental quality. Two approaches that could lead to the enhancement of visual quality are, (l) to maintain the existing environmental quality while decreasing vehicular accessibility to at least meet the requirements of a visual standard, or (2) to maintain the present vehicular accessibility while various means are taken to upgrade the visual appearance. 13 The f i r s t approach has been advocated by the Buchanan Beport J 14 and J. Antoniou . The problem resolves itself into an exercise in environmental management which is defined as a possible method of protect-ing the environment of an area against the adverse effects of motor traffic by measures designed to prevent the entry of extraneous traffic, and to re-organize internal flows so that they are less damaging in their effects. The Buchanan Report technique consists of the laying of a (moving and at rest) traffic ceiling in environmental areas by modifying the arrangements for vehicles and people, so that the amount of traffic does not exceed the environmental capacity. The mere establishment of a visual environmental standard is not intended to guarantee that an area will have any positive aesthetic qualities; that is why the Report refers specifically to the environment in relation to traffic only. Some of the steps required to establish an environmental area 15 are as follows: J (1) Numbers, types, and speeds of vehicles to be kept down to a level compatible with environmental standards. (2) Circulation of essential traffic to destinations to be contrived, but not necessarily by the shortest route, nor even with any choice of route. (3) Streets and areas which are used predominantly by pedestrians to be converted to pedestrian use only. (4) A l l through movements to be prevented. 112 (5) Internal movements to be re-organized to eliminate the conflict of criss-cross journeys. (6) Parking policy, especially as to the amount and location of parking space, to be firmly directed towards the environmental objectives. J. Antoniou, who questions whether meaningful environmental standards can be determined, suggests alternative techniques to reduce 16 vehicular accessibility. He sees that the key to safeguarding the environment l i e s i n greatly improved public transport systems, including the adoption of novel forms of transport. He suggests other practical physical improvements such as comprehensive pedestrian networks. The San Francisco City Planning Department has attempted to reduce vehicular accessibility by designating "protected" residential areas 17 throughout the city. ' These areas were to be protected from through t r a f f i c by /policies such as the improvement of public transit, the concen-tration of t r a f f i c on the city's main arteries by increasing their capacity through separated grades,selective widening, parking controls, and so on, and the blocking of through t r a f f i c by devices such as rough pavement surfaces, "necking^down" entrances, bending alignments, landscaping, lighting, and sidewalk treatment, a l l which would slow down t r a f f i c to a residential pace. The above proposals to reduce accessibility are generally considered as components of a longer term approach requiring substantial re-organization of the existing transport system and substantial physical alterations of the environment. These changes w i l l l i k e l y result i n some community disruption and w i l l commit large amounts of public dollars to a mode of transport whose future existence i s uncertain (especially i n l i g h t of gasoline shortages, r i s i n g automobile insurance rates, innovative 113 telecommunications, and the unlikely nearby change over to novel modes such- as electric cars). The second alternative, yet complimentary approach suggested, whereby accessibility i s maintained while measures are taken to enhance the visual quality, leads to such proposals as visual screening or perhaps vehicle design to ameliorate adverse visual conditions. Visual screening i s considered here as a more short-term, "wait and see", "bandaid" type proposal. It i s weighted towards enhancing visual quality of the appearance of the neighbourhood and should i n the longer term compliment and be integral i n public transportation plans. D. Appleyard and M. L i n t e l l proposed the protection of residences from glaring street lights, car lamps, and the view of passing vehicles 18 through the planting of trees. As well i t i s suggested that fences, hedges, drapes, walls, and landscaping can be effective structures not only to screen out visual intrusions but also to enhance the visual appearance of the neighbourhood. Visual screening structures such as the above are suggested therefore as aflbandaid" type solution for streets where vehicular activity can not or w i l l l i k e l y not be reduced. The various types of screening structures are preferred and are effective to varying degrees. As stated previously, the actual effective-ness of a screening structure depends both on i t s inherent physical capability (efficiency) and on i t s location on the resident's property. From the case study i t was shown that people tended to prefer natural vegetation type screening such as hedges, trees, and landscaping, more than the man-made structures. The trees and hedges, which were more common in Area 1 than in other areas, provided effective and preferable visual 114 screening on certain lots. Besides performing the visual screening function, screening structures are advantageous for other reasons. The vegetative type structures especially, f o r example, can enhance the appearance of a neighbourhood. This has the added benefit to the homeowner of l i k e l y increases i n the sales value of the property. Screening structures can be a r t i s t i c i n design, texture, colour, and so om and can be representa-tive of personal household tastes and a r t i s t i c efforts. Landscaping i n particular can be arranged i n a variety of ways ways with a variety of different structures and yet s t i l l be functional. Screening structures can add privacy to certain lots and thereby permit greater outdoor use of the property. Structures such as walls or fences can block out some fumes but i n most cases their effectiveness i n this regard i s negligible. The vegetative type structures, through the process of photosynthesis, provide oxygen to the urban environment. Screening structures can be advantageous for providing shade on a property, street, and neighbourhood. Finally, the enhancement of the appearance of a neighbourhood with screening structures has the supporting influence of enhancing visual harmony for the motor vehicle operator and passenger. Visual screening structures do, however, have their disadvantages as well. For example, screening structures on corner lots can be hazardous to driving safety i f the structure interferes with the vehicle operator's f i e l d of vision. Hedges tend to collect dust and can provide an attractive habitat f o r pests and insects. Fences, hedges, trees, and drapes a l l require occasional maintenance. High stone walls are effective but are not generally compatible with the appearance of most urban 115 neighbourhoods; especially those where the lot sizes are small. An attitudinal disadvantage of the vegetative type structures is that unless they are of a sufficient size when they are planted, there is a time lag before they grow to become adequate enough to perform the screening function. A major disadvantage for man-made structures is the constraint imposed by the City bf Vancouver, Zoning and Development By-Law No. 3375 which states that no screening structure should be over 4 feet high in . 19 the front yard and no more than 6 feet high in the back yard. On the other hand, vegetative type structures can grow to any height. A f inal disadvantage of a l l visual screening structures, (except perhaps to a degree, stone walls-and certain raised landscaping designs) is that none are particularly helpful in damping out vehicular noise. Various combinations of screening structures provide diversity and can be more or less preferable or effective, (see Illustration 8) It should be noted that the most aesthetically appropriate screening structures in urban residential areas are those which are equally attractive when viewed from inside the property as when viewed from outside the property, (see Illustration 9) Structures should enhance the particular visual qualities of an area. Visual screening structures should also be designed to reduce other adverse motor vehicle effects such as noise, dust, and fumes. Extensive visual screening is not required for a l l residential properties. Those lots closest to severe vehicular activity may have greater need for complete visual screening. It should be noted, however, that even properties close to severe vehicular conditions may have residents who do not desire screening structures. Some people enjoy the site of motor vehicle activity and other people like to have their lots ILLUSTRATION 8 Effective Visual Screening Structures 117 T R E E S A N D F E N C E WALL ANO HEJD6E ILLUSTRATION 9 Visual Screening Structures - Inside and Outside Appearances 121 l i s 126 more open to the visual surroundings. In summary then, visual screening structures are suggested for those residents that have indicated that they are visually disturbed by the presence of motor vehicles, (a situation over which they generally have l i t t l e control except the extreme perogatives of either staying indoors with the drapes drawn or relocating to an area of higher visual quality). REFERENCES - CHAPTER III 126a "*"D. Appleyard, K. Lynch, and J.R. Meyer, The View from the Road, (Cambridgej M.I.T. Press, 1965). 2 G.H. Winkel, R. Malek, and P. Thiel, "Community Response to the Design Features of Roads: A Technique for Measurement", Highway Research  Record, No. 305, (Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Board, 1970).. <D. Appleyard and M. Lintell, Environmental Quality of City Streets, Working Paper No. 142, (Berkley, California: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 1970)' S. Van der Ryn, "Value Measurement and Visual Factors in the Urban Environment", (University of California, College of Environmental Design, January 1963)' •^R. Likert, "A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes", Archives  of Psychology, R.S. Woodsworth (ed.), No. 140, (New York: Columbia University, 1932). B^.R. Blishem, "A Socio-Economic Index for Occupations in Canada", Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, IV, No. 1, (February, 1967), pp. 41-53. 7 'City of Vancouver, British Columbia, Street and Traffic By-Law No. 2849, up to June 11, 1974. ^.H. Nie, D.H. Bent, and C.H. Hull, Statistical Package for the  Social Sciences, (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970), 9Ibid., pp. 153-154. "^ D. Appleyard and M. Lintell, op. cit., p. 98. n i b i d . , p. 99. 12 J. Antoniou, Environmental Management: Planning for Traffic, (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1971), PP« 19-2lT "^Ministry 0 f Transport, Traffic in Towns, (The Buchanan Report), (London: H.M.S.O., 1963), p. 221. 14 1 Antoniou, op. cit., p. 34. ^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. cit., p. 119* ^Antoniou, op. cit., p. 9« ^San Francisco City Planning Department, "The Urban Design Plan for the Comprehensive Plan of San Francisco", 1971, cited in Appleyard and Lintell, op. cit., pp. 99-100. 126b REFERENCES - CHAPTER III (continued) 1 ft Appleyard and Lintell, op. cit., p. 99* "^The City of Vancouver, Zoning and Development By-Law No. 3575* Sec. 10, sub. (7) (a) to (d), May 28, 1974. APPENDIX. A 127 S U R V E Y Q U E S T I O N N A I R E A T T I T U D E S A N D V I S U A L I N T R U S I O N U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a A t t i t u d i n a l I n f o r m a t i o n W h e n c h o o s i n g a n a r e a i n w h i c h t o l i v e m a n y f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e p e o p l e . P l e a s e r a n k t h e f o l l o w i n g Uctors i n t h e o r d e r o f g r e a t e s t i m p o r t a n c e t o y o u I n m a k i n g t h e d e c i s i o n t o l i v e h e r e . R a n k a ) L o c a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o w o r k , s h o p p i n g e t c . b) V i s u a l a p p e a r a n c e o f s u r r o u n d i n g s c ) C h a r a c t e r o f n e i g h b o u r h o o d d ) A d v i c e o f t h e r e a l t o r e) P r i c e f ) R e s a l e v a l u e ^rXUnllVtrZ^f m»\ u n d e s i r a b l e e f f e c t s . R a n k a ) V e h i c l e n o i s e b) V e h i c l e a i r p o l l u t i o n c ) V i s u a l d i s t u r b a n c e o f v e h i c l e s d ) V i b r a t i o n s c a u s e d b y v e h i c l e s e) V e h i c l e s r e d u c i n g p e d e s t r i a n s a f e t y f ) V e h i c l e s r e d u c i n g p r o p e r t y v a l u e T h i n k i n g o f y o u r p r e s e n t n e i g h b o u r h o o d t r y t o r a n k t h e f o l l o w i n g . h i g h m e d i u m l o w ( a ) T h e t r a f f i c v o l u m e i s , _ . (b) T h e d e n s i t y o f p a r k e d v e h i c l e s I s Physical characteristics of traffic alfect the e n v J ^ n » f J J 8 ^ o f a n area, looking at the picture, please indicate the extent to which you are annoyed visually by each of the following, 12'8 Not Noticeable Mildly Mod- Very Noticeable but not Annoying erately Annoying Annoying . Annoy-*ng a ) Street width b) Trolley bus lines c ) Parked vehicles d ) Moving vehicles c) Trucks .f) Cars g) Design of vehicles h) Condition of vehicles 1) Vehicle congestion Please rank the following types of screening in the order you find them most effective in reducing the visual disturbances of traffic • in the residential neighbourhood. Rank 1) a fence 11) a hedge * 111) window drapes lv) trees . v) a brick or stone wall v i ) * landscaping „ . Have you ever made a complaint to City Hall or to your local political representative concerning the disturbances of traffic? . . Yes Q- No a Please indicate the extent of your agreement or disagreement with the following statements. a. The unattractiveness of traffic in this neighbourhood is annoying. strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree disagree , a. a a a a .. b* There has been a noticeable increase in the visual unpleasantness of traffic here over the past few years,(if applicable). strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree disagree o . Q . a •' a a €, Visual disturbances from traffic are no worse In this neighbourhood than the last one I lived 1n8 (If applicable). strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree disagree p a , a . a a d. Visual disturbances from traffic bother us less now than when we first moved here , • . strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree' disagree . Q O D • D O «, He would/do tolerate some visual disturbance frcm traffic because we like living close to work/shopping/schools etc, strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly • nor disagree disagree disagree a ' ' o a a p f. The visual characteristics of this residential environment were important in our decision to reside here. • Strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree disagree p a a a a g. The existing amount of truck traffic downgrades the appearance of our neighbourhood. strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly nor disagree disagree disagree ' o o o a ' a he Included in the annual safety check of a motor vehicle there should bt a check on its visual appearance. strongly agree mildly agree- neither agree mildly strongly m? disagree disagree disagree lo At the present ttme tn this neighbourhood, parked vehicles are more annoying than isoving vehicles, strongly agree mildly agree neither agree mildly strongly Ror disagree disagree disagree • 8.. Would you please examine the photographs. If your view of the street was as portrayed in the pictures, what Is the number of 1 3 0 . the picture which portrays the maximum amount of traffic you would tolerate before you would consider moving. ROW I - PARKED VEHICLES s then . . . ture 1 Picture 1 Picture 2 Picture 3 D o a ROW II - MOVING VEHICLES Picture 4 a s than ture 1 Picture 1 Picture 2 Picture 3 a o ROW III - PARKED AND MOVING VEHICLES s than ture 1 Picture 1 Picture Z Picture 3 a Q a a Picture 5 a More than Picture 6 Picture 6 D a a a a a More than Picture 4 Picture 5 Picture 6 Picture 6 a More than Picture 4 Picture 5 Picture 6 Picture 6 a FACTUAL INFORMATION Socio-Economic Characteristics of Sample Household:-9. How long have you livad at this address? 10. Do you own or rent your present dwelling? own years rent neither 11. [ How many vehicles are presently owned (or used) by your family? cars , trucks (vans) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ f nsotorcycles 12. Where do you most often park each of these vehicles? on your property on the street in front of the house car(s) truck(s) motorcycles (vans) What Is your total household Income (Including income from al l members of the family)? $ 0 - 6000 $ 6001 - 12000 * ~~ $ 12001 - 18000 $ 18001 - 24000 $ 24000'. and over What is the number of children in the household? no children age 0 - 5 age 6-12 ega 13 - IB age 18 and over Personal Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondent:-Please check the appropriate square for the following questions. 0 - 1 5 . IS - 25 •26 - 40 _ 40 - 60 over 60 Marital Status: single married widow or widower other Education: elementary school so^e high school high school graduation university university graduation Occupation: (specify position held or type of work) Sex: female f32L 5 (a 3 4-APPENDIX C THE COMPONENTS OF THE URBAN PLANNING PROCESS Components Problem/opportunity d e f i n i t i o n . Data c o l l e c t i o n to permit the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s . E v a l u a t i o n of p r e l i m i n a r y a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s to a r r i v e at a set of r e l e v a n t a l t e r n a t i v e s . S e l e c t i o n of appropriate p o l i c y - d e c i s i o n makers. I d e n t i f i c a t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e implementing mechanisms. S e l e c t i o n of appropriate implementing mechanism. Program design and implementation. P o l i c y outcome a n a l y s i s and review of the planning process. V i s u a l I n t r u s i o n Example C o n f l i c t i n g community o b j e c t i v e s ; that i s , A c c e s s i b i l i t y vs Environmental Q u a l i t y . A t t i t u d i n a l surveys, f i e l d measurements and observations. (1) M a i n t a i n present a c c e s s i b i l i t y , yet increase environmental q u a l i t y . (2) Decrease a c c e s s i b i l i t y thereby i n c r e a s i n g environmental q u a l i t y . Say (1) of component 3. (a) V i s u a l screening s t r u c t u r e s . (b) V e h i c u l a r and/or s t r e e t f u r n i t u r e design change. Say (a) of component 5. Who gets screening, who pays, what kinds of screening s t r u c t u r e s , e t c . V i s u a l screening s t r u c t u r e s enhance the v i s u a l appearance f o r r e s i d e n t s of neighbourhoods and increase v i s u a l harmony f o r v e h i c l e operators and passengers. 138; APPENDIX D VISUAL INTRUSIONS AND PLANNING ] u K u r d J \ R<=ceP"Ko<\ or s'cr-eerM'vvv - H I Sys+eiYA A e c / s i OA of '*\Q-\QC A-H,'-rucU_ U A W I A . PL<£KV\ i A . ^ Pro Ce.Ji 5 37 1 Pod'ci/) Oyiccwv<2-APPENDIX E - l ADVERSE VEHICULAR EFFECTS (Absolute frequency of responses to Q 2 from Areas 1, 2, and 3) Column RANK Noise Air Visual Vibes Safety Prop. Val. Marginal — \ 81 3.4 4 13 2.7 14 2 1 IMPORTANT 98 27 27 14 49 13 228 41 38 40 35 39 35 3 1 SOME 20 8 4 2.4 2.2 0 * 1 IMPORTANCE 10 53 49 24 45 31 212 38 36 37 33 36 33 5 7 LITTLE 25 1 0 30 11 19 « J IMPORTANCE 5 27 34 60 14 54 194 35 33 34 30 33 30 ROW MARGINAL 113 107 110 98 108 98 634 Degrees of freedom (d.f.) = 10 X 0 05 ( c r i t i c a l v a l u e ) = 18.31 X2, . v (calculated value) = 281.44 (matrix) chisquare observed expected APPENDIX E-2 ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION (Absolute frequency of responses to Q 1 from Areas 1, 2, and 3) RANK Lo c a t i o n V i s u a l Appear. Character R e a l t o r P r i c e Resale Row Marginal C Important 2 j 23 72 41 3.6 52 40 6.2 57 41 30.3 3 36 1.2 46 39 28.7 5 38 235 3 / Some ^ 7 Importance 0.4 35 39 3.8 50 38 0.9 44 38 14.2 12 34 0.7 42 37 0.3 38 35 222 5 ? L i t t l e g J Importance 20.8 8 35 16.9 10 34 13.8 13 35 101 87 31 4.4 21 33 28.1 62 32 201 Column Marginal 115 112 114 102 109 105 657 X^ ( c r i t i c a l value) •? 18.31 X2, . N ( c a l c u l a t e d value) = 273.3 (matrix) hr1-O ' APPENDIX E-3 VISUAL SCREENING STRUCTURES (Absolute frequency of responses to Q 5 from Areas 1, 2, and 3) RANK Fence Hedges Drapes Trees Wall Landscape. Row Marginal > E f f e c t i v e 2 ) 12-4 17 39 18.2 67 40 5.8 24 39 32.4 76 40 10.5 18 38 0.9 34 40 236 ^ { Some ^ j E f f e c t i v e n e s s 10.5 58 38 0.2 42 39 5.8 24 39 0.6 34 39 0.0 36 37 0.0 38 39 232 5 7 L i t t l e g \ E f f e c t i v e n e s s 0.3 39 36 24.3 7 37 10.8 67 37 25.9 6 37 13.8 57 35 1.3 44 37 220 Column Mar g i n a l 114 116 115 116 111 116 688 X n n c ; ( c r i t i c a l value) = 18.31 X1, . . ( c a l c u l a t e d value) = 173.7 (matrix) BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Allport, F.H. Theories of Perception and the Concept of Structure. New York: John Wiley, 1955' Antoniou, J. Environmental Management: Planning for Traffic. Toronto: McGraw-Hill,- 1971. Appleyard, D., Lynch, K., and Meyer, J.R. The View from the Road. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1965. Bern, D.J. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Human Affairs. Belmont, California: Brooks-Cole, 1970. Claus, R.J., and Claus, K.E. Visual Environment. Toronto: C o l l i e r -MacMillan, 1971. Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford': Stanford University Press, 1957-Goldschmidt, W. Man's Way: A Preface to the Understanding of Human  Society^ Toronto: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1959* Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: John Wiley, 1958. Higbee, E. The Squeeze: Cities Without Space. New York: Morrow, i960. Hunt, E.B. Concept Learning: An Information Processing Problem. New York: John Wiley, 1962. Hyman, H.H. Survey Design and Analysis: Principle Cases and Procedures. New York: Free Press, 1957. Jacobs, J. Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House, 1961. Krech, D., and Crutchfield, R.S. Theories and Problems of Social  Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948. Lynch, K. The Image of the City. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, i960. Meyerson; Martin; and Banfield, E.C. Boston: The Job Ahead. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956^  Nairn, I. The American Landscape. New York: Random House, 1965. Neisser, B... Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967. Nie, N.H.j Bent, D.H.; and Hull, C.H. S t a t i s t i c a l Package for the Social Sciences. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1970. 143 Randall, J.H., and Buchler, J. Philosophy: An Introduction. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1942. Santayana, B.G. The Sense of Beauty. New York: Dover, 1955• Segall, M.H.j Campbell, D.T.j and Herkovits, M.J. The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966. Shaw, M.E., and Costanzo, P.R. Theories of Social Psychology. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1970. Wild, J. Introduction to Realistic Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, 1948. B. ARTICLES Appleyard, D. "City Designers and the P l u r a l i s t i c City". Regional Planning  f o r Development, ed. by L. Rodwin et a l . Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1969. Appleyard, D. "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge". Proceedings  of the Environmental Design Research Association, ed. by J. Archea and C. Eastman, 1970• Barnes, C F . "Living Patterns and Attitude Survey". Highway Research Record. No. 187, Washington, D.C.: Higheay Research Board, 1967* Bross, I.D.J. "Nature of Decision". Design f o r Decision. New York: Free Press, 1953-Galbraith, J.K. "The Dependence Effect and Social Balance". Private Wants and Needs, ed. by E.S. Phelps. New York: W.W. Morton, 1962^  Hallowell, A.I. "Cultural Factors i n the Structuralization of Perception." . Social Psychology at the Crossroads, ed. by J.H. Roher and M. Sherif. New York: Harper, 1951* Hilgard, E. "The Role of Learning i n Perception". Perception: An Approach to Personality, ed. by R.R. BLake and G.V. Ramsey. New York: Renald Press, 1951* Jackson, J.B. "Commentary: Visual Blight - Civic Neglect". Visual Blight i n America. Washington, D.C: Association of American Geographers, 1973* Lowenthal, D. "The Offended Eye: Towards an Excresential Geography". Visual Blight i n America. Washington, D.C: Association of American Geographers, 1973* 1.44 Manheim, M. "The Impact of Highways on Environmental Values". Highway  Research Record. No. 305, Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1970. Mumford, L. "The Highway and the City". The Environmental Handbook. ed. by Garret de Bell. New York: Ballantine Books, 1970. Nairn, I. "Outrage". Architectural Review-. Westminster: S.W.I. Architectural Press, 1965. Peterson, G.L. "Complete Value Analysis: Highway Beautification and Environmental Quality". Highway; Research Record. No. 182, Washington, D.G.: Highway Research Board, 1967. Scheerer, M. "Cognitive Theory". Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. by G. Lindsey. Vol. 1. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1954. Tuan, Y. "Visual Blight: Exercises in Interpretation". Visual Blight  in America. Washington, D.C: Association of. American Geographers, 1973• Whorf, B.L. "Science and Linguistics". Readings in Social Psychology, ed. by E.E. Maccobyj T.M. NewcOmbj and E.L. Hartley. New York: Holt, 1958. Winkel, G.H.j Malek, R.j and Thiel, P. "Community Response to the Design Features of Roads: A Technique for Measurement". Highway Research Record. No. 3°5« Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Board, 1970. C GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS City of Vancouver, Street and Traffic By-Law, No. 2849. Vancouver, British Columbia, 1974. City of Vancouver. Zoning and Development By-Law. No. 3575» Vancouver, British Columbia, 1974. Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board. Metropolitan Toronto. Toronto: Thorn Press, 1965. Ministry of Transport. Traffic in Towns. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1963« D. JOURNALS Anolevard. D., and Lintell, M. "Environmental Quality of City Streets: ^ ^ ' i i ; Resident's viewpoint". Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology. No. 38 (1949). .145 Bagby, J. "A Cross-Cultural Study of Perceptual Predominance i n Binocular Rivalry". Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, No. 38 (1949). Berlyne, D.E. "Recent Developments in Piaget*s Work". Br i t i s h Journal  of Educational Psychology, No. 27 (1957)• Blishen, B.R. "A Socio-Economic Index f o r Occupations i n Canada". Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, IV, No. 1, (February 1967). Bruner, J.S. "Our Perceptual Readiness". Psychological Review, Nol 64, (1957). Buchanan, C. "The Urban Environment". Journal of the Town Planning  Institute, Vol. 50, No. 7 (July/August 1964). Doob, L.W. "The Behavior of Attitudes". Psychological Review, No. 47, (1947). Gibson, J.J. '.'The Visual Fi e l d and the Visual World* A Reply to Professor Boring". Psychological Review, No. 59 (1952). Hudson, W. "Pictoral Depth Perception i n Sub-Sultural Groups i n Africa". Journal of Social Psychology, No. 52 (i960). Likert, R. "A Technique f o r the Measurement of Attitudes". Archives of Psychology, ed. by R.S. Woodsworth, No. 140 (1932). Samuels, I. "Reticular Mechanisms and Behavior". Psychological Bulletin, No. 65 (1959). Zajonc, R.B. "The Process of Cognitive Tunig i n Communication". Journal  of Abnormal Psychology, No. 6l (i960). E. MAGAZINES Davis, K. "The Urbanization of the Human Population". Scientific American, Vol. 213, No. 3 (September 1965). F. NEWSPAPERS The Vancouver Sun. March 15, 1968. 146. G. LECTURES AND PAPERS Appleyard, D., and Lintell, M. "Environmental Quality of City Streets", Working paper No. 142. Berkley, California: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 19.70. Blumenfeld, H. "Criteria for Judging the Quality of the Urban Environment". Occasional Paper No. 14, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Waterloo, 1974. Fox, I.K. "Regional Planning: Theory, Method, and Techniques". Lecture notes, September 26, 1975* School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Morton, W., and Fox, I.K. eds? Regional Natural Resources Planning. Unpublished manual, Westwater Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 1975• Vancouver Planning Department. "Vancouver's Changing Population". The City of Vancouver, June 1964. Van der Ryn, S. "Value Measurement and Visual Factors in the Urban Environment". Paper presented to the College of Environmental Design, University of California, 1963. H. THESES Barford, J.C. Environmental Traffic Standards. M.A. Thesis. School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, 1968. Vanin, D. Legislating for Urban Aesthetics: A Case Study of the Civic Design Panel, Vancouver, B.C. M.A. Thesis. School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, 1972. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093690/manifest

Comment

Related Items