UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Townhouses in single family areas : an analysis of public attitudes towards increasing density Battles, Robert Anthony Marvin 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_A8 B38.pdf [ 10.28MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093900.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093900-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093900-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093900-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093900-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093900-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093900-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093900-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093900.ris

Full Text

TOWNHOUSES IN SINGLE FAMILY AREAS' AN ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARDS INCREASING DENSITY by ROBERT ANTHONY MARVIN BATTLES B.A. ( E c on . ) , U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a , 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Schoo l of Community and Regiona l P lann ing We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r equ i r ed s tandard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 (c) Robert Anthony Marvin Battles, 1976 In p resen t i ng t h i s t he s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, I agree tha t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r re fe rence and s tudy . I f u r t h e r agree that permiss ion f o r ex tens i ve copy ing of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s en t a t i v e s . I t i s understood that copy ing o r p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed w i thout my w r i t t e n pe r -m i s s i o n . School of Community and Regional P lann ing The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Way 3, 1976 ABSTRACT The past two decades have seen the c on s t r u c t i o n of an i n c r e a s i n g number of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs i n s i n g l e f am i l y a r eas . Two po s s i b l e reasons f o r p e rm i t t i n g development to h igher d e n s i t i e s are to make more e f f i c i e n t use of land and mun i c ipa l s e r v i c e s , and to a l l ow new r e s i d e n t s , e s p e c i a l l y those w i th c h i l d r e n , to l i v e i n a s o c i a l l y s t a b l e r e s i d e n t i a l environment. There remains, however, widespread r e s i s t an ce to change w i t h i n e s t a b l i s h ed s i n g l e f am i l y neighbourhoods. P lanners are thus o f t en con f ron ted w i t h the problem of a ch i e v i ng i n -c reases i n dens i t y wh i l e m in im i z i ng f e e l i n g s of resentment towards incoming r e s i den t s and a m i s t r u s t of government on the pa r t of the e x i s t i n g r e s i d en t s . Th is study focuses upon homeowners' a t t i t u d e s towards townhouses cons t r u c t ed i n e x i s t i n g s i n g l e f am i l y zones. The pr imary source of i n f o rma t i on i s persona l i n t e r v i ews conducted w i th a t o t a l of 75 s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d e n t s . The i n t e r v i ews were equa l l y d i v i d ed between th ree V i c t o r i a neighbourhoods: two i n which a townhouse p r o j e c t had been b u i l t and one i n which no change had o c cu r r ed . Th i s survey f o l l owed a l i t e r a t u r e review which s t r e s s e s the va r y i ng v iewpo in ts from which the response to the i n t r o d u c t i o n of new hous ing types i n t o a r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhood has been examined. The purposes of the study were: a) to determine which aspects of townhouse p r o j e c t s are of the g rea te s t concern to sur round ing r e s i d e n t s , i i i b) to a s c e r t a i n i f and how a t t i t u d e s are mod i f i ed by exposure to a totunhouse p ro j e c t and i t s i n h a b i t a n t s , c) to eva luate the pub l i c hear ing as a dev ice f o r measuring community a t t i t u d e s towards zon ing changes, d) to recommend c r i t e r i a which cou ld guide p lanners i n t h e i r e v a l u a -t i o n of s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t p r oposa l s . Survey r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d tha t the most troublesome aspects of town-houses were t h e i r e f f e c t s on v iews , p r i v a c y , and t r a f f i c . Another f i n d i n g was tha t both negat ive and p o s i t i v e s h i f t s of a t t i t u d e s had oc cu r r ed . Increased concern was generated by the des ign of the p r o -j e c t , wh i l e concerns lessened i n r e l a t i o n to the i s sue s of p r i v a c y , neighbourhood s t a t u s , the type of people a t t r a c t e d to townhouses, p r o -per ty va l ues , maintenance, p a r k i ng , and open green spaces . In most cases these s h i f t s were exp la ined by s i t e and p r o j e c t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r by the f a c t tha t c e r t a i n f e a r s had not been r e a l i z e d . The i n t e r v i ew r e s u l t s a l s o i n d i c a t e d tha t the pub l i c hear ing i s an adequate dev ice f o r measuring the range of res iden ts* concerns . Neve r the l e s s , i t was conc luded tha t the a t t i t u d e survey i s a more app rop r i a t e t o o l s i n c e i t reaches a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of neighbourhood r e s i d e n t s . The f i n a l chapter desc r ibes a s e t of p l ann ing gu i d e l i n e s tha t shou ld be adopted as the bas i c c r i t e r i a f o r a s se s s i ng townhouses and the a c t u a l p r o j e c t approva l p rocess . The need to formula te a mun i c i -p a l rezon ing p o l i c y based on the above c r i t e r i a i s a l s o d i s cu s sed . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i LIST OF MAPS v i i LIST OF FIGURES v i i i LIST OF TABLES i x ACKNOWLEDGEWENTS x i Chapter I . INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 The Problem 3 Scope and Purpose of the Study 3 Relevance of the Study 5 Conc lus ion 7 I I . REVIEW OF RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES 9 P h y s i c a l Determinism 9 S t r e s s i n the R e s i d e n t i a l Environment 12 T e r r i t o r i a l i t y 14 The Neighbourhood Concept and the Format ion of 16 C i t i z e n s Groups The P u b l i c Hear ing as a Measure of P u b l i c Op in ion 18 A t t i t u d e and Pre fe rence S tud ie s Re la ted to Town- 20 houses Summary and Conc lus ions 28 V Chapter Page I I I . ATTITUOE MEASUREWENT 31 D e f i n i t i o n s and Measurement Concepts 31 A t t i t u d e Change 34 Conc lus ion 36 IV. METHODOLOGY 37 S e l e c t i o n of the Study Areas 37 The Design of the In te rv i ew Schedules 44 Sample S e l e c t i o n and the In te rv i ew 51 The Respondents 53 Conc lus ion 57 V. RESEARCH FINDINGS 59 A t t i t u d e s Towards Townhouse L i v i n g and P r o j e c t 59 Res idents The Nature and Ranking of Res i den t s ' Concerns 62 Residents* Design Pre fe rences 70 The Ex ten t of A t t i t u de Change 74 Pub l i c Hear ings and A t t i t u d e s Towards Future 82 Townhouse Cons t ruc t i on Summary 86 V I . CONCLUSIONS> IMPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING Conc lus ions Recommendations 89 90 93 v i Page APPENDICES APPENDIX A. LETTER OF INTRODUCTION 100 APPENDIX B. SURVEY OF HOMEOWNERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS 101 TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS (Area Without Touin-houses) APPENDIX C. SURVEY OF HOMEOWNERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS 109 TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS (Area With Townhouses) APPENDIX D. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATE- 118 WENT SHEET IN THE HAULTAIN AREA APPENDIX E. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATE- 119 WENT SHEET IN THE VIC. WEST AREA APPENDIX F. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATE- 120 WENT SHEET IN THE CEDAR HILL AREA BIBLIOGRAPHY 121 v i i LIST OF MAPS Nap Page 1. Loca t ion of Study Areas i n the C i t y of V i c t o r i a 40 2. Hau l t a i n Study Area 41 3. V i c . West Study Area 42 4 . Cedar H i l l Study Area 43 v i i i LIST OF FIGURES F igu re Page 1. View of Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t from North Da i ry Road 46 2. Rear view of Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t from the backyard 46 of a home on Clawthorpe S t r e e t 3. Rear view of Rochdale P l ace u n i t s i n V i c t o r i a West 47 4. View between rows of Rochdale P lace u n i t s 47 5. One example of a c h i l d r e n ' s p lay area i n a townhouse 48 development i n the M u n i c i p a l i t y of Saan ich 6. An example of po s s i b l e e x t e r i o r des ign f ea tu re s i n a 48 Saan ich townhouse p r o j e c t 7 . Recent ly cons t ruc ted townhouses i n the M u n i c i p a l i t y 49 of Saan ich 8. F r o n t a l view of a sma l l townhouse p ro j e c t 49 i n the M u n i c i p a l i t y of Oak Bay 9 . An example of l andscap ing i n a Vancouver townhouse p r o j e c t 50 i x LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Study Area C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 39 2. Sex of Respondent 54 3. Age of Respondent (By Observat ion) 54 4. Stage i n L i f e Cyc l e 55 5. Household S i z e 55 6. H ighest Leve l of Educat ion Completed 56 7. To t a l Household Income 56 8. Occupat iona l S ta tus of Household Head 56 9 . Tenure 57 10. Length of Residence i n Present Dwe l l i ng 57 10. Ques t i on : Do you th ink that townhouse r e s i d en t s 60 and the occupants of s i n g l e f am i l y homes have d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? 12. Ques t ion : To your knowledge, what k i nd of i n d i v i - 61 dua ls l i v e i n townhouses? 13 . Statement Sheet 63 14. Statement Ranking 64 15. Key References and Phrases 69 16. Design Pre fe rences 71 17. Reasons f o r Choice of Home 76 18. Length of Residence i n Re l a t i on to Townhouses 76 19. Weighted Statement Scores 77 20. Persona l Assessment of A t t i t u d e Change 79 21 . D i f f i c u l t y i n S e l l i n g Home 81 X Table Page 22. W i l l i n gne s s to Buy i n Same Loca t ion 81 23 . Number of Households Thought to Have Moved Because 81 of the Townhouses 24. A t t i t u d e s Towards Future Townhouse Cons t r u c t i on 83 25. C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Res iden t s ' P o s i t i o n 83 x i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would l i k e to express h i s s i n c e r e app r e c i a t i o n to Dr . Henry Hightower and to Dr . Ann McAfee f o r t h e i r thorough a s s i s t ance and many h e l p f u l comments dur ing the p repa ra t i on of t h i s t h e s i s . I a l s o extend my thanks to o ther f a c u l t y members who o f f e r ed t h e i r ad -v i c e and c on s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m . I express my g r a t i t ude to Deane S t rong i tharm of the V i c t o r i a C i t y P lann ing Department f o r h i s generos i t y i n p r o v i d i ng maps and i n f o rm -a t i o n . L a s t l y , I would extend a s i n ce r e thank you to the r e s i den t s of the C i t y of V i c t o r i a who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s s t udy . 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Th is study i s concerned w i th the a t t i t u d e s of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s to medium dens i t y m u l t i - f a m i l y hous ing p r o j e c t s that are cons t ruc ted i n otherwise s i n g l e f am i l y zones. A v a r i e t y of i n t e r v i e w -i n g techn iques are emphasized as the most app rop r i a te means of examin-i n g the i n t e n s i t y and s t a b i l i t y of these a t t i t u d e s . Subsequent ana l y -ses of the research f i n d i n g s prov ide the bas i s f o r recommendations to a s s i s t p lanners i n the f i e l d s of neighbourhood land use p lann ing and hous ing . Background H i s t o r i c a l l y , the mix ing of housing types has not been en -couraged i n Canada. Such a pa t t e rn of r e s i d e n t i a l development has, i n f a c t , been purpose ly d iscouraged through the enforcement of zon ing by-laws . Zoning was o r i g i n a l l y conce ived to keep incompat ib le uses from imp ing ing on one another and to prevent o v e r - i n t e n s i v e development of one s i t e from impos ing burdens on i t s neighbours (He i l b r u n , 1974s 309) . As such , i t has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been accepted by most p lanners as a l e g i t i m a t e way of r e gu l a t i n g the land market by reduc ing the e f f e c t s of e x t e r n a l i t i e s . On the o ther hand, zon ing has a l s o been used by some m u n i c i p a l i t i e s f o r ex c l u s i ona ry purposes; the i n t e n t be ing not to c o r -r e c t market f a i l u r e , but to d i s c r im i n a t e aga in s t c e r t a i n forms of land uses . 2 The past two decades have seen the c on s t r u c t i o n of an i n c r e a s -i n g number of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs i n s i n g l e f am i l y a reas . In suburban r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s , f o r example, l ow - r i s e apartments have t y p i c a l l y rep laced o l de r s i n g l e f am i l y homes. Redevelopment to a h igher dens i t y has occur red as a r e s u l t of r i s i n g land and development c o s t s . However, t h i s i s not the on ly development p a t t e r n . Townhouses, i n p a r t i c u l a r , have been b u i l t on land p rev i ous l y bypassed by deve lopers . This i s an example of i n f i l l b u i l d i n g or a f i r s t use r a the r than redevelopment. To avo id con fu s i on , i t shou ld be noted that the development pa t te rns desc r i bed above are l e s s a pp l i c a b l e to i nne r c i t y ne ighbour-hoods. In these areas the t rend i s towards wholesa le redevelopment as apartment zones rep lace areas of s i n g l e f am i l y homes conver ted to m u l t i -f am i l y use . From the p l anne r ' s pe r spec t i v e , i n c reases i n suburban r e s i d en -t i a l d e n s i t i e s have been caused by s t rong u r ban i z a t i on p ressu res . A very s e n s i t i v e index of these growth pressures i n Canada i s the p r i c e of hous ing . I t has been the most v i s i b l e i n d i c a t o r of an inadequate supply of s e r v i c ed land i n met ropo l i t an areas i n the face of a burgeoning de-mand. Yet , desp i te i n f l a t i o n a r y i nc reases i n the cos t of a l l housing components, i n c l u d i n g the cos t of borrowing money, many Canadians con-t i nue to a sp i r e to own a s i n g l e detached home. Th i s i s , however, no longer a r e a l i s t i c hope f o r moderate income f a m i l i e s l i v i n g i n c i t i e s such as Toronto, Ottawa, and Vancouver. I t has thus become apparent that medium dens i t y housing w i l l become the only f e a s i b l e housing a l t e r -na t i ve f o r a l a r g e r p ropo r t i on of f a m i l i e s . Fac to r s other than cos t have 3 a l so l e d to the cons i de r a t i on of a v a r i e t y of hous ing t ypes . These f a c -t o r s i n c l ude i n c r e a s i n g numbers of c h i l d l e s s coup les who do not neces-s a r i l y view s i n g l e f am i l y homes as e i t h e r necessary o r app rop r i a t e , and the cos t s of suburban sprawl i n terms of a e s t h e t i c s , resource consump-t i o n , and l o s se s of a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d . The response to these f a c t o r s has been a growth i n the c on s t r u c t i o n of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g s , rang ing from h igh r i s e apartments and garden apartments to rowhouses. The Problem The s o c i a l and economic f a c t o r s desc r i bed above c o n s t i t u t e the bas i c r a t i o n a l e f o r p e rm i t t i n g the development of new and o l d r e s i d e n t i a l areas a t h igher d e n s i t i e s . There remains, however, widespread r e s i s t an ce to change w i t h i n e s t a b l i s h ed s i n g l e f am i l y neighbourhoods. P lanners are thus o f ten con f ronted w i th the problem of a ch i e v i ng ; i n c reases i n dens i t y wh i l e m in im i z i ng f e e l i n g s of resentment towards incoming r e s i den t s and a m i s t r u s t of government on the pa r t of the e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t s . Th is problem i s compounded by a l a c k of research on a t t i t u d e s towards some forms of h igher dens i t y development and how these a t t i t u d e s may be e va l u -ated by p l anne r s . Scope and Purpose of the Study Th is study focuses upon homeowners* a t t i t u d e s to townhouses cons t ruc ted i n e x i s t i n g s i n g l e f am i l y zones. The cho ice of t h i s narrow research pe r spec t i ve was i n f l u en ced by two c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . F i r s t l y , there i s c u r r e n t l y a p re s s i ng need f o r the type of g round-or iented f am i l y 4 accommodation prov ided by townhouse u n i t s . Second ly , because of p ub l i c o p p o s i t i o n , the assumption was made that i t i s more d i f f i c u l t to i n s e r t mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs i n t o e s t ab l i s h ed neighbourhoods than i t i s to i n c l ude them as an i n t e g r a l pa r t of a new r e s i d e n t i a l development. In the former ca se , homes are purchased w i th the expec ta t i on tha t the s i n g l e f am i l y cha ra c t e r of the neighbourhood w i l l remain unchanged. As a r e s u l t , r e -s i s t a n c e to mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs i s u sua l l y s t reng thened . Th i s problem does not a r i s e i n the l a t t e r case s i n ce the p rospec t i ve buyer of a de-tached home i s aware of the mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs before the de c i s i o n to purchase i s made. At the ou t se t of t h i s study a survey of the l i t e r a t u r e i s p r e -sen ted . The pr imary f u n c t i o n of t h i s survey i s to s t r e s s the va ry i ng v iewpo in ts from which the response to the i n t r o d u c t i o n of new housing types i n t o a r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhood has been examined. I t s purpose i s not to present an exhaust i ve d i s c u s s i on of crowding i n the r e s i d e n -t i a l environment o r of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g l o c a t i o n s t u d i e s . Reviews of t h i s nature a l ready e x i s t (Rap;opor t , 1975; Howard, 1974; F i s c he r e t a l , 1974; Andzans, 1973; E a r l , 1970). A second f un c t i o n of the l i t e r a t u r e survey i s to r evea l the ex tent to which c e r t a i n groups - at tempt to i n f l u e n c e p l ann ing and land use d e c i s i o n s . P a r t i c u l a r c on s i de r a t i on i s g iven to the persons who are l i k e l y to appear a t a p ub l i c hear ings on rezon ing proposa l s as w e l l as to the i s sues which are u s u a l l y r a i s e d . The purpose of t h i s approach i s to i n d i c a t e the u t i l i t y of the pub l i c hear ing as a means by which p lanners may assess the a t t i t u d e s of a community towards zon ing chan-5 ges. The research data of t h i s study was obta ined by means of pe r -sona l i n t e r v i ews conducted w i th a t o t a l of 75 s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d e n t s . The i n t e r v i ews were equa l l y d i v i d ed between three V i c t o r i a ne ighbour-hoods: two i n which a townhouse p r o j e c t had been b u i l t and one i n which no change had oc cu r r ed . A l l three neighbourhoods were chosen on the bas i s of t h e i r s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s wh i l e the townhouse p ro j e c t s were s e l e c t e d on the bas i s of t h e i r des i gn , s i z e , and o r i e n t a t i o n to sur round ing homes. The purpose of the i n t e r v i ews was: a) to determine which aspects of townhouse p r o j e c t s are of the g rea tes t concern to sur round ing r e s i d en t s : b) to a s c e r t a i n i f and how a t t i t u d e s are mod i f i ed by exposure to a townhouse p ro j e c t and i t s i n h a b i t a n t s ; c) to make recommendations conce rn ing : i ) the nature of a rezon ing p o l i c y which would reduce the negat ive e f f e c t s of redevelopment upon the i n d i v i d u a l and the community; i i ) c o n s u l t a t i o n w i th the pub l i c p r i o r to r e -zonings and the u t i l i t y of p ub l i c hea r ings ; i i i ) s i t e c r i t e r i a f o r townhouse p r o j e c t s ; i v ) des ign c r i t e r i a f o r townhouse p r o j e c t s . Relevance of the Study Smith and McCann (1975: 30) have r a i s e d a number of the ques-t i o n s i d e n t i f i e d by the preced ing d i s c u s s i o n : Is r e a c t i n g to the p l eas and demands of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t groups a l l tha t can be done i n the name of p lann ing? S i m i l a r i l y , can not l o c a t i o n p o l i c i e s be drawn up which 6 weigh the need f o r new accommodation i n e x i s t i n g neighbourhoods aga i n s t the needs of the people a l ready l i v i n g there? A d d i t i o n a l l y , shou ld i t not be po s s i b l e to a n t i c i p a t e the pressures f o r change and to fo recas t* how they w i l l a f f e c t the r e s i d e n t i a l environment? Some of the answers to these ques t ions are now be ing sought through exper imenta t ion (Koen ig , 1975: 7 1 ) . Under the ausp ices of the Grea te r Vancouver Reg iona l D i s -t r i c t (GVRD) P lann ing Department, a "Compact Housing Program" has been i n i t i a t e d which i s des igned to i n t roduce and t e s t the s u i t a b i l i t y of d i f f e r e n t forms of medium dens i t y development i n the Grea te r Vancouver a r e a . The c r i t e r i a e s t a b l i s h ed to judge these developments i n c l ude the impact of a p r o j e c t on i t s su r round ings . A r e l a t e d c h e c k - l i s t of c on -s i d e r a t i o n s emphasizes the importance of complementary l andscap ing , e c o l o g i c a l s e n s i t i v i t y , harmonious s c a l e , pe rce i ved d en s i t y , and s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n . A f u r t h e r dimension to the i s s ue of dens i t y i n c reases e x i s t s i n B r i t i s h Co lumbia. I t i s the p o s s i b i l i t y tha t some m u n i c i p a l i t i e s who have been very r e l u c t a n t to accept some forms of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ng s w i l l be g iven no cho i ce by the P r o v i n c i a l Government. A recent r epo r t s t a t e s tha t The zon ing by- law has been desc r i bed as a dev ice f o r making sure tha t the poor people l i v e i n the next muni-c i p a l i t y . Rather than damning these a t t i t u d e s as un -c h a r i t a b l e , i t might we l l bs recogn ized tha t they are p e r f e c t l y n a t u r a l and are l i k e l y to be he l d by l o c a l c oun c i l s r ega rd less of t h e i r p o l i t i c a l po i n t of v iew. . . . We cannot ob j e c t to the prov ince s u b s t i t u t i n g i t s view f o r tha t of the mun i c i p a l i t y i n the sho r t te rm. Th i s cou ld take the form of s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t approva ls but might a l s o dea l w i t h genera l development s tanda rds . . . • There are l a rge b u i l t up areas i n the c i t i e s w i th 7 u n d e r u t i l i z e d schoo l s and a tuealth of s e r v i c e s i n roads , underground s e r v i c e s and indeed a s o c i a l wea l th i n the ex i s tence of s t ab l e communities t ha t work w e l l . We do not suggest tha t these communities be dest royed by h i g h -dens i t y apartments. They cou ld and i n our view should be prepared to accommodate some modest popu la t i on i n -c r ease , through some convers ions and i n f i l l b u i l d i n g . ( i n t e rdepa r tmen ta l Study Team on Housing and Rents , 19755 68,69) The lack of research i n t h i s f i e l d i s acknowledged by a number of au tho r s . Smith and McCann (19751 30) , f o r example, s t r e s s the gene-r a l need f o r Canadian re sea r ch . They cau t i on tha t the urban problems of American and Canadian c i t i e s are s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t and f o r c e -f u l l y conclude tha t conven t i ona l t h i n k i n g about neighbourhood change shou ld be cha l l enged s i n ce i t i s l a r g e l y de r i ved from American s o c i o -l o g i s t s and land economists . The reader shou ld a l s o r e a l i z e that the ma jo r i t y of a t t i t u d e and preference s t u d i e s , most noteab ly those by M i che l son , have i n v e s t i -gated the adapt ive a b i l i t i e s of persons upon moving to a new env i r on -ment. R e l a t i v e l y few surveys have s y s t e m a t i c a l l y examined homeowners' a t t i t u d e s when the i n d i v i d u a l has remained s t a t i o n a r y wh i l e the env i r on -ment has changed about him. Or, when such s t ud i e s have been attempted ( E a r l , 1970; Rodgers, 1972), the ana l y s i s has been a t a f a i r l y " g e n e r a l l e v e l and few e f f o r t s have been made to c o n t r o l f o r extraneous v a r i a b l e s . Conc lus ion Th is chapter has noted s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d e n t s ' oppos i t i on to changes i n t h e i r neighbourhood. Given good reasons f o r pe rm i t t i ng r e -development w i t h i n these neighbourhoods, p lanners are consequent ly con -f r on t ed w i th the genera l problem of m in im i z ing the negat ive e f f e c t s of 8 redevelopment upon the i n d i v i d u a l . A subset of t h i s problem which p l a n -ners must dea l w i th i s the negat ive e f f e c t s a s so c i a t ed w i th h igher den-s i t y redevelopment i n the form of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g s . The a t t i t u d e s of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s towards townhouses are focused upon i n t h i s study f o r two p r i n c i p l e reasons . There i s c u r r e n t -l y a p re s s i ng need f o r g round-or iented accommodation f o r couples w i th c h i l d r e n . P l anners , however, have a l i m i t e d knowledge of the s o c i a l impact of these dwe l l i ngs on a s i n g l e f am i l y neighbourhood. At the p r e -sent time one of the p r i n c i p l e means by which t h i s impact i s measured i s the pub l i c hea r i ng . Ye t , doubts have been expressed as to the value of such hea r i ngs . The l i t e r a t u r e presented i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter cons ide rs the v a r i e t y of research pe r spec t i ves r e l a t e d to the response of i n d i v i d u a l s to neighbourhood change as w e l l as the u t i l i t y of pub l i c hea r i ngs . Th i s i s done to c rea te a broad foundat ion f o r the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and c r i t i c a l e va l ua t i on of the ensuing r e sea r ch . 9 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES Th is chapter attempts to i d e n t i f y those research pe r spec t i ves which best exp l a i n the response of i n v i d i d u a l s to neighbourhood change. A number of behav iou ra l concepts and a s e r i e s of a t t i t u d e surveys are emphasized to c rea te a bas i s f o r unders tand ing the p o t e n t i a l impact of townhouses on ne ighbour ing s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d e n t s . The chapter begins w i th a d i s cu s s i on of the concept of p h y s i c a l determin ism. Th is concept i s focused upon to i n d i c a t e the po s s i b l e i n -f l uence of p h y s i c a l s t r u c t u r e s upon i n d i v i d u a l behaviour a t the ne i gh -bourhood l e v e l . Subsequent ly , the c l o s e l y l i n k e d concepts of s t r e s s and t e r r i t o r i a l i t y are examined. I t i s shown tha t s t r e s s may be caused by a c t u a l changes i n a neighbourhood, such as a reduc t i on i n the amount of space a v a i l a b l e to a r e s i d en t , or by the a n t i c i p a t i o n of change. The d i s c u s s i on of the t e r r i t o r i a l i t y concept r evea l s how i n d i v i d u a l s reac t or adapt to d i f f e r e n t forms of s t r e s s . The chapter concludes w i th a d e s c r i p t i o n of some exp l o ra to r y s t ud i e s which have attempted to i n t e r p r e t the response of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s to mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs cons t ruc ted i n t h e i r neighbourhoods. P h y s i c a l Determinism Many researchers have chosen the "ne ighbourhood" as t h e i r u n i t of s tudy . In t h i s s p a t i a l con tex t the concept of p h y s i c a l determinism i s o f ten mentioned. Th is concept desc r i bes the s i t u a t i o n i n which the p h y s i c a l environment, a c t i n g as an independent v a r i a b l e , p r ed i c t s o r c r ea t e s behav iour of a s p e c i f i c nature w i t h i n i t . Environment and behaviour are seen to i n t e r a c t i n a s t r i c t r e l a t i o n s h i p of cause and e f f e c t . In the not too d i s t a n t past neighbourhood p l ann ing focused almost e x c l u s i v e l y upon f a c t o r s such as s t r e e t p a t t e r n , l andscap ing , housing arrangement, and the d i s t r i b u t i o n of va r i ous s e r v i c e s . These elements were presented as encouraging o r d i s cou rag ing c e r t a i n types of behav iour among r e s i den t s o r as c o n t r i b u t i n g to any of a number of a t t i t u d i n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , rang ing from a sense of s e c u r i t y to one of r e l a x a t i o n (Lynch, 1971: 38 ) . Such b e l i e f s are now being t e s t ed by researchers i n the f i e l d of envi ronmenta l psycho logy . Th is r e l a t i v e l y new f i e l d attempts to e s t a b l i s h a r e l a t i o n s h i p between human behav iour and p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g on the bas i s of c o g n i t i v e mechanisms such as pe r -c e p t i o n . However, research i n t h i s area a t the neighbourhood l e v e l has been l a r g e l y i n c on c l u s i v e (Proshansky, 1970) . Other researchers have attempted to account f o r the f a c t t ha t the s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g of the neighbourhood was u sua l l y over looked or on ly cons idered i n d i r e c t l y . Kuper has noted tha t The f i n d i n g s i n regard to the s o c i a l consequences of the s p a t i a l arrangement of the houses, taken i n con junc t i on w i th the r e s u l t s of the American s t u d i e s , prov ide some ev idence i n support of the p l ann ing assumption of en-v i ronmenta l determin ism. But there i s no s imple mechani-c a l de te rm ina t i on ; the consequences depend f i n a l l y on the va lues and a t t i t u d e s of the r e s i den t s themselves . (Kuper, 1953: 17 Both Gans (1968) and K e l l e r (1972) have s t r e s s ed the e f f e c t s of s o c i a l 11 v a r i a b l e s upon i n d i v i d u a l s ' response to neighbourhood change. They a s s e r t tha t the homogeneity and l i f e s t y l e s of the groups brought t o -gether i n a neighbourhood exe r t the g rea tes t i n f l u en ce upon behav iour . A c co rd i ng l y , they c l a im tha t p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s and d i s tances can not always be manipulated to ach ieve s p e c i f i c r e s u l t s . At bes t , the p h y s i -c a l environment i s a f a c i l i t a t o r of behav iour . Research has thus caused p lanners to doubt the ex c l u s i v e determin ing i n f l uence : of the p h y s i c a l environment. I t i s now seldom assumed tha t some p o s i t i v e a l t e r a t i o n of behav iour can be accompl ished merely by changes i n neighbourhood des i gn . Ye t , w i t h the i n c r e a s i n g concern f o r the s o c i a l consequences of p l ann ing d e c i s i o n s , the p lanner i s c ons t r a i ned by the danger that some of h i s des igns o r those of the p r o j e c t s he approves may have negat ive behav iou ra l e f f e c t s . The C i t y of Edmonton P lann ing Department (1972: 19) has noted i n a ne ighbour-hood s a t i s f a c t i o n study tha t i f p h y s i c a l s t r u c t u r e s are des igned to f o r ce r egu l a r i n t e r a c t i o n between r e s i den t s i n an a r ea , there i s a h igh p r o b a b i l i t y tha t some form of s o c i a l pathology w i l l o ccu r . Th is might be a degree of p s y cho l og i c a l d i s comfo r t , such as a sense of c rowding, or open h o s t i l i t y . The po in t i s a l s o made that the p lanner can respond to these c ond i t i o n s i n two ways. He may attempt to use educat ion t e ch -n iques to a l t e r the p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s of r e s i den t s or he may concede that h i s r o l e i s a t best to c rea te a p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g which enhances the p r e -fe rences of the e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t s . The d i f f i c u l t y posed by these op-t i o n s i s the requirement tha t the p lanner be ab le to i s o l a t e those p h y s i -c a l and s o c i a l f ea tu res of b u i l d i n g s which are most impor tant to i n d i -12 v i dua l s i n a community. A l so c r i t i c a l i s an unders tand ing of how d i f f e r -ent b u i l d i n g s impinge on the p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s of ad jacent r e s i den t s as w e l l as how va r ious k inds of people ad jus t to these b u i l d i n g s . S t r e s s i n the R e s i d e n t i a l Environment The a b i l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l to cope w i th s t r e s s of va r y i ng types i s another pe r spec t i ve from which neighbourhood change has been v iewed. A l though the study of human s t r e s s i s s t i l l i n a fo rmat i ve s t age , most researchers would not qua r r e l w i t h the f o l l o w i n g bas i c d e f i -n i t i o n : s t r e s s a r i s i n g from nonsoc i a l ( p h y s i c a l ) sources may be s a i d to e x i s t when there i s a s u b s t a n t i a l imbalance be-tween a person ' s demand f o r space and the capac i t y of a p a r t i c u l a r r e s i d e n t i a l space to f u l f i l l t h i s e xpe c t a t i o n . S t r e s s from s o c i a l sources ( excess i ve s o c i a l s t imu l a t i o n ) i s s a i d to occur when there i s s u b s t a n t i a l imbalance be-tween env i ronmenta l demand and the response c a p a b i l i t y of the organism. (Howard, 1974: 120) Howard (1974: 102)has noted, however, tha t t h i s d e f i n i t i o n r equ i r e s two important q u a l i f i c a t i o n s : a) An env i ronmenta l demand can produce p s y cho l o g i c a l o r pe rce i ved s t r e s s on ly i f the i n d i v i d u a l a n t i c i p a t e s tha t he w i l l not be ab le to cope w i th i t , cope w i th i t adequate ly , or cope w i th i t w i thout endanger ing other goa l s . That i s , one i s not threatened by demands he does not " r e c e i v e " or be l i e ve s h imse l f capable of hand l i ng ; but i s threatened when he a n t i c i p a t e s he cannot handle these demands adequate ly ; b) S t r e s s or t h r ea t occurs on ly when the consequences of f a i l u r e to 13 meet the demand are pe rce i ved by the i n d i v i d u a l to be impor tan t , o r , to have s e r i ou s consequences f o r h imse l f . M iche lson (1969) has cons ide red adap ta t i on to s t r e s s . He has desc r i bed the case of the f am i l y hav ing s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r elements of l i f e s t y l e inconoruent w i th one o r more aspec ts of t h e i r s e t t i n g , den ta l h ea l t h s t ud i e s have shown tha t l a c k of a b i l i t y to change such a s i t u a t i o n o r adapt to i t i s h i gh l y r e l a t e d to mental i l l n e s s . Geographers have shown tha t t h i s very same process as a p p l i e d to hous ing , produces a change of res idence most t y p i c a l l y . Psycho-l o g i c a l l y , t h i s phenomenon i s analogous to F e s t i n g e r ' s c o g n i t i v e d issonance theo ry , which ho lds t ha t a person cannot s u s t a i n two incompat ib l e b e l i e f s ; he w i l l change one of them o r s u f f e r d i s t r e s s . ( f f l i che lson, 1969x 4) Assess ing the importance of the adap ta t i on p roces s , N i cho l son (1969: 5) a l s o notes t ha t no s t ud i e s have been conducted to document e i t h e r the c ond i t i o n s which suggest how long a time pe r i od there w i l l be between s t a b l e s i t u a t i o n s o r the e f f e c t of that t ime span upon eventua l pe rcep-t i o n of the emerging s i t u a t i o n . The mix ing of d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l groups i s an impor tant p o t e n t i a l cause of s t r e s s . K e l l e r (19721 286) observes t ha t such mix ing i s a "complex and d e l i c a t e matter r e q u i r i n g a great dea l of s k i l l not yet con -t a i ned i n any e x i s t i n g f o rmu l a . " I t i s subsequent ly a s se r ted tha t adap-t a t i o n to s t r e s s of t h i s k i nd cannot be cons ide red apar t from the broader con tex t of the a r e a . The l a t t e r i s i n tu rn shaped by s o c i a l t r a d i t i o n s , the des ign of dwe l l i n g s , group c o m p a t i b i l i t y , and the dynamics of s o c i a l change. 14 T e r r i t o r i a l i t y T e r r i t o r i a l behaviour i s seen to be the defence by i n d i v i d u a l s of a s p a t i a l area which they use to s a t i s f y t h e i r needs (Carson, 1972: 154) . So de f i ned , the concept of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y i s c l o s e l y t i e d to the concepts of persona l space and p r i v a c y . Cen t r a l to each of these i s the no t i on tha t peoble e s t a b l i s h boundar ies around themselves to main-t a i n t h e i r p s y cho l og i c a l i n t e g r i t y , manage t h e i r i n t e r -a c t i on s w i th o the r s , and p ro tec t t h e i r environment. Whi le the d i s t ances t ha t an i n d i v i d u a l ma in ta ins between h imse l f and others are gene ra l l y seen as a f un c t i o n of such f a c t o r s as f a m i l i a r i t y , s t a t u s s i t u a t i o n , sex , and age the o v e r a l l pa t t e rn of such s p a t i a l behaviour i s c u l t u r a l l y determined. (Howard, 1974: 71) The r e a l va lue of the t e r r i t o r i a l i t y concept as i t a pp l i e s to neighbourhoods has yet to be shown. Neve r the l e s s , i t i s p o s s i b l e to draw from the l i t e r a t u r e a number of observa t ions and conc lus i ons t ha t are r e l evan t to the sub jec t of i n c r e a s i n g d e n s i t i e s . S ince t e r r i t o r i a l behaviour i s de fens ive i n na tu re , i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that work i n t h i s area focuses upon a s e r i e s of t h rea t s to the r e s i d e n t i a l environment. Ne i the r i s i t s u r p r i s i n g that researchers have emphasized the importance of the percept ions of these t h r e a t s , the human responses to them, and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to numerous s o c i a l and env i ronmenta l v a r i a b l e s . Carson (1972) , f o r example, has surveyed h igh income suburban r e s i den t s i n Ph i l a de l ph i a to determine what events were pe r ce i ved to be urban t h r e a t s . He fiound tha t the s p e c i f i c t h rea t s be l i e v ed to be most imminent were drug problems i n s choo l s , s choo l c rowding, t r a f f i c conges t i on , 15 minor c r ime , reduced open green spaces, and a i r p o l l u t i o n . Other t h r ea t s i n c l uded genera l popu la t i on crowding, park and p layground crowding, and i nc reased low cos t r e n t a l hous ing . Crowding was thus judged to be the thread weaving these th rea t s t oge the r . Yet the response pa t te rn of the sample of f a m i l i e s d i d not show a c t u a l people as be ing the s i g n a l s of c rowding. On the c on t r a r y , the th rea t of crowding was judged on the bas i s of v i s i b l e changes that were t ak i ng p l a c e , or t h rea ten ing to take p l a c e , i n t h e i r immediate ph y s i c a l environment. The most s i g n i f i c a n t - o f these changes, or c l u e s , was reduced open green, spaces . The term t e r r i t o r i a l has a l s o been used to desc r i be the o r g a n i -z a t i on of space i n the West End of Boston and, more g ene r a l l y , i n many work ing c l a s s neighbourhoods (Hartman, 1972! 313) . In these areas the space immediate ly sur round ing one ' s dwe l l i n g i s regarded and used as a s t a b l e meaningfu l locus f o r i n t e r p e r s ona l c on t a c t , l e i s u r e time a c t i v i -t i e s , shopp ing, and s e r v i c e s . I t i s a p a r t i c u l a r , cont iguous t e r r i t o r y to which an i n d i v i d u a l belongs and w i t h i n which he f e e l s ' a t home'. S ince t h i s t e r r i t o r y i s r e ad i l y a v a i l a b l e , i t i s i n f a c t one ' s persona l l i v i n g space, even though i t i s not e x c l u s i v e or p r i v a t e . In d e s c r i b i n g the development of the house as a p lace of sa f e t y from both nonhuman and human t h r e a t s , Rainwater (1973» 181) takes the above argument one s tep f u r t h e r . He notes tha t the p h y s i c a l b a r r i e r s between i n s i d e and ou t s ide are not mainta ined when people t a l k of t h e i r a t t i t u d e s and des i r e s w i th respec t to hous ing . Rather , they t a l k of the e x t e r i o r as an i n e v i t a b l e ex tens ion of the i n t e r i o r and that what occurs i n one l o c a l e may s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the o the r . Furthermore, i n t imes of 16 c o n f l i c t , lower income people do not have the f i n a n c i a l a b i l i t y or the i n c l i n a t i o n to move of the more a f f l u e n t . Hartman (1972: 311) po i n t s out tha t many West End f a m i l i e s i n Boston have exper ienced h igher den-s i t i e s than they would have p r e f e r r e d . Adapta t ion occurred as a r e s u l t of the des i r e not to abandon a f a m i l i a r s e t t i n g o r to sever persona l t i e s . Minor d i scomfor t s which r e s u l t e d from changes i n s p a t i a l needs and de s i r e s were absorbed as a l t e r n a t i v e c o s t s . The Neighbourhood Concept and the Formation of C i t i z e n s Groups At t h i s po in t i t shou ld be ev ident tha t the f u n c t i o n i n g of r e s i -d e n t i a l areas unde r l i e s much of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n . S i m i l a r l y , the extent of ne ighbour ing a c t i v i t i e s i n a community may e xp l a i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s towards change. Whi le i t i s beyond the scope of t h i s study to examine the neighbourhood concept i n any d e t a i l , some notes of cau t i on o f f e r e d by researchers i n t h i s f i e l d must be ment ioned. F i r s t l y , g e n e r a l i -z a t i on s about where r e s i den t s draw boundary l i n e s or how they become a t -tached to an area can not be made w i th any a u t ho r i t y on the bas i s of e x i s -t i n g da t a . For some urban r e s i den t s neighbourhood attachment i s s t r o n g . For o thers i t i s very weak. While i t i s po s s i b l e to s t a t e that the l o c a l area i s no longer of pr imary importance to a l l peop le , more e x p l i c i t c on -c l u s i o n s are thwarted by the l ack of s c i e n t i f i c a l l y v a l i d knowledge on the fo rmat ion and f u n c t i o n i n g of neighbourhoods. K e l l e r (1972: 286) ma inta ins t ha t a t t i t u d e s towards neighbourhood change must the re fo re be viewed as pa r t of a s ub j e c t i v e phenomenon dependent upon perce ived and a c t u a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r f r i e n d s or f a c i l i t i e s , oppo r t un i t i e s f o r m o b i l i t y , as we l l as the age, persona l temperament, and tas te of the i n d i v i d u a l . 17 In many cases r e s i d e n t s ' s p e c i f i c b e l i e f s lead to p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n . I t i s the re fo re not s u r p r i s i n g tha t geographers and p o l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t s have ana lyzed the fo rmat ion of c i t i z e n s groups. Ley (1974: 75) has desc r i bed the emergence of these groups i n North America dur ing the mid 1960*s. C i t i z e n s sought to rep lace the t r a d i t i o n a l a l l i a n c e of p o l i t i c i a n s and entrepreneurs w i th a new se t of va lues emphasiz ing the p r e se r va t i on of f u n c t i o n i n g neighbourhoods. The i r language i s one of s t a b l e neighbourhoods, of s i n g l e f am i l y dwe l l i ngs and low r i s e apartments, w i t h b locked access to through t r a f f i c , e f f i c i e n t r ap i d t r a n s i t , t r e e - l i n e d r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s , parks and t o t - l o t s , and the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n f r a -s t r u c t u r e of a secure community. (Ley , 1974: 75,76) The above pre ferences are a par t of a l a r g e r non-growth movement. In the U.S. context F i n k l e r and Peterson have observed tha t many people are e i t h e r consc i ous l y or unconsc ious ly d i s conce r ted by the f r u i t s of a few decades of r ap i d growth and are w i l l i n g to ac t d i f f e r e n t l y , vote d i f f e r e n t l y , and maybe even pay more taxes to ma inta in a c e r t a i n q u a l i t y of l i f e . . . A l o t more people would l i k e to be ab le to p r e d i c t t h e i r f u t u r e s more a c cu ra t e l y and to have some degree of c o n t r o l over change and t h e i r d e s t i n i e s .».« In the past few yea r s , there has been a s i g n i f i c a n t change i n a t t i t u d e s ; a growing number of communities and p o l i t i c a l l eaders have come r i g h t out and s a i d ' s t o p ' , o r a t l e a s t ' s l ow down*. The d i s cu s s i on of growth versus non-growth i s now out i n the open i n many a reas , w i th the unde r l y i ng a s -sumption tha t f u tu re growth can be a f f e c t e d and perhaps even stopped as a matter of pub l i c p o l i c y . ( F i n k l e r and Pe te rson , 1974:16) A s i m i l a r t rend i n Canadian c i t i e s has been desc r i bed i n the Greater Van-couver area as a l o s s of conf idence i n government's a b i l i t y to manage u r -ban change: 18 the degree and frequency w i th which c i t i z e n s i n the past few years have banded together to form pressure groups o r s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t movements c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s the extent to which the pub l i c has l o s t conf idence i n the a b i l i t y of the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s to cope w i th growth. In many areas c i t i z e n s groups have r e s i s t e d the occurrence of deve lop-ment. In a number of i n s t ances t h i s has r e s u l t e d i n c o s t l y changes on the pa r t of the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . More r e cen t l y we have seen t h i s l o s s of conf idence r e s u l t i n a tendency to r e s i s t development of any k i n d . P ro tes t i s becoming a r e f l e x . (Grea te r Vancouver Reg iona l D i s t r i c t , 1974: 18) The Pub l i c Hear ing as a Measure of Pub l i c Opin ion One of the pr imary means by which p o l i t i c i a n s and p lanners mea-sure pub l i c op in ion i s the pub l i c hear ing - a meeting a t which community r e s i den t s are g iven the oppor tun i t y to express t h e i r approva l or d i s a p -p r o va l of p o t e n t i a l l and use changes. 'Ne t ze r (1974) notes tha t such hear ings are bound to be dominated by persons o b j e c t i n g to proposed changes i n land use . He argues that the on ly op t i on an ; ad jacent land user has i s to f i g h t the proposed new use, no matter how sma l l the prospec-t i v e harm. For example, h igher dens i t y hous ing i n a neighbourhood might i n c r ease t r a f f i c volumes. Even i f the i nc rease i s a sma l l one, there i s an i n c e n t i v e to ob jec t to the proposed zon ing change. (Ne t ze r , 1974: 171) Ley (1974) takes a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t approach i n h i s examinat ion of the Vancouver scene. He po in t s out tha t c e r t a i n groups are more l i k e l y to be heard than o t he r s : High s t a t u s groups have s p a t i a l l y ex tens i ve images where-as low s t a tu s groups have s p a t i a l l y con f i ned urban know-ledge . Therefore both c o g n i t i v e l y and behav i;Ourally, h igh income groups regard l a rge areas of the c i t y as being i n 19 some sense t h e i r t u r f , whereas low income groups perce i ve on ly t h e i r immediate neighbourhoods i n t h i s l i g h t . Thus, f a r more p o t e n t i a l l and use c o n f l i c t s f a l l w i t h i n the range of h igher s t a t u s groups. Consequent ly , these groups= and t h e i r fo rma l o r gan i s a t i on s are i n vo l v ed not on ly i n l o c a l c on t e s t s , but a l s o i n s e l e c t e d c i t y - w i d e con tes t s over proposed land use change. Content ion i s aroused by a symbol ic cha l l enge to a che r i shed b e l i e f - s y s t e m . (Ley , 1974: 67) In l i g h t of the above comments and the r eac t i ona r y nature of the p ro t e s t movement i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that much has been w r i t t e n on the need f o r c i t i z e n involvement i n the ea r l y s tages of the p l ann ing and u r -ban management process (Fe l lman , 1970: 281; Bottomley and Ho ldsworth , 1974: 7 1 ) . felhile p lanners recogn ize t h i s i d e a l , they tend to seek c i t i -zen p a r t i c i p a t i o n at a r e s t r i c t e d number of s tages i n the p lann ing p ro -c e s s . The pub l i c hear ing i s an example of one such s t age . However, one may ask whether the pub l i c hear ing i s an app rop r i a te t o o l f o r guaging the range of a t t i t u d e s i n a neighbourhood towards a zon ing change. Un-f o r t u n a t e l y , few w r i t e r s have even attempted to answer t h i s que s t i o n . Some have suggested tha t the views of non - j o i ne r s and the i n a r t i c u l a t e would not be heard (He f f e ron , 1972). Others , such as Lans ing and fflarans (1969: 199)» have i n f e r r e d tha t a pub l i c meeting i s an inadequate p l ann ing t o o l . They conclude tha t a more va luab le dev ice would be the a t t i t u d e survey s i n c e i t would enable p lanners to go d i r e c t l y to a l l the people to determine d i f f e r en ce s as we l l as consensus i n va lues and a s p i r a t i o n s . Zech (1972) s t r ong l y supports t h i s v i ewpo in t , but i s more c r i t i c a l of the pub l i c hear ing p rocess . He a s se r t s tha t a survey i s one form of ga i n i ng an unbiased i n s i g h t i n t o the p reva len t f e e l i n g s and sent iments of a community. 20 Al though the democrat ic process ensures tha t p reva l en t community f e e l i n g s w i l l be made pub l i c knowledge, op in ions expressed i n the p o l i t i c a l arena are not r e l i a b l e i n d i -ca to r s of a consensus of op in ion towards g iven i s s u e s . S pe c i a l i n t e r e s t groups together w i th the a l l too common apathy of l o c a l c i t i z e n s may combine to g ive the impres-s i on tha t some sent iments are p reva l en t and important which i n r e a l i t y are e n t i r e l y un rep resen ta t i ve of the ma jo r i t y of c i t i z e n s . (Zech , 1972: V-2) In l i g h t of these remarks, i t seems c l e a r tha t there i s a need f o r a f u l -l e r understand ing of the mot ives , pe r cep t i on s , and pre ferences of those r e s i den t s who a t tend pub l i c meetings as we l l as those who are not p r e -s en t . A t t i t u d e and Preference S tud ie s Re lated to Townhouses To t h i s po in t the d i s c u s s i on has centered upon the genera l r e -sponse to neighbourhood change and planners* i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of that r e -sponse. What remains to be cons idered are a t t i t u d e s towards the i n t e g -r a t i o n of townhouse un i t s w i t h i n a s i n g l e f am i l y zone. Due to a l ack of p e r t i n en t r e sea r ch , t h i s i s not e a s i l y done. The more exhaust ive s t ud i e s i n the f i e l d of housing mix and dens i t y pre ferences t y p i c a l l y focus on the ' u s e r ' ( B e l l and Cons tan t i nescu , 1974? Howard, 1974; Andzans, 1973; Zehner and Marans, 1973; Cooper, 1972). In b r i e f , t h i s l i n e of research has shown tha t townhouse r e s i den t s have env i ronmenta l p re ferences s i m i l a r to those of s i n g l e f am i l y homeowners. Consequent ly , the use of mu l t i p l e f am i l y developments as bu f fe r s between s i n g l e f am i l y dwe l l i ngs and zones of h igher i n t e n s i t y land use i s not s a t i s f a c t o r y to the r e s i den t s of the former p r o j e c t s . Even when m u l t i -21 f am i l y p r o j e c t s are l o ca ted among i n d i v i d u a l homes, i n s u f f i c i e n t con -s i d e r a t i o n of des ign f e a t u r e s , the l i f e s t y l e s of the people brought toge ther , and s i t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s cou ld lead to the s o c i a l and c u l -t u r a l a l i e n a t i o n of p r o j e c t households (Cooper, 1971: 79 ) . These conc lus i ons rece i ve some support from the f i n d i n g s of a 1973 survey of townhouses and apartment condominiums i n the Lower Mainland a r e a . The most f r e quen t l y - v o i c ed compla in ts of p r o j e c t r e s i den t s were poor soundproo f ing , poor c o n s t r u c t i o n , inadequate p a r k i n g , l a ck of p r i v a c y , poor a t t i t u d e of o ther owners, and uncon t r o l l e d c h i l d r e n (Koen ig , 1975: 53 ,54 ) . There are two p r i n c i p l e means of e x p l a i n i n g the a t t i t u d e s of s i n g l e f am i l y homeowners to the i n c u r s i o n of townhouse dwe l l i n g s . As a f i r s t approach one may examine the popular impress ion of townhouse l i v e -a b i l i t y . In the l a t e 1960's townhouses were not we l l accepted by the p u b l i c . Gans (1968: 21) notes tha t a t tha t time the r e j e c t i o n of t h i s new form of housing was due l a r g e l y to the occupan t ' s l a ck of p r i v a c y . In comparison w i th s i n g l e f am i l y detached hous ing , more recent town-house developments are s t i l l pe rce i ved to be l e s s a t t r a c t i v e , l e s s w e l l ma in ta ined , more no i s y , and l e s s w e l l p rov ided w i th p lay areas f o r c h i l d -ren (Zehner and Marans, 1973: 337) . These s p e c i f i c views are i n d i c a t i v e of the unde r l y i ng f e a r that s o c i a l problems a r i s i n g w i t h i n a m u l t i - f a m i l y p r o j e c t w i l l s p i l l over i n t o the sur round ing community. Some examples of pe rce i ved s p i l l over e f f e c t s would be i n c reases i n vandal ism and j u v e n i l e de l inquency and the i nc reased s t r a i n s p laced upon neighbourhood r e c r e a -t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s . Oppos i t ion to townhouses i s i n par t a r e a c t i on to change of any 22 k i n d . F am i l i e s who moved i n t o a neighbourhood because they l i k e d i t s ' r u r a l ' cha rac te r f r equen t l y attempt to keep i t tha t way by l obby ing aga in s t a l l types of mu l t i p l e f am i l y dwe l l i n g s . The p re se r va t i on of neighbourhood amen i t ies i s u sua l l y g iven as a motive f o r t h i s a c t i o n . Neve r the l e s s , i t does not obscure the s e l f i s h impulses "now tha t we are i n , l e t ' s s lam the door to keep others from f o l l o w i n g " (He i l b r u n , 1974: 310) . In t h i s same overv iew f a sh i on i t may be s t a t e d that the oppos i t i on i s o f ten an attempt to exc lude persons perce i ved to be of a lower s o c i a l s t a t u s . C lass p re jud i ce i s c l e a r l y a f a c t o r i n t h i s i n s t an c e , but i t i s a l s o a sub jec t few people w i l l d i s cuss open ly . Other mot ives are f i n a n c i a l , r e f l e c t i n g the view tha t lower income housing does not "pay i t s way" i n terms of t axes . • The gene r a l i t y of the above paragraph i s exp la ined by the f a c t tha t no townhouse a t t i t u d e surveys of the type attempted i n t h i s study have been uncovered. There fo re , surveys measuring a t t i t u d e s t o -wards a v a r i e t y of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs and lower income housing w i l l be used as s u b s t i t u t e s . Gruen and Gruen (1972) have shown tha t m idd le - and upper-income suburban r e s i den t s be l i e ve that the entry of low- and moderate-income households i n t o t h e i r neighbourhoods w i l l harm important f ea tu re s of t h e i r l i v i n g environment. S p e c i f i c a l l y , they f e a r tha t 1) Proper ty w i l l be l e s s w e l l ma in ta ined . 2) Proper ty va lues w i l l drop. 3) Se rv i ce l e v e l s w i l l d rop. 4) Proper ty taxes w i l l i n c r e a s e . 5) Schoo l q u a l i t y w i l l drop. 6) S o c i a l o r gan i z a t i o n w i l l d e t e r i o r a t e . 7) S o c i a l s t a t u s w i l l d e c l i n e . 8) S o c i a l s t a b i l i t y w i l l decrease . (Gruen and Gruen, 1972s 93) 23 L i s t i n g these hazards i n t h i s way i s somewhat dangerous s i n ce i t does not r evea l t h e i r contex t or the i n t e n s i t y of r e s i d e n t s ' f e e l i n g s . On the o ther hand, such a l i s t i n g revea l s the range of concerns that have been measured by o ther surveys and the s i g n i f i c a n c e of property main-tenance. The l a t t e r emerges as the key element due to i t s overwhelming importance to the suburban image: i t i s the symbol of the economic s t a t u s , the pu r i t an a t t i t u d e s , the m o r a l i t i e s , and the va lues f o r which the suburban i te has s t r i v e n . (Gruen and Gruen, 1972: x i i ) I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note tha t these f i n d i n g s c o r r e l a t e h i gh l y w i th the r e s u l t s of neighbourhood s a t i s f a c t i o n s t u d i e s . To summarize, e a r l i e r s t ud i e s have e s t a b l i s h ed o r imp l i ed the importance of p r i v a c y , s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n , c o m p a t i b i l i t y , maintenance l e v e l , and s e ve r a l o ther f a c t o r s f o r neighbourhood e v a l u a t i o n s . . . as i n Lans ing and Hendr icks* study of D e t r o i t , i t proved to be more important to have neighbours one f e l t were compat ib le than to have neighbours w i th whom one i n t e r a c t e d f r e q u e n t l y . . . . S p e c i f i c a l l y , on the bas i s of the b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s , those f a c t o r s most h i gh l y r e l a t e d to the s a t i s f a c t i o n s s c a l e are the maintenance l e v e l of the neighbourhood ( . 5 6 ) , the f r i e n d l i -ness ( .44) and s i m i l a r i t y ( .36) of the ne ighbours , and the neighbourhood no ise l e v e l ( . 3 4 ) . (Zehner , 1972: 176-179) Some s t ud i e s have attempted to determine the amount of r e s i s t ance to mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ng s i n a neighbourhood. The most comprehensive of these s t ud i e s was a community a t t i t u d e survey of r e s i d en t s i n the Greater V i c -t o r i a m u n i c i p a l i t y of Oak Bay (Zech, 1972). A t o t a l of 148 s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s r e p l i e d to a mai l ques t i onna i r e des igned to measure the com-mun i ty ' s f e e l i n g s and sent iments towards mu l t i p l e f am i l y hous ing . The t o t a l sample was subd iv ided i n t o a pure ly random sample and one where 24 respondents l i v e d c l o s e to e x i s t i n g mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g s . In genera l i t was found tha t those l i v i n g next to mu l t i p l e hous ing u n i t s had much more favourab le a t t i t u d e s towards them than d i d o ther respondents . In p a r t i c u l a r , the adjacent r e s i den t s d i sagreed tha t apartments reduce proper ty va lues and r u i n the cha rac te r of the neighbourhood. Assess ing a l l of the ques t i onna i r e r e s u l t s , Zech found tha t about one-quar ter of the respondents favoured m u l t i p l e hous ing i n Oak Bay, another one-qua r te r was opposed to i t , and the remainder would a l l ow i t i n s e l e c t e d l o c a t i o n s . One purpose of the ques t i onna i r e survey was to measure respondents* a t t i t u d e s towards the prospect of hav ing m u l t i p l e dwe l l i ng s on an adjacent p rope r t y . One-quarter of the respondents i n d i c a t e d they would be i n favour i f the bu i l d i n g s were garden apartments. S i x t y per cent of the respondents were opposed to such apartments. For wood-framed b u i l d i n g s , 9 f l o o r b u i l d -i n g s , and m u l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs i n genera l the p ropo r t i on i n favour dropped to below 12 per cent wh i l e the p ropo r t i on opposed rose to between 70 and 90 per cen t . Another purpose of the survey was to guage the r e l a t i v e a c cep t -a b i l i t y of d i f f e r e n t dwe l l i n g t ypes . Th is wa3 ach ieved by c r e a t i n g a " t o t a l impress i on" category on the bas i s of the o v e r a l l response pa t t e rn of each respondent (Zech, 19721 V -19 ) . By t h i s means the author con -c luded tha t most respondents would welcome dup lexes , garden apa r t -ments and i n gene ra l , l o w - r i s e s t r u c t u r e s . S i x f l o o r s are acceptab le to many but beyond t ha t , support becomes i n c r e a s i n g l y ma rg i na l . (Zech , 1972: V - l ) Respondents were a l s o asked to agree or d i sagree w i th negat i ve statements about apartments. I t was found that the con ten t i on tha t apartments do not pay t h e i r way and that t h e i r tenants are lower c l a s s were r e j e c t ed w i th the g rea tes t f requency . The ma jo r i t y of respond-ents a l s o r e j e c t ed the statements that apartments are tomorrow's slums and t h e i r dwe l l e r s " t r a n s i e n t s " . Agreement cen te red about the s t a t e -ments tha t mu l t i p l e f am i l y hous ing " cu t s o f f l i g h t and a i r " and tha t such developments "make the area too urban by i n c r e a s i n g d e n s i t i e s and t r a f f i c c onges t i on " . On the s t r eng th of the survey f i n d i n g s , Zech i d e n t i f i e s a num-ber of i n t a n g i b l e cos t s tha t can be a s soc i a t ed w i th mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs cons t ruc ted w i t h i n a s i n g l e f am i l y d i s t r i c t . These cos t s may be sum-marized as f o l l o w s : a) a reduc t i on i n community cha rac te r as a r e s u l t of i nc reased u n i -f o rm i t y and monotony i n b u i l d i n g des i gn . Th is imposes s o c i a l cos t s i n terms of the " a l i e n a t i o n " of d i f f e r e n t areas of the M u n i c i p a l i t y and a l e s sen i ng of a neighbourhood's a e s t h e t i c appea l . b) a reduc t i on i n the p r i vacy of ad jacent r e s i den t s as a r e s u l t of " v i s u a l and aud ib l e i n t r u s i o n " by mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g occupants . Any consequent f r i c t i o n between newcomers and e s t a b l i s h ed r e s i -dents i s a s o c i a l cos t to the community as a whole. c) a reduc t ion i n community " i n t e g r a t i o n " due to the i n t r o d u c t i o n of persons w i th d i f f e r i n g l i f e s t y l e s and va l ue s . d) i n c reased p h y s i c a l danger, s t r e s s , or d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i th the neighbourhood as a r e s u l t of i n c reased t r a f f i c volumes, p o l l u t i o n 26 and l i t t e r , and o ther v i s u a l d i s t r a c t i o n s . e) the burden of moving and ad j u s t i n g to an a l i e n environment im-posed upon those r e s i den t s who are d i s l o c a t e d . f ) the i n c reased unce r t a i n t y as to the f u t u r e cha rac te r of the neighbourhood. Th is i s the r e s u l t of the precedent e s t ab -l i s h e d w i th a new mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ng wh ich , from the home-owner 's po in t of v iew, " th rea tens the c on t i nua t i on of com-munity l i f e " . Having i d e n t i f i e d these cos t s i t i s unfor tunate t ha t Zech d i d not r e l a t e them to s p e c i f i c types of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g s . He cou ld have done so had he attempted to analyze how r e s i d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s change once they have been exposed to a p a r t i c u l a r p r o j e c t . Such an a n a l y s i s of a t t i t u d e change would have complemented an otherwise thorough study by enab l i ng him to suggest how the i n t a n g i b l e cos t s of redevelopment can be reduced or even e l i m i n a t e d . Other surveys have focused s o l e l y upon a t t i t u d e s towards a pa r t -ment development. In Thunder Bay, f o r example, the Lakehead P lann ing Board i n t e r v i ewed 141 r e s i den t s l i v i n g w i t h i n a one-quar te r mi le rad ius of apartment complexes of va r y i ng s i z e s . The respondents were quest ioned on a v a r i e t y of t o p i c s . These i n c l uded the appearance of the apartments, p roper ty va l ues , p r i v a c y , and the adequacy of community f a c i l i t i e s . In every case the ma jo r i t y of r e s i den t s r e p l i e d that they would not ob jec t to the ex i s tence of apartments i n t h e i r neighbourhood. Negat ive respon-ses were a t t r i b u t e d to a s m a l l , but r e l a t i v e l y c on s i s t e n t core of ob j e c -to r s equa l i ng one-quar te r of the sample. 27 On the sub j e c t of a d d i t i o n a l development 57 per cent of the respondents i n d i c a t e d they would ob jec t to a l a rge development (over 12 un i t s ) w i t h i n one-quar ter mi le of t h e i r home. An a d d i t i o n a l 4 per cent would ob j e c t i f the development was "very c l o s e " . I f the development was to be l e s s than 12 un i t s 30 per cent of the sample would ob jec t and another 5 per cent would be opposed to a nearby development. Such f i n d i n g s are u s e f u l s i n ce they account f o r the s i z e and p rox im i t y of the apartments. However, there i s no i n d i c a t i o n of how responses v a r i ed among r e s i den t s l i v i n g near sma l l p r o j e c t s as op-posed to l a r g e r ones. Nor i s there an i n d i c a t i o n of how many of the respondents had l i v e d i n the community before the apartments were con -s t r u c t e d . A s i m i l a r , yet more exp l o r a to r y i n t e r v i ew survey was conduc-ted by E a r l (1970) i n the Greater Vancouver a r e a . Th is researcher i n -terv iewed 20 s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s l i v i n g w i t h i n two b locks of 2 and 3 s to rey apartments i n North Vancouver and Su r rey . H i s pr imary ob j e c -t i v e was to determine i f the l e v e l of ob j e c t i on to apartments had chan-ged a f t e r t h e i r c o n s t r u c t i o n . Recorded oppos i t i on to the apartments was used as the bas i s f o r determin ing homeowners' a t t i t u d e s before the s t r u c t u r e s were b u i l t . E a r l determined t ha t , i n gene ra l , a t t i t u d e s towards s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s had changed from i n t ense oppos i t i on to a f e e l i n g of complacency a f t e r t h e i r c o n s t r u c t i o n . With the except ion of 10 to 15 per cent of the sample, respondents d i d not pe rce i ve that the p r o j e c t s had a f f e c t ed proper ty va l ue s , p r i v a c y , p roper ty t axes , t r a f f i c volumes, views, and pa r k i n g . A d d i t i o n a l l y , the p lay areas around the apartments were genera l y thought to be adequate and the no ise c rea ted by c h i l d r e n ' s p lay was not cons idered to be a s i g n i f i c a n t problem. E a r l a l so quest ioned r e s i den t s on the sub j e c t of a d d i t i o n a l apartment development i n t h e i r a r ea . He found tha t homeowners who volun t a r i l y chose to l i v e i n c l o se p rox im i t y to apartments "were almost 100 per cent i n favour of mixed hous ing" ( E a r l , 1970» 175) . On the o ther hand, he conc luded tha t even a f t e r hav ing l i v e d next to the apartments f o r over a year , 90 per cent of those r e s i den t s who had apartments " f o r c e d " upon them remained opposed to mixed hous ing . A f i n a l c o n c l u -s i on was tha t the type of apartment development and i t s he ight were c r i t i c a l f a c t o r s . A t t i t u d e s were much l e s s negat i ve towards garden apartments and 2 s to rey s t r u c t u r e s i n comparison w i th 3 s to rey bu i l d i n g s The above f i n d i n g s c l e a r l y suggest that a t t i t u d e s towards i n d i -v i d u a l apartment p r o j e c t s do change over t ime. However, these f i n d i n g s must be cons idered t en t a t i v e due to the very sma l l sample s i z e . As w e l l the a n a l y s i s of a t t i t u d e change must be viewed w i th cons ide rab l e s k e p t i -c i sm . E a r l h imse l f admits that any impress ion of a change i n a t t i t u d e s cou ld on ly be a r r i v e d a t on a very s ub j e c t i v e bas i s a f t e r examining the o v e r a l l responses to the que s t i o nna i r e . ( E a r l , 1970: 133) Summary and Conc lus ions The preced ing pages have desc r ibed the prob ing attempts of many researchers to analyze the f u n c t i o n i n g of neighbourhoods. The response 29 of neighbourhood r e s i den t s to changes i n t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l environments was a l s o examined. I t was shown tha t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s response to change i s l i k e l y to be a defens ive r ea c t i on to a s e r i e s of t h r e a t s . In t u r n , the s t r e s s s u f f e r ed by the i n d i v i d u a l i s r e l a t e d to h i s pe rcept ion of those th rea t s and h i s a b i l i t y to adapt to new c i r cums tances . Adapta t ion to change was emphasized because of the key r o l e of i n d i v i d u a l s ' a t t i t u d e s . Only t e n t a t i v e conc lus i ons were reached, however, due to the complex r e l a t i o n s h i p between a t t i t u d e s and numerous s o c i a l and env i ronmenta l f a c t o r s . The most important of these f a c t o r s were s o c i a l t r a d i t i o n s , attachment to the neighbourhood, area c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , group c o m p a t i b i l i t y , and the age, pe rsona l temperament, and t a s t e of the i n d i v i d u a l . Th i s chapter a l so i n c l uded an examinat ion of the pub l i c hear ing as a p l ann ing t o o l . I t was shown tha t a number of authors have s e r i ou s doubts as to the use fu lness of these hear ings to p l anne r s . Subsequent ly , i t was conc luded tha t research on t h i s sub j e c t was needed to determine which groups i n the community are l i k e l y to be represented a t such hear -i n g s . To f u r t h e r understand the po s s i b l e s o c i a l impact of townhouses on a neighbourhood, the r e s u l t s of a number of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g a t t i t u d e surveys were d i s cu s sed . These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that the i n i t i a l o ppo s i -t i o n of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s to mu l t i p l e f am i l y dwe l l i ngs i s r e l a t e d to the a e s t he t i c q u a l i t i e s of a proposed development and the imagined c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p rospec t i ve ne ighbours . The r e s u l t s a l s o suggested tha t a t t i t u d e change does occur i n r e l a t i o n to a number of t op i c s once s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s have been exposed to a m u l t i - f a m i l y development. 30 Another f un c t i o n of the d i s cu s s i on of p rev ious a t t i t u d e surveys was to r e vea l the s t reng ths and weaknesses of t h e i r i n t e r v i ew methodology. The surveys were shown to have on ly l i m i t e d a p p l i c a b i l i t y to t h i s study due to the au tho r s ' f a i l u r e to i n v e s t i g a t e the extent of a t t i t u d e change o r the consequences f o r the i n d i v i d u a l who must adapt to mu l t i p l e dwe l -l i n g s cons t ruc ted near h i s home. I t was w i th these c r i t i c i s m s i n mind tha t the research method-ology of t h i s study was dev i sed . Chapter IV desc r i bes the f o rmu l a t i on of the i n t e r v i ew schedules and how the techniques of o ther researchers were used to gain a be t t e r i n d i c a t i o n of changes i n a t t i t u d e s as we l l as the p ropo r t i on of r e s i den t s who would p u b l i c l y express t h e i r o p i n i o n s . P r i o r to a d i s cu s s i on of research methodology i t was f e l t tha t a b r i e f review of the problems r e l a t e d to a t t i t u d e measurement would be approp-r i a t e . Th is review i s presented i n the next chap te r . 31 CHAPTER I I I ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT One of the major tasks of t h i s t h e s i s i s to i d e n t i f y a t t i t u d e s towards change w i t h i n a neighbourhood. In o rder to accompl ish such a task t h i s study, assumes that a t t i t u d e s towards a p a r t i c u l a r form of new housing can be measured w i th a u s e f u l degree of accuracy . I t a l s o assumes tha t changes i n a t t i t u d e s can be i n t e r p r e t e d to y i e l d p o l i c y r e l e van t c on c l u s i on s . The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r these assumptions l i e s i n the s c i ence of a t t i t u d e measurement as i t has evo lved over the past s i x t y yea r s . Over t h i s pe r iod concepts and techniques have become i n -c r e a s i n g l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d . Problems of d e f i n i t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , however, s t i l l e x i s t . The purpose of t h i s b r i e f chapter i s to desc r i be some of the more bas i c problems and d e f i n i t i o n s r e l a t e d to a t t i t u d e s . Whi le such a treatment bare l y s c ra t ches the su r f a ce of t h i s complex f i e l d , i t shou ld a i d i n the understand ing of the research methodology as w e l l as the subsequent a n a l y s i s . D e f i n i t i o n s and Measurement Concepts S o c i a l p s y cho l og i s t s have de f ined an a t t i t u d e to be "a learned p r e d i s p o s i t i o n to respond p o s i t i v e l y or nega t i v e l y to a g iven c l a s s of ob j e c t s " (McGrath, 1964: 2 1 ) . A t t i t u d e s are thus d i f f e r e n t from hab i t s which are more automat ic and f i x e d responses towards a c l a s s of o b j e c t s . A d i s t i n c t i o n may a l s o be made between a t t i t u d e s and va l ue s : 32 Va lues , thus , are a b s t r a c t i o n s o r g ene r a l i z a t i o n s which f i n d t h e i r express ion i n a t t i t u d e s towards p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t s , the ob jec t s be ing regarded as a i d i n g o r b l o ck -i n g the r e a l i z a t i o n of these va l ue s . These " o b j e c t s " may be th i ngs o r peop le , o r complex s o c i a l phenomena and concepts such as norms, s t e r eo t ype s , r o l e s , and so f o r t h . There fo re , given tha t o rder i n the s o c i a l e nv i r on -ment i s mainly based on va lues , i t f o l l ows t ha t the s o c i a l behaviour of the i n d i v i d u a l i s a l s o u l t i m a t e l y l a r g e l y a f u n c t i o n of h i s a t t i t u d e s . ( K e l v i n , 1970s 40) In s p i t e of the m u l t i p l i c i t y of d e f i n i t i o n s of a t t i t u d e , there i s agreement among p sy cho l og i s t s tha t an a t t i t u d e has an a f f e c t i v e , c og -n i t i v e , and behav iou ra l component (Lemon, 1973s 16; Seeord and Backman, 1964s 97; Sch i f f , , 1970s 6, 7 ) . The behav iou ra l component c on s i s t s of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s f e e l i n g s of l i k e o r d i s l i k e f o r an o b j e c t , wh i l e the c o g n i -t i v e component c o n s i s t s of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f s about the o b j e c t . In o ther words ,one 's a t t i t u d e towards an ob jec t i s a combinat ion of what one knows o r be l i e ve s to be t r u e , what one f e e l s , and what one i s i n c l i n e d to do about i t . When d i s c u s s i n g a t t i t u d e s i t i s extremely important to remember that there i s no s t r a i g h t f o rwa r d r e l a t i o n s h i p between a pe r son ' s a c t i o n s , a t t i t u d e s , and expressed o p i n i o n s . Overt a c t i on s and speech are f r e S quent ly des igned to concea l p r i v a t e a t t i t u d e s : When the p o l i t i c i a n k i s s e s Negro babies as an express ion of h i s f r i e n d l y a t t i t u d e toward the Negro race h i s a c t i o n i s probably no more an accura te index of h i s " p r i v a t e " a t t i t u d e than i s h i s impassioned d e c l a r a t i o n of f r i e n d -sh i p from the p l a t f o rm . . . The po in t i s tha t our know-ledge of a t t i t u d e s can come on ly through a study of be-hav iou r , and a l l behaviour i s sub jec t to mod i f i c a t i o n i n the process of execu t ion from con s i d e r a t i o n s of cou r -t e sy , expedience, o r o ther s o c i a l p r e s su re s . (Lundberg, 1929: 202) 33 Furthermore, over t responses may be d i f f i c u l t to e xp l a i n s o l e l y i n r e -l a t i o n to the immediate environment. They may be a f un c t i o n of such f a c t o r s as the i n d i v i d u a l ' s past exper ience and present mo t i v a t i on . These unobservable i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s " i n t e r v ene " to determine at l e a s t i n par t the observed responses to the observed s t i m u l i . A ravenous c h i l d , f o r example, w i l l rush to a food- laden t ab l e wh i l e a w e l l - f e d gourmet would probably ignore i t ( K e l v i n , 1970: 43 ) . Of the numerous sources of b ias i n the measurement of a t t i -tudes many can be t raced to the s i t u a t i o n i n which the i n t e r v i ew :'. ques t i onna i r e i s adm in i s t e red . One s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r which i s ob-v i ou s l y important i s the nature of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the i n -v e s t i g a t o r and the respondent. I t i s w e l l known tha t the c ha r a c t e r -i s t i c s of the former can i n f l u en ce the i n f o rma t i on which i s ob ta ined dur ing an i n t e r v i e w . This i s p a r t i a l l y a r e s u l t of the f a c t tha t the t e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n i s not a pure data ga ther ing occas ion which i s de-vo id of meaning f o r the respondent. More o f ten than not i t i s a s o c i a l event i n which both p a r t i e s have expec ta t i ons about t h e i r r o l e beha-v i o u r . Respondents' expec ta t i ons about the u l t ima te use and c on f i d en -t i a l i t y of t h e i r r e p l i e s are the re fo re key f a c t o r s i n any t e s t i n g s i t u -a t i o n . The tendency to g ive s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e responses or to respond i n an extreme way are a d d i t i o n a l f a c t o r s which must be a l lowed f o r i n both the design of the i n t e r v i ew schedule and the manner i n which ques-t i on s are asked. Th is task i s most demanding when i s sues of mora l i t y and p re jud i ce are be ing s t u d i e d . Any s i n g l e a t t i t u d e measure i s b iased to some ex tent (Lemon, 34 1973: 82) . I t i s the re fo re adv i sab l e to use a number of d i f f e r e n t i n d i -c a t o r s . Th is enables the researcher to randomize the e r r o r which a r i s e s s p e c i f i c a l l y from the type of measuring ins t rument which i s being used. A d d i t i o n a l l y , i t p rov ides a means of check ing the cons i s tency of an i n -d i v i d u a l ' s remarks. Severa l o ther c r i t e r i a may be app l i e d to minimize sources of d i s t o r t i o n i n a t t i t u d e measurement. Dur ing an i n t e r v i ew every attempt shou ld be made to ga in the conf idence and t r u s t of the s ub j e c t . At the same time the i n t e r v i ewe r may wish to obscure h i s t rue ob j e c t i v e s f o r a po r t i on of the i n t e r v i e w . Th is would be done to l e ssen the pos-s i b i l i t y of the very ac t of t e s t i n g a l t e r i n g the a t t i t u d e under s c r u t i n y . Wore s p e c i f i c a l l y , every statement shou ld be such tha t acceptance or r e -j e c t i o n of the statement i n d i c a t e s something about the i s sue i n que s t i o n . Doub le -ba r re l ed statements shou ld be avo ided , as shou ld any ques t ions open to va ry i ng i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . S i m i l a r l y , any statement to which pe r -sons w i th markedly d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s can respond i n the same way i s u n s a t i s f a c t o r y . A t t i t u d e Chancie K e l v i n (1970: 59) suggests that a change i n a t t i t u d e imp l i e s a change i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s order of va lues - which are a s soc i a t ed w i th changes i n h i s b e l i e f s and behav iour . Consequent ly , any change i n the way i n which the i n d i v i d u a l orders h i s environment n a t u r a l l y a f f e c t s the p r e d i c t i o n s which he makes about i t and the way i n which he ad jus t s to i t and manipulates i t . W i th in t h i s d e f i n i t i o n a l framework some important q u a l i f i c a t i o n s must be made. F i r s t l y , an i n d i v i d u a l i s not always con -35 s c i ous of a change i n h i s own a t t i t u d e s . An employee, f o r example, may o f ten s c a r c e l y recongize t ha t new working c ond i t i o n s have a f f e c t ed h i s "mora le" and thus the s a t i s f a c t i o n he gains from h i s job ( K e l v i n , 1970: 59 ) . Second ly , a t t i t u d e change i s u sua l l y g r adua l , both i n time and ex-t e n t . To g ive another example, a person may be very favourab le towards a newly e l e c t ed government, become s l ow ly d i sappo in ted by i t s a c t u a l performance, and even tua l l y s u f f i c i e n t l y h o s t i l e to vote aga ins t i t a t the next e l e c t i o n . T h e o r e t i c a l l y , the capac i t y to change a t t i t u d e s a l l ows the i n -d i v i d u a l to accommodate changes i n h i s c i r cumstances , whether these be due to n a t u r a l processes such as ag ing or to exogenous changes i n h i s e n v i r o n -ment. Th is b r ings to the f o re one ' s a b i l i t y to cope w i th s t r e s s as we l l as the a t t i t u d i n a l e f f e c t s of a s t r e s s s i t u a t i o n . I t has been shown, f o r i n s t an ce , that the c o n t r o l of behaviour by the use of f o r ce may sub-sequent l y l ead to a change i n a t t i t u d e s : When the Un i ted S ta tes army enforced r a c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n , a t t i t u d e s towards i n t e g r a t i o n were o f ten i n i t i a l l y h o s t i l e ; sometime af terwards the great ma jo r i t y of o f f i c e r s and men became favourab le to i t . Merely be ing f o r ced to p ro -pose a v iewpo int i n pub l i c may make the advocate more favourab le towards i t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f he gains s a t i s f a c -t i o n from h i s performance or i s p u b l i c l y approved. ( K e l v i n , 1970: 68) From another pe r spec t i ve an undes i r ab l e o b j e c t , event , or form of behaviour may be accepted because the a l t e r n a t i v e s are even l e s s ap-p e a l i n g . A person may, f o r example, mainta in an unhappy and mutua l l y u n s a t i s f y i n g marriage because the consequences of complete ma r i t a l breakdown ( e . g . l o n e l i n e s s , g u i l t , 36 f i n a n c i a l s t r i ngency ) are even more unp leasant . His comparison l e v e l f o r a l t e r n a t i v e s ' i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s l i k e l y to be so low that he would be prepared to t o l e r a t e h i s e x i s t i n g m a r i t a l c i r cums tances . Very few s tud i e s of the behav ioura l consequences of a t t i t u d e s take i n t o account the respondents a t t i t u d e s to a l t e r n a -t i v e behav iours , and thereby l i m i t t h e i r p r e d i c t i v e a b i l i t y . (Lemon, 1973: 259) Conc lus ion The preced ing d i s c u s s i on i s c l e a r l y on ly a b r i e f i n t r o d u c t i o n to the study of i n d i v i d u a l s ' a t t i t u d e s . Neve r the l e s s , i t i n d i c a t e s some of the p recau t ions which must be taken when d e v i s i n g an i n t e r v i ew schedu le . Furthermore, by p rov i d i ng a bas i s f o r e va l ua t i ng the research methods desc r i bed i n the f o l l o w i n g chap te r , i t removes the need to cons ide r the ob j e c t i v e of each i n t e r v i ew que s t i o n . A g rea te r need i s to understand tha t the mixture of i n t e r v i ew i n g techniques used i n t h i s s tudy d i d have a d e f i n i t e purpose. That purpose was to randomize response e r r o r s , to check the cons i s tency of i n d i v i d u a l s ' remarks, and to probe i n t o the r e -spondents ' a t t i t u d e s to a l t e r n a t i v e behav iours . 37 CHAPTER IV METHODOLOGY Th i s chapter o u t l i n e s the research methods tha t were designed to assess the impact of townhouses p laced i n s i n g l e f am i l y a reas . The de-velopment and ref inement of the methodology i s shown to have occur red i n a number of ove r l app ing phases. Dur ing the i n i t i a l phase, mun i c ipa l p lanners and government o f f i c i a l s i n V i c t o r i a and Vancouver were c on su l t e d . The purpose of t h i s s e r i e s of d i s cus s i ons was to l o ca t e townhouse p r o j e c t s tha t were des igned f o r f a m i l i e s w i th c h i l d r e n and which were t o t a l l y or p a r t i a l l y surrounded by s i n g l e f am i l y dwe l l i n g s . Subsequent ly , i t was a l s o necessary to s e l e c t an area i n which townhouses had not been b u i l t , but one tha t was as s i m i l a r as po s s i b l e to the areas a l r eady chosen. The second phase of the research p repa ra t i on c on s i s t ed of the d r a f t i n g , t e s t i n g , and r e v i s i o n of two separate i n t e r v i ew schedu les . Dur ing the t h i r d phase a sampl ing procedure was designed and a sample of households was chosen. L e t t e r s of i n t r o d u c t i o n (see Appendix A) were then d i s t r i b u t e d and i n t e r -views were conducted. S e l e c t i o n of the Study Areas To f a c i l i t a t e the s e l e c t i o n of two areas i n which townhouses had been b u i l t i t was necessary to e s t a b l i s h some gu i d e l i n e s concern ing the s i z e , des i gn , and l o c a t i o n of the townhouses. The f o l l o w i n g i s a l i s t of the c r i t e r i a upon which the cho i ce of the t e s t areas was made: 38 a) The study areas had to be e x i s t i n g , " o l d e r " r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods. b) The study areas had to be zoned p r i m a r i l y f o r s i n g l e f am i l y dwe l l i n g s . c) The townhouse proper ty shou ld be adjacent to the p r ope r t i e s of homeowners on a t l e a s t two s i d e s . d) The townhouses shou ld be ground-or iented f am i l y u n i t s w i th a maximum he ight of three s t o r e y s . e) The townhouse p ro j e c t shou ld not i n c l ude any commercial development. f ) The townhouse p ro j e c t s shou ld have been cons t ruc t ed at d i f f e r -ent t imes; one f i v e or more years ago and one b u i l t w i t h i n the l a s t two yea r s . Th is gu i de l i n e was e s t a b l i s h ed to permit a t e s t f o r the e f f e c t s of time exposure as we l l as f o r the e f f e c t s of des ign improvements. On the bas i s of these c r i t e r i a , the C i t y of v i c t o r i a was found to con ta i n the two most s u i t a b l e p r o j e c t s . One p r o j e c t i s 24 townhouse un i t s b u i l t i n 1969 on North Da i ry Road i n the Cedar H i l l a r ea . The o ther p r o j e c t , known as Rochdale P l a c e , c on s i s t s of 36 townhouse un i t s i n a t o t a l co -ope ra t i ve development of 74 u n i t s . Of the remaining u n i t s , 28 are dup lex , 6 are semi-detached, and 4 are detached. I t i s l o ca t ed i n the hear t of an area known as V i c . West. As some d i f f i c u l t y was encountered i n f i n d i n g any p ro j e c t s which met a l l of the above c r i t e r i a , i t was not po s s i b l e to choose e i t h e r p ro j e c t s or areas tha t were s i m i l a r i n a l l r e spe c t s . Th is d i f -f i c u l t y f u r t h e r compl i ca ted the s e l e c t i o n of the t h i r d study a r ea . F i n a l l y , a d i s t r i c t which w i l l be r e f e r r ed to as the Hau l t a i n area was chosen. I t i s w i t h i n a mi le of the Cedar H i l l neighbourhood. Con-sequen t l y , the two d i s t r i c t s have much the same o r i e n t a t i o n towards shopping f a c i l i t i e s and a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s . While the V i c . West ne i gh -39 bourhood i s f i v e mi les d i s t a n t from these areas i t s o r i e n t a t i o n to shopping and employment cen t res i s comparable. Fu r t he r comparisons between a l l three of the areas are s i m p l i f i e d by the c h e c k l i s t presented i n Table 1 as w e l l as by re ference to Maps 1, 2, 3 and 4. Table 1  Study Area C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Feature Cedar H i l l V i c West Hau l t a i n 1. Homes b u i l t about 1915 X X 2. Homes b u i l t about 1946 X 3. Some homes being renovated X X 4. Some new homes nearby X X 5. Elementary schoo l w i t h i n 2 b locks X X 6. Parks o r open green space w i t h i n 2 b locks X X X 7. Apartments w i t h i n 3 b locks X X X 8. Adjacent to sma l l s t o r e s X X 9 . Adjacent to l i g h t i n d u s t r i a l area X 10. Some dead-end s t r e e t s or cu l - de - sa c s X X X 11 . No c l e a r view of ocean or mountains X X X Some a d d i t i o n a l f a c t s about the townhouse developments themselves are worth n o t i n g . Both p r o j e c t s i t e s are i r r e g u l a r i n shape and both had p r ev i ou s l y been open f i e l d s . In each case , three or f ou r o l de r homes were demol ished to permit c on s t r u c t i o n of the townhouses. At t h i s po in t the s i m i l a r i t i e s end. The Cedar H i l l P ro j e c t was p r i v a t e l y f i nanced and each un i t was s o l d a t p r e v a i l i n g market p r i c e s . In c o n t r a s t , Rochdale P lace rece i ved f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t ance from the P r o v i n c i a l and Fede ra l Governments 40 Saanich viCToniA O a k B a y Map I Location of Study Areas in the City of Victoria Legend Haultain Study Area Vic. West Study Area (^) Cedar H i l l Study Area (^) Scales 2 inches = 1 mile 1 /=? V > 3 A / <5 _3 / O /3 A 5 Q ' t in 8 _ ? < s ° " 7 • S S %. 3" . ' £?£! Se 1 _?_>' ; /a ' /p • /<s i ^ l = : /S '8 . / / O J s s L u / o /3 se' a s S J H « I a? o : So p /9 a • ' /& fr* / O • /<& /S IS ; //o | //<? • > \ ; ES •• £1 ; e _ •<£ « fig '& r " p ' /a /o = • / © (*••• 5 H i - /3 a |^_?<& wa'. ^ i «5 ^ &s, (4a _r i ; _?/ . ^ s 1 /* - C O P < (/£*) a /a 3 : • / P / O : / / « /a 1 ! I | / £ ! • •s_> / / r ~ J h i *) PARK fO ago.  /a /o = // = /s /£ • . ?? (a-) ; ^ J '• 2o P -< /_» > /a 3 « j • < / p ; / O :j (//) • 5 /a- /_? • < 3 81 i • : i | rBGZ a J ' • 2 3 • £*o • /a ^ . ; 1 CLOSED \ - //o • ^ S<c> / *> Q ;'• h s • Q -NI •o ^ 3 "0 XT? • _ f a - d " 3 ' - d — i • _?3 • 21 ' _ _ a - ; g § £?/ -//o • G 1 /A | p ; a • / i 'j ^ /a _> I • / P / O x • i •• /<& // = , J • / a 55 i _r_ '3 ! s >s • ^ 3 .ea *3! map 2 Hau l t a i n Study Area Legend Survey Sanple Commercial Use SCBIG: 1 i n ch = 200 Feet Map 3 Vic. West Study Area Legend Townhouse s i t ~ Survey Sample • o A Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet ILV - V P -^ ^ Dp * /cs.c » \37 \ 2 -415 A- g * ^ ' 1 •C* * *'*' /"*• o B \ ;« . . t'9.97' '.-, r; : •t 1 6 •i t».M * i ic o\ j 9 1 IC5.0' SB <0 19* 9' Si u 01 —• i i . . * -**«* • l \ CO 0) N 5 Map 4 Cedar H i l l Study Area Legend Townhouse site Survey Sample Commercial Use A • Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet 44 as we l l as from community o r g an i z a t i o n s . Furthermore, be ing a co -ope ra -t i v e , the complex i s owned c o l l e c t i v e l y by members who i n d i v i d u a l l y lease t h e i r homes. The Design of the In te rv iew Schedules The bas i c des ign of the i n t e r v i ew schedules (see Appendices B and C) was i n f l u enced by the work of past researchers ( E a r l , 1970; Duguid, 1972; Lakehead P lann ing Board, 1973). The i r schedules were va luab le be-cause they had a l ready been tes ted and because t h e i r a t t i t u d e measurement ob j e c t i v e s were s i m i l a r . Based on t h e i r expe r i ence , s p e c i f i c ques t ions were chosen to meet a v a r i e t y of needs. Separate ques t i on s , f o r example, d e a l t w i th the type of people l i v i n g i n townhouses and the a c t ua l des ign of the dwe l l i n g s . This was done to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of these cons i de r a t i on s i n the mind of the respondent. The number of people who had moved away o r who were thought to have moved because of the townhouses was po s tu l a t ed as be ing one measure of the impact of the new housing on the neighbourhood. Quest ions on t h i s sub jec t were the re fo re i n c l uded i n the townhouse schedu le . In t h i s same schedule an attempt to check the cons i s tency of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s response was made by ask ing f o r h i s op in ions of the townhouses nearby and of any a d d i t i o n a l townhouses that might be b u i l t i n the immediate a r ea . The a c t u a l words chosen to i n d i c a t e p rox im i t y were " w i t h i n s i g h t of your home". I t was f e l t tha t the use of such a phrase would evoke a more meaningful response than words such as " i n t h i s neighbourhood" o r " w i t h i n a i m i l e r a d i u s " . 45 For obvious reasons the nature and sequence of ques t ions f o r the Hau l t a i n area re s i den t s had to be s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t . Neve r the l e s s , an attempt was made to measure the same a t t i t u d e s on each top i c by r e -t a i n i n g the mixture of c l o sed and open-ended ques t ions found i n the o ther schedu le . S i m i l a r l y , the same statement sheet was used i n both cases . The cor respond ing answer sheet was des igned so that i t cou ld be completed by the respondent w i thout i n t e r f e r en ce from the i n t e r v i e w e r . I t was be l i e ved that an i n d i v i d u a l might express an a t t i t u d e on paper v i a a check mark that he might not express v e r b a l l y . As a f u r t h e r means of s t i m u l a t i n g negat ive or p o s i t i v e op i n i o n s , the respondent was asked to eva luate a s e r i e s of co l ou r photographs (see F i gu res 1 through 9 ) . These photographs, which i n c l uded two views of each of the study area p r o j e c t s , were chosen to show a v a r i e t y of townhouse t ypes . Subsequent to the i n i t i a l d r a f t i n g of the two schedu les , c e r t a i n ques t ions were d e l e t ed , added, rephrased, o r rearranged acco rd ing to the adv ice of a number of p r o f e s s o r s . P r e t e s t s of both schedules were then c a r r i e d out i n Vancouver. The schedule to be used i n the Hau l t a i n area was tes ted i n an area of s i n g l e f am i l y homes i n K e r r i s d a l e . Due to the s i m i l a r i t y of the two i ns t ruments , the t e s t r e s u l t s prompted changes i n both schedu les . The most impor tant change was the a dd i t i o n of the r e s -ponse ca tego r i e s " d on ' t know" and " c a n ' t g ene r a l i z e " to a number of ques t i ons . The second schedule was t e s t ed i n the v i c i n i t y of a townhouse development completed i n 1973. Other a l t e r a t i o n s were then made to e l i -minate awkward or r e p e t i t i v e words. In t o t a l , f i v e homeowners were i n t e r -viewed dur ing the p r e t e s t s t age . Figure 2» Rear view of Cedar H i l l project from the backyard of a home on Clawthorpe Street. F igure 4: View between rows of Rochdale P lace u n i t s . 48 F igure 61 An example of pos s i b l e e x t e r i o r des ign fea tu res i n a Saan ich townhouse p r o j e c t . 49 Figure 8: Frontal view of a small townhouse project in the Municipality of Oak Bay. 50 F igure 9: An example of l andscap ing i n a Vancouver townhouse p r o j e c t . 51 Sample S e l e c t i o n and the In te rv iew In l i g h t of the a v a i l a b l e resources the t o t a l sample s i z e was se t a t 75 completed i n t e r v i e w s . Manageable t a rge t s of 25 i n t e r v i ews per week per study area were thus e s t a b l i s h e d . Whi le these ta rge ts were not r e l axed i n any of the three a reas , the f i n a l sampl ing procedure d i f f e r e d between the Hau l t a i n area and the two townhouse d i s t r i c t s . In the con-t r o l area the f i r s t task was to s e l e c t f ou r b locks f o r s tudy . Fo l l ow ing a tour of the area the b locks shown on Map 2 were s e l e c t e d because of t h e i r c loseness to a s c hoo l , a park , and some sma l l s t o r e s . The age and c ond i t i o n of the houses themselves had, of cou r se , been p r i n c i p a l f a c t o r s i n the cho i ce of the l a r g e r study a r ea . Another c on s i d e r a t i o n was tha t w i t h the removal of approx imate ly three houses as w e l l as a s t r e e t c l o -sure a sma l l townhouse p r o j e c t of about a dozen un i t s cou ld have been b u i l t i n the a r ea . The next task was to s e l e c t the households to be con ta c t ed . I t was f i n a l l y dec ided to attempt to i n t e r v i ew every t h i r d r e s i d e n t . The r a t i o n a l e was that t h i s would s i m p l i f y the l e t t e r d i s -t r i b u t i o n process and evenly d i s t r i b u t e the response over the fou r b l o c k s . The problem of where to begin d i s t r i b u t i n g l e t t e r s was so l ved by a random draw from among the l o t numbers shown on Map 2. In the two townhouse areas a mod i f i c a t i o n was made i n the house-ho ld s e l e c t i o n procedure as a r e s u l t of the poor i n i t i a l response i n the Cedar H i l l a r ea . The mod i f i c a t i o n c on s i s t ed of an attempt to con tac t each r e s i den t whose proper ty was on the same b lock as the townhouses o r whose home was d i r e c t l y across the s t r e e t from the p r o j e c t . Th is was a compromise measure designed to ensure tha t the g rea te s t number of persons 52 d i r e c t l y a f f e c t ed by the p ro j e c t cou ld be i n t e r v i ewed . For those more d i s t a n t r e s i den t s w i t h i n an a r b i t r a r y two b lock rad ius the procedure of c on t a c t i n g every t h i r d r e s i den t was r e t a i n e d . I f a r e s i den t cou ld not be contac ted a f t e r two or three attempts a l e t t e r of i n t r o d u c t i o n was d i s t r i b u t e d to another household. Th is was the s tandard p r a c t i c e i n each a r ea . Those i n d i v i d u a l s who would not grant an i n t e r v i ew were c l a s s i -f i e d as " r e f u s a l s " . Some of the r e f u s a l s on the f i r s t day of i n t e r v i e w -i n g i n the Cedar H i l l d i s t r i c t were l i k e l y due to the au tho r ' s uneas iness and l ack of t a c t i n reques t i ng an i n t e r v i e w . Other r e f u s a l s may be a t -t r i b u t e d to i l l n e s s , apathy, or an unw i l l i ngness to spare the time need-ed f o r the i n t e r v i e w . Inc luded i n these ca t ego r i e s was one man who twice postponed a prearranged i n t e r v i ew and another who would not answer a knock a t the door. The i n t e r v i ews were conducted between 9.30A.M. and 10.00P.IY1. each day - w i th the except ion of F r iday and Saturday n i gh t s and Sunday mornings. Such a schedule was needed because many persons were not a t home before 4.00P.M. dur ing the week. The normal l ength of the i n t e r -v iews va r i ed between 40 to 60 minutes. On occas ion they cont inued f o r approx imate ly 90 minutes. As a s o c i a l event , the i n t e r v i ew r e a l l y began a t the doors tep . From t h i s po in t fo rward a degree of conf idence had to be e s t ab l i s h ed between the i n t e r v i ewe r and the respondent. Some persons ' apprehensions were v i s i b l y d i s p e l l e d by statements that the author was not a salesman of any k ind as we l l as by h i s w i l l i n g n e s s to r e tu rn at a more convenient 53 t ime. Other i n d i v i d u a l s needed no such assurances , The l e t t e r e x p l a i n i n g the nature and purpose of the survey had been s u f f i c i e n t . Once i n s i d e the home some a d d i t i o n a l measures were taken to calm any sense of m i s t r u s t or uneas iness the respondent might have. The i n d i v i d u a l was, f o r i n s t an c e , o f ten encouraged to resume t h e i r normal a c t i v i t i e s f o r tha t time of day. A number of women seemed p leased to be ab le to proceed w i th t h e i r cook ing o r i r o n i n g as they responded to ques t i on s . Others seemed to r e l ax when a t op i c of common i n t e r e s t un re l a ted to townhouses was b r i e f l y d i s c u s s ed . I f , on the o ther hand, the i n t e r v i ew was an obvious inconven ience , fewer spontaneous or prob ing ques t ions were asked. The i n t e r v i ew u sua l l y took p lace i n a l i v i n g room or k i t c h e n . In two ex cep t i ona l cases i t was completed at the f r o n t door . In every case the views of one person were recorded . I f both husband and wi fe were present and i n t e r e s t e d i n the survey the husband was chosen as the spokesman. Th is was done to ob ta in a more even balance between the num-ber of male and female respondents . Such a d e c i s i o n d i d not mean, however, tha t the op in ions of a wi fe or f r i e n d were not welcomed. In f a c t , t h i r d par ty comments were o f ten encouraged s ince they tended to prompt d i s c u s -s i o n . The Respondents The persona l and household c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the respondents i n the three study areas are desc r i bed below i n s t a t i s t i c a l fo rm. Tables 2 through 10 are l a r g e l y s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . They f a c i l i t a t e comparisons between the three sample popu la t ions and prov ide the bas i s f o r e v a l u a t i n g 54 the a t t i t u d e s of area r e s i d en t s . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of a l l the respondents by sex was 59: per cent female and 41 per cent male. The g rea tes t d e v i a t i o n from t h i s average was i n the V i c . West area where on ly 29 per cent of the respondents were males. As most i n t e r v i ews were conducted du r i ng the day the l a r g e r female r ep re sen ta t i on was expec ted . I t was g rea te s t i n V i c . West be-cause more non-male households were contac ted and because more husbands happened to be absent dur ing the e a r l y even ing . From the data i n Tables 3 and 4 i t i s c l e a r tha t the V i c . West sample popu la t i on was younger than the o ther two groups of respondents . Only 20 per cent of those i n t e r v i ewed i n V i c . West were over the age of f i f t y . Comparable f i g u r e s f o r the same age group are 40 per cent and 48 per cent f o r the Hau l t a i n and Cedar H i l l areas r e s p e c t i v e l y . Table 2 Sex of Respondent Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l Male 13 7 11 Female 12 18 14 Table 3 Aoe of Respondent (By Observat ion) Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l 19-24 1 4 4 25-34 8 8 4 35-50 6 8 5 50-65 5 2 6 Over 65 5 3 6 55 Table 4 Stage i n L i f e Cyc le Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l C h i l d l e s s 2 7 6 With on ly p reschoo l age c h i l d r e n 4 5 3 With on ly s choo l age c h i l d r e n 5 4 4 Mix ture 5 4 2 With on ly adu l t c h i l d r e n 9 5 10 Table 5 Household S i ze No. of Persons Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l 1 2 3 1 2 5 10 7 3 5 2 9 4 6 7 5 5 6 3 1 6 or more 1 0 2 Table 6 revea l s that the l a rge ma jo r i t y of respondents i n each area had not at tended u n i v e r s i t y . Th i s corresponds c l o s e l y w i th the f ac t that most respondents repor ted a low to moderate income (see Table 7 ) . The f i g u r e s f o r tenure and length of res idence do not show any major d i f f e r en ce s between the three study a reas . In each neighbourhood the turnover of homes i s f a i r l y r a p i d . At the same t ime, however, approx-imate l y 44 per cent of the respondents i n each area have been r e s i d en t s f o r f i v e or more yea r s . Many of these cou ld be termed permanent r e s i den t s wi th no i n t e n t i o n of moving e l sewhere . As w e l l , a sma l l m ino r i t y ( 1 2 -16 per cent) of the respondents i n each area were r en t e r s . Table 6 H iohest Leve l of Educat ion Completed Elementary s choo l High s choo l 1-3 years u n i v e r s i t y o r c o l l e g e U n i v e r s i t y degree Hau l t a i n 7 15 2 1 V i c . West 7 12 5 1 Cedar H i l l 5 12 5 3 Table 7 To ta l Household Income Income Ranoe Under $8,000 $8,000 - 814,000 $14,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $25,000 $25,000 - $35,000 Over $35,000 No response Hau l t a i n 7 8 7 1 2 0 0 V i c . West 4 10 7 0 0 2 2 Cedar H i l l 7 5 6 2 1 0 4 Table 8 Occupat iona l S ta tus of Household Head  Hau l t a i n Se l f -employed 4 Usua l l y employed f u l l t ime 14 Usua l l y employed pa r t time 0 Unemployed 1 Re t i r ed 6 Student 0 V i c . West 2 18 2 0 3 0 Cedar H i l l 3 13 1 1 6 1 57 Table 9 Tenure Own Rent: Detached house Duplex Su i t e i n house Hau l t a i n 22 2 1 0 V i c . West 21 2 2 0 Cedar H i l l 21 3 0 1 Table 10 Lenath of Residence i n Present Dwe l l i ng Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l Less than 1 year 6 4 4 1 - 2 years 0 7 3 3 - 5 years 8 4 4 6 - 1 0 years 2 4 5 Over 10 years 9 6 9 Conc lus ion Th is chapter has desc r i bed the research methods and the c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c s of the respondents i n cons ide rab le d e t a i l . Th is was done to permit the reader to detec t any sources of b i as i n the sample s e l e c t i o n . From the au tho r ' s v i ewpo in t , the c on s i s t en t adherence to the household s e l e c t i o n procedure and the t im ing of the i n t e r v i ews e l im i na t ed any p o t e n t i a l l y s i g -n i f i c a n t b i a s e s . I t i s the re fo re as se r ted tha t the sample i n each study area i s r ep resen ta t i ve of the neighbourhood popu l a t i o n . FOOTNOTES The number of r e f u s a l s was 4, 13 , and 12 f o r the H a u l t a i n , V i c . West, and Cedar H i l l areas r e s p e c t i v e l y . I t shou ld be po in ted out f o r those readers w i th a s t a t i s t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n tha t these numbers are 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 a t the .05 l e v e l u s i ng a Ch i - square t e s t w i t h two degrees of freedom. In o ther words, the number of r e f u s a l s may have been due to random v a r i a t i o n i n the sample. Having made t h i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n , i t i s worth no t i ng some of the apparent reasons f o r the g rea te r number of r e f u s a l s i n the two townhouse a reas . Some i n d i v i d u -a l s seemed to view the survey as an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the townhouses. One woman commented a p o l o g e t i c a l l y that she d i d not wish to become " i n v o l v e d " . Others s t a t ed f l a t l y that they were not i n t e r e s t e d i n answering any que s t i on s . The i r abrupt manner suggested tha t they r e -sented a s t r a n g e r ' s attempt to d i s cuss i s sue s t ha t might generate bad f e e l i n g s i n the community. 59 CHAPTER V RESEARCH FINDINGS This chapter examined the r e s u l t s of the i n t e r v i e w s . Responses to s p e c i f i c ques t ions are cons idered under the f o l l o w i n g headings: a) a t t i t u d e s towards townhouse l i v i n g and p r o j e c t r e s i den t s b) the nature and rank ing of res idents* concerns c) r e s i d e n t s ' des ign pre ferences d) the ex tent of a t t i t u d e change r e s u l t i n g from exposure to townhouses e) pub l i c hear ings and a t t i t u d e s towards f u t u r e townhouse c on s t r u c t i o n Each of these s e c t i on s cons ide r s methods of a n a l y s i s and the e f f e c t i v ene s s of us i ng the i n t e r v i ew schedule approach to measuring a t t i t u d e s . As such , the i n f o rma t i on presented i s both d e s c r i p t i v e and i n t e r p r e t i v e . A t t i t u d e s Towards Townhouse L i v ino and P r o j e c t Res idents Survey r e s u l t s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d tha t the a t t i t u d e s of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s repor ted below were formed on the bas i s of l i m i t e d know-ledge . Only 4 of the 75 respondents had p r ev i ou s l y l i v e d i n a townhouse. A much l a r g e r number (31) d i d have f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s who were p r e sen t l y l i v i n g i n townhouses or who had done so i n the pa s t . Two- th i rds of the f r i e nd s and r e l a t i v e s were repor ted by the respondents to be s a t i s f i e d w i th t h e i r townhouse accommodation. The a t t i t u d e s of the respondents towards townhouse l i v i n g were 60 measured by ask ing i f a townhouse u n i t would be cons ide red when l ook i ng f o r a new home. Twenty-e ight per cent of the respondents r e p l i e d that they would look a t townhouses - f o r reasons of co s t or because of a s c a r c i t y of s i n g l e f am i l y homes. A lack of p r i v a c y , a lack of persona l freedom, o r a f e e l i n g of be ing crowded were among the reasons g iven by the ma jo r i t y who s a i d they would not cons ide r a townhouse f o r themselves. Opin ion was evenly d i v i d ed as to whether p r o j e c t r e s i den t s d i f -f e r ed from the occupants of s i n g l e f am i l y homes (see Table 11) . Those who f e l t there was a d i f f e r en ce he ld two d i s t i n c t po i n t s of v iew. One Table 11 Ques t ion : Do you th ink that townhouse r e s i den t s and the occupants of s i n g l e f am i l y homes have d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? Response Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l T o t a l Yes 7 13 10 30 No 12 9 8 29 Don ' t know 5 3 3 11 Can ' t gene ra l i z e 1 0 4 5 Number of respondents 25 25 25 75 view was tha t townhouse dwe l l e r s were seek ing a more c l o s e l y k n i t s t y l e of l i v i n g and the re fo re cou l d accept l e s s freedom and p r i v a c y . The g rea te r preva lence of t h i s view i n the V i c . West area was l i k e l y due to the p rox im i t y of the Rochdale P lace Co -ope ra t i v e . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , townhouse r e s i den t s were cons idered to be t r a n s i e n t , l a zy i n d i v i d u a l s a t tempt ing to avo id the g rea te r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a s soc i a t ed w i th the ownership of a s i n g l e detached house. 61 Table 12 r equ i r e s on ly a b r i e f comment. Most respondents pe r -ce i ved tha t townhouses a t t r a c t e d persons from a v a r i e t y of c l a s se s and age groups. However, they d i d f e e l tha t f a m i l i e s and working c l a s s peo-p le predominated. None of the respondents be l i e ved tha t s i n g l e people o r members of the upper c l a s s l i v e d i n townhouses. Table 12 Quest ions To your knowledge, what k ind l i v e i n townhouses? of i n d i v i d u a l s F reauencv of Response Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l T o t a l F am i l i e s 11 7 10 28 S i ng l e people 0 0 0 0 Young people 1 2 1 4 Middle aged people 0 2 0 2 Re t i r ed persons 1 0 2 ..3 A l l types of people 14 17 18 49 Upper c l a s s 0 0 0 0 Middle c l a s s 9 1 6 16 Working c l a s s 12 10 11 33 Mix ture of c l a s s e s 4 10 9 23 Can ' t gene ra l i z e 3 5 2 10 Notes No income or o ccupa t i ona l data was used to de f ine the three c l a s s e s l i s t e d above. The respondent was f r ee to choose the term which matched h i s impress ion of the townhouse r e s i d e n t s . The term "work ing c l a s s " was used as a s u b s t i t u t e f o r " lower c l a s s " because i t was f e l t tha t the l a t t e r term had an ove r l y derogatory conno ta t i on . 62 The Nature and Ranking, of Res i den t s ' Concerns One of the bas i c o b j e c t i v e s of the survey was to determine which aspects of townhouse redevelopment or i n f i l l p r o j e c t s were of the g rea tes t concern to sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . Th is was accompl ished p r i m a r i l y by we igh t ing and then summing the responses to the statement sheet con ta ined i n the i n t e r v i ew schedules ( f o r ease of re fe rence the statement sheet i s reproduced i n Table 13 ) . The r e s u l t i n g rank ing and the s ca l e s used are shown i n Table 14. The s i x p o s i t i v e statements have been shown sepa ra te l y to avo id c on f u s i on . The i r o rde r i ng revea l s that i n a l l areas r e s i den t s f e l t tha t townhouses u sua l l y rep lace rundown houses and were more accep t -ab le i f they were a t t r a c t i v e l y des igned. Th is i n f o rma t i on compliments the rank ing of the negat ive statements a l though the main reason f o r i n -c l u d i ng the more favourab le statements was to present a mixed se t of s t i m u l i to the respondent. The data of Table 14 prov ides some i n t e r e s t i n g con t r a s t s between the op in ions of r e s i den t s i n the Hau l t a i n area and the two townhouse neighbourhoods. P r i vacy emerges as the dominant concern i n the former area whereas those r e s i den t s who have a townhouse nearby agree tha t one ' s view i s most l i k e l y to be a f f e c t e d by a rowhouse p r o j e c t . Proper ty v a l -ues are c l e a r l y of a l e s s e r concern to the V i c . West and Cedar H i l l r e s i d e n t s . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note tha t a l l of the sample groups pe r -ce i ved maintenance to be a secondary i s s u e . Problems as soc i a t ed w i th p r i vacy and t r a f f i c are shown to be the more important common concerns of the ma jo r i t y of r e s i den t s i n a l l three a reas . The dangers of g e n e r a l i z i n g f u r t h e r from the i n f o rma t i on d i sp l ayed Table 13 Statement Sheet 1. They c rea te t r a f f i c problems. 2. They have la rge open green spaces on t h e i r p rope r t y . 3. They reduce the p r i vacy of sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . 4. They b lock the view of sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . 5. They rep lace rundown houses. 6 . They p lace s t r a i n s on sewer, water , and o the r s e r v i c e s . 7 . They cause l o c a l tax ra tes to r i s e . 8 . They are acceptab le w i t h i n s i n g l e f am i l y areas i f they are a t t r a c t i v e l y des igned. 9 . They cause crowding i n s choo l s . 10. They are not we l l ma in ta ined . 11 . They i nc rease the s t a t u s of the neighbourhood. 12. They a t t r a c t most ly s i n g l e persons w i th we l l - p ay i ng jobs or s en i o r c i t i z e n s . 13 . They reduce proper ty va l ue s . 14. They cause pa rk ing problems. 15. They are poor l y des igned. 16. They r u i n the cha rac te r of the community. 17. They b lend i n w i th the neighbourhood. 18. They c rea te no ise problems. Statements 2, 5, 8 , 11 , 12 , and 17 are cons ide red to be p o s i t i v e statements wh i le the remainder are cons idered to be negat ive s ta tements . 64 Table 14 Statement Ranking Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l Negat ive statements 1 . p r i vacy b lock view b lock view 2. proper ty va lues t r a f f i c problems p r i vacy 3. t r a f f i c problems schoo l crowding t r a f f i c problems 4 . pa rk ing problems p r i vacy park ing problems 5. s t r a i n s s e r v i c e s proper ty va lues s t r a i n s s e r v i c e s 6. b lock view pa rk ing problems no ise problems 7. s choo l crowding s t r a i n s s e r v i c e s r u i n cha rac te r 8. r u i n cha ra c t e r tax r a te s poor des ign 9 . no ise problems no ise problems schoo l crowding 10. maintenance poor des ign proper ty va lues 11 . poor des ign maintenance tax ra tes 12. tax ra tes r u i n cha rac te r maintenance P o s i t i v e statements 1. rundown houses rundown houses a t t r a c . des ign 2. a t t r a c . des ign a t t r a c . des ign rundown houses 3. open green spaces blend i n b lend i n 4. b lend i n i n c rease s t a t u s open green spaces 5. i nc rease s t a t u s open green spaces i nc rease s t a t u s 6 . s i n g l e and s en i o r s i n g l e and s en i o r s i n g l e and s en i o r Notes The above statements were ranked acco rd ing to the f o l l o w i n g s c a l e s : Negat ive Statements P o s i t i v e Statements ( F i r s t Group) (Second Group) S t rong l y Agree -3 +3 Agree -2 +2 Don ' t Know 0 0 Disagree +2 -2 S t rong l y Disagree +3 -3 Can ' t Genera l i ze 0 0 65 i n Table 14 are numerous. F i r s t l y , the rank ings can not be i n t e r p r e t e d to i n d i c a t e tha t i n d i v i d u a l s * a t t i t u d e s have changed. Whi le the data suggest tha t t h i s i s the case the method of we igh t i ng the responses to the statements must be cons idered i n g rea te r depth . Th is w i l l be done i n the s e c t i o n on a t t i t u d e change. Second ly , the rank ings on ly r e f l e c t the op in ions of those persons who f e l t they cou ld agree or d isagree w i th a g iven s tatement . These tended to be people who answered on the bas i s of very l i m i t e d knowledge o r on the bas i s of t h e i r exper ience w i th a pro-j e c t tha t was l e s s than two b locks away. The person who was aware of d i f f e r e n t types of townhouse developments u sua l l y checked the " c a n ' t g ene r a l i z e " column. On the o ther hand, the person who had no knowledge of c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c e f f e c t s of townhouses marked the " d o n ' t know" column. Both of these responses were ass igned a weight of z e ro . Th is weight was app l i e d s o l e l y f o r a n a l y t i c a l purposes and does not i n d i c a t e that both answers were cons idered to be equal or i n s i g n i f i c a n t . Both of these r e s -ponses are u s e f u l s i n ce they i n d i c a t e t ha t r e s i d en t s are l e s s s e t i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s i n r e l a t i o n to c e r t a i n t o p i c s . These t o p i c s i n c l ude tax r a t e s , neighbourhood s t a t u s , the v i s i b i l i t y and des ign of townhouses, and t h e i r e f f e c t on community c h a r a c t e r . Any f u r t h e r a na l y s i s a long the above l i n e s i s l e f t to the reader . For t h i s purpose the responses to the statement sheet i n each study area are shown i n Appendices D, E, arid F. These frequency t ab l e s d i s p l a y i n -format ion which i s not e a s i l y put i n t o words. They a l s o permit the skep-t i c a l o r cu r i ous reader to apply a number of d i f f e r e n t we igh t ing s c a l e s to the data to t e s t the r e s u l t s desc r ibed i n t h i s s t udy . Another important po in t i s that the rank ings shown i n Table 14 66 are not i n d i c a t i o n s of houi r e s i den t s would respond to a f u tu re townhouse p r oposa l . As w i l l be e xp l a i n ed , c e r t a i n t opog raph i ca l and design f ea tu re s then become key c ond i t i o n i n g v a r i a b l e s . Desp i te a n a l y t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , the statement sheet proved to be a va luab le dev i c e . A number of respondents enqu i red as to the o r i g i n of the s ta tements . They seemed p leased tha t the comments had been made by s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s l i k e themselves. H e s i t a t i o n to i n d i c a t e one 's r e a l op in ions f o r f e a r of marking the "wrong" column was there fo re r e -duced to a minimum. Of equal importance was the f a c t tha t many persons murmured to themselves as they marked t h e i r answer shee t s . Others o f -f e r ed unexpected remarks, many of which revea led the extent of t h e i r knowledge of the sub j e c t and reasons f o r b i a s e s . The respondents o f ten o f f e r ed t h e i r comments when marking the " s t r o n g l y agree" or " s t r o ng l y d i sag ree " columns. Th i s seemed to be t h e i r way of i n d i c a t i n g the spe -c i f i c e f f e c t s of imposing townhouses on a community. In t h i s manner the i n t e n s i t y of f e e l i n g s was recorded . Due to the we igh t ing s ca l e s a p p l i e d , those statements which aroused the s t ronges t r eac t i on s are those tha t are ranked h ighes t f o r a l l three study a reas . The on ly except ion i s the statement that townhouses are poor l y designed (see Appendices D, E, and F ) . Ha l f of those who agreed w i th t h i s op in i on had s t r ong f e e l i n g s . The i r e f f e c t on the rank ings was moderated by the much l a r g e r number of persons who d i d not agree w i th the s tatement . The va lue of the spontaneous comments made wh i le marking the statement sheet and a t o ther t imes dur ing the i n t e r v i ew was tha t they revea led some concerns that had not been a n t i c i p a t e d . A l i s t of the most 67 f r equen t l y mentioned remarks o r f e e l i n g s was consequent ly prepared to i n d i c a t e these concerns . Th is l i s t , which appears i n Table 15, p r o -v ides some a d d i t i o n a l i n s i g h t s i n t o the r e s i d e n t s ' past exper i ences , t h e i r s c a l e of va l ue s , and why c e r t a i n f e a r s are not e a s i l y d i s p e l l e d . As i n t e r v i ews were be ing conducted i t became apparent tha t a m ino r i t y of r e s i den t s i n a l l three areas shared the op in i on that c i t i -zens* p ro t e s t s have no e f f e c t on p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n s . V i c . West and Cedar H i l l r e s i d en t s , i n p a r t i c u l a r , were s k e p t i c a l of the value of pub l i c hea r i ngs . Some t y p i c a l comments were: a) "The community i s u s ua l l y bypassed. " b) " I would p r o t e s t , but i t wou ldn ' t do any good there would be a cheque behind someone's back . " c) " I don ' t th ink i t matters i f they ( the neighbours) ob j e c t or not . I f the C i t y or the Government want i t to happen, i t w i l l go th rough . " On occas ion these op in ions were coupled w i th the p e s s i m i s t i c view that C i t y Counc i l represents bus iness i n t e r e s t s . As a r e s u l t b u i l d i n g permi ts were thought to be granted o r re fused on the bas i s of the development 's c o n t r i b u t i o n to mun ic ipa l revenues ra the r than i t s a e s t h e t i c or s o c i a l impact on the community. A t h i r d emot ional concern was tha t the townhouses might be a low income r e n t a l p r o j e c t . The two examples most o f ten c i t e d i n t h i s regard were B lanshard Court and Burns ide Gardens. Both p r o j e c t s were b u i l t i n the l a t e 1960*s and both s u f f e r ed from vandal ism s h o r t l y a f t e r they were occup ied . Burns ide Gardens was o r i g i n a l l y des igned as a low r e n t a l de-velopment f o r f a m i l i e s , a l though the un i t s have r e cen t l y been o f f e r ed f o r s a l e . B lanshard Court cont inues to house approx imate ly n ine ty low income 68 f a m i l i e s . Those persons who r e f e r r e d to these two p ro j e c t s were very apprehensive of the e f f e c t s of concen t r a t i ng low income f a m i l i e s i n one a r ea . The i r p r i n c i p l e concern was tha t c h i l d r e n would " run w i l d " be-cause both parents were working or because a s i n g l e mother cou ld not c o n t r o l them. A sma l l m ino r i t y of the respondents a s se r t ed tha t the tenure of the townhouse un i t s was the v i t a l i s s u e . In t h e i r v iew, homeowners are i n t e r e s t e d i n the appearance of t h e i r p roper ty wh i l e r en te r s are not mot ivated to do maintenance work. Those r e s i den t s who spoke i n terms of " the p r i de of ownership" a l s o r e f e r r e d to the sense of compet i t i on tha t can be aroused between ne ighbours; w i th each one t r y i n g to impress the o ther by s e t t i n g h igh maintenance s tandards . A l though they admit ted that t h e i r a c t i on s and expend i tures bordered on the i r r a t i o n a l , they added tha t they d i d not wish to be a source of embarrassment to the neighbourhood. Having adopted t h i s ownership e t h i c , t h i s group resented people pe rce i ved to have opposing va l ue s . Other r e s i den t s were opposed to townhouses f o r a wide assortment of reasons . Some were d i s t r e s s ed tha t some s i n g l e f am i l y homes might be s a c r i f i c e d . Others f e l t tha t townhouses represented an a l i e n , compact l i f e s t y l e which they cou ld not adapt to because of t h e i r r u r a l background. S t i l l o thers doubted the need to l o ca t e mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ng s i n s i n g l e f am i l y a reas . They a l l uded to Canada's vastness o r c la imed tha t rezon ings were the r e s u l t of l obby ing by deve lopers i n search of l a rge p r o f i t s . Numerous r e s i den t s admi t ted tha t "people have to l i v e somewhere", but f e l t they cou ld not accept as neighbours;,persons who chose townhouse 69 Table 15 Key References and Phrases Reference Townhouses should not be l i k e apartments o r ' boxes " Res idents p ro t e s t s have no e f f e c t Uncon t r o l l ed c h i l d r e n B lanshard Court Deve lope r ' s p r o f i t motive Rura l background Burns ide Gardens Increase i n t r a f f i c Neighbourhood problems (not r e -l a t e d to townhouses) Ownership versus r e n t a l Pa rk ing problems Townhouses shou ld not over look neighbours* yards Homes shou ld not be p u l l e d down Number of Times Mentioned Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l To t a l 11 3 4 6 5 3 4 4 1 3 0 2 0 5 5 2 1 4 1 2 4 1 3 1 1 4 3 3 4 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 4 24 12 12 11 10 9 8 8 8 6 5 5 5 70 un i t s as on ly " a p lace to s l e e p " . Nor cou ld they accept the r e g u l a -t i o n s which d i d not permit more i n du s t r i o u s townhouse occupants to make a l t e r a t i o n s to t h e i r u n i t . For these reasons , there was a common expec ta t i on tha t the bu i l d i ng s would not be mainta ined and that a " s l um" or "tenement" would be the eventua l r e s u l t . Res iden t s ' Design Pre fe rences The use of photographs as a s t imu lus proved to be a very use -f u l technique f o r determin ing townhouse des ign p re f e rences . For the ma jo r i t y of respondents the photographs ( F i gu res 1 to 9) were the h i g h -l i g h t of the i n t e r v i e w . They had something to po i n t to as a means of express ing a mixture of hopes and f e a r s . The photographs a l s o tended to encourage f u r t h e r u se fu l d i a l ogue . Given the assumption tha t townhouses would be a l lowed i n t h e i r a r e a , r e s i den t s were asked to i n d i c a t e what f e a t u r e s o r f a c i l i t i e s would make townhouses more acceptab le to them. The i r r e p l i e s are tabu la ted i n Table 16. Th i s l i s t of pre ferences emphasizes the importance to r e s i den t s of an e x t e r i o r des ign tha t does not c l a s h w i th the predominant cha rac te r of the a r ea . V a r i a t i o n i n u n i t des ign was a p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r ong p re -f e r ence . I t was mentioned that d i f f e r e n t co l ou r s of p a i n t , d i s t i n c t i v e doors , and an assortment of window s i z e s helped to c rea te t h i s e f f e c t . S i m i l a r f e e l i n g s were expressed by r e s i den t s who f e l t tha t townhouses would be be t t e r r ece i ved i f they resembled s i n g l e f am i l y homes. In t h i s regard suggest ions were made f o r the s t agge r i ng of un i t s and the c r e a t i o n of an i r r e g u l a r roof l i n e . Recommendations f o r the g rea te r use of b r i c k 71 Table 16 Design Preferences Feature Number of Times Mentioned Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l T o t a l Landscaping 10 14 14 38 V a r i a t i o n i n u n i t des ign 8 4 8 20 P lay area f o r c h i l d r e n 7 5 6 18 Use of wood 4 5 7 16 Fences 3 6 6 15 S i ng l e f am i l y home appearance 6 4 4 14 Break ing up of rows 6 1 5 12 Use of b r i c k 2 5 5 12 Own yard 2 4 5 11 Expensive appearance 6 0 3 9 Low p r o f i l e 3 1 3 7 Peaked roof 1 4 2 7 B i g windows 1 1 3 5 72 and na t u r a l wood ma te r i a l s were a l s o qu i t e common. Prev ious s t ud i e s have shown that an investment i n l andscap ing can generate a h igh degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r townhouse o r m u l t i -f am i l y r e s i den t s ( B e l l and Cons tan t i nescu , 1974; Cooper, 1972). Th is survey i n d i c a t e s tha t t h i s statement i s equa l l y a pp l i c a b l e to sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . More than 50 per cent of the respondents made re ference to mature t r e e s , shrubs , and green g ras s . The genera l consensus was tha t these so f tened the v i s u a l impact of the townhouses. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , good landscap ing was h i gh l y r a ted because i t he lped to c rea te a q u i e t , s a f e , p a r k - l i k e , community atmosphere tha t cou ld do much to o f f s e t i n -he ren t l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l - l o o k i n g b u i l d i n g forms. The prev ious paragraphs unde r l i ne the f a c t tha t s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d en t s are very image consc i ous . They r e j e c t un i f o rm, unbroken facades and s t r u c t u r e s tha t are ove r l y consp icuous . Many re s i den t s s t r o ng l y emphasized tha t townhouses were p r e f e r ab l e to apartments, but tha t any b o x - l i k e s t r u c t u r e was unacceptab le . When eva l ua t i ng the photographs, many reac ted nega t i v e l y to the Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t f o r t h i s reason. They a t tacked i t s ba r ren , impersona l appearance by comparing i t to a ch icken coop, o f f i c e , mote l , or p r i s o n . Th is was t h e i r way of say -i ng that a r c h i t e c t u r a l c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i th ad jacent homes i s a p r e -r e q u i s i t e to the acceptance of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs w i t h i n a s i n g l e f am i l y zone. Many of the respondents a l s o exp la ined tha t t h e i r op in ions were based on vague f e e l i n g s or f e a r s r a the r than f a c t s . The i r dominant concern was the f e e l i n g of crowding tha t might r e s u l t from new development w i th in t h e i r f i e l d of v iew. Such comments were o f ten supplemented by hand ges-73 tu res which were used to desc r ibe the sense o r the e f f e c t s of be ing " c l o s ed i n " . Before cons i de r i ng the respondents o ther pre fe rences i t must be revea led tha t some persons d i d not seem to understand tha t op in ions were be ing sought on the sub jec t of l i v i n g near r a t he r than i n a town-house complex. C a r e f u l r e p e t i t i o n of the ques t ion was necessary i n numerous cases . Ye t , even when t h i s po in t had been c l a r i f i e d , some r e s i den t s p e r s i s t e d i n making comments one might expect from an occupant of a p r o j e c t . A p l ay area f o r c h i l d r e n was deemed to be very impor tan t . Fences between un i t s and around the whole p r o j e c t were another f r equen t l y mentioned p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e . Other pre ferences were f o r rear yards f o r each u n i t and f o r l a r g e r windows. On the bas i s of the above comments; it was ev ident that the l i v e a b i l i t y of the townhouses was a key i s s u e . The r e -spondents i n f e r r e d that des ign improvements would ease the s o c i a l problems of townhouse r e s i den t s and thereby reduce po s s i b l e sources of c o n f l i c t w i t h the wider community. Fences, f o r example, i n c r ease the p r i va cy of p r o j e c t r e s i den t s by reduc ing the amount of unwanted i n t e r a c t i o n between ne ighbours . Fences a l s o i n d i c a t e the area f o r which the occupant i s r e spons ib l e and may promote a g rea te r i n t e r e s t i n the appearance of the y a r d . One important t op i c tha t i s not l i s t e d i n Table 16 i s p r o j e c t s i z e . I t 'was d e l i b e r a t e l y omi t ted because r e s i den t s r a r e l y l i n k e d t h e i r acceptance of townhouses to the number of dwe l l i n g u n i t s . The v i s u a l appearance of the development was u sua l l y the more s a l i e n t i s s u e . When prompted to es t imate an acceptab le s i z e , most r e s i den t s mentioned f i g u r e s 74 i n the range of 6 to 30 u n i t s . The f i g u r e most f r equen t l y used was twelve u n i t s . These es t imates are somewhat m i s l ead i ng , however, s i n ce r e s i den t s d i d not always rep l y i n abso lu te terms. Some cons idered a doub l ing of the s i n g l e f am i l y dens i t y to be the upper l i m i t w i th the p rov i so tha t the number of u n i t s i n a s i n g l e row shou ld not exceed s i x . Others would not commit themselves, s ay i ng " i t depends on the l o c a t i o n " o r " i t depends on how much l and i s a v a i l a b l e . " The Ex ten t of A t t i t u d e Change The i d e a l method of measuring a t t i t u d e change would have been to i n t e r v i ew the same group of i n d i v i d u a l s both before and a f t e r town-houses had been b u i l t i n t h e i r a r e a . Due to the l ength of time needed f o r t h i s approach, i t was not at tempted. However, the methods used i n t h i s s tudy were chosen to approximate t h i s i d e a l method as c l o s e l y as p o s s i b l e . The a na l y s i s of a t t i t u d e change desc r i bed below i s based upon one c r i t i c a l assumpt ion. I t i s that the three study areas and t h e i r sample popu la t i ons are s u f f i c i e n t l y s i m i l a r to permi t a v a l i d comparison of the i n t e r v i ew da t a . A l e s s e r assumption i s t ha t i t would not be c o r -rec t to i n c l ude i n a response comparison the views of those r e s i den t s who had moved to the townhouse areas a f t e r the community had been n o t i f i e d of the townhouse p r oposa l . With the except ion of one o r two persons moving p r i o r to the s t a r t of c o n s t r u c t i o n , these i n d i v i d u a l s would have l i m i t e d knowledge of the cond i t i on s which e x i s t e d before the townhouses were b u i l t . 75 The above reason ing i s not meant to suggest tha t those persons who purchased homes near Rochdale P lace or the Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t ap -proved of the townhouses. The data of Table 17 i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s p o i n t . For the ma jo r i t y of respondents the ph y s i c a l and s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the immediate neighbourhood were of secondary impor tance. F i n a n c i a l and l o c a t i o n a l f a c t o r s were the main determinants of dwe l l i n g choice.. Consequent ly , the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the townhouses to the purchaser cou l d be cons idered minimal were i t not f o r the f a c t t ha t a number of people s t a t e d tha t no o ther homes were a v a i l a b l e or tha t they cou ld not a f f o r d any th ing e l s e . In o ther words, these people cons ide red the townhouse p r o j e c t to be one of the negat i ve f ea tu res of t h e i r a r ea , but not some-t h i ng to s tand i n the way of the homeownership g o a l . The method of measuring a t t i t u d e change i n t h i s survey may now be o u t l i n e d w i th the a i d of Table 19. Responses to the statement sheet were f i r s t ass igned the numer ica l weights g iven i n Table 14. These we igh t -ed responses were then summed h o r i z o n t a l l y to ob ta i n a p o s i t i v e or negat i ve f i g u r e (a weighted statement score) oppos i te each s ta tement . The statement scores f o r the Hau l t a i n area are based on the responses of a l l 25 i n t e r -v iewees. In c o n t r a s t , the f i g u r e s f o r the townhouse d i s t r i c t s are based on the responses of 23 people* 11 from the V i c . West area and 12 from the Cedar H i l l a r ea . As shown i n Table 18, these were the i n d i v i d u a l s who met the requirement of hav ing been r e s i den t s when the townhouses were proposed. An a t t i t u d e change and i t s d i r e c t i o n i s i n d i c a t e d by the f i g u r e s i n columns 4 and 5 of Table 19. These f i g u r e s represent the d i f f e r e n c e Table 17 Reasons For Choice of Home Reasons Economic reasonable p r i c e / r e n t on ly a v a i l a b l e home Loca t ion c l o se to work genera l a c c e s s i b i l i t y c l o se to schoo l c l o s e to shopping c l o se to park Dwe l l i ng u n i t r e l a t e d l a you t /des i gn space o ther P h y s i c a l environment p leasan t sur round ings l e s s conges t ion view S o c i a l environment c h i l d / f a m i l y r e l a t e d f r i e n d l y neighbours H i s t o r i c a l Percentage of Respondents C i t i n g Fac to r  Hau l t a i n V i c West Cedar H i l l 28 16 8 36 28 24 0 12 4 0 4 0 0 4 8 44 96 16 12 72 12 4 20 8 0 4 12 4 4 4 0 4 0 8 84 36 20 32 20 8 32 8 12 0 16 0 0 24 4 0 4 0 52 60 16 28 12 24 Table 18 Length of Residence i n Re l a t i on to Townhouses V i c . West Cedar H i l l P r i o r to neighbourhood awareness of townhouse proposa l 11 12 P r i o r to p r o j e c t approva l 0 0 P r i o r to s t a r t of c on s t r u c t i o n 0 0 P r i o r to date of f i r s t occupancy 5 1 Subsequent to date of f i r s t occupancy 9 12 77 Table 19 Weighted Statement Scores (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l ( 2 ) - ( l ) ( 3 ) - d ) t r a f f i c problems -13 -13 -06 0 +07 p r i v a cy -26 +01 -07 +27 +19 b lock view -10 -22 -14 -12 -04 s t r a i n s s e r v i c e s -11 +01 -04 + 12 +07 tax ra tes +10 +03 +07 -07 -03 s choo l crowding -02 -06 +07 -04 +09 maintenance +02 +09 +17 +07 +15 proper ty va lues -16 -09 -01 +07 + 15 pa rk ing problems -13 -01 -04 +12 +09 poor des ign +06 -03 -04 -09 -10 r u i n cha ra c t e r -01 +03 +07 +04 +08 no ise problems +02 -01 +03 -03 +01 open green spaces -10 +05 -05 +15 +05 rundown houses + 21 +08 + 13 -13 -08 a t t r a c . des ign +20 +09 +10 -11 -10 i nc rease s t a t u s -26 -09 -14 +17 +12 s i n g l e and s en i o r -36 -08 -21 +28 +15 b lend i n -15 -04 -08 +11 +07 Note: a sample c a l c u l a t i o n of a weighted statement score i s g iven below. Response i n Hau l t a i n Area S t rong l y Don ' t S t rong ly Can ' t Agree Agree Know Disagree Disagree Genera l i ze T r a f f i c problems 1 10 5 5 0 4 Weights -3 - 2 0 2 3 0 Weights x responses -3 -20 0 10 0 0 Weighted statement score = sum of weighted responses = -23 + 10 = -13 78 between the statement scores of the townhouse area respondents and those of the " c o n t r o l " respondents i n the Hau l t a i n a r e a . I f the va lue was be-tween -10 and +10 the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t ha t a t t i t u d e s had not changed. Va lues ou t s i de t h i s range were accepted as s i g n a l s of a s h i f t i n a t t i t u d e s . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t ha t every s e t of d i f f e r e n c e ' v a l u e s f o r each va r -i a b l e i s of the same s i gn w i th the except ion of the t r a f f i c , n o i s e , and schoo l crowding v a r i a b l e s . Th is suggests tha t the i n t r o d u c t i o n of town-houses i n t o s i m i l a r areas can have p r e d i c t a b l e e f f e c t s on a t t i t u d e s . The f a c t t ha t both p r o j e c t s were b u i l t on p r e v i o u s l y vacant land had a d i s c e r n i b l e e f f e c t . Respondents i n both areas d i sagreed more o f ten tha t rundown houses were rep laced and V i e . West r e s i d en t s f e l t s t r o ng l y tha t the views of sur round ing r e s i den t s are b locked by townhouses. I t i s not as s imp le to e xp l a i n the l ack of a p e r c ep t i b l e a t t i t u d e s h i f t by Cedar H i l l r e s i den t s on the view que s t i o n . On the one hand, they have had a much g rea te r l eng th of t ime to accept the l o s s of any view they en joyed . Ye t , on the o ther hand, the Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t has fewer breaks between i t s b u i l d i n g s and has a g rea te r he igh t than Rochdale P l ace u n i t s . I t i s l i k e l y t ha t one f a c t o r cance l s the o the r . The des ign of the p r o j e c t i s shown to be a source of more concern once townhouses are b u i l t . Th i s i s another i n s t ance where there i s no c l e a r reason f o r the more negat i ve a t t i t u d e s . As revea led i n the s e c t i o n on des ign p re fe rences , the eva l ua t i on of p r o j e c t des ign tends to be sub-j e c t i v e i n na tu re . A number of p a r t i c u l a r des ign f ea tu re s admired by some respondents were detes ted by o t h e r s . The p o s i t i v e s h i f t s i n a t t i t u d e occur red i n r e l a t i o n to the f o l l ow i ng ' concerns: p r i v a c y , neighbourhood s t a t u s , the type of people a t t r a c t e d to townhouses, proper ty va l ue s , maintenance, p a r k i ng , and open green spaces . In genera l terms, these s h i f t s are exp la ined by the f a c t tha t c e r t a i n f e a r s had not been r e a l i z e d . Yet a l l of the s h i f t s i n a t t i t u d e were not common to both townhouse a reas . Concern over maintenance and proper ty va l ue s , f o r example, on ly lessened apprec i a b l y i n the Cedar H i l l d i s t r i c t . D i f f e r ence s i n time exposure would ex -p l a i n t h i s r e s u l t . In t u r n , p o s i t i v e s h i f t s r e l a t e d to park ing and open green space occur red on ly i n V i c . West. The r e s u l t i n t h i s case i s ex -p l a i n ed by the p r o v i s i o n of v i s i t o r pa rk ing spaces and a des ignated p lay area on the grounds of Rochdale P l a c e . As a means of check ing the above f i n d i n g s , the 23 respondents we asked i f they f e l t t h e i r op in ions had changed over t ime. The i r answere have been ca t ego r i z ed i n Table 20. Verba l a t t i t u d e s and w r i t t e n respon-ses correspond to the extent tha t both i n d i c a t e p o s i t i v e and negat ive s h i f t s . A d d i t i o n a l l y , these i n d i c a t o r s suggest tha t the p o s i t i v e s h i f t s are g rea te r i n number and magnitude than the negat i ve s h i f t s . Table 20 Persona l Assessment of A t t i t u d e Chanae A t t i t u d e Assessment V i c . West Cedar H i l l P o s i t i v e s h i f t 4 2 Negat ive s h i f t 2 0 Cons tan t l y p o s i t i v e 0 0 Cons tan t l y negat ive 2 6 Cons tan t l y n eu t r a l 3 4 Number of respondents 11 12 80 Fu r the r v e r i f i c a t i o n f o r changes i n a t t i t u d e were sought v i a ques t ions r e l a t e d to the i n d i v i d u a l ' s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i th h i s ne ighbour-hood. One hypo the t i c a l ques t ion asked of the Hau l t a i n r e s i den t s was whether they thought the c on s t r u c t i o n of townhouses w i t h i n s i g h t of t h e i r home would make i t d i f f i c u l t to s e l l . Th i r t y - two per cent of the homeownersc answered i n the a f f i r m a t i v e . On t h i s same t o p i c , h a l f of the townhouse area respondents f e l t tha t they c u r r e n t l y would have no d i f f i c u l t y s e l l i n g t h e i r home (See Table 21 ) . Fur thermore, of those who a n t i c i p a t e d some problems, on ly three persons f e l t tha t the townhouses were to blame. In l i g h t of these responses, i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that a t l e a s t two - th i r d s of the 50 townhouse area r e s i den t s would buy or rent i n the same l o c a t i o n today (see Table 22 ) . Given t h e i r present knowledge of the neighbourhood, 13 of the 23 o r i g i n a l r e s i den t s s t a t ed they would make t h i s same d e c i s i o n . Of the 10 persons who would buy e lsewhere, 6 were unhappy w i th the p rox im i t y of the townhouses. The genera l preference of t h i s group was f o r a more r u r a l s e t t i n g . The i r s p e c i f i c compla ints concerned a reduc t i on i n pa rk ing space in f r o n t of t h e i r homes, a decrease i n p r i v a c y , and a l o s s of p roper ty va l ue . The impact of the townhouses was a l s o c rude l y measured by ask ing the V i c . West and Cedar H i l l r e s i den t s whether anyone had moved because of the p r o j e c t s . A l though fou r ad jacent p r ope r t i e s were e i t h e r f o r s a l e or had r e cen t l y been s o l d i n each a r e a , only 5 of the 50 townhouse area respondents f e l t tha t movement out of the d i s t r i c t cou ld be a t -t r i b u t e d to the townhouses (see Table 23 ) . These persons had been i n a good p o s i t i o n to observe the changes c rea ted by the townhouses s i n ce 81 Table 21 D i f f i c u l t y i n S e l l i n g Home ( i f Townhouses B u i l t ) (At Present) Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l No d i f f i c u l t y 11 12 15 Presence of townhouses 7 2 1 Other 4 7 5 Not a p p l i c a b l e 3 4 4 Number of respondents 25 25 25 Table 22 W i l l i n gne s s to Buy i n Same Loca t i on V i c . West Cedar H i l l Yes 17 16 No 8 6 Don ' t know 0 3 Number of respondents 25 25 Table 23 Number of Households Thought to Have Moved  Because of the Townhouses Number of Households V i c . West Cedar H i l l None 21 24 One 1 1 Two or more 3 0 Number of respondents 25 25 82 they had l i v e d i n t h e i r r e spec t i ve neighbourhoods before the p r o j e c t s were b u i l t . However, none cou ld i d e n t i f y the f e a t u r e s of the town-houses which had d i s tu rbed the depar t i ng f a m i l i e s . Pub l i c Hear ings and A t t i t u d e s Towards Future Townhouse Cons t ruc t i on Th i s s e c t i o n compares the responses to the prospect o f : a) some townhouses be ing b u i l t i n the Hau l t a i n a r e a ; b) a d d i t i o n a l townhouses be ing b u i l t i n the V i c . West and Cedar H i l l a r eas . The a na l y s i s i n vo l v e s a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r e s i d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s and how a c t i v e l y they would support o r oppose a p roposa l f o r townhouses w i t h i n s i g h t of t h e i r homes. Th is approach f a c i l i t a t e s an assessment of the pub l i c hear ing as an a t t i t u d e measuring dev i c e . Tables 24 and 25 summarize the p o s i t i o n of r e s i den t s as c l a s s i -f i e d by the au thor . Th is breakdown revea l s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r en ce i n the a t t i t u d e s p r e v a i l i n g i n the two townhouse neighbourhoods. In the V i c . West area fewer r e s i den t s were w i l l i n g to oppose something they knew l i t t l e about . T h i r t y - s i x per cent of these r e s i den t s were opposed i n p r i n c i p l e to another townhouse p r o j e c t , but on ly 12 per cent s t a t ed they would express t h e i r f/eel ings p u b l i c l y . The response of the Cedar H i l l r e s i -dents was-much more s t e reo t yped . In f a c t , t h e i r a t t i t u d e s are shown to be very s i m i l a r i n d i s t r i b u t i o n to those of the Hau l t a i n r e s i d e n t s . S i x t y per cent of the Cedar H i l l respondents were opposed i n p r i n c i p l e to another p r o j e c t and, most impo r t an t l y , 44 per cent of the sample f e l t they would express t h e i r op in ions a t a pub l i c hear ing o r i n a l e t t e r to C i t y H a l l . 83 Table 24 A t t i t u d e s Towards Future Townhouse Cons t ru c t i on (Some Townhouses) ( A d d i t i o n a l Townhouses) Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l In favour 0 3 1 I n d i f f e r e n t 5 6 6 Not i n favour 13 9 15 Would depend on the s i z e and des ign of the p r o j e c t 7 7 - 2 Would depend of the type of people i n the p r o j e c t D 1 1 Number of respondents 25 25 25 Table 25 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Res iden t s ' P o s i t i o n (Some Townhouses) ( A d d i t i o n a l Townhouses) Hau l t a i n V i c . West Cedar H i l l A c t i v e , voca l support 0 0 0 Weak support 0 1 0 S i l e n t , but i n favour 0 2 1 S i l e n t and n e u t r a l 8 7 8 S i l e n t , but opposed 5 6 4 Weak oppos i t i on 3 0 4 A c t i v e , voca l oppos i t i on 6 3 7 Voca l concern 3 6 1 Number of respondents 25 25 25 84 The major d i f f e r en ce between the two sample groups i s tha t more of the V i c . West r e s i den t s adopted an enqu i r i ng a t t i t u d e . They tended to hav/e s p e c i f i c quest ions r e l a t e d to a po s s i b l e s i t e f o r a p r o j e c t , p r o v i s i on s f o r v i s i t o r pa r k i ng , the number of un i t s i n r e l a t i o n to the land a v a i l -a b l e , and the type of people who might move i n t o the neighbourhood. An exp l ana t i on f o r the d i f f e r en ce i n a t t i t u d e s between the two townhouse sample popu la t ions must focus on the townhouse p ro j e c t s them-s e l v e s . These were the guideposts by which most r e s i den t s responded. The he ight and e x t e r i o r des ign of the Cedar H i l l p r o j e c t shows l e s s s en -s i t i v i t y to the neighbourhood i n comparison w i th Rochdale P l a c e . The l a t t e r i n co rpo ra t e s a g rea te r number of des ign improvements which, as has been shown, more c l o s e l y meet the pre fe rences of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d e n t s . As w e l l , i t must be remembered tha t the V i c . West r e s i den t s were e va l u a t i ng a much more recent change i n t h e i r a r ea . Many Cedar H i l l r e s i den t s had not observed a change i n t h e i r immediate area f o r c l o se to s i x yea r s . From t h i s pe r spec t i ve i t i s perhaps not s u r p r i s i n g tha t people are more r e s i s -tan t to change once they have become a t tached to t h e i r su r round ings . I t i s a l s o p l a u s i b l e tha t V i c . West r e s i den t s are more accustomed to change, hav ing bean exposed to a g rea te r amount of renovat ion a c t i v i t y and new house c o n s t r u c t i o n . Furthermore, a number of r e s i den t s i n t h i s area equated new hous ing w i t h an improved neighbourhood - a t l e a s t i n v i s u a l terms. Some a d d i t i o n a l obse rva t i ons are po s s i b l e on the bas i s of the data i n Tables 24 and 25. F i r s t l y , only 4 of the 75 respondents s a i d they would be i n favour of townhouses proposed w i t h i n s i g h t of t h e i r homes. 85 Cons ide r i ng tha t 21 r e s i den t s moved to the two townhouse areas a f t e r the two p ro j e c t s were occup ied , t h i s f i n d i n g i s s i g n i f i c a n t . I t i n d i -ca tes tha t those who move i n t o a mixed housing environment do not neces-s a r i l y approve of the mix ing of d i f f e r e n t hous ing t ypes . The second key f ea tu r e of the response c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s i s the l a rge p ropo r t i on of r e s i d en t s i n each study area (52 - 60 per cent) who would not vo i ce t h e i r op in ions p u b l i c l y . In t h i s subgroup those not i n favour of the townhouses outnumber those i n f a vou r . Ye t , the most i n t e r e s t i n g f a c t i s t ha t the ma jo r i t y of t h i s s i l e n t subgroup were n eu t r a l w i t h respect to having townhouses nearby. Taking a l l f a c t o r s i n t o account , i t i s p o s s i b l e to conclude tha t most persons who are opposed to a zon ing change w i l l communicate t h e i r f e e l i n g s to p o l i t i c i a n s i n a v a r i e t y of ways. Furthermore, on the bas i s of r e s i d e n t s ' comments, p o l i t i c i a n s and p lanners may f e e l c on f i den t tha t the views expressed a t a pub l i c hear ing are l i k e l y to be r ep re sen ta -t i v e of more than ha l f of the a f f e c t e d popu l a t i o n . However, as d e c i s i o n -makers who must cons i de r a l l po i n t s o f v iew, they would be concerned tha t a lmost o ne - t h i r d of the community who are not r e s i s t a n t to change are not rep resen ted . Th i s f i n d i n g does not s ub s t an t i a t e Zech ' s a s s e r t a t i o n tha t " op i n i on s expressed i n the p o l i t i c a l are not r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t o r s of a con sensus of op in i on towards g iven i s s u e s . " Ye t , i t does i n d i c a t e tha t an a t t i t u d e survey of the type conducted by the author would be most u s e f u l i n determin ing the views of r e s i den t s who would otherwise remain s i l e n t . The au t ho r ' s exper ience dur ing the course of t h i s survey suggests tha t persons i n t h i s s i l e n t m ino r i t y group are those most l i k e l y to make l e s s 86 emot iona l and o f ten more va luab le comments on the p o t e n t i a l impact of the townhouses. Summary The p resen ta t i on and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the survey r e s u l t s has been c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the i n t e r v i ew methodology. Th is was done to f u r t h e r e xp l a i n the reasons f o r the methods adopted and the e f f e c t i v ene s s of a v a r i e t y of i n d i c a t o r s . I t was shown that the pe r sona l i n t e r v i ew approach was a va luab le means of reco rd ing an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s . Much of the success of the i n t e r v i ew schedule i t s e l f was l i n k e d to the use of the statement sheet and the photographs. They permi t ted a range of a t t i t u d e s to be measured and a l s o prompted the ma jo r i t y of respondents to engage i n a f rank d i s cu s s i on of t h e i r o p i n i o n s . Survey r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that a t t i t u d e s towards townhouses are based upon l i m i t e d knowledge. Al though approx imate ly ha l f of the respond-ents had been i n s i d e a townhouse u n i t , the vast ma jo r i t y (95 per cent) had never l i v e d i n one. These f i n d i n g s e xp l a i n why most V i c . West and Cedar H i l l r e s i den t s were only f a m i l i a r w i th the p r o j e c t nearby and perhaps one o r two o ther p r o j e c t s i n the c i t y . The impress ions of townhouse l i v e a b i l i t y gained from these few developments were gene ra l l y not f a vou rab l e . A f e e l i n g of being crowded or a l ack of persona l freedom and p r i vacy were commonly c i t e d as reasons f o r not c on s i de r i ng a townhouse f o r a new home. The impress ions of townhouse r e s i den t s were more f a vou r ab l e . Working c l a s s f a m i l i e s were be l i e ved to c o - e x i s t w i th a v a r i e t y of o ther age and c l a s s groups - w i t h the except ion of s i n g l e people and members of the upper c l a s s . 87 Ha l f of the respondents f e l t t ha t townhouse and s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i d en t s had much the same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , wh i le a l e s s e r p ropo r t i on of the sample desc r ibed occupants of row-housing developments to be a l a z i e r , l e s s r e -s pon s i b l e , and more t r a n s i e n t type of person . One of the bas i c ob j e c t i v e s of the survey was to determine which aspects of townhouse p ro j e c t s were of the g rea tes t concern to sur round ing r e s i d en t s . An ana l y s i s of the respon-ses to the statement sheet y i e l d e d the conc l u s i on tha t the most t r o u b l e -some aspects were the p r o j e c t s ' impact on v iews, p r i v a c y , and t r a f f i c . I t was noted that a l l of the sample groups pe rce i ved maintenance to be a secondary i s sue and tha t proper ty va lues were of l e s s e r concern to the V i c . West and Cedar H i l l r e s i d e n t s . A second important ob j e c t i v e of the survey was to a s c e r t a i n i f and how a t t i t u d e s are mod i f ied by v i s u a l o r p h y s i c a l con tac t w i th a town-house p r o j e c t . Fu r the r a n a l y s i s of the statement sheet responses suggested tha t both p o s i t i v e and negat ive s h i f t s of a t t i t u d e s had occu r red . Ye t , a l l of the s h i f t s were not common to both townhouse a reas . In most cases the reasons f o r the s h i f t were exp la ined by s i t e o r p r o j e c t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . However, i n some ins tances there was no c l e a r exp l ana t i on f o r the change i n a t t i t u d e s . Examples of the l a t t e r case were the i nc reased concern generated by the des ign of the p r o j e c t . The p o s i t i v e s h i f t s i n a t t i t u d e occur red i n r e l a t i o n to the i s sues of p r i v a c y , neighbourhood s t a t u s , the type of people a t t r a c t e d to townhouses, p roper ty va l ues , maintenance, park-i ng , and open green spaces . Many of these s h i f t s were a t t r i b u t e d to the f a c t tha t c e r t a i n f e a r s had not been r e a l i z e d . A t t i t u d e s towards f u tu r e townhouse p roposa l s were a l s o ana lyzed 88 i n some depth. I t was shown tha t r e s i den t s of the two townhouse areas were no more i n favour of a d d i t i o n a l townhouses than Hau l t a i n r e s i den t s were to the prospec t of one p r o j e c t i n t h e i r d i s t r i c t . The on ly d i f -fe rence i n a t t i t u d e s was tha t V i c . West r e s i den t s were l e s s opposed i n p r i n c i p l e to another p r o j e c t . Th is r e s u l t was r e l a t e d to the supe r i o r des ign of Rochdale P l a c e . I t was i n d i c a t e d tha t t h i s p r o j e c t c l o s e l y r e -f l e c t e d the pre ferences of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s f o r l andscap ing , v a r i -a t i o n i n u n i t des i gn , a p lay area f o r c h i l d r e n , and a s i n g l e f am i l y home appearance. The s t r ong ave r s i on of r e s i den t s to 3 - s to rey b o x - l i k e s t r u c t u r e s was g iven as the reason f o r the more negat ive response of Cedar H i l l respondents . These f i n d i n g s revea led tha t an assortment of f e a r s had been lessened but not d i s p e l l e d by the exposure to a s i n g l e p r o j e c t . Res idents dominant f e a r s were tha t a new p r o j e c t would not be we l l main-t a i n ed , tha t c h i l d r e n would not be c o n t r o l l e d , and tha t they would f e e l ' c l o sed i n " . The a na l y s i s of the survey r e s u l t s lead to two o ther important c on c l u s i o n s . One was tha t the ma jo r i t y of persons who move i n t o a mixed housing environment do not favour the mix ing of d i f f e r e n t hous ing t ypes . The second conc l u s i on was tha t the views expressed at a pub l i c hear ing are l i k e l y to be r ep re sen ta t i ve of more than ha l f of the popu l a t i on . At the same time i t was po in ted out t ha t a lmost o n e - t h i r d of the community who were not opposed to change i n the form of townhouses would not express t h e i r op in ions i n p u b l i c . 89 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING Th i s s tudy has focused upon homeowners* a t t i t u d e s to townhouses cons t ruc ted i n s i n g l e f am i l y zones. The i n t e n t was to gain a g rea te r un-ders tand ing of the response of i n d i v i d u a l s to i n c reases i n dens i t y caused by medium s c a l e i n f i l l and redevelopment p r o j e c t s . I n i t i a l l y , a review of the l i t e r a t u r e demonstrated tha t the response to new housing forms cou l d not be mechan ica l l y determined. Persona l va lues and a t t i t u d e s were shown to be the f i n a l determinants of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s r e a c t i o n . In t h i s con tex t , i t was suggested tha t s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s eva luated a proposed housing development on the bas i s of i t s a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t i e s as w e l l as the imagined c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e i r p rospec t i ve ne ighbours . Po s s i b l e exp lana t i ons f o r r e s i d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s were d i scussed from a num-ber of research pe r spe c t i v e s . These pe r spec t i ves i n c l uded the concepts of p h y s i c a l determin ism, t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , ne ighbour ing , and env i ronmenta l s t r e s s . A t the ou t se t of t h i s study the po i n t was a l s o made tha t the mix ing of d i f f e r e n t housing types has been t r a d i t i o n a l l y d iscouraged through the enforcement of zon ing by - l aws . I t i s on ly more r e c en t l y tha t market pressures have prompted changes i n zon ing p o l i c i e s to permit the c on s t r u c t i o n of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i n g s , i n c l u d i n g townhouses, i n s i n g l e f am i l y d i s t r i c t s . When asked to assess the cos t s and bene f i t s of s p e c i f i c rezon ing d e c i s i o n s , p lanners must cons i de r the s o c i a l b ene f i t s 90 acc ru i ng to those who w i l l be accommodated i n a new townhouse p r o j e c t . Ye t , p lanners must a l s o cons ide r the negat ive e f f e c t s a townhouse p r o j e c t may have on the community's e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t s . In s ho r t , what are the cos t s of imposing a townhouse development on a ne ighbour-hood, and how may they be minimized? Furthermore, what c r i t e r i a shou ld guide p lanners i n t h e i r e va l ua t i on of s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t proposa ls? The d i s c u s s i on which f o l l ow s attempts to prov ide some of the answers to these ques t i ons . Conc lus ions Th is s t u d y ' s f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e tha t i n d i v i d u a l s ' responses to change may be viewed as a form of t e r r i t o r i a l behav iour . I t has been shown that respondents made numerous re fe rences to the f e e l i n g s of p r i -vacy and persona l freedom they a s soc i a t ed w i th a s i n g l e f am i l y d w e l l i n g . Th i s suggests tha t people do need to e s t a b l i s h boundar ies around them-se l v e s to ma in ta in t h e i r p s y cho l og i c a l I n t e g r i t y and manage t h e i r i n -t e r a c t i o n s w i th o t he r s . The respondents a l s o f e l t t ha t townhouse r e s i -dents would have a s i m i l a r need to extend t e r r i t o r i a l r i g h t s from t h e i r home onto a p iece of ground. They would agree w i th Cooper ' s remark tha t . . . t e r r i t o r i a l r i g h t s over a p iece of ground - and i n d i v i d u a l i s m - are somehow connected, and a sure way to permit people to f e e l a l i t t l e more secure and happy i n a b a s i c a l l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l atmosphere i s to prov ide them w i th some means, however l i m i t e d , f o r exp ress i ng t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l i t y . (Cooper, 1972: 125) In b r i e f , s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s are ab le to i d e n t i f y some of the needs and des i r e s of p r o j e c t r e s i d en t s . The i r h igh pre ference f o r p lay areas 91 f o r c h i l d r e n would con f i rm t h i s ob se r va t i on , even though such a pre fe rence r e f l e c t s the concern that a l a ck of adequate f a c i l i t i e s might cause prob-lems w i t h i n the p r o j e c t to s p i l l over i n t o the community at l a r g e . Another i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s study i s t ha t a sense of crowding i s more f r equen t l y induced by p h y s i c a l phenomenon than by i n c reases i n the number of people i n an a r ea . The ma jo r i t y of r e s i den t s eva luated town-houses on the bas i s of t h e i r v i s u a l appearance. They o f ten added tha t the p s y cho l og i c a l e f f e c t of v iew ing rows of un i fo rm ly designed un i t s was a " c l o s ed i n " f e e l i n g . Many homeowners admit ted to hav ing l i t t l e s o c i a l con tac t w i th t h e i r ne ighbours . There fo re , t h e i r degree of attachment to the neighbourhood tended to be measured i n terms of a e s t h e t i c s , qu i e tnes s , s a f e t y ( e s p e c i a l l y f o r women and c h i l d r e n ) , and a f e e l i n g of freedom to do as one p leased w i t h i n one 's own yard or d w e l l i n g . The oppos i t i on to townhouses may thus be viewed as a r e s u l t of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s very s u b s t a n t i a l f i n a n c i a l and p sy cho l og i c a l investment i n h i s home. S i ng l e f am i l y r e s i den t s can not accept the concept of mix ing townhouses w i th s i n g l e f am i l y d w e l l i n g s . The ma jo r i t y can only o b j e c t i v e l y assess a s i n g l e p r o j e c t once they have been exposed to i t . Some r e s i den t s s t a t ed tha t they cou ld not make a t rue assessment of the p ro j e c t u n t i l a t l e a s t a year had passed. Th i s gave them time to ana lyze p ro j e c t c ond i t i o n s dur ing the summer and w in te r months. Th is survey has i d e n t i f i e d two types of co s t s tha t may be a s soc -i a t e d w i th the de c i s i o n to a l l ow a townhouse p r o j e c t i n a s i n g l e f am i l y a r e a . The f i r s t type of cos t r e s u l t s from the exposure of the r e s i den t to the a c t u a l p r o j e c t . I t may be de f ined i n terms of an i n c rease i n s t r e s s on the i n d i v i d u a l o r a l e s sen i ng of h i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i th h i s home env i r on -92 ment. Th is survey determined tha t s t r e s s cou ld be r e l a t e d to l o s se s of view and p r i v a c y , i n c reases i n t r a f f i c , and a l s o a d i s l i k e f o r the v i s u a l appearance of the p r o j e c t . I t was not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the l e s s q u a n t i f i a b l e f e a r s of reduced proper ty va lues and lack of mainten-ance. These two f e a r s were cons idered to be l e s s v a l i d once the p r o j e c t had been b u i l t . The s i g n i f i c a n c e of these f i n d i n g s i s tha t most of the s t r e s s - r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s can be regu la ted by p l anne r s . I t i s the re fo re conc luded that the negat ive responses to a s i n g l e p r o j e c t may be g r e a t l y reduced by the a p p l i c a t i o n of a se t of des ign standards and p lann ing gu i de l i n e s to each townhouse p r oposa l . The second type of cos t r e s u l t s from the rezon ing process i t -s e l f . M i s t r u s t of l o c a l government o f f i c i a l s i s c r ea ted by C i t y C o u n c i l ' s d e c i s i on to ove r ru l e the ob j e c t i on s of l o c a l r e s i d e n t s . Th is m i s t r u s t i s he ightened by the nature of pub l i c hear ings and the nature of zon ing . I t was shown tha t on ly those opposed to a p r o j e c t or those people w i th s p e c i f i c concerns are a t t r a c t e d to pub l i c hea r i ngs . They are so a t t r a c t e d because they be l i e ve tha t a zoning change w i l l have on ly negat ive e f f e c t s . Under e x i s t i n g zon ing p o l i c i e s , they can not expect to be compensated f o r a c cep t i ng a p r o j e c t i n t h e i r v i c i n i t y , nor can they expect that one p r o -j e c t w i l l be the on ly one a l lowed i n the a r e a . The outcome i s a very emot iona l b a t t l e between the developer and the r e s i d e n t s . Any p r o j e c t approva l i s the re fo re seen as a contemptuous d i s r ega rd f o r the concerns of the ma j o r i t y . In Chapter 2 of t h i s study the adequacy of the pub l i c hear ing as a p l ann ing t o o l was quest ioned.On the bas i s of the research f i n d i n g s i t 93 was subsequent ly revea led tha t the views expressed a t a pub l i c hear ing are l i k e l y to be r ep re sen ta t i ve of more than h a l f of the a f f e c t ed popu la -t i o n . I t i s the re fo re conc luded tha t the p ub l i c hear ing i s an adequate dev ice f o r measuring the range of res idents* concerns . The weakness of the pub l i c hear ing i s tha t i t does not a t t r a c t those persons whose more open-minded a t t i t u d e permi ts them to make c on s t r u c t i v e comments on the p o t e n t i a l impact of a townhouse p r o j e c t on the community. The more app rop r i a te t o o l f o r r e g i s t e r i n g the views of these s i l e n t i n d i v i d u a l s i s the a t t i t u d e survey s i n ce the survey des ign can assure tha t i t reaches a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of neighbourhood r e s i d e n t s . Recommendations The recommendations of t h i s study are l i s t e d under the headings of f u r t h e r research and p ro j e c t e va l ua t i on c r i t e r i a . The requirements f o r f u tu r e research are desc r ibed f i r s t so tha t the reader may assess the p r o j e c t c r i t e r i a i n the l i g h t of the l i m i t e d scope of t h i s s tudy . 1• Fu r the r Research I t shou ld be s t r e s sed i n i t i a l l y that townhouses are on ly one exam-p le of mu l t i p l e dwe l l i ngs t ha t have been cons t ruc t ed i n s i n g l e f am i l y a reas . I f the pressure to permit increase© i n dens i t y cont inues unabated, there w i l l be an i n c r e a s i n g need to study the impact of o ther medium den-s i t y m u l t i - f a m i l y s t r u c t u r e s on the s i n g l e f am i l y community. I t i s i n t h i s broad con tex t tha t the recommendations f o r f u r t h e r research shou ld be viewed. I t was p r e v i ou s l y s t a t ed that the i d e a l method of measuring a t t i t u d e change would be to i n t e r v i ew the same group of s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t s both before and a f t e r a p r o j e c t had been b u i l t . This type of mon i to r ing approach i s the most f r u i t f u l d i r e c t i o n f o r f u r t h e r r e sea r ch . F i r s t l y , i t would permit changes i n a t t i t u d e on s p e c i f i c t op i c s to be measured much more p r e c i s e l y . Second ly , the e f f e c t s of time exposure cou l d be ana lyzed more e f f e c t i v e l y by r e - i n t e r v i e w i n g respondents on more than one o c ca s i on . The number of people who moved because of the new p ro j e c t cou ld a l s o be p r e c i s e l y determined. Other r e l a t e d s tud i e s shou ld examine the s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n of the townhouse p ro j e c t w i t h i n the neighbourhood. Th is would i n vo l v e the i n t e r v i e w i n g of p r o j e c t r e s i den t s as w e l l as the sur round ing homeowners. In ' th i s way the common preferences and concerns of the two groups cou ld be determined and acted upon. A d d i t i o n a l l y , the t r adeo f f s that each group would make to accommodate the o ther cou l d be measured. The r e -search f i n d i n g s would enable p lanners to draw up d e t a i l e d des ign s t a nd -a rds . The two types of s t ud i e s desc r i bed above shou ld be app l i e d to townhouses d i f f e r i n g i n s i z e , des i gn , tenure , and s i t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Th is would permit researchers to determine the s o c i a l impact of town-houses over t ime. Such an a n a l y s i s cou ld then be used to recommend the extent to which mun i c i pa l c o un c i l s shou ld cons i de r the i n i t i a l negat ive r ea c t i on s of community r e s i den t s to townhouse p r oposa l s . 2. P r o j e c t Eva l ua t i on C r i t e r i a The amount of unce r t a i n t y and an imos i ty generated by cu r r en t rezon ing p r a c t i c e s i l l u s t r a t e s the need f o r a r e v i s ed rezon ing p o l i c y . I n d i v i d u a l s may not have the r i g h t to expect tha t changes i n the land us 95 of ad jacent p r ope r t i e s w i l l not o ccu r . Ye t , they do have the r i g h t to expect t ha t a l l rezon ing proposa l s w i l l be judged on the same c r i t e r i a . They shou ld a l s o have the r i g h t to a s s i s t i n the f o rmu l a t i on of these c r i t e r i a . On the bas i s of the survey f i n d i n g s i t i s recommended tha t the c r i t e r i a f o r e va l ua t i ng townhouse proposa l s i n s i n g l e f am i l y areas shou ld i n c l ude the f o l l o w i n g gu i de l i n e s r e l a t e d to the s i t i n g , and design of townhouses and the approva l p rocess . S i t e c r i t e r i a a) p r o j e c t approva l shou ld be dependent upon the a b i l i t y of e x i s t i n g community f a c i l i t i e s to bear the a d d i t i o n a l s t r a i n s p laced on them by the townhouse r e s i d e n t s . The capac i t y of such f a c i l i t i e s as s t r e e t s , s choo l s , and parks cou ld be determined by p lanners i n con -s u l t a t i o n w i th eng ineers , t eache r s , and community s e r v i c e workers . b) w i th the except ion of u n i t s des igned s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r i n d i v i d u a l s w i thout c h i l d r e n , the number of dwe l l i n g un i t s per gross acre shou ld not exceed 2 t imes the number of s i n g l e f am i l y un i t s per gross acre on ad jacent p rope r t y . c) no minimum s i t e s i z e shou ld be e s t a b l i s h e d . Sma l le r p r o j e c t s , e s p e c i a l l y those of l e s s than 12 u n i t s , are l i k e l y to be most acceptab le to the community as a whole. Such p r o j e c t s shou ld be permi t ted when they meet the e s t ab l i s h ed p lann ing c r i t e r i a s i n ce they cause min imal i n c reases i n popu la t i on d en s i t y , t r a f f i c v o l -umes, and no i s e . 96 P ro j e c t des ign c r i t e r i a a) the maximum number of un i t s i n any one row shou ld not exceed s i x . In p r o j e c t s hav ing more than three rows, b u i l d i n g s shou ld be s e t ' a t angles to one another so tha t t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n d i f f e r s . Th is i n c reases the l i k e l i h o o d tha t view c o r r i d o r s w i l l be mainta ined and that the p r o j e c t w i l l appear l e s s c o n f i n i n g to sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . From the pe r spec t i ve of p r o j e c t r e s i d e n t s , B e l l and Constant inescu (1974) conc luded that p r o j e c t s i n which dwe l l i n g un i t s are d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from the whole by means of sma l l c l u s t e r s , changing facades , d i r e c t s u i t e entry from the ou t s i d e , e t c . , are pe rce i ved as be ing l e s s crowded than those which do no t . ( B e l l and Cons tan t i nescu , 1974s 14) b) Landscaping shou ld be e x t en s i v e . Mature and f a s t - g row ing t rees ( a t l e a s t equal to the number tha t are removed du r i ng cons t r u c t i on ) shou ld be p l an t ed . Evergreen t rees and shrubs shou ld a l s o be used to serve as v i s u a l bu f f e r s a t a l l t imes of the year . Other f ea tu r e s of the s i t e , such as rock w a l l s , which would o f f s e t the newer bu i l d i n g s shou ld be preserved wherever p o s s i b l e . E f f o r t s shou ld be made to i n co rpo ra te such f ea tu r e s i n t o the o v e r a l l des ign of the p r o j e c t . c) At l e a s t one o f f - s t r e e t pa rk ing space per u n i t shou ld be r equ i r ed . A d d i t i o n a l pa rk ing spaces shou ld be prov ided f o r second and t h i r d c a r s , o v e r - s i z ed r e c r e a t i o n a l v eh i c l e s and v i s i t o r pa r k i ng . The number of a d d i t i o n a l spaces shou ld be determined on the bas i s of the number and s i z e of un i t s and the width and c on f i g u r a t i o n of l o c a l s t r e e t s . 97 d) an on - s i t e p lay area f o r p re - schoo l aged c h i l d r e n shou ld be prov ided i n any p r o j e c t hav ing more than 15 f am i l y un i t s ( i f the s i t e i s not ad jacent to a p a r k ) . Th is p lay area shou ld be segregated from t r a f -f i c as we l l as pa rk ing and access zones, and shou ld be i n a w e l l -d ra ined l o c a t i o n . Cons i de ra t i on shou ld be g iven to l o c a t i n g t h i s p lay area where i t cou ld e a s i l y be used by the c h i l d r e n of sur round ing r e s i d e n t s , e s p e c i a l l y when a p r o j e c t i s cons t ruc t ed on vacant land fo rmer l y used as a play area by l o c a l c h i l d r e n . e) each townhouse un i t shou ld have a fenced p r i v a t e y a r d . A recent survey i n the Greater Vancouver area determined that p r i v a t e yards are a l s o popu lar w i th townhouse r e s i d en t s : Economic c o n s t r a i n t i n the housing game d i d not d im in i sh peop le ' s commitment to p r i v a t e ya rds . Seventy-one per cent of respondents who were ab le t o , chose a p r i v a t e backyard i n pre ference to a s em i - p r i v a t e y a rd , a p a t i o , a balcony or no space. ( B e l l and Cons tan t i nescu , 1974s 27-28) f ) Fences which separate the townhouse p r o j e c t from adjacent p r ope r t i e s shou ld be of s o l i d c on s t r u c t i o n and s u f f i c i e n t i n he ight to d issuade c h i l d r e n from e a s i l y s c a l i n g them. The a c t u a l des ign and appearance of the fence shou ld be determined i n c o n su l t a t i o n w i th the ad jacent proper ty owners. g) s i d e yard and setback requirements on the per imete r of the s i t e shou ld be the same as those app l i e d to ad jacent p r o p e r t i e s . Or, i f the o r i e n t a t i o n and bulk of the b u i l d i n g ( s ) d i f f e r s s u f f i c i e n t l y from a group of ad jacent homes, the requirements should take shadow e f f e c t s i n t o account . h) sub j e c t to economic c o n s t r a i n t s , un i f o rm i t y i n the e x t e r i o r des ign of u n i t s shou ld be avo ided . Des ign f ea tu re s tha t shou ld be va r i ed i n c l ude the s i z e and placement of windows, the s i z e of the u n i t s , roof he i gh t , and the p ropo r t i on of s i d e wa l l s which are common to two u n i t s . Attempts shou ld a l s o be made to vary the facades of separa te b u i l d i n g s to g ive the p r o j e c t more of a s i n g l e f am i l y appearance. In the case of sma l l e r p r o j e c t s , i n p a r t i c u l a r , r e l a x a t i o n of t h i s gu i de l i n e shou ld be a l l owed upon the approva l of a ma jo r i t y of r e s i den t s l i v i n g w i t h i n one b lock of the p r o j e c t . Approval process c r i t e r i a a) the des ign of the p r o j e c t shou ld be sub j e c t to rev iew by an adv i so r y des ign panel composed of p r o f e s s i o n a l a r c h i t e c t s as we l l as some r e s i dents of the m u n i c i p a l i t y . Th is group shou ld on ly make t h e i r recom-mendtaions a f t e r v iew ing the s i t e i n ques t ion and assess i ng the a r c h i t e c t u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the sur round ing dwe l l i n g s . b) an i n fo rmat i on meeting shou ld be he ld p r i o r to a pub l i c hea r i ng . At l e a s t one p lanner shou ld be present a t t h i s meeting to d i scuss em-ployment, suburban sp r aw l , and o ther growth i s sues which e xp l a i n the t rend towards townhouse c o n s t r u c t i o n . Wore impo r t a n t l y , r e s i den t s shou ld be ab le to determine from sketches or photographs the cha rac -t e r i s t i c s of the proposed p r o j e c t . The moderat ion of op in ions t ha t occur red dur ing the i n t e r v i ews suggests tha t t h i s approach cou ld l e s sen the i n i t i a l f e e l i n g s of h o s t i l i t y by tempering the f ea r s tha t are based upon a very l i m i t e d knowledge of townhouses. 99 c) an a t t i t u d e survey of r e s i den t s l i v i n g w i t h i n a one b lock rad ius of the s i t e shou ld be s e r i o u s l y cons idered i f the proposed p ro j e c t i s l a r g e r than 20 u n i t s . The i n t e r v i ew process would a l l ow the p lanner and the developer to determine the concerns and preferences of r e s i den t s based on t h e i r knowledge of the l o c a l a r ea . I t would a l s o a l l ow the p lanner or developer to e xp l a i n the p ro j e c t to the r e s i den t s i n the s e c u r i t y of t h e i r homes. The labour costs of such a survey would be approx imate ly two man-hours per household. These cos t s shou ld be borne by the deve loper . d) w i t h i n an i d e n t i f i a b l e neighbourhood o r an area of 6-10 square b locks on ly one l a rge p r o j e c t (20 or more u n i t s ) , or two sma l l p r o j e c t s ( l e s s than 20 u n i t s ) , shou ld be approved under t h i s s e t of gu i de l i n e s f o r the f i r s t 18 months the gu i d e - l i n e s are i n e f f e c t . This would permi t a cont inuous mon i to r ing of the p r o j e c t s and assessments of t h e i r impact on the community. I f necessary , the gu i de l i ne s cou ld then be a l t e r e d before o ther p r o j e c t s were approved. In summary, i t i s be l i e ved tha t the c on s i s t e n t a p p l i c a t i o n of these gu i de l i n e s would do much to reduce the s o c i a l cos t s a s soc i a t ed w i th town-house redevelopment. They are s e n s i t i v e to the pre fe rences of both the s i n g l e f am i l y r e s i den t and the p r o j e c t r e s i d e n t , and u l t i m a t e l y r e f l e c t the view tha t i n the event tha t more and more housing must be b u i l t i n m u l t i - f a m i l y schemes, a bas i c r u l e of thumb shou ld be to prov ide as many as po s s i b l e of those q u a l i t i e s which people look f o r i n a s i n g l e f am i l y house. . . . These requirements can be prov ided i n m u l t i - f a m i l y hous ing . I t j u s t takes a l i t t l e more thought and imag ina t ion than has p r ev i ou s l y been expended by the sponsors and des igners of most m u l t i - f a m i l y schemes. (Cooper, 1972: 141) 101 APPENDIX B SURVEY OF HOMEOWNERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS (Area Without Townhouses) In te rv i ewer Area Date Address P lanners are o f ten c r i t i c i z e d f o r not c on su l t i n g the pub l i c on important i s s u e s . Th is i s one of the main reasons why I have, chosen to t a l k to people l i k e you r se l f about t h e i r t rue f e e l i n g s concern ing t h e i r home and immediate neighbourhood. In p a r t i c u l a r , I am i n t e r e s t e d i n your op in i on of townhouses tha t are b u i l t i n areas of s i n g l e f am i l y homes. Before ask ing f o r your op in ions i t would be h e l p f u l to know who l i v e s here . 1 . How many people l i v e i n t h i s house? _________________ 2. How many c h i l d r e n do you have l i v i n g a t home? ______________ ( i f 1 o r more) (a) How many are of p reschoo l age? (b) How many a t t end schoo l ? ( e x c l ud i ng u n i v e r s i t y ) 3. Do you own or rent t h i s home? j | Own • Rent 4. How long have you l i v e d here? I ) Less than 1 year TZD 6 - 1 0 years I I 1 - 2 years CD Over 10 years I I 3 - 5 years 5. P lease s t a t e your reasons f o r choos ing a home i n t h i s l o c a t i o n . (1) (2) (3) (4) (5), 102 Th is completes the i n t r oduc t o r y s e c t i o n of the i n t e r v i e w . Next i t w i l l be u s e f u l to l ea rn about your exper ience w i t h townhouses. Th is i n f o rm -a t i o n i s important because what one th i nks of a p a r t i c u l a r type of hous-i n g i s i n f l u en ced by how much one knows about i t . But before I c on t i nue , I shou ld s t r e s s tha t the townhouses I am r e f e r r i n g to are 2 or 3 s t o r ey s t r u c t u r e s i n which i n d i v i d u a l u n i t s are a t tached s i d e - t o - s i d e . In o the r words, they share common w a l l s , but are not s tacked one on top of the o t h e r . P lease keep t h i s d e f i n i t i o n i n mind as you answer the f o l l o w i n g ques t i on s . 6. Have you ever l i v e d i n a townhouse? • Y e s CZ3 No ( I f Yes) (a) For how long? I I Less than 1 year I . I 6 - 1 0 years I I 1 - 2 years I I over 10 years I I 3 - 5 years (b) Where was t h i s townhouse? (c) Why d i d you move? 7. Are any of your f r i e n d s or r e l a t i v e s l i v i n g i n townhouses? • . Y e s • No ( I f Yes) (a) Are they ( i s he/she) s a t i s f i e d w i th t h e i r home(s)? 8. I f you were l ook i ng f o r a new home would you look a t a townhouse? • Yes L - I No ( I f No) (a) Why i s tha t? _ ., ( i f Yes) (b) What would be the major reason? • Cost of townhouses w i th respec t to other housing types • Less maintenance r equ i r ed i n home and garden C l o se r p rox im i t y to o ther people and f a c i l i t i e s • Ch i l d r en have moved out - home too l a rge • Other ( s p e c i f y ) 9. To your knowledge, what k i nd of i n d i v i d u a l s l i v e i n townhouses? 103 (a) Are they: • Fam i l i e s • M i d d l e aged people • S i ng l e people • R e t i r e d persons • Young people Q A 1 1 types of people (b) Would you say they a r e : • Upper c l a s s • M i x t u r e of c lasses • Middle c l a s s Can ' t gene ra l i z e | I Working c l a s s 10. Do you th ink tha t townhouse r e s i den t s and occupants of s i n g l e f am i l y homes have d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? • Yes • N o • Don ' t know • C a n ' t gene ra l i z e ( I f Yes) (a) Why do you say tha t? 11 . I f townhouses were proposed w i t h i n s i g h t of your home what would be your r e a c t i on ? O I n favour • I n d i f f e r e n t • Not i n favour • Would depend on the s i z e and des ign of the p r o j e c t I I Would depend on the type of people i n the p r o j e c t (a) P lease e x p l a i n , g i v i n g reasons: (b) Would you express your f e e l i n g s i n some fash ion? • Yes • N o • D o n ' t know ( I f Yes) ( i ) What would you do? ( I f No) ( i i ) Why do you say tha t? (For i n t e r v i ewe r ) • A c t i v e , vo ca l oppos i t i on I | Weak oppos i t i on • S i l e n t , but opposed • S i l e n t and n eu t r a l O S i l e n t , but i n favour • Weak support • A c t i v e , voca l support • Voca l concern 104 12. I f townhouses were b u i l t w i t h i n s i g h t of your home do you th i nk your home would be d i f f i c u l t to s e l l ? • ' Y e s • No • Don ' t know (a) Why do you say tha t? Next, you are g iven the oppor tun i t y to compare your op in ions w i th those of o ther homeowners. P lease complete t h i s form, keeping i n mind the d e f i n i t i o n of townhouses g iven e a r l i e r ( repea t d e f i n i t i o n i f necessa ry ) . (Note: Use a c l i p b o a r d to a l i g n statement sheet w i th the f o l l o w i n g page. Then give the c l i p boa r d to the respondent .) 14. P lanners are o f ten asked to decide what f ea tu r e s w i l l make townhouses more acceptab le to r e s i den t s of a community. Assume f o r the moment tha t C i t y Counc i l i n tends to a l l ow townhouses to be b u i l t - i n t h i s a r ea . With the a i d of these photographs ( g i v e photos to respondent or d i s p l a y on a t a b l e ) , cou ld you i n d i c a t e what f ea tu res or f a c i l i -t i e s would make townhouses more acceptab le to you. 105 STATE(VE NT SHEET 1. They c rea te t r a f f i c problems. 2. They have l a rge open green spaces on t h e i r p rope r ty , 3. They reduce the p r i vacy of su r round-i n g r e s i d e n t s . 4 . They b lock the view of sur round ing r e s i d en t s . 5. They rep lace rundown houses. 6. They p lace s t r a i n s on sewer, water , and other s e r v i c e s 7. They cause l o c a l tax ra tes to r i s e . 8. They are acceptab le w i t h i n s i n g l e f am i l y areas i f they are a t t r a c t i v e l y des igned. 9 . They cause crowding i n s c hoo l s . 10. They are not we l l ma in ta ined . 11 . They i nc rease the s t a t u s of the neighbourhood. 12. They a t t r a c t most ly s i n g l e persons w i th we l l - p ay i ng jobs o r s en i o r c i t i z e n s . 13. They reduce proper ty va lues 14. They cause pa rk ing problems. 15. They are poor l y des igned. 16. They ru i n the cha rac te r of the community. 17. They blend i n w i th the neighbourhood. 18. They c rea te no ise problems. 106 13. The f o l l o w i n g are some statements tha t o thers have made about townhouses. I nd i ca t e the extent.;to which you agree or d i s ag ree . P lease scan the l i s t before making any check marks. S t rong l y Agree Agree Don ' t Know Disagree S t rong l y D isagree Can ' t Genera l i ze 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. 6. 7 . 8. 9 . 10. 11 . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 107 F i n a l l y , there are a few a d d i t i o n a l ques t ions about your household. Look ing a t t h i s card (hand respondent ca rd 1 ) , cou ld you p lease t e l l me the number of the category which app l i e s t o : 15. The t o t a l y ea r l y income of the household? • Under §8,000 • $20,000 - $25,000 • S8,000 - $14,000 • $25,000 - 335,000 0 814,000 - S20,000 • Over S35,000 16. The h ighes t l e v e l of educat ion you have completed? • Elementary schoo l • 1—3 years u n i v e r s i t y or c o l l e g e 1 I High schoo l O U n i v e r s i t y degree 17. The occupa t i ona l s t a t u s of the head of the household? I I Se l f -employed O U s u a l l y employed pa r t time I i Re t i r ed • Unemployed D Usua l l y employed f u l l time • O t h e r ( s p e c i f y ) (By observa t ion) 18. Respondent 's sex : • Wale CZl Female 19. Respondent's age: • 19 - 24 • 50 - 65 • 25 - 34 • Over 65 • 35 - 50 20. Stage i n l i f e c y c l e : I I C h i l d l e s s '.*• O Mix ture • With on ly p reschoo l age c h i l d r e n • Adu l t c h i l d r e n on ly • With on ly schoo l age c h i l d r e n • Other ( s pe c i f y ) 108 I would l i k e to thank you f o r your a s s i s t ance i n t h i s su rvey , and f o r g i v i n g me so much of your t ime. (Note: p lace pen and paper to one s i de and ask the respondent i f he ( o r she) would l i k e to make any genera l comments of the t op i c s d i scussed or the way i n which ques t ions were asked. Do they have some quest ions of t h e i r own? The ob j e c t i v e a t t h i s stage i s to engage i n an i n f o rma l d ia logue tha t may conducive to more i n depth prob ing i n t o persona l o p i n i o n s . No attempt shou ld be made to record responses i n the presence of the respondent .) Comments: 10 9 APPENDIX C SURVEY OF HOfVEOl'JNERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS (Area With Townhouses) In te rv i ewer • Area Date Address P lanners are o f ten c r i t i c i z e d f o r not c o n s u l t i n g the pub l i c on important i s s u e s . Th is i s one of the main reasons why I have chosen to t a l k to people l i k e you r se l f about t h e i r t rue f e e l i n g s concern ing t h e i r home and immediate neighbourhood. In p a r t i c u l a r , I am i n t e r e s t e d i n your op in i on of townhouses tha t are b u i l t i n areas of s i n g l e f am i l y homes. Before ask ing f o r your op in ions i t would be h e l p f u l to know who l i v e s here . 1 . How many people l i v e i n t h i s house? _____________ 2. How many c h i l d r e n do you have l i v i n g a t home? ( i f 1 or more) (a) How many are of p reschoo l age? (b) How many a t tend schoo l ? _________________ ( e x c l ud i ng u n i v e r s i ty) 3. Do you own or rent t h i s home? I I own o rent 4 . How long have you l i v e d here? (For i n t e r v i ewe r ) | I Residence p r i o r to neighbourhood awareness of townhouse p roposa l • Residence p r i o r to p r o j e c t approva l • Residence p r i o r to s t a r t of c on s t r u c t i o n • Residence p r i o r to date of f i r s t occupancy of town-houses • Residence subsequent to date of f i r s t occupancy of townhouses _____________ 5. P lease s t a t e your reasons f o r choos ing a home i n t h i s l o c a t i o n . (1) (2) (3) . (4) 110 6. To your knowledge, i s there anyth ing about your home o r i t s l o c a -t i o n tha t would make i t d i f f i c u l t to s e l l ? r__ Presence of townhouses • Poor l o c a t i o n I I Qua l i t y of sur round ing homes I I Poor des ign of house • Other ( s pe c i f y ) " • ( I f because of presence of townhouses) (a) P lease e x p l a i n . Th i s completes the i n t r oduc t o r y s e c t i o n of the i n t e r v i e w . The next group of ques t ions shou ld be c a r e f u l l y cons ide red s i n c e they r e l y heav i l y on your memory. ( i f townhouses nearby have a l ready been mentioned ask ques t i on 7.) I am aware tha t there are townhouse un i t s nearby. 7. D id you know a t the time you purchased your home tha t townhouses would be b u i l t i n t h i s area? ( I f No) (a) • Yes No • A l ready B u i l t What was your r eac t i on when you heard they would be b u i l t ? I—I Negat ive O Neut ra l • P o s i t i v e (b) Why d i d you f e e l tha t way? (G ive reasons) (c) Do you s t i l l f e e l t h i s way, or have your f e e l i n g s changed i n any way? ( I f r e l evan t ) (d) Do your c h i l d r e n p lay w i th the c h i l d r e n l i v i n g i n the townhouses? 8. I f you knew at the time you purchased your home what you know about t h i s a r ea , would you s t i l l buy i n th is l o c a t i o n ? • Yes • No (a) What are your reasons f o r say ing tha t? 9 . Do you know of anyone who moved because of the townhouses? • Yes • No ( i f Yes) ( i ) How many people moved? ( i i ) What d i d they d i s l i k e about the townhouses? ( i i i ) D id they have any d i f f i c u l t y s e l l i n g t h e i r homes? Next i t w i l l be u s e f u l to l ea rn about your exper ience w i th townhouses. Th is i n fo rmat i on i s important because what one th i nks of a p a r t i c u l a r type of housing i s i n f l u en ced by how much one knows about i t . But , before I con t i nue , I should s t r e s s that the townhouses I am r e f e r r i n g to are 2 or 3 s to rey s t r u c t u r e s i n which i n d i v i d u a l un i t s are a t tached s i d e - t o p s i d e . In o ther words, they share common w a l l s , but are not s tacked one on top of the o the r . P lease keep t h i s d e f i n i t i o n i n mind as you answer the f o l l o w i n g ques t i on s . 10. Have you ever l i v e d i n a townhouse? • Yes • No (If Yes) (a) For how long? • Less than 1 year (ZD 6 - 10 years • 1 - 2 years CZl Over 10 years I I 3 - 5 years (b) Where was t h i s townhouse? 112 (c ) Why d i d you move? 11 . Are any of your f r i e n d s or r e l a t i v e s l i v i n g i n townhouses? • Yes • No ( I f Yes) (a) Are they ( i s he/she) s a t i s f i e d w i th t h e i r home(s)? 12. I f you were l ook i ng f o r a new home would you look a t a townhouse? • Yes f_3 No ( I f No) (a) Why i s tha t? ( i f Yes) (b) What would be the major reason? • Cost of townhouses w i th respect to other housing types I I Less maintenance r equ i r ed i n home and garden I I C l o se r p rox im i t y to o ther people and f a c i l i t i e s • Ch i l d r en have moved out - home too l a rge • Other ( s p e c i f y ) 13. To your knowledge, what k i nd of i n d i v i d u a l s l i v e i n townhouses? (a) Are they: • Fam i l i e s • Middle aged people • S i ng l e people • Re t i r ed persons I I Young people • A l l types of people (b) Would you say they a r e : I I Upper c l a s s f__ Mix ture of c l a s s e s • Middle c l a s s • Can ' t gene ra l i z e I I Working c l a s s 14. Do you th ink tha t townhouse r e s i den t s and occupants of s i n g l e f am i l y homes have d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? I I Yes • No O Don ' t know • Can ' t gene ra l i z e ( i f Yes) (a) Why do you say tha t? 113 15. I f more townhouses were proposed w i t h i n s i g h t of your home what would be your r eac t i on? I I In favour • I n d i f f e r e n t • Not i n favour I I Would depend on the s i z e and des ign of the p ro j e c t I | Would depend on the type of people i n the p ro j e c t (a) P lease e x p l a i n , g i v i n g reasons: (b)v Would you express your f e e l i n g s i n some f a sh i on? I I Yes O No • Don ' t know ( I f Yes) ( i ) What would you do? ( I f No) ( i i ) Why do you say tha t? (For i n t e r v i ewe r ) • A c t i v e , voca l oppos i t i on CZ3 Weak oppos i t i on CZl S i l e n t , but opposed (ZD S i l e n t and neu t r a l (Z3 S i l e n t , but i n favour CZl Weak support • A c t i v e , voca l support • Voca l concern Next, you are g iven the oppor tun i t y to compare your op in ions w i th those of o ther homeowners. P lease complete t h i s form, keeping i n mind the d e f i n i t i o n of townhouses g iven e a r l i e r ( repea t d e f i n i t i o n i f neces sa ry ) . (Note: Use a c l i p b o a r d to a l i g n statement sheet w i th the f o l l ow ingpage . Then g ive the c l i p b oa r d to the respondent . ) 114 STATEMENT SHEET 1. They c rea te t r a f f i c problems. 2. They have l a rge open green spaces on t h e i r p roper ty . 3. They reduce the p r i vacy of su r round-i n g r e s i d e n t s . 4. They b lock the view of sur round ing r e s i d e n t s . 5. They rep lace rundown houses. 6. They p lace s t r a i n s on sewer, water , and o ther s e r v i c e s . 7 . They cause l o c a l tax ra tes to r i s e . 8. They are acceptab le w i t h i n s i n g l e f am i l y areas i f they are a t t r a c t i v e l y des igned. 9. They cause crowding i n s choo l s . 10. They are not we l l ma in ta ined. 11 . They inc rease the s t a t u s of the neighbourhood. 12. They a t t r a c t most ly s i n g l e persons w i th we l l - p ay i ng jobs or s en i o r c i t i z e n s . 13. They reduce proper ty va l ues . 14. They cause pa rk ing problems. 15. They are poor ly des igned. 16. They r u i n the cha rac te r of the community. 17. They blend i n w i th the neighbourhood. 18. They c rea te no ise problems. 115 16. The f o l l o w i n g are some statements tha t o thers have made about townhouses. I nd i ca t e the extent to which you agree o r d i s ag ree . P lease scan the l i s t before making any check marks. S t rong ly Agree Agree Don ' t Know Disagree S t rong l y Disagree Can ' t Genera l i ze 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7 . 8. 9 . 10. 11 . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 116 17. P lanners are o f ten asked to decide what f ea tu res w i l l make town-houses more acceptab le to r e s i den t s of a community. Assume f o r the moment tha t C i t y Counc i l in tends to a l l ow a d d i t i o n a l townhouses to be b u i l t i n t h i s a r ea . With the a i d of these photographs ( g i v e photos to respondent or d i s p l a y on a t a b l e ) , cou ld you i n d i c a t e what f ea tu res or f a c i l i t i e s would make townhouse more acceptab le to you. F i n a l l y , there are a few a d d i t i o n a l ques t ions about your household. Looking a t t h i s card (hand respondent Card 1 ) , cou l d you p lease t e l l me the number of the category which app l i e s t o ! 18. The t o t a l y ea r l y income of the household? • Under $8,000 • $20,000 - $25,000 • $8,000 - $14,000 • $14,000 - $20,000 • $25,000 - $35,000 • Over $35,000 19. 20. The h ighes t l e v e l of educat ion you have completed? • Elementary s choo l • 1 - 3 years u n i v e r s i t y o r c o l l e g e • High schoo l • U n i v e r s i t y degree The occupa t i ona l s t a tu s of the head of the household? • Se l f -employed • U sua l l y employed par t t ime I—I Re t i r e d • U sua l l y employed f u l l t ime I I Unemployed r~l Other ( s pe c i f y ) (By observa t ion) 21. Respondent 's sex i 22. Respondent 's age: • 19 - 24 • 25 - 34 • 35 - 50 23. Stage i n l i f e c y c l e : • C h i l d l e s s r~1 With only preschoo l age c h i l d r e n I | With on ly s choo l age c h i l d r e n • Male • 50 - 65 I I Over 65 1 I Female r~l M ix ture • Adu l t c h i l d r e n on ly • O t h e r ( s pe c i f y ) I would l i k e to thank you f o r your a s s i s t ance i n t h i s su rvey , and f o r g i v i n g me so much of your t ime. 117 (Notes p lace pen and paper to one s i de and ask the respondent i f he ( o r she) would l i k e to make any genera l comments on the t o p i c s d i scussed or the way i n which ques t ions were asked. Do they have some quest ions of t h e i r own? The ob j e c t i v e at t h i s s tage i s to engage i n an i n f o rma l d ia logue tha t may be conducive to more i n depth prob ing i n t o persona l op i n i on s . No attempt shou ld be made to record responses i n the presence of the respondent.) Comments s APPENDIX D DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATEMENT SHEET IN THE HAULTAIN AREA merit T S t rong l y Agree Agree Don' t Knoui Disagree S t r ong l y D isagree Can ' t Genera l i ze No Response 1 . 1 10 5 5 0 4 0 2. 0 5 3 12 0 5 0 3. 4 12 3 5 0 1 0 4. 2 8 6 4 0 5 0 5. 1 13 3 4 0 4 0 ' 6 . 1 9 9 5 0 1 0 7. 0 1 15 6 0 3 0 8. 3 15 2 5 0 0 0 9. 2 6 6 8 0 3 0 10. 2 5 8 9 0 1 0 11. 0 1 7 11 2 4 0 12. ° 1 3 19 0 1 1 13. 2 12 3 7 0 1 0 14. 1 11 3 6 0 3 1 15. 2 3 4 9 0 7 0 16. 1 5 5 7 0 7 0 17. 0 4 6 10 1 4 0 18. 1 6 7 7 1 3 0 119 APPENDIX E DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATEMENT SHEET IN THE VIC. WEST AREA ement er S t rong ly Agree Agree Don' t Know Disagree S t rong l y D isagree Can ' t Genera l i ze No Response 1. 5 8 5 5 0 2 0 2. 0 8 4 8 3 2 0 3. 2 9 4 7 1 2 0 4. 0 19 1 3 1 1 0 5. 3 13 4 2 0 3 0 6. 2 4 8 7 1 3 0 7. 0 3 17 3 1 1 0 B. 2 16 3 3 1 0 0 9. 1 9 8 4 1 2 0 10. 2 4 3 9 2 5 0 11 . 0 8 6 7 1 3 0 12. 0 2 5 13 2 3 0 13. 2 5 8 6 0 3 1 14. 3 7 2 11 0 2 0 15. 4 3 3 10 1 4 0 16. 0 3 5 9 2 6 0 17. 0 11 5 2 2 5 0 1B. 0 10 2 9 2 2 0 APPENDIX F DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO THE STATE WENT SHEET IN THE CEDAR HILL AREA Statement Number S t rong l y Agree Agree . Don ' t Know Disagree S t rong l y D isagree Can ' t Genera l i ze No Response 1. 4 8 3 6 0 4 0 2. 0 5 5 11 1 3 0 3. 4 12 0 8 0 1 0 4 . 3 17 0 2 0 3 0 ' 5. 1 12 2 3 0 7 0 6 . 2 7 5 7 0 3 1 7. 0 2 17 5 1 0 0 8. 0 19 2 2 1 1 0 9. 0 8 6 8 2 1 0 10. 0 1 3 15 2 4 0 11 . 0 0 9 9 2 5 0 12. 0 0 3 19 4 4 0 13. 1 6 3 9 1 5 0 14. 4 9 1 9 0 2 0 15. 3 4 0 8 2 8 0 16. 2 2 0 13 0 8 0 17. 0 8 2 9 0 6 0 18. 3 6 1 9 0 6 0 BIBLIOGRAPHY Andzans, P. (1973) , A t t i t u d e s of Row House Res idents Toward R e s i d e n t i a l  L o ca t i on , HI.A. The s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouve B r i t i s h Columbia (May) . Backstrom, C H . and G.D. Hursh (1963) , Survey Research, * M inneapo l i s : Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . B e l l , L . I . and J . Cons tant inescu (1974) , The Housing Game: A Survey of Consumer Pre ferences i n Medium-Density Hous ing. Vancouver: Un i ted Way of Greater Vancouver. B lumenfe ld , H. (1967) , The Modern Me t r opo l i s : I t s O r i g i n s , Growth, C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and P l ann i ng . Cambridge: M.I .T. P r e s s . Bot tomley, J . and D. Holdsworth (1974) , "A Cons i de r a t i on of A t t i t u d e s Under l y ing Community Involvement w i th C i v i c I s sue s , " i n D. Ley, e d . , Community P a r t i c i p a t i o n and the S p a t i a l Order of  the C i t y . Vancouver: Tanta lus Research L i m i t e d . Carson, D.H. (1972) , " R e s i d e n t i a l De s c r i p t i o n s and Urban Th rea t s , " i n D.H. Carson and J . F . W o h l w i l l , e d s . , Environment and the  S o c i a l S c i en ce s ; Pe r spec t i ve s and A p p l i c a t i o n s . Was h i n g t on : American P s y cho l og i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , I n c . C i t y of Edmonton P l ann ing Department (1972) , R e s i d e n t i a l S a t i s f a c t i o n  S tudy. Edmonton. Cooper, C.C. (1972) , "Res iden t D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n Mu l t i - F am i l y Hous ing . " Repr in t No, 97, I n s t i t u t e of Urban & Reg iona l Development, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley* Cooper, M.G. (1971) , E l i t e Groups i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, M.A. Thes i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia ( J u l y ) . D i A i s o , R . J . , e t a l (1971) , Pe rcep t ion of The Housing Environment: A Comparison of R a c i a l and Dens i ty P re f e rences . P i t t s b u r g h : U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h . Duguid, A .G . (1972) , Eco -Behav iou ra l Fac to r s as Ind i ces of R e s i d e n t i a l  S t a b i l i t y , M.A. The s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Van-couver , B r i t i s h Columbia ( A p r i l ) . E a r l , D.D. (1970) , The M ix ing of Housing Types: A Study of Se l e c t ed  S o c i a l : I s sues , M.A. The s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia ( A p r i l ) . 122 Fe l lman , G. (1970) , Imp l i c a t i on s f o r Planning, P o l i c y of Neighbour-hood Res i s tance to Urban Renewal and Highway P roposa l s . Ulaltham, Mass. : Brande is U n i v e r s i t y . F i n k l e r , E. and D.L. Peterson (1974) Nonqrowth P l ann ing S t r a t e g i e s ; The Develop ing Power of Town, C i t i e s and Reg ions. New York! Praeger P u b l i s h e r s . F i s c h e r , C . S . , e t a l (1974) "Crowding S tud i e s and Urban L i f e : A C r i t i c a l Review." Working Paper No. 242, I n s t i t u t e of Urban & Regional Development, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Be r ke l ey . Gans, H . J . (1968), People and P l a n s : Essays on Urban Problems and  S o l u t i o n s . New York: Bas i c Books, I n c . Gans, H . J . (1969) , " P l ann i ng f o r Peop le , not B u i l d i n g s , " E n v i r o n -ment and P lann ing 1s 33-46. Greater Vancouver Reg iona l D i s t r i c t P l ann ing Department (1975) , A. Q u a l i t a t i v e C h e c k l i s t f o r Compact Hous ing. Vancouver. Gruen, N . J . and C. Gruen (1972) , Low and Moderate Income Housing  i n the Suburbs; An Ana l y s i s f o r the Dayton, Ohio Region. New Yorks Praeger P ub l i s h e r s . Hartman, C.W. (1972) , " S o c i a l Values and Housing O r i e n t a t i o n s , " i n B e l l and Ty rwh i t t , e d 3 . , Human I d e n t i t y i n the Urban En - v i ronment. Ba l t imores Penguin Books I n c . He f f e ron , D.C. (1974) , Land-Use P l ann i ng . Toronto: York U n i v e r s i t y . He i l b r un , J . (1974) , Urban Economics and P u b l i c P o l i c y . New York: S t . Ma r t i n ' s P re s s . Homenuck, P. (1973) , A Study of High Rises E f f e c t , P re fe rences , and  Pe r cep t i ons . Toronto! I n s t i t u t e of Env i ronmenta l Research Inc . Howard, B . J . (1974) , Crowding i n the R e s i d e n t i a l Environment, M.A. Thes i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia (September). In te rdepar tmenta l Study Team on Housing and Rents (1975)../Hpusino and Rent Con t r o l i n B r i t i s h Co lumbia. Vancouver. 123 K e l l e r , S . (1966) . "The Role of S o c i a l C l a s s i n P h y s i c a l P l a nn i ng , " I n t e r n a t i o n a l S o c i a l Sc ience B u l l e t i n 18: 494-512. K e l l e r , S. (1972) , "Neighbourhood Concepts i n S o c i o l o g i c a l P e r c p e c t i v e , " i n B e l l and Tyru ih i t t , e d s . , Human I d e n t i t y i n the Human Env i r o n - ment. Ba l t imo re : Penguin Books In c . K e l v i n , P. (1970) The Bases of S o c i a l Behav iour . London! H o l t , R inehar t and Winston. K i l b r i d g e , O 'B lock , and T e p l i t z (1970) , Urban A n a l y s i s . Boston: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y . Koen ig , J . F . (1975) , A l t e r n a t i v e Forms of Hous ing. Vancouver: The Real E s t a t e Board of Greater Vancouver. Kuper, L. (1953) , " B l u e p r i n t f o r L i v i n g Together , i n L. Kuper, e d . , L i v i n g i n Towns. London: Cresfsent P re s s . Lakehead P lann ing Board (1973) . Apartment Design C r i t e r i a S tudy. Thunder Bay. Lambert, W.W. and W.E. Lambert (1964) , S o c i a l Psycho logy . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc . Lans ing , J . B . and R.W. Marans (1969) , " E va l u a t i o n of Neighbourhood Q u a l i t y , " J ou rna l of the American I n s t i t u t e of P lanners 35 (Way): 195-199. Lemon, N. (1973) . A t t i t u de s and The i r Measurement. London: B.T. Ba t s f o rd L t d . Ley, D. (1974) (ed i )» Community P a r t i c i p a t i p n and the S p a t i a l Order  of the C i t y . Vancouver: Tanta lus Research L im i t ed . Lundberg, G.A. (1929) , S o c i a l Research. Toronto: Longmans, Green and Co. Lynch, K. (1971) , S i t e P l ann i ng . Cambridge, Mass. : M.I .T. P re s s . McGrath, J . E . (1964) , S o c i a l Psychology; A B r i e f I n t r o du c t i o n . Toronto: H o l t , R inehar t and Wins ton . McGrath, J . E . (1970) ( e d . ) , S o c i a l & P s y cho l og i c a l Fac to r s i n S t r e s s . New York: H o l t , R inehar t & Winston. Miche l son , W. (1968) "Urban Soc io l ogy as an A id to Urban Ph y s i c a l Development* Some Research S t r a t e g i e s , " J ou rna l of  the American I n s t i t u t e of P lanners 34 (March) : 105-108. M i che l son , Ul. (1969) , "The Ph y s i c a l Environment as A t t r a c t i o n and Determinant* S o c i a l E f f e c t s i n Hous ing . " Research Paper No. 22, Centre f o r Urban and Community S t ud i e s , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. M i che l son , W. (1970) , Man% and His Urban Environment: A S o c i o l o g i c a l  Approach. Don M i l l s : Addison-Ulesley Pub l i s h i n g Company. Moser, C.A. and G. Ka l ton (1971) , Survey Methods i n S o c i a l I n v e s t i - g a t i o n . London: Heinemann Educa t i ona l Books L t d . Ne t ze r , D. (1974) , Economics and Urban Problems. New York: Bas i c Books, I n c . Onibokun, A .G. (1974) , " E v a l u a t i n g Consumers* S a t i s f a c t i o n w i th Hous ing: An A p p l i c a t i o n of a Systems Approach," Jou rna l  of the American I n s t i t u t e of P lanners 40 (May): 189-200. Pearson, N. (1972) , "Den s i t i e s f o r L i v i n g . " P u b l i c a t i o n No. 6 4 , ' The Centre f o r Resources Development, U n i v e r s i t y of Guelph. P lann ing and Transport Research and Computation Company L im i ted (1973) , Hous ing: Housing Markets , Dens i ty P o l i c y , P ro j e c t  O r gan i s a t i o n . Proceedings of the seminar on Housing he ld du r i ng the PTRC New Year Meet ing, 8-10 January , 1973 a t the U n i v e r s i t y of Sussex. London: PTRC Company L im i t e d . Proshansky, H.M., et a l . (1970) , "The In f l uence of the P h y s i c a l Environment on Behav ior : Some Assumpt ions ," i n H.M. Proshansky, et a l , e d s . , Env i ronmenta l Psycho logy. New York: H o l t , R inehar t and Winston. Rainwater , L. (1973) . "Fear and the House-as-Haven i n the Lower C l a s s " , i n Pynoos, S cha fe r , and Hartman, ed s . , Housing  Urban Amer ica. Ch icago: A l d i ne P u b l i s h i n g Company. Rapoport, A. (1975) , "Toward a R e d e f i n i t i o n of D e n s i t y , " E n v i r o n - ment and Behavior 7 (June) : M 33-158. Rogers, E.G. (1972) , Pub l i c A t t i t u d e s Toward Mobi le Homes, M.A. The s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia (May). 125 Sano f f , H. and M. Sawhny (1972) , " R e s i d e n t i a l L i v e a b i l i t y ; A Study of User A t t i t u d e s Towards The i r R e s i d e n t i a l Env i ronment ," i n Env i ronmenta l Des ign: Research and P r a c t i c e . P ro -ceedings of the Edra 3/ a r 8 Conference, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a a t Los Ange les , January 1972. S c h i f f , m.R. (1970) , "Some Theo r e t i c a l Aspects of A t t i t u d e s and P e r c ep t i o n . " Working Paper No. 15, U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Secord , P . F . , and C.W. Backman (1964) , S o c i a l Psycho logy. New York: WcGraw-H i l l . Sm i th , P . J . , and L.D. McCann (1975) . "The Sequence of P h y s i c a l Change i n Apartment Redevelopment Areas i n Edmonton," P lan Canada (march): 30-37. Techn i c a l P lann ing Board (1969) , P o l i c y Report : Low Dens i ty m u l t i p l e  Hous ing. Vancouver. Wellman, B. (1972) . "Who Needs Neighbourhoods," i n A. Powe l l , e d . , " The C i t v t A t t a c k i ng modern Myths. Toronto: mcC le l l and and Stewart L im i t e d . Zech, F .H. (1972) , mu l t i p l e Fami ly Housing For Oak Bay: A Cos t -Bene f i t A n a l y s i s . Oak Bay. Zehner, R.B. (1972) , "Neighborhood and Community S a t i s f a c t i o n : A Report on New Towns and Less Planned Suburbs , " i n D.H. Carson and J . F . W o h l w i l l , e d s . , Environment and the  S o c i a l S c i ences ; Pe r spec t i ves and A p p l i c a t i o n s . Washing-ton ; American P s y cho l og i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , I n c . Zehner, R.B. and R.W. marans (1973) , " R e s i d e n t i a l Dens i t y , Planned Ob jec t i ves and L i f e i n P lanned Communit ies, " J ou r n a l of the American I n s t i t u t e of P lanners 39 (September): 337-345. 

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.831.1-0093900/manifest

Comment

Related Items