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 B r i t i s h Columbia  We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April  ©  1976  Donald F. Park  in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s  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 m a k e i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and v  I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n  for e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s  study. thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s  representatives.  It  i s understood that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n  o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my written  permission.  Depa rtment o f  ScApQ 1  pf  levwn  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  Date  Z<7  ~ 4- ~  =T&  Jf\i j ^ CuAg{ / \ e ^ ' O f \ & J  f^&Wi  A<  ii ABSTRACT Visual intrusions are a consequence of the presence of motor vehicles i n 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 f o r the appearance of a neighbourhood are tasks i n 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 i n 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 i n 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 i n 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 i n 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.  iii  Because of the uncertain future use of motor vehicles, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n l i g h t o f f u e l shortages and r i s i n g insurance costs f o r vehicles, and the high p u b l i c expenditures required f o r p h y s i c a l a l t e r a t i o n s 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 o f v i s u a l intrusions.  A planning a l t e r n a t i v e whereby access-  i b i l i t y i s maintained while measures are -taken to enhance the v i s u a l q u a l i t y leads to an implementing proposal such as v i s u a l screening structures.  iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I  II  Page INTRODUCTION  1  1.1 MOTOR 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4 1.1.5 1.1.6 1.1.7  1  VEHICLES AND THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT Introduction Problem Statement Hypothesis Objectives of the Study Assumptions Scope and Limitations Organization of Thesis  LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ... 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 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  III  10 10  16  2.3 VISUAL BALANCE IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS..  37 41  CASE STUDY  45  3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PRESENTATION OF DATA COLLECTED 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  45  V  CHAPTER  Page  3.1.2.3 3.1.2.4 3.1.2.5 3.1.2.6  V i s u a l Screening i n the Study Areas Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Sample Households Personal Socio-Economic Characterist i c s of the Sample Households A t t i t u d i n a l Responses  3.2  DATA ANALYSIS 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 V i s u a l Intrusions 3.2.2.2 Testing the Research Hypothesis 3.2.2.3 The Perceived Capacity of the V i s u a l Environment to Accommodate Motor Vehicle A c t i v i t y 3.2.2.4 V i s u a l Screening  3.3  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.3.I Case Study Conclusions 3*3.2 Discussion of Conclusions 3.3.3 Recommendations  •  89  105  APPENDIX A  Survey Questionnaire  12?  B  L e t t e r of Introduction  136  C  Components of the Urban Planning Process  D  V i s u a l Intrusions and Planning  138  E-l  Adverse Vehicular E f f e c t s  139  E-2  Environmental  140  E-3  V i s u a l Screening Structures....  BIBLIOGRAPHY  Selection  137  141  142  vi LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1  Page B r i t i s h Columbia Motor Vehicle Registrations, 1958-1966  3  2  T r a f f i c Counter Tapes, 1974  59  3  Parked Vehicle Counts  60  4  Parked Vehicle A c t i v i t y  6l  5  Moving Vehicle A c t i v i t y  65  6  T o t a l Effectiveness of V i s u a l Screening  6?  7  Average Period of Residence  67  8  Home Ownership........  9  Average Number of Cars per Household  76  10  Number of Vehicles per Household  77  11  T o t a l Household Income  77  12  Households with Children  ?8  13  Number o f Children per Household  78  14  Ages of Sample Respondents  79  15  Sex of Sample Respondents...  79  16  M a r i t a l Status of Sample Respondents  81  17 18  Education Level o f Sample Respondents... S o c i a l Status of Occupation of Sample Respondents  81 82  19  Environmental Selection  82  20  Undesirable  84  21  Extent of Annoyance - A. Parked Vehicles  •  E f f e c t s of Motor Vehicle A c t i v i t y  B. Moving Vehicles 22  Perceived Effectiveness of Screening  23  Unattractiveness  Structures  o f Motor Vehicle A c t i v i t y  76  85 86 86  vii  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  Visual Appearance of the Surroundings  104  32  viii  LIST OF  ILLUSTRATIONS  ILLUSTRATION 1  Page Elements o f A c c e s s i b i l i t y  - Environmental  Q u a l i t y System 2  A Guidance Framework*  14 Incorporating Aspects o f  V i s u a l B a l a n c e and T r a f f i c I n t r u s i o n .  38  3  L o c a t i o n o f Study A r e a s  48  4  Study A r e a 1  49  5  Study A r e a 2.  50  6  Study A r e a 3  51  7  V i s u a l Screening Structures  A.  Study A r e a 1  70  B.  Study A r e a 2  71  G.  Study A r e a 3  73  8  E f f e c t i v e V i s u a l Screening Structures  9  V i s u a l S c r e e n i n g S t r u c t u r e s - I n s i d e and O u t s i d e Appearances  116  119  1  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1  1.1.1  MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT  Introduction Each year the world's net population increases "by close to 50 m i l l i o n  persons.  In the past century and a half, urban areas have been created  f a s t e r than i n any previous time period i n world history.^"  At t h i s rate,  according to J.O. Firestone, more than 35 m i l l i o n Canadians w i l l be located  2 i n our urban environment by the end of the century. An increased demand f o r land immediately surrounding urban areas f o r r e s i d e n t i a l , work, and t r a v e l space has created a disconcerning side e f f e c t ;  3 described by E. Higbee as "environmental leukemia".  Urban decay, suburban  sprawl, r i s i n g taxes, clogged s t r e e t s , and disappearing r e c r e a t i o n a l space are  some of the impacts of t h i s urbanization. The whole geographic scale of c i t i e s i s changing today, and a t the  base of the change i s the pressure from urban growth as well as man's desire  4 continually to "improve and i n t e n s i f y the q u a l i t y of l i f e . "  There i s  l i t t l e place f o r a built-up c i t y 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 i r r e g u l a r and dispersed."' the  Despite  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 f o r the evolution of c i t i e s . They aret (1) The Geographic Sprawl of the C i t i e s .  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 i n the Number of Automobiles.  Of particular interest i s  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 i s involved i s 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 i n registered vehicles, compared to a population growth of only 50 percent f o r the same period.^"  0  The following table shows that the  increase i n 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 i n 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 c i t i e s 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 i n congestion  and overloading street systems which i n 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  POPULATION  1956 1958 1959 1969 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966  1,398,464  REGISTRATIONS  34$ increase 1,873,674 )  511,203 541,363 560,271 584,041 616,037 657,174 705,380 767,669 818,112  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.  increase  society', quite i n contrast to the past generation, there has evolved i n Canada and the United States a new way of l i f e i n 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 - i n which not even the rich rejoiced a century ago."  The  tremendous growth i n middle income groups, together with shorter working hours, and more leisure time, has resulted l n an increasing demand for goods, services, and f a c i l 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.  I t 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,"  1.1.2  J  and leads others to state " ... most American c i t i e s are ugly ..."  Problem Statement The proliferation of motor vehicles i s a factor i n 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, t r a f f i c 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 i s instead, therefore, a dual  problem consisting of both motor vehicle accessibility and urban environmental 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 i s not present,  negative physical images can be perceived by urban residents as visual annoyance.  The level of this annoyance w i l l depend upon various aspects  of the visual and cultural environments. If the central concern of urban planning i s the urban environment and the quality of l i f e therein, then with respect to visual quality, the transportation planner faces three d i f f i c u l t taskst (1)  The f i r s t task i s to measure effectively the extent of visual  deterioration and/or level of annoyance.  The central problem f o r the  planning profession w i l l always remain - to reach a satisfactory interpretation of the public Interest i n relation to land use. (2)  The second task i s 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 i s 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 f o r 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, i s a function of various characteristics of the physical and cultural environments. More specifically then, and for the purpose of the thesis, i t i s 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 characteristics 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 i s 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 i s 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 i s 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  i s 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 i s assumed that:  It i s desirable  for a community to seek and demand a visual environment which w i l l contribute toward i t s well-being.  It i s desirable and possible to achieve an<  acceptable balance between motor vehicle accessibility and urban environmental quality•  1.1.6  Scope and Limitations This research investigation i s 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 w i l l 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 t r a f f i c 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 i s made to itemize or to investigate the f u l l range of problems i n visual intrusions and environmental quality;  nor i s there  any attempt to present a comprehensive l i s t of relevant alternative policy recommendations.  Visual environmental t r a f f i c standards are discussed and  visual screening i s 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 i n the survey questionnaire, the availability of literature f o r review, and the specific problems of the various urban residential areas.  1.1.7  Organization of Thesis The thesis i s 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 i n the city i s intended to arouse an interest f o r planning the appearance of the urban environment. Chapter II - LITERATURE REVIEW, i s divided into four sections, The f i r s t section investigates the dimensions of the accessibility-environmental quality phenomenon. Terminology that i s referred to throughout the study, i s defined, and a framework to conceptualize the phenomenon (later to be termed a system) i s presented. The second section looks further into one specific adverse effect as a consequence of vehicular accessibility, that i s , visual intrusion.  The process whereby visual images are determined as  annoying i n urban residential aareas i s reviewed i n discussions of visual perception, cognitive attitude formulation, and attitude measurement.  9  The t h i r d section reviews l i t e r a t u r e with respect to v i s u a l balance between vehicular images and the appearance of r e s i d e n t i a l environments.  The  v i s u a l capacity of an environment i s discussed i n preparation f o r an examination,  i n the fourth and f i n a l section, of v i s u a l  environmental  standards. Chapter I I I - 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 r e s i d e n t i a l areas. three sections.  I t i s divided i n t o  The f i r s t section provides a d e s c r i p t i o n of the research  methodology and a p r o f i l e of the areas studied.  The second analyzes  the data c o l l e c t e d and outlines the f i n d i n g s . A t h i r d , and f i n a l section then summarizes the case study and considers v i s u a l screening as a recommendation to reduce v i s u a l 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:  and Co., i960).  Cities Without Space, (New York: Morrow  I. Nairn, The American Landscape, (New Yorkt  1965).  Random House Inc.,  e  -'Vancouver Planning Department, "Vancouver's Changing Population", The City of Vancouver, June, 1964, p. 1. **J.W. Rouse, " M i l l Downtown Pace up to i t s Future?", Urban Land, Vol. 16. No. 2, (Washington1 Urban Land Institute, 1957) P« 1* 7 'Vancouver Planning Department, op. c i t . , p. 1. Q  Ministry of Transport, Traffic i n 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 B e l l (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: (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I 9 6 6 ) .  The Job Ahead,  ^ J . C . Barford, Environmental Traffic Standards, Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 1968, p. 2. l6  I b i d . , p. 4.  CHAPTER I I LITERATURE REVIEW The adverse e f f e c t s of motor vehicles on the q u a l i t y of community l i f e have "become a matter of serious concern to planners.! I t i s i n regard to such a statement as the above that t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review i s undertaken.  The p a r t i c u l a r adverse; e f f e c t to be examined i s the  v i s u a l intrusions r e s u l t i n g from the presence of motor vehicles.  The  appearance of the urban r e s i d e n t i a l environment i s the f o c a l area of attention. The structure of t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review i s comprised of four sections. The content of these sections a r i s e s from l i t e r a t u r e concerning f i r s t , the association between motor vehicle a c c e s s i b i l i t y and the environmental q u a l i t y of the urban neighbourhood; the  second, the problem of v i s u a l Intrusions and  appearance of the neighbourhood;  mental capacity and v i s u a l balance;  t h i r d , the theories of v i s u a l environand fourth, the concept of v i s u a l  environmental standards.  2.1 2.1.1  MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY  Defining the Problem I t has been r i g h t l y s a i d 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 d e t e r i o r a t i n g e f f e c t on the urban surroundings. This i s expressed p h y s i c a l l y by the massive i n t r u s i o n of vehicles which destroy the v i s u a l balance and compact layout of c i t i e s ... 3  When motor vehicles are admitted to a r e s i d e n t i a l area, environmental conditions are a l t e r e d .  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, two major problems of urban transportation.  pointed out i n 1963 the  There i s f i r s t the d i f f i c u l t y of  providing accessibility for motor vehicles, and second the adverse effects of t r a f f i c on the quality of the urban environment.  V.S. Pendakur and  G.R. Brown^ further point out that the efficiency and f l e x i b i l i t y 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 i s recognized, however, that a limited level of motor vehicle activity i s perhaps necessary and even compatible with urban street l i f e .  7  Thus, i t i s 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 t r a f f i c  and provide destinations to which i t can go. Two factors which compound the conflicts between vehicular accessib i l i t y 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 v e h i c l e . (2)  10  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 q u a l i t y of the urban area.""" In f a c t , vehicular a c t i v i t y has often been permitted and encouraged to expand i n urban areas a t the expense of good l i v i n g conditions. J . Antoniou states that. ... t r a f f i c improvements which s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the p h y s i c a l environment are seen as a disagreeable necessity i n order that c i t i e s can continue to function. Many Improvements f o r vehicle a c t i v i t y have r a p i d l y exceeded t h e i r designed capacity and/or have become o b s o l e t e . ^ Antoniou observes f u r t h e r that there appears to be a c o n f l i c t i n objectives and attitudes between planners and engineers concerning the c o n f l i c t i n g requirements of t r a f f i c and neighbourhood amenities. The engineer, who i n the past has been •.given-  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of resolving  the problems of vehicular a c c e s s i b i l i t y and design of urban vehicle routes, and who by education and t r a i n i n g has acquired a quantitative approach t o t r a f f i c and i t s e f f e c t s , has tended to use c r i t e r i a based predominantly on engineering and economic f a c t o r s .  L i t t l e attention has been p a i d to the  environmental implication of t r a f f i c .  The t e c h n i c a l standards adopted by  the engineer have been considered by implication to be acceptable l e v e l s of q u a l i t y . On the other hand, Antoniou suggests that the planner, by education, has a much wider range o f i n t e r e s t s 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,  p h y s i c a l restructuring, as w e l l as planning f o r better a c c e s s i b i l i t y .  By  t h e i r very nature these requirements are often c o n f l i c t i n g and the planner must therefore be engaged i n the I n t r i c a t e task of balancing and absorbing contradictions.  But to achieve these c o n f l i c t i n g aims, the planner has  not as yet developed a clear-cut way o f 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 i s evident that t r a f f i c technology has continued to increase 14 in i t s application while t r a f f i c 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 f o r accessibility generally at the expense of the objectives for environmental quality. In conclusion, there i s a wide range of adverse effects from the presence of vehicles i n the urban environment.  Since there are often  substantial d i f f i c u l t i e s i n visualizing and assessing the impacts of effects, i t i s helpful to conceptualize the elements of the movement system i n an orderly framework.  Subsection 2.1.2 presents a model which, although >,  designed i n regard to conflicts and balance between vehicles and pedestrians in a suburban shopping d i s t r i c t , can equally be applied to those conflicts and balance between vehicles and householders i n 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 I n i t i a l 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;  SUPPORTING  (B)  CONFLICTING ELEMENTS  ELEMENTS  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  CONFLICTING  +/_ direction of change to meet planning cojectives ^ — supporting elements - — conflicting elements  ELEMENTS  Street Width Vehicular Speed Vehicular Volume Pedestrian Crosswalks Controlled Intersections Message Communication Exposure Points  -  -  + +  Turning Movements  _ Pedestrian Crosswalks  -+  -  i  Controlled Intersections Parking Facility  Pedestrian Flows  + Travel Sfwcd Potential  -  Fxistcnee ot oostreet pnrknc + Lane Width + Street Width Controlled Intersections Traffic Flow Interruptions  Pathway Directness Parking Proximity L inkage Severance  Noise Vibration Fumes  -  -  On-street Truck Density Parking Facility Size E xistence of oostreet Parkinrj 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  •i  • '••i •  v•  + 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  Source:  •!  Pendakur and Brown, op. c i t . , pp. 48-49.  +/_ direction of change to ' meet planning objectives — supporting elements . — conflicting elements  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 w i l l rationalize the accessib i l i t y and environmental objectives i n 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 i s l n order.  Environmental quality refers only to the resulting quality of  those aspects of the physical environment which are affected by motor vehicles.  Appearance i s the mosaic of visual images which result from motor  vehicles, signs, and various street and t r a f f i c hardware.  Visual intrusions  are the negative images produced, by these elements. Accessibility i s 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 i s the relative measure between the  capacity of an area to accommodate vehicles and the number of vehicles seeking to enter and stop w i t h i n , ^ system of movementj  Accessibility refers to the complete  safety* convenience, driver comfort, visual harmony  with roadway elements, and penetration f o r parking. The parameters of accessibility and environmental quality can be sub-divided into their constituent elements.  For example, the concept of  appearance i s denoted by measurements of moving vehicle density, existence  16  of on-street parking, and so on. The i n t e r a c t i o n of the constituent elements of the system i l l u s trate three possible r e l a t i o n s h i p s . F i r s t , there are elements that support one another.  For example, to meet planning objectives f o r the appearance  of an urban area and f o r motor vehicle a c c e s s i b i l i t y 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 e f f e c t on the other. For instance, the reduction of v i s u a l intrusions by implementing various types of screening does not a f f e c t a c c e s s i b i l i t y . elements that c o n f l i c t .  Third, there are c e r t a i n  I f , f o r example, vehicle speeds are reduced to  enhance safety i n the neighbourhood, a c c e s s i b i l i t y 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 f a c t o r s which a f f e c t a c c e s s i b i l i t y and environmental q u a l i t y within urban areas.  I t portrays the tradeoffs between a  high q u a l i t y and the need f o r vehicle a c c e s s i b i l i t y .  Attention i n Section  2.2 i s devoted to a discussion of c o n f l i c t i n g elements of the system; s p e c i f i c a l l y the v i s u a l intrusions from vehicle a c t i v i t y which have negative impacts on the appearance of the urban r e s i d e n t i a l environment.  2.2  VISUAL INTRUSIONS DUE TQ THE PRESENCE OF MOTOR VEHICLES  This section sets out to discuss the problem of v i s u a l disturbances due to the presence of motor vehicles i n the urban r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhood. The concepts of v i s u a l 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 i s lacking*  Visual intrusion i s now a serious matter to  17 which society w i l l be bound to pay serious heed. 18 The intrusion into the environment i s of two kinds.  The f i r s t i s  the intrusion of the motor vehicle i t s e l f , 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 f o r 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 i n 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 t r a f f i c  i s on the move, visual intrusion i s 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 i s drawn to the rather unsophisticated architecture which previously would have blended into the local atmosphere.' The most damaging visual Impacts have occurred i n those residential areas built before the impact of motor vehicle t r a f f i c , 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 i n 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 i s the problem of negative visual effects resulting from motor vehicle activity?  Actually, of a l l  19  the adverse e f f e c t s , the question of v i s u a l i n t r u s i o n s i s the most debatable.  However, the motor age has contributed towards many p h y s i c a l  changes i n the urban scene.  Indeed the whole s e t t i n g of the s t r e e t has  been a f f e c t e d by the motor v e h i c l e s .  The conglomeration of v e h i c l e s mars  24 the general appearance of many areas. The v i s u a l consequences of the i n t r u s i o n s by motor v e h i c l e s as reported i n the Buchanan Report a r e : ^ The crowding ,;out of every a v a i l a b l e square yard of urban space w i t h v e h i c l e s e i t h e r moving o r s t a t i o n a r y , so that the b u i l d i n g s seem to r i s e from a p l i n t h of cars; the d e s t r u c t i o n of a r c h i t e c t u r a l and h i s t o r i c a l scenes; the i n t r u s i o n i n t o parks and squares; the garaging, s e r v i c i n g , and maintenance of v e h i c l e s i n r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s which creates more than j u s t the impression of hazards f o r c h i l d r e n , trapping garbage and l i t t e r , and g r e a t l y hindering snow clearance; and the i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s of o i l s t a i n s which render dark black the only c o l o u r f o r surfaces. Indifference to v i s u a l i n t r u s i o n leads eventually to a slovenly disregard f o r the q u a l i t y of the surroundings.  ?6  Peoples' senses can become  d u l l e d to the v i s u a l d i s o r d e r around them, encouraging r i g i d i t y of perception 27 of v i s u a l communication.  I f , f o r example, permanent parking a t the  curbside becomes accepted, then maintenance, garbage, o i l s t a i n s , 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 t h a t frank acceptance of v i s u a l impact of motor v e h i c l e a c t i v i t y i s l e a d i n g to the emergence of any new k i n d 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 u g l i n e s s on a great s c a l e . ^ Vehicular i n t r u s i o n s reducing the q u a l i t y of the v i s u a l scene i s a dangerously s u b j e c t i v e form of p o l l u t i o n .  This i s not only a r e s u l t from  the d i f f i c u l t y of q u a n t i f y i n g v i s u a l q u a l i t y and awareness, but a l s o because of the continuously changing s o c i a l a t t i t u d e s towards the motor v e h i c l e . Measures of the extent o r importance of v i s u a l p o l l u t i o n vary with the  39  different attitudes of the urban residents, which i n 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 i n the environment i s dependent upon four components!  (1) the  image and the source of visual stimulus, (2) the medium and the process through which the stimulus i s 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  responses.^  It i s the fourth component of the visual communication process that i s expanded upon i n this subsection.  2*2.2.1 Cognition and Cognitive Structure Cognitive theory i s a term used to refer to the general theoretical orientation that emphasizes central processes (for example, attitudes, ideas, 32 expectancies) i n 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 i s 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 i s transformed, reduced, elaborated, stored, ..recovered, and used.  JJ  Thus cognition seems to be that which i s 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 i n learning, perception, and similar psychological 37 processes. 2.2.2.2  Visual Perception Basic to a l l visual communication i s visual perception.  Our  perception of the quality of the urban visual environment involves the complicated interaction of many processes and i s subject to influences from many sources, thus making i t d i f f i c u l t to define, except i n the most elemental 38 way.  In the simplest psychological sense, perception i s the way an 39  organism relates to i t s environment.  This definition encompasses a l l of  the senses and cognitive processes and stresses the concept of organismenvironment interaction.  Perception i s a psychological process which  clearly reveals the cognitive orientation.  M. Scheerer defines perception  as the phenomenal representation of d i s t a l objects (physical objects)  22  resulting from the organization of d i s t a l 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, f o r example, and not merely the pattern of light waves reflected by the object (table).  The organization of independent  local stimuli i s induced by the relations among them. The meaning of whatever i s perceived derives from the class of precepts with which i t i s grouped.  Meaning i s thus a consequence of a categorization process that i s  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. course, symbolically coded.  This environment i s , of  Using these learned information processing  units, the individual i s able to construct an internal model of the environment. This environment can then be used to predict external events. 44 D.E. Berlyne identifies several aspects of perception. (1) (2) (3) (4)  The perceived properties of a stimulus vary according to the pattern of which i t i s a part. Perceptions are variable from person to person and from time to time. Perception varies with the direction (focus) of the sense organs. Perceptions tend to develop in a particular direction, and are largely irreversible. Por Instance, once a concealed object i s discovered i t cannot be ignored.  Perception i s determined by two major sets of factors or variables! 45 structural variables and functional variables.  J  The structural variables  are those inherent i n the physical stimuli and the neural events they  produce i n the human nervous system. Functional factors are those that reside i n the perceiver,  for example, needs, moods, past experiences of  the perceiver, and other Individual characteristics. Although the concern here i s with perceptions which are generated hy visual stimuli, i t i s d i f f i c u l t 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 a i r pollution, the sun glaring i n his eyes, the roaring and honking of t r a f f i c , dust blown up on his face and on and on one could go, l i s t i n g 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, i n his urban research, has suggested that three types of visual perception appear to be dominant! and inferential.  operational, responsive  48 kQ ' ^  Many elements i n the urban residential environment are visually perceived because of their operational roles. environments to perform various tasks.  People use their urban  The street, for example, may be  seen as a component of the urban transportation system. directed by activities i s similar.  Visual perception  For example, the urban resident who  uses the car himself for daily shopping trips, may perceive other t r a f f i c as functional i n 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 i s 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. principles of vision as well which influence perception.  There are certain  For example, i t i s  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 configurations, colour combinations, shapes, textures, sizes, and so on of the physical environment.  For example, high densities of parked vehicles and/or  congested vehicular t r a f f i c 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 i n many urban areas they have become an easily selected,target f o r visual pollution charges.  Distinctive type elements of  the physical environment are analagous to those "imageable" elements which 54 Kevin LyncJr has described. Finally, perception i s inferential and probabilistic i n 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 w i l l 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 f i t t i n g categories,^ predicting probabilities, forming and testing hypotheses.  Those items of  the environment which occur more frequently w i l l he more accessible i n a person's reference system and w i l l stand.a good chance of being identified. Motor vehicle activity i s likely highly accessible i n most resident's reference systems.  For opposite reasons, more related to curiosity, the  unfamiliar or unusual aspects of vehicular activity w i l l 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 i s i n any case a sporadic one, i s 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 i s also f a i r l y 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 w i l l be discussed further i n subsection 2.2.3.  Moreover, the individual has a  memory and can compare time segments of experience.  59  Much of the visual communication i s absorbed by the urban resident and represented i n his memory as actions or images without transformation as enactive or iconic images, while others are labelled, categorized, or interpreted f o r some particular purpose or through habit or experience.^ The resident's representation of the immediate environment i s 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 i n 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 i n 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 d i f f i c u l t to detect others. Visual perception i s influenced by a person's inference system which has been established through habit. As with other culturally affected phenomena, i t i s therefore a very human tendency to judge a visual display  of say,, vehicular t r a f f i c , from one's own point of view. This ethnocentric interpretation by an Individual i s 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 i n the visual environment. This position postulates that the pattern of visual experiences to which a person i s subjected in his lifetime modifies his perception of objects i n space and thus the world i s 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 i n 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 i n experience (which are built up as unconscious assumptions about, for example, the urban environment), rather than 64 biological differences i n 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 i s , black and white two-dimensional representations of objects i n three-dimensional space), 6*5  encountered failure to perceive the object displayed i n the photograph. Similar support to the hypothesis has been provided i n regard to content 66 67 68 perception, colour perception, ' and the perception of form.  D  One f i n a l point i s that the perception of the visual f i e l d (that i s , the pictoral mode of visual perception) i s dependent upon conditions of attitude more than on conditions of stimulation. This may be of importance to the planner who uses photographs i n an attitudinal survey.  J.J. Gibson  28  states, " *.* the visual f i e l d i s a product of the chronic habit of c i v i l i z e d men of seeing  the world as a picture."  69  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 i n 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 i s considered ln section 2.3»  I f . for example;then, the  planner i s presented with the problem of visual intrusions resulting from the presence of motor vehicles, i t i s 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 i n 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 consideration, 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 i t s 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 i s worth acquiring, protecting, and conserving. It i s the process and criterion with which that 'quality* i s evaluated by the community that i s 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' i s that which i s preferred  and that there are two classes of good. that are good f o r their own sake.  The f i r s t contains things aesthetic  They require no justification;  they are  good because they are preferred; they are preferred because they give pleasure, which i s an end i n i t s e l f .  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 f o r pleasure i s foregone i n 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 i s a dynamic  system. External circumstances can alter l i f e conditions i n a community and consequently change inhabitants' values and/or the basis f o r evaluation 77 of altered l i f e conditions. Although i t i s often d i f f i c u l t for the planner to O b t a i n a consistent, operational set of values that represent the consensus of the community affected' by, f o r 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 i n a community.  The criterion for their preference, as  explained previously, i s that they are preferred f o r 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 i s 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 i n subsection 3«3«li  aesthetic values, including concepts of spatial harmony, are culturally influenced)  are subject to change*  and are things we acquire i n the process  of maturation and learning. Evaluation of a residential view i s compounded of many elements of which visual appeal - the beauty of surface forms - i s 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 " v i t a l " ,  "necessary", "living", "dynamic", and "inviolable", i n appraising the visual images, suggests that even from the perspective of pure aesthetics, beauty i s closely related to man's deepest sense of organic well-being. Beauty i s not identical with charm and sense appealj expressive (or significant) form;  i t is  i t i s 'pleasure o b j e c t i f i e d ' . ^ As  visible form beauty c l a r i f i e s 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^ i s , ... '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 i t s aesthetic merits alone; ... If this i s true of peoples* attitude toward works of art, i t i s 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 i s superficial - a gloss on function. Aesthetic values are, more often than not, influenced by other values.  People i n a community prefer certain visual environments on purely  aesthetic grounds, such as, "visual delight" which i s a rewarding environmental experience or "visual seriousness" which i s 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 i s meant that judgment of the health of the community i s on the grounds of visual evidence i n the residential environment.  Householders  visualize congested t r a f f i c volumes and densities, of parked cars and take them as evidence that society i s desperately i l l .  They see commercial  vehicles rumble past and conclude that society i s drunk with business ethos and blind to other values.  Other householders who perceive commercial  t r a f f i c as economic well-being or progress may visualize the vehicular activity as beautiful.  In other words, the argument as to what makes for  quality i n an environment i s 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, i s i n the eye of the beholder and i s d i f f i c u l t therefore to delimit. ... Just as no scene i s so impecable that i t w i l l not offend some observers, there i s no scene so blighted that i t w i l l not find admirers ...89 90 Aesthetic quality i s a matter of subjective judgment.  Aesthetic judgments  then, vary widely i n community evaluation of the visual quality of the 91 residential environment.  Each c r i t i c may dislike what he sees not  because the object or view i t s e l f i s visual pollution but because i t provokes some displeasing reaction;  excitement, anxiety or perhaps shock f o r  92 example. Furthermore, i t i s not just the motor vehicle presence or activity but the presence or activity i n the view from the homes. Habitation 93 conditions aesthetic judgment.  J  Repeated views of a site or the simple  lapse of time w i l l d u l l 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 i n a scene that i n i t a l l y was repelling. To deal further with aesthetic judgment would require delving into such elusive topics as - a sense of place, meaning of landscape, environmental 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 Peterson -' 7  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 i n order to provide information f o r decision making i t i s necessary to measure the value systems.  In urban planning  elected o f f i c i a l s 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 i n the policy. There i s 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 i n making decisions which w i l l alter 98 the environment. . Of the various procedures used to identify community values, the attitude survey i s 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. Indication of what the community i s thinking c feels are of greatest importance.  They give an  and the issues which i t  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 i s that i n  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 i n a consistent manner i n a given s i t u a t i o n ; ^ and as such attitudes are more enduring than opinions. According to L.W. Doob,"^ 10  An attitude i s an implicit response ... which i s 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 i s an  expression of the underlying (implicit) attitude i s 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 i n 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 i n the visual environment) might overtly respond differently because of differences i n Internal stimuli, such as drive level, at the moment of response. Doob suggests three reasons why attitudes are evoked. the previous learning of the individual.  The f i r s t i s  Thus, some stimuli may become  elicitors of attitudes through the process of conditioning.  For example,  i f motor vehicle noise i s negatively reinforcing to the individual, the image of motor vehicles i n the appearance of the surroundings may i n time come to serve as a negative reinforcer. The second reason why attitudes are evoked i s 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 i s physical i t can be conceptualized over  physical gradients of colour, size, shape, intensity, and other physical attributes.  Where the similarity i s based on meaning, the process of  mediated generalization occurs over a semantic gradient to f i x an individual's attitudes to a whole class of objects. Lastly, attitudes may be evoked through the process; of discrimination.  This process i s operative when one's attitude i s 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 f o r 107 103 attitude assessment.  Several of these projective techniques can  he adapted f o r use i n 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. a standard environment can be represented i n a photograph.  Such  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 i s 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 f o r measurement i s to explain  the standard environment to the respondent of the attitude survey and to ask him to imagine himself as being i n 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 p a r t i c u l a r character of an area, i t s a r c h i t e c t u r a l and h i s t o r i c s i g n i f i c a n c e , and so on, the number of vehicles that can be v i s u a l l y 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 q u a l i t i e s which give a s t r e e t o r area i t s p a r t i c u l a r character and then to assess to what extent t r a f f i c can be absorbed without destroying the v i s u a l balance.  (see I l l u s t r a t i o n 2)  The q u a l i t i e s of an  area may be a t t r i b u t e d to a variety of factors including natural s e t t i n g , manner of layout, and the i n t e n s i t y of a c t i v i t i e s .  But an equally important  aspect of an area's q u a l i t y i s the v i s u a l display presented to the pedestrian or resident and to the vehicle operator o r 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 c a r r i e s with i t the important implication that 111  any environmental area must have a maximum acceptable I t must i n other words have a maximum capacity.  l e v e l of t r a f f i c .  (By environmental area  the Buchanan Report r e f e r s to an area i n 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 s t r e e t s with narrow pavements.  The amount of t r a f f i c within such an area would  obviously have to be c u r t a i l e d i f reasonable standards of environment were to be secured. Antoniou states that the capacity of a p a r t i c u l a r s t r e e t may be governed not only by p h y s i c a l f a c t o r s , but also by v i s u a l and environmental considerations.  For example, the capacity of a p h y s i c a l 'bottleneck* may  be e a s i l y assessed and accurately defined.  But the capacity of a p a r t i c u l a r  33 ILLUSTRATION 2 A GUIDANCE FRAMEWORK»  INCORPORATING ASPECTS  OF VISUAL BALANCE AND TRAFFIC INTRUSION  TRAFFIC FACTORS  /K (1)  / VISUAL CAPACITY  (2)  /  (3) (4) (5)  STATIONARY VEHICLES* parking; loading/unloading, e t c . MOVING VEHICLES: Volumei composition of t r a f f i c . ROAD FURNITURE: carriage way; markings; signs; t r a f f i c objects. STRUCTURES: garages; s e r v i c ing; f u e l i n g stations. POLLUTION: Noise; fumes; vibrations| d i r t ; etc.  ASSETS  (1) (2) (3) (4)  (5)  SYMBOLIC SIGNIFICANCE: archeology; history; architecture. NATURAL SETTING: climate; topography; land c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS: U \ \ concentration of a c t i v i t i e s , r — 7 / VISUAL DISPLAY: panaorama; | < / skyline; v i s t a ; frame; space; serits; detail. PERCEPTION ELEMENTS: temperature; touch; smell; sound. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS  Source:  Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. ?1  VEHICULAR SATURATION  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 i n 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 t r a f f i c , according to the 113 Buchanan Report  ^ - a crude capacity related only to the movement and  parking of vehicles, and an environmental capacity i n which account i s taken of the need to restrain the volume of t r a f f i c in-order to maintain environmental 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 t r a f f i c 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 t r a f f i c 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,  f o r example, by providing  garages for vehicles which would otherwise be l e f t on the street, or perhaps by introducing visual screening structures to separate pedestrians or residents from the negative visual effects. I t i s possible then to rearrange an area (provided enough capital i s available) i n 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 t r a f f i c capacity i f the quality of the environment i s to be securred, i s very important. calculable.  The acceptable amount of t r a f f i c should in theory be  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 i n crossing a street.  The estimation i s refined by  including a variable for safety*  that i s , the vulnerability of those  individuals crossing the street.  The capacity of the street i s expressed  in terms of a single number which i s independent of the composition of vehicles.  The passenger-car unit (p.c.u.) allows f o r the different effect  of various types of vehicles by considering them i n terms of the equivalent number of passenger cars. An important point i s that the estimation of environmental capacity provides an immediate pointer to the policy to be adopted for the s t r e e t . ^ 11  If the policy recommendation i s physical alteration then the aesthetic design of streets and related street furniture i s 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 i s basically unsuited for motor t r a f f i c , i t i s 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 i n planning the future function of many streets. ... the time i s fast approaching when hundreds of streets i n hundreds of towns and cities w i l l have to be classified for their primary function, and i f i t i s an environmental function ( p r e s i d e n t i a l )  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. L i n t e l l insist that environmental conditions on residential streets w i l l not be improved unless means of determining acceptable and unacceptable 121 conditions are^available.  They go on to say that present planning  thought i s running against the formulation of standards, as planners have come to realize the variability of population needs and ^situations and the d i f f i c u l t i e s of scaling environmental conditons.  Yet without standards or  specific guidelines, planning controls w i l l remain amorphous and ineffectual. There i s an urgent need at the very least to articulate unacceptable environmental conditions for particular groups.  These conditions might be  couched i n the form of environmental performance standards. An environmental standard, according to the Buchanan Report, i s a state of affairs defined as acceptable i n relation to any or a l l of the 122 direct or indirect effects of motor t r a f f i c on the environment.  The  pedestrian or resident who says, "The conditions i n this street would be quite acceptable i f there were not so much t r a f f i c , " i s in fact expressing a view on the environmental capacity and seeking the application of an environmental standard. 3 12  Since the ubiquitous presence of the vehicular  42  urban street i s likely to continue f o r some time, environmental standards must be concerned with the conditions under which the street can continue to play an effective role.  124  As indicated previously, however, not a l l planners are i n favour of environmental standards.  J. Antoniou maintains that whereas i t i s a  relatively easy task to locate the intrusive elements descriptively, i t i s a f a r more d i f f i c u l t problem to assess the precise line of acceptability, 125 in relation to environmental quality, with any degree of accuracy.  This  i s 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 i s an inherent d i f f i c u l t y i n reducing a l l factors to cold numerical standards.  In conclusion Antoniou suggests that the Interactions  between visual balance and t r a f f i c 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" f o r 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 i n many ways of crucial importance. ... I f we decide that intrusion does not matter then we must be prepared to see an even greater loosening of the urban structure ... our assumption i s that society, perhaps only after some bitter experience, w i l l decide that visual intrusion i s 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 f o r visual intrusion are 127 more d i f f i c u l t , "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 i n an urban area as three variables related i n rough and ready "law". ... within any urban area as I t 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 i s indeed desiret to have a great deal of t r a f f i c i n 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 i n the Buchanan Report, hypothesizes that environmental t r a f f i c 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 f o r 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. objective basis.  First, they should have a scientific and  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" i n nature.  "Each person experiences  44  'his' environment i n a different way, and to a different extent, dependent upon such factors as social status, education level, and immediate state 131 of mind," hut to avoid the problem of visual intrusion " w i l l probably 132 v  result i n the destruction of many urban values."  v  Barford only, however,  suggests one standard (and only i n regard to commercial areas). He suggests, " ... unilateral-parking only to reduce visual intrusion of motor vehicles and to ensure maximum i n t e r v i s i b i l i t y between driver and pedestrian.""*"^ He concludes that what i s particularly needed i s a set of overall visual criteria that can apply to the urban physical environment. It should be noted i n conclusion that although there has been l i t t l e success or effort i n regard to t r a f f i c standards for visual intrusion, there has been an increased interest i n aesthetic control generally i n residential areas.  This interest has lead to legislation usually i n the form of 134  municipal zoning by-laws, design standards, and aesthetic regulations.  135 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 C i v i l Engineers, Vol. 95, No. UPI, Proc. Paper 6518, April 1969, pp. 43-59. "Ti. Blumenfeld, "Criteria f o r 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 (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1971). P- 7«  Planning for Traffic,  ^Ministry of Transport, Traffic i n Towns, (The Buchanan Report), (London: H.M.S.O., 1963), P« 39. 5  Ibid.  ^Pendakur and Brown, op. c i t . , p. 43. 'Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 70. Q  M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , comments of the Steering Group. ^Pendakur and Brown, op. c i t . , p. 44. ""*°M.0.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 7-18. n  Antoniou, op. c i t . , 34-35*  12  1  I b i d . , p. 7.  ^Ibld., pp. 19-21.  ^ I b l d . , p. 13. ^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , pp. 216-222. ^Antoniou, op. c i t . , pp. 67-70. ^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , 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. c i t . , p. 22.  20 Barford, op. c i t . , p. 43.  21 ^Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 70. ^ IIbid., b i d . , p. p. 68. 70. 23  44b REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued) 2  **Ibld., p. 58.  ^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 22. 26  I b i d . , p. 23.  ^R.J. Claus and K.E. Claus, Visual Environment, (Toronto. MacMillan, 1971), p. 61.  Collier-  M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 23. 2  ^Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 67.  3°J. Wild, Introduction to Realistic Philosophy, (New York.  and Row, 1948), p. STJ.  3"h?. Heider, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. John Wiley, 1958).  Harper  (New York.  •E. Shaw and P.R. Costanzo, Theories of Social Psychology. McGraw-Hill, 1970), p. ?1.  (Toronto.  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. Crofts, 1967).  (New York.  Appleton-Century -  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. c i t . , p. 173• 3^ciaus and Claus, op. c i t . , p. 3« 3 9  l b i d . , p. 3.  ^Shaw and Costanzo, op. c i t . , p. 176. 41  M. Scheerer, op. c i t . J.S. Brumer, "Our Perceptual Readiness", Psychology Review,  No. 64, 1957, PP. 123-152. * 3 E .B. Hunt, Concept Learning. An Information Processing Problem. (New York. John Wiley, 1962).  REFERENCES - CHAPTER II (continued)  4  4  C  44  D.E. Berlyne, "Recent Developments i n 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. c i t . , p. 3* 48 D. Appleyard, "City Designers and the Pluralistic City", Regional Planning for Development, ed. L. Rodwin et. a l . , (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1969), Chapter 23, pp. 422-452. 49 ^D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge'-', Proceeding of the Environmental Desgin Research Association ed. by J. Archea and C. Eastman, 1970, pp. 97-101. "^Shaw and Costanzo, op. c i t . , p. 184. r  -'"'"Heider, op. c i t . 52 ^ I. Samuels, "Reticular Mechanisms and Behavior", Psychological Bulletin, 1959, No. 56, pp. 1-25. 53 ^Claus and Claus, op. c i t . , p. 14. Lynch, The Image of the City. (Cambridge: MIT Press, i960), Chapter 1.  p. 97.  55 ^D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. c i t . , 56 Bruner, op. c i t . , pp. 123-152. 57  J  •"Bruner, op. c i t . , pp. 123-152. •"^D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. c i t . , p. 98. York:  -^I.D.J. Bross, "Nature of Decision", Design for Decision, (New The Free Press, 1953). P« 30. 60  D. Appleyard, "Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge", op. c i t . ,  p. 98.  6l  Claus and Claus, op. c i t . , p. 5*  REFERENCES - CHAPTER I I (continued)  4  62A.I. Hallowell, " C u l t u r a l Factors i n the S t r u c t u r a l l z a t l o n of Perception", S o c i a l Psychology a t the Crossroads, J.H. Roher and M. Sherif (eds.), (New Yorki Harper, 1951). p. 168. Hllgard, "The Role of Learning i n Perception", Perception. An Approach to Personality, R.R. Blake and G.V. Ramsey (eds.), (New York» Renald Press, 1951).  64 (New  York.  F.H. A l l p o r t , Theories of Perception and the Concept of Structure, John Wiley, 1955)t PP« 278-279.  65  ^W. Hudson, " P i c t o r a l Depth Perception in.-,Sub C u l t u r a l Groups i n A f r i c a " , Journal of S o c i a l Psychology, I960, No. 52, pp. 183-208. ^ J . Bagby, "A Cross-Cultural Study of Perceptual Predominance l n Binocular Rivalry", Journal of Abnormal S o c i a l Psychology, 1949, No. 38,  pp. 445-44?.  ^B.L. Whorf, "Science and L i n g u i s t i c s " , Technology Review, 1940, No. 54, pp. 229-231. Reprinted i n Readings i n S o c i a l 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 V i s u a l Perception, (Indianapolis1 Bobbs-Merrill Co. Inc., 1966).  69 J.J.CGibson, "The V i s u a l F i e l d and the V i s u a l World: A Reply to Professor Boring", Psychological Review, 1952, No. 59, pp. 149-151. 7  ^ 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 P u b l i c Roads Instruction Memorandum, 50-2-63 c i t e d i n "Attitudes, Community Values, and Highway Planning," M.T. Shaffer, Highway Research Record, No. 187, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1970), p. 56. California: ^I.K.  Bern, B e l i e f s , Attitudes and Human A f f a i r s , (Belmont, Brooks-Cole Publishing Co., 1970), p. 4. fox, op. c i t . , Lecture notes 26-9-75»  74 C D . Loeks, "Community Values, Goals and Objectives i n the Transportation Planning Process", Paper presented to AASHO Urban Transportation Planning Committee, (New York* 1965). as c i t e d i n M.T. Shaffer, op. c i t . , p. 56. ^G.  Santayana, The Sense of Beauty, (New York:  76 I.K. Fox, op. c i t . , Lecture notes, F a l l , 1975*  Dover, 1955).  4  d  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 York:  J.H. Randall and J. Buchler, Philosophy: An Introduction, (New Barnes and Noble, 1942), Chapter 12. Q-l  Y. Tuan, "Visual Blight: Exercises i n Interpretation", Visual Blight i n America, Commission on College Geography, Resource Paper No. 23, (Washington, B.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1973), P« 24. 82  I b l d . , p. 27«  ^Santayana, op. c i t .  8  84 Tuan, op. c i t . , pp. 27-28. 85  86  8?  I b l d . , p. 27. I b i d . , p. 26. I b i d . , p. 26.  OQ  D. Lowenthal, "The Offended Eye: Towards and Excresential Geography", Visual Blight in America, op. c i t . , p. 30. 89  I b i d . , 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. c i t . , p. 58. 92 J.B. Jackson, "Commentary: Visual Blight - Civic Neglect", Visual Blight i n America, op. c i t . , p. 47. 93 -'Lowenthal, op. c i t . , p. 29« ^Buchanan, op. c i t . , 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) * \ j . Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, (New York. Random House, 1961). 9  09  M.T. Shaffer, op. c i t . , p. 55. 98  S. Van der Ryn, "Value Measurement and Visual Factors i n 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. c i t . , pp. 43-49. 100  Peterson, op. c i t . , pp. 9-1?.  "^"San der Ryn, op. c i t . , pp. 1-1?. in? G.A. Wlnkel, R. Malek, and P. Thlel, "Community Response to the Design Features of Roadsj A Technique f o r Measurement", Highway Research Record, No. 305, (Washington, D.C.j Highway Research Board, 1970), pp. 133-  145.  3c.F. Barnes, "Living Patterns and Attitude Survey", Highway Research Record, No. I87, (Washington, D.C: Highway Research Board, 1967), p. 46. 10  104  Shaffer, op. c i t . , p. 55• ^H.H. Hyman, Survey Design and Analysis; Procedures, (New York: Free Press, 1957)• 10  Principle Cases and  ^L.N. Doob, "The Behavior of Attitudes", Psychology Review, No. 47, 1947, p. 136. 10  1 0 ?  I b i d . , pp. 14-15.  108  S h a f f e r , op. c i t . , pp. 58-59*  109  V a n der Ryn, op. c i t . , p. 3.  "^Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 71 • m  M.0.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , pp. 45-46.  112 "^Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 71 • "^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 50, p. 203n  \ 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  u 8  I b l d . , p. 197.  r b i d . , p. 203. I b l d . , p. 50.  1 1 9  120 Claus and Claus, op. c i t . , p. 55* Appleyard and M. L i n t e l l , "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. c i t . , p. 220. I b l d . , p. 51. ^ I b i d . , p. 49. 12*5 •'Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 71. 126 M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 50.  1 2 3  12  1 2 7  I b l d . , p. 49.  1 2 8  I b l d . , p. 45.  129  B a r f o r d , op. c i 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 f o r 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. c i t . , 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 i n contrast, and like the research of D. Appleyard and M. L i n t e l l 3 , and S. Van der Ryn 4, i s directed at the appearance of the urban street from the perspective of the residents, and as i t i s influenced by the presence of motor vehicles. The investigation reported i n this thesis identifies and measures the attitudes of persons living on residential streets i n the City of Vancouver concerning the vehicular visual intrusion problem.  I t i s a study  using observations, measurements, and questionnaire techniques, and does not pretend to s t a t i s t i c a l 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. the data collected.  This includes a presentation of  The descriptions are followed by an outline of the  findings of the data analyzed.  The study i s terminated in a discussion of  the use of visual screening as an alternative mechanism to reduce visual intrusions.  3.1 3.1.1  RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PRESENTATION OF DATA COLLECTED  Research Methodology In order to test the hypothesis and to examine further the visual  intrusion problem, a field, study i s presented i n which questionnaires were  46'  administered and observations and measurements, were carried out i n 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 i n 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 i n 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 f i e l d 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 f i n a l l y other data regarding t r a f f i c volume counts was obtained from The City of Vancouver, Traffic Engineering Department. The computer was chosen to process and compile the various information collected from the study areas.  Nonparametric s t a t i s t i c a l 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 i n 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 i n 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 i n 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 i n 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 i n 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"* i n 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 A r e a 1  4-1-TH AVENUE.  24  IG  23  15 h ii UL  Ot  Hi Q  <  33  31  13  vi  21  30  3  12  J 5:  20  2^  2  (  Hi  <  ti  IA  5  25 32  34  i  S  1  1 IO  H  za  0  Is UJ  N  0  R 16 26 2^  #-9T/W AVENUE. so  ILLUSTRATION 5 Study A r e a 2  33  h LU  4 5  UJ tf  In < OQ  Z 3  6  A V E N U E .  14 8  iO  lJ  32  i Z 13  15  33  34  35 3 6  3^- 3 3  3<3  4D 4/  54  30  2 D Z ! ZZ Z3Z4 2 5 Z 6 21-Z62? 3/  uJ  4^  Q  16 is  ti  44  4-5  D  30-TH A V H . N l / E  4^. 4 ? 4 a 49  50  .51 52J53  5.5  uJ  z iii  CD  UV  o  FR AS EL R N  N N N  Lv  4*  0 Ul  0  s  c ID  Cn  0)  Ul  m 0  u -i X  Oi  > m z  0>  LA  Ch  > <  m z m  1  O  8 LA)  LH  N O (5 -£  s  o  LA  U\  Ch  PRINCE.  0  Utl  0^  LA  41  L>  CP  4i  -0  OD  0  A L B E R T  .52  illustrated in a blow-up picture.  A check i n 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 i n each, i n which motor vehicle activity was the variable factor in the standard environment.  The householder was asked to respond  by choosing the picture, i n each row, which portrayed the maximum level of visual annoyance that could be tolerated. Questions 9 to 17, which were designed to acquire factual information, were structured similarly.  Question 17(b) - Occupation, which  required the respondent to specify, i n writing, the position or type of work, was the only deviant question. the appropriate square.  A l l others required only a check i n  The respondent's occupations were categorized  according to a modification of the Blishen Scale,^ which measured the social status of occupations. social status):  The five categories Were (in order of descending  professional, managerial, sales - c l e r i c a l - 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 i n each of the three areas, prior to the survey, l n order to introduce the interviewers and briefly to describe the nature of the survey,  (see Appendix B) Questionnaires were administered both i n the daytime and i n 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. was 119.  The total number of questionnaires completed f o r a l l areas  In Area 1, 23 homes (68 percent) were surveyed.  48 homes (87 percent), and;, in the survey.  In Area 2,  in Area 3» 40 homes (61 percent) participated  This was not a very large sample but since i t represented  greater than 50 percent of the homes i n 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 effectiveand perceived preferable by residents to varying degrees. effective bad to be distinguished from the term efficient.  The term 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 l o t then i t s 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 f e l t that  this reaction failed to mitigate the condition in the long term. Most people like their drapes l e f t open during the daytime and, as well, drapes  provide screening only while the residents are a c t u a l l y i n the house. Drapes were not considered, therefore, i n the subjective assessment of the t o t a l effectiveness of a l l types of screening present. The t o t a l effectiveness of v i s u a l screening r e f e r r e d to both the p h y s i c a l e f f i c i e n c y and l o c a t i o n of screening structures. a l l , or any combination of screening  I t included each,  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 s i t u a t i o n i n which the resident would be looking out from the f r o n t of h i s house, (not necessarily from inside the house).  The exception was  those homes on corner l o t s , i n  which two sides of the residence had to be included i n the r a t i n g 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 v i s u a l disturbances medium - blocks out some/to almost a l l v i s u a l disturbances low - blocks out zero/to some v i s u a l disturbances zero - blocks out zero v i s u a l disturbances  3.I.I.5  F i e l 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 f a c t o r s : 'l) ,2) (3) (4) (5) (6)  the the the the the the  state of movement d i r e c t i o n of movement frequency of movement ( t r a f f i c flow) s p a t i a l orientation (congestion) number of vehicles present design o r condition  The v i s u a l impacts of motor vehicles depend, p a r t i a l l y , on the extent of motor vehicle a c t i v i t y .  The Influence  of the v i s u a l e f f e c t s on  the  r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhood depends, as well, on a v a r i e t y of other p h y s i c a l image creating f a c t o r s , such as  s t r e e t f i x t u r e s , v i s u a l screening  .55  structures, and so on. Field measurements were made f i r s t , i n 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 i l J  r  TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES (4 OBSERVATIONS)  high  14  medium  8-14  0-7  low  With respect to moving vehicle activity, t r a f f i c 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 PERIOD  MID POINTS  very high  15,000 to 17.500  16,250  high  12,500 to 15,000 10,000 to 12,500 7,500 to 10,000  13,750 11,250  moderately high medium moderately low low very low  5,000 to 7.500 2,500 to 5,000 0 to 2,500  8,750 6,250 3.750 1,250  RATIO SCALE  13 11 9 7 5 3 1  .56  3-1.2  Presentation of Data Collected The presentation of data collected can he classified as factual or  attitudinal.  The factual information i s outlined i n terms of description  of the residential environments surveyed. aspects as-  This description includes such  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 i n 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 l o t sizes were much smaller and the houses were generally closer together and closer to the street.  The houses i n Area 1 were  generally larger and fewer houses were located on each block.  There was  a greater percentage of homes, i n Area 1, with garages attached to the side of the house.  The majority of houses i n Area 3 were finished i n wood while  most houses in,Areas 1 and 2 were finished i n stucco, stone, brick or aluminum siding.  The architectural styles of houses i n Areas 1 and 2  were more sophisticated than those of Area 3'  The houses and grounds i n  Area 3 were not as well maintained as those i n the other two areas. The streets i n Area 3 were, likewise, not as well maintained, although the street surfaces i n a l l three areas were hard-topped with asphalt.  The streets i n Areas 1 and 3 were f a i r l y 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 i n Area 2 and the Granville Street - 49th Avenue - Churchill Street - 47th Avenue block i n Area 1. Area 3  cLid.  not have cement curbs on  56th Avenue, 57th. Avenue, nor Prince Albert Street.  The boulevards i n  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 i n Area 3'  City  maintained trees, located on the boulevards of Adera Street and Churchill Street were of sufficient age to provide a partial arbour i n Area 1.  3.1.2.2  Motor Vehicle Activity i n the Study Areas The major.: similarity between the study areas was i n regard to the  types of vehicular activity.  A l l streets within or bordering each area  could accommodate two-way t r a f f i c .  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. had bus stops on both sides.  In Area 2, Dunbar Street  Likewise, Fraser Street, i n 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 f o r 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 f o r 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 f i r e hydrant. The nature and extent of the vehicular activity i n 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 a r t e r i a l routes i n a l l areas and lighter on the side streets, (see Table 2) and 3.  Compared to Area 1, on-street parking was much heavier in Areas 2  (see Table 3) Of the sample surveyed i n the questionnaire, a greater proportion of  households i n Area 1 were subjected to lower parked vehicle activity than i n Area 2.  In Area 2 a slightly higher proportion of households were subjected  to lower parked vehicle activity than i n 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 i n 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 1  2  STREET G r a n v i l l e S t r e e t - North of 45th S t r e e t  DATE  24 HOUR TOTAL  9 a.m.  t o 5 p.m. TOTAL  3-9-74  30,156  18,688  4 9 t h Avenue - West o f Angus S t r e e t  28-2-74  12,384  6,264  Blenheim S t r e e t - North of 41st Avenue  19-2-74  3,453  1,580  21-2-74 (northbound)  10,224  4,389  Dunbar S t r e e t - N o r t h o f 3 6 t h Avenue  26-8-74 (southbound)  3  33rd Avenue - West o f Collingwood Street  26-8-74  2,096  1,097  Fraser Street - North of 6 1 s t Avenue  12-7-74  10,928  5,325  5 7 t h Avenue - West o f Ross S t r e e t  11-7-74  5,734  2,594  .60 Table 3 PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 1 Observation  1  2  3  4  Date  4-8-75  6-8-75  7-8-75  8-8-75  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2  House Location Number  02  .  4  Observation  1  2  3  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  0  0  0  0  TOTAL  00  T a b l e 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2 Observation  1  2  3  4  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  M Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 2 Observation  1  2  3  4  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  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 4 .  Observation  1  2  3  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  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  63 Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 Observation  1  2  3  4  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  64: Table 3 (cont'd) PARKED VEHICLE COUNT - AREA 3 Observation  1  2  3  4  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  House Location Number  TOTAL  65  Table 4 PARKED VEHICLE ACTIVITY  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households C o n f r o n t e d w i t h Parked V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y Extent of Parked Vehicle A c t i v i t y  (%') AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  high  14.6  42.5  medium  16.7  35.0  68.8  22.5  low  100  Table 5 MOVING VEHICLE ACTIVITY  E x t e n t o f Moving Vehicle A c t i v i t y  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households C o n f r o n t e d w i t h Moving V e h i c l e A c t i v i t y (%) AREA 1  very high  21.7  high  26.1  AREA 2  10.4  moderately high  AREA 3  7.5  medium 25.0  m o d e r a t e l y low 8.3  low v e r y 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 t o t a l effectiveness of v i s u a l screening was s u b s t a n t i a l l y greater i n Area 1.  (see Table 6)  Likewise,  Area 2 has a t o t a l effectiveness of screening greater than Area 3' These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were generally common to most properties i n each area and not j u s t p a r t i c u l a r to thoseohouseholds surveyed i n each area. In regard to the existence and effectiveness of various screening types, a high proportion of households sampled i n a l l three study areas had highly e f f e c t i v e window drapes that could be used to block out vehicular v i s u a l intrusions,  (see I l l u s t r a t i o n 7) Very few e f f e c t i v e walls, fences,  or. landscaping were present i n any of the three areas.  The proportion o f  properties with e f f e c t i v e hedges were moderately low i n Area 1, and very low i n Areas 2 and 3*  F i n a l l y , with respect to trees, Areas 1 and 2 both  had a medium proportion of properties with e f f e c t i v e trees;  whereas Area 3  had very few l o t s with e f f e c t i v e type trees f o r v i s u a l screening.  3.1.2.4 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Sample Households As mentioned previously, the three study areas were chosen deliberately as a r e s u l t of t h e i r differences i n regard to socio-economic status.  Socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a t t r i b u t e d to the households of  each area are outlined i n the following paragraph. economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the respondents  Personal s o c i o -  sampled from each area are  outlined i n sub-section 1.2.5. The average length of residence was s i m i l a r f o r households i n a l l three study areas,  (see Table 7) In regard to home ownership, however,  l i t t l e s i m i l a r i t y existed.' More householders of Areas'.! and 2 owned t h e i r  67 Table 6 TOTAL EFFECTIVENESS OF VISUAL SCREENING  P e r c e n t a g e of Sample Households (%)  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  AREA 2  AREA 1  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 o f Y e a r s  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  Effective  Fence  1  1  Hedge  2  2  Drapes  3  3  Tree  5  5  Wall  6  6  Landscaping  6  6  TOTAL SCREENING EFFECTIVENESS  High  A  Medium  B  Low  C  Zero  D  -  SL - SL  Commercial  S e r v i c e Lane  70 ILLUSTRATION 7 A.  Study A r e a 1  4-TTH A V E N U E  ©©©© J if)  i@@©© r  ©  ©  l  1  D  ©  -©  B  A  c © -2.  C  ©  D  r-  ©  m  ©  c  fe  ©  J J 0  ©  I  X| © 0 © ©  c  c  1  ©  c  -© ©  A  ©  4  B  4  -©  ©  © -J  © ©  5L  5L.  A © 4  C  A  ©  @©@© ©©©©  ©  © ©  A©  ©1  <3>  -©+© 43TH  © 6 ©© ©  AVENUE  4± ©' 3 C  ©  3  D  3A<f>  ® © ® i  ILLUSTRATION 7 B.  Study Area 2  33K.D  AVE-NU&  -=z-  4 4 3  D 1*  ©  4-  4  4-  4 (D C  r  t  3  C  ® C  3  c  44-zt  C  D  4  4  4  4 C  4-  4  0  ©©© D  o 3  D  0  D  4  .SL-  H  of < 7 z> Q  C  cD 2  ®(DB 4  uv  r  D  c  c  c  c  4 -  D  ©  © (D D  A  4-  4  4  +-2--  4 4-'  1  4 3 4-TH  l>£_  ©  i  ©i  ©<2)©1  ILLUSTRATION 7 Continued - Study Area 2  B.  33  A\/£N  /^D  U £_ -©-  4 4  4  ^4 ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  — 5—*  ©  4  4  ©  ©#>! A  ©  5  C  ©I ©  (D 4  |©©@© ©f ©I  D  C  c  C  c  r  ©  4  uJ  H  N  q 0 0 N5  © ©  c  0 0  D  ®  I ©  A  © ©  C  ©  4 34-TH  3  Ui /W/aNUE.  c ©  C  5  ©  c 3  ©t B © ©  1  ©  4  4-  © 4  5  rf © -v3  ILLUSTRATION 7 Study A r e a 3  C.  55  T H  A\/&/\! UE-  4  (a  ®  o  N  3 ©  D  D  © D  C  D  D  C  i  38  i  I 11 © D  © D  C  > r  m ®  D  -i CA  fn  D ©  12.  © 4  C  D  ©  ©  i t I I i  ©  C  D 3  I  5oTH  A l / £ N f .  D  D  3  3  H  ILLUSTRATION 7 C.  C o n t i n u e d - Study A r e a 3  ©  4  "0 ] ©  4  + 4  I o  4 ©  K  M  D  ©  © D  D  ©  © c  D  ©  3  ©  D  D  D  ^©4  > H ON  tn  @ D  © C  45 T T H  © D  4-  ©  4 AVBrsJU  ©  ©  ©  3  © C  4-4M-4  © D  • VI  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 i n Area 1; percentage differences between the three areas were less,  but the (see Table 10)  The total household income i n Area 1 was higher than i n Area 2, which was i n turn higher than i n Area J.  (see Table 11)  Generally more  households i n 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 i n a l l three areas, which i s perhaps typical of many areas i n the City of Vancouver. In summary then, the socio-economic status of households i n 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 i n 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 i n Area 3 were much more spread out over the age categories, while Area 1 respondents were closely grouped i n 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  own rent  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households (%) AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  95.7  95.8  75.0  4.3  4.2  25.0  Table 9 AVERAGE NUMBER OF CARS PER HOUSEHOLD  Number o f Cars  P e r c e n t a g e 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  1.87  1.69  1.34  Mean Number  77 T a b l e 10 NUMBER OF VEHICLES PER HOUSEHOLD  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households  (%) Number o f V e h i c l e s 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  T a b l e 11 TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME  T o t a l Household Income $  0-6,000  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households W AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  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 p l u s  52.2  35.4  7.5  M i s s i n g Values  26.0  14.6  7.5  78 T a b l e 12 HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households (%) Children AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  Have C h i l d r e n  65.2  56.3  32.5  Have No C h i l d r e n  34.8  43.7  67.5  T a b l e 13 NUMBER OF CHILDREN PER HOUSEHOLD  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Households Number o f 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  1.56  1.38  1.00  Mean Number  79  T a b l e 14 AGES OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS  Age o f Respondent (years)  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents (%) AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  0-15  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  o v e r 60  28.0  15.4  23.8  T a b l e 15 SEX OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents Sex o f 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 The percentage of singles and widows/widowers was highest i n Area 3« Table  1.  (see  16) In Area 1,  100  percent of those respondents surveyed had a completed  high school education or better. and 64.3  percent i n Area 3'  This i s compared to 90 percent i n Area 2  Both Areas 1 and 2 had s i m i l a r proportions  of respondents with u n i v e r s i t y graduation - 36 percent and 34.6 respectively. percent,  percent  Area 3 bad a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower proportion, that was  (see Table  9«5  17)  With respect to the occupational status of sample respondents, both Areas 1 and 2,  had r e l a t i v e l y s i m i l a r proportions of respondents with  medium-high and high status jobs - 28 percent and 34.6 Area 3i  percent respectively.  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 i n part to the increasing percentage of femalsrespondents from Area 1 to Area 3« In summary, the personal socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of respondents i n Areas 1 and 2 d i d not d i f f e r to the extent that they d i f f e r e d between respondents of Areas 2 and 3«  3.1.2.6.  A t t i t u d i n a l Responses The presentation of a t t i t u d i n a l data i s r e s t r i c t e d to those  questions from the survey questionnaire which were used f o r the analysis i n Chapter I I I , Section  3.2.  81  T a b l e 16 MARITAL STATUS OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS  P e r c e n t a g e of Sample Respondents M a r i t a l S t a t u s o f Respondent AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  single  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  Missing  1.9  Values  Table 17 EDUCATION LEVEL OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS  P e r c e n t a g e of Sample Respondents Education Level AREA 1 elementary  AREA 2  AREA 3 16.7  school 7.7  19.0  28.0  28.8  38.1  some u n i v e r s i t y  36.0  26.9  16.7  university  36.0  34.6  9.5  some h i g h s c h o o l high school  Missing  graduation  graduation  Values  1.9  82  T a b l e 18 SOCIAL STATUS OF OCCUPATION OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents W  S o c i a l Status of Occupation  AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  20.0  25.0  2.4  8.0  9.6  4.8  60.0  50.0  42.9  m o d e r a t e l y low  0.0  1.9  16.7  low  4.0  3.8  7.1  8.0  9.6  26.2  high moderately high medium  M i s s i n g Values  (including retired)  T a b l e 19 ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION  Rank o f Importance Influencing Factor AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  location  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  price  5  6  6  4  5  5  resale  value  83  The sample responses to Question 1 indicated that, of the f a c t o r s influencing people i n t h e i r s e l e c t i o n of an environment i n which to l i v e , l o c a t i o n a l advantage was the most important f a c t o r l i s t e d ,  (see Table 19)  Areas 1 and 2 ranked v i s u a l appearance as second and t h i r d respectively and ranked character of nieghbourhood as t h i r d and second respectively. Area 3« however, ranked p r i c e as second, character of neighbourhood t h i r d , and v i s u a l appearance fourth.  Areas 1 and 2 considered p r i c e l e s s  important and therefore ranked i t s i x t h and fourth respectively.  Areas 2  and 3 both regarded resale value and the advice of a r e a l t o r l e a s t important and thus ranked them f i f t h and s i x t h respectively.  Area 1 apparently f e l t  that resale value was s l i g h t l y more important and ranked i t fourth. Question 2 attempted to determine how respondents ranked the v i s u a l disturbances from motor vehicle a c t i v i t y i n comparison to various other undesirable e f f e c t s of vehicular a c t i v i t y .  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 p o l l u t i o n ahead of safety as a problem.  Areas 2  and 3 ranked the problem of v i s u a l intrusions as t h i r d 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 l e a s t important of vehicular problems i n r e s i d e n t i a l environments. Question 4 from the questionnaire asked the sample respondents to indicate the l e v e l of t h e i r annoyance to c e r t a i n physical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of vehicular a c t i v i t y 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 T a b l e 20 UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACTIVITY  Rank o f Importance  Undesirable E f f e c t  AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  noise  1  1  1  air pollution  2  4  4  v i s u a l disturbances  4  3  3  vibrations  5  6  5  reduction of pedestrian safety  3  2  2  r e d u c t i o n of property safety  6  5  6  TABLE 21 EXTENT OF ANNOYANCE  A. B.  PARKED VEHICLES MOVING VEHICLES  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents Extent of Annoyance  A. PARKED VEHICLES  B. MOVING VEHICLES  AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  v e r y 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  noticeable 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  M i s s i n g Values  1.9  AREA 3  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 a t the number of moving vehicles, In comparison, 86.5  percent and 71.5  (see Table 21)  percent respectively, of respondents  of Areas 2 and 3» were mildly to very annoyed by parked vehicles; 67.3  and  percent and 6I.9 percent respectively were mildly to very annoyed by  moving vehicles i n the photograph. With respect to high l e v e l s of annoyance to parked vehicles, 56 percent of respondents from Area 1 were very annoyed with the s i t u a t i o n 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 l e v e l s of annoyance to moving vehicles, a l a r g e r 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 i n Area 3 were  very annoyed^  that was 9>5 percent.  Question 5 i n the survey questionnaire asked the respondents to rank c e r t a i n types of v i s u a l screening structures as they perceived them to be most e f f e c t i v e f o r reducing v i s u a l disturbances of t r a f f i c i n a r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhood.  The r e l a t i v e frequency of ranks by respondents  of a l l three areas was remarkably s i m i l a r ,  (see Table 22)  A l l areas  ranked hedges as the most e f f e c t i v e , trees second most e f f e c t i v e , landscaping t h i r d , fences fourth, walls f i f t h , and window drapes as s i x t h most e f f e c t i v e . Questions ?(a) and 7(d) asked the respondents to indicate the extent of t h e i r agreement or disagreement with respect to a p a r t i c u l a r  86  T a b l e 22 PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF SCREENING  Rank o f E f f e c t i v e n e s s Type o f S c r e e n i n g  Structure AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  fence  4  4  4  hedge  1  1  1  drapes  6  6  6  trees  2  2  2  wall  5  5  5  landscaping  3  3  3  T a b l e 23 UNATTRACTIVENESS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACTIVITY  E x t e n t o f Agreement  P e r c e n t a g e o f 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 n o r d i s a g r e e  16.0  13.5  21.4  mildly  28.0  19.2  11.9  0.0  1.9  11.9  disagree  strongly  disagree  87  statement.  A major proportion of the respondents from each area sampled  considered the unattractiveness of vehicular a c t i v i t y i n t h e i r neighbourhood to be annoying.  In Areas 1, 2, and 3 i 56.0 percent, 65-4 percent,  and 5^.7 percent respectively, mildly to strongly .agreed with statement 7(a).  (see Table 23)  the statement.  Wo respondents of Area 1 strongly disagreed with  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 c e r t a i n environmental conditons.  In p a r t i c u l a r , residents  were asked i f v i s u a l disturbance from motor vehicles were l e s s annoying than they were a t a previous time.  In Area 1, 48 percent of the sample  e i t h e r 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 a t t i t u d i n a l question, presented as data, deals again with photographs and a standard environment.  Question 8 was designed to determine  the respondent's maximum l e v e l of tolerance to v i s u a l intrusions from motor vehicles.  Residents were asked to examine three standard environments.  In one, only the number of parked vehicles wasvto be considered and i n another, only the number of moving vehicles.  In a t h i r d , consideration  was given to both the number of parked and moving vehicles.  88 T a b l e 24 ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATION  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents W  E x t e n t o f Agreement  AREA 1  AREA 2  AREA 3  8.0  3.8  7.1  20.0  21.2  31.0  n e i t h e r agree n o r d i s a g r e e  24.0  23.1  21.4  m i l d l y disagree  20.0  25.0  11.9  strongly  28.0  26.9  26.2  strongly mildly  agree agree  disagree  2.4  M i s s i n g Values  T a b l e 25 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE  -  PARKED VEHICLES  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents (%)  Photograph R e p r e s e n t i n g Maximum T o l e r a n c e  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  g r e a t e r than 6  0.0  13.5  26.2  89  Responses to Question 8, Row 1, resulted i n approximately one t h i r d 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 s i t u a t i o n s between photograph;  2 and photograph 6.  In Area 1 only  8 percent of the respondents chose picture number 6 or greater, whereas, i n Areas 2 and 3 a l a r g e r proportion -" 23«1 percent and 42.9 percent respectively chose parked densities as portrayed i n picture number 6 o r greater parked d e n s i t i e s . With respect tb the number of moving vehicles, the range of responses to Question 8, Row 2, was greater than f o r Row 1.  (see Table 26)  The d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses from each area was also greater.  In Area 1,  72 percent of the respondents chose pictures 2, 3» o r 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 o r greater. When parked and moving vehicles became part of the same standard environment, i n Question 8, Row 3» 84 percent of respondents of Area 1 could tolerate vehicle l e v e l s up to the number portrayed i n photograph number 2.  (see Table 27)  The r e l a t e d proportions f o r Areas 2 and 3 were  78.8 percent and 52.3 percent respectively.  Compared to Areas 1 and 2,  a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher proportion of respondents of Area 3 could tolerate vehicular a c t i v i t y beyond that i l 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 b r i e f l y the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures employed and second, to describe the case study data analyses  90 T a b l e 26 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE  Photograph R e p r e s e n t i n g Maximum T o l e r a n c e  -  MOVING VEHICLES  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents (%) AREA 2  AREA 1  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  g r e a t e r than 6  0.0  1.9  2.4  T a b l e 27 MAXIMUM VISUAL TOLERANCE  Photograph R e p r e s e n t i n g Maximum T o l e r a n c e  -  PARKED AND MOVING VEHICLES  P e r c e n t a g e o f Sample Respondents (%) AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  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 s t a t i s t i c a l manipulation of that data. The 8  Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) i s an integrated system of computer programs containing many of the most' common s t a t i s t i c a l 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 s t a t i s t i c a l 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  s t a t i s t i c a l procedures employed was referred to, functionally, as "Descriptive Statistics and One-Way Frequency Distributions". MARGINALS computed and presented tables containing (1) frequencies,  (2)  relative frequencies, and (3)  The sub-program  simple ram  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 f u n c t i o n a l l y as "Bivariate Correlation Analysis".  The c o r r e l a t i o n analysis provided a  technique f o r measuring the l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p 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 c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t .  Nonparametric Correlation . (NONPAR CORR) enabled the computation of e i t h e r Spearman o r Kendall rank-order c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s o r both. The output from NONPAR CORR provided the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t , the number o f observations upon which the c o r r e l a t i o n was based, and the l e v e l of s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the c o e f f i c i e n t .  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 f a c t , the sample respondents  were annoyed by t h ^ v i s u a l disturbances of motor vehicle a c t i v i t y . conjunction  t h i s was followed by an analysis of Question 2;  In  that i s , how  the sample respondents ranked the importance o f those v i s u a l disturbances i n comparison to other undesirable  e f f e c t s o f motor vehicle a c t i v i t y .  Second,  the research hypothesis was tested with respect t o the a c t u a l and standard environments. was  Correlation between the responses to p a r t i c u l a r questions  used to describe the r e l a t i o n s h i p between variables.  Third, Question 8  was analyzed to investigate the sample respondents' perceptions of the tolerable v i s u a l capacity of the standard environment to accommodate vehicular a c t i v i t y .  At the same time responses to Questions 1 and 7(d)  were examined so as to permit a b r i e f description of two f a c t o r s (that i s , environmental s e l e c t i o n and environmental adaptation respectively) which  93  would likely influence the respondents* determination of his/her maximum tolerable number of vehicles.  The fourth and f i n a l analysis was to  determine, from responses to Question 5» which visual screening structures were regarded as most effective for utilization i n 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), i n 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 i n their importance ranking of a i r 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 i n 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. and the sum:  Each variable was scaled  numerically  of the three variables, which would extend from 3  (low  status) to 15 (high status), provided an index of respondents' socioeconomic status.  The l e v e l of annoyance was  then correlated with  socio-economic status. The t o t a l , effectiveness of screening structures i n the a c t u a l environment, as previously stated i n Chapter I I I , sub-:section was  scaled - high, medium, low, or zero.  J.l.l,k  A numerical index was  t  applied  to t h i s scale to create an index of t o t a l effectiveness - 1 represented zero t o t a l effectiveness and 4 represented high t o t a l effectiveness. l e v e l of annoyance was screening  The  then correlated with t o t a l effectiveness of v i s u a l  structures.  With respect to the presence of motor vehicles, parked vehicles and moving vehicles were examined separately as to t h e i r possible influence on l e v e l s of annoyance. observations  was  The t o t a l number of parked vehicles from four  correlated with the l e v e l of annoyance.  of moving vehicles (see sub-section vehicle a c t i v i t y .  J.l.l)  The r a t i o scale  provided an index of moving  Moving vehicle a c t i v i t y was  then correlated with the  l e v e l of annoyance. A presentation of variable i n d i c i e s i s displayed i n Table 28. The r e s u l t s of the three correlations are displayed i n Table 29o Theoretically, the Spearman Correlation C o e f f i c i e n t (r) from -1.0  to +1.0.  varies  A c o e f f i c i e n t of 0 always indicates that no l i n e a r  relationship exists;  a +1.0  c o e f f i c i e n t implies a 'perfect' p o s i t i v e  r e l a t i o n s h i p (that i s , an increase i n one variable i s always associated with a concommitant increase i n the other v a r i a b l e ) ;  and a c o e f f i c i e n t  T a b l e 28 Variable Indicies  -  A c t u a l Environment  N u m e r i c a l Index Variable  Very H i g h  High  Moderately High  Medium  Moderately Low  Low  Very Low-  Annoyance = Q 7 (a) Socio-economic s t a t u s = Income + E d u c a t i o n + 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 Structures Number of B a r k e d V e h i c l e s R a t i o o f Moving V e h i c l e s  12-15  7-11  3-6  4  3  2  8-14  0-7  >14 13  11  7  5  3  1  1  ON  97 T a b l e 29 Nonparametric C o r r e l a t i o n s Spearman Correlation Coefficient (r)  Correlation Variables  Significance  ACTUAL ENVIRONMENT 0.1862  * 0.021  0.0263  0.388  Annoyance w i t h p a r k e d v e h i c l e s  -0.0058  0.475  Annoyance w i t h moving v e h i c l e s  0.1679  * 0.034  Annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s  0.1057  0.126  Annoyance moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s  0.2746  * 0.001  Annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s w i t h annoyance moving v e h i c l e s  0.2036  * 0.013  Annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s  0.1266  0.085  Annoyance moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s  -0.1695  * 0.033  Annoyance p a r k e d and moving v e h i c l e s w i t h socio-economic s t a t u s  -0.1933  * 0.018  Annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s w i t h annoyance moving v e h i c l e s  0.4202  * 0.001  Annoyance w i t h socio-economic  status  Annoyance w i t h t o t a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s  STANDARD ENVIRONMENT Question 4  Question 8  * Statistically significant  98  of -1.0 i n d i c a t e s a ' p e r f e c t ' negative r e l a t i o n s h i p (that i s , one i n which an increase i n one v a r i a b l e i s always associated with a decrease i n the other v a r i a b l e ) .  The s i g n i f i c a n c e s t a t i s t i c i n d i c a t e s the  p r o b a b i l i t y of committing a Type 1 Error}  that i s , of erroneously  r e j e c t i n g a hypothesis which i s r e a l l y t r u e . The l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e , that i s , the p r o b a b i l i t y of obtaining a f a i r l y strong ( p o s i t i v e or negative) c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t purely by chance was set a t 5 percent (  «= 0.05)«  To t e s t the n u l l hypothesis of  no c o r r e l a t i o n (namely, the hypothesis that there i s no l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between two given v a r i a b l e s ) the s i g n i f i c a n c e value obtained was compared to the l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e s e t .  I f the s i g n i f i c a n c e value obtained was  greater than 0.05 then there was no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n 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 a n t . The r e s u l t s of the c o r r e l a t i o n between the l e v e l of annoyance and socio-economic s t a t u s , and between the l e v e l of annoyance and moving v e h i c l e a c t i v i t y , suggested a weak d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p .  The c o r r e l a t i o n s  between the l e v e l of annoyance and the t o t a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s of screening, and between the l e v e l of annoyance and parked v e h i c l e a c t i v i t y , on the Other hand, were chance c o r r e l a t i o n s and hence the c o e f f i c i e n t s were not statistically significant. F i n a l l y , the a s s o c i a t i o n between the l e v e l of annoyance, with respect t o standard v i s u a l environments, and socio-economic status was examined.  Like the previous c o r r e l a t i o n s 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  s c a l e d from ' n o t n o t i c e a b l e ' (low annoyance) t o ' v e r y annoying', were given numerical values from 1 (low annoyance) t o 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 i n 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 environments 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 i s 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 - 8 8 percent, and Row 3 - 8 4 percent) the following findings became evident,  (see Tables 25, 26, and 27)  The  Table 30 VARIABLE INDICIES  -  STANDARD ENVIRONMENTS  N u m e r i c a l Index  Variable  Very High  High  Moderately High  Medium  Moderately Low  Low  Very Low  Question 4 (c)  L e v e l o f annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s  3  3  2  1  (d)  L e v e l o f annoyance moving v e h i c l e s  4  3  2  1  Question 8 Row 1 - L e v e l o f annoyance p a r k e d v e h i c l e s  6  4  3  2  1  Row 2 - L e v e l o f annoyance moving v e h i c l e s  6  4  3  2  1  Row 3 - L e v e l o f annoyance p a r k e d and moving v e h i c l e s Socio-economic s t a t u s = Income + Education + Occupation  12-15  7-11  3-6  101  residents of Area 1 sampled could tolerate 4 vehicles and less i n 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 environment. When parked and moving vehicles - Row 3 - were portrayed together i n a standard, visual, arterial street,environment, Area 1 respondents could tolerate 3 parked and 3 moving vehicles and less. The cut-off point f o r 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; vehlcles  :  5 moving  and; 4 parked and 5 moving vehicles respectively, i n regard to  the three rows of photographs.  The overall results from the three areas  are displayed i n Table 31Environmental 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, i n comparison with other influencing factors i n his/her selection of an urban environment in which to reside.  According to the total responses  102 T a b l e 31 MAXIMUM TOLERABLE VEHICULAR ACTIVITY  -  STANDARD ENVIRONMENTS  MAXIMUM TOLERABLE NUMBER OF VEHICLES  AREA  Q 8 - ROW 1 PARKED (76 p e r c e n t o f respondents)  Q 8 - ROW 2 MOVING (88 p e r c e n t o f respondents)  Q 8 - ROW 3 PARKED AND MOVING (84 p e r c e n t o f 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 i n 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. somewhat different}  Areas 1 and 3» °n the otherl.hand, were  that i s , only 58 percent and 47.6 percent of the  respondents respectively considered visual appearances i n 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 i n the neighbourhood.  According to the responses  compiled i n 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 l n reducing the visual disturbances of motor vehicle activity?  The aggregated responses from the three study areas  to Question 5 indicated that respondents were sensitive i n ranking the  104 T a b l e 32 VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE SURROUNDINGS  % o f Sample Respondents AREA 3  AREA 1  AREA 2  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  1.9  2.4  1.9  11.9  RANK  6 MV  4.0  105 effectiveness of screening structures, mentioned i n sub-section  (see Appendix E-3)  As already  3*1«2.6, the ranking given to various screening  structures was v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l f o r a l l three study areas, (see Table 22) I t should be mentioned that the word 'effective' was generally misinterpreted 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 ( i n 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 r e s p e c t i v e l y ,  i n the following sub-sections.  This section i s terminated with a  discussion of v i s u a l screening structures as a recommendation to reduce v i s u a l disturbances from motor vehicles.  3.3.I  Case Study Conclusion I t can be concluded from the case study that residents sampled  from three areas surveyed, when asked d i r e c t l y , appeared to be annoyed by v i s u a l intrusions of motor vehicles i n t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods. In f a c t , according to the community a t t i t u d e s c o l l e c t e d , i t was shown that v i s u a l disturbances were considered as the t h i r d or fourth most undesirable e f f e c t of vehicular a c t i v i t y i n the neighbourhood.  However,  when asked to rank the Importance of v i s u a l intrusions i n regard to other adverse vehicular e f f e c t s , residents appeared to be i n s e n s i t i v e to the problem.  106  Although the r e s u l t s of the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures i n section 3.2 are inconclusive to v e r i f y the following statements, i t i s speculated that i n regard to the presence of motor vehicles ( l ) the higher the socio-economic status of a resident, the higher i s his/her l e v e l of annoyance, and (2) the greater the number of parked and/or moving vehicles, the higher i s the l e v e l of his/her annoyance.  On the other hand, (3) as  the t o t a l effectiveness of v i s u a l screening structures present on a resident's property increases, the resident's l e v e l of annoyance decreases. As w e l l a resident's l e v e l o f annoyance to parked vehicles increased as his/her l e v e l of annoyance to moving vehicles increases. The maximum tolerable l e v e l of vehicular activity;.In the standard v i s u a l environment, assessed by sample respondents, appeared to be higher i n Area 2 than i n Area 1 and highest i n Area 3»  Therefore, the v i s u a l  capacity of the r e s i d e n t i a l 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 v i s u a l surroundings i n t h e i r s e l e c t i o n of an urban environment i n which t o reside.  In the process of environmental s e l e c t i o n  the appearance of the v i s u a l surroundings i s more important to higher socio-economic groups.  I t 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 v i s u a l disturbances of vehicular a c t i v i t y i n the neighbourhood.  However, the impression following the  questionnaire administration was that environmental adaptation was a f a c t o r i n modifying the respondent's annoyance.  10?  3-3'2  Discussion of Conclusions I f a Large proportion of residents i n an urban area indicate  that they are annoyed by vehicular v i s u a l i n t r u s i o n s and i f the l e v e l o f annoyance i s measured and i s determined to be substantial, the urban planner, on the basis of t h i s i n i t i a l problem d e f i n i t i o n and v e r i f i c a t i o n , can begin to c o l l e c t an inventory of data to permit him/her to i d e n t i f y various a l t e r n a t i v e courses of action so as to mitigate the problem, (see Appendices C and D)  Such was the s i t u a t i o n i n the case> study.  The  annoyance indicated by residents was measured and the l e v e l was determined to be "moderate".  The ensuing data c o l l e c t i o n and analysis lead to the  f i n d i n g s and conclusions presented i n previous sub-sections.  From t h i s  information base the following discussions a r i s e . The dependence of annoyance l e v e l s on the socio-economic statuses of the residents of the urban community was perhaps f i r s t due to the f a c t that a higher income might have permitted more l e i s u r e time which i n turn might have lead to a greater frequency of contact with the v i s u a l environment.  Second, higher education  l e v e l s might have led'to a greater  awareness and understanding of the problem o f v i s u a l intrusions. The dependence of annoyance l e v e l s on the p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of motor vehicle a c t i v i t y was l i k e l y influenced by a variety of f a c t o r s . Even though the survey questionnaire attempted to s p l i t out only the number of vehicles as a variable, i t was l i k e l y that other variables such as the design, o r the condition of the vehicles, .the speed of movement, the noise, the resident's mood, and so on, influenced the response regarding his/her l e v e l o f annoyance.  As well, the assumed association  between annoyance and vehicles was u n l i k e l y t o be a d i r e c t l y proportional  108  relationship.  An increase i n the presence of vehicles i n areas presently  low i n vehicle a c t i v i t y , l i k e l y arouses proportionately more annoyance than i f a s i m i l a r absolute increase occurs i n an area presently high i n vehicle a c t i v i t y .  The association i n which a resident's l e v e l of  annoyance to parked vehicles increases as his/her l e v e l of annoyance to moving vehicles increases indicates that residents probably f a i l to d i f f e r e n t i a t e completely the adverse aspects of parked vehicles from the adverse aspects of moving vehicles. The photograph which represented a respondent's maximum tolerance to v i s u a l intrusions was,  at l e a s t i n part, an i n d i c a t i o n of what the  respondent perceived the maximum capacity of the standard v i s u a l environment to be i n regard to motor vehicle a c t i v i t y .  The average maximum tolerance  indicated from the residents of a p a r t i c u l a r area was considered represent the community attitude concerning capacity.  to  the v i s u a l environmental  This a t t i t u d e could help lead to the establishment  of a  standard  f o r the v i s u a l capacity of the environment to accommodate vehicles. Attitudes of residents to photographs of t r a f f i c a c t i v i t y can be used to predict the residents' attitudes concerning Objective obervations  t r a f f i c i n the a c t u a l environment.  of environmental q u a l i t y , 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 p a r t i c u l a r l y severe.  However, the l e v e l s of  annoyance from persons l i v i n g on o r close to higher l e v e l s of vehicular a c t i v i t y and subsequently greater v i s u a l intrusions were not so high as might reasonably be suspected.  One major reason appeared to be that the  errosion of the v i s u a l environmental q u a l i t y had been subtle and occurred over a number of years.  had  During that time the workings of v i s u a l  109 environmental s e l e c t i o n and v i s u a l environmental adaptation had l i k e l y been operating. These are important phenomena to consider i n measurements of a t t i t u d i n a l responses to environmental q u a l i t y . The workings of v i s u a l environmental s e l e c t i o n may be stated as follows:  A v i s u a l environment tends to be selected by those groups  who  f i n d i t most amenable, and to be rejected by those who f i n d i t l e a s t amenable.  The p r i n c i p l e does not work p e r f e c t l y however.  Appleyard  and L i n t e l l go on. to suggest that those who are unable to s e l e c t t h e i r preferred v i s u a l environment through lack of f i n a n c i a l , informational, or psychological resources become "locked i n " to c e r t a i n v i s u a l environments and are therefore l i k e l y to s u f f e r the most from increasing v i s u a l disturbances of vehicles.  Householders may select a l e s s than i d e a l v i s u a l  environment f o r reasons other than lack of resources.  Many make a  compromise, s a c r i f i c i n g v i s u a l amenity f o r the benefits of, f o r example, l o c a t i o n a l advantage, quickly available accommodation, and so on. people s e l e c t i n g an environment may make errors of judgment.  Other  Visually  49th Avenue i n Area 1, f o r example, i s a well maintained, high q u a l i t y , yet increasingly busy s t r e e t .  A p o t e n t i a l resident who assesses the  appearance of t h i s street environment a t a period of lower t r a f f i c a c t i v i t y (say on a Sunday morning) might be deceived.  Another kind of e r r o r i s the  i n a b i l i t y to predict future v i s u a l deterioration of an area. By v i s u a l environmental adaptation i t i s meant that those who remain i n one v i s u a l environment f o r a length of time become adapted or resigned to i t whether or not i t i s v i s u a l l y pleasant* , e s p e c i a l l y i f they see no future change i n s i t e . ^  Those with low expectations or aspirations  may be content with any v i s u a l environment.  V i s u a l adaptation may be  110 apparent as a r e s u l t of-residents not wishing to complain i n order to keep up t h e i r s o c i a l image and the sales value of t h e i r property o r through reluctance to admit that they have l i m i t e d resources o r have made an e r r o r of judgment i n t h e i r s e l e c t i o n of an a t t r a c t i v e place to reside.  3.3.3  Recommendations In l i g h t of the case study conclusions and the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed,  the following sub-section concerning recommendations i s presented. Subsequent to a problem d e f i n i t i o n and an i n i t i a l data c o l l e c t i o n , the urban planner's next task i s to present relevant a l t e r n a t i v e courses of action r e f l e c t i n g community objectives, (see Appendix C)  In the  l i t e r a t u r e various means to resolve the c o n f l i c t between motor vehicle a c c e s s i b i l i t y and v i s u a l environmental q u a l i t y have been proposed.  In the  past, proposals were directed toward improving motor vehicle a c c e s s i b i l i t y a t the expense of the v i s u a l q u a l i t y of the urban r e s i d e n t i a l  neighbourhood.  However, i n the; advent of serious f u e l shortages and environmental deterioration the emphasis has to be taken away from vehicular a c c e s s i b i l i t y improvements and instead given to improving environmental q u a l i t y while a t 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 e f f e c t i v e as well as e f f i c i e n t i n 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  Ill  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 i t s e l f into an exercise i n  environmental management which i s defined as a possible method of protecting the environment of an area against the adverse effects of motor t r a f f i c by measures designed to prevent the entry of extraneous t r a f f i c , and to re-organize internal flows so that they are less damaging i n their effects. The Buchanan Report technique consists of the laying of a (moving and at rest) t r a f f i c ceiling i n environmental areas by modifying the arrangements for vehicles and people, so that the amount of t r a f f i c does not exceed the environmental capacity.  The mere establishment of a visual  environmental standard i s not intended to guarantee that an area w i l l have any positive aesthetic qualities;  that i s why the Report refers specifically  to the environment i n relation to t r a f f i c only. Some of the steps required to establish an environmental area 15 are as follows: (1) Numbers, types, and speeds of vehicles to be kept down to a level compatible with environmental standards. (2) Circulation of essential t r a f f i c 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. J  112 (5) (6)  Internal movements to be re-organized to eliminate the c o n f l i c t of c r i s s - c r o s s journeys. Parking p o l i c y , e s p e c i a l l y as to the amount and l o c a t i o n of parking space, to be f i r m l y directed towards the environmental objectives.  J. Antoniou, who questions whether meaningful environmental standards can be determined, suggests a l t e r n a t i v e techniques to reduce  16 vehicular a c c e s s i b i l i t y .  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 p r a c t i c a l p h y s i c a l  improvements such as comprehensive pedestrian networks. The San Francisco City Planning Department has attempted to reduce vehicular a c c e s s i b i l i t y by designating "protected" r e s i d e n t i a l areas  17 throughout the c i t y . '  These areas were to be protected from through  t r a f f i c by /policies such as the improvement of p u b l i c t r a n s i t , the concent r a t i o n of t r a f f i c on the c i t y ' s main a r t e r i e s by increasing t h e i r 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, l i g h t i n g , and sidewalk treatment, a l l which would slow down t r a f f i c to a r e s i d e n t i a l pace. The above proposals to reduce a c c e s s i b i l i t y are generally considered as components of a longer term approach requiring substantial re-organization of the e x i s t i n g transport system and substantial physical a l t e r a t i o n s of the environment.  These changes w i l l l i k e l y r e s u l t i n some community  d i s r u p t i o n and w i l l commit large amounts of p u b l i c d o l l a r s to a mode of transport whose future existence i s uncertain ( e s p e c i a l l y i n l i g h t of gasoline shortages, r i s i n g automobile insurance rates, innovative  113  telecommunications, and the u n l i k e l y nearby change over to novel modes such- as e l e c t r i c c a r s ) . The second a l t e r n a t i v e , yet complimentary approach suggested, whereby a c c e s s i b i l i t y i s maintained while measures are taken to enhance the v i s u a l q u a l i t y , leads to such proposals as v i s u a l screening o r perhaps vehicle design to ameliorate adverse v i s u a l conditions.  V i s u a l screening  i s considered here as a more short-term, "wait and see", "bandaid" type proposal.  I t i s weighted towards enhancing v i s u a l q u a l i t y of the  appearance of the neighbourhood and should i n the longer term compliment and be i n t e g r a l i n public transportation plans. D. Appleyard and M. L i n t e l l proposed the protection o f residences from g l a r i n g s t r e e t l i g h t s , c a r 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 e f f e c t i v e structures not only to screen out v i s u a l intrusions but also to enhance the v i s u a l appearance of the neighbourhood.  V i s u a l screening structures such as the  above are suggested therefore as a bandaid" type solution f o r s t r e e t s fl  where vehicular a c t i v i t y can not o r w i l l l i k e l y not be reduced. The various types of screening structures are preferred and are e f f e c t i v e to varying degrees.  As stated previously, the a c t u a l e f f e c t i v e -  ness of a screening structure depends both on i t s inherent p h y s i c a l c a p a b i l i t y ( e f f i c i e n c y ) and on i t s l o c a t i o n on the resident's property. From the case study i t was shown that people tended to p r e f e r natural vegetation type screening such as hedges, trees, and landscaping, more than the man-made structures.  The trees and hedges, which were more common  i n Area 1 than i n other areas, provided e f f e c t i v e and preferable v i s u a l  114 screening on c e r t a i n l o t s . Besides performing the v i s u a l screening function, screening structures are advantageous f o r other reasons.  The vegetative type  structures e s p e c i a l l y , f o r example, can enhance the appearance of a neighbourhood.  This has the added benefit t o 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-  t i v e of personal household tastes and a r t i s t i c e f f o r t s .  Landscaping  i n p a r t i c u l a r can be arranged i n a variety of ways ways with a variety of d i f f e r e n t structures and y e t s t i l l be functional.  Screening structures  can add privacy t o c e r t a i n l o t s and thereby permit greater outdoor use of the property.  Structures such a s walls or fences can block out some  fumes but i n most cases t h e i r effectiveness i n t h i s regard i s n e g l i g i b l e . The vegetative type structures, through the process o f photosynthesis, provide oxygen to the urban environment.  Screening structures can be  advantageous f o r providing shade on a property, street, and neighbourhood. F i n a l l y , the enhancement o f the appearance of a neighbourhood with screening structures has the supporting influence of enhancing  visual  harmony f o r the motor vehicle operator and passenger. V i s u a l screening structures do, however, have t h e i r disadvantages as well.  For example, screening structures on corner l o t s can be  hazardous to d r i v i n g safety i f the structure i n t e r f e r e s with the vehicle operator's f i e l d of v i s i o n .  Hedges tend to c o l l e c t dust and can provide  an a t t r a c t i v e habitat f o r pests and i n s e c t s . drapes a l l require occasional maintenance.  Fences, hedges, trees, and High stone walls are e f f e c t i v e  but are not generally compatible with the appearance o f most urban  115  neighbourhoods;  especially those where the lot sizes are small.  An  attitudinal disadvantage of the vegetative type structures i s that unless they are of a sufficient size when they are planted, there i s a time lag before they grow to become adequate enough to perform the screening function.  A major disadvantage for man-made structures i s 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 final  disadvantage of a l l visual screening structures, (except perhaps to a degree, stone walls-and certain raised landscaping designs) i s 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) qualities of an area.  Structures should enhance the particular visual Visual screening structures should also be designed  to reduce other adverse motor vehicle effects such as noise, dust, and fumes. Extensive visual screening i s 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  WALL  S  A  N  ANO  D  F  E  N  HEJD6E  C  E  ILLUSTRATION 9 V i s u a l Screening Structures Outside Appearances  -  Inside and  121  lis  126  more open to the v i s u a l surroundings.  In summary then, v i s u a l screening  structures are suggested f o r those residents that have indicated that they are v i s u a l l y disturbed by the presence of motor vehicles, (a s i t u a t i o n over which they generally have l i t t l e control except the extreme perogatives of e i t h e r staying indoors with the drapes drawn or r e l o c a t i n g to an area of higher v i s u a l q u a l i t y ) .  126a  REFERENCES - CHAPTER III "*"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. L i n t e l l , 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 i n the Urban Environment", (University of California, College of Environmental Design, January 1963)'  •^R. Likert, "A Technique f o r 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 f o r Occupations i n 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 f o r the Social Sciences, (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970), 9  I b i d . , pp. 153-154.  "^D. Appleyard and M. Lintell, op. c i t . , p. 98. n  i b i d . , p. 99.  12  J. Antoniou, Environmental Management: Planning f o r Traffic, (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1971), PP« 19-2lT "^Ministry f Transport, Traffic i n Towns, (The Buchanan Report), (London: H.M.S.O., 1963), p. 221. 14 1 Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 34. 0  ^M.O.T. (Buchanan Report), op. c i t . , p. 119* ^Antoniou, op. c i t . , p. 9« ^San Francisco City Planning Department, "The Urban Design Plan for the Comprehensive Plan of San Francisco", 1971, cited i n Appleyard and L i n t e l l , op. c i t . , pp. 99-100.  126b  REFERENCES - CHAPTER III (continued) 1 ft  Appleyard and Lintell, op. c i t . , 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  SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE A T T I T U D E S AND V I S U A L INTRUSION University o f B r i t i s h Columbia  Attitudinal  Information  When 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 many 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 to you In making the decision to l i v e here. Rank a) Location with respect to work, shopping etc. 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) Character o f neighbourhood d) Advice o f the realtor e) P r i c e f) Resale value  ^rXUnllVtrZ^f  m»\ u n d e s i r a b l e  effects. Rank  a) b) c) d) e)  Vehicle noise Vehicle air pollution Visual disturbance of vehicles Vibrations caused by vehicles Vehicles reducing pedestrian safety  f)  Vehicles reducing property  value  Thinking o f your present neighbourhood t r y to rank the high (a) The t r a f f i c volume 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  , Is  following.  medium _  low .  Physical characteristics of traffic alfect the e n v J ^ » f J J ^ o f a n area, looking at the picture, please indicate the extent to which you are annoyed visually by each of the following, n  Not Noticeable  8  Noticeable Mildly Modbut not Annoying erately Annoying . Annoy*ng  Very Annoying  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 QNo 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 o.  mildly agree Q  .  neither agree nor disagree a •'  mildly disagree a  strongly disagree a  12'8  €, Visual disturbances from traffic are no worse In this neighbourhood than the last one I lived 1n (If applicable). 8  strongly agree  mildly agree  neither agree nor disagree  mildly strongly 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 • a  '  mildly agree  neither agree nor disagree  ' o  a  mildly disagree a  strongly disagree p  f. The visual characteristics of this residential environment were important in our decision to reside here. • Strongly 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 ' o he  mildly agree  mildly agree  o  neither agree nor disagree  o  mildly disagree a'  strongly disagree a  Included in the annual safety check of a motor vehicle there should  bt a check on its visual  strongly agree  appearance.  mildly agree-  neither agree m? disagree  mildly disagree  strongly disagree  lo At the present ttme tn this neighbourhood, parked vehicles are more annoying than isoving vehicles, strongly agree  mildly agree  neither agree Ror disagree  mildly disagree  strongly disagree  Would you please examine the photographs. If your view of the street was as portrayed in the pictures, what Is the number of the picture which portrays the maximum amount of traffic you would tolerate before you would consider moving.  8.. .  ROW I  -  PARKED VEHICLES ...  s then ture 1  Picture 1 Picture 2  •  D  o ROW II -  s than ture 1  Picture 3  Picture  Picture 4  a  a  Picture 5  1  a  a  D  More than 1  Picture 2  ROW III  Picture  3  Picture 4  Picture 5  o  -  a  PARKED AND MOVING VEHICLES  Picture 6  Picture 6  a  a More  s than Picture 1  Picture  a  Z  Picture 3  Picture 4  a  Q  Picture 5  Picture 6  a  a  a  a  Socio-Economic Characteristics of Sample Household:-  How long have you livad at this address?  Do  10. 11.  [  you own or  years  rent your present dwelling?  How many vehicles  are presently  cars  own  owned (or used)  neither  rent  by your  family?  ,  trucks (vans)  _______  nsotorcycles  f  12.  Where do  you most  often  park each of these vehicles?  car(s) on your property on the street in front of the house  truck(s)  (vans)  than  Picture 6  FACTUAL INFORMATION  9.  0  More than Picture 6 Picture 6  MOVING VEHICLES  a  ture 1  3  motorcycles  What Is your total household Income (Including income from a l l members of the family)?  $ 0 $ 6001 $ 12001 $ 18001  - 6000 - 12000 - 18000 - 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.  0-15  .  - 25 •26 - 40 40 - 60 IS  _  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 Sex:  female  position held or type of work)  f32L  5  (a  3  4-  APPENDIX C THE COMPONENTS OF THE URBAN PLANNING PROCESS V i s u a l I n t r u s i o n Example  Components Problem/opportunity d e f i n i t i o n .  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 E n v i r o n m e n t a l Q u a l i t y .  Data c o l l e c t i o n t o p e r m i t t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f alternative policies.  A t t i t u d i n a l s u r v e y s , f i e l d measurements and observations.  Evaluation of preliminary 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 a t a s e t of relevant a l t e r n a t i v e s .  (1)  S e l e c t i o n of appropriate p o l i c y makers.  Say  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 i m p l e m e n t i n g mechanisms.  decision  of a l t e r n a t i v e  (2)  (a) (b)  Maintain present a c c e s s i b i l i t y , yet increase environmental q u a l i t y . Decrease a c c e s s i b i l i t y t h e r e b y i n c r e a s i n g environmental q u a l i t y . (1) o f component 3. V i s u a l screening structures. 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 d e s i g n change.  S e l e c t i o n o f a p p r o p r i a t e implementing mechanism.  Say  (a) of component 5.  Program d e s i g n and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .  Who g e t s s c r e e n i n g , who pays, what k i n d s o f screening structures, e t c .  P o l i c y outcome a n a l y s i s and r e v i e w of t h e planning process.  V i s u a l s c r e e n i n g s t r u c t u r e s enhance t h e v i s u a l appearance f o r r e s i d e n t s o f neighbourhoods and i n c r e a s e v i s u a l harmony f o r v e h i c l e o p e r a t o r s and p a s s e n g e r s .  138;  APPENDIX D VISUAL INTRUSIONS AND PLANNING  R<=ceP"Ko<\ or  of '*\Q-\QC  s'cr-eerM'vvv -HI  ]  Sys+eiYA u Kurd A e c / s i OA  J \ A-H,'-rucU_  UAWIA  .  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)  Noise  RANK  2  1  IMPORTANT  3  11  SOME IMPORTANCE  *  5  7  «  J  3.4  41  38  40  20  8  4  228  39  2.4  2.2  35 0 212  31  45  38  36  37  33  36  33  25  1  0  30  11  19  98  110  107  113  30  33  30  34  33  108  194  54  14  60  34  27  5 35  ROW MARGINAL  14 13  35  24  49  53  10  Column Marginal  Prop. V a l .  2.7 49  14  27  Safety  13  4  27  98  LITTLE IMPORTANCE  Visual  Air  81  — \  Vibes  634  98  Degrees of freedom (d.f.) = 10 0 05 (  X  c r i t i c a l  v a  l  u e  )  =  18.31  X, . v (calculated value) = 281.44 (matrix) 2  chisquare observed expected  APPENDIX E-2 ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION ( A b s o l u t e f r e q u e n c y o f responses t o Q 1 from Areas 1, 2, and 3)  RANK  Location  2  Important  3  /  ^  7  Some Importance  ?  Little  g  J  Importance  Column Marginal  Price  40  41  36  39  0.4  3.8  0.9  14.2  0.7  38  39  16.9  112  115  X^  13.8  101  114  0.3  28.1 201  62 32  33  109  222 35  4.4  31  102  38  37  21  87 35  34  35  34  13  10  8  38  235  38  42  12  44  50  35  Row Marginal  28.7 5  46  3  Resale  1.2  30.3  41  20.8 5  Realtor  6.2 57  52  72  j  Character  3.6  23 C  Visual Appear.  105  657  ( c r i t i c a l v a l u e ) •? 18.31  X, . ( c a l c u l a t e d v a l u e ) = 273.3 (matrix) 2  N  hr 1  O'  APPENDIX E-3 VISUAL SCREENING STRUCTURES ( A b s o l u t e f r e q u e n c y o f responses t o Q 5 from Areas 1, 2, and 3)  2  > Effective )  40  39  0.2  {  Some  ^  j  Effectiveness  39  38  24.3  0.3 5  g  7 \  Little Effectiveness  Column Marginal  116  114  X  n  n c ;  0.6  39  10.8  25.9  115  111  ( c r i t i c a l v a l u e ) = 18.31  X, . . ( c a l c u l a t e d v a l u e ) = 173.7 (matrix) 1  37  39  13.8  1.3 220  44 37  35  37  232  38  57  6  116  0.0  0.0 36  39  40  38  34  37  37  36  5.8  67  7  39  40  24  42  58  39  236  34  18  Row Marginal  0.9  10.5  32.4 76  24  67  17  Trees  5.8  18.2  12-4  10.5 ^  Drapes  Hedges  Fence  RANK  Landscape.  Wall  116  688  BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS A l l p o r t , F.H. Theories of Perception and the Concept of Structure. New York: John Wiley, 1955' Antoniou, J . Environmental Management: Toronto: McGraw-Hill,- 1971.  Planning f o r T r a f f i c .  Appleyard, D., Lynch, K., and Meyer, J.R. The View from the Road. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1965. Bern, D.J. B e l i e f s , Attitudes, and Human A f f a i r s . Brooks-Cole, 1970.  Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a :  Claus, R.J., and Claus, K.E. V i s u a l Environment. MacMillan, 1971.  Toronto:  Collier-  Stanford':  Stanford  Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. 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. Wiley, 1958. Higbee, E.  The Squeeze:  C i t i e s Without Space.  New York:  New York:  John  Morrow,  i960.  Hunt, E.B. Concept Learning: An Information Processing Problem. New York: John Wiley, 1962. Hyman, H.H. Survey Design and Analysis: New York: Free Press, 1957.  P r i n c i p l e Cases and Procedures.  Jacobs, J . Death and L i f e o f Great American C i t i e s . House, 1961.  New York:  Random  Krech, D., and Crutchfield, R.S. Theories and Problems of S o c i a l Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948. Lynch, K.  The Image of the City.  Meyerson;  Martin; and Banfield, E.C. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1956^  Nairn, I . The American Landscape.  Cambridge:  New York:  Neisser, B... Cognitive Psychology. New York:  M.I.T. Press,  i960.  The Job Ahead.  Cambridge:  Random House, 1965. Appleton-Century-Crofts,  1967. Nie, N.H.j Bent, D.H.; and H u l l , C.H. S t a t i s t i c a l Package f o r the S o c i a l Sciences. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1970.  143  Randall, J.H., and Buchler, J . Philosophy: An Introduction. Barnes and Noble, 1942. Santayana, B.G.  The Sense of Beauty.  New York:  Dover,  New York:  1955•  Segall, M.H.j Campbell, D.T.j and Herkovits, M.J. The Influence of Culture on V i s u a l Perception. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966. Shaw, M.E., and Costanzo, P.R. McGraw-Hill, 1970.  Theories of S o c i a l Psychology.  Wild, J . Introduction to R e a l i s t i c Philosophy. New York: Row, 1948.  Toronto:  Harper and  B. ARTICLES Appleyard, D. "City Designers and the P l u r a l i s t i c C i t y " . Regional Planning f o r Development, ed. by L. Rodwin e t 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 . " L i v i n g Patterns and Attitude Survey". Highway Research Record. No. 187, Washington, D.C.: Higheay Research Board, 1967* Bross, I.D.J. "Nature of Decision". Free Press, 1953-  Design f o r Decision.  New York:  Galbraith, J.K. "The Dependence E f f e c t and S o c i a l Balance". Private Wants and Needs, ed. by E.S. Phelps. New York: W.W. Morton,  1962^ Hallowell, A.I. " C u l t u r a l Factors i n the S t r u c t u r a l i z a t i o n of Perception." . S o c i a l Psychology a t 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: V i s u a l B l i g h t - C i v i c Neglect". V i s u a l B l i g h t i n America. Washington, D.C: Association of American Geographers, 1973* Lowenthal, D. "The Offended Eye: Towards an Excresential Geography". V i s u a l B l i g h t i n America. Washington, D.C: Association o f 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: Architectural Press, 1965.  S.W.I.  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 i n Interpretation". Visual Blight i n America. Washington, D.C: Association of. American Geographers, 1973•  Whorf, B.L. "Science and Linguistics". Readings i n 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. British Columbia, 1974.  Vancouver,  City of Vancouver. Zoning and Development By-Law. No. 3575» British Columbia, 1974.  Vancouver,  Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board. Thorn Press, 1965.  Toronto:  Metropolitan Toronto.  Ministry of Transport. Traffic i n Towns. London: Stationery Office, 1963«  Her Majesty's  D. JOURNALS Anolevard. D., and L i n t e l l , 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 S o c i a l Psychology,  No. 38 (1949). Berlyne, D.E. "Recent Developments i n Piaget*s Work". of Educational Psychology, No. 27 (1957)•  B r i t i s h Journal  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 I n s t i t u t e , Vol. 50, No. 7 (July/August 1964). Doob, L.W.  "The Behavior of Attitudes".  Psychological Review,  No. 47,  (1947). Gibson, J . J . '.'The V i s u a l F i e l d and the V i s u a l World* A Reply t o Professor Boring". Psychological Review, No. 59 (1952). Hudson, W.  " P i c t o r a l Depth Perception i n Sub-Sultural Groups i n A f r i c a " . Journal of S o c i a l Psychology, No. 52 (i960).  L i k e r t , R. "A Technique f o r the Measurement o f Attitudes". Archives of Psychology, ed. by R.S. Woodsworth, No. 140 (1932). Samuels, I. " R e t i c u l a r Mechanisms and Behavior".  Psychological B u l l e t i n ,  No. 65 (1959). Zajonc, R.B. "The Process of Cognitive Tunig i n Communication". of Abnormal Psychology, No. 6l (i960).  E. Davis, K.  MAGAZINES  "The Urbanization of the Human Population". Vol. 213, No. 3 (September 1965).  F. NEWSPAPERS The Vancouver Sun.  March 15, 1968.  Journal  S c i e n t i f i c American,  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 i n 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 f o r 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